’Escheat with Heir’: Guardianship, Upward Mobility, and Political Reconciliation in the Reign of Edward III
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article looks at Edward III’s use of the royal feudal rights over guardianships and marriages for the sake of a group of men newly promoted into the peerage or further to earldoms. Based primarily on chancery records, it examines this monarch’s use of wardships and marriages of his tenants-in-chief, which were used both in order to bolster the wealth of his "new men" to match their new status and as a way to mingle their blood with those of more established noble families. More importantly, the royal use of both these rights during the reign marked a way in which the potentially problematic situation inherited from his father, Edward II, and from the minority regime of Isabella and Mortimer, could be defused. For, though a number of the key players of the 1320s were now dead, their families were often still a force to be dealt with, both in terms of their landed power and the potential ill-will they had towards either the king or other members of the polity. However, by placing the estates of the "old" nobility into the care of the new men, and by marrying the new men into the established nobility, a way was opened not only whereby the fortunes of the two groups — and by extension, the monarchy — were intermingled, but also through which reconciliation could take place. Thus, though feudalism was beginning its decline in this period, for Edward III’s reign at least, control over the right of wardship and marriage played a crucial part in both the development of royal power and the smoothing over of political divisions of the earlier decades of the fourteenth-century.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".