Gateway Chronicle 2022

Bolingbroke fuelled his ambition which was
a contributing factor to why Richard II lost
his crown, it would be inaccurate for a
historian to deem his ambition the primary
reason for Bolingbroke’s success seeing
there is so little record of his desire until
later on in events happening.
On the other hand, when considering the
consequences of Richard’s own actions, it
is evident they were the main reason for
the loss of his throne. Arguably a key
reason why Bolingbroke was able to gain
supporters in so little time was due to
Richard’s apathetic stance towards the
common man. Unlike other monarchs
before him, Richard did not try to woo the
average man in his kingdom; this
combined with his tyrannical rule towards
the end of his reign enabled Bolingbroke’s
rapid growth of support. Richard’s tyranny
can be evidenced by his dealing with the
Lords Appellant, with Arundel executed,
Warwick exiled to the Isle of Man and
Gloucester murdered, as well as the
arguably less serious but more impactful
tax issues: his promise of lightening them
from 1389 was never delivered upon, in
1393 a Common’s faith was used to justify
a tax raise and in 1398 a grant of wool and
leather customs for life was given to
Richard. This autocratic rule was just one
of many of Richard’s actions with
unintended consequences, and, in this
case, it was to drive not only the common
man but also the powerful families into
Bolingbroke’s arms. Thus, it can be seen a
large degree of Bolingbroke’s success of
his ambition was drawn from Richard’s
own actions which would suggest them
being the primary reason why the throne
was lost. Furthermore, the king’s tendency
to prefer his favourites over the impartiality
a monarch is meant to show, due partially
to the youth at which he ascended to the
throne. The appeal of the Lords Appellant
from February 1388 aptly shows this, with
it stating ‘false traitors to and enemies of
the king and kingdom, perceiving the
tender age of our said lord the king and the
innocence of his royal person, so caused
him to believe many falsities devised and
plotted by them against loyalty and good
faith, that they caused him to devote his
affection, firm faith, and credence entirely
to them, and to hate his loyal lords and
lieges, by whom he ought rather to have
been governed.’ Although the reliability of
this source is severely hindered by the
political motivations of the Lords, who
sought to rebel against the king, utilising
this appeal to legitimise their motivations to
Parliament, they do bring to light the issue
that Richard was young and easily led
astray in the early years of his reign. Thus,
as a result of the youthful counsel Richard
employed, a precedent for his tyranny was
set in the formative years of his reign which
led to his subjects turning against him,
towards Bolingbroke. Moreover, if one
considers Richard’s treatment of
Bolingbroke an extension of his actions,
that too fuels the idea these actions led to
the loss of the crown. Hence, it is clear to a
historian it was Richard’s own actions were
the primary reason for his deposition rather
than the ambition of Bolingbroke.
Finally, the declining authority and prestige
of the crown made some impact on the
deposition of Richard II. This decline is
evidenced not only by the Lords
Appellant’s challenge but also by Richard’s
own efforts to increase the standing of the
crown. Through imagery, such as the
general pardon issued in 1398, as well as
more practical means, such as claiming the
estates of Gloucester, Arundel and
Warwick in 1397, Richard displayed a keen
interest in bolstering the image of the
15 | G ateway Chronicle