Текст этой рифмованной хроники был закончен в середине 80-х гг. XIV в. Условно его можно разделить на две части. В первой кратко излагаются события из жизни принца Уэльского вплоть до 1365 г. (отправки на Пиренеи французской армии). Вторая часть, доведенная до смерти принца, гораздо более подробна. Герольд постоянно находился при своем господине, сопровождая его во всех кампаниях (в том числе в испанском походе), отлучаясь от него только для доставки посланий Черному принцу, герцогу Бургундскому, графу Пемброку, графу Кембриджу и другим лордам. Герольд Чандоса лично был свидетелем и непосредственным участником многих важных событий во Франции и Испании, а также имел доступ к документам из канцелярии Черного принца, что, безусловно, повышает историческую ценность его сочинения. По роду своих занятий автор не только прекрасно разбирался во всех тонкостях военного искусства, но и являлся хорошо образованным человеком, которому была не чужда придворная жизнь. Хроника герольда Чандоса написана в традициях рыцарской литературы: реальные исторические события на Пиренеях, которым поэт был непосредственным свидетелем, трансформированы в рыцарский роман на историческую тему, в котором роль главного героя играет герцог Аквитании, а героя «второго плана» — сэр Джон Чандос.
Элхэм, Томас (Thomas Elmham) — клюнийский монах, поэт, историк.
Родился 8 апреля 1364 г., вероятнее всего в Норфолке. В 1379 г. вступил в бенедиктинский монастырь Св. Августина в Кентербери, где в 1407 г. исполнял должность казначея. В 1414 г. стал приором клюнийского монастыря в Лентоне (графство Ноттингем). В 1415 г. клюнийский аббат Раймунд сделал Элхэма викарием и камерарием Англии и Шотландии, а в 1426 г. — генеральным комиссаром по имуществам ордена в Англии, Шотландии и Ирландии. Однако по неизвестной причине в том же году Элхэм ушел в отставку. Возможно, отставка была связана с ухудшением здоровья, поскольку в 1427 г. (или вскоре после) он умер.
Все три главных (из сохранившихся) труда Элхэма были написаны между 1414 и 1418 гг. Во всех трех автор зашифровал свое имя в акростихах. Первое из этих сочинений посвящено истории монастыря Св. Августина в Кентербери («Historia monasterii S. Augustini Cantuariensis»). В 1416 г. Элхэм закончил «Хронику благородных королей Англии» («Cronica regum nobilium Angliae») — компилятивный труд (основанный главным образом на «Истории бриттов» Гальфрида Монмутского и хронике «Брут») о правителях Британии от легендарного Брута до Ричарда II. Сразу после завершения этой работы Элхэм принялся за написание прозаической и рифмованной истории войн Генриха V. Прозаический текст пока не найден.
В 1418 г. Элхэм преподнес королю «Рифмованную книгу о Генрихе V» («Liber metricus de Henrico Quinto»). Это сочинение весьма близко к анонимным «Деяниям Генриха V», что позволяет предположить знакомство приора из Лентона с трудом анонимного капеллана. О второй королевской континентальной кампании Элхэм повествует вполне самостоятельно, опираясь на официальные донесения об успехах английских войск. Книга заканчивается провозглашением законности притязаний английских королей на французскую корону, восходящим по своему содержанию к текстам прокламаций Эдуарда III, которые Элхэм вполне мог прочитать в одной из более ранних хроник.
Images of War and Perceptions of History in Late Medieval England[1582]
The present book deals with the ideas, notions and attitudes of the late-medieval people of England towards the wars waged by English sovereigns. Among the numerous foreign policy conflicts of that period 1 have considered several principal ones: the Hundred Years' War, hostilities in Scotland and Flanders, and the two Castilian campaigns of 1367 and 1386. Without going into the details of foreign affairs, my aim is to examine the motives and circumstances behind each conflict through the eyes of the participants and their contemporaries, to scrutinize stereotypes, commonplaces and topoi created by the medieval historiographical tradition, and to raise the question of the influence of prolonged warfare on the English national identity of that period.
Analysis of royal official documentation, as well as court-initiated propaganda reflected in the works of late-medieval historians, clearly testifies that even in the Early Modem period, just as in the previous epoch, formal observance of conditions of the just war was extremely important. Any military conflict conducted without it was resolutely condemned by the Christian community as a sinful act. The full conformity of each conflict in which the English sovereigns took part to all the criteria of just war, as formulated by the Church Fathers and expressed in canonical law, was constantly accented in all propagandists and historical texts. Reasoning from justice as the main principle of organization of the cosmic order, English authors represented their kings' military campaigns as just acts directed not so much towards the defence of those monarchs' personal interests as the protection of the very foundations of that order. Thus, in all the official letters and proclamations of the English kings, the war against France was not only presented as a conflict between two pretenders to the French throne, but also viewed at a different angle as a struggle between law and lawlessness. The English opposed the ancient custom of the Franks which dismissed women and their descendants from royal succession, appealing to a higher law they saw as written in the Old and New Testaments and embodied in nature. Thus, in the conception of the English theologians and lawyers, the French who appealed to the Salic Law opposed the Law of the Lord and were apostates. This reinforced the notion that the English fought not only for the rights of their suzerain, but also for divine truth and justice.
The interpretation of war as accomplishment of a certain noble and just mission appears to have been an important factor which influenced English national identity. Justifying war against neighbouring Christian peoples, the English medieval theologians, lawyers and historians treated each battle as an ordeal, wherein the Lord sent victory to the just party, and each victory by one's countrymen became a verdict of divine justice. It is important to note that the English authors were ready to see signs of divine support to their side in any conflict, and as a consequence came to form a conception of the English as a chosen people. Historical notions of English righteousness did not change even in periods of military failure. For example, narrating the defeats inflicted by the French at the end of the Hundred Years' War, the English chroniclers blamed all troubles on unfaithful allies and poor military leaders, but never questioned God's benevolence towards the English side.
The measures undertaken by the royal administration had quite an effective impact on popular awareness, forming a patriotic attitude to England's wars. While I do not attribute a conscious desire to inculcate beliefs of national superiority to medieval monarchs and their "ideologists", I would argue that such beliefs came about as an indirect consequence of propaganda which had in fact been aimed at the achievement of quite specific goals: gathering of surtaxes, organization of border defences, recruitment of mercenaries, etc. Some elements of that propaganda, in particular collective prayers for the success of royal armies, and the streamlined system of dissemination of information through newsletters and proclamations, promoted the perception of war as a matter of the sovereign's honour by all subjects of English crown. Being obliged to support him as true vassals and true Christians, they were thus led to develop feelings of personal participation and individual interest in the successful end of the conflict.
Official propaganda not only engendered pride in feats of one's countrymen in English society, but also inspired fear of the enemy threatening to invade England itself and plotting enslavement of its population. It is necessary to note that the patriotic rhetoric urging the people to join in the struggle with the enemy and even accept death for the defence of the motherland (pro patria mori), testifies not only to the durability of ancient topoi, but also to a well-developed national consciousness. Following the authors of royal proclamations and engaged by authorised preachers, English chroniclers too worked at the "proper" image of the enemy. Comparing fellow-countrymen and "others" (who in times of war turned from strangers into enemies), historians inevitably placed the representatives of the conflicting sides at the opposite ends of the "scales" of mental and ethical and even physical parameters.
Naturally, the principal characters of medieval historical narration were sovereigns. Medieval authors were certainly quite far from creating "complex" depictions of historical heroes whose characteristic features, deeds and behaviours would all interconnect logically; nevertheless, it is still possible to mark out several key parameters distinguishing a good sovereign from a bad one. Perhaps the most important requirement for each monarch (who occupied the throne by the grace of God and for protection of the people from external danger and lawlessness) was the virtue of justice. In English medieval chroniclers' view, hostile sovereigns lacking in this virtue not only usurped thrones, impiously ignoring the will of God, but also egoistically tyrannised their own subjects. The absence of justice and piety generated hypocrisy, insidiousness, cruelty and other vices. On the contrary, guided by the quest for supreme justice, the pious English kings showed truthfulness, mercy and other positive qualities.
If justice was the central trait in the descriptions of those in power, above all the monarchs, then the defining positive quality of the subjects was, beyond any doubt, fidelity. It is important to note that during the period under discussion, subjects' fidelity was gradually depersonalised, emphasizing devotion less to the person of the king and more to the kingdom as a whole. All other evaluative parameters coincided with characteristic features of sovereigns and were assumed to be positive for one's own countrymen and negative for the "others". Thus, the typical representative of "our" community possessed a certain specific set of virtues, and the typical enemy a corresponding set of vices and weaknesses.