Part 46

A formidable rebellion broke out in Kent (1450), then, as now, one of the most independent and democratic counties in England. The leader was Jack Cade, who called himself by the popular name of Mortimer (S257, note 1, and S279). He claimed to be cousin to Richard, Duke of York, a nephew of that Edmund Mortimer, now dead, whom Henry IV had unjustly deprived of his succession to the crown.

Cade, who was a mere adventurer, was quite likely used as a tool by plotters much higher than himself. By putting him forward they could judge whether the country was ready for a revolution and change of sovereigns.

Wat Tyler's rebellion, seventy years before (S250), was almost purely social in its character, having for its object the emancipation of the enslaved laboring classes. Cade's insurrection was, on the contrary, almost wholly political. His chief complaint was that the people were not allowed their free choice in the election of representatives, but were forced by the nobility to choose candidates they did not want. Other grievances for which reform was demanded were excessive taxastion and the rapacity of the evil counselors who controlled the King.

Cade entered London with a body of twenty thousand men under strict discipline. Many of the citizens sympathized with Cade's projects of reform, and were ready to give him a welcome. He took formal possession of the place by striking his sword on London Stone,--a Roman monument still standing, which then marked the center of the ancient capital,--saying, as Shakespeare reports him, "Now is Mortimer lord of this city."

After three days of riot and the murder of the King's treasurer, the rebellion came to an end through a general pardon. Cade, however, endeavored to raise a new insurrection in the south, but was shortly after captured, and died of his wounds.

"Now is Mortimer lord of this city, and here, sitting upon London Stone, I charge and command that, at the city's cost, this conduit runs nothing but claret wine this first year of our reign; and now it shall be treason for any man to call me other than Lord Mortimer." --Shakerspeare's "Henry VI," Part II, Act IV, scene vi. It is noticeable that the great dramatist expresses no sympathy in this play with the cause of the people. In fact he ridicules Cade and his movement. In the same spirit he does not mention the Great Charter in his "King John," while in his "Richard II" he passes over Wat Tyler without a word. Perhaps the explanation may be found in the fact that Shakespeare lived in an age when England was threatened by both open and secret enemies. The need of his time was a strong, steady hand at the helm; it was no season for reform or change of any sort; on this account he may have thought it his duty to be silent in regard to democratic risings and demands in the past (S313, note 2).

299. Wars of the Roses, 1455-1485.

The real significance of Cade's insurrection is that it showed the widespread feeling of discontent caused by misgovernment, and that it served as an introduction to the long and dreary period of civil strife known as the Wars of the Roses.

So long as the English nobles had France for a fighting ground, French cities to plunder, and French captives to hold for heavy ransoms, they were content to let matters go on quietly at home. But that day was over. Through the bad management, if not through the positive treachery, of Edmund, Duke of Somerset, the French conquests had been lost. Henry VI, a weak king, at times insane, sat on the English throne (S295), while Richard, Duke of York, a really able man and a descendant of the Mortimers (see table, p. 161), was, as many believed, unlawfully excluded from it.

This fact in itself would have furnished a plausible pretext for hostilities, even as far back as Cade's rising. But the birth of a son to Henry (1453) probably gave the signal for the outbreak, since it cut off all hopes which Richard's friends may have had of his peaceful succession.

Prince Edward. See Genealogical Table, p. 161, under Henry VI.

300. The Scene in the Temple Garden.

Shakespeare represents the smoldering feud between the rival houses of Lancaster and York (both of whom it should be remembered were descendants of Edward III) as breaking into an angry quarrel in the Temple Garden, London, when Richard, Duke of York, says:

"Let him that is a true-born gentleman, And stands upon the honor of his birth, If he suppose that I have pleaded truth, From off this brier pluck a white rose with me."

To this challenge John Beaufort, Duke of Somerset, a descendant of the house of Lancaster, who has just accused Richard of being the dishonored son of a traitor, replies:

"Let him that is no coward, nor no flatterer, But dare maintain the party of the truth, Pluch a red rose from off this thorn with me."

A little later on the Earl of Warwick rejoins:

"This brawl to-day, Grown to this faction in the Temple-garden, Shall send, between the red rose and the white, A thousand souls to death and deadly night."

Table showing the descendants of Edward III, with reference to the claims of Lancaster and York to the crown:

Edward III | ---------------------------------------------------- | | | Lionel, Duke of John of Gaunt, Duke of Edmund, Duke of Clarence (3d son) Lancaster (4th son) York (5th son) | ----------------- | Philippa | | Richard, Earl of | Henry IV +John, Earl Cambridge, m. -------------- | of Somerset Anne Mortimer | | Henry V | Edmund Anne Mortimer | --------------- Mortimer m. Richard, Prince Edward, | | (Earl of Earl of b. 1453; killed John, Edmund, March) Cambridge (s. at battle of Duke of Duke of d. 1424 of Edmund, Tewkesbury, Somerset, Somerset Duke of York) 1471 d. 1448 | *Richard, Duke of York | Edward IV (1461-1483)

*Inherited the title of Duke of York from his father's brother, Edward, Duke of York, who died without issue. Richard' father, the Earl of Cambridge, had forfeited his title and estates by treason, but Parliament had so far limited the sentence that his son was not thereby debarred from inheriting his uncle's rank and fortune. Richard, Duke of York, now represented the direct hereditary line of succession to the crown, while Henry VI and his son represented that established by Parliament through the acceptance of Henry IV (S279). +John, Earl of Somerset, was an illegitimate half brother of Henry IV's, but was, in 1397, declared legitimate by act of Parliament and a papal decree.

Shakespeare's "Henry VI," Part I, Act II, scene iv. John, Duke of Somerset, died 1448. He was brother of Edmund, Duke of Somerset, who was slain at St. Albans, 1455. Shakespeare's "Henry VI," Part I, Act II, scene iv.

301. The Real Object of the Wars of the Roses.

The wars, however, did not directly originate in this quarrel, but rather in the strife for power between Edmund, Duke of Somerset (John's brother), and Richard, Duke of York. Each desired to get the control of the government, though at first neither appears to have openly aimed at the crown.

During King Henry's attack of insanity (1453) Richard was appointed Protector of the realm, and shortly afterward the Duke of Somerset, the King's particular favorite and chief adviser, was cast into prison on the double charge of having culpably lost Normandy and embezzled public moneys.

When Henry recovered (1455), he released Somerset and restored him to office. Richard protested, and raising an army in the north, marched toward London. He met the royalist forces at St. Albans; a battle ensued, and Somerset was slain.

During the next thirty years the war raged with more or less fury between the parties of the Red Rose (Lancaster) and the White Rose (York). The first maintained that Parliament had the right to choose whatever king it saw fit, as in Henry IV's case (S279); the second insisted that the succession should be determined by strict hereditary descent, as represented in the claim of Richard.

See Genealogical Table, p. 161.