Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	daughter_n	king_n	marry_v	7,147	5	8.7437	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49781	The right of primogeniture, in succession to the kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland as declared by the statutes of 24 E.3 cap 2. De Proditionibus, King of England, and of Kenneth the third, and Malcolm Mackenneth the second, Kings of Scotland : as likewise of 10 H.7 made by a Parliament of Ireland : with all objections answered, and clear probation made : that to compass or imagine the death, exile, or disinheriting of the King's eldest son, is high treason : to which is added, an answer to all objections against declaring him a Protestant successor, with reasons shewing the fatal dangers of neglecting the same.	Lawrence, William, 1613 or 14-1681 or 2.	1681 (1681)	Wing L691; ESTC R1575	180,199	230

truth in what the Flatterers of Kenneth boast that by this means the Govetousness and Slaughters of Kindred are avoided Neither are the Treacheries of Guardians less to be feared to the Children of Kings left in Minority than of their Kindred wherefore now the Tyrant being fallen who Ravished our Liberty let us valiantly resume the same and his Law Enacted by force and assented to by fear if it be a Law and not rather a selling us for Slaves let us abrogate and repeal the same and Restore again our Ancient Fundamental Laws which brought forth this Kingdom of nothing and from so small beginnings not only advanced to such an height as is inferiour to none of our Neighbours but when cast down hath again raised the same to its former Strength and let us imbrace the present opportunity while it offers it self which if once Elapsed we may in vain seek again The People are by this perswaded and the Twelfth day after the Funeral of Kenneth he is chosen King Anno Domini 994. And was after Slain in Battel in the Town of Vaumond in Louthian in the Second Year of his Reign And though Milcolumbus or Malcolm the second Son of Kenneth the Third who was so tormented in Conscience for Poysoning the first Son of his Brother Duffus to get an Act to Intayl the Grown to his own Posterity made no Conscience to kill Grinius another Son of the same Duffus in Battel Malcolm Son of Kenneth revives and confirms the Law making the Kingdom hereditary and having by the Success gotten the Power of the Sword into his hand in the Same manner as his Father Kenneth had by force Enacted again by force confirmed at the Same Scone by Parliament the Act of Intayl of the Crown to the Issue of Kenneth Buchanan 196. Yet doth Buchanan the same Historian p. 200 201 censure this Act of changing the Ancient Law of Election by Parliament of the Brother or any other person more fit than the Son to be Injust Imprudent and Infortunate Objections against the Reviver 1. Injust 1. Injustice Because he saith Italex enervat vires consilij publici sine quo nullus Legitimus dominatus potest consistere Such a Law enervates the Strength of Parliaments without which no Lawful Government can be for all Government is either by Conquest or Contract As to Conquest there is none demanded or acknowledged on Such a Title As to Contract there can be none without a Parliament who are the Representative of the People to contract for them 2. Imprudent ● Imprudence Because Propinquorum in eos qui Regno potiuntur insidias et Regnantium adversus eos quos et natura et lex voluit ●●ique esse Charissimos suspitiones nesarias quas narrationis or do Exphrabit tot priorum Seci●●orum clades cum illis collatae calamitatibus quae Alexandri tertij interitum sunt consecutae Leves prae ijs tolerabiles videri possunt The Treacheries of Kindred against those who enjoy the Kingdom and the wicked Suspitions of those who Reign against them who by the Bonds of Nature and Law they ought to esteem most dear as this discourse in order shall declare And the Slaughters of so many former Ages compared with the Calamities which hereby followed the death of Alexander the Third were light and tolerable Note Alexander the Third began his Reign Anno Domini 1649. he Married first Margaret Daughter to Henry the Third King of England by whom he had Alexander the Prince David and Margaret who married Hangonamus or as some call him Ericus Son to Magnus 4th King of Norway who bare him a Daughter commonly called the Maiden of Norway The Maiden of Norway had United England and Scotland if she had lived Skene And concerning this Lady of Norway saith Buchanan Lib. 8. p. 241. Edvardus Anglorum Rex gnarus suae sororis neptem Regis Norvegiae filiam unam Ex Alexandri posteris esse superstitem Eandemque Regni Scotorum Legitimam Heredem Legatos ad eam deposcendam filio suo in Scotiam misit c. Edward the First King of England knowing his Neice the Daughter of the King of Norway to be the only Remaining Issue of Alexander the Third and Lawful Heir to the Crown of Scotland he sent his Ambassadours into Scotland to ask her in Marriage for his Son They when they Argued much in the Publique Gonvention of the Publique Benefit which would ensue such Marriage they found the Minds of the Scots not Dis-inclined from that affinity for Edward was a man of great Courage and of great Power and Ambition of greater And the glory of his Valour in the Holy Warr while his Father was alive and in Subduing Wales after his death shone bright Neither could they ever Remember the Scotish and English name to have been nearer Conjoyned than under the Last Kings Neither could old Hostility be more Commodiously abolished then if there were an Union made of both Nations upon Honest and Equal Conditions The Marriage was therefore Readily Assented unto and Conditions added by Mutual assent of both That the Scots should so long use their own Laws and Magistrates till such Children should be born of the same as were able to Reign And if none should happen to be procreated or being born should dye before their Lawful age Then the Kingdom of Scotland should go to the next of the Blood-Royal Things being thus Agreed Michael or as others mention Daevid Wemes and Michael Scot two Knights of Fife of great Repute for their Prudence with their Country in those Times were sent Embassadors to Norway but they because Margaret for that was the Young Ladies Name dyed before their Arrival returned home sad and nothing done by whose immature death there arose such Controversie as vehemently shook England and almost destroyed the Name of the Scots For to go on with the History as he and other Writers Relate it not withstanding this new Act of Intayling the Crown Ten Competitors arose to the Crown of Scotland notwithstanding the Act of Reviver making the same hereditary there arose Ten Competitors for the Succession Erick King of Norway Florence Earl of Holland Robert Bruce Earl of Anandale John de Baliol Lord of Galloway John de Hastings Lord of Abergaveny John Cumyn Lord of Badenair Patrick de Dunbar Earl of March John de Vesey Nicholas de Hues William de Ross All or the most part of them alledging themselves descended from David Earl of Huntingdon Younger Brother to William King of Scots and Great Uncle to the late King Alexander But the Principal and most Potent Factions which contended were that of Balyol and Bruce On which saith Sir Richard Baker Hist 96. broke out the Mortal Dissention between the Two Nations which consumed more Christian Blood and continued longer And the Wars between the Factions of Baliol and Bruce then any Quarrel we read of ever did between any Two People in the

Cohabitation 3. No lawful Impediment why the Parties should not Marry 4. Chastity and Children 5. Length of time and no Judicial Questioning and Sentence to the contrary while alive 7. Promise of Marriage 8. Acknowledgment by the Father of the Children either by word or writing or by giving them Aliment and Education as Children As to the First Fame and Reputation which are Voces opinio Vulgi are an usual Presumption of Marriage As to the Second The Cannon Law it self Jus Pontificium praesumit ex diuturna Cohabitatione filium esse Legitimum Craig Feud 270. Cohabitation for any time is so high a Presumption of Marriage as it Legitimates the Son And amongst the Old Romans one of their chief ways of Lawful Marriage without Ceremony of Priest or Temple was Vsus that is Cohabitation and Conjugal Society for the space of a year and this was reputed so considerable a time as it made a Marriage by Prescription As to the Third which is where there is no Lawful Impediment nor the Parties are prohibited by the Law of God to Marry this makes a presumption of Marriage because it was no Sin for them by the Law of God to Marry As to the Fourth cause of Presumption which is Chastity and Children where all the Circumstances concur of Lawful Marriage as Cohabitation no Lawful Impediment Chastity of the Lady Children and acknowledgment by the Father of the Children to be his these are not only the strongest presumptions which can be made of a Lawful Marriage but are of themselves as is fully proved in the following Discourse without any Ceremony a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble As to the Fifth cause of presumption which is no Judicial Questioning and Sentence against the Marriage in the space of Thirty years in which time all Witnesses may be Dead and Writings lost or burnt the same is so high as by the Laws of the Land and of all Nations no proof ought to be admitted to the contrary nor no questioning now to be permitted of the same because it is beyond the time of Limitation of Actions and the peace and security of all Families and Kingdoms must be destroyed should Witnesses be required Thirty years after of all such Marriages as have not been Judicially question'd and sentenced in all that time As to the Sixth cause of presumption which is the Death of either Party without being Judicially question'd or sentenced while alive This by the Law of God and of the Land is so high a presumption for the Parents and so necessary justice for the Children That no Probation ought to be admitted to the contrary nor ought or can the Legitimation of the Child be question'd after the Death of either Parent yea though the Marriage of the Parents were Unlawful as if a man Marry his own Sister which is a far more Unlawful Marriage than to Marry without a Papal or Episcopal Ceremony and have Issue by her if she die before a Judicial hearing and sentence pass'd against her her Children are Inheritable and their Legitimation can never be question'd for she that is Deceased cannot be Summon'd before any Humane Tribunal And if Sentence should be there pass'd against her she is condemn'd without Hearing and therefore that the Children ought to be Legitimate and Inheritable hath been resolved by the Parliament it self as may appear Bro. Deraignement 5. Bro. Bastardy 23.44 24 H. 8. 39 E. 3.32 And it is for the same reason very clear That if Queen Katherine the Wife of H. 8. had died before Judicial Sentence pass'd against her the Legitimation of his Daughter by her who was afterwards Queen Mary could never have been question'd and should the Legitimation of the Royal Lines of England Scotland and Ireland or any other Kingdom in the World be permitted to be question'd after the Death of one or both of the Parents It is impossible but all certainty and security of the Successions to them must be utterly destroyed As to the Seventh cause of presumption which is presumption of a Promise of Marriage to shew which all the foremention'd circumstances concur and though the Ecclesiasticks of Scotland keep the people under sufficient servility of their Ceremonies of Marriage yet even thereby the Laws of the Land doth promise of Marriage without any Proclamation of Banns or other Ceremony both Endow the Mother and Legitimate the Children as appears Craig Feud 269.270 As to the last Cause of Presumption which is Filiation not only the Civil Law but the Law of God in the Scripture Legitimates every Son and makes him Heir to the Father who begot him either of a Primogenial or Filial Portion except of Inheritance intail'd to a former Wife as was that of Abraham to Sarah and whether this Probation of Filiation is made by the Son or Father as in the Civil Law is said Filium alicujus se esse probans videtur probare se esse Legitimum § Et ib. ad Marg. de Adopt who proves himself a Son to any proves himself Legitimate And by the same Law such as are proved Children are Legitimated though there were no Ceremonies of Marriage Authen Collation 6. Novella 174. Tit. 3. quibus modis Natur. cap. primo Siquis 3530. And the Scripture is Positive in the point Rom. 8.17 If Children then Heirs Et Gal. 4.7 If a Son then an Heir 5. To return again to other Laws of the Land besides those of Presumptions It is not necessary to prove a Lawful Marriage by proving Ceremonies But all Marriage is declared Lawful whether with or without Ceremonies by the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Law of the Land which is not Prohibited by the Law of God as appears by the 32 Art of the 39 Articles Roger's Articles p. 185. 187 188. as shewn more at large in the Discourse following and likewise in the Statute 32 H. 8. cap. 38. of Precontracts wherein there is this Clause And that no Reservation or Prohibition God's Law except shall Trouble or Impeach any Marriage without the Levitical Degrees Whereby it is clear that this Marriage being without the Levitical Degrees and not Prohibited by the Law of God ought not by the express words of the Act of Parliament to be troubled or impeach'd by any Humane Law whatsoever Ecclesiastical or Temporal Which said Act of Parliament except as to matter of Pre-contracts stands unrepealed to this Day and of full force And the Reasons of the said Act are expressed in the Preamble of the same to be because the Usurped Power of the Bishop of Rome hath always intangled and troubled the meer Jurisdiction and Regal Power of this Realm of England and also unquieted much the Subjects of the same by his Usurped Power in them and by making that Unlawful which by God's Word is Lawful both in Marriages and other things 6. They whom no Law of the Land makes Illegitimate are Legitimate by the Law of the Land But no Law of the Land either

making the Crown Hereditary to the Eldest Son answered ibid. Objections against the being of the King 's Eldest Son within the Statute of 25 E. 3. cap. 2. De Proditionibus Page 20. Obj. 1. That the Lady Mother was not a Queen ibid. Answ 1. The Statute is false Translated by the Lawyers and the Scripture false Translated by the Bishops in the word Queen ibid. Answ 2. Proved that the Lady Mother was Madam sa Compaign according to the Moral Law of God which is all and more than is required to be proved by the Statute ibid. Obj. 2. No Marriage according to the Mass-Book in the time of E. 3. nor by the Modern Common Prayer-Book or Book of Canons Page 23. Answ 1. No Marriage by any Book required by the Statute but only a Lady Companion according to the Moral Law of God Page 24. Answ 2. Marriage by the Common Prayer-Book not Necessary in a time of War when both Books of Common Prayer and of Canons were Prohibited and Abolished by the Power of the Sword ibid. Answ 3. The Legitimation of Children by the Law of God and of the Land ought not to be question'd after the Death of either Parent where not Judicially question'd and sentenced in their life-time Vid. Praeface Page 25. Answ 4. Not Necessary for a King who is Supreme Ordinary to Marry by the Common Prayer Book or Book of Canons Page 26. Answ 5. A King who is Supreme Ordinary may dispence with his own Canons and with any thing that is only Malum Prohibitum in his own Marriage but not with what is Malum in se by the Moral Law of God Page 28. Obj. 3. The Lady Mother was not HIS Companion which is the Article of Propriety required by the Statute Page 32. Answ She was HIS and he had the sole Propriety according to the Law of God and the Land Page 33. Obj. 4. There was no Marriage according to the Law of God Page 34. Answ 1. Certain Preparatory Considerations are laid down before the contrary is proved to this Negative By what Law and what Judges shall be judged what is the Law of God by which is after proved here was a Marriage according to the Law of God ib. Answ 2. Of the damnable Effects have followed by the Popish Prohibitions and Nulling of all Marriage not made by a Priest in a Temple Page 35. What is not Marriage by the Moral Law of God Page 39. What is not Matrimony by the Moral Law of God ibid. Answ 3. The Statute requires neither a King De Jure nor a Lady Companion De Jure nor a Son De Jure but only De Facto yet are they all here both De Jure and De Facto Page 40. Dangerous to leave the Succession of a Kingdom on so incertain a word as Lawful yet here both the King the Lady Companion and the Son are all Lawful ibid. Answ 4. A Lawful Successor may be of an unlawful Marriage Page 41. Obj. 5. The Lady Mother was not a Wife according to the Scripture Page 42. Answ 1. The Objection is false and it is after proved she was a Wife according to the Scripture ibid. Answ 2. The Statute requires no Wife according to Scripture but only a lawful Companion yet was she both a Wife and a lawful Wife according to Scripture as will hereafter be proved Page 43. Answ 3. The Bishops have falsly Translated the Scripture in all words relating to Marriage ibid. Of certain Differences between a Wife of the Bishop's making and a Wife of God's making Page 46. Obj. 6. There is no Bishop's Certificate to testifie the Marriage and Filiation Page 48. Answ The Statute requires no Certificate of either ibid. The Forms of Bishops Certificates Page 49. Their Original came from the Priests of Priapus Page 50. Of the Damnable Mischiefs insue from Tryal of Marriage and Filiation by Bishops Certificates ibid. The Certificates of Bishops inconsistent with the Right of Primogeniture Page 58. Of the General Custom of Nations of Successions to Kingdoms by Primogeniture and of the Mischiefs and Civil Wars commonly follow the disinheriting of the Eldest Son Page 62. What is Marriage and what Matrimony de Facto Page 66. What is Marriage De Jure according to the Law of God and of the Nations Page 67. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Romans 1 Usu 2 Confarreatione 3 Coemptione Page 68. Of the three Lawful Marriages amongst the Hebrews 1 Copulatione 2 Coemptione 3 Instrumentis ibid. That Carnal knowledge Chastity and Childbirth between a Man and a Woman not prohibited by the Moral Law to Marry makes a Marriage Lawful Holy and Indissoluble without Banns Licence Priest Temple or any other Ceremony whatsoever Page 71. That the Marriage Coemptione Confarreatione or Instrumentis was not intended by Christ but only the Marriage Copulatione Page 86. An Epithalamium on the Marriage of Nature intended by Christ without a Priest or Temple Page 88. Obj. 7. The King 's Eldest Son is not the Heir intended by the Statute Page 90. Answ Proved he is the Heir both in the Letter and Intention of the Statute ibid. That to compass the Exile or Disinheriting of the King 's Eldest Son is High Treason Page 94. Obj. 8. By the Custom of Nations the Succession goes not to the Eldest Son born when the Father is only a Prince but to a younger Son born when he is a King ibid. Answ This Statute was made to prevent incertainty of this and other Customs and prevent all Cavils and Contentions about Succession by ascertaining the same to the Eldest Son Page 95. Obj. 9. The King 's Eldest Son is not yet declared Prince of Wales or of the Scots ibid. Answ The Statute requires no such thing Page 97. Obj. 10. Illegitimacy deprives of the benefit of the Statute ibid. Answ This Statute declares every Eldest Son of a King Legitimate and Heir to the Crown ibid. The Eldest Son of a King of Great Britain is Legitimate by his Birth-right per Jus Coronae ibid. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in other Nations Page 100. Examples of the same Jus Coronae in the Eldest Sons and Daughters of the Kings of England and Scotland who have thereby succeeded as Heirs to their Fathers Kingdoms on Marriages according to the Moral Law of God without the Ceremonies of a Priest or a Temple Page 102 103. That 't is High Treason for any Subject to slander the King 's Eldest Son with Illegitimacy Page 111. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against Queen Elizabeth and the King 's Eldest Son Page 112. A Comparison of the Popish slanders of Illegitimacy against King Edward the Sixth Queen Elizabeth the King 's Eldest Son and the Sons and Daughters of the whole Protestant Clergy Page 114. Of the insolent absurdity of Popish Laws Disinheriting the Lawful Sons of Kings according to the Law of God and inheriting the Bastards of Popes by the Law of the Devil

voluerunt enim opinor viri prudentes ut illae quoties mentionem sui fieri audirent ex adjuncto viri nomine se viris obnoxias esse meminissent 6. The Statute by Compaigne intended Sociam Thalami non Throni And in the same sense is the word Companion used in Scripture Cant. 1.15 It is said Behold thou art fair my Companion thou art fair And Mal. 2.14 Yet is she thy Companion and the Wife of thy Covenant In both which places the word Companion signifies the Companion of the Bed and not of the Throne Non bene conveniunt nec in una sede morantur Majest as Amor Nulla fides regni sociis omnisque potestas Impatiens consortis erit Of the like false Translation of the Scriptures by the Bishops of the Hebrew words Shegal and Gibhira into the English word Queen Scripture false translated by Bishops in the word Queen Psal 45.9 Is thus falsly translated Vpon thy right hand did stand the Queen in Gold of Ophir Whereas the Hebrew is only Shegal which signifies no more than Conjux or Wife from Shagal Coivit Concubuit and is no more than a Woman that hath been lain with by her Husband In like manner 1 King 15 13. 2 King 10.13 are false translated Queen the Hebrew word being Gibhira which signifies no more in French than Madame as in the Statute nor in Latin than Hera or Domina nor in English than Lady or Mistress And the Antient Hebrews and many other Nations did no more allow the Title of Queen except to a Queen Regnant than as is already said did the Saxons or Scots for Regina is derived à Regendo and is only proper to Gynarchies and imports none but the Supreme Governess of a Kingdom by which Title Queen Elizabeth was called Neither had Saul or David any Queens but onely Wives nor Solomon himself in all his Royalty of his thousand Wives any Queen for 700 are onely called in the Septuagint 1 King 11.3 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is no more than Feminae Principes in Latine and Chief Women in English And the other 300 which are falsly translated Concubines as I have elsewhere at large shewed are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifie no more in Latine than Juvenculae and in English than the honest name of Young Women Neither was he the Son of a Queen for his Mother wheresoever she is named is onely called plain Bathsheba as 1 King 1.5 And Bathsheba went in unto the King into the Chamber and the King was very old And verse 28. Then King David answered and said call me Bathsheba and she came into the Kings presence and stood before the King And 1 Chron. 3.5 And these were born unto him in Jerusalem Shimeah and Shobah and Nathan and Solomon four of Bathsheba the Daughter of Ammiel That the Bishops have likewise falsly translated all in the Scripture relating to Marriage and Filiation is proved before at full Lib. 2. p. 142. usque ad p. 162. And in other matters as is assirmed by that great Linguist Doctor Broughton Old Testament false translated by Bishops in 848. places The Lady Mother of the Kings Eldest Son was Madame sa Compaigne intended in this Statute they have false translated the Old Testament in no less then 848. places Now that this Lady-Mother was Madame sa Compaigne which are both the words and intention of the Statute is so known as need not be proved by Witnesses For she had the honour to be Primus Amor the first Lady Companion of the Prince the Raies of whose Favour cast upon her made the Lustre of those Graces rarely conjoined in the same person the more illustrious for she was a Virgin and not praepossessed by another She was a Protestant and not a Papist She was a Native and not a Strange Woman She was a Subject and not Imperious In her were conjoined Beauty with Chastity Greatness with Humility Treasure with Frugality Fidelity with Adversity Though she did not reign with him to be called Queen she suffered with him and was partaker of all his troubles no bloudy Wars no Seas no Foreign Countries could fright her from him But as if the Soul of that sacred Queen Eleanor the Companion of the famous Edward I. in his Wars to the Holy Land had transmigrated into her Body she led the Pilgrimage of her life with him whithersoever he travelled and though she had no Crown in her Life she was faithful to Death and beyond Death left him such a pleadge of affection as is hoped by Gods mercy will indear her memory to all Protestants in the three Kingdoms which will evince to all except the Malicious That she was Madame sa Compaigne the Lady his Companion mentioned and intended in this Statute which is sufficient and as much as is necessary to be proved Object 2 Object 2. That she was not married according to the Mass-Book Common-Prayer Book of Canons or Ordinance of Parliament or by a Priest in a Temple therefore the Eldest Son is not within this Statute Answ Marriage by the Common Prayer Book not necessary within the Statute Answ 1. There is neither the word Marriage Mass Book Common-Prayer Book Book of Cannons or Ordinance of Parilament Priest or Temple named in the Statute therefore being not expressed they are not to be intended in so wise a Statute which minded substance and not Ceremonies and Safety of the Royal Blood and not Insecurity and Incertainty 2. Admit the Statute had in express terms said our Lady his Companion married by the Mass-book which was the Book then in Fashion at time of this Statute yet none will deny but when by a succeeding Power this Mass-Book was abolished or changed Marriage by the Common-Drayer-Book not necessary in time of War as in the time of H. 5. the Service Book of Pauls was changed into the Service Book of Salisbury that none need to marry according to it Then as to the Common-Prayer and Book of Cannons at the time of the Princes taking his Lady Companion it is known that both Mass-Book Common Prayer Book Book of Cannons and all were abolished by the then Power of the Sword and it might have been Death for a Prince to have married by a Book of Common-Prayer or in Publick Is any Protestant then so imprudent as to expect in such a time and place of War and the Usurping Power provailing in their contrary Ordinances and threatning death and destruction to all who opposed them that such who were in those dangers should publickly and with Rites and Ceremonies by a Priest Temple and Altar solemnize a Marriage or can any be so sensless as when in the time of King John Pope Innocent Marriage by the Common-Prayer Book not necessary in time of Interdiction Papal or Potentatical the French King and English Bishops conspired together and the Pope Excommunicated and Interdicted the King and whole Kingdom of England for the space

both in England and Scotland sought to dishonour him with the Name of Nothus for by that name Buchanun Rerum Scot. 175. Stiles him and says Praerat omnibus Anglorum copiis Athelstanus Edwardi Nothus And in the same manner other Writers yet was neither the name nor the thing any bar of his Succession to the Kingdom but he was thereto prefer'd before his younger Brother Edmund whom Papal Laws made Legitimate and accordingly he was Crowned by Athelmus Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at Kingston upon Thames And proved after the most Heroick Victorious Prince that the English ever had before the Conquest for he conquered both the Danes and Scots confederated against him and Subdued the whole Island Edward the Son of Edgar Legitimate per Jus Coronae Ethestede for her excellent Beauty sirnamed the White was a Virgin and not Prohibited by Law of God for King Edgar to Marry but he neglected or despised Pontifical Ceremonies and begot on her without them his eldest Son Edward for which Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury injoyned him seven years Pennance which he underwent for the Fact After Edgar Married Elfrida the only Daughter and Heiress of Ordganus Duke of Devonshire with the Ceremonies of the Church and made her his Queen and likewise Contracted with her That her Children should be Heirs to the Crown and had Issue by her two Sons Edmund who died young and Ethelred who survived him Edgar dies Note here are all the Objections made against the succeeding to the Crown by Edward which are now made and more for here is an Heir by Marriage-Covenant opposed against the Natural Heir Queen Elfrid excepted against the Succession of Edward the eldest Son That his Mother was no Queen nor Wife Married according to the Ceremonies of the Church and that he was therefore Illegitimate That she her self was King Edgar's Queen and Wife whom he Married Solemnly according to the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church and that by his Marriage-Covenants he bound himself That her Children by him should be Successors to the Kingdom That therefore her Son was both the Legitimate Heir and Heir by Covenant and thereupon drew divers Lords to be of her Party and the two Sons are both produced before the Council assembled to demand their Rights But while the Council sate to Debate the same Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury came in with his Banner and Cross and not staying for dispute of the Title presented Prince Edward the eldest Son as next right Heir to the Crown and their lawful King and the Assembly consisting most of Clergy-Men drew the Approbation of the Rest whereupon Prince Edward was Admitted and Crowned King being but Twelve years old by Archbishop Dunstan at Kingston upon Thames Anno Dom. 975. and so continued till about Three years and Six Months after King Edward Hunting in the Isle of Purbeck not far from Corf Castle where his Mother-in-Law Queen Elfrid with his Brother Ethelred were then Residing he out of his Love to both would needs go to visit them where the cruel Step-mother out of Ambition to make her own Son King caused one to Stab him in the Back with a Knife as he was Drinking a cup of Wine on Horseback at his departing who feeling himself hurt set Spurs to his Horse thinking thereby to get to his Company but the wound being Mortal and he fainting through loss of so much Blood fell from his Horse and one foot being intangled in his Stirrup he was thereby ruefully dragged up and down and lastly left Dead at Corf Gate in Commiseration of which untimely Death he was ever afterward called Edward the Martyr On which may be noted 1. That notwithstanding the Mother of Edward was no Queen Notwithstanding she was never Contracted nor Married by the Rites and Ceremonies of the then Church Notwithstanding Elfrid was a Queen and solemnly Married by all those Rites and Ceremonies notwithstanding the Kingdom was by Marriage-Covenant setled on her Issue by King Edgar Notwithstanding Ethelred appeared with a Company of Lords Competitors Notwithstanding the accompanying of Edgar with Elfred was through Romish Superstition thought so unlawful as not to be Expiated under seven years Pennance Yet the same Archbishop Dunstan who imposed the same on the Father laid none on the Son but he and the Clergy declared him the Right and Lawful Heir by which they did implicitly confess and acknowledge That the Moral Law of God of Marriage and not any Ceremonial Law of Man is the immutable Law which ought to Govern the Succession of the Crown 2. The opinion of the Possession of the Crown to purge all Treason from him who commits it hath been a great incouragement to the committing of the same 3. That Princes disinheriting the Children of the first Wives and entailing their Kingdoms to the Children of the Second destroying thereby their own Houses 4. That none are more Cruel to the Children of the first Mothers than Step-mothers which it seems makes all Poets so out of Charity with them that they never mention them without some odious Epithet of Injustae mala dirae ferae terribiles Novercae and defame them with Stabbing Poisoning and Witchcraft Pocula si quando Saevae infecere Novercae Miscueruntque herbas non innoxia verba Virg. Georg. 2. When Cruel Step-mothers Poys'ning the Cup Add Herbs and Spells for Right Heirs to drink up I find but one kind of Step-mother excepted by Horace as not apt to be Guilty of these Practices which is she that neither brings Portion nor expects Jointure particularly of the Getick Women of whose Chastity and good Nature he thus writes Illic matre carentibus Privignis mulier temperat innocens Nec dotata regit virum Conjux nec infido fidit adultero Dos est magna parentium Virtus metuens alterius viri Certo foedere castitas Et peccare nefas aut pretium mori The innocent and kind Step-mothers there The Orphans Motherless to hurt forbear And not with Portions o're their Husbands rant Helpt by the Gay adulterous Gallant Vertue is Portion great and Chastity Strange man to touch more fearing than to Die 5. That where Marriage by the Ceremonial Laws of Men is preferr'd before a Marriage by the Moral Law of God this makes way for all Murders by Step-mothers of the Children of first Mothers of which see likewise the Example of Roxalana before related at large Lib. 2. cap. 1. p. 245. William the Conqueror succeeded to his Natural Fathers Dukedom his Mother never Married by a Priest in a Temple William the Conqueror was the Son of Rollo Duke of Normandy by Arlotte a mean Woman whom he made Sa Compaigne or Sociam Thalami without any Ceremonies of a Priest or Temple she was a Person how mean soever yet not Prohibited by the Law of God for him to Marry and though some slander her in hatred to her Son as if by some Lightness of hers all such as were of that Trade