Book Review: “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462” by Hugh Bicheno

519b6FCcEGL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_In recent years, the study of the English conflict known as the “Wars of the Roses” has become rather popular. The Lancasters and the Yorks fighting for the English throne. Only one can be the winner. When we do look at this time period, we tend to focus on the people involved in the battles and the political aspect of the conflict. The battles, how they were fought, and why the conflict started in the first place tend to be pushed to the sideline. That is not the case with this particular book. In Hugh Bicheno’s book, “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462”, the political and military aspects combine with family histories for a comprehensive look into what made this time period so fascinating.

I came across this particular book by browsing the shelves at Barnes and Noble. I saw that it was about the Wars of the Roses, but I was not familiar with the author. I decided to give it a shot and I am so glad I did. This book is a delight and a fantastic resource.

Bicheno starts his book by exploring two extraordinary women whose families would shape the direction that the Wars of the Roses would take; Jacquetta Woodville and Catherine de Valois. Both women married for love and this love would shape who would win the crown of England, as Bicheno explains:

Sometimes love does conquer all: despite having turned their backs on the game of power, Catherine and Jacquetta became the common ancestors of every English monarch since 1485. Before that could happen, all those with a superior claim to the throne had first to wipe each other out. This they did in what was, in essence, a decades-long, murderously sordid dispute over an inheritance within a deeply dysfunctional extended family. It became merciless not despite but because the combatants had so much in common, and projected their own darkest intentions onto each other….it was an extraordinary period in English history. Four of the six kings crowned between 1399 and 1485 were usurpers who killed their predecessors, undermining the concept of divine right as well as the prestige of the ruling class. (Bicheno, 10-11).

Family drama is the center of Bicheno’s book so he spends several chapters laying out the major players and how they were related to one another. This can get a tad bit confusing for those who are not familiar with the story, so Bicheno has included family trees and a list of protagonists and marriages to help readers. I will say that they became very useful for me as I was reading this book and I would highly suggest you use the resources that Bicheno has included in this book for future research. Bicheno also included maps, which corresponded with the different battles that were important between 1440 and 1462, not only in England but in France, Wales, and Scotland as well.

What really impressed me about this book was the amount of detail that Bicheno was able to include and making it understandable for any casual student of the Wars of the Roses, yet engaging enough for a scholar. That is not an easy feat, but Bicheno is able to do it. He uses modern data with extensive research of historical documents, knowledge of medieval military strategies, and interpreting all of this information for modern readers, which included a few nods to a certain popular show(Game of Thrones) that is roughly based off of the events of this time period.

Hugh Bicheno breathes new life into the study of the Wars of the Roses. I wasn’t really sure what to expect when I first started reading this book, but I am extremely glad I did. Even if you think you know tons about the Wars of the Roses, this book will surprise you with new information and make you question your previous knowledge about the battles in the first part of this tumultuous time. If you have an interest in the Wars of the Roses and understanding how it occurred from a military and a political point of view, I highly suggest you read Hugh Bicheno’s book, “Battle Royal- The Wars of the Roses: 1440-1462”. It is an eye-opening, riveting reading experience.

Book Review: “Wars of the Roses: Ravenspur- Rise of the Tudors” by Conn Iggulden

41+RQteGLUL._SX324_BO1,204,203,200_By the year 1470, England had been embroiled in a civil war between the houses of York and Lancaster for nearly 20 years. Edward IV was king until he was driven out of the country by his former best friend Warwick and Edward’s own brother, George Duke of Clarence. The House of Lancaster is back in charge with Henry VI, but Edward IV and his other brother Richard Duke of Gloucester are not giving up without a fight. However, there is another family who wants to fight for the throne, the Tudors. How will it come to an end? Who will become King of England when all the major battles come to an end? These questions are answered in Conn Iggulden’s thrilling conclusion to his Wars of the Roses series, “Ravenspur- Rise of the Tudors.”

We are thrown back into the story with Edward forced to leave England and his wife and children forced to go into sanctuary while the Lancasters, with Warwick and George Duke of Clarence taking over military control. We are also introduced to new characters. Jasper Tudor, his nephew Henry Tudor, and Edward’s other brother Richard Duke of Gloucester, who would one day become King Richard III. In his historical note, Conn Iggulden explains Richard, his twisted spine and the struggle he might have had on the battlefield:

For all those who have imbibed a romantic view of King Richard III, I think they have cause to be grateful to Shakespeare, for all the bard’s delight in making him a hunchbacked villain. Without Shakespeare, Richard Plantagenet was only king for two years and would have been just a minor footnote to his brother’s reign. There is not one contemporary mention of physical deformity, though we know now that his spine was twisted. He would have lived in constant pain, but then so did many active fighting men. There is certainly no record of Richard ever needing a special set of armour for a raised shoulder. Medieval swordsmen, like Roman soldiers before them, would have been noticeably larger on their right sides. A school friend of mine turned down a career as a professional fencer because of the way his right shoulder was developing into a hump from constant swordplay- and that was with a light, fencing blade. Compare his experience to that of a medieval swordsman using a broader blade, three feet long or even longer, where strength and stamina meant the difference between victory and a humiliating death. (Iggulden, 456-457).

Iggulden explores the relationship between the main characters; Edward IV, Warwick, Jasper Tudor, Richard III, George Duke of Clarence, and Henry Tudor, and how the events between 1470 and 1485 radically changed their lives forever. The betrayal of Warwick and George and how that affected Edward and Richard. How Edward and Richard leaving England for a time affected Elizabeth Woodville and her children. When Edward and Richard landed in Ravenspur and marched against Warwick and George at the Battle of Barnet. The final defeat of the Lancasterian cause at the Battle of Tewkesbury and what followed after the death of Edward IV in 1483. And of course, the Battle of Bosworth where Henry Tudor wins the crown and begins the Tudor dynasty.

“Ravenspur” is a well-written and thrilling conclusion to Iggulden’s “Wars of the Roses” series. He was able to combine exciting battle scenes with family drama, internal dialogue, and political intrigue to create a masterpiece of a series. The only problem I had with the book was that I did want more dialogue from Elizabeth Woodville, Elizabeth of York and Margaret Beaufort. They seemed to have been sprinkled in when it was convenient. Overall, I found “Ravenspur” engaging and enjoyable. If you have read the three previous books in Conn Iggulden’s series, I highly encourage you to read “Ravenspur- Rise of the Tudors” as it brings the Wars of the Roses to a dramatic end.

Book Review: “Wars of the Roses: Bloodline” by Conn Iggulden

51nExUGFrkL._SX331_BO1,204,203,200_The deaths of the Duke of York, Earl Salisbury and Edmund Earl of Rutland at the Battle of Wakefield at the end of 1460 marked a changing point for how the Wars of the Roses was fought. Now it was not going to be simply a matter of who was going to be the King of England, but it was a war of revenge. What the Lancastrians did not realize at the time was the fact that these deaths would unleash two men who would mark the destruction of the Lancastrian cause; Edward Duke of York, the future King Edward IV, and Richard Neville Earl of Warwick “the Kingmaker”. In the third book of Conn Iggulden’s Wars of the Roses series called “Bloodline”, Iggulden explores the rise of these two dynamic men and how family matters tore the two best friends apart.

After the victory at Wakefield, Margaret of Anjou marched her Lancastrian forces to London, but they were not allowed to enter. The Lancastrians decided to keep marching until they meet the Yorkists at St. Albans for a rematch, on February 17, 1461. The Lancastrians were able to win the battle and regain control of King Henry VI. However, this was a small victory. After the defeat, Edward Duke of York decided to take up the claim to the throne that his father left behind, and declared himself King Edward IV of England. That’s right, there were two kings of England in 1461. Margaret of Anjou and the Lancastrians were not about to give without a fight. They met Edward IV, Warwick and the Yorkists forces outside Towton on March 29, 1461, during a snowstorm. The Battle of Towton is known to be the bloodiest battle on English soil and the way Iggulden described the onslaught is masterful. In the end, the Yorkists are victorious and Edward IV is officially the King of England while Henry VI is held captive in the Tower of London while Margaret of Anjou and her son flee to France for help.

After Towton, Edward IV and Warwick are closer than ever. Warwick wants to do what he can to help support his friend and king so he tries to arrange a marriage between Edward and a French princess, to form an alliance. However, Edward has other ideas and marries Elizabeth Woodville and decides to tell Warwick later. I find it fascinating that Iggulden decided to change how Edward and Elizabeth met as it is quite different from what traditionally is told about how they met, but it works really well. Edward’s brother George Duke of Clarence falls in love with Warwick’s daughter Isabel and wants to marry her.  This is the moment when Edward and Warwick really begin to feud.

Iggulden explains in his Historical Note why he decides to focus on this aspect of their relationship quite a bit:

In the first two books, I have tried to explore the sheer awe felt by some for the person of the king of England. It is the only thing that explains why King Henry remained alive despite being captured by York and held for months at a time. Yet it is also true of human nature that “awe” is less likely when one witnessed a boy growing up and becoming king. No man is a prophet in his own home- and Warwick was sufficiently exasperated with Edward and his wife to throw it all into the air and arrange Edward’s capture and imprisonment. (Iggulden, 402).

It is interesting to read about the relationship between these two friends and how that friendship turned into hatred because Edward decided to marry for love. Iggulden is able to capture the shifting relationships between the main characters extremely well in the third book of this amazing series. The blend of battles, political intrigue and romance is perfect and keeps the reader engaged. This is the fall of the Lancasters and the rise of the Yorks.  If you were a fan of the first two books of the Wars of the Roses series, I highly encourage you to read “Wars of the Roses: Bloodline” by Conn Iggulden.

Book Review: “Wars of the Roses: Trinity” by Conn Iggulden

61793uzwgql._sx324_bo12c2042c2032c200_England is on the brink of civil war. Families with royal blood in their veins are fighting amongst each other as King Henry VI has fallen ill.  Mistrust runs rampant and sacrifices are made in order to gain the throne. This is the England of 1454 and the beginning of the period in English history that we know today as the Wars of the Roses. Families like the Nevilles,  the Percys, and the houses of York, Lancaster, and Tudor would gain fame and infamy during this time. Conn Iggulden decided to explore this tumultuous time after the Jack Cade rebellion, which he explored in his first book “Stormbird”, in the second book of his “Wars of the Roses” series called “Trinity”.

Many who study the Wars of the Roses believe that it started in 1455 with the First Battle of St. Albans. However, Conn Iggulden begins “Trinity” with a conflict between the Percys and the Nevilles, which is known as the Battle of Heworth Moor. Iggulden explains why he chose this point to begin his story in his Historical Note:

The ambush by some seven hundred Percy retainers and servants on the Neville wedding party took place a little earlier than I have it here, in August 1453- around the same time King Henry VI fell into his senseless state. It was a key event among years of low-level fighting between the families as they struggled to control the north and widen their holdings. That attack by Thomas Percy, Baron Egremont, was one of the most brutal actions in that private war, sparked by the marriage of Salisbury’s son to the niece of Ralph Cromwell, a union which placed estates claimed by the Percy family into Neville hands. The ‘Battle of Heworth Moor’ failed in its main aim of slaughtering Richard Neville, Earl of Salisbury. I have not included a dozen minor skirmishes, but that feud played a key part in deciding where the Nevilles and the Percys stood in the first battle of St. Albans in 1455- and its outcome. (Iggulden, 463).

The Battle of Heworth Moor is a unique place to start. We are thrust into the middle of the Percy family’s feud with the Nevilles. The plan is to attack the Nevilles during a wedding, but the Percys fail. It would not be a wedding that either family would forget for a long time. The Percy family decides to side with the Lancasters and the King, while the Nevilles side with the Yorkist cause. In the beginning, the Wars of the Roses was nothing but feuds between families to determine who should be taking care of the sick King Henry VI. Iggulden describes Henry VI in a way that shows the King as weak in body but his mind is sharp. When he wakes from his first bout of illness, he dismisses Richard Duke of York from being Lord Protector and reverses everything that  Richard did.

Richard and the Yorkist cause are not upset with the king, but rather those who they believe are responsible for being in control of the king; Queen Margaret of Anjou, the Duke of Somerset and the Nevilles. Anger boils until it bursts at the First Battle of St. Albans in 1455. This battle was so pivotal in the evolution of the conflict that Iggulden goes into great detail to explain how the battle unfolded. The Yorkist cause may have one the “first” battle of the Wars of the Roses, but it ignited a flame inside of Margaret of Anjou to not only protect her son and her husband but to also completely destroy Richard Duke of York. As the story progresses, we see both sides working hard to gain control of the king in a more complex version of “capture the king”.

Conn Iggulden delivers a high action and extremely descriptive sequel to “Stormbird” with “Trinity”. He incorporates beloved characters from the previous novel, like Margaret of Anjou and the charismatic Derry Brewer, with new faces like the Tudors, Thomas Percy Baron Egremont, Warwick, Richard Duke of York and his eldest son Edmund Earl of Rutland. Iggulden transports the reader to this volatile time in English history. This book is so engaging and it keeps the reader wanting more, so he included a side story that is equally entertaining. Once again, Iggulden makes the Wars of the Roses and all of its intrigue come alive. If you were a fan of Conn Iggulden’s first book in the “Wars of the Roses” series “Stormbird”, I strongly encourage you to read “Trinity”.   

Guest Post: Was Henry IV A Usurper? By Michele Morrical

170px-king_henry_iv_from_npg_(2)Some medieval English kings have unfairly gotten a bad rap. Others are deservedly vilified (Richard III, I’m talking to you).

Our modern-day perception of English kings is largely constructed from only a few sources. Of course, we have the writings of Shakespeare which were generally based on the real events of English monarchs but had lots of extra drama added in to spice things up. We also have the writings of chroniclers who actually lived in the middle ages, but they aren’t always reliable. Just imagine if you were hired by Henry VIII to write the history of his reign. You would definitely write it in a way that reflected very well on the king. And we have modern-day historians who try to bring the past to life with new interpretations of English monarchs and their new explanations of their controversial actions.

One of the English kings who has received very little attention over the years is Henry IV, also known as Henry of Bolingbroke and Henry of Derby. The common perception is that Henry was a usurper, but was he really? Did he seize the throne from Richard II illegally or was he the rightful heir?

What was Henry IV’s claim to the throne?

To answer this question, we must go back a couple of reigns to Henry’s grandfather, King Edward III, a Plantagenet king that ruled England from 1327 to 1377. King Edward was also the nephew of King Charles IV of France through his mother Isabella. When Charles IV died childless, Edward asserted his right to the French crown as Charles’ nearest male relative. The French overruled him citing Salic Law which said inheritance could not be passed through a female line. So the throne went instead to Philip of Valois, Charles’ cousin through a completely male line. As if losing his claim to the kingdom of France wasn’t enough of a blow to Edward, Philip also confiscated Edward’s land in France. Edward was not one to take things lying down so he took military action against France and initiated the Hundred Years War.

One of King Edward’s best military commanders was his eldest son, Edward of Woodstock, also known as the Black Prince. The king’s son was raised and educated in preparation to be the next king and he was perfectly suited to follow in his father’s footsteps. However, there was a major problem. His repeated military expeditions around Europe caused him to become quite ill, including a raging case of dysentery. He died in 1376 at the age of 45. He had not outlived his father, therefore he never got the chance to fulfill his destiny as King of England.

After the death of the Black Prince, King Edward wrote his will and “Act of Entail” in which he named his heir. Rather than naming his eldest living son (John of Gaunt) to be the next king, he did something unusual. He instead named his grandson, Richard of Bordeaux, eldest living son of the Black Prince, to be next in the order of succession using a device called “Right of Substitution”. Essentially since the Black Prince died prematurely, his son Richard was accepted as a substitute.

After Richard, he named the next in line for succession to be John of Gaunt and the male heirs of his body, followed by his other living sons, Edmund, Duke of York, and Thomas, Duke of Gloucester. Interestingly enough, the “Act of Entail” document was kept secret from the public. The only people who knew about it were those named in the entail and the king’s closest confidants. It was never introduced to Parliament to put into law. Many rulers were hesitant to publicly name their heir because that gave any discontented subjects someone to rally around and overthrow the king.

If King Edward had followed traditional Salic Law rules, his eldest living son, John of Gaunt, would have been named his heir followed by Gaunt’s son, Henry of Bolingbroke, which would have left Richard completely out of the succession. Imagine how different the course of English history would have been if Edward had not made this decision to use the uncommon right of substitution. The inheritance would have been strictly through the house of Lancaster, cutting out the house of York. The Wars of the Roses may have never even happened.

Henry of Bolingbroke would have known about King Edward III’s act of entail and that he had been named third in line for the throne (after Richard and John of Gaunt) rather than second in line after Gaunt. Even so, being third in line to the throne wasn’t so bad for Henry. He lived a relatively comfortable life as a royal heir and spent his youth preparing to be a successful ruler like his grandfather. Henry became one of the most respected knights in Europe, he traveled abroad on crusades, and he learned it was better to work with the nobles and forge alliances rather than trying to control them. There was only one problem…Richard absolutely hated Henry. Richard was none of the things that Henry was. Richard was not strong and athletic, he did not joust, and he was not an experienced military leader. He was basically the antithesis of Edward III. Richard was terribly jealous of Henry and felt threatened that Henry or his father might one day try to wrestle the crown from his head.

Richard’s Revenge

For the first 10 years of Richard’s reign, it was assumed that Edward’s entail would be upheld by Richard but in the Parliament of 1386, Richard did something shocking. He threw out his grandfather’s entail and instead declared that his heir would be the twelve-year-old earl of March, Roger Mortimer, great-grandson of King Edward III. Roger’s mother Phillipa was the daughter and only child of King Edward’s second-born (yet deceased) son Lionel of Antwerp. Even though Lionel was deceased, Richard used the right of substitution in selecting Roger, just as Edward III had done in selecting Richard as the Black Prince’s substitute. However, it was highly unusual to name an heir through a female line, especially when there were plenty of other male heirs to choose from. Richard selected the Mortimers so that John of Gaunt, Henry of Bolingbroke, and the entire Lancastrian line would be excluded from the succession. He was putting them on notice that they better work for him instead of against him.

Richard’s declaration was met with great resistance from the lords of his realm who were already disgruntled from enduring years of his tyrannical treatment. They had been terribly unhappy about Richard’s style of kingship, lack of military experience, misguided attempts to negotiate with France, reckless financial spending, attempts to degrade the power of Parliament, and general misrule resulting from Richard’s circle of favorites. Threatening civil war and deposition, the Lords were successful in pressing Richard to exclude the minor Roger Mortimer from succession and to reinstate King Edward III’s entail naming John of Gaunt and his son Henry as the next in line to the throne.

Richard was a very spiteful and vengeful man. He would agree to a deal when he was face-to-face with the nobles, but behind their backs, he would plot to punish them for any sign of disloyalty. Over the next 10 years, he continually threatened the lords and nobles with arrest, confiscation of lands, titles, goods, and even exile if they didn’t bend to his every whim. Richard again changed the order of succession, throwing out John of Gaunt, Henry, and the Mortimers. He decided that the person who would be the least threatening to his reign would be Edward III’s fourth son, Edmund of Langley, Duke of York, who was an arthritic invalid.

Henry of Bolingbroke was always at the top of Richard’s hit list but since he was such a close royal relative, Richard couldn’t afford to take him out. His reputation would have been destroyed if he used force to get the likable, respected knight out of the picture. So instead of using force, he used a 1397 civil dispute between Henry and Thomas Mowbray, Duke of Norfolk, as the mechanism to remove him. Richard ruled both men guilty and sentenced them both to exile: Henry for 10 years and Norfolk for life.

As if exile wasn’t punishment enough, just one year later when John of Gaunt died, Richard delivered the knock-out punch. Despite his promise to Gaunt, Richard revoked Henry’s entire Lancastrian inheritance and confiscated all of his lands and assets. Furthermore, Henry was to be considered a traitor to England. Henry of Bolingbroke had nothing left. To fall so far from being the heir to the throne down to a penniless vagabond was untenable for Henry. And there was only one person at fault: his cousin, King Richard II.

Henry’s Return to England

As Henry lived in exile, he thought about his situation and strategies for getting back what was rightly his. There weren’t many options. There was certainly no chance now at reconciliation with Richard, things had simply gone too far. The only way he would be allowed to return to England and be restored to his rightful inheritance would be if Richard was no longer the king of England.

Removing King Richard II from the throne is not something Henry could do by himself. Luckily, he had friends in high places who had also been unfairly treated by Richard. Together with several dukes and earls, Henry planned an uprising against Richard to protest his tyrannical rule. Henry landed in England on July 4, 1399, at Ravenspur in Yorkshire with only 300 men. As he traveled towards the safety of the Lancastrian stronghold, Pontefract Castle, his army grew into the thousands. Henry had become the leader of the revolution. He swore to his followers that his only intent was to defend England from Richard’s tyranny and to reclaim his Lancastrian inheritance. He promised that he would not take the throne for himself by force.

King Richard was with the royal army in Ireland at the time of Henry’s invasion. The Keeper of the Realm during his absence was his 58-year-old heir, Edmund of Langley, Duke of York. Edmund knew that his nephew was a cruel despotic ruler and he instead threw in his lot with Henry. Edmund agreed to support his uprising and would not take measures to suppress his army. Edmund also believed that Henry had been treated unfairly and was perfectly within his rights to reclaim his inheritance.

So Henry’s army moved across the country unchallenged until he came to Conway Castle where King Richard was hiding. Rather than fighting, they negotiated. Henry demanded that he be allowed to return to England and that his lands be restored to him. Richard agreed but then shortly thereafter declared he had no intent to keep his promise. In fact, he was more determined than ever to see Henry dead. Henry’s army arrested Richard and took him into their possession.

While Richard was kept under lock and key in a variety of royal castles, Henry was working with English lawyers to legally reinstate his claim to the Lancastrian inheritance. They determined that the best course of action would be for Richard to sign a written resignation which would then be ratified by Parliament. After much resistance, the king finally relented and signed the document. In doing so, he stepped down from the throne and agreed to Henry’s accession, just as King Edward III’s act of entail had outlined nearly twenty-five years earlier.

The Rule of Succession in England

Was Henry right to overthrow Richard II in an attempt to restore justice to the kingdom of England? Or did he take advantage of the circumstances by claiming the throne for himself?

It all comes down to this. Were any laws broken when Edward named his grandson Richard as his heir instead of his eldest living son John of Gaunt? Likewise, did Richard break any laws when he bypassed Edward’s entail and named Edward of Langley as his heir? Did Henry break any laws when he accepted the crown for himself and deposed his cousin Richard? Should kings have to uphold entails from their predecessors or was it legal for them to change it to their own personal liking?

We cannot judge these decisions as morally right or wrong, rather we can only judge them in terms of the law or the absence of law. In England during the Middle Ages, there was no law that strictly defined the order of succession. Other European kingdoms, such as France, observed Salic Law which prohibited women from being crowned as well as their sons. Germanic kingdoms followed the semi-Salic rule which allowed a woman to inherit but only if all the men in the royal bloodline were dead.

England was a kingdom heavily influenced by their different European neighbors so England’s laws and customs were a mish-mash of the various customs immigrants had brought with them to England. Since England had never put the order of succession into a legal act, it was basically up to the current ruler to choose the next heir to the throne.

Is it any wonder England had so many disputes over control of the kingdom during the Middle Ages? With no legal rules governing the order of succession, it became open to interpretation and that’s when the royal heirs and nobility used it to their advantage. It made it much more possible to maneuver their own royal relatives into positions where they might someday have a shot at the throne themselves.

Was Henry IV a Usurper?

It is my judgment that Henry IV was not a usurper. To be a usurper, one has to either seize authority illegally or by force.

Although Henry did amass a sizable army, they did not resort to violence to solve the conflict. The army was merely a show of force so that Richard would take them seriously and understand the gravity of the situation.

Henry was careful to use lawyers to find a legal way to depose King Richard II and thus overturn his previous statute naming Edmund of Langley as his heir. With Richard deposed and all of his previous acts of Parliament voided, the order of succession had to revert back to the previous king. That would make King Edward III’s act of entail valid again and Henry of Bolingbroke next in line to the throne.

 About the Author

Michele Morrical is a writer, blogger, and amateur historian on all things Tudor and Wars of the Roses. She lives in Indianapolis, Indiana with her husband, son, daughter, and many pets. You can find her writings at michelemorrical.com.

My journey into Tudor history began about 10 years ago with the TV show “The Tudors” from Showtime. As I watched the show, I wondered how much of it was really true because the storylines were more dramatic and shocking than any soap opera I had ever seen. I picked up Margaret George’s autobiography of Henry VIII and I was hooked. I’ve since read over 100 books on the Tudor period and I’m currently writing my own book about the Wars of the Roses

Book Review: “The House of Beaufort: The Bastard Line that Captured the Crown” by Nathen Amin

51ygXgS66nL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_The houses of York, Lancaster, the  Nevilles, the Howards, the Mowbrays, the Percys, and the Tudors are often recognized as the families involved in the Wars of the Roses. However, there was one more house that was just as important as the others; the Beauforts. The Beauforts were the sons and daughters of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster and his mistress Katherine Swynford. They were considered bastards since they were born out of wedlock, yet they were connected to the house of Lancaster and rose to power by their own right. They would help change not only English history but the history of Europe forever. The Beauforts made a huge impact during the Hundred Years War and the Wars of the Roses, yet many people only recognize Margaret Beaufort and Edmund Beaufort 2nd Duke of Somerset. The Beauforts don’t get much attention. Nathen Amin, the founder of The Henry Tudor Society, wanted to tell the story of this remarkable family.  It is in his book “The House of Beaufort: The Bastard Line that Captured the Crown”, that the Beauforts are given the attention that they rightfully deserve.

Nathen Amin explains why he chose to focus on the Beauforts:

The Beauforts are a family often encountered when reading or studying the fifteenth century and the Wars of the Roses, although commonly relegated to supporting roles in the life and times of more prominent figures like Richard, duke of York, Edward IV, and Henry IV, V, and VI. They were always in the background, serving a king, counselling a king, and even fighting for or against a king. …Yet, there were few family units more influential in the governance of England during the period, and none more devoted to defending the Lancasterian dynasty, whether against France in the last vestiges of the Hundred Years War, or against the House of York in a new war of a very different kind. Born as bastards to a mighty prince, the Beauforts were the right-hand men of their royal kinsmen, amassing considerable authority on the national and continental stage. From uncertain beginnings, the Beauforts became earls, dukes and cardinals, and in time kings themselves, their blood seeping into every corner of the English artistocracy within a few generations of their birth. (Amin, 7).

So how exactly were the Beauforts able to accomplish all of this, going from bastards to kings? It starts with John of Gaunt marrying his mistress Katherine Swynford, making his four children with Katherine legitimate and they were given the name “Beaufort”, after his second marriage did not work out. After their half-brother King Henry IV( also known as Henry of Bolingbroke) became king, he allowed his half-siblings to obtain royal status, however, they could not be in line for the English throne.

John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford’s four children found a way to live successful lives without pursuing the English throne and they continued to support their Lancasterian family. John Beaufort became the 1st Earl of Somerset and his children became earls, counts, dukes and his daughter Joan became Queen of Scotland. John Beaufort’s granddaughter was Margaret Beaufort, the mother of the future King Henry VII. Henry Beaufort was able to become a very wealthy man and was promoted all the way to Cardinal of England, quite a feat for an English man at that time. Thomas Beaufort became the  1st Duke of Exeter and his sister Joan Beaufort Countess of Westmoreland was the matriarch of the powerful Neville family.

The Beauforts went through numereous highs and lows as they worked hard to protect England and the honor of their Lancastrian relations. Nathen Amin is able to navigate the complex world of the English court during both the Hundred Years War and the Wars of the Roses to give us the intricate story of the Beaufort family. As someone who is acquianted with parts of the Beaufort family story, I found this book rather fascinating and very informative. This was my first time reading a book by Nathen Amin and I cannot wait to read more of his books. In a complex time, it would be easy to forget one person, but Amin spends the time to write about each Beaufort child and how they made a difference.

The only real issue I had with the book was the family tree. I wished that there were birth and death dates included because I found myself getting a tad bit confused about who was who, especially when some of the Beauforts shared the same name and a similar title.

Overall, I found this book extremely fascinating and informative. Amin’s writing style is easy to understand and he brings the Beauforts from the background and onto center stage. They may have started as illegitimate children of John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford, but they rose to be dukes and kings. If you want to learn more about this remarkable family and their influence in both the Hundred Years War and the Wars of the Roses, I absolutely recommend that you read “The House of Beaufort: The Bastard Line that Captured the Crown” by Nathen Amin.

Biography: Jacquetta of Luxembourg, Duchess of Bedford and Countess Rivers

(Born around 1415/1416- Died May 30, 1472). Daughter of Pierre de Luxembourg and Margaret of Baux. Married to John of Lancaster, 1st Duke of Bedford and Richard Woodville, 1st Earl Rivers. Mother of Elizabeth Woodville, Queen of England, Lewis Woodville, Anne Woodville, Anthony Woodville, 2nd Earl Rivers, Mary Woodville, Jacquetta Woodville, John Woodville, Richard Woodville, 3rd Earl Rivers, Martha Woodville, Eleanor Woodville, Lionel Woodville, Margaret Woodville, Edward Woodville, Lord Scales, and Catherine Woodville, Duchess of Buckingham. Jacquetta of Luxembourg was a woman who married from love, just like her daughter Elizabeth of Woodville. She was accused of witchcraft later on in her life.

Jacquetta of Luxembourg was born either around 1415 or 1416, but many believe it was around 1416, to Pierre de Luxembourg,Count of St. Pol, Conversano and Brienne, seigneur of Enghien and Viscount of Lille, and his wife Margaret of Baux. Not much is known about Jacquetta’s early life. She was born during the Hundred Years War between France and England. In 1420, the Treaty of Troyes was signed, making King Henry V and his heirs the next heirs to the French throne. In 1422, the brother of Henry V, John Duke of Bedford was named regent in France for the young English King Henry VI. John was married to Anne, sister of Philip the Good, Duke of Burgundy in 1423. Anne died childless in 1432.

John wasn’t sure about marrying again, until Louis, Bishop of Thérouanne, convinced him to marry his niece Jacquetta; the couple was married by Louis in April 1433. The marriage was controversial because they had married so soon after the death of John’s first wife, making his brother in law, the Duke of Burgundy, upset. Humphrey Duke of Gloucester and the English regent to the young King Henry VI, requested that John come back to England to answer questions about neglect in his job in France. John also needed more funds for the war effort so he took Jacquetta with him to England in June of 1433. On July 8, Jacquetta was given the rights of English citizenship and that same year, her father Pierre de Luxembourg died. In 1434, Jacquetta of Luxembourg, Duchess of Bedford was given the honor of joining the Order of the Garter.

The Duke of Burgundy was still fuming over the marriage of John and Jacquetta, decided to abandon his alliance with the English and join forces with the French. During this time, Sir Richard Woodville was appointed as lieutenant of the garrison at Calais. His father was Richard Woodville, the chamberlain of the Duke of Bedford. John Duke of Bedford, was very ill at this time, and would die on September 14, 1435; he was buried in Rouen. He had no children with Jacquetta.

Sir Richard Woodville was ordered by King Henry VI to bring Jacquetta to England under an agreement with Jacquetta’s uncle Louis. This allowed her to maintain one third of the Bedford estates and the title of Duchess of Bedford if she agreed to go to England and obtain the king’s permission to remarry. During the journey, Jacquetta and Richard fell in love and married in secret, without seeking the king’s permission. This angered the king and he fined the couple 1000 pounds and on March 23, 1437, Parliament recognized the marriage. Jacquetta did raise the money and was able to buy land in October. The couple had a long and happy marriage. They had 14 children, including Elizabeth Woodville, the future Queen of England.

Richard continued his military career even after his controversial marriage. He served under the Dukes of Somerset and York in France until 1442 and he was recognized as a premier jouster. In 1444, Jacquetta and Richard were part of a large group to help escort Margaret of Anjou to England; Jacquetta was related to Margaret through marriage as Jacquetta’s sister Isabel was married to Margaret’s uncle Charles, Count of Maine. Jacquetta was a favorite at court and in 1448, Richard Woodville was made Baron Rivers. In 1452, Jacquetta watched as her daughter Elizabeth was married to Lord Grey of Groby, a member of the Lancastrian family. The couple would have two sons.

In 1453, Jacquetta was there for the churching ceremony of Margaret of Anjou after she gave birth to her son Edward of Westminster. In 1457, Richard was made constable of Rochester Castle and his family was sent to live with him there. Richard’s job was not to guard against attacks from the French but to guard against an attack from Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick. In 1461 at the Second Battle of St. Albans, Margaret of Anjou’s Lancastrian army were victorious over the Yorkist army, but Elizabeth Woodville’s husband and Jacquetta’s son in law Sir John Grey, was killed, leaving Elizabeth a widow.

After the Yorkist victory a few weeks later at Towton, Edward IV, the new king, stopped by at Grafton Regis for a couple of days, where it is said he fell in love with Elizabeth Grey, Jacquetta’s daughter. In 1464, the Lancastrian Woodvilles decided to side with Edward IV after he married Elizabeth in secret, angering his allies, especially Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, who was working on a marriage alliance with France. Jacquetta was there to see her daughter crowned queen and she was the godmother of Elizabeth’s first child, Elizabeth of York, born on February 11, 1466.

In 1469, Warwick decided to rebel against Edward IV and join the Lancastrian cause to put Henry VI back on the throne. After the Battle of Edgecote Moor, Jacquetta’s husband Richard and their son John were arrested and executed on August 12 at Kenilworth. Jacquetta was arrested by Warwick on the charges of witchcraft. She is said to have made two leaden figures of Edward IV and Elizabeth Grey and she practiced black arts to bring about the marriage between her daughter and the king. She was also accused of making a figure of Warwick and conspiring his death. These charges were dropped in February 1470, but they would resurface after Edward IV’s death in 1483.

In September 1470, Warwick invaded England and placed Henry VI back on the throne, forcing Edward IV to flee and Jacquetta, Elizabeth and her children sought sanctuary at Westminster Abbey. During this time, Elizabeth gave birth to her first son, the future Edward V. Edward IV returned and defeated Warwick at the Battle of Barnet in April 1471. When Margaret of Anjou returned, she formed an army to march against Edward IV, which forced Jacquetta and Elizabeth to seek shelter at the Tower of London. After the Battle of Tewkesbury, Jacquetta and Elizabeth exited the Tower and Margaret of Anjou and Henry VI entered it; Henry VI would later die in the Tower. Jacquetta tried to bring charges against Warwick for the murder of her husband and her son, but they failed. Jacquetta would die on May 30, 1472.

Biography: Thomas Stanley, 1st Earl of Derby

Quartered_arms_of_Sir_Thomas_Stanley,_1st_Earl_of_Derby,_KG(Born 1435- Died July 29, 1504). Son of Thomas Stanley, 1st Baron Stanley and Joan Goushill. Married to Lady Eleanor Neville and Lady Margaret Beaufort. Father of George Stanley, 9th Baron Strange, Sir Edward Stanley, James Stanley, Bishop of Ely.  Thomas Stanley was a wealthy landowner who was able to find favor with successive kings during the Wars of the Roses, until his death in 1504.

Thomas Stanley was born around 1435 and he was the eldest son of Thomas Stanley, 1st Baron Stanley and his wife Joan Goushill. The Stanleys supported Henry Bolingbroke and the Lancastrian cause until the reign of Henry VI. Stanley was a squire for King Henry VI in 1454, but then the king fell mentally ill. In 1455, the Wars of the Roses broke out between the Duke of York and the Duke of Somerset. Somerset was killed at the first battle of St. Albans, which should have ended the conflict, but it only embroiled it. In the late 1450’s, Stanley decided to marry Eleanor Neville, the sister of Richard Neville Earl of Warwick, aligning himself with the Yorkist cause. In 1459, after a lull in the fighting, Margaret of Anjou marched against the Yorkist army, which included Warwick, Stanley’s brother in law. At the Battle of Blore Heath in August 1459, Margaret of Anjou ordered Stanley to raise an army to stop Warwick, but Stanley refused to fight; Stanley’s brother William was firmly on the Yorkist side and he was attainted.

In 1460, Stanley saw that the Yorkist cause was coming into power and so he decided to side with York and his cause. Stanley fought alongside his brother in law Warwick against the Lancastrian army. Edward placed Stanley in charge of maintaining the peace in north-west England, which he did. After the death of his father in 1459, Stanley inherited his father’s titles, including those of Baron Stanley and “King of Mann” as well as his extensive lands and offices in Cheshire and Lancashire. Stanley was the last person to call himself “King of Mann” as his successors would style themselves as “Lord of Mann”.

When Warwick decided to revolt against the king between 1469 and 1471, Stanley was torn on who to support, his king or his brother in law. In 1470, when Warwick fled to France to join the Lancastrian cause, Stanley made his choice and decided to go to Manchester to seek aid and support. When Warwick made his way back to England, Stanley joined forces with him to restore Henry VI to the throne. Edward came back in 1471 and Warwick was killed. Stanley was forgiven for his disloyalty and right after Edward was restored to the throne, Stanley was appointed steward of the king’s household and thereafter became a regular member of the royal council. Stanley’s wife Eleanor Neville died around this time, cutting his ties with the Warwicks and the Nevilles.

Stanley was looking for another wife and in 1472, he married Lady Margaret Beaufort, dowager Countess of Richmond and the mother of Henry Tudor. In 1475, Stanley led an expedition to France and in 1482, he helped Richard Duke of Gloucester in Scotland, playing a large role in capturing Berwick upon Tweed.

On April 9, 1483, Edward IV died, leaving his son Edward V king, Stanley was among those who sought to maintain a balance of power between the young king’s uncle, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, who was now Lord Protector, and his maternal family, the Woodvilles. When the Duke of Gloucester attacked this group at a council meeting in June 1483, Stanley was wounded and imprisoned but was not executed like Hastings. That month, Parliament declared Edward V and his younger brother Richard, Duke of York illegitimate on the grounds that their father Edward IV’s marriage to Elizabeth Woodville was invalid , by way of a prior pre-contract of marriage with Eleanor Butler. The Duke of Gloucester was therefore declared king Richard III and it was confirmed through the act of Parliament called Titulus Regius.

Richard III decided not to isolate Stanley so he let Stanley to keep his position at court and allowed Margaret Beaufort to carry Queen Anne’s train at her coronation. Shortly afterward, Margaret’s properties and titles were given to Stanley and she was placed under house arrest instead of being executed for treason for aiding her son to overthrow Richard III. After the failed Buckingham rebellion in 1483, Stanley was given more forfeited properties and he was made Lord High Constable of England. Margaret was one of the conspirators in this plot and the one who arranged the marriage between her son Henry Tudor and Elizabeth of York. Stanley, in 1485, asked to leave court to go to his estates in Lancashire. Richard III , being very suspicious, agreed that he could if Stanley would allow his son George Stanley Lord Strange to stay at court. In reality, Lord Strange was a hostage.

The Stanleys were in constant communication with Henry Tudor and they were helping him with his landing in Wales and his invasion into England. Richard, hearing about this plan, ordered Stanley to raise an army and join him without delay. Stanley decided to fake an illness. Richard knew that Stanley had switched sides and the morning of the Battle of Bosworth Field, Richard said that he would kill Lord Strange if Stanley didn’t side with him. Stanley and his brother William decided to sit on the sidelines. Stanley did not fight, but it was his brother William who decided to intervene on Henry Tudor’s behalf, which helped Henry win the crown. Even though Stanley did not participate in the fighting, it is said that he is the one who placed the crown on Henry’s head after the battle was won. Henry VII was grateful to Thomas Stanley and made him the 1st Earl of Derby. William Stanley would foolishly side with Perkin Warbeck and would be executed for treason in 1495.

Stanley died at Lathom, Lancashire on July 29, 1504, and was buried in the family chapel in Burscough Priory, near Ormskirk in Lancashire. His son Lord Strange would die shortly afterward so the earldom of Derby was passed onto Stanley’s grandson Thomas Stanley, 2nd Earl of Derby.

Biography: Henry Stafford, 2nd Duke of Buckingham

Henry_Stafford(Born September 4, 1454- Died November 2, 1483). Son of Humphrey, Earl of Stafford and Margaret Beaufort, daughter of Edmund Beaufort 2nd Duke of Somerset. Married to Catherine Woodville, the sister of Queen Elizabeth Woodville. Father of Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, Elizabeth Stafford, Henry Stafford, 1st Earl of Wiltshire and Anne Stafford. Henry Stafford, Duke of Buckingham would become one of Richard III’s most trusted advisors, but he would switch sides and side with Henry Tudor, leading to his ultimate execution.

Henry Stafford was born on September 4, 1454 to Humphrey Earl of Stafford and Margaret Beaufort, the daughter of Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset. Henry’s father, Humphrey Stafford, was killed at the first battle of St. Albans in 1455. His grandfather Humphrey the 1st Duke of Buckingham was killed at Northampton in 1460. Both men were fighting for the Lancastrian cause. His grandfather, the 1st Duke of Buckingham, gained his title from his mother and was the son of Edmund, 5th Earl of Stafford, and of Anne, daughter of Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, youngest son of Edward III. His mother was Margaret Beaufort (not to be confused with Margaret Beaufort mother of Henry Tudor), daughter of Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset, grandson of John of Gaunt. When his grandfather passed away, the title of Duke of Buckingham passed onto Henry at the tender age of 4. With the royal blood on both sides of his family plus his title and inheritance, Henry’s future was very important to Edward IV.

In 1466, Henry Stafford married Catherine Woodville, the sister of Queen Elizabeth Woodville, and became the brother-in-law to the king Edward IV. Henry and Catherine had four children; Edward Stafford, 3rd Duke of Buckingham, Elizabeth Stafford, Henry Stafford, 1st Earl of Wiltshire and Anne Stafford. In 1474, Henry was made a Knight of the Garter and in 1478, he was a high steward at the trial of George, 1st Duke of Clarence. After Edward IV’s death on April 9, 1483, Henry decided to join forces with Richard Duke of Gloucester.
It was Buckingham who helped Richard obtain possession of the young King Edward V. For helping Richard, he was rewarded with the offices of Justiciar and Chamberlain of North and South Wales, and Constable of all the royal castles in the principality and Welsh Marches. According to Sir Thomas More, it was Buckingham who gave a speech at Guildhall on June 24, 1483 to the people to make Richard Duke of Gloucester king.

Richard Duke of Gloucester became King Richard III and Buckingham served as chamberlain and later Constable of England. Richard III thought that he could trust Buckingham as one of his right hand men, but he was sadly mistaken. In early August, Buckingham withdrew from court to Brecon, a town in Wales. Some say that he withdrew because he believed that he deserved more for his services to Richard III, others believe that he became disgusted with Richard III, or that he had his own desire for the crown since he did have royal blood in his veins. What we do know is that he began talking with a man name John Morton, who was a prisoner in the custody of Buckingham. Morton told him about a young Henry Tudor and Buckingham decided to support Henry Tudor and his mother Margaret Beaufort to have Henry Tudor replace Richard III as king of England.

A widespread plot was soon formed, but Richard had early warning, and on October 15, 1483, he issued a proclamation against Buckingham. Buckingham, as arranged, prepared to enter England with a large force of Welshmen. Buckingham’s troops were stopped by a massive flood on the Severn and he himself took refuge with a follower, Ralph Bannister, at Lacon Hall. Bannister betrayed him for a large reward, and on the November 1, 1483, Buckingham was brought to the king at Salisbury. Buckingham never saw Richard III and right after his trial on November 2, 1483, a Sunday, he was beheaded in the courtyard between the Blue Boar Inn and the Sarcen’s Head Inn near the marketplace at Salisbury. He died at the age of 29 and his titles and honors were forfeited.

Biography: Richard Neville,16th Earl of Warwick

62624506_129166816586Also known as “the Kingmaker”. (Born November 22, 1428- Died April 14, 1471). Son of Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury and Alice Montacute, 5th Countess of Salisbury. Married to Anne Beauchamp, 16th Countess of Warwick. Father of Isabel, Duchess of Clarence and Anne, Queen of England. Warwick “the Kingmaker” was the man who helped put Edward IV on the throne, but it was his greed for power and a broken alliance with Edward IV that would lead to his downfall.

Richard Neville was born on November 22, 1428 to Richard Neville, 5th Earl of Salisbury and Alice Montacute, 5th Countess of Salisbury. His father had gained his title of Earl of Salisbury through his marriage to Alice Montacute. We don’t know much about Richard’s childhood except that he was betrothed to Anne Beauchamp at the age of six. She was the daughter of daughter of Richard de Beauchamp, 13th Earl of Warwick, and of his wife Isabel Despenser, making Richard not only the heir to the earldom of Salisbury, but heir to a large part of the Montague, Beauchamp, and Despenser inheritance. With the death of Beauchamp’s son Henry, who was married to Richard’s sister Cecily in 1446 and the death of Henry’s daughter Anne in 1449, Richard found himself the new Earl of Warwick. This was disputed by Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset, who married another one of Beauchamp’s daughters from Beauchamp’s first marriage, not because of the titles since the daughters were barred from the line of succession, but because of the land. Richard Neville was now the 16th Earl of Warwick.

Warwick became a knight probably at the coronation of Margaret of Anjou on April 22, 1445. He and his father helped to calm the unrest in the north. They may have helped in the war against Scotland in 1448-1449. When Richard, Duke of York, rose against the king in 1452, Warwick and his father sided with Henry VI and York’s revolt ultimately failed.

In June 1453, Somerset was granted custody of the lordship of Glamorgan, which was part of the Despenser inheritance. This made Warwick upset and a conflict started between the two men. Unfortunately, Somerset was an ally of Margaret of Anjou and was a favorite in the court of Henry VI so Warwick had no choice but  to align himself with York. When York became the Lord Protector when Henry VI fell ill, Warwick and his father decided to fully support York. York’s first protectorate would not last long and Somerset fell back into favor, which angered York and Warwick. Warwick rallied an army with York and Warwick’s father and met Somerset at the First Battle of St. Albans, where Somerset was killed. This battle was the start of the Wars of the Roses.

After the First Battle of St. Albans, Henry VI fell ill again and York became Lord Protector for a second time. It didn’t last long, but after York was removed from his position of Protector, Warwick was granted  the title of Constable of Calais, which would become a valuable position during the conflict of the Wars of the Roses. He was able to gain military experience, as well as gain important allies Charles VII of France and Philip the Good of Burgundy. In  September 1459, Warwick was able to help lead a Yorkist army to victory against the Lancastrians at the Battle of Blore Heath. In 1459, at the battle of Ludlow, the Lancastrians won and sent the Yorkists into hiding. York fled to Ireland with his son Edmund Earl of Rutland, while Warwick took Edward Earl of March with him to Calais. The Yorkists came back with a vengeance at the battle of Northampton, where Henry VI was taken captive.

In 1460 York officially declared his claim to the throne. After much discussion, it was agreed that after the king died, York and his sons would be the heirs to the throne, removing Edward of Westminster from the line of succession. Henry VI seemed to have been okay with this arrangement, but Margaret was beyond upset. She led the Lancastrian forces to face off against York at the battle of Wakefield on December 30, 1460. York and his son Edmund, Earl of Rutland, were killed in the battle. Edward was 18 at the time of his father’s death.

Edward was now in charge of the Yorkist faction and with the help of Warwick, he was able to defeat the Lancastrian army at both the battle of Mortimer’s Cross and the Second Battle of St. Albans in February 1461. On March 4, 1461, Edward declared himself king of England, a move that his father never attempted to make. Three weeks later at the Battle of Towton on March 29, 1461, the bloodiest battle on English soil, Edward  and Warwick were able to decisively beat Henry VI’s forces and secure Edward’s claim to the throne. Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou fled to Scotland to seek the aid of James III.

Edward was declared Edward IV and  was welcomed to the throne. Edward owed a lot to his cousin Warwick, also known from that point on as  “the Kingmaker”, and he rewarded him greatly. He was made the Chamberlain of England , High Admiral of England and Steward of the Duchy of Lancaster, along with several other offices. Warwick was considered the second most powerful man in England. Warwick’s  brothers also benefited: John Neville, Lord Montagu, was made Warden of the East March in 1463, and the next year created Earl of Northumberland. George Neville, Bishop of Exeter, was confirmed in his post as chancellor by King Edward, and in 1465 was promoted to the archbishopric of York. In the summer of 1462, Warwick was able to negotiate a truce with  both Scotland and France, which allowed Warwick to be granted Lancastrian properties.

Warwick and Edward were considered close. However that would change very quickly. Warwick knew that Edward would have to marry well and so under his own initiative, he set to secure an alliance with the French King Louis XI by marrying Edward IV to the French king’s daughter Bona of Savoy. Edward wasn’t really thrilled about an alliance with France; he had actually prefered an alliance with Burgundy. Edward decided to take the issue of  his marriage into his own hands. In May 1464, he secretly married Elizabeth Woodville, the daughter of the 1st Lord of Rivers and Jacquetta Rivers, and the widow of Sir John Grey. They were able to keep the marriage a secret for over four months and when it was announced, there was an uproar. Her family was always supporters of the Lancastrian cause and there was a rumor, that we cannot confirm or deny as of right now, that Edward entered into a similar marriage contract with Lady Eleanor Butler a year or two before he married Elizabeth.

Warwick was obviously the most upset about this marriage because he had spent so much time setting up an alliance  with France to be thwarted. With the rise of the Woodvilles, Warwick feared that they would overthrow his title of the second most powerful man in England. Edward thwarted Warwick’s plans to marry his family with the king’s and the final straw for Warwick was when Edward married his sister Margaret to Charles duke of Burgundy, cementing an alliance between England and Burgundy, which was not what Warwick wanted. Warwick realized that the gap between him and Edward was too large.

Warwick decided to side with Edward’s power hungry younger brother George Duke of Clarence, and Louis XI of France, who promised Warwick land in France if he overthrew Edward. Warwick’s plan was to depose Edward and  place George on the throne. In July 1469, Warwick successfully married George to his daughter Isabel, which was something that Edward did not approve of. Warwick then started a series of uprisings in northern England; Edward was a popular king but his marriage with Elizabeth Woodville sullied his image a little while Warwick was seen as a national hero. Edward did employ an army, but when he saw that he was outnumbered, he dispersed his army and allowed himself to be captured by Warwick. Warwick had Edward imprisoned in the Tower, but when his reputation began to suffer, he released Edward in October 1469. Warwick and George both  decided to reconciled with Edward but Edward never truly trusted either of them ever again.

Warwick knew that if he was going to restore his power, he had to discuss matters with Louis XI and Margaret of Anjou, which meant that he had to defect to the Lancastrian cause, which he did. In September 1470, Warwick and his rebellion made its way to England. John Neville switched sides, which left Edward unprepared and it forced him to leave England on October 2 and seek aid from his brother in law the duke of Burgundy. Warwick removed Henry VI from the Tower and restored him to the throne. Warwick made a mistake and decided to take Louis XI’s advice and declare war on Burgundy. This forced the duke of Burgundy, who had stayed on the sidelines this entire time, to help Edward IV raise an army. Edward returned to England on March 11, 1471. His army defeated Warwick’s army at the Battle of Barnet, where Warwick and John Neville were killed.