Conclusion

Summary

Edward iii and his successors poured money and men into Calais and what became known as the Pale for over 200 years, yet, when it was lost, the ripples created in English society seem to have subsided quickly. Within a relatively short space of time, all that was left was a vague remembrance that the town had once been an English possession. More recent historians, indeed, often tend to pass over its loss with the barest of mentions, virtually all seeing the fall of the town as a blessing in disguise, since this ended the need to finance the garrison and defend the Pale. Geoffrey Elton remarked that ‘Calais—expensive and useless—was better lost than kept’, although he acknowledged that neither Mary nor the nation saw it that way. Conrad Russell saw it as a financial burden, which was also frequently a base for political disaffection. In his view, even keeping the garrison in food was ‘not a practical proposition for a small power in a time of inflation’. Its loss was financially ‘a blessing but it was also a national humiliation.’ Elizabeth was bound to demand its return at Cateau-Cambrésis, but this was something of a face-saving measure. In Norman Jones's view it was doubtful whether the ‘English government expected ever to get the territory back’.