The new monarchy: England 1471-1534 (review)

Reviews 189 being distorted by bombast or rendered insipid by bland generalities. Indeed, dthough Fossier's chronological canvas is rather more limited than Georges Duby's much bulkier Rural Economy and Country Lifew in the Medieval West, his geographicd scope is larger; incorporating Spdn and Italy. H o w is this feat of synthesis achieved? By focussing on areas of recent research, particularly in the field of village archaeology; by being unembarrassed by questions which have, as yet, no answers (like Marc Bloch, he litters his text with questionmarks ); and by being engagingly frank (shades, agdn, of Bloch) with a reader for w h o m great things are expected in terms of future research. The emphasis, as with Duby, is on France; but who can blame them when possibly as many as one person in every two in the medieval west was French? There are inevitable infelicities in translation, such as the boys and girls dancing and coupling on the threshing floor, 'to beat the grain', (p. 42), but these are rare. Nicholas Wright Department of History University of Adeldde Goodman, A., The new monarchy: England 1471-1534 (Historical Association Studies), Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1988; pp. 89; R.R.P. A U S $12.95. The Historical Association Studies are brief surveys of recent thinking on classicd topoi in History. Anthony Goodman, in considering the phenomenon dubbed the new monarchy, has produced a useful overview of the revisions in the conceptualizing of the role of monarchy developed in the last 10 to 15 years. Given the rather severe restrictions on length, it is a guide to students rather than a source of sustained argument. Nevertheless, Dr. Goodman is to be congratulated on the concise coverage he achieves. The balance and structure of the volume is an accurate reflection of the shift of emphasis away from parliament and towards an emphasis on image and presentation. The role of perception and propaganda in the promotion of the monarchy is now seen as critical, while tyranny is handled only within this context. The shifting interpretation of the relationship of the monarchy to magnate power and the power of the commercial bourgeoisie, the growth of faction inherent in increased royal patronage, which are subjects where historians stiU disagree, are handled with appropriate evenhandedness, even if one disagrees with the conclusions. The total presentation is also a reasonable representation of the insularity of British historical scholarship. Only briefly, in passing, and where it is unavoidable, as in the section on military activity, is there reference to the outside world. Developments are sui generis with all the occasion for distortion 190 Reviews which is implicit in an unwillingness to consider the wider context. Dr. Goodman fulfils his brief with admirable sensitivity. Perhaps, however, the Historical Association should next consider publishing a European interpretation. The change in focus might assist in distinguishing the important from the trivial. Sybil M . Jack Department of History University of Sydney Guenee, B., States and rulers in later medieval Europe, trans. J. Vale; Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1985; pp. xi, 322; 2 maps; R.R.P. A U S $34.95. This book is an English translation of VOccident aux XlVe et XVe sUcle: les Etats, which appeared in the Nouvelle Clio series in 1971. The bibliography, dways a fine feature of Nouvelle Clio, has been doubled to include works published between 1971 and 1984 though Guenee's text has not itself been revised in response to this recent literature. Guenee is one of the leading French medievalists of our day and his book, since its English translation by Juliet V d e in 1985, has enjoyed a wide circulation amongst English-speaking students of the later Middle Ages. They have been attracted by its wide geographicd canvas (though its western European emphasis is concealed in the Englishtitle)and by its discursive, problem-oriented, treatment of constitutional and politicd themes. There is a great deal of generalization about what 'people' thought, what 'everyone' demanded, and what 'no-one' disputed which, with the almost complete absence of foot-notes, gives the work a magisterial - if not downright dogmatic dr. These breaches of scholarly etiquette should be tolerated because Guenee is a trustworthy guide...