Once he had completed a draft of his translation, Hoby sent a copy to his former Cambridge tutor and fellow exile, Sir John Cheke. In his reply, dated 16 July 1557, Cheke is full of praise for Hoby’s undertaking, although he confesses that he has made some changes to the text which he had received. He then proceeds to offer a short manifesto on how he believes texts should be translated into English:

‘I am of this opinion that our own tung shold be written cleane and pure, vnmixt and vnmangeled with borowing of other tunges, wherin if we take not heed bi tijm, euer borowing and neuer payeng, she shall be fain to keep her house as bankrupt.’

He then courteously qualifies his remarks by explaining that:

‘This I say not for reproof of you, who haue scarslie and necessarily vsed whear occasion serueth a strange word so, as it seemeth to grow out of the matter and not to be sought for: but for mijn own defens, who might be counted ouerstraight a deemer of thinges, if I gaue not thys accompt to you, mi freend and wijs, of mi marring this your handiwork.’

However, the mere fact of Cheke having chosen to raise the matter of borrowed words gives the impression that there were, in the draft which he had read, too many words which seemed to lack an authentic English pedigree.

Thomas Hoby (trans.), The Courtyer of Count Baldessar Castilio (London: William Seres, 1561), sig. [3A]1^r. Cambridge University Library, LE.6.88.