Bennett, Michael, 'Edward III’s Entail and the Succession to the Crown, 1376-1471', The English Historical Review 113 (1998), 580-609

-

Quick Summary

Edward III changed English law so that only his male heirs could inherit the English crown

  • Edward III created an ‘entail in the male line’ in 1376-77
  • His sons stood a better chance of inheriting the crown in the event of the untimely death of Richard II
  • Undermined Edward III’s claim to the French throne in the Hundred Years War
Key Conclusion

Bennet explores English laws about who could become king in the fourteenth century. The article draws attention to a charter, drawn up by Edward III in 1376 or 1377, which appears to create ‘an entail in the male line’ (a law change which limited the succession of the English crown to Edward III’s male heirs, p. 591). The article concludes by emphasizing the broad significance of Edward III’s charter, which Bennet believes has been overlooked by historians.

Content Overview

The article explores the historical backdrop to the ‘remarkable declaration by Edward III on the royal succession’ (p. 582). Bennet highlights the year 1376 as a time of political crisis wherein the issue of succession was ‘absolutely central’ (p. 585). The article suggests that the ageing King Edward III needed his three sons to cooperate to preserve the authority of the crown, and the entail in the male line was a way to encourage this cooperation. As a result of the grant, Edward III’s sons stood a better chance of succeeding to the throne themselves should the young Richard II die prematurely. Edward III hoped this would encourage them to work together to preserve the authority of the crown.

Further Findings

The principle that a woman could pass on the title of the English crown to a son was reasonably well established when Edward III issued his declaration in 1376 limiting the succession to the male line. Given that Edward III had claimed the French crown through his mother at the outset of the Hundred Years War, the ‘settlement of 1376 would appear to be a ‘volte-face’ of some magnitude’ (p. 592) that undermined one of the key reason why the English were fighting a war against the French.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Theilmann, John M., 'Stubbs, Shakespeare, and Recent Historians of Richard II', Albion 8 (1976), 107-124

-
Quick Summary The idea that Richard II was a tyrant persists even though a satisfactory history of his reign is yet to be written According to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy, Richard II was a coldly calculating king A revision to the Stubbsean Orthodoxy cast Richard II as insane Existing research distorts history by its fixation on constitutional issues Key Conclusion Theilmann explores the historiography of Richard II’s reign from the 1890s to the 1970s and, in particular, the verdict reached by historians about his approach to kingship. This historiographical review leads Theilmann to conclude that the traditional interpretation of Richard’s reign – the ‘Stubbsean Orthodoxy’ – has been slowly challenged but its influence remains strong. According to this Orthodoxy, Richard II was a ‘coldly calculating king’ (p. 110). He was a tyrant determined to diminish parliament and destroy constitutional government. Theilmann notes that while more recent research h...
Read more

Phillpotts, Christopher, 'The fate of the truce of Paris, 1396-1415', Journal of Medieval History 24 (1998), 61-80

-
Quick Summary The Truce of Paris (1396) formed a framework to reduce the level of warfare between England and France up until 1415 The focus of the truce changed depending on the particular ambitions of subsequent English kings Richard II maintained the truce after 1397 to secure dowry payments from France Henry IV and Charles VI put their differences aside to establish a peace between kingdoms Key Conclusion Phillpotts explores the longest truce of the Hundred Years War, agreed at Paris between Richard II of England and Charles VI of France in 1396, and its subsequent extension, redefinition and clarification until 1415. Truces reduced the level of warfare, rather than ended it, and needed to be periodically renegotiated to be effective. Phillpotts concludes that the truce of 1396 ‘formed the central framework of a series of general and particular truces’. The focus of the truce changed between 1396 and 1314, from Richard II’s initial concern to p...
Read more

Wilkinson, B., 'The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381', Speculum 15 (1940), 12-35

-
Quick Summary The Peasants’ Revolt of 1381 was primarily a ‘movement of reaction’ against John of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster Historians have paid too much attention to one particular source Common hatred of John of Gaunt brought the Londoners and the rebels together After the destruction of Gaunt’s palace in London the Peasants’ Revolt began to wane Key Conclusion Wilkinson provides a revisionist interpretation of the events in London during the Peasants’ Revolt of 1381. Wilkinson contends that historians have paid too much attention to one particular source – the return of the jurors in the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions of 1382. The evidence presented to the Sheriffs’ Inquisitions was ‘thoroughly and, it seems likely, intentionally misleading’ (p. 12), since the London jurors ‘did their best to conceal the powerful support which Londoners themselves gave to the revolt’ (p. 29). Wilkinson concludes that the revolt was primarily a ‘movement of reaction against J...
Read more