A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror For Princes

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes: The Yale Law School Manuscript of the Nova statuta
Angliae
Rosemarie McGerr
Textual Cultures: Texts, Contexts, Interpretation, Volume 1, Number 2, Autumn 2006, pp. 6-59 (Article) Published by Indiana University Press DOI: 10.1353/txc.0.0039
For additional information about this article

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/txc/summary/v001/1.2.mcgerr.html
Access Provided by UNIFAL-Uniersidade Federal de Alfenas at 10/31/12 8:00PM GMT
A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes

The Yale Law School Manuscript of the Nova statuta Angliae
Rosemarie McGerr
or many years, the codex Yale Law School, Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1 has attracted critical attention for its deluxe decoration and the suggestion that the copy of the Nova statuta Angliae it contains was made as a wedding gift from Henry VI of England for his bride, Margaret of Anjou.1 A deeper appreciation of this manuscripts significance becomes possible, however, when we recognize its unique interweaving of the legal, political, and iconographic discourses of its time. By examining this manuscript as a cultural artifact, not just in terms of the production of legal manuscripts in England during the second half of the fifteenth century, but also in terms of fifteenth-century English political history and late medieval iconographic traditions, I would like to offer a new reading of the manuscript that reassesses the significance of its form and content, as well as its connections with Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou. My analysis explores the manuscripts links to Lancastrian polemic, specifically Margarets leadership of a campaign between 1453 and 1471 to support the legitimacy of the Lancastrian royal line, in order to maintain her husbands claim to the English throne and her sons claim as heir apparent. If we consider the Yale manu1. I want to thank Harvey R. Hull, Rare Book Librarian at Yale Law Schools Lillian Goldman Library, for his assistance in obtaining images of MS G. St. 11. 1 and permission to reproduce them. I also want to thank the Bodleian Library, the British Library, and the Philadelphia Free Library for permission to reproduce images of manuscripts in their collections.
A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 7
script in its cultural context, we can see that there are important parallels between this copy of the Nova statuta Angliae and the written work of one of Margarets most important allies in supporting the Lancastrian cause, Sir John Fortescue, Henry VIs chief justice and later chancellor-in-exile. The Yale Nova statutas links with Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae suggest that this manuscript was most likely made as a gift for Henry and Margarets son, Edward of Lancaster, as a symbol of his role as rightful heir to the English throne. Thanks to the visual and verbal traditions into which it sets the Nova statuta, the Yale Law School manuscript transforms a record of English statutes into a mirror for princes that comments on Englands mid-fifteenthcentury political crisis from the Lancastrian perspective. In its 389 chartae, Yale Law School, Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1 contains several legal texts: a Latin treatise on the rules governing sessions of Parliament (Modus tenendi Parliamentum), a Latin treatise on the duties of the seneschal of England (Tractatus de senescalsia Angliae), and the Nova statuta Angliae, a record in Law French of the statutes of England beginning in 1327 with the reign of Edward III, along with an alphabetical index to the statutes.2 The manuscript offers several forms of assistance to the reader in finding and interpreting this large quantity of information about English law. The index that precedes the Nova statuta text proper allows the reader to find statutes according to topic. Large historiated initials depicting the English kings from Edward III through Edward IV appear with full border decoration to help the reader locate the beginning of statutes passed during each monarchs reign. Titles at the top of the chartae in the Nova statuta identify the reigning king for that section, and small gold initials mark the beginning of the statutes for each regnal year. Alternating blue and red paragraph marks appear for the beginning of each statute. The manuscript does not, however, contain explicit indication of when or for whom it was made. Coats of arms appear as part of the border decoration on most chartae with historiated initials (cc. 55r, 139r, 198r, 261r, and 358r). Plate 1 shows the beginning of the first set of statutes, with the initial depicting Edward III and corner medallions housing the arms of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou in the top border and the arms of the Elyot and Delamere families in the bottom border. Unfortunately, the presence of the arms of the last two families here and the subsequent appearance of the Elyot arms on cc. 139r, 198r, 261r, and 358r do not provide evidence of the origins of this manuscript, since the Elyot and Delamere arms were added to the manuscript over earlier decoration when the book became the prop2. See the Appendix and Plates 17.
8 | Rosemarie McGerr
erty of Sir Richard Elyot and Lady Alice Delamere.3 While the presence of Henry and Margarets arms does not of itself indicate that the manuscript was made for them, the inclusion and survival of their arms suggest the manuscripts early association with supporters of the Lancastrian royal line, as does the codexs inclusion of the tract on the seneschal of England, a document supporting the Lancastrian claim that, after the king, the seneschal had the power to supervise and regulate the whole realm of England, including presiding over trials in the House of Lords.4 There has been little consensus among scholars who have commented on the origins, contents, or significance of Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1. In 1975, art historian Jane Hayward argued that the book was a wedding gift from Henry to Margaret in 1445, noting the manuscripts luxurious decoration and appearance of Henrys and Margarets coats of arms in border decorations and suggesting that the statutes from after 1444 in the codex are additions that Margaret herself commissioned until the king of France paid the ransom to Edward IV that allowed her to return to France.5 While a book about English law might well be a symbolic gift for a new queen from abroad, other evidence offered by MS G. St. 11.1 makes it unlikely that the codex was made as Henrys wedding gift to his bride. Despite its elaborate execution, the manuscript does not contain any inscription or presentation miniature linking it to the royal wedding or a gift presenta3. The earliest inscription in the manuscript verifies its ownership by the Elyot family in the sixteenth century. An inscription on c. 1r indicates that George Freville received the book as a gift from Dame Margaret Elyot and identifies her as the widow of Sir Richard Elyot. Historical records indicate, however, that the reference to Sir Richard as Dame Margarets husband is a mistake. Sir Richards first wife was Lady Alice Delamere, and the arms that appear on c. 55r suggest that they owned the manuscript before it came into the possession of Margaret Elyot. It was Sir Thomas Elyot, the son of Richard Elyot and Alice Delamere, who married Lady Margaret Abarough (or Barrow). When Sir Richard died in 1522, he left his Latin and French books to Sir Thomas and his English books to his daughter, Margery. When Sir Thomas died in 1546, he had no children and left instructions for his wife, Margaret, to sell his books and donate the proceeds to support poor students. On Sir Richard Elyot and Sir Thomas Elyot, see entries by Richard Schoeck and Stanford Lehmberg in Matthew and Harrison 2004, ad voc. 4. See Taylor 1987, 31416. 5. See Hayward 1975, 14243; Haywards comments accompany a plate of c. 358 in Goldman Library G. St. 11.1 in the catalogue for an exhibit of the manuscript at the Cloisters Museum: New York Metropolitan Museum of Art. See also Horwood 1874, 53; Sotheby Auction House 1933, 5657, lot 427 and accompanying plate; and Faye and Bond 1962, 53, no. 20.
tion, which contrasts with the carefully planned ceremonies with which the betrothal, wedding, and coronation were celebrated.6 Indeed, in this regard the Yale Nova statuta differs considerably from the one book scholars agree Margaret did receive as a wedding presenta collection of French narratives and treatises on chivalry and heraldry given to her by Sir John Talbot, the first earl of Shrewsbury, with a dedicatory poem, inscription, and miniature depicting the presentation of the manuscript.7 Haywards interpretation also failed to account for other evidence that the manuscript provides: for example, the statutes passed after 1445supposedly added by Margaret until her final departure from England in 1476actually stop at 14671468, while she was in exile with her son and other Lancastrian loyalists in France; and a later addition to the manuscript presents statutes passed after her death in 1482.8 Basing her analysis on the illustration depicting Edward IV on c. 358r (Plate 2), Hayward also contended that the manuscripts historiated initials are unique because they portray the English kings as sovereign givers of law. Though the Edward IV initial might support this reading of the kings legal power, the manuscript as a whole does not; for this initial differs from the other five historiated initials in the manuscript. Ironically, instead of offering a unique portrayal of sovereign power, this depiction of Edward IV resembles much more the visual representation of kings in other copies of the Nova statuta than the other illustrations of kings in the Yale Law School manuscript. Since Hayward, other scholars have offered alternative interpretations of the manuscripts 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 Margarets marriage to Henry.9 Though noting the appearance of Henrys and Margarets 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 the assessment by Hayward in arguing that the manuscripts 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 among the manuscripts, as well as possible connections between this manuscripts
6. See, for example, the account in Maurer 2003, 1723. 7. This codex is now London, British Library, MS Royal 15 E VI. See Mandach 1974a and 1974b; and Bossy 1998. 8. See, for example, Laynesmith 2004, 17073, and Maurer 2003, 2038. 9. The description of the manuscript appears in Cahn and Marrow 1978, 24041, a special topic volume of the Yale University Library Gazette.
illustrations and other medieval iconographic traditions. Differing statements about the manuscripts dating and illustrations have continued to appear. In his 1985 catalogue, legal historian John Hamilton Baker (1985 1990, 1: 7374) dated the Yale Nova statuta to the 1450s, with later additions, and gave a full account of the manuscripts post-medieval provenance; but he erroneously described this copy of the Nova statuta as containing six miniatures of kings in Parliament. 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 detailed associations between the Yale Nova statuta manuscript and a group of statutes manuscripts produced by artists who worked in London from the 1450s through the 1480s and developed a standardized layout for the text, illustration, and decoration of many of these statute books during the 1470s.10 As Scotts work shows, one of the scribes and two of the artists who made the Yale Nova statuta also worked on at least eleven other copies of the same text. Nevertheless, it is precisely because MS G. St. 11.1 was made by these same scribes and artists that the Yale manuscripts differences from the other copies of the Nova statuta become significant, for these differences provide clues about the purpose for which this codex was made. In addition, although all of the assessments of MS G. St. 11.1 published after Haywards analysis avoid discussing the manuscripts association with Henry VI or Margaret of Anjou, I believe that a link between Margaret and this manuscript deserves reexamination. While nothing in MS G. St. 11.1 indicates that it was a wedding gift from Henry to Margaret, a close connection with Margaret and her circle does explain the manuscripts unique features. A detailed examination of the manuscripts illustrations and border decoration as a frame for the legal texts it contains shows that the manuscript does make a political statement through its representation of English laws and kings; but the statement is one that parallels Lancastrian discourse of the period from 1453 through 1471 and takes a form particularly well suited to Margaret of Anjou. Margaret began to take an active role in measures to support Henry VIs authority during his incapacity from August 1453 until December 1454.11 A major factor in the queens emergence as the leader in defense of the Lancastrian cause at this time was the birth of her son, Edward of Lancaster, in
10. See Scott 1980a; 1980b, 4549 and 6668 (respectively Additions to the Oeuvre of the English Border Artist: the Nova statuta, and Appendix B); 1989, 3234; and 1996, 2: 300, 34556. 11. See Gross 1996, 4656; Watts 1996, 30562; Maurer 2003, 67111; Laynesmith 2004, 11 and 14043; and Lee 1986.
October 1453, both because the princes security depended on the security of his father and because Margarets construction of her role as mother of Henrys heir was one of the few options she had for exercising authority on behalf of her husband (Laynesmith 2004, 16062). After Parliament rejected her appeal to be appointed as regent for Henry, Margaret and her allies sought other means to protect the interests of her husband and son against erosion by the Yorkist party. One of these means was textual. Lancastrian polemicists used several types of texts to defend the sanctity of the Lancastrian claim to the throne, in part to respond to Yorkist propaganda and in part to assure those internal to the regime of the validity of their cause (Gross 1996, 36). In addition to treatises on royal succession and satirical attacks on Yorkist claims against Henry VI, Lancastrian writers composed works in the mirror for princes tradition that associate both Henry and Prince Edward with ideals of kingship. One such mirror for princes, this one addressed to Henry VI, is Knyghthode and Bataile, an English verse translation of Vegetiuss De re militari, thought to have been commissioned between 1457 and 1460 by John, Viscount Beaumont, chief steward of Prince Edwards lands.12 The poems narrator compares the king to Goddes sone (v. 17) and refers to the rebels as those who fordoon Goddes forbode (act counter to Gods prohibition [v. 29]). The poem goes on to describe obedience to Gods law as knighthoods first ideal, to remind readers that all earthly lords are subservient to Gods authority, and to ascribe disobedience, envy, and discord to Satan (vv. 13143).13 As we will see, this focus on the importance of upholding the law can also be found in the mirrors for princes addressed to Prince Edward by John Fortescue and George Ashby, keeper of the queens privy seal. Ashbys On the Active Policy of a Prince and Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae offer the prince instruction but also defend Henry VIs right to rule by presenting kings as the
12. Dyboski and Arend 1935. This translation has sometimes been attributed to Robert Parker: see Bowers 2002, 355. On Viscount Beaumont, see also Laynesmith 2004, 15152. 13. Along the same lines, the anonymous Lancastrian tract Somnium vigilantis, usually dated to 1459, repeatedly describes York and his supporters as undermining the most fundamental laws securing the order of the realm. Some scholars have suggested that Fortescue had a hand in composing this text. See, for example, McCulloch and Jones 1983, 133; Lander 1961, 120; and Gross 1996, 5859. See Gilson 1911 for the text of the Somnium vigilantis.
earthly representatives of universal justice and the divine order.14 For Margaret and the Lancastrian loyalists, educating the prince and defending the king became complementary parts of the same process. It is in this temporal and political context that I believe we should read the Yale Law School manuscript of the Nova statuta Angliae and its relationship to other copies of this text. As Kathleen Scott argues, the Yale manuscript appears to be one of the Nova statuta manuscripts that were made in stages, so that it is not useful or even accurate to date a manuscript on the basis of the last occurring statute; a series of dates would be more appropriate, based on a close study of the stints of scribes and illuminators (1980b, 46n3). To Scotts list of pertinent forms of evidence for dating, I would add the evidence provided by the relationship of the manuscripts contents to historical, literary, and artistic developments. This evidence suggests that work on all but the last gathering of the Yale Nova statuta most probably began in the late 1450s and continued under the same basic plan until shortly after 1468. After this point, the changes in the manuscripts format suggest a later time and new owner. As the Appendix shows, the manuscript contains the work of three scribes and three illustrators. Scribe A, whose work appears in Plate 1, copied the bulk of the text in this manuscript, from cc. 2r through 344v. Since this portion of the manuscript ends with the statutes from 1450 and 1451, Scott (1996, 2: 346) dates this portion of the manuscript to ca. 1452. Nevertheless, this date is more of a terminus a quo for the completion of Scribe As work period. Scott offers no evidence that Scribe A could not have started his transcription later in the 1450s. This principal copyists extensive work in the manuscript links the earlier texts in the manuscript to the Nova statuta text and suggests a plan for the original parts of the codex. When the gatherings copied by this first scribe were assembled, they created a pattern in which blank chartae appear before the beginning of each of the major units of text in the manuscript, perhaps as space where large illustrations, gift inscriptions, or other prefatory materials could be added before final preparation of the codex for presentation. Scribe B, whose work appears in Plate 2, began copying immediately below Scribe As work on c. 344v and continued through c. 381v, where his work stops during the statutes for 14671468. Scott therefore dates the por-
14. Gross 1996 37. See Bateson [1899] 1965, 1241; and Chrimes 1942. English texts from earlier in the century also depicted the kings rule in parallel with Gods justice (see Osberg 1986). On the medieval conception of the king as lex animata, see Kantorowicz [1957] 1997, 12742; and Mayali 1988.
tion of the manuscript copied by this scribe to ca. 1470.15 Since Scribe Bs work concludes with the end of a gathering (but in mid-sentence), it is not clear whether he continued his transcription in a new gathering that has been lost or ended his work there. What is clear, however, is that, since Scribe B began copying in the middle of the charta where Scribe A stopped, the scribes seem to have worked sequentially, rather than dividing the text by gatherings or quires in order to work concurrently. As the plates show, the change from Scribe A to Scribe B does not alter the basic format of the text, which remains constant across the work of these two scribes both in terms of page layout and types of decoration. This continuity suggests that both of these scribes and the artists working on the manuscript through c. 381r were guided by a unified plan, however much time elapsed in the process. Three different illustrators painted the scenes in the manuscripts historiated initials: Illustrator A painted the initial for Edward III on c. 55r, as well as the initial depicting Richard II on c. 139r (Plate 3), and Illustrator B painted the initial depicting Henry IV on c. 198r (Plate 4), as well as those of Henry V on c. 235v (Plate 5) and of Henry VI on c. 261r (Plate 6).16 Scott (1996, 2: 300, 346) maintains that Illustrators A and B may have been influenced or trained by the same master and that they should, for stylistic reasons, be considered as belonging to the same shop, if they in fact did not actually collaborate. Since these first two illustrators worked on illuminations contained in Scribe As stint, they may have had a professional association with him. In comparison with the border decoration that appears with the historiated initials, which represents the work of several different artists and shows more variation, the use of only two artists for the first five royal portraits and their demonstrated continuity suggest that the sequence of historiated initials was a high priority for the person commissioning the manuscript. As a result, we should note the addition of a third illustrator for the final initial depicting Edward IV (Plate 2). This initial presents a change in style and quality, as well as in iconographic representation of the king. This third illustrator seems to have been commissioned to paint the portrait for the only monarch whose reign began in Scribe Bs copying stint. If the manuscript was indeed copied in two stages, over ten years time could have lapsed between the work of Illustrator C and that of the earlier artists.
15. Scott 1996, 2: 346. Scribe Bs hand is similar to that of Scribe A in many respects, which might indicate a professional or educational link between them, just as there seem to be associations among the artists who worked on the historiated initials and borders. 16. See Scott 1980b, 46; and Scott 1996, 2: 346.
This scenario fits with the political events of this period. Illustrator Cs work must date from no earlier than 1461, the date of Edward IVs deposition of Henry VI, and possibly as late as the early 1470s, a time when the Lancastrians would have had very limited access to London scribes and artists who could have completed the Yale Nova statuta, even though several exiled Lancastrian loyalistsincluding Ashby and Fortescuecompleted or revised works defending the Lancastrian claim to the throne for circulation in England. Lancastrian sympathizers remaining in England after 1461 were also unlikely to find many artists willing to run the risk of working on a manuscript with Lancastrian associations, especially after Edward IV began to torture and execute individuals convicted of sympathizing or having contact with members of the Lancastrian party in the mid-1460s.17 Nevertheless, secret communication did take place, and the appearance of Illustrator Cs work in the portion of the manuscript copied by Scribe B suggests that the third illustrator worked under the same basic plan as the other artists working on the text up through c. 381. We should therefore not necessarily ascribe the changes in artistic style and iconography in the depiction of Edward IV to a change in the plan or the motivation governing the manuscripts production as much as to a change of artist who seems to have been involved in painting standardized initials in other copies of the Nova statuta and who may not have been given access to the earlier parts of the Yale manuscript that contain the other royal portraits and Margarets coat of arms. If Scott (1980b, 46n8) is correct in suggesting that seven different border artists might have worked on the manuscript, it is quite likely that the manuscript gatherings containing the opening of a new reign were separated from the rest of the manuscript for this work, at least temporarily. Consequently the overall continuity of format through c. 381 must have been overseen by the patron or a trusted agent. This supervisor of the manuscripts production took great care, at least up through this point, to coordinate its parts, despite the number of people involved and the time the copying and decoration must have taken. Again, these factors parallel the political strategy of Margaret and her circle. Even after Henry VIs deposition, continuity of form was an important tool for the Lancastrian party: The Lancastrian advisers continued to protect their cause by working
17. Gross 1996, 39. For example, the capture of agents bearing letters from the Lancastrians in France in 1468 led to arrests, imprisonments, torture, and executions (see Kekewich et al. 1995, 8892).
within patterns set while Henry was still king. After all, their position rested on the claim that that was still his rightful status (Gross 1996, 38). Despite changes in its scribes and illustrators, the continuity we can see across the majority of the manuscript breaks down significantly in the final gathering (cc. 382r-389v), where we find the work of Scribe C (statutes for 14821484). Since the text of this scribes transcription is incomplete both in its beginning and ending, this quire may have been meant for a different copy of the statutes. Scribe C also employs a less formal script and a different format. Instead of the careful ruling for 38 lines of text in the chartae of the gatherings completed by Scribes A and B, the ruling in the last quire is darker and the number of lines of text per charta varies. Instead of preparation for a large initial like the historiated ones earlier in the manuscript, space has been left for a smaller initial to open the statues passed under Richard III on c. 386r, with even smaller spaces left for subsequent initials (Plate 7). Nevertheless, initials and paragraph markers were never added to the quire. The simpler format followed in this section is similar to those of many other surviving copies of the Nova statuta Angliae. Some of the statutes less elaborate copies contain only a pen-drawn initial opening each kings reign, while others have a painted initial and even border decoration but no large historiated initial for the beginning of a new kings reign.18 Some of the less elaborate copies use painted decoration only for the most important parts of the Nova statuta, such as the opening of the text or the opening of the statutes under the monarch reigning when the manuscript was made.19 The much later date of the
18. Copies with only pen-and-ink initials include MSS New York, Columbia University Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Plimpton MS 273; London, Inner Temple, MS 505; and Oslo, Martin Schyen Collection, MS 1355 (which contains the statutes in Middle English from 1 Edward III to 23 Henry VI). Copies of the Nova statuta that have painted initials and border decoration, but no historiated initials: Bodleian Library, Fr. c. 50 (contains the statutes from the end of 9 Henry V and start of 1 Henry VI); London, British Library, Lansdowne 470; and Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MSS 10, 2930, 42, and 163. 19. Such seems to be the case with a copy of the Nova statuta in Middle English that uses a painted initial and border decoration for the opening of statutes passed under Henry VI, but has only pen-drawn initials for the reigns of the other kings. This manuscript was sold by Christie auction house on 16 November 2005 (sale no. 7088). See the description and two plates in Christie Auction House 2005, lot 19. Because this copy ends with the statutes for 20 Henry VI (14411442), it may have been made shortly thereafter; but this may just represent the extent of the English translation available to the copyist, since English versions appear to have been unusual at this time.
statutes copied by Scribe C and the formatting differences between his gathering and those that contain the earlier parts of the Yale manuscript all suggest that Scribe Cs work was a later addition to the manuscript, undertaken under a different set of guidelines and for a different patron.20 Scott has verified that Scribe B of the Yale Law School Nova statuta worked on at least eleven copies of the Nova statuta with differing styles, including London, Inner Temple MS 505 (with pen-drawn initials only); London, Lincolns Inn MS Hale 194 (with historiated initials and full borders); and Philadelphia, Free Library, MS Carson LC 14/9.5, (with standardized historiated initials and full borders [Plate 8]).21 She also contends that Illustrator B in the Yale manuscript painted an historiated initial in MS Hale 194, as well as two of the initials in the codex London, Corporation of London, Guildhall MS Cartae Antiquae. In addition, she argues that the border artist who worked on c. 358r in the Yale Law School manuscript also worked on five additional copies of the Nova statuta, including MS Hale 194 and MS Carson LC 14/9.5, an artist whose work she dates between 1469 and 1483.22 While these links demonstrate that the Yale manuscript has close ties with the group of London scribes and artists who produced a large number of Nova statuta manuscripts, among other texts, from the 1450s through the 1480s, the links also allow us to assess the features that make the Yale manuscript unique. For example, Haywards judgment that the Yale Nova statuta was a wedding present for Margaret was built primarily on the appearance of Henrys and Margarets arms in the border decoration on the first three chartae with historiated initials: 55r, 139r, and 198r (Plates 1, 3, and 4). The fact that both Henrys and Margarets coats of arms appear in the decoration on three chartae of the Yale manuscript does suggest a connection with them, though not necessarily one of ownership. While the appearance of arms in a medieval manuscript is often considered evidence of ownership, royal arms may have been included in some manuscripts to suggest support for the monarchy by a manuscript patron or to record the arms used by a specific monarch in a text with an historical or legal subject. Royal arms appear in at least five other manuscript copies of the Nova statuta, including
20. Though the simpler formats were predominant before the 1470s, the use of the simpler format in the addition to the Yale manuscript with statutes from the 1480s shows that this format persisted as an option, even after the ornate style became more common. 21. See Scott 1980b, 48 and 67, where she cites the earlier work of N. R. Ker (1969 2002, 1: 1819, 87, 140, and 190), and unpublished work by J. J. Griffiths. 22. Scott 1980b, 46 and 67; 1996, 2: 346; and, for images from London, Corporation of London, Guildhall, Cartae Antiquae, see again Scott 1996, 1: plates 48183.
MS Hale 194.23 Rather than indicating that all of these copies were commissioned for the king, this recurrence of royal arms could mean that including royal coats of arms became a convention in statutes manuscripts. Two of the copies that contain royal arms (San Marino, Huntington Library MS HM 19920; and Cambridge, St. Johns College MS A. 7) coordinate the arms depicted with the particular king portrayed on the charta. This pattern does not appear in the Yale Nova statuta, however, which uses the arms of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou on the chartae that contain the portraits of Edward III, Richard II, and Henry IV, but not on the charta portraying Henry VI, where one might expect to see them. Some of the Nova statuta manuscripts containing royal arms also include the coats of arms of members of the nobility who commissioned or owned the manuscripts.24 Often, however, coats of arms were painted in after original production for later owners, either painted over earlier parts of the border decoration or added in the margins, as is the case of the Elyot and Delamere arms in the Yale Nova statuta, which appear to be painted over earlier decoration at the bottom of c. 55r.25 The Elyot coat of arms also appears to be added over border decoration in the center of the bottom margin on several chartae of the Yale manuscript (Plates 2, 3, 4, and 6). Indeed, the center of the bottom margin seems to have become a common site for owners arms
23. Other copies containing royal arms include London, Public Records Office, E 164/11; Oxford, St. Johns College, MS 257; Cambridge, St. Johns College, MS A. 7; and San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 19920. On Cambridge, St. Johns College, MS A. 7, see Baker and Ringrose 1996. 24. Lincolns Inn, Hale 194 uses the medallion next to the historiated initial for royal arms and the medallion on the right and the bottom margin for the arms of John Neville, Lord Montagu, who was elevated by Edward IV to baron in 1463 and marquess in 1470, but died fighting for the Lancastrians in 1471. Huntington Library, HM 19920 has royal arms in the corner opposite its historiated initials, with arms of other families added to early decoration and then incorporated on later chartae. See Scott 1989, 2021 and 1980b, 58, for discussions of owners and arms. 25. If other families coats of arms appear underneath the Elyot and Delamere coats of arms on c. 55r, this might indicate that one of these families had the manuscript made and decided to honor Henry and Margaret by including theirs. On the other hand, Henrys and Margarets arms may have originally appeared in the bottom roundels as well as the top ones. Yet a third option is that acanthus leaf decorationrather than other coats of armsmay have appeared in the lower roundels of the Yale manuscript in the original decoration: such is the case with the roundels in the London Guildhall copy and in London, British Library, Yates Thompson 48 (Plate 9).
in Nova statuta manuscripts, whether incorporated into the original design of the page or added after initial production.26 What distinguishes the Yale manuscript from other copies of the Nova statuta with royal arms is the way that it pairs a kings arms with his queens, which does not seem to occur in other copies of this text. Though this pairing of Henry VIs and Margaret of Anjous arms need not mean the manuscript was a wedding gift, the pairing is clear evidence that the manuscript celebrates both of them, not just Henry. A similar use of coats of arms to celebrate marital alliances can be found in another copy of the Nova statuta, one made for Sir Thomas Fitzwilliam of Mablethorpe, Lincolnshire: each of the six large initials that mark the opening of the royal reigns contains the arms of the Fitzwilliam family impaled with those of a family with whom the Fitzwilliam men married, so that the series as a whole records the marriages of six generations of Fitzwilliam men ending with that of Sir Thomas himself.27 The iconography in the Fitzwilliam Nova statuta thus intertwines that familys history with the countrys history, most likely to document the familys long-standing social prominence. The coats of arms originally in the Yale Law School manuscript only celebrate one marriage, however, that of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou; but, through the repeated appearance of their arms, the marriage could be read as a theme in the manuscriptnot as an event, but as the union that produced a legitimate heir, Edward of Lancaster, who should rightfully continue the line of the first five kings depicted in the manuscript by inheriting the throne of England from Henry VI. 28 Prince Edwards claim as heir was one that indeed needed demonstrations of support; even before his birth, the Yorkists spread rumors denying his legitimacy.29 With Henry VIs illness often preventing him from public celebrations of the young prince as heir apparent or consistent participation in plans for Edwards education, Margaret took on an active role in
26. Plate 8 shows an example (c. 245r) from Philadelphia, Free Library, Carson LC 14/9.5. Other copies with coats of arms centered in the bottom margin include the London Guildhall copy and MS Hale 194. 27. For details of this section of the first Dyson Perrins Collection Sale (9 Dec. 1958), see Sotheby Auction House 1958, lot. 23. 28. Though the absence of Henrys and Margarets arms after the third royal portrait may just reflect design changes made by some of the border artists, the use of roundels with royal arms in the borders for the reigns of the first three kings suggests either a greater measure of coordination during work on borders in the earlier portion of the manuscript or greater circumspection about asking border artists to include Margarets arms as political tensions grew. 29. See Prendergast 2002.
protecting her sons rights and preparing him to take on the responsibilities of kingship. Margaret may also have seen parallels between her husbands condition and the periods of mental illness suffered by his maternal grandfather, Charles VI of France, as well as a parallel between her situation and that of Charless queen, Isabelle of Bavaria.30 To help Queen Isabelle educate her oldest son during Charles VIs incapacity, John of Burgundy engaged Christine de Pizan to make a French translation of Vegetiuss De re militari, the same text that would be translated into English verse in the late 1450s as Knyghthode and Bataile.31 Margaret of Anjou owned a copy of Christines Livre des fais darmes et de chevalerie, in the anthology she had received as a wedding present from Sir John Talbot.32 While Talbot may
30. It was Isabelle who in 1420 helped arrange the treaty whereby her daughter Katherine married Henry V of England and Henry VI was crowned king of France after the death of Charles VI. Margaret would also have been familiar with the accounts of Charles VIs illness and Isabelles actions on behalf of her children because of the important role played at that time and subsequently by Margarets grandmother, Yolande of Aragon, duchess of Anjou, with whom Margaret lived for eight years as a child. Yolande arranged for the engagement of her daughter Marie to Isabelles younger son, Charles, who came to live at the court of Anjou. After his father and older brothers died, Charles claimed the throne of France, leading to the round of fighting with the English that Margarets marriage to Henry VI was supposed to resolve. See Maurer 2003, 23; Jansen 2002, 37; and Vale 1974. 31. Since the original French text of Christines treatise has not been published since 1488, Charity Cannon Willards critical edition of this text is much anticipated. I quote from Willard 1999. See also Teague 1991; and Forhan 2002, 3. 32. We can, in fact, surmise that Margaret knew Christines Livre de la cit des dames, Le Livre des fais et bonnes meurs du sage roi Charles V, and Le Livre du corps de policie, as well as Le Livre des fais darmes et de chevalerie. Helen Maurer (2003, 59, 151) maintains that Margaret followed Christines ideal of queenship in seeking reconciliation between the king and his opponents before 1459, while Frances Teague (1991, 31) suggests that Margaret followed Christines ideal of kingship in rallying the Lancastrian forces against Henrys foes. In addition to owning the anthologized copy of Le Livre des fais darmes, Margaret probably had access to some of Christines other works. Margarets family had close relationships with many of Christines original patrons and was herself close friends with Alice Chaucer, Duchess of Suffolk, who owned a copy of Christines Livre de la cit des dames. Among the members of the French royal and ducal families who owned at least one of Christines works between 1405 and 1425 are Charles VI, Charles VII, Isabelle of Bavaria (a collection of thirty texts), Louis of Guyenne, Louis of Orlans, Philip of Burgundy, Marguerite of Burgundy, John of Berry, and Marie of Berry. John of Burgundy, Philips son, owned mmmm
have intendedas Bossy suggests (1998, 246)the anthology to be a resource for educating a royal heir, Christines treatise provided Margaret with guidance on ideals of kingly conduct. From the title of Christines work and her invocation of Minerva, to her emphasis on the contributions of wisdom and justice to chivalric ideals, we see that Christine conceives of chivalry as more than just the use of arms (Willard 1999, 1213). Although Christine repeats her source in recommending the ancient practice of military education for noble sons at age fourteen, her treatise suggests that the noble prince who will lead a country should be educated in chivalric conduct and law, which could begin even earlier. Especially in the opening passages, her treatise discusses the kings responsibility to pursue justice through divine and earthly law.33 She argues further that only sovereign princes have the legal authority to undertake wars or battles (15), an argument that the Lancastrians would also make when they condemned York and his followers for taking up arms against Henry VI. Christines treatise may well have offered the textual matrix for Margarets encouragement of her own son to study English law; but for this Prince Edward would need another book, a copy of the Nova statuta Angliae. Decorated with the coats of arms of both of Edward of Lancasters parents, offering portraits of his royal English forebears and including the introductory treatises and index to the statutes, Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1 would have been an appropriate copy of the Nova statuta for the prince. External evidence also suggests that members of Margarets circle expected that Prince Edward would have access to a copy of the Nova statuta. The mirrors for princes composed for Edward by Ashby and Fortescue parallel Christines text in highlighting the important link between good kingship and just laws. In his On the Active Policy of a Prince Ashby repeatedly advises Prince Edward to implement the statutes authorized by the noble kings who preceded him (vv. 52023, 540, 546).
seven volumes of Christines works (see McGrady 1998). On Jean de Berrys role as one of Christines chief patrons, see Meiss 1967, 1: 50, and 2: figures 83336. On Alice Chaucers ownership of a copy of the Livre de la cit des dames, see Meale 1996. 33. See Forhan 2002, 11032; Teague 1991, 28. Christine cites biblical authority to support her argument that wars and battles waged for a just cause are but the proper execution of justice, to bestow right where it belongs. Divine law grants this, as do laws drawn up by people to repress the arrogant and evildoers (Willard 1999, 14).
Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae addresses even more directly the princes need to learn about the laws of God and the laws of the kingdom. In the opening chapters of his treatise, Fortescue cites classical and biblical sources to argue that the prince should add the study of law to his preparation for kingship:
Regis namque officium pugnare est bella populi sui, et eos rectissime iudicare, ut in primo Regum, viijo capitulo, clarissime tu doceris. Quare ut armorum utinam et legum studiis simili zelo te deditum contemplarer, cum ut armis bella, ita legibus iudicia peragantur. (For the office of a king is to fight the battles of his people and to judge them rightfully, as you may very clearly learn in I Kings, chapter viii. For that reason, I wish that I observed you to be devoted to the study of the laws with the same zeal as you are to that of arms, since, as battles are determined by arms, so judgements are by laws.) (De laudibus [Chrimes 1942, 25])
Fortescues text also stresses the divine authority behind earthly justice:
A Deo etiam sunt omnes leges edite, que ab omine promulgantur. [. . .] Ex quibus erudiris quod leges licet humanas addiscere leges sacras et ediciones Dei, quo earum studia non vacant a dulcitudine consolcionis sancte. (Moreover, all laws that are promulgated by man are decreed by God. [. . .] By this you are taught that to learn the laws, even though human ones, is to learn laws that are sacred and decreed of God, the study of which does not lack the blessing of divine encouragement.) (De laudibus [Chrimes 1942, 89])
Like Christines treatise, Fortescues argues that a king is only able to fight just wars if he governs his realm justly: Iusticia vero hec subiectum est omnis regalis cure, quo sine illa rex iuste non iudicat nec recte pugnare potest. Illa vero adepta perfecteque servata equissime peragitur omne officium regis (This justice, indeed, is the object of all royal administration, because without it a king judges unjustly and is unable to fight rightfully. But this justice attained and truly observed, the whole office of king is fairly discharged [De laudibus 1213]). Finally, by citing Moses command in Deuteronomy 17:1819that the king of Israel have a copy of the laws to keep with him and read all the days of his lifethe chancellor recommends
that the prince have his own copy of the laws by which he will one day rule (De laudibus 45), that is his own copy of the Nova statuta Angliae.34 Though the version of Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae that survives depicts the dialogue between chancellor and prince taking place during their exile in France between 1463 and 1471, this does not mean that work on a copy of the Nova statuta for the prince had not begun before this.35 Fortescues treatise indicates that he made an earlier contribution to Edwards legal education, for the chancellor in the dialogue refers to having written another Latin treatise on law, De natura legis naturae, for the prince in the past (De laudibus 2627). Fortescue thus seems to have begun the princes education in law at an earlier time, perhaps when he first accompanied the queen and prince into refuge in Scotland, or even earlier when the princes formal education was just beginning in 1460.36 Fortescue had been one of the loyal administrators who, beginning in 1453, joined with Henry
34. In citing the command in Deuteronomy 17 that kings should have a personal copy of the laws for daily study, Fortescues text parallels Book 4 of John of Salisburys Policraticus. For John of Salisburys text, see Keats-Rohan, 19931995, vv. 2797 and 287176; and Nederman 1990, 36 and 41. Fortescues text goes beyond the Policraticus, however, in depicting the laws the prince must know as the laws of a particular kingdom, in addition to divine law. 35. Fortescues treatise presents Prince Edward as an engaged and mature student: Princeps ille mox ut factus est adultus [. . .] (This prince, as soon as he became grown up [. . .]) (De laudibus [Chrimes 1942, 23]). Though the opening of this section depicts the dialogue between Fortescue and the prince as taking place at an unspecified time during their exile in France, which began in 1463 when the prince was not quite ten years old, the representation of the prince as an adult suggests that Fortescue completed his work towards the end of his exile, between 1468 and 1470, when the prince was at least fifteen and could be presented as ready to assume the role of regent for his father, as Charles VIs son had and as Parliament had originally authorized Edward to do, when he was of the age of discretion, in the appointment of York as protector (Maurer 2003, 122; Watts 1996, 309). By depicting the dialogue between chancellor and prince in the context of their exile from England, Fortescue encourages his readers to understand the texts arguments about just kingship as an indictment of Edward IV. This critique, along with the texts representation of Prince Edward, suggests that one of the audiences targeted in this version of the De laudibus was that of the educated members of English society, who might be persuaded to assist the prince in restoring his father to the throne, as the Lancastrians tried to do in 14701471. Fortescue may therefore have prepared an earlier version of the De laudibus for the prince and later revised it for public circulation, as he seems to have done with several of his works. 36. Chrimes (1942, xcii-xciii) contends that the De natura could have been written at any point after 1460. Gill (1971, 334) maintains that Fortescue composed the De natura during exile in Scotland (between July 1460 and July 1463).
VIs supporters in Parliament to help Margaret use English law to protect the rights of both her husband and son. Although Parliament appointed the Duke of York as protector for Henry VI in 1454, the declaration specified that Prince Edward would remain heir apparent. Margaret seems to have also worked in less direct ways to establish the princes authority as Henry VIs heir. If Margaret took Christines treatise as a guide, finding ways to link Prince Edward to the laws of England would serve that purpose. Deprived of most means to help the king directly, Margaret highlighted on every possible public occasion and forum the laws of succession by depicting Henrys son as next in the line of Lancastrian kings.37 Although any of the events highlighting the princes authority might have been an appropriate context for a gift like the Yale Nova statuta, Margarets next move had particular relevance to Edwards need for such books. In March 1460, the supervision of Prince Edwards education was officially transferred from women to men.38 Although this transition traditionally occurred when a noble son reached the age of seven, Margaret appears to have found it useful to announce the beginning of the princes formal education six months early, perhaps because of increased political tension.39 Given Margarets concerns over establishing her sons authority in the face
37. Though it had more symbolic than practical significance, since he was barely five months old at the time, Edward of Lancaster was formally invested as prince of Wales in March 1454. In December 1454, when York attempted to continue his control over the government after the end of his protectorate, Margaret succeeded in taking control of the princes affairs and resources through the appointment of his officers (Maurer 2003, 13435; Laynesmith 2004, 15152; Watts 1996, 337). In another attempt to shape public perception of the prince, the queen encouraged her young sons participation in public events that would highlight his role as heir apparent: for example, Margaret and Prince Edward were welcomed to Coventry in 1456 with public pageants that served to construct the new prince as a potential exemplar of kingship in order to emphasize the potential and legitimacy of Lancastrian kingship (Laynesmith 2004, 140 and 143). In December 1459, the Lancastrians again worked through Parliament to strengthen legal support for Prince Edward as Henrys rightful heir: at the Coventry session of Parliament, after the declaration of attainder against the Yorkist lords, sixty-six peers of England swore life-long allegiance to King Henry and also loyalty to Prince Edward, accepting his succession as heir to the throne and the succession of his legal heirs (see Watts 1996, 353; Maurer 2003, 173). 38. Maurer, 2003, 177; Laynesmith 2004, 14752; and Calendar 18911916, 49: 567. 39. On the conventions of educating noble children in the late Middle Ages, see Given-Wilson 1987, 3; and Orme 2001, 68.
of Yorkist challenges, she might also have commissioned the Yale Law School Nova statuta as a gift to celebrate this transition in the princes education, or for Prince Edwards knighting ceremony, which could have been planned for October 1460, when he would reach the age of seven. No grand celebration of the princes birthday took place that October, however, because in July Yorks forces captured the king, and Margaret took refuge with the prince in Scotland. Instead of celebrating his sons seventh birthday in October, the imprisoned Henry accepted an agreement that allowed him to remain king only if he designated the Duke of York as royal heir and disinherited Prince Edward. Margaret responded by sending the Lancastrian army in the livery of Prince Edward to meet Yorks forces, and the Lancastrians captured and executed York in December. After another Lancastrian military victory in February 1461 brought his release, Henry VI celebrated his reunion with his family by knighting his son.40 The Lancastrian celebration of their victory did not last long; for less than a month later Yorks son Edward persuaded Parliament to declare him king. Henry, Margaret, and their son first took refuge in Scotland; in July 1463 Margaret took Prince Edward and a group of about fifty supportersincluding Fortescueinto France, where they set up a Lancastrian court in exile, worked to find a way to restore Henry VI to the throne of England, and prepared Edward of Lancaster to fulfill his role as Henrys heir.41
40. See Maurer 2003, 19196. The ceremony must have been considerably less elaborate than Margaret and the Lancastrians would have preferred, however, since any plans that may have been in the works for gifts and public spectacles had been interrupted by eight months of political and military warfare. For descriptions of some of the elaborate ceremonies that accompanied the knighting ritual for a medieval prince, see Vale 2001, 13031, 21011. 41. In July 1465, the Yorkists captured Henry again and imprisoned him in the Tower of London. In 1470, however, after a falling out between Edward IV and Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, Sir John Fortescue acted as Prince Edwards agent to negotiate a truce with Warwick and a marriage between the prince and Warwicks daughter, Anne (Maurer 2003, 207). Warwick then defeated Edward IVs army in October 1470 and restored Henry VI to the throne. Prince Edward and the queen arrived from France in March 1471; but Henrys restoration was not secure. In April, the Yorkists defeated Warwick and recaptured Henry. On 4 May 1471, Prince Edward was killed while leading the Lancastrian forces at the battle of Tewksbury. Margaret was then captured and taken to London as prisoner on 21 May, and Henry was murdered in the Tower on that same night. Margaret remained in English custody, however, since she was more valuable to Edward IV alive than dead: after Margaret renounced all her claims in England and Edward mmm
Since Sir John Fortescue became one of Margarets most trusted advisors and one of the leading authors defending the Lancastrian royal line in the textual war that paralleled the military battles with the Yorkists, it should not be surprising to find parallels between a Lancastrian manuscript such as the Yale Nova statuta and the ideas put forth in Fortescues writings. Nevertheless, Margaret may have become familiar with copies of the Nova statuta through other members of the Lancastrian court working closely with her in the 1450s: for example, three inscriptions in a Nova statuta manuscript attest to its ownership by William Coote of Coningsby, Lincolnshire, who served as the queens attorney general in Chancery in 1459.42 Margarets attempts to use English law to defend her husband and son, her possession of Christine de Pizans Faits darmes, and her probable knowledge of the commissioning of that text to educate a royal heir all suggest that she could well have been responsible for including law in the princes studies and commissioning a statute book for her son that would also serve as a mirror for princes, highlighting the integral connection between law and good kingship. If such a book also presented Henry VI as an embodiment of good kingship, as MS G. St. 11.1 does, this would certainly have served Margarets purposes as well. The Yale Law School manuscripts depiction of the kings of England from Edward III to Edward IV both distinguishes this copy of the Nova statuta Angliae from all others and provides the strongest evidence for reading this book as a document reflecting the political debates of the 1450s and 1460s, rather than the 1440s. The iconography of the Yale manuscripts historiated initials presents the English kings from Edward III through Henry VI in terms of an ideal of just rulership and divine sanction. As we shall see, however, the depiction of Edward IV suggests that this single king differs from his predecessors in his relationship to divine and human law. Ironically, of the royal portraits included in this manuscript, it is the portrayal of Edward IV, enthroned at center and flanked by figures in ceremonial robes, that also ties
received a ransom from Louis XI, she was escorted back to France in 1476. There she was forced to relinquish her inheritance rights to Louis and lived in retirement until her death in 1482 (Maurer 2003, 208). 42. Coote first appears in the Calendar of the Patent Rolls as the kings servant with an annuity for life granted in 1439, then as Justice of the Peace for Lincoln in 1448. Coote seems to have continued his service to the Lancastrian party until its final defeat, sincelike FortescueCoote received a pardon from Edward IV in 1471. See Calendar 18911916, 46: 291 and 495; 48: 579 and 591; 49: 104 and 507; and 51: 261. Cf. also Christie Auction House 2005, lot 19 .
this manuscript to the standardization of Nova statuta manuscripts that Scott has situated in the 1470s. As Marrow and Cahn noted, many Nova statuta manuscripts feature an historiated initial depicting a king for the beginning of each new reign. Scott has shown that many of these initials depict a king enthroned at center and flanked by figures in ceremonial robes, who have been described variously as members of court, members of Parliament, or legal counselors.43 In some cases, these figures are depicted as members of the clergy, while in other cases the figures appear to be secular lords or wear the striped sleeves that would identify them as lawyers. As Hayward argued, this representation of the monarch in a collection of statutes seems to highlight the kings sovereignty as law-giver, as it centralizes the kingwho often holds symbols of sovereignty like a scepterand marginalizes the other figures. Some copies feature this type of standardized depiction of the king throughout, as does Philadelphia Free Library MS LC 14/9.5 (Plate 8), or for most of their historiated initials.44 Like the Yale manuscript, however, in the case of the reign of Edward IV some copies move from another format to the standardized use.45 Several other manuscripts of the Nova statuta have historiated initials that vary from the standardized model slightly in their depic43. See Scott 1996, 2: 34536. Scott also sees a possible link between the group of artists working on Nova statuta manuscripts and those who executed the codex now found in the British Library, Royal MS 18 D ii, articles 2 and 3 (John Lydgates Troy Book and Siege of Thebes), since the illustrations for these include a miniature of a king holding an orb and a scepter, seated center under canopy, and surrounded by courtiers, which is similar to the standard format used in many Nova statuta manuscripts (see fig. 16 in Scott 1980b). MS Royal 18 D ii was commissioned by Sir William Herbert, Earl of Pembroke (d. 1469), and his wife Anne Devereux (married in 1449), perhaps for presentation to Edward IV around 1461 1462, or to Henry VI around 14551456. Nevertheless, the 1365 depiction of Charles V of France, seated and holding the symbols of his power, surrounded by lords spiritual and temporal, in British Library, Cotton, Tiberius B. viii, c. 59v (the Coronation Book of Charles V) suggests that a similar model for depicting kings appeared in France in the fourteenth century (see OMeara 2001). 44. Other manuscripts of the Nova statuta that use the standardized representation of the king and court for most of their historiated initials include Oxford, St. Johns College, MS 257; Holkham Hall, Norfolk, Library of the Earl of Leicester, MS 232; and London, British Library, MS Hargrave 274. 45. For example, Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Hatton 10 uses the standardized scene only for the last two of its eight historiated initials: its first six initials feature each monarchs badge animal instead; and Cambridge, Harvard University, Houghton Library, MS Richardson 40 has the standardized scene only for the last of its three royal portaits (Scott 1980b, 66).
tions of each king. For example, the historiated initials in San Marino, Huntington Library MS HM 19920 and Cambridge (MA), Harvard Law School MS 21 show the enthroned king alone. Cambridge (UK), St. Johns College MS A. 7, and Lincolns Inn MS Hale 194 have some initials that show the king enthroned and receiving a text (the statutes?), while the initials in MS Yates Thompson 48 depict kings standing alone and holding scepter and orb (Plate 9). In all these representations, however, the king remains the visual and thematic focus of the scene, a figure whose ultimate authority as monarch is underscored by symbols of rulership. Nevertheless, some copies of the Nova statuta, such as Inner Temple MS 505 and the Fitzwilliam family copy, have historiated initials that do not depict kings at all. It may be that some of these copies predate the standardized model, which seems to have spread in the 1470s, as the market for these books grew and speculative production began. Alternatively, such deviation from conventions of illustration can also occur through the influence of patrons.46 Such, I would argue, is also the case with the Yale copy of the Nova statuta, for its illustrations differ from those in all other copies of this text, despite the fact that it was made by some of the same artists who worked on those other copies. Even where the Yale manuscripts illustrations are most like the standardized model of king and court, we find an important difference. Though the portrait of Edward IV (Plate 2) in the Yale manuscript at first appears to follow the standardized format, close scrutiny of this initial reveals that the depiction of Edward IV does not follow the standard model as thoroughly as the other copies using it: instead of holding a scepter and orb, symbols of the kings rightful rule, the image of Edward IV in the Yale initial holds only a sword, and he holds it in his left hand. Since even the illustrators who used variations on the standardized image of the king with scepter and orb in other copies of the Nova statuta, such as Yates Thompson MS 48 (Plate 9), do not replace the scepter or the orb with a sword, this deviation from the standardized model suggests conscious intervention on the part of the person or persons planning the illustrations.47 While in another context the depiction of a seated king holding an upright sword might symbolize his power as judge or embodiment of the law, in the context of the Yale Nova statuta this image suggests a subtle attempt to
46. See, for example, Scotts discussion (1989) of the influence of patrons on illustration of fifteenth-century English manuscripts. 47. I have not found any illustrations in other manuscript copies of the Nova statuta or descriptions of illustrations in other manuscript copies in which a king holds a sword in either hand. The depiction of Edward IV in the Yale manuscript, therefore, would appear to be rare, if not unique, in copies of this text.
depict Edward IV as someone who used military power, rather than the laws of succession, to become king.48 The Yale manuscripts depiction takes on its significance in comparison with the series of five royal portraits that come before it. Each of the first five kings appears kneeling before a prie-dieu, a format that does not seem to recur in other copies of the Nova statuta. Despite differences in some details, which portray each king with distinguishing features, this basic model remains constant throughout the depictions of the first five kings.49 These representations of kingship include symbols of sovereign rulership, such as scepter and crown, yet these illustrations depict the kings on their knees in prayer, demonstrating their piety and humility before God. If the standardized portraits showing the king flanked by courtiers are thought to emphasize the kings power as sovereign law-giver, the Yale portraits might remind readers that a kings power to rule derives from a divine law-giver, who authorizes kings to act as earthly representatives of divine justice. This is also the argument made in the opening sections of Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae: while encouraging Prince Edward to study the laws of England, the chancellor argues that earthly kings should also pray for divine guidance in their pursuit of justice: Sed quia ista sine gracia lex operari nequit tibi, illam super omnia implorare necesse est; legis quoque divine et sanctarum scripturarum indagarer scienciam tibi congruit (But because this law cannot flourish in you without grace, it is necessary to pray for that above all things; also it is fitting for you to seek knowledge of the divine law and holy scripture, De laudibus [Chrimes 1942, 1819]). Likewise, in her treatise on acts of war and chivalry, Christine de Pizan claims that kings who fight wars for just cause fulfill the royal responsibility to maintain the har48. The seals of English kings in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries held the image of the enthroned monarch holding scepter and orb on one side as a representation of royal justice and an image of the monarch on horseback holding an upright sword on the other side as a representation of royal military power (Watts 1996, 21). If the images of kings holding scepters and orbs in Nova statuta manuscripts echo the seals image of justice, the depiction of Edward IV in the Yale manuscript again departs from tradition. On the king as lex animata, see above, note 14. Classical personifications of justice often hold an upright sword, and in Christian iconography the Archangel Michael often holds an upright sword in his depiction as agent of divine justice. See the terms Schwert, Recht, Justicia, and Kaiser in Kirschbaum 19681976. 49. These distinguishing features differ considerably from the royal portraits in the standardized Nova statuta manuscripts that Scott discusses. For analysis of the developments in royal portraiture in France and England beginning in the fourteenth century, see Sherman 1969; Thomas 1979, 65; and Whittingham 1971.
mony of earthly and divine law (14). With each of the kings in its first five portraits shown at prayer with an open book on the prie-dieu before him, the Yale Nova statuta manuscript offers visual reinforcement of the ideals put forth in these treatises. The full significance of the difference between the first five illustrations and the last illustration becomes clearer when we note that the first five portraits echo the depictions of King David at prayer that appear in many liturgical and devotional books in the late Middle Ages.50 The Yale manuscripts use of King David as a model for its first five illustrations seems to associate these English monarchs with the great biblical king. In coronation rituals, the visual arts, and literature, King David was depicted as an important model for medieval rulers, both because he represented the unification of secular and divine authority and because his story reinforced the importance of royal piety and humility.51 King David was also one of the Nine Worthies, or chivalric heroes, named by Jacques de Longuyon in his poem Les Voeux du Paon (ca. 1310)a pantheon who then appeared widely in late medieval and Renaissance literature and visual arts.52
50. See Owens 1989 for examples. Although some of these illustrations depict David praying in the wilderness or against an abstract background, others present David in architectural contexts, either kneeling before an altar or a prie-dieu, sometimes with a throne behind him. The scenes described as at prayer and communicating with God are studied in Hourihane 2002. Fifteenth-century English manuscripts that depict David kneeling in prayer before a prie-dieu include Cape Town, National Library of South Africa, MS Grey 4 c 5, c. 36r; Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, MS I. 1. 9, c. 82v; London, British Library, MS Royal 1. E. ix, c. 153r; and Nottingham, University Library, Wollaton Antiphonal, c. 213r. See Scott 1996, 1: plate 121; 2: 101, 135, and 204. 51. On this topic, see Kantorowicz 1958, 5659, 64; Tudor-Craig 1989; Hen 1998; and Hobbs 2003. One important example is John Gowers late fourteenthcentury poem Le Miroir de lhomme cites David as the mirror and exemplar for all other kings (especially vv. 22 and 873884 [see Fisher 1964, 182, for a discussion of the passage]). 52. See Schrder 1971. Dutton and Kessler (1997, 78, 4344, and 8799) note an earlier royal manuscript that suggests David as a model for kings and emphasizes the monarchs role as upholder of the law is the Bible given to the young Charles the Bald by the Benedictine abbey of St. Martin at Tours in 845 (Paris, Bibliothque nationale, Lat. 1). The illustrations in this manuscript and the dedicatory poems addressed to Charles the Bald establish parallels between the new king and David and encourage the king to read the Bible as divine law and to uphold justice as his primary responsibility: justice [. . .] is one of the main themes binding together dedicatory poems and illustration (Dutton and Kessler 1997, 44).
In representing five of its six kings as iconographic reflections of King David, the Yale Nova statuta associates the first five with an important medieval ideal of kingship and differentiates them from Edward IV, whose depiction involves very different imagery. As visual texts that accompany the statutes, the first five illustrations suggest to the reader not that kings are the sovereign givers of law (as Hayward 1975 argues), but that human laws and rulers are secondary to the divine law of the heavenly king. Though the human king is physically central to the image, he is shown on his knees in petition to a higher authority and as both earthly ruler and spiritual servant of the heavenly king. The Yale manuscripts treatment of what should have been a standardized depiction of the king with his court in the case of Edward IV becomes an ironic commentary on his different attitude toward divine law. One might see a similar argument implicit in Fortescues De laudibus, although it presents images of the kings in reverse order: Fortescue first associates the usurping Edward IV with the most unspeakable madness (nephandissima rabie) of civil war and then praises Henry VI as the most pious king (piissimus rex [De laudibus, 2]). Fortescues equation establishes a parallel between Henry and the good kings of the Old Testament who ruled wisely because they studied the book of Gods laws. Applied to Henry VI and Edward IV, Fortescues contrast between Henry VI and Edward IV and the depictions of these two kings in the Yale manuscript are strikingly similar, especially when we examine in detail the portrait of Henry VI. An important feature of many depictions of King David in medieval psalters and books of hours is the image of the face or hand of God that appears in the heavens, often with golden rays shining down on David. In the Yale manuscript this feature of the traditional David iconography appears only in the initial depicting Henry VI (Plate 6), and only in muted form: the circular blue area in the upper-right corner of this historiated initial has facial characteristics that represent the face of God, just as we find in the depictions of David in an English psalter that has been dated to the early fifteenth century (Oxford, Bodleian Library MS Don. d. 85 [see Plate 10]).53 The circular blue area in the historiated initial for Henry VI sends golden rays down upon Henry, just as the face or hand of God more explicitly sheds gracious illumination in many of the depictions
53. Examples of this kind of depiction of the face of God in Bodleian Library MS Don. d. 85 occur on cc. 21v, 29r, and 42v. For more details of this codex, see Scott 1996, 1: plates 16871, and 2: no. 39; Pcht and Alexander 1973, 3: no. 803, and plates LXXVI-VII; and de la Mare and Barker-Benfield 1980, no. XVII. 3, and figs. 44 and 49.
of King David in late medieval books of hours and psalters. In using imagery that associates Henry VI with King David, the Yale manuscript distinguishes Henry VI from the other kings in the series by suggesting that he is the recipient of divine grace and is most like the medieval ideal of kingship. This depiction of Henry VI also distinguishes him by portraying him with a crown that is larger than those worn by the other kings in the manuscript and is topped with a cross, a feature that sometimes also appears in the depictions of King David.54 This representation of Henry VI as the recipient of divine favor is consistent with attempts to argue for his sanctity in the 1480s as veneration for Henry grew after his murder in 1471.55 Scott sees overt evidence of such cult influence in another Nova statuta manuscript, Hargrave 274, which she dates to ca. 1488.56 Nevertheless, depictions of Henry VI as an especially devout king who had received divine approval began in the 1450s, in Lancastrian polemical texts defending him against the criticism of the Duke of York and his supporters. In light of the other evidence provided by the Yale Nova statuta, I suggest that the representation of Henry VI in this manuscript provides a visual parallel to the portraits of Henry VI in these Lancastrian texts. The Yale manuscript uses visual iconography both to heighten the positive depiction of Henry VI and to distance Edward IV from the ideals of kingship, while the Hargrave Nova statuta differs from the
54. Cahn and Marrow (1978, 240) identify this crown as the Germanic Bgel type, which has imperial associations. They also suggest that the crown may be an addition to the original design of the initial. 55. See Knox and Leslie 1923; McKenna 1974, 74; and Wolffe 2001, 415. Though Edward IV originally had Henrys body buried at Chertsey Abbey, in 1484 Richard III had the body reinterred at St. Georges Chapel, Windsor, purportedly because of the growing number of miracles attributed to Henry. Richards successor, Henry VII, commissioned an account of these miracles in order to make a case for Henry VIs canonization. John Blacmans account of Henrys piety also seems to date from the 1480s (see Lovatt 1981, 43839; and Lovatt 1984, 172 97). 56. This manuscripts depiction of Henry VI (c. 204v) portrays him in our standardized form, except that he wears a crown topped by a cross and angels descend with a heavenly scepter and crown. Scott (1996, 2: 347 [with accompanying plates]) has found work by the illustrator who painted this initial in three other copies of the Nova statuta, which she dates to the 1480s and 1490s; but none of these other copies singles out Henry VI for special treatment. Since this illustrators work also appears in three additional manuscripts associated with Henry VII and his family, it may be that Hargrave 274 was also made for Henry VII and reflects his particular sympathy for reading Henry VI as a saint.
Yale copy in using a standardized iconographic form for all of its historiated initials, with variation only for Henry VI.57 Though Hargrave 274 mirrors the veneration of Henry VI after his death, it offers no other distinctions among the other depicted monarchs, whereas the Yale manuscript presents a more complex (and clearly Lancastrian) program of illustration in its depiction of the relationship of kingship and law. Although appropriating the iconography of King David in order to depict a living king was not a widespread practice in the late medieval period, Scotts discussion (1989, 4246, 61n70) of the patrons influence on fifteenth-century manuscript illustration suggests that there are parallels between the images of King David in prayer that accompanied psalms in late medieval manuscripts and illustrations of unidentified praying figures in codices from the same period which might be considered patron portraits. Representations of King David in psalters and books of hours seem to have inspired many of the depictions of John of France, Duke of Berry, in his famous devotional books, since he is often portrayed kneeling before a prie-dieu with a depiction of Gods face appearing in an upper corner of the illustration, especially in his Petites heures (Paris, Bibliothque nationale, Lat. 18014), made in the late fourteenth century.58 Less easy to interpret are the figures in ceremonial robes, who appear along with the kings in three of the first five initials in the Yale manuscript. Because these initials are those carried out by the second illustrator, the introduction of these three figures might reflect a change in artist; but this runs contrary to the care in continuity exhibited by the second illustrator. Since the additional figures appear only in the initials depicting Henry IV, Henry V, and Henry VI (Plates 4, 5, and 6), the mysterious figures serve to distinguish the Lancastrian kings from the first two kings in the series. The figures ermine-adorned robes associate them with the court leaders, judges, or royal counselors who flank Edward IV in the last initial; but the additional figures in the three illuminations (Illustrator B) are not portrayed identically and may represent different sorts of royal advisors: only the front figure in the initial depicting Henry VI has the sleeve stripes that identify him as a lawyer. In addition, the position of these figures in the miniatures does not remain constant: the first figure peers from behind the canopy in the initial depicting Henry IV. A similar figure appears beside the king in the initial depicting
57. In this distinction, the Hargrave codex parallels the copy of the Nova statuta owned by William Coote, which uses more elaborate decoration to highlight the reign of Henry VI in contrast to the reigns of earlier kings. See above, note 28. 58. For detailed discussions of this manuscipt and its illustrations, see Meiss 1967, figs. 83176; Avril, Dunlopp, and Yapp 1989; and Manion 1991.
Henry V. Two similar figures appear to the side of the royal canopy in the initial depicting Henry VI. These changes which span the three illustrations create a narrative perhaps on the increasing role of counselors on legal matters during the reigns of the Lancastrian kings, a theme that is emphasized in Christine de Pisans Fais darmes et de chevalerie and Fortescues De laudibus.59 The figures that appear in the portraits of the Lancastrian monarchs thus reinforce the manuscripts celebration of the Lancastrian royal line, especially Henry VI, as fulfilling the ideals of kingship enunciated by French and English mirrors for princes in the fifteenth century. As a sequence, the historiated initials depicting Edward III through Edward IV in the Yale Law School manuscript parallel the Lancastrian polemical writings of the 1450s and 1460s, including the Lancastrian mirrors for princes written or commissioned by members of the Lancastrian court in personal contact with Prince Edward: George Ashby, John Fortescue, and Viscount Beaumont. In addition, Fortescues treatise encouraging Prince Edward to study English law from his personal copy suggests that the prince either already possessed a copy of the Nova statuta or was about to receive one as a gift. Nevertheless, this link need not mean that Fortescue himself commissioned the Yale manuscript for the prince or that the manuscript was begun at the time depicted in Fortescues treatise, that is during his exile in France with the prince and queen from 14631471. Indeed, most of the work on the manuscript must have been completed before the royal family went into exile in 1461. Nevertheless, given additional statutes for 14611468 that appear in the manuscript, supplementary work would have been required. The evidence points to Margaret as the person who first commissioned the book as a gift for Prince Edward from his parents. At the same time that the Yale manuscript has important connections to the Lancastrian treatises, it also has links with texts and iconographic traditions closely associated with Margaret of Anjou or her family. As we have seen, the Yale Nova statuta echoes themes in the Christine de Pizan treatise that Margaret received as a wedding gift. It also echoes other traditions with which Margaret had contact, either in France or England. For example, Margaret certainly knew about the representation of King David as one of the Nine Worthies by August 1456, when she and Prince Edward were welcomed to Coventry with a pageant depicting these noble heroes that year.60 She was
59. Christine contends that the wise king will seek advice from Parliament, including elder statesmen, legal scholars, and representatives of the merchants and craftsmen (17, 19, and 20). 60. It is not known if she suggested the theme or merely recognized its usefulness to her cause. See Harris 1908, 28599.
probably already familiar with the tradition of presenting King David as one of the Nine Worthies before she arrived in England, thanks to the widespread influence of this theme in French literature and art, in particular, in the early fifteenth-century: the Duke of Berry commissioned tapestries that depict the Nine Worthies and use his own coat of arms in the background of the images of the three biblical heroes (Joshua, David, and Judas Maccabeus).61 If Margaret sought an image that would serve to link a contemporary prince with King David, she could have found it in the Duke of Berrys own prayer books that reprise the King David iconography from psalters and books of hours with depictions of the duke at prayer before a prie-dieu with the face of God looking down from heaven.62 As granddaughter of Yolande of Aragon, a collector and commissioner of illustrated manuscripts, Margaret would have had knowledge of the Duke of Berrys famous collection of devotional books and almost certainly would have seen at least one of these in her grandmothers collection: after the dukes death, Yolande arranged to purchase his Belles heures, which she gave to the Master of the Rohan Hours to use as a model for the four prayer books she commissioned from him for members of her own family.63 In her father, Duke Ren of Anjou, and her uncle, Charles VII, Margaret had more models to
61. These tapestries of the Nine Worthies now hang in the Cloisters Museum in New York. See Rorimer and Freeman l960. 62. See, for example, illustrations of the duke at prayer in his Petites Heures (Paris, Bibliotheque nationale, Lat. 18014, cc. 117v, 119r, 121v, and 145v (plates 119, 120, 122, and 137 in Meiss 1967). Margaret may also have found in the Duke of Berrys Petites Heures and Belles Heures a model for the figures in the Yale manuscript who emerge from behind the draperies of the kings throne. Examples occur on cc. 22r, 121v, and 167v in the Petites Heures (Meiss 1967, 2: fig. 146). In the Belles Heures, which was purchased by Margarets grandmother, a portrait of the duke at prayer shows a figure partially visible behind a curtain on c. 91r, and a parallel miniature on c. 91v shows the duchess at prayer with a figure holding back a curtain (see Meiss 1967, 2: fig. 518; and Knig 2004, 21). 63. Porcher 1945; and Meiss 1973. On Louis II of Anjou and Yolande of Aragon as collectors and commissioners of illustrated manuscripts, see also Harf-Lancner 1998, 222. In their study of the Duke of Berrys most famous prayer book, the Trs riches heures, Raymond Cazelles and Johannes Rathofer (1988, 22526) discuss Yolandes purchase of the Belles heures and claims of her possible involvement in additions to the Trs riches heures after the Duke of Berrys death, claims based on the appearance of a painting of her chteau, Saumur, in one of the illustrations and on the Rohan Masters possible acquaintance with the manuscript. Cazelles mmmm
reinforce the family tradition of commissioning deluxe manuscripts and actively participating in their design.64 Several kinds of evidence suggest Margarets own interest in collecting and commissioning books. She is thought to have owned a copy of works by Chaucer and Lydgate, as well as Talbots gift of French chivalric literature.65 She also had in her possession devotional works, including a collection of Latin prayers to the Virgin (in the form of a roll) that depicts Margaret kneeling before a prie-dieu and combines her coat of arms with Henry VIs, as does the Yale statutes manuscript.66 In addition, Margaret owned an ordinary of arms, suggesting that she had contact with the newly established College of Arms, the possible source, according to some legal historians, for the standardized copies of the Nova statuta.67 In 1452, Henry VI assigned a new tower at Westminster for the safekeeping of Margarets books and documents, so her collection must have been large enough to warrant the new space.68
and Rathofer conclude, however, that Yolandes links with the manuscript probably came about through her close ties with Charles VII, who had married Yolandes daughter and had inherited the manuscript when most of the dukes possessions came under royal ownership. 64. See Robin 1985. Art historians have suggested that Ren may have assisted Margarets uncle, Charles VII, in commissioning illustrations for the Duke of Berrys Trs riches heures, which remained unfinished at the dukes death (Cazelles and Rathofer 1988, 218 and 224). 65. Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Hatton 73, which contains Lydgates Life of Our Lady and lyrics by Lydgate, Chaucer, and others, has an inscription indicating that it previously belonged to Queen Margaret (see Laynesmith 2004, 253; and Madan et al. 18951953, no. 4119). London, British Library, Royal MS 15 E VI is the anthology that Sir John Talbot gave her as a wedding present. 66. Margarets prayer roll is Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Jesus College 124, illustrated by the London artist William Abell, who also illustrated charters granted by Henry VI and several statutes books (see Scott 1996, 2: 264, and 26668; and Laynesmith 2004, 253 and plate 2). 67. London, British Library, Additional 40851, called Thomas Jenyns Ordinary of Arms, has Margarets full-page coat of arms at the front (see Boos 2004). For the connection between the College of Arms and copies of the Nova statuta, see Pronay and Taylor 1974, 17. 68. Myers 19571958, 95. Myers also points out the unusually large number of lawyers in Margarets service. Other manuscripts possibly owned by Margaret of Anjou include Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 36 (Latin life of Gilbert of Sempringham made in England in the fifteenth century, with Margarets arms on c. 7r); New York, Public Library, MS 32 (a fifteenth-century book of hours in Rouen use which was thought to have belonged to her); Cambridge, Fitzwilliam mmmm
Given her familys history of commissioned books, it is likely that Margaret took an active interest in the design of the books she commissioned. As in the case of the previously mentioned Coventry pageants of 1456, Margaret would have understood the potential for expressing political views through artistic means. Deprived of independent authority to protest the actions of those who sought to undermine the legitimacy of her husband and son, she may well have commissioned a text that would express her views in a symbolic fashion. The Yale Nova statuta would therefore have been a particularly appropriate gift for Margaret to commission for a celebration such as as Prince Edwards knighting ceremony. That the Yale manuscript contains no direct indication of being a gift to Prince Edward is probably due to the political turmoil that interrupted Margarets plans. The parts of the Yale manuscript copied by Scribe A (cc. 1r-344v) were probably complete by the time that Edward IVs deposition of Henry sent the Lancastrians into exile. But Scribe B, who took up copying where Scribe A left off on c. 344v, and Illustrator C, who executed the historiated initial for the statutes of Edward VI on c. 358r, must have added most, if not all, of their work to the manuscript during the time between Henry VIs loss of the throne in March 1461 and May 1471, when Prince Edward was killed in battle against the Yorkist forces and King Henry was murdered in the Tower of London. One can understand why, with the end of the Lancastrian royal line, work on the Yale manuscript seems to have stopped until a different owner arranged for statutes to be added in a less luxurious style after 1484. The manuscript was probably not bound until this point, but rather kept in quires awaiting final touches before binding and presentation. Nothing in the manuscript suggests that it was confiscated by the crown or seized as booty by Edward IVs agents. Though the statutes are historical documents, their visual and verbal contexts in the Yale manuscript present them from a notably Lancastrian perspective. So the fact that the manuscript survived, especially with Margaret of Anjous arms intact, suggests continued sympathy for the Lancastrian royal line among later owners. During the reign of Edward IV, discretion about owning the manuscript would have been necessary: only by renouncing past support of the Lancastrian cause could survivors of the final battles in 1471, such as Sir John Fortescue and Sir William Coote, re-
Museum, MS 381950 (a Psalter originally made in England ca. 1370 for the Bohun family, with added arms of Henry VI impaled with those of Margaret on c. 1r). See Alexander and Kauffmann 1973, no. 70; and Cockerell 1908. I thank Kathleen Scott for these additional references.
ceive a pardon.69 Since Edward IV soon made Fortescue a member of the royal council, he continued to spend time in London and Westminster after 1471, and so was in position to retrieve any parts of the Yale Nova statuta that remained in the hands of scribes or artists there. Fortescue could not have added the statutes from 14821484 to the manuscript, however, since he died around 1479.70 Though Fortescues possession of the Yale manuscript after 1471 must remain a conjecture, it is a theory that finds support in the identity of the earliest documented owner of the manuscript, Lady Margaret Elyot, whose donation of the codex is recorded on c. 1r. Lady Margarets husband, Sir Thomas Elyot, probably inherited the manuscript from his father, Sir Richard Elyot, a member of the Middle Temple Inn of Court who rose to become member of Parliament, distinguished judge, and attorney general to Henry VIIs queen consort.71 Sir Richard seems to have been responsible for the addition of his wifes coat of arms as well as his own on the opening charta of the statutes, mirroring the inclusion of Margaret of Anjous arms with her husbands on that same charta. If Sir Richard also had knowledge of Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae, he might have recognized a link between this copy of the statutes and Fortescues treatise. Sir Thomas Elyots own writings suggest that he was familiar with De laudibus legum Angliae, as well as with Fortescues Governance of England and De natura legis naturae: Elyots Book Named the Governor (published in 1531 and dedicated to Henry VIII) and Image of Governance (published in 1541, but possibly composed in 1532) both contain echoes of Fortescues works.72 Since Sir Thomas Elyot inherited his fathers Latin and French books in 1522, it may be that both the Yale Nova statuta Angliae and copies of Fortescues
69. Fortescue composed a new treatise renouncing his earlier arguments against Edwards claim to the throne before the king pardoned him (Kekewich et al. 1995, 5366). 70. Since his only son Martin died in 1471 and his wife died in 1472, Sir John Fortescues estates in Devonshire were inherited by Martins sons (Chrimes 1942, lxxv). 71. Sir Thomas is thought to have been born before 1490. He had a distinguished career as a humanist scholar, author, diplomat, and court official (Lehmberg 1960). 72. See the discussion of Elyots use of Fortescues treatises in Crofts edition (1880, 1: 13233) of The Boke Named the Governour, as well as in McLaren 1996. The dating of Elyots treatises becomes significant when we consider that prior to 1537 he would have needed access to a manuscript copy of Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae. Due to its critical depiction of Edward IV, Fortescues treatise did not circulate openly during his reign and it was not printed until 1537.
treatises came to Sir Thomas through his father. Sir Richard Elyot was very well situated to have access to Fortescues collection of books, through acquaintance with Fortescues nephew, also Sir John. This John Fortescue, esquire of the body to Edward IV and Richard III, later joined the service of Henry VII, was knighted in 1485, and remained in royal service until his death in 1500. Although Sir Richard received his appointment as kings sergeant-at-law in 1503, he had received temporary commissions from the Crown in the 1490s and also served as a reader at New Inn, one of the inns of Chancery that Fortescue describes in De laudibus.73 In addition, Richard Elyots brother William and cousin John Elyot held a lease on the nearby Clements Inn, another of the inns of Chancery, where John Elyot was principal; and this property bordered on property where the elder Fortescue had resided while serving as chief justice between 1442 and 1461 and again after his appointment to Edward IVs council in 1471.74 After regaining ownership of his property through royal pardon, Fortescue gave the property next to St. Clements Inn to his nephew in royal service, who left the property to his wife when he died. The younger John Fortescue therefore owned his uncles home near the inns of Chancery and served in Henry VIIs court in the 1490s at the same time that Richard Elyot lectured at a nearby inn of Chancery and entered royal service under the same king. Especially with his cousin John as principal of Clements Inn, abutting the Fortescue property, Sir Richard had both opportunity and motive to become acquainted with the younger Sir John Forescue. Since the elder Fortescue had used this home in St. Clement Danes parish during the many years he was chief justice and during his royal service after returning from exile, it is likely that he kept some of his books at that home and left them to his nephew along with the property in 1479. At this nephews death in 1500, his family may have been willing to sell some of his books to a colleague, neighbor, and book collector like Sir Richard Elyot. Over the centuries, owners have bestowed this Nova statuta manuscript because of its cultural value, not just because it contains a copy of medieval English statutes.75 In 1507, Sir Richard inherited the lease on the Clements Inn property; he then left it to his son Thomas as part of his estate in 1522,
73. For Fortescues discussion in De laudibus of the Inns of Chancery, see Chrimes 1942, 11421. For information about the Elyot familys holding of the Clements Inn property, see Williams 1927, 2: nos. 1467, 146668, 1506, and 151013A. 74. Information on Fortescue property holdings is contained in Williams 1927, 1: 24, and 2: 146667, 1474, 1498, and 1506; see also Wedgwood 1938, 349. 75. Beginning in the 1480s, readers who wished to own up-to-date copies of the Nova statuta could purchase printed versions (see Bennett 1969, 80).
along with his Latin and French books. Even if Sir Thomas did not recognize a connection between Fortescues De laudibus legum Angliae and the copy of the Nova statuta he inherited from his father, the humanist scholar must have realized the statute manuscripts connection with Margaret of Anjou, since it memorializes her role as Henry VIs queen through the inclusion of her coat of arms in the border decoration. Sir Richard Elyots addition of Alice Delameres arms to the manuscript, along with his own, in the lower border of the first charta of the statutes, sets up a parallel between the two couples and their sons. The inclusion of Alice Delameres arms on that charta suggests a desire to continue this type of commemoration of a wife or mothers role in the history of a family or nationa view of women that echoes Sir Thomas Elyots own treatise, A Defense of Good Women (1540). There Elyot depicts several wise women from antiquity who had become learned in languages, history, and philosophy, as evidence of womens capacity for education and virtue. While Lehmberg (1960, 17477) has interpreted Elyots final example, the learned warrior queen Zenobia, as a veiled defense of Catherine of Aragon, many of the reasons given for admiring Zenobia could also apply to Margaret of Anjou, both in regard to fortitude under adversity and to the education of children. A more positive view of Margarets efforts on behalf of her husband and son may have resulted from Henry VIIs renewal of sympathy for the Lancastrian royal line in the 1480s and 1490s; but evidence of a sympathetic view of Margaret survives from the mid-1470s as well: among the records of the Fraternity of Our Ladys Assumption, associated with Londons Worshipful Company of Skinners, we findunder the year 15 Edward IV (14751476) and shortly before her ransomMargarets admission to membership in the fraternity and a miniature which portrays the former queen in black and gray widows clothing, kneeling before a prie-dieu on which rest a book, scepter, and crown.76 Elyots positive views on the education of women reflect earlier humanist arguments, including those of Christine de Pizan, who praises Queen Zenobia in her Livre de la cit des dames.77 Both Sir Thomas and Lady Margaret Elyot participated in the gatherings of humanist scholars at the home of Sir Thomas More, where Hans Holbein the Younger drew their portraits.78
76. See Scott 1996, 2: 343 and illustration 474; as well as Meale 1989, 21213 and illustration 22. 77. OBrien 1993. Elyots treatise may also reflect the accomplishments of his wife, Margaret, whom he named sole executrix of his estate in his 1531 will (see Lehmberg 1960, 182 and 195). 78. These portraits are now in the royal collection at Windsor Castle. See Lehmberg 1960, 1619.
It seems fitting that Margaret Elyot came into possession of the Yale Nova statuta Angliae, as the inscription on c. 1r attests. The fact that she did not sell this manuscript along with her husbands books after his death in 1546 to raise money for charitable donations in his name, as his will instructed, suggests that the book had become hers prior to his death. We can only conjecture that Sir Thomas gave her the codex when he inherited it from his father in 1522, recognizing its commemoration of a more famous Margaret. Without children of her own to educate, Margaret Elyot gave the manuscript to a young member of the Middle Temple, the Cambridgeshire lawyer George Freville, as the inscription on c. 1 indicates.79 Freville, who received Queen Elizabeth Is appointment as baron of the Exchequer in 1559 and died in 1579, might well have had an interest in legal records associated with the Lancastrians, since he was appointed counsel to the Duchy of Lancaster in 1548. The manuscript was in the hands of another woman (perhaps Frevilles widow) by 1581, since another, partially erased inscription on c. 1r states that the book was amongst other bookes at her house at Totenham High Crosse in that year. Another inscription on this same charta reveals that Roger Nichols of the Inner Temple purchased the book in 1614. The codex eventually became the property of Sir Thomas Edward Winnington (d. 1746), perhaps through his grandfather, Sir Francis Winnington (d. 1700), who had served as solicitor-general and then member of Parliament.80 The manuscript remained with the Winnington family until it was sold by the estate of Sir Thomass descendant, Sir Francis Salwey Winnington, in 1932, and passed through several additional owners until Yale Law School acquired it in 1955.81 Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1 offers a striking example of the interaction of visual and verbal discourses offered by manuscript books and the role that these manuscripts can play in illuminating the culture that pro79. In making the gift to a member of the inn of court where her father-in-law had been a member, Margaret may have represented the manuscript as Sir Richard Elyots, which would explain why the gift inscription mistakenly refers to her as Sir Richards widow. Frevilles own record of the gift refers to the donor as Margaret Elyot, which suggests that she must have given Freville the statute manuscript before her marriage to Sir James Dyer, another prominent lawyer, which occurred before April 1551 (Lehmberg 1960, 182). For further details, see the article on Freville by John Hamilton Baker in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Matthew and Harrison 2004, ad voc.). 80. See the article on Sir Francis Winnington by Paul Halliday in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Matthew and Harrison 2004, ad voc.). 81. See Baker 19851990, 1: 74.
duced them. Though the evidence that Margaret of Anjou commissioned the Yale copy of the Nova statuta Angliae for her son remains indirect, this attribution is consistent with both the manuscripts content and the historical, political, literary, and iconographic contexts of its production and early ownership. Margaret was especially well situated to bring together the French and English literary and artistic traditions that shaped the manuscripts illustration and decoration. Margaret, queen of Henry and mother of Edward, also provides the key to understanding the manuscripts marshalling of arguments about just kingship found in contemporary works by Christine de Pizan and John Fortescue and strategically used in defense of her husband and son. The notion that an English statutes manuscript decorated with Margaret of Anjous coat of arms must have been a wedding present from her husband reflects the patriarchal lens through which Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1 has been viewed for much of its critical history. Reading the manuscript as a cultural artifact shaped by its literary, artistic, and historical contexts, however, reveals the nature of this codex as both legal record and Lancastrian mirror for princesa unique text to which women and men made significant contributions. Indiana University
Appendix
New Haven, Yale Law School, Lillian Goldman Library, MS. G. St. 11.1
structure 389 vellum chartae, approximately 180x250 mm. binding Sixteenth-century binding of brown, blind-tooled calf over oak boards. ruling Most chartae show light ink ruling for a single column of text, with additional ruling for running heads in the top margin and ruling for regnal year notations in the outer margins. Up through c. 381v, the text block is ruled for 38 lines; thereafter the ruling is darker and less regular, with the number of lines of text varying from 34 to 38.
hands Three hands, using anglicana bastarda and anglicana formata scripts for main
text and textualis for highlighted words: Hand A = cc. 2r-344v; Hand B = cc. 344v381v; Hand C = cc. 382r-389v.
contents Legal texts in Latin and French:
1r-v 2r-7r 7v-8v 9r-v 10r-53r 53v-54v 55r-334r 334v-335v 336r-344v 357r-v 358r-381v 382r-389v Blank, with later inscriptions added on 1r Modus tenendi Parliamentum Tractatus de senescalsia Angliae Blank Subject index for Nova statuta Angliae Blank Nova statuta Angliae for 1 Edward III (1327) 23 Henry VI (1444 1445) Blank Nova statuta Angliae for 25 Henry VI (14461447) 39 Henry VI (14601461) Blank Nova statuta Angliae for 1 Edward IV (14611462) 7 Edward IV (14671468) [incomplete] Nova statuta Angliae for 21 Edward IV (14821483) 1 Richard III (14831484) [incomplete]
illustration and decoration Completed through c. 381v. Red and blue paragraph marks for statutes. Small gold initials on red and blue painted fields with acanthus leaf border extensions mark regnal years. Historiated initials and full borders in paint and gold leaf, by three hands, depicting kings at prayer or in court, open the main sections of the statutes: Illustrator A: c. 55r (Edward III), c. 139r (Richard II); Illustrator B: c. 198r (Henry IV), c. 235v (Henry V), c. 261r (Henry VI); Illustrator C: c. 358r (Edward IV).
Works Cited
Alexander, J[onathan] J. G., and C[laus] M. Kauffmann. 1973. English Illuminated Manuscripts 7001500. Brussels: Bibliothque royale Albert Ier. Avril, Franois, Louisa Dunlopp, and Brunsdon Yapp. 19891990. Les Petites Heures du Duc de Berry. 2 vols. Lucerne: Faksimile-Verlag. Baker, J[ohn] H[amilton]. 19851990. English Legal Manuscripts in the United States of America: A Descriptive List. 2 vols. London: Selden Society. Baker, John Hamilton, and J[ayne] S. Ringrose. 1996. A Catalogue of English Legal Manuscripts in Cambridge University Library. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. Bateson, Mary, ed. [1899] 1965. George Ashbys Poems. London: Oxford University Press (rpt. of edition by the Early English Text Society, Extra Series 76. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trbner & Co.). Bennett, H[enry] S[tanley]. 1969. English Books and Readers 1475 to 1557: Being a Study in the History of the Book Trade from Caxton to the Incorporation of the Stationers Company. 2d ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Boos, Emmanuel de. 2004. Larmorial ordonn de la reine Marguerite, al. Livre de Thomas Jenyns: daprs le manuscrit de Londres, British library, Ms Add. 40851. Paris: Le Lopard dOr. Bossy, Michel. 1998. Arms and the Bride: Christine de Pizans Military Treatise as a Wedding Gift for Margaret of Anjou. In Christine de Pizan and the Categories of Difference, edited by Marilynn Desmond, 23656. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Bowers, John M. 2002. Thomas Hoccleve and the Politics of Tradition. Chaucer Review 36: 35269. Cahn, Walter, and James Marrow. 1978. Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts at Yale: A Selection. Special issue of the Yale University Library Gazette 52.4 Calendar. 18911916. Calendar of the Patent Rolls Preserved in the Public Record Office, 12321509. 52 vols. London: Her Majestys Stationery Office. Cazelles, Raymond, and Johannes Rathofer. 1988. Illuminations of Heaven and Earth: The Glories of the Trs Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, forward by Umberto Eco. New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc.; and Luzern: Faksimile-Verlag. Chrimes, Stanley B[ertram], ed. and trans. 1942. De Laudibus Legum Anglie by Sir John Fortescue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Christie Auction House. 2005. Valuable Printed Books and Manuscripts, Including Maps and Atlases. London: Christie and Company. Cockerell, Sydney Carlyle. 1908. Exhibition of Illuminated Manuscripts. London: Burlington Fine Arts Club. Croft, H[enry] H[erbert] S[tephen], ed. [1531] 1883. The Boke Named the Governour, by Sir Thomas Elyot. 2 vols. London: Kegan Paul (rpt. New York: Burt Franklin, 1967). de la Mare, A[lbinia], and B[ruce] C. Barker-Benfield, eds. 1980. Manuscripts at Oxford: An Exhibition in Memory of Richard William Hunt (19081979), Keeper of Western Manuscripts at the Bodleian Library Oxford, 19451975, on Themes Selected and Described by Some of his Friends. Oxford: Bodleian Library. Dutton, Paul Edward, and Herbert L. Kessler. 1997. The Poetry and Paintings of the First Bible of Charles the Bald. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Dyboski, Roman, and Zygfryd Marjan Arend, eds. 1935. Knyhthode and Bataile. Early English Text Society, Original Series 201. London: Oxford University Press (rpt. by London: D. S. Brewer, 1995). Faye, Christopher Undahl, and William Henry Bond, eds. 1962. Supplement to the Census of Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts in the United States and Canada. New York: Bibliographical Society of America. Fisher, John. 1964. John Gower: Moral Philosopher and Friend of Chaucer. New York: New York University Press. Forhan, Kate Langdon. 2002. The Political Theory of Christine de Pizan. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Gill, Paul E. 1971. Politics and Propaganda in Fifteenth-Century England: The Polemical Writings of Sir John Fortescue. Speculum 46: 33347.
Gilson, Julius Parnell. 1911. A Defence of the Proscription of the Yorkists in 1459. English Historical Review 26: 51225. Given-Wilson, Chris. [1987] 1996. English Nobility in the Late Middle Ages: The Fourteenth-Century Political Community. London: Routledge (rpt.). Gross, Anthony. 1996. The Dissolution of the Lancastrian Kingship: Sir John Fortescue and the Crisis of Monarchy in Fifteenth-Century England. Stamford, U.K.: Paul Watkins. Harf-Lancner, Laurence. 1998. Image and Propaganda: The Illustration of Book I of Froissarts Chroniques. In Froissart Across the Genres, edited by Donald Maddox and Sara Sturm-Maddox, 22150. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Harris, Mary Dormer, ed. 1908. The Coventry Leet Book. Early English Text Society, Original Series 134. London: Kegan Paul. Hayward, Jane. 1975. Guilds and Civic Affairs. In The Secular Spirit: Life and Art at the End of the Middle Ages, edited by Timothy Husband and Jane Hayward, 126 43. New York: E. P. Dutton (New York Metropolitan Museum of Art). Hen, Yitzhak. 1998. The Uses of the Bible and the Perception of Kingship in Merovingian Gaul. Early Medieval Europe 7: 27789. Hobbs, R. Gerald. 2003. Bucers Use of King David as Mirror of the Christian Prince. Reformation & Renaissance Review: Journal of the Society for Reformation Studies 5: 10228. Horwood, A[lfred] J[ohn]. 1874. First Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts. London: George Edward Eyre and William Spottiswoode. Hourihane, Colum, ed. 2002. King David in the Index of Christian Art. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Kantorowicz, Ernst. [1957] 1997. The Kings Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology. Princeton: Princeton University Press (rpt. with introduction by William Chester Jordan). . 1958. Laudes Regiae: A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Medieval Ruler Worship. University of California Publications in History, 33. 2d ed. Berkeley: University of California Press. Keats-Rohan, Katharine S. B., ed. 19931995. John of Salisbury, Policraticus. 2 vols. Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Medievalis, 118. Turnholt: Brepols. Kekewich, Margaret Lucille, Colin Richmond, Anne F. Sutton, Livia Visser-Fuchs, and John L. Watts. 1995. The Politics of Fifteenth-Century England: John Vales Book. Gloucester, UK: Alan Sutton Publishing. Ker, N[eil] R[ipley]. 19692002. Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries. 5 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kirschbaum, Engelbert, ed. 19681976. Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie. 8 vols. Rome: Herder. Knox, Ronald, and Shane Leslie, eds. 1923. The Miracles of King Henry VI: Being an Account and Translation of Twenty-three Miracles Taken from the Manuscript in the British Museum (Royal 13 c. viii). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Knig, Eberhard. 2004. Die Belles Heures des Duc de Berry: Sternstunden der Buchkunst. Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss.

Lander, J[ack] R[obert]. 1961. Attainder and Forfeiture, 1453 to 1509. Historical Journal 4: 11951. Laynesmith, J[oanna] L. 2004. The Last Medieval Queens: English Queenship, 1445 1503. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lee, Patricia Ann. 1986. Reflections of Power: Margaret of Anjou and the Dark Side of Queenship. Renaissance Quarterly 39: 183217. Lehmberg, Stanford. 1960. Sir Thomas Elyot, Tudor Humanist. Austin: University of Texas Press. Litzen, Veikko. 1971. A War of Roses and Lilies: The Theme of Succession in Sir John Fortescues Works. Helsinki: Academia Scientiarum Fennica. Lovatt, Roger. 1981. John Blacman: Biographer of Henry VI. In The Writing of History in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to Richard William Southern, edited by Ralph Henry C. Davis and John Michael Wallace-Hadrill, 41544. Oxford: Clarendon. . 1984. A Collector of Apocryphal Anecdotes: John Blacman Revisted. In Property and Politics: Essays in Later Medieval English History, edited by Anthony J. Pollard, 17297. Gloucester, U.K.: Alan Sutton. Luders, Alexander, et al., ed. 1963. The Statutes of the Realm: 12251713. 11 vols. London: Dawson (rpt. of London: Eyre and Strahan, 181028). Madan, Falconer, et al., eds. 1980. A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford which have not hitherto been catalogued in the Quarto series. 7 vols. in 8. Munich: Kraus Reprints (rpt. with corrections of Oxford: Oxford University, 18951953). Mandach, Andr de. 1974a. LAnthologie chevaleresque de Marguerite dAnjou (B. M. Royal 15 E VI) et les officines de Saint-Augustin de Canterbury, Jean Wauquelin du Mons, et David Aubert de Hesdin. In VIe Congrs International de la Socit Rencesvals: Actes, edited by Jean Subrenat, 31750. Aix-en-Provence: Universit de Provence. . 1974b. A Royal Wedding Present in the Making: Talbots Chivalric Anthology (Royal E VI) for Queen Margaret of Anjou and the Laval-Middleton Anthology of Nottingham. Nottingham Medieval Studies 18: 5676. Manion, Margaret M. 1991. Art and Devotion: the Prayer Books of Jean de Berry. In Medieval Texts and Images: Studies of Manuscripts from the Middle Ages, edited by Margaret M. Manion and Bernard J. Muir, 177200. Philadelphia: Harwood Academic Publishers. Matthew, Henry Colin Gray, and Brian Harrison, eds. 2004. Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. 60 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Maurer, Helen. 2003. Margaret of Anjou: Queenship and Power in Late Medieval England. Woodbridge: Boydell. Mayali, Laurent. 1988. Lex animata: Rationalisation du pouvoir politique et science juridique (XIIme-XIVme sicles). In Renaissance du pouvoir lgislatif et gense de ltat, edited by Andr Gouron and Albert Rigaudire, 15564. Publications de la socit dhistoire du droit et des institutions des anciens pays de droit crit, 3. Montpellier: Univerity of Montpellier.
McCulloch, Diarmaid, and Evan David Jones. 1983. Lancastrian Politics, the French War, and the Rise of the Popular Element. Speculum 58: 95138. McGrady, Deborah. 1998. What is a Patron? Benefactors and Authorship in Harley 4431, Christine de Pizans Collected Works. In Christine de Pizan and the Categories of Difference, edited by Marilynn Desmond, 19598. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. McKenna, John. 1974. Piety and Propaganda: The Cult of Henry VI. In Chaucer and Middle English Studies in Honour of Rossell Hope Robbins, edited by Beryl Rowland, 7288. Kent, OH: Kent State University Press, 1974. McLaren, Anne N. 1996. Delineating the Elizabethan Body Politic: Knox, Aylmer and the Definition of Counsel 155888. History of Political Thought 17: 22452. Meale, Carole. 1989. Patrons, Buyers and Owners: Book Production and Social Status. In Book Production and Publishing in Britain 13751475, edited by Jeremy Griffiths and Derek Pearsall, 20138. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. . 1996. Reading Womens Culture in Fifteenth-Century England: The Case of Alice Chaucer. In Mediaevalitas: Reading the Middle Ages; The J. A. W. Bennett Memorial Lectures, Ninth Series, Perugia, 1995, edited by Piero Boitani and Anna Torti, 81101. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer and Boydell & Brewer. Meiss, Millard. 1967. French Painting in the Time of Jean de Berry: The late fourteenth century and the patronage of the duke. 2 vols. London: Phaidon Press. . 1973. The Rohan Master: A Book of Hours. New York: G. Braziller. Myers, Alec Rreginald. 19571958. The Household Accounts of Queen Margaret of Anjou, 14523. Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 40: 79113, 391432 (now rpt. in Myers, Alec R. 1985. Crown, Household, and Parliament in Fifteenth-Century England, edited by Cecil H. Clough, 93229. London: Hambledon Press). Nederman, Cary J., ed. 1990. John of Salisbury, Policraticus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. OBrien, Dennis J. 1993. Warrior Queen: The Character of Zenobia According to Giovanni Boccaccio, Christine de Pizan, and Sir Thomas Elyot. Medieval Perspectives 8: 5368. OMeara, Carra Ferguson. 2001. Monarchy and Consent: the Coronation book of Charles V of France, British Library, Cotton MS Tiberius B. VIII. London: Harvey Miller. Orme, Nicholas. 2001. Medieval Children. New Haven: Yale University Press (rpt. 2003). Osberg, Richard. 1986. The Jesse Tree in the 1432 London Entry of Henry VI: Messianic Kingship and the Rule of Justice. Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies 16: 21332. Owens, Margareth Boyer. 1989. The Image of King David in Prayer in FifteenthCentury Books of Hours. Imago musicae 6: 2338. Pcht, Otto, and Jonathan J. G. Alexander. 1973. Illuminated Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. 3 vols. Oxford: Bodleian Library. Porcher, Jean. 1945. Two Models for the Heures de Rohan. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 8: 16. Prendergast, Thomas A. 2002. The Invisible Spouse: Henry VI, Arthur, and Fifteenth-Century Subject. Journal of Medieval & Early Modern Studies 32: 30526.

Pronay, Nicholas, and John Taylor. 1974. The Use of the Modus Tenendi Parliamentum in the Middle Ages. Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 47: 1123. Robin, Franoise. 1985. La cour dAnjou-Provence: La vie artistique sous le rgne de Ren. Paris: Picard. Rorimer, James J., and Margaret B. Freeman. 1960. The Nine Heroes Tapestries at the Cloisters. New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art. Schrder, Horst. 1971. Der Topos der Nine Worthies in Literatur und bildender Kunst. Gttingen: Vandenhoek & Ruprecht. Scott, Kathleen L. 1980a. A late fifteenth-century group of Nova Statuta manuscripts. In de la Mare and Barker-Benfield 1980, 1035. . 1980b. The Mirroure of the Worlde: MS Bodley 283 (England c. 147080). Oxford: Roxburghe Club. . 1989. Caveat Lector: Ownership and Standardization in the Illustration of Fifteenth-Century English Manuscripts. English Manuscript Studies, 11001700 1: 1963. . 1996. Later Gothic Manuscripts: 13901490 (A Survey of Manuscripts Illuminated in the British Isles, Part 6). 2 vols.. London: Harvey Miller Publishers, 1996. Sherman, Claire Richter. 1969. The Portraits of Charles V of France (13381380). New York: New York University Press for the College Art Association of America. Sotheby Auction House. 1933. Catalogue of valuable printed books, illuminated and other manuscripts, autograph letters and historical documents, etc. . . . which will be sold by auction . . . on Monday, the 31st of July, 1933, and the following day. London: Sotheby and Co. . 1958. Catalogue of forty-five exceptionally important illuminated manuscripts of the 9th to the 18th century. London: Sotheby and Co. Taylor, John. 1987. English Historical Literature in the Fourteenth Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Teague, Frances. 1991. Christine de Pizans Book of War. In The Reception of Christine de Pizan from the Fifteenth through the Nineteenth Centuries, edited by Glenda K. McLeod, 2541. Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press. Thomas, Marcel. 1979. The Golden Age: Manuscript Painting at the Time of Jean, Duke of Berry, translation by Ursele Molinaro and Bruce Benderson. New York: George Braziller. Tudor-Craig, Pamela. 1989. Henry VIII and King David. In Early Tudor England: Proceedings of the 1987 Harlaxton Symposium, edited by Daniel Williams, 183205. Woodbridge: Boydell. Vale, Malcolm. 1974. Charles VII. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. . 2001. The Princely Court: Medieval Courts and Culture in North-West Europe, 12701380. Oxford: Oxford University Press (rpt. 2003). Watts, John. 1996. Henry VI and the Politics of Kingship. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wedgwood, Josiah C. 1938. History of Parliament 14391509: Biographies. London: His Majestys Stationery Office.
Willard, Charity Cannon. 1999. The Book of the Deeds of Arms and of Chivalry by Christine de Pizan, translation by Sumner Willard. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press. Williams, Elijah. 1927. Early Holborn and the Legal Quarter of London. 2 vols. London: Sweet and Maxwell. Wolffe, Bertram. 1981. Henry VI. London: Methuen (rpt. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2001).
List of Manuscripts Cited

Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, MS 381950 Cambridge, St. Johns College, MS A. 7 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 10 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 21 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 29 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 30 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 42 Cambridge, Harvard Law School Library, MS 163 Cambridge, Harvard University, Houghton Library, MS Richardson 40 Cape Town, National Library of South Africa, MS Grey 4 c 5 Holkham, Holkham Hall, Norfolk, Library of the Earl of Leicester (private collection), MS 232 London, British Library, Additional 40851 London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius B. viii London, British Library, Hargrave 274 London, British Library, Lansdowne 470 London, British Library, Royal 1 E ix London, British Library, Royal 15 E vi London, British Library, Royal 18 D ii London, British Library, Yates Thompson 48 London, Corporation of London, Guildhall, Cartae Antiquae London, Inner Temple, MS 505 London, Lincolns Inn, MS Hale 194 London, Public Records Office, MS E 164/11 New Haven, Yale Law School, Lillian Goldman Law Library, MS G. St. 11.1 New York, Columbia University, Rare Books and Manuscripts Library, Plimpton MS 273 New York, Public Library, MS 32 Nottingham, University Library, Wollaton Antiphonal Oslo, Martin Schyen Collection, MS 1355 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 36 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Don. d. 85

Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Fr. c. 50 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Hatton 10 Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Hatton 73 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Jesus College MS 124 Oxford, St. Johns College, MS 257 Paris, Bibliothque nationale, Lat. 1 Paris, Bibliothque nationale, Lat. 18014 Philadelphia, Free Library, Carson LC 14/9.5 San Marino, Huntington Library, HM 19920 Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, MS I. 1. 9
Plate 1: New Haven, Yale Law School, Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1, c. 55r. Reproduced with the kind permission of The Paskus-Danziger Rare Book Room, The Lillian Goldman Library.
Plate 5: New Haven, Yale Law School, Goldman Library MS G. St. 11.1, c. 235v. Reproduced with the kind permission of The Paskus-Danziger Rare Book Room, The Lillian Goldman Library.
Plate 8: Philadelphia, The Free Library, MS Carson LC 14/9.5, c. 245r. Reproduced with the kind permission of the Rare Book Department, The Free Library of Philadelphia.
Plate 9: London, British Library, Yates Thompson 48, c. 41r. Reproduced with the kind permission of The British Library.
Plate 10: Oxford, The Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, MS Don. d. 85, c. 21v (detail). Reproduced with the kind permission of The Bodleian Library, University of Oxford.

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror For Princes - The Yale Law School Manuscript of The Nova Statuta Angliae

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror For Princes - The Yale Law School Manuscript of The Nova Statuta Angliae

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes: The Yale Law School Manuscript of the Nova statuta

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by UNIFAL-Uniersidade Federal de Alfenas at 10/31/12 8:00PM GMT

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 7

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 9

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 11

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 13

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 15

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 17

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 19

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 21

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 23

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 25

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 27

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 29

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 31

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 33

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 35

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 37

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 39

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 41

contents Legal texts in Latin and French:

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 43

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 45

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 47

List of Manuscripts Cited

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 49

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 51

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 53

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 55

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 57

A Statute Book and Lancastrian Mirror for Princes | 59

You might also like