page_0002

referred to as NAYLER. In M.R. Brailsford's book "A Quaker
from Cromwell's Army - James Nayler" she always refers to him as
NAYLER, though I must admit there are three engravings in
that book, one a Dutch one (1657) NAILOR, the other two
(both 172) and both NAYLOR. Finally, in the book by
Emilia Fogelklow (1931) she was NAYLER throughout her study of
him, but again the frontispiece is NAYLOR, but the sentence of
the court describes him as NAYLER.

Well, Sir, it does seem to me that if we assume that
there was no settled way of spelling names in his day, it
seems that the NAYLERS have a maority vote.

For my part, I should like to know why you give him
as Naylor - which, I would be pleased to
think he was

I am, Sir,

Yours faithfully,
L.S. Ashby Naylor

P.S. My copy of your work is a 1st Edition so I do not know if
the mistake has since been rectified, but the index to this
edition gives him as "Thomas" and not James.