What Made Edward IV A Bad KIng

 Henry VI is often blamed for the Wars of the Roses. But the man who deposed him twice, Edward IV, as a king, was little better. He was impulsive, as demonstrated by his shock marriage to Elizabeth Woodville. This made a dangerous enemy out of an ally in the shape of Warwick The Kingmaker and led to Edward’s own brief deposition in 1470. Warwick had been on the continent,  negotiating,on Edward’s behalf, a spectacular marriage for the king with several European princesses an option. When Warwick got word of Edward’s marriage to a woman from a relatively obscure family, he was both embarrassed and furious. Edward had sent him to do his bidding and eventually left him high and dry. Warwick now turned against the king.

Astonishingly, Warwick turned to Margaret of Anjou, the queen of the deposed Henry VI. With Henry increasingly fragile and delicate, his hopes of becoming king again lay in the hands of Margaret, a forceful and determined woman, but Warwick was her only realistic option. The two hated each other but realised if Henry was to be restored to power and Warwick avenge himself upon Edward for his very public humiliation then Margaret and Warwick now knew an alliance was needed, no matter how much they undoubtedly resented. The alliance briefly worked as Edward was forced to flee England when Warwick and Margaret landed in England with an invading forces. Henry ruled as king for a few short months but Edward returned.

He defeated Warwick at the Battle of Barnet with Warwick being killed attempting to flee. Then ,at Tewkesbury, Edward triumphed again over the House of Lancaster and ,here, Henry and Margaret’s one son, another Edward, died at the age of 17. Henry was then murdered at the Tower of London, likely on the orders of Richard, Duke of Gloucester, Edward IV’s brother. Thus, Edward’s enemies were eliminated and he was restored to his throne. It had been a narrow escape from a situation that was entirely avoidable. Edward’s pursuit of Elizabeth had been driven by lust and his decision to marry by impulse. Had the king been thinking clearly, he would have realised the damage he would cause to his relationship with Warwick The Kingmaker. He’d got away with it.

But Edward IV didn’t learn his lessons. He failed to think about the future and over indulged when he had finally removed his enemies. Edward’s excessive eating habits contributed to his premature death in 1483 which led to further, terrible instability. When he first came to the throne in 1461, Edward had been a fine figure of a young man in his late teens. Strong, powerful and tall, standing at 6 foot 4, Edward embodied everything that was looked for, physically, in a medieval king. But after reclaiming the crown a decade later, he began to let himself go. He gave in to temptation, eating great quantities of food and an all too strong liking for women. Edward kept a number of mistresses which was not unusual for medieval kings regardless of their marital status. When Richard III took the throne from his nephew Edward V, the rightful heir to Edward IV, his supporters claimed that Edward V was illegitimate due to a marriage agreement Edward IV had made with a woman named Eleanor Talbot.

But it’s possible Edward’s sex life came back to haunt him. It’s been speculated recently that Edward died of syphilis although that remains unproven. What that indicates, true or not, is that Edward had strayed from the path of good medieval kingship. Excessive indulgence is not the trait of a good king and Edward’s grandson, Henry VIII, would fall into the same pitfalls. Edward was also not popular in his own time and faced rebellions against his rule including from the mysterious Robin of Redesdale. The king’s authority was also repeatedly undermined by his nuisance of a brother, George, Duke of Clarence.

I think it can be argued, when looking at the evidence, that Edward IV was as responsible for the Wars of the Roses as Henry VI. Henry, after all, was clearly not a well man and so had some mitigating factors. And Henry’s biggest crime was that he was simply too nice to rule a country. When Edward’s father, Richard, Duke of York attempted to take the crown, it was simply a power grab. If the nobles in 15th century England had the best interests of the realm at heart then supporting Henry should have been their main concern. He was no tyrant and didn’t deserve his fate that he met in the Tower of London; a vicious beating. Edward, when he took the crown, was ultimately a usurper and, frankly, aside from his undoubted military skills, he failed to prove himself any more worthy of the title of king then Henry had done. And, as I've evidenced, what followed Edward's death were not just about the greed of Richard III but also the shortsightedness of Edward IV. He left a young son to take the crown. Had he lived just a few years more, which was easily achievable had he taken care of himself better, then Edward V WOULD have been crowned king. A king's legacy isn't just dictated by the events of his reign but what came after it and this is why I regard Edward IV as being really quite a poor king.