Edwards, J. G., 'The Parliamentary Committee of 1398', The English Historical Review 40 (1925), 321-333

-

Quick Summary

Richard II falsified the official records of parliament to allow a special committee to exceed the authority granted to it by parliament

  • The importance of the ‘Parliamentary Committee of 1398’ has been overrated
  • The committee exceeded the authority granted to it by the parliament of 1398
  • Richard falsified the parliament roll and was accused of doing so at his deposition in 1399
Key Conclusion

Edwards explores the ‘Parliamentary Committee of 1398’, a governmental body which some chroniclers believed had been designed by Richard II to replace parliament. Edwards concludes that the committee’s importance in Richard’s political schemes has been overrated, and that the committee ‘was not necessarily a permanent or essential feature of those schemes’ (p. 332). Ultimately, Richard’s main concern in 1397-9 was probably not to supersede parliament, but to prevent the revival of a body similar to the commission of 1386, whereby a number of barons had taken control of government and curbed royal authority.

Content Overview

The first part of the article explores action taken by the committee of 1398, while the second part of the article explores surviving evidence of the committee actually at work. Edwards determines that the committee’s action at Westminster on 18 March 1399 and at Windsor on 23 April 1399 exceeded the powers granted to it by the parliament of 1398. In the former case, the committee condemned as a traitor Sir Robert Plesyngton who had worked alongside the Lords’ Appellant against the king in 1386. In the latter case, a clerk named Henry Bowet who had aided another of the appellants – the duke of Hereford – was also adjudged a traitor.

Further Findings

In March or April 1399 the parliament roll dating from 1398 was altered so that it gave Richard’s Parliamentary Committee sufficient authority to proceed against Plesynton and Bowet. One of the charges made against Richard II during his deposition in 1399 was that he had falsified the parliament roll – an accusation which Edwards concludes is ‘substantially justified by the facts’ (p. 325). However, where the committee did exceed its powers, it did so for the sole purpose of ‘wreaking vengeance upon the king’s remaining enemies of 1386-8’ (p. 329). This indicates that Richard may not have intended to dispense with parliament altogether, and the fact that the roll was altered indicates recognition of parliament’s importance.

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