ontrol of men – her estates were her own, and the maintenance of them were her responsibility. However, it was largely reported until recent years that Isabella’s retirement was not one of freedom but instead one of imprisonment. For example, Bond’s article in 1853 displays Isabella’s retirement as one of humiliation and seclusion, presenting the queen as completely removed from any form of political or social influence. This view is supported in select chronicles where Isabella is depicted being “confined in a handsome castle” in which she wasn’t allowed to leave. The image of a recluse Isabella has since been overturned and, instead, the more prevailing idea is of an active and public queen-mother is now accepted. Isabella’s household book presents Isabella constantly moving around the country, not something expected of someone who was supposedly secluded from society. This image is present in numerous chronicles such as the Chronicle of Lanercost which suggests that Isabella, despite the restrictions placed upon her, did not have a life of imprisonment but one of “competent and honourable sufficiency” which she “enjoyed”. While her position had been considerably reduced, her political and cultural impact continued through her relationship with the royal family, her French heritage, and through her interest in cultural and religion.

Isabella established a relationship with her son early on in his life which was essential to maintain political power when he became king. Whether she maintained this relationship solely for this purpose, the effect still existed and allowed her to continue to influence her son from 1330 onwards. Immediately after his coup, Edward III dramatically restricted Isabella’s life as a punishment for her role in the minority government (as discussed in the previous chapter) which would suggest there were some initial strains in their relationship. Her dower which she had gradually increased during her time in power was reduced to £3000 per annum