text:
Henry VI of England

Henry VI (6 December 1421 – 21 May 1471) was King of England from 1422 to 1461 and again from 1470 to 1471, and disputed King of France from 1422 to 1453. The only child of Henry V, he succeeded to the English throne upon his father's death, at the age of eight months; and succeeded to the French throne on the death of his maternal grandfather, Charles VI, shortly afterwards.

Henry was born during the Hundred Years' War (1337–1453), at the beginning of its third phase, in which his uncle, Charles VII, contested the Lancastrian claim to the French throne, which had been ratified in the Treaty of Troyes (1420). He is the only English monarch to have been crowned King of France, with his coronation in 1431 taking place in Notre-Dame de Paris. His early reign, when England was ruled by a regency government, saw the pinnacle of English power in France. However, subsequent military, diplomatic and economic problems damaged the English cause by the time Henry was declared mature enough to rule in 1437. The young king faced military setbacks in France, and political and financial crises in England, where divisions among the nobility in his government began to widen.

In contrast to his father, Henry VI is described as timid, shy, passive, benevolent and averse to warfare and violence; after 1453, he became mentally unstable. His ineffective reign saw the near total loss of English lands in France. In 1445 – partially in the hope of achieving peace – Henry married Charles VII's niece, the ambitious and strong-willed Margaret of Anjou. The peace policy failed and war recommenced, with France rapidly recovering much of the territory held by the English, including their ancestral lands in Aquitaine and the conquered Normandy. By 1453, Calais was the only English-governed territory on the continent. Henry's domestic popularity declined in the 1440s, partly due to the revelation that a large, strategically important territory (the county of Maine) had been secretly returned to the French. Political unrest in England grew rapidly as a result; the lynching of Henry's key adviser, William de la Pole, 1st Duke of Suffolk, provoked a major rebellion in 1450. Factions and favourites encouraged the rise of further disorder in the country: regional magnates maintained increasing numbers of private armed retainers, including soldiers returning from France, with whom they fought regional conflicts (e.g. the Percy-Neville feud), terrorised their neighbours, paralysed the courts, and dominated the government.

Starting in 1453, Henry had a series of mental breakdowns, making him unable to rule. Power was duly exercised by quarrelsome nobles, headed by the leaders of cadet branches of the royal family; Richard, 3rd Duke of York and Edmund Beaufort, 2nd Duke of Somerset developed a fierce political rivalry and jostled for power in Henry's government. Queen Margaret did not remain politically neutral and took advantage of the situation to make herself an effective power behind the throne. Amid military disasters in France, and a collapse of law and order in England, the Queen and her clique came under accusations – particularly from Henry VI's increasingly popular cousin, the Duke of York – of misconduct of the war in France and misrule of England. Tensions mounted between Margaret and York over control of the incapacitated King's government, which developed into a major dispute over the succession to the English throne. Civil war broke out in 1455, leading to a long period of dynastic conflict known as the Wars of the Roses (1455–1487).

Henry was deposed on 4 March 1461 by York's eldest son, who took the throne as King Edward IV. Despite Margaret continuing to lead a resistance to Edward, Henry was captured by Edward's forces in 1465 and imprisoned in the Tower of London. Henry was restored to the throne by the Earl of Warwick in 1470. Edward retook power in 1471 and killed Henry's only son, Edward of Westminster, at the Battle of Tewkesbury; Henry was imprisoned once again. Having "lost his wits, his two kingdoms and his only son", Henry died in the Tower during the night of 21 May 1471, possibly killed on the orders of King Edward. He was buried at Chertsey Abbey before being moved to Windsor Castle in 1484. Miracles were attributed to Henry after his death and he was informally regarded as a saint and martyr until the 16th century. He left a legacy of educational institutions, having founded Eton College, King's College, Cambridge and (together with Henry Chichele) All Souls College, Oxford. Shakespeare wrote a trilogy of plays about his life, depicting him as weak-willed and easily influenced by his wife, Margaret.

Child king

Henry was born on 6 December 1421 at Windsor Castle, the only child and heir-apparent of King Henry V. Succeeding to the throne as King of England at the age of eight months on 1 September 1422, the day after his father's death; he remains the youngest person ever to succeed to the English throne. On 21 October 1422, in accordance with the Treaty of Troyes of 1420, he became titular King of France upon his grandfather Charles VI's death. His mother, the 20-year-old Catherine of Valois, was viewed with considerable suspicion by English nobles as Charles VI's daughter. She was prevented from playing a full role in her son's upbringing.

On 28 September 1423, the nobles swore loyalty to Henry VI, who was not yet two years old. They summoned Parliament in the King's name and established a regency council to govern until the King should come of age. One of Henry V's surviving brothers, John, Duke of Bedford, was appointed senior regent of the realm and was in charge of the ongoing war in France. During Bedford's absence, the government of England was headed by Henry V's other surviving brother, Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester, who was appointed Lord Protector and Defender of the Realm. His duties were limited to keeping the peace and summoning Parliament. Henry V's uncle Henry Beaufort, Bishop of Winchester (after 1426 also Cardinal), had an important place on the Council. After the Duke of Bedford died in 1435, the Duke of Gloucester claimed the Regency himself but was contested by the other members of the Council.

From 1428, Henry's tutor was Richard de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, whose father had been instrumental in the opposition to Richard II's reign. For the period 1430–1432, Henry was also tutored by the physician John Somerset. Somerset's duties were to "tutor the young king as well as preserv[e] his health". Somerset remained within the royal household until early 1451 after the English House of Commons petitioned for his removal because of his "dangerous and subversive influence over Henry VI".

Henry's mother Catherine remarried to Owen Tudor and had two sons by him, Edmund and Jasper. Henry later gave his half-brothers earldoms. Edmund Tudor was the father of King Henry VII of England.

In reaction to the coronation of Charles VII of France in Reims Cathedral on 17 July 1429, Henry was soon crowned King of England at Westminster Abbey on 6 November 1429, aged 7, followed by his own coronation as King of France at Notre-Dame de Paris on 16 December 1431, aged 10. He was the only English king to be crowned king in both England and France. It was shortly after his crowning ceremony at Merton Priory on All Saints' Day, 1 November 1437, shortly before his 16th birthday, that he obtained some measure of independent authority. This was confirmed on 13 November 1437, but his growing willingness to involve himself in administration had already become apparent in 1434, when the place named on writs temporarily changed from Westminster (where the Privy Council met) to Cirencester (where the King resided). He finally assumed full royal powers when he came of age at the end of the year 1437, when he turned sixteen years old. Henry's assumption of full royal powers occurred during the Great Bullion Famine and the beginning of the Great Slump in England.

Assumption of government

Henry, who was by nature shy, pious, and averse to deceit and bloodshed, immediately allowed his court to be dominated by a few noble favourites who clashed on the matter of the French war when he assumed the reins of government in 1437. After the death of King Henry V, England had lost momentum in the Hundred Years' War, whereas the House of Valois had gained ground beginning with Joan of Arc's military victories in the year 1429. The young King came to favour a policy of peace in France and thus favoured the faction around Cardinal Beaufort and William de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, who thought likewise; the Duke of Gloucester and Richard, Duke of York, who argued for a continuation of the war, were ignored.

Marriage
As the English military situation in France deteriorated, talks emerged in England about arranging a marriage for the king to strengthen England's foreign connections and facilitate a peace between the warring parties. In 1434, the English council suggested that peace with the Scots could best be effected by the wedding of Henry to one of the daughters of King James I of Scotland; the proposal came to nothing. During the Congress of Arras in 1435, the English put forth the idea of a union between Henry and a daughter of King Charles VII of France, but the Armagnacs refused even to contemplate the suggestion unless Henry renounced his claim to the French throne. Another proposal in 1438 to a daughter of King Albert II of Germany likewise failed.

Better prospects for England arose amid a growing effort by French lords to resist the growing power of the French monarchy, a conflict which culminated in the Praguerie revolt of 1440. Though the English failed to take advantage of the Praguerie itself, the prospect of gaining the allegiance of one of Charles VII's more rebellious nobles was attractive from a military perspective. In about 1441, the recently ransomed Charles, Duke of Orléans, in an attempt to force Charles VII to make peace with the English, suggested a marriage between Henry VI and Isabella of Armagnac, daughter of John IV, Count of Armagnac, a powerful noble in southwestern France who was at odds with the Valois crown. An alliance with Armagnac would have helped to protect English Gascony from increasing French threats in the region, especially in the face of defections to the enemy by local English vassals, and might have helped to wean some other French nobles to the English party. The proposal was seriously entertained between 1441 and 1443, but a massive French campaign in 1442 against Gascony disrupted the work of the ambassadors and frightened the Count of Armagnac into reluctance. The deal fell through due to problems in commissioning portraits of the Count's daughters and the Count's imprisonment by Charles VII's men in 1443.

Cardinal Beaufort and the Earl of Suffolk persuaded Henry that the best way to pursue peace with France was through a marriage with Margaret of Anjou, the niece of King Charles VII. Henry agreed, especially when he heard reports of Margaret's stunning beauty, and sent Suffolk to negotiate with Charles, who consented to the marriage on condition that he would not have to provide the customary dowry and instead would receive the province of Maine from the English. These conditions were agreed upon in the Treaty of Tours in 1444, but the cession of Maine was kept secret from Parliament, as it was known that this would be hugely unpopular with the English populace. The marriage took place at Titchfield Abbey on 23 April 1445, one month after Margaret's 15th birthday. She had arrived with an established household, composed primarily not of Angevins, but of members of Henry's royal servants; this increase in the size of the royal household, and a concomitant increase on the birth of their son, Edward of Westminster, in 1453, led to proportionately greater expense but also to greater patronage opportunities at Court.

Henry had wavered in yielding Maine to Charles, knowing that the move was unpopular and would be opposed by the Dukes of Gloucester and York, and also because Maine was vital to the defence of Normandy. However, Margaret was determined that he should see it through. As the treaty became public knowledge in 1446, public anger focused on the Earl of Suffolk, but Henry and Margaret were determined to protect him.

Ascendancy of Suffolk and Somerset

In 1447, the king and queen summoned the Duke of Gloucester to appear before parliament on the charge of treason. Queen Margaret had no tolerance for any sign of disloyalty toward her husband and kingdom, thus any suspicion of this was immediately brought to her attention. This move was instigated by Gloucester's enemies, the earl of Suffolk, whom Margaret held in great esteem, and the ageing Cardinal Beaufort and his nephew, Edmund Beaufort, Earl of Somerset. Gloucester was put in custody in Bury St Edmunds, where he died, probably of a heart attack (although contemporary rumours spoke of poisoning) before he could be tried.

The Duke of York, being the most powerful duke in the realm and also being both an agnate and the heir general of Edward III (thus having, according to some, a better claim to the throne than Henry VI himself), probably had the best chances to succeed to the throne after Gloucester. However, he was excluded from the court circle and sent to govern Ireland, while his opponents, the earls of Suffolk and Somerset, were promoted to dukes, a title at that time still normally reserved for immediate relatives of the monarch. The new duke of Somerset was sent to France to assume the command of the English forces; this prestigious position was previously held by the duke of York himself, who was dismayed at his term not being renewed and at seeing his enemy take control of it.

In the later years of Henry's reign, the monarchy became increasingly unpopular, due to a breakdown in law and order, corruption, the distribution of royal land to the king's court favourites, the troubled state of the crown's finances, and the steady loss of territories in France. In 1447, this unpopularity took the form of a Commons campaign against William de la Pole, 1st Duke of Suffolk, who was the most unpopular of all the king's entourage and widely seen as a traitor. He was impeached by Parliament to a background that has been called "the baying for Suffolk's blood [by] a London mob", to the extent that Suffolk admitted his alarm to Henry. Ultimately, Henry was forced to send him into exile, but Suffolk's ship was intercepted in the English Channel. His murdered body was found on the beach at Dover.

Henry's mental health began to deteriorate in the late 1440s. He exhibited possible signs of paranoia (the arrest of Duke Humphrey in 1447) and grandiosity (the scale of his plans of expansion for Eton Chapel in 1449 and King's College in 1446). By 1449, Henry had many critics questioning his ability to rule due to his mental health.

In 1449, the Duke of Somerset, leading the campaign in France, reopened hostilities in Normandy (although he had previously been one of the main advocates for peace), but by the autumn he had been pushed back to Caen. By 1450, the French had retaken the whole province, so hard won by Henry V. Returning troops, who had often not been paid, added to the lawlessness in the southern counties of England. Jack Cade led a rebellion in Kent in 1450, calling himself "John Mortimer", apparently in sympathy with York, and setting up residence at the White Hart Inn in Southwark (the white hart had been the symbol of the deposed Richard II). Henry came to London with an army to crush the rebellion, but on finding that Cade had fled kept most of his troops behind while a small force followed the rebels and met them at Sevenoaks. The flight proved to have been tactical: Cade successfully ambushed the force in the Battle of Solefields (near Sevenoaks) and returned to occupy London. In the end, the rebellion achieved nothing, and London was retaken after a few days of disorder; but this was principally because of the efforts of its own residents rather than those of the army. At any rate, the rebellion showed that feelings of discontent were running high.

In 1451, the Duchy of Aquitaine, held by England since Henry II's time, was also lost. In October 1452, an English advance in Aquitaine retook Bordeaux and was having some success, but by 1453 Bordeaux was lost again, leaving Calais as England's only remaining territory on the continent.

Illness and the ascendancy of York

In 1452, the Duke of York was persuaded to return from Ireland, claim his rightful place on the council, and put an end to bad government. His cause was a popular one and he soon raised an army at Shrewsbury. The court party, meanwhile, raised their own similar-sized force in London. A stand-off took place south of London, with the Duke of York presenting a list of grievances and demands to the court circle, including the arrest of Edmund Beaufort, Duke of Somerset. The king initially agreed, but Margaret intervened to prevent the arrest of Beaufort. By 1453, Somerset's influence had been restored, and York was again isolated. The court party was also strengthened by the announcement that the queen was pregnant.

However, in August 1453, Henry received the bad news that his army had been routed in the decisive Battle of Castillon. Shortly thereafter, Henry experienced a mental breakdown. He became completely unresponsive to everything that was going on around him for more than a year. At the age of 31, he "fell by a sudden and accidental fright into such a weak state of health that for a whole year and a half he had neither sense nor reason capable of carrying on the government and neither physician nor medicine could cure that infirmity..." and he was, "...smitten with a frenzy and his wit and reason withdrawn." Henry even failed to respond to the birth of his son Edward six months into the illness.

Henry may have inherited a psychiatric condition from Charles VI of France, his maternal grandfather, who was affected by intermittent periods of mental illness during the last thirty years of his life. At least one study identifies this illness as schizophrenia. During his bout of illness, Henry VI was attended by the surgeons Gilbert Kymer and John Marchall.

The Duke of York, meanwhile, had gained a very important ally, Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick, one of the most influential magnates and possibly richer than York himself. York was named regent as Protector of The Realm in 1454. The queen was excluded completely, and Edmund Beaufort was detained in the Tower of London, while many of York's supporters spread rumours that Edward was not the king's son, but Beaufort's. Other than that, York's months as regent were spent tackling the problem of government overspending.

Wars of the Roses

Around Christmas Day 1454, King Henry regained his senses. Disaffected nobles who had grown in power during Henry's reign, most importantly the Earls of Warwick and Salisbury, took matters into their own hands. They backed the claims of the rival House of York, first to the control of government, and then to the throne itself (from 1460), pointing to York's better descent from Edward III. It was agreed that York would become Henry's successor, despite York being older. In 1457, Henry created the Council of Wales and the Marches for his son Prince Edward, and in 1458, he attempted to unite the warring factions by staging The Love Day in London.

Despite such attempts at reconciliation, tensions between the houses of Lancaster and York eventually broke out in open war. Their forces engaged at the Battle of Northampton, 10 July 1460, where the king was captured and taken into captivity under the Yorkists. Queen Margaret, who also had been on the field, managed to escape with her son, the prince, fleeing through Wales to Scotland where she found refuge in the court of the queen regent, Mary of Guelders, recent widow of James II. Here she set about eliciting support for her husband from that kingdom.

Re-entering England at the end of the year, the English queen in force engaged with the Duke of York at the Battle of Wakefield, 30 December 1460, where York fell. A few weeks later, at the Second Battle of St Albans, 17 February 1461, her forces engaged with the Earl of Warwick, under whose custody her husband was being held. She defeated Warwick and liberated the king. Henry's mental state at the time was such that he had reputedly laughed and sung as the battle raged around him.

The victory however was short-lived. Within six weeks, the king and queen's forces were once more defeated at the Battle of Towton, 29 March 1461, by the Duke of York's son, Edward. Henry and Margaret together evaded capture by Edward and this time they both escaped into exile in Scotland. With Scottish aid, Margaret now travelled to the continent to elicit further support for her husband's cause.

Mainly under her leadership, Lancastrian resistance continued in the north of England during the first period of Edward IV's reign but met with little luck on the field. At the same time as Henry's cause was beginning to look increasingly desperate in military terms, an English embassy to Scotland, through the Earl of Warwick on behalf of Edward, served to further weaken his interests at the Scottish Court in political terms. After the queen mother's death in November 1463, Scotland now actively sued for peace with England and the exiled king passed back across the border to try his fortune with those nobles in the north of England and Wales who were still loyal.

Following defeat in the Battle of Hexham, 15 May 1464, Henry, as a fugitive in his own land, continued to be afforded safety in various Lancastrian houses across the north of England. Sir John Pennington provided refuge to Henry VI of England in Muncaster Castle following the battle. Legend has it that Henry VI left behind a Venetian glass bowl as a token of gratitude, known as the "Luck of Muncaster", ensuring the prosperity of the Pennington family as long as it remained intact. Nonetheless, while he was in hiding at Waddington Hall, in Waddington, Lancashire, the home of Sir Richard Tempest, he was betrayed by "a black monk of Addington" and on 13 July 1464, a party of Yorkist men, including Sir Richard's brother John, entered the house for his arrest. Henry fled into nearby woods but was soon captured at Brungerley Hippings (stepping stones) over the River Ribble. He was subsequently held captive in the Tower of London.

The following poem has long been attributed to Henry, allegedly having been written during his imprisonment. However, a largely identical verse appears in William Baldwin's 1559 work The Mirror for Magistrates, a collection of poems written from the perspective of historical figures.

Kingdoms are but cares
 * State is devoid of stay,

Riches are ready snares,
 * And hasten to decay

Pleasure is a privy prick
 * Which vice doth still provoke;

Pomps, imprompt; and fame, a flame;
 * Power, a smoldering smoke.

Who meanth to remove the rock
 * Owst of the slimy mud

Shall mire himself, and hardly [e]scape
 * The swelling of the flood.

Return to the throne

Queen Margaret, exiled in Scotland and later in France, was determined to win back the throne on behalf of her husband and her son, Edward of Westminster. By herself, there was little she could do. However, eventually, Edward IV fell out with two of his main supporters: Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, and his own younger brother George, Duke of Clarence. At the urging of King Louis XI of France they formed a secret alliance with Margaret. After marrying his daughter Anne Neville to Henry and Margaret's son, Warwick returned to England, forced Edward IV into exile, and restored Henry VI to the throne on 3 October 1470; the term "readeption" is still sometimes used for this event. However, by this time, years in hiding followed by years in captivity had taken their toll on Henry. Warwick and Clarence effectively ruled in his name.

Henry's return to the throne lasted less than six months. Warwick soon overreached himself by declaring war on Burgundy, whose ruler Charles the Bold responded by giving Edward IV the assistance he needed to win back his throne by force. Edward returned to England in early 1471 and was reconciled with Clarence. Warwick was killed at the Battle of Barnet on 14 April and the Yorkists won a final decisive victory at the Battle of Tewkesbury on 4 May, where Henry's son Edward of Westminster was killed.

Imprisonment and death

Henry was imprisoned in the Tower of London again and, when the royal party arrived in London, he was reported dead. Official chronicles and documents state that the deposed king died on the night of 21 May 1471. In all likelihood, his opponents had kept him alive up to that point, rather than leave the Lancastrians with a far more formidable leader in Henry's son, Edward. However, once the last of the most prominent Lancastrian supporters had been either killed or exiled, it became clear that Henry VI would be a burden on Edward IV's reign. The common fear was the possibility of another noble using the mentally unstable king to further their own agenda.

According to the Historie of the arrivall of Edward IV, an official chronicle favourable to Edward IV, Henry died of melancholia, but it is widely suspected, however, that Edward IV, who was re-crowned the morning following Henry's death, had ordered his murder.

Sir Thomas More's History of Richard III explicitly states that Richard, who was then the Duke of Gloucester, killed Henry. More might have derived his opinion from Philippe de Commines' Mémoires. Another contemporary source, Wakefield's Chronicle, gives the date of Henry's death as 23 May 1471, on which date Richard, then only eighteen, is known to have been away from London.

Modern tradition places his death in Wakefield Tower, part of the Tower of London, but that is not supported by evidence, and is unlikely, since the tower was used for record storage at the time. Henry's actual place of death is unknown, though he was imprisoned within the Tower of London.

King Henry VI was originally buried in Chertsey Abbey in Surrey, but in 1484 Richard III had his body moved to St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. When the body was exhumed in 1910, it was found to be 5 ft tall. His light brown hair was found to be covered in blood, with damage to the skull, strongly suggesting that the king had indeed died by violence.

Legacy
Overall, Henry VI is largely seen as a weak, inept king, who did nothing to ease the Wars of the Roses. He is widely believed to have favoured diplomacy, rather than all-out war in the Hundred Years' War, in stark contrast to his father, Henry V, who led the victory at Agincourt. This allowed Henry to be heavily influenced by many nobles, such as William de la Pole, who oversaw significant English losses in France, such as the Siege of Orléans. On the other hand, many historians see Henry as a pious, generous king, who was victim of an unstable crown, caused by the deposition of Richard II. John Blacman, personal chaplain of Henry, described the king as a man without "any crook or uncouth."

Architecture and education

Henry's one lasting achievement was his fostering of education: he founded Eton College; King's College, Cambridge; and All Souls College, Oxford. He continued a career of architectural patronage started by his father: King's College Chapel and Eton College Chapel and most of his other architectural commissions (such as his completion of his father's foundation of Syon Abbey) consisted of a late Gothic or Perpendicular-style church with a monastic or educational foundation attached. Each year on the anniversary of Henry VI's death, the Provosts of Eton and King's lay white lilies and roses, the respective floral emblems of those colleges, on the spot in the Wakefield Tower at the Tower of London where the imprisoned Henry VI was, according to tradition, murdered as he knelt at prayer. There is a similar ceremony at his resting place, St George's Chapel.

Posthumous cult
Miracles were attributed to Henry, and he was informally regarded as a saint and martyr, addressed particularly in cases of adversity. The anti-Yorkist cult was encouraged by Henry VII of England as dynastic propaganda. A volume was compiled of the miracles attributed to him at St George's Chapel, Windsor, where Richard III had reinterred him, and Henry VII began building a chapel at Westminster Abbey to house Henry VI's relics. A number of Henry VI's miracles possessed a political dimension, such as his cure of a young girl afflicted with the King's evil, whose parents refused to bring her to the usurper, Richard III. By the time of Henry VIII's break with Rome, canonisation proceedings were under way. Hymns to him still exist, and until the Reformation his hat was kept by his tomb at Windsor, where pilgrims would put it on to enlist Henry's aid against migraines.

Numerous miracles were credited to the dead king, including his raising the plague victim Alice Newnett from the dead and appearing to her as she was being stitched in her shroud. He also intervened in the attempted hanging of a man who had been unjustly condemned to death, accused of stealing some sheep. Henry placed his hand between the rope and the man's windpipe, thus keeping him alive, after which he was revived in the cart as it was taking him away for burial. He was also capable of inflicting harm, such as when he struck John Robyns blind after Robyns cursed "Saint Henry". Robyns was healed only after he went on a pilgrimage to the shrine of King Henry. A particular devotional act that was closely associated with the cult of Henry VI was the bending of a silver coin as an offering to the "saint" so that he might perform a miracle. One story had a woman, Katherine Bailey, who was blind in one eye. As she was kneeling at mass, a stranger told her to bend a coin to King Henry. She promised to do so, and as the priest was raising the communion host, her partial blindness was cured.

Although Henry VI's shrine was enormously popular as a pilgrimage destination during the early decades of the 16th century, over time, with the lessened need to legitimise Tudor rule, his cult faded.

In culture

William Shakespeare and possibly others completed the Henry VI trilogy around 1593, roughly 121 years after the real monarch's death. The period of history covered in the plays was between the funeral of Henry V (1422) to the Battle of Tewkesbury (1471).

Though modern scholars are more interested in the context that the Henry VI trilogy paved for the more popular play Richard III, it was very popular during Elizabethan times. Rather than being representative of the historical events or the actual life and temperament of Henry VI himself, the Shakespearean plays are more representative of the pivotal political situation in England at that time: international war in the form of the Hundred Years' War, and civil strife in the form of the War of the Roses.

Shakespeare's portrayal of Henry is notable in that it does not mention the King's madness. This is considered to have been a politically advisable move to not risk offending Elizabeth I whose family was descended from Henry's Lancastrian family. Instead, Henry is portrayed as a pious and peaceful man ill-suited to the crown. He spends most of his time in contemplation of the Bible and expressing his wish to be anyone other than a king. Shakespeare's Henry is weak-willed and easily influenced allowing his policies to be led by Margaret and her allies, and being unable to defend himself against York's claim to the throne. He takes an act of his own volition only just before his death when he curses Richard of Gloucester just before he is murdered.( Shakespeare, William: Henry VI, Part III Act 5, scene 6)

There have been many adaptations of Richard III in film, which include the bulk of Henry VI's cultural appearances in modern times. In screen adaptations of these plays Henry has been portrayed by: James Berry in the 1911 silent short Richard III; Miles Mander portrayed Henry VI in Tower of London, a 1939 historical film loosely dramatising the rise to power of Richard III; Terry Scully in the 1960 BBC series An Age of Kings which contained all the history plays from Richard II to Richard III; Carl Wery in the 1964 West German TV version König Richard III; David Warner in The Wars of the Roses, a 1965–66 filmed version of the Royal Shakespeare Company performing the three parts of Henry VI (condensed and edited into two plays, Henry VI and Edward IV) and Richard III; Peter Benson in the 1983 BBC versions of Henry VI part 1, 2, and 3 as well as Richard III; Paul Brennen in the 1989 film version of the full cycle of consecutive history plays performed, for several years, by the English Shakespeare Company; Edward Jewesbury in the 1995 film version of Richard III with Ian McKellen as Richard; James Dalesandro as Henry in the 2007 modern-day film version of Richard III; and Tom Sturridge as Henry to Benedict Cumberbatch's Richard III in the 2016 second season of the BBC series The Hollow Crown, an adaptation of Henry VI (condensed into two parts) and Richard III.

Henry VI's marriage to Margaret of Anjou is the subject of the historical novel A Stormy Life (1867) by Lady Georgiana Fullerton. The novel The Triple Crown (1912) by Rose Schuster focuses on Henry's insanity. The novel London Bridge Is Falling (1934) by Philip Lindsay depicts Henry's response to Jack Cade's Rebellion. Henry VI also features in the short story "The Duchess and the Doll" (1950) by Edith Pargeter.

title: Henry VI of England


text:
Catalan's constant

In mathematics, Catalan's constant $G$, is defined by

 * $$G = \beta(2) = \sum_{n=0}^{\infty} \frac{(-1)^{n}}{(2n+1)^2} = \frac{1}{1^2} - \frac{1}{3^2} + \frac{1}{5^2} - \frac{1}{7^2} + \frac{1}{9^2} - \cdots,$$

where $β$ is the Dirichlet beta function. Its numerical value is approximately

It is not known whether $G$ is irrational, let alone transcendental. $G$ has been called "arguably the most basic constant whose irrationality and transcendence (though strongly suspected) remain unproven".

Catalan's constant was named after Eugène Charles Catalan, who found quickly-converging series for its calculation and published a memoir on it in 1865.

Uses
In low-dimensional topology, Catalan's constant is 1/4 of the volume of an ideal hyperbolic octahedron, and therefore 1/4 of the hyperbolic volume of the complement of the Whitehead link. It is 1/8 of the volume of the complement of the Borromean rings.

In combinatorics and statistical mechanics, it arises in connection with counting domino tilings, spanning trees, and Hamiltonian cycles of grid graphs.

In number theory, Catalan's constant appears in a conjectured formula for the asymptotic number of primes of the form $$n^2+1$$ according to Hardy and Littlewood's Conjecture F. However, it is an unsolved problem (one of Landau's problems) whether there are even infinitely many primes of this form.

Catalan's constant also appears in the calculation of the mass distribution of spiral galaxies.

Known digits
The number of known digits of Catalan's constant $G$ has increased dramatically during the last decades. This is due both to the increase of performance of computers as well as to algorithmic improvements.

Integral identities
As Seán Stewart writes, "There is a rich and seemingly endless source of definite integrals that can be equated to or expressed in terms of Catalan's constant." Some of these expressions include: $$\begin{align} G &= -\frac{1}{\pi i}\int_{0}^{\frac{\pi}{2}} \ln\ln \tan x \ln \tan x \,dx \\[3pt] G &= \iint_{[0,1]^2} \! \frac{1}{1+x^2 y^2} \,dx\, dy \\[3pt] G &= \int_0^1\int_0^{1-x} \frac{1}{1 -x^2-y^2} \,dy\,dx \\[3pt] G &= \int_1^\infty \frac{\ln t}{1 + t^2} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= -\int_0^1 \frac{\ln t}{1 + t^2} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\frac{\pi}{2} \frac{t}{\sin t} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \int_0^\frac{\pi}{4} \ln \cot t \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\frac{\pi}{2} \ln \left( \sec t +\tan t \right) \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \int_0^1 \frac{\arccos t}{\sqrt{1+t^2}} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \int_0^1 \frac{\operatorname{arcsinh} t}{\sqrt{1-t^2}} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\infty \frac{\operatorname{arctan} t}{t\sqrt{1+t^2}} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^1 \frac{\operatorname{arctanh} t}{\sqrt{1-t^2}} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \int_0^\infty \arccot e^{t} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{4} \int_0^{{\pi^2}/{4}} \csc \sqrt{t} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{16} \left(\pi^2 + 4\int_1^\infty \arccsc^2 t \,dt\right) \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\infty \frac{t}{\cosh t} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{\pi}{2} \int_1^\infty \frac{\left(t^4-6t^2+1\right)\ln\ln t}{\left(1+t^2\right)^3} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= \frac{1}{2} \int_0^\infty \frac{\arcsin \left(\sin t\right)}{t} \,dt \\[3pt] G &= 1 + \lim_{\alpha\to{1^-}}\!\left\{\int_0^{\alpha}\!\frac{\left(1+6t^2+t^4\right)\arctan{t}}{t\left(1-t^2\right)^2}\, dt + 2\operatorname{artanh}{\alpha} - \frac{\pi\alpha}{1-\alpha^2} \right\} \\[3pt] G &= 1 - \frac18 \iint_{\R^2}\!\!\frac{x\sin\left(2xy/\pi\right)}{\,\left(x^2+\pi^2\right)\cosh x\sinh y\,} \,dx\,dy \\[3pt] G &= \int_{0}^{\infty}\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{\sqrt[4]{x} \left(\sqrt{x} \sqrt{y}-1\right)}{(x+1)^2 \sqrt[4]{y} (y+1)^2 \log (x y)}dxdy \end{align}$$

where the last three formulas are related to Malmsten's integrals.

If $G = 0.916…$ is the complete elliptic integral of the first kind, as a function of the elliptic modulus $K(k)$, then $$ G = \tfrac{1}{2} \int_0^1 \mathrm{K}(k)\,dk $$

If $k$ is the complete elliptic integral of the second kind, as a function of the elliptic modulus $E(k)$, then $$ G = -\tfrac{1}{2}+\int_0^1 \mathrm{E}(k)\,dk $$

With the gamma function $k$ $$\begin{align} G &= \frac{\pi}{4} \int_0^1 \Gamma\left(1+\frac{x}{2}\right)\Gamma\left(1-\frac{x}{2}\right)\,dx \\ &= \frac{\pi}{2} \int_0^\frac12\Gamma(1+y)\Gamma(1-y)\,dy \end{align}$$

The integral $$ G = \operatorname{Ti}_2(1)=\int_0^1 \frac{\arctan t}{t}\,dt $$ is a known special function, called the inverse tangent integral, and was extensively studied by Srinivasa Ramanujan.

Relation to other special functions
$G$ appears in values of the second polygamma function, also called the trigamma function, at fractional arguments:

$$\begin{align} \psi_1 \left(\tfrac14\right) &= \pi^2 + 8G \\ \psi_1 \left(\tfrac34\right) &= \pi^2 - 8G. \end{align}$$

Simon Plouffe gives an infinite collection of identities between the trigamma function, $\pi$2 and Catalan's constant; these are expressible as paths on a graph.

Catalan's constant occurs frequently in relation to the Clausen function, the inverse tangent integral, the inverse sine integral, the Barnes $20,000$-function, as well as integrals and series summable in terms of the aforementioned functions.

As a particular example, by first expressing the inverse tangent integral in its closed form – in terms of Clausen functions – and then expressing those Clausen functions in terms of the Barnes $50,000$-function, the following expression is obtained (see Clausen function for more):

$$G=4\pi \log\left( \frac{ G\left(\frac{3}{8}\right) G\left(\frac{7}{8}\right) }{ G\left(\frac{1}{8}\right) G\left(\frac{5}{8}\right) } \right) +4 \pi \log \left( \frac{ \Gamma\left(\frac{3}{8}\right) }{ \Gamma\left(\frac{1}{8}\right) } \right) +\frac{\pi}{2} \log \left( \frac{1+\sqrt{2} }{2 \left(2-\sqrt{2}\right)} \right).$$

If one defines the Lerch transcendent $Γ(x + 1) = x!$ (related to the Lerch zeta function) by $$\Phi(z, s, \alpha) = \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac { z^n} {(n+\alpha)^s},$$ then $$ G = \tfrac{1}{4}\Phi\left(-1, 2, \tfrac{1}{2}\right).$$

Quickly converging series
The following two formulas involve quickly converging series, and are thus appropriate for numerical computation: $$\begin{align} G & = 3 \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{2^{4n}} \left(-\frac{1}{2(8n+2)^2}+\frac{1}{2^2(8n+3)^2}-\frac{1}{2^3(8n+5)^2}+\frac{1}{2^3(8n+6)^2}-\frac{1}{2^4(8n+7)^2}+\frac{1}{2(8n+1)^2}\right)- \\ & \qquad -2 \sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{2^{12n}} \left(\frac{1}{2^4(8n+2)^2}+\frac{1}{2^6(8n+3)^2}-\frac{1}{2^9(8n+5)^2}-\frac{1}{2^{10} (8n+6)^2}-\frac{1}{2^{12} (8n+7)^2}+\frac{1}{2^3(8n+1)^2}\right) \end{align}$$ and $$G = \frac{\pi}{8}\log\left(2 + \sqrt{3}\right) + \frac{3}{8}\sum_{n=0}^\infty \frac{1}{(2n+1)^2 \binom{2n}{n}}.$$

The theoretical foundations for such series are given by Broadhurst, for the first formula, and Ramanujan, for the second formula. The algorithms for fast evaluation of the Catalan constant were constructed by E. Karatsuba. Using these series, calculating Catalan's constant is now about as fast as calculating Apery's constant, $$\zeta(3)$$.

Other quickly converging series, due to Guillera and Pilehrood and employed by the y-cruncher software, include:

 * $$G = \frac{1}{2}\sum_{k=0}^{\infty }\frac{(-8)^{k}(3k+2)}{(2k+1)^{3}{\binom{2k}{k}}^{3}}$$

 * $$G = \frac{1}{64}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty }\frac{256^{k}(580k^2-184k+15)}{k^3(2k-1)\binom{6k}{3k}\binom{6k}{4k}\binom{4k}{2k}}$$

 * $$G = -\frac{1}{1024}\sum_{k=1}^{\infty }\frac{(-4096)^k(45136k^4-57184k^3+21240k^2-3160k+165)}{k^3(2k-1)^3}\left( \frac{(2k)!^6(3k)!^3}{k!^3(6k)!^3} \right)$$

All of these series have time complexity $$O(n\log(n)^3)$$.

Continued fraction
$100,000$ can be expressed in the following form
 * $$G=\cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1^4}{8+\cfrac{3^4}{16+\cfrac{5^4}{24+\cfrac{7^4}{32+\cfrac{9^4}{40+\ddots}}}}}}$$
 * The simple continued fraction is given by
 * $$G=\cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1}{10+\cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1}{8+\cfrac{1}{1+\cfrac{1}{88+\ddots}}}}}}$$
 * This continued fraction would have infinite terms if and only if $$G$$ is irrational, which is still unresolved.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Catalan's constant


text:
Henry IV of England

Henry IV (c. April 1367 – 20 March 1413), also known as Henry Bolingbroke, was King of England from 1399 to 1413. Henry was the son of John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, himself the son of Edward III, and Blanche of Lancaster.

Henry was involved in the 1388 revolt of Lords Appellant against Richard II, his first cousin, but he was not punished. However, he was exiled from court in 1398. After his father, John of Gaunt, died in 1399, Richard blocked Henry's inheritance of his father's duchy. That year, Henry rallied a group of supporters, overthrew and imprisoned Richard II, and usurped the throne; these actions later contributed to dynastic disputes in the Wars of the Roses (1455–1487).

As king, Henry faced a number of rebellions, most seriously those of Owain Glyndŵr, the last Welsh Prince of Wales, and the English knight Henry Percy (Hotspur), who was killed in the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403. Henry IV had six children from his first marriage to Mary de Bohun, while his second marriage to Joan of Navarre was childless. Henry and Mary's eldest son, Henry of Monmouth, assumed the reins of government in 1410 as the king's health worsened. Henry IV died in 1413, and his son succeeded him as Henry V.

Unlike his forebears, Henry was the first English ruler whose mother tongue was English (rather than French) since the Norman Conquest, over three hundred years before.

Early life
Henry was born at Bolingbroke Castle, in Lincolnshire, to John of Gaunt and Blanche of Lancaster. His epithet "Bolingbroke" was derived from his birthplace. Gaunt was the third son of King Edward III. Blanche was the daughter of the wealthy royal politician and nobleman Henry, Duke of Lancaster. Gaunt enjoyed a position of considerable influence during much of the reign of his own nephew, King Richard II. Henry's elder sisters were Philippa, Queen of Portugal, and Elizabeth, Duchess of Exeter. His younger half-sister Katherine, Queen of Castile, was Gaunt's daughter with his second wife, Constance of Castile. Henry also had four half-siblings born of Katherine Swynford, originally his sisters' governess, then his father's longstanding mistress and later third wife. These illegitimate (although later legitimized) children were given the surname Beaufort from their birthplace at the Château de Beaufort in Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes, France.

Henry's relationship with his stepmother Katherine Swynford was amicable, but his relationship with the Beauforts varied. In his youth, he seems to have been close to all of them, but rivalries with Henry and Thomas Beaufort caused trouble after 1406. Ralph Neville, 4th Baron Neville, married Henry's half-sister Joan Beaufort. Neville remained one of his strongest supporters, and so did his eldest half-brother John Beaufort, even though Henry revoked Richard II's grant to John of a marquessate. Katherine Swynford's son from her first marriage, Thomas, was another loyal companion. Thomas Swynford was Constable of Pontefract Castle, where Richard II is said to have died.

Relationship with Richard II

Henry experienced a more inconsistent relationship with King Richard II than his father had. First cousins and childhood playmates, they were admitted together as knights of the Order of the Garter in 1377, but Henry participated in the Lords Appellants' rebellion against the king in 1387. After regaining power, Richard did not punish Henry, although he did execute or exile many of the other rebellious barons. In fact, Richard elevated Henry from Earl of Derby to Duke of Hereford.

Henry spent all of 1390 supporting the unsuccessful siege of Vilnius (capital of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania) by Teutonic Knights with 70 to 80 household knights. During this campaign, he bought captured Lithuanian women and children and took them back to Königsberg to be converted, even though Lithuanians had already been baptised by Polish priests for a decade by then.

Henry's second expedition to Lithuania in 1392 illustrates the financial benefits to the Order of these guest crusaders. His small army consisted of over 100 men, including longbow archers and six minstrels, at a total cost to the Lancastrian purse of £4,360. Despite the efforts of Henry and his English crusaders, two years of attacks on Vilnius proved fruitless. In 1392–93 Henry undertook a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, where he made offerings at the Holy Sepulchre and at the Mount of Olives. Later he vowed to lead a crusade to 'free Jerusalem from the infidel', but he died before this could be accomplished.

The relationship between Henry and Richard had a second crisis. In 1398, a remark about Richard's rule by Thomas de Mowbray, 1st Duke of Norfolk, was interpreted as treason by Henry, who reported it to the king. The two dukes agreed to undergo a duel of honour (called by Richard) at Gosford Green near Caludon Castle, Mowbray's home in Coventry. Yet before the duel could take place, Richard decided to banish Henry from the kingdom (with the approval of Henry's father, John of Gaunt), although it is unknown where he spent his exile, to avoid further bloodshed. Mowbray was exiled for life.

John of Gaunt died in February 1399. Without explanation, Richard cancelled the legal documents that would have allowed Henry to inherit Gaunt's land automatically. Instead, Henry would be required to ask Richard for the lands.

Accession
After some hesitation, Henry met the exiled Thomas Arundel, former archbishop of Canterbury, who had lost his position because of his involvement with the Lords Appellant. Henry and Arundel returned to England while Richard was on a military campaign in Ireland. With Arundel as his advisor, Henry began a military campaign, confiscating land from those who opposed him and ordering his soldiers to destroy much of Cheshire. Henry initially announced that he intended to reclaim his rights as Duke of Lancaster, though he quickly gained enough power and support to have himself declared King Henry IV, imprison Richard (who died in prison, most probably forcibly starved to death,) and bypass Richard's heir-presumptive, Edmund de Mortimer, 5th Earl of March.

Henry's 13 October 1399 coronation at Westminster Abbey may have been the first time since the Norman Conquest that the monarch made an address in English.

In January 1400, Henry quashed the Epiphany Rising, a rebellion by Richard's supporters who plotted to assassinate him. Henry was forewarned and raised an army in London, at which the conspirators fled. They were apprehended and executed without trial.

Reign

Henry procured an Act of Parliament to ordain that the Duchy of Lancaster would remain in the personal possession of the reigning monarch. The Barony of Halton was vested in that dukedom.

Henry consulted with Parliament frequently, but was sometimes at odds with the members, especially over ecclesiastical matters. On Arundel's advice, Henry obtained from Parliament the enactment of De heretico comburendo in 1401, which prescribed the burning of heretics, an act done mainly to suppress the Lollard movement. In 1410, Parliament suggested confiscating church land. Henry refused to attack the Church that had helped him to power, and the House of Commons had to beg for the bill to be struck off the record.

Rebellions

Henry spent much of his reign defending himself against plots, rebellions, and assassination attempts. Henry's first major problem as monarch was what to do with the deposed Richard. After the early assassination plot was foiled in January 1400, Richard died in prison aged 33, probably of starvation on Henry's order. Some chroniclers claimed that the despondent Richard had starved himself, which would not have been out of place with what is known of Richard's character. Though council records indicate that provisions were made for the transportation of the deposed king's body as early as 17 February, there is no reason to believe that he did not die on 14 February, as several chronicles stated. It can be positively said that he did not suffer a violent death, for his skeleton, upon examination, bore no signs of violence; whether he did indeed starve himself or whether that starvation was forced upon him are matters for lively historical speculation.

After his death, Richard's body was put on public display in the old St Paul's Cathedral, both to prove to his supporters that he was truly dead and also to prove that he had not suffered a violent death. This did not stop rumours from circulating for years after that he was still alive and waiting to take back his throne, and that the body displayed was that of Richard's chaplain, a priest named Maudelain, who greatly resembled him. Henry had the body discreetly buried in the Dominican Priory at Kings Langley, Hertfordshire, where he remained until King Henry V brought the body back to London and buried it in the tomb that Richard had commissioned for himself in Westminster Abbey.

Rebellions continued throughout the first 10 years of Henry's reign, including the revolt of Owain Glyndŵr, who declared himself Prince of Wales in 1400, and the rebellions led by Henry Percy, 1st Earl of Northumberland, from 1403. The first Percy rebellion ended in the Battle of Shrewsbury in 1403 with the death of the earl's son Henry, a renowned military figure known as "Hotspur" for his speed in advance and readiness to attack. Also in this battle, Henry IV's eldest son, Henry of Monmouth, later King Henry V, was wounded by an arrow in his face. He was cared for by royal physician John Bradmore. Despite this, the Battle of Shrewsbury was a royalist victory. Monmouth's military ability contributed to the king's victory (though Monmouth seized much effective power from his father in 1410).

In the last year of Henry's reign, the rebellions picked up speed. "The old fable of a living Richard was revived", notes one account, "and emissaries from Scotland traversed the villages of England, in the last year of Henry's reign, declaring that Richard was residing at the Scottish Court, awaiting only a signal from his friends to repair to London and recover his throne."

A suitable-looking impostor was found and King Richard's old groom circulated word in the city that his master was alive in Scotland. "Southwark was incited to insurrection" by Sir Elias Lyvet (Levett) and his associate Thomas Clark, who promised Scottish aid in carrying out the insurrection. Ultimately, the rebellion came to nought. Lyvet was released and Clark thrown into the Tower of London.

Foreign relations

Early in his reign, Henry hosted the visit of Manuel II Palaiologos, the only Byzantine emperor ever to visit England, from December 1400 to February 1401 at Eltham Palace, with a joust being given in his honour. Henry also sent monetary support with Manuel upon his departure to aid him against the Ottoman Empire.

In 1406, English pirates captured the future James I of Scotland, aged eleven, off the coast of Flamborough Head as he was sailing to France. James was delivered to Henry IV and remained a prisoner for the rest of Henry's reign.

Final illness and death
The later years of Henry's reign were marked by serious health problems. He had a disfiguring skin disease and, more seriously, suffered acute attacks of a grave illness in June 1405; April 1406; June 1408; during the winter of 1408–09; December 1412; and finally a fatal bout in March 1413. In 1410, Henry had provided his royal surgeon Thomas Morstede with an annuity of £40 p.a. which was confirmed by Henry V immediately after his succession. This was so that Morstede would "not be retained by anyone else". Medical historians have long debated the nature of this affliction or afflictions. The skin disease might have been leprosy (which did not necessarily mean precisely the same thing in the 15th century as it does to modern medicine), perhaps psoriasis, or a different disease. The acute attacks have been given a wide range of explanations, from epilepsy to a form of cardiovascular disease. Some medieval writers felt that he was struck with leprosy as a punishment for his treatment of Richard le Scrope, Archbishop of York, who was executed in June 1405 on Henry's orders after a failed coup.

According to Holinshed, it was predicted that Henry would die in Jerusalem, and Shakespeare's play repeats this prophecy. Henry took this to mean that he would die on crusade. In reality, he died in the Jerusalem Chamber in the abbot's house of Westminster Abbey, on 20 March 1413 during a convocation of Parliament. His executor, Thomas Langley, was at his side.

Burial

Despite the example set by most of his recent predecessors, Henry and his second wife, Joan, were not buried at Westminster Abbey but at Canterbury Cathedral, on the north side of Trinity Chapel and directly adjacent to the shrine of St Thomas Becket. Becket's cult was then still thriving, as evidenced in the monastic accounts and in literary works such as The Canterbury Tales, and Henry seemed particularly devoted to it, or at least keen to be associated with it. The Reasons for his interment in Canterbury are debatable, but it is highly likely that Henry deliberately associated himself with the martyr saint for reasons of political expediency, namely, the legitimisation of his dynasty after seizing the throne from Richard II. Significantly, at his coronation, he was anointed with holy oil that had reportedly been given to Becket by the Virgin Mary shortly before his death in 1170; this oil was placed inside a distinct eagle-shaped container of gold. According to one version of the tale, the oil had then passed to Henry's maternal grandfather, Henry of Grosmont, Duke of Lancaster.

Proof of Henry's deliberate connection to Becket lies partially in the structure of the tomb itself. The wooden panel at the western end of his tomb bears a painting of the martyrdom of Becket, and the tester, or wooden canopy, above the tomb is painted with Henry's personal motto, 'Soverayne', alternated by crowned golden eagles. Likewise, the three large coats of arms that dominate the tester painting are surrounded by collars of SS, a golden eagle enclosed in each tiret. The presence of such eagle motifs points directly to Henry's coronation oil and his ideological association with Becket. Sometime after Henry's death, an imposing tomb was built for him and his queen, probably commissioned and paid for by Queen Joan herself. Atop the tomb chest lie detailed alabaster effigies of Henry and Joan, crowned and dressed in their ceremonial robes. Henry's body was evidently well embalmed, as an exhumation in 1832 established, allowing historians to state with reasonable certainty that the effigies do represent accurate portraiture.

Titles

 * Styled Earl of Derby (1377–1397);
 * Earl of Northampton and Hereford (22 December 1384 – 30 September 1399);
 * Duke of Hereford (29 September 1397 – 30 September 1399);
 * Duke of Lancaster (3 February – 30 September 1399);
 * King of England and Lord of Ireland (30 September 1399 – 20 March 1413).

Arms
Before his father's death in 1399, Henry bore the arms of the kingdom, differenced by a label of five points ermine. After his father's death, the difference changed to a label of five points per pale ermine and France.

First marriage: Mary de Bohun
Henry married Mary de Bohun (died 1394) at an unknown date, but her marriage licence, purchased by Henry's father John of Gaunt in June 1380, is preserved at the National Archives. The accepted date of the ceremony is 5 February 1381, at Mary's family home of Rochford Hall, Essex. The near-contemporary chronicler Jean Froissart reports a rumour that Mary's sister Eleanor de Bohun kidnapped Mary from Pleshey Castle and held her at Arundel Castle, where she was kept as a novice nun; Eleanor's intention was to control Mary's half of the Bohun inheritance (or to allow her husband, Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, to control it). There Mary was persuaded to marry Henry. They had six children:

Henry had four sons from his first marriage, which was undoubtedly a clinching factor in his acceptability for the throne. By contrast, Richard II had no children and Richard's heir-presumptive Edmund Mortimer was only seven years old. The only two of Henry's six children who produced legitimate children to survive to adulthood were Henry V and Blanche, whose son, Rupert, was the heir to the Electorate of the Palatinate until his death at 20. All three of his other sons produced illegitimate children. Henry IV's male Lancaster line ended in 1471 during the War of the Roses, between the Lancastrians and the Yorkists, with the deaths of his grandson Henry VI and Henry VI's son Edward, Prince of Wales.

Second marriage: Joan of Navarre
Mary de Bohun died in 1394, and on 7 February 1403 Henry married Joan, the daughter of Charles II of Navarre, at Winchester. She was the widow of John IV, Duke of Brittany (known in traditional English sources as John V), with whom she had 9 children; however, her marriage to King Henry produced no surviving children. In 1403, Joan of Navarre gave birth to stillborn twins fathered by King Henry IV, which was the last pregnancy of her life. Joan was 35 years old at the time.

Mistresses
By an unknown mistress, Henry IV had one illegitimate child:
 * Edmund Leborde (1401 – shortly before 19 December 1419)

title: Henry IV of England


text:
Asymmetric warfare

Asymmetric warfare (or asymmetric engagement) is a type of war between belligerents whose relative military power, strategy or tactics differ significantly. This type of warfare often, but not necessarily, involves insurgents or resistance movement militias who may have the status of unlawful combatants against a standing army.

Asymmetrical warfare can also describe a conflict in which belligerents' resources are uneven, and consequently, they both may attempt to exploit each other's relative weaknesses. Such struggles often involve unconventional warfare, with the weaker side attempting to use strategy to offset deficiencies in the quantity or quality of their forces and equipment. Such strategies may not necessarily be militarized. This is in contrast to symmetrical warfare, where two powers have comparable military power, resources, and rely on similar tactics.

Asymmetric warfare is a form of irregular warfare – conflicts in which enemy combatants are not regular military forces of nation-states. The term is frequently used to describe what is also called guerrilla warfare, insurgency, counterinsurgency, rebellion, terrorism, and counterterrorism.

Definition and differences
The popularity of the term dates from Andrew J. R. Mack's 1975 article "Why Big Nations Lose Small Wars" in World Politics, in which "asymmetric" referred simply to a significant disparity in power between opposing actors in a conflict. "Power," in this sense, is broadly understood to mean material power, such as a large army, sophisticated weapons, an advanced economy, and so on. Mack's analysis was largely ignored in its day, but the end of the Cold War sparked renewed interest among academics. By the late 1990s, a new research building off Mack's works was beginning to mature; after 2004, the U.S. military began once again to prioritize responding to challenges presented by asymmetric warfare.

Since 2004, the discussion of asymmetric warfare has been complicated by the tendency of academic and military officials to use the term in different ways, as well as by its close association with guerrilla warfare, insurgency, terrorism, counterinsurgency, and counterterrorism.

Academic authors tend to focus on explaining two puzzles in asymmetric conflict. First, if "power" determines victory, there must be reasons why weaker actors decide to fight more powerful actors. Key explanations include:
 * Weaker actors may have secret weapons.
 * Weaker actors may have powerful allies.
 * Stronger actors are unable to make threats credible.
 * The demands of a stronger actor are extreme.
 * The weaker actor must consider its regional rivals when responding to threats from powerful actors.

Second, if "power," as generally understood, leads to victory in war, then there must be an explanation for why the "weak" can defeat the "strong." Key explanations include:
 * Strategic interaction.
 * Willingness of the weak to suffer more or bear higher costs.
 * External support of weak actors.
 * Reluctance to escalating violence on the part of strong actors.
 * Internal group dynamics.
 * Inflated strong actor war aims.
 * Evolution of asymmetric rivals' attitudes towards time.

Asymmetric conflicts include interstate and civil wars, and over the past two hundred years, have generally been won by strong actors. Since 1950, however, weak actors have won the majority of asymmetric conflicts. In asymmetric conflicts conflict escalation can be rational for one side.

Strategic basis
In most conventional warfare, the belligerents deploy forces of a similar type, and the outcome can be predicted by the quantity or quality of the opposing forces, for example, better command and control of theirs (c2). There are times when this is the case, and conventional forces are not easily compared, making it difficult for opposing sides to engage. An example of this is the standoff between the continental land forces of the French Army and the maritime forces of the United Kingdom's Royal Navy during the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars. In the words of Admiral Jervis during the campaigns of 1801, "I do not say, my Lords, that the French will not come. I say only they will not come by sea", and a confrontation that Napoleon Bonaparte described as that between the elephant and the whale.

Tactical basis
The tactical success of asymmetric warfare is dependent on at least some of the following assumptions:
 * One side can have a technological advantage that outweighs the numerical advantage of the enemy; the English longbow at the Battle of Crécy is an example.
 * Technological superiority usually is cancelled by the more vulnerable infrastructure, which can be targeted with devastating results. Destruction of multiple electric lines, roads, or water supply systems in highly populated areas could devastate the economy and morale. In contrast, the weaker side may not have these structures at all.
 * Training, tactics, and technology can prove decisive and allow a smaller force to overcome a much larger one. For example, for several centuries, the Greek hoplite's (heavy infantry) use of phalanx made them far superior to their enemies. The Battle of Thermopylae, which also involved good use of terrain, is a well-known example.
 * If the inferior power is in a position of self-defense, i.e., under attack or occupation, it may be possible to use unconventional tactics, such as hit-and-run and selective battles in which the superior power is weaker, as an effective means of harassment without violating the laws of war. Perhaps the classic historical examples of this doctrine may be found in the American Revolutionary War, movements in World War II, such as the French Resistance and Soviet and Yugoslav partisans. Against democratic aggressor nations, this strategy can be used to play on the electorate's patience with the conflict (as in the Vietnam War, and others since), provoking protests, and consequent disputes among elected legislators.
 * However, if the weaker power is in an aggressive position or turns to tactics prohibited by the laws of war (jus in bello), its success depends on the superior power's refraining from like tactics. For example, the law of land warfare prohibits the use of a flag of truce or marked medical vehicles as cover for an attack or ambush. Still, an asymmetric combatant using this prohibited tactic to its advantage depends on the superior power's obedience to the corresponding law. Similarly, warfare laws prohibit combatants from using civilian settlements, populations or facilities as military bases, but when an inferior force uses this tactic, it depends on the premise that the superior one will respect the law that the other is violating, and will not attack that civilian target, or if they do the propaganda advantage will outweigh the material loss.

Terrorism
There are two opposing viewpoints on the relationship between asymmetric warfare and terrorism. In the modern context, asymmetric warfare is increasingly considered a component of fourth generation warfare. When practiced outside the laws of war, it is often defined as terrorism, though rarely by its practitioners or their supporters. The other view is that asymmetric warfare does not coincide with terrorism.

Use of terrain
Terrain that limits mobility, such as forests and mountains, can be used as a force multiplier by the smaller force and as a force inhibitor against the larger one, especially one operating far from its logistical base. Such terrain is called difficult terrain. Urban areas, though generally having good transport access, provide innumerable ready-made defensible positions with simple escape routes and can also become rough terrain if prolonged combat fills the streets with rubble:

"The contour of the land is an aid to the army, sizing up opponents to determine victory and assessing dangers and distance. 'Those who do battle without knowing these will lose.'" "The guerrillas must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea."

In the 12th century, irregulars known as the Assassins were successful in the Nizari Ismaili state. The "state" consisted of fortresses (such as the Alamut Castle) built on strategic mountaintops and highlands with difficult access, surrounded by hostile lands. The Assassins developed tactics to eliminate high-value targets, threatening their security, including the Crusaders.

In the American Revolutionary War, Patriot Lieutenant Colonel Francis Marion, known as the "Swamp Fox," took advantage of irregular tactics, interior lines, and the wilderness of colonial South Carolina to hinder larger British regular forces.

Yugoslav Partisans, starting as small detachments around mountain villages in 1941, fought the German and other Axis occupation forces, successfully taking advantage of the rough terrain to survive despite their small numbers. Over the next four years, they slowly forced their enemies back, recovering population centers and resources, eventually growing into the regular Yugoslav Army.

Role of civilians
Civilians can play a vital role in determining the outcome of an asymmetric war. In such conflicts, when it is easy for insurgents to assimilate into the population quickly after an attack, tips on the timing or location of insurgent activity can severely undermine the resistance. An information-central framework, in which civilians are seen primarily as sources of strategic information rather than resources, provides a paradigm to understand better the dynamics of such conflicts where civilian information-sharing is vital. The framework assumes that: Given the additional assumption that the larger or dominant force is the government, the framework suggests the following implications:
 * The consequential action of non-combatants (civilians) is information sharing rather than supplying resources, recruits, or shelter to combatants.
 * Information can be shared anonymously without endangering the civilian who relays it.
 * Civilians receive services from government and rebel forces as an incentive to share valuable information.
 * Rebel violence can be reduced if the government provides services.
 * Provision of security and services are complementary in reducing violence.
 * Civilian casualties reduce civilian support to the perpetrating group.
 * Provision of information is strongly correlated with the level of anonymity that can be ensured.

A survey of the empirical literature on conflict, does not provide conclusive evidence on the claims. But the framework gives a starting point to explore the role of civilian information sharing in asymmetric warfare.

War by proxy
Where asymmetric warfare is carried out (generally covertly) by allegedly non-governmental actors who are connected to or sympathetic to a particular nation's (the "state actor's") interest, it may be deemed war by proxy. This is typically done to give the state actor deniability. The deniability can be crucial to keep the state actor from being tainted by the actions, to allow the state actor to negotiate in apparent good faith by claiming they are not responsible for the actions of parties who are merely sympathizers, or to avoid being accused of belligerent actions or war crimes. If proof emerges of the true extent of the state actor's involvement, this strategy can backfire; for example, see Iran-contra and Philip Agee.

American Indian Wars

Benjamin Church designed his force primarily to emulate Native American patterns of war. Toward this end, Church endeavored to learn to fight like Native Americans from Native Americans. Americans became rangers exclusively under the tutelage of the Native American allies. (Until the end of the colonial period, rangers depended on Native Americans as both allies and teachers.)

Church developed a special full-time unit mixing white colonists selected for frontier skills with friendly Native Americans to carry out offensive strikes against hostile Native Americans in terrain where normal militia units were ineffective. Church paid special care to outfitting, supplying and instructing his troops in ways inspired by indigenous methods of warfare and ways of living. He emphasized the adoption of indigenous techniques, which prioritized small, mobile and flexible units which used the countryside for cover, in lieu of massed frontal assaults by large formations. Benjamin Church is sometimes referred to as the father of Unconventional warfare.

American Revolutionary War
From its initiation, the American Revolutionary War was, necessarily, a showcase for asymmetric techniques. In the 1920s, Harold Murdock of Boston attempted to solve the puzzle of the first shots fired on Lexington Green and came to the suspicion that the few score militiamen who gathered before sunrise to await the arrival of hundreds of well-prepared British soldiers were sent to provoke an incident which could be used for Patriot propaganda purposes. The return of the British force to Boston following the search operations at Concord was subject to constant skirmishing by Patriot forces gathered from communities all along the route, making maximum use of the terrain (particularly, trees and stone field walls) to overcome the limitations of their weapons – muskets with an effective range of only about 50–70 meters. Throughout the war, skirmishing tactics against British troops on the move continued to be a key factor in the Patriots' success; particularly in the Western theater of the American Revolutionary War.

Another feature of the long march from Concord was the urban warfare technique of using buildings along the route as additional cover for snipers. When revolutionary forces forced their way into Norfolk, Virginia and used waterfront buildings as cover for shots at British vessels out in the river, the response of destruction of those buildings was ingeniously used to the advantage of the rebels, who encouraged the spread of fire throughout the largely Loyalist town and spread propaganda blaming it on the British. Shortly afterwards, they destroyed the remaining houses because they might provide cover for British soldiers.

The rebels also adopted a form of asymmetric sea warfare by using small, fast vessels to avoid the Royal Navy and capturing or sinking large numbers of merchant ships; however the Crown responded by issuing letters of marque permitting private armed vessels to undertake similar attacks on Patriot shipping. John Paul Jones became notorious in Britain for his expedition from France in the sloop of war Ranger in April 1778, during which, in addition to his attacks on merchant shipping, he made two landings on British soil. The effect of these raids, particularly when coupled with his capture of the Royal Navy's HMS Drake (1777) – the first such success in British waters, but not Jones' last – was to force the British government to increase resources for coastal defense, and to create a climate of fear among the British public which was subsequently fed by press reports of his preparations for the 1779 Bonhomme Richard mission.

From 1776, the conflict turned increasingly into a proxy war on behalf of France, following a strategy proposed in the 1760s but initially resisted by the idealistic young King Louis XVI, who came to the throne at the age of 19 a few months before Lexington. France ultimately drove Great Britain to the brink of defeat by entering the war(s) directly on several fronts throughout the world.

American Civil War
The American Civil War saw the rise of asymmetric warfare in the Border States, and in particular on the US Western Territorial Border after the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 opened the territories to vote on the expansion of slavery beyond the Missouri Compromise lines. Political implications of this broken 1820's compromise were nothing less than the potential expansion of slavery all across the North American continent, including the northern reaches of the annexed Mexican territories to California and Oregon. So the stakes were high, and it caused a flood of immigration to the border: some to grab land and expand slavery west, others to grab land and vote down the expansion of slavery. The pro-slavery land grabbers began asymmetric, violent attacks against the more pacifist abolitionists who had settled Lawrence and other territorial towns to suppress slavery. John Brown, the abolitionist, travelled to Osawatomie in the Kansas Territory expressly to foment retaliatory attacks back against the pro-slavery guerrillas who, by 1858, had twice ransacked both Lawrence and Osawatomie (where one of Brown's sons was shot dead).

The abolitionists would not return the attacks and Brown theorized that a violent spark set off on "the Border" would be a way to finally ignite his long hoped-for slave rebellion. Brown had broad-sworded slave owners at Potawatomi Creek, so the bloody civilian violence was initially symmetrical; however, once the American Civil War ignited in 1861, and when the state of Missouri voted overwhelmingly not to secede from the Union, the pro-slavers on the MO-KS border were driven either south to Arkansas and Texas, or underground—where they became guerrilla fighters and "Bushwhackers" living in the bushy ravines throughout northwest Missouri across the (now) state line from Kansas. The bloody "Border War" lasted all during the Civil War (and long after with guerrilla partisans like the James brothers cynically robbing and murdering, aided and abetted by lingering lost causers ). Tragically the Western Border War was an asymmetric war: pro-slavery guerrillas and paramilitary partisans on the pro-Confederate side attacked pro-Union townspeople and commissioned Union military units, with the Union army trying to keep both in check: blocking Kansans and pro-Union Missourians from organizing militarily against the marauding Bushwhackers.

The worst act of domestic terror in U.S. history came in August 1863 when paramilitary guerrillas amassed 350 strong and rode all night 50 miles across eastern Kansas to the abolitionist stronghold of Lawrence (a political target) and destroyed the town, gunning down 150 civilians. The Confederate officer whose company had joined Quantrill's Raiders that day witnessed the civilian slaughter and forbade his soldiers from participating in the carnage. The commissioned officer refused to participate in Quantrill's asymmetric warfare on civilians.

Philippine–American War
The Philippine–American War (1899–1902) was an armed conflict between the United States and Filipino revolutionaries. Estimates of the Filipino forces vary between 100,000 and 1,000,000, with tens of thousands of auxiliaries. Lack of weapons and ammunition was a significant impediment to the Filipinos, so most of the forces were only armed with bolo knives, bows and arrows, spears and other primitive weapons that, in practice, proved vastly inferior to U.S. firepower.

The goal, or end-state, sought by the First Philippine Republic was a sovereign, independent, socially stable Philippines led by the ilustrado (intellectual) oligarchy. Local chieftains, landowners, and businessmen were the principales who controlled local politics. The war was strongest when illustrados, principales, and peasants were unified in opposition to annexation. The peasants, who provided the bulk of guerrilla forces, had interests different from their illustrado leaders and the principales of their villages. Coupled with the ethnic and geographic fragmentation, unity was a daunting task. The challenge for Aguinaldo and his generals was to sustain unified Filipino public opposition; this was the revolutionaries' strategic centre of gravity. The Filipino operational center of gravity was the ability to sustain its force of 100,000 irregulars in the field. The Filipino General Francisco Macabulos described the Filipinos' war aim as "not to vanquish the U.S. Army but to inflict on them constant losses." They initially sought to use conventional tactics and an increasing toll of U.S. casualties to contribute to McKinley's defeat in the 1900 presidential election. Their hope was that as president the avowedly anti-imperialist future Secretary of state William Jennings Bryan would withdraw from the Philippines. They pursued this short-term goal with guerrilla tactics better suited to a protracted struggle. While targeting McKinley motivated the revolutionaries in the short term, his victory demoralized them and convinced many undecided Filipinos that the United States would not depart precipitously. For most of 1899, the revolutionary leadership had viewed guerrilla warfare strategically only as a tactical option of final recourse, not as a means of operation which better suited their disadvantaged situation. On 13 November 1899, Emilio Aguinaldo decreed that guerrilla war would henceforth be the strategy. This made the American occupation of the Philippine archipelago more difficult over the next few years. In fact, during just the first four months of the guerrilla war, the Americans had nearly 500 casualties. The Philippine Revolutionary Army began staging bloody ambushes and raids, such as the guerrilla victories at Paye, Catubig, Makahambus, Pulang Lupa, Balangiga and Mabitac. At first, it seemed like the Filipinos would fight the Americans to a stalemate and force them to withdraw. President McKinley even considered this at the beginning of the phase. The shift to guerrilla warfare drove the U.S. Army to adopt counterinsurgency tactics.

Second Boer War
Asymmetric warfare featured prominently during the Second Boer War. After an initial phase, which was fought by both sides as a conventional war, the British captured Johannesburg, the Boers' largest city, and captured the capitals of the two Boer Republics. The British then expected the Boers to accept peace as dictated in the traditional European manner. However, the Boers fought a protracted guerrilla war instead of capitulating. 20,000-30,000 Boer guerrillas were only defeated after the British brought to bear 450,000 imperial troops, about ten times as many as were used in the conventional phase of the war. The British began constructing blockhouses built within machine gun range of one another and flanked by barbed wire to slow the Boers' movement across the countryside and block paths to valuable targets. Such tactics eventually evolved into today's counterinsurgency tactics.

The Boer commando raids deep into the Cape Colony, which were organized and commanded by Jan Smuts, resonated throughout the century as the British adopted and adapted the tactics first used against them by the Boers.

World War I

 * T.E. Lawrence and British support for the Arab uprising against the Ottoman Empire. The Ottomans were the stronger power, and the Arab coalition were the weaker.
 * Austria-Hungary's invasion of Serbia, August 1914. Austria-Hungary was the stronger power, and Serbia was the weaker.
 * Germany's invasion of Belgium, August 1914. Germany was the stronger power, Belgium the weaker.

Between the World Wars

 * Abd el-Krim led resistance in Morocco from 1920 to 1924 against French and Spanish colonial armies ten times as strong as the guerrilla force, led by General Philippe Pétain.
 * TIGR, the first anti-fascist national-defensive organization in Europe, fought against Benito Mussolini's regime in Northeast Italy.
 * Anglo-Irish War (Irish War of Independence) fought between the Irish Republican Army and the Black and Tans/Auxiliaries. Though Lloyd George (Prime Minister at the time) attempted to persuade other nations that it was not a war by refusing to use the army and using the Black and Tans instead, the conflict was conducted as an asymmetric guerrilla war and was registered as a war with the League of Nations by the Irish Free State.

World War II

 * Philippine resistance against Japan – During the Japanese occupation in World War II, there was an extensive Philippine resistance movement, which opposed the Japanese with an active underground and guerrilla activity that increased over the years.
 * Winter War – Finland was invaded by the much larger mechanized military units of the Soviet Union. Although the Soviets captured 8% of Finland, they suffered enormous casualties versus much lower losses for the Finns. Soviet vehicles were confined to narrow forest roads by terrain and snow, while the Finns used ski tactics around them unseen through the trees. They cut the advancing Soviet column into what they called motti (a cubic metre of firewood) and then destroyed the cut-off sections one by one. Many Soviets were shot, had their throats cut from behind, or froze to death due to inadequate clothing and lack of camouflage and shelter. The Finns also devised a petrol bomb they called the Molotov cocktail to destroy Soviet tanks.
 * Soviet partisans – resistance movement which fought in the German occupied parts of the Soviet Union.
 * Warsaw Uprising – Poland (Home Army, Armia Krajowa) rose up against the German occupation.
 * Germany's occupation of Yugoslavia, 1941–45 (Germany vs. Tito's Partisans and Mihailović's Chetniks).

Britain

 * British Commandos and European coastal raids. German countermeasures and the notorious Commando Order.
 * Long Range Desert Group and the Special Air Service in Africa and later in Europe.
 * South East Asian Theater: Wingate, Chindits, Force 136, V Force
 * Special Operations Executive (SOE)
 * Provisional Irish Republican Army against British security forces in the Northern Campaign.

United States

 * Office of Strategic Services (OSS)
 * China Burma India Theater: Merrill's Marauders and OSS Detachment 101.

After World War II

 * First Indochina War (1946-1954) and Algerian War of Independence (1954-1962); both against France
 * The Cuban Revolution of 1953-1958 became a template of asymmetric warfare.
 * The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 (or "Russo-Hungarian" war ) saw makeshift forces improvising lopsided tactics against Soviet tanks.
 * Libyan support to the Provisional Irish Republican Army during the Troubles (1960s to 1998) and collusion between British security forces and Ulster loyalist paramilitaries.
 * United States Military Assistance Command Studies and Observations Group (US MAC-V SOG) (1964-1972) and Viet Cong in Vietnam.
 * The South African Border War, otherwise known as the Namibian War of Independence (1966-1990) between the South African Defense Force and People's Liberation Army of Namibia.
 * United States support of the Nicaraguan Contras (1979-1990).

Cold War (1945–1992)
The end of World War II established the two strongest victors, the United States of America (the United States, or just the U.S.) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR, or just the Soviet Union) as the two dominant global superpowers.

Cold War examples of proxy wars
In Southeast Asia, specifically Vietnam, the Viet Minh, NLF and other insurgencies engaged in asymmetrical guerrilla warfare with France. The war between the Mujahideen and the Soviet Armed Forces during the Soviet–Afghan War of 1979 to 1989, though claimed as a source of the term "asymmetric warfare," occurred years after Mack wrote of "asymmetric conflict." (Note that the term "asymmetric warfare" became well-known in the West only in the 1990s. ) The aid given by the U.S. to the Mujahideen during the war was only covert at the tactical level; the Reagan Administration told the world that it was helping the "freedom-loving people of Afghanistan." Many countries, including the U.S., participated in this proxy war against the USSR during the Cold War.

Post-Cold War
The Kosovo War, which pitted Yugoslav security forces (Serbian police and Yugoslav army) against Albanian separatists of the guerrilla Kosovo Liberation Army, is an example of asymmetric warfare, due to Yugoslav forces' superior firepower and manpower, and due to the nature of insurgency/counter-insurgency operations. The NATO bombing of Yugoslavia (1999), which pitted NATO air power against the Yugoslav armed forces during the Kosovo war, can also be classified as asymmetric, exemplifying international conflict with asymmetry in weapons and strategy/tactics.

Israel/Palestine
The ongoing conflict between Israel and some Palestinian organizations (such as Hamas and PIJ) is a classic case of asymmetric warfare. Israel has a powerful army, air force and navy, while the Palestinian organizations have no access to large-scale military equipment with which to conduct operations; instead, they utilize asymmetric tactics, such as paragliding, small gunfights, cross-border sniping, airstrikes, and others.

Sri Lanka
The Sri Lankan Civil War, which raged on and off from 1983 to 2009, between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) saw large-scale asymmetric warfare. The war started as an insurgency and progressed to a large-scale conflict with the mixture of guerrilla and conventional warfare, seeing the LTTE use suicide bombing (male/female suicide bombers) both on and off the battlefield use of explosive-filled boats for suicide attacks on military shipping; and use of light aircraft targeting military installations.

Iraq
The victory by the US-led coalition forces in the 1991 Persian Gulf War and the 2003 invasion of Iraq demonstrated that training, tactics and technology could provide overwhelming victories in the field of battle during modern conventional warfare. After Saddam Hussein's regime was removed from power, the Iraq campaign moved into a different type of asymmetric warfare where the coalition's use of superior conventional warfare training, tactics and technology was of much less use against continued opposition from the various partisan groups operating inside Iraq.

Syria
Much of the 2012–present Syrian Civil War has been asymmetrical. The Syrian National Coalition, Mujahideen, and Kurdish Democratic Union Party have been engaging with the forces of the Syrian government through asymmetric means. The conflict has seen large-scale asymmetric warfare across the country, with the forces opposed to the government unable to engage symmetrically with the Syrian government and resorting instead to other asymmetric tactics such as suicide bombings and targeted assassinations.

Ukraine
The 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine has resulted in a classical asymmetrical warfare scenario. Russia's superior military might, including its vast nuclear arsenal, larger economy and population, and seemingly superior armored forces have not helped Russia surmount fierce opposition from the Armed Forces of Ukraine, which has inflicted severe blows against the Russian Armed Forces by relying on technologically advanced weaponry supplied by the outside Ukraine supporting parties. The use of MAGURA V5 unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) to attack Russian Black Sea Fleet ships such as the Tsezar Kunikov has been cited as example of asymmetrical warfare by analysts.

Semi-symmetric warfare
A new understanding of warfare has emerged amidst the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Although this type of warfare does not oppose an insurgency to a counter-insurgency force, it does involve two actors with substantially asymmetrical means of waging war. Notably, as technology has improved war-fighting capabilities, it has also made them more complex, thus requiring greater expertise, training, flexibility and decentralization. The nominally weaker military can exploit those complexities and seek to eliminate the asymmetry. This has been observed in Ukraine, as defending forces used a rich arsenal of anti-tank and anti-air missiles to negate the invading forces' apparent mechanized and aerial superiority, thus denying their ability to conduct combined arms operations. The success of this strategy will be compounded by access to real-time intelligence and the adversary's inability to utilize its forces to the maximum of their potential due to factors such as the inability to plan, brief and execute complex, full-spectrum operations.

Bibliographies

 * Compiled by Joan T. Phillips Bibliographer at Air University Library: A Bibliography of Asymmetric Warfare, August 2005.
 * Asymmetric Warfare and the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) Debate sponsored by the Project on Defense Alternatives

Articles and papers

 * A mathematical approach to the concept.
 * A mathematical approach to the concept.
 * A mathematical approach to the concept.
 * A mathematical approach to the concept.

title: Asymmetric warfare