Naval and Maritime Life: Medicine, Navigation, and Law in Seventeenth-Century England.

The Edward Worth Library’s collection on seventeenth-century naval and maritime affairs provides an overview of some of the main maritime preoccupations during this dynamic period. Worth’s publications provide an insight into the advancing medical studies, intellectual pursuits, debates, and maritime law of the era.

Thomas Brugis, Vade Mecum: Or A Companion for a Chirurgion. Fitted for Sea, or Land; Peace, or War (London, 1681). Frontispiece portrait and title page featuring the signature of John Worth (1648-88).

Thomas Brugis (b. in or before 1620, d. in or after 1651), a renowned surgeon of his time, referred to himself as a ‘doctor in physick’ in his popular work Vade Mecum: Or A Companion for a Chirurgion. Fitted for Sea, or Land; Peace, or War (London, 1681), a work bought by theologian and dean of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, John Worth (1648-88). While the book did not contain any new information, it became popular due to its usefulness in condensing the medical knowledge of the time into a single medical guide.[1] Brugis’ Vade Mecum’ is wide-ranging and, as might be expected, he was particularly interested in medicinal remedies for scurvy, and he cited a range of possible ‘cures’: ‘Oil of Vitriol … It is also a very good medicine, not only in preventing the Scurvey, taken inwardly, but also in the Cure of the Scurvy many ways; both inwardly taken with any comfortable Wine, or with Beer; … Theriaca Diatefferon, … Also it openeth the obstructions of the Liver and Spleen and thereby preserveth the Body from the Disease called Scurvy; … Brooklime, for the Scurvy and Dropsie & c …’.^[2] As scurvy directly affected seamen, it was beneficial for a book of this kind to provide treatment options. For more information on Brugis’ portrait, visit the Medical Portraits small exhibition.

William Cockburn, Sea Diseases or, A Treatise Of their Nature, Causes, and Cure … (London, 1706). Title page.

William Cockburn, (1669-1739), a physician of the Royal Navy’s Blue Squadron under Queen Anne (1665-1714), ‘kept a Journal of the Mens Names, and a History of their Sickness; … of the medicins’ they were provided and ‘with the success they had’ for two years.^[3] His research was important to the field as it was one of the first in-depth reports on maritime health and wellness which did not solely focus on the treatment of wounds – a factor which had, naturally, been the centre of attention during the intense sea battles of the Second (1665-67) and Third Dutch Wars (1672-74).

His journal turned book, An account of the nature, causes, symptoms and cure of the distempers that are incident to seafaring people was initially published at London in 1696 and Worth owned the second edition, which was entitled: Sea Diseases or, A Treatise Of their Nature, Causes, and Cure … (London, 1706). In it Cockburn investigated the state of the seafarer’s diet, activity levels, lodgings, as well as illnesses while at sea. In regards to their diet, or the ‘victuals’ provided, he noted, ‘Pork and Pease … Oatmeal (Burgoo) Butter and Cheese … Beef and Pudding, or, all Beef … and with these a large proportion of Bread’.^[4] For their drink on the ship they had ‘a very good Table Beer’.^[5] He went on to make a suggestion for improving the oatmeal, as it was important for the health of ‘our Sea-Faring people …’ but was the least favourite food amongst the men due to a small amount of butter.^[6] Cockburn proposed that it might be worth considering an increase to the butter allowance, because ‘if that part of the victualling were made more grateful and agreeable to the Sailors, it would very much contribute to the preservation of their Health’.^[7] He also raised issues about the quality and quantity of bread being served to the men, describing it as ‘… tough and tenacious; and therefore is not so easily broken and divided by the Stomach, and …, is very apt to make way for Obstructions, and to breed very thick and gross humours. But an entire abstinence from Bread deprives the Chyle of that due and necessary Body, that is requisite to make its passage flow enough thro’ the Guts, …’.^[8] Cockburn stressed the importance of bread in aiding digestion, just not this particular poor quality bread that was being served.

Cockburn did not suggest that food was the sole cause of diseases suffered by mariners. In fact he put even more emphasis on the impact of inactivity on their bodies for in his view this was the true cause of their sickness. He observed that when the mariners performed their usual heavy labour on the ship, they were able to properly digest the tough foods given to them. Conversely, problems arose when any men were sedentary for lengths of time, which he believed led to improper digestion and ultimately scurvy. He detailed the symptoms and progression of scurvy, including weakness, itching/bleeding gums, loss of teeth, gangrene, and ulcers. While we now know that scurvy is caused by an extreme vitamin C deficiency, discovered by James Lind (1716-94) in his work A Treatise of the Scurvy in Three Parts (Edinburgh, 1753), Cockburn’s assumption that issues with digestion led to an imbalance of the body’s humours was in line with medical thinking of the time.

Cockburn also considered the mariners’ lodgings when discussing their health. He noted that they slept in hammocks on or below deck, which resulted in ‘the pilfering of Hammocks one from another, their lying on Deck, or betwixt Decks when they are pretty warm after Can of Flip;’.^[9] A ‘can of flip’ was a warmed alcoholic drink, usually beer or rum, sometimes with an egg, which would certainly have kept the men warm and made it difficult for them to find their way into hammocks. These sleeping habits led to colds and other illnesses.

John Collins, The mariners plain scale new plain’d: or, a treatise shewing the ample uses of a circle equally divided, or of a line of chords and equal parts, divided into three books or parts … (London, 1659). ‘Print of the Compass and its Winds’, p. 6.

Worth, as a physician, was naturally interested in naval medicine, but he did not limit himself to texts by surgeons at sea. His collection also includes important books on both navigation and maritime law. One of the former was by John Collins (1626-83), a writer on mathematics and navigation. Following the death of his parents, Collins had become a booksellers apprentice, and then went on to become a junior clerk under a skilled mathematician, who taught Collins about the construction of sundials, mathematics, and accounting.^[10] Following this he worked on a merchant ship for some time. On his return to London he worked in many different jobs, from teaching to writing his own books on mathematics and accounting matters. His mathematical works generally focused on maritime navigation and telling time while at sea.^[11] Collins referred to himself as a ‘philomath’ (lover of mathematics) in his publications.^[12]

The mariner’s plain scale was written in 1659. It was intended for ‘students or mariners’ and contained many geometric drawings and instructions for solving problems.^[13] The initial chapter is called ‘of the Art of Navigation’, and in it Collins outlined the importance of sound mathematical knowledge for mariners.^[14] We can see his didactic approach in Chapter Two, ‘Shewing the Use of the Plain Chart …’ where he defines each term before starting into mathematic problems. A plain chart is defined as ‘a Chart drawn on Paper or Paste-board, lined with Meridians and Parallels, making right Angles each with other, and numbered with degrees both of Latitude and Longitude …’, and the course is where the beginning, middle, and end of a voyage are marked.^[15] Collins describes a ‘Compass and its Winds’ as having ‘each Quadrant divided into ninety degrees’.^[16] This compass aided in determining the course and distance between two places, especially when latitude and longitude are provided.

The engraved title page of Collins’ Geometricall Dyalling: or, Dyallling, a tract included in his The mariners plain scale new plain’d, features four circles in each corner with different problems presented, the ‘Generall Scheme’, ‘Projection of ye Sphere’, ‘In a Circle’, and ‘In a Parrallelogram’, and two rectangles with rulers labelling ‘Chords fitted to ye Schemes in ye Book’ and ‘Chords in time fitted to the Booke’.^[17] Dyalling’s definition is briefly mentioned at the start of the book when Collins supposed ‘that the Reader understands what a Dyal is, what hour Lines are.’.^[18] Dyalling is in fact a method of creating a sundial to determine time based on the position of the sun, an action incredibly useful while at sea. Throughout the book Collins explained to his audience how to determine solutions to numerous navigation problems, and specifically how to chart their journey.

John Selden, Mare Clausum Seu De Dominio Maris … (London, 1635). Title page.

Worth had at least two texts dealing with maritime law. From his father John Worth (1648-88), Dean of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, Dublin, he inherited one of the most important treatises on the subject: John Selden’s Mare Clausum Seu De Dominio Maris … (London, 1635). This was a response to a seminal text which had been published in 1609, by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645), a Dutch statesman and scholar, whose Mare Liberum (in English The Freedom of the Seas), advocated for ‘free access to the ocean for all nations’.^[19] Selden (1584-1654), an English lawyer and scholar, published his celebrated response, Mare Clausum Seu De Dominio Maris (London, 1635), twenty six years later. This seminal text is the July 2024 Book of the Month. While Mare Clausum was written in response to Mare Liberum, it also aimed to justify British fishing rights in the North Sea. Selden sought to push out Dutch fishing fleets monopolizing the waters and to allow English fishermen to claim those waters for the betterment of their business, as well as ensuring the safety of English ports during the Thirty Years’ War.^[20]

Mare Clausum had a massive impact on maritime law. In cases like the 1637-8 Ship-Money Case of John Hampden vs. the Crown, Selden’s work is credited with providing assistance to the prosecution on the legality of the ship-money tax.^[21] The conscription of merchant ships for military service had been common prior to the 1630s, but due to emerging differences in ship constructing standard for merchant ships (as opposed to battle ships), this was no longer possible.^[22] Due to this decline in available naval defences England was at risk of losing control over vital seas and channels, primarily to the French and Dutch. King Charles I (1600-49), began to impose a ‘Ship Money’ tax on citizens to replace the loss of these conscripted ships. A tax that used to only be pressed on coastal towns was now being applied to the entire country. John Hampden (1594-1643), a former student at Magdalen College, Oxford, and the Inner Temple, was opposed to additional taxation for war purposes. In an act of protest, he did not pay his ship-money tax in full, challenging the legality of the tax.^[23] In the case taken against Hampden, the prosecutors cited Mare Clausum because Selden’s claims of England’s inherent sovereignty of the seas had become associated with King Charles I’s ship-money tax.^[24] In the end, the judges ruled in favour of the crown, and following this perceived injustice, more and more citizens began to refuse the ship-money tax. Despite his loss in court, Hampden was highly respected for having challenged the crown for a cause in which he deeply believed.^[25]

Charles Molloy, De Jure Maritimo et Navali or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books (London, 1707). Title page.

Worth’s second text on English maritime law was by Charles Molloy (1646?-90), an Irish born legal writer, who was mostly known for his work De Jure Maritimo et Navali or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books. This text had initially been printed at London in 1696 and Worth owned the 1707 edition. The book proved to be a very popular maritime law text, being published in no less than ten different editions over the next 100 years.^[26] Molloy opened De Jure Maritimo et Navali with a lengthy message to the reader to provide context to his audience as to why humans are inclined to trade with one another across far distances. He revered God as having given man the ‘pious affection of desiring society, where-by one is inclined to defend, love, cherish, and afford mutual aid to each other,’ meaning, humans are predisposed to help and advance one another, in this case, through trade and commerce.^[27] He further stated, ‘they found it was Commerce and Navigation that gave power and force to that mighty People’, and that nations have the right to engage in trading on the sea, and to defend their shores from foreigners.^[28] Worth’s copy of De Jure Maritimo et Navali (London, 1707) exhibits a beautifully detailed double-plate at the front of the book that illustrates the areas of the maritime world that come together to create Britain’s naval power.

Charles Molloy, De Jure Maritimo et Navali or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books (London, 1707). Illustration of allegorical figure Britannia.

The image above depicts the allegorical figure of Britain, Britannia. She is seated on a ‘Union’ shield featuring both the St George and St Andrew crosses, representing England and Scotland together following the Act of Union (1707), which took place in the same year as the publication.^[29] She holds a spear over her shoulder, and there is a lion depicted on her clothing, as well as a helmet on her head. Behind the figure there are numerous ships engaged in a sea-battle, some sinking with plumes of smoke rising from them. At Britannia’s feet there is an image surrounded by two intertwined snakes, of war materials, cannons, cannonballs, spears, and a knight’s helmet. This depiction of Britannia show-cased the naval excellence of Britain and the dominance they exercised over the seas.^[30]

The next illustration depicts a calmer scene. Three women are shown with books and packages scattered about their feet, behind them are four ships, and above them fly three cherubs. The woman furthest to the left wears a helmet and armour on her upper body and holds a serpent-entwined staff. These details lead to the conclusion that this woman is an allegorical figure of Minerva, the Roman goddess of wisdom, law, commerce, and most notably war strategy. The woman seated on the throne, likely a portrayal of Queen Anne of Great Britain and Ireland who reigned between 1702-14, wears a royal crown and holds a sceptre wrapped in a ribbon which says ‘Iubet Prohibet’, loosely translated to ‘she commands and forbids’. She is situated with a book on her lap that says ‘In Legibus Salus’ or ‘safety in the law’, as a show of her power over the seas as the sovereign of the nation. The final figure to the right is representative of Urania, the Greek muse of astronomy, shown with 5 stars around her head, holding a celestial globe to the sky. The use of the stars was vital to navigation and determining time of day for mariners.

Charles Molloy, De Jure Maritimo et Navali or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books (London, 1707). Illustration of three allegorical figures representing Minerva, Queen Anne, and Urania.

In Book 1, Chapter 3: Of Privateers or Capers, Molloy mentions a law that made it illegal for ‘Privateers [to] attempt anything against the Laws of Nations, as to assault or endamage an Enemy in the Port or Haven, under the protection of any Prince or Republick, be he Friend, Ally, or Neuter, for the peace of such places must be kept inviolably’.^[31] The need for private vessels to maintain peace when in port, especially a port of nations non-allied to their own, is of utmost importance, as they are presumably guests of the port, and should act as such.

In Book 1, Chapter 4: Of Piracy, Molloy covers the topic of ‘sea-theives’ or pirates, who ‘enrich [themselves], either by surprise or open force, sets upon Merchants and others trading by Sea, ever spoiling their Lading, … sometimes bereaving them of their lives, and sinking of their Ships;’.^[32] He refers to the rights of a ship’s captain and crew to determine what would come of captive pirates following a failed piracy attempt. He explained that ‘Captors are not obliged to bring them to any Port, but may expose them immediately to punishment, by hanging them up at the Main-yard end before a Departure; for some old natural liberty remains in places where [there] are no judgments’.^[33] Life at sea was dangerous in many ways for captain and crew and by law they were permitted to defend themselves and to determine the fates of those who made attempts on their livelihoods and lives.

Samuel Pepys, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690). Frontispiece portrait of Pepys and title page.

Worth’s final important text on the English navy was by the celebrated diarist Samuel Pepys (1633-1703). Pepys is perhaps the most famous person mentioned in this exhibition, and for good reason. Best known for his diaries, Pepys worked as a senior naval administrator from 1673-79, working closely with James, Duke of York (1633-1701). From 1679-84, Pepys was imprisoned in the Tower of London over false accusations of being involved in the infamous ‘Popish Plot’, during the reign of King Charles II (1630-85).^[34] Following his release and reinstatement in 1684, in or around 1685 he advanced to the position of Chief of the naval staff, the highest achievable rank in the Royal Navy,^[35] He subsequently wrote Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690), in order to comment on and assess the condition of ships, officers and mariners aboard the Royal Navy. According to Knighton, Pepys ‘flagrantly misused statistics to besmirch his predecessors’, and omitted crucial context as to why the navy was in the state it was.^[36]

Samuel Pepys, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690), pp 180-1. Table of ‘Ships and Vessels’.

The Edward Worth Library contains a copy of Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688. The Memoires have been recently analysed by J.D. Davies who dissects the historical discrepancies in the text, and analyses why Pepys would have made such statements.[37] On the surface, the Memories is ‘[s]upported by an impressive-looking array of lists, transcripts of official documents, and statistics,’ which appear to substantiate Pepys’ statement that when he left the navy in 1679, all was well, and that his successors were responsible for ruining everything for which he had worked.^[38] Pepys asserted that it was only because of ‘the far sightedness of [himself] and King James II, particularly in the appointment of a special commission for naval reconstruction from 1686 to 1688, [which] restored the navy to an excellent condition prior to his second departure from office in 1689’.^[39] Pepys provided the following information on the fleet in Memoires:

In 1679, 76 ships were at sea with around 12,040 men aboard them.

In 1684, 24 ships were at sea with around 3,070 men aboard them.

In 1688, 67 ships were at sea with around 12,303 men aboard them.

According to these numbers, it would be easy to presume that something had gone awry in the time that Pepys was imprisoned (1679-84), and that after his return in 1684, the navy was once again back in order.^[40] However, Pepys fails to mention the context of the time. The large active navy in the years leading up to 1679 was due to a threat of war with France that never came to fruition. The decreased size of the fleet on Pepys’ return in 1684 was actually representative of ‘a normal peacetime summer guard, and in fact thirty-nine ships were in service not twenty-four’.^[41]

Samuel Pepys, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England for Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690), p. 100. Table depicting location of ‘Ships under Repair’ and ‘Remaining to be Repair’d’.

Later in his service as Chief of Naval Staff, Pepys was criticised for the deteriorating state of ‘thirty new ships,’ that he himself had urged be built and added to the fleet.^[42] In his absence they had been improperly cared for while in Chatham dry dock, and were suffering from rot within four to seven years of being built. Supporters of his predecessors at the Admiralty blamed ‘Pepys and his regime for purchasing inferior Baltic timber instead of honest English oak’ and for the hurried construction of the ships in question. Pepys’ claims of improper care were later corroborated, as dockyard officers were found to have not been watering the ships daily as they should have been, leading to the accelerated decay.^[43]

The Edward Worth Library’s collection of texts on naval and maritime affairs thus presents a valuable insight into the changing maritime law and political turmoil of seventeenth-century England. It offers us a detailed view of life at sea: the living conditions and medical challenges faced by early modern sailors. At the same time, it reminds us of the wider economic context and the political and economic challenges facing England at this time.

Text: Ms. Deirdre Kennedy, third year student of Educational Sociology and Museum Studies, Purchase College, State University of New York.

Sources

Bederman, David J., ‘The Sea’, in Bardo Fassbender & Anne Peters (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law (Oxford, 2012), pp 359-79.

Brugis, Thomas, Vade Mecum: Or A Companion for a Chirurgion. Fitted for Sea, or Land; Peace, or War … (London, 1681).

Christianson, Paul, ‘Selden, John (1584-1654)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Collins, John, The mariners plain scale new plain’d: or, a treatise shewing the ample uses of a circle equally divided, or of a line of chords and equal parts, divided into three books or parts … (London, 1659).

Court of Exchequer, England and Wales, The arguments of Sir Richard Hutton Knight, one of the judges of the Common Pleas: and Sir George Croke Knight, one of the judges of the Kings Bench … (London, 1641).

Cockburn, William, Sea Diseases or, A Treatise Of their Nature, Causes, and Cure … (London, 1706).

Creighton, Charles, ‘Cockburn, William (1669-1739)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Handley, Stuart, ‘Molloy, Charles (1645/6-1690)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Hargreaves, A.S., ‘Britannia’, A Dictionary of Reference and Allusion.

Ittersum, Martine Julia, van, ‘Debating the Free Sea in London, Paris, The Hague and Venice: the publication of John Selden’s Mare Clausum (1635) and its diplomatic repercussions in Western Europe’, History of European Ideas, 47, no.8 (2021), 1193-1210.

Knighton, C.S., ‘Pepys, Samuel (1633-1703)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Lind, James, A Treatise of the Scurvy in Three Parts Containing An inquiry into the Nature, Causes, and Cure, of that Disease (Edinburgh, 1753).

Lunney, Linde, ‘Molloy (Mulloy), Charles’, Dictionary of Irish Biography.

McGrath, C.I, ‘Brewster, Sir Francis (d. 1704/5)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Molloy, Charles, De Jure Maritimo et Navali: Or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books (London, 1707).

Onuma, Yasuaki, ‘Hugo Grotius’, Encyclopedia Britannica.

Padwa, David J, ‘On the English Translation of John Selden’s Mare Clausum‘, The American Journal of International Law, 54, no. 1 (1960), 156-9.

Pepys, Samuel, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England, For Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690).

Pepys, Samuel & J.D. Davies, Memoires of the Royal Navy 1690 ; New Introduction (Barnsley, South Yorkshire & Annapolis, Md., 2010).

Raymond, Joad, ‘Nedham [Needham], Marchamont (bap. 1620, d. 1678)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Roberts, John (ed.), ‘Asia, Roman province’, The Oxford Dictionary of the Classical World.

Royal Collection Trust, ‘Memoires relating to the state of the Royal Navy of England, for ten years, determin’d December 1688 / by [Samuel Pepys]’.

Russell, Conrad, ‘Hampden, John (1595-1643)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Scriba, Christoph J, ‘Collins, John (1626-1683)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

Selden, John, Mare Clausum Seu De Dominio Maris … (London, 1635).

Selden, John, Of the Dominion Or, Ownership of the Sea … (London, 1652).

Somos, Mark, ‘Selden’s Mare Clausum: the secularisation of international law and the rise of soft imperialism (Version 1)’, Journal of the History of International Law, 14, no. 2, (2012), 287-330.

Thornton, Helen, ‘John Selden’s Response to Hugo Grotius: The Argument for Closed Seas.’ International Journal of Maritime History, 18, no. 2 (2006), 105-128.

Vieira, Monica Brito, ‘Mare Liberum vs. Mare Clausum : Grotius, Freitas, and Selden’s Debate on Dominion over the Seas’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 64, no. 3, (2003), 361-377.

Ward, Jenny, ‘Brugis, Thomas (b. in or after 1620, d. in or after 1651)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

[1] Ward, Jenny, ‘Brugis, Thomas (b. in or after 1620, d. in or after 1651)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[2] Brugis, Thomas, Vade Mecum: Or A Companion for a Chirurgion. Fitted for Sea, or Land; Peace, or War … (London, 1681), pp 50, 103 and 146. These ‘cures’ should not be tried today!

^[3] Cockburn, William, Sea Diseases or, A Treatise Of their Nature, Causes, and Cure … (London, 1706), Dedication.

^[4] Ibid., p. 6.

^[5] Ibid.

^[6] Ibid., p. 33.

^[7] Ibid.

^[8] Ibid., p. 28.

^[9] Ibid., p. 100.

^[10] Scriba, Christoph J, ‘Collins, John (1626-1683)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[11] Ibid.

^[12] Collins, John, The mariners plain scale new plain’d: or, a treatise shewing the ample uses of a circle equally divided, or of a line of chords and equal parts, divided into three books or parts … (London, 1659).

^[13] Ibid., Dedication.

^[14] Ibid., p. 1

^[15] Ibid., p. 5.

^[16] Ibid., p. 6.

^[17] Ibid. Geometricall Dyalling or Dyalling by a line of Chords onely, engraved title page.

^[18] Ibid., p. 1.

^[19] Onuma, Yasuaki, ‘Hugo Grotius’, Encyclopedia Britannica.

^[20] Vieira, Monica Brito, ‘Mare Liberum vs. Mare Clausum : Grotius, Freitas, and Selden’s Debate on Dominion over the Seas’, Journal of the History of Ideas, 64, no. 3, (2003), 362. ; Thornton, Helen, ‘John Selden’s Response to Hugo Grotius: The Argument for Closed Seas.’ International Journal of Maritime History, 18, no. 2 (2006), 108; Christianson, Paul, ‘Selden, John (1584-1654)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[21] Russell, Conrad, ‘Hampden, John (1595-1643)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[22] Ibid.

^[23] Ibid.

^[24] Ittersum, Martine Julia, van, ‘Debating the Free Sea in London, Paris, The Hague and Venice: the publication of John Selden’s Mare Clausum (1635) and its diplomatic repercussions in Western Europe’, History of European Ideas, 47, no.8 (2021), 1194.

^[25] Russell, Conrad, ‘Hampden, John (1595-1643)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[26] Lunney, Linde, ‘Molloy (Mulloy), Charles’, Dictionary of Irish Biography.

^[27] Molloy, Charles, De Jure Maritimo et Navali: Or, A Treatise of Affairs Maritime and of Commerce In Three Books (London, 1707), p. i.

^[28] Ibid., p. vi.

^[29] Hargreaves, A.S., ‘Britannia’, A Dictionary of Reference and Allusion.

^[30] Ibid.

^[31] Ibid., p. 48.

^[32] Ibid., p. 55.

^[33] Ibid., p. 61.

^[34] Royal Collection Trust., ‘Memoires relating to the state of the Royal Navy of England, for ten years, determin’d December 1688 / by [Samuel Pepys]’.

^[35] Knighton, C.S., ‘Pepys, Samuel (1633-1703)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.

^[36] Ibid.

[37] Pepys, Samuel & J.D. Davies, Memoires of the Royal Navy 1690; New Introduction (Barnsley, South Yorkshire & Annapolis, Md., 2010).

^[38] Ibid., p. ix.

^[39] Ibid.

^[40] Ibid.,pp ix-x.

^[41] Ibid.

^[42] Pepys, Samuel, Memoires Relating to the State of the Royal Navy of England, For Ten Years, Determin’d December 1688 (London, 1690), pp 16-17.

^[43] Pepys, Samuel & J.D. Davies, Memoires of the Royal Navy 1690 ; New Introduction (Barnsley, South Yorkshire & Annapolis, Md., 2010), pp xi-xii.