Explore the vast range of titles available.

Linda S. Clark is a distinguished scholar of fifteenth-century England, best known for her important contribution to the study of the late medieval English parliament. She has served as general editor of 'The Fifteenth Century' since 2003. This special volume in the series marks her four decades of work for the History of Parliament Trust. As is appropriate, its essays focus above all on Parliament and the personalities that served in its chambers, but they also illuminate a wider range of themes that have long concerned students of the later middle ages, including the lawlessness of the gentry and nobility, the acquisition and management of their estates, and their self-expression in pageantry and legend. Other social groups, ranging from the mercantile élite of the city of London and their Italian trading partners to England's common soldiers, also make an appearance. Several of the papers collected here have a geographical focus in London and East Anglia, but other regions are also represented. The collection thus pays tribute to the breadth of Dr Clark's contribution to the field, both in her own writing, and in her long-standing commitment to facilitate the publication of the original research of others. Contributors: A. J. Pollard, Simon Payling, Charles Moreton, Colin Richmond, J. L. Bolton, James Ross, Carole Rawcliffe, Elizabeth Danbury, Matthew Davies, Hannes Kleineke, David Grummitt, Caroline M. Barron

While the debate on the role of war in state development in early modern Europe has ranged widely, the participants have not answered its most fundamental question to the satisfaction of most historians. The difficulty has been how to assess whether war was more important than other factors as a driver of state formation. In practice it is more fruitful to study the role of war within a multi-causal model, but to do this the interaction between war and other factors such as judicial, religious, ideological, and social change must be studied, preferably in detail but in comparative context.

In the summer of 1514 a curious case came before the mayor's court in Norwich. It concerned a Lancashire priest, Adelston Attylsey, who had come to Norwich to serve in the household of Sir Philip Calthorpe. Attylsey had got his hands on ‘an Englysshe boke in print’, entitled Thordre and behauyoure of the right honourable Erle of Surrey tresour and Marshal of Englande ayenst the kynge of Scottes and the Inuasions howe the same kynge at the Batayle of Brakston was slayne by the sayd erle. This was an account of Surrey's famous victory at Flodden printed by the king's printer, Richard Pynson, which sought to magnify the Howards' role in the battle. Attylsley, riled by the slanderous accusations levelled against the Cheshire contingents and his hero, Sir Edward Stanley (who, the work alleged, had fled the field), took up his pen and ink, scratched out the word ‘honourable’ and changed the title to read ‘the horrorable Erle of Surrey’. His defacement of the book was soon discovered, however, and he fell into a heated argument with Sir Philip's other household servants, who were ‘of the company of Norf’ and Suff', over who had fought bravely and who had fled. The ensuing disturbance resulted in Attylsey having to explain himself to the mayor of Norwich and his fellow justices of the peace.As well as providing a fascinating insight into early sixteenth-century tavern life, this case is important because of what it reveals about the way in which war and the military service of local communities were perceived in early Tudor England.

This article challenges the prevalent perception that the development and use of gunpowder weaponry in England in the late fifteenth century differed markedly from that in France and Burgundy. This is done in the light of the evidence of the Calais victuallers' accounts. Calais was England's most important military and commercial frontier, and the unique survival of large amounts of archival material allows its gunpowder weaponry to be reconstructed in detail. The accounts show that from the 1460s the Crown system-atically increased and modernized the ordnance in Calais and, moreover, extended increasing royal control over it, bringing English gunpowder weaponry and its use in line with that of France and Burgundy.

Throughout the reign of Henry IV the government tried various expedients to solve the problem of the financing of Calais France and in late 1406 or early 1407 affairs reached a crisis when the garrison mutinied over their arrears of pay. Grummitt discusses the high priority given to the efficient financing of Calais throughout the fifteenth century.

The ostensible aim of all governments in 1347-1558 was to ensure the surety of the town and marches. However, due to political constraints and the particular character of a regime dominated by a king unschooled in the usual forms of English government and kingship, Tudor policy at times seemed to undermine the stability of government in the town and marches. Calais serves as an example of the nature of early Tudor government in general and the ramifications of Henry VII's primary role in the formation and execution of policy in particular.