The Wars of the Roses/Causes of the Wars of the Roses/A travel to the past

Most people know, that the Wars of the Roses was a civil war in

England between the nobles of the two rival branches of the royal family,

the House of Lancaster [descended from John of Gaunt, third

son of King Edward III ,  the family line of King

Henry VI, and the House of York [with the Duke of York, descendant

of both Lionel of Antwerp , second son of King Edward III and

Edmund of Langley, fourth son of King Edward III.

A very important member of the Beaufort family was Edmund Beaufort,

Duke of Somerset, later the bitter enemy of the Duke of York.

looting and plundering in Londen, they were driven out

by the citizens, who were initially sympathetic.

The uprising, that began in may, ended somewhere in july, when

Cade was arrested, despite he had been pardoned first.

The link with the War of Roses is the demands of the rebels,

to bring the Duke of York [who was sent to Ireland as King’s

Lieutenant, which many considered as an exile]

back to England and to remove the Duke of Suffolk,

whom they considered a traitor.

I quote from The Complaints of the Poor Commons of Kent:

”His true commons desire that he will remove from him all the false progeny and affinity of the Duke of Suffolk and to take about his noble person his true blood of his royal realm, that is to say, the high and mighty prince the Duke of York, exiled from our sovereign lord’s person by the noising of the false traitor, the Duke of Suffolk, and his affinity. Also to take about his person the mighty prince, the Duke of Exeter, the Duke of Buckingham, the Duke of Norfolk, and his true earls and barons of his land, and he shall be the richest king Christian.”

CAUSES OF THE WARS OFTHE  ROSES

THE WEAK REIGN OF HENRY VI

Part of the outbreak of the Wars ofthe  Roses lies in the

person and reign of King Henry VI.

King Henry VI  had suited well as a monk, doing good

deeds and charity, but not as a ruler and a King.

He was generous, pious, forgiving and didn’t like

war or violence.

Not suited to a medieval King.

He was in everything the opposite of his

warrior father, King Henry V.

Alas he had psychic problems, which resulted in various

nervous breakdowns, with as a consequence, that rival

noblemen sought to control the crown.

That was not so strange, since an incapacitated King

meant anarchy and unrest, and a strong government

was needed.

Untill 1453 [when his only son was born], he had no children,

what made the Duke of York [who had inherited the Mortimer

claim to the throne after the death of his maternal uncle,

Edmund Mortimer  in 1425]  his heir presumptive.

When King Henry VI was incapacitated, York became

Protector of the Realm  and Chief Councillor.

He did a pretty good job in ruling the country, untill

Henry VI wake up again [he was in a sort of

coma], reversed York’s action, Somerset in power

again and the country prepared for civil war.

According to the historian Robin Storey, “If Henry’s insanity was a tragedy, his recovery was a national disaster”

Unwisely the King was encouraged by his wife Margaret of

Anjou, who was a strong opposer of York, aligning

herself with men like the Duke of Suffolk

and the Duke of Somerset.

The King was not able to control the rivalling noble factions

[York/Somerset], nor other conflicts as the Percy/Neville feud,

Queen Margaret of Anjou unwisely favoured Somerset, embittering

the Yorkists, tensions flow to extremes, all hell burst out.

A civil war.

War of Roses, Marc Goacher rightly points out:

A situation of an undermighty King and  overmighty subjects.

CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES

KING HENRY VI CHOOSES SIDES

What not has been pointed out thouroughly, that King Henry VI,

on purpose or not, was not ”above the rivalling parties”,

but became party himself.

At first he took sides with the peace party in the French war, consisting

the Duke of Suffolk, Duke of Somerset  and Queen Margaret of Anjou,

against the ”war party”, consisting Humphrey of Gloucester, uncle to

the King and the Duke of York.

In 1445 Henry sent the Duke of York to Ireland instead of prolonging

his function as Lieutenant in France, which could be considered as a sort

of exile.

And in 1455, after the Duke of York ruled the country two years when

Henry was in coma, he dismissed the Duke of York, putting

Somerset in charge again.

Result:

Open war.

And  Henry being a Lancaster himself, like the Duke

of Somerset [whose grandfather had been the half brother of

Henry IV, sharing the same father, John of Gaunt], quickly the

whole thing became not only Somerset against York,

but Somerset AND the King against York, added the preference of

Margaret of Anjou for Somerset.

WARS OF THE ROSES

LAST DRAMA

MARGARET OF ANJOU

DUKE OF SOMERSET

DUKE OF YORK

In the first military confrontation in the First Battle of St Albans

Duke of Somerset was killed, the Yorkists were victorious

and King Henry VI came into the hands of the victorious

Yorks.

Fighting went on and on, when than one side, than the other

won.

After a final attempt for reconciliation, the socalled

´´Loveday´´ in 1458, fighting embittered and finally

at instigation of Margaret of Anjou, the Duke of York and his

allies,Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury  (brother of his wife

Cicely Neville , and Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, the ´´Kingmaker´´ 

(the son of Lord Salisbury), suffered attainder, which meant

In 1460, the victorious York did an attempt in Parliament

to be acclaimed as King, which failed.

However, he obtained the Act of Accord , meaning,

that King Henry VI remained King, but that after his death,

York and his heirs would rule.

This excluded Edward of Westminster, the son of the

King, which infuriated Margaret of Anjou.

The struggle went on.

At 1460, the Duke of York was killed in the battle of

Wakefield, with his second son, Edmund, Earl of

Rutland, as his brother in law, Lord Salisbury.

It is assumed, that Rutland was executed after the battle.

Certainly, Lord Salisbury was executed afterwards.

But the tides were turning.

York´s eldest son Edward, then Earl of March, was victorious

in the Battle of Townton  and became King Edward IV.

Margaret of Anjou left the country (Henry VI was in

Yorkist hands and yearlong prisoner of

the Tower) for exile in France, did a last attempt

to conquer the throne (together with former Yorkist

ally, Richard Neville, the Earl of Warwick, who choose her

side out of conflict with Edward IV, but was

finally defeated at Tewkesbury in 1471,

where her son Edward of Westminster was killed and she

was imprisoned.

According some sources, he was executed after the battle.

Shortly after that, Henry VI died in prison,

probably murdered.

Margaret was imprisoned for some years,

ransomed by the French King Louis XI  and

died  in poverty in 1482.

A sad and tragic end.

WARS OF THE ROSES

AFTERMATH

Edward IV died in 1483, his brother Richard III

succeeded him, disinheriting Edward IV´s eldest

son and heir, Edward V.

He and his brother disappeared in the Tower,

probably murderd, although it is not clear, whether

Richard III was involved.

Rebellion against his reign took place, and

 1485, Richard III was defeated in the Battle of

Bosworth  by the later King Henry VII ,

son of Margaret Beaufort  of the House

of Lancaster, (niece of

the Duke of Somerset  and descendant of

John of Gaunt) and Edmund Tudor.

The victorious Henry VII married Elisabeth

of York , daughter of King Edward IV.

They became the parents of King Henry VIII.

So in a way, the House of Lancaster (the Beaufort branche) and

the House of York were united.

The Tudor era began.

Interesting is the Tudor emblem, a Red Rose with a

White Rose covered in it.

And through their granddaughter Elisabeth of York,

and his wife Cecily.

WARS OF THE ROSES

MARGARET OF ANJOU IN LITERATURE

SHAKESPEARE

The way history is written [apart from the main undeniable

facts as ”there was a war” or ”that king ruled”] is important

in giving a positive or negative image of the persons involved.

In the case of Margaret of Anjou, her image is very much

coloured by Shakespeare´s play Henry VI, where

she is portrayed as a ruthlless, murderous, vindictive and extraordinary cruel

person.

The Duke of York, in the contrary, was pictured as chivalrous

, manganimous and brave, sides he undoubtedly posessed, but leading

a fight to the death against the Beaufort branche of

the House of Lancaste first, and later openly

 against King Henry VI, whom

he forced to disinherit his own son, in favour of York

and his heirs, he must have been hard and ruthless, too.

A warlord, like his Beaufort enemies.

Coming back to Shakespeare’s Henry VI

After the Battle of Wakefield, where the Duke of York

was defeated, Margaret of Anjou personally stabs

Edmund, Duke of Rutland, on it.

When he is dead, she orders to put his head on a pike

and to be crowned with a paper crown, to mock

his rights to the throne.

That horrible image of Margaret of Anjou was shown

in the work of many historians and influenced generations

and generations, including myself.

I myself  read in old Dutch history books, that Margaret of

Anjou personally ordered to put the heads of York his son

and brother in law, on pikes, tarnishing York´s head with

a paper crown.

But historical  fact is, that this is not altogether true.

Margaret of Anjou could not have ordered the execution

of York and the paper crown thing or torturing York

because she was not present at Wakefield, but in Scotland,

asking Queen Regent Mary of Guelders military aid against

the Yorkists.

Modern historical investigation shows that.

Probably York would have suffered considerably, when she

could have lain her hands upon him, but that´s of

no importance, because she did not.

Moreover, most historians assume, that York has been

killed in the Battle of Wakefield.

PICTURING MEDIEVAL QUEENS

MARGARET OF ANJOU REVIEWED

THE ROLE OF WOMEN

The bad  image Shakespeare had of Margaret of Anjou

is probably inspired by the picture of medieval women, who

were supposed to be mild, soft, forgiving, obedient wives

and caring mothers.

Being a noblewoman and certainly a Queen, good works,

charity and being  forgiving were other characteristics.

Often it happened, that when the King conquered

a city, his Queen plead for mercy of the citizens, which

as a rule could be granted.

Women, who took a firm stand in men´s affairs (as politics

and war was seen in the Middle Ages) were viewed as

Therefore, apart from her personality, Margaret of Anjou

provoked little sympathy for her active political

role, which she probably not would have fullfilled,

whether Henry VI was capable of ruling and there were

no rival branches in the royal family.

Had she been the wife of warrior King Henry V, for

example, she probably would go in history unnoticed,

a loyal wife, doing good works and trying to soften

the harder sides of the King sometimes.

But her circumstances were extraordinary, with an incpacitated

husband, a growing unpopularity (being a French Queen, allgning

herself with unpopular nobles like Edmund of Beaufort, Duke

of Somerset and the Duke of Suffolk) and childless until 1453, standing

against powerful men like the Duke of York, claiming the throne,

with a superior claim indeed.

As I see it, it was a difficult situation for her and when she really

wanted to play´´ the Game of thrones´´, she had to be tough.

At the other side, her character limited her possibilities.

Being a fierce woman, who saw no middleground, she demonized

the Duke of York in an early stage (also  by her alliance with his

arch enemy the Duke of Somerset) and didn´t see the necessity of

a strong reign, since her husband was not able to do it.

The fact, that the Duke of York should be regent or Protector

of the Realm seemed natural considering his right to

the throne, but soon enough Margaret considered all

his action in a treacherous light, with escalating consequences.

So the aversion of men for women taking power, combined

with her uncompromising attitude, caused many of the

problems.

MARGARET OF ANJOU

WOMAN OR SHE WOLF

HISTORY AND FICTION

There were two sort of critics on Margaret of Anjou

The fact, that she was a woman

Her uncompromising character and ruthless acts

In my view,Shakespeare and  many elder historians

were especially influenced, not by cruel or unreasonable

acts of Margaret of Anjou, but the fact, she was a woman.

Admitted, she was hard and uncomprfomising, ordering executions

and forfeited her adversies of all their lands (which gave York

no alternative than eventually demanding the crown for himself

with the Act of Accord), but

she did no worse than the men in that time.

the Battle of Agincourt, yet making him a war hero.

Otherwise, you can condemn or criticize her hard and uncompromising

character, alienating many and driving her enemies to the point

of no return.

But that is another stand than critic, because she is a woman.

Considering the Middle Ages and later, that is what can be expected,

but in present days actions have to be valuated, not whether

male or female.

In each case unacceptable are the myths about Margaret,

presenting as historical facts.

She was not present at the Battle of Wakefield, not ordering

York´s execution and her troops plundered and looted,

but no more than the Yorkists did.

And concerning her hardness and cruelty, honesty

urges me to say, that she was hard and gave orders to

executions after the battle (however the Yorkists did that too),

but she also spared prisoners of war.

At least three Yorkist prisoners of war, including John of Neville, The Earl

of Warwick’s younger brother, were spared execution, probably

 asone of her commanders, the Duke of Somerset (son of Edmund Beaufort,

York’s bitter enemy) feared that his own younger brother who was in Yorkist hands might be executed in reprisal.

But that’s speculation.

Fact is, she spared his life.

So in her hardness, she had outburst of mercy too.

In fact, she was no better or worse as the warrior men, Lancaster

or York.

But hardness and cruelty are no characteristics I can valuate,

especially (I admit that) when there are women involved.

Apart from that, following the timeline of events, it seemed

to me, that, not denying the responsibility of the men involved,

especially the Dukes of York and Somerset, she was more vengeful,

embittered and prejudiced, pushing her policies to extremes, when

a peaceful solution still possible.

And that has nothing to do with a man/woman thing, but with character.

So although her hardness is not sympathetic to me,

one must pity her fate.

Loosing both husband and especially son, for whom she

fought so hard and died in poverty.