Edward III

Bearing in mind Edward II's awful relationship with his own father what sort of relationship do you think he had with his eldest son? I know it was the norm for the children to be brought up in other households but how often would they have come into contact? Would they have met up for official purposes or did they do other things together? I'm sure Isabella would've been peeved to think of Edward taking her son fishing with him!

The future Edward III was granted his own household when he was still only a few weeks old! He lived mostly at Windsor Castle, and Edward II and Isabella visited him occasionally (not necessarily together).

Edward was called to Parliament for the first time at 8 years old (?!) and his father tried to arrange marriage alliances for him sometimes. Otherwise, he rarely crops up in the records - which is usual for medieval children, even the future king of England!

I'd love to know how Ed III felt about Ed II. Nobody ever accused Ed II of being a bad father, and I think it's likely they were quite close on a personal level, although Ed III may well have been ashamed of his father, his incompetence and his odd hobbies (which he definitely didn't share, so there were probably no fishing trips or training sessions on how to thatch a roof.)

I found it interesting to be reminded the other day that on one occasion in the 1340's after Edward III's ship was nearly lost at sea, he made a point of going to his father's tomb (among other places) to give thanks. Not sure if this proves much, but it does suggest that Edward III thought his dead father was looking after him.

Hello...
Please bear in mind... that I'm new!

What is the general opinion of Ian Mortimer's book "The Perfect Prince" and his theory that Edward II was spared murder by his lords and was sent to the continent to live?

Hi Froyle!

I find Ian Mortimer's argument pretty compelling - he's written another article about it, on his website: http://www.ianmortimer.com/EdwardII/death.htm

I've written about all the theories of Ed's survival on my blog - they're collected under the sub-heading 'Aftermath of Ed's Reign' in the sidebar on the left: http://edwardthesecond.blogspot.com/

What's really interesting is a letter written by the archbishop of York in January 1329 or 1330, saying "my liege lord Edward of Caernarfon is alive, and in good health of body, and in a safe place."

Hello Froyle!

It's down to Alianore and Ian Mortimer that I've revised my view of the 'murder' of Edward II. I'd always gone along the lines of leaving a deposed king alive would always create problems for the 'usurper' - as Henry IV and Richard III knew. The difference with Ed II's deposition is that his usurper didn't actually usurp the throne - Edward III was the puppet of Isabella and Roger Mortimer. It was their plot to get rid of Ed II. Their survival rested on being able to control Edward III, and what better way than to keep his father alive and use this to threaten him. IMO, it would also mean ED II, even if he did escape, would be unlikely to try to reclaim the throne from his own son.

Anejre wrote:

Hello Froyle!

It's down to Alianore and Ian Mortimer that I've revised my view of the 'murder' of Edward II. I'd always gone along the lines of leaving a deposed king alive would always create problems for the 'usurper' - as Henry IV and Richard III knew. The difference with Ed II's deposition is that his usurper didn't actually usurp the throne - Edward III was the puppet of Isabella and Roger Mortimer. It was their plot to get rid of Ed II. Their survival rested on being able to control Edward III, and what better way than to keep his father alive and use this to threaten him. IMO, it would also mean ED II, even if he did escape, would be unlikely to try to reclaim the throne from his own son.

I believe that Edward II was tired of all the fuss and wanted out. He had been at war (in arms or just words) with his father, wife, lords, courtiers, the Scots and Parliament et al. during the whole of his mature years.
I'd be sick of it too. Which is why he didn't go on fighting and took the banishment as a way out. IMHO

That's an excellent theory, Froyle. Ed's reign was so turbulent, it's hardly surprising he might say 'Enough!' I doubt he'd ever wanted to be king in the first place, and he realised he was no good at it - according to the Flores Historiarum, he said when he was forced to abdicate ''I greatly lament that I have so utterly failed my people, but I could not be other than I am." I think that's a great quote.[/u]

I agree - an excerllent theory. I don't think he would have wanted to challenge his son for the throne either. Maybe he knew his reign had been disasterous, and after the violent death of both his favourites, maybe enough was enough. He'd be content to have his son succeed him. Maybe he did become very pious in prison and chose the life of a hermit. It would have been very difficult if he escaped and tried to raise an army against his own son. The country would be plunged into further civil war. And would Ed even want to raise an army against his own son, who was placed in an impossible position. IMO, Mortimer sought to control Ed III through his mother Isa and by keeping his father a prisoner. If Ed II was happy to let his son have the crown, then Mortimer's trump card was gone - and I'm sure Ed II would have been satisfied with the justice meted out to Mortimer.