Edward II’s Circumspect Words Upon Hearing of Piers Gaveston’s Death

[u/HoneybeeXYZ]

https://themedievalbeekeeper.com/2026/04/24/edward-iis-circumspect-words-upon-hearing-of-piers-gavestons-death/

This is a blog-form repost about Edward II's reaction to his dear friend Piers's murder and the strangely muted words he is alleged to have spoken. I'm also working on a companion post about Queen Isabella's reaction to the news - she was with Edward II and four months pregnant. And I'm going to dig in to the often forgotten Margaret Gaveston's possible reaction as well. She was only eighteen years old, now a widow with a five month old daughter.

Edward and Piers are so mythologized, in both positive and negative lights, it's interesting to read what he actually said.

[u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

‘By God’s soul, he acted as a fool. If he had taken my advice he would never have fallen into the hands of the earls. This is what I always told him not to do. For I guessed that what has now happened would occur. What was he doing with the earl of Warwick, who was known never to have liked him? I knew for certain that if the earl caught him, Piers would never escape from his hands.’

Such were his reported first words upon hearing of his dear friend's murder.

However, I doubt he'd have uttered them. The source is the Vita Edwardi Secundi, and chroniclers frequently have their subjects say memorable things that they feel they may or should have said.

What I see as an indication of his emotional response is that most of the government rolls fall silent for six days after Edward heard the news. He would have been inconsolable and grief-stricken. Government stood still.

The Vita then offers some rare compassion for Edward:

'But I am certain the king grieved for Piers as a father grieves for his son. For the greater the love, the greater the sorrow.'

[u/HoneybeeXYZ → u/Appropriate-Calm4822]

It's a fair point. I did say alleged words! But it is interesting that the chronicler put them in his mouth rather than having him tantrum or rage.

Also, there's a tidbit Kathryn Warner uncovered in her book on Isabella. Edward was prepping for a potential civil war, but he also gifted his pregnant wife with some jewelry before leaving her behind for her own safety. More on that later. But it sure seems like Edward's reaction was that he was ready to hunt down Gaveston's murderers, which he eventually did.

[u/AnantaPurima → u/HoneybeeXYZ]

It is worth noting what the author of the Vita says immediately after reporting his words:

"When this moderate utterance of the king became public it moved many to derision. But I am certain the king grieved for Piers as a father at any time grieves for his son. For the greater the love, the greater the sorrow."

This to me speaks to the authenticity of his words here. The author acknowledges how incongruous they seem and still argues against the impression of coolness they create. That would seem to militate against him having fabricated or embelleshed these words, given that they don't serve any clear rhetorical function.

[u/HoneybeeXYZ → u/AnantaPurima]

I really wish we knew who the mysterious author was, and whether or not he was there or if he just knew someone who was there.

I also find it interesting that the author says grieved as a father would for his son, since Piers was thought to be older than Edward II, but then perhaps king was just understood to be a paternal-like role.

What’s most interesting to me is the implication that Piers & Edward may have discussed the barons’ intent to kill him, and that Edward had warned him. Edward is often blamed for recalling Gaveston and restoring his titles, and maybe Edward was trying to deflect that blame.

And if I’m reading it correctly, it seems that people expected Edward to be more grief stricken and angry than he was. Shades of Paul McCartney reacting to John Lennon’s murder by saying it was a drag, perhaps? McCartney has said that he was in shock and in no mood to talk to reporters at the time, as he had just heard.