King Edward having no dominion over them could not impose a Law upon them Not was it probable that he should borrow any of their Lawes or impose them on his natural subjects considering the Antipathy and disaffection betwixt the Nations There were indeed at that time in England three kinds of Lawes The first called Dane-lage or the Danish Lawes prevailing for the most part in the Kingdom of the East-Angles and that of Northumberland secondly Saxon-lage used generally in the Kingdoms of the West-Saxons East-Saxons South-Saxons and that of Kent and thirdly Merceâ—-lage extending over all the Provinces of the Kingdom of Mercia As for the Britans of Cornwal and Cumberland they had no distinct Law for themselves as had those of Wales but were governed by the Lawes of that Nation unto which they were subject By these three sorts of Laws were these Nations governed in their several and respective limits which being afterwards reduced into one body and made common equally to all the subjects did worthily deserve the name of the Common-Law But secondly I dare not give the honour of this action to King Edward the Confessor The great Iustinian in this work was another Edward called for distinctions sake King Edward the elder who began his Reign Anno 900. almost 150 years before this Confessor to whom our Author hath ascribed it But the truth is that these Lawes being suppressed by the Danish Kings who governed either in an arbitrary way or by the Lawes of their own Countrey they were revived and reinforced in the time of this Edward from whence they had the name of Edward the Confessors Lawes and by that name were sued and fought for in the time succeeding of which more hereafter Now as this work may be ascribed to his love to justice so from his piety his successors derive as great a benefit of curing the disease which from thence is called the Kings evill which some impute as our Author tels us to secret and hidden causes Fol. 145. Others ascribe it to the power of fancy and an exalted imagination Amongst which others I may reckon our Author for one He had not else so strongly pleaded in defence thereof But certainly what effect soever the strength of fancy and an exalted imaginationâ— as our Author cals it may produce in those of riper years it can contribute nothing to the cure of children And I have seen some children brought before the King by the hanging sleeves some hanging at their Mothers breasts and others in the armes of their Nurses all touch'd and cur'd without the help of any such fancies or imaginations as our Author speaks of Others lesse charitably condemn this cure as guilty of superstiâ—ion quarrelling at the Circumstances and Ceremonies which are used and this they do Saith he ibid. either displeased at the Collect consisting of the first nine verses of the Gospell of St. John as wholly improper and nothing relating to the occasion c. Our Author tels us more then once lib. 11. 167. of his being a Clerk of the Convocation but I finde by this that he never came so high as to be Clerk of the Closet Which had he been he would not have mistaken the Gospel for a Collect or touched upon that Gospel which is lesse material without insisting on the other which is more pertinent and proper to the work in hand or suffered the displeased party to remain unsatisfied about the sign of the Crosse made by the Royall hands on the place infected as it after followeth when there is no such crossing used in that sacred Ceremony the King only gently drawing both his hands over the sore at the reading of the first Gospel But that both he and others may be satisfied in these particulars I have thought fit to lay down the whole form of prayers and readings used in the healing of that malady in this manner following The form of the Service at the healing of the Kings-evill The first Gospel is exactly the same with that on Ascension day At the touching of every infirm person these words are repeated They shall lay their hands on the sick and they shall recover The second Gospell begins the first of St. Iohn and ends at these words Full of grace and truth At the putting the Angell about their necks were repeated That Light was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world Lord have mercy upon us Christ have mercy upon us Lord have mercy upon us Our Father which art in Heaven hallowed be thy Name c. Min. O Lord save thy servants An. Which put their trust in thee Min. Send unto them help from above An. And evermore mightily defend them Min. Help us O God our Saviour An. And for the glory of thy name sake deliver us be merciful unto us sinners for thy names sake Min. O Lord hear our Prayer An. And let our cry come unto thee The Collect. Almighty God the eternal health of all such as put their trust in thee hear us we beseech thee on the behalf of these thy servants for whom we call for thy merciâ—â—l help that they receiving health may give thanks â—nto thee in thy holy Church through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen The peace of God c. This is the whole form against which nothing is objected but the using of the words before mentioned at the putting on of the Angel the pertinency whereof may appear to any who consider that the Light which was the true Light and lighteth every man which cometh into the world did not shine more visibly at the least moâ—e comfortably upon the people then in the healing of â—o many sick infirm and leprous persons as did from time to time receive the benefit of it But it is time I should proceed Fol. 148. These chose Harald to be King whose Titlâ— to the Crown is not worth our deriving of itâ— much 〈◊〉 his râ—lying on it A Title not so deâ—picable as our Author makes it nor much inferior unto that by which hiâ— Predecessor obtain'd the Kingdom Harald being â—on to Earl Godwin the most potent man of all the Sâ—â—xons by Theyra the natural Daughter of Canutus the fiâ—st was consequently Brother by the whole bloud to Harald Harâ—agar and Brother by the half bloud to Canutus the â—econd the two last Danish Kings of England In which respect being of Saxon Anceâ—â—ry by his Faâ—her and of the Danish Royal bloud by his Mother he might be look'd on as the fittest person in that conjâ—ncture to conâ—ent both Nations But whatsoever his Title was it was undoubtedly better then that of the Norman had either his success been answerable or his sword as good Upon occasion of which Conquest our Author telleth us that Ibid. This was the fifth time wherein the South of this Island was conquered first by Romans secondly by Picts and Scots thirdly by Saxons fourthly by the Danes and fifthlyâ— by the Norman But this I can by no means
have produc'd those arguments by which some shameless persons endeavoured to maintain both the conveniency and necessity of such common Brothel houses Had Bishop Iewel been alive and seen but half so much from Dr. Harding pleâ—ding in behalf of the common women permitted by the Pope in Rome he would have thought that to cal to him an Advocate for the Stews had not beeen enough But that Doctor was nor half so wise as our Author is and doth not fit each Argument with a several Antidâ—te as our Author doth hoping thereby by but vainly hoping that the arguments alleadged will be wash'd away Some of our late Criticks had a like Design in marking all the wanton and obscene Epigrams in Martial with a Hand or Asterism to the intent that young Scholars when they read that Author might be fore-warn'd to pass them over Whereas on the contrary it was found that too many young fellows or wanton wits as our Author calls them did ordinarily skip over the rest and pitch on those which were so mark't and set out unto them And much I fear that it will so fall out with our Author also whose Arguments will be studied and made use of when his Answers will not Fol. 253. Otherwise some suspect had he survived King Edward the sixth we might presently have heard of a King Henry the ninth Our Author speaks this of Henry Fitz Roy the Kings natural Son by Elizabeth Blunt and the great disturbance he might have wrought to the Kings two Daughters in their Succession to the Crown A Prince indeed whom his Father very highly cherished creating him Duke of Somerset and Richmond Earl of Nottingham and Earl Marshal of England and raising him to no small hopes of the Crown it self as appears plainly by the Statute 22 H. 8. c. 7. But whereas our Author speaks it on a supposition of his surviving King Edward the sixth he should have done well in the first place to have inform'd himself whether this Henry and Prince Edward were at any time alive together And if my Books speak true they were not Henry of Somerset and Richmond dying the 22. of Iuly Anno 1536. Prince Edward not being born till the 12. of October An. 1537. So that if our Author had been but as good at Law or Grammar as he is at Heraldry he would not have spoke of a Survivor-ship in such a case when the one person had been long dead before the other was born These incoherent Animadversions being thus passed over we now proceed to the Examination of our Authors Principles for weakning the Authority of the Church and subjecting it in all proceedings to the power of Parliaments Concerning which he had before given us two Rules Preparatory to the great business which we have in hand First that the proceedings of the Canon Law were subject in whatsoever touched temporals to secular Laws and National Customs And the Laitie at pleasure limited Canons in this behalf Lib. 3. n. 61. And secondly that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court in cases of Heresie Lib. 4. n. 88. And if the Ecclesiastical power was thus curbed and feâ—â—ered when it was at the highest there is no question to be made but that it was much more obnoxious to the secular Courts when it began to sink in reputation and decline in strength How true and justifiable or rather how unjustifiable and false these two principles are we have shewn already and must now look into the rest which our Author in pursuance of the main Design hath presented to us But first we must take notice of another passage concerning the calling of Convocations or Synodical meetings formerly called by the two Archbishops in their several Provinces by their own sole and proper power as our Author grants fol. 190. to which he adds Fol. 190. But after the Statute of Praemunire was made which did much restrain the Papal power and subject it to the Laws of the Land when Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute command but at the pleasure of the King In which I must confess my self to be much unsatisfied though I finde the same position in some other Authors My reasons two 1. Because there is nothing in the Statute of Praemunire to restrain the Archbishops from calling these meetings as before that Act extending only to such as purchase or pursue or cause to be purchased or pursued in the Court of Rome or elsewhere any such translatations Processes Sentences of Excommunication Bulls Instruments or any other things whatsoever which touch the King against him his Crown and his Regality or his Realm or to such as bring within the Realm or them receive or make thereof notification or any other Execution whatsoever within the same Realm or without c. And 2. because I finde in the Statute of the submission of the Clergy that it was recognized and acknowledged by the Clergie in their Convocation that the Convocation of the said Clergie is always hath been and ought to be assembled always by the Kings Writ And if they had been always call'd by the Kings Writ then certainly before the Statute of Praemunire for that the whole Clergy in their Convocation should publickly declare and avow a notorious falsehood especially in a matter of fact is not a thing to be imagined I must confess my self to be at a loss in this intricate Labyrinth unless perhaps there were some critical difference in those elder times between a Synod and a Convocation the first being call'd by the Archbishops in their several and respective Provinces as the necessities of the Church the other only by the King as his occasions and affairs did require the same But whether this were so or not is not much material as the case now stands the Clergie not assembling since the 25 of King Henry the eighth but as they are convocated and convened by the Kings wâ—it only I only adde that the time and year of this submission is mistook by our Author who plâ—ceth it in 1533. whereas indeed the Clergy made this acknowledgement and submission in their Convocation Anno 1532. though it pass'd not into an Act or Statute till the year next following Well then suppose the Clergy call'd by the Kings Authority and all their Acts and Constitutions ratiâ—ied by the Râ—yal assent are they of force to binde the Subject to submit and conform unto them Not if our Author may be judge for he tels us plainly Fol. 191. That even such Convocations with the Royal assent subject not any for recusancy to obey their Canons to a civil penalty in person or property untill confirmed by 〈◊〉 of Parliament I marvel where our Author took up this opinion which he neither finds in the Registers of Convocation or Records of Parliament Himself hath told us fol. 190. that such Canons and Constitutions as were concluded on in Synods or Convocations before the
their yongest Sons some Earldom or other until the time of Edward the third after which time they were invested with the Title of Dukes as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies But that they or any of them were Earls by Birth is a new piece of learning for which if the Historian can give me any good proof I shall thank him for it Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cousened into some kindness both by his own power and purse makes Charls Emperor and the French King his Prisoner 1519. Neither so nor so For first though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner yet to the making of Charls Emperor he contributed neither the one nor the other And secondly though Charls were created Emperor Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after Anno 1525. Fol. 31â— Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages 3â— That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned was a Puiâ—â—ant Prince as being the ninth Monarch of the English I shall easily grant but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland is not any where found Our Author therefore must be understood of his uniting the two Realms of Deâ—ra and Pernicia part of which last hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland which after his decease were again divided Fol. 317. Whose Results notwithstanding are not to be obtruded on the Sâ—culars to be obsâ—rved with the Authority of Laws until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses An error far more pardonable in our present Author to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied then in our Church Historian where before we had it and which hath had a full Conâ—utation in our Animadversions to which for brevity sake I shall now refer Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here The Ambassador who was sent from France was neither called Rory nor Duke of Solia but Marquess of Rhosney created afterward Duke of Sully and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom by King Henry 4. A Protestant and therefore purposely selected for that imployment Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service in the Cathedral Chuâ—ch at Câ—nâ—erbury he was heard to say that if the like had been used in France there would have been many thousands of Protestants more then were at that present Fol. 329. Ceâ—il foâ— his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury That is to say for so it must be understood for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery call'd so by the Historian himself in the course of thaâ— Naâ—rative and made so by King Iames in the Mâ—y foregoâ—ng at what time also his Brother Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER The like mistake I finde in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet plac'd by the Author fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King Iames March 13. Anno 1603. Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders c. being by Storm cast upon our Coast c. was fain to yield to all the Kings demands in delivering up the Countess of Warwick and other Fugitives resident in Flanders This story is well meant but not rightly told there being at that time no Earl of Flanders commonly so called to be cast upon the Coast of England nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of the truth is that the person here meant was Philip King of Castile Duke of Burgundy Earl of Flanders c. who in his return from Spain was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh was detained here till he had delivered into the Kings hands the Earl of Suffolk who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection and began to work new troubles against his Soveraign The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban from fol. 222. to 225. Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown This spoken of the Piercies Earls of Northumberland too often false to the Crown though not always so For Henry the second Earl of this Family lost his life fighting for King Henry the sixth in the Battle of St. Albans as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of â—owton And so did Henry the fifth Earl in the time of King Henry the seventh for his Fidelity to that King in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People not to say any thing of his Son and Successor who dyed without any imputation of such disloyalty Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelders did of right belong to the Dukâ— Arnold who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy who died before Nancy that Duke intruded upon his Possession c. 40. Not so it was not Arnold Duke of Gelders that was Imprisoned by Charls Duke of Burgundy but his Son Adolphus who having most ungratiously Imprison'd his aged Father was vanquished by Duke Charls and by him kept Prisoner and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty In a grateful acknowledgement of which favor he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charls and his Heirs to commence after his decease though it took no effect till Conquered under that pretence by Charls the fifth uniting it unto the rest of his Belgick Provinces Anno 1538. Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour Grandchilde to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford created by Henry the eighth whose sister he marryed c. And being thus near the Crown c. In this business of Sir William Seymer now Marquess of Hertford there are two mistakes For first the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his discent married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth he having but two Wives in all the first the Daughter of Filol of Woodland from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West the second Anne Daughter of Sir Edward and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop from whom discends the House of Hertford still in being It s true King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer by him created Earl of Hertford but not é contra the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his Secondly The nearness of this House to the Crown of England came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that Kings Sister but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl with a Neece of that Kings that is to say with 〈◊〉 Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk and of Fâ—aâ—ces his Wife
ordinary temper And so much was the King startled when he heard of the giving up of that City with the Fort and Castle and that too in so short a time that he posted away a Messenger to the Lords at Oxford to displace Col. Legg a well known Creature of Prince Ruperts from the Government of that City and Garison and to put it into the hands of Sir Thomas Glenham which was accordingly done and done unto the great contentment of all the Kings party except that Prince and his Dependents But Legg was sweetned not long after by being made one of the Grooms of his Majesties Bed-chamber a place of less command but of greater trust Fol. 891. And now the Parliament consider of a Term or Titleâ— to be given to the Commissioners intrusted with their Great Seal and are to be called Conservators of the Common-wealth of England Not so with reference either to the time or the thing it self For first The Commissioners of the Great Seal were never called the Conservators fo the Common-wealth of England And Secondly If they ever had been called so it was not now that is to say when the Kings Seals were broken in the House of Peers which was not long after Midsummer in the year 1646. But the truth is that on the 30 of Ianuary 1648. being the day of the Kings most deplorable death the Commons caused an Act or Order to be printed in which it was declared that from thenceforth in stead of the Kings Name in all Commissions Decrees Processes and Indictments the â—â—tle of Custodes Libertatis Angliae or the Keepers of the Liberties of England as it was afterwards englished when all Legall Instruments were ordered to be made up in the English-Tongue should be alwaies used But who these Keepers of the Liberties were was a thing much questioned some thought the Commissioners for the great Seal were intended by it whom our Authour by a mistake of the Title cals here the Conservators of the Common-wealth others conceiv'd that it related to the Councel of State but neither rightly For the truth is that there were never any such men to whom this Title was appliable in one sense or other it being onely a Second Notion like Genus and Species in the Schools a new devised term of State-craft to express that trust which never was invested in the persons of any men either more or fewer Fol. 892. â—o then the eldest Son and the yongest Daughter are with the Quâ—â—n in France the two Dukes of York and Glocester with the Princess Elizabeth at St. James 's The Prince in the Weâ—t with his Army â— This is more strange then all the rest that the Kings eldest Son should be with his Mother in France and yet that the Prince at the same time should be with his Army in the West of England I always thought till I saw so good Authority to the contrary that the Prince and the Kings eldest Son had been but one person But finding it otherwise resolved I would fain know which of the Kings Sonâ— is the Prince if the eldest be not It cannot be the second or third for they are here called both onely by the name of Dukes and made distinct persons from the Prince And therefore we must needs believe that the Kings eldest Son Christned by the name of Charls-Iames who dyed at Greâ—nwich almost as soon as he was born Anno 1629. was raised up from the dead by some honest French Conjurer to keep company with the yong Princess Henrietta who might converse with hâ—m as a Play-Fellow without any terror as not being able to distinguish him from a Baby of Clouts That he and all that did adhere unto him should be safe in their Persons Honors andâ—â—onsciences in the Scotish Army and that they would really and effectually joyn with him and with such as would come in unto him and joyn with them for his preservation and should employ their Armies and Forces to assist him to his Kingdomâ— in the recovery of his â—ust Rights But on the contrary these jugling and perfidious 〈◊〉 declare in a Letter to their Commissioners at London by them to be communicated to the Houses of Parliament that there had been no Treaty nor apitulation betwixt his Mâ—â—esty and them nor any in their names c. On the receit of which Letters the Houses Order him to be sent to Warwick Castle But Lesâ—ly who had been us'd to buying and selling in the time of his Pedlâ—ry was loth to lose the benefit of so rich a Commodity and thereupon removes him in such post-haste that on the eighth of May we finde him at Southwel and at Newcastle on the tenth places above an hundred Miles distant from one another and he resolv'd before-hand how to dispose of him when he had him there â—o Scotland he never meant to carry him though some hopes were given of it at the first for not onely Lesly himself but the rest of the Covenanters in the Army were loth to admit of any Competitor in the Government of that Kingdom which they had ingrossed whoâ—y to themselves but the 〈◊〉 in an Assembly of theirs declare expresly against his coming to live amongst them as appears fol 〈◊〉 So that there was no other way left to dispose of his person but to â—ell him to the Houses of Parliament though at the first they made 〈◊〉 of it and would be thought to stand upon Terms or Honor The Eaâ—l of Lowdon who lov'd to hear himsâ—lf speak more â—hen â—ny man living in some Speâ—ches made beâ—ore â—he Houses protested strongly against the dâ—livery of their Kings Person into their Power 〈◊〉 what in 〈◊〉 â—â—amy would lie upon them and the whole Nation â—f 〈◊〉 â—hould to 〈◊〉 But this was but a coâ—y of their Countenance onely 〈◊〉 â—â—vice to raise the Marâ—eâ— and make is â—uch money 〈…〉 as they could At last they came to this Agreement that for the sum of Two hundred thousand pounds they should deliver him to such Commissioners as the Houses should Authorize to receive him of them which was done accordingly For Fol. 939. The Commissioners for receiving the Person of the King came to Newcastle Iune 22. c. Not on the 22 of Iune I am sure of that the Commodity to be bought and sold was of greater value and the Scots too cunning to part with it till they had raised the price of it as high as they could The driving of this Bargain took up all the time betwixt the Kings being carried to Newcastle and the middle of the Winter then next following so that the King might be delivered to these Commissioners that is to say from Prison to Prison on the 22 day of Ianuary but of Iune he could not And here it will not be amiss to consider what loss or benefit redounded to those Merchants which traded in the buying and selling of this precious Commodity And first The Scots not long before their breaking out
any till he found it out such wherein he is not like to finde many followers though the way be opened I know it is no unusuall thing for works of different Arguments publisht at severall times and dedicated to severall persons to be drawn together into one Volume and being so drawn together to retain still those particular Titles and Dedications which at first they had But I dare confidently say that our Historian is the first who writing a Book of the same Argument not published by peece-meal as it came from his hand but in a full and intire Volume hath filled his Sheets with so many Title-leaves and Dedications as we have before us For in this one Book taking in the History of Cambridge which is but an Appendix to it there are no fewer then 12 particular Titles beside the generall as many particular Dedications and no fewer then fifty eight or sixty of those By-Inscriptions which are addrest to his particular Friends and Benefactors which make it bigger by fourty Sheets at the least then it had been otherwise Nay so ambitious he is of encreasing the Number of his Patrons that having but four Leaves to come to the end of his History he findes out a particular Benefactress to inscribe it to Which brings into my minde the vanity of Vitellius in bestowing and of Roscius Regulus for accepting the Consular Dignity for that part of the day on which Cecina by Order and Decree of the Senate was degraded from it Of which the Historian gives this Note that it was Magno cum irrisu accipientis tribuentisque a matter of no mean disport amongst the People for a long time after But of this Argument our Author heard so much at the late Act in Oxford that I shall say no more of it at this present time 3. In the next ranck of Impertinencies which are more intrinsecal part of the substance of the work I account his Heraldry Blazons of Arms Dâ—scenis of noble Families with their Atchievements intermingled as they come in his way not pertinent I am sure to a Church-Hâ—storian unless such persons had been Founders of Episcopal Sees or Religious Houses or that the Arms so blazoned did belong to either Our Author tells us lib. 5. fol. 191. that knowledge in the Laws of this Land is neither to be expected or required in one of his profession and yet I trow considering the great influence which the Laws have upon Church-matters the knowledge of the Law cannot be so unnecessary in the way of a Clergy-man as the study of Heraldry But granting Heraldry to be an Ornament in all them that have it yet is it no ingredient requisite to the composition of an Ecclesiastical History The Copies of Battle-Abbey Roll fitter for Stow and Hollingsheâ—d where before we had them can in an History of the Church pretend to no place at all though possibly the names of some may be remembred as their Foundations or Endowments of Churches give occasion for it The Arms of the Knights-Errant billeted in the Isâ—e of Ely by the Norman Conqueror is of like extravagancy Such also is the Catalogue of those noble Adventurers with their Arms Issue and Atchievements who did accompany King Richard the first to the War of Palestine which might have better serv'd as an Appendix to his History of the Holy Warâ— then found a place in the main Body of an History of the Church of England Which three alone besides many intercalatious of that kinde in most parts of the Book make up eight sheets more inserted onely for the ostentation of his skill in Heraldry in which notwithstanding he hath fallen on as palpable Errors as he hath committed in his History For besides those which are observed in the course of this work I finde two others of that kinde in his History of Cambridge to be noted here For fol. 146. he telleth us That Alice Countess of Oxford was Daughter and sole Heir of Gilbert Lord Samford which Gilbert was Hereditary Lord Chamberlain of England But by his leave Gilbert Lord Samford was never the Heriditary Chamberlain of the Realm of England but onely Chamberlain in Fee to the Queens of England betwixt which Offices how vast a difference there is let our Authour judge And secondly The Honor of Lord Chamberlain of England came not unto the Earls of Oxford by that Marriage or by any other but was invested in that Family before they had attained the Title and Degree of Earls Conferred by King Henry the first on Aubrey de Vere a right puissant Person and afterwards on Aubrey de Vere his Son together with the Earldom of Oxford by King Henry the second continuing Hereditary in that House till the death of Robert Duke of Ireland the ninth Earl thereof and then bestowed for a time at the Kings discretion and at last setled by King Charls in the House of Lindsey But because being a Cambridge Man he may be better skild in the Earls of that County let as see what he saith of them and we shall finde fol. 162. That Richard Plantagenet Duke of York was the eighth Earl of Cambridge Whereas first Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge And secondly If he had been such he must have been the seventh Earl and not the eighth For thus those Earls are marshalled in our Catalogues of Honor and Books of Heraldry viz. 1. William de Meschines 2. Iohn de â—amalt 3. William Marquess of Iuliers 4. Edmond of Langley D. of York 5. Edward D. of York 6. Richard de Conisburgh yonger Brother of Edward 7. Iames Marquess Hamilton c. No Richard Duke of York to be found amongst them his Father Richard of Konisburgh having lost that Title by Attainder which never was restored to Richard his Son though most improvidently advanced to the Dukedom of York nor unto any other of that Line and Family 4. Proceed we in the next place to Verses and old ends of Poetry scattered and dispersed in all parts of the History from one end to the other for which he hath no precedent in any Historian Greek or Latine or any of the National Histories of these latter times The Histories of Herodotus Xenophon Thucydides and Plutarch amongst the Greeks of Caesar Livy Salust Taciâ—us and Sueâ—onius amongst the Latines afford him neither warrant nor example for it The like may be affirmed of Eusâ—bius Socrates Sâ—zomen Theodoret Russin and Evagrius Church Historians all though they had all the best choice and the most excellent Poets of the world to befriend them in it And he that shall consult the Histories of succeeding times through all the Ages of the Church to this present day will finde â—hâ—m all as barren of any incouragements in this kinde as the ancients were Nay whereas Bishop Godwin in his Annals gives us an Epitaph of two Verses onely made on Queen Iane Seymour and afterwards a Copy of eighteen verses on the Martyrdom of Arch Bishop Cranmer
thereof in the main body of it not far from a little dore which openeth into one of the Prebends houses This I can say on certain knowledge being casually invited to his Funeral when I thought not of it though since his Statua hath been set up in the other place which our Author speaks of Fol. 153. The Right to the Crown lay not in this Henry but in Edmund Mortimer Earl of March descended by his Mother Philippa from Lionel Duke of Clarence elder son to Edward the third I shall not now dispute the Title of the House of Lancaster though I think it no hard matter to defend it and much less shall I venture on the other controversie viz. whether a King may Legally be depos'd as is insinuated by our Author in the words foregoing But I dare grapple with him in a point of Heraldry though I finde him better studied in it then in matter of History And certainly our Author is here out in his own dear Element Edmund Mortimer Earl of March not being the Son but Husband of the Lady Philippa Daughter of Lionel Duke of Clarence and Mother of Roger Mortimer Earl of March whom Richard the second to despite the House of Lancaster declared Heir apparent to the Kingdom of England 'T is true this Edmond was the son of another Philippa that is to say of Philip Montacute wife of a former Roger Earl of March one of the founders of the Garter So that in whomsoever the best Title lay if lay not in this Edmond Mortimer as our Author makes it 〈◊〉 154. This is one of the clearest distinguishing 〈…〉 the Temporaâ—â— and Spiritual Lordsâ— that 〈…〉 be tryed per pares by their Peers being 〈…〉 Noâ— shall I here dispute the point 〈…〉 may not challenge to be tryed by his 〈…〉 wheâ—â—er the Bishops were not Barons and 〈◊〉 of the Realm Our Author intimates that they were not but I think they were and this I think on the authority of the learned Selden in whom we finde that at a Parliament at Northampton 〈◊〉 Henry the 2. the Bishops thus challenge their own â—ee age viz. Non sedemus hiâ— Episcopi sed Barones Nos â—â—â—â—nes vâ—s Barones Pares hiâ— sumus that is to 〈◊〉 We 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 as Bishops only but as Barons We are Barons and you are Barons here we sit as Peers Which last is also 〈…〉 in terminis by the words of a Statuâ—e 〈◊〉 Act of Parliament wherein the Bishops are acknowledged to â—e Peers of the Land And for further proof heâ— eoâ— Ihon â—tratford Archbishop of Canterbury if I remember it aright being fallen into the displeâ—sure of King Edward the third and denyed entrance into the House of 〈◊〉 made his Protest that he was Primus 〈◊〉 Regni the 〈◊〉 Peer of the Realm and therefoâ—e not to be 〈…〉 from his place and Suffrage But of this Argument enough iâ— not too much as the case now stands 〈…〉 thing to consider what they have 〈…〉 what they are at this preâ—ent 〈…〉 Reign theâ—e paâ—â— an Act of Paâ—liament by which it was enacted That the Countrey of Wales should be stand and continue for ever from thenceforth incorpoâ—aâ—ed united and annexed to and with this Realm of England And that all and singular person and persons born and to be born in the said principality countrey or dominion of Wales shall have inâ—oy and inhe â—it all and singular Freedoms Liberties Rights Priviledges and Lawes within this Realm and other the Kings Dominions as other the Kings Subjects naturally boâ—n within the same have and injoy and inheâ—â—it And thirdly between the time which our Author speaks of being the 14 year of King Henry the fourth and the making of this Act by King Henry the eighth there passed boâ—e an hundâ—ed and twenty years which intimates a longer time then some years after as out Author words it Fol. 168. I will not complain of the dearness of this Univeâ—sity where seventeen weeks cost me more then seventeen years in Cambridge even all that I had The oâ—dinary and unwary Reâ—der might collect from hence that Oxford is a chargeable place and that all commodities there are exceeding dear but that our Author lets him know that it was on some occasion of distâ—â—bance By which it seems our Author doth 〈◊〉 to the time of the War when men from all 〈◊〉 did repair to Oxford not as a University but a place of safety and the fear Royall of the King at 〈◊〉 time notwithstanding all provisions were so plenâ—â—ull and at such cheap rates as no man had reason to complain of the 〈◊〉 of them No better argument of the 〈◊〉 of the soil and richness of the 〈◊〉 in which Oxford standeth then that the 〈…〉 on the accession of such 〈…〉 at that 〈◊〉 and on that occasion 〈◊〉 Author therefoâ—e 〈◊〉 be thought to relate unto somewhat else then is here expâ—essed and possibly may be that his being at Oxford at that time 〈◊〉 him within the compass of Delinquency and consequently of Sequestration And 〈…〉 hath 〈…〉 son to complain of the Vniversity or the dearness of it but rather of himself for coming to a place so chargeable and destructive to him He might have tarryed where he was for I never heard that he was sent foâ— and then this great complaint against the dearness of that Vniversity would have found no place Fol. 175. Surely what Charles the fifth is said to have said of the City of Florence that it is pity 〈◊〉 should be seen save only on holy-dayes c. Our Author is somewhat out in this in fachering that saying on Charles the fifth Emperor and King of Spain which Boterus and all other Authors ascribe to Charles Archduke of Austria that is to say to Charles of Inspruch one of the younger sons of the Emperor Ferdinand the first and consequently Nephew to Charles the fifth Not is oâ—r Author very right in taking Aquensis for Aix in Provence Fol. 178. Especially â—aith he if as I take it by Aquensis Aix be meantâ— scited in the fâ—rthermost parts of Provence though even now the English power in France was a waning For first the English never had any power in Provence no interest at all therein nor pretentions to it as neither had the French Kings in the times our Author speaks of Provence in thoâ—e dayes was independent of that Crown an absolute Estate and held immediately of the Empire as being a part and member of the Realm of Burgundy and in the actual possession of the Dukes of â—njou on the expiring of which House by the last will and Testament of Duke Rene the second it was bequeathed to Lewis the eleventh of France by him and his successors to be enjoyed upon the death of Charles Earl of Maine as it was accordingly And secondly that Bernard whom the Latine cals Episcopus Aquensis is very ill taken by our Author to be Bishop of Aix He was indeed Bishop of Acqus or
to say the Title of Earl of Hereford which the Duke requested but so much of the Lands of those Earls as had been formeâ—ly enjoy'd by the House of Lancaster Concerning which we are to know that Humphry de Bohun the last Earl of Hereford left behinde him two Daughters only of which the eldest called Eleanor was married to Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Gloster Mary the other married unto Henry of Bullenbrook Earl of Darby Betwixt these two the Estate was parted the one Moiety which drew after it the Title of Hereford falling to Henry Earl of Darby the other which drew after it the Office of Constable to the Duke of Glocester But the Duke of Glocester being dead and his estate coming in fire unto his Daughter who was not able to contend Henry the fifth forced her unto a sub-division laying one half of her just partage to the other Moiety But the issue of Henry of Bullenbrook being quite extiâ—ct in the Person of Edward Prince of Wales Son of Henry the sixth these three parts of the Lands of the Earls of Hereford having been formerly incorporated into the Duchy of Lancaster remained in possession of the Crown but were conceiv'd by this Duke to belong to him as being the direct Heir of Anne Daughter of Thomas Duke of Glocester and consequently the direct Heir also of the House of Hereford This was the sum of his demand Nor do I finde that he made any suit for the Office of Constable or that he needed so to do he being then Constable of England as his Son Edward the last Duke of Buckingham of that Family was after him Fol. 199. At last the coming in of the Lord Stanley with three thousand fresh men decided the controversie on the Earls side Our Author is out in this also It was not the Lord Stanley but his Brother Sir William Stanley who came in so seasonably and thereby turn'd the Scale and chang'd the fortune of the day For which service he was afterward made Lord Chamberlain of the new Kings Houshold and advanc'd to great Riches and Estates but finally beheaded by that very King for whom and to whom he had done the same But the King look'd upon this action with another eye And therefore when the merit of this service was interposed to mitigate the Kings displeasure and preserve the man the King remembred very shrewdly that as he came soon enough to win the Victory so he staid long enough to have lost it ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Fifth and Sixth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN Relating to the time of King Henry the Eighth WE are now come to the busie times of King Henry the Eighth in which the power of the Church was much diminisht though not reduced to such ill terms as our Author makes it We have him here laying his foundations to overthrow that little which is left of the Churches Rights His superstructures we shall see in the times ensuing more seasonable for the practice of that Authority which in this fifth Book he hammereth only in the speculation But first we will begin with such Animadversions as relate unto this time and story as they come in our way leaving such principles and positions as concern the Church to the close of all where we shall draw them all together that our discourse and observations thereupon may come before the Reader without interruption And the first thing I meet with is a fault of Omission Dr. Newlen who succeeded Dr. Iackson in the Presâ—dentship of Corpus Christi Colledge in Oxford Anno 1640. by a free election and in a statuteable way being left out of our Authors Catalogue of the Presidents of C. C. C. in Oxford fol. 166. and Dr. Stanton who câ—me in by the power of the Visitors above eight years after being placed therein Which I thought fit though otherwise of no great moment to take notice of that I might do the honest man that right which our Author doth not Fol. 168. King Henry endevoured an uniformity of Grammar all over his Dominions that so youths though changing their School-masters might keep their learning That this was endevoured by King Henry and at last enâ—oyned I shall easily grant But then our Authour should have told us if at least he knew it that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thereof pâ—oceeded fâ—om the Convocation in the yeaâ— 1530. in which complaint being made Quod multiplex varius in Scholis Grammaticalibus modus esset 〈◊〉 c. That the multiplicity of Grammars did much him to learning it was thought meet by the Prelates and Clergy then assembled Vt una eadem edatur formula Auctoritate 〈…〉 singula Schola Grammaâ—icals per 〈…〉 that is to say that one only 〈…〉 that within few years after it was enjoyned by the Kings Proclamation to be used in all the Schools thoughout the Kingdom But here we are to note withall that our Author anticipates this business placing it in the eleventh year of this Kingâ— Anno 1519. whereas the Convocation took not this into conâ—ideration till the eighth of March Anno 1530. and ceâ—tainly would not have medled in it then if the King had setled and enjoyned it so long before Fol. 168. otherâ—ardiner â—ardiner gathered the Flowers made the Collections though King Henry had the honour to wear the Posie I am not ignorant that the making of the Kings Book against Martin Luther is by some Popish writers ascribed to Dr. Iohn Fisher then Bishop of Rochester But this Cavâ—â— was not made till after this King had reâ—ected the Popes Supremacy and consequently the lesse credit to be given unto it It is well known that his Father King Henry the seventh designed him for the Arch-bishoprick of Canterbury and to that end caused him to be trained up in all parts of learning which might inable 〈◊〉 for that place But his elder Brother Prince Arthur dâ—ing and himself succeeding in the Crown though he had laid aside the thoughts of being a Priest he could not but retain that Learning which he had acquired and reckon it amongst the fairest Flowers which adorned his Diadem Too great a Clerk he was to be called Beauclerk junior as if he were as short in learning of King Henry the first whom commonly they called Beauclerk as he was in time though so our Author would fain have it Hist. Cam. p. 2 3. A little learning went a great way in those early dayes which in this King would have made no shewâ— in whose â—â—me both the Arts and Languages began to flourish And if our Author doth not suspect this Kings lack of learning he hath no reason to suspect his lack of 〈◊〉 the work being small the glory great and helps enough at hand if he wanted any But of this enough Fol. 196. Which when finished as White-hall Hampton-Court c. he either freely gave to the King or exchanged them on very reasonable considerations That Hampton Court was either freely given by
74. But leaving him to stand or fall to his own Master I would fain know what text of Scripture ancient Writer or approved Councel can be brought to justifie Bounds Doctrines which he affirms for ancient truths and consonant to holy Scripture But more particularly where he can shew me any ground for the third Position viz. That there is as great reason why we Christians should take our selves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath it being one of the moral Commandements whereof all are of equall authority This if it be a truth is no ancient truth and whensoever it be received and allowed for truth will in conclusion lay as heavy and insupportable Burthens upon the consciences of Gods people as ever were imposed upon the Jewes by the Scribes and Pharisees And secondly I would fain know the meaning of the following words in which it is said that others conceived them grounded on a wrong bottom but because they tended to the manifest advance of Religion it was pity to oppose them I would fain know I say considering that the foundation of the Christian faith is laid on the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Christ himself being the chief corner stone how any thing which is not built upon this foundation but grounded on a wrong bottom as this seemed to be could tend to the manifest advance of the true Religion That it tended to the manifest advance of some Religion I shall easily grant and if our Author mean no otherwise we shall soon agree But sure I am no part of the true Religion was ever grounded upon â—alshood and therefore is 〈◊〉 Doctrine were grounded on so ill â— bottom aâ— they say it was it might â—onâ—â—â— to the advancement of a Faction and mens private 〈◊〉 but to the true Religion it was likely to contribute nothing but disgrace and scandal Lâ—stly I am to minde our Author that he makes Mr. Greenhams Treatise of the Sabbath to be published in pursuance of Bounds opinions which could not be till in or after the year 1595. Whereas he had laid him in his grave above two years before telling us that he died of the Plugue in London Anno 1592. fol. 219. By which it seems that Greenham either writ this Treatise after his decease oâ— else our Author hath done ill in giving the fâ—â—st honour of these new Doctrins unto Dr. Bound In the next place we shall see our Author engage himself in defence of the Calviâ—an Doctrins about Predestâ—ation Grace c. of which he telleth us that Fol. 229. Having much troubled both the Schools and Puâ—pit Archbishop Whitgift out of his Christian care to propogate the truth and suppress the opposite errors 〈◊〉 used a solemn meeting of many grave and learned 〈◊〉 at Lanibâ—th The occasion this The controversâ—â— about Predestination Grace c. had been long 〈◊〉 in the Schools between the Dominicant on the one side and the Francisâ—ans on the other 〈◊〉 the Dominicans grounding their opinion on the Authority of St. Augustin Prosper and some others of the following 〈◊〉 the Franciscans on the general current of the 〈◊〉 Fathers who lived ante motâ— certamina Pelagiana before the rising of the Pelagian Hereâ—ies 〈◊〉 disputes being after taken up in the 〈◊〉 Churches 〈◊〉 moderate Lutherans as they 〈◊〉 them followed the Doctrine of Melanchâ—hon conformable to the 〈…〉 those particulars The others whom they 〈…〉 or rigid Lutherans of whom 〈◊〉 Illyricus was the chief go in the same way with the Dominicans The authority of which last opinion after it had been entertained and publishe in the works of Calvin for his sake found admiâ—â—ance in the Schools and Pulpits of most of the Reformed Churches And having got footing here in England by the preaching of such Divines as had fled to Geneva in Queen Maries time it was defended in the Schools of Cambridge without opposition till Peter Barâ— a French man came and setled there Who being the Lady Margarets Pâ—ofessor in that University and liking better of the Melanchthonian way then that of Calvin defended it openly in the Schools many of parts and qâ—ality being gained unto his opinion Which gave so much displeasure to Dr. Whitaker Dr. Tyndall Mr. Perkins and some other leading men of the contrary judgement that they thought best to use the Argument ab Authoritatâ— to convince their Adversaries and complained thereof to the Archbishop and in the end prevailed with him to call that meeting at Lambeth which our Author speaks of in which some Articles commonly called the Nine Articles of Lambeth were agreed upon and sent down to Cambridge in favour of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates But our Author not content to relate the story of the Quarrel must take upon him also to be a judge in the Controversie He had before commended the Dominicans for their Orthodoxie in these points of Doctrine as they were then in agitation betwixt them and the Iesuits He now proceeds to do the like between the two parties men of great piety and learning appearing in it on both sides disputing the same points in the Church of England honouring the opinion of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates with the name of the truth and branding the other with the Title of the opposite error And yet not thinking that he had declared himself sufficiently in the favour of the Calvinian party he telleth us not long after of these Lambeth Articles fol. 232. that though they wanted the Authority of Provincial Acts yet will they readily be received of all Orthodox Christians for as far as their own purity bears conformity to Gods word Which last words though somewhat perplextly laid down must either intimate their conformity to the word of God or else signifie nothing But whatsoever opinion our Author hath of these Nine Articles certain it is that Queen Elizabeth was much displeased at the making of them and commanded them to be supprest which was done accordingly and with such diligence withall that for long time a Copy of them was not to be met with in that University Nor was King Iames better pleased with them then Queen Elizabeth was Insomuch that when Dr. Renalds mov'd in the Conference of Hampton-Court that the Nine Articles of Lambeth might be superadded to the 39. Articles of the Church of England King Iames upon an information of the true staâ—e of the businesse did absolutely refuse to give way to it But of this more at large elsewhere I only add a Memorandâ—m of our Authors mistake in making Dr. Richard Bancroft Bishop of London to be one of the Bishops which were present at the meeting at Lambeth whereas indeed 〈◊〉 was Richard Fletcher Bishop elect of London and by that name entituled in such Authors as relate this story Dr. Bancroft not being made Bishop of London or of any place else till the year 1597. which was two years after this Assembly Alike mistake relating to this business
own Thirdly though it be true enough that some Persons of Honour had been denied such higher Titles as they had desired fol. 163. Yet was it not the denying of such Titles unto Men of Honour which wrote these terrible effects but the denying of an Honorary Title to a Man of no Honour If Colonel Alexander Lesley an obscure fellow but made rich by the spoils and plunder of Germany had been made a Baron when he first desired it the rest of the Male-contents in Scotland might have had an heart though they had no head But the King not willing to dishonor so high a Title by conferring it on so low a person denyed the favour which put the man into such a heat that presently he joyned himself to the faction there drove on the Plot and finally undertook the command oâ— their Armieâ— Rewaâ—ded foâ— which notable service with the Title of Earl of Levin by the King himâ—elâ— he could not so digest the injury of the first refusal but that he afterwards headed their Rebellions upon all occasions Fol. 163. Generally they excused the King in their writings as innocent therein but charged Archbishop Laâ—d as the principal and Dr. Cousins for the instrumental compiler thereof This is no more then we had reason to expect fâ—om a former passage lib. 4. fol. 193. where our Author telleth us that the Scottish Bishops withdrew themselves from their obedience to the See of York in the time when George Nevil was Archbishop And then he adds Hence forwards no Archbishop of York medled more with Church matters in Scotland and happy had it been if no Archbishop of Canterbury had since interessed himself therein His stomach is so full of choler against this pooâ— Prelate that he must needs bring up some of it above an hundred years before he was born Hence is it that he rakes together all reports which make against him and sets them down in rank and file in the course of this History If Archbishop Abbot be suspended from his Jurisdiction the blame thereof was laid on Archbishop Laud as if not content to succeed he endeavoured to suâ—plant him fol. 128. The King sets out a Declaration about lawful sports the reviving and enlarging of which must be put upon his accompt also some strong pâ—eâ—â—mptions being urged for the proof thereof fol. 147. The 〈◊〉 of the Church to her antient Rules and publick Doctrines must be nothing else but the enjoyning of his own private practices and opinions upon other men fol. 127. And if a Liturgy be compos'd for the use of Church of Scotland who but he must be charged to be the Compiler of it But what proofs have we for all this Only the 〈◊〉 or his Enemies or our Authors own 〈…〉 or some common fame And if it once be 〈…〉 shall pass for truth and as a truth 〈…〉 Authors History though the greatest falsehood Tam facilis in mendaciis fides ut quicquid famae liceat fingere illi esset libenter audire in my Authors language But for the last he brings some pâ—oof he would have us think so at the least that is to say the words of one Bayly a Scot whom it concern'd to make him as odious as he could the better to comply with a Pamphlet called The Intentions of the Army in which it was declared that the Scots entred England with a purpose to remove the Archbishop from the King and execute their vengeance on him What hand Dr. Cousins had in assisting of the work I am not able to say But sure I am that there was nothing done in it by the Bishops of England but with the counsel and co-operation of their Brethren in the Church of Scotland viz. the Archbishop of St. Andrews the Archbishop of Glasco the Bishop of Murray Ross Brechin and Dunblane as appears by the Book entituled Hidden Works of Darkness c. fol. 150 153 154 c. And this our Author must needs know but that he hath a minde to quarrel the Archbishop upon every turn as appears plainly 1. By his Narrative of the Design in King Iames his time from the first undertaking of it by the Archbishop of St. Andrews and the Bishop of Galloway then being whose Book corrected by that King with some additions expunctions and accommodations was sent back to Scotland 2. By that unsatisfiedness which he seems to have when the project was resum'd by King Charles whether the Book by him sent into Scotland were the same which had passed the hands of King Iames or not which he expresseth in these words viz. In the Reign of King Charles the project was resumed but whether the same Book or no God knoweth fol. 160. If so if God only knoweth whether it were the same or no how dares he tell us that it was not and if it was the same as it may be for ought he knoweth with what conscience can he charge the making of it upon Bishop Laud. Besides as afterwards he telleth us fol. 163. the Church of Scotland claimed not only to be Independent and free as any Church in Christendom a Sister not a Daughter of England And consequently the Prelates of that Church had more reason to decline the receiving of a Liturgy impos'd on them or commended to them by the Primate of England for fear of acknowledging any subordination to him then to receive the same Liturgy here by Law establisht which they might very safely borrow from their Sister Church without any such danger But howsoever it was the blame must fall on him who did least deserve it Fol. 167. Thus none seeing now foul weather in Scotland could expect it fair Sun-shine in England In this I am as little of our Authors opinion as in most things else The Sun in England might have shined with a brighter beam if the clouds which had been gathered together and threatned such foul weather in Scotland had been disperst and scattered by the Thunder of our English Ordinance The opportunity was well given and well taken also had it not been unhappily lost in the prosecution The Scots were then weak unprovided of all necessaries not above three thousand compleat Arms to be found amongst them The English on the other side making a formidable appearance gallantly Horst compleaâ—ly arm'd and intermingled with the choicest of the Nobility and Gentry in all the Nation And had the Scots been once broken and their Countrey wasted which had been the easiest thing in the world for the English Army they had been utterly disabled from creating trouble to their King disturbances in their own Châ—rch and destruction to England So true is that of the wise Histoâ—ian Conatus subditorâ—m irritos imperia â—â—â—per promovere the Insurrections of the people when they are supprest do always make the King stronger and the Subjects weaker Fol. 167. The Sermon ended We chose Dr. Stewart Den of Chichester Prolocutor and the next day of sitting We met at Westminster in the