Caroline Halstead's work - Was New member ...

 
 
Carol responds:

What's sad is that Gairdner started out believing in Richard' s innocence. If only he had retained his skepticism regarding Tudor sources (it boggles the mind to think of a man of his intellect considering Shakespeare a source!), Ricardian studies would have been much further along. Instead, we had only Sir Clements Markham and Caroline Halstead (whose work was unfairly dismissed because of its Victorian "sentimentalis m" but includes much original research) until Kendall came along in the 1950s.

****
 
Here's something interesting I found in Halstead's Richard III:
 
She seems to have seen a copy of Edward IV's last will in Nichol's collection of royal wills at Lambeth.  
 
Halsted, Caroline A.  Richard III as Duke of Gloucester and King of England.  London:  Longman, Brown, Green, and Longmans, 1844, Vol. 2, pp. 17-18.
 
Does anyone know if Nichol's collection of royal wills at Lambeth still exists?  If not, what happened to it?
 
 A copy of the codicils to Henry V's will were found at Eton College in 1978, so it's not impossible that a copy of Edward IV's last will is waiting to be found.
 
It may be wishful thinking, but I hope Edward IV's last will can give some insight into motivations--or lack of them--for events between April-June 1483.
 
Marion

The version I was taught is that Gairdner originally distrusted traditional and undocumented stories but, after being converted to Roman Catholicism, he decided that traditional teachings had much merit.
Can anyone justify that allegation?


--- In , marion davis wrote:
>
>
> What's sad is that Gairdner started out believing in Richard' s innocence.
> ****

I read the same thing, but I can't remember where. Actually Carol, wrote that, I didn't.

I was hoping someone could tell me more about Nichol's collection of wills at Lambeth. But Tudor gremlins filled my post with bunches of letters and symbols that I didn't type.

Marion



--- In , "ejthompsonuk" wrote:
>
>
>
> The version I was taught is that Gairdner originally distrusted traditional and undocumented stories but, after being converted to Roman Catholicism, he decided that traditional teachings had much merit.
> Can anyone justify that allegation?
>
>
> --- In , marion davis wrote:
> >
> >
> > What's sad is that Gairdner started out believing in Richard' s innocence.
> > ****
>