The name is absent



CHAPTER XIII

MEDIAEVAL ROYAL SHEEP TAXES

Share of the crown in local taxes. Moorish sheep tolls. The seτvicio de ganados or
subsidy from domestic animals. Origin of the servieio y montazgo. Royal sheep
tolls during the period of fifteenth-century profligacy. The tax schedule of 1457.

The fiscal history of the migratory sheep industry in other lands
would lead one to expect the annals of the Castilian transhu-
mantes to reveal at a very early date certain definite tolls being
paid to the crown. We should expect to find royal imposts com-
parable to the early Roman
Scriptura and pensio, the Aragonese
and Valencian
earner age, or even the Bardenas incomes of the
Navarrese crown.1 It is important to observe, therefore, that in
Castile there is no indication of any such direct income to the
royal exchequer from migratory flocks previous to the organiza-
tion of the Mesta in or shortly before the year 1273. It is true
that a few fueros or town charters of the twelfth century assign
part of the local montazgo tax to the crown as lord of the land.2
It is likewise true that part of the local portazgos, which were by
no means paid exclusively by transhumantes, were occasionally
turned over to the sovereigns.3 These instances, however, were
extremely rare, and do not in the least justify the assumptions of
such recognized authorities as Schaefer, Cos-Gayon, Canga
Argiielles, Gounon-Loubens, and even Colmeiro and Mariéjol,
that the sovereign as such collected the montazgos and portazgos.4

* See above, pp. 153 fl.

2 Munoz, p. 510 (fuero of Guadalajara, 1133); Urena y Smenj’aud, ed., Fuero de
Zorita de Ios Canes
(Madrid, 1911: Memorial Hislorico Espanol, xliv), p. 42°
(n8o). On the origins of the montazgo, see above, pp. 163 S.

3 See above, p. 163.

* The writers mentioned, whose opinions have hitherto been accepted without
question, fail in the first place to make any distinction whatever between local and
royal sheep taxes. Schaefer, in
Archivfiir Geschichle und Literatur, iv, p. 93 (1833),
Gounon-Loubens,
Admin, de la Caslille (Paris, i860), p. 280, and Mariéj’ol, L’Es-
pagne sous Ferdinand et Isabelle
(Paris, 1892), p. 217, not only describe the mon-
tazgo as a royal tax, but derive its name from “ the mountain passes where it was

2S4

MEDIAEVAL ROYAL SHEEP TAXES

255


From the early mediaeval period down to the middle of the nine-
teenth century these taxes always retained their original char-
acter as local exactions.

Aside from these local sheep taxes, of which the crown received
a share, the royal exchequer was able to reach the pastoral in-
dustry through certain imposts which came into existence during
the Moorish wars. The Reconquest had, of course, greatly
benefited the sheep owners, whose flocks were now more secure
on their southern marches and were particularly favored with
excellent new pasture lands in the reconquered territory. In
recognition of these valued contributions made to the pastoral
industry by the warrior monarchs, tax obligations were duly
recognized on the part of the migrating flocks. It is quite prob-
able that as a means of adjusting this relationship the Christian
kings took over such Moorish taxes as the
azaqui or asequi, a form
of royal tithe, to which shepherds contributed from one to forty
animals out of every hundred.1 The
almojarifazξo, an import and
export tax levied by the Moorish kings at the gates of towns, was
promptly appropriated by the Christian conquerors. Though
the right to collect this impost was frequently bestowed by the
sovereigns upon loyal Andalusian cities, it served as one means of
royal assessments upon migratory flocks.2

Another group of early royal imposts to which the pastoral in-
dustry contributed a large share was that of the
diezmos de puertos
collected,” a deduction which is as ingenious as it is incorrect (see above, p. 149).
As will be explained below (p. 261), when a royal sheep tax was created, it was not
called a montazgo but a servicio, and later
servicio y montazgo. Furthermore, none
of the
puertos reales or royal toll gates where it was collected was at a mountain
pass. The derivation of
montazgo, from monte—wooded pasture land—is indicated
above, p. 149. Colmeiro, i, p. 468, Cos-Gayon,
Hist. Admin. Piib. (Madrid, 1851),
p. 149, and Canga ArgUelles,
Dice, de Hacienda (Madrid, 1833-34, 2 vols.), ii, pp.
338-339, assign montazgos and portazgos to the king as the preserver of order in
rural districts, or as lord of all highways and public lands.

* Al-Makkart, History of the Mohammedan Dynasties, ed. Gayangos (London,
1840-43, 2 vols.), i, p. 401. Dozy and Engelmann,
Glossaire des mots espagnols
(Paris, 1869), pp. 207, 224.

s See below, p. 424. By 1264 it was being collected by towns as far north as
Cuenca. Acad. Hist., Ms. 25-ι-C-19, fol. 420. In the hands of various southern
towns it became, in the fourteenth century, a source of considerable vexation to the
Mesta.



More intriguing information

1. Non-farm businesses local economic integration level: the case of six Portuguese small and medium-sized Markettowns• - a sector approach
2. Implementation of a 3GPP LTE Turbo Decoder Accelerator on GPU
3. Menarchial Age of Secondary School Girls in Urban and Rural Areas of Rivers State, Nigeria
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. Activation of s28-dependent transcription in Escherichia coli by the cyclic AMP receptor protein requires an unusual promoter organization
7. The name is absent
8. The Demand for Specialty-Crop Insurance: Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard
9. Credit Markets and the Propagation of Monetary Policy Shocks
10. The Social Context as a Determinant of Teacher Motivational Strategies in Physical Education
11. Firm Closure, Financial Losses and the Consequences for an Entrepreneurial Restart
12. Passing the burden: corporate tax incidence in open economies
13. Skill and work experience in the European knowledge economy
14. Climate change, mitigation and adaptation: the case of the Murray–Darling Basin in Australia
15. The name is absent
16. Financial Markets and International Risk Sharing
17. The Determinants of Individual Trade Policy Preferences: International Survey Evidence
18. References
19. The name is absent
20. The name is absent