Queen Isabella: Treachery, Adultery, and Murder in Medieval England

by Alison Weir

  It has been suggested that Isabella also kept the Prince in France because she was aware that Charles IV had as yet no male heir and was hopeful that he might name this promising boy, his nephew, as his successor, in the event of Queen Jeanne’s failing to bear sons. This is possible. It is certain, too, that the presence of the heir to England in France crystallized the ambitions of the English exiles.

  Soon after Michaelmas, Edward wrote to Isabella, “advising that she should escort her son back to England as soon as possible. Isabella replied that the King of France was treating them with great kindness and all but keeping them there against their will.”58 Not satisfied with this, Edward began sending Isabella further commands and entreaties to come home59 and ordered Stratford to broach the matter with the Queen and Charles IV. During their discussions, Isabella expressed her anger over the sequestration of her estates and her fears that she would not be safe in England. The Bishop insisted that she would come to no harm, but she was evidently not reassured by this and tried again to put Edward off with a succession of flimsy and frivolous excuses.60

  On 18 October, the King complained to the Pope about Charles’s retention of the Agenais. He also expressed his mounting concern about the unwonted prolongation of the Queen’s visit to France.61

  Isabella was now spending much of her time with King Charles and Queen Jeanne, “and the news she told them from England gave them little pleasure.”62 Much of it concerned the activities of Walter Stapledon, Bishop of Exeter.

  Bishop Stapledon had known that he was not welcome in France: it was said that, because he was closely associated with the Despensers, if he ever set foot in that kingdom, he would be tortured.63 Before he left England, he had confided his fears for his safety to the King, who had asked Isabella for an undertaking that the Bishop would come to no harm, which she readily gave. Despite this, he was treated by French courtiers and officials “as if he were guilty of some crime,”64 which seems to have made him somewhat paranoid.

  Prior to his departure, Stapledon had been commanded by Edward to raise a loan to help meet the expenses of Isabella’s household, but the money was only to be given to her once she had agreed to return with Stapledon to England.65 Clearly, Edward had from the first been edgy at the prospect of Isabella’s being in France with his heir in her custody.

  Stapledon had so far failed to raise the loan.66 He did not like what he saw of the Queen’s activities in Paris, especially the favor shown by her to the English exiles who were now clustering around her, and he was greatly perturbed by the intelligence that had come to him concerning the intrigues of this group, who were apparently plotting nothing less than the murder of the King, an act of the most heinous treason. This is the earliest evidence for this being the ultimate aim of Edward’s enemies.

  Stapledon was never to accuse Isabella directly of being a party to such treason, but it is hard to believe that she was unaware of what was being discussed by the members of her circle. That she should sanction, or engage in, discussions concerning the regicide of her husband the King, which was then regarded as one of the most dreadful and sacrilegious crimes that could be committed and carried with it terrible penalties, is testimony to the virulence of her anger against Edward, and to the change in her character that had been brought about by his and the Despensers’ ill-treatment of her during the past years. Above all, her actions at this time must have been dictated by her fear of returning to face the wrath of the Despensers and the King, who she knew from bitter experience could not be trusted to keep his word. And doubtless she was being pressured by those who were convinced that the removal of Edward II was a political necessity after years of his inflicting misgovernment and rapacious favorites upon his subjects.

  Stapledon was so horrified at what he had learned that he was desperate to return to England without delay and was seeking a way to do so without alerting anyone to his suspicions.

  Without a doubt, Isabella did not like Stapledon: he was too closely associated with the Despenser administration to be any friend to her, and he had a reputation for being “unreasonably avaricious; during his term of office [as Treasurer], he had become remarkably rich, whence it seemed that he had made his wealth by extortion rather than by honest dealing.”67 Unsurprisingly, he was “excluded from [the Queen’s] secret conferences,”68 and she refused to entertain him69 or receive any letters from him, sending them back unread through Stratford.70 But she could not let his failure to raise the loan pass and summoned him to her presence. This must have been before 22 October, on which date she left Paris to visit Le Bourget and Rheims with her son; she would not return until 12 November, by which time Stapledon would be back in England.71

  Their interview must have left her more convinced than ever that the Despensers must be removed and him painfully aware that she was impervious to any influence he might try to exert over her.

  Isabella began by reminding Stapledon that he had been commanded by the King to help finance her stay in Paris but had done nothing. He, in turn, lied to her that the King had written summoning him home, whereat Isabella demanded to see the letter. Of course, Stapledon could not produce it, although he said he would do so. By now, he must have made it obvious to Isabella that he was fearful of staying in France and wanted to return to England forthwith, but she forbade him to do so without her permission.72 Undoubtedly, she was concerned about her funds and expected him to obey his orders, but she was also almost certainly alarmed at what he might have found out.

  It is significant that, soon after this interview, Stapledon received a death threat. This suggests that Isabella knew exactly what the English exiles were plotting and that, before she left Paris, she warned them they might be exposed. The consequence of this was that someone threatened Stapledon, not dreaming that he would defy the Queen’s order to stay in Paris.

  On 31 October, Bishop Stapledon suddenly arrived back in England73 and hastened to the royal headquarters at Portchester Castle in great distress. Certain of the King’s banished enemies, he warned Edward, were plotting to kill him. His own life had been threatened, and he had secretly escaped from France under cover of darkness, disguised “as a merchant or pilgrim.” It was claimed that he had left behind his household “to pretend he was there,” but his expense account shows that every one of his retinue of forty-nine men, along with thirty-two horses, accompanied him, and that they traveled in three ships.74 This suggests that his flight had been planned carefully in advance.75 Stapledon now urged the King to demand the immediate return of the Queen and the Prince.76

  Evidently, Stapledon felt embarrassed about the precipitous and undoubtedly rude manner in which he had deserted the Queen and left the French court, for he had the grace to write to her excusing his conduct, taking care not to apportion any blame to her.77

  On 14 November, probably as a result of Stapledon’s revelations, Edward apparently ceased paying Isabella’s expenses, for her accounts come to an abrupt end on that date.78 Evidently, he was not prepared to finance her self-imposed exile any longer. It was probably this that hardened Isabella’s resolve against him and forced her to declare her defiance.

  The Vita Edwardi Secundi states that “when the King sent his son to France, he ordered his wife to return to England without delay” and then refers to messengers laying this command before the Queen in the presence of Charles IV. In fact, given that Isabella had not yet declared her reasons for staying in France, it is more likely that Edward sent his demand in November rather than September and that he sent it via Stratford, who was the messenger in question. Isabella was evidently prepared for this.

  “When this command had been laid before the King of France and the Queen, she replied: ‘I feel that marriage is a joining together of man and woman, maintaining the undivided habit of life, and that someone has come between my husband and myself, trying to break this bond. I protest that I will not return until this intruder is removed, but, discarding my marriage garment, shall assume the robes of widowhood an
d mourning until I am avenged of this Pharisee.’” This last word meant an opponent of Christ, or one who separates. Charles IV, seeing Isabella’s distress and “not wishing to detain her, said, ‘The Queen has come [to France] of her own will, and may freely return when she so wishes. But if she prefers to remain in these parts, she is my sister, and I refuse to expel her.’”79

  From now on, Isabella made a point of wearing only simple black mourning garments, with a nunlike veil and a barbe above the chin, “like a doleful lady who has lost her lord.”80 We may imagine that, far from concealing her charms, this severe attire enhanced her famous beauty to striking effect and aroused men’s sympathy, as she had certainly intended.

  At the end of November, Stratford arrived back in England “and reported all this to the King.”81 He also gave him a letter from Isabella, in which she declared that neither she nor her son would return to his court until the Despensers had been dismissed from his presence, for she believed that “it was the[ir] intention to cause her to be put to death if she returned to England.” She also insisted on reaching an agreement with Edward regarding her status and her income.82 In another letter, Isabella warned that she and her brother, with the aid of her supporters in France, intended to do “that which will turn out not to the prejudice of the lord King, but to the destruction of Hugh alone.”83 This could mean only one thing: a show of armed force against England with the intention of removing the favorite.

  At face value, Isabella’s demands and threats indicate that she was still willing to return to Edward, but on her own terms. Her ultimate aim at this time must have been the assassination of the Despensers. Given Edward’s long history of breaking his word and putting the interests of his favorites before all other considerations, he could hardly be counted on to send them away forever for her sake. Nor could she have expected them to remain meekly in exile, causing no trouble. She must have known that to return to England and trust to Edward to keep his word would be foolish in the extreme. How many times had he been constrained to banish his favorites and then secretly recalled them? And Despenser, she must have known, would not hesitate to take a brutal revenge on one who had so opposed him, while Edward had already demonstrated that he was hardly likely to intervene on Isabella’s behalf.

  But did Isabella really believe that Edward would accede to her demands? If she did, she was less of a realist than her other deeds proclaim her to be. No, it is far more likely that Isabella made those demands in the full expectation that Edward would refuse them and thus give her a pretext for remaining in France until her future could be safely assured through the intervention of her brother and her supporters. As for her threats against Despenser, she had given Edward due warning, and Hugh’s fate would now be his responsibility.

  Edward, thick-skinned and self-centered as he was, and not well endowed with great powers of perception, was shocked by his wife’s ultimatum. On 18 November, Parliament had met at the Tower of London, and before it rose on 5 December, having been transferred to Westminster, the King appeared before the magnates and prelates “and began to rehearse what had happened in a short speech,” which amounted to a public complaint about the Queen’s conduct, which now appeared not only disloyal and undutiful but menacing and scandalous. He told the assembly:

  You know how providentially, as then it seemed, the Queen crossed to France to make peace, being told that when her mission was accomplished, she should at once return. And this she promised with a good will. And on her departure, she did not seem to anyone to be offended. As she took her leave, she saluted all and went away joyfully. But now someone has changed her attitude. Someone has primed her with inventions. For I know that she has not fabricated any affront out of her own head. Yet she says that Hugh le Despenser is her adversary and hostile to her. It is surprising that she has conceived this dislike of Hugh, for when she departed, towards no one was she more agreeable, myself excepted. For this reason, Hugh is much cast down, but he is nevertheless prepared to show his innocence in any way whatsoever. Hence I firmly believe that the Queen has been led into this error at the suggestion of someone, and he is in truth wicked and hostile, whoever he may be. Now therefore deliberate wisely, that she whom the teaching of evil men incites to guile may be led back to the path of unity by your prudent and kindly reproof.84

  Who was the “someone,” the man who had led Isabella astray? Edward’s reference to “evil men” probably refers to the group of exiles that had attached itself to Isabella in Paris, and clearly, he did not know which one of them to blame most. If anyone had influenced Isabella, it was perhaps Richmond, who had also refused to obey an order to return home, and who certainly held great sway with the Queen.

  Edward’s defense of Despenser cannot have impressed his listeners, most of whom would have known that Hugh had indeed given Isabella many causes for offense and had repeatedly proved himself hostile to her. Yet the refusal of the Queen of England to return home was creating a major scandal as well as undermining national security, and the lords, however sympathetic they were toward her, were anxious to put an end to this situation as soon as possible.

  In response to the King’s appeal, Despenser made a public declaration to the Lords that his intentions toward the Queen had always been innocent of malice. Edward then began to put pressure on the bishops, who reluctantly agreed to write collectively to Isabella, as “fathers” to a “dear daughter,” exhorting her to set aside “her baseless ill-feeling” and return home to her husband. Their letter, which was dated 1 December 1325, read:

  Most dear and potent lady, the whole country is disturbed by your news, and the answers which you have lately sent to our lord King; and because you delay your return out of hatred for Hugh le Despenser, everyone predicts that much evil will follow. Indeed, Hugh le Despenser has solemnly demonstrated his innocence before all, and that he has never harmed the Queen, but done everything in his power to help her; and that he will always in future do this, he has confirmed by his corporeal oath. He added moreover that he could not believe that these threats ever proceeded from your head alone, but that they come from some other source, especially as before your departure, you showed yourself gracious to him, and afterwards sent him friendly letters, which he produced in full Parliament.

  The phraseology in this letter so closely mirrors that in the King’s speech that preceded it that one cannot avoid the suspicion that these words had been dictated to the bishops by either Edward himself or Despenser.

  The letter continues:

  Wherefore, dearest lady, [we] beseech you as [our] lady, [we] warn you as a daughter, to return to our lord King, your husband, putting aside all rancour. You who have gone away for the sake of peace, do not, for the sake of peace, delay to return. For all the inhabitants of our land fear that many evils will result from your refusal to return. They fear the arrival of foreigners and that their goods will be plundered. They do not think that this comes from due affection, that you should wish to destroy a people so devoted to you, through hatred of one man. But as for what you have written, that what your brother the King of France and your other friends of their country intend to do on your behalf, will turn out not to the prejudice of the lord King or anyone else, but to the destruction of Hugh alone. Dearest and most powerful lady, refuse to give an opening to such a business, as its furthering can in all probability bring irreparable loss. The English people predict from these threats the coming of foreigners, and say, if the French come, they will plunder the land. It is impossible that the innocent should not suffer equally with the guilty [was this a Freudian slip, an admission that Despenser was guilty?], and what the innocent do not snatch away they shall lose. Alas! If things turn out thus, it may happen that we shall regard as a stepmother her whom we had hoped to have as a patron. Alas! Clergy and people with complaining voice reiterate their fear that they and theirs will be utterly destroyed through the hatred felt for one man. Wherefore, lady Queen, accept wise counsel and do not delay your return. For your longed-
for arrival will restrain the malice of men and restrict all opportunities for evil.85

  This was a clever letter, constructed so as to put Isabella firmly in the wrong and place upon her the responsibility for any hostilities that resulted from her action. “But notwithstanding this letter, mother and son refused to return to England.”86

  Meanwhile, Isabella had begun to find herself seriously short of money and unable to maintain the state required of a queen and pay all her servants, so she sent some of her people home.87 At the end of November, members of her entourage and Prince Edward’s began arriving back in England.88 Hamo de Hethe, Bishop of Rochester, met some of them while he was traveling through Kent, and they told him that the Queen had sent them back because Stapledon had fled from France without giving her any money with which to pay them.89

  The Queen was now relying on loans from the Bardi,90 but there was no guarantee that these would continue, so Charles IV again came timely to her rescue and lent her 1,000 Paris livres.91 According to Froissart, he told her, “We have enough for you as well as for ourselves,” and “he had everything necessary supplied to her.” This was no purely altruistic or fraternal gesture, for Charles had every intention of exploiting the bad relations between his sister and her husband with a view to recovering Gascony. He wrote firmly and unequivocally to Edward “that he could not permit her to return to him unless she were guaranteed from the evil that was meditated against her by her enemies, the Despensers.”92

  On 1 December, the day on which he obliged the bishops to write to the Queen, Edward himself sent her a letter ordering her to come home forthwith.