by Charles Ross
Edward had won an immense victory. The particular importance of Towton is that it finally shattered the strength of the great northern lords, like Percy, Clifford, Roos and Dacre, who had hitherto been so loyal to Lancaster, and who between them could dominate England north of Trent. The way now lay open for the subjugation of Yorkshire and the regions towards the Scottish Border. As we shall see, the danger was far from over. Many die-hard Lancastrians were still at large, and even exiles might prove a menace with foreign support. Traditional loyalties to the great families were not extinguished overnight. Much of Wales remained to be brought under control. Yet, in a wider sense, Towton proved politically decisive. For most Englishmen, including a majority amongst the barons and gentry, it now became prudent and realistic to acknowledge the authority of the new king.
1 For York in Ireland, see Curtis, article cited above, p. 13; A. J. Otway-Ruthven, A History of Medieval Ireland (1967), 386–8.
2 Scofield, I, 42–4, 47–54, 59–65; and, for a highly-coloured account, P. M. Kendall, Warwick the Kingmaker, 55–61.
1 Bourchier and Abergavenny fought at Northampton, and Herbert at Mortimer’s Cross; see below, pp. 26, 31.
2 For the attainders, see RP, V, 348–9, and for the fines and pardons, RP, V, 349; CPR, 1452–61, 526–92 passim. Those fined or pardoned included many prominent connections of York like Sir Walter Devereux, William Hastings and Ralph Hopton, who were at once appointed to crucial commissions after the landing of the Yorkist earls, e.g., those of 28 June 1460 (ibid., 607).
3 CPR, 1452–61, 576 (lands of York and Warwick detained by their adherents), 602–6 (castles holding out); Scofield, I, 56 (for resistance of Denbigh to February 1460).
4 E.g. English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 98; but cf. PL, III, 249–50, for similar views by Clement Paston.
1 Chronicles of the White Rose of York, lxxiv-vi.
2 For Yorkist popularity in Kent, see Gregorys Chronicle, 206, and English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 91; the latter suggests that Kent feared that the earl of Wiltshire would repeat there the acts of judicial terrorism already carried out at Ludlow, Newbury and elsewhere. For support in the south and east of England generally, see Storey, End of the House of Lancaster, 196–7. In Norfolk Friar Brackley regarded the Yorkist earls, especially Warwick, as saviours of the realm (PL, II, 226, October 1460).
3 English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 86–90.
1 J. R. Lander, ‘Marriage and Politics: the Nevilles and the Wydevilles’, BIHR, xxxvi (1963), 125–6; Conflict and Stability in Fifteenth Century England, 87, where it is suggested that this factor may explain why the number of peers actively supporting the Yorkists rose from six to seventeen between Ludford and Northampton.
2 English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 91–4.
3 For a full account of Coppini’s activities, see Constance Head, Tope Pius II and the Wars of the Roses’, Archivum Historiae Pontiflciae, viii (1970), 139–78
1 Scofield, I, 61–2, 64–5.
2 Ibid., 76–7. Sir John Fogge became treasurer of the royal household, 1461–9, and was one of the grasping favourites denounced by Warwick (J. Wedgwood, History of Parliament, Biographies, 339–42); for Scott’s career under Edward IV, see below, pp. 325–6.
3 Scofield, I, 77–81. The London authorities were reluctant to commit themselves to either side, and were mainly concerned to prevent the destruction of property in the city (summary of the unpublished London M.A. thesis by M. I. Peake, ‘London and the Wars of the Roses’, BIHR, iv (1926–7), 45–7).
4 E.g. £40 lent ‘in our great necessity’ by the prior of St Bartholomew, Smithfield. and repaid by Edward in July 1461 (P.R.O., Warrants for Issues, E. 404/72/1).
5 E. 404/72/1, no. 23, 4 July 1460.
1 Scofield, I, 86–7.
2 R. I. Jack, ‘A quincentenary: the battle of Northampton, July 10th, 1460’, Northamptonshire Past and Present, ii (1960), 21–5.
3 English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 97–8; ‘Short English Chronicle’, 74–5; ‘John Benet’s Chronicle for the years 1400 to 1462’, ed. G. L. Harriss (Camden Miscellany, xxiv, 1972), 227; Scofield, I, 91, 95.
4 For Warwick’s rewards, see below, p. 70, and Appendix III.
1 RP, V, 374; Wedgwood, Hist. Parl., Register, 267 and n. 4.
2 For a discussion of this point, see K. B. McFarlane, ‘Wars of the Roses’, 9; Lander, ‘Marriage and Polities’, 126–8. The evidence of Waurin and Whethamstede on which they relied can now be supported by Pope Pius’s statement that Warwick opposed York, derived, no doubt, from Coppini (C. Head, ‘Pius II and the Wars of the Roses’, 160).
3 See Genealogical Tables. The claim, and the discussions in parliament upon it, are printed in RP, V, 375–80. For modern comment, S. B. Chrimes, English Constitutional Ideas in the Fifteenth Century, 26–30
1 Including the dukes of Somerset and Exeter, the earls of Devon and Northumberland, and at least five North-Country barons.
2 Scofield, I, 99–100, 117.
3 CPR, 1452–61, 607–8, 610–11; Annales, 774–5; Gregory, 209–10; Proc. Ord. Privy Council, ed. Nicolas, VI, 304–5; Evans, Wales in the Wars of the Roses, 180–6.
1 Annales, 774–5; English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 106; Gregory, 209–10.
2 Scofield, I, 118.
3 Ramsay, Lancaster and York, II, 237–8. The only roughly contemporary source to mention the paper crown is Annales, 775, but the ‘Brief Latin Chronicle’ (Three Fifteenth-Century Chronicles, 172) speaks of the heads being displayed ‘obprobiose’.
1 Printed in Archaeologia, xxix (1842), 344. The Lancastrian pillaging, though probably exaggerated, was very widely reported at the time, see Scofield, I, 135–6.
2 ‘Short English Chronicle’, 76.
3 The fullest list of his supporters is in William Worcestre, Itineraries, ed. J. H. Harvey, 203–5. Despite the statement of Scofield, I, 137, there is no evidence that Hastings was in Edward’s company. For Devereux’s offices, see K. B. McFarlane, ‘Wars of the Roses’, 90, 93; J. T. Rosenthal, ‘Estates and Finances of Richard, Duke of York’, 181; and for further details of these men’s later careers, see below, pp. 75–8, 80–1.
4 William Worcestre, op. cit.; ‘Short English Chronicle’, 76–7; Gregory, 211; H. T. Evans, Wales in the Wars of the Roses, follows Gairdner, the editor of Gregory, in the belief that Owen and other prisoners were executed at Haverfordwest in Pembrokeshire. This seems unlikely because of the distance involved and because the Yorkists had no control over the far west of Wales until many months later (see below, pp. 48–9). It is based on a misunderstanding of the contemporary form for Hereford.
1 As first suggested by the Tudor writer, Edward Hall, Chronicle, 251, followed by Scofield, I, 139. Cf. Ramsay, Lancaster and York, II, 244.
2 Annales, 777; Evans, op. cit., 130–1. For St Albans, and London’s dealings with Queen Margaret, see Scofield, I, 149.
3 Gregory, 215. Both English Chronicle, ed. Davies, 109, and GC, 194, suggest that, whatever the divisions of the city authorities, popular feeling in London was strongly in favour of the Yorkists. The date of Edward’s entry into London is often wrongly given as Friday, 27 February (e.g. Scofield, I, 149; Lander, Wars of the Roses, 123), but it is clearly the 26th, as Gregory, 215, and ‘Short English Chronicle’, 77. GC and other London chronicles say a Thursday, which must be the 26th.
1 E.g. Oman, Warwick the Kingmaker, 112–13; P. M. Kendall, Warwick the Kingmaker, 85–7; see also Lander, ‘Marriage and Polities’, 129. Professor Kendall speaks of Warwick ’producing’ another king, and ‘staging’ his elevation to the throne.
2 E.g. Francesco Coppini, the papal legate: ‘Warwick … has made a new king of the son of the Duke of York’, CSP, Milan, I, 69. For examples of foreign exaggerations of Warwick’s influence, see below, p. 63. It is noticeable that contemporary English chroniclers make no such assertions.
3 Gregory, 215; ‘the substance of his mayny [affinity or retinue] come at their own cost’. For Edward’s use of the style ‘heir of England’, see G. A.
J. Armstrong, ‘The Inauguration Ceremonies of the Yorkist Kings, and their Title to the Throne’, TRHS, 4th ser., xxx (1948), 53.
1 RP, V, 463–7.
2 For much of what follows, see Armstrong, ‘Inauguration Ceremonies’, 51–73.
3 Though it is unlikely that the ‘multi alii’ contained many men of note, Professor Lander’s comment on this assembly – ‘a meagre list to make a king!’ (’Marriage and Polities’, 128–9) – minimizes unduly the extent of Yorkist support among the barons. Many proven Yorkists (including Viscount Bourchier and his sons, and others like Lords Abergavenny, Grey of Ruthyn, Audley, and Cobham) were absent, probably because the assembly was summoned in great haste.
4 See below, p. 41.
1 OCR, 1461–8, 54–5. Northumberland was the surprising exception.
2 Ibid., 55–6.
3 According to Annales, 775.
4 P.R.O., Warrants for Issues, E. 404/72/1, no. 22.
5 Scofield, I, 158.
1 Scofield, I, 157, 159–60, 162. For the background of the dauphin’s connection with Duke Philip, see P. M. Kendall, Louis XI, 95–102.
2 RP, V, 477; Wedgwood, Hist. Parl., Register, 293.
3 List in Gregory, 216. Montagu and Berners interceded for the city of York immediately after the battle (PL, III, 267), and were probably present there. Montagu had probably been summoned as a baron for the first time at a hitherto unknown session of the 1460 parliament; see John Benet’s Chronicle, ed. Harriss, 229.
4 As suggested by Lander, Wars of the Roses, 21 (who is elsewhere properly sceptical of large numbers). The large number of casualties also implies very large forces (see below, pp. 37–8).
5 For accounts of the battle, see Burne, op. cit., 96–107; Ramsay, op. cit., II, 271–3.
1 Gregory, 217.
2 PL, III, 268, in a newsletter appended to a letter of 4 April. The reappearance of this ‘herald’s estimate’ in other sources (e.g. in a letter of the bishop of Salisbury, 7 April, and the Milanese ambassador in France, 12 April, CSP Milan, I, 64–5, 68; Kingsford, Chronicles of London, 175, and Edward’s own statement, Burne, op. cit., 104) suggests this letter was widely circulated. Many other contemporary estimates are much higher, but the figure given by Annales, 778, of 9,000 deaths, apparently on the Lancastrian side, seems more plausible.
1 PL, III, 267
Part II
THE FIRST REIGN, 1461–1471
Chapter 3
THE DEFENCE OF THE THRONE, 1461–1464
(i) Disorder, Disaffection and Pacification
On Friday, 26 June 1461, Edward made his state entry into London to await his coronation two days later.1 The citizens’ applause and the splendid ceremonies of crown-wearing and banqueting did not conceal the fact that the new king was far from secure on his throne. Towton had discredited but had not destroyed the Lancastrian cause, chiefly because the defeated king and queen and many of their most active supporters were still at large and free to continue the struggle. In large areas of the country the authority of the new government remained precarious.
The firm establishment of the Yorkist regime depended on the successful resolution of three related problems. First, it was essential to restore a measure of peace and order to a disturbed and divided country. This involved not only suppressing Lancastrian-inspired disaffection, but also quelling much local disorder which was the legacy of weak government and had been encouraged by the conditions of civil war. Secondly, Edward had to prevent intervention by foreign powers tempted to benefit from English domestic discord. The danger of Lancastrian resistance would be greatly increased if backed by foreign support. Thirdly, a Yorkist regime had to be created which would carry the royal authority into the shires, especially into areas where Lancastrian sympathies were strong, including the west and north of England, large parts of the midlands, and Wales and the Marches. For the next three years these tasks provided the Yorkist leaders with their main preoccupation.
The main weakness of Edward’s position in the months following his victory at Towton lay in the fact that he still possessed comparatively few really reliable supporters amongst the English nobility and gentry, and his realization of this fact is reflected in the urgency with which he pursued a policy of conciliation towards his former enemies. Casualties in battle had thinned the ranks of loyal Lancastrians; others, less committed, hastened to make their peace with the young king, but could not be fully trusted immediately.1 Even men with very close associations with the house of Lancaster found it prudent to make a temporary accommodation. Thus Sir Thomas Tuddenham, formerly keeper of the wardrobe and treasurer of the household to Henry VI, who had been deeply involved with the dukes of Suffolk and Somerset, escaped attainder, as did his collaborator, John Heydon, who received a general pardon in April 1462. Edward’s clemency was carried so far as to arouse criticism from his own supporters. In East Anglia it was reported that the common people ‘grudge and say how that the King receiveth such of this country … as have been his great enemies, and oppressors of the commons; and such as have assisted his highness, be not rewarded; and it is to be considered, or else it will hurt’.2
But many Lancastrians were not disposed to give up the fight. Among them were Jasper Tudor, earl of Pembroke, Henry Holland, duke of Exeter, and several young lords whose fathers had died in the fighting, like the sons of the duke of Somerset, the earl of Wiltshire, and Viscount Beaumont. Many prominent Lancastrian gentry remained unreconciled, and the spring and early summer of 1461 saw the appointment of a series of commissions to arrest active rebels and to enquire into treasons and rebellions.3 The West Country was particularly disaffected, and the dangers here were increased by fears of a French invasion. Elsewhere disorder was increased by local family feuds, like the bitter strife of the Vernons and the Gresleys in Derbyshire, which flared into violence in the favourable atmosphere of civil war.4 Gangs of ‘seditious vagabonds’ roamed through many midland and southern regions, accused of killing, despoiling and oppressing the king’s subjects.5 In Norfolk Margaret Paston expressed the anxious hope that ‘there may be set a good rule and a sad in this country in haste, for I heard never say of so much robbery and manslaughter in this country as is now within a little time’.6
As Lancastrian sympathizers were rounded up or made good their escape, the tide of specifically treasonable disorders slackened during the autumn of 1461, only to break out again during the winter and in the early months of 1462. In November followers of the dukes of Exeter and Somerset and the earl of Wiltshire were stirring up sedition in Hampshire. In January 1462 ‘suspicious congregations’ inspired by named Lancastrians were reported from Somerset, Dorset and Wiltshire, and there was evidence too of popular disillusionment with the new king. In February reports of further disturbances came in from six counties in the north midlands and the north-west.1 In some of the more remote parts of the realm, government control was barely nominal, and effective royal administration had collapsed.2 Edward and his councillors clearly feared a widespread conspiracy by Lancastrian sympathizers, in league with their exiled and foreign friends, and on 12 February 1462 they appointed a powerful commission of twenty-three barons and ten judges to investigate treasons and trespasses in no fewer than twenty-five counties and eight cities.3 At the same time they uncovered a Lancastrian plot headed by the earl of Oxford, his son, Aubrey de Vere, and Sir Thomas Tuddenham. Arrested on 12 February they were speedily convicted before the Constable of England, John Tiptoft, earl of Worcester, who was now creating his unenviable reputation for ruthlessness; and between 20 and 26 February they, and two fellow-conspirators, were executed on Tower Hill.4
In southern England the alarm was increased by fears of foreign invasion. The aged Charles VII of France had shown some favour to the Lancastrian cause. After Towton, he had permitted Queen Margaret’s friend, Pierre de Brézé, seneschal of Normandy, to assemble a fleet for the conquest of the Channel Islands, a reward already promised to Pierre by Margaret; and in May this led to the French establishin
g themselves on Jersey.5 Active preparations for war were going ahead in the last few weeks of Charles’s life. In reply, Edward incited the men of the southern and western counties of England to resist the French, urging his subjects to raise a fleet at their own expense, and organizing measures for the defence of the Isle of Wight.6