Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
death_n brother_n king_n son_n 9,077 5 5.2235 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A50893 A defence of the people of England by John Milton ; in answer to Salmasius's Defence of the king.; Pro populo Anglicano defensio. English Milton, John, 1608-1674.; Washington, Joseph, d. 1694. 1692 (1692) Wing M2104; ESTC R9447 172,093 278

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

make it evident that you take a liberty to publish palpable down-right lies You begin with the Egyptians and indeed who does not see that you play the Gipsy your self throughout Amongst them say you there is no mention extant of any King that was ever slain by the People in a Popular Insurrection no War made upon any of their Kings by their Subjects no attempt made to depose any of them What think you then of Osiris who perhaps was the first King that the Egyptians ever had Was not he slain by his Brother Typhon and five and twenty other Conspirators And did not a great part of the Body of the People side with them and fight a Battel with Isis and Orus the late King's Wife and Son I pass by Sesostris whom his Brother had well-nigh put to Death and Chemmis and Cephrenes against whom the People were deservedly enraged and because they could not do it while they were alive they threatned to tear them in pieces after they were dead Do you think that a People that durst lay violent hands upon good Kings had any restraint upon them either by the Light of Nature or Religion from putting bad ones to Death Could they that threatened to pull the dead Bodies of their Princes out of their Graves when they ceased to do mischief tho by the Custom of their own Country the Corps of the meanest Person was sacred and inviolable abstain from inflicting Punishment upon them in their Life-time when they were acting all their Villanies if they had been able and that upon some Maxim of the Law of Nature I know you would not stick to answer me in the Affirmative how absurd soever it be but that you may not offer at it I 'll pull out your Tongue Know then that some Ages before Cephrene s time one Ammosis was King of Egypt and was as great a Tyrant as who has been the greatest him the People bore with This you are glad to hear this is what you would be at But hear what follows my honest tell-truth I shall speak out of Diodorus They bore with him for some while because he was too string for them But when Actisanes King of Ethiopia made War upon him they took that oppotunity to revolt so that being deforced he was easily subdued and Egypt became an Accession to the Kingdom of Ethiopia You see the ●…tians as soon as they could took up Arms against a Tyrant they joyned Forces with a Foreign saince to depose their own King and disinherit his Posterity they chos● to live under a moderate and good Prince as Actisanes was tho a Foreigner rather than under a Tyrant of their own The same People with a very unanimous Consent took up Arms against Apries another Tyrant who relied upon Foreign Aids that he had hired to assist him Under the Conduct of Amasis their General they Conquered and afterward Strangled him and placed Amasis in the Throne And observe this Circumstance in the History Amasis kept the 〈◊〉 aptive King a good while in the Palace and treated him well At last when the People com●●…d that he nourished his own and their Enemy he put him into their hands who put him to Death in the manner I have mentioned There things are related by Heroditus and Diodorus Where are you now Do you think that any Tyrant would not chuse a Hatchet rather than an Halter As●… say you when the Egyptians were brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Persians they continued faithful to 〈◊〉 which is most false they never were faithful to 〈◊〉 For in the fourth year after Cambyses had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 th●m they rebelled Afterward when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tamed them within a short time after 〈◊〉 r●volted from his Son Artaxerxes and set up one 〈◊〉 to be their King After whose Death they rebell'd again and made one Tachus King and made War upon Artaxerxes Mnemon Neither were they better Subjects to their own Princes for they deposed Tachus and confer'd the Government upon his Son Nectanebus till at last Artaxerxes Ochus brought them the second time into Subjection to the Persian Empire When they were under the Macedonian Empire they declared by their Actions that Tyrants ought to be under some restraint They threw down the Statutes and Images of Ptolomaeus Physco and would have killed himself but that the Mercenary Army that he Commanded was too strong for them His Son Alexander was forced to leave his Country by the meer Violence of the People who were incensed against him for killing his Mother And the People of Alexandria dragged his Son Alexander out of the Palace whose Insolent Behaviour gave just Offence and killed him in the Theatre And the same People deposed Ptolomaeus Auletes for his many Crimes Now since it is impossible that any Learned Man should be ignorant of these things that are so generally known and since it is an inexcusable fault in Salmasius to be ignorant of them whose profession it is to teach them others and whose very asserting things of this Nature ought to carry in its self an Argument of Credibility it is certainly a very scandalous thing either that so Ignorant Unlearned a Blockhead should to the Scandal of all Learning profess himself and be accounted a Learned Man and obtain Salaries from Princes and States or that so impudent and notorious a Lyar should not be branded with some particular Mark of Infamy and for ever banished from the Society of learned and honest Men. Having searched among the Egyptians for Examples let us now consider the Ethiopians their Neighbours They adore their Kings whom they suppose God to have appointed over them almost as if they were a sort of gods themselves And yet whenever the Priests condemn any of them they kill themselves And on that manner says Diodorus they punish all their Criminals they put them not to death but send a Minister of Justice to command them to kill themselves In the next place you mention the Assyrians the Medes and the Persians who of all others were most observant of their Princes And you affirm contrary to all Historians that have wrote any thing concerning those Nations That the Regal Power there had an unbounded Liberty annexed to it of doing what the King listed In the first place the Prophet Daniel tells us how the Babylonians expelled Nebuchadnezzar out of human Society and made him graze with the Beasts when his pride grew to be insufferable The Laws of those Countries were not entituled the Laws of their Kings but the Laws of the Medes and Persians which Laws were irrevocable and the Kings themselves were bound by them Insomuch that Darius the Mede tho he earnestly desired to have delivered Daniel from the hands of the Princes yet could not effect it Those Nations say you thought it no sufficient pretence to reject a Prince because he abused the Right which was inherent in him as he was Sovereign But in the very writing of these words you are so stupid
that may save in all thy cities and thy judges of whom thou saidest give me a king and princes I gave th●● a king in mine anger and took him 〈…〉 my wrath And Gidem that warlike Judg that was greater than a King I will not rule over you says he 〈…〉 shall my son rule over you the Lord shall rule over you Judges Chap the 8th Intimating thereby that it is not fit for a man but for God only to exercise Dominion over men And hence Josephus in his Book against A●… an Egyptian Grammarian and a ●oulmouth'd fellow like you calls the Commonwealth of the Hebrews a Theocracy because the principality was in God only In Isaiah Chap. 26. v. 13. The people in their repentance complain that it had been mischievous to them that other Lords besides God himself had had Dominion over them All which places prove clearly that God gave the Israelites a King in his anger but now who can forbear laughing at the use you make of Abimelech's story Of whom it is said when he was kill'd partly by a woman that hurl'd a piece of a Mill-stone upon him and partly by his own Armour-Bearer that God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech This History say you proves strongly that God only is the Judge and Avenger of Kings Yea if this Argument holds he is the only Judge and Punisher of Tyrants Villanous Rascals and Bastards whoever can get into the Saddle whether by right or by wrong has thereby obtain'd a Soveraign Kingly right over the people is out of all danger of punishment all inferior Magistrates must lay down their Arms at his feet the people must not dare to mutter But what if some great notorious robber had perished in War as Abimelech did would any man infer from thence That God only is the Judge and Punisher of High-way men Or what if Abimelech had been condemn'd by the Law and died by an Executioner's hand would not God then have rendred his wickedness You never read that the Judges of the Children of Israel were ever proceeded against according to Law And yet you confess That where the Government is an Aristocracy the Prince if there be any may and ought to be call'd in question if he break the Laws This in your 47th Page And why may not a Tyrant as well be proceeded against in a Kingly Government Why because God rendred the wickedness of Abimelech So did the Women and so did his own Armour-bearer over both which he pretended to a right of Soveraignty And what if the Magistrates had rendred his wickedness Do not they bear the Sword for that very purpose for the punishment of Malefactors Having done with his powerful argument from the History of Abimelech's death he b●takes himself as his custom is to Slanders and Calumnies nothing but dirt and filth comes from him but for those things that he promis'd to make appear he hath not prov'd any one of them either from the Scriptures or from the Writings of the Rabbins He alledges no reason why Kings should be above all Laws and they only of all mortal men exempt from punishment if they deserve it He falls foul upon those very Authors and Authorities that he makes use of and by his own Discourse demonstrates the truth of the opinion that he argues against And perceiving that he is like to do but little good with his arguments he endeavours to bring an odium upon us by loading us with slanderous accusations as having put to death the most Vertuous innocent Prince that ever reign'd VVas King Solomon says he better than King Charles the First I confess some have ventur'd to compare his Father King James with Solomon nay to make King James the better Gentleman of the 〈◊〉 Solomon was David's Son David had been Sau●… ●…n but king James was the Son of the End of Darly who as ●uchanan tells us because D●… the Musitian get into the Queen's Bed-Chamber at an unseasonable time kill'd him a little after he could not get to him then because he had Bolted the Door on the inside So that King James being the Son of an Ear● was the better Gentleman and was frequently called a second Solomon though it is not very certain that himself was not the Son of David the Musitian too But how could it ever come into your head to make a comparison betwixt King C●ries and Solomon For that very King Charles whom you praise thus to the sky that very man's ob●…acy and covetousness and cruelty his hard usage of all good and honest men the Wars that he rais'd the Spoilings and Plunderings and Conflagrations that he occasioned and the death of innumerable of his Subjects that he was the cause of does his Son Charles at this very time whilest I 'm a writing confess and bewail in the Stool of Repentance in Scotland and renounces there that Kingly right that you assert but since you delight in Parallels let 's compare King Charles and King Solomon together a little Solomon began his reign with the death of his Brother who had justly deserved it King Charles began his with his Father's Funeral I do not say with his Murder and yet all the marks and tokens of Poyson that may be appeared in his dead body but the suspition lighted upon the Duke of Buckingham only whom the 〈◊〉 notwithstanding cleared to the Parliament though he had killed the King and his Father and not only so● but he dissolved the Parliament lest the matter should be enquired into Solomon oppressed the people with heavy Taxes but he spent that ●…upon the Temple of God and in raising other publick Buildings King Charles spent his in Extravag 〈◊〉 Solomon was enticed to Idolatry by many Wives This man by one Solomon though he were seduced himself we read not that he seduced others but King Charles seduced and enticed others not only by large and ample rewards to corrupt the Church but by his Edicts and Ecclesiastical Constitutions he compelled them to set up Altars which all Protestants abhor and to bow down to Crucifixes painted over them on the Wall But yet for all this Solomon was not condemned to die Nor does it follow because he was not that therefore he ought not to have been Perhaps there were many Circumstances that made it then not expedient But not long after the people both by words and actions made appear what they took to be their right when Ten Tribes of Twelve revolted from his Son and if he had not saved himself by flight it is very likely they would have stoned him notwithstanding his Threats and big swelling words CHAP. III. HAving proved sufficiently that the Kings of the Jews were subject to the same Laws that the people were That there are no exceptions made in Scripture That 't is a most false assertion grounded upon no reason nor warranted by any Authority to say That Kings may do what they list with Impunity That God has exempted them
Partner in the Soveraign Power because he molested the Eastern Christians by which act of his he declared thus much at least That one Magistrate might punish another for he for his Subjects take punished ●icinius who to all intents was as abso 〈◊〉 in the Empire as himself and did not leave the vengeance to God alone Licinius might have done the same to Constantine if there had been the like occasion So then if the matter be not wholly reserved to Gods own Tribunal but that men have something to do in the case why did not the Parliament of England stand in the same relation to King Charles that Constantine did to Licinius The Soldiers made Constantine what he was But our Laws have made our Parliaments equal nay superior to our Kings The Inhabitants of Constantinople resisted Constantius an Arrian Emperour by force of Arms as long as they were able they opposed Hermogenes whom he had sent with a Military power to depose Paul an Orthodox Bishop the house whither he had betaken himself for security they fired about his ears and at last killed him right out Constans threatned to make War upon his Brother Constantius unless he would restore Paul and Athanasius to their Bishopricks You see those holy Fathers when their Bishopricks were in danger were not ashamed to stir up their Prince's own Brother to make War upon him Not long after the Christian Soldiers who then made whom they would Emperors put to death Constans the Son of Constantinus because he behaved himself dissolutely and proudly in the Government and Translated the Empire to Magnentius Nay those very persons that saluted Julian by the name of Emperour against Constantius his will who was actually in possession of the Empire for Julian was not then an Apostate but a vertuous and valiant person are they not amongst the number of those Primitive Christians whose Example you propose to us for our imitation which action of theirs when Constantius by his Letters to the people very sharply and earnestly forbad which Letters were openly read to them they all cried out unanimously That themselves had but done what the Provincial Magistrates the Army and the Authority of the Commonwealth had decreed The same persons declared War against Constantius and contributed as much as in them lay to deprive him both of his Government and his Life How did the Inhabitants of Antioch behave themselves who were none of the worst sort of Christians I 'le warrant you they prayed for Julian after he became an Apostate whom they used to rail at in his own presence and scoffing at his long Beard bid him make Ropes of it Upon the news of whose death they gave publick Thanksgivings made Feasts and gave other publick Demonstrations of Joy do you think they used when he was alive to pray for the continuance of his life and health Nay is it not reported that a Christian Soldier in his own Army was the Author of his Death Sozomen a Writer of the Ecclesiastical History does not deny it but commends him that did it if the fact were so For it is no wonder says he that some of his own Soldiers might think within himself that not only the Greeks but all Mankind hitherto had agreed that it was a commendable action to kill a Tyrant and that they deserve all mens praise who are willing to die themselves to procure the liberty of all others so that that Soldier ought not rashly to be condemned who in the cause of God and of Religion was so zealous and valiant These are the words of Sozomen a good and Religious man of that age by which we may easily apprehend what the general opinion of pious men in those days was upon this point Ambrose himself being commanded by the Emperour Valentinian the Younger to depart from Milan refused to obey him but defended himself and the Palace by force of Arms against the Emperour's Officers and took upon him contrary to his own Doctrine to resist the higher powers There was a great sedition raised at Constantinople against the Emperour Areadius more than once by reason of Chrysostom's Exile Hitherto I have shewn how the Primitive Christians behaved themselves towards Tyrants how not only the Christian Soldiers and the people but the Fathers of the Church themselves have both made War upon them and opposed them with force and all this before St. Austin's time for you your self are pleased to go down no lower and therefore I make no mention of Valentinian the Son of Placidia who was slain by Maximus a Senator for committing Adultery with his Wife nor do I mention Avitus the Emperour whom because he disbanded the Soldiers and betook himself wholly to a luxurious life the Roman Senate immediately deposed because these things came to pass some years after St. Austin's death But all this I give you Suppose I had not mentioned the practice of the Primitive Christians suppose they never had stirred in opposition to Tyrants suppose they had accounted it unlawful so do I will make it appear that they were not such persons as that we ought to ●ely upon their Authority or can safely follow their Example Long before Constantine's time the generality of Christians had lost much of the Primitive Sanctity and integity both of their Doctrine and Manners Afterwards when he had vastly enriched the Church they began to fall in love with Honour and Civil Power and then the Christian Religion went to wrack First Luxury and Sloth and then a great drove of Herches and Immoralities broke loose among them and these begot Envy Hatred and Discord which abounded every where At last they that were linked together into one Brotherhood by that holy band of Religion were as much at variance and strife amongst themselves as the most bitter Enemies in the world could be No reverence for no consideration of their duty was left amongst them the Soldiers and Commanders of the Army as oft as they pleased themselves created new Emperors and sometimes killed good ones as well as bad I need not mention such as Verannio Alaximus Eugenius whom the Soldiers all on a sudden advanced and made them Emperors nor Gratian an excellent Prince nor Valentinian the younger who was none of the worst and yet were put to death by them It is true these things were acted by the Soldiers and Soldiers in the field but those Soldiers were Christians and lived in that Age which you call Evangelical and whose example you propose to us for our imitation Now you shall hear how the Clergy managed themselves Pastors and Bishops and sometimes those very Fathers whom we admire and extol to so high a degree every one of whom was a Leader of their several Flocks those very men I say fought for their Bishopricks as Tyrants did for their Soveraignty sometimes throughout the City sometimes in the very Churches sometimes at the Altar Clergy-men and Lay-men fought promiscuously they slew one another and great