¹ The relevant correspondence is found mainly in BL, Harl. MS 285, Cotton MS Galba C VIII, and the various classes of the State Papers. These collections are a complex mixture of Leicester, Walsingham and Davison papers, see ‘Leic. Pap. II’, esp. 138. An initial reconstruction was attempted by John Bruce, the editor of Leic. Corres., but this collection was compiled solely from the MSS in the British Museum.

² The fullest account is found in Read, , Walsingham, iii, 112–31Google Scholar, but it contains some serious errors. Those in Strong, and van Dorsten, , Leicester's Triumph, pp. 23–31Google Scholar, Wilson, C., Queen Elizabeth and the Revolt of the Netherlands (2nd ed, the Hague, 1979), pp. 86–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar, MacCaffrey, W.T., Queen Elizabeth and the Making of Policy, 1572–1588 (Princeton, 1981), pp. 348–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Oosterhoff, F.G., Leicester and the Netherlands 1586–1587 (Utrecht, 1988), pp. 45–9Google Scholar, are cursory.

³ This is not the place for a discussion of Leicester's instructions or the wider political debate.

⁴ The surrender was signed on 7/17 August and the Prince of Parma entered the city on the 17th/27th. The English receipt of the news is noted by Walsingham in a letter to Edward Wotton of 21 August, ‘yesterdaye we had newse of the rendering of Antwarpe’ (Hamilton Papers., ii, 681).Google Scholar

⁵ The initial stage is indicated by a request from Walsingham to Davison on 22 August to come immediately to Barn Elms for a meeting on the Netherlands (CSPF, 1584–5, 670Google Scholar). This letter also contains the quite useful piece of information that with the tide in his favour the journey from London to Barn Elms by river would only take Davison an hour.

⁶ See Davison's instructions (25 Aug.), BL, Add. MS 48116, fo. 145, and Davison to Walsingham, 4 Sept., CSPF, 1585–6, 6Google Scholar. The purpose of his embassy is discussed in Hamilton Papers, iiGoogle Scholar, Walsingham to Wotton, 26 Aug., and Hist. MSS Comm, Bath MSS, v, 45Google Scholar, Lord Talbot to Shrewsbury, 26 Aug. (mis-calendared 1583). The intended function of the nobleman, a subject of great future controversy, cannot be discussed here.

⁷ See n. 595. In his answers Leicester does not mention the dates of these letters (which included two from Walsingham), but the fact that Walsingham had apparently referred to Davison's departure suggests they were written on 25 September or possibly the 24th.

⁸ CSPF, 1584–5, 682Google Scholar, Walsingham to Davison, 27 Aug.; BL, Add. MS 48127, fo. 91, Elizabeth to Davison, 3 Sept.; PRO, SP12/182/11, Burghley to Walsingham, 4 Sept.; CSPF, 1585–6, 5, 21Google Scholar, Dutch Commissioners to Walsingham, 2 Sept., Walsingham to Davison, 12 Sept.

⁹ CSPF, 1585–6, 14, 23Google Scholar, Walsingham to Davison, 8, 13 Sept.

¹⁰ Ibid., 26, 28, Commissioners to Walsingham, 16 Sept., Walsingham to Davison, 18 Sept.

¹¹ Ibid., 35–42, Davison's reports to Walsingham, Burghley and Leicester, 24 Sept. The delay in the despatch of the Dutch act was first noted by Motley, J.L., History of the United Netherlands (1886 ed.), i, 320–1Google Scholar, but he was confused by the new style and old style dating, see Read, , Walsingham, iii, 115Google Scholar. Copies of the Dutch act of ratification (dated 22 Sept./2 Oct.) can be found in both the PRO and ARA. The covering letters for its despatch to England are dated 25 Sept./5 Oct., see below. It is not clear whether Davison had received the copy of the English Amplification Treaty that Walsingham had sent him by 22 September.

¹² PRO, SP12/18/2/1.

¹³ CSPF, 1585–6, 8Google Scholar. For Grey, see n. 549, and the Countess, n. 580.

¹⁴ Ibid., 21.

¹⁵ Arthur Atye informed Jean Hotman on 18 September that Elizabeth ‘hath nowe even yesterday fully resolved to send my L. our master into the Low Countries’ (AMAE, CPH, II, fo. 12). Walsingham told the Dutch commissioners on the 18th, see BL, Cotton MS Galba C VIII, fo. 205, Ortel to Leicester, 21 Sept., and their letter to the States-General, 18/28 Sept., ARA, Eerste Afdeling, Regeringsarchiven, I–92.

¹⁶ See BL, Cotton MS Galba C VIII, fo. 146, Ortel and Paul Buys to Leicester, 22 Sept., ‘Cest apres diner sont apportés a Monsieur Valck lettres des Estats de Zeelande’. Valcke himself wrote on the 23rd (ibid., fos. 148–9), ‘Ayant le jour d'hier recu lettres d'avis’.

¹⁷ PRO, SP12/182/67, to Walsingham [24 Sept.].

¹⁸ One, NLW, MS 9015E (printed in ‘North Wales’, 147), was sent to John Wynn of Gwydir. A second, addressed to a Mr Burdett, has appeared in the catalogues of two manuscript dealers: John Wilson, Autograph Letters and Historical Documents Catalogue 63 (1988), item 112, and Roy Davids, Manuscripts, Literary Portraits and Association Items (n.d.), item 89. I am most grateful to Dr Henry Woudhuysen and Mr. A.J.A. Malkiewicz for bringing these catalogues to my attention. Burdett was either Robert Burdett (1558–1603) of Bramcote, Wars., MP, or John Burdett, who attended Leicester's funeral. Under the Amplification Treaty Elizabeth agreed to add 1,000 horse to the English contingent; see ‘Puritan Crusade’, pp. 17–22, ‘North Wales’, 137–9, for a further discussion of their recruiting. It is curious that the disbursement book contains no entries to the expenses of messengers, but the purchasing of substantial amounts of writing paper on his return from Kenilworth, see p. 305, may be relevant.

¹⁹ Leic. Corres., 4–5.Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid., 5–7.

²¹ On the raising of money see also PRO, SP12/182/108, Horatio Palavicino to Walsingham, 28 Sept. This was the initial stage of the loan raised in London discussed below and in n. 663.

²² Leic. Corres., 7–8Google Scholar. It is clear that Leicester expected that the Queen would see the letter and phrased it accordingly; the enclosure was intended for Walsingham's eyes only. This appears to have been a common practice, but while some other examples survive it is probable that most of the enclosures were destroyed on receipt.

²³ SP12/182/67, see n. 17 above.

²⁴ See pp. 311–2.

²⁵ Hist MSS Comm, Rutland MSS, i, 180Google Scholar. Catherine Butler was the widow of Lord Gerald Fitzgerald.

²⁶ See pp. 314–6, and, for the Stables at St Albans, n. 609.

²⁷ Hist MSS Comm, Rutland MSS, i, 178.Google Scholar

²⁸ Leic. Corres, 8–10Google Scholar, the endorsement is taken from the original, BL, Harl. MS 285, fo. 133. For the significance of Atye's endorsements, see ‘Leic. Pap. II’, 131.

²⁹ By dating it 27 Sept., Bruce considered it an answer to Leicester's of the 27th, and assumed from it that the Queen had been won round in the meantime.

³⁰ Leic. Corres., 10–12Google Scholar. Bruce correctly identified this as an answer to Walsingham's letter, but having mis-dated Walsingham's could only date it late September.

³¹ Sidney had returned to Court on 21 September (Hist MSS Comm, Rutland MSS, i, 180Google Scholar), and the implication here is that he was at Leicester House on the 26th and sent to Walsingham then. He may have been with Leicester earlier in the weekend.

³² PRO, SP84/3/205, calendared in CSPF, 85–6, 53Google Scholar, where Burghley is suggested as the recipient. The relevant passage in the letter to Walsingham reads, ‘I doe find all sorts of men where I come so dauntyd with this conceatt as those who wold have runne to this servyce at the begining wyll slowly goe now yf they be entreated, for they will not beleave that hir Mat. wyll so deal in yt as they may hope ether of good assistance or such comfort as ys fitt for men that must goe hazard their lyves’, and that in the letter to Burghley ‘And men abroad begin now to doubt her persuasion in this case’. The reasons for considering that Walsingham was the recipient are not relevant here.

³³ PRO, SP12/182/41.

³⁴ For the barge journey, see p. 313.

³⁵ BL, Cotton MS Caligula C LX, fo. 180. There is no evidence of Walsingham being in London during the previous week. From the references cited above, he was at Court on the 18th and 23rd, and he wrote to Leicester from Barn Elms on the 21st, Bodl., MS Tanner 78, fo. 74.

³⁶ FSL, MS Xd 452 [Carey Papers], art. 6 (a copy). Given Warwick's health as reported by Stanhope earlier in the month, it is doubtful that he was at Court. Leicester probably took it to Northaw with him and obtained his signature there.

³⁷ PRO, C66/1255/43. For the raising of these tenants, see ‘North Wales’, 132–4.

³⁸ Also enrolled on roll 1255, memb. 43, which suggests that it might have been drafted at the same time as the earlier commission.

³⁹ ARA, Eerste Afdeling, Regeringsarchieven I–92 contains both the minute of the State-General's letter and Leicester's answer. The letter to Davison is calendared in CSPF, 1585–6, 118.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ The only reference to the Tothill Fields muster and the horsage that I have encountered is found in the discussion of Leicester's debts to the crown in BL, Lansdowne MS 61, fos. 206–7, Arthur Atye to Burghley, 9 Dec. 1589. Despite the numerous entries to the presenting of individual horses, nothing resembling an entry for the muster can be found in the disbursement book. However, it is possible that one of the lists of the horsemen mentioned in the Introduction, p. 23, may be the product of the muster.

⁴¹ PRO, SP12/183/176, to Leicester, 26 Oct. See also Motley, , i, 321–2Google Scholar, and Read, , Walsingham, iii, 122–3.Google Scholar

⁴² PRO, SP84/5/50–1, to Davison, 10 Nov. It is not clear how the Queen was mollified.

⁴³ On 6 November (CSPF, 1585–6, 146Google Scholar), Walsingham informed Davison that Leicester would leave at the same time as Sidney. On 15 November Leicester told Shrewsbury (Hist MSS Comm, Bath MSS, v, 63)Google Scholar he would leave within the next seven days. On the 18th he told Davison (PRO, SP84/5/82–3) ‘within x days at furthest’, and Roger Manners reported on the same day (Hist MSS Comm, Rutland MSS, i, 183Google Scholar) that he would leave a week from the next Friday.

⁴⁴ PRO, SP84/5/110–11, to Davison, 24 Nov.

⁴⁵ Printed in Leic. Corres., 461–6Google Scholar, from BL, Harl. MS 6846, fos. 26–8, without omissions.

⁴⁶ The three founding documents for the hospital were signed at this time, the deed of incorporation on 21 November, the statutes on the 26th and the deed of endowment on the 30th (WCRO, CR1600/LH 1, 2,3). Leicester also wrote to the governor of Ostend from ‘ma maison a Londres’ on the 30th, PRO, SP77/1/92. For Leicester's visit to the Court on the 28th, see the reference to a reward at Richmond on p. 338.

⁴⁷ PRO, SP84/5/152–3, 154–5, to Walsingham and Davison, 3 Dec. The letter to Davison is subscribed ‘from London’. On the 2nd Roger Manners reported to the Earl of Rutland from the Savoy ‘it is now certenly thought the Earle of Lecester setteth forwardes tomorrow. He hath taken leave of her Majestie’ (Hist MSS Comm, Rutland MSS, i, 184Google Scholar). By implication, the leave-taking had occurred since his last letter to Rutland on 18 November.

⁴⁸ BL, Harl. MS 6993, fo. 119 (Leic. Carres., 21–3Google Scholar), ‘on my way to the sea side’. He had written to Burghley the previous day, giving no address, on a minor matter of business (BL, Lansdowne MS 45, fo. 84). According to Roger Manners (see the previous note) Burghley was suffering from an attack of gout.

⁴⁹ PRO, SP84/5/160–1, dated only ‘this Sonday morning’.

⁵⁰ The history of the mortgages of Denbigh is a complex subject, see ‘Leic. Pap. III’. The first mortgage was to be paid off in three instalments of £5,000. Leicester certainly paid off the first, and the last was outstanding at his death, but the position regarding the second is unclear.

⁵¹ See n. 663 above. He sent the ‘assurance’ to Walsingham to present to the Queen on the 3rd (PRO, SP84/5/152–3). On the 5th he learned of her initial refusal to sign from Walsingham (PRO, SP84/5/160–1), and commented ‘I lye this night at Sir John Peters & but for this doubt had I byn tomorrow at Harwich’. He clearly did not leave Wanstead until later in the day, for he answered another letter from Walsingham simply ‘In all haste ready to horse’ (PRO, SP84/5/162–3).

⁵² CSPF, 1585–6, 201–2.Google Scholar

⁵³ In his letters from the ship (Ibid., 205), he names it the Anytyst, as does the 1585–7 disbursement book, see p. 367. Borough calls it the Amytie.

⁵⁴ PRO, SP84/5/154–5, to Davison, 3 Dec. The request had come from Paul Buys.

⁵⁵ CSPF, 1585–6, 213–4Google Scholar, to the Council, 14 Dec. from Middelburg.

⁵⁶ They wished him to attend the meeting of the States-General at the Hague. This was probably the reason for the earlier request relayed by Buys to sail to the Brill.

⁵⁷ Borough's account concludes with Leicester's departure from Middelburg for Dor drecht on 17 December.