I'm really looking forward to the publication of Kathryn Warner's new book, 'Edward II: His Sexuality and Relationships'. It's due to be published at the end of February. Obviously there will be a reference to his relationship with Piers Gaveston. We don't know what the exact relationship between Edward and Piers was like. Pierre Chaplais wrote a book entitled 'Piers Gaveston - Edward II's Adoptive Brother'. Chaplais explores the relationship as one of chivalrous intent - that Edward wanted Piers to be his brother and that they took some sort of oath declaring this intent. It's a very interesting read and interpretation. I just wonder, if this was Edward's intent, why did he choose Piers Gaveston? Yes, Gaveston had been sent to the Prince's household for his graceful manners and military skills. Edward 1st considered him a role model for his son, and knew the family of Piers well. But there were other young role models for the Prince in his household at the same time, notably, his cousin, Gilbert de Clare. Surely he would have been more suitable as an 'adoptive brother'? And did Edward really need an adoptive brother anyway? And why not an 'adoptive brotherhood', with more than one member? Piers was banished by Edward 1st after, apparently, his son had asked for the county of Ponthieu for Piers, which caused Edward 1st to explode with anger, and according to one chronicler, physically assault his son and banish Piers. It was notable that the king did not blame Piers but rather his son. Piers was to be banished for life. Was Edward 1st aware of the 'adoptive brother' oath, and furious with his son for wanting to single out one of his household, and one who was not blood related, for such a special honour? Did he find the whole idea of a chivalrous pact absurd? Or was he aware of a sexual relationship between the 2, and that by asking for Ponthieu, the Prince was showing himself to openly raise his lover above anyone else, and that by asking for such a mighty prize for Piers, that far from raising Piers up because of an adoptive pact, he wanted to elevate him because of his love for him? It would be a very bold step for the Prince. Maybe the King thought it was a foolish infatuation, a crush that got out of hand, and that separation would be the best solution for the Prince. Had not Prince Edward asked for that particular honour for Piers, and there's no evidence Piers pressured him into asking for it, Edward 1st may have turned a blind eye to whatever the relationship between the two, seeing it as a youthful infatuation that would run it's course, and that Edward would no doubt marry and have children anyway.
Kathryn Warner's book will be available from February 28th and can be pre-ordered from Amazon.
