Jenni Nuttall, The Creation of Lancastrian Kingship: Literature, Language and Politics in Late Medieval England.

Nuttall, Jenni. The Creation of Lancastrian Kingship: Literature, Language and Politics in Late Medieval England. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Print.

Nutall's text argues that the political events surrounding the usurpation of Richard II, specifically the rhetoric employed by Henry Bolingbroke and his supporters, shaped the rhetoric of the literature produced by Lancastrian poets, creating a dialogue that was aware of the financial responsibilities of kingship, supportive of Henry IV's reign, and critical of how Henry IV failed to meet some of the ideals set forth during the usurpation. Nutall employs a linguistic framework, following Pocock's model, to locate the linguistic "coordinates" of historical aspects within these texts. Of particular interest is Nutall's second section, which lays out the emphasis of fiscal responsibility put forth by Henry IV's supporters. As part of the validation for deposing Richard II, the rhetoric focused on financial irresponsibility on Richard's part, which cast him as both Wynner and Wastore, so to speak. Henry IV's substantial land holdings and sources of revenue were considered enough to make the Lancastrian monarchy self sufficient, not requiring special taxes or levies to raise funds for defense or governance. Ideally, this would match well with the promises that Henry IV made during the usurpation, that he would not use such tactics to raise capital, and nicely opposed the image of Richard II as financially unstable that Lancastrian rhetoric had set up. Yet, as Nutall argues, that same rhetoric would come to be used by such Lancastrian poets as Hoccleve to call some of the Lancastrian monarchy's practices into question. In sum, Nutall suggests that rather than simply serving as critique or propaganda, Lancastrian poets instead appropriate the rhetoric put forth by Henry IV in order to do both simultaneously, encouraging the monarchy to adhere to the ideals set forth at its inception while calling out where it seems to be failing to do so.

While some of the book reviews of this text tended towards the scathing, I found it mostly interesting. The rhetorical function of economic matters is of particular interest to me, and I found the discussion of how Hoccleve appropriates this language compelling. That said, I generally found the linguistic model to be somewhat odd. Perhaps I missed the section where it was plotted out in greater detail, but it read rather as a model whose complexity exceeded its utility, and that's coming from someone who sadly has history employing models that are far more complex than are useful. In addition, I would rather like to see this argument put in conversation with Matthews' Writing to the King (acknwoledging that Matthews' text was published five years after Nutall's), specifically in regards to the rhetoric of addressing one's monarch and considering Matthews' engages with several of the same texts as Nutall. Regardless, Nutall raises some interesting points that have shaded in another corner of my understanding of Middle English literature.