Tuck, J. A., 'The Cambridge Parliament, 1388', The English Historical Review 84 (1969), 225-243

-

Quick Summary

The Lords Appellant who seized power from Richard II in 1388 quickly ceased to concern themselves with the government of England

  • The primary objective of the Lords Appellant was the destruction of the king’s friends and favourites
  • Once this objective had been achieved they yielded power back to the king
  • In the Cambridge Parliament of 1388 popular feeling was growing against the Lords Appellant
Key Conclusion

Tuck explores why the commons who attended the Cambridge Parliament of 1388 were so critical of the Lords Appellant – a group of rebel barons who had seized control of government from Richard II and held power in England from January 1388 until May 1389. Tuck concludes that the Appellants achieved their main objective in the Merciless Parliament (February – June 1388) when they brought down ‘the most prominent favourites of the king and sentenced them to death, imprisonment and exile’ (p. 225). After this, the Appellants ceased to concern themselves with government and yielded power back to the king, thereby frustrating hopes for political reform which they had aroused in the commons during the Merciless Parliament.

Content Overview

In the Cambridge Parliament popular opinion was beginning to move against the Appellants. Out of 248 members of parliament who attended the Cambridge Parliament, 52 had also served in the Merciless Parliament – a remarkably high proportion for this period. This is significant because it reveals that many of those who had supported the Appellants previously were now highly critical of their conduct. Although surviving documentary evidence from the parliament of Cambridge is limited, Tuck identifies a roll of petitions presented by the commons during the parliament. This document makes it ‘much easier to understand the work of the parliament’ (p. 227), as well as the extent to which the Appellants had taken a step back from government.

Further Findings

The commons had enthusiastically supported the Appellants in the Merciless Parliament, but on 3 May 1389 the Appellants fell from power. Their power had rested on popular support, which might have been secured by reducing taxes, keeping England’s borders secure, or having something to show for their military expenditure: ‘they did none of these things’ (p. 226). Indeed, their own unity had been momentary and during their year in power it is unlikely that they worked together as they had done during the Merciless Parliament. They were uninterested in the reforms put forward by the commons. Where tentative attempts were made to address these issues, they were driven by initiative from the Chancery itself rather than the appellants.

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