Images and Memories of a Common War: the Battles of 1383-1385 in the Chronicles of Pero López de Ayala and Fernão Lopes In 1383, with the death of Fernando I of Portugal, a dramatic dispute for the kingdom’s government began between Juan...
moreImages and Memories of a Common War: the Battles of 1383-1385 in the Chronicles of Pero López de Ayala and Fernão Lopes
In 1383, with the death of Fernando I of Portugal, a dramatic dispute for the kingdom’s government began between Juan I of Castile and the master of Avis. Throughout this conflict, which officially lasted until 1431, the kingdoms of Portugal and Castile went through some periods of intense military activity, mainly during the so-called Crisis of 1383-1385. During this period – in which we also witness the siege of Lisbon, in 1384, and the acclamation of the Master as João I of Portugal, in 1385 –, four open field battles occur. Rare moments in the military campaigns of the Middle Ages, but ideologically relevant and often decisive, open field battles have always been of particular interest and importance for medieval historiography.
This was precisely what happened at the end of the 14th century and in the middle of the 15th, when two chronicles, by Pero López de Ayala and Fernão Lopes, appear in the Castilian and Portuguese courts, dedicating particular attention to the military confrontations between 1383 and 1385. Written inside the political spheres involved in the dispute, these important agents of legitimation would not fail to be committed with the propagandistic aims of the dynasties they served. Highlighting the positive and negative features of certain characters and elements of the conflict, these chronicles would present, more than factual events, perspectives more or less plausible of those same events.
Therefore, based on these two chronicles, this study seeks to examine two different perspectives about the battles of Atoleiros (April 1384), Trancoso (May 1385), Aljubarrota (August 1385), and Valverde (October 1385). Through a comparative study
of two sources produced by opposing sides, it searches for divergences and convergences on the narrative of war. More than the events, this study tries to address the way each chronicle, as a registry of one of the parties involved in the four battles, conveys the moments that compose, precede and succeed them, and therefore how each one builds its memory of a common war.