Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	ancient_a	king_n	time_n	3,370	5	3.4567	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45694	Political aphorisms: or, The true maxims of government displayed Wherein is likewise proved, that paternal authority is no absolute authority, and that Adam had no such authority. That there neither is or can be any absolute government de jure, and that all such pretended government is void. That the children of Israel did often resist their evil princes without any appointment or foretelling thereof by God in scripture. That the primitive Christians did often resist their tyrannical emperors, and that Bishop Athanasius did approve of resistance. That the Protestants in all ages did resist their evil and destructive princes. Together with a historical account of the depriving of kings for their evil government, in Israel, France, Spain, Portugal, Scotland, and in England before and since the conquest.	Locke, John, 1632-1704. Two treatises of government.; Languet, Hubert, 1518-1581. Vindiciæ contra tyrannos.; Defoe, Daniel, 1661?-1731, attributed name.; Ferguson, Robert, d. 1714, attributed name.; Harrison, T. (Thomas), fl. 1683-1711.	1691 (1691)	Wing H917E; ESTC R216382	24,457	34

the Kings over the Children of Israel whom God permitted and appointed to be slain and those that were carried away Captive by the Heathens for their unjust Government I should be too copious But I will leave the Hebrews and give you several Examples of the depriving of Evil Princes of the Government in France Spain Portugal c. and last of all in Scotland and England and of the Happiness and Prosperity that did attend those Kingdoms upon such Acts which can be imputed to nothing but the Blessing of Almighty God which attended those Proceedings and by consequence he approved thereof and does approve of such Acts. There has been two great Changes made of the Royal Line in France the first from Pharamond to the Line of Pepin the second from Pepin to Hugo Capet Childerick the Third was deprived for his Evil Government and Pepin was chosen King in his stead whose Posterity reigned for many Years after him and were brave Kings as History doth testify Lewis the Third and Charles sirnamed Le-Gross were both deprived by the States of France for their ill Government and such who were thought more worthy appointed in their stead All French Histories do attribute to these great Changes that have been made by the People the Prosperity and Greatness of their present Kingdom Henry the Third before he was King of France was chosen King of Polonia But for departing thence without leave and not returning at his Day was deprived by publick Act of Parliament If I were to mention all the Acts of this Nature throughout Europe I should be too tedious therefore I will mention only some few In Spain Flaveo Suintila was deprived for his Evil Government together with all his Posterity and Sissinando chosen in his room Don Pedro sirnamed the Cruel for his injurious Proceedings with his Subjects they resolved to dethrone him and to that intent sent for a Bastard Brother of his named Henry that lived in France desiring him to come with some French Men to assist them in that Act and take the Crown upon himself Which he did by the help of the Spaniards and slew him in Fight hand to hand and so enjoyed the Crown as doth his Off-spring to this Day This Henry was a most Excellent King as well for his Courage in War as for his other brave Qualities In Portugal Don Sanco the Second was deprived by the Universal Consent of all Portugal and Don Alanso his Brother set up Who amongst other great Exploits was the first that set Portugal free from all Subjection Dependance and Homage to the Kingdom of Castile And his Son who was his Successor builded and founded above forty great Towns in Portugal Who was likewise a most rare Prince and his Off-spring ruleth there to this Day Cisternus King of Denmark for his intolerable Cruelty was deprived and his Wife and three Children disinherited and his Uncle Frederick was chosen King in his stead whose Off-spring remaineth in the Crown In Scotland the Nobility and Gentry c. took Arms against Durstus their King for his intolerable Cruelty and slew him and his Confederates in Battel and put by his Sons lest they should imitate their Father's Vices and elected Even his Brother King who leaving a Bastard Son the Kingdom was conferred on him Crathy Cinthus having surprized and slain Donald for his Tyranny he was unanimously elected King Ethus was for his Evil Government deprived and Gregory made King in his stead Buchanan a Scots-man speaking of his Country saith That it was free from the beginning created it self Kings upon this very Law that the Empire being conferred on them by the Suffrages of the People if the Matter required it they might take it away by the same Suffrages Of which Law many Footsteps have remained even to our Age. I will end this Narration with Examples out of England before and since the Conquest Archigallo Emerian Vortigern Sigibert King of the West-Saxons Beornred and Alured King of Northumberland were all deprived of their Thrones for their Evil Government and such who were thought more Worthy preferred in their Stead King Edwin being deprived for his Unjust Government the Crown was given to his Brother Edgar who was one of the rarest Princes that the World had in his Time both for Peace and War Justice Piety and Valour He kept a Navy saith Stow of three thousand and six hundred Ships distributed in divers Parts for defence of the Realm and he built and restored forty seven Monasteries at his own Charge c. The Crown of England hath been altered by the Community and settled upon those from whom they expected more Justice than from the right Heirs Witness the Electing and Crowning of Edelwald and Casebelian Egbert not next in Blood Edward Adalston and Harold who were all Illegitimate and Edred against the Right of his two Nephews Canutus a Foreigner and Hardiknute without Title and Edward the Confessor against the Right Heirs After the Conquest Anno. 1087. Robert the Elder Brother was put aside and William Rufus the third Son of William the Conqueror was Elected After whose Death Henry the First his Younger Brother though not next Heir was chosen by the People not summoned by Writ After the Death of Henry the First Stephen was chosen King against the right of Maud the Daughter of Henry the First After his Death Henry the second was admitted King against the Right of his Mother Maud. After the Death of Richard the First King John Earl of Morton was Elected and Arthur the Right Heir disinherited Henry the Third was chosen against the Right of Eleanor Prince Arthur's Sister At the Death of Henry the Third the States of the Kingdom met and setled the Government by appointing Officers and what else was necessary for the Defence of the Realm and Edward the Fourth was set up by the People during the Life of Henry the Sixth Now it is plain that the Kings and Queens of England ever since William Rufus's Time have proceeded from those who were set up by the People against the next Heirs King Edward the Second Richard the Second and Richard the Third were for not governing according to the Laws of the Land deprived of the Government and Edward the Third and Henry the Fourth and Seventh were preferred in their rooms which were most Rare and Valiant Princes who have done many Important Acts in this Kingdom and have raised many Families to Nobility put down others changed States both abroad and at home altered the Course of Descent in the Blood Royal and the like which was unjust and is void at this Day if the Changes and Deprivations of the former Kings were unlawful and consequently all those Princes that have succeeded them which yet never failed of a constant Lineal Descent were Usurpers and those that do pretend to the Crown of England at this Day have no Title at all which was yet never denied for that from those Men they descended who

is not to an absolute Authority for there can be no absolute Authority where there is an Authority above it With what Folly and Ignorance do some assert That the Kings of England are Absolute as proceeding from William the Conqueror To which I answer That a Conqueror has no right of Dominion much less any Absolute Authority over the Wife and Children of the Conquered or over those who assisted not against him Conquest may claim such a Right as Thieves use over those whom they can master which is a Right of Tenure but no Tenure of Right Conquest may restore a Right Forfeiture may lose a Right but 't is Consent only that can transact or give a Right There is no other Absolute Power than over Captives taken in a just War If the Possession of the whole Earth was in one Person yet he would have no Power over the Life or Liberty of another or over that which another gets by his own Industry for Propriety in Land gives no Man Authority over another William the Conqueror made a League or Compact with the Nobles and Lords of the Land to the performance of which he takes an Oath to observe the ancient Laws of the Realm established by his Predecessors the Kings of England and especially of Edward the Confessor as likewise did Henry the First with the Emendations his Father had made to them Stephen who succeeded Henry made a Compact and promised a Meloration of their Laws according to their Minds William Rufus Henry the First and Stephen get the Consent of the People by promising to grant them their usual Laws and ancient Customs Henry the First Richard the First King John and Richard the Second oblige themselves at their Coronations to grant them and then the People consented to own them as their King and Richard the First and King John were conjured by the Arch-bishops not to take upon them the Crown unless they intended to perform their Oaths If any King refused so to do the Nobles thought it their Concern to hinder his Coronation till he had either made or promised this Engagement What can be more absurd than to say That there is an absolute Subjection due to a Prince whom the Laws of God Nature and the Country have not given such Authority as if Men were made as so many Herds of Cattel only for the Use Service and Pleasure of their Princes But some do object That the anointing of Kings at their Coronations makes their Persons Sacred Unquestionable and Irresistable for any Tyrannical or Exorbitant Actions whatsoever To which I answer That every Christian's Baptism is a Sacrament of Christ's Institution a Spiritual Unction and Sanctification which makes a Person as sacred yea more holy than the Anointing of Kings can or doth of it self that being no Sacrament a Truth which no Christian can without Blasphemy deny And yet no Christian is exempted from Resistance Censure or Punishments according to the nature of his Crime and therefore the Anointing of Kings at their Coronations cannot do it it being a Ceremony of the Jews not instituted by Christ or any ways commanded to be continued by the Apostles or their Successors it signifying only the chusing or preferring one before another and so became the Ceremony of consecrating to any special Office and so was ordinarily used in the enstalling Men to Offices of any Eminency The Reign of a good King resembles that of Heaven over which there is but one God for he is no less beloved of the Vertuous than feared of the Bad and if human Frailty could admit a Succession of good Kings there were no comparison Power being ever more glorious in one than when it is divided 'T is not the Title of a King but the Power which is the Laws which is invested in him which makes the difference betwixt him and other Men in the executing of this Power his Person is sacred and not to be resisted he being above every Soul contained in the same Society and therefore cannot be resisted or deprived of his Office by any part or by the whole Community without the greatest Sin of Robbery and Injustice imaginable If a Government say some may be disturbed for any unlawful Proceedings of the Governour or his Ministers how can any Government be safe To which I answer That it is not lawful for every private Man to fly into the Bosom of his Prince for he is no competent Judg be he of never so great a Quality else a King was the most miserable Man living lying at the Mercy of every desperate Fellow's Censure It is impossible for one or a few oppressed Men to disturb the Government where the Body or the People do not think themselves concerned in it and that the Consequences seem not to threaten all yea when it does yet the People are not very forward to disturb the Government as in King Charles the Second's time when the Charters were condemned and seized upon in order to make us Slaves and the Laws perverted to the loss of many innocent Lives and many other Oppressions too many to insert and yet no body offered to disturb the Government I say till the Mischief be grown general and the Designs of the Rulers become notorious then and then only will the People be for righting themselves Whosoever either Ruler or Subject by Force goes about to invade the Rights of either Prince or People and lays the Foundation for overturning the Constitution and Frame of any just Government he is guilty of the greatest Crime I think a Man is capable of being to answer for all those Mischiefs of Blood Rapine and Desolation which the breaking to pieces of Governments brings on a Country and he who does it is justly to be esteemed the Common Enemy and Pest of Mankind and is so to be treated accordingly and how far the late King James was guilty of this I leave the World to judg FINIS The Author's Advertisement JUST as I had finished this Book I received a Reply to my former Book which I thought to have Answered but finding the Arguments to be Frivolous and Weak and my necessary Avocations allowing me but little time therefore I forbore answering it ADVERTISEMENTS THe Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Jure Divino disproved Price 1 d. The Letter which was sent to the Author of the Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Jure Divino disproved c. Answered and Refuted Wherein is proved That Monarchy was not Originally from GOD. That Kings are not by Divine Appointment but that all Government proceeds from the People That the Obedience required in Scripture is to the Laws of the Land and no otherwise That Resisting of Arbitrary Power is Lawful That the Oath of Allegiance to the late King James was dissolved before the Prince of Orange our present King landed That upon the non-performance of an Oath on one side the other becomes void is plainly prov'd from several Examples in Scripture That Protection is the only Cause of Allegiance and that Obedience or Allegiance is due to the present Government is proved from Scripture Law and Reason And those Texts of Scripture which relate to Government of Monarchy are Explained Price stitch'd 6 d. Both written by the same Author and printed for Tho. Harrison