This seminal study addresses one of the most beautifully decorated 15th-century copies of the New Statutes of England, uncovering how the manuscript's unique interweaving of legal, religious, and literary discourses frames the reader's perception of the work. Taking internal and external evidence into account, Rosemarie McGerr suggests that the manuscript was made for Prince Edward of Lancaster, transforming a legal reference work into a book of instruction in kingship, as well as a means of celebrating the Lancastrians' rightful claim to the English throne during the Wars of the Roses. A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes also explores the role played by the manuscript as a commentary on royal justice and grace for its later owners and offers modern readers a fascinating example of the long-lasting influence of medieval manuscripts on subsequent readers.
This seminal study addresses one of the most beautifully decorated 15th-century copies of the New Statutes of England, uncovering how the manuscript's unique interweaving of legal, religious, and literary discourses frames the reader's perception of the work. Taking internal and external evidence into account, Rosemarie McGerr suggests that the manuscript was made for Prince Edward of Lancaster, transforming a legal reference work into a book of instruction in kingship, as well as a means of celebrating the Lancastrians' rightful claim to the English throne during the Wars of the Roses. A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes also explores the role played by the manuscript as a commentary on royal justice and grace for its later owners and offers modern readers a fascinating example of the long-lasting influence of medieval manuscripts on subsequent readers.
A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes: The Yale Law School New Statutes of England
320
A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes: The Yale Law School New Statutes of England
320eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
This seminal study addresses one of the most beautifully decorated 15th-century copies of the New Statutes of England, uncovering how the manuscript's unique interweaving of legal, religious, and literary discourses frames the reader's perception of the work. Taking internal and external evidence into account, Rosemarie McGerr suggests that the manuscript was made for Prince Edward of Lancaster, transforming a legal reference work into a book of instruction in kingship, as well as a means of celebrating the Lancastrians' rightful claim to the English throne during the Wars of the Roses. A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes also explores the role played by the manuscript as a commentary on royal justice and grace for its later owners and offers modern readers a fascinating example of the long-lasting influence of medieval manuscripts on subsequent readers.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780253001986 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Indiana University Press |
| Publication date: | 12/22/2021 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 320 |
| File size: | 18 MB |
| Note: | This product may take a few minutes to download. |
| Age Range: | 18 Years |
About the Author
Rosemarie McGerr is Professor of Comparative Literature and Director of the Medieval Studies Institute at Indiana University Bloomington. She is author of Chaucer's Open Books: Resistance to Closure in Medieval Discourse and The Pilgrimage of the Soul: A Critical Edition of the Middle English Dream Vision.
Read an Excerpt
A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes
The Yale Law School New Statutes of England
By Rosemarie McGerr
Indiana University Press
Copyright © 2011 Rosemarie McGerrAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-253-35641-3
CHAPTER 1
The Yale New Statutes Manuscript and Medieval English Statute Books
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
* * *
The Yale Law School manuscript of the Nova statuta Angliae (Goldman Library MS MssG +St11 no.1) contains almost four hundred leaves, so it offers many margins and centers for readers to explore. Modern readers coming to a manuscript copy of a medieval text discover the complexity and the potential to empower that the reading process offered in earlier times: letter forms and abbreviations in handmade books could be ambiguous, words might be rearranged or missing, and authorship could be uncertain; but medieval readers could select what texts, decoration, and illustrations were put into new manuscript books, and medieval readers often added to or removed texts or images from their books over time. Examining the layout and content of the text and decoration in a medieval manuscript, as well as the structure of the manuscript as a whole and the relationship of its components to other manuscripts, can help modern readers understand when, where, and for whom a medieval manuscript was made, as well as the process by which the texts within the manuscript were read. As Malcolm Parkes and Ian Doyle have argued, "Layout and decoration [in a medieval manuscript] function like punctuation: they are part of the presentation of a text which facilitates its use by a reader" (Parkes and Doyle 1978, 169). In this chapter, we will examine what evidence the Yale Nova statuta manuscript offers about when and where it was made, who made it, and how the parts of the manuscript construct several frames for its presentation of English law. We will also consider its relationship with developments in the history of medieval English statutes manuscripts. In the process, we will begin to see how the Yale manuscript transforms the New Statutes of England into a Lancastrian mirror for princes.
There has been little consensus among scholars about the origins, contents, or significance of the Yale manuscript of the New Statutes of England. In 1975, noting the manuscript's luxurious decoration and the appearance of Margaret of Anjou's coat of arms in the border decoration, art historian Jane Hayward argued that the book was a wedding gift from Henry VI to Margaret in 1445 (Hayward 1975, 142). Hayward suggested that the statutes in the codex from the Parliaments after 1444–45 are additions that Margaret herself commissioned before she returned to France as a widow in 1476. Since Hayward published her comments, other scholars have offered alternative interpretations of the manuscript's origins and significance. In 1978, art historians Walter Cahn and James Marrow dated the early parts of the manuscript to around 1460, fifteen years after Margaret's marriage to Henry (Cahn and Marrow 1978, 240–41). As we will see, this dating of the manuscript fits the evidence much better than Hayward's estimate. Though noting the appearance of Henry's and Margaret's arms, Cahn and Marrow did not link the presence of these arms with any royal commission or ownership of the manuscript. Cahn and Marrow also parted from Hayward in arguing that the manuscript's series of historiated initials is similar to illustrations in other English statute books. While Cahn and Marrow revealed some of the links between the Yale Nova statuta and other copies of the text, their description masked important distinguishing features of the Yale manuscript, as well as possible connections between this manuscript's illustrations and other medieval iconographic traditions.
Differing statements about the manuscript's dating and illustrations have continued to appear. In his catalogue of English legal manuscripts in the United States, legal historian John Hamilton Baker dated the core of the Yale Nova statuta to the 1450s, with later additions to 1484, and gave a full account of the manuscript's post-medieval provenance; but he erroneously described this copy of the Nova statuta as containing six miniatures of kings in Parliament (Baker 1985, 73–74). The most extensive work on this manuscript thus far, however, has been by art historian Kathleen Scott. Over the course of several publications, she has pointed out associations between the Yale Nova statuta manuscript and other English manuscripts from the second half of the fifteenth century, including a group of Nova statuta manuscripts that follow a standardized layout for illustration and decoration. Scott's work, along with that of paleographers Malcolm Parkes, Jeremy Griffiths, and Pamela Robinson, suggests that one of the scribes and two of the artists who made the Yale manuscript of the New Statutes also worked on at least eleven other copies of this text. Scholars have now christened this scribe the "Nova statuta scribe." Research by Jeremy Griffiths locates this scribe's work in several more manuscripts of the New Statutes and suggests that this scribe may have played a role in organizing production of copies of this text (J. Griffiths 1980). Recognizing the similarities between the Yale manuscript and these other copies of the New Statutes helps to demonstrate what elements of the Yale manuscript are conventions of fifteenth-century statutes manuscripts. Nevertheless, it is precisely because the Yale Law School manuscript was made by these same scribes and artists that its differences from the other copies of the Nova statuta are significant, for these differences provide clues about the purpose for which this particular codex was made.
The Yale manuscript of the New Statutes of England is part of a complex and politically charged proliferation of legal information that took place in England in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Based on the number of surviving manuscripts, scholars have determined that this period saw a significant increase of interest in owning copies of the Statutes of the Realm: more than four hundred manuscript copies of English statutes survive from the period between the end of the thirteenth century and the end of the fifteenth, when the statutes begin to appear in print (Skemer 1999, 113). The largest number of statutes manuscripts come from the second and third quarters of the fifteenth century: of the 125 surviving manuscripts of the New Statutes, thirty-three come from the 1430s and 1440s, yet Don Skemer argues that the third quarter of the fifteenth century probably saw even greater numbers of statutes manuscripts produced (Skemer 1999, 129–30). The expansion in the market for statute books was probably partly due to growth in the legal profession during this period. Nevertheless, Skemer presents the fifteenth-century proliferation of statutes manuscripts as fueled to a large degree by desire for education on the part of persons without professional legal training, such as land holders, who sought to learn about the laws through private reading. Skemer also recognizes a political dimension to the widening interest in knowledge about England's statutes, especially during the mid-fifteenth century: "Faced with a weak central government during the long minority and chaotic reign of Henry VI, and by the widespread lawlessness and the dynastic struggles of Lancaster and York, members of the landed gentry like the Paston family defended its property interests by every means available, including legal knowledge gained from school and from reading statute books" (Skemer 1999, 128–29). As we will see, political concerns other than protecting property rights may also have shaped the use of statute books during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
The wider transmission of statutes texts brought changes in the content and format, as well as the ownership, of the books that recorded English statutes. None of these manuscripts has the same content or form as the official records of English statutes: the Great Roll of the Statutes, which was kept in the Tower of London, and the Rolls of Parliament. Yet production of the statute books required access to the official records for fair copies to be used as models, as well as verification of individual copies by scribes: for example, Neil Ker found six statutes manuscripts from between 1330 and 1450 with scribal notes about statutes having been checked against the official rolls (Ker 1969–2002, 1:41–42, 127–28, 157, and 3:263–67, 519–20, and 660– 65). The need for access to official documents and the evidence in the manuscripts themselves both suggest that production of statutes manuscripts was centered in the London area and most likely involved scribes who had training in legal records (Scott 1980a, 48–58; Skemer 1999, 115–22). The earliest collections, the Old Statutes of England (the Statuta Angliae, Vetera statuta, or Statuta antiqua), were a selection of important statutes from prior to the reign of Edward III, rather than an inclusive or chronological collection. The Statuta antiqua almost always begin with the Magna carta and almost always present the statutes in Latin. In the fourteenth century, however, changes took place in the form and content of statute collections that suggest a transformation in the purposes of statute books and interest in the statutory process itself. Beginning with the reign of Edward III (1327–77), statute books were produced that contain all of the statutes for each of a king's Parliament sessions, organized chronologically and recorded in Law French. The use of French for these statutes certainly made them accessible to a wider audience than the earlier Latin statutes, and inclusion of all of the statutes made the collection useful for a wider range of English society: each reader could decide for himself or herself which statutes were more or less important, according to personal concerns. The New Statutes were less of a collection and more of a continuous text; yet it was a text that continued to grow, with leaves often left blank at the end of the codex for addition of new statutes as time went on. In several senses, then, the New Statutes of England was a much more "open" text than the earlier statutes books had been.
Given the larger amount of text in the New Statutes, greater numbers of organizational tools were used in the New Statutes manuscripts – including initials of several different sizes and colors, scripts of different size and formality, and notations of kings, regnal years, and statute numbers in the margins – in order to facilitate reading and locating information. Additional reading aids were also developed, such as chronological lists of statutes and then alphabetical indexes of subjects covered in the statutes. During this time, new copies of the older statutes also began to present the laws in chronological order, with a table of contents and headings that indicated the king and regnal year associated with each law, and some manuscripts contain both the Latin Statuta antiqua and French Nova statuta. With the chronological and inclusive format of the New Statutes of England, the statutes can be read sequentially, like a history book, or read for statutes of a particular Parliament or on a particular topic, like a reference work. Reader interest in the parliamentary process itself may have led to the inclusion of additional texts in some manuscripts of the New Statutes. One of these is the Latin treatise Modus tenendi Parliamentum (The Method of Holding Parliament), a fourteenth-century text that Matthew Giancarlo has discussed as a mythologizing account of the origins and procedures of Parliament (Giancarlo 2007, 2). This anonymous treatise offers the earliest known discussion of Parliament as a part of English government, and scholars continue to debate the date and purpose of its composition. The Modus is divided into sections that discuss such topics as the process by which the king calls Parliament into session, who among the clergy and laity should be summoned to a session of Parliament, who should keep the records of the session, what the order of business should be, and how decisions should be made about difficult problems. The discussion of the role of the high steward or seneschal in the Modus tenendi Parliamentum links it to a second Latin treatise that sometimes also appears in manuscripts of the New Statutes after the Modus: De senescalsia Angliae (On the Seneschal of England). The origins of this text are also somewhat obscure: Claire Valente argues that Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, had the treatise drawn up in order to justify his use of military power against the favorites of Edward II in 1321 (Valente 2003, 128, 137). Other scholars have associated this treatise with Lancastrian sympathizers in the later fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, since the tract supports the claim that, after the king, the seneschal has the power and responsibility to maintain justice in the realm of England, including presiding over trials in theHouse of Lords (J. Taylor 1987, 314–16; and Weber 1998, 160). If the treatise on the seneschal was perceived to stem from the problems that led to Edward II's loss of the throne and his replacement by his son Edward III, medieval readers may have found it an appropriate preface for the opening of the New Statutes, which begin with the statutes of Edward III after a preamble that accounts for the king's replacement of his father. Both treatises appear in the Yale manuscript (fols. 2r–8v).
The wider audience for statutes books in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries is also reflected in the wide range of workmanship and decoration in these manuscripts, both of which reflect a range of expenditure on the part of the owner. Copies of both the Old Statutes and New Statutes in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries appear in smaller and less decorated forms, as well as larger and luxuriously decorated forms. The Yale manuscript of the New Statutes, with its gold leaf, painted initials, images of kings, and decorated borders, falls into the latter category (plates 1–24). The smaller and simpler copies were probably made for professionals who needed information about the content of the statutes and perhaps could not afford expensive decoration. Some of the simple copies of the Nova statuta contain only a pendrawn initial to open each king's reign: examples include New York, Columbia University Rare Book and Manuscript Library Plimpton MS 273 (plate 25); London, Inner Temple Library MS Petyt 505; and Oslo and London, Martin Schøyen Collection MS 1355. Though the simpler format is more common among earlier copies of the Nova statuta, this format remained an option during the middle of the fifteenth century: for example, Schøyen MS 1355 contains the statutes through 23 Henry VI (1444–45) and Inner Temple Library MS Petyt 505 contains the statutes through 29 Henry VI (1450–51). Some of the less decorated copies of the Nova statuta use a large initial in paint and gold leaf, as well as border decoration, to mark only one king's reign, most often that of the first monarch, but sometimes the monarch reigning when the manuscript was made: for example, London, British Library MS Lansdowne 468 has a large painted initial and border for the opening of the statutes of Edward III and only pen-drawn initials for subsequent reigns, while London, British Library MS Additional 81292 uses a painted initial and border decoration for the opening of statutes passed under Henry VI, but uses only pen-drawn initials for the reigns of the other kings. Some of the more elaborately decorated copies of the statutes have a large decorated initial in paint and gold leaf and border decoration for the beginning of each new king's reign, but no historiated initials: examples include Philadelphia, Free Library MS Carson LC 14. 10 (plate 26); London, British Library MS Lansdowne 470; Kew, National Archives MS E 164/10; and Cambridge (MA), Harvard Law School Library MSS 10, 29–30, 42, and 163. Use of these large illuminated, but not historiated, initials continued even after copies of the Nova statuta with historiated initials began to become more widespread: for example, Carson LC 14. 10 contains the statutes through 3 Henry VII (1487–88). It seems clear, therefore, that levels of luxury in presentation of text and in decoration in Nova statuta manuscripts were adjusted throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries to suit the desires or circumstances of the person commissioning the copy.
(Continues...)
Excerpted from A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes by Rosemarie McGerr. Copyright © 2011 Rosemarie McGerr. Excerpted by permission of Indiana University Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction: The Margin and the Center—Framing a Reading of a Legal Manuscript
1. The Yale New Statutes Manuscript and Medieval English Statute Books: Similarities and Differences
2. Royal Portraits and Royal Arms: The Iconography of the Yale New Statutes Manuscript
3. The Queen and the Lancastrian Cause: The Yale New Statutes Manuscript and Margaret of Anjou
4. Educating the Prince: The Yale New Statutes Manuscript and Lancastrian Mirrors for Princes
5. "Grace Be Our Guide": The Cultural Significance of a Medieval Law Book
Appendix 1: Chronology of Events
Appendix 2: Codicological Description of New Haven, Yale Law School, Lillian Goldman Law Library MssG +St11 no.1
Notes
Bibliography
Index
Plates appear after page 000.
What People are Saying About This
The study presents an original and a highly important reading of the imagery of this distinctively illustrated copy of the 'New Statutes.' . . . Professor McGerr skillfully interweaves the study of codicology, iconography, history and literature offering fresh and expansive interpretations of the interaction of its visual and verbal discourses.
This book is a model of contemporary manuscript scholarship. By splicing together several disciplinary strands of medieval studies, it sheds light on Lancastrian book patrons and what they had in common with their Valois and Angevin relatives in France and other great fifteenth-century bibliophiles. Rosemarie McGerr expertly shows what pedagogical and political aims were served by the New Statutes of England codex at Yale. A strong grasp of fifteenth-century iconography and a sharp eye for tell-tale details enable her to decode the core message lodged within the manuscript's program of miniatures, a message of opposition to Edward IV's usurpation of the throne. A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes splendidly investigates the circumstances under which that pro-Lancastrian manuscript was first created at the behest of Queen Margaret of Anjou and then later preserved intact in spite of Yorkist supremacy. Here codicology splendidly opens the way for lucid historical inferences.
A Lancastrian Mirror for Princes is the first monographic study of a medieval English statute book, a deluxe Nova statuta manuscript in the Yale Law School Library, MssG +St11, no. 1. McGerr contextualizes the Yale manuscript by iconographical comparison with contemporary English manuscripts and argues convincingly that its royal portraits and allusions to the imagery of King David in prayer were shaped by Lancastrian and Yorkist dynastic struggle during these critical years of 1460–71, when the manuscript was most likely illuminated in London for a Lancastrian supporter. McGerr's well-researched interdisciplinary study argues forcefully that the historiated initials emphasize royal power and justice based on the king's relationship with God, so that the manuscript can be seen as a commentary on kingship and a mirror of princes. Her study is a valuable contribution to the history of the book in late medieval England.