Aston, M. E., 'Lollardy and Sedition 1381-1431', Past & Present 17 (1960), 1-44

-

Quick Summary

Fears about the link between Lollardy and rebellion led to substantial anti-heresy legislation by the early-fifteenth century

  • England did experience serious problems from heresy until the late-fourteenth century
  • There is no substantive evidence to connect Lollardy with the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381
  • Chroniclers and medieval writers believed there was a link between Lollardy and rebellion
Key Conclusion

In this article, Aston sets out to explore the attitude and approach of English government to the dual challenge of heresy and rebellion in the years after the Peasants’ Revolt (1381). Before 1381 England had never faced a serious problem from heretics or popular rebellion, but then in the late-fourteenth century the English government had to deal with both simultaneously.

Content Overview

Aston begins by questioning the link between Lollardy and rebellion. The article highlights how John Wycliffe, the founder of the heretical movement known as Lollardy, did not personally advocate rebellion along the lines of the Peasants’ Revolt in 1381. Furthermore, there is no evidence to support the view that Wycliffe’s teaching was in any way connected with the Revolt. Nevertheless, through the ‘deliberate falsification, fixed prejudice, or plausible hypothesis’ (p. 5) of chroniclers and medieval writers, the conviction was established that Lollardy was associated with revolt.

Further Findings

In response to this perceived association of Lollardy and sedition, the English government gradually introduced anti-heretical legislation in the early-fourteenth century. In the second half of the article, Aston explores the growth of this anti-heresy legislation in England. In particular, the year 1401 is highlighted for its importance because this year saw the death penalty introduce for relapsed impenitent heretics. The anti-heresy legislation culminated in 1414 when ‘heresy hunting’ (p. 34) was formalised as a responsibility of the chancellor, treasurer, justices and royal officials throughout England.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Theilmann, John M., 'Stubbs, Shakespeare, and Recent Historians of Richard II', Albion 8 (1976), 107-124

-
Quick Summary The idea that Richard II was a tyrant persists even though a satisfactory history of his reign is yet to be written According to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy, Richard II was a coldly calculating king A revision to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy cast Richard II as insane Existing research distorts history by its fixation on constitutional issues Key Conclusion Theilmann explores the historiography of Richard II’s reign from the 1890s to the 1970s and, in particular, the verdict reached by historians about his approach to kingship. This historiographical review leads Theilmann to conclude that the traditional interpretation of Richard’s reign – the ‘Stubbsean Orthodoxy’ – has been slowly challenged but its influence remains strong. According to this Orthodoxy, Richard II was a ‘coldly calculating king’ (p. 110). He was a tyrant determined to diminish parliament and destroy constitutional government. Theilmann notes that while more recent research h...
Read more

Phillpotts, Christopher, 'The fate of the truce of Paris, 1396-1415', Journal of Medieval History 24 (1998), 61-80

-
Quick Summary The Truce of Paris (1396) formed a framework to reduce the level of warfare between England and France up until 1415 The focus of the truce changed depending on the particular ambitions of subsequent English kings Richard II maintained the truce after 1397 to secure dowry payments from France Henry IV and Charles VI put their differences aside to establish a peace between kingdoms Key Conclusion Phillpotts explores the longest truce of the Hundred Years War, agreed at Paris between Richard II of England and Charles VI of France in 1396, and its subsequent extension, redefinition and clarification until 1415. Truces reduced the level of warfare, rather than ended it, and needed to be periodically renegotiated to be effective. Phillpotts concludes that the truce of 1396 ‘formed the central framework of a series of general and particular truces’. The focus of the truce changed between 1396 and 1314, from Richard II’s initial concern to p...
Read more

Wilkinson, B., 'The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381', Speculum 15 (1940), 12-35

-
Quick Summary The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 was primarily a ‘movement of reaction’ against John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster Historians have paid too much attention to one particular source Common hatred of John of Gaunt brought the Londoners and the rebels together After the destruction of Gaunt’s palace in London the Peasants’ Revolt began to wane Key Conclusion Wilkinson provides a revisionist interpretation of the events in London during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Wilkinson contends that historians have paid too much attention to one particular source – the return of the jurors in the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions of 1382. The evidence presented to the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions was ‘thoroughly and, it seems likely, intentionally misleading’ (p. 12), since the London jurors ‘did their best to conceal the powerful support which Londoners themselves gave to the revolt’ (p. 29). Wilkinson concludes that the revolt was primarily a ‘movement of reaction against J...
Read more