Davies, Richard G., 'Some Notes from the Register of Henry de Wakefield, Bishop of Worcester, on the Political Crisis of 1386-1388', The English Historical Review 86 (1971), 547-558

-

Quick Summary

Church records provides evidence of support for the rebellion of the Lords Appellant in 1388

  • The bishop of Worcester recorded an independent account of the crisis years 1386-88
  • The account is relatively impartial because the bishop took no active part in the crisis
  • The account provides evidence of widespread support for the Lords Appellant in 1388
Key Conclusion

Davies explores an account of the Wonderful Parliament of 1386 and the rebellion of the Lords Appellants against Richard II in 1387. This account is found in the episcopal register of Henry de Wakefield, bishop of Worcester, which was written for the sole benefit of future bishops of Worcester and their clerks who might require some background information about the rebellion of the Lords Appellant. Davies concludes that the account was written very soon after events without any obvious ‘propaganda motive’ (p. 554). The account is favourable towards the rebellion of the Lords Appellant, thereby providing evidence of widespread support for the rebel cause against the favourites of Richard II.

Content Overview

The account of the crisis is perhaps the earliest that survives. The first entry in the register relating to the crisis is a brief notice of the Wonderful Parliament of 1386, while the remainder of the account was written later, possibly in the summer of 1388. Since Bishop Wakefield took ‘no active part’ (p. 554) in the rebellion of the Lords’ Appellant his decision to include an account of the crisis in his episcopal register requires comment. Davies is unable to provide a definitive explanation, but suggests that the account’s inclusion may have resulted from bishop’s personal interest in politics, his social connections with those involved, in addition to the general gravity of the crisis.

Further Findings

The account does not radically alter historians’ existing understanding of what happened in 1386-8 but it does provide some additional details about events. In particular, the account names the king’s representatives who were dispatched to meet the Lords Appellant when they arrived in London in late December: the duke of York and three bishops, William Wykeham of Winchester, Thomas Arundel of Ely, and John Gilbert of Hereford (p. 551). Additionally, the account is at a slight variance with the J. N. L. Myers’s reconstruction of the Radcot Bridge campaign insomuch as it suggests that the royalist army led by Robert de Vere was heading towards Windsor, not London (p. 550).

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