Edward II

A forum to discuss the reign of Edward II and 14th century history
 
HomePortalFAQRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 Piers Gaveston

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
AuthorMessage
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:36 pm

I wonder if there are any descriptions of Piers ghost? Seriously - like, how does anyone know it's even him? Of course, every castle must have a ghost! Good for business:) I wonder if Berkely castle claims Edward II? and does any castle claim Despencer?


Last edited by Anejre on Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:39 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:38 pm

btw, I am neglecting the Hamilton book because I have started reading Hunt's 'Gaveston' - am nearly half way through. So much better than Brandy Purdy's effort.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
elflady

avatar

Number of posts : 74
Age : 46
Location : BUCURESTI, ROMANIA
Registration date : 2007-10-01

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 14, 2008 1:51 am

LOL, I really have no idea of how one can in truth positively identify a ghost! Wonder if there are any images of Piers, paintings, statues, whatever, for people to be so sure it's him... Haven't heard any stories about Edward or Despenser, but it's being said that Roger Mortimer's ghost is still haunting Nottingham and that Isabella too has turned into a ghost... I suppose it is indeed good for business, as you said, but I wish people had more respect for the dead and let them all sleep in peace!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Melisende

avatar

Number of posts : 38
Location : Australia
Registration date : 2007-11-26

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 14, 2008 7:03 am

You could always contact "Most Haunted" - they always seem to find a ghost out on location (though some of it is quite hilarious even though I know they think they are being sooo serious)
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Styx/9329
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:45 pm

There is no representation of Piers in any art form from his lifetime - which is really disappointing. Edward could have had a magnificent portrait painted of him to pass down - and maybe he did, but it was probably destroyed.

Isabella haubts 2 places, apparently - Castle Howard, with manical laughter, and her 'mage' is alledgedly seen where Greyfriars once stood.

Naturally Nottingham would claim Mortimer.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:46 pm

Melisende wrote:
You could always contact "Most Haunted" - they always seem to find a ghost out on location (though some of it is quite hilarious even though I know they think they are being sooo serious)

yeah, maybe they cold take some 'celebs' on location to Scarborough and Piers could have some fun with them jocolor
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 14, 2008 9:47 pm

The Chaplais book arrived today! I'm up to my eyes in Gaveston books! Wonderful!

btw, the BBC 4 is running a series on 'The Medieval Mind', if anyone has access to it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:45 pm

Finished Chris North's Gaveston, and thouroughly enjoyed it!

Highlights of the book for me – well all of it! But in particular, how the relationship between Ed and Piers developed. It's slow-burning on Piers part, as he seems unsure what to make of Edward's declaration of love, and is worried that he will be seen not to earn his knightly reputation, but to become known for somthing he is unprepared for.

The scene where he and Ed are first to part is really moving, when Piers finally admits he has fallen in love with Ed. I think this first part of the book was my favourite – Ed struggling to live up to his father’s expectations, and just waiting for him to die. The fun that Ed and Piers have, their developing rapport and sense of humour.

If there is any criticism to be made, it's casting Lancaster as being gay and lusting after both Ed and Piers. Lancaster seems to want to dominate Edward in all aspects of his life. He looks down on Piers station in life, but can't help lusting after him.

Ed's grief at losing Piers is deeply moving and he becomes hellbent on revenge. He recognises that the likes of Audley and Damory are 'greedy boys', only after what they can get from him, but thinks that Despencer has true feelings of love for him.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:47 pm

I should say that the book is told by Edward, dictating it to his former fool, and now scribe, Robert, who occasionally interjects with his own thoughts - most notably trying to warn Ed about Despencer.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Sun Apr 20, 2008 10:49 pm

I decided to check up a few facts in a book called 'Whose buried where?' - and dismayed to find the section about Piers written as thus - 'abandonned by Edward at Scarborough', he was seized and executed etc. Abandonned? How unfair is that! Totally gives the wrong idea, IMO.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Alianore
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 168
Age : 45
Location : NRW, Germany
Registration date : 2007-09-30

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Tue Apr 22, 2008 11:00 am

Abandoned, indeed! What nonsense!

Was there anything about Ed II on the BBC medieval season?

_________________
"Sans lui n'estoit rien fait, et par lui estoit tous fait, et le creoit li rois plus que tout le monde." Without him nothing is done and through him everything is done, and the king trusts him more than any other: Hugh Despenser the Younger and Edward II
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://edwardthesecond.com/
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:28 pm

Sadly, no - not so far anyway. 'Inside the Medieval Mind' dealt with superstitions of the age - and 'fantastic' stories about sea monsters and men with the head of dogs. Nothing new, IMO. If there is any Edward II, you can be sure I will report it!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:15 pm

Finished Hamilton's Gaveston bio on Saturday. It's a sympathetic, well researched, straight forward bio. He takes the view that Ed and Piers were lovers, but doesn't see this as the root of the unpopularity of Piers. At the end of the book, he searches for reasons for Piers' unpopularity. He dismisses low birth, saying that Piers came from well-established family with widespread landholdings. Hamilton doesn't believe Pies beng re-called from Gascony on the accession of Edard caused problems, or his elevation to the Earldom of Cornwall and marriage to Margaret de Clare. Hamilton believes their sexual relatinship didn't attract that much criticism - the only criticism being that Edward loved Piers 'too much'. Neither did Piers stop him spending time with his wife. He also believes Piers did not distract Edward from ruling, because they were not toegther that much in the first year of Edward's reign. He cites 1308 being the turning point.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:16 pm

Anejre wrote:
Finished Hamilton's Gaveston bio on Saturday. It's a sympathetic, well researched, straight forward bio. He takes the view that Ed and Piers were lovers, but doesn't see this as the root of the unpopularity of Piers. At the end of the book, he searches for reasons for Piers' unpopularity. He dismisses low birth, saying that Piers came from well-established family with widespread landholdings. Hamilton doesn't believe Pies beng re-called from Gascony on the accession of Edard caused problems, or his elevation to the Earldom of Cornwall and marriage to Margaret de Clare. Hamilton believes their sexual relationship didn't attract that much criticism - the only criticism being that Edward loved Piers 'too much'. Neither did Piers stop him spending time with his wife. He also believes Piers did not distract Edward from ruling, because they were not toegther that much in the first year of Edward's reign. He cites 1308 being the turning point.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:23 pm

Hamilton discounts prejudice against gaveston because he was from Gascony - it was part of the English empire, several of the magnates had wives/family from outside England and the fact that Piers dd not accentuate his origins. He didn't patronage Gascons over the English in his own household. His political influence is also dismissed - he didn't seek power for himself, and he didn't exploit land-owning opportuities. So, what did cause his downfall?

Hamilton blames his arrogance, pride, and influencing Edward in royal patronage. He cites the tournament at Wallingford, the insulting nicknames and Piers behaviour at the coronation. He also says Gaveston's murder was the result of Edward's behaviour - he was seen as the symbol to bring Edward back into line.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:29 pm

I would take exception with some of Hamilton's comments. I can't see the chroniclers of the time writing explicitly about Edward and Piers relationship - after all, this was the king. It had led to some historians denying Edward and Piers were even lovers. Yet it must have rankled the magnates to think Gaveston had risen as high as he had through sharing Edward's bed and influencing patronage through 'pillow talk'. They wouldn't be able to have the same access and connection with Edward that Piers did. This, IMO, was probably the root of their dislike. Knowing Edward Ist had bansished Piers over concerns about his relatinship with Edward was bound to be uppermost in their thoughts, especially when things began to go wrong. With their animosity growing, they would then have seized the opportunity to mock his origins and station in life.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:34 pm

The title of the Earl of Cornwall was a 'royal' title, and I can imagine that the king's cousin Lancaster would be incensed at Piers' elevation to the royal family, especially when he married Edward's niece. His high profile at the coronation made things worse. Gaveston's pride obviously played it's part as well - but pride alone cannot account for the vehemence of the magnates.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Thu May 01, 2008 9:43 pm

Been making enquiries about Piers' resting place. I know the Dominican Friars took care of the body for almost 3 years and the body was buried at the Friary church. The coming of the Reformation meant the church fell into disrepair - but it is possible that Piers rests under a local school in the area. I do hope so!
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Thu May 08, 2008 10:28 pm

Completed Chaplais' book on Piers. Obviously, any book on Piers is welcome, but this was a bit of a 'dry' effort. To be fair to Chaplais, he is aware that Hamilton's book had only been published a few years before and he makes the claim he won't repeat alot of the well-known info that has been written there. What he does do is probe the relationship between Edward and Piers - taking the view they were 'adoptive' brothers, and had probably entered into some sort of 'blood pact'. Conveniently, he says there is rarely any written evidence of such pacts, and then looks at other so-called adoptive brother pacts through history - even exploring David and Jonathan, which of course is how the relationship is compared in the Vita chronicle. Chaplais points out that Piers was often said to 'love' Richmond, and this quote is often over-looked.


Last edited by Anejre on Thu May 08, 2008 10:52 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Thu May 08, 2008 10:41 pm

Chaplais points out that there is no explicit evidence that Piers and Ed were lovers - but on the flipside, neither is there any to deny it. I don't know how the chroniclers would be able to make clear they were lovers - after all, this was the king they were writing about. There hadn't really been a precedent in England before. IMO, Edward chooses the word 'brother' to describe their relationship because I don't think even he would tell the magntes Piers was his lover, although he must have been aware they knew. I have to question whether Edward actually needed a brother anyway - he had half-brothers of his own and an extended family. He could certainly have favoured courtiers - but to elevate one to his actual brother just seems unrealistic to me. If it was a chivalry thing, then surely he would have looked to the example of King Arthur and his knights of the round table?

Chaplais thinks that Phillip would hardly have married his daughter to a man who was gay - but Ed was no ordinary man, he was a king - and as long as his daughter produced an heir and was treated well, he surely would have been ok with the situation. If Edward had had a mistress, would that then have bothered Philip? I doubt it. But Ed's relationship with Piers would provide a ready excuse should Philip ever feel Ed had crossed him in some way. Besides, he surely knew of the relationship before he married his daughter to Ed - Piers had been exiled by Edward Ist. I don't think Phillip would have much of a conscience marrying Isabella to Ed, whatever his sexuality.


Last edited by Anejre on Thu May 08, 2008 10:53 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Thu May 08, 2008 10:49 pm

Chaplais does a good job of defending Piers' reputation as being the greedy Gascon, siphoning off the treasury to send back to Gascony. He points out that as Ed's Lord Chamberlain, he had every right to have the royal jewels in his safe keeping - and that Edward trusted him to. Chaplais believes the famous inventory drawn up by Lancaster consisted mainly of the royal jewels, which Ed and Piers had chosen to keep with them for safety - bad mistake in hindsight. Chaplais is able to identify some of the jewels as royal. He points out that Lancaster says they were labelled - but would Piers really have labelled all his jewels and plate? or was it, as Chaplais believes, an attempt by Lancaster to smear Piers? Chaplais also raises the point that Piers is criticised for abandonning the royal jewels to flee to Scarborough - the same jewels he is accused of hording for himself - so whose jewels were they? They can't be both the royal jewels and his hord. Ed and Piers left in a hurry - so it would have been possible to try and hastily pack what they could, and mixed up the king's jewels and Piers'. Besides, Piers had been accused of taking the jewels and plate out of the country - so how could he have left it behind?

I also appreciated the fact Chaplais makes about how the 'chivalrous' Lancaster, for all his pretensions of being Arthur, bascially murdered Piers and handled the whole situation in the most unchivalrous way.

Definitely well worth a read.


Last edited by Anejre on Thu May 08, 2008 11:01 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Thu May 08, 2008 10:51 pm

On a personal level, I do hope the silver forks for eating pears were Piers own - for some reason, this image appeals to me Very Happy
Back to top Go down
View user profile
elflady

avatar

Number of posts : 74
Age : 46
Location : BUCURESTI, ROMANIA
Registration date : 2007-10-01

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Fri May 09, 2008 11:57 am

Thanks, Anejre! Both bios look interesting. You're tempting me to order them too ! Smile

Where did you read about Lancaster being described as chivalrous? Is there a bio on him too? Frankly, it's the first time I hear this...
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Alianore
Admin
avatar

Number of posts : 168
Age : 45
Location : NRW, Germany
Registration date : 2007-09-30

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Fri May 09, 2008 12:32 pm

Elflady: J. R. Maddicott wrote a biography called Thomas of Lancaster 1307-1322: A Study in the Reign of Edward II, published in 1970. Definitely worth a read, if you can find it - unfortunately, it's very difficult to find a reasonably-priced copy.

I'd also recommend J. R. S. Phillips' Aymer de Valence, earl of Pembroke 1307-1324: Baronial Politics in the Reign of Edward II from 1972, though sadly it's also hard to find a cheapish copy of it!

Anejre: thanks a lot for all the posts on the Hamilton and Chaplais books. As far as I know, the silver forks for eating pears definitely belonged to Piers (according to C. M. Woolgar's book on great households of late medieval England). The man was not lacking in style. Very Happy

Interesting about the contradiction - Piers was meant to have 1) sent royal jewels out of the country, 2) abandoned the royal jewels and 3) taken the royal jewels for himself!! Hmmm....

It's a shame that even today, historians repeat myths about Ed and Piers cited in 14c chronicles - such as, Ed was meant to have broken into the Temple church in 1307 and given 50,000 marks (which is often cited as 50,000 pounds, a lot more) belonging to Walter Langton to Piers - which has been comprehensively disproved, but is still often stated as fact!!

Philip IV was desperate for his daughter to become queen of England and for the next king of England to be his grandson. Ed's sexuality didn't come into it - he could have been the worst kind of pervert and Philip would still have gladly married Isabella to him! I totally disagree (as you do) with the point Chaplais makes there. I also agree that Philip must have known about Piers and Ed's relationship with him before Ed became king (how could he not have heard?)

_________________
"Sans lui n'estoit rien fait, et par lui estoit tous fait, et le creoit li rois plus que tout le monde." Without him nothing is done and through him everything is done, and the king trusts him more than any other: Hugh Despenser the Younger and Edward II
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://edwardthesecond.com/
Anejre

avatar

Number of posts : 187
Registration date : 2008-03-29

PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   Fri May 09, 2008 10:02 pm

elflady wrote:
Thanks, Anejre! Both bios look interesting. You're tempting me to order them too ! Smile

Where did you read about Lancaster being described as chivalrous? Is there a bio on him too? Frankly, it's the first time I hear this...

Chaplais makes this point, and used the book Alianore mentions - plus, Lancaster seems to think of himself as Arthur - he signed himself as such in his plotting letters. All knights and magnates would surely like to think of themselves as chivalrous, I'm sure. I rarely refer to Piers as being executed if I can help it, it was murder - it was a farce of a trial, and the way in which the murder was carried out was undoubtedly cowardly. Lancaster and Warwick must have been frightened of the consequences, whatever they thought of Ed II.

Both books are very short, and both expensive - although I got the Hamilton book for £20. And I believe Hamilton's is the better book. Plus, alot of documentatin is in Latin and 'old' French.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Piers Gaveston   

Back to top Go down
 
Piers Gaveston
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 3 of 6Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Edward II :: Reign of Edward II :: Personalities :: Others :: Piers Gaveston-
Jump to: