The War Of The Roses

The War of the Roses. The extent of the conflict’s impact on medieval English life. Its outcome.

Was the War of the Roses important in the achievement of some kind of peace in Medieval England after what happened with the hundred years war, the black plague and the peasant’s revolt?

First of all we have to take into account primary facts of this conflict and their context as well. We haveto acknowledge that England wasn’t a pretty place to live in in those years (the century before the War of the Roses) and there are three points that can make us think that way

One of the most important points is that England was coming out from a very extenuating conflict with France (the hundred years war) that turned out to be a fiasco because England not only lose on the ground, the countrylose a lot of resources trying to win the battles. The war seemed like a great idea in the first place but in the long run it took a lot of things from the country because it was a huge moral loss as well.

Then we have to put on the table what happened with the black plague. It was something that didn’t start on the “English island” but it took the life of at least 30-50% of the population ofEngland. This plague spread over Europe at the same time the hundred year war was happening.

The previous points lead us into a third major event. The peasant’s revolt. That revolt was a consequence of the two first points and the importance is given by the fact that the society was opening their eyes to what was happening and they were not be quiet about it. The taxes were rise up because ofthe hundred year war (so the royalty could finance that war) and because of the black plague (because there were less workers, the ones that were alive asked for a pay rise but the king created a “statue of laborers” that made that impossible).

So, there we have it. Three major points that lead us to think that things in England prior to the War of the Roses were bad, but like all things inhistory, always a new dawn comes from crisis and “that” crisis was the war between the houses of York and the house of Lancaster. The upside was the character that rise from that conflict and became one of the greatest kings of England.

Some may say that nothing good can come out of a fratricidal war, but history can show us that those conflicts can unite even more a country that was broken in thefirst place. We have the case of USA and the civil war. Lincoln got what he wanted and freedom was given to all the afroamerican people (on a piece of paper, still not a 100% real), and we have the case of Chile as well, when in 1891, a civil war broke out and after 20 years or so, people realized that whey really screw it up doing what they did and tried to amend their wrong doing byreestablishing a more democratic system that in the long run became the basis of our actual Chilean democracy

But there are differences between what happened in the USA and in Chile as aftermath of the conflicts. In the states there are still some differences between the south and the north, in terms of political and social views. And in Chile it took 30 years to realize that they made a huge mistake doingwhat they did. What happened after the War of the Roses changed the political structure of England in it’s entirely and it was the only way to go, because the system was already rotten.

Henry Tudor was bound to become a unifier king. He had English, French, Welsh, Bavarian, Italian and even Hungarian. His dream (his mother’s dream as well) was to unite the warring houses into one house thatcould lead England to a better place and in a way he achieve that mission on the battlefield (beating his uncle, Richard III, at the battle of Bosworth Field) and in the church by marrying Elizabeth of York (sister of Edward V and daughter of Edward IV)

One of the great pros in his kingdom was that he wasn’t a “warrior king” he wasn’t interested in regaining the territories lost to the French...