| Abstract: | Propaganda occurs sporadically in the chronicles of medieval England, mainly in official histories (that is those commissioned by authority) and quasi-official ones (those not actually commissioned but representing the authority's point of view). It ranges from mere eulogy to forceful argument which may even involve deliberate misrepresentation. In monastic chronicles the propaganda is generally on behalf of the monastery itself, and is rarely that of the central government; in fact such chronicles tend to be critical of king and government. Government propaganda occurs more frequently in chronicles by other groups of writers, notably secular clerks. Although very few non-monastic chronicles were actually commissioned by the king (the only indisputable examples belong to the reign of Edward IV), a few are quasi-official, written probably to attract patronage and/or in a literary mode, especially that of romance literature, which tended to favour the king.Clearly government-sponsored history established no continuous tradition in England, comparable to that, for example, in France. Nor were quasi-official histories numerous. Therefore it seems that government propaganda was not congenial to most chroniclers in England, an impression confirmed by the fact that it only left a significant mark on the chronicles in exceptional circumstances, for instance at times of political crisis. Moreover, the chronicles containing it were by foreigners and/or were written when continental influence was particularly strong at court. The historiographical genre most characteristic of medieval England was the monastic chronicle, with its strong local attachments and generally independent attitude to the central government. |
