AN INQUIRY Into the Remarkable Instances of History and Parliament Records used by the Author of the Vnreasonableness of a new Separation on Account of the Oaths whether they are faithfully cited and applied THE Author of this Discourse makes Enquiry into two things to clear what he hath before delivered Page 12. 1st How far the Discharge or Release from a Person who hath Right and is concerned is necessary to those who take the Oaths of Allegiance to another Person in Possession of the Crown 2dly How far our Saviour's Rule holds in this Case The Theological part of this Discourse I wholly pretermit and leave it to Divines the Historical is only that I shall enquire into And before I enter upon this Enquiry I shall Note First That the Saxons were a miscellaneous People joyned with the Francks in Piracy and Rapine who made Descents wherever they could upon the Coasts of Gallia Flanders and Britain as Ammianus Marcellinus lib. 27. c. 7. and l. 28 c. 7. Bede in his History fol 58. col 2. adds the Jutes and Angles to those who came or were invited into England Mr. Selden adds to these the Danes and Frisons in his Chronology at the end of Janus and most certainly under the names of Saxons were comprehended several other People such as joyned with them in Rapine and Piracy or such as they had subdued which by the Conquering Romans or Neighbour Nations had been forced for their own safety into Islands Bogs and Morasses upon and near the Coasts of the German Sea from the River Eydor in Juteland to the Elve and from thence to the Rhine and Scheld and it may not want probability that the Heptarchy was here erected by the Leaders of seven different sorts of People Robbers and Pillagers under the names of Saxons Such as they were when they came they remain'd especially during the Heptarchy always Invading Plundering and Burning one anothers Countries frequently killing and murthering their Kings Earls or Chief Governours or those one another So as I think very Judicious Men would not look for Authentick and Well-grounded Precedents in the History of these times where things were always in a Flux without permanent settlement or amongst the barbarous Usages of these rude illiterate People unless in such Cases as may have a great appearance of Truth and are reported or confirmed by the unanimous consent of their Historians The order of Succession was certain in the West Saxon Kingdom after Egbert brought the greatest part of the Heptarchy under his Power and Government Yet from the various Expressions of the ancient Writers of the Saxon Story concerning the Succession an unwary Reader would think that the Saxons agreed not in one Rule of Succession or that they had no Rule at all but whoever considers with understanding what those Historians say will find they pursued a sure Rule of Succession as much and as often as those times would permit which was either Right and Proximity of Blood or the Nomination and Appointment of a Successor by the Precedent King which Nomination by the Saxon Kings before the Danes came in mostly happened in the Minority or Nonage of their Children and that only in the turbulent State of the Nation in turbulento Reipublicae tempore which was thought and allowed a sufficient Cause for the Father to prefer his Brothers Son before his own Vit. Aelfred fol. 9. sect 10. lin 4. c. or a Bastard before his lawful Issue ut pater fratris filium proprio vel etiam Nothum anteferret Germano And by the following Instances it will plainly appear That the Saxons did in their owning of Subjection and Submission to their Princes acknowledge both Proximity of Blood and Nomination by their Kings often both together sometimes only one of them but never followed any other Rule nor did the People in the Saxon Monarchy set up any King themselves in any formal or pretended Assembly of the Nation Of both Titles in the same Person there are these three Examples before the Danes Conquest Egbert the first Saxon Monarch had two Sons Ethelwolth and Aethelstan the Eldest succeeded him in the Kingdom of the West Saxons and he gave to his other Son Aethelstan what he had subdued or his Conquests who died obscurely it not being known what end he came to Malmsb. de Gest Reg. Ang. f. 20. a. n. 30. Ethelwolphus West-Saxonum regno contentus caetera quae pater subjugaverat Appendicia Aethelstano filio contradidit Qui quanto quo fine defecerit incertum The Saxon Chronology Ann. Dom. 836. hath it thus Ethelwolphus Occidentalium Saxonum regnum capessit Feng to Weg-Sexana Rice the Common expression for Succession in that Language filio autem suo Aethelstano Cantuariorum Saxonum Orientalium Suthregientium Suth Saxonum regnum donavit Florence of Worcester in the same year thus Cujus post mortem meaning Egbert Ethelulphus filius suus in West-Saxonia regnare coepit suumque filium Aethelstanum Cantuariis East-Saxonibus Suth-Regiis Suth-Saxonibus regem perfecit Egbert made his Son Aethelstan King of Essex Kent Surrey and Sussex After whose death the whole Kingdom came into the hands of Aethelwulph * Testam Aelfred in Asser Meneven f 22. n. 20. Malm. f. 22. a. n. 20. b. n. 30. chron Saxon. Anno 854. Aethelwulph notwithstanding his Sons by Proximity of Blood were his Heirs and also Heirs to one another yet gave his Kingdom of the West Saxons to Ethelbald his Eldest Son Ethelred his third Aelfred his fourth Son successively and gave to his second Son Ethelbert Essex Kent Surry Sussex Ethelhald lived but five years and Aethelbert succeeded him in the whole Kingdom as next Brother Vt justum erat says Asser f. 4. n. 40. Flor. Worcest and Simon of Durham Anno. 860. †Chon Saxon. Anno. 860. Aethelbaldus autem Quinquennium regnabat Feng Aethelbryht to Eallum Tham Rice his Brother Ethelbertus autem totum fratris sui regnum capessit * Flor. Wigoâ—n Anno. 866 871. After whom his two younger Brothers Aethelâ—ed and Aelfred were possessed of the Kingdom successively This Historian calls this Testament or Will Epistola haereditaria †Id. Anno. 975. So King Edward possessed the Kingdom after his Father King Edgar both by Proximity of Blood as his Eldest Son and by his Fathers Donation and Command Edwardum ut pater ejus praeceperat eligerunt c. Flor. Wig. Anno. 975. From Egbert the First Saxon Monarch to Ethelred the last Saxon King by Proximity and right of Blood for the space of 216 years we do not often find the words Elected or Election and where they do occur they are bound and limited by Proximity of Blood or Nomination of the Successor by the Predecessor and as they are used they signifie only Recognition of or Submission to him that was said to be Elected Secondly The Danes a promiscuous People as the Saxons were Danes Norwegians Goths Sweves Frisons
and advancing his Son Vortimer he cites Mat. West Anno Domini 454. But in the whole Story there is not one Syllable of a Secret League in Mat. West in that or in any other following Year What he cites in the Margin is in Mat. West HISTORY To prevent the Easiness Supinity Luxury and Effeminacy of all People the Ignorance Avarice Debauchery and Simony of the Clergy and an universal lapse of the Nobility and People into notorious Extravagancies and Impieties and to repel the Violences and hinder the Incursions and Invasions of the Picts and Scots Vortigern held a Counsel of his Great Men and Nobles being excited thereto by the Noise and Clamours of the People wherein by General consent it was agreed to call the Saxons out of Germany to their aid Who no sooner received the Invitations from the Britains by special Messengers but easily granted what they themselves had a Thousand * Gildas pag. 46 47 48 49. times wished for Vortigern excited by the noysiness of his People about the Publick State asked the Advice of his Great Men and it pleased them all to call the English and Saxons out of Germany Mighty in Arms Vagabonds without Habitations with prospect of a double Profit that they might easily conquer their Enemies and that hitherto being void of Habitations they might esteem it a vast benefit to inhabit a nasty Soil or Poor Country But they were not to attempt any thing against the Britains because the memory of the Advantage they received by coming thither would soften and reduce their natural Ferity or Barbarity The Advice was allowed and there were sent into Germany Envoys very considerable Men and such as worthily represented the Nation The Germans hearing what they had a Thousand times wished for * Malms fol. 3. b. n. 10.20 c. they enter'd at first with great Joy †Ibid. n. 40. 50. and Favour of the People but finding they cheated them and came for their Estates when it was too late they would have * Ibid. f. 4. a. n. 20. expell'd them They leagued with the Scots whom they were sent for to expel pretending they were not sufficiently rewarded and provided for c. and with their Assistance wasted burnt and spoiled all Cities and Countries from the East to the West Sea †Gild c. 24. p. 55 56. Part of the Story cited by this Author tho he mentions only Mat West is from Geofry of * Fol. 48. b. Monmouth the most Fabulous Historian if he be worthy to be called so extant amongst the English and therefore it may be supposed this Tale is brought in by a side Wind and father'd upon Mat. West Lues acerrima acrior mox hostium novorum i. e. Anglorum est sequuta Flor. Wigorn f. 541. Ann. Dom. 446. Quos Britanni unanimi consilio cum Rege suo Vortigerio quasi Defensores Patriae ad se invitandos eligerunt sed statim Impugnatores Expugnatores senserunt A more sharp than the sharpest of Plagues followed which was of the new Enemies the English whom the Britains by Unanimous Counsel and Advice with their King Vortigern had chosen to be invited to them as Defenders of the Country but they presently proved Assaulters of it and Conquerors The Saxon Chronology speaks to the same purpose * Anno. 446 447 And the late Dean of St. Paul's agrees with and approves of these Relations of the Britains joyning with their King Vortigern in calling in the Saxons in his learned Book of the Antiquities of the British Churches Pag. 304. 317 318 The Author's Words ibid. p. 13. In the Saxon times Sigebert King of the West Saxons in the time of the Heptarchy was complain'd of for misgovernment and for changing their Laws for his own ends but when he persisted in his way there was a Convention of the Nobility and People convenerunt Nobiles regni cum populo universo saith Mat. West and they declared themselves free from Allegiance to him and chose Kineulfus in his room * Cum autem modiâ— omnibus male tractaret eos legesque a tecessorum suorum propter coâ—modum suum vel dâ— pravaret vel mutaret Mat. West A. 〈◊〉 756. He Hunt l. â— p. 196. The following words here omitted in both Authors are Kineulfus Juvenis egregius de Regiâ stirpe oriundus electus est in Regem HISTORY Both Hen. of Hunt and from him Mat. West have this Story But 't is otherwise reported and by Florence of Worcester †Fol. 57 An. Dom 755. Kineulfus de Prosapiâ Regis Cerdicii oriundus auxilium sibi ferentibus West-Saxonicis Primatibus Regem illorum Sigebertum ob multitudinem suorum factorum iniquorum regno exterminavit loco ejus regnavit Kineulphus of the Stock of Cerdic who was the first Saxon King by the assistance of the West Saxon Noblemen for the multitude of his wicked Actions that was Kineulf's pretence and without doubt a Common Good tacked to it expell'd Sigebert the Kingdom except out of Hampshire and he reigned in his stead Almost the same relation is in the Saxon Annals Kineulfus West-Saxonum primatibus adjutus Sigeberti regnum pro malefactis suis totum quidem exceptâ Hamtonensium provinia occupavit Kineulf by the help of the West Saxon Nobility usurped or possest himself of Sigebert's whole Kingdom for his misdeeds except Hampshire * Saxon. Chron. A. D. 755. Whence Kineulf is also derived from Cerdic the Founder of the West Saxon Kingdom This was in the time of the Heptarchy when the petty Kings Earls and Pretenders to his Government took all Opportunities and Pretences to destroy and overturn one another And it was the Action and Contrivance of Kineulf assisted by the rebellious and mutinous Subjects of Sigebert that thrust him out of his Kingdom Malmsbury hath it thus Arripuit regnum Sigebertus vir apud suos saevitiâ immanis idemque foris ignavia perinfamis quocirca omnium odio conspirante post annum Solio deturbatus meliori locum fecit †l. 1. fol. 7. â— n. 20.30 Suscepit regni gubernacula Kienulphus clarus ille quidem morum compositione militiaeque gestis Sigebert invaded or seized the Throne a man very cruel at home and abroad very infamous for Sloth and Cowardise wherefore he was hated of all Men and after one Year being dethroned made way for a better Kineulf famous for his good Temper and Military Actions undertook the Government In these three most Authentick and Ancient Histories there is nothing of a Convention of the Nobles and People or an Election of Kineulf but they affirm that both he and Sigebert whom he dethroned invaded the Government by Force or Fraud and entered upon it by indirect means and by such it was to be kept and for that reason the People hated Sigebert The Author's Words p. 14. In the Kingdom of Mercia Beornredus for not governing by the Laws was by a Convention of
Malms l. 1. c. 2. f. 8. a. n. 10. cujus affinitate fultus Egbertum solum Regalis Prosapiae Superstitem quem validissimum suis Vtilitatibus metuebat Obicem Franciam fugandum curavit nam ipse Brithricus caeteri infra Inam Reges licet Natalium splendore gloriantes quippe qui de Cerdicio originem traherent non parum tamen alienâ regiae stirpis exorbitaverant illo igitur expulso securo resolvi coeperat otio c. Supported by the Affinity of Offa he caused Egbert the only Survivor of the Royal Race to fly into France fearing he would be a great check to his Affairs for Brithric himself and the other Kings since Ina altho they might glory in the splendor of their Births as deriving their Origin from Cerdic yet they were not a little out of the way from the line of the Royal Progeny When Egbert was expelled the Kingdom he began to live securely c. From this Observation of Malmsbury's as the Author calls it if it be one the lineal Succession before Ina which might be here set forth if needful is as much proved as no lineal Succession after him and notwithstanding the several Usurpations that had been between the Reign of Ceadwally or Ina and Egbert who was much feared by Brithric as being the only Survivor and of right Successor of the Royal Line and therefore banished into France the lineal Succession in the West-Saxon Kingdom was in time revived and continued in the Saxon Monarchy which he founded as will appear in the further Enquiry into the Author's other Saxon Instances This if it had been fairly cited could not have been useful to him but he took what served his turn and left out the rest The Words of the Author p. 14. Aethelulphus King of the West-Saxons went to Rome Matt. West A. D. 854. 867. and there crowned Alfred his youngest Son King and married the King of France's Daughter in his return and made her Queen against the Laws for which reason he was excluded his Kingdom his eldest Son and Alston Bishop of Shireburn being at the top of this Act of Exclusion and he came back only upon the terms of receiving his Son into a Share of the Kingdom which shews that they looked on the Laws as the measure of Allegiance and where those were openly broken that it was in their power to transfer it HISTORY Rex Occidentalium Saxonum Aethelulphus cum honore maximo Romam profectus c. Aethelulphus King of the West Saxons went with great honour to Rome carrying with him his younger Son Alfred whom he loved beyond all his other Sons that he might be instructed by Pope Leo in Manners and Religion where he stay'd a year with his Son and caused him to be crowned King by the Pope and after few days returning to his Country he brought with him Judith Daughter to Charles King of France whom he had married But in the mean time while the King was beyond Sea there was a Conspiracy of certain great Men formed against him the chief of the Conspiracy were Aethelbald his eldest Son and Alston Bishop of Shireburn and Landulph Earl of Somersetshire who had resolved that upon his return he should never be received to the Government for which they had two causes One for that he had caused his younger Son Alfred to be crowned at Rome and postpon'd and excluded his other Sons the second was That he had despised all English Women and married a Stranger Moreover the Conspirators had heard that contrary to the Custom and Statutes of the West-Saxon Kings he called the King of France's Daughter whom he had lately married Queen and caused her to sit by him at the Table and eat with him which the West Saxon Nation did not permit nor that she should be called Queen but the King's Wife Haec autem infamia ab Eadburga Offae Regis filiâ ejusdem generis reginâ exorta est Quae Virum suum Brithricum â—eneno perdidit c. The occasion of which non permission arose from Eadburg the Daughter of Offa a Queen of the same sort who destroyed her Husband with Poyson and sitting by the King was wont to accuse all the Noblemen of the Kingdom and those she could not accuse she killed by Poyson Therefore for the lewdness of the Queen all conspired that they would never permit a King to reign over them Qui in praedictis culpabilis inveniretur who should be found culpable in what hath been said Revertente tandem a Roma Aethelulfo Rege Pacifico praedictus filius ejus Aethelbaldus conceptam nequitiam ad effectum producere attentavit sed Deus omnipotens id fieri non permisit c. When the peaceable King Aethelulph return'd from Rome his Son Aethelbald attempted to effect his wicked Contrivance but God would not permit it for to prevent a more than Civil War between Father and Son by the ineffable Clemency of the King the Confederacy of all the Nobles and Bishops was broken he dividing the Kingdom of the West Saxons between himself and Son which before was undivided so as his Son possessed the East part and the Father the West part Et cum tota regni Nobilitas pro Rege decertare filium a Jure regni depellere vellent si Pater id fieri permisisset ipse mentis nobilitate ab avaritiae sese vitio excludens filii sui concupiscentiae satisfecit sicque ubi Pater justo Dei Iudicio regnare debuerat illic filius pertinax iniquus regnavit and when as the whole Nobility of the Kingdom would have fought for the King and forced his Son from the right of the Kingdom if his Father would have permitted it to be done but he being free from all Covetousness satisfied the unruly Appetite of his Son and so where the Father ought to have reigned by the just Sentence of God the obstinate and wicked Son reigned This Story Mat. Westm had from Flor. of Worcester †A. D. 675. tho it is not in the last altogether so formal * f. 21. b. n. 50. l. 22. a. n. 10. 20. Malmsbury likewise hath it tho not intirely But the Saxon Chronology hath nothing of it nay rather it hath something contrary to it * A. D. 854. Eodem anno Aethelwulfus rex magno cum honore Romam perrexit ibique per Menses Duodecim moratus est cui mox domum redeunti Carolus Francorum Rex filiam suam in Reginam dedit hinc posteà ad populum suum reversus est qui mirificè laetabatur sed post biennium ex quo a Francis redierat defunctus est corpus autem Wintoniae sepultum jacet In the Year 854. Aethelwulph went in great Pomp to Rome where he staid Twelve Months To whom as he returned home Charles King of France gave him his Daughter for his Queen Afterwards when he returned to his People they rejoyced wonderfully within Two Years after he died
arose the Royal Race of the Northumbers Eod Anno. Florence of Worcester says In provincia Berniciorum Ida regnum suscepit 12 annis regnavit hic ex Reginis sex filios habuit sex habuit ex Pellicibus Ex Quibus Regalis Northanhymbrorum prosapia propagata est In the Province of Bernicia part of the Kingdom of Northumberland Ida took the Kingdom He had six Sons by his Queens and as many by his Harlots from whom the Royal Stock was propagated Malmsbury says Ida Reigned the first in the Kingdom of Northumberland Fol. 8 â— n. 40. but whether he made himself King verum atrum ipse per se Principatum invaserit or took it by the consent of others he could not define parum definio quid Veritas in abdito est In Brompton whom he cites in the Margent there is nothing to be found of an Election but only that the Northumbers tumultuously set up some Kings and Murther'd and Dethroned others which was a common Practice in most Kingdoms during the Saxon Heptarchy and the same Reason the Author gives that he would not meddle with this Kingdom might have been given for the passing by all the other except the Kingdom of the West Saxons The Author's words p. 15. But if by the Fundamental Constitution Allegiance were indispensably due to the next Rightful Heir in this Monarchy how came Aethelsian to be Crowned magno consensu Optimatum says Malmsbury when he was not the rightful Heir HISTORY â—lor Wiâ—rn A D. 24. f. â—2 Invictissimus rex Edwardus senior ex hâc vitâ transiens Aethelstano filio regni gubernacula reliquit nec multo post filius ejus Aelfwardus alias Edwardus apud Oxenfordam decessit sepultus est ubi pater illius Aethelstanus vero in Kingestune i. e. in Regiâ Villâ in regem elevatur honorificie ab Athelmo Dorobernensi Archiepiscopo consecratur The invincible King Edward the Elder passing out of this World left the Government of his Kingdom to his Son Aethelstan and not long after him his Son Aelward or Edward died at Oxford and was buried where his Father was but or then Aethelstan was saluted King and was honourably Consecrated or Anointed and Crowned by Athelm Arch-Bishop of Canterbury at Kingston Anno Dominicae Incarnationis 924. â—lms f. â— n. 10. Aethelstanus filius Edwardi regnare coepit frater ejus Ethelwardus alias Edwardus paucis diebus post patrem vita decedens sepulturam cum eodem Wintoniae meruerat This is what Florence of Worcester says and needs no Translation â—dem Itaque magno consensu optimatum Electus apud Regiam villam Quae vocatur Kingston Coronatus Therefore being Elected or Recognized by full consent of the Great Men he was Crowned at Kingston and in another Place â— f. 27. â— 30. Westm 84. n. Post mortem Patris Interitum Fratris in Regem apud Kingston coronatus est Anno. Gratiae 924. Rex Anglorum Edwardus cognomento senior diem clausit extremum Aethelstanus quoque filius ejus primogenitus apud Kingstonam rex creatus ab Athelmo Dorobernensi Archiepiscopo consecratur Here Mat. Westm says Aethelstan was King Edward's Eldest Son which was true after his Brother was dead If the Author had taken notice of these Historians especially of Malmsbury whom he cites he would have known how Aethelstan came to be rightful Heir The Authors words p. 15. Some say from an old Monk in Malmsbury that his Father left him his Crown by his Testament which doth not clear the difficulty as to the inviolable right of Succession by the Constitution But this cannot be true for his Elder Brother Edward died after his Father and none pretend that his Father disinherited him History and Inquiry into these Words A pretty Story This old Monk in Malmsbury was William of Malmsbury himself whom he cited but two Lines before Jussu Patris in Testamento Aethelstanus in Regem acclamatus est This the Historian says of himself without vouching any old Monk for it By the command of his Father in his Testament Aethelstan was Proclaimed or Saluted King Which clears the difficulty about Election and the States having power to dispose of the Crown As to the truth of it no body can doubt that observes what is said before of his Elder Brother Edward The Author's Words p. 15. And if Athelstan was Lawful Heir M. Westm A. D. 934. A. D. 939. what made him to dispatch his Brother Edwin out of the way and to build two Monastries for expiation of that Guilt HISTORY Florence of Worcester hath nothing of this Idle Story and Malmsbury from whom Matt. Westminster transcribed the very words of it and added something of his own did not believe it and tells it as a Fable but before he begins it he Apologizes for telling it and after he had reported the Design and Conspiracy of Alfred against King Athelstan who would have made him a Bastard and so kept him from the Throne saith thus Et haec quidem fide integra de rege conscripsi Malmg f. 29 a. n. 10 l. 2. c. 6. sequentia magis Cantilenis per Successiones temporum detritis quam libri ad Institutiones posterorum elucubratis didicerim Quae ideo apposui non ut earum veritatem defendam sed ne Lectorum scientiam defraudem ac primum de Nativitate dicendum And these things I have written concerning the King may intirely be believed Those which follow I rather learnt from old Songs and Tales then Books written for the Information of Posterity which I have inserted here Ibid. n. 20 30 40. not that I shall defend the truth of them but that I may not keep from the Readers what is to be known and then proceeds to tell a Romantick Prodigy of a Shepherds Beautiful Daughter out of whose Womb a Moon shone that irradiated all England c. With this Virgin Edward the Elder stole a leap by the assistance of his sometime Nurse and upon the first Enjoyment of her begat Aethelstan c. And goes on to tell Edwin his Brother was accused by some to have been in the Conspiracy with Alfred and for that Reason out of Jealously he was by order of Aethelstan put into a small Pinnace without either Tackle or Oars accompanied only with one Page with grief whereof he leaped into the Sea and drowned himself After this he immediately subjoyns Haec de fratris nece etsi verisimilia videantur eò minùs corrobero quod mirabilem suae pietatis diligentiam in reliquos fratres intenderet Quos cum pater pueros admodum reliquisset ille parvos magnâ dulcedine fovit adultos regni consortes fecit Although these things concerning the death of his Brother may seem probable yet I esteem them less firm by reason of the admirable Piety he shew'd towards his other Brothers whom he cherisht with great kindness when his Father left them very
the Nobility and People set aside from the Government and Offa chosen King who was of the Royal Stem but not the next Heir and so William of Malmsb. observes in the West Saxon Kingdom after Ina That no Lineal Succession was then observed but still some of the Royal Line sat in the Throne and of Ina himself that he was rather put into the Throne for his Virtue than by his Right of Succession This Paragraph he makes good by the three parcels of History there noted A. D. 758. Gensde regno Merciorum contra Regem suum Beornredum insurgens pro eo quod populum non aequis legibus sed per tyrannidem gubernaret convenerant in unum omnes tam Nobiles quam ignobiles Offâ Duce ipsum a regno expulerunt Mat. West Nam ipse Brithricus caeteri infra Inam reges licet Natalium splendore gloriantes quippe qui de Cerdicio originem traherent non parum tamen a linea regiae Stirpis exorbitaverant Will Malms degest Reg. Ang. l. 1. c. 2. Regnum per Inam novatum qui Cinegissi ex fratre Cuthhalbo pronepos magis pro insitivae virtutis industriâ quam sucessivae sobolis prosapiâ in principatum ascitur id ib. What he says of Beornredus and Offa is to be found in Mat. West but nothing to that purpose in the Saxon Chronology All that is there to be found of them as to this particular is in Anno Domini 755. toward the latter end of the Year Eodem anno Aethelbaldus Rex Merciorum Secan-dunae occissus est Bearnredus autem regnum capessit aliquantisper tenuit Eodemque anno Rex-Offa regnum suscepit annosque triginta novem tenuit In the Year 755. Ethelbald King of the Mercians was killed at Secandune and Beornredus possessed the Kingdom and held it a small time And the same Year King Offa took the Kingdom and held it 39. Years Nor in Florence of Worcester he only says Rex Merciorum Aethelbaldus in Segeswald occiditur cujus regnum Beoruredus tyrannus invasit per modicum tempus in parvà letitiâ tenens regnum cum vitâ perdidit quô mortuô successit in regnum Nepos patruelis Aethelbaldi Regis Merciorum Offa. †A. D. 755. f. 574. Ethelbald King of the Mercians was killed in Segeswald i. e. Secandunt whose Kingdom Beornred the Tyrant invaded and holding it a little while with small joy lost both the Kingdom and his own Life and Offa the Brothers Son of Aethelbald King of the Mercians succeeded him Malmsbury speaking of Aethelbald says Hic altâ pace multo tempore id est Quadraginta uno Annis rerum perfunctus novissimè a Subjectis occisus fortunae rotam volvit author ejus necis Bernredus nil memorabile dedit nisi quod mox ab Offâ necatus dignum finem Insidiarum tulit * fol. 14. b. n. 30. Aethelbald managed his Affairs in a full Peace One and forty Years but at last the Wheel of Fortune turned and he was killed by his Subjects the Author of his Death Bernred left nothing memorable behind him unless his being killed by Offa and thereby receiving a worthy Reward of his Treachery In these Historians here is nothing of a Convention that either set aside Beornred and chose Offa for their King but only that Beornred was a Tyrant and Traytor who with his Accomplices murder'd his peaceful Soveraign Aethelbald who in great quiet had govern'd his Kingdom one and forty years which he invaded and set up himself and that Offa revenged his Uncle Aethelbald's Murder killed Bernred and succeeded in the Goveâ—nment and doubtless by the means of the power and force with which he subdued Bernred The other two parcels of History are not fairly cited or duly placed and laid together for the Author hath placed that last which is first mentioned in the Historian and by these he would prove That in the West-Saxon Kingdom after Ina no lineal Succession was then observed and of Ina himself that he was rather put into the Throne for his Virtue than by right of Succession HISTORY The words of the Historian are * Malms degest Reg. l. 1. c. 2. f. 7. a. lin 6. Eo Roman eunte Regnum per Inam novatum and so on as cited by the Author he going to Rome that is King Ceadwalla concerning whom the preceding Discourse had been Ina seized upon the Kingdom or changed the Succession who was the Grandchild of Cuthbald Brother of Kinegils and was called to the government more for his real Virtue than by successive Birthright The Saxon Chronology †A. D. 689. thus expresseth his coming to the Government Ine Feng to West-Seaxna Rice c. Ina West-Saxonum regnum capescit Eodem anno Cadwalla Romam Profectus est Baptismumque à Papa suscepit Quem Papa Petrum cognominavit atque circiter Septimanam unam postea defunctus est Ina took upon him the Government of the West-Saxon Kingdom c. Flor. of Worcester thus A. D. 688. Abeunte Ceadwalla Romam suscepit Imperium Ina de stirpe Regia cujus pater Kenredus cujus pater Ceolwaldus cujus pater Cutha cujus pater Cuthwinus cujus pater Ceanlinus Ceadwall going to Rome Ina undertook or put himself upon the Government whose Father was Kenred whose Father was Ceoldwald whose Father was Cutha or according to Malmsb. Cuth-bald whose Father was Cuthwin whose Father was Ceanlin In these Histories there is nothing how he ascended the Throne whether he was called to it or otherwise placed himself upon it or received it as recommended to it by his Predecessour Ceadwald as he himself when he went to Rome recommended his Successour Aethelhard Relicto Imperio ac * Flor. Wig. A. D. 728. f. 572. Aethelhardo de prosapiâ Cerdici Regis oriundo commendato Rex Ina ad limina beatorum Apostolorum profectus est Ina left his Government and having recommended Aethelhard went to Rome The Saxon Chronology only says †A.D. 728. Ina Romam abiit ibique Spiritum efflavit Aethelhardus West-Saxonum regnum capessit tenuitque annos quatuordecim * f. 7. b. n. 20. Malmsbury's words are Successit Principatui Aedelardus Inae consanguineus per quatuordecim annos quietissimè regnum retentum Cuthredo cognato reliquit Aethelhard the Kinsman of Ina succeeded in the Government enjoyed it quietly fourteen years and left it to his Kinsman Cuthred who held it about the like time In the Saxon †A.D. 741. Chronology and Flor. of Worcester 't is Cuthred took upon him the Government or succeeded in the Kingdom The two next Rulers after Cuthred were Sigebert and Kineulf of whom before Brithric succeeded Kineulf but how and when none of these three Historians tell us In his Story we meet with the Author's last parcel of History but very partially cited They all report that he married the Daughter of Offa King of Mercia at that time most potent â€
Person in Possession by a Lawful Title he never goes about to quarrel with his own Right and just Occupancy and therefore 't is not hard to know how Disputes come to be about Lineal Succession Though the Right be clear beyond dispute Men of designs against the clearest Right will take hold of and make advantage of every opportunity to do their business The Words of the Author subjoyn'd to his Reasoning p. 17. But reason of State and the publick Interest still over-ruled this matter and so Ethelred's Sons by Emma who were the true Heirs by Legal Succession were set aside and Harold being upon the place and so best able to manage the Affairs of the Kingdom carried it What may be said to the Authors Inference from his precedent Reasoning A fine Piece of Art and Legerdemain How did Harold carry it Malmsbury tells us by force and violence What reason of State or publick Interest could make the Saxons set aside the next Heir if they could have had him for their King and place in the Throne a Stranger the Son of a Conqueror with his Fathers Army at his Heels Had not the Danes the greatest share in making him King and could the Saxons think otherwise than that they would have the greatest share in the Government What Affairs of the Kingdom was Harald best able to manage Certainly not the Affairs and publick Interest of the Saxons They could not believe it when he had an Army and great numbers of his own Countrymen with their Families to provide for and when they could not but see the Nation was to be planted by Foreigners who must be their Masters Therefore what reason of State what publick Interest could there be for Harolds carrying of the Crown and Kingdom as the Author neatly Phraseth it The Words of the Author p. 18. For if there be no Rule it is not possible to satisfie Conscience in the Niceties of Titles If there be a Rule the general consent of the people joyned with the Common Good seems to have been that which our Ancestors proceeded by What may be opposed to this saying The general Consent of the People in conjunction with Common Good or these two joyned never was actually in Practice nor never can be Where or how can all the People meet or if that could be how can they joyn in establishing of the Notion of Common Good Were they ever all of one mind Were not they ever since things were of divers Parties and those of different Judgments what the Common Good was Was there not partiality in every Party And did not every Party helieve that was the Common Good which they apprehended to be so and suited best with their Interest and Proposals to themselves But the People meet by their Representatives Did ever all the People meet to choose them Hath not a Party commonly chosen for the whole excluding all others Or have not Men of a Party imposed themselves upon the People and usurped the general consent of the whole Upon a strict enquiry this will appear to have been the general Practice Where then is the General Consent of the People as for Common Good enough hath been said before to invalidate that pretence and for the Conjunction of the General consent of the People and Common Good the Author talks of let him shew it practicable if he can Do as you would be done by is the Ground and Foundation of Common Good as hath been said before but when and where did the general and free Consent of the People high and low concur and unite in this Foundation If all Men would build upon it none could receive wrong or injury there could be no Disputes about any matter whatever if Men would make this Rule the measure of their Actions In the mean time while Men can arrive at this perfection The Legal Constitution by which the Kingdom hath flourisht and been supported in great Reputation for some hundreds of years is the best and safest Rule for all sober Men to use the Authors Phrase to proceed by When Men go from the Law and legal Establishment they walk in the dark and go they know not whither and travel while they make themselves not only uneasie but miserable 'T is a strange fate upon the People that their name is always used their benefit pretended their power to create right to Govern and Governors magnified by restless Projectors whose only design is to dig up the very Foundations of Legal Settlements and such as by many Ages have been found by experience to have been for the ease quiet and benefit of the People who are never in greater danger than when they listen to such Men that promise to make them happy by Eutopian Illegal and Impracticable Schemes and Devices after misery and desolation is brought upon them their Consent is pretended and vouched to warrant it If the Author could have prevailed with himself to have read the several Declarations Remonstrances and almost innumerable other Papers printed between the years 1640. and 1660. all filled with the Consent Rights and Authority of the People and holding forth Common Good and Publick Interest and asserting and maintaining both those impracticable Notions after such manner as the People are made to believe they belong unto them in every change of Affairs and Government that then happened he could not have been so fond of or so often have vainly and to no purpose repeated these two empty idle sayings and expressions The Author's Words p. 19. I take ours to be a true original Monarchy especially after the Rights of the lesser Monarchies were swallowed up or deliver'd into that of the West-Saxon Kings And farther I do not stick to affirm that it was Hereditary where the Right of Succession and the Publick Good did not interfere i. e. where there was not a natural or moral Incapacity a natural as in the Sons of the Elder Edmond when Edred was made King before them a Moral as when Edgar's Elder Brother was set aside for ill Government by one half of the Nation and the other never disputed the matter with them What may be said this As to his Distinction of natural or moral Incapacity since a Protector or a Protector and Council may supply and have often supplied both those incapacities it signifies nothing And as to his Examples of Edred's Government in the Minority of Edmunds Sons and of Edwy Edgar's elder Brother being deserted by half the Nation they have been spoken to before The Author's words in the same Page These things I mention to shew That although this were a true and successive Monarchy in ordinary course yet where the Publick Good was by the Estates of the Realm judged to require it they thought it no Perjury or breach of Faith to transfer their Allegiance although it were without the consent of the actual Governor or the next Lineal Heir What may be said to this Passage The things hitherto mentioned by the Author
c. and under the name of Danes †Aelfred vit f. 10. c. 14. ever since the beginning of King Egbert having by continued Invasions and Piracies harassed and grievously wasted and molested England in the Reign of King Aelfred by pact and bargain between him and Guthran enjoy'd East Saxony or Essex and the County of the East Angles and as * Faedus Aelfr Guthr c. 1. Lamb. fol 36. some say a far greater part of the Nation In King Ethelred's Reign Swane King of Denmark with a great Army Invaded and made himself Master of the whole Nation forcing Ethelred and his Wife Emme Sister to Richard the Second Duke of Normandy with their two Sons Edward and Alfred into that Country The Danish Kings stayed not long here after Swane had conquer'd the Kingdom they all four Reigned not much above 25 years their only Title was the Sword notwithstanding they either brought hither the custom of the Predecessors naming or giving the Kingdom to his Successor as probably it might have been some times practis'd in their own Kingdoms or used it as they found it here practis'd in cases of Necessity and in their Childrens Minority by the Saxon Kings †Encomium Emmae pr. by du Chesn amongst the old French Histor fol. 164. B. Swane made his Son Cnute his Successor He married Emme the Widow of Ethelred by whom he had his Son Harde Cnute To him his half Brother Cnute gave all that had been any ways under his Government but he being then in Denmark * Ibid. C. Harold possessed himself of the Kingdom who was a Bastard Son of a Maid Servant brought into his Concubines Chamber and imposed upon him by her Fol. 174. A. B. and for this reason Elnoth Archbishop of Canterbury refused to Consecrate him King and to deliver him the Crown and Scepter After the death of Harold Harde Cnute called his half Brother Edward by his Mother Emme afterward called the Confessor out of Normandy and caused him to live with him and dying within less than two years after left him Heir of his whole Kingdom Gul. Gemeticens l. 6. c. 9. Totius regni reliquit haeredem And he not long before he died made William the Conqueror his Successor Anno eodem viz. 1065. Note the Reason Rex Edwardus senio gravatus cernens Clitonis Edwardi nuper defuncti filium Edgarum Regio folio minus idoneum tam corde quam corpore Godwinique Comitis multam malamque sobolem Quotidie super terram crescere ad Cognatum suum Wilhelmum Comitem Normanniae animum apposuit eum sibi succedere in regnum Angliae voce flabili sancivit In the same year King Edward growing infirm with Age perceiving Edgar Aetheling the Son of Prince Edward lately Deceased neither in Mind nor Body fit for the Government nor to bear up against the growing Power and Malice of Godwin's Sons thought upon his Cousin William Earl of Normandy Fol. 511. b. n. 30. and by a firm Declaration Decreed he should be his Successor in the Kingdom Ingulph that Reports this was at the very time Secretaty to this William Earl of Normandy and after he had given him a great Character for his Courage Conduct and constant success in War his Justice Religion and Devotion subjoyns that King Edward sent Robert Archbishop of Canterbury as Envoy to him to let him know he was designed his Successor in his Kingdom Which probably he would never have done if this and the like Donations had been question'd in those days Nay †Review of Tyrhs p. 482. Mr. Selden says This Donation was a lawful Title William Rufus had the same Right and Title of Succession by the Donation of his Father and as his Testamentary Heir * Fragmt de vitâ Gul. long f. 32. n. 20. 30. 40. Orde Vit. f. 39. C. D. Ralph de Diceto Dean of St. Paul's who lived in or very near the time says †Col. 505. n. 40. 50. That Hugh Bigod Steward of the King made speed out of Normandy where King Henry died into England and made Oath before the Archbishop of Canterbury That upon his Death bed upon some Differences that hapned between him and his Daughter the Empress did disinherit her and made Stephen Earl of Boloign his Heir Whereupon William Archbishop of Canterbury giving too much credit to the Words of the Steward consecrated Stephen Earl of Mortaign King at Westminster If this should be true he succeeded as Testamentary Heir to King Henry King John was Testamentary Heir to his Brother Richard who upon his Death-bed when he despaired of Life devised to his Brother John the Kingdom of England and all other his Lands and made all present swear Fealty to him and commanded that his Castles and Three parts of his Treasure should be delivered to him * f. 449. b. lin 37. Wals Hypodig Neustriae f. 457. n. 40. Roger Hoveden who was a Domestick in the Family of King Henry II. and wrote at this very time delivers this King John before he left the World made Henry his First-begotten Son his Heir Paris who * f. 288. lin 2. Mat. West f. 276. n. 40. writes this was Historian to this Henry After what hath been premised the Author's History comes to be considered upon his first Query which he maintains upon Instances in the Saxon Norman and subsequent times The Author's Words P. 13. As to the former I say the resolution of Conscience in this case doth not depend upon the Will and Pleasure of the Person to whom the former Oath was made but upon the ground on which it was made and from which it had its force to oblige and if those cease the obligation of the Oath ceases together with them And whether they do or not no particular Person is so fit to judge as the Three Estates of the Realm as I shall now prove from several remarkable Instances to this purpose in our Histories and Parliament Records whereby I shall make it appear that when a Dispute hath hapned about the Right of Succession and to whom the Oaths of Allegiance were to be made they have looked on it as their proper Right to limit the Succession and determine the Oaths The Author's Words and Application continued ibid. p. 13. V nder the British Government we find a considerable Instance to our purpose Vortigern A.G. 454. Magnates Brit. Regem Vortigernum penitus deserentes unanimiter filium suum in Regem sublimaverunt Mat. West p. 83. the British King had enter'd into a Secret League to bring over the Saxons upon which the Great Men of the Nation deserted him and chose Vortimer in his room he was his eldest Son Here it is plain they thought the introducing a Foreign Power a sufficient discharge of their Obligation to him it being so directly contrary to the publick Good of the Nation although Vortigern gave them no Discharge In the Desertion of Vortigern
and his Body lies buried at Winchester Not one Word here or any where else in this Chronology of this improbable and Romantick Story But be it true as it is told in Mat. Westminster was it against their Laws i. e. the West Saxon Laws for Aethelwulph to marry the King of France his Daughter and make her his Queen Where is this Law It is not amongst Ina's Laws But the Law was made in Brithric's time by reason of the wickedness of his Queen Eadburgh If she was as wicked as the Story makes her was the Anger and Humour of the People against her sufficient to make a Law That for the time coming no West Saxon King should permit his Wife to sit and eat with him or be called Queen Why was she not put to death for her transcendent Wickedness if true Why was she permitted to go into France with innumerable Treasure after her Husband's death If there was such a Law made then 't was in the time of the Heptarchy Can any Man think that Egbert the first Saxon Monarch did not suffer his Wife to sit and eat with him and to be called Queen And that our Aethelwulph who had Four Sons by a former Wife did not permit her to sit and eat with him and to be called Queen There was a Conspiracy and wicked Design of Aethelbald to dethrone his Father carried on by Alston Bishop of Shireburn and the Earl of Somersetshire c. the pretence was for that he had caused his youngest Son Alfred to be crowned at Rome What Laws had Aethelwulph broken in this except the Laws of Birth-right Lineal Descent and Proximity of Blood Upon which the Succession of the Monarchy was fixed if Alstan Ethelbald or the Earl of Somersetshire understood any thing of it Nor could there be any Exclusion of Aethelwulph when the whole Nobility offered to fight for and defend him nor could there be any Terms of receiving his Son into a share of the Kingdom when out of ineffable Clemency he himself divided it to avoid a Civil War and would not suffer the Nobility to force his Son from the Right of the Kingdom What right was this Was it not from Proximity of Blood and Lineal Succession he being his eldest Son The Author's Words p. 15. If our Allegiance cannot be transferred by the States of the Realm it must be because as some think by the Fundamental Constitution of this Kingdom we are bound in Allegiance to the next Right Heir in a Lineal Succcession But I find no such thing in the Saxon times for altho they generally kept to the Royal Line yet not so but that when it appeared to be much more for the Publick Good they did not stick upon the Point of Proximity What may be opposed to the Words and Assertion of the Author Those who in these cases our Author and all others that have written upon this or the like Subject do call the States of the Realm and what is due to the Heir in a Lineal Succession by the Laws of our Land and consequently by the Constitution of the Kingdom shall be consider'd afterwards Concerning the Saxon Succession what hath been already said might be sufficient but upon further occasion given in his Instances there will be more said of it The Publick Good which the Author here and in many other places seems to rely mainly upon to support what he asserts is chiefly to be enquired after Publick or Common Good is a common Notion and signifies nothing unless it be stated and explain'd the true import of the Words are That every Individual of the common Body according to the capacity of the Person should and ought to be made a partaker of the benefit and advantage that ought to accrue to the whole for if it be such a Good or rather such an Evil as is only for the benefit of a Party and in respect of the whole of the least or a small number 't is impossible it should be a Publick Good but a most horrid cheat put upon the People under that pretence to gull them into Slavery and to make them the Authors of their own and the Publick Ruin of the Nation All designing Men of whatsoever Perswasion though if called together cannot say what they would have yet in all Ages have pretended to procure the Publick Good of the People Every Party though in the beginning never so inconsiderable that intends to advance it self declares for it until it gets Power to manage and appropriate to themselves what they call so and then it appears the Interest Gain and Advancement of the Party were the End and the pretence of Common Good but the Means to that End And this pretence and false light hath at all times so Lowbell'd the blind and ignorant World that Men fly into the Net though they see all the Laws broken that maintain the Publick Good and the very Foundations of it eradicated all the goodly Pretences and fair Promises relinquisht and utter desolation coming upon them And therefore where it is manifest the Publick Laws are or cannot but be broken contemn'd and vilified by any Party 't is Private and Party-Good they only intended and to accomplish their ends and secure themselves must proceed against all the Measures and Rules of Publick Good by fraud force and violence accompanied with stupendious Devastation For nothing can be a Publick Good to any Nation where the exercise and practice of it is not warranted by the Law Custom and Constitution of that Nation So that the Authors Argument upon the account of Common Good signifies little unless he can prove the Saxons waved Proximity of Blood and that they did it according to the Law and Constitution of the Kingdom The Author's words p. 15. Pag. 101. Brompton p. 862. l. 1. c. 3. p. 14. I shall not meddle with the Kingdom of the Northumbers which alone was Originally Elective as appears by Mat. Westm and wherein there happened so great Disorders and Confusions that at last William of Malmsb. saith none could be perswaded to accept of the Kingdom HISTORY Regnum Northanhumbrorum exordium sumpsit M. Westm A. D. 548. f. 101. n. 20. Cùm enim Proceres Anglorum magnis laboribus continuis Patriam illam subjugâssent Idam juvenem Nobilissimum Regem sibi unanimiter praefecerunt In the year 548 the Kingdom of the Northumbers first began The chief Men or Leaders of the English having conquer'd that Country unanimously set up Ida a most noble young Man for their King What if the English in the beginning of the Kingdom of the Northumbers did set up Ida in all probability at that time the great Leader of them to be their King Doth it therefore follow that Kingdom was Elective or that they chose their King afterward A. D. 547 The Saxon Chronology says only Ida caepit regnare Vnde Northanhymbrensium Genus Regale ortum est In the year 547. Ida began to Reign from whom
Children and when they were grown up made them sharers in the Government Not one word in Malmsbury of Athelstan's building two Monasteries to expiate the Guilt of Edwin's murder This was Westminster's own The Author's Words p. 15. How came Alfred to oppose his Election as being Illegitimate as Malmsbury confesses HISTORY He also confesses That Alfred and his Complices were factious People who reported he was born of a Concubine Malmsb. l. 2 〈…〉 2 〈…〉 10. to obviate his being Crowned and that Sedition never wants Abettors Aethelstanus apua Regia villa quae vocatur Kingston coronatus quamvis Quidam Alfredus cum factiosis suis quia seditio semper invenit complices obviare tentâsset occasio contradictionis ut ferunt quod Aethelstanus ex Concubinâ natus esset and in another place King Edward and his Son Elward 〈…〉 or Edward being dead Tunc omnium spebus in Ethelstanum erectis solus Alfredus magnae insolentiae homo cum suis clam restitit quoad potuit dedignatus subdi Domino quem suo non delegisset arbitrio Then all Mens hopes were placed upon Ethelstan only Alfred a Man of great insolence and his Party opposed him disdaining to submit to a Governour that he himself had not set up The Author's Words p. 15. But Mat. Westm gives the Reason The times were then difficult and Edwards other Sons were too young to mâ—nage the Government and therefore they set up Athelstan as one fit for Business HISTORY Mat. Westm transcribes many of the Words of Malmsbury in the place last cited but leaves out that Clause of Alfred's being an Insolent Man and his making opposition to Athelstan and adds this of his own A. D. 934. f 186. n. 20. Spreto Edwino nondum ad regnandum propter teneros annos idoneo Aethelstanum in Kingstonâ consecravêrunt From the partial Construction and Explication of these last Words above what they will bear the Author hath set up a particular Sense of his own against the Sense and Report of all other Historians nay against the Report of M. Westm himself A. D. 924. who says Aethelstan was made King and Crowned as Edward's eldest Son After the Death of Aethelstan his own Author says M. Westm A. D. 940. f. 187. lin 5. Successit ei in regnum frater ejus haeres legitimus Eadmundus His Brother and lawful Heir Edmaend succeeded him The Author's Words p. 16. How came Edred to succeed Edmund and not his own Sons Edwin and Edgar Mat. Westminster and Brompton give the same Reason M. Westm A. 946. Brompt p. 862. Flor. Wig. A. 949. They were uncapable by reason of their Age Repugnance illegitimâ aetate patri succedere non valebant Florence of Worcester saith The Northumbers sware Allegiance to Edred and he saith He was next Heir and yet there were two Sons of Edmond before him for he confesses that they were the Sons of Edmond and Algiva his Queen HISTORY M. Westm f. 188. n. 30. Defuncto Edmundo apud Glastoniam sepulto Eadredus frater ejus in Kingstona regiâ villâ regni diadema à B. Othone Archiep Cantuariensi suscepit Reliquit quoque duos filios haeredes legitimos Eadwinum Eadgarum qui repugnante illegitima aetate patri succedere non valebant Edmund being dead his Brother Edred was Crowned by Otho Archbishop of Canterbury He left also two Sons his lawful Heirs Edwin and Edgar who by reason of their Non-age could not succeed their Father Mortuo Edmundo rege Brompton col 862. n. 20. Edredus frater suus filiusque Regis Adelstani eo quod pueri Edwinus Edgarus filii Edmundi pra immaturâ aetate adhuc regnare non poterant sibi in Regem successit ab Odone Dorobernensi Archiep. consecratus est A. D. 947. Edmund being dead Edred his Brother and the Son of King Athelstan succeeded him as King for that the Children Edwin and Edgar the Sons of Edmund by reason of their tender Age could not as yet reign Magnificus rex Anglorum Edmundus die festivitatis Sancti Augustini c. interficitur Flor. Wig. f. 604. A. D. 946. mox proximus haeres Edredus fratri succedens regnum naturale suscepit a Sancto Odone c. The Magnificent King Edmund was killed on the Festival of St. Austin presently the next Heir Edred succeeding his Brother took upon him the Government according to Nature or according to Natural Duty and Affection If the Author had fairly and truly cited these Three Pieces of History it had not been impossible to have found out that Edred was but only Tutor Curator Regent or Protector of the young Princes and Kingdom and so took upon him the Government until they were of sufficient Age. Westminster says Edwin and Edgar were the lawful Heirs of Edmund which Words the Author left out but could not succeed him by reason of their Nonage or that they were not of lawful Age. Brompton says Edred succeeded his Brother for that his Sons Edwin and Edgar by reason of their immature Age could not yet reign As much as to say Tho in respect of their Age they could not at present yet afterwards in their riper Years they were to reign and so they did successively Lastly Florence of Worcester says Edred was next Heir What Heir could he be to his Brother but Epistolary or Testamentary Heir or Successor For in that sense Hares is commonly used And so 't was most probable by some Instrument or other he made him Tutor Curator Regent or Protector of his Sons and Kingdom or that by Consent of the Great Men he took upon him the Tutorship and Regency For what other Meaning can those Words have regnum naturale suscepit than that according to natural Duty and Affection he took upon him the Government and Protection of his Nephews and their Kingdom But how then came it to pass that he was Crowned and called King 'T is not hard to answer this Question For anciently the Sons and Heirs of Emperors Kings Dukes Earls Barons were not always called so but Heirs only of the Empire Kingdom Dukedom Du Fresn Gloss vol. 2. in verb. Haeredes col 686 687. c. And the Tutor Curator Governor or Protector and such as had the Care of them and the Administration of the Government were then called Emperors Kings Dukes Earls c. of such Empires Kingdoms Dukedoms c. until the Heir came of Age and sometimes those Curators and Guardian Kings and Emperors were anointed and crowned But when the Heirs were of lawful Age they quitted their Curatorships and Regency and parted with or laid down all Royal Marks of Majesty retaining only the Name and Honour of King And the Title of King and the Ceremony of Coronation was allowed and granted to such Regents that they might have the greater Authority with the People Of such Curators Tutors or Regents Du Fresn gives several Examples and of Odo Duke of
Aquitain Tutor to Charles the Simple not much before this time and of other Kings of France that had Crowned Tutors with the Titles of Kings The Author's Words p. 16. A. 957. After the Death of Edred the eldest Son of Edmond succeeded but being found under a Moral Incapacity for in Florentius his words and M. Westminster In commisso regimine insipienter egit he was set aside as to all the Government beyond Thames and Edgar put into it HISTORY Obiit Edredus Rex die S. Clementis festo in aetatis vigore Chron. Sax. A. D. 955 decem circiter annos regnabat deinceps Eadwigus Eadmundi Regis filius regnum capessit Sanctum Dunstanum de terrâ fugavit Eadwigus rex Calendis Octobris obiit Ibid. A. D. 957. Eadgarus autem frater ejus regnum capessit Hic Sanctum Dunstanum accersit eique Episcopatum Wigorniensem donavit postea Londinensem King Edred died in the Festival of St. Clement in the vigor of his Age after he had reigned about Ten years Then Eadwy the Son of Edmund enjoy'd the Kingdom and banish't St. Dunstan Eadwy died the First of October and his Brother Edgar took the Kingdom and recalled St. Dunstan and gave him the Bishoprick of Worcester and afterward that of London This Chronology hath not one word of the Northumbers and Mercians rejecting Edwy and chusing Edgar Rex Anglorum Eadwigus Flor. Wigorn eodem An. quoniam in commisso regimine insipienter egit a Mercensibus Northimbrensibus contemptus relinquitur suus germanus Clito Eadgarus ab eis rex eligitur sicque res Regum sejuncta est ut flumen Thamesii regnum disterminaret amborum mox Rex Mercensium Eadgarns heatum Dunstanum Abbatem then Abbot of Glastenbury cum honore gloriâ revocavit King Edwy because he acted foolishly in his Government was despised and deserted by the Mercians and Northumbrians and his Brother Prince Edgar chosen and the Government of the Kings was so divided as the Thames bounded both their Kingdoms and King Edgar presently called back St. Dunstan the Abbot with honour and glory The Words of M. Westminster are mostly the very same as these before-cited the Sense differs not After this they both tell how Abbot Dunstan was made first Bishop of Worcester then of London by King Edgar The Author at his first entrance upon the Saxon Instances p. 15. said he would not meddle with the Kingdom of Northumbers which in this place both the Historians he cites do expresly mention for Reasons there given and therefore thinking this Instance to be for his purpose he cunningly omits to mention that Nation as believing for his own Reasons it might undervalue the Instance and only says Edwy was set aside as to all the Government beyond Thames and Edgar put into it But what if the Northumbrians and Mercians did reject him 'T was no more than the Northumbrians had done in the two preceding Reigns Flor. Wig. A. D. 926. They made a League with Aethelstan and confirm'd it by Oath yet they called in Anlaf a Pagan King and raised War against him And tho' he Ibid. A. D. 937. and Constantine King of Scots his Assistant and the Northumbrians were baffled with great Slaughter of their Men yet but Four years after and in the First year of King Edmund Ibid. A. D. 941. Northimbrenses fidelitati quam magnifico regi Anglorum Edmundo debebant infidelitatem praeferentes Regem Northmannorum Anlafam sibi in regem eligêrunt The Northumbrians preferring Infidelity to the Fealty they ought to the Magnificent King Edmund chose Anlaf King of Norway for their King Ibid. A. D. 944. Three years after Magnificus rex Anglorum Edmundus duos reges Anlafum Regis videlicet Sithrici filium Reignoldum Guthfredi filium de Northumbriâ expulit eamque suae ditioni subegit King Edmund drove two Kings Anlaf the Son of Sithric and Reinold the Son of Gutred out of Northumberland and conquer'd or reduced it under his Power Ibid. A. D. 949. And Five years after that Wolstanus Archiepiscopus Eboracensis proceresque Northimhembrenses omnes egregio regi Anglorum Edredo fidelitatem juraverunt sed non illam diu tenuerunt Wulstan Archbishop of York and all the Great Men of Northumberland sware Fealty to the famous King Edred but did not long keep it Namque quendam Danicâ stirpe progenitum Ircum nomine super se Regem levaverunt For they set up Iric a Dane King over them And the very next year King Edred threatning to destroy the whole Country Ibid. A. D. 950. they threw down Iric Ircum quem sibi regem praefecerant abjecêrunt and compounded with Edred for a great Sum of Money Ibid. A. D. 957. And seven years after they revolted from Edwin and set up his Brother Edgar And like them were the Mercians Would any Man fetch an Instance from these People to confirm and warrant what he would prove or have thought to be a just and regular Proceeding But what was his Crime How did he play the Fool Why Malmsb. l. 11. c. 7. f. 30. a. n. 20. 30. he banisht Dunstan Chief of the Monks turn'd the Monks out of Monasteries and put in Secular Priests and made bold with the Monks Revenue By which Folly he made them his Enemies and lost the People so as he could not chastise the Northumbrians as Edred had done before him and so was forced to be content to let his Brother Edgar enjoy Mercia and Northumberland Chron. Sax. A. D. 957. who forthwith recalled Dunstan from Exile and restored the Monks where he could which made him secure against his Brother Edwy after whose Death he possest the whole Nation The Author's Words p. 16. How came there to be a Dispute about the Election after the death of Edgar between his eldest Son Edward and Etheldred his youngest HISTORY Malmsbury answers the Question L. 2. c. 9. f. 33. b. n. 40. Edwardum Dunstanus ceteri Episcopi consentanci regali culmine sublimârunt contra voluntatem quorundam ut aiunt Optimatum Novercae quae vix Septem annorum puerulum Ethelredum filium suum provehere conabatur ut ipsa potius sub ejus nomine imperitaret Dunstan and the other Bishops that agreed with him set Edward in the Throne against the mind as they say of some great Men and his Stepmother who endeavoured to set up her Son Ethelred a Child scarce Seven Years old that under his name she might reign The Author's Words p. 16. I lay no force upon his Mothers endeavours to advance him but if there had been such an unalterable Right of Succession there had not been any colour or pretence for it T is true there neither was nor could be any yet she with her Friends endeavour'd it and seeing she could not do it that way she afterwards caused Edward to be murther'd that the Right of Succession might be
in her Son after the Eldest was taken away so much the unalterable Right of Succession was then understood But saith Flor. Wig. there was a great Contention amongst the great Men about the choice of the King A. 975. How could there be any dispute if they knew the Constitution of the Kingdom to be that the next Heir must inherit the Crown HISTORY Flor. Wig. f. 607. A. D. 975. De rege eligendo magna inter regni primores oborta est dissentio Quidam namque Regis filium Edwardum quidam autem fratrem illius elegerunt Ethelredum Quam ob causam Archipraesules Dunstanus Oswaldus cum Corepiscopis Abbatibus Ducibusque quam plurimis in unum convenerunt Edwardum ut pater ejus praeciperat elegerunt electum consecraverunt in Regem unxerunt There was a great Contention amongst the prime Men of the Kingdom about choosing or setting up a King Some were for Edward some for Ethelred For which cause the Archbishops Dunstan and Oswald with their Suffragans the Abbots and very many great Men assembled and chose Edward as his Father had commanded consecrated and anointed him King From what hath been said before it appears those that would have set up Ethelred against the Right of Succession and against Edward King Edgar's eldest Son were his Stepmother and her Party the others that opposed her Design and kept fast to Edward were for the Right of Succession with the last the Parliament as the Constitution then was or the Great Assembly of the Nation that is the Archbishops Bishops Abbots and very many Noblemen concurred and chose or recognized and crowned Edward their King whom his Father at his Death Regni morum Haeredem reliquit Ibidem left Heir of his Kingdom and Temper It cannot be thought but this Assembly understood the Constitution of the Nation and yet there arose a dispute about the Succession The best Laws in the World cannot keep Men from being wicked nor secure the Government from the Attempts of Intruders and Usurpers when they think they have Opportunity and Means to set themselves up let the Constitution be never so clear and well known If the Author would have look'd into or considered the cause of this Contention about the Succession he might as well have asked how can there be any Intruders against the known Constitution as how could there be a Dispute about the Succession M. Westminster says A. D. 977 Edward retained only the Name of a King and by the Flattery of his Stepmother he permitted to her and her Son Aethelred the Transaction of all the Affairs of the Kingdom Ibid. A. D 978. Flor. Wigâ—eod Anno. Yet so powerful a thing and so agreeable to the Constitution was Succession by Birth right that for the establishing her Son in the Throne the very next Year she caused Edward to be murthered and triumph'd at his Death The next are his Danish Instances These People had the Sword only for their Title and staid but Five and twenty Years or thereabouts Nor can any Man affirm from our Historians what the Constitution of the Kingdom was then as to the Government or Governours and the manner of and chief prâ—tence to the Succession was Donation as hath been noted before to which the Reader is referred Edmund Ironside the true lineal Saxon Heir made an agreement with Canutus and divided the Kingdom with him who had no other pretence to the Throne than his Father Swane's Conquest and his own Army of Danes to make it good After the Death of Edmund the Bishops and English Nobility sware they would have Cnute for their King would humbly obey him and pay his Taxes for his Army â—â—id A. D. â—16 f. 18. Eique humiliter obedire vellent suo exercitui vectigalia dare Let the Author say whether it were not Force and Fear made these Men swear The Author's Words p. 17. After the death of Canutus a new difference arose about the Succession 〈◊〉 1055. some were for Harold his supposed Son by Algiva others for Hardecnute his Son by Emma HISTORY After the Death of Cnute â—almsb l. c. 12. f. â— b. n. 50. 43. a lin c. Elegerûnt Haraldum Dani Londoniae cives qui jam penè in Barbacorum mores propter frequentem convictum transierant Angli diu obstiterint magis unum ex filiis Ethelredi qui in Normanniâ vel Hardecnutum filium Cnutonii ex Emma qui tunc in Danemarchia erat regem habere volentes The Danes and Citizens of London who were almost become barbarous by their Converse with them chose Harald the English opposed and had rather have had for their King one of the Sons of Ethelred who were then in Normandy or Hardecnute the Son of Cnute by Emme who was then in Danemark Earl Godwin who profest himself Tutor or Curator of the Children pupillorum Tutorem se professus headed the English but at length being unequal in Force and Number gave way to violence sed tandem vi numero impar cêssit violentiae All Historians concluded Harald to have been a Bastard yet without doubt he had a very great Command in his Father's Army which set him up and it may be with the Assistance of the complying English The Author's Word's p. 17. If the Lineal Succession were a part of our Constitution how come such perpetual Disputes to be concerning it For if it had been own'd as a Fundamental Law the right of Succession must have been clear beyond dispute What may be said to the Reasoning of the Author The Author would be thought to have read much History but certainly he never considered what he read Did he in all his reading never meet with Usurpers Invaders and Intruders Did he never read of Men that above all things desired to be Kings though they knew they had no right to be so Did he never read of the Attempts of such Men to make themselves so and that some have failed and others succeeded in those Attempts Did he never read that such Men always had Abbettors and a Party to carry on their Designs Did he never hear of such wicked Men as have acted contrary to the light of Nature and their own Consciences or to the great Rule of all Mankind Do as you would have others do unto you The Fundamental Law of Succession may be as clear as the light it self yet Invaders though they know it will not see it nor do think themselves bound by it but their whole Contrivance is how to evade baffle and enervate that Law and every other Law that stands in their way and yet pretend to advance the Publick Interest the Common Good of the People when they intend only to set up their own and the Interest of the Party against the known Laws of the Nation If these things have frequently been they may be so again 'T is the Invader and Intruder makes the Dispute not the
were his Saxon and Danish Instances and whatever appears by those Instances to have been done was done by a Party as hath been shewn from undoubted History and not by Representatives of the Nation yet such Party or Parties he calls the States of the Realm as his Tutor Robert Parsons the Jesuit alias Doleman hath taught him especially in the 4th 7th 8th and 9th Chapters of the first part of his Conference about the Succession to the Crown of England where are to be found all the Author 's Saxon and Danish Instances urged and applied in the same manner and to the same purpose as they are in this Author and also his two Norman Instances that of Maud the Empress Hen. 2 and King Stephen the other of the two Houses of Tork and Lancaster in his Second Part of the Conference cap. 2. and 3. and likewise in Mr. Pryns first Part of the Sovereignty of Parliament and Kingdom p. 7 8 9. and the two Norman Instances p. 94 95. Mr. Pryn followed Doleman who says all Kings that take Coronation Oaths are Elected Conf. of Success part 1. cap. 5. and all Invaders or Intruders that set up themselves by the help of a Party only were Elected and set up by the States or Commonwealth Those Parties the Jesuit calls the State or Commonwealth Mr. Pryn calls Parliament or Kingdom in the very same Instances but this Author is best pleased with the Jesuits Expressions and useth them most frequently But if he had consider'd what Mr. Pryn hath written since the year 1648. and in that year against his own former Notions and Opinions about the Sovereignty of Parliament and Kingdom c. especially his Plea for the House of Lords his four Parts of a brief Register of Parliament Writs his Animadversions upon Coke's 4th Institute and many other Writings and the Epistles to them He would never have Publisht such Instances baffled by him and many others If the States as he calls them had had upon the Consideration of Publick Good the Power he speaks of and that it was known and legal or if the Crown had according to the Constitution been at their Disposal supposing the Saxon Estates had freely chosen Canutus as he vainly Asserts what could prompt him to cause Edwin Flor. Wig. A. D. 1016. Edmond Ironside's Brother to be murder'd and to send his two Sons Edward and Edmond to the King of Sweves that they also might be murder'd And if the Succession had not been notoriously wholly and completely Hereditary what need he to have feared the Title and Succession of the Sons and Brother of Edmond if it had been true what the Author insinuates that he was legally Elected and upon account of the Publick Good Besides imposing Parties small Numbers and Factions upon his Readers and calling them the States he hath another pretty knack of imposing upon them by telling them Oaths made to foreign Kings such as the Danes were and forced upon the Nation by Foreign Armies was transferring of Allegiance as if the People then were wonderfully pleased and satisfied with their new Masters From these Instances and Topicks he might as well have proved that because this Nation hath been overrun and possest by Saxons and Danes with their miscellaneous Assistants therefore it may be expedient it should be so again They seem to be Arguments to encourage such another undertaking rather than any thing else After the Saxon Constitution he comes to the Norman and there makes only two Instances The words of the Author p. 20. The first Instance I shall bring is in the Case of the Oath taken to Maud the Daughter of Hen. 1. in the Thirty first year of his Reign and there is no question but he designed signed her to succeed him Malmsb. Hist novest l. 1. p. 100. 105. 2. legitima perenni successione as Malmsbury's words are but Stephen who had before sworn Allegiance to her watched his opportunity and by the help of a Party made by his Brother the Bishop of Winchester he was Crowned King and although at first Malmsbury saith but three Bishops and very few Noblemen joyned with him yet he soon after saith that most of them went into him and even Robert of Gloucester King Henry the first 's natutural Son took an Oath to him but with the Condition of his preserving his Honour and Covenants There are several things worth our observation in this affair with respect to the Oaths of Allegiance HISTORY Malmsb. f. 99. a. n. 30. Anno 27. Regni sui Rex Henricus Angliam venit mense Septembri adducens secum filiiam suam c. In the 27th year of his Reign King Henry came to England in the Month of September and brought with him his Daughter He called together at Christmas a great number of the Clergy and chief Men of the Kingdom at London and being much grieved he was like to have no Children by his Second Wife the â—uke of Lorrain's Daughter he was very thoughtful about a Successor and having a long time before deliberated about that matter Tunc in eodem Concilio omnes totius Angliae Optimates Episcopos etiam Abbateâ— sacramento adegit obstrinxit ut si ipsi sine haerede masculo decederet Matildam filiam suam quondam Imperatricem incunctanter sine ulla retractatione Dominam reciperent Then in the same Council he bound all the chief men of England the Bishops also and Abbats by Oath that if he should die without Heir Male they should forthwith without retraction or revoking their Oath receive his Daughter Maud late Empress for their Queen Having before told them what a great loss the Nation sustein'd by the death of his Son William to whom by right the Kingdom belonged and now that his Daughter survived to whom only the lawful Succession was due from her Grandfather Uncle and Father that were Kings and from the Stock of her Mother many Ages Ibid. n. 40. cui soli legitima debeatur successio ab avo avunculo patre regibus a materno genere multis retro seculis siquidem ab Egbirtho West-Saxonum rege c. For from Egbert King of the West-Saxons who first subdued the other Saxon Kings in the year 800 during the Reign of * The Historian doth not reckon the Danish Kings amongst them there were 14 Saxon Kings beside them Ibid. n. 50. b. lin 1. c. Ibid. f. 100. a. n. 40. Fourteen Kings unto the year 1043. when Edward the Confessor was Crowned King the Line of the Royal Blood never failed nor was there one wrong step or halt made in the Succession nec unquam ejusdem regalis sanguinis linea defecit nec in Successione regni claudicavit All Persons of any moment in this Council did take the Oath first William Archbishop of Canterbury then the other Bishops and Abbats The first of the Lay-men that took it was David King of Scors the next Stephen Earl of Mortaign and Bologn
the Nation which shâ—ws how far the publick Good was thought to be the Measure of the Obligation of these Oaths Gâ—â— Newburgeâ—sis saith L. 1. c. 30. the Bâ—num publicum was the Foundation of this Agreement A. 1153. And M. Westminster that the King and Lords did all swear to it and a solemn Charter was made of it and kâ—pt in a most secure place HISTORY M. W stm A. D. 1153 f. 246. n. 10 Diligentia Theobaldi Archiepiscopi Cantuartensi Episcoporum râ—gni Rex Anglorum Stephanus D x Nâ—â—mannorum Hâ—nricus apud Waâ—ingford talem concordiam inierunt c. By the D ligence of Theobald Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishops of the Kingdom the following Agreement was made between King Stephen and Henry Duke of Normandy at Walingford King Stephen not having an Heir except only Duke Henry did acknowledge in an Assembly of the Bishops and other chief Men of the Kingdom that Duke Henry had the hereditary Right to the Kingdom of England and the Duke kindly granted that King Stephen should during his Life peaceably enjoy his Kingdom The Agreement was so co firmed that the King him elf and the Bishops then present with the rest of the best Men of the Kingdom sware that Duke Henry after the Death of the King if he should outlive him should enjoy the Kingdom without all Contradiction Oâ— which Agreement there was a Charter made which was kept in a most secure place Ibid. n. 20. This is what the Historian hath in both places cited by the Author The whole Charter is in Brompton Brompton col 1037. n. 60. and begins thus Stephanus Râ—x Angliae Archiepiscopis Episcopis Abbatibus Comitibus Justitiariis Vicecomitibus Bâ—ronibus omnibus fidelibus suis salutem Sciatis quod Ego Rex Stephanus Henricum Ducem Normanâ—â—ae post me Successorem regni Angliae hae edem meum jâ—re haereditario constitus sic e haeredibus suis regnum Ang iae donavi consiâ—mavi Dâ—x vero propter hunc honorem Donationem Confirmationem sibi a me factam Homagio michi Sacramento securitatem fecit scilicet qâ—od fidelis mâ—chi erit vitam honâ—rem meum pro suo posse custodiet per Convâ—ntiones inter nos praelocâ—tas quae in hac Charta continentur Stephen K ng of England c Know ye that I have appointed Henry Duke of Normandy Successor of the Kingdom of England after me and my Heir by hereditary Righâ— and so have given and confirmed the Kingdom of England to him and his Heirs For which Honour Donation and Confiâ—mation made by me to him he gave me Security by Homage and Oath that he would be faithful to me and preserve my Life and Honour to the utmost of his power according to the Agreements made by us which are contained in this Charter Neubrigensis speaking of this Treaty says L. 1. c 30. p. 104. In Paris Ed. 1610. Pâ—acuâ—t inter eos that is the King and Duke solemne salubre colleqâ—ium celebrari ubi amicis mediantibus circa bonum publicum pia prudenti provisione satagentibus pâ—x inter eos caute formata solide firmata est Tâ—ey agreed to have a solemn and wholsome Treaty where by the Mediation of Friends having a pious and prudent respect to the common Good a Peace was warily made and solidly confirmed Ibidem p. 105. Quibus Deo propitio salâ—briter actis Rex Angliam Anglia pacem recepit annis enim jamplurimis fere nudo regis nomine insignis tunc recipere visus est hujus rem nominis quasi tunc primo regnare coepit quia tunc primo purgata Invasionis Tyrannica macula legitimi principis justitiam induit Which things being done by God's Assistance the King received England and England received Peace for having had the bare name of King for many Years now he enjoyed the thing it self and began then first to reign because then the Blot of Tyrannical Invasion being first wiped out he exercised the Justice of a lawful King The Author 's further Words about this Accord p. 22. And thus the Oaths of Allegiance were continued to one that had no Right for his Life and made to one who predended to no R ght but after his Mother who was set aside in this Agreement for we never read that she was present at the Agreement or resigned her Right to the Crown So that here were three Oaths of Allegiance at once that to Maud the Empress that to King Stephen and to Henry II. and yet the general Good of the Nation must give an equitable Sense of these Oaths or there must be Perjury on all sides The Answer to what the Author says about this Agreement and the Exclusion of Maud c. By this Accord it was owned by King Stephen Bishops and Barons which were then the Parliament or Colloquium as the Author confesseth that thâ— hereditary Right was in Duke Henry and he granted that King Stephen during his Life should peaceably enjoy his Kingdom And if the Right was in Henry might he not recede from it if he pleased And the Agreement says he did during Stephen's Life This Retrocession made the Bishops and Barons Oaths to the Agreement lawful and if he had not some testimony of a Cession or Resignation by and from his Mother though not mentioned in the Agreement this Convention could not upon Stephen's Acknowledgment only have own'd his hereditary Right upon Oath And that by Cession or some other way she did quit and leave her Right to govern to her Son 't is most probable from what follows Mâ—nd the Empress Malmâ—b f. 104. a.n. 10. upon the death of her Father and the Invasion of Stephen on the 30â—h of September in the Year 1139 came into England with her Brother Robert and managed the War against him in her own Person her Son being but a Child He was born A.D. 1133. and her Husband engaged in the Defence of Normandy Anjon c. against the King of France Her three great Supports were her half Brother Robert Earl of Gloucester Ranulph Earl of Chester and Milo Earl of Hereford the last Chaon Gervas Col. 1359. n. 10 Col. 1361. n. 10. Col. 1362. n. 10. lin 1. to her very great Grief died in the Year 1143. the second made his Peace with King Stephen 1145. and the first Robert Earl of Gloucester died in the beginning of November in the Year 1146. of an high Fever after he had sent Henry then being about thirteen Years of Age over to his Father into Normandy After the loss of these Friends and Supports the Empress Ibidem Col. 1363. lin 1. wearied out with these Commotions and Wars in England before Lent in the Year 1147. passed over into Normandy chusing rather to live there with her Husband in Peace than undergo so many Troubles In the Year 1149. Ibidem Col. 1366.
carried away the Inhabitants Prisoners The Norman Histories abound with these Stories Ordericus Vitalis in the Lives of Rufus Henry I. and this King Stephen especially hath many Relations of such inhumane Ravages And even at this very time the Norman Commanders and Soldiers and other Foreigners as well of Maud's as Stephen's Party practised the same Barbarities in this Nation The Country or Husbandmen such as ploughed and sowed such as cultivated Towns and Villages and the Inhabitants thereof were given to the Soldiers as their Wages and were sold with their Goods and Substance Contin ad Flor. Wig. f. 672. Militibus in stipendium dantur venunduntur vicorum villarum cultores habitatores cum rebus suis universis ac substantiis Cambden Brit f. 199 200. In this King's Reign there were in England so many Tyrants as there were Lords of Castles and many Flemings and Britains flocked to him from beyond Sea who were accustomed to live by plundering that came into England in expectation of geat Booty Malmsb. fol. 105. a. n. 20. Sub Stephano plures ex Flandria Britannia rapto vivere assueti spe magnarum praedarum Angliam involabant England was then made a Prey to all Invaders and Villains But the Author tells us that the general Good of these inhumane People did give an equitable Sense to the Oaths then taken If it were not as he says there must be Perjury on all sides for those who had first sworn to Maud could not transfer their Allegiance on any other Account that is of the general Good c. either to Stephen or Henry II. during her Life What was thought of the Perjury of those Times and especially of the Perjury of his three Bishops who were all Nâ—rmans which the Author calls transferring of Allegiance will be evident from the following Testimonies f. 221. a. n. 5. Henry Archdeacon of Hâ—ntington who lived and wâ—ote at this time and continued his H stâ—ry only unto the Year 1154 tells his Readers That in Succession of the most flâ—gitious time in which the Rage of the Norman Fury appeared whatsoever Henry hâ—d dâ—ne tyrannically or royally in comparison of worse things seemed to have been the best for immediately upon his death Stephen Vir magnae strenuitatis audacâ—â—e a Man of great Confidence and Boldness though he had sworn Fealty to the Daughter of King H nry fretus tamen vigore imp dentia furnished with Râ— olution and Impudence regna dâ—â—â—â—ma Dâ—um tentaâ—s invasit tempâ—ing God 〈◊〉 6. lin 1 c. invaded the Crown But alas Wil iam Archbishop of Canterbury who fiâ—st made Oath to the Daughter of Henry cr wned him for which Act God appointed the same Jâ—â—gment for him which he had done to the High Priest Jeremias â—hat is to say that he should not live a â—â—aâ— after Gul. Neub l. 1. c 4 p. 18 19. Cum ergo ut praedictum est â—ex ld â—ricus obâ—â—sset idem Stephanus Sacramentâ—â— q â—â— fiâ—â—ae ejus de conservanda fiâ—â—tate pâ—aesticerat p aevaricator regnâ—m arripuit Therefore as hath b en said when K ng Henry died Stephen bâ—â—ke his Oath of Fealty made to his Daught r and seized the Kingdoms the Bâ—shâ—ps and great Men that were bound by the same Oâ—th giving their Assi ance Archiepiscopus qâ—idem eâ—usdâ—m ut creditur perjuria merito ipso prâ—varicationas anno defecit And truly the Archbishop as it was believed for the same Câ—me of Peâ—jury left the World within a Year Ibid. p. 19. Stephanus ergo ut contra jus humanum pariter divinâ—m humanum scâ—â—icet quia legitimus heres non erat divinum id est violata jurisjurandi religione sublimaretur in regem pactus est quaecunque praesules proceres exigere voluerunt Stephen therefore because he was made King against both humane and divine Laws humane as not being the lawful Heir divine as having violated his Oath promised and agreed to do whatsoever the Bishops and Great Men exacted of him As to Roger Bishâ—p of Saâ—isbury if we may believe Malmsbury he sware to Maud what â—he never intended to perform The Testimony is from what the Hi â—orian heard him say Malmsb. f 99. b. n. 10. Ego Rogerium Saâ—esberiensem Episcopum saepâ—e audâ—vi dicentem solutum se a Sacramento quod Imperatrici fecerat c. I have often heard R ger Bishop of Salisbury say he was free from the Oâ—th he had made to the Empress becaâ—se he made it upon condition that the King should not marry his Daughter to a Stranger out of the Kingdom Nec vero haec ita dixerim quod credam vera fuisse verba hominus qui se unicuâ—que tempori pro volubilitate fortunae accommodare nosset Neither have I said these things that I b lieve the Mâ—n's Words to be true who knew how to comply with all Times and accommodate himself to every Turn of Fortune This Roger was an illiterate Pâ—iest Gul. Neub l. 1. c. 6. who got his Living by his saying M ss in the Suburbs of Caen in Normaâ—dy King Henry took him to be his Chaplain because he was ready at h s Office and a cunning crafty Man and promoted him to the Bishoprick of Saâ—â—bâ—â—y and not only so but committed to him the publick Administration of Secular Affairs Vt esset non tantum in Ecclesia magnus sed etiam in regno a rege secundus So as he was not only great in the Church but second or next to the King in the Kingdom Sed râ—ge defuncto Ibid. qui ei tantae in seculo claritatis author extiterat circa legitimos ejâ—s haeredes infidâ—s ut Stephanum sacramento illo aeque astrictum alliceret non est veritus incurrere perjurium verâ—m etiam aliis insigne pejâ—â—andi praestruxit exemplum But the King being dead who had made him so glorious in the World he proved unfaithful to his lawful Heirs that he might please Stephen who was bound by the same Oath did not only commit Perjury himself but became a famous Example to others to do the like As to the Third Henry Bishop of Wâ—nchester the Pope's Legat who was first mâ—de Abbot of Gâ—astenbury and then p omoted to that See by K ng Henry There needs no more to be said of him than that he first sware to be true to Maud and to maintain her Title after her Father's death yet used all the Endeavour that he could to set up his Brother Stephen by making the Clergy who then ruled all for him and then sware to be true to him When Stephen was beaten and made Prisoner by Maud he lefâ— him and sware again to Maud and when he was at liberty he left Maud and made Oath of Fealty to him again and continued Pope's Legat all the time The Conclusion of the Answer to this Instance shall be the Judgment and Opinion of Mr. Pryn in this very Case in
nor enter into Communication thereof without the King's Command Agreement and Assent 5. The King consented and prayed and commanded the Lords to search and find out what might be opposed to the Duke's Claim and Title 6. They sent for the Judges to advise what might be said against the Duke to fortifie the King's Right 7. The Judges excused themselves for that the matter was so high and touched the King's high Estate and Regality which was above the Law and passed their Learning wherefore they dare not enter into Communication thereof 8. The Loâ—ds upoâ— this Answer of the Judges sent for the King's Serjeants and Attorney and gave them the same Command who made the same Excuse the Judges had done but the Lords would not take it Whereupon the Articles and Reasons against the Duke's Claim and Title were exhibited n. 13. 9. The Authour p. 22 23. That in the Articles and Reasons against the Duke's Claim and Title theâ—e is not the least word of Phileppe's being illegitimate or that her Fâ—ther was divorc'd from her Moâ—her nor is there the least mention that the House of Lancaster claimed by Prescription of sixty years Possession which comes from Doâ—eman and the Authour is to find out both these things in the Parliament Rolls or be guilty of downright Falshood for he reports them both as pleaded against the Duke's Title As to the first there needed no other Argument if it had been insisted on and could have been made good And as to the second neither was it insisted on or mentioned as was said before and if it had Nâ—llum tempus occurrit Regi would have been a sure Rule in this Case For it is absurd to think that Prescription at least so shâ—â—t a Prescription as this could justifiâ— a wrong and make a Title in this Case for there is another Rule of Law Non confiâ—matur Tractu temporis quod de jure non subsistit no length of time makes that lawfull which was not so from the beginning If there be a right Heir of the Crown that claims or else would claim but that he wants either notice of his Right and Title or Power to make it good or forbears to claim for other sufficient Reasons Vide n. 16. here Prescription signifies nothing 10. It was allowed at least not contradicted that all Persons and namely the Peers and Lords might and by the Laws or God and Man ought to help and assist him in Truth and Justice n. 14. 11. It was the Judgmeâ—t of all the Lords that the Title of the Duke which was onely Succession by Birthright and Proximity of Bloud could not be defeated 12. That Richard Duke of York was by King Henry and the Lords acknowledged as very and rightfull Heir to the Câ—own and that he was so to be called 13. That the mean found out to save the King's Honour and appease the Duke if he would was not or could be imposed or forced upon him but he was at liberty to accept or refuse it and was no ways bound but by his own coâ—sent n. 18. 14 The Oath that Richard Duke of Yâ—rk took was in pursuance of the Agreement and any man may lawfully take an Oath to make good a Bargain where no man receives Injury but himself and so with his consent that is injured any other Person concerned in the Agreement may swear to the observation of it Pag. 24. Lastly The Weal Rest and Prosperity of the Land which the Authour calls the Publick Good followed this Agreement and the Reason was that the Câ—own was restored to the right Heir whereupon all Murmuring Hatred Sâ—â—â—e and Contention amongst the People and Evil-will and Contrivances againsâ— one another ceased These are all the Instances the Authour useth yet two are wanting the Successions of Edward III. and Hen. IV. but seeing he may have peruâ—ed an excellent Treatise bearing the Title of the Grand Question he may haply be convinced by what the learned Authour hath said Pag. 80 81 83 85 86. that they were both Vsurpers the first during his Father's Life the second from the very time he took upon him Kingship The Authour's Words p. 29 30. There are three sorts of Persons may be said to have Possession of the Crown an Vsurper a King de jure and a King de facto and because the Distinction betewen these doth not seem to be well understood I shall briefly explain it 1. An Vsurper is one that comes in by force and continues by force 2. A King de facto is one who comes in by consent of the Nation but not by virtue of an immediate hereditary right 3. A King de jure is one who comes in by Lineal Descent as next Heir and whose Right is owned and recognised by the Estates of the Realm The Authour may make what verbal frivolous Distinction he pleases between a King de facto and an Usurper yet de facto they are the very same Let him shew an Example in this Nation if he can of a King de facto set up without an Army or Force or of an Usurper that came in by Force who did not make the Nation own him and though he took upon him the Name and Title by force and the assistance of a Party yet afterwards made the States and People consent to it Was not Edward II. made Prisoner by an Army and afterward deposed and Edward III. in his Father's lifetime set up by such as were under the power of that Army And Henry IV. set up by such as acted and were under the power of that Force Our Laws make no difference betwen an Vsurper and a King de facto according to the Author's description The Author's Words pag. 32. A King de facto according to our Law as I said is one in quiet possession of the Crown by Consent of Parliament without hereditary Right such as Henry IV. V. VI. VII were all thought to be by those who made this Distinction For as far as I can find the Distinction of a King de facto and de jure was then started when the House of York so much insisted on their hereditary Right and so many of our Kings had governed the Kingdom by Consent without it therefore the Lawyers to find a sufficient Salvo for the Kings of the House of Lancaster framed this Distinction of Kings de facto and de jure Records Law and History Rot. Parl. 1. Ed. IV. n. 8. In the First of Edward IV. the Commons exhibit a Petition in Parliament wherein they set forth his Title by Birth-right and Proximity of Blood and say Richard II. was lawfully rightly and justly seated and possessed of the Corone of Englond Roiall Power Estate Dignite Pre-eminence Governaunce and Lordship of Irelond and the same joyed in rest and quiet without interruption or molestation Ibid. n. 9. unto the time that Henry late Eâ—le of Derby sonne of John of Gaunt the fourth goten sonne of King
them shall be reversed cancelled void undone revoked repealed and of no foâ—ce nor effect Henry VI. was a King de facto according to the Author's Description as well before at and after this Parliament in the Ninth of Edward IV. and Forty ninth of Henry VI. and is said to be in this Statute yet in all these Times he is declared an Vsurper at this time a Rebel and his Reign a pretensed Reign and this Parliament is also declared a pretensed Parliament Statutes at large 1. Hâ—n VII cap. 6. Richard III. was acknowledged to be a King by a Parliament of his own calling and was according to the Author's description a King de facto yet in the First of Henry VII he is declared an Vsurper of the Realm and not so much as allowed the name of King or pretensed King in that Statute After the King de facto and Vsurper Enquiry is to be made what Right and Title a King de jure may pretend to the Crown accordiâ—g to the Constitution Law and Statutes of thâ— Kingdom and it appears by the following plain Proofs that it is onâ—y by Descent and not oâ—herwise This is an hereditary successive Moâ—archy and immediately upon the Death oâ— Cession of th Predecessor the Crown is vested in the lawful Successor by Inheritance and Proximity of Blood Which appears 1. By the Record before cited of the Compromâ—se and Agreement between Râ—chard Duke of Yo k and Henry VI. in the Thiâ—ty â—inth Yâ—ar of his Râ—ign wherein he makes his Claâ—m only by lineal Dâ—scent He exhibited only a bare Title by Descent and Proximity of Bâ— od which could not be denied and upon such shewing of his Right the Lâ—rds concluded it could not be defeatâ—d Rot. Parl. 1. Edw. IV. n. 10. This was pâ— t of the Petâ—tion and Declaration of the Commons before mentioned and pâ—ssed into an Act. n. 15. notwithstanding what King Henry's Council could say againâ—â— it 2. By the Râ—cord of the First of Edward IV. Thâ— Commyns being in this present Parlement having sufficient and evident knâ—wlege of the seid unrightw se Vsurpation and Intrusion by the sâ—id Henry late Erle of Derby upon the s â—â— Câ—rone of Englond knowing also certaiâ—ly without doubte or ambiguite thâ— Right and Title of our seid Soverayne Lord therunto true and that by God's Law Manne's Law and Law of Nature he anâ— none other is and owe to be their true rightwise and natural Liege and Soveraign Lord and that he was in Right from the deth of the seid noble and famous Pâ—iâ—ce his Fader very just King of the seid Reaume of England And yet his Father was never possâ—ssed of the Crown 3. Ibid. n. 10. And that the Takeing of Possession and Entree into the Exercise of the Roiall Estate Dignite Reign and Governaunce of the seid Reaume of Englond and Lordship of Irelond of our seid Soverayne Liege Lord King Edward IV. the seid 4th Day of March That Day he took Possession of the Crown and Government Ibid. n. 11. and the Amocion of the seid Henry late called King Henry VI. from the Exercise Occupaâ—ion Usurpation Intrusion Reigne and Gâ—vernaunce of the seid Reaume and Lordship doon by our seid Soverayne and L ege Lord King Edward IV. the seid 4th Day of March was and is rightwiâ—e lawfull and according to the Lawes and Cu â—umes of the seid Reaume and soe owe to be taken holden reputed and accep ed. And over that that our seid Sovâ—rayne and Liege Lord King Eâ—ward IV. the seid 4 h Day of March was lawfully seaâ—ed and possessed of the seid Corone of Englond in his seid Right and Title and from thenceforâ—h hâ—ve to hym and his Heires K ngs of Eâ—glond all such Manners Castells Lordships Honoures Londs Tenements Rentes Services Fees Fee-farm Rentes Knights Fâ—es Avousons Gyftes of Offices to yere at his pleasure Feires Markets Iss es Fynes and Amerciamentes Libertees Franchises Prerogatifs Eâ—chetes Custumes Reversions Remeyâ—ders and all other Hereditamentes with her Appurtenaunces whatsoever they bâ— in Englond Wales and Irelond and in â—aleys and the Marches therof as the seid King Richard had in the Feâ—â— of S. Matthew the Apostle about three Weeks before he was deposed the Twenty third Yere of his Reigne in the Right and Tâ—tle of the Corone of Englond and Lordship of Iâ—elond and shâ—ld afâ—er his Decesse have descended to the sâ—id Edmund Mortymer Erle of Marche Sonne of the seid Roger Mortymer Erle of Marche as to the next Heire of Blode of the same King Richard after his deth yf the seid Usurpation had not been committed or after the seid Edmund to his next Heire of Blode by the Lawe and Custume of the seid Reaume of Englond 4. The general Opinion of the Nâ—tion in these Times that the Right and Title to the Crown was by Inheritance only and Proximity of Blood caused Henry IV. â—o claim it Rot. Parâ— 1. Hen. IV. n. 53. Rot. Parl. 1 Râ—c III. in Exact Abridgment fol. 712 713 714. al 's descendit be ryght Lyne of the Blâ—de comeynge fro the gude Lord Henry Therde And for the same Reason Richard III. was by the three Estates that is to say the Lords Spi itual and Temporal and Commons in Parliament assembled declared to be undoubted Heir of Richard Duke of York Father to Edward IV. very Inheriter of the Crown of England and Dignity Royal and as in Right King oâ— England by way of Inheritance Tâ— ssel's Câ—ntâ—n fol. 231. All this was insinuated by himself in his Answer to Buckingham's Speech when he took upon him Kingship Likewise Henry VII upon the same Account prefers his Title by Conquest and Succession before that by Act of Parliament which Pope Innocent VIII In Cotton's Library Cleopatra E. 3. in his Bull of Confirmation of his Title says belonged to him non modo jure belli ac notorio indubitato proximo successionis titulo verum etiam omnium Praelatorum Procerum Magnatum Nobilium totiusque ejusdem regni plebis Electione noch decreto statuto ordinatione ipsius Angliae regni trium Statuum in ipsorum Conventu Parlamento nuncupato Bacon's History of Henry VII f. 1. 3. Not only by Right of War being saluted King by the Army in Bosworth-Field and had there King Richard's ornamental Crown put on by Sir William Stanley and the notorious and indubitable next Title of Succession but also by the Election of all the Prelates and Great Men of the who e Commonalty of the Kingdom of England and by a known and decreed Statute and Ordinance of the three Estates of the same Kingdom of England in their Meeting called a Parliament But that he thought himself most safe in the Pope's Confirmation is clear for that in the Thirteenth Year of his Reign he procured the Bull to be renewed and the Act of Parliament confirmed by Pope Alexander VI. Cotton Lib. ut supra under pain of Excommunication and Curse to such as should upon any pretence whatsoever disturb the Peace of the Nation and create Troubles against the Title of Henry VII Henry VIII in all his extravagant Acts concerning his Queens and the Succession founded them in pretended legal Proximity of Blood according to the due course of Inheritance the pretended want of which was the Ground and Suggestion still for passing those Acts. See 25 Hen. VIII cap. 22. 28. Hen. VIII cap. 7. And 35. Hen. VIII cap. 1. 5. Statut. 1. Mar. Sess 2. cap. 4. Where it hath pleased Almighty God the 6th Day of July last past to call out of this transitory Life unto his Mercy our late Sovereign Lord King Edward VI. by and immediately after whose decease the Imperial Crown of this Realm with all Dignities Dominion Hâ—nours Pre-eminencies Prerogatives Stiles Authorities and Jurisdictions to the same united annexed or belonging did not only descend remain and come unto our most dread Sovereign Lady the Queen's Majesty but also the same was then immediately and lawfully invâ—sted deemed and adjâ—dged in Her Highness's most Royal Person by the due Course of Inheritance and by the Laws and Statutes of this Râ—alm 6. Stat. 1. Jac. cap. 1. The Act of Recognition in the First of King James doth not take notice of Henry VII his Title but of his Daughter Margaret's as descended from Elizabeth her Mother Daughter and Heir to Edward IV. and declare that he was lineally rightfully and lawfully descended or the Body of the most excellent Lady Margaret eldest Daughter of the most renowned King Henry VII and the high and noble Princess Queen Elizabeth his Wife eldest Daugâ—ter of King Edward IV. In consideration whereof the Parliament doth acknowledge King James their onâ—y rightful Liege Lord and Sovereign and further say as being bound thereunto both by the Laws of God and Man they do recognize and acknowledge that immediately upon the Dâ—ssolution and Decease of Elizabeth late Queen of England the Imperial Crown of the Realm of England and all the Kingdoms Dominions and Rights belongâ—ng to the same did bâ—â—â—erent Birth-right and lawful and undoubted Succession desâ—â—nd and come to His most Excellent Majesty as being lineaâ—ly justly and â—lawfully next and sole Heir of the Blood Royal of this Realm as it is aforesaid In the First of the same King there was a Conspiracy formed against him by Persons of divers Persuasions Term. Miâ— 1. Jac. kept at Winchester Watson and Clerk two Priests pleaded it could not be Treason because he was not crowned All the Judges resolved That King James being right Heir to the Crown by Descent was immediately upon the death of Queen Elizabeth actually pâ—ssâ—ssed of the Crown and lawful Kâ—ng of Eâ—gland before any Proclamation or Coronation of him which were but Ceremonies For their Treason they were condemned and executed at Winchester the 29th of November These are impregnable Proofs from thâ— Constitution Laws and Statutes of this Nation what the Right and Title to the Crown is and to whom the Succession is due FINIS