The Books of Payments I: Money Out and the Development of the Books

Books of Payments, either in the form of the original master ledgers audited and signed off by the king, or the copy books created contemporaneously by the Office clerks, survive continuously from the beginning of October 1495 to the end of April 1521.  All have been transcribed, including those running in duplicate. Fittingly perhaps, the last transcribed page of entries of incidental payments for April 1521 includes Henry VIII’s offering at the annual mass of requiem for his father, Henry VII.[37]  Whilst further books document Chamber activity for the remainder of Henry VIII’s reign, they survive only as a discontinuous sequence, and their date compass falls outside the Winchester Project. 

The earliest of Henry VII’s books of payments, from the first years of the reign to Michaelmas 1491, had been lost by the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century.  The evidence for this is circumstantial. Roman numerals in a hand of that period are inked on the top left corner of the only three books that still retain their original covers.  That for 1495-1497 is marked II, for 1497-1499 III, and 1499-1502 IIII. The book that we will call 1491-1495 was still extant in the second half of the eighteenth century, and was presumably marked I. It has since been lost: of which more below.  A selection of entries from this book, biased towards the picaresque rather than the pedestrian, was copied with variable accuracy in the eighteenth or early nineteenth century.  The main source for these is a pocketbook compiled by the antiquarian and Exchequer clerk Craven Ord (1755-1832).  The notebook was purchased by the British Museum in 1829.  While it has not been transcribed for the Project in its entirety, since it repeats itself, the principal sequence of extracts from December 1491 to its end point of Michaelmas 1505 has been included.[38]  From December 1491 to the end of September 1495 over 550 entries signalled, like the extant but later originals, by the word ‘Item’, have been thus preserved. Ord’s post-1495 transcripts may be judged against the original books.[39]  Other than the extracts, there are just two major pointers to Chamber expenditure prior to Michaelmas 1495.   Sir Thomas Lovell’s accounts for receipts from 4 July 1487 to Michaelmas, 29 September, 1489 showed a surplus of income over expenditure of £5739 17s 2d, ‘all Receiptes charged and Paymentes allowed’, which suggests expenditure over the same period of £30,851 16s 11d.[40]  Largely unnoticed by historians, the following book, ending at Michaelmas 1495, contains an estimate drawn up by John Heron for ‘ordinary payments’ anticipated for the accounting year Michaelmas 1490-1491.  The much amended total of over £4000 includes wages for musicians and others, annual wages of £10 for John Heron himself, and an allowance for daily mass offerings, all of which are likely to have been accurately assessed and duly paid; but the round figure of £1000 allowed for each of casual ‘rewards’, and ‘diuerse necessariis’ bought for the king, must surely have been a guesstimate.[41]  

The Books of Payments are more complex in their content and make-up than the Books of Receipts.  Like the Books of Receipts, they were ‘engrossed’ and fair written in real time from subsidiary documents and rough accounts. To a far greater extent than the Books of Receipts the master ledgers were working books, repeatedly consulted and updated even whilst they were still current. They were annotated by both Heron and Henry VII, the king making alterations, additions – and, just occasionally, mistakes. His general practice was to sign off the payments weekly, although inevitably there were variations in the periodicity. Clerk and king came together to audit the books approximately quarterly, ensuring in the process the safe custody and transfer of any outstanding credit balance.[42] Henry VIII initially followed his father’s practice, mostly signing each page and total, albeit with a wayward signature that only gradually assumed its more regular form.  By the end of his first year, the king was signing just once a month.  He signed off also the supplementary matter recorded towards the back of the books.  Yet occasional interventions in the hand of the king suggest that he read, not merely signed, the warrants that authorised the treasurer to make payments. Part of the difference is structural.  John Heron made frequent large issues of money from the Chamber direct to the king, for the king’s own use: and one surviving account of the king’s privy purse indicates that Henry VIII paid the same attention to those more personal accounts that his father had done towards those of the Chamber.[43]

From at least 1505 the books were kept in duplicate, with the copy being written out by the clerks, and not by the treasurer.  The earliest known of these duplicate books is a hybrid, including running totals abstracted from two books, and just six months worth of payments all copied from the master ledger.  The supplementary sections were included.  The book itself was signed periodically by Henry VII, which means that he was fully cognisant of its existence, and could have encouraged or required its creation.[44]  Thereafter, the copy books have no signatures, few signs of use, and inevitably occasional errors or misunderstandings introduced by the copying process, as well as differences in orthography reflecting the personal preferences of the scribes.[45]  The copy ledgers incorporate also the marginalia and other annotation written against entries in the themed sections of the master ledgers – or at least they should.  The large book for 1509-1518 follows this pattern.[46]  Those for 1505-1509, and 1518-1521 do not.[47]  They carry over marginalia copied from the immediately preceding books but little thereafter.[48]  The death of Henry VII and the review and dismantling of much the financial legacy of his punitive regime of recognisances and obligations, a review in which Heron as one of the commissioners took part, may explain the first.  The second omission is problematic, but the breakdown in John Heron’s health, and the interregnum in office that followed, suggest that his close oversight was crucial to the efficient running of the Office.  Duplication of the record at a time when the Chamber was experiencing a massive expansion both in funds and as a centralised information system made sense.  It gave both the king and the treasurer access to current information in its digested format. By the late 1490s John Heron remained based largely at Westminster, whilst the king was still itinerant, and at times significantly so.[49] Although perhaps not a consideration at the time, a second ledger provided security against loss.  The master ledger for 1505-1509 had been lost by the late eighteenth century.[50]  The original ledger would have told a modern user more – but in its absence the copy ledger remains invaluable.[51]