Welsh Journals

Search over 450 titles and 1.2 million pages

BOOK REVIEWS Kenneth Fincham [ed], Visitation Articles and Injunctions of the Early Stuart Church, volume 1 [Church of England Record Society 1994]. xxvii + 227 pp. ISBN 0-85115-353-4. This is an elegantly-produced book, whose contents have been sensibly chosen and expertly edited by Kenneth Fincham; the first of two intended volumes on the early Stuart period, 1603-42. It concentrates mainly on the reign of James I [1603-25], though some later items relating to Charles I's reign are included, partly for editorial convenience but chiefly on account of the close "family relationship" they bear to earlier documents. As the editor observes, it's a contribution that is long overdue, since it is over seventy years ago that W H Frere and W P M Kennedy produced their valuable and much-used three volumes of articles and injunctions for the Elizabethan era. Wales is not well represented in this volume. Much to the editor's regret, he could unearth only four relevant sets of articles, none of them archidiaconal, from all four of the Welsh dioceses. Bishop Francis Godwin's Injunctions of 1603 for Llandaff are published; so are Bishop William Laud's Articles for St Davids diocese for 1622; and Bishop Theophilus Field's Articles for Llandaff of 1621. Students of early modern Welsh church history are unlikely to be surprised to learn this; they will already be only too painfully familiar with the dispiriting scarcity of primary material surviving for Welsh dioceses. However, they may be mildly cheered to discover that one of the most distinguished Welshmen to become a bishop during this period, Richard Vaughan, bishop first of Bangor, then Chester, and finally of London, compiled a set of Articles for London in 1605 [published in this volume] which exercised a great deal of influence on later bishops in London and other dioceses. One of the interesting points raised by the editor is that articles woujd not be merely inquiries to be put to parsons and churchwardens, but might also serve as clear indications of "best practice" to be observed in the diocese. How far incumbents, and churchwardens especially, followed such rules of guidance presented to them is quite another matter. They were all too prone to be