Keeper of the Realm (Violent Delights Book 2)

Afterword

Afterword

As with anything in this time period, records are relatively scarce. We are relying on at most two chroniclers, and a handful of surviving letters. To that end, details are largely left up to the imagination when writing historical fiction. Unlike with people like Henry V or to an extent Edward II, we don't have a lot of financial records so movements in fact are a bit flawed and sometimes up for best guess. So, let's get into what really happened.

Ages and general locations are all true. It's true young Edward was keeper of the realm. His staff and council's names are all accurate. As always we don't know what was said.

Simon, Bernard, the Courtenay brothers, all of them were Edward's knights, and mostly good friends. We have little contextual proof of how they felt but they are often around. Hugh Courtenay would die at the age of twenty one, of unknown causes but possibly plague. Even Queen Philippa visited his grave, and he was a knight of the Garter, so seems like he was close to the family. I don't know how much Edward played with him as a boy, but it seems likely and he had young companions as a rule.

Yes, this is the same family as Richard Courtenay, Henry V's chief ambassador/spymaster/tomb mate. Hugh and Edward Courteany are Richard's paternal uncles—his father Philip is Hugh de Courtenay the Elder's younger son. It's not strictly a coincidence—Edward and Philip both remained Prince Edward's knights, so it's arguable that Richard Courtenay was given little jobs about court and wound up being friends with young Henry V, for that reason, the family was about. It's not clear how the tragic pair met, but it's entirely possible that they did through the Courtenay's established presence at court.

Edward was highly intelligent, he seems to have opened and attended the Parliaments. It's not clear how much the nine year old participated, he did read his father's letter so likely a little.
Edward had been doing royal engagements since age six and seven, even greeting ambassadors alone. So the little boy was quite dressed up like a doll from a young age. I'd say like a child actor, but probably pageant child would be more accurate. He was in heavy robes, as is shown, had to stand properly and be neat for hours, that manner of thing from a very young age.
It's not clear how he psychologically reacted to this and his parent's absence. Arguably they'd have a good relationship their whole lives, so whatever strife they worked through together, Edward and Philippa seem to have been good parents. But, again, arguably that was also quite the blow psychologically. There's no way, from a mental standpoint, that sort of upbringing wouldn't mess with your head a bit. That's why I wrote it the way I did—how could it not? Even if Guillame and Elizabeth were fine stand in parents, he's still being paraded out like a show dog, still shuttled about. Grown ups are bowing to him. It's surprising he was as nice a guy as he was after that sort of an upbringing.
Biographers for whatever reason like to shame Edward. It's not clear why. He committed no sins England's golden boys, Edward III and Henry V, aren't grossly guilty of. Unlike them he really has no war crimes to his name, he seems to have been mostly fair with prisoners. He was an all right administrator, had the odd issue but nothing awful or telling beyond human error. He got along with all his brothers.
One main criticism of him that I can see are that he wore fine clothes and had jewels. Which is what Middle Ages nobles did. Of course he did! That would be like saying someone today 'got a new iPhone every year'. Yeah. Lots of people do that. Like that's culturally a thing it's not excessive for someone wealthy enough to do it. I don't see anything out of the ordinary yes he wore nice stuff. He was a bloody prince he had to appear in public. Need I bring up Henry V's twenty foot long purple cape he wore at Harfluer (that's on campaign)? Or Henry V's pure gold robe? This is not shaming Henry V (though may deserve it) he was literally king! Of course he wore stuff like that. Our Edward, same thing. He's the bloody prince he has to look the part.
The other major one is that he spent money on his dogs and horses, and occasionally played cards and dice. God forbid the man have hobbies? Dogs and horses, hunting things, again sounds like a typical Middle Ages nobleman pastime. He also was single much of his life so what? It's not absurdly excessive he just spent some money on it. As a little boy he did apparently have pet rabbits which is cute. He had wolfhounds engraved on his tomb and was known to let them follow him around. Richard II his son did the same. So he liked dogs.
So far as cards and dice, he's usually only spending like the equivalent of twenty bucks on it maybe a month. Usually this is with Chanos or Bernard or Simon. So he's playing poker with his buddies. Again, sounds like a normal way to pass the evening if you ask me they didn't have Netflix. The only time he loses a lot at card or dice is to his idiot parents, who both would apparently fleece their eldest for the equivalent of hundreds of dollars. As in, they did this like three times to him collectively that we know of. Which is amusing, arguably since it is them the payment was just noted as for losing at cards—maybe he was paying them for something else and keeping it off the books, lending them pocket money because he had it for sneaking off to go jousting, or betting on something else. Whatever the case, it sounds more like a family thing than a gambling problem, if anything it's rather funny!
So that's it. Again at his worst—sounds like a normal guy. Bernard, Simon, and Chanos would remain his friends. He would end up marrying Joan of Kent, that's a bit complicated I talk about it in other books, along with his illegitimate son Roger. More on him in a moment.
The other criticism is that he wasn't the mastermind behind his greatest strategies, Chanos was. That's for one thing not a criticism they think it is. If he was smart enough to hire and listen to the guy with the awesome plan—that makes him smart as well. Also he was successful in Spain without Chanos, so he at the very least could pick good advisors, even if he wasn't personally doing it.
All those things, namely the odd card game and the raising dogs, come primarily from the Prince's accounts. Sadly, historians tend to see these things and think it's odd or excessive, the same happens to Richard III and a bit Richard II, because their accounts survive. Other's don't, so it creates the bias of 'oh he spent loads of money on this'. Yes well they all likely did. Again, Henry V has many dramatic outfits, silk, pure spun gold, the year he dressed in black velvet lined in spun gold—all of which we know from chroniclers describing him. We've got no receipts for it. But he was acquiring the clothes somehow! We just don't have whatever expense account he used to pay for it, doesn't mean he wasn't wearing it! So it becomes a bit biased and confusing to read as it's like 'what's your evidence he bought a lot of fine clothes?' Oh he bought X amount of yards of nice cloth? Okay what do you want him to wear otherwise? Henry VI get's the opposite—he usually bought cloth once a year, and we know he sometimes reword his father's stuff—but they say he dressed like a pauper just because he bought cloth yearly. He wasn't! He had his father's clothes to refit, and he did buy velvet and fur.
Which is a long way of saying, we know bits and pieces about Prince Edward—but nothing definite. The character references mostly come from Foussaint, who chronicled Edward III. Well Foussaint was paid to write nice things about all the kids he's hardly accurate! And then Chanos wrote an epic poem about prince Edward—again not overly accurate as they were good friends.
So we've got either standard good stuff, and the odd bits and bobs from his expenses, which are distressingly normal. Relatively little glimpse into the real person, let alone how he felt about much of this.
We only have a couple of the prince's letters—but they are in fact a bit interesting. Some are strictly business so less character stuff—the amusing time he refused a bribe that Edward III accepted. The prince refused it on the grounds of chivalry, Edward accepted and then did the briber no favors, he simply took the money on the grounds that he's king everything is his! A bit funny again, but seems like the prince was at least trying to appear fair.
Another letter we have his him informing his parents of his intent to marry Joan. This is very straightforward, saying that he's sure he's marrying her he'll get the documents necessary. Edward III replies immediately with 'all right good for you! I'll get the paperwork in order'. Which is nice, not really much, other than that clearly Edward III wasn't surprised at his sons' choice, seems like they talked, and the prince was more telling than asking—which he was past thirty, I'd hope he had that level of assertion even with his father and mother.
There's a, admittedly, funny, incident where Edward III is writing to the prince, saying does he know his tax schemes are driving the people to revolt? And the prince's cheerful reply that yes he's looking forward to the revolt all in hand. Edward III and PHilippa responded by stopping the tax so the revolt wouldn'T happen. It's the most telling set of letters, especially since there was no real fall out between the prince and his parents, it seems like a genuine confusion or mishap, and if we've got the full context, it's a bit sociopathic of him, the only time inn his correspondence I come closer to judging him negatively.
The other letter is most telling. The king of france, was trying to run the English out of France, and he'd spread rumors that the prince's people were killing the townsfolk in the streets to quell a riot. The prince is telling his father he's horrified by the accusations, but his argument delves a bit, if we're being critical, that he's less worried about loss of life but more the implication that he, a man of honor, and a skilled military leader, would go about it that way.
All of which—isn't telling us all that much with scant context. Doesn't fully give a picture of the man, we get glimpses, but for the most part he seems more normal than he had a right to be given his childhood.