Walker, S. K., 'Lordship and Lawlessness in the Palatinate of Lancaster, 1370-1400', Journal of British Studies, 28 (1989), 325-348

-

Quick Summary

The retainers of the duke of Lancaster did not significantly contribute to public disorder in the palatinate of Lancaster

  • The lack of lords in Lancashire other than the duke of Lancaster was problematic
  • The commons in parliament complained that magnate affinities disrupted public order
  • The duke of Lancaster suffered, rather than profited, from the corruption of his men
Key Conclusion

Walker explores the state of law and order in the palatinate of Lancaster under John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster. Walker concludes that John of Gaunt’s affinity (retinue) did not cause excessive disruption to public order in Lancashire. Any disruption caused by Gaunt’s retainers was offset by their ability to provide a means of resolving local disputes in Lancashire. A key problem in Lancashire was the lack of lords other than the duke of Lancaster offering patronage and protection to members of the gentry (social elites beneath the rank of the nobility). Another problem was caused by ‘the endemic failure of medieval rulers to control their local agents’ (p. 348).

Content Overview

Walker focuses on Lancashire as a way of assessing the validity of complaints made by the commons in parliament that ‘magnate affinities’ were having ‘destructive consequences for the quality of public order’ (p. 325). A magnate affinity is band of men bound to a lord by an ‘indenture of retainer’ and a ‘money fee’ (salary) rather than a traditional feudal bond of a ‘heritable fief’ (land held in exchange for customary services). The exercise of power through affinities is known as ‘bastard feudalism’. Historians disagree on how pervasive this system was. Some believe that magnates could control a county using indentured retainers, others argue that there was a large body of independent county gentry over whom lords exercised limited influence.

Further Findings

About three-quarters of the manors in Lancashire were held by members of the gentry, leaving less than a quarter under aristocratic or ecclesiastical control (p. 332). Furthermore, economic evidence demonstrates that a ‘large and important’ section of the county community ‘remained permanently outside the Lancastrian affinity’ (p. 333). Walker concludes that John of Gaunt ‘was not as free to extend or withhold his favor as the critics of magnate lordship in the Commons liked to make out’ (p. 333). As a final consideration, Walker argues that far from encouraging the corruption of his officials and retainers, Gaunt suffered from the depredations of his officials, both politically and financially. In this sense, lords could themselves be victims of ‘bastard feudalism’.

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