This study looks at criticisms of kingship found in the chronicles of Adam Usk and Thomas Walsingham, which date from the late fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries in England. It explores the similarities between these two critiques of kingship, exploring the king's duties to society. Both authors agreed that the king did not have absolute power, but had to rule with the help and advice of the nobility. If a monarch acted in a tyrannical way then the nobility had a legitimate right to curb the monarch's power. However, the king also had responsibilities to the poor and the church. A monarch who oppressed the church or the poor would suffer divine pumishment. Both authors agreed that a monarch who failed in their duties to society would suffer accordingly.
|School:||The University of Akron|
|School Location:||United States -- Ohio|
|Source:||MAI 57/05M(E), Masters Abstracts International|
|Keywords:||Chronicle of Adam Usk, Kings, Nobility, Parliament, Richard II, St. Albans Chronicle|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be