Item for the makyng of ij hames Whodis.
Item for a pec. of Say to make ij Cowlys and a frocke.
Item for a Gerdell ij d. A purse viij d. A peyre of knyves viij d.
Item for viij lambes skynys for to ffur a hode and ij Cotis Slevys at the hande.
Item for ffurryng of the same.
The total for this bill came to £2 6s. 5d. exclusive of the first six items which have no charge entered and so were presumably drawn from stock.
The Chamberlain was accustomed to renew only some seven articles, those for actual day and night-wear. Directly responsible to him were the tailor, skinner and barber, the last of whom beside shaving the brethren had probably to bleed them periodically.
The Treasurer’s income in the early sixteenth century was no less than three hundred and seventy-six pounds a year, of which two hundred and forty-one pounds were derived from twenty-four manors. Of these the Manor of Battersea was worth about sixty pounds. Hendon was even more profitable with eighty-eight, while Aldenham produced fifty-seven. It will be well, however, to mention some of the items of his expenditure before noting the sources of the remainder of his income.
First in the demands on his purse was the purchase of grain. Four hundred quarters of wheat and a rather larger quantity of barley were bought for the Convent’s consumption either in the form of bread or beer. Not all of this was purchased from outside. It will be obvious that since many of the offices were endowed with land each might have grain at its disposal, and it was clearly advantageous to have one’s market so close at hand. Hence there arose a system of what may be termed interdepartmental dealing, the Treasurer purchasing the produce of other offices in wheat and at the same time perhaps selling his own surplus goods to others of his brother-officials.
The Treasurer’s main purpose was the sustenance of the brethren. Accordingly in addition to his own purchases of food in the form of grain he made an allowance of ten shillings a day to the Coquinarius, whose office is not adequately described if his title be translated simply as “cook,� while the ordinary rendering of “kitchener� entails the same objection. The Coquinarius would seem to have been a steward of the kitchen, combining the duties of an overseer and caterer. We shall take some further notice of him later.