The Peterborough Chronicle

This is one of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, containing unique information about the history of England after the Norman Conquest. Some scientists (J. A. W. Bennett, for example) state, that it’s the only prose history in English between the Conquest and the later XIV century.

These Chronicles were composed in different monasteries of Anglo-Saxon England, and their authors tried to record British history throughout the years A. D. So, the typical scheme was the following: birth of Christ, Biblical and Roman history, and continued to the present times. Every significant religious house in England kept its own chronicle, and they were not compared or coordinated. But, if a chronicle was damaged, nearby monasteries lent their chronicles for copying. That is the case of Peterborough Chronicle: a fire forced the monks to copy the chronicles from other churches up to 1120.

Anglo-Saxon Chronicles ceased, when Willam the Conqueror took the throne. But Peterborough Abbey continued to work with their annals. And this chronicle is one of the few first-hand accounts from the period 1070 – 1154, written in English, and does not reflect the court point of view.

The first part of the chronicle is a copy of Winchester Cathedral’s Chronicle, and also has influence from other historical documents. Though it is hard to name all of them, even after studying.

After 1122 the manuscript becomes unique; so it is usually divided into “first continuation” (1122 – 1131) and the “second continuation” (1132 – 1154, including the reign of King Stephen). The extract from the last is presented here.

Although the second continuation holds the most importance, the first continuation has unique records of events in the Peterborough area and provides an insight into ordinary people's lives. The first continuation records the Conquest, the invasion of Sweyn of Denmark, and rumors of other unrest about the throne. However, it has no evidence at all for Saxon opposition and rebellion against William and his sons. An arguably eyewitness account describes the burning of Peterborough Abbey itself, due to the drunkenness of the monks. It also covers ecclesiastical scandals, such as the abbot of Glastonbury bringing in mercenaries to control his religious house. Further, there is a significant change in language from the previous late Old English that begins with the entry for the years 1122-1131, with mixtures of Old English and Middle English vocabulary (and increasing Gallic formations) and syntax (a simplification of the pronouns and strong verbs, as well as a decrease in the declensions of the nouns).

Both the first and second continuation authors have sympathy for the common man. As Bennett (mentioned above) suggests, Peterborough is the one source for compassion of the laity found in contemporary accounts. The first continuation expresses as much outrage at the hanging of forty-four thieves in 1122, some of whom were innocent, as at the burning of the monastery at Gloucester. The monastic author suggests that taxes were too high, putting the impoverished villagers in a dilemma of stealing or starving. Therefore, the nobles were guilty of a double sin. First, they executed the innocent and used excessive cruelty with the guilty. Second, it was at least as sinful for the nobles to compel theft with their avarice as for the poor to steal for bread. When the Norman king, Henry I of England foisted his kinsman upon Peterborough as abbot, the chronicler protests at some length at the illegality and impiety of the appointment. He also mentions that the Wild Hunt (a mythological image of evil fairy company) was seen at the same time as the appointment, as an ill omen. When Henry was eventually removed by death, the monk again takes the position that this was divine remedy, for Henry had tried to make Peterborough part of the Cluniac Order and had attempted to have his own nephew be the next abbot, "oc Crist it ne uuolde" ("but Christ did not will it").

The second, continuation is remarkable for being in one authorial voice, and it relates the events of The Anarchy in England. There are versions, that the second continuation is dictated or written as the recollections of a single elderly monk. It is a highly moving account of torture, fear, confusion, and starvation.

Henry I died in 1135, and Stephen and Matilda both had a claim to the throne. The monastic author describes the rebellion of the barons against Stephen, the escape of Matilda, and the tortures that the soldiers of the baronial powers inflicted upon the people. The author blames Stephen for the Anarchy for being "soft and good" when firmness and harshness were needed. When Stephen captured the rebelling barons, he let them go if they swore allegiance. The barons then attempted to raise money as quickly as they could. They needed money and manpower to build castles (which the author regards as novel and rare), and so they robbed everyone they met:

The monastic author sympathises with the average farmer and artisan and talks about the devastation suffered by the countryside. He is outraged by the accounts of torture he relates and laments.

After the account of The Anarchy, the chronicler goes on to church matters. He speaks of the abbot Martin, who replaced the illegitimate Henry, as a good abbot. Martin had a new roof put on the monastery and moved the monks into a new building. He also, according to the author, recovered certain monastic lands that had been previously held "by force" by noblemen. Which lands these are is unclear, but they had probably been claimed by the nobles through the practice of placing younger sons in monasteries, making and revoking gifts of land, and by some early form of chantry. The Chronicle ends with a new abbot entering upon the death of Martin, an abbot named William. This abbot presumably halted the writing of the Chronicle.

As it was said before, the two Peterborough continuations sympathize with the poor, and this makes them almost unique in Latin or English history. They also focus more on life outside of the abbey than other Chronicles. The general Chronicle is somewhat insular. While most versions note the national events, such as a progress of the king or a change in sovereign, discussion of the countryside around the monastery is limited. Portents and omens receive coverage, but rarely do the chroniclers discuss political alliances (as the author of the second continuation does with his denunciation of the bishops who were allied with Matilda) or the legalities of monastic rule (as the author of the first continuation does in his lament over Abbot Henry). The monks who compiled the continuation at Peterborough were either consciously striking out in a new direction (perhaps under the direction of Abbot Martin) or continuing a type of chronicle that was confined to their own monastery (that was lost with the fire). It does not seem likely that Peterborough was in any sense a lax or secular monastery, as the description of drunkenness causing the fire would not have made the abbey singular in the age.

Here we have a small extract from this chronicle:

I ne can, ne I ne mai, tellen alle þe wunder ne alle þe pines þǽt hi diden wrecce men on þis land, and ðǽt lastede þa XIX wintre, wile Stephne was king, and ǽvre it was uuerse and uuerse.

Hi lǽiden gǽildes o[n] the tunes ǽvre umwille and clepeden it tenserie. Þa þe uurecce men ne hadden nan more to gyven, þa rǽveden hi and brendon alle the tunes, ðǽt wel þu myhtes faren all a dǽis fare, sculdest thu nevre finden man in tune sittende, ne land tiled.

Date: 2015-12-18; view: 2070