Selected quad for the lemma: england_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
england_n	henry_n	king_n	richard_n	15,475	5	9.2713	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33624	Argumentum anti-normannicum, or, An argument proving, from ancient histories and records, that William, Duke of Normandy, made no absolute conquest of England by the Sword, in the sense of our modern writers being an answer to these four questions, viz. I. Whether William the First made an absolute conquest of this nation at his first entrance?, II. Whether he cancelled and abolished all the confessor's laws?, III. Whether he divided all our estates and fortunes between himself and his nobles?, IV. Whether it be not a grand error to affirm, that there were no English-men in the Common Council of the whole Kingdom?	Atwood, William, d. 1705?; Johnson, Samuel, 1649-1703.; Coke, Edward, Sir, 1552-1634.; Petyt, William, 1636-1707.; Cooke, Edward, of the Middle Temple.	1682 (1682)	Wing C4907; ESTC R1971	61,200	184

of the Realm This Law of the Realm Cited in White 's Sacred Laws p. 69. or Land was looked upon in the judgment of these Parliaments as * 27. E. 1. the Law of Ancient Time † 25. E. 3. of old Time used and * 42. E. 3. the Old Law whose Age made it the more venerable and gave an addition of honour to it Well having thus shewn you the Coronation of King William the First and given you the Solemn Oath he at the same time took even before his Consecration that so he might give all possible satisfaction to the English of his resolving to rule accordingly and also having made it plain that it was the same in substance with that the Ancient Saxons took before him I shall now descend briefly to set before you some of his own Charters as likewise some of William the Second's and of Henry the First 's his Children and succeeding Kings and from them evidence to you I hope demonstrably that it was not so much his Conquest he relied upon when he was setled in this Imperial Throne as his claim to the Crown of England Iure Hereditario by Right of Inheritance And for the proof of this be pleased to accept of these ensuing Instances 1. In Nomine Patris Carta Antiqua litera D. N. 4. Filii Spiritus Sancti Amen Ego Willielmus Dei Gratia Rex Anglorum Haereditario Iure Factus 2. In Nomine Patris Carta 4. E. 4. m. 27. per Inspex Filii Spiritus Sancti Amen Ego Willielmus Rex Anglorum Haereditario Iure Factus 3. In nomine Sanctae individuae Trinitatis Monast. Anglican Vol. 1. fol. 317. Ego Willielmus Dei Gratia Rex Anglorum notum facio omnibus tam posteris quam praesentibus Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Baronibus omnibus ●idelibus Francis Anglis Quod cum in Angliam venissem in sinibus Hasting cum excercitu applicuis●em contra hostes meos qui mihi Regnum Angliae injustè conabatur auferre 4. In ore gladii saith William the First 's Charter Carta Westmper Inspex 1. E. 4. parte septima m. 26. Mr. Seld. Review p. 483. Regnum adeptus sum Anglorum devicto Haroldo Rege cum suis Complicibus qui mihi Regnum cum providentia Dei destinatum beneficio concessionis Domini Cognati mei gloriosi Regis Edwardi concessum conati sunt auferre c. Come we now to his Second Son William Rufus 5. Willielmus Rex Anglorum Carta Regis Willielmi Rusi vide Monast. Anglican Vol. 1. fol. 352. Willielmo Vicecomiti Filio Baldewini omnibus Baronibus suis Ministris qui habitant in Devonescira Salutem Notifico vobis quod mea condonatione Ecclesia beati Olavi Regis Martyris à Monachis belli aedificata in honore beati Nicholai quam cum omni terra quae pertinet ad Ecclesiam suprascripti Martyris meo privilegio videlicet Literis Sigillo liberam facio ita liberam quietam per omnia cum saca soca thol theam infangenetheof warpeni murdro omnibus consuetudinibus operibus auxiliis sicut Pater meus liberam fecit Ecclesiam Sancti Martini de bello ubi hostem devicit ubi Coronam Regni haereditariam sibi bellando adquisivit T. Walchelino Wintoniensi Episcopo Rogero Bigot apud Wintoniam From William Rufus proceed we to his Brother Henry the First And saith he 6. In Nomine Sanctae Individuae Trinitatis Ex Hist. Eliensis Eccles. M. S. in Bibl. Bodleana inter Codices Cant. I. 58. lib. 3 fol 2. a. Monast. Anglican Vol 1. fol. 95. Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti Anno Incarnationis Dominicae MCVIII Indictione ... Anno vero Pontificatus Domini Paschalis Papae secundi ✚ Regni quoque mei similiter ✚ Ego Henricus providente divina clementia Rex Anglorum Normannorum Dux Willielmi Magni Regis Filius qui Edwardo Regi Haereditario Iure successit in Regnum c. 7. Again Monast. Anglican Vol. 2. fol 845. Ego Henricus Dei Gratia Rex Anglorum Filius Magni Regis Willielmi qui beatae memoriae Edwardo in Regnum Successit 8. To give you one Charter more Ex MS. Domini Rogeri Owen Equit. Aurati The words of that of Henry the First to the Abby of Westminster are Pro memoria Edwardi Cognati mei qui Patrem meum liberosque illius in Regnum suum adoptivos haeredes instituit And thus have I given you as it were a three-fold Cord not easily to be snapt asunder to bind hard my Assertion and to convince those who will not suffer themselves to be over-run by an obstinate Prejudice or captivated by a byass'd Interest that our first William when he came in gained not such an absolute Uictory as is pretended over this Nation for when he came in he had not subdued the fifth part of it but came to the Crown by the Election and Consent of the Clergy and People And foedus pepigit he made a Solemn Covenant with the English to observe and keep those Laws which were bonae approbatae antiquae Leges Regni And this Sir is what I shall endeavour clearly to make out to you in my Answer to your Second Question The Second Question Whether this first William did abolish all the English Laws Quest. 2. and changed the whole frame and Constitution of the Government ANd doubtless not for as my Lord Coke saith Lord Coke's Preface to his 8th Report The Grounds of our Common Laws at this day are beyond the Memory or Register of any beginning Ex vitâ Abbatis Sancti Albani and the same which the Norman Conqueror then found within this Realm of England And those Laws he swore to observe which were good approved and ancient Now that these were only his Norwegian Laws sure none can or ought to believe after they have throughly examined these plain Truths which I shall here offer to their fair perusal 1. If they please to consider what was the Title of the Laws called the Laws of King William the First published by Mr. Selden with his learned Notes upon Eadmer and since with the Saxon Laws Why truly the Title was plainly this These are the Laws and Customs which William the King granted to the whole People of England after the Conquest of the Land ●elden ad Eadmerum fol. 173. These were those which the King● Edward his Cousin held before him Ce sont les Leis les Custumes que li Reis William grantut a tut le Peuple de Engleterre apres le Conquest de la Terre Ice les me●smes que le Reis Edward sun Cosin tint devant luy In these Laws recited by Hoveden in the Life of King Henry the Second King Edward's Laws are confirmed in these words This we command That

or Distress and in the same sence are used in the Custumary That which puts it further out of scruple is That there are yet extant the Manuscripts themselves of the Saxon Laws made in the Parliamentary Councils held by them here which are in the Language and Character of those Times and contain in them many of those things which are in the Norman Custumary It is no improbable Opinion That there was a former Establishment of our Laws in Normandy before the Time of Hen. 1. and that it was by Edward the Confessor who as all Writers of our History agree was a great Collector and Compiler of our English Laws He lived a long time with his Kinsman Duke William in Normandy who was willing to please the Confessor in hopes to be appointed by him to be his Suc●essor wherein the Duke's Expectation did not fail him The Confessor having no Children and finding Normandy without a setled Government and wanting Laws advised with his Kinsman Duke William to receive from him the Laws of England which he had collected and to establish them in Normandy which Duke William and his Lords readily accepted for the good of their People and thereby obliged the Confessor Another proof hereof is That such Laws as the Normans had before the Time of Duke William were different from those in the Custumary and from the English Laws As their Law That the Husband should be hanged if his Wife were a Thief and he did not discover it The meaner People were as Slaves and the like and the Trial of Theft by Ordeil which then was not in England Wigorniensis reports That the Normans who came in with Queen Emma the Wife of Etheired were so hated of the English for their injustice and false Iudgment that in the Time of King Canutus they were for this cause banished and it is the less probable that they being so unjust themselves should introduce so just Laws as ours are Between the Conquest of Normandy by Rolio and the Invasion of England by Duke William there were not above 160 Years that of Normandy was about Anno 912. that of England Anno 1060. It is not then consonant to Reason that those Normans Pagans a rough Martial People descended from so many Barbarous Nations should in the time of 150 Years establish such excellent Laws among themselves and so different from the French Laws among whom they were and all parts in the World except England And such Laws which were not only fit for their Dukedom and small Territory but fit also for this Kingdom which in those days was the second in Europe for Antiquity and Worth by confession of most Forreign Historians If we will give credit to their own Authors this Point will be sufficiently evinced by them These words are in the Proem of the Custumary which is entituled Descriptio Normanniae Hucusque Normannicae CONSVETVDINES LATOREM sive Datorem SANCTVM EDWARDVM Angliae Regem c. The same is witnessed by Chronica Chronicorum That St. Edward King of England gave the Laws to the Normans when he was long harboured there And that he made both the Laws of England and Normandy appears sufficiently by the conformity of them for which he cites several Particulars as of Appeals and the Custom of England ad probandum aliquid per credentiam duodecim hominum vicinorum which he saith remained in Normandy to that day Polydore forgetting himself what he wrote in another place saith of King Henry the Seventh that when a Doubt was made upon the Proposal of Marriage of his Daughter to Scotland that thereby England might in time be subject unto Scotland The King answered No and that England as the Greater will draw it to Scotland being the less and incorporate it to the Laws of England as saith the Historian it did Normandy though the owner thereof was Conqueror of England And Sir Roger Owen in his Manuscript affirms That there is not any of our Historians that lived in the space of 200 Years immediately after the Conquest which doth describe our Laws to be taken away and the Norman Custom introduced by the Conqueror Some of them and not improbably mention the alteration of some part of them and the bringing in some Norman Customs effectual for the keeping of the Peace There is yet behind the great Argument most insisted on and often urged by the Gentlemen of another Opinion which is the Title of William who is called the Conqueror from whence they conclude That by his Conquest he changed the Laws and Government of this Nation and that his Successors reckon the beginning of their Reigns from his Conquest To this is answered That a posse ad esse non valet Argumentum the Conquering of the Land is one thing the introducing of new Laws is another thing but there is direct proof to the contrary of this Argument Duke William never Sir-named himself the Conqueror nor was so called in his life-time as may appear by all the Letters Pattents and Deeds that he made wherein he is called Guilielmus Rex Dux c. never Conquestor and our Ancient Historians give him the same Titles and not that of Conqueror In the Title of Nubrigensis's Book he is Sirnamed William the Bastard Malmsbury calls him William the First Hoveden William the Elder Adam de Monmoth saith That 1. Ed. 3. this word Conquest was found out to denote and distinguish the certain Edward because two of the same name were Predecessors to this King and to the Conqueror who claimed the Crown as Heir to Edward the Confessor but saith he we call him the Conqueror for that he overcame Harold Duke William himself claimed to be King of England as Successor and Adopted Heir of the Confessor by his Will and Harold's renounceing of his Title by Oath The Register of St. Albans Matth. Paris and others attest That the Barons of England did homage to him as Successor and he relied on them in his Forreign Wars and the Check given to him by the Kentish Men and the Forces gathered by the Abbot of St. Albans brought him to engage to confirm the Laws of the Confessor and as his Successor by legal Right they admitted him to be their King Volaterus writes That he was made Heir to the Confessor and was Vncle to him Another affirms That Edward by his Will left England to him Paulus AEmilius and Fulgasius are to the same purpose Pope Alexander the 11 th sent him a Banner as Witness that with a safe Conscience he might expel Harold the Tyrant because the Crown was due to him by the Confessors Will and by Harold's Oath Agreeable hereunto are Gemiticensis Walsingham Malmesbury Huntington Ingulphus Paris Pike Wendover Gaxton Gisburn and others The Antient Deeds of the Abby of Westminster which were sometime in my Custody do prove this King William in his Charter to them sets forth his own Title to the Crown thus Beneficio Concessionis Cognati mei gloriosi

Regis Edwardi In his second Charter dated Anno 15. of his Reign he saith in honour of King Edward who made me his Heir and adopted me to Rule over this Nation In his Charter dated 1088. of the Liberties of St. Martins the Great in the Manuscript thereof are these words In Example of Moses who built the Tabernable and of Solomon who built the Temple Ego Guilielmus Dei dispositione consanguinitatis Haereditate Anglorum Basileus c. The Charter of Hen. 1. his Son to this Abby in honour of Edward my Kinsman who adopted my Father and his Children to be Heirs to this Kingdom c. In another Charter of Hen. 1. in the Book of Ely he calls himself the Son of King William the Great who by Hereditary Right succeeded King Edward It is true as to his pretence of Title by the Will of the Confessor Mathew Paris objecteth That the Devise was void being without the consent of the Barons To which may be answered That probably the Law might be so in Hen. 3. Time when Paris wrote and was so taken to be in the Statute of Carlisle and in the Case of King Iohn But at the time of Duke William's Invasion the Law was taken to be That a Kingdom might be transferred by Will So was that of Sixtus Rufus and Asia came to the Romans by the Will of King Attalus the words by Annaeus Florus are Populus Romanus Bonorum meorum HAERES esto Bithinia came to the Romans by the last Will of their King Nicomedes which is remembred by Vtropius together with that of Libia Cicero in his Oration tells us That the Kingdom of Alexandria by the last Will of their King was devolved to Rome And Prasutagus Rex Icenorum in England upon his Death-bed gave his Kingdom to the Emperor Nero. As to Examples in this Point at Home This King William the first by his Will gave England to his younger Son William Rufus King Stephen claimed by the Will of Henry the first King Henry the eight had Power by Act of Parliament to order the Succession of the Crown as he pleased by Will And the Lords of the Council in Queen Mary's Time wrote to her That the Lady Iane's Title to the Crown was by the Will and Letters of Edward the sixth As. the case of Hen. 8. was by Act of Parliament so Duke William after he had conquered Harold was by the general consent of the Barons and People of England accepted for their King and so his Title by Will confirmed And he both claimed and governned the Kingdom as an Heir and Successor confirmed their Antient Laws and ruled according to them This appears by Chronica Chronicorum speaking of William the Bastard King of England and Duke of Normandy he saith That whereas as St. Edward had no Heir of England William having conquered Harold the Vsurper obtained the Crown under this Condition That he should inviolably observe those Laws given by the said Edward It is testified likewise by many of our Historians That the Ancient Laws of England were confirmed by Duke William Iornalensis saith That out of the Merchen-Lage West-Saxon-Lage and Dane-Lage the Confessor composed the Common Law which remains to this day Malmesbury who lived in Duke William's Time saith That the Kings were sworn to observe the Laws of the Confessor so called saith he because he observed them most religiously But to make this Point clear out of Ingulphus he saith in the end of his Chronicle I Ingulphus brought with me from London into my Monastery Crowland the Laws of the most Righteous King Edward which my Lord King William did command by his Proclamation to be Authentick and Perpetual and to be observed throughout the whole Kingdom of England upon pain of most heinous punishment The Lieger-Book of the Abby of Waltham commends Duke William for restoring the Laws of the English-men out of the Customs of their Country Radburn follows this Opinion and these Laws of Edward the Confessor are the same in part which are continued in our GREAT CHARTER of LIBERTIES A Manuscript entituled De Gestis Anglorum saith That at a Parliament at London 4. W. 1. the Lawyers also present that the King might hear their Laws he established Saint Edward's Laws they being formerly used in King Edgar's Time There is also mention of the twelve Men out of every County to deliver truly the Estate of their Laws The same is remembred by Selden's History of Tythes and Titles of Honour and in a Manuscript Chronicle bound with the Book of Ely in Cotton's Library One of the worthy Gentlemen from whom I differ in Opinion was pleased to say That if William the Conqueror did not introduce the Laws of Normandy into England yet he conceives our Laws to be brought out of France hither in the time of some other of our Kings who had large Territories in France and brought in their Laws hither else he wonders how our Laws should be in French Sir I shall endeavour to satisfy his Wonder therein by and by but first with your leave I shall offer to you some Probabilities out of the History That the Laws of England were by some of those Kings carried into France rather than the Laws of France brought hither This is expresly affirmed by Paulus Iovius who writes That when the English Kings reigned in a great part of France they taught the French their Laws Sabellicus a Venetian Historian writes That the Normans in their Manners and Customs and Laws followed the English Polydore Virgil contradicting himself in another place than before cited relates That in our King Hen. 6. Time the Duke of Bedford called together the Chief Men of all the Cities in Normandy and delivered in his Oration to them the many Benefits that the English afforded them especially in that the English gave to them their Customs and Laws By the Chronicle of Eltham H. 5. sent to Cane in Normandy not only Divines but English Common Lawyers by the agreement at Troys So there is much more probability that the Laws of England were introduced into France and Normandy than that the Laws of Normandy or any other part of France were introduced into England If the Normans had been Conquerors of England as they were not but their Duke was only a Conqueror of Harold and received as Hereditary King of England yet is it not probable they would have changed our Laws and have introduced theirs because they did not use to do so upon other Conquests The Normans conquered the Isles of Guernsey and Iersey yet altered not their Laws which in their local Customs are like unto ours The like they did in Sicily Naples and Apulia where they were Conquerors yet the Ancient Laws of those Countries were continued I hope Mr. Speaker I have by this time given some satisfaction to the Worthy Gentlemen who differed from me that the Laws of England were not imposed upon us by the Conqueror nor brought over

Absolute Conquest be true then either the Arch-bishops Bishops Abbots Priors Earls Barons and Commons in Parl. 15. R. 2. knew it or they did not That they were ignorant of it is not easily to be presumed because they lived within ten of three hundred Years ago and no doubt but there were some Learned Men among them that knew the ancient Constitutions of the Nation And if they did then were they guilty of the greatest madness and folly that ever was when the Commons prayed that King En plein Parlement que nostre Seigneur le Roy s●it estoise ausi frank en sa Regalie Liberte Dignite Royale en son temps come ascuns de cest Noble Progenitors Rot. Parl. 15. R. 2. N. 13. Roys d' Eng● furent en lour temps nient contresteant ascun Estatut on Ordinance fait devant cest hures a contraire mesment en derogation de la Libertee Franchise de la Corone qu'il soit adnulle de nul force puis touz les Prel●tes Seigneures Temporels prierent en mesine le manere sur ce nostre Seigneur ledit Roy mercia les dits Seigneurs Communes de la grant tendresse affection qu●ils avoient a la Salvation de son Honeur de son Estate a cause que lour dit priers requestes luy semblerent honestes resonables il sagrea assenta pleinement a ycelles Now can any Man of but an ordinary understanding think That the Parliament intended by this Act to out themselves of all their Ancient and Legal Rights and totally to give up their Estates and Fortunes to the King 's absolute Disposition Is it possible almost to be supposed that they designed to confound and overthrow the whole Polity and Government of the Kingdom and reduce all to the Arbi●rary Will and Power of a New Conqueror without a Conquest What Man is there that is not become servile to Common Opinion and implicit Suppositions of so Inventive a Faculty as to conjecture such grand Absurdities And yet these and many more are the direct Consequences of those that endeavour to maintain and justify these pernicious Principles For the Petition and Law is that Rich. 2. should be as free in his Regality Liberty and Dignity Royal as any of his Noble Progenitors Kings of England then it naturally follows That he was to be as Free and Absolute as William the Conqueror And then what is the Conclusion and Result The Anonymus Author against Mr. Petyt p. 43. But that the English were neither to have Estates nor Fortunes left them and therefore it could be no great Matter to them by what Law Right or Property Men held their Estates And so farewel to Parliaments But we know and are well assured That never any such Imagination entred into the Minds of the Lords and Commons in 15. R. 2. Ras. Stat. 15 R. 2. f. 161. not only by the Laws made then in that Parliament but by those in the next Parliament held the next Year after Id. 16. R. 2. fo 163. The Commons granted to the King That pur la grant Affiance Affection and Assurance for the great Trust Rot. Parl. 16 R. 2. N. 8. Affection and Assurance they had in the Noble Person of the King in his most excellent Knowledg and his most sage Discretion and also for the great tenderness they had for his Crown and the Kingdom les drots dicels and the Rights thereof s' accorderant assenterent they agreed and assented in full Parliament That the King by good deliberation and Assent of the Lords of his Wise Council might take the whole Matter touching the Statute of Provisors to him and that he should have full Power and Authority to modify the said Statute against the Pope and Court of Rome and to Ordain by the Deliberation and Assent aforesaid in such manner as he should think best to the Honour of God and of Holy Church and the Salvation of the Rights of his Crown and of the Estate and Profit of this Realm and to put the same in execution when done And that au proschein Parlement at the next Parliament all the Matter aforesaid should be fully shewn as ditz Communes to the said Commons and the Reason thereof is memorable viz. au sin quils purront alors par bon avisement agreer si Dieu plest a y●elles That the Commons then might upon good advice agree thereto if it should so please God From all which it evidently appears 1. That no Law could be made in Richard the Second's Time or in any of his Progenitors Kings of England which cannot but take in William the First without the Assent of the Lords and Commons in Parliament 2. That none of those Kings could abrogate or make void such Laws when made without the like assent 3. That though the General Phrase viz. That King Richard should be and stand as free in his Regality Liberty and Dignity Royal in his Time as any of his Progenitors were in Theirs and that the King says That the Desires and Requests of the Commons seemed honest and reasonable to him and therefore he gave his Royal Assent to that Law Yet neither the King nor the Lords could ever believe that it was honest and reasonable or that it was any part of the Liberty and Dignity of the Crown to change the whole Frame and Constitution of the English Government by altering and making Laws at Will by taking away the Subjects Possessions and bestowing them upon whomsoever he pleased by destroying the ancient Course and Power of Parliaments and in a word by turning all things topsy turvy And thus we have the Evidence and Proof of the greatest Authority that can be given against the Absurdity as well as falseness of King William's Absolute Conquest viz. a Law and Statute of the Kingdom To conclude all I shall make bold to borrow the words of that great Assertor of the Protestant Cause against the Intollerable U●urpations of Papal Power the so eminently Learned and Pious Thomas now Lord Bishop of Lincoln in his Treatise of Popery or the Principles and Positions approved by the Church of Rome c. in Quarto pag. 116. and say If any Man can truly and impartially as to the sum and substance of the Testimonies here cited for I neither need nor will undertake for every particular Circumstance or Typographical Error either shew 1. That I have misquoted the Authors and Books I cite and that such Passages do not occur in the places quoted 2. Or if they do occur that I have mistook their meaning as to the Purposes for which they are produced I say If any Man can and will ingeniou●●y shew me either of these I shall be so far from not confessing my Fault or declaring how I was misled into it that I shall have a bearty value for any such friendly admonition and receive it with all the grateful acknowledgment as becomes me For my only design is the Detection of Error and Establishment of Truth to future Generations and not to have the World imposed upon by the Tricks Impostures and Artifices which too many have been guilty of either to promote their own particular Gain and Interest to which such care not what they Sacrifice or upon a far worse and more grievous Consideration to bring the whole Nation into dividing Parties and Factions and thus by Embroyls and Entanglements to throw them at last into fatal Convulsions to the destruction both of Prince and People FINIS

their proper Land Or under some base Favourites Command May they whilst others riot with their Stores Without Relief beg at their Native Doors Vnder their Countries Curse their Tyrant's Scorn May they with never-ceasing Pangs be torn Who violate the Sacred Trust to which they 're born But blest be Thou and all who dare like Thee Bravely assert their Countries Liberty Our well-built Freedom thou dost make to appear And its Foundation from Time's Rubbish clear The Norman swore to Laws by which we 're free Laws were more his than our Security Him King the People's joint Consent alone Did make which by that Sacred Oath he won Or that same joint Consent had made him none We were no Norman Slaves nor French could be Had we enough True Englishmen like Thee But now my Muse before you end take care Humbly to close up all with Heav'n in Prayer Prayer for that King who doth Great Britain Rule Who of this Isle is th' Vniversal Soul In whom so many glorious Vertues shine As make him seem to be of Race Divine May Heav'n continually His Guardian prove And keep Him safe in all His Subjects Love Long may unruffled Peace adorn His Crown May all the Laws in their smooth Channel run And flowing Iustice still support His Throne Thus blest and thus united here at Home What cannot Britain's Monarch overcome Oh may Great Edward's and Fifth Henry's Soul By Heav'nly Pow'r be transfus'd to him whole May He ride Mighty Admiral of the Seas Scourging His stubborn Enemies into Peace His Envying Neighbours all their Powers disown Strike to His Flag and tremble at His Frown And th' humbled World be glad to pay him fear And awful veneration every where That this may be May the Illustrious Senate of the Land With their Wise Councils ever by him stand He pleas'd in them and they resolv'd to show What th' utmost stretch of Loyalty can do Then will his Glories shine in brightest state At th' Head of such a joint Triumvirate Then King and People doubly will be blest And Europe then enjoy a lasting Rest. For this let all our Vows to Heav'en be sent To see Great Charles happy in 's Parliament Argumentum Anti-Normannicum SIR YOu were pleased some time since in my happiness of a short but free conversation with you to tell me You had a mind to read how far I could give you satisfaction in a few Points you had raised to your self concerning the Norman Conquest and that within a little while I should have a Paper from you wherein they should be contained You were not long Sir in justly acquitting your self of your promise to me I did receive the Furniture of these ensuing Arguments by the four Questions you sent me and hope there is nothing to be found in them but unbyassed and venerable Truth which surely none will be offended to hear I have endeavoured to pay all possible Respect to You and to Justice and as far as my Abilities could reach in so small a Treatise have impartially offered my Thoughts upon them and now beg your candour in judging me Your Questions Sir are these The First Question I. Whether William Duke of Normandy who was afterwards William the First got the Imperial Crown of England by the Sword and made an absolute Conquest of the Nation at his first Entrance The Second Question II. Whether this first William did abolish all the English Laws and changed the whole Frame and Constitution of the Government The Third Question III. Whether it be true That the English had neither Estates nor Fortunes left but all was divided between the King and his Normans The Fourth Question IV. Whether it be not a grand Error to affirm That there were no English Men in the Common Council of the whole Kingdom I shall take them Sir in the order you have sent them to me and so first begin with your first Question The First Question Whether William Duke of Normandy who was afterwards William the First got the Imperial Crown of England by the Sword and made an * For England thus much I dare speak and under the rule of Modesty protest That sithence the Vniversal Conquest of William who first commanded and imposed Tribute upon this Land for Conquerors may command Tribute and Subsidie have been as justly both by the Law of God and the Law of Nations paid in England as in Jewry yea and justly continued as a remembrance of a Conquest Dr. Pulbec Pandects of the Law of Nations c. 10. p. 69. One Blackwood wrote a Book which concluded That we are all Slaves by reason of the Conquest Vid. Mr. Pety● Misc. Parl. p. 66. And t● is Position is maintained by an Anonimus Author in his full and clear Answer to Mr. Pety●'s Ancient Right of the Commons of England asserted Pag. 35. in the Margin Absolute Conquest of the Nation at his first entrance AS you have stated the Question Sir and desire to know what is my Opinion of it with submission to others better informed and who are more able to maintain the Truth of those Principles I proceed upon than my self I shall return you this modest Answer as my Sence and Judgment in the Point viz. That I cannot conclude in the Affirmative for these several constraining Reasons 1. That William laid a far greater stress upon his Claim and Titles to this Kingdom than ever he did upon his great and mighty Conquest will be very plain and evident if you please but to consider with me these following Particulars 1. In that before his Conquest when the People had chosen Harold the Son of Earl Godwin for their King after the Death of Edward the Confessor and had put aside Edgar Atheling by right of Blood and Inheritance entitled to the Crown This Norman Duke made his loud Complaints of the Injuries done him in not electing him for he was * Edward the Confessor was Son to Ege●●ed K. of England by Emma Sister to Rich. ● Duke of Normandy who was Grandfather to Duke William so that K Edward and Duke William were Cosen Germans once removed as this farther shews you Richard 1. Richard 2. Emma Robert Edward William Cosen German to the Confessor who died † Edward married Edith the Daughter of E. Godwin but whether upon a vow of Chastity or upon impotency of Nature or upon any hatred to her Father or suspicion against her self for all these Causes are alledged by several Writers of those Times he forbore all private Familiarities with her without Issue and therefore pretended that the Right truly devolved upon him But it seems as ill luck would have it this Duke they knew to be a Bastard and neither the Saxon Law nor the Norman Custom could help him in such a Case and so that Title did him but little good Well what therefore was to be his next Work Why 2. Truly his Pretence was then That the Confessor had designed him for his Successor

a form of Combination as he himself could not desire to introduce a better and if any thing look'd like Absolute 't was his disarming them when he found them thus Law-bound hand and foot From this Authority Sir I think it is very plain and obvious That I. Here was no Absolute Conquest II. That neither were all the Saxon Laws cancelled and abolished by the coming in of this Conqueror I. That here was no Absolute Conquest because 1. Tho' here was an invading England yet it was upon pretence of a Donation of the Soveraignty from Edward the Confessor confirmed by his last Will and that in the presence of most of the English Nobility And so it was only an endeavour to get his own upon the Claim of an alledged just Title which shewed he had at least more reason to demand than Harold who at best was an Usurper to detain the Crown And so the Quarrel to be more Personal than National 2. The Conquest could not be Absolute for tho' he was by a happy success over Harold possessor of the English Throne yet saith my Author The Nation continued nescia vinci so that whenever he was Tyrannical and Arbitrary they were continually vexing him with their Revolts 3. This Conquest could not be absolute because then the English must have been perfect Slaves and Vassals to his uncontroulable Beck but alas here Sir Winston tells you the Norman Conqueror could find them no such easy Beasts of Burthen their Necks would not bear the Yokes of his Severity for they were several times up in Arms against him and that after they had submitted to him so that at most this could be but a submission upon terms 4. He was so far from being in love with the gawdy name of Conqueror that when some that designed to preoccupate the Grace of Servitude gave him that ungrateful Title he esteemed it the greatest misfortune his good Fortune had brought upon him And 5. The Conquest surely could not be absolute for then it would have been very idle and ridiculous for any one to say what Sir Winston no doubt but upon good and mature consideration hath thought fit to say of him that if any thing look'd like absolute and hereby you may plainly take notice that he seems to wonder how any Man can pretend to make him an absolute Conqueror when he could hardly find so much as any thing to look like it But II. I shall observe to you that neither were all the Saxon Laws cancelled and abolished by the coming in of this Conqueror 1. If King William might have done despotically whatsoever he had a mind to then what necessity was there for such a moderation of his Mind as the Author hints to us 2. Because he found the People were not to be galled with any New he chose rather but it was a choice upon Necessity to bind them stricter to him by the Old Laws that is in plain down-right English they would not yield to him nor to his Government unless he resolved to circumscribe his ruling of them within the bounds of the good Old Laws in which they were born and bred and make his French and Normans come over and buckle to them 3. He suffered himself to be so far conquered by them as to let them have their Old Laws and it was with a kind of good satisfaction too For 4. The Book tells you He contentedly bound himself up by those which they called St. Edward's Laws And was there not do ye think very good Reason for his so doing when thereby 5. He understood at length that it was a guarding his Prerogative to keep within that Cittadel of the Burrough Law 6. And lastly We cannot rationally think he would after he had thereby throughly looked into them cancel and abolish them since those Laws were such as it is said he himself could not desire to introduce a better I hope Sir all these Deductions arise naturally from the words themselves without any force or strain upon the sence and what I have said may be sufficient to convince you that King William still kept to the Saxon Laws and did not change the whole Frame and Constitution of the Government as you say is very strenuously and with heat asserted by several of our Modern Authors I shall yet make bold with your Patience Sir and shew you what Florentius Wigorniensis a famous Historian in King Stephen's Time and Brompton from him say upon this Point and so conclude my Argument Henricus primus omnes malas consuetudines injustas exactiones quibus Regnum Angliae injustè opprimebatur abstulit ●oren Wig. fol. 650. pacem firmam in toto Regno suo posuit teneri praecepit Legem Regis Edwardi omnibus in commune reddidit cum illis emendationibus quibus Pater suus illam emendavit Brompton's words are the same In Hen. 1. fol. 997 998. and therefore I shall content my self with only referring you to the Book without repeating them to you And Sir from hence we may learn 1. That this King Henry's Father William the First was so far from cancelling and abolishing K. Edward's Laws that he made them to be the Common standing Laws of the Land to be equally and inviolably observed as well by the Normans as the English for he says omnibus cam in commune reddidit unless you will understand the word Omnibus to be a particular Universal and so only to include the Normans And if so then it follows likewise That instead of the Normans giving to the English their Laws the English Laws were imposed upon the Normans 2. And whereas there were 't is confest some Additional Laws made in his Time yet you may plainly observe hence that they were grounded upon and but a better Improvement and Melioration of the Confessor's Laws and they were for the Sake Benefit and Advantage of the English as you will find hereafter 3. Henry the First Son to this Conqueror William took away omnes malas consuetudines injustas exactiones c. by which England had been sorely oppressed under his Brother William Rufus and restored the English to their former Rights and Liberties and he renewed and confirmed the Ancient Saxon Laws as his Father had done before him as it is well noted in the continuation of the History of Bede Bede Histor. lib. 3. cap. 30. fol. 347. In Concilio peritorum proborum virorum Regni Angliae 4. But if there had been no Freemen but the Normans if the Normans had all the Estates of the English given them if there were none but Normans in the Common Councils of the Kingdom how is it possible to be supposed by any that will allow themselves the free use of their Reason that Henry the First would ever make such a Grant or if he did that the Normans would ever submit to it or what is much more unlikely give their consent to out themselves of all their new-gotten Possessions