Narratives of Value in Richard Brome's Dispute with the Salisbury Court

The bill and answer for the 1640 court of request proceedings constitute the extant evidence of the terms of two contracts between Richard Brome and the Salisbury Court, one signed in 1635 and the other drafted in 1638 but unsigned. Inferring from these documents key differences between the contracts, this essay argues that the first contract left crucial ambiguities about the value of Brome's labour, and the company attempted to resolve these ambiguities to its advantage through the second contract and the bill of complaint. This evidence suggests a primarily antagonistic relationship between Brome and the Salisbury Court from 1636.