Behind the Arras
The Hurling Time. By Maurice Collis. (Faber, 32s. 6d.)
WHAT is history : a story, a lesson? Why do we read about the past: to relax, to escape, to learn, and what to learn? These old questions—hardy Perennials, but no less important for being conn- Monplace—are revived by Mr. Collis's new book. The 'Hurling Time' of which he writes is the Peasants' Revolt of 1381. But Mr. Collis believes that the Peasants' Revolt cannot be interpreted satisfactorily as' an isolated episode; rather, it forms part of 'the structural unity of a drama' Which goes back, to the beginning of Edward ill's French wars. For it was the 'ultimate failure' of the continental adventures which `so disgusted' the 'lower classes' that, 'out of temper as they were for domestic reasons, they rose against the upper classes.'
Mr. Collis's conception of a wider 'dramatic unity' is basically correct. But what is the signifi- cance or relevance of this story for us, and how are we best to get at it? Professional historians have given much attention latterly to what they call the 'crisis of the fourteenth century.' It was beyond doubt an economic crisis, a crisis of over- production, falling prices, restrictive practices and agricultural slump, and its ramifications in the way of social and political dislocation need no' elaboration. Without doubt it is the under- lying and unifying theme of the period of history with which Mr. Collis is concerned. Mr. Collis himself, on the other hand, presents us with a brisk and competent but rather melodramatic account of the events. He bases his story fair and square on contemporary chronicles. But unfortu- nately the chroniclers, Froissart not least, had no conception of the profounder causes of events, and when they come down to the Peasants' Revolt itself, their accounts are warped and twisted by hatred, humour and prejudice. Even a carefully sifted combination of them is unlikely to bring us within measurable distance of the truth.
The picture, without doubt, is more complex than Mr. Collis paints it In London itself, the scene of the climax of his story, the conflict of factions and interests, of guilds and companies, contributed to the outcome. Among the revolt- ing peasants, as Russian historians such as Petrushevsky and Kosminsky have shown, there were different groups with different objectives corresponding to their social backgrounds. The landowning classes were divided also, the smaller knights having economic interests distinct from those of the great nobles and ecclesiastics, whose estates were run on different principles. To intro- duce such aspects, it may be' said, would make the story altogether too austere; but, I wonder whether this is really true? The social and economic realities, 'one would think, lie nearer to modern preoccupations than the clash and clang of distant arms.
In any case, though a story may justify itself as a story, it is pertinent, when it is history, to ask what its significance is. Mr. Collis's answer is that the rebels of 1381 established a 'visionary truth.'
From the knowledge that they had been the decisive factor in three grand victories . . . came the intuition that they were competent to be the rulers of England.
This, Mr. Collis says, was 'an idea of the greatest originality.' It may be so; but it would be hard to find historians to endorse his verdict. Perhaps, indeed, in making the Peasants' Revolt the climax of a drama, Mr. Collis has attributed to it more significance than it had. In reality, it marked neither a beginning nor an end. The interest lies rather in the process of social change in which it was no more than an incident : the impact of slump and unsuccessful war. Here is something which makes the fourteenth and twentieth cen- turies kin, and allows us to penetrate behind the brittle unrealities of the tapestried, middle ages
Previous page
