The Great Endeavour: A New Timeline!

Rule by Appellant Degree said:

The Lords Appellant were able to take control of the king and through him manage most of the Country.
Gloucester and Arundel were joined by Henry Bolingbroke, Earl of Derby, and Thomas de Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham. They all managed to break up Richards support base, isolating him and force him to do their bidding.
But the lords were not universally popular, but Richard was defeated and for the moment Friendless.

Click to expand...

Rule by Appellant Degree said:

Richard gradually re-established poor royal authority in the months after the Merciless Parliament, thanks to several factors. First, the Lords Appellant's aggressive foreign policy failed when their efforts to build a wide, anti-French coalition came to nothing, and the north of England fell victim to a Scottish incursion. Secondly, Richard was now over twenty-one years old, and could with confidence claim the right to govern in his own name. Lastly, in 1389 John of Gaunt returned to England, and once the differences with the king had been settled, the old statesman acted as a moderating influence on English politics. Richard assumed full control of government on 3 May 1389, claiming that the difficulties of the past years were due solely to bad councillors. He outlined a policy contrasting with that of the appellants, seeking peace and reconciliation with France, and promised this would significantly lessen the burden of taxation on the people. He ruled peacefully for the next eight years, having reconciled with his former adversaries.
Still, later events would show that he had not put behind him the indignities suffered during the preceding years. In particular the execution of his former teacher Sir Simon de Burley was an insult not easily forgotten.
For his new allies that managed to overturn the Lords Appellant there were rewards of titles and land for their support and many became very loyal to the tall and handsome king.

Click to expand...

The Tyranny and Rebellion said:

Finally the accusations of conspiracy landed on Bolingbroke, immortalised in the play Richard II, he was not, as portrayed, a devious plotter working against the king, but as the cruel victim of political manoeuvrings by the king. Richard saw Bolingbroke as a threat, his involvements in the Lords Appellant were clear, but there is no current evidence of an actual conspiracy to the throne.
But Richard was not to be swayed and in the court he denounced Bolingbroke as a traitor and a conspirator, citing fictitious evidence of a plot to sink his royal ship on the kings planned trip to Ireland.
Richard by this point had 'done away' with Thomas of Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, another former Appellant.
With de Mobray exiled, shown leniency for his 'part in the conspiracy' because of his accusations against Bolingbroke.

Richard thought he had finally subdued his opposition to the throne, ruling in his own right, he had his enemies right where he wanted them. But he did not count on one thing, John of Gaunt. Gaunt was Bolingbroke's father and viewed Richard with much distrust. Gaunt knew Richard could not let Bolingbroke go, so suggested exile to France. Richard refused, spoiling for blood (some modern Histio-Psychologists suggest this was a bout of some of his personality disorders) and declared Bolingbroke a traitor an sentenced him to execution.

Gaunt was enraged and threatened the King. His own nephew was about to execute his son and threatened not only his familial lines but his duchies hegemony in the nobility of the Plantagenet kingdom.

When the executioners sword fell in September 1397, Gaunt was already raising his army in Lancastrian lands.

Click to expand...

The Plantagenet Civil War said:

Gaunt had raised his army in his Lancastrian homelands and fielded a formidable army. His son, the recently executed Henry Bolingbroke, had used many of his Lancastrian militia in his crusade with the Teutonic Knights in his attempts to eradicate the Pagans of Vilnius. This gave him an advantage to compare to the Kings army, who had not performed well under Gaunt in battle in France, and failed to find the enemy in a punitive mission to Scotland under the Lords Appellant.
Richard had not been complacent in his time as king and had built up Cheshire as a power base. As Richards main general John Holland mustered in Cheshire, Gaunt had already moved.

Bypassing Cheshire, Gaunt moved south, encountering Edward of Norwich on his march on London. The battle occurred mid March 1398, in an as yet undiscovered field in northern Rutland. The Battle of Rutland demonstrated that Gaunt's men were a considerable force, nearing 7,000, including many that had fought for the Appellants under Bolingbroke at the battle of Radcot Bridge. Current historical thinking puts the battle at either what is now the Cricket Fields of Oakham, or in the grounds of the Tolethorpe Hall.

The battle was short but bloody, with heavy losses on the Loyalist side, Norwich was forced to withdraw, and regroup. Gaunt moved further south. But this was not the end of the line for Norwich, after regrouping, he was faced with the task of intercepting the forces of the Percys. Henry Percy, first Earl of Northumberland and his son, Henry 'Hotspur' Percy, had fallen out of favour with the King, with his preferential treatment to the Nevilles, their bitter rivals. The Percys forces were of a much lower calibre then those of the Duke of Lancaster. Norwich had fresher men, and in a repeat of the ancient events of the Norman conquests, the long march from the north had tired out the troops when they met in the Battle of Whitwick, on the 29th September, this battle had the effect of stopping Percy influence in the war and removing much of the support Gaunt had outside of his own retinue.

The next major engagement fell to the 3rd Earl of Salisbury, John Montacute. The Montacute's had been entrusted with Bolingbroke's son Henry whilst his campaigning in Vilnius, but they were also staunch supporters of Richard and had been one of his most trusted advisors. When it was clear Gaunt would move against him, Richard had moved Henry back into their care from Ireland where Richard had taken Henry on an expedition. Gaunt wished to secure the young teenager as a potential heir, or replacement to Richard. Thus Gaunt moved on the Montacute's residence at Bisham manor where the boy was being kept. Montacute knowing that Gaunt with an heir would be more powerful and have more support compared to the currently heirless Richard.

Montacute made plans to remove Henry from Bisham, and move him to more secure locations in London or France. But he needed time to prepare and move him. Gaunt needed to be delayed.

Battle was joined in Marlow, Buckinghamshire on the 10th May, across the Thames from the Abbey. Popularised in the works of the Poet John Massey;

'for wonder of his hwe men hade, he ferde as freke were fade, and oueral darke horowe'
'Great wonder of the knight, full fierce was he to sight, and all over dark filth'

Click to expand...

The famous passage from the epic of the Millers son, Massey portrayed the Duke as a knight, seen from the eyes of a mustered millers boy, formed to delay Gaunt on the 'dark filth' of the fields of Marlow .

The Battle itself was a harrowing affair, as Montacute dug in. Forcing Gaunt to come through him made the battle extra bloody as the wet field made manoeuvring difficult.

Gaunt eventually won the battle, but it was a difficult and drawn affair, and ultimately pointless. The Battle allowed Montacute to move Henry out of Gaunt's reach, and caused great anger to the duke. Seen in hindsight, even though it was a defeat for the Loyalists in terms of on the battle field, it denied Gaunt much support for his cause with the denial of a clear heir. Gaunt is reported to have said 'In the sweeping of victory in battle, I have lost the basis for my Victory in this great endeavour.'

Gaunt now swung west, wanting to defeat the Kings great ally Thomas le Despenser , before beginning his assault on London, Gaunt picked his spot carefully as the Earl of Gloucester had considerable forces, choosing a road just outside the village of Curbridge in Oxfordshire, on the path between his enemies, dividing them.

The forces met on the 8th of June, the battle was hard fought, but in the end Gaunt won, and the road was clear to London.[if you with to know more about the battle of Curbridge and the other battles of the Civil War, see Authors works including 'Curbridge or Marlow, which saved Richards hide?' And 'Battles of the Plantagenet Civil War', also see 'The Uncle and the King, the tale of 1398' by John Templeman, and 'The Tyranny and Rebellion, a study of Richard II Reign 1395-1400' by Ken Forester ]

Click to expand...

Turning the Tide said:

John of Gaunt now had defeated most of Richards main allies in the south, but the campaign had exhausted the men. Rather then risk an assault on London, Gaunt wanted to strike a blow and establish a southern base of operations for the next year. Oxford became his next target, controlled by the aging Earl of Oxford, Aubrey de Vere, Gaunt laid siege.
Oxford though did not want to go without a fight, and managed to resist the invaders until September. Gaunt realised that his position could become unstuck if he moved at this stage of the season, so he awaited news of his Percy allies from the north and their progress moving south. This delay has been cited as one of the reasons for the defeat of the Lancastrian Army, but any attempt to attack London after the battle of Curbridge would have undoubtedly resulted in defeat.

When news reached Gaunt of the Defeat of his allies at the hands of the Earl of Norwich, Gaunt knew that he would need to move on Richard in London as soon as the campaign season started the next year, it would be a do or die attack.

Richard for his part wasn't idle in his capital whilst his generals men fought and died in his name in the country, feverishly working in France he managed to use his connections with the slightly less anti-English Burgundian faction in the French court. This faction wanted a written treatise on the 28 year truce that Richard managed to secure with his betrothal to the princess Isabelle de Valois a few years previous. Richard agreed to the terms, in return for men and arms to crush the Gaunt rebellion, England would sign a treaty to protect the tenuous peace between the nations.

In secret though, Richard agreed to support Burgundy in their feud with the Duke of Orleans faction within the French court of the 'Mad King'. This would have repercussions later in Richards reign.

As 1399 rolled around Richard had secured the support and was raising his main army in London, spurred on by the French reinforcements and a renewed sense of hope after the delay at Oxford.

Gaunt left Oxford with a token garrison in February, hoping to catch Richard unready for the early start in the unseasonably warm late Winter of 1399. Gaunt had received some extra men from Lancashire, and some of the remnants of the Percy force that had managed to get south over the Winter. Richard managed to ready his men though, and moved to meet him in the Oxfordshire countryside.

Gaunt had to move north to avoid the castle at Wallingford, and to try and circumvent some of Richards forces who were closing in, but it failed as Richard simply cut them off before they could manoeuvre around them.

The battle was joined near Woodstock, Oxfordshire, this was poignant as it was the birthplace of Edward, 'the Black Prince', father to Richard and brother to Gaunt. The battle was the largest to be fought in England for generations, as both sides clashed, both Richard and Gaunt personally led their sides to the battle.

The battle was fierce, and bloody, Gaunt's centre was decimated and crumbled, whilst his cavalry succumbed to the French Allies Richard had brought. Longbowmen featured less then many other battles as Gaunt had left many in Oxford to protect it, whilst Richard had a reduced force due to a fire at the Royal Armoury containing most of the Longbows stored for the coming campaign. So it was that crossbows played the biggest part in any battle that they had on English soil and the French Archers, and French trained Englishmen did reasonable damage to the Cavalry, being more of a quirk of history rather then a decider in the battle.

In the end the battle was almost a draw, with both sides with mounting casualties. By the end of the day, the feast of St Oswald (the 28th of February) both sides pulled back. Even though the battle wasn't a defeat for Gaunt, the opportunity to take Richard and London, and therefore the Crown, was gone.

The morning after Gaunt learnt that a force under a renewed Le Despenser managed to take Oxford from Gaunt's meagre garrison. Faced with destruction in all other directions, Gaunt was left with no choice but a long march back to Lancaster.

But even that was soon unavailable as John Holland, constable of Cheshire had raised a force and moved to block Gaunts route back to his home county, in the Battle of Malkins Bank, Gaunt's beleaguered and battered army was finally fully defeated in what was the end of the Plantagenet Civil War. Gaunt was captured and spent the rest of his time in the Tower, dying later that year in his sleep from natural causes.

With the death of Gaunt and the main threats to Richard gone, the Plantagenet Civil war was over, actual casualty numbers vary wildly, from a low 8,000 estimate, to 30,000, which is calculated including several outbreaks of dysentery on the passing armies of the time.

The Civil war is a tale of What if's: What if the Percy's hadn't been defeated by Norwich?, what if Oxford had been taken quicker?, what if Gaunt had 'rescued' Henry from the Montacutes?

Click to expand...

The Millers Son Verse 17 said:

Gretter were thee fite wif the Kinge
for wonder of his hwe men hade,
he ferde as freke were fade
and oueral darke horowe

On darke dartes, and grette bowes
Thy might stryke drad into souels
Mine sone filded wif horrore in seeing
On grounde standed he, wif olde Montacute

Wif grette sound, and terribble hearings
The armyes thy moved, towarde the brigge
To were bachiler Henrye, the weres moot
Till yvoyded awye from knyght wrooth nosethirles

Battaile breme, long didthy fite
Dartes foynen intye fyres ofte
Endyng of lyfs, soore and unheele
To Hevene superyr, and to thyne Lord

To yre, o frensyed knyght
Al ofte olde Montacute dede
Henrye stal awaye pile Knyght
Magestyee sauf a throwe longer

Click to expand...

Greater were they who fought against the King
For the wonder of the knight the men had
Full fierce was he to sight.
And all over dark filth

With Dark spears, and great bows
They strike fear (dread) into souls
My Son filled with horror at the sight
But Stood his ground, with old Montacute

With Great sound, and terrible noise
The army they moved, towards the bridge
To defend young Henry, the defenders must
Till Whisked away from Gaunts furious nose

The battle was fierce, long did they fight
Spear thrust into the fires of many
Ending of lives of anguish and pain
To heaven above, and to the lord

To the fury of mad Gaunt
Though many old Montacutes died
Henry was stolen from his grasp
And Richard safe for a while longer

Click to expand...

Richards Court: Art said:

In the last years of Richard's reign, and particularly in the months after the suppression of the Appellants and Gaunt in 1397, the king enjoyed a virtual monopoly on power in the country, a relatively uncommon situation in medieval England. In this period a particular court culture was allowed to emerge, one that differed sharply from that of earlier times. A new form of address developed; where the king previously had been addressed simply as "highness", now "royal majesty", or "high majesty" were often used. It was said that on solemn festivals Richard would sit on his throne in the royal hall for hours without speaking, and anyone on whom his eyes fell had to bow their knees to the king. The inspiration for this new sumptuousness and emphasis on dignity came from the courts on the continent; not only the French and Bohemian courts, that had been the homes of Richard's two wives, but also the court that the Black Prince had maintained while residing in Aquitaine.
Richard's approach to kingship was rooted in his strong belief in the Royal Prerogative, the inspiration of which can be found in his early youth, when his authority was challenged first by the Peasants' Revolts and then by the Lords Appellant and finally in the so called Plantagenet Civil War. Richard rejected the approach his grandfather, Edward III had taken to the nobility. Edward's court had been a martial one, based on the interdependence between the king and his most trusted noblemen as military captains. In Richard's view, this put a dangerous amount of power in the hands of the baronage. To avoid dependence on the nobility for military recruitment, he pursued a policy of peace towards France. At the same time he developed his own private military retinue, larger than that of any English king before him, and gave them livery badges with his White Hart, which are also worn by the angels in the Wilton Diptych. He was then free to develop a courtly atmosphere in which the king was a distant, venerated figure, and art and culture, rather than warfare, were at the centre.
After the Civil War Richard turned himself to the task of bringing his vision of a cultured England, with himself at the centre of it all, an elevated figure of almost heavenly majesty. He had begun this in the 'tyranny' years, the half decade preceding the death of Henry Bolingbroke, with several portraits including the larger than life portrait of Westminster and the flattering Wilton Diptych, depicting Richard as kneeling in front of the Virgin Mary. This portable work of art was intended to be taken with Richard to Ireland in one of his expeditions, but the Bolingbroke affair cut it short. This use of the arts to depict Richard as a majestic figure has been cited by some as the reason for his ability to monopolise regal power, and established him as one of the first absolutist monarchs. This authoritative and paternal reign in the post war era of his reign is characteristic of Richard and his ruling style.
Richard himself has been described as tall, pale and handsome, with a slight feminine quality. His personality matched his tall stature, but had a very strong narcissistic streak, which shows in his flamboyant spending on flattering pictures and other works of art.

Click to expand...

Feeding the Opulence by Simon Hart; said:

Richards’s court was not a cheap one, his wilful spending on lavish arts, his building works and informal patronage of the emerging literary sector of the time. Richard before the civil war was not particularly popular with his parliament for his higher taxes, even after a promise to reduce it as a distancing policy from the Appellants.
Richard needed to find a source of income, to fund his personal life and to pay the soldiers for their work in the civil war, and the vacant Lancastrian lands to the north were ready to piecemeal out to his victorious 'duketti', but even though there were rich rewards to the victors, Richard kept the main lands for himself to raise money. Harsh taxes in the provinces he acquired and the selling of large swathes of the assets so carefully built up by the Lancastrian lords, through this Richard was able to support his lavish courts, more closely related to the future courts of Europe, then the preceding courts of the more paternal, Spartan and militaristic Kings.
This was not an inexhaustible supply of wealth to Richard, that although it swelled the royal coffers considerably, the soon needed to reign in royal spending. But other revenue sources soon became apparent, the Lollard heretics soon became a target for the royal household, and confiscated land were soon rolling into the royal purse. This royal spending was a new appearance in middle age England and showed the future of Royal behaviour commonplace in European courts in Richards descendants and successors.

Click to expand...

The Neville-Percy Feud said:

The Neville family stemmed from Northumberland, from before the conquest of William of Normandy,
The family can be traced back to one Uhtred, whose son Dolfin is first attested in 1129, holding the estate of Staindrop in County Durham. This locality remained the principal seat of the family until 1569, their chief residence being at Raby, just north of the village of Staindrop, where in the 14th century they built the present Raby Castle. Dolfin was succeeded by his son Meldred and he in turn by his son Robert, who married the Norman heiress Isabel de Néville. Their son Geoffrey inherited the estates of his mother's family as well as his father's, and adopted their surname, which was borne by his descendants thereafter. In Norman-ruled England a French surname was more prestigious and socially advantageous than an English one. Already before the Néville marriage the family was a major power in the area: "In the extent of their landed possessions this family, holding on obdurately to native names for a full hundred years after 1066, was pre-eminent among the lay proprietors within the bishopric of Durham during the twelfth century".

By the time of the end of the 14th Century the Nevilles had risen through the ranks of the English nobility and Alexander Neville had become Archbishop of York under Richard the Second, but in the rising of the Lords Appellant, he was accused of treason and forced to flee the country. The family became close to the King, and suffered under the aforementioned Lords for it, but for their loyalty Ralph Neville, Lord of Raby was created Earl of Westmoreland.

The Percy Family came from Normandy, the village of Percy-en-Auge, and came with the Duke of Normandy with his invasion force. The Percys were descended from Joscelin of Louvain, son of Godfrey I, Count of Leuven and Agnes Percy, daughter of William de Percy and Adelaide de Clare. The family had not enjoyed such popularity with the Plantagenet kings but had developed a bitter rivalry with the Neville family.

The origins of the feud is unknown but entered into the families legends, with fantastical tales of many a duel to the death, especially through the playwrights of the later centuries, and the newly prominent authors of the time.

But the end came for the Percy family when John of Gaunt raised his banner against Richard, the feelings of resentment under the King burst out in the Percy camp. The Percys were outraged when a Neville was created the Earl of Westmoreland, and hoped by siding with the renegade Duke would bring them to prominence in the North. The Percy's through their entire wealth into the escapade, feeling that under Richard they would not be given their rightful place, ahead of the Nevilles and 'Lords of the North'. As victories for Gaunt, over The Edward of Norwich, and the seemingly unstoppable force of the Lancastrians, the Percy's, under Henry Percy, First Earl of Northumberland and his son Henry 'Hotspur' Percy threw in their lot.

The Percy folly was not to, as hoped, propelled into the limelight of the nobility, but instead spelled the beginning of the end of the Percy nobilities influence in English politics. Their defeat of their forces by Norwich in the famous battle Whitwick, after the famous muster of York, showed Percy inadequacy in battle and hotheadedness in politics. After this, with the bankruptcy of Percy stocks, they began to fade into obscurity.

The Neville Family on the other hand took no part in the actual fighting of the War, for they were unable to join any battle at the time. But they watched the North for Richard, and were able to capture 'Hotspur' on his way back to Percy lands. This led to Richard rewarding them with some of the more northern holdings of Lancaster, and for their valued contribution to the effort, even with the lack of winning battles, titles were handed out, and the Nevilles grew much in power

Click to expand...

Richard and Lollardy said:

The Lollard movement began with John Wycliffe, who in 1381 was thrown out of the University of Oxford for his preaching of reform of the Western Church, with differences in their Eucharist and that the bible should be translated into common tongues. Though the movement has been linked to the work of Wycliffe, it was not an organised central religion or sect, but rather a group of people unhappy with Church doctrine who wished to practice in their own way. Though groups within the community did happen, including the sect who posted the 'Twelve Conclusions of the Lollards' on Westminster Hall in February of 1395, and the Lollard Knights both who were active in Richards reign.

Richard was at once both fearful and intrigued by the movement. There were moments when Lollardy seemed a direct threat to the throne, for example John Ball, a prominent member of the Peasants revolt preached Lollardy to the riotous mob. This proved to Richard that Lollardy was a threat to not only the Church, to which he kept special heed, but to himself and his throne if allowed to develop.

But whilst seeing that Lollardy was a threat, Richard was impotent to act. As regent, his uncle John of Gaunt was a Lollard sympathiser and an anti-clerical noble. Lollard protection was lessened when Gaunt travelled to Spain to pursue a claim to the Castilian throne. During this time the Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Arundel persecuted those he could, but was stopped when he was exiled by Richard in his movements against the Lords Appellant at the end of the 14th Century.

The resulting conflict between Richard and Gaunt led to many Lollards fighting on both sides, including the famous Lord Montacute, who fought with Gaunt to stop Gaunt using his grandson Henry to garner support for his court. But the majority fought for the Lancastrians and were renewed as a threat.

The other side to the Lollards were seen by many, including Gaunt and other nobility was their stance on Episcopal Poverty, thus the great wealth of the church could be subsumed to the Lords and the crown. But with the Lancastrian defeat it was discredited and defeated.

The new Archbishop of Canterbury, Roger Walden, a former treasurer for Richard began to organise the forces of the Church towards the Lollard threat, persuading Richard in 1404 to pass 'Digredior ex Statutum tempus Pontifex Auctorita', or 'On Deviation from the Appointed Popes Authority' a text on which deviation from Rome's authority, and thus doctrine became a capital offence.

Up to this point with the exception of Montacute, Lollards had not been actively persecuted by the state but not allowed into prominent positions of State, but with the renewed organisation of the Church under Walden, Lollardy became the prime target.

Montacutes fate was a quiet one, not told by many historians, and especially glossed over by the authors and playwrights of the time and future generations. Montacute was a war hero, but was a Lollard, and had to go, formerly reprimanded by Richards for his beliefs, Montacute was moved against by Henry le Despenser, uncle to Montacutes compatriot Thomas. Henry was a staunch enemy of Lollardy and had as the 'fighting Bishop of Norwich' fought against Lollardy.

Famously the Bishop asked Montacute to recant his heresies, as this would pardon him, and would have let him go as he had done for other Lollards. Montacute refused, and forced the Bishop to act. Sentencing Montacute to burn in chains, the act occured on the feast of St Bede, the 10th of May.

The confiscation of Lollard lands raised the revenue for the crown for the coming years, ironically providing the cash that their proponents had promised, just not in the way that they expected

Click to expand...

England and the Armagnac-Burgundian Civil War said:

The intrigues of the Armagnac-Burgundian civil war were far reaching; the 28 year truce between England and France was not popular in many of the French Court. The main opponents were the Duke of Orleans, who headed a camp that included many of the dukes of Southern France. On the pro-truce side were the Burgundians led by Philip the bold who had been instrumental in the arranging of the Truce and the marriage of Richard II to Isabelle de Valois.
With the death of Philip, and the succession of John the Fearless to Burgundy, the Burgundian camp fell out of favour with the French courts in 1404. Orleans, now holding prominence in the court started to make overtures to renounce the treaty and attack English held lands in France.

Burgundy supported the English because Flanders depended almost entirely on English wool for its industry and as it saw England as a way to gain control of the French court. Orleans on the other hand wanted prominence in the French court, and England out of France, a 'reconquérir' as he saw it.

In 1407 Orleans was assassinated and began a civil war between the two camps, the opposition was led by the Count of Armagnac, Bernard VII, who took up the mantle against Burgundy to control the 'Mad King Charles VI'.

Though the civil war was, unlike the Plantagenet Civil war across the Channel nine years previous, a series of unconnected events that spanned over a decade, with moves, counter moves, and a battle for influence in the Court.

Notable events include the taking of Paris by Burgundian forces in 1414, its recapture in 1415 by the Duke of Berry, who was allied to Armagnac. In 1317 Forces under John the Fearless took Paris again and forced the Dauphine, later the King Charles VII to allow the marriage of Burgundian allies and family members into the royal house and line, this ensured Burgundian influence in the French court for many years to come.

The Role of the English was a strange one, with the mainly Burgundian forces fighting in the Plantagenet Civil war, England returned the favour with many men to fight in the wars as mercenaries, but with a contingent under the Duke of Gloucester, Thomas le Despenser, was seconded to the Burgundians in agreement.
For the most part the English troops did not take part in the fighting, but instead roamed the countryside looting the lands belonging to Burgundian Enemies looting and pillaging, but avoiding large confrontation. This harrying gave Burgundy advantages and allowed them the ultimate victories.

In return the English took what loot they could from their work, but also a political tie was born. Contrary to the years of dynastical wars between the Valois and Plantagenet, Richard did not want war with France, seeing his own tenuous position in his crown. Thus the treatise of the 28 Year truce was beneficial. Though Richard did not give up the fight for the Crown of France, he did not actively pursue it, instead more connecting himself with the ancient King Edward the Confessor, from pre Conquest times. This infatuation with this led to his impaling of his arms with those attributed to the Confessor, playing down his claim to the French crown. This co-operation with the Burgundians also led to political ties, with the marriage of the Prince of Wales, Edward of Longstreet; to the Burgundian princess Anne of Burgundy in 1412, whilst the Prince was only 6, strangely the same age as the prince's mother was when she married the King.

Click to expand...

Richard II's Reign said:

Richard had a mixed history with Ireland; an expedition to Ireland in the 'peaceful' years between the Lords Appellant and the Civil War had gained him support and had strengthened the Position of the Anglo-Irish lords. This led to Richard seeing Ireland as a way to gain support and expand the Kingdom.
In 1411 Richard again set sail over the Irish Sea for an expedition to support the Irish Lords and expand. Progress was not as well as expected, Richard just could not penetrate enough to gain victory outside of the comfort zone of his Lords.
Richard though used what he could to score relations points with his populace, having funded the campaign from raised money from Lollard confiscations, it was seen as a good expedition in the public light, even if not a tactical victory.
This did strengthen the position though of the Lords, ensuring dominance of the English in Eastern Ireland, even if Richard could not take the whole island.

In Wales Richard left well enough alone, entrusting the policing of his principality to the local Lords who were doing a good enough job, even if some had been in the employ of Bolingbroke at the battle of Radcot Bridge [1]. The only change to Wales Richard made in his reign was to grant the Lands of John of Gaunt that had been taken to his son when he came of age, continuing the tradition of giving the first born son of the reigning monarch the title Prince of Wales, first given to Richards Father, Edward.

[1]This was Owain Glyndwr, who had been a squire of Bolingbroke, and knighted by Richard, but in this timeline there is less to rebel about, the confusion of the post usurpation of Henry not as prevalent in this instance

Click to expand...

The reign of Edward IV said:

With the Kings withdrawal from public affair to hide his discordance with his own mind, Edward began to take more of a role in running of state, readying himself to the task of running the country.
Edward was of a less flamboyant nature then his father, favouring the more military minded courts of his Father in Law, John the Fearless. Though whilst Richard still lived the Duke of Gloucester was officially regent, back from campaigning in France, Edward worked to influence court circles in his favour ready for the transition to him on the Kings death.
Edward had not only worked in Ireland with the King on his expeditions, but also worked with the Nevilles in their work guarding the northern Border. The Scottish were more closely affiliated with the Armagnac camp in the French civil war, and had led several raids into England to try to help their allies in accordance with the Auld Alliance. This had given Edward a good military background and shaped his reign to come.
Richard, in his failing health had made Edward Prince of Wales when he came of age, giving him the confiscated estate of John of Gaunt, and finally in 1425 Richard died of Hyperthermia in his bed from the especially cold winter.
Edward's coronation was held in Westminster Abbey on the feast of St John the Baptists, crowned as Edward IV

Click to expand...

Shawn Endresen said:

I'm very interested to see where you go with this the Wars of the Roses aren't my strongest point, but I've always understood that Richard's madness was pretty debilitating by 1399 - he seems uncharacteristically lucid for a long time here.

Money's a mess. A standing army answering directly to the King, significantly increased patronage of the arts, and no extorting funds from the Church - possibly keeping some promises to lower the tax rates imposed by the Lords Appellant - how on Earth is Richard paying for all this? He has a little more revenue from Lancaster lands he kept for himself, and a lot more expenses than his OTL counterparts. There doesn't seem to be anyone to rally opposition to his reign with Henry gone, but coming down squarely on the side of the Church against the Lollards, then expecting the barons to pay for the army whose only purpose can be to keep them in check (the White Harts) is going to lead to lots of resentment. Edward's in a nasty pickle - he needs the Harts to control the barons, but he probably owes the Harts a good deal of back pay by now and I expect they're restless...

Just my two cents. Carry on

Click to expand...