Edward was already 59 years old when he became King of the United Kingdom and the British Dominions and Emperor of India. Nine years later, he was dead.
That should have been the end of the Edwardian times. After all, it was named after him (unless you're American, in which case the Gilded Age is often used instead, while the French prefer La Belle Époque (The Beautiful Era)).
If we're going with the end of Edward, then this period stops in 1910.
No-one ever does that.
History, once the gears have been set in motion, is slow to grind down. This was particularly true when the King was so popular in his lifetime. It also makes sense to continue the period until a certain line can be drawn under it.
Four years after the death of King Edward VII, one of the most major events of recent history began. This was the First World War, which erupted out of the political manoeuvrings of the Edwardian Age. For some that era ended with this - the Great War of 1914.
But there's a kind of morality tale in letting the hubris and arrogance of the Edwardians result in wholesale destruction. They caused it, so they should remain associated with it. For historians who take this view, then the period is put to rest in 1919 with the signing of the Treaty of Versailles.
The end of war and the end of the Edwardians.
So what is after the Edwardian era? It's either a kind of limbo half decade of the new Georgians. That's too messy. It sounds too much like the Georgian period over a century before. Or it's the First World War.
For the majority of people, what followed the Edwardian era is none of those. It's the 1920s and the Inter-War Period. It's Austerity or, if you're looking at the positive attempts at kicking-starting the fun and games again, it's the Roaring Twenties.
Asking what dates are Edwardian is problematic though. It's 1901-1910; 1901-1914; or 1901-1919. Take your pick. We can make a case for them all.