Wars of the roses begin History e-magazine Issue 07 An Ovi Publication 2025 Ovi Publications - All material is copyright of the Ovi & Ovi Thematic/History Magazines Publications C Ovi Thematic/History Magazines are available in Ovi/Ovi ThematicMagazines and OviPedia pages in all forms PDF/ePub/mobi, and they are always FREE. If somebody tries to sell you an Ovi Thematic or Ovi History Magazine please contact us immediately. For details, contact: ovimagazine@yahoo.com No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise), without the prior permission of the writer or the above publisher of this magazine b efore Game of Thrones brought the phrase “winter is coming” into our collective imagination, England had already lived through a chilling saga of its own, one where families were torn apart, loyalties bought and sold, and the crown passed hands as easily as a sword changed masters. This was no fantasy. This was the Wars of the Roses. Between 1455 and 1487, England became a battleground of ambition. The noble houses of Lancaster and York, both with royal blood, both believing they had the rightful claim, plunged the country into a brutal civil war. The white rose of York and the red rose of Lancaster became the emblems of rival dynasties locked in a deadly dance of power, vengeance, and survival. But this isn’t just a story of medieval England; it’s a story that echoes through the ages. In a world still captivated by political rivalries, fractured leadership, and media-fuelled dynasties, the Wars of the Roses feel startlingly modern. Imagine the spin doctors of today shaping the reputations of Richard III or Henry VI, or social media fanning the flames of rebellion in the streets of London. Even in our world of parliamentary debates and constitutional monarchy, the shadow of this war still looms. And yes, if some of these events feel familiar to fans of Game of Thrones, it’s no coincidence. George R.R. Martin drew heavily from this era, the weak king, the scheming nobles, the unexpected usurpers. If you’ve heard whispers of a dragonless Daenerys or a editorial less-romantic Jon Snow in English history, you’re not wrong. The real “game of thrones” was played centuries ago, only with more mud, blood, and betrayal. This issue will take you into that world, of battles and betrayals, of kings and commoners, of a nation reshaped not just by who won, but by what was lost in the fight for England’s soul. Also a short story from Manisha Yadav and a prose from David Sparenberg. And like every other time, this issue will be joined by a historical novel from Lucas Durand, “Whispered Edge”. With the hope that you will enjoy the articles, do read this historic chronicle Thanos Kalamidas StorieS and narrativeS from time paSt https://ovipeadia.wordpress.com/ https://realovi.wordpress.com/ The Ovi history eMagazine Wars of the roses begin May 2025 Editor: T. Kalamidas Contact ovimagazine@ yahoo.com Issue 7 The series of bloody civil conflicts known as the Wars of the Roses began at the First Battle of St Albans on 22 May 1455. The wars raged for over 30 years as two royal houses vied for the English throne. contents Ovi Thematic/History eMagazines Publications 2025 Editorial 3 Wars of the Roses begin The first battle of St. Albans, a pyrrhic victory 9 22 May 1455, Wars of the Roses begins 13 Seeds of conflict in a crumbling realm 15 A rivalry that set a kingdom aflame 21 The War of the Roses, the real-life Game of Thrones 25 A clash in the streets at the battle of St. Albans ` 31 Was peace ever possible? 37 The iron will behind the throne 43 St. Albans, a Medieval ‘Blitzkrieg’ 49 The legacy of 1455, a kingdom divided 55 The dark mark of the 1936 Berlin Modern echoes of the War of Roses 59 The tiger in the chapel of roses by Manisha Yadav 65 CREED & Weapons of an EARTH SPIRIT (Peaceful) WARRIOR: a Lyric Essay by David Sparenberg 73 May in history 77 The first battle of st. albans, a pyrrhic victory o n May 22nd, 1455, the quiet streets of St. Albans were transformed into a battlefield that would ignite decades of civil strife. The First Battle of St. Albans, often marked as the opening salvo in the Wars of the Roses, saw the forces of Richard, Duke of York, clash with the royal army loyal to King Henry VI and his chief advisor, Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset. Though brief and relatively small in terms of casual- ties, the battle had a disproportionately large impact on English politics. While York emerged victorious militarily, the immediate aftermath reveals that the conflict did little to resolve the political instability of the realm. If anything, the triumph at St. Albans deep- ened the fissures within the nobility, set the stage for further bloodshed, and questioned the very nature of royal authority—making it a Pyrrhic victory in all but name. By 1455, England was teetering on the edge of cha- os. The long and inconclusive Hundred Years’ War had drained the treasury and eroded public confi- dence in the Lancastrian crown. King Henry VI’s pe- riods of mental incapacity had paralyzed government, and factionalism ran rampant. Richard of York, heir to a powerful Plantagenet line, had been appointed Lord Pro- tector during one of Henry’s in- capacitations in 1454, only to be removed upon the king’s brief recovery, largely due to the in- fluence of Somerset and Queen Margaret of Anjou. York’s decision to raise arms was framed as a defensive ma- noeuvre: he sought to eliminate “evil counsellors” a political eu- phemism for Somerset—and re- store good governance. But his actions undermined the notion of a divinely anointed monarchy and challenged the legitimacy of the Lancastrian rule. The First Battle of St. Albans was thus not just a military engagement, but a confrontation over who should control the mechanisms of state. In the immediate aftermath, York’s faction could claim some tangible victories. Edmund Beaufort, the Duke of Somerset and York’s chief rival, was killed in the fighting, along with sever- al key Lancastrian nobles. King Henry VI was captured and, for a brief time, fell under Yorkist control. Richard of York was reappointed as Lord Protector, and his allies, particularly Rich- ard Neville, Earl of Warwick (later known as the “Kingmak- er”) gained influential positions within the royal council. But these gains masked a deeper instability. The killing of Somerset, which York like- ly viewed as a decisive blow against corrupt governance, had the unintended consequence of martyring him in the eyes of Queen Margaret and the staunch Lancastrians. Far from stabilizing the realm, York’s use of force to achieve political ends established a dangerous prece- dent: that noble factions could bypass parliament and royal au- thority through military might. Furthermore, the battle alien- ated many moderates who may have sympathized with York’s grievances but not with open rebellion. The spectacle of vi- olence in a market town, with fighting breaking out through narrow streets and blood stain- ing the cobblestones outside the Abbey, was a shock to the national conscience. It eroded confidence in both sides and sowed fear that England could spiral into lawlessness. Perhaps the most consequen- tial development in the wake of St. Albans was the political awakening of Queen Marga- ret of Anjou. Incensed by the death of Somerset, her closest political ally, Margaret became the de facto leader of the Lan- castrian cause. While Henry VI remained a weak and pliable fig- ure, Margaret began gathering forces, building alliances among powerful nobles such as the Per- cys and Cliffords, and preparing to counter York’s influence. York’s temporary ascendan- cy also alienated many of the great houses. While he held the title of Lord Protector, his posi- tion was precarious and lacked the full support of the peerage. His failure to reconcile with the Lancastrians or to offer clem- ency to Somerset’s allies only intensified hostilities. Within a year, the fragile peace shattered again, with new outbreaks of violence such as the Battle of Blore Heath (1459) and the rout at Ludford Bridge. In classical terms, a Pyrrhic victory is one that comes at such a devastating cost to the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. The First Battle of St. Albans fits this mold. York succeeded in removing his immediate rivals and briefly held sway over the crown, but his methods, par- ticularly the use of armed force, undermined the very consti- tutional principles he claimed to defend. By turning political rivalry into military confronta- tion, he unleashed forces that neither he nor his allies could ultimately control. Moreover, the battle solid- ified factionalism. Instead of diffusing tensions, it drew clear- er lines between Yorkist and Lancastrian camps. The deaths of noblemen such as Somerset and Northumberland were not just battlefield losses; they were blood debts that demanded re- venge, perpetuating a cycle of violence that would engulf En- gland for years. The First Battle of St. Albans should be remembered less as a triumph of reform and more as the harbinger of national trage- dy. Richard of York won the day, but at the expense of undermin- ing the institution of monarchy, antagonizing powerful factions, and igniting a civil war that would rage intermittently for over thirty years. His “victory” at St. Albans did not heal the kingdom; it tore open wounds that had scarcely begun to scar. In that sense, the battle was not the beginning of resolution, but the first misstep in a long and bloody march toward dynastic catastrophe. 22 May 1455 Wars of the roses begins t he series of bloody civil conflicts known as the Wars of the Roses began at the First Battle of St Albans on 22 May 1455. The wars raged for over 30 years as two royal houses vied for the English throne. The First Battle of St Albans took place on 22 May, 1455, at St Albans, 22 miles (35 km) north of London, and traditionally marks the beginning of the Wars of the Roses in England. Richard, Duke of York, and his allies, the Neville Earls of Salisbury and Warwick, defeated a royal army commanded by Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset. Unusually, the battle was contested in the town of St Albans itself, with the bulk of the fighting taking place in the streets and a tavern being used as a redoubt. Som- erset was killed in the battle, and King Henry VI cap- tured, clearing the way for a subsequent parliament to appoint Richard of York Lord Protector. seeds of conflict in a crumbling realm W hen the sun rose on May 22, 1455, and the clash at St. Albans ignited the Wars of the Roses, it was not a spontaneous eruption of violence but the culmination of decades of decay in the English political order. The Battle of St. Albans is often seen as the beginning of a civil war between the Houses of York and Lancaster, but the real story lies in the decades preceding it—a pe- riod marked by weak kingship, factional strife, and deep-rooted socio-economic turmoil. In truth, the road to civil war was not paved in a year or even a decade; it was carved over generations of mismanage- ment, mistrust, and misfortune. By 1455, conflict was not just likely, it was nearly inevitable. At the heart of the crisis lay the feeble kingship of Henry VI. Crowned as an infant in 1422 after the death of his warrior father, Henry V, the young king inherited not only a throne but a troubled legacy. En- gland was embroiled in the latter stages of the Hun- dred Years’ War with France, and governance fell into the hands of regents and councils during Henry’s mi- nority. While the kingdom managed to function with a degree of cohesion in these early years, the return of power to Henry in adulthood revealed the dangerous vacuum at its core. Unlike his formidable father, Henry VI lacked the temperament and skills to govern. He was pious, gentle, and conflict-averse, traits admirable in a monk, but disastrous in a monarch. He had no taste for warfare, no aptitude for governance, and no ability to mediate between the increasingly aggressive noble factions vying for influ- ence. His frequent periods of mental instability, especially the pro- longed catatonic episode of 1453–54, further eroded confidence in royal leadership. In a society where kingship was the linchpin of political order, Henry’s incapacity was more than a personal flaw, it was a national crisis. In the void left by Henry’s ineffectual rule, ambitious nobles stepped forward to fill the power vacuum, turning the court into a battleground for influence and favouritism. Chief among these were Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, a staunch Lancastrian and royal favourite, and Richard, Duke of York, a distant cousin to the king and, crucially, a man with a legitimate claim to the throne. As tensions mounted, these rival factions began to resemble pro- to-political parties. Somerset represented the entrenched Lancas- trian establishment, benefitting from royal patronage and corrupt control over government affairs. York, meanwhile, positioned him- self as a reformer, though hardly without ambition, arguing for the removal of corrupt counsellors and the restoration of good gover- nance. His grievances found a receptive audience among many in the realm, especially after the disastrous losses in France and the economic collapse at home. By the early 1450s, England was no longer governed by a sin- gle court but by shifting alliances and vendettas between magnates. These lords maintained private armies and regional power bases that made them quasi-sovereign figures. Royal authority, such as it was, had become an illusion. The crisis of the mid-15th century was not only political but pro- foundly economic and social. The tail end of the Hundred Years’ War had brought massive debt, crippling taxation, and the loss of almost all English holdings in France, including the prized Duchy of Normandy. Veterans returned home not to triumph but to pov- erty, while trade routes faltered and inflation soared. The wool trade, the backbone of England’s economy, suffered un- der mismanagement and continental instability. The burden of tax- ation to fund foreign wars and court extravagance fell heavily on the gentry and commoners, breeding resentment and unrest. Jack Cade’s Rebellion in 1450, though ultimately suppressed, re- vealed the depth of public anger. Marching under the banner of an- ti-corruption, the rebels demanded the removal of the king’s “evil counsellors,” including Somerset. The fact that their demands mir- rored Yorkist rhetoric was no coincidence. Cade’s uprising showed that the crisis was not merely an elite power struggle, it was a na- tional grievance. Trust in the monarchy was withering at every level of society. Richard, Duke of York, has long been a controversial figure, was he a reformer seeking to rescue the kingdom or an ambitious noble- man coveting the crown? In truth, he may have been both. By 1453, with the king incapacitated, York was appointed Lord Protector, giving him temporary control of the government. His tenure was brief but telling: Somerset was imprisoned, and efforts were made to restore some semblance of order. However, when Henry recovered in late 1454, York was dismissed and Somerset restored. For York and his allies, this was the final insult. The failure to resolve the structural issues of governance, combined with personal grievances, tipped the balance. War was no longer a distant threat but an imminent reality. The battle at St. Albans was brief but bloody. It was not a war for territory or ideology; it was a direct strike at Somerset and the Lancastrian court. York’s forces emerged victorious, Somerset was slain, and the king fell back into Yorkist hands. But peace would not follow. The pattern of grievance, rebellion, and retaliation had been set. It is tempting to see St. Albans as the beginning of the Wars of the Roses, but in truth, it was merely the first open act of a tragedy long in the making. The kingdom had been weakened not by a single blow but by years of neglect, division, and instability. The war was not born in a moment; it was the fruit of a poisoned tree. By 1455, England was a realm adrift. The monarchy had become a shell, the nobility a law unto themselves, and the people restless and embittered. The Wars of the Roses were not an anomaly; they were the natural consequence of a kingdom allowed to fester in dys- function. In hindsight, the outbreak of civil war seems less like a sudden storm and more like the cracking of a dam long straining under the weight of unchecked failure. If anything, the question is not why the war began, but how peace lasted as long as it did.