Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Changing relationship between crown and the nobility: 'overmighty…
Changing relationship between crown and the nobility: 'overmighty subjects'.
Major landholders: props or rivals?
An effective monarch needed to delegate certain tasks to key noblemen:
The King's Chamber:
Headed by chamberlain who controlled who could see the king and how royal finances were spent.
The Chancery:
Legal section, wrote up important royal charters. Chancellor often a bishop to reflect the role of the Church in government.
Office of the privy seal:
Held the great seal almost permanently. Keeper of the Privy Seal often a clergyman and travelled around the country with the king.
The Exchequer:
Matters of royal finance (revenues, mostly taxes). Headed by treasurer.
Great Council:
Made up of lords who served in parliament. Could be upwards of 125 men and had the advantage of being able to be called at short notice.
The Continual Council:
A much smaller group of the king's advisors; dealing with everyday governance of the realm.
Key officers of state (such as the Chancellor) would often travel with the king to advise him.
Other roles like the Constable of the Tower of London and the Captain of Calais were held by leading nobles and were critical to the king fulfilling his role as monarch.
The role and status of nobles was a crucial factor; the king needed to be seen as taking advice from a range of the greater nobles. This had a practical element in that these nobles were often the great landowners and controlled loyalty in their areas.
The rebellion against Henry VI in 1450 was due to ridding the king of his 'evil councillors'. This prevented it being seen as outright treason and criticism of the king's decisions, whilst also allowing for protest over the dominating nobles (like Suffolk and Somerset).
The gentry also had an important role in advising the king.Typically, these were lesser landowners who often acted as sheriffs and justices of the peace. The gentry also made up the majority of the House of Commons when parliament was called. Parliament was crucial to the king for advice, passing laws and raising money through taxation, which could often be a source of controversy if the tax was not deemed to be spent on defence of the country.
The role of the Church
The Church was split into the regular clergy (monks, nuns, friars) and the secular clergy (priests and deacons). The Church owned lots of land and claimed exemption from tax which monarchs were not typically a fan of.
Finally, the Church also operated their own courts, where clergy could claim 'benefit of the clergy' (which Henry VII limited) if they had committed a crime.
Another bone of contention for monarchs was the loyalty shown by the clergy primarily to the pope (who had considerable spiritual and political authority) rather than the king.
There were benefits to the monarchy however, as demonstrated by Henry VII, who gained the support of the pope when usurping the throne and was grantal papal dispensation to marry Elizabeth of York, despite the fact they were both great-great-grandchildren of John of Gaunt.
The cathedral chapter were supposed to select new bishops, subject to the king's approval, but often the king would impose his own choice for political reasons - bishops had an automatic seat in the House of Lords and were involved in government offices (such as the chancellor). Ergo, it was important that the king have men who would be sympathetic to his will.
A career in the Church could be very politically advantageous. Gentry figures could rise to bishop and archbishop, whilstt also being chancellor or otherwise in royal service.
The shift by the end of the 1400s in kinghsip and nobilty helped shape Tudor England. The legacy of the WoR would therefore pave the way for the later attacks on the Church by Henry VIII.
Overmighty subjects vs. undermighty monarchs
Henry IV serves as an ideal example of the concept of OMS opposing UMM when he usurped the throne of Richard II.
This made a mockery of the concept of hereditary claim and provided a precedent for an unpopular king to be removed by force. This led to Henry facing rebellion as there were other legitimate claimants to the throne who would have felt wronged by Henry's actions.
The use of force became necessary for monarchs in the 15th Century to retain their crown from rebellious subjects.
Henry V and Henry VII were particularly good at effective use of force. Henry V demonstrates this during the Southampton Plot and Henry VII in the execution of Warwick.
The view that OMS and
the nobility were a stabilsing force is too simplistic
. Most nobles, even OMS, tried to keep the peace by brokering agreements and acting loyally as they had too much to lose from disruption.
Whilst the nobles were prominent in conflicts throughout this period, and many crises began at noble level,
their behaviour was often caused by the troubles of the time
. E.g. an incompetent government, the dynamics of civil war and undermighty monarchs.
Any good king recognised that the nobility were the best guarantee of rule in a region. This is why most kings sought to use them.
Edward IV sought clemency to try and maintain stability. Mixed success; Henry Beaufort (Somerset) pardoned but later rebelled, Henry Percy pardoned and remained loyal, and gave people like Hastings control in the midlands. Even Henry Tudor relied on Jasper Tudor.
The importance of heirs comes into play too. The nobility wanted security on the throne and when there is no heir (E.g. Edward IV only having a daughter in 1469, and later Richard III having no son), there are periods of uncertainty.
During the WoR, there was great disruption in the localities and to the nobility and the process of 'attainder, resumption and restoration' creates instability. There is a shift by the time Henry VII comes into power and this is because he does not rule through local lords like Henry IV did.
How significant was retaining to political stability?
Control of the land was crucial to political power in medieval England. Previously this had been controlled by the feudal system, but in the 15th Century feudalism becomes bastardised as there is a movement away from hereditary links between vassals and lords and towards cash payments (in lieu of land) to allow more freedom of selection for both lords and his retainers.
The oath of fealty is replaced by a contract of indenture and the entire system becomes more flexible
. There is a scope to argue that this shift in social hierarchy contributes to the WoR due to reflecting more widespread destabilisation.
However,it is worth remembering that retinues were necessary in order to provide the numbers of men required for fighting in France, particularly during the Hundred Years War and that large retinues were seen as a necessity for great magnates as a sign of power and status. This system of livery did lead to some
mercenary-type behaviour however with some men taking fees from more than one lord and causing civil unrest
.
There were several Acts of parliament to try and curb the misuse of retainers, although the fact that there were so many suggests that:
1) It was a growing concern.
2) the Acts were not particularly effective.
This is in part due to the recognition of the king of the necessity of retainers which meant that there were loopholes to exploit.
Henry VII actually introduced lots of retaining laws to mean only the king's men could retain. We therefore see a strengthening of the king's power by Edward IV and Henry VII.
Furthermore, they sought to re-establish control of justice and placed a monopoly on this; saw it as a king's job to bring justice and we therefore see Edward IV and Henry VII more active in this area.
Local disorder
The Neville-Percy dispute: 1453-58
Henry Percy's grandson (also Henry) manages to recover most of his lost land by 1440. Meanwhile, Richard Neville (Earl of Salisbury) was a member of the king's council and his son (also Richard Neville) would go on to marry Anne Beauchamp in 1449 and inherit the title Earl of Warwick.
Their rivalry arose when the possibility of former Percy estates would be given to the Nevilles through marriage. The Percys attempted to ambush Richard Neville and the newlyweds (Richard jr and Anne).Part of the reason this was able to happen was
due to the instability of the crown
, due to Henry VI being weak and ineffective.
The appointment of Richard of York as protector was bad for the Percys as Richard of Salisbury was made chancellor and tensions carried on. This dispute was somewhat resolved during Loveday in 1458.
This was not as big as it was made out to be
. The North/South divide was more pressing as the North were always more detached from the crown. This is relevant as when local lawyers and judges attempted to carry out the law they were often outnumbered and unable to fo their job.
With local disputes it is not as simple as saying that they occurred because of a weak king. In fact, many of the stronger kings did not settle them as they attempted to allow the law to do their job. They generally only stepped in if the issues threatened the national situation.
The Bonville-Courtenay dispute: 1455
The Courtenays were earls of Devon and were under threat from the growing esteem of the Bonvilles (William Lord Harington) who owned one of the most valuable estates in the area by 1437. Combined with Bonville's appointment as Royal Steward in Devon for life, he continued to grow in eminence - rising to baron under queen Margaret whilst the Courtenays allied themselves with Richard of York.
Bonville shifted his support to the Yorkist cause in 1455 after marrying his grandson to the Earl of Salisbury's daughter Katherine. In 1458, the new earl of Devon (Thomas Courtenay) finds favour with the queen, driving a further wedge between the two families and after the 2nd Battle of St Albans in 1461, Bonville was executed for being Henry VI's keeper for the Yorkists.
The Paston Family: 1459-76
The Pastons are a prime example of an upwardly mobile family whose petty disputes became representative of the wider Wars of the Roses. John Paston bequeathed his sons (John II and John III) a complex legal dispute over the inheritance of Sir John Fastolf, which involved Fastolf's two heirs (WIlliam Yelverton and Thomas Howes) but also the Mowbrays and the de la Poles.
Howes and Yelverton sold their right to inheritance to the Duke of Norfolk who occupied one of the properties - Caister Castle - until his death in 1476. This dispute lasted nearly 20 years (1459-1476) and thus saw a period of great change and instability in the monarchy, including the short-lived readeption of Henry VI.
Local disputes happen all the way through this period. It could be argued that at points they could be beneficial to a king in keeping the nobility on their toes and their minds off the crown. Having said this, they were not good for the economy or stability of the crown and were a
reflection on the strength of law
.
Readeption of Henry VI and return of Edward IV:
Edward's overreliance on Warwick deteriorates terribly and results in Warwick's failed attempt to seize the crown for himself. Warwick's actions perfectly encapsulate the concept of an OMS. Edward's second reign ushered in a much more stable period for local politics, largely due to the
development of regional councils
in addition to great and continual councils.
The Council of the North was particularly significant under the control of Richard of Gloucester (Richard III) which ensured Yorkist supervision in the hitherto lawless North.