Baronial Opposition to Edward II

Its Character and Policy

James Conway Davies

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Topic: History
• eBook ISBN:
  9781136240980
• Subtopic: World History
• Index: History

First Published in 1967. This volume looks at the baronial opposition to Edward II which was more than an opportunist outburst of oligarchical tendencies, though the circumstances of the time were suitable for an opposition of such a nature. It was more than a reaction from the policy of Edward I. It was against the royal system of administration that the barons stood in the reign of Edward II. A consideration of the features of that system of administration is therefore of the utmost importance in determining the character and policy of the baronial opposition. A study of the administration as controlled by the household is important for two chief reasons. It gives the objective of the baronial attack. It explains the strength of the king's position and therefore supplies the reason for the failure of the barons. The second part of the thesis is concerned with the various attacks of the barons upon the royal position.

PART I

THE HOUSEHOLD SYSTEM AND THE ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REIGN OF EDWARD II

Edward I had set a high standard for his successors. In every sphere of his activity he had shown outstanding ability. As a warrior he had subdued Wales and nearly conquered Scotland. As a legislator he had defined matters of procedure and produced settlement in the realm of common law. As an administrator he had made a strenuous endeavour to increase the royal revenue, upon which the efficiency of administration was dependent, but had not met with complete success. He developed and improved the machinery of local and central government. He had provided the Model Parliament. The country had been rescued out of the chaos into which it had fallen under Henry III and the prosperity of the land as well as the strength of the kingship had been increased. He had done more than secure reforms; he had laid down the lines of future development. In many directions the work of his successor would have to be the maintenance of Edward I’s reforms. In one direction, partly because Edward I had failed to grapple successfully with the problem, partly because of the reforms he had introduced, important work awaited the new king. The administration was in need of reform. The state of the exchequer in particular required drastic amendment.

The reign of Edward II derives its first importance from the work his predecessor had achieved, with the incomplete character of many of its features and its failure in a number of directions. First of all must be considered the way in which the reign of Edward I influenced certain movements, the results of which are of vital importance to our problem.

The reign of Edward I had accelerated the general transformation of feudalism. Political feudalism had received its transformation by the time of Magna Carta. From that time the barons applied themselves to the problems of central government, and an oligarchic policy gradually took the place of disruptive feudalism. The efficacy of feudalism as a military system was ending¹. The feudal levy had become unsuited to the needs of warfare and hopelessly small. The king had to seek new methods of finding troops. Indentures², commissions of array³, levies from Wales⁴, grants of fencible men from each township⁵ were the new forms employed. Already, too, the Edwardian castle was doomed—almost before completion. The social aspect of feudalism had been dependent upon its political and military aspects. When feudalism lost its force as a political and military power its decline as a social system was inevitable. The empty chivalry of the fourteenth century was not unconnected with feudalism but was a feudalism greatly transformed. The general transformation of feudalism had ended by its becoming merely tenurial. Even in its purely tenurial aspect feudalism was to have an influence upon the administration and upon the king. The rights and inheritance of the crown had been assimilated to the position of an ordinary fief. Edward II became king immediately after his father’s death because “the pressure of circumstances and the influence of feudal land law brought about the triumph of the notion that the right of inheritance is the only essential element in making a king⁶.”

The transformation of feudalism affected the administration, for in part the administrative system seems to have been built upon feudalism. The great officers of the king’s household, the marshal, the constable, the chamberlain, the steward, had certain lands attached to them by tenure of grand serjeanty. The offices had become hereditary and had passed with the lands. Minor offices of the administration had also been serjeanties, offices such as carrying royal writs and keeperships of forests. It would seem as if serjeanty had been an immature expression of the household system, possessing the fatal weakness of being hereditary. The grand serjeanties had become merely ceremonial offices. The effective offices in the household were held either by deputy, as in the case of the marshal, who retained a larger number of official duties than his brother officers, or by entirely new officials such as the steward and chamberlain of the household. Other of the serjeanties had been commuted for a money payment.

In addition to the great offices of the household there were such grand serjeanties as being larderer in the king’s household¹, of finding a larderer yearly² and of carrying the wand of the marshalsea in the king’s household³. Other serjeanties consisted in holding positions in the local administration. John de Hastings held a manor by serjeanty of being the steward of the liberty of St Edmund’s⁴. Others held land by serjeanty of being the king’s bailiff in a wapentake⁵, of being the king’s forester⁶, of finding a bedel to serve a hundred⁷, of keeping a gaol⁸. Some held land by service of making attachments at the king’s court⁹, or of finding a hundreder to serve the king, levy his peace, make distraints for the king’s justices and sheriffs¹⁰. Serjeanty by service of carrying the king’s treasure was frequent¹¹, and one tenant held his land by service of finding a man to carry the king’s writs in his war in England for forty days at his own charges¹².

Offices other than local were held in serjeanty. The earl of Warwick held certain lands by being the king’s chamberlain¹³, and other lands by service of finding a chamberlain at the king’s exchequer¹⁴. The office of usher of the exchequer was similarly held. In 1291 Edward I...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright
• PREFACE
• CONTENTS
• INTRODUCTION
• PART I THE HOUSEHOLD SYSTEM AND THE ADMINISTRATION
• PART II THE CONSTITUTIONAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION OF THE BARONIAL OPPOSITION
• CONCLUSION
• APPENDIX OF DOCUMENTS
• LIST OF SOURCES
• INDEX