by Ian Mortimer
In this madness, Pembroke and Badlesmere had begun to act together, as the two most experienced and sensible elder statesmen. They urged both parties to come to an agreement but, far from being reasonable, Lancaster would not even attend a conference. He feared he would be murdered at court, and anyway he preferred the distinction of being a leader of the king’s enemies to the role of a faithful subject. It was a position which suited his cantankerous nature. But such a stance was likely to lead to a national disaster, as anyone with a clear mind could see. It was impossible to defend the northern border against the Scots without Lancaster’s help, Parliament could not function properly, Lancaster acted at every opportunity to impede the government, and there was a constant risk of civil war.
Two papal envoys had finally secured Lancaster’s tentative agreement to come to court in September 1317; but then Edward had stupidly let his favourites talk him into attacking Lancaster’s castle at Pontefract in retaliation for the occupation by Lancaster’s agents of two royal castles in the constableship of Roger Damory. Only Pembroke’s intervention had prevented bloodshed and probable war. Once again Lancaster withdrew his agreement to negotiate. Back at the point where they had started, Pembroke and Badlesmere decided on a new approach: they sought to control the king’s favourite and thus to direct the king in the way he preferred to be directed: by his closest companions. Accordingly in late November 1317 they sealed a contract with Roger Damory so that Damory would advise the king only in conjunction with Pembroke and Badlesmere. And by the spring of 1318 the two elder statesmen had achieved what they set out to do: a position of real influence over the king and his courtiers, so that civil war could be averted.
While Pembroke and Badlesmere had been working together to restore sanity at court, the English bishops and the Archbishop of Dublin had been working on the Earl of Lancaster. At their suggestion Lancaster met with them at Leicester in April, where negotiations began on a patched-up truce between the earl and the king. Enough progress was made for Pembroke and Badlesmere to join the earl and the prelates. On 12 April an outline agreement was reached on statements of intent, and enough concessions were offered for there now to be hope of a settlement. It was at this point that Roger Mortimer was summoned back from Ireland, to help negotiate on behalf of the king.
Roger did not rush. It seems that he was delayed from sailing until the end of the month, possibly due to adverse weather conditions.2 He did not reach the English court until July, by which time preliminary meetings between the king and the Earl of Lancaster had taken place. He was not part of the embassy which was sent from Northampton to Lancaster on 4 July. This team, which included the Archbishop of Dublin, the Bishops of Ely and Norwich, the Earl of Pembroke and two barons (Hugh Despenser and Bartholomew de Badlesmere) secured agreement on a number of points: that gifts made contrary to the Ordinances should be revoked and that Damory, Montagu and Audley should be banished from the court, except to answer military and parliamentary summons.3 They conceded that a permanent royal council, consisting of eight bishops, four earls and four barons, would monitor the king’s government over the course of each year, two bishops, one earl and one baron being with him at all times. For his part Lancaster promised he would attend the king and fight against the Scots when ordered to do so. However, having returned to court, Hugh Despenser tried to persuade the king not to confirm the terms agreed on his behalf. With Audley, Damory and Montagu also stamping their feet at the thought of being expelled from court, the king’s will gave way, and only the determination of the Earl of Pembroke saved the agreement. A second deputation, with more reliable members, was organised. Hugh Despenser was dropped, and Roger, who was back at court by 18 July,4 was invited to join, probably at the joint instigation of Badlesmere and Pembroke. On 20 July the new delegation set out from Northampton for Lancaster. They returned on 29 July, having made good progress. A third delegation set out on 1 August, consisting of Roger and the same delegates as the second delegation with the additions of the Bishop of Norwich, Sir John de Somery, Sir Ralph Bassett and Sir John Botetourt. Six days later, between Loughborough and Leicester, Roger witnessed the kiss of peace exchanged between the king and his rebellious cousin. At Leake, on 9 August, the final treaty was drawn up and witnessed.
The treaty secured peace for the time being, and was a significant diplomatic achievement. For Roger it marked a personal milestone in several ways. He was chosen to be one of the four barons on the permanent royal council, and thereby acquired a position of importance in the government. Equally significantly, he had proved himself as a negotiator, a military general and a provincial governor. He was also appointed to the committee to reform the royal household. Roger may well have reflected how far he had come since he had been a mere ward in the household, fourteen years before.
Political authority carried with it financial rewards. Roger’s fee for delivering Ireland from the Scots was 6,000 marks (£4,000). Some idea of how large a sum this was, and how much it reflected the king’s high regard for him, is revealed by the fact that usually the Justiciar of Ireland received a salary of £500. In addition there were grants towards Roger’s expenses, and although payment was not as prompt as it should have been,5 Roger had every reason to be satisfied with the financial rewards for his period in Ireland. Together with the not inconsiderable sum of £2,000 which he had received from de Badlesmere, he was now a rich man indeed.
As for Ireland itself, Roger could be satisfied that his estates there were now safe from incursions by native Irish and Scots invaders. On 14 October 1318 Sir John de Bermingham, whom Roger had knighted the previous year, met Edward Bruce in battle at Faughart, just north of Dundalk. The English charged through the Scottish ranks and destroyed them, killing many. Philip de Mowbray was so badly wounded that he later died. Several Irish chiefs who had sided with Edward Bruce were also killed, including the King of the Hebrides and the King of Argyle. Hugh and Walter de Lacy escaped but Edward Bruce did not: after the battle John de Maupas’s corpse was discovered still lying on top of him; with his last breath he had ended the reign of the first and only Scottish King of Ireland. Sir John de Bermingham came to court with Edward Bruce’s head. It was the only successful overseas campaign of Edward II’s reign.
*
In December 1318 Roger journeyed back to the Welsh Marches. He was probably at Wigmore Castle for Christmas. Three days later he and his uncle, Lord Mortimer of Chirk, went to Wigmore Abbey to witness the resignation of the abbot, Philip le Galeys, in the abbot’s chamber.6 This was usual practice: frequently when the abbot of an important monastic house became too old to act, he was pensioned off and another monk elected or presented in his place. Thus Philip (who had been one of the executors of Roger’s father’s will) received a pension, servants and a room near the infirmary. In his place John de Clayhanger was appointed, a man presented to the monks and the lords by the new Bishop of Hereford, Adam of Orleton.
Contemporaries and later generations considered Adam of Orleton a cunning, calculating man, a ruthless cleric with more thought for his own authority than for his flock. Orleton was highly intelligent, cynical perhaps, but with an intolerance of foolish government and a loyalty to the Pope bordering on fanaticism. Therein lies the key to understanding his political career. Orleton had spent a considerable time at the papal court, having been despatched at a very early point in Edward’s reign to Pope Clement V. Later he was closely associated with Pope John XXII, whom he counted a personal friend. Edward’s poor government exasperated and embarrassed him on an international front. He preferred the dynamic new government espoused by his noble friends, the Mortimers, to whom he felt he owed a loyalty second only to the Pope.
The nature of Orleton’s relationship with the Mortimer family is not entirely clear. His name came from one of Roger’s manors, and he himself may have done likewise, although it seems more probable that he was born in Hereford.7 There is no doubt that he was acquainted with Roger from an early point in their respective caree
rs. His appointment by Edward II as an envoy to Pope Clement in 1307 may have had something to do with Roger’s influence. Whatever his origins, he proved to be a very political bishop. Now, at the start of 1319, he and Roger had ample opportunity to discuss matters of state, as Orleton spent six days at Wigmore.8 It was the start of a working relationship which would have the most profound consequences for both men.
It was probably also at this time, or shortly afterwards, that the wedding took place between Roger’s daughter, Maud, and John, the heir of John de Charlton, lord of Powys.9 This brings a curious political alignment to the fore, for John de Charlton’s younger brother Thomas had been the king’s unsuccessful candidate for the see of Hereford, which had been given to Orleton. Both Orleton and Thomas de Charlton had been clerks close to the royal household, and the two men went together to Avignon to petition the Pope on behalf of the king to appoint Henry de Burghersh to the see of Lincoln. Henry de Burghersh, who was not yet twenty-five, was another of Roger’s relatives, being the nephew of Bartholomew de Badlesmere. In fact Badlesmere paid the Pope no less than £15,000 of the king’s money for the appointment, which, overriding the previous election by the canons of Lincoln, some considered illegal.10 Thus it is possible to see Roger, with the help of his son’s father-in-law, Lord Badlesmere, promoting the interests of several of the most intelligent and highly educated men known at court: men who, although they were in holy orders, could wield very great power through the wealth and influence associated with an English mitre. In this respect it must be remembered that Roger’s father was himself an Oxford-educated man, who had stayed at university even after it became likely that he would succeed to the family titles and estates. In these friendships with ecclesiastics – Orleton, Charlton, Burghersh, as well as Alexander Bicknor (Archbishop of Dublin) and John de Hothum already mentioned – Roger was building an educated and diplomatic power base as well as a military one. He was in effect collecting a series of political forces, and in many respects grooming himself to take over the position of the ageing Earl of Pembroke: the king’s most astute, militarily able and independent adviser, and a foil to the antagonistic Earl of Lancaster.
Edward was mindful of Roger’s ambition and ability. While Damory or Audley had won the king’s unlimited affection for a month or six, Roger had increasingly gained the king’s respect. But, as the king’s interference in Roger’s Irish administration showed, he did not completely trust him. Roger, like Pembroke, was not a pawn. A good example is Roger’s move on the young Earl of Warwick. In early 1315, one of Roger’s vassals, Walter Hakelut, had died. The Earl of Warwick had claimed some of Walter’s lands in Wales, which Roger believed were his.11 The dispute outlived the earl, who died in 1316, passing to his under-age son. Roger saw an opportunity and purchased from the king the right to marry one of his daughters to the heir. This aligned Roger with members of a family estranged from Edward, following the death of Gaveston. It was justified by Roger on the grounds that it solved the quarrel between him and the late earl, as the disputed lands could pass in dower to the heir and Roger’s daughter and their children.12 In this way Roger was able to strengthen his family alliances, preserve his independence from the king and solve a dispute without recourse to royal favouritism. But although such moves won the king’s respect Roger could not command the king’s wholehearted trust. It was not through favouritism but through his loyal work as a governor of Ireland, a negotiator, and as a military leader, that he deserved reward, and after the success at Faughart it was obvious where his talents could most usefully be employed. In mid-March Roger was once more made governor of Ireland.
Roger did not set off straightaway. First he had to attend to the burial of his younger brother John, who had been a yeoman in the king’s service. Afterwards, in May, Roger also probably attended the marriage of his eldest daughter Margaret with Thomas, the son and heir of Lord Berkeley, which secured an earlier alliance with an important lord of the Welsh Marches.13 Interestingly Berkeley and his adherents John Maltravers and Thomas Gurney had fallen out with the Earl of Pembroke at this time, and Berkeley’s move towards Roger was a long-term political shift, not a mere interweaving of alliances but a vote of confidence in him as a leader.
From Roger’s point of view, the king’s behaviour towards him only suffered in one significant respect: his preferment of Hugh Despenser. With the king losing Damory, Audley and Montagu from court, his affections fell most heavily on Roger’s rival and the sworn enemy of the Mortimer family. And Despenser was no fool: he was working himself into a position at court as strong as Roger’s. In 1318 Despenser had been appointed to negotiate with the Scots: he too was being entrusted with more serious diplomatic business. He and Roger were not just hereditary enemies, they were rivals. Now, as Roger made his way towards Ireland, it seemed Despenser’s ambitions were on the verge of being fulfilled, as he had already partly persuaded the king to command Hugh Audley to give the castle and town of Newport to him in return for other, less choice, manors in England. He was also making plans for acquiring the lands of Roger Damory which had belonged to the Earl of Gloucester. Despenser was gradually acquiring the whole of the earldom of Gloucester, and there was nothing Roger could do to stop him.
*
Roger’s second period of administration in Ireland was far less eventful than his first. Very few Scots had survived the Battle of Faughart, and those who had had fled back to Scotland. All across the country English and Irish joined in one euphoric expression of relief. The satisfaction from the English point of view is easily understandable; the native Irish were just as glad to see the demise of the Scots. Describing the death of Edward Bruce, one Irish writer from Ulster stated that ‘there was not done from the beginning of the world a deed that was better for the men of Ireland than that deed. For there came dearth and loss of people during his time in all Ireland in general for the space of three years and a half, and people undoubtedly used to eat each other throughout Ireland.’14 As a consequence of this restored stability, the title under which Roger governed Ireland from his landing on 12 June 1319 was that of ‘Justiciar’. It was a less significant position than ‘King’s Lieutenant’, and had no huge fee attached, but it had the ring of permanency about it. In addition the king gave Roger the keeping of the royal castles of Roscommon, Rawdon and Athlone, and ordered the Exchequer not to demand any debts from him.15
Roger’s main objective as Justiciar was to keep order. In view of the recent war, this included having to make inquiries into who had aided and abetted the Scots, and who had fought well enough against them to deserve reward. Under his direction Thomas FitzJohn, Earl of Kildare, and Sir John de Bermingham (now Earl of Louth), Arnold le Poer and John Wogan were all ordered to root out the adherents of Edward Bruce, and Roger was to hold an inquisition of their findings.16 At the same time he was commanded to reward men who had fought well against Bruce. Not surprisingly he combined his rewarding of the faithful with his punishment of traitors, granting the lands of Hugh and Walter de Lacy and other rebels to his chosen faithful supporters. Among those who benefited were Sir Hugh de Turpington, John de Cusack, Miles de Verdon, Edmund de Bermingham and Adam le Breton. The rewarding of de Verdon, a pardoned rebel, in particular suggests that Roger had the essential diplomatic ability to forgive men as well as to pardon them.
Peace, and one successful harvest, were not sufficient in themselves to ensure a swift return to normality. The Dubliners, who had sacrificed their suburbs for the sake of defending their walls, needed to be pardoned for burning down a royal manor in the process, and begged to have half of the fee of their city remitted, since they could not afford to rebuild and pay their usual dues. Cork was in a similar position, having spent a large sum on a new defensive wall around the city in 1316. Limerick too was in an impoverished state. Then there were the estates of dead men. Many English subjects having been cut down in the wars, their heirs were left under age, and Roger had to grant these wardships to others or take them in hand himself. Ju
st after Roger’s departure from Ireland in May 1318, Richard de Clare, one of the greatest lords, was killed in a skirmish with the native Irish, and this too required an inquiry and a distribution of the wardship of his heir. Of course, Roger was in a strong position to affect such inquiries and allocations, and it is noticeable that the Irish estates of the dead Earl of Gloucester, which should have been allocated either to Despenser, Audley or Damory, remained in his hands. Since Roger assisted Audley’s steward and Damory’s rent collector in 1319,17 the logical explanation for the Gloucester inheritance not being allocated was that it was all at risk of being given to Hugh Despenser.
In addition to the rebuilding of the country, he had to deal with roaming bands of thieves and foragers who were taking advantage of the weakened law enforcement. Thus, although there was no full-scale military campaign, Roger’s responsibility was to stop the looters, and to bring them to justice. A glance at his itinerary shows that he quickly covered most of English-administered Ireland. Arriving in June, he stayed in Dublin for a month before setting out for Cashel. A few days later he was at Callan, just south-west of Kilkenny, before returning by way of Cashel to Dublin. Another long stay there ended in October when he moved to Athboy in Meath, a few miles north-west of Trim, then in another rapid shift he moved south to Wexford in November, settling at Cork for December. He stayed in the south, being at Waterford in February, until in March he moved back up to Drogheda and then back to Dublin, just in time to attend the parliament he had summoned to meet on the 30th. Thus in his tours he was accessible to many of the Anglo-Irish lords, and saw for himself what needed rebuilding and repairing, where force was necessary to protect a lordship, or where a grant of a local customs duty was necessary to finance the building or rebuilding of town gates and walls.