Given-Wilson, C. J., 'Richard II and His Grandfather’s Will', The English Historical Review 93 (1978), 320-337

-

Quick Summary

King Richard II prevented the execution of Edward III’s will for 25 years because he believed the arrangements made by his grandfather were excessive

  • Richard II’s action shows a disregard for property rights
  • A compromise solution was reached in 1382
  • Richard II wanted to avoid the loss of income on lands granted away by Edward III
Key Conclusion

Given-Wilson explores the controversy surrounding the execution of Edward III’s will, and argues that Richard II’s involvement in the matter was more extensive than historians have previously appreciated. The article concludes that it was the king himself, along with his advisors, who were ultimately responsible for the fact that it took 25 years and so ‘much ill-feeling’ to execute his grandfather’s will: ‘the case is a striking example… of his [King Richard II’s] singular disregard for property rights’ (p. 355).

Content Overview

As part of the arrangements made for the “performance” (execution) of his will, Edward III granted a substantial amount of land to several courtiers and advisors – including his son, John of Gaunt. Essentially, this land was a form of payment granted to those who had taken on the responsibility of putting the king’s will into effect. King Richard II and his advisors challenged this grant until the year 1382, when a compromise was reached. As part of this compromise, some of the land that had been granted out by Edward III being taken back by the crown.

Further Findings

Richard II and his advisors believed that the grant made by Edward III was excessive and wanted to avoid the loss of income on lands that they thought shouldn’t have been given away in the first place. Given-Wilson highlights a similar situation that arose some fifty years later, when Henry V’s decision to grant extensive Duchy of Lancaster lands for the performance of his will resulted in the loss to the crown of some £114,000 between 1422 and 1441 (p. 334).

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