Clark, James G., 'Thomas Walsingham Reconsidered: Books and Learning at Late-Medieval St. Albans', Speculum 77 (2002), 832-860

-

Quick Summary

The medieval chronicler Thomas Walsingham did not seek to the revive a thirteenth-century tradition of historical writing but embarked on a new school of thought altogether

  • Walsingham did not seek to imitate Matthew Paris
  • The monks of St Albans were open to a wider variety of intellectual influences by the late-fourteenth century
  • Some of the works attributed to Thomas Walsingham were actually written by another monk at St Albans
Key Conclusion

Clark explores the approach to historical writing adopted by Thomas Walsingham, chronicler and monk of St Albans Abbey. The article revises the conclusion of V. H. Galbraith, who believed that Walsingham consciously imitated the work of the thirteenth-century chronicler Matthew Paris and sought to revive an approach to historical writing known as the St Albans “school”. The short-lived revival under Walsingham has been seen as the ‘swan-song’ of the monastic chronicle in England. Clark, however, concludes that Walsingham was a very different figure than Matthew Paris. He argues that Walsingham’s chronicle should not be seen as the ‘swan-song’ of a once-great cultural tradition, but rather as the ‘opening strains’ of a new school of thought about historical writing (p. 860).

Content Overview

The abbey of St Albans was perhaps the most important centre of learning and literary production in medieval England. Consequently, the abbey occupies a central position in scholarly discussions about monastic culture. The writings of Thomas Walsingham reveal how, by the late fourteenth century, intellectual life at St Albans had become more complex and varied in character. The monks of Walsingham’s generation were open to a wider variety of intellectual influences than their predecessors. Many, like Walsingham, studied at university. Scholarly pursuits took Walsingham ‘far beyond the confines of the traditional St Albans “school”’ (p. 859). He devoted much of his career to classical literature, and his commentaries on Latin poetry ‘set him apart from conventional monastic culture’ (p. 860).

Further Findings

The historian V. H. Galbraith believed that Walsingham, like Matthew Paris, had been the ‘presiding genius of the scriptorium’ at St Albans and that every manuscript ‘passed directly through his hands’ (p. 834). However, Clark argues that this assumption is incorrect. Rather, Walsingham was ‘only one of a number of monks’ at work compiling and copying books. Most importantly, Clark concludes that Walsingham was not the ‘sole author of the chronicles emerging from St Albans’ in the late-fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (p. 859). At least two narratives that historians have frequently attributed to Walsingham, the Annales Ricardi Secundi et Henrici Quarti and the shorter Gesta abbatum continuation, were the work of another graduate-monk – William Wintershill.

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