The letters from the king [Sigismund I Jagiellon] and from the addressee reached Dantiscus after the conclusion of the Diet [of Royal Prussia] in Elbing (Elbląg), which was devoted to the settling of legal cases, while the bishop of Kulm (Chełmno) [Tiedemann Giese] was still present together with the envoy of the city council of Thorn (Toruń) [Adrian Friedewalt]. Dantiscus read the king's letter together with them and with certain members of the city council of Elbing [Nikolaus Friedwald, Jacob Alexwangen]. The castellan of Gdańsk (Danzig) [Achatius von Zehmen (Achacy Cema)] was no longer present, having discreetly departed without taking his leave, together with the chamberlain of Marienburg (Malbork) [Johann (Jan)] von Baysen [(Bażyński)], when certain legal proceedings did not go quite to his liking. The bishop of Kulm learned from the king’s letter that the king had summoned the city council of Gdańsk, whose envoys [Barthel Brand, Johann Zierenberg] had already departed, to appear before the royal court. In the bishop of Kulm’s opinion, copies of the king’s letter ought to be sent to the members of the council of Royal Prussia with the suggestion that they should ask the king to put the matter of the estate of Putzig (Puck) forward until the spring Diet [of Royal Prussia]. In his view, it is not possible to dispatch envoys to the king representing all the members of the council [of Royal Prussia] who are unable to attend swiftly enough, nor is there anyone who could safely undertake such a mission.

[The passage concerning Dantiscus’ opinion on the royal writ of summons issued to Gdańsk concerning Putzig is partially damaged and unclear]. Dantiscus notes that the members of the council of Royal Prussia ought to take care not to infringe upon their own privileges. How the matter will proceed further, given that the bishop of Kulm, together with the citizens of Gdańsk, has won over the greater part of the councillors [of Royal Prussia], remains to be seen. Dantiscus will find out once he knows their positions, which he is to receive by letter.

Dantiscus hopes to be able to discuss those matters, as well as others, at greater length in person. Regardless of the state of his finances, which have been strained by his previous journeys, and of the state of his health, which has nonetheless improved rather markedly of late, he is desirous of meeting his sovereign and offering him counsel.

He conveys the remaining news on a separate sheet and asks for discretion.

In a postscript, Dantiscus reports that, upon receiving the addressee’s letter, he requested the Castellan of Elbing [Stanisław Kostka] to return to him in Elbing, to which the latter agreed. They discussed the lawsuit [against the town of Gdańsk in the matter of Putzig]. Although the writ makes no mention of the commandery, the defendants are nonetheless obliged to provide explanations not only in matters explicitly mentioned in the writ, but in all other matters that are its subject. The clause will prove to be most helpful under such an interpretation.

Dantiscus confirms that he will come to court, though he has no money left to spare. He pays no heed to the ill will and suspicions directed against him, since, as suggested by Maciejowski in his letter, these may be dispelled by his arrival. He believes that it would be advantageous were the castellan of Elbing to accompany him. However, he asks Maciejowski to arrange this in such a way as to make it appear that the castellan has been summoned by the king on other business.

Should our people [the members of the council of Royal Prussia] send the envoys, which Dantiscus doubts, or resolve upon anything in the matter under consideration, they will deliberate upon his position. It is impossible to emphasise the extent to which the bishop of Kulm [Tiedemann Giese] attends to his own interests, or how greatly he harms the king’s cause. The castellan of Gdańsk [Achatius von Zehmen (Achacy Cema)] conducts himself likewise. They have their factions and pay no heed to their obligations towards the king. This is plainly evident in the letters in which they were supposed to provide counsel on the matter of proceedings against the [Gdańsk] rebels. They levelled accusations against the king and offered justifications for their own people, as though the latter had been wrongfully blamed. They even formulated threats that the volatile populace might rise up against the Kingdom [of Poland].

Dantiscus is surprised by their self-assurance. In his view, they ought to remember their obligations towards the king, lest he take appropriate steps against them. [The text of this paragraph is partially damaged].

The bishop of Kulm has declared that the royal letters containing the complaint [concerning the conduct of the council of Royal Prussia] against the letter of recommendation [issued for the citizens of Gdańsk in the matter of the king’s efforts to recover Putzig] sent recently [from the Diet of Royal Prussia] at Graudenz (Grudziądz), are of no consequence and do not merit a response. Dantiscus, for his part, stated that since the others were unwilling to respond, he would do so himself, in order to fulfil the duty incumbent upon his office. He added that the councillors of Royal Prussia have a tendency to send letters of recommendation, particularly such as cannot be well received by the king. He will therefore suggest that these be henceforth rejected at the court. As a man unversed in the ways of the royal court, the bishop of Kulm took this to be a jest, unaware of the current goings-on at the court. In Dantiscus’ view, a sharper rebuke ought to be directed at him, so that he may gain a proper understanding of the state of affairs prevailing at the court. Dantiscus writes this out of goodwill towards him, fearing that his easy-going manner may one day lead him to take too great a liberty.

The neighbour’s [Duke Albrecht I von Hohenzollern’s] nephew [Albrecht Alcibiades] is staying with him, and the former styles him “Duke of Prussia” in writing. He was reportedly met by one thousand five hundred infantry and cavalry. It is not yet known precisely what matter Duke Albrecht, Albrecht Alcibiades and his brother-in-law [Adolf, Duke of Holstein] are deliberating upon. Dantiscus will endeavour to find out more; it has come to his attention, however, that the matter concerns a marriage and that they are soon to travel to court. Should he ascertain anything more definite, he will convey it to the addressee by messenger upon the latter’s return.

He asks that the king should be informed of such contents of his letter as may seem significant to the sovereign, without witnesses and in particular without the primate [Piotr Gamrat]. Dantiscus is aware that the primate is ill-disposed towards him on account of the matter of Putzig, which causes Dantiscus as much pain as it does the addressee. He encourages him not to yield to adversity. He hopes that he will be able to discuss all matters more freely at a personal meeting.

In a second postscript, Dantiscus reports that he has received a letter from the younger king [Sigismund Augustus] and the queen [Elizabeth of Austria]. The king informed him that in recent days he had forwarded Dantiscus’ letter to the present addressee. The sovereign, having been admonished by Dantiscus not to allow himself to be led astray in matters of religion by writings sent from the neighbourhood [Ducal Prussia], declared a wish to remain faithful to the old religion and to defend it in both his private and public life. Dantiscus was so gladdened by this that he was willing to travel to Lithuania with a small retinue, had he not been prevented from doing so by the Diet [of Royal Prussia], at which legal cases were being heard. He had already written about this to the king, but the latter replied that his visit would be more convenient in spring. Dantiscus adds this news after the sealing of the present letter. [The text of the second postscript is damaged in several places].