Isabella and the Strange Death of Edward II Read Online Free Page A

Fieschi give any reason why he should communicate these matters to Edward III or why this hermit, who had been wandering Europe for almost ten years, should decide to turn up and tell Fieschi everything. Perhaps the hermit thought he was protected by the seal of confession or that Fieschi, his distant kinsman, would not communicate his findings to the English court. Yet this seems illogical. Most refugees and exiles are only too happy to hide in obscurity. Why should the former King of England suddenly decide to break his silence and put his trust in a man only too eager to betray him? If this hermit was Edward II, he was courting danger. Edward III had clearly demonstrated, by his pursuit of Gurney, that he was both ruthless and relentless. Whathope did the hermit have that Fieschi wouldn’t betray him? Within months of his confession, English agents might be dogging his footsteps. The opening sentence lays Fieschi’s own motives open to question.
    First of all he said that, feeling that England was in insurrection against him because of the threat from your mother, he departed from his followers in the castle of the Earl Marshal by the sea which is called Gesota [Wye].
    Fieschi is now providing accurate detail of the events of 1326. Edward II, fearful of his wife’s invasion, fled west and did cross the Severn/Bristol Channel to the castle of Chepstow. This information would have been known to many, but again Fieschi is clever. He says Chepstow Castle was held by the Earl Marshal and this is accurate. Thomas Brotherton, Earl of Norfolk, half-brother of Edward II, had been created Earl Marshal in 1313 and the castle given to him. 4 Edward II did flee there for a short while during his fruitless escape from the invading forces of Isabella and Mortimer.
    Many people would have known of Edward II’s flight from his kingdom in 1326 but only a few were aware of his arrival at Chepstow and that this castle was held and maintained by the Earl of Norfolk. The second sentence clearly reinforces Fieschi’s assertion that he had heard the confession of Edward II, especially when he talks of ‘your father’ and ‘your mother’.
    Later, driven by fear, he boarded a vessel, togetherwith Lord Hugh de Spencer, the Earl of Arundel and a few others and landed in Glomorgom [Glamorgan] on the coast. There he was captured together with the said Lord Hugh and Master Robert de Baldoli [Baldock] and they were taken by Lord Henry de Longo Castello [Lancaster] and they led him to Chilongurda [Kenilworth] castle and others were taken elsewhere to other places and there, many people demanding it, he lost his crown.
    Again, Fieschi’s factual accuracy cannot be questioned. He demonstrates an inside knowledge of those last frantic days of Edward II. Edward II did take ship with de Spencer and Arundel and landed in Glamorgan where he was captured along with de Spencer and another adherent called Baldock. Edward II was taken by Lancaster to Kenilworth whilst the others, as has been noted, were brought to Hereford for execution. The writer only makes one omission: Edward II was not immediately taken to Kenilworth by Lancaster but, as noted above, to Monmouth, where he surrendered the Great Seal to Isabella’s envoys.
    Finally, they sent him to the castle of Berkeley.
    If this sentence is studied in connection with the previous one, it seems a
non sequitur
, as if Fieschi had been talking of where the imprisoned Edward II had been after Kenilworth and before he was taken to Berkeley. Fieschi then apparently changed his mind, deleted this entry and decided to concentrate on Edward II’s imprisonment at Berkeley in April 1327. This
non sequitur
actually enhanceshis story. Edward II had been imprisoned at Kenilworth under the custody of Henry of Lancaster but then transferred, by indenture, to the care of Sir John Maltravers and Lord Thomas Berkeley. To throw off pursuers like the Dunheveds and others, the deposed King was not taken immediately to