Waugh, W. T., 'The Great Statute of Praemunire', The English Historical Review 37 (1922), 173-205

-

Quick Summary

The Statute of Praemunire (1393) was a ‘political manifesto’ designed to warn the pope not to meddle with the English legal system

  • Historians have been uncertain about what the statute was supposed to achieve
  • The statute was issued after complaints from the commons in parliament about the pope
  • In its application, the statute had very little legal significance
Key Conclusion

Waugh re-examines the Statute of Praemunire (1393) in light of the ‘perplexing variety of opinions’ among historians about what the statute was designed to achieve (p. 173). Referred to as the ‘most anti-papal Act of Parliament passed prior to the reign of Henry VIII’ by some historians, others have denied it served any anti-papal purpose at all. Waugh concludes that the statute was intended primarily to impress upon the pope the ‘unanimity of the English nation’ in opposition to his recent moves to challenge an aspect of the judicial system in England. As such, Waugh argues that the statute ‘should be looked upon as a political manifesto rather than as part of a measure of legislation’ (p. 196).

Content Overview

The Statute of Praemunire (1393) made it illegal for people to initiate a legal process at the papal curia (court) by procuring certain types of papal documents. In particular, it concerned safeguarding the operation of secular courts in England and their ability to decide who the rightful patron of a church benefice was (a church benefice was essentially a source of income for a member of the clergy, p. 193). The statute arose from a complaint made by the commons in parliament that the pope was interfering in this area of justice, and punishing bishops who accepted the judgements of the secular courts in England.

Further Findings

The statute did not seek to prevent ‘all exercise of the pope’s authority in the country’, and Englishmen continued to appeal to the papal courts ‘without any thought that they were breaking the law’ (p. 175). Although the statute took on more significance under Henry VIII, when it was manipulated to serve anti-papal aims, Waugh notes that the statute was of little significance when it was enacted: ‘No chronicler living at the time gives an accurate account of its contents’ (p. 184). Moreover, between 1393 and 1439 Waugh finds no official records that mention the statute, and concludes that ‘for many years the English and the English courts of law took no notice of the statute’ (p. 189).

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Aston, Margaret , 'Corpus Christi and Corpus Regni: Heresy and the Peasants’ Revolt', Past & Present 143 (1994), 3-47

-
Quick Summary Rebels taking part in the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 ignored the feast of Corpus Christi, but not because of the teachings of John Wycliffe No evidence that rebels didn’t celebrate Corpus Christi Day because of the teachings of John Wycliffe The rebels did show hostility towards the church The Lollards believed that worship of the Eucharistic host amounted to idolatry Key Conclusion Aston seeks to the answer the question: ‘What, if any, is the significance of the fact that the rising of 1381 took place over the feast of Corpus Christi?’ The article concludes that although ‘countless individuals’ failed to celebrate Corpus Christi Day in 1381, there is no evidence to suggest that any of them were motivated by the heretical teachings of John Wycliffe. Yet, many contemporary writers saw a direct link between heresy and rebellion, and reasoned that the Peasants’ Revolt was a manifestation of divine displeasure and a prompt from God for the
Read more

Johnston, Dorothy, 'Richard II’s departure from Ireland, July 1399', The English Historical Review 98 (1983), 785-805

-
Quick Summary The logistic problems faced by Richard II when attempting to bring his army back from Ireland meant that his failure against Henry Bolingbroke was virtually inevitable Richard did not appreciate the severity of the threat posed by Bolingbroke’s return Jean Créton seems to be a fairly reliable source for information about Richard’s departure from Ireland The number of bows and arrows left in Dublin suggests Richard did not envisage a battle with Bolingbroke Key Conclusion Johnston explores Richard II’s military campaign in Ireland which ended prematurely in the summer of 1399 following reports that Henry Bolingbroke had landed in England to reclaim his right to the duchy of Lancaster. The article concludes that the logistic problems faced by Richard in bringing his army back from Ireland meant that his failure in Wales was ‘virtually inevitable’ (p. 802). The ships that had transported Richard’s army to Ireland had already disper
Read more