least amiss and indeed this is all the praise that can belong to any part of his Books for tho all that is in them is amiss yet some parts are less amiss than others And is roving about Political projects are certainly less amiss than his plain and impudent Falsehoods XX. I had accused Mr. Varillas for saying that all England witout excepting any one person professed the same Religion under Henry the Seventh and I shewed him that the putting this so generally must be false since in the second year of Henry the Eighth's reign there were a great many condemned of Heresy he pretends to excuse this since the Spaniards boast that Heresy never past the Pyrenees tho many have suffered in the Inquisition for it But if any Spaniard had said that there was never so much as one Heretick in Spain I should have told him that he did not write exactly and because I press this no further than to shew by it that Mr. Varillas is a careless Writer and am willing to let it pass with a gentle censure because I had greater things to lay to his charge he according to his usual sincerity pretends that I acknowledged the weakness of the Objection and abandoned it XXI He pretends that I accuse him falsly for denying the consummation of P. Arthur's Marriage whereas he says he determined nothing positively concerning P. Arthur's Impotence But that was never the Question for it was never brought under debate whether he was impotent or not and that for which I had chiefly accused Mr. Varillas was that he affirmed that P. Arthur was then sick and not yet recovered out of a great disease this is all Fiction and is disproved by Witnesses upon Oath but he says not a word to justify this 2. Here the pretends to tell at what pains he was to examin the Affairs of England that he thought the English and Germans of both Religions might be too partial that the Italians were too short that Ribadeneira might be suspected because of his Orders and therefore he thought Florimond de Raimond the best Author to depend upon But if he had read Sanders alone he would have found that both his Florimond and his Ribadeneira was nothing but Sanders over and over again 3. He accuses me for making him say that P. Arthur died Seven moneths after the Marriage whereas he had said Five moneths But in my English it was five moneths so he has no reason to blame me for this since I am not bound to answer for a Translation and tho this was a good and exact Translation in which my meaning was not mistaken as it has been too often in a Translation of a late Book of my Letters concerning Italy yet so small a mistake was no great matter and in a thing of this nature Mr. Varillas ought to have got some who understand English to examin my Book in the Language in which I writ before he had aecused me of having put seven for five on design to deceive my Readers 4. He justifyes his false Citation of the Bull by the most exact of all those who have continued Baronius in whom the words he had cited are to be found But why then did he cite the third Tome of the Bullarium on his Margin and why did he not name this Writer and the place of his Book for such a way of citing especially in Mr. Varillas is very suspicious and if that Author does not set down the Bull it self but only delivers these words as his sense of them then this was like the rest of Mr. Varillas's Citations to give this on the Margin as drawn out of the Bull. 5. He pretends that there is no material difference between his Citation and mine But as it was enough for me to shew that the words he cited were not in the Bull so tho Mr. Varillas boasts in another place how much he has studied the Law yet I must take the Liberty to tell him that he has lost his time extreamly while he pursued that Study if he does not know a difference between a Confirmatory Clause which may have passed with less observation and what is set forth in a Preamble which being the ground upon which the grace is granted and set at the head of the Bull is of much more importance and was probably much better considered than any general Clause XXII He accuses me for having said That Henry the Eighth was educated as his Brother had been who knew only Latin and some general Elements of Learning and tells me how learned King Henry was It appears by my words that I spake only of his first Education and not of the Improvements that followed 2. He seems mightily concerned for the Memory of King Henry the Seventh as if by this affected Zeal he would make some reparations to the Royal Family for the Injuries he has endeavoured to do them but I will be so plain as to tell him roundly that Henry the Seventh weakned the Rights of the Crown of England more than any that ever reigned in it He knew that he could not found his Title on his Descent from the House of Lancaster for then he could never have been more than Prince of Wales since his Mother by whom he had that pretension out-lived him a year and he would not hold the Crown by his Queens Title for then the Right must have been in her and have passed from her to her Children upon her death or to her Sister if she hapned to dye without issue therefore he who would not hold the Crown upon such a doubtful tenure made that dangerous Law that whosoever is in possession of the Crown is to be acknowledged as the Legal King And if King Henry the Seventh had been so Wife a King as some Flatterers have made him he would never have suffered the Dutchy of Bretagne to have fallen in to the Crown of France it having been always considered that the preserving that in a separated Principality was one of the most indispensible Maxims of the English Policy yet he tho he made use of this as a pretence to ask Money of his Parliament to oppose it no sooner had the Money than he gave way to it for which it was believed that he had Money from France 3. He denies that learning wâ—s then esteemed among Princes and says that the Cardinal of Lorrain was the first Prince that valued himself upon his Learning But is it not known that Francis the First valued himself upon the protection that he gave to Learning and the Glory of the Houses of Est and Medici was not a little encreased by the care they took of learned men of which I could convince Mr. Varillas by his own Anecdotes if I were not ashamed to cite so bad an Author XXIII He reproaches me for my insupportable Ignorance in not knowing the difference between the Council and the Parliament of England and in great
a word to justify are also falsely cited out of Cajetan but he does not say a word to justify this and does not so much as give a shaddow of a proof that Pope Iulius designed to settle the Peace of Italy but much to the contrary for that of hindring K. Henry from marrying into Houses suspected of Heresy he says it is the part in which I treat him with the greatest Injustice and for which he has the justest occasion to complain of me and yet after all he confesses it is wrong and lays the blame of it on his Compositor so that he would make it only an Error of the Press but yet this is so expressed that it seems there is some other thing under it and what ever may be in it I vehemently suspect that there is no truth at all in it and I am neither bound to know how Matters go between his Compositor him nor to believe so unlikely a thing as that the put Heresie instead of those who were suspect to the Holy See He says his weak sight makes him correct the proofs by the eyes of another but if he Imployed his Ears he might have corrected this without straining his Sight in short it had been good for the Age that both his Sight and his hearing had failed him long ago for then the world had not been troubled with such a set of Impostures as he has given it He has much more material faults to answer for than the putting Squadrons for Bataillions for which he makes such an excuse LII Beauvais for Belcaire is a fault of the Impression in the French and in my English it is Belcaire he sets up here again his probabilities against the positive Proofs that are among the Acts which I have printed that shew the truth of this concerning a Bull of dissolving the Marriage that was sent over by Cardinal Campege but all this is already shewed to be so ridiculous that I will say no more of that subject LIII He makes me guilty of a Contradiction tradiction for saying that he adds no new matters of fact to those mentioned by Sanders and yet adding that he had Invented somewhat but this was only a Circumstance of the time when the Queen went out of the Court so this is not to be reckoned among the Matters of fact yet after all he shews me indeed that Florimond had said this which I had believed was an effect of his own Invention so that I find I judged too well of his Invention in ascribing to him those Romantick tours that he gave matters for I find he had these furnished him by another This is all that he does in the 54. Article for after a dull saying over and over again that he was not guilty of those things for which I had charged him he again justifies himself by his Florimond LIV. And this is all he says likewise upon the next Article only because I had shewed him that the Queens Cause could not be pleaded by her Advocates after she had declined the Court this being so Universal a rule that is founded on so clear a principle that I had thought even Mr. Varillas could not be ignorant of it that when one declines a Court he can no more plead before it since by pleading before it he passes from his Declinator he after he has shewed that he took this from Florimond concludes in those dreadful words Dare I doubt that this Author did not know the forms of Courts since he was so long a Councellor in a Parliament where this Practice is followed with as much regularity as in any place in the World but I am not so soon frighted as Mr. Varillas fancies for I dare do any thing that I think fit to be done and I do not see what should appear in this that is so terrible for tho I were in the hands of that Parliament I do not believe they would use me ill for saying that one of their body writ once Impertinently concerning the forms of proceeding but I dare not only doubt of this but because of this I dare doubt yet much more than I did concerning the Author of this Book and if it is not likely that a Councellour of Parliament could be guilty of such a Mistake which I confess I think he could hardly commit unless he was as Ignorant as Mr. Varillas is then this makes it more probable that he was not the Author of that Book but that F. Richeome writ it and published it in Florimond's name for a mistake in a point of form might be justly enough supposed in the one without any great derogation to him but not in the other LVI Upon the 56. Article there is nothing but two short Citations out of Florimond LVII He cites again the same Voucher and because he thought it would be a little offensive to me he runs out in an Invective against King Henry in which I am no way concerned having writ of him with all the freedom that became a sincere Historian yet in one thing I must tell Mr. Varillas that his heat carries him a little too far when he says that for four hundred years there had been no Prince who had put to death more of his Subjects than he had done when there was neither War nor Rebellion in the case I have examined in my Reflections on his second Volum a long List he had given of all that King Henry had put to death and have shewed him that there is not one Article of all the ten that he gives that is either ture or so much as near truth and that those who suffered upon the account of his Supremacy and that were not either in actual Rebellion or in Conspiracies for raising one were not above twelve persons and I believe it is possible to find out Princes within muchless than four hundred years that have put more of their Subjects to death upon the account of Religion LVIII He gives no other justification of all he had said to blacken Cranmer but his constant Voucher Florimond and yet he appeals to the Publick upon this and thinks the Quotation he brings is an entire Iustification but whether He or I knew Cranmer's Character better and gives it truer will be no hard point to decide he never saw any thing concerning him but Florimond's History and I have perused many Volums writ with his own hand besides a vast number of Letters that were writ by him and to him yet as for Cranmer's being made the King 's Chieff Minister Florimond says not a word of that so that Mr. Varillas who had asserted it does not find an entire Iustification in his Florimond LIX Mr. Varillas who is Ignorant of every thing cannot bear the least Imputation of Ignorance for commonly men are tender when they know their own defects and tho it had been no heinous matter if he had been thought a
by Mr. du Puy he says he had two Negotiations in England and that the second did not relate to the Divorce but to the Reconciling King Henry to P. Clement and here he fills the Page with a needless Repetition of that matter And adds that he made use of that Cardinals Letters on that single occasion and for those dangers which he represents as if the Cardinal had set them before the King he says they are contained all in one Letter and that it was not strange if King Henry was disposed to reconcile himself to the Pope apprehending danger to his Person since Camdem reports that Queen Elisabeth could not bring her self to resolve on the Queen of Scots death but after she had said those terrible words Either she or I most perish And in conclusion he says that the Manuscripts that are in the Kings Library favour my History so little that he who would undertake to refute it Page by Page would find more than enough in Mr. de Bethunes Manuscripts alone 1. Mr. Varillas had done well to have named the first Negotiation of Cardinal de Bellay in England for the Books that he cites mention but one 2. The breach that the King made with the Pope being only founded on the divorce it cannot be said that this Negotiation did not relate to it 3. I refer the Readers to his Preface if they will be at the pains to take so ill a Book any more in their hands there they will find that he makes Cardinal de Bellay's Letters the Text of all that he writ of English Affairs 4. If that Discourse of the Cardinals with the King of the Dangers he might run of Rebellions and Assassinations be all contained in one single Letter Mr. Varillas had obliged the Publick more by printing it than by all the rest of this Book 5. If King Henry apprehended this the more shame for that Church that has authorised such Doctrines and such Practices and in which a Pope made a Panegyrick on one Assassinate Clement the Iesuites have Besainted another Garnet 6. If Mr. Varillas intends to justify Queen Elisabeth's Severity to the Queen of Scots he does very pertinently to alledge this for as Self-preservation works strongly on all men so it ought to make a greater Impression on Princes whose Live are of greater consequence and more in danger and if Queen Elisabeth had reason to say That either the one or the other must perish no body will wonder if she chose to let the fate fall on the Queen of Scots for in such an alternative one would not lose much time in the deliberation 7. As for his threatning me it is known that is the language of Cowards I am not affraid of him and I do not apprehend that he has so much tenderness for me or that he thinks himself so much obliged to me that he would not discredit my History as much as I have done his if he but knew how to go about it XIII He assures me He has read Camdem exactly and he excuses his citing him as the Historian of the Revolution of England only in the singular and confesses if he had said it in the plural number Revolutions I had some reason for my Censure so since he writ of the Revolution under Queen Elisabeth this justifies him He denys that Camdem troubled Mr. de Thou with the Manuscript of the second part of his History which was an Imployment below a President de Mortier to be concerned in and he adds that he has often heard that Camdem sent his Manuscript to Mr. du Puy who took care to print it and then he reflects on Mr. de Thou's partiality in all those matters that related to the Queen of Scots and says that King James spake so severely to his Son upon it that it threw him into a sickness of three moneths continuance and in conclusion he thinks I contradict my self having said that he had not read a Paege in Camdem and yet adding that he was displeased with him for his having discovered so many Rebellions and Conspiracies against Queen Elisabeth for how could he know this is he had not read him 1. I do not know why Mr. Varillas calls Camden always Camdem this tempts me still to think that he never saw his Book for when men hear names only mentioned in discourse they are apt to Mistake them but when they see them before them in print they write them truer 2. When Mr. Varillas set a Preface before his first Volum and mentioned a Revolution of Religion in England in it that must be understood of the Revolution comprehended within the Volum and not of one that does not come in but in the third Volum so the Revolution made by King Henry being all that was comprehended in that Volum I had reason to say he had never opened Camden since he cites him as having writ concerning it 3. He obliges me here to tell the Story of Camdens Manuscript more particularly than I had thought necessary Mr. de Thou having intended to make his History general entred into a Correspondence with the men over all Europe that were most likely to inform him right so he was in a great Correspondence with Camden and when Camdens first Volum appeared he writ severely to him finding that it was so different from what had past between them in Letters chiefly with Relation to the Queen of Scots upon which Camden told him the truth that King Iames would needs revise it himself and afterwards put it in the Earl of Northampton's hands who was Brother to the Duke of Norfolk that had been beheaded on that Queens account and that many things were struck out and many things altered this troubled Camden extreamly who took care that his second Part should not run the same fate and therefore he sent it out of England to that Great Man that it might be printed faithfully after his death This is well-known in England and the sending the Second Part beyond Sea to a forreigner does very easily carry a man to believe this to have been the true Reason of it 4. I do not indeed think that a President de Mortier went to the Cramoisy's and the Barbin's of that time to sell the Manuscripts or to correct the Impression and if so worthy and so learned a man as Mr. du Puy took care to see it faithfully printed Mr. de Thou as he did nothing unworthy of his dignity in being the Depositary of so valuable a piece of History so he answered the sacredness of the trust to the full when he put it in his Kinsmans hands 5. It is true that King Iames reproached Mr. de Thou's Son for his Father's having copied Buchanan's invectives against his Mother but Mr. de Thou had a very tender heart if this gave him a sickness of three moneths 6. It is no contradiction for me to say that he never read Camden and yet to add that he disliked
charity he explains it to me and so he says that I confound what he had said of the Council of England with the Parliament 1. If I were ignorant of this my Ignorance were indeed insupportable or which is all one it were as great as his own 2. But tho he speaks indeed of the Council yet when he had the confidence to cite on the Margin the Petition of the Parliament to the Pope I had reason to discover something else which is in him that is yet more insupportable than Ignorance and to prove his forging of Authorities by shewing that the Parliament never medled in this matter which I do yet more evidently in my Appendix since no Parliament met at that time 3. He affirms here that the Council of England knew that care was taken that the Marriage with P. Arthur could not be consummated which is another character of that insupportable quality for which I charge him I clearly prove that the Privy Councellors knew there was no such matter since they deposed the contrary upon Oath 4 But at last he betakes himself to his Florimond and there I leave him in Company like himself XIV He accuses me of an irreparable Injury that I have done the Memory of Henry the Seventh in taxing him of Avarice which he says no Historian Protestant or Catholick had done before me This is a good discovery of his acquaintance with our Historians in particular with Chancellor Bacon since that whole reign but chiefly the last year of it was a course of Extortions and as the vast Treasure which he left behind him shewed this so if Mr. Varillas had known Henry the Eighths History he would have seen that the very day he came to the Crown he sent the two chief Instruments of his Fathers Oppressions to Prison and that their Process was made and they were soon after executed So certain it is that Mr. Varillas read no History of that Reign 2. He excuses the Impertinence with which I had taxed him in calling Henry the Eighth Duke of York after his Brothers death by saying he did it to avoid a Galimathias which he thinks had followed if he had called both the Brothers Princes of Wales but having once shewed that by the death of the Elder the Younger became Prince of Wales this had been no more a Galimathias than to call any Successor to a Crown the King which will create no confusion in the Readers mind or if he was too tender in this point he might have distinguished them by their names of Arthur and Henry which was both clearer and shorter XXV He excuses himself here and says he drew from a Letter of the Catholick King 's that which he had asserted of their Apprehensions and adds that Authors are not to be blamed when they write out of good Memoirs But I do not blame him for writing out of good Memoirs but for forging false ones 2. His confidence in putting himself in the Class with Salustius and Tacitus is another of his insupportable Qualities 3. His spending two pages in repeating over again that for which I had charged him as if he had read it in a Letter of the Catholick King 's does not make any man believe this a whit the better If he had told where that Letter was to be found what the date of it was and to whom it was writ and if he had given it in the Language in which it was writ originally then this might have had some appearance of a Proof but he had several very weighty Reasons that kept him from doing this and he hoped that as Downright Impudence was the shortest way so it would be the surest to make him be believed 4. He goes on to justify that of Henry the Sevenths power to alienate the Crown of England by saying that he was a Conquerour and was the Master of the Kingdom as much as William the Conquerour was and so he might dispose of it as he pleased This is a new Theory of Mr. Varillas's that one who pretends to be the right Heir and is so happy as to defeat an Usurper is upon that to be accounted a Conquerour for this was the case both of William the Conquerour and of Henry the Seventh the one pretended a Title from Edward the Confessor and defeated Harold as the other did derive a Title from the House of Lancaster and defeated Richard but neither the one nor the other pretended that the Nation was a Conquest no more than Henry the Ninth of France did when he broke the League 5. He says I needed not tell him that K. Henry the Seventh chused rather to hold the Crown by his Marriage with the Heir of the House of York than by his right of Conquest I told him no such thing for I know it is false since for the Reasons that I formerly named he would never consent to hold the Crown in his Wife 's Right 6. He pretends that I am banished England for having been in the design of the Exclusion of the present King All this is equally false that I was in that design that I was banished the Nation and that it was on that account so his Sentence set in Capitals is only a more evident discovery that he makes of himself which he has done indeed in Capital Letters XXVI He had said somewhat to purpose upon the Article of P. Alexander the sixth if he had given any sort of proof that he had refused to grant the Dispensation for the Marriage XXVII If instead of all the Relations both printed and Manuscripts which he mentions so indefinitly he had cited any one printed Relation of an Author that deserves credit or any Manuscript that may be examined this had deserved an Answer Mr. Varillas had not said as he would have it pais now that Ferdinand only pretended to give his Daughter to the Duke of Calabria but he had affirmed positively that he intended it and yet all the proof he brings for this is that there is no inconvenience in thinking that at some time or other of his life he might have been touched with the Remorse of the Injustice he had done the Duke of Calabria I am not to examin the State of Ferdinands Conscience nor what his secret Remorses might be tho in matters of Injustice his was not very tender But it is a new sort of proof and well becoming our Author who being called on to make good a thing which he had positively affirmed tells us there is no Inconvenience in thinking it true but then I see as little Inconvenience in thinking otherwise it was convenient indeed for Mr. Varillas to have it believed but his Conveniences do not determin me XXVIII He pretends that I had denied that Henry the Eighths Parents thought of Marrying him to Francis the Firsts Sister He tells me It was ordinary in those days to contract Marriages among Children and therefore it was not