[Footnote 320.1: [From Fenn, iii. 200.] This letter is dated by
a contemporary note at the bottom of the original, which is
given thus in Fenn: ‘Li’t a͞a Mich. xxxiijº.’ But for ‘a͞a,’
according to the Errata in vol. iii., we should read ‘a͞e,’
_i.e._ ‘Litteræ _ante_ Mich. [Festum S. Michaelis] xxxiij.’
[_i.e._ anno Regis xxxiii.].]
247