Medieval Intrigue
Decoding Royal Conspiracies, by Ian Mortimer
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9738696 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher Fletcher (0000-0003-2055-154X, Laboratoire de Médiévistique Occidentale, Université de Paris I, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 127 |
| Issue | 527 |
| Pages | 963-964 |
| Publication date | 2012-08-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The English Historical Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0013-8266 • E-ISSN: 1477-4534 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/ehr/ces141 |
| OpenAlex | W2333452801 |
| Language | EN |
There are several books trying to get out of this collection of essays, some of which are more successful than others. The framework which the author would like to impose is a theoretical one: a revolutionary new historical method based on ‘information streams’, ‘objective inconsistencies’ and a ‘biographical’ approach. In practice, though, this perspective is overshadowed by a second one: that of reasserting and building upon his earlier work, in which he argues that Edward II did not die in Berkeley Castle in September 1327 but escaped and lived on for more than a decade. This argument and its consequences occupy most of the book. Besides the theoretical introduction and essays dealing directly or indirectly with Edward’s fate, there are two chapters which cover the succession to the Crown, and a final broad consideration of the phenomenon of royal pretenders, which takes us back to Edward II. Was Edward II murdered in Berkeley Castle, then? Ian Mortimer has put together an impressive set of arguments which suggest that he probably was not. First he applies the method of ‘information streams’—in short, paying attention to why and when a document was drawn up, and to the known sources of the information it contains—arguing that all extant documents which serve to establish Edward’s sodomitical reputation and his death by poker are based on late and unreliable sources. This, though, merely sets the scene for the main act: an article already published in this journal in which Mortimer draws into question all the positive evidence for Edward II’s death in 1327 (ante, cxx [2005], 1175–1214). In subsequent chapters, he strengthens this argument. First, he argues that the earl of Kent was not duped into rebelling to save the ex-king in 1330, but rather that he and his co-conspirators were acting on good information. Then, Mortimer carefully reconstructs the links with the English crown of the Fieschi family, including Manuele Fieschi, the author of a letter to Edward III which describes his father’s escape and subsequent travels. For Mortimer, this letter served to arrange a meeting between Edward III and the ex-king near Koblenz in 1338
Argument (complex analysis · Extant taxon · Political science · Reputation · Scholarship · Sociology · Classics · History · Law · Medieval Literature and History
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |