#for example: A.J Pollard's assumption that Edward IV had no choice but to helplessly give into his overbearing brothers' demands | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

wonder-worker · 9 months

Text

"Because Richard (III) usurped the throne, his retinue is inevitably seen as inimical to the crown and therefore in an important sense independent of royal authority. In the context of Edward IV's reign, in which the retinue was created, neither assumption is true. The development of the retinue would have been impossible without royal backing and reflected, rather than negated, the king's authority. Within the north itself, Gloucester's connection subsumed that of the crown. Elsewhere, in East Anglia and in Wales, that focus for royal servants was provided by others, but Gloucester was still part of that royal connection, not remote from it. In the rest of England, as constable and admiral, he had contributed to the enforcement of royal authority. When he seized power in 1483 he did not do it from outside the prevailing political structure but from its heart."

-Rosemary Horrox, "Richard III: A Study of Service"

#r*chard iii #english history #my post #Richard was certainly very powerful in the north but to claim that he 'practically ruled' or was king in all but name is very misleading #his power/success/popularity were not detached from Edward IV's rule but a fundamental part/reflection/extension of Edward IV's rule #even more so that anyone else because he was Edward's own brother #there's also the 1475 clause to consider: Richard & Anne would hold their titles jointly and in descent only as long as George Neville #also had heirs. Otherwise Richard's title would revert to life interest. His power was certainly exceptional but his position wasn't as #absolute or indefinite as is often assumed. It WAS fundamentally tied to his brother's favor just like everyone else #and Richard was evidently aware of that (you could even argue that his actions in 1483 reflected his insecurity in that regard)#once again: when discussing Edward IV's reign & Richard III's subsequent usurpation it's really important to not fall prey to hindsight #for example: A.J Pollard's assumption that Edward IV had no choice but to helplessly give into his overbearing brothers' demands #and had to use all his strength to make Richard to heed to his command which fell apart after he died and Richard was unleashed #(which subsequently forms the basis of Pollard's criticism of Edward IV's reign & character along with his misinterpretation of the actions #of Edward IV's council & its main players after his death who were nowhere near as divided or hostile as Pollard assumes)#is laughably inaccurate. Edward IV was certainly indulgent and was more passive/encouraging where Richard (solely Richard) was concerned #but he was by no means unaware or insert. His backing was necessary to build up Richard's power and he was clearly involved & invested #evidenced by how he systematically depowered George of Clarence (which Clarence explicitly recognized) and empowered Richard #and in any case: to use Richard as an example to generalize assumptions of the power other magnates held during Edward IV's reign #- and to judge Edward's reign with that specific assumption in mind - is extremely misleading and objectively inaccurate #Richard's power was singular and exceptional and undoubtedly tied to the fact that he was Edward's own brother. It wasn't commonplace.#as Horrox says: apart from Richard the power enjoyed by noble associates under Edward IV was fairly analogous to the power enjoyed by #noble associates under Henry VII. and absolutely nobody claims that HE over-powered or was ruled by his nobles or subjects #the idea that Richard's usurpation was 'inevitable' and the direct result of Edward empowering him is laughable #contemporaries unanimously expected Edward V's peaceful succession. Why on earth would anyone - least of all Edward -#expect Richard to usurp his own nephew in a way that went far beyond the political norms of the time?#that was the key reason why the usurpation was possible at all #as David Horspool says: RICHARD was the 'overriding factor' of his own usurpation There's no need to minimize or outright deny his agency #as Charles Ross evidently did

13 notes · View notes