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

HISTORICAL FICTION
Richard II King of England.jpg
HISTORICAL IMAGE

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

KING RICHARD II,[SON OF THE BLACK PRINCE , THE FIRST
SON OF KING EDWARD III, WHO DIED DURING THE
REIGN OF EDWARD III
THEREFORE RICHARD II WAS SUCCESSOR
OF KING EDWARD III], WHO DECLARED ROGER MORTIMER
HIS HEIR PRESUMPTIVE.
ROGER MORTIMER WAS THE SON OF RICHARD II’S FIRST
COUSIN PHILIPPA,
THE DAUGHTER OF THE SECOND SON OF KING EDWARD III,
LIONEL OF ANTWERP
AND THEREFORE NEXT IN LINE TO THE SUCCESSION TO
THE THRONE, AS LONG AS RICHARD II WAS CHILDLESS.
ROGER MORTIMER HAD TWO CHILDREN, EDMUND, 4TH EARL OF
MARCH AND ANNE MORTIMER, WHO MARRIED RICHARD CONISBURGH,
SON OF EDMUND OF LANGLEY, DUKE OF YORK [FOURTH SON
OF EDWARD III]
AFTER HIS DEATH, ROGER MORTIMER PASSED HIS HEIR
PRESUMPTIVE RIGHT TO HIS SON EDMUND, 5TH EARL
OF MARCH, WHO PASSED THIS RIGHT TO HIS NEPHEW
RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK,  SON OF HIS SISTER
ANNE MORTIMER.
WHEN RICHARD II WAS USURPED BY HIS COUSIN
HENRY BOLINGBROKE [LATER KING HENRY IV, SON OF JOHN
OF GAUNT, THE THIRD SON OF KING EDWARD III AND
THEREFORE WITH A LESSER RIGHT TO THE THRONE
THAN EDMUND MORTIMER],
EDMUND, THE SON OF THE LATE ROGER MORTIMER,
BEING THE RIGHTFUL SUCCESSOR, WAS OVERLOOKED.
ROGER MORTIMER’S SON AND DAUGHTER, EDMUND AND
ANNE MORTIMER
ANNE MORTIMER’S SON, RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK,
GRANDSON [FROM HIS MOTHER’S SIDE]
OF ROGER MORTIMER
HIS CLAIM TO THE THRONE WAS BASED ON HIS
MATERNAL SIDE AND SUPERIOR TO THE LANCASTERS,
WHO DESCENDED FROM THE THIRD SON OF EDWARD III,
WHILE RICHARD DESCENDED FROM THE SECOND SON
File:Richard Plantagenet, 3rd Duke of York.jpg
RICHARD OF YORK, CLAIMANT TO THE ENGLISH THRONE
AND ONE OF THE MAIN LEADERS OF THE WAR OF ROSES
[WAR BETWEEN THE HOUSES OF LANCASTER AND YORK,
BOTH DESCENDANTS OF KING EDWARD III]
[HISTORICAL IMAGE]

WAR OF THE ROSES
SCENE AT THE TEMPLE GARDEN
RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK, WEARING A
WHITE ROSE, TO CONFRONT
HIS POLITICAL RIVAL AND ENEMY,
EDMUND, BEAUFORT, 2ND DUKE OF
SOMERSET, FORCING HIM TO
CHOOSE A RED ROSE
THE NOBLE LORDS TAKING SIDES
THIS IS A SHAKESPEARE SCENE [HENRY VI]
AND NOT BASED ON ANY HISTORICAL
EVIDENCE
KING HENRY VI OF ENGLAND
[HISTORICAL IMAGE]
MARGARET OF ANJOU, QUEEN OF ENGLAND
MARGARET OF ANJOU, QUEEN OF ENGLAND
[HISTORICAL IMAGE]

TWO IMAGES OF MARGARET OF ANJOU, QUEEN OF ENGLAND
[FICTION]
INTRODUCTION
Dear Readers,
Recently I wrote about the Wars of Roses, with respect to the role
of 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 and
Richard, Duke of York, two major players
AND
The wars of Roses were the civil war in late medieval England
between the rivaling royal branches of the Plantagenet dynasty, the
Houses of Lancaster and York, both claiming superior rights
to the throne.
Recently I encountered the very intesting blog ”Emily Tudor talk
with the article
”THE CLAIMS OF LANCASTER AND YORK”
The author defends the view, that the Lancasters had a superior
right to the throne.
In underlying article I defend, why
the House of York had a more superior right to the throne, which
is supported by modern history.
See also my letter to the author
AND
It is a little complicated, but when you are prepared to go into the
fascinating medieval world and read my previous article first, you
will make the impressive journey to the past again.
See my article, again

”THE CLAIMS OF LANCASTER AND YORK”
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
FIRST
WOMAN’S RIGHTS TO THE THRONE
In contrary to what the author wrote, in England women could inherit
the throne, because there were no Salic Laws as in the Holy
Roman Empire and France. [1]
A historical English example is King Henry I [son to
William the Conqueror], who passed his right to the throne
to his daughter Matilda, the later Queen Maud, mother of
King Henry II. [2]
If a woman had no right to inherit the throne, King
Henry could not have made such a move.
That Queen Maud, also named  Empress Matilda[3]  [after
her former marriage to the Holy Roman Emperor
Henry V] never ruled England, was due to the civil
war, which broke out, since her cousin, Stephen of
Blois, 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 [whose
son was already dead]
Civil war broke out, a period, called ”the Anarchy” [6],which
ended with a compromise, the Treaty of Winchester [or
Wallingford],  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 THRONE
THE 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 of
Antwerp, Duke of Clarence [great great grandfather of Richard, the
Duke of York] [10], John of Gaunt, First Duke of Lancaster
[title inherited from his wife, Blanche of Lancaster] [11], Edmund of
Langley, First Duke of York [grandfather of Richard, Duke of York]
[12] and Thomas of Woodstock, First Duke of Gloucester. [13]
THE YORK LINEAGE OF INHERITANCE
YORK BRANCHE AND MORTIMER BRANCHE
FATHER’S SIDE:
Richard, Duke of York, descends from as well as father’s as
mother’s side, from King Edward III.
His father, Richard of Conisburgh [14] was the second son of
Edmund Langley, Duke of York and therefore the grandson of
King Edward III.
[Conisburgh’s eldest brother, Edward of York, was slain in the
Battle of Agincourt, died childless, so Conigsburgh’s son Richard, Duke
of 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, inferior
to the Lancasters, who decended from the third son.
Therefore it’s his mothers claim, that counts.
 
MOTHER’S SIDE
MORTIMER CLAIM TO THE THRONE
 
From his mother’s side, the Duke of York is descending from the
second son of Edward III, Lionel of Antwerp.
By right of primogeniture [15], the descendants of Lionel of
Antwerp 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, Duke
of 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, it
was not through his father, BUT THROUGH HIS MOTHER,
ANNE MORTIMER, DESCENDANT OF THE SECOND
SON OF EDWARD III AND THEREFORE HAVING SUPERIOR
RIGHTS TO THE THRONE.
See also, the documentary about the Causes of the Wars
of the Roses by Mark Goacher. [19]
 
 
KING RICHARD II AND ROGER MORTIMER,
HEIR PRESUMPTIVE
USURPATION OF THE THRONE BY THE LANCASTERS
What made the Yorkist claim to the throne legitimate and valid were
two factors.
The fact, that the Lancasters raised to power by usurping the throne
from 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 to
his son, Edmund Mortimer, 5th Earl of March [22].
Edmund of Mortimer was the maternal uncle of Richard, Duke
of York [brother of his mother, Anne Mortimer] [23]
After the death of Edmund, the heir presumptive right, thus passed to
his nephew Richard, Duke of York. [24]
LANCASTER USURPATION OF THE THRONE OF
KING RICHARD II
But there is more to it.
At 1399, King Richard’s cousin [son of his uncle, John of
Gaunt, third son of Edward III], Henry Bolingbroke, deposed
Richard II, making himself King Henry IV. [25]
That meant, that the Lancasters [Henry IV, Henry V and Henry VI] were
no legitimate Kings, but usurpers,with the only later legitimization
the 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 descendant
of Edmund Crouchback [27] [son of King Henry III and younger brother of
King Edward I], had superior rights to the throne.
Because Edmund Crouchback was in reality the first son of King Henry
III, but was disinherited.
So King Edward I should not have been king, being a younger brother.
However, this is pure Lancaster propaganda and no real
proof for it whatsoever. [28]
By deposing King Richard II the Lancasters did more than
usurpation.
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 Somerset
and 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 civil
war, The Wars of the Roses.
See also my article
ENGLISH HISTORY/
THE WARS OF THE ROSES, MARGARET OF ANJOU
AND RICHARD, DUKE OF YORK, TWO MAJOR PLAYERS
OR
EPILOGUE
I think I have made my point by showing  a different
view, that the York claim to the throne was superior above the
Lancasters.
Summary:
The female right to the throne was valid.
The Yorks descended from the second son of
King Edward III,.the Lancasters from the third
The Yorks of course based their claim on the MATERNAL
side [from the second son of Edward III], NOT on
the side of the father [descended from the fourth son
of Edward III]
King Richard II appointed Roger Mortimer, maternal grandfather
of the Duke of York, as his heir presumptive, which passed
to his descendants, but could not be effectuated since
Henry Bolingbroke [later King Henry IV] usurped the throne.
There was no proof, that Blanche of Lancaster”s [the wife
of John of Gaunt and foremother of the Lancasters] ancestor,
Edmund Crouchback, second son of King Henry III, was in reality
his first son in stead of King Edward I, which was a claim
of 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 past
with me again
Astrid Essed
Amsterdam
The Netherlands
[1]
WIKIPEDIA
SALIC LAW
 
 
 
[2]
 
 
 In response to this, Henry declared his daughter, Matilda, as his heir and married her to Geoffrey of Anjou. ”
WIKIPEDIA
KING HENRY I OF ENGLAND
 
 
 
[3]
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
EMPRESS MATILDA
 
 
 
[4]
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
STEPHEN, KING OF ENGLAND
 
 
 
[5]
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
ADELA OF NORMANDY
 
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
STEPHEN, KING OF ENGLAND
 
[6]
WIKIPEDIA
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.”
WIKIPEDIA
TREATY OF WALLINGFORD
 
 
[8]
 
WIKIPEDIA
KING HENRY II OF ENGLAND
 
 
 
[9]
 
WIKIPEDIA 
EDWARD THE BLACK PRINCE
 
 
 
[10]
 
WIKIPEDIA
LIONEL OF ANTWERP, DUKE OF CLARENCE
 
 
 
 
[11]
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
JOHN OF GAUNT, FIRST DUKE OF LANCASTER
 
 
 
 
[12]
 
WIKIPEDIA
EDMUND OF LANGLEY, FIRST DUKE OF YORK
 
[13]
WIKIPEDIA
THOMAS OF WOODSTOCK, FIRST DUKE
OF GLOUCESTER
[14]
WIKIPEDIA
RICHARD OF CONISBURGH
[15]
WIKIPEDIA
PRIMOGENITURE
[16]
WIKIPEDIA
PHILIPPA, 5TH COUNTESS OF ULSTER
[17]
WIKIPEDIA
EDMUND MORTIMER, 3TH EARL OF MARCH
[18]
ROGER MORTIMER, 4TH EARL OF MARCH
[19]
THE CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
MARK GOACHER
”The House of York

Following 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 1459
ORIGINS OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
 

[20]
WIKIPEDIA
RICHARD II OF ENGLAND
[21]
WIKIPEDIA
HEIR PRESUMPTIVE
WIKIPEDIA
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.”
WIKIPEDIA
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.”
WIKIPEDIA
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]
 
 
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY VI OF ENGLAND
INSANITY AND THE ASCENDANCY OF YORK
 
 
 
SOURCE
 
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY VI OF ENGLAND
 
 
 
 
 
[25]
WIKIPEDIA
RICHARD II OF ENGLAND
OVERTHROW AND DEATH
SOURCE
WIKIPEDIA
RICHARD II OF ENGLAND
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY VI OF ENGLAND
[26]
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY V OF ENGLAND
THE CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
MARK GOACHER
[27]
WIKIPEDIA
EDMIND CROUCHBACK
ENGLISH MONARCHS
PLANTAGENET OF LANCASTER
EDMUND CROUCHBACK, EARL OF LANCASTER
 
 
 
[28]
THE CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
MARK GOACHER
[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]
 
WIKIPEDIA
RICHARD II OF ENGLAND
OVERTHROW AND DEATH
THE CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
MARK GOACHER
[29]
THE CAUSES OF THE WARS OF THE ROSES
MARK GOACHER
[30]
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY VI OF ENGLAND
THE ASCENDANCY OF SUFFOLK AND SOMERSET
WIKIPEDIA
HENRY VI OF ENGLAND

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

Filed under Divers

Comments are closed.