Griffiths, The Reign of King Henry VI (London, 1981), p. Pollard (ed.), The Wars of the Roses (New York, 1995), p. Dockray, The Origins of the Wars of the Roses’, in A. Storey, The End of the House of Lancaster (lst edn, London, 1966), p. Chrimes, Lancastrians, Yorkists and Henry VII (London, 1966), p. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. The crucial point is that so much in the history of this period depended on personalities and accidents. There was nothing inevitable about the accession of the Tudors: far from it, their advent was one of the flukes of a very confused period of English history and it is more true to say that Richard III, the last of the Yorkist branch of the Plantagenets, lost Bosworth than that Henry Tudor positively won it. Henry Tudor had only the flimsiest claim to the Crown of England, and his success was due solely to the events of a single day: the very future of England hung on the outcome of a battle, just as it had back in 1066. Finally after the elimination of most claimants the Plantagenets found themselves swept from power with the arrival of a new dynasty in the person of Henry Tudor, victor of the battle of Bosworth (22 August 1485). The ruling Plantagenets became divided into Yorkist and Lancastrian parties striving for the throne.
The Crown changed hands violently five times between 14.
The term ‘Wars of the Roses’ is the traditional title given to a complex and protracted, but not continuous, conflict among the political elite in England in the second half of the fifteenth century.
0 kommentar(er)
