Can we say there is a "red Tory" king or queen or something close to it ?
As many here have studied monarchs, I was just wondering.
if you look at the war of the roses - the battles between york and Lancaster - you could say it was literally a conservative vs progressive battle.
the lancasterians wanted to give up the french conquest policy to build schools and improve the infrastructure of the country. Henry VI and Margaret of ANJOU, have colleges in cambridge and oxford named after them. The York's on the otherhand were furious they wanted to continue the french conquest policy and played the populist card.
the York's were very clever in how they made attacks. instead of attacking Henry vi the son of the hero Henry v they attacked his queen Margaret of Anjou who was french. like politics today the conservatives out of power target phantom groups/individuals the civil service are corrupt we need to get inside and get rid of them all. henry had opportunity after opportunity to deal wit hte York's everytime they were accused of treason the Yorks would worm their way out of it. They were destabilizing the monarchy to usurp the throne. Margaret of Anjou knew it but she was french and she was damaged goods in the eyes of the englush people the smear campaign had killed her opinion.
you then had rebellions in Tory heartlands in Kent and southwest which still to this day remain Tory heartlands. the marches on the welsh border still Tory territory was again hardcore for the York's. so the country split into two. the lancasterians were strong in the north and the midlands astutest. so there was utter paralysis. the country was divided into two. Henry vi was popular but he wouldn't fight anyone. while Margaret of anjou his queen wanted the York's heads on the end of a spike as they were calling their son an illegitimate bastard. Ironic as the only bastard was Edward earl of march the york heir who became Edward iv. typical of conservatives to smear people they forget to look at themeselves before smearing.
the person who changed everything was the earl of warwick who was based in the north but had territory in the midlands. he sided with the York's after the lancasterians had captured duke of york, warwicks father ear of Salisbury and one of York's sons Edmund earl of rutland. Margaret of Anjou chopped their heads of and put paper crowns on their heads at York.
the war of the roses has the most complex characters is incredible interesting and still to this day their remains alot of unknowns. Margaret of Enjoy fought fire with fire. Elizabeth Woodville, Anne Neville, Margaret Beaufort, Lord Stanley Earl of Warwick, Edward IV, George Duke of Clarence who got his wish to be dunged in mulberry wine for his execution, Richard iii , the two princes in the tower and a young thomas more. Henry VII the emergence of the Tudors which was the lancasterian wing but the Henry VIII was the consequence to the war between lancaster and york. His mother was a york his father was a lancasterian but they would have told him how Margaret of anjou fought tirelessly to defend her only son the prince of wales who was butchered to death by the York's. he would have been told what happened to his mothers brothers in the tower, he would have been told by his father about perkin warbeck limbert simnel and to trust no-one. That's why he became a tyrant fear that history would repear itself....that's why as he got older he took down the remaining York's for example George duke of Clarence's daughter Margaret countess of Salisbury was sent to the gallows for basically nothing. she was just a york.
if your Tory you will understand the York's
if your progressive you will understand the lancasterians
historians aren't neutral they are biased towards one wing or the other even today and groups exist to represent these families. Sutton Publishing for example promotes york propaganda. Vintage promote lancasterian propaganda.
