On Thursday, I asked you to send in your questions for Martin Williams to answer, following the release of his new book last month.
We received some excellent and some quite challenging questions, but I can guarantee that Martins answers do not disappoint!
When did your interest in King Edward VII start and what triggered it?
“Virtually since childhood, I’ve been fascinated by the popular notion of the Edwardian era as one of glamour, peace and prosperity that was irrevocably shattered by the outbreak of war in 1914. Familiar from innumerable illustrations, photographs, films and television, the iconography of the age is so incredibly seductive. Outwardly at least, a spirit of optimism and gaiety was abroad that it’s hard to resist, even from this distance and with our knowledge of what came after. As man and monarch, Edward personified his age. It would be difficult to imagine the era without him at the head of it.
While the image contains elements of truth, it was, of course, only part of the story. Edward’s reign was defined by innovation, experimentation, discord and disaffection on many fronts: social, political and cultural. What l’ve attempted to do in my book is foreground his death in May 1910 as a moment – a ‘jumping off point’, if you like – when one world was slipping away and another world was taking shape. Edward’s reign seems so distant in some ways, yet so relatable in others. As I wrote, I was acutely struck by the similarities between 1910 and now.”
Was Edward VII a ‘good’ king?
“Edward was the right man in the right place at the right time. Not only was he uniquely suited to his historical moment, he actively helped to define that moment. His love of luxury, lack of censoriousness, charisma and cosmopolitanism combined to make him greatly loved by his people. If one judges the ‘success’ of a monarch by the affection he commands, then Edward wasn’t merely a good king. He was an outstanding king.
I’ll qualify that statement by observing that Edward may not have been quite so popular had he come to the throne twenty years earlier or later. There was an element of good timing in his accession, and indeed in his death. With hindsight, Edward died at exactly the right time. Already, forces were at work that would shatter the Edwardian idyll of popular imagination. He was fortunate that he didn’t live to be left behind by the twentieth century.”
What was your research process like? Did you use the Royal Archive?
“I had roughly eighteen months in which to write my book. During that time, my research took various forms.
The Edwardian era was a golden age for British journalism, so I immersed myself in period newspapers and magazines in order to distil the ‘flavour’ of the time. They enabled me to better understand how various personalities and events were perceived, represented and processed. The detailed coverage of Edward’s final illness, death, lying-in-state and funeral enabled me to construct a precise chronology from day to day, and sometimes from hour to hour.
During their lifetimes, or in the years after their deaths, the diaries, letters and memoirs of many prominent Edwardians were published. They helped me to capture the individual ‘voices’ of the likes of Daisy, Princess of Pless, Lord Esher, Lady Duff Gordon, Sonia Keppel, Violet Bonham Carter (née Asquith), Vanessa Bell and Virginia Woolf (née Stephen).
I visited numerous archives throughout the UK: in London, High Wycombe, York, Oxford, Liverpool and Belfast. I handled raw materials hand-written by Princess Victoria, Lady Victoria Stanley, Margot Asquith, Elsie Bowerman, Edith Chibnall and Sir Schomberg McDonnell. Some of the accounts I transcribed and drew upon have never before been published, or even fully catalogued.
During my period of research, access to the Royal Archive was limited owing to Covid. Did that matter? Less than I feared at the outset. It was never my intention to write a ‘comprehensive’ or ‘revisionist’ biography of Edward VII. Instead, I sought to situate him within his era, showing how his life and death were experienced by individuals at various levels of society. When researching Edward, three books, all of which extensively utilised the Royal Archive, proved indispensable: the two-volume ‘life’ by Sir Sidney Lee (1925-7); the excellent biography by Philip Magnus (1964); and what I consider to be the ‘definitive’ account by Jane Ridley (2012). As an analysis of Edward as man and monarch, the latter, which is entitled simply Bertie, will surely never be bettered.”
What was the best thing you discovered during your research?
“That Edward – always allowing for the very different values of his era – was as likeable as I had always imagined. Far from becoming disillusioned with him during the course of my research, I came to admire and respect him so much more.”
Did Edward resent his mother as much as we are led to believe?
“Edward found the limitations placed upon him by his mother, Queen Victoria, very frustrating. Not only did she refuse to delegate official responsibilities to him, she regularly remonstrated with him over his private pleasures (for example, she seldom missed an opportunity to chide him for his love of racing). There’s a famous cartoon by Max Beerbohm of the late middle-aged Edward facing the wall like a naughty schoolboy while his mother pouts disapprovingly in the foreground. There were certainly elements of resentment, born of frustration and mutual misunderstanding, in their relationship. But it cut both ways. Edward maintained that Victoria’s fierce seclusion after the death of his father, Prince Albert, was deeply misguided, and told her so.
On the other hand, there were occasions when Victoria stood by her son, actively supporting him when it might have been expected that she wouldn’t. Edward appreciated that. The Queen and the Prince of Wales had a rocky relationship, yes, but it wasn’t an exclusively negative one.”
Did Bertie get along with his father, Prince Albert? Do you think Bertie’s affair caused Albert’s death?
“Prince Albert died when Edward was only twenty, so it’s difficult to say how their relationship might have unfolded had he lived as long as Queen Victoria. Temperamentally, father and son could not have been more different. Albert was serious, industrious and earnest, with a passionate interest in the arts and sciences. He found it difficult to truly relax. Edward also worked hard, but he had a much lighter touch, recognising the importance of influence attained through charm, charisma and personal understanding. Albert was no hedonist, and I’m certain he would have intensely disapproved of his son’s love of women, food, racing and gambling. He would have perceived all that as frivolous and unworthy, and even as a threat to the survival of the monarchy.
On the other hand, had Albert only known how popular and successful his son would be as king, I like to believe he would have been proud – if somewhat surprised!
Although he undoubtedly caused him stress in his final months, I don’t consider that it’s either fair or true to claim that Bertie was somehow responsible for Albert’s premature death in 1861.”
What are your thoughts about the almost forgotten King William IV, who reigned between 1830 and 1837?
“William IV is so often squeezed out by the very strong personalities and wildly different styles of his brother, George IV, and his niece, Queen Victoria!
It’s been said that the elderly, somewhat peppery but generally well-meaning William, who reigned for only seven years, was a stabilising ‘bridge’ figure who returned the monarchy to a semblance of respect and affection after the incredibly unpopular reign of his older brother, who had been loathed by so many his subjects. I’m not an expert on the period but I wouldn’t argue with that assessment. William was neither brilliant nor glamorous, but he did well in the brief time he occupied the throne”
Do you think Queen Alexandra resented Edward for his affairs?
“Alexandra didn’t relish Edward’s infidelities, and his liaison with Lady Brooke (subsequently the Countess of Warwick) put a particular strain on their relationship. But she was a woman of her time and accepted the situation as so many wives of her class and generation were obliged to do. She put on a brave face and generally behaved with grace and dignity, demonstrating courtesy, and even cordiality, to her husband’s mistresses when she felt it was sensible to do so.
Edward appreciated Alexandra’s forbearance. He recognised her importance to his public image and, as a sort of reward, permitted her a remarkable amount of license to do exactly as she pleased, particularly after his accession in 1901. It helped that they had a ‘semi-detached’ marriage and frequently travelled separately, reducing the risk of treading on each other’s toes.
Alexandra was chronically unpunctual and often kept her very organised husband waiting when she knew it was torture for him to do so. It’s hard not to suspect that that was a subtle form of revenge – or at the very least the exercise of ‘soft’ power over a relationship she couldn’t always control.”
Edward VII is famous for his love of women, but where did he stand with women’s rights and the suffrage movement?
“Edward relished the company of a certain type of woman: attractive, witty, glamorous and ‘feminine’ overall. On a one-on-one basis, he admired women and respected their intelligence and opinions.
Nevertheless, he was firmly opposed to the suttragette movement and thought Mrs Pankhurst and her followers were absolutely frightful! (It’s worth remembering that Queen Victoria had also opposed the very idea of women’s suffrage.)”
Edward VII famously admired American women. Were any of them invited to his funeral?
“Edward’s enthusiastic embrace of the so-called ‘Dollar Princesses’ was an important factor in the revitalisation of the somewhat insular and hidebound British aristocracy from the late nineteenth century onward.
I’ve not come across the definitive guest list for Edward’s funeral, so I don’t know the names of every single person who attended. I think it likely that a few Americans were there: particularly those who, like the duchesses of Roxburghe and Marlborough, had married senior-ranking peers or Court officials. The Hon. John Ward, who was one of Edward’s favourite equerries, had married Jean Reid, the daughter of the American ambassador. I suspect she was present at the funeral in that capacity.
At least two prominent ‘Dollar Princesses’ attempted to gain private access to Edward’s lying-in-state in Westminster Hall. And many Americans were present in the Royal Enclosure at ‘Black Ascot’ in June 1910: a fascinating episode that lies at the heart of my book, and also features in the prologue and epilogue.”
Do you think Edward VII enjoyed being king?
“Edward was a consummate showman. He relished the opportunity to revitalise the previously dowdy Court, as well as the public image of the Crown, which he did extremely effectively through his instinctive understanding of the importance of pageantry and public appearances. He enjoyed his stake in the improvement of relations with France and, to a lesser but still important extent, Russia. A highly skilled diplomat, his abilities and experience equipped him brilliantly for his role.
From around 1908, Edward found the fraught political situation at home, and the deterioration of European affairs and the gathering clouds of war, extremely worrisome. Combined with a decline in his physical health, those final years were stressful ones.”
What would you say was his biggest achievement as king?
“Although Edward was celebrated in his lifetime, and immediately after his death, as the ‘Peacemaker’, we now know that that peace, which had always been fragile, wouldn’t endure for another five years.
Instead, I’d say that his greatest achievement was to attain such extraordinary personal popularity in the country at large: a popularity that was reflected in the intensity of the mourning that accompanied his death. In the long term. Edward – the consummate showman I described above – enshrined pageantry as the essence of the Crown. Regardless of what we might think of the successive kings and queens who’ve come after, it’s the pageantry we associate with the British monarchy which has probably done as much as anything to ensure its survival into the twenty-first century.”
How do you think Edward’s death affected society?
“Practically, and in the short term, Edward’s death in May 1910 compelled virtually everybody in the country to observe weeks of mourning, during which black clothing was obligatory and social activities of all kinds were severely restricted. Nobody would have been oblivious to his passing.
‘High’ society was particularly affected. Edward had been its leader for fifty years, setting the pace and tone. His successor, George V, had very little interest in doing likewise. After 1910, there was something of a separation between the Crown and Society. Nominally, the reigning monarch was still the head of Society, but never again would we have a king or queen so interested in fashion and whose favour could make or break social careers. That really came to an end with Edward.
More broadly, I wouldn’t say that Edward’s death changed British society. Even before his passing, the tectonic plates of politics, culture and technology were shifting. Transformation would have occurred, regardless of whether he lived or died. Nevertheless, Edward was an extremely potent symbol of the ‘old’ England that was finally shattered in 1914. With hindsight, it’s hard not to see his death as a sort of ‘full stop’, separating the ‘before’ from the ‘after’. That’s certainly what I’ve attempted to convey in my book”
Was Edward VII in any way responsible for the First World War?
“The First World War was arguably the defining event of the twentieth century, creating the conditions for everything that followed. Given it’s seminal importance, an immense volume of scholarship has built up around it’s various causes. So many arguments and theories have been advanced by world-class historians that it would be impossible to synthesise them in ten books, let alone in one!
During the First World War, Edward, who during his reign had cemented British alliances with France and Russia, was framed by many in Germany as a convenient scapegoat for the outbreak of war in 1914 (just as the British framed Kaiser Wilhelm II). But that notion is extremely simplistic, and it doesn’t consider the complex interplay of geo-political fault-lines and flash-points which had been evolving for years, and which continued to evolve after Edward’s death in 1910.
What I do believe is that Edward recognised the vital importance of peace in Europe. As king, he worked assiduously to maintain it while simultaneously preserving the ‘honour’ (as he put it) of Great Britain and it’s interests. The war would have absolutely horrified him, and he would have done everything in his power to avert it. Would he have succeeded? We will never know. Personally. I have my doubts that any man could have single-handedly prevented that global cataclysm.”
Are you interested in any other historical eras or figures?
“I’ve always been fascinated by France in the reign of Louis XVI, and by the events and personalities of the French Revolution and its aftermath. I’m also extremely interested in the presidency of John F. Kennedy and the USA during the early Sixties: like Edwardian Britain, a time and place on the brink of seismic politcal, social and cultural upheaval.”
We hope you have enjoyed reading this Q&A. You can buy copies of Martins book through the link below. You can also follow him on instagram exciting posts all about Edward VII and His the era he gave his name to.
Buy a copy of ‘The King Is Dead, Long Live The King!’
Follow Martin Williams on instagram
©️Queen.Victoria.Roses 2024
This article is the intellectual property of Queen.Victoria.Roses and should not be COPIED, EDITED, OR POSTED IN ANY FORM ON ANOTHER WEBSITE under any circumstances unless permission is given by the author
