Edward II: King of Incompetence

Summary

Gone Medieval: Episode Summary – "Edward II: King of Incompetence"

Release Date: March 7, 2025
Host: Matt Lewis and Dr. Eleanor Janega
Guest Experts: Daniel Evans (Director, Royal Shakespeare Company), Chris Given-Wilson (Professor of Late Medieval English History, St. Andrews University), Daniel Raggett (Actor portraying Edward II in RSC's "Edward II")

---

Introduction: Unveiling Edward II

In this episode of Gone Medieval, hosts Matt Lewis and Dr. Eleanor Janega delve deep into the tumultuous reign of Edward II, often labeled as one of England's most inept monarchs. The discussion intertwines historical analysis with contemporary theatrical interpretations, offering listeners a multifaceted view of Edward II's legacy.

---

Theatrical Interpretation: Daniel Evans on Marlowe's "Edward II"

[02:36]
Matt Lewis introduces the episode by announcing a collaboration with the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC), highlighting their new production of Christopher Marlowe's play, Edward II. Daniel Evans, the play’s director, joins the conversation to shed light on the challenges of adapting a historical figure’s life for the stage.

Balancing History and Drama
Daniel Evans emphasizes the delicate balance between historical accuracy and theatrical storytelling. He states, "These history plays are fundamentally plays and so they're meant to be performed and it's about creating drama" ([07:43]). Evans draws from historical sources to enrich character portrayals, ensuring that the political machinations and personal dynamics resonate with authenticity.

Depicting Kingship and Leadership
Evans explores the abstract themes of kingship and power, making them relatable to modern audiences. He reflects, “There's a real correlation to leadership, full stop” ([09:17]), connecting medieval notions of divine right to contemporary discussions on leadership ethics. By removing the physical crown in a pivotal scene, Evans transforms the loss into a profound personal tragedy: “You cannot choose to be a king. And from that also came… you can no more choose to be a king than you can choose to be gay” ([10:47]).

Set and Costume Design
The production blends historical elements with modern metaphors. A significant feature is the replica of the Cosmati Pavement from Westminster Abbey, symbolizing the continuity of monarchy. Evans remarks, “It's making a kind of… nowadays it would be a political thriller” ([17:22]), positioning the play as a timeless narrative of power struggles.

---

Historical Analysis: Chris Given-Wilson on Edward II’s Reign

[19:48]
Professor Chris Given-Wilson provides an in-depth historical perspective on Edward II, defending his position as one of England’s worst kings.

Character and Leadership Flaws
Given-Wilson describes Edward II as "completely unsuited to kingship" ([20:13]), highlighting his vindictiveness, passion, and poor relationships with his magnates. Edward’s favoritism towards figures like Piers Gaveston and Hugh Despenser is pinpointed as a central flaw that undermined his rule.

Military Failures and Political Weakness
The episode details Edward II’s military blunders, notably the catastrophic Battle of Bannockburn ([41:36]). Given-Wilson explains, “Edward II was forced to flee, chased, hotly chased as far as Dunbar” ([45:24]), emphasizing how these defeats eroded his credibility and authority.

Economic Mismanagement
Inherited debts of around £200,000 left by Edward I plagued Edward II’s reign. Given-Wilson notes, “He was always poor. He could never get the money he wanted until after 1322” ([27:10]), leading to his reliance on unscrupulous favorites to finance his ambitions.

Downfall and Legacy
The Professor outlines the escalating tensions between Edward II and his barons, culminating in his deposition. He asserts, “He was a man completely unsuited to kingship” ([61:43]), underscoring Edward’s inability to navigate the complex political landscape, ultimately leading to his removal from the throne.

---

Portraying Edward II: Daniel Raggett's Insight

[62:16]
Daniel Raggett, the actor embodying Edward II in the RSC's production, discusses the intricacies of portraying such a complex historical figure.

Balancing Vulnerability and Authority
Raggett highlights the challenge of representing Edward’s personal vulnerabilities alongside his authoritative role. He shares, “I find it very easy to identify with Edward's loneliness and what is possibly littered throughout the play, which is a degree of shame” ([63:30]). His own queer identity aids in authentically conveying Edward’s internal struggles.

Character Development and Relationships
Exploring Edward’s interactions, Raggett explains how the play delves into his strained marriage with Isabella and his manipulative relationships with his favorites. He reflects, “He is terribly misogynistic towards his wife” ([67:22]), emphasizing the complexity of Edward’s character—torn between personal desires and royal responsibilities.

Emotional Transformation
Raggett describes the dramatic arc of Edward II, from a powerful monarch to a broken leader. He narrates the emotional journey: “I start full of medals, full of pomp... and then end up in my underpants in a muddy, wet dungeon” ([73:51]). This transformation underscores the tragic downfall of a king unable to adapt to the demands of his position.

---

Conclusion: Edward II’s Legacy and Upcoming Episodes

[75:33]
As the episode nears its end, Matt Lewis encapsulates the duality of Edward II’s persona—a king capable of both camaraderie and tyranny. The hosts tease the continuation of the series, focusing on Queen Isabella and her pivotal role in Edward II’s eventual deposition.

[76:22]
The summary concludes with an evocative portrayal of the impending crisis, setting the stage for listeners to explore the intricate web of power, relationships, and rebellion that defined Edward II’s reign.

Upcoming Topics
Listeners are invited to join the next episode, which will spotlight Queen Isabella’s transformation from a sidelined consort to a formidable political player, further unraveling the complexities of the Plantagenet dynasty.

---

Notable Quotes Highlighted:

• Daniel Evans:

  • "These history plays are fundamentally plays and so they're meant to be performed and it's about creating drama." ([07:43])
  • "You cannot choose to be a king. And from that also came… you can no more choose to be a king than you can choose to be gay." ([10:47])

• Chris Given-Wilson:

  • "He was completely unsuited to kingship." ([20:13])
  • "Edward II was forced to flee, chased, hotly chased as far as Dunbar." ([45:24])

• Daniel Raggett:

  • "I find it very easy to identify with Edward's loneliness and what is possibly littered throughout the play, which is a degree of shame." ([63:30])
  • "He is terribly misogynistic towards his wife." ([67:22])
  • "I start full of medals, full of pomp... and then end up in my underpants in a muddy, wet dungeon." ([73:51])

---

This episode masterfully blends historical scholarship with theatrical interpretation, providing a comprehensive examination of Edward II’s reign and his enduring legacy. By intertwining expert analysis with artistic perspectives, Gone Medieval offers a nuanced portrayal of a king whose reign left an indelible mark on English history.

Transcript

[Matt Lewis]

Hello, I'm Matt Lewis.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And I'm Dr. Eleanor Jaenega and we're.

[Matt Lewis]

Just popping up here to tell you some insider info.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

If you would like to listen to Gone Medieval ad free and get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit.

[Matt Lewis]

With the History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Documentaries such as my new series on everyone's favorite conquerors, the Normans, or my.

[Matt Lewis]

Recent exploration of the castles that made Britain.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

There's a new release to enjoy every week.

[Matt Lewis]

Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com subscribe or find the link in the show Notes for this episode.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Applebee's has a brand new Big Easy menu. It features all your Bourbon street favorites in one in one new menu. Plus a new Bourbon street chicken and chicken and andouille sausage. Penny Sty just 11.99 with Cajun flavored Show to get your oh show to get your taste buds dancing. Applebee's is bringing Bourbon street to your own street. Make sure to try the Big Easy menu now. Only at Applebee's. Only at Applebee's.

[Daniel Raggett]

Limited time, price, participation and selection may vary.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Will full coverage make me look cakey? Is my undertone neutral or is it cool? We get it. Finding the right foundation is hard, but with IL Maquillage it's easy to find your perfect match online. Customized for your unique skin tone and coverage needs. Pl plus with Try before youe Buy, you can try your full size at home for 14 days. With over 600,000 five star reviews, this best selling foundation is going viral for a reason. Take the Power Match quiz [e-mail] Quiz I L M A K I A G E.com Quiz.

[Matt Lewis]

Hello, I'm Matt Lewis.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And I'm Dr. Eleanor Yaraga.

[Matt Lewis]

Welcome to Gone Medieval from History Hit.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

The podcast that delves into the greatest millennium in human history.

[Matt Lewis]

We've got the most intriguing mysteries, the gobsmacking details and latest groundbreaking research.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

From the Vikings to the Normans, from.

[Matt Lewis]

Kings to Popes to the Crusades, we.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Delve into the rebellions, plots and murders.

[Matt Lewis]

To find the stories, big and small that tell us how we got here.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And tell us who we really were.

[Matt Lewis]

Welcome to this episode of Gone Medieval. I'm Matt Lewis.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And I'm Dr. Eleanor Yannagal. And today we have been unleashed into the wild again.

[Matt Lewis]

The wilds of Stratford up on Avon. That is because we're heading to the Royal Shakespeare Company for the first part of a special series.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

From 21 February to 5 April the Royal Shakespeare Company are staging a brand new production of Christopher Marlowe's violent yet tender play, Edward II.

[Matt Lewis]

Edward II's rule and his deposition represented a moment of crisis in Plantagenet England that would rip up the Being King of England rule book.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

There are huge characters, kings, queens, princes, ambitious noblemen and greedy favorites all wrapped up in a constitutional crisis.

[Matt Lewis]

Sounds delicious. We'll be learning more about all of those central figures across the series.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

But how did this fall from grace actually play out 700 years ago? Everyone in 14th century England seem to hate Edward II so much. Was he really that bad at being king? Let's travel back in time to find out.

[Matt Lewis]

It is the year of our Lord 1307. The old king is dead. The first Edward since the conquest, named for the confessor, proved himself a very different man from his namesake. He sought to quench his anger and soothe his temper with blood, fire and conquest. Wales and Scotland have paid the price. His glory was the glory of all England, but war brings with it suffering in equal measure. The new king shares his father's name. He will be our second Edward. He inherits his father's wars as well as his name. They have been long, and if the father could not find his way to victory, then the son will be quickly and sorely tested. Scotland remains raw, a wound that might heal or fester or run once more with blood. This Edward may not have caused the damage, but it is his to end however he might. At 23, he offers youth in place of experience. Who knows in what direction he may lead his people? The promise of a brighter future can be dazzling. The light of hope will not blind us for long, though we will see him soon enough. The kingdom seeks to take the measure of the man who now rules us all. He has favourites, so many of them, few think it's a good thing, but none can shake them from Edward's affections. As we wonder whether he can be roused to war, it becomes clear when his first favorite is murdered by his enemies that this at least can stir King Edward. Hear him lament his loss.

[Daniel Raggett]

If I be England's King, in lakes of gore, your headless trunks, your bodies will I trail, that you may drink your fill and quaff in blood and stain my royal standard with the same, that so my bloody colours may suggest remembrance of revenge immortally on your accursed traitorous progeny, you villains that have slain my gavest.

[Matt Lewis]

So who is this new king? He sounds like his father, full of wrath and vengeance. What qualities does he possess? Will he Step into a legacy of war or seek to clear his own path for good or for ill? We are about to find out together. We're beginning with a chat with the plays director, Daniel Raggett. Daniel, welcome to God Medieval. Thank you very much for joining us. Thank you for having me. So you're the director of this new production of Christopher Marlowe's Edward ii. And we're here while you're in rehearsals. Is that a pretty intense time for you?

[Daniel Evans]

Yeah, it is because it's the end of rehearsals. So this is our penultimate day in the rehearsal room. So it's the end of a six week process so far. And then a new bit of the process starts. So then we go into the technical rehearsals to make sure that it all works. And this is quite an ambitious production. So there's a lot of moving parts, literally and figuratively.

[Matt Lewis]

So Marlowe's Edward II is based on real historical events, what really happened to King Edward ii, But it also takes some dramatic liberties with the story. As the director, how do you balance historical accuracy with the need for this to be a theatrical storytelling of an intense and dramatic tale? Where do you place that balance?

[Daniel Evans]

It's a really interesting question because I think that it's important to remember that these history plays are fundamentally plays and so they're meant to be performed and it's about creating drama and those dramatic liberties are, I think, really interesting. But at the same time, the historical fact of it can really help with lots of things from understanding, you know, a lot. My history reading on this has been around how the nobles and barons worked, what exactly the makeup of that was within Edward's court. You know, the idea that, for example, the power of Lancaster historically has really guided the way that we've got Evan, that actor, to play that part, the way we've costumed him and the way that, because so much of it is about the machinations of these lords and nobles, exactly what the dynamics are between them, and then that sort of becomes, I suppose, the circumstances which the scenes then pour out of, and whether that was what Marlo wrote, it's definitely helped us make those feel sort of, I suppose, thicker, more realistic. So, yeah, it's useful, but it's always a balance and. And I have been irreverent. I suppose some people, scholars wouldn't say that in what I've cut and what I've ignored historically. But yeah, it's trying to find a balance of the two things.

[Matt Lewis]

Edward II's downfall is kind of really deeply tied into complex medieval notions of Kingship and power and how it works and what kingship means. How do you approach depicting some of those often quite abstract themes to a modern audience so that an audience sitting here can understand the messages that you're trying to portray about Edward's fall?

[Daniel Evans]

Well, I think what's really interesting is, again, historically, you had a sort of a weak king between two strong kings, and the way that that sort of happens. And we've just had Elizabeth die and we've still got a monarchy. There's still a line of succession in that sense. I mean, what I'd say about kingship as well is there's a real correlation to leadership, full stop. And working with Daniel Evans, who's just taken over at the rsc, there's a real. As artistic director, there's a real conversation going on about what leadership means and how to be a good leader. And so it's quite. There are simple parallels to be drawn. You also have, like, you know, global leadership. And then you have the leadership of people like Musk and Zuckerberg who have sort of appointed kings in a weird way of, like, just because of their sheer power of patronage and control over, like, government, as you see Musk wading into the White House. But the other side of that is a thing I think that we don't think about as much as the idea of the divine right of kings, which I'm really interested in. And we were rehearsing a scene with Daniel the other day, and he had. It's all about when he's giving up his crown, the deposition scene. And when he had a physical crown in the space, what continued to happen is it felt like it was about an object. And then when I took it away and when he was talking about the crown being his head, and when the head is removed, that's death. Suddenly it took on a whole new depth, I suppose, because you really understood that they were one and the same, that you cannot choose to be a king. And from that also came this really interesting conversation around. You can no more choose to be a king than you can choose to be gay. Like, it is just a part of you and who you are.

[Matt Lewis]

I think it's interesting, that notion that the object of the crown became too much of a focus. And if you take that away, it makes it much more personal. And that's what Edward would have felt, you know, 700 years ago. It was personal. It wasn't him losing a crown, it was him losing everything he was and everything he had. So it's interesting that removing the physical Object of the Crown makes such an impact on a modern production. And I also think it's interesting what you say that actually. Is it that difficult to make it relatable for a modern audience when we live in a world where we're questioning what does it mean to have power, who has it, how do they get it, how do you take it away from them again if you don't want them to have it anymore? Those are questions that are current today.

[Daniel Evans]

And is there any consensus? Because I think that's another interesting thing about the play is that the. At least in this version, that the nobles rarely agree on the best course of action. There's a lot of deferring to each other, of trying to sort of escape. There's a lot of flip flopping in the play. Basically, we go back, we go forth, we make a decision that's banishing. Let's get him back. Gaveston, that is. And I think that that's another sort of. It's those moments where you realize that a lot of what is going on is just people like you and me with an elevated status, but then still having the same desires, needs, wants, flaws. And that unfortunately, being acted out on a global scale. And that I think is also part of it at the beginning. What Edward doesn't realize is that to be a king is not to just get what you want. And the kind of structure of the whole thing. The sadness of that story is he only finds his true kingship, his true leadership, when he's been stripped of everything. And by that point it's too late. And that's been kind of. I would say it's been very interesting to explore with somebody who is just stepping into a new role as a leader as well, because there's a lot that he feels. It's like, oh, that's like when I xyz. And it helps with the making of it, as it were.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. Learn the lessons available the second.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Exactly.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. But I think that's a really interesting way of looking at it that really personalizes it because they are, you know, people throughout history are ordinary people like you and I, who make decisions every day. Some of those are mistakes that have consequences. It's just for them, for kings and great noblemen, the consequences are so much bigger and reach so much further than they do when probably you or I make a similar mistake.

[Daniel Evans]

I would just say on that, just really quickly that also we did have another conversation about the fact that, like, it is possible that he is just a bad leader and his sexuality has absolutely nothing to do with it. But is is sort of used and monopolized by bad actors in order to give a reason for them to, you know, pursue their own ends. And I think that's a really interesting thing as well, that a lot of times we conflate, or certainly in the world nowadays, things are weaponized. Again, I don't want to come back to obviously to polit that things are identity politics are weaponized in order to achieve specific ends. And I think that's a part of it. The play shot through with that as well, that they keep saying, well, it's not because of that, but is it really because of that? Or yeah, the vice versa option, that maybe it is like a kind of latent homophobia that exists that mean that the nobles create a situation in which he cannot lead well and that he's never going to be as accepted as his father, who, you know, by all accounts was a stronger king, a warmonger, kind of. Although he bankrupt Britain.

[Matt Lewis]

And again, that comes down to elements of. For Edward ii, expectation. People have had Edward I, they're expecting him to be exactly the same. He is ultimately all he can do is be who he is. Whether that's anything to do with his sexuality is irrelevant. He's a different kind of man. He's a different kind of leader who does things in a different way, but that doesn't meet the expectations of those around him. And then, you know, medieval history is littered with cases of throwing homosexuality at someone as a weapon, of throwing promiscuity at medieval women as a weapon. Lots of things that are often difficult to disprove, used to drag down someone who is simply not the right person or not personally you want there at that specific moment. So all of these things become loaded on them.

[Daniel Evans]

That's a really good point. And it's about leverage though, isn't it?

[Matt Lewis]

And so all of those things get piled upon them as ways to deal with the fact that we've got a bad leader here that we don't want, so we can throw this mud at him and throw those sticks and those stones. We'll see what eventually it takes to knock him off his perch. And it's almost. It doesn't matter what those things are, it doesn't even matter how true they are. They're just the ammunition used to depose a ruler that people don't happen to want there at the time.

[Daniel Evans]

And it being about leverage as well, we had a problem in that when Edward was giving out the title Daniel, as Edward was giving out the title of Sir Gaveston, at the beginning, it wasn't really clicking, that those corresponded to huge amounts of land and money and they were being taken away from other people. And so, you know, if suddenly someone new comes into an organization and you suddenly fear for your job and your salary and the amount of power and control that you have, like, that is a. It's a very active concern. And so a lot of it was trying to sort of ground that and activate it in a way that didn't make him seem. It wasn't frivolous, like he was doing it, because Gaveston is Edward's number one in his mind. But to everybody else, that is a genuine threat that corresponds to a real world consequence.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, yeah. And the play deals with topics around sexuality, with favoritism, with rebellion of the nobility. And these are all topics that will have real world consequences for Edward II and will ultimately lead to his downfall. How do you make sure each of those gets proper weight and proper context in the play? I guess it must be tempting or easy to focus in on one of those things. How do you balance those things throughout the production?

[Daniel Evans]

It's a really good question because I don't know how. That's where the audience come in and I don't know how successful we've been, because when you're in, when you're sort of hermetically sealed in the rehearsal room, you have all these ideas and you throw them out there. And it's only when you sit with an audience and you sort of try and follow the story through their eyes that things will become, hopefully, clearer. And we've tried to honor a lot of that. But it's another place in which history has been really useful to me in that I've gone. When I've read back the story of what happened to Edward, I sort of have tried to. Even though the time has significantly contracted, I've tried to sort of focus on those things as well and pull those forward, rather than, I suppose, trying to pack everything in, which is about whether it's clear at the end of the day, I think.

[Matt Lewis]

And the production you mentioned is kind of reset in a modern world, so we're not in the 14th century. What do you need to do and think about in terms of the set, the costume, to give it any historical references? Or do you just abandon that altogether?

[Daniel Evans]

No, we haven't on this. I always think theatre is most successful when it has one foot in metaphor as well. So it's not fully literal. So although it sets modern dress, we've kind of created our own world that is recognisably modern, but also links back through that line of kings to Edward. And so one of the central pieces of the set is a replica of the Cosmati Pavement, which is in Westminster Abbey, which was commissioned. Someone in this room is going to correct me by Henry I. Henry iii. Henry iii. So because we start the play with the funeral of Edward I and then through that we get to Edward iii and it still exists. We were watching videos the other day of Charles coronation that it feels like that pulls it back into the historical context and sort of creates a living history, which I really like because you do sometimes forget. And it makes it feel so much more live that you can draw a single line between all these monarchs to present day. And that feels really exciting. So what you're making is a kind of. Nowadays it would be a political thriller. The crown maybe is a really good example of it. And so what we're trying to do is make, I suppose, our own version of the crown. But the crown is simultaneously now and the one that sat on Edward's head. But within that, he won a nice bit of theatre. It's all drawn from the Marlowe, but bigger.

[Matt Lewis]

Bigger.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Better. More.

[Daniel Evans]

Bigger.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Better, More.

[Daniel Evans]

A little bit, yeah.

[Matt Lewis]

I wrote a biography of Henry iii, so as a Henry III nerd, I very much appreciate the Cosmati Pavement being there. And it is an interesting way to make a modern production with something that does still exist today, but also was part of Edward II's life and his story. And he would have seen it and stood on it as well. So there is that connectivity across the.

[Daniel Evans]

Centuries and the idea that it is this beautiful thing that has such a weight of history to it.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, fascinating. Well, thank you so much for joining us, Daniel. It's been great to try and understand your process with this a little bit more, but I guess I ought to let you get back to rehearsals, really.

[Daniel Evans]

Yes, very much.

[Daniel Raggett]

Thank you.

[Daniel Evans]

Thank you.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Okay, so let's get into this. What exactly happened during Edward II's reign that set off this dramatic chain of events leading to his deposition in 1327? Who were Piers Gaveston and Hugh Despenser to Edward? Professor Chris Given Wilson specializes in late medieval English political and social history at St. Andrews University. Matt caught up with him to hear more about the worst king of England.

[Matt Lewis]

Chris, a very warm welcome to Gone Medieval. It's fantastic to have you with us.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Thank you.

[Matt Lewis]

So we're going to talk about Edward ii and I thought let's just deal with some of the big broad stroke questions. Before we get into the detail of his life, he's quite often listed as one of the worst medieval kings of England. Do you think he deserves that? Does he rank up above the worst?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Yep, he ranks with the very worst.

[Matt Lewis]

Okay. Are we going to give him top three billing?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Oh, I should imagine so, yeah. His reign was a disaster. His reign was a disaster for all sorts of reasons we're going to go into, but, you know, we can deal with them one by one. But, I mean, he was very unsuited to kingship.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. And what are the historical sources that are available to us to give us detail and color about Edward and his life?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

As usual, there are a host of chronicles. There are some very good chronicles of Edward the Shrey. The best one is a chronicle. It's an anonymous chronicle, although there's been quite a few guesses as to who wrote it, called the Vita Eduardoadi Secundi. That's not the original title. That's the name it was given by its editors. And that was written by a guy who was obviously pretty close to the court. And he has a lot of quite interesting inside information about the way baronial factions were forming and falling apart again and then coming together and realigning. And that's very interesting stuff because, I mean, really, the big problem with Edward ii, the overriding problem, is his relations with his magnates. But I'm sure we're going to come on to that. There's a very good northern chronicle called the Lanacost Chronicle, and that's got the detail of the Scottish problems, all the Scottish raiding into England, and the English attempts under Edward II to try to impose English overlordship of Scotland, which was really what Edward I had been very keen to try to achieve. And, of course, Edward II failed disastrously when it came to Scotland. And then there are also a number of London Chronicles, Chronicle of St. Paul's the Chronicle of the London Annals, and then there are some chronicles which are written after Edward II's reign. I mean, an interesting one is Geoffrey Labaker's chronicle, because Geoffrey Lubaker is one of the very, very few chroniclers who is actually quite sympathetic towards Edward ii. But to be honest, I mean, historians obviously take into account what he's written, but no one really agrees with him, or very few people agree with his judgment on Edward ii.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, fair enough. Do we get a sense from this collection of chronicles of what kind of a person Edward was? Do we get any sense of his character?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Yeah, I mean, his character. I started by saying he was completely unsuited to kingship. He was vindictive, he was very passionate. He was foolish in many ways. I mean, particularly his associations with his two particular favourites and with favourites more generally. Personally, he was quite witty. There are one or two interesting letters of his which survive which suggest that, you know, he liked to have a good joke. One of the most unkingly things about him was something which has often been pointed out, is that he indulged in unkingly occupations. And what both chroniclers, and there is documentary evidence for this as well, he liked to go thatching and digging and rowing and swimming. And, I mean, these are things which everybody now thinks are absolutely fine. If you want to go and dig something, go and dig it, that's great. If you want to go swimming in the river, go rowing with your friends, the oarsmen, then that's fine. But these are just not the sort of things which were thought of as kingly in the Middle Ages. And one of the problems here was that Edward was seen as so unlike his father. His father was a very kingly character indeed. He upheld the dignity of kingship and the power of Kingship. And Edward II's, well, some people call them his vices or his predilections or preoccupations or whatever you want to call them. This made him ridiculous. It made him seem ridiculous to be going swimming. And so they said, this guy can't really be the son of Edward I. Now, to be fair, very few people really thought that he wasn't the son of Edward the First. What they meant was he just isn't like his father and he ought to be. So those are some sides of his character. But of course, the great flaw in Edward's character was his passionate attachment to his favorites. And I'm sure that's something we're going to come onto.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, I guess some of those physical pursuits, we might think of it making him something like a man of the people. But that's simply not what his subjects and his barons expected from their king at the time.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Absolutely not. I mean, George III could get away with it. You know, the whole Farmer George thing, people sort of just smiled a bit at that Farmer George. He liked to go around with his plants and, you know, his farming proclivities. That was okay, possibly in the 18th or 19th century, but it was not possible, you know, under a constitutional monarchy, but it was not the case under a personal monarchy. Edward II really couldn't get away with that sort of thing. I mean, you might say it's a bit harsh on him. To condemn him for that. All I'm saying is that his contemporaries condemned him for that and, you know, he should have known better. We can think, yeah, jolly nice, go for a swim, you know, go for a row with your pals. But they didn't.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, I mean, it's tempting, I guess, to see him as sandwiched between a really famous and successful father and a really famous and successful son, but it sounds like he kind of deserves the bad reputation that he's got in your mind.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, he was sandwiched between a very successful father in many ways, a very successful father and certainly a very successful son. The problem was, for Edward ii, had. Edward I had a pure agenda in his kingship, and towards the end of his reign, he was pursuing that agenda, particularly the desire to control Scotland. I mean, the last 10 years were very much focused on Edward I, trying to bring the Scots to heel. And the legacy that he left to his son in Scotland was pretty crippling. People often talk about Edward I's legacy to his son and how this was a bit of a disabling factor for Edward II right from the start. There was this unfinished war in Scotland, which just a year or two before Edward I's death had turned much more difficult because this was the time when Robert Roose, you know, rose up in rebellion and began to claim the throne and began to pick off English castles and so forth. So this was, in some ways a new situation in Scotland for Edward. But Edward I also left enormous debts to his son. The Crown was about 200,000 pounds in debt when Edward II came to the throne. And that's one of the defining features of Edward II's reign, actually. He was always poor. He could never get the money he wanted until after 1322. And then. Well, we'll come back to that, I'm quite sure. And then, of course, he made damn sure that he had all the money he wanted, but the price was tyranny.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, yeah, Fascinating. Yeah, we're going to get there. We're definitely going to get there. If we go back a little bit and think about Edward's younger years, he's born in 1284. He's fairly famously, I guess, born at Caernarfon Castle and eventually invested with the title Prince of Wales by his father, the kind of first English heir to the throne to be called the Prince of Wales.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Absolutely.

[Matt Lewis]

And I guess that's a really significant statement by his father that's wrapping the future Edward II up in his conquest of Wales.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Yes, it's doing something more than that. I mean, it is doing that, and it's doing something more than that. And I think it's fair to say that this period after Edward I completed the conquest of Wales, something which had been going on piecemeal for 200 years, since the late 11th century, and the conquest of Snowdonia, in effect, was the completion of the conquest of Wales and the establishment of a new administration in Wales under the English crown and so forth. At the same time, England was doing pretty well in Ireland. We had a pretty substantial hold in Ireland, and Edward I was trying very hard to bring Scotland under control as well. And what you're actually seeing here, what you see under Edward I, is probably about as close as we get at any time before the 17th century to what you might call the idea of the English Isles rather than the British Isles, if you follow what I mean by that. In other words, England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales united under English rule. Whether that was the deliberate policy of Edward I is something which you can debate. But in practical terms, that was where it seemed to be heading at the end of the 13th century. By the end of Edward II's reign, it was absolutely. It was in ruins. That English dream, if it was an English dream, it quite possibly was. So, you know, there was an unfinished war and there was £200,000 worth of debts. But, I mean, I think it's important to say that this was not a particularly unusual situation for an heir to the throne. And Edward II had many things on his side. When he came to the throne. He was 23 years old, the perfect age to come to the throne. You don't want to come to the throne at the age of 10. You don't particularly want to come to the throne at the age of 55 or 60, you know, 23, perfect. Most of the nobles were within 10 years either side of that. So, you know, there was a generation of youngish nobles here. He was the undisputed heir to the throne. No one disputed his right to be his father's heir. And that, again, is something which is actually quite unusual. There are plenty of examples of, you know, people who have to fight for their inheritance, to fight to establish their kingship. So there were good signs for Edward II as well. But he squandered everything, really.

[Matt Lewis]

Do you have a sense of how Edward II ends up so poorly militarily trained, given that his father is Edward I and his father's rule is characterized by wars with Wales, with Scotland, and part, you know, efforts to go to war with France? Does he not teach his son, what he needs to know to succeed him? Or does Edward simply not take on those lessons?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, I mean, I think Edward I asked himself the same question. Why is this son of mine not very good? He took him on. He took him on expeditions to Scotland, he encouraged him, he tried to give him his own commands. But I think, above all, there's tactical inflexibility from Edward ii. I mean, Edward I, to be fair, he tried to train Edward II in military leadership. But I think you're right that Edward II just didn't take it on board.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. Didn't absorb any of those messages. And so then Edward will become betrothed and married to Isabella of France.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Indeed.

[Matt Lewis]

What is the reason for selecting that French marriage? What is the strategy? What is the diplomatic benefit of a marriage to a French princess at that time?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

An attempt to sort out the problem in Gascony. Gascony is the area of southwest France, the Bordelay and the surrounding region, a region which the English have held for 150 years or something like that by this time. But the French don't like it. The French don't like having this very powerful neighbourhood as one of the chief vassals of the French Crown. And Philip iv, the King of France, he launches various campaigns against Gascony. And Edward I has to fight hard to defend Gascony and to hold on to English possession of Gascony and to marry. They, in effect, make a truce in 1297, Edward I and Philip IV, and they agree at that time, even though the kids are too young to get married at that time, that they will cement this peace or truce. It is at the time, cement this truce, hopefully to become a peace with a marriage between the two royal families, which, as I'm sure you know, was a very traditional, a very normal way and remained so for a long time, to try to make peace between warring nations or nations which were liable to go to war. So it was a diplomatic marriage. No doubt about that.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. And so then I'm going to bring in a name that people may well be aware of, Piers Gaveston. He will dominate the early portion of Edward II's reign. When does he first come to court and how does he get close to Edward?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, he first comes to court in 1305. He's the son of a Gascon nobleman. Well, a Gascon baron. I mean, the English, or most of the English, not Edward ii? Most of the English, certainly the magnates, regard him as a foreign upstart. I mean, you know, we've just been talking about Gascony and how it's actually. But the English never colonized Gascony in the sense that they didn't move there to go and live there in the way that they did in parts of Wales or parts of Ireland. The nobility of Gascony was Gascon, not English. So he's regarded as a foreign upstart. He arrives in 1305, he becomes an esquire in Edward II's household, and he kind of bewitches Edward II. Gaveston has a lot going for him. Gaveston is said to be witty, charming, handsome. I mean, but he was also foolish and tactless. I mean, he made up nicknames for all the earls after he defeated them at a tournament, you know, in single combat and so forth. He was foolish and tactless and acquisitive and he was out for what he could get. But, you know, Gaveston could have been a perfectly successful and very, probably very well liked courtier or servant of any king. The problem was not Gaveston. The problem was Edward ii. The problem was Edward ii, who, as I said earlier, was passionate in his relationships. And he really. He loved Gaveston so much that he would do practically anything that Gaveston wanted. Edward II became infatuated with people, Gaveston. And later on, there were other favorites. Of course, the most notorious is the younger dispenser, but we'll come on to him, I'm sure. But Gaveston doesn't really go away. And then, of course, six months later, Edward I dies. And the first thing that happens is Gaveston immediately returns and about two weeks after his. After Edward I died, Edwards II makes him Earl of Cornwall. And the Earldom of Cornwall was said to be. I mean, it was one of those titles which was usually reserved for a member of the royal family. And it was utterly inappropriate and seen as utterly inappropriate by the magnates that Gaveston, this foreign upstart, who was hardly even a knight, should be made Earl of Cornwall. There we are.

[Matt Lewis]

I guess it becomes easy to see why the barons and the magnates begin to despise Gaveston. Although, as you said, it's possibly more to do with Edward than Gaveston in particular. I guess the burning question that everyone always have, that you must have been asked a million times already, how confident can we be that their relationship was a physical one, that there was a homosexual relationship between Edward II and Piers Gaveston?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

It's possible, but we can't be confident of it at all. Edward ii, I mean, if it was a homosexual relationship, Edward was. Edward was clearly bisexual. He had four children. He had a bastard child. Gaveston had children. He had a bastard child as well. So they were certainly not in any way exclusively homosexual. It may have been that there was a physical relationship. The direct accusation of sodomy was not made against Edward II until after the revolution of 1326. People perhaps insinuated a little bit at the time. They used the sort of language. I mean, I think it's the Vita who says something like, I never knew a man love another man so much. And people can interpret that as they want. There is no definite evidence, but it's a possibility.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, yeah. So there's nothing explicit, but it's kind of there in the background as a possibility.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, and the accusation was made in 1326 by Adam Alllerton, the Bishop of Hereford, who was a supporter of Isabella and Mortimer. But this was after Edward II had actually. And Despenser had actually been captured. And one possibility is that they were raising this question of Edward II's possible homosexuality in order to deflect attention from Isabella's relationship with Mortimer.

[Matt Lewis]

How then do we. Do we move towards Gaveston's fall? How does he end up dying and how does Edward react to that?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, Edward made Gaveston Earl of Cornwall. He also made him the chamberlain, his personal chamberlain. The chamberlain is the man who controls access to the king's chamber. And Gaveston basically let in those he wanted to let in and didn't let in those he didn't want to let in. It's a very powerful position, being the royal chamberlain and the nobles, their counsel was not being considered. They were sidelined by this foreign upstart. You know, they exiled him in 1309. He went off to Ireland for a year, did well, as I said, but then came back. Then they exiled him again, and this time he didn't go abroad. And then they exiled him for a third time. And each time, Edward II was just forced to accept this as the price of any kind of cooperation from the magnates. And he couldn't rule the country without agreeing to Gaveston being exiled. Eventually, he came back at the beginning of 1312, and they just decided to hunt him down. They hunted him down. They caught him at Scarborough Castle, or at least they made him come out of Scarborough Castle. The Earl of Pembroke apparently promised him. Promised him he would be safe, but they took him down to Oxford and then the Earl of Warwick and the Earl of Lancaster came along and said, no, this man can't live anymore. Every time we try to exile him, you know, he just comes back and we'll never. We'll never have peace in this country unless we kill him silly. Chopped his head off. The barons and Edward II never forgave them. This was an execution, a death which poisoned English politics for the remaining 15 years. Well, certainly for the next 10 years, and you could say for the remaining 15 years of Edward II's reign, he never forgot the fact that they had done this to his great friend.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

If you're like me and you love history, but in particular you love the smutty, salacious, gossipy history, then do I have the perfect podcast for you? If you fancy finding out about the slippery origins of Lube, or how Vikings linked sex and magic together, then listen no further. Join me, Kate Lister, on Betwixt the Sheets, where I delve into the most accurate, outrageous, the most taboo and the downright sexiest parts of our history. It's the kind of history that you probably wouldn't bring up at a family lunch, but you might bring it up.

[Matt Lewis]

Down the pub, from the history of.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Swear words to answering important questions like just how incestuous were Neanderthals and so much more.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Listen, every Tuesday and Friday, wherever it.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Is that you get your podcasts, a podcast by History hit.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. And is it fair to say that for all the favorites that will follow, Gaveston remained special to Edward, that he was sort of somehow above the rest of them?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

I wouldn't say so. I wouldn't say so. I think that. I mean, there were various favourites in the 1310s, the decade or so after Gaveston, or the six or seven years after Gaveston's death, people like Damery and Audley and Montague and a few others. But, I mean, the favourites become a problem again by 1318. By this time, of course, the man who is very much leading the opposition to Edward II is Thomas of Lancaster. I'm sure we'll say more about him in a minute. And Thomas of Lancaster eventually meets the King at Nottinghamshire, called Leek. So the Treaty of Leek in 1318. And he says, you've got to get rid of all these favorites. All these favorites have got to go. We can't have them around anymore. And so Damari and Audley and Montacute, they're all dismissed from court. The man who takes their place and once again becomes the King's chamberlain is Hugh Despenser the Younger. And, no, he was every bit as powerful as Gaveston had been between 1307 and 1312.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, we're definitely going to come back to Dispenser in a moment. But before we get on to him, I wondered if we could just move back to Scotland a little bit and talk a bit more about Bannockburn. How does Edward end up at Bannockburn? How does he end up facing this Scots army still at war with Scotland? And why does it go so horribly wrong?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, for a year after Gaveston's death, the chief opponents of the king, the chief barons opposing the King and Lancaster's now really the leader of the opposition, chief opponents of the king and Edward just will not really talk to each other. They hardly meet each other at all for a year. And then they make a peace. In the autumn, I think it's In September or October 1313, they make a peace. And one of the conditions of the peace that they make is that they are going to go and deal with Bruce in Scotland, because with all the distractions of Gaveston and the threats of civil war in England and the very difficult parliaments and all that, Bruce has been given virtually a free hand in Scotland. When Edward I died, he held. There were about 40, 40 English held castles in Scotland by 13. So by this autumn of 1313, there were less than 20. They'd been gradually picked off by Bruce. He was, you know, reasserting his kingship in Scotland. And Edward. And Edward never lacked the desire to deal with Scotland. He lacked the ability to do it. And Edward and the barons agreed when they made peace in the autumn of 1313. The priority is a Scottish campaign. We must go and deal with Bruce. And so they, they raised this big army, they raised this big army and they marched north and they found, I mean, probably about 15,000, which was a very sizable army at the time, and they marched north and they got very. They got to Falkirk and they realized that they knew that Bruce and his army, which was about half the size of the English army, they realized that Bruce and his army were standing, were encamped between them and Stirling. That's only like 15 miles or so from a white, or even less from Falkirk to Stirling. So they marched up the road towards Stirling Castle and the Scots came out and stood in their way. And this was obviously going to be a battle. But the English found themselves, and maybe this was. The Scots were on a sort of slight slope going down. Obviously, you know, they chose the high ground and below them was a very marshy area, the pools and the bogs. This is the first force. And there were lots of bends and pools and marshes and everything. And Edward II just couldn't adapt his army to this sort of. He still tried to maneuver great big divisions around and they were getting stuck in the mud and they were falling over and, you know, falling, falling into the pools and whatever, and they just couldn't maneuver. And Scots Bruce drew up his forces in what were called Schultrons, which were kind of like Greek style phalanxes, very tightly packed to resist the English cavalry charges. Because the English were fighting mainly at. Well, the cavalry were fighting on horse. The Scots were almost entirely on foot. They dismounted. They'd learned from the Flemish at Courtrai ten years earlier that it was best to dismount. And it was, of course, an absolute disaster for the English. And I mean, 200 English knights were killed. 200 English knights, that was probably about 15% of the knighthood in England. You know, 15% of all the knights in England were killed at Bannockburn. Edward II was forced to flee, chased, hotly chased as far as Dunbar, where he managed to find a fishing boat to take him down to Newcastle. So, I mean, utter humiliation, utter humiliation for the English. I mean, they were overconfident. Apart from anything else, they thought they had these big, well armed mounted armies and they, you know, the Scots were never gonna be able to deal with them. And of course, for the Scots, it was a resounding and very well remembered victory.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. How significant is Bannockburn, both for Scotland in terms of fighting to regain and maintain their independence, but also Edward II's kind of popularity within the kingdom? You've just lost a significant battle with Scotland. Surely that's not going to go down well at home.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Oh, it was absolutely ignominious for Edward ii. Ignominious for him. It was not just a military disaster, it was a political disaster for Edward ii. And basically, when Parliament met at Lincoln the Following year in 1315, Thomas of Lancaster, Edward's great enemy, his first cousin, but also his great enemy, was handed. He was made head of the council and became, in effect, ruler of the kingdom for the next couple of years or so, until he found it absolutely impossible to work at all with the king and retired up to his northern fastnesses and sulked for the next four years.

[Matt Lewis]

As we move Edward kind of through all of these moments of crisis and towards the building problem that will ultimately bring about his downfall, the dispensers, particularly Hugh Despenser the Younger, but also his father, Hugh Dispenser the Elder, kind of step onto the, the political stage. Now, when do they begin to emerge and how do they get close to Edward ii?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Hugh Despenser the Elder is A man very well regarded in many ways and he had always been loyal to Edward ii and Edward II really valued him. For example, he was one of the very few magnates who refused ever to agree to Gaveston's exile. He always said, you know, he was always on the side of the king. So he was a constant at court. He was constantly at court and a well trusted advisor. Now, the younger Despenser, well, he gets rich after the Earl of Gloucester is killed at Bannockburn. The Earl of Gloucester is the second richest earl in England. He has a patrimony worth about £6,000 a year. He's second to Thomas of Lancaster, who has probably 10 or 11,000 pounds a year. But those two are way above the rest of the earls. None of the other earls have more than about two and a half or three thousand pounds a year. Gilbert, Earl of Gloucester is killed at Bannockburn and he leaves three sisters as his heirs, heiresses. And Gaveston marries one of them. He'd marry one before, but Dispenser also marries one of them. And so he becomes rich overnight. He, you know, gets an inheritance worth about £2,000 a year, which is. This is a very rich man in those days. He really steps into having. He's very ambitious. He's got a third of the Clare inheritance, but he wants more than that. He really steps into the shoes vacated by Audley, Amory and Montague after the Treaty of Leek in 1318. Treaty of Leake is an attempt to make peace between Edward and Thomas of Lancaster, and that breaks down fairly quickly. But Amory, Audley and Montagu are dismissed from court after the Treaty of Leake because Lancaster insists on this. And then in their place comes the younger dispenser and he is very rapidly made chamberlain of the King's household. His attempts to augment his inheritance, particularly in South Wales and the southwest, basically he's trying to put together again the Earldom of Gloucester, the Earldom of Gloucester, which was held by Gilbert de Clare. And he's using all sorts of violent and underhand and bullying tactics to try to force the other magnates around there, the Marcher lords around there, to give up their lands to cede their lands to him. And, well, eventually that leads to what is called the marcher war in 1321.

[Matt Lewis]

I just wondered at this point we discussed a little bit earlier how, you know, Gaveston actually had a fair bit going for him, could have been quite a good subject and that maybe Edward was more the problem than Gaveston. Is there a similar situation here? Because it seems like people take against Hugh Despenser the younger much more in a personal way than they did against Gaveston.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

People were outraged by Gaveston. People were terrified of the younger Despenser. He was a violent, vindictive, ruthless, very, very greedy and in every imaginable way, deeply unpleasant character. Edward II didn't think so. Sadly, there's an interesting relationship going on there. I mean, the dispensers, the two dispensers are both exiled in 1321. Not that that's effective at all, but we'll come on to that. But one of the charges against them says that if the King didn't do what Dispenser asked him to do, he would get angry and shout at the King. And that is a very unusual thing to find in the Middle Ages, the idea that a subject shouts at the King and tells him, no, you've got to do this, you know, you've got to do that. I want this land or whatever. And he's kind of using with the King the same bully boy tactics that he uses with the nobles whose lands he wants. And Edward, for some reason, seems to accept this. And again, it's a complete infatuation with the younger dispenser. And again, people say it might have been homosexual, but we really can't prove it one way or the other. And it's a complete infatuation. But the other thing, Spencer was clever, he was manipulative, and the other thing is he was very good at finance, very good at money. And he says to Edward, I'm going to make you rich. And of course he does, he makes him very rich. And, you know, one of the chroniclers says, I mean, the evidence is all there in the Exchequer documents of the time, but he makes Edward ii, according to one chronicler, the richest king since William the Conqueror. And that's probably true. It's probably true. Edward II, having been poor all of his reign up until 1322, suddenly becomes. Yeah, the richest king for two and a half centuries.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, yeah, Fascinating. And I guess it's easy to wonder whether, was it the infatuation that is painted later in terms of a physical relationship, or is it that dispenser is giving Edward what he really wants, which is the cash to be able to control the kingdom the way he wants to?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, he's giving him the cash and therefore he is a valuable, a valuable ally for the King. But also, I mean, it was interesting, one chronicler said, and this man had bewitched the King, and he meant that I Think quite literally, because this was actually quite a common trope in the Middle Ages, that favorites actually employed some kind of sorcery. Now, there's no evidence that Despenser employed some kind of sorcery, but it was believed, so firm was his hold on Edward II's affections, that it was believed that he must in some way have bewitched the king. And Edward II certainly acted as if he was bewitched. He would do more or less anything that the younger Despenser wanted, just as he had done more or less anything that Gaveston had wanted. And we come back to the same problem. I mean, no one could like the younger Despenser. He was a revolting character. But we come back to the same problem. It's really Edward ii, You know, he becomes absolutely infatuated with people and he can't control his emotions and everyone else hates them.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. And is the march of war that breaks out then? Is that more Hugh Despenser's war than Edward II's? Is he pulling Edward II along with him?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Oh, definitely. Well, he's pulling Edward II along. Edward II seems quite happy to be pulled along because he also sees this. I mean, it's a war very largely fought in South Wales, in the area of the former Gloucester inheritance, the British, the Canty, Maurice, Glamorgan. Nowadays, it's Hugh Despenser's war against the marchers whose lands he covered, because the marchers had risen up against him. They said, you know, you're bullying us, you're forcing us to. You're attacking our land, you're forcing our peasants to leave us, and so forth. And so they rose up against Despenser and then Despenser called in the King and said, come on, we're going to go and deal with this lot. And Edward II said, fine. Right. And, of course, Edward II was totally successful in the Marcher war. And one of the problems for the marchers was they hoped that Thomas of Lancaster, who was still sulking up in Pontefract Castle, they hoped that Thomas of Lancaster would come and join them. But Lancaster didn't come and join them until basically the war was over. And then Edward II turned north and Despenser said to him, and other people must have said to him as well, it's time to deal with Lancaster, because you'll never really rule your kingdom until you crush Lancaster. And they did, and Lancaster was executed too.

[Matt Lewis]

So at this point, we're kind of around 1322. Edward II must have felt like finally he'd got a grip on his kingdom. He was in control and he'd won. He'd got his vengeance for what they'd done to Gaveston and potentially driving away his other favourites too. He must have felt like he was sitting pretty.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

And he did. And he was. He had an opportunity now. He was, in effect, a tyrant. Now, the last few years of Edward II's reign is often referred to as his tyranny and the tyranny of him and the dispensers. He could rule England as he wanted to, really. It was an opportunity for a king to do lots and lots of good things and it was an opportunity which Edward squandered. It was not the benign rule, it was basically a reign of terror. And the punishments that were inflicted on anyone who'd been involved with the Marchers. Lots of people were imprisoned. About 20 barons were executed, hanged and their bodies left up for years in the places where they held their lands and so forth, and their lands were seized. Edward ii, as I've said, became very rich. Hugh Dispenser, of course, became very rich. That is the younger Despenser, Basically, he was trying to reunite the earldom of Gloucester. His father became Earl of Winchester. He became very rich too. And, yeah, it was. It was a reign of terror. Hugh Despenser's the younger. The younger Despenser's speciality was really widows. He would torture widows of people who had been opposed to Edward II until they agreed to sign over their lands to him. And not a man you'd ever want to meet, really.

[Matt Lewis]

I was going to say. Sounds like such a lovely guy.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Yeah, yeah.

[Matt Lewis]

What could possibly go wrong?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Applebee's has a brand new Big Easy menu. It features all your Bourbon street favorites and what in one new menu. Plus a new Bourbon street chicken and chicken and andouille sausage penny Starting at.

[Daniel Raggett]

Just $11.99, limited time, price participation and selection may vary.

[Matt Lewis]

And then in 1325, war will break out with France. Is Edward. Is Edward doing this with his newfound confidence and his newfound wealth and authority, or is it France that ignites the war?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Well, relations with France are made difficult by the fact that lots of French kings die very young. Philip iv dies in 1314 and then three of his sons become king, because the first two die within another eight years. And then Charles IV becomes king in 1322. And Charles IV, he is a bit keener to bring these English to heel in Gascony than his predecessors had been. And he summons Edward to come and do homage. And this was a thing which English kings were meant to do. To go and pay homage to French kings, preferably in person. And Edward II goes down to Dover and he says, I'm coming to pay homage. And then he decides not to. And he sends the Charles IV a message saying, I'm ill, I can't come and do homage. Now Charles 4th doesn't believe this anyway, there is this war, this really quite brief war in which the French take something like half of Gascony back. I mean, it's, it's a war of reconquest of Gascony. And when Edward II says I'm not going to come pay homage, he decides instead to send his 12 year old son, that is Edward III, now his wife Isabella, who actually for most of the time of their marriage, seems to have got on fairly well together with Edward. Seems to have got on fairly well. But by this time she was absolutely sick of Hugh Despenser and she had already gone to France because she was the sister of the French king. Well, as we know, you know, this was this diplomatic marriage between England and France, the sister of the French king, and she was thought to be the best person to try to patch up relations between England and France. So she's already in France, in Paris. The future Edward III is sent across to do homage and EDSA does homage to Charles iv. And then Isabella says, we're not coming back, we're not coming back to England. And she announces that it's. I can't remember the exact wording, but it's something she. It's this public announcement. Marriage is supposed to be a union between a man and a woman, but someone has come between me and my husband and I shall not return to England until that man is removed. Everyone knew she was referring to Hugh Dispenser. Some people, of course, think that is code for the fact that they were having a homosexual relationship. Maybe or maybe not. She didn't say that.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. It has a sense of the medieval version of the. You know, there were three of us in that marriage.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Absolutely. It's a bit like that. Yes. I didn't. I think she thought actually that. That she wasn't really in it anymore.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

But anyway.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. So today we are either denying or depriving, depending on how you feel about it. Denying or depriving you the chance to talk about Edward's actual downfall and his deposition. But I just wondered if you could leave us with the scene set for how all of this, the time with Gaveston, his experiences in Scotland, the rise of Hugh Despencer, the March Awards, the success that he's felt. And now this sort of war ending in a peace with France. How does that set the stage for Edward II to meet his ultimate failure?

[Chris Given-Wilson]

I think that the lasting impression that one gets from Edward II's reign is that this is an age of absolutely visceral hatreds. There is so much violence, so many nobles. People talk about the execution of Gaveston. He was an earl. He was the first English earl to be executed for 250 years, and he's the last English earl to be executed after Edward II's reign. There are no other English earls executed for over 50 years. So the visceral hatreds of this reign have created a situation and especially the treatment of the people whom Edward II called the contrarians, that is, the people who opposed him in 1321-2, the treatment of them had created enormous fault lines in English politics. And these fault lines are going to go on for a long time because people say, oh, we were deprived under Edward ii, we need our lands back. They're going to go on saying that for a hundred years, you know, so this has created tremendous fault lines in English politics. Edward II's regime is clearly absolutely hated. The Spencers in particular are absolutely hated by 1325, 1326, and there are lots of people who have gone outlaws, who are making raids on dispenser lands and so forth. And even he's even turned his queen away from him and his younger son. Well, Edward iii was only 12 years old at this time, so what he thought is very difficult to know. But anyway, there they are in France. They know that a regime in England, her husband's regime in England, is absolutely hated. They're going to do something about it.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah. And so Edward ii, we're going to leave him about to face his ultimate test. And I think with a sense that whoever else might be included in the blame, particularly Hugh Dispenser, the younger Edward II himself, needs to shoulder most of the blame for the situation he finds himself in.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

I think he certainly does. He was a man completely unsuited to kingship.

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

And, you know, in the end, he's going to be the first English king since the conquest to be deposed, isn't he?

[Matt Lewis]

Yeah, yeah. Hopefully that's not too much of a spoiler. Thank you so much for joining us, Chris. It's been absolutely fascinating to get to know Edward a little bit better and to work out how he arrived at this kind of monumental crisis that we're building towards. So thank you so much for helping us to get to know him. A little bit better.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

No problem. Okay, thank you.

[Matt Lewis]

Thank you very much.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Thanks for that, Matt. Okay, now we are bringing you back to Stratford to dig a bit deeper into Edward II's portrayal in Marlowe's play. We've managed to catch Daniel Evans, one of the Royal Shakespeare Company's co artistic directors and the actor playing Edward II in the play, in the middle of rehearsals. We're here to speak to him about what it's like to play one of England's most enigmatic medieval kings and how he goes about capturing Edward's fickle fancies in his performance. Daniel, thank you so much for letting me pick your brain about this because you are in such an interesting position as the actor who needs to portray Edward ii. This is a really, really complex, layered person. You've got to deal with this man who's really torn between his personal desires, but also his responsibilities as king, which are, you know, part of who he is as a person, but almost outside of him as.

[Daniel Raggett]

Yes.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

How did you, as a regular person who's living in the modern world, then balance this vulnerability of him as, you know, a queer person, but an authority at the same time in your performance?

[Daniel Raggett]

Oh, gosh, really good question. I guess the hardest thing is to really imagine what it's like to think and know that your kingship is given to you by God. So that kind of divine right of kings, that you're born into something, so it's your birthright and you have no choice. Like this is what you're born into. And that's quite a hard thing for, I think, for any regular person to get your head round, even without the religious aspect. But you add God into the picture and it's even harder in our more secular times. The way that I've kind of found my way through close to it is obviously I'm also queer. And so I find it very easy to identify with Edward's loneliness and what is possibly littered throughout the play, which is a degree of shame that, you know, many, many queer people grow up with because we live in a heteronormative world and so that that sort of, in a way comes easier. And then I have a little bit of insight into leadership, just having been an artistic director for 15 years. And even though that's not the same as being king. Meanwhile, one of the cast members did say, we arrived in Stratford and you're like, king of Stratford. I'm like, well, yes, that's quite the same. But. And not that I think that I'm King of Stratford by the way. But there is, for me, working on the play, a really interesting discovery has been how much the intersection of queerness and leadership is really explored by Marlowe. And that has been a fascinating kind of unpacking how, you know, even as co artistic director of the Royal Shakespeare Company, this isn't a job about me, it's about the organization. And for Edward, well, it's meant to be about the crown. And eventually it is about the crown. It's just that when we start the play, it's about his love.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And I mean, this is such an interesting point because kingship obviously is by its very nature bound up with the masculine and of course, heteronormativity.

[Daniel Raggett]

Yes. Primogeniture, you know, the whole thing completely.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And so you have to be a man's man. And that's sort of thrust upon you. I mean, I think even now to be a royal today. It's such an interesting and I would say completely difficult position because on the one hand, you have all the privilege in the world, but you don't have any freedom.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

That's right.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

There's no choice in this matter. It's usually something that happens to you. And so it's so difficult to really grapple with that again.

[Daniel Raggett]

There's a kind of parallel, though, isn't it? Because, I mean, I. Who knows? You know, when they find the gay gene, I'm presuming they will at some point, but, you know, people think that it's a choice to be gay. Oh, that it were. I mean, you know, frankly, you know, with all the bullying I experienced, it would not have been something I would have chosen necessarily. Although, you know, so my kind of pride journey has taken a long time. But that is a little insight. And it's interesting that with Edward, he was born king and born gay and had no choice in both matters. And somehow or other they're both things have become obstacles because of the heteronormative world of the barons and the earls around him and indeed the structures, you know, of kingship itself. As you said, it's such a difficult.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

I don't know, ball of yarn to unpick. What do you do then, as an individual now who kind of has the knowledge of the past? You know, you're sitting here in the year of our Lord 2025, and we know how this all plays out and we can see what happens then. How do you balance that as an actor trying to portray Edward's priorities? You know, is there something that you really feel about this? Because, you know, on the one Hand, obviously, it's very difficult for us to say, oh, well, I don't know, don't be that nice to your boyfriend. Right. You know, a ridiculous kind of thing to say. But then on the other, there is his treatment of Isabella as well, where, you know, for me it's sort of like, okay, well, you just don't need to be that rude to your wife. Maybe play the politics game a little bit more with the nobles. What's it like to try to bring a character out who has these flaws, who makes these decisions?

[Daniel Raggett]

Well, I think you have no choice there too. You have to do what's on the page. And on the page, he is terribly misogynistic towards his wife. Calls her a strumpet, you know, to his first line to her, fall not on me, foul strumpet, yet thee gone, you know, away, touch me not. He doesn't even want to be touched by her. And yet when she pleads for Gaveston, when she does what he asks, he says, I'll hang a golden tongue about thy neck. So he's also, you know, flip flopping even in his feelings towards those presumably close to him. But just to come back to your question for a moment, I think this is where the job of an actor's quite complicated, because I have to be inside him and therefore, in order to play him, I have to try and find a way to understand him and therefore not judge him. If I'm standing back, though, and thinking about leadership and what I've learned about leadership, I have to objectively be able to say, edward's not the best strategist. Like handing out titles willy nilly as ways of bribes to the earls and the barons is just not gonna get him very far. And sort of imposing his will in a kind of totalitarian way. Well, it doesn't work. And so it's one of the tragedies of the character and of the play is that I think he learns too late what leadership is about. So when he says to the Archbishop at the end of the play, commend me to my son and bid him rule better than I, he knows. He's reached the point where he knows, oh, God, I didn't do this the right way. And had he only been someone who could encompass take people with him, as all leaders have to do if they're going to be successful, then he might have been able to find a way through.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

It's such a tricky way to balance things out because on the one hand you're told you have a divine right to be you're the guy who gets all these things. But then it turns out you actually, actually have to be fair minded. You have to know how it, how to really establish yourself as a leader. And those two things almost don't so hard.

[Daniel Raggett]

And that's why balance comes into the question, right? Because it's always a bit of give and take. But I was thinking, I had a conversation with someone yesterday and really made me think about how Edward, if he were a leader now, you know, because in history, apparently he didn't like spending much time with the barons and earls. He liked speaking to, quote, unquote commoners. You know, he liked rowing. He would stop along the river and talk to, you know, your everyday people along the river. He liked digging ditches with laborers, et cetera. And today, and today in today's world, you might say, oh, well, good on them. You know, they sort of want to be down and dirty with, you know, the real people, but not in that.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Time when he's just like me, for real, you know, like. And I, I'm the sort of person who's so much more interested in ordinary people than royals a lot of the time, specifically because they're so different to us and they have this, these really different circumstances and you know, to me, that really tugs on my heartstrings.

[Daniel Raggett]

Yeah, because you sort of feel there's a hint in the play that he's a leader who's just born into the wrong time. And I mean, although having said that, it is interesting that. I guess. I guess I was going to say it's interesting that we don't have a very prominent gay member of the royal family. I know we, the living royal family. I know the queen's uncle was gay, but it's not much talked about. So it isn't. It's interesting that that kind of heteronormative world and structure really does impose its rules and codes.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Absolutely. And I mean, almost to a certain extent, even now, I wonder if we would even know because, you know, that's right. Would it be something that they would wish to suppress? You know, because we're still not, we're not quite there yet, are we?

[Daniel Raggett]

No, no, no, no, indeed.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

Okay, so relationship, you know, and we, we keep talking about her normativity and queerness because really at the heart of this play, yes, this is a story about power, but it's also about relationships. You've got Galveston, you've got Isabella, you've got Mortimer Spencer. Oh, oh, gosh, absolutely. And they're absolutely central to this play. Like these. This back and forth, this give and take. How did you then develop this in these dynamics with your fellow actors? When you're attempting to bring a really complex situation to life? How do you make that legible?

[Daniel Raggett]

Well, one of the things we do is talk about our histories. Not our histories, our characters histories, and we dovetail that with the actual history. So, for example, it was really important for me to find out that when Edward was very, very young, a baby, both his father and mother went to France for a few years, and then when they came back, she only lasted nine more months, and then she died. So he grew up without his mother, as most royals, I guess, do, because they have nannies, et cetera. But I think that was a kind of key thing for me, that, yeah, his parents, like, left when he was a baby. Isabella, I think, was 12 when she was conjoined, politically conjoined to him. I think they married later, but it was decided when she was 12. So they were kind of thrown together when they were children. So that's complex in itself. So. So Ruta Gedwintas, who's the actress playing Isabella, and I really have done quite a bit of discussion around what was their marriage like, did they have happy times? When was the last time they had sex, for example? You know, and I guess the same then, obviously, with Gaveston, because one of the things I read. Who knows, you maybe can tell me if this is true or not. But apparently it was Edward I who introduced Galveston as a kind of playmate to Edward ii. And clearly, you know, we can decide, well, was there something that they were caught doing that therefore, Edward I said, right, this guy has to leave the court now because he's a bad influence on my son. And so we've made up our own kind of histories there, which can hopefully feed then what happens when we're acting in scenes in the play. And we did a lot of improvisation, actually, around those. I mean, not sexual improvisation, I should say, but we did a lot of, you know, we improvised Dad's funeral, for example, and that was. That's really been helpful for us.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

I think that's so useful to really have these dynamics and these relationships and stories that you're. You're building out in this world.

[Daniel Raggett]

World, yeah. And it is world building. We have to take what we can from the history and then dramatize it. So. Yes.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

All right. Well, speaking of dramatic, if you are the person who is portraying Edward ii, there's such a huge dramatic transformation for him as a character because, you know, you kind Of Begin, he's at the height of his power. Everything is sort of going well for him. Then by the end, he's broken, you know, spiritually, politically, physically. And what's it like to try to embody that as an actor?

[Daniel Raggett]

Well, we. So we did a run through yesterday in the rehearsal room, and it was the first time we had a little audience because staff members, wardrobe technicians and wig technicians came, you know, to see people from the marketing department, et cetera. And it was really, you know, you feel very self conscious because, you know, they're the first audience that you've had. But it was interesting just getting to do that full journey. And, you know, in the rehearsal, we did ask the cast if it was okay for me to kind of disrobe, because I didn't disrobe fully, but I will do in the production, because obviously the death is the death. And. But it was interesting just to start in full regalia. And the costume itself has this huge journey. So I start full of medals, full of pomp, the coronation robe, et cetera, the ermine, and then end up in my underpants in a muddy, wet dungeon. And that is a kind of amazing. Yeah, it is an amazing journey and feeling loneliness throughout with the odd moments of joy with Gaveston.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

I mean, it's a real stripping of all of the worldly things that would protect you, especially as a queer person. You know, everything. All the armor that you need just to function in the world at all.

[Daniel Raggett]

Yes.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And then, yes, he's working down absolutely nothing.

[Daniel Raggett]

And then he has this line which is, sweet God of heaven, make me despise this transitory pomp. So as he's given up his crown, he's asking God to help him despise all the jewelry, all the pomp, all the power, so that he can just be content with being nothing. Which, by the way, is a line that Shakespeare wrote for Edward ii. Cause, you know, this play heavily influenced Richard ii. But Shakespeare did coin this amazing phrase about feeling like you're nothing.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

And I mean, how to ever grapple with feeling like you're nothing while at the same time, for the majority of your life, you've been told you're the center of the kingdom, one of the centers of the world, even by God. And I mean. And of course, there's also religious ramifications for that, you know, because if God's given you this, what does it mean for you personally? What does it mean for the universe if that can be stripped away?

[Daniel Raggett]

Yes. And he asked to sit forever enthronized in heaven. It's sort of amazing. The language of the play is really extraordinary.

[Dr. Eleanor Janega]

I mean, this is just. I'm sorry, but as a medieval nerd, it's like, yeah, right, finally a play for us. But I'm so excited because I think that, you know, you've done such a great job to modernize it and make it make sense in a really modern world that thinks about things a lot differently.

[Daniel Raggett]

Yeah.

[Matt Lewis]

This second. Edward has ruled for two decades. We have learned about him the whole hard way. Favorites fighting his own nobles, driving his wife away. His reign is scarred by his own hand. But here's a man you could share an ale with who would help you fix your leaky roof. How do we reconcile the good man with the terrible ruler? That is a question for the ages. But King Edward. Edward now faces a more pressing problem. Where does he go from here? He has all the power in the world, but it's a world that's turned against him. Can he rebalance all that is shifted out of his grasp? Does his England want him anymore? If not, then what's to be done? England hasn't seen a king deposed since before the conquest. Now every Englishman can feel the earth rumbling beneath his feet as Edward's curses ring in our ears. The wolves are circling. They have the scent of fear in their nostrils. They bare their teeth, snarling and snapping at the lamb that sits on the throne. An end is coming. We will soon discover what it will mean for England and for Edward. Join Eleanor on Tuesday to continue our series about the Plantagenets. Next we turn to Queen Isabella, the she wolf. Edward II's long suffering queen who took control of her destiny, aligning herself with a powerful maybe lover, Roger Mortimer. How did Isabella transform from a sidelined wife into one of the most formidable figures in English history? Don't forget to also subscribe or follow us on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts and tell all of your friends and family that you've gone medieval. You can sign up to History Hit to access hundreds of hours of original documentaries with a new release every week. And all of History Hit's podcasts ad free. Sign up [e-mail] history subscribe. Anyway, I better let you go. I've been Matt Lewis and we've just gone medieval with History Hit.

[Chris Given-Wilson]

Applebee's has a brand new Big Easy menu. It features all your Bourbon street favorites in one in one new menu. Plus a new Bourbon street chicken and chicken and andouille sausage pennies done at just 11.99 with Cajun flavors. Sure to get your oh, sure to get your taste buds dancing. Applebee's is bringing Bourbon street to your street. Make sure to try the Big Easy menu now or only at Applebee's. Only at Applebee's.

[Daniel Raggett]

Limited time, price participation and selection may vary.