^{Page 91 of note 1} The phrase occurs in a fragment of correspondence, discovered by Mr Alistair C. Duke, and deposited in London University Library, MS 610. Professor Gordon Donaldson has suggested that it should be placed in the 1630s.

^{Page 92 of note 1} Cardwell, E., A History of Conferences . . . Connected with the Revision of the Book of Common Prayer, Oxford 1841, 202-3, 172, 215Google Scholar; Usher, R. G., The Reconstruction of the English Church, New York 1910, II, 351-2Google Scholar; Canons XXXV, CXXII.

^{Page 92 of note 2} British Museum, MS Additional 38492, f. 81^r; printed by Usher from another copy, op. cit., II, 335-8.

^{Page 92 of note 3} The descrypcyon of the images of a verye chrysten bysshop and of a counterfayte bysshop, 1536? (S.T.C. 16963), Sig. Cvi^v.

^{Page 92 of note 4} Shaw, W. A., A History of the English Church during the Civil Wars and under the Commonwealth, 1640-60, 1900,1, 32, 30 Google Scholar.

^{Page 93 of note 1} This was a scholarly polemic, commissioned by Archbishop Davidson in his search for a solution to the Kikuyu crisis of 1913-14. Similarly, the symposia Episcopacy Ancient and Modern (1930) and The Apostolic Ministry (1946) contemplated, the one obliquely, the other less so, the problems arisi ng in South India and elsewhere.

^{Page 93 of note 2} p. 23.

^{Page 94 of note 1} Jewel, John, Works, ed. Ayre, J., Parker Socy., I, 1845, 340, 379, III, 1848, 439 Google Scholar; Pilkington, James, Works, ed. Scholefield, J., Parker Socy., 1842, 493-4Google Scholar.

^{Page 94 of note 2} Norman F. Sykes, Old Priest and New Presbyter, 1956, 1-57; Gordon Donaldson, The Scottish Reformation, 1960, 102-29, and in his unpublished London Ph. D. thesis, ‘The Relations Between the English and Scottish Presbyterian Movements to 1604,’ 1-96. The extent to which this paper follows Professor Donaldson’s lead will be apparent. His work casts almost as much light on the English sixteenth-century polity as it does on Scotland. For a different view of the problem, see H. F. Woodhouse, The Doctrine of the Church in Anglican Theology, 1547-1603, 1954, 78-123.

^{Page 95 of note 1} Relations between Anglican and Presbyterian Churches: A Joint Report, 1957, 11-12.

^{Page 95 of note 2} Conversations between the Church of England and the Methodist Church: A Report to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and the Conference of the Methodist Church, 1963, 24.

^{Page 95 of note 3} Jewel, , Works, III, 103 Google Scholar.

^{Page 95 of note 4} Pilkington, Works, 604.

^{Page 96 of note 1} Sermons, ed. G. E. Corrie, Parker Socy., 1844, 66.

^{Page 96 of note 2} In the Short-Title Catalogue and elsewhere this tract has been attributed to Luther, on grounds that for me remain obscure. Efforts by the British Museum staff to relate it to any of the reformer’s known works have not been fruitful. At one point the writer compares the performance of popish will-works to a man who ‘wolde go about to stoppe the ryver of Thaymes of his course with a banke made of straw.’ (Sig. hvi^r.)

^{Page 96 of note 3} Sigs. av^v, bvi^v.

^{Page 96 of note 4} William Haller, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs and the Elect Nation, 1963.

^{Page 97 of note 1} Donaldson, Scottish Reformation, 183-202; Hall, Basil, ‘Calvin against the Calvinists’, Proceedings of the Huguenot Socy. of London, XX, 1962, 284–301 Google Scholar. The origins and progress of Presbyterianism in England are reviewed in my unpublished London Ph. D. thesis, ‘The Puritan Classical Movement in the Reign of Elizabeth I,’ 1957, and in my forthcoming book, ‘The Elizabethan Puritan Movement.’

^{Page 97 of note 2} When Bishop Cooper of Lincoln explained that the Ordinal and the 36th Article of Religion ‘alloweth not three distinct orders in the mynistery’ but a distinction ‘in government politicall,’ three hundred Leicestershire ministers, virtually the entire clergy of a county subject to the pervasive puritan influence of the Hastings family, professed their willingness to subscribe to both. (John Rylands Library, Rylands English MS 874, f. 39r).

^{Page 97 of note 3} See his disappointed comment on the Elizabethan estimation of the episcopal succession, in the introduction to the Oxford edn. of Hooker’s Works, 1888,I, lix.

^{Page 98 of note 1} Sykes, op. cit., 17-29.

^{Page 98 of note 2} Explicatie gravissima questions, London 1589 (S.T.C. 10511), Thesis LXXIIII, 61.

^{Page 98 of note 3} The controversy, stirred up by Sir Francis Knollys, is documented in P.R.O., S.P. 12/223/23; B.M., MS Lansdowne 61, ff. 78-80, 151-2; ibid., MS Additional 48064, ff. 94-5, 226-38; H.M.C. Report, Hatfield MSS, III, 412-13.

^{Page 98 of note 4} See, for example, the last will and testament of Archbishop Sandys: ‘The state of a small private church, and the form of a learned Christian kingdom, neither would long like nor can at all brook one and the same ecclesiastical government.’ (Sermons, ed. J. Ayre, Parker Socy., 1842, 448). Cf. John Whitgift, Works, ed. J .Ayre, Parker Socy., II, 1852, 265, III, 1853,166, 175-8, 535-6.

^{Page 99 of note 1} Sigs. di^v-ii.

^{Page 99 of note 2} Lloyd, C., Formularies of Faith, Oxford 1825, 109-10Google Scholar.

^{Page 99 of note 3} Burghley to Sandys, 22 August 1573; B.M., MS Lansdowne 17, f. 101.

^{Page 100 of note 1} Jewel to Simler, 2 Nov. 1559; Zurich Letters, ed. H. Robinson, Parker Socy., 1842, 50-1.

^{Page 100 of note 2} Jedin, Hubert, A History of the Council of Trent, tr. Graf, II, 1961, 99–124 Google Scholar.

^{Page 100 of note 3} Wilkins, , Concilia, 1837, IV, 121-6Google Scholar. The decrees are available, if not easily accessible, in translation; The Reform of England by the Decrees of Cardinal Pole, tr. Henry Raikes, Chester 1839. Cf. W. Schenk, Reginald Pole, 1950, 142-4.

^{Page 100 of note 4} Bishop John Ponet of Winchester made a positive suggestion that the title should be altered: Strype, John, Ecclesiastical Memorials, Oxford 1822, II. ii, 141 Google Scholar.

^{Page 101 of note 1} Jewel, Works, IV, 906.

^{Page 101 of note 2} The Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws, ed. Cardwell, E., 1850, 103-4Google Scholar.

^{Page 101 of note 3} Kennedy, W. M., Elizabethan Episcopal Administration, I, Alcuin Club Collections XXVI, 1924, lxxxix Google Scholar.

^{Page 101 of note 4} An undated list of ‘bishops elect’ (May 1559?) shows that Thomas Sampson was first choice for the bishoprics of Hereford and Norwich in turn; that Miles Coverdale was expected to return to Exeter; and that Alexander Nowell was considered for Coventry and Lichfield. (P.R.O., S.P. 12/11/12). Sampson wrote to Peter Martyr on 6 Jan. 1560: ‘Let others be bishops; as to myself, I will either undertake the office of a preacher, or none at all . . .’ (Zurich Letters, 63). Rumours that David Whitehead had first refusal of the archbishopric of Canterbury were not entirely discounted by A. F. Pollard in the D.N.B., and he certainly rejected the mastership of the Savoy. (P.R.O., S.P. 12/19/48).

^{Page 102 of note 1} Thomas Lever to Bullinger, 10 July 1560; Zurich Letters, 84.

^{Page 103 of note 1} Christopher Hill, Economic Problems of the Church from Whitgift to the Long Parliament, 1956, 3-49. These general problems are exemplified from the history of a single diocese in the unpublished London Ph.D. thesis of Mrs P. M. Hembry, ‘The Bishops of Bath and Wells, 1535-1647: a social and economic study,’ 1956. Cf. much illustrative material in Sir John Harington, A briefe viewe of the state of the Church of England (1608), 1653; and F. O. White, Lives of the Elizabethan Bishops, 1898.

^{Page 103 of note 2} Jedin, , op. cit., II, 103-4Google Scholar.

^{Page 103 of note 3} ed. F. J. Furnivall, 1877, 16.

^{Page 104 of note 1} B.M., MS Additional 27632, ff. 47r, 48r.

^{Page 104 of note 2} Burghleyto Archbishop Whitgift, 17 Sept. 1584; B.M..MS Additional 22473, f. 12.

^{Page 104 of note 3} Donaldson, Scottish Reformation, 194-9.

^{Page 104 of note 4} ‘Field, John and Puritanism, Elizabethan,’ Elizabethan Government and Society, ed. Bindoff, Hurstfield and Williams, 1961, 127-62Google Scholar.

^{Page 105 of note 1} A brief exhortation to England, in Works, ed. Laing, D., V, 1864, 518-19Google Scholar.

^{Page 105 of note 2} An harborowe for faithfull and trewe subjectes, Strasbourg 1559 (S.T.C. 1005), Sig. 04^v.

^{Page 105 of note 3} The huntyng of the Romyshe Vuolfe, Zurich 1554 (S.T.C. 24356), Sig. Fi^v.

^{Page 106 of note 1} B.M., MS Additional 48066, ff. 2-15.

^{Page 106 of note 2} William Stoughton, An assertion for true and Christian Church-policie, Middelburg 1604 (S.T.C. 23318), epistle, 13-14. For Stoughton, see my Letters of Thomas Wood, Puritan, 1566-1577, BIHR Special Supplement no. 5, 1960, x.

^{Page 107 of note 1} Bucer, , De Regno Christi, II, xii Google Scholar; ed. Wendel, Opera Latina, XV, 1955, 118.

^{Page 108 of note 1} Hooper, Later Writings, ed. C. Nevinson, Parker Socy., 1852, 132, xix.

^{Page 108 of note 2} ed. Cattley, VI, 610.

^{Page 108 of note 3} Robert Beale, the learned clerk of the Privy Council, even contrived to relate the clandestine classes and synods of the Presbyterians to these ancient institutions: ‘And further, if men will without partiallitie looke into the first foundacions in the auncient cannons for the Ruralle Deanyries, what were they but Classes? and the bishopes visitacions but colloquies and conferences? to see howe the churches had profitted and the people bin taught? . . . Wherefore, although the tearmes be somewhat straunge, yet the matter is good and auncient. . .’ (B.M., MS Additional 48046, f. 135^v.)

^{Page 108 of note 4} The rural deanery was a life tenure in the diocese of Norwich, where their continuance was ‘perpetual, and their admission more solemn than elsewhere,’ and by collation; and in the diocese of Chester, where deaneries were sometimes granted en bloc by patent, to be held with the office of commissary. ( Dansey, William, Horæ Decanica Rurales, 1835, I, 146-7, 133-4Google Scholar; II, 379-84; A. Hamilton Thompson, Diocesan Organisation in the Middle Ages: Archdeacons and Rural Deans, Raleigh Lecture 1943, 39-41.)

^{Page 108 of note 5} In the time of Bishop Cox (1559-81), as earlier in the sixteenth century, rural deans were nominated in the diocese of Ely as part of the business of the annual synods, held at or near Whitsun. (Cambridge University Library, Ely Diocesan Records, B2/1, 7).

^{Page 109 of note 1} In Bury St Edmunds on 3 Febr. 1596, one George Atherston of Bury, rural dean, affirmed on oath before a notary that a certain induction had taken place on 2 June 1582. (Seckford Library, Woodbridge, MS V. B. Redstone 3.1, p. 24). There is no clergyman of Atherston’s names in any clergy-list for the diocese of Norwich.

^{Page 109 of note 2} Dansey, , op. cit., II, 101-8, 120-7Google Scholar; A. Hamilton Thompson, op. cit., 34-44, and The English Clergy and their Organisation in the Later Middle Ages, 1947, 63-70; Gibson, Edmund, Codex Juris Ecclesiastici Anglicani, Oxford 1761, II, 973 Google Scholar; Richard Burn, Ecclesiastical Law, 1797, II, 123.

^{Page 109 of note 3} Strype, John, Life of Whitgift, Oxford 1822, III, 445-52Google Scholar.

^{Page 109 of note 4} Opera Latina, XV, 129.

^{Page 109 of note 5} The Reformation of the Ecclesiastical Laws, 100-1.

^{Page 110 of note 1} P.R.O., S.P. 12/36/41; printed, Dixon, R. W., History of the Church of England, VI, 1902, 80 (77n.)Google Scholar.

^{Page 110 of note 2} Synodalia, ed. E. Cardwell, 1842,I,117. Burn remarks (op. cit., II, 125) that this was ‘rather a permission, than a positive command, for the continuance of that office.’

^{Page 110 of note 3} Simonds D’Ewes, The Journals of all the Parliaments during the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, 1682, 193. Cf. the interest taken in the ancient practice of rural deans by William Harrison: ‘Unto these deanerie churches also the cleargie in old time of the same deanrie wer appointed to repaire at sundrie seasons, there to receive wholesome ordinances, and to consult upon the necessarie affaires of the whole jurisdiction, if necessitie so required: and some image hereof is yet to be seene in the north partes.’ (Description of England, 15-16.)

^{Page 110 of note 4} J. E. Neale, Elizabeth I and her Parliaments, 1559-1581, 1953, 194-7.

^{Page 111 of note 1} Dansey, , op. cit., II, 187 Google Scholar.

^{Page 111 of note 2} A full account of the prophesyings will be found in my doctoral thesis, op. cit. ,173-214; and in my forthcoming ‘Elizabethan Puritan Movement.’

^{Page 111 of note 3} John Ireton to Anthony Gilby, May 1578; Cambridge University Library, MS Mm. 1.43, p. 452.

^{Page 112 of note 1} The order for the prophesying at Bedford, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2007, ff. 106-7; similar to the Hertfordshire order, ibid., ff. 108-9, printed, S. E. Lehmberg, ‘Archbishop Grindal and the Prophesyings,’ Historical Magatine of the Protestant Episcopal Church, XXXIV, 1965, 93-7; and from another copy by Strype, Annals, Oxford 1824, II. i, 473-7; and to the ‘Rules and orders agreed unto by the mynysters in Buckinghamshyre tochynge the exercyse of theym selves together in the interpretation of the scriptures,’ Cambridge University Library, MS Ff. 5.14, no. 8, f. 85; these all sanctioned by Bishop Cooper of Lincoln. Cf. the commission for the holding of an exercise granted to the preachers of Bury St Edmunds by Bishop Parkhurst, Cambridge University Library, MS Ee.11.34, f. 106; the ‘order of Northampton,’ P.R.O., S.P. 12/78/38, often printed; and the Norwich order of 1575, ‘sede vacante,’ Dr Williams’s Library, MS Morrice B I, pp. 268-70, printed, J. Browne, History of Congregationalism in Norfolk and Suffolk, 1877, 18-20. Apart from these documents, most of what is known of the history and conduct of the prophesyings is contained in a collection of reports from fifteen bishops, and three archdeacons of the diocese of London, Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003; printed, Lehmberg, loc. cit., 87-145.

^{Page 112 of note 2} When the prophesyings were put down in 1577, Thomas Wood described this as ‘not only a great reioysing to all God’s enemies, but such a service to Sathan as unles the whole religion shold be overthrowen a greater could not be done.’ (Letters of Thomas Wood, 22.)

^{Page 113 of note 1} There are some references in the register of Bishop Cooper of Lincoln. (Lincoln Episcopal Records in the Time of Thomas Cooper, ed. C. W. Foster, Lincoln Record Socy., II, 1912,114.)

^{Page 113 of note 2} For Coventry and Essex, evidence in Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003, ff. 5,12-13; for Norwich, evidence in a letter in P.R.O., S.P. 15/12/27.

^{Page 113 of note 3} Much of the documentation for this episode, and for the subsequent troubles of Archbishop Grindal, is in The Remains of Archbishop Grindal, ed. W. Nicholson, Parker Socy., 1843, 372-403. The queen’s letter to Whitgift, as bishop of Worcester, ordering the suppression of the exercises, is in Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003, ff. 40-1, printed, Lehmberg, loc. cit., 142-3.

^{Page 113 of note 4} The evidence is gathered in my doctoral thesis, op. cit., 261-79.

^{Page 113 of note 5} Peck, Francis, Desiderata Curiosa, 1732,I, iii, 29 Google Scholar; iv, 33; Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, MS 197/103, pp. 175-84; H.M.C., 14th Report, Appendix IV, Kenyon MSS., 15.

^{Page 113 of note 6} Marchant, R. A., The Puritans and the Church Courts in the Diocese of York, 1560-1642, 1960, 29-39, 115, 134-5, 169Google Scholar; J. A. Newton, ‘Puritanism in the Diocese of York, Excluding Nottinghamshire, 1604-1640,’ unpublished London Ph.D. thesis, 1956, 218-38.

^{Page 114 of note 1} The exercises in the diocese of Lincoln are described in the report of a visitation made to Bishop Neile in 1614. (Original in Muniment Room of the dean and chapter of Lincoln Cathedral, MS 4/3/43; Ralph Thoresby’s transcript in John Strype’s papers, Cambridge University Library, MS Baumgartner 8, double ff. 199-202; whence copied by William Cole, B.M., MS Additional 5853, ff. 166^v-8). Dr Mark C. Curtis has recently referred to this document in his article ‘The Alienated Intellectuals of Early Stuart England,’ Past and Present, XXIII, 1962, reprinted, Crisis in Europe, 1560-1660, ed. T. Aston, 1965, 310. But pace Dr Curtis, the seventy ‘lecturers’ who maintained these exercises were mostly beneficed clergy, and not ‘lecturers’ in the professional sense.

^{Page 114 of note 2} The Registrum Vagum of Anthony Harison, I, Norfolk Record Socy. XXII, 1963, 96-103.

^{Page 114 of note 3} Macgregor, Janet G., The Scottish Presbyterian Polity, 1926, 53, 115-16Google Scholar; B. J. Kidd, Documents Illustrative of the Continental Reformation, 1911, 592; Donaldson, Scottish Reformation, 204-8.

^{Page 115 of note 1} Puritan Manifestoes, ed. W. H. Frere and C. E. Douglas, repr. 1954, 107-8; The Seconde Parte of a Register, ed. A. Peel, 1915, II, 217.

^{Page 115 of note 2} See my thesis, op. cit., and my forthcoming ‘Elizabethan Puritan Movement.’

^{Page 115 of note 3} A collection of speeches made by Sir Edward Dering . . . in matter of religion, 1642, 72.

^{Page 115 of note 4} Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2007, f. 109.

^{Page 115 of note 5} Ibid., MS 2003, ff. 29-30, 4, 8.

^{Page 116 of note 1} Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003, passim.

^{Page 116 of note 2} Unlike the Norwich prophesying of 1575 (Browne, op. cit., 18-20) and the Dedham conference of 1582-9, led by ‘exiles’ from Norwich, (the minutes and other papers printed, The Presbyterian Movement in the Reign of Queen Elisabeth, ed. R. G. Usher, Camden Socy, 3rd ser. VIII, 1905), which were voluntary, and where the office of moderator circulated.

^{Page 116 of note 3} Lincoln Episcopal Records, 114.

^{Page 116 of note 4} Ibid.

^{Page 116 of note 5} Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003.

^{Page 116 of note 6} Cambridge University Library, MS Ee. 11.34, f. 106.

^{Page 117 of note 1} Collated to a life-tenure of the office by patent, and empowered to impose acts of penance. ( Dansey, , op. cit., I,146-7Google Scholar; J. F. Williams, ‘Ecclesiastical Discipline at South Creake in 1317,’ Norfolk Archaeology, ,XXIII, 1929, 305-7).

^{Page 117 of note 2} H.M.C. Report, Hatfield MSS., II, 195-8; Strype, Annals, II. ii, 695-701.

^{Page 118 of note 1} Of particular importance is a schedule of articles of 1581, which distil the reforms pursued by the Puritans in the House of Commons with some consistency between 1576 and 1584, and which were referred by Sir Walter Mildmay and Sir Francis Walsingham to the queen, and by the queen to the attention of the bishops. (Neale, op. cit., 349-53, 398-406; copy of the articles bearing the bishops’, and mostly Whitgift’s, comments, Inner Temple Library, MS Petyt 538/54, ff. 247-62; printed by Strype, Whitgift, III, 47-63, from B.M., MS Lansdowne 30, ff. 203-10.) There is also a project drafted for the eye of Parliament which, like the 1581 articles, provides the bishop with six learned preachers, appointed by the justices of the peace, ‘his six annexed,’ to assist him in most of his functions, including ordination. (P.R.O., S.P. 12/282/71.) Cf. Thomas Norton’s ‘Devices,’ ‘A note of such thinges as are mete to be considered of, for the stay of the present corruption in religion,’ drawn up in 1581, apparently at the instigation of Walsingham and perhaps other councillors. (B.M., MS Additional 48023, ff. 41^v-58^v.) Cf. also Thomas Lever’s ‘notes for some reformation of the ministry and ministers’ (Inner Temple Library, MS Petyt 538/38, ff. 71-4) which may have prompted a modest experiment on similar lines undertaken by Bishop Overton of Coventry and Lichfield in 1584. ( Kennedy, , Elizabethan Episcopal Administration, III, 161-74Google Scholar; Seconde Parte of a Register, I, 260-7.)

^{Page 118 of note 2} Cardwell, Conferences, 201-2.

^{Page 119 of note 1} Speeches, 139.

^{Page 119 of note 2} B.M., MS Additional 29546, ff. 56^v-7^v.

^{Page 119 of note 3} Erasmus, tr. William Burton, Seven dialogues both pttbie and profitable, 1606 (S.T.C. 10457), Sig. A2^v.

^{Page 120 of note 1} These examples drawn from Victoria County History of Derbyshire, II, 21-2; Records of the Old Archdeaconry of St Alban’s, ed. H. R. Wilton Hall, St Alban’s & Herts. Architectural and Archaeological Socy., 1908, 46-7; Herts. Record Office, Records of the Archdeaconry of St Albans, Act Book, 1582-6, ASA 7/11, f. 18^v.

^{Page 120 of note 2} The development of ‘exercises’ in the sense of tasks for the unlearned clergy is reconstructed in my thesis, op. cit., 244-60. For Whitgift’s orders of 1585 ‘for the increase of learning in the unlearned sort of ministers,’ see Records of the Old Archdeaconry of St Alban’s, 45, 49-50; for the similar orders promulgated from Convocation in 1586/7, Lambeth Palace Library, Whitgift’s Register, I, f. 131^r, whence printed, Strype, Whitgift, III, 194-6.

^{Page 120 of note 3} Guildhall Library, MS 9537/6 (Liber visitationis, 1586), ff. 173-83.

^{Page 121 of note 1} Erasmus, tr. Burton, Seven dialogues, Sig. A2.

^{Page 121 of note 2} Dr Williams’s Library, MS Morrice L, no. V, pp. 8–11.Google Scholar

^{Page 121 of note 3} Knollys to Burghley, 4 Aug. 1589; B.M., MS Lansdowne 61, f. 151^v.

^{Page 121 of note 4} Shaw, , op. cit., I, 32 Google Scholar; Dering, Speeches, 139.

^{Page 121 of note 5} ‘of the Churche’ erased.

^{Page 122 of note 1} B.M., MS Additional 48039, ff. 49^v, 67^v.

^{Page 122 of note 2} Letters of Thomas Wood, 18; Lambeth Palace Library, MS 2003, ff. 5, 17.

^{Page 122 of note 3} H.M.C. Report, Hatfield MSS., II, 196,198. For the politics underlying this project, see my thesis, op. cit., 882-5.

^{Page 122 of note 4} Speeches, 69-70.

^{Page 123 of note 1} For example, Turner, The huntying of the Romyshe Vuolfe, Sig. Fii. The anonymous ‘plot for reformation’ referred to above contains elaborate plans for the redeployment of the bishops’ revenues. (B.M., MS Additional 48066, ff. 14-15^r.) For a very early calculation of the same kind, see Henry Brinklow’s Complaynt of Roderyck Mors, Early English Text Socy., extra ser. XXII, 1874, 50-3.

^{Page 123 of note 2} Shaw, , op. cit., I, 36 Google Scholar.

^{Page 123 of note 3} Erasmus, tr. Burton, Seven dialogues, Sig. A2.

^{Page 124 of note 1} Hill, op. cit., 3-13. These concluding remarks owe much to Mr Christopher Hill’s fertile suggestions.