69. A place so marked being foretold fortunate to Aeneas to found Alba since Rome therein A passage as well stor'd with Errors as the rest before and such a piece of fine new learning as never any Antiquary had found out till now For first Aeneas was not the founder of Alba though that the place design'd unto him for the fear of his Kingdom The building of that City was the work of Ascanius as we finde in Virgil. At puer Ascanius Regnumque à sede Lavini Transferet longam multa vi muniet Albam That is to say Ascanius from Lavinum shall translate To Alba strongly fenc'd the Regal State And secondly Alba was not built in the place where Rome since stood but duodecimo ab urbe Lapide about twelve miles off For though the River Tiber in some ancient Writers hath the name of Albula yet I never found many Writer either old or new till I incounter'd it â—n our Author that Rome was anciently called Alba. Fol. 104. It is admirable to consider what Sholes of People were formerly vented out of Cimbrica Chernonesus take it in the largest extent for Denmark Norway and Swedeland And in the largest extent it is taken indeed such as no Author ever gave it before this time The Cimbrick Chersonese truly and properly so call'd comprehended only those parts of the Kingdom of Denmark which we now call Iuitland divided by the River Eydore from the Dukedom of Hostein Ortelius and some 〈◊〉 Geographers make it to take up all that Languel or piece of Land on the North of Germany extended from the River Albis in the South and stretching Northward to that part of the Ocean which leads into the narrow Strait or passage now called Sundt But never any till our Author extended this name over those great Kingdoms of Denmark Norway and Swedeland or unto any part of either beyond the Sundt And yet he had need stretch it a great deal further before he can finde place in it for his Huns and Vandals of which the first inhabited in Asia beyond the Fens of Maeotis the last upon the Coast of the Baltick Sea in Germany now the Dukedom of Mecklenburg Fol. 125. Datum in Grantecestria Anno ab incarnatione Domini 915. venerabili Fratri Frithstano Civitatis Scolaâ—ium Cantabrig Cancellario Doctori per suum c. These words are the conclusion of an ancient Charter suppos'd to have been given to the Scholars of Cambridge by King Edward the elder against which our Author fancies one objection which he thinks easie to be answered but utterly leaves out another which I think upanswerable The objection which our Author makes against it is the barbarous style and language of it which if it be a good objection against this Charter will be as strong against all the Charters of this age as some ages following in which there 〈◊〉 but little of the Elegancies of the Latine tongue Anâ— therefore this objection might have well been spared but that our Author would be thought to deal verâ— equally in the business by saying all that might bâ— said against himself But yet I have another objectiâ—on which he takes no notice of because not so easiâ— to be answered which is that Frithstan whatsoever he was is here honored with the degree of Doctor and the title of Chancellor But first I would fain know where Frithstan took the degree of Doctor and iâ— what faculty he took it that title in those early daies being so unusual as hardly to be found amongst the Attributes of the learnedest men Secondly I conceive it to be very hard I had almost said impossible for him to prove that the chief Officer of Cambridge admitting it at that time for a place of learning had theâ— name of Chancellor When I shall see some proof oâ— this and some satisfaction I shall give some credit to the Charter till then none at all Fol. 139. Cambridgeshire men claim an ancient new antiquated priviledge to lead the Van in all Battels Zealous alike not only for the Vniversity but the County of Cambridge his zeal in both transporting him beyond his knowledge into dark adventures Some Authors he pretends to for the University for this priviledge none telling us only that he hath read it though he know not where But I can tell him when and where I have read the contrary that is to say in learned Camden who ascribes this honour to the Kentish For this he cites not only the authority of a nâ—melesse Monk but the words of Iohannes Sarisburiensis in his Polycratiaeon which are these that follow For good desert saith he of that notable valour which Kent shewed so puissantly and patiently against the Danes it retaineth still unto these daies in all Battails the honour of the first and foreward yea and of the first conflict with the Enemy And if this priviledge was given the Kenâ—ish for their valour shew'd against the Danes it could â—either be given to the men of Cambridge-shire as our Author would nor on the same occasion as he saith it was Fol. 141. It did not afterwards embolden him to the anticipation of the Crown attending till it descended upon him He speaks this of King Edward the Confesâ—or who had he tarryed till the Crown had descended on him might possibly have found a place amongst the Confessors but not amongst the Kings of England For the truth is the right title to the Crown was at that time in Edward surnamed the Outlaw the eldest Son of Edmund Ironside who flying into Hungary to avoid the fury of the Danes married the Kings sister of that Countrey and was by her the Father of Edgar Atheling and of Margaret wife to Malcolm Conmor King of the Scots But these being absent at that time Emma the Mother of Prince Edward and Widow to Canutus the Dane took the opportunity to set her Son upon the Throne as being not only half-brother to King Edmund Ironside but also half-brother and consequently â—earest kinsman to Canutus the second which if it were a good descent will plead almost as strongly for King Harald as it did for him But by what means soever he got the Crown he deserved to wear it our Author telling us Ibid. That whereas formerly there were manifold Laws in the Land made some by the Britains others by the Danes others by the English c. He caused some few of the best to be selected and the rest as captious and unnecessary to be rejected from whence they had the name of the Common Lawes That the Common-Law was so call'd because compounded of the Saxon British and Danish Lawes which were before of force only in such places where the Danes Britans and Saxon had the greatest sway though it be easie to be said will be hard to be proved The Britans at that time liv'd under their own Princes and were governed by their own Lawes and so they were for a long time after so that
any till he found it out such wherein he is not like to finde many followers though the way be opened I know it is no unusuall thing for works of different Arguments publisht at severall times and dedicated to severall persons to be drawn together into one Volume and being so drawn together to retain still those particular Titles and Dedications which at first they had But I dare confidently say that our Historian is the first who writing a Book of the same Argument not published by peece-meal as it came from his hand but in a full and intire Volume hath filled his Sheets with so many Title-leaves and Dedications as we have before us For in this one Book taking in the History of Cambridge which is but an Appendix to it there are no fewer then 12 particular Titles beside the generall as many particular Dedications and no fewer then fifty eight or sixty of those By-Inscriptions which are addrest to his particular Friends and Benefactors which make it bigger by fourty Sheets at the least then it had been otherwise Nay so ambitious he is of encreasing the Number of his Patrons that having but four Leaves to come to the end of his History he findes out a particular Benefactress to inscribe it to Which brings into my minde the vanity of Vitellius in bestowing and of Roscius Regulus for accepting the Consular Dignity for that part of the day on which Cecina by Order and Decree of the Senate was degraded from it Of which the Historian gives this Note that it was Magno cum irrisu accipientis tribuentisque a matter of no mean disport amongst the People for a long time after But of this Argument our Author heard so much at the late Act in Oxford that I shall say no more of it at this present time 3. In the next ranck of Impertinencies which are more intrinsecal part of the substance of the work I account his Heraldry Blazons of Arms Dâ—scenis of noble Families with their Atchievements intermingled as they come in his way not pertinent I am sure to a Church-Hâ—storian unless such persons had been Founders of Episcopal Sees or Religious Houses or that the Arms so blazoned did belong to either Our Author tells us lib. 5. fol. 191. that knowledge in the Laws of this Land is neither to be expected or required in one of his profession and yet I trow considering the great influence which the Laws have upon Church-matters the knowledge of the Law cannot be so unnecessary in the way of a Clergy-man as the study of Heraldry But granting Heraldry to be an Ornament in all them that have it yet is it no ingredient requisite to the composition of an Ecclesiastical History The Copies of Battle-Abbey Roll fitter for Stow and Hollingsheâ—d where before we had them can in an History of the Church pretend to no place at all though possibly the names of some may be remembred as their Foundations or Endowments of Churches give occasion for it The Arms of the Knights-Errant billeted in the Isâ—e of Ely by the Norman Conqueror is of like extravagancy Such also is the Catalogue of those noble Adventurers with their Arms Issue and Atchievements who did accompany King Richard the first to the War of Palestine which might have better serv'd as an Appendix to his History of the Holy Warâ— then found a place in the main Body of an History of the Church of England Which three alone besides many intercalatious of that kinde in most parts of the Book make up eight sheets more inserted onely for the ostentation of his skill in Heraldry in which notwithstanding he hath fallen on as palpable Errors as he hath committed in his History For besides those which are observed in the course of this work I finde two others of that kinde in his History of Cambridge to be noted here For fol. 146. he telleth us That Alice Countess of Oxford was Daughter and sole Heir of Gilbert Lord Samford which Gilbert was Hereditary Lord Chamberlain of England But by his leave Gilbert Lord Samford was never the Heriditary Chamberlain of the Realm of England but onely Chamberlain in Fee to the Queens of England betwixt which Offices how vast a difference there is let our Authour judge And secondly The Honor of Lord Chamberlain of England came not unto the Earls of Oxford by that Marriage or by any other but was invested in that Family before they had attained the Title and Degree of Earls Conferred by King Henry the first on Aubrey de Vere a right puissant Person and afterwards on Aubrey de Vere his Son together with the Earldom of Oxford by King Henry the second continuing Hereditary in that House till the death of Robert Duke of Ireland the ninth Earl thereof and then bestowed for a time at the Kings discretion and at last setled by King Charls in the House of Lindsey But because being a Cambridge Man he may be better skild in the Earls of that County let as see what he saith of them and we shall finde fol. 162. That Richard Plantagenet Duke of York was the eighth Earl of Cambridge Whereas first Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge And secondly If he had been such he must have been the seventh Earl and not the eighth For thus those Earls are marshalled in our Catalogues of Honor and Books of Heraldry viz. 1. William de Meschines 2. Iohn de â—amalt 3. William Marquess of Iuliers 4. Edmond of Langley D. of York 5. Edward D. of York 6. Richard de Conisburgh yonger Brother of Edward 7. Iames Marquess Hamilton c. No Richard Duke of York to be found amongst them his Father Richard of Konisburgh having lost that Title by Attainder which never was restored to Richard his Son though most improvidently advanced to the Dukedom of York nor unto any other of that Line and Family 4. Proceed we in the next place to Verses and old ends of Poetry scattered and dispersed in all parts of the History from one end to the other for which he hath no precedent in any Historian Greek or Latine or any of the National Histories of these latter times The Histories of Herodotus Xenophon Thucydides and Plutarch amongst the Greeks of Caesar Livy Salust Taciâ—us and Sueâ—onius amongst the Latines afford him neither warrant nor example for it The like may be affirmed of Eusâ—bius Socrates Sâ—zomen Theodoret Russin and Evagrius Church Historians all though they had all the best choice and the most excellent Poets of the world to befriend them in it And he that shall consult the Histories of succeeding times through all the Ages of the Church to this present day will finde â—hâ—m all as barren of any incouragements in this kinde as the ancients were Nay whereas Bishop Godwin in his Annals gives us an Epitaph of two Verses onely made on Queen Iane Seymour and afterwards a Copy of eighteen verses on the Martyrdom of Arch Bishop Cranmer
Prerogative and Authority to all Emperors Kings Princes and Potentates and all other we have conceiv'd such opinion and have such estimation of your Majesties goodness and vertue that whatsoever any persons not so well learned as your Grace is would pretend unto the same whereby we your most humble Subjects may be brought in your Graces displeasure and indignation surmising that we should by usupation and presumption extend our Laws to your most noble Person Prerogative and Realm yet the same your Highness being so highly learn'd will of your own most bounteous goodness facilly discharge and deliver us from that envy when it shall appear that the said Laws are made by us or our Predecessors conformable and maintenable by the Scripture of God and determination of the Church against which no Laws can stand or take effect Somewhat to this purpose had been before endevoured by the Commons in the last Parliament of King Edw. 3. of which because they got nothing by it but only the shewing of their teeth without hurting any body I shall say nothing in this place reserving it to the time of the long Parliament in the Reign of King Charles when this point was more hotly followed and more powerfully prosecuted than ever formerly What says our Author unto this Findes he here any such matter as that the Laity at their pleasure could liâ—â—â— the Canons of the Church Or that such Canons in whatsoever tâ—uched temporals were subject unto secular Laws and National Customs And hereof I desire the Reader to take special notice as that which is to serve for a Catholicon of general Antidoâ—e against those many venomous insiâ—nations which he shall meet with up and down in the course of this History As for the case in which our Author grounds this pestilent Position it was the Canon made in a Synod at Westminster in the time of Anselm Anno 1102. prohibiting the sale of men and women like brute beasts in the open Market Which Canon not finding presently an universal obedience over all the Kingdom as certainly ill customs are not easily left when they are countenanced by profit occasioned our Author to adventure upon this bold assertion Fol. 24. Indeed St. Davids had been Christian some hundred of years whilest Canterbury was yet Pagan â— Not many hundred years I am sure of that nor yet so many as to make a plural number by the Latin Grammar Kent being conquered by the Saxons who brought in Paeâ—â—nism Anno 455. Converted unto Christianity by the preaching of Austin An. 569. Not much more then 140 years betwixt the one and the other Fol. 29. To whose honor he viz. King Stephen erected St. Stephens Chappel in Westminster neer the place whero lately the Court of Requests was kept Our Author is here 〈…〉 and will not parler le tout as the French men say For otherwise he might have told us that this Chappel is still standing and since the â—â—endry of it to King Edward the sixth haâ—â— been 〈◊〉 for a Parliament House implâ—yed to that purpose by the Common as 〈…〉 be thus reserved I can hardly tell unless it be to prevent such inferences and observations which by some wanton wits might be made upon it Fol. 40. By the same title from his Father Jeffery Plantagenet he possessed fair lands in Anjou and Maine I had thought he had possessed somewhat more in Anjou and Maine then some fair Lands only his Father Ieffery Plantagenet being the Proprietary Earl of Anjou Maine and Toureine not aâ—itular only succeeded in the same by this King Henry and his two sons Richard and Iohn till lost unhappily by the last with the rest of our Estates on that side of the Sea From this Ieffery descended fourteen Kings of the name of Plantagenet the name not yet extinguished though it be impoverished our Author speaking of one of them who was found not long since at the Plow Lib. 2. p. 170. Another of that name publishing a Book about the Plantation of new Albion An. 1646. or not long before Fol. 53. King John sent a base degenerous and unchristian Embassage to Admiralius Murmelius a Mahometan King of Morocco then very puissant and possessing a great part of Spain This Admiralius Murmelius as our Author and the old Monks call him was by his own name called Mahomet Enaser the Miramomoline of Morocco to whom if King Iohn sent any such Message it was as base unchristian and degenerate as our Author makes it But being the credit of the â—ale depends upon the credit of the Monkish Authors to which bâ—ood of men that King was known to be a professed Enemy â—haâ—ing and hated by one anotherâ— it is not to be esteemed so highly as a piece of Apocrypha and much less to be held for Gospel Possible it is that being overlaid by his own subjects and distressed by the 〈◊〉 he might send unto that King for aid in his great extremities And doing this 〈◊〉 this were aâ—â— he did no 〈…〉 and in ignation and 〈…〉 so much as was done afterwards upon far weaker grounds by King Francis the first employing the Turks Forces both by Sea and Land against Charles the fifth But the Monks coming to the knowledge of this secret practise and constâ—â—ing his actions to the worst improv'd the Molehil to a Mountain rendring him thereby as odious to posterity as he was to themselves Fol. 63. I question whether the Bishop of Rochester whose Countrey house at Brumly is so nigh had ever a House in the City There is no question but he had Stâ—w finding it in Southwark by the name of Rochester 〈◊〉 adioyning on the South side to the Bishop of Winchesters minons and out of â—eparation in his time as possibly not much frequented since the building of Bromly House and since converted into Tonements for private persons But since our Author hath desired others to recover the rest from oblivion I shall help him to the knowledge of two more and shall thank any man to finde out the third The first of these two is the Bishop of Lincolns House situate neer the old Temple in Holborn first built by Robert de Chesney Bishop of Lincoln Anno 1147. Since alien'd from that See to the Earls of Southampton and passing by the name of Southampton House The second is the Bishop of Bangors a fair House situate in Shoo-lane neer St. Andrews Church of late time Leased out by the Bishops and not long since the dwelling of Dr Smith Doctor in Physick a right honest and ingenuous person and my very good Friend Of all the old Bishops which were founded before King Harry the eight there is none whose House we have not found but the Bishop of Aâ—aph to the finding whereof if our Author or any other will hold forth the Candle I shall follow the 〈◊〉 the best I can and be thankful for it Fol. 67. And though some high Royalists look on it as the product of subjects 〈◊〉 themselves
on their 〈…〉 Our Author tells us in his Brerewood upon a diligent enquiry hath found it otherwise then our Author doth letting us know That the first Countrey in Christendom whence the Jews were expelled without hope of return was our Countrey of England whence they were banished Anno 1290. by King Edward the first and not long after out of France Anno 1307. by Phiâ—ippus Pulcher. Not out of France first out of England afterwards as our Author would have it Fol. 100. Thus men of yesterday have pride too much to remember what they were the day before An observation true enough but not well applyed The two Spenâ—â—rs whom he speaks this of were not men of yesterday or raised out of the dirt or dunghill to so great an height but of as old and known Nobility as the best in England insomuch that when a question grew in Parliament whether the Baronesse de Spencer or the Lord of Aburgaveny were to have precedency it was adjudg'd unto de Spencer thereby declar'd the antientest Barony of the Kingdom at that time then being These two Spencers Hugh the Father was created Earl of Winchester for term of life and Hugh the Son by marrying one of the Daughters and co-heirs of Gilbert dt Clâ—re became Earl of Gloster Men more to be commended for their Loyalty then accused for their pride but that the King was now declining and therefore it was held fit by the prevalent faction to take his two supporters from him as they after did Fol. 113. The Lord Chancellor was ever a Bishop If our Author by this word ever understands 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most commonly or for the most part he is right enough but then it will not stand with the following words viz. as if it had been against equity to employ any other 〈◊〉 〈…〉 he take the word ever in its proper and more natural sense as if none but Bishops had ever been advanced unto that office he doth not only misinform the Reader but confute himself he having told us fol. 31. of this present book that Thomas Becket being then but Archdeacon of Canterbury was made Lord Chancellor and that as soon as he was made Archbishop he resign'd that office But the truth is that not only men in holy Orders but many of the Laity also had attained that dignity as will appear to any who will take the pains to 〈◊〉 the Catalogue of the Chancellors and 〈◊〉 of the Grâ—at Seal in the Glossary of Sir Henry 〈◊〉 in which appear not only some of inferior dignity as Deans Archdeacons House-hold Chaplains but many also not dignified with any Ecclesiasticall â—â—â—â—or Notification and therefore in all probability to be looked on as meer Laymen Counsellors and Servants to the Kings in whose times they lived or otherwise studied in the Lawes and of good affectionâ— and consequently capable of the place of such trust and power Fol. 116. This yearâ— viz. 1350. as Authors generally agree King Edward instituted are Order of the Garter Right enough as unto the time but much mistaken in some things which relate unto that antient and most noble Order our Author taking up his Commodities at the second hand neither consulting the Records noâ— dealing in this business with men of credit For first there are not 〈◊〉 Canons resident in the Church of Winâ—or but thirteen only with the Dean it being King Edwards purpoâ—e when he founded that Oâ—deâ— consisting of twenty 〈◊〉 Knights himself being one to 〈◊〉 as many greater and lesser Canons and as many old Souldiers commonly called poor Knightsâ— to be pensioned there Though in this last the number was 〈…〉 up to his first intention He tels us secondly that if he be not mistaken as indeed he is Sir Thomas Row was the last Chancellor of the Order whereas Sir Iames Palmer one of the Gentlemen Huishers of the Privy Chamber succeeded him in the place of Chancellor after his decease Anno 1644. He tels us thirdly that there belongs unto it one Register being alwayes the Dean of Winsor which is nothing so For though the Deans of late times have been Registers also yet ab initio non suit sic it was not so from the beginning The first Dean who was also Register being Iohn Boxul Anno 1557. Before which time beginning at the year 1414. there had been nine Registers which were not Deans but how many more before that time I am not able to say their names not being on Record And soâ—â—thly he tels us that the Garter is one of the extraordinary Habiliments of the Knights of this Order their ordinary being only the blew Ribbon about their necks with the picture of St. George appendant and the Sun in his glory on the left shoulder of their Cloak whereas indeed the Garter is of common wearing and of such necessary use that the Knights are not to be seen abroad without it upon pain of paying two Crowns to any Officer of the Order who shall first claim it unless they be to take a journey in which case it is sufficient to wear a blew Ribbon under their Boots to denote the Garter Lastly whereas our Author tels us that the Knights heâ—eof do wear on the left shoulder of their Cloaks a Sun in his glory and attributes this wearing as some say to King Charles I will first put him out of doubt that this addition was King Charles his then shew him his mistake in the matter it self And first in the first year of that King Ap. 26 1626. it was thus enacted at a publick Chapter of the Oâ—der viz. That all Knights and Companions of the Order shall wear upon the left part of their Cloaks Coats and riding Cassacks at all times when they shall not wear their Roabs and in all places of Assembly an Escocheon of the Armes of St. George id est a Crosse within a Garter not enriched with Pearls or Stones in token of the honour which they hold from the said most noble Order instituted and ordained for persons of the highest worth and honour Our Authour secondly may perceive by this Act of the Kings that St. Georges Crosse within the Garter is the main device injoyned to be worn by all the Knights of that noble Order to which the adding of the Sun in his glory served but for ornament and imbellishing and might be either used or not used but only for conformities sake as they would themselves So many errors in so few lines one shall hardly meet with The Fourth Book From the first Preaching of Wickliffe to the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the Eighth OUR Author begins this Book with the Story of Wickliffe and continueth it in relating the successes of him and his followers to which he seems so much addicted as to Christen their Opinions by the name of the Gospel For speaking of such incouragements and helps as were given to Wickliffe by the Duke of Lancaster with other advantages which
Aux in Guienne called antiently Aquae Augustae from whence those parts of France had the name of Aquitaine and not of Aix which the antient writers called Aquae Sextiae in the Countrey of Provence Now Guienne was at that time in the power of the Kings of England which was the reason why this Bernard was sent with the rest of the Commissioners to the Councell of Basil and being there amongst the rest maintained the rights and preheminences of the English Kings In agitating of which controversie as it stands in our Author I finde mention of one Iohannes de Voragine a worthless Author fol. 181. Mistook both in the name of the man and his quality also For first the Author of the Book called Legenda aurea related to in the former passage was not Iohannes but Iacobus de Voragiâ—e In which Book though there are many idle and unwarrantable fictions yet secondly was the man of more esteem then to passe under the Character of a Worthless Author as being learned for the times in which he lived Archbishop of Genâ—a a chief City of Italy moribus dignitate magno precio as Philippus Bergomensis telleth us of him Anno 1290. at what time he liv'd most eminent for his translation of the Bible into the Italian tongue as we read in Vossius a work of great both difficulty and danger as the times then were sufficient were there nothing else to free him from the ignominious name of a worthlesse Author A greater mistake then this as to the person of the Man is that which followes viz. Fol. 185. â—umphâ—y Duke of Gâ—oueâ— son to King Henry the fifth This though I cannot look on as a fault of the Presle yet I can easily consider it as a slip of the pen it being impossible that our Author should be so far mistaken in Duke Humphry of Gloster who was not son but bâ—otheâ— to King Henry the fifth But I cannot think so charitably of some other errors of this kinde which I finde in his History of Cambridge fol. 67. Where amongst the English Dukes which carryed the title of Earl of Cambridge he reckoneth Edmund of Langly fifth son to Edward the third Edward his son Richard Duke of York his brother father to King Edward the fourth But first this Richard whom he speaks of though he were Earl of Cambridge by the consent of Edward his elder brother yet was he never Duke of York Richard being executed at South-Hampton for treason against King Harry the fifth before that Kings going into France and Edward his elder brother slain not long after in the Battail of Agincourt And secondly this Richard was not the Father but Grandfather of King Edward the fourth For being marryed unto Anne sister and heir unto Edmund Mortimer Eaâ—l of March he had by her a son called Richard improvidently â—estored in bloud and advanced unto the Title of Duke of York by King Henry the sixth Anno 1426. Who by the Lâ—dy Cecely his wife one of the many Daughters of Ralph Eâ—rl of Westmerland was father of King Edward the fourth George Duke of Clarence and King Richard the third Thirdly as Richard Earl of Cambridge was not Duke of York so Richard Duke of York was not Earl of Cambridge though by our Author made the last Earl thereof Hist. of Cam. 162. before the restoring of that title on the House of the Hamiltons If our Author be no better at a pedegree in private Families then he is in those of Kings and Princes I shall not give him mâ—â—h for his Art of Memory for his History less and for his Heraldry just nothing But I see our Author is as good at the succession of Bishops as in that of Princes For saith he speaking of Cardinal Beaufort Fol. 185. He built the fair Hospital of St. Cross neer Winchester and although Chancellor of the University of Oxford was no grand Benefactor thereunto as were his Predecessoâ—s Wickam and Wainfleet Wickam and Wainfleet are here made the Predecessors of Cardinal Beaufort in the See of Winchester whereas in very deed though he succeeded Wickam in that Bishopâ—ick he preceded Wainfleet For in the Catalogue of the Bishops of Winchester they are marshalled thus viz. 1365. 50. William of Wickham 1405. 51. Henry Beaufort 1447. 52. William de Wainfleet which last continued Bishop till the year 1486. the See being kept by these three Bishops above 120. years and thereby giving them gâ—eat Advantages of doing those excellent works and founding those famous Colledges which our Author rightly hath ascribed to the first and last But whereas our Author telleth us also of this Cardinal Beaufort that he built the Hospital of St. Crosse he is as much out in that as he was in the other that Hospital being first built by Henry of Blais Brotheâ— of King Stephen and Bishop of Winchester Anno 1129. augmented only and perhaps more liberally endowed by this Potent Câ—â—dinal From these Foundations made and enlarged by these three great Bishops of Winchester successively pâ—oâ—eed we to two others raised by King Henry the sixth of which our Author telleth us Fol. 183. This good precedent of the Archbishops bounty that is to say the foundation of All-Souls Colledge by Archbishop Châ—cheley may be presumed a Spur to the speed of the Kings liberality who soon after founded Eaton Colledge c. to be a Nursery to Kings Colledge in Cambridge fol. 184. Of â—aton Colledge and the condition of the same our Author hath spoken here at large but we must look foâ— the foundation of Kings Colledge in the History of Cambridge fol 77. where I finde some thing which requireth an Animadversion Our Author there chargeth Dr. Heylyn for avowing something which he cannot justifie that is to say for saying That when William of Wainfleet Bishop of Winchester afterwards founder of Magdalen Colledge perswaded King Henry the Sixth to erect some Monument for Learning in Oxford the King returned Imo potius Cantabrigiae ut duas si fieri possit in Anglia Academias habeam Yea rather said he at Cambridge that if it be possible I may have two Universities in England As if Cambridge were not reputed one before the founding of Kings Colledge therein But here the premises only are the Doctors the inference or conclusion is our Authors own The Doctor infers not thereupon that Cambridge was not reputed an Vniversity till the founding of Kings Colledge by King Henry the sixth and indeed he could not for he acknowledged before out of Robert de Reningtâ—n that it was made an Vniversity in the time of King Edward the second All that the Doctor says is this that as the Vniversity of Cambridge was of a later foundation then Oxford was so it was long before it grew into esteem that is to say to such a measure of esteem at home or abroad before the building of Kings Colledge and the rest that followed but that the King might use those words in his
Discourse with the Bishop of Winchester And for the Narrative the Doctor whom I have talked with in this business doth not shame to say that he borrowed it from that great Treasury of Academical Antiquities Mr. Brian Twine whose learned Works stanâ— good against all Opponents and that he found the passage justified by Sir Isaack Wake in his Rex Platonicus Two Persons of too great wit and judgement to relate a matter of this nature on no better gâ—ound then common 〈◊〉 talk and that too spoke in merriment by Sir Henry Savil. Assuredly Sir Henry Savil was too great a Zealot for that University and too much a friend to Mr. Wake who was Fellow of the same Colledge with him to have his Table-talk and discourses of merriment to be put upon Record as grounds and arguments for such men to build on in that weighty Controversie And therefore when our Author tells us what he was told by Mr. Hubbard Mr. Hubbard by Mr. Barlow Mr. Barlow by Mr. Bust and Mr. Bust by Sir Henry Savil it brings into my minde the like Pedegree of as true a Story even that of Mother Miso in Sir Philip Sidney telling the young Ladies an old Tale which a good old woman told her which an old wise man told her which a great learned Clerk told him and gave it him in writing and there she had it in her Prayer-book as here our Author hath found this on the end of his Creed Not much unlike to which is that which I finde in the Poet Quae Phoebo Pater omnipotens mihi Phoebus Apollo Praedixit vobis Furiarum ego maxima pandâ— That is to say What Iove told Phoebus Phoebus told to me And I the chief of Furies tell to thee But to proceed Fol. 190. This was that Nevil who for Extraction Estate Alliance Dependents Wisdom Valour Success and popularity was superior to any English Subject since the Conquest Our Author speaks this of that Richard Nevil who was first Earl of Warwick in right of Anne his Wife Sister and Heir of Henry Beauchamp the last of that Family and after Earl of Salisbury by descent from his Father a potent and popular man indeed but yet not in all or in any of those respects to be match'd with Henry of Bullenbrook son to Iohn of Gaunt whom our Author must needs grant to have lived since the time of the Conquest Which Henry after the death of his Father was Duke of Lancaster and Hereford Earl of Leicester Lincoln and Darby c. and Lord High Steward of England Possessed by the donation of King Henry the third of the County Palatin of Lancaster the forfeited Estates of Simon de Montfort Earl of Leicester Robert de Ferrars Earl of Darby and Iohn Lord of Monmouth by the compact made between Thomas Earl of Lancaster and Alice his Wife of the Honor of Pomfret the whole Estate of the Earl of Lincoln and a great part of the Estates of the Earl of Salisbury of the goodly Tertitories of Ogmore and Kidwelly in Wales in right of his descent from the Chaworths of the Honor and Castle of Hartford by the grant of King Edward the third and of the Honor of Tickhill in Yorkshire by the donation of King Richard the second and finally of a Moity of the vast Estate of Humphry de Bohun Earl of Hereford Essex and Northampton in right of his Wife So royal in his Extraction that he was Grandchilde unto one King Cousin german to another Father and Grandfather to two more So popular when a private person and that too in the life of his Father that he was able to raise and head an Army against Richard the Second with which he discomfited the Kings Forces under the command of the Duke of Ireland so fortunate in his successes that he not only had the better in the battail mentioned but came off with Honor and Renown in the War of Africk and finally obtained the Crown of England And this I trow renders him much Superior to our Authors Nevil whom he exceeded also in this particular that he dyed in his bed and left his Estates unto his Son But having got the Crown by the murther of his Predecessor it stay'd but two descents in his Line being unfortunately lost by King Henry the sixth of whom being taken and imprisoned by those of the Yorkish Faction our Author telleth us Fol. 190. That States-men do admire how blind the Policy of that Age was in keeping King Henry alive there being no such sure Prison as a Grave for a Captive King whose life though in restraint is a fair mark for the full Aim of mal-contents to practise his enlargement Our Author might have spâ—r'd this Doctrine so frequently in practise amongst the wordly Politicians of all times and ages that there is more need of a Bridle to hold them in then a Sput to quicken them Parce precor stimulis fortiùs utere loris had been a wholesom Caveat there had any friend of his been by to have advis'd him of it The muâ—thering of depos'd and Captive Princes though too often practised never found Advocates to plead for it and mâ—â—h less Preachers to preach for it until these latter times First made a Maxim of State in the School of Machiavel who lays it down for an Aphorism in point of policy viz. that great Persons must not at all be touched or if they be must be made sure from taking Revenge inculcated afterwards by the Lord Gray who being sent by King Iames to intercede for the life of his Mother did undeâ—-hand solicit her death and whispered nothing so much in Queen Elizabeths ears as Mortua non mordet if the Scots Queen were once dead she would never bite But never prest so home never so punctually apply'd to the case of Kings as here I finde it by our Author of whom it cannot be â—ffirm'd that he speaks in this case the senâ—e of others but positively and plainly doth declare his own No such Divinity pâ—each'd in the Schools of Ignatius though fitter for the Pen of a Mariana then of a Divine or Minister of the Church of England Which whether it passed from him before oâ— since the last sad accident of this nature it comes all to one this being like a two-hand-sword made to strike on both â—â—des and if it come too late for instruction will serve abundantly howsoever for the justification Another note we have within two leaves after as derogatory to the Honor of the late Archbishop as this is dangerous to the Estate of all Soveraign Princes if once they chance to happen into the hands of their Enemies But of this our Author will give me an occasion to speak more in another place and then he shall hear further from me Now to go on Fol. 197. The Duke requested of King Richard the Earldom of Hereford and Hereditary Constableship of England Not so it was not the Earldom that is
severally chalenged that Trial against the French King and by Charles of Arragon and Peter de Taâ—â—acone for the 〈◊〉 of Sicilie Either the Author or the Printer is much mistaken here The title to the Realm of Sicilie was once indeed intended to be tried by Combat not between Charles of Arragon and Peter of Tarracone as is here affirmed but between Peter King of Arragon and Charles Earl of Anâ—ou pretending severally to that Kingdom 10. Such another mistake we have Fol. 55. Where it is said that there were some preparations in King James his time intended betwen two Scotch mâ—n the Lord Ree and David Ramsey Whereas indeed those preparations were not made in King Iames but King 〈◊〉 his time Robert Lord Willoughby Earl of 〈◊〉 and Lord great Chamberlain of England being made Lord Constable pro tempore to deside that Controversie Fol. 83. Katherine de Medices Pope Clements Brothers Daughter and Mother of King Charles c. 11 Katheriâ—e de medices was indeed wife to Henry the second and mother to Charles the ninth Frâ—nch Kings but by no means a â—â—â—thers daughter to Pope Clement the seventh For first Pope Clement being the natural son of 〈…〉 who was killed young and unmarried had nâ— brother at all And secondly Katherine de Medeces was Daughter of 〈◊〉 Duke of Vrbin son of Peter de Medeâ—es and Grâ—ndson of Laurence de Medicâ—s the brother of 〈◊〉 before mentioned By which account the father of that Pope and the great Grandfather of that Queen were Brothers and so that Queeu not Broâ—hers Daughter to the Pope Of nearer kiâ— she was to Pope Leo the tenth though not his Brothers Daughter neither Pâ—pe Leo being Brother to Peter de Medices this great Ladies Grand-father Fol. 84. This yâ—â—r took away James Hamilton Earl of Arran and Duke of Castle-herauld at Poictures a Province in France The name of the Province is Poictou of which Poictires is the pâ—â—â—cipal City accounted the third City next to Paris and 〈◊〉 â—ll that Kingdom And such anothâ—r slight mistake we have fol. 96. where we finde mention of the absâ—nce of the Duke of Arran Whereas indeed the chief of the Hamiltons was but Earl of Arrar as he after calls him the Title of Duke being first confâ—â—'d by King Charls upon Iames Marquess of Hâ—milâ—on created Duke Hâ—milâ—on of Arran Anno 1643. The like mâ—â—nomers we have after fol. 139. Where we finde mention of the History of Q. Elizabeth writ by 〈◊〉 whereas 〈◊〉 writ no further then King Henry 8. the rest which follows being clapt to by the publisher of it and possibly may be no other then Camdeâ—s Annals of that Queen in the English Tongue The like I frequently observe in the name of Metallan Metellanus he is called by their Latine Writers whom afterward he rightly calleth by the name of 〈◊〉 fol. 149. Fol. 156. The Leagures with some iustice in Rebellion elect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a degree nearer to the Crown then Navar. Not so but one degree at the least further off the Cardinal of 〈◊〉 called â—harls being the yongest Son of â—harls Duke of 〈◊〉 whereas Henry King of Navar was the onely Son and Heir of Anâ—hoâ—y the eldest Brother So that not oâ—ely the King of Navar but the Princes of the Hâ—use of 〈◊〉 deriv'd from Francis Duke of Anghein the second Brother had the precedency in Title before this 〈◊〉 But being of the Catholick party and of the Royal Hâ—use of Bourbon in which the Rights of the Crown remained and withal a man of great Age and small Abilities he was set up to serve the turn and screen'd the main Plot of the Lâ—aguers from the eyes of the people Fol. 161. Sir Thomas Randolph bred a Civilian was taken from Pembroke Colledge in Oxford Not otherwise to be made good in case he were of that House in Oxford which is now called Pembroke Colledge but by Anticipation Lavinaqueveâ—t Littora as in the like case the Poet has it that which is now called Pembroke Colledge was in those times call'd Broadgates Hâ—ll not changed into a Colledge till the latter end of the Reign of King Iames and then in Honor of William Earl of Pembroke Chancellor of that University and in hope of some endowment from him called Pembroke Colledge Fol. 189. The other Title was of the Iâ—â—ant of Spain In laying down whose several Titles the Author leaves out that which is most material that is to say the direct and lineal Succession of the Kings of Spain from the Lady Katherine Daughter of Iohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster marryed to Henry the third King of Castile and Mother to King Iohn the second from whom descend the Kings of Castile to this very day Fol. 191. Hawkins Drake Baskervile c. Fiâ—e sâ—ne Towns in the Isle Dominica in the West Indies They fired indeed some Towns in Hispanâ—olâ— and amongst others that of Dominica or St. Domâ—ngo But they attempted nothing on the Isle of Dominica which is one of the Châ—rybes and they had no reason that Island being governed by a King of its own at deadly enmity with the 〈◊〉 anâ— conseqâ—ently more likely to be aydâ—d then annâ—yed by those Sea Adventurers A like mistake we had before in the name of Câ—â—mâ—rdin fol. 157. That party who discovered unto Queen Elizabeth the Estate of the Customs not being named 〈◊〉 but Carwâ—rdin Fol. 229. Sr. Thomas Erskin created Earl of Kelly and by degrees Knight of the Garter Not so Knight of the Garter first by the name of Thomas Viscount Fenton as appeares by the Registers of the Order and then Earl of Kelly Thus afterwards we finde Sr. Iohn Danvers for Sr. Charles Dâ—nvers fol. 238. And Iohn Lord Norris for Sr. Iohn Norris fol. 243. And some mistakes of this nature we finde in the short story of the Earle of Essex in which it is said first that Fol. 233. He was eldest son to Waltar Devereux c. created by Queen Elizabeth Earl of Essex and Ewe Not so but Earl of Essex onely as appears by Camden in his Britannia fol 454. If either he or any of his Descendants have taken to themselves the Tittle of Earl's of Ewe they take it not by vertue of this last Creation but in right of their descent from William Boâ—rchier created Earl of Ewe in Normandy by King Henry the fift and father of Henry Bourchier created Earl of Essex by King Edward the fourth Secondly it is said of Robert Earl of Essex the son of this Walâ—er that in 89. he went Commander in chief in the expedition into Portugal Fol. 233. whereas indeed he went but as a Voluntier in that expedition and had no command And so much our Author hath acknowledged in another place saying that Ambitious of common fame he put himself to Sea and got aboard the Fleet conceiting that their respect to his biâ—th and quâ—liâ—y would receive him their chief but was mistaken in that honouâ— Fol. 155. Thirdly it is said of this
their yongest Sons some Earldom or other until the time of Edward the third after which time they were invested with the Title of Dukes as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies But that they or any of them were Earls by Birth is a new piece of learning for which if the Historian can give me any good proof I shall thank him for it Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cousened into some kindness both by his own power and purse makes Charls Emperor and the French King his Prisoner 1519. Neither so nor so For first though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner yet to the making of Charls Emperor he contributed neither the one nor the other And secondly though Charls were created Emperor Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after Anno 1525. Fol. 31â— Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages 3â— That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned was a Puiâ—â—ant Prince as being the ninth Monarch of the English I shall easily grant but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland is not any where found Our Author therefore must be understood of his uniting the two Realms of Deâ—ra and Pernicia part of which last hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland which after his decease were again divided Fol. 317. Whose Results notwithstanding are not to be obtruded on the Sâ—culars to be obsâ—rved with the Authority of Laws until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses An error far more pardonable in our present Author to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied then in our Church Historian where before we had it and which hath had a full Conâ—utation in our Animadversions to which for brevity sake I shall now refer Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here The Ambassador who was sent from France was neither called Rory nor Duke of Solia but Marquess of Rhosney created afterward Duke of Sully and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom by King Henry 4. A Protestant and therefore purposely selected for that imployment Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service in the Cathedral Chuâ—ch at Câ—nâ—erbury he was heard to say that if the like had been used in France there would have been many thousands of Protestants more then were at that present Fol. 329. Ceâ—il foâ— his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury That is to say for so it must be understood for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery call'd so by the Historian himself in the course of thaâ— Naâ—rative and made so by King Iames in the Mâ—y foregoâ—ng at what time also his Brother Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER The like mistake I finde in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet plac'd by the Author fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King Iames March 13. Anno 1603. Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders c. being by Storm cast upon our Coast c. was fain to yield to all the Kings demands in delivering up the Countess of Warwick and other Fugitives resident in Flanders This story is well meant but not rightly told there being at that time no Earl of Flanders commonly so called to be cast upon the Coast of England nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of the truth is that the person here meant was Philip King of Castile Duke of Burgundy Earl of Flanders c. who in his return from Spain was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh was detained here till he had delivered into the Kings hands the Earl of Suffolk who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection and began to work new troubles against his Soveraign The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban from fol. 222. to 225. Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown This spoken of the Piercies Earls of Northumberland too often false to the Crown though not always so For Henry the second Earl of this Family lost his life fighting for King Henry the sixth in the Battle of St. Albans as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of â—owton And so did Henry the fifth Earl in the time of King Henry the seventh for his Fidelity to that King in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People not to say any thing of his Son and Successor who dyed without any imputation of such disloyalty Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelders did of right belong to the Dukâ— Arnold who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy who died before Nancy that Duke intruded upon his Possession c. 40. Not so it was not Arnold Duke of Gelders that was Imprisoned by Charls Duke of Burgundy but his Son Adolphus who having most ungratiously Imprison'd his aged Father was vanquished by Duke Charls and by him kept Prisoner and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty In a grateful acknowledgement of which favor he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charls and his Heirs to commence after his decease though it took no effect till Conquered under that pretence by Charls the fifth uniting it unto the rest of his Belgick Provinces Anno 1538. Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour Grandchilde to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford created by Henry the eighth whose sister he marryed c. And being thus near the Crown c. In this business of Sir William Seymer now Marquess of Hertford there are two mistakes For first the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his discent married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth he having but two Wives in all the first the Daughter of Filol of Woodland from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West the second Anne Daughter of Sir Edward and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop from whom discends the House of Hertford still in being It s true King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer by him created Earl of Hertford but not é contra the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his Secondly The nearness of this House to the Crown of England came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that Kings Sister but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl with a Neece of that Kings that is to say with 〈◊〉 Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk and of Fâ—aâ—ces his Wife
one of the Daughters of Charls Brandon Duke of Suffolk and of Mary the French Queen King 〈◊〉 Sister Fol. 427. The late French King Henry the fourth had three Daughters the one married to the Duke of Savoy c This Marriage both for the time and person is mistaken also First for the time in making it to precede the match with Spain whereas the cross Marriages with Spain were made in the year 1612. and this with Savoy not trans-acted till the year 1618. Secondly for the Person which he makes to be the eldest Daughter of Henry the fourth and Elizabeth married into Spain to be the second whereas Elizabeth was the eldest Daughter and Christienne married into Savoy the second onely For which consult Iames Howels History of Lewis the 13. fol. 13. 42. Fol. 428. The story was that his Ancestors at Plough â—lew Malton an High-land Rebel and dis-comfited his Train using no other Weapon but his Geer and Tackle But Camden whom I rather credit tells us That this was done in a great fight against the Danes For speaking of the Earls of Arrol he derives the Pedigree from one Hay a man of exceeding strength and excellent courage who together with his Sons in a dangerous Battle of Scots against the Danes at Longcarty caught up an Ox Yoak and so valiantly and fortunately withal what with fighting and what with exhorting re-inforced the Scots at the point to shâ—ink and recoyl that they had the day of the Danes and the King with the States of the Kingdom adscribed the Victory and their own safety to his valor and prowess Ibid. But to boot he sought out a good Heir Gup my Lady Dorothy sole Daughter to the Lord Denny This spoken of Sir Iames Hay afterwards Viscount Doncaster and Earl of Carâ—â—sle who indeed married the Daughter and sole Heir of the L. Denny of Waltham But he is out for all that in his Gup my Lady her name being Honora and not Dorothy as the Author makes it And for his second Wife one of the Daughters of Henry Piercy E. of North-Humberland she was neither a Dorothy nor an Heiâ— And therefore we must look for this Gup my Lady in the House of Huntington that bald Song being made on the Marriage of the Lady Dorothy Hastings Daughter of George Earl of Huntington with a Scotish Gentleman one Sir Iames Steward slain afterward at â—â—â—ington by Sir George Wharton who also perisht by his Sword in a single Combate Fol. 429. Amongst many others that accompanied Hays expedition was Sir Henry Rich Knight of the Bath and Baron of Kensington Knight of the Bath at that time but not Baron of Kensington this Expedition being plac'd by our Author in the year 1616. and Sir Henry Rich not being made Baron of Kensington till the 20 year of King Iames Annâ— 1622. Fol. 434. The chief Iudge thereof is called Lordchief Iustice of the Common Pleas accompanied with three or four Assistants or Associates who are created by Letters Patents from â—he King But Doctor Cowel in his learned and laborious work called The Interpreter hath informed us otherwise This Iustice saith he speaking of the chief Justice of the Kings Bench hath no Patent under the Broad-Seal He is made onely by Writ which is a short one to this effect Regina Iohanni Popham Militi salutem Sciatis quod constituimus 〈◊〉 Iâ—stâ—ciarium nostrum Capitalem ad Placita coram nobis terâ—â—nandum durante bene placito nostro Teste c. For this he citeth Crompton a right learned Lawyer in his Book of the Iurisdiction of Courts And what he saith of that chief Justice the practice of these times and the times preceding hath verified in all the rest Fol. 450. She being afterwards led up and down the Kingâ— Army under oversight as a Prisoner but shewed to the people 〈◊〉 if reconâ—iled to her Son c. Not so for after the deatâ— of the Marquess D'Aucre she retired to Blois where 〈◊〉 liv'd for some years under a restraint till released by the Duâ—â— of Eâ—pâ—rnon and prtly by force pâ—rtly by treaty restorâ— again into power and favor with her Son which she improvâ—â— afterwards to an omne-regenâ—y till Richeleu her great Assistant finding himself able to stand without her and not enduring a Competitor in the Affairs of State mde her leave the Kingdom Fol. 45â— By his first Wife he had bâ—t one Sâ—n risâ—â—g no higher in Honor then Kâ—ight and Baronet Yet afâ—erwâ—â—ds he had preferment to the Govâ—rnment of Ulster Pâ—ovince in Ireland This spoken but mistakingly spoken of Sir George Vâ—lliers Father of the Duke of Buckingham and his eldest son For first Sir George Villiers had two sons by a former Wife that is to say Sir William Villiers Knight and Baronet who preferred the quiet and repose of a Countrey life before that of the Court and Sir Edward Villiers who by a Daughter of Sir Iohn St. Iohn of Lidiard in the County of Wilts was Father of the Lord Viscount graâ—dâ—Graâ—dâ—son now living And secondly It was not Sir William but Sir Edward Villiers who had a Government in Ireland as being by the Power and Favor of the Duke his halfâ— Brother made Lord President of Mâ—nster not of Vlster which he held till his death And whereas it is said fol. 466. that the Dâ—ke twiâ—teâ— himself and his Issue by inter-marriâ—ges with the best and most â—noble If the Author instead of his Issue had said his â—â—ndred it had been more properly and more truly spoken For the Duke liv'd not to see the Marriage of any one of his châ—ldren though a Contract had passed between his Daughter Mary and the Heir of Pembroke but he had so disposed of hâ—s Female Kindred that there were more Countesses and â—onorable Ladies of his Relations then of any one Family 〈◊〉 the Land Fol. 458. Henry the eighth created Anne Bullen 〈◊〉 of Pembroke before he marryed her The Author here â—â—eaks of the Creation of Noble Women and maketh that of â—nne Bullen to be the first in that kinde whereas indeed it as the second if not the third For Margaret Daughter 〈…〉 Fol. 4â—4 And that Comâ—t at Châ—ists birth was 〈…〉 But first the Star which appeared at the birth of our 〈◊〉 and conducted the wise men to Ierusalem was of condition too â—ubâ—ime and supernatural to be called a Comet and so resolved to be by allâ—learned men who have written of it And secondly had it been a Comet it could not possibly have portended the death of Nero there passing between the bâ—â—th of Chrâ—st and the death of that Tyrant about 〈◊〉 yearâ— too long a time to give unto the influences of thâ— strongest Comet So that although a Comet did presage thâ— death of Nero as is said by Tacitus yet could not that Comet be the 〈◊〉 which the Scriptures speak of Fol. 48â— Ferdinand meets at Franckford with the three 〈◊〉 Menâ—â— Colen and Trevours the other three Silesia Moravia and Luâ—atia
failing in their persons sentâ—their 〈…〉 I more admire at this gross pieâ—â— of ignorance then at all the rest Silesia Moravia and 〈…〉 incorporated with the Realm of 〈◊〉 being nâ—ver qualified with sending any Electors â—or thâ— choice of the Emperour The three Electors which he meaneth were the Count Palatine of the Râ—â—ne the Duke of Saxony and the Marquess of Brandenburg and they not coming in Person to the 〈◊〉 at Frackford appeared there by their Embassadors as at other times A like mistake but far more pardonâ—ble oâ—curreth Fol. 484. Where Daâ—mstal is said to be a Town of Bohemia whereas indeed it is a Town of the Land of Hâ—ssen the whole Territories of the Duke of Saxony being interposed betwixt this Town and the nearest parts of that Kingdom Fol. 489. The Lord Marchers after the Conquest were reâ—ident upon the Confines and borders of the Welch and other places not subdued men of valour of high blood of the Normans with the name and priviledges of the Earls of Chester That the Lord Marchers on the Borders of Wales were at first many in number as it after followeth is a truth undoubted But their power being contracted into fewer hands one of them Roger Mortimer by name was by King Edward the third made Earl of March The Earldome of Chester was of another foundation conferrd by William the Conqueror upon Hugh sirnamed Lupus Son to the Viscount of Auranches in Normandy with all the Rites and Privileges of a County Palatine to him and to his Heires for ever So that this honour being appropriated to the Heirs of that House was not Communicable unto any of the rest of the Marchers nor could those Marchers claim the stile and privileges of Earles of Chester Fol. 490. Sir Edward Montague had three sons Edward the eldest Knight of the Bath c. The Author here is much mistaken in the House of the Montagues For first that Edward Montague who was 〈…〉 c. was not Brother to Iames Bishop of Winchester aâ—d Henry Earl of Manchester but their Brothers Son that is to say the Son of another Eâ—ward their eldest Brother Secondly besides that Edward Iames and Henry there was another Brother whom the Author names not though he could not chuse but know the man viz. Sir Sidney Monâ—â—â—â— one oâ— the Masters of the Requests to the late King 〈◊〉 Theâ—â—fore to set this matter right I am to let both him and his Reaâ—ers know that Sr. Edward Montague chief Justice â—n the time of King Edward the sixth was father of another Edward who lived peaceably and nobly in his own Country To whom succeeded a third Edwâ—rd who 〈…〉 in the Wars and gained the reputation of a good Commaâ—der the elder Brother of Iames Henry and 〈◊〉 before mentioned and the father of a fourth Edâ—â—â—â— who was made Knight of the Bath at the Coronâ—tion 〈…〉 Anno 1â—03 and afterwards created Lord 〈◊〉 of Boughâ—on in the ninâ—teenth year of that King Anno 1621. which honourable Title is now enjoyed by his Son anotheâ— Edward Anno. 1658. And thirdly thâ—â—gh â— grant that Dr. Iames Montagâ—e Bishop of Winchâ—ster the second Brother of the four was of great power and favour in the time of King Iames and might have free accesse into the Bed-chamber of that King whensoever he pleased yeâ— that he was of the Bed chamber as the Author saith that iâ— to say admitted formerly thereunto and one of that number I do more then doubt Fol. 506. Then comes Iohn Howard c. created by Richard the 〈◊〉 Duke of Northfolk but not Earle Marshal In this and in the â—â—st that follows touching the succession of the Earls Mâ—rshâ—â—ls there aâ—e many mistaken Fâ—r first tâ—is Iohn Lord Howard was by Richard the third â—ot onely created Duke of North-folk but Earl Marâ—â—â—ll also as appears by Camdâ—n Fol 483. Secondly as well Thomas Earl of Surrey the son of this 〈◊〉 as anâ—thâ—r Thomas the son of that Thomas were both advanâ—â—d 〈◊〉 the â—ffice of Earl Marshal as is affirmed by such as have writ the Genealogies of this noble family Thirdly that Thomas Howard whom queen Mary restored unto the Office of Earl Marshâ—l was not the Grand-câ—ilde of Thomas Mâ—wbray â—ut the Grand-child of the Grand-child of the Daughter of that Thomas Mowbray as will appear to any who shall search that Pedigree But this perhaps may be an error of the Printer in giving us the name of Thomas Mowbray for Thomas Howard Fourthly though Robert Devâ—râ—ux Earle of Essex is by our Author placed next after this last Thomâ—s Hâ—ward in the Office of Marshal yet sure it is that Georg Talbot Earl of Shrewbury came in between them advanc'd unto that Dignity by Queen Elizabeth Anno 157â— Fol. 507. He 〈◊〉 the emineâ—t Struâ—ture of the Library of St. Iohns in Cambridge where he had been Master for many years This spoken of Dr. Williams then Bishop of Lincoln and Lord Keeper who certainly was never Master of that Colledge though by his power and and party in that Society he advanced Dr. Gwin who had been his Tutor unto that place as is affirmed in the Church History of Bâ—itain Lib. 11. fol. 225. It may be Mr. Williams was at that time of the same minde with â—harles Martâ—l of whom it is affirmed that he chose rather to make a King then to be a King Non â—word regnâ—re sed Râ—gibus 〈…〉 as the old verse hath it Or else perhaps we may say of him as Tâ—citus does of Mutianâ—s Cui facilâ—us erâ—t 〈…〉 that is to say that it was easier for him to procure the mastership for another then to obtain it for himsâ—lf But howsoever it was it seemes to have been carried by strong 〈◊〉 canvas of which Nation both the Pupil and the Scholer were as appeareth by these Hâ—xameters following in which the four Competitors are thus laid before us Fol. 〈◊〉 Th◠〈◊〉 of that Protestation 〈◊〉 meâ—◠〈…〉 Regni negotiis but left out Quibusdam 〈…〉 particular cases as the King 〈…〉 This spoken of a Protestation entred bâ—â—ome of the House of Commons Anno 1621. concerning 〈◊〉 of their pretended Rights and Privileges in which they 〈◊〉 mistaâ—en and I wonder the Author did not see it in 〈◊〉 the veâ—y grounds on which they built it For by the writ of summons the Commons were not called to consult of any thing either great of little difficult or not difficult whatsoâ—â—ver it was but onely 〈◊〉 consentiendum faciendum to consent to and perfoâ—m such things as by the great Councel of the Realmâ— consisting of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal should be then ordained as by the very â—writ it self doth at large appear By which it seems that the Commons assembled in Parliament were of themselves so far from being any 〈◊〉 oâ— that supreme Couâ—t that they were not to be counted for a part of the Kings great Councel So that the foundaâ—ion being 〈◊〉 the Superstructure could not stand which was built upon
Seas and a Westâ—country Gentleman whose name I call not now to minde of the Western parts Our Author may be good for land service but we have some cause to fear by this experiment that if he should put forth to Sea he would easily fall into Scylla by avoiding Charybdis Fol. 18. This Gentleman was second Son of Thomas Cecil Earl of Exeter c. Our Author speaks this of Sr. Edward Cecil created by King Charles in the first year of his Reign Lord Cecil of Putney and Viscount Wimbleton and by the King made Commander General of his first Fleet against the Spaniards concerning whom he falls into several Errours For first Sr Edward Cecil was not the second but the third son of Thomas Earl of Exeter the second Son being Sr. Richard Cecil of Walkerly in the County of Rutland the Father of that David Cecil who succeeded in the Earldom of Exeter after the death of Earl William eldest Son of Thomas aforesaid Secondly this Sr. Edward Cecil was not of a Colonel made General of the English forces in the unhappy war of the Palatinate He was indeed made General of the English forces in the war of Cleve Anno 1610. the power which his Uncle Sr. Robert Cecil Earl of Salisbury had with King Iames advancing him to that imployment But that he was not General of the English forces in the Palatinate war I am very confident Sr. Horace Vere one of a more noble extraction and a far better Souldier being chief Commander in that service of the English forces Thirdly admitting this for true yet could not the mis-effects of that war be charged on him or any other of the English Commanders the English forces being inconsiderable for their number in reference to those which were raised for that war by the German Princes all of them under the Command of the Marquesse of Oâ—alsback as their Generalissimo to whose either cowardize or infidelity the mis-effects of that war as our Author calls them were imputed commonly And fourthly it was not 27. years since his imployment there when he was called home to be Commander of this fleet there being not above five years from the beginning of the war in the Palatinate and his calling home and not above fifteen from his being made General of the English in the war of Cleveland Fol. 24. Dr. Williams outed of the Seal but kept his Bishoprick of Lincoln and the Deanry of Westminster which indeed he had for his life Our Author is as much out in this as in that before for though the Deanry of Westminster was given at first to Dr. Williams for terme of Life yet when he was made Bishop of Lincoln that Deanry fell again to the King and by the king was regranted to him to be holden in Commendam with that Bishoprick After which being made Arch-Bishop of York in the year 1641. he obtained it in Commendam for three years onely which term expired he was a Sutor to the King at Oxford for a longer term and on denial of that Suit retired into Wales and openly betook himself to the Parliament-party concerning which consult our Author in the latter part of his History Nor did he only keep the Bishoprick of Lincoln and the Deanry of Westminster but also a Residenciaries place in the Church of Lincoln the Prebend of Asgarve and Parsonage of Walgrove so that he was a whole Diocesse within himself as bing Parson Prebend Dignitary Dean and Bishop and all five in one Fol. 25. All setled and reposed the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury presented his Majesty to the Lords and Commons East West North and South asking them if they did consent to the Coronation of K. Charles their lawful Soveraign Our Author takes this whole Narrative of the pomp and order of the Kings Coronation out of the Church History of Britain endeavoured and but endeavoured by Mr. Fuller of Walthamâ— and takes it all upon his credit without so much as startling at that dangerous passage which is now before us That Author and this also following him conceive the peoples consent so necessary to the Coronation of the King that it was askt no less then four times by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury before he could proceed any further in that solemnity But if we look into the form used in the Coronation of King Edward the sixth we shall finde it thus viz. That being carried by 〈◊〉 noble Courâ—iers in another Chair unto the four sides of the Stage he was by the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury declared unto the People standing round about both by Gods and Mans Laws to be the right and lawful King of England France and Ireland and proclaimed that day to be Crowned Coâ—secrated and Anoiâ—ted unto whom he demanded whether they would obey anâ— serve or not By whom it was again with a loudâ—ery answered God save the King and ever live his Majesty And in the Coronation of King Iames more briefly thus The King is shewed to the people and they are required to make acknowledgement of their Allegiance to his Majesty by the Arch-Bishop which they do by Acclamations Which being so it cannot possibly be supposed that instead of requiring the peoples obedience to the Kings Authority the Arch-Bishop shouâ—d crave their consent to his Coronation as if the Coronation were not strong and valid nor his succession good in Law without their consent But though our Author follow Mr. Fuller in one Error yet he â—orrects him in another though in so doing he require some correction also Master Fuller tells us that the Kings Traâ—â— was held up by the Lord Compton as belonging to the Robes and the Lord Vicount Dorchester lib. 11. fol. 122. Mr. Sanderson knowing that there was no such man then being as a Viscount Dorchester must play the Critick on the Text and instead of Viscount Dorchester gives us Viscount Doncaster whom he makes Master of the Wardrobe and both true alike fol. â— 5. The Master of the Wardrobe at that time was the Earl of Dâ—â—bâ—gh and the Lord Viscount Doncaster now Earl of Carstile was then too yong to perform any Service in this solemnity which had he done Mr. Fuller who hath some dependence on him would not have robb'd him of the honor of performing that service which none but persons of place and merit could pretend unto Fol. 25. The Sermon being done the Arch-Bishop invested in a rich Cope goeâ—h to the King kneeling upon Cushions at the Communion Table and asks his willingness to take the Oath usually taken by his Predecessors c. The form and maner of w h Oath as having afforded much matter of discourse in these latter times I will first subjoyn and afterwards observe what descants have been made upon it The form and maner of the Oath as followeth Sir says the Arch-Bishop will you grant and keep and by your Oath confirm to the People of England the Laws and Customs to them granted by the Kings of England your Lawful and
of the English Parliament till the time of King Iames. It s true that on the Petition of the Commons in the beginning of each Parliament the King was graciously pleas'd to indulge them a freedom of reasoning and debate upon all such points as came before them and not to call them to account though they delivered their opinions contrary to his sence and meaning But then it is as true withal that they used not to waste time in tedious Orations nor to declaim against the proceedings of the King and the present Government or if they did the Speaker held it for a part of his Office to cut them short and to reminde them of their duty besides such after-claps as they were sure to finde from an injured and incensed Soveraign But of this take along with you this short passage as I finde it in a letter written ab ignoto to King Charls in this very business of the Duke May it please your excellent Majesty to consider That this great opposition against the Duke of Buckingham is stirred up and maintained by such who either maliciously or ignorantly and concurrently seek the debasing of this free Mâ—narchy which because they finde not yet ripe to attempt against the king himself they endeavor it through the dukes sides These men though agreeing in one mischief yet are of divers sorts and humors Viz. 1. Medling and busie persons who took their first hint at the beginning of King Iames when the Vnion was treated of in Parliament That learned King gave too much way to those popular Speeches by the frequent proof he had of his great Abilities in that kinde Since the time of H. 6. these Parliamentary Discourses were never suffered as being the certain Symptoms of subsequent Rebellions Civil Wars aâ—d the dethroning of our Kings But these last twenty years most of the Parliament Men seek to improve the reputation of their Wisdoms by these Declamations and no honest Patriot dare oppose them lest he incur the imputation of a Fool or a Coward in his Countries cause But which is more the pride they took in their own supposed Eloquence obtain'd another priviledge for them that is to say The liberty for any man to speak what he list and as long as he list without fear of being interrupted whereof King Iames takes notice in his said Speech to both the Houses at White-Hall Nor did they onely take great delight in these tedious speeches but at first disperst Copies of them in writing and afterwards caused them to be printed that all the people might take notice of the zeal they had to the common liberty of the Nation and the edge they hed against the Court and the Kings Prerogative But to proceed Fol. 47. To ballance the Dukes enemies three persons his confederates were made Barons to compeer in the Lords house the Lord Mandevil the eldest son to the Earl of Manchester created by Patent Baron Kimbolton Grandison Son to the created Baron Imbercourt and Sr Dudly Carlton made Baron Tregate In which short passage there are as many mistakes as lines For first the Lord Mandevil was not created by Patent Lord Kimbolton that title together with the tite of Vicount Mandevil having been conferred upon his father by letter Patents in the 18. year of King Iames Anno 1620. whom afterwards King Charles in the first year of his Reign made Earl of Manchester The meaning of our Author is that Sr. Edward Montague commonly called Lord Mandevil was summoned to the Parliament by the Title of Lord Kimbolton as is the custom in such cases when the eldest sons of Earls are called to Parliament by the stile and Title of their Fathers Barony Secondly there never was any such Baron as the Baron Tregate Thirdly Sr. Dudly Carlton was not created Baron Tregat but Baron of Imbercourt that being the name of a Mannor of his in the County of Surry But fourthly Grandison son to the created Baron Imbercourt is either such a peece of negligence in not filling the blanks or of ignorance in not knowing that noble Person as is not often to be met with And therefore to inform both our Author and his Reader also I must let them know that William de Grandâ—son a noble Burgundian Lord allied to the Emperour of Constantinople the King of Hungary and the Duke of Bavaria was brought into England by Edmond Earl of Lancaster second son to King Henry the 3. by whose bounty he was endowed with fair possessions and by his power advanced unto the dignity of an English Baron The estate being much encreast by the Marriage of the Daughter and Heir of the Lord Tregoz fell by the Heir general to the Pateshuls of Bleâ—so in the County of Bedford and by a Daughter of that house to the house of the Beauchamps By Margaret the daughter and Heir of Sr. Iohn Beauchamp of Bletso the whole estate came by Marriage to Sr. Oliver St. Iohn from whose eldest son descended that Sr. Oliver St. Iohn whom Queen Elizabeth descended from the said Margaret by Iohn Duke of Somerset her second husband made Lord St. Iohn of Bletho in the first year of her Reign From Oliver St. Iohn the second son of the said Margaret estated by his mother in the Mannor of Lydiard Tregoz neer Highworth in the County of Wilts descended another Oliver St. Iohn the second son of Sr. Iohn St. Iohn of Lydiard Tregoz who having in defence of his Fathers Honour killed one Captain Best in St. Georges fields neer Southwark was fain to passe over into France where he remained untill his friends about the Queen had obtained his pardon To merit which and to avoid the danger which might happen to him by Bests acquaintances he betook himself to the wars of Ireland where he performed such signal service against the Rebels that passing from one command to another he came at last to be made Lord Deputy of Ireland at what time he was created viscount Grandison with reference to the first founder of the greatnesse of his House and family That dignity entailed on him and the heires males of his body and for want of Such Issue on the Heires males of Sr. Edward Villers begotten on the body of Mrs. Barbara St. Iohn the new Viscounts Neece according unto which remainder that Honnurable Title is enjoyed by that branch of the house of Villers But being the Title of Viscount Grandison was limited to the Realm of Ireland to make him capable of a place in this present Parliament he was created Lord Tregoz of Highworth to him and to the heires males of his body without any remainder Fol. 62. Carlton gone upon this Errand and missing the French King at Paris progressed a tedious journey after that Court to Nantes in Bohemia And here we have as great an Error in Geography as before in Heraldry there being no such Town as Nantes in Bohemia or if there were it had been too farre off and too unsafe a
Câ—rrans by Queen Elizabeth it was done as our Authour tels us to cry quits with the Venetians who had rais'd the Customes of our Clâ—th And this was done saith he without regret or complaint the generall prosperity of the Reign overshadowing and her power commanding fol. 133. Here then we have an Imposition raised upon some Commodities by the sole will anâ— power of the Queen not only without Act of Parliament but without any regret or complaint of the Merchants as our Authour tels us And in the first he tels us true but not so in the last For the Merchants having fee'd some Members of the House of Commons to befriend them in it it was moved that some course might be taken by the House to ease the Merchants in thâ—t Point When presently M. Secretary Cecil addressing himself unto the Speaker desired that that businesse might proceed no further affirming that it was a Noli me tangere part of the Queens prerogative Royall and therefore not to be disputed within those wals adding wâ—â—hal that if 〈◊〉 proceeded any further he must as he was in duty bound acquaint her Majesty with the matter of whose displeasure they would quickly finde themselves to be very sensible And so the businesse stopt for that time though it broke out afterwards but little to the benefit of the Merchant as in fine it proved It seems by this story that the Commons challenged no such priviledge in Queen Elizabeths time as they did afterwards in the time of King Charles that is to say that neither the King nor Queen was to take notice of any thing which was said or done within those Walls until it was communicated to them by the consent of the House For whereas the King in a Speech made to both Houses on the 14 of December 1641. took notice of some dispute which had been raised in that House about the Kings power in pressing Soldiers for his Wars the Commons voted this for a breach of Priviledge and gain'd so far upon the Lords that they joyn'd together in this Declaration to his Maâ—esty viz. That amongst other priviledges of Parliament it was their ancient and undoubted right that his Majâ—sty ought not to take notice of any matter in Agitation and debate in either House of Parliament but by their Information and Agreement But yet as ancient as it was the yongest man present had seen the beginning and as undoubted as it was the oldest man there sitting liv'd to see the end of it And so much for that Fol. 136. But they were all ten committed to several Prisons and on the first of May Attorney-General Noy sent Process out against them to appear in the Star-Chamber and answer his Information there Our Author speaks this of those ten persons who had been guilty of that most unparallel'd Ryot which was committed in the House of Commons at the dissolving of the last Parliament at what time Mr. Noy was not Attorney-General nor in three years after and therefore could not send out Process or make any Infoâ—mation against them as is here affirmed The Attorney-General was at that time Sir Robert Heath who not long after entred the like Information against the Earls of Bedford Somerset and Clare Sir Robert Cotton Master Selden Mr. St. Iohn for dispersing a Manuscript containing sundry projects for raising money on the Subject without the help of Parliaments as if it had been some Design of the King or his Councel to enslave the Nation Concerning which our present Author tells us one thing and an absent Author tells us another That which our present Author tells us is That Fol. 140. It was contrived at Florence by Sir Robert Dudley who descended from the Dudlies Earls of Warwick and so he stiled himself That this Book of projects was contrived by Sir Robert Dudley I am well assured and I am well assured also that he neither descended from the Dudlies Earls of Warwick nor ever call'd himself by that Title There were but three that held the Titles of Warwick viz. Iohn the first Baron of that House created Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland by K. Edward the sixth Secondly Iohn his eldest surviving Son commonly called Earl of Warwick as the custom is after his Father was made Duke who dyed without Issue And thirdly Ambrose the fourth Son of the first Ioâ—n created Earl of Warwick by Queen Elizabeth Anno 1552. who deceased without Issue also so that there was but one Dudley Earl of Warwick from whom this Robert could descend and from him he did as being the base or natural Son of Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester the fifth Son of the said Iohn Dudly Earl of Warwick and Duke of Northumberland Secondly This Sir Robert Dudley who contriv'd the Manuscript did not stile himself by the name of Earl of Warwick that being too low a title to content his Ambition For looking on himself as the onely remaining branch of this House of the Dudlies he took upon himself the Stile of Duke of Northumberland and was commonly called so by all sorts of People in the State of Florence But to proceed our Author tells us of this Manuscript of Sir Robert Dudlies That Ibid. It was a Rhapsody of several proâ—ects for increase of the Kings Revenue and somewhat in prejudice of proceedings in Parliament sundry copies whereof were dispersed c. And so disperst that there were few or none who were inquisitive into matters which conâ—erned the publick that got not â— Copy of thâ—se Paperâ— Which being found in the Study of the Earl of Strafford as it might have been in thousâ—nds more gave an occasion to E. H. an obscure fellow compos'd of Ignorance and malice to publish it in Print with this following Title viz. Straffords Plâ—t discovered and thâ— Parliament vindicated in their Iustice executed upon him by the late discovery of certain Propositions delivered to his Majesty by the Earl of Strafford a little before his tryal with this Inscription Propositions for the bridling of Parliaments and for the increasing of his Majesties Revenue much mâ—re then before c. And so much for the harmless Errors of my present and the malicious falshood of my absent Author Amongst which harmless Errors of my present but not to be excused in any Author I reckon his naming of King Charls to be the Uncle of Frederick Prince Elector Palatine fol. 143. and within few lines after his Brother-in-law as indeed he was his making â—alcedon to be a City in Greece fol. 151. whereas it was a City of Bithynia in Asia minor on the other side of the Sea But leaving these I proceed to matters of more moment and of greater conseqâ—ence Fol. 148. And therefore draws a Pedigree of his right and title from King James the first c. Our Author speaks this of the Pedigree by which the Marquess of Hamilton pretended a Right and Title to the Crown of Scotland a Title which had so many flaws that
over to the King when he was at Oxford about the latter end of the year 1643. But finding his sufferings unregarded and his Person neglected as not being suffered to appear as a Member of the House of Commons when the Parliament was summoned thither he retired again into France to his Wife and Children And secondly He dyed not a profest Catholick but continued to the last a true Son of the Church of England reproacht in his best fortunes by the name of a Papist because preferr'd by the Arch-Bishop a faithful servant to the Queen and a profest enemy to the Puritan Faction For which last reason the Earl of Arundel must be given out to be a Papist though I have seen him often at Divine Service in the Kings Chappel and is so declared to be by our Author also who tells us further That finding his native Countrey too hot for him to hold out he went with the Queen Mother unto Colen fol. 428. as if the Land had been hotter for him or his Zeal hotter then the place had he been a Papist as he was not then for any other Noble Man of that Religion Fol. 320. The English proposed a Cessation of Arms but the Scots as they would obey his Majesties command not to advance so they could not return till they had the effects of their Errand And all this while I would fain know what became of the Irish Army which had been raised in so much haste by the Earl of Strafford with the beginning of the Spring An Army consisting of 10000 Foot and 1500 Horse kept ever since in constant pay and continual Exercise by which the King might have reduced the Scots to their due obedience as the Earl of Strafford declared openly at the Councel Table immediately on the dissolving of the former Parliament yet now this Army lies dormant without acting anything thing toward the suppressing of the Scots exprest in their invading England their wasting the Northern parts of the Kingdom and their bold Demands Which Army if it had been put over into Cumberland to which from the Port of Carick-Fergus in Ireland is but a short and easie passage they might have got upon the back of the Scots and caught that wretched People in a pretty Pit-fall so that having the English Army before them and the Irish behinde them they could not but be ground to powder as between two Mill-stones But there was some fatality in it or rather some over-ruling providence which so dulled our Councels that this Design was never thought of for ought I can learn but sure I am that it was never put into Execution An Army of which the prevailing Members in both Houses stood in so much fear that they never left troubling the King with their importunities till they had caus'd him to Disband it the Scots in the mean time nesting in the Northern Counties and kept at most excessive charges to awe the King and countenance their own proceedings Fol. 334. The Book whilst in loose Papers â—re it was compleat and secured into his Cabinet and that being lost was seized by the enemy at Naseby fight c. Our Author here upon occasion of his Majesties most excellent Book called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he hath wholly Incorporated part per part in this present History gives a very strange Pedigree of it that being composed before Naseby fight it was there taken with the rest of the Kings Papers and coming to his hands again was by the King committed to the hands of one Mr. Symonds and by him to the Press In all which there is nothing true but the last particular For first That Book and the Meditations therein contained were not composed before Naseby fight many of them relating to subsequent Passages which the King without a very hâ—gh measure of the Spirit of Prophecy was not able to look so far intoâ— as if past already Besides that Book being called The Porâ—raiâ—ure of his Maâ—esty in his Solitudes and Sufferings must needs relate unto the times of his Solitude and therefore could not be digested before Naseby fight when he had been continually exercised in Camp or Counsel and not reduc'd to any such Solitude as that Title intimateth Secondly These Papers were not found with the rest in the Kings Cabinet or if they were there must be somewhat in it above a miracle that he should get them again into his hands Assuredly those men who used so much diligence to suppress this Book when it was published in print and many thousand Copies disperst abroad would either have burnt it in the fire or use some other means to prevent the printing of it to their great trouble and disadvantage Thirdly These papers were not delivered by the King to Mr. Symonds who had no such near access to him at that time For the truth is that the King having not finisht his Conceptions on the several Subjects therein contained till he was ready to be carried away from Carisbrook Castle committed those papers at the time of his going thence to the hands of one of his trusty Servants to be so disposed of as might most conduce to the advancement of his Honor Interest By which trusty Servant whosoever he was those papers were committed to the care of the said Mr. Symons who had shewed himself exceeding zealous in the Kings Affairs by whom there was care taken for the publishing of them to the infinite contentment of all those well affected Subjects who could get a â—ight of them Fol. 372. The loss of his place viz. the City of Arras animated the Portugueses to revolt from the Spanish Yoke and to submit themselvesâ— to the right Heir Duke John of Braganza Our Author is out of this also For first it was not the loss of the City of Arras but the secret practices and sollicitations of Cardinal Richelieu which made the Portuguez to revolt And secondly if the King of Spains Title were not good as the best Lawyers of Portugal in the Reign of the Cardinal King Don Henry did affirm it was yet could not the Duke of Braganza be the right Heir of that Kingdom the Children of Mary Dutchess of Parma the eldest Daughter of Prince Edward the third Son of Emmanuel being to be preferr'd before the Children of Katherine Dutchess of Braganza her younger Sister He tells next of Charls That Fol. 373. The Soveraignty of Utrick and Dutchy of Gelders he bought that of William he won by Arms with some pretence of right But first the Soveraignty of Vtreckt came not to him by purchase but was resigned by Henry of Bavaria the then Bishop thereof who being then warred on by the Duke of Gelders and driven out of the City by his own Subjects was not able to hold it Which resignation notwithstanding he was fain to take the City by force and to obtain a confirmation of the Grant not onely from Pope Ciement the 7. but also from the Estates of the Countrey
consent to the acting of any thing to take away his life By which it needs must follow if the Bill of Attainder was first passed or at the least in probability to be passed in the House of Peers before the King had given any such promise under his hand for the words are that the King had given him a promise under his hand never to passe that Bill Now that Bill was not taken into consideration in the House of Lords till Saturday the 24. of April in which considering their own danger and the little satisfaction they are able to give themselves M. St Iohn the Kings Sollicitor Generall was appointed by the House of Commons to open the Bill before their Lordships and to give them information in it which was done upon Thursday the nine and twentieth of the same Moneth On the next day some of the Lords began to stagger in their resolutions and to incline unto the Commons which moved the King to declare himself before both Houses on the first of May That he could not with a good Consciâ—nce condemn the Earl of High Treason which he must needs do if he passe that Bill and therefore hoped that they would not expect that from him which neither fear nor any other respect whatsoever should enforce him to Other assurance then this of not passing the Bill as the King never made the Earl so indeed he could not the Earl being a close Prisoner and so narrowly watcht especially after his Majesties said Declaration of the first of May that no such Paperâ—promise under the Kings hand could be sent unto him if either the King had thought it necessary to make any such promise or the Earl to seek it Adeo mendaciorum natura est ut coherere non possint as Lactantius hath it This point thus cleared and the King discharged from making any such promise under his hand there must some other way be found out to preserve the Earl by devising some means for his escape and to this plot the King must be made a party also our Authour telling us positively That Some Designe there was no doubt of delivering the Earl of Strafford by escape in order whereunto Sir William Balfour Lieutenant of the Tower must be commanded by the King to receive one Captain Billingsley with an hundred men to secure the place If so how durst Balfour refuse to yeeld obedience to the Kings command Marry forfooth because three good Women of Tower-street peeping into the Earls Gallery through the Key-hole could by the Spectacles of their eyes discern him talking with this Captain and by the Otocoâ—sticon of their ears could hear them talk of some Desigâ—e for this escape The Summe of their Discourse being this that a Ship of Captain Billingsleys Brothers should be in readinesse which was fallen down on purpose below in the River that they three might be there in twelve hours that if the Fort were but secur'd for three or four Moneths there would come aid enough and that there was nothing to be thought upon but an escape and much more broken speech to that purpose It seems the womens ears must be very long and the tongues both of the Earl and Billingsly must be very loud or else how could a practise of such a close and dangerous nature be so plainly heard Assuredly by the same means by which the Zealous Brother in More fields discovered a dangerous plot against the Parliament discoursed of by some who were passing by but he knows not who they were as he was sunning himself under an hedge Of whom as creditable an Authour as Sir William Balfour hath told me this That while he was contriving some Querpo-cut of Church-Government by the help of his out-lying ears and the Otocousticon of the Spirit â—e discovered such a Plot against the Parliament that Selden intends to combat Antiquity and maintain it was a Taylors Goose that preserved the Capitol But in good earnest I would fain know of our Author or of Sir William Balfour or of both together whether the three Good-Wives of Tower-street did hear these Passages in discourse by their eyes or their ears Not by their Eyes for the Eye is not the sense of hearing nor by their Ears for it is not said that they laid their Ears to the Key-hole but that they peeped thorow it And next I would fain know whâ—ther they peep'd or hearkned all at once or one after another If all at once the Key-hole must be wondrous wide as Heavenly-wide as Mopsus mouth in Sir Philip Sidney which could admit of three pair of hearing Eyes or of three single seeing Ears at one time together And if they peep'd or hearkned one after another they must needs have both very quick Wits and strong Comprehensions that could make up so much of a set Discourse from such broken Speeches though they within spake never so loudly Letting this pass therefore with a Risum teneatis Amici we have next a more serious discovery of this Design by the Conference which the Earl of Strafford had with Sir William Balfour offering him but four days before his death no less then Twenty thousand pounds and a Marriage of his Daughter to Balfours Son if he would assent to his Escape And for this also as well as for the tale of the three Good-Wives of Tower-Street and the command of admitting Billingsley with an hundred men to secure the Tower we must take Sir Williams bare word for he gave it not in upon his Oath in the House of Commons And what the bare word of a Scot a perfidious Scot and one that shortly after took up Arms against his Master will amount unto we all know too well Nor was the Earl so ignorant of the hatred which generally the Scotish Covenanters bare unto him or of the condition of this man particularly as to communicate any such design unto him had he been so unprepar'd for death as our Author makes him And so this second Romance of Sir William Balfour and the three Women Good-Wives of Tower Street being sent after that of the Bishop of Lincoln we leave the Earl of Straffords business and go on with our Author to some other Fol. 418. Then follows King Henry the fourth c. ofâ—larence â—larence Title to precede that of Mortimer That some of the Lords combined to depose this King I shall easily grant though not upon those grounds which our Author mingles with the Speech of one Mr. Thomas a Member of the House of Commons against the Bishops For though the Title of Clarence did precede that of the King yet was not the Kings Title derived from Mortimer the Title of Mortimer and Clarence being one and the same The Title of King Henry the fourth came by his Father Iohn Duke of Lancaster the fourth Son of King Edward the third the title of Mortimer came by Philip the sole Daughter and Heir of Lionel Duke of Clarence the third son of the said King Edward
the Houses of Parliament being loth to lose so many good men appointed Mr. Stephen Marshal to call them together and to absolve them from that Oath which he did with so much confidence and Authority that the Pope himself could not have done it better The King was scarce setled in Oxford the fittest place for his Court and Counsel to reside in When Fol. 597. The noble Lord Aubigny Brother to the Duke of Richmond dyed and was buried at Oxford This Lord Aubigny was the second Son of Esme Duke of Lenox and Earl of March succeeding his Father both in that Title and Estate entail'd originally on the second Son of the House of Lenox he receiv'd his deaths wound at Edge-Hill but dyed and was solemnly interr'd at Oxford on the 13 of Ianuary then next following the first but not the last of that Illustrious Family which lost his life in his Kings Service For after this in the year 1644. the Lord Iohn Stewart lost his life in the Battle of Cheriton near Alresford in the county of South-Hampton And in the year 1645. the Lord Bernard Stewart newly created E. of Litchfield went the same way in the fight near Câ—ester The Duke of Richmond the constant follower of the King in all his Fortunes never injoying himself after the death of his Master languishing and pining from time to time till at length extremity of Grief cast him into a Fever and that Fever cast him into his Grave A rare example of a constant and invincible Loyalty no paralel to be found unto it in the Histories of the antient or latter Ages Philip de â—omines telleth us of a Noble Family in Flanders that generally they lost their lives in the Wars and Service of their Prince And we finde in our own Chronicles that Edmond Duke of Summerset lost his life in the first Battle in St. Albans Duke Henry following him taken in the Battle of Hexam and so beheaded a second Duke Edmond and the Lord Iohn of Somerset going the same way in the Battle near Teâ—xbury all of them fighting in the behalf of King Henry the sixth and the House of Lancaster But then they heapt not Funeral upon Funeral in so short a time as the first three Brothers of this House in which as those of the House of Somerset did â—all short of them so those of that Noble House in Flanders fell short of the House of Somerset Fol. 601. In this time the Queen in Holland now Imbarques for England the sixteenth of February and with contrary winds and foul Weather was forced back again and thereafter with much hazzard anchored at Burlington Bay the nineteenth and Lands at the Key the two and twentieth In this our Author tells the truth but not the whole truth the Queen induring a worse Tempest on the Shore then she did upon the Sea Concerning which the Queen thus writes unto the King viz. The next night after we came unto Burlington four of the Parliament Ships arrived without being perceived by us and about five of the clock in the Morning they began to ply us so fast with their Ordnance that it made us all 〈◊〉 rise out of our Beds and to leave the Village at least the Women one of the Ships did me the favor to flank upon the House where I lay and before I was out of my Bed the Cannon Bullets whistled so loud about me that all the Company pressed me earnestly to go 〈◊〉 of the House their Cannon having totally beaten down all the neighboring Houses and two Cannon Bullets falling from the top to the bottom of the House where I was So that clothed as I could be I went on foot some little distance out of the Town under the shelter of a ditch like that of New-market whither before I could get the Canon-Bullets fell thick about us and a Sergeant was killed within twenty paces of me We in the end gained the Ditch and staied there two hours whilest their Canon plaied all the time upon us the Bullets flew for the most part over our headâ— some few only grazing on the Ditch covered us with Earth Nor had they thus given over that disloyal violence if the ebbing of the Sea and some threatnings from the Admiral of Holland who brought her over had not sent them going Fol. 603. The next day the Prince marches to Glocester his hasty Summons startled them at these strange turnings So saies our Authour but he hath no Authour for what he saith The Prince marched not the next day to Glocester nor in many moneths after having businesse enough to do at Cirencester where he was upon the taking of which Town the Souldiers Garrison'd for the Parliament in the Castles of Barkly Sudely and the Town of Malmsbury deserted those places which presently the Prince possessed and made good for the King Which done he called before them all the Gentry of Cotswold and such as lived upon the banks of Severn betwixt Glocester and Bristol who being now freed from those Garisons which before had awed them were easily perswaded by him to raise a Monethly contribution of 4000. pound toward the defence of the Kings person their Laws and Liberties It was indeed generally beleeved that if he had marched immediatly to Glocester while the terrour of sacking Cirencester fell first upon them the Souldiers there would have quitted the place before he had come half way unto it the affrightment was so generall and their haste so great that Massey had much adoe to perswade the Townsmen to keep their Houses and the Souldiers to stand upon their Guard as I have often heard from some of good quality in that City till the Scouts which he sent out to discover the Motions of the Prince were returned again But whatsoever they feared at Glocester the Prince had no reason to march towards it his Army being too small and utterly unfurnisht of Canon and other necessaries for the attempting of a place of such a large circumference so well mann'd and populous as that City was Contented therefore with that honour which he had got in the gaining of Cirencester and feeling the Kings affairs in that Countrey he thought it a point of higher wisedom to return towards Oxford then hazard all again by attempting Glocester Fol. 604. The Scots Army marched Southwards and crossed Tine March 13. If so it must be in a dream not in Action the Scots not entring into England till December following when the losse of Bristol Exceter and generally of all the West compelled the Houses of Parliament to tempt the Scots to a second invasion of the Kingdome And this appears most clearly by our Authour himself who tels us fol. 615. ' That Sir William Aâ—min was sent to Edinburgh from the Parliament to hasten the Scots Army hither having first sworn to the Solemn League and Covenant each to other Before which Agreement as to the taking of the Solemn League and Covenant by all the Subjects of
Monroe an old experienced Commander with his three thousand old and experienced Scots train'd up for five or six years then last past in the Wars of Ireland By whose assistance it is possible enough that he might not have lost his first Battle not long after his Head which was took from him on the same day with the Earl of Hollands But God owed him and that Nation both shame and punishment for all their â—reacheries and Rebellions against their King and now he doth begin to pay them continuing payment after payment till they had lost the Command of their own Countrey and being reduced unto the form of a Province under the Commonwealth of England live in as great a Vassalage under their new Masters as a conquered Nation could expect or be subject to Fol. 1078. This while the Prince was put aboard the revolted Ships c. and with him his Brother the Duke of York c. the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen the Lord Cuâ—pepper c. In the recital of which names we finde two Earls that is to say the Earls of Brentford and Ruthen which are not to be found in any Records amongst our Heralds in either Kingdom Had he said General Ruthen Earl of Brentford he had hit it right And that both he and his Reader also may the better understand the Risings and Honors of this Man I shall sum them thus Having served some time in the Wars of Gustavus Adolphus King of Sweden he was Knighted by him in his Camp before Darsaw a Town of Pomerella commonly counted part of Prussia and belonging to the King of Poland Anno 1627. at what time the said King received the Order of the Garter with which he was invested by Mr. Peter Yong one of his Majesties Gentlemen Huishers and Mr. Henry St. George one of the Heralds at Arms whom he also Kinghted In the long course of the German Wars this Colonel Sir Patrick Ruthen obtain'd such a Command as gave him the title of a General and by that title he attended in a gallant Equipage on the Earl of Morton then riding in great pomp towards Windsor to be installed Knight of the Garter At the first breaking out of the Scots Rebellion he was made a Baron of that Kingdom and Governor of the Castle of Edinburgh which he defended very bravely till the Springs which fed his Well were broken and diverted by continual Batteries Not long ater he was made Earl of Forth and on the death of the Earl of Lindsey was made Lord General of his Majesties Army and finally created Earl of Brentford by Letters Patents dated the 27 of May Anno 1644. with reference to the good Service which he had done in that Town for the fiâ—st hanselling of his Office So then we have an Earl of Brentford but no Earl of Ruthen either as joyn'd in the same Person or distinct in two Not much unlike is that which follows Ibid. His Commissions to his Commanders were thus stiled Charls Prince of great Britain Duke of Cornwal and Albany Here have we two distinct Titles conferred upon one Person in which I do very much suspect our Authors Intelligence For though the Prince might Legally stile himself Duke of Cornwal yet I cannot easily believe that he took upon himself the Title of Duke of Albany He was Duke of Cornwal from his Birth as all the eldest Sons of the Kings of England have also been since the Reign of King Edward the third who on the death of his Uncle Iohn of Eltham E. of Cornwal invested his eldest Son Edw. the Black Prince into the Dukedom of Cornwal by a Coronet on his head a ring on his finger and a silver Verge in his hand Since which time as our learned Camden hath observed the King of Englands eldest Son is reputed Duke of Cornwal by Birth and by vertue of a special Act the first day of his Nativity is presumed and taken to be of full and perfect age so that on that day he may sue for his Livery of the said Dukedom and ought by right to obtain the same as well as if he had been one and twenty years old And he hath his Royalties in certain Actions and Stannery Matters in Wracks at Sea Customs c. yea and Divers Officers or Ministers assigned unto him for these or such like matters And as for the Title of Duke of albany King Charls as the second Son of Scotland receiv'd it from King Iames his Father and therefore was not like to give it from his second Son the eldest Son of Scotland being Duke of Rothsay from his Birth but none of them Dukes of Albany for ought ever I could understand either by Birth or by Creation Fol. 1094. And so the dignity of Arch-Bishops to fall Episcopal Iurisdiction also Our Author concludes this from the general words of the Kings Answer related to in the words foregoing viz. That whatsoever in Episcopacy did appear not to have clearly proceeded from Divine Institution he gives way to be totally abolished But granting that the Dignity of Arch-Bishops was to fall by this Concession yet the same cannot be affirmed of the Episcopal Iurisdiction which hath as good Authority in the holy Scripture as the calling it self For it appears by holy Scripture that unto Timothy the first Bishop of Ephâ—sus St. Paul committed the power of Ordination where he requires him to lay hands hastily on no man 1 Tim. 5 22 And unto Titus the first Bishop of Crete the like Authority for ordaining Presbyters or Elders as our English reads it in every City Tit. 1. v. 5. Next he commands them to take care for the ordering of Gods publick Service viz. That Supplications Prayers Intercessions and giving of Thanks be made for all men 1 Tim. 2. 1. which words relate not to the private Devotions of particular persons but to the Divine Service of the Church as it is affirmed not onely by St Chrysostom Theophylact and Oâ—cumenius amongst the Ancients and by Estius for the Church of Rome but also by Calvin for the Protestant or Reformed Churches Next he requires them to take care that such as painfully labor in the Word and Doctrine receive the honor or recompence which is due unto them 1 Tim. 5. 17. as also to censure and put to silence all such Presbyters as preached any strange Doctrine contrary unto that which they had received from the Apostles 1 Tim 1. 3. And if that failed of the effect and that from Preaching Heterodoxies or strange Doctrines they went on to Heresies then to proceed to Admonition and from thence if no amendment followed to a rejection from his place and deprivation from his Function 1 Tit. 3. 10. as both the Fathers and late Writers understand the Text. Finally for correction in point of Manners as well in the Presbyter as the people St. Paul commits it wholly to the care of his Bishop where he adviseth Timothy not to receive an Accusâ—ation against
Earl of Essex that he went Deputy into Ireland Fol. 234. Whereas indeed he was not sent over into Ireland with the Title of Deputy but by the more honourable Title of Lord Leviâ—enant having power to create a Lord Deputy under him when his occasions or the the necessities of the state should require his absence Fol. 2â—1 The 26. of February 1â—00 was born the Kings third son and Christnâ—â— Charles at Dunferling The Kings third son and afterwards his Successor in the Crown of England was not born on the 26. of February but on the 19. of Noveâ—â—er as is averred by all others who have written of it and publickly attested by the annual ringing of Bells upon that day in the City of London during the whole time of his pâ—wer and prosperity The like mistake we finde in the tiâ—e and day of the Birth of Queen Elizabeth of whom it is â—â—id Fol. 261. 25. That she gave up the Ghost to Gâ—d oâ— that day of her Birth from whom she had it intimating thaâ— she died on the Eve of the same Lady-day on which she was born But the truth is that she was born on the Eve of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary being the seventh day of September and died on the Eve of the Annuntiation being the 24. of March And so much for the History of the Reign of Queen Mary and King Iames her Son as to the Realm of Scotland onely both of them Crowned as Iames the fift had also been in their tenderest infancy But whereas our Author tells us Fol. 8. that Q Mary 〈◊〉 the kingdom to her son who was born a King I can by no means yeild to that I finde indeed that our Saâ—iour Christ was born King of the Iews and so proclaimed to be by the Angel Gabriel at the very time of his Conception And I have read that Sapores one of the Kings of Persia was not onely born a King but crowned King too before his birth for his Father dying withouâ—â—â—ue as the story saith left his wife with child which child the Magi having signified by their Art to be a Male the Persian Princes caused the Crown and Royal Ornaments to be set upon his Mothers Belly acknowledging him there by for their King and Sovaraign But so it was not with King Iames who was born on the 19 of Iune Anno. 1566. and Crowned King on the 24. of Iuly being the 5. day after his Mothers resignation of the Crown and Government Anno. 1567. ADVERTISEMENTS ON THE REIGN DEATH OF KING IAMES Of GREAT BRITAIN FRANCE and IRELAND the first WE are now come unto the Reign of King Iames as King of England or rather as King of England and Scotland under the notion of Great Britain of whose reception as he passed through Godmanchestâ—r the Historian telleth us that Fol. 270. At Godmanchester in the Counâ—y of Notthamptonshire they presented him with 70 Teem of Horses c. beâ—â—g his Tenants and holding their Land by that Tenure But first Godâ—aâ—chester is not in Northampton but in Huntiâ—gtonshire And secondly Though it be a custom for those in Godmanchâ—ster to shew their Bravery to the Kings of England in that rustical Pomp yet I conceive it not to be the Tenure which they hold their Lands by For Camden who is very punctual in observing Tenures mentions not this as a Tenure but a Custom onely adding withal that they make their boast That they have in former time received the Kings of England as they passed in their progress this way with ninescore Ploughs brought forth in a rustical kinde of Pomp for a gallant shew If onely for a gallant shew or a rustical Pomp then not observed by them as their Tenure or if a Tenure not 〈◊〉 from ninescore to 70. all Tenures being â—ixt not variable at the will of the Tenants Fol. 273. This most honorable Order of the Garter was instituted by King Edward the third c. So far our Author right enough as unto the â—ounder and rigâ—â— enough as to the time of the institution which he placeth in the year 1350. But whereas he telleth us withal that this Order was founded by King Edward the third 〈◊〉 John of France and King James of Scotland being then Prisâ—ners in the Tower of London and King Henry of Castile the Bastard expulst and Don Pedro restored by the Prince of Wales called the Black Prince in that he is very much mistaken For first It was David King of the Scots not Iames who had been taken Prisoner by this Kings Forces there being no Iames King of the Scots in above fifty years after Secondly Iohn of France was not taken Prisoner till the year 1356. nor Henry of Castile expulsed by the Prince of Wales till ten years after Anno 1366. By consequence neither of those two great Actions could precede the Order But worse is he mistaken in the Patron Saint of whom he tells us that Fol. 273. Among sundry men of valor in ancient days was Geo. born at Coventry in England c. This with the rest that follows touching the Actions and Atchievements of Sir George of Coventry is borrowed from no better Author then the doughty History of the Seven Châ—mpions of Christendom of all that trade in Knighthood-errant the most empty Bable â—But had our Author look'd so high as the Records of the Order the titles of Honor writ by Selden the Catalogue of Honor publisht by Mills of Canterbury Camdens Britannia or any other less knowing Antiquary he might have found that this most noble Order was not dedicated to that fabulous Knight Sâ—â— George of Coventry but to the famous Saint and Soldier of Christ Jesus St. George of Cappadocia A Saint so universally received in all parts of Christendom so generally attested to by the Ecclesiastical Writers of all Ages from the time of his Martyrdom till this day that no one Saint in all the Calender those mentioned in the holy Scriptures excepted onely can be better evidenced Nor doth he finde in Matthew Parts that St. George fought in the air at Antioch in behalf of the English the English having at that time no such iâ—â—eress in him but that he was thought to have been seen figâ—ting in behalf of the Christians Fol. 275. Earldoms without any place are likewise of two kindes either in respect of Office as Earl-Morshal of England or by Birth and so are all the Kings Sons In the Authority and truth of this I am much unsatisfied as never having met with any such thing in the course of my reading and I behold it as a diminution to the Sons of Kings to be born but Earls whereby they are put in an equal rank with the eldest sons of Dukes in England who commonly have the Title of their Fathers Earldoms since it is plain they are born Princes which is the highest civil Dignity next to that of Kings It was indeed usual with the Kings of England to bestow upon