Abstract
By 1430, the expansive phase of Lollardy was well and truly over. This is as plain in intellectual as in social terms. No new Lollard treatises were compiled after this date, and there is little evidence even for the continued copying of old texts. Thomas Netter had completed his monumental refutation of Wyclif, and nobody afterwards thought the task worth repeating — except Reginald Pecock, whose innovative attempt to refute the Lollards in the vernacular around the middle of the century struck his clerical contemporaries as a cure far worse than the disease. Nor is there any solid evidence of Lollard traditions being established anywhere new after this time. Cases of Lollardy are recorded from time to time in most of the areas already known for heresy, in a pattern which probably reflects rather the varying zeal of the bishops or of the local ruling elite than the innate strength of the movement. It has been argued that Lollardy suffered a sharp decline in the mid-fifteenth century, as very few Lollards turn up in ecclesiastical records between 1430 and 1480, followed by a dramatic revival under the early Tudors. Yet this is probably an optical illusion. Despite the paucity of records in this period (for which many episcopal registers are lost, and for which very few ecclesiastical court books survive), there are clear signs of the persistence of Lollardy in most of the areas where it had already become established.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
See Eric Acheson, A Gentry Community: Leicestershire in the Fifteenth Century, c. 1422–c.1485 (Cambridge, 1992), pp. 186–98, esp. p. 194, for an assessment of the overwhelmingly orthodox character of Leicestershire gentry religion; James Crompton, ‘Leicestershire Lollards’, Transactions of the Leicestershire Archaeological and Historical Society 44 (1968–69), pp. 11–43, at pp. 30–3.
C. J. Drees, Authority and Dissent in the English Church (Lewiston, 1997), pp. 80–6. See pp. 63, 80, and 86 for some links between Lollards in the dioceses of Winchester, Salisbury, and Lincoln.
J. Fines, ‘Heresy trials in the diocese of Coventry and Lichfield, 1511–1512’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 14 (1963), pp. 160–74.
A. G. Dickens, Lollards and Protestants in the Diocese of York, 1509–1558 (Oxford, 1959), p. 17. See also Crouch, Piety, Fraternity and Power, p. 223 for the lack of Yorkshire Lollardy.
Imogen Luxton, ‘The Lichfield court book: A postscript’, Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 44 (1971), pp. 120–5. But see McSheffrey, Gender and Heresy, pp. 37–45.
R. W. Hoyle, ‘The Earl, the Archbishop and the Council: The affray at Fulford, May 1504’, in Rulers and Ruled in Late Medieval England, ed. R. E. Archer and S. Walker (London, 1995), pp. 239–56.
See J. F. Davis, ‘Joan of Kent, Lollardy and the English Reformation’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 33 (1982), pp. 225–33, for her career.
Claire Cross, Church and People, 1450–1660 (London, 1976), p. 41.
See John Strype, Ecclesiastical Memorials (3 vols in 6 parts, Oxford, 1822), vol. 1, pt 2, pp. 52–3, and 60–1.
J. A. Sharpe, Judicial Punishment in England (London, 1990), pp. 27–9.
Copyright information
© 2002 Richard Rex
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rex, R. (2002). Survival and Revival. In: The Lollards. Social History in Perspective. Palgrave, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21269-5_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21269-5_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-333-59752-1
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-21269-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave History CollectionHistory (R0)