1535944

[SUSANNA KEENE.FTW]

Source: A Baronial Family in Medievil England: The Clares,
1217-1314, Michael Altschul, The Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore, 1965. p 94: "Gilbert de Clare, the "Red Earl" of
Gloucester and Hertford, was after Simon de Montfort the single
most important figure in the later stages of the baronial
opposition to Henry III. From his father Earl Richard he
inherited not only the great Clare estates and lordships in
England, Wales, and Ireland, but also a position of leadership
among the magnates of the realm; and he was destined to play an
even more decisive role in the civil wars which determined the
fate of the struggle between king and baronage than his father
had played in the initial stages of the movement for reform."
From same p 104, 107-108: "The victory at Lewes [over Henry
III, 14 May 1264] marked the high point of Simon de Montfort's
fortunes. Ominously, a number of Simon's supporters deserted
him, including the Earl of Gloucester. (P) Gilbert's defection
proved the decisive factor in the situation. The chroniclers
record a long list of grievances, and the chancery records bear
at least some of them out. He had become increasingly
dissatisfied with Simon's regime and reproached the earl for
his supposed autocratic rule. He was jealous of the position
the earl's sons held in the government. He quarreled with
Simon over the control of royalist castles and manors, and the
exchange of prisoners. He objected to the use of foreign
knights in important castles and the failure to expel all the
aliens from court. His support for Simon had not been
unqualified, as the letter written in the winter of 1263-64 had
shown. A combination of grievances thus drove him into
opposition." From same, p 108-110: "Simon [de Montfort] took
[Lord] Edward and Henry [III] with him to the west, and
encamped at Hereford until May 24 [1265]. Attempted
negotiations proved fruitless, for Gilbert had already worked
out a plan with Edward and Roger Mortimer which would seal
Simon's fate. On May 28, with the assistance of Thomas de
Clare, Earl Gilbert's younger brother, Edward managed an
escape. He joined forces with [Roger] Mortimer at Wigmore, and
the next day Gilbert joined them in Ludlow. Wykes, perhaps the
best informed chronicler of this period, records an important
set of cnditions that Earl Gilbert demanded as the price of his
support. The earl made Edward swear a solemn oath that, if
victorious, he would cause the "good old laws" of the realm to
be observed' evil customs would be abolished, aliens banished
from the king's council and administration; and the king would
rule with the counsel of his faithful subjects. If Wykes'
account of the oath is substantially correct, it clearly shows
that Gilbert remained firmly attracted to the principles of the
Provisions [of Oxford (1258) and Westminster (1259), granted to
the barons by Henry III but not much adhered to], however
vaguely envisioned and conventionally expressed, and to the
xenophobia which the movement engendered. If he withdrew his
support from Simon, it was not because he was willing, like his
father Earl Richard in 1260, to repudiate the Provisions, but
because he felt that Simon did not distinguish between the
baronial ideals and his personal ambition. The cause of
reform, in short, was not the exclusive prerogative of the earl
of Leicester. (P) The military operations are quickly told.
Under the leadership of Edward and Earl Gilbert, the royalists
gathered at Gloucester, cutting off Simon's retreat across the
Severn at that point. Boldly making his way into the march,
Simon renewed his alliance with Llywelyn in the middle of June.
He then went through Monmouth to the borough of Newport in the
Clare lordship of Gwynllwg and attempted to cross over to
Bristol, but this plan was foiled when Earl Gilbert destroyed
the convoy sent for that purpose. Simon managed to return to
Hereford, and tried to join forces with an army led by his son.
Edward and Gilbert, however, surprised the younger Simon at
Kenilworth in Warwick on August 1, routed his forces, and
immediately doubled back to intercept Earl Simon. The earl
reached the Worcester manor of Evesham on August 3, but was
surrounded by the royalists. The next day battle [of Evesham]
was joined. As Simon advanced on a troop led by Roger
Mortimer, Earl Gilbert, who commanded the second line, suddenly
attacked from the rear. The outcome was less a battle than a
slaughter. The only important marcher who fought with Simon,
Humphrey de Bohun the younger, was captured and imprisoned at
Beeston castle in Cheshire, where he died on October 27. Two
other men with marcher affiliations, Henry de Hastings and John
fitz John, were also imprisoned. Otherwise the royalists
showed no mercy. Simon de Montfort, his son Henry, his loyal
friend Peter de Montfort the elder, the justiciar Hugh
Despenser and many others were slain. King Henry himself was
rescued by Roger Leyburn. The Montfortian experiment was
ended. (P) The death of Simon de Montfort did not produce
peace. The ferocity with which the royalists had crushed their
enemies carried over into a period of widespread seizures of
rebel lands and indiscriminate plundering which produced
further turmoil and unrest. In addition, the territorial
policy adopted by the restored royal government provoked those
supporters of Earl Simon still at large into guerilla
operations which turned into full-scale warfare and prevented a
final pacification of the kingdom until the end of 1267. In
this period the actions of Gilbert de Clare again proved
decisive. His support for the disinherited rebels was a major
factor in the establishment of internal order following the two
years of continued civil strife which constituted the aftermath
of the battle of Evesham."
From same, p 120-121: "The most striking feature of Gilbert de
Clare's role in the later stages of the baronial movement is
its consistency. The Red Earl's shifting allegiance was a sign
not of vaillation but of independence. He was the moderating
force against the extremes of both the royalist and the
Montfortian sides. He was attracted to the baronial movement
as a whole, but even more than his father Earl Richard, he drew
the crucial distinction between its policies and the great earl
whose name is inseparably associated with the movement. Earl
Gilbert was not convinced that Simon de Montfort's actions were
always and indisputably right, and he withdrew his support when
he felt that Simon's regime was no better in its way than King
Henry's had been. His adherence to the royalists, however, was
no less qualified. When two years of continued resistance to
the restored government of Henry III produced further social
and political unrest, Earl Gilbert's rising proved the decisive
factor in restoring unity and tranquillity to the realm.
Unlike Earl Richard, Gilbert had not accepted Henry's
repudiation of the principles which underlay the Provisions of
Oxford and Westminster. His activities, while strongly colored
by personal animosities and conditioned by personal interests,
nevertheless reveal a continuity of purpose which did much in
helping to incorporate those principles into the fabric of the
common law and the conduct of monarchy. From same, p 155-156:
"On December 7 [1295] he [Gilbert] died at Edmund of
Lancaster's castle of Monmouth, and was buried two weeks later
at Tewkesbury Abbey. Most of the chroniclers merely noted his
death without further comment, although an interpolation in the
chronicle of Walter of Guisborough refers, in rather
conventional fashion, to the earl's military prowess and
staunch defense of his rights. The Red Earl's last years were
spent under the shadow of Edward I's domination, and his stormy
career ended in dispirited humiliation. Perhaps the soundest
judgment is that contained in the otherwise undistinguished
Osnay chronicle. In referring to the earl's marriage to Joan
of Acre in 1290, the chronicler calls Gilbert the greatest of
the magnates of the realm in nobility and eminence, and
incomparably the most powerful man in the kingdom -- next to
the king. Later events proved that the chronicler's
qualification was more significant than he could have realized
at the time." From same, p 41-42: "Taken as a whole, the
Clare family represents what might be termed one of the most
successful joint enterprises in medieval English history. More
than two centuries of steady territorial growth raised the
family to a position of pre-eminence in the ranks of the higher
nobility. The major factors in this development in the twelfth
century were undoubtedly royal favor and shrewdly chosen
marriages. The Clares prospered from their intimate
connections with successive rulers of England, and the male
members of the house were rewarded with a series of important
fiefs and well-placed ladies. The power and prestige of the
family reached their highest level in the thirteenth century
and the fortunes of its members help illuminate almost every
aspect of the social and political life of the English baronage
in this period."

REF: "Falls the Shadow" Sharon Kay Penman: May 1263 the young
Earl of Gloucester led an Army west & captured the Bishop of
Hereford, the most hated of the foreign advisors to Henry III
then left after the expulsion of the de Lusignans. He threw
the Bishop into prison, laid siege to the royal castle at
Gloucester, where de Montfort assumed command. The army then
went north to Bridgenorth, where they coordinated their attack
with Llywelyn ap Gruffydd; the twon & castle surrendered. de
Montfort then headed south for London, where a panicked Henry
took refuge in the Tower. On April 5 1264 the defeat at
Northampton by Prince Edward of Simon de Montfort's forces
crippled Simon's forces. Northampton defenses had been allowed
to decay in the years previous to de Montfort's occupation
there, plus the battle was lost due to the treachery of the
Prior at St. Andrew's. After the defeat, Edward allowed his
army to have their sport on the town, culminating in utter
destruction, rapine, murder, etc. of its inhabitants. Some 80
barons & knights were taken prisoner & the rebel army was
gutted. The defeat touched off a riot in London on Apr 9, 1264
in which hundreds, mainly Jews, were slain. Sir Hugh le
Despenser, Simon's Justicialar & Thomas FitzThomas, Mayor of
London, attempted to control the crowds & saved some lives by
offering sanctuary in the Tower. FitzThomas then begged Simon
to return to London to quell the Londoners' fear. In May 1264
Edward looted lands of Robert de Ferrers, the Earl of Derby,
after he lost Tutbury Castle, Derby defected from Simon's
support. King Henry meanwhile took Leicester & Nottingham.
Simon & Gilbert de Clare attacked Rochester Castle (which
surrendered) & besieged the town when Edward approached London
so Simon went back to defend it. King Henry & Edward were
practicing fierce cruelty by chopping off the nads & feet of
all common soldiers captured from de Montfort's army. The
Cinque Ports & Dover Castle held fast for Simon, & did not obey
Henry & Edward's command for a naval force to attack London.
Thwarted, Edward took Gilbert de Clare's Tonbridge Castle.
Simon continued to hold London, but is surrounded by Edward &
Henry. Gilbert lets his men loose on the Canterbury Jews using
as a weak (& unproven) excuse that they were in league with the
King. de Clare had a fairly long histroy of intense hatred for
Jews. On the eve of the Battle of Lewes, 14 May 1264, after
Henry had refused the entreaty of the Bishops of London &
Worcester (Walter de Cabntelou) to negotiate, de Clare followed
Simon de Montfort's lead & formally renounced all allegiance to
King Henry. With Robert de Vere, the Earl of Oxford, de Clare
had the most to lose of any of the rebel supporters. In late
July, he joined forces with Montfort & Llywelyn ap Gruffydd &
put down a rebellion of the Welsh Marcher Lords, including
Roger de Mortimer. In October 1264 he was excommunicated by
Papal edict along with other Montfort supporters & Simon
himself; however, the sentecne of anathema was not practiced by
the English Church. Clare had an extremely prickly sense of
pride, & held a mixture of rancor toward Montfort's sons &
jealosy of Montfort himself, both of his acclaim & his personal
popularity with the people. Clare also could have split
because of his intense anti-Jewish sentiment & Montfort's
refusal to condone pogroms, etc. In November 1264, Clare had
the latest of many quarrels with Montfort's son Bran de
Montfort, but this one spilled bad blood for the first time
over to Gilbert's brother Thomas de Clare too. Before Nov 1264,
Montfort awarded his sons several lucrative appointments; when
Clare complained he was brushed off by Montfort. Although
after Lewes Clare received the lands of John de Warenne,
William de Lusignan & Peter de Savoie, but Montfort rejected
his demand for the ransom of Richard of Cornwall (despite the
Mise of Lewes proclaiming no ransoms to be paid for prisoners
from the battle). Montfort called a Parliament January 1265; at
this Parliament Montfort had a very public clash with Clare;
Clare withdrew to his estates on the Welsh Marches. Clare was
harboring Marcher Lords in violation of the government
expulsion edict. Clare was grieved at Montfort's unilateral
appointment of his son Amaury as treasurer of York & when in
late 1264 Montfort arrested the Earl of Derby & threw him into
the Tower of London for wanton lawlessness, extortion &
plundering of his neighbors. Many lords, while not feeling
sorry for Derby, felt this set a dangerous precedent. Lord paid
for political transgressions; not criminal ones. By April/May
1265, Simon & Clare had supposedly patched up a peace again,
but Clare was only stalling for time in order to free Prince
Edward from the custody of Henry de Montfort & Robert de Ros.
Edward had again played his cousin Henry for the fool,
gradually getting Henry to trust him & allow him more freedom.
While Clare made a visit to King Henry to make a false oath of
fealty to the King & Simon's government, he engineered Roger de
Mortimer's rescue of Edward from Henry de Montfort to Wigmore
castle in May 1265. Gilbert almost goes to war with Roger de
Mortimer over the lands of Humphrey de Bohun, who died in
captivity soon after Evesham (Aug 4 1265). Gilbert was as
uneasy in his new alliance with Edward as he had been formerly
with Simon; he simmered until April 1267 he siezed London. He
held London for two months until he was able to negotiate an
amnesty with Henry. His wife (they shared a mutual hatred for
one another) tried to warn her uncle King Henry of Gilbert's
intention but he did not believe her until it was too late.

Records not imported into INDI (individual) Gramps ID I2640:

Line ignored as not understood Line 62142: 2 SOUR @S085410@
Skipped subordinate line Line 62143: 3 DATA
Skipped subordinate line Line 62144: 4 TEXT Date of Import: Aug 7, 2000