Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T09:21:34.910Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Characters ‘Civil’ and ‘Theology’ in ‘Piers Plowman’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Alexandra Barratt
Alexandra Barratt*
Affiliation:
University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Among the entourage of Lady Meed in Passus 2 of Piers Plowman appear two figures whose part in the action at this point is central though brief: Civil and Simony. The pair, who connive at and forward Lady Meed's marriage to Fals, carry all before them until challenged by another figure: Theology. This paper will try to define the precise significance of Civil, consider the background to the odium in which he is held, and discuss Langland's purpose in choosing Theology as Civil's opponent.

Type
Miscellany
Information
Traditio , Volume 38 , 1982 , pp. 352 - 364
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Quotations from and references to Piers Plowman are from the following editions: Piers Plowman: The A Version, ed. G. Kane (London 1960); Piers Plowman: The B Version, edd. G. Kane and E. Talbot Donaldson (London 1975); Piers Plowman by William Langland: An Edition of the C Text, ed. D. Pearsall (London 1978.)Google Scholar

2 An error made most recently by Benson, C. D., who interprets Simony and Civil as allegorisations of ‘those who corrupt both the secular and ecclesiastical law’ (‘The Function of Lady Meed in Piers Plowman,’ English Studies 61 [1980] 195).Google Scholar

3 ‘Roman Law in England,’ Ius Romanum Medii Aevi (1971) 5.13a.1–97.Google Scholar

4 Ibid. 12.Google Scholar

5 Ibid. 25–26.Google Scholar

6 Ibid. 27.Google Scholar

7 Ibid. 27–28.Google Scholar

8 Ibid. 28.Google Scholar

9 ‘Roman Law in England’ 36; cf. Tuck, A., Richard II and the English Nobility (London 1973) 123–24.Google Scholar

10 Ibid. 48–49.Google Scholar

11 Ibid. 49.Google Scholar

12 ‘Roman Law in England’ 53; cf. Tuck 146.Google Scholar

13 Ibid. 64.Google Scholar

14 Ibid. 71.Google Scholar

15 ‘Roman Law in England’ 76; cf. Tuck 146–47, on the extension of the jurisdictions of these courts during the 1370s, ’80s, and ’90s.Google Scholar

16 Op. cit. 151.Google Scholar

17 Ibid. 152.Google Scholar

18 Levett, A. E., Studies in Manorial History (Oxford 1938; repr. London 1963) 32; cf. Steel, A., Richard II (Cambridge 1941; repr. 1962) 62.Google Scholar

19 Ibid. 32.Google Scholar

20 The Vision of William Concerning Piers Plowman in Three Parallel Texts (Oxford 1886) II 34.Google Scholar

21 Langland: Piers Plowman, The Prologue and Passus I–VII of the B Text ed. J. A. W. Bennett (Oxford 1972) 125; The Vision of Piers Plowman: A Complete Edition of the B Text, ed. A. V. C. Schmidt (London 1978) 309.Google Scholar

22 Ibid. 131 n. to line 178.Google Scholar

23 Ed. cit. 58; on the traditional association of the law in general with the sin of simony, see Post, G., Giocarinis, K., and Kay, R., ‘The Medieval Heritage of a Humanistic Ideal: “Scientia donum Dei est, unde vendi non potest,”’ Traditio 11 (1955) 195–234.Google Scholar

24 See the references given by MED s.vv. civile adj. as n., and civil(e adj.; Ludus Coventriae, ed. Block, K. S. (EETS es 120; London 1922) 179 (‘In grett canon and in Cevyle lawe’) and 228 (‘Both sevyle and Canone sette pou at nowth’); Life of Saint Werburge, ed. H. Bradshaw (EETS 88; London 1887) 132 (‘The lawe of ciuile / and of holy canon’); Daunce of Death, ed. F. Warren (EETS 131; London 1931) 156; Office and Dewtie of Kingis, ed. F. Hall (EETS 3; 2nd ed.; London 1869) 16.Google Scholar

25 According to MED s.v., decretistre is here used contemptuously.Google Scholar

26 See MED s.v. canon 2 (b).Google Scholar

27 Stein, P., ‘Vacarius and the Civil Law,’ in Church and Government in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to C. R. Cheney, edd. C. N. L. Brooke et al. (Cambridge 1976) 125.Google Scholar

28 Ibid. 126.Google Scholar

29 Haskins, C. H., The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, Mass. 1927; repr. 1957) 212.Google Scholar

30 Jacob, E. F., Archbishop Henry Chichele (London 1967) 3. But not all proctors in the Church courts held legal degrees, apparently: see Helmholz, R. H., Marriage Litigation in Medieval England (Cambridge 1974) 148.Google Scholar

31 Rashdall, H., The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages , edd. F. M. Powicke and A. B. Emden (Oxford 1964) I 133.Google Scholar

32 Ibid. Google Scholar

33 Ullmann, W., The Growth of Papal Government in the Middle Ages (2nd ed.; London 1962) 369.Google Scholar

34 Ullmann, W., ‘John Baconthorpe as Canonist,’ in Church and Government … Essays Presented to C. R. Cheney 245.Google Scholar

35 Pollock, F. and Maitland, F. W., The History of English Law (2nd ed.; Cambridge 1968) I 111–12; they cite Giraldus Cambrensis, Opera, edd. J. S. Brewer et al. (Rolls Series; London 1861–91) II 349.Google Scholar

36 Stein 136.Google Scholar

37 Kantorowicz, H. and Smalley, B., ‘An English Theologian's View of Roman Law,’ Medieval and Renaissance Studies 1 (1941–43) 246.Google Scholar

38 Richardson, H. G., ‘The Oxford Law School under John,’ Law Quarterly Review 57 (1941) 323–24.Google Scholar

39 Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis, edd. H. Denifle and L. Chatelain (Paris 1889–97) I 90–93.Google Scholar

40 Ullmann, Law and Politics in the Middle Ages (London 1975) 103.Google Scholar

41 Rashdall II 29; see Ullmann, The Growth of Papal Government 373 n. 3, for a modern defence of this development.Google Scholar

42 Opus tertium, ed. J. S. Brewer (Rolls Series; London 1859) 419.Google Scholar

43 Ibid. 421.Google Scholar

44 Ibid. 418.Google Scholar

45 Ibid. 86.Google Scholar

46 Ibid. Google Scholar

47 Ibid.; Easton, S. C., Roger Bacon and His Search for a Universal Science (New York 1952) 136, suggests that he is referring to a pseudo-Joachimite prophecy.Google Scholar

48 Easton 28, citing Davy, M. M., ‘Les sermons universitaires,’ Études de philosophie médiévale 15 (1931) 88–91.Google Scholar

49 Ullmann, ‘John Baconthorpe’ 225.Google Scholar

50 Ibid. 245.Google Scholar

51 Tractatus de civili dominio, edd. R. L. Poole and J. Loserth (London 1885–1904) I cap. xvii 38c; cf. cap. xlii 112c–113a.Google Scholar

52 Ibid. I cap. xviii 40c.Google Scholar

53 Ibid. I cap. xliv 132b.Google Scholar

54 Ibid. I cap. xlv 139b.Google Scholar

55 Ibid. I cap. xvii 39b.Google Scholar

56 Ibid. I. cap. xviii 40b.Google Scholar

57 Ibid. I cap. xliv 132b.Google Scholar

58 Ibid. I cap. xvii 40b.Google Scholar

59 Ibid. I cap. xlii 113b.Google Scholar

60 Ibid. I cap. xliv 130c–131a.Google Scholar

61 Tractatus de officio regis, edd. A. W. Pollard and C. Sayle (London 1887) 188.Google Scholar

62 Ibid. 189.Google Scholar

63 Ibid. 190.Google Scholar

64 Ibid. 190–91.Google Scholar

65 Ibid. 193.Google Scholar

66 Ibid. 194.Google Scholar

67 Ed. L. M. Swinburn (EETS 151; London 1897; repr. New York 1971) 2.Google Scholar

68 The English Works of Wyclif, ed. F. D. Matthew (EETS 74; London 1880; 2nd ed. 1902) 184.Google Scholar

69 Ibid. 185.Google Scholar

70 Ibid. 235.Google Scholar

71 Ibid. 145.Google Scholar

72 Ibid. 158.Google Scholar

73 Ibid. 157.Google Scholar

74 On d'Ailly's ideas on law, see Oakley, F., The Political Thought of Pierre d'Ailly (New Haven 1964) 164–65: ‘Echoing St. Bernard, he says that the clerics and prelates are paying too much attention to the laws of this world — civil or canonistic — and too little to the laws of God.’Google Scholar

75 The continual charges of the prominence of civil lawyers in the ecclesiastical hierarchy were not simply the paranoid ravings of disappointed theologians. A civilian could well be destined for a brilliant career on the episcopal bench. An examination of the academic background of English bishops in the mid- and late-fourteenth century reveals a substantial number with civil law backgrounds. Of the five Archbishops of Canterbury who held the see between 1348 and 1374, three held civil law qualifications. Offord, John (1348–49) was a doctor of civil law; Islip, Simon (1349–66) and Whittlesey, William (1368–74) were doctors of both laws. Most of the other bishops had some background at least in civil law. Lenn, William (Chichester, 1362–68) was LL.D.; Charlton, Lewis (Hereford, 1361–69), D.C.L.; Harewell, John (Bath, 1366–86), B.C.L.; Courtenay, William (Hereford, 1369–75; London, 1375–81), D.C.L., doctor decretorum; Dispenser, Henry (Norwich, 1370–1406), B.C.L.; Thoresby, John (Worcester, 1350–52; York, 1352–73), B.C.L.; Brian, Reginald (Worcester, 1352–61), B.C.L.; Barnet, John (Worcester, 1362–63; Ely, 1366–73), B.C.L.; Zouche, William (York, 1340–52), B.C.L.; Neville, Alexander (York, 1374–88), scholar of civil law; Gynwell, John (Lincoln, 1347–52) studied civil law at Oxford; Northburgh, Michael (London, 1354–61), LL.D.; Trilleck, Thomas (Rochester, 1365–72), licentiate in canon and civil law; Erghum, Ralph (Salisbury, 1375–88), LL.D.; Houghton, Adam (St. David's, 1362–99), LL.D.; Stretton, Robert (Coventry and Lichfield, 1358–85), LL.D. (‘it is said’); Orleton, Adam († 1345), ‘utriusque iuris peritus,’ D.C.L.: the civil law element, then, was much in evidence among the bishops during Langland's lifetime, which tends to reflect the fact that many were civil servants first and the descendants of the apostles second. (Information derived from DNB and Emden, A.B., A Biographical Register of the University of Oxford to A.D. 1500 [Oxford 1957–59], and A Biographical Register of the University of Cambridge to 1500 [Oxford 1963].)Google Scholar

76 Ed. J. H. Todd (Camden Society; London 1842) 73.Google Scholar

77 English Works 156.Google Scholar

78 Ibid. 225.Google Scholar

79 Holmes, G., The Good Parliament (Oxford 1975) 167.Google Scholar

80 See, e.g., Skeat, ed. cit. II ix–x.Google Scholar

81 Op. cit. I 140.Google Scholar

82 Ed. cit. 128.Google Scholar

83 Ed. cit. 309.Google Scholar