Notes to Chapter 1conspiracy charges and claimed he had not written but merely copied the poem (Masson,
V, 163–4).
2 For Vlacq’s pirated editions see chapter 9, note 133. This combined (duodecimo) edi-
tion has the title Joannis Miltoni Defensio Secunda Pro Populo Anglicano;... Accessit Alexandri
Mori Ecclesiastae, Sacrarumque litterarum Professoris Fides Publica, Contra calumnias Joannis
Miltoni Scurrae (The Hague, 1654). A note to the reader at the end of the book explains
why it is incomplete and promises to publish the rest when available. I quote from the
selections, including the prefaces by George Crantz and Vlacq, included in CPW IV.2,
1,086–128, trans. Paul Blackford.
3 He also quotes Salmasius on the Bontia affair in terms that invite an unintended mean-
ing, as Milton gleefully pointed out: “If More erred at all in this respect [had an affair
with Bontia] I am a pander and my wife is a bawd” (CPW IV.2, 1,087, 803).
4 See chapter 9, p. 292. More quotes in their entirety Nieupoort’s two letters to him
reporting his unsuccessful efforts to persuade Milton that, since he erred in naming
More the author of Clamor, he should stop publication of the Defensio Secunda.
5 Page 1,103. See chapter 7, pp. 226–7.
6 See chapter 4, p. 108.
7 Alexandri Mori... Supplementum Fidei Publicae, Contra Calumnias Joannis Miltoni (The
Hague, 1655).
8 The translation of this passage in CM IX, 229 makes better sense of the Latin than that
in CPW: “That More may not upbraid me with having taken another two years to put
him to the rout, I have had by me this my defence, now two months; and such was the
longing desire with which I expected this supplement to the Public Faith, that the time
seemed an age to me.”
9 Joannis Miltoni Angli Pro Se Defensio Contra Alexandrum Morum Ecclesiasten, Libelli famosi,
cui titulus, Regii sanguinis clamor ad coelum adversus Parricidas Anglicanos, authorem recté dic-
tum (London, 1655).
10 He was the son of a noted theologian in Geneva, Frederick Spanheim, who had long
been an enemy to More and Salmasius.
11 CPW IV.2, 873–4. Milton’s excuse is that he received the letter, inexplicably, almost
three months late, and then delayed almost another three months in answering
it. Spanheim’s letter is lost but is quoted in the Pro Se Defensio. Milton also refers
to other Genevans – Jean Louis Calandrin and the Turretini brothers – who may
have provided some information; he proposes that subsequent correspondence be-
tween himself and Spanheim be sent through the Turretinis, one of whom is in
England.
12 Introduction, CPW IV.2, 689–90, 722, n. 55. Milton Latinizes the woman’s name as
Claudia Pelletta.
13 CPW IV.2, 757, n. 140.
14 LR III, 426. Dury denies that he informed More that Milton meant to attack him in the
Defensio Secunda but acknowledges that Hotton might have passed on that news. Several
of Dury’s letters contain greetings for Milton. For Dury’s reports about denials of More’s
authorship, see chapter 9, pp. 300–1.
15 LR III, 442. An unsigned letter to Hartlib from Leyden suggests that Milton write to
Geneva and to Salmasius’s widow for further information about More.
16 ME I, 34–5. See chapter 9, pp. 284–5. Another Leyden correspondent was probably
Notes to Chapter 10