Additional Notes And Errata in Vol. VII

No.

17. In date, for "Oxford" read " Otford."

32. The letter, though "holograph," is not in Sampson's hand.

68, 1. 1, for "Four" read "Five."

120, in margin, for "B. M." read " R. O."

137, 1. 4, for "194l." read "494l."

217. This is an extract from Du Bellay's letter to Castillon, App. No. 8.

229. The date of this document, "25 Feb. 1534," means 1535, modern style.

390. The true date of this is 5 July 1533 (see Venetian Calendar, Vol. IV., No. 933). Consequently the "assent of Parliament" does not refer to the Statute cited in the footnote. The same thing was said to Katharine herself in 1533. See vi. 759.

421, p. 178, 1. 18, for "Grevaise" read "Frenaise" (i.e., Farnese).

530, p. 214, 1. 4, for "weak" read "faithful" (feable in orig).

731–2. These letters are of the year 1536.

783. The writer of this letter is La Pommeraye, not la Guiche.

810. The original of this document is at Vienna.

862. The writer is not Sir Anthony St. Leger, afterwards Deputy of Ireland.

868. This letter is of the year 1535.

873. A detached leaf, which seems to have belonged to the same common-place book of Tayler, has been left unnoticed. It is written only on one side, and contains jottings of one or more speeches on the conclusion of some league; but from the contracted character of these memoranda it is very difficult to surmise the occasion to which they refer. An alliance by blood seems to be spoken of, and the orator then goes on to discourse of the praises of peace and its great importance at that time, owing to the existence of civil discord in Germany and war in the East. Then follow broken sentences intended, perhaps, for another speech in praise of the King, who, it is said, had ample means of continuing the war if so inclined. The occasion which seems to agree best with the contents of this leaf is the treaty of the Moore in 1525. The handwriting, apparently, is that of Tayler himself, but very rough and careless.

874. This letter is some months later than the place in which it is inserted perhaps as late as Jan. 1535. Æpinus returned to Hamburg in February of that year.

911 (1 and 2). The descriptions at the end of these documents are transposed. The word "Mutilated" should have been at the end of § 1, and "Nineteen leaves," &c. at the end of § 2.

928. The date of this letter is 17 June 1535. See VIII. 1175.

942. A P.S. of this letter overleaf has been omitted, in which the writer says he is glad the King likes Hokenorton.

1013. The footnote is wrong. Doubtless "de sobrez" means desoeuvrez (at liberty).

1089–91. These letters are more probably of the year 1535.

1131. This letter is more probably of the year 1535.

1193. This letter is slightly out of place. The marginal date should have been 24 Sept.

Ib., p. 463, 1. 27, for "Queen" read "Queen's" (i.e., the Queen's physician)."

1206, p. 467, 1. 24, for "1,600 (sez C)" read "sixteen (seze)."

1210, 1. 1, for "20 years" read "9 years."

1297, p. 497, 1. 37, after "others" insert "who all come to see her (Mary)."

1302, in date at end, for "28 Oct." read "24 Oct."

1312. An undated copy of this letter has since been discovered in the R. O.

1368, 1. 11, "undone." The meaning is rather "at his wit's end."

1483, 1. 23, before "interview" insert "proposed."

1527. This letter is printed in St. P. v. 62. It is probably of the year 1535, like the four which follow it.

1554, p. 579, 11. 22–26. The passage ought to read:—"As to the indignation of this King against the relations of his said lady, it does not appear otherwise than that Rochford's wife was sent from Court for the reason that I have heretofore written, and that the King has lately shown favour to Master Bryan in a suit he had with the said Rochford."

1554, p. 580, 1. 9 from bottom of text, for "discretionary" read "moderate."

1564, 1. 2 from bottom of text, for "great [master]" read "great [admiral]."

App. 8, 11.15, 16. The passage should read:—"He cannot do without Clement for the affairs of Italy; but if in this matter there is an inch of good there is an ell of bad."

Ib., p. 631, 11. 24–26. The passage should read:—" I am no very great papist, but I declare I am sorry to see him in such pain, only for expressing himself in favor of the king of England. He is threatened in full consistory, and not with baked pears."

Ib., 11. 39–40, read "should name one of the judges, the Queen another, and the Emperor or Francis a third."

App. 11, 1. 18, for "ministers" read "enemies." The beginning of the second paragraph should be:—"After some further conversation the King took him to a garden, and said he promised him (but begged that he would keep it secret, because he would not like people to believe that he granted this request so suddenly, although he will prevent the great sum of money going to Rome in future,) that when the bp. of Paris sends the memoirs, he will arrange about the excusator."

App. 12, 1. 2 of second paragraph, after "baillez" insert "les doubtes." Three lines lower, for "prevented from removing," read "occupied with." And last line of text, for "hired" read "led."

App. 13, p. 634, 1. 12, for "that matter" read "her."

" " 1. 13, for "it" read "her."

" " 1. 18, for "a niece" read "nieces, the one."

" " 1. 22, for "Mary" read "she."