#AND DUKE OF LANCASTER

[everythingroyalty]

ELIZABETH II (21 April 1926 – 8 September 2022) by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith 🕊️

[eve-to-adam]

Book illustration - Joan Beaufort, Countess of Westmorland with her daughters.

[analoguemagic]

Railings above the River Calder in Burnley Lancashire

[bstag]

What do you feel about the house of york

I feel like it's a medieval dynasty that one a war. That's about it.

I also think that Richard Duke of York was nothing more than a jealous cousin that saw the perfect opportunity to climb the ladder and took it, justly paying the price. Edward IV's anger over his and his brother's death is understandable and so were his actions. Too bad that he didn't saw that the Duke of York's ruthless ambitions had trickled down to his sons Richard and George before they tried it with him. I think the Woodvilles were overtly greedy and took too much of the hand that fed them making the nobility hate them, and they also paid for it. I mean, arranging prestige marriages for every single Woodville? I get it, one of them was the Queen, but come on now, they clearly overplayed.

On the whole, I find this representation of the Yorks as this typical Good HeirsTM that took their rightful place on the throne and stepped up through harsh times that persists so much to this day lame and reductive. The truth of the matter is, they were never more just and GoodTM than the Lancasters. The Lancasters successfully organized a coup and sat the throne, the Yorks did the same, demonizing Henry VI and Queen Margaret of Anjou through propaganda as a freak and an overly ambitious femme fatale respectively, while casting their teenage son as a cruel bastard. All for defending fiercely what was by right theirs (we have Shakespeare to blame for that as well).

[harryofderby]

If the rumours of the illegitimacy of Richard of Conisburgh, Earl of Cambridge turn out to be true and there is some circumstantial evidence backing it namely that he was left out of his wills of his father and brother Edmund and Edward respectively; his mother Isabella of Castile was rumoured to have an affair with John Holland, Duke of Exeter which was recorded by the chronicler Thomas Walsingham amongst others; and her petition to Richard II ( the half-brother of the aforesaid John Holland) to grant a pension to Richard of Conisburgh.

Having said that, if this is true; this will make Richard, Duke of York and his sons and grandsons NOT Plantagenets which is ironic considering that Richard of York was the first one to use Plantagenet as surname.

Having said that, if this is true; this will make Henry VI not only the last Lancastrian but the last Plantagenet too which makes me feel even sadder considering that not only did he just lose his son but he is also the last of his family with none by his side except Margaret.

[une-sanz-pluis]

The thing that strikes me as extraordinary about Henry V and his brothers is how there's no real comparative case to make about English kings who were universally supported by their brothers. Edward II alienated his brothers and stepmother by favouring his favourites at their expense. Edward III's only brother, John of Eltham, died young and Edward was rumoured to have murdered him. Of the "three sons of York", George Duke of Clarence attempted to usurp his brother and was later executed for treason by Edward IV while Richard III usurped his brother's sons and had them declared bastards. The Devil's Brood was, well, the Devil's Brood.

Yet whatever could be said for the rivalry between Henry V and Thomas, Duke of Clarence in their father's reign, or the fractious relationship between John, Duke of Bedford and Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester in their nephew's reign, they worked as a team. They were all loyal to Henry V and he rewarded their loyalty. There is no sign of faction or discontent between them.

[destinyh3art]

Watch "Richard III || Dynasty" on YouTube

So currently i am on this Aneurin Barnard obsession phase and it has been going on for quite a while. Like i am not able to move on from his performance as king Richard in the series. Hated the incest with the niece part and am very glad to know it most likely didn’t happen in real life. Btw, this edit just slaps.

[historicconfessions]

[heartofstanding]

I once saw someone talking about Thomas of Lancaster being bi and for a brief moment I was like "...yeah I'll incorporate that into my worldview" and then I realised they were talking about the Thomas of Lancaster who was the Earl of Lancaster who was executed by Edward II and who Thomas was probably named after.

[blueberry-bubbles130]

So I figured out how to use the hunger games simulator thing and I wanted to put the people from the Wars of the Roses in.

I’d like to give credit to @malvoliowithin for this because I saw their post where they did this.

Of course these aren’t all from the same game, and not all of these figures are from Wars of the Roses but I wanted to add them in anyway.

Here’s some of the ones so far.

[thepastisalreadywritten]

5 February 2024

The King is being treated for cancer, Buckingham Palace has announced.

It has not said what type of cancer the 75-year-old has but confirmed that it was not prostate cancer. The King was recently treated for prostate enlargement.

King Charles III was crowned at Westminster Abbey in May 2023 alongside his wife, Queen Camilla.

How will the King's duties change while he is treated for cancer?

Buckingham Palace said:

"Regrettably, a number of the King's forthcoming public engagements will have to be rearranged or postponed.

His Majesty would like to apologise to all those who may be disappointed or inconvenienced as a consequence."

It said that he was receiving expert care and "looks forward to returning to full public duty as soon as possible."

While the King is recovering, the Queen is expected to continue attending engagements.

"Her Majesty will continue with a full programme of public duties," Buckingham Palace said.

Despite stepping back from public events, the King will continue with paperwork and private meetings as head of state.

What does the King do?

The King is the UK head of state, but his powers are largely symbolic and ceremonial, and he remains politically neutral.

He receives daily dispatches from the government in a red leather box, including briefings ahead of important meetings, or documents needing his signature.

The prime minister normally meets the King on a Wednesday at Buckingham Palace.

These meetings are completely private, and no official records are kept of what is said.

The King also has a number of official parliamentary roles:

Appointing a government — the leader of the party that wins a general election is usually called to Buckingham Palace, where they are invited to form a government. The King also formally dissolves Parliament before a general election

State Opening and the King's Speech — the King begins the parliamentary year with the State Opening ceremony, where he sets out the government's plans in a speech delivered from the throne in the House of Lords

Royal Assent — when a piece of legislation is passed through Parliament, it must be formally approved by the King in order to become law. The last time Royal Assent was refused was in 1708

In addition, the monarch leads the annual Remembrance event in November at the Cenotaph in London.

The King also hosts visiting heads of state, and regularly meets foreign ambassadors and high commissioners.

For his first state visit, Charles visited Germany, where he became the first British monarch to address the country's parliament, speaking in English and German.

The King then travelled to France for a three-day state visit in September and to Kenya for a four-day state visit in October, where he acknowledged the "abhorrent and unjustifiable acts of violence committed against Kenyans during their independence struggle."

He also delivered the opening address at the COP28 climate conference in Dubai in December, where he said: "The Earth does not belong to us."

Charles is also head of the Commonwealth, an association of 56 independent countries spanning 2.5 billion people.

He is head of state for 14 of these, known as the Commonwealth realms, as well as the Crown dependencies - the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man.

The Queen supports the King in carrying out his work and undertakes her own public engagements on behalf of the 90 charities she supports.

Where does the Royal Family get its money?

The Royal Family receives an annual payment from the taxpayer, known as the Sovereign Grant, which is used to pay for official expenses, such as the upkeep of properties and staff costs.

The amount is based on a proportion of the profits of the Crown Estate, a property business owned by the monarch but run independently.

It had assets worth £16.5bn in 2022.

The Sovereign Grant was worth £86.3m in 2022-2023, the same as in 2021-2022.

But total spending for the year was £107.5m, a 5% increase on the £102.4m spent the previous year, with more than £20m drawn from financial reserves to cover the shortfall.

The King also receives money from a private estate called the Duchy of Lancaster, which is passed down from monarch to monarch.

It covers more than 18,000 hectares of land, including property in central London.

Worth £654m, it generates about £20m a year in profits.

The Duke of Cornwall (currently William, Prince of Wales) benefits from the Duchy of Cornwall, which mainly owns land in the south-west of England.

Worth £1bn, it generated a net surplus of £24m in 2022-23.

The King and Prince William receive the profits from the duchies personally, and can spend the money as they wish.

Both voluntarily pay income tax on the proceeds.

In addition, some other Royal Family members have private art, jewellery and stamp collections, which they can sell or use to generate income as they wish.

NOTE: Edited

[eve-to-adam]

How to make Richard of York angry, Season 7, Episode 12

Cecily Neville: What do you do when York sends you annoying letters? Isabel Plantagenet: I'll give him a tailored answer. Cecily Neville: Do you write even more annoying letters? Isabel Plantagenet: No. I send him lines from the Canterbury Tales, an answer he won't understand a word of. This makes him lose his mind.

[wonder-worker]

"The late medieval nobility were not always gleefully ganging up on the king. On the contrary, a lord with pretensions of dominance would find his severest critics among his fellow nobles, who seem on the whole to have considered an inept king infinitely preferable to a colleague wielding excessive power. The isolation of Richard of York in the 1450s can be paralleled in the fourteenth century by Thomas of Lancaster, whose assumption of dominance in opposition to Edward II was much disliked, in spite of the king's own unpopularity."

-Rosemary Horrox, "Personalities and Politics", The Wars of the Roses (Problems in Focus), edited by A.J Pollard

[themidnightcircusshow]

On one hand, John probably would have been a great king and could have potentially mitigated a lot of factors that lead to the war of the roses

On the other hand, John had no legitimate children, and no one, no one wanted King Humphrey I

[harryofderby]

Wish we lived in a world where Thomas, Duke of Clarence was a bit more sensible and didn't end up getting himself killed in Bauge.

[une-sanz-pluis]

In the years before his death Prince Edward gradually came to symbolize Lancastrian hopes: Lancastrian troops bore not only the King's but also the Prince's livery, of crimson and black with ostrich feathers. Although in the agreement of October 1460 between Henry VI and Richard, Duke of York, Prince Edward was denied the right of inheritance in favour of York himself, Edward could have been venerated as the 'natural', legitimate heir of Henry VI. He was the only and last Lancastrian descendant: Henry VI had no other children or Siblings, and all his uncles were dead by then. Edward's reputation required that rumours about his parentage be opposed and that his military prowess, courage and leadership be emphasized.

Danna Piroyansky, Martyrs in the Making: Political Martyrdom in Late Medieval England (Palgrave, 2008)