Ordinances of 1311 - Aftermath

Aftermath

The Ordinances were published widely on 11 October, with the intention of obtaining maximum popular support. The decade following their publication saw a constant struggle over their repeal or continued existence. Although they were not finally repealed until May 1322, the vigour with which they were enforced depended on who was in control of government.

Before the end of the year, Gaveston had returned to England, and civil war appeared imminent. In May 1312, Gaveston was taken captive by the Earl of Pembroke, but Warwick and Lancaster had him abducted and executed after a mock trial. This affront to Pembroke’s honour drove him irrevocably into the camp of the king, and thereby split the opposition. The brutality of the act initially drove Lancaster and his adherents away from the centre of power, but the Battle of Bannockburn, in June 1314, returned the initiative. Edward was humiliated by his disastrous defeat, while Lancaster and Warwick had not taken part in the campaign, claiming that it was carried out without the consent of the baronage, and as such in defiance of the Ordinances.

What followed was a period of virtual control of the government by Lancaster, yet increasingly – particularly after the death of Warwick in 1315 – he found himself isolated. In August 1318, the so-called "treaty of Leake" established a modus vivendi between the parties, whereby the king was restored to power while promising to uphold the Ordinances. Lancaster still had issue with the king though, particularly with the conduct of the new favourite, Hugh Despenser the younger, and his father, Hugh Despenser the elder. In 1322, full rebellion broke out which ended with Lancaster’s defeat and execution at the Battle of Boroughbridge in March. At the parliament of May in the same year, the Ordinances were repealed. However, six clauses were retained that concerned such issues as household jurisdiction and appointment of sheriffs. Any restrictions on royal power were unequivocally annulled.

The Ordinances were never again reissued, and therefore hold no permanent position in the legal history of England in the way that Magna Carta, for instance, does. The criticism has been against the conservative focus of the barons' role in national politics, ignoring the ascendancy of the commons. Yet the document, and the movement behind it, reflected new political developments in its emphasis on how assent was to be obtained by the barons in parliament. It was only a matter of time before it was generally acknowledged that the Commons were an integral part of that institution.