 | This articlerelies largely or entirely on asingle source. Relevant discussion may be found on thetalk page. Please helpimprove this article byintroducing citations to additional sources. Find sources: "Scutage" – news ·newspapers ·books ·scholar ·JSTOR(February 2012) |
| English feudalism |
|---|
 |
| Manorialism |
| Feudal land tenure in England |
| Feudal duties |
| Feudalism |
Scutage was amedieval English tax levied on holders of aknight's fee under thefeudal land tenure ofknight-service. Underfeudalism the king, through hisvassals, provided land to knights for their support. The knights owed the king military service in return. The knights were allowed to "buy out" of the military service by paying scutage (a term derived fromLatinscutum, "shield").
As time passed the kings began to impose a scutage on holders of knight's fees, whether or not the holder was actually a knight.
The institution existed under Henry I (reigned 1100–1135) and Stephen (reigned 1135–1154), when it occurs asscutagium,scuagium orescuagium. The creation of fractions of knights' fee probably hastened its introduction: the holders of such fractions could only discharge their obligationvia scutage.[1] The increasing use ofmercenaries in the 12th century would also make a money payment of greater use to the crown.[1]
Separate levies of scutage received the names of the campaigns for which they were raised, as "the scutage of Toulouse" (or "great scutage"), "the scutage of Ireland", and so forth.[1] Thelevy demanded from each fee one mark (13s. 4d., two thirds of a pound), onepound or two marks, but anything above a pound seemed abnormal untilJohn (reigned 1199–1216) imposed levies of two marks in most years without even the excuse of a war.[1] The irritation caused by these exactions reached a climax in 1214, when John demanded three marks.[1] Taxation through scutage became a prominent cause among the many that led to the rebellion of 1215, which culminated in the proclamation ofMagna Carta of 1215. Its provisions prohibited the crown from levying any scutage save by "the common counsel of our realm".[1]
The reissued Charter of 1217 provided, instead of this, that scutage levies should remain at the rate as of the reign ofHenry II. In practice, however, underHenry III (reigned 1216–1272), scutage rates usually amounted to three marks, but required the assent of the barons, and levies occurred only on adequate occasions.[1]
Meanwhile, a practice had arisen, possibly as early asRichard I's reign (1189–1199), of accepting from great barons special "fines" for permission not to serve in a campaign. This practice appears to have rested on the crown's right to decide whether to exact personal service or to accept scutagein lieu of service. A system of special composition thus arose which largely replaced the old one of scutage. As between thetenants-in-chief, however, and theirunder-tenants, the payment of scutage continued. The terms of charters ofsubinfeudation, which specified the quota of scutage due rather than the proportion of a knight's fee granted, often stereotyped scutage. For the purpose of recouping themselves by levying from their under-tenants, the tenants-in-chief received from the crown writsde scutagio habendo. UnderEdward I (reigned 1272–1307) the new system developed so completely that the six levies of the reign, each as high as two pounds on the fee, applied in practice only to the under-tenants, their lords compounding with the crown by the payment of large sums, though their nominal assessment, somewhat mysteriously, became much lower (seeKnight service).[1]
Scutage rapidly became obsolescent as a source of revenue,Edward II (reigned 1307–1327) andEdward III (reigned 1327–1377) imposing only one levy each and relying on other more uniform and direct modes of taxation. The lengths to which subinfeudation had gone also hastened its rapid decay; increasing subinfeudation led to constant dispute and litigation as to which of the holders in the descending chain of tenure remained liable for the payment. Apart from its financial aspect it had possessed a legal importance as the test, according toBracton, of tenure by knight-service, its payment, on however small a scale, proving the tenure to be "military" with all the consequences involved.[1]
J. F. Baldwin'sThe Scutage and Knight Service in England (1897), a dissertation printed at theUniversity of Chicago Press, offers a major monograph on the subject (though not wholly free from error).Madox'sHistory of the Exchequer formerly formed the standard authority.J. H. Round inFeudal England (1895) first set forth a more modern view. In 1896 appeared theRed Book of the Exchequer (Rolls series), which, with theBook of Fees (Public Record Office) and thePipe Rolls (published by theRecord Commission and the Pipe Roll Society), provides the chief record authority on the subject; but the editor misdated many of the scutages, and JH Round in hisStudies on the Red Book of the Exchequer (privately issued) and hisCommune of London and other Studies (1899) severely criticized his conclusions. See also Pollock and Maitland'sHistory of English Law (1895) and McKechnie'sMagna Carta (1905). Scargill Bird's "Scutage and Marshal’s Rolls" inGenealogist (1884), vol. i., has important coverage of later records.[1]