EDWARD II (1307-1327)
THE STORY BEHIND AN INCOMPETENT KING
|
 |
 |
“Starved of affection during childhood, ignored by his
father in adolescence, and confronted by unsolved problems at his accession,
Edward II sought advice, friendship, even affection, from ambitious favourites.”(Morgan,
176) It is strange that a king should be seeking affection and be in need of
friendship. In fact, what is strange is that such a man as Edward II should be
a king. But it was not his fault because he did not choose it, and probably he
would not choose it, which he made apparent during his reign.
|
Sandwiched between the hammer of
Scots and a famously chivalric king, Edward II’s reign looks very unfortunate.
“The apparently secure edifice [built by Edward I] collapsed under the
incompetent Edward II”(Prestwich, 1). After Edward II “under Edward III the
wheel of fortune turned again”(Prestwich, 2). Son of one Edward, the father of
another, Edward II was a very different Edward. He did not have the power and
the will of either Edwards. Finding the affection and friendship in Piers
Gavaston and Hugh Despenser he isolated himself from his noblemen. He ignored
the art of patronage. In fact he ignored his job, kingship. |
|
By his appearance and name he
made people think that this was a second Edward, but he was only Edward the
second as he soon proved to be. He did not have the conventional interests of a
king: he did not like horsemanship or fighting. Rather than a king he looked
like a romantic prince: he took delight in the countryside, he loved music, and
his pastimes included woodwork and metalwork. Actually as a prince he had done
his job well since he was not expected to do much. Occasionally his father
would leave him nominally in charge when he went away “In reality, the country
was ruled by a regency council, but Edward of Caernarvon witnessed documents
and put his seal to them”(Saaler, 16). With a regency like that council he
would probably do better when he was a king, because, after all, witnessing
documents and putting his seal to them was apparently among Edward’s abilities.
The
companionship of his noblemen Edward II was apparently not in favor of. He
would like the companionship of monks in the seclusion of a monastery as one
chronicler recorded: “The King’s son stayed longer, enjoying the seclusion of
the monastery. He became our brother in the chapter. The magnificence of the
place and the frequent recreation of the brethren pleased him greatly. Every
day, he asked to be served with a monk’s portion, such as the brothers take in
the refectory.”(Saaler, 17). Probably he would stay longer and perhaps one day
become a monk himself. However, seclusion is not what a king or a prince is
supposed to like. He secluded himself from his nobility and ignored his duties
to them as a king. The nobility could tolerate his unconventional behavior, but
not their subordination by the king for the company of workmen. They needed and
expected him to patronize them as his father had done, but he could not be
reached.
As
noted before, Edward II would remain a prince, but he was strangely destined to
become a king. He was the fourth son of Edward I. Therefore he was normally the
fourth in line to the throne. However, unfortunately all three elder brothers
died in childhood. So the throne was left to Edward. In fact, Edward was left
to the throne. He was doomed to be the king.
His
contemporaries tended to attribute the evils of his reign to his attachment to
Gavaston. Gavaston was the devil who furnished his court with companies of
jesters, ruffians, flattering parasites, musicians and other nasty men so that
the king might spend both days and nights jesting, playing, blanketing and
other such filthy exercises. In fact, the actual cause of everything was the
king’s own personality. He is said to have followed the easiest path, and to
have agreed with the last person who spoke to him. Consequently his opinions
changed from hour to hour, and therefore people did not trust his decisions. He
was so peculiar a man that occasionally he did behave like a king, conforming
to the accepted behavior for a king. This drove mad his nobles because they
concluded that he could rule effectively, but chose not to. He was an impulsive
and unpredictable person who was easily bored. He allowed his friends to gain
influence and wealth by using his boredom to their advantage. He disliked
governing and allowed, or forced, others to gain power. Therefore his period
witnessed rivalry of different groups and persons for land, wealth, and high
office.
The
kind of king that Edward was was depicted effectively by his own wife: “Edward
brings the lowest and most infamous men to the palace. He visits low dens of
the Port of London, sits with tramps, wrestles with lightermen, races against
grooms. Fine tournament, these, for our delectation! He has no care who runs
the kingdom, provided his pleasures are organized and shared.” It is no
surprise that she actively participated in his deposition.
Edward
II’s reign is usually summed up by chroniclers as a period of destruction
rather than governance, resulting from the king’s failure to obey the Edward I
kind of kingship pattern. He was criticized for his careless attitude and
disregard and for relying on bad advice which finally led to his deposition and
murder. Edward I had presented a powerful image. He had been a man of strong
character who commanded respect in both war and politics. After a reign of
almost 35 years he had come to embody a tradition of kingship, which people
assumed his son would follow. But, unlike his father, Edward II was bored by
the traditional duties of a king.
There
was every possible reason for Edward II’s failure. He was unable, or unwilling
to govern. His period was marked with continuous wars but he lacked the
resources to achieve a decisive victory. the economic strains were made worse
by a series of natural disasters such as famine and disease. Consequently he
failed. He was first deposed and then murdered.
Overshadowed
by his father’s image as a king, Edward II disappointed, frustrated, even
enraged those who were used to the 35 years of powerful, autocratic and kingly
regime of Edward I. He was supposed to be like his father, but he was a man of
peace, and leisure, and did not want to bother himself by the duties of a king.
By his nature he was inclined to tranquility, simplicity, and joy. He would not
choose to be a king, he would rather remain a prince and enjoy the privileges
of the son or brother of a king. But he was given no choice. He was but a
tragic hero, driven by his inevitable destiny to his tragic end.
WORKS CITED
Prestwich, Michael The Three Edwards, Clays
Ltd., 1994, London
Saaler, Mary Edward II, The Rubican Press,
1997, Great Britain
Morgan, Kenneth E. The Oxford Illustrated History
of Britain, Oxford University Press, 1984, Great Britain