Search results
This book presents key texts relating to the political as well as to the broader socio-economic history of the reign of Edward II. Drawing on a wide range of narrative sources, especially the extensive chronicle accounts of the reign, the editors also introduce other important material, including parliamentary rolls, charters, court records and accounts. Together this gathering of sources allows the reader to navigate this troubled and eventful period in English medieval history. The volume is organised chronologically, guiding the reader from the moment of Edward II’s accession in 1307 until his removal from office in 1327 and his supposed death in the same year. The editors also introduce more thematic chapters throughout, addressing such key themes as royal finances and the state of the early fourteenth-century economy, the role of parliament, and political and military engagement with Scotland. In an introductory essay, the editors discuss previous historical work directed at the reign of Edward II and also outline the range of source types available to the historian of the reign. Each section of primary source is also introduced by the editors, who offer a contextual analysis in each instance.
inevitable. 15 By early 1310, leading magnates and ecclesiastics were able to persuade Edward to allow them to reflect and offer advice on the present state of the realm and the need for reform. In March of that year, Edward, by charter, granted them royal authority to proceed in their work and in the following months the Ordainers, who included the earls of Lancaster, Lincoln, Pembroke, Warwick and
strong. 4 The major crises reveal the perceived value of parliament in various statements made. For example, in 1311 the Ordinances themselves contained important demands for regular parliaments in a convenient place and for consent in parliament [ 16b ]. In 1320 Lancaster stated that parliament should be held openly ( non ... in cameris ). 5 In 1321 the peers claimed that, as peers, they could declare
after Boroughbridge, wrote of Edward’s ‘insane tyranny’ and the ‘cruelty of the tyrant’ in 1323, and stated that the Gascons in 1324 preferred French rule to the ‘tyranny, greed, and folly of the king of England’ [ 49b ]. 4 Orleton, who was accused in 1334 of describing Edward as tyrant and sodomite in his Oxford sermon in 1326, denied it, saying that the word ‘could
(a) Proclamation of the price ordinance in London, 14 March 1315 Foedera , II.i, p. 263 ( CCR 1313–1318 , p. 160) The king to the mayor and sheriffs of London, greetings. We have received a complaint from our archbishops, bishops, earls, barons and others of the community of our kingdom through their petition shown before us and our council, stating that the
. 18 Where there is a stated constitutional aspiration, it tends to be presented as a sham, a cynical attempt to adjust the situation to the advantage of the supposed aspirant. This is a view that has tended to persist in more recent work and there has been no significant return to the constitutionalism of the early twentieth century. The appearance in the past twenty years of major biographies of
kingdom’ while Edward was only his vassal [ 41b ]. Nonetheless war was not inevitable. Although the problems had led to war in 1294, the French marriages of Edward I and Edward II since then were meant to bring the royal families closer together, 4 Edward II’s state visits to France in 1313 and 1314 had kept communications open, and the popes, both the Gascon Clement V (d. 1314) and John XXII (elected 1316
in the earliest years of the reign to confront the threat of Edward’s favouritism towards Piers Gaveston, were as notable for the early evidence of the fragility of the alliance against the king and the Despensers as for those who attended and indicated some level of support. The indenture witnessed at Sherburn in Elmet in late June 1321 stated the opposition to the perceived misdeeds of the
his kingdom for himself and his heirs wholly, freely and peacefully’ and that ‘those not wishing to join this agreement, should be destroyed as disturbers of the peace and tranquillity of the people, and notorious enemies of each kingdom’ both removed the English claim to Scotland and made the English crown an enemy in its own state [ 25a–c ]. 18 That Harclay paid for his mistake with his life is not
that they ‘write to the king without delay’ each stating ‘what he thinks of the matter and what he would do and what he would advise to be done by the king’. For Stapeldon’s reply to the letter, see [ 16c] . 34 The civil war as recounted in the chronicles (a) Bridlington , pp. 73–6 Also in the same year [1321], Lord Bartholomew Badlesmere through