The Roll Maker's Decision Making Essay

In the year of 1317, Charles IV, son of Phillip IV died leaving an unborn male heir John I. In a tumultuous turn of events, the infant John I died within mere days of his birth, resulting in a crisis of succession as Charles IV’s daughter Joan remained his sole living child. Following John I’s death his uncle Phillip V held an assembly with the barons of France, through which it was decided that no woman should succeed to the throne of France. It is curious that the Roll maker has included this piece of commentary, as it bears no influence on the lineage of the English kings themselves. However, written between 1429-1433, the timing of the Canterbury Roll’s creation suggests a propagandistic motive to this extract. It is apparent that this
In the Roll maker’s commentary, an outline is given of the series of deaths that from a Lancaster perspective should have led to Isabella’s succession to the French throne. Following this, the Roll maker states Phillip IV responsible for ruling that no woman should succeed to the throne of France. By ordering the information in this way, the Roll maker contrasts Isabella should have succeeded, versus the reason why she was unable to, making it appear as though she had been usurped of this right. There is no mention of the granddaughters of Phillip IV who would also possess a claim should Salic law have not been implemented, suggesting the Lancasters either ignored their claims or viewed Isabella’s claim as being of greater legitimacy. Further emphasis on the claim is apparent in the multi colouring between blue and red in the genealogical tree following the appearance of Edward II on the Roll. This provides further evidence that the Lancasters believed that they did indeed possess claim to the French crown through the marriage of Isabella of France to Edward II of England, and her subsequent attempt to abdicate the throne to her son Edward