Edward II: Act 1, Scene 1 Summary & Analysis

Edward II opens with the King extending a fairly shocking invitation to Gaveston. Although the romantic nature of the men's relationship does not become fully clear until a few lines later, this is largely beside the point: from the point of view of the English nobility, Edward has no right to elevate a commoner like Gaveston to a position of power (and certainly not to a position of equality with the King himself, as Edward's remark about sharing his kingdom suggests). 

Gaveston's reference to the myth of Leander and Hero is the first of several classical allusions in the play, many of which hint that Gaveston and Edward's relationship is sexual. This particular allusion, however, also hints that the men's relationship will come to a bad end, since Hero and Leander's affair ended with Leander drowning and Hero killing herself in grief. Furthermore, as Gaveston goes on, it becomes clear why the men's relationship might pose problems. Gaveston is totally dismissive of everyone except Edward, but a ruler (or, in Gaveston's case, an advisor to a ruler) cannot simply disregard the welfare of his people or the ambitions of the other nobility. The comparison of Edward to the sun underscores the self-absorption of Gaveston's dreams, since he is using a symbol typically meant to evoke the king's centrality to the nation as a way of describing a personal relationship. 

Gaveston's disinterest in the poor men's plight foreshadows the issues that will dominate the argument between him and Edward on the one hand, and the English nobility on the other. The nobles (Mortimer Junior in particular) see the King's disregard for military matters as evidence of his weakness as a ruler. Gaveston's dismissal of the soldier lends some credibility to this position. Regardless of whether war is itself a good thing, Gaveston's treatment of the soldier is callous, and part of a broader pattern of indifference toward the well-being of the kingdom.

Although Gaveston's feelings for Edward are quite obviously reciprocated, Gaveston is marked as a sexual outsider in a way that the King mostly is not. In this passage, for instance, Gaveston speaks openly about homosexual desire, which he plans to use to manipulate Edward. By contrast, while Edward often expresses intense affection for Gaveston and his other male favorites, he doesn't ever draw on the explicitly sexual imagery present in this passage. The discussion of poetry and theater, meanwhile, lays the groundwork for the conflict between violence and language in the play. Edward explicitly favors the latter, but his words become increasingly powerless and empty as time goes on, and the actual violence of rebellion rises.

The power struggle between Edward and the English nobility is well underway by the time the play begins, and neither side comes across as entirely in the right. Although Edward's frustration is understandable from a personal perspective, his willingness to completely ignore the wishes of the nobility flies in the face of English monarchical tradition. On the other hand, Mortimer's quickness to resort to threats implies a lack of respect for the King's status, and comes across as bullying in tone.

Much of the nobility's hatred for Gaveston is rooted in his status as a commoner. As Lancaster's words make clear, the nobles view Edward's favoritism not simply as an insult but also as a challenge to the "natural" order of things—namely, the social structure that provides them with their own power and status. In a sense, Gaveston's ability to leapfrog the social hierarchy by pursuing a relationship with the King is an existential threat to the idea of power as something that is inherited. This helps explain the nobles' boldness in confronting Edward, although it does not necessarily excuse it: Kent's criticism of the nobles implies that it is basically never acceptable to challenge the King's authority so openly. Finally, this first exchange between Edward and the nobility also introduces the idea of violence as a form of communication (e.g. Mortimer saying the nobles will "parley" (speak) with their swords). Similar images recur throughout the play, underscoring the complex relationship between violence and language.

Just as Mortimer’s open defiance of the king seems out step with English tradition, so do Edward's complaints about the nobility reveal an attitude that is itself not totally compatible with English monarchical tradition, since he seems to believe he should enjoy unlimited power as king. Such an outlook would likely cause problems regardless, but what makes it especially troubling (at least from the nobles' perspective) is the fact that Edward is not truly suited to hold power. Here, for instance, Edward's total identification with his lover reflects his inability to separate his personal life from his political role. Arguably, it also suggests that Edward has a rather weak sense of self, which would help explain the nobles' persistent claims that the King is somehow out of his mind.

Since, later in the play, Kent eventually (though temporarily) joins the nobility in opposing his brother's rule, his objections in this passage are significant. Although he earlier defended Edward's rights as king, he evidently shares some of the nobility's concerns about elevating a commoner like Gaveston. Edward's response, meanwhile, further demonstrates the extent to which he allows his private feelings to dominate political decisions. In fact, he redefines his public role as king in entirely personal terms when he claims to only care about power as a way of advancing Gaveston.

Like his earlier snubbing of the nobility, Edward's attack on Coventry oversteps his authority as King. At the time the play is set, the Church was separate from the English monarchy and (at least in theory) superior to it in some respects. Despite the violence of the scene, however, Edward and Gaveston's treatment of Coventry would likely have been more sympathetic to the audience of the play than their treatment of the nobility would be: England had broken away from the Catholic Church earlier in the 16th century precisely because the monarch at the time (Henry VIII) did not acknowledge the Pope's authority over his actions. Gaveston's remarks about the implicit hypocrisy of a wealthy priest are also very much in keeping with prevailing 16th-century attitudes toward Catholicism, and therefore cast Gaveston himself in a favorable light.