THIS is the received wisdom as to how Edward III managed his nobility – much as, it has been argued, Henry I and other kings had done with varying degrees of enthusiasm, competence and success before him. Moreover, it has generally been accepted that for Edward III and his predecessors this strategy was for the sake of foreign wars and control at home. Both seem simple, logical assertions to make.

The impact of Edward III's patronage programme

However, as we have seen, the ‘how’ of Edward III's patronage programme is not as it first appears. From the evidence presented, it is clear that a simple, wide and level distribution of largesse was not the basis of Edward III's patronage programme, neither was it influenced solely by matters of domestic administration and foreign power. With close to nine-tenths of the parliamentary peerage being the recipients of few or no acts of substantial royal patronage during the reign (including twenty-five of thirty-four (74%) members of the titled nobility), the argument of a wide spread of royal patronage during the reign is very difficult to sustain. Perhaps the only way one can see any form of parity when it came to royal patronage is through the number of individuals given substantial patronage by Edward III in both established and new peerages.