LECTURE XXXVII.-WARS OF THE ROSES. The old nobility and their armies. End of the feudal system. Causes of the war. Condition of the people. Edward IV. His marriage. Vicissitudes. 1. It is hardly necessary to study and recollect all about these twelve battles,* and the changes and chances of the war. Sometimes one side conquered, and sometimes the other; in the end we may say neither, or perhaps both conquered, since a member of the House of Lancaster, marrying a member of the House of York, became undisputed king. But though we may be inclined to say then that the wars were all for nothing, and nothing came of them, they had in reality a very great effect on the whole future history and state of England. After those wars were over England was much more like what she is now, than she ever could have been without them. The armies. 2. In all the past history we have seen what an enormous power the nobles possessed; how they could help or hinder the king and the government just as they chose; how they rebelled and led armies about, fighting each other, or fighting the king, just as it happened; or if they had a strong, clever king, whom they respected, following him and fighting for him. How different all that is from anything we ever see or hear of now. Imagine now if we were to hear that some great duke or earl was going to lead an army against the government! We all know it is impossible. Dukes and earls have no armies now. They may give their opinions, and advice, and votes, and money; they may serve in the queen's army, as any other gentleman may, and that is all they can do. But up till this time the great lords had always little armies, or even rather large armies sometimes, of their own. They were bound indeed to have them; it was on that very condition they held their estates. The theory of the feudal system was, that the vassals * A list of them will be found at the end of this lecture. BB of the king were obliged to furnish so many men to help him in his wars. But when they did not like the king it was quite as probable that they would fit out those said men to oppose him, as we know Percy and the others did in the reign of Henry IV. If there were a rival claimant to the throne, some of the nobles would take one side and some the other, according as it suited their interest, or, perhaps, according as they thought was their duty. 3. In such times a rich nobleman, who had a large following, who could make himself popular, and perhaps hire many other soldiers besides his own under-vassals and tenants, would be very powerful indeed, even more powerful than the king himself, like Warwick, the king-maker. In those days there was no regular standing army, such as we have now, nor was there indeed for some hundreds of years after this. At that time everybody was a soldier, and nobody was a soldier. We can see how they managed in the play of Henry VI. In the course of this war Henry hears that his rival, Edward, has just landed from the Continent. He has no army ready at the moment, but he says, "Let's levy troops, and beat him back again." Then he and his friends arrange how to levy these troops. Each of the noblemen is to go to the place where he has most influence, and muster up his friends and their followers. The Earl of Warwick says "In Warwickshire I have true-hearted friends, 4. So when the nobles went to muster up an army, the ploughmen, the weavers, the labourers of all sorts would leave their work and follow them to fight. They were doubtless better soldiers than such men would be at present, for they were regularly trained and practised at certain times, and every man knew, more or less, how to fight, though they were not like the disciplined regiments we have now. In a little while, after a battle or two, perhaps, they would go back again to their work, to their ploughs or their looms. There were some regular soldiers too, whose regular profession was war, "companions," as they were called, who were trained men, but who belonged to no side, and no chief, and could be hired by any party, city, or rich man who wanted them; and who, when wanted by no one, generally became brigands. The nobles. 5. At the time of the Wars of the Roses all the principal nobles of the kingdom took one side or the other, either that of York or Lancaster; each brought his little army behind him, and it was they who fought those twelve battles. At the end of the wars they were nearly all gone, all killed. The family feeling was very strong in those times, and it was a point of honour for a man to revenge the deaths of his relations; then the other side would revenge themselves in return, till we can hardly believe, the men who worked these cruel deeds could have called themselves Christians at all. Thus one nobleman, Lord Clifford, had his father killed by the Yorkists. In revenge he stabbed that poor boy the Duke of Rutland, the son of the Duke of York. Afterwards, in revenge for that, he was himself killed by the poor boy's brother. Thus the war became bitterly cruel and savage. Alas for chivalry! 6. In looking over the pedigrees of those great old families it is quite startling to see how many times we read "killed at Tewkesbury," "killed at St. Albans," "beheaded after Wakefield," and the like. No less than four dukes of Somerset, one after the other, perished in these wars. The end of it was that the old nobility was almost destroyed, and the feudal system vanished for ever. Things began to be much more like what they are now; so this period is generally looked on as the end of the middle ages, and the beginning of modern times. 7. We cannot suppose the great nobles, or anybody else, would have taken all this trouble, raised their armies, and hurried about the war. all over the country, fighting, killing, and being Causes of killed, all for love of Henry or Edward, Lancaster or York. Had there not been some grave causes of discontent, it is pretty certain both York and Mortimer would have been forgotten, now that the Lancasters had been sitting on the throne for fifty years, whatever their exact rights might have been in the onset. But there was in fact a great deal of discontent, and a spirit of entire disaffection spread abroad among the nation. Every one was ashamed and disgusted at the disgraceful end of the French war, and the pride of the people was not much comforted by the death of the Duke of Suffolk, or the Bishop of Chichester. The state of England itself was also unsatisfactory. Jack Cade and the Kentish men, as we saw, had A great complained about the way parliaments were elected. many people who formerly used to vote for members were no longer allowed to do so at all, and many of those who still had votes had to give them according to orders, and not according to their own wishes. And parliament very seldom met at all. Nor was the government strong enough to keep the country quiet and peaceful. High and low were able to defy the law with impunity; the great families were continually carrying on little wars of their own; innumerable robbers ranged over the land, keeping the people in constant alarm and distress, and nobody had power to punish the evil-doers or protect the helpless and innocent. 8. Moreover, the House of Lancaster, both Henry IV. and Henry V., had, in their mistaken zeal for religion, made common cause with the Church, and had persecuted and burnt the Lollards. But though the Lollards appeared to be quite crushed and put down, in the bottom of their hearts immense numbers of people believed them to be right, and sympathized with them; so that when they had time to think, and were not dazzled and absorbed by Henry's splendid victories, it caused a vast deal of hidden discontent, and turned men's hearts away from their rulers. 9. Thus, with all these grievances, either spoken or unspoken, a great many people were ready for a change. Not that the princes of the House of York were at all likely to remedy any of these things, or ever did so, but that when people are dissatisfied they are willing to hope that any change will be for the better; though it had need to be very, very much better indeed to make up for the misery of a civil war. We have seen how cruel and hard-hearted the nobles became towards one another; what their followers were obliged to suffer we may imagine. In one beautiful passage which Shakespeare added to the old play of Henry VI. he paints it for us very vividly. He shows us how in one of these battles a father has unknowingly killed his own son, and a son his own father, who were fighting in opposite ranks; and as they both lament their cruel fortune, they think of what is so often forgotten, of the poor wife and mother at home, to whom they must carry the bitter news. * 10. But though sad and terrible things like this must often have happened, and though the nobles, many of them, became little better than murderers, there is a great consolation in knowing that, on the whole, the mass of the people did not suffer so much as might have been The people. * Third Part of King Henry VI., Act II, Scene v. expected. In some of the battles the leaders on both sides gave orders that the poorer people were to be spared, and that only the principal men were to be killed. For the most part the people, except those who were dependent upon the nobles, took no part at all. The merchants and shopkeepers went on with their business; the judges went on circuit and held their assizes as if nothing was the matter. No towns, no churches were destroyed, and we have the comfort of thinking that those who made the quarrel bore the brunt of the punishment. 1463. 11. There is good reason to believe, in fact, that the poor people were better off than they ever were before; for while Edward IV. was king new laws were made to prevent them from spending too much money on their clothes. This subject seems to be always cropping up; we are perpetually having sermons and laws against finery, and very little good they seem to have done. In the very midst of the war a law was passed beginning in this way: "The commons, as well men as women, have worn, and daily do wear, excessive and inordinate array and apparel, to the great displeasure of God, and impoverishing of this realm of England." It goes on to command that common labourers, and servants, and their wives are never to wear cloth costing more than two shillings a yard; nor are they to wear girdles ornamented with silver. Another law was passed forbidding the wives to get their veils and handkerchiefs too fine. Thus it is evident they must have been well off, and receiving good wages, or they would never have thought of wanting expensive things of this kind. 12. But though the emancipation of the serfs had done a great deal of good, and the labourers were in this prosperous condition, some evil had come with it too, and that was that there were now a great many people who had no work and no wages at all. As we saw, after the plague of the Black Death, when there were so few men, and wages rose so high, many landlords would not or could not pay them. They left off tilling the land, and turned it into great sheep-farms. Then only two or three men would be wanted instead of a great many; and the sheep were very profitable, both for food and for their wool. Now there was this to be said in favour of villeinage, that the owner of the land had at least to feed, clothe, and shelter all his villeins, or to see that they had land enough to support them. Even when they were ill or old they still had to be maintained, and we never hear that they were badly treated in this respect. 13. But now that was all over; they were free, and their own |