Modern Connections

Download PDF PDF Page Citation Cite Share Link Share

Henry VI, Part Three opens with a dispute between King Henry and York over who is the legitimate ruler of England. This conflict traces back to the reign of Henry's grandfather, King Henry IV, a Lancastrian who seized the throne from Richard II, the grandson and rightful heir of King Edward III. Shakespeare's series of plays—Richard II, Henry IV, Part One and Two, and Henry V—depicts the rise of the Lancastrians. York claims his lineage provides a more direct connection to King Edward III's throne than Henry's does, asserting that York should be king, while Henry, whose grandfather took the crown by force, should merely hold the title of Duke of Lancaster. This dispute between York's supporters (the Yorkists, represented by the white rose) and King Henry's supporters (the Lancastrians, symbolized by the red rose) is the essence of the Wars of the Roses. In I.i.134, Henry acknowledges his weak claim to the throne. Consequently, in I.i.194-200, he agrees to pass the crown to York and his descendants "forever," provided he remains king for life and that the Wars of the Roses cease. York agrees to this arrangement, proclaiming, "Now York and Lancaster are reconcil'd" (I.i.204).

However, ending the wars is not as straightforward as York and King Henry propose. The conflict began in Henry VI, Part One, and the battles have been prolonged, fierce, and bloody. For instance, both Clifford and Northumberland lost their fathers fighting against the Yorkists in Henry VI, Part Two. In Henry VI, Part Three, "They seek revenge, and therefore will not yield" even though Henry and York declare the war over (I.i.190). Clifford later exacts his revenge by savagely killing York's young son Rutland and then York himself (I.iii and I.iv). As a result, York's surviving sons pledge to take revenge on Clifford. When they discover him already dead on the battlefield, their fury drives them to mock Clifford's corpse, decapitate him, and place his head where their father's once was on the gates of the town of York—fulfilling "measure for measure" (II.vi.46-86).

In Henry VI, Part Three, the conflict has surpassed its initial cause, with retribution becoming the main focus. Gloucester expresses this after killing King Henry: "may such purple tears [of blood] be always shed / From those that wish the downfall of our house!" (V.vi.64-65). To complicate matters, the two factions are evenly matched, leading Henry to note in II.v.1-13 that neither side is "conqueror nor conquered." The fighting continues as Yorkists and Lancastrians alternate between victories and defeats, while fathers unknowingly slay their sons, and sons inadvertently kill their fathers when conscripted to fight on opposing sides.

The chaotic legacy of civil war is a narrative familiar to contemporary audiences, as seen in the aftermath of conflicts like those between the Hutus and Tutsis in East Central Africa, and the Serbs, Croats, and Bosnians in the former Yugoslavia. In both of these modern conflicts, innocent civilians have suffered horrendous brutality, neighbors have turned against each other, and the initial political and ethnic motivations for the wars have been eclipsed by widespread suffering and an intense, personal desire for revenge and compensation that seems impossible to fulfill.

A factor that adds to the bitterness of the Wars of the Roses is its nature as a family feud. King Henry and York are distant relatives, as are many of the nobles on both sides. As the play progresses and the seemingly endless war becomes more chaotic, internal feuding arises within each faction. In Act IV, Scene i, for instance, George, Duke of Clarence, is...

(This entire section contains 719 words.)

Unlock this Study Guide Now

Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.

Get 48 Hours Free Access

infuriated when his brother, the newly crowned Yorkist King Edward, rashly marries Lady Grey. Clarence's anger deepens when Edward favors his new wife's family over his own brothers. In retaliation, Clarence temporarily sides with the Lancastrians. Although his defection lasts only until Act V, Scene i, line 81, it later haunts him when his malicious and ambitious brother Gloucester exploits this early betrayal against him in Shakespeare's sequel,Richard III. Today, most family feuds do not lead to warfare, but they can still incite violence and often persist across generations, involving grandparents, cousins, and siblings in long-lasting resentment long after the original dispute is forgotten, making family gatherings difficult or, at best, uncomfortable.

Bibliography

Download PDF PDF Page Citation Cite Share Link Share

Baker, Herschel. Introduction to Henry VI, Parts 1, 2, and 3, by William Shakespeare. In the Riverside Shakespeare, edited by G. Blakemore Evans, 587-95. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1974. Baker discusses all three plays and includes a helpful family tree of King Edward III's descendants. He describes Henry VI, Part Three as "a play of battles, each more savage than the last," and highlights Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard of Gloucester as a "new advance" in the playwright's craft.

Bergeron, David M. "The Play-within-the Play in 3 Henry VI." Tennessee Studies in Literature 22 (1977): 37-45. Bergeron explores how the theatrical elements in scenes I.iv, II.v, III.i, and III.ii create a play-within-a-play effect in Henry VI, Part Three.

Bevington, David. Introduction to The Third Part of King Henry the Sixth, by William Shakespeare. In The Complete Works of Shakespeare, edited by David Bevington, 584-85. Updated 4th ed. New York: Longman, 1997. Bevington treats Henry VI, Part Three as "a play in its own right," examining its themes of revenge and oath-breaking, noting the lack of heroes, and highlighting Richard of Gloucester's prominence.

Kelly, Faye L. "Oaths in Shakespeare's Henry VI Plays." Shakespeare Quarterly 24 (Autumn 1973): 357-71. Kelly analyzes the frequent making and breaking of oaths in the Henry VI plays, emphasizing how broken vows in Henry VI, Part Three underscore the disorder resulting from the abandonment of lawful succession and group loyalties.

Manheim, Michael. "Silence in the Henry VI Plays." Educational Theatre Journal 29 (March 1977): 70-76. Manheim interprets King Henry's silence as a positive attribute, suggesting it signifies his honesty and humanity—qualities absent in other, more vocal characters. Manheim uses I.in Henry VI, Part Three to support his argument.

Norvell, Betty G. "The Dramatic Portrait of Margaret in Shakespeare's Henry VI Plays." West Virginia Association of College English Teachers. Bulletin 8 (Spring 1983): 38-44. Norvell contends that Margaret is a multifaceted character with roles including lover, Machiavellian, mother, and military leader.

Sanders, Norman. Introduction to The Third Part of King Henry the Sixth, by William Shakespeare, edited by Norman Sanders, 7-37. The New Penguin Shakespeare. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd., 1981. Sanders examines the intertwined themes of family revenge and civil war, and their impact on the royal succession system. He also focuses on the dominance of Richard, Duke of Gloucester, in the play, hinting at his future role in Shakespeare's Richard III.

Swayne, Mattie. "Shakespeare's King Henry VI as a Pacifist." College English 3 (1941): 143-49. Swayne argues that Henry VI should be admired for his emphasis on peaceful, private virtues rather than criticized for his failures in governance and warfare.

Utterback, Raymond V. "Public Men, Private Wills, and Kingship in Henry VI, Part III." Renaissance Papers (1978): 47-54. Utterback discusses how the debate in Act I, Scene i, highlights the conflicting views that both factions hold regarding their private beliefs and public ideals of kingship.

Watson, Donald G. "The Dark Comedy of the Henry VI Plays." Thalia 1 (Autumn 1978): 11-21. Watson examines the trilogy of Henry VI as well as Richard III, arguing that the presence of dark comedy in these plays compels us to reconsider our perspectives on the interplay between politics and ethics.

Setting

Download PDF PDF Page Citation Cite Share Link Share

Towton

Towton, a modest town in Yorkshire, stands as a historical backdrop for one of the most harrowing battles depicted in Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 3. In this small locale, the ferocity of the Wars of the Roses reaches its zenith. For Shakespeare's audience, the Battle of Towton epitomized the brutal nature of civil conflict. The chaos of political strife is mirrored by the more intimate tragedy of familial disintegration, as fathers and sons find themselves on opposing sides, tragically killing one another. Such scenes resonated with Elizabethan beliefs that civil war not only tore apart the nation but also dismembered the body politic. On this battlefield, this dismemberment becomes literal, as seen when Lord Clifford's head is gruesomely displayed on the gates of York, a grim replacement for the duke of York's head.

Amidst the carnage, King Henry's presence adds a poignant layer to the turmoil. Deposed and ignored in the struggle for his crown, Henry, relegated to a humble molehill, embodies the loss of royal power. Yet, stripped of his authority, he assumes the role of a somber chorus, illuminating the human cost of war. His moral stature starkly contrasts with his political impotence, offering a reflection on the tragedy engulfing the nation.

Tower of London

The Tower of London, with its looming presence on the banks of the River Thames, serves as a grim setting for the unfolding drama. Within its walls, Richard of Gloucester commits the heinous act of murdering King Henry, an ominous prelude to the infamous Tower murders that would later characterize Richard in Richard III. The tragic irony of Henry's confinement is palpable; once a monarch of both England and France, he ends his days as a powerless prisoner. However, it is within these walls that Henry undergoes a transformation. Despite his captivity, he emerges as a prophetic figure, predicting the rise of the young Henry of Richmond as a great king and foreseeing Richard's future tyranny. This paradox highlights the complex interplay of power and prophecy within the Tower's confines.

Royal Palace

In stark contrast to the blood-stained fields of Towton and the grim corridors of the Tower, the royal palace in London offers a brief respite from the play's relentless battles. Here, Edward IV holds court, seemingly secure on his throne. In this bastion of royal power, the art of romance supersedes military strategy. Edward's pursuit of the widow Elizabeth Grey mirrors his earlier quest for the crown, replacing the clamor of conflict with the subtleties of courtship and humor. The palace becomes a stage for bawdy jokes and innuendos, a theatrical diversion from the horrors of war.

Nevertheless, the palace's tranquility is deceptive. The seeds of future discord are sown within its walls, as Edward's eventual marriage to Elizabeth Grey ignites the lingering embers of the Wars of the Roses. It is also here that Richard of Gloucester reveals his ambition to seize the throne, delivering an iconic soliloquy that foreshadows the turmoil to come. Thus, even within the seeming security of the palace, the specter of civil war looms large, threatening to unravel any semblance of peace.

Previous

Characters

Next

Critical Essays

Loading...