shall now begin to make more particular declaration taking my beginning from the Children of King Edward the third who were the causers of this fatal dissention CHAP. III. Of the succession of English Kings from King Edward the third unto our days with the particular causes of dissention between the Families of York and Lancaster more largely declared KIng Edward the third surnamed by the English the Victorious though he had many Children whereof some died without Issue which appertain not to us to treat of yet had he five Sons that left Issue behind them to wit Edward the eldest that was Prince of Wales surnamed the Black Prince Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son John of Gaunt so called for that he was born in that City that was the third Son and by his Wife was Duke of Lancaster and fourthly Edmond surnamed of Langley for that he was also born there and was Duke of York and last of all Thomas the fifth Son surnamed of Woodstock for the same reason of his birth and was Duke of Gloucester All these five Dukes being great Princes and Sons of one King left Issue behind them as shall be declared and for that the descendents of the third and fourth of these Sons to wit of the Dukes of Lancaster and York came afterward to strive who had best Title to Reign thereof it came that the controversie had his name of these two Families which for more distinction sake and the better to be known took upon them for their Ensigns a Rose of two different colours to wit the White Rose and the Red as all the World knoweth whereof the White served for York and the Red for Lancaster To begin then to shew the Issue of all these five Princes it is to be noted that the two elder of them to wit Prince Edward and his second Brother Leonel Duke of Clarence dyed both of them before King Edward their Father and left each of them an Heir for that Prince Edward left a Son named Richard who Succeeded in the Crown immediately after his Grand-father by the name of King Richard the second but afterward for his evil Government was deposed and dyed in prison without Issue and so was ended in him the Succession of the first Son of King Edward The second Son Leonel dying also before his Father left behind him one only Daughter and Heir named Philippa who was married to one Edmond Mortimer â—arl of March and he had by her a Son and Heir named Roger Mortimer which Roger had Issue two Sons named Edmond and Roger which dyed both without Children and one daughter named Anne Mortimer who was married unto Richard Plantagenet Earl of Cambridge second Son unto Edmond Langly Duke of York which Duke Edmond was fourth Son as hath been said unto King Edward the third and for that this Richard Plantagenet married the said Anne as hath been said hereby it came to pass that the House of York joyned two titles in one to wit that of Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son of King Edward the third and that of Edmond Langly Duke of York which was the fourth Son and albeit this Richard Plantagenet himself never came to be Duke of York for that he was put to death while his elder Brother lived by King Henry the fifth for a conspiracy discovered in Southampton against the said King when he was going over into France with his Army yet he left a Son behind him named also Richard who afterward came to be Duke of York by the death of his Uncle which Uncle was slain soon after in the Batteâ— of Ageâ—couâ—t in France and this Richard began first of all to prosecute openly his quarrel for the Title of the Crown against the House of Lancaster as a little afterward more in particuler shall be declared as also shall be shewed how that this 2 Richard Duke of York being slain also in the same quarrel left a Son named Edward Earl of March who after much trouble got to be King by the name of King Edward the 4 by the oppression and putting down of King Henry the 6 of the House of Lancaster and was the first King of the House of York whose Genealogy we shall lay down more largely afterwards in place convenient And now it followeth in order that we should speak of John of Gaunt the third Son but for that his descent is great I shall first shew the descent of the fifth and last Son of King Edward who was Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester and Earl of Buckingham that was put to death afterward or rather murthered wrongfully by order of his Nephew King Richard the second and he left only one daughter and Heir named Anne who was married to the Lord Stafford whose Family afterward in regard of this marriage came to be Dukes of Buckingham and were put down by King Richard the third and King Henry the eighth albeit some of the bloud and name do remain yet still in England And thus having brought to an end the Issue of three Sons of King Edward to wit of the first second and fifth and touched also somewhat of the fourth there resteth to prosecute more fully the Issues and descents of the third and fourth Sons to wit of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster and of Edmond Langly Duke of York which are the Heads of these two Noble Families which thing I shall do in this place with all brevity and perspicuity possible beginning first with the House of Lancaster John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward being Duke of Lancaster by his Wife as hath been said had three Wives in all and by every one of them had issue though the Bishop of Ross in his great Latine Arbour of the Genealogies of the Kings of England Printed in Paris in the year 1580. assigneth but one Wife only to this John of Gaunt and consequently that all his Children were born of her which is a great and manifest errour and causeth great confusion in all the rest which in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title he buildeth hereon for that it being evident that only the first Wife was Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and John of Gaunt Duke thereof by her it followeth that the Children only that were born of her can pretend properly to the inheritance of that house and not others born of John of Gaunt by other wives as all the World will confess First then as I have said this John of Gaunt married Blanch Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster and had by her one Son only and two Daughters The Son was called Henry Earl first of Darby and after made Duke of Hereford by King Richard the second and after that came to be Duke also of Lancaster by the death of his Father and lastly was made King by the deposition of his Cousen German the said King
Richard and Reigned 13. years by the name of King Henry the fourth and was the first King of the House of Lancaster of the right of whose title examination shall be made afterwards The first of the two daughters which John of Gaunt had by Blanch was named Philippa who was married to John the first of â—hat name King of Portugal by whom she had Issue Edward King of Portugal and he Alfonsus the fifth and he John the second and so one after another even unto our days The second daughter of John of Gaunt by Lady Blanch was named Elizabeth who was married to John Holland Duke of Exeter and she had Issue by him another John Duke of Exeter and he had Issue Henry Duke of Exeter that died without Issue Male leaving only one Daughter named Anne who was married to Sir Thomas Nevil Knight and by him had Issue Ralph Nevil third Earl of Westmerland whose Lineal Heir is at this day Lord Charles Nevil Earl of Westmerland that liveth banished in Flanders And this is all the Issue that John of Gaunt had by Lady Blanch his first Wife saving only that I had forgotten to prosecute the Issue of Henry his first Son surnamed of Bullenbroke that was afterward called K. Henry the fourth which King had four Sons and two daughters his daughters were Blanch and Philippa the first married to William Duke of Bavaria and the second to Erick King of Denmark and both of them died without Children The four Sons were first Henry that Reigned after him by the name of Henry the fifth and the second was Thomas Duke of Clarence the third was John Duke of Bedford and the fourth was Humphry Duke of Glocester all which three Dukes died without Issue or were slain in Wars of the Realm so as only King Henry the fifth their elder Brother had Issue one Son named Henry also that was King and Reigned 40 years by the name of Henry the sixth who had Issue Prince Edward and both of them I mean both Father and Son were murthered by order or permission of Edward Duke of York who afterward took the Crown upon him by the name of King Edward the fourth as before hath been said so as in this King Henry the sixth and his Son Prince Edward ended all the bloud-Royal male of the House of Lancaster by Blanch the first Wife of John of Gaunt and the Inheritance of the said Lady Blanch returned by right of succession as the favourers of the House of Portugal affirm though others deny it unto the Heirs of Lady Philip her eldest daughter married into Portugal whose Nephew named Alfonsus the fifth King of Portugal lived at that day when King Henry the sixth and his Heir were made away and thus much of John of Gaunt's first marriage But after the death of the Lady Blanch John of Gaunt married the Lady Constance daughter and Hâ—ir of Peter the first surnamed the Cruel King of Castile who being driven out of his Kingdom by Henry his Bastard-brother assisted thereunto by the French he fled to Bourdeaux with his Wife and two daughters where he found Prince Edward eldest Son to King Edward the third by whom he was restored and for pledge of his fidelity and performance of other conditions that the said King Peter had promised to the Prince he left his two daughters with him which daughters being sent afterwards into England the eldest of them named Constance was married to John of Gaunt and by her Title he named himself for divers years afterwards King of Castile and went to gain the same by Arms when Peter her Father was slain by his foresaid Bastard-brother But yet some years after that again there was an agreement made between the said John of Gaunt and John the first of that name King of Castile Son and Heir of the foresaid Henry the Bastard with condition that Catharine the only daughter of John of Gaâ—nt by Lady Constance should marry with Henry the third Prince of Castile Son and Heir of the said King John and Nephew to the Bastard Henry the second and by this means was ended that controversie between England and Castile And the said Lady Catharine had Issue by King Henry John the second King of Casâ—â—â—e and he Isabel that married with Ferdinando the Catholick King of Aragon and joyned by that marriage both those Kingdoms together and by him she had a daughter named Joan that married Philip Duke of Austria and Burgundy and by him had Charles the such that was Emperor and Father to King Philip that now reigneth â—n Spain who as we see is descided two ways from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster to wit by two daughters begotten of two Wives Blanch and Constance neither had John of Gaunt any more Children by Constance but only this daughter Catharine of whom we have spoken wherefore now we shall speak of his third Wife that was Lady Catharine Swinford This Lady Catharine as English Histories do note was born in Heinalt in Flanders and was daughter to a Knight of that Country called Sir Payne de Ruet and she was brought up in her youth in the Duke of Lancasters house and attended upon his first Wife Lady Blanch and being fair of personage grew in such favour with the Duke as in the time of his second Wife Constance he kept this Catharine for his Concubine and begat upon her four Children to wit three Sons and â— daughter which daughter whose name was Jane was married to Ralph Earl of Westmorland called commonly in those days Daw Raby of whom descended the Earls of Westmorland that ensued His three Sons were John Thomas and Henry and John was first Earl and then Duke of Summerset Thomas was first Marques of Dorset and then Duke of Excester Henry was Bishop of Winchester and after Cardinal And after John of Gaunt had begotten all these four Children upon Catharine he married her to a Knight in England named Swinford which Knight lived not many years after and John of Gaunt coming home to England from Aquitaine where he had been for divers years and seeing this old Conâ—â—â—â—ne of his Catharine to be now a Widow and himself also without a Wife for that the Lady Constance was dead a little before for the love that he bore to the Children that he had begotten of her he determined to marry her and thereby the rather to legitimate her Children though himself were old now and all his Kindred utterly against the Marriage and so not full two years before his death to wit in the Year of Christ 1396. he married her and the next Year after in a Parliament begun at Westminster the 22 of January Anno Domini 1397. he caused all his said Children to be legitimated which he had begotten upon this Lady Swinford before she was his Wife But now to go forward to declare the Issue of these three Sons of John of Gaunt by Catharine
you have heard it proved of all Law-makers Philosophers Lawyers Divines and Governours of Commonwealhs who have set down in their Statutes and Ordinances that Kings shall swear and protest at their entrance to Government that they will observe and perform the conditions there promised and otherwise to have no Interest in that Dignity and Soveraignty By examples in like manner of all Realms Christian he declared how that often-times they have deposed their Princes for just causes and that God hath concurred and assisted wonderfully the same sending them commonly very good Kings after those that were deprived and in no Country more then in England it self yea in the very Line and Family of this King Richard whose Noble Grandfather King Edward the third was exalted to the Crown by a most solemn deposition of his predecessor King Edward the second wherefore in this point there can be little controversie and therefore we shall pass unto the second which is whether the causes were good and just for which this King Richard was esteemed worthy to be deposed And in this second point much more difference there is betwixt York and Lancaster and between the white Rose and the Red for that the House of York seeking to make the other odious as though they had entred by tyranny and cruelty doth not stick to avouch that King Richard was unjustly deposed but against this the House of Lancaster alledgeth first that the House of York cannot justly say this for that the chief Prince assistant to the deposing of King Richard was Lord Edmond himself Duke of York and head of that family together with Edward Earl of Rutland and Duke of Aumarl his eldest Son and Heir yea and his younger Son also Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard that now pretendeth for so do write both Stow Hollingshead and other Chroniclers of England that those Princes of the Hâ—â—â—e of York did principally assist Henry Duke of Lancaster in getting the Crown and deposing King Richard and Polidâ—r speaking of the wicked Government of King Richard and of the first Cogitation about deposing him when King Henry of Lancaster was yet in France banished and seemed not to think of any such matter he hath these words Sed Edmundo Eboâ—acensium duci ea res cum primis bilem commovit quod Rex omnia jam jura perverteret quod antea parricidio postea râ—pints se obstrinxâ—sset c. That is this matter of the wicked Government of King Richard did principally offend his Uncle Edmond Duke of York for that he saw the King now to peâ—srvert all Law and Equity and that as before he had defiled himself with Parricide that is with the murther of his own Uncle the Duke of Glocester Brother to this Edmond so now he intangled himself also with Rapine in that he took by violence the Goods and Inheritance of John of Gaunt late deceased which did belong to Henry Duke of Lancaster his Cousin-German By which words of Polidor as also for that the Duke of Lancaster coming out of Britany accompaned only with threescore persons as some stories say chose first to go into York shire and to enter at Ravenspur at the mouth of Humber as all the World knoweth which he would never have done if the Princes of York had not principally favoured him in that action all this I say is an evident argument that these Princes of the House of York were then the chief doers in this deposition and consequently cannot alledge now with reason that the said Richard was deposed uniustly Secondly the House of Lancaster alledgeth for the justifying of this deposition the opinions of all Historiographers that ever have written of this matter whether they be English French Dutch Latine or of any other Nation or Language who all with one accord do affirm that King Richards Government was intolerable and he worthy of deposition whereof he that will see more let him read Thomas of Walsingham and John Frosard in the life of King Richard Thirdly they of Lancaster do alledge the particular outrages and insolencies of King Richards Government and first the suffering himself to be carried away with evil counsel of his favorites and then the perverting of all Laws generally under his Government as before you have heard out of Polidor the joyning with his Minions for oppressing the Nobility of which Stow hath these words The King being at Bristow with Robert de Vere Duke of Ireland and Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk devised how to take away the Duke of Glocester the Earls of Arundel Warwick Darby and Nottingham and others whose deaths they conspired Thus saith Stow. And after they executed the most part of their devices for that Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester was made away without Law or Process the Earl of Arundel also was put to death and Warwick was banished and so was also Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury by like Injustice and the like was done to Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster and among other insolencies he suffered Robert Vere to dishonour and put from him his Wife a Noble and goodly young Lady as Stow saith and born of Lady Isabella King Richards Aunt that was daughter to King Edward the third and suffered Vere to marry another openly to her disgrace and dishonour of her Kindred And finally in the last Parliament that ever he held which was in the 21. year of his Reign commonly called the Evil Parliament he would needs have all authority absolute granted to certain favourites of his which Thomas Walsingham saith were not above 6 or 7. to determine of all matters with all full authority as if they only had been the whole Realm which was nothing indeed but to take all authority to himself only and Stow in his Chronicle hath these words following This Parliament began about the 15. of Sept. in the year 1397. at the beginning whereof Edward Stafford Bishop of Exeter Lord Chancellor of England made a proposition or Sermon in which he affirmed that the power of the King was alone and perfect of it self and those that do impeach it were worthy to suffer pain of the Law c. thus saith Stow by all which is evident how exorbitant and contrary to all Law and Equity this Kings Government was Fourthly and lastly those of Lancaster do alledge for justifying of this deprivation that Duke Henry was called home by express Letters of the more and better part of all the Realm and that he came wholly in a manner uâ—â—rmed considering his person for that Frosard saith he had but three Ships only out of Britany and Walsingham saith he had but 15. Lances and 4â—0 foot-men and the additions to Polâ—â—hronicon as before I noted do avouch that when he landed at Ravenspur in the County of York he had but threescore men in all to begin the Reformation of
that seeing rigour of Law runneth only with the Uncle for that indeed he is properly nearest in bloud by one degree and that only indulgence and custom serveth for the Nephew permitting him to represent the place of his Father who is dead they resolve I say that whensoever the Uncle is born before the Nephew and the said Uncle's elder Brother died before his Father as it happened in the case of John of Gaunt and of King Richard there the Uncle by right may be preferred for that the said elder Brother could not give or transmit that thing to his Son which was not in himself before his Father died and consequently his Son could not represent that which his Father never had and this for the Civil Law Touching our Common Laws the favourers of Lancaster do say two or three things first that the right of the Crown and interest thereunto is not decided expresly in our law nor is it a plea subject to the common rules thereof but is superiour and more eminent and therefore that men may not judge of this as of other pleas of particular persons nor is the Tryal alike nor the common maxims or rules always of force in this thing as in others which they prove by divers particular cases as for example the Widow of a private man shall have her thirds of all his Lands for her Dowry but not the Queen of the Crown Again if a private man have many daughters and die seized of Lands in Fee-simple without Heir Male his said daughters by law shall have the said Lands as co-partners equally divided between them but not the daughters of a King for that the eldest must carry away all as though she were Heir male The like also is seen if a Baron match with a Feme that is an Inheritrix and have Issue by her though she die yet shall he enjoy her Lands during his life as Tenant by courtesie but it is not so in the Crown if a man marry with a Queen as King Philip did with Queen Mary and so finally they say also that albeit in private mens possessions the common course of our law is that if the Father die seized of Land in Fee-simple leaving a younger Son and a Nephew that is to say a Child of his Elder Son the Nephew shall succeed his Grandfather as also he shall do his Uncle if of three Brethren the elder die without Issue and the second leave a Son yet in the inheritance and succession of the Crown it goeth otherwise as by all the fotmer eight examples have been shewed and this is the first they say about the common law The second point which they affirm is that the ground of our Common Laws consisteth principally and almost only about this point of the Crown in custom for so say they we see by experience that nothing in effect is written thereof in the common law and all old Lawyers do affirm this point as were Ranulfus de Granvilla in his books of the laws and customs of England which he wrote in the time of King Henry the second and Judge Fortescue in his book of the praise of English laws which he compiled in the time of King Henry the sixth and others Whereof these men do infer that seeing there are so many presidents and examples alledged before of the Uncles case preferred before the Nephew not only in foreign Countries but also in England for this cause I say they do affirm that our common laws cannot but favour also this title and consequently must needs like well of the interest of Lancaster as they avouch that all the best old Lawyers did in those times and for example they do Record two by name of the most famous learned men which those ages had who not only defended the said title of Lancaster in those days but also suffered much for the same The one was the forenamed Judge Fortescue Chancellor of England and named Father of the common laws in that age who fled out of England with the Queen Wife of King Henry the sixth and with the Prince her Son and lived in banishment in France where it seemeth also that he wrote his learned book intituled de laudibus legum Angliae And the other was Sir Thomas Thorpe chief Baron of the Exchequer in the same Reign of the same King Henry the sixth who being afterward put into the Tower by the Princes of the House of York for his eager defence of the title of Lancaster remained there a long time and after being delivered was beheaded at High-gate in a tumult in the days of King Edward the fourth These then are the allegations which the favourers of the House of Lancaster do lay down for the justifying of the title affirming first that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster ought to have succeeded his Father King Edward the third immediately before King Richard and that injury was done unto him in that King Richard was preferred And secondly that King Richard were his right never so good was justly and orderly deposed for his evil Government by lawful authority of the Commonwealth And thirdly that after his deposition Henry Duke of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt was next in succession every way both in respect of the right of his Father as also for that he was two degrees nearer to the King deposed then was Edmond Mortimer descended of Leonel Duke of Clarence and these are the principal and substantial proofs of their right and title But yet besides these they do add all these other arguments and considerations following first that whatsoever right or pretence the House of York had the Princes thereof did forfeit and lose the same many times by their conspiracies rebellions and attainders as namely Richard Earl of Cambridge that married the Lady Anne Mortimer and by her took his pretence to the Crown was convicted of a conspiracy against King Henry the fifth in Southampton as before I have said and there was put to death for the same by Judgment of the King and of all his Peers in the year 1415. the Duke of York his elder Brother being one of the Jury that condemned him This Earl Richards Son also named Richard coming afterward by the death of his Uncle to be Duke of York first of all made open claim to the Crown by the title of York But yet after many oaths sworn and broken to King Henry the sixth he was attainted of Treason I mean both he and Edward his Son then Earl of March which afterward was King with the rest of his off-spring even to the ninth degree as Stow affirmeth in a Parliament holden at Coventry in the year 1459. and in the 38. year of the Reign of the said King Henry and the very next year after the said Richard was slain in the same quarrel but the House of Lancaster say these men was never attainted of any such
States of that Crown before his two Sisters that be elder then he and so likewise say these men ought John of Somerset to have done before Philippa his eldest Sister if he had been alive at that time when King Henry the sixth was put down and died and consequently his posterity which are the descendents of King Henry the seventh ought to enjoy the same before the Princes of Portugal that are the descendents of Lady Philippa his Sister Thus say the issue of King Henry the seventh But to this the Princes of the House of Portugal do reply and say first That by this it is evident at least that the Dukedom of Lancaster whereof the Lady Blanch was the only Heir must needs appertain to them alone and this without all doubt or controversie for that they only remain of her Issue after extinguishing of the posterity of her elder Brother King Henry the fourth which was extinguished by the death of King Henry the sixth and of his only son Prince Edward and for this they make no question or controversie assuring themselves that all Law right and equity is on their side Secondly Touching the Succession and right to the Kingdom they say that John Earl of Somerset being born out of Wedlock and in Adultery for that his Father had an other Wife alive when he begot him and he continuing a Bastard so many years could not be made Legitimate afterward by Parliament to that effect of Succession to the Crown and to deprive Queen Philippa of Portugal and her Children born before the other Legitimation from their right and Succession without their consents for that John King of Portugal did Marry the said Lady Philippa with condition to enjoy all Prerogatives that at that day were due unto her and that at the time when John of Gaunt did Marry the said Lady Catherine Swinford and made her Children Legitimate by Act of Parliament which was in the year of Christ 1396. and 1397. the said Lady Philippa Queen of Portugal had now two Sons living named Don Alonso and Don Edwardo which were born in the years 1390. and 1391 that is six years before the Legitimation of John Earl of Somerset and his Brethren and thereby had jus acquisitum as the Law saith which right once acquired and gotten could not be taken away by any Posterior Act of Parliament afterward without consent of the parties Interessed for which they do alledge divers places of the Canon Law which for that they hold not in England I do not cite but one example they put to shew the inconvenience of the thing if it should be otherwise determined then they affirm which is that if King Henry the eighth that had a Bastard Son by the Lady Elizabeth Blunt whom he named Henry Fitz-roy and made him both Earl of Nottingham and Duke of Richmond and Somerset in the 18 th year of his Reign at what time the said King had a lawful Daughter alive named the Princess Mary by Queen Catherine of Spain if I say the King should have offered to make this Son Legitimate by Parliament with intent to have him succeeded after him in the Crown to the prejudice and open injury of the said lawful Daughter these Men do say that he could not have done it and if he should have done it by violence it would not have held and much less could John of Gaunt do the like being no King Nor was the Act of Parliament sufficient for this point it being a matter that depended especially say these men of the Spiritual Court and of the Canon Law which Law alloweth this Legitimation no further but only as a Dispensation and this so far forth only as it doth not prejudice the right of any other Neither helpeth it any thing in this matter the Marriage of John of Gaunt with Lady Catherine for to make better this Legitimation for that as hath been said their Children were not only naturales but Spurij that is to say begotten in plain Adultry and not in simple Fornication only for that the one party had a Wife alive and consequently the priveledge that the Law giveth to the Subsequent Marriage of the Parties for legitimating such Children as are born in simple Fornication that is to say between parties that were single and none of them married cannot take place here So as these men conclude that albeit this Legitimation of Parliament might serve them to other purposes yet not to deprive the Princes of Portugal of their Prerogative to succeed in their Mothers Right which she had when she was married to their Father And this they affirm to have been Law and Right at that time if the said Queen Philippa and Earl John had been alive together when Henry the sixth and his Son were put to death and that this Question had been then moved at the death of King Henry the sixth Whether of the two to wit either the said Queen Philippa or her younger Brother John Earl of Somerset by the Fathers side only should have succeeded in the Inheritance of King Henry the sixth In which case these men presume for certain that the said Queen Philippa legitimately born and not John made legitimate by Parliament should have succeeded for that by common course of â—aw the Children legitimated by favour albeit their legitimation were good and lawful as this of these Children is denied to be yet can they never be made equal and much less be preferred before the lawful and legitimate by Birth But now say these men the case standeth at this present somewhat otherwise and more for the advantage of Queen Philippa and her Off-spring For when King Henry the sixth and his Son were extinguished and Edward Duke of York thrust himself in to the Crown which was about the year of Christ 1471. the foresaid Princess and Prince Lady Philippa and Earl John were both dead as also their Children and only their Nephews were alive that is to say there lived in Portugal King Alfonsus the fifth of that name Son to King Edward which King Edward was Child to Queen Philippa and the death of King Henry the sixth of England happened in the 38 th year of the Reign of the said Alfonsus And in England lived at the same time Lady Margaret Countess of Richmond Mother of King Henry the seventh and Neece of the foresaid John Earl of Somerset to wit the Daughter of his Son John Duke of Somerset So as these two Competitors of the House of Lancaster that is to say King Alfonsus and Lady Margaret were in equal degree from John of Gaunt as also from King Henry the sixth saving that King Alfonsus was of the whole Bloud as hath been said and by Queen Philippa that was legitimate and the Countess of Richmond was but of the half bloud as by John Earl of Somerset that was a Bastard legitimated The Question then is Which of these two should have
made reply by their President and Chancellor and other of their own Councellors residing for the Flemish Nation in the Court of Spain for this Nation hath always a particular Councel there about the King as all other Foreign Nations also have that are under him and by this means they obtained lightly what they would and brought the Governour to what they pleased so as in effect they were absolute Kings in themselves and wrought their Wills in every thing and this is in that time while the Country was quiet But now since this Revolt which hath indured almost these four or five and twenty years what hath succeeded surely there hath not a quarter so many been punished or put to Death in all these years by order of Justice of their King absent as before I have shewed that there were in one day by ther own Earls and Dukes when they were present and that upon far less occasion and cause given then are these for if we take away the two Noblemen Egmond and Horne put to Death at the beginning of these Flemâ—sh Troubles by the Duke of Alva for which some men say also that he had no thanks afterward by the King no man of importance hath been since Executed and the chiefest Towns that have been and are against the King in Holland and Zeeland are suffered until this day to Traffique freely into Spain it self to wit in the Kingdom of Aragon many Heads have been strucken off and much injustice done whereof then riseth this difference no doubt for that the Flemmings are Strangers and far off and the other near at Home and Natural-Born so as this circumstance of being a Stranger and dwelling far off doth them great pleasure and giveth them priviledge above the Home-born Subjects The like I might shew for this matter of punishment in the foresaid States of Italy where if a man do compare the number of them that were put to Death pulled Down or Afflicted by order of Justice or otherwise at the the commandment of the Prince in time of their own Home-born Kings with that which hath been since especially of the Nobility you shall find one for twenty and the reason of this is for that their own Kings were Absolute and had to give an account to no man of their doings and for that they were men and had their Passions and Emulations with the Nobility and might put the same in Execution without Account or Controlment they pulled down and set up at their pleasure and made oftentimes but a Jest of Noblemens Lives and Deaths but now these that are Governours and Vice-roys for a Foreign Prince first they have not so great Authority or Commission as to touch any such Principal persons Lives without giving Relation thereof of first unto their King and Councel and receive again particular order for the same and then they knowing that after their three years Government is ended they must be private men again and stay their fourty days as Subjects under the next new Governour to give Reckoning of their doings against all that shall Accuse them which in these Countries they call to make their residence they take heed what they do and whom they offend so as the condition of Nobility is far different under such a strange Government as this is termed then under a Natural Prince of their own Country which oppresseth them at his pleasure But now to draw near homeward if we will examine and consider what hath passed in England in this point of Massacring our Nobility by our Domestical Princes it is a matter lamentable for it may seem that they have served oftentimes for our Princes to make disport and play with their Heads And to let pass all those which in time of Wars Rebellions and Commotions have been cut off which occasions may seem more justifyable I do read also in our Chronicles that a Sangue freddo as the Italian saith that is to say in time of Peace and by Execution of Justice at the Princes appointment these Noblemen following and Knights by Name were put to Death within the space of one five years in King Henry the fourth his days The Duke of Exeter the Duke of Surry the Archbishop of York the Earls Salisbury of Glocester of Worcester and of Huntington the Earl Mowbray Earl Marshal the Barron of Kinderton Sir Roger Clarington Bastard Son of Edward the Black Prince Sir Thomas Blunt Sir Bernard Rocas Sir Richard Vernon And again soon after under King Edward the fourth in almost within as little space the Dukes of Somorset and of Exeter the Earls of Devonshire of Oxford and of Keyns the Lord Ross the Lord Molyns Sir Thomas Tudingham Sir Philip Wentworth Sir Thomas Fyndam and many others afterwards for this was but at the beginning of his Reign which number of Nobility if a man should have seen them alive together with their Trains before they had been put down he would have said they had been a very goodly company and pityful that so many of our own Nobility should be brought by our own Princes to such Confusion But yet this matter may seem perhaps the less marvellous and more excusable under those two Kings for that Troubles and Contentions had passed a little before in the Realm about the Succession and herupon so many of the Nobility might be cut off But let us see then what ensued afterwards when things were established and all doubt of contention about the Succession taken away as in King Henry VIII the his days it was and yet do I find Registred in our Chronicles these persons following either made away cut off or put down by the said King to wit two Queens Ann and Catharine three Cardinals put down and disgraced Woolsey Pool and Fisher whereof the last was Beheaded soon after his Dignity given him in Rome and the first was Arrested the second Attainted of imagined Treasons three Dukes put down to wit the Noble Dukes of Buckingham Suffolk and Norfolk whereof the last lost his Lands Dignities and Liberty only the former two both Lands and Lives A Marquess with two Earls Beheaded Devonshire Kyldare and Surrey two Countesses Condemned to die Devonshire and Salisbury and the latter Executed Lords many as the Lord Darcy the Lord Hussey the Lord Montague the Lord Leonard Gray the Lord Dacers of the South the Lord Cromwel and six or seven Abbots Knights also in great number as five in one day with the Lords Hussey and Darcy and five in another day with the Earl of Kildare whose Uncles they were and besides them Sir Thomas Moor Sir Rice Griffith Sir Edward Nevel Sir John Nevel Sir Nicholas Carew Sir Adrian Fortescue and divers other Knights of great Account and then Gentlemen almost without end And all these within the space of 20 years of his Reign and in the time of peace and if we look upon but four or five years together of the Reign of this mans
Bastardies or other particular impediments that may have fallen upon each discent or branch thereof all these things said he may alter the course of common supposed right in him or her that is taken to be next in bloud as proving them not to be truly and lawfully the nearest though they be the next in degree As for example said he the whole multitude of competitors or pretendors which I conceive may come in consideration or have action or claim to the Crown after her Majesty that now is may be reduced to three or four first heads or principal stocks to wit to the House of Lancaster a part as descended of John of Gant Duke of Lancaster by his first Wife Blanch sole Heir of the Dutchess of Lancaster And of this branch or stock the most known off spring in these our days are those Princes that are lineally descended of Don Juan the first sirnamed de bona memoria tenth King of Portugal who married with Philippa the eldest Daughter of the said John of Gant by his first Wife Blanch and these Princes are King Philip of Spain now King also of Portugal and the Duke of Parma and Braganza who descended of the same race as also the Duke of Savoy on degree after them The second stock is of the house of York a part descended of George the Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward the fourth who being put to death by the Kings order in Cales left a daughter by whom were descended the Earl of Huntington with his Brothers which also have children and the off spring of Geffry Pole and Sir Thomas Barrington who married the other Sister of her that was married to the Hastings The third stock was in King Henry the seventh who being himself of the house of Lancaster and marrying the eldest daughter of Edward the fourth of the house of York is presumed to have joyned these two houses together and from this man by his two daughters for of his Son who was King Henry the eighth there remaineth only the Queen that now is there hath proceeded the house of Scotland divided into the families of the King of Scots and Arabella as also the Progeny of the two Earls yet living of Hartford and Darby Vnto these three heads which are commonly known to all men some of our days do add also a fourth which may seem more ancient then either of these three to wit by the Duke of Britany who are descended divers ways of the bloud royal of England as may easily be declared whose Heir at this day by lineal descent is the Infanta of Spain named Dona Isabella Clara Eugenia daughter to King Philip. So that hereby we come to discover no less then ten or eleven families that may pretend and have all of them friends in England and else where as yesterday I told you who do not fail in secret to negotiate and lay plots for them for that there are none of these so far off but to their friends it seemeth the times standing as they do that reasons may be given for their preferment and good hope conceived of prevailing You do well to add said a Captain there present the times standing as they do or at leastwise as they are like to stand when this matter must come to tryal at what time I believe not you Lawyers but we Souldiers must determine this title and then no doubt if there were not only these ten by you named but twenty more also of the Bloud Royal that would pretend and had friends and money to stand by them we should admit their causes to examination and perhaps give sentence for him that by your laws would soonest be excluded for when matters come to snatching it is hard to say who shall have the better part I do not add this circumstance of the time said the Lawyer as though it were the only or principal point which maketh doubtful the matter of Succession though I confess that helpeth thereunto greatly in respect of the great variety of mans affections at this day in Religion which do decline them commonly to judge for him whom they best love but besides this I do say that were the times never so quiet and Religion never so uniform yet are there great doubts in many mens heads about the lawfulness of divers Petitions of the Families before-named but if you add unto this the said wonderful diversity in matters of Religion also which this time yieldeth you shall find the event much more doubtful and consequently it is no marvel though many may remain in hope to prevail seeing that where many are admitted to stand for a preferment there divers may have propability also of speeding An example you may take said the Civilian Lawyer in the Roman Conclave at the Popes election where among three or four score Cardinals that enter in for Electors few there are that have not hope also to be elected not for that they see themselves all well qualified as others but because often times when divers that are more forward by likelyhood cannot be agreed upon it falleth to the lot of him that is farthest off and so it may among your pretenders quoth he in England Your example said the Temporal Lawyer confirmeth somewhat of that I mean though it be not altogether in like matter or manners for that the Pope is made by Election and here we talk of a King by Succession Your Succession said the Civilian includeth also an Election or approbation of the common-wealth and so doth the succession of all Kings in Christendom besides as well appeareth by the manner of their new admision at their Coronations where the people are demanded again if they be content to accept such a man for their King though his title of nearness by bloud be never so clear And therefore much more it is like to be in this case of English pretenders now where their lawful nearness in bloud is so doubtful as you have signified and so I do come to confirm your former proposition of the doubtfulness of the next Successor in England with another reason besides that which you have alledged of the ambiguity of their true propinquity in bloud for I say further that albeit the nearness of each mans succession in bloud were evidently known yet were it very uncertain as things now stand in England and in the rest of Christendom round about who should prevail for that it is not enough for a man to be next only in bloud thereby to pretend a Crown but that other circumstances also must concur which if they want the bare propinquity or ancestry of bloud may justly be rejected and he that is second third fourth fifth or last may lawfully be preferred before the first and this by all Law both divine and human and by all reason conscience and custom of all Christian Nations To this said the temporal Lawyer you go further Sir then
of Kin also to King Henry the eighth of England yet could he never get to be restored but passed his time miserably partly in Banishment and partly in Prison until he died But it shall be best perhaps to end this short Narration with an Example or two out of England it self for that no where else have I read more remarkable accidents touching this point than in England but for brevity sake I shall only touch two or three that have happened since the Conquest for that I will go no higher though I might as appeareth by the Example of King Edwin and others neither will I begin to stand much upon the Example of King John though well also I might for that by his evil Government he made himself both so odious at home and contemptible abroad having lost Normandy Gascoin Guyen and all the rest in effect which the Crown of England had in France as first of all he was both Excommunicated and Deposed by the Sentence of the Pope at the Suit of his own people and was forced to make his peace by resigning his Crown into the hands of Pandulf the Pope's Legaâ—e as Polidor recounteth and afterwards falling back again to his old defects and naughty Government albeit by his promise to the Pope to go and make War against the Turks if he might be quiet at home and that his Kingdom should be perpetually tributary to the See of Rome he procured him to be of his side for a time and against the Barons yet that stayed not them to proceed to his Deprivation which they did effectuate first at Canterbury and after at London in the 18 th and last year of King John's Reign and meant also to have disinherited his Son Henry which was afterwards named King Henry the 3 d. and at that time a Child of Eight years old only and all this in punishment of the Father if he had lived and for that cause they called into England Lodowick Prince of France Son to King Philip the second and Father to St. Lewis the ninth and chose him for their King and did swear him Fealty with general consent in London in the year of our Lord 1216. And but that the Death of King John that presently ensued alter'd the whole course of that defignment and moved them to turn their purposes and accept of his Son Henry before matters were fully established for King Lodowick it was most likely that France and England would have been joyned by these means under a Crown But in the end as he said King Henry the third was admitted and he proved a very worthy King after so evil as had gone before him and had been Deposed which is a circumstance that you must always note in this Narration and he reigned more years than ever King in England did before him for he reigned full Fifty three years and left his Son and Heir Edward the first not inferiour to himself in Manhood and Virtue who reigned 34 years and left a Son named Edward the second who falling into the same or worse defects of Government than King John his Great-Grand-father had done was after 19 years reign Deposed also by Act of Parliament holden at London in the year 1326. and his Body adjudg'd to perpetual Imprisonment he being Prisoner at that present in the Castle of Wallingford whither divers both Bishops Lords and Knights of the Parliament were sent unto him to denounce the Sentence of the Realm against him viz. How they had deprived him and chosen Edward his Son in his stead For which act of choosing his Son he thanked them heartily and with many tears acknowledged his own unworthiness whereupon he was degraded his Name of King first taken from him and he appointed to be called Edward of Carnarvan from that hour forward and then his Crown and Ring were taken away and the Steward of his House brake the Staff of his Office in his presence and discharged his Servants of their Service and all other people of their Obedience or Allegiance towards him And towards his maintenance he had only a hundred Marks a year allowed for his Expences and then was he delivered also into the hands of certain particular Keepers who led him Prisoner from thence by divers other places using him with extreme indignity in the way until at last they took his Life from him in the Castle of Barklay and his Son Edward the third reigned in his place who if we respect either Valour Prowess length of Reign Acts of Chivalry or the multitude of famous Princes his Children left behind him was one of the noblest Kings that ever England had though he were chosen in the place of a very evil one as you have seen But what shall we say Is this worthiness which God giveth commonly to the Successors at these changes perpetual or certain by Descent No truly noâ— the example of one Prince's punishment maketh another to bewares for the next Successor after this noble Edwardâ— which was King Richard the second though he were not his Son but his Sons Son to wit Son and Heir to the renowned Black Prince of Walâ—s This Richard I say forgetting the miserable end of his Great-Grand-father for evil Government and the felicity and virtue of his Father and Grand-father for the contrary suffered himself to be abused and misled by evil Counsellors to the great hurt and disquiet of the Realm For which cause after he had reigned 22 years he was also Deposed by Act of Parliament holden in London in the year of our Lord 1399. and condemned to perpetual Imprisonment in the Castle of Pontefract where he was soon after put to death also and used as the other before had been And in this man's place by free Election was chosen for King the noble Knight Henry Duke of Lancaster who proved afterwards so notable a King as the World knoweth and was Father to King Henry the fifth commonly called the Alexander of England for that as Alexander the Great conquered the most part of Asia in the space of 9 or 10 years so did this Henry conquer France in less than the like time I might reckon also in this number of Princes Deposed for defect in Government though otherwise he were no evil man in life this King Henry the fourths Nephew I mean King Henry the sixth who after almost forty years Reign was Deposed and Imprisoned and put to death also together with his Son the Prince of Wales by Edward the fourth of the House of York and the sameâ— was confirmed by the Commons and especially by the people of London and afterwards also by publick Act of Parliament in respect not only of the Title which King Edward pretended but also and especially for that King Henry did suffer himself to be over-ruled by the Queen his Wife and had broken the Articles of Agreement made by the Parliament between
Darly her Husband which by many was laid against her And the second did handle her Title to the Crown of England and the third did answer the Book of John Knox the Scot entituled Against the Monstrous Government of Women Of all which three Points for that the second that concerneth the Title is that which properly appertaineth to our purpose and for that the same is handled again and more largely in the second Book set out not long after by John Lesley Lord Bishop of Ross in Scotland who at that time was Embassadour for the said Queen of Scots in England and handled the same matter more abundantly which M. Morgan had done before him I shall say no more of this Book of M. Morgan but shall pass over to that of the Bishop which in this Point of Succession containeth also whatsoever the other hath so as by declaring the Contents of the one we shall come to see what is the other The Intent then of this Book of the Bishop of Ross is to refute the other book of Hales and Bacon and that especially in the two Points before mentioned which they alledged for their Principles to wit about Foreign Birth and King Henry's Testament And against the first of these two Points the Bishop alledgeth many Proofs that there is no such Maxim in the common Laws of England to disinherit a Prince born out of the Land from his or her Right of Succession that they have by Blood And this first for that the Statute made for barring of Aliens to inherit in England which was in the 25. Year of the Reign of King Edward III. is only to be understood of particular mens inheritance and no ways to be extended to the Succession of the Crown as by comparison of many other like Cases is declared And secondly for that there is express exception in the same Statute of the Kings Children and Off-spring And thirdly for that the practice hath always been contrary both before and after the Conquest to wit that divers Princes born out of the Realm have succeeded The other Principle also concerning King Henry's Testament the Bishop impugneth first by divers Reasons and Incongruities whereby it may be presumed that King Henry never made any such Testament and if he did yet could it not hold in Law And secondly also by Witness of the Lord Paget that was of the Privy Council in those days and of Sir Edward Montague Lord Chief Justice and of one William Clark that set the Kings Stamp to the Writing all which avowed before the Council and Parliament in Queen Maries time that the said Testament was signed after the King was past sense and memory And finally the said Bishop concludeth that the Line of Scotland is the next every way both in respect of the House of Lancaster and also of York for that they are next Heirs to King Henry VIII who by his Father was Heir to the House of York But after these three Books was written a fourth by one Robert Highinton Secretary in time past to the Earl of Northumberland a man well read in Stories and especially of our Countrey who is said to be dead some years past in Paris This man impugneth all the three former Books in divers principal Points and draweth the Crown from both their Pretenders I mean as well-from the House of Scotland as from that of Suffolk and first against the Book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon written as hath been said in favour of the House of Suffolk Highington holdeth with the Bishop and Morgan that these two Principles laid by the other of Foreign Birth and of King Henry's Testament against the Scotish Line are of no Validity as neither their reasons for legitimating of the Earl of Hartfords Children which afterwards shall be handled And secondly he is against both Morgan and the Bishop of Ross also in divers important Points and in the very Principal of all for that this man I mean Highinton maketh the King of Spain to be the next and most rightful Pretender by the House of Lancaster for proof whereof he holdeth first that King Henry VII had no Title indeed to the Crown by Lancaster but only by the House of York that is to say by his Marriage of Queen Elizabeth elder Daughter to King Edward IV For that albeit himself were descended by his Mother from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster yet this was but by his Third Wife Catharin Swinford and that the true Heirs of Blanch his first Wife Dutchess and Heir of Lancaster to whom saith he appertained only the Succession after the death of King Henry the VI. and his Son with whom ended the Line Male of that House remained only in Portugal by the Marriage of Lady Philip Daughter of the foresaid Blanch to King John the I. of Portugal and that for as much as King Philip of Spain saith this man hath now succeeded to all the Right of the Kings of Portugal to him appertaineth also the onely Right of Succession of the House of Lancaster and that all the other Descendents of King Henry VII are to pretend only by the Title of York I mean as well the Line of Scotland as also of Suffolk and Huntington for that in the House of Lancaster King Philip is evidently before them all Thus holdeth Highington alledging divers Stories Arguments and Probabilities for the same and then adjoineth two other Propositions which do import most of all to wit that the Title of the House of Lancaster was far better than that of York not for that Edmond Crookback first Founder of the House of Lancaster who was Son to King Henry the III. and Brother to King Edward the I. was eldest son to the said Edward injuriously put back for his deformity in Body as both the said Bishop of Ross and George Lylly do falsly hold and this man refuteth by many good Arguments but for that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being the eldest Son that King Edward the III. had alive when he dyed should in Right have succeeded in the Crown as this man holdeth and should have been preferred before Richard the II. that was the black Princes Son who was a degree further off from King Edward the III. his Grandfather than was John of Gaunt to whom King Edward was Father and by this occasion this man cometh to discuss at large the opinions of the Lawyers whether the Uncle or the Nephew should be preferred in the Succession of a Crown to wit whether the younger Brother or the elder Brothers son if his Father be dead without being seased of the same which is a Point that in the Civil Law hath great Disputation and many great Authors on each side as this man sheweth and the matter also wanteth not examples on both parts in the Succession of divers English Kings as our Friend the Civil Lawyer did signify also in his discourse and we may chance to have occasion
reason is for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly wise discreet Prince notwithstanding that some Authors call him Crouchback and that he was highly in the favour both of his Father King Henry as also of his Brother King Edward and imployed by them in many great Wars and other affairs of State both in France and other where which argueth that there was no such great defect in him as should move his Father and the Realm to deprive him of his Succession Thirdly we read that King Henry procured by divers ways and means the advancement of this Lord Edmond as giving him the Earldoms of Leicester and Darby besides that of Lancaster as also procuring by all means possible and with exceeding great charges to have made him King of Naples and Sicilie by Pope Innocentius which had been no policy to have done if he had been put back from his Inheritance in England for that it had been to have Armed him against his Brother the King Fourthly we see that at the death of his Father King Henry the III. this Lord Edmond was principally left in charge with the Realm his elder Brother Prince Edward being scarsly returned from the War of Asia at what time he had good occasion to challenge his own right to the Crown if he had had any seeing he wanted no power thereunto having three goodly Sons at that time alive born of his Wife Queen Blanch Daugher of Navarre and County of Champain to whom she had born only one Daughter that was married to Philip le Bel King of France But we shall never read that either he or any of his Children made any such claim but that they lived in very good agreement and high grace with King Edward the first as his Children did also with King Edward the II. until he began to be mis-led in Government and then the two Sons of this Lord Edmond I mean both Thomas and Henry that Successively were Earls of Lancaster made War upon the said Edward the II. and were the principal Actors in his deposition and in setting up of his Son Edward the III. in his place aâ— what time it is evident that they might have put in also for themselves if their title had been such as this report maketh it A fifth reason is for that if this had been so that Edmond Earl of Lancaster had been the elder Brother then had the controversie between the two Houses of York and Lancaster been most clear and without all doubt at all for then had the House of York had no pretence of right in the World and then were it evident that the Heirs general of Blanch Dutchess of Lancaster Wife of John of Gaunt to wit the descendents of Lady Philip her Daughter that was married into Portugal these I say and none other were apparent and true Heirs to the Crown of England at this day and all the other of the House of York usurpers as well King Henry the VII as all his posterity and off-spring for that none of them have descended of the said Blanch as is manifest And therefore lastly the matter standeth no doubt as Polidor holding in the latter end of the life of King Henry the III. where having mentioned these two Sons Edward and Edmond he addeth these words There wanted not certain men long time after this that affirmed this Edmond to be the elder Son to King Henry the III. and to have been deprived of his Inheritance for that he was deformed in body but these things were feigned to the end that King Henry the IV. that came by his Mothers side of this Edmond might seem to have come to the Kingdom by right whereas indeed he got it by force Thus saith Polidor in this place but afterward in the beginning of the life of the said King Henry the IV. he saith that some would have had King Henry to have pretended this Title among other reasons but that the most part accounting it but a meer fable it was omitted Now then it being clear that of these two Sons of King Henry the III. Prince Edward was the Elder and Lawful Heir it remaineth only that we set down their several descents unto the times of King Edward the III. and his Children in whose days the dissention and controversie between these Royal Houses of York and Lancaster began to break forth And for the Issue of Edward that was King after his Father by the name of King Edward the first it is evident that albeit by two several Wives he had a dozen Children male and female yet only his fourth Son by his first Wife called also Edward who was King after him by the name of King Edward the II left Issue that remained which Edward the II being afterward for his evil Government deposed left Issue Edward the III. who was made King by election of the people in his place and after a long and prosperous Reign left divers Sons whereof after we shall speak and among them his III. Son named John of Gaunt married Lady Blanch Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and of the forenamed Lord Edmond Crouchback by which Blanch John of Gaunt became Duke of Lancaster so as the lines of these two Brethren Edward and Edmond did meet and joyn again in the fourth descent as now shall appear by declaration of the Issue of the foresaid Lord Edmond Edmond then the second Son of King Henry the third being made County Palatine of Lancaster as also Earl of Leicester and of Darby by his Father King Henry as hath been said had issue three Sons to wit Thomas Henry and John among whom he divided his three States making Thomas his eldest Son County Palatine of â—ancaster Henry Earl of Leicester and John Earl of Darby But Thomas the eldest and John the youngest dying without Issue all three States fell again upon Henry the second Son which Henry had Issue one Son and three Daughters his Son was named Henry the second of that name Earl of Lancaster and made Duke of Lancaster by King Edward the third and he had one only Daughter and Heir named Blanch who was married unto John of Gaunt as before hath been said But Duke Henry's three Sisters named Joan Mary and Eleanor were all married to divers principal men of the Realm for that Joan was married to John Lord Maubery of whom are descended the Howards of the House of Norfolk at this day and Mary was married to Henry Lord Percy from whom cometh the House of the Earls of Northumberland and Eleanor was married to Richard Earl of Arundel thence is issued also by his Mothers side the Earl of Arundel â—hat now is so as of this ancient Line of Lancaster there want not noble Houses within the Realm at this day issued thence before the controversie fell out between York and this Family of which controversie how it rose and how it was continued I
what Historiographers do say according to their affections or Interests as what reasons and proofs be alledged of every side for that by this we shall more easily come to judge where the right or wrong doth lie First therefore the defenders of the House of York do alledge that their title is plain and evident for that as in the former chapter hath been declared Richard Duke of York first pretender of this House whose Father was Son to Edmond Langley Duke of York fourth Son of King Edward the third and his Mother Anne Mortimer that was Neece once removed and sole Heir to Leonel Duke of Clarence second Son of the said King Edward this Richard I say Duke of York pretended that for so much as he had two titles joyned together in himself and was lawful Heir as well to Duke Leonel the second Brother as to Duke Edmond the fourth that he was to be preferred in Succession of the Crown after the death of King Richard the second Heir of the first Son of King Edward before the Issue of John of Gaunt that was but third Son to the said King Edward and consequently that Henry Bolenbrok John of Gaunts Son Duke of Lancaster called afterwards King Henry the fourth entred the Crown by tyranny and violonce first for deposing the true and Lawful King Richard and secondly for taking the Kingdom upon himself which Kingdom after the death of the foresaid King Richard which happened in the year 1399. belonging to Edmond Mortimer Earl of March then living and after his death to Anne Mortimer his Sister married to Richard Earl of Cambridge Father to this Richard pretendent Duke of York as hath been said for that this Edmond and Anne Mortimer were Children to Roger Mortimer Son of Philip that was daughter to Duke Leonel which Leonel was elder Uncle to King Richard and before John of Gaunt the younger Brother whose Son took the Crown upon him For the better understanding of which pretence and allegation of the House of York against Lancaster we must note the story following to wit That King Edward the III. seeing in his old age that Prince Edward his eldest Son whom of all his Children he loved most dearly was dead though there wanted not much doubt in some mens heads as after shall be shewed who ought to succeed yet the old man for the exceeding great affection he bare to the dead Prince would hear nothing in that behalf but appointed Richard the said Prince Edwards only Son and Heir to succeed him in the Kingdom and made the same to be confirmed by Act of Parliament and inforced all his Children then alive to swear to the same which were John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster his third and eldest Son that then lived for Leonel his second Son Duke of Clarence was dead before and Edmond Langley and Thomas Woodstock Earls at that time but after Dukes of York and Glocester and so King Richard Reigned with good obedience of his Uncles and their Children for 20 years together but in the end when he grew insolent and had put to death his Uncle the Duke of Glocester together with the Earl of Arundel and banished many others of the Nobility and among them the Archbishop of Canterbury as also his own Cousin-German Henry Duke of Hertford and after of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt and had made many wickedd Statutes as well against the Church and State Ecclesiastical as also to intangle the Realm and Nobility with fained crimes of Treason against his Regality as then he termed them the principal men of the Realm seeing a sit occasion offered by the Kings absence in Ireland called home out of France the foresaid Henry Duke of Lancaster with the Archbishop of Canterbury Earls of Arundel and Warwick and others which were in banishment and by common consent gathered upon the suddain such an Army to assist them in England as they took the King brought him to London and there in a Parliament laying together the intolerable faults of his Government they deprived him of all Regal Dignity as before they had done to his great Grandfather K. Edward the second and then by universal consent of the Parliament and people there present they chose and admitted the said Henry Duke of Lancaster to be their King who continued so all the days of his life and left the Crown unto his Son and Sons Son after him by the space of threescore years until this Richard before named Duke of York made challenge of the same in manner and form as before hath been shewed Now then the story being thus the question is first whether Richard the second were justly deposed or no and secondly whether after his deposition the House of York or House of Lancaster should have entred and thirdly if the House of Lancaster did commit any wrong or injustice at their first entrance to the Crown yet whether the continuance of so many years in possession with so many approbations and confirmations thereof by the Commonwealth were not sufficient to legitimate their right Concerning which points many things are alledged by the favourers of both Families and in the first point touching the lawfulness or unlawfulness of King Richards deposition three Articles especially do seem most considerable to wit about the thing in it self whether a lawful King may be deposed upon just causes and secondly about these causes in King Richards deposition to wit whether they were just or sufficient for deposition of the said King and lastly about the manner of doing iâ— whether the same were good and orderly or not And touching the first of these three points which is that a King upon just causes may be deposed I think both parties though never so contrary between themselves will easily agree and the Civil Lawyer seems to me to have proved it so evidently before throughout his whole dicourse as I think very little may be said against the same For he hath declared if you remember both by reason authority and examples of all Nations Christian that this may and hath and ought to be done when urgent occasions are offered And first by reason he sheweth it for that all Kingly authority is given them only by the Commonwealth and that with this express condition that they shall Govern according to Law and equity that this is the cause of their exaltation above other men that this is the end of their Government the butt of their authority the star and pole by which they ought to direct their stern to wit the good of the people by the weal of their Subjects by the benefit of the Realm which end being taken away or perverted the King becometh a Tyrant a Tyger a fierce Lion a ravening Wolf a publick enemy and a bloudy murtherer which were against all reason both natural and moral that a Common-wealth could not deliver it self from so eminent a destruction By authority also
daughter and Heir of Leonel Duke of Clarence and was Grandfather to the last Edmond by me named should be Heir apparent to the Crown if the King should chance to die without Issue To which objection those of Lancaster do answer first that Polydor doth erre in the person when he saith that Edmond Husband of Lady Philippa was declared for Heir apparent for that this Edmond Mortimer that married Lady Philippa died peaceably in Ireland three years before this Parliament was holden to wit in the year of Christ 1382. as both Hollingshed Stow and other Chroniclers do testifie and therefore Polydor doth erre not only in this place about this man but also in that in another place he saith that this Edmond so declared Heir apparent by King Richard was slain by the Irish in Ireland 12 years after this declaration made of the succession to wit in the year 1394. which was indeed not this man but his Son Roger Mortimer Heir to him and to the Lady Philippa his Wife who was declared Heir apparent in the Parliament aforesaid at the instance of King Richard and that for especial hatred and malice as these men say which he did bear against his said Uncle the Duke of Lancaster and his Son Henry whom he desired to exclude from the succession The cause of this hatred is said to be for that presently upon the death of Prince Edward Father to this Richard which Prince died in the year of Christ 1376. and but 10. months before his Father King Edward the third there wanted not divers learned and wise men in England that were of opinion that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster eldest Son then living of the said King Edward should have succeeded his Father jure propinquitatis before Richard that was but Nephew and one degree further off then he but the old King was so extremely affectionate unto his eldest Son the black Prince Edward newly dead that he would not hear of any to succeed him as Frosard saith but only Richard the said Prince's Son Wherefore he called presently a Parliament which was the last that ever he held and therein caused his said Nephew Richard to be declared Heir apparent and made his three Sons then living that were Uncles to the Youth to wit John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster Edmond Langley Duke afterwards of York and Thomas Woodstock Duke of Gloucester to swear Fealty unto Richard as they did And albeit John of Gaunt all his life after for keeping of his Oath that he had made unto his Father never pretended any Right to the Crown yet King Richard knowing well the pretence that he and his might have was still afraid of him and sought infinite means to be rid of him first by perswading him to go and make War in Spain where he thought he might miscarry in so dangerous an attempt and then offering to give him all Aquitain if he would leave England to go and live there as he did for three years with extreme peril for that the people of Aquitain would not receive him but rose against him and refused his Government and would not admit him for their Lord but appealed to the King who also allowed thereof and so when John of Gaunt came home into England again King Richard thought no better way to weaken him then to banish his Son Henry Duke of Hertford and so he did And besides this the said King Richard practised also by divers secret drifts the death of his said Uncle the Duke of Lancaster as Walsingham witnesseth and when the said Duke came at length to die which was in the 22. year of King Richard's reign he wrote such joyous Letters thereof as Frosard saith to his Father-in-law Charles the sixth King of France as though he had been delivered of his chiefest Enemy not imagining that his own destruction was so near at hand and much accelerated by the death of the said Duke as it was And these were the causes say the favourers of the House of Lancaster why King Richard caused this Act of Parliament to pass in favour of Roger Mortimer and in prejudice of the House of Lancaster and not for that the right of Earl Mortimer was better then that of the Duke of Lancaster And this they say is no new thing for Princes oftentimes to procure partial Laws to pass in Parliament for matter of Succession according to their own affections for the like say they did Edward the third procure in the favour of this Richard as before I have shewed in the last Parliament before his death and afterward again King Richard the third with much more open Injustice caused an Act of Parliament to pass in his days whereby his Nephew John de la Pole Earl of Lincoln Son to his Sister Elizabeth Dutchess of Suffolk was declared Heir apparent to the Crown excluding thereby the Children of his two elder Brothers to wit the daughters of King Edward the fourth and the Son and daughter of George Duke of Clarenoe which yet by all order should have gone before their Sisters Children And like facility found King Henry the 8th to get the consent of two Parliaments to give him Authority to appoint what Successor he would of his own Kindred by which Authority afterward he appointed by his Testament as in another place shall be shewed that the Issue of his younger Sister Mary should be preferred before the Issue of his eldest Sister Margaret of Scotland A like declaration was that also of King Edward the sixth of late memory who appointed the Lady Jane Gray his Cousen-german removed to be his Heir and Successor in the Crown of England and excluded his own two Sisters the Lady Mary and the Lady Elizabeth from the same but these declarations make little to the purpose when right and equity do repugn as these men say that it did in the foresaid declaration of Roger Mortimer to be Heir apparent for that they hold and avouch the House of Lancaster to have had the true right to enter not only after the death of King Richard the second as it did but also before him that is to say immediately upon the death of King Edward the third for that John of Gaunt was then the eldest Son which King Edward had living and nearer to his Father by a degree then was Richard the Nephew About which point to wit whether the Uncle or Nephew should be preferred in Succession of Kingdoms it seemeth that in this age of King Edward the third there was great trouble and controversie in the World abroad for so testifieth Girard du Haillan Councellor and Secretary of France in his History of the year of Christ 1346. which was about the midst of King Edwards Reign and therefore no marvel though King Edward took such care of the sure establishing of his Nephew Richard in Succession as is before related And much less marvel is it if K.
crime Secondly they say that the House of York did enter only by violence and by infinite bloudshed and by wilful murthering not only of divers of the Nobility both Spiritual and Temporal but also of both King Henry the sixth himself and of Prince Edward his Son and by a certain popular and mutinous election of a certain few Souldiers in Smithfield at London and this was the entrance of the House of York to the Crown whereas King Henry the fourth first King of the House of Lancaster entred without bloudshed as hath been shewed being called home by the requests and letters of the people and Noblity and his election and admission to the Crown was orderly and authorized by general consent of Parliament in the doing thereof Thirdly they alledge that King Henry the sixth put down by the House of York was a good and holy King and had Reigned peaceably 40. years and never committed any act worthy deposition whereas King Richard the second had many ways deserved the same as himself came to acknowledge and thereupon made a personal solemn and publick resignation of the said Crown unto his Cousen Henry of Lancaster the which justified much the said Henry's entrance Fourthly they alledge that the House of Lancaster had been in possession of the Crown upon the point of 60â— years before the House of York did raise trouble unto them for the same in which time their Title was confirmed by many Parliaments Oaths approbations and publick Acts of the Commonwealth and by the Nobles Peers and people thereof and by the States both Spiritual and Temporal and with the consent of all foreign Nations so that if there had been any fault in their first entrance yet was this sufficient to authorize the same as we see it was in the title of King William the Conqueror and of his two Sons King William Rufus and King Henry the first that entred before their elder Brether and of King John that entred before his Nephew and of his Son King Henry the third that entred after his Fathers deprivation and after the election of Prince Lewis of France as also of Edward the third that entred by deposition of his own Father of all which Titles yet might there have been doubt made at the beginning but by time and durance of possession and by confirmation of the Commonwealth they were made lawful and without controversie Fifthly they say that if we consider the four King Henrys that have been of the House of Lancaster to wit the 4 5 6 and 7 and do compare them with the other four that have been of the House of York to wit Edward the fourth Richard the third Henry the eighth and Edward the sixth and all their acts both at home and abroad what quietness or troubles have passed and what the Commonwealth of England hath gotten or lost under each of them we shall find that God hath seemed to prosper and allow much more of those of Lancaster then of those of York for that under those of Lancaster the Realm hath enjoyed much more peace and gaining far greater honour and enlarged more the dominions of the Crown then under those of York and that it had done also much more if the seditions rebellions and troubles raised and brought in by the Princes of the House of York had not hindered the same as say these men it was evidently seen in the time of King Henry the sixth when their contention against the Princes of the House of Lancaster was the principal cause why all the English States in France were lost and what garboils and troubles at home have ensued afterwards and how infinite murthers and men slaughters with change of Nobility have been caused hereby and increased afterward under the Government and rule of the Princes of York needeth not say these men to be declared One thing only they note in particular which I will not omit and let it be the sixth note and that is that the Princes of York have not only been rigorous and very bloudy unto their adversaires but also among themselves and to their kindred which these men take to be a just punishment of God upon them And for proof hereof they alledge first the Testimony of Polydor who albeit he were a great advocate of the House of York as before hath been noted for that he lived and wrote his story under King Henry the eighth yet in one place he breaketh forth into these words of the Princes of this House Cum non haberent jam inimicos in quos saevitiam explerent saturarent in semetipsos crudelitatem exercuerunt proprioque sanguine sâ—as pollure manus When these Princes now had brought to destruction all those of the House of Lancaster so as they had no more enemies upon whom to fill and satiate their cruelty then began they to exercise their fierceness upon themselves and to imbrew their hands with their own bloud Thus far Polydor. Secondly they do shew the same by the deeds of both sides for that the love union trust confidence faithfulness kindness and Loyalty of the Princes of Lancaster the one towards the other is singular and notorious as may appear by the acts and studious endeavours of the Lord Henry Bishop of Winchester and Cardinal and of the Lord Thomas Duke of Exceter and Marquis of Dorset Brothers of King Henry the fourth to whom and to his Children they were most faithful friendly and loyal as also by the noble proceedings of the Lords Thomas Duke of Clarence John Duke of Bedford and Humphry Duke of Glocester Sons of the forâ—said Henry the fourth and brothers of King Henry the fifth the first of which three gave his bloud in his service and the other two spent their whole lives in defence of the dignity of the English Crown the one as Regent of France the other as Protector of England by the worthy acts also and renowned faithfulness of the Dukes of Somerset Cousen-jeâ—â—ans to the said King Henry the fourth and to his Children and the proper Ancestors of King Henry the VII all which Dukes of Somerset of the House of Lancaster being five or six in number did not only as Polydor saith assist and help their Soveraign and the whole Realm Vigiliis curis periculis that is to say with watchfulness carâ—s and offering themselves to dangers but also four of them one after another to wit Edmond with his three Sons Henry Edmond and John whereof two successively after him were Dukes of Somerset and the Marquess of Dorset were all four I say as so many Maccabees slain in the defence of their Country and Family by the other faction of the House of York which thing say these men shewed evidently both a marvelous confidence that these men had in their quarrel as also a great blessing of God towards that Family that they had such love and union among themselves But now
Deprivation by the Pope that soon after ensued as also by another Deprivation made by the Barons of his Realm as after shall be touched Furthermore they say That when Arthur Duke of Britain whom to this effect they do hold to have been the only true Heir at that time to the Kingdom of England was in Prison in the Castle of Roan suspecting that he should be murthered by his said Unkle King John he nominated this Lady Blanch his Cousin-jerman to be his Heir perswading himself that he by the help of her Husband Prince Lewis of France and her Father the King of Spain should be better able to defend and recover his or her right to the Crown of England than Eleanor his own Sister should be who was also in the hands of his said Unkle for that he supposed that she should be made away by himself shortly after as indeed the French Chronicler affirmeth that she was And howsoever this matter of Duke Arthur's Testament was yet certain it is that when he and his Sister were put to death the next in Kin that could succeed them in their right to England was this Lady Blanch and her Mother Queen Eleanor that was Sister to Arthur's Father Geffrey Duke of Britany for that King John their Unkle was presumed by all men to be uncapable of their Inheritance by his putting of them to death and Child he had yet none And this is the second point that these men do deduce for the Lady Infanta of Spain by the title of Queen Eleanor and her Daughter Blanch to whom the Infanta is next Heir A third Interest also the same men do derive to the Infanta by the actual Deposition of King John by the Barons and States of this Realm in the 16 th year of his Reign and by the Election and actual Admission of Lewis Prince of France Husband of Lady Blanch whom they chose with one consent and admitted and swore him Fealty and Obedience in London for him and for his Heirs and Posterity in the year 1217. and gave him Possession of the said City and Tower of London and of many other chief places of the Realm and albeit afterwards the most part of the Realm changed their minds upon the sudden death of the said King John and chose and admitted his young Son Henry III. a Child of 9 years old yet do the favourers of the Infanta say That there remaineth to her as Heir unto the said Lewis until this day that Interest which by this Election Oath and Admission of the Realm remained unto this Prince Lewis which these men affirm to be the very like case as was that of Hugo Capetus in France who came to be King especially upon a certain Title that one of his Ancestors named Odo Earl of Paris had by being once elected King of France and admitted and sworn though afterwards he was deposed again and young Charles surnamed the Simple was admitted in his place as Henry III. was in England after the Election of Lewis But yet as the other ever continued his Right and Claim till it was restored to Hugo Capetus one of his Race so say these men may this Infanta continue and renew now the Demand of King Lewis her Ancestor for that Titles and Interests to Kingdoms once rightly gotten do never die but remain ever for the Posterity to effectuate when they can And thus much of this matter But after this again these men do shew how that the said Infanta of Spain doth descend also from Henry III. son of King John by the Dukes of Britany as before in the second Chapter hath been declared and in the Arbor and Genealogy following in the end of this Conference shall be seen for that King Henry besides his two Sons Edward and Edmond which were the beginners of the two Houses of York and Lancaster had also a Daughter named Beatrix married to John the second of that Name Duke of Britany and by him she had Arthur II. and so lineally from him have descended the Princes of that House until their Union with the Crown of France and from thence unto this Lady Infanta of Spain that now is who taketh her self for proper Heir of the said House of Britany and Heir general of France as hath been said By this Conjunction then of the House of Britany with the Bloud-Royal of England the Friends of the Infanta do argue in this manner That seeing she descendeth of the Sister of these two Brothers which were the Heads of the two opposite Houses of Lancaster and York and considering that each of these Houses hath often-times been Attainted and Excluded from the Succession by sundry Acts of Parliament and at this present are opposite and at contention among themselves why may not this right of both Houses say these men by way of Composition Peace and Comprize at least be passed over to the Issue of their Sister which resteth in the Infanta Again they say That all these three Branches of the Lines to wit by the Lady Constance Daughter of King William the Conquerour by the Lady Eleanor Daughter of King Henry II. and by the Lady Beatrix Daughter of King Henry III. it is evident that this Lady the Infanta of Spain is of the true ancient Bloud-Royal of England and that divers ways she may have Claim to the same which being granted they infer That seeing matters are so doubtful at this day about the next lawful Succession and that divers of the Pretenders are excluded some for Bastardy some other for Religion some for unaptness to Govern and some for other Causes and seeing the Commonwealth hath such Authority to dispose in this Affair as before the Civil-Lawyer hath declared why may there not Consideration be had among other Pretenders of this noble Princess also say these men especially seeing she is unmarried and may thereby commodate many matters and salve many breaches and satisfie many hopes and give contentment to many desires as the world knoweth And this is in effect as much as I have heard alledged hitherto in favour of the Infanta of Spain but against this Pretence others do produce divers Arguments and Objections As first of all That these her Claims be very old and worn out and are but Collateral by Sisters Secondly That she is a Stranger and Alien born Thirdly That her Religion is contrary to the State Unto all which Objections the favourers aforesaid do make their Answers And to the first they say That Antiquity hurteth not the goodness of a Title when occasion is offered to advance the same especially â—n Titles belonging to Kingdoms which commonly are never presumed to die as hath been said and nullum tempus occurrit Regi saith our Law And as for Collateral Lines they say That they may lawfully be admitted to enter when the direct Lines do either fail or are excluded for other just respects as in our Case they hold that
it happeneth And as for the second point of Foreign Birth they say there hath been sufficient answer before in treating of the House of Scotland that in rigour it is no bar by intention of any English Law yet whether in reason of State and politick Government it may be a just impediment or no it shall after be handled more at large when we come to treat of the House of Portugal To the last point of Religion they answer that this impediment is not universal nor admitted in the Judgment of all men but only of those English that be of different Religion from her But to some others and those many as these men do ween her Religion will rather be a motive to favour her Title then to hinder the same so that on this ground no certainty can be builded and this is as much as I have to say at this time of these two Families of Clarence and Britany CHAP. VIII Of the House of Portugal which containeth the Claims as well of the King and Prince of Spain to the succession of England as also of the Dukes of Parma and Bragansa by the House of Lancaster IT hath been oftentimes spoken before upon occasions offered that the Princes of the House of Portugal at this day do perswade themselves that the only remainder of the House of Lancaster resteth among them as the only true Heirs of the Lady Blanch Dutchess and Heir of Lancaster and first Wife of John of Gaunt which point of these Princes descents from the said Dutchess of Lancaster though it be declared sufficiently before in the third and fourth Chapters yet will I briefly here also set down and repeat again the reasons thereof which are these that follow John of Gaunt was Duke of Lancaster by the right of his first Wife Lady Blanch and had by her only one Son as also one Daughter of whom we need here to speak for that the other hath left no Issue now living The Son was King Henry the 4th who had Issue King Henry the 5th and he again Henry the 6th in whom was extinguished all the succession of this Son Henry The daughter of John of Gaunt by Lady Blanch was called Philippa who was married to John the first King of that name of Portugal who had Issue by him King Edward and he again had Issue King Alfonsus the fifth King of Portugal and he and his off-spring had Issue again the one after the other until our times and so by this marriage of Lady Philippa to their first King John these Princes of the House of Portugal that live at this day do pretend that the Inheritance of Lancaster is only in them by this Lady Philippa for that the succession of her elder Brother King Henry the fourth is expired long ago This in effect is their pretence but now we will pass on to see what others say that do pretend also to be of the House of Lancaster by a latter marriage John of Gaunt after the death of his first Wife Lady Blanch did marry again the Lady Constance daughter of King Peter surnamed the Cruel of Castile and had by her one daughter only named Catharine whom he married afterward back to Castile again giving her to Wife to King Henry the third of that name by whom the 〈◊〉 Issue King John and he others so as lineally King Philip of Spain is descended from her which King Philip being at this day King also of Portugal and chief Titler of that House unto England he joy 〈◊〉 the Inheritance of both the two daughters of John of Gaunt in one and so we shall not need to talk of these two daughters hereafter distinctly but only as of one seeing that both their descents do end in this one man The only difficulty and dissention is then about the Issue of the third marriage which was of John of Gaunt wiâ—h Lady Catharine Swinford whom he first kept as a Concubine in the time of his second Wife Lady Constance as before hath been shewed in the third Chapter and begat of her four Children and after that his Wife Lady Constance was dead he took her to Wife for the love he bare to his Children a little before his death and caused the said Children to be legitimated by Authority of Parliament and for that none of these four Children of his have left Issue but only one that was John Earl of Somerset we shall speak only of him omitting all the rest This John then Earl of Somerset had Issue another John which was made Duke of Somerset by King Henry the sixth who with his three Sons were slain by the Princes of the House of York in the quarrel of Lancaster and so left only one daughter named Margaret who by her Husband Edmond Tudor Earl of Richmond was Countâ—ss of Richmond and had by him a Son named Henry Earl of Richmond that was after King by the name of King Henry the seventh and from him all his descendents both of the House of Scotland and Suffolk do pretend also to be of the House of Lancaster which yet can be no otherwise then now hath been declared to wit not from Blanch first Wife and Heir of the Dutchy of Lancaster but from Catharine Swinford his third Wife wherein riseth the question whether those men I mean King Henry the seventh and his descendents may pâ—â—perly be said to be of the true House of Lancaster or no Whereunto some do answer with a distinction to wit that to the Dutchy of Lancaster whereof the first Wife Lady Blanch was Heir these of the third marriage cannot be Heirs but only the remainder of the Issue of the said Lady Blanch that resteth in the Princes of the House of Portugal But yet to the Title of the Crown of England which came by John of Gaunt himself in that he was third Son of King Edward the third and eldest of all his Children that lived when the said King Edward died by which is pretended also that he should have succeeded immediately after him before King Richard the second as before in the fourth Chapter hath been declared to this Right I say and to this Interest of the Crown which came by John of Gaunt himself and not by Lady Blanch or by any other of his Wives the descendents of King Henry the seventh do say that they may and ought to succeed for that John Earl of Somerset eldest Son of John of Gaunt by Lady Catharine Swinford though he were begotten out of matrimony yet being afterward made legitimate he was to inherit this right of John of Gaunt his Father before the Lady Philippa his Sister for that so we see that King Edward the sixth though younger and but half-brother unto the Lady Mary and Elizabeth his Sisters yet he inherited the Crown before them and in like manner is Lord Philip Prince of Spain at this day to inherit all the
John that was King after his Father by the Name of John the third Secondly the Lady Isabel Married to the Emperor Charles the fifth and Mother to King Philip of Spain that now liveth Thirdly Lady Beatrix Married to Charles Duke of Savoy and Mother to Duke Philibert the last Duke that Died and Grand-mother to this that now Liveth Fourthly Lord Lewis Father to Don Antonio that now is in England Fifthly Lord Henry that was Cardinal and Archbishop of Ebora and in the end King of Portugal And sixthly Lord Edward that was Father of the two Dutchesses of Parma and Bragansa to wit of the Lady Mary and Lady Catharine both which left goodly Issue for that Lady Mary hath left by the last Duke of Parma Lord Ranutius that is now Duke of Parma and Lord Edward that is Cardinal And the Lady Catharine Dutchess of Bragansa that yet liveth hath Issue divers goodly Princes as the Lord Theodosius that is now Duke of Bragansa and three younger Brothers to wit Edward Alexander and Philip young Princes of great expectation and these are the Children of King Emmanuel whose particular Successions and Issues I shall declare somewhat more in particular Prince John of Portugal afterward King by name of King John the Third had Issue another John that was Prince of Portugal but died before his Father and left a Son Named Sebastian who was King and slain afterward by the Moors in Barbary and so ended this first Line The second Son and fourth Child of King Emmanuel was Named Lord Lewis and died also without Issue Legitimate as is supposed for that Don Antonio his Son that afterward was proclaimed King by the People of Lisbone and now liveth in England was taken by all men to be unlawful as presently more at large shall be shewed so as after the Death of King Sebastian there entred the Cardinal Lord Henry which was third Son of King Emmanuel and Great-Uncle to Sabastian lately Desceased for that he was Brother to King John the third that was Grand Father to King Sebastian And albeit there wanted not some according as the Authors Write which afterward I shall Name who affirmed and held that King Philip of Spain should have succeeded King Sebastian before the Cardinal for that he was nearer in Consanguinity to him than was the Cardinal for that besides that King Philip was Son of King Emmanuâ—ls Eldest Daughter he was Brother also to King Sebastians Mother yet the said Cardinal entred peaceably and by consent of all parties but for that he was Old and Unmarried and not like to leave any Child of his own there began presently the Contention in his days who should be his Successor To which Succession did pretend five Princes of the Blood-Royal of Portugal besides the Lady Catharine Queen-Mothers of France who pretended by her Mothers side to be Descended of one Lord Ralph Earl of Bullain in Piccardy which Ralph was Eldest Son of Alfonsus the third King of Portugal which Alfonsus before he was King to wit in the time of his Eldest Brother King Sanches of Portugal was Married to the Countess and Heir of Bullain Named Mathildis and had by her this Ralph But afterwards this Alfonsus coming to be King of Portugal he Married again with the King of Castile's Daughter and had by her a Son called Denyse who reigned after him and his Successors unto this day all which Succession of King Denyse and his Posterity the said Queen Mother would have improved and shewed that it appertained unto her by the said Raphe and for this cause sent she to Portugal one Lord Vrban Bishop of Comince in Gascony to plead her Cause which Cause of hers was quickly rejected and only the aforesaid five Princes Descended of King Emmanuel's Children were admitted to the Tryal for the same which were Don Antonio Son of Lord Lewis the King Cardinals Elder Brother and King Philip of Spain Son of Lady Elizabeth the Eldest Sister of the said Cardinal and Philibert Duke of Savoy Son of the Lady Beatrix the same Cardinals Younger Sister and the two Dutchesses of Parma and Bragansa named Mary and Catharine Daughters of Lord Edward Younger Brother of the said Cardinal and Youngest Child of the said King Emmanuel And for that the Lady Mary Dutchess of Parma which was the Elder of the two Daughters was Dead before this Controversy fell out her Eldest Son Lord Ranutio now Duke of Parma pretended by her Right to the said Crown And for that this matter was of so great Importance every party procured to lay down their Reasons and declared their Rights in the best manner they could and such as could not be present themselves in Portugal sent thither their Agents Embassadors and Attorneys to plead their Cause for them Don Antonio and the Dutchess of Bragansa as Inhabitants of that Kingdom were present and declared their pretences Namely Don Antonio by himself and for himself and the Lady Mary of Bragansa by her Husband the Duke and his Learned Councel The Prince of Parma sent thither for his part one Ferdinando Farneso Bishop of Parma The Duke of â—avoy seâ—t Charles of Rovere afterward made Cardinal The King of Spain as the greatest pretender sent the Lord Peter Gyron Duke of Osuna afterward Viceroy of Naples and Sir Christopher de Mora Knight of his Chamber at that time but since of his Privy-Council and lately made Earl of Castil Rodrigo in Portugal of which Country he is a Native and besides these two a great Lawyer Named Roderigo Vasques made since as I hear say Lord President of Castil which is as much almost as Lord Chancellor with us All these did lay forth before the King Cardinal their several Reasons and Pretensions to the Succession of the Crown of Portugal for the five persons before-mentioned whereof two were quickly excluded to wit the Duke of Savoy for that his Mother was Younger Sister to King Philip's Mother and himself also of less Age then the said King And secondly Don Antonio was also excluded by publick and Judicial Sentence of the King Cardinal his Uncle as Illegitimate and Born out of lawful Wedlock And Albeit Don Antonio denyed the same and went about to prove himself Legitimate affirming that his Father the Lord Lewis before his Death had Married with his Mother in secret and for this brought forth some Witnesses as Namely his Mothers Sister with her Husband and two others Yet the King Cardinal affirmed that upon Examination he had found them Suborned which he said was evident to him partly for that they agreed not in their Speeches and partly for that some of them had Confessed the same to wit that they were Suborned whom he cast into Prison and caused them to be punished And so sitting in Judgment accompanied with four Bishops and four Lawyers whom he had called to assist him in this Cause he pronounced the same Don Antonio to be a Bastard for
Queen of Spain Garib l. 13. cap. 10. An. 12â—7 An English Queen Grand-mother to two King Saints at once Another breach of Succession The Cord is put back from the Crown 1276. Garabay l. 15. c. 1. an 1363. Many alterations of Lineal descent Don John the first bastard King of Portugal Garib l. 15. c. 22 l. 34. c. 39. Of the State of France An 419. An. 751. An. 988. Examples of the two Ranks of French Kings King Pepin by Election An. 751. King 〈…〉 〈…〉 â—â—â—â—lan 〈◊〉 an â—8 Eginard Belfor li. 2 cap. 5. The Uncle preferred before the Nephew Paul Mili hist. Franc. King Luys de bonnaire An. 814. Gerard. l. 5. An. 834 An. 840. An. 878. Baudin en la Chronique pag. 119. Gerard l. 1 An. 879. Two Bastards preferred An. 881. Luys Faineant King of Foance An. 886. Charles 4. le Gros King of France Gerard. li. 5. An. 888 Odo a King and after Duke of whom came Hugo Capetus Ralph I. King of France An. 927. An. 929. Luys IV. d' Outremer The true Heir of France excluded Hugh Capet otherwise Snatchcape 988. Belfor li. 3. cap. 1. An. 988. Defence of Hugh Kapetus Title The Embassage of the States of France unto Charles of Loraine Gerard l. 6. an 988. Note this comparison Example out of the third time of France Gerard. li. 6. an 1032. King Henry preferred before his elder Brother William Conquerour how he came to be Duke of Normandy Gerard l. 6. anno 1032. 1037. Sons excluded for the Fathers offences Gerard l. 7. ann 1110 Belfor l. 4. c. 1. l. 5. Commaeus in commentar l 1. in vita Ludovic 11. Examples of the Realm of England Divers Races of English Kings The name of England and English King Egbert the first Monarch of England Polidor hist. Aug. li 4. in fine An. 802. King Pepin of France King Adelwolfe An. 829. King Alfred 872. King Edward Elder An. 900 King Aleston the Bastard preferred An 〈◊〉 〈…〉 hist. Angl. Stow pag. 130. An. 924. King Edmond I. An. 940. The 〈◊〉 preferred before the Nephews 946. Polid. l. 6. Stâ—w in 〈…〉 〈…〉 King Edward martyrized King Etheldred 978. Polid. l. 7. hist. Aug. King Edmond Ironside Queen Emma Mother to King Edward the Confessor Many breaches of Lineal Succession Sons of King Edmond Ironside King Canutus the First 1018 King Harald the Bastard 1038. Polyd. l 8. hist. Angl. King Hardiâ—anutus Anno 1041. Alfred the younger Brother preferred King Edward the Confessor made King against Right of Succession Prince Edward the Outlaw and his Children put back Polyd. l. 8. Harald second King by Election 1066. Polid. ubi sâ—p 〈…〉 of England An. 1066. by Election Gerard. li. 6. An. 1065 Chron. 〈◊〉 l. 3. cap. â—4 Antoninus part 2. Chron. tit 16. cap. 5. §. 1. Examples after the conquest Polyd. in vita Gul. Conq. William Rufus King An. 1087. Henry I. An. 1100. Mathild the Empress King Stephen entred against Succession An Act of Parliament about Succession 1153. King Richard and King John 1190. Prince Arthur put back Two Sisters of Prince Arthur Duke of Britain King John and his Son rejected 1216. The Titles of York and Lancaster The conclusion of this Chapter Causes of Excluding Princes Who must be Judge of the lawful cause of Exclusion Open injustice to be resisted What are the chief points to be regarded in â— Princes admission Whence the Reasons of admitting or rejecting a Prince are to be taken Gerard. li. 3. de l' Estat pag. 242. Three principal Points to be considered Why â—e resolveth to treat of Religion principally The chief end of a common-wealth supernatural Philosophers and Law-makers what end they had of their Doings The commonwealth of Beasts The natural end of Mans commonwealth Sacrifices and Oblations by Nature Gen. 8. Job 1. The chief end of a common-wealth and Magistrates is Religion Genebrard l. 1. Chronol de l. aetate Genes 25. 29. Deut. 21. 2 Parali 21. Regard of Religion among Gentiles Cicero li. 1 quaest Tus. de natuâ—a Deorum lib. 1. Plâ—tâ—rch adverses 〈◊〉 Aristo l. 7. Polâ—ti c. 8. The aâ—sâ—rd 〈…〉 Politicks See before the Oaths made by Princes at their Coronations in the IV. Chapter The Oath to Governours for defence of Religion Collat. 2. Novella constit Justin. 8. tit 3. Note the form of this Oath written An. Dom. 560. How great a defect is want of Religion in a Magistrate Lack of Religion the chiefest cause to exclude a Pretender Vide Digest li. 2â— tit 1. leg 8. 10. Matth. 1â— Marc. 10. 1 Cor. 7. Lib. 4. deceret Greg. tit 19. c. 7. Whether difference in Religion be infidelity Act. 23. 1 Cor. 8. 2 Cor. 5. 1 Pet. 3. Matth. 18 How he that doth against his own conscience Rom. 14. 1 Cor. 14. 10. See upon this place of S. Paul S. Chrysost. hom 36. in hanc epistolam Orig. l. 10. Theodor. in hunc locum How dangerous to favour a Pretender of a contrary reli Against Wisdom and Policy to prefer a Prince of a contrary Religion The conclusion of the whole Speech A protestation of the Lawyer Why they will not determin of any one Title The Book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon The but of â—â—lâ—s his â—â—â—k 〈◊〉 Râ—â—son 〈…〉 The Book of M. Morgan and Judge Brown Answer to the I. Reason To the II. Reason Highinton's book George Lilly in fine Epit. chronic Anglic Sundry important Points Divers other Nots and Pamphlets Sir Richard Shelly Francis Peto A Treatise in the behalf of 〈◊〉 Infanta of Spain Discent of William the Conqueror The Children of the Conqueror Polid. l. 9. in fine Stow in vita Guliel The miseries of Duke Robert and his Son Stow in vit Gul. Conquest William Son of Duke Robert Belfor l 3. cap. 42. An. 1128. King William Rufus Tareagnotta l. 2. del Hist. del mondo K. Henry Polydor. in vita Henrici 1. The House of Britain by the elder Daughter of the Conqueror Belfor l. 3. Pag. 423. Conan Duke of Britain Poysoned by William the Conqueror Belâ—or l. 3. Cap. 12. Aâ— 1095. ex chronic dionis The Daugh of Spain â—re of the â—loud Royal of England The Houses of Bloys Why Stephen was admitted King of England Girard l. 6. Belfor l. 3. The Issue of K. Stephen K. Henry the II. Belfor l. 3. cap. 50. An. 1151. Geraâ—d l. 8 pag 549 King Henry II. his Issue Stow in vita Hen. King Richard Duke Geffrey Paradyn apud Belforest Belfor l. 3. cap. 71. An. 1203. Belfor l. 4. cap. 4. King John and his Issue Miseries that fell upon King John Poâ—i l. Hollâ—â—g 〈◊〉 Stow â—n vita Johannis The issue of King Henry II his Daâ—â—â—ters 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. â—9 〈◊〉 115â— The Issue of Lady Eleanor Queen of Spain Polyd. l. 15. in vit Johan Steph. Garib l. 12. cap. 31. Queen Berenguela Garibay l. 12. c. 52. Pretences of the Infanta of Spain to English French States K. Henry â—he 3. and his
Issue The meeting of three Houses Prince Edward Duke Edmond Lady Beatrix daughter of K. Henry 3. The Pedegree of the Dukes of Britany The great Contention between the Houses of Monford and Bloâ—s in Britany Burgundy and Orleans The controversie between the House of Monford and Blois A question about succession between the Uncle and the Niece The House of Blois overcome The succession of the Monfords in Britany Francis last Duke of Britany How the Dukedom of Britany was united to France The Issue Male of K. Henr. 3. The Bishop of Ross in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title George Lilly in fine Epitomes Chron. Anglic. That Edward was the elder Mat. West in vit H. 3. Hollingshed ibid. p. 654. Hollingsh in vit H. 3. p. 740. 777. Edmonds Line never pretended to the Crown Note this consequent The eldership of Edmond a fiction Polyd. in fine vit Henr. 3. The Issue of K. Edward the â— The Issue of Edmond Crouch-back Collateral Lines of Lancaster 〈…〉 of K Edward 3. The Red Rose and the White Issue of the Black Prince The Issue of Leonel the 2d Son The Issue of Edmond the 4. Son The Issue of Thomas the 5. Son The Issue of of the 3d. â—n Duke of Lancast. The Issue of L. Blanch. Lady Philippa married into Portugal and her Issue Lady Elizabeth second Daughter The Issue of K. Henr. 4. The Issue of John of Gaunt by his second Wife The controversie in Spain between King Peter the Cruel and his Bastard broohâ—r Garibay l. 15. â— 26. Of Lady Catharine Swinford Hollinshed in vita Rich. 2. p. 1088. The Duke of Lancaster 's bastards made legitimate Hollingh in vita Kich 2. pag. 1090. The issue of Katharine Swinfords children King Henry VII The Dukes of Somerset Polidor hist. Ang. lib. 23. Hollings in vita Edwardi IV. pa. 1314. 1340. What heirs of Lancaster now remain in England The Issue of the House of York Richard Earl of Cambridge executed Richard Duke of York slain Edward Duke of York and King his Issue The Line of the Pooles The Line of the Hastings The Barringtons King Richard 3. Issue of K. Henry the 7. Issue of the Lady Mary of Scotland Issue of Mary 2d Sister to K. Henry Lady Frances Stow An. 7 Edw. 6. Of Lady Eleanor of Suffolk Variety of Authors opinions about this controversie Polyd. in fine vit Henr. 3. initio vit Henr. 4. in vit Ric. An. 1386. The Allegations of the House of York The story of the controversie between Lancaster and York Polyd. in â—â—a Riâ—h 2. l. b. 20. King Richards deposition Chief points of the controversie between Lancaster and York Three pâ—â—â—t King Richards deposition That a 〈…〉 1. Reason 2. Authority 3. Examples Whether the causes were sufficient of King Richards deposition The Hâ—â—se of York chief 〈◊〉 in deposing K. Rich. Polyd. Hist. Angl. l. 20. Addit ad Polycronicon Testimony of Stories The evil government of K. Rich. Stow in vit Rich. 2. pag. 502. regni 11. A great insolency The evil Parliament Stow an 21 regni Rich. The Duke of Lancaster called by common request Frosard Walsingham Whether the manner of deposing K. Richard were good Arms necessary for removing an evil Prince 〈◊〉 of 〈…〉 by 〈◊〉 Forces King Eglon slain in his Chamber Judg. 3. Saul put down by violence 1 Chr. 10. vers 9. Rehoboam deposed by his Subjects of ten Tribes 2 Reg. 11. 12. 2 Paralip cap. 10. Joram and his Mother Jezabel deposed by force 4 Reg. 9. Athalia deprived by force 4 Reg. 11. Whether Lancaster or York should have entred after K. Rich. Polydor l. 20. in vit Rich. Stow in vita Richardi 2. Whether 〈◊〉 Earl of 〈…〉 or 〈…〉 K. Râ—â—h The Title of York is by a Woman Stow in vit Hen. 5. an 3. regn The Earl of Cambridge executed for Conspiracy An objection for York that Edmond Mortimer was declared Heir appaâ—â—n Polyd. l. 20 Stow in vit Rich. 2. an 1385. Hollingsh in vit Rich 2. p. 1038. Stow an 1382. Polyd. l. 20 an 1394. The cause of hatred between K. Richard and the House of Lancaster John Frosard in Histor. Polydor. Hollingsh Stow in vit Rich. 2 Wâ—lâ—â—â—gh 〈…〉 2. p. 341. 3â—â— John Frosard in vit Henriet 〈◊〉 Roger Moâ—tiâ—â—â— was deâ—lâ—red Hâ—â—r 〈◊〉 Hollingsh in vit Richar. 3. p. 1406. in vit Edwar. 6. p. 1715. The declaration of K. Edw. 6. in favour of the Lady Jane Gray Girard du Haillan l. 15. his Franc. initio 〈…〉 〈◊〉 in â—â—tent Poâ—â—â—nem Câ—â—e suis leg haered The second â—â—â—mâ—le of the Uncle An examâ—plâ— of the Uncle before 〈◊〉 Nephew in Spain Garâ—bay l. 13. c. 1â— an 1276. Another example in France and Flanders Polydor. l. 15. in vit Edw. 3. Anoâ—â—eâ— example of Britany Supra c. 2. Another example â—n Scotland The contention of the Houses of â—alliol and Bruse in Scotl. Examples in England Hollingsh in vit Regis Johannis p. 142. How Arthur Duke of Britany was declared Heir apparent Polydor l. 14. Hollingsh in vit Ric. 1. p. 480. Hollingsh in vit Richardi Regis p. 496. 499. Hollingsh p. 540. Walsingh in Ypodig Neustriae Opinions of Lawyers for the Nephew and Uncle Benedict Cap. Ranutius verb. in eodem testam Baldus in lib. ut in test cap. de suis leg haered per. li. unicam pro 20. sui autem novissimo Touching the Common Law of England Different rules in succession of the Crown of other Inheritances The Common Law grounded in Custom Ancient Lawyers that defended the House of Lancaster Hollingsh in vit Henrici 6. p. 1300. The sum of this controversie repeated Other Arguments of Lancaster Stow in vit Hen. 5. p. 587. The Princes of York often attainted Stow in vit Hen. 6. York entred by violence Stow in fine vit Henrici 6. The House of York put down a Holy King Long possessions of the House of Lancaster 5. The difference of Kings of both Houses The Princes of York cruel one to the other Polydor Virg Hist. Angl. l. 24. Great union and faithfulness of the Princes of Lancaster Polydor lib. 23. Dissentioâ—s in the House of York K. Edw. 4. K. Riâ—h 3. K. Henry 8. how many he put to death of his own Kindred The de la Pools The House of Buckingham The House of Câ—urtâ—eys The House of Salisbury Seymers put to death Queen of Scots 7. Nâ— old noble House standing in England but such as took part with Lancaster Five ancient noble houses Arondel Oxford Northumberland Westmerland Shrewsbury Houses that favoured York destroyed 〈…〉 〈…〉 Pooâ—â—◠〈…〉 of 〈◊〉 and Warwick King Henry the 7. Chowned in the field in respect of the house of Lancaster only though his title that way was not great A division of the families that do pretend Of the house of Scotland Arabella In favour of the King of Scots Argument against the King of Sâ—ots The King of Scots
naturae the voice of nature her self for there was never yet Nation found either of ancient time or now in our days by discovery of the Indies or else where among whom men living together had not some kind of Magistrate or Superior to govern them which evidently declareth that this point of Magistrates is also of Nature and from God that created Nature which point our Civil Law doth prove in like manner in the very beginning of our digests where the second Title of the first Book is de origine juris civilis omnium magistratuum of the beginning of the Civil Law and of all Magistrates which beginning is referred to this first principle of Natural Instinct and Gods Institution And last of all that God did concur also expresly with this Instinct of Nature our Divines do prove by clear testimony of Holy Scripture as when God saith to Solomon By me Kings do Reign and St. Paul to the Romans avoucheth That Authority is not but of God and therefore he which resisteth Authority resisteth God Which is to be understood of Authority Power or Jurisdiction in it self according to the first Institution as also when it is lawfully laid upon any person for otherwise when it is either wrongfully taken or unjustly used it may be resisted in divers cases as afterwards more particular shall be declared for then it is not lawful Authority These two points then are of Nature to wit the Common-wealth and Government of the same by Magistrates but what kind of Government each Common-wealth will have whether Democretia which is Popular Government by the People it self as Athens Thebes and many other Cities of Greece had in old time and as the Cantons or Switzers at this day have Or else Aristocretia which is the Government of some certain chosen number of the Best as the Romans many years were governed by Councels and Senators and at this day the States of this Countrey of Holland do imitate the same or else Monarchia which is the Regiment of one and this again either of an Emperor King Duke Earl or the like These particular Forms of Government I say are not determined by God or Nature as the other two points before for then they should be all one in all Nations as the other are seeing God and Nature are one to all as often hath been said but these particular Forms are left unto every Nation or Countrey to chuse that Form of Government which they shall like best and think most fit for the Natures and conditions of their people which Aristotle proveth throughout all the second and fourth Books of his Politiques very largely laying down divers kinds of Government in his days as namely in Greece that of the Milesians Lacedemonians Candians and others and shewing the causes of their differences which he attributeth to the diversity of mens Natures Customs Educations and other such causes that made them make choice of such or such Forms of Government And this might be proved also by infinite other examples both of times past and present and in all Nations and Countries both Christian and otherwise which have not had only different Fashions of Governments the one from the other but even among themselves at one time one form of Government and another at other times For the Romans first had Kings and after rejecting them for their Evil Government they chose Councils which were two Governours for every year whose Authority yet they limited by a multitude of Senators which were of their Council and these mens power was restrained also by adding Tribunes of the people and some time Dictators and finally they came to be governed last of all by Emperors The like might be said of Carthage in Africa and many Cities and Common-wealths of Greece which in divers Seasons and upon divers Causes have taken different Forms of Government to themselves The like we see in Europe at this day for in only Italy what different Forms of Government have you Naples have a King for their Soveraign Rome the Pope and under him one Senator in place of so many as were wont to be in that Common-wealth Venice and Genua have Senators and Dukes but little Authority have their Dukes Florence Farara Mantua Parma Vrbin and Savoy have their Dukes only without Senators and their power is absolute Milan was once a Kingdom but now a Dukedom the like is of Burgundy Lorain Bavire Gascony and Britain the lesser all which once had their distinct Kings and now have Dukes for their Supream Governours The like may be said of Germany that many years together had one King over all which now is divided into so many Dukedoms Earldoms and other like Titles of Supream Princes But the contrary is of Castile Aragon Portugal Barcelona and other Kingdoms this day in Spain which were first Earldoms only and after Dukedoms and then Kingdoms and now again are all under one Monarchy The like is of Bohemia and Polonia which were but Dukedoms in old time and now are Kingdoms The like may be said of France also after the expulsion of the Romans which was first a Monarchy under Pharamond their first King and so continued for many years under Clodion Merovys Childrik and Clodovaeus there first Christened Kings but after they divided it into four Kingdoms to wit one of Paris another of Soissons the third of Orleans and the fourth of Metts and so it continued for divers years but yet afterwards they made it one Monarchy again England also was first a Monarchy under the Brittains and then a Province under the Romans and after that divided into seven Kingdoms at once under the Saxons and now a Monarchy again under the English and all this by Gods permission and approbation who in token thereof suffered his own peculiar people also of Israel to be under divers manners of Governments in divers times as first under Patriarchs Abraham Isaac and Jacob then under Captains as Moses Joshua and the like then under Judges as Otheniel Aiod and Gideon then under High Priests as Hely and Samuel then under Kings as Saul David and the rest and then under Captains and High Priests again as Zorobabel Judas Machabeus and his Brethren until the Government was lastly taken from them and they brought under the power of the Romans and Forraign Kings appointed by them So as of all this there can be no doubt but that the Common-wealth hath power to chuse their own Fashion of Government as also to change the same upon reasonable causes as we see they have done in all times and Countries and God no doubt approveth what the Realm determineth in this point for otherwise nothing could be certain for that of these changes doth depend all that hath succeeded sithence In like manner is it evident that as the Common-wealth hath this authority to chuse and change her Government
so hath she also to limit the same with what Laws and Conditions she pleaseth whereof ensueth the great diversity of Authority and power which each one of the former Governments hath as for example the Councils of Rome were but for one year other Officers and Magistrates were for more or less time as their Common-wealth did alot them The Dukes of Venice at this day are for their Lives except in certain cases wherein they may be Deposed and those of Genua only for two years and their Power as I have said is very small and much limited and their Heirs have no claim or pretence at all after them to that Dignity as the Children and next of Kin of other Dukes of Italy have though in different sort also For that the Dukedoms of Farara Vrbin and Parma are limited only to Heirs Male and for defect thereof to return to the Pope or See of Rome Florence and Mantua for like dedefects are to return to the Empire and do not pass to the Heirs Female or to the next of Kin as Savoy and some others do And now if we respect God and Nature as well might all these Governments follow one Law as so different for that neither God nor Nature prescribeth any of these particular Forms but concurreth with any that the Common-wealth it self appointeth and so it is to be believed that God and Nature concurred as well 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 Switzerland which once was one Common-wealth only under Dukes and Marquesses of Austria and now are devided into thirteen Cantons or Common-wealths under Popular Magistrates of their own as hath been said So as when men talk of a Natural Prince or Natural Successor as many times I have heard the word used if it be understood of one that is born within the same Realm or Countrey and so of our own natural blood it hath some sense though he may be both good or bad and none hath been worse or more Cruel many times then home born Princes But if it be meant as though any Prince had his particular Government or Interest to succeed by Institution of Nature it is ridiculous for that Nature giveth it not as hath been declared but the particular Constitution of every Common-wealth within it self and so much for this first point which must be the ground to all the rest that I have to say CHAP. II. Of the Form of Monarchies and Kingdoms in Particular and the different Laws whereby they are to be Obtained Holden and Governed in divers Countries according as each Commonwealth hath Chosen andâ— Established ALL that hitherto hath been spoken hath appertained to all Princely and Supream Government in general but now for that our matter in question is concerning the Succession to a Kingdom good reason that we should reduce our Speech unto this Form of Government in particular First of all then is to be considered that of all other Forms of Government the Monarchy of a King in it self appeareth to be the most excellent and perfect and so doth hold not only Aristotle in his forenamed Books of Politiques and namely in his third with this only condition that he govern by Laws but Seneca also and Plutarch in his Morals and namely in that special Treatise wherein he dicusseth An seni sit Respub tractanda whether an old man ought to take upon him the Government of a Common-wealth or no Where he saith that Regnum inter omes Respub consumatissima prima est a Kingdom is the most perfect Common-wealth among all other and the very first That is to say the most perfect for that it hath most Commodities and least inconveniences in it self of any other Government and it is the first of all other for that all people commonly made this choice at the beginning of this kind of Government so as of all other it is most Ancient for so we read that among the Syrians Medes and Persians their first Governours were Kings and when the Children of Israel did ask a King at the hands of Samuel which was a thousand years before the coming of Christ they alleadged for one reason that all Nations round about them had Kings for their Governours and at the very same time the chiefest Cities and Commonwealths of Greece as the Laceaemonians Athenians Corinthians and others whereof divers afterwards took other Governments unto themselves for the abuses in Kingly Government committed at that time were governed by Kings as at large proveth Dionysius Halicarnessas Cornelius Tacitus Cicero and others The Romans also began with Kings as before I have noted and the reason of this is for that as our Christian Doctors do gather especially St. Hierome and St. Chrisostom this kind of Government resembleth most of all the Government of God that is but one it representeth the excellency of one Sun that lighteth all the Planets of one Soul in the Body that governs all the Powers and Members thereof and finally they shew it also to be most conform unto Nature by example of the Bees which do chuse unto themselves a King and do live under a Monarchy as the most excellent of all other Governments to which purpose also I have heard alleadged sometimes by divers those words of St. Peter Subjecti estoti omni humanae creaturae propter Deum sive regi quasi precellenti sive ducibus ab eo missis c Be you subject of every 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 evil men and praise of the good Out of which words some do note two points first that as one the one side the Apostle doth plainly teach that the Magistrates authority is from God by his first institution in that he sayeth we must be subject 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 choice this particular Form of Government as all other also is appointed in every Common-wealth as before hath been declared And that by mans Election and consent the same is laid upon some particular man or woman according to the Laws of every Countrey all which maketh it rightly to be called both a humane creature and yet from God The second point which divers do note out of these words is that St. Peter calleth a King most excellent which though it may be understood in respect of the Dukes Authority whereof immediatly there followeth mention Yet may it seem also to be taken and verified of Kingly Authority in respect of all other Governments seeing that at this time when the Apostles write this Epistle the chief Governour of the World was not called King but Emperor and therefore seeing in such a time St. Peter
Nation that was lawfully and orderly preferred to the Imperial Seat after that it passed from the Children of Charles the Great and there be divers points worthy the noting in this example and among other that albeit he were lawful King and Emperor by Succession as also by appointment of his Father Yet was he chosen and admitted again by the Prince and People and that he Swore to fulfil all those points and conditions which the signification of the Emperial Ornament did bind him unto After this about sixteen years or more Pope Gregory the fifth in a Synod holden in Rome did by the consent of Otho the third Emperour and Nephew unto this other Otho of whom we have now treated appoint a certain Form of Election for the time to come of the German Emperour to wit that he should be chosen by six Princes of Germany three Ecclesiastical which are the Archbishops of Moguntia Colen and Trevires and three Temporal Lords to wit the Duke of Saxony the Count Palatine of Rhene and the Marquess of Brandeuburg and when these six voices should happen to be equally divided then that the Duke of Bohemia for then it was no Kingdom should have place also to determine the Election All which was determined in the year of Christ 996. in Rome and approved afterward by all the Princes of Germany and allowed by all other Christian Princes and States of the World and so endureth unto this day And among all other points this of his Coronation and his Oath to be taken for his well Government was and is most exactly set down and recorded by many Historiographers of that time and since But I shall aledge them out of John Sleydan as the most convenient Author for this our time and purpose First of all then he Writeth that after any Man is chosen Emperour he is to be called only Caesar and the King of the Romans and not Emperour until he be Crowned and the Conditions which he Sweareth unto presently after his Election Are to defend the Christian and Catholick Religion to defend the Pope and Church of Rome whose Advocate he is to Minister Justice equally to all to follow Peace to keep and observe all Laws Rights and Priviledges of the Empire not to alienate or engage the possessions of the Empire to condemn no Man without hearing his cause but to suffer the course of Law to have its place in all and whatsoever he shall do otherwise that it be void and of no Validity at all Unto all these Articles he Sweareth first by his Legates and then he giveth a Copy of his Oath in Writing to every one of the six Electors and after this he goeth to the City of Aquis-grun to be Crowned in that great Church where about the middle of the Mass the Archbishop of Colen goeth unto him in the presence of all the People and asketh whether he be ready to Swear and promise to observe the Catholick Religion defend the Church Minister Justice protect the Widdows and Fatherless and yield dutiful Honour and Obedience to the Pope of Rome Whereunto he answering That he is ready to do all this The Archbishop leadeth him to the high Altar where he Sweareth in express words all these Articles which being done the said Archbishop turning himself to the Princes of the Empire and People there present doth ask them Whether they be content to Swear Obedience and Fealty unto him Who answering Y a He is Annointed by the said Archbishop before the Altar and then do come the other two Archbishhps of Moguntia and Treviers and do lead him into the Vestery where certain Deacons are ready to Apparel him in his Robes and do set him in a Chair upon whom the Archbishop of Colen sayeth certain Prayers and then delivereth him a Sword drawn and putting a Ring upon his finger and giveth him a Scepter in his hand and then all the three Archbishops together do put on the Crown upon his head and leading him so Crowned and Apparreled unto the high Altar again He Sweareth the second time That he will do the part of a good Christian and Catholick Emperor Which being ended he is brought back and placed in the Emperial seat and Throne where all the Princes of the Empire do Swear obedience and faith unto him beginning with the three Archbishops and continuing on with the three other Electors and so all the rest in order which is a notable and magestical manner of admitting and authorising of a Prince as you see and it is to be marked among other things that the Emperour Sweareth three times once by his Deputies and twice by Himself before his Subjects Swear once unto him and yet will Belloy as you have heard needs have Subjects only bound to their Princes and the Prince nothing at all bound to them again In Polonia which being first a Dukedom was made a Kingdom about the same time that this form of electing of the German Emperour was prescribed the manner of Coronation of their King is in substance the very same that we have declared to be of the Emperour For first of all the Archbishop of Guesua Metropolitant of all Polonia cometh to the King standing before the high Altar and sayeth unto him these words Whereas you are right Noble Prince to receive at our hands at this day who are thought unworthily in place of Christ for execution of this Function the sacred Anointing and other Ceremonies Ensigns and Ornaments appertaining to the Kings of this Land it shall be well that we admonish you in a few words what the charge importeth which you are to take upon you c. Thus he beginneth and after this he declareth unto him for what end he is made King what the obligation of that place and dignity bindeth him unto and unto what points he must Swear what do signifie the Sword the Ring the Scepter and the Crown that he is to receive and at the delivery of each of these things he maketh both a short exhortation unto him and prayer unto God for him And the Kings Oath is in these Words Promitto coram Deo Angelis ejus I do promise and Swear before God and his Angels that I will do Law and Justice to all and keep the Peace of Christ his Church and the union of his Catholick Faith and will do and cause to be done due and Canonical Honour unto the Bishops of this Land and to the rest of the Clergy and if which God forbid I should break my Oath I am content that the Inhabitants of this Kingdom owe no Duty or Obedience unto me as God shall help me and Gods holy Gospels After this Oath made by the King and received by the Subjects the Lord Martial General of the whole Kingdom doth ask with a loud voice of all the Councellors Nobility and People there present Whether they be content to submit
as also he left a little Infant newly born of his lawful Wife Adeltrude Daughter to King Alfred of England which infant was King of France afterwards by the name of Charles the Simple albeit not immediatly after the death of his Father for that the Nobles of France said that they had need of a Man to be King and not a Child as Gerard reporteth and therefore the whole State of France chose for their Kings the two foresaid Bastards Luys the third and Carlomon the First of that name jointly and they were Crowned most solemnly and divided the whole Realm between them in the year of Christ 881. and Queen Adelâ—rude with her child true Heir of France fled into England to her Father and there brought him up for divers years in which time she saw four or five Kings Reign in his place in France one after the other for briefly thus it passed Of these two Bastard Kings the Elder named Luys reigned but four years and died without issue the second that is Carlomon lived but one year after him and left a son called also Luys which succeeded in the Kingdom by the name of Luys the Fifth and sirnamed Faineant for his idle and slothful life For which as also for his vitious behaviour and in particular for taking out and marrying a Nun of the Aâ—bey of S. Baudour at Chels by Paris he was deprived and made a Monk in the Abbey of S. Denis where he died and in his place was chosen King of France and Crowned with great Solemnity Charles the Fourth Emperour of Rome sirnamed le Gros for that he was fat and corpulent he was Nephew to Charles the Bald before mentioned and therefore the French Stories say that he came to the Crown of France partly by Succession and partly by Election but for Succession we see that it was nothing worth for so so much as Charles the Simple the right Heir was alive in England whom it seemeth that the French men had quite forgotten seeing that now they had not only excluded him three times already as you have heard but afterwards also again when this Gross Charles was for his evil Government by them deposed and deprived not only of the Kingdom of France but also of his Empire which he had before he was King and was brought into such miserable penury as divers write that he perished for want At this time I say the States of France Would not yet admit Charles the Simple though hitherto his Simplicity did not appear but he seemed a goodly Prince but rather they chose for King one Odo Earl of Paris and Duke of Angiers and caused him to be Crowned But yet after a few years being weary of this man's Government and moved also somewhat with compassion towards the Youth that was in England they resolved to depose Odo and so they did whilst he was absent in Gascony and called Charles the Simple out of England to Paris and restored him to the Kingdom of France leaving only to Odo for Recompense the State of Aquitaine with Title of a Duke wherewith in â—ine he contented himself seeing that he could get no more But yet his Posterity by vertue of this Election pretended ever after a Title to the Crown of France and never left it off until at length by Hugo Capetus they got it for Hugh descended of this King and Duke Odo This King Charles then sirnamed the Simple an English Womans Son as you have heard being thus admitted to the Crown of France he took to Wife an English Woman named Elgina or Odin Daughter of King Edward the Elder by whom he had a Son named Lowys and himself being a Simple man as hath been said was allured to go to the Castle of Peronne in Picardy where he was made Prisoner and forced to resign his Kingdom unto Ralph King of Burgundy and soon after he dyed through Misery in the same Castle and his Queen Ogin fled into England with her little son Luys unto her Uncle King Adelstan as Queen Adeltrude had done before with her Son unto King Alfred and one of the Chief in this Action for putting down of the Simple was Counte Hugh sirnamed the Great Earle of Paris Father unto Hugo Capetus which after was King But this new King Ralph lived but three Years after and then the States of France considering the right Title of Luys the lawful child of King Charles the Simple which Luys was commonly called now in France by the name of d' Outremer that is beyond Sea for that he had been brought up in England the said States being also greatly and continually solicited hereunto by the Embassadours of King Adelstan of England and by William Duke of Normandy sirnamed Long Spear Great Grandfather to William the Conquerour who by the King of England was gained also to be of the young Princes part for these Considerations I say they resolved to call him into France out of England as his Father had been before him and to admit and Crown him King and so they did and he Reigned 27 Years and was a good Prince and dyed peaceably in his Bed in the Year of Christ 945. This King Luys d' Outremer left two Sons behind him the Eldest was called Lothaire the First who succeeded him in the Crown of France the Second was named Charles whom he made Duke of Loraine Lothaire dying left one onely Son named Luys as his Grandfather was who was King of France by the name of Luys the V. and dying without issue after two Years that he had Reigned the Crown was to have gone by Lineal Succession unto his Uncle Charles the Duke of Lorayne second Son to Luys d' Outremer as is evident but the States of France did put him by it for mislike they had of his Person and did chuse Hugo Capetus Earl of Paris and so ended the Second Line of Pepin and of Charles the Greâ—t and entred the Race of Hugo Capetus which endureth unto this day and the French Stories do say that this Sirname Capet was given to him when he was a boy for that he was wont to snatch away his Fellows Caps from their Heads whereof he was termed Snatch-Cap which some do interpret to be an Abodement that he should snatch also a Crown from the true Owners Head in time as afterwards we see it fell out though yet he had it by Election and Approbâ—tion of the Commonwealth as I have said And in this respect all the French Chroniclers who otherwise are most earnest Defenders of their Law of Succession do justify this Title of Hugo Capetus against Charles for which cause Francis Belforest doth alledge the saying of William Nangis an antient and diligent-Chronicler of the Abbey of S. Denys in France who defendeth King Capetus in these words We may not grant in any case that Hugh Capet may be esteemed an Invader or Vsurper
and Chartres in France and the other two Polidor said dyed before they were Married and so their names were not Recorded These are the Children of King William the Conqueror among whom after his death there was much strife about the Succession For first his eldest Son Duke Robert who by order of Ancestrie by birth should have succeeded him in all his Estates was put back first from the Kingdom of England by his third Brother William Rufus upon a pretence of the Conquerors Will and Testament for particular affection that he had to this his said third Son William though as Stow Writeth almost all the Nobility of England were against William's entrance But in the end agreement was made between the two Brothers with the condition that if William should dye without Issue then that Robert should succeed him and to this accord both the Princes themselves and twelve principal Peers of each side were Sworn but yet after when William dyed without Issue this was not observed but Henry the fourth Son entred and deprived Robert not only of this his Succession to England but also of his Dukedom of Normandy that he had enjoyed peaceably before all the time of his Brother Rufus and moreover he took him Prisoner and so carried him into England and there kept him till his death which happened in the Castle of Cardif in the year 1134. And whereas this Duke Robert had a goodly Prince to this Son named William who was Duke of Normandy by his Father and Earl of Flanders in the right of his grand Mother that was the Conquerors Wife and Daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders as hath been said and was established in both these States by the help of Lewis the VI. surnamed Le Gros King of France and admitted to do homage to him for the said States his Uncle King Henry of England was so violent against him as first he drove him out of the state of Normandy and secondly he set up and maintained a Competitor or two against him in Flanders by whom finally he was slaine in the year of Christ 1128. before the Town of Alost by an Arrow after he had gotten the upper hand in the Field and so ended the race of the first Son of King William the Conquerour to wit oâ— Duke Robert which Robert lived after the Death of his said Son and Heir Duke William Six years in Prison in the Castle of Cardiff and pined away with sorrow and misery as both the French and English Histories do agree The second Son of the Conqueror named Richard dyed as before hath been said in his Fathers time and left no Issue at all as did neither the third Son William Rufus though he Reigned 13. years after his Father the Conqueror in which time he established the Succession of the Crown by consent of the States of England to his elder Brother Duke Roberts issue as hath been said though afterwards it was not observed This King Rufus came to the Crown principally by the help and favour of Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury who greatly repented himself afterward of the error which in that point he had committed upon hopes of his good Government which proved extream evil But this King William Rufus being slayn afterward by the Arrow of a Cross-bow in Newforrest as is well known and this at such time as the foresaid Duke Robert his elder Brother to whom the Crown by Succession apperteined was absent in the War of the Holy Land where according as most Authors do Write he was chosen King of Hierusalem but refused it upon hope of the Kingdom of England But he returning home found that his fourth Brother Henry partly by fair promises and partly by force had invaded the Crown in the year 1110. and so he Reigned 35. years and had Issue divers Sons and Daughters but all were either drounded in the Seas coming out of Normandy or else dyed otherwise before their Father except only Mathildis who was first Married to Henry the Emperour fifth of that name and after his death without Issue to Geffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anjow Touraine and Maine in France by whom she had Henry which Reigned after King Stephen by the name of Henry the II. And thus much of the Sons of William the Conqueror Of his two Daughters that lived to be Married and had Issue the elder named Constance was Married to Alayn Fergant Duke of Britain who was Son to Hoel Earl of Nants and was made Duke of Britain by William the Conquerors means in manner Following Duke Robert of Normanyd Father to the Conqueror when he went on Pilgrimage unto the Holy Land in which Voyage he dyed left for Governour of Normandy under the protection of King Henry the first of France Duke Alayne the first of Britain which Allayn had Issue Conan the first who being a stirring Prince of about 24. years old when Duke William began to treat of passing over into England he shewed himself not to favour much that enterprise which Duke William fearing caused him to be Poysoned with a pair of perfumed Gloves as the French stories do report and caused to be set up in his place and made Duke one Hoel Earl of Nantes who to gratifie William sent his Son Alaine surnamed Fergaâ—t with 5000. Souldiers to pass over into England with him and so he did and William afterward in recompence thereof gave him his eldest Daughter Constantia in Marriage with the Earldom oâ— Richmond by whom he had Issue Conan the second surnamed le Gross who had Issue a Son and a Daughter The Son was called Hoel as his Grand-Father was and the Daughters name was Bertha Married to Eudo Earl of Porhet in Normandy and for that this Duke Conan liked better his Daughter and his Son in-law her Husband then he did Hoel his own Son he disavowed him on his Death Bead and made his said Daughter his Heir who had by the said Eudo a Son named Conan surnamed the younger which was the third Duke of that name and this man had one only Daughter and Heir named Lady Constance who was Married to the third Son of King Henry the second named Geffrey and elder Brother to King John that after came to Reign and by this Lord Geffrey she had Issue Arthur the second Duke of Britain whom King John his Uncle put back from the Crown of England and caused to be put to death as after shall be shewed and he dying without Issue his Mother Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britain Married again with a Prince of her own House whom after we shall name in the prosecution of this Line and by him she had Issue that hath endured until this day the last whereof hitherto is the Lady Isabella infant of Spain and that other of Savoy her Sister whom by this means we see to have descended from King William the Conqueror by his eldest Daughter Lady
his Realm against so potent a Tyrant as King Richard was then accounted and yet was the concourse of all people so great and general unto him that within few days he atchieved the matter and that without any battel or bloud-shed at all and thus much for the justness of the cause But now if we will consider the manner and form of this act they of Lancaster do affirm also that it could not be executed in better nor more convenient order First for that it was done by the choice and invitation of all the Realm or greater and better part thereof as hath been said Secondly for that it was done without slaughter and thirdly for that the King was deposed by Act of Parliament and himself convinced of his unworthy Government and brought to confess that he was worthily deprived and that he willingly and freely resigned the same neither can there be any more circumstances required say these men for any lawful deposition of a Prince And if any man will yet object and say that notwithstanding all this there was violence for that Duke Henry was Armed and by force of Arms brought this to pass they of Lancaster do answer that this is true that he brought the matter to an end by Forces for that an evil King cannot be removed but by force of Arms if we expect the ordinary way of remedy left by God unto the Commonwealth for seeing that a Tyrannical or obstinate evil Prince is an Armed enemy with his feet set on the Realms head certain it is that he cannot be driven nor plucked from thence nor brought in order but by force of Arms. And if you say that God may remedy the matter otherwise and take him away by sickness and other such means it is answered that God will not always bind himself to work Miracles or to use extraordinary means in bringing those things to pass which he hath left in the hands of men and of Commonwealths to effectuate by ordinary way of Wisdom and Justice As for example it were an easie thing say these men for God Almighty also when any wicked man breaketh his Law by theft murther or the like to punish him immediately by death or otherwise himself and yet he will not so do but will have the Realm to punish him and that by force of Arms also it otherwise it cannot be done and this as well for example and terror of 〈…〉 that God hath 〈…〉 in his name 〈…〉 〈…〉 particular president of punishing of evil 〈◊〉 in like manner by force and violence when other means will not serve these men say that besides all the great multitude of examples alledged before by the Lawyer in his fourth Chapter about evil Kings deposed there is great variety of several manners how the same hath been done by God's own Ordinance recounted in Holy Writ as first when the Scripture saith in the Books of Judges that Aod was stirred up by God to kill Eglon King of the Moabites that prosecuted the people of Israel and the manner was to feign a secret Embassage or message unto him and so to slay him in his Chamber as he did and God delivered his people by that means and chose this particular way whereas none will deny but that he might have done it by many other means less odious to the World then this was that seemed so cruel and full of Treason Again they shew that when God had rejected King Saul for his wickedness and determined to depose him he chose to do it by raising of David against him and by defending and assisting David both in Arms and otherwise divers years against Saul and in the end raised the Philistians also against him who after divers battels cut off his head and carried it up and down the Country upon a pole and presented it in all the Temples of their Idols and in the end left it pitched up in the Temple of Dagon all which God might have spared and have taken him away quietly without bloudshed if he would but he chose this second way In like manner when he would punish King Rehoboam for the sins of Solomon his Father and yet spare him also in part for the sake of his Grandfather David he caused a Rebellion to be raised against him by Jeroboam his Servant and more then three parts of four of his people to rebel against him and this by God's own instinct and motion and by his express allowance thereof after it was done as the Scripture avoucheth and if Rehoboam had fought against them for this fault as once he had thought to do and was prepared with a main Army no doubt but they might have lawfully slain him for that now these ten Tribes that forsook him had just authority to depose him for his evil Government and for not yielding to their just request made unto him for easing them of those grievous Tributes laid upon them as the Scripture reporteth For albeit God had a meaning to punish him for the sins of his Father Solomon yet suffered he that Rehoboam also should give just occasion himself for the people to leave him as appeareth by the story and this is God's high Wisdom Justice Providence and sweet disposition in humane affairs Another example of punishing and deposing evil Princes by force they do alledge out of the first Book of Kings where God appointed Elizeus the Prophet to send the Son of another Prophet to anoint Jehu Captain of Joram King of Israel which Joram was Son to the Queen Jezabel and to perswade Jehu to take Arms against his said King and against his mother the Queen and to deprive them both not only of their Kingdoms but also of their lives and so he did for the Scripture saith Conjuravit ergo Jehu contra Joram Jehu did conjure and conspire at the perswasion of this Prophet with the rest of his fellow Captains against his King Joram and Queen Jezabel the Kings Mother to put them down and to put them to death with all the ignominy he could devise and God allowed thereof and perswaded the same by so holy a Prophet as Elizeus was whereby we may assure our selves that the fact was not only lawful but also most Godly albeit in it self it might seem abominable And in the same book of Kings within two chapters after there is another example how God moved Jehoiadah High-priest of Jerusalem to perswade the Captains and Colonels of that City to conspire against Athalia the Queen that had Reigned 6. years and to Arm themselves with the Armor of the Temple for that purpose and to besiege the Palace where she lay and to kill all them that should offer or go about to defend her and so they did and having taken her alive she was put to death also by sentence of the said High-priest and the fact was allowed by God and highly commended in the Scripture and Joas
Succession or Right of Women which the Kingdom of France in it self doth not as is known and consequently a Woman may be Heir to the one without the other that is to say she may be Heir to some particular states of France inheritable by Women though not to the Crown it self and so do pretend to be the two Daughters of France that were Sisters to the late King Henry III. which Daughters were married the one to the King of Spain that now is who had Issue by her the Infanta of Spain yet unmarried and her younger Sister married to the Duke of Savoy and the other to wit the younger Daughter of the King of France was married to the Duke of Lorrain yet living by whom she had the Prince of Lorrain and other Children that live at this day This then being so clear as it is first that according to the common course of Succession in England and other Countries and according to the course of all Common Law the Infanâ—a of Spain should inherit the whole Kingdom of France and all other States thereunto belonging she being the Daughter and Heir of King Henry II. of France whose Issue-male of the direct line is wholly extinct but yet for that the French do pretend their Law Salique to exclude Women which we English have ever denied to be good until now hereby cometh it to pass that the King of Navarr pretendeth to enter and to be preferred before the said Infanta or her Sisters Children though Male by a Collateral Line But yet her favourers say I mean those of the Infanta that from the Dukedoms of Britany Aquitain and the like that came to the Crown of France by Women and are Inheritable by Women she cannot be in right debarred as neither from any Succession or Pretence to England if either by the Bloud-Royal of France Britany Aquitain or of England it self it may be proved that she hath any Interest thereunto as her favourers do affirm that she hath by these reasons following First for that she is of the ancient Bloud-Royal of England even from the Conquest by the elder Daughter of William the Conquerour married to Allain Fergant Duke of Britany as hath been shewed before in the second Chapter and other places of this Conference And of this they infer three Consequences First when the Sons of the Conquerour died without Issue or were made uncapable of the Crown as it was presumed at least-wise of King Henry I. last Son of the Conquerour that he lost his Right for the violence used to his elder Brother Robert and unto William the said Robert's Son and Heir they say these men ought the said Dutchess of Britany to have entred as eldest Sister Secondly they say That when Duke Robert that both by right of Birth and by express Agreement with William Rufus and with the Realm of England should have succeeded next after the said Rufus came to die in Prison the said Lady Constance should have succeeded him for that his Brother Henry being culpable of his Death could not in right be his Heir And thirdly they say That at least wise after the death of the said King Henry I. she and her Son I mean Lady Constance and Conan Duke of Britany should have entred before King Stephen who was born of Adela the younger Daughter of William the Conquerour Secondly they do alledge That the Infanta of Spain descendeth also lineally from Lady Eleanor eldest Daughter of King Henry II. married to King Alonso the ninth of that name King of Castile whose eldest Daughter and Heir named Blanch for that their only Son Henry died without Issue married with the Prince Lewis VIII of France who was Father by her to King St. Lewis of France and so hath continued the Line of France unto this day and joyned the same afterwards to the House of Britany as hath been declared So as the Infanta cometh to be Heir general of both those Houses that is as well of Britany as France as hath been shewed And now by this her descent from Queen Eleanor Daughter of King Henry II. her favourers do found divers Pretences and Titles not only to the States of Aquitain that came to her Father by a Woman but also to England in manner following First for Aquitain they say it came to King Henry II. by his Wife Eleanor Daughter of William Duke of Aquitain as before in the second Chapter at large hath been declared and for that the most part thereof was lost afterwards to the French in King John's time that was fourth Son to the aforesaid King Henry it was agreed between the said King John and the French-King Philip that all the States of Aquitain already lost to the French should be given in Dowry with the said Blanch to be married to Lewis VIII then Prince of France and so they were And moreover they do alledge That not long after this the same States with the residue that remained in King John's hands were all adjudged to be forfeited by the Parliament of Paris for the Death of Duke Arthur and consequently did fall also upon this Lady Blanch as next Heir capable of such Succession unto King John for that yet the said King John had no Son at all and for this cause and for that the said States are Inheritable by Women and came by Women as hath been often said these men affirm That at this day they do by Succession appertain unto the said Lady Infanta of Spain and not unto the Crown of France To the Succession of England also they make pretence by way of the said Lady Blanch married into France and that in divers manners First for that King John of England by the Murther of Duke Arthur of Britany his Nephew which divers Authors do affirm as Stow also witnesseth was done by King John's own hands he forfeited all his States though his right to them had been never so good and for that this Murther happened in the fifth year of his Reign and four years before his Son Henry was born none was so near to succeed at that time as was this Lady Blanch married into France for that she was Daughter and Heir unto King John's elder Sister Eleanor or the said Lady Eleanor her self Queen of Spain should have succeeded for that she yet lived and died not as appeareth by Stephen Garribay Chronicler of Spain until the year of Christ 1214. which was not until the fifteenth year of the Reign of King John and one year only before he died so as he having yet no Issue when this Murther was committed and losing by this forfeit all the right he had in the Kingdom of England it followeth that the same should have gone then to his said Sister and by her to this Lady Blanch her Heir and eldest Daughter married into France as hath been said which forfeit also of King John these men do confirm by his
which was not a little for the advancement of King Philip's Title before them both as presently shall be shewâ—d It was replied against this answer in the behalf of the Duke of Parma that the last King Sebastian entred the Crown by way of Representation and not by propinquity of Blood for that he was a degree further off in propinquity of Blood from King John the III. whom he succeeded than was the Cardinal for that he was but his Nephew to wit his Sons Son and the Cardinal was his Brother and yet was the said Sebastian admitted before the Cardinal for that he represented the Place and Right of his Father Prince John that dyed before he inherited and so we see that in this case Representation was admitted said they and in like manner ought it to be now To this it was said that Sebastian was not so much preferred before his great Uncle the Cardinal by vertue of Representation as for that he was of the right Descendant line of King John and the Cardinal was but of the collateral or transversal Line and that all Law alloweth that the right Line shall first be served and preferred before the Collateral shall be admitted so that hereby Representation is nothing furthered This exclusion of Representation did greatly further and advance the pretence of King Philip for the excluding of both these Ladies and their Issues for that supposing as this answer avoucheth that there is no Representation of Father or Mother or Predecessors to be admitted but that every pretender is to be considered only in his own person then it followeth said these men which plead for the King that King Philip being in equal degree of propinquity of Blood with the two Ladies in respect as well of King Henry yet living for that they were all three children of Brother and Sister it followeth that he was to be preferred before them both as well in respect that he was Man and they both Women as also for that he was elder in age and born before them both And albeit the Duke of Parma alledged that he was one degree further off from the foresaid Kings than was King Philip so as not respecting Representation of their Parents that is to say not considering at all that King Philip descended of a Woman and the two Dutchesses of a man but only especting their own persons as hath been declared these mâ—n avouched that King Philip's person was evidently to be preferred for that he was a degree nearer in Blood than the Duke of Parma and superior in sâ—x and age to the Lady Catharine of Bragansa Moreover the Lawyers of King Philip's side affirmed that he was nearer also in propinqâ—ity of blood to King Sebastian the last King than was the very King Cardinal himself and much more than any of the other two pretenders for that he was Brother to the said King Sebastian's Mother and the Cardinal was but Brother to his Grandfather And besides this they alledged that Portugal did belong to the Crown of Castil by divers other means of old as for that it could not be given away by Kings of Castil in Marriage of their Daughters as the principal parts thereof had been as also for that when King John the I that was a Bastard was made King of Portugal by Election of the People the Inheritance thereof did evidently appertain to King John of Castile that had to Wife the Lady Beatrix Daughter and Heir of Ferdinand King of Portugal from which Inheritance of that Crown by open injury both she and her Posterity whose Right is in King Philip at this day were debarred by the intrusion of the said John Master of Avis bastard brother of the foresaid King Ferdinand Thesâ— Reasons alledged divers Lawyers in the behalf of King Philip and those not only Spaniards but also of divers other Countries and Nations as my authors before-named do avow and many books wâ—â—â— written of this matter and when the contention was at the hotest then died the King Cardinal before he could decide the same controversy upon which occasion the King of Spain being perswaded that his Right was best and that he being a Monarch and under no temporal Judge was not bound to expect any other judgment in this Affair nor to subject himself to any other Tribunal but that he might by Force put himself in possession of that which he took to be his own if otherwise he could not have it delivered unto him for so write these Authors by me named seeing also Don Antonio to pretend the said Kingdom by only Favour of some popular party that he had in Lisbon the said King Philip entred upon Portugal by Force of Arms as all the World knoweth and holdeth the same peaceably unto the day And I have been the longer in setting down this contention about the Succession to the Crown of Portugal for that it includeth also the very same pretence and contention for the Crown of England For that all these Princes before-named may in like manner pretend the Succession of that Interest to the House of Lancaster and by that to the Crown of England which doth descend from Queen Philippa eldest Daughter of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster and Sister of King Henry the IV. as hath largely been declared And albeit that some men will sâ—y that this matter is now decided which of these Princes of the House of Portugal entreth also thereby to the other Right of Succession of England yet others will say no for that the Laws of Succession in Portugal and England be different For that in England Representation taketh places so as the children of the Son â—hough they be Women shall never be preferred before the Children of the Daughter though they be Men whereof these men do infer that seeing the Lady Philips Right before-mentioned to the Dukedom of Lancaster and thereby also to the Crown of England is to be preferred according to the Laws of England and not by the Laws of other Foreign Countries it followeth that the self same Right of Succession that is pretended at this day by the Princes of Portugal for succeeding the said Lady Philippa should be determined only by the Laws of England where Representation taketh place and not by the Laws of any other Nation Thus say they But against this others do alledge that the question is not here by what Law this pretence of the Blood Royal of Portugal to the Crown of England is to be tried but rather who is the true and next Heir and Successor unto King John the I. and to his Wife Queen Lady Philippa Heir of the House of Lancaster which two Princes were King and Queen of Portugal and their true Heir at this day hath the forenamed pretence to the Crown of England true and next Hâ—â—r being once known it little importeth by what Lâ—w he pretendeth his said Right to England whether by that of England or by
Children we shall see the like course continued for we shall see put to death within the space of four years all these following by Name the Duke of Somerset the Duke of Suffolk the Duke of Northumberland and the Lord Admiral of England Sir Miles Partridge Sir Ralph Vane Sir Michael Stanhope Sir Thomas Arundel Sir John Gates Sir Thomas Palmer Knights with divers other Gentlemen of their Retinue and all these by Natural Domestical and Home-born Princes whereas I dare adventure the greatest Wager that I can make that you shall not find so many put to death of the Nobility by any strange Prince State or Commonwealth Christian in any Foreign Dominion that they possess in many Ages together and the reason thereof is evident by that I said before neither were it policy or wisdom nor could the causes be so often nor ordinarily given by the Nobility to a Prince that were absent from them to use such Severity so as by this it may also appear that to be under a Foreign Government even in the worst kind thereof that can be devised which is to be as a Province or piece of another Kingdom and to come under it by very Conquest it self is not so dangerous a matter as at the first shew it may seem and much less to be under Foreign Government by other sweeter means of Succession or Composition as the present case of England seemeth to import in respect of those foreign Princes which do pretend to the Succession thereof And this is not only shewed and declared by the state and condition of Flanders before their tumults but in like manner it is seen by the present state of Britanny Normandy Aquitaine Provence and other Dukedoms and Countries in France that were wont to have their own particular Princes and now are much more commodiously under the Crown of France The like is seen by the States of Naples Millain Sicily Sardinia and other parts and Countries of Italy which were wont to be under Kings and Princes of their own and now are under the Crowns of Aragon and Castile with infinite odds of peace rest security and wealth then they were before when they had domestical Princes and so themselves do confess I mean the wise and dispassionate among them for of the Vulgar in this case no account is to be made and if they should deny it yet the thing speaketh it self and the publick Histories of their Countries would convince them wherein it is to be read what Phalaris what Dionysius and other homeâ—born Tyrants Sicily for example hath had and suffered and with what infinite cruelty they and divers others of their own Governours have exercised upon them as also what continual turmoils there were in the City of Naples and in all that Kingdom for many years together after it self fell from the Government first of the Roman Empire and then of the Grecian until it came to the Crown of Aragon I mean between their own domestical Kings now of the Blood of Italians now of the Normans now of the Hungarians and now of the French for of all these Lines there have reigned among them and the Realm was a perpetual prey to Souldiers and the very like may be said of Millain after their fall from the Roman Empire under which they lived quiet and prosperously until they came again to be under the Crown of Spain they passed infinite Tribulations first by the contention of their common People against their Nobility and then by the Bloody falling out of their chief Families the one against the other to wit the Furiani Visconti Marcelli Castilioni and Ssorzi which Family last of all prevailed he I say that shall remember this and then behold the present state with the quiet peace safety and riches wherein they now live will now live wiâ—l easily confess that they have changed for the better though they be under Foreign Government and thus much of this point There remaineth to speak a word or two about the second part of the Question before proposed and included partly in this which already hath been treated to wit whether it be better to be under a little or great King which question though it may be decided in part by that which before hath been alledged about being under a foreign Prince yet more particularly to make the same plain these men do say that the reasons be many and evident to prove that the subjection to a great and mighty Monarch is far better First for that he is best able to defend and protect his Subjects And secondly for that he hath least need ordinarily to pill and pole them for that a little King be he never so mean yet must he keep the State of a King and his subjects must maintain the same and if they be but few the greater will the burthen be of every one in particular And thirdly for that a great and potent Prince hath more to bestow upon his Subjects for reward of Vertue and Valour than hath a poor and seeing that every particular subject born within his Princes Dominions is capable of all the Prefermenes which Princes State or Kingdom do yield if he be worthy of the same it is a great Prerogative say these men to be born under a potent Prince that hath much to give which they declare by this example following A man that is born in the City of Genoua or Geneva for both are Cities and States within themselves let him be of what ability or worthiness soever yet can he hope for no more preferment than that Commonwealth and State can give and if there should be many worthy men born there at one time then were this his condition worse for then must he part also with other men though there were not sufficient for himself and the most he could aspire unto if he were an Ecclesiastical man were the greatest Benefice within that State and on the other side if he were a Temporal man he could not hope for much for that the State hath it not to bestow but another that is born under a great Monarch as is the King of France or Spain in these our dayes that hath so many great Bishopricks for Examples sake and other Spiritual Livings to bestow upon the Clergy and so many high Governments and Employments both of War and Peace to give unto Temporal men that can deserve the same This man I say hath a great Advantage of the other in respect of preferment at this day but much more was it in old time to be born under the Roman Empire when it had the preferments of all the World to bestow for that every subject thereof was capable of all the said preferments so far forth as he could make himself worthy and deserve the same For better explication of which point yet I have thought good to cite in this place the words of a certain Learned Knight that in our dayes hath written the Lives
of all the Roman Emperours and in the Life of one of them that was an excellent Governour named Antonius Pius the said Knight hath this discourse ensuing There was in this mans Governments said he great Contentment and Joy on all hands great Peace and Quietness and very great Justice and truely it is a thing worthy in this place to be considered what was the humane Power and how infinite the Forces of the Roman Empire at this day and how great was the Liberty Quietness Security Wealth and Contentment of the Subjects that lived under that Government when good Princes had the managing thereof as was this Antoninus and his Son Aurelius that followed him and as were Adrian Trajan and divers others What a thing was it to see their Courts frequented freely by all the Noble Valiant and Learned men of the World to see the union and friendly dealing of diffierent Nations together when all served one Prince so as a man might have gone over the whole World or most and best parts thereof with all security and without all fear all Nations and Countries being their Friends Neighbours or Subjects neither was there need at that time of any Pasports or safe Conducts nor of so often change of Coyn to travel as now there is neither yet were there new Laws every foot as now be found in different Countries neither was there danger of Enemies or to be taken prisoners and captives nor could any malefactor do a mischief in one Countrey and flee into another thereby to be free from punishment and he that was born in the very Orcades or furthest part of Europe was at home though he were in Africa or Asia and as free a Denizen as if he had been born there Merchants also might pass at that day from Countrey to Countrey with their Merchandise without particular Licences or fear of Forfeits and finally the temporal state of a Subject was wonderful happy at that time Thus far discourseth that learned Knight and no doubt but that his discourse and consideration is founded on great Reason and he that will leave at this day the many commodities of being under a Great and Potent Prince if it lie in his own hands to chuse for this only circumstance that he is not born in the same Countrey with him is a man of small judgment and capacity in these mens opinion and measureth matters of publick utility with a false weight of fond affection And thus much may be said of the first way of being under Strangers and Foreign Government which is that which vulgar men do most abhor and inveigh against to wit to be under a foreign Prince that liveth absent and ruleth by his Governours But besides this there is another manner of being under a Foreign Prince as when an Alien Prince cometh to dwell among us and this by either of two ways to wit that either this Prince cometh without Forces as did King Stephen and King Henry the II. that were French-men as hath been said and came to live and govern in England but without external Forces and as King Philip of Spain came afterwards when by Marriage of Queen Mary he became King of England and as the last King Henry the III of France went into Polonia by the free Election and Invitation of that Nation and as his Brother Monsieur Francis Duke of Alenson should have entred afterward to have been King of England if the Marriage pretended between her Majesty and him had gone forward and taken effect as many thought once that it should This I say is one way and another is that this Prince do bring Forces with him for his own assurance and these either present as the Danish Kings Sweno Canutus Haraldus and Hardicanutus did and as after them the Norman Princes also used I mean not only William the Conquerour himself but also his two Sons William Rufus and Henry the I who either by help of the Normans already in England or by others brought in by them afterwards wrought their will or else that this Prince so entring have Foreign Forces so at hand as he may call and use them when he will for that they have no Sea to pass which is the case of the King of Scots and of both these wayes these men do give their sentence distinctly For as concerning the former way when a Foreign Prince entreth without any Forces at all and with intention to live among us they hold that there is no danger nor yet any inconvenience can justly be feared for that in this case he subjecteth himself rather to the Realm and Nation than they to him and if he live and marry in England both himself and his Children will become English in a little space And for his own assurance he must be inforced to favour and cherish and make much of the English Nation and be liberal gentle and friendly to all for gaining their good wills and friendship And in one very great and important point his condition is different and better for the English than any English Kings can be which is that he entreth with indifferent mind towards all men hath no kindred or alliance within the Land to whom he is bound nor enemy against whom he may be inticed to use cruelty so as only merit or demerit of each man must move him to favour or disfavour which is a great Foundation say these men of good and equal Government Again they say that in respect of the State present of England and as now it standeth and for the publick good not only of the common Subjects but also of the Nobility and especially and above others of the English Competitors and Pretenders that cannot all speed no way were so commodious as this to avoid bloodshed to wit that some external Prince of this time should be admitted upon such Compositions and Agreements as both the Realm should remain with her ancient Liberties and perhaps much more than now it enjoyeth for such Princes commonly and upon such occasions of Preferment would yield to much more in those Cases than a home-born Prince would and the other Pretenders at home also should remain with more security than they can well hope to do under any English Competitor if he come to the Crown who shall be continually egged on by his own kindred and by the aversion emulation and hatred that he has taken already by contention against the other opposite Houses to pull them down and to make them away and so we have seen it by continual Examples for many years though no occasion say these men hath ever been offered to suspect the same so much as now if any one of the home English Bloud be preferred before the rest and this is so much as they say to this second kind of being under Foreign Princes To the third they confess that it standeth subject to much danger and inconvenience to admit a foreign Prince
Lancaster Joan eldest Daughter married to L. Mowbray Mary second Daughter married to Hen. L. Percy Hen. 2d Son Earl of Lancaster Darby and Lâ—icester H. II. 1st D. of Lancaster made by Edward III. J. of Ga. 3d. Son of Ed. D. of Lanâ— by his 1st Wife Blanch Heir of Lancaster first Wife to Jo. of Gaunt 13. Hen. IV. first King of the House of Lanc. 1406. 14. Henry V. King of England 1414. 15. Hen. VI. deposed by the House of York Edw. Prince of Wâ—les slain by the house of York Eleanor 3â— Daughter married to â— E. of Arunâ—el The 1st Son Earl of Lancaster died without issue John the 3d. Son Earl of Darby Edmond Crockbâ—â—k 2d Son Earl of Lancaster 8. Henry III. succeeded his Father John 1316. 9. Edward I. Son of Henry III. reigned 1272. 10. Edward II. afterward deposed 11. Edw. III fâ—om whom bâ—gan the â—â—uses of Lan â— York 1326. Edw. Prince of Wales 1st Son died before his Fath. 12. Richard II. deposed by H. D. of Lanc. 1460. The House of Britany by the Second â—â—ay Beatrix married to John II. Duke of Britany Arth. II. D. of Brit. whose title ends in the Inf. of Sp. John II. that married Beatrix John the first of that name D. of Britany The House of Devonshire H. D. of Exeter had no issue and left all to 's sister Ann married to Siâ— T. Nevil Father of R. J. E. of West John Holland D. of Exeter Son of Elizabeth Elizabeth 2d Daughter married to J. H. D. of Exet. The House of PORTUGAL Philippa eldest daughter married to John I. K. of Port. Edward I. K. of Port. Son of Queen Philippa Alfonsus V. eldest Son King of Portugal John II. King of Portugal Ferdinand â—d Son D. of Viseo in Portugal Emmanuel King of Portugal Son of D. Ferdinand Henry 3d. Son Cardinal and K. of Portugal John III. eldest Son K. of Portugal John Prince of Portugal died before his Father Sebastian K. of Portugal slain in Barbary Lewis 2d Son never married Anthony Illegitimate Son of Lewis Isabel eldest Daughter of K. Em. born next K. John The Line of Castile Const. Heir of K of Castile 2d Wife of Jo. of Gaunt Catherine married to K. Henry III. of Castile John I. King of Castile Son of Catherine Isab. married to Ferd. K. of Aragâ—n sirnam'd Cathaâ— Joan marrito Philip I. Arch-Duke of Austria Chacees V. Emperour and King of Spain Philip II. King of Spain Isabel 〈◊〉 ta of Spain eldest Daughter Philip III. prince of Spain Cathar 2d Daughter married the D. of Savâ—y Edward Infanta of Portugal younger Son Katharine 2 daughter married to John D. of Bragansa Theodosius Duke of Bragansa Edward Alexander Philip Brothers of Theâ—dosius Mary eldest Daughter married Al. D. of Parma Ranutius the first Son D. of Parma Edward 2d Son Cardinal The House of Clarence Lionel 2d son D. of Clarence died before his Father Philipa married to Edm. Mortimer E. of March Roger Mort. 4th E. of March died in Ireland Ed. Mortim. E. of March slain in Irel. without Issu Mortim. younger son died without Issue The House of Buckingham Edm. of Langly D. of York 4th Son of K. Edward Edw. eldest Son D. of York had no Issue Th. of Woodst D. of Glo. 5th son of E. III. slain by his Neph Rich. Ann mar to â— L. Staf. whereby they become Duke of Bucks The House of YORK Richard â—d Son D. of York husband of Ann Ann Mort. mar the D. of York by which they claim R. Plantagâ—net D. of York 1 st pretendâ—r of that house 18. Rich. III. 2d Son of Rich. D. of York 1483. Edw. Prince of Wales died without Issue George Duke of Clarence 2d Son of Richard Edward Earl of Warwick put to death by H. VII Margaret Countess of Salisbury married of Rich. Pâ—ol Reginald Pool died Cardinal so England Hon. I. Mâ—â—tague â—â—t Son put to death by Henry VIII Winifred 2d daughter maried to S. T. Barington Catharine married to S. F. Hâ—stings E. of Hunting H. Hastings â—arl of Hantington and his Brethren Geffry Pool Knight Geffry Pool Arthur and Geffry Pool Sons of Geffry 18. Edw. IV. first K. of the House of York 1460. 17. Edw. V. put to death hy his Unkle Richard The Line of Somerset and of K. H. 7. The Uniting of York and Lancaster Catharine Swinford 3â— Wife to John of Gaunt John Earl of Somerset John Duke of Somerset Margaret married to Edm. Tuder â— of â—ichm 19. Henry VII King of England 1485. 20. Henry VIII King of England 1507. 21. Edw. VI. Son of Henry VIII 1546. 22. Mary eldest Daughter Queen of England 23. Elizab. â—d daughter of K. Henry 1558. Eliz. eldest Daughter of Ed. IV. married to H. VII Mary 2d daughter married Cha. Br. D. of Suf. Franc. eldest Daughter married Hen. Gr. D. of Suf. Cathar Gray had by the E. of Harts two sons Edward Seymour called Lord Bâ—aâ—ham Hen. Seymor ad Son begoten in the Tower Eleanor 2d Daughter married H. E. of Camb. Margaret married to H. Earl of Darby Ferdinand L. Strange and his Brother Jama IV. K. of Scots first husband of Margaret Margar. eldest daughter married twico Arch. Doug. E. of Angus 2d Husband of Margaret James V. King of Scotland Margaret married to Matthew E. of Lanox Mary Queen of Scotland put to death in England Henry Lord Darly Husband of Mary Charles 2d Son married to Eliz. Candish James VI. King of Scotland The Lady Arabella Polyd. in vita â— VIII Occasions of meeting The matter of Succession discussed Mr. Promely Mr. Wentworth Two Lawyers Many pretenders to the Crown of England Sucession doubtful and why Three or four principal heads of pretendors 1. Lancaster 2 York 3. The two houses joyned Circumstances of the time present The Romman Conclave Succession includeth also some kind of election Of this more afterwards Cap. 4 5. Nearness only in bloud not sufficient M◠〈…〉 in 〈◊〉 pretenders Two principal points handled in this book Two parts of this conference Bellay apollog pro reg cap. 20. Not only Succession sufficient That no particular form of Government is of Nature To live in Company is Natural to man and the ground of all Common-Wealths Plato de repub Cicero de repub Aristotle polit Divers Praeses 1. Inclination universal Pompon Mela. lib. 3. cap. 3 4. Tacit. l. 8. 2. Speech Aristot. l. 1.1 pol. c. 1.2.3.4 3. Imbecility of man Theoph. lib. de Plaut Plutarch conde fortuna lib. de pietatem in parent Note this saying of Aristotle 4. The use of Justice and Friendship Cicero lib. de amicitia The use of charity and helping one an other August lib. de amicitia Gen. 2. v. 18. That Government and Jurisdiction of Magistrates is also of Nature 1. Necessity Job 10. v. 22. 2. Consent of Nations Cicero li. 1. de natura Deorum 3. The Civil Law Lib. 1. digest tit 2. Scripture Prov. 8. Rom. 13. Particular form of Government is free Arist. li. 2.
Polit. Diversity of Government in divers Countries and Times Rome Africa and Greece Italy Dukes for Kings and Kings for Dukes Spain Bohemia Polonia England The Jews lib. Genes Lib. Exo. Lib. Job Lib. Jud. Lib. 1. Reg. Lib. Machab The Realm chuseth her Form of Government The Commonwealth limiteth the Governours Authority A Natural Prince A Monarchy the best Government Arist. lib. 4. pol. a. c. 9. Seneca Plutarch The Antiquity of Monarchy 1 Reg. 8. Dionys. Haly l. 5. Cornel. Tacit. l. 3. Cicero l. 1. Offic. Hierom. l. 2. epist. 12. Chrisost. ho. 23. 1 Pet. 2. Two Points to be noted How St. Peter calleth a King most excellent Utilites of a Kingdom and conveniences of other Governments Cicero l. 1. offic Democratia Miseries of Popular Government in Italy Tit. liv l. 30. Eutrop. l. 3. Oros. l. 5. 6. The cause why Laws be added to Kings Arist. l. 3 pol. c. vitâ— A notable Saying Arist. l. 3â— pol. c. 12. Arist. l. 1. Pol. c. 2. Divers â—â—â—nes and properties of Laws Cic. lib. 2. Offic. Law is the Discipline of a weal publick Psal. 2. The Counsels of Princes a great help Arist. l. 4. Pol. c. 10. The Monarchy of England temper'd The restraints of Kingly power in all Estates Roman Kings Liv. lib. 1. dâ—c 1. Greâ—ian Kings Arist. lib. 2. c. 8. polit Plutarch in Lycurg Cic. l. â— Offic. Why Kiâ—â— were restrained Laws Cic. l. 3. de legibuâ— Why Kinâ—â—ly Goverâ—â—ment we left in Rome Titus Livâ—â—â—us l. 1. dec 8. Livius ibidem Restrain's of Kingdoms in Europe Sleydon lib. 8. Aâ— 1532. Blond Dâ—â—cad 2. l. Crant li. cap. 25. Kingdoms of Polonia and Bohemia Her l. 9. Hist. Polonia Cromerus l. 3. Hist. Polon Kings of Spain France and England Concil blet 4. c. 74. concil s. c. 3. Peculiar manner of Succession An. 1340. Paul Anil Hist. Franc. l. 2. Gerard du Hailan l. 4. Hist. Franc. Fran. Belfor l. 5. c. 1 An. 1327. Reason for Succession of Women The Infanta of Spain and Prince of Lorrain Gerard dâ— Hailain lib. 13. Hiâ—â— Franc. c An. 1317 lib. 14 An. 132â— lib. 3. dâ— l'Estat de frunce Kings lawfully possessed may be deprived A markable circumstance Against Rebillions People and contemnorâ— of Princes 2 Pet. 2.10 Jude 8. Titles of Princes once settled not to be examined by private men Against flatterers that yield too much power to Princes Absurd flateries uttered by Belloy and others Belloy in apolog Cath. apolog pro Rege The purpose of the next Chapter Two points to be proved Nothing hear spoken against due respect to Princes ☜ Deprivations of Kings recounted in Scripture ☜ 1 Reg. 31. 4 Reg. 21.44 King Josias 2 Paralip 34. 2 Paralip 35. King David Xenophon in Cyropaed Ni. Machâ— l. 2. c 2. â— Tit. Liviâ— August l. de Gran. The wisdome and piety of King David 1 Paralipâ— 15. 1 Psal. 22â— 25. The Arms King David His Valour in Chivalry King David ' s Victories 2 Reg. 8. 1 Paral. 18 2 Reg. 23. Joseph l. 7. antiq c. 10 2 Reg. 7. His Humiliâ—y Charity and Devotion Kings put down among the Romans and what Successors they had Halicar l. 1 Tertul. l. de praescrip contra haeres Justin. martyr apolog T it liv l. 1 dec 1. Eutrop. l. 1 Caesar Augustus Dion in Caesa. Sueton in Câ—esa Nero Vespatian Cornel. Tacit. lib. 10 81. Egesip l. 5 Entrop in vita Caesa. Heliogabalus An. Domâ— 124. Alius lamp in vita Heliog Alexander Severus Herod in vit Sever Maxentius Constantin The bhange of the East Empire Charles the Great An. 800. Two chanâ—gs in France Belfori l. â— Girard l. â— Aemil. l. 2 Clem. Caudin en la Chroâ—nique des Roys de France Reasons Deprivation Hugo Capet Anno 988. Examples of Spain Concil Tolet. 4. cap. 4. Ambros. moral l. 11 cap. 17. Isidor in Hist. Hispan Estevan â— Garibay 13. de la â— Hist. de â—spa c. 1 Tabulae Astron. Alfonsinae King Don Alonso deposed Don Pedrâ— Crâ—el deposed Garibay l. 14. c. 40.41 In Portugal King Don Sancho 2. deposed Garibay lib. 4. de Hist. Portug c. 19. Lib. 6. dâ—â—â—cret tit de suppleâ— da cap. Grand 1. Garibay in Hist. dâ— Portug 〈◊〉 34. cap. 2. The Emperrors of Greece Galicas in Annal. part 4. Zon. Annal co 3. in vita Michael Calapha In Polonia In literis reip Polon ad Henr. Valesium pag. 182.184 Vide Gagneum part 1. de rebus Polon In Suetia Poilin 1.32 Histor de Franc. An. 1568. In Denmark Sleydanâ— l. 4. Hisâ— An. 133â— Munst. 〈◊〉 Cosmogâ— descript Davide Paulus â— vius in ris illust Example of England King Joâ—â— Deposed Polid. hiâ—â— Ang. l. 1â— An. 121. An. 1216. An. 1216. King Henry the third King Edward the second deposed Polyd. l. 18 Hist Ang. An. 1386. Stow in the Life of K. Edward the second The manner of Deprivation of a King See Stow and Hollings in this man's Life King Edward the third King Richard the second Deposed Polyd. l. 20. Hist. Aug. 1399. King Henry the 6th Deposed Polyd. lib. 23. Hist. Anglic. K. Richâ— the thiâ—â— deposedpunc An. 1â— A poâ—â— much noted The reply of the Temporal Lawer Belloy apolog Cathol c. part 2. Paragraph 9. Apol. pro. Regâ—â— cap. 9. An objection out of the Prophet Samuel 1. Reg. 8. The Power of a King or rather of a Tyrant Belloy polog pâ— 2. Paraâ— Apolâ— rege câ— 2.4 c Great aâ—surditieâ— flateriesâ— Cic. lib. 2. offic Another absurdity Institut imperial l. 2. Tit. 1. Division of goods by Civil Law Slaves and Freemen Arist. l. â— pol. c. 4 â— Arist. l. â— c. 3. Mark the Reason Divers evident reasons against Belloy 3 Reg. 21. Cap. inovamus 10. de cauebus c. super quibusdam 26. §. de verborum signif An Answer to the Objection out of the Prophet Samuel Arist. l. pol. c. 1â— Joseph l. â— antiq c. â— Deut. 1â— 3 Reg. 10. Psal. 2. By what Law Princes are punished The difference beween a private man and a Common-wealth The Prince Authority but subdelegat In reguliâ— utrinque juris vide in sine sexti Decret reg 75.69 When an Oath bindeth not Cicero li. 1. Offic. A clear Example Math. 24. Regul 68. in sine 6. Decret Decret Greg. l. Tit. 24. Decret part 2. caâ— sa 22. quâ— 4. c. 5. â— quâ— 5. perâ—â—totuâ— Two principle cases when Oath hold not â—â—wards a Prince Aemil. l. 2. Hist. Franc. Belfor in vita Childer Girad lib. 3. The Speech of the Fren. Embassador for deprivation of their King The conclusion how when Oaths do not bind Subjects The difference between a King and a Tyrant Plat. dial 1. de repub Arist. li. 2. Pol. c. 5. Bart. li. de Tyrannide Cicero li. 3. de legibus God l. 1. Tit. 14 §. digna Suet. c. 23. in Calig Zoo tom 2 in Trainâ— See in the Chapter following The Speech of a Souldier The occasion of the next Chapter The