|
SCUTAGE or ESCUAGE, the pecuniary commutation, under the feudalSee also: system, of the military service due from the holder of a knight's See also: fee
.
Its name is derived from his See also: shield (scutum)
.
The See also: term is sometimes loosely applied to other pecuniary levies on the basis of the knight's fee
.
It was supposed till recently
that scutage was first introduced in 1156 or on the occasion of See also: Henry II.'s expedition against Toulouse in 1159; but it is now recognized that the institution existed already under Henry I. and
See also: Stephen, when it occurs as scutagium, scuagium or escuagium
.
Its introduction was probably hastened by the creation of fractions of knights' fees, the holders of which could only discharge their See also: obligation in this fashion
.
The increasing use of mercenaries in the 12th century would also make a See also: money payment of greater use to the See also: crown
.
Levies of scutage were distinguished by the names of the See also: campaigns for which they were raised, as " the scutage of Toulouse " (or " See also: great scutage "), " the scutage of See also: Ireland " and so forth
.
The amount demanded from the fee was a marc (13s
.
4d.), a See also: pound or two marcs, but anything above a pound was deemed abnormal till See also: John's reign, when levies of two marcs were made in most years without even the excuse of a war
.
The irritation caused by these exactions reached a
See also: climax in 1214, when three marcs were demanded, and this was prominent among the causes that led the barons to insist on the Great Charter (1215)
.
By its provisions the crown was prohibited from levying any scutage save by " the See also: common counsel of our See also: realm." In the reissue of the Charter in 1217 it was provided, instead of this, that scutages should be levied as they had been under Henry II
.
In practice, however, under Henry III., scutages were usually of three marcs, but the assent of the barons was deemed requisite, and they were only levied on adequate occasions
.
Meanwhile, a practice had arisen, possibly as early asSee also: Richard I.'s reign, of accepting from great barons See also: special " fines " for permission not to serve in a See also: campaign
.
This practice appears to have been based on the crown's right to decide whether See also: personal service should be exacted or scutage accepted in lieu of it
.
A system of special composition thus arose which largely replaced the old one of scutage
.
As between the tenants-inchief, however, and their under-tenants, the payment of scutage continued and was often stereotyped by the terms of charters of See also: subinfeudation, which specified the See also: quota of scutage due rather than the proportion of a knight's fee granted
.
For the purpose of recouping themselves by levying from their under-tenants the See also: tenant-in-chief received from the crown writs de scutagio habendo
.
Under See also: Edward I. the new system was so completely See also: developed that the six levies of the reign, each as high as two pounds on the fee, applied only in practice to the under-tenants, their lords compounding. with the crown by the payment of large sums, though their nominal assessment, somewhat mysteriously became much See also: lower (see KNIGHT SERVICE)
.
Scutage was rapidly becoming obsolescent as a source of revenue, Edward II. and Edward III. only imposing one See also: levy each and relying on other modes of See also: taxation, more See also: uniform and See also: direct
..
Its rapid decay was also hastened by the lengths to which subinfeudation had been carried, which led to See also: constant dispute and litigation as to which of the holders in the descending chain of tenure was liable for the payment
.
Apart from its See also: financial aspect it had possessed a legal importance as the test, according to See also: Bracton, of tenure by knight-service, its payment, on however small a See also: scale, proving the tenure to be " military " with all the consequences involved
.
The best monograph on the subject (though not wholly See also: free from error) is J
.
F
.
Baldwin's The Scutage and Knight Service in See also: England (1897), a dissertation printed at the University of See also: Chicago See also: Press
.
Madox's See also: History of the See also: Exchequer was the See also: standard authority formerly, and is still of use
.
The view now held was first set forth by J
.
H
.
Round in Feudal England (1895)
.
In 1896 appeared the Red See also: Book of the Exchequer (Rolls series), which, with the Testa de Nevill (Record
ommission) and the See also: Pipe Rolls (published by the Record Commission and the Pipe See also: Roll Society), is the chief record authority on the subject; but many of the scutages are wrongly dated by the editor, whose conclusions have been severely criticized by J
.
H
.
Round in his Studies on the Red Book of the Exchequer (privately issued) and his Commune of See also: London and other Studies (1899)
.
See also: Pollock and See also: Maitland's History of See also: English See also: Law (1895) should be consulted
.
M'Kechnie's Magna Carta (1905) is of value; and Scargill See also: Bird's " Scutage and Marshal's Rolls " in Genealogist (1884), vol. i., is important for the later records
.
(J
.
H
.
|
|
|
[back] SCURVY (Scorbutus) |
[next] SCUTARI (Turkish, Uskudar, anc. Chrysopolis) |
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.