The Wars of the Roses/Richard, Duke of York/The claims to the throne of Lancaster and York

The Wars of the Roses/Richard, Duke of York/The claims to the throne of Lancaster and York

donderdag 22 januari 2015 06:29

THE WARS OF THE ROSES/RICHARD, DUKE OFYORK/THE CLAIMS TO THE THRONE OF LANCASTERAND YORK
SEE ALSO

http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-and-york/

INTRODUCTION

Dear Readers,

Recently I wrote about the Wars of Roses, with respect to the roleof Margaret of Anjou, wife of King Henry VI and her great adversary,Richard, Duke of York.
”English history/The Wars of the Roses/Margaret of Anjou andRichard, Duke of York, two major players
http://community.dewereldmorgen.be/blog/astridessed/2015/01/11/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargareta-of-anjou-and-the-duke-of-york-major-playershistorical-role-of-women-in-politics

AND
http://www.astridessed.nl/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargaret-of-anjou-and-richard-duke-of-york-two-major-players/

The wars of Roses were the civil war in late medieval Englandbetween the rivaling royal branches of the Plantagenet dynasty, theHouses of Lancaster and York, both claiming superior rightsto the throne.
Recently I encountered the very intesting blog ”Emily Tudor talkwith the article
”THE CLAIMS OF LANCASTER AND YORK”
http://emilystudortalk.blogspot.nl/2013/08/the-claims-of-lancaster-and-york.html

The author defends the view, that the Lancasters had a superiorright to the throne.In underlying article I defend, whythe House of York had a more superior right to the throne, whichis supported by modern history.
See also my letter to the author
http://community.dewereldmorgen.be/blog/astridessed/2015/01/22/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-of-yorkletter-to-emily-tudor-talk-blogspot

AND 
http://www.astridessed.nl/the-wars-of-the-rosesrichard-duke-of-yorkthe-claims-to-the-throne-of-lancaster-and-yorkletter-to-emily-tudor-talk-blogspot/

It is a little complicated, but when you are prepared to go into the fascinating medieval world and read my previous article first, youwill make the impressive journey to the past again.
See my article, again

http://community.dewereldmorgen.be/blog/astridessed/2015/01/11/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargareta-of-anjou-and-the-duke-of-york-major-playershistorical-role-of-women-in-politics

AND
http://www.astridessed.nl/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargaret-of-anjou-and-richard-duke-of-york-two-major-players/

ENJOY YOURSELF
ENTER THE WORLD
Astrid EssedAmsterdamThe Netherlands

”THE CLAIMS OF LANCASTER AND YORK”
http://emilystudortalk.blogspot.nl/2013/08/the-claims-of-lancaster-and-york.html

I have read a very interesting comment on Emily Tudor Talk Blogspotabout the Lancaster and York claim to the throne
http://emilystudortalk.blogspot.nl/2013/08/the-claims-of-lancaster-and-york.html

About the York claim the author writes
”Richard Duke of York, as the main member of the house of York trying to claim the throne, was the son of Anne Mortimer and her husband Richard earl of Cambridge (who’s elder brother was duke of York) Anne Mortimer is descended from the Mortimer line, which means she’s descends from the daughter of John of Gaunt’s older brother, Lionel of Clarence. (her name was Philippa by the way) As for Richard of Cambridge, he was descended from Edmund of York, a younger brother of John of Gaunt. Sadly women could not inherit the throne and female claims came second in the line of succession. Thus, Richard duke of York’s only claim could come through Edmund of York. But any of York’s descends use this claim. ”

My research [as of others] however showes, that not the Lancasters,but the Yorks had a superior right to the throne

FIRSTWOMAN’S RIGHTS TO THE THRONE
In contrary to what the author wrote, in England women could inheritthe throne, because there were no Salic Laws as in the HolyRoman Empire and France. [1]A historical English example is King Henry I [son toWilliam the Conqueror], who passed his right to the throneto his daughter Matilda, the later Queen Maud, mother ofKing Henry II. [2]If a woman had no right to inherit the throne, KingHenry could not have made such a move.That Queen Maud, also named  Empress Matilda[3]  [afterher former marriage to the Holy Roman EmperorHenry V] never ruled England, was due to the civilwar, which broke out, since her cousin, Stephen ofBlois, claimed the throne, simply because he was a man. [4]But he was also a grandson of William the Conqueror,by his mother Adela, daughter to William the Conqueror. [5]Not the son of the anointed King, Henry I [whoseson was already dead]
Civil war broke out, a period, called ”the Anarchy” [6],whichended with a compromise, the Treaty of Winchester [orWallingford],  whichwas an agreement reached in England the summer of 1153.  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.” [7]
After the death of Stephen of Blois, King Henry II ascended the throne. [8]

BACK TO THE YORK CLAIM ON THE THRONETHE SONS OF KING EDWARD III
King Edward III had a number of sons, Edward, the Black Prince [father of the later King Richard II] [9], Lionel ofAntwerp, Duke of Clarence [great great grandfather of Richard, theDuke of York] [10], John of Gaunt, First Duke of Lancaster[title inherited from his wife, Blanche of Lancaster] [11], Edmund ofLangley, First Duke of York [grandfather of Richard, Duke of York][12] and Thomas of Woodstock, First Duke of Gloucester. [13]
THE YORK LINEAGE OF INHERITANCEYORK BRANCHE AND MORTIMER BRANCHE
FATHER’S SIDE:
Richard, Duke of York, descends from as well as father’s asmother’s side, from King Edward III.His father, Richard of Conisburgh [14] was the second son ofEdmund Langley, Duke of York and therefore the grandson ofKing Edward III.[Conisburgh’s eldest brother, Edward of York, was slain in theBattle of Agincourt, died childless, so Conigsburgh’s son Richard, Dukeof York, inherited the considerable lands and the title of his uncle,Edward of York]
So as a descendant of the fourth son of King Edward III, Richard,Duke of York, had a claim to the throne, but of course, inferiorto the Lancasters, who decended from the third son.Therefore it’s his mothers claim, that counts.
MOTHER’S SIDEMORTIMER CLAIM TO THE THRONE
From his mother’s side, the Duke of York is descending from thesecond son of Edward III, Lionel of Antwerp.By right of primogeniture [15], the descendants of Lionel ofAntwerp should have gone before the Lancasters.Why that not happened, I will explain below.
Now the line.Lionel of Antwerp had one daughter, Philippa Plantagenet  [16],who married Edmund Mortimer, 3th Earl of March [17][therefore, the Mortimer claim to the throne].Her son, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March, [18]was the maternal grandfather of Richard, Dukeof York [the father of his mother, Anne Mortimer]

That Roger Mortimer would play an important role.I refer to that below.
So when Richard of York later claimed the throne, itwas not through his father, BUT THROUGH HIS MOTHER,ANNE MORTIMER, DESCENDANT OF THE SECONDSON OF EDWARD III AND THEREFORE HAVING SUPERIORRIGHTS TO THE THRONE.See also, the documentary about the Causes of the Warsof the Roses by Mark Goacher. [19]

KING RICHARD II AND ROGER MORTIMER,HEIR PRESUMPTIVEUSURPATION OF THE THRONE BY THE LANCASTERS
What made the Yorkist claim to the throne legitimate and valid weretwo factors.
The fact, that the Lancasters raised to power by usurping the thronefrom King Richard II [20], as the fact that Richard II appointed Roger Mortimer his heir presumptive [21], being the descendant of King Edward III’s second son, Lionel of Antwerp.He died a year before King Richard II, but his right to the throne passed tohis son, Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March [22].Edmund of Mortimer was the maternal uncle of Richard, Dukeof York [brother of his mother, Anne Mortimer] [23]
After the death of Edmund, the heir presumptive right, thus passed tohis nephew Richard, Duke of York. [24]
LANCASTER USURPATION OF THE THRONE OFKING RICHARD II
But there is more to it.At 1399, King Richard’s cousin [son of his uncle, John ofGaunt, third son of Edward III], Henry Bolingbroke, deposedRichard II, making himself King Henry IV. [25]That meant, that the Lancasters [Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI] wereno legitimate Kings, but usurpers,with the only later legitimizationthe considerable military successes of King Henry V. [26]
The Lancasters did an attempt by legitimise their right, by claiming,that Blanche of Lancaster [the wife of John of Gaunt[, who was a descendantof Edmund Crouchback [27] [son of King Henry III and younger brother ofKing Edward I], had superior rights to the throne.Because Edmund Crouchback was in reality the first son of King HenryIII, but was disinherited.So King Edward I should not have been king, being a younger brother.
However, this is pure Lancaster propaganda and no realproof for it whatsoever. [28]
By deposing King Richard II the Lancasters did more thanusurpation.Theyoverlooked and  passed the rightful heir presumptive Edmund Mortimer,  son of the first heir presumptive, Roger Mortimer. [29]
And in the fifties, when the reign of friendly and pious,and, alas, insane, King Henry VI was weak and men as Somersetand Suffolk [allies of the wife of Henry, Queen Margaret of Anjou],made a ruin of English rule [30], Richard, Duke of York, at last,made his claim, wiith a vengeance, resulting in civilwar, The Wars of the Roses.
See also my article 
ENGLISH HISTORY/THE WARS OF THE ROSES, MARGARET OF ANJOUAND RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK, TWO MAJOR PLAYERS

http://www.astridessed.nl/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargaret-of-anjou-and-richard-duke-of-york-two-major-players/

OR

http://community.dewereldmorgen.be/blog/astridessed/2015/01/11/english-historythe-wars-of-the-rosesmargareta-of-anjou-and-the-duke-of-york-major-playershistorical-role-of-women-in-politics

EPILOGUE

I think I have made my point by showing  a differentview, that the York claim to the throne was superior above theLancasters.
Summary:
The female right to the throne was valid.
The Yorks descended from the second son ofKing Edward III,.the Lancasters from the third
The Yorks of course based their claim on the MATERNALside [from the second son of Edward III], NOT onthe side of the father [descended from the fourth sonof Edward III]
King Richard II appointed Roger Mortimer, maternal grandfatherof the Duke of York, as his heir presumptive, which passedto his descendants, but could not be effectuated sinceHenry Bolingbroke [later King Henry IV] usurped the throne.
There was no proof, that Blanche of Lancaster”s [the wifeof John of Gaunt and foremother of the Lancasters] ancestor,Edmund Crouchback, second son of King Henry III, was in realityhis first son in stead of King Edward I, which was a claimof the Lancasters.

So I may conclude, as been affirmed by any source I researched,that the House of York had a superior right to the throne,by mother’s [Mortimer] side.
Thanks very much for making a trip to the pastwith me again

Astrid EssedAmsterdamThe Netherlands

[1]
WIKIPEDIASALIC LAW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_law

[2]

” In response to this, Henry declared his daughter, Matilda, as his heir and married her to Geoffrey of Anjou. ”
WIKIPEDIAKING HENRY I OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_I_of_England

[3]

WIKIPEDIAEMPRESS MATILDA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empress_Matilda

[4]

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

[5]

WIKIPEDIAADELA OF NORMANDY

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

[6]
WIKIPEDIATHE ANARCHY
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Anarchy

[7]
”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.”
WIKIPEDIATREATY OF WALLINGFORD
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Wallingford

[8]
WIKIPEDIAKING HENRY II OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_II_of_England

[9]
WIKIPEDIA EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward,_the_Black_Prince

[10]
WIKIPEDIALIONEL OF ANTWERP, DUKE OF CLARENCE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lionel_of_Antwerp,_1st_Duke_of_Clarence

[11]

WIKIPEDIAJOHN OF GAUNT, FIRST DUKE OF LANCASTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_of_Gaunt,_1st_Duke_of_Lancaster

[12]
WIKIPEDIAEDMUND OF LANGLEY, FIRST DUKE OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_of_Langley,_1st_Duke_of_York

[13]

WIKIPEDIATHOMAS OF WOODSTOCK, FIRST DUKEOF GLOUCESTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_of_Woodstock,_1st_Duke_of_Gloucester

[14]
WIKIPEDIARICHARD OF CONISBURGH

n.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_of_Conisburgh,_3rd_Earl_of_Cambridge

[15]

WIKIPEDIAPRIMOGENITURE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primogeniture

[16]

WIKIPEDIAPHILIPPA, 5TH COUNTESS OF ULSTER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippa,_5th_Countess_of_Ulster

[17]

WIKIPEDIAEDMUND MORTIMER, 3TH EARL OF MARCH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Mortimer,_3rd_Earl_of_March

[18]
ROGER MORTIMER, 4TH EARL OF MARCH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Mortimer,_4th_Earl_of_March

[19]

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

”The House of YorkFollowing the death of Henry V in 1422, other descendents of Edward III emerged and began to assert a claim to the throne. Edmund of Langley was Edward III’s fifth son, which meant he had less of a claim than his elder brother John of Gaunt. However, his grandson Richard Duke of York, had a stronger claim to the throne as he also had a connection to Edward III’s third son Lionel, Duke of Clarence (senior to John of Gaunt) through his mother, Anne Mortimer.”
BATTLE OF BLOREHEATH 1459ORIGINS OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
http://www.bloreheath.org/wars.php?ref=wars

[20]
WIKIPEDIARICHARD II OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_II_of_England

[21]
WIKIPEDIAHEIR PRESUMPTIVE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heir_presumptive

WIKIPEDIAROGER MORTIMER, 4TH EARL OF MARCH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roger_Mortimer,_4th_Earl_of_March

[22]
Edmund de Mortimer, 5th Earl of March and 7th Earl of Ulster (6 November 1391 – 18 January 1425), was anEnglish nobleman. 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.”

WIKIPEDIAEDMUND MORTIMER, 5TH EARL OF MARCH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edmund_Mortimer,_5th_Earl_of_March

[23]

”Anne’s father, Roger Mortimer, 4th Earl of March, was heir presumptive during his lifetime, and at his death in Ireland on 20 July 1398 his claim to the crown passed to his eldest son, Edmund.”

WIKIPEDIAANNE DE MORTIMER
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_de_Mortimer

[24]

The Duke of York, now Henry’s heir presumptive, was excluded from the court circle and sent to govern Ireland, while his opponents, the Earls of Suffolk and Somerset were promoted to Dukes, a title at that time still normally reserved for immediate relatives of the monarch.[11]

WIKIPEDIAHENRY VI OF ENGLANDINSANITY AND THE ASCENDANCY OF YORK
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England#Insanity.2C_and_the_ascendancy_of_York


SOURCE
WIKIPEDIAHENRY VI OF ENGLAND

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


[25]



WIKIPEDIARICHARD II OF ENGLANDOVERTHROW AND DEATH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_II_of_England#Overthrow_and_death

SOURCEWIKIPEDIARICHARD II OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_II_of_England

WIKIPEDIAHENRY VI OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_IV_of_England

[26]

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

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

[27]

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

ENGLISH MONARCHSPLANTAGENET OF LANCASTEREDMUND CROUCHBACK, EARL OF LANCASTER

http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/plantagenet_68.html




http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/plantagenet_68.html

[28]

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

[29]

”Henry was by now fully determined to take the throne, but presenting a rationale for this action proved a dilemma.[3] It was argued that Richard, through his tyranny and misgovernment, had rendered himself unworthy of being king.[78] However, Henry was not next in the line to the throne; the heir presumptive was Edmund Mortimer, Earl of March, who descended from Edward III‘s second son, Lionel of Antwerp. Bolingbroke’s father, John of Gaunt, was Edward’s third son.[79]
WIKIPEDIARICHARD II OF ENGLANDOVERTHROW AND DEATH
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_II_of_England#Overthrow_and_death

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

[29]

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

[30]

WIKIPEDIAHENRY VI OF ENGLANDTHE ASCENDANCY OF SUFFOLK AND SOMERSET
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England#The_ascendancy_of_Suffolk_and_Somerset

WIKIPEDIAHENRY VI OF ENGLAND
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_VI_of_England

dagelijkse newsletter

take down
the paywall
steun ons nu!