With his transition to adulthood, Henry was able to impose his own personal rule over the kingdom, or at least remove the damaging effects of the minority government. As a King he lacked the decisiveness and strong will to impose any sense of royal authority, which essentially took his destiny out of his own hands. A successful foreign policy would have been a weak Kings salvation but these rarely occur together as was the case with Henry. For some time he was able to rely on the momentum built by the successes of his father and later Bedford, stagnation had set into English strategy though and the resulting collapse of military control in France had its groundings in the inability of Henry VI to be an effective monarch and provide the necessary leadership. The complete reversal of fortunes witnessed in the early 1450s caused widespread disillusion with government, resulting in the rise of fortunes of the chief opponent to the regime, Richard, Duke of York. The sheer wastage of manpower and resources that became apparent after France was lost caused considerable anger, which was not at first directed at the King but his advisors, primarily Suffolk and Somerset.
They were some of many who benefited from the patronage of Henry, which he used almost frivolously. As was the case with other monarchs who did not understand the tactics necessary for the successful deployment of royal patronage such as Edward II, Henry did not gain support through his actions. His stubborn determination for favouritism along with alienating powerful magnates such as the Duke of York did nothing to gain the widespread support and unity of the magnate class that was so necessary for such a weak reign. Richard from 1450 onwards gained considerable support from outside court and he developed aims to remove the harmful influences within government. This mostly appears to have been concentrated against Somerset but there was no real success for Richard and it was only the insanity of Henry VI that saved his political career. In 1454 Richard was able to hold the position of protector and chief of the council. The madness was a further aspect of weakness for the King, he was unable to preside over the government and it allowed the Duke of York considerable access to power and Richard was a far more effective leader. He still aimed only to produce efficient government and not undermine the authority of Henry, which he did with some success, being able to introduce some reforms, especially to the council.
With York as protector, this situation would have entailed the continuing dominance of the Lancastrian line, the political situation was stable and the negative influence of Somerset was removed through his imprisonment. However Henry recovered late in 1454 and resumed his control of state affairs, reinstating Somerset and once again aggravated the Duke of York and his now strong band of support that included the Nevilles. The ensuing tensions resulted in a battle at St.Albans on May 22nd 1455 between the Yorkist faction who were convinced of military action as their only option available and the royalist forces under the Duke of Buckingham. The resulting Yorkist victory brought the end of Somerset but developed the sense of a blood feud as Keen puts it, ensuring continuing magnate divisions. The eventual result of the Yorkist rebellions was the condemnation of York and his followers, prompting York to claim the throne for himself, despite that never being his initial intentions.
The various feuds that existed between magnate groups such as the Percys and Nevilles previous to the outbreak of the wars assisted in forming the conflicts into a larger scale. As Richard and Henry, through the court, gained support from various magnates, the opposing magnate in certain feuds often took the other side and indeed it has been argued that the Percy-Neville engagement at Heworth in 1453 was the start of the Wars of the Roses. Storey is a keen advocate of this view, claiming that an accumulation of private feuds contributed heavily to the outbreak of war, certain rivalries becoming interlinked in the same struggle in attempts from both sides to gain an advantage. The development of these feuds into military encounters was allowed through the poor governance of Henry’s reign, coupled with his personal shortcomings, he surrounded himself with unsuitable advisors and also an unsuitable queen. Margaret of Anjou had considerable influence over Henry but it is unlikely she acted with English interests as her primary priority, as was the case when she was able to convince Henry to release control of Maine. Through his dependence on favourites to perform government there was bound to be severe contemporary criticism of his reign and McFarlane argues that it was this continual and acute lack of royal authority that prompted the nobles, under York, to take action.
It was the practical results of Henry’s inabilities, especially the disastrous foreign policy, which gained the greatest support among the populace for the Yorkist movement. The disastrous loss of the French territories was seen by the Yorkist faction as a legitimate reason to criticise the government and they actively propagated this view, ultimately to their benefit. Some historians have seen this as the justification York needed for fielding his armies against the monarchy, that there was a feeling that the prestige and well being of the nation came above the monarch and that it was the responsibility of the magnates to rectify the problem. There would always be disagreement amongst the magnates whether to take action against the monarchy, not all supported York for reasons of personal feud or simply because they did not agree with the notion of removing the king. As York was almost intent on military action or at least was forced into this or face political extinction, a civil war seems inevitable. Through his misuse of patronage Henry created various factions among the nobles who began to quarrel with each other and as there was no longer a preoccupation of war in France, the nobles had little else to do except enhance their estates in England. Rivalries among the nobility had always existed in some form though and it required the inept kingship of Henry VI to allow these magnate tensions to expand and produce war and it was essentially the lack of character needed that brought about Henry’s downfall via the Wars of the Roses.
