De community ruimte is een vrije online ruimte (blog) waar vrijwilligers en organisaties hun opinies kunnen publiceren. De standpunten vermeld in deze community reflecteren niet noodzakelijk de redactionele lijn van DeWereldMorgen.be. De verantwoordelijkheid over de inhoud ligt bij de auteur.

The Wars of the Roses/Lancaster and York/Usurpation and the right to the throne through females

The Wars of the Roses/Lancaster and York/Usurpation and the right to the throne through females

dinsdag 17 februari 2015 17:40
Spread the love


THE WARS OF THE ROSES/LANCASTER AND YORK/USURPATIONAND THE RIGHT TO THE THRONE THROUGH FEMALES

SEE ALSO

http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-roseslancaster-and-yorkusurpation-and-the-right-to-the-throne-through-females-2/

Dear Readers

Recently I wrote a letter to Encyclopaedia Britannica abouttheir History Page about the House of York.
See my letter
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-roseslancaster-and-yorkusurpation-and-the-right-to-the-throne-by-femalesletter-to-encyclopaedia-britannica/

See the article of Encyclopaedia Britannica aboutthe House of York
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/653692/house-of-York

Although I have much appreciation for theirhistorical work I had some comments about their remarks on their Page, regarding the alleged ”usurpation”of the House of Lancaster by the House of York,by deposing King Henry VI by Edward of York, sonof Richard, Duke of York, in 1461, as the socalled”weakness” in the claim to the throne byRichard of York, because derived from females.
See my comments:
TRAVEL WITH ME TO THE PASTENTER THE WORLD

FIRST:
USURPATION OF THE THRONE OF THE HOUSE OFLANCASTER BY THE HOUSE OF YORK
Encyclopaedia Britannica wrote
House of York, younger branch of the house of Plantagenet of England. In the 15th century, having usurped the throne from the house of Lancaster, it provided three kings of England—Edward IV, Edward V, and Richard III—and, in turn defeated, passed on its claims to the Tudor dynasty.” [2]
I think they are wrong here, since, according to my opinion,there was no  ”usurpation” here, in the classic meaning of the definition.To go to the definition of ”usurpation”:
”illegal seizure and occupation of a throne.” [3]

I will not go extensively  into their remarks that the Houseof York ”passed on its claims to the Tudor dynasty”, which is wrong.Because, although there was a certain [not Tudor,but Beaufort/Lancaster] claim to the English throne [4], the House of York had a far stronger claim to the throne.I refer to that later.And smart Henry Tudor [who became King HenryVII and was undoubtedly aware of that stronger York claim] claimed the throne as ”right of conquest”,notby ”right of inheritance”,  afterhis victory in the Battle of Bosworth, where he defeatedthe Yorkist King Richard III. [5]And as a ”right of conquest” the legality of Henry’s kingshipwas considered generally. [6]
No, the main point I want to focus here is Encyclopaedia Britannica’s remark:”’House of York, younger branch of the house of Plantagenet of England. In the 15th century, having usurped the throne from the house of Lancaster”   [7]
USURPATIONTHE ACT OF ACCORD 
I said it beforeAccording the definition, usurpation is”illegal seizure and occupation of a throne.”

That means not only deposing a King(which was almost a deadly sin in the MiddleAges), but also through someonewho had none or lesser right to the throne.
In this case, at first there was no deposal ofthe throne at all, since there was ”the Act of Accord”and later, when King Edward IV ascended thethrone, the deposal of King Henry VI  was not as ”illegal”as it seemed, because of two factors:The stronger claim of the House of York to the throne,[the Mortimer claim to the throne],as the fact, that the House of Lancaster itself rose into powerby usurpation.But first the Act of Accord
I referred to the fact, that there was no deposal at allat first, mentioning the Act of Accord in 1460. [8].that  included, that King Henry VI remained King of England, but that Richard, Duke of York and his heirs would succeed Henry, thus desinheriting Henry´s son, Edward of Westminster. [9]
Of course one can put  questions by disinheriting theKings´s son, but that’s another story.The Act of Accord was a legal document, as aresult of negociations between the Duke of York andthe Parliament.(10), after his come back from Irelandand (indeed) seemed to have tried  to seize the throne.[11]
Admitted, that [the deal of the Duke of York with the Parliament] was power play, since the partyof the Duke of York was on the winning hand in theWars of the Roses at that moment, but the Act of Accorddid not come ´´out of the blue´´ either.
ACT OF ACCORDWHAT HAPPENED BEFORE
Susan Higginbotham, historical fictional writer ofMargaret Anjou, mentions the Act of Accord as´´York, after all, had bullied her husband (Henry VI, my remark)into disinheriting his own son in favor of York´´ (12)and it is her right to see it like that, but I have another vision,because I take the whole history, which preceeded the Accord Act.into consideration.
Since King Henry VI’s uncle, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester,died in 1447, Richard, Duke of York, was heir presumptiveto the then childless King Henry VI. [13]But from various reasons, King Henry VI, and his wife,Queen Margaret of Anjou [14] favourited the partyof the Duke’s adversary, Edmund Beaufort, 1st Dukeof Somerset [who was of the Lancaster Swynford line] [15]and sent Richard as Lieutenant to Ireland,obviously in a sort of exile.[16]Tensions grew high in the 50ths between York andthe Duke of Somerset [with the Queen as his ally],the King got mental ill and in 1453 became father, whichended York’s position as heir presumptive, but dueto the mental illness of the King, he became Protectorof the Realm twice.Enmity between York and Somerset [and Margaret ofAnjou] rose farther and probably they wanted Yorkto be arrested, so he and his allies armed themselves.A military confrontation was enevitable and broke out between York [withhis brother in law and his nephew, Warwick the Kingmaker asallies] and the King [actually the Queen and Somerset],which was the start of the Wars of the Roses.After several bloody battles, in 1459, the Coventry Parliament[probably instigated by Margaret of Anjou] attainted York and his allies [declared them to ”traitors” without trial] and forfeited their lives andestates [17], which left York [according to my opinion]no choice than first flee to Ireland and latertrying to seize the throne, resulting in the Act of Accord.
I don’t think either York, however ambitious, was after thethrone, before 1460.He had enough opportunities to have taken the throne beforethat [especially when the King was in his power after theFirst Battle of St Albans in 1455], but he never made an attemptuntill he was pushed to the edge by the attainder of 1459. [18]

THE ACT OF ACCORDAFTERMATHBLOODY WAR, WAKEFIELD 

When the Act of Accord had been accepted by the Lancastrian party,probably King Henry should have remained King till his death, butthe bloody battles intensified.Understandably, Margaret of Anjou was furious about her son’s disinheritanceand refused to accept it.She went to Scotland, asking Mary of Guelders, the Queen Regent,military support against the Yorkist party[19]  and the militaryconfrontations went on.In her absence,  the Battle of Wakefield took place,where the Dukeof York [higly probable] died in battle and his son Edmund Earl ofRutland, as the Dukes brother in law, the 5th Earl of Salisbury[the father of Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, the ”Kingmaker],were executed after the battle. [20]Unlike popular belief, Margaret of Anjou was not present at Wakefield, soshe couldn’t have ordered their executions. [21]She returned to England and defeated Warwick in the 2nd Battleof St Albans [22], where she was responsible for theexecutions following. [23]However, she spared the life of John Neville, brother ofthe Earl of Warwick, probably since the brotherof her commander  the 3rd Duke of Somerset[son to the late 2nd Duke of Somerset, enemy of Richard of York]was a captive in Yorkist hands. [24]
But relieved as she might have been to get rid of the Duke of York,she had a more formidable military adversary in his son and heirEdward, now Duke of York, who defeated the Lancastrian forces inthe bloody and decisive Battle of Towton. [25]

THE ACT OF ACCORD/AFTERMATHTHE DUKE OF YORK’S SON AND HEIR’SASCENDANCY TO THE THRONEKING EDWARD IV
Edward of York was not like his father, who had a loyaltyto the throne till he was pushed to the extremes.Probably hardened by the loss of his father and brother atWakefield [where Warwick also lost his father and brother Edward’s maternal uncle and cousin],as by an attitudeof machiavellistic politics,  he was not inclinedto hold on to the Act of accord, remaining Henry VI King of England.In fact, since his mental instability, as the reality ofEdward’s victories, he wouldn’t have ruled anyway.He was imprisoned in the Tower.
At march 1461, Edward was declared King of England, fulfillinghis father’s wishes for his sons.
USURPATION OR NOT?THE CLAIMS TO THE THRONE OF THE HOUSEOF YORK
Although Encyclopaedia Britannica calls the overthrowing of the Actof Accord an usurpation, to my opinion it is nousurpation at all, since the Lancasters should not have tobe kings all along, due to the superior claim to the throneof York, as the Lancaster usurpation of King Richard II. [26]
The claims to the throne first.
Richard, Duke of York had superior claims to the throne.He was the grandson of Edmund of Langley, the fourth sonof King Edward III, but that was not his superior claim, sincethe House of Lancaster [The ”King Henry’s” as the Beauforts}descended from John of Gaunt, the third son of King Edward III.But it was his mother” side, that gave him the superior claim.[27]
York’s maternal grandfather, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March,was the materrnal grandson of Lionel of Antwerp, the SECOND sonof King Edward III and that gave him a greater claim than that of the Lancaster.See the Family Tree
King Edward III
Lionel of Antwerp [second son to Edward III]
Philippa P lantagenet [Lionel’s daughter], married Edmund Mortimer, 3rd3th Earl of March
Roger, 4th Earl of March [Philippa Plantagenet’s son]
Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March [son to Roger]
Anne Mortimer [daughter to Roger], maried Richard Conisburtgh[son of Edmund of Langley, first Duke of York]
Richard, Duke of York [son to Anne Mortimer, descendant ofLionel of Antwerp, second son of Edward II]
Isabel Plantagenet [daughter to Anne Mortimer and sister toRichard, Duke of York] [28]

MORTIMERS CLAIM TO THE THRONE
But there was more, which asserted the superior York claims.Since King Richard II was childless, he appointed as his heirpresumptive, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March   [Richard of York’s maternal grandfather].Roger was the son of Richard II’s cousin Philippa [Richard II and Philippa were the children of two brothers,The Black Prince and Lionel of Antwerp, the first and second sonof King Edward III]. [29]
Roger Mortimer never became King, since he died a year before Richard II, buthis heir presumptive right passed to his son, Edmund, 5th Earl of March,who was the maternal uncle of Richard of York. [30]
However, since Henry Bolingbroke usurped the throne from Richard II, Edmund,only a boy, was overlooked, so also his superior right to the throne. [31]However, when Edmund Mortimer [brother to Richard the Duke’s mother,Anne Mortimer]died childless, York not only inherited his lands and estates,as his titles, but also his heir presumptive right.
After the death of King Henry VI’s uncle, Humphrey,Duke of Gloucester, [brother of his father Henry V],York became heir presumptive till the birth of Henry’s son in 1453, Edward ofWestminster. [32]
WHO WERE THE REAL USURPERS?LANCASTER USURPATION OF RICHARD II
I have shown above, that it was Henry IV, founder of the Houseof Lancaster, who usurped not only thethrone of England by deposing the rightful King Richard II [33],but also overlooked the rightful heir presumptive, Edmund  Mortimer.When the right to the throne was justly followed, not King Henry IV,but Edmund Mortimer had ascended the throne and was probablysucceeded by his nephew Richard, Duke of York.
Therefore it is [with all respect] utter nonsense to speak ofan ”usurpation of the throne” by Edward, son of Richard of York,in 1461.The only usurpators were the Lancasters.
Amitted, due to the military succesful reign of King Henry V [34],the usurpation was forgotten, but that didn’t make it undone.Therefore it were the Mortimers and their descendant Richard of York, who should have been Kings from the beginning.
I think that was the reason, that York was ousted of powerand sent to Ireland in the late 40s.And probably the reason, Margaret of Anjou didn’t trust him. [35]

SECOND:
THE ”WEAKNESS” OF THE CLAIM OFRICHARD OF YORK, SINCE IT WAS DERIVEDFROM FEMALES?
Encyclopaedia Britannica justly confirmed the superior claim of Yorkto the House of Lancaster, as they correctly state,that was the reign of Henry VI succesful, the claimwas never advanced at all.I also think, that the only reason York advanced hisclaim was the unsuccesful rule of Henry VI,due to his mental problems, his corrupt advisors,as the great losses in the Hundred Years War.
But I disagree with Encyclopaedia Britannica on the point, that the weakness in the claim of York was, that it was derived from females.
Because although men had the first rights to the throne,there was no Salic Law in England, that exclude women fromthe throne, nor from claims to the throne, which passedthrough their descendants.
For example Queen Maud [mother to the laterKing Henry II and daughter to King Henry I, who was theson to William the Conqueror] was declared heiress tothe throne by her father after the death of his only son. [36]Granted, the Norman barons didn’t accept her after the deathof her father and civil war burst out [37], but were women excluded,her father should not have declare his daughter heiress.
But moreover, claiming rights to the throne from female lineis done in English history at several occasions and wasconsidered legally and valid.
FOUR IMPORTANT HISTORICAL OCCASIONSBY WHICH MEN CLAIMED OR INHERITED THE THRONE FROM FEMALE LINE
There are at least four important occasions by which men claimed the throne from female descent.
First:Stephen of Blois, cousin to Queen Maud [daughterof King Henry I and heiress to the throne], who claimedthe right to the throne through female line [being a maternalgrandson to William the Conqueror]

The first was in the time of Queen Maud [called also”Empress Maud because of her earlier marriage withthe Holy Roman Emperor].Her right to the English throne was challenged by hercousin, Stephen of Blois, who claimed the thronethrough his grandfather, William the Conqueror, whowas his maternal grandfather. [38]He had men enough, prepared to support his maternalclaim, took the throne, drove his cousin Mathilda and her husband Henryof Anjou out of the country and a yearlong military struggle, theanarchy, started. [39]Eventually, after the death of Stephen’s son and heir,a deal was made, that Stephen would rule, but had to recognise Maud’s son, Henry of Anjou, as his heir. [40]
Second:Henry of Anjou [King Henry II], son to Queen Maud, who inherited the throne through his mother.
After Stephen’s death, Henry of Anjou would become King HenryII [41], father to Richard Lion Heart [Richard I] (42) and John, Kingof England [John Lackland] [43]Henry II was the founder of the Plantagenet Dynasty. [44]
So here are two men who claimed or inherited their thronefrom females.Stephen of Blois, claiming the throne as a grandson ofWilliam the Conqueror from his mother’s side asKing Henry II, who inherited the throne from his mother’sside.No ”weakness” here.
ThirdKing Edward III, who claimed the French throne throughhis mother, Isabella of FranceResulting in the Hundred Years War with France, being thematernal grandson of the French King Philip IV.
Perhaps most famous is the claim to the French throne,laid by King Edward III [45], through is mother, QueenIsabella of France (46), who was the daughter of the FrenchKing, Philip IV (47)That made Edward III the maternal grandson to a French King.When the last son of King Philip IV, named Charles IV (48),died in 1328 without a male heir, the question wasWho is going to be the new King!His sister Isabella, mother of Edward III, claimed the thronefor her son, but problem was, that since 1316 the SalicLaw was introduced in France (which excluded women asheirs to the throne). (49)This was no coincidence, but due to an adultery scandal,involving the wives of Charles IV and his brother Louis X (50),The Tour de Nesle Affair (51), questioning the paternityof the sons of the King.This was particularly urgent after the death of Louis X, sincethe legitimacy of his daughter Joan was in question, (52)due to her mother´s alleged adultery. (53)
Anyway, Isabella´s claim to the throne for Edward III wasrejected, since she, being a woman, was excluded from therights to the throne and couldn´t transmit a right what shedidn´t possess. (54)But that was the French Law.Point I want to make is, that claiming through a femalewas quite strong in England, which didn´t know the Salic Law.Eventually Edward III would claim the French throneanyway [55], which was one of the causes of theHundred Year´s war with France.And that´s my second point I want to state.Since no one in England questioned Edward´s claimthrough a female and the nobles wholeheartedly supportedhim in the war with France, female claims were neitherunusual nor ´´weak´´.
FOURTHLANCASTER CLAIM TO THE THRONE THROUGHFEMALE LINE/THE QUESTION EDMUND CROUCHBACK
Since Henry Bolingbroke usurped the throne of Richard II in1399, becoming King Henry IV, a Lancaster right to the throne was of the greatest importance, that was superiorto  that of Richard II, son of the first son of Edward IIIas the Mortimer right to the throne [descendants ofLionel of Antwerp, second son of Edward III.So Henry IV was clever enough not to base his claim on hisfathers side, since John of Gaunt [his father] was the third sonof Edward III.In stead of that, he based it on the side of his mother, Blanche,of Lancaster [56], who was the great granddaughter of Edmund Crouchback.[57]And Edmund Crouchback was the son of King Henry III [58] and theyounger brother of King Edward I. [59]One could say.So what about the claim?Well, here it is.According to Henry IV [Lancastrian views], this Edmund Crouchback wasnot the second son of Henry III, but his first son in stead of Edward I,but disinherited because of his bodily deformity [a twisted back]
You see the consequences?That makes King Edward I, II, III and Richard II a sort of usurpersand the rights to the throne of Richard II as the Mortimers claim null and void, since Edward III would be an usurper king.However, it’s a pity for Henry IV and the other Lancasters, whoclaimed the Crouchback case, that there is no proofwhatsoever, that Edward I was not the first son ofKing Henry III.So its pure Lancastrian propaganda. [60]
I mentioned this ”Edmund Crouchback claim” as the fourth historfical example of men, who based their claims on femalesor inherited the throne by females.
A proof, that deriving a right to the throne from females,as has done by Richard, Duke of York, was not ”weak”at all, but has proven valid and generally accepted throughEnglish history.

EPILOGUE

To my opinion, the deposing of King Henry VI by Edward of York,son of Richard, Duke of York, was no usurpation, sinceThe Duke of York [who passed the right to the throne to hiseldest son, Edward] had a superior right to the throne than King Henry VI,[called the Mortimer claim]being the descendant of Lionel of Antwerp, second sonof Edward III, while Henry was the descendant of the third sonof Edward III, John of Gaunt.In fact, after the death of King Richard II, the Dukes uncle,Edmund Mortimer, who was heir presumptive to Richard IIshould have become King of England.So by deposing Henry VI, Edward of York took his rightfulplace on the throne.
The reason why Edmund Mortimer didn’t become King waslain in the usurpation of Henry IV [grandfather to Henry VI] ofthe throne of Richard II, which was not only illegitimate,but also overlooking the superior Mortimer claim of EdmundMortimer.

Encyclopaedia Britannica also remarked the ”weak point” of the Mortimer claim[York’s right to the throne] his deriving from females.I’ve shown  four historical examples, by which claimsto the throne [or even inheritance] by females were made,the most famous Edward III claim to the French throne byhis mother, Queen Isabella [wife to Edward II]I think I have stated clearly, that the female right is valid and not weak.

Thank you for travelling with me to the past again

Astrid EssedAmsterdam 

SEE FOR NOTES
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-roseslancaster-and-yorkusurpation-and-the-right-to-the-throne-through-females-2/

SEE THE NOTES

[1]

ENGLISH HISTORY/THE WARS OF THE ROSES/MARGARET OF ANJOU, TWO MAJOR PLAYERSASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargaret-of-anjou-and-richard-duke-of-york-two-major-players/

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK, THE CLAIMS TO THE THRONE
OF LANCASTER AND YORKASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-and-york/

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES/A TRAVEL TO THE PASTASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosescauses-of-the-wars-of-the-rosesa-travel-to-the-past/

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/MARGARET OF ANJOU/SHE WOLFOR NOT/COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLE OF MR GARETH RUSELLABOUT MARGARET OF ANJOUASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesmargaret-of-anjoushe-wolf-or-notcomments-on-the-article-of-mr-gareth-rusell-about-margaret-of-anjou/

[2]

ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA, HOUSE OF YORK
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/653692/house-of-York

[3]
”illegal seizure and occupation of a throne.”
DICTIONARY.COM
USURPATION

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/usurpation

[4]

”Henry’s main claim to the English throne derived from his mother through the House of Beaufort. Henry’s mother, Lady Margaret Beaufort, was a great-granddaughter of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, fourth son of Edward III, and his third wife Katherine Swynford. Katherine was Gaunt’s mistress for about 25 years; when they married in 1396, they already had four children, including Henry’s great-grandfather John Beaufort.”

WIKIPEDIAHENRY VII OF ENGLANDANCESTRY AND EARLY LIFE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VII_of_England#Ancestry_and_early_life

SOURCEWIKIPEDIAHENRY VII OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VII_of_England

The Swynford branch of the Lancaster line [the children of John of Gaunt, son to Edward III and his mistress Kathryn Swynford], called the”Beauforts”, were legitimised first by King Richard II and later byKing Henry IV [as legitimate son of John of Gaunt, the halfbrother ofthe Beauforts], on condition that they should not claim the throne.
YOUTUBE.COMCAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSESMARK GOACHER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2QgaRbIjzQ

”The family is descended from John Beaufort (1371-1410), John of Gaunt’s son by his then-mistress Katherine Swynford. Gaunt married Swynford in 1396, and their children were legitimized by Richard II and Pope Boniface IX. They had three other children, also Beaufort: Henry, Thomas, and Joan.[1]

The Beauforts were a powerful and wealthy family from the start, and rose to greater power after their (half-)brother and uncle became King Henry IV in 1399. However, in 1406, Henry IV decided that although the Beauforts were legitimate, their genetic line could not be used to make any claim to the throne.”

WIKIPEDIA

HOUSE OF BEAUFORT

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Beaufort

[5]

WIKIPEDIA

BATTLE OF BOSWORTH

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bosworth_Field

[6]

”So Henry VII didn’t claim the throne through right of inheritance: he claimed it through the right of conquest, not through any of his own royal lineage.”

WOMEN’S HISTORY

LEGITIMATE ENOUGH HERITAGE?

TUDOR’S CLAIM TO THE THRONE [1485]

http://womenshistory.about.com/od/medbritishwomen/ss/Birth-Controversies-and-the-Wars-of-the-Roses_2.htm

” Henry VII acknowledged the necessity of marrying Elizabeth of York to ensure the stability of his rule and weaken the claims of other surviving members of the House of York, but he ruled in his own right and claimed the throne by right of conquest and not by his marriage to the heir of the House of York.”

WIKIPEDIAELIZABETH OF YORKWIFE OF THE KING
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_of_York#Wife_of_the_king

SOURCE
WIKIPEDIAELIZABETH OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_of_York

” It was truly through the defeat of Richard and the ‘right of conquest’ that Henry claimed the throne.”
TUDOR HISTORYHENRY VII
http://tudorhistory.org/henry7/

[7]

ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICAHOUSE OF YORK

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/653692/house-of-York

[8]
WIKIPEDIATHE ACT OF ACCORD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Accord

THE FULL TEXT OF THE ACT OF ACCORD
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X_4UAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA104&dq=inauthor:%22John+Silvester+Davies%22&output=html_text

BRITAIN EXPRESSTHE ACT OF ACCORD
http://www.britainexpress.com/History/medieval/act-accord.htm

HISTORY OF WARACT OF ACCORD, 25 OCTOBER 1460
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/treaty_act_accord.html

[9]
WIKIPEDIATHE ACT OF ACCORD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Accord

BRITAIN EXPRESSTHE ACT OF ACCORD
http://www.britainexpress.com/History/medieval/act-accord.htm

HISTORY OF WARACT OF ACCORD, 25 OCTOBER 1460
http://www.historyofwar.org/articles/treaty_act_accord.html

[10]
WIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORKTHE WEEL OF FORTUNE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York#The_wheel_of_fortune_.281459.E2.80.931460.29

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York

[11]

WIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORKTHE WEEL OF FORTUNE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York#The_wheel_of_fortune_.281459.E2.80.931460.29

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York

[12]

”Margaret undoubtedly rejoiced over York’s death—York, after all, had bullied her husband into disinheriting his own son in favor of York, and Margaret had every reason to fear for her husband’s future in a government controlled by York—but she did not have what to her might well have been the pleasure of seeing her enemy fall.”
MYTHS ABOUT MARGARET OF ANJOUSUSAN HIGGINBOTHAM
http://www.susanhigginbotham.com/subpages/margaretmyths.html

[13]

”The death of Humphrey, duke of Gloucester, in 1447 left York next in line for succession to the throne, and the Beauforts had him sent—virtually banished—to Ireland as lord lieutenant.”
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICARICHARD, 3RD DUKE OF YORK
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/653703/Richard-3rd-duke-of-York

[14]

WIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou



[15]
Kings favouritism of the Somerset and Suffolk party [whichwas the ”peace” party to France, more open fornegociations] against the Gloucester [the Kings uncleHumphrey  Duke of Gloucester] and York party[the war party to France]
YOUTUBE.COMCAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSESMARK GOACHER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2QgaRbIjzQ


[16]

His attitude toward the Council’s surrender of Maine, in return for an extension of the truce with France and a French bride for Henry, must have contributed to his appointment on 30 July as Lieutenant of Ireland. In some ways it was a logical appointment, as Richard was also Earl of Ulster and had considerable estates in Ireland, but it was also a convenient way of removing him from both England and France.”
WIKIPEDIARICHARD DUKE OF YORKIRELAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York#Ireland_.281445.E2.80.931450.29

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York

[17]
”In December 1459 York, Warwick and Salisbury had suffered attainder. Their lives were forfeit, and their lands reverted to the king; their heirs would not inherit.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York#The_wheel_of_fortune_.281459.E2.80.931460.29

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York
”On this day in 1459 the ‘Wars of the Roses’ between the houses of Lancaster and York took on an increased ferocity. Parliament had not met for three and a half years, since March 1456, when it had been dissolved following the resignation of Richard, duke of York, as Protector and the nominal resumption of authority by the mentally-unstable Henry VI. That summer the seat of government was effectively removed to Coventry, in the Lancastrian heart-lands, and the chief offices of state were allotted to intimates of the queen, Margaret of Anjou.”ON THIS DAY, 20 NOVEMBER 1459, THE ”PARLIAMENT OF DEVILSASSEMBLES AT COVENTRYHISTORY OF PARLIAMENT ONLINEhttp://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/periods/medieval/day-20-november-1459-parliament-devils-assembles-coventry WIKIPEDIAPARLIAMENT OF DEVILS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Devils

[18]
”In December 1459 York, Warwick and Salisbury had suffered attainder. Their lives were forfeit, and their lands reverted to the king; their heirs would not inherit.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York#The_wheel_of_fortune_.281459.E2.80.931460.29

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD, DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_York,_3rd_Duke_of_York
”On this day in 1459 the ‘Wars of the Roses’ between the houses of Lancaster and York took on an increased ferocity. Parliament had not met for three and a half years, since March 1456, when it had been dissolved following the resignation of Richard, duke of York, as Protector and the nominal resumption of authority by the mentally-unstable Henry VI. That summer the seat of government was effectively removed to Coventry, in the Lancastrian heart-lands, and the chief offices of state were allotted to intimates of the queen, Margaret of Anjou.”ON THIS DAY, 20 NOVEMBER 1459, THE ”PARLIAMENT OF DEVILSASSEMBLES AT COVENTRYHISTORY OF PARLIAMENT ONLINEhttp://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/periods/medieval/day-20-november-1459-parliament-devils-assembles-coventry WIKIPEDIAPARLIAMENT OF DEVILS http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliament_of_Devils

[19]

WIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOUMILITARY CAMPAIGNS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou#Military_campaigns

SOURCEWIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou#The_Wars_of_the_Roses

”While Mary was still mourning the death of King James II, the Lancastrian Queen Margaret of Anjou fled north across the border seeking refuge from the Yorkists. Mary sympathetically aided Margaret and took Edward of Westminster into her household to keep them out of Yorkist hands.

Mary’s dealings with Margaret were mainly to provide aid to the deposed queen. Mary gave a number of Scottish troops to help Margaret and the Lancastrian cause”

WIKIPEDIAMARY OF GUELDERSREGENCY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_of_Guelders#Regency

SOURCEWIKIPEDIAMARY OF GUELDERS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_of_Guelders

[20]

WIKIPEDIABATTLE OF WAKEFIELDCASUALTIES
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wakefield#Casualties

WIKIPEDIABATTLE OF WAKEFIELD

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wakefield

[21]

”While she was attempting to raise further support for the Lancastrian cause in Scotland,[15] her principal commander, Henry Beaufort, 3rd Duke of Somerset,[16] gained a major victory for her at the Battle of Wakefield on 30 December 1460 by defeating the combined armies of the Duke of York and the Earl of Salisbury. Both men were beheaded and their heads displayed on the gates of the city of York. As Margaret was in Scotland at the time the battle had taken place, it was impossible that she issued the orders for their executions despite popular belief to the contrary.”
WIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOUMILITARY CAMPAIGNS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou#Military_campaigns

WIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou#The_Wars_of_the_Roses

[22]
WIKIPEDIASECOND BATTLE OF ST ALBANS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_St_Albans

[23]

”Two knights (Lord Bonville and Sir Thomas Kyriell, a veteran leader of the Hundred Years War) had sworn to let him come to no harm, and remained with him throughout. The next morning Margaret asked her son, the seven-year-old Edward of Westminster, how, not whether, the two knights were to die. Edward, thus prompted, sent them to be beheaded.[6]
WIKIPEDIASECOND BATTLE OF ST ALBANSAFTERMATH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_St_Albans#Aftermath

SOURCEWIKIPEDIASECOND BATTLE OF ST ALBANS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_St_Albans

[24]

”John Neville had been captured but was spared execution, as the Duke of Somerset feared that his own younger brother who was in Yorkist hands might be executed in reprisal”
WIKIPEDIASECOND BATTLE OF ST ALBANSAFTERMATH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_St_Albans#Aftermath

SOURCEWIKIPEDIASECOND BATTLE OF ST ALBANS
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Battle_of_St_Albans

[25]
WIKIPEDIABATTLE OF TOWTON
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Towton

[26]

WARFARE HISTORY BLOGPRELUDE TO THE WARS OF THE ROSES,USURPATION,REBELLION AND MEDIEVALWARFARE  1387-1403
http://warfarehistorian.blogspot.nl/2012/10/prelude-to-wars-of-roses-usurpation.html

”Their son Henry usurped the throne in 1399, creating one of the factions in the Wars of the Roses.”
WIKIPEDIAHOUSE OF LANCASTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lancaster

[27]
YOUTUBE.COMCAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSESMARK GOACHER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2QgaRbIjzQ
”Though Parliament conceded that Richard had the better claim to the throne, they were unwilling to depose him outright. A compromise was reached, and that compromise was the Act of Accord.”
BRITAIN EXPRESSTHE ACT OF ACCORD
http://www.britainexpress.com/History/medieval/act-accord.htm

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/RICHARD, DUKE OFYORK/THE CLAIMS TO THE THRONE OF LANCASTERAND YORKASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-and-york/

[28]

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/RICHARD, DUKE OFYORK/THE CLAIMS TO THE THRONE OF LANCASTERAND YORKASTRID ESSED
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-and-york/

[29]

” During her own lifetime, Philippa was the heir presumptive to her first cousin Richard II; she would have been displaced in the succession by any legitimate children of the king. Richard remained childless, so after her death, her position as first in line for the throne passed to her son, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March. He was killed at the Battle of Kells in Ireland in 1398, making his six-year-old son, Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March, Richard’s heir presumptive.”
WIKIPEDIAPHILIPPA, 5TH COUNTESS OF ULSTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa,_5th_Countess_of_Ulster

[30]

” During her own lifetime, Philippa was the heir presumptive to her first cousin Richard II; she would have been displaced in the succession by any legitimate children of the king. Richard remained childless, so after her death, her position as first in line for the throne passed to her son, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March. He was killed at the Battle of Kells in Ireland in 1398, making his six-year-old son, Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March, Richard’s heir presumptive.”
WIKIPEDIAPHILIPPA, 5TH COUNTESS OF ULSTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa,_5th_Countess_of_Ulster

[31]

” A great-grandson of King Edward III of England, he was heir presumptive to King Richard II of England, his cousin once removed, when Richard II was deposed in favour of Henry IV. Edmund Mortimer’s claim to the crown was the basis of rebellions and plots against Henry IV and his son Henry V, and was later taken up by theHouse of York in the Wars of the Roses, though Mortimer himself was a important and loyal vassal of Henry V and Henry VI”
WIKIPEDIAEDMUND MORTIMER, 5TH EARL OF MARCH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Mortimer,_5th_Earl_of_March

[32]

WIKIPEDIAEDWARD OF WESTMINSTER, PRINCE OF WALES
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_of_Westminster,_Prince_of_Wales

[33]

WARFARE HISTORY BLOGPRELUDE TO THE WARS OF THE ROSES,USURPATION,REBELLION AND MEDIEVALWARFARE  1387-1403
http://warfarehistorian.blogspot.nl/2012/10/prelude-to-wars-of-roses-usurpation.html

”Their son Henry usurped the throne in 1399, creating one of the factions in the Wars of the Roses.”
WIKIPEDIAHOUSE OF LANCASTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lancaster

[34]
WIKIPEDIAHENRY V OF ENGLANDCAMPAIGN
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_V_of_England#1415_campaign

SOURCE

WIKIPEDIAHENRY V OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_V_of_England

[35]

WIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOUENMITY BETWEEN MARGARET AND THE DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou#Enmity_between_Margaret_and_the_Duke_of_York

SOURCEWIKIPEDIAMARGARET OF ANJOU
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_of_Anjou

[36]

”Meanwhile, Matilda’s younger brother, William Adelin, died in the White Ship disaster of 1120, leaving England facing a potential succession crisis. On Henry V’s death, Matilda was recalled to Normandy by her father, who arranged for her to marry Geoffrey of Anjou to form an alliance to protect his southern borders. Henry I had no further children and nominated Matilda as his heir, making his court swear an oath of loyalty to her and her successors, but the decision was not popular in the Anglo-Norman court.”
WIKIPEDIAEMPRESS MATHILDA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Matilda

[37]

WIKIPEDIATHE ANARCHY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchy

[38]

WIKIPEDIASTEPHEN, KING OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen,_King_of_England

BIOGRAPHYSTEPHEN OF BLOIS
http://www.biography.com/people/stephen-of-blois-9493736

Adela of Normandy also known as Adela of Blois and Adela of England (c. 1067[1] – 8 March 1137), and Saint Adela in Roman Catholicism,[2] was, by marriage, Countess of BloisChartres, and Meaux. She was a daughter ofWilliam the Conqueror and Matilda of Flanders. She was also the mother of Stephen, King of England and Henry of BloisBishop of Winchester.”
WIKIPEDIAADELA OF NORMANDY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adela_of_Normandy

[39]

WIKIPEDIATHE ANARCHY

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchy

[40]

”The Treaty of Wallingford, also known as the Treaty of Winchester or the Treaty of Westminster, was an agreement reached in England the summer of 1153. It effectively ended a civil war known as the Anarchy (1135–54), caused by a dispute between Empress Matilda and her cousin King Stephen of England over the English crown. The Treaty of Wallingford allowed Stephen to keep the throne until his death (which was to come in October 1154), but forced Stephen to recognise Matilda’s son Henry of Anjou (also called Henry FitzEmpress), who later became Henry II, as his heir.”

TREATY OF WALLINGFORD, ALSO KNOWNAS THE TREATY OF WINCHESTER

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Wallingford

[41]

WIKIPEDIAHENRY II OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_II_of_England

[42]

WIKIPEDIARICHARD I OF ENGLAND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_I_of_England

(43)
WIKIPEDIAJOHN, KING OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John,_King_of_England

[44]

WIKIPEDIAHOUSE OF PLANTAGENET

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Plantagenet

(45)

WIKIPEDIAEDWARD III OF ENGLAND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_III_of_England

(46)

WIKIPEDIAISABELLA OF FRANCE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_of_France

(47)

WIKIPEDIAPHILIP IV OF FRANCE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_IV_of_France

(48)

WIKIPEDIACHARLES IV OF FRANCE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_IV_of_France

(49)

´´ In 1316, a principle was established denying women succession to the French throne.´´
SOURCEWIKIPEDIAHUNDRED YEAR´S WAR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War

(50)

WIKIPEDIALOUIS X OF FRANCE

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_X_of_France

(51)

WIKIPEDIATOUR DE NESLE AFFAIR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_de_Nesle_Affair

(52)

´´Louis’ second wife Clementia was pregnant at the time of his death, leaving the succession in doubt. A son would have primacy over Louis’ daughter, Joan.[32] A daughter, however, would have a weaker claim to the throne, and would need to compete with Joan’s own claims – although suspicions hung over Joan’s parentage following the scandal in 1314´´

WIKIPEDIALOUIS X OF FRANCE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_X_of_France

(53)

WIKIPEDIATOUR DE NESLE AFFAIR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tour_de_Nesle_Affair

(54)

´´The French rejected the claim, maintaining that Isabella could not transmit a right which she did not possess.´´
WIKIPEDIAHUNDRED YEAR´S WAR
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War

(55)

´´ For about nine years (1328-1337), the English had accepted the Valois succession to the French throne. But the interference of the French king, Philip VI, in Edward III’s war against Scotland, led Edward III to reassert his claim to the French throne. Several overwhelming English victories in the war—especially at CrecyPoitiers, and Agincourt—raised the prospects of an ultimate English triumph. However, the greater resources of the French monarchy precluded a complete conquest. Starting in 1429, decisive French victories at PatayFormigny, and Castillon concluded the war in favor of France, with England permanently losing most of its major possessions on the continent.´´

WIKIPEDIAHUNDRED YEAR´S WAR

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Years%27_War

[56]

WIKIPEDIABLANCHE OF LANCASTER

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blanche_of_Lancaster

[57]

WIKIPEDIAEDMUND CROUCHBACK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Crouchback

[58]

WIKIPEDIAHENRY III OF ENGLAND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_III_of_England

[59]

WIKIPEDIAEDWARD I OF ENGLAND

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_I_of_England

[60]

LANCASTER ”EDMUND CROUCHBACK” CLAIM TO THE THRONE

YOUTUBE.COMCAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSESMARK GOACHER
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2QgaRbIjzQ

dagelijkse newsletter

Unite Talks: Mohamed Barrie

This interview is one to to take your time for! 🙏 🔆 45 minutes of Mohamed Barrie!🔆 💥 Mohamed is a dedicated social worker, organizer and advocate for veganism. He shares his view on structural racism, power, exclusion and veganism. 🌏 Based on his own experiences he shines a new light on the vegan movement and on the role of racism within these movements. 〄 PS: We just started doing these interviews, so feedback is much appreciated!

Geplaatst door u:nite op Dinsdag 20 oktober 2020

take down
the paywall
steun ons nu!