^{page 181 note 1} See p. 3.

^{page 181 note 2} See p. 203.

^{page 181 note 3} I originally made this assumption myself (TTC, 17n.), but revised my opinion on further investigation.

^{page 181 note 4} f.6r.

^{page 182 note 1} f.4v. The author had also seen MS 23, apparently in a more complete version than that which now survives, and other papers which either did not come into George's hands, or were subsequently lost.

^{page 182 note 2} MS 7, published by Singer. See p. 1.

^{page 182 note 3} See p. 185.

^{page 182 note 4} MS 24.

^{page 182 note 5} He was sent on embassy to the Emperor in April 1537, with the object of trying to patch up relations with the Habsburgs.

^{page 183 note 1} Dr Edm. Bonner to Cromwell, 2 Sept. 1538. L and P, XIII, 270Google Scholar. See also Wyatt's defence of himself printed by Walpole in Miscellaneous Antiquities (1772), II, 21–54Google Scholar. Both documents are reproduced in Muir, 64–9; 187–209.

^{page 183 note 2} Sanders, N., De origine ac progressa Schismaticis Anglicani Liber (Coloniae Agrippinae, 1585).Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 3} Sanders, 19. ‘Eminebat inter Palatinos insignis quidam aulicus Thomas Viatus, qui veritus, ne, si forte Rex aliunde impudicissima Annae Bolenae instituta didicisset, ipsius, qui male sibi conscius erat, vita in discrimen veniret, inamque intelligeret senatum Regis hoc ipsum agere, ad eum ultro venit, ac se confessus est cum Anna Bolena rem habuisse, nihil minus cogitantem, quam Regem velie ipsam thori sociam facere.’ DNB notes this story as coming from Nicholas Harpesfield's Pretended Divorce, but in that version Wyatt tells his story only to the King. Although Harpesfield wrote in 1556, his work was not printed until 1878 (Camden Society, n.s. xxi, 1878), and there is nothing to suggest that the author of this document knew of it. The portion bracketed is obliterated in this text, and supplied from MS 24. All the sentences in this document reproduced in capitals are written in lower case italic in the MS.

^{page 183 note 4} Sub heading and marginal numbers from MS 24.

^{page 183 note 5} He had married before 1520, Elizabeth Brooke, daughter of Thomas Brooke, Lord Cobham. They were estranged by 1525.

^{page 184 note 1} He had been an Esquire of the Body since before 1523. See p. 6.

^{page 184 note 2} He served as Ewerer, in place of his father, at Anne Boleyn's coronation on 1 June 1533. L and P, VI, 601.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 3} He was imprisoned briefly, from 5 May to 14 June 1536 in connection with Anne Boleyn's fall, but no charges were brought against him. See p. 7, and Muir, 27–36. His second imprisonment, from 17 January to 19 March 1541 in connection with Bonner's charges of 1538, was a much more serious matter because he could no longer receive the protection of Thomas Cromwell. See p. 7, and Muir, 175–210.

^{page 185 note 1} The following 3 ff. are substantially the same as certain passages of the ‘Life’ (Singer, Appendix, 179–215), for which George names as his authorities ‘… a lady with whose house and mine there was then kindred and strict alliance (identified by Singer as Anne Gainsford); the second a lady of noble birth living in those times … from whom I am myself descended.’

^{page 185 note 2} Marginal sub heading from MS 24, where it stands fully in the margin.

^{page 185 note 3} There is written her faier necke rounde abowte:

Noli me tangere, for Cesars I ame;

And wylde for to hold, though I seme tame.

Wyatt, Poems, no. 7. Muir, 19

^{page 186 note 1} Marginal note by George Wyatt. Jane Seymour's coronation was twice planned and twice deferred; the coronation of later Queens does not seem to have been considered, although both Catherine Howard and Catherine Parr were recognized by the title.

^{page 186 note 2} 3 or 4 words illegible.

^{page 186 note 3} 2 words illegible.

^{page 186 note 4} Marginal note by George Wyatt.

^{page 186 note 5} 28 Henry VIII, cap. vii, para. 1. Statutes, III, 656.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 1} Sonnet 136.

^{page 187 note 2} Sic, perhaps meaning ‘frequently’. Elizabeth was born in September 1533; Anne had a miscarriage in the following year, and a stillborn son in January 1536.

^{page 187 note 3} A reference to Jane Seymour. L and P, XI, 32.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 4} The author here apparently chooses to ignore the cases of Smeaton and Norris.

^{page 188 note 1} I.e. his intrigue with Jane Seymour. L and P, X, 103 etc.

^{page 188 note 2} This sentence, written on a separate slip of paper, is gummed to the page at one end, covering the appropriate part of the next. Underneath is written the same sentence in secretary hand.

^{page 188 note 3} This is probably a reference to her uncle, the Duke of Norfolk and his conservative allies, especially the Duke of Suffolk.

^{page 188 note 4} Anne ‘… having an excellent quick witt, and being a ready speaker, did so answeare to all objections, that the peeres had given theire Verdict accordinge to the expectation of the assembly, she had been acquitted; but they (amongst whome the duke of Suffolke the kings brother-in-law was cheife, and wholly applyinge himself to the King's humour) pronounced her guilty’. William Cobbett etc., State Trials (London, 1816–1898), I, 410.Google Scholar

^{page 189 note 1} See Foxe (ed. 1853, V, 137), from which this is probably taken.

^{page 189 note 2} There are a number of accounts of this speech, all similar. Cf. Foxe (ed. 1853, V, 134), and Cobbett (I, 410).

^{page 190 note 1} She was buried in the chapel of St. Peter within the Tower.

^{page 190 note 2} This perhaps refers to the disgrace of the Howards in December 1546.

^{page 190 note 3} Rymer, , Foedera, (ed. 1713) XV, 113.Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 4} I.e. Elizabeth.

^{page 190 note 5} I.e. hunt them down. Sanders was ordained in Rome, became Professor of Theology at Louvain in 1565, went to Spain about 1573, and died in Ireland in 1581.

^{page 191 note 1} Sanders, 134; ‘Viatum, ut eas nuptias regnique ab haeresi reconciliationem impediret, turbas in Cantio cientem, sua potius insigni fide, quam ulia militum manu devicit.’

^{page 191 note 2} Line partially erased, 4 or 5 words illegible.

^{page 191 note 3} There is (not surprisingly) no record of this episode. The only occasion on which an illness of Wyatt is mentioned is in connection with a commission given him on 14 November 1550 to deal with border disputes around Calais. On that occasion he was ‘unwell and unable to act’. Cal. For., I, 63.Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 4} Mary and Jane Grey. This refers to the period 6–19 July 1553.

^{page 191 note 5} Rymer, XV, 113.‘… for Default of Heirs of the several Bodyes of Us and our sayd Sonne Prince Edward lawfully begotten, the said Imperial Crown and all other the Premises shall wholly remayn and cum to our said Daughter Mary and the Heirs of her Body lawfully begotten, upon Condition that our said Daughter Mary after our Decease, shal not mary ne take any Person to her Husband without the Assent and Consent of the Privy Counsaillours, and others appoincted by Us to our dearest Son Prince Edward aforesaid to be of his Counsail, or the most part of them, or the most part of such as shall then be alive …’

^{page 192 note 1} In addition to the verbal thanks mentioned here, Sir Thomas, in common with a number of other gentleman, also received a letter from the Queen. BM MS Add 33230 f.21.

^{page 192 note 2} Issued on 25 January 1554. Proctor, J., The Historie of Wyates rebellion, (1555)Google Scholar. Reprinted in Pollard, A. F., Tudor Tracts, 212.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 3} It would seem that the author had seen Wyatt's letter to Arundel, or a copy of it. As far as I can discover, neither this letter, nor the supplication, are now extant.

^{page 192 note 4} Cf. Proctor, 210. ‘we mind nothing less than anywise to touch her Grace’.

^{page 192 note 5} ‘Old Sir John Gage was appointed without the utter gate, with some of his Guard, and his servants and others with him. The rest of the Guard were in the Great Court, the gates standing open. Sir Richard Southwell had charge of the back sides, as the Wood Yard and that way, with 500 men …’ The narrative of Edward Underbill (Harl. MS 425) re-printed in Pollard, A. F., Tudor Tracts, 190–1Google Scholar. Underbill also gives a lively and dramatic account of the rebels' approach. See also The Chronicle of Queen Jane and of two years of Mary, ed. J. C. Nichols, Camden Society, xlviii (1850), 49.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 1} Presumably in the same sense as ‘hands’, meaning men.

^{page 193 note 2} Cf. his reaction to the Council's proposals on 31 January 1554, when he demanded the Queen's person as a hostage (Cal. Span., XII, 79).Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 3} Proctor's was the only full contemporary narrative, upon which most subsequent versions were based. On the brief note printed by John Mychell see Wm. H. Wiatt, ‘The Lost History of Wyatt's Rebellion’, Renaissance News, XV (1962), 128–33.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 4} This is partly confirmed by the description of the battle given in the Chronicle of Queen Jane. (49), and in Rawlinson MS B. 102, ff. 83–5. (Printed in the English Historical Review, xxxviii, 252–8.)Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 5} Baron Hastings of Loughborough, 3rd son of George Hastings 1st Earl of Huntingdon, and a leading supporter of Mary. He was one of the Commissioners appointed on 28 January 1554 to treat with Wyatt. After Elizabeth's accession, although he took the oath of Supremacy, he was in trouble for recusancy, and spent most of the last ten years of his life in retirement. He died at Stoke Poges in Buckinghamshire in March 1573.

^{page 193 note 6} Cobbett, , State Trials, I, 861–3.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 7} The person referred to here was probably Maurice of Saxony, who almost captured the Emperor in 1552, and died in his service in the following year. If so, it was not a very felicitous example.

^{page 194 note 1} This was in fact Jane Wyatt's half sister, Mary Finch. By 1554 she was the long-standing widow of Lawrence Finch the eldest son of Sir William Finch, who had died in his father's lifetime, and was consequently the aunt of that Jane Finch whom George Wyatt was to marry. She had been born Mary Kemp and was the only child and heir of Christopher Kemp, who had died some time before 1518. After her father's death her mother (also Mary, the daughter of Sir Richard Guildford) married Sir William Hawte of Bishopbourne, and became by him the mother of Jane, who married Sir Thomas Wyatt. Mary Finch had been in the service of Mary Tudor since 1536, and was a trusted confidant. She was granted some of Sir Thomas's land after his attainder (Cal. Pat., Philip and Mary, II, 250) and died in 1557.

^{page 194 note 2} This was possibly Sir Robert Southwell, who, as Sheriff of Kent, had been active in opposing the rising. According to Cobbett (I, 816) there was a quarrel between them ‘for a money matter’, and Southwell could certainly have expected to benefit from Wyatt's attainder. He did in fact receive a small part of the estate. Cal. Pat., Philip and Mary II, 69.

^{page 194 note 3} I.e. signed.

^{page 194 note 4} This is quite consistent with the promptings which could be expected from Renard, who was very keen that an example should be made of the rebel leaders. See his letter of 22 March 1554, Cal. Span., XII, 168.Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 5} The parliament opened on 2 April 1554.

^{page 194 note 6} See p. 10.

^{page 195 note 1} See p. 199.

^{page 195 note 2} For a consideration of the probable truth of this assertion, see TTC, 19–20.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 1} Strenuous efforts were made to persuade Wyatt to implicate Elizabeth, because as Juan Hurtado de Mendoza wrote on 19 March (Cal. Span., XII, 162Google Scholar) ‘… while she lives it will be very difficult to make the Prince's entry here safe, or accomplish anything of promise’. For a consideration of these attempts, see TTC, 91–3.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 2} This is probably a reference to Gardiner's sermon of 11 February, concerning the safety of the commonwealth, ‘which could not be unless the hurtful members thereof were cutt off and consumed’. Chronicle of Queen Jane, 54.Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 3} Proctor, 239.

^{page 196 note 4} Presumably this refers to Proctor, who was hostile to Wyatt. If there were any other pamphlets of ‘the whole matter’ printed they have not survived. MS pamphlets may have circulated, such as the ‘Chronicle of Jane’ or Rawlinson B.102, but printed comment other than Proctor's is brief. For example, the Preface to The agreement of the holye Fathers, by John Aungell (1555; STC 634Google Scholar) contains the following passage: ‘For if that ye (O Englande) had that grace geven unto the of God, that thou woldest call unto thy remembraunce howe that this Judith [Mary], at the risynge of our Holifernus [Northumberland], had the hartes of men and not the bodyes; And that at the risynge, and preceding forth of that pestiferous traytor Wyat, had the bodyes and not the hartes and yet overcame her enemies by the power of God, it were such a miracle unto the, whereby to cause the to forsake all the naughty opinions and erreurs.’

^{page 197 note 1} Edward Courtenay. Released from the Tower (where he had been since the execution of his father Lord Montague in 1538) and created Earl of Devon in 1553. He had been backed by Gardiner as a suitor for the Queen's hand, but she would not consider him, and he became involved in the plot, see TTC, 94–5.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 2} Cf. the testimony of Lord Chandos, ‘… I, being lieutenant of the Tower when Wyatt suffered, he desired me to bring him to the Lord Courtenay; which when I had done he fell down upon his knees before him in my presence, and desired him to confesse the truth of himselfe, as he had done before, and to submit himself unto the queen's majesty's mercy’ Chronicle of Queen Jane, 72n. At his trial, Wyatt admitted writing to Elizabeth, but denied receiving any reply. According to Foxe (ed. 1853, VI, 431) this story of Wyatt's confession was invented by Gardiner (presumably with Chandos’ connivance), who was the author of the whole ‘plott’.

^{page 197 note 3} Possibly Lord Paget, who exercised all his influence on Elizabeth's behalf in this crisis, and was the sworn foe of Gardiner.

^{page 197 note 4} Chronicle of Queen Jane, 74Google Scholar. Sir Thomas's words had precisely the desired effect. See p. 10.

^{page 198 note 1} Chronicle of Queen Jane, 74Google Scholar. There was clearly some ambiguity about Wyatt's alleged declaration to the Council. The author here makes it appear that the declaration had been made, and had explicitly exonerated Elizabeth and Courtenay. The Chronicle version makes him say, ‘And whereas yt is said and wysled abroade, that I shoulde accuse my lady Elizabeth's grace, and my lorde Courtney, yt is not so …’; in this version a written declaration is mentioned only by Weston (the confessor) who interrupts him to say, ‘Marke this, my masters, he saythe that that which he hath showed to the Counsell in wryting of my lady Elizabeth and Courtenay is true.’ The editor of the Chronicle also noted another version of Wyatt's words in MS Harl. 559 f.53 (74, note a): ‘Good people, I have confessed before the quenes majestyes honnorable counsayle alle those that toke parte with me, and were privaye of the conspiracye; butt as for mye ladye Elzabethes grace, and the yearle of Devonnshire, here I take hyt uppon mye deathe that theye never knewe of the conspiracye …’

^{page 198 note 2} Ibid. Weston's action in this respect was generally resented.

^{page 198 note 3} A mark at this point seems to indicate a missing word.

^{page 198 note 4} See p. 195. The passage which follows is probably an authentic quotation from a letter which the author had seen, but which no longer survives.

^{page 199 note 1} Foxe (ed. 1853, VI, 549) agrees basically with the other accounts of Wyatt's last words, but makes Weston say, ‘Believe him not good people, for he confessed otherwise before unto the council.’ To which, he alleges, Wyatt replied, ‘That which I said then, I said, that which I say now, is true,’ thus virtually admitting that he had made an accusation.

^{page 199 note 2} Ibid., 415.

^{page 199 note 3} This is written on a torn slip pasted over the line. Several words seem to have been lost. The scribe made this amendment as he was working, as some words have been partly written over the slip. The incomplete word ‘sise’ seems to represent the point at which the sense of the slip was resumed on the main page.

^{page 199 note 4} Cf. Chronicle of Queen Jane, 50.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 5} Foxe (ed. 1853), VIII, 737.

^{page 200 note 1} See p. 197, note 2.

^{page 200 note 2} This was presumably Arthur. See pp. 11,202

^{page 200 note 3} Of Northumberland.

^{page 201 note 1} For the part played by the wealthy exiles in financing their less fortunate colleagues, see Garrett, C. H., The Marian Exiles (C.U.P., 1938)Google Scholar, introduction.

^{page 201 note 2} I have not been able to find any trace of this document.

^{page 201 note 3} I.e. George.

^{page 201 note 4} At his trial, Wyatt claimed that he was ‘but the iii or iv man’ in the conspiracy. Cobbett, I, 861–3.

^{page 202 note 1} See pp. 8–9.

^{page 202 note 2} MS 23. See p. 58. The reference in the surviving parts is to the Emperor rather than to the Spaniards.

^{page 202 note 3} If Sir Thomas really thought this, he was wrong. Gardiner had in fact opposed the Spanish marriage in every way consistent with his position. TTC, 12–24.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 1} Antoine de Noailles, the French Ambassador (admittedly not an impartial witness) wrote on 17 February 1554 ‘Of the twenty five or thirty who compose the Queen's Council, there are not three who approve the said marriage …’ Harbison, E. H., Rival Ambassadors at the Court of Queen Mary (Princeton, 1940), 159.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 2} STC 17560.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 3} Two or three words obliterated.

^{page 203 note 4} The majority of Wyatt's followers were of thoroughly respectable religious antecedents. TTC, 86–8.Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 5} He was 26, she 37.

^{page 204 note 1} 28 Henry VIII, cap. vii. Statutes, III, 659Google Scholar. See pp. 191–2.

^{page 204 note 2} There is no evidence that the younger Sir Thomas was ever a member of parliament. Henry VIII's will was a great rallying point among the opponents of the Spanish marriage. The Dudley conspirators in 1556 thought that it contained ‘matter enough for (their) purpose’. TTC, 196.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 3} 28 Henry VIII, cap. vii was repealed by 1 Mary, St. 2, cap. i.

^{page 205 note 1} Marginal heading from MS 24, in which the wording of the following paragraph is slightly different.

^{page 205 note 2} Sic, probably for ‘a’.