The fact that these requirements were bolstered up in town documents shows that aldermen in London had a certain legal separation from other townsmen and their membership was limited only by high-ranking people with a property status.

All the power in the town — executive, judicial, administrative, and legislative — was in the hands of aldermen and officials, including the upper ones, chosen from them. Mayors who headed London's municipality were elected only from among aldermen. Sheriffs were also mainly aldermen. Recorders, chamberlains, town clerks and other civil servants were made up of aldermen as well.

The most important town positions were considered as royal too: the Mayor was not only the head of London's municipality but also a royal official. The same and even more can be said about sheriffs for whom their service to the king was a priority.

London's city power was concentrated in the municipality which has been embodied in the building of Guildhall since the 15th century. In the whole the structure of power in London of the 14th — 16th centuries can be seen as follows: the “Council of Aldermen”, about 23–26 people (according to the number of administrative districts) and a mayor; the “Council of the Chosen” which included the mayor, aldermen and about 150–200 councilors who were elected in administrative districts; the “Council of Citizens Assembly” consisting of a mayor, aldermen, sheriffs, and, approximately, 70 “guild masters” registered in freemen lists and wearing a livery of one of the Great Twelve Livery Companies.

The city administration was closely connected with the judicial power represented by the Mayor's Court, Aldermen's Court and the Sheriff's Court which tried property, trade, and various financial cases. There were also District Courts with aldermen at the head that dealt with the protection of administrative districts and provided their social and fire safety and sanitary state.

During the given period formation of city authorities and senior officials was taking place in the way of co-optation. Moreover, several of the most important posts (from 3 to 9 successively and from 3 to 4 simultaneously) could be engrossed for quite a long time though in the 15th — 16th centuries prestige of administrative and police posts was gradually decreasing while financial and business positions were becoming more attractive. It should be also noted that aldermen occupied their posts for life.

Power exercised by the representatives of the London aldermen group during the 14th — 16th centuries could be characterized as elitist-oligarchic.

An important factor of the unity and consolidation of London ruling elite, its stability and securing of seclusion was marriages among the representatives of aldermen families. In fact, the principle of having life posts which grew into life-hereditary gave some aldermen families the opportunity of constant participation in London power holding structures. It seems that we may speak about 20–30 affinitive families.

Business connections between ruling families in the spheres of trade, finance and credit operations, investment into real estate and its commercial usage can be clearly traced in the alderman environment. Family solidarity seems to be the most important instrument of political and economic dominance of the elite.

However, seclusion of the aldermen community of the 14th — 16th centuries was not absolute. It was constantly replenished by people from different social layers and communities. Among them there were London merchants and merchants from various towns and boroughs of England who possessed large financial resources and good reputation in business and, as a rule, younger sons of the gentry from various counties of England to provide for life being involved into trading which was, at least in the 14th century, a well-known activity.

A wide and regular inflow of new forces from counties and provincial English towns had a positive impact on qualitative characteristics of London alderman community. There was a considerable and more or less regular renewal of its members who strived for success and making a career and who, first of all, relied on themselves, their abilities and opportunities. All this strengthened economic might of big London merchants and interconnections between the classes, strengthening, therefore, the position of aldermen in the city community and authorities.

Marriage to those who belonged to different social groups and layers was one of the most important instruments of realization of a typical for London men of business tendency to the dialogue with a surrounding world. Matrimonial interests of business community covered representatives of the merchant class, both of the capital and provincial towns. It is obvious that such marriages promoted not only strengthening business cooperation among English merchants, but also were one of the few means of penetration of rich and enterprising merchants into the business world and London ruling class. Many businessmen families of London related to English aristocracy of different levels, both gentry and knights and even titled aristocracy. This shows a considerable interest of commercially active city dwellers in socially more prestigious community of the 14th — 16th centuries and their wish to penetrate into it with the help of marriages which corresponded to their social ambitions and desires. Some noblemen would not mind to relate to the richest merchants. Such matrimonial behavior of noblemen was caused by the closeness of economic, social and political positions of the big merchant class and gentry and the desire of some aristocrats to improve their financial position.

Commercial activity of London men of business was complicated and reflected a contradictory social and economic nature of the 14th — 16th town itself.

First of all, merchants carried on a large-scale trade in London, inside and outside England. It was trade, seen as worthy, honorable and pious work, that took the most important part of their minds and required from them manifestation of rationalism, common sense, business activity, professionalism and understanding that their aim was to get additional benefits. Wealth which became the measure of achieved success and social importance caused a complicated conflict with some elements of Christian consciousness. How to use this wealth and not to be cast into hell-fire, but to provide for the family and close people was the problem which aldermen tried to solve in their wills. Understanding of the risk that accompanied their profession and the desire to provide their safety incited aldermen to search for God's and saints' protection which is reflected in a widely spread practice of sacrifices recorded in their wills. In fact, it can be said that the merchant class worked out a new type of religiousness which combined the belief in God and fear of after death punishment with a commercial approach to the so called “good works” that brought success in the land of the living and a reward after death. Great opportunities for trade and having income were given by livery, merchant by nature, companies whose members were merchants-aldermen. Besides them in the 14th -16th centuries there were also family associations, companies of merchants-? of Calais and merchants-adventurers, and a number of new corporations that emerged and functioned on share principles in the 16th — the beginning of the 17th centuries (Moscow, Levant, East Indies and so on). It is important to note that they all united and attracted to cooperation not only London aldermen from various livery companies but other merchants from the capital and provinces and representatives of English noblemen and church as well. A considerable number of people from different social groups were involved into the sphere of trade and interacted successfully which led to the expansion of trade and increasing of its volume. As aldermen were among the biggest shareholders, they were those who received the main profit from it.