whom at that day they were At which demaund both God himselfe and Samuel vvere greuiously offended and Samuel by Gods expresse order protested vnto them in this manner wel quoth be you wil haue a king harken then to this that I wil say Hoc erit ius regis qui imperaturus est vobis this shal be the rlght and power of the king that shal rule ouer you to vvit he shal take frō you your children both sonnes and daughters your fieldes vinyards your haruest also and rents your seruants handmaydes heards of catle and shal giue them to his seruants and you shal cry vnto God in that day from the face of this your king whom you haue chosen and God shal not heare you for that you haue demaunded a king to gouerne you thus far the Prophet Out of al vvhich discourse and spech of the Prophet thes men do gather that a king is nothing so restrayned in his power or limited to law as you haue affirmed but rather that his law is his own vvil as by thes vvordes of the Prophet may appeare and much lesse may the common vvealth chastice or depriue him for exceding the limites of law or doing his vvil seing that here in this place God doth foretel that Princes oftentymes shal commit excesses and iniuries and yet doth he not therfore wil them to chasten or depose them for the same but rather insinuateth that they must take it paciently fot their sinnes and cry to God for remedy and perseuer therin though he do not 〈◊〉 the first harken to them or grant their redresse hitherto the temporal lavvyer Wherunto answered the Ciuilian that he confessed that Belloy other his companions that vvrote in flattery of Princes in thes our dayes did nor only affirme thes things that the temporal lawyer had alleaged and that Princes were lawlesse and subiect to no accompt reason or correction whatsoeuer they did but also vvhich is yet more absurd and pernicious to al common vvealthes that al goods chattels possessions and whatsoeuer els commodityes temporal of the common wealth are properly the kings and that their subiects haue only the vse therof without any propriety at al so as when the king wil he may take it from them by right vvithout iniustice or iniury vvhich assertions do ouer throw wholy the very nature substance of a common vvealth it selfe For first to say that a king is subiect to no law or limitation at al but may do vvhat he wil is against al that I haue alleaged before of the very institution of a commō vvealth which vvas to liue together in iustice and order as I shewed out of Cicero speaking of the first kings Iustitiae fruendae causa bene morati Reges olim sunt constituti For enioying of Iustice were kings appointed in old tyme that vvere of good life but if they be boūd to no iustice at al but must be borne and obeyed be they neuer so wicked then is this end and butte of the common wealth of al royal authority vtterly frustrat then may vve set vp publique murderours rauishers theeues and spoylers to deuowre vs in steed of kings and gouernours to defend vs for such in deede are kings that follow no law but passion and sensualitie and do commit iniustice by their publique authority then finally vvere al thos kings before mentioned both of the Iewes gentiles and christians vnlawfully depriued and ther successors vnlawfully put vp in their places and consequently al Princcs liuing in Christianity at this day who are descended of them are intruders and no lawful Princes By the second saying also that al temporalityes are properly the Princes and that subiects haue only the vse therof without any interest of their owne no lesse absurdityes do follow then of the former assertion for that first it is against the very first principle and foundation of our ciuil law which at the first entrance and beginning maketh this diuision of goods that some are common by nature to al men as the ayer the sea and the like other are publique to al of one citty or country but yet not common to al in general as riuers portes and other such some are of the community of a citty or common wealth but yet not common to euery parttculer person of that citty as common rents theators the publique house and the like some are of none nor properly of any mans goods as churches and sacred things some are proper to particuler men as thos which euery man possesseth of his owne which diuision of Iustinian the Emperor and his most learned lavvyers is not good if the Prince be Lord proprietarie of al nay he that made this diuision being Emperor did great iniury also to himselfe in assigning that to others which by the opinion of Belloy and his fellowes vvas properly truly his owne in that he was Emperor and Lord of the vvorld Besides al this so absurd a saying is this as it ouerthroweth the whole nature of a common wealth it selfe and maketh al subiects to be but very slaues For that slaues and bondmen as Aristotle sayeth in this do differ from freemen that slaues haue only the vse of things vvithout property or interest and cannot acquire or gett to themselues any dominion or true right in any thing for that what soeuer they do gett it accreweth to their master not to theselues and for that the condition of an oxe or an asse is the very same in respect of a poore man that hath no slaue for that the oxe or asse getteth nothing to himselfe but only to his master and can be lord of nothing of that for which he laboreth for this cause wittely also sayed Aristotle that bos aut asinus pauperi agricolae pro seruo est An oxe or an asse is to a poore husbādman in steed of a bondman and so feing that Belloy wil needes haue the state and condicion of al subiects to be like vnto this in respect of their Prince and that they haue nothing in propriety but only the vse and that al dominion is properly the Princes vvhat doth the other then make al subiects not only slaues but also oxen and asses and pecora campi Last of al for I vvil not ouerlode you vvith reasons in a matter so euident if al subiects goods be properly the kings why then vvas Achab and Iezabel king and Queene of Israel so reprehended by Elias so punished by god for taking away Nabothes vineyard seing they tooke but that vvhich was ther owne nay why vvas not Naboth accused of iniquity rebellion and treason for that he did not yeald vp presently his vineyard when his Princes demaunded the same seing it vvas not his but thers why do the kings of Ingland France and Spayne aske money of their subiects in parlaments if they might take it as ther owne why
wherof the first he hath in that he is a man and the other in that he is a Prince For this cause then al common wealthes haue prescribed lawes vnto their Princes to gouerne therby as by a most excellent certayne immutable rule to which sense Cicero said leges sunt inuentae vt omnibus semper vna 〈◊〉 voce loquerentur lawes were inuented to the ende they should speake in one and the 〈◊〉 same sense to al men For which very reason in lyke maner thes lawes haue bin called by Philosophers a rule or square inflexible and by Aristotle in particular a mynde without passion as hath bin said but the Prophet Dauid who was also a Prince king semeth to cal it by the name of Discipline for that as discipline doth keepe al the partes of a man or of a particuler house in order so law vvel ministred keepeth al the partes of a common vvealth in good order and to sheow how seuerely God exacteth this at al Princes handes he sayth these wordes And now learne ye kinges and be instructed you that iudge the world serue God in feare and reioyse in him with trembling embrace ye discipline least he enter into wrath and so ye perish from the way of righteousnes Which wordes being vttered by a prophet and king do conteyne diuers poynts of much cōsideration for this purpose as first that kings and Prince are bound to learne law and discipline and secondly to obserue the same vvith great humility and feare of Gods wrath and thirdly that if they do not they shal perish frō the way of righteousnes as though the greatest plage of al to a Prince weare to lose the way of righteousnes law and reason in his gouerment and to giue himselfe ouer to passion and his owne vvil whereby they are suer to come to shipwrack and thus much of the first helpe The second help that common wealthes haue giuen to their kings and Princes especially in later ages hath bin cerrayne councelles and councellors with whom to consult in matters of most importance as we see the parlaments of Ingland and France the courtes in Spayne and diets in Germany vvithout which no matter of great moment can be concluded and besides this commonly euery king hath his priuy councel whom he is bound to heare and this vvas done to temper somwhat the absolute for me of a Monarchy whose danger is by reason of his sole authority to fal into tiranny as Aristotle vvisely noteth in his fourth booke of politiques shewing the incōuenience or dangers of this gouerment vvhich is the cause that vve haue few or no simple monarchies now in the world especially among Christians but al are mixt lightely with diuers pointes of the other two formes of gouerment also and namely in Ingland al three do enter more or lesse for in that ther is one king or Queene it is a monarchy in that it hath certayne councelles which must be hard it participateth of Aristocratia and in that the commonalty haue their voices and burgesses in parlament it taketh part also of Democratia or populer gouerment al which limitations of the Princes absolute authority as you see do come for the common wealth as hauing authority aboue their Princes for their restraint to the good of the realme as more at large shal be proued hereafter From like authority and for like considerations haue come the limitations of other kings and kingly povver in al tymes and countries from the beginning both touching themselues and their posterity and successors as breefly in this place I shal declare And first of al if we vvil consider the tvvo most renoumed and allowed states of al the world I meane of the Romans and Grecians vve shal finde that both of them began vvith kings but yet vvith far different lawes and restraints about their authorityes for in Rome the kings that succeded Romulus their first founder had as great and absolute authority as ours haue now a dayes but yet their children or next in blood succeded them not of necessity but new kings were chosen partly by the senate and partly by the people as Titus Liuius testifieth so as of three most excellent kings that ensewed immediatly after Romulus to wit Numa Pompilius Tullius Hostilsus Tarqninus Priscus none of them were of the blood royal nor of kyn the one to the other no nor yet Romans borne but chosen rather from among straingers for their vertue and valor and that by election of the senate and consent of the people In Greece and namely among the lacedemonians which vvas the most emynent kingdom among others at that tyme the succession of children after their fathers was more certayne but yet as Aristotle noteth ther authority power was so restrayned by certayne officers of the people named Ephori which commonly vvere fiue in number as they were not only checked and chastined by them if occasion serued but also depriued and some tymes put to death for which cause the said philosopher did iustly mislike this emynent iurisdiction of the Ephori ouer their kings but yet hereby we see vvhat authority the common wealth had in this case and what their meaning vvas in making lawes and restrayning their kings power to wit therby the more to binde them to do iustice which Cicero in his offices vttereth in tbes vvordes Iustitiae fruendae causae apud maiores 〈◊〉 I se Asia in Europe bene morati regesolint sunt constituti c. at cum ius aequabile ab vno viro 〈◊〉 non consequerentur inuentae sunt leges Good kings vvere appoynted in old tyme among our ancestors in Asia and Europe to the end therby to obteyne iustice but when men could not ob teyne equal iustice at one mans handes they inuented lawes The same reason yealdeth the same philosopher in another place not only of the first institution of kingdomes but also of the chainge therof agayne into other gouerments when thes vvere abused Omnes antiquae gentes regibus 〈◊〉 paruerunt c. That is al old nations did liue vnder kingdomes at the beginning which king of gouerment first they gaue vnto the most iust and wisest men which they could finde and also after for loue of them they gaue the same to their posterity ot next in kynne as now also it remayneth vvher kingly gouerment is in vse but other countries which liked not that forme of gouerment and haue shaken of haue done it not that they wil not be vnder any but for that they wil not be euer vnder one only Thus far Cicero and he speaketh this principally in deferice of his-owne cornmō wealth I meane the Roman which had cast of that kinde of gouerment as before hath bin said for the offence they had taken agaynst cessayne kings of thers and first of al agaynst 〈◊〉 himselfe their first founder for 〈◊〉
into Ingland but after this tyme the manner and ceremonies was somwhat altered and made more maiestical in outward shew this especially by king Lewis surnamed the yonger nephew to the foresaid king Phillip who leauing the substance of the action as it vvas before caused diuers external additions of honor and maiestie to be adioyned therunto especially for the coronation of his sonne Phillip the seconde surnamed Augustus whom he caused also to be crowned in his dayes as his grand father Phillip had bin and as himselfe had bin also in his fathers dayes This man among other royal ceremonyes ordeyned the offices of the twelue peeres of France 6. Ecclesiastical and 6. temporal vvho are they which euer since haue had the chiefest places and offices in this great action fot that the fore said Archbishop of Rhemes intituled also Duke of Rhemes hath the first and highest place of al others and annoynteth crowneth the king The bishop Duke of Laon beareth the glasse of sacred oyle The bishop Duke of Langres the crosse The Bishop and earle of Beuais the mantel royal The Bishop Earle of Noyon the kings girdle and last of al the Bishop and Earle of Chalons doth cary the ring and thes are the six ecclesiastical peeres of France with their offices in the coronation The temporal peeres are the Duke of Burgundie deane of the order vvho in this day of coronation holdeth the crowne the Duke of Gasconie Guyene the first banner quartered the Duke of Normandie the 2. banner quartered the Earle of Tholosa rhe golden spurres the Earle of Champanie the banner Royal or standerd of warr and the Earle of flanders the sword royal so as thet are 3. Dukes 3. Earles in euery one of both ranks of spiritual temporal Lords and as Girard noteth the king is apparraled on this day 3. times and in 3 seueral sortes the first as a priest the secōd as a king ād vvarryer the third as a iudge and finally he saith that this solemnitie of anoynting and crowning the king of France is the most mag nificent gorgious and maiestical thing that may be seene in the vvorld for which he referreth vs not only to the particuler coronations of thes two ancient king Phillipps the first second but also to the late coronation of Henry the second father to the last kings of France which is also in printe and in deede is a very goodly and most notable thing to be read though in deede much more to be seen But to say a vvord or two more of Phillip Augustus before I passe any further which happened in the yeare 1179. and in the 25. of the reigne of our king Henry the 2. of Ingland who as the French stories say was present also at this coronation and had his ranck among the peeres as Duke of Normandy and held the kings crowne in his hand one of his sonnes had his ranck also as Duke of Gasconie the forme vsed in this coronation was the very same which is vsed at this day in the admission of the kings of France in recounting wher-of I wil let passe al the particuler ceremonies Which are largely to be read in Francis Belforest in the place before mentioned and I vvil repeate only the kings oth which the said author recounteth in thes wordes The Archbishop of Rhemes being vested in his pontifical attyre and come to the aulter to begin masse wher the king also was vppon a high seat placed he turned to him and said thes wordes in the name of al the cleargie and churches of France Syre that which we require at your handes this day is that you promise vn to vs that you wil kepe al canonical priuileges law and iustice dew to be keept defended as a good king is bound to do in his realme and to euery bishop and church to him committed wherunto the king answered I do promisse and auow to euery one of you and to euery church to you committed that I wil kepe and mainteyne al canonical priuileges law and iustice 〈◊〉 to euery man to the vttermost of my power and by Gods helpe shal defend you as a good king is bound to doe in his realme This being done the king did sweare and make his oth laying his handes vppon the gospel in thes wordes following Au nom de Iesus Christ ie iure promets au peuple christien a moy suiect ces choses c. Which is in Inglish In the name of Iesus Christ I do sweare and promise to al Christian people subiect vnto me thes points ensuning first to 〈◊〉 that al my subiects be kept in the vnion of the church and I wil defend them from al excesse rapine extorsion and iniquity secondly I wil take order that in al iudgments iustice shal be kept with equity and mercy to the end that God of his mercy may conserue vnto me with you my people his holy grace and mercy Thirdly I shal endeuour as much as possibly shal lye in me to chase and driue out of my realme and al my dominions al such as the church hath or shal declare for heretiques as God shal help me and his holy gospels Thus swereth the king and then kysseth the gospels and mediatly is song Te Deum laudamus and after that are said many particuler prayers by the Archbishop and then is the king vested and the ring scepter crowne and other kingly ornaments and ensignes are brought put vppon him with declaration first vvhat they signifie then particuler prayers are made to God that ther signification may be by the king fulfilled And after al ended the Archbishop with the Bishops do blesse him and say thes vvordes vnto him God which reigneth in heauen and gouerneth al kingdomes blesse you c. Be you stable and constant and hold your place and right from hence forth which heere is committed and laid vppon you by the authority of almighty God and by this present tradition and deliuery which we the bishops and other seruants of God do make vnto you of the same and remember you in place conuenient to beare so much more respect reuerence vnto the 〈◊〉 by how much neerer then other men you haue seene 〈◊〉 to approch to Gods aulter to the end that Iesus Christ mediator of God and man may confirme and maynteyne you by the cleargie and people in this your royal seat and throne who being lord of Lords and king of kings make you reigne with him and his father in the life and glory euerlasting Thus saith the Archbishop vnto him and after this he is led by him and the other peares vnto the seat royal wher the crowne is put vppon his head and many other large ceremoneies vsed vvhich may be read in the author a fore said and are to long for this place And yet haue I bin the larger in this matter of France
in Magistrats and for that the former is of nature the other also is of nature Al which is confitmed also by the consent vse of al nations through-out the world which general consent Cicero calleth ipsius vocem naturae the voice of nature herselfe for ther was neuer yet nation found ether of ancient tyme or now in our dayes by the discouery of the Indies or els where among vvhom men liuing together had not some kind of Magestrate or superior to gouerne them which euidently declareth that this poynt of Magestrates is also of nature and from god that created nature which poynt our ciuil law doth proue in like manner in the very begining of our digestes vvher the secōd title of the first booke is de origineiuris ciuilis omnium magestratuum of the begining of the ciuil law and of al magestrates which begining is referred to this first principle of natural instinct and Gods institution And last of al that God did concurr also expresly vvith this instinct of nature our diuines do proue by cleare testimony of holy scripture as vvhen God saith to Salomon by me kings do raigne and S. Paule to the Romans auoucheth that autbority is not but of God and therfore he which resisteth authority resisteth God Which is to be vnderstood of authority power or iutisdiction in it selfe according to the first institution as also vvhen it is lawfully laid vppō any person for otherwise when it is ether vvrongfully taken or vniustly vsed it may be resisted in diuers cases as afterwards more in particuler shal be declared for then it is not law ful authority Thes two poynts then are of nature to wit the common wealth and gouerment of the same by magistrates but vvhat kind of gouermēt ech common vvealth vvil haue whether Democratia vvhich is popular gouerment by the people it selfe as Athens Thebes and many other cyties of Greece had in old tyme as the Cantons of Swizers at this day haue or els Aristocratia vvhich is the gouerment of some certayne chosen number of the best as the Romans many yeares vvere gouerned by Consuls and senators and at this day the states of this countrey of Holland do imitate the same or els Monarchia vvhich is the regiment of one and this agayne eyther of an Emperor King Duke Earle or the like thes particuler formes of gouerment I say are not determyned by God or nature as the other two poyntes before for thē they should be al one in al nations as the other are seing God and nature are one to al as often hath bin said but thes particuler formes are left vnto euery nation and countrey to chuse that forme of gouerment which they shal like best and think most fit for the natures and conditions of their people vvhich Aristotle proueth through out al the second and fourth bookes of his politiques very largly laying dovvne diuers kinds of gouerments in his dayes as namely in Greece that of the Milesians Lacedemonians Candians and others and shevving the causes of their differences which he attributeth to the diuersity of mens natures customes educations and other such causes that made them make choise of such or such forme of gouerment And this might be proued also by infinit other examples both of tymes past and present and in al nations and countryes both christian and otherwise which haue not had only differēt fassions of gouermēts the one frō the other but euen among themselues at one tyme one forme of gouerment and an other at other tymes for the Romans first had Kings and after reiecting them for their euil gouerment they chose 〈◊〉 vvhich vvere two gouernours for euervycare vvhose authority yet they limited by a multitude of senators which vvere of their counsel and thes mens power vvas restrayned also by adding tribunes of the people and some tyme dictators and finally they came to be gouerned last of al by Emperors The like might be said of Carthage in Africa and many cityes and common wealthes of Greece which in diuers seasons and vppon diuers causes haue taken different formes of gouerment to themselues The like vve see in Europe at this day for in only Italye what different formes of gouerment haue you Naples hath a kinge for their soueraine Rome the pope and vnder him one senator in place of so many as vvere wont to be in that common vvealth Venice and Genua haue senators Dukes but litle authority haue ther Dukes Florence Farara Mantua Parma Vrbin and Sauoy haue their Dukes only without senators and there power is absolut Milan vvas once a kingdom but now a Dukedom the like is of Burgundy Lorayne Bauire Gascony and Britayne the lesser al which once had their distinct kings and now haue Dukes for their supreme gouernours The like may be said of al Germany that many yeares together had one king ouer al which now is deuided into so many Dukedomes Earldomes other like titles of supreme Princes But the contrary is of Castile Aragon Portugal Barcelona and orher kingdomes this day in Spayne which vvere first earldomes only and after Dukedomes and then kingdomes and now a gayne are al vnder one Monarchy The like is of Boeme and Polonia which vvere but Dukedomes in old tyme and now are kingdomes The like may be said of France also after the expulsion of the Romans vvhich was first a monarchy vnder Pharamond their first king and so continued for many yeares vnder Clodion Merouys Childrik and Clodouaeus ther first christened kings but after they deuided it into fower kingdomes to vvit one of Paris an other of Suessons the third of Orleans and the fourth of Metts and so it continued for diuers yeares but yet aftervvards they made it one monarchy agayne England also vvas first a monarchy vnder the Britaynes and then a prouince vnder the Romans and after that deuided into seauen kingdomes at once vnder the Saxons and novv a monarchy agayne vnder the Inglish and al this by Gods permission and approbation vvho in token therof suffred his owne peculier people also of Israel to be vnder diuers manners of gouerments in diuers tymes as first vnder Patriarques Abraham Isaac and Iacob then vnder Captaynes as Moses Iosua and the like then vnder iudges as Othoniel Aiod and Gedion then vnder high Priestes as Hely and Samuel then vnder kings as Saul Dauid and the rest then vnder captaines highe priests agayne as Zorobabelludas Machabeus his brethren vntil the gouerment vvas lastely taken from them and they brought vnder the povver of the Romans and forraine kinges appoynted by them So as of al this ther can be no doubt but that the common vvealth hath power to chuse their owne fassion of gouerment as also to change the same vppon resonable causes as we see they haue done in al tymes and countryes and God no
doubt approueth vvhat the realme determineth in this poynt for otherwise nothing could be certaine for that of thes changes doth depend al that hath succeeded sythens In like manner is it euident that as the common wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her gouerment so hath she also to limite the same vvith vvhat lavves and conditions she pleaseth wherof ensueth the great diuersity of authority and power vvhich ech one of the former gouerments hath as for example the Consuls of Rome vvere but for one yeare other officers and Magestrates vvere for more or lesse tyme as their commō wealth did alott them The Dukes of Venice at this day are for their liues except in certayne cases wherin they may be deposed thos of Genua only for two years and their power as I haue said is very smal and much limited and their heyres haue no clayme or pretence at al after them to that dignity as the children and next of kinne of other Dukes of Italy haue though in different sort also for that the Dukedomes of Ferara Vrbin and Parma are limited only to heyres male and for defect therof to returne to the pope or Sea of Rome Florence and Mantua for like defects are to returne to the empire and do not passe to the heyrs femal or to the next of kynne as Sauoy and some others do Aud now if we respect God and nature as wel might al thes gouerments follow one law as so different for that neyther God not nature prescribeth any of thes particuler formes but concurreth with any that the cōmon wealth it selfe appoynteth and so it is to be beleued that God and nature concurred as vvel with Italy when it had but one Prince as now when it hath so many and the like with Germany and the like also with Swizerlād which once was one common vvealth only vnder the dukes and Marqueses of Austria and now are deuided into thirtene Cantons or common wealthes vnder populer Magestrates of their owne as hath bin said so as when men talke of a natural Prince or natural successor as many tymes I haue hard the vvord vsed if it be vnderstood of one that is borne within the same Realme or countrey and so of our owne natural blood it hath some sense though he may be both good or badd and none hath bin worse or more cruel many tymes then home borne Princes but if it be ment as though any Prince had his particuler gouerment or interest to succeed by institutiō of nature it is rediculous for that nature giueth it not as hath bin declared but the particuler constitution of euery cōmon wealth with-in it selfe and so much for this first poynt which must be the ground to al the rest that I haue to say OF THE FORME OF MONARCHIES AND KINGDOMES IN PARTICVLER AND THE DIF ferent lawes wherby they are to be obteyned holden and gouerned in dyuers countries accordinge as eche common wealth hath chosen established CAP. II. AL that hitherto hath bin spoken hath appertayned to al princely and supreme gouerment in general but now for that our matter in question is concerning the succession to a kingdome good reason that we should reduce our speech vnto this forme of gouerment in particuler First of al then is to be considered that of al other formes of gouerment the monarchy of a king in it selfe appeareth to be the most excellent and perfect and so do hold not only Aristotle in his fornamed bookes of pollitiques namely in his third with this only condicion that he gouerne by lawes but Seneca also and Plutarch in his morales namely in that special treatise wher-in he discusseth an seni sit Respub tractanda whether an old man ought to take vppon him the gouerment of a common wealth or no wher he saith that regnum inter omnes respub consumatissima prima est a kingdome is the most perfect common wealth among al other the very first that is to say the most perfect for that it hath most commodities and least inconueniences in it selft of any other gouerment and it is the fitst of al other for that al people commonly made their choise at the begining of this kind of gouerment so as of al other it is most ancient for so we read that among the Sytians Medes and Persians their first gouernours were kings and when the children of Israel did aske a kynge at the hands of Samuel which vvas a thousand yeares before the comming of Christ they alleaged for one reason that al nations round about them had kings for their gouernours and at the very same tyme the chiefest cyties and common vvealths of Greece as the lacedemonians Athenians Corinthians and others wherof diuers afterwards tooke other gouerments vnto themselues for the abuses in kingly gouermet committed at that tyme vvere gouerned by kings as at large proueth Dyonisius Halicarnasseus Cornelius Tacitus Cicero others The Romans also began vvith kings as before I haue noted and the reason of this is for that as our Christian doctors do gather especially S. Hierome and S. Chrisostome this kind of gouerment resembleth most of al the gouerment of God that is but one it representeth the excellency of one sonne that lightneth al the plannets of one soule in the body that gouerneth al the powers and members therof and finally they shew it also to be most conforme vnto nature by example of the bees which do choose vnto themselues a kinge and do liue vnder a monarchy as the most excellentest of al other gouerments to which purpose also I haue hard alleaged somtymes by diuers those wordes of S. Peter Subiecti estote omni humanae creaturae propter Deum siue regi quasi precellenti siue ducibus ab eo missis c. Be you subiect of euery humane creature for Gods cause whether it be to a king as the most excellent or to Dukes sent by God for the punishment of euil men and praise of the good Out of which wordes some do note two points first that as one the one side the Apostle doth plainely teach that the magistrates authority is from God by his first institutiō in that he sayeth vve must be subiect to them for Gods cause so on the other side he calleth it a humane creature or a thing created by man for that by mans free choise this particuler forme of gouerment as al other also is appoynted in euery common wealth as before hath bin declared and that by mans election and consent the same is layd vppon some particuler man or vvoman according to the lawes of euery countrey al which maketh it rightly to be called both a humane creature and yet from God The second poynt which diuers do note out of thes wordes is that S. Peter calleth a king most excellent which thoughe it may be vnderstood in rcspect of the Dukes authority wherof
immediatly ther followeth mentiō yet may it seeme also to be taken and verified of kingly authority in respect of al other gouerments seing that at this tyme when the Apostle wrote this epistle the chiefe gouernour of the world vvas not called king but emperour and therfore seing in such a tyme S. Peter affirmeth the state of kingly gouerment to be most excellent it may seme he meant it absolutly signifying therby that this is the best kind of gouerment among al others though to confesse the truth betwene the title of king and Emperor ther is litle or no difference in substance but only in name for that the authority is equal euery king is an Emperor in his owne kingdome And finally the excellency of this gouerment aboue al other is not only proued by the perfection therof in it selfe as for that it is most ancient simple and conforme vnto nature most resembling the gouerment of God himselfe as hath bin said but by the effects also and vtility that it bringeth vnto the subiects with farr lesse inconueniences then any other forme of gouerment what-soeuer if vve compare them together for in the monarchy of one king ther is more vnity agreement and conformity and therby also celerity commonly in dispaching of busines and in defending the cōmon vvealth then vvher many heades be lesse passions also in one man then in many as for example in Democratia vvher the common people do beare the cheife sway which is bellua multorum capitum as Cicero wisely said that is a beast of many heades ther is nothing but sedition trouble tumults outrages and iniustices committed vppon euery litle occasion especially vvher crafty and conning men may be admitted to incense or assuage them with sugred vvords such as were the Orators in Athens and other cyties of Greece that had this gouermēr and the Tribunes of the people of Rome and other such populer and plausible men vvho could moue the vvaues rayse vp the windes and inkindle the fier of the vulgar peoples affections passions or furies at their pleasure by which vve see that of al other common vvealthes these of populer gouerment haue soonest come to ruine vvhich might be shevved not only by old examples of Greec Asia and Africa but also of many cyties in Italy as Florence Bolonia Siena Pisa Arezzo Spoleto Perugia Padua and others vvhich vppon the fall or diminution of the Roman Empire vnder which they vvere before tooke vnto themselues populer gouerments vvherin they vvere so tossed vvith continual sedition mutines and bāding of factions as they could neuer haue ende therof vntil after infinite murthers massacres and inundatiō of blood they came in the ende to be vnder the monarchy of some one Prince or other as at this day they remayne so that of al other gouerments this is the vvorst The second forme which is called Oligarchia or Aristocratia for that a few and those presumed to be the best are ioyned together in authority as it doth participate some thinge of both the other gouermēts to wit of monarchia and Democratia or rather tempereth them both so hath it both good and euil in it but yet inclineth more to the euil for the disunion that commonly by mans infirmity malice is among thos heades for vvhich cause the states before named of Venice and Genua vvhich were wont to haue simply this gouerment of Aristocratia in that their regiment was by certaine chose senators were inforced in the end to chuse Dukes also as heades of their senates for auoyding of dissention and so they haue them at this day though their authority be but smale as hath bin said We see also by the examples of Carthage Rome wher gouerment of Aristocratia tooke place that the diuision and factions among the senators of Carthage was the cause why ayde and succor was not sent to Hanibal their Captaine in Italy after his so great and important victory at Cannas which was the very cause of the sauing of the Roman Empire and the losse of their owne As also afterwardes the emulations discord and disunion of the Roman senators among themselues in the affaires and contentions of Marius and Silla and of Pompey and Cesar was the occasion of al their destruction of their common vvealth with them Euident then it is that of al other gouerments the monarchy is the best least subiect to the inconueuiences that other gouerments haue and if the prince that gouerneth alone hath supreme authority to himselfe as he resembleth God in this poynte of sole gouermēt so could he resemble him also in wise discret and iust gouerment and in ruling without passion no doubt but that nothing more excellent in the world could be desired for the prefect filicity of his subiects but for that a king or Prince is a man as others be and therby not only subiect to errors in iudgment but also to passionat affections in his wil for this cause it was necessary that the common vvealth as it gaue him this great power ouer them so it should assigne him also the best helpes that might be for directing and rectifying both his wil and iudgment and make him therin as like in gouerment to God whom he representeth as mans fraylty can reach vnto For this consideration they assigned to him first ofal the assistance and direction of law wherby to gouerne which law Aristotle saith Est mens quaedam nullo perturbata affectu it is a certayne mynde disquieted with no disordinate affection as mens myndes commonly be for that when a law is made for the most part it is made vppon dew consideration and deliberation and without perturbation of euil affections as anger enuy hatred rashnes or the like passions and it is referred to some good end and commodity of the common vvealth which law being once made remayneth so stil without alteration or partial affectiō being indifferent to al and partial to none but telleth one tale to euery man in this it resembleth the perfection as it were of God himselfe for the which cause the said philosopher in the same place addeth a notable wise sayng to wit that he which ioyneth a law to gouerne with the Prince ioyneth God to the Prince but he that ioyneth to the Prince his affection to gouerne ioyneth a beast for that mens affections and concupiscenses are common also to beastes so that a Prince ruling by law is more then a man or a man deifyed and a Prince ruling by affections is lesse then a man or a man brutified In an other place also the same philpsopher sayeth that a Prince that leaueth law and ruleth himselfe others by his owne appetite and affections of al creatures is the worst and of al beasts is the most furious and dangerous for that nothing is so outragious as iniustice armed and no armor is so strong as witt and authority
as Alexander the great conquered the most parte of Asia in the space of 9. or 10. yeares so did this Henry conquere France in lesse then the like tyme. I might recon also in this number of Princes deposed for defect in gouermēt though otherwise he vvere no euel man in lyfe this king Henry the fourths nephew I meane king Henry the sixt vvho after almost forty yeares reigne vvas deposed and imprisoned and put to death also together vvith his sonne the Prince of wales by Edward the fourth of the howse of yorke the same was confirmed by the commons and especially by the people of London and afterwards also by publique act of parliament in respect not only of the title which king Edward pretended but also and especially for that king Henry did suffer himselfe to be ouerruled by the Queene his wife and had broken the articles of agrement made by the parlament betwene him and the Duke of Yorke and solemnly sworē on both sides the 8. of Octob. in the yeare 1459. In punishment vvherof and of his other negligent and euel gouermēt though for his owne particuler life he vvas a good man as hath bin said sentence was giuen agaynst him partly by force and partly by law and king Edward the fourth vvas put in his place who was no euel king as al Inglish men vvel know but one of the renoumedst for martial actes and iustice that hath worne the Inglish crowne But after this man agayne ther fel an other accident much more notorious vvhich was that Richard Duke of Glocester this king Edwards yonger brother did put to death his two nephewes this mans children to vvit king Edward the fifth and his litle brother made him selfe king and albeit he synned greuously by taking vppon him the crowne in this wicked manner yet when his nephewes were once dead he might in reason seeme to be lawful king both in respect that he was the next male in blood after his said brother as also for that by diuers acts of parlament both before and after the death of thos infantes his title vvas authorized and made good and yet no man vvil say I thinke but that he vvas lawfully also deposed agayne afterward by the cōmō wealth which called out of France Henry Earle of Richmond to chastise him and to put him downe and fo he did and tooke from him both life and kingdome in the fielde and vvas king himselfe after him by the name of king Henry the seuenth and no man I suppose vvil say but that he vvas lawfully king also vvhich yet cannot be except the other might lawfully be deposed moreouer as I sayd at the beginning I vvould haue you consider in al thes mutations what men commonly haue succeded in the places of such as haue bin deposed as namely in Ingland in the place of thos fiue kings before named that vvere depriued to vvit Iohn Edward the second Richard the second Henry the sixt and Richard the third ther haue succeded the three Henryes to wit the third fourth and seuenth two Edwards the third and fourth al most rare valiant Princes who haue donne infinit importanr acts in their cōmon vvealthes and among other haue raysed many houses to nobility put downe others changed states both abroad and at home distributed ecclesiastical dignityes altred the course of discent in the blood royal and the like al which was iniust and is voyd at this day if the chainges and depriuations of the former Princes could not be made and consequently none of thes that do pretende the crowne of Ingland at this day can haue any title at al for that from thos men they discende vvho were put vp in place of the depriued And this may be sufficient for proofe of the two principal poynts which you required to be discussed in the beginning of this spech to wit that lawful Princes haue oftentymes by their common wealthes bin lawfully deposed for misgouerment and that God hath allowed and assisted the same with good successe vnto the weal publique and if this be so or might be so in kings lawfully set in possession then much more hath the said common wealth power authority to alter the succession of such as do but yet pretend to that dignity if ther be dew reason and causes for the same which is the head poynt that first we began to treate of saide the Ciuilian and with this ended his speech vvithout saying any more VVHER IN CONSISTETH PRINCIPALLY THE LAVFVLNES OF PROCEEDING AGAYNST Princes which in the former chapter is mētioned what interest Princes haue in their subiect 's goods or liues how othes doth binde or may be broken by subiects towards Princes and finally the difference betwene a good king and a Tirant CHAP. IIII. VVHEN the Ciuilian had ended his speech the temporal lawyer looked vppon the stāders by to see whether any would reply or no and perceauing al to hold ther peace he began to say in this māner Truly Syr I cannot deny but the examples are many that you haue alleaged and they seme to proue sufficiently that which you affirmed at the beginning to wit that the Princes by you named were depriued and put downe by their common vvealthes for ther euel gouerment And good successors commonly raysed vp in their places and that the common wealth had authority also to do it I do not greatly doubt at least wise they did it de facto and now to cal thes factes in question were to embroyle and turne vp-side-downe al the states of Christen dom as you haue wel signified but yet for that you haue added this vvord lawfully so many tymes in the course of your narration I vvould you tooke the payne to tel vs also by vvhat law they did the same seing that Belloy whom you haue named before and some other of his opinion do affirme that albeit by nature the common vvealth haue authority ouer the Prince to chuse and appoynt him at the beginning as you haue vvel proued out of Aristotle and other vvayes yet hauing once made him and giuen vp al their authority vnto him he is now no more subiect to ther cortection or restraynt but remayneth absolute of himselfe without respect to any but only to god alone vvhich they proue by the example of euery particuler man that hath authority to make his Master or Prince of his inferior but not afterwards to put him downe agayne or to depriue him of the authority vvhich he gaue him though he should not beare himselfe vvel and gratefully but discourtious rather iniuriously towards him that gaue him first this authority To which also they do alleage the speech of the prophet Samuel in the first booke of the kings vvher the people of Israel demaunded to haue a king to gouerne ouer them as other nations round about them had and to leaue the gouerment of the high Prieste vnder
are thos contributions termed by the names of subsidies helpes beneuolences lones prests contributions and the like if al be dew and not voluntary of the subiects parte How haue parlaments oftentymes denyed to their Princes such helpes of money as they demaunded Why are their iudges appoynted to determyne matter of sutes and pleas between the Prince and his subiects if al be his and the subiect haue nothing of his owne And last of al why doth the Cannon Law which is a part also of my profession and receaued in most countries of the vvorld so straightly inhibit al Princes vppon payne of excommunication to impose new impositions taxes vppon ther people without great consideration and necessity and free consent of the giuers if al be the Princes and nothing of the subiect nay whybe al Princes generally at this daye prohibited to alienat any thing of their owne crowne without consent of ther people if they only be Lords of al and the people haue interest in nothing And hereby also vve may gather what the Prophet Samuel meant when he threatned the Iewes with the disorders of kings that should raigne ouer them not that thes disorders were lawful or appertayned to a rightious king but that seing they refused to be vnder the moderate gouermēt of their high priests other gouernors which God had giuen them hitherto and required to be ruled by kings as other heathen nations of Egypt Babilon Syria and Persia were whos manner of gouerment not only Historiographers but Philosophers also and Aristotle among the rest doth note to haue bin very tyranical yet for that the Iewes would needs haue that gouerment as a matter of more pompe and glory then that which hitherto they had had Samuel did first insinuate vnto them what extorsion and wickednes thos heathen kings did vse commonly ouer ther people in taking their childrē seruants wiues goods and the like from them and that many kings of Israel should do the like and take it for ther right and souerainty and should oppresse and tyrānise ouer them and inforce them to cry out to God for helpe and they should not find remedy for that so heddyly they had demaunded this change of gouerment which highly displeased almighty God and this is the true meaning of that place if it be vvel considered and not to authorize herby iniustice or wickednes in any king seing the principal poynts recorded to al Princes kings through out the whole course of scripture are diligere iudictum iustitiam apprehendere disciplinam facere veritatem that is to saye to loue iudgment and iustice to admit discipline to execute truth and this is the instruction that God gaue to the Iewes in Deutronomy for their kings when they should haue them which God foretould many yeares before they had any and this is the admonition that king Dauid left vnto his sonne and successor Salomon at his death and by him to al other kings and Princcs and for want of obseruing thes points of iudgment iustice discipline truth vve see not only Achab and Iezabel Before mentioned greuiously punished but many other kings also by God himselfe as Achaz Manasses Ioachim and the like which had not bin iustice on Gods part so to punish them if it had bin lawful for them to vse that manner of proceeding towards their people as thes good instructors of Princes in our dayes most fondly and wickedly do affirme and thus much for that place But to the first point which you asked by vvhat law the common wealthes that are mentioned in the former chapters did punish their euel Priuces I haue answered you before that it is by al law both diuine and humane diuine for that God doth approue that forme of gouerment which euery common vvealth doth chuse vnto it selfe as also the conditions statutes and limitations vvhich it selfe shal appoynt vnto her Princes as largely before hathe bin declared And by al humane law also for that al law both natural national and positiue doth teach vs that Princes are subiect to law order and that the common vvealth which gaue them ther authority for the commō good of al may also restrayne or take the same away agayne if they abuse it to the common cuel And vvheras thes men saye that like as if a priuate man should make his inferior or equal to be his Prince he could not after restrayne the same agayne and so nether the commō wealth hauing once deliuered away her authority I answere first that the comparison is not altogether like for that a priuat man though he giue his voice to make a Prince yet he being but one maketh not the Prince vvholy as the common vvealth doth and therfore no maruaile though it lye not in a particuler mans hād to vnmake him agayne besides this a priuat man hauing giuē his voice to make his Prince remayneth subiect and inferior to the same but the vvhole body though it be gouerned by the Prince as by the head yet is in not inferior but superior to the Prince nether so giueth the common vvealth her authority and power vp to any Prince that she depriueth her selfe vtterly of the same vvhen neede shall require to vse it for her defence for vvhich shee gaue it And finally which is the cheefest reason of al the very ground and foundation in deede of al kings authority among christians the power and anthority vvhich the Prince hath from the common wealth is in very truth not absolute but potestas vicaria or deligata as vve Ciuilians cal it that is to say a power delegate or power by commissiō from the commō wealth which is giuen vvith such restrictions cautels and conditions yea vvith such playne exceptions promises and othes of both parties I meane betwene the king and common wealth at the day of his admission or coronation as if the same be not kept but vvilfully broken on ether part then is the other not bounde to obserue his promise nether though neuer so solemly made or sworne for that in al bargaines agreements and contracts wher one parte is bound mutually and reciprocally to the other by oth vow or condition ther if one side go from his promise the other stādeth not obliged to performe his and this is so notorious by al law both of nature and nations and so cōform to al reason and equity that it is put among the very rules of both the Ciuil and cannon law vvher it is said frustra fidem sibi quis postulat seruari ab eo cui sidem à se prestitam seruare recusat He doth in vaine require promisse to be kept vnto him at an other mans hands to vvhom he refuseth to performe that which himselfe promised and agayne Non abstringitur quis iuramento ad implendum quod iur auit si ab alio parte non impletur cuius respectu praebuit iur amentum A
he approueth also the same in other realmes vvhen iust occasions are offred either for his seruice the good of the people and realme or els for punishment of the sinnes and wickednes of some princes that the ordinary line of succession be altred Now then to passe on further and to begyn with the kingdomes of Spayne supposing euer this ground of Gods ordenance as hath bin declared first I say that Spayne hath had three or foure races or discents of kings as France also and Ingland haue had and the first race was from the Gothes which began their raigne in Spayne after the expulsion of the Romans about the yeare of Christ 416. to whō the Spaniard referreth al his old nobility as the french man doth to the German Franckes and the Inglish to the Saxons which entred France and Ingland in the very same age that the other did Spayne the race of Gothysh kynges indured by the space of 300. years vntil Spayne was lost vnto the Moores The second race is from Don Pelayo that was chosen first king of Asturias and of the mountayne countrey of Spaine after the distruction therof by the Mootes about the yeare of Christ 〈◊〉 as before hath bin touched which race contynewed increased added kingdome vnto kingdome for the space of other three hundred yeares to wit vntil the yeare of Christ 1034. when Don Sancho may or king of Nauarra at vnto his power the Earldome also of Aragon and Castilia and made them kingdomes and deuided them among his children and to his second sonne named Don Fernando surnamed afterward the great he gaue not only the said Earldome of Castilia with title of kingdome but by mariynge also of the sister of Don Dermudo king of Leon and Asturias he ioyned al those kingdomes together so began from that day forward the third race of the kings of Nauar to reigne in Castel and so indured for syuehundred yeares vntil the yeare of Christ 1540. whē the house of Austria entred to reigne ther by mariage of the daughter and heyre of Don Ferdinando surnamed the Catholique and this was the fourth race of Spanish kings after the Romans which endureth vntil this day And albeit in al thes foure races and ranckes of royal discents diuers exāples might be alleaged for manifest proofe of my purpose yet wil I not deale whith the first race for that it is euident by the councels of Toledo before alleaged which were holden in that very time that in those dayes expresse election was ioyned with succession as by the deposition of king Suintila and putting back of al his children as also by the election approbation of king Sisinando that was further of by succession hath bin insinuated before in the fyft councel of that age in Toledo it is decreed expresly in these wordes Si quis talia meditatus fuerit talking of pretending to be king quem nec electio omnium perficit nec Gothicae gentis nobilitas ad hunc honoris apicem trahit sit consortio Catholicorum priuatus diuino anathemate condemnatus If any man shal imagin said thes fathers or go about to aspire to the kingdome whom the election choise of al the 〈◊〉 doth not make perfect not the nobility of the Gotish nation doth draw to the height of this dignity let him be depriued of al Catholique society and damned by the curse of almighty God by which woords is insinuated that not only the nobility of Gotish blood or neernes by succession was required for the making of ther king but much more the choise or admission of al the realme wherin this councel putteth the perfection of his title The like determinatiō was made in an other councel at the same place before this that I haue alleaged the vvordes are these Nullus apud nos presumptione regnum arripiat sed defuncto in pace principe optimates gentis cum sacerdotibus successorem regni communi concilio constituant Which in Inglish is thus let no man with vs snatche the kingdome by presumption but the former Prince being dead in peace let the nobility of the nation together with the Priests and cleargie appoint the successor of the kingdome by common councel which is as much to say as if he had said let no man enter vppon the kingdome by presumption of succession alone but let the Lords temporal and spiritual by common voice see vvhat is best for the vveal publique Now then according to thes ancient decrees albeit in the second race of Don Pelayo the law of succession by propinquity of blood was renewed and much more established then before as the ancient bishop of Tuys and Molina and other spanish vvriters do testifie yet that the next in blood was oftentymes put back by the common wealth vppon iust causes thes examples following shal testifie as breefly recoūted as I can possibly Don Pelayo died in the yeare of our Lord 737. and left a sonne named Don Fauila who vvas king after his father and reigned two yeares only After whos death none of his children were admited for king thoughe he left diuers as al writers do testifie But as Don Lucas the Bishop of Tuy a very ancient author vvriteth Aldefonsus Catholicus ab vniuer so populo Gothorum eligitur that is as the chronicler Moralis doth translat in spanish Don Alonso surnamed the Catholique was chosen to be king by al voices of the Gotish nation This Don Alonso was sonne in law to the former king Fauila as Morales sayeth for that he had his daughter Erneenesenda in mariage he was preferred before the kings owne sonnes only for that they were yonge vn-able to gouerne as the said historiographer restifyeth And how wel this fel out for the cōmon wealth and how excellent a king this Don Alonso proued Morales sheweth at large from the tenth chapter of his thirteenth booke vntil the 17. and Sebastianus Bishop of Salamança that liued in the same tyme writeth that of his valiant acts he was surnamed the great To this famons Don Alonso succeded his sonne Don Fruela the first of that name who was a noble king for 10. yeares space and had diuers excellent victories against the Moores but afterward declining to tyrannie he became hate ful to his subiects and for that he put to death wrongfully his owne brother Don Vimerano a Prince of excellent partes and rarely beloued of the Spaniards he was him selfe put downe and put to death by them in the yeare of Christ 768. And albeit this kyng left two goodly children behinde him which were lawfully begotten vppō his Queene Dona Munia the one of them a sonne called Don Alonso the other a daughter called Dona Ximea yet for the hatred conceaued against ther father neyther of them was admitted by the realme to succede him but rather his cosen german named Don Aurelio
solemnities and feastes that were celebrated at ther seueral natiuities so as it seemeth ther can be no ertor in this matter The 2. reason is for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly vvise and discreet prince notwithstanding that some authors cal him crokback and that he vvas highly in the fauour both of his father king Henry as also of his brother king Edward and employed by them in many great warres and other affayres of state both in France other where vvhich argueth that ther was no such great defect in him as should moue his father and the realme to depriue him of his succession Thirdly vve reade that king Henry procured by diuers waies and meanes the aduancement of this L. Edmond as giuing him the earldomes of Lecester Darby besides that of Lancaster as also procuring by al meanes possible with exceding great charges to haue him made king of Naples Sicilie by pope Innocentius which had bin no pollicy to haue done if he had bin put back from his inheritance in Ingland for that it had bin to haue armed him against his brother the king Fourthly we see that at the death of his father king Henry the third this Lord Edmond vvas principally left in charge with the realme his elder brother prince Edward being scarsly returned frō the warr of Asia at what tyme he had good occasion to chalēg his owne right to the crowne if he had had any seing he wanted no power therūto hauing three goodly sonnes at that tyme aliue borne of his wife Queene Blanch dowager of Nauarre vvho had bin marryed before to Henry king of Nauarre and contie of Champaine to whom she had borne only one daughter that vvas marryed to Phillip le bel king of France But vve shal neuer reade that either he or any of his children made any such clayme but that they liued in very good agreement high grace vvith king Edward the first as his children did also vvith king Edward the second vntil he began to be mis-led in gouerment and then the two sonnes of this Lord Edmond I meane both Thomas and Henry that successiuely vvere earles of Lancaster made vvarr vppon the said Edward the second and vvere the principal doers in his deposition in setting vp of his sonne Edward the third in his place at vvhat tyme it is euidēt that they might haue put in also for themselues if there title had bin such as this report maketh it A fift reason is for that if this had bin so that Edmond earle of Lancaster had bin the elder brother then had the controuersie betweene the two houses of York and Lancaster bin most cleare and vvithout al doubt at al for then had the house of Yorke had no pretence of right in the vvorlde and then vvere it euident that the heyres general of Blanch duchesse of Lancaster vvife of Iohn of Gaunt to wit the discendentes of lady Phillip her daughter that vvas marryed into Portugal these I say and none other were apparent and true heyres to the crowne of Ingland at this day and al the other of the house of Yorke vsurpers as wel king Henry the 7. as al his posterity ofspring for that none of them haue 〈◊〉 of the said Blanch as is manifest And therfore lastly the matter standeth no doubt as Polidor holdeth in the later ende of the life of king Henry the third vvhere hauing mētioned these two sonnes Edward Edmōd he addeth these wordes Ther wanted not certayne men long tyme after this that affirmed this Edmond to be the elder sonne to king Henry the third and to haue bin depriued of his inheritance for that he was deformed in body but these thinges were feyned to the end that king Henry the fourth that came by his mothers side of this Edmond might seeme to haue come to the kingdome by right whereas in decd he gat it by force Thus saith Polidor in this place but aftervvard in the begining of the life of the said K. Henry the 4. he sayeth that some vvould haue had king Henry to haue pretended this title among other reasons but that the more part accompting it but a meare fable it vvas omitted Novv then it being cleere that of these two sonnes of king Henry the third prince Edward vvas the elder and lawful heyre it remayneth only that vve set downe their seueral discents vnto the tymes of king Edward the third and his children in whose dayes the dissention controuersie betweene these royal houses of Yorke and Lancaster began to break fourth And for the issue of Edward that vvas king after his father by the name of king Edward the first it is euident that albeit by two seueral vviues he had a dosen children male and femal yet only his fourth sonne by his first vvife called also Edward vvho vvas king after him by the name of king Edward the second left issue that remayned which Edward the second being afterward for his euel gouerment deposed left issue Edward the third vvho vvas made king by election of the people in his place and after a long and prosperous reigne left diuers sonnes vvherof after vve shal speak and among them his third sonne named Iohn of Gaunt married lady Blanch daughter and heyre of the house of lancaster and of the fornamed Lord Edmond Crouchback by vvhich Blanch Iohn of Gant became duke of lancaster so as the lines of these tvvo bretheren Edward and Edmond did meete and ioyne againe in the fourth discent as novv shall appeare by declaration of the issue of the foresaid L. Edmond Edmond then the second sonne of K. Henry the third being made county palatine of Lancaster as also earle of Lecester and of Darby by his father king Henry as hath bin said had issue three sonnes to vvit Thomas Henry and Iohn among vvhom he deuided his three states making Thomas his eldest sonne county palatine of Lancaster Henry earle of Lecester Iohn earle of Darby But Thomas the eldest Iohn the yongest dying vvithout issue al three states fel againe vppon Henry the second sonne vvhich Henry had issue one fonne and three daughters his sonne vvas named Henry the second of that name earle of Lancaster and made duke of Lancaster by king Edward the third and he had one only daughter heyre named Blanch vvho vvas marryed vnto Iohn of Gant as before hath bin said But Duke Henries three sisters named Ioan Mary and Elenor vvere al marryed to diuers principal men of the realme for that Ioan vvas marryed to Iohn L. Maubery of vvhom are descended the Howards of the house of Norfolk at this day and Mary vvas marryed to Henry lord Pearcy from vvhom cometh the house of the Earles of Northumberland and Elenor vvas married to Richard earle of Arundel vvhence is issued also by his mothers side the Earle of Arundel that novv is so as of this
and she neece once remoued he preuailed in like manner and thus farr Gerrard historiographes of France And no doubt but if we consider examples that fell out euen in this very age only concerning this controuersie betweene the vncle and nephew we shal finde store of them for in Spaine not long before this tyme to wit in the yeare of Christ 1276. vvas that great and famous determination made by Don Alonso the wise eleuenth king of that name and of al his realme and nobility in their couites or parlament of Segouia mentioned before by the Ciuilian wherin they disinherited the children of the prince Don Alonso de la Cerda that dyed as our prince Edward did before his father and made heyre apparent Don Sancho brauo yonger brother to the said Don Alonso and vncle to his children the two yong Cerdas Which sentēce standeth euen vnto this day and king Phillip enioyeth the crowne of Spaine therby and the dukes of Medina Celi and their race that are discendentes of the said two Cerdas vvhich vvere put backe are subiects by that sentence and not soueraines as al the world knoweth The like controuersie fel out but very litle after to vvit in the tyme of king Edward the third in frāce though not about the kingdome but about the earldome of Artoys but yet it was decided by a solemne sentence of two kings of France and of the whole parlament of Paris in fauour of the aunte against her nephew which albeit it cost great troubles yet vvas it defended and king Phillip of Spaine holdeth the county of Artoys by it at this day Polidor reporteth the story in this manner Robert earle of Artoys a man famous for his chiualry had two children Phillip a sonne and Maude a daughter this maude vvas marryed to Otho earle of Burgundy and Phillip dying before his father left a sonne named Robert the second vvhose father Robert the first being dead the question was vvho should succede ether maude the daughter or Robert the nephew and the matter being remitted vnto Phillip le Bel king of France as chiefe Lord at that tyme of that state he adiuged it to Maude as to the next in blood but vvhen Robert repyned at this sentence the matter vvas referred to the parlament of Paris vvhich confirmed the sentence of king Phillip wher vppon Robert making his way with Phillip de Valoys that soone after came to be king of France he assisted the said Phillip earnestly to bring him to the crowne against king Edward of Ingland that opposed himselfe therunto and by this hoped that king Phillip would haue reuoked the same sentence but he being once established in the crowne answered that a sentence of such importance and so maturely giuen could not be reuoked Wheruppon the said Robert fled to the king of Inglands part against france thus far Polidor The very like sentence recounteth the same author to haue bin giuē in Ingland at the same tyme and in the same controuersie of the vncle against the nephew for the succession to the dukedome of Britany as before I haue related wherin Iohn Breno earle of Montford vvas preferred before the daughter and heyre of his elder brother Guy though he vvere but of the halfe blood to the last duke and she of the whole For that Iohn the third duke of Britanny had two brothers first Guy of the vvhole blood by father and mother and then Iohn Breno his yonger brother by the fathers side only Guy dying left a daughter and heyre named Iane married to the earle of Bloys nephew to the king of France vvho after the death of duke Iohn pretended in the right of his wife as daughter and heyre to Guye the elder brother but king Edward the third with the state of Ingland gaue sentence for Iohn Breno earle of Montford her vncle as for him that vvas next in consanguinity to the dead duke and with their armes the state of Ingland did put him in possession vvho flew the earle of Bloys as before hath bin declared and ther-by gat possession of that realme and held it euer after and so do his heyres at this day And not long before this againe the like resolution preuayled in Scotland betweene the house of Balliol and Bruse who were competitors to that crowne by this occasion that now I wil declare VVilliam king of Scots had issue tvvo sonnes Alexander that succeded in the crowne and Dauid earle of Huntington Alexander had issue an other Alexander and a daughter marryed to the king of Norway al which issue and lyne ended about the yeare 1290. Dauid yonger brother to king William had issue two daughters Margaret and Isabel Margaret vvas married to Alaine earle of Galloway and had issue by him a daughter that married Iohn Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normādie vvho had issue by her this Iohn Balliol founder of Balliol College in Oxford that now pretended the crowne as discended from the eldest daughter of Dauid in the third discent Isabel the second daughter of Dauid vvas married to Robert Bruse Earle of Cleueland in Ingland vvho had issue by her this Robert Bruse earle of Carick the other competitor Now then the question betweene these two cōpetitors was vvhich of them should succeede ether Iohn Balliol that was nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruse that vvas sonne to the yonger daughter so one degree more neere to the stock or stemme then the other And albeit king Edward the first of Ingland whose power vvas dreadful at that day in Scotland hauing the matter referred to his arbitrement gaue sentence for Iohn Bailliol and Robert Bruse obeyed for the tyme in respect partly of feare and partly of his oth that he had made to stand to that iudgment yet vvas that sentence held to be vniust in Scotland and so vvas the crowne restored afterward to Robert Bruse his sonne and his posterity doth hold it vnto this day In Ingland also it selfe they alleage the examples of king Henry the first preferred before his nephew William sonne and heyre to his elder brother Robert as also the example of king Iohn preferred before his nephew Arthur duke of Britany for that king Henry the second had fower sonnes Henry Richard Geffrey and Iohn Henry dyed before his father vvithout issue Richard reygned after him and dyed also vvithout issue Geffrey also dyed before his father but left a sonne named Arthur duke of Britanie by right of his mother But after the death of king Richard the question vvas vvho should succeede to vvit either Arthur the nephew or Iohn the vncle but the matter in Ingland vvas soone decided for that Iohn the vncle was preferred before the nephew Arthur by reason he vvas more neere to his brother dead by a degree then vvas Arthur And albeit the king of Frāce and some other princes abroad opposed themselues for stomack against this succession of king Iohn yet say these
the auersion and natural alienatiōn of that people from the Inglish and their ancient inclination to ioyne with the Frēch Irish against vs maketh it yery probable that that subiection of theirs to the crowne of Ingland vvould not loug indure as by expetience we haue feene since the tyme of king Edward the first vvhen after the death of their king Alexander the third without issue they chose king Edward to be their king deliuered their townes and fortresses into his hands did sweare him fealty receaued his deputy or viceroy as Polidor at large declareth And yet al this serued afterward to no other effect but only slaughter bloodshed and infinyt losses and charges of Ingland Thirdly they saye that if the king of Scots should come to possesse the crowne of Inglād he cannot choose at least for many yeares but to stand in great ielousy of so many other competitors of the Inglish blood royal as he shal finde in Ingland against whom he must needes fortifie him selfe by those other forayne natiōs that may be presumed to be most sure vnto him though most contrary by natural inclination least tollerable in gouermēt to Inglish men as are the Scots of whom he is borne and danes vvith vvhom he is allyed and French of vvhom he is descended and of the vnciuil part ofIreland vvith vvhom one great piece of his realme hath most coniunction the authority sway of which fower nations in Ingland and ouer Inglish-men vvhat trouble it may worke euery vvise man may easely coniecture Besides that the Scots-men themselues specially those of the nobility do openly professe that they desire not this coniunction and subordination vnto Ingland which in no wise they can beare both for the auersion they haue to al Inglish gouerment ouer them as also for that their liberties are far greater as now they liue then in that case it would be suffred their king coming heerby to be of greater power to force them to the forme of Inglish subiection as no doubt but in tyme he would And seing the greatest vtility that in this case by reason and probability can be hoped for by this vnion is that the Scotish nation should come to be aduanced in Inglād and to be made of the nobility both temporal and spiritual of the priuy councel and of other lyke dignities of credit and confidence for otherwise no vnion or amitie durable can be hoped for and considering that the king both for his owne safetie as before hath bin said as also for gratitude and loue to his owne nation and allied frends must needs plant them about him in chiefe place of credit vvhich are most opposite to Inglish natures and by litle litle through occasion of emulations and of controuersies that vvil fal out daylie betwixt such diuersity of nations he must needes secretlie begin to fauour and fortifie his owne as we reade that William Conqueror did his Normannes and Canutus before him his Danes to the incredible calamity of the Inglish nation though otherwise neither of them vvas of themselues either an euil king or enimye to the Inglish blood but driuē hereunto for their owne saftie and for that it vvas impossible to stand neutral in such national contentions if al this I say fel out so then as vve know it did and our ancestors felt it to their extreme ruine what other effect can be hoped for now by this violent vnion of nations that are by nature so disunited and opposite as are the Inglish Scotish Irishe Danishe Frenche other on them depending vvhich by this meanes must needs be planted together in Ingland And if vve reade that the vvhole realme of Spayne did refuse to admitt S. Lewis king of France to be their king in Spayne to vvhom yet by law of succession it vvas euident confessed by the spaniards themselues as their chronicler Garibay writeth that the right most clearly dyd appertayne by his mother lady Blanch eldest daughter and heyre of K. Alonso the nynth and that they dyd this only for that he vvas a Frenchman and might therby bring the french to haue chiefe authority in Spayne and if for this cause they did agree together to giue the kingdome rather to Ferdinando the third that was sonne of Lady Berenguela yonger sister to the said lady Blanch and if this determination vvas thought at that tyme to be vvife and prouident though against al right of lineal succession and if vve see that it had good successe for that it indureth vnto this day what shal vve say in this case say these men vvhere the king in question is not yet a S. Lewis nor his title to Ingland so cleere as that other vvas to spayne and the auersion betwixt his nation and ours much greater then vvas that betwixt the french and Spanish thus they do reason Agayne we heard out of the discourse made by the Ciuilian before how the states of Portugal after the death of their king Don Ferdinando the first of that name vvho left one only daughter and heyre named lady Beatrix married vnto Iohn the first king of Castile to whō the succession of Portugal vvithout al controuersie did apertaine they rather determyned to chose for their king a bastard brother of the sayd Don Fernando named Iohn then to admitt the true inheretor Beatrix vvith the gouerment of the Castilians by vvhom yet they being much the richer people the Portugals might hope to reape far greater vtility then Inglish men can do by Scotland considering it is the poorer country and nation And this is that in effect which these men do answere in this behalfe noting also by the way that the Romās themselues vvith al their power could neuer bring vnion or peace betweene thease two nations of Ingland Scotlande nor hold the Scots and North-Irish in obedience of any authority residing in Ingland and so in the end they vvere enforced to cut them of to make that famous walle begun by Adrian and pursued by other Emperours to diuide them from Inglād and barre them from ioyning as al the vvorld knoweth and much lesse shal any one king liuing in Ingland now hold them al in obedience let him be of vvhat nation he vvil and this for the vtility that may be hoped by this vnion But now for the other pointe alleaged by the fauourers of Scotland about establishmēt of true religion in Ingland by entrance of this king of Scots these other mē do hold that this is the vvoorst and most dangerous pointe of al other considering vvhat the state of religion is in Scotland at this day and how different or rather opposite to that forme which in Ingland is mainteyned and vvhen the Archbishopes bishopes deanes archdeacons and other such of ecclesiastical and honorable dignities of Ingland shal consider that no such dignity or promotion is left now standing in Scotland no nor any cathedral
or collegiate church is remayned on foote vvith the rents and dignities therunto apperteyning and vvhen our nobilytie shal remember how the nobilitie of Scotland is subiect at this day to a few ordinary and common ministers vvithout any head vvho in their synodes and assemblies haue authority to put to the horne and driue out of the realme any noble man vvhatsoeuer vvithout remedy or redresse except he vvil yeald and humble himselfe to them and that the king himselfe standeth in avve of this exorbitant and populer povver of his ministers and is content to yeld therunto it is to be thought say these men that few Inglish be they of vvhat religion or opinion so-euer vvil shevv themselues forvvard to receaue such a King in respect of his religion that hath no better order in his ovvne at home and thus much concerning the King of Scotland Now then it remayneth that we come to treat of the lady Arbella second branch of the house of Scotlād touching whose title though much of that vvhich hath bin said before for or against the king of Scotland may also be vnderstoode to apparteyne vnto her for that she is of the same house yet shal I in this place repeat in few wordes the principal points that are alleaged in her behalfe or preiudice First of al then is alleaged for her and by her fauourers that she is descended of the foresaid lady Margaret eldest daughter of king Henry the seuenth by her second marriage vvith Archibald Duglas earle of Anguys and that she is in the third degree only from her for that she is the daughter of Charles Steward vvho was sonne to Margaret Countesse of Lenox daughter to the said lady Margaret Queene of Scots so as this lady Arbella is but neece once remoued vnto the said Queene Margaret to vvit in equal degree of discent vvith the king of Scots vvhich king being excluded as the fauorers of this vvoman do affirme by the causes and arguments before alleaged against hym no reason say they but that this lady should enter in his place as next in blood vnto him Secondly is alleaged in her behalfe that she as an Inglish vvoman borne in Ingland and of parents vvho at the tyme of her birth vvere of Inglish alleageance vvherin she goeth before the king of Scots as hath bin seene as also in this other principal pointe that by her admission no such inconuenience can be feared of bringing in strangers or causing troobles sedition vvith-in the realme as in the pretence of the Scotish king hath bin considered and this in effect is al that I haue heard alleaged for her But against her by other competitors and their frendes I haue hard diuers arguments of no smale importance and consideration produced vvherof the first is that vvhich before hath bin alleaged against the king of Scotlād in like māner to wit that neither of them is properly of the house of Lancaster as in the genealogie set downe in the third chapter hath appeared And secondly that the title of Lācaster is before the pretence of Yorke as hath bin proued in the fourth chapter wherof is inferred that neythere the king of Scots nor Arbella are next in successiō and for that of these two propositiōs ther hath bin much treated before I remitte me therunto only promising that of the first of the tvvo vvhich is how king Henry the seuēth vvas of the house of Lancaster touching right of succession I shal handle more particulerly afterward vvhen I come to speake of the house of Portugal vvherby also shal appeare playnly vvhat pretence of succession to the crowne or duchy of Lancaster the discendentes of the said king Henry can iustely make The second impediment against the lady Arbella is the aforesaid testament of king Henry the eight and the two acts of parlaments for authorising of the same by al vvhich is pretended that the house of Suffolke is preferred before this other of Scotland A third argument is for that there is yet liuing one of the house of Suffolk that is neerer by a degree to the stemme to vvit to Hēry the seuenth to vvhom after the discease of her Maiesty that now is we must returne then is the lady Arbella or the king of Scots and this is the lady Margeret countesse of Darby mother to the present earle of Darby vvho was daughter to lady Elenor daughter of Queene Mary of France that vvas second daughter of king Henry the seuēth so as this lady Margaret coūtesse of Darby is but in the third degree from the said Henry wheras both the king of Scotland and Arbella are in the fourth and consequently she is next in propinquitie of blood how greatly this propinquity hath bin fauoured in such cases though they vvere of the yōger liine the examples before alleaged in the fourth chapter do make manifest Fourthlie and lastely and most strongly of al they do argue against the title of this lady Arbella affirming that her discent is not free from bastardly vvhich they proue first for that Queene Margaret soone after the death of her first husband king Iames the fourth marryed secretly one Steward lord of Annerdale which Steward vvas alyue longe after her marriage vvith Duglas and consequently this second marriage vvith Duglas Steward being aliue could not be lawful vvhich they do proue also by an other meane for that they saie it is most certaine and to be made euident that the said Archibald Duglas earle of Anguis had an other vvife also aliue vvhen he married the said Queene vvhich points they say vvere so publique as they came to king Henries eares vvhervppon he sent into Scotland the lord William Howard brother to the old duke of Norfolke and father to the present lord Admiral of Ingland to enquire of these pointes and the said lord Howard founde them to be true and so he reported not only to the king but also aftervvards many tymes to others and namely to Queene Mary to vvhom he vvas lord Chamberlayne and to diuers others of vvhom many be yet liuing which can and will testefy the same vppon the relation they heard from the-sayd lord Williams owne mouthe vvheruppon king Henry vvas greatly offended and would haue letted the marriage betweene his said sister and Duglas but that they were married in secret and had consummate their marriage before this was knowne or that the thing could be preuented vvhich is thought vvas one especial cause and motiue also to the said king afterward to put back the issue of his said sister of Scotland as by his fornamed testament is pretended and this touching Arbellas title by propinquitie of byrthe But besides this the same men do alleage dimers reasons also of inconucnience in respect of the common vvealthe for vvhich in their opinions it should be hurtful to the real me to admitt this lady Arbella for Queene as first of al for that she is a
6. decret tit 6. de supplē da cap. Grand 1. Garibay in hist. de Portug li. 34. cab 20. 21. The Emperors of Greece Glicas in Annal. part 4. Zon. Annal co 3. in vita Michael Calapha In Polonia In literis reip Polō ad Henr. Valesium pag. 182. 184. Vidc Gagneum part I. de rebus Polon In Suetia Poilin I. 32. histor de Franc. An. 1568. In Denmarke Sleydan l. 4. hist. An. 1532. Munst. l. 3 Cosmogra in descript Dauide Paulus lo uius in viris illust Examples of England King Ihō deposed Polid. hist. Ang. l. 15. An. 1212. An. 1216. An. 1216. King Hēry the thirde King Edvvard the secōd deposed Polyd. 1. 18. hist. Anglicanae Anuo 1326. Stovv in the life of King Edvvard the 2. The man ner of deprimatiō of a king See Stovv and hollings in this mans life King Edvvard the third King Richard 2. deposed Polyd. 1. 20. hist. Aug. 1399 King Hēry the 6. deposed Polyd. lib. 23. histor Anglic. King Richard 3. deposed An. 1487. A point much to be noted The reply of the tēporal lavvyer Belloy apolog catholic part 2. paragraf 9. apol pro rege cap. 9. An obiection out of the prophet Samuel The Povver of a King or rather of a Tirant Belloy apolog part 2. pa rag 7. Apol. pro rege c. 6. 24. 26. Great absurdities and flateries Cic. lib. 2. offic An other absurdity Institut imperial l. 2. Tit. 1. Diuision of goods by ciuil lavv Slaues freemen Arist. lib. 1. polit c. 4. 5. Arist. li. 1. cap. 3. Marke this reason Diuers euident reasons against Belloy 3. Reg. 21. Cap. inouamusio de causibus c. super quibusdam 26. 〈◊〉 de verborum signif The ansvvere to the obiection out of the pro phet Samuel Arist. 1. 5. pol. c. 11. Ioseph 1. 6 antiq c. 4. Deut. 17. 3 Reg. 2. 10. Psal. 2. By vvhat lavv Princes are punished The difference betvvene a priuat mā a common vvealth The Princes autho rity but subdelegat In regulis vtrinque iuris vide in sine sexti Decret reg 75. 69. VVhen an oth bindeth not Cicero li. 1. offic A cleere example Matth. 24 Regul 68. in fine 6. Decret Decret Greg. l 2. tit 24. Decret part 2. cau sa 22. quest 4. c. 5. qu 5. per totū Tvvo principal cases vvhen othes hold not tovvards a Prince AEmil l. 2. hist. Frāc Belfor in vita childer Girard lib. 3 The spech of the French Embassador for depriuation of their king The conclusion hovv and vvhen othes do not bynde subiestes The difrence betvvene a King a tyrant Plat. dial 1. de repub Arist. li. 2. Pol. c. 5. Bart. li. de tyrannide Cicero li. 3. de legibus Cod. l. 1. tit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 digha Suet. c. 23 in Calig Zō tom 2 in Traian Se in the capter fol lovving The speach of a Souldier The occa sion of the next chapter The first grounde of lavves lymits to Princes Entrance of tyrants into their gouerment The rites of admitting christian Kinges The man ner of admitting Greeke Emperors at their co ronation Zonar tom 3. Annal. in vita Anastas Niceph. l. 16. cap. 29 Euagt l. 2. cap. 32. Vbi supr The Grecian Emperors Qth. Zon. Tō 3. in vita Mich. An. 820. Saxo. Gram. li. 10. Cranzius lib. 3. metrop c. 12. The crovvning of Oth the first VVhitichindus gest Saxon. lib. 1. Ensignes of the empire VVitichin l. 2. Vbi supra Election German Electors Blend decad 2. li. 3 Crant l. 4. cap. 25. Sleyd li. 1 histor An. 1519 The man ner of the Emperors coronatiō at this day Sleyd 〈◊〉 supra Interrogatories to the Emperor Emperial ornaments Second oth To be noted The man ner of coronation in Polonia Alex Gua guinrerū Polon Tom. I. Oricho in Chimer fol. 90. 106 The kinge of poole landes othe Bodin de rep l. 2. c. 9. The admiffiō of kings in Spaine Amb. Mo rales li. 11. c. 17. hist. Hisp. praefat eiusdem concilij The humilitie of King Sissinandus Concil Tol. 4. c. 74. Ambros. Maral l. 11. cap. 17. Cap. 74. Conditions of reigning in Spaine Ambros. Moral 1. 11. cap. 23 24. Concil 5. cap. 2. 3. 4. 5. conc 6. cap. 16. 17. 18. Concil Td. 6. c. 3. The king of Spaines othe at his admission Ambros. Moral lib. 1. cap. 23. The distruction of Spaine The beginning of the restitution of spaine Ambros. Moral li. 13. c. 1. 2. de la Chron. de Esp. Kingdomes in Spayne The gotish lavv of Don Pelayo King of Spayne Ambros. Moral li. 〈◊〉 cap. 2. Lucas Episcop Tuyensin histor Hispan Lodou de 〈◊〉 lib. de hered The old Spanish cerimonyes in making ther Kinge The present manner of Spaine The man ner of French coronation The old ceremonies Belfor l. 3 c. 20. Theuet cosmograph vniuers l. 15. cap. 2. Papir masson annal l 3. pag. 2. 15. Gerand l. 3 del b. estat fol. 238. Francis Belfor hist. fran lib. 3. c. 20 in vita Philip. 1. The coronation of King Phillip the first The speach of the father Notes vppon the kings speaches Memoires du Tillet c. du sacre des Roys The particuler manner of corona tion Prosessiō of faith The oth of the King of France Belfor 1. 3 cap. 20. The peoples election and admifsiō The later order of coronatiō in France The 12. peeres of France ther offices in the coronation Temperal peeres To be no ted Girard du haillan li. 3. de l'estat pag. 240. 242. 258. The ceremonies vsed at this day Francis Belf. in vita Augustus The coronation of Phillip 2. Augustus The oth of the French king vsed at this day The archbishopes blessing spech to the nevv kinge The man ner of coronations takē from France 1. Reg. 10. 16. 2. Reg. 2. 2. Reg. 1. The holy oyle of Rhemes Belfo. l. 3. cap. 57. Esteuan Garribay lib. 22. C 1 Kinges crovvned in nauarra and not in Spaine The Inglish coronation taken frō he frēch Le Sacre des Roys Polid. lib 13. hist. Angliae in vita Henrici In vita D. Thom. Cantuar. apud sarium in mense Decembris The speech of an other Arch-bushop of Canter bury to the King Stovv in vita Henrici 4. Holingsh in his Cro. pag. 476. 1005. The Kinges of England Regal ornaments Stovv in vita 〈◊〉 2. in fine Admissiō and Coronation of King Henry 4. The coro nation of King Edvvard 4. Stovv in vita Her 6. pag. 709. The conclusion of this capter Absurd aslertions of Bclloy A pause Grose flatery The propositions of Belloy apolog ca. h. part 2. §. 7. Matth. 6. 2. Apolog. Cathol part 1. parag 7. 3. Apolog. pro rege 〈◊〉 6. Sc 34. 4. Apolog. Cathol part 2. parag 7. pro rege cap. 9. 5. Apolog. pro rege cap. 20. Successiō of princes by birth better thē ineere election vvhy 2. reason 2. 3. 4. 5. The preheminene of
nephevves The case of succession to Portugal The proper interest of K. Henry the 4. cānot discend to king Hēry the 7. Issue of K. Iohn the 3. of Portugal L. Levves father of Don Antonio King Hen ry Cardinal The pretence of the Queene mother in France to Portugal Fiue pretenders of the Grovvne of Portugal The contention about the succession of Portugal Atturneyes sent to Portugal sentēce of illegitimation against Don Antonio VVriters of this cō trouerfie 1. The 〈◊〉 vvhy don Antonio vvas pronounced illegitimate 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Don Antonio his pretēce to Ingland Three principall pretenderes of Por tugal Pretence of the duke of Parma K. Phillippes pre tence to Portugal Diuers allegations for king Phillip Hieron Fraki lo Pet. VipeIanus The case of pretece of the hovvle of Portugal to Ingland An obiection vvith the ansvver Obiections against the pretenders of Portugal Ansvvers Note this By vvhat title king Hēry the 7. did enter About forrayne povver in Ingland About forrayne gouerment The occa sion of the next chapter about foraine gouerment Reasons against forraine gouerment Polit. Arist. Demosthenis Philipicae in AEfhines Attēptes to deliuer realmes from strāgers Quint. Curt. li 5. 6. de gest Alex. Vespere Sicilianae an 1265. Leand. in descript Siciliae Polyd. li. 〈◊〉 Hollings in vit Camiti The rage of the french against Inglish The conclusion against 〈◊〉 Authority of scripture against strangers Deus 15. The ansvvere in defence of fortaine gouerment The effect of go uerments to be con sidered not the gouernours An example Lytle importeth the subiect of vvhat country his go uernour is so he be good 〈◊〉 Reg. 12 Not the country but the good gouerment importeth Note these examples VVho are properly straingers Diuers manners of being vnder strangers To be vnder Strangers by Coquest Hovv Cōquerors doe proceede tovvards the Conquered Polydor Virg. lib. 8 histot 〈◊〉 Clemēcie of the Romans Lib. 5. Mechab cap. 8. Strangers most fauoured to vvise gouerments Gascoynes Britons Candians States of Italie The condition of Irish vnder the Inglish Of the states of Flanders Girard du Hailan lib. 18. an 1381. Prosperity of Flanders vnder the hovvse of Austria Io. Guicciard nella descrittione delli pasi bassi The anthority of the Fleminges at home The indulgence vsed to offenders in Flanders The Spaniard punis heth lesse in Italie thē 〈◊〉 home Viceryes do giue accompt of ther gouerment Much slaughter of nobility in Ingland Executiō of nobility by Hēry the eight Vnder King Edvvard and Queene Mary States gouerned happely by torrayne Princes Old afflictions of Naples Millan VVhether a great or little Prince be better An exam ple to shevv the former diffetēce Pedro Mexia en vit de Antonino Pio. The felicity of the Romā gouermēt The seeōd vvaye of being vnder a forraine Prince A fortayne Prince vvithout forces not preiudicial Note this vtilitie 〈◊〉 a forayne king The māner of forayne Prince more cōmodious for the present A third vvay of being vnder forraine gouerment Dangers of domes tical gouerment Inconueniences of this go uerment Strang gouer nours desired in some Realines The ansvver to 〈◊〉 against forrayne gouermēt Ansvver to the Grecian Philosophers aud orators Demosthenes The trooblesome state of the Grecian cittyes Arist. l. 2. polit c 1. 〈◊〉 2. Ansvver to the obiectiō out of Deutronomye Deut. 15. Secōdary Lines Ambiguite of preuailinge Tvvo groundes of probabilitie of speeding Three religions in Ingland The greate importance of religion in this actions The Cleargie The Coūcell and nobilitic Persons designed or fauoured by the protestant partie Foraayne frends of the protestants Of the party Putitan Persons affected by the Puritans External frends 〈◊〉 The Puritan at home Those of the Romā Religion The Roman partye great vvhy 1. Reg. 234 Effects of pressing an religiō Frends allies abroade The Lordes Beacham the earle of Darby Alliance of the earle of Darby Alliance of the Seymers Alliance of the Stanleys Alliāce of the old countesse of Darby The states of the Lord Beacham and the earle of Darby Religion of these Lords The earle of Huntington Alliāce of the earle of Huntington The povver of London Polydor. 24. Hollingshod in vita Henrici 6. The houses of Britaine and Portugal Infanta of Spayne Duke of Parma The duke of Bragansa Povver of forrayne pretēders The 1. Cōiecture that their vvilbe vvarre vvhye 1. 2. 3. 4. Sup. c. 4. 5. 6. A consideration to be marked The secōd cōiecture no mayn battayle probable 2. The third coniecture vvho is lykest to preuaile For the Infanta of Spayne For the earle of Hartfords seconde sonne 1. Sup. c. 〈◊〉 2. 3. For the children of the Coūtesse of Darbie 1. Garibay l. a5 c. 36. Polydor in rit Steph. 3.