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	son_n	33,152	5	6.0091	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A86280	Certamen epistolare, or, The letter-combate. Managed by Peter Heylyn, D.D. with 1. Mr. Baxter of Kederminster. 2. Dr. Barnard of Grays-Inne. 3. Mr. Hickman of Mag. C. Oxon. And 4. J.H. of the city of Westminster Esq; With 5. An appendix to the same, in answer to some passages in Mr. Fullers late Appeal.	Heylyn, Peter, 1600-1662.; Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Bernard, Nicholas, d. 1661.; Hickman, Henry, d. 1692.; Harrington, James, 1611-1677.	1659 (1659)	Wing H1687; Thomason E1722_1; ESTC R202410	239,292	425

betwixt him and King Hen. the 6. nor in any one of his many Children though Edmund his third Sonne was made Earl of Rutland which Title had been formerly conferred on Edward Duke of York in his Fathers life time And though I give no credit to Ralph Brook whom I have found to be as full of Errors as our Author himself yet the Authority of Augustine Vincent shall prevail for the present and so let it go But then our Author might have found in the Animadversions that admitting Richard Duke of Yorke to be Earl of Cambridge he must have been the seventh not the eighth Earl of it as he saith he was and then that Errors lies before our Authors Doors as before it did And then again whereas our Authors tells us p. 2. fol. 49. that it is questionable whether his Father that is to say Richard of Conningburg Earl of Cambridge were Duke of York I must needs look upon it as a thing unquestionable and so must all men else which are skilled in Heraldry that Richard being executed at Southampton by King H●n the 5. before Edward Duke of York his elder Brother had been slain at the Battel of Agen-Court 25. But whereas our Author thinks it not onely difficult but impossible to defend a Title of the House of Lancaster to the Crown of England except I can challenge ●the priviledge of the Patriarch Jacob by crossing my hands to prefer the younger child in the succession before the Elder p. 2. fol. 43. admitting Richard the Second to resign the Crown or dying without children by course of nature For I behold Hen. of Bullingbrook Duke of Lancaster as Cousin German to that King and consequently his nearest Kinsman at that time wherein Edmund Mortimer Earl of March in whom remained the Rights of the House of Clarence was but Grandchild to the Lady Philip Daughter and sole Heir of Lionel Duke of Clarence and consequently more remote by two degrees from King Richard the Second then the other was By which proximity of blood as Edward the Third laid claim to the Crown of France and Philip the Second carried the Crown of Portugal and Robert Bruce the Crown of Scotland against the Balions so I am confident of some ability to prove that Henry of Bullingbrook Duke of Lancaster had a better Title to this Crown then the house of Mortimer For thoughby the common Law of England he may find it otherwise yet there are many things in the common Law which cannot extend to the succession of the Kings of England as in the case of Aliens which was that of King James or in the case of Parseners as in that of the two Daughters of King Hen. the 8. or in that of the half blood in the case of the sisters of King Edw. the 6. and finally in that of the tenure by curtesie in the case of King Philip the 2d of Spain admitting that Queen Mary had been Mother of a living Child And now I am fallen on these matters of Heraldy I will make bold to take in a Remembrance of the House of the Mountagues descended in the Principal branches of it from a Daughter of King Edw. the Third concerning which our Author tells us that I have made up such a heap of Errors as is not to be paralelled in any Author which pretends to the emendation of another p. 2. fol. 37. How so because forsooth I have made Sir Edward Mountague the Grand-child of the Lord chief Justice and the first Lord Mountague of Broughton not to have been the elder Brother of Henry Earl of Manchester and James Bishop of Winton but their Brothers Son But first this Error was corrected in a Postscript to the Examen Historicum before he could accuse me of it and consequently he doth but Actum agere and fit a Plaister for that sore which had before been cured by a better Chyrurgion Secondly This can be at the most but a single Error in case it had not been retracted and therefore no such heap of Errors as is not to he paralelled in any other And Thirdly It appears by another passage in this present Appeal p. 2. fol. 96. that he had seen the Postscript to the said Examen which rendereth him the more inexcusable by raising such an out-cry on no occasion In which passage he taxeth me with sallery in my third endeavour touching the late Barons of that House in making the said Sir Edward Mountague to be Lord Mountague of Broughton in Northamptonshire which acknowledged for one of his Mannors but not his Barronie For I knew well that Broughton and not Broughton gave the nomination to this branch of that Family having never heard before of any Estate they had in Broughton And therefore I must needs charge this Error which he so triumpheth at as one of the Errata's which were made at the Press though not observed when the sheets were read over to me and so not Printed with the rest Less candidly deals he with me in another place about the mistaking of a number that is to say 1555. for 1585. p. 1. fol. 41. The Errors being meerly pretal as is own phrase is And this he could not chuse but see though he can winck sometimes when it makes best for his meeting of that precedent once again on a more particular occasion then was given at the present where the time thereof is truly stated and where he spends some few lines in relation to it so that the motion was direct not Retrograde but that he had a mind to pull me a little back seeing how much I had got the start of him in the present race And as for the Error in the Errata I know not how it came but a friend of mine in reading over the first sheets as they came from the Press had put a Quere in the Margin whether Melkinus or Felkinus and that afterwards by the ignorance or incogitancy of my Amanuensis it might be put in amongst the rest of the Errata which is all that I am able to say as to that particular 26. Our Author had affirmed that St. Davids had been a Christian some hundred years whilst Canterbury was yet Pagan The contrary whereof being proved by the Animedvertor he flyes to Caerleon upon Vsk p. 2. fol. 29. by which instead of mending the matter he hath made it worse Mistaking wilfully the point in difference between us For if the Reader mark it well the question is not whether St. Davids or Canterbury were the Ancienter Archi-Espiscopal See or how many hundred years the one was elder then the other but for how long time Canterbury had continued Pagan when the other was Christian which he acknowledgeth to be no more then 140 years as was before observed by the Animadvertor And though Caerleon upon Vske had been an Archi-Episcopal See some hundreds of years before that honour was conferred on the City of Canterbury yet Canterbury might be be Christian as soon as

gave a meeting to the Brittish Bishops to be in the confines of the Wiccians and West Saxons as he saith it was that part of Glostershire which lay on the other side the Severn and some part of the Cotswald division of it being interposed And as for the mistake * in making Jeffery of Monmouth who was brought in for a principal witness to be the fore-man of the Grand Inquest impannelled at the arraignment of the said Augustine for murthering the Monks of Banchor which in a man who wholly trusts to the eyes of a mother may be easily pardoned it makes no difference in the case for which it was produced by the Andimadvertor rather it makes for confirmation of the point which is there delivered Jeffery of Monmouth being brought in as the principal witness by whom the Jurors were to be directed in the course of their evidence The conversion of the Saxons being thus passed over the Author speaks of the beginning of the several languages how truly let the Reader judge by comparing the Animadversions thereupon with the Answer to them and in particular affirms that the Hebrew was the common tongue of all the world before it was inclosed into several Languages Ch. Hist lib. 2. fol. 65. Which proposition seeming groundless to the Animadvertor he took occasion to discourse upon these four Questions First Whether the Hebrew were the tongue which was spoken in Paradise Secondly Whether it were the common language in all the World before the confusion Thirdly whither it were appropriated to Heber and his Posterity as the proper Language of that line Fourthly Whether Abraham brought it into the Land of Canaan with him or found it spoken by the Natives at his coming thither The two first of these four Questions are held in the affirmative by the Church Historian and for the proof thereof he pretends unto some Authorities which whether they be strong enough to conclude the point is left as all the other points betwixt us to the Readers Judgment But the Appealant being unwilling to take any information from the Animadvertor and yet not able to confute the Arguments by him alledged against the common opinion in the other two he is fain to shift off that Dispute in such a way as would have been called a tergiversation in another man For mark the weighty reasons which induce him to decline that Controversie and not to * gratifie the Animadvertor with a better Answer till either it should come in his way or make for his wish which happy conjuncture we may hear of at New-years-tide next The first whereof is to show his liberty that he is free-born and not bouod to Lacquey after the Animadversions when he hath other business of his own The second is to wean the Animadvertor from his moreseness by not indulging too much to his humour therein The last to time his own and his Readers pains that he may more seasonably spend them hereafter on matters of more importance Our Author here like Captain Bessus skips over the fight or rather runs plainly ou● of the field leaving the Animadvertor the sole Master of it With how much greater care of preserving his credit might he have cut of this unluckie section with a thrifty c. as he doth some others or totally pretermitted it as not worth the looking after which prudent omission he makes use of frequently when he meets with any knot which he cannot untye Or rather how happy had it been if he had entered on these considerations before he ventured on the work and in like manner passed over all the rest of the Animadversions by doing which he might have more gratified himself by sparing so much pretious time to a better purpose then he hath gratified the Animadvertor in the want of an Answer But he proclaims himself free-born and may therefore speak both when he list and what he list by his Fathers Coppy In the mean time I must change my own and instead of finding fault with the Appealant for some sins of omission must save my self as well as I can from a sin of commission I mean from a supposed error which he lays upon me in making the small River of Lech to fall into the Thames neer Lechled whereas Thames saith he * is more then eighteen miles from Lechled by land and thirty by water not taking the name untill the confluence of Thame with Isis nere to Dorchester in Oxford-shire But by his leave though our great Critiques call that part of this River which ariseth in Glocester-shier by the name of Isis yet it is known to all the people inhabiting on each side thereof in the Counties of Glocester Wilts Berks and Oxford by no other name then that of Thames Our Author having lived seventeen weeks in Oxford as he saith himself cannot chuse but know that it is called there by that name and by no name else and should he travel from Dorchester to the head of that River and enquire of any whom he met with for the River of Isis it would be as hard for them to direct him to it as it is for him to point me to the Isle of Largeria or for Dame Miso to find out the Oudemian street in Mantinaea whereas the name of Thames is so known amongst them that every child of seven years of age which lives neer the River can direct him to it The nominations by the rules of Logick are taken commonly from the Name of the principal part and by that rule this River may properly be called the Thames before the confluence or meeting of Thame and Isis Nor am I so much mistaken as he makes me in K. Haralds Mother whom out of Cambden he calls Githa and I call Theyra out of Reusner one of the most exact and painful Genealogists that ever travelled in those studies And therefore probably that Lady might have two names which was no rare matters in those times or might be called Theiras by the Danes and Githa by the Saxon Writers and so both Authors being reconciled the Animadvertor may be in the right though the Appealant be not in the wrong And as for Harolds Title by his Mother to the Crown of England I doubt not but I may be able to prove that his Title to it as brother by the whole blood to Harald Hartiger and by the half blood to Canulus the second was little worse then that of Edward the Confessor as the Son of Elthdred 24. Proceed we next unto the Kings of the Norman Race and the first thing he quarrelleth in me is my denying Richard Duke of York to be Earl of Cambridge p 1. fol. 34. And I conceive I had good reason so to do not finding them amongst the Earls of Cambridge in Glovers Catalogue of Honour published by Mills of Canterbury a right knowing man not finding this amongst the other of his Titles in the Tables of the Dukes of Yorke or the Capitulations made