VIII. Matthew Paris-Likens Roman Court to “Strumpet”

MATTHEW PARIS, or Matthieu (c. 1200-1259), considered the greatest medieval English chronicler, was a Benedictine monk of the Abbey of St. Albans. Diplomatist, mathematician, poet, and theologian, he was born on the lands of St. Albans. He was called “Parisiensis” (the Parisian) simply because he received his advanced education in Paris. At the age of seventeen he put on the religious habit of St. Albans. ^{131William Hunt, “Paris, Matthew,” Dictionary of National Biography, vol. 15, pp. 207 ff.} He was a man of marked accomplishments, and exceptional in that he, as a monk, did not leave to history any theological work or commentaries as such. His life was spent mainly at St. Albans, though in 1248 he was sent to Norway with a message from Louis IX to King Haakon VI. ^{132Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 15, p. 97, art. “Matthew of Paris.”} He was the royal historiographer to Henry III.PFF1 625.2

Matthew’s life was thus devoted to the chronicling of history—history when England was dominantly Catholic. By 1200 the best days of the old monasteries were past. The coming of the friars and the rise of the universities were a sharp challenge to the monks. Then the St. Albans school of history arose, after 1200, and persisted for nearly three centuries. When Matthew came to the institution St. Albans already had a special scribe—Roger of Wendover, who had started to write soon after 1215. Thus a chronicle of England developed. ^{133See Vivian Hunter Galbraith, Roger Wendover and Matthew Paris, pp. 5, 9: M’Clintock and Strong, op. cit., vol. 5, pp. 897, 898, art. “Matthew of Paris”; Lagarde, op. cit., p. 582.} Matthew was diligent, and developed into an expert scriptor. When Wendover died Matthew succeeded to the post, beginning to write in 1235. He was alert and kept his eye on public affairs, gathering information from all quarters. He derived much of his information from letters of important personages, and from conversations with the participants and chief eyewitnesses. He visited kings, and men of highest rank were eager to tell him of their doings. Portions of the old walls of St. Albans still stand, incorporated as part of a later structure.PFF1 625.3

Picture 2: MATTHEW PARIS, ENGLISH CHRONICLER, BOLDLY ATTACKED THE CORRUPTIONS OF THE Roman COURT
Page 626PFF1 626

English politics were involved and tedious in those days. But Matthew had a vigor of expression, a boldness and a freshness for the time, that was refreshing. For twenty-four years he recorded the chronicles, and has been called the greatest historical writer of this great historical century in Britain. His industry was untiring, his curiosity insatiable, and his output enormous. His most notable work as a historian was his Chronica Majora, or Historia Major. Down to 1235 it was a continuation of Roger Wendover’s Flores Historiarum (Flowers of History). But the years from 1235 to 1250 were compiled by Matthew exclusively from the original sources. He also wrote a Historia Anglorum, or Historia Minor, extending from 1067 to 1253. ^{134J. A. Giles, Preface to 1853 ed. of Matthew Paris’ English History (a translation of the Historia Major), p. vi; G. G. Coulton, A Mediaeval Garner, p. 280; Galbraith, op. cit., pp. 15, 45.}PFF1 626.1

Matthew was noted for his pungent comments and sparkling vignettes. ^{135Galbraith, op. cit., p. 17.} He was easily the greatest of the English medieval chroniclers, and had few rivals on the Continent. He claimed to be the interpreter of the English people. And the boldness with which he attacked the abuses of the court of Rome is remarkable. Thoroughly English in feeling, and a lover of freedom, he was angered when foreigners were promoted to high places in the church, and when English money was spent in enriching those who brought no benefit to the country. In such cases he spared neither king nor cardinal, royal or papal favorite. The venality of the papal curia, and the oppression of the English church by successive popes, found trenchant expression in his indignant language. He called the Roman court a “strumpet,” because it could be corrupted for money. ^{136Matthew Paris, op. cit., vol. 1, p. 332; see also Lagarde, op. cit., pp. 582, 583.} With him closes our survey of the British writers.PFF1 627.1