The Governance of Rutland
For more information on each of the areas outlined below see Ryder, I E, The Governance of Rutland 1614-1664,
Rutland Local History & Record Society, Occasional Publication 13 (2021).
The National Archives, Kew, London.
Record Office for Leicestershire, Leicester & Rutland, Leicester.
Egerton Manuscripts, British Library, London.
Hasting Manuscripts, Huntington Library, San Marino, California, USA.
Numbering is based on four groups of data:
Miscellaneous, broken into several sub lists, see below (1 – 1455)
Subsidy Taxes, (2000 – 4869)
Militia Roll, (5000 – 6670)
Tax to raise £400,000, (7000 – 8192). See below for more information.
Locations are generally based on the order they appear in the particular documentary source, rather than
Spelling in most cases follows modern usage. Personal forenames have mostly been rendered in a conventional
or consistent format but there are many instances of alternative spellings, for instance Brian and Bryan, which
have been retained. There are also many individual forenames which are not current today and these have
usually been retained as written in the original manuscripts. Surnames are often spelt in many different ways.
For instance, there are some half a dozen different spellings in the various manuscripts of the surname Falkener
(as distinct from Falconer), and these have all been retained as originally rendered even when they clearly refer to
the same individual.
Missing names, usually forenames, which can be supplied from other sources are indicated by italics.
For the file download menu and more detailed information please select from one of the links at the top left of this page.
Copyright © Rutland Local History and Record Society - All rights reserved
Registered Charity No 700273
from the list below
Tax to raise £400,000
With the outbreak of war in Ireland in late 1641 Parliament voted for a new form of taxation. The new tax used
the quota approach adopted for Ship Money. Rutland’s allocation was £1050, with local county commissioners
appointed to administer its raising, similar to Subsidies. The tax was to be raised in two tranches in May and
Abandoning the nominal valuations used for subsidies the Rutland commissioners elected to use actual rental
valuations as the basis for the township subdivision. The township allocation was then further subdivided into
tax charges on all persons, including nobles and members of the clergy, who generated wealth from the
Township members’ tax charges for the May 1641 tranche survive for three of the county’s hundreds and provide
a relative measure of the wealth of each township’s inhabitants.
Comments / Corrections
The author’s digital copies of relevant British Library Egerton and Huntington Library
Hastings papers have been deposited for personal consultation at the Rutland County
Rutland Local History and Record Society is keen to maintain the relevance and accuracy of
the Database and should you have any query, comment, or spot any mistake, please contact
us at http://www.rutlandhistory.org/contacts
Subsidy Taxes (see also Governance, p53)
Subsidy taxes were based on the assessment of two forms of wealth: land rentals and goods.
In Rutland the latter was generally crops and livestock. By the time of the Stuarts, subsidy
assessments had become nominal and only reflected in the crudest sense a person’s relative
wealth. All the subsidy taxes listed in the database had the same threshold assessment levels
of £1 for land and £3 for goods and, except in the 1611 assessment, the same tax rates per
assessed pound of four shillings for land and 2s 8d for goods. Thus, a threshold land
assessment generated a four-shilling tax liability and a threshold goods assessment an eight-
shilling liability (i.e. 3x 2s 8d). The tax rates per assessed pound for the 1611 assessment were
for land 1s 4d and for goods one shilling. Sometimes multiple subsidies were granted which
required double tax payments.
To achieve this requirement the county commissioners who administered the assessments
had an option to double either the assessment or the tax rate. The table below shows how
each assessment was rated. From 1625 subsidies were used to penalise recusants, generally
Catholics: those assessed for land or goods had their tax rate doubled while others were
charged a poll rate of eight pence each.
Single or Double Assessment
Single or Double Tax Rate
Hundreds and Townships
Historically Rutland was divided administratively into five Hundreds: Alstoe, East, Martinsley,
Oakham Soke, and Wrangdike. Within the Hundreds the population was concentrated in
townships that were or had been the centre of an open field system. An exception was the
manor of Leighfield which consisted of the old royal forest, which when included in valuations
was part of Oakham Soke Hundred.
While most townships were coterminous with a parish, some parishes had two or more
townships, for example Ryhall and Belmesthorpe. There are two places where caution is
needed: first, Oakham, this was divided manorially into two, i.e. Oakham Lordshold (including
the Castle and most of the town) and Oakham Deanshold (the church and the rest of the town
and Barleythorpe, belonging to the Abbey of Westminster) – the latter is generally referred to
in these sources as Westminster Fee;
Secondly, the places we know today as Great and Little Casterton. Great Casterton was known
in these and many other historical sources as Casterton Magna or Bridge Casterton and Little
Casterton as Casterton Parva.
Individual payments to
at a time of plague in June 1642
lists for various townships
Dole of Corn and Beef
– List of Cottesmore and Barrow’s poor receiving provisions 1639-42.
hundred in the 1640 list are associated with arms required from the clergy and for the cavalry
Scots in 1640
in the County. They could cast a vote for each of two separate candidates
1639 Militia Roll (see also Governance, pp22, 108)
Since medieval times all able-bodied men between the ages of sixteen and sixty were liable for service in the
militia. To ensure that this requirement was maintained the Privy Council required Lord Lieutenants who had
command of each county’s militia to periodically maintain a register of persons liable for service.
Such a register was separate from the much small numbers either selected for the Trained Band or who were
required to provide the Trained Band with arms. Although the Militia roll lists over 1600 individuals it was not
exhaustive and represents only about fifty percent of eligible males.