Theilmann, John M., 'Political Canonization and Political Symbolism in Medieval England', Journal of British Studies 29 (1990), 241-266

-

Quick Summary

Richard II unsuccessfully attempted to have his great-grandfather, Edward II, recognised as a saint

  • Richard II’s attempt to have Edward II canonized was politically motivated
  • Politically motivated canonization was a way of gaining and maintaining political legitimacy
  • Richard wanted a symbollic representation of God’s support against his rebellious subjects
Key Conclusion

Theilmann explores how ‘political canonization’ – securing papal recognition that a particular political figure was a saint – was used by kings and rebels in late-medieval England to legitimise their actions. Theilmann focuses on Richard II’s unsuccessful attempt to have his great-grandfather, Edward II, canonized. Richard II was successful, however, in preventing the growth of a popular saints’ cult centred on Richard FitzAlan, earl of Arudel, who was executed in 1397. Theilmann concludes that political sainthood benefited the crown more than baronial rebels because the king was already the legitimate ruler: ‘political canonization was an aspect of gaining and maintaining political legitimacy, but without real power it was ultimately useless’ (p. 266).

Content Overview

The thirteenth and fourteenth centuries were the ‘heyday of political saints in England’. During this period, ‘kings and barons struggled to work out a relationship that maintained the legitimacy of royal power and acknowledged a baronial role in the governance of the realm’ (p. 265). Saints, when appealed to as political symbols, lent legitimacy to a particular movement or set of actions. For example, Richard II sought to promote and lend legitimacy to his absolutist conception of the monarchy by having Edward II canonized. Having Edward II declared a saint would have given Richard II a ‘formidable weapon to brandish against the barons’ (p. 254), by providing a symbolic representation of God’s support for kings against their rebellious subjects.

Further Findings

Richard II laid the groundwork for the canonization of Edward II in 1383 by encouraging ‘public notice’ of Edward II’s tomb at the abbey of St Peter’s in Gloucester. Later, probably in 1385 but possibly as late as 1389, a letter was written to Pope Urban VI requesting Edward’s canonization. However, Theilmann observes that ‘canonization came neither swiftly nor the late fourteenth century’, and despite repeated efforts Edward II had still not been canonized at the time of Richard II’s deposition in 1399 (p. 257). More successful was Richard II’s order to exhume the body of earl of Arundel and destroy of his tomb in London to prevent a cult centred on the ‘traitor’ from taking hold (p. 261).

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