Advertisement

The Marriage of Self and Structure

  • David Gary Shaw
Part of the The New Middle Ages book series (TNMA)

Abstract

The three shepherds of the Wakefield “First Shepherds Play” are common men with common troubles.They are equals—like the small town and urban people we’re studying and who would have watched such plays—and that meant that their relative worth to each other shifted only gradually, but perhaps constantly. By contrast, the clear worthiness of Christ was simple for them, although they could see his surpassing quality in two ways, according to two schedules of honor, the worldly and the eternal. As they enter the stable and behold Him, the First Shepherd exclaims: “Hayll, King I thee call! Hayll, most of myght! Hayll, the worthyst of all. Hayll, duke! Hayll, knyght! Of greatt and small Thou art lorde by right…”l He speaks in the language of high class and power, of feudal rights, familiar things, precisely the things that shepherds did not have, but felt the butt end of. The Second Shepherd follows, however, with the great Christian irony: that Christ is but a baby and a humble one at that: “Hayll, little tyn’ mop, rewarder of mede! Hail, bot oone drop of grace at my nede; Hayll, lytytll mylk sop! Hayll, david sede! Of oure crede thou art crop; hayll, in god hede.”2 Odd as this might be to the canons of power, it is undoubtedly so, and known by all. How challenging a master view this is for social life however. These shepherds must assess the child’s status and that means their own relative status. They are given a great advantage: the angels have already explained the situation, but furthermore, Christ is outside their normal domain, from another social circle entirely. From either the spiritual or political perspective He is worthiest and of another kind. Here is class difference of the first magnitude.

Keywords

Comparative Worshipfulness Royal Court Relative Worth Arbitration Case Medieval Town 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. 10.
    Edward Powell, “Arbitration and the Law in England in the Later Middle Ages,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 33 (1983): 49–67;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. William Palmer, “Scenes from Provincial Life: History, Honor, and Meaning in the Tudor North.” Renaissance Quarterly 53:2 (2000): 425–48;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carole Rawcliffe, “The Great Lord as Peacekeeper: Arbitration by English Noblemen and their Councils in the Later Middle Ages,” in Law and Social Change in British History, ed. J.A. Guy and H.G. Beale (London: Royal Historical Society, 1984), pp. 34–54;Google Scholar
  4. M.T. Clanchy, “Law and Love in the Middle Ages,” in Disputes and Settlements: Law and Human Relations in the West, ed. John Bossy (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1983), pp. 47–67;Google Scholar
  5. Josephine Waters Bennett, “The Mediæval Loveday,” Speculum 33 (1958): 351–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Julian Pitt-Rivers, “Honour and Social Status,” in Honour and Shame. The Values of a Mediterranean Society, ed. J.G. Peristiany (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1966), pp. 21–77.Google Scholar
  7. Karl S. Bader, “Arbiter, Arbitrator seu amicabilis compositor,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte. Kanonistische Abteilung 77 (1960): 239–76Google Scholar
  8. 32.
    Cf. Jennifer Kermode, Medieval Merchants:York, Beverly, and Hull in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 47;Google Scholar
  9. S.H. Rigby and Elizabeth Ewan, “Government, Power and Authority, 1300–1540,” in The Cambridge Urban History of Britain, volume 1, 600–1540, ed. David M. Palliser (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 302.Google Scholar
  10. Martha C. Howell, “Citizenship and Gender: Women’s Political Status in Northern Medieval Cities,” in Women and Power in the Middle Ages, ed. Mary Erler and Maryanne Kowaleski (Athens, Ga.: University of Georgia Press, 1988), pp. 37–60.Google Scholar
  11. Maurice Keen, English Society in the Later Middle Ages (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1990), pp. 1–24;Google Scholar
  12. Robert S. Gottfried, Bury St Edmunds and the Urban Crisis of the Later Middle Ages (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1982), pp. 60–61;Google Scholar
  13. Stephen Rigby, “Urban ‘Oligarchy’ in Late Medieval England,” in Towns and Townspeople in the Fifteenth Century, ed. John A.F. Thomson (Gloucester: Alan Sutton, 1988), pp. 62–86;Google Scholar
  14. Maryanne Kowaleski, “The Commercial Dominance of a Medieval Provincial Oligarchy: Exeter in the Late Fourteenth Century,” Mediaeval Studies 46 (1984): 355–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Robert Tittler, The Reformation and the Towns in England: Politics and Political Culture, c. 1540–1640 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 182–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© David Gary Shaw 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Gary Shaw

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations