Henry VII practice essay 5
‘The handling of finances was Henry VII’s most successful domestic achievement.’ How far do you
agree with this view?
Henry VII is often considered by modern historians to have been ‘the best businessman to
have sat on the English throne’ owing to his ability to balance the Kingdom’s finances at a time when
the weakness of the monarchy after the Wars of the Roses necessitated it. Henry was shrewd and
decisive in recognising that increasing revenue would consolidate the dynasty because if the
succession was still challenged when he died, a full treasury would provide the heir with the
resources to fight opponents. With an unstable throne in 1485, Henry successfully switched to the
Exchequer system of finances in order to bring security to the realm by sharing out control of the
Kingdom’s treasury to all organs of government. Once the financial situation had recovered in 1487,
Henry was quick to restore the Chamber system, which gave him much more control over his
finances. As a result, annual turnover rose from just £25,000 in Richard III’s reign to £100,000 by the
end of the 1490s, taking in considerable income from Crown lands and feudal dues. The rise in
proceeds from Crown lands can be explained by Henry’s effective policy of keeping the peerage
small; the shrinking of the peerage from 62 in 1485 to 42 in 1509 meant that only Prince Henry
required provision of land by 1502, and so the king had few relatives who expected to benefit from
his territorial acquisitions. This enabled him to transfer revenue from Crown lands directly to the
monarchy as opposed to its subjects, which enriched the Crown. Likewise, with feudal dues, Henry
was determined to extract the maximum possible income by exploiting his position as the Kingdom’s
feudal lord. Initially, the proceeds from marriage were small at £350 in 1487, but by 1507 the annual
income had risen to £6000 after the appointment of a new Master of the King’s Wards in 1503. Such
a huge increase is testament to the outstanding economic abilities of Henry VII, who always acted
with tact and decisiveness in restoring the financial position of the Crown, recognising how crucial it
was to do so for a usurper king.
Another impressive achievement of Henry’s approach to finances was the increase in profits
of justice during the reign. For the first time, these profits became central to an English king’s income
because Henry ensured that most criminal acts were punished by fines as opposed to imprisoning
and/or executing opponents. He undertook an effective campaign to curb the practice of retaining
among the nobility, something he saw as a reason for the Wars of the Roses. Those who retained
illegally were fined heavily, as demonstrated by the huge penalty of £70,550 dealt to Lord
Bergavenny in 1506. Clearly, Henry was going to extract the maximum indemnity possible from
those who challenged the stability of his throne, a policy which had the dual benefit of increasing
revenue and securing the dynasty. He also used the punishment of attainder, for example in the case
of Sir William Stanley, who had to pay the Crown £9000 and £1000 per annum thereafter for
treason. It is vital to remember than in the reigns of Henry’s predecessors, treason would have
always been punished with execution, and so it is to Henry’s credit that he guaranteed the loyalty of
his subjects in a way that enriched the Crown whilst simultaneously stabilising it. However, it could
be argued that in other aspects of Henry’s quest for riches, he became so tyrannical that he
threatened the dynasty. Bond receipts rose from £3000 in 1493 to £35,000 in 1505 as the Council
Learned became renowned for hounding those who had yet to pay. It estimated that at one time, 46
out of the 62 noble families were at Henry’s financial mercy. Revisionist historian, Christine
Carpenter, has contended that such financial repression left Henry in serious danger of being
‘The handling of finances was Henry VII’s most successful domestic achievement.’ How far do you
agree with this view?
Henry VII is often considered by modern historians to have been ‘the best businessman to
have sat on the English throne’ owing to his ability to balance the Kingdom’s finances at a time when
the weakness of the monarchy after the Wars of the Roses necessitated it. Henry was shrewd and
decisive in recognising that increasing revenue would consolidate the dynasty because if the
succession was still challenged when he died, a full treasury would provide the heir with the
resources to fight opponents. With an unstable throne in 1485, Henry successfully switched to the
Exchequer system of finances in order to bring security to the realm by sharing out control of the
Kingdom’s treasury to all organs of government. Once the financial situation had recovered in 1487,
Henry was quick to restore the Chamber system, which gave him much more control over his
finances. As a result, annual turnover rose from just £25,000 in Richard III’s reign to £100,000 by the
end of the 1490s, taking in considerable income from Crown lands and feudal dues. The rise in
proceeds from Crown lands can be explained by Henry’s effective policy of keeping the peerage
small; the shrinking of the peerage from 62 in 1485 to 42 in 1509 meant that only Prince Henry
required provision of land by 1502, and so the king had few relatives who expected to benefit from
his territorial acquisitions. This enabled him to transfer revenue from Crown lands directly to the
monarchy as opposed to its subjects, which enriched the Crown. Likewise, with feudal dues, Henry
was determined to extract the maximum possible income by exploiting his position as the Kingdom’s
feudal lord. Initially, the proceeds from marriage were small at £350 in 1487, but by 1507 the annual
income had risen to £6000 after the appointment of a new Master of the King’s Wards in 1503. Such
a huge increase is testament to the outstanding economic abilities of Henry VII, who always acted
with tact and decisiveness in restoring the financial position of the Crown, recognising how crucial it
was to do so for a usurper king.
Another impressive achievement of Henry’s approach to finances was the increase in profits
of justice during the reign. For the first time, these profits became central to an English king’s income
because Henry ensured that most criminal acts were punished by fines as opposed to imprisoning
and/or executing opponents. He undertook an effective campaign to curb the practice of retaining
among the nobility, something he saw as a reason for the Wars of the Roses. Those who retained
illegally were fined heavily, as demonstrated by the huge penalty of £70,550 dealt to Lord
Bergavenny in 1506. Clearly, Henry was going to extract the maximum indemnity possible from
those who challenged the stability of his throne, a policy which had the dual benefit of increasing
revenue and securing the dynasty. He also used the punishment of attainder, for example in the case
of Sir William Stanley, who had to pay the Crown £9000 and £1000 per annum thereafter for
treason. It is vital to remember than in the reigns of Henry’s predecessors, treason would have
always been punished with execution, and so it is to Henry’s credit that he guaranteed the loyalty of
his subjects in a way that enriched the Crown whilst simultaneously stabilising it. However, it could
be argued that in other aspects of Henry’s quest for riches, he became so tyrannical that he
threatened the dynasty. Bond receipts rose from £3000 in 1493 to £35,000 in 1505 as the Council
Learned became renowned for hounding those who had yet to pay. It estimated that at one time, 46
out of the 62 noble families were at Henry’s financial mercy. Revisionist historian, Christine
Carpenter, has contended that such financial repression left Henry in serious danger of being
