¹ Foucault, Michel, The order of things (New York, 1970), p. 41Google Scholar.

² See Dobin, Howard, Merlin's disciples (Stanford, 1990), p. 16Google Scholar.

³ Patterson, Lee, Negotiating the past (Madison, 1987), p. 63Google Scholar.

⁴ Montrose, Louis Adrian, ‘Professing the renaissance: the poetics and politics of culture’, in Veeser, H. Aram (ed.), The new historicism (New York, 1989)Google Scholar refers to the post-structuralist orientation in history as a ‘reciprocal concern with the historicity of texts and the textuality of history’, p. 20.

⁵ Smith, Nigel, ‘Literature as History’, Historical Journal, XXXV (1992), 219Google Scholar.

⁶ Greene, Robert A., ‘Synderesis, the spark of conscience, in the English renaissance’, Journal of the History of Ideas, LI (1991), 195–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Slights, Camille W., The casuistical tradition in Shakespeare, Donne, Herbert, and Milton (Princeton, 1971)Google Scholar; Sommerville, Johann P., ‘The “new art of lying”: equivocation, mental reservation, and casuistry’, in Leites, Edmund (ed.), Conscience and casuistry in early modeen Europe (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 159–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sampson, Margaret, ‘Laxity and liberty in seventeenth-century English political thought’, in Leites, Edmund (ed.), Conscience and casuistry in early modern Europe (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 72–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁸ One of Lee Patterson's arguments against new historicism is its inattention to the ‘historically real’ and its denial of the individual and intentionality. See Negotiating the past, pp. 41–74.

⁹ For example, see Barker, Arthur, ‘Calm regained through passion spent’, in Rajan, B. (ed.), The prison and the pinnacle (Toronto, 1973), pp. 3–48Google Scholar.

¹⁰ At crucial points in his analysis, Zagorin relies on the interpretations of other historians for his arguments. See especially pp. 64, 91, 93, 97, 107, 145, 241, 260 and 267.