The Evolution of Parliament in England, 1295-1401

Index:
1. Three Summonses to the Parliament of 1295 (click here)
2. the Good Parliament of 1376 (click here)
3. Parliamentary Developments in the Fourteenth Century (click here)



I. Three Summonses to the parliament of 1295
Remember that in 1295, parliament was still very much an ad hoc, temporary institution. The king called together whomever he wished, whenever he wished, to discuss whatever topics he wished.  We would do well to remember that parliament was originally simply an extension of the royal council (that is, the group of advisors, yes-men, and warriors who surrounded a given monarch). Edward I (1272-1307) is significant in the history of parliament for beginning to call together certain of his subjects on a quasi-regular basis. He is also important for establishing the form of the English parliament: he regularly called people in three groups, nobles, churchmen, and ‘commons' (ie., simple knights and townsmen), and subsequent kings found this arrangement so useful that this became the standard formula for the composition of parliament with one important exception (the churchmen split off from Parliament in the 14th century since the king found it easier to deal with them separately, in a group known as the Convocation) . By 1400 this left Parliament composed of two groups which eventually (many centuries later) became known as the House of Lords and the House of Commons. Remember, moreover, that the ‘Commons' were not peasants: they were men of the countryside and towns who possessed wealth and local influence, but no title.  The following three summonses have been taken from the On-Line Medieval Sourcebook and have been modernized slightly by Richard Barton.

A. Sample Summons of a Bishop to Parliament (1295)
The King to the venerable father in Christ Robert, by the same grace archbishop of Canterbury, primate of all England, greeting.  Since  a most just law, established by the careful providence of sacred princes, exhorts and decrees us that what affects all ought to be approved by all, so too is it evident that common danger should be met by means provided in common.  You know sufficiently well, and it is now, as we believe, divulged through all regions of the world, how the king of France fraudulently and craftily deprives us of our land of Gascony, by withholding it unjustly from us.  Now, however, not satisfied with the before-mentioned fraud and injustice, having gathered together for the conquest of our kingdom a very great fleet, and an abounding multitude of warriors, with which he has made a hostile attack on our kingdom and its inhabitants, he now proposes to destroy the English language altogether from the earth, if his power should correspond to the detestable proposition of the contemplated injustice, which God forbid.  Therefore, since darts seen beforehand do less injury [ie., ‘forewarned is forearmed'], and since your particular interest, as well as that of the rest of the citizens of our realm, is concerned in this affair, we command you and strictly enjoin you by the fidelity and love in which you are bound to us that on the next Sunday after the feast of St. Martin, in the approaching winter, you be present in person at Westminster; [and we command that you] cite beforehand the dean and chapter of your church, the archdeacons and all the clergy of your diocese, causing the same dean and archdeacons in their own persons, and the said chapter by one suitable proctor, and the said clergy by two, to be present along with you, having full and sufficient power from the same chapter and clergy. [You should all be present in order] to consider, ordain and provide, along with us and with the rest of the prelates and principal men and other inhabitants of our kingdom, how the dangers and threatened evils of this kind are to be met.  Witness the king at Wangham, the thirtieth day of September. (Summonses just like this were sent out to the two archbishops and eighteen bishops, and, with the omission of certain inappropriate phrases, to seventy abbots)

B. Sample Summons of a Baron to Parliament (1295)
The king to his beloved and faithful relative, Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, greetings.  Because we wish to have a consultation and meeting with you and with the rest of the principal men of our kingdom concerning efforts to remedy the dangers which in these days are threatening our whole kingdom, we command you and strictly enjoin you in the fidelity and love in which you are bound to us that on the next Sunday after the feast of St. Martin, in the approaching winter, you be present in person at Westminster, in order to consider, ordain and do  -- along with us, the prelates, the rest of the principal men and other inhabitants of our kingdom  -- whatever may be necessary to meet dangers of this kind.
Witness the king at Canterbury, the first of October.
[Similar summonses were sent to seven earls and forty-one barons]

C. Summons of Representatives of Shires and Towns to Parliament (1295)
The king to the sheriff of Northamptonshire.  We intend to have a consultation and meeting with the earls, barons and other principal men of our kingdom with regard to providing remedies against the dangers which are in these days threatening our kingdom.  On that account we have commanded them to be with us on the next Sunday after the feast of St. Martin in the approaching winter, at Westminster, in order to consider, ordain, and do whatever may be necessary for the avoidance of these dangers.  Therefore, we strictly require you to cause two knights from the aforesaid county, two citizens from each city in the same county, and two burgesses from each borough, [chosen from] those who are especially discreet and capable of laboring, to be elected without delay, and to cause them to come to us at the aforesaid said time and place.
 Moreover, the said knights are to have full and sufficient power for themselves and for the community of the aforesaid county, and the said citizens and burgesses for themselves and the communities of the aforesaid cities and boroughs separately, then and there for doing what shall then be ordained according to the common counsel in the premises; so that the aforesaid business shall not remain unfinished in any way for defect of this power.  And you shall have there the names of the knights, citizens and burgesses and this writ.
Witness the king at Canterbury on the third day of October.

[These texts are part of the Internet Medieval Source Book, an on-line site operated by Paul Halsall at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/ed1-summons.html.  The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.  Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational purposes and personal use. They have been scanned from summonses in E. P. Cheyney, trans., University of Pennsylvania. Dept. of History: Translations and Reprints from the Original Sources of European history, published for the Dept. of History of the University of Pennsylvania., Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press [1897]. Vol. 1, No. 6, pp. 33-35. Language has been modernized slightly by Richard Barton]




II. The Good Parliament of 1376
In 1376 King Edward III was near his deathbed and practically incapable of governing. The affairs of the state, as well as the Hundred Years War being waged in France, were in the hands of his second son, Duke John of Lancaster, and the royal bureaucrats. When Parliament was summoned to discuss the usual affairs, things rapidly took a different course. The commons, in collusion with certain lords and churchmen, demanded reform of the royal government.  The author of this chronicle was a man named Thomas Walsingham.  Note: "subsidies" are grants of money to the king made by his people. Recall that the England had been deeply enmeshed in the 100 Years War since 1346; by 1376, it was going badly for the English.   Does this help explain the events of the parliament?  Why do you think this is known as the "Good Parliament"?  The following text has been taken from the On-Line Medieval Sourcebook; it has been condensed slightly and its language modernized by Richard Barton.

        In the year of our lord 1376 a parliament was held at London by command of the king; it began about the octave of St. George and lasted almost continuously for nine weeks.  There the king urgently demanded a subsidy from the common people.
 But the knights of the shire, divinely inspired, as it is believed, diligently treated  together on this matter and refused to answer these requests without the counsel of the  magnates. Therefore the knights petitioned that there should be sent to them certain bishops, by whose advice they might be informed so as to reply more circumspectly to the  requests of the king. [I skip ahead .... The bishops come and listen to the knights (ie., the ‘commons').  They suggest that the commons enlist the support of four barons who can aid them in presenting their demands to the king. The barons are duly elected and sworn to be faithful to the commons. The barons then refuse to proceed without more security, and four earls are brought in.]
    . . .  When, therefore, the above nobles had consulted with the knights concerning the royal request [for a subsidy], it was agreed amongst them that they should unanimously refuse the royal requests until certain abuses and defects had been corrected, and until certain persons who seemed to have impoverished the king and the kingdom, to have vilely tarnished his fame and greatly  to have diminished his power, should have been eliminated, and their excesses properly punished according to their kind.
        When they had done this, a natural question arose amongst them as to which knight should speak on behalf of the king, the kingdom and the common people. For they feared certain deceitful persons amongst the king's secretaries who had obtained full grace and  favor with the king, and who would, they knew, prepare traps for them, on account of the fact that they had for the first time planned to bring their defects into the open.
        But whilst they were disturbed about such things, God lifted up the spirit of a certain knight of their company whose name was Peter de la Mare, pouring into his heart abundant wisdom from His treasures, and an unhoped-for eloquence.  God gave him also such great perseverance and constancy that he was neither terrified by the threats of his adversaries nor confused by the plotting of the envious; but he was always ready to suffer all things  for truth and justice . . . . Thus the trustworthy Peter began to speak, trusting in the help of God. He stood with his colleagues before the Lords, of whom the greatest was John Duke of Lancaster [the king's son and the leader of the royal government], whose deeds always stood out in discord with his name; for he always, as it is believed, lacked both human and divine grace.
        "Lords," said Peter, "and magnates, by whose faith and industry the  government of the kingdom ought to be carried out.  I will by no means try to conceal from your wisdom how weighed down the common people have been by the burden of taxes, now paying a fifteenth, now a tenth, or even yielding a ninth to the king's use.  All of which they would bear cheerfully if the king or the kingdom seemed to get any advantage or profit from it. It would also have been tolerable to the people if all that money had been spent in forwarding our military affairs, even though these had been unsuccessful. But it is obvious that the king has received no advantage from it nor the kingdom  any return from it. And so, because the public was never told how such great sums of money were spent, the common people are demanding a statement of accounts from those who received the money, for it is not credible that the king should need such an infinitely large sum if his ministers were loyal."
        The judges, having nothing to say to Peter when he made these statements, kept silent.  Then because nearly all the magnates and common people held the Duke and his accomplices in suspicion, the Duke declined to reply at that time, and dismissed the council, so that the matters might be treated elsewhere .... The Duke took counsel with his followers:  he is said to have uttered boastful words. "What," he said, "are these degenerate knights of wax trying to do? Do they think they are the kings or princes of this land? From where have they got their pride and arrogance? I think they are ignorant of my power.  I will appear before them early tomorrow in such glorious a manner; I will raise up such a great force amongst them; and I will terrify them with such severity, that neither they nor anybody like them will dare in future to provoke my majesty." But one of his men-at-arms is said to have replied to the Duke, who was glorifying and deceiving himself in this way with these empty promises, [in this way]: "Lord, do not let your magnificence conceal from you by whom, and how strongly, these knights are supported.  They are not common people as you have said, but men powerful and strenuous in arms. They have the backing of the lords and, first of all, of prince Edward your brother who gives them sound advice and aid. Also all the Londoners and the common people are so closely connected with them that they will not permit them to be overwhelmed with insults or molested with any injury however slight.  These knights, if they are insulted, will be driven to undertake all the most extreme steps against your person and your friends; whereas otherwise they might perhaps set out  to do very little."
        So the Duke, driven by the sharp prick of his conscience and terrified by the replies of his followers, as we have indicated before, put aside the harshness of his mind when he entered the assembly of the knights on the following day. Beyond the hopes of any, he showed himself so gracious and favorable to them that he swung them all over in admiration and surprise ..... craftily pretending modesty, he seemed to offer encouragement, saying  that he knew well how honorable the desires of the knights were, as they labored to improve the conditions of the realm. Whatever they thought ought to be corrected, they  should set forth, and he would apply the remedy they chose. The knights expressed their thanks to him, although they knew that he was insincere. Then, entering parliament, and standing before his judges they formally accused Latimer, the king's chamberlain, by the mouth of Peter de la Mare, of being useless to the king and to the kingdom. Therefore they most urgently petitioned that he should be deprived of his office; he was said often to have deceived the king and to have been false---let me not say traitorous---to his lord  the king.
        When they had put forward these and a host of other charges, they begged the judges  that they would justly provide the remedy of correction for their great excesses. The duke knew that such ill deeds deserved the penalty of death. Nevertheless, he perceived that, if he pronounced sentence of death against them, their goods would fall to the use of the king and not of himself. He chose to delay the pronouncement of the sentence . . . because he  ardently desired their money and because, what is worse, he was a partner in their  crimes. He dismissed the assembly for the time being, in order to examine the case elsewhere --- Would that he would justly judge it! --- And he went away. . . Meanwhile, the appointed day of judgement for Latimer and Lyons arrived. Replying to the complaint that he had evaded the laws of the kingdom, contrary to the provisions of  statute, Lord Latimer replied that his actions had the approval of the king and his ministers.  And Sir Peter responded that this was nonetheless against the statutes made in parliament,  and that statutes so made in parliament must be followed as written, and could only be changed in parliament by another statute. To show that Latimer had not followed the statutes as written, Sir Peter took a book of statutes he had with him, opened it, and read the statutes before all the lords and commoners present, which showed that indeed Latimer had not followed the laws as made in previous parliaments.
        The Duke reflected on the charges presented against Latimer and Lyons [another ‘corrupt' official]. He weighed their quality and their number (for more than sixty notable defects were presented against  them, on the greater part of which they were convicted before the duke and the judges).  And although, as it is said, he had received a great sum of money from them, now-wishing to quiet the people whom he knew to be inflamed against him, and fearing the majesty of the prince [that is, his older brother Edward, the so-called "Black Prince"], whom he well knew to favor the people and the knights --- he deprived  Latimer by judicial sentence of his office. The latter had been chamberlain of the king.  He also confiscated all his profits for the use of the king, so that he should be content with his ancestral heritage.  Since Latimer was a peer of the realm the Duke did not wish him to be kept in a public prison, so he ordered Latimer to be kept under safe custody until they  should learn the wish of the king concerning him.
        It was further decreed, by a common decree of parliament, that Latimer should in future be held as infamous, and that he should in no way be admitted to the council of the king or of the kingdom. But this vigor dissolved away immediately after the untimely death of Prince Edward [the Black Prince]. For after that death the Duke could do whatever he  desired and willed. Thus he afterwards did all things like a judge who neither feared God nor man. [I skip ahead - the Duke tries to get parliament to agree that he should be named the heir to the throne after the Black Prince. The commons reply that so long as King Edward III lived, and so long as the Black Prince's ten-year old son was alive, there was no need to think about this matter.] .....
        After this reply, the commons were directed that, if they thought there were other  matters still needing correction, they were to report them, in the usual manner, before the Duke. They replied that first the things they had deposed before him ought to be duly carried out. . . Therefore the above knights of the shire, on behalf of the community and through the mouth of Peter de la Mare, petitioned that the duke and his fellow judges  would provide remedy and correction for such great excesses.
        After these things had happened, and when the end of the parliament was already approaching, the knights began to consider the king's mental incapacity and the free opportunity which some of his familiars had to appropriate the [wealth of the] kingdom..  So that these men should not be able to do whatever they wished by pretext of the king's wish, the knights petitioned in the name of the people that twelve men, peers of the realm and faithful, discreet and  devoid of greed, should continually be in the councils of the king and of the kingdom. At least six of them should be with the king at all times, for the less important business.  When anything weighty was to be discussed, all twelve should be present. The commons were motivated by the greed of certain Englishmen, to whom the king had given too much power in  managing the affairs of the kingdom; for these men, everything was for sale, namely the faith and justice which they owed to the king and to the people. For this reason the knights  petitioned the lords as described above. The duke, judging their petition to be just (but only in word, for he resolved something different in his secret heart), adjudged it to be granted, directing that those lords should be elected by the people. They were elected accordingly.
        And it was decreed in this parliament that if any of the said lords was discovered to  have received gifts, or to have been disloyal in the obedience he showed either to the  king or to the community, he should forthwith be removed from the government and be held  infamous for all time; he should pay the king five times what he had accepted, and his  body should be at the mercy of the king. And in order that all these decisions might achieve  enduring strength, they were sent from the knights of parliament to the king. . . [The knights] begged his assent and confirmation of all the statutes in the aforesaid parliament, and asked that this parliament might be ratified according to the custom of parliament and should be classified by the king under the name of parliament. All of which the king promised that he would hold agreeable and determined. And here ended the parliament which has been  described above.

[From: Thomas Walsingham, Chronicon Angliae, trans. E. M. Thompson (London: Rolls  Series, 1874), pp. 68-101. Scanned and modernized by J.S. Arkenberg, Dept. of History, Cal. State Fullerton. Further modernized and truncated by Richard Barton.  This text is part of the Internet  Medieval Source Book, an on-line site operated by Paul Halsall at http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/1376goodparliament.html. The Sourcebook is a collection of public domain and  copy-permitted texts related to medieval and Byzantine history.  Permission is granted for electronic copying, distribution in print form for educational  purposes and personal use.]



III. Parliamentary Developments in the Fourteenth Century
 The expense and duration of the Hundred Years War, and the initial ease with which the King could manipulate parliaments to grant him exceptional taxation (called Aids or Subsidies) to conduct the war, meant that a number of important constitutional developments took place in the 14th century.  As more and more parliaments were called, and the king asked for more and more money, the Commons [knights and townsmen] came to be less and less willing to grant the king's every wish.  By 1400, what had once been an impromptu meeting of selected subjects called to help out their king had become instead a formal institution with rules of conduct, officers, and, as we see here, a growing sense of its own role in government.  Consider the implications of these brief accounts on the power of the king.  Assuming both had been accepted by the crown (and neither was), what would the king's position have been?  What powers would the Commons have held?

1. The Commons Petition the King for Audit of Accounts, 1341
Item, the Knights and Commons of the land request that for the common profit of all, certain knights be deputed by Commission to hear the accounts of all those who have received the Loans of our lord King, or other Aids granted to him; ... and that Rolls and other [written] remembrances, obligations and other things made by those [gathering royal income] be delivered to the Chancery, there to be enrolled and put into common memory.

2. Commons' Demand for Redress of Grievances before Supplying Funds (1401)
Item, on the same Sunday, the said Commons reminded our Lord King that in many Parliaments prior to this one, their common petitions had not been answered before the Commons had made its grant of an Aid or Subsidy to the king; and concerning this matter, they asked the Lord King that for the greater ease and comfort of the said Commons it might please the king to grant the Commons that they should know the [King's] answers to their petitions before proceeding to make any such grant. ... [the King then consulted with the Lords]  And, leaving them, the King [said he did] not at all want to change the good Customs and Usages made and established in ancient times past.

[very rough translations made from the chancery French by Richard Barton, from texts in Eleanor C. Lodge and Gladys A. Thornton, English Constitutional Documents, 1307-1485 (Cambridge, 1935), pp. 138, 159-160.]



back to Translated Texts Index

back to my homepage