Key Enquiry Questions- Unit 2B
Topic One: Origins of conflict 1450-59
EQ1 – Why did conflict break out in 1455?
Weakness of Henry VI’s rule:
• 1422 Henry became king at 9 months
• 1431 – Henry crowned King of France. – During Henry’s minority the war with goes with some success
under the leadership of his uncle, Duke of Bedford.
(1421-1455 – Costly war with France – financial drain and damages prestige when starts to go badly.)
• 1432 – Henry never visits France again. Will later be seriously criticised for failing to lead his men in
battle against France
• 1437 – Henry takes control of government.
Heavily influenced by favourites such as Duke of Somerset and Duke of Suffolk. – ‘over-mighty subjects’
Led to tension and rivalries which Henry was unable to manage/control
• 1444 – Henry mistakes Cardinal Beaufort’s (Somerset’s uncle) offer of loans over £200,000 as
friendship, rather than as a means of controlling the King.
• 1446– John Capgrave reports naval and coastal security neglected – criticism of Henry’s ability to
provide protection and peace for his realm.
• 1447– Henry’s uncle, the Duke of Gloucester was brought down by his rival Cardinal Henry Beaufort
who accused him of treason.
King did nothing to help his uncle, who dies in mysterious circumstances before his trial. – Henry
misunderstood which would eventually play a part in outbreak of Wars of the Roses.
• 1449– War with France restarts. Foolishly Henry follows advice of Suffolk in backing the capture of the
town of Fougeres.
• 1450– Loss of Normandy
• 1450 – Cade’s Rebellion
• 1451 – Loss of Gascony Loss of morale in England – embarrassment. Loss of income for nobles – less
loyal to failing King. Lots of refugees arriving in England
• 1453 – Henry suffers mental breakdown. Rivalry between Margaret of Anjou, Somerset, Richard of York
and other nobles over who should rule now King is incapable. Birth of Henry’s son Edward
• 1455– Outbreak of the Wars of the Roses
•
Baronial factions:
Was Henry VI to blame for the feuds and rivalries amongst the nobility?
Did he take sides? Yes! In the Bonville/Courtenay feud he took Bonville’s sides and kept giving him titles that
traditional belonged to Courtenay making things much worse. Took Somerset’s side in his feud with York and
continually side-lined York, increasing tension
Did he not get involved? Also yes, he didn’t get involved in order to save his uncle the Duke of Gloucester. Didn’t
intervene even when the Neville Percy feud descended into violence- allowed it to devolve into a pitched battle.
Does this show him as a weak or strong king? Weak – he failed to control his nobility who owed him loyalty. A
strong king would not have allowed it to get to this stage.
Is he the reason things did not break out into civil war? Possibly – fear of treason/respect for the title of king
possibly helped to keep the peace at this stage. Although, still had loyalty of majority of nobility despite feuds.
Should Margaret of Anjou share the blame? Margaret took Somerset’s side and distrusted York and worked to
alienate him from Henry.
,
,Cades Rebellion:
What caused Cade’s rebellion?
Fear of revenge:
• The Duke of Suffolk was blamed for the loss of Normandy and arrested. Henry VI arranged for him to
be exiled (rather than executed), but his ship was intercepted, and he was murdered.
• The murder of the Duke of Suffolk is a key trigger for the rebellion as the Kentish folk feared they would
be held to blame for his death since his body had been found on a Kent beach.
• Their fears were fuelled by rumours that Lord Saye and William Crowmer, Sheriff of Kent, had
threatened to take revenge on the people of Kent.
Corrupt advisors:
• Many rebels demanded fairer and more efficient government, instead of one that appeared to favour
and reward corrupt nobles whilst punishing ordinary people.
• Lord Saye and Crowmer were seen as examples of corrupt officials in the Kent region because they had:
• Fixed elections so that ‘their’ men were elected to Parliament
• Reduced taxes paid by nobles, whilst increasing taxes for ordinary people
• Extorted money/goods from people by accusing them, falsely, of crimes, then fining
them. In some cases, their property was seized and the perpetrators were protected
– example on next slide.
• The rebels demanded an end to unjust taxation.
• They also wanted the king’s ‘evil advisors’ dealt with, as they blamed them for corrupting the
government, the Crown’s debt and the King’s inability to pay his bills, which led to higher taxes for
ordinary people.
National and Local complaints:
• As we have seen, corruption was an issue at a national and local level.
• A slump in the economy e.g. farming and the cloth trade, led to falling incomes, rising poverty and
hunger, especially in the south-east (Kent, Sussex…) – this made rebellion more likely.
• The rebels revised their petition, shifting from a local to a more national focus. They stressed their
loyalty to the Crown (why?), but demanded that the King’s corrupt advisors be dealt with, especially
those in the now dead Suffolk’s affinity e.g. Saye, Dudley, Ascough… - they executed those they caught.
They accused the corrupt advisors of:
• enriching themselves at the expense of the Crown – Henry VI granted more land than was required e.g.
to Lord Saye in Kent, Suffolk particularly in East Anglia and Thames Valley, Beaumont in Leicestershire
and Lincolnshire. It meant income now went to the Lords, not the King, so Crown income fell and bills
left unpaid. By 1448 some of the crown jewels had to be sold to repay debt.
• Corrupting law and justice for their own benefit – the Paston example supports this.
• Excluding nobles closely related to the King from acting as advisors – Suffolk and supporters lacked
royal blood and were accused of deliberately excluding those who had, especially Humphrey, Duke of
Gloucester and Richard, Duke of York. They blamed Suffolk for the death of the Duke of Gloucester.
• Losing Normandy was blamed on the treachery of Suffolk and his affinity, accusing them of having ‘sold’
Normandy in return for bribes.
• The loss of Normandy caused problems, e.g. soldiers billeted near the coast (unpaid bills, crime,
disorder..), a reduction in trade opportunities, and increase in French attacks along the southern coast,
a refugee problem as people fled France finding themselves homeless.
, Henry VI:
• The rebels were careful not to criticise the King, which might suggest Henry wasn’t to blame for the
outbreak of violence.
• But was Henry VI blameless?
• Could it be suggested that Henry’s inability to govern, his failure to provide stability and deliver justice,
lay at the root of the rebellion?
• Suffolk should share the blame but again, it was Henry’s failure to control ‘over-mighty subjects’ such
as Suffolk that was the root cause.
• Ultimately, Henry’s failure as king suggests he must take responsibility for the rebellion; there would
have been no need to protest had he been successful in governing the realm.
What did the rebels want?
When a truce was called, Cade presented a long list of complaints that reflected the local and national nature of
their complaints:
• Taxes were unfairly levied
• Taxes had been increased because the King had given so much crown land away to his
favourites.
• Crown debt had led to non-payment of sums owed.
• Justice was not impartially administered; bribery and corruption amongst judges and sheriffs
was rife.
• The Lords who were favourites at court were allowed to continue to hold office despite being
responsible for misgovernment at home and the loss of territories in France.
In essence the rebels wanted political reform and they saw the Duke of York as the one to lead this reform acting
as adviser to the King.
What was the significance of the rebellion?
• It had demonstrated the King’s inability to cope in a crisis. He failed to engage with the general
population and had failed to deal with the war in France, economic and political problems. He had fled
London rather than deal with the rebels. Henry VI was therefore seen as failing to act for the ‘common
weal’ of the country.
• It highlighted the extent to which the King’s government had failed. The spread of the violence to other
parts of the country showed widespread discontent with the ‘evil advisors’ that had been misleading
the King and ruining the country.
• The rebels had called on the Duke of York to act, but he did not return from Ireland immediately. This
allowed the Duke of Somerset to position himself as the King’s chief advisor, replacing Sussex.
• Somerset intensified the factions in government and the exclusion of York, making York a dangerous
enemy – he eventually challenged Somerset at St Albans, and ultimately felt pushed into going for the
Crown itself.
• York was also emboldened by the popular support shown for him during Cade’s rebellion, which might
have encouraged him to challenge ‘evil councillors’ and even to take the crown.
how serious the rivalry was between Gloucester and Somerset – failed to heal the rift = tensions
Loss of Normandy:
Wanted to make peace with France:
Henry VI, William de la Pole, Duke of Suffolk, Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset.
Wanted to continue the war with France:
Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, brother of Henry V, Richard, Duke of York.
How was Henry V’s empire lost?
• Henry V’s success was due partially to the weak French king, Charles VI; the new French king, Charles
VII, was more effective, which made the task of holding France difficult for Henry VI.
• Henry V had created an ambitious empire in France which proved impossible to keep control over.
• English crown was in debt and army commanders were not always paid, which led to a lack of loyalty;
crown lands had to be sold to pay for campaigns, draining the crown of finances.
