It is desirable here to correct an error in the text, which
unfortunately was discovered too late. Letters 1020-1022 are out of
their proper place. No. 1020 is certainly a letter of Elizabeth
Woodville, Edward IV.’s queen, not of her daughter Elizabeth, who
was Henry VII.’s. No. 1021 was placed after it as being about the
same time, which no doubt it was; and the fact that the Earl of
Oxford was out of favour for a considerable part of Edward IV.’s
reign made it appear as if both letters belonged to that of Henry
VII., to which they were accordingly relegated in previous editions.
But this Earl of Oxford was in favour under Edward IV. till the
restoration of Henry VI.; and No. 1022, a letter which only appeared
in the Supplement of the last edition of this work, was written by
John Daubeney, who was killed at the siege of Caister in 1469. The
reference to the Queen’s confinement, moreover, which was so
perplexing in the case of Elizabeth of York, fits exactly with the
August of 1467, in which month Elizabeth Woodville gave birth to a
daughter named Mary. This letter, therefore, was written on the 8th
August, which would be the ‘Saturday before St. Laurence’ day’ in
that year: and it must be noted that the footnotes on p. 107 are
entirely wrong. The Archbishop of York referred to in the letter was
George Nevill, and the Treasurer was Richard, Earl Rivers.
No. 1021 is perhaps before A.D. 1467, as Howard and Sir Gilbert
Debenham are believed to be intending ‘to set upon Coton,’ of which
apparently Sir Gilbert was in possession in April 1467 (see vol. iv.
No. 664, p. 274).