Hailed at birth as a new King Arthur, Edward II lost his crown to his wife
Prophets greeted the baby born at Caernarfon Castle in 1284 as a new King Arthur. Instead Edward II lost at Bannockburn, fought his own barons over two favourites, and was finally toppled by his queen, Isabella, and her ally Roger Mortimer, ending his days a prisoner at Berkeley Castle.
His father, Edward I, was a formidable warrior who crushed baronial revolts, conquered North Wales and claimed overlordship of Scotland; one historian calls him an efficient bully. He chose Caernarfon, freshly conquered and rich in Roman associations, as the birthplace of his fourth son, who became heir after his brother Alphonso died. The inheritance was heavy: an unfinished war in Scotland, friction with France over Gascony, restless barons and debts of about 200,000 pounds.
Edward became king in 1307 and married Isabella, daughter of Philip IV of France, the next year. His devotion to Piers Gaveston, in his household since 1300 and perhaps a friend, lover or sworn brother, enraged the nobility. The barons forced reforms known as the Ordinances of 1311, and a faction led by his cousin Thomas, Earl of Lancaster, seized and killed Gaveston in 1312. Two years later Robert the Bruce crushed the English at Bannockburn, and famine followed.
A new favourite, Hugh Despenser the Younger, sparked a fresh revolt in 1321. Edward struck back, executed Lancaster, cancelled the 1311 reforms and ruled harshly alongside the Despensers, confiscating rivals' estates, while settling for a truce with Robert. Sent to France to negotiate peace in 1325, Isabella refused to come home, joined the exiled Mortimer and landed with a small army in 1326. Edward fled to Wales, was captured in November, and was made to give up the throne to his son, Edward III, in January 1327. He died at Berkeley on 21 September that year, probably on the new regime's orders.
Christopher Marlowe turned the Gaveston story into his 1592 play Edward II, and many later works have dwelt on the possibility that the two men were lovers. Contemporaries judged him a failure, but some 19th-century scholars credited his reign with strengthening Parliament, and historians still argue whether he was idle and incompetent or simply a reluctant king out of his depth.
Source: Edward II
