The Supposed Illiteracy of Archbishop Walter Reynolds1
One aspect of the character of Walter Reynolds, archbishop of Canterbury 1314-1327, was darkened by three contemporary chroniclers whose words have been accepted with little question by some historians of more modern times—his supposed illiteracy. The question is this: Did Edward II choose a primate...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
1969
|
| In: |
Studies in church history
Year: 1969, Volume: 5, Pages: 58-68 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | One aspect of the character of Walter Reynolds, archbishop of Canterbury 1314-1327, was darkened by three contemporary chroniclers whose words have been accepted with little question by some historians of more modern times—his supposed illiteracy. The question is this: Did Edward II choose a primate for all England who was seriously defective in learning? Even if literacy in medieval usage meant strictly a knowledge of Latin, was Reynolds illiterate?This notion comes to us originally from the three chronicles most hostile to Reynolds: 1) the Flores Historiarum: ‘vir siquidem laicus et in tantum illiteratus ut nomen proprium declinare penitus ignorabat’; 2) the Vita Edwardi Secundi: ‘simplex clericus et minus competenter litteratus’; and 3) the chronicle of Lanercost: ‘homo quasi illiteratus, et, secundum judicium humanum, tam ratione vitae quam scientiae omni gradu dignitatis indignus.’ |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2059-0644 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Studies in church history
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1017/S0424208400004691 |
