Notes to Chapter 154 For Milton’s relation to Lily and other grammar texts, see J. Milton French, “Introduc-
tion,” CPW VIII, 32–83; and French, “Some Notes on Milton’s Acceidence Commenc’t
Grammar,” Journal of English and Germanic Philology 60 (1961), 641–50. For Milton’s
relation to the Ramist grammars see Gordon Campbell, “Milton’s Accidence Commenc’t
Grammar,” MQ 10 (1976), 39–48.
55 See, for example, Petrus Ramus, Grammatica (Paris, 1559), and the English Ramist
grammars that preceded Milton’s: Paul Greaves, Grammatica Anglicana (Cambridge, 1594);
Thomas Granger, Syntagma Grammaticum (London, 1616); and Ben Jonson, The English
Grammar, in Works, 2 vols (London, 1640).
56 While Ramus and the Ramist grammarians claimed these were not properly parts of a
grammar book they did discuss them; Milton excluded the topics of letters, syllables,
spelling, pronunciation, and versification.
57 See Wyman Herendeen, “Milton’s Accidence Commenc’t Grammar and the Deconstruction
of ‘Grammatical Tyranny’,” in Paul Stanwood, ed., Of Poetry and Politics (Binghamton,
NY, 1995), 295–312.
58 Some theological comments, the preface, and an appended “Life” of Ramus were most
likely added just before publication. See chapter 14, pp. 497–8.
59 Milton used the Dialecticae libri duo (Basel, 1572) of Ramus (Pierre de la Ramée) along
with Downame’s Commentarii in P. Rami... Dialecticam (Frankfurt, 1601). He cites
definitions from Ramus, often in italics; he abridges Downame’s very lengthy com-
mentary, and draws about half of his sample logical exercise almost verbatim from
Downame (Bk 1, ch. 3, 111–13). But he adds his own third example. See Walter J.
Ong, “Introduction,” CPW VIII, 144–205; and Ong, Ramus, Method, and the Decay of
Dialogue (Cambridge, Mass., 1958).
60 Aristotelian rhetoric involved five parts: invention, disposition, ornament, pronuncia-
tion, and memory; the first two overlap in some ways with logic, but propose some-
what different ways of inventing and organizing arguments. Ramus assigned these first
two parts to logic, giving only ornament to rhetoric, on the assumption that the same
logical processes underpin all forms of knowledge.
61 Either Milton was wrong about the date of her death (it was December 6) or his date
indicates when he composed the sonnet.
62 The reference to George Thomason occurs in Milton’s 1647 letter to Carlo Dati (CPW
II, 765). The inscribed tracts are Of Reformation, The Reason of Church-Government, An
Apology, and Areopagitica.
63 R. L. Ramsay, “Morality Themes in Milton’s Poetry,” Studies in Philology 15 (1918),
- The Everyman analogue is closest in the first draft of the poem in TM.
64 LR II, 164. The date of the will is wrongly transcribed as the “thirtieth of December.”
On February 27, 1651 Powell’s widow took oath that her husband “died near the first
day of January [1647]... at the house of Mr. John Milton, situate in Barbican, Lon-
don” (see Parker, II, 931).
65 The will stipulated that his wife was to be executor if his son refused, as in fact he did,
evidently to clear the way for Anne Powell to claim Wheatley. It also asked the son to
pay from the estate the jointure to his wife, for which he had given a bond of £2,000
but had never been able and still was not able to pay, and also to satisfy his debts and
provide portions for his other unmarried children. See notes 46 and 47.
66 A jury in Oxfordshire was charged to determine what properties might be seized to
Notes to Chapter 7