Kingdoms and to show how they succeed to all who ever pretended to Monarchy in any of them As to the British part of the Isle Aurelius Ambrosius was by common consent chosen sole Prince of all the Britons And he had no other Succession save two Daughters Anna married to the King of the Picts and Ada married to the King of the Scots Mordredus King of the Picts Grand-child to the foresaid Aurelius finding himself debarr'd from the Succession of the British Crown employ'd the Scots who fought for him against the Britons But the Britons having called in the Saxons after a bloody Battel both Parties were forced to withdraw and the King of the Picts was induc'd to desist from his Pretentions at that time But thereafter Hungus King of the Picts and the direct Heir of the same Mordredus and consequently of Ambrosius King of the Britons gave his Sister Fergusiana to Achaius King of the Scots and in her Right Alpin King of Scotland succeeded both to the British and Pictish Crowns Hungus having died without any Children Kenneth the 2d Son to Alpin was forc'd to conquer the Picts who refus'd unjustly to receive him as their lawful King Our Kings are likewise Lineal Heirs of the Danish-Race who were Kings of England for 27 or as others say 29 Years they being the only Lineal Successors of Canutus King of the Danes in Britain for Margaret Wife to King Malcolm the 3d was Sister to Edgar which Edgar was Grand-child to St. Edward who was Brother to Hardiknut Son to Canutus After this the Kingdom of England return'd to the old Stock in King Edward's Time to whom succeeded Edgar whose Sister the pious Queen Margaret married King Malcolm the 3d of Scotland by whom he came to have right to the Crown of England there being none extant of the old Royal-Saxon-Line besides her self And with her came very many of the Nobility who fled from William the Conquerour after he conquer'd England and with whom King Malcolm would not make Peace till such of them as resolved to return were restored to their Estates The next Royal-Race which flourished in England was the Norman and to that Race our Kings succeeded thus The Line of William the Conqueror was branch'd out in the Houses of Lancaster and York To the House of Lancaster they succeed as Heirs by the marriage betwixt Ioan Daughter to the Duke of Somerset and undoubted Successor of the Family of Lancaster And to both Lancaster and York they succeed by being Heirs to Henry the 7th in whom these Successions were again happily reconcil'd he having married Elizabeth eldest Daughter to Edward the 4th who had transferred the Succession of the Crown from the House of Lancaster to that of York or at least had united the two in one For clearing whereof it is fit to know that Henry the 7th had only four Children Arthur Henry Margaret and Mary Arthur and Henry dying without Succession the Right of the Crown was certainly devolv'd upon the Children of Margaret the Daughter who did bear King Iames the 5th in a first Marriage with King Iames the 4th and Margaret Dowglas by a second Marriage with the Earl of Angus which Margaret being married to Matthew Earl of Lenox had two Sons the eldest whereof was Henry who thereafter married Queen Mary Daughter to King Iames the 5th and begot upon her King Iames the 6th and thus King Iames the 6th was upon all sides Heir to William the Conquerour and to Henry the 7th The Histories also of both Nations confess that our King is the undoubted Successor of the Blood-Royal of Wales for Walter Stuart from whom our Kings are descended was Grand-Child to the King of Wales by his Daughter who married Fleanchus Son to Banqhuo and Henry the 7th to whom King Iames the 6th was the true Successor was also the righteous Heir of Cadwallader the last Prince of Wales The Histories both of Scotland and Ireland do acknowledg that our Kings are undoubtedly descended from the Royal Race of the Kings of Ireland and all the debate that can be is only whether they be desended from King Ferquhard Father to King Fergus the first or from Eeric Father to King Fergus the second or from some other Irish Kings as Vsher pretends From all which I may draw two Conclusions First that God has from an extraordinary kindness to those Kingdoms lodged in the Person of our present Soveraign King Iames the 7th whom GOD Almighty long preseve all those opposite and different Rights by which our Peace might have been formerly disturb'd 2. That His Majesty who now Reigns has deriv'd from His Royal Ancestors a just and legal Right by Law to all those Crowns without needing to found upon the Right of Conquest so that the very endeavour to exclude him from all those Legal Rights by Arbitrary Insolence under a Mask of Law was the height of Injustice as well as Imprudence FINIS BOOKS Printed for and Sold by RICHARD CHISWELL FOLIO SPeed's Maps and Geography of Great Britain and Ireland and of Foreign Parts Dr. Cave's Lives of the Primitive Fathers in 2 Vol. Dr. Cary's Chronological Account of Ancient Time Bp Wilkins real Character or Philosophical Language Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity Guillim's Display of Heraldry with large Additions Dr. Burnet's History of the Reformation of the Church of England in 2 Vol. Account of the Confessions and Prayers of the Murderers of Esquire Thynn Burlace's History of the Irish Rebellion Herodoti Historia Gr. Lat. cum variis Lect. The Laws of this Realm concerning Jesuits Seminary Priests Recusants the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance explained by divers Judgments and Resolutions of the Iudges with other Observations thereupon By William Cawley Esq Sanford's Genealogical Hist. of the Kings of England Modern Reports of select Cases in the reign of King Charles the 2d Sir Tho. Murray's Collection of the Laws of Scotland Dr. Towerson's Explication on the Creed the Commandments and Lord's Prayer in 3 Vol. The History of the Island of CEYLON in the East-Indies Illustrated with Copper Figures and an exact Map of the Island By Capt. Robert Knox a Captive there near 20 Years QVARTO DR Littleton's Dictionary Latin and English Bp Nicholson on the Church-Catechism History of the late Wars of New-England Atwell's Faithful Surveyer Mr. Iohn Cave's seven occasional Sermons Dr. Crawford's Serious Expostulation with the Whigs in Scotland Dr. Parker's Demonstration of the Divine Authothority of the Law of Nature and the Christian Religion Mr. Hook's new Philosophical Collections Bibliotheca Norfolciana OCTAVO BIshop Wilkin's Natural Religion His Fifteen Sermons Mr. Tanner's Primordia Or the Rise and Growth of the first Church of God described Lord Hollis's Vindication of the Judicature of the House of Peers in the Case of Skinner Jurisdiction of the House of Peers in case of Appeals Jurisdiction of the House of Peers in case of Impositions Letters about the Bishops Votes in Capital Cases Spaniards Conspiracy against
Apology against Edward the first of England about the Year 1300 we assert the Tradition of a wonderful Victory obtain'd by our King Hungus against the Saxons by the Relicts of St. Andrew the Apostle by virtue whereof the Scots first receiv'd the Faith of Christ. To which it is shortly answer'd that every Contradiction does not overturn the Truth of a whole History otherwise we need not be troubled to give any other answer to the Bishop's own Book nor is this pretended to be a Contradiction amongst our Historians for they all agree that King Donald was our first Christian King but in that Apology which is alledg'd to contradict our Histories our Predecessors design'd as most Pleaders do and this Eloquent Author does in his Book to gain their Point at any rate For understanding whereof it is fit to know that King Edward the first having upon the Competition betwixt Bruce and Baliol interpos'd with design to make himself Lord Paramount of Scotland he caus'd his Parliament write to the Pope to whom afterwards he wrote himself in which Letter of his it is pretended that we were Vassals to England as descended from Albanactus the second Son to Brutus 2. Because several of our Kings had become Vassals to his Predecessors in the Times of the British Saxon and Norman Kings To which we answer in our Apology That without debating whether the first Inhabitants of the Isle were descended from Albanactus or his Albanians it is asserted that we came from Spain by Ireland and conquer'd the first Inhabitans for which we cite Beda and so tho they had been Vassals we were free not being lyable to the Conditions of the People we conquer'd and as such fought constantly against the Britons who were forc'd to build Severus's Wall against us And as to any homage made by our Kings it was either for the Three Northen Countries of Cumberland Westmoreland and Northumberland confirm'd to us by the Britons to defend them against the Saxons and thereafter again confirm'd by both Saxons and Britons to assist them against the Danes Or was extorted by force from one or two young Captive Kings upon which heads the Popes had declar'd us free which Bulls Edward himself had robb'd unjustly out of our Treasure with other Records which he could not deny but to cajole the Pope their Judg they insinuate that though they were not Tributaries to his Holiness as England was yet they ought to be protected by the Pope because they had been converted by St. Andrew his Predecessors Brother-german St. Andrew having in Hungus's reign obtain'd for them a Victory over the Saxons and so became subject and subservient to the Pope in having converted the Saxons by Aidan Finan and Colman From this Matter of Fact I observe 1. That we own'd the same origination there that our Historians do to this day and so our Ancestors differ'd not from our Historians much less are they irreconcilable as St. Asaph alleadges 2. That the English acknowledg'd us to be as ancient as the Britons they and we being descended from two Brothers 3. That what we said of St. Andrew must needs be upon design to have oblidg'd the Pope meaning certainly either that we were then first effectually converted to the Church of Rome from the Oriental Observations in which we were very long very obstinate and that Rome consider'd that as the true Conversion or that after that time we first became subject tho not feudatary to the Pope as these forecited words subjoyn'd do insinuate But that our conversion from Paganism was more than 400 Years before the Saxons is positively asserted in that same Apology Nor can this have another meaning for it is undeniable that we were Christians long before the reign of Hungus who reign'd 800 Years after Christ and Colman c. liv'd long before that King Nor was Hungus our King we being only Auxiliaries to him then as King of the Picts after which Apology King Robert the 1st being crown'd and having defeated King Edward at Banock-burn where he gain'd a most signal Victory over the English they then being low made application to the Pope and he having discharg'd us by a formal Interdiction to pursue the Victory into England the Nobility to pacify that Pope and to remove the Interdiction at the desire of the King wrote Letter wherein they own the Antiquity of our Nation and Religion and Royal-Line mentioning when we came from Spain as our Historians do with whom they agree exactly Vt ex antiquorum gestis libris collegimus says the Letter which being prior to Fordon proves that all this was not Fordon's Dream and that our History is well founded on old Records prior to Fordon And lastly it appears that our Kings were not Vassals to England for their Crown but only for these Provinces as my Lord St. Asaph confesses and as I have prov'd in my Treatise of Precedency albeit our Independency was as much controverted of old as our Antiquity is now and I hope that the one will shortly appear as unjust a Pretence as the other is already confest to be From this it appears that there is rather a Harmony than real Contradiction here and that any seeming Contradiction is far less than the real ones betwixt Beda and the Bishop of St. Asaph and the following Contradictions wherein he differs from himself For clearing whereof observe That the Bishop says he questions not the truth of any thing that is said to have been within 800 nay within 1400 Years but so it is that this would bring us to be setled here before the Year 300 after Christ for substract 1400 out of 1684 which is the Year in which the Bishop prints his Book his Lordship can controvert nothing except what was done within 284 Years after Christ And yet he decryes our Historians for saying that we were settl'd here before the Year 503 and denies our being Christians for many Years after the Year 300 and to improve this learn'd Bishop's just Concession I must remark that all our Historians agree that Gregory the great King of Scotland who died Anno 892 added Northumberland to the Merse and having defeated the Britons at Lochmaben he forc'd them to renew their ancient League and to confirm to him the former Right his Predecessors got from them to Cumberland and Westmorland for assisting them against the Picts and Saxons which shews also what great things we could do not only alone without but even against the Picts All which being said by our Historians not only within the 1400 Years but the 800 are not controvertible by the Bishop's concession and therefore I understand not why he asserts that we had nothing but the Kingdom of Argyle before the beating and extirpating of the Picts who gave us their possession beyond Drumalbain Nor can I reconcile how the Bishop asserts all alongst and particularly that the Picts had nothing besouth Grahams-dyke or the
written by Ventonius yet extant which Buchannan also cites and follows Since the Writing of these Sheets I have seen a very old Manuscript brought from Icolmkill written by Carbre Lifachair who liv'd six Centuries before St. Patrick and so about our Saviours time wherein is given a full account of the Irish Kings By which I conclude that since the Irish had Manuscripts then certainly we must also be allowed to have had them having greater occasion of learning Sciences and writing Histories because of our Commerce with the Romans and polite Britans In this Book also there are many Additions by the Druids of those times from which I likewise may confirm that the Priests in our old Monasteries learn'd our Ancient History from the Druids who preceded them I have seen also an old Genealogy of the Kings of the Albanian Scots agreeing with that mentioned in our History at the Coronation of King Alexander the 2d and which has still been preserv'd as Sacred there I have also seen another old Manuscript wherein the Dalreudini Albanach are considered as setled here six Generations before Eric whom Vsher calls the Father of our Kings I find also in it that Angus Tuerteampher reign'd in Ireland five Generations before our Fergus the First and that in his time the Irish and Albanians divided and separated from one another Which agrees with our Histories which say that the Scots were in this Country long before King Fergus and his Race setled here And these our Irish Manuscripts agree in every thing with the above-cited History of Corbre ' and are in effect Additions to his Book by our old Sanachies Having thus cleared that there were sufficient Warrants upon which our Authors might have founded their Histories I shall in the next place say something of our Historians and make appear that they deserv'd the credit and applause they met with and that they founded their History on those good Warrants from which Verimund Boetius and Chambers are formerly prov'd to have drawn theirs viz. our ancient Annals and Registers Fordon was no Monk as the Bishop is pleas'd to call him and we had no such Monastery as Fordon but he was venerabilis vir dominus Iohannes Fordon Presbyter and is called a Monk by the Bishop who studies still his own conveniency to make the World believe he was inclin'd to lie as the Monks are said to have been in that Age and to shew him interested for the Independency of Monks and Culdees from Bishops This Author began at least to write before the Year 1341 for in his Book he speaks of that as a present Year This Book was so esteem'd that there were Copies of it in most of our Monasteries and one of them we have in very old but in fair Characters continued by Arelat another continued by a Reverend Man Walter Bowmaker Abbot of Icolmkill and found in the custody of one who had preserv'd several of the Manuscripts of that Monastery And both these Continuations have drawn out our Histories to the Reign of King Iames the 2d And it is not to be imagin'd that the Monasteries would have esteem'd it so much or that the Abbot of that Monastery where our chief Annals were kept would have continued it if they and he had not known it to agree with their Annals And Fordon cites frequently through his Book Chronica alia Chronica and Beda and follows him exactly he cites also Adamnanus who liv'd before the Year 700 and Turgot Archbishop of St. Andrews who lived anno 1098 and Alvared who dedicated his Book to King Malcom the 3d about the year 1057. He cites also other foreign Authors such as Sigisbert and Isidor and so has done all that the Bishop requires and all that the best Historians can do Neither does he follow Ieffrey but contradicts him even in the instance of Bassianus as shall be cleared to conviction in answering the Bishop's Objections He has in him also Baldredus or Ethelredus and the Process before the Pope containing the Copies of the authentick Letters Objections Apologies and Answers made and sign'd by Edward 1. and his Parliament and the Scotish Nobility produc'd before the Pope about the year 1300 whereof the Copies are not only extant from Fordon but the Bishop also insinuates that the Originals themselves are extant in England and certainly they were at Rome And Fordon cites many other considerable old Records He writes in a good Stile and with good Judgment and the reason why this Work was not printed was not because it deserv'd not the Press but because Boethius Buchannan and Lesly having printed their Histories in their own time and there being no printing in his it was thought we had Histories enow which also occasion'd the perishing of many of our excellent Manuscripts But why should the Bishop object to us Fordon his not being printed since he cites against us Manuscripts never cited by any and which have been left unprinted in a Country where every thing is printed and I dare say after exact perusal of the Bishops Book and of the Authors cited by him that Fordon is preferable to all those old Legends and most of those Authors which he cites against us venerable Beda only excepted who is still on our side Ioannes Major was Rector of the famous Divinity-School of Paris and was a Man of such Reputation in that University as that he is yet remembred with esteem and a Man of too innocent a life to have written a Romance for a History and he likewise relates to Beda and our Annals Of Iohn Major a full account and Elogium is given by the Learn'd Launoy Academiae Parisionsis illustrata Tom. 2. pag. 652 653. sequent One of the most accurate Writers in this Age says That the talent of writing History hath not been found on this side of the Alps in any save in Buchannan who hath written the History of Scotland better than Livius did that of Rome The Bishop of Condom also and the famous Rapin in their exact Essays concerning History have preferr'd none to him save Mariana the Jesuit whom all Men know to be far inferior but they prefer Mariana because Buchannan was a Protestant Ioseph Scaliger says of Buchannan and Us Imperii fuerat Romani Scotia limes Romani Eloquii Scotia finis erit And Mr. Dryden also my Friend whom I esteem a great Critick as well as Poet prefers Buchannan to all the Historians that ever wrote in Britain And tho I approve as little of Buchannan's Politicks as the Bishop of St. Asaph doth yet I will not be so unjust to him as he is in saying That Buchannan in the Life of Fergus the First refers to our old Annals but he cites them not for there is no such thing in the Life of that King And he was not so much a favourer of Monarchy to have allow'd it the advantage of so singular an Antiquity if he had not found the
of the Nation yet their Verdict cannot be question'd for error otherways than by twenty five whereof most part must be Persons of Quality who must proceed upon most infallible grounds and evidences By this rule then our Historians cannot be redargu'd otherways than by the Testimonies of far more unsuspected Historians who agree in what they assert against us and who are receiv'd with greater applause in the World than ours and proceed upon far stronger Evidences Let us then examine if these Qualifications can be found in those Historians by whom the faith of ours is to be overturned And first as to the old British Historians it might be objected by us that they are too much interested both because the Subject Matter is an emulation for Antiquity between the two Nations and because they were over-run by our Country-men at that time to a degree to make them passionate enough for disabling a Witness And as it is very remarkable that Florentius Wigorniensis Malmesburiensis Huntingdonensis and Hoveden wrote about the Reign of Henry the Second and Tho. Walsingham and Matthew of Westminster in the Reigns of Edward the Third and Henry the Sixth at all which times there were Wars and Animosities betwixt the Nations So if any Man will read the sad Lamentations that are in Gilda's and the rage with which he cries out against us no Man can allow him to be an unsuspected Judg or Witness in what concerns our Honour Polidor Virgil suspects that there are some things supposititious in the History of Gildas and if any thing certainly we may suspect most what is added concerning us since the design of detracting from our History possest too much those who were Masters of that Manuscript and printed the same And yet Gildas says very little that can be wrested against us in the Points controverted being as Beda interprets him clearly for us as shall hereafter appear 2. As our Writers are not inferiour in number so most of theirs deserve no credit and they agree not so well against us in the Points controverted as our Authors do in what they assert viz. when we setled here and who were our first Kings For Nennius Britannus does positively say that the Scots came here in the time of Brutus Matthew of Westminster says that we setled here the eleventh year after Christ. And Baker acknowledgeth that Severus built his Wall against the Scots and Picts without mentioning this to be the first incursion and this at least confutes the Bishop of St. Asaph who asserts that we were not come to this Isle even by way of incursion till after the year 300. As they thus differ remarkably as to our Origination and most of them follow Ieffreys ridiculous Inventions as our Author himself acknowledges So Holinshed speaking of those ancient times says That Scotland had in those days two Kingdoms the one whereof consisted of the Picts called Pictland and the other of the Irish Race call'd Scotland which I hope says he no wise Man will readily deny And Caixton in his old Chronicle of England tells that the King of the Scots assisted Cassibelan King of the Britains against Julius Caesar which shews that our Antiquity was believed And Balaeus a most famous English Chronologist says that the Scots wrote c. ex incorrupta annalium Fide 3. That our settlement was so ancient as not only to have been contemporary with their Historians but even to be higher than their Chronology could reach to appears from this that Gildas declares he knew nothing of us but what he was forc'd to borrow from beyond Sea Beda places us amongst the old Inhabitants of this Isle without condescending upon the particular time which he had given us if he had known it himself as he did in all other occasions Nennius their next Author to Beda owns that the most skillful amongst the Scots affirm'd in his time that we were descended from Scota as our Authors now do And the eldest after him affirm that we are descended from Albanactus second Sond to Brutus And this is so far acknowledg'd by succeeding Ages that Edward the First did upon that account claim the superiority to England over us as younger Brother to Locrinus the eldest Son of Brutus And we may see in Hollinshed where he brings in many Scotish Kings doing Homage to the Kings of Britain long before this year 502 and in which several of their Authors agree with him And the Bishop fore-seeing the unanswerable strength of this Argument acknowledges this Superiority to be a most unjust Pretension as indeed it is especially seeing it is undeniable that there was any such thing known in the World then as that Feudol Homage which the English Historians contend for there being no Vestige thereof in any part of Europe till the 800 year of God and we having had no such Kings as some of those whom they name in that ancient Homage But yet even all these Forgeries prove clearly that we were consider'd by those Writers as Inhabitants here past all Memory and as ancient as themselves Giraldus Cambrensis also considers us as descended from Gathelus and Scota which proves not only that this old Tradition was believ'd but that Fordon was not the inventer of it For Girald liv'd about 200 years before Fordon But how any Historian in this also can controvert this Antiquity after Selden has asserted it Lib. 2. cap. 8. I understand not There is likewise a very full and well written Manuscript in the hands of the Lord Maitland which makes us to come from Spain about the year of the World 3242 and to have been first govern'd by Captains and thereafter govern'd by the Kings mention'd in our History 4. There are no positive Authorities produc'd against us condescending expresly when our Royal Line did begin save three Legendary Stories written with design in whom no Protestant Bishop can find any considerable Passages worthy to be cited the easiest thing in them being That a Child made a Fire of Ice and that when St. Columba was sick his Mare wept The first is a nameless Author of St. Patrick's Life cited by Vsher who affirms that when Neil Neilialagh was King of Ireland and Constantius was Emperor Muredus King of Ulster had six Sons who possest themselves of the Northern Parts of Britain and the Nation sprung from them as Giraldus repeating this passage says was by a special name called Scotland And it may be saith the Bishop Reuda mention'd by Beda was one of these six Sons Joceline another Author of St. Patrick's Life tells that the twelve Sons of the King of Dalrieda in Ireland having despised their youngest Brother Fergus he complain'd of them to St. Patrick and he prophesied to him that from him should descend Kings who should reign in many Foreign Kingdoms and accordingly Fergus became King of all Dalrieda and after his Successors had for many Generations reigned
in the transition from that 2d to the 3d Chapter tells after that he had spoke of the Scots Dominion of their own Sea that he will treat of the succeeding Ages and so proceeds to the Saxons which demonstrates that we were setled here before the Saxons though my Lord St. Asaph makes their settlement here more ancient than ours And in this Beda agrees with Selden but both contradict the Bishop And lastly this passage clears that the Testimonies not only of Claudian concerning Ierna but even of Tertullian when speaking of the Inhabitants of Britain not conquer'd by the Romans and of Ierom speaking of the Britannick Nations are only applicable to us And therefore I hope my Lord St. Asaph will not take it ill if we in a Matter of Antiquity prefer an impartial Antiquary to an interested Divine as I would not be offended if the Bishop of St. Asaph were preferr'd to me in a Theological Controversy The first general Objection against our Histories is that they were not written by those who lived in the Time but more than 1400 Years after the things happened of which they wrote And it were strange that if Gildâ—s who liv'd 500 Years before the eldest of them could find no sufficient Instructions save from Foreigners that our Historians should have found sufficient Warrants for a History after so long a time To which my Answer is That our Histories giving only an account of one Nation it was easier to find the true and sincere Tradition as to us than it was in other Nations where the Conquerors were not concern'd to preserve the Traditions and Records and though I have made it very probable that this Isle had the use of Letters before or at least soon after we settl'd in it and so might have preserv'd the Story Yet albeit our History were only founded on Tradition until about 600 Years after Christ before which the Monastery of Iona or Icolm-kill was founded that Tradition might have been sufficiently preserv'd for so few Generations by the means and methods that I have formerly condescended upon Nor can I see how the Origin of a Nation could not have been preserv'd by those who were of it or how being established it could have vanished when People became more polite and curious And after the Year 600 I have prov'd that our Historians might have been and were sufficiently warranted in what they have said by old Manuscripts and Records nor is there any thing urg'd in this Objection against us but what might as unanswerably be urg'd against the Greek and Latin Historians A receiv'd History cannot be overturn'd from what I have formerly represented without Arguments which necessarily conclude that the History impugn'd must be false which cannot be alledg'd here where the Warrants of the History controverted not only might have been but probably were true and are so far from contradicting other Histories that they are confirm'd by them I desire also to know what old Manuscripts and Records Luddus the Antiquary so far preferr'd to ours had for proving that much elder Succession of History from Brutus to his own Time And whereas St. Asaph says that Buchannan should not have tax'd Luddus for deriving the Britons from Brutus since he own'd a Succession of our Kings from Fergus there being as few Documents to support the one as the other To this my Answer is That there have been very solid grounds brought for sustaining the one which cannot be alledg'd for the other and ours are adminiculated by the Roman History whereas theirs is inconsistent with it for it is palpably inconsistent with the Roman History to say that Brutus was the Son of Ascanius whom he kill'd for which being banish'd from Italy he came over to Britain and that Britain was govern'd by Consuls which should rather be laugh'd at than confuted The Bishop is most unjust to us in asserting that we have no Author of our own before Fordon and that no Author mentions our Antiquity but such as have follow'd Fordon who wrote about 300 Years ago For Fordon cites his Vouchers many of which are extant and those who are lost are prov'd to have been extant Within the Isle we could have no Authors till there were Writers and Gildas and Beda the eldest in the Isle prove our Antiquity Without the Isle none could know us being so remote but either by the Wars they had with us or the Christianity that was common to them and us As to our Wars all the Roman Authors above-related speak of us Orosius about the Year 417. Claudian 397. Ammianus before the Year 360. Beda and Eumenius speak of us as before Iulius Caesar as hath been prov'd All which we have collaterally supported by a gradation of Ecclesiastick Historians abroad and all our own Historians at home Beda brings us to Reutherus who was the 6th King from Fergus the first and he living within 150 Years of Fergus this short step may be trusted to Tradition though we had wanted the help of the Druids and Phaenician Letters for a Father might have inform'd his Son of so near a Time nor was this worthy of a fiction And I may modestly say of the foregoing Citations from forraign Authors that if they be not strong enough to overturn the Bishop's Hypothesis yet they are at least as strong as those produc'd by Iosephus in defence of the Jewish History and yet all the learn'd World has acquiesc'd in them Nor is there any thing to be concluded from the silence of Adamnanus and Marianus the eldest of our Historians though as the Bishop alleadges they had certainly mention'd our Antiquitiy if they had known it For Adamnanus wrote no History save of Columba and Marianus going to Germany when he was very young could know little of us and mentions only the three Kings of Scotland in whose time he liv'd and so if this Argument prov'd any thing it would prove too much For certainly we had Kings before those three whom he mentions and these negative Arguments are of no moment in Matters of History and are justly reprobated by the learned Scaliger in his Notes on Eusebius and by Vossius The second Objection is That our Historians contradict one another concerning the Origin of the Picts which ought to lessen their credit But to this it is answered That our Historians were not concern'd to consider the Origin of the Picts as they were to consider their own And this Objection subsumes not what is true in Matter of Fact For our Historians generally agree in the Origin of the Picts whom all of them make to be Scythians and though Fordon relates three different accounts of them yet he does not settle upon any thing that is different from our other Historians as is fully to be seen The third Objection is That our Historians are contradicted by our own Antecessors for our Historians assert that King Donald the first was our first Christian King whereas in our