By June 1460, the Earls of Warwick, Salisbury and March, together with Lord Falconberg, were back in England, and won the Battle at Northampton. The restoration of the fortunes of the house of York was fully under way.  By October of that year, the family was together in London, and George watched his father, the Duke of York, ride triumphantly into the capital city.  Acclamation by the crowds, riding with sword and banners, the Duke came in the manner of a king claiming his throne. What impression did this make on the young George’s mind?  Was he overwhelmed by it all or was there complete acceptance that this was the rightful way of it, the house of York claiming the throne of England?  Not so much illusions of grandeur as the right of grandeur reverting to the once attainted family. 

At seventeen, George, duke of Clarence was ‘a handsome, loquacious, spoiled youth, fretfully ambitious, … but weak of will and shy on talent.’   Michael Hicks refers to him at this age as being ‘immature and inexperienced.’ There is possibly a tendency for historians to apply today’s standards to those of the past; it is very hard to think of a seventeen year old being ‘immature and inexperienced’ in the Middle Ages.  At that age George already had his own household and had been a knight for some time.  Admittedly his Lieutenantship of Ireland was given to a deputy, the Earl of Worcester, as Edward refused to let him go but in other ways he was busy with his life and, as indicated, acting as commissioner and steward on important occasions.  There is no record that at any time he abused his position, or made a fool of himself when handling the responsibilities given to him.  He seemed to act with mature intent and Edward seemed to believe that his brother could be relied upon, subsequently arranging for his certificate of coming of age. In between these events, he was causing, and sometimes losing, disputes over various matters, apparently seeking to add to his income and his estates. Is this a throwback to those times of abandonment? It is something to be considered in the light of his past; it would account for the avaricious side of his nature which he displayed over land and money.

Before the wedding, Warwick had written to Coventry and other places with an array to subdue the northern rebels.  In truth, he had it in mind to use the men in his own insurrection.  In the subsequent uprising it seems that Clarence, with new powers, having been allied to the great earl, instigated an attack on the house of Lord Scales.  After the Battle of Edgecote it is noted that Clarence, working with Warwick, ordered the executions of several knights.  This must surely have been a taste of real power, the ability to end a man’s life, an almost king-like act.  Then, when his brother Edward was taken prisoner by Archbishop Neville and handed over to Warwick and Clarence himself, is there anyone able to define his feelings?  Was this not supreme power, not only to authorize executions but to hold the king of England prisoner?

It was very likely then that Clarence secretly began his moves to reinstate himself with his brother the king, resulting in having land and estates returned to him.  Why did he feel he could demand such things from Edward when he had been a traitor to him?  Was it because of his inherent desire to one day take the crown of England for himself, by right?  Was it in light of the fact he had been declared Edward’s heir in the event of his having no offspring to inherit?  Did he feel it was his by right? The question must also be asked, why did Edward return so much to the wayward seemingly vacillating brother, who had so obviously blatantly committed treason? Many unanswered questions, many topics open to speculation.  Was it through brotherly love on Edward’s part, or an effort to keep the peace, to be fair and open with a ‘black sheep’ returning to the fold?