Wednesday, September 18, 2019

Emalee on Mirror for Magistrates

Budra, "The Mirror for Magistrates and the Politics of Readership" (Emalee Schmeidel)


In “The Mirror for Magistrates and the Politics of Readership”, Paul Budra discusses the different editors of The Mirror for Magistrates.  His argument is that the most recent editor, Richard Niccols, essentially ruined The Mirror for Magistrates.  He argues that Niccols’ intent for his edition of the work is what led to its decline. 
    Budra begins by discussing the first few editors, what they included in The Mirror for Magistrates, and how it impacted society and how well the collection sold.  The first editor, William Baldwin, included works through the War of the Roses.  The second editor, John Higgins, “filled in the period from Brut until Ceasar”. The third editor, Thomas Blennerhasset, included material from the Roman Conquest to William the Conqueror.  The fourth and last editor, Richard Niccols, included more works from that time. 
    Budra discusses the essential differences and importances of the works included by each of the editors.  The first three editors mainly included material that was old enough to not really cause any turmoil in society.  The material they included was mostly historically based.  It was far enough in the past to not cause unrest in their present day society.  While there were lessons meant to be seen in the works, the works were not about things recent enough to cause issues. 
    While the previous editors all made changes that were gradually causing a decline in the Mirror, the final editor, Richard Niccols, was really the one who caused the greatest decline, by including propaganda.  His edition was meant for the “urban reader” rather than the original audience of political authorities, but as Budra says, ultimately “was bound to alienate the citizenry”.  Budra discusses how Niccols ultimately missed the mark with his edition.  Ultimately it did not sell, even being released on 3 separate occasions. 

    Ultimately, Budra’s argument is that The Mirror for Magistrates was ultimately ruined by Niccols.  What was originally a collection meant for political authorities to read and learn history from was eventually turned into a piece of political propaganda.  Niccols took The Mirror and changed who the intended audience was, but the intended audience did not appreciate what he did with the collection.  This audience then did not purchase the collection, and led to it dying out.  As Budra said, “Niccols finally broke the Mirror”.

No comments:

Post a Comment