tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post9150164561340347652..comments2024-03-14T05:56:44.390+00:00Comments on Edward II: The Charges Against Hugh Despenser The Younger, November 1326Kathryn Warnerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-23345891720368952332017-04-23T01:29:04.154+01:002017-04-23T01:29:04.154+01:00As far as the Canteruaure bit goes, given that the...As far as the Canteruaure bit goes, given that the indictment mentions it in the context of robbing the Church, I wonder whether this is a reference to the De Clare inheritance disputes. At one stage in that tangled process, Hugh Despenser seized control of Tonbridge Castle in Kent in the belief that this formed part of the lands rightfully belonging to his wife Eleanor, after the death of her brother Gilbert Earl of Gloucester. This caused something of a stir since it was subsequently discovered that the castle actually belonged to the Archbishop of Canterbury.<br /><br />Of course, if that is what the indictment is referring to, then it conveniently ignores the facts that this appears to have been an honest mistake on Hugh's part, and that he restored Tonbridge to the Archbishop once he discovered it was Church land. Yet another piece of Mortimer "ingenuity" perhaps?James Harrisnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-75911349167190582592013-07-23T18:07:46.856+01:002013-07-23T18:07:46.856+01:00Hi Laura, thanks so much for the comment! So glad...Hi Laura, thanks so much for the comment! So glad you like the blog, and wow, that's really great that you're writing a novel! Best of luck, and do let me know how it goes - I'd love to read it one day!<br /><br />Yes, the word 'dishonour' ('deshonour' in the Anglo-Norman original) is also used in the context of Hugh dishonouring the king by robbing the ships, etc, so I very much doubt that it meant sexual misconduct. I also don't know if the fourteenth-century Anglo-Norman word carried the same possible nuance of violation, as we would understand it (archaically). I've written an entire post about whether Hugh raped Isabella, just in case you haven't yet seen it, and to my mind it's a 21st-century invention of Isabella's two biographers which has no contemporary evidence beyond the possible secondary meaning of 'dishonour'. The 'damaging her noble estate' refers to the confiscation of Isabella's dower lands in September 1324.<br /><br />http://edwardthesecond.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/did-hugh-despenser-younger-rape.htmlKathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-14542003904658202952013-07-23T17:55:48.055+01:002013-07-23T17:55:48.055+01:00Hello, I would first like to thank you for your fa...Hello, I would first like to thank you for your fantastic blog and its prodigious research which I find so absorbing.<br /><br />I'm attempting a novel (yes I know - groan!) but am trying to stick to facts as much as possible. Researching on here is much more fun than fleshing out characters and writing dialogue though!<br /><br />About the question of whether Despenser raped Isabella, one thing puzzles me. The archaic meaning of "dishonour",according to my trusty dictionary, is "to violate the chastity of, or rape." So the accusation in Hugh's judgement "of often dishonouring the queen and damaging her noble estate" could allude to that. But then the word is used in other contexts too. As the nature of the judgement was retaliatory and Hugh couldn't answer to it anyway, maybe they just threw that one in along with the other fictional parts?Lauranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-11104024681168597232011-06-02T04:27:17.898+01:002011-06-02T04:27:17.898+01:00Hi! How are you? Great job on researching all abou...Hi! How are you? Great job on researching all about King Edward II,the people, and the events that are mostly assoicaited with him!<br /><br /> I just wanted to know how "evil" Hugh le Despenser the Younger and the Elder were to Queen Isabella and maybe her family,friends,and associatites. Were there PROBELLY other acts and threats of violence,physical and sexual assalt,abducting,bullying,murder,falsely accussing, and other bad stuff going on just to name few between the Despencers and the people I just mentioned above that historians and scholers did not recorded in history or did the Despencers just mainly threatened people like Isabella with unfair trials and excutions,influenting the king,spieing,takeing control of the gov. and changing the laws,just to name a few? <br /><br />Because to me the things I just mention first seem ALOT more "scary" and "dangerous" than the things I just mentioned last and in my eyes their are different degees of "evil" but, they are all both "evil" equally and unequally evil in their very own speacial way. Thanks for researching and sharing about ALOT of my famous and infamous ancestors! SORRY that this is VERY LONG! Have a great day! Thanks!Theahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09199714333966157712noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-56096480511810710662009-04-26T06:48:00.000+01:002009-04-26T06:48:00.000+01:00Actually, the punctuation is original - there's no...Actually, the punctuation is original - there's not a single damn full stop in the whole thing (agh!) and very few commas, so I had to decide where to add them, and rather odd capitalisation of random words and non-capitalisation of some names - sometimes 'Hughe' and sometimes 'hughe' for example. Just to make it even more fun. :)<br /><br />"sez otherpeople" *big grin* That makes a lot of sense about the scribe skipping a line or two, or that grammar was a minor consideration in the rush to condemn Hugh to death. :)Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-64280455492300829672009-04-25T22:26:00.000+01:002009-04-25T22:26:00.000+01:00I assume any punctuation is editorial, so I suppos...I assume any punctuation is editorial, so I suppose you could read it as "ses Barons, ses Cheualers, sez oilz". But that is a weird construction, isn't it - it looks as if "oilz" is grammatically on the same level as "Barons" and "Cheualers", as if his eyes also were to be "traynez". (And now I have a disturbing image of a pair of plucked eyes hanging from the gallows.) I'd venture that the scribe skipped a line or a few words after Cheualers, possibly because the next two lines both started with "sez" (eg "sez baliz, sez otherpeople, devant" / "sez oilz veintz, trayner") and his eye skipped from one line to the next similar one.<br /><br />Or, you know, they were just so furious with Hugh they forgot about niceties like grammar. :)Hannah Kilpatrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750010843246514032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-8681832091575348252009-04-25T11:23:00.000+01:002009-04-25T11:23:00.000+01:00Ceirseach: the original says faistes en meisme cel...Ceirseach: the original says <I>faistes en meisme cele iournee pur mon dit seignour pluys tormenter, ses Barons ses Cheualers sez oilz veintz trayner et pendre</I>: "you had on this same day, to further torment my said lord, his barons and knights, [before?] his vanquished eyes, drawn and hanged." I think! :) The word order strikes me as rather odd - no conjunction between 'his barons' and 'his knights'.Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-42321765630950910382009-04-25T08:06:00.000+01:002009-04-25T08:06:00.000+01:00Huh. So it scans as "to further torment my said lo...Huh. So it scans as "to further torment my said lord his vanquished eyes"? If I were to read a construction like that in Middle English I'd probably take it as "the vanquished eyes of my said lord". Might that work?<br /><br />And yes, working out place names even in the work of just one 14c scribe is horribly imprecise.:(<br /><br />And yes, thank you! I couldn't remember quite who it was, but of course, Mortimer. :)Hannah Kilpatrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750010843246514032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-23108340104998917772009-04-25T07:20:00.000+01:002009-04-25T07:20:00.000+01:00Hi Ceirseach - thanks for the suggestion. I'd exp...Hi Ceirseach - thanks for the suggestion. I'd expect Canterbury to be spelt as Canterbirs or similar at this time, too, and I don't think Ed gave Hugh any lands there. Gah, 14c scribes and their spelling! :)<br /><br />My problem with the 'sez oilz veintz' bit was that there was no preposition before it - so I translated it as 'before his vanquished eyes', but I was speculating a bit there.<br /><br />The source for the men abandoning the Scots campaign is: Fine Rolls 1272-1307, pp. 543-4. Most of the men were pardoned a few months later: Close Rolls 1302-07, pp. 481-2. I'm sure it's mentioned in some chronicles too, but I don't have the refs. Young Ed didn't go with them, and Ed I's writ to seize the men's lands on 18 Oct 1306 accuses them of 'deserting the king and his son in those parts in contempt of the king'. Roger Mortimer was one of the men who went with Piers.Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-55729328326410353452009-04-25T03:56:00.000+01:002009-04-25T03:56:00.000+01:00Cantuariens is the usual Latin spelling for Canter...Cantuariens is the usual Latin spelling for Canterbury at this point - would Canterbury make sense? Did he have Edward give him any lands in/around Canterbury? Granted, the petitions to the Archbishop of same that I've been translating from Anglo-Norman all have Cantabirs, but they're from almost a century later, and would have had more time to be influenced by English pronunciation and move away from the Latin. <br /><br />And I'd agree about veintz being vanquished, defeated.<br /><br />By the way, I was just trying to remember - when Piers abandoned Edward I's Scottish campaign and scuttled off to France for a little jousting fun, did young Edward go with him? And which source is that from, do you remember?Hannah Kilpatrickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06750010843246514032noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-75957758259891261652009-04-23T08:44:00.000+01:002009-04-23T08:44:00.000+01:00Lady D: that makes sense, especially given the way...Lady D: that makes sense, especially given the way English scribes inevitably mangled Welsh spellings! :)Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-18627679872319144952009-04-22T22:50:00.000+01:002009-04-22T22:50:00.000+01:00Obviously I'm having trouble with speling too lol!...Obviously I'm having trouble with speling too lol!Jules Frusherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207281934232383811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-64571769205877903362009-04-22T22:49:00.000+01:002009-04-22T22:49:00.000+01:00Another thought about Canteruaure - considering ho...Another thought about Canteruaure - considering how bad the scribes were with speling Welsh names - could it be Cantref Mawr - which Edward gave to Hugh in 1317 in lieu of £600 that Ed owed him? I know the spelling's all over the place, but it has a very similar, if mangled sound - and it is in Wales and associated with Hugh's land-holdings.Jules Frusherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207281934232383811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-82296330328457520882009-04-22T14:31:00.000+01:002009-04-22T14:31:00.000+01:00Gabriele: exactly - personal hatred of Hugh on Isa...Gabriele: exactly - personal hatred of Hugh on Isa and Mort's part, and a useful scapegoat.<br /><br />Lady D: Mort's hypocrisy, when he wasn't one iota better than his enemy, is stunning. And accusing a man of rape on no evidence other than vague mutterings of 'dishonour' is pretty nasty.<br /><br />Thanks, Anerje and Carla! I did wonder if "Canteruaure" meant Kent, but the earldom of Kent was held by Ed's brother, and Hugh preferred to build up his landholdings in South Wales and wasn't very interested in lands in SE England. I'm not sure - it's an odd name.Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-32486627002419121882009-04-21T11:14:00.000+01:002009-04-21T11:14:00.000+01:00Most impressed - that translation must have taken ...Most impressed - that translation must have taken a lot of time and expertise. <br /><br />I agree with your summing up :-)<br /><br />One suggestion - is it possible that "Canteruaure" could refer to Kent? Its old name in the ASC was Cantware.Carlahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11901028520813891575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-91400666518936364312009-04-20T20:07:00.000+01:002009-04-20T20:07:00.000+01:00Thank you so much for the translation - fascinatin...Thank you so much for the translation - fascinating reading!Anerjehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16305237339979790391noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-91227594405996659002009-04-20T19:58:00.000+01:002009-04-20T19:58:00.000+01:00Awesome translation - I know how long it takes fro...Awesome translation - I know how long it takes from when I did just that small bit about lady Baret. It's great to see you put a different spin and emphasis on certain words too - and I think that your version makes more sense than some others' I have read. <br /><br />Also, there is nothing about 'dishonouring the queen' or as some historians would have it - raping Isabella for which no evidence exists at all. Here it is as is much more likely - dishonour through taking away her status (lands and money). Good to get that straight...<br /><br />These charges against Hugh do make me so angry though as although some of them can certainly be leveled against him, most of them are utter rubbish. Roger Mortimer was, from everything I've read, a very ambitious (just as much as Despenser), ruthless man who had a penchant for revenge on those he considered his enemies (eg the de Lacys in Ireland). <br /><br />These charges and the subsequent sentence served so many purposes that were advantageous to Mortimer, Isabella and the new regime: scapegoat, the stamping of a new authority, inducing fear against rebellion - and revenge against an old enemy.Jules Frusherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08207281934232383811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-21724536962026475522009-04-20T14:10:00.000+01:002009-04-20T14:10:00.000+01:00I suppose blaming everything on Hugh was a way out...I suppose blaming everything on Hugh was a way out of the fact they couldn't well put Edward to trial himself. A mix of genuine hartred and making him a scapegoat.Gabriele Campbellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17205770868139083575noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-47926024249701645172009-04-20T07:02:00.000+01:002009-04-20T07:02:00.000+01:00Susan: seems bizarre to put all the blame for that...Susan: seems bizarre to put <I>all</I> the blame for that disastrous campaign on Hugh, doesn't it?<br /><br />Christy: thanks! Yes, it's the Lord Clifford whose father was killed at Bannockburn. Lord Mowbray's son John (1310-1361) married Henry of Lancaster's daughter Joan, and Henry Beaumont's son John (d. 1342) married Henry of Lancaster's daughter Eleanor - so they're maybe your ancestors also. <br /><br />Kate: when I started the translation, I had the feeling it was going to be my life's work ;), but in the end it didn't take long at all, suprisingly. Yes, it must have been a heck of a dramatic moment when Trussell read out the sentence.Kathryn Warnerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00397714441908100576noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-44484662907595863912009-04-20T03:14:00.000+01:002009-04-20T03:14:00.000+01:00Thank you for the wonderful translation! I know h...Thank you for the wonderful translation! I know how long you must have spent deciphering it all. The language is very strong and I can almost see the spit flying from his mouth as the pent up anger bursts forth by the last word...CRIMINAL! Poor Hugh. Those who put him to death (I imagine) loved every gory moment of it.Kate Plantagenetnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-8948472137354146092009-04-20T02:00:00.000+01:002009-04-20T02:00:00.000+01:00Thank you AGAIN, Alianore. You are awesome! Many o...Thank you AGAIN, Alianore. You are awesome! Many of the people Hugh persecuted had family surnames I've researched (Mauduit, Clifford, Giffard, Montfort, Beaumont), but these were distant cousins by the 14th century. The one you mention as "Lord Clifford" was (I'm guessing) Roger, 2nd Lord Clifford, the brother of my Idoine Clifford who married Henry Lord Percy. Their father, 1st Lord Clifford, was Robert, and he was killed at Bannockburn.Christy K Robinsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05988458745832012138noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19545049.post-62577439707494208872009-04-19T15:07:00.000+01:002009-04-19T15:07:00.000+01:00Great to have this all translated! The one about H...Great to have this all translated! The one about Hugh forcing Edward to fight the Scots is a real head-scratcher, isn't it?Susan Higginbothamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13517907583894026599noreply@blogger.com