Can Lollardy Be Considered a Vigorous Movement in the Late Fifteenth and Early Sixteenth Centuries - Literature review Example

Can Lollardy be considered a vigorous and coherent movement in the later fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries? Introduction A political and religious movement that was initiated during the mid-14th century by Lollards has been named as Lollardy. This movement lasted until the English Reformation. The initiators of this movement were the Lollards who were the followers of a renowned theologian, John Wycliff. John Wycliffe has been recognised as an Evening Star of Scholasticism and Morning Star of Reformation.1 Before presenting the arguments for or against the entitlement of Lollardy movement as a vigorous or coherent movement, an overview of history of Lollardy movement is very essential. The Lollard movement started when the followers of John Wycliff, after the death of Wycliff in 1384, started circulating Lollard doctrine around different regions of the world such as Southern and central England. Continuing its connections to Oxford and considerable gentry support, Lollardy was recognised as a small but persistent sect during the fifteenth century. Different scholars have been presenting different views regarding Lollards movement. Some consider Lollards movement as a small-scale movement resulted as a response to Wycliff teachings however, some scholars consider it as a coherent reform movement that prefigured sixteenth-century changes (Amold and Lewis 2004).2 After the emergence of Lollards movement in the fourteenth century, there has been always a dilemma regarding the nature of Lollards movement. Therefore, the aim of this report is to evaluate whether Lollards movement be considered as a vigorous and coherent movement in the fifteenth and sixteenth century. Arguments Various studies have been conducted to cover the concepts of Lollards movement. Historians and scholars have been always keen to evaluate the impact on Lollardy. Before presenting arguments, analysing the work of historians and scholars is very essential. Lollard is a problematic label and there are many issues regarding the origins, coherence and affect of this movement.3 There are two extreme views regarding the Lollards movement. The first view argues that not all but most of the Lollard writings are written by Wycliffe. Therefore, Lollardy as an incoherent movement was encouraged by social and economic grievance. This movement was primarily started to spread the thought of Wycliffe and it can be termed as either Lollardy or Wycliffism. On the other hand, the other extreme view suggests that Lollardy is not a movement but it is a projection of the anxieties of monarchies or churches. The second view considers Lollardy as a coherence of diverse beliefs and practices that threatened the authorities. One important thing is that the views of modern historians are more acceptable because they are at the advantage of seeing the impact of Lollards movement during the fifteenth and sixteenth century. Therefore, in the following section, the views of the modern historians have been taken into consideration regarding the Lollards movement. According to Shannon McSheffrey, Lollard movement can be considered as a social and creed movement and it attracted more men than women. He also argued that the proofs of coherence of Lollard movement did not vanish until about 1530 (McSheffrey 1995).4 McSheffrey through his analysis of participation of men and women in this movement came to this conclusion, that more men were influenced by this movement. Therefore, McSheffrey work is an assertion of Lollardy as a coherent movement. On the other hand, Thomson talked about the dual character of Lollard movement including academic wing and a popular one. He argued that with time Lollard movement became a working-class tradition from a highly intellectual content. This dual nature of Lollard movement kept Lollards far from homogenous beliefs (Thomson 2007).5 Thomson during his analysis found that although the writings of Wycliffe (academic wing) initiated the movement however, the spread of intellectual content to working class and layman, changed its scope, therefore, conclusions of Thomson are based on the dual nature of this movement. The two views of the scholars are conflicting because McSheffrey is viewing Lollardy as a creed movement whereas, Thomson’s view advocate that even a disparity used to exist in the beliefs of Lollards. Therefore, if McSheffrey has supported the coherence of Lollardy, then Thomson has viewed it as a non-coherent movement. Hudson considered Lollardy movement as more coherent than what McFarlane considered. According to McFarlane, Lollardy was encouraged by bothered career ambitions instead of evangelical dedication. He also argued that the relationship between Wycliff and his preachers was indirect and the only lasting effect of Lollardy was to hinder real church reform for a half or one century. McFarlane traced Lollardy from its early days and compared its effects after the half century, based on which he drew his conclusions.6 On the other hand, Anne Hudson with other scholars explored the writings of Lollard at Oxford, which were produced during the last and first decade of fourteenth and fifteenth century respectively.7 Based on his study, Hudson concluded that Lollardy had appeared as a cohesive sect through to the Reformation, regardless of the lack of gentle and academic support during the second decade of fifteenth century.8 In short, according to McFarlane, Lollardy impact lasted only for one century whereas, Hudson believes that it has appeared as a coherent movement until English Reformation. Therefore, although both of the scholars are viewing Lollardy as a great and logical movement however, their views differ when it comes to analyse the extent to which Lollardy can be considered as a vigorous and coherent movement. Lollardy became a coherent program, when the traditions of Wycliff fused with other dissenting traditions therefore, Lollardy can be thought of as a religious sect (Wogan-Browne & Johnson 1999).9 Wynne et al. believed that Lollardy appeared as a more coherent movement during the fifteenth century because it became a more condensed body and a more distinct creed movement. Therefore, Wynne view of Lollardy is totally opposite to that of McFarlane, who talked about its impact only for half or one century.10 The supporters of Lollardy movement withstood vigorous harassment for more than hundred years to join English reformation in the sixteenth century (Miles 2005).11 This forceful withstanding of Lollards was a result of coherence and forcefulness of Lollardy. Miles has entitled Lollardy as a vigorous movement because he used to believe that Lollards were the common people such as carpenters, trade people, shoemaker etc. Since, Lollardy supported that vernacular bible should be given freely to masses; therefore, more and more people supported this movement, which enhanced the forcefulness and coherence of Lollardy during the fifteenth century. On the other hand, Miles show that the opponents of Lollardy argue that Lollardy attracted the people through its beliefs and practices. They viewed a Lollard as a poisoner who mixes poison with sweet tasting food and medicine to increase its attractiveness. Another interesting view about Lollardy was presented by Aston, who argued that despite its heterogeneity of belief, Lollardy had considerably predicted some parts of the sixteenth century programme. The only driving force, which resulted in Reformation after Lollardy movement, was the lack of central insight of Luther in this movement. 12 Therefore, Aston view clearly advocates the forcefulness of Lollardy during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Meanwhile, through different evidences, he has also shown that lack of coherence lowered its impact later on. According to Bagchi and Steinmetz, the ideological source of Lollardy was Oxford theologian John Wycliffe. The difference between the research work of early and modern historians regarding Lollardy is that the early historians were more interested in debating over the ideology of Lollardy whereas, the modern historians are more interested in exploring the nature of this movement. Unlike modern historians, the early historians saw Lollardy as an incoherent and extremely diverse movement. Moreover, the study of hostile sources also talks about the incoherence of Lollards movement.13Therefore, Bagchi and Steinmetz compared the work of early and modern historians related to Lollardy and made important conclusions based on their research. Most of the historians, no matter the proponents or the opponents of Lollards movement agree on the evangelical nature of Lollardy. This evangelical nature of Lollardy not only encouraged the origin of Lollards movement, but it has been attributed to encourage the expansion of this movement. Regardless of the nature f Lollards movement, one thing that is admitted by most of the scholars is that this movement has really made great contributions to English Reformation. Moreover, Lollardy role in the spread of literacy also shows its forcefulness. Margaret Aston, in his study “Lollardy and Literacy” has beautifully explained the role of Lollardy in English Reformation that happened during the fifteenth and sixteenth century. Actually, the writings of Wycliffe and other written material have a major contribution in the persistence and coherence of this movement. If historians and scholars are very keen to talk about the transformation of Wycliffe’s writing into religious sect, then it means that this movement really has a significant role in the history. Moreover, According to David Lollardy in pre-reformation Scotland also describes how this movement slowly spread throughout North. He highlights that it has been possible only because of the Wycliffe ideology and the vigorousness of this movement that enhanced its impact even after the death of Wycliffe. Conclusion The above discussion shows the conflicting views of different historians and scholars regarding Lollardy. However, most of these views about Lollardy actually advocate that it has been a vigorous movement during the fifteenth and sixteenth century, regardless of its coherent or incoherent nature. However, the real topic that has been always debatable for the historians and the scholars is the coherence of Lollards movement. Some scholars view it as a coherent movement whereas, other consider it as a diverse and incoherent movement. Coming to an end regarding the coherence of Lollards movement is really not simple but highly complex. The reason is that if more arguments have been presented above from the work of other writers, the same conflicting views again appear. Nevertheless, if Lollardy has not been a coherent movement during the fifteenth and sixteenth century, but rather a product of multifaceted interaction of forces, still it is significant because it has a prominent position in culture and religious history. Lollardy brought theology into English language, which is more important that the debate of whether it is coherent or not. Moreover, it made an important contribution towards the development of English theology, no matter being a coherent or incoherent movement. In short, it can be concluded that Lollardy can be considered as a vigorous movement during the fifteenth and sixteenth century, however, its coherent or incoherent nature is still debatable. Bibliography 1. Arnold, J. & Lewis, J. K., 2004, A companion to The book of Margery Kempe. [Online] DS Brewer. Pg. 77 Available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=PTdgRM1tayQC&dq=lollards+a+coherent+movement&source=gbs_navlinks_s [Accessed 2 January 2010]. 2. Aston, M., 1984, Lollards and reformers: images and literacy in late medieval religion. [Online] Continuum International Publishing Group. Pg. 136 Available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=eWw-Sl-yA3oC&dq=opponents+of+lollards&source=gbs_navlinks_s [Accessed 4 January 2010]. 3. Bagchi, D. V. N. & Steinmetz, D. C., 2004. The Cambridge companion to Reformation theology. Cambridge University Press, [Online] Pg 15. Available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=TUv-iHni6roC&dq=historians+views+about+lollard&source=gbs_navlinks_s. [Accessed 2 January 2010]. David, l. n., 1991, Lollardy Theology: a stereological analysis of the 4. English Wycliffite sermon cycle . [online] ds brewer. pg. 77 available at: http://etd.lib.ttu.edu/theses/available/etd-09012009-31295007097172/unrestricted/31295007097172.pdf. [Accessed 2 January 2010]. 5. McSheffrey, S., 1995, Gender and heresy: women and men in Lollard communities, 1420-1530. [Online] University of Pennsylvania Press. Pg 4-6 6. Rex, R., 2003. The Lollards Series: Social History in Perspective. [Online] Available at: https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/5405/03.02.17.html?sequence=1. [Accessed 3 January 2009]. 7. Thomson, J. A. F., 2007. Orthodox Religion and Origins of Lollardy. Willey InterScience, [Online] 74 (240), Pg 39-55. Available at: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120004082/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0. [Accessed 2 January 2010]. 8. Whyne et al., 1934, The Catholic encyclopaedia: an international work of reference on the constitution, doctrine, discipline, and history of the Catholic church. [Online] Encyclopaedia Press. Volume 9. Available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=lVgsAAAAIAAJ&q=Wynne%2Blollards&dq=Wynne%2Blollards&cd=1 [Accessed 4 January 2010]. 9. Wogan-Browne, J. & Johnson, I. R., 2007. The idea of the vernacular: an anthology of Middle English literary theory, 1280-1520. Penn State Press, Pg 341. [Online] Available at: http://books.google.com.pk/books?id=S0BWfR3A8ZUC&dq=lollards+a+coherent+movement&source=gbs_navlinks_s. [Accessed 3 January 2010]. Read More