Home Forums Medieval Wars of the Roses

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49041
    William Jones
    Participant

    This is a question for the UK gamers and historians here.

    I’m getting all kinds of inspiration from Conn Iggulden’s series of historical fiction on this war. So much I am tempted to go two scales for two different sets of rules, A Coat of Steel and Bloody Barons. And I am a tightwad, so that is very inspired indeed.

    Reading this has allowed me to follow the personalities, reasons and events for these conflicts for the first time (no plot spoilers, please!), and has left me somewhat astonished at the fanatical levels of passion, unless Iggulden is engaging in artistic license.

    So, honest question, does anyone in England or Scotland much care about this anymore, or have partisan loyalties died out over 500 years? I know the ECW still rouses some, but it is a more modern war over more modern ideas. So, aside from the Richard III supporters, does anyone else feel a bit of accelerated heart rate, or rising heat when delving into the Wars of the Roses? Or is that limited to a very few aficionados?

    • This topic was modified 4 years, 5 months ago by William Jones.
    #49044
    Norm S
    Participant

    Speaking as an Englishman, I find the history fascinating, but I am not and do not know anyone who is, within the general public, ‘connected’ emotionally or otherwise to any one particular faction or cause.

    There are societies such as the Richard III Society and other interested parties that seek to ‘uncover’ the truth behind such things as how Richard III came to  power etc. Much of that is academic interest in making sure our history is accurate, but no doubt there is passion there as well.

    So a sort of generic answer is that the nation as a whole are indifferent, by comparison a few are passionate, though a few years ago there was a documentary based examination of Richard by way of a re-enacted trial and the new thoughts about the location of the battle of Bosworth and the finding of the King’s body have seen public interest, with the stories being carried in mainstream media.

    #49046
    Northern Monkey
    Participant

    I absolutely love this period, its a shame no one else does (or at least very few) as Norm says, other than the publics apparent interest in RIII, its a very much forgotten period with the vast majority believing it has something to do with a conflict between the two Counties of Lancashire and Yorkshire rather than the houses of Lancaster and York!

    Speaking as a native of Lancashire living in Yorkshire, there is the odd bit of banter between us Red & White roses but this is more to do with local rivalry than any throw back to the WotR (especially as we would have generally speaking both fought for the Lancastrian cause) .

    Incidentally, I don’t think the Scottish, ever really cared, even at the time, it was a win/win situation for them as England (well the nobility at least) tore itself apart.

    My attempt at a Blog: http://ablogofwar.blogspot.co.uk/

    #49047
    Victoria Dickson
    Participant

    For me it isn’t sides, it’s families.  I support the Nevilles whichever side they happen to be on, and oppose the Woodvilles in the same way.  An attitude I got from my Mum, not sure where she got it from. 

     

    #49050
    Northern Monkey
    Participant

    Im almost with you on that one, although im not a fan of the Kingmaker(he thought too highly of himself IMO), his brother John is my favourite personality of the Wars, and with him, Salisbury and Fauconberg you have the best commanders too.

    My attempt at a Blog: http://ablogofwar.blogspot.co.uk/

    #49064
    Thuseld
    Participant

    I love this period and find it to be probably the most interesting episode in the history of post 1066 British Isles. I studied it at university and have ended up reading history books about it for my own pleasure in the years following. This is the only non 20th century historical episode that has captured my imagination and interest to such a degree (although the formation of the Bible is oddly fascinating to me).

    #49096
    cmnash
    Participant

    I’ve also become interested in the period recently and have a small seed of an idea of a project for it in 6mm using Baccus mini’s.

    My inspiration though, was the BBC’s Hollow Crown series – they did Shakepseare’s WotR plays in rather excellent fashion IMO.

    That said, back to the question in the OP – I’ve never met anyone who would let the WotR affect their daily lives; i.e. they don’t care about it

    edited: I should have said that I am English, but from the south. Attitudes might be different for people from Lancashire and Yorkshire – after people are strange oop norff  

    • This reply was modified 4 years, 5 months ago by cmnash.

    .

    #49119
    Guy Farrish
    Participant

    90 something per cent of people have no idea of what it was about and care even less about it or the result.

    This is entirely a good thing as it was a feud within an extended group of Anglo-Norman Mafia style families and concerned the ordinary people at the time not one jot.

    For the historian it has some interesting facets I suppose but I confess to liking the bit where Henry VII comes along and slaps the aristocracy around a bit and gets down to actually governing the country and making a profit.

    #49120
    Not Connard Sage
    Participant

    90 something per cent of people have no idea of what it was about and care even less about it or the result. This is entirely a good thing as it was a feud within an extended group of Anglo-Norman Mafia style families and concerned the ordinary people at the time not one jot. For the historian it has some interesting facets I suppose but I confess to liking the bit where Henry VII comes along and slaps the aristocracy around a bit and gets down to actually governing the country and making a profit.

     

    Wot ‘e said.

    "I go online sometimes, but everyone's spelling is really bad. It's... depressing."

    #49122
    Northern Monkey
    Participant

    …… gets down to actually governing the country and making a profit.

    You mean much like Edward IV had done for the 10 years previous to his death?

    My attempt at a Blog: http://ablogofwar.blogspot.co.uk/

    #49136
    Guy Farrish
    Participant

     

    But he didn’t stop the silliness did he? Otherwise we wouldn’t have had Bosworth and the tidying up Henry had to do. Ed wasn’t ruthless enough with nobles. He should have topped a few more and broken the power of the bigger magnates. If he’d invested his French winnings into trade a bit more and nicked a few more noble estates then I’d be cheering for him right now. But he didn’t. Good try. Thanks for playing, next contender (pretender?).

    #49174
    Northern Monkey
    Participant

    But he didn’t stop the silliness did he?

    Never said he did, just pointing out that he did govern reasonably well and restored the countries fortunes somewhat, so much so that we could resume our favoured pastimes of invading France & Scotland again, I believe Henry VII gets too much credit for restoring order/rebuilding the countries finances when he basically “inherited” a stable economy

    Ed wasn’t ruthless enough with nobles. He should have topped a few more and broken the power of the bigger magnates. 

    I agree to a point, all he had to do was bump off Tudor (might as well have done Oxford while he was at it)whilst he was a friendless, landless, vagabond being shunted from one French noble to another, where I disagree is in the 2nd part of your statement, Eddie did do a good job of breaking the bigger magnates, other than Stanley(who he needed to keep an eye on the Percies, but even here he eventually limited their power by appointing Gloucester as defacto Lord of the North), who of the big players was in a position to support a Lancastrian pretender/contender during the 2nd part of Eddies reign? The Nevilles(de Raby) – nope all dead, The Westmoreland Nevilles – nope – mental health issues, The Beauforts – nope – annihilated in the legitimate male line at least, Buckingham – nope – allied to the Crown, Devon – nope – dead or attainted, The Percies – nope – reliant on Edwards goodwill to retain their holdings, so who where these bigger magnates that he needed to break?

    During this 2nd reign there was no real popular support for Lancaster, and if it wasn’t for Tricky Dicky alienating a good portion of the nobility their would have been even less support for Tudors invasion (which didn’t receive significant support from either the commons or nobility anyway).

     

    My attempt at a Blog: http://ablogofwar.blogspot.co.uk/

    #49189
    Guy Farrish
    Participant

    I’m not overly praising Henry (although I think most of the revisionist interpretations trying to knock him off his perch are from academics trying to carve a niche in a difficult tenure environment, or freaky Richard III apologists). I’m just glad someone brought the whole tedious interlude of ‘King of the Castle’ to an end. If Ed had managed it, fine by me. But he didn’t so Henry gets my vote.

    #49219
    William Jones
    Participant

    Thank you all for your answers. The reason I asked the questions is because of the duration and periodic intensity of the fighting. Towton appears to have been an absolute shambles and national tragedy. I’m glad to see animosities faded with time. It is very hard for us to relate to such passionate adherence to this or that house, I think. Mob families, essentially, as noted above.

    That said, what an inspiration for wargames, and alternative history campaigns!

    On my wargames rebuild I have decided to be fussy. I have to love the history or fantasy world, the rules, the scale, and the appearance of the minis and terrain to consider it. No compromises. WotR hits all of those for me. I’d love to see an essentially RPG approach to campaign games with battles put on the tabletop.

Viewing 14 posts - 1 through 14 (of 14 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.