r/EdwardII

So, here's blog post covering the pervasive myth that Hugh Despenser the Younger assaulted Isabella, which has been repeated by popular historians and run with by historical fiction writers. It begins:

>Hugh Despenser the Younger was a corrupt and malevolent person on top of being a spectacularly greedy person, but there's not a single shred of evidence he sexually assaulted Isabella of France. Nor is there evidence that her husband, Edward II, pushed her into some sort of ménage à trois or medieval wife-swapping arrangement with Hugh, as has been imagined by both modern historians and historical fiction writers.

You can read the rest by clicking the link.

I came across a rather balanced post on facebook of all places, written by the author David Pilling. I think it merits crossposting here. It was written yesterday.

#OTD in 1284 Edward II was born at Caernarfon.

Modern fiction has painted Edward as a coward, an abusive husband and a terrible king. In Outlaw King (2018) he is portrayed as a noisy buffoon with a tragic haircut.

The real Edward was only one of these things — sadly, it was the one that really counted. Even if you strain every point in his favour, it is very difficult to make a case for Edward’s kingship.

It is not that he lacked ability. Caroline Burt, in her recent study of the governance of the first two Edwards, has shown that Edward II could be a very effective ruler when he chose to be. However, he only made the effort when his favourites were threatened. Otherwise, he was largely disengaged from his own administration — more so, Burt argues, than any other medieval ruler of England. That made for a stark contrast with his father, a notorious micro-manager.

It is true Edward inherited a difficult situation in 1307, including heavy debts and an unfinished war in Scotland. The debts had no obvious practical effect on England’s ability to raise armies and wage war. Some historians have sought to qualify Edward’s responsibility for Bannockburn, noting the difficult circumstances he faced.

Even if you accept that, he cannot be absolved from abandoning his allies in Scotland, refusing to consider a face-saving peace deal, and continuing to throw men and money down a very deep hole. By the end of the reign, he had lost control of the northern counties and was effectively facilitating the payment of ransoms demanded by Robert Bruce’s forces from English towns and cities.

The story that the infant Edward was presented to the Welsh as a prince who spoke no English is a later myth. In reality he was created Prince of Wales in 1301. There was no investiture ceremony, and he seems to have been granted the title so he could lead Welsh troops into Scotland. While he had some loyal supporters among the Welsh gentry, others were bitterly opposed and played a role in his downfall.

In one respect Edward succeeded brilliantly: after 1315 he rapidly became very rich, and by 1323 his finances had skyrocketed. This was largely due to the confiscation of the estates of English rebels. After 1323, Edward and his new favourites, the Despensers, embarked upon a large-scale campaign of extortion, kidnapping and blackmail, termed a ‘reign of terror’ by Natalie Fryde.

After several years of this, large sections of the political nation declined to resist the invasion of his estranged queen, Isabella of France, and her ally Roger Mortimer. Edward was deposed and probably murdered* at Berkeley Castle, although the notorious hot poker story is almost certainly untrue. Death by smothering (to leave no marks) is more likely. There is also a tradition—impossible to verify or deny—that Edward escaped custody and lived as a hermit in Italy.**

Attached is a poster for Derek Jarman’s play about Edward II.

—

*This is what I disagree on personally, but otherwise I think it’s a very fair take, and his tone is reasonable and respectful throughout.
**Very good of him to mention this possibility, most detractors usually give it the silent treatment. But it’s not impossible to verify, while his death in 1327 can not be proven. In fact, the evidence speaks against his death at Berkeley Castle.

I purchased this from a reseller ($20 plus USD for a postcard thank you very much) but I thought it was cool. It's pretty faded but probably dates back to the late 20th Century. The photographer is credited as R. W. Patterson.

I like how you can see the details on his crown and see the scepter on the lower left.

Not necessarily asking if would *cast* them as that figure in theatrical depiction of the period, but simply whethere there are any specific faces you have "assigned", for lack of a better phrase, to such figures.

I only have one, and it is for Isabella. I think it is an incredible shame Isabelle Adjani never portayed Isabella during her prime, though I struggle to think of how an adaption doing justice to Isabella could have come out at the time. I haven't read Druon's *La Louve de France*, but it does seem to lean heavily into the She-Wolf narrative its title references. I feel that would have been a waste for her.