Talk:Good Parliament

Middle Ages Mid‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Mid‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

[Untitled]

The opening line states that this was the longest parliament when held, however there were some exceptionally long parliaments in Edward II's reign. J.R. Maddicott in 'The origins of the English Parliament' notes that the 1312 session was particularly lengthy, and was indeed longer than the Good Parliament. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.132.137.48 (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the need for funds was pressing in 1377 how did John of Gaunt summon a parialment in 1376? Did he have a time machine? Sumergocognito 05:56, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Parliament of 1376 was held not by John of Gaunt but by the Commons who were indignant of Edward III's heavy taxation and bad advisors. With Peter de la Mare as leading figure, the Good Parliament succeeded in influencing the King. However, some months later with the king being susceptible to John of Gaunt's bad influence, the latter regained his power and restored the previous status quo declaring at the same time the Good Parliament of 1376 unconstitutional. In 1377, after the death of Edward III, another Parliament was summoned through which the Commons revived their hopes for good governement by declaring Richard II as the new king.

Thus the article does not contradict itself.

References for the above:

Primary sources:
- The Anonimalle Chronicle, ed. W.R Childs and J.Taylor (Leeds, 1991)
- Walsingham Thomas, The St Albans Chronicle: The Chronica Majora of Thomas Walsingham, ed.and transl. J.Taylor, W.R Childs and R.Watkiss (Oxford, 2003)

Secondary sources:
- Tout, T.F, The History of England. From the ascension of Henry III to the death of Edward III, 1216-1377 (London, 1905), pp 435-441
- Taylor, J., English Historical Literature in the Fourteenth Century (Oxford, 1987), pp 198-200
- Harriss, G., Shaping the Nation. England 1360-1461 (Oxford, 2005), pp 440-445
- Green, J.R, A Short History of the English People,(London, 1895), vol 2, p 485

Ourania 22:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just a couple of points:

Parliament was not 'held' by the Commons; only the king had the right to summon parliament. Yet with Edward's failling health it is reasonable to assume that it was Gaunt, being in charge of government, who took the initiative. The Commons, however, soon took control of the agenda.

Though it is correct that two parliaments were held in 1377, the third paragraph doesn't make much sense the way it stands now, since this article is indeed about the 1376 parliament.

More seriously the line "Ordinarily, the death of Prince Edward would have made one of Edward's brothers the legal successor" should be adressed. I believe this to be wrong: Richard was true heir, and generally accepted as such. John of Gaunt was, however, considered over-ambitious, and was therefore forced to recognise the prince so that he would not later challenge the succession.

I will correct these flaws and remove the tag. Eixo 14:38, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]