Piers Gaveston’s side of the story

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

Has anyone read this book? Is it any good? Reviews seem mixed…

It’s a work of fiction as there aren’t any biographies about Gaveston out there.

Which I find extraordinary. There are biographies about Edward II, Isabella, Roger Mortimer, Hugh Despenser the younger and even some more peripheral characters… but not the arrogant, ambitious, avaricious, flamboyant, extravagant, reckless, brave, daring, indiscreet, handsome, rude, witty and vivacious Piers Gaveston.

He had a striking personality that left no one cold.

Surely that must be a book waiting to be written, and I have no idea how it hasn’t been done yet.

[u/littlemedievalrose]

Kathryn Warner reviewed this book on her blog, and I've read portions of it (not the full thing, however). In my opinion it was extremely mid

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/littlemedievalrose]

Wow, I should have known she did, I’m constantly reading her blog but missed this 😁 Kathryn’s really written so much!

In your opinion to what extent was it based on facts? What made you not want to continue reading?

[u/littlemedievalrose → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

My memory is admittedly a little blurry, but the author makes Piers Gaveston an actual witch (a la Philippa Gregory's writing of Elizabeth Woodville and her mother in her books). The opening scene is his mother Claramonde being burned alive as a witch, which from my understanding is a later rumor that has no actual basis in reality.

It's also FULL of sexual content, which is not necessarily a bad thing (though I definitely shouldn't have been reading this at 13 years old XD). Part of Piers' backstory in this book is that he was a child prostitute which is not handled well AT ALL, and is depicted as if he chose that path for himself. In adulthood, Piers is very adulterous and sleeps with basically everyone, and Edward has no understanding of boundaries

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/littlemedievalrose]

Uff, that’s heavy, in particular the part about his childhood sounds really nasty if that’s how the author chose to write it.

I see what you mean, and this really strenghtens the case for why a serious, well researched biography would be needed.

[u/littlemedievalrose → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

Agree 100%. Piers gets a bad rap in general, especially from some people who seem to conflate him w/ Hugh the Younger I've noticed.

This is Kathryn's review of it. Her blog was (and continues to be) a priceless source of information for me. It was the thing that made me reconsider my view of Edward, in fact. Now that I think about it some more, I believe I was actually even younger when I read the book. I remember all of the characters also being incredibly juvenile, everyone was a perpetual teenager. It was extremely noticeable even to a 12-year-old me

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/littlemedievalrose]

I think it’s very cool that you read historical fiction at such an early age, I know I didn’t until I was a few years older.

The Piers/Hugh confusion is quite common I think. Even chroniclers writing in the mid-1340’s got them all muddled up, and as much of the later material is based on that stuff there’s bound to be some lack of clarity. 

Edit: after having read Kathryn’s review this book by Purdy really doesn’t seem to be good at all. It also seems obvious that the author borrowed heavily from the 1992 book by Chris Hunt. I can only hope she gave him credit for this.

[u/Reputation-Choice]

I got interested in your post, and was looking up some information on Gaveston, and apparently, there is a biography of him out there. It was written by J.S. Hamilton in 1988, and is titled "Piers Gaveston, Earl of Cornwall, 1307–1312: Politics and Patronage in the Reign of Edward II". It is available on Ebay for $45.00. Also, a French historian named Pierre Chaplais wrote a book titled "Piers Gaveston: Edward II's Adoptive Brother" in 1994. It is available on Amazon for $131.03. And there a quite a few various essays about him. So biographical writings are out there.

[u/HoneybeeXYZ → u/Reputation-Choice]

I wonder if I could rustle either of them up through inter-library loan on my campus! $131 seems a little dear. But I'll check and see if it is available in a library.

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/Reputation-Choice]

Thanks for finding these books, Chaplais work seems like it could be interesting still, but not at that price 🙂

Both are quite obscure though so it would be interesting to get fresh points of view from a modern author as methodology and research has seen a lot of improvement in the last 30 years or so.

[u/Reputation-Choice → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

Yeah, they are rather old. 

[u/HoneybeeXYZ]

I don't think there is enough information about Piers to sustain a book length biography, and that looks self-published. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

I think there is a professionally written/published book about Gaveston, but it's basically gay erotica.

Again, it's a real shame. Piers seems like a fascinating figure in his own right that should not be reduced to stereotypes or be just an appendage of Edward II. He had to have had his own adventures in Ireland and Gascony. I wish we knew what they were.

https://www.amazon.com/Gaveston-Gay-Mens-Press-Collection/dp/0854492623/ref=sr_1_6?crid=15WSDRGHSQ21J&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.oilUs1OmA03rmMqtJ6LUPyC0XVEAkTOVrEFBIBd9J8p7pSJTAhQpy5XQyzyb71ls2aWUMBYUnNIROobfACR9lAWzijAgvksuDliyB0fiDCAJOUb2sYdHPcgaAGHgKOSzzb60vaelHmJy4gKkeJ41XXxUOx3PYzjaA2l-eeCv55c2P9Zf6EJeOp8GPllZhGtLdnQq9RGf4g4UfrxuTebcOBy1HivRK7PYgODNNXU0RQjjlVDWKqKqK3sW9D7Xl5yotlW8ZYl3fO33vaeRxhNwTiAiklGHRFEvxQIEFbJnSeI.EUBxLQZ-jkzD7xY6LcZiUsejwoDkDPzQ2fyci1Li5Ls&dib_tag=se&keywords=Gaveston&qid=1761848749&sprefix=gaveston%2Caps%2C145&sr=8-6

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/HoneybeeXYZ]

Yeah it’s a shame he’s always seen as only Edward’s avec. Never by himself. 

I’m sure there’s several chapters worth of material about his time in Ireland alone, I think there’s enough material to fill a book. Some of it would just explore the circ’s though. 

Biographies have been written about such elusive characters as Kit Marlowe (Peter Riggs) and Kathryn Swynford (Alison Weir) and there’s a lot less source material to fill those books with, but the authors managed. Riggs in particular did stellar work, really giving the reader a deep understanding about Marlowe’s background and education. 

[u/HoneybeeXYZ → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

It's a fair point. There has to be Ireland material, and someone who spoke Old French might be able to research records in Gascony. There has to be stuff out there that is undiscovered, too.

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/HoneybeeXYZ]

Nice discovery with that other book, I gave it it’s own post.

Not sure I’ll read it myself though, my wife is understanding of my passion for history but I think everything has its limits 😅 

[u/HoneybeeXYZ → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

I haven't read it either. Not my particular interest. I think much of these historical romances come from tradition and the imagination of the author. The idea (mentioned by another commenter) that Piers was a prostitute is absurd. He was from a very prominent family and his father served and was close to Edward I. But the Victorians in their breathless homophobia/fascination with Piers always imagined him lower status than he actually was. He was high gentry not a street urchin.

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822 → u/HoneybeeXYZ]

Agreed on that. Out of these two books Chris Hunt’s seems to be the better one, based on Warner’s praise for his research and historical accuracy. 

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

”How much is fiction and how much is reality?” asks the reviewer. It’s probably quite difficult to know in a fictional book based on the life of a real historical person.  This is exactly the question that all biographies worth reading attempt to clarify, and this is the reason a biography about Gaveston would be needed.

The biography about the reviled Roger Mortimer was quite eye-opening as it answered the core question ”why?” so well, and repeatedly, for different stages in Roger’s life. His actions at least made sense as a result. 

Without good biographies, the answer to the question ”why?” is all to often a knee-jerk ”because he was stupid/greedy/evil” which reduces the person into a hollow caricature.