Salutem in Christo.

My very good Lord.

Your Lordship will excuse me that these my Letters are not soe formall as they are wont to be. The occasion of theyr breifnes is this. You lately gave me a touch in your owne Letters, and I have since understood it more fully by your Sonne, that there is a Gentleman in those partes who intendes very well towardes the poore Colledge at Manchester, and is willing to part with some 400li towards the buying in of theyr House, which is now in the handes of my Lord the Earle of Derbye. I have allready spoken with my Lord Strange about this busynes, and he hath very nobly promised me to doe all fayre offices he can with my Lord his Father. Soe that I conceyve good hopes by the Kinges gracious favour, and your Lordships care in this matter, that Colledge may ere longe recover, and flourish againe. And that which I shall desire of you now is this, that you will take some good opportunity to speake with my Lord the Earl of Derbye, and my Lord Strange his Sonne (being now in those Partes) and likewise with the Gentleman abovementioned, and dryve the busynes to as fayre an Issue as possibly you can. Whereupon I shall desire you to send me word, that I may acquaint his Majesty and give you such further directions as shall be necessary. And in this I make noe question but your Lordship will use all manner ﹛of﹜ diligence that shall be fitting. Soe wishing you health I leave you to the grace of God and rest.

Your Lordships very lovinge Freind.

W: Cant:

Lambeth. June. 29. 1635.

To the Right Reverend Father in God, my very good Lord and Brother the Lord Bishop of Chester: these.

Salutem in Christo.

My very Good Lord.

I have receaved your Lordships Letters of February 23. And am very glad to reade in them, that you follow my Counsell, for making hay whilst the Sun shines. The truth is, I trust none of theire Devotions, but there is somewhat els in it, which cannot last alwayes. And therefore you doe marvellous well to take your tyme. My Lord Ronelah's Offer is very faire, and his present Restitution greate. I hope you will be able to perfit the One, as well as the other, while he is in that good mynde.

I am right glad to heare of the Resolution of the Commissioners for Defective Titles. And I am most Confident you will make passing Good use of it. And whereas you write, That this Secret is communicable only to mee, I shalbe so true to the Busines, as that I shall not Communicate it to any man els upon any termes whatsoever.

One Thing you have not yet performed to mee. Which is the Sending mee a perfit Note of all Particulars restored to the Church in Whole, or in Part, since my Lord Deputyes goeing thither, and theire severall Values. I pray heartily defer it noe longer, but let me have it as soone as possibly you can.

I am very sorry to heare what you write Concerning the Proposition made to His Majestye about London-Derry. For I see by that which you have written, and that which is written to me by my Lord Deputy, that there may bee a greate deale of Danger in the Busines, and that both of honour and profit to his Majesty, and of future Plantations, if the English be soe discouraged: and of the Church, if the King fill that Kingdome, with men so well set in Religion and so Conformable to Good Orders. My Lord I have spoken freely to his Majesty what I thinke of the whole Busines, and shall doe the best Service in it that possibly I can. And to that ende I purpose to keepe your Lordships Letter by mee that I may be the better able, to speake to anie Particular, as Occasion shall be farther offer’d mee.

My very Good Lord.

I have receaved two Letters from you, the One of the 9th, the other of the 18th of October. And they Came to my hands together now by your servant. And since Mr. Secretary kept your former Letters by him so long, without delivering it to mee, you must blame him not mee, that you had not your Answer sooner.

Concerning Mr. Thomas Godwin, and his remoove of the Chayre, in which your Lordship used to sitt at sermons and that without giving you any notice, was in the very best Construction a very foolish and a peevish Action. But you must not looke, that I will take upon me to Censure anie man, where I have nothing to doe, being out of my Visitation, and without knowledge of the Circumstances of the Action: But I leave you to Order and punish those Thinges, as you shall finde fitt.

This I finde by your Lordships Letters, that Dr Burghill Continues the Lecture (if I mistake you not). But that is directly against the Statues of the Church; And therefore I doe hereby pray, and require you, That he doe presently leave the Lecture, and that the Church proceede to the Choice of a New according to Statute. But whether the Dean and Prebends will think it fitt to have 2 Brothers Residentiaryes at the same tyme, I leave to themselves to Judge. For my owne part, if my Judgement be asked, I Cannot approve itt.

Your Lordships second Letter needes noe Answer; what the Note inclosed Contayning your Answer to the Information against you needes one, and a Larger, then I have now Leisure to give.

Sir:

Your last letters tould mee that your selfe and your Ladie were goinge towards Cornbury that very day: that made mee delay answearinge your letter that weeke, and since that I have had little or noe leasure. I hope by this tyme you have visited all Frends you intended abroad, and are return’d well and safe to your owne home, which I shall be gladd to heare. And I hope farther that this Journey and styrringe in fresh Ayre hath brought home your Ladie in better health then shee went forth, and falsified all those prognostications which seem’d to threaten Relapse into her former indispositions. I am still of the same mynd I was that her owne sadness and thoughts is the greatest cause of her bodily Infirmity; and that one winter well mastered would doe her more good then her Phisicke.

For the Land marks (as you are pleasd to call them) I have nowe found an opportunity, to make them somewhat perfect, upon an Accident of meetinge with another Booke, and have heere inclos’d sent you a Coppye: soe that nowe you may doe what you please with the former. This is as perfect as I cann make it.

I am sorry to hear that they of whom you have had so much Care, have made you such ill returne: but as I knewe little of that, so I delt truly with you, in relatinge what moov’d mee to adventure that little which I did against my Judgment. Since that tyme I have heard noe more of them, which I am very gladd of.

And nowe whereas you write that you are gladd to see the same hand and a new Name, I must thanke you for it: and I had noe reason but at that tyme to doe as I did, and fasten upon any indifferent thinge to gett out of Wales. But nowe as God hath dispos’d of businesses it is likely to prove my hinderance. For being soe lately preferr’d, I knowe not howe in Modesty to be a present Suiter againe. But upon Munday morninge last my Lord the Bishopp of Winchester died: Et Magnum illud Christiani Orbis Lumen extinctum est.

Salutem in Christo

My verye good Lord:

Anye man maye sweare you will be at leisure to wright that reeds your volumes. And I take mye selfe much beholdinge to you for both paines and kindnes. Mye hand is as little as mye selfe, and will thrust up an answear into a closer roome.

I am verye glad you have your desyres to staye till November but I shall take noe notice of yt.

Sir David Fowles, I thinke it goes on as well as you could wishe. His Maiestye was pleased to tell me part of the storye, upon occasion of mye shewinge a passage of your Leters to hime. The passage was concerninge the Gentleman under the press. Which his Maiestye sayde he would againe putt to the Attournye. And then added: And because I see thear is good correspondencye betweene mye Lord Deputye and you (which I am glad of because you ar both honest men and mye servants) I will tell you howe Sir David Fowles etc. And it maye be I shall fitt hime a little before your game be readye to playe.

Mye Lord Cottington tells me he hears that both of us abuse hime. The best is, what he hath nowe written (what eare it be) was written before I told hime of his Spannish aches. But wot you what? He was not at the Bath at all, but onlye ridd up and downe the Cuntrye for his pleasure and is come home as sound as Armestronge.

One greevous accident he had as he rode on hawkinge. He stole a penn from me at the Counsell Table two months before, and putt it in his pockett. Thear he kept it soe longe that it wore out the lynings of his hose and ran up into his Breetch. Thiss he confesses himselfe, what hurt els he had bye it I knowe not.

Mr Railton brought me the Petition for Palses fyne. I would have you thanke mye Lord Treasurer, and mye Lord Cottington for their noblenes in the busynes. Your Leters came to mye hand September 27. and bare date the 4th soe longe they wear on the waye.

The Jerninghams or Jernegans were one of Suffolk's older gentry dynasties. According to a family origin myth cautiously repeated by the seventeenth-century antiquary John Weever, King Canute had first brought their ancestors from Denmark to settle in England in 1030. They were certainly established in the county by the late twelfth century. Sir Peter Jernegan inherited the manor of Somerleyton in Lothingland through his mother c. 1310–11. It then became the family's ‘capital seat’. In 1314 Sir Peter was granted the patronage of the Augustinian priory of St Olave in the neighbouring parish of Herringfleet. St Olave's became the Jerninghams’ favoured place of burial. The tomb of Sir Peter's descendant Sir Thomas was said to have borne the inscription

Lothingland, in the far north-eastern corner of Suffolk, is effec¬tively an island, bounded to the west and north by two rivers – the Waveney and the Yare – to the east by the North Sea, and to the south by the long inlet of Lake Lothing and Oulton Broad, which the Oulton Dyke links to the Waveney. Extensive marshes fringed the rivers on the landward side on one or both banks, while sand banks created a hazard for those attempting to land from the sea. Lothingland was easily defensible both from sea and land, as the authors of a report of 1584 pointed out. In Elizabeth I's reign, only four bridges gave access to it. Parts of the island probably seemed somewhat sequestered, especially during inclement winter weather. Yet, as the 1584 report also observed, it was ‘verie fertile’, and yielded ‘stoare of Corn Cattall and other victuall’. In its south-east¬ern corner lay Lowestoft, a port and market town with a population of around 1,500, which benefited from both fishing and seaborne trade. There was a long-established rivalry between Lowestoft and the port of Yarmouth across the Yare. That rivalry, together with Lothingland's insular position, made it, in the words of the fore¬most historian of Tudor Suffolk, ‘an ideal place for piracy and clan¬destine activities’.

Under the early Tudor kings, the Jerningham family enhanced its wealth and standing through advantageous marriages and royal favour. Edward Jerningham (d. 1515) first married Margaret, daughter of Sir Edmund Bedingfield. Sir Edmund's ancestors had lived at Bedingfield, near Eye in Suffolk.

Salutem in Christo

My very Good Lord.

I have receaved your Letters of April 20th. In which you tell mee, I shall now heare from my Lord Primate, what he thinkes fitt to bee done, in the Case of my Lord of Kilmores Synod. And I must tell you, I have receaved a Letter from my Lord Primat, since I receaved your Last, Dated indeed from Tredah; But there was nothing in itt, but Thankes and a very kinde Expression Concerning my Booke; Not a word concerning my Lord of Kilmore.

I am very sorry my Lord of Kilmore soe forgetts himselfe towards you. But you doe exceeding well by your patient forbearance. For should it be otherwise, they which Care for neither of you, would laugh at Both.

A great part of the rest of your Letter Concernes the Cause of the Bishop of Clonfert. But when I had receaved your Letters, I had receaved nothing from him about his owne Busines; but since, I did. For he sent me the Copie of the Petition presented to the Commissioners of Plantations, and a Letter besides. And they were deliver’d very seasonably to mee, whilest Sir George Radcliffe was with mee. So not understanding the Busines fully, nor able to Carry all the Circumstances of it in memory, I put the Petition itselfe into Sir Georges hands. Who tooke itt with him to his Lodging; And when he brought it mee agen, gave mee Advice, to write a Letter to my Lords the Commissioners in the behalfe of the Bishop of Clonfert; Which Advice of his I have followed, and sent the Letter by himselfe.

I thanke you for the paynes, which I see you have taken, in reeding over my Booke. But I much feare the great Testimony you give itt and mee, proceedes rather from your Affection, then anie Merit of the Thing.

In my Letters to the Commissioners concerning the Bishop of Clonfert, I have forborne to mention any Particular, save only quarta Episcopalis, because of your Direction, that it might not bee knowne to Come from you. And I shall not faile a second tyme, at or neere his parting to be earnest with Sir Geo Ratcliffe agen, and to desire him particularly to speake with the two Lords Chiefe Justices.

My verye good Lord.

Since I writt last to your Lordship Mr Oldsworth told me he was goinge to your Lordship to intreat in his Lord's Name some migitation of Fees Concerninge the perpetuitye for the Hebrewe Reeder. Mye Lords memorye must ever be pretious with me: and thearfore understandinge from your Lord's officer that it was fitt his Maiestye should be moved in it, and his pleasure be signifyed to your Lordship, I did in prosecution of mye late Lords desyer, humblye move his Maiestye about it; And in Consideration the Perpetuitye in thiss graunt is not to Mr Morris his person, but his place as Hebrewe Reader; his Maiestye is graciouslye pleased to have the Fees Moderated or remitted as your Lordship pleases, and Commaunded me to signifye soe to your Lordship. Thiss done I ﹛maye﹜ not trespass farther upon the multitude of your Lordships occasions, but humblye take mye leave. And shall ever rest

your Lordships, lovinge poore frend and servant

Guil: London:

April. 13. 1630.

To the Right honourable my very good Lord the Lord Coventrie Lord Keeper of the great Seale of England. These.

Mr Atturney

His Majesty is graciously pleased, that the Rectory of Hanbury in the Countie of Stafford, with all rights and profits therunto belonging, shall be newly granted and appropriated to the Lord Bishopp of Coventrie and Litchfeild and his successours, under the great Seale of England and seale of the Duchy of Lancaster according to your Certificat, To be houlden in franckalmoigne, with addition of all such clauses as you shall thinke fitt to make this new grant of validity in Lawe; for the passing whereof, you are to prepare a Bill accordinglie fit for his Majesties signature, for which this shall be your warrant.

W: Cant:

March. 26. 1639

As the largest surviving manuscript of medieval motets, Mo has attracted lively scholarly discussion, including intense studies of dating, codicology, and large-scale organization. Among the least controversial elements of the manuscript's structure is the generic organization of the so-called old corpus motets of Mo, found in fascicles 2–6. The motets in these sections seem to have been copied around the same time, and are arranged based on the number of voices and language: fascicles are devoted to triple motets, bilingual double motets, Latin double motets, French double motets, and French monotextual motets. This generic scheme is conspicuously lacking in the seventh and eighth fascicles: while the motets in these later sections are primarily French double motets, a number of Latin and bilingual motets appear among them. Furthermore, no fascicle of the codex easily yields evidence of internal organization – unlike in many contemporary motet collections and chansonniers, there is no generic, alphabetical, authorial, or liturgical pattern within each fascicle.

Mo also does not bear out any of the other, less obvious schemes recently uncovered in other seemingly unordered manuscripts. These alternate principles are often obscured by the interaction of multiple schemes. Catherine A. Bradley argues that the ordering of the second motet fascicle of F may relate to the presence of related clausulae and motets in F and other sources, or to the popularity of the motets. Katarzyna Grochowska's study of the Stary Saçz manuscript suggests that modal organization in the manner of a tonary could be applied to polyphonic works alongside liturgical ordering. But no such scheme applies to the organization of the large repertory of motets in Mo. Perhaps because the generic organization by fascicle is so clear, there has been little consideration of the precise selection and ordering of the motets within the larger fascicle groupings of the older corpus. The only organizational plans that have, to my knowledge, been suggested, are those of ‘relative popularity’ or chronological summa of the genre; such organization has been suggested by Edward Roesner and Emma Dillon respectively. Even these loose schemes have not been proposed in relation to the final two fascicles; explanations for the ordering of the eighth fascicle in particular can rely little on the metric of relative popularity, as nearly all of the motets are unica.

Salutem in Christo

My very Good Lord.

Your Last Letters were only an Accompt, That you had settled the Busines of the Majour of Chester; And I am very Glad ‘tis att Quiett; And hope the Deane will have more Care to Keepe Things orderly, and in peace.

My Lord All the Occasion I have for writing to you att this tyme, is to lett you Know, That to satisfye his Majesties Desires, I am once more Come under the Presse; And a Booke I here send you. I have beene faine to steale Broken tymes to make itt in. And therefore, if, when you reade itt, you finde itt a Broken Discourse, you will be the readyer to pardon both itt, and mee. And this I assure you, I doe not beleeve, That ever anie man was putt upon such a Busines with so many Busy, and Interrupted Thoughts about him. Well! Here you have it; And I am desirous some friends should see itt, since many Enemyes will. So to Gods blessed protection, I leave you, and rest

Your Lordships very Loving friend and Brother

W: Cant:

Lambeth: February 20. 1638./9.

Salutem in Christo

Sir.

I take myself very much beholdinge to you, and the Fellowes of that worthy Foundation, for the great kyndnes and respect which you were pleasd to shew to a kinswoman of myne, one Mistress Mayot of Abingdon, for my sake. The particular was about a Lease held from the Colledge by one Mr Molyns, if my memory mistake not. And her desyre was to have compounded with him, and soe have been your Colledge Tenant. But now these may be to let you understand, that upon due consideration of all circumstances, she hath been advised by her Counsell to lay out her money elswhere, and not to deale with Mr Molyns, which she hath done accordingly; and Mr Molyns is well contented, and hath thought of another Chapman. Soe that now I doe very freely surcease my Suyte in the behalfe of my kinswoman to you and the Colledge, and with a great deale of thankes for all your love, leave you to doe with Mr Molyns as you shall fynde fittest. Soe in hast I commend you to Gods grace, and shall ever rest

Your very lovinge Freind

Guil: London:

London house October 16 1632.

To the Right Worshipfull my very worthy Freind Dr Gwynn Master of S. Johns Colledge in Cambridge. These.

As noted in Chapter 2, towards the end of the fourteenth century royal servants – chancery scribes and secretaries – gradually adopted a more polished style in both Latin and Catalan, occasionally modelled on Cicero. Official correspondence in Latin was the most important task of those responsible for secular administration, such as the royal secretary Bernat Metge, whom we have already encountered (pp. 54–6 and 93–8). A good example of the way in which Metge engages with Cicero is provided by a Latin letter of 17 October 1408 written on behalf of King Martin to the councillors of the Sardinian town of Oristano, whose support the monarch is eager to secure in his fight against William II of Narbonne (Taylor 2012: 137–9). Here Metge's style adopts several features typical of the Roman orator. One key characteristic of Ciceronian style is the use of periodic sentences, a device imitated by Metge from the outset. The first two sentences, comprising twelve lines, include a series of subordinate clauses (relative, conditional, and participial phrases), which allow the text to unfold gradually. In the opening sentence the main idea is emphasized by being placed at the end:

Throughout his epistle Metge resorts to parallel structures, chiefly through tripartite sentences: ‘Venit enim tempus quo fletus vester in gaudium, planctus in plausum, et in libertatem captivitas redigetur’ (‘A time will come in which your tears will turn into joy, your lamentations into applause, and into liberty your captivity’). The style is additive, often by means of rhetorical questions: ‘Ubi est deus tuus? Ubi latitat? Ubi dormit?’ (‘Where is your god? Where is he hiding? Where is he sleeping?’).

In the course of their daily work, these dictatores commonly resorted to compilations of extracts from other writings. A good example is a Latin florilegium included in Montserrat, MS 981, which features collections of sentences from classical authors (Livy, Plato, Ptolemy) and writers on spiritual matters (Bernard of Clairvaux), as well as a series of mnemonic devices.

Salutem in Christo.

After my hearty Commendations etc.

While you were absent in the West about my Visitation, there was a Petition deliverd unto me by Mr Earles Fellow of Merton College about his holding that Fellowship longer, notwithstanding his admittance into the Benefice of Gamlingay. I doe not now remember all the Circumstances upon which the Petition was grounded, but hearing very well of the person, I subscrib’d his petition, that nothing should be done to his preiudice in that particular till your Returne; that I might be the better informed what your Statutes are, and what hath been the pratise of the College in that kind, and in that particular Benefice. These are therfore to pray and require you; to take notice of the said Petition, and to doe Mr Earles all the right with favor which may any way belong unto him, and his well deserveings. If he be willing to leave his Fellowship upon the acceptation of this Liveing, ther's an end of the busyness. If otherwise, he continue his Suite to hold his Fellowship longer, then I would have the Statute concerning that point sent unto me, togither with the practise of the College and thereupon I shall either doe that which to iustice shall apperteine, or remitt it freely to yourselves. For though I shall be very willing to shew deserving men favour, yet I shall not doe it with the violation of Statute, nor with such example as shalbe preiudiciall to the Church abroad in point of Residence, or to your College in regard of over long continuance of any Fellowe in it. Thus not doubting but I shall receive one way or other a satisfactory Answere from you, I leave you to the Grace of God and rest

Your very loveing Freind and Visitor.

The recent opening up of the Maltese Notarial Archives marks an important step for Maltese and Mediterranean historical studies. Researchers had always found this archive difficult, if not at times impossible, to consult and this mostly due to its inaccessible state. Being legal in nature, the documents are a unique and veritable mine of information for the socio-economic historian. They not only provide evidence of an uninterrupted series of daily trading activities from the late fifteenth century to date but also shed light on various laws, customs and traditions which have moulded Maltese society through the centuries. The acts of notaries working in and around the harbour area are a significant source for establishing prevailing economic patterns.

This book has traced the impact of the arrival of the Knights Hospitaller on Malta's economic activity during the period 1530–65. The focus has been on specific topics which both enlighten local historiography and allow for comparative analysis with similar issues in play in other countries. The paths chosen by particular sections of the local population have been traced, including a number of new settlers such as the Rhodiot community that followed the Order from the Dodecanese island of Rhodes. Additionally, wherever possible, it has followed the route of foreign traders, whether Christian or Muslim. The case studies support the central argument that the presence of a naval power, the Knights Hospitaller, generated a variety of economic activities which led to the creation of a vibrant, monetarised economy based on trade. The trade which flourished in the late sixteenth century and which is often referred to in Maltese historiography had a precedent which was interrupted only by the Ottoman siege of 1565.

Even though the fundamental reason for the existence of the Knights of St John had substantially diminished by the beginning of the sixteenth century, their naval presence and power in the Mediterranean were not an anachronism. With Malta as a base for their constant naval activities, especially those targeted against the Barbary corsairs, they managed to adapt themselves to the exigencies of the times. The acts of Notary Bartholomeo Selvagi de Via drawn up in Malta in 1530 bear witness to the Knights’ immediate participation in an ‘undeclared’, low-level holy war which justified their raison d'être in the eyes of their European benefactors.

The Latin word ‘parliamentum’, and other similar terms such as ‘colloqium’ and ‘locutio’, basically means nothing more than an occasion on which words are spoken. Just what those words might be, spoken by whom, under what circumstances and to what purpose are other matters entirely. John Maddicott has traced the distant origins of the English parliament as an institution as far back as the Anglo-Saxon monarchy in the early tenth century, and there is some justification for such a long view; but it was not until the thirteenth century that the term ‘parliament’ came to mean a formal meeting to which the king summoned his leading subjects to give him advice and to discuss important matters affecting the ‘state of the realm’, such as the approval of legislation in the form of statutes, the granting of taxation, and the answering of petitions. Those summoned initially consisted of the great men of the kingdom or ‘magnates’, together with the bishops and abbots of the greatest monastic houses. Such meetings are recorded from the beginning of the reign of Henry III in 1216; usually they were described in the records as a ‘council’ or ‘colloqium’, but sometimes the cognate term ‘parliament’ was applied, with no obvious reason for the distinction. Examples of meetings called ‘parliaments’ occur in 1236 and 1242, but with increasing frequency in the 1250s and 1260s. Occasionally other groups of people were summoned: representatives of the knights in 1254, 1258 and 1264; and in 1265 two knights from each county together with two burgesses from the leading towns in England. However, apart from the magnates and prelates, there was no fixed composition of parliament, and it was not until late in the reign of Edward I that the attendance of knights, burgesses, and also representatives of the lower clergy became frequent. The description ‘Model Parliament’ has been applied to the assembly of November 1295, at which all these elements were present, although, as we shall see, the practical reality was not so straightforward.