Kriehn, George, 'Studies in the Sources of the Social Revolt in 1381', The American Historical Review 7 (1902), 254-285

-

Quick Summary

The medieval chronicler Jean Froissart is an unreliable source for the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381

  • The Peasants’ Revolt was primarily an uprising against serfdom
  • Froissart is unreliable compared to the Monk of Evesham and the Anonimalle chronicle
  • Richard II was a ‘lamb among wolves’ when he met the rebels at Mile End
Key Conclusion

Kriehn challenges traditional interpretations of the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Indeed, Kriehn even rejects the usual title for the rebellion – ‘Peasants’ Revolt’ – on the grounds that the rebels were comprised on townsmen as well as peasants (p. 254, n. 1). The article concludes that the chronicle of Jean Froissart, which has been relied upon by historians to provide us with the main narrative of the revolt, is an unreliable source. Kriehn’s account of the revolt is based on the narrative provided in two other chronicles, as well as a royal order known as the ‘revocation of pardons’. According to Kriehn’s reading of these sources, the ‘backbone’ of the movement was an ‘uprising against serfdom and servile labor’ (p. 285).

Content Overview

Kriehn is particularly interested in accounts of Richard II’s meeting with the rebels at Mile End on 14 June – where the rebels presented a list of demands to the king. In Froissart’s chronicle, the young king conducts himself with ‘fearlessness’ in front of the rebels. Yet, Kriehn argues that Froissart’s account is unreliable. Writing around 1386-7, Froissart was influenced by ‘moral and rhetorical purposes’ and intended to show the ‘sin and folly of such rebellion’ (p. 263). More trustworthy is the monk of Evesham’s independent account based on a source in London, as well as the account provided by the author of the Anonimalle Chronicle whose ‘vividness and detail’ bear every mark being written by a ‘contemporary’ observer (p. 267).

Further Findings

In contrast to Froissart’s fearless king, the monk of Evesham compares Richard to a ‘lamb among wolves’ at his meeting with the rebels at Mile End (p. 279). At Mile End, the Anonimalle Chronicle recounts how the rebel leader, Wat Tyler, presented the king with a series of petitions. For the content of these petitions, Kriehn examines the ‘revocation of pardons’ – an official record of what Richard initially granted to the rebels (p. 281). This grant included (1) the abolition of serfdom in England; (2) pardons for rebellion and offenses caused by insurgents; (3) the right for manumitted serfs to trade freely; (4) a limit on land rent for manumitted serfs.

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