Before I begin this post, about Piers Gaveston's return to England in early 1312 after his third exile, I have to get something out of my system. I feel like grabbing Edward II by the shoulders and shaking him and screaming "What are you doing, man?? You're tearing your kingdom apart! You're going to get him killed! I know you love him, but COME ON!!!" But that's often the effect Edward II has on me. I'm torn between wanting to hug him and wanting to smack him round the head.
Anyway...
As I wrote in my last post, Piers was sent into exile in early November 1311, and from the evidence available, seems to have accepted that it would last for at least a few years. However, in January 1312, he returned to England.
Why he did this is not clear. It may be that he only intended to slip into England for a little while, to see his wife Margaret de Clare, who was pregnant when he left, and their newborn child - then leave again once he knew they were well. It may also be that Edward recalled him, as the Vita suggests: "out of hatred for the earls he recalled Piers, swearing as he was wont on God’s soul that he would freely use his own judgement."
Unfortunately, as regular readers of this blog will know, Edward II had no judgement whatsoever.
The chronology of events is murky, but what seems to have happened is this. Edward spent Christmas 1311 at Westminster with Queen Isabella, and left a few days later, leaving her behind. He spent New Year at Windsor, and Isabella sent him 'precious gifts' there. Sometime in early January 1312, Edward left Windsor and headed north to Yorkshire, collecting his niece Margaret de Clare from Wallingford on the way. From Wallingford to York is 200 miles, a dreadful journey for the very pregnant Margaret, especially on winter roads.
Presumably, Edward knew that Piers was on his way back, and wanted to get Margaret out of the way of the Ordainers, who, furious at Piers' return, might use her as a hostage - or to ensure that Margaret gave birth far away from the Ordainers, so that Piers could slip into the country to see her and his child.
Margaret gave birth to Piers' daughter Joan, named after her mother and Edward II's sister Joan of Acre, on or around 12 January (so she was close to nine months pregnant when dragged on the long journey north, poor thing, and the timing suggests that they travelled very fast). Edward seems to have met Piers at Knaresborough on 13 January, and the two men rushed the seventeen miles to York that same day, almost certainly so Piers could see his wife and baby. (I'm following the interpretation of Pierre Chaplais from his book Piers Gaveston: Edward II's Adoptive Brother here.) A contemporary newsletter, undated, says that the king arrived in York 'this Thursday', and 13 January is the only Thursday that makes sense. When Piers returned to England, where he landed, and how he made his way to Knaresborough, is not known, except that he spent two nights in Nottingham on the way (J. S. Hamilton, Piers Gaveston, earl of Cornwall 1307-1312).
Possibly, Piers intended to leave England once he had seen Margaret and Joan - this interpretation is not at all certain, but I do like the idea of Piers promising his wife that he'd be with her when she gave birth, despite the danger. But Edward II took the decision out of his hands. On 18 January 1312, Edward revoked his friend’s exile: Gaveston, "who was lately exiled contrary to law and custom, in which exile he was named as other than good and loyal, has returned to the kingdom by the king’s order and is ready to justify himself before the king, wherefore the king holds him good and loyal." (Close Rolls/Foedera). The bit "by the king's order" does, of course, suggest that Piers' return was Edward's idea.
Edward had his sheriffs proclaim the (good?!) news, and two days later, ordered them to restore Gaveston’s lands to him. Two memoranda were added: "this form [revoking the exile] was made by the king himself, and he took the writs as soon as they were made and put them on his bed" and "these writs were made in the king’s presence by his order under threat of grievous forfeiture" (Close Rolls). Evidently Edward's chancery clerks were reluctant to write out the writs - understandably - and he lost his temper and threatened them, typical Edward behaviour. The reference to putting the writs on his bed is further proof that he didn't trust his clerks, and wanted to keep the writs himself, just in case.
On 26 January, Edward tried to mollify his barons by ordering that the Ordinances, published the previous autumn, should be observed, "so far as they are not prejudicial to the king". (Close Rolls). However, according to the contemporary but undated newsletter, Edward met knights and other 'good men' (bone gentz) of Yorkshire, and "told them that what he had done and granted in London [agreeing to the Ordinances] was against his will and that he has revoked everything which the earls have done and ordained". Edward was playing a dangerous double game.
The Ordainers met in London in early February. Despite their fury with Edward, they were reluctant to make war on him, a thing not lightly done. To cut a very long story short, they made plans to capture Piers, and the earl of Lancaster slowly made his way north, organising jousting tournaments en route as a way of raising a large force of armed men. The task of arresting Piers was given to the earls of Pembroke and Surrey - two of Piers' least hostile opponents - as well as Robert Clifford and Henry Percy.
Meanwhile, Queen Isabella left Westminster and joined her husband in the north; Edward gave her £400 for her expenses on the journey, which took just under three weeks (to travel 200 miles!) Isabella send letters and gifts to Edward during her journey, including a basket of lampreys, via her messenger John Moigne. (Household Book of Queen Isabella). She reached York on or just after 21 February, whereafter she and Edward conceived Edward III.
Incredibly, Edward made overtures to Robert Bruce, and offered to acknowledge him as king of Scots if Bruce would agree to protect Piers. This is just incredible. I don't even have the words to describe what an incredible offer that was. And did I mention that this is totally incredible? Bruce refused, exclaiming "How shall the king of England keep faith with me, since he does not observe the sworn promises made to his liege men?…No trust can be put in such a fickle man; his promises will not deceive me." (Vita). Oops. Further proof that Edward II would do anything, anything, for Piers Gaveston. I wonder why he didn't just hand over the keys of his kingdom to the Ordainers while he was at it.
Edward and Piers, and their respective wives, remained in the north, unaware that the Ordainers were coming to capture Piers, and that he didn't have much longer to live...
30 March, 2008
27 March, 2008
Bad Translations
This post was inspired by this interview with Susan Higginbotham about her novel The Traitor's Wife (about Edward II's niece Eleanor de Clare) which I assume was fed into one of those online translating jobbies then back into English, with hilarious results:
"The rule of prince II was digit of unceasing state between the noesis and the nobility, and Eleanor, hardcore to her uncle and to her husband, is presently caught up in the tumultuous events that yet defeat both of the men she loves. She’s mitt to build her chronicle amid a rule that’s rattling hostile to her."
"Give us whatever brainwave into Eleanor de Clare. What identify of blackamoor was she? What was she aroused about?"
"where we crapper ease wager the stained-glass windows acting her ancestors, her brother, and her husband."
"Queen Isabella, prince II’s realty wife, yet became fed up with this. While on stag playing in France, she bacilliform an alinement with Roger Mortimer"
So I decided to use Babelfish to translate random bits of my blog posts into another language, then back into English...
Original text:
"Piers Gaveston returned to England from his second exile on or about 27 June 1309, and on 5 August, was re-granted his earldom of Cornwall at parliament. This was the period when he gave the earls insulting nicknames and acted even more arrogantly than ever, according to some of the chronicles."
Translated into German, and back into English:
"Jetties Gaveston, which was returned to a June 27 or approximately to England from its second exile 1309 and on August 5, became its Earl cathedral of Cornwall at the parliament RH -- grants. This was the period, when he gave the counts, who insult and even more arrogantly than at all functioned pointed names, according to some the chronicles."
Original text:
"But to no avail. Even the royalist earls were determined to see the back of Piers. Furious, powerless, Edward gave vent to his emotions, alternating between screaming insults and threats at the Ordainers and trying cajole them with flattery and promises of favours. Again, to no avail. Piers Gaveston was to leave the country by 1 November 1311, from Dover and nowhere else. If he did not, he would "thereafter be treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and the people.""
Into French and back into English:
"But in vain. Even the royalist counts were determined to see the back of the pillars. Furious, impotent, Edouard gave the passage to his emotions, alternating between the yelling insults and threats at Ordainers and testing cajolez them with the flattery and the promises of the favours. Still, in vain. The Gaveston pillars were to leave the country within November 1, 1311, Dover and nowhere differently. If it not, it "would be then treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and populates.""
Original text:
"Piers sailed from London, not Dover, on 3 November, not the 1st. His wife Margaret did not accompany him, for the simple reason that she was about six or seven months pregnant. The earldom of Cornwall was stripped from Piers."
Into Spanish and back into English:
"The wharves sailed of London, nonDover, the 3 of November, not 1ros them. Her Margaret wife did not accompany it, for the simple reason that she was near six or seven months of embarrassed. Earldom of Cornwall was bare of the wharves".
Original text:
"Edward II recalled Piers from the exile imposed on him by Edward I immediately after he heard the news that his father was dead, on 11 July 1307. Piers was back in England by early August, and Edward created him earl of Cornwall on 6 August, possibly without Piers' prior knowledge".
Into Russian and back into English:
"Edward II Recalled the piers from exile of that induced on I eat Yedshard 4 immediately after it it heard news that its father was dead, to 11 - GO of July 1307. Piers were located back in England k in the beginning of August, and Edward created it earl Cornwall to 6 - GO of August, as far as possible without the knowledge of the piers of previous".
Original text:
"Edward's obsession with his friend was such that he refused to see any of his barons unless Piers was also present, and rudely ignored them, talking only to Piers. Piers grew more and more arrogant because of Edward's favour, according to the Vita: "scornfully rolling his upraised eyes in pride and in abuse, he looked down upon all with pompous and supercilious countenance…indeed the superciliousness which he affected would have been unbearable enough in a king’s son.""
Into Dutch and back into English:
"Obsession of Edward with its friend was such that he refused no matter which of its our see unless the pillars were also present, and harsh ignored them, which speak only to pillars. The pillars grew more more arrogant and because of the grace of Edward, according to Vita: "upraised contemptuously rolling of him looks in proud and in abuse, he looked down on all with pompous and supercilious tolerate... indeed superciliousness those he enough unbearable are would be in the zoon of a king." influenced"
Original text:
"Edward also arranged Piers' marriage to his (Edward's, not Piers', obviously) niece Margaret de Clare, which took place on 1 November 1307, but which had been planned for months - the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own. Piers had an annual income of £4000, making him one of the richest men in the country."
Into French, then into German, and back into English:
"Edouard likewise assigned itself the marriage of the columns at its (Edouard not columns naturally) niece Margaret of Clare, which took place 1 November 1307, but during months planned was - the Charter, which grants the arget0_0_titel von Cornwall at columns 6 August, was decorated with the arms by Clare exactly the same as clean by the columns. The columns had an annual income of £4000, which makes one of the richest men in the country for it."
Hours of mindless entertainment! :)
"The rule of prince II was digit of unceasing state between the noesis and the nobility, and Eleanor, hardcore to her uncle and to her husband, is presently caught up in the tumultuous events that yet defeat both of the men she loves. She’s mitt to build her chronicle amid a rule that’s rattling hostile to her."
"Give us whatever brainwave into Eleanor de Clare. What identify of blackamoor was she? What was she aroused about?"
"where we crapper ease wager the stained-glass windows acting her ancestors, her brother, and her husband."
"Queen Isabella, prince II’s realty wife, yet became fed up with this. While on stag playing in France, she bacilliform an alinement with Roger Mortimer"
So I decided to use Babelfish to translate random bits of my blog posts into another language, then back into English...
Original text:
"Piers Gaveston returned to England from his second exile on or about 27 June 1309, and on 5 August, was re-granted his earldom of Cornwall at parliament. This was the period when he gave the earls insulting nicknames and acted even more arrogantly than ever, according to some of the chronicles."
Translated into German, and back into English:
"Jetties Gaveston, which was returned to a June 27 or approximately to England from its second exile 1309 and on August 5, became its Earl cathedral of Cornwall at the parliament RH -- grants. This was the period, when he gave the counts, who insult and even more arrogantly than at all functioned pointed names, according to some the chronicles."
Original text:
"But to no avail. Even the royalist earls were determined to see the back of Piers. Furious, powerless, Edward gave vent to his emotions, alternating between screaming insults and threats at the Ordainers and trying cajole them with flattery and promises of favours. Again, to no avail. Piers Gaveston was to leave the country by 1 November 1311, from Dover and nowhere else. If he did not, he would "thereafter be treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and the people.""
Into French and back into English:
"But in vain. Even the royalist counts were determined to see the back of the pillars. Furious, impotent, Edouard gave the passage to his emotions, alternating between the yelling insults and threats at Ordainers and testing cajolez them with the flattery and the promises of the favours. Still, in vain. The Gaveston pillars were to leave the country within November 1, 1311, Dover and nowhere differently. If it not, it "would be then treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and populates.""
Original text:
"Piers sailed from London, not Dover, on 3 November, not the 1st. His wife Margaret did not accompany him, for the simple reason that she was about six or seven months pregnant. The earldom of Cornwall was stripped from Piers."
Into Spanish and back into English:
"The wharves sailed of London, nonDover, the 3 of November, not 1ros them. Her Margaret wife did not accompany it, for the simple reason that she was near six or seven months of embarrassed. Earldom of Cornwall was bare of the wharves".
Original text:
"Edward II recalled Piers from the exile imposed on him by Edward I immediately after he heard the news that his father was dead, on 11 July 1307. Piers was back in England by early August, and Edward created him earl of Cornwall on 6 August, possibly without Piers' prior knowledge".
Into Russian and back into English:
"Edward II Recalled the piers from exile of that induced on I eat Yedshard 4 immediately after it it heard news that its father was dead, to 11 - GO of July 1307. Piers were located back in England k in the beginning of August, and Edward created it earl Cornwall to 6 - GO of August, as far as possible without the knowledge of the piers of previous".
Original text:
"Edward's obsession with his friend was such that he refused to see any of his barons unless Piers was also present, and rudely ignored them, talking only to Piers. Piers grew more and more arrogant because of Edward's favour, according to the Vita: "scornfully rolling his upraised eyes in pride and in abuse, he looked down upon all with pompous and supercilious countenance…indeed the superciliousness which he affected would have been unbearable enough in a king’s son.""
Into Dutch and back into English:
"Obsession of Edward with its friend was such that he refused no matter which of its our see unless the pillars were also present, and harsh ignored them, which speak only to pillars. The pillars grew more more arrogant and because of the grace of Edward, according to Vita: "upraised contemptuously rolling of him looks in proud and in abuse, he looked down on all with pompous and supercilious tolerate... indeed superciliousness those he enough unbearable are would be in the zoon of a king." influenced"
Original text:
"Edward also arranged Piers' marriage to his (Edward's, not Piers', obviously) niece Margaret de Clare, which took place on 1 November 1307, but which had been planned for months - the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own. Piers had an annual income of £4000, making him one of the richest men in the country."
Into French, then into German, and back into English:
"Edouard likewise assigned itself the marriage of the columns at its (Edouard not columns naturally) niece Margaret of Clare, which took place 1 November 1307, but during months planned was - the Charter, which grants the arget0_0_titel von Cornwall at columns 6 August, was decorated with the arms by Clare exactly the same as clean by the columns. The columns had an annual income of £4000, which makes one of the richest men in the country for it."
Hours of mindless entertainment! :)
23 March, 2008
Piers Gaveston's Third Exile
Piers Gaveston returned to England from his second exile on or about 27 June 1309, and on 5 August, was re-granted his earldom of Cornwall at parliament. This was the period when he gave the earls insulting nicknames and acted even more arrogantly than ever, according to some of the chronicles. Tension ran high in England in late 1309 and early 1310. On 18 October, the earls of Warwick, Lancaster, Lincoln, Arundel and Oxford refused to attend the parliament which Edward had summoned for early the following year, giving Piers' presence as their reason (according to the chronicler Walter Guisborough). In the end, only the earl of Surrey agreed to attend, even the royalist earls of Gloucester, Pembroke and Richmond refusing. Eight days later, Edward tried again, summoning a parliament to be held at York on 8 February. This meeting, too, some of the earls refused to attend, because "as long as their chief enemy [Gaveston], who had set the baronage and the realm in an uproar, was lurking in the king’s chamber, their approach would be unsafe." (Vita Edwardi Secundi).
Eventually the location was changed to Westminster. The earls of Lancaster, Hereford, Warwick and Pembroke agreed to attend "if it was absolutely necessary to present themselves before the king" but they would come armed. However, they hastened to add that Edward should not feel "offended or injured" and they were only choosing the "safer way". (Vita) Edward was forced to send Piers away before they would agree to come before him (Annales Londonienses).
At this parliament, a petition was presented, a harsh indictment of Edward's rule containing a long list of grievances. I won't go into it here - it deserves a post to itself - but the upshot was that Edward was forced, on 16 March 1310, to agree to the formation of the Lords Ordainer, a group of twenty-one men, eight earls, seven bishops and six barons. (The Annales Londonienses is the most detailed contemporary source describing the formation of this group). Their aim was to reform Edward's household and address the grievances they had presented to him.
In late August 1310, Edward departed for Scotland, his clear aim to avoid the Ordainers rather than out of any desire to fight in Scotland, and spent almost a year there, with Piers and the earls of Gloucester and Surrey, his nephew and nephew by marriage. Surrey was one of only three earls not an Ordainer - the others were Oxford, a nonentity, and Cornwall, Piers Gaveston himself.
By the summer of 1311, the Ordainers were ready with their reforms - the Ordinances, forty-one of them - and Edward reluctantly, and very slowly, came south to meet them. The Vita claims he went on pilgrimage to Canterbury to put off the evil moment, though looking at his itinerary, it's hard to see when. He left Piers in the north, in the stronghold of Bamburgh, for his own safety.
Parliament met on 16 August. To his horror, Edward saw that the Ordinances placed severe limitations on his power, and he protested that "some things were disadvantageous to him, some fabricated out of spite, and he argued and pleaded that he was not bound to give his consent to these". (This and all following quotes are taken from the Vita). But the one that horrified him most was the twentieth:
"Piers Gaveston has led the king astray, counselled him badly and persuaded him deceitfully and in many ways to do evil…Piers Gaveston, as a public enemy of the king and of the kingdom, shall be utterly cast out and exiled, not only from England, but from Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Gascony, and from every land as well beyond the sea as on this side of the sea subject to the lordship of the king of England, for ever and without return."
The full text is much, much longer than that. ;) It accuses Piers, among many other things, of stealing Edward’s treasure and sending it abroad, dominating the king and turning away his heart from his liege men, maintaining robbers and murderers, and persuading Edward to make war without his barons’ consent, "and all the aforesaid he does cunningly, falsely and treacherously to the great disgrace and loss of the realm, the disherison of the crown, and the manifold destruction of the people".
The Ordainers stated rather lamely, regarding Gaveston’s previous exile in 1308, "he did not return by common consent, but only by the consent of some", and that his return had depended on his good behaviour, and "now it is found of a certainty that he has behaved badly." (I love that deadpan statement.)
I bet you can guess what Edward did next, can't you? Yup - he agreed to accept all the Ordinances, despite the severe limitations they placed on his power, if the lords would only revoke the twentieth, and said:
"Whatever has been ordained or decided upon, however much they may redound to my private disadvantage, shall be established at your request and remain in force for ever. But you shall stop persecuting my brother Piers, and allow him to have the earldom of Cornwall. "
But to no avail. Even the royalist earls were determined to see the back of Piers. Furious, powerless, Edward gave vent to his emotions, alternating between screaming insults and threats at the Ordainers and trying cajole them with flattery and promises of favours. Again, to no avail. Piers Gaveston was to leave the country by 1 November 1311, from Dover and nowhere else. If he did not, he would "thereafter be treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and the people."
Edward was even threatened that if he did not consent to Piers' banishment:
"...the kingdom would be in turmoil and peace driven out of the land…considering also how ruthless and perilous would be the struggle between the king and his barons, that the desolation of the whole land would ensue, that amid the varying fortunes of war the capture of the king could hardly be avoided…he [Edward] might through imprudence be deprived of his throne and his kingdom."
Faced with this potent threat, Edward finally (on 27 September, six weeks after Parliament opened) agreed to all the Ordinances. Piers was to leave the country for the third time, and this time, it was to be permanent. On 9 October, Edward sent letters to his sister and brother-in-law the duke and duchess of Brabant asking them to receive Piers (Close Rolls/Foedera). He also begged his father-in-law Philippe IV of France for a private interview, presumably to ask him to help Piers (Foedera). The meeting in fact never took place.
On 22 October, Piers appointed attorneys for five years, and asked for letters of protection for the same length of time (Patent Rolls). Evidently, he expected his exile to be a very long one. It's interesting to see that on 29 October, Queen Isabella wrote to her controller of Ponthieu (the county in northern France, Edward II's inheritance from his mother, which he granted to Isabella in 1308) regarding "the affairs of the earl of Cornwall" (Household Book of Queen Isabella). Evidently, she was prepared to help him in exile, at least financially. Whether this was out of sympathy, or relief that he was gone, is not clear, but it's almost certainly not a coincidence, in my opinion, that Edward granted Isabella many lands and properties in Lincolnshire and Kent at this time, including the palace of Eltham (Patent Rolls).
Piers sailed from London, not Dover, on 3 November, not the 1st. His wife Margaret did not accompany him, for the simple reason that she was about six or seven months pregnant. The earldom of Cornwall was stripped from Piers, though Margaret was allowed to keep Wallingford Castle and was granted an income for her sustenance.
Piers probably went to Flanders. The Vita says he went there; the Pauline annalist specifically says Bruges; Trokelowe says he first went to France, but was forced to flee and ended up in Flanders. However, there were rumours by late November that he had returned to England, and on 30 November, two men were sent to the west country to search for him (Patent Rolls/Foedera).
Several chronicles (Vita, Annales Londonienses, Trokelowe, Bridlington) all claim that Piers returned to England before or around Christmas. However, this seems unlikely to be true. Wherever Piers was, he was not with Edward, as his (Piers') biographer J. S. Hamilton has pointed out that Edward gave Piers' messenger a pound on 23 December for carrying messages between the two men.
What is certain is that Piers was back in England by 13 January 1312. Why he might have returned, and what happened subsequently, is the subject of the next post!
Eventually the location was changed to Westminster. The earls of Lancaster, Hereford, Warwick and Pembroke agreed to attend "if it was absolutely necessary to present themselves before the king" but they would come armed. However, they hastened to add that Edward should not feel "offended or injured" and they were only choosing the "safer way". (Vita) Edward was forced to send Piers away before they would agree to come before him (Annales Londonienses).
At this parliament, a petition was presented, a harsh indictment of Edward's rule containing a long list of grievances. I won't go into it here - it deserves a post to itself - but the upshot was that Edward was forced, on 16 March 1310, to agree to the formation of the Lords Ordainer, a group of twenty-one men, eight earls, seven bishops and six barons. (The Annales Londonienses is the most detailed contemporary source describing the formation of this group). Their aim was to reform Edward's household and address the grievances they had presented to him.
In late August 1310, Edward departed for Scotland, his clear aim to avoid the Ordainers rather than out of any desire to fight in Scotland, and spent almost a year there, with Piers and the earls of Gloucester and Surrey, his nephew and nephew by marriage. Surrey was one of only three earls not an Ordainer - the others were Oxford, a nonentity, and Cornwall, Piers Gaveston himself.
By the summer of 1311, the Ordainers were ready with their reforms - the Ordinances, forty-one of them - and Edward reluctantly, and very slowly, came south to meet them. The Vita claims he went on pilgrimage to Canterbury to put off the evil moment, though looking at his itinerary, it's hard to see when. He left Piers in the north, in the stronghold of Bamburgh, for his own safety.
Parliament met on 16 August. To his horror, Edward saw that the Ordinances placed severe limitations on his power, and he protested that "some things were disadvantageous to him, some fabricated out of spite, and he argued and pleaded that he was not bound to give his consent to these". (This and all following quotes are taken from the Vita). But the one that horrified him most was the twentieth:
"Piers Gaveston has led the king astray, counselled him badly and persuaded him deceitfully and in many ways to do evil…Piers Gaveston, as a public enemy of the king and of the kingdom, shall be utterly cast out and exiled, not only from England, but from Wales, Scotland, Ireland, Gascony, and from every land as well beyond the sea as on this side of the sea subject to the lordship of the king of England, for ever and without return."
The full text is much, much longer than that. ;) It accuses Piers, among many other things, of stealing Edward’s treasure and sending it abroad, dominating the king and turning away his heart from his liege men, maintaining robbers and murderers, and persuading Edward to make war without his barons’ consent, "and all the aforesaid he does cunningly, falsely and treacherously to the great disgrace and loss of the realm, the disherison of the crown, and the manifold destruction of the people".
The Ordainers stated rather lamely, regarding Gaveston’s previous exile in 1308, "he did not return by common consent, but only by the consent of some", and that his return had depended on his good behaviour, and "now it is found of a certainty that he has behaved badly." (I love that deadpan statement.)
I bet you can guess what Edward did next, can't you? Yup - he agreed to accept all the Ordinances, despite the severe limitations they placed on his power, if the lords would only revoke the twentieth, and said:
"Whatever has been ordained or decided upon, however much they may redound to my private disadvantage, shall be established at your request and remain in force for ever. But you shall stop persecuting my brother Piers, and allow him to have the earldom of Cornwall. "
But to no avail. Even the royalist earls were determined to see the back of Piers. Furious, powerless, Edward gave vent to his emotions, alternating between screaming insults and threats at the Ordainers and trying cajole them with flattery and promises of favours. Again, to no avail. Piers Gaveston was to leave the country by 1 November 1311, from Dover and nowhere else. If he did not, he would "thereafter be treated as an enemy of the kingdom, the king, and the people."
Edward was even threatened that if he did not consent to Piers' banishment:
"...the kingdom would be in turmoil and peace driven out of the land…considering also how ruthless and perilous would be the struggle between the king and his barons, that the desolation of the whole land would ensue, that amid the varying fortunes of war the capture of the king could hardly be avoided…he [Edward] might through imprudence be deprived of his throne and his kingdom."
Faced with this potent threat, Edward finally (on 27 September, six weeks after Parliament opened) agreed to all the Ordinances. Piers was to leave the country for the third time, and this time, it was to be permanent. On 9 October, Edward sent letters to his sister and brother-in-law the duke and duchess of Brabant asking them to receive Piers (Close Rolls/Foedera). He also begged his father-in-law Philippe IV of France for a private interview, presumably to ask him to help Piers (Foedera). The meeting in fact never took place.
On 22 October, Piers appointed attorneys for five years, and asked for letters of protection for the same length of time (Patent Rolls). Evidently, he expected his exile to be a very long one. It's interesting to see that on 29 October, Queen Isabella wrote to her controller of Ponthieu (the county in northern France, Edward II's inheritance from his mother, which he granted to Isabella in 1308) regarding "the affairs of the earl of Cornwall" (Household Book of Queen Isabella). Evidently, she was prepared to help him in exile, at least financially. Whether this was out of sympathy, or relief that he was gone, is not clear, but it's almost certainly not a coincidence, in my opinion, that Edward granted Isabella many lands and properties in Lincolnshire and Kent at this time, including the palace of Eltham (Patent Rolls).
Piers sailed from London, not Dover, on 3 November, not the 1st. His wife Margaret did not accompany him, for the simple reason that she was about six or seven months pregnant. The earldom of Cornwall was stripped from Piers, though Margaret was allowed to keep Wallingford Castle and was granted an income for her sustenance.
Piers probably went to Flanders. The Vita says he went there; the Pauline annalist specifically says Bruges; Trokelowe says he first went to France, but was forced to flee and ended up in Flanders. However, there were rumours by late November that he had returned to England, and on 30 November, two men were sent to the west country to search for him (Patent Rolls/Foedera).
Several chronicles (Vita, Annales Londonienses, Trokelowe, Bridlington) all claim that Piers returned to England before or around Christmas. However, this seems unlikely to be true. Wherever Piers was, he was not with Edward, as his (Piers') biographer J. S. Hamilton has pointed out that Edward gave Piers' messenger a pound on 23 December for carrying messages between the two men.
What is certain is that Piers was back in England by 13 January 1312. Why he might have returned, and what happened subsequently, is the subject of the next post!
16 March, 2008
Piers Gaveston's Second Exile
Edward II recalled Piers from the exile imposed on him by Edward I immediately after he heard the news that his father was dead, on 11 July 1307. Piers was back in England by early August, and Edward created him earl of Cornwall on 6 August, possibly without Piers' prior knowledge - or so Edward would claim in letters to the Pope and the king of France the following year. (Edward can't entirely be trusted here, however - he also claimed that he made Piers an earl at the urging of his barons - which was emphatically not the case!)
Edward also arranged Piers' marriage to his (Edward's, not Piers', obviously) niece Margaret de Clare, which took place on 1 November 1307, but which had been planned for months - the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own. Piers had an annual income of £4000, making him one of the richest men in the country.
As though all this wasn't bad enough - making the younger son of a minor Gascon noble a wealthy earl and a member of the royal family by marriage - Piers dominated Edward's favour and attention. According to the contemporary Vita Edwardi Secundi, Piers "alone found favour in the king's eyes and lorded it over them [the English barons] like a second king, to whom all were subject and none equal. Almost all the land hated him..his name was reviled far and wide...he was an object of mockery to almost everyone in the kingdom." The comment that Piers was 'like a second king' is echoed in other chronicles - the (later) Meaux chronicle called him "almost a king" (quasi rex) and the canon of Bridlington claimed there were two kings in England.
Edward's obsession with his friend was such that he refused to see any of his barons unless Piers was also present, and rudely ignored them, talking only to Piers. Piers grew more and more arrogant because of Edward's favour, according to the Vita: "scornfully rolling his upraised eyes in pride and in abuse, he looked down upon all with pompous and supercilious countenance…indeed the superciliousness which he affected would have been unbearable enough in a king’s son."
According to the Flores Historiarum, Piers "aroused the hatred of nearly all the great lords of England, because the new king loved him excessively and irrationally, and supported him totally." On 26 December 1307, Edward took the extraordinary step of appointing Piers custos regni, keeper of the realm or regent, while he went to France to marry Isabella. The Vita spoke for many when its author exclaimed "An astonishing thing, that he who had lately been an exile and outcast from England should now be made ruler and guardian of the realm."
On arriving in England with Isabella, Edward II caused a scandal by rushing up to Piers at Dover, hugging and kissing him repeatedly, in front of everyone. His antics at his coronation strengthened the already strong opposition to Piers, and at the parliament that met at Westminster a few days later, a powerful confederation of earls and barons demanded Piers' exile. They were led by Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, the eldest and most senior earl, a staunch royalist but deeply concerned by Edward's obsession with Piers.
Edward had few allies at this time. One of them was, surprisingly, his cousin the earl of Lancaster (Lincoln's son-in-law) who would later become his greatest enemy, and another their cousin the earl of Richmond, who was politically insignificant. Others were: Roger Mortimer (yes, that Roger Mortimer), Hugh Despenser the Elder, John, Lord Hastings, Edward's former tutor Guy Ferre, William Latimer, John Haudlo, John Cromwell, and John de Sulleye - a few lords and knights who were no match for the grand opposition to Edward and Piers, who were supported to some extent by Edward's powerful father-in-law the king of France.
To cut a very long story short, Edward agreed to exile Piers on 18 May; it had taken him many weeks to give in, and he had little choice, as he was facing civil war. The Vita said "the seditious quarrel between the lord king and the barons spread far and wide through England, and the whole land was much desolated by such a tumult…The king had his towns and castles munitioned and repaired, and the magnates on their part did likewise…it was held for certain that the quarrel once begun could not be settled without great destruction." A letter written around this time agreed: "very evil are the times in England now; and there are many who fear that worse times are still in store for us." (Ironically, the letter was written by Walter Stapeldon, bishop-elect of Exeter, murdered by a mob in 1326 for his loyalty to Edward II.)
The day after Edward finally agreed to the exile, the archbishop of Canterbury threatened to exile Piers if he didn't leave the country by 25 June. Piers' young wife Margaret de Clare was not included in the exile - she was the granddaughter of the old king and the sister of the earl of Gloucester, and nobody intended her any harm or insult - but she accompanied Piers abroad anyway, according to the Lanercost chronicle and the Annals of Dublin. This hardly suggests that their marriage was a disaster or that she hated Piers.
Piers was stripped of the lands he held as earl of Cornwall, though he was allowed to keep the title, an empty gesture probably insisted on by Edward II. A few days after Edward agreed to the exile, he granted Piers £2000 worth of lands in his homeland of Gascony, and another £2000 of English lands to Piers and his wife Margaret jointly - so Piers did not suffer from any loss of income. Edward also gave him a gift of 1180 marks, about 786 pounds, a truly enormous sum.
On 16 June, Edward hit on the idea of making Piers Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, having given the title to the earl of Ulster only the day before. Edward went to Bristol with Piers and Margaret to see them off to Ireland; they sailed on 28 June, three days late.
Even before Piers' departure, Edward was exerting himself to get the exile overturned. On 16 June, he granted the castle of Blanquefort in Gascony to the Pope's nephew and namesake Bertrand de Got, candidly explaining that he hoped the grant would encourage the Pope to look on Edward's affairs, i.e., Piers Gaveston, more favourably. It took a while, but a few months later, Pope Clement agreed to nullify the archbishop of Canterbury's threat to excommunicate Piers.
Edward spent the next few months schmoozing his earls and barons, granting them lands, favours, positions and money: "he bent one after another to his will, with gifts, promises and blandishments" (Vita). One by one, he brought then back to his side, to the disgust of the Vita: "See how often and abruptly great men change their sides…The love of magnates is as a game of dice." Labouring under the delusion that Edward and Piers would change their behaviour if Piers returned, the earl of Lincoln - formerly their most determined opponent - even persuaded some of the other earls to accept Piers' return.
Piers Gaveston came back to England on or about 27 June 1309, a year almost to the day since he'd left, having done a pretty good job as Lieutenant of Ireland. On 5 August 1309, at parliament in Stamford, the lands of his earldom were restored to him. Secure in Edward's favour and in the knowledge that the king had spent a year trying to bring him back, and therefore adored him as hopelessly as ever, Piers became ever more arrogant, and gave the earls insulting nicknames.
He and Edward then proceeded to demonstrate that neither of them had learned a damn thing from the experience, and that they did not have a molecule of political sense between them. Actually, that's not quite true. Edward's actions in 1308 and 1309 demonstrate clearly how astute, cunning and energetic he could be when he chose. But most of the time, he chose not to be. He couldn't be bothered unless his friends and therefore his personal feelings were involved, which must have been intensely frustrating to his contemporaries. If he had used his undoubted talents to, you know, actually govern his kingdom and to fight in Scotland, he could have been a great king.
As it was, events led inexorably to Piers' third and final exile, in November 1311, and ultimately, Edward's passion for and obsession with Piers led to his friend's destruction...
Edward also arranged Piers' marriage to his (Edward's, not Piers', obviously) niece Margaret de Clare, which took place on 1 November 1307, but which had been planned for months - the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own. Piers had an annual income of £4000, making him one of the richest men in the country.
As though all this wasn't bad enough - making the younger son of a minor Gascon noble a wealthy earl and a member of the royal family by marriage - Piers dominated Edward's favour and attention. According to the contemporary Vita Edwardi Secundi, Piers "alone found favour in the king's eyes and lorded it over them [the English barons] like a second king, to whom all were subject and none equal. Almost all the land hated him..his name was reviled far and wide...he was an object of mockery to almost everyone in the kingdom." The comment that Piers was 'like a second king' is echoed in other chronicles - the (later) Meaux chronicle called him "almost a king" (quasi rex) and the canon of Bridlington claimed there were two kings in England.
Edward's obsession with his friend was such that he refused to see any of his barons unless Piers was also present, and rudely ignored them, talking only to Piers. Piers grew more and more arrogant because of Edward's favour, according to the Vita: "scornfully rolling his upraised eyes in pride and in abuse, he looked down upon all with pompous and supercilious countenance…indeed the superciliousness which he affected would have been unbearable enough in a king’s son."
According to the Flores Historiarum, Piers "aroused the hatred of nearly all the great lords of England, because the new king loved him excessively and irrationally, and supported him totally." On 26 December 1307, Edward took the extraordinary step of appointing Piers custos regni, keeper of the realm or regent, while he went to France to marry Isabella. The Vita spoke for many when its author exclaimed "An astonishing thing, that he who had lately been an exile and outcast from England should now be made ruler and guardian of the realm."
On arriving in England with Isabella, Edward II caused a scandal by rushing up to Piers at Dover, hugging and kissing him repeatedly, in front of everyone. His antics at his coronation strengthened the already strong opposition to Piers, and at the parliament that met at Westminster a few days later, a powerful confederation of earls and barons demanded Piers' exile. They were led by Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln, the eldest and most senior earl, a staunch royalist but deeply concerned by Edward's obsession with Piers.
Edward had few allies at this time. One of them was, surprisingly, his cousin the earl of Lancaster (Lincoln's son-in-law) who would later become his greatest enemy, and another their cousin the earl of Richmond, who was politically insignificant. Others were: Roger Mortimer (yes, that Roger Mortimer), Hugh Despenser the Elder, John, Lord Hastings, Edward's former tutor Guy Ferre, William Latimer, John Haudlo, John Cromwell, and John de Sulleye - a few lords and knights who were no match for the grand opposition to Edward and Piers, who were supported to some extent by Edward's powerful father-in-law the king of France.
To cut a very long story short, Edward agreed to exile Piers on 18 May; it had taken him many weeks to give in, and he had little choice, as he was facing civil war. The Vita said "the seditious quarrel between the lord king and the barons spread far and wide through England, and the whole land was much desolated by such a tumult…The king had his towns and castles munitioned and repaired, and the magnates on their part did likewise…it was held for certain that the quarrel once begun could not be settled without great destruction." A letter written around this time agreed: "very evil are the times in England now; and there are many who fear that worse times are still in store for us." (Ironically, the letter was written by Walter Stapeldon, bishop-elect of Exeter, murdered by a mob in 1326 for his loyalty to Edward II.)
The day after Edward finally agreed to the exile, the archbishop of Canterbury threatened to exile Piers if he didn't leave the country by 25 June. Piers' young wife Margaret de Clare was not included in the exile - she was the granddaughter of the old king and the sister of the earl of Gloucester, and nobody intended her any harm or insult - but she accompanied Piers abroad anyway, according to the Lanercost chronicle and the Annals of Dublin. This hardly suggests that their marriage was a disaster or that she hated Piers.
Piers was stripped of the lands he held as earl of Cornwall, though he was allowed to keep the title, an empty gesture probably insisted on by Edward II. A few days after Edward agreed to the exile, he granted Piers £2000 worth of lands in his homeland of Gascony, and another £2000 of English lands to Piers and his wife Margaret jointly - so Piers did not suffer from any loss of income. Edward also gave him a gift of 1180 marks, about 786 pounds, a truly enormous sum.
On 16 June, Edward hit on the idea of making Piers Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, having given the title to the earl of Ulster only the day before. Edward went to Bristol with Piers and Margaret to see them off to Ireland; they sailed on 28 June, three days late.
Even before Piers' departure, Edward was exerting himself to get the exile overturned. On 16 June, he granted the castle of Blanquefort in Gascony to the Pope's nephew and namesake Bertrand de Got, candidly explaining that he hoped the grant would encourage the Pope to look on Edward's affairs, i.e., Piers Gaveston, more favourably. It took a while, but a few months later, Pope Clement agreed to nullify the archbishop of Canterbury's threat to excommunicate Piers.
Edward spent the next few months schmoozing his earls and barons, granting them lands, favours, positions and money: "he bent one after another to his will, with gifts, promises and blandishments" (Vita). One by one, he brought then back to his side, to the disgust of the Vita: "See how often and abruptly great men change their sides…The love of magnates is as a game of dice." Labouring under the delusion that Edward and Piers would change their behaviour if Piers returned, the earl of Lincoln - formerly their most determined opponent - even persuaded some of the other earls to accept Piers' return.
Piers Gaveston came back to England on or about 27 June 1309, a year almost to the day since he'd left, having done a pretty good job as Lieutenant of Ireland. On 5 August 1309, at parliament in Stamford, the lands of his earldom were restored to him. Secure in Edward's favour and in the knowledge that the king had spent a year trying to bring him back, and therefore adored him as hopelessly as ever, Piers became ever more arrogant, and gave the earls insulting nicknames.
He and Edward then proceeded to demonstrate that neither of them had learned a damn thing from the experience, and that they did not have a molecule of political sense between them. Actually, that's not quite true. Edward's actions in 1308 and 1309 demonstrate clearly how astute, cunning and energetic he could be when he chose. But most of the time, he chose not to be. He couldn't be bothered unless his friends and therefore his personal feelings were involved, which must have been intensely frustrating to his contemporaries. If he had used his undoubted talents to, you know, actually govern his kingdom and to fight in Scotland, he could have been a great king.
As it was, events led inexorably to Piers' third and final exile, in November 1311, and ultimately, Edward's passion for and obsession with Piers led to his friend's destruction...
12 March, 2008
Blogs and Stuff
Lady D of Lady Despenser's Scribery and The Scribe's Den has set up a great new blog, The Despensery, with posts about the lighter side of the fourteenth century, including an exciting new discovery, The Lost Diary of Eleanor de Clare, Lady Despenser! Also including lots of fun stuff like medieval chat-up lines, 'you know you're addicted to the fourteenth century when...' and so on. Lady D has kindly asked me to be a contributor, and I'm thinking of writing stuff like: the events of Edward II's reign as reported by the British tabloid press ("Mort romps all night with busty blonde Izzy!") and Hugh Despenser's chats with his long-suffering confessor ("It has been four hours since my last confession. Since then, I've deprived three widows of their lands and had carnal thoughts of the king...")
Also, Brian Wainwright, author of the marvellous historical novels Within The Fetterlock and The Adventures of Alianore Audley, has set up The Yorkist Age, a blog about the House of York from 1385 to 1485. I urge you to read Within The Fetterlock, if you haven't already, because it's bloody brilliant. It tells the story of Edward II's great-granddaughter Constance of York and her husband Thomas Despenser, great-grandson of Hugh the Younger, against the backdrop of the struggles between Richard II and Henry IV, also great-grandchildren of Edward II. In fact, almost all of the characters are the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the nobility of Edward II's era - I love reading the continuation of the family saga!
And if you haven't seen it yet, check out Carole's The Age of Treason, a blog about the royalty and nobility of the fourteenth century, with occasional trips into other centuries.
It's great to see all these new history blogs. May there be many more! Oh, and last but definitely not least on the subject of blogs, Steven Till has a great one on historical fiction and medieval history that I've discovered recently.
And in other news:
No fewer than three books on the battle of Bannockburn are coming out this year: Chris Brown's Bannockburn 1314: A New History (1 or 10 April); John Sadler's Bannockburn: Battle for Liberty (20 March), and David Cornell's Bannockburn: A New History (I can't find the publication date - only seen it on the website of the author's agent). Amazing, especially as the 700th anniversary of the battle isn't coming up till 2014!
Talking of battles of Edward II's reign, the anniversary of the battle of Boroughbridge in 1322 is coming up on 16 March. I think Carole at Age of Treason is planning a post about it.
A recent thread on the Plantagenesta community points out the truth about the paternity of Edward III and Edward II's other children.
A recent search that hit my blog: william wallace had affair with edward ii daughter-in-law. That old dog Wallace, eh? Having an affair with a woman born nine years after his execution. How ever did he manage it?
Next post on Piers Gaveston and his many exiles coming soon...
Also, Brian Wainwright, author of the marvellous historical novels Within The Fetterlock and The Adventures of Alianore Audley, has set up The Yorkist Age, a blog about the House of York from 1385 to 1485. I urge you to read Within The Fetterlock, if you haven't already, because it's bloody brilliant. It tells the story of Edward II's great-granddaughter Constance of York and her husband Thomas Despenser, great-grandson of Hugh the Younger, against the backdrop of the struggles between Richard II and Henry IV, also great-grandchildren of Edward II. In fact, almost all of the characters are the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the nobility of Edward II's era - I love reading the continuation of the family saga!
And if you haven't seen it yet, check out Carole's The Age of Treason, a blog about the royalty and nobility of the fourteenth century, with occasional trips into other centuries.
It's great to see all these new history blogs. May there be many more! Oh, and last but definitely not least on the subject of blogs, Steven Till has a great one on historical fiction and medieval history that I've discovered recently.
And in other news:
No fewer than three books on the battle of Bannockburn are coming out this year: Chris Brown's Bannockburn 1314: A New History (1 or 10 April); John Sadler's Bannockburn: Battle for Liberty (20 March), and David Cornell's Bannockburn: A New History (I can't find the publication date - only seen it on the website of the author's agent). Amazing, especially as the 700th anniversary of the battle isn't coming up till 2014!
Talking of battles of Edward II's reign, the anniversary of the battle of Boroughbridge in 1322 is coming up on 16 March. I think Carole at Age of Treason is planning a post about it.
A recent thread on the Plantagenesta community points out the truth about the paternity of Edward III and Edward II's other children.
A recent search that hit my blog: william wallace had affair with edward ii daughter-in-law. That old dog Wallace, eh? Having an affair with a woman born nine years after his execution. How ever did he manage it?
Next post on Piers Gaveston and his many exiles coming soon...
07 March, 2008
Piers Gaveston's First Exile
Piers Gaveston was exiled from England no fewer than three times. I wonder if that's a record? Here's some info on the first one.
On 26 February 1307, the ageing Edward I ordered Piers out of the country and told him to return to Gascony, his homeland. The odd thing is that this exile was evidently not intended to punish Piers. Edward ordered him to leave England "after three weeks from the next tournament", which was 30 April - so he set the date more than two months ahead, and allowed Piers to go jousting. He also granted Piers a generous income of 100 marks (66 pounds) a year, and the exile was not intended to be permanent - the king told Piers to stay in Gascony "until he shall be recalled by the king." This is from Foedera, and the Close Rolls confirm this: "...he shall remain in parts beyond sea during the king's pleasure and awaiting recall." If Edward I had been angry with Piers personally, it would be very apparent, and he clearly wasn't.
According to the chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, Edward I exiled Piers because his son Edward of Caernarfon had asked him for permission to grant his county of Ponthieu to his friend. It's also likely that Edward I was concerned about the nature of the relationship between his son and Piers, and that Piers had far too much influence over the young Prince of Wales (and he was entirely right to be concerned, as Edward demonstrated over the next few years).
Piers and Edward were forced to swear on the Host and sundry other relics that they would obey this order, and although Piers did indeed leave the country, he went to Ponthieu, Edward of Caernarfon's inheritance from his mother, not Gascony as ordered.
Edward accompanied Piers to Dover, where he seems to have departed a few days later than he should have, and gave him numerous presents - no fewer than sixteen tapestries, four green, four yellow, four with coats of arms decorated on them, and four green with red rosettes. (I wonder why Edward thought it was necessary to give Piers quite so many tapestries.) He also gave him two quilted tunics and sent after him two splendiferous jousting outfits, one of green velvet embroidered with pearls, gold and silver piping and gold aigulettes, the other somewhat plainer, of green sindon. As if this wasn't enough, he sent him five horses and the whopping sum of £260, something like 100 times most people's annual income.
Before Piers' exile, Edward of Caernarfon had been intending to visit Ponthieu, but Edward I countermanded the order in early June, presumably to keep the two men apart. Piers benefited from the stores of food collected there for Edward's visit, and was given thirteen swans and twenty-two herons.
Piers' first exile lasted only a few weeks. Edward I died on 7 July 1307, and as soon as Edward II heard the news on the 11th, he recalled his friend, almost certainly the first act he took as king. Supposedly, his father ordered him on his deathbed not to recall Piers, but there wasn't a snowflake's chance in hell that Edward would obey him. After all, he was king now and could do anything he wanted...so he thought.
Edward and Piers were reunited at Dumfries sometime in early to mid August. For the next few months, Edward proceeded to demonstrate that he cared little about anyone or anything that wasn't Piers. On 6 August, he made his friend earl of Cornwall, possibly without Piers' prior knowledge, as Edward would claim in a letter to the Pope the following year (though Edward can't really be trusted here, and also said that he made Piers earl of Cornwall on the advice of his barons, which certainly isn't true - he was trying to get the Pope on his side, shortly before Piers' second exile began). Edward also arranged his friend's marriage to Margaret de Clare on 1 November 1307, which evidently had been planned for a few months, as the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own.
Edward's overriding obsession with Piers over the next few months led inexorably to Piers' second exile in June 1308, subject of a future post!
On 26 February 1307, the ageing Edward I ordered Piers out of the country and told him to return to Gascony, his homeland. The odd thing is that this exile was evidently not intended to punish Piers. Edward ordered him to leave England "after three weeks from the next tournament", which was 30 April - so he set the date more than two months ahead, and allowed Piers to go jousting. He also granted Piers a generous income of 100 marks (66 pounds) a year, and the exile was not intended to be permanent - the king told Piers to stay in Gascony "until he shall be recalled by the king." This is from Foedera, and the Close Rolls confirm this: "...he shall remain in parts beyond sea during the king's pleasure and awaiting recall." If Edward I had been angry with Piers personally, it would be very apparent, and he clearly wasn't.
According to the chronicle of Walter of Guisborough, Edward I exiled Piers because his son Edward of Caernarfon had asked him for permission to grant his county of Ponthieu to his friend. It's also likely that Edward I was concerned about the nature of the relationship between his son and Piers, and that Piers had far too much influence over the young Prince of Wales (and he was entirely right to be concerned, as Edward demonstrated over the next few years).
Piers and Edward were forced to swear on the Host and sundry other relics that they would obey this order, and although Piers did indeed leave the country, he went to Ponthieu, Edward of Caernarfon's inheritance from his mother, not Gascony as ordered.
Edward accompanied Piers to Dover, where he seems to have departed a few days later than he should have, and gave him numerous presents - no fewer than sixteen tapestries, four green, four yellow, four with coats of arms decorated on them, and four green with red rosettes. (I wonder why Edward thought it was necessary to give Piers quite so many tapestries.) He also gave him two quilted tunics and sent after him two splendiferous jousting outfits, one of green velvet embroidered with pearls, gold and silver piping and gold aigulettes, the other somewhat plainer, of green sindon. As if this wasn't enough, he sent him five horses and the whopping sum of £260, something like 100 times most people's annual income.
Before Piers' exile, Edward of Caernarfon had been intending to visit Ponthieu, but Edward I countermanded the order in early June, presumably to keep the two men apart. Piers benefited from the stores of food collected there for Edward's visit, and was given thirteen swans and twenty-two herons.
Piers' first exile lasted only a few weeks. Edward I died on 7 July 1307, and as soon as Edward II heard the news on the 11th, he recalled his friend, almost certainly the first act he took as king. Supposedly, his father ordered him on his deathbed not to recall Piers, but there wasn't a snowflake's chance in hell that Edward would obey him. After all, he was king now and could do anything he wanted...so he thought.
Edward and Piers were reunited at Dumfries sometime in early to mid August. For the next few months, Edward proceeded to demonstrate that he cared little about anyone or anything that wasn't Piers. On 6 August, he made his friend earl of Cornwall, possibly without Piers' prior knowledge, as Edward would claim in a letter to the Pope the following year (though Edward can't really be trusted here, and also said that he made Piers earl of Cornwall on the advice of his barons, which certainly isn't true - he was trying to get the Pope on his side, shortly before Piers' second exile began). Edward also arranged his friend's marriage to Margaret de Clare on 1 November 1307, which evidently had been planned for a few months, as the charter granting the earldom of Cornwall to Piers on 6 August was decorated with the de Clare arms as well as Piers' own.
Edward's overriding obsession with Piers over the next few months led inexorably to Piers' second exile in June 1308, subject of a future post!
02 March, 2008
Piers Gaveston's Insulting Nicknames, and An Illegitimate Squire
After Piers Gaveston returned to England from his second exile in the summer of 1309 - he'd been in Ireland, proving surprisingly effective as Lord Lieutenant - he demonstrated that he'd learnt little from the experience and was as arrogant as ever. Secure in Edward II's love and favour, he proceeded to continue annoying the great men of the realm. The contemporary Vita Edwardi Secundi says "The earls and barons he despised, and gave them insulting nicknames" (turpia cognomina).
The only nickname that's strictly contemporary is the one Piers gave to Guy Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, which appears as 'the Dog' in the Vita and as 'the black hound of Arden' in Flores Historiarum, or noir chien de Ardene in the later French Chronicle. The other nicknames were not recorded until Edward III's reign, including 'Burst-Belly', boele-crevee, for Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln in the French Chronicle. Edward II's cousin Thomas, earl of Lancaster, was called 'the Churl' according to the English Brut, and 'the Fiddler' (vielers in the original) in the French Brut. The latter was said to have been inspired by Lancaster's appearance, because he was slim and tall (porceo quil est greles et de bel entaile).
The name Piers supposedly gave to Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke, 'Joseph the Jew', doesn't appear until Thomas Walsingham's chronicle at the end of the fourteenth century, around seventy years after Pembroke's death and a good eighty years after Gaveston's, and was said, in an echo of the Lancaster nickname, to have been inspired by Pembroke's appearance, pale and tall (eo quod pallidus esset et longus).
The most controversial of Piers' nicknames is given as filz a puteyne or 'whoreson' in the French Brut, and rendered as 'cuckold's bird' in the French Chronicle. This name is generally assumed to refer to Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, nephew of Edward II, because his mother Joan of Acre made a secret marriage in early 1297 to her late husband's squire, Ralph de Monthermer, against her father's wishes.
However, there are problems with this identification. Firstly, Gloucester's mother was also the mother of Gaveston's wife Margaret de Clare, and secondly and probably more importantly, Joan of Acre was Edward II's sister. I find it hard to believe that Gaveston would have maligned her so nastily, for Edward's sake if nothing else. And finally, the earl of Gloucester supported Gaveston for years, only giving him up in 1312 when Gaveston returned from his third, supposedly permanent, exile. Again, I find it hard to believe that Gloucester would have supported Gaveston for as long as he did if Gaveston had publicly called his mother a whore.
It's far more likely that the nickname 'whoreson' referred to Ralph de Monthermer, Gloucester's stepfather and Edward II's brother-in-law, earl of Gloucester in right of his wife Joan of Acre from 1297 to her death in April 1307. Ralph's parentage is obscure, but evidently he was illegitimate. In 1304, the writer of the Annals of London referred to him as 'the earl of Gloucester, called a bastard'.
In 1318, Ralph married Isabella, Lady Hastings, one of the sisters of Hugh Despenser the younger, without Edward II's permission. Edward fined them 1000 marks (666 pounds), but pardoned them and respited the debt in May 1321. ("Pardon to Ralph de Monte Hermerii and Isabella his wife, late the wife of John de Hastinges, tenant in chief, of the 1,000 marks by which the said Ralph made fine for the trespass committed by the said Isabella in marrying him without licence.")
In September 1324, Edward put Ralph and Isabella in charge of the household of his daughters Eleanor and Joan. Ralph had been part of Edward's family circle since Edward was twelve, and Lady Hastings was evidently a trustworthy, maternal sort: in December 1327, when Edward II's niece Elizabeth de Clare attended his funeral, she left her two young daughters in the care of Lady Hastings, despite her hatred of the lady's (dead) brother, Despenser.
Ralph died in January 1325, leaving four children by Joan of Acre, the eldest of whom, Mary, was married to the earl of Fife. Mary lived till after 1371, when she was well into her seventies, and Ralph's granddaughter Isabella, countess of Fife in her own right, married four times. Ralph's ultimate heir was his son Thomas's daughter Margaret de Monthermer, who lived to the mid-1390s. Margaret's son John Montacute succeeded as earl of Salisbury in 1397.
Pretty impressive descendants for an illegitimate squire, albeit one who persuaded two highborn ladies to marry him without the king's permission. Ralph de Monthermer must really have had something.
The only nickname that's strictly contemporary is the one Piers gave to Guy Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, which appears as 'the Dog' in the Vita and as 'the black hound of Arden' in Flores Historiarum, or noir chien de Ardene in the later French Chronicle. The other nicknames were not recorded until Edward III's reign, including 'Burst-Belly', boele-crevee, for Henry de Lacy, earl of Lincoln in the French Chronicle. Edward II's cousin Thomas, earl of Lancaster, was called 'the Churl' according to the English Brut, and 'the Fiddler' (vielers in the original) in the French Brut. The latter was said to have been inspired by Lancaster's appearance, because he was slim and tall (porceo quil est greles et de bel entaile).
The name Piers supposedly gave to Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke, 'Joseph the Jew', doesn't appear until Thomas Walsingham's chronicle at the end of the fourteenth century, around seventy years after Pembroke's death and a good eighty years after Gaveston's, and was said, in an echo of the Lancaster nickname, to have been inspired by Pembroke's appearance, pale and tall (eo quod pallidus esset et longus).
The most controversial of Piers' nicknames is given as filz a puteyne or 'whoreson' in the French Brut, and rendered as 'cuckold's bird' in the French Chronicle. This name is generally assumed to refer to Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, nephew of Edward II, because his mother Joan of Acre made a secret marriage in early 1297 to her late husband's squire, Ralph de Monthermer, against her father's wishes.
However, there are problems with this identification. Firstly, Gloucester's mother was also the mother of Gaveston's wife Margaret de Clare, and secondly and probably more importantly, Joan of Acre was Edward II's sister. I find it hard to believe that Gaveston would have maligned her so nastily, for Edward's sake if nothing else. And finally, the earl of Gloucester supported Gaveston for years, only giving him up in 1312 when Gaveston returned from his third, supposedly permanent, exile. Again, I find it hard to believe that Gloucester would have supported Gaveston for as long as he did if Gaveston had publicly called his mother a whore.
It's far more likely that the nickname 'whoreson' referred to Ralph de Monthermer, Gloucester's stepfather and Edward II's brother-in-law, earl of Gloucester in right of his wife Joan of Acre from 1297 to her death in April 1307. Ralph's parentage is obscure, but evidently he was illegitimate. In 1304, the writer of the Annals of London referred to him as 'the earl of Gloucester, called a bastard'.
In 1318, Ralph married Isabella, Lady Hastings, one of the sisters of Hugh Despenser the younger, without Edward II's permission. Edward fined them 1000 marks (666 pounds), but pardoned them and respited the debt in May 1321. ("Pardon to Ralph de Monte Hermerii and Isabella his wife, late the wife of John de Hastinges, tenant in chief, of the 1,000 marks by which the said Ralph made fine for the trespass committed by the said Isabella in marrying him without licence.")
In September 1324, Edward put Ralph and Isabella in charge of the household of his daughters Eleanor and Joan. Ralph had been part of Edward's family circle since Edward was twelve, and Lady Hastings was evidently a trustworthy, maternal sort: in December 1327, when Edward II's niece Elizabeth de Clare attended his funeral, she left her two young daughters in the care of Lady Hastings, despite her hatred of the lady's (dead) brother, Despenser.
Ralph died in January 1325, leaving four children by Joan of Acre, the eldest of whom, Mary, was married to the earl of Fife. Mary lived till after 1371, when she was well into her seventies, and Ralph's granddaughter Isabella, countess of Fife in her own right, married four times. Ralph's ultimate heir was his son Thomas's daughter Margaret de Monthermer, who lived to the mid-1390s. Margaret's son John Montacute succeeded as earl of Salisbury in 1397.
Pretty impressive descendants for an illegitimate squire, albeit one who persuaded two highborn ladies to marry him without the king's permission. Ralph de Monthermer must really have had something.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)