The Reign of Henry III. Some Suggestions

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
It is now nearly twenty years since Mr. G. J. Turner gave to the Royal Historical Society the second of those two papers that did much to change current ideas about the minority of Henry III. Due recognition was here at last given to the protective care of the Church for the kingdom of its infant ward, and the difficulties experienced by the Council in dealing with John's war-inured sheriffs and castellans were for the first time sympathetically examined in the light of record evidence. But the papers were notable in that they were the first serious English attempt to bring criticism to bear upon the St. Albans chronicler, Roger of Wendover, and his greater editor and successor, Matthew Paris. I say English, because in 1897 there had appeared the interesting and too little known dissertation of Dr. Hans Plehn upon the second of these writers, analysing with care and acumen the political sympathies of Paris, and anticipating some of the remarks made by the late Master of Balliol in his Ford Lectures. Mr. Turner's examination fixed chiefly upon the not always justifiable partiality of the St. Albans writers for Hubert de Burgh, and the foundations were now laid for Miss Norgate to continue, not long afterwards, this critical line in regard to the hero of the St. Albans' scriptorium.

This publication has 0 references indexed in Scilit: