The Caroline War was the second phase of the Hundred Years' War between France and England, following the Edwardian War. It was so-named after Charles V of France, who resumed the war nine years after the Treaty of Brétigny (signed 1360). The Kingdom of France dominated this phase of the war.
The Black Prince, eldest son and heir of Edward III of England, spent a huge sum of money in order to restore Peter the Cruel to the throne of Castile. The Castilian King was unable to repay him, however, so the Black Prince raised taxes in his domains in Aquitaine. The people's complaints were unheeded, so they appealed to the French King Charles V. In May 1369, the Black Prince received summons from the French king demanding his presence in Paris. The prince refused, and Charles responded by declaring war. He immediately set out to reverse the territorial losses imposed at Brétigny and he was largely successful in his lifetime. His successor, Charles VI, made peace with the son of the Black Prince, Richard II, in 1389. This truce was extended many times until the war was resumed in 1415.
Background
In the Treaty of Brétigny, Edward III renounced his claim to the French throne in exchange for the duchy of Aquitaine in full sovereignty. Between the nine years of formal peace between the two kingdoms, the English and French clashed in Brittany and Castile.
In the War of the Breton Succession, the English backed the heir male, the House of Montfort (a cadet of the House of Dreux, itself a cadet of the Capetian dynasty) while the French backed the heir general, the House of Blois. Since Brittany allowed female succession, the French considered the Blois side to be the rightful heir. The war began in 1341, but the English continued backing the Montforts even after the Peace of Brétigny. The English-supported claimant John of Montfort defeated and killed the French claimant, Charles of Blois, at the Battle of Auray in 1364. By that time, however, Edward III no longer had a claim to the throne of France, so John had to accept the suzerainty of the French king in order to hold his duchy in peace. Thus, the English derived no benefit from their victory. In fact, the French received the benefit of improved generalship in the person of the Breton commander Bertrand du Guesclin, who, leaving Brittany, entered the service of Charles and became one of his most successful generals.
With peace in France, the mercenaries and soldiers lately employed in the war became unemployed, and turned to plundering. Charles V also had a score to settle with Pedro the Cruel, King of Castile, who married his sister-in-law, Blanche of Bourbon, and had her poisoned. Charles V ordered Du Guesclin to lead these bands to Castile to depose Pedro the Cruel. The Castilian Civil War ensued. Du Guesclin succeeded in his object; Henry of Trastámara was placed on the Castilian throne.
Having been opposed by the French, Pedro appealed to the Black Prince for aid, promising rewards. The Black Prince succeeded in restoring Pedro following the Battle of Nájera. But Pedro refused to make payments, to the chagrin of his English and Navarrese allies. Without them, Pedro was once more deposed, and lost his life. Again the English gained nothing from their intervention, except the enmity of the new king of Castile, who allied himself with France. The English merchant community that had been established in Seville was massacred on Henry's order.[1] Between 1372 and 1380, Castilian corsairs raided the southern coasts of England with relative impunity, turning the tide in the Hundred Years' War decisively in France's favour.[2]
The Black Prince's intervention in the Castilian Civil War, and the failure of Pedro to reward his services, depleted the prince's treasury. He resolved to recover his losses by raising the taxes in Aquitaine. The Gascons, unaccustomed to such taxes, complained. Unheeded, they turned to the King of France as their feudal overlord. But by the Treaty of Brétigny the King of France had lost his suzerainty over Aquitaine. After reflecting on the matter, it was asserted that Edward III's renunciation of France had been imperfect. In consequence, the King of France retained his suzerainty over Aquitaine. Charles V summoned the Black Prince to answer the complaints of his vassals but Edward refused. The Caroline phase of the Hundred Years' War began.
French recovery
When Charles V resumed the war, the balance had shifted in his favour; France remained the largest and most powerful state in Western Europe and England had lost its most capable military leaders. Edward III was too old, the Black Prince an invalid, while in December 1370, John Chandos, the vastly experienced seneschal of Poitou, was killed in a skirmish near Lussac-les-Châteaux.[3] On the advice of Bertrand du Guesclin, appointed Constable of France in November 1370, the French adopted an attritional strategy. Rather than seeking battle, the English were worn down by an incremental approach whereby the areas ceded at Bretigny were retaken piece by piece, including Poitiers in 1372.[4]
In August 1372, the English suffered a disastrous naval defeat at La Rochelle, when a supply convoy carrying reinforcements for Aquitaine, along with £20,000 to pay the troops, was intercepted and sunk by a Castilian fleet. This exposed the English coast to French and Spanish raids, isolated Gascony and increased public opposition to the war.[5] In addition, Jean III de Grailly, Captal de Buch, a Gascon fighting for the English who had filled the gap left by Chandos, was captured in the fighting around La Rochelle. Despite pleas from his own knights, Charles refused to ransom the Captal, arguing he was too dangerous to release, and kept him in prison where he died in 1376.[6]
The English responded with a series of destructive military expeditions into French territory called chevauchées, hoping to bring du Guesclin to battle. The most significant was led by John of Gaunt in 1373; launched between two bouts of the Black Death in 1369 and 1375, the plague had a devastating economic impact, making it difficult for to fund the campaign.[7] According to chronicler Jean Froissart, the Chevauchée had been planned for three years.[8] Known for their capability in this type of warfare, [9] the English plan involved marching from Calais, through Champagne and Burgundy into Aquitaine, a journey of over 1,000 miles, lasting five months.[10]
By burning manors, mills and villages, they hoped to destroy the French tax base and demonstrate the inability of Charles to protect his subjects, moving at speed to allow them strike and withdraw before the enemy could respond.[11] On this occasion, Charles issued strict instructions to avoid major combat and ordered farmers to take refuge in fortified towns.[10] As they entered Burgundy, the English columns were tracked by one of du Guesclin's most effective subordinates, Olivier de Clisson, who killed over 600 and took many others prisoner.[12] Most of their baggage and transport was lost crossing the Loire and Allier in October, leaving them short of supplies.[13]
By the time they reached Bordeaux on Christmas Eve 1373, the English had been decimated by disease and starvation, with many of the knights on foot.[14] Defeat caused great anger and resentment in England against John of Gaunt, who remained a powerful political player, but his unpopularity meant his efforts to agree peace with France were unsuccessful.[15] By 1374, the Treaty of Bretigny had been nullified in fact as well as name; apart from Calais, England held no more territory than before their victory at Crécy in 1346.[16]
Treaty of Bruges
Instigated by Pope Gregory XI, the 1375 Treaty of Bruges agreed a 12-month truce between the two sides while they negotiated an end to the fighting.[17] France was represented by Philip II, Duke of Burgundy, England by John of Gaunt but talks eventually broke down over the issue of Aquitaine; the English wanted full sovereignty, while the French insisted it be retained by the House of Valois. Despite attempts by the Pope to broker a compromise, agreement could not be reached and the war resumed in 1377.[18]
The Black Prince died in 1376; in April 1377, Edward III sent his Lord Chancellor, Adam Houghton, to negotiate with Charles, who returned home when Edward himself died June.[19] He was succeeded by his ten-year-old grandson, Richard II, succeeded to the throne of England. It was not until Richard had been deposed by his cousin Henry Bolingbroke that the English, under the House of Lancaster, could forcefully revive their claim to the French throne. The war nonetheless continued until the first of a series of truces was signed in 1389.
Charles V died in September 1380 and was succeeded by his underage son, Charles VI, who was placed under the joint regency of his three uncles. With his successes, Charles may have believed that the end of the war was at hand. On his deathbed Charles V repealed the royal taxation necessary to fund the war effort. As the regents attempted to reimpose the taxation a popular revolt known as the Harelle broke out in Rouen. As tax collectors arrived at other French cities the revolt spread and violence broke out in Paris and most of France's other northern cities. The regency was forced to repeal the taxes to calm the situation.
The Great Schism
In 1378 Charles V's support for the election of the Avignon Pope Clement VII started the Great Schism.[20] This event split the Church for almost four decades and thwarted papal efforts to prevent or end the Hundred Years' War. The disputed papal succession resulted in several lines of popes competing for the support of national rulers, which exacerbated the political divisions of the war. Despite papal involvement in peace conferences throughout the 14th century, no settlement was ever reached, in part because the papacy was not influential enough to impose one. [21]
Sources
- Cannon, J. A. (2002). "Bruges, treaty of". The Oxford Companion to British History. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 97-8019-86051-40.
- Nicolle, David (2011). The Great Chevauchée: John of Gaunt's Raid on France 1373. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1849082471.
- Rogers, Clifford (2006). "Chevauchée". International Encyclopedia of Military History. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0415936613.
- Wagner, John A (2006). Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War. Westport CT: Greenwood Press. ISBN 0-313-32736-X.
- Williams, Glanmor (2004). "Houghton, Adam (d. 1389)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/13863. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
- Ormrod, W., (2002). "Edward III". History Today. Vol. 52(6), 20 pgs.
- Ayton, A., (1992). "War and the English Gentry under Edward III". History Today. Vol. 42(3), 17 pgs.
- Harari, Y., (2000). "Strategy and Supply in Fourteenth Century Western European Invasion" *Campaigns. Journal of Military History. Vol. 64(2), 37 pgs.
- Saul, N., (1999). "Richard II". History Today. Vol. 49(9), 5 pgs.
- Tuchman, Barbara W (1978). A Distant Mirror; the calamitous 14th century (2017 ed.). Penguin. ISBN 978-0241972977.
- Jones, W.R., (1979). "The English Church and Royal Propaganda during the Hundred Years' War". The Journal of British Studies, Vol. 19(1), 12 pages.
- Perroy, E., (1951). The Hundred Years' War. New York, New York: Oxford University Press.
Notes
- Wagner 2006, p. 238.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War,_1369%E2%80%931389
| Edward the Black Prince | |
|---|---|
| Prince of Wales and of Aquitaine Duke of Cornwall | |
 | |
| Born | 15 June 1330 Woodstock Palace, Oxfordshire, England |
| Died | 8 June 1376 (aged 45) Westminster Palace, London, England |
| Burial | 29 September 1376 Canterbury Cathedral, Kent |
| Spouse | |
| Issue more... | |
| House | Plantagenet |
| Father | Edward III of England |
| Mother | Philippa of Hainault |
Edward of Woodstock, known to history as the Black Prince (15 June 1330 – 8 June 1376),[1][a] was the eldest son and heir apparent of King Edward III of England. He died before his father and so his son, Richard II, succeeded to the throne instead. Edward nevertheless earned distinction as one of the most successful English commanders during the Hundred Years' War, being regarded by his English contemporaries as a model of chivalry and one of the greatest knights of his age.[2] His reputation in France, on the other hand, was one of brutality.[3]
Edward was made Duke of Cornwall, the first English dukedom, in 1337. He was guardian of the kingdom in his father's absence in 1338, 1340, and 1342. He was created Prince of Wales in 1343 and knighted by his father at La Hougue in 1346.
In 1346, Prince Edward commanded the vanguard at the Battle of Crécy, his father intentionally leaving him to win the battle. He took part in Edward III's 1349 Calais expedition. In 1355, he was appointed the king's lieutenant in Gascony, and ordered to lead an army into Aquitaine on a chevauchée, during which he pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary, sacked Carcassonne, and plundered Narbonne. The next year (1356) on another chevauchée, he ravaged Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry but failed to take Bourges. He offered terms of peace to King John II of France, who had outflanked him near Poitiers, but refused to surrender himself as the price of their acceptance. This led to the Battle of Poitiers, where his army routed the French and took King John prisoner.
The year after Poitiers, Edward returned to England. In 1360, he negotiated the Treaty of Brétigny. He was created Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony in 1362, but his suzerainty was not recognised by the lord of Albret or other Gascon nobles. He was directed by his father to forbid the marauding raids of the English and Gascon free companies in 1364. He entered into an agreement with Kings Peter of Castile and Charles II of Navarre, by which Peter covenanted to mortgage Castro de Urdiales and the province of Biscay to him as security for a loan; in 1366 a passage was secured through Navarre. In 1367 he received a letter of defiance from Henry of Trastámara, Peter's half-brother and rival. The same year, after an obstinate conflict, he defeated Henry at the Battle of Nájera. However, after a wait of several months, during which he failed to obtain either the province of Biscay or liquidation of the debt from Don Pedro, he returned to Aquitaine. Prince Edward persuaded the estates of Aquitaine to allow him a hearth tax of ten sous for five years in 1368, thereby alienating the lord of Albret and other nobles.
Prince Edward returned to England in 1371, and the next year resigned the principality of Aquitaine and Gascony. He led the Commons in their attack upon the Lancastrian administration in 1376. He died in 1376 of dysentery[b] and was buried in Canterbury Cathedral, where his surcoat, helmet, shield, and gauntlets are still preserved.
Early life (1330–1343)
Edward, the eldest son of Edward III of England, Lord of Ireland and ruler of Gascony, and Queen Philippa, was born at Woodstock in the County of Oxfordshire, on 15 June 1330. His father, Edward III, had been at loggerheads with the French over English lands in France and also the kingship of France; Edward III's mother, Queen Isabella of France was a daughter of the French king Philip IV of France, thus placing her son in line for the throne of France. England and France's relations quickly deteriorated when the French king threatened to confiscate his lands in France, beginning the Hundred Years War. His mother was Queen Philippa of Hainault, daughter of the Count of Hainault, who married Edward III when his mother, Queen Isabella, arranged the marriage between them. His father on 10 September 1330 allowed five hundred marks a year from the profits of the county of Chester for his maintenance; on 25 February 1331, the whole of these profits were assigned to the queen for maintaining him and the king's sister Eleanor.[4] In July of that year, the king proposed to marry him to a daughter of Philip VI of France.[5]
His father was Edward III of England, who became king at the young age of fourteen years in 1327, when his father (and the Black Prince's grandfather) Edward II of England was deposed by his wife Isabella of France, daughter of Philip IV of France, and by the English nobility due to his ineffectiveness and weakness to assert his control over the government and his failed wars against Scotland. His mother, Philippa of Hainault, was the daughter of William II, Count of Hainault. The marriage between his mother and father was arranged by his grandmother, Isabella of France, to get financial and military aid from the Count of Hainault for her own benefit to depose her husband, Edward II. The marriage of Edward III and Phillippa of Hainault produced thirteen children; Edward was the eldest child and eldest son.
His father had begun a war with Scotland to regain lost territories which were captured by the Scots during the reign of Edward II and began the military operations undertaken by Edward III's grandfather, Edward I of England, recapturing English lands such as Berwick-Upon-Tweed. Edward III took his grandfather's military strategies and tactics against the Scots to avenge the humiliating defeat of the English under Edward II at the Battle of Bannockburn in 1314, and this time, Edward III defeated the Scots at the decisive Battle of Halidon Hill in 1333, killing many Scottish nobles and routing the entire Scottish army. Edward III was able to recover the country politically and militarily, and was welcomed as a "great champion of the English nation".
On 18 March 1333, Edward was invested with the earldom and county of Chester, and in the parliament of 9 February 1337, he was created Duke of Cornwall and received the duchy by charter dated 17 March. This is the earliest instance of the creation of a duke in England. By the terms of the charter the duchy was to be held by him and the eldest sons of kings of England.[6] His tutor was Dr. Walter Burley of Merton College, Oxford. His revenues were placed at the disposal of his mother in March 1334 for the expenses she incurred in bringing up him and his two sisters, Isabella and Joan.[7] Rumours of an impending French invasion led the king in August 1335 to order that he and his household should remove to Nottingham Castle as a place of safety.[8]
When two cardinals came to England at the end of 1337 to make peace between Edward III and Philip VI of France, the Duke of Cornwall is said to have met the cardinals outside the City of London and, in company with many nobles, to have conducted them to King Edward.[9] On 11 July 1338 his father, who was on the point of leaving England for Flanders, appointed him guardian of the kingdom during his absence, and he was appointed to the same office on 27 May 1340 and 6 October 1342;[10] he was, of course, too young to take any save a nominal part in the administration, which was carried on by the council. To attach Duke John III of Brabant to his cause, the king in 1339 proposed a marriage between the young Duke of Cornwall and John's daughter Margaret, and in the spring of 1345 wrote urgently to Pope Clement VI for a dispensation for the marriage.[11]
On 12 May 1343, Edward III created the duke Prince of Wales in a parliament held at Westminster, investing him with a circlet, gold ring, and silver rod. The prince accompanied his father to Sluys on 3 July 1345, and the king tried to persuade the burgomasters of Ghent, Bruges and Ypres to accept his son as their lord, but the murder of Jacob van Artevelde put an end to this project. Both in September and in the following April the prince was called on to furnish troops from his principality and earldom for the impending campaign in France, and as he incurred heavy debts in the king's service, his father authorised him to make his will and provided that, in case he fell in the war, his executors should have all his revenue for a year.[12]
Early campaigns (1346–53)
Battle of Crécy
Telfair Museums, Savannah, Georgia
Edward, Prince of Wales, sailed with King Edward III on 11 July 1346, and as soon as he landed at La Hougue received knighthood from his father in the local church of Quettehou.[13] Then he "made a right good beginning", for he rode through the Cotentin, burning and ravaging as he went, and distinguished himself at the taking of Caen and in the engagement with the force under Sir Godemar I du Fay, which endeavoured to prevent the English army from crossing the Somme by the ford of Blanchetaque.[14]
Early on Saturday, 26 August 1347, before the start of the battle of Crécy, Edward, Prince of Wales, received the sacrament with his father at Crécy, and took the command of the right, or van, of the army with the earls of Warwick and Oxford, Sir Geoffroy d'Harcourt, Sir John Chandos, and other leaders, and at the head of eight hundred men-at-arms, two thousand archers, and a thousand Welsh foot, though the numbers are by no means trustworthy. When the Genoese bowmen were discomfited and the front line of the French was in some disorder, the prince appears to have left his position to attack their second line. At this moment, however, the Count of Alençon charged his division with such fury that he was in great danger, and the leaders who commanded with him sent a messenger to tell his father that he was in great straits and to beg for assistance.[15]
When Edward learned that his son was not wounded, he responded that he would send no help, for he wished to give the prince the opportunity to "win his spurs" (he was in fact already a knight), and to allow him and those who had charge of him the honour of the victory. The prince was thrown to the ground and was rescued by Sir Richard FitzSimon, his standard bearer, who threw down the banner, stood over his body, and beat back his assailants while he regained his feet.[16] Harcourt now sent to Earl of Arundel for help, and he forced back the French, who had probably by this time advanced to the rising ground of the English position.[14]
A flank attack on the side of Wadicourt was next made by the Counts of Alençon and Ponthieu, but the English were strongly entrenched there, and the French were unable to penetrate the defences and lost the Duke of Lorraine and the Counts of Alençon and Blois.[14]
The two front lines of their army were utterly broken before King Philip's division engaged. Then Edward appears to have advanced at the head of the reserve, and the rout soon became complete. When Edward met his son after the battle was over, he embraced him and declared that he had acquitted himself loyally, and the prince bowed low and did reverence to his father. The next day he joined the king in paying funeral honours to King John of Bohemia.[14][c]
The prince was present at the siege of Calais (1346–1347), and after the surrender of the town harried and burned the country for 30 miles (48 km) around, and brought much booty back with him.[28] He returned to England with his father on 12 October 1347, took part in the jousts and other festivities of the court, and was invested by the king with the new Order of the Garter (1348).[29]
Siege of Calais and Battle of Winchelsea
Prince Edward shared in the king's expedition to Calais in the last days of 1349, came to the rescue of his father, and when the combat was over and the king and his prisoners sat down to feast, he and the other English knights served the king and his guests at the first course and then sat down for the second course at another table.[30] When the king embarked at Winchelsea on 28 August 1350 to intercept the fleet of La Cerda, the Prince sailed with him, though in another ship, and in company with his brother, the young John of Gaunt, Earl of Richmond. During the Battle of Winchelsea his ship was grappled by a large Spanish ship and was so full of leaks that it was likely to sink, and though he and his knights attacked the enemy manfully, they were unable to take her. Henry of Grosmont, Earl of Lancaster, came to his rescue and attacked the Spaniard on the other side; she was soon taken, her crew were thrown into the sea, and as the Prince and his men got on board her their own ship foundered.[31]
Cheshire expedition
In 1353 some disturbances seem to have broken out in Cheshire, for the Prince as Earl of Chester marched with Henry of Grosmont, now Duke of Lancaster, to the neighbourhood of Chester to protect the justices, who were holding an assize there. The men of the earldom offered to pay him a heavy fine to bring the assize to an end, but when they thought they had arranged matters the justices opened an inquisition of trailbaston, took a large sum of money from them, and seized many houses and much land into the prince's, their earl's, hands. On his return from Chester the prince is said to have passed by the Abbey of Dieulacres in Staffordshire, to have seen a fine church which his great-grandfather, Edward I, had built there, and to have granted five hundred marks, a tenth of the sum he had taken from his earldom, towards its completion; the abbey was almost certainly not Dieulacres but Vale Royal.[32]
Further campaigns (1355–64)
Aquitaine
When Edward III determined to renew the war with France in 1355, he ordered the Black Prince to lead an army into Aquitaine while he, as his plan was, acted with the king of Navarre in Normandy, and the Duke of Lancaster upheld the cause of John of Montfort in Brittany. The prince's expedition was made in accordance with the request of some of the Gascon lords who were anxious for plunder. On 10 July the king appointed him his lieutenant in Gascony, and gave him powers to act in his stead, and, on 4 August, to receive homages.[33] He left London for Plymouth on 30 June, was detained there by contrary winds, and set sail on 8 September with about three hundred ships, in company with four earls (Thomas Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, William Ufford, Earl of Suffolk, William Montagu, Earl of Salisbury, and John Vere, Earl of Oxford), and in command of a thousand men-at-arms, two thousand archers, and a large body of Welsh foot.[34] At Bordeaux the Gascon lords received him with much rejoicing. It was decided to make a short campaign before the winter, and on 10 October he set out with fifteen hundred lances, two thousand archers, and three thousand light foot. Whatever scheme of operations the King may have formed during the summer, this expedition of the Prince was purely a piece of marauding. After grievously harrying the counties of Juliac, Armagnac, Astarac, and part of Comminges, he crossed the Garonne at Sainte-Marie a little above Toulouse, which was occupied by John I, Count of Armagnac, and a considerable force. The count refused to allow the garrison to make a sally, and the prince passed on into the Lauragais. His troops stormed and burnt Montgiscard, where many men, women, and children were ill-treated and slain,[35] and took and pillaged Avignonet and Castelnaudary. The country was "very rich and fertile" according to the Black Prince,[36] and the people "good, simple, and ignorant of war", so the prince took great spoil, especially of carpets, draperies, and jewels, for "the robbers" spared nothing, and the Gascons who marched with him were especially greedy.[37] The only castle to resist the English forces was Montgey. Its châtelaine defended its walls by pouring beehives onto the attackers, who fled in panic.[38]
Carcassonne was taken and sacked, but he did not take the citadel, which was strongly situated and fortified. Ourmes (or Homps, near Narbonne) and Trèbes bought off his army. He plundered Narbonne and thought of attacking the citadel, for he heard that there was much booty there, but gave up the idea on finding that it was well defended. While he was there a messenger came to him from the papal court, urging him to allow negotiations for peace. He replied that he could do nothing without knowing his father's will.[39] From Narbonne he turned to march back to Bordeaux. The Count of Armagnac tried to intercept him, but a small body of French having been defeated in a skirmish near Toulouse the rest of the army retreated into the city, and the prince returned in peace to Bordeaux, bringing back with him enormous spoils. The expedition lasted eight weeks, during which the prince only rested eleven days in all the places he visited, and without performing any feat of arms did the French king much mischief.[40] During the next month, before 21 January 1356, the leaders under his command reduced five towns and seventeen castles.[41]
Battle of Poitiers
On 6 July 1356 Prince Edward set out on another expedition, undertaken with the intention of passing through France to Normandy, and there giving aid to his father's Norman allies, the party headed by the king of Navarre and Geoffrey d'Harcourt. In Normandy he expected to be met by his father,[42] He crossed the Dordogne at Bergerac on 4 August,[43] and rode through Auvergne, Limousin, and Berry, plundering and burning as he went until he came to Bourges, where he burnt the suburbs but failed to take the city. He then turned westward and made an unsuccessful attack on Issoudun on 25–27 August. Meanwhile, King John II was gathering a large force at Chartres, from which he was able to defend the passages of the Loire, and was sending troops to the fortresses that seemed in danger of attack. From Issoudun the prince returned to his former line of march and took Vierzon. There he learnt that it would be impossible for him to cross the Loire or to form a junction with Lancaster, who was then in Brittany. Accordingly he determined to return to Bordeaux by way of Poitiers, and after putting to death most of the garrison of the castle of Vierzon set out on 29 August towards Romorantin.[44]
Some French knights who skirmished with the English advanced guard retreated into Romorantin, and when Prince Edward heard of this he said: "Let us go there; I should like to see them a little nearer".[44] He inspected the fortress in person and sent his friend Chandos to summon the garrison to surrender. The place was defended by Boucicault and other leaders, and on their refusing his summons he assaulted it on 31 August. The siege lasted three days, and the prince, who was enraged at the death of one of his friends, declared that he would not leave the place untaken. Finally he set fire to the roofs of the fortress by using Greek fire, reduced it on 3 September.[44]
On 5 September the English proceeded to march through Berry. On 9 September King John II, who had now gathered a large force, crossed the Loire at Blois and went in pursuit of them. When the king was at Loches on 12 September he had as many as twenty thousand men-at-arms, and with these and his other forces he advanced to Chauvigny. On 16 and 17 September his army crossed the Vienne.[44]
Meanwhile, the prince was marching almost parallel to the French and at only a few miles distance from them. It is impossible to believe Froissart's statement that he was ignorant of the movements of the French. From 14 to 16 September he was at Châtellerault, and on the next day, Saturday, as he was marching towards Poitiers, some French men-at-arms skirmished with his advance guard, pursued them up to the main body of his army, and were all slain or taken prisoners. The French king had outstripped him, and his retreat was cut off by an army at least fifty thousand strong, while he had not, it is said, more than about two thousand men-at-arms, four thousand archers, and fifteen hundred light foot. Lancaster had endeavoured to come to his relief, but had been stopped by the French at Pont-de-Cé.[45]
When Prince Edward knew that the French army lay between him and Poitiers, he took up his position on some rising ground to the south-east of the city, between the right bank of the Miausson and the old Roman road, probably on a spot now called La Cardinerie, a farm in the commune of Beauvoir, for the name Maupertuis has long gone out of use, and remained there that night. The next day, Sunday, 18 September, the cardinal, Hélie Talleyrand, called "of Périgord", obtained leave from King John II to endeavour to make peace. The prince was willing enough to come to terms, and offered to give up all the towns and castles he had conquered, to set free all his prisoners, and not to serve against the king of France for seven years, besides, it is said, offering a payment of a hundred thousand francs. King John, however, was persuaded to demand that the prince and a hundred of his knights should surrender themselves up as prisoners, and to this he would not consent. The cardinal's negotiations lasted the whole day, and were protracted in the interest of the French, for John II was anxious to give time for further reinforcements to join his army. Considering the position in which the prince then was, it seems probable that the French might have destroyed his little army simply by hemming it in with a portion of their host, and so either starving it or forcing it to leave its strong station and fight in the open with the certainty of defeat. John II made a fatal mistake in allowing the prince the respite of Sunday; for while the negotiations were going forward he employed his army in strengthening its position. The English front was well covered by vines and hedges; on its left and rear was the ravine of the Miausson and a good deal of broken ground, and its right was flanked by the wood and abbey of Nouaillé. All through the day the army was busily engaged in digging trenches and making fences, so that it stood, as at Crécy, in a kind of entrenched camp.[46]
Prince Edward drew up his men in three divisions, the first being commanded by the earls of Warwick and Suffolk, the second by himself, and the rear by Salisbury and Oxford. The French were drawn up in four divisions, one behind the other, and so lost much of the advantage of their superior numbers. In front of his first line and on either side of the narrow lane that led to his position the prince stationed his archers, who were well protected by hedges, and posted a kind of ambush of three hundred men-at-arms and three hundred mounted archers, who were to fall on the flank of the second battle of the enemy, commanded by the Dauphin, Charles, Duke of Normandy.[47]
At daybreak on 19 September Prince Edward addressed his little army, and the fight began. An attempt was made by three hundred picked men-at-arms to ride through the narrow lane and force the English position, but they were shot down by the archers. A body of Germans and the first division of the army which followed were thrown into disorder; then the English force in ambush charged the second division on the flank, and as it began to waver the English men-at-arms mounted their horses, which they had kept near them, and charged down the hill. The prince kept Chandos by his side, and his friend did him good service in the fray. As they prepared to charge he cried: "John, get forward; you shall not see me turn my back this day, but I will be ever with the foremost", and then he shouted to his banner-bearer, "Banner, advance, in the name of God and St. George!".[48] All the French except the advance guard fought on foot, and the division of the Duke of Normandy, already wavering, could not stand against the English charge and fled in disorder. The next division, under Philip, Duke of Orléans, also fled, though not so shamefully, but the rear, under King John II in person, fought with much gallantry. The prince, "who had the courage of a lion, took great delight that day in the fight".[48] The combat lasted until a little after 3 pm, and the French, who were utterly defeated, left eleven thousand dead on the field, of whom 2,426 were men of gentle birth. Nearly a hundred counts, barons, and bannerets and two thousand men-at-arms, besides many others, were made prisoners, and the king and his youngest son, Philip, were among those who were taken. The English losses were not large.[48]
When King John II was brought to him, the prince received him with respect, helped him to take off his armour, and entertained him and the greater part of the princes and barons who had been made prisoners at supper. He served at the king's table and would not sit down with him, declaring that "he was not worthy to sit at table with so great a king or so valiant a man",[48] and speaking many comfortable words to him, for which the French praised him highly.[49] The next day the Black Prince continued his retreat on Bordeaux; he marched warily, but no one ventured to attack him.[48]
At Bordeaux, which Prince Edward reached on 2 October, he was received with much rejoicing, and he and his men tarried there through the winter and wasted in festivities the immense spoil they had gathered. On 23 March 1357 the prince concluded a two years' truce, for he wished to return home. The Gascon lords were unwilling that King John II should be carried off to England, and the prince gave them a hundred thousand crowns to silence their murmurs. He left the country under the government of four Gascon lords and arrived in England on 4 May, after a voyage of eleven days, landing at Plymouth.[50] When he entered London in triumph on 24 May, King John II, his prisoner, rode a fine white charger, while he was mounted on a little black hackney. Judged by modern ideas the prince's show of humility appears affected, and the Florentine chronicler remarks that the honour done to King John II must have increased the misery of the captive and magnified the glory of King Edward; but this comment argues a refinement of feeling which neither Englishmen nor Frenchmen of that day had probably attained.[51]
England, tournaments and debts
After his return to England Prince Edward took part in the many festivals and tournaments of his father's court, and in May 1359 he and the king and other challengers held the lists at a joust proclaimed at London by the mayor and sheriffs, and, to the great delight of the citizens, the king appeared as the mayor and the prince as the senior sheriff.[52] Festivities of this sort and the lavish gifts he bestowed on his friends brought him into debt, and on 27 August, when a new expedition into France was being prepared, the king granted that if he fell his executors should have his whole estate for four years for the payment of his debts.[53]
Reims campaign
In October 1359 Prince Edward sailed with his father to Calais, and led a division of the army during the Reims campaign (1359–1360). At its close he took the principal part on the English side in negotiating the Treaty of Brétigny, and the preliminary truce arranged at Chartres on 7 May 1360 was drawn up by proctors acting in his name and the name of Charles, Duke of Normandy, the regent of France.[54] He probably did not return to England until after his father,[55] who landed at Rye on 18 May. On 9 July he and Henry, Duke of Lancaster, landed at Calais in attendance on the French king. As, however, the stipulated instalment of the king's ransom was not ready, he returned to England, leaving King John in the charge of Sir Walter Manny and three other knights.[56] He accompanied his father to Calais on 9 October to assist at the liberation of King John and the ratification of the treaty. He rode with John to Boulogne, where he made his offering in the Church of the Virgin. He returned with King Edward to England at the beginning of November.[57]
Marriage to Joan
On 10 October 1361 the prince, now in his 31st year, married his cousin Joan, Countess of Kent, daughter of Edmund of Woodstock, Earl of Kent, younger son of Edward I, and Margaret, daughter of Philip III of France, and widow of Thomas Lord Holland, and in right of his wife Earl of Kent, then in her thirty-third year, and the mother of three children. As the prince and the countess were related in the third degree, and also by the spiritual tie of sponsorship, the prince being godfather to Joan's elder son Thomas, a dispensation was obtained for their marriage from Pope Innocent VI, though they appear to have been contracted before it was applied for.[58] The marriage was performed at Windsor, in the presence of King Edward III, by Simon Islip Archbishop of Canterbury. According to Jean Froissart the contract of marriage (the engagement) was entered into without the knowledge of the king.[59] The prince and his wife resided at Berkhamsted Castle in Hertfordshire[60] and held the manor of Princes Risborough from 1343; though local history describes the estate as "his palace", many sources suggest it was used more as a hunting lodge.[61]
Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony
On 19 July 1362 his father, Edward III granted Prince Edward all his dominions in Aquitaine and Gascony, to be held as a principality by liege homage on payment of an ounce of gold each year, together with the title of Prince of Aquitaine and Gascony.[62] During the rest of the year he was occupied in preparing for his departure to his new principality, and after Christmas he received the king and his court at Berkhamsted, took leave of his father and mother, and in the following February sailed with his wife, Joan, and all his household for Gascony, landing at La Rochelle.[60]
At La Rochelle the prince was met by John Chandos, the king's lieutenant, and proceeded with him to Poitiers, where he received the homage of the lords of Poitou and Saintonge; he then rode to various cities and at last came to Bordeaux, where from 9 to 30 July he received the homage of the lords of Gascony. He received all graciously, and kept a splendid court, residing sometimes at Bordeaux and sometimes at Angoulême.[60]
The prince appointed Chandos constable of Guyenne, and provided the knights of his household with profitable offices. They kept much state, and their extravagance displeased the people.[63] Many of the Gascon lords were dissatisfied at being handed over to the dominion of the English, and the favour the prince showed to his own countrymen, and the ostentatious magnificence they exhibited, increased this feeling of dissatisfaction. Arnaud Amanieu, Lord of Albret, and many more were always ready to give what help they could to the French cause, and Gaston, Count of Foix, though he visited the prince on his first arrival, was thoroughly French at heart, and gave some trouble in 1365 by refusing to do homage for Bearn.[64] Charles V, who succeeded to the throne of France in April 1364, was careful to encourage the malcontents, and the prince's position was by no means easy.[60]
In April 1363 the prince mediated between the Counts of Foix and Armagnac, who had for a long time been at war with each other. He also attempted in the following February to mediate between Charles of Blois and John of Montfort, the rival competitors for the Duchy of Brittany. Both appeared before him at Poitiers, but his mediation was unsuccessful.[60]
The next month, May 1363, the prince entertained Peter, King of Cyprus, at Angoulême, and held a tournament there. At the same time he and his lords excused themselves from assuming the cross. During the summer the lord of Albret was at Paris, and his forces and several other Gascon lords held the French cause in Normandy against the party of Navarre. Meanwhile, war was renewed in Brittany; the prince allowed Chandos to raise and lead a force to succour the party of Montfort, and Chandos won the Battle of Auray (29 September 1364) against the French.[60]
As the leaders of the free companies which desolated France were for the most part Englishmen or Gascons, they did not ravage Aquitaine, and the prince was suspected, probably not without cause, of encouraging, or at least of taking no pains to discourage, their proceedings.[65] Accordingly on 14 November 1364 Edward III called upon him to restrain their ravages.[66]
Spanish campaign (1365–67)
In 1365 the free companies, under Sir Hugh Calveley and other leaders, took service with Bertrand du Guesclin, who employed them in 1366 in compelling King Peter of Castile to flee from his kingdom, and in setting up his bastard brother, Henry of Trastámara, as king in his stead. Peter, who was in alliance with Edward III, sent messengers to Prince Edward asking his help, and on receiving a gracious answer at Corunna, set out at once, and arrived at Bayonne with his son and his three daughters. The prince met him at Capbreton, and rode with him to Bordeaux.[60]
Many of the prince's lords, both English and Gascon, were unwilling that he should espouse Peter's cause, but he declared that it was not fitting that a bastard should inherit a kingdom, or drive out his lawfully born brother, and that no king or king's son ought to suffer such disrespect to royalty; nor could any turn him from his determination to restore the king.[67]
Peter won friends by declaring that he would make Edward's son king of Galicia, and would divide his riches among those who helped him. A parliament was held at Bordeaux, in which it was decided to ask the wishes of the English king. Edward replied that it was right that his son should help Peter, and the prince held another parliament at which the king's letter was read. Then the lords agreed to give their help, provided that their pay was secured to them. To give them the required security, the prince agreed to lend Peter whatever money was necessary.[68]
The prince and Peter then held a conference with Charles of Navarre at Bayonne, and agreed with him to allow their troops to pass through his dominions. To persuade him to do this, Peter had, besides other grants, to pay him 56,000 florins, and this sum was lent him by the prince. On 23 September a series of agreements (the Treaty of Libourne) were entered into between the prince, Peter, and Charles of Navarre, at Libourne, on the Dordogne, by which Peter covenanted to put the prince in possession of the province of Biscay and the territory and fortress of Castro de Urdialès as pledges for the repayment of this debt, to pay 550,000 florins for six months' wages at specified dates, 250,000 florins being the prince's wages, and 800,000 florins the wages of the lords who were to serve in the expedition. He consented to leave his three daughters in the prince's hands as hostages for the fulfilment of these terms, and further agreed that whenever the king, the prince, or their heirs, the king of England, should march in person against the Moors, they should have the command of the vanguard before all other Christian kings, and that if they were not present the banner of the king of England should be carried in the vanguard side by side with the banner of Castile.[69]
The prince received a hundred thousand francs from his father out of the ransom of John II, the late king of France,[70] and broke up his plate to help to pay the soldiers he was taking into his pay. While his army was assembling he remained at Angoulême, and was there visited by Peter.[71] He then stayed over Christmas at Bordeaux, where his wife, Joan, gave birth to their second son Richard (the next king of England).[68]
Prince Edward left Bordeaux early in February 1367, and joined his army at Dax, where he remained three days, and received a reinforcement of four hundred men-at-arms and four hundred archers sent out by his father under his brother John, duke of Lancaster. From Dax the prince advanced via Saint-Jean-Pied-de-Port through Roncesvalles (in the Pyrenees) to Pamplona (the capital of Kingdom of Navarre).[68]
When Calveley and other English and Gascon leaders of free companies found that Prince Edward was about to fight for Peter, they withdrew from the service of Henry of Trastámara, and joined Prince Edward "because he was their natural lord".[72] While the prince was at Pamplona he received a letter of defiance from Henry.[73]
From Pamplona the prince marched by Arruiz to Salvatierra, which opened its gates to his army, and thence advanced to Vitoria, intending to march on Burgos by this direct route. A body of his knights, which he had sent out to reconnoitre under Sir William Felton, was defeated by a skirmishing party, and he found that Henry had occupied some strong positions, and especially Santo Domingo de la Calzada on the right of the river Ebro, and Zaldiaran mountain on the left, which made it impossible for him to reach Burgos through Álava. Accordingly he crossed the Ebro, and encamped under the walls of Logroño. During these movements the prince's army had suffered from want of provisions both for men and horses, and from wet and windy weather. At Logroño, however, though provisions were still scarce, they were somewhat better off.[68]
On 30 March 1367, the prince wrote an answer to Henry's letter. On 2 April he left Logroño and moved to Navarrete, La Rioja. Meanwhile, Henry and his French allies had encamped at Nájera, so that the two armies were now near each other. Letters passed between Henry and the prince, for Henry seems to have been anxious to make terms. He declared that Peter was a tyrant, and had shed much innocent blood, to which the prince replied that the king had told him that all the persons he had slain were traitors.[68]
On the morning of 3 April, the prince's army marched from Navarrete, and all dismounted while they were yet some distance from Henry's army. The vanguard, in which were three thousand men-at-arms, both English and Bretons, was led by Lancaster, Chandos, Calveley, and Clisson; the right division was commanded by Armagnac and other Gascon lords; the left, in which some German mercenaries marched with the Gascons, by Jean, Captal de Buch, and the Count of Foix; and the rear or main battle by the prince, with three thousand lances, and with the prince was Peter and, a little on his right, the dethroned James of Majorca and his company; the numbers, however, are scarcely to be depended on.[74]
Before the battle of Nájera began, the prince prayed aloud to God that as he had come that day to uphold the right and reinstate a disinherited king, God would grant him success. Then, after telling Peter that he should know that day whether he should have his kingdom or not, he cried: "Advance, banner, in the name of God and St. George; and God defend our right".[75] The knights of Castile attacked and pressed the English vanguard, but the wings of Henry's army failed to move, so that the Gascon lords were able to attack the main body on the flanks. Then the prince brought the main body of his army into action, and the fighting became intense, for he had under him "the flower of chivalry, and the most famous warriors in the whole world".[75] At length Henry's vanguard gave way, and he fled from the field.[76]
When the battle was over the prince asked Peter to spare the lives of those who had offended him. Peter assented, with the exception of one notorious traitor, whom he at once put to death; and he also had two others slain the next day.[75]
Among the prisoners was the French marshal Arnoul d'Audrehem, whom the prince had formerly taken prisoner at Poitiers, and whom he had released on d'Audrehem giving his word that he would not bear arms against the prince until his ransom was paid. When the prince saw him he reproached him bitterly, and called him "liar and traitor".[75] D'Audrehem denied that he was either, and the prince asked him whether he would submit to the judgment of a body of knights. To this d'Audrehem agreed, and after he had dined the prince chose twelve knights, four English, four Gascons, and four Bretons, to judge between himself and the marshal. After he had stated his case, d'Audrehem replied that he had not broken his word, for the army the prince led was not his own; he was merely in the pay of Peter. The knights considered that this view of the prince's position was sound, and gave their verdict for d'Audrehem.[77]
On 5 April 1367, the prince and Peter marched to Burgos, where they celebrated Easter. The prince, however, did not take up his quarters in the city, but camped outside the walls at the Monastery of Las Huelgas. Peter did not pay him any of the money he owed him, and the prince could get nothing from him except a solemn renewal of his bond of the previous 23 September, which he made on 2 May 1367 before the high altar of the Cathedral of Burgos.[78] By this time, the prince began to suspect his ally of treachery. Peter had no intention of paying his debts, and when the prince demanded possession of Biscay told him that the Biscayans would not consent to be handed over to him. To get rid of his creditor Peter told him that he could not get money at Burgos, and persuaded the prince to take up his quarters at Valladolid while he went to Seville, whence he declared he would send the money he owed.[75]
Prince Edward remained at Valladolid during some very hot weather, waiting in vain for his money. His army suffered so terribly from dysentery and other diseases that it is said that scarcely one Englishman out of five ever saw England again.[79] He was himself seized with a sickness from which he never thoroughly recovered, and which some said was caused by poison.[80] Food and drink were scarce, and the free companies in his pay did much mischief to the surrounding country.[81]
Meanwhile, Henry of Trastámara made war upon Aquitaine, took Bagnères and wasted the country. Fearing that Charles of Navarre would not allow him to return through his dominions, the prince negotiated with the King Peter IV of Aragon for a passage for his troops. Peter IV made a treaty with him, and when Charles of Navarre heard of it he agreed to allow the prince, the Duke of Lancaster, and some of their lords to pass through his country; so they returned through Roncesvalles, and reached Bordeaux early in September 1367.[75]
War in Aquitaine (1366–70)
Some time after he had returned to Aquitaine the free companies, some six thousand strong, also reached Aquitaine, having passed through Kingdom of Aragon. As they had not received the whole of the money the prince had agreed to pay them, they took up their quarters in his country and began to do much mischief. He persuaded the captains to leave Aquitaine, and the companies under their command crossed the Loire and did much damage to France. This greatly angered Charles V, who about this time did the prince serious mischief by encouraging disaffection among the Gascon lords.[75]
When the prince had been gathering his army for his Spanish expedition, the lord of Albret had agreed to serve with a thousand lances. Considering, however, that he had at least as many men as he could find provisions for, the prince on 8 December 1366 had written to him requesting that he would bring only two hundred lances. The lord of Albret was much incensed at this, and, though peace was made by his uncle the Count of Armagnac, did not forget the offence, and Froissart speaks of it as the "first cause of hatred between him and the prince".[75] A more powerful cause of this lord's discontent was the non-payment of an annual pension which had been granted him by Edward. About this time he agreed to marry Margaret of Bourbon, sister of the queen of France. The Black Prince was annoyed at this betrothal, and, his temper probably being soured by sickness and disappointment, behaved with rudeness to both D'Albret and his intended bride. On the other hand, Charles offered the lord the pension which he had lost, and thus drew him and his uncle, the Count of Armagnac, altogether over to the French side.[82]
The immense cost of the late campaign and his constant extravagance had brought the prince into financial difficulties, and as soon as he returned to Bordeaux he called an assembly of the estates of Aquitaine (Parliament) to meet at Saint-Émilion to obtain a grant from them. It seems as though no business was done then, for in January 1368 he held a meeting of the estates at Angoulême, and there persuaded them to allow him a fouage, or hearth tax, of ten sous for five years. An edict for this tax was published on 25 January 1368.[83]
The chancellor, Bishop John Harewell, held a conference at Niort, at which he persuaded the barons of Poitou, Saintonge, Limousin, and Rouergue to agree to this tax, but the great vassals of the high marches refused, and on 20 June and again on 25 October the Counts of Armagnac, Périgord, and Comminges, and the lord of Albret laid their complaints before the king of France, declaring that he was their lord paramount.[84] Meanwhile, the prince's friend Chandos, who strongly urged him against imposing this tax, had retired to his Norman estate.[83]
Charles took advantage of these appeals, and on 25 January 1369 sent messengers to Prince Edward, who was then residing at Bordeaux, summoning him to appear in person before him in Paris and there receive judgment. He replied: "We will willingly attend at Paris on the day appointed since the king of France sends for us, but it shall be with our helmet on our head and sixty thousand men in our company".[83]
Prince Edward caused the messengers to be imprisoned, and in revenge for this the Counts of Périgord and Comminges and other lords set on Sir Thomas Wake,[85][d] the high-steward of Rouergue, slew many of his men, and put him to flight. The prince sent for Chandos, who came to his help, and some fighting took place, though war was not yet declared. His health was now so feeble that he could not take part in active operations, for he was swollen with dropsy and could not ride. By 18 March 1367 more than nine hundred towns, castles, and other places signified in one way or another their adherence to the French cause.[86]
Prince Edward had already warned his father of the intentions of the French king, but there was evidently a party at Edward's court that was jealous of his power, and his warnings were slighted. In April 1369, however, war was declared. Edward sent the Earls of Cambridge and Pembroke to his assistance, and Sir Robert Knolles, who now again took service with him, added much to his strength. The war in Aquitaine was desultory and, though the English maintained their ground fairly in the field, every day that it was prolonged weakened their hold on the country.[83]
On 1 January 1370, Prince Edward sustained a heavy loss in the death of his friend Chandos. Several efforts were made by Edward to conciliate the Gascon lords,[87] but they were fruitless and can only have served to weaken the prince's authority. It is probable that John of Gaunt was working against him at the English court, and when he was sent out in the summer to help his elder brother, he came with such extensive powers that he almost seemed as though he had come to supersede him.[83]
In the spring, Charles raised two large armies for the invasion of Aquitaine; one, under Louis I, Duke of Anjou, was to enter Guyenne by La Reole and Bergerac, the other, under John, Duke of Berry, was to march towards Limousin and Quercy, and both were to unite and besiege the prince in Angoulême. Ill as he was, the prince left his bed of sickness,[88] and gathered an army at Cognac, where he was joined by the Barons of Poitou and Saintonge, and the Earls of Cambridge, Lancaster, and Pembroke. The two French armies gained many cities, united and laid siege to Limoges, which was treacherously surrendered to them by the bishop, Jean de Murat de Cros, who had been one of the prince's trusted friends.[89]
When Prince Edward heard of the surrender of Limoges to the French, he swore "by the soul of his father" that he would have the place again and would make the inhabitants pay dearly for their treachery.[89] He set out from Cognac with an army of about 4,000 men. Due to his sickness he was unable to mount his horse, and was carried in a litter. During the siege of Limoges, the prince was determined to take the town and ordered the undermining of its walls. On 19 September, his miners succeeded in demolishing a large piece of wall which filled the ditches with its ruins. The town was then stormed, with the inevitable destruction and loss of life.[90]
The Victorian historian William Hunt, author of Prince Edward's biography in the Dictionary of National Biography (1889), relying on Froissart as a source,[e] wrote that when the bishop (who was the most responsible for the surrender) was brought before the Prince, the Prince told him that his head should be cut off (Lancaster persuaded him not to carry out the deed), but that the city was nevertheless pillaged and burnt, and that 3,000 persons of all ranks and ages were massacred.[90] However, modern scholarship, including the historian Richard Barber writing in 2008 in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography and drawing on a wider range of evidence, places casualties much lower than Froissart did – around 300 garrison soldiers and civilians in total.[91]
The prince returned to Cognac; his sickness increased and he was forced to give up all hope of being able to direct any further operations and to proceed first to Angoulème and then to Bordeaux.[92]
England
The death of Prince Edward's eldest son, Edward of Angoulême, in 1371, caused Edward a great deal of grief. His health continued to deteriorate and the prince's personal doctor advised him to return to England. Edward left Aquitaine with the Duke of Lancaster, and landed at Southampton early in January 1371. Edward met his father at Windsor. At this meeting, Prince Edward interceded to stop a treaty Edward III had made the previous month with Charles of Navarre because he did not agree to the ceding of lands King Charles demanded in it.[93] After this, the Black Prince returned to his manor in Berkhamsted. [92]
On his return to England, the prince was probably at once recognised as the natural opponent of the influence exercised by the anti-clerical and Lancastrian party, and it is evident that the clergy trusted him; for on 2 May he met the convocation of Canterbury at the Savoy, and persuaded them to make an exceptionally large grant.[94] His health now began to improve, and in August 1372 he sailed with his father to the relief of Thouars; but contrary winds meant that the fleet never reached the French coast. On 6 October he resigned the principality of Aquitaine and Gascony, giving as his reason that its revenues were no longer sufficient to cover expenses, and acknowledging his resignation in Parliament of the next month. At the conclusion of this parliament, after the knights had been dismissed, he met the citizens and burgesses "in a room near the white chamber", and prevailed on them to extend the customs granted the year before for the protection of merchant shipping for another year.[95]
It is said that after Whitsunday, 20 May 1374, the prince presided at a council of prelates and nobles held at Westminster to answer a demand from Pope Gregory XI for a subsidy to help him against the Florentines. The bishops, after hearing the pope's letter, which asserted his right as lord spiritual, and, by the grant of John, lord in chief, of the kingdom, declared that "he was lord of all". The cause of the crown, however, was vigorously maintained, and the prince, provoked at the hesitation of Archbishop Wittlesey, spoke sharply to him, and at last told him that he was an ass. The bishops gave way, and it was declared that John had no power to bring the realm into subjection.[92][f]
The prince's illness soon returned in force, though when the "Good Parliament" met on 28 April 1376 he was looked upon as the chief support of the commons in their attack on the abuses of the administration, and evidently acted in concert with William of Wykeham in opposing the influence of Lancaster and the disreputable clique of courtiers who upheld it, and he had good cause to fear that his brother's power would prove dangerous to the prospects of his son Richard.[96] Richard Lyons, the king's financial agent, who was impeached for gigantic frauds, sent him a bribe of £1,000. and other gifts, but he refused to receive it, though he afterwards said that it was a pity he had not kept it, and sent it to pay the soldiers who were fighting for the kingdom.[97]
Death
From the period of the Good Parliament, Edward knew that he was dying. His dysentery had become so violent on occasion, causing him to faint from weakness, that his household believed he had died.[b] He left gifts for his servants in his will and said goodbye to his father, Edward III, whom he asked to confirm his gifts, pay his debts quickly out of his estate, and protect his son Richard.
His death was announced at the Palace of Westminster on 8 June 1376.[98][g] In his last moments, he was attended by the Bishop of Bangor, who urged him to ask forgiveness of God and of all those he had injured. He "made a very noble end, remembering God his Creator in his heart", and asked people to pray for him.[99]
Edward was buried with great state in Canterbury Cathedral on 29 September. His funeral and the design of his tomb were conducted in accordance to the directions contained in his will.[100] It has a bronze effigy beneath a tester depicting the Holy Trinity with his heraldic achievements – his surcoat, helmet, shield and gauntlets[100] – hung over the tester; they have been replaced with replicas, and the originals now reside in a glass-fronted cabinet within the Cathedral. His epitaph inscribed around his effigy reads:[100]
Such as thou art, sometime was I.
Such as I am, such shalt thou be.
I thought little on th'our of Death
So long as I enjoyed breath.
On earth I had great riches
Land, houses, great treasure, horses, money and gold.
But now a wretched captive am I,
Deep in the ground, lo here I lie.
My beauty great, is all quite gone,
My flesh is wasted to the bone.[101]
Arms and heraldic badge
.svg)
Arms: Quarterly, 1st and 4th azure semée of fleur-de-lys or (France Ancient); 2nd and 3rd gules, three lions passant guardant or (England); overall a label of three points argent. Crest: On a chapeau gules turned up ermine, a lion statant or gorged with a label of three points argent. Mantling: gules lined ermine. Edward's coat of arms as Prince of Wales were those of the kingdom, differenced by a label of three points argent.[102]
Edward also used an alternative coat of Sable, three ostrich feathers argent, described as his "shield for peace" (probably meaning the shield he used for jousting).[c] This shield can be seen several times on his tomb chest, alternating with the differenced royal arms. His younger brother, John of Gaunt, used a similar shield on which the ostrich feathers were ermine.
Edward's "shield for peace" is believed to have inspired the badge of three ostrich feathers used by later Princes of Wales. The motto "Ich dien" means "I serve".
Family
Edward married his cousin, Joan, Countess of Kent (1328–1385), on 10 October 1361. She was the daughter and heiress of Edmund, Earl of Kent, the younger son of King Edward I by his second wife Margaret of France.
They had two sons, both born in Aquitaine:[100]
- Edward, born at Angoulême on 27 July 1364,[103] died immediately before his father's return to England in January 1371, and was buried in the church of the Austin Friars, London[104]
- Richard, who succeeded his grandfather as king
From his marriage to Joan, he also became stepfather to her children by Thomas Holland:
- Thomas Holland, 2nd Earl of Kent, whose daughter, Joan Holland, later married Edward's brother, Edmund of Langley.
- John Holland, 1st Duke of Exeter, who married Edward's niece, Elizabeth of Lancaster, daughter of his brother, John of Gaunt.
- Joan Holland, Duchess of Brittany
Edward had several natural sons before his marriage.[100]
With Edith de Willesford (died after 1385):
- Sir Roger Clarendon (c. 1352 – executed 1402);[100] he married Margaret (d. 1382), a daughter of John Fleming, Baron de la Roche.[105]
With unknown mother:
Ancestry
| Ancestors of Edward the Black Prince |
|---|
Appellation "Black Prince"
Edward is often referred to as the "Black Prince".[15] The first known source to use the sobriquet "Black Prince" was the antiquary John Leland in the 1530s or early 1540s (about 165 years after Edward's death). Leland mentions the sobriquet in two manuscript notes in the 1530s or early 1540s, with the implication that it was in relatively widespread use by that date. In one instance, Leland refers in Latin to "Edwardi Principis cog: Nigri" (i.e., "Edward the Prince, cognomen: The Black"); in the other, in English to "the Blake Prince".[113] In both instances, Leland is summarising earlier works – respectively, the 14th-century Eulogium Historiarum and the late 15th-century chronicle attributed to John Warkworth – but in neither case does the name appear in his source texts. In print, Roger Ascham in his Toxophilus (1545) refers to "ye noble black prince Edward beside Poeters";[114] while Richard Grafton, in his Chronicle at Large (1569), uses the name on three occasions, saying that "some writers name him the black prince", and elsewhere that he was "commonly called the black Prince".[115] Raphael Holinshed uses it several times in his Chronicles (1577);[116] and it is also used by William Shakespeare, in his plays Richard II (written c. 1595; Act 2, scene 3) and Henry V (c. 1599; Act 2, scene 4). In 1688 it appears prominently in the title of Joshua Barnes's The History of that Most Victorious Monarch, Edward IIId, King of England and France, and Lord of Ireland, and First Founder of the Most Noble Order of the Garter: Being a Full and Exact Account Of the Life and Death of the said King: Together with That of his Most Renowned Son, Edward, Prince of Wales and of Aquitain, Sirnamed the Black-Prince.
The origins of the name are uncertain, though many theories have been proposed, falling under two main themes, that it is derived from Edward's:
- Black shield, and/or his black armour.
- Brutal reputation, particularly towards the French in Aquitaine.
The black field of his "shield for peace" is well documented (see Arms and heraldic badge above). However, there is no sound evidence that Edward ever wore black armour, although John Harvey (without citing a source) refers to "some rather shadowy evidence that he was described in French as clad at the battle of Crécy ' en armure noire en fer bruni ' – in black armour of burnished steel".[117] Richard Barber suggests that the name's origins may have lain in pageantry, in that a tradition may have grown up in the 15th century of representing the prince in black armour. He points out that several chronicles refer to him as Edward the IV (the title he would have taken as King had he outlived his father): this name would obviously have become confusing when the actual Edward IV succeeded in 1461, and this may have been the period when an alternative had to be found.[118]
Edward's reputation for brutality in France is also well documented, and it is possible that this is where the title had its origins. The French soldier Philippe de Mézières refers to Edward as the greatest of the "black boars" – those aggressors who had done so much to disrupt relations within Christendom.[3] Other French writers made similar associations, and Peter Hoskins reports that an oral tradition of L'Homme Noir, who had passed by with an army, survived in southern France until recent years.[119] In Shakespeare's Henry V, the King of France alludes to "that black name, Edward, Black Prince of Wales". John Speed reported in 1611 that the Black Prince was so named "not of his colour, but of his dreaded Acts in battell";[120] a comment echoed in 1642 by Thomas Fuller, who wrote that he was named "from his dreaded acts and not from his complexion".[121] Joshua Barnes claimed in 1688 that it was from the time of the Battle of Crécy that "the French began to call [him] Le Neoir, or the Black-Prince", appearing to cite a record of 2 Richard II (i.e. 1378–9); but his reference is insufficiently precise to be traceable.[122][22] However, it is unclear how a French sobriquet might have crossed to England, and Barber finds this derivation of the name "unlikely".[123]
See also
- Black Prince's Ruby, which he forced Peter of Castile to give to him after the Castilian campaign. It is actually a large red spinel, now set at the front of the British Imperial State Crown.
- Black Prince (tank) A43 Infantry Tank, a British experimental AFV design, essentially a "super Churchill" of which six prototypes were built very late in World War II.
- Cultural depictions of Edward the Black Prince
- HMS Black Prince, for Royal Navy ships named in his honour
- Junio Valerio Borghese (1906–74), an Italian Navy commander also known as the Black Prince due to his aristocratic connections and adherence to fascism.
- List of knights and ladies of the Garter
Notes
- The ich dien motto is attributed to Edward according to a long-standing but unhistorical tradition (Siddons 2009, pp. 178–190).
Citations
- Barber 1978, p. 243.
References
- Armitage-Smith, Sydney (1905), John of Gaunt: King of Castile and Leon, Duke of Aquitaine and Lancaster, Earl of Derby, Lincoln, and Leicester, Seneschal of England, Charles Scribner's Sons, p. 21
- Ascham, Roger (1545), Toxophilus, vol. 1, London, p. 40
- Barber, Richard (1978), Edward, Prince of Wales and Aquitaine: a biography of the Black Prince, London: Allen Lane, ISBN 978-0-7139-0861-9
- Barber, Richard (January 2008), "Edward, prince of Wales and of Aquitaine (1330–1376)", Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.), Oxford University Press, doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/8523 (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
- Costain, Thomas B. (1962) [1958], The Three Edwards, New York: Popular Library, p. 87
- Froissart, Sir John (1848), Chronicles of England, France and Spain and the Surrounding Countries, Translated from the French Editions with Variations and Additions from Many Celebrated MSS, translated by Johnes, Thomas, London: William Smith, pp. 398–411
- Grafton, Richard (1569), A Chronicle at Large, London, pp. 223, 293, 324
- Green, David (2007), Edward, the Black Prince: Power in Medieval Europe, Harlow: Longman, p. 73, ISBN 978-0-582-78481-9
- Harvey, John (1976), The Black Prince and his Age, London: Batsford, ISBN 978-0-7134-3148-3
- Holinshed, Raphael (1577), The Laste Volume of the Chronicles of England, Scotlande, and Irelande, London, pp. 893, 997, 1001
- Hoskins, Peter (2011), In the Steps of the Black Prince: the Road to Poitiers, 1355–1356, Woodbridge: Boydell, ISBN 978-1-84383-611-7
- Jones, Dan (2014), The Plantagenets: the warrior kings and queens who made England, New York: Penguin, p. 524.
- Jones, Michael (2017), The Black Prince, London: Head of Zeus, pp. 365–7, ISBN 978-1-78497-293-6
- Leland, John (1774), Hearne, Thomas (ed.), Collectanea, vol. 2 (3rd ed.), London, pp. 307, 479
- MacNalty, A. S. (1955), "The illness of Edward the Black Prince.", Br Med J, vol. 1, no. 4910, p. 411, doi:10.1136/bmj.1.4910.411, PMC 2061131, PMID 13230513
- Redlich, Marcellus Donald R. von (2009) [1941], Pedigrees of Some of the Emperor Charlemagne's Descendants, vol. I (1st, reprint, ebook ed.), Genealogical Publishing Company, p. 64, ISBN 978-0-8063-0494-6
- Sainte-Marie, Père Anselme de (1726), Histoire généalogique et chronologique de la maison royale de France [Genealogical and chronological history of the royal house of France] (in French), vol. 1 (3rd ed.), Paris: La compagnie des libraires, pp. 87–88}
- Selby, Walford Dakin; Harwood, H. W. Forsyth; Murray, Keith W. (1895), The genealogist, London: George Bell & Sons, p. 228
- Siddons, Michael Powell (2009), Heraldic Badges in England and Wales 2.1., Woodbridge: Society of Antiquaries/Boydell, pp. 178–190
- Speed, John (1611), The History of Great Britaine under the Conquests of ye Romans, Saxons, Danes and Normans, London, p. 567
- Taylor, Colin (2018). Lauragais: Steeped in History, Soaked in Blood. Troubador Publishing. ISBN 978-1789015836.
- Velde, Francois R. (5 August 2013), "Marks of cadency in the British royal family", Heraldica, retrieved 10 November 2017.[unreliable source][better source needed]
- Wagner, J. (2006), Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War (PDF), Westport: Greenwood Press, ISBN 978-0-313-32736-0, archived from the original (PDF) on 16 July 2018
- Weir, Alison (1999), Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy, London: The Bodley Head, pp. 75, 92
- Weir, Alison (2008), Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy, London: Vintage Books, p. 95
Attribution
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Hunt, William (1889), "Edward the Black Prince", in Stephen, Leslie (ed.), Dictionary of National Biography, vol. 17, London: Smith, Elder & Co, pp. 90–101
Endnotes
- Barnes, Joshua (1688). The history of that most victorius monarch, Edward IIId, ... together with that of his most renowned son, Edward, Prince of Wales and of Aquitain, sirnamed the Black-Prince. Cambridge – via EEBO.;
- Collins, Arthur (1740). The Life and Glorious Actions of Edward, Prince of Wales, (commonly Call'd the Black Prince). London: Thomas Osborne. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- James, G. P. R. (1836) [1822]. A history of the life of Edward the Black Prince, and of various events connected therwith, which occurred during the reign of Edward III, King of England (2nd ed.). London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green & Longman. Retrieved 18 March 2020. – eulogistic and wordy, but useful; in the edition of 1836 James defends his work from the strictures of the Athenæum;
- Longman, William (1869). The history of the life and times of Edward the Third. Longmans, Green. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
- Murimuth, Adam; Anon (1846). Hog, Thomas (ed.). Adami Murimuthensis Chronica sui temporis (M.CCC.III.–M.CCC.XLVI.) cum eorundem continuatione (ad M.CCC.LXXX.) (in Latin). Sumptibus Societatis. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
- Walsingham, Thomas (1858–1863). Haydon, Frank Scott (ed.). Eulogium (historiarum sive temporis): Chronicon ab orbe condito usque ad annum Domini M.CCC.LXCI., a monacho quodam Malmesburiensi exaratum. Rolls Series (in Latin and English). Vol. 9. London: Longman, Brown, Green and Longsman, and Roberts. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
- Walsingham, Thomas (1863–1864). Riley, Henry T. (ed.). Thomae Walsingham, quondam monachi S. Albani, Historia Anglicana. Rolls Series (in Latin and English). Vol. 28. London: Longman, Green, Longman, Roberts, and Green. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
- Robert of Avesbury (1720). Historia de mirabilibus gestis Edvardi III (in Latin). Oxford: Thomas Hearne. Retrieved 17 March 2020.
- Knighton, Henry (1652). "Henricus Knighton Leicestrensis". In Twysden, Roger (ed.). Historiae anglicanae scriptores X. London: Printed by James Flesher and Cornelius Bee. pp. 2311–2744.
- Stow, John (1603). Annales of England. London. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Galfridi Le Baker de Swinbroke (1847). Giles, J. A. (ed.). Chronicon Angliae temporibus Edwardi II et Edwardi III (in Latin). London: Jacobus Bohn. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Sloane MSS. 56 and 335;
- Nichols, John Gough (1843). "Observations on the Heraldic Devices discovered on the Effigies of Richard the Second and his Queen in Westminster Abbey, and upon the Mode in which those Ornaments were executed; including some Remarks on the surname Plantagenet, and on the Ostrich Feathers of the Prince of Wales". Archaeologia. Society of Antiquaries of London. 29: 32–59. doi:10.1017/S0261340900001880. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
- Nicolas, Nicholas Harris (1846). "Observations on the Origin and History of the Badge and Mottoes of Edward Prince of Wales". Archaeologia. Society of Antiquaries of London. 31: 350–384. doi:10.1017/S0261340900012509. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
- Planché, J. R. (1847). "Observations on the Mottoes, 'Houmout' and 'Ich Dien', of Edward the Black Prince". Archaeologia. Society of Antiquaries of London. 32: 69–71. doi:10.1017/S0261340900003465. Retrieved 18 March 2018.
- Strachey, John (ed.). Rotuli Parliamentorum; ut et Petitiones, et Placita in Parliamento. Vol. II: Tempore Edwardi R. III. London. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Rymer, Thomas, ed. (1816–1869). Fœdera. London: Record Commission.
- Jehan Le Bel (1863). Polain, Matthieu Lambert (ed.). Les vrayes chroniques de Messire Jehan le Bel. Académie royale de Belgique (in French). Bruxelles: F. Heussner. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Froissart, Jean (1869–1875). Luce, Siméon (ed.). Chroniques (in French). Paris: Mme. ve. J. Renouard for Sociéte de l'histoire de France.
- Froissart, Jean (1835). Buchon, J. A. C. (ed.). Chroniques. Panthéon littéraire. Littérature française. Histoire (in French). Paris: Desrez.
- Chandos Herald (1883). Francisque, Michel (ed.). Le Prince Noir (in French). J. G. Fotheringham. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Bertrand du Guesclin (1839). Charrière, Ernest; de Saint-André, Guillaume (eds.). Chronique. Paris: Printed by Firmin Didot frères for Panthéon. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- Villani, Matteo (1729). "Istorie". In Muratori, Ludovico Antonio (ed.). Rerum Italicarum Scriptores (in Italian). Vol. 14. Milan: Societas Palatinae. pp. 1–770.
- For the battle of Poitiers
- Allonneau (1841). "Campagne du prince de Galles dans le Languedoc, l'Aquitaine et la France, terminée par la bataille de Poitiers et la captivité du roi Jean". Mémoires de la Société des antiquaires de l'Ouest. 8: 59–120. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- St-Hypolite (1844). "Extraits de quatre notices sur les batailles de Voulon, Poitiers, Maupertuis et Moncontour: § III: Bataille de Maupertuis ou de Poitiers". Mémoires de la Société des antiquaires de l'Ouest. 11: 76–91. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- For the Spanish campaign, López de Ayala, Pedro (1779). "Aňo XIV–XVIII". In Zurita, Geronimo; de Llaguno Amirola, Eugenio (eds.). Cronicas de los Reyes de Castilla. Vol. I: Don Pedro. Madrid: Don Antonio de Sancha. pp. 364–519. Retrieved 18 March 2020.
- For other references see under "Edward III". Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 17. 1889., in text of above article, and in the notes of M. Luce's Froissart.
Further reading
- Barber, Richard, ed. (1986), The Life and Campaigns of the Black Prince: from contemporary letters, diaries and chronicles, including Chandos Herald's Life of the Black Prince, Woodbridge: Boydell, ISBN 978-0-85115-435-0
- Jean de Bel (1904), Chronique de Jean de Bel, Paris, Librairie Renouard, H. Laurens, successeur
- Green, David (2001), The Black Prince, Stroud: Tempus, ISBN 978-0-7524-1989-3
- Green, David (2009), "Masculinity and medicine: Thomas Walsingham and the death of the Black Prince", Journal of Medieval History, 35: 34–51, doi:10.1016/j.jmedhist.2008.12.002, S2CID 155063563
- Gribling, Barbara (2017), The Image of Edward the Black Prince in Georgian and Victorian England: negotiating the late medieval past, Woodbridge: Royal Historical Society, ISBN 978-0-86193-342-6
- The Herald of Sir John Chandos (1910), Pope, Mildred K.; Lodge, Eleanor C. (eds.), Life of the Black Prince, Oxford: Clarendon Press
- Pattison, Richard Phillipson Dunn (1910), The Black Prince, London: Methuen
- Pepin, Guilhem (2006), "Towards a new assessment of the Black Prince's principality of Aquitaine: a study of the last years (1369–1372)", Nottingham Medieval Studies, 50: 59–114, doi:10.1484/J.NMS.3.394
- Witzel, Morgen; Livingstone, Marilyn (2018), The Black Prince and the Capture of a King: Poitiers 1356, Oxford: Casemate, ISBN 978-1-61200-451-8
External links
Texts on Wikisource:
- Haaren, John H (1904). . Famous Men of the Middle Ages.
- Tout, Thomas Frederick (1911). "Edward, the Black Prince". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 8 (11th ed.). pp. 999–1000.
- Edward the Black Prince
- 1330 births
- 1376 deaths
- 14th-century English nobility
- 14th-century peers of France
- Basque history
- Burials at Canterbury Cathedral
- Children of Edward III of England
- Deaths from dysentery
- Dukes of Cornwall
- English people of French descent
- English people of Dutch descent
- English people of Spanish descent
- Heirs apparent who never acceded
- Heirs to the English throne
- High Sheriffs of Cornwall
- House of Plantagenet
- Garter Knights appointed by Edward III
- Knights Bachelor
- Male Shakespearean characters
- Peers created by Edward III
- People from Wallingford, Oxfordshire
- People from Woodstock, Oxfordshire
- People of the Hundred Years' War
- Princes of Wales
- Sons of kings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_the_Black_Prince
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Garter_Knights_appointed_by_Edward_III
Henry of Grosmont, Duke of Lancaster KG (c. 1310 – 23 March 1361) was an English statesman, diplomat, soldier, and Christian writer. The owner of Bolingbroke Castle in Lincolnshire, Grosmont was a member of the House of Plantagenet, which was ruling over England at that time. He was the wealthiest and most powerful peer of the realm.
The son and heir of Henry, 3rd Earl of Lancaster, and Maud Chaworth, Grosmont became one of King Edward III's most trusted captains in the early phases of the Hundred Years' War and distinguished himself with victory in the Battle of Auberoche. He was a founding member and the second knight of the Order of the Garter in 1348, and in 1351 was created Duke of Lancaster. An intelligent and reflective man, Grosmont taught himself to write and was the author of the book Livre de seyntz medicines, a highly personal devotional treatise. He is remembered as one of the founders and early patrons of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, which was established by two guilds of the town in 1352.[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_of_Grosmont,_Duke_of_Lancaster
| Most Noble Order of the Garter | |
|---|---|
 Badge of the Order of the Garter: The attributed arms of Saint George circumscribed by the Garter | |
| Awarded by the monarch of the United Kingdom | |
| Type | Dynastic order |
| Established | 1348 |
| Motto | Honi soit qui mal y pense (Middle French for 'Shame on him who thinks evil of it')[1] |
| Criteria | At His Majesty's pleasure |
| Status | Currently constituted |
| Founder | Edward III |
| Sovereign | Charles III |
| Chancellor | The Duke of Abercorn |
| Prelate | The Bishop of Winchester (ex officio) |
| Classes |
|
| Statistics | |
| First induction | 1348 |
| Last induction | 2023 |
| Total inductees |
Tally: 1,027 |
| Precedence | |
| Next (higher) | George Cross |
| Next (lower) | Order of the Thistle |
 Ribbon of the Order of the Garter | |
,_f.8_-_BL_Stowe_MS_594_(cropped).jpg)
The Most Noble Order of the Garter is an order of chivalry founded by Edward III of England in 1348. It is the most senior order of knighthood in the British honours system, outranked in precedence only by the Victoria Cross and the George Cross. The Order of the Garter is dedicated to the image and arms of Saint George, England's patron saint.
Appointments are at the sovereign's sole discretion and are usually in recognition of a national contribution, for public service, or for personal service to the sovereign.[2] Membership of the order is limited to the sovereign, the Prince of Wales, and no more than 24 living members, or Companions. The order also includes supernumerary knights and ladies (e.g., members of the British royal family and foreign monarchs).
The order's emblem is a garter with the motto Honi soit qui mal y pense (Middle French for 'Shame on him who thinks evil of it') in gold lettering. Members of the order wear it on ceremonial occasions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_the_Garter
Robert of Namur, KG (1323 – April 1391) was a noble from the Low Countries close to King Edward III of England. He was made Knight of the Garter in 1369.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_of_Namur_(1323%E2%80%931391)
Guy Bryan, 1st Baron Bryan, KG (born before 1319 and died 17 August 1390) was an English landowner, military and naval commander, courtier, diplomat, and administrator.[1][2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Bryan,_1st_Baron_Bryan
Thomas Ughtred, 1st Baron Ughtred (also Oughtred; Outred), KG (1292 – before 28 May 1365[1]) was an English soldier and politician. The eldest son and heir of Robert Ughtred, lord of the manor of Scarborough, Kilnwick Percy, Monkton Moor, and other places in Yorkshire. He was born in 1292, being eighteen years of age at his father's death, before 24 May 1310.[2] During a distinguished career he was knighted in 1324,[2] made a Knight banneret in 1337,[3] a Knight of the garter between 15 May 1358 and 1360,[4] and summoned to parliament as Baron Ughtred on 30 April 1344.[5][6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Ughtred,_1st_Baron_Ughtred
The Battle of Old Byland (also known as the Battle of Byland Abbey, the Battle of Byland Moor and the Battle of Scotch Corner) was a significant encounter between Scots and English troops in Yorkshire in October 1322, forming part of the Wars of Scottish Independence. It was a victory for the Scots, the most significant since Bannockburn.
| Battle of Old Byland | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of First War of Scottish Independence | |||||||
 Edward II- by Cassell | |||||||
| |||||||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Old_Byland
The Wars of Scottish Independence were a series of military campaigns fought between the Kingdom of Scotland and the Kingdom of England in the late 13th and early 14th centuries.
The First War (1296–1328) began with the English invasion of Scotland in 1296, and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Edinburgh–Northampton in 1328. The Second War (1332–1357) began with the English-supported invasion by Edward Balliol and the 'Disinherited' in 1332, and ended in 1357 with the signing of the Treaty of Berwick. The wars were part of a great crisis for Scotland and the period became one of the most defining times in its history. At the end of both wars, Scotland retained its status as an independent state. The wars were important for other reasons, such as the emergence of the longbow as a key weapon in medieval warfare.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_Scottish_Independence
The 1383–1385 Portuguese interregnum was a civil war in Portuguese history during which no crowned king of Portugal reigned. The interregnum began when King Ferdinand I died without a male heir and ended when King John I was crowned in 1385 after his victory during the Battle of Aljubarrota.
The Portuguese interpret the era as their earliest national resistance movement to counter Castilian intervention, and Robert Durand considers it as the "great revealer of national consciousness".[1]
The bourgeoisie and the nobility worked together to establish the Aviz dynasty, a branch of the Portuguese House of Burgundy, securely on an independent throne. That contrasted with the lengthy civil wars in France (Hundred Years' War) and England (War of the Roses), which had aristocratic factions fighting powerfully against a centralised monarchy.
It is usually known in Portugal as the 1383–1385 Crisis (Crise de 1383–1385).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1383%E2%80%931385_Portuguese_interregnum
| House of Aviz Casa de Avis | |
|---|---|
.png) | |
| Parent house | Portuguese House of Burgundy |
| Country | Portugal |
| Founded | 1385 |
| Founder | John I |
| Final ruler | Henry I or António I (disputed) |
| Titles | |
| Dissolution | 1580 |
| Cadet branches | |
The House of Aviz (Portuguese: Casa de Avis), also known as the Joanine Dynasty (Dinastia Joanina), was a dynasty of Portuguese origin which flourished during the Renaissance and the period of the Portuguese discoveries, when Portugal expanded its power globally.
The house was founded by King John I of Portugal, Grand-Master of the Order of Aviz and illegitimate son of King Pedro I (of the Portuguese House of Burgundy), who ascended to the throne after successfully pressing his claim during the 1383–1385 Portuguese interregnum.[1] Aviz monarchs would rule Portugal through the Age of Discovery, establishing Portugal as a global power following the creation of the Portuguese Empire. In 1494, Pope Alexander VI divided the world under the dominion of Portugal and Spain with the Treaty of Tordesillas.
The House of Aviz has produced numerous prominent figures in both European and global history, including Prince Henry the Navigator, King Manuel I of Portugal, and Holy Roman Empress Isabella of Portugal. Numerous Aviz dynasts have also claimed thrones or titles across Europe, including King Peter V of Aragon and John, Prince of Antioch. The Aviz ruled Portugal from 1385 until 1580, when the Philippine Dynasty succeeded to the throne following the Portuguese succession crisis of 1580.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Aviz
| Wars of the Roses | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Miniature of the Battle of Tewkesbury, late 15th century | |||||||
| |||||||
| ||
| Belligerents | ||
|---|---|---|
| Commanders and leaders | ||
| Casualties and losses | ||
| 105,000 dead[6] | ||
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
The Wars of the Roses (1455–1487), known at the time and for more than a century after as the Civil Wars, were a series of civil wars fought over control of the English throne in the mid-to-late fifteenth century. These wars were fought between supporters of two rival cadet branches of the royal House of Plantagenet: Lancaster and York. The wars extinguished the male lines of the two branches, leading to the Tudor family inheriting the Lancastrian claim to the throne. Following the war, the Houses of Lancaster and York were united, creating a new royal dynasty and thereby resolving their rival claims. For over thirty years, there were greater and lesser levels of violent conflict between various rival contenders for control of the English monarchy.
The War of the Roses had its roots in the wake of the Hundred Years' War. After fighting a series of armed conflicts with France, the English monarchy's prestige was weakened by emergent socio-economic troubles.[i] This weakened prestige unfolded structural problems with bastard feudalism, a system developed by the powerful duchies created by Edward III.[8] Combined with the mental infirmity and weak rule of King Henry VI, these structural problems revived interest in the Yorkist claim to the throne by Richard of York. Historians disagree over which of these factors was the main catalyst for the wars.[9] It was also used as a proxy war between France and the Burgundian State.
The wars began in 1455 when Richard of York captured Henry at the First Battle of St Albans and was appointed Lord Protector by Parliament, leading to an uneasy peace.[10] Fighting resumed four years later. Yorkists, led by Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, often referred to as "Warwick the Kingmaker," captured Henry again at the Battle of Northampton. Richard of York attempted to claim the throne but was dissuaded and was then killed at the Battle of Wakefield. His son Edward inherited his claim. The Yorkists lost custody of Henry after the Second Battle of St Albans but destroyed the Lancastrian army at the Battle of Towton. Edward was formally crowned three months later in June 1461.[11][12] Resistance to Edward's rule continued but was crushed at the Battle of Hexham in 1464, and a period of relative peace ensued.
In 1464, Edward married Elizabeth Woodville, the widow of a Lancastrian knight, and showed favour to her family. He also reversed Warwick's policy of seeking closer ties with France. Warwick, offended and sidelined, turned against Edward. In 1469, his supporters defeated a Yorkist army at the Battle of Edgcote. He captured and imprisoned Edward shortly afterwards. However, his attempt to replace Edward with his younger brother George of Clarence met with no support and Edward was allowed to resume his rule, seemingly reconciled with Warwick. Within a year, Edward accused Warwick and Clarence of fresh treachery and forced them to flee. In France, Warwick joined forces with Margaret of Anjou and led an invasion of England. When Warwick's younger brother John Neville deserted Edward, Edward in turn was forced to flee to Flanders. Warwick restored Henry VI as king.
Henry's renewed reign was short-lived however. With aid from Burgundy, Edward mounted a counter-invasion. Henry was returned to prison, and Edward defeated and killed Warwick at the Battle of Barnet. He then defeated a Lancastrian army at the Battle of Tewkesbury. Henry's heir, Edward of Westminster, was killed. Henry himself died or was assassinated on Edward's order shortly afterwards.[13] Edward ruled unopposed, and England enjoyed a period of relative peace until his death twelve years later in 1483.
Edward's twelve-year-old son reigned for 78 days as Edward V until he was deposed by his uncle, Richard III. Richard assumed the throne under a cloud of controversy, particularly the disappearance of Edward IV's two sons, sparking a short-lived but major revolt and triggering a wave of desertions of prominent Yorkists to the Lancastrian cause.[14] In the midst of the chaos, Henry Tudor, son of Henry VI's half-brother and a descendant of Edward III through his mother, returned from exile with an army of English, French, and Breton troops. Henry defeated and killed Richard at Bosworth Field in 1485, assumed the throne as Henry VII, and married Elizabeth of York, the eldest daughter and sole heir of Edward IV, thereby uniting the rival claims.
The Earl of Lincoln then put forward Lambert Simnel as an impostor Edward Plantagenet, a potential claimant to the throne. Lincoln's army was defeated and Lincoln himself killed at Stoke Field in 1487, ending the wars. Henry never faced any further serious internal military threats to his reign. In 1490, Perkin Warbeck claimed to be Richard of Shrewsbury, Edward IV's second son and rival claimant to the throne, but was executed before any rebellion could be launched.[15]
The House of Tudor ruled England until 1603. The reign of the Tudor dynasty saw the strengthening of the prestige and power of the English monarchy, particularly under Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, and the end of the medieval period in England which subsequently saw the dawn of the English Renaissance.[1][2][3] Historian John Guy argued that "England was economically healthier, more expansive, and more optimistic under the Tudors" than at any time since the Roman occupation of Britain.[16]
Nomenclature and symbolism
The name "Wars of the Roses" refers to the heraldic badges associated with the two rival branches of the royal House of Plantagenet fighting for control of the English throne; the White Rose of York and the Red Rose of Lancaster. Embryonic forms of this term were used in 1727 by Bevil Higgons, who described the quarrel between the two roses[17] and by David Hume in The History of England (1754–61):
The people, divided in their affections, took different symbols of party: the partisans of the house of Lancaster chose the red rose as their mark of distinction; those of York were denominated from the white; and these civil wars were thus known over Europe by the name of the quarrel between the two roses.[18]
The modern term Wars of the Roses came into common use in the early 19th century following the publication of the 1829 novel Anne of Geierstein by Sir Walter Scott.[19] Scott based the name on a scene in William Shakespeare's play Henry VI, Part 1 (Act 2, Scene 4), set in the gardens of the Temple Church, where a number of noblemen and a lawyer pick red or white roses to symbolically display their loyalty to the Lancastrian or Yorkist faction respectively. During Shakespeare's time, the conflict was simply referred to as the "civil wars".[j]
The Yorkist faction used the symbol of the white rose from early in the conflict, but the red rose of Lancaster was introduced only after the victory of Henry Tudor at the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485. After Henry's victory and marriage to Elizabeth of York, the heir of Edward IV, the two roses were combined to form the Tudor rose, to symbolise the union of the two claims.[20] The use of the rose itself as a cognizance stemmed from Edward I's use of "a golden rose stalked proper".[21] Often, owing to nobles holding multiple titles, more than one badge was used: Edward IV, for example, used both his sun in splendour as Earl of March, but also his father's falcon and fetterlock as Duke of York. Badges were not always distinct; at the Battle of Barnet, Edward's 'sun' was very similar to the Earl of Oxford's Vere star, which caused fatal confusion in the fighting.[22]
Many participants wore livery badges associated with their immediate liege lords or patrons. The wearing of livery was confined to those in "continuous employ of a lord", thus excluding, for example, mercenary companies.[23] For example, Henry Tudor's forces at Bosworth fought under the banner of a red dragon,[24] while the Yorkist army used Richard III's personal device of a white boar.[25]
While the names of the rival houses derive from the cities of York and Lancaster, the corresponding duchy and dukedom had little to do with these cities. The lands and offices attached to the Duchy of Lancaster were primarily located in Gloucestershire, North Wales, Cheshire, and, ironically, in Yorkshire, while the estates of the Duke of York were spread throughout England and Wales, with many in the Welsh Marches.[26]
Causes
Historical origins and overview
The House of Plantagenet was a royal house which originated from the lands of Anjou in France. The family held the English throne from 1154 (with the accession of Henry II at the end of the Anarchy) to 1485, when Richard III died in battle.
Under the Plantagenets, England was transformed. The Plantagenet kings were often forced to negotiate compromises such as Magna Carta, which had served to constrain their royal power in return for financial and military support. The king was no longer considered an absolute monarch in the nation—holding the prerogatives of judgement, feudal tribute, and warfare—but now also had defined duties to the kingdom, underpinned by a sophisticated justice system. A distinct national identity was shaped by their conflict with the French, Scots, Welsh and Irish, as well as by the establishment of the English language as the primary language.
In the 15th century, the Plantagenets were defeated in the Hundred Years' War and beset with social, political and economic problems. Popular revolts were common-place, triggered by the denial of numerous freedoms. English nobles raised private armies, engaged in private feuds and openly defied Henry VI.
The rivalry between the House of Plantagenet's two cadet branches of York and Lancaster brought about the Wars of the Roses, a decades-long fight for the English succession, culminating in the Battle of Bosworth Field in 1485, when the reign of the Plantagenets and the English Middle Ages both met their end with the death of King Richard III. Henry VII of Lancastrian descent became king of England; five months later, he married Elizabeth of York, thus ending the Wars of the Roses and giving rise to the Tudor dynasty. The Tudors worked to centralise English royal power, which allowed them to avoid some of the problems that had plagued the last Plantagenet rulers. The resulting stability allowed for the English Renaissance and the advent of early modern Britain.
Bastard feudalism
Edward III, who ruled England from 1327 to 1377, had five sons who survived into adulthood; Edward of Woodstock "the Black Prince", Lionel of Antwerp, John of Gaunt, Edmund of Langley, and Thomas of Woodstock. Throughout his reign, he created duchies for his sons; Cornwall in 1337 for Edward,[27] and Clarence and Lancaster in 1362 for Lionel[28] and John[29] respectively. Edmund and Thomas became the dukes of York[30] and Gloucester[28] respectively in 1385, during the reign of Richard II. Dukedoms had hitherto never been conferred by any English monarch upon a subject until the creation of the Duchy of Cornwall in 1337,[31] and their genesis spawned a powerful new class of English nobility with claims to the throne and, theoretically, enough power to vie for it, since the new duchies provided Edward's sons and their heirs presumptive with an income independent of the sovereign or the state,[32] thereby allowing them to establish and maintain their own private military retinues.[33]
Over time, these duchies began to exacerbate the structural defects inherent in so-called "bastard feudalism", a somewhat controversial term coined in 1885 by historian Charles Plummer but largely defined by Plummer's contemporary, William Stubbs. During the reign of Edward's grandfather, Edward I, Stubbs describes a substantive shift in social dynamics in which the conscription-based feudal levy came to be replaced by a system of royal payment in return for military service by the magnates who served the monarch. Thus, instead of vassals rendering military service when called, they paid a portion of their income into their lord's treasury, who would supplement the owed service with hired retainers.[34] These retinues were known as affinities; essentially a collection of all the individuals to whom a lord had gathered for service, and came to be one of the most fundamentally defining aspects of bastard feudalism.[35] These affinities also had the means of tying the more powerful magnates to the lower nobility, although these relationships were now largely defined by personal connections that exhibited reciprocal benefit, rather than tenurial or feudal relationships that preceded bastard feudalism.[36] Consequently, lords could now raise retinues they could implicitly trust, since the men of the affinity owed their positions to their patron.[37] These affinities were often much larger than the number of men the lord actually knew, since the members of the affinity also knew and supported each other.[38]
Under the reign of Richard II, this created a power struggle with the magnates, as Richard sought to increase the size of his own affinities as a counterweight to the growing retinues of his nobles.[39] The retinues of the magnates became powerful enough to defend the interests of their lord against even the authority of the monarch, as John of Gaunt, and later his son, Henry Bolingbroke, did against Richard.[33][35] During the wars, disaffected magnates such as Richard of York and Warwick the Kingmaker were able to rely upon their complex network of servants and retainers to successfully defy the authority of Henry VI.[40]
Claims of the two Houses
Lancastrian claim
The House of Lancaster descended from John of Gaunt, the third surviving son of Edward III. The name derives from Gaunt's primary title as Duke of Lancaster, which he held by right of his spouse, Blanche of Lancaster. The Lancastrian claim on the throne had received preference from Edward III which explicitly emphasised the male line of descent.[41] Henry IV based his right to depose Richard II and subsequent assumption of the throne upon this claim,[42] since it could be argued that the heir presumptive was in fact Edmund Mortimer, the great-grandson of Edward III's second surviving son, Lionel, Duke of Clarence.[43] However, Mortimer was descended through the female line, inheriting the claim from his grandmother, Philippa.[41] An important branch of the House of Lancaster was the House of Beaufort, whose members were descended from Gaunt by his mistress, Katherine Swynford. Originally illegitimate, they were legitimised by an Act of Parliament when Gaunt and Katherine later married. However, Henry IV excluded them from the line of succession to the throne.[44]
Yorkist claim
The House of York descended from Edmund of Langley, the fourth surviving son of Edward III and younger brother of John of Gaunt. The name derives from Langley's primary title as Duke of York, which he acquired in 1385 during the reign of his nephew, Richard II.[30] The Yorkist claim on the throne, unlike the Lancastrian claim, was based upon the female line of descent, as descendants of Lionel, the Duke of Clarence. Langley's second son, Richard of Conisburgh, had married Anne de Mortimer, daughter of Roger Mortimer and sister of Edmund Mortimer. Anne's grandmother, Philippa of Clarence, was the daughter of Lionel of Antwerp. During the fourteenth century, the Mortimers were the most powerful marcher family in the kingdom.[45] G.M. Trevelyan wrote that "the Wars of the Roses were to a large extent a quarrel between Welsh Marcher Lords, who were also great English nobles, closely related to the English throne."[46]
Initial phase of conflict (1377–1399)
Succession crisis
The question of succession following the death of Edward III in 1377 is said by Mortimer to be the root cause of the Wars of the Roses.[47] Although Edward's succession seemed secure, there was a "sudden narrowing in the direct line of descent" near the end of his reign;[41] Edward's two eldest sons, Edward, Duke of Cornwall (also known as Edward the Black Prince) and heir presumptive, and Lionel, Duke of Clarence, had predeceased their father in 1376 and 1368 respectively. Edward III was survived by three sons with claims to the throne: John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster; Edmund of Langley; and Thomas of Woodstock.
The Black Prince had a son, Richard, who had a claim to the throne based upon the principle that the son of an elder brother (Edward, in this case) had priority in the line of succession over his uncles. However, as Richard was a minor, had no siblings (on his father's side), and had three living uncles at the time of Edward III's death, there was considerable uncertainty within the realm over who should inherit the throne.[48] Ultimately, Edward was succeeded by his grandson who was crowned Richard II at just 10 years old.[49]
Under the laws of primogeniture, if Richard died without a legitimate heir, his successors would be the descendants of Lionel of Antwerp the Duke of Clarence, Edward III's second eldest son. Clarence's only child, his daughter Philippa, married into the Mortimer family and had a son, Roger Mortimer, who technically would have the best legal claim of succession. However, a legal decree issued by Edward III in 1376 introduced complexity into the question of succession, since the letters patent he issued limited the right of succession to his male line, which placed his third son, John of Gaunt, ahead of Clarence's descendants, since the latter were descended through the female line.[41]
Richard II's Reign
Richard II, also known as Richard of Bordeaux, was King of England from 1377 until he was deposed in 1399. He was the son of Edward, Prince of Wales (known to posterity as the Black Prince), and Joan, Countess of Kent. Richard's father died in 1376, leaving Richard as heir apparent to his grandfather, King Edward III; upon the latter's death, the 10-year-old Richard succeeded to the throne.
During Richard's first years as king, government was in the hands of a series of regency councils, influenced by Richard's uncles John of Gaunt and Thomas of Woodstock. England then faced various problems, most notably the Hundred Years' War. A major challenge of the reign was the Peasants' Revolt in 1381, and the young king played a central part in the successful suppression of this crisis. Less warlike than either his father or grandfather, he sought to bring an end to the Hundred Years' War. A firm believer in the royal prerogative, Richard restrained the power of the aristocracy and relied on a private retinue for military protection instead. In contrast to his grandfather, Richard cultivated a refined atmosphere centred on art and culture at court, in which the king was an elevated figure.
Richard's reign as Richard II of England was tumultuous, marked by increasing dissension between the monarch and several of the most powerful nobles.[50] Richard ruled without a regency council despite his young age in order to exclude his uncle, John of Gaunt the Duke of Lancaster, from wielding legitimate power.[51] Unpopular taxes which funded unsuccessful military expeditions in Europe triggered the Peasant's Revolt in 1381,[52] and Parliament's refusal to cooperate with the king's unpopular Lord Chancellor, Michael de la Pole, created a political crisis that seriously threatened to dethrone Richard.[53] Richard had repeatedly switched his choice of heir throughout his reign to keep his political enemies at bay.[54]
The king's dependence on a small number of courtiers caused discontent among the influential, and in 1387 control of government was taken over by a group of aristocrats known as the Lords Appellant. By 1389 Richard had regained control, and for the next eight years governed in relative harmony with his former opponents.
In France, much of the territory conquered by Edward III had been lost,[55] leading Richard to negotiate a peace treaty known as Truce of Leulinghem with Charles VI in July 1389. The peace proposal, which would effectively have made England a client kingdom of France, was derided and rejected by Parliament, which was predominately controlled by the knights fighting the war.[56] Richard decided to negotiate a de facto peace directly with Charles without seeking Parliament's approval and agreed to marry his six-year-old daughter, Isabella of Valois. Richard used the interim peace to punish his political rivals. In 1397, he took his revenge on the Appellants, many of whom were executed or exiled. The next two years have been described by historians as Richard's "tyranny".
Richard II Deposed by Henry IV
When John of Gaunt died in 1399, Richard exiled Gaunt's son Henry Bolingbroke to France, and confiscated his lands and titles.[57] In May 1399, Richard left England for a military expedition in Ireland,[58] giving Bolingbroke the opportunity to return to England.[59] Henry invaded England in June 1399 with a small force that quickly grew in numbers, meeting little resistance. With the support of much of the disaffected nobility, Bolingbroke deposed Richard and was crowned as Henry IV, the first Lancastrian monarch.[60] Richard is thought to have been starved to death in captivity, although questions remain regarding his final fate.
Richard's posthumous reputation has been shaped to a large extent by William Shakespeare, whose play Richard II portrayed Richard's misrule and his deposition as responsible for the Wars of the Roses. Modern historians do not accept this interpretation, while not exonerating Richard from responsibility for his own deposition. While probably not insane, as many historians of the 19th and 20th centuries believed, he may have had a personality disorder, particularly manifesting itself towards the end of his reign. Most authorities agree that his policies were not unrealistic or even entirely unprecedented, but that the way in which he carried them out was unacceptable to the political establishment, leading to his downfall.[citation needed]
Lancastrian dynasty (1399–1455)
Henry IV and Henry V
.jpg)
Almost immediately after assuming the throne, Henry IV faced an attempted deposition known as the "Epiphany Rising" in 1400 by John Montagu, 3rd Earl of Salisbury, John Holland, 1st Duke of Exeter, Thomas Holland, 1st Duke of Surrey, and the Thomas Despenser, 1st Earl of Gloucester, to re-install the imprisoned Richard as king. The attempt failed, all four conspirators were executed, and Richard died shortly thereafter "by means unknown" in Pontefract Castle.[61] Further west in Wales, the Welsh had generally supported Richard's rule, and, welded to a myriad of other socio-economic problems, the accession of Henry triggered a major rebellion in Wales led by Owain Glyndŵr, a member of the Welsh nobility.[62] Glyndŵr's rebellion would outlast Henry's reign, and would not end until 1415.[62] During the revolt, Glyndŵr received aid from members of the Tudurs, a prominent Anglesey family and maternal cousins of Glyndŵr himself, who would come to play a defining role in the coming Wars of the Roses.[63] Disputes over promises of land, money, and royal favour in exchange for their continued support drove the House of Percy, led by Henry Percy, 1st Earl of Northumberland and Thomas Percy, 1st Earl of Worcester, to rebel multiple times against Henry. The first challenge was defeated at Shrewsbury in 1403 and Worcester was executed,[64] while a second attempt failed at Bramham Moor in 1408, at which Northumberland was killed.[65] Henry himself died in 1413, and was succeeded by his son, Henry of Monmouth, who was crowned Henry V.[66]
To cement his position as king both domestically and abroad, Henry revived old dynastic claims to the French throne, and, using commercial disputes and the support France loaned to Owain Glyndŵr as a casus belli, invaded France in 1415.[67] While not plagued by constant rebellions as his father's reign was, Henry V faced a major challenge to his authority on the eve of his expedition to France in the form of the Southampton Plot. This was led by Sir Thomas Grey, Henry, Baron Scrope, and Richard of Conisburgh, the latter of whom was the second son of Edmund of Langley the 1st Duke of York. They intended to replace Henry with the young Edmund Mortimer, Richard of Conisburgh's maternal uncle, who was a great-great-grandson of Edward III and at one time the heir presumptive to Richard II.[68] Mortimer remained loyal and informed Henry of the plot, who had all three ringleaders executed.[69]
Henry captured Harfleur on 22 September[70] and inflicted a decisive defeat on the French at Agincourt on 25 October which wiped out a significant part of the French nobility.[71] Agincourt and Henry's subsequent campaigns firmly entrenched the legitimacy of the Lancastrian monarchy and Henry's pursuit of his claims on the French throne.[72] In 1420, Henry and Charles VI of France signed the Treaty of Troyes. The treaty disinherited the French Dauphin Charles from the line of succession, married Charles' daughter Catherine of Valois to Henry, and acknowledged their future sons as legitimate successors to the French throne.[73]
Richard of York, the son of Richard of Conisburgh, was four years old when his father was executed. As his paternal uncle, Edward, 2nd Duke of York, had died at Agincourt without issue, [74] Henry permitted Richard of York to inherit the title and lands of the Duchy of York. When Edmund Mortimer died childless in 1425, Richard of York also inherited the Earldom of March and Mortimer's claim to the throne through his late mother, Edmund Mortimer's sister.
Henry, who himself had three younger brothers and had recently married Catherine, likely did not doubt that the Lancastrian claim on the crown was secure.[45] On 6 December 1421, Catherine gave birth to a son, Henry. The following year on 31 August, Henry V died of dysentery at the age of 36, and his son ascended to the throne at just nine months old.[75] Henry V's younger brothers produced no surviving legitimate heirs, leaving only the Beaufort family as alternative Lancastrian successors. As Richard of York grew into maturity and Henry VI's rule deteriorated, York's claim to the throne became more attractive. The revenue from his estates also made him the wealthiest magnate in the kingdom.[26]
Reign of Henry VI
From early childhood, Henry VI was surrounded by quarrelsome councillors and advisors. His younger surviving paternal uncle, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, sought to be named Lord Protector until Henry came of age, and deliberately courted the popularity of the common people for his own ends,[76] but was opposed by his half-uncle, Cardinal Henry Beaufort. On several occasions, Beaufort called on John, Duke of Bedford, Gloucester's older brother and nominal regent to Henry, to return from his post as the king's commander in France, either to mediate or defend him against Gloucester's accusations of treason.[77] Overseas, the French had rallied around Joan of Arc and had inflicted major defeats on the English at Orléans,[78] and Patay,[79] reversing many of the gains made by Henry V and leading to the coronation of the Dauphin as Charles VII in Reims on 17 July 1429.[80] Henry was formally crowned as Henry VI, aged 7, shortly thereafter on 6 November in response to the coronation of Charles.[81] Around this time, Henry's mother Catherine of Valois had remarried to Owen Tudor[82] and bore two surviving sons; Edmund Tudor and Jasper Tudor, both of whom would play key roles in the concluding stages of the coming wars.[83]
Henry came of age in 1437 at age sixteen.[84] However, Bedford had died two years earlier in 1435, and Beaufort largely withdrew himself from public affairs sometime thereafter, in part because of the rise to prominence of his ally William de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk as the dominant personality in the royal court.[85] Like Beaufort, Suffolk favoured a diplomatic rather than a military solution to the deteriorating situation in France, a position which resonated with Henry, who was by nature averse to violence and bloodshed.[86] Suffolk was opposed by Gloucester and the rising Richard of York, both of whom favoured a continued prosecution of a military solution against France. Suffolk and the Beaufort family frequently received large grants of money, land, and important government and military positions from the king, who preferred their less hawkish inclinations, redirecting much-needed resources away from Richard and Gloucester's campaigns in France, leading to Richard developing a bitter resentment for the Beauforts.[87]
Suffolk continued to increase his influence at court as the principal architect of the Treaty of Tours in 1444 to broker peace between England and France. Suffolk successfully negotiated the marriage to Henry of Margaret of Anjou, only a distant relation of Charles VII through marriage rather than blood, in exchange for the strategically important lands of Maine and Anjou.[88] Though Suffolk earned a promotion from Earl to Marquess (and would be made a Duke in 1448) for his efforts, the clauses of the treaty that required cession of lands to France were kept secret from the English public due to fears of a significant backlash, but Henry insisted on the treaty.[89] Two years later in 1447, Suffolk succeeded in having Gloucester arrested for treason. Gloucester died while awaiting trial, with some at the time suspecting that Suffolk had him poisoned.[90] Richard of York was stripped of his prestigious command in France and sent to govern the relatively distant Lordship of Ireland with a ten-year term of office, where he could not interfere with affairs at court.[91]
During this time, England continued to suffer reversals in France. Suffolk, who was now the principal power behind the throne, could not avoid taking the blame for these losses. Additionally, the blame of the unfavourable request to cede Maine and Anjou to the French was laid at Suffolk's feet, though he continued to insist he made no promises during negotiations to such a demand.[92] In 1450, Suffolk was arrested, imprisoned in the Tower of London, and impeached in the Commons. Henry intervened and instead exiled Suffolk for five years, but en route to Calais, Suffolk was captured and executed on 2 May 1450.[93] Suffolk was succeeded by Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, nephew of Henry Beaufort, as the leader of the faction pursuing peace with France, who had been appointed as Richard's replacement as commander in France in 1448. Somerset's political position was somewhat fragile, as English military failures in 1449 following a resumption of hostilities left him vulnerable to criticism from Richard's allies at court.[94] Somerset had by this time become a close ally of Henry's wife, Margaret of Anjou.[95] Margaret herself wielded almost complete control over the pliable king Henry,[96] and her close friendship with Somerset led many to suspect the two were having an affair; indeed, upon the birth of Henry and Margaret's son, Edward of Westminster in 1453, there were widespread rumours that Somerset was the father.[97]
On 15 April 1450, the English suffered a major reversal in France at Formigny, which paved the way for the French reconquest of Normandy.[98] That same year, there was a violent popular uprising in Kent, which is often seen as a precursor to the Wars of the Roses.[99] The rebel manifesto, The Complaint of the Poor Commons of Kent, written under the stewardship of rebel leader Jack Cade, accused the crown of extortion, perversion of justice, and election fraud. The rebels occupied parts of London, and executed James Fiennes, the unpopular Lord High Treasurer.[100] They dispersed after they were supposedly pardoned but several ringleaders, including Cade, were later executed.[101] After the rebellion, the grievances of Cade and his followers formed the basis of Richard of York's opposition to a royal government from which he felt unduly excluded.[99] Richard of York used the opportunity to return from Ireland and went to London. Angling himself as a reformer to demand better government, he was eventually imprisoned for much of 1452 and 1453.[102] By the summer of the latter year, Richard seemed to have lost the power struggle.[103]
Throughout these quarrels, Henry himself had taken little part in proceedings. He displayed several symptoms of mental illness, possibly inherited from his maternal grandfather, Charles VI of France.[104] His near-total lack of leadership in military matters had left the English forces in France scattered and weak, which left them ripe for defeat at Formigny in 1450.[105] Henry was described as more interested in matters of religion and learning, which, coupled with his timid and passive nature and, if not well-intentioned, aversion to warfare, made him an ineffectual king for the time.[106] On 17 July 1453, the English forces in southern France suffered a catastrophic defeat at Castillon, and England lost all her possessions in France except for the Pale of Calais, shifting the balance of power in Europe, and ending the Hundred Years' War.[107] Perhaps in reaction to the news, Henry suffered a complete mental breakdown, during which he failed to recognise his newborn son, Edward.[108] On 22 March 1454, Cardinal John Kemp, the Lord Chancellor, died, and Henry could not be induced to nominate a successor, thus making government in the king's name constitutionally impossible.[109]
The lack of central authority led to a continued deterioration of the unstable political situation, which polarised around long-standing feuds between the more powerful noble families, in particular the Percy-Neville feud, and the Bonville-Courtenay feud, creating a volatile political climate ripe for civil war.[110] To ensure the country could be governed, a Regency Council was established and, despite the protests of Margaret, was led by Richard of York, who was appointed Lord Protector and Chief Councillor on 27 March 1454. York appointed his brother-in-law, Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury to the post of Chancellor, backing the Nevilles against their chief adversary, Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland. In backing the Nevilles, York gained a key ally, Salisbury's son Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, one of the wealthiest and most powerful magnates in the kingdom. York removed Somerset from his position and imprisoned him in the Tower of London.[111]
In 1455, Henry made a surprise recovery from his mental instability, and reversed much of Richard of York's progress. Somerset was released and restored to favour, and York was forced out of court into exile.[112] However, disaffected nobles, chiefly the Earl of Warwick and his father the Earl of Salisbury, backed the claims of the rival House of York to control of the government.[113] Henry, Somerset, and a select council of nobles elected to hold a Great Council at Leicester on 22 May, away from Somerset's enemies in London. Fearing that charges of treason would be brought against them, York and his allies gathered an army to intercept the royal party at St Albans, before they could reach the Council.[114]
York's Revolt (1455–1460)
St. Albans
Richard of York, 3rd Duke of York [k] led a force of around 3,000–7,000 troops south toward London, where they were met by Henry's force of 2,000 at St Albans, north of London, on 22 May 1455.[115] Though the ensuing struggle resulted in fewer than 160 casualties combined,[116] it was a decisive Yorkist victory.[117] King Henry VI had been taken prisoner by York's men, having found the monarch hiding in a local tanner's shop, abandoned by his courtiers and advisors.[118] Despite the paucity of casualties on either side, many of York and the Neville family's most influential foes were killed, including Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset, Henry Percy, 2nd Earl of Northumberland, and Thomas Clifford, 8th Baron de Clifford.[117] With the king in his custody and many of his key rivals dead, York was again appointed Lord Protector by Parliament, and the Yorkist faction regained their position of influence.[10]
York's allies were soon in ascendancy thanks to the temporarily stabilised situation, particularly the young Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, who, in his capacity as Captain of Calais, had conducted anti-piracy operations in the English Channel.[119] Warwick rapidly overtook his father, Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury, as York's key ally, protecting York from retribution in Parliament.[120] Warwick's position as commander of the strategically important port of Calais also gave him command of England's largest standing army.[121] Henry's consort, Margaret of Anjou, considered Warwick a serious threat to the throne and attempted to cut off his supplies,[122] however a French attack on Sandwich in August 1457 ignited fears of a French invasion, forcing Margaret to concede and provide Warwick with the funding he required to protect the realm.[123] However, in February 1456, Henry recovered his mental faculties, and once again relieved York of his office as Lord Protector, reassuming personal governance over the realm.[124] Despite the tenuous peace, disorder was returning to the kingdom as sporadic fighting once more broke out between the Neville and Percy families.[125] To quell the growing discontent, Henry attempted to broker a public display of reconciliation between the two sides at St. Paul's Cathedral on 25 March 1458, however, no sooner had the procession dispersed than the plotting resumed.[125]
York's attempt to take the throne
Meanwhile, as Henry attempted in vain to secure peace in England, Warwick, in disregard of royal authority, had conducted attacks against the Castilian fleet in May 1458, and against a fleet of the Hanseatic League a few weeks later.[126] His position in Calais also enabled him to establish relations with Charles VII of France, and Philip the Good of Burgundy, international connections that would serve him in the future.[127] In response to the attacks, Warwick was summoned to London to face inquiries along with York and Salisbury. However, fearing arrest once they were isolated from their allies, they refused.[128] York instead summoned the Nevilles to rendezvous at his stronghold of Ludlow Castle in the Welsh Marches; Warwick departed Calais with a portion of the garrison there to join the main Yorkist forces.[129]
Margaret had not been idle during this time and had been actively recruiting armed support for Henry, distributing a livery emblem of a silver swan to knights and squires enlisted by her personally.[130] Before Warwick could join them, the Yorkist army of 5,000 troops under Salisbury was ambushed by a Lancastrian force twice their size under James Tuchet, 5th Baron Audley at Blore Heath on 23 September 1459.[131] The Lancastrian army was defeated,[132] and Baron Audley himself killed in the fighting.[133] In September, Warwick crossed over into England and made his way north to Ludlow.[134] At nearby Ludford Bridge, the Yorkist forces were scattered due to the defection of Warwick's Calais troops under Andrew Trollope.[135]
Forced to flee, York, who was still Lieutenant of Ireland, left for Dublin with his second son, Edmund, Earl of Rutland, while Warwick and Salisbury sailed to Calais accompanied by York's heir, Edward, Earl of March.[136] The Lancastrian faction appointed the new Duke of Somerset, Henry Beaufort to replace Warwick in Calais, however, the Yorkists managed to retain the loyalty of the garrison.[134] Fresh from their victory at Ludford Bridge, the Lancastrian faction assembled a "Parliament of Devils" at Coventry with the sole purpose of attainting York, his sons, Salisbury, and Warwick,[137] however, the actions of this assembly caused many uncommitted lords to fear for their titles and property.[138] In March 1460, Warwick sailed to Ireland under the protection of the Gascon Lord of Duras[139] to concert plans with York, evading the royal fleet commanded by Henry Holland, 3rd Duke of Exeter,[140] before they returned to Calais.[141]
In late June 1460, Warwick, Salisbury, and Edward of March crossed the Channel and rode north to London, where they enjoyed widespread support.[142] Salisbury was left with a force to besiege the Tower of London,[143] while Warwick and March pursued Henry northward.[144]
The Yorkists caught up with the Lancastrians and defeated them at Northampton on 10 July 1460.[145] Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham, John Talbot, 2nd Earl of Shrewsbury, John Beaumont, 1st Viscount Beaumont, and Thomas Percy, 1st Baron Egremont were all killed defending their king.[146] For a second time, Henry was taken prisoner by the Yorkists, who escorted him to London, compelling the surrender of the Tower garrison.[147]
That September, York returned from Ireland, and, at the Parliament of October that year, he made a symbolic gesture of his intention to claim the English crown by placing his hand upon the throne,[148] an act which shocked the assembly.[149] Even York's closest allies were not prepared to support such a move.[150] Assessing York's claim, the judges felt that common law principles could not determine who had priority in the succession, and declared the matter "above the law and passed their learning".[151] Finding a lack of decisive support for his claim among the nobility who at this stage had no desire to usurp Henry, a compromise was reached: the Act of Accord was passed on 25 October 1460, which stated that following Henry's death, his son Edward would be disinherited, and the throne would pass to York.[152] However, the compromise was quickly found to be unpalatable, and hostilities resumed.[153]
Death of Richard of York
Queen Margaret and her son had fled to Lancastrian-held Harlech Castle, where they joined Henry's half-brother Jasper Tudor and Henry Holland, 3rd Duke of Exeter, who were recruiting troops in Wales and the West Country. Margaret headed north to Scotland, where she successfully negotiated the use of Scottish troops and other aid for the Lancastrian cause from Queen Regent Mary of Guelders, in return for the surrender of Berwick, which a year prior, James II of Scotland, using the turmoil of the war as an opportunity tried to retake as well as Roxburgh. The latter, though successful, cost him his life. A similar successful negotiation was made for the use of French troops and aid for the Lancastrians cause that same year, this time in return for the surrender of Jersey,[154] thus having the Auld Alliance backing the Lancastrian side to prevent the Yorkist ruled England from joining the Burgundian State in its war with France, a scenario that neither ally had the stomach for. The Lancastrians rallied in the North of England, where the Percy family were gathering support. They were joined by Somerset and the Thomas Courtenay, 6th/14th Earl of Devon.[155] York, his son the Earl of Rutland, and Salisbury left London to contain the Lancastrian threat in the north.[156]
On 16 December 1460, York's vanguard clashed with Somerset's forces from the West Country at the Battle of Worksop ,and was defeated.[157] On 21 December, York reached his fortress of Sandal Castle near the town of Wakefield, with the Lancastrians encamped just 9 mi (14 km). For reasons unclear, York sortied from the castle on 30 December,[158] and in the ensuing Battle of Wakefield, York, Rutland, and Warwick's younger brother Thomas Neville were all killed.[159][154] Salisbury was captured the following night and executed.
Yorkists' triumph, 1461
Following the Yorkist defeat at Wakefield, Richard, 3rd Duke of York's 18-year-old son, Edward, Earl of March was now heir to the Dukedom of York, and thereby inherited Richard's claim to the throne.[160] Edward sought to prevent the Lancastrian armies gathering under the Tudors in western England and Wales from joining the main Lancastrian forces opposing him in the north.
On 2 February 1461, he decisively defeated the Lancastrian armies at Mortimer's Cross,[161] and the captured Owen Tudor, husband to Henry V's widow Catherine of Valois, was executed by his troops.[162] As dawn broke across the field, a meteorological phenomenon known as parhelion occurred, giving the appearance of a trio of suns rising. Edward calmed his frightened troops by convincing them it represented the Holy Trinity, and therefore evidence of divine blessing upon their cause.[163] Edward would later take the heraldic symbol of the sunne in splendour as his personal device.[164][165]
In the north, having defeated and killed Richard, Margaret's troops and the victorious Lancastrians moved south,[166] while Warwick, with the captive Henry in tow, moved his forces to meet them astride the ancient Roman road of Watling Street at St Albans. Warwick's forces were well-entrenched,[167] but were ultimately defeated in the Second Battle of St Albans on 17 February.[168]
Henry was freed by the Lancastrians, and knighted his young son Edward of Westminster, who in turn knighted thirty Lancastrian leaders.[169] Warwick and his troops marched to rendezvous with the Yorkist troops in the Marches under Edward, fresh from their victory at Mortimer's Cross.[170] Although the Lancastrians had the strategic advantage after St Albans, the Lancastrian cause was unpopular in London, and the citizenry refused entry to Margaret's troops. Warwick and Edward, seizing the initiative, marched rapidly to London, where Edward was proclaimed Edward IV of England by a hastily gathered assembly.[171] Edward was a more attractive prospect as a monarch for the people of England; contemporaries such as Philippe de Commines describe him as energetic, handsome, affable,[172] and struck an imposing sight in full armour and resplendent clothing, a deliberate move on the part of his supporters to contrast him with Henry, whose physical and mental frailties had fatally undermined his support.[173]
To cement his position, Edward and Warwick moved north to confront the Lancastrians. Warwick, leading the Yorkist vanguard, inconclusively clashed with the Lancastrians at Ferrybridge on 28 March, at which Warwick was wounded,[174] and the Lancastrian commanders, the Barons Clifford, and Neville (a distant relative of Warwick), were killed.[175] Edward engaged the Lancastrian's main army the following day on 29 March near Towton, Yorkshire. The battle that followed was the largest and bloodiest ever fought on English soil,[176] and resulted in a decisive triumph for Edward which broke the power of the Lancastrians in the north.[11] The lynchpins of Lancastrian control in the royal court were either killed or fled the country; Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland was killed,[177] Andrew Trollope, one of the most astute Lancastrian field commanders,[178] was also killed,[179] while James Butler, 5th Earl of Ormond was captured and executed.[180] Henry, Margaret, and their son Prince Edward fled north to Scotland.[181] Edward returned to London for his coronation,[182] while Warwick remained in the north to pacify further Lancastrian resistance.[183] The Battle of Towton confirmed to the English people that Edward was the uncontested ruler of England, at least for the time being;[11][12] as a result, Edward used this opportunity to employ a bill of attainder to forfeit the titles of 14 Lancastrian peers and 96 knights and minor members of the gentry.[184]
Ascension and reign of Yorkist Edward IV (1461–1483)
Coronation of Edward IV and Warwick's apex
Edward was formally crowned King of England on 28 June 1461 in Westminster Abbey.[185] Edward sought to win the affections of his vanquished foes; he pardoned many of the Lancastrians he attainted following his victory at Towton after they submitted to his rule,[186] and permitted them to retain their property and titles.[187]
For his part, Warwick benefited generously from Edward's patronage and became the most powerful noble in the country.[188] He had inherited the lands and titles of both his parents,[189] and was made High Admiral of England, Steward of the Duchy of Lancaster, along with several other offices of importance.[190] In the summer of 1462, Warwick successfully negotiated a truce with Scotland,[122] while at Piltown in Ireland, Yorkist forces under Thomas FitzGerald, 7th Earl of Desmond decisively defeated the Lancastrians under John Butler, 6th Earl of Ormond,[191] forcing the Ormonds into exile and ending Lancastrian designs on Ireland.[192] That October, Margaret of Anjou invaded England with troops from France, and captured the castles of Alnwick and Bamburgh,[193] although they were back in Yorkist hands within just three months.[194]
In the spring of 1463, the north of England rose in revolt in support of Henry when Sir Ralph Percy laid siege to Norham Castle.[195] Separate truces had been agreed with both Scotland and France by late 1463, allowing Warwick to recover much of the territory lost in the north by 1464.[196] The main Lancastrian army moved south through Northumberland, however, it was destroyed by a Yorkist force under John Neville at Hexham on 15 May 1464.[197] All three Lancastrian commanders, Henry Beaufort, 3rd Duke of Somerset,[198] the Baron Ros,[199] and the Baron Hungerford,[200] were captured and executed. Yorkist troops captured the deposed king Henry in the woods near the River Ribble,[201] and was taken to London where he was imprisoned in the Tower.[202][203] With Somerset's army defeated and Henry captured, all effective resistance to Edward's rule had been wiped out.[204]
Edward saw no profit in killing Henry while his son remained alive, instead preferring to keep the Lancastrian claim with a frail captive.[205] Margaret and Prince Edward were compelled to leave Scotland and sailed for the court of Margaret's cousin, Louis XI of France, where they maintained an impoverished court in exile for many years.[206]
Growing discontent
With his position upon the throne secure, Edward was free to pursue his domestic and foreign ambitions. Internationally, Edward favoured a strategic alliance with the Duchy of Burgundy, however, Warwick persuaded him to negotiate a treaty with Louis XI of France; at the negotiations, Warwick suggested Edward would be disposed to a marriage alliance with the French crown; the intended bride either being Louis' sister-in-law Bona of Savoy, or his daughter, Anne of France.[207] To his considerable embarrassment and rage, Warwick discovered in October 1464 that four months earlier on 1 May, Edward had secretly married Elizabeth Woodville, the widow of a Lancastrian noble.[208] Elizabeth had 12 siblings, some of whom married into prominent families, turning the Woodvilles into a powerful political establishment independent of Warwick's control.[209] The move demonstrated that Warwick was not the power behind the throne as many had assumed,[210] and the marriage was criticised by Edward's own Privy Councillors, who felt that marriage to a woman who was the daughter of neither a duke nor an earl was unbefitting a man of royal blood.[211] Warwick attempted to restore his lost influence by accusing Elizabeth, and her mother Jacquetta of Luxembourg, of witchcraft,[212] a ploy which, while unsuccessful, did not break the relationship between Warwick and Edward.[213]
Edward's choice of bride would plague him politically for the rest of his reign.[214] Politically, it opened Edward up to accusations that Warwick had been intentionally deceiving the French into believing the king was committed to the marriage proposal.[215] Meanwhile, Elizabeth's family began to ascend to positions of great importance; Edward's father-in-law, the Earl Rivers, was appointed as Lord High Treasurer, and supported the king's position for a Burgundian alliance.[216] Unbeknownst to Warwick, Edward had already concluded a treaty in secret with Burgundy in October 1466, while leaving Warwick to continue with doomed negotiations with the French court.[217] In 1467, Edward removed Warwick's brother, the Archbishop of York, from his office of Lord Chancellor, while the king refused to entertain a marriage proposal between Warwick's eldest daughter, Isabel, and Edward's brother, George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence.[218] For various reasons, Clarence himself greatly resented his brother's interference.[218] In 1468, Edward sent his forces and successfully retook Jersey from the French.
Redesdale's rebellion
In April 1469, a rebellion broke out in Yorkshire under a leader known only as Robin of Redesdale.[219] A second pro-Lancastrian revolt broke out the following month, which demanded the restoration of Henry Percy as Earl of Northumberland,[220] however the revolt was quickly crushed by the current earl, John Neville, though he made little attempt to quell Redesdale's actions.[220] Warwick and Clarence had spent the summer assembling troops, officially to suppress the revolt, however, in early July they travelled to Calais, where Clarence and Isabel were married in a ceremony overseen by Warwick. They returned to London, where they assembled their troops, ostensibly to remove 'evil councillors' from the king's company and re-establish good governance and moved north to link with the Yorkshire rebels.[221] Privately, Warwick hoped to depose Edward and install the nineteen-year-old Clarence on the throne.[222]
Redesdale defeated royal troops at Edgcote on 26 July 1469; although Redesdale was reportedly killed, the two royal commanders, William Herbert, 1st Earl of Pembroke and Humphrey Stafford, 1st Earl of Devon were both captured and executed.[223] Edward's father-in-law, Earl Rivers, and the earl's son, Sir John Woodville, were apprehended and murdered.[224] After the battle, Edward was taken captive by George Neville and held at Middleham Castle.[225][226] However, it soon became clear to the rebels that neither Warwick nor Clarence enjoyed significant support, and unable to quell the growing disorder, Edward was released in September of that year and reassumed his duties as king.[227] In March 1470, Warwick and Clarence exploited political instabilities to induce Lincolnshire into a full-scale revolt, hoping to lure Edward north where he could be taken by Warwick's men.[l] However, on 12 March 1470, Edward routed the Yorkist rebels at Losecoat Field and captured the rebel leader, the Baron Willoughby, who named Warwick and Clarence as the "partners and chief provokers" of the rebellion.[229] Physical evidence also came to light which proved the complicity of the two men, who subsequently fled to France in May.[230] Willoughby was beheaded, and his lands seized.[231]
Warwick's Rebellion and readeption of Henry VI
Seeking to capitalise on Warwick's disfavour with the king, Louis XI of France arranged a reconciliation between Warwick and his bitter rival, Margaret of Anjou, with the objective to restore Henry to the throne.[232] As part of the arrangement, Warwick agreed to marry his daughter Anne to Edward of Westminster, Margaret and Henry's son and heir apparent;[233] while the marriage was solemnised, it may not have been consummated, as Margaret was hoping to find a better match for her son once he became king.[234] Staging a diversionary uprising in the north, Warwick and Clarence launched a two-pronged invasion of England at Dartmouth and Plymouth on 13 September 1470.[235] Warwick's brother, the Marquess of Montagu joined him, bitter with the king that his support for the crown during the preceding revolts did not result in the restoration of his earldom.[236] Edward rushed south to meet the invasion, while Montagu's forces advanced from the north, and the king found himself surrounded.[237] With few options, Edward, his younger brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester, and several hundred retainers fled to Flanders on 2 October, then part of the Duchy of Burgundy, his ally.[m]
The Readeption of Henry VI restored him as king, a throne which Warwick was now indisputably in effective control of.[240] In November, Edward was attainted, and his brother Clarence was awarded the title of Duke of York.[241] Burgundy was ruled by Charles the Bold, husband of Edward's sister Margaret. Charles rendered precious little assistance to his brother-in-law, something Edward would never forget.[242] However, unfortunately for Warwick and Clarence, Henry's new regime was precariously unstable; Edmund Beaufort, 4th Duke of Somerset held Warwick responsible for his father's death in 1455, and the ensuing internal disputes eventually left Warwick and Clarence politically isolated.[243] With the backing of Flemish merchants, Edward landed at Ravenspurn in Yorkshire on 14 March 1471, supported by the Earl of Northumberland.[244] Edward was joined by troops under Sir William Parr and Sir James Harrington, a move which convinced Clarence, who was politically disadvantaged by his agreement with the Lancastrians,[245] to abandon Warwick and Henry and join his brother.[246] Edward's army made rapidly for London, where they took the by now feeble king Henry prisoner and sent him to the Tower of London.[247]
Poor weather contained French troops under Margaret and Edward of Westminster on the continent, preventing Warwick from being reinforced.[248] Despite this and Clarence's defection, Warwick marched in pursuit of Edward's growing army, and the two sides met in battle at Barnet on 14 April 1471.[249] Poor visibility due to thick mist and the similarity of Edward's heraldic sun to the Earl of Oxford's star[250] led to the Lancastrians attacking their own men,[251] and, coupled with Edward's determined attack, Warwick's army was destroyed. During the rout, Warwick was unhorsed and killed,[252] along with his brother the John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu,[253] while Henry Holland, 3rd Duke of Exeter was apprehended and imprisoned in the Tower of London.[254] In 1475, Exeter would be sent on a Yorkist expedition to France, where he was reputed to have fallen overboard while at sea, and drowned without any witnesses.[255] Warwick's defeat and death was a catastrophic blow for the Lancastrian cause,[256] and the Neville family's political influence was irrevocably broken.[257]
Defeat of Henry VI; Return of Edward IV
The return of Henry VI to the throne did not last long. Though the Nevilles had been defeated, on the same day of the clash at Barnet, Margaret had managed to land her forces at Weymouth, and augmented her army with recruits from the Welsh Marches.[258] Despite the heavy defeat they had suffered at Barnet, survivors from the battle rallied around the Lancastrian queen.[256] Edward moved to intercept the Lancastrian army, realising they are attempting to cross the River Severn into Wales. Acting upon correspondence sent by Henry VI, Sir Richard Beauchamp, governor of Gloucester, barred the gates to Margaret's troops, preventing the Lancastrians from crossing in time.[259] On 4 May 1471, Edward intercepted and engaged Margaret's army at Tewkesbury, defeating it. Henry VI and Margaret's only son, Edward of Westminster, was killed by Clarence's men,[260] while the Duke of Somerset[260] and John Courtenay, 15th Earl of Devon[261] were both killed.
The royal propagandist of the Historie of the arrivall of Edward IV suggests the royal army was, "though small, well-armed and determined" and that Edward claimed he had returned solely for his duchy of York.[262] However, Henry VI could not start raising a force of any numbers until well to the south (of England), in Lord Hastings's estates in the Midlands (about 3,000 men in Nottingham, where he was joined by William Parr and James Harrington, with their personal forces of sixty men-at-arms). Whereas, in the north, came "not so many as supposed would have come", reported the Arrivalist.[263]
Edward IV entered London on 21 May. Henry VI died that night, or soon afterwards, perhaps on Edward's orders. A contemporary chronicle (favourable to Edward IV) reported Henry's death as caused by "melancholy" after hearing of his son's death.[264] It is widely suspected however, that with Henry's only heir dead, Edward had ordered the former king's murder.[13] Margaret of Anjou was imprisoned until she was ransomed by Louis XI in 1475 to France,[265] where she would live for the remainder of her life, dying on 25 August 1482.[266]
Second Reign of Edward IV
With the defeats at Barnet and Tewkesbury, armed Lancastrian resistance appeared to be at an end. However, Edward IV's regime was progressively fractured by a worsening feud between his brothers, George Plantagenet, Duke of Clarence and Richard, Duke of Gloucester. On 22 December 1476, Clarence's wife Isabel died. Clarence accused one of the late Isabel's ladies-in-waiting, Ankarette Twynyho, of having murdered her, and, in turn, Clarence murdered her. Ankarette's grandson received a retrospective pardon for Ankarette from Edward in 1478, illustrating the quasi-monarchical attitude of Clarence which Edward was growing wary of.[267] In 1477, Clarence was proposed as a suitor for Mary, who had just become Duchess of Burgundy, but Edward objected to the match, and Clarence left the royal court.[268]
For his part, Gloucester was married to Anne Neville; both Anne and Isabel were daughters of the Countess of Warwick, and therefore heirs to their mother's considerable fortune.[269] Many of the estates held by the two brothers had been bestowed upon them by Edward's patronage (who retained the right to revoke them). This was not the case with property acquired through marriage; this difference fuelled the disagreement.[270] Clarence continued to fall out of favour with Edward; persistently widespread claims he was involved in a revolt against Edward led to his imprisonment and execution at the Tower of London on 18 February 1478.[271]
Edward's reign was relatively peaceful domestically; in 1475 he invaded France, however he signed the Treaty of Picquigny[272] with Louis XI whereby Edward withdrew after receiving an initial payment of 75,000 crowns plus an annual pension of 50,000 crowns,[273] while in 1482, he attempted to usurp the Scottish throne but was ultimately compelled to withdraw back to England. Nevertheless, they were successful in retaking Berwick.[274] In 1483, Edward's health began to fail and he fell fatally ill that Easter. Prior to his death, he named his brother Richard to act as Lord Protector for his twelve-year-old son and successor, Edward. On 9 April 1483, Edward IV died.[275]
Richard III reign and defeat by Lancastrians (1483–1485)
Overview
For only approximately two years, Richard III (2 October 1452 – 22 August 1485) was King of England and Lord of Ireland from 26 June 1483 until his death in 1485. He was the last king of the House of York and the last of the Plantagenet dynasty. His defeat and death at the Battle of Bosworth Field, the last decisive battle of the Wars of the Roses, marked the end of the Middle Ages in England.
Richard was created Duke of Gloucester in 1461 after the accession of his brother King Edward IV. In 1472, he married Anne Neville, daughter of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick. He governed northern England during Edward's reign, and played a role in the invasion of Scotland in 1482. When Edward IV died in April 1483, Richard was named Lord Protector of the realm for Edward's eldest son and successor, the 12-year-old Edward V. Arrangements were made for Edward V's coronation on 22 June 1483. Before the king could be crowned, the marriage of his parents was declared bigamous and therefore invalid. Now officially illegitimate, their children were barred from inheriting the throne. On 25 June, an assembly of lords and commoners endorsed a declaration to this effect, and proclaimed Richard as the rightful king. He was crowned on 6 July 1483. Edward and his younger brother Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, called the "Princes in the Tower", were not seen in public after August, and accusations circulated that they had been murdered on King Richard's orders, after the Tudor dynasty established their rule a few years later.
There were two major rebellions against Richard during his reign. In October 1483, an unsuccessful revolt was led by staunch allies of Edward IV and Richard's former ally, Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham. Then, in August 1485, Henry Tudor and his uncle, Jasper Tudor, landed in southern Wales with a contingent of French troops, and marched through Pembrokeshire, recruiting soldiers. Henry's forces defeated Richard's army near the Leicestershire town of Market Bosworth. Richard was slain, making him the last English king to die in battle. Henry Tudor then ascended the throne as Henry VII.
Edward V's claims to the throne
.png)
During Edward IV's reign, his brother Richard, Duke of Gloucester had risen to become the most powerful magnate in the north of England,[276] particularly in the city of York where his popularity was high.[276] Prior to his death, the king had named Richard as Lord Protector to act as regent to his twelve-year-old son, Edward V.[275] Richard's allies, particularly Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham and the powerful and wealthy Baron William Hastings, the Lord Chamberlain, urged Richard to bring a strong force to London to counter any move the Woodville family might make.[277] Richard departed Yorkshire for London, where he intended to meet the young king at Northampton and travel to London together.[278] Following Edward IV's death, the Dowager Queen Elizabeth instructed her brother, Anthony Woodville, Earl Rivers, to escort her son Edward V to London with an armed escort of 2,000 men.[279]
However, upon reaching Northampton, Richard discovered that the king had already been sent onward to Stony Stratford in Buckinghamshire.[280] In response, and to forestall any Woodville family attempts on his person, on 30 April 1483, Richard had Earl Rivers, Edward's half-brother Richard Grey, and Edward's chamberlain Thomas Vaughan arrested and sent to the north.[281] Richard and Edward journeyed to London together, where the young king took up residence at the Tower of London on 19 May 1483, joined the following month by his younger brother, Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York.[282]
Richard III takes the throne
Despite his assurances to the contrary, Richard had Earl Rivers, Grey, and Vaughan beheaded in June 1483.[283][284][285] Acting as Lord Protector, Richard repeatedly stalled the coronation of Edward V, despite the urging of the king's councillors, who wished to avoid another protectorate.[286] That same month, Richard accused the Lord Chamberlain, the Baron Hastings, of treason, and had him executed without trial on 13 June.[287] Hastings had been popular, and his death created considerable controversy, not least because his loyalty to Edward and his continued presence would have presented a major obstacle to Richard's path to securing the throne.[288][289] A clergyman, likely Robert Stillington, the Bishop of Bath and Wells,[290] informed Richard that Edward IV's marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was invalid because of Edward's earlier union to Eleanor Butler, thereby making Edward V and his siblings illegitimate heirs to the throne.
On 22 June, the selected date for Edward's coronation,[291] a sermon was preached outside St. Paul's Cathedral declaring Richard the rightful king,[292] a post which the citizenry petitioned Richard to accept.[293] Richard accepted four days later, and was crowned at Westminster Abbey on 6 July 1483.[294]
Conflicts and actions against opposing claims
Edward and his brother Richard of Shrewsbury, who were still in residence in the Tower of London, had completely disappeared by the summer of 1483.[295] The fate of the two princes following their disappearance remains a mystery to this day, however, the most widely accepted explanation is that they were murdered on the orders of Richard III.[296]
Stripped of her family's influence at court, the widowed Elizabeth Woodville, along with Richard's disaffected former ally Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, allied themselves with Lady Margaret Beaufort,[5] who began to actively promote her son, Henry Tudor, a great-great-great-grandson of Edward III[297] and the closest male heir of the Lancastrian claim,[n] as an alternative to Richard.[298]
Woodville proposed to strengthen Henry's claim by marrying him to her daughter Elizabeth of York, the only living heir to Edward IV. Convinced of the need for Yorkist support, Henry promised his hand to Elizabeth well before his planned invasion of England,[299] a factor which caused many Yorkists to abandon Richard.[300] By September 1483, a conspiracy against Richard began to be formulated among members of the disaffected English gentry, many of whom had been staunch supporters of Edward IV and his heirs.[301]
Buckingham's Rebellion
Since Edward IV had regained the throne in 1471, Henry Tudor had lived in exile at the court of Francis II, Duke of Brittany.[302] Henry was half-guest half-prisoner, since Francis regarded Henry, his family, and his courtiers as valuable bargaining tools to barter for the aid of England, particularly in conflicts with France, and therefore shielded the exiled Lancastrians well, repeatedly refusing to surrender them.[303] Henry, in particular, was supported by the Breton treasurer Pierre Landais, who hoped that an overthrow of Richard would cement a joint Anglo-Breton alliance.[304] Now in alliance with Richard's former supporter, Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham, Francis provided Henry with 40,000 gold crowns, 15,000 troops, and a fleet of ships to invade England. However, Henry's forces were scattered by a storm, compelling Henry to abandon the invasion.[305] Nevertheless, Buckingham had already launched a revolt against Richard on 18 October 1483 with the aim of installing Henry as king.[306] Buckingham raised a substantial number of troops from his Welsh estates, and planned to join his brother the Earl of Devon.[307]
However, without Henry's troops, Richard easily defeated Buckingham's rebellion, and the defeated duke was captured, convicted of treason, and executed in Salisbury on 2 November 1483.[308] Following the rebellion in January 1484, Richard stripped Elizabeth Woodville of all the lands bestowed upon her during her late husband's reign.[309] For the sake of outward appearances, the two appeared to reconcile.[310]
Defeat of Richard III
Following Buckingham's failed revolt, some 500 Englishmen fled to Rennes, the capital of Brittany to join Henry in exile.[311] Richard opened negotiations with Francis for Henry's extradition to England, however, the Duke continued to refuse, hoping for the possibility of extracting more generous concessions from Richard in exchange.[312] By mid-1484, Francis was incapacitated from illness, leaving Landais to take the reins of government. Richard made overtures to Landais, offering military support to defend Brittany against a possible French attack; Landais agreed, however, Henry escaped to France by mere hours.[313] Henry was warmly received at the court of Charles VIII of France, who supplied Henry with resources for his coming invasion.[314] Upon the recovery of Francis II, Charles offered the remaining Lancastrians in Brittany safe conduct to France, paying for their expenses himself. For Charles, Henry and his supporters were useful political pawns to ensure Richard did not intervene with French designs on the acquisition of Brittany.[315]
On 16 March 1485, Richard's wife, Anne Neville, died.[316] Rumours quickly spread that she had been murdered to allow Richard to marry his niece, Elizabeth of York, rumours which alienated Richard's northern supporters.[317] Richard's marriage to Elizabeth had the potential of unravelling the Tudor plans, and split the Yorkists who supported Henry from their cause.[318] Henry secured the patronage of the French regent Anne of Beaujeu, who supplied him with 2,000 troops in support.[319] Overseas, Henry relied heavily on his mother Margaret of Beaufort to raise troops and support for him in England.[4] Anxious to press his claim, with the backing of the Woodvilles, Henry set sail from France on 1 August with a force consisting of his English and Welsh exiles, along with a large contingent of French and Scottish troops,[320] landing near Dale, Pembrokeshire, in Wales.[321] Henry's return to his Welsh homeland was regarded by some as the fulfilment of a Messianic prophecy,[322] as "the youth of Brittany defeating the Saxons" and restore their country to glory.[323] Henry amassed an army of approximately 5,000 troops to confront Richard.[324] Richard's lieutenant in Wales, Sir Walter Herbert, failed to move against Henry, and two of his officers deserted to the Tudor claimant with their troops.[325] Richard's lieutenant in West Wales, Rhys ap Thomas, also defected.[325] By mid-August, Henry crossed the English border, advancing on Shrewsbury.[326]
Richard, who had been well-informed of Henry's movements, had ordered a mobilisation of his troops.[327] The powerful Stanleys had assembled their bannermen upon hearing of Henry's landing; while they had been communicating on friendly terms with Henry both prior to and during his landfall in England,[318][328] their forces were a wildcard, and would not support Henry until a decisive juncture in the coming battle.[329] On 22 August 1485, Henry Tudor's outnumbered forces[330] engaged Richard's army in the Battle of Bosworth Field. Stanley's forces entered the fray on behalf of Henry, decisively defeating Richard's army.[331] Polydore Vergil, Henry's official historian, records that "King Richard, alone, was killed fighting manfully in the thickest press of his enemies",[332] and became the last English king to die in battle.[333] Richard's ally the Earl of Northumberland fled, while the Duke of Norfolk was killed, and Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey was taken captive.[329] Henry claimed the throne by right of conquest, retroactively dating his claim to the day prior to Richard's defeat.[334]
Aftermath and Henry VII's reign (1485–1509)
Henry was crowned as Henry VII of England on 30 October 1485 in Westminster Abbey.[335] As per his pledge, Henry married Elizabeth of York on 18 January 1486,[336] and Elizabeth gave birth to their first child just 8 months later, Prince Arthur.[337] The couple's marriage appears to have been a happy one;[338][339] Henry in particular was noted for being uncharacteristically faithful for a king of the time.[337] Henry and Elizabeth's marriage united the rival Lancastrian and Yorkist claims since their children would inherit the claims of both dynasties; however, paranoia persisted that anyone with blood ties to the Plantagenets were secretly coveting the throne.[340]
Challengers to Henry VII
Despite the union of the two dynasties, Henry's position as king was not immediately secure. That same year he faced a rebellion of the Stafford brothers, aided and abetted by Viscount Lovell, but the revolt collapsed without any open fighting.[341] The Stafford brothers claimed sanctuary at a church belonging to Abingdon Abbey in Culham,[342][343] however, Henry had the Staffords forcibly removed by the knight Sir John Savage[344] on 14 May[342] and tried before the Court of the King's Bench, which ruled that sanctuary was inapplicable in matters of treason.[345] Protests over Henry's actions were lodged with Pope Innocent VIII, which resulted in a papal bull that agreed to some modifications over the right of sanctuary.[346] Henry also dealt with other potential threats to his reign; the heir to the Yorkist claimant was Edward, Earl of Warwick, the ten-year-old son of Edward IV's brother, George, Duke of Clarence.[347] Henry had Warwick arrested and imprisoned at the Tower of London.[348]
Lincoln's rebellion
Around this time, a Yorkist-sympathising priest by the name of Richard Symonds had noticed a striking similarity between a young boy, Lambert Simnel, and Richard of Shrewsbury, one of the Princes in the Tower, and began tutoring the boy in the manners of the royal court, perhaps hoping to put forth Simnel as an impostor Prince Richard.[349] The rumour spread that Edward IV's children were still alive, however, the false report of the death of the imprisoned Earl of Warwick changed the impersonation, who was roughly the same age as Simnel.[262] John de la Pole, 1st Earl of Lincoln, who himself had a claim on the throne as a Plantagenet descendant and Richard III's nephew,[347] left the royal court on 19 March 1487 for Burgundy to capitalise on the rumours.[350] His aunt, Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy provided him with financial and military support. The Yorkist exiles sailed for Ireland, where the Yorkist cause was popular, to gather support.[351] Simnel was proclaimed King Edward VI in Dublin despite Henry's efforts to quell the rumours, which included parading the real Earl of Warwick through the streets of London.[262] While nominally supporting the impostor king, Lincoln likely saw the whole affair as an opportunity to claim the throne for himself.[352]
Lincoln had no intention of remaining in Ireland, and with Simnel, 2,000 German mercenaries and an additional large host of Irish troops, landed on Piel Island in Lancashire and proceeded to march on York.[353] Though the Yorkist march avoided Henry's main army, they were repeatedly harassed by Tudor cavalry under Sir Edward Woodville.[354] While Henry's army was outnumbered, they were far better equipped than the Yorkists, and Henry's two principal commanders, Jasper Tudor and John de Vere, 13th Earl of Oxford, were more experienced than any of the Yorkist leaders.[355] The two armies met in battle at Stoke Field on 16 June 1487, and resulted in the destruction of the Yorkist force.[356] The Earl of Lincoln was killed in the fighting, while the Viscount Lovell disappeared, likely to Scotland.[357] Henry pardoned the young Simnel, likely recognising he was merely a puppet in the hands of adults, and put him to work in the royal kitchens as a spit-turner. Simnel later became a falconer, and died around 1534.[358] Henry persuaded the Pope to excommunicate the Irish clergy who supported the revolt, and had Symonds imprisoned, but not executed.[355] Stoke Field proved to be the last military engagement of the Wars of the Roses.[359]
Warbeck's rebellion
In 1491, Perkin Warbeck, a young man hired in the service of a Breton merchant,[360] was regarded favourably as an inheritor of the Yorkist claim to the throne by the pro-York citizens of Cork in Ireland, who allegedly decided to put Warbeck forth as an impostor Richard of Shrewsbury.[361] Warbeck first claimed the throne at the Burgundian court in 1490, claiming to indeed be Richard, and that he had been spared due to his young age.[362] He was publicly recognised as Richard by Margaret of York, sister of Edward IV, and was recognised as Richard IV of England at the funeral of the Holy Roman Emperor, Frederick III, and had become recognised as the Duke of York in international diplomacy, despite Henry's protests.[363] Some nobles in England were prepared to recognise Warbeck as Richard, including Sir Simon Montfort, Sir William Stanley, Sir Thomas Thwaites, and Sir Robert Clifford. Clifford, who visited Warbeck, wrote back to his allies in England confirming Warbeck's identity as the lost prince.[364]
In January 1495, Henry crushed the conspiracy with six of the conspirators imprisoned and fined, while Montfort, Stanley, and several others were executed.[365] Warbeck courted the Scottish royal court, where he was well received by James IV, who hoped to use Warbeck as leverage in international diplomacy.[366] In September 1496, James invaded England with Warbeck, however the army was forced to withdraw when it expended its supplies, and support for Warbeck in the north failed to materialise.[367] Having now fallen out of favour with James, Perkin sailed to Waterford.[368] On 7 September 1497, Warbeck landed in Cornwall, hoping to capitalise on the Cornish people's resentment to Henry VII's unpopular taxes,[369][370] which had induced them into revolt just three months earlier.[371] Warbeck's presence triggered a second revolt; he was declared as Richard IV on Bodmin Moor, and his army of 6,000 Cornishmen advanced on Taunton.[371][372] However, when Warbeck received word the king's troops were in the area, he panicked and deserted his army. Warbeck was captured, imprisoned, and on 23 November 1499, he was hanged.[362]
That same year, Henry had the captive Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick, who had shared a cell with Warbeck and made an escape attempt together, executed. With Warwick's death, the direct male-line descent of the Plantagenet dynasty was rendered extinct.[373][374] [o]
Impact
Immediate social effects
Some historians question the impact the wars had on the fabric of English society and culture; revisionists, such as the Oxford historian K. B. McFarlane, suggests that the effects of the conflict were greatly exaggerated.[377] Many parts of England were largely unaffected by the wars, particularly East Anglia.[378] In the densely populated regions of the country, both factions had far more to lose by the ruin of the country through protracted sieges and pillaging, and sought a quick resolution to the conflict through a pitched battle. The lengthy sieges that did occur, such as at Harlech and Bamburgh were in comparatively remote and sparsely populated areas.[379] Contemporaries such as Philippe de Commines observed in 1470 that England was a unique case compared to wars that befell the continent, in that the consequences of war were only visited upon soldiers and nobles, not citizens and private property.[380]
The instability caused by the Wars of the Roses allowed nobles to take advantage and promote their own position at the expense of others. This was because the 15th century CE witnessed the phenomenon of 'bastard feudalism' which involved the partial degradation of medieval feudalism. Rich landowners were able to possess private armies of retainers, accumulate wealth, and diminish the power of the Crown at a local level. [381] Many areas undertook little effort to improve their defences; city walls were either left in prior ruinous states or only partially rebuilt, as was the case in London, whereby the citizenry was able to avoid devastation by persuading the Yorkist and Lancastrian troops to stay out, after the inability to reconstruct adequate walls, thereby rendering the city indefensible.[382] "It is true that the wars were largely fought between nobles and their private armies, and they were also intermittent with fewer than 24 months of actual fighting over the entire period. Nevertheless, the local populace was sometimes dragged into the conflict, especially if nobles formed militia from their estate workers."[381]
Among the lords, few noble houses were extinguished entirely by the wars; between 1425 and 1449, before the outbreak of fighting, there were as many extinctions of noble lines from natural causes (25), as occurred between 1450 and 1474 (24), during the heaviest period of combat.[383] However, several preeminent noble families had their power crippled because of the fighting, such as the Neville family,[257] while the direct male line of the Plantagenet dynasty was rendered extinct. Nevertheless, every subsequent monarch of England and its successor states has been a direct descendent of Edward III of England through three of his sons, but through the female line. The reign of the monarchy was broken briefly only by Cromwell's Commonwealth of England and The Protectorate.[373]
Despite the relative paucity of violence undertaken against civilians, the wars claimed the lives of 105,000 people,[6] approximately 5.5% of the population level in 1450, though by 1490 England had experienced a 12.6% increase in population levels compared to 1450, despite the wars[384][385]
Question of succession
Although there would be no more serious military threat to Henry's rule or the Tudor claim to the throne that threatened a repeat of the Wars of the Roses, individuals claiming descent from the Plantagenets continued to present challenges to the Tudor dynasty; when Henry ascended the throne, there were eighteen Plantagenet descendants who may be considered to have a stronger claim to the throne, and by 1510 this number had increased by the birth of sixteen Yorkist children.[386] The De La Pole family continued to lay claim to the throne; Edmund de la Pole, 3rd Duke of Suffolk, brother of the executed Earl of Lincoln, was executed in 1513 by Henry VIII for this claim,[387] while his brother Richard, known as the White Rose and who had conspired to invade England to claim the throne, was killed in battle at Pavia in 1525.[388]
As late as 1600, before the death of Elizabeth I, there were twelve competitors for succession,[389] which included seven Plantagenet descendants.[390] The Tudor dynasty's tenuous claim to the throne and the potentially stronger claims of Plantagenet inheritors was a significant factor in driving Henry VIII's considerable anxiety over the need to produce a male heir.[391] Henry was well aware of the potential instability that could follow a succession crisis, and wished to avoid a repeat of the Wars of the Roses.[392]
Tudor dynasty
The English monarchy prior to the wars exerted only weak influence, unable to prevent the growing factional infighting that tore the political structure of the country apart.[393] When Henry VII ascended the throne, he inherited a governmental structure that had been significantly weakened.[394] Although the Tudor claim on the throne was weak and the new regime faced several rebellions, Henry's rule provided much-needed stability to the realm that prevented further outbreaks of civil war;[395] trade, commerce, and culture flourished, and England would not face civil war for 155 years.[1][2][396] Upon his death, Henry VII had left to his successors a prosperous, thriving economy, in part thanks to his frugal spending.[397] Slavin (1964) considers Henry VII to be a member of the so-called "New Monarchs", defined as a ruler who centralised power in the monarchy and unified their nation.[398] Though the monarchy saw a strengthening under the Tudors, Tudor monarchs generally operated within the pre-established legal and financial boundaries, which compelled the monarch to cooperate closely with the nobility, rather than against them.[399] Nevertheless, Tudor monarchs, particularly Henry VIII, defined the concept of the "divine right of kings" to help reinforce monarchical authority,[400] a philosophical concept which would come to plague England under the reign of Charles I, leading to another civil war.[401]
The ascension of the Tudor dynasty saw the end of the medieval period in England and the dawn of the English Renaissance, an offshoot of the Italian Renaissance, that saw a revolution in art, literature, music, and architecture.[402] The English Reformation, England's break with the Roman Catholic Church, occurred under the Tudors, which saw the establishment of the Anglican Church, and the rise of Protestantism as England's dominant religious denomination.[403] Henry VIII's need for a male heir, impelled by the potential for a crisis of succession that dominated the Wars of the Roses, was the prime motivator influencing his decision to separate England from Rome.[404] The reign of Henry VIII's daughter, Elizabeth I, is considered by historians to be a golden age in English history, and is widely remembered today as the Elizabethan era.[405][406]
Historian John Guy argued that "England was economically healthier, more expansive, and more optimistic under the Tudors" than at any time since the Roman occupation.[16] However, some historians such as Kendall, Walpole, and Buck contend that the characterisation of the Wars of the Roses as a period of bloodshed and lawlessness, contrasted with the Tudors ushering in a period of law, peace, and prosperity, served the political interests of the Tudors to present the new regime positively.[407][408][409] Indeed, contemporaries of the Tudors, such as William Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More, wrote fictional and non-fictional works respectively which were hostile to the Yorkists.[410][407]
Armies and warfare
Strategy
Military strategy in the medieval period was predominated by siege warfare; fortifications provided a powerful bastion of defence for a regional populace to shelter from large-scale pillaging that characterised groups such as the Vikings or Mongols,[411] and castles evolved as a central point of control and protection for local elites to exercise their authority over a given area. Fortifications also nullified the dominant weapon of the medieval battlefield: heavy cavalry.[412] Pitched battles were generally rare compared to the Classical period due to a dramatic reduction in logistical capability,[413] and those that were fought tended to be decisive encounters that risked the deaths of the leaders and the potential destruction of the army as a fighting force, discouraging them from taking place.[414] The Wars of the Roses were anomalous in this regard; nobles had a great deal to lose by the ruin of the countryside in a protracted conflict, so they tended to deliberately seek pitched battles to resolve their grievances quickly and decisively.[379]
Battlefield
Decline of chivalry
The code of chivalry governed the actions of nobles in medieval warfare; in particular, nobles would often go to great lengths to take a fellow noble prisoner during combat in order to ransom them for a sum of money, rather than simply killing them.[415] However, the concept of chivalry had been in decline for many years prior to the Wars of the Roses; for example, the battle at Crecy in 1346 (over a century prior) saw the cream of French nobility cut down by English archers,[416] and the killing of many wounded French knights by common soldiers.[417][418] The Wars of the Roses continued this trend; Edward IV was noted by contemporary Philippe de Commines as ordering his troops to spare common soldiers and kill the nobles.[380] Ensuring the deaths of nobles in battle often led to one side wielding lopsided political control in the aftermath as a result, as occurred after Towton at which 42 captured knights were executed,[419] and Barnet, which irrevocably broke the influence of the powerful Neville family.[257] Nobles who escaped battle may be attainted, thereby being stripped of their lands and titles, and would therefore be of no value to a captor.[420]
Tactics, arms, and equipment
Much like their campaigns in France, the English gentry fought on foot.[421] Though heavy cavalry had been the dominant class of soldier on the medieval battlefield for centuries,[422] the relative inexpensiveness to train and outfit an infantryman compared to an expensive mounted knight incentivised leaders for expanding their use,[423] and the late medieval battlefield saw an increased use of infantry and light cavalry.[424] In particular, English armies were characterised by their use of massed longbowmen, which often proved decisive in their encounters with French cavalry,[424] however, as the English nobility fought on foot, and due to advances in fluted plate armour, neither side possessed a decisive tactical advantage from the use of these archers.[425] An exception to this was at Towton, where the Yorkist archers took advantage of the high winds to extend their maximum range, dealing disproportionate damage to their Lancastrian opponents.[426][427]
English armies of the time tended to favour a mix between infantry equipped with bills supported by massed longbowmen, a combination they would continue to use well into the Tudor period.[428] Despite their frequent association with medieval warfare, swords were rare among the common soldiery and were instead favoured by men-at-arms or knights as a personal weapon indicating prestige and wealth.[429] Other weapons commonly used by infantry and men-at-arms include axes,[430] halberds,[431] crossbows,[432] and daggers.[433] Hand cannon and arquebuses were used by both sides, however their numbers were limited.[434] While artillery was used as early as 1346 at Crecy, these were crude ribauldequins firing metal arrows or simple grapeshot,[435] and were rendered obsolete by the bombards that came in the late 15th century.[436] Bamburgh Castle, previously thought impregnable, was captured thanks to bombards in 1464.[437] Field artillery was used but sparingly; Northampton was the first battle on English soil to use artillery.[438] Early cannon were expensive to cast as they were often made from bronze,[439] as such few commanders were willing to risk their capture on the field; at Barnet in 1471, the Yorkist artillery withheld their fire so as not to betray their location.[440]
The invention of the blast furnace in Sweden in the mid-14th century increased and improved iron production,[441] which led to advances in plate armour to protect soldiers from the powerful crossbows, longbows, and the advent of gunpowder weaponry, such as the hand cannon and the arquebus, that began to emerge around the same time.[442] By the 15th century, plate armour had become cheaper than mail, although mail continued to be used to protect joints which could not be adequately protected by plate, such as the armpit, crook of the elbow, and groin.[443] Contrary to the popular preconception of medieval armour as excessively heavy,[444] a full suit of medieval armour in the 15th century seldom weighed more than 15 kg (33 lbs),[445] substantially less than the loads that modern ground combat troops carry.[446]
Recruitment
Following the climax of the Hundred Years' War, large numbers of experienced unemployed soldiers returned to England seeking work in the growing forces of the local nobility. England drifted towards misrule and violence as feuds between powerful families, such as the Percy-Neville feud, increasingly relied on their retainers to settle disputes. It became common practice for local landowners to bind their mesnie knights to their service with annual payments.[447] Edward III had developed a contractual system whereby the monarch entered into agreements named indentures with experienced captains who were obliged to provide an agreed-upon number of men, at established rates, for a given period. Knights, men-at-arms, and archers were often sub-contracted.[447] Skilled archers could often command wages as high as knights.[448] The complex feudal structures that existed in England enabled nobles to raise large retinues, with armies large enough that could challenge the power of the crown.[33][35]
Leadership
As the wars were a series of sporadic battles fought across a period of over 32 years, many of the key commanders fluctuated due to death in battle, death by natural causes, executions, and possible assassinations. Some key commanders also defected between sides, such as Warwick the Kingmaker.
Yorkists are those who supported the rival House of York's claims to the throne, over the incumbent Lancastrian dynasty.
Lancastrians are those who supported the Lancastrian claim to the throne, principally by supporting the incumbent monarch, Henry VI.
Tudors are those who supported Henry VII's claim to the throne by right of conquest in 1485.[334]
Yorkist rebels are Yorkists who, while not aligned with the claims of the Lancastrian dynasty, nevertheless rebelled against Edward IV during his reign.
| Title | Name | Side | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| King of England | Edward IV of England | York | First reign: 4 March 1461 – 3 October 1470 Second reign: 11 April 1471 – 9 April 1483 Died of natural causes on 9 April 1483[275] |
| King of England | Edward V of England | York | Reign: 9 April 1483 – 25 June 1483 Deposed by Richard III after a 78-day reign One of the Princes in the Tower[449] |
| King of England | Richard III of England † | York | Reign: 26 June 1483 – 22 August 1485 Killed in battle at Bosworth Field on 22 August 1485, the last English king to die in battle[333] |
| Queen consort of England | Elizabeth Woodville | York | Consort to Edward IV Mother to Edward V and Elizabeth of York Organised the alliance with Beaufort to promote Henry Tudor as a claimant to the throne[5] |
| Dowager Queen | Tudor | ||
| Queen consort of England | Anne Neville | York | Consort to Richard III Died of natural causes on 16 March 1485[450] |
| Duke of York | Richard of York † | York | Also Lord Protector Killed in battle at Wakefield on 30 December 1460[451][159] |
| Earl of Rutland | Edmund Plantagenet † | York | Son of Richard of York Killed in battle at Wakefield on 30 December 1460[154] |
| Duke of Clarence | George Plantagenet 
|
York | Briefly joined the Lancastrians Son of Richard of York Executed for treason at the Tower of London on 18 February 1478[268] |
| Lancaster | |||
| Duke of Buckingham | Henry Stafford
|
York | Defected to the Tudor cause |
| Tudor | Grandson of Humphrey Stafford, 1st Duke of Buckingham Executed after the failed Buckingham's Rebellion on 2 November 1483[452] | ||
| Earl of Warwick | Richard Neville Warwick The Kingmaker † |
York | Defected from the Yorkist to the Lancastrian cause. Killed in battle at Barnet on 14 April 1471[238] |
| Lancaster | |||
| Earl of Salisbury | Richard Neville
|
York | Father of Warwick the Kingmaker Executed after the Battle of Wakefield by Lancastrians on 31 December 1460[453] |
| Earl of Kent | William Neville | York | Uncle of Warwick the Kingmaker Died of natural causes on 9 January 1463 |
| Viscount Fauconberg | Thomas Neville | York | Son of William Neville, Earl of Kent Defected from the Yorkists to the Lancastrians Executed at Middleham Castle on 22 September 1471[454] |
| Lancaster | |||
| Marquess of Montagu | John Neville † | York | Younger brother of Warwick the Kingmaker Defected from the Yorkist to the Lancastrian cause Killed in battle at Barnet on 14 April 1471[455] |
| Lancaster | |||
| Baron Neville | John Neville | Lancaster | Briefly defected from the Lancastrians to the Yorkists Killed in battle at Ferrybridge on 28 March 1461[456] |
| York | |||
| Knight of the Realm | Thomas Neville † | York | Younger brother of Warwick the Kingmaker Killed in battle at Wakefield on 30 December 1460[457] |
| Duke of Norfolk | John de Mowbray | York | Died of natural causes on 6 November 1461[82] |
| Duke of Norfolk | John Howard † | York | Killed in battle at Bosworth Field on 22 August 1485[458] |
| Earl of Lincoln | John de la Pole † | York | Killed in battle at Stoke Field on 16 June 1487[357] |
| Viscount Lovell | Francis Lovell | York | Disappeared after the Battle of Bosworth Field on 22 August 1485[357] |
| Earl of Pembroke | William Herbert
|
York | Executed after the Battle of Edgcote on 27 July 1469[459] |
| Earl of Devon | Humphrey Stafford
|
York | Executed after the Battle of Edgcote on 27 July 1469[460] |
| Earl of Desmond | Thomas FitzGerald X | York | Commanded Yorkist forces in Ireland Assassinated in Drogheda in 1468[461] |
| Baron Hastings | William Hastings
|
York | Executed at the Tower of London on 20 June 1483[462] |
| King of England | Henry VI of England 
|
Lancaster | First reign: 1 September 1422 – 4 March 1461 Second reign: 3 October 1470 – 11 April 1471 Captured and imprisoned by the Yorkists Died in unclear circumstances on 21 May 1471[13] |
| Prince of Wales | Edward of Westminster † | Lancaster | Son of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou Killed in battle at Tewkesbury on 4 May 1471[463] |
| Queen consort of England | Margaret of Anjou
|
Lancaster | Wife of Henry VI Died of natural causes on 25 August 1482[464] |
| Duke of Somerset | Henry Beaufort † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at St Albans on 22 May 1455[117] |
| Duke of Somerset | Henry Beaufort
|
Lancaster | Son of Henry Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset Executed after the Battle of Hexham on 15 May 1464[198] |
| Duke of Somerset | Edmund Beaufort
|
Lancaster | Younger brother of Henry Beaufort, 3rd Duke of Somerset Executed after the Battle of Tewkesbury on 6 May 1471[465] |
| Earl of Northumberland | Henry Percy † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Towton on 29 March 1461[177] |
| Earl of Northumberland | Henry Percy | Lancaster | Son of Henry Percy, 3rd Earl of Northumberland |
| Duke of Buckingham | Humphrey Stafford † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Northampton on 10 July 1460[147] |
| Earl of Shrewsbury | John Talbot † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Northampton on 10 July 1460[466] |
| Duke of Exeter | Henry Holland | Lancaster | Died of natural causes in September 1475[467] |
| Earl of Wiltshire | James Butler
|
Lancaster | Executed after the Battle of Towton on 1 May 1461[180] |
| Earl of Devon | John Courtenay † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Tewkesbury on 4 May 1471[468] |
| Earl of Oxford | John de Vere | Lancaster | Later supported the Tudor claim to the throne under Henry VII |
| Tudor | |||
| Earl of Ormond | John Butler | Lancaster | Commanded Lancastrian forces in Ireland Died in the Holy Land of natural causes on 14 December 1476[469] |
| Viscount Beaumont | John Beaumont † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Northampton on 10 July 1460[470] |
| Baron Audley | James Tuchet † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Blore Heath on 23 September 1459[133] |
| Baron Clifford | John Clifford † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Ferrybridge on 28 March 1461[471] |
| Baron Ros | Thomas de Ros
|
Lancaster | Executed after the Battle of Hexham on 17 May 1464[199] |
| Knight of the Realm | Andrew Trollope † | Lancaster | Killed in battle at Towton on 29 March 1461[179] |
| Knight of the Realm | Owen Tudor
|
Lancaster | Grandfather of Henry VII Father of Edmund Tudor and Jasper Tudor Executed shortly after the Battle of Mortimer's Cross at Hereford on 2 February 1461[162] |
| Earl of Richmond | Edmund Tudor
|
Lancaster | Father of Henry VII Died of bubonic plague on 3 November 1456 while imprisoned at Carmarthen Castle[472] |
| Earl of Pembroke | Jasper Tudor | Lancaster | Uncle of Henry VII |
| Tudor | |||
| King of England | Henry VII of England | Tudor | Reign: 22 August 1485 – 21 April 1509 Inherited the Lancastrian claim Defeated the Yorkists at Bosworth Field[473] |
| Countess of Richmond | Lady Margaret Beaufort | Tudor | Mother of Henry VII Orchestrated the rise of the Tudor dynasty[4] |
| Earl of Shrewsbury | George Talbot | Tudor | — |
| Baron Stanley | Thomas Stanley | Tudor | Supported Henry VII late at the Battle of Bosworth Field[329] |
| Baron Strange | George Stanley | Tudor | Son and heir apparent of Thomas Stanley |
| Knight of the Realm | William Stanley | Tudor | Younger brother of Thomas Stanley Supported Henry VII late at the Battle of Bosworth Field |
| Baron Scales | Edward Woodville | Tudor | — |
| Baron Willoughby de Eresby | Robert Welles
|
Yorkist rebel | Executed following the Battle of Losecoat Field on 19 March 1470[231] |
| Knight of the Realm | Robin of Redesdale † | Yorkist rebel | Reportedly killed in battle at Edgcote on 24 July 1469 |
Family tree
| English royal families in the Wars of the Roses |
|---|
In literature
Chronicles written during the Wars of the Roses include:
- Benet's Chronicle
- Gregory's Chronicle (1189–1469)
- Short English Chronicle (before 1465)
- Hardyng's Chronicle: first version for Henry VI (1457)
- Hardyng's Chronicle: second version for Richard, duke of York and Edward IV (1460 and c. 1464)
- Hardyng's Chronicle: second "Yorkist" version revised for Lancastrians during Henry VI's Readeption (see Peverley's article).
- Capgrave (1464)
- Commynes (1464–98)
- Chronicle of the Lincolnshire Rebellion (1470)
- Historie of the arrival of Edward IV in England (1471)
- Waurin (before 1471)
- An English Chronicle: AKA Davies' Chronicle (1461)
- Brief Latin Chronicle (1422–71)
- Fabyan (before 1485)
- Rous (1480/86)
- Croyland Chronicle (1449–1486)
- Warkworth's Chronicle (1500?)
Stories set within the Wars of the Roses include:
- The Black Arrow: A Tale of the Two Roses, a novel by Robert Louis Stevenson (1888)
See also
- Hundred Years' War
- War of the League of Cambrai
- Roses Tournament
- Roses Match or "The War of the Roses", any game of cricket between Yorkshire County Cricket Club and Lancashire County Cricket Club, first played in 1849
Notes
- Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick, (25 February 1475 – 28 November 1499) was the son of Isabel Neville and George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence, and a potential claimant to the English throne during the reigns of both his uncle, Richard III (1483–1485), and Richard's successor, Henry VII (1485–1509). He was also a younger brother of Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury. Edward Plantagenet was the son of George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence and Isabel Neville, who was the elder daughter of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick. Edward was born on 25 February 1475 at Warwick, the family home of his mother. At his christening, his uncle King Edward IV stood as godfather. He was styled as Earl of Warwick from birth,[375] but was not officially granted the title until after his father's death in 1478. His potential claim to the throne following the deposition of his cousin Edward V in 1483 was overlooked because of the argument that the attainder of his father barred Warwick from the succession (although that could have been reversed by an Act of Parliament). Despite this, he was knighted at York by Richard III in September 1483.[376]
References
Citations
that hede shalle ly on the stocke that was wonte to ly on Quene Kateryns lappe.
Polydore Vergil records that Henry travelled to the ducal capital at Rennes, where he sent for Dorset and the other exiles who arrived at Vannes.
See also B. Campbell (1990), "People and Land in the Middle Ages, 1066–1500", in Robert A. Dodgshon and Robin A. Butlin (eds), Historical Geography of England and Wales, 2nd edition. Elsevier. ISBN 1483288412, pp. 69–122 for discussion of drivers and trends underlying the numbers.
- Ross, Charles D. (1981). Richard III. English Monarchs series. Eyre Methuen. p. 323. ISBN 978-0-413-29530-9.
Bibliography
- Allmand, C. T. (30 April 1982). "The Coronations of Henry VI". History Today. Vol. 32, no. 5. Archived from the original on 28 July 2017.
- Arthurson, Ian (1987). "Chapter 1: The Rising of 1497: A Revolt of the Peasantry?". In Rosenthal, Joel; Richmond, Colin (eds.). People, Politics and Community in the Later Middle Ages. Alan Sutton. pp. 1–18. ISBN 0-312-01220-9.
- —— (1994). The Perkin Warbeck Conspiracy, 1491–1499. Alan Sutton. ISBN 978-0-862-99742-7.
- Ayton, Andrew (2007) [2005]. "The English Army at Crécy". In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 159–251. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0. JSTOR 10.7722/j.ctt163tbzv.10.
- Baldwin, David (2002). Elizabeth Woodville. Stroud: Sutton Publishing. ISBN 0-7509-2774-7.
- —— (2013). Richard III: a life. Stroud: Amberley. ISBN 978-1-4456-0182-3. OL 28284638M.
- Bellamy, John G. (1989). Bastard Feudalism and the Law. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-71290-3. OL 10186393M.
- Bennett, Michael (1 June 1998). "Edward III's Entail and the Succession to the Crown, 1376–1471". The English Historical Review. 113 (452): 580–609. doi:10.1093/ehr/CXIII.452.580.
- Bottomley, Frank (1983). The Castle Explorer's Guide. Crown Publishers. ISBN 0-517-42172-0. OL 7686362M.
- Boutell, Charles (1914). Fox-Davies, A. C. (ed.). The Handbook to English Heraldry (11th ed.). London: Reeves & Turner. OCLC 2034334. OL 19529731M.
- Brooke, Richard (1857). "The Field of the Battle of Barnet". Visits to Fields of Battle, in England, of the Fifteenth Century: To which are Added Some Miscellaneous Tracts and Papers Upon Archaeological Subjects. London: John Russell Smith. OCLC 43406489. OL 6922778M. Retrieved 28 January 2009.
- btilley (26 October 2007). "Debunking myths about the real Battle of Hexham". Hexham Courant. Archived from the original on 29 February 2012.
- Carpenter, Christine (1997). The Wars of the Roses: Politics and the Constitution in England, c. 1437–1509. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-31874-7. OL 661588M.
- Chrimes, Stanley (1999) [1972]. Henry VII. Yale English Monarchs. New Haven, Connecticut; and London: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07883-8. LCCN 99061177. OL 53092M.
- Clodfelter, Micheal (2017). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Encyclopedia of Casualty and Other Figures, 1492–2015 (4th ed.). McFarland. ISBN 978-0-7864-7470-7.
- Cokayne, G. E. (1913). Gibbs, Vicary & Doubleday, H. Arthur (eds.). The
Complete peerage of England, Scotland, Ireland, Great Britain and the
United Kingdom, extant, extinct or dormant (Canonteign to Cutts). Vol. 3 (2nd ed.). London: The St Catherine Press. OL 17518257M.
- —— (1932). H. A. Doubleday & Lord Howard de Walden (eds.). The Complete Peerage, or a history of the House of Lords and all its members from the earliest times (Lindley to Moate). Vol. 8 (2nd ed.). London: The St Catherine Press.
- —— (1945). Doubleday, H. A. & Lord Howard de Walden (eds.). The Complete Peerage, or a history of the House of Lords and all its members from the earliest times (Oakham to Richmond). Vol. 10 (2nd ed.). London: The St Catherine Press.
- Ellis, Steven G. (2004). "Butler, John, sixth earl of Ormond (d. 1476/7)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/4195. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
- Elton, Geoffrey (2003) [1992]. "Henry VII". Studies in Tudor and Stuart Politics and Government: Volume 4, Papers and Reviews 1982–1990. Studies in Tudor and Stuart politics and government. Vol. 4. London: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-53317-1.
- Farquhar, Michael (2001). A Treasury of Royal Scandals. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-7394-2025-6.
- Gravett, Christopher (1999). Bosworth 1485: Last Charge of the Plantagenets. Campaign. Vol. 66. Oxford: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 1-85532-863-1.
- —— (2003a). Tewkesbury 1471: The last Yorkist victory (PDF). Oxford: Osprey Publishing (published 22 October 2003). ISBN 1-84176-514-7. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2019.
- —— (2003b). Towton 1461: England's Bloodiest Battle (PDF). Campaign. Vol. 120. Oxford, UK: Osprey Publishing (published 20 April 2003). ISBN 978-1-84176-513-6. Archived from the original (PDF) on 8 August 2013.
- Gillingham, John (1981). The Wars of the Roses : peace and conflict in fifteenth-century England. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 9780807110058.
- Goodman, Anthony (1981). The Wars of the Roses: Military Activity and English society, 1452–97. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. ISBN 9780710007285.
- Griffiths, Ralph Alan (1968). "Local Rivalries and National Politics: The Percies, the Nevilles, and the Duke of Exeter, 1452–55". Speculum. 43 (4): 589–632. doi:10.2307/2855323. JSTOR 2855323. S2CID 155012397.
- ——; Thomas, Roger S. (1985). The Making of the Tudor Dynasty. New York: St. Martin's Press. ISBN 978-0-31250-745-9.
- —— (16 February 2012). Fatal Colours. London: Phoenix. ISBN 978-0-7538-2817-5.
- Gristwood, Sarah (2013). Blood Sisters: The Women Behind the Wars of the Roses. New York: Basic Books. ISBN 9780465065981. OCLC 1261945310.
- Grummitt, David (30 October 2012). A Short History of the Wars of the Roses. I.B. Tauris. ISBN 978-1-84885-875-6.
- Guy, J. (1988). Tudor England. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-285213-7. OCLC 17677564.
- Haigh, Christopher (1993). English Reformations: Religion, Politics, and Society under the Tudors. Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-822162-3.
- Haigh, P. (1995). The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the Roses. ISBN 0-7509-0904-8.
- Hicks, Michael A. (1980). False, Fleeting, Perjur'd Clarence. ISBN 978-0-904-38744-5.
- —— (1995). Bastard Feudalism. London. ISBN 978-0-582-06091-3.
- —— (1998). Warwick the Kingmaker. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. ISBN 978-0-470-75193-0. OCLC 857290076.
- —— (2000). Richard III (Revised ed.). Stroud: History Press. ISBN 0-7524-1781-9.
- —— (2001). Revolution and Consumption in Late Medieval England. Boydell & Brewer. ISBN 978-0-85115-832-7.
- —— (2003). The Wars of the Roses: 1455–1485. Osprey. ISBN 978-1-841-76491-7.
- —— (2006). Anne Neville: Queen to Richard III. Stroud: The History Press. ISBN 978-0-752-43663-0.
- Ingram, Mike (2012). Bosworth 1485: Battle Story. The History Press. ISBN 978-0-7524-6988-1.
- Jacob, Ernest Fraser (1961). The Fifteenth Century 1399–1485. Oxford History of England. Vol. 6. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19821-714-5.
- Johnson, P. A. (1988). Duke Richard of York 1411–1460. Oxford Historical Monographs. Oxford: Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0-19-822946-9.
- Kendall, Paul Murray (2002). Richard The Third. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-00785-5.
- Lander, Jack Robert (1980). Government and Community: England, 1450–1509. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-35794-5.
- Licence, Amy (2013). Anne Neville: Richard III's Tragic Queen. Stroud: Amberley Publishing. ISBN 978-1-445-61177-8.
- McCaffrey, Wallace (1984). "Recent Writings on Tutor History". In Schlatter, Richard (ed.). Recent Views on British History: Essays on Historical Writing since 1966. Rutgers University Press. ISBN 978-0-8135-0959-4.
- McClelland, J. S. (1996), A History of Western Political Thought, London: Routledge
- Morris, T. A. (1999). Tudor Government. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-203-98167-2.
- Mortimer, Ian (20 June 2006). "Richard II and the Succession to the Crown". History. 91 (3, 303): 320–336. doi:10.1111/j.1468-229X.2006.00368.x. JSTOR 24427962.
- —— (2007). The Fears of Henry IV: The Life of England's Self-Made King. Jonathan Cape. ISBN 978-0-224-07300-4. Archived from the original on 17 June 2017. Retrieved 27 June 2018.
- Penn, Thomas (2019). The Brothers York. Allen Lane. ISBN 978-1846146909.
- Peverley, Sarah L. (Autumn 2004). Adapting to Readeption in 1470–1471: The Scribe as Editor in a Unique Copt of John Hardtng's Chronicle of England (Garrett Ms. 142). Vol. 66. The Princeton University Library Chronicle. pp. 140–172.
- Pollard, A. J. (1988). The Wars of the Roses. Basingstoke: Macmillan Education. ISBN 978-0-333-40604-5.
- —— (2007). Warwick the Kingmaker: Politics, Power and Fame. London. ISBN 978-1-847-25182-4.
- Public Records Office (1870). Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, of the Reigns of Edward VI, Mary, Elizabeth, 1547–1580: Elizabeth 1601–1603; with addenda, 1547–1565. Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans, & Roberts. p. 60.
- Pugh, Thomas (1992). "Henry VII and the English Nobility". In Bernard, George (ed.). The Tudor Nobility. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 0-7190-3625-9.
- Redstone, Vincent B. (1902). "Social Conditions of England during the Wars of the Roses". Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. New Series. 16 (1): 159–200. doi:10.2307/3678121. JSTOR 3678121. S2CID 154994287.
- Richmond, C. (2004). "Mowbray, John, third duke of Norfolk (1415–1461)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/19454. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.)
- Ross, Charles D. (1974). Edward IV. English Monarchs Series. Berkeley: University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-02781-7.
- —— (1981). Richard III. Yale English Monarchs (1st ed.). London: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-22974-5.
- —— (1997) [1974]. Edward IV. English Monarchs series (revised ed.). Connecticut, United States: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07372-0.
- —— (1999) [1981]. Richard III. Yale English Monarchs (new ed.). New Haven, Connecticut; and London: Yale University Press. ISBN 0-300-07979-6.
- Rowse, A. L. (1966). Bosworth Field & the Wars of the Roses. Wordsworth Military Library. ISBN 1-85326-691-4.
- Royle, Trevor (2009). The Road to Bosworth Field. London: Little, Brown. ISBN 978-0-316-72767-9.
- Sadler, John (2000). Armies and Warfare During the Wars of the Roses. Bristol: Stuart Press. ISBN 978-1-85804-183-4.
- —— (2010). The Red Rose and the White: the Wars of the Roses 1453–1487. Longman.
- —— (2011). Towton: The Battle of Palm Sunday Field 1461. Barnsley: Pen and Sword Military. ISBN 978-1-84415-965-9.
- Saul, Nigel (2005). The Three Richards: Richard I, Richard II and Richard III. London: Hambledon Continuum. ISBN 978-1852855215.
- Seward, Desmond (1995). A Brief History of the Wars of the Roses. London: Constable & Co. ISBN 978-1-84529-006-1.
- Slavin, Arthur (1964). The New Monarchies and Representative Assemblies: Medieval Constitutionalism or Modern Absolutism?. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
- Stubbs, William (1875). The Constitutional History of England, in its origin and development. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
- Tuck, Anthony (1985). Crown and Nobility 1272-1461: Political Conflict in Late Medieval England. London: Fontana. ISBN 0006860842.
- Wagner, John A. (2001). Encyclopedia of the Wars of the Roses. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-85109-358-8.
- ——; Schmid, Susan Walters, eds. (2011). Encyclopedia of Tudor England. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1-59884-298-2.
- Webster, Bruce (1998). The Wars Of The Roses. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-85728-493-5.
- Weir, Alison (1996). The Wars of the Roses. New York: Random House. ISBN 9780345404336. OCLC 760599899.
- —— (2008a). Britain's Royal Families: The Complete Genealogy. Vintage. ISBN 978-0-09-953973-5.
- —— (2008b) [1992]. The Princes in the Tower. London: Vintage. ISBN 9780099526964.
- —— (2011). Henry VIII: King and Court. Random House. ISBN 978-1-4464-4923-3.
- Williams, C. H. (April 1928). "The Rebellion of Humphrey Stafford in 1486". English Historical Review. Oxford University Press. 43 (170): 181–189. doi:10.1093/ehr/xliii.clxx.181. JSTOR 552001.
- Wise, Terence; Embleton, G.A. (1983). The Wars of the Roses. London: Osprey Military. ISBN 0-85045-520-0.
- Wolffe, Bertram (1981). Henry VI (The English Monarchs Series). Methuen. ISBN 978-0413320803.
- Wood, Charles T. (1975). "The Deposition of Edward V". Traditio. 31: 247–286. doi:10.1017/S036215290001134X. JSTOR 27830988. S2CID 151769515.
- Wroe, Ann (2003). The perfect prince: the mystery of Perkin Warbeck and his quest for the throne of England. New York: Random House. ISBN 978-1-4000-6033-7.
Further reading
- Clark, K. L. (2016). The Nevills of Middleham: England's Most Powerful Family in the Wars of the Roses. Stroud, Gloucestershire: The History Press. ISBN 978-0-7509-6365-7.
- Santiuste, David (2010). Edward IV and The Wars of the Roses. Barnsley: Pen & Sword Books. ISBN 978-1844159307.
External links
- The Wars of the Roses in the World History Encyclopedia
- warsoftheroses.com includes a map, timeline, info on major players and summaries of each battle
- Diagram of the Wars of the Roses
- Reflections of the Yorkist Realm—Includes photographs and discussion of places connected with the Wars of the Roses, including Bosworth, Harlech and Towton
- "The Wars of the Roses", In Our Time, BBC Radio 4 discussion with Helen Castor, Colin Richmond and Steven Gunn (18 March 2000).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wars_of_the_Roses
Ferdinand I (Portuguese: Fernando;[1] 31 October 1345 – 22 October 1383), sometimes called the Handsome (o Formoso) or occasionally the Inconstant (o Inconstante), was the King of Portugal from 1367 until his death in 1383. His death led to the 1383–85 crisis, also known as the Portuguese interregnum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_I_of_Portugal
| Henry V | |
|---|---|
 Miniature of Henry in the Regement of Princes by Thomas Hoccleve, c. 1411–1413 | |
| King of England | |
| Reign | 21 March 1413 – 31 August 1422 |
| Coronation | 9 April 1413 |
| Predecessor | Henry IV |
| Successor | Henry VI |
| Born | 16 September 1386 Monmouth Castle, Wales, Kingdom of England |
| Died | 31 August 1422 (aged 35) Château de Vincennes, Kingdom of France |
| Burial | 7 November 1422 |
| Spouse | |
| Issue | Henry VI of England |
| House | Lancaster (Plantagenet) |
| Father | Henry IV of England |
| Mother | Mary de Bohun |
| Signature |  |
Henry V (16 September 1386 – 31 August 1422), also called Henry of Monmouth, was King of England from 1413 until his death in 1422. Despite his relatively short reign, Henry's outstanding military successes in the Hundred Years' War against France made England one of the strongest military powers in Europe.[1] Immortalised in Shakespeare's "Henriad" plays, Henry is known and celebrated as one of the greatest warrior-kings of medieval England.
During the reign of his father Henry IV, Henry gained military experience fighting the Welsh during the revolt of Owain Glyndŵr and against the powerful aristocratic Percy family of Northumberland at the Battle of Shrewsbury. Henry acquired an increased role in England's government due to the king's declining health, but disagreements between father and son led to political conflict between the two. After his father's death in 1413, Henry assumed control of the country and asserted the pending English claim to the French throne.
In 1415, Henry embarked on war with France. His first military campaign included his famous victory at the Battle of Agincourt in 1415. By 1420, his armies had captured Paris and had come close to conquering the whole of medieval France. Taking advantage of political divisions within France, he conquered large portions of Northern France, resulting in Normandy's occupation by the English for the first time since the mid-14th century. After months of negotiation with Charles VI of France, the 1420 Treaty of Troyes recognised Henry V as regent and heir apparent to the French throne, and he was subsequently married to Charles's daughter, Catherine of Valois. Everything seemed to point to the formation of a union between the kingdoms, in the person of Henry. However, he died two years later and was succeeded by his only child, the infant Henry VI.
Analyses of Henry's reign are varied. He was widely praised for his personal piety, bravery and military genius even by contemporary French chroniclers, but his occasionally cruel temperament and lack of focus on domestic affairs have made him the subject of some criticism.[2] Nonetheless, his militaristic pursuits during the Hundred Years' War created a strong sense of English nationalism and set the stage for the rise of England and then later Britain to prominence as a dominant global power.[3]
Early life
Birth and family
Henry was born in the tower above the gatehouse of Monmouth Castle in Wales, and for that reason was sometimes called Henry of Monmouth.[4] He was the son of Henry of Bolingbroke (later Henry IV of England) and Mary de Bohun. His father's cousin was the reigning English monarch, King Richard II. Henry's paternal grandfather was the influential John of Gaunt, a son of King Edward III. As he was not close to the line of succession to the throne, Henry's date of birth was not officially documented, and for many years it was disputed whether he was born in 1386 or 1387.[5] However, records indicate that his younger brother Thomas was born in the autumn of 1387 and that his parents were at Monmouth in 1386 but not in 1387.[6] It is now accepted that he was born on 16 September 1386.[7][8][9][13]
Upon the exile of Henry's father in 1398, Richard II took the boy into his own charge and treated him kindly.[14] The young Henry accompanied Richard to Ireland. While in the royal service, he visited Trim Castle in County Meath, the ancient meeting place of the Parliament of Ireland.
In 1399, John of Gaunt died. In the same year, King Richard II was overthrown by the Lancastrian usurpation that brought Henry's father to the throne, and Henry was recalled from Ireland into prominence as heir apparent to the Kingdom of England. He was created Prince of Wales at his father's coronation and Duke of Lancaster on 10 November 1399, the third person to hold the title that year. His other titles were Duke of Cornwall, Earl of Chester and Duke of Aquitaine. A contemporary record notes that in 1399, Henry spent time at The Queen's College, Oxford, under the care of his uncle Henry Beaufort, the chancellor of the university.[16] During this time, due to taking a liking to both literature and music, he learned to read and write; this made him the first English King that was educated in this regard.[17] He even went on to grant pensions to composers due to such love for music.
From 1400 to 1404, he carried out the duties of High Sheriff of Cornwall. During that time, Henry would also be in command of part of the English forces. He led his own army into Wales against Owain Glyndŵr and joined forces with his father to fight Henry "Hotspur" Percy at the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403.[18] It was there that the 16-year-old prince was almost killed by an arrow that became impaled on the left side of his face. An ordinary soldier might have died from such a wound, but Henry had the benefit of the best possible care. Over a period of several days, John Bradmore, the royal physician, treated the wound with honey to act as an antiseptic, crafted a tool to screw into the embedded arrowhead (bodkin point) and thus extract it without doing further damage, and flushed the wound with alcohol. The operation was successful, but it left Henry with permanent scars, evidence of his experience in battle.[19] Bradmore recorded this account in Latin, in his manuscript titled Philomena. Henry's treatment also appeared in an anonymous Middle English surgical treatise dated to 1446, that has since been attributed to Thomas Morstede.
Early military career and role in Government
The Welsh revolt of Owain Glyndŵr absorbed Henry's energies until 1408. Then, as a result of the king's ill health, Henry began to take a wider share in politics. From January 1410, helped by his uncles Henry and Thomas Beaufort, legitimised sons of John of Gaunt, he had practical control of the government.[14] Both in foreign and domestic policy he differed from the king, who discharged his son from the council in November 1411. The quarrel between father and son was political only, though it is probable that the Beauforts had discussed the abdication of Henry IV. Their opponents certainly endeavoured to defame Prince Henry.[14]
It may be that the tradition of Henry's riotous youth, immortalised by Shakespeare, is partly due to political enmity. Henry's record of involvement in war and politics, even in his youth, disproves this tradition. The most famous incident, his quarrel with the chief justice, has no contemporary authority and was first related by Sir Thomas Elyot in 1531.[14][20]
The story of Falstaff originated in Henry's early friendship with Sir John Oldcastle, a supporter of the Lollards. Shakespeare's Falstaff was originally named "Oldcastle," following his main source, The Famous Victories of Henry V. Oldcastle's descendants objected, and the name was changed (the character became a composite of several real persons, including Sir John Fastolf). That friendship, and the prince's political opposition to Thomas Arundel, Archbishop of Canterbury, perhaps encouraged Lollard hopes. If so, their disappointment may account for the statements of ecclesiastical writers like Thomas Walsingham that Henry, on becoming king, was suddenly changed into a new man.[14][21]
Reign (1413-1422)
Accession
After Henry IV died on 20 March 1413, Henry V succeeded him and was crowned on 9 April 1413 at Westminster Abbey. The ceremony was marked by a terrible snowstorm, but the common people were undecided as to whether it was a good or bad omen.[22] Henry was described as having been "very tall (6 feet 3 inches), slim, with dark hair cropped in a ring above the ears, and clean-shaven". His complexion was ruddy, his face lean with a prominent and pointed nose. Depending on his mood, his eyes "flashed from the mildness of a dove's to the brilliance of a lion's".[23]
Henry tackled all of the domestic policies together and gradually built on them a wider policy. From the first, he made it clear that he would rule England as the head of a united nation. He let past differences be forgotten—the late Richard II was honourably re-interred; the young Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March, was taken into favour; the heirs of those who had suffered under the last reign were restored gradually to their titles and estates. Yet, where Henry saw a grave domestic danger, he acted firmly and ruthlessly, such as the Lollard discontent in January 1414 and including the execution by burning of Henry's old friend Sir John Oldcastle in 1417 to "nip the movement in the bud" and make his own position as ruler secure.[14]
Henry's reign was generally free from serious trouble at home. The exception was the Southampton Plot in favour of Mortimer,[14] involving Henry, Baron Scrope, and Richard, Earl of Cambridge (grandfather of the future King Edward IV), in July 1415. Mortimer himself remained loyal to the King.
Starting in August 1417, Henry promoted the use of the English language in government[24] and his reign marks the appearance of Chancery Standard English as well as the adoption of English as the language of record within government. He was the first king to use English in his personal correspondence since the Norman conquest 350 years earlier.[25][26]
Henry could now turn his attention to foreign affairs. A writer of the next generation was the first to allege that Henry was encouraged by ecclesiastical statesmen to enter into the French war as a means of diverting attention from home troubles. This story seems to have no foundation. Old commercial disputes and the support the French had lent to Owain Glyndŵr were used as an excuse for war, while the disordered state of France afforded no security for peace.[14] King Charles VI of France was prone to mental illness; at times he thought he was made of glass, and his eldest surviving son was an unpromising prospect. However, it was the old dynastic claim to the throne of France, first pursued by Edward III of England, that justified war with France in English opinion.
War in France
Henry may have regarded the assertion of his own claims as part of his royal duty, but a permanent settlement of the national debate was essential to the success of his foreign policy. Following the instability back in England during the reign of King Richard II, the war in France came to a halt, as during most of his reign relations between England and France were largely peaceful and so was during his father's reign as well. But in 1415, hostilities continued between the two nations and since Henry had a claim to the French throne, through his great–grandfather King Edward III by his mother's side, this claim was ultimately rejected by the French as its nobles pointed out that under the Salic law of the Franks, women were forbidden from inheriting the throne. Thus the throne went to a distant male–relative of a cadet of branch of the House of Capet, Philip VI of France, resulting in the Hundred Year's War in 1337. Wanting to claim the French throne for himself, Henry resumed the war against France in 1415. This would lead to one of England's most successful military campaigns during the whole conflict and would result in one of the most decisive victories for an English army during this time period.[14]
1415 campaign
On 12 August 1415, Henry sailed for France, where his forces besieged the fortress at Harfleur, capturing it on 22 September. Afterwards, he decided to march with his army across the French countryside toward Calais despite the warnings of his council.[27] On 25 October, on the plains near the village of Agincourt, a French army intercepted his route. Despite his men-at-arms' being exhausted, outnumbered and malnourished, Henry led his men into battle, decisively defeating the French, who suffered severe losses. It is often argued[by whom?] that the French men-at-arms were bogged down in the muddy battlefield, soaked from the previous night of heavy rain, and that this hindered the French advance, allowing them to be sitting targets for the flanking English archers. Most were simply hacked to death while completely stuck in the deep mud. Nevertheless, the victory is seen as Henry's greatest,[weasel words] ranking alongside the Battle of Crécy (1346) and the Battle of Poitiers (1356) as the greatest English victories of the Hundred Years' War. This victory both solidified and strengthened Henry V's own rule in England and it also legitimized his claim to the French throne more than ever.[28]
During the battle,[29] Henry ordered that the French prisoners taken during the battle be put to death, including some of the most illustrious who could have been used for ransom. Cambridge historian Brett Tingley posits that Henry was concerned that the prisoners might turn on their captors when the English were busy repelling a third wave of enemy troops, thus jeopardizing a hard-fought victory.[citation needed]
The victorious[weasel words] conclusion of Agincourt, from the English viewpoint, was only the first step in the campaign to recover the French possessions that he felt belonged to the English crown. Agincourt also held out the promise that Henry's pretensions to the French throne might be realized. After the victory, Henry marched to Calais and besieged the city until it fell soon afterwards, and the king returned to England on November, in triumph and received a hero's welcome. The brewing nationalistic sentiment among the English people was so great that contemporary writers describe firsthand how Henry was welcomed in such triumphal pageantry into London upon his return. The accounts also describe how Henry was greeted by elaborate displays and with choirs following his passage to the St.Paul's Cathedral.[30]
Most importantly, the victory at Agincourt inspired and boosted the English morale, while it caused a heavy blow to the French as it further aided the English in their conquest of Normandy and much of northern France by 1419. The French, who by this stage, were weakened and exhausted by the disaster, began quarrelling and fighting among themselves (especially the nobility). This also led to a division in the French aristocracy and caused a rift in the French royal family, leading to infighting. By 1420, a treaty was signed between Henry V and Charles VI of France, known as the Treaty of Troyes, which acknowledged Henry as regent and heir to the French throne and also married him to his daughter, Princess Catherine of Valois as a result of the treaty.[31]
Diplomacy
Following the Battle of Agincourt, King Sigismund of Hungary (later Holy Roman Emperor) made a visit to Henry in hopes of making peace between England and France. His goal was to persuade Henry to modify his demands against the French. Henry lavishly entertained him and even had him enrolled in the Order of the Garter. Sigismund, in turn, inducted Henry into the Order of the Dragon.[32] Henry had intended to crusade for the order after uniting the English and French thrones, but he died before fulfilling his plans.[33][34][35] Sigismund left England several months later, having signed the Treaty of Canterbury acknowledging English claims to France.
Command of the sea was secured by driving the Genoese allies of the French out of the English Channel.[14] While Henry was occupied with peace negotiations in 1416, a French and Genoese fleet surrounded the harbour at the English-garrisoned Harfleur. A French land force also besieged the town. In March 1416 a raiding force of soldiers under the Earl of Dorset, Thomas Beaufort, was attacked and narrowly escaped defeat at the Battle of Valmont after a counterattack by the garrison of Harfleur. To relieve the town, Henry sent his brother, John, Duke of Bedford, who raised a fleet and set sail from Beachy Head on 14 August. The Franco-Genoese fleet was defeated the following day after the gruelling seven-hour Battle of the Seine[36] and Harfleur was relieved. Diplomacy successfully detached Emperor Sigismund from supporting France, and the Treaty of Canterbury—also signed in August 1416—confirmed a short-lived alliance between England and the Holy Roman Empire.
1417–1421 campaigns
With those two potential enemies gone, and after two years of patient preparation following the Battle of Agincourt, Henry renewed the war on a larger scale in 1417. After taking Caen, he quickly conquered Lower Normandy and Rouen was cut off from Paris and besieged. This siege has cast an even darker shadow on the reputation of the king, along with his order to slay the French prisoners at Agincourt. Rouen, starving and unable to support the women and children of the town, forced them out through the gates believing that Henry would allow them to pass through his army unmolested (note. e.g. without added contention, defacement, injury, desecration, desanctification, complication, use, return, etc.). However, Henry refused to allow this, and the expelled women and children died of starvation in the ditches surrounding the town. The French were paralysed by the disputes between Burgundians and Armagnacs. Henry skilfully played one against the other without relaxing his warlike approach.[14]
In January 1419, Rouen fell.[14] Those Norman French who had resisted were severely punished: Alain Blanchard, who had hanged English prisoners from the walls of Rouen, was summarily executed; Robert de Livet, Canon of Rouen, who had excommunicated the English king, was packed off to England and imprisoned for five years.[37]
By August, the English were outside the walls of Paris. The intrigues of the French parties culminated in the assassination of John the Fearless, Duke of Burgundy, by Dauphin Charles's partisans at Montereau-Fault-Yonne on 10 September. Philip the Good, the new duke, and the French court threw themselves into Henry's arms. After six months of negotiation, the Treaty of Troyes recognised Henry as the heir and regent of France.[14] On 2 June 1420 at Troyes Cathedral, he married Catherine of Valois, the French king's daughter. They had only one son, Henry, born on 6 December 1421 at Windsor Castle. From June to July 1420, King Henry's army besieged and took the military fortress castle at Montereau-Fault-Yonne close to Paris. He besieged and captured Melun in November 1420, returning to England shortly thereafter. In 1428, Charles VII retook Montereau, to once again see the English take it over within a short time. Finally, on 10 October 1437, Charles VII was victorious in regaining Montereau-Fault-Yonne.
While Henry was in England, his brother Thomas, Duke of Clarence, led the English forces in France. On 22 March 1421, Thomas led the English to a disastrous defeat at the Battle of Baugé against a Franco-Scottish army. The duke was killed in the battle. On 10 June, Henry sailed back to France to retrieve the situation. It was to be his last military campaign. From July to August, Henry's forces besieged and captured Dreux, thus relieving allied forces at Chartres. On 6 October, his forces laid siege to Meaux, capturing it on 11 May 1422.
Death
Henry V died on 31 August 1422 at the Château de Vincennes.[38] The commonly held view is that Henry V contracted dysentery in the period just after the Siege of Meaux, which ended on 9 May 1422. However the symptoms and severity of dysentery present themselves fairly quickly and he seems to have been healthy in the weeks following the siege. At the time speculative causes of his illness also included smallpox, the bacterial infection erysipelas and even leprosy. But there is no doubt he had contracted a serious illness sometime between May and June. Recovering at the castle of Vincennes, by the end of June it seems he was well enough to lead his forces with the intent of engaging the Dauphinist forces at Cosne-sur-Loire. At the outset, he would have been riding in full armour, probably in blistering heat, as the summer of 1422 was extremely hot. He was struck down again, with a debilitating fever, possibly heatstroke, or a relapse of his previous illness. Whatever the cause or causes, he would not recover from this final bout of illness. For a few short weeks he was carried around in a litter, and his enemies having retreated, he decided to return to Paris. One story has of him trying, one last time, to mount a horse at Charenton and failing. He was taken back to Vincennes, around 10 August, where he died some weeks later. He was 35 years old and had reigned for nine years. Shortly before his death, Henry V named his brother, John, Duke of Bedford, regent of France in the name of his son, Henry VI of England, then only a few months old. Henry V did not live to be crowned King of France himself, as he might confidently have expected after the Treaty of Troyes, because Charles VI, to whom he had been named heir, survived him by two months.
Henry's comrade-in-arms and Lord Steward, John Sutton, 1st Baron Dudley, brought Henry's body back to England and bore the royal standard at his funeral.[39] Henry V was buried in Westminster Abbey on 7 November 1422.[38] An exhumation in 1953, in which it appeared that Henry V shared a grave with Richard Courtenay, led to speculation that Henry and Courtenay had been lovers.[40] However, Courtenay's grave was found in the base of Henry's chantry, perchance disturbed when the king's memorial was built.[41] Henry's last will and codicils, which gave specific instructions on how he should be buried, made no mention of a co-burial with anyone else.[42]
Legacy
Reputation
King Henry V's death was premature as he was set to rule both kingdoms of England and France after Charles VI's death, which occurred two months after Henry died in August 1422. This resulted in the unexpected succession of his infant son, Henry VI, that year. Henry V's demise meant that England was ruled by an infant, which led to a regency formed by Henry's brothers, John, Duke of Bedford and Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester. Although for a time this was largely proved to be a success, during the later reign of Henry VI most of the territories captured by the English were lost to the French and English military power in the region ceased to exist. This brought an end to almost all the English army's success in the Hundred Years' War and their possessions in France were lost. Later, Henry's heirs would descend into civil strife and quarrels in the following years, leading to the War of the Roses between Henry V's House of Lancaster and its rival, the House of York, in 1454. [43]
Despite this, Henry V is remembered both by his countrymen and foes as a capable military commander during the war against France and is one of the most renowned monarchs in English and British history. He is largely seen as a symbol of the English military might and power, which inspired later kings and queens of England. His effect on English history, culture, and the military is profound. His victory at Agincourt significantly impacted the war against the French, and led to the English capturing most of northern France. This led to the Treaty of Troyes in 1420, in which Charles IV of France appointed Henry his successor, although Henry died two months before Charles in October 1422. Henry's victories created a national sensation and caused a patriotic fervour among the English people that would go on influence both medieval English army and the British army for centuries to come. His continuous victories against the French during 1417–1422 led to many romanticized depictions of Henry V as a figure of nationalism and patriotism as well as in literature and in the renowned works of Shakespeare and the film industry as in modern times.[44]
Henry is not only remembered for his military prowess but also for his architectural patronage. He commissioned the building of King's College Chapel and Eton College Chapel and, although some of his building works were discontinued after his death, others were continued by his son and successor Henry VI. He also contributed to the founding of the monastery of the Syon Abbey, completed by Henry VI during his lifetime. Although in the 16th Century, the monastery was demolished as a result of the growing movement of the English Reformation during the reign of King Henry VIII. Henry V further contributed to the church, as he was forced to put down an anti–church uprising in the form of the Lollard uprising led by the English Lollard leader, John Oldcastle in 1414, who had been a friend of Henry V before his rebellion. Henry also faced a coup orchestrated by a relative and prominent noble, Edmund Mortimer in the Southampton Plot. And in 1415 dealt with a Yorkist conspiracy to overthrow him. After this, during the remainder of his reign, Henry was able to rule without any opposition against him.
In popular culture
In literature
Henry V was often a figure of literary imagination and often used as a traditional character of a morally great king in the works of many writers, playwrights and dramatists. This is the case with Henry V's depiction in Henry V a play largely based on the life of Henry V by the famed William Shakespeare. It is one of the plays that were about Richard II, Henry V's father Henry IV and son Henry VI known as the Henriad in Shakespearean scholarship. It depicts the king as a pious but cunning ruler who ventured on a campaign to France to become heir to the French throne. This largely acquainted audiences and the wider population of the king himself and the nature of his character as a whole. [45]
In the other depictions of Henry V in literature, Henry V is a character in William Kenrick's sequel to Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 2, known as Falstaff's Wedding. In the play, Henry V plays a minor role. In Georgette Heyer's Simon the Coldheart Henry also appears as a minor character. In other works, Henry V is the main character such as in Good King Harry by Denise Giardina and in Azincourt by Bernard Cornwell.
In film and television
Henry V was also depicted in many historical films and operas. Such as in Laurence Olivier's 1944 film Henry V played by Olivier himself, for which he was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor.[46] Henry also appears in the 1935 film Royal Cavalcade in which he was played by actor Matheson Lang, Henry V also appears and is played by Kenneth Branagh in the 1989 film Henry V for which he was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actor, Best Director and also for the BAFTA Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role.[47] Henry V appears as a major character played by Keith Baxter in Orson Welles's 1989 film Chimes at Midnight. He is also played by Timothée Chalamet in 2019 Netflix film The King directed by David Michôd. He is portrayed in the BBC television series The Hollow Crown.
In comics and video games
Henry V is a character in the comic series The Hammer Man in the BBC comic strip The Victor featuring him as the commander of the hero, Chell Paddock. King Henry V is a character in the video game Bladestorm: The Hundred Year War and also in the Age of Empires II: The Conquerors in which he was featured as a paladin.
Arms
Henry's arms as Prince of Wales were those of the kingdom, differenced by a label argent of three points.[48] Upon his accession, he inherited use of the arms of the kingdom undifferenced.
Henry's achievement as Prince of Wales
Royal achievement as king
.svg)
.svg)
Marriage
After his father became king, Henry was created Prince of Wales. It was suggested that Henry should marry the widow of Richard II, Isabella of Valois, but this had been refused. After this, negotiations took place for his marriage to Catherine of Pomerania, Countess Palatine of Neumarkt between 1401 and 1404, but ultimately failed.[49]
During the following years, marriage had apparently assumed a lower priority until the conclusion of the Treaty of Troyes in 1420 when Henry V was named heir to Charles VI of France and provided in marriage to Charles's daughter Catherine of Valois, younger sister of Isabella of Valois.[38] Her dowry, upon the agreement between the two kingdoms, was 600,000 crowns.[50] Together the couple had one child, Henry, born in late 1421.[38] Upon Henry V's death in 1422, the infant prince became King Henry VI of England.[38]
Ancestry and family
Descent
| Ancestors of Henry V of England |
|---|
| Family tree of the Earls of Leicester, and Earls of Lancaster and Dukes of Lancaster |
|---|
See also
Footnotes
Bibliography
- Weir (1999), p. 78.
Further reading
Sources
- Allmand, Christopher (2013) [1968]. Henry V. Association Pamphlets, General Series. Vol. 68 (revised ed.). London: Historical Association.
- Cowper, Marcus (10 September 2010). Henry V. Command. Vol. 8. Illustrated by Graham Turner. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84908-370-6.
- Curry, Anne. Henry V: From Playboy Prince to Warrior King.
- Dockray, Keith (2001). Warrior King: The Life of Henry V. Tempus Publishing. ISBN 978-0-7524-3046-1.
- Earle, Peter (1972). The Life and Times of Henry V. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. ISBN 978-0-297-99428-2.
- Hutchinson, Harold Frederick (1967). Henry V: A Biography. London: Eyre & Spottiswoode.
- Kingsford, Charles (1891). . In Stephen, Leslie; Lee, Sidney (eds.). Dictionary of National Biography. Vol. 26. London: Smith, Elder & Co.
- ——, ed. (1911) [1513]. The First English Life of King Henry the Fifth. Oxford: Clarendon Press. hdl:2027/yale.39002004659539.
- Mortimer, Ian (2009). 1415: Henry V's Year of Glory. London: The Bodley Head. ISBN 978-0-224-07992-1.
- Muir Wilson, I. M. U. (1922). "Henry V of England in France, 1415–1422". The Scottish Historical Review. 20 (77): 34–48. JSTOR 25519493.
- Pollard, A. J. (Anthony James) (3 February 2014). Henry V. Stroud: The History Press. ISBN 978-0-7524-9763-1.
- Ripley, George & Dana, Charles A., eds. (1879). "Henry V". American Cyclopædia (2nd ed.). New York: D. Appleton & Company. Vol. 8. pp. 644–646.
- Seward, Desmond (1987). Henry V as Warlord. Harmondsworth.
- Wylie, James H. & Waugh, William Templeton (1914–1929). The Reign of Henry V. Cambridge University Press.
External links
- Henry V (biography), Archontology, retrieved 28 November 2009
- "Henry V", BBC
- Henry V (official website), UK: British Monarchy.
- "Henry V Biography", Who2
- Fernandez-Armesto, Felipe (17 February 2011), "The Myth of Henry V", BBC
- Tyler, J Endell, Henry of Monmouth: Memoirs of Henry the Fifth, Project Gutenberg.
- BBC Radio 4 Great Lives on Henry V – listen online: "Henry V", BBC Radio 4, Great Lives
- Henry V of England
- 1386 births
- 1422 deaths
- 14th-century English nobility
- 15th-century English nobility
- 15th-century English monarchs
- Alumni of The Queen's College, Oxford
- Burials at Westminster Abbey
- Deaths from dysentery
- Dukes of Cornwall
- Dukes of Lancaster
- English people of French descent
- English pretenders to the French throne
- English Roman Catholics
- High Sheriffs of Cornwall
- House of Lancaster
- House of Valois
- Infectious disease deaths in France
- Knights of the Garter
- Lords Warden of the Cinque Ports
- Male Shakespearean characters
- Order of the Dragon
- People from Monmouth, Wales
- People of the Hundred Years' War
- Princes of Wales
- Regents of France
- Sons of kings
- Children of Henry IV of England
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_V_of_England
List of Hundred Years' War battles
This is a list of major battles in the Hundred Years' War, a conflict between France and England that lasted 116 years from 1337 to 1453. There are 62 of them.
| Year | Battle | Victor | Details | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1337 | Battle of Cadzand | .svg){kind=small} England
|
| |
| 1338 | Battle of Arnemuiden |  France
|
The first naval battle using artillery, as the English ship Christofer had three cannons and one hand gun. | |
| 1340 | Battle of Sluys | England
|
24 June Edward III destroys the Franco-Genoese fleet of Philip VI of France off the coast of Flanders ensuring England will not be invaded and that the majority of the war will be fought in France. | |
| 1340 | Battle of Saint-Omer | France
|
The battle of Saint-Omer was the culmination of the northern fork of Edward's campaign and resulted in a tactical stalemate but forced a strategic withdrawal for the Anglo-Flemish forces. | |
| 1340 | Siege of Tournai (1340) | France
|
Tournai was relieved. |
|
| 1341 | Battle of Champtoceaux | France
|
| |
| 1342 | Battle of Brest | England
|
| |
| 1342 | Battle of Morlaix | France
| ||
| 1345, August | Battle of Bergerac | England
|
English attack by Earl of Derby against a French army moving towards Bergerac from Montcoq in Gascony. After a running battle, the English stormed the city and sacked it, taking many prisoners and goods. The French reported heavy losses. | |
| 1345, October | Battle of Auberoche | England
|
English surprise attack by Earl of Derby against a French army at Auberoche in Gascony.[1] | |
| 1346 | Battle of St Pol de Léon | England
|
| |
| 1346 | Battle of Caen | England
|
Caen was sacked. | |
| 1346 | Battle of Blanchetaque | England
|
English army successfully forded the river. | |
| 1346 | Battle of Crécy | England
|
26 August English longbowmen soundly defeat French cavalry near the river Somme in Picardy.An estimated 4,000 French are killed. | |
| 1346 | Battle of Neville's Cross | England
|
| |
| 1346–1347 | Siege of Calais | England
|
On 1 August 1347, the city surrendered. Edward allowed the surviving citizenry to live, so, after providing them with some provisions, he allowed them to leave the city. | |
| 1347 | Battle of La Roche-Derrien | England
|
Smaller English force defeated a French force 4-5 times larger, featuring the leadership of Sir Thomas Dagworth.[2] | |
| 1350 | Les Espagnols sur Mer | England
|
English fleet defeats Castilian fleet in a close fight. | |
| 1351 | Capture of Saint-Jean-d'Angély | France
|
| |
| 1351 | Battle of Ardres | France
|
| |
| 1351 | Combat of the Thirty | France
|
Thirty French Knights from Chateau Josselin under Beaumanoir call out and defeat thirty English Knights under Pembroke and Robert Bramborough. | |
| 1352 | Battle of Mauron | France
|
10 August, small victory of Brittany-French forces against Brittany-English ones. | |
| 1353 | Capture of Lusignan | France
|
| |
| 1353 | Battle of Comborn | England
|
| |
| 1354 | Battle of Montmuran | France
|
Easter 1354, victory of Brittany-French forces against English ones. | |
| 1356 | Battle of Poitiers | England
|
Edward the Black Prince captures King John II of France, France plunged into chaos. | |
| 1364 | Battle of Cocherel | France
|
16 May, near Houlbec-Cocherel, victory of Brittany-Burgundy-Gascony forces against Navarrese-English ones. | |
| 1364 | Battle of Auray | England
|
29 September, end of Breton War of Succession Du Guesclin captured. | |
| 1367 | Battle of Nájera (Navarette) | England
|
Black Prince defeats a Castilian / French army at Nájera in Castile. | |
| 1369 | Battle of Montiel | France
|
14 March, in Castille, Castilian / French army defeats a Castilian / Portuguese force. | |
| 1370 | Siege of Limoges | England
|
| |
| 1370 | Battle of Pontvallain | France
|
4 December, the Brittany-French army defeats English forces. | |
| 1372 | Battle of La Rochelle | .svg){kind=small} Castille
|
Castilian fleet defeats the English fleet, leading to loss of dominance at sea and French piracy and coastal raids. | |
| 1373 | Battle of Chiset | France
|
| |
| 1382 | Battle of Roosebeke |  France
|
27 November, a French-Burgundy-Brittany-Norman army defeats a Flemish force twice more numerous. | |
| 1383 | Siege of Ypres | France
|
8 June - 8 August, occurs during Despenser's Crusade. The English are routed. | |
| 1385 | English invasion of Scotland | England
|
July, Jean de Vienne, having successfully strengthened the French naval situation, lands an army in Scotland, but is forced to retreat. | |
| 1385 | Battle of Aljubarrota |  Portugal
|
14 August, heavy defeat of Franco-Castilian forces by Portugal, strengthened by English longbowmen. Marks the end of 1383–1385 Portuguese interregnum. | |
| 1387 | Battle of Margate | England
|
English fleet defeats Franco-Castilian-Flemish fleet, ending the threat of a French invasion of England. | |
| 1404 | Battle of Blackpool Sands | .svg){kind=small} England
|
| |
| 1415 | Siege of Harfleur | England
|
| |
| 1415 | Battle of Agincourt | England
|
25 October, English longbowmen under Henry V defeat French under Charles I d'Albret. 6000 French died. 400 English died. | |
| 1418–1419 | Siege of Rouen | England
|
31 July - 19 January 1419, Henry V of England re-gains a foothold in Normandy. | |
| 1419 | Battle of La Rochelle | Castille
|
Castilian fleet defeats the English fleet. | |
| 1420 | Battle of Fresnay | England
|
3 March, the Battle resulted in the defeat of a large Franco-Scottish army. | |
| 1421 | Battle of Baugé | France
|
22 March, the French and Scottish forces of Charles VII commanded by the Earl of Buchan defeat an outmanoeuvred English force commanded by the Henry V's brother, the Duke of Clarence, who is killed, forcing Henry to return to France where he will die. | |
| 1422 | Siege of Meaux | England
|
Henry V falls ill during the siege. He is taken to Chateau de Vincennes, where he dies aged 35yrs | |
| 1423 | Battle of Cravant | .svg){kind=small} England
|
31 July, the French and Scottish army is defeated at Cravant on the banks of the river Yonne. | |
| 1423 | Battle of La Brossinière | France
|
26 September, Brittany-French forces annihilates an English army. | |
| 1424 | Battle of Verneuil | England
|
17 August, the French and Scottish forces are decisively defeated in what becomes a ’second Agincourt’ for the French. | |
| 1426 | Battle of St. James | England
|
6 March, a French besieging army under Arthur de Richemont was dispersed by a small force under Sir Thomas Rempstone in Brittany. | |
| 1428 | Siege of Orléans | France
|
12 October - 8 May 1429 English forces commanded by the Earl of Salisbury, the Earl of Suffolk, and Talbot (Earl of Shrewsbury) lay siege to Orleans, and are forced to withdraw after a relief army accompanied by Joan of Arc arrives at the city. | |
| 1429 | Battle of the Herrings | England
|
English force under Sir John Fastolf defeats French and Scottish armies. | |
| 1429 | Battle of Jargeau | France
|
12 June. French forces recaptured the neighboring district along the Loire river. The English suffered heavy losses. | |
| 1429 | Battle of Meung-sur-Loire | France
|
| |
| 1429 | Battle of Beaugency | France
|
English surrendered the town. | |
| 1429 | Battle of Patay | France
|
18 June, a French army under La Hire, Richemont, Joan of Arc, and other commanders break through English archers under Lord Talbot and then pursue and mop up the other sections of the English army, killing or capturing about half (2,200) of their troops. The Earl of Shrewsbury (Talbot) and Hungerford are captured. | |
| 1430 | Siege of Compiègne | France
|
Otherwise a minor siege, both politically and militarily, and ultimately ended in a defeat for the Burgundians, the capture of Joan of Arc was an important event of this phase of the war. | |
| 1435 | Battle of Gerberoy | France
|
La Hire defeats an English force under Arundel. | |
| 1449 | Battle of Rouen | France
|
29 October, Rouen is regained from the English by a Brittany-French force. | |
| 1450 | Battle of Formigny | France
|
A French force under the duke of Bourbon and Richemont defeats an English force under Thomas Kyriell. 3,774 English deaths and 1,500 captured. Thomas Kyriel, the English general, was captured in action. | |
| 1453 | Battle of Castillon | France
|
A French army, under Jean Bureau, defeats an English army under John Talbot to end the Hundred Years' War. This was also the first battle in European history where the use of cannon was a major factor in determining the victor. John Talbot was killed in action. 4,000 English killed in this battle. |
References
- ThePostgradChronicles (2018-02-06). "Death, Treachery, & a Victory Against the Odds: Sir Thomas Dagworth & the Battle of la Roche Derrien". The Postgrad Chronicles. Retrieved 2021-05-10.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Hundred_Years%27_War_battles
| Battle of Crécy | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of the Crécy campaign during the Hundred Years' War | |||||||
 The Battle of Crécy, from a 15th-century illuminated manuscript of Jean Froissart's Chronicles | |||||||
| |||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||
|
Kingdom of England | |||||||
| Commanders and leaders | |||||||
| Strength | |||||||
| 7,000–15,000 |
20,000–30,000 • 8,000 men-at-arms • 2,000–6,000 crossbowmen • Unknown infantry | ||||||
| Casualties and losses | |||||||
| 40–300 killed | At least 4,000 killed, including 1,542 nobles | ||||||
  Crécy | |||||||
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
Location of the battle within France |
The Battle of Crécy took place on 26 August 1346 in northern France between a French army commanded by King Philip VI and an English army led by King Edward III. The French attacked the English while they were traversing northern France during the Hundred Years' War, resulting in an English victory and heavy loss of life among the French.
The English army had landed in the Cotentin Peninsula on 12 July. It had burnt a path of destruction through some of the richest lands in France to within 2 miles (3 km) of Paris, sacking many towns on the way. The English then marched north, hoping to link up with an allied Flemish army which had invaded from Flanders. Hearing that the Flemish had turned back, and having temporarily outdistanced the pursuing French, Edward had his army prepare a defensive position on a hillside near Crécy-en-Ponthieu. Late on 26 August the French army, which greatly outnumbered the English, attacked.
During a brief archery duel a large force of French mercenary crossbowmen was routed by Welsh and English longbowmen. The French then launched a series of cavalry charges by their mounted knights. These were disordered by their impromptu nature, by having to force their way through the fleeing crossbowmen, by the muddy ground, by having to charge uphill, and by the pits dug by the English. The attacks were further broken up by the effective fire from the English archers, which caused heavy casualties. By the time the French charges reached the English men-at-arms, who had dismounted for the battle, they had lost much of their impetus. The ensuing hand-to-hand combat was described as "murderous, without pity, cruel, and very horrible." The French charges continued late into the night, all with the same result: fierce fighting followed by a French retreat.
The English then laid siege to the port of Calais. The battle crippled the French army's ability to relieve the siege; the town fell to the English the following year and remained under English rule for more than two centuries, until 1558. Crécy established the effectiveness of the longbow as a dominant weapon on the Western European battlefield.
Background
Since the Norman Conquest of 1066, English monarchs had held titles and lands within France, the possession of which made them vassals of the kings of France.[1] Following a series of disagreements between Philip VI of France (r. 1328–1350) and Edward III of England (r. 1327–1377), on 24 May 1337 Philip's Great Council in Paris agreed that the lands held by Edward in France should be taken back into Philip's hands on the grounds that Edward was in breach of his obligations as a vassal. This marked the start of the Hundred Years' War, which was to last 116 years.[2]
There followed eight years of intermittent but expensive and inconclusive warfare: Edward campaigned three times in northern France to no effect;[3] Gascony was left almost entirely to its own devices and the French made significant inroads in attritional warfare.[4] In early 1345 Edward attempted another campaign in the north; his main army sailed on 29 June and anchored off Sluys in Flanders until 22 July, while Edward attended to diplomatic affairs.[5] When it sailed, probably intending to land in Normandy, it was scattered by a storm. There were further delays and it proved impossible to take any action with this force before winter.[6] Meanwhile, Henry, Earl of Derby, led a whirlwind campaign through Gascony at the head of an Anglo-Gascon army.[7] He heavily defeated two large French armies at the battles of Bergerac and Auberoche, captured more than 100 French towns and fortifications in Périgord and Agenais and gave the English possessions in Gascony strategic depth.[8]
In March 1346 a French army numbering between 15,000 and 20,000,[9] "enormously superior" to any force the Anglo-Gascons could field, including all the military officers of the royal household,[10] and commanded by John, Duke of Normandy, the son and heir of Philip VI, marched on Gascony. They besieged the strategically and logistically important town of Aiguillon.[11] On 2 April the arrière-ban, the formal call to arms for all able-bodied males, was announced for the south of France.[9][12] French financial, logistical and manpower efforts were focused on this offensive.[13] Derby, now Lancaster,[note 1] sent an urgent appeal for help to Edward.[14] Edward was not only morally obliged to succour his vassal but contractually required to; his indenture with Lancaster stated that if Lancaster were attacked by overwhelming numbers, then Edward "shall rescue him in one way or another".[15]
Meanwhile, Edward was raising a fresh army, and assembled more than 700 vessels to transport it – the largest English fleet ever to that date.[16][17] The French were aware of Edward's efforts, and to guard against the possibility of an English landing in northern France, relied on their powerful navy.[18] This reliance was misplaced, and the French were unable to prevent Edward successfully crossing the Channel.[18]
Prelude
The English landed at Saint-Vaast-la-Hougue, Normandy, on 12 July 1346. They achieved complete strategic surprise and marched south.[19] Edward's soldiers razed every town in their path and looted whatever they could from the populace. Caen, the cultural, political, religious and financial centre of north west Normandy, was stormed on 26 July and subsequently looted for five days. More than 5,000 French soldiers and civilians were killed; among the few prisoners was Raoul, Count of Eu, the Constable of France. On 29 July Edward sent his fleet back to England, laden with loot, with a letter ordering that reinforcements, supplies and money be collected, embarked and loaded respectively, and sent to rendezvous with his army at Crotoy, on the north bank of the mouth of the River Somme.[20][21] The English marched out towards the River Seine on 1 August.[22]
The French military position was difficult. Their main army, commanded by John, Duke of Normandy, the son and heir of Philip VI, was committed to the intractable siege of Aiguillon in the south west. After his surprise landing in Normandy, Edward was devastating some of the richest land in France and flaunting his ability to march at will through France. On 2 August, a small English force supported by many Flemings invaded France from Flanders; French defences there were completely inadequate. The treasury was all but empty. On 29 July, Philip proclaimed the arrière-ban for northern France, ordering every able-bodied male to assemble at Rouen, where Philip himself arrived on the 31st.[23][24] On 7 August, the English reached the Seine, 12 miles (19 km) south of Rouen, and turned south-east. By 12 August, Edward's army was encamped at Poissy, 20 miles (30 km) from Paris, having left a 20-mile-wide swathe of destruction down the left bank of the Seine,[25] burning villages to within 2 miles (3 km) of Paris.[26][27] Philip's army marched parallel to the English on the other bank, and in turn encamped north of Paris, where it was steadily reinforced. Paris was in uproar, swollen with refugees, and preparations were made to defend the capital street by street.[28]
Philip sent orders to Duke John of Normandy insisting that he abandon the siege of Aiguillon and march his army north, which after delay and vacillation he did on 20 August – though he would ultimately not arrive in time to change the course of events in the north.[29] The French army outside Paris consisted of some 8,000 men-at-arms, 6,000 crossbowmen, and many infantry levies. Philip sent a challenge on 14 August suggesting that the two armies do battle at a mutually agreed time and place in the area. Edward indicated that he would meet Philip to the south of the Seine, without actually committing himself. On 16 August the French moved into position; Edward promptly burnt down Poissy, destroyed the bridge there, and marched north.[30][31]
The French had carried out a scorched earth policy, carrying away all stores of food and so forcing the English to spread out over a wide area to forage, which greatly slowed them. Bands of French peasants attacked some of the smaller groups of foragers. Philip reached the River Somme a day's march ahead of Edward. He based himself at Amiens and sent large detachments to hold every bridge and ford across the Somme between Amiens and the sea. The English were now trapped in an area which had been stripped of food. The French moved out of Amiens and advanced westwards, towards the English. They were now willing to give battle, knowing they would have the advantage of being able to stand on the defensive while the English were forced to try to fight their way past them.[32]
Edward was determined to break the French blockade of the Somme[33] and probed at several points, vainly attacking Hangest and Pont-Remy before moving west along the river. English supplies were running out and the army was ragged, starving and beginning to suffer from a drop in morale.[34] On the evening of 24 August the English were encamped north of Acheux while the French were 6 miles (10 km) away at Abbeville. During the night the English marched on a tidal ford named Blanchetaque. The far bank was defended by a force of 3,500 French. English longbowmen and mounted men-at-arms waded into the tidal river and after a short, sharp fight routed the French. The main French army had followed the English, and their scouts captured some stragglers and several wagons, but Edward had broken free of immediate pursuit. Such was the French confidence that Edward would not ford the Somme that the area beyond had not been denuded, allowing Edward's army to plunder it and resupply.[35][36]
Meanwhile, the Flemings, having been rebuffed by the French at Estaires, besieged Béthune on 14 August. After several setbacks they fell out among themselves, burnt their siege equipment and gave up their expedition on 24 August.[37] Edward received the news that he would not be reinforced by the Flemings shortly after crossing the Somme. The ships which were expected to be waiting off Crotoy were nowhere to be seen. Edward decided to engage Philip's army with the force he had. Having temporarily shaken off the French pursuit, he used the respite to prepare a defensive position at Crécy-en-Ponthieu.[36] The French returned to Abbeville, crossed the Somme at the bridge there, and doggedly set off after the English again.[38]
Opposing forces
English army
The English army comprised almost exclusively English and Welsh soldiers, along with a handful of Normans disaffected with Philip VI and a few German mercenaries, the foreigners constituting probably no more than 150 in number.[39] The exact size and composition of the English force is not known. Contemporary estimates vary widely; for example Froissart's third version of his Chronicles more than doubles his estimate in the first.[40] Modern historians have estimated its size as from 7,000 to 15,000.[41] Andrew Ayton suggests a figure of around 14,000: 2,500 men-at-arms, 5,000 longbowmen, 3,000 hobelars (light cavalry and mounted archers) and 3,500 spearmen.[42] Clifford Rogers suggests 15,000: 2,500 men-at-arms, 7,000 longbowmen, 3,250 hobelars and 2,300 spearmen.[43] Jonathan Sumption, going by the carrying capacity of its original transport fleet, believes the force was around 7,000 to 10,000.[44] Up to a thousand men were convicted felons serving on the promise of a pardon at the end of the campaign.[45][46] Many of the English, including many of the felons, were veterans; perhaps as many as half.[47][48]
The men-at-arms of both armies wore a quilted gambeson under mail armour which covered the body and limbs. This was supplemented by varying amounts of plate armour on the body and limbs, more so for wealthier and more experienced men. Heads were protected by bascinets: open-faced iron or steel helmets, with mail attached to the lower edge of the helmet to protect the throat, neck and shoulders. A moveable visor (face guard) protected the face. Heater shields, typically made from thin wood overlaid with leather, were carried. The English men-at-arms were all dismounted. The weapons they used are not recorded, but in similar battles they used their lances as pikes, cut them down to use as short spears, or fought with swords and battle axes.[49][50][51][52]
The longbow used by the English and Welsh archers was unique to them; it took up to ten years to master and could discharge up to ten arrows per minute well over 300 metres (980 ft).[note 2] A computer analysis in 2017 demonstrated that heavy bodkin point arrows could penetrate typical plate armour of the time at 225 metres (738 ft). The depth of penetration would be slight at that range; predicted penetration increased as the range closed or against armour of less than the best quality available at the time.[53][note 3] Contemporary sources speak of arrows frequently piercing armour.[54] Archers carried one quiver of 24 arrows as standard. During the morning of the battle, they were each issued two more quivers, for a total of 72 arrows per man. This was sufficient for perhaps fifteen minutes' shooting at the maximum rate, although as the battle wore on the rate would slow. Regular resupply of ammunition would be required from the wagons to the rear; the archers would also venture forward during pauses in the fighting to retrieve arrows.[55] Modern historians suggest that half a million arrows could have been shot during the battle.[56][57]
The English army was also equipped with several types of gunpowder weapons, in unknown numbers: small guns firing lead balls; ribauldequins firing either metal arrows or grapeshot; and bombards, an early form of cannon firing metal balls 80–90 millimetres (3+1⁄4–3+5⁄8 in) in diameter. Contemporary accounts and modern historians differ as to what types of these weapons and how many were present at Crécy, but several iron balls compatible with the bombard ammunition have since been retrieved from the site of the battle.[58][59][60]
French army
The exact size of the French army is even less certain, as the financial records from the Crécy campaign are lost, although there is consensus that it was substantially larger than the English. Contemporary chroniclers all note it as being extremely large for the period. The two who provide totals estimate its size as 72,000 or 120,000. The numbers of mounted men-at-arms are given as either 12,000 or 20,000.[61] An Italian chronicler claimed 100,000 knights (men-at-arms), 12,000 infantry and 5,000 crossbowmen.[62] Contemporary chroniclers estimated the crossbowmen present as between 2,000 and 20,000.[63]
These numbers are described by historians as exaggerated and unrealistic, on the basis of the extant war treasury records for 1340, six years before the battle.[64] Clifford Rogers estimates "the French host was at least twice as large as the [English], and perhaps as much as three times."[65] According to modern estimates, 8,000 mounted men-at-arms formed the core of the French army,[65] supported by two to six thousand mercenary crossbowmen recruited by and hired from the major trading city of Genoa,[note 4] and a "large, though indeterminate, number of common infantry".[68] How many common infantrymen, militia and levies of variable levels of equipment and training, were present is not known with any certainty, except that on their own they outnumbered the English army.[69][68]
The French men-at-arms were equipped similarly to the English.[50] They were mounted on entirely unarmoured horses and carried wooden lances, usually ash, tipped with iron and approximately 4 metres (13 ft) long.[70] Many of the men-at-arms in the French army were foreigners: many joined individually out of a spirit of adventure and the attractive rates of pay offered.[71] Others were in contingents contributed by Philip's allies: three kings, a prince-bishop, a duke and three counts led entourages from non-French territories.[72]
Since Philip came to the throne, French armies had included an increasing proportion of crossbowmen.[73] As there were few archers in France, they were usually recruited from abroad, typically Genoa; their foreign origin led to them frequently being labelled mercenaries.[71] They were professional soldiers and in battle were protected from missiles by pavises – very large shields with their own bearers, behind each of which three crossbowmen could shelter.[73] A trained crossbowman could shoot his weapon approximately twice a minute[74] to a shorter effective range than a longbowman[75] of about 200 metres (220 yd).[76]
Initial deployments
| Blue dots – English archers Blue blocks – other English infantry | Red dots – French crossbowmen Red rectangles – French men-at-arms |
Edward deployed his army in a carefully selected position,[77] facing south east on a sloping hillside, broken by copses and terracing, at Crécy-en-Ponthieu.[78] This was in an area which Edward had inherited from his mother and well known to several of the English; it has been suggested that the position had long been considered a suitable site for a battle.[77][79][80] The left flank was anchored against Wadicourt, while the right was protected by Crécy itself and the River Maye beyond. This made it difficult for the French to outflank them.[40][81] The position had a ready line of retreat in the event that the English were defeated or put under intolerable pressure.[82] While waiting for the French to catch up with them, the English dug pits in front of their positions, intended to disorder attacking cavalry, and set up several primitive gunpowder weapons.[83][84] Edward wished to provoke the French into a mounted charge uphill against his solid infantry formations of dismounted men-at-arms, backed by Welsh spearmen and flanked by archers.[85][86] The army had been in position since dawn, and so was rested[87] and well-fed, giving them an advantage over the French, who did not rest before the battle.[40][81] Having decisively defeated a large French detachment two days before, the English troops' morale was high.[88][89]
The English army was divided in three battalions, or "battles", deployed in a column.[90] The King's son, Edward, Prince of Wales, aided by the earls of Northampton and Warwick (the 'constable' and 'marshal' of the army, respectively), commanded the vanguard[91] with 800 men-at-arms, 2,000 archers and 1,000 foot soldiers including Welsh spearmen.[92] To its left, the other battle was led by the Earl of Arundel,[93] with 800 men-at-arms and 1,200 archers. Behind them, the King commanded the reserve battle, with 700 men-at-arms and 2,000 archers.[94] Each division was composed of men-at-arms in the centre, all on foot, with ranks of spearmen immediately behind them, and with longbowmen on each flank and in a skirmish line to their front.[95][96] Many of the longbowmen were concealed in small woods, or by lying down in ripe wheat.[97] The baggage train was positioned to the rear of the whole army, where it was circled and fortified, to serve as a park for the horses, a defence against any possible attack from the rear and a rallying point in the event of defeat.[40][98]
Around noon on 26 August French scouts, advancing north from Abbeville, came in sight of the English. The crossbowmen, under Antonio Doria and Carlo Grimaldi, formed the French vanguard. Following was a large battle of men-at-arms led by Count Charles of Alençon, Philip's brother, accompanied by the blind King John of Bohemia. The next battle was led by Duke Rudolph of Lorraine and Count Louis of Blois, while Philip commanded the rearguard.[99] As news filtered back that the English had turned to fight, the French contingents sped up, jostling with each other to reach the front of the column. The Italians stayed in the van, while the mounted men-at-arms left their accompanying infantry and wagons behind.[100][101] Discipline was lost; the French were hampered by the absence of their Constable, who was normally responsible for marshalling and leading their army, but who had been captured at Caen.[102][103] Once it halted, men, especially infantry, were continually joining Philip's battle as they marched north west from Abbeville.[95][100]
After reconnoitring the English position, a council of war was held where the senior French officials, who were completely confident of victory, advised an attack, but not until the next day.[104] The army was tired from a 12-mile march, and needed to reorganise so as to be able to attack in strength.[105] It was also known that the Count of Savoy, with more than 500 men-at-arms, was marching to join the French and was nearby.[106] (He intercepted some of the French survivors the day after the battle).[64] Despite this advice, the French attacked later the same afternoon; it is unclear from the contemporary sources whether this was a deliberate choice by Philip, or because too many of the French knights kept pressing forward and the battle commenced against his wishes.[107] Philip's plan was to use the long-range missiles of his crossbowmen to soften up the English infantry and disorder, and possibly dishearten, their formations, so as to allow the accompanying mounted men-at-arms to break into their ranks and rout them.[108][109] Modern historians have generally considered this to have been a practical approach, and one with proven success against other armies.[110]
Battle
Archery duel
.jpg)
The French army moved forward late in the afternoon, unfurling their sacred battle banner, the oriflamme, indicating that no prisoners would be taken.[111][112] As they advanced, a sudden rainstorm broke over the field. The English archers de-strung their bows to avoid the strings becoming slackened. A contemporary account, followed by some modern historians, has the rain weakening the Genoese crossbows' strings, reducing their power and range; other modern historians state that their bowstrings were protected by leather coverings and so the Genoese were as unaffected by the storm as the English archers.[113]
The Genoese engaged the English longbowmen in an archery duel.[114] The longbowmen outranged their opponents[75] and had a rate of fire more than three times greater.[115][116] The crossbowmen were also without their protective pavises, which were still with the French baggage, as were their reserve supplies of ammunition.[109][117][118] The mud also impeded their ability to reload, which required them to press the stirrups of their weapons into the ground, and thus slowed their rate of fire.[113]
The Italians were rapidly defeated and fled;[119] aware of their vulnerability without their pavises, they may have made only a token effort.[120] Modern historians disagree as to how many casualties they suffered; some contemporary sources suggest they may have failed to get off any shots at all, while a recent specialist study of this duel concludes that they hastily shot perhaps two volleys, then withdrew before any real exchange with the English could develop. Italian casualties in this phase of the battle were probably light.[120]
The knights and nobles following in Alençon's division, hampered by the routed mercenaries, hacked at them as they retreated. By most contemporary accounts the crossbowmen were considered cowards at best and more likely traitors,[121] and many of them were killed by the French.[122] The clash of the retreating Genoese and the advancing French cavalry threw the leading battle into disarray. The longbowmen continued to shoot into the massed troops. The discharge of the English bombards added to the confusion, though contemporary accounts differ as to whether they inflicted significant casualties.[116][123]
Cavalry charges
Alençon's battle then launched a cavalry charge. This was disordered by its impromptu nature, by having to force its way through the fleeing Italians, by the muddy ground, by having to charge uphill, and by the pits dug by the English.[124] The attack was further broken up by the heavy and effective shooting from the English archers, which caused many casualties.[125] It is likely the archers preserved their ammunition until they had a reasonable chance of penetrating the French armour, which would be at a range of about 80 metres (260 ft).[126] The armoured French riders had some protection, but their horses were completely unarmoured and were killed or wounded in large numbers.[127] Disabled horses fell, spilling or trapping their riders and causing following ranks to swerve to avoid them and fall into even further disorder.[128] Wounded horses fled across the hillside in panic.[129] By the time the tight formation of English men-at-arms and spearmen received the French charge it had lost much of its impetus.[130]
,_f.152v_-_BL_Cotton_MS_Nero_E_II.jpg)
A contemporary described the hand-to-hand combat which ensued as "murderous, without pity, cruel, and very horrible."[131] Men-at-arms who lost their footing, or who were thrown from wounded horses, were trampled underfoot, crushed by falling horses and bodies and suffocated in the mud. After the battle, many French bodies were recovered with no marks on them. Alençon was among those killed.[132][133][134] The French attack was beaten off. English infantry moved forward to knife the French wounded, loot the bodies and recover arrows.[135][136] Some sources say Edward had given orders that, contrary to custom,[137] no prisoners be taken; outnumbered as he was he did not want to lose fighting men to escorting and guarding captives. In any event, there is no record of any prisoners being taken until the next day, after the battle.[112][138]
Fresh forces of French cavalry moved into position at the foot of the hill and repeated Alençon's charge. They had the same problems as Alençon's force, with the added disadvantage that the ground they were advancing over was littered with dead and wounded horses and men.[125][134] Ayton and Preston write of "long mounds of fallen warhorses and men ... add[ing] significantly to the difficulties facing fresh formations ... as they sought to approach the English position."[128] Nevertheless, they charged home, albeit in such a disordered state that they were again unable to break into the English formation. A prolonged mêlée resulted, with a report that at one point the Prince of Wales was beaten to his knees. One account has the Prince's standard-bearer standing on his banner to prevent its capture. A modern historian has described the fighting as "horrific carnage".[139] Edward sent forward a detachment from his reserve battle to rescue the situation.[140] The French were again repulsed. They came again. The English ranks were thinned, but those in the rear stepped forward to fill the gaps.[131][141]
How many times the French charged is disputed, but they continued late into the night,[95] with the dusk and then dark disorganising the French yet further.[139] All had the same result: fierce fighting followed by a French retreat. In one attack the Count of Blois dismounted his men and had them advance on foot; the Count's body was found on the field.[142] The French nobility stubbornly refused to yield. There was no lack of courage on either side.[139] Famously, blind King John of Bohemia tied his horse's bridle to those of his attendants and galloped into the twilight; all were dragged from their horses and killed.[141][143] There are accounts of entire English battles advancing on occasion to clear away broken French charges milling in front of them, then withdrawing in good order to their original positions.[144]
Philip himself was caught up in the fighting, had two horses killed underneath him, and received an arrow in the jaw.[75] The bearer of the oriflamme was a particular target for the English archers; he was seen to fall but survived, albeit abandoning the sacred banner to be captured.[145] Finally, Philip abandoned the field of battle, although it is unclear why. It was nearly midnight and the battle petered out, with the majority of the French army melting away from the battlefield.[146][147] The English slept where they had fought. The next morning substantial French forces were still arriving on the battlefield, to be charged by the English men-at-arms, now mounted, routed and pursued for miles.[148][149] Their losses alone were reported as several thousand,[150] including the Duke of Lorraine.[151] Meanwhile, a few wounded or stunned Frenchmen were pulled from the heaps of dead men and dying horses and taken prisoner.[152][153]
Casualties
The losses in the battle were highly asymmetrical. All contemporary sources agree that English casualties were very low.[85][154] It was reported that English deaths comprised three or four men-at-arms and a small number of the rank and file, for a total of forty according to a roll-call after the battle.[155][156] It has been suggested by some modern historians that this is too few and that English deaths might have numbered around three hundred.[157][156] To date, only two Englishmen killed at the battle have been identified;[158] two English knights were also taken prisoner, although it is unclear at what stage in the battle this happened.[157]
The French casualties are considered to have been very high.[154][159] According to a count made by the English heralds after the battle, the bodies of 1,542 French noble men-at-arms were found (perhaps not including the hundreds who died in the clash of the following day).[160][153][154] More than 2,200 heraldic coats were reportedly taken from the field of battle as war booty by the English.[160] No such count was made of the lower-born foot soldiers, as their equipment was not worth looting.[154] No reliable figures exist for losses among them, although their casualties were also considered to have been heavy, and a large number were said to have been wounded with arrows.[156] The dead on the second day of battle alone were said to have been exceptionally numerous, with estimates varying from 2,000 to, according to Edward III himself, 4,000.[161]
A disproportionate number of magnates featured among the slain on the French side, including one king (John of Bohemia), nine princes, ten counts, a duke, an archbishop and a bishop.[39][162] According to Ayton, these heavy losses can also be attributed to the chivalric ideals held by knights of the time, since nobles would have preferred to die in battle, rather than dishonourably flee the field, especially in view of their fellow knights.[163]
No reliable figures exist for losses among the common French soldiery, although they were also considered to have been heavy. Jean Le Bel estimated 15,000–16,000.[85] Froissart writes that the French army suffered a total of 30,000 killed or captured.[164] The modern historian Alfred Burne estimates 10,000 infantry, as "a pure guess",[165] for a total of 12,000 French dead.[166]
Aftermath
.jpg)
The result of the battle is described by Clifford Rogers as "a total victory for the English",[167] and by Ayton as "unprecedented" and "a devastating military humiliation".[168] Sumption considers it "a political catastrophe for the French Crown".[115] The battle was reported to the English parliament on 13 September in glowing terms as a sign of divine favour and justification for the huge cost of the war to date.[169] A contemporary chronicler opined "By haste and disorganisation were the French destroyed."[170] Rogers writes that, among other factors, the English "benefitted from superior organisation, cohesion and leadership" and from "the indiscipline of the French".[167] According to Ayton "England's international reputation as a military power was established in an evening's hard fighting."[171]
Edward ended the campaign by laying siege to Calais, which fell after eleven months, the Battle of Crécy having crippled the French army's ability to relieve the town.[172] This secured an English entrepôt into northern France which was held for two hundred years.[173] The battle established the effectiveness of the longbow as a dominant weapon on the Western European battlefield.[95] English and Welsh archers served as mercenaries in Italy in significant numbers, and some as far afield as Hungary.[174] Modern historian Joseph Dahmus includes the Battle of Crécy in his Seven Decisive Battles of the Middle Ages.[175]
Notes, citations and sources
Notes
- The number of the Genoese crossbowmen is variously given as two,[63] four,[65] and six thousand.[66] Schnerb questions the higher figure, based on estimates that 2,000 crossbowmen were available in all of France in 1340, and doubts that Genoa alone could have recruited several thousand crossbowmen.[67]
Citations
- Dahmus 1983, p. 169.
Sources
- Ayton, Andrew (2007a) [2005]. "The Battle of Crécy: Context and Significance" (PDF). In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 1–34. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 February 2019.
- Ayton, Andrew (2007b) [2005]. "The Crécy Campaign". In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 35–108. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0.
- Ayton, Andrew (2007c) [2005]. "The English Army at Crécy". In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 159–251. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0.
- Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Sir Philip (2007) [2005]. "Topography and Archery: Further Reflections on the Battle of Crécy". In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 351–377. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0.
- Bachrach, Bernard S.; Bachrach, David S. (2017). Warfare in Medieval Europe c.400–c.1453. Abington, Oxfordshire; New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-1-138-88765-7.
- Bennett, Matthew (1994). "The Development of Battle Tactics in the Hundred Years War". In Anne Curry & Michael Hughes (eds.). Arms, Armies and Fortifications in the Hundred Years War. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 1–20. ISBN 978-0-85115-365-0.
- Burne, Alfred (1999) [1955]. The Crécy War. Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions. ISBN 978-1-84022-210-4.
- Curry, Anne (2002). The Hundred Years' War 1337–1453 (PDF). Oxford: Osprey Publishing (published 13 November 2002). ISBN 978-1-84176-269-2. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 September 2018.
- Dahmus, Joseph (1983). "The Battle of Crecy". Seven Decisive Battles of the Middle Ages. Chicago: Nelson-Hall. pp. 168–196. ISBN 978-0-8304-1030-9.
- DeVries, Kelly (1998) [1996]. Infantry Warfare in the Early Fourteenth Century. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-0-85115-567-8.
- DeVries, Kelly (2015). "The Implications of the Anonimo Romano Account of the Battle of Crécy". In Gregory I. Halfond (ed.). The Medieval Way of War: Studies in Medieval Military History in Honor of Bernard S. Bachrach. London: Routledge (published 5 March 2015). pp. 309–322. ISBN 978-1-4724-1958-3.
- Edge, David; Paddock, John (1988). Arms & Armor of the Medieval Knight. New York: Crescent Books. ISBN 978-0-517-64468-3.
- Fowler, Kenneth (1961). Henry of Grosmont, First Duke of Lancaster, 1310–1361 (PDF) (PhD thesis). Leeds: University of Leeds. Archived (PDF) from the original on 11 October 2018. Retrieved 7 May 2019.
- Froissart, Jean (1908). G.C. Macaulay (ed.). The Chronicles of Froissart. Translated by John Bourchier, Lord Berners. London: MacMillan. ISBN 978-0-585-04908-3. OCLC 2925301.
- Gribit, Nicholas (2016). Henry of Lancaster's Expedition to Aquitaine 1345–46. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-1-78327-117-7. Archived from the original on 3 August 2020. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
- Harari, Yuval (1999). "Inter-frontal Cooperation in the Fourteenth Century and Edward III's 1346 Campaign" (PDF). War in History. 6 (4): 379–395. doi:10.1177/096834459900600401. S2CID 59055741. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 June 2019.
- Hardy, Robert (2010) [1976]. Longbow: A Social and Military History (PDF) (reprint of 4th ed.). Yeovil, Somerset: Haynes Publishing. ISBN 978-1-85260-620-6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 6 December 2018. Retrieved 7 May 2019.
- King, Andy (2002). "'According to the Custom used in French and Scottish wars': Prisoners and Casualties on the Scottish Marches in the Fourteenth Century" (PDF). Journal of Medieval History. 28 (3): 263–290. doi:10.1016/S0048-721X(02)00057-X. S2CID 159873083. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 October 2019.
- King, Andy (2017). "'Then a Great Misfortune Befell Them': the Laws of War on Surrender and the Killing of Prisoners on the Battlefield in the Hundred Years War" (PDF). Journal of Medieval History. 43 (1): 106–117. doi:10.1080/03044181.2016.1236502. S2CID 159619516. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 October 2019.
- Livingston, Michael (2022). Crécy: Battle of Five Kings. Osprey Publishing.
- Livingstone, Marilyn & Witzel, Morgen (2004). The Road to Crécy: The English Invasion of France, 1346. London: Routledge (published 19 November 2004). ISBN 978-0-582-78420-8.
- Lucas, Henry S. (1929). The Low Countries and the Hundred Years' War: 1326–1347. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. OCLC 960872598. Archived from the original on 3 August 2020. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
- Lynn, John (2003). Battle: A History of Combat and Culture. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. ISBN 978-0-8133-3371-7.
- Magier, Mariusz; Nowak, Adrian; et al. (2017). "Numerical Analysis of English Bows used in Battle of Crécy". Problemy Techniki Uzbrojenia. 142 (2): 69–85. doi:10.5604/01.3001.0010.5152. ISSN 1230-3801.
- Mallett, Michael (1974). Mercenaries and their Masters: Warfare in Renaissance Italy. London: Bodley Head. ISBN 978-0-370-10502-4.
- Mitchell, Russell (2008). "The Longbow-Crossbow Shootout at Crécy (1346): Has the "Rate of Fire Commonplace" Been Overrated?". In L. J. Andrew Villalon & Donald J. Kagay (eds.). The Hundred Years War (Part II): Different Vistas. Leiden: Brill (published 29 August 2008). pp. 233–257. ISBN 978-90-04-16821-3.
- Neillands, Robin (2001). The Hundred Years War. London: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-26131-9.
- Oman, Charles (1998) [1924]. A History of the Art of War in the Middle Ages: 1278–1485 A.D. London: Greenhill Books. ISBN 978-1-85367-332-0. Archived from the original on 3 August 2020. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
- Ormrod, W. Mark (2012). Edward III. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-11910-7. Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
- Pratt, P.L. (2010). "Testing the Bows". In Hardy, Robert (ed.). Longbow: A Social and Military History. Yeovil, Somerset: Haynes Publishing. pp. 205–217. ISBN 978-1-85260-620-6.
- Prestwich, Michael (2007). Plantagenet England 1225–1360. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-922687-0.
- Prestwich, Michael (2007b) [2005]. "The Battle of Crécy". In Ayton, Andrew & Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 139–157. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0.
- Rodger, N.A.M. (2004). The Safeguard of the Sea. London: Penguin. ISBN 978-0-14-029724-9.
- Rogers, Clifford (1993). "Edward III and the Dialectics of Strategy, 1327–1360". Transactions of the Royal Historical Society. 6th series. 4: 83–102. doi:10.2307/3679216. JSTOR 3679216. OCLC 931311378. S2CID 163041276.
- Rogers, Clifford (1998). "The Efficacy of the English Longbow: A Reply to Kelly DeVries" (PDF). War in History. 5 (2): 233–242. doi:10.1177/096834459800500205. S2CID 161286935. Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 February 2019. Retrieved 22 October 2018.
- Rogers, Clifford (2000). War Cruel and Sharp: English Strategy under Edward III, 1327–1360. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-0-85115-804-4. Archived from the original on 15 March 2022. Retrieved 9 April 2016.
- Rogers, Clifford (2004). Bachrach, Bernard S; DeVries, Kelly; Rogers, Clifford J (eds.). The Bergerac Campaign (1345) and the Generalship of Henry of Lancaster. Journal of Medieval Military History. Vol. II. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. ISBN 978-1-84383-040-5. ISSN 0961-7582. Archived from the original on 9 June 2021. Retrieved 8 November 2020.
- Rogers, Clifford J. (2007). Soldiers' Lives Through History. Westport: Greenwood. ISBN 978-0-313-33350-7.
- Rogers, Clifford J. (2008). "The Battle of Agincourt". In Villalon, L. J. Andrew; Donald J., Kagay (eds.). The Hundred Years' War (Part II): Different Vistas. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 978-90-474-4283-7.
- Rogers, Clifford, ed. (2010). The Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology, Volume 1. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-85115-804-4.
- Rothero, Christopher (1981). The Armies of Crécy and Poitiers (PDF). London: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-0-85045-393-5. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 February 2019.
- Schnerb, Bertrand (2007) [2005]. "Vassals, Allies and Mercenaries: the French Army before and after 1346". In Ayton, Andrew; Preston, Philip (eds.). The Battle of Crécy, 1346. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell Press. pp. 265–272. ISBN 978-1-84383-115-0.
- Strickland, Matthew & Hardy, Robert (2011). The Great Warbow: From Hastings to the Mary Rose. Somerset: J. H. Haynes & Co. ISBN 978-0-85733-090-1.
- Sumption, Jonathan (1990). The Hundred Years War 1: Trial by Battle. London: Faber & Faber. ISBN 978-0-571-13895-1.
- Wagner, John A. (2006). Encyclopedia of the Hundred Years War (PDF). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. ISBN 978-0-313-32736-0. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 July 2018.
- Wailly, Henri de (1987). Crécy 1346: Anatomy of a Battle. Poole, Dorset: Blandford Press. ISBN 978-0-7137-1930-7.
Further reading
Modern sources
- Barber, Richard (2013). Edward III and the Triumph of England: The Battle of Crécy and the Company of the Garter. London: Allen Lane. ISBN 978-0-7139-9838-2.
- Hewitt, H. J. (1966). The Organization of War under Edward III. Manchester: Manchester University Press. OCLC 398232.
- Keen, Maurice (editor) (1999). Medieval Warfare: A History. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-820639-2. OCLC 41581804.
- Livingston, Michael & DeVries, Kelly, eds. (2016). The Battle of Crécy: A Casebook. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-1-78138-264-6.
- Matthews, Rupert (2007). The Battle of Crecy: A Campaign in Context. Stroud, Gloucestershire: Spellmount. ISBN 978-1-86227-369-6.
- Reid, Peter (2007). A Brief History of Medieval Warfare: The Rise and Fall of English Supremacy at Arms, 1314–1485. Philadelphia: Running Press.
- Rogers, Clifford J. (2010). Essay on Medieval Military History: Strategy, Military Revolution, and the Hundred Years War. Surrey, UK: Ashgate Variorum. ISBN 978-0-7546-5996-9. OCLC 461272357.
Primary sources
- Avesbury, Robert of. De gestis mirabilibus regis Edwardi Tertii. Edited by Edward Maunde Thompson. London: Rolls Series, 1889.
- French Chronicle of London. Edited by G. J. Aungier. Camden Series XXVIII, 1844.
- Rotuli Parliamentorum. Edited by J. Strachey et al., 6 vols. London: 1767–1783.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cr%C3%A9cy
| War of the Two Peters | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Part of the Hundred Years' War | |||||||
| |||||||
| Belligerents | |||||||
With the support of: Kingdom of England Republic of Genoa Kingdom of Portugal Kingdom of Navarre.svg){kind=small} Kingdom of Granada |
With the support of:.svg){kind=small} Henry of Trastámara Kingdom of France | ||||||
| Commanders and leaders | |||||||
Peter of Castile.svg){kind=small} Edward, the Black Prince John of Gaunt |
 Peter IV of Aragon.svg){kind=small} Henry of Trastámara | ||||||
The War of the Two Peters (Spanish: La Guerra de los Dos Pedros, Catalan: Guerra dels dos Peres) was fought from 1356 to 1375 between the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon. The conflict was a struggle between two claimants to the throne of Castile, Peter of Castile and Peter IV of Aragon. The former Peter was supported by England and several English nobles led by Edward III and his son, while the latter Peter was supported by France. The conflict also brought in the involvement of the kingdoms of Navarre and Portugal. The war resulted in Aragon gaining the upper hand, but it also devastated its economy that was already reeling from the effects of the Black Death.
Background
_01.jpg)
At the beginning of the fourteenth century, Castile was suffering from unrest caused by its civil war, which was fought between the local and allied forces of the reigning king, Peter of Castile, and his half-brother Henry of Trastámara over the right to the crown.
Peter IV of Aragon supported Henry of Trastámara. Henry was also supported by the French commander Bertrand du Guesclin and his "free companies" of troops. Peter of Castile was supported by the English. The War of the Two Peters can thus be considered an extension of the wider Hundred Years' War as well as the Castilian Civil War.
Peter of Castile sought to claim the Kingdom of Valencia, which included parts of Murcia, Elche, Alicante, and Orihuela. Peter of Aragon wished to dominate the Mediterranean in opposition to Castile and Castile's ally Genoa.[1]
A naval incident between the two powers had already caused tension: Catalan galleys, armed by Mossèn Francesc de Perellós, who had letters of marque from the Aragonese king, aided France against England, and also managed to capture two Genoese ships at Sanlúcar de Barrameda. Genoa was an ally of Castile. Peter of Castile, leading the Castilian fleet, caught up to Perellós at Tavira but was unable to capture him.
War
1356–1363
The war lasted from 1356 to 1375, prolonged because Peter of Castile lost his throne to Henry of Trastámara. The war primarily took place on the border between Castile and Aragon, namely Aragonese border towns such as Teruel, which fell to the Castilians.
In 1357, Castile penetrated Aragon and conquered Tarazona on March 9; on May 8, they arranged a temporary truce.
At the beginning of 1361, the Castilians conquered the fortresses of Verdejo, Torrijos, Alhama, and other places. However, the peace of Terrer (sometimes called the peace of Deza) was negotiated on May 18, 1361, in which all conquered places and castles were returned to their original lords. Bernardo de Cabrera, ambassador of the Aragonese king, negotiated the peace. Peter IV married his daughter Constance to Frederick III the Simple.[2]
In June 1362, Peter of Castile met with Charles II of Navarre at Soria, and mutual aid was promised. Peter also contracted an alliance with Edward III of England and Edward's son The Black Prince.
With these negotiations complete, the Castilian king invaded Aragonese territory without officially declaring war, and the conflict commenced again. The Aragonese king was at Perpignan without troops, and thus caught off guard. The Castilians took the castles of Arize, Atece, Terrer, Moros, Cetina, and Alhama. Peter of Castile was unable to take Calatayud, even though he attacked it with all types of siege machines. Without taking his conquests any further, he returned to Seville.
In 1363 Castile continued the war against Aragon, and again occupied Tarazona. Peter of Castile received reinforcements from Portugal and Navarre. Meanwhile, the Aragonese king negotiated a treaty with France and a secret treaty with Henry II of Castile. Pedro of Castile then conquered Cariñena, Teruel, Segorbe, Morvedre, Almenara, Xiva, and Bunyol.
The papal nuncio Jean de la Grange arranged the peace of Morvedre (Sagunt) (July 2, 1363) between the two kings. The peace was not ratified, however, and hostilities continued. The Castilians penetrated the Kingdom of Valencia in 1363, and conquered Alicante, Caudete, Elda, Gandia, and other places.
1363–1369
From 1365 to 1369 Peter of Castile was preoccupied with maintaining his position on the Castilian throne against Henry of Trastámara.
The Castilian Civil War began in 1366 and Peter of Castile was dethroned. He was assailed by his illegitimate brother Henry of Trastámara at the head of a host of soldiers of fortune, including Bertrand du Guesclin and Hugh Calveley. Peter abandoned the kingdom without daring to give battle, after retreating several times (first from Burgos, then from Toledo, and finally from Seville) in the face of the oncoming armies. Peter fled with his treasury to Portugal, where he was coldly received by his uncle, King Peter I of Portugal, and thence to Galicia, in northern Spain, where he ordered the murder of Suero, the archbishop of Santiago, and the dean, Perálvarez. Both the Archbishop and the Dean were supporters of Henry.
Peter of Castile was overthrown in 1369. He was killed by Henry.[3]
Invasion of Valencia
The Kingdom of Granada supported Peter of Castile in the War of the Two Peters.[4] Castilian troops and their Moorish allies invaded southern Valencia, which suffered low-level ravaging and political instability. The Castilians unsuccessfully laid siege to Orihuela in 1364.[5]
End of the war
Castile recovered comarcas that had passed under Aragonese rule, such as the lordship of Molina. A marriage was contracted between Eleanor of Aragon, daughter of Peter IV of Aragon, and John I of Castile, the successor of Henry II of Castile.
The misery of the war was compounded by the Black Death and other natural disasters, such as drought and a plague of locusts. These events ruined the Aragonese economy, leading to a decrease of the country’s population.[6] The Cathedral of Tarazona was destroyed during the war and not rebuilt until much later.
However, the war is believed to have led to the establishment of administrative and military forces that would ultimately result in a unified Castile and Aragon in the next century.[7]
References
- Donald J. Kagay, "The Defense of the Crown of Aragon during the War of the Two Pedros (1356-1366)," The Journal of Military History, Volume 71, Number 1, January 2007, pp. 11-31.
Bibliography
- Kagay, Donald J. (2007). "The Defense of the Crown of Aragon during the War of the Two Pedros (1356–1366)". The Journal of Military History. 71 (1): 11–31. doi:10.1353/jmh.2007.0040. S2CID 201755047. [A later version of this paper appears in Villalon and Kagay (eds.), The Hundred Years War (Part II).]
- Kagay, Donald J. (2012). "The War of the Two Pedros (1356–1366): Aragon's Successful Administrative Strategy of Asymmetrical Defense". Imago Temporis: Medium Aevum. 6: 191–222.
- Kagay, Donald J. (2013). "Disposable Alliances: Aragon and Castille during the War of the Two Pedros and Beyond". Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History. 10: 111–47. [A working version of this paper is available here.]
{{cite journal}}: External link in|postscript= - Villalon, L. J. Andrew (2008). ""Cut Off Their Heads, or I'll Cut Off Yours": Castilian Strategy and Tactics in the War of the Two Pedros and the Supporting Evidence from Murcia". In L. J. Andrew Villalon; Donald J. Kagay (eds.). The Hundred Years War (Part II): Different Vistas. Leiden: Brill. pp. 153–84.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Two_Peters
The Castilian King was unable to repay him, however, so the Black Prince raised taxes in his domains in Aquitaine.
The English merchant community that had been established in Seville was massacred on Henry's order.[1]
With peace in France, the mercenaries and soldiers lately employed in the war became unemployed, and turned to plundering.
The Black Prince's intervention in the Castilian Civil War, and the failure of Pedro to reward his services, depleted the prince's treasury. He resolved to recover his losses by raising the taxes in Aquitaine. The Gascons, unaccustomed to such taxes, complained. Unheeded, they turned to the King of France as their feudal overlord. But by the Treaty of Brétigny the King of France had lost his suzerainty over Aquitaine. After reflecting on the matter, it was asserted that Edward III's renunciation of France had been imperfect. In consequence, the King of France retained his suzerainty over Aquitaine. Charles V summoned the Black Prince to answer the complaints of his vassals but Edward refused. The Caroline phase of the Hundred Years' War began.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War,_1369%E2%80%931389
The Lancastrian faction appointed the new Duke of Somerset, Henry Beaufort to replace Warwick in Calais, however, the Yorkists managed to retain the loyalty of the garrison.[134] Fresh from their victory at Ludford Bridge, the Lancastrian faction assembled a "Parliament of Devils" at Coventry with the sole purpose of attainting York, his sons, Salisbury, and Warwick,[137] however, the actions of this assembly caused many uncommitted lords to fear for their titles and property.[138]
The House of Lancaster descended from John of Gaunt, the third surviving son of Edward III. The name derives from Gaunt's primary title as Duke of Lancaster, which he held by right of his spouse, Blanche of Lancaster. The Lancastrian claim on the throne had received preference from Edward III which explicitly emphasised the male line of descent.[41]
The king's dependence on a small number of courtiers caused discontent among the influential, and in 1387 control of government was taken over by a group of aristocrats known as the Lords Appellant. By 1389 Richard had regained control, and for the next eight years governed in relative harmony with his former opponents.
The English army was also equipped with several types of gunpowder weapons, in unknown numbers: small guns firing lead balls; ribauldequins firing either metal arrows or grapeshot; and bombards, an early form of cannon firing metal balls 80–90 millimetres (3+1⁄4–3+5⁄8 in) in diameter. Contemporary accounts and modern historians differ as to what types of these weapons and how many were present at Crécy, but several iron balls compatible with the bombard ammunition have since been retrieved from the site of the battle.[58][59][60]
French army
The exact size of the French army is even less certain, as the financial records from the Crécy campaign are lost, although there is consensus that it was substantially larger than the English. Contemporary chroniclers all note it as being extremely large for the period. The two who provide totals estimate its size as 72,000 or 120,000. The numbers of mounted men-at-arms are given as either 12,000 or 20,000.[61] An Italian chronicler claimed 100,000 knights (men-at-arms), 12,000 infantry and 5,000 crossbowmen.[62] Contemporary chroniclers estimated the crossbowmen present as between 2,000 and 20,000.[63]
On 16 August the French moved into position; Edward promptly burnt down Poissy, destroyed the bridge there, and marched north.[30][31]
s
The French had carried out a scorched earth policy, carrying away all stores of food and so forcing the English to spread out over a wide area to forage, which greatly slowed them. Bands of French peasants attacked some of the smaller groups of foragers.
In January 1419, Rouen fell.[14] Those Norman French who had resisted were severely punished: Alain Blanchard, who had hanged English prisoners from the walls of Rouen, was summarily executed; Robert de Livet, Canon of Rouen, who had excommunicated the English king, was packed off to England and imprisoned for five years.[37]
Edward and his brother Richard of Shrewsbury, who were still in residence in the Tower of London, had completely disappeared by the summer of 1483.[295] The fate of the two princes following their disappearance remains a mystery to this day, however, the most widely accepted explanation is that they were murdered on the orders of Richard III.[296]
The prince's illness soon returned in force, though when the "Good Parliament" met on 28 April 1376 he was looked upon as the chief support of the commons in their attack on the abuses of the administration, and evidently acted in concert with William of Wykeham in opposing the influence of Lancaster and the disreputable clique of courtiers who upheld it, and he had good cause to fear that his brother's power would prove dangerous to the prospects of his son Richard.[96] Richard Lyons, the king's financial agent, who was impeached for gigantic frauds, sent him a bribe of £1,000. and other gifts, but he refused to receive it, though he afterwards said that it was a pity he had not kept it, and sent it to pay the soldiers who were fighting for the kingdom.[97]
sent him a bribe of £1,000. and other gifts, but he refused to receive it,
No comments:
Post a Comment