4 ms·

You're asking why they didn't round to the nearest £722.74, which apparently was more than a month's wages. See: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-polic

• anonymouskimmer 3y ago
  Worse than that: > the swan mark would have to be purchased at the price of six shillings - swans not included. This was about the same amount as a year’s wages for a household servant. One pound would be over three years wages for a household servant.
  • sportslife 3y ago
    You caught me skimming the article! The National Archives gives one pound in 1480 as the 33 days' wages for a skilled tradesman's labour, so I can see why they'd want to join a guild.
    • anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      To be fair, a household servant got room and board too.
• thaumasiotes 3y ago
  > You're asking why they didn't round to the nearest £722.74 No, the question is dumber than that. The proposed "rounded" fine is well over double the original fine; rounding to the nearest four pounds would result in a fine of zero.
  • gus_massa 3y ago
    I rounded the first fine and then pasted here the second fine.