FOOTNOTES FROM THE CHRONICLE OF QUEEN JANE
 Letter of the council to sir Philip Hoby, ambassador with the emperor, printed in Stype's Memorials, 1721, ii. 430. It was not written until the 8th of the month, and is silent regarding the successor to the throne. Mary, in her letter to the lords of the Council, dated from Kenynghall on the 9th of July (printed in Foxe's Actes and Monuments), also states that she had learned from some advertisement that the king her brother had died on Thursday (the 6th) at night last past.
 Northumberland's intention was to keep the death of the king a secret, until he should have obtained possession of the person of the lady Mary, who had been summoned to visit her brother, and was at no further distance from London than the royal manor of Hunsdon in Hertfordshire. But there were not wanting about the court those who from attachment to Mary, or from self interest, ventured to incur the hazard of conveying to her this momentous intelligence; whereupon she immediately took alarm, and rode off towards the eastern coast, from which she might have escaped to the continent, had such a step become necessary. Many writers assert that it was the earl of Arundel who made a private communication to her. I have not found any contemporary authority for this statement; but sir Nicholas Throckmorton, in his poetical autobiography (MS. Cole, vol. xl. p. 272, verses 111, 112, 113, 114), claims the credit of having been the officious person. He had been a favourite servant of king Edward; and on his royal master's death,
By "Robert" the lady Mary meant sir Robert Throckmorton, one of the four brothers.
 See the Diary of Henry Machyn, p. 35.
 It appears most probable that this was the first intimation which the citizens had received of the existence of the letters patent: and that it was on this occasion that, being "sworn to them," they affixed their signatures, although the document had been previously executed on the 21st of June. No fewer than thirty-two signatures follow that of the lord mayor, but the parties were perhaps not all citizens, and from the arrangement of their names in the existing transcript (mentioned in the following note ) it would be difficult to distinguish which were the aldermen, which the merchants of the staple, and which the merchant adventurers.
 Dr. Peter Heylyn,in his History of the Reformation, fol. 1674, p. 159, has described the interview supposed to have taken place between the dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk and their daughter the lady Jane, when they waited upon her on the morning of the 10th of July, and then first made known to her the fatal diadem to which she was destined. The scruples of the gentle heiress were overcome with much difficulty, and the whole course of argument, pro et contra, is stated at considerable length. I believe, however, that this is only one of those dramatic scenes in which historical writers formerly considered themselves justified in indulging, as I have not been able to trace it to any earlier authority. Its verisimilitude may indeed be justified by the passage of the duke of Northumberland's speech recorded by our present chronicler (p. 6), " Who, by your and our enticement, is rather of force placed therein, than by her own seeking and request." However, having been adopted by the writer of the Life of Lady Jane Grey in the Biographia Britannica, it is followed as authentic history by many subsequent writers. The more recent authors (including sir Harris Nicolas, Mr. P. F. Tytler, and Mr. Aungier the historian of Syon-house and Isleworth) have placed the scene of this interview at Syon; but Heylyn himself fixed it at Durham-house in the Strand: which was the duke of Northumberland's town mansion, and where the lady Jane's marriage had been celebrated only a few weeks before. Here Heylyn might well suppose she would be lodged at this critical period of her father-in-law's conspiracy. The fact, however, seems to have been otherwise. In the chronicle of the Grey Friars (which will be found in the Appendix) she is stated to have come down the river from Richmond to Westminster, and so to the Tower of London. If, then, she was supposed to have come from Richmond, she may very well have come from Syon, which was also at this time in the hands of the duke of Northumberland .
 Scarcely any of our historical writers show an acquaintance with these letters patent, though they have been conversant with the substance of them from the recital which is made in queen Jane's proclamation. A copy of the letters patent exists among Ralph Starkey's collections in the Harl. MS. 35, bearing this attestation: "This is a true coppie of Edward the Sixte his Will [this terme is misapplied], takene out of the originall undere the greate seale, which sir Robart Cottone delyvered to the King's Matie the xijth of Apprill 1611 at Boystorne to be canseled." From this source the document is printed, in connection with the lady Jane's trial, in Cobbett's State Trials; and Mr. Howard, in his Lady Jane Grey and her Times, pp. 213-216, has described its contents.
It is set forth in these letters patent that the king intended to complete this settlement of the crown by making a will, and by act of Parliament: thus following the precedent of his father Henry the Eighth's settlement, which this was to supersede (see an essay by the present writer in the Archaeologia, vol. xxx. p. 464). But the rapid termination of king Edward's illness prevented these final acts of ratification; and Northumberland, in consequence, could only rely upon the validity of the letters patent, which had passed the great seal upon the 21st of June.
There are, besides the letters patent, two other documents extant, marking the earlier stages of this bold attempt to divert the succession.
 Sir William Drury, for his services "at Framlingham," received, by patent dated the 1st Nov. following, an annuity of 100 marks: see it printed in Rymer's Foedera, xv. 352. A like annuity of 200 marks was granted on the 14th Nov. to Thomas West lord la Warre for his services against the duke (ibid. p. 352); one of 100l. on the 4th Dec. to Sir Richard Southwell (ibid. p. 355); and one of 50l. on the 10th Feb to Francis Purefay for his services at Framlingham (ibid. p. 365). Probably many others, unnoticed by Rymer, are recorded on the Patent Rolls.
 In the suppression of Kett's rebellion.
 Here commences our Manuscript, at f. 31 of the Harleian volume No. 194, as now incorrectly bound.
 i.e. alleged; printed said in Stowe.
 The marquess of Northampton.
 Stowe has altered this to the lord Grey.
 presse in Stowe.
 See the commissions addressed to several commanders to suppress the rebellion in Buckinghamshire, in the Catalogue of State Papers of the reign of queen Jane in the Appendix.
 This passage, together with those that follow, shows that the Chronicler was still writing in the Tower of London.
 Thomas lord Cheney.
 The marquess of Winchester.