Factions and Feuds

Factions and Feuds are among the various issues that caused the Wars of the Roses. However, many students will be unfamiliar with the way in which late medieval politics worked, so will find it hard to place these issues into context. This page explores some possible routes of tackling this issue. It follows on from an introduction to the causes of the Wars of the Roses outlined in A Harvest of Heads.

Also see – British History – Wars of the Roses 1455-1487 – Lessons and Activities

Factions

Do students understand what a faction is? A very simple starting point is to address that very question: what is a faction? If this can be defined as a starting point, it can then be applied to a medieval setting. So, what is a faction? In simple terms, it is a group with a viewpoint. Students then need to think about how this may work in a medieval setting.

Medieval Governance

This could be achieved utilising active learning techniques similar to those on thinkinghistory.co.uk. Alternatively, an explanation with questioning will suffice.

Head of State: the King. All laws are by the King or in his name.

Council: senior nobles who advise the King on matters of importance. In Henry VI‘s minority, the council rules in his name.

Parliament: the Lords and Bishops form one house, elected MPs form another.

Court: the household of the Royals. It influences decision-makers.

The gentry: they elected MPs.

The commons: ordinary people. These come in many forms, be they merchants, guild members, sailors, farmers etc. They have the right to petition.

The church: has representation at Council and in Parliament. The clergy remained bound to ecclesiastical laws.

Is that basically the Feudal System?

Some students may recall the Feudal System from earlier studies. At this point it is worth explaining to them that Feudalism was not quite as simple as taught to year 7s, nor was it the same in the 15th century as it had been in the 11th. By the 15th century, the system had developed into what is sometimes called “Bastard Feudalism”. In this structure, the role of the King remained pivotal but he was held to account, could not make any demands he wanted without approval and people and organisations had rights and regulations governing their relationship with the state.

Questions

• How might factions emerge within this system of Government?
• In what ways can having factions within a medieval Government be a good thing?
• In what ways can having factions within a medieval Government be a negative thing?
• What do students think the possible outcomes of having factions within medieval governments might be?

From Consensus Councils to Majority Rule

One consideration in the role of factions is the changing nature of Henry VIs government. Prior to him assuming personal rule the Council ruled in his name through a consensus approach. Factions did emerge during this period. There was a block of power based around Cardinal Beaufort. Others supported Humphrey, duke of Gloucester. The influence of Somerset and Suffolk also increased over time. So too did that of Richard 3rd Duke of York. The Council though had to rule by majority, or ideally unanimous, decisions. Factions could be healthy in terms of moderating a policy or adapting it so that it worked. They could also lead to tension building up but not necessarily being aired.

Does Majority Rule change everything?

With Henry VI assuming personal rule the need for consensus government goes. Everything now is through the King, or by the King.  This means in theory that opposing views are less likely to be shared: you cannot directly challenge the King, it is unlawful.

Questions

• Who now decides who has positions of authority in Government?
• How will he decide who should be appointed?
• Are there any factors that will colour his judgement on these matters?
• What issues does he have to take into consideration when choosing appointments?

Sourcework: Factions in the late 1440s and early 1450s.

Understanding the basics of the system of government is very important. Seeing how it can be affected by factionalism is also key to understanding the events of the 1450s. The following sources and accompanying questions introduce the issue of factions. Students will need additional lesson time to fully comprehend it, this is introductory in nature.

Source 1: Growing Enmity

In these recent times sprang up between our lord, king Henry the Sixth and Richard, the most illustrious duke of York, those dissensions, never sufficiently to be regretted, and never henceforth allayed: dissensions indeed, which were only to be atoned for by the deaths of nearly all the nobles of the realm. For there were certain persons enjoying the royal intimacy, who were rivals of the said duke, and who brought serious accusations against him of treason, and made him to stink in the king’s nostrils even unto the death; as they insisted that he was endeavouring to gain the kingdom into his own hands, and was planning how to secure the sceptre of the realm for himself and his successors. For this reason he was often summoned by threatening letters to appear in the royal presence, and was as often prevented by his rivals, as he was never allowed to gain admission to the royal presence, nor yet so much as to gain a sight of the king. At last, a solemn oath was demanded of him upon the sacrament at the altar, to the effect that, so long as he should live he would never aspire to the rule of the kingdom, nor in any way attempt to usurp the same. Without any further delay, he was forbidden all intercourse with his adherents, and was most strictly ordered not to presume publicly to go beyond his own estates, or to pass the boundaries of his castles. Upon this, many of the nobles of the realm, who held the said duke in some degree of honor, took it very much to heart that injuries so monstrous and so great should be inflicted upon an innocent man; nay more, for want of free breathing, they were unable to bear this state of things any longer, but determined to watch for an opportunity to inflict due vengeance for their malice upon their malignant rivals; in case they could find any means of removing them from the side of the king, in whose presence they were in continual attendance.

Croyland (Crowland) Chronicle.

Questions:

1. What does the Croyland Chronicle suggest is the cause of factionalism in the years leading up to the outbreak of warfare?
2. What facts are stated within this source?
3. What opinions are offered within this source?
4. Would the writer of the Croyland Chronicle be in a position to have detailed knowledge or insight into the workings of court? Why do you think this?

Source 2: Factionalism 1450-60

And not only among princes and people had such a spirit of contention arisen, but even in every society, whether chapter, college, or convent, had this unhappy plague of division effected an entrance; so much so, that brother could hardly with any degree of security admit brother into his confidnece, or friend a friend, nor could any one reveal the secrets of his conscience without giving offence. The consequence was, that, from and after this period of time, the combatants on both sides, uniting their respective forces together, attacked each other whenever they happened to meet, and, quite in accordance with the doubtful issue of warfare, now the one and now the other, for the moment gained the victory, while fortune was continually shifting her position. In the meantime, however, the slaughter of men was immense; for besides the dukes, earls, barons, and distinguished warriors who were cruelly slain, multitudes almost innumerable of common people died of their wounds. Such was the state of the kingdom for nearly ten years.

Croyland (Crowland) Chronicle.

The Chronicle is outlining the manner in which factionalism escalated. From contention to distrust to violence. Some of the ‘attacks’ on each other would be verbal, or symbolic – such as removal of office, demotion etc – others would be the use of armed force. “Such was the state of the kingdom for nearly ten years”, remember that this segment of the chronicle is talking about the period 1450 to 1461. It talks of slaughter, warriors, death from wounds over a sustained period: most of which we would NOT consider being a state of war. This is a very damning account of the state in which England had gotten itself into in the 1450s.

Questions

1. Why were men of all ranks finding themselves in a position of contention, distrust and eventually attacking one another? What had led to England being like this?
2. Who would the nobility, gentry and commons turn to for leadership in such times? Given that there is contention, would they all look to the same people for leadership? How does this lead to the hardening of factional positions?

Source 3: York, a man with a score to settle?

It was over Normandy that the two royal dukes fell out. The rift occurred partly because Somerset was preferred for the post of lieutenant-governor in 1447 and partly because York lost substantial French possessions as a result of Somerset’s negligence. From York’s point of view it was not just a question of pique that he had been overlooked in 1447. He had a personal appandage in Normandy and, as the previous governor, an established affinity based in the province. The loss of his appandange, while he himself was prevented by his soujourn in Ireland from defending it in person and without Somerset lifting a finger on his behalf, added insult to injury. When York returned to England in the summer of 1450, he was a man who had a score to settle.

AJ Pollard, The Wars of the Roses.

AJ Pollard is one of the leading recent historians of the Wars of the Roses. He is Emeritus Professor of the University of Teesside and specialises particularly in the history of the Wars of the Roses in the North East of England. His book ‘The Wars of the Roses’ has been revised three times to take into account new scholarship, research and trends in historical thinking on the subject.

Questions:

1. What does Pollard say is the cause of the rift between the Dukes of Somerset and York?
2. In what ways does Pollard’s modern interpretation of the problem differ from the contemporary account of the Croyland Chronicle?
3. Is it possible for both the Croyland Chronicles version and Pollard’s interpretation to be correct? Explain your answer.

Source 4: One of the worst crises in the history of medieval England

Although York made great play with Somerset’s loss of France and more generally with the misconduct of the war in general in the 1440s, it is clear that he neither resented Somerset’s succession to his command in 1446 nor resisted the inexorable progress toward the surrender of Maine…

We must remember that York was in Ireland when he first heard of the occurrences of 1449-50. In its combination of overwhelming opposition in parliament and the violent rebellion in the country at large, this was  one of the worst crises in the history of medieval England. All the nobility must have felt shaken to the core, especially in view of  the fact that we must now accept their acquiescence in the governance and policies that had caused it. What must have been particularly humiliating and alarming for them is that it showed that, in their anxiety to maintain unity and the semblance of rule in the 1440s, they had lost their ability to act as links between the centre and the provinces. They, who should have spoken for the gentry, had allowed themselves to be led into a course of action that was being rejected wholesale by the rest of the political nation.

Christine Carpenter The Wars of the Roses 1997

Christine Carpenter is Professor of English Medieval History at Newnham Colle, The University of Cambridge. Her book The Wars of the Roses: Politics and the constitution in England c1437-1509 is one of the leading recent assessments of the period. Like Pollard, her work has been hugely influential and it reflects on historiographical developments: so much so that the causes of the Wars of the Roses don’t actually get touched upon until page 116 of the book.

Questions:

1. Professors Carpenter and Pollard are among the best in the field. How can they have such different views of the views held by Richard 3rd Duke of York about Somerset being given the Lord Lieutenancy of France?
2. What are the major issues facing the medieval English nobility in 1450? How might they lead to the development of opposing and increasingly hostile factions?
3. What issues facing the government of medieval England in the period 1450-55 are not mentioned in any of these sources? In what way are they linked to factionalism?

Focus Question: How do problems between Somerset and York impact on the running of the country?

Think about the structure of Medieval Government as outlined in the first half of this lesson. Consider the way in which a conflict between two Dukes – the most senior title that can be held other than those for the immediate family of the monarch – will affect the workings of state apparatus at each level.

 

Links

Hicks on the causes of the Wars (From a Review by Professor J Watts)

Causes of the Wars of the Roses – Course of the War of the Roses – Events of the War of the Roses

Battles in the Wars of the Roses

First Battle of St. Albans  – Battle of Blore Heath – Battle of Ludford Bridge – Battle of Northampton – Battle of Wakefield – Battle of Mortimer’s Cross – Second Battle of St. Albans Battle of Ferrybridge – Battle of Towton – Battle of Hedgeley Moor – Battle of Hexham – Battle of Edgecote Moor – Battle of Losecote Field – Battle of Barnet – Battle of Tewkesbury – Battle of Bosworth – Battle of Stoke Field

Documents, Maps and Evidence

The Rous Rolls – Paston Letters – Edward IV Roll

People and periods

British History – The Wars of the Roses – The Plantagenets – The Tudors – King Henry IV – King Henry V – King Henry VI – King Edward IV – King Edward V – King Richard III – King Henry VII – Margaret of Anjou

Schoolshistory – teaching resources for Key Stage 3, GCSE and A Level history