Round Two: Henry VI/Lancaster vs Edward IV/York (ep 46)

For Round Two, we’re jumping right into the middle of an epic battle: York versus Lancaster. The Question is which King DESERVED to win the Wars of the Roses: Henry VI of the House of Lancaster or Edward IV of the House of York. Both men were the son of a warrior, both men sat on the throne, both men won the crown in battle. So which King, Henry or Edward, do you think deserved to be the ultimate winner of the Wars of the Roses?

Henry VI was the son of one of the greatest kings in English history: Henry V. Son of that great warriors, Henry VI was the first King of England to inherit the French throne! King of France and England, all before turning a year old. And there’s the problem. 

The early years of Henry VI’s reign were also the early years of his life! When Henry V realized he was dying, he made provisions for his baby son’s reign with his brothers sharing responsibility. So young Henry VI was surrounded by relatives with their individual personalities and competing agendas. 

The York family were descendants of King Edward III, just like Henry VI was. Richard, Duke of York, was a loyal servant of the King who wanted a more important job. The king needed someone to establish order in France following the death of the Duke of Bedford. He appointed the Duke of York lieutenant-general of France. This was York’s big break, so he headed off to France.

The King’s court fell apart in 1453. Summer brought disaster in France. The English army was destroyed by a French force. This represented a lasting defeat for the English. Henry VI was devastated and, possibly as a result, fell into an illness that left him unable to speak, recognize those around him, or comprehend where he was. He couldn’t eat or walk. It was as if he retreated from life. The next March, the Duke of York was elected as protector and defender of the realm. It was agreed that he would act until the king recovered.

The king recovered as suddenly as he had become ill. His physical strength was restored. He was able to move around unassisted. He was able to communicate. He recognized those around him. He was delighted to see his wife and meet his newborn son. All those around him reportedly wept with joy.

York did not weep with joy. He was thrown out of government and responded by raising an army and eventually fighting for the crown. After a series of battles, Richard Duke of York was killed at Wakefield in 1460. But his son Edward took up the fight and, a year later, was proclaimed King Edward IV.

The fighting continued. After Yorkist forces defeated the Lancastrians, the Lancastrians regrouped. They were significantly helped by the addition of the "Kingmaker,"who had supported York but switched sides and restored Henry VI to the throne in 1470. But York assembled a new army and fought back, taking the throne once more in 1471. This time Edward IV made sure Henry VI and his main supporters were dead or immobilized, and he reigned for a dozen years.

So...was it ok for the Dukes of York to come out in open rebellion against the King? Was it OK for Edward IV to take the throne (twice) from an anointed King?

Who deserved to win the Wars of the Roses?

History shows us what's possible.