Notes to Chapter 1a visit from John Dury on November 18 “in a really bad storm, so as to be so much the
more secret and unrecognized,” who brought a report from Milton that Whitelocke
was perturbed about those reports, but Dury later told him (December 6) that
Whitelocke was disregarding those unproved assertions (Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard,
82, 86, 91, 102).
143 Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard, 93. The affair did not move: on November 26 Whitelocke
reported to parliament, which referred the matter back to the Council of State, which
referred it again to committee.
144 Ibid., 97.
145 CPW IV.2, 835–6. Mylius’s answer (January 1) effusively expresses his gratitude, his
distress at hearing “that you suffer from headache and inflammation of the eyes,” and
his prayer to God to restore and preserve Milton “for the good of your country” (837).
146 Mylius alludes to earlier meetings in a letter to a friend on January 2: “Milton... is
among the friends whom I see from time to time, but not as much as I wish because he
does not always come by and because of bad health is often away” (Miller, Oldenburg
Safeguard, 126–7). This may be Mylius claiming more than he has in fact accom-
plished, or he may be referring to casual encounters rather than private visits. Still,
Milton’s use of Mylius’s first name suggests some growth in intimacy.
147 Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard, 128.
148 CPW V.2, 558. Milton had in fact produced a version of this letter by May 22, but it
was only signed in January. He also produced another letter to the Grand Duke,
signed January 20, which exists only in drafts. See Miller, “Another Milton State Paper
Recovered,” English Language Notes 25 (1987), 30–1.
149 CPW V.2, 570–1. See p. 253.
150 CPW V.2, 560–9; Leo Miller, John Milton’s Writings in the Anglo-Dutch Negotiations,
1651–1654 (Pittsburgh, 1992), 94–111. On January 23, 1652 the council ordered
Milton to supply an English translation of the ambassadors’ protest over the seizures.
He also wrote the council’s reply (January 29), claiming to be dealing expeditiously
with the various claims and to have suspended the seizures. Milton probably translated
all the correspondence relating to these matters, and evidently dealt directly with at
least one member of the Dutch embassy; Mylius reported on January 20 that as he was
leaving “one of the Dutch came to him” (Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard, 146).
151 Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard, 130–1.
152 Ibid., 134–5.
153 The dispute concerned the right to collect tolls on the Weser river, which Oldenburg
claimed and Bremen challenged; the right was guaranteed to Oldenburg in the Treaty
of Westphalia. Milton thought the matter could be quickly resolved if Mylius would
appeal directly to friendly council members. He did so, but protested bitterly to Milton
in a letter of January 21 about all the “sandbanks and rocks” in his path (CPW V.2,
841–3).
154 Miller, Oldenburg Safeguard, 171–2.
155 Ibid., 179–80.
156 CPW IV.2, 846–7. His explanation to Whitelocke downplays the extent of his asso-
ciation and collaboration with Mylius: “The Agent himself was with me this morning
and desird earnestly to see the Copy, which because it was a thing granted to him by
the Councell at his request, I thought it could be no tresspass to lett him see, and it
Notes to Chapter 8