mother and Mortimer at the head of the rebel army, and had been declared regent. But as the authority he possessed was a mere name, the kingdom was in a deplorable state. There was no government, the courts of justice were shut, and the people committed all kinds of violence without control. The mobs of London and other cities committed robberies and murders with impunity, and were called by the name of the Riflers. The queen and Mortimer having got the king into their power, declared him incapable of governing, deposed him and proclaimed the prince king in his stead. But the prince refused to be king in his father's lifetime without his consent. To remove this scruple, the parliament sent a deputation to Kenilworth, to intimate to the king the sentence of his deposition, and to procure his consent to the coronation of his son. As soon as the miserable king saw the deputies, he fainted; and when he recovered, and was told their errand, he said to them that he was in their power, and must submit to their will. Judge Trussel, one of the party, then, in the name of the people of England, renounced all fealty to Edward of Carnarvon; and sir Thomas Blount, high steward, broke his staff, and declared all the king's officers discharged from their service. Thus ended the reign of Edward the Second, a period of nearly twenty years of public disgrace and private calamity. But his own miseries did not end with it. After his deposition he was put under the care of the earl of Lancaster but the queen and Mortimer, thinking that Lancaster treated the king too humanely, removed him to the custody of Lord Berkeley, John de Maltravers, and sir Thomas Gournay, who were to keep him each a montli by turns. Lord Berkeley behaved kindly to the unfortunate Edward; but it seems as if the other two were desirous to kill him by ill-usage. They hurried him about from castle to castle, in the middle of the night, and but half clothed. Who demanded the coronation of the prince of Wales? Did the king submit patiently to his enemies? Did king Edward's miseries terminate with the loss of the crown One day Maltravers ordered him to he shaved with water out of a dirty ditch, and refused to let him have any other The king shed tears at this usage. These varied insults and cruelties did not satisfy the savage hearts of the queen and Mortimer, who, therefore, ordered Gournay and Maltravers to despatch him without delay. And they, taking the opportunity of Lord Berkeley's absence, murdered the king at Berkeley castle, with circumstances of great cruelty. He was murdered on the 21st of September, 1327, in the forty-third year of his age. He was called Edward of Carnarvon, from having been born there It appears from the historians of this age that little of the present refinement of the English nation was then known. Froissart, a French historian, tells us in his Chronicles, that "the English were so proud and haughty, that they could not behave to the people of other nations with civility." Nor does he give a more favorable account of the Scots; for he says of them, "they are naturally fierce and unpolished, and in Scotland there is little or no politeness, the people being a herd of savages, envying the riches of others, and tenacious of their own possessions." Erse or Gaelic was the original language of the Scots; but great part of the Lowlands of Scotland being conquered by the Saxons, about the time when they made themselves masters of England, the Saxon became the language of that part of the country. The Saxon, so introduced into Scotland, continuing afterwards unmixed with the Norman, remained much purer there than in England. In England there arose, in different districts, so great a dif ference of dialect and pronunciation, that one half of the kingdom did not understand the other. The domestic manners of the English were very differ ent in the fourteenth century from those of our age At whose instigation was Edward II. murdered? What says the historian Froissart of the English and Scots of the 14th sentury? What was the language of the British at that time? Though famine sometimes followed war, and the neglect of agriculture, the nobles lived gluttonously and wastefully This extravagance was checked at one time by interference of the king. Edward the Second issued a proclamation forbidding the people of his realm to have at dinner more than two courses. 'Whereas, by the outrageous and excessive multitude of meats and dishes which the great men of our kingdom have used, and still use in their castles, many great evils have come upon our kingdom, the health of our subjects has been injured, their goods consumed," &c. &c. The usual hour of dinner amongst the higher classes was eleven o'clock in the morning. They had no meal equivalent to our tea; but early in the evening had a supper. And, in great houses, before the company retired to Sed, cakes and spiced wines were handed round. 66 The houses of the nobility had commonly some sort of garden or pleasance" attached to them; and all the monasteries had orchards and gardens, including a “herberie," or physic garden, the chief medicinal nostrums of the times being preparations from herbs. We do not hear of ornamental gardening till many years afterwards; and the list of culinary vegatables at this time cultivated was very scanty, there being few besides carrots, parsnips, and cabbages, in general use There was then, not such a thing as a potato in Europe. CHAPTER XVI. EDWARD III. [Years after Christ, 1327-1377.] Edward III., at the commencement of his reign, not being more than fifteen years old, was only a tool in the Was luxury known in England in Edward the second's time? How were mea.s regulated in Englard? What was the horticulture of England in the 14th century What was the conduct of Isabella and Mortimer after the death of Ed ward II.? pro nands of the queen and Mortimer, who confiscated the perty of the Spensers, and appropriated it to their own purposes. They caused the late king's brother, the earl of Kent, to be executed under a false charge of treason; and by their revengeful and rapacious conduct made themselves so much hated by the people, that the nation would soon have been thrown into internal confusion, had not a foreign foe appeared, and drawn the public attention to a more pressing danger. Robert Bruce thought this a favorable time to retaliate on the English the sufferings they had brought on Scotland, and began hostilities on the border. Edward immediately took the field against him, and though no important action was performed on either side, showed Bruce that he had roused a far more formidable antagonist than the late king had been. Bruce was glad to put a stop to the war by entering into a negotiation with the queen for the marriage of his infant son with her daughter Jane. Edward married Philippa of Hainault, a A. D. 1328. queen of the highest and most irreproachable character, and no less distinguished for her sense and intrepidity, when the occasion called these qualities forth, than for her benevolence and gentleness to all whom she could benefit by her kindness. Edward also is esteemed one of the greatest of English kings, though he has been more commonly admired for his bravery and military skill than for his better qualities. He was majestic in his figure, and his countenance bore a very noble expression. His address was pleasing; he was well versed in the learning of his time, and had an excellent understanding; but, unfortunately for his country, all the powers of his mind were early engrossed by one ruinous desire, that of making conquests. His mother had had three brothers, who were all kings of France one after the other, and who all died leaving only daughters. There is a law in France, called the Salique law, which excludes daughters from inheriting the crown. Consequently, when Charles, the last of the three What disposed Edward and Robert Bruce to make peace? What was the character of Edward III.? Upon what account did Edward III. claim the throne of France? brothers, died, Philip of Valois, his uncle's son, became king, as being the next male heir. But Edward affirmed himself to be the next male heir, being nephew to the late king, and contended that though his mother, according to the French law, could not be queen, still he might be king as inheriting through her. But before Edward could be master of France, it was necessary for him to shake off the bondage in which his mother and Mortimer still kept him. He had soon an opportunity of doing this. Isabella and Mortimer (now earl of March) resided at Nottingham castle. Edward, by the assistance of the governor, contrived to get through some subterranean passages into an apartment where Mortimer and the queen were; and in spite of the entreaties of the queen, who called 66 her son upon to have pity on the gentle Mortimer," he seized, and had him carried away prisoner to Westminster. Mortimer was soon after hanged on a gibbet at Tyburn. The queen-mother was deprived of all her ill-gotten riches, and was confined during the remainder of her life a sort of state prisoner at Rising. A. D. 1331. The king now took the administration of affairs into his own hands, and by his wise regulations gave early proof (for he was very young) of his great capacity: but unhappily his love of war soon called him off from the arts of peace. He renewed hostilities with Scotland, where David, son of the brave Robert Bruce, was now king, a child of only seven years old. David in less than a year was driven from the throne his father had so hardly won, and was conveyed into France; and the son of John Baliol was recalled from his retirement and made king of Scotland, if king he could be called, who was only a tool in the hands of Edward, and who was placed on the throne and displaced from it, as the party of the English or of The Bruce prevailed. At last, Edward, tired of this unprofitable war, determined to abandon it, and to apply all his strength to a project How did Edward punish his mother and Mortimer? What happened to young David Bruce? When did Edward prosecute his pretensions to the doininion of France? |