Edward IV's treasure

I have read that the theory advanced by Kendall, that the Woodvilles
stole treasure after Edward IV's death, is wrong. Historians e. g.
Horrox claim that there was no treasure to steal. The story was
propaganda by Richard to malign the Woodvilles. The evidence for
their argument is that Edward's funeral cost £1500 but there was only
£1200 cash available to pay for it and some of his possessions had to
be sold.

However, I've re-read Kendall and it says that the selling off of
possessions to cover the costs took place when the executors met on
May 7 1483.

Couldn't you therefore argue that while this was the amount of Edward
IV's treasure in cash on 7 May, it is no proof at all for how much
money he had on April 9th? In which case this fact cannot be used to
either prove or disprove that Dorset and the Queen raided the
treasury. Therefore historians cannot also use this amount as proof
that Richard was spreading lies.

Also in the letter, from, I think, St Albans on May 4, in Edward V's
name, Archbishop Bourchier, is asked to see to the security of the
Great Seal and the royal treasure. Isn't this evidence for Richard
being concerned about its safety, rather than propaganda? He would
undermine his own credibility if he was caught out by the Archbishop
of Canterbury as lying.

In Simon Stallworth's letter of 21 June he says that the Prior of
Westminster is in trouble because of certain goods delivered to him
by the Marquess of Dorset. Isn't this independent evidence, that
doesn't come from Gloucester, that Dorset did take something?

Joanne

--- In , "jotwo2003"
<jsummerill@s...> wrote:
> I have read that the theory advanced by Kendall, that the
Woodvilles
> stole treasure after Edward IV's death, is wrong. Historians e.
g.
> Horrox claim that there was no treasure to steal. The story was
> propaganda by Richard to malign the Woodvilles. The evidence for
> their argument is that Edward's funeral cost £1500 but there was
only
> £1200 cash available to pay for it and some of his possessions had
to
> be sold.

Apparently so, yes. It left Richard pretty brassic and so he has
been criticised for remitting taxes he desperately needed which he
then had to replace with forced loans which he had outlawed.
>
> However, I've re-read Kendall and it says that the selling off of
> possessions to cover the costs took place when the executors met
on
> May 7 1483.
>
> Couldn't you therefore argue that while this was the amount of
Edward
> IV's treasure in cash on 7 May, it is no proof at all for how much
> money he had on April 9th? In which case this fact cannot be used
to
> either prove or disprove that Dorset and the Queen raided the
> treasury. Therefore historians cannot also use this amount as
proof
> that Richard was spreading lies.

I agree, it could and the whole issue should probably be pursued
further. One has to wonder what Woodville paid his sailors with?
>
> Also in the letter, from, I think, St Albans on May 4, in Edward
V's
> name, Archbishop Bourchier, is asked to see to the security of the
> Great Seal and the royal treasure. Isn't this evidence for
Richard
> being concerned about its safety, rather than propaganda? He
would
> undermine his own credibility if he was caught out by the
Archbishop
> of Canterbury as lying.

Well it'c certainly evidence of needing it if the government were to
return to anything approaching "work as usual", though for anything
else it is open to interpretation. I am happy with your more
favourable one!
>
> In Simon Stallworth's letter of 21 June he says that the Prior of
> Westminster is in trouble because of certain goods delivered to
him
> by the Marquess of Dorset. Isn't this independent evidence, that
> doesn't come from Gloucester, that Dorset did take something?
>
> Joanne

It would be interesting to know what these goods were, certainly,
and it would be nice to think they could be some of the stolen royal
loot. It's hardly conclusive but it is good circumstantial evidence
in Richard's favour - and since his opponents' case is heavily
reliant on circumstantial evidence it's only fair we use it too!
B