Sir George Grey's mistake in Oliver Cromwell: protectorate politics in a colonial collection.
More than a century later, the documents have been little remarked, granted only occasional mention in accounts of the wider Grey collection and in the historiography of the English Revolution of 1640-60. The one occasion on which they received concerted attention in published scholarship came in 1892, when an article entitled 'Some Correspondence of Thurloe and Meadowe' appeared in the 'Notes and Documents' section of the English Historical Review. The author was the legal scholar and historian Edward Jenks, directed to the manuscripts by Grey during a visit to Auckland. (3) In the article, Jenks provided a four-page introduction to a series of transcriptions of the letters penned by an unnamed 'gentleman engaged in the library', along with the Latin text of the treaty manuscript. (4)
Overseas scholars did not beat a path to Auckland library's door as Grey hoped. Jenks's visit helped save others the trouble, ironically. In a letter to Edward Shillington, the first librarian, Jenks anticipated forwarding copies of the transcriptions to Samuel Rawson Gardiner, the great Victorian historian of the English Civil War. (5) Gardiner's work did not make use of the information, though Jenks's article was cited in C. H. Firths continuation of Gardiner's history of the Protectorate. (6) Since then, the source of sporadic references to the documents in early modern scholarship has invariably been Jenks's article, which, now digitised, has made the text of the letters accessible at desktops around the world. (7) It is another irony, however, that more people probably knew of the Cromwell papers before they entered Auckland Free Library in 1887 as part of Greys gift. Grey had marked his return for a second term as New Zealand governor (1861-68; first term, 1845-53) by buying Kawau Island, off the Auckland coast, where he created a palatial new home and a library to replace the collection he had donated to what is now the National Library of South Africa, where he had also been governor (1854-61). Over following decades, countless guests and Auckland day-trippers visited Grey's island home, where the Cromwell papers were made a showpiece. Reports in the press began spreading news to the wider New Zealand public of the presence at Kawau of a 'secret treaty' and letters bearing the handwriting of Cromwell and John Milton, with an overseas audience sharing the secret through accounts such as the one in James Anthony Froudes bestselling Oceana. (8)
Together, Sir George and reports based on his appraisal created an aura around the documents as being 'Cromwellian manuscripts of almost incalculable value'. (9) Jenks applied a necessary if excessive deflationary note in remarking that 'a short account of them may be of some little interest, though they do not contain anything of special value'. (10) The Cromwell papers are of more interest than Jenks allowed, however, not only because of what they say about Protectorate foreign policy but because part of their story is about his own age, about the Victorian cult of Cromwell, Grey's colonial ambitions, and the politics and pitfalls of possessing and popularising historical texts.
The present article addresses these themes but is first and foremost a ground-clearing foray into the archive, comparing the claims made for Greys collection against the historical and physical evidence, to gain a clearer picture of the Cromwell papers, specifically the treaty document (see Figure 1). The 'treaty', an agreement between the English and Dutch governments concerning the Hanse cities of Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburg, is 'secret' in that it does not appear in the authoritative index of British treaties nor in earlier lists, but it was wrongly described and dated by Grey, and has continued to be misdescribed ever since. (11) In The World's Mistake in Oliver Cromwell, the republican Slingsby Bethel, a merchant in Hanseatic Hamburg in Cromwell's time, blamed 'idolatry' towards the Protector's memory as the main source of error about Cromwellian foreign policy. Greys mistake was not due solely to 'idolizing Oliver', but 'adoring the remembrance of Cromwell', as Bethel put it, contributed to the zeal with which Grey publicised his mistaken apprehension of his prized possessions. (12) The approach of the present account is critical but also conscious that Grey gained public attention for historical texts in ways likely to make a modern scholar uncertain whether to see red or be green with envy.
The present article revisits and reassesses the manuscripts in the twin contexts of a crucial period in early modern history and a formative period in New Zealand history. The following section provides an initial overview of the Cromwell papers and gives an account of how they were described by Grey, the press, and others in the nineteenth century. The next section compares the popular claims with the physical and historical evidence, and shows that the treaty document has been misdated for more than a century, having been signed not in 1659, but in 1654, under Oliver Cromwell and not his son. A final section then traces the history of the Hanse agreement in its correct context, a context that allows further connections to be explored between seventeenth-century and nineteenth-century ideas of empire.
I. The Cromwell Papers Described and Misdescribed
Greys Cromwell papers form part of the Sir George Grey Special Collections: Ta Hori Kerei--Nga kohinga taonga whakahirahira. They are held at Auckland Central City Library, with call numbers from GMS 149 to GMS 164 in the Grey Manuscripts series. The individual sheets are bound in a single volume with the binder's title 'Thurloe papers'. The title is a reference to one of the correspondents involved, Cromwell's Secretary of State and intelligence chief John Thurloe, and to the vast collection of correspondence in England known as the Thurloe state papers, collected by Thurloe and now held in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. (13) Since Thomas Birch's publication of the collection in 1742, they have been the pre-eminent source for the history of the Protectorate. (14) The group of letters in the Cromwell collection at Auckland is effectively a small, detached part of the Thurloe papers, though the collection does not only include correspondence and Grey himself preferred to associate it more explicitly with Cromwell. (15)
The catalogue, at the time of writing, described the contents as 'correspondence and papers, mainly holographs relating to the state of affairs of Holland, Denmark and Sweden', along with an 'original treaty concluded by Richard Cromwell', being an 'Agreement 20 July 1659 between the Commonwealth and the United Provinces that the Hanseatic Towns be included in their treaty of friendship' (GMS 149). (16) There is also a Latin copy and a translation of the agreement, and two copies of an addendum concerning naval restrictions in the Baltic, written in French (GMS 149 (2-4)). The correspondence in the volume (GMS 150-163) consists of fourteen letters. Four are from Thurloe to the Protectorate's agents in the Baltic; two each to Philip Meadows (27 November; 18 December 1657) and William Jephson (18 December 1657; 26 March 1658). The other ten letters are from Meadows to Thurloe, all in 1658 (21 April; 28 April; 31 May; 8 June; 15 June; 22 June; 6 July; 12 July; 16 August). (17) Finally, there is a paper dated 19 May 1658 in French relating to a dispute between the Elector Palatine and ambassadors of the Elector of Bavaria (GMS 164).
The catalogue description arose mainly from information at the time of Grey's donation. An earlier, more selective and effusive description was provided by Grey himself in his address at the Theatre Royal in 1883, which was reported in full by the New Zealand Herald, reprinted in other newspapers, as was usual, and also sold as a booklet. (18) The speech captures the core of Greys popularising project:
It would be a proud thing for you to be able to say one portion of a period of English history can only be written in the city of Auckland ... the latter part of the history of the reign of Cromwell, and of the short period during which his son ruled and influenced the English nation ... [Y]ou will have what is a rare thing indeed out of England, the actual treaty concluded by Richard Cromwell with the Hanseatic towns, of which no record exists, because apparently it was stolen or carried away immediately before the restoration of Charles II. But there you will see the signatures of Lyle, of Strickland, of Montague, indeed of the whole of the great council of England at that time, and the signatures of the foreign ambassadors. This was a confirmation of a treaty which, I dare say, you have all heard of, in which Cromwell guaranteed to assist all the Protestant Powers, and the Hanseatic towns in particular, and it is signed by the Council as if Richard Cromwell was the sole ruler of England, although he was so soon to abdicate that position. (19)
The Auckland Star, which also reported the speech, offered a different version of one line, having Grey say the agreement was 'a treaty by Cromwell guaranteeing the security of the Protestant Powers, and particularly of the -Hanseatic towns, and Richard Cromwell renewed it during his brief tenure'. (20)
It will be argued that both versions were factually in error, though Grey's audience was unaware and unconcerned, cheering as he described another highlight, one of the letters from Meadows to Thurloe:
To take in one's hands a letter addressed to Cromwell, by his ambassador to Sweden, held by Cromwell in his hands, looked over by his eyes, perhaps with pleasure, and to read the message of a foreign sovereign to him, so that one seems absolutely to see the man himself, and to read the words he read to this effect, "The King of Sweden said to me that he wondered that so great and experienced a prince, who had achieved such great actions, although accompanied by manifold dangers, should at last hesitate to do that in which consisted his most visible security." This the King of Sweden said in reference to assuming the title of King.... Cromwell had this temptation before him, and the great-souled man took no notice of it, assumed no title, did nothing, and let the flattering words pass, unheeded by him. (Cheers.) I think that no man can hold the documents of that man in his hand, and can look at them without being greatly moved to think that he has, as it were, been present almost at such a scene as I have described. (21)
It was not the first time Grey had described such a scene to popular effect. The same mixture of enthusiasm and hyperbole had marked newspaper accounts of the Cromwell papers drawing on his views, dating back to 1874. By that time, Grey had already been in possession of the manuscripts for twenty years or more. In a letter to the American historian James K. Hosmer, Grey recalled:
I had the manuscripts in my possession for several years, in fact for 13 or 14 years in a large roll of papers which had been given to me, without having had time to search through the roll to ascertain what it contained. Sometime after I had discovered their value I returned to England, about the year 1868 or 1869. (22)
This suggests a date before 1856, possibly the brief period Grey spent in England in 1853-54 between his New Zealand and South African postings. Unfortunately, Grey does not say who gave him the papers, and their journey in the previous two hundred years is likewise obscure.
The Cromwell papers began their emergence from obscurity in an article in the Otago Daily Times in November 1874, in which an Auckland correspondent relayed an account by a similarly nameless friend who had visited Sir George in retreat on Kawau and was guided around his library. (23)
The report declares the Protectorate manuscripts to be 'of great historical value', doubly so because the 'Secret Treaty between Cromwell and the Hanseatic League and other Protestant powers' is 'in the handwriting of John Milton'. It recounts the episode of the king of Sweden's advice, and claims that some of the letters from Thurloe have corrections in Cromwell's hand:
In one instance, complaining of the treatment from a foreign power as being "barely civil", old Oliver has dashed his pen through the milk and water phrase of his Secretary, and substituted for it "hardly borne". In others he has, with a bold dash, erased whole paragraphs of compliment or useless verbiage.
The report conjured an image of Grey the bookish gentleman in quiet retreat but also served as political public relations, signing off with the comment: 'If he go into Parliament, as he most likely will, Sir George Grey would at once be a power, and have at his back a following, intelligent and united.' (24) Grey had recently protested against abolition of the devolved provincial government system he helped create. Soon afterwards he was nominated and elected for Auckland City West-his acceptance speech rued Auckland's lack of a 'great public library'-and in 1877, he became New Zealand premier for two turbulent years before resigning, though he continued as an MP until 1890. (25)
It seems unlikely that Grey was unaware of the intentions of his visitor in 1874, who must have been taking notes to convey in detail what he saw and heard. James Belich's comment that Grey was a master of propaganda with an eye on his place in history may be more apt for the New Zealand wars than book collecting, but Grey was acutely sensitive to what appeared in the press and attuned to opportunities for publicity. (26) A bookish air was a marketable attribute not least when coupled with activist attachment to Cromwell, whose nineteenth-century reputation as Gods Englishman had been fostered by Lord Macaulay and sent soaring from the 1840s by Thomas Carlyle through books such as On Heroes and the hugely influential Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell. (27) Grey owned both works and counted the 'Sage of Chelsea' as a friend and a political ally, with letters from Carlyle in the Auckland collection revealing his support for Greys bid to enter the British Parliament in 1870. (28) However, the Victorian elevation of Cromwell and fellow parliamentarians like Milton by Carlyle and others could be of more general service to anyone seeking to bask in their reflected glory. Oliver's image as patriotic hero, man of God and people, and model of moral resolution connected with nineteenth-century issues from electoral franchise to religious revival and toleration, and importantly with the relationship of state and empire, of which he 'was seen as the precursor or originator'. (29) The 'cult of Cromwell' was probably as influential in nineteenth-century New Zealand as anywhere outside England, with towns christened Cromwell and Milton, school textbooks treating Cromwell as a 'demi-god' (complained Bishop Patrick Moran), and the Protector a frequent reference-point in politics. (30) Grey was compared and contrasted with Cromwell, as was his predecessor as governor, Robert Fitzroy, along with others including the Maori leader Te Waharoa. (31) When the MP Te Wheoro referred to Cromwell to make a political point he was praised (or patronised) for speaking 'with so much study and reading displayed'. (32)
Penguin, 2002), chaps 8-11; Blair Worden, 'The Victorians and Oliver Cromwell', in History, Religion, and Culture: British Intellectual History 1750-1950, eds Stefan Collini, Richard Whatmore, and Brian Young (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), pp. 112-35; Ivan Roots, 'Carlyle's Cromwell', in Images of Oliver Cromwell: Essaysjor and by Roger Howell, ed. R. C. Richardson (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1993), pp. 74-95; J. C. Davis, Oliver Cromwell (London: Arnold, 2001), pp. 53-59; J. P D. Dunbabin, 'Oliver Cromwell's Popular Image in Nineteenth-Century England', in Britain and the Netherlands, 5: Some Political Mythologies, eds J. S. Bromley and E. H. Kossmann (The Hague: Springer, 1975), pp. 141-63.
A thorough account of the relationship of Grey to Cromwell would further distinguish detailed affinities from the general benefit of associating with the 'consensual Cromwellianism' of the later nineteenth century by which Grey could venerate both Cromwell and the Queen. (33) But it can be said that Grey believed in the cause of the Carlylean Cromwell, perceived as selfless devotion to the cause of the English people, driving out aristocratic and moribund ways and with a vision of empire in which a Protestant league could transmute into the 'great Anglo-Saxon federation' of self-governing, English-speaking polities favoured by Grey, 'the Grand Old Man of Greater England'. (34) It was a cause in which Grey counted the patriotic and civilisational value of the gift to be bestowed on the people through their library. Donald Kerr's detailed account of Grey the bookman eschews interest in the political import of Grey's collecting, while noting that the Cromwell papers became his 'showpiece'. (35) The reason why they were Greys showpiece, however, and the reason why he was so concerned to amplify their importance to the point of exaggeration, is hard to grasp without recognising the political and historical resonance of Cromwell.
In the years after 1874, the process of publicising the Cromwell papers became a regular routine. Grey would alert visitors and acquaintances to the documents and convey an enthusiastic account of their nature and importance, in person or by letter, which then gained wider currency. There is little evidence that anyone drew independent conclusions from studying the manuscripts, meaning the message the public received in print was largely Grey's message, with some added over-statement and garbling by writers. An 1876 article by the Auckland correspondent of the Brisbane Courier was typical--a secret treaty in Miltons handwriting, 'Old Noll' amending 'barely civil' to 'hardly borne', Cromwell resisting the Swedish king's temptation--while adding a claim by Grey that he had been offered a considerable sum for the manuscripts by the British Museum. (36) Grey later said he declined because he did not want to deprive New Zealand of 'papers of such value, which may call into existence some historian in this new world of ours'. (37) In 1878, James Grattan Grey's 'His Island Home' told of Sir George showing him 'many original documents of the Cromwellian period, of almost incalculable value'. (38) In 1880, the Auckland Star's 'Afternoon at the Kawau' reported, blunderingly, that the 'secret treaty' was signed by Thurloe and Meadows, but added the compensatory nugget of information that, though of 'extraordinary historic importance', the document was so secret that 'even Mr Carlyle' had no knowledge of it until alerted by Grey, but 'he felt too old now to re-write his book, but he hoped that the correction would be made in future editions'. No 'correction' was made. (39)
The Star article introduced another new note by reporting that Grey was contemplating bequeathing his collection to a library. (40) Two years previously, Greys government had become the first to set aside a sum for subsidising public libraries, pound for pound with any local library tax. (41) In June 1882, Grey announced his decision to donate his books and manuscripts to the new Auckland library, to help provide 'all usefull accessories' for the university whose foundation in the city had been agreed the previous day, prompting a fresh round of articles highlighting the Cromwell papers. (42)
The collection continued to feature in printed accounts as the library's official opening and Grey's donation drew nearer, while the library on Kawau became known to an overseas audience thanks to visiting European writers such as Baron von Hubner and James Anthony Froude. (43) Froude, Carlyle's disciple and a leading figure in his own right, stayed for a week on Kawau with Grey ('Singular man!') and in his Oceana, published in London and New York, recounted being shown treasures 'of the highest historical value', with 'important English historical MSS., never printed, of the time of the Commonwealth'. (44)
Early the following year, the news was of transporting Grey's gift from Kawau to Auckland, with the press anticipating the arrival of 'many of Thurlows letters, the treaty between Richard Cromwell and the Hanse Towns, and original historical letters and papers'. Mention of 'the treaty' perhaps confirmed how familiar the collection had become. (45) Case 51, containing the Cromwell papers, was the last to leave Greys hands, shipped to Auckland just two days before the opening of the new library on Saturday 26 March. (46) Once the opening was over, cataloguing commenced. The library's General Catalogue, published the following year, drew on Grey's own written descriptions to list under the heading 'Cromwell Documents' the 'Treaty Concluded by Richard Cromwell--1659', along with the letters and other papers. (47) This formed the basis of the catalogue entry for the next 125 years.
Attention continued into the 1890s. Grey directed the head of the British publishing house, John Murray, to the library, resulting in A Handbook for Travellers in New Zealand urging visitors to make a beeline for 'the only Treaty that was made by England during the brief Protectorate of Richard Cromwell'. (48) A newspaper guide to 'Auckland as a Holiday Resort' recommended a trip to see 'the original treaty signed by Richard Cromwell, for which the British Museum people have loudly clamoured'. (49) In 1892, a chapter devoted to Grey's gift in The Life and Times of Sir George Grey, written by his long-time associate William Lee Rees and Rees's daughter Lily, rehearsed the familiar refrain of 'the treaty concluded in the time of Richard Cromwell', adding a colourful description of Cromwell having adapted Thurloe's sentences 'to his own iron words, one written when the shadows of death were already creeping over his undaunted heart'. (50) In the same year, Jenks applied his scholarly eye but he too succumbed to Grey's view of the Hanse agreement, expressing some puzzlement about the 'original treaty between Richard Cromwell and the States-General', but concluding it to be a supplement to the treaty between France, England, and the Netherlands of 11/21 May 1659 agreeing to bring the warring Swedish and Danish kings to the negotiating table. (51) Shillington subsequently delivered a paper on the library to the International Library Conference in London, his text including mention of the correspondence and 'the famous Treaty with the United Protestant Powers, concluded by Richard Cromwell in 1659'. (52)
Grey's death in 1898 saw press attention to the Cromwell papers diminish without their major publicist, and the cult of Cromwell was ebbing in Britain and its empire, the erection of the present statue outside Parliament at Westminster in 1899 being a grand finale. (53) Nonetheless, there were still occasional appearances. In 1901, New Zealand newspapers reprinted without demur a letter to the Melbourne Age contending that the library possessed 'the original document signed by Richard Cromwell, and witnessed by six Earls and Lords, under which he agreed to resign the Crown of England for ever for himself and his heirs'. (54) In 1908, Henry Shaw, second only to Grey among early donors, printed a translation of the Latin treaty in his guide to the library's treasures, describing it as being 'made in 1659, between the English and the Dutch', and adding, 'It is believed that this is the only treaty made by Richard Cromwell during his brief Protectorate, and it is a most valuable historical document'. (55) In 1913, when a new room opened for rare manuscripts and books, the librarian Mr J. Barr highlighted the treaty of Richard Cromwell, as did the Herald in 1930, saying it was 'signed by Richard Cromwell. (56) In more recent times, Philip Aubrey, in his biography of Thurloe, describes the treaty document as having been signed in July 1659 on behalf of the Protector, and Donald Kerr describes the Cromwell papers as 'letters written by Sir Philip Meadowes, Richard Cromwell, the English parliamentarian politician John Thurloe, and the poet John Milton'. (57) Sir George Grey's legacy lives on, in its beneficence and its mistakes.
II. The Cromwell Treaty Redescribed and Redated
More than two decades of publicity about the contents of Greys Cromwellian collection preceded their entry into Auckland Public Library, and its key manuscript has spent more than 140 years described and catalogued as a treaty concluded by Richard Cromwell in 1659. The following section will show that this description is a longstanding error. The Hanse agreement has nothing to do with Richard Cromwell (nor was it penned by John Milton), though in linking the Hanse agreement to Oliver Cromwell and ideas of a Protestant League, Greys interest in popularising the collection brought him closer to the true date, 1654. (58)
Before redescribing the Hanse agreement, it is worth dealing with some of the repeated claims about the other main part of the Cromwell papers, the correspondence. The 'Swedish king' story does indeed appear in one of the letters from Meadows to Thurloe, essentially in the words Grey uses, except Cromwell is said to 'scruple' rather than 'hesitate' to take the crown. It was not 'addressed to Cromwell' (who is referred to in the third person) and it can only be guessed that he read it personally. (59) It is also the case that some phrases are struck through in the letters, and sometimes replaced, including the instance seized on by Grey of substituting 'hardly borne' for 'barely civil'. However, inspection of the letters tends to suggest that the corrections are in the same hand as the main text, though a simple crossing-out is hard to attribute securely. Cromwell may have read the letters; it is certainly likely he was acquainted with their contents, but they do not provide evidence to confirm the Grey-inspired scenario of Old Noll dashing his pen through the milksop phrases of Thurloe. The veracity of Grey's claims about the interest shown by Thomas Carlyle and the British Museum cannot be determined from the manuscripts, though here too one may suspect a mixture of truth and Grey's enthusiastic embellishment. (60)
To turn to the treaty manuscript, the claim that it was in John Milton's handwriting can be discounted: Milton had been blind since early 1652, 57 58 59 60 relying on amanuenses to write his dictation. (61) Grey realised this at some point, noting on a copy that was made of the agreement: 'Milton was blind in 1654 therefore did not write this treaty'. (62) It is also highly unlikely that Milton dictated the wording of the Hanse agreement in his role as Latin secretary. He contributed significantly to Anglo-Dutch exchanges before 1654, and from 1649-52, he wrote several letters to the Hanse towns on behalf of Parliament and the Council of State. (63) However, no Milton state letters have been identified between November 1653 and 29 June 1654, when he was working on his Second Defence, and his subsequent official output involved letters from Cromwell, not documents of the Protectoral Council like the Hanse agreement. (64) Another candidate might be Meadows, who had been engaged as Latin secretary and assistant to Thurloe since 1653. (65) This is tempting, given the presence of Meadows's letters in the Cromwell papers, but would be difficult to establish and another possibility will be advanced below.
The Hanse agreement itself can be readily described. It comprises a single clause, in Latin, according to which the Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland, on the one hand, and the States-General of the United Provinces, on the other, agree to include Lubeck, Bremen, and Hamburg in an earlier treaty, 'Tractatu pacis, Unionis, et confoederationis'. The three Hanse towns, crucial trading partners to both English and Dutch, were at this time semi-autonomous Protestant 'free cities' within the Holy Roman Empire, with republican governing institutions. (66) The text records that the Hanse agreement was concluded at Westminster, and has the signatures and seals of the six commissioners for the Protector and three ambassadors of the States-General: for the English, Henry Lawrence, Philip Lisle, John Lambert, Gilbert Pickering, Edward Montagu, and Walter Strickland; for the Dutch, Hieronymous van Beverningh, William Nieupoort, and Allart Pieter van Jongestall. (67) Below the text of the agreement and above the signatures appears the date, which at first sight--and indeed subsequent viewings--appears as '20/30 July 1659' (giving English and continental dates) (see Figure 2). (68) Close inspection also suggests that Jongestall has appended what appears to be '1659' in small letters under his signature. (69)
The myth of Richard Cromwell's treaty was built on Grey's interpretation and enthusiasm but had a mundane origin. The date '1659' appears undeniable on looking at the document but it cannot be correct. Negative evidence will be offered to show why it cannot be correct and positive evidence provided dating the Hanse agreement to 1654. The appearance of '1659' will also be explained (simply that the '9' is actually a '4'). The Hanse agreement therefore has no connection with Richard Cromwell's period as Protector, instead being an agreement concluded on behalf of Oliver Cromwell, three months after the Treaty of Westminster in 1654, to which it is a supplement.
The historical grounds for doubting the date 1659 are many, while the reasons for accepting it largely reduce to the fact that the year appears blindingly obvious on paper, admittedly no minor consideration. It is another irony of the Cromwell papers that anyone who came to Auckland and mixed amongst us, as Grey hoped, was not necessarily in a better position to assess the correct date than someone who did not see the manuscript. Indeed, the likelihood of the date 1659 being an error was pointed out fifty years ago in a footnote by a historian of the Baltic, on the basis of applying his knowledge of the period to reading Jenks. (70) To Grey, Jenks, and others who saw the original document, the date '1659' must have seemed so beyond doubt that some rather obvious questions were left unasked, or unanswered. Instead, the apparent date served as the springboard for the story about Richard Cromwell's involvement.
Inspection of the Hanse agreement reveals another puzzle, however. The manuscript is dated 1654. The document is clearly endorsed on the reverse, in a contemporary hand, 'Comprehension of Lubecke, Bremen and Hamborough 20/30 July 1654'. Why this was ignored by Grey and others is uncertain. If it was noticed, presumably the '1654' on the reverse was thought less authoritative than the apparently clear date '1659' on the face of the agreement. The present research has also revealed that Auckland's Hanse agreement is not the only copy in existence. A duplicate, complete with signatures and seals, is in the Hanseatic League archives at Lubeck, carrying an identically misleading date, but accompanied by contemporary copies in Latin and German in which the date appears clearly as 1654, under which year the papers are catalogued (see Figure 3). (71) In addition, a copy of a similar agreement comprehending the Duchy of Oldenburg in the treaty is held in the Oldenburg archive, clearly dated 20/30 July 1654. (72) Moreover, a draft of the wording used for both agreements is printed in the key Dutch account of the period, Verbael, published in 1725, which notes its application to 'Civitates Hanseaticae, Lubeca, Brema & Hamburgum' and gives the date 'July 1654'. (73)
Grey does not seem to have had a moment's doubt about the story woven around the manuscript, apart from privately severing the Milton connection, though there are reasons besides the physical evidence that might have given him pause. Grey knew that Oliver Cromwell was dead by 1659, having written on the copy of the agreement, above his note on Milton: 'This treaty was made by Richd Cromwell. O. Cromwell died 1658 Sept 3rd.' (74) However, the seemingly obvious date of the Hanse agreement and its clear reference to the 'Protectorem' appear to have blinded Grey to a major problem with his conclusion: Richards brief period as Protector had ended, along with the Protectorate, at least two months before late July 1659. (75) If Greys oversight was odd, that of Jenks was odder, because he had just published a book in which Richard Cromwell's downfall was dated to the first week in May 1659 when the Rump Parliament reconvened. (76) Jenkss article also cited a page of Birch's edition of the Thurloe papers containing no conclusive evidence for his case, without noting surrounding references which showed that since March 1659, one of the Hanse agreement's signatories, Edward Montagu, had been at sea leading the English fleet bound for the Baltic, a voyage from which he only returned in September. The ostensible date of the agreement in England, 20 July 1659, was one on which Montagu's absence is particularly well attested. (77)
The date for the Hanse agreement accepted by Grey and Jenks therefore supposes that the document was concluded on behalf of a deposed head of government by signatories at least one of whom was hundreds of miles away at the time. Other negative evidence confirms the improbability of the date 1659. The agreement's first signature is that of Henry Lawrence, signing himself 'president', but after May 1659, he was not president or member of the Protectorate council, which had ceased to exist. (78) While some English signatories continued to have a role in government, others did not, and none figured in negotiations for the May 1659 treaty. (79) The longstanding Dutch envoy Nieupoort was involved in that treaty, and was in London in 1659, but there is no record of van Beverningh and Jongestall being there. An emissary from the Hanseatic towns visited London in the summer of 1659, but his business was the 'Steelyard', the Hanse trading enclave in the city, and there is no evidence of a treaty or agreement being discussed. (80)
Grey could not have been expected to know these details, of course, but positive evidence that the Hanse agreement was of earlier date was also available to him, not only the year marked on the reverse of the document but the fact that the Hanse agreement names the treaty it supplemented. In the English translation made of the document, possibly in Grey's hand, which was printed in Shaw's 1908 Guide, the Latin 'Tractatu Pacis, Unionis, et confoederationis' is translated 'Treaty of Peace, Union, and Alliance'. (81) If rendered 'Treaty of Peace, Union, and Confederation', however, it becomes the English title accorded by the Protectorate to the Anglo-Dutch treaty of 1654, later known as the Treaty of Westminster. (82) This was the immediate context of the Hanse agreement and its consideration will allow the history of the Auckland manuscript to become clearer.
III. The History of the Hanse Agreement
The context and character of the Anglo-Dutch treaty signed at Westminster in April 1654 has attracted considerable attention recently as a key moment in a founding period for British imperial ideas and ambition. The treaty marked an end to almost two years of naval warfare between England and the United Provinces, a crucible for trade rivalry and realpolitik but also for the universalising and expansionist tendencies of the English Revolution, in which attempts to forge a union between the two Protestant republics were central. Steve Pincus finds an English eschatological narrative of the Dutch as fallen Protestant brethren, resisting union, and harbouring Orangeist monarchism and Charles Stuart, but punished by war and partly recovered. (83) Jonathan Scott observes that English liberty in the republican vision 'was imperial', ready for export in the godly cause of an expanding commonwealth embracing the Dutch. (84) David Armitage traces republican fears, once the Protectorate replaced the Rump Parliament, of stable expansion becoming unstable acquisition under the 'imperial monarchy of Oliver Cromwell', a concern he identifies with James Harrington's Oceana (1656) as a critical meditation on England's 'imperial moment' around the signing of the AngloDutch treaty, which yielded the resources and hubris driving Cromwell's 'Western Design', the project of empire in the Caribbean in 1654-55. (85) For Gardiner, this was a turning point at which Cromwell's Puritan spirit gave way to the 'mundane endeavour' of material interest. (86) After the English defeat at Hispaniola, Cromwell himself feared he had put personal gain before godly purpose, the sin of Achan. (87)
The fuller story of the Hanse agreement would have fascinated Grey, one imagines, not least in bringing him closer to Cromwell. It remains almost invisible in published accounts in English but can be pieced together from various sources. Grey's translation--if he was the translator--of 'confoederationis' as 'alliance' itself evokes one part of the story. The Anglo-Dutch love-hate relationship had veered from proposals for union to war to negotiation by 1653, when England's renewed proposal to unite into 'one People and Commonwealth' met Dutch replies which the English claimed 'doe interlard words of confederation, and other expressions inconsistent with the common and genuine acception of coalition'. (88) In the event, 'peace, union and confederation' as a looser bond was accepted in order to end war, open trade, and reconcile the two Protestant commonwealths in the face of the threat of hostile Catholic and absolutist European powers. Cromwell, famously, also secured a secret additional clause to prevent the Prince of Orange achieving power. The treaty was the first of several agreements concluded in 1654 by the Protectorate with Protestant states, as well as with France and Portugal. Carlyle's favourite Cromwell speeches, of 4 and 12 September 1654, hailed the treaties with the Dutch, Swedes, and Danes as bringing 'our wars ... very near an end' by securing 'the Protestant Interest abroad', in which he included German Protestants, whom the Holy Roman Empire made 'run to Protestant States'. (89) Greys talk of Cromwell's ambition for a Protestant league, and indeed of 'secret' treaties, may suggest his recollected reading of Carlyle, or of his own printed copies of the two speeches, which he had owned then left behind in his Cape Town gift. (90)
In 1642, at the start of the English Civil War, Walter Strickland had been sent to The Hague as parliamentary ambassador to seek a 'more strict alliance'. With the defeat and execution of Charles I, and the death of the royal stadtholder William II, the English republic sent Strickland back with Oliver St John in 1651 to pursue full union. (91) England took rebuttal as a signal to treat the Dutch as rivals not allies, notably through the protectionist Navigation Act, and the Anglo-Dutch War erupted the following July. In June 1653, four Dutch ambassadors arrived in London to negotiate a peace: van Beverningh and Nieupoort from Holland, Paulus van der Perre from Zealand, who shortly died, and Jongestall for Friesland. (92) The English again proposed union, placing foreign policy under a single authority, which prompted the testy exchange noted earlier, the Dutch fearing that the English would 'use us as they use the Scots'. (93) The ambassadors explained that 'confederation' was the term in their commission and expressed puzzlement about the English understanding of the word, to which the Council of State retorted that the proposal was not to forge a 'close allyance' but to make the two states one, at which point the Dutch returned to the Hague for instructions. (94) The ambassadors returned in the autumn and delivered a paper, read in council on 28 October, which proposed that an alliance short of full union would nonetheless 'unite God's people', in part by extending the peace to other Protestant states and any others ready to 'tolerate the free exercise of the orthodox reformed religion'. (95) A further submission a few days later was more specific, urging invitations to 'the protestant Cantons of Switzerland, the free protestant Townes, and Princes of Germany, the Crownes of Sweden, and Denmarke'. (96) The practical initiative for a wider Protestant union therefore came from the Dutch, their concern for the reformed religion coupled with a strategic appreciation that the proposal could appeal to the English and ameliorate the pressure for a fuller union between the two states alone. Denmark proved an obstacle, however, as the main ally of the Dutch. (97)
In December, the prospect of the Hanse agreement came more clearly into view. The ambassadors wrote toThe Hague with news of the Protectorate being declared, expressing hopes of progress now the 'power of concluding' was in Cromwell's hands. (98) They reported that Cromwell ordered a meeting with Strickland, Lisle, and other members of his new council, at which 'especially we urged the including of the allies', a paper to this effect being conveyed to the council meeting the following day. (99) It reiterated the proposal for comprehension, this time insisting on the inclusion of Denmark, which was initially refused and then made conditional on a process to agree restitution for English ships seized by the Danes, which dragged on until the following August. (100) Earlier in the month, the Hamburg senate had written to the Council of State requesting inclusion in any peace between England and the United Provinces. (101) The Dutch had made overtures to recruit the neutral Hanse cities into alliance during 1653, and in late December, the States-General passed a resolution supporting the comprehension of Hamburg, home to a large Dutch population as well as the English Merchant Adventurers Company. (102) The move was instigated by Lieuwe van Aitzema, Dutch envoy for Hamburg at The Hague and compiler of key Dutch and Latin sources on the negotiations. (103)
The Dutch ambassadors again left England, returning in early March. In the intervening time, the Dutch seem to have cooled and the English warmed towards the Hanse towns. In January, Cromwell received the Swiss envoy and Hamburg's emissary Joachim Petersen, telling the former that the pope aimed to reconcile Spain and France in a united front against Protestantism. Petersen remained in London until after the signing of the Hanse agreement. (104) Thurloe's agents reported in January and February that the States-General were 'much unsatisfied with Hambourg' and ready to oppose its inclusion, suggesting that the Dutch envied England's hold on the city's trade. (105) Richard Bradshaw, the Protectorate's resident in Hamburg, later referred to England's 'malicious neighbours' having tried to exclude the city. (106) Cromwell was now urged to 'caress and draw the Hans towns to himself'. (107) On 10 March, Thurloe delivered a report to council on relations with the Dutch and introduced a draft of 'an answer to the paper of the Hamburgh Agent, touching the comprehending of the Hanseatique towns in the Treaty which was read and agreed'. (108) It is not clear whether 'agreed' refers to comprehension or just the letter, but the English and Dutch at this time decided to proceed to conclude the main treaty and resolve the issue of Denmark and other alliances separately, Cromwell issuing his commission to the eventual signatories on 14 March. (109)
The Anglo-Dutch treaty was signed on 5 April 1654, by the same nine signatories who would sign the Hanse agreement, and was ratified by the end of the month. Rejoicing was reported on both sides of the Channel celebrating the end of the war and the treaty commitments to peace, religious solidarity, mutual defence, and security of trade. Verses by the young John Locke extolled the accord as more glorious because 'neithers conqueror'. (110) An undertaking to include others in the treaty's provisions soon followed. In early May, the ambassadors advised the States-General of moves towards comprehension, including the drafting of a Latin text naming all the potential partners, including the Hanse cities. (111) On 16 May, Bradshaw thankedThurloe for a copy of the Westminster treaty and added that the people of Hamburg 'are extremly well pleased with his highnesse [Cromwell] in his favourable admittinge the Hans townes'. (112) The Venetian ambassador in France claimed that the English and Dutch 'religious league' had already been joined by Denmark, the Hanse cities, the Duke of Oldenburg, and the Swiss Protestant Cantons. (113) In fact, the matter had not been concluded and the English now became the main source of delay, possibly awaiting the conclusion of the discussions on Danish reparations, given a deadline of 1 August. At the end of June, the Dutch ambassadors met with Strickland and Pickering and told them of being 'daily importuned' by Hamburg and others to be included in the peace. (114) The Dutch Verbael records that the States-General at this point authorised the ambassadors to sign an agreement comprehending the Hanse cities. (115) Cromwell wrote to the Count of Oldenburg confirming the granting of his request for inclusion. (116)
The English divorced comprehension in the Anglo-Dutch treaty from the issue of Denmark, which became the subject of a further treaty in September, and prepared to include others. Pressure from the Dutch may have been a reason but so, too, must have been escalating fears of royalist resurgence in July, with Thurloe's intelligence reports warning that the 'Scottish King', the future Charles II, was on the move following the treaty and preparing to launch an attempt to retrieve his father's kingdom from a German port. (117) On 18 July, Bradshaw complained to Thurloe that the Hamburg senate was turning a blind eye to a suspicious armed ship, yet 'By the Dutch articles, in which they are included, they ought not to permit armes, &c. to be shipt for the enemie'. (118) He then wrote to Cromwell of rumours that Charles 'will shortly be here' and would find a 'great concourse of cavaliers' given the city's 'pretence of neutralitie', necessitating a reminder that they were required by 'the articles of peace with the United Provinces, not to permit any declared enemies of your highness and the state of England to harbour with and among them'. (119)
Earlier in July, Thurloe had notified the Dutch ambassadors that arrangements should go ahead to comprehend the Swiss cantons, Hanse cities, Oldenburg, Anhalt, Holstein, and Courland. The account in Verbael indicates that he invited the ambassadors to submit the wording and wrote on 12 July approving a draft but proposing that each confederate should have a separate instrument of inclusion, which when supplied would be 'signed in such form as is usual'. (120) As mentioned earlier, the standard wording applied to each agreement was printed in Verbael, being the wording found in Grey's Hanse document. (121) An entry in the proceedings of the States-General subsequently confirmed the signing of the 'distincte Acten van Comprehensie' on 20/30 July, naming the 'Hanze-Steden, Lubeck, Bremen, ende Hamburgh', and the others. (122)
It is certain, then, that the Hanse agreement was signed in 1654, and moreover that Greys depiction of the document as being part of Cromwell's quest for a Protestant league needs tempering by the recognition that it was initiated and ultimately followed through by the Dutch, who appear to have been responsible for drafting it. The handwriting, rather than being that of Milton or Meadows, may be that of a Dutch draughtsman. This conclusion, if correct, could also help to explain the appearance of the date. A similarity between '4' and '9' was a feature of certain early modern Dutch handwriting styles, although declining in the seventeenth century. (123) Furthermore, there are other documents held in the British State Papers for 1654 in which the figure '4' in 1654 is written as a '9'. A clear example is a Latin letter from the Dutch ambassadors to Cromwell of 21/31 August 1654, which more generally resembles the handwriting of the Hanse agreement. In the same document, Jongestall, in adding his signature to that of Nieupoort and Beverning, again writes '1654', with the appearance of '1659' under his name, as he did with the Hanse agreement (see Figure 4). (124) There are numerous other examples, all letters from the Dutch ambassadors, and further research may confirm whether Jongestall, or another penman, was responsible. (125)
A final twist in the story of the Hanse agreement, pertinent to its passage to New Zealand, is that once established as being dated 20 July 1654, it shares a day characterised as a key 'imperial moment' by Armitage and others, and sheds light on that day. (126) The day is one of two for which a record exists of discussion involving Cromwell and his council about the Western design, the other being 20 April, the day after the ratification of the Treaty of Westminster, when Cromwell broached the plan. The discussions were recorded by Montagu in his journal and published in Firth's edition of the Clarke Papers in 1899, leading to 20 July 1654 becoming a staple of scholarship as the day on which Cromwell and John Lambert fell into dispute over the scheme to seize Spanish possessions. Cromwell famously declared that with the conclusion of the Anglo-Dutch war, 'Providence seemed to lead us hither, haveinge 160 ships swimminge. (127) Doubt has been cast on the veracity of the record, since the council order book does not list Montagu as having been present at its meeting on 20 July and does not give any indication of the debate on foreign policy. (128) However, Montagu's signature on the Hanse agreement suggests that at some point on that day he was in close proximity to other signatories who did attend, namely Lawrence, Strickland, and Lisle. (129) Firth gave the account the title 'A Debate in the Protector's Council' but Montagus own heading was 'Notes at the Councell table', and it seems possible that Montagu recorded a discussion outside the formal business of the meeting. (130) As Grey might have visualised the scene, one can imagine Montagu arriving from other business at the close of the council meeting ready to sign the Hanse agreement, taking a seat at the table and quietly noting down a conversation already flowing between Cromwell and Lambert, as often happens when meetings wind up. It would be a mistake to treat Montagu's notes as, in effect, a full and accurate record of a formal debate, as many historians have done, but they capture a moment--quite literally a few minutes--when the vision of close Protestant union concluded in acceptance of wider and more diffuse European alliance and a determination to launch a new mission seeking overseas possessions. Sir George Greys possession of Cromwell's Hanse agreement in far-off New Zealand was itself part of the legacy of the events that gave birth to the manuscript.
The University of Auckland
(1) AL, GMS 149-164. This article was written while I was the Sir George Grey Special Collections Researcher in Residence 2014-15, supported by the Auckland Library Heritage Trust in association with Auckland Council. I am grateful to these bodies and the University of Auckland for support during research, and to Eddy Verbaan and Bill Barnes for assistance with Dutch and Latin sources.
(2) Sir George Grey, Address delivered by Sir George Grey, K.C.B., at the Theatre Royal, Auckland, June 5th, 1883 (Auckland: Wilson and Horton, 1883).
(3) Edward Jenks, 'Some Correspondence of Thurloe and Meadowe', English Historical Review, 7.28 (1892), 720-42.
(4) Jenks, 'Some Correspondence', p. 724.
(5) AL, GL J5.2, Jenks to Edward Shillington, 15 November 1891.
(6) Charles Harding Firth, The Last Years of the Protectorate, 1656-1658, 2 vols (London: Longmans, Green, 1909), I, VIII; Samuel Rawson Gardiner, History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate 1649-1660, 3 vols (London: Longmans, Green, 1894-1901).
(7) See, however, Philip Aubrey, Mr Secretary Thurloe: Cromwell's Secretary of State 1652-1660 (London: Athlone, 1990), p. xi. Aubrey, who refers to both Jenks's article and Auckland Library as sources in referring to the Cromwell papers, appears to be an exception, though his account is flawed (see discussion at nn. 57, 76, below).
(8) James Anthony Froude, Oceana, Or, England and Her Colonies (London: Longmans, Green, 1886), pp. 253, 308-09.
(9) 'Sir George Greys Library', New Zealand Herald, 21 August 1882, p. 5.
(10) Jenks, 'Some Correspondence', p. 720.
(11) Clive Parry and Charity Hopkins, An Index of British Treaties 1101-1968, 3 vols (London: HMSO, 1970), II, 53-54; A Catalogue and Collection ... From Decem. 16. 1653. Unto Septem. 3. 1654 (London: William Du-Gard and Henry Hills, 1654); A General Collection of Treatys of Peace and Commerce, 4 vols (London: J. J. and P Knapton, and others, 1732), III, 67-88; J. Dumont, Corps Universel diplomatique du droits des gens, Book 6, Pt 2 (Amsterdam and The Hague: P Brunel, and others, 1728).
(12) Slingsby Bethel, The World's Mistake in Oliver Cromwell (London, 1668), p. 2. Bethel was in Hamburg when the Hanse agreement was signed. See Gary S. De Krey, 'Slingsby Bethel', ODNB; and Sarah Barber, 'Richard Bradshaw', ODNB.
(13) Timothy Venning, 'John Thurloe', ODNB; Aubrey, Mr Secretary Thurloe.
(14) A Collection of the State Papers of John Thurloe, ed. Thomas Birch, 7 vols (London: Fletcher Gyles and others, 1742) (hereafter Thurloe State Papers).
(15) The term 'Cromwell papers' is preferred in the present account. W L. F. Colvert, assistant librarian, referred to 'the documents known as the Cromwell Documents'. See 'The Free Public Library, Auckland, N.Z.', Library, 1st ser., 2.1 (1890), 328-31 (p. 329).
(16) The catalogue description is under review as a result of the present research. The Hanse agreement is itself a treaty on some definitions but for clarity, and because of its subordinate status, reference will be to the Hanse 'agreement' and to the 1654 Anglo-Dutch 'treaty'.
(17) Meadows also signed himself 'Meadowe' and 'Meadowes'.
(18) 'Auckland Public Library', New Zealand Herald, 6 June 1883, p. 5; 'Sir George Greys Address', Auckland Star, 6 June 1883, p. 2; Grey, Address.
(19) 'Auckland Public Library', New Zealand Herald.
(20) 'Sir George Grey's Address', Auckland Star.
(21) 'Auckland Public Library', New Zealand Herald.
(22) Minnesota Historical Society, James K. Hosmer Papers, 148.K.16.6F Reserve 99, Grey to Hosmer, 10 June 1890 (hereafter Grey to Hosmer).
(23) 'Sir George Grey', Otago Daily Times, 5 November 1874, p. 2. The article was reprinted numerous times, including: 'Sir George Grey--Socially, Domestically and Politically', New
Zealand Herald, 17 November 1874, p. 1; also OtagoWitness (7 November); Grey RiverArgus (17 November); Star (20 November); Colonist (24 November); Otago Daily Times (25 November).
(24) 'Sir George Grey', Otago Daily Times.
(25) 'Election of a Member for the City West', New Zealand Herald, 29 March 1875, p. 3; James Belich, 'Sir George Grey', ODNB.
(26) James Belich, The New Zealand Wars and the Victorian Interpretation of Racial Conflict, rev. edn (Auckland: Penguin, 1998), pp. 58, 311-12; 'Sir George Grey and the Colonial Press', New Zealand Herald, 3 December 1874, p. 3. This marked a key characteristic given Belich s thesis that the New Zealand wars under Grey offer a case study in the construction of British success as the dominant interpretation.
(27) On Macaulay, Carlyle, and the Victorian 'cult of Cromwell', see Blair Worden, Roundhead Reputations: The English Civil War and the Passions of Posterity, new edn (London:
(28) AL, GL C10.1-3; Grey to Hosmer.
(29) Worden, 'Victorians', p. 115; Worden, Roundhead Reputations, p. 258. The Gladstonian MP John Morley remarked that Cromwell was made 'a name on an Imperialist flag'. See John Morley, Recollections, 2 vols (New York: Macmillan, 1917), II, 48-49.
(30) Jane A. Mills, ed., Cromwell's Legacy (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2012), chaps 7-11; Hugh Laracy, 'Paranoid Popery: Bishop Moran and Catholic Education in New Zealand', New Zealand Journal ojHistory, 10.1 (1976), 51-62 (p. 53).
(31) William Lee Rees and Lily Rees, The Life and Times of Sir George Grey, K.C.B., 2 vols (London: Hutchinson & Co., 1892), II, 552; George C. Henderson, Sir George Grey, Pioneer of Empire in Southern Lands (New York: E. P Dutton, 1907), pp. 286-87; 'Sir George Grey and the Maoris', Daily Southern Cross, 6 July 1867, p. 5; 'Native Outrages in the Northern Island', Auckland Times, 11 February 1845; 'Official Subserviency', Nelson Examiner, 29 September 1849; 'Correspondence', Daily Southern Cross, 15 August 1851, p. 3; 'The Late W Thompson. --Young New Zealand', Daily Southern Cross, 11 May 1868, p. 3.
(32) New Zealand, Parliamentary Debates (Hansard), 36 (1880), p. 380; G. W. Rusden, Aureretanga: Groans of the Maoris (London: William Ridgway, 1888), p. 154. Another product of the Puritan preoccupation, more poetical than political, was Alexander Turnbull's Milton collection in Wellington. See E. H. McCormick, Alexander Turnbull, His Life, His Circle, His Collections (Wellington: Alexander Turnbull Library, 1974), p. 111.
(33) Worden, Roundhead Reputations, p. 256; see also Official Report of the National Australasian Convention Debates (Sydney: George Stephen Chapman, 1891), pp. 551-53 (1 April 1891). At the 1891 Australasian Federation conference, Grey argued for 'a commonwealth in terms of the strictest loyalty, love, and veneration for the Queen', opposing delegates who objected to the word 'commonwealth' because of its association with Cromwell and regicide.
(34) J[ames] M[ilne], 'The G.O.M. of Greater England. An Interview with Sir George Grey', Illustrated London News, 26 May 1894, p. 660.
(35) Kerr, Amassing Treasures, pp. 16, 199-200.
(36) Reprinted in the Nelson Evening Mail, 20 July 1876, p. 4.
(37) Grey to Hosmer.
(38) James Grattan Grey, 'His Island Home', Press (Christchurch), 21 December 1878, p. 2; reprinted in James Grattan Grey, His Island Home; and, Away in the Far North (Wellington: Lyon and Blair, 1879; facs. repr. Christchurch: Kiwi Publishers, 1996), p. 5.
(39) 'An Afternoon at the Kawau', Auckland Star, 5 January 1880, p. 3; The Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell with Elucidations by Thomas Carlyle, ed. S. C. Lomas, intro. C. H. Firth, 3 vols (London: Methuen, 1904). The Cromwell papers did not appear in the latter despite the involvement of Firth, who knew of the manuscripts.
(40) 'An Afternoon at the Kawau', Auckland Star.
(41) 'Public Library', New Zealand Herald, 11 January 1878, p. 3; 'Deputation to the Premier. A Free Library for Wellington', Evening Post (Wellington), 22 July 1878, p. 2.
(42) AL, GNZMS 352, Grey to James Shera, 19 June 1882; 'Sir George Grey's Library', New Zealand Herald, 21 August 1882, p. 5; 'Sir George Greys Library', Evening Post, 25 July 1882, p. 2; 'Auckland', New Zealand Tablet, 1 September 1882, p. 11.
(43) Joseph von Hubner, Through the British Empire, 2 vols (London: John Murray, 1886), I, 209-11.
(44) Froude, Oceana, pp. 253, 308-09; see also James Anthony Froude, Oceana, Or, England and Her Colonies (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1886).
(45) New Zealand Herald, 14 February 1887, p. 5.
(46) AL, New Zealand Manuscripts, NZMS 640/5, Thomas Osborne, Diary 1882-1887 (22-26 March 1887); 'Auckland Free Library and Art Gallery', New Zealand Herald, 28 March 1887, p. 6.
(47) General Catalogue of [the] Grey Collection (Auckland: Brett, 1888), p. 318.
(48) ATL, Micro-MS-0836, A. H. Hallam Murray, Diaries (15 October 1890); F. W Pennefather, A Handbookfor Travellers in New Zealand (London: John Murray, 1893), pp. 2-3.
(49) 'Auckland as a Holiday Resort', Auckland Star, 18 April 1893, p. 3.
(50) Rees and Rees, Life and Times, II, chap. 58, 'The Library at Auckland'.
(51) Jenks, 'Some Correspondence', pp. 720, 723.
(52) Edward Shillington, 'Auckland Free Public Library', Transactions and Proceedings of the Second International Library Conference (London: for Members of the Conference, 1998), pp. 201-03, 221.
(53) Worden, Roundhead Reputations, p. 314. The Cromwell papers are not mentioned, for instance, in descriptions of the library and its treasures such as: 'Auckland Public Library: Address to Rotarians by Mr. J. Barr', Auckland Star, 28 May 1923, p. 7; 'City Treasures', Auckland Star, 7 January 1929, p. 8; 'Auckland Library's Diamond Jubilee', Auckland Star, 6 September 1940, p. 3.
(54) 'A Valuable Historical Document', Press (Christchurch), 27 March 1901, p. 6; Otago Daily Times, 28 March 1901, p. 4.
(55) Henry Shaw, A Guide to the Principal Manuscripts, Early Printed Books, Autograph Letters, Etc. Contained in the Auckland Free Public Library (Auckland: Brett, 1908), pp. 18-19. In addition to the treaty made at the end of Richards Protectorship (see n. 51, above), Parry and Hopkins (Index, II, 55-56) lists a treaty concluded by Richard Cromwell with France to facilitate a peace between Sweden and Denmark, 3 February 1659.
(56) 'Two Valuable Gifts', Auckland Star, 8 December 1913, p. 7; 'Literary Treasures', New Zealand Herald, 6 September 1930, p. 6. The Australian politician Sir John Kirwan recalled seeing in 1893 the 'treaty concluded by Richard Cromwell'. See John Kirwan, My Life's Adventure (London: Eyre & Spottiswoode, 1936), p. 22.
(57) Aubrey, Mr Secretary Thurloe, p. 185; Kerr, Amassing Treasures, pp. 199-200.
(58) Grey to Hosmer. Grey informed Hosmer that the manuscript was a treaty which 'undertakes to observe and hold to the Treaty which [Oliver] Cromwell had concluded with ... the Protestant powers'.
(59) AL, GMS 162.
(60) Roots, 'Carlyles Cromwell', p. 74. Carlyle was prone to complaining of the 'Cromwell rubbish' he had to work through.
(61) John Milton, Complete Prose Works, 8 vols, rev. edn (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1953-82) (hereafter Milton, CPW), VII (1980), ed. Robert W Ayers, p. 207; Barbara K. Lewalski, The Life of John Milton (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), p. 278.
(62) AL, GMS 149.
(63) Milton, CPW, v.2 (1971), ed. John Max Patrick, pp. 478-98, 514-22, 561-69, 584-600, 608-12, 628-30; Leo Miller, John Milton's Writings in the Anglo-Dutch Negotiations, 1651-1654 (Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press, 1992); Robert Thomas Fallon, Milton in Government (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004), pp. 73-88.
(64) Milton, CPW, v.2, 660-76; Fallon, Milton in Government, p. 124.
(65) Calendar of State Papers, Domestic Series, 1653-54, ed. Mary Anne Everett Green (London: Longman & Co., 1879), 17 October 1653; 3 February 1654 (where Meadows is listed as Latin secretary, on a salary of 200 [pounds sterling] a year); Miller, John Milton's Writings, p. 73.
(66) Phillippe Dollinger, The German Hansa (London: Macmillan, 1970), pp. 362-66.
(67) A further error in newspaper reports about the Hanse agreement in 1874-76, probably stemming from Grey, was identifying Lisle as the husband of Alice Lisle, who was executed under James II for harbouring rebels. Alice was the widow of John, Lord Lisle; the signatory was Philip Sidney, Viscount Lisle.
(68) In what follows, dates in England (old style) will be given unless otherwise indicated.
(69) AL, GMS 149.
(70) Michael Roberts, 'Cromwell and the Baltic', English Historical Review, 76 (1961), 402-46 (p. 435, n. 1).
(71) Lubeck, Archiv der Hansestadt Lubeck, 070, 1653-54, 'EinschluBvertrag vom 20./30. Juli 1654'.
(72) Niedersachsisches Landesarchiv, Oldenburg, Peace Agreement between England and the Netherlands 1654 ('Friedensschluss zwischen England und den Niederlanden 1654). Oldenburg's inclusion is noted, and the Hanse cities mentioned, in W C. Abbott, ed., The Writings and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, 4 vols (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945; New York: Russell and Russell, 1970), III, 344-45.
(73) Verbael Gehousen door de Heeren H. van Beverningk, W Nieupoort, J. van de Perre, en A.P Jongestal, Als Gedeputeerden en Extraordinaris Ambassadeurs van de Heeren Staeten Generael Der Vereenigde Nederlanden, aen de Republyck van Engelandt (The Hague: Hendrick Scheurleer, 1725) (hereafter Verbael), pp. 503-04.
(74) AL, GMS 149(2).
(75) John A. Butler, A Biography of Richard Cromwell, 1626-1712, The Second Protector (Lewiston: Mellen, 1994), pp. 117-27.
(76) Edward Jenks, The Constitutional Experiments of the Commonwealth: A Study of the Years 1649-1660 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1890), pp. 126-28. Philip Aubrey (Mr Secretary Thurloe, p. 185) notes that the date July 1659 postdates Richard s fall but instead of questioning the date hazards the possibility that because the Protectorate had not been formally repudiated it retained legal status, making the treaty document 'of remarkable constitutional interest'.
(77) The Journal of Edward Mountagu, First Earl of Sandwich, Admiral and General at Sea, 1659-1665, ed. R. C. Anderson (London: Navy Records Society, 1929), p. 41 (entry for 20 July 1659); F. R. Harris, The Life of Edward Mountagu, 2 vols (London: John Murray, 1912), I, 144.
(78) TNA, State Papers (hereafter SP) 25/98, p. 12, Harrington to Meadows, 2 June 1659. Sir James Harrington wrote to Meadows of having taken on the circulating role of president of the new Council of State in May; SP 25/98, pp. 29-30. In the days around 20 July 1659, letters were signed as president by Archibald Johnston and Bulstrode Whitelocke.
(79) 'House of Commons Journal Volume 7: 14 May 1659', in Journal of the House of Commons: Volume 7, 1651-1660 (London, 1802), pp. 652-55, accessed via British History Online <http://www.british-history.ac.uk/commons-jrnl/vol7/pp652-655>; Dumont, Corps, p. 252. The new Council of State named in mid-May 1659 included only Lambert among those who signed the Hanse agreement; the Committee of Safety named in October 1659 included Lambert, Strickland, and Pickering. See The Memoirs of Edmund Ludlow, ed. C. H. Firth, 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1894), II, 85-86, 131.
(80) SP 82/9, fols 243r, 245r. The envoy, Martin Boekell, wrote to the Council of State on 20 July 1659.
(81) AL, GMS 149; Shaw, Guide, pp. 18-19.
(82) Articles of Peace, Union and Confederation, Concluded and Agreed between his Highness Oliver Lord Protector Of the Common-wealth of England, Scotland & Ireland, and the Dominions thereto belonging. And the Lords the States General of the United Provinces of the Netherlands (London, 1654).
(83) Steven C. A. Pincus, Protestantism and Patriotism: Ideologies and the Making of English Foreign Policy, 1650-1668 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), pp. 81-192. Pincus provides a particularly detailed account of the negotiations and context (though does not consider the Hanse agreement).
(84) Jonathan Scott, When the Waves Ruled Britannia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), pp. 78-79.
(85) David Armitage, 'The Cromwellian Protectorate and the Languages of Empire', Historical Journal, 35 (1992), 531-55.
(86) Gardiner, History of the Commonwealth and Protectorate, II (1897), 479.
(87) BlairWorden, 'Oliver Cromwell and the Sin of Achan', in Cromwell and the Interregnum, ed. David L. Smith (Oxford: Blackwell, 2003), pp. 39-59 (essay originally published 1985).
(88) SP 98/105, fol. 19v, Council of State to the Dutch ambassadors, 22 July 1653.
(89) Letters and Speeches of Oliver Cromwell, II, 339-91 (see p. 356 for 4 September; p. 368 for 12 September).
(90) Oliver Cromwell, His Highnesse the Lord Protector's Speeches to the Parliament in the Painted Chamber, The one on Munday the 4th of September, The other on Tuesday the 12. of September, 1654 (London, 1654); Oliver Cromwell, His Highnesse the Lord Protector's Speech to the Parliament in the Painted Chamber, On Tuesday the 12th of September, 1654 (London, 1654); Theophilus Hahn, An Index of the Grey Collection in the South African Public Library (Cape Town: Solomon, 1884), pp. 48-49.
(91) Jonathan Scott, Commonwealth Principles: Republican Writing of the English Revolution (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 102-03.
(92) Pincus, Protestantism and Patriotism, pp. 50-60, 84, 120-21; Scott, Commonwealth Principles, pp. 103-04.
(93) Abbott, ed., Writings and Speeches, III, 79. On Dutch reticence, see also Scott, Commonwealth Principles, p. 103.
(94) SP 105/98, pp. 34-42, Dutch ambassadors to Council of State, 23 and 27 July 1653; Council of State to Dutch ambassadors, 25 July 1653.
(95) SP 105/98, pp. 49-53; Pincus, Protestantism and Patriotism, pp. 156-57.
(96) SP 105/98, pp. 54-56 (p. 55); Leonis ab Aitzema, Historia Pacis, a Foederatis Belgis ab Anno MDCXXI ad hoc usque tempus tractatae (Leiden: Elsevier, 1654), pp. 835-36.
(97) SP 105/98, pp. 65, 72; see also Thurloe State Papers, I, 655. The States-General resolved not to conclude a peace without Denmark's inclusion.
(98) Thurloe State Papers, I, 643.
(99) SP 105/98, p. 64; Thurloe State Papers, I, 643; Pincus, Protestantism and Patriotism, p. 181.
(100) SP 105/98, pp. 65, 72, 91-92, 95; Thurloe State Papers, I, 655; Jonathan Israel, The Dutch Republic: Its Rise, Greatness, and Fall, 1477-1806 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), p. 721.
(101) SP 82/9, fol. 157r.
(102) Thurloe State Papers, I, 461-62; Allen B. Hinds, ed., Calendar of State Papers Relating To English Affairs in the Archives of Venice, Volume 29: 1653-1654 (London: HMSO, 1929), p. 31.
(103) Thurloe State Papers, I, 649 (5 January 1654 n.s.).
(104) Abbott, ed., Writings and Speeches, III, 159-60, 164, 346, 387-88, 420; Severall Proceedings of State Affaires, 225 (12-19 January 1654), p. 3565.
(105) Thurloe State Papers, II, 21,60-61 (23 January; 1 February 1654 n.s.).
(106) Thurloe State Papers, II, 283. On 25 April, Bradshaw reported a rumour that the Dutch were seeking to exclude Hamburg from the treaty. See ibid., II, 249. Jenks ('Some Correspondence', p. 723) footnotes this letter but takes it as confirmation that the Hanse agreement must refer back (from 1659) to a treaty later than 1654.
(107) Thurloe State Papers, II, 21, 60-61.
(108) SP 25/75, p. 161.
(109) A General Collection of Treatys, III, 80-82.
(110) John Locke, 'Verses upon peace with the Dutch', in Locke: Political Writings, ed. Mark Goldie (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), pp. 201-02.
(111) Thurloe State Papers, II, 305, referring to 5 May; Aitzema, Historia Pacis, p. 867; Leonis ab Aitzema, Historie of Verhael van Staet en Oorloogh, 1654-1658 (The Hague: Johan Veely, and others, 1663), p. 99.
(112) Thurloe State Papers, II, 283.
(113) Hinds, ed., State Papers Venice, pp. 217-29 (esp. pp. 217-18, 23 May).
(114) Thurloe State Papers, II, 449-50.
(115) Verbael, p. 488 (referring to 9 July 1654 n.s.).
(116) Abbott, ed., Writings and Speeches, III, 344-45; Milton, CPW, v.2, 667; Leo Miller, John Milton and the Oldenburg Safeguard (New York: Loewenthal, 1985), pp. 283-88.
(117) SP 25/75, pp. 415-16; Thurloe State Papers, II, 585; Eva Scott, The King in Exile: The Wanderings of Charles II from June 1649 to July 1654 (New York: E. P Dutton, 1905), pp. 489-94.
(118) Thurloe State Papers, II, 466, 18/28 July.
(119) Thurloe State Papers, II, 486-87, 25 July 1654.
(120) Verbael, pp. 501-02; SP 25/75, p. 426. On 12 July, Strickland reported to the council, with Cromwell present, of 'severall papers' delivered to himself and Pickering by the Dutch ambassadors; see also Thurloe to Pell and Dury, 14 July 1654, in The Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, ed. Robert Vaughan, 2 vols (London: Henry Colburn, 1838), i, 26. On 14 July, Thurloe sent a copy of the agreement including the Swiss cantons to the ambassador John Pell.
(121) Verbael, pp. 503-04.
(122) Verbael, p. 557 (proceedings of 17/27 August).
(123) The liability to cause confusion is noted--' Alleen tussen de 4 en de 9 wil nog wel eens verwarring ontstaan'--in the University of Amsterdam's Cursus Nederlandse paleografie, I6e t/m 18e eeuw, under 'Facts and Figures' ('4. Cijfers en getallen) <http://www.vondel. humanities.uva.nl/paleografie/index.php> [accessed 6 November 2015]. Images showing the declining similarity between 4 and 9 over time are drawn from P A. Grun, Leseschlussel zu unserer alten Schrift (Limburg: Starke, 1935).
(124) SP 84/159, fol. 229r (State Papers, Foreign, Holland).
(125) Other examples from the three ambassadors to Cromwell, writing '1654' as '1659', in the same hand, are: SP 84/160, fol. 1r (1/11 September 1654); SP 84/160, fols 9r, 11r-11v, 13r, 15r (all 7/17 Sept 1654); SP 46/101, fols 133r-134r. Another letter from the ambassadors in a different, less formal hand is also endorsed with the date 1654 appearing to be 1659. See SP 46/101, fol. 131r (28 September/8 October 1654).
(126) Armitage, 'Cromwellian Protectorate', p. 335.
(127) The Clarke Papers, ed. C. H. Firth, 4 vols (London: Longmans, Green, 1891-1901), III (1899), 207-08; Fallon, Milton in Government, pp. 128-29; Armitage, p. 536.
(128) Peter Gaunt, '"The Single Persons Confidants and Dependants"? Oliver Cromwell and his Protectoral Councillors', Historical Journal, 32 (1989), 537-60 (p. 550); repr. in Cromwell and the Interregnum, ed. Smith, pp. 93-119.
(129) The Council order book for Thursday 20 July 1654 (SP 25/75, pp. 439-40) records those present as Cromwell, Lawrence, Fynnes, Strickland, Mackworth, Wolseley, Desborough, and Lisle, with Montagu and Pickering in attendance on other, adjacent days.
(130) Firth, Clarke Papers, III, 207; Gaunt, p. 550, n. 35; private communication from Peter Gaunt. I am grateful to Professor Gaunt for sharing information from his notes.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Title Annotation:||Part II: Early Modern Discoveries and Reflections|
|Date:||Jul 1, 2015|
|Previous Article:||Seventeenth-century French translations of the Consolatio Philosophiae of Boethius in New Zealand.|
|Next Article:||William Thomas's notebook: a window on seventeenth-century religion and politics.|