¹ MS Osborn fb234, Beinecke Library, Yale, epistle dedicatory, a. The manuscript (hereafter referred to as “Pax”) has a title page with a design for a frontispiece on the reverse, followed by an epistle dedicatory (pages a–c), a blank side, and a preface (paginated i–xxiii in a paler shade). After this the pagination runs 1–75, 75a (with the “a” in a paler shade), 76–136, 163 (corrected to 137), 138–342, 243–44 (i.e., 343–44), 345–421, and a blank side. The size is taken from the Yale University Online Catalogue, http://hdl.handle.net/10079/bibid/7041807.

² Discussed in the following: Rose, Jacqueline, “Royal Ecclesiastical Supremacy and the Restoration Church,” Historical Research 80, no. 209 (2007): 324–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 328–30; Matthew Ward, “‘Thinking with Hobbes’: Political Thought in Ireland, c.1660–c.1730” (PhD diss., University of Oxford, 2020), chap. 2. Mentioned in the following: Mark Somos, “Harrington's Project: The Balance of Money, a Republican Constitution for Europe, and England's Patronage of the World,” in Commerce and Peace in the Enlightenment, ed. Béla Kapossy, Isaac Nakhimovsky, and Richard Whatmore (Cambridge, 2017), 20–43, at 36n76; Mark Somos, “Open and Closed Seas: The Grotius-Selden Dialogue at the Heart of Liberal Imperialism,” in Empire and Legal Thought, ed. Edward Cavanagh (Brill, 2020), 322–61, at 351n90.

³ “Pax,” xxiii.

⁴ “Pax,” 338; Richard Blome, A Description of the Island of Jamaica: with the other isles and territories in America [. . .] (London, 1672); Edward Arber, ed., The Term Catalogues, 1668–1709 A.D.: With a Number for Easter Term, 1711 A.D., 3 vols. (London, 1903–1906), 1:96 (7 February 1671/72); Arlington: Alan Marshall, s.v. “Bennet, Henry, First Earl of Arlington (bap. 1618, d. 1685), Politician,” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography Online, 3 January 2008, https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/2104.

⁵ Jon Parkin, Taming the Leviathan: The Reception of the Political and Religious Ideas of Thomas Hobbes in England, 1640–1700 (Cambridge, 2007), chap. 5.

⁶ “Pax” therefore partly demonstrates David Armitage's claim that political economy (in the sense of commerce being an affair of state) provided a way to describe British relationships in an Atlantic economic context, but its way of conceptualizing those relationships differed from some of the examples that Armitage cites, and it appeared before such discourse really took off in the early eighteenth century. David Armitage, The Ideological Origins of the British Empire (Cambridge, 2000), esp. 7–8 and chap. 6.

⁷ Skinner, Quentin, “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas,” History and Theory 8, no. 1 (1969): 3–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 16–22.

⁸ Skinner, “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas,” 45–48.

⁹ Marco Geuna, “Skinner, Pre-Humanist Rhetorical Culture and Machiavelli,” in Rethinking the Foundations of Modern Political Thought, ed. Annabel Brett et al. (Cambridge, 2006), 50–72, at 54.

¹⁰ Quentin Skinner, “Interpretation, Rationality and Truth,” in Visions of Politics, vol. 1, Regarding Method (Cambridge, 2002), 27–56, at 54–56.

¹¹ Annabel Brett, “What Is Intellectual History Now?,” in What Is History Now?, ed. David Cannadine (Basingstoke, 2002), 113–31, at 127.

¹² Denoted in the full title of “Pax.”

¹³ Parkin, Taming the Leviathan, 36.

¹⁴ Parkin, 342–43.

¹⁵ Michael Hunter, The Image of Restoration Science: The Frontispiece to Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society (1667) (London, 2016). It is worth noting that Wenceslaus Hollar, who etched the frontispiece for Spratt's History, also etched Blome's map of London of 1673.

¹⁶ Worsley and Petty both benefited from the creation of new offices and councils under Cromwell and again under the Cabal ministry. Worsley served on the council of trade established in 1650, the council of trade established in 1668, and the council for trade and plantations established in 1672; see Thomas Leng, Benjamin Worsley (1617–1677): Trade, Interest, and the Spirit in Revolutionary England (Woodbridge, 2008), 61, 155, 165. Worsley also served as surveyor-general under Cromwell, a role in which he came into conflict with Petty, who was appointed to conduct the Down Survey of Ireland; see Ted McCormick, William Petty and the Ambitions of Political Arithmetic (Oxford, 2009), 95–106. For Petty's advice, see below, at note 150.

¹⁷ Mordechai Feingold, s.v. “Stubbe [Stubbes, Stubbs], Henry (1632–1676),” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography Online, 3 January 2008, https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/26734.

¹⁸ The author refers to the “Accident of Fire” that had befallen “our Citty” and the “mighty care” the king had taken in “rebuildinge it”; “Pax,” 120. References to the City of London Corporation, the River Thames, and Chatham confirm his familiarity with the capital and the surrounding area; “Pax,” 291, 293.

¹⁹ “Pax,” 164.

²⁰ “Instructions for the Council for Foreign Plantations, 1670–1672,” printed in Charles McLean Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 1622–1675 (Baltimore, 1908), appendix 2, 117–24, and discussed by Abigail L. Swingen in Competing Visions of Empire: Labor, Slavery and the Origins of the British Atlantic Empire (New Haven, 2015), 85.

²¹ Slingsby was responsible for communicating with Sir Thomas Lynch, an official in Jamaica favored by Arlington; Lynch became de facto governor in 1671 following Sir Thomas Modyford's dismissal; “Council for Foreign Plantations, Journal, 1670–1686,” 3 vols., Library of Congress, Phillipps no. 8539, 1:84–85.

²² Slingsby seems to have leased the Earl of Bristol's House on Queen's Street; see John Evelyn, The Diary of John Evelyn, ed. William Bray, 2 vols. (London, 1901), 1:65. For Hobbes's occupation of the house, see John Aubrey, “Brief Lives,” Chiefly of Contemporaries, ed. Andrew Clark, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1898), 1:350.

²³ The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. Robert Latham and William Matthews, 11 vols. (London, 1970–1983), 6:23 (27 January 1665).

²⁴ “Pax,” 313.

²⁵ See below, in the section “‘Pax’ on the Theory of Subjecthood and Sovereignty.”

²⁶ Henry Slingsby to Sir Henry Slingsby, 21 April 1670, North Yorkshire County Record Office, Northallerton, ZKZ 5/5/2/1. For the Slingsbys’ interests in Connaught, see John Cunningham, Conquest and Land in Ireland: The Transplantation to Connacht, 1649–1680 (London, 2011), 134.

²⁷ C. E. Challis, s.v. “Slingsby, Henry (1619/20–1690), Master of the Mint,” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 3 January 2008, https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/58155.

²⁸ “Council for Foreign Plantations, Journal, 1670–1686,” 1:3.

²⁹ “Pax,” 116, 294.

³⁰ Christoph J. Scriba, s.v. “Collins, John (1626–1683), Mathematician and Scientific Administrator,” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography Online, 23 September 2004, https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/5941.

³¹ John Collins, A Plea for the bringing in of Irish cattel (London, 1680).

³² Sir Henry Slingsby to “Mr Williamson,” 18 June 1672, North Yorkshire County Record Office, Northallerton, ZKZ 4/5/2/1b.

³³ “Pax,” 121.

³⁴ Robert Boyle's experiment was first described in “A Conjecture concerning the Bladders of Air that are found in Fishes,” Philosophical Transactions (1665–1678), no. 10 (1675): 311. John Ray's response confirms the novelty of Boyle's experiment and its findings: “A letter written to the Publisher by the Learned Mr. Ray [. . .],” Philosophical Transactions (1665–1678), no. 10 (1675): 349–51. Though he did not mention Boyle by name, Charles Preston later described Boyle's experiment and suggested that it refuted Walter Needham's claim that the swim bladder served a fish's digestion; see “A General Idea of the Structure of the Internal Parts of Fish,” Philosophical Transactions (1683–1775), no. 19 (1695–97): 422–23.

³⁵ Webster, Charles, “The Discovery of Boyle's Law, and the Concept of the Elasticity of Air in the Seventeenth Century,” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 2, no. 6 (1965): 441–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 449–50.

³⁶ Robert Boyle, “A New Essay-Instrument Invented and Described by the Honourable Robert Boyle Together with the Uses Therof,” Philosophical Transactions (1665–1678), no. 10 (1675): 331.

³⁷ Robert Boyle, appendix to Tracts written by the Honourable Robert Boyle containing New Experiments (London, 1672), 25–39.

³⁸ Calendar of the Proceedings of the Committee for Compounding &c., 1643–60 [. . . ], ed. Mary Anne Everett Green, 5 vols. (London, 1889–1892), 2:1387; various other Slingsbys appear at 3:1800, 1889–1890, and (with less-clear kinship links) 1:14, 113, 623, 33, 380; 2:1154. See also P. G. Holiday, “Land Sales and Repurchases in Yorkshire after the Civil Wars, 1650–70,” in The English Civil Wars: Local Aspects, ed. R. C. Richardson (Stroud, 1997); David Scott, s.v. “Slingsby, Sir Henry, First Baronet (1602–1658), Royalist Army Officer and Conspirator,” Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, 23 September 2004, https://doi.org/10.1093/ref:odnb/25727.

³⁹ Melanie Harrington, “Disappointed Royalists in Restoration England and Wales” (Ph.D. diss., University of Cambridge, 2014); Paul H. Hardacre, The Royalists during the Puritan Revolution (The Hague, 1956), chap. 7; John Miller, After the Civil Wars (Harlow, 2000), chap. 9.

⁴⁰ “Pax,” 54–55.

⁴¹ “Pax,” 22, ii, 37, 47. Challis mentions Slingsby's receiving assistance from Ashley Cooper. Challis, “Slingsby, Henry.” See below for their disagreement over Restoration policy.

⁴² “Pax,” 6–7.

⁴³ “Pax,” 56, 25, 60, 62, 57.

⁴⁴ “Pax,” 41–46.

⁴⁵ Mark Goldie, “Danby, the Bishops and the Whigs,” in The Politics of Religion in Restoration England, ed. Tim Harris, Paul Seaward, and Mark Goldie (Oxford, 1990), 75–105, at 76.

⁴⁶ Jesse Norman, “Smith as Spad? Adam Smith and Advice to Politicians,” in Political Advice: Past, Present and Future, ed. Colin Kidd and Jacqueline Rose (London, 2021), 99–115, at 106.

⁴⁷ Although its length is exceptional, in this way “Pax” fits with the anonymous, policy-focused, and unsystematic economic literature that Julian Hoppit describes. Hoppit, Julian, “The Contours and Contexts of British Economic Literature, 1660–1760,” Historical Journal 49, no. 1 (2006): 79–110Google Scholar. Hoppit alludes to but does not discuss scribal publications.

⁴⁸ That is, orb. This is a textual description of what to draw, rather than an image; “The Frontispice,” “Pax,” n.p.

⁴⁹ Goldsmith, M. M., “Hobbes's Ambiguous Politics,” History of Political Thought 11, no. 4 (1990): 639–73Google Scholar, esp. 641–43, 655–57; M. M. Goldsmith, “Picturing Hobbes's Politics? The Illustrations to Philosophical Rudiments,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, no. 44 (1981): 232–37.

⁵⁰ For example, law is represented by Magna Carta, judges, and an executioner, toleration by “A Conventicle drawne Hatts on men kicking at the comon pray[er] booke.”

⁵¹ “Pax,” 164, 205; see Axtell, James L., “The Mechanics of Opposition: Restoration Cambridge v. Daniel Scargill,” Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research 38, no. 97 (1965): 102–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Parkin, Jon, “Hobbism in the Later 1660s: Daniel Scargill and Samuel Parker,” Historical Journal 42, no. 1 (1999): 85–108Google Scholar; Milton, Philip, “Hobbes, Heresy, and Lord Arlington,” History of Political Thought 14, no. 4 (1993): 501–46Google Scholar. Parkin, Jon, “Baiting the Bear: The Anglican Attack on Hobbes in the Later 1660s,” History of Political Thought 34, no. 3 (2013): 421–58Google Scholar, argues that there was a concerted targeting of Hobbes, whose particular concern (448–50) was the threat of a writ de haeretico comburendo, the point to which “Pax” refers. On the wider reception of Hobbes, see in particular Mark Goldie, “The Reception of Hobbes,” in The Cambridge History of Political Thought, 1450–1700, ed. J. H. Burns and Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1991), 589–615; Parkin, Taming the Leviathan; Jeffrey R. Collins, In the Shadow of Leviathan: John Locke and the Politics of Conscience (Cambridge, 2020), esp. chaps 2–3.

⁵² “Pax,” 161, chap. 8.

⁵³ “Pax,” 160, 166–67.

⁵⁴ “Pax,” 181, 185.

⁵⁵ “Pax,” 185–86; 189 cites “Hobs 80” praising peace. Slingsby's citations match the pagination of the “head” edition of Leviathan (Wing H2246), but not of the second (1647) edition of De cive, nor Philosophical Rudiments (1651), nor that in Hobbes's Opera philosophica quae latinè scripsit, omnia (Amsterdam, 1668). For the single natural law on peace and war and the need to keep one's covenants, see On the Citizen, ed. Richard Tuck and Michael Silverthorne (Cambridge, 1998), 34, 43–44.

⁵⁶ “Pax,” 177; Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. Noel Malcolm, 3 vols. (Oxford, 2012), 2:254, chaps. 13–14. The language that “Pax” uses is drawn from Leviathan rather than De cive.

⁵⁷ “Pax,” 181, 177–78, 202; Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:198 (cf. Hobbes, De cive, 111, which shares the sentiment, but “Pax”'s language derives from Leviathan, 2:192, which has “Competition” rather than ambition).

⁵⁸ “Pax,” 181; Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:194, 196.

⁵⁹ “Pax,” 160, 177, 189; Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:204 (separating contract and covenant), 210; Hobbes, De cive, 36–37, distinguishes an immediate contract from an agreement involving trust.

⁶⁰ “Pax,” 161.

⁶¹ Genesis 1:28, quoted in “Pax,” 190.

⁶² “Pax,” 192–93, 197–98; 193 cites Clement Barksdale's translation of Grotius, The illustrious Hugo Grotius of the law of warre and peace (London [1654]), 198.

⁶³ Barksdale, Illustrious Hugo Grotius of the law of warre and peace, 203.

⁶⁴ Barksdale, 203; the equivalent passage is found in Grotius, De iure belli, II.II.II.i, II.II.II.v, ed. Richard Tuck, 3 vols. (Indianapolis, 2005), 2:421, 426–27; for promises versus contracts, see II.XI–XII; for Selden, who offered a more historically dense discussion, see Richard Tuck, Natural Rights Theories (Cambridge, 1979), 86–89.

⁶⁵ “Pax,” 198, 213.

⁶⁶ “Pax,” 203–4; the text stresses the foundation of law on superior command at 188–89 and 200–1, though inelegantly describing human law as making sin “exceedinge sinfull,” at 198.

⁶⁷ “Pax,” 204–5, citing 1 Peter 2 and Romans 13, and then Barksdale, Illustrious Hugo Grotius of the law of warre and peace, 323–24.

⁶⁸ Barksdale, Illustrious Hugo Grotius of the law of warre and peace, 136–37, 150–51; Grotius, De iure belli, I.IV.II, VII, 1: 338–39, 358.

⁶⁹ On royalist critics, see Goldie, “Reception of Hobbes,” 603–5; Roger Coke, A Survey of the Politicks of Mr Thomas White, Thomas Hobbs and Hugo Grotius (1662), sig. Er-v, pp. 25–26; cited in “Pax,” 205–6.

⁷⁰ “Pax,” 164; Samuel Parker, A Discourse of Ecclesiastical Politie (1670 [1669]), 115–19.

⁷¹ “Pax,” 209–13, at 214, 212; albeit 211 quotes Parker's Ecclesiastical Politie, 31, on fathers being kings and priests. Parker briefly referred to fathers being the first kings (Ecclesiastical Politie, 29–30) and stressed that men were always born under government.

⁷² Jacqueline Rose, “The Ecclesiastical Polity of Samuel Parker,” Seventeenth Century 25, no. 2 (2010): 350–75; Collins, Shadow of Leviathan, 155–65.

⁷³ “Pax,” 19.

⁷⁴ “Pax,” 4, 5, 19; Parker, Ecclesiastical Politie. The language of conscience as a tyrant is also prominent in the series of works stemming from Simon Patrick's A Friendly Debate (1668).

⁷⁵ “Pax,” 365–66, 371, 379; Edward Chamberlayne, Angliae Notitia (1669), 123 of Wing C1819.

⁷⁶ “Pax,” chaps. 19–20, at 377, 379, 385.

⁷⁷ Angle brackets indicate text inserted by unknown hand.

⁷⁸ “Pax,” 364–66, 379, 368.

⁷⁹ “Pax,” 379; for Stubbe, see “An Inquiry into the Supremacy Spirituall of the Kings of England: Occasioned by a Proviso in the Late Act of Parliament against Conventicles,” The National Archives, London, SP 29/319/220; “The History of the Spirituall Supremacy as it was Exercised by Qu: Elizabeth,” The National Archives, SP 29/319/221; “An Answer unto Certaine Objections formed against the Proceedings of His Majesty to Suspend the Lawes against Conventicles by His Declaration March 15 1672,” The National Archives, SP 29/219/222.

⁸⁰ “Pax,” 394, 13–14, 406–7.

⁸¹ John Locke, “An Essay on Toleration,” in Political Essays, ed. Mark Goldie (Cambridge, 1997), 134–59, at 159; W. D. Christie, A Life of Anthony Ashley Cooper, First Earl of Shaftesbury, 2 vols. (London, 1871), 2:appendix 1; John Owen, Truth and Innocence Vindicated (1669), 77–81; Henry Stubbe, A Further Iustification of the Present War (1673), Wing S6046, 29; A Second Letter [. . .] against Comprehension (1668), 3.

⁸² Slingsby Bethel, The Present Interest of England Stated (London: 1671), 7–8, 13, 17–18. On the nexus of London Dissent, see Gary S. De Krey, London and the Restoration (Cambridge, 2005), chaps. 2–3.

⁸³ Samuel Fortrey, Englands Interest and Improvement (1673), 8–11. This is a reprint of a work of 1663, at which point the debate on political economy was less prominent than it was by the later 1660s.

⁸⁴ Fleetingly in Parker, Ecclesiastical Politie, sig. b8r, and in the anonymous attack on Parker's critic Marvell, S'too him Bayes (Oxford, 1673), 58–59.

⁸⁵ Roger Coke, A Treatise wherein is demonstrated that the Church and State of England are in Equal Danger with the Trade of it (1671), sig. A2r and pp. 4–5, 90, and passim.

⁸⁶ “Pax,” 10, makes some positive noises about reunion on a Grotian or “Cassandrian” model, but at 65 conflates comprehension and toleration.

⁸⁷ “Pax,” 145–48.

⁸⁸ Francis Bacon, “Of the true Greatnesse of Kingdomes and Estates,” in The Essayes or Counsels, Civill and Morall, ed. Michael Kiernan (Oxford, 1985), 625–86, at 98. On commerce and naval strength, see John Evelyn, Navigation and Commerce, their Original and Progress (1674), in The miscellaneous writings of John Evelyn: author of Sylva, or, a discourse of forest trees; Memoirs, &c., ed. William Upcott (London, 1825), 625–86, at 635.

⁸⁹ David Armitage, “Greater Britain: A Useful Category of Historical Analysis?,” American Historical Review 104, no. 2 (1999): 427–45, at 427. In this section and the one that follows, we build on Matthew Ward, “‘Thinking with Hobbes’: Political Thought in Ireland, c.1660–c.1730” (PhD diss., University of Oxford, 2020), chap. 2.

⁹⁰ Barbara Arneil, “Trade, Plantations, and Property: John Locke and the Economic Defense of Colonialism,” Journal of the History of Ideas 55, no. 4 (1994): 591–609.

⁹¹ Coke, Church and State of England in Equal Danger, 25.

⁹² Bethel, The Present Interest of England Stated, 32.

⁹³ “Instructions for the Council for Foreign Plantations, 1670–1672,” in Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, appendix 2, 117–24.

⁹⁴ Andrews, 122.

⁹⁵ The council of plantations met at least 145 times: Ralph Paul Bieber, “The British Plantation Councils of 1670–4,” English Historical Review 40, no. 157 (1925): 93–106, at 94.

⁹⁶ Though historians of colonial administration have noticed the “movement for centralization” throughout the Restoration, the debate about the nature of this centralisation has been largely overlooked: Phillip Haffenden, “The Crown and the Colonial Charters, 1675–1688: Part II,” William and Mary Quarterly 15, no. 4 (1958): 452–66; Michael J. Braddick, “The English Government, War, Trade, and Settlement, 1625–1688,” in The Oxford History of the British Empire, vol. 1, British Overseas Enterprise to the Close of the Seventeenth Century, ed. Nicholas Canny (Oxford, 1998), 286–308, at 298–300; Nuala Zahedieh, The Capital and the Colonies: London and the Atlantic Economy, 1660–1700 (Cambridge, 2010), 27–54.

⁹⁷ Violet Barbour, Henry Bennet, Earl of Arlington, Secretary of State to Charles II (Washington, DC, 1914), 176.

⁹⁸ Armitage, Ideological Origins, chap. 1.

⁹⁹ Benjamin Worsley, “The peculiar advantages which this Nation hath by the trade of our Plantations above any other,” 1668, Rawlinson MS, A478, fol. 65v, Bodleian Library, Oxford. See also Tim Harris, “England's ‘Little Sisters without Breasts’: Shaftesbury and Scotland and Ireland,” in Anthony Ashley Cooper, First Earl of Shaftesbury, 1621–1683, ed. John Spurr (Farnham, 2011), 183–205, at 188.

¹⁰⁰ Thomas M. Truxes, Irish American Trade, 1660–1783 (Cambridge, 1988), 9; Carolyn A. Edie, “The Irish Cattle Bills: A Study in Restoration Politics,” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 60, no. 2 (1970): 1–66, at 12–13.

¹⁰¹ Edie, “The Irish Cattle Bills,” 17–40.

¹⁰² Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 106–7; Bieber, “British Plantation Councils,” 100.

¹⁰³ “Journal of the Lords of the Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations,” Phillipps no. 8539, vol. 2:1–3.

¹⁰⁴ “Journal of the Lords of the Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations,” Phillipps no. 8539, vol. 2:45–46.

¹⁰⁵ Patrick Hyde Kelly, “General Introduction: Locke on Money,” in Locke on Money, ed. Patrick Hyde Kelly, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1991), 1:1–109, at 6–7.

¹⁰⁶ Thomas Leng, “Shaftesbury's Aristocratic Empire,” in Anthony Ashley Cooper, First Earl of Shaftesbury, 1621–1682, ed. John Spurr (Farnham, 2011), 101–25, at 119.

¹⁰⁷ John Locke, Some Considerations of the Consequences of Lowering of Interest, and Raising the Value of Money, in Locke on Money, 1:203–342, at 289.

¹⁰⁸ Patrick Hyde Kelly, “The Irish Woollen Export Prohibition Act of 1699: Kearney Re-visited,” Irish Economic and Social History, no. 7 (1980): 22–44, at 24, 27–28. For the discussion about prohibiting “the Importation of Woollen yarne out of Ireland,” see “Journal of the Lords of the Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations,” 56.

¹⁰⁹ A. P. Thornton, West-India Policy under the Restoration (Oxford, 1956), 67.

¹¹⁰ A Proclamation for the encouraging of Planters in His Majesties Island of Jamaica in the West-Indies (London, 1661).

¹¹¹ Swingen, Competing Visions, 75–81; for detailed discussions of privateering in Jamaica under Modyford, see Jon Latimer, Buccaneers of the Caribbean: How Piracy Forged an Empire, 1607–1697 (London, 2009), chaps. 9–11, and Nuala Zahedieh, “‘A Frugal, Prudential and Hopeful Trade’: Privateering in Jamaica, 1655–89,” Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History 18, no. 2 (1990): 145–68, at 145–57.

¹¹² Leng, Benjamin Worsley, 160.

¹¹³ Frances Gardiner Davenport, ed., European Treatises bearing on the History of the United States and its Dependencies, 4 vols. (Washington, DC, 1929), 2:iv.

¹¹⁴ Stephen Saunders Webb, The Governors-General: The English Army and the Definition of the Empire, 1569–1681 (Chapel Hill, 1979), 245–49; For Arlington's pro-Spanish diplomatic policy and the consequences for it of Modyford's actions, see Maurice Lee, The Cabal (Urbana, 1965), 115–16.

¹¹⁵ Swingen, Competing Visions, 91–93. There is evidence that the crown was planning to dismiss Modyford before the destruction of Panama. On Thursday, 10 November 1670, the council was informed of the king's intention to revoke Modyford's commission and the “disposing of the privateers” was also debated: “Journal of the Lords of the Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations,” 29.

¹¹⁶ “Journal of the Lords of the Committee for Trade and Foreign Plantations,” 10, 19.

¹¹⁷ Modyford's formal replacement, the Earl of Carlisle, stayed in England: Latimer, Buccaneers of the Caribbean, 205.

¹¹⁸ Sir Thomas Lynch to Lord Arlington, 29 November 1671, British Library, London, Add. MS 11410, 410–12; Sir Thomas Lynch to Lord Arlington, “The Present State of the Government of Jamaica,” 20 August 1671, The National Archives, Colonial Office 1/27/22.1, fol. 43v.

¹¹⁹ Worsley referred cryptically to the importance of Jamaica having a prudent and eminent Governor: Worsley to Buckingham, “Discourse of the Privateers of Jamaica,” undated, British Library, London, Add. MS 11410, 670. This MS is paginated; and we have followed other scholars in citing the page rather than folio numbers.

¹²⁰ Lynch to Lord Arlington, undated, British Library, Add. MS 11410, 371–80, esp. p. 373; Mr Ball to Lord Arlington, 17 December 1671, British Library, Add. MS 11410, p. 442. For Lynch's connection to Arlington, see Webb, Governors-General, 232.

¹²¹ Worsley, “Discourse of the Privateers,” 671.

¹²² Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America, and West Indies, 1669–1674, ed. W. Noel Sainsbury, vol. 7 (London, 1889), 339–41, 420, 425–27. Available at British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/cal-state-papers/colonial/america-west-indies/vol7.

¹²³ Dunn, Sugar and Slaves: The Rise of the Planter Class in the English West Indies, 1624–1713 (Chapel Hill, 2000), 156–57, 168–89.

¹²⁴ Lynch to Lord Arlington, 29 November 1671, British Library, Add. MS 11410, 429.

¹²⁵ “Pax,” 337.

¹²⁶ “Pax,” 447–48.

¹²⁷ “Pax,” 297.

¹²⁸ Calendar of State Papers Colonial, America, and West Indies, 1669–1674, 298.

¹²⁹ “Pax,” 126–27.

¹³⁰ “Pax,” 341.

¹³¹ “Pax,” 309.

¹³² “Pax,” 336. The author seems to refer to the publication of material relating to the natural history of American colonies in Philosophical Transactions 8, no. 93 (1673).

¹³³ “Pax,” 338–39.

¹³⁴ Mark Govier, “The Royal Society, Slavery and the Island of Jamaica: 1660–1700,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society 53, no. 2 (1999): 203–17.

¹³⁵ “Pax,” 90–5. The numbers of enslaved people in Jamaica rose sharply from the late 1660s: Dunn, Sugar and Slaves, 154–55, 157, 167–70, 237. The author of “Pax” was probably writing just before rebellions of those enslaved people began there; Dunn, 256, 259–60, 161. The idea of involuntary labor solving the problem of idleness was also suggested by the Royal Fishing Company's Charter of 1664: Govier, “Royal Society,” 206.

¹³⁶ Jamaica experienced an influx of English servants in the 1660s, but they had quite distinct legal rights from enslaved people, who were governed by a separate legal system: Dunn, Sugar and Slaves, 239–40; Diana Paton, “Punishment, Crime, and the Bodies of Slaves in Eighteenth-Century Jamaica,” Journal of Social History 34, no. 4 (2001): 923–54, esp. 926–28.

¹³⁷ “Pax,” 120–21.

¹³⁸ Parliament severely restricted intercolonial trade in 1673: E. E. Rich, “The First Earl of Shaftesbury's Colonial Policy,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, no. 7 (1957): 47–70, at 67–68.

¹³⁹ “Pax,” 121.

¹⁴⁰ “Pax,” 308–9.

¹⁴¹ Thomas Hobbes, Behemoth, or, The Long Parliament, ed. Paul Seaward (Oxford, 2010), 2, 6, 106.

¹⁴² See, for example, Richard Tuck, “Hobbes and Locke on Toleration,” in Thomas Hobbes and Political Theory, ed. Mary G. Dietz (Lawrence, 1990), 153–71, at 159; also, Philip Milton's response to Tuck in Milton, “Hobbes, Hersey and Arlington,” 153–71.

¹⁴³ Hobbes, Behemoth, 48–50.

¹⁴⁴ Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:236.

¹⁴⁵ Hobbes, Behemoth, 48–49.

¹⁴⁶ Hobbes, The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, ed. Sir William Molesworth, 11 vols. (London, 1840) 4:145–47.

¹⁴⁷ Hobbes, Leviathan, 3:1134

¹⁴⁸ Hobbes, 1:33–35.

¹⁴⁹ Hobbes, 2:314.

¹⁵⁰ Hobbes, 2:304.

¹⁵¹ William Petty, “Report from the Council of Trade in Ireland,” The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty, ed. Charles Henry Hull, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1899), 1:212. Hull refers to Arlington's copy of the report, now in the National Archives, which was “apparently transmitted” to Arlington by Essex. Locke's copy is in “Locke's 1661 Notebook,” 1673, Bodleian Library, Oxford, MS Film 77, fols. 220–31. It is attributed incorrectly to Worsley in Leng, Benjamin Worsley, 169.

¹⁵² Essex to Arlington, 26 October 1672, in Essex Papers, vol. 1, 1672–1679, ed. Osmund Airy (London, 1890), 36, cited in Truxes, Irish American Trade, 10.

¹⁵³ Petty, “Report from the Council of Trade in Ireland,” 219–21.

¹⁵⁴ Sir William Petty, “Essay on the King's right to the dominion of the seas,” [possibly late 1680s], British Library, Add. MS 72865, fol. 119r.

¹⁵⁵ Petty, “Report from the Council of Trade in Ireland,” 242n4.

¹⁵⁶ Petty, 298.

¹⁵⁷ Petty, 300.

¹⁵⁸ “Pax,” 288.

¹⁵⁹ Istvan Hont, Jealousy of Trade: International Competition and the Nation-State in Historical Perspective (Cambridge, 2005), esp. 17–21 and 182–84.

¹⁶⁰ “Pax,” 134.

¹⁶¹ Tom Sorell, “Hobbes, Public Safety and Political Economy,” in International Political Theory after Hobbes: Analysis, Interpretation and Orientation, ed. Raia Prokhovnik and Gabriella Slomp (Basingstoke, 2010), 42–55, at 50–52.

¹⁶² Hont, Jealousy of Trade, 18.

¹⁶³ Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:364. Noel Malcolm revealed Hobbes's membership in the Virginia Company in “Hobbes, Sandys, and the Virginia Company,” Historical Journal 24, no. 2 (1981): 297–321, at 298.

¹⁶⁴ Hobbes, English Works, 4:207.

¹⁶⁵ Henry S. Turner, The Corporate Commonwealth: Pluralism and Political Fictions in England, 1516–1651 (Chicago, 2016), 88.

¹⁶⁶ Henry S. Turner, “Corporations: Humanism and Elizabethan Political Economy,” in Mercantilism Reimagined: Political Economy in Early Modern Britain and Its Empire, ed. Philip J. Stern and Carl Wennerlind (Oxford, 2013), 153–76, at 167.

¹⁶⁷ Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:348.

¹⁶⁸ Hobbes, 2:362–64.

¹⁶⁹ Hobbes, 2:364n66.

¹⁷⁰ “Pax,” 310.

¹⁷¹ “Pax,” 293.

¹⁷² “Pax,” 292.

¹⁷³ Skeel, Caroline A. J., “The Canary Company,” English Historical Review 31, no. 124 (1916): 529–44Google Scholar, at 533.

¹⁷⁴ “Pax,” 293.

¹⁷⁵ “Pax,” 121. Paul Halliday discusses these efforts in Dismembering the Body Politic: Partisan Politics in England's Towns, 1650–1730 (Cambridge, 2009), 85–92.

¹⁷⁶ “Pax,” 342.

¹⁷⁷ Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:358–60.

¹⁷⁸ Andrews, British Committees, Commissions, and Councils of Trade and Plantations, 14–23.

¹⁷⁹ “Pax,” 121, 293–94.

¹⁸⁰ Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:358–60.

¹⁸¹ Arash Abizadeh, “Sovereign Jurisdiction, Territorial Rights, and Membership,” in The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes, ed. Al P. Martinich and Kinch Hoekstra (Oxford, 2016), 97–432, at 425–26; see the similarities in Hobbes, Leviathan, 2:298.

¹⁸² “Pax,” 335.

¹⁸³ “Pax,” 289.

¹⁸⁴ “Pax,” 189.

¹⁸⁵ “Pax,” 121, 308.

¹⁸⁶ “Pax,” 308–10.

¹⁸⁷ “Pax,” viii.