The grossly unequal distribution of wealth, power and status is clear enough in the sources considered so far. Comparison of the assessment of 1327 with the national military survey of 1522 indicates that social structure, measured by systematic assessments of relative wealth, changed very little in the intervening period. The lists are comparable. Both exclude a large class of people considered too poor to be worth assessing. As R.W. Hoyle observes, ‘it is clear that the 1522 return for the Cotswolds massively under records the names of men who in 1525 paid either 20s. in wages or 40s. in goods’. Cirencester's listing has no-one paying less than £2. In the western parts of the county this category comprised up to 50 percent of the total. The Cirencester listing thus excluded at least half the households in the town, those dependent on wages or other forms of employment by the wealthier households. Like the listing of 1327, the assessment of 1522 probably offers a reliable indicator of the relative wealth of merchants, middling traders and craftworkers. Fewer men were assessed in 1522 than in 1327 (73 as against 85). It is possible that the total population was lower, but probably not much lower, for reasons given earlier. In 1522, 73 persons were assessed on a total of £1,962. Those assessed on £2–5 (22 or 30%) totalled £63 (3.2%); the next group, assessed on £5–59 (41 or 56%), totalled £641 (32.6%); persons assessed on £60–280 numbered 11 (15% of total assessed) and totalled £1,258 (64% of total).