the County of Longford which he deduces to Anno Domini 1405. The Annals of Vlster by one Maguir Canon of Armach deduced to his own time who died An. Dom. 1498. And the Annals of Dungall composed by four modern Authours out of all their former Annals But among all these there is nothing pretending to Antiquity but the Psalter of Cashel and Tigernacus yet the Psalter of Cashel falls short of the time of Nennius for Cormach King of Munster the supposed Authour of it lived after the beginning of the tenth Century being killed by Flanmhac Siona called Flannus Siuna by Gratianus Lucius who died An. Dom. 914. or as Sir James Ware thinks An. Dom. 916. And for Tigernacus his Annals the four Magistri as Colgunus calls them or the Annals of Dungall are positive that Tigernacus ô Braion the Authour of them died in the eleventh Century An. Dom. 1088. There remains onely the Psaltuir Na-Ran written by Aonghais Ceile de or by Aengusius one of the Culdees who lived in the latter end of the eighth Century as the same Irish Antiquary confesses who withall saith That all the Works contained therein relate onely to Matters of Piety and Devotion which therefore can signifie nothing to our purpose So that nothing appears of the Irish Antiquities which can pretend to be written before the Danish Invasion And although we are told that these Annals were taken out of others more ancient yet we have barely their Word for it for those ancient Annals whatever they were are irrecoverably lost So that there can be no comparison of one with the other And how can they be so certain of the exactness used in the Parliament of Tarach to preserve their Annals if there be no ancient Annals to preserve the Memory of the Proceedings at that time It was a very extraordinary Care for the Estates of the whole Nation to preserve their Annals if we could be assured of it Which doth much exceed the Library of Antiquities which Suffridus Petrus speaks of set up as he saith by Friso the Founder of the Frisians at Stavera near the Temple of Stavo in which not onely the ancient Records were preserved from time to time But the Pictures of the several Princes with the times of their Reigns from An. 313. before Christ 's coming to Charlemagns time The like whereof he saith no German Nation can boast of But yet methinks the Posterity of Gathelus exceeds that of Friso's in the Care of Preserving their Antiquities For the Wisedom of the whole Nation was concerned in it But I never read of any who ever saw this Library of Antiquities at Stavera but we must believe Cappidus Staverensis and Occa Scarlensis as to these things And that they saw the Records as Hector did Veremundus although none else ever did But as to this Parliament of Tarach which was carefull to preserve the Irish Antiquities Whence have we this Information Are the Acts of that Assembly preserved Are any Copies of those Annals still in being Yes we are told that the keeping of the Original Book was entrusted by the Estates to the Prelates and those Prelates for its perpetual Preservation caused several authentick Copies of it to be fairly engrossed whereof some are extant to this day and several more faithfully transcribed out of them their Names being the Book of Ardmach the Psalter of Cashel c. It seems then these are the Transcripts of the Original Authentick Book allowed by all the Estates of the Kingdom But the Book of Ardmach is a late thing being the same with the Annals of Vlster composed by a Canon of Armach So that the whole rests upon the Psalter of Cashel which must be composed 500 years after the meeting of that famous Assembly For St. Patrick was one of the number and it was done in the time of Laogirius or Leogarius King of Ireland who died saith Gratianus Lucius An. Dom. 458. But King Cormach lived in the tenth Century And therefore an account must be given how this Original Book or Authentick Copies were preserved for that 500 years and more in the miserable Condition that Nation was in a great part of that time So that the Difference is not so great between the Authority of Geffrey of Monmouth and these Annals as is pretended For I see no Reason why the Story of Brutus should be thought more incredible than that of Ciocal Bartholanus and Nemedus with his Son Briotan that gave the name to Britain And especially the Story of Gathelus himself his Marriage in Egypt to Scota coming to Spain and thence his Posterity to Ireland which seems to me to be made in imitation of Geffrey's Brutus For Brutus married Pandrasus his Daughter the King of Greece and then was forced to seek his Fortune at Sea and passing by Mauritania just as Gathelus did the one landed in Gaul and came for Albion And the other in Spain and sent his Son for Ireland And I wonder to find Brutus his Giants in Albion of so much larger Proportions than the Giants in Ireland who are said not to exceed the tallest growth of Men For I had thought Giants had been Giants in all Parts of the World Suppose some Learned Men have question'd Whether there were such a person as Brute I should think it no more Heresie than to call in question Whether there were such Persons as Ciocal Bartholanus Briotan or Gathelus If the silence of good Authours the distance of time and want of Ancient Annals complained of makes the History of Brutus so hard to be believed I onely desire that these Irish Traditions may be examined by the same Rules and then I believe the Irish Antiquities will be reduced to the same Form with the British Onely Geffrey had not so lucky an Invention as to have his History confirm'd by Parliament For if he had but thought of it he could have made as general an Assembly of the Estates at Lud's Town and as select a Committee of Nine as ever was at Tarach But all mens Inventions do not lie the same way And in this I confess Keting or his Authours have very much exceeded Geffrey and his British MS. And upon the whole matter I cannot see that the Irish Chronologers and Historians have so much more probability in their Story of Briotan than the British Writers had in the Tradition of Brute For it is certain it was not originally the Invention of Geffrey onely he might use some art in setting it off as he thought with greater advantage than the Britains had done before him But still we are referr'd to the Authority of the Irish Monuments in the Psalter of Cashel written 800 years since by the holy Cormach both King and Bishop of Munster Let us then for once examine one part of the History taken from thence and then leave the Reader to judge whether it deserves so much more Credit than the British Antiquities
of more remote Antiquity were put into them whether by the first Pontifex Max. in Numa's time or after it is impossible now to determine It seems at first the People were not permitted to view these Annals as Canuleius in Livy complains but afterwards they were exposed to all And it appears by Licinius Macer in Livy that the Libri Lintei which seem to have been for the same purpose with the Annales Maximi but composed by the Magistrates were preserved in Aede Monetae and in them the Names of the Magistrates were inserted and in the same place Livy takes notice of the Annales prisci and the Libri Magistratuum for determining a point about the Consuls of a year long before the burning of Rome which shews that Livy did not think all their Records then destroyed And afterwards he saith in the same Book disputing about another Consul that Augustus rebuilding the Temple of Jupiter Feretrius found there in thorace linteo the name of that Consul So that the Romans had not onely the Pontifical Annals but Civil too being made up by the Magistrates and therefore called Libri Magistratuum by Livy which he distinguishes from the Annales Prisci And besides these Livy mentions private Records among them of which Cicero speaks which belonged to particular Families and there is no probability these should be all lost in the burning of the City for the Capitol was not burnt in which probably after the Romans found the Gauls coming upon them they preserved their ancient Annals And it is considerable that Dionysius Halicarnasseus quotes a passage of Antiochus Syracusanus who lived before the burning of Rome and wrote concerning the affairs of Italy wherein he saith that he took his History out of ancient and undoubted Records which shews that there were certain written Annals both at Rome and in other Cities of Italy very early and the same Dionysius quotes the Domestick Annals of the Sabins and Festus the History of Cuma So that the Roman Histories were built on better foundation than the very uncertain Tradition of the Natives which the Advocate is pleased to make the surest Foundation of all Histories but I am so much of another Opinion that I think it since the shortning of Mens lives the certain foundation of none Let now the Reader judge whether the case of the Antiquities in dispute be the same with that of the Romans for here are no ancient Annals pretended near the time of Fergus I. nor in the time of any King of the first Race no nor from Fergus II. till after the Destruction of the Picts nor any Record yet produced for a long time after that how then can any persons pretend that if we reject their Antiquities we must reject the Roman But this is not all for he goes higher and saith the same objections will lie 2. Against the Jewish Antiquities For saith he the Iewish History had no historical Warrant for the first 2000 years but Tradition and after that time their transactions were mentioned in very few foreign Histories and Annals of their own Priests were thought good Historical Foundations in the opinion of Iosephus even for the Sacred History And not long after he saith that the Iewish History was challenged by Apion upon the same ground that theirs is now quarrell'd by the Bishop of St. Asaph This looks somewhat strange among us for the Antiquities of any particular Nation so far short of the Jewish to be parallel'd with them in point of Credibility since the Records of Scripture are own'd to be divine and sacred and not merely built on the authority of Tradition or the Annals of the Jewish Priests Whatever Josephus or other Jews might say in defence of their Antiquities against the Greeks we that own our selves to be Christians ought to look on Moses and the Prophets under a higher Character I know a late Critick in great Vogue among some hath endeavoured to reduce the Sacred History to the Authority of the ancient Annals of the Iews but withall adding that we have onely some imperfect Abridgments of them much like that which the Rector of Ranfrew made of the Book of Pasley which the Advocate saw in Sir R. Sibbald's Library A Doctrine so unreasonable and mischievous in the Consequences of it that I wonder it hath hitherto passed so easily through so many hands But this is not my present business I am now onely to shew the vast disparity of these Antiquities in question and those of the Jews It 's very true that Apion did object against them because the Greek Writers took so little notice of them But how doth Josephus answer him He shews That the Greeks were very late Writers of History and therefore incompetent Iudges of matters of so great Antiquity and he proves that the more ancient Nations as the Egyptians Chaldeans Phoenicians had a most lasting way of preserving their Histories for they had publick Annals made by their wisest Men and kept in sacred Places but the Greeks were very defective in these things having no publick Writings in their Temples or elsewhere and that they had not the use of Letters in the time of the Trojan War and their first Historians were little elder than the Persians War against the Greeks And this reason he gives of the dissonancy of the Greek Historians because they had no publick Annals which would have prevented Errours and kept Men from a power of deceiving But great care he saith from the most ancient times was taken of such things among the Egyptians and Babylonians And for their Ancestours he saith they exceeded all others in their exactness this way committing the care of these things to their High Priests and Prophets But the authority of Writing was not allow'd promiscuously to all but certain Prophets were pitched upon who wrote the most remote Antiquities by divine inspiration and the matters in their own times plainly and according to Truth and therefore saith he we have no such multitude of Books differing from each other as the Greeks have but onely 22 containing an account of all times past written with great Fidelity and Authority Afterwards their Annals were continued but not with equal Authority the Succession of their Prophets failing And to shew of how great credit these Books of the first sort are among us in so long time saith he no Man hath dared either to add or to take away or to transpose any thing Which is utterly inconsistent with the Principles of the late Critick for without a liberty of abridging and transposing and inserting his new Inventions come to nothing But as to the silence of other Nations about them he shews that they were a People who lived in great retirement that the Romans themselves were a considerable People before the Greeks knew them and after all he shews they were known to the Egyptians Babylonians and Greeks which he proves from many
saying that Scotia had its Name from Scota the most noble Person in that Colony he saith it was in some Chronica but what Chronica was ever written by Grosthead deserves to be enquired For it is certain Fordon quotes him in other Places about Scota and the Scots Which makes me wonder that Dempster doth not put him among his Scotish Writers but as far as I can perceive he never read Fordon nor saw Elphinston In Chap. 20. where Fordon quotes an old Chronicle which affirms that Gaithelus gave the same Laws to his People which Phoroneus did to the Greeks and that the Scots to this day glory that they have those Laws this last Clause Elphinstoun left out and he passes over Chap. 21. where the miserable condition of the Posterity of Gathelus in Spain for 240 years is set down In some following Chapters he confutes Geoffrey of Monmouth in the very words of Fordon and uses his very expressions about the first peopling of Scotland from Ireland the coming of the Picts and the hard usage of the Scots by them and Fergus his going over out of Ireland in all which not one Authority is cited which is not in Fordon and not the least intimation of any such Authour as Veremundus In the second Book he follows Fordon not onely in other things before but when he describes the Islands of Scotland and particularly Jona onely he leaves out Fordon's Hebrew Etymology making Iona and Columba the same and he saith not one word of any Library or Records kept there or any old Histories and Annals to be there found as Hector Boethius affirms all that he saith is that there was a Sanctuary for Transgressours About Fergus and Rether he varies not a tittle from Fordon and never mentions any other Kings of that Race which he would never have omitted if he had known such an Authour as Veremundus And he doth not suppose that Rether succeeded Fergus in the Kingdom of Scotland but that he came afresh from Ireland and so makes this the second coming of the Scots out of Ireland Which plainly overthrows the constant Succession of the Monarchy from Fergus in Scotland And he names no one King of Scotland from Rether to Eugenius who was banished with all the Scots In the beginning of the third Book he gives an account after Fordon of Fergus the Son of Erk coming into Scotland and he reckons 45 Kings between the two Fergusses just as Fordon doth and he desires to be excused as he did for not setting down distinctly the times of their several Reigns because he could not then find any Writings about them his words are ad praesens non in Scriptis reperimus Now from this expression I thus argue against Hector Boethius his Veremundus He saith that Elphinstoun gave the first intimation of him and that followed him in his History either therefore Veremundus gave no account of this first Succession which Hector pretends to have from him and so his Authority signifies nothing at all in this matter or Elphinston never saw him for he saith he never could find any History of this first Succession And therefore if ever there were such a Book under the Name of Veremundus it was after Elphinston's days For having searched the whole Nation for ancient Writings and particularly Jona as Hector testifies and finding no History of the Succession from Fergus as himself declares it is a plain Evidence that Hector Boethius hath given a false account of Elphinston in relation to Veremundus and in all probability of Veremundus too But this is not all for Elphinston doth not onely say that he could not find any Books relating to the Succession of the Kings from Fergus but he refers his Readers to the old Irish Annals his Words are ad antiquos Hiberniae Libros referimus So that according to Elphinston's judgment the most certain account of their Antiquities is to be taken from the Irish Authours And so we may observe both in him and Fordon the Irish Legends of S. Brendan and others served them for very good Authorities And so much for the Advocate 's ancient Historian Veremundus the Spaniard For I suppose the mention of him by Bale Gesner Hollinshed c. after he was so much celebrated by Hector Boethius deserves no farther consideration But Vossius did not think him worth mentioning and although he blames Luddus as the Advocate calls him or Humphry Lhuyd for being too severe upon Hector Boethius yet it is evident that he looked on him as a fabulous Writer and so durst not set him down on his authority The Advocate would excuse this Censure of Vossius as though it related onely to his credulity in point of miracles whereas there is not the least intimation that way and Vossius saith that Leland on the account of his fabulousness wrote sharp Verses upon him What! for his having believed too many Miracles No certainly but for his fabulous Antiquities But he hopes to bring Hector Boethius better off from the Censure of Bishop Gavin Dowglas which the Bishop of St. Asaph takes notice of from Polydore Virgil because Bishop Dowglas died A. D. 1520. and Boethius his History was not published till 1526. and he had not his Records from Icolmkill till 1525. To which I answer that this looks like one of the Miracles the Advocate confesses that Hector did too easily report For if he had the Records on which this History was built but in 1525. how came his History to be published the following year For he makes use of Veremundus his Authority in the very beginning of his History for the Scotish Antiquities both in Spain Ireland and Albany In his second Book he saith whatever he had written of the ancient Kings of Scotland he had taken out of Veremundus Campbell and Cornelius Hibernicus all which he pretended to have had from Icolmkill In his third Book about Caesar's Expedition he still pretends to follow Veremundus And in his seventh Book he declares he had kept close to him in the whole series of his History Now how was this possible if he had never seen Veremundus till A. D. 1525. and his History was published by Badius Ascensius at Paris A. D. 1526. It would take up that year in sending it thither and revising and correcting and publishing so large a Volume as his History makes So that there must be some great mistake as to the year of his receiving those Records if he ever did But if this were not the History Bishop Dowglas censured what other was there at that time which could deserve it It could not be Joh. Major for his Book was printed by Badius Ascensius after Dowglas his death if he died as he saith A. D. 1520. and he pretends to no new Discoveries as Boethius doth But why should the Advocate imagine his History was not known by the learned Men at home such as Bishop Dowglas was before it was
first settling of the Scots in Britain to be that under Reuda But he mentions their Annals for Fergus the Son of Ferchard before Reuda and Rether and Ryddesdale as it is in Fordon But he makes the Kingdoms of the Picts Scots and Britains to be distinct in Caesar's time And that they all joined against him And so relates Fordon's Story to the time of Fergus II. But between the two Fergusses he makes but 15 Kings and 700 Years Hector Boethius before he begins the Tradition of Gathelus very ingenuously confesses that their Nation follow'd the Custome of other Nations therein making themselves the Offspring of the Greeks and Egyptians And so he tells all the Story from Gathelus as Fordon has done onely here and there making Additions and Embellishments of his own As when he derives the Brigantes from Brigantia in Spain When he sets down the Deliberation about the Form of Government upon Fergus his coming to Scotland And the Speeches of Fergus and the King of the Picts The Death of Coilus King of the Britains The entring the fundamental Contract of the Scots with the Posterity of Fergus in Marble Tables in the way of Hieroglyphicks The Agrarian Law and Partition made by Seven and the Division of the Tribes The bringing the Silures Ordovices Camelodunum as well as the Brigantes within the Compass of Scotland These are the proper Inventions of Hector unless he had them from his Spaniard Veremundus which no one could tell but himself Thence Leland and Lluyd charge him with innumerable Falshoods Dempster confesses that Buchanan frequently chastises him But he would have it rather on the Account of Religion than Learning But it is plain that he owns his Mistakes and Vanity onely he charges Lluyd with as great on behalf of the Britains In the Second Book Hector inlarges more For Fordon passeth on from Fergus to Rether or Bede's Reuda having nothing to say But Hector acquaints us with the Contest about the Regency upon Fergus his Death and the Law then made concerning it the attempt of Resignation of Feritharis to Ferlegus the Son of Fergus and his Imprisonment upon it The Death of Feritharis after fifteen years Reign The Flight of Ferlegus into Britain with the Choice of Main his younger Brother to be King His good Government and Annual Progress for Justice through all Places of his Dominions His appointing Circles of great Stones for Temples and one in the middle for the Altar And the Monthly Worship of the New Moon And several Egyptian Sacrifices which one would have thought had been more proper for Gathelus himself with the Succession of his Son Dornadil his making the Laws of Hunting which were still observed there And of his Brother Nothatus his Son Reuther being an Infant Who came in by the Law of Regency saith Hector By the Power of the People saith Buchanan but in truth by neither For all this Succession seems to have been the product of Hector's fruitfull Invention which Buchanan follows without Authority as he doth in all the rest of the Succession of that Race of Kings from Reuther to Fergus II. To make way for Bede's Account of Reuda's coming into those Parts of Britain This Reuther is forced back into Ireland from whence he is said to return with new Supplies after twelve years From whom the Scots were then called Dalreudini But this return of Reuther Hector places in the year before Christ 204. And after him Reutha his Kinsman In whose time Hector relates an Embassy from Ptolemy Philadelphus to him And the Account of Scotland which he began in a large Volume for his satisfaction which was after finished by Ptolemy the Cosmographer This Buchanan had the Wit to leave out and even Dempster himself though he mentions him for a Writer of their History and so he doth the Voyage of the two Spanish Philosophers in the time of Josina and their Preaching against the Egyptian Worship in Scotland but Lesly hath it And if Buchanan had believed it he would have set it down as well as Josina's bringing Physick and Chirurgery into so much request That there was not a Noble Man that could not practise the latter And yet Hector declares immediately after the Story of the Philosophers that hitherto he had followed Veremundus John Campbell and Cornelius Hibernitus the most approved Authours of their History It would have been some satisfaction to the World if any other Person had seen these Authours besides Fordon never mentions them And yet he used great diligence to search their Antiquities And if Dempster may be believed had the Sight of their most ancient MSS. Buchanan passes them over Dempster names them on the authority of Hector What became of these great Authours afteâ— Hector's time Did he destroy them as some say Polydore Virgil did some of ours after he had used them But this were Madness to quote their Authority and destroy the Authours For these were his Vouchers which ought most carefully to have been preserved And in truth Hector himself gives no very consistent Account of his Authours For in his Epistle to James 5. he mentions Veremundus Archdeacon of St. Andrew's who deduced the Scotish History from the Original to Malcolm III. And Turgott Bishop of St. Andrew's and John Campbell which were brought from the Island Iona To whom he adds an Anonymous Authour and the imperfect History of William Elphinston Bishop of Aberdeen But saith he if any ask such a material Question How came these Authours to be seen no where else He answers That Edw. I. destroy'd all their Monuments of Antiquity So that had not those been preserved in the Island Iona with the Chest of Books which Fergus II. brought from the sacking of Rome in the time of Alaric They had been able to give no account of their Antiquities From whence it is evident that Hector never saw or heard of any ancient Authours of their History but such as were conveyed to him from the Island Iona. But in his Seventh Book where he gives a more particular account of those Books which were brought to him from thence he onely mentions some broken Fragments of Latin Authours But whose they were where Written whence they came he knew not And as to their own Histories he names indeed Veremundus and Elphinston and no more The latter he said before was imperfect and lately done So that the whole Credit of Hector's Antiquities rests entirely upon Veremundus For here he never takes notice of Campbell or Cornelius Hibernicus But he saith Edw. I. had destroy'd all their Antiquities but such as were preserved in the Island Iona or Hy. And is this now a good Foundation to build a History upon For is it not very strange that no one Copy of Veremundus should be heard of since that time When there were several of Fordon not onely there but in our Libraries some with the Inlargements and some without But if our King
it seems wrote Additions and Continuations to him such as besides Maculloch Arelat and Walter Bowmaker are said to have been who continued the Histories to the Reign of James II. And yet I would be glad to see any Testimony of Veremundus of that Antiquity As to the Testimony of Chambers who saith he had these principal Authours Veremund a Spaniard Turgott Swinton Campbell c. till some farther Proof be produced I have reason to suppose it was the same Case as to him with that of Sir R. Baker which immediately follows For we are told that he likewise quotes this Veremund among the Authours out of whom he compiled his History and likewise Campbell and Turgott And if we have no more ground to believe that Chambers had them than Sir R. Baker the matter must remain in as much obscurity as before For no one imagines that Sir R. Baker had all those Authours by him which he there mentions but he sets down the Names of those whose Authorities he relied upon although he found them quoted by others And he is not the onely person in the World who hath cited the Authority of Books which he never saw The same is to be said of Hollinshed But if such kind of Proofs must pass for evident Demonstrations that the Scots had such Historians as Veremundus and the others before mentioned I wonder the same Learned Authour should shrink so much the Faith of History as to allow that despicable thing called Moral Certainty to be a sufficient Probation for it For scarce any History can be mention'd but may have such kind of evident Demonstrations to prove it Well but Balaeus a Learned English-man and Gesner and other famous Strangers quote Veremundus But so do not Boston of Bury nor Leland who had written of the British and other Writers before the time of Hector Boethius And those were Men who searched all our Libraries for the ancient Books in them and have digested them with great Care and if Veremundus with other MSS. were brought into England by Edw. I. as is now suggested it could hardly have escaped the diligence of those Men. But those who lived after Hector Boethius published his History took his word for Veremundus and entred him into their Catalogues as Vossius hath done many whom he never saw But Erasmus saith that Hector was a Person who could not lie That was more than Erasmus could know unless he had been by when he wrote his History and compared it with the Authours he pretended to follow As to Paulus Iovius he was a fit Second to Boethius but I am sure Erasmus would not have said of him that he could not lie For Hector's pretending to have his Books from the Island Iona I have given an Account of it already and shew'd how inconsistent his own relation thereof is But all this while Where is the great Applause of these Scotish Antiquities for many hundreds of years by all Historians Antiquaries and Criticks of foreign Nations When not so much as one is produced who lived before Hector Boethius and I think that was not many hundred years since But whatever becomes of Veremundus we are told That the Black-book of Scoon containing the Scotish Histories from the beginning was among President Spotswood 's Books and given to Lambert and by him to Collonel Fairfax All this I am afraid is a great mistake for a black-Black-book of Fordon's which was brought out of Scotland and presented to the late King by a Gentleman of that Name as some yet living can attest But no such thing as the Black-book of Scoon was ever heard of here and if any such could be found we should be so far from suppressing any thing that tended to the Glory of the Scotish Nation that some here would be very glad to publish it with all other ancient Annals which themselves would think fit to be printed whether it be the Black-book of Paslay Pluscardin or any others We do not deny that they had any ancient Annals or Registers in their Monasteries but we desire to be better acquainted with them and it is no good Argument they can tell us where to find them that they are so carefull to let us know how they came to lose them But after all this Fencing it is positively said that the surest foundation of all History is the common belief and consent of the Natives But what if the Natives of several Countries differ from each other It may be reasonable to believe neither but it is not possible to believe both What if they had for a long time no certain way of conveying their Histories from one Age to another It is possible Oral Tradition may preserve some general strokes of the ancient History of a Countrey but it is hardly credible that so many particulars as Boethius hath in the first Race of Kings could be kept so distinctly by the force of Tradition The case of the old World is vastly different from any other People since the shortning of Mens Lives and whatever Nation wanted Records could never make out the Credibility of their History to other People We do not deny the Annals of the Jewish or Roman Priests but we think Annals and Oral Tradition are two things when Annals are produced we must weigh and consider them and compare the Annals of several Nations together that we may better judge which are to be relied upon And yet we are told again that when Histories are already formed out of ancient Records there is no farther need to produce them for Papers may be lost by accident but the Histories taken out of them are to be believed although the Records cannot be found as it is in respect of the Histories of Rome and Greece whose Authority remains although the Testimonies on which they relied are not extant So that at last Geffrey of Monmouth must be believed as to the British Antiquities as well as Hector Boethius as to the Scotish For Geffrey doth no more pretend to invent his History than Hector and Hunibaldus is as good an Authour as either of them and Keting as good as Hunibaldus For they all equally pretend to derive their Histories from ancient Records and the Tradition of the Natives and all these having formed their Histories out of these substantial Grounds we are to search no farther but to believe them all however improbable in themselves and contradictions to one another The case is very different as to the Learned Greek and Roman Histories from those of the modern barbarous Nations which were plainly made in imitation of them as will appear afterwards And as to the Greeks and Romans there is a considerable difference to be made between the Histories that related to the times before they had written Annals and after Can any Man imagine that there is as great reason to believe the first Accounts of Greece as those that were written after the Peloponnesian War Or that the first beginnings of the Roman
which had more smattering of Learning than in the Ages before And so he begins his History very formally in imitation of the best Roman Authours with deducing their History from Gathelus and Scota deriving their Succession from the Greeks and Egyptians as the Romans did theirs from the Trojans This I do not attribute to his invention for it is at large in Fordon who quotes some old Chronicles and Legends for it especially the Legend of S. Brendan an admirable and authentick Record But to doe right to Hector in this matter he saith ingenuously that their People follow'd the custome of other Nations therein And as I have shew'd in the following Book at large where I treat of these Antiquities this humour had overspread all the Northern Nations as soon as they shook off the Roman Yoke and began not onely to be distinct Kingdoms but to have some affectation of the Roman Learning and to have Persons of their own Nation who began to write their Histories who thought they did nothing for the honour of their Countrey unless they could some way or other derive themselves from the Trojans or Greeks or Egyptians whom they met with so often in the Roman Authours and the Romans in most Provinces mixing together with the Northern People excited a greater Ambition in them either to be like the Romans or to exceed them in their pretended Antiquities And their inventions not being extraordinary there is very little variety in their several Accounts as will appear by comparing them in their proper Places In this point Hector Boethius hath acquitted himself well enough but finding the Succession of their Kings very short and meagre having no flesh to fill it nor nerves to support it nor colour to adorn it therefore he sets himself to make up what he found defective and to put it together under the Names of Veremundus and Cornelius Hibernius or others out of these he frames a long series or Catalogue of Kings which looked big and raised Mens expectations and seem'd well enough contrived to serve the pretence to so great Antiquity This being done he fills up the Story of these Kings not out of their old Annals as far as yet appears but in a great measure out of his own invention so as to mix the Commonwealth-Learning of the Greeks and Romans with the History of their ancient Kings Which hath done great prejudice to the Rights of the Monarchy for Hector's History took so much among the Nobility for very good Reasons to them that all that have written since him have depended upon his Authority as appears both by Buchanan and Lesly unless it were where he grosly contradicted the Roman History and there Buchanan leaves him but for the main of his History he relies upon him and Lesly doth nothing in effect but abridge him whatever he pretends as to Records and the Annals of the Monasteries of Pasly and Scoon which the Advocate supposeth he saw at Rome whither he saith they were carried If so it had been worth while to have procured well attested Copies from thence which had not been hard in all this time so many Gentlemen of that Nation travelling thither and seeing all the Curiosities of their Libraries But Lesly saith no such thing for he appeals to the publick Archives of the Kingdom and not to any MSS. at Rome so that if they were any where they were then in Scotland But the Advocate seems to have forgotten what he had said before viz. that the black Book of Scoon was among President Spotswood 's Books indeed he saith King Charles I. ransom'd it from Rome but how that appears I know not but I know the circumstances he mentions about Col. Fairfax c. relate not to the Book of Scoon but to a Copy of Fordon which was presented by him to King Charles II. And if Buchanan had the use of the Books of Pasley and the famous Book of Pluscarden as the Advocate believes upon Buchanan's word then in his time they were not carried to Rome For my part I do not question that there were MSS. Chronicles in Scotland before Fordon for I find him frequently citing them but by the things he quotes out of them they were not considerable nor done by any Authority as the Annals of the Royal Monasteries of this Kingdom his Continuer saith were and afterwards examined and compared I am sorry to find Sir R. Sibbald reckon up among the Books he had never seen having made it his business so many years to illustrate his Countrey not onely Cornelius Hibernicus and Veremundus but the Annals of Pasley and Scoon But however we are glad that the Advocate assures us he hath a very old Abridgment of the Book of Pasley and may this present heat against the Bishop of St. Asaph provoke them to procure and publish their ancient Annals such as they are which will be the greatest advantage to the World of this Contention about their Antiquities And I am so far from any Pique or Animosity in this matter that I should be glad to see those Antiquities which yet appear dark and confused clear'd up to the satisfaction of all learned and ingenuous Men. But I must beg pardon of his Majesty's Advocate if I take the freedom to say he hath not taken the right method to doe it For he ought first to have proved the matter in dispute by clear and indubitable Testimonies before he had made his severe Reflexions and Inferences but as Cicero said of the Musician who defined the Soul to be Harmony ab Arte sua non recessit so this ingenious Gentleman hath managed this whole debate in a way more agreeing to the Character of an Advocate than of an Antiquary For why so many insinuations as though some injury were intended to the Royal Line which I dare say the Bishop of St. Asaph doth really honour and esteem as much as his Majesty's Advocate himself For doth any Man of understanding think that it is any injury to the Royal Line of Britain to have the fabulous Antiquities of Geoffrey of Monmouth concerning the Succession of British Kings down from Brutus confuted And is not this done by Buchanan And the Advocate in plain English saith those tempt Men to lie who endeavour to derive themselves from the Trojans But why not as well from the Greeks and Egyptians But the Bishop of St. Asaph is so just to Truth and so little a Friend to popular Fables that he fairly gives up Geoffrey before he attacks Hector Boethius could any thing be more fairly and impartially done or more convincing that he onely designed to find out Truth in these matters without regard to that fondness some Men still have for these British Antiquities For there are and will be some and those not wholly unlearned who are naturally inclined to believe Fables and have so passionate a zeal for such things that they cry out upon all discoveries of this
kind as injuries to their Countrey if not to the Royal Line But may it not justly seem strange that when our polite and learned Neighbours have endeavoured with so much care to reform their Histories and to purge away all fabulous Antiquities out of them we of this Island should grow angry and impatient when any undertake so generous a design What injury is it thought to be to the Royal Line of France that Hunibaldus his Antiquities find no longer place in their Histories And yet nothing seems more glorious than to have their Royal Line deduced long before the time that Alexander took Babylon For according to Hunibaldus his Account which he took he saith out of an ancient MS. of Vastaldus such another Authour as Veremundus the Franks went from Troy under the Conduct of Francio towards the Palus Maeotis just about the time that Aeneas went for Italy where they fixed and built the City Sicambria and at last removed into Germany under Marcomir the Son of Priamus and Sunno the Son of Antenor After Francio Hunibaldus sets down a formal Succession of Kings of two several Races 16 in the first and 31 in the second All which he gives a very particular account of as to the times of their Reign for above 413 years before Christ's Nativity And although this ancient Succession of Kings was a long time received and magnified as appears by Lazius and P. Aemilius and Fordon quotes Sigebert for it yet now their learned Historians are ashamed to mention it much more to plead for it and to charge those with a degree of Lese-Majesty who call it in question Suffridus Petrus hath written the Antiquities of Friseland much in the way that Hector Boethius hath done those of Scotland He tells a very grave Story concerning a Province in the Indies called Fresia from whence a Colony was sent under Friso Saxo and Bruno who went into Alexander's Army and for this he quotes old Frisian Rythms and one Patrocles an old Indian Writer and besides he hath all the Advocate 's Common places of Tradition common Fame the Testimonies of their own Historians and he names Andreas Cornelius it seems there was a Cornelius Frisius as well as Hibernicus Solco Fortemannus Occo Scherlensis Joh. Uleterpius and several others who with one Consent deliver these Antiquities But saith he ye will object that in so long a time and amidst so many Wars such Antiquities could hardly be preserved To that he answers That Friso being admirably skilled in Greek Learning set up a publick School at Stauria near the Temple of Stavo and in the Temple a Library on purpose for Antiquities like that of Icolmkill and besides a Palace was built by Uffo wherein was contained the Effigies of all their Kings from Friso who came to Friseland just 313 years before Christ's Nativity to the time of Charlemagn for 1113 years And are not these Antiquities very well attested yet since Ubbo Emmius hath confuted them no learned Advocate hath appeared in vindication of them Is it any disparagement to the Royal Line of Spain to have the first Succession of Kings there disputed viz. from Jubal to Melicola the 24th King from him who is said to have reigned there the very year after the destruction of Troy So very punctual are the Authours of Fabulous Antiquities And if you believe them they have good ancient Authours and the Tradition of their Countrey for them haec nostri Majores multis Libris tradiderunt saith the pretended Berosus And by these helps we have great light given us into the Antiquities of Europe for thereby we understand that Janus who was somewhat elder than Gathelus being Noah himself gave Tuysco the Countrey from the Tanais to the Rhyne Italy to Gomer the Celtick Provinces to Samothes and Celtiberia to Jubal And this was just 131 years after the Floud Gomer went into Italy the 10th year of Saturn the Father of Jupiter Belus in the 12th Jubal went into Celtiberia and not long after Samothes called Dis founded the Celtick Colonies among which were the Britains and from him their Druids were called Samothei after Jubal among the Celtiberians reigned Iberus his Son from whom came the name of Iberi and among the Celtae Magus the Son of Samothes in the 51st year of Ninus who succeeded Jupiter Belus This Magus in the Scythian Language is Magog and from him came so many terminations of the Names of Towns as Rhotamagum Noviomagum Juliomagum Caesaromagum c. In the 34th of Semiramis Jubelda Son of Iber succeeded in Celtiberia in the time of Ninias Son to Semiramis reign'd Sarron among the Celtae from him the learned Gauls were called Sarronidae the same I suppose with our Advocate 's Sanachies In the 20th of Arius Brigus reigned in Celtiberia and in the 29th Dryius among the Celtae nothing can be more natural than to derive the Druids from him who being converted the Advocate tells us became their first Monks and in the Irish Version of the New Testament the wise Men are translated Druids therefore the Druids were originally Irish. In the time of Aralius the seventh King of Babylon Bardus was King over the Celtae and he was the Inventour of Musick and Verses and from him came the Bards who were the Poets of their Traditions as the Advocate styles them After him succeeded Longo then Bardus junior after him Lucus and then Celtes and Galates Narbon Lugdus Beligius Allobrox Romus Paris Lemannus Galatas junior and Francus Must we allow all these noble Antiquities for fear of shortning the Royal Lines of the Princes of Europe And yet here is a great appearance of Exactness a pretence to ancient Records and to the common Tradition of the several Countries for Berosus appeals both to Tradition and Writing and so doth Manetho in the continuation of him quae ex nostris Historicis vel corum relationibus consecuti fumus so that here we have the two Supporters of Antiquities which the Advocate builds upon viz. Tradition and Records And Metasthenes another pretended continuer of Berosus saith he took all out of the Royal Library at Susae where the Persian Annals were preserved But notwithstanding all these fair shews and specious pretences there is not a Man of tolerable judgment in Europe who would venture his Reputation to plead for these Antiquities But the learned Advocate saith That their Antiquities have been received with great applause for many hundreds of years by all Historians Antiquaries and Criticks of other Nations who had any occasion to take notice of their affairs These are very high expressions and argue a good assurance in the very beginning of his Book For my part I do not pretend to acquaintance with all Historians Antiquaries and Criticks for many hundreds of years and so there may have been some for any thing I know who have applauded their Histories from 330 years before Christ but upon my little knowledge in Books I dare
other Antiquaries and Criticks than they are by Scaliger this Argument will come to very little And yet Salmasius and the rest he mentions say much less than Scaliger Salmasius onely useth Scaliger's Criticism about the Scoto-Brigantes without adding any thing Lipsius unhappily calls Galgacus a Scot which was an improper expression as I have proved in the proper place because it is so evident from Tacitus that the Caledonians were not Scots unless it be taken for Scythians of which afterwards but by Scots here we mean such as came out of Ireland to settle in Britain and such Galgacus and his Souldiers were not And the like impropriety Bergier though a learned Antiquary fell into when he interprets the Caledonians by Scots but such as Dempster is frequently guilty of when he calls the Britains English because the English dwelt in Britain afterwards But improper expressions where they fall from learned Men by chance ought rather to be passed over with silence than made use of as Arguments unless those who use them go about to prove what is implied in them Sigonius his Name stands among the rest being indeed a learned Historian Antiquary and Critick but not one word can I find produced out of him in his whole Book What Baronius saith relaâ—es to the Conversion of the Scotish Nation and not to these Antiquities of which I have treated at large in the following Book Andr. Favin and P. Aemilius speak onely of an Alliance between Achaius King of the Scots and Charles the great and what is this to Fergus and the Succession of Kings for 330 years before Christ's Nativity which he saith in the beginning was applauded by all Historians Antiquaries and Criticks and as though this were not extravagant enough he saith afterwards that Baronius Scaliger Salmasius Lipsius Sigonius Favin and others of the first rank too many to be named have passionately defended their Antiquity and not onely sustained but praised their Histories Whereas not one of these produced by him speaks any thing to the matter in question But we hope to see these things better cleared in the third Part of Sir R. Sibbald's Scotia Antiqua where he has promised to give a particular account of the State of the Scots in Britain before they had Kings then under Kings from Fergus I. to Fergus II. and from thence to Malcolm Canmore If he doth clear these Parts of their Antiquities he will doe a great thing and for my part I shall be as willing to believe Fergus to have come into Britain in the time of Alexander as any time after provided there be sufficient Evidence to prove it which must be somewhat more convincing than his Majesty's Advocate hath been pleased to make use of but I remember Scaliger's Censure of Claudian addit de ingenio quantum deest materiae Therefore from the Testimony of Historians Antiquaries and Criticks I proceed to examine the Argumentative part of his Book and setting aside all common Places about Historical certainty Tradition common Fame c. I shall keep close to the point before us and examine the force and strength of his Reasoning which consists in these things 1. That upon the same Reason we question their Antiquities we may call in question the Roman Iewish Greek French Spanish Antiquities all which depended upon Tradition without Records for a long time This is indeed a material Objection for we ought not to give a partial Assent to some Antiquities and deny it to others if there be the same ground either to give or deny Assent to all But this must be examined 1. As to the Roman Antiquities he cites a passage in Livy in which he saith that the use of Letters was not then ordinary the onely certain preserver of the memory of things past so Livy's Words are to be understood rarae per ea tempora Literae una custodia fidelis memoriae rerum gestarum and not as the Advocate with too much art hath translated them that the best Records were the faithfull Remembrance of things past For if this were Livy's meaning why doth he complain of the want of the common use of Letters when he saith Tradition is the best way to preserve the memory of things Which is to make Livy speak inconsequently But he goes on saying that what Memorials were left by the High Priests or were in publick or private hands were most part destroyed in the burning of the Town He doth not say all were lost but the most part This Livy alledgeth to excuse the shortness and obscurity of his first Books for want of sufficient Records and he speaks like a very judicious Historian in it And when he gives an Account of the remote Antiquities of Rome he is far from confident asserting them but he speaks with great Modesty and Discretion about them saying that he would neither affirm nor deny them being rather built on Poetical Fables than any certain Monuments of affairs at that time that an allowance must be made to Antiquity which was wont consecrare Origines suas to make their beginnings as sacred and venerable as they could But as to such things he would be no Advocate either for or against them Then he proceeds to deliver the common Tradition about Aeneas his coming into Italy and Ascanius succeeding him but he cannot tell whether Ascanius the Son of Creusa or another the Son of Lavinia quis enim rem tam veterem pro certo affirmet Who can be certain in such remote Antiquities And yet at that time it was thought a great disparagement to the Royal Line to have it question'd whether it were the elder Ascanius because the Julian Family as Livy there saith derived themselves from him who was called Julus It is true Livy after this relates the Roman Antiquities down to the burning of the City when so many Records were lost but we are to consider that the Romans had certain Annals before that time and that some of them were preserved That they had Annals both publick and private appears by Livy's own Words who mentions both the Commentarii Pontificum and the publica privata monumenta and Cicero affirms that the Romans from the beginning had Annals made up by the Pontifex Maximus of the transactions of every year and these were publickly exposed in a Table in his House that the People might be satisfied about them and these he saith were called Annales Maximi which he adds were continued down to the time of Mucius Scaevola who was Pontifex Maximus about A. U. C. 623. These as Servius saith were after made up into 80 great Books and were the standing Monuments of their Antiquities And it is observable that the Authour of the Book de origine Gentis Romanae as Vossius and others take notice inserts several things as taken out of the Pontifical Annals which hapned before the building of Rome from whence they do justly infer that matters
from him To this the Irish Antiquaries reply that their ancient Annals do give a clear Account of this Fergus his Race and Time of going into Scotland but although they have the Succession of the Kings of Ireland long before and the remarkable things done in their time yet there is no mention at all of any Fergus or his Successours going to settle in Britain before this time They do believe that there were Excursions made by some of the Kings of Ireland before and I see no reason to question it even before the times mentioned by Gildas but they utterly deny any foundation of a Monarchy there by Scots going out of Ireland before the time of Fergus the Son of Eric and that 100 years later than the Scotish Antiquaries do place his coming for they make the first coming of this Colony to be A. D. 503. just the time which the Bishop of St. Asaph had pitched upon but according to their Antiquities Loarn the elder Brother was first King and he dying Fergus succeeded A. D. 513. and because his Race succeeded in that Kingdom therefore Fergus is supposed to have been founder of the Monarchy The Question now comes to this whether the Irish or the Scotish Antiquaries go upon the better Grounds For here the Advocate 's Common Places of Historical Faith Common Fame Domestick Tradition c. can determine nothing since these are equal on both sides and yet there is a contradiction to each other about a matter of Fact We must then appeal to the Records on both sides and those who can produce the more Authentick Testimonies from thence are to be believed The Advocate pleads that it is very credible that they had such because they had Druids and Sanachies and Monks as well as those in Ireland and that Columba founded a Monastery at Icolmkill and their Kings were buried there for a long time But where are the Annals of that Monastery Or of any other near that time To what purpose are we told of the Monasteries that were at Scoon and Paslay and Pluscardin and Lindesfern and Abercorn unless their Books be produced It is by no means satisfactory to say they had two Books their Register or Chartulary and their Black Book wherein their Annals were kept for we desire to see them of what colour soever they be and to be convinced by Testimonies out of them if they appear of sufficient authority But if these cannot be produced let them print the full Account of Irish Kings which the Advocate in his Advertisement saith he had lately seen in a very old MS. brought from Icolmkill written by Carbre Lifachair who lived six Generations before St. Patrick and so about our Saviour's time St. Patrick died about the end of the fifth Century being above 100 years old if the Irish Historians may be believed but how six Generations will reach from his birth to about our Saviour's time is not easie to understand For although the ancients differ'd much in computing Generations yet Censorinus saith they generally called 25 or 30 years by the Name of a Generation Herodotus indeed extends a Generation to 100 years yet even that will over doe here But who was this Carbre Lifachair who wrote so long since I find one of that Name among the Kings of Ireland about A. D. 284. and therefore I am apt to suspect that some body not very well versed in the Irish Language finding this Name among the Kings made him the Authour of the Book And the Irish Antiquaries speak with some indignation against those Scotish Writers who pretend to debate these matters of Antiquity relating to the Irish Nation without any skill in the Irish Language For this Debate doth not concern the Saxons in Scotland as all the Lowlanders are still called by the Highlanders and many of the best Families of their Nobility setled there in the time of Malcolm Canmoir after he had married the Sister to Edgar but it relating wholly to those who came out of Ireland the Irish Antiquaries think it reasonable it ought to be determined by the Irish Annals But will not the same objections lie against the Irish Antiquities which have been hitherto urged against the Scotish For why should we believe that the Original Irish were more punctual and exact in their Annals than those who went from thence into Scotland I answer that a difference is to be made concerning the Irish Antiquities For they either relate to what hapned among them before Christianity was received in Ireland or after As to their remote Antiquities they might have some general Traditions preserved among them as that they were peopled from Britain and Scythia and had Successions of Kings time out of mind but as to their exact Chronology I must beg leave as yet to suspend my Assent For Bollandus affirms that the Irish had no use of Letters till Saint Patrick brought it among them at which their present Antiquary is much offended and runs back to the Druids as the learned Advocate doth But neither of them have convinced me that the Druids ever wrote Annals All that Caesar saith is that in Gaul they made use of the Greek Letters which they might easily borrow from the Greek Colony at Marseilles but how doth it appear that they used these Letters in Ireland or Scotland Or that they any where used them in any matters of Learning which seems contrary to the Institution of the Druids who were all for Memory as Caesar saith and thought Books hurtfull to the use of it So that nothing could be more repugnant to their Discipline than the 150 Tracts of the Druids which St. Patrick is said to have cast into the Fire But I do not deny that they might have Genealogies kept up among them by their Druids and Sanachies and Bards who made it their business and so it was in Scotland as appears by the Highlanders repeating the Genealogy of Alexander III. by heart But the great Errour lay in fixing Times and Places and particular Actions according to the Names of those Genealogies And this was the true Reason of the mistake as to the Scotish Antiquities For the Genealogists carrying the Pedigree of Fergus the Son of Erk so much farther back some afterwards either imagined themselves or would have others think that all those mentioned before him were Kings in Scotland as Fergus was which by degrees was improved into a formal Story of forty Kings And I am very much confirmed in this conjecture because I find in the Genealogy in Fordon the descent of Fergus the Son of Erk from Conar the Irish Monarch as it is in the Irish Genealogies and that by Rieda called by them Carbre Riada by the other Eochoid Ried and several other Names are the very same we now find in the Genealogy of the Irish Kings as Eochoid Father to Erc Aengus Fedlim Conar the Son of Ederskeol and so up to Fergus
called in the Irish Catalogue of Kings Fergusius Fortamalius whom the Authour of the Synchronism makes contemporary with Ptolemy Philometor From whence I conclude that the original mistake lay in applying the Irish Genealogy to the Kings of Scotland But if we go beyond these Genealogies in Ireland and come to examine the matters of Fact relating to their remote Antiquities we shall find no more certainty there than we have done in Scotland And it is ingenuously confessed by Tigernacus in his Annals that all their Antiquities to the Reign of Kimbaithus their 73. King are very uncertain but he might have gone farther and done no injury to Truth However we cannot but acknowledge it to be a great piece of Ingenuity to own so much in those times when fabulous Antiquities were so much cried up and believed But what becomes then of Caesarea Baronna and Balba with fifty other Women and but three Men coming from Ireland just forty days before the Floud and the fifteenth day of the Moon What becomes of Partholanus and his Company who arrived in Ireland the 312 th year after the Floud in the Month of May 14. of the Moon and upon Wednesday Is not this wonderfull exactness at such a distance of time And the late Antiquary confesses he doth not know how they came to understand the day of the Week and the Month so well How come they to understand that the second Colony under Nemethus came to Ireland when it had been 30 years desolate and after the destruction of that Colony that it remained so 200 years As to the Milesian Colony from Spain I discourse at large afterwards of it and the Authority of those Annals these Antiquities depend upon But then as to later times since Christianity was among them and some kind of Learning did flourish in Ireland for some time there is greater reason to have a regard to the Testimony of their most ancient Annals Such are those of Tigernacus who died A. D. 1088. and the Synchronisms of Flannus who died A. D. 1056. the Historical Poems of Coemannus who is celebrated as their chief Antiquary and he deduces his Historical Poem of the Kings of Ireland to A. D. 1072. which is supposed to be the time he lived in Modudius continues the History of their Kings from A. D. 428. to A. D. 1022. and he lived A. D. 1143. But besides these the Irish Antiquaries have found an Irish Poem of the Kings of Scotland in the time of Malcolm Canmoir with their Names and the time of their Reigns Which Poem begins with Loarn and Fergus the Son of Erc as the first Kings of Scotland but takes notice of Kings among the Picts before without the least intimation of any among the Scots which being join'd with the Testimony of their Genealogies and the Annals of Tigernacus and of Jocelin in the Acts of St. Patrick they conclude sufficient to prove that there was no Monarchy in Scotland till the time of this Fergus of the Dalredian Family And it is not improbable that Bede should understand this Colony under the Conduct of these Brethren by his Duce Reuda because they being equal the Denomination was taken from the Head of the Stock who was Rieda or Reuda and Daal the Irish Antiquaries say originally signifies a Stock and onely by consequence a Share or Portion But the Advocate still insists upon it that in their chief Monasteries they had ancient Annals kept which must be of greater Authority than these Irish Historical Poems This is a matter of Fact and there can be no Argument drawn from the bare probability that there were such Annals but when they are produced and compared with the Irish Annals of Tigernacus the Annals of Ulster Ynisfallin Dungall and others which the Irish Antiquaries quote so often besides their Historical Poems we shall then be able to judge better between them in point of Antiquity and Credibility At present it doth not seem so probable that they have any such that are considerable since they have not been alledged by so learned an Advocate for their Antiquities who would not omit so material an evidence for his Cause And there is a passage in the Conclusion of the Continuation of Fordon which makes it more than probable they had no ancient authentick Annals in the Monasteries For there it is said That in other Countries and as he heard in England in all their Monasteries of Royal Foundation there was a certain Person appointed to write the passages of the present times and after the King's death at the next great Council all these Writers were to meet and to bring in their Papers which were to be compared and examined by skilfull Men appointed for that purpose and out of all one Authentick Chronicle was to be made which was to be laid up in the Archives of the Monasteries as such from whence the Truth might be known The like he wishes were done in Scotland From whence it follows that there were no Authentick Annals in their Monasteries before that time to his knowledge Buchanan I know doth several times quote the Book of Paslay but it had been far better to have printed the Book it self since Dempster saith it was in the hands of the Earl of Dumferlin that others might have been better able to judge concerning it But Fordon tells us that Monastery was founded A. D. 1168. or a year after saith the Chronicle of Melros now the very foundation of the Monastery is here so late that no great matter can be expected as to remote Antiquities That at Scone as Fordon saith was founded not much sooner A. D. 1107. As to Abercorn though mentioned by Bede yet Buchanan saith no one could find out so much as the footsteps of it and so we are not like to expect much light from thence It is very strange that Buchanan onely should see the famous Book of Pluscardin For Books do not easily grow famous by one Man's seeing them But no great matter of Antiquity is to be expected from thence since that Monastery at the soonest was founded by Alexander II. in the thirteenth Century but Dempster rather thinks it was 200 years after I never heard that Aidan Finan and Colman left any Annals at Lindesfern nor Columba or his Successours at Icolmkill If any such be ever found it will be a great favour to inquisitive Men to oblige the World by publishing them that if we are guilty of mistakes we may rectifie them upon such great Authorities when they vouchsafe to let them see the light As to the Chronicle of Melrosse lately published at Oxford we find no advantage at all to the Advocate 's Cause by it But here is an odd kind of Reflexion either on the MS. or the worthy Publisher of it as though it were very unfaithfull in the things relating to the Scotish Nation Whereas I have frequently perused the Original
MS. in the Cotton Library which is a very fair and ancient one And those Verses he speaks of which are omitted are not there in the same hand but added in the Margin by another and seem transcribed from some other Book such Verses being frequent in Fordon and it may be are the greatest Monuments of Antiquity they have being agreeable to the Irish Historical Poems But seeing the first produced by the Advocate go no farther back than Alpin the Father of Kenneth who subdued the Picts they can afford very little light in these matters And it had been but a reasonable piece of justice in the Advocate before he had charged such unfaithfulness upon the MS. Copy of Mailros as it appears in the Oxford Edition to have looked either on the Beginning or the End of the Book and then he might have spared his Censure For in the Preface an account is given of the Verses relating to the Succession of the Kings of Scotland And in the end the very Verses themselves are printed and more at large than he quotes them From the Annals of their Monasteries I proceed to their Historians and the first mentioned by the Advocate is Veremundus a Spaniard Archdeacon of St. Andrews A. D. 1076. who dedicated his History to Malcolm Canmoir and in his Epistle appeals to the Druids and Monks and the Monuments of Antiquity kept by them in the Isles of Man and Icolmkill This is an Evidence to the purpose and speaks home to the point But the Bishop of St. Asaph hath unhappily questioned whether there ever were such a Writer and I do not think the Advocate hath cleared the point There may be two things in dispute with respect to this Veremundus first whether there ever were such a History appearing under the name of Veremundus And then supposing there were whether it were genuine or made under his Name by Hector Boethius or rather by his Physician of Aberdeen who was so helpfull to him saith Dempster in texenda Historia i. e. in weaving the Materials for his History I will not dispute so much the former and the Testimony of Chambers a Lord of Session and learned Man as the Advocate tells us who wrote A. D. 1572. goes no farther nor any other produced by him But as to the second point I am very much unsatisfied for these Reasons 1. It is very well known that it was no unusual thing in that Age to publish Books under the Names of ancient Authours which cost the Criticks a great deal of Pains to discover the Imposture as is apparent in the Berosus Manetho Metasthenes or Megasthenes Philo Cato Xenophon Archilochus Sempronius published by Annius who lived in the fifteenth Century and was buried during the Popedom of Alexander VI. And not onely Authours but other Monuments of Antiquity were then counterfeited as appears by many in Gruter's Collection of Inscriptions by those of Annius in Italy and by the Tuscan Inscriptions published by Inghiramius under the Name of Prosper Fesulanus which were the Invention of Thomas Foedrus who lived at the same time with Hector Boethius For in that Age Men began to be inquisitive into Matters of Antiquity and therefore some who had more Learning and better Inventions than others set themselves to Work to gratifie the Curiosity of such who longed to see something of the Antiquities of their own Countrey And such things were so greedily swallowed by less judicious Persons that it proved no easie matter to convince such of the imposture For even Annius and Prosper Fesulanus as well as Veremundus have had their Advocates to plead for them 2. We find as to the Scotish Antiquities many such Authours pretended to who never wrote concerning them As for instance three Books of the History of Scotland by St. Adam Bishop of Cathnes Auminus of the Right of the Culdees King Achaius his History of his Predecessour Aldarus his History of Scotland and Ireland St. Convallanus his History of the Kings of Scotland The Chronicle of Dumfermlin Elvanus Avalonius his History of Scotland St. Fastidius his Chronicle of Scotland Fergus the great his Epistles to the Scots Fulgentius his Epistle to Donald King of Scotland in the time of Severus St. Glacianus his History of Scotland St. Glodianus his Chronicle of the Picts cited by Veremundus saith Dempster Galdus his Epistles to the Britains Hunibertus his Scotish Chronicle Kenneth's Epitome of his Laws St. Machorius of the Destruction of the Picts St. Minnanus of the Vnion of the Scots and Picts Marcerius of the coming of the Scots into Albion He is said to be their first Authour and out of him Veremundus saith Dempster took the Foundation of his History but I do not find that any Man besides ever saw him King Reuther's Scotish History Salifax Bardus his Genealogy of their Kings in King Reuther's time Here we have no less than 20 Authours relating to their Antiquities every one mentioned as genuine by Dempster and yet as far as we can find not one of the whole number was so Is it then any wonder that Veremundus should be reckon'd among the rest 3. No such Authour was known to Fordon as far as appears by his History and he is very punctual in quoting the Authours he makes use of and sometimes transcribes large passages out of them as out of Baldredus as he calls him and Turgot's Life of Malcolm c. Jocelin de Furnes Vincentius Adamnanus and any old Legends or Chronicles he could meet with as Chronica de Abernethy variae Chronicae upon many occasions I do not therefore deny that Fordon doth appeal to Chronicles before him but I think the Argument so much stronger against Veremundus when one who gathered all he could meet with never once takes notice of him as far as I can find 4. William Elphinston Chancellour of Scotland Bishop of Aberdeen and Founder of the Vniversity there a Man highly commended by Hector Boethius did as Hector himself tells us in his Epistle to James V. search all Scotland for Monuments of Antiquity and gave the first intimation of Veremundus in the Island Iona and followed him exactly in writing his History Now as it happily falls out this very History of Elphinstoun is in being among us and I have at this time by me eight Books of it which go as far as the thirteenth Century He tells the Story of Gathelus and Scota as others had done before him or rather just as Fordon had set it down For there is very little variation from him in all the first Book onely the eighth Chapter in Fordon is very much contracted the fifteenth about Gathelus his building the City Brigantia in Spain is transposed another Chapter being set before it In the seventeenth he follows Fordon exactly about the Posterity of Gathelus coming into Ireland and whereas Fordon onely quotes Grossum Caput for
judge whether by Scotia Bede understands the Northern parts of Britain or Ireland But after all doth not Bede say that the Island Hy did belong to Britain as a part of it And what then follows Doth not Bede in the same place say it was given by the Picts not by the Scots to the Scotish Monks who came from Ireland So that upon the whole matter that which Bede understands by Scotia seems to be Ireland although he affirms the Scots to have setled in the Northern parts of Britain and to have set up a Kingdom there From whence there appears no probability of Palladius's being sent to the Scots in Britain Bede saying nothing of their Conversion when he so punctually sets down the Conversion of the South Picts by Ninias a British Bishop and of the Northern Picts by Columba a Scotish or Irish Presbyter But if Palladius were sent to the Scots in Ireland how came St. Patrick to be sent so soon after him To this the Bishop of St. Asaph answers that Palladius might die so soon after his Mission that Pope Celestine might have time enough to send St. Patrick before his own death And this he makes out by laying the several circumstances of the Story together as they are reported by Authours which the Advocate calls a laborious Hypothesis and elaborate contrivance to divert all the unanswerable Authorities proving that Palladius was seâ—t to them in Scotland A. D. 431. What those unanswerable Authorities are which prove Palladius sent to the Scots in Britain I cannot find And for all that I see by this Answer the onely fault of the Bishop's Hypothesis is that it is too exact and doth too much clear the appearance of contradiction between the two Missions 3. As to Dr. Hammond's Testimony who is deservedly called by the Advocate a learned and Episcopal English Divine it is very easily answered For 1. He looks on the whole Story of the Scots Conversionfs as very uncertainly set down by Authours 2. He saith that Bozius applies the Conversion under Victor to Ireland then called Scotia for which he quotes Bede 3. That neither Marianus Scotus nor Bede do take the least notice of it 4. That if Prosper's Words be understood of the Scots in Britain yet they do not prove the thing designed by his Adversaries viz. that the Churches there were governed by Presbyters without Bishops for Prosper supposes that they remained barbarous still and therefore the Plantation was very imperfect and could not be understood of any formed Churches But the Advocate very wisely conceals one passage which overthrows his Hypothesis viz. that they could not be supposed to receive the first Rudiments of their Conversion from Rome viz. under Pope Victor since the Scots joined with the Britains in rejecting the Roman Customs From whence we see that Dr. Hammond was far from being of the Advocate 's mind in this matter and what he proposes as to some Rudiments of Christianity in Scotland before Palladius his coming thither was onely from an uncertain Tradition and for reconciling the seeming differences between Bede and Prosper or rather for reconciling Prosper to himself But I remember the Advocate 's observation in the case of their Predecessour's Apology against Edward I. viz. that they designed as most Pleaders do to gain their Point at any rate and how far this eloquent Advocate hath made good this observation through his Discourse I leave the Reader to determine Having thus gone through all the material parts of the Advocate 's Book I shall conclude with a serious Protestation that no Pique or Animosity led me to this Undertaking no ill Will to the Scotish Nation much less to the Royal Line which I do believe hath the Advantage in point of Antiquity above any other in Europe and as far as we know in the World But I thought it necessary for me to enquire more strictly into this Defence of such pretended Antiquities both because I owed so much service to so worthy and excellent a Friend as the Bishop of St. Asaph and because if the Advocate 's Arguments would hold good they would overthrow several things I had asserted in the following Book and withall I was willing to let the learned Nobility and Gentry of that Nation see how much they have been imposed upon by Hector Boethius and his followers and that the true Honour and Wisedom of their Nation is not concerned in defending such Antiquities which are universally disesteemed among all judicious and inquisitive Men. And it would far better become Persons of so much Ingenuity and Sagacity to follow the Examples of other European Nations in rejecting the Romantick Fables of the Monkish times and at last to settle their Antiquities on firm and solid Foundations As to the following Book it comes forth as a Specimen of a greater Design if God gives me Life and Opportunity which is to clear the most important Difficulties of Ecclesiastical History And because I look on a General Church-History as too heavy a Burthen to be undergone by any Man when he is fit for it by Age and Consideration I have therefore thought it the better way to undertake such particular Parts of it which may be most usefull and I have now begun with these Antiquities of the British Churches which may be followed by others as I see occasion But I hope none will have just cause to complain that I have not used diligence or faithfulness enough in this present Work or that I have set up Fancies and Chimaera's of my own instead of the true Antiquities of the British Churches I have neither neglected nor transcribed those who have written before me and if in some things I differ from them it was not out of the Humour of opposing any great Names but because I intended not to deliver other Mens judgements but my own ERRATA In the Preface PAge 6. line 35. for but he did it reade for doing it p. 23. l. 31. for And r. Surely p. 36. l. 32. for but r. yet p. 38. l. 10. for Cladroe r. Cadroe p. 41. l. 39. after had insert made p. 44. l. 33. for a Generation r. three Generations and for overdoe r. not doe p. 61. l. 37. for foelix r. Salix In the Book PAge 2. l. 10. dele and. p. 25. l. 19. for under floo r. understood p. 59. l. 20. for with r. and. p. 70. for Dioclesian r. Diocletian and so throughout p. 115. l. 14. for Alexander r. Alexander p. 137. l. 7. for put p. 179. l. 11. for Council r. Church p. 194. l. 11. for Frecalphus r. Freculphus p. 209. l. 39. instead of but r. whereas p. 241. l. 7 8. dele But now the Britains were p. 256. l. 26. for Edecus r. Ederus p. 266. l. 35. for Egypt r. Europe p. 276. l. 37. for Erimthon r. Erimhon p. 281. l. 23. for Eanus r. Edanus p. 285. l. 18. for Authemius r. Anthemius p. 306. l. 29.
being a very usefull point but not very agreeing with the simplicity of the primitive Christians wanted some more than ordinary confirmation and such we are told it had For St. David having a design to consecrate this Church our Lord appeared to him in a Dream and forbad him having consecrated both the Church and Church-yard before himself And for a Sign thereof he thrust his Finger through the Bishop's hand Which it seems was to pass for the Token of a former Consecration But as much as this looks like a Monkish Legend Alford and Cressy are much displeased with Sir H. Spelman for calling it in question But they who can in earnest believe That Christ himself did then consecrate a Church and Church-yard to the honour of his Mother are past all Confutation by reason having their minds naturally framed to believe Legends and to such one Legend serves to confirm another which is the way those persons take to confute Sir H. Spelman For Cressy to prove the Antiquity of dedicating Churches to the blessed Virgin brings the Tradition of the Temple at Saragoça called del Pilar because the Pillar on which her Image was placed was brought thither by the Ministery of Angels Now those things are thought Proofs by some which to others look onely like bringing one Absurdity to support another But as yet we find no Testimony to confirm this Tradition but what is taken from Glassenbury which is not the best Witness in a Cause which so nearly concern'd it self But these now mentioned Authours at last venture on a considerable Testimony if it hold good viz. of Augustin the Monk in an Epistle to Gregory but upon Examination that which they quote out of St. Augustin's Epistle is nothing else but the passage already mentioned by Malmsbury which he found in a Book taken out of the Library of St. Augustin at Canterbury and they might as well have quoted St. Edmund's Epistle to the Pope to the same purpose For William of Malmsbury saith He met with the same passage at St. Edmund 's as well as St. Augustin 's i. e. in the Libraries of those Monasteries I will not dissemble that they cite two considerable Authours of our own for this mistake I wish they had been as ready to have followed them where they were in the right as where they were guilty of an oversight which the most carefull Writers may sometimes fall into But it is an unhappy temper to follow Great men onely in their Errours and Imperfections So that upon the whole matter we have not one Testimony which reaches to the point concerning Joseph of Arimathea which is not originally taken from the Glassenbury Legends where it seems there was great choice of them For Capgrave mentions several one out of which the Life of Joseph of Arimathea there is extracted is said to be taken out of a Book which the Emperour Theodosius found in the Palace of Pilate at Jerusalem which is a very hopefull Introduction to a Legend And there we find the History of Joseph of Arimathea very distinctly set down How he was miraculously delivered out of Prison in Jerusalemand conveyed to Arimathea whither the chief of the Jews sent a solemn Embassy to him of seven Persons with an Epistle wherein they beg Pardon for his Imprisonment and desire his Company at Jerusalem whither being come upon their request he gives an account of his Escape the house being taken up by four Angels and Christ appeared to him and carried him to the place where he buried him and shew'd him the Linen Cloth about his Head after which he was baptized by Philip and was present with him at the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin and fifteen years after he came to Philip in Gaul who sent him over into Britain with twelve of his Disciples and his Son Josephes But an other Tradition saith They were six hundred Men and Women who were to come over having taken a Vow of Abstinence till they came to Land which they did all break but one hundred and fifty who passed the Sea upon the Shirt of Josephes but the rest repenting a Ship was sent to convey them over which was built by King Salomon and with them came a Duke of the Medes called Nacianus formerly baptized by Joseph in the City Saram with the King of it called Mordraius who valiantly killed a King of North-Wales who kept Joseph a Prisoner After which he and his Companions preached here in the time of Arviragus And then follows the common Tradition of his giving the Island of Avalon to them and the twelve Hydes of Land by the three Pagan Kings Arviragus Marius and Coilus This is followed by another Tradition out of the Acts of King Arthur and the Inquisition of Lancelot de Lac all which is concluded with the admirable Legend of Melkinus Avalonius already mentioned These are the choice Materials in Capgrave's Collection to confirm this Tradition And if he had found any better he would no doubt have produced them It must be confessed that Mr. Cressy with some scorn rejects that part of the Tradition taken out of the holy Graal about the six hundred Companions and the Prince of Media c. But I can find no better Authority for one part than for the other and for all that I can see the holy Graal deserves as much credit as the Book taken out of Pilat's Palace or Melkinus Avalonius especially since Pits hath given the supposed Author so good a place among his British Writers under the name of Eremita Britannus and saith he lived about the time of King Ina Anno Dom. 720. And Helinandus takes notice of the Vision to the British Eremit about that time concerning Joseph of Arimathea and the Dish wherein our Saviour ate the Passover with his Disciples which sort of Dish he saith was then called in French Graal but others think the true name was Sangreal being some of Christ's real bloud which he shed upon the Cross which was said to be somewhere found by King Arthur And to confirm this it is said in the authentick Writing of Melkinus That in the Coffin of Joseph were two Silver Vessels filled with the Bloud and Sweat of Jesus the Prophet But lest I should seem to expose so ancient a Tradition by setting down onely the fabulous Mixtures which the Monks thought to adorn it with I now proceed from their Dreams and Visions to what seems to have much more weight and authority in it viz. their ancient Records which William of Malmsbury seems most to rely upon Among these In the first place he mentions the Charter of St. Patrick as he calls it which is at large printed in the Monasticon and both in Alford and Cressy and is magnified by them as a substantial proof of the Glassenbury Tradition which Cressy saith was transcribed out of a very ancient MS. belonging to Glassenbury by Marianus Victorius and for this he
the History of all Churches designing an Ecclesiastical History out of the Collections he made The Testimony of a Person so qualified cannot but deserve great Consideration especially when it is not delivered by way of Report but when the force of an Argument depends upon it And Eusebius in his third Book of Evangelical Demonstration undertakes to prove that the Apostles who first preached the Gospel to the World could be no Impostours or Deceivers and among other Arguments he makes use of this That although it were possible for such men to deceive their Neighbours and Countreymen with an improbable Story yet what madness were it for such illiterate men who understood onely their Mother Tongue to go about to deceive the World by preaching this Doctrine in the remotest Cities and Countries And having named the Romans Persians Armenians Parthians Indians Scythians he adds particularly that some passed over the Ocean 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those which are called the British Islands From whence he concludes that some more than humane power did accompany the Apostles and that they were no light or inconsiderable men much less Impostours and Deceivers Now unless this had been a thing very well known at that time that Christianity was planted here by the Apostles why should he so particularly and expresly mention the British Islands It cannot be said that they are onely set down to denote the most remote and obscure places For long before that time the British Islands were very well known all over the Roman Empire Britain having been the Scene of many Warlike Actions from Claudius his time The Occasion of Emperours additional Titles and Triumphs The Residence of Roman Lieutenants and Legions The Place of many Roman Colonies Cities and Ways But especially about Constantine's time It was the talk of the World for the Revolt of Carausius and Allectus The Victory and Death of Constantius here The Succession of Constantine and his being declared Emperour by the Army in Britain So that scarce any Roman Province was so much interested in the several Revolutions of the Empire as Britain and therefore Constantine going from hence and being so much in the esteem of Eusebius it is not to be conceived that he should speak these Words at random but that he had made a diligent Enquiry both of Constantine himself to whom he was well known and of others of his Court concerning the State of the British Churches of what continuance they were and by whom planted After all which Eusebius affirms it with so much assurance That some of the Apostles preached the Gospel in the British Islands Much to the same purpose Theodoret speaks another learned and judicious Church Historian For among the Nations converted by the Apostles he expresly names the Britains and elsewhere saith That St. Paul brought Salvation to the Islands that lie in the Ocean after he had mention'd Spain and therefore in all probability the British Islands are understood by him And in another place he saith That St. Paul after his Release at Rome went to Spain and from thence carried the Light of the Gospel to other Nations What other Nations so likely to be understood as those which lay the nearest and are elsewhere said to be converted by the Apostles as the Britains are by him St. Jerome saith That St. Paul having been in Spain went from one Ocean to another imitating the motion and course of the Sun of Righteousness of whom it is said his going forth is from the end of Heaven and his circuit unto the ends of it And that his diligence in Preaching extended as far as the Earth it self Which are more indefinite Expressions But elsewhere he saith That St. Paul after his Imprisonment preached the Gospel in the Western parts By which the British Islands were especially understood As will appear by the following Testimony of Clemens Romanus who saith St. Paul preached Righteousness through the whole World and in so doing went 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the utmost bounds of the West Which Passage will necessarily take in Britain if we consider what was then meant by the Bounds of the West Plutarch in the Life of Caesar speaking of his Expedition into Britain saith He was the first who brought a Fleet into the Western Ocean By which he understands the Sea between Gaul and Britain And Eusebius several times calls the British Ocean the Western and joins the British Ocean and the Western parts together And elsewhere he mentions Gaul and the Western parts beyond it by which he understands Britain And Theodoret reckons up the Inhabitants of Spain of Britain and Gaul who saith he lie between the other two as those who dwell in the bounds of the West And among these the Britains must be in the utmost bounds because the Gauls lie in the midst Herodotus saith the Celtae are the most Western of all the Europeans Now the ancient Greek Geographers knew of but two Nations in Europe besides themselves the Celtae and the Scythae these latter comprehended all in the most Northern parts of Europe and the Celtae the Western And among these the remotest were the Britains Thence Horace calls them Vltimos Orbis Britannos As Catullus before him Vltimósque Britannos For before the discovery of Britain the Morini who lived over against it were said to be the utmost People of the Earth So Virgil calls them Extremos hominum Morinos And Pliny VltimÃque hominum existimati Morini Aethicus saith they were Gentes Oceani Occidentalis But Britain being throughly made known in the time of Claudius The utmost bounds of the West must be understood of Britain especially since Catullus calls Britain Vltimam Occidentis Insulam And Arnobius setting down the bounds of the Gospel East and West for the East he mentions the Indians and for the West the Britains I cannot but wonder what so Learned a man as Joh. Launoy means when being urged by his Adversaries with this place of Clemens his Epistle to prove the Apostolical Antiquity of the Gallican Churches He fairly rejects the authority of this Epistle which hath been so universally received by all Learned men since the first publishing of it But then he argues well that if this passage holds for Gaul it will much more hold for Britain So that from this undoubted Testimony of Clemens it follows not onely That the Gospel was preached in Britain in the times of the Romans but That St. Paul himself was the Preacher of it Which is affirmed by Venantius Fortunatus where he describes St. Paul's labours Transit Oceanum vel quà facit Insula Portum Quásque Britannus habet terras quásque ultima Thule But because this may look onely like a Poetical Expression 3. To make this out more fully I shall consider the concurrent probability of Circumstances together with these Testimonies And I shall make it appear 1. From
among the Britains is onely spoken of the Maeatae and Caledonii in their great Confusion when all the Reins of Government were cast off and the People did what they list as Tacitus describes them in his time saying That they were drawn off from their former obedience to their Kings by the Heads of several Factions among them So that although in the most ancient times here was Monarchical Government yet it was not extended over all Britain as the Monkish Tradition pretends concerning King Lucius and I know not how many Predecessours of his even from the coming of Brutus to his days But neither our Religion nor our Government need such Fictions to support them Supposing then that King Lucius succeeded Cogidunus though not immediately in the Government of that part of Britain committed to his care I see no inconvenience in allowing that King Lucius hearing of the Christian Doctrine either by the old British Christians such as Eluanus and Medwinus are supposed to have been or by some of M. Aurelius his Souldiers coming hither after the great deliverance of the Roman Army by the Prayers of the Christians which had then lately happen'd and occasion'd great discourse every where the Emperour himself as Tertullian saith giving the account of it in his own Letters might upon this be very desirous to inform himself throughly about this Religion and there being then frequent Intercourse between Rome and Britain by reason of the Colonies that were settled and the Governours and Souldiers passing to and fro he might send Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius to be fully instructed in this Religion And either the same persons alone or two others with them called Faganus and Duvianus commonly coming into Britain might have so great success as to baptize King Lucius and many others and thereby inlarge the Christian Church here The old Book of Landaff gives a much more modest account of this whole matter than either Geffrey of Monmouth or any of his followers There we find onely that King Lucius sent Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius the twelfth Bishop of Rome to desire that he might be made a Christian through his Instruction Upon which he gave God thanks that such a Heathen Nation did so much desire Christianity And then by the Advice of the Presbyters of the City of Rome they first baptized these Embassadours and being well instructed they ordained them making Eluanus a Bishop and Medwinus a Teacher And so they returned to King Lucius who with the chief of the Britains were baptized And then according to the Instructions of Eleutherius he settled the Ecclesiastical Order caused Bishops to be ordained and the Christian Religion to be taught There is nothing in all this account but what seems to have great probability in it The same account is in Capgrave out of John of Tinmouth in the Life of Dubricius and this seems to have been the original Tradition of the British Church Which Geffrey of Monmouth hath corrupted with his Flamins and Archiflamins and others afterwards made an Epistle for Eleutherius to King Lucius but could not avoid such Marks in the way of Writing as evidently discover the Imposture and when the Monks hands were once in they knew not how to give over For some of them carry Faganus and Diruvianus as some call him to Glassenbury others make them Consecrate the Church at Winchester to which they say King Lucius had a particular kindness and gave all the Lands and Privileges which the Flamins had to the Bishop and Monks A Gift that would never make them the richer or the safer Others make King Lucius to found St. Peter's Church at Westmister the Church in Dover Castle St. Martin's by Canterbury St. Peter's in Cornhill where the Metropolitan Church they say was placed by him and Theanus made the first Bishop who was succeeded by Eluanus who went on the Embassey to Eleutherius and besides these they make him to found and endow so many Churches with such unlikely Circumstances as hath made others question whether there was ever such a Person in the World as King Lucius That being the common effect of saying much more than is true to make what is really true more doubtfull and suspicious But there is one Difficulty yet to be cleared For all this Story in its best Circumstances seems to imply that there was no Christian Church here before For if there had been what need he to have sent as far as Rome to be instructed unless the Bishop of Rome were then known to be the Head of the Church which were a sufficient Reason for it To this I answer That if the Contest lay beâ—ween these two things Whether it be more credible that Christianity was planted here before King Lucius Or that King Lucius was baptized by order from Eleutherius I should very much prefer the former because the Authority of Gildas as to the British Christianity is to be relyed on before the later Writers and Gildas asserts the one and although he had as much reason as Bede or any after him he never takes the least notice of King Lucius and Eleutherius And if a Negative Argument will hold any where it is where a person hath as much reason to know as any that follow him and as great occasion to discover what he knows both which will hold in the case of Gildas compared with Bede or later Writers It were worth while for us to know whence Bede had his first Information of this matter for he professes to follow other Writers about the British Affairs and in many places he follows Gildas exactly but in this he passes by what Gildas saith about the Primitive Christianity of Britain and instead thereof puts in this Story of King Lucius Bale saith that Eluanus Avalonius was a Disciple to those who were the Disciples of the Apostles and that he preached the Gospel in Britain with good Success But King Lucius being persuaded by his Druids would not come to any resolution but to satisfie himself lest he should be deceived by his Countreymen he sent Eluanus and Medwinus to Eleutherius And Eluanus upon his return wrote a Book De Origine Ecclesiae Britannorum Of the first beginning of the British Church And Pits is sure to follow him where he hath no reason But Leland never mentions this Book nor the Writings of Medwinus Belgius and of King Lucius himself all relating to this matter But Leland onely takes notice that Eluanus and Medwinus were employ'd upon an Embassey to Eleutherius that by his means he might become a Christian which saith he is very unreasonable to suppose unless he were first informed what Christianity was which he thinks was preached to King Lucius by them being two of the old British Christians And there he relates how by chance he met with an old MS. of the British Affairs joyn'd with Geffrey of Monmouth wherein this Story is told exactly as it is in the Book
at the same time to be their Supreme Head They could have been glad of the Company of their Brother of Rome as they familiarly call him But since his Occasions would not permit his Absence from home they acquaint him what they had done and so send him an Abstract of their Canons as may be seen at large both in Sirmondus and Baronius By this we see what Opinion the British Bishops and their Brethren had of the Pope's Supremacy But now to their Canons Those may be reduced to three Heads Either to the Keeping of Easter Or to the Discipline of the Clergy Or to Lay Communion 1. As to Easter That Council decreed Can. 1. That it should be observed on the same day and time throughout the World And that the Bishop of Rome should give notice of the day according to custome But this latter part was repealed as Binius confesses by the Council of Nice which referr'd this matter to the Bishop of Alexandria 2. As to the Clergy There were Canons which related to Bishops Priests and Deacons 1. To Bishops and those were four 1. That no Bishop should trample upon another Can. 17. which Albaspineus well interprets of invading another's Diocese 2. As to travelling Bishops that they should be allow'd to perform Divine Offices in the City they came unto Can. 19. 3. That no Bishop should consecrate another alone but he ought to take seven with him or at least three Can. 20. Which shews the number of Bishops then in the Western Provinces and so in Britain at that time The Nicene Canon C. 4. takes notice onely of three Bishops as necessary to be present because many Eastern Provinces had not seven as Christianus Lupus observes on that Canon In an African Council in Cresconius we find That because two had presumed to consecrate a Bishop they desire that twelve may be present But Aurelius Bishop of Carthage refused it for this reason Because in the Province of Tripolis there were but five Bishops Therefore when the Council of Arles appoints seven it doth suppose these Provinces to have a greater number of Bishops 4. That if any were proved to have been Traditores in the Time of Persecution i. e. to have given up the Sacred Books or Vessels or to have betrayed their Brethren and this proved by Authentick Acts Then they were to be deposed However their Ordinations are declared to be valid Can. 13. 2. As to inferiour Clergy 1. Excommunication is denounced against those that put out money to use Can. 12. 2. That they were not to forsake the Churches where they were ordained Can. 2. And Deprivation is threatned on that account Can. 21. 3. The Deacons are forbidden to celebrate the Lord's Supper there called Offering Can. 15. 3. As to Lay Communion 1. Those that refuse to continue in their Employment as Souldiers now the Persecution was over were to be suspended Communion Can. 3. The words are de his qui Arma projiciunt in Pace Of which some do hardly make tolerable sense Binius saith it must be read in Bello But nothing can be more contrary to Peace than War How then should such a mistake happen Albaspineus saith It is against those who refuse to be Souldiers in time of Peace Baronius saith It is against them that apostatize in time of Peace But if a Metaphorical Sense will be allow'd that which seems most probable is That many Christians now the Persecution was over neglected that Care of themselves and that Strictness of Discipline which they used before And therefore such are here threatned if not to be thrown out yet to be debarr'd Communion till they had recover'd themselves And much to this purpose Josephus Aegyptius and Joh. Antiochenus do understand the 12. Can. of the Council of Nice But if a Metaphorical Sense be thought too hard Then I suppose the meaning is against those who renounced being Souldiers as much now in time of the Churches Peace as under Persecution when they could not be Souldiers without committing Idolatry as appear'd in the Persecution of Licinius and others Constantine as Eusebius saith gave them all leave to forsake their Employment that would But the Council of Arles might well apprehend That if all Christians renounced being Souldiers They must still have an Army of Heathens whatever the Emperours were And therefore they had reason to make such a Canon as this since the Christians ever thought it lawfull to serve in the Wars Provided no Idolatrous Acts were imposed which was frequently done on purpose by the Persecutours as Maximianus Licinius Julian c. And this I think the true meaning of this difficult Canon 2. For those who drove the Chariots in Races and acted on Theatres as long as they continued so to doe There being so many Occasions of Idolatry in both of them They were to be cast out of Communion Can. 4 5. 3. That those who were Christians and made Governours of remote places should carry with them the communicatory Letters of their own Bishop and not be debarr'd Communion unless they acted against the Discipline of the Church This I take to be the meaning of Can. 7. 4. That those who were received into the Church in their weakness should have Imposition of hands afterwards Can. 6. 5. That those who brought Testimonials from Confessours should be bound to take communicatory Letters from their Bishop Can. 9. 6. That those who found their Wives in Adultery should be advised not to marry again while they did live Can. 10. 7. That those young Women who did marry Infidels should for a time be suspended Communion Can. 11. 8. That those who falsly accused their Brethren should not be admitted to Communion as long as they lived Can. 14. 9. That none who were excommunicated in one place should be absolved in another Can. 16. 10. That no Apostate should be admitted to Communion in Sickness But they ought to wait till they recover'd and shew'd amendment Can. 22. 11. That those who were baptized in the Faith of the Holy Trinity should not be rebaptized Can. 8. And this was the Canon which Saint Augustine on all occasions pressed upon the Donatists as Sirmondus and Launoy think And therefore they suppose this Council to be called so often a Plenary and Vniversal Council not from the number of Bishops present but from the Provinces out of which they came And so it was the first General Council of the Western Church CHAP. III Of the Succession of the British Churches from the Council of Nice to the Council of Ariminum GReat Probabilities that the British Bishops were present in the Council of Nice The Testimonies of Constantine's being born in Britain clear'd The particular Canons of the Council of Nice relating to the Government of Churches explained How far the right of Election was devolved to the Bishops Of the Authority of Provincial Synods there settled Particular Exceptions as to the Bishops of Alexandria Rome and Antioch from ancient Custome
the foreign Provinces and the Emperour's Court where ever it was So that I see no reason to question London's being the chief Metropolis among the Romans The Argument from York's being a Colony signifies nothing after Antoninus gave the Jus Civitatis to the whole Empire and London was a Colony before York as I may shew elsewhere and of a higher nature when it was called Augusta which shews that it was then the Imperial City of Britain that name being given to no other City in Britain besides And it is observed by the learned Marc. Velserus That those Cities which had the Title of Augusta conferred upon them were the Capita Gentium the chief Metropoles of the Provinces And since by the general Rule of the Church the Ecclesiastical Government did follow the Civil There is no reason to question but if Fastidius were then Bishop of London he was the chief Metropolitane over the Churches of Britain But whether Fastidius were Metropolitane or onely a British Bishop his Doctrine is of late charged to be inclinable to Pelagianism For Holstenius found in ancient MS. the Book Fastidius wrote De Vita Christiana with his name to it and so published it but it is not directed ad Fatalem but to a certain Widow In this Book a late Augustinian hath discovered as he thinks some Tincture of Pelagianism but to any candid Reader his Exceptions will appear very frivolous and there is so much of true Primitive Christianity in the rest of it as makes good the Character which Gennadius and Trithemius give of him Out of which Book and no great one Bale hath made four one De Vita Christiana a second De Doctrina Spiritûs a third De Viduitate servanda a fourth Admonitiones Piae Pits keeps the same number but lest he should seem to take all out of Bale he alters the Title of one of them And because Gennadius saith his Doctrine was Deo digna therefore Pits very artificially makes the Title of his second Book to be De Doctrina Deo digna vel spirituali Boston of Bury makes him the Authour of two Books by mistaking Gennadius but as far as we can find there is but one exstant Dempster hath found Fastidius to have been born upon the Mountains of the Western parts of Scotland and he makes him Authour of a fifth Book called Chronicon Scotorum which is a Strain beyond Pits He possitively affirms that he lived An. Dom. 440. Trithemius saith about An. Dom. 420. As to Faustus his Case is much harder That he was originally a Britain I find not denied by any For although Facundus calls him a Gaul yet that was because of his being a Bishop so long there as Sirmondus observes he being Ortu Britannus habitaculo Regiensis as Alcimus Avitus saith in his Epistle to Gundobadus King of the Burgundians to whom he saith Faustus was known In his Epistles to Ruricius Faustus speaks of his living in a State of Banishment and the Comforts he found in it This our Learned Primate understood of his living out of his own Countrey But Hen. de Noris of a Banishment by Euaricus an Arian King then in Gaul which he supposes he underwent for writing against the Arians If he had produced any Testimony of such Banishment there might have been Reason to have understood his Expression so But since there is none and his Words are general as to his Countrey I see no cause to take them in any other sense For Men do not use to call that their Countrey where they live as Strangers and he speaks of the kindness of Ruricius so to him that he did Patriam in peregrinatione facere which cannot well bear any other sense than that he made up the want of his own Countrey to him Sirmondus grants he was a Britain but he adds he was one of those Britains who dwelt upon the Loir i. e. in the parts of Aremorica There is no question but in the time of Faustus there were great numbers of Britains there for Jornandes saith That Riothamus their King or General went with 12000 Britains against Euricus King of the Visigoths Which Riothamus Sidonius Apollinaris writes to and mentions the Britains with him But it may be justly a question whether there were any Colonies of Britains on the Continent before Faustus his birth For Faustus was made Abbat of Lerins before the Saxons came first into Britain For he was Abbat when St. Caprasius died as the Authour of his Life affirms which was about Anno Domini 430. But their coming was not till Anno Domini 449. and it will be hard to make out any Settlement of the Britains on the Loir before It is then most probable that Faustus went at first out of Britain into Gaul where he attained to a wonderfull Reputation both for Piety and Learning He was worshipped as a Saint saith Noris in the Church of Riez and his Name was preserved in the Calendar of the Gallican Church Molanus was the first who durst adventure to strike out his name Baronius follow'd him but upon admonition restored it as Bollandus observes who likewise takes notice that he was called a Saint by Cl. Robertus by Ferrarius and by Pet. Galesinius in his Martyrology who adds that his Books are piously and learnedly written and that Miracles are said to be wrought by him It is certain he was a Person in mighty esteem in his own time as appears by the Passages of Sidonius Apollinaris of Ruricius and others concerning both his Eloquence Learning and Piety Of whom Sidonius Apollinaris gives that excellent Character that he had learnt to speak better than he was taught and to live better than he spake He was Bishop of Riez Anno Domini 462. for at that time he was joined with Auxanius in determining the Controversie between Leontius of Arles and Mamertus of Vienna But nothing can more manifest the esteem he was then in among the Gallican Bishops than that in the Council of Arles he was pitched upon as the fittest Person to draw up their sense in the great Points then so much agitated about Predestination and Grace as appears by his Preface to Leontius At this Council thirty Bishops were present and there Lucidus presented his Recantation of the Errours he held about Predestination and after this Faustus wrote his Books of Grace and Free-will to which he saith another Council at Lyons caused some things to be added In these Books it is thought that under a Pretence of confuting those Errours he sets himself against St. Augustine's Doctrine as seems clear by one Expression in his first Book That if it be true that some are predestinated to Life and others to Destruction ut quidam Sanctorum dixit non judicandi nascimur sed judicati But these words may refer to what follows as well as to what went before As a certain holy Man
hath said We are not born to be judged but we are judged before we are born According to which Doctrine saith Faustus There can be no Equity in the day of Iudgment It hath been a great Question among some Learned Men whether there were any Persons who drew ill Consequences from Saint Augustine's Doctrine and were therefore opposed by Faustus and others or whether it were the mere Doctrine of St. Augustine that was so opposed by them and urged with those Consequences as following from it I see no Reason to deny that the Semipelagians did charge the Followers of St. Augustine with the same things which are made the Opinions of those who are called the Predestinatian Hereticks by Sigebert Gennadius Hincmarus and others But yet that there were certain Persons who did own such bad Consequences as the overthrowing the Liberty of Man's Will and the Necessity of our Endeavours will appear from these two Reasons 1. St. Augustine's Doctrine was so misunderstood by some in his Life time as appears by the Controversie amongst the Adrumetine Monks The Case was this Florus one of that Society going to Vzala a City near Vtica between Hippo and Carthage where Euodius was then Bishop a Friend of St. Augustine's there met with St. Augustine's large Epistle to Sixtus against the Pelagians which being sent home and Florus himself going to Carthage before his return they were fallen into great Heats upon the Occasion of that Epistle Some of them as St. Augustine himself saith did so preach up the Grace of God as to deny Free-will and consequently to say That God in the day of Iudgment would not render to men according to their Works Others said That our Free-will was assisted by the Grace of God that we may know and doe the things that are right That the Lord when he comes to render to every Man according to their Works may find our Works good which he hath prepared that we may walk in them And they saith he who judge thus do judge rightly Therefore those who thought otherwise did mistake his Doctrine For as he saith If there be no Grace there can be no Salvation If there be no Free-will there can be no day of Iudgment To what purpose is all this if some of these did not so misunderstand his Doctrine as to overthrow all Liberty of Will in Mankind And so Euodius in his Answer to those Adrumetine Monks shews That there is still Free-will in us but wounded by the Fall and onely recoverable by the Grace of Christ. Jansenius grants that they did misunderstand St. Augustine 's Doctrine thinking that Free-will was wholly destroyed by it And that no Man ought to be reproved when he doeth amiss but that others ought to pray that he may have Grace to doe better But the President Mauguin will not allow this For he saith That St. Augustine was at first falsely informed of the state of the Controversie among them by Cresconius and Felix But after Florus his coming he found they were Semipelagians who misunderstood his Doctrine But to what purpose then doth St. Augustine take such pains to prove even in the Book he wrote after the coming of Florus That there is Free-will still left in Mankind Liberum itaque arbitrium confitendum nos est habere ad malum ad bonum faciendum Not so as to exclude the necessity of Divine Grace as he proves at large but yet in such a manner as to shew its consistency with Divine Commands and the just Reproof and Punishment of those who doe amiss Which shews plainly That he thought there were some still who misinterpreted his Doctrine not barely to object against it but to make ill use of it Therefore Noris had no Reason to conclude that the Errour of the Adrumetine Monks was Semipelagianism 2. It appears evidently from the Case of Lucidus and the Councils of Arles and Lyons I grant that the Objections mentioned by Prosper and Hilary were made by the Semipelagians and not by any Predestinatian Hereticks at that time in Gaul and therein Sirmondus was certainly mistaken as he was likewise when he saith that the Epistle of Celestine was against the latter and not against the former But it appears by Faustus his Epistle to Lucidus that there were some who did so assert Predestination as to make all Mens Endeavours vain and useless And this dangerous Errour he renounced in his Recantation delivered to the Council of Arles Mauguin is very hard put to it when he saith That all these things were the mere invention of Faustus whom he makes to be Countreyman with Pelagius and Coelestius and to have sucked in the Poison of Pelagianism with his Milk He grants that he was famous for his Wit Eloquence and Philosophy But especially for a profound cunning which Isidore mentions in him From whence he endeavours to prove by many Arguments That these Councils and Epistles were all forged by Faustus But he is so far from persuading Learned Men to be of his Mind That Noris himself confesseth he can never assent to it And although it be looked on as part of the cunning of Faustus That he designed to convey his Books so privately to his Countreymen the Britains as appears by the Epistle of Sidonius Apollinaris to him yet it is utterly incredible that he should forge two Councils and set down the Names of several Bishops as present in them with whom Sidonius Apollinaris was particularly acquainted and yet he not discover the Cheat and Imposture But the Jansenists yield that both those Councils were held about Anno Domini 475. But they say that the Bishops were partly Semipelagians partly deceived by Faustus who was so And Noris doth not deny that there were other Persons who were then charged with those Opinions which Lucidus held But he saith they were not many nor considerable enough to make a Sect And that they did not willingly yield those Consequences But not knowing how to answer the Semipelagians they were forced to assert them Which their Adversaries therefore charged them with as their own Opinions Which seems no improbable Account of those called Predestinatians It cannot be denied that Faustus his Books were severely censured after his death not onely by the Scythian Monks at Constantinople among whom Joh. Maxentius was the chief but by the African Bishops who were then Exiles in Sardinia by whom Fulgentius was employ'd to write against them But Possessor one of the African exiled Bishops being then at Constantinople and finding great Heats about Faustus his Books sends to Pope Hormisdas to know his Judgment about them Which he did at the request of Vitalianus and Justinianus two of the greatest Men in the Emperour's Court. He returns a cautious Answer as to Faustus Which by the way shews how little Credit is to be given to the Decree of Gelasius about Apocryphal Books for therein Faustus his Books are
Kentigern I know what Heats have been about this Passage among very Learned Men. For my part I see no cause to mistrust the sincerity of Archbishop Parker in the Edition of his very ancient Copy where this Passage was not to be found And I do not question Camden's Fidelity in publishing Asserius out of some other Copy But it had been fair to have given an Account whence he had it and for what Reasons he inserted it in another Edition of Asserius and why he preferred the Savilian Copy before the other But I cannot but wonder that these Learned Men have taken no more notice of the Inconsistency of this Passage with the History of those times For these Persons all lived a considerable time after St. German as it were easie to prove if it were worth the pains For Gildas was not born till at least forty four years were past after St. German's death which thus appears He saith he was born the year of the Victory of Aurelius Ambrosius over the Saxons at the Mons Badonicus which was forty four years after they came hither Anno Dom. 449. And by comparing St. German's Embassy to Valentinian at Ravenna where he died we shall find that St. German was dead the year before the Saxons arrival Anno Dom. 448. As the Samarthani shew But against this there is a considerable Objection from what Bede saith That the Saxons and Picts joined together after St. Germans coming which occasion'd the Victory by singing Alleluiah according to St. German 's direction and it is so much stronger in that the very same Expressions are in Constantius But this may be easily solved by those that consider the frequent Incursions the Saxons made on the Britains before they were sent for over as appears by the Comes Litoris Saxonici per Britanniam appointed to secure the Coasts from the Saxons And that Gildas therefore wonders the Britains should send for the Saxons of whom they were so much afraid before And when the Roman Forces were withdrawn no doubt they did more boldly and frequently disturb them Besides Constantius saith in St. German's Life that he succeeded St. Amator in his See and continued therein thirty years and twenty five days But St. Amator died Anno Dom. 418. as our Learned Primate hath proved because the Calends of May on which he died were that year as Constantius saith the fourth day of the Week which agrees to 418. If it be said That this Passage of Asserius is meant of an Elder Gildas called Gildas Albanius whose Life the same excellent Antiquary supposes to be written by Caradoc of Lancarvan I answer that when he comes to fix the times in his Chronological Index he doth overthrow his own Supposition For Caradoc by his own confession makes Gildas contemporary with King Arthur and he is said by him to be born Anno Dom. 493. And therefore Caradoc's Gildas can be no elder than the Gildas Badonicus Although therefore the want of skill may make Caradoc set his Gildas elder than he ought to have done yet whosoever will compare that Life published by Joh. Ã Bosco with the other by Caradoc will find that they were designed for the same Person And therefore Leland with far more judgment mentions but one Gildas but Bale and Pits make more but it is their Vanity to multiply Authours as well as Books St. Kentigern was baptized assoon as he was born by Seruanus one of the Disciples of Palladius whose Mission had the same date with the first coming of St. Germanus and Lupus And therefore it is not very probable that St. German should see the Orders of Gildas and Kentigern much less those of Melkin and Nennius whose Ages fall so far short of the others But although St. German's being at Oxford cannot be proved by such obscure and incoherent Passages as this yet I doubt not but by the Evidence already produced he did take care to advance Learning and Piety in the British Churches wheresoever he came Both which were falling very much to decay upon the irruption of the barbarous Nations While the Roman Empire flourished there was care taken for the encouragement of Learning especially in greater Cities At Rome by the Constitution of Valentinian we may see the Orders then made for Regulation of Students there as for entring their Names who came thither out of the several Provinces by the Magister Census with the Testimonials from the Governours of Provinces of the Place of their Birth and Quality who then were to declare what Studies they designed to follow and an account was to be given of their Lodgings And particular Officers were appointed called Censuales to make an Inspection into their Lives that they did avoid all Clubs called there Consociations or frequent appearing at the Sports or affecting unseasonable and publick Entertainments If any were found faulty they were to be chastised and sent away home but none were permitted to stay after twenty at Rome and an account of these things was to be taken monthly and given in to the Praefectus Vrbis and return'd to the Emperour every year as appears by the Constitution it self in the Theodosian Code By which we find That Rome it self was then the chief Vniversity of the Empire to which Students resorted from all the Provinces and the Emperour thought it not below his Cognizance to have notice sent him of the Numbers Qualities and Behaviours of the Students But lest the Splendour and Vanities of Rome should tempt them to forsake the Service of their Countrey they were not permitted to stay there after twenty years of Age For then not having the Difficulties of the Language to conquer which they were used to while Children at fifteen they were thought fit to be instructed in other Studies and five or six years was all the time this Law allow'd them to prosecute them under the Masters at Rome Where besides an infinite number of private Teachers in that vast City there were publick Professours appointed who had their Schools within the Area of the Capitol which were called Auditoria publica as we may reasonably infer from the Constitution of Theodosius where the Exedrae of the Portico's of the Capitol at Constantinople are appointed to make Auditoria for the publick Professours there And Constantinople follow'd the Pattern at Rome These Exedrae were as Vitruvius describes them Places of Capacity within the Portico's with Seats round in which the Rhetoricians and others were wont to discourse Or according to Cicero they were Cellae ad colloquendum aut meridiandum such as Crassus had at Tusculum and Cotta at Rome where those great Men were wont to sit for their diversion and discourse with each other And the Greek Glossary renders Exedra a School such a one Strabo describes in the Musaeum at Alexandria which consisted of a Walk an Exedra and a great House where the Learned Men did all live and eat together
Professours of all Arts and Sciences And at Sicca Veneria in Africa Arnobius was Professour of Rhetorick Near Lyons in Gaul the 60 Cities had dedicated an Altar to Augustus where the Rhosn and the Arar meet there Caius Caligula appointed Prizes to be plaid both in Greek and Latine Eloquence And not that onely but Philosophy was there taught Thence Odilo Abbat of Clugney about Anno Dom. 1020. calls Lyons of old the Mother and Nurse of Philosophy In the time of Dioclesian and Maximianus the Nobility of Gaul were brought up to Learning at Augustodunum Autun and there Eumenius was both Rectour and Professour as appears by his Speech to Constantius where he celebrates so much the Scholae Moenianae Quondam pulcherimo opere studiorum frequentiâ celebres which having suffer'd very much in the Rebellion of the Bagaudae under the latter Claudius he was extremely concerned to have them rebuilt which is the design of his excellent Oration But long before in Tiberius his time Tacitus saith The Sons of the Nobility did there Liberalibus studiis operari improve themselves in Learning Eusebius mentions in the time of Nero Statius Vrsulus of Tholouse a famous Professour of Rhetorick And Ausonius reckons up many of those who had been famous there and at Bourdeaux and other Places But to spare our pains in particular Places there is extant in the Theodosian Code an Edict of Gratian requiring all the chief Cities of these Parts of the Roman Empire to settle and maintain in them Professours of Learning both of the Greek and Roman Languages This Edict was directed to the Praefectus Praetorio Galliarum and was commanded to be observed through all his Diocese which Gothofred restrains to the Provinces of Gaul excluding Britain for which I see no reason Since Ausonius who was himself in that Office in Gratian's time comprehends the Britains under his Jurisdiction And the Notitia Imperii places the Provinces of Britain under him after Gratian's time Which Notitia he thinks was made about Anno Dom. 426. By virtue of which Edict we are to search for the ancient Schools of Learning among the Britains in the chief Cities of the Provinces at that time especially at London which was the Caput Gentis being Augusta or the Imperial City and so at York and Caerleon So that the British Churches as long as the Roman Power continued here had the same advantages for Learning which they had in other Provinces But when the Roman Forces were withdrawn and nothing but Miseries and Desolation follow'd then St. German's Care proved a most seasonable Relief to them in providing such Schools as those of Dubricius and Iltutus for the breeding up of Persons qualified for the Service of the Church as far as the Miseries of those times would permit The last thing to be considered is The Publick Service of the British Churches And in an ancient MS. in the Cotton Library about the Original of Divine Offices Germanus and Lupus are said to have brought into the use of the British Churches Ordinem Cursûs Gallorum By which Archbishop Vsher understands the Gallican Liturgy For Cursus in the Ecclesiastical use of the Word is the same with Officium Divinum as Dominicus Macer in his late Hierolexicon shews thence Cursum celebrare is to perform Divine Offices And so the word Cursus is often used in Fortunatus his Life of St. German Bishop of Paris and in our Saxon Writers But this Cursus Gallorum is there distinguished from the Cursus Orientalis and the Cursus Ambrosii and the Cursus Benedicti which little differs he saith from the Cursus Romanus And this was that which Germanus and Lupus had learnt in the Monastery of Lerins where it was used by Cassianus and Honoratus as the Authour of that Book affirms which I find to have been the same which Sir H. Spelman commends for its great Antiquity And that Authour derives the Gallican Liturgy from St. John by Polycarp and Irenaeus Which MS. Mabillon was inclined to think to have been the Book which Gregorius Turonensis wrote de Cursibus Ecclesiasticis but for the quoting the Life of Columbanus and Attala which was not written till after his Death This will oblige us to enquire what the Gallican Liturgy at this time was and how far different from the Roman It is agreed on all hands that there was a material difference between them but wherein it lay is not so easily understood When Gregory sent Augustine the Monk into England to settle the Saxon Churches and he was consecrated by the Archbishop of Arles one of the Questions Augustine proposed was since there was such difference between the Offices of the Roman and Gallican Churches Which he should follow Gregory answered That he should chuse what he thought most proper for the English Church Which implies That there was a diversity still between them And that the Pope did not oblige him to follow the Example of the Roman Church chiefly I suppose Because the Queen being a Christian before and using the Gallican Liturgy in the Publick Service and her Bishop being of the Gallican Church it would have given great Offence to them to have had it taken away as likewise to all the British Churches which had been accustomed to it If the Books of Musaeus mention'd by Gennadius were extant we should easily understand wherein the difference lay For he being a Presbyter of the Church of Marseilles and a Man Learned in the Scriptures was desired by Venerius the Bishop there to draw up a Form of Publick Service consisting of two Parts viz. The Morning Service and the Communion Service The first he finished in the time of Venerius and is highly commended by Gennadius for its Order Vsefulness and Decency The second in the time of Eustathius his Successour which he likewise commends for its great weight and exactness And there was great Reason at that time to bring the Church Service into Order because Cassian and others endeavour'd to introduce the Monastick Customs which he had observed in Egypt and elsewhere as appears by the design of his Monastick Institutions especially the second and third Books which he dedicated to Castor Bishop of Apta Iulia at the same time that Venerius was Bishop of Marseilles where Cassian lived This Musaeus was therefore employ'd to draw up the most convenient Order for the Publick Service from whence we may be able to judge of the difference in both parts between the Gallican and Roman Offices I begin with the first viz. the Morning Service which consisted of Lessons Hymns and Psalms agreeable to the Lessons and short Collects after them In the Church of Rome for a long time viz. for above 400 years they had nothing before the Sacrifice as the old Ritualists agree besides the Epistle and Gospel then Celestine appointed the Psalms to be used or as Walafr Strabo and Micrologus say caused
Edw. I. destroy'd all their ancient Histories how came Turgott's to be preserved He was Bishop of St. Andrew's in the time of Malcolm III. and Queen Margaret whose Lives he wrote And whose History Hector saith he had So that not onely Turgott's History of the Church of Durham is preserved in the Cotton Library with his own Name written in an ancient Character the same that is printed under the Name of Simeon Dunelmensis with some Alterations as Mr. Selden hath shewed But if Hoveden be so much to blame as Leland saith for concealing what he borrow'd from Simeon Dunelmensis Simeon himself is at least as much to blame for assuming to himself the proper work of Turgott But it seems Hector had seen what he wrote in relation to the Scotish History And Bale and Pits say he wrote of the Kings of Scotland But Dempster saith he wrote onely the Annals of his own time i. e. I suppose the Lives of Malcolm and Margaret If so Hector mentions him to little purpose with respect to the Scotish Antiquities But however from the forementioned Authours Hector pretends to give an Account of the Institution of the Great Council by Finannus of the Order of the Druids and their Chief Seat in the Island Mona which he would have to be the Isle of Man to the great regret of Humphrey Lluyd who hath written a Book on purpose to disprove him and Polydore Virgil about it Of the Tyranny and violent Death of King Durstus Of the choice of Euenus his Kinsman to succeed him and his first requiring an Oath of Allegeance Of the Disturbances by Gillus his natural Son and his flying into Ireland And his Death by Cadallus And Euenus his setting up Edecus the Grandchild of Durstus with which he ends his Second Book In his Third Book he gives an Account of the Troubles from Ireland by Bredius a Kinsman of Gillus Of Cassibellan's Message to Ederus for Assistence against Julius Caesar And the Speech of Androgeus before the Council and Ederus his Answer and sending 10000 Men under the Command of Cadallanus Son to Cadallus Who with the British Forces quite overthrew Caesar by the help of Tenantius Duke of the Cambri and Corinei for which as we may easily conceive there was wonderfull rejoicing in Scotland And great Friendship upon it between the Britains the Picts and the Scots But next Summer they hear the sad News of Caesar's coming again And then the Britains refused the Scots assistence and it is easie to imagine what must follow the poor Britains were miserably beaten And Cassibellan yields himself to Caesar and Caesar marches towards Scotland but before he enters it he sends a more Eloquent Letter to them than that in Fordon And the Scots and Picts returned a resolute Answer But it seems Caesar had so much good Nature in him as to send a Second Message to the Scots which was deliver'd with great Eloquence but it did not work upon them For saith Hector had it not been for the Law of Nations they had torn the Messengers to pieces But it happen'd luckily that while Caesar was making Preparations to enter Scotland he received Letters from Labienus of the Revolt of the Gauls upon which Caesar returns having scarce so much as frighted the Picts and the Scots And here again Hector vouches the Authority of Veremundus and Campbell But notwithstanding Buchanan very wisely leaves all this out which Lesly believing Veremundus or rather Hector before Caesar keeps in But here Hector becomes very nice and critical rejecting the vulgar Annals which it seems were not destroy'd by Edw. I. which say that Caesar went as far as the Caledonian Wood and besieged Camelodunum and left there his Pretorian House which he used to travell with called Julis Hoff. But for his part he would write nothing that might be found fault with and therefore he follows Veremundus again That this was the Temple of Victory built by Vespasian not far from Camelodunum Onely the Inscription was defaced by Edw. I. Buchanan in the Life of King Donald saith This was the Temple of the God Terminus being near the Roman Wall It was a round Building made of square Stones and open onely at the top 24 Cubits in height 13 in breadth as Camden describes it Nennius saith It was built by Carausius in token of his Triumph But this looks no more like a Triumphal Arch than Caesar's travelling Palace And therefore Buchanan's opinion seems most probable since Hector saith That there was within it a Stone of great magnitude which was the Representation of the God Terminus especially if the hole in the top were over the Stone as it was in the Capitol at Rome Then follow the wicked Life and tragical End of Euenus III. the good Reign of Metellanus and his Friendship with Augustus which he goes about to prove from Strabo But he had better kept to Veremundus After him succeeded Caratacus born at Caractonium a City of the Silures saith Hector and that he might be sure to confound all he saith his Sister Voada was married to Arviragus King of the Britains But he divorced her and married Geuissa a Noble Roman upon which Caratacus joined the Britains against the Romans and was at last beaten by them and betrayed by Cartumandua his Mother-in-law who after his Father's death was married to Venusius and was by Ostorius carried in Triumph to Rome from whence he saith he returned to Scotland and remained to his death a Friend to the Romans After Caractacus Corbred his Brother was chosen King who joined with Voada against the Romans And partaking of her misfortune returned into Scotland and there died His Sons being under Age Dardannus succeeded Who designing to destroy the right Heirs of the Crown was himself taken off And thereby Way was made for Galdus the true Heir to succeed Who was the same saith Hector with Tacitus his Galgacus and he confesses was beaten by Petilius Cerealis This King Buchanan thinks was the first of their Kings who fought with the Romans What becomes then of the Credit of Hector and Veremundus from whom we have such ample Narrations of their engaging with the Romans so long before From hence it is plain that Veremundus his Authority signified nothing with him And yet he follows Hector where he professes to rely upon his Authority For Buchanan evidently abridges Hector as to the Scotish Affairs leaving out what he found inconsistent with the Roman History Hector begins his Fifth Book with the short Reign and dolefull End of Luctacus Galdus his Son who was succeeded by Mogallus his Sisters Son who continued for some time a brave Prince but at last degenerating was killed by his Subjects After him Conarus his Son who was confined for ill management and the Government committed to Argadus Upon his death the Kingdom fell to Ethodius Nephew to Mogallus who was strangled in his Bed by an Irish Harper And so was Satrael that succeeded him
And that shall be concerning the Kingdom of the Picts because we are told This is the way to end the vexatious Questions about them being taken out of the most authentick Records of Ireland which are of such irrefragable Authority That some are persuaded had they been known to Camden he would never have disputed the matter And so I think too But this irrefragable Authority is that of the Psalter of Cashel From whence we are instructed in these Particulars 1. That the Picts served in Thracia under one Policornus a King of that Countrey where their General Gud took away the King's Life to prevent an Attempt on his Daughter And did not Brutus serve King Pandrasus with his Army not far off in Greece And methinks Pandrasus is as good a Name for a King of Greece as Polycornus for the King of Thrace But where are either of them to be met with elsewhere 2. That upon this the General and his Army fled the Countrey roamed up and down at Sea till they came to Gaul and there they founded the City of Pictavia This is just Geffrey For Brutus came to Gaul too and there fought with Groffarius King of the Picts and founded the City of Tours which had its Name from Turonus Brutus his Nephew 3. That upon the same Occasion they were forced to leave Gaul and to go for Ireland as Brutus did for Albion where they were entertained to fight with the Britains Who it seems made very early Invasions upon Ireland which still agrees with Geffrey's History 4. The Story of the Advice of Trosdan the Pictish Magician for the Irish Army to bath in the Milk of 150 White Crumple-horned Cows as an effectual Antidote against the envenom'd Arrows of the Britains and the strange Success upon it is hardly to be matched in Geffrey 5. That the Picts growing insolent were forced by Herimon to retire to the Northern Parts of Britain Onely with three Irish Women whatever Bede saith of more or how differently soever he relates the whole Story of the Picts For what is Bede's a poor Monk's Authority to King Cormach's 6. That from Cathluan Son to Gud there was a constant Succession of Kings of the Picts in that Countrey But not more exact than the Succession of British Kings from King Brutus And now I leave the Reader to judge whether Geffrey be not hardly dealt with when such Authours are preferr'd so much before him We now return to the farther Account which the Irish Antiquaries give of their own Antiquities 4. We are then to understand that besides the Race descended from Nemedus there was another called Clanna Gaoidhel or Posterity of Gathelus concerning whom these things are affirmed 1. That he was descended from Niul a younger Son to Feanusa Farsa King of Scythia who travelling into Egypt had a Countrey there given him by Pharaoh Cingeris called Capacyront I suppose in the old Egyptian Language who was married to Pharaoh 's daughter called Scota Whereas the Scotish Antiquaries do peremptorily affirm it was Gathelus himself was married to her But we ought not to forget that this Scythian King had a celebrated School on the Plain of Sennaar and one Gaodel being there employ'd to compose or refine the Irish Language called from him Gaodhelc or Gaodhlec This is a Strain beyond Geffrey who never thought of bringing the British Language from the Plain of Sennaar 2. That Gaodhel 's Posterity continued in Egypt till the time of his Grandchild Sruth and then being forced thence they landed in Creet where he died And his Eldest Son Eibhir Scot went into Scythia where one of his Descendents killed Restoir the King of that Countrey and was forced with his Company to the Caspian Sea and landed in an Island there just like Geffrey's Largeâ—ia where Brutus landed But they went from thence to Caronia another Island in the Pontick and from thence to the North end of the Riphean Mountains a pretty kind of Compass And here instead of Diana's Oracle to Brutus an old Druyd told them they should never fix till they came to the Western Island and so they removed to Gothia and in the eighth Generation they went to Spain And doth not this exceed the Story of Brute in the great Probability of it which their latest Antiquary knows not what to make of It is certain whoever invented it designed to go beyond the Authour of the former But this is not all For we are told farther from the same Authentick Irish Annals 3. That Calamb called Milead Espain or Milesius the Spaniard great Grandchild to Bratha who brought them into Spain went back into Scythia and there served as General under Refloir King of the Scythians From whence upon Suspicions he fled into Egypt and there married Pharaoh 's Daughter called Scota And at last returned to Spain and there founded Braganza And here the Scotish Antiquities fall in But is it not a little improbable to have the same Scene acted twice over Two Gaodel's two Refloir's two Scota's twice passing to and fro after much the same manner We may well say as our Authour doth enough of these profound remote Antiquities For I shall not need now to add any thing about the eight Sons of this Milesius coming to Ireland And how the rest being killed the Countrey was divided between Eibhir and Erimthon and the former being killed the latter became the first Monarch of Ireland from whom descended 181 Monarchs of this Milesian Race which must depend on the Credit of their Annals of which I have already spoken But in short to give the true Account of these Fabulous Antiquities We are then to consider That when the Northern Nations began to have some smattering of the Greek and Roman Learning they were never satisfied till by one means or other they could deduce their Original from some of the Nations most celebrated in ancient Books Such were the Trojans the Greeks and the Egyptians As to the Trojans the Romans themselves had shewed the Way to other Nations For there are considerable Arguments to prove that neither Aeneas nor Ascanius ever came into Italy as may be seen in Dionysius Halycarnasseus Strabo and Festus in the Word Roma Hellanicus in Dionysius saith That Ascanius from whom Brutus is derived never left Phrygia But onely withdrew for a time to Dascylites near the Lake from him called the Ascanian and afterwards returned to Troy Strabo saith That Ascanius reigned at Scepsis near the Ruins of Troy and that his Posterity continued there a long time after with a Royal Title Festus shews that the old Authours were not agreed where Aeneas was buried Many were of Opinion that he lay buried in the City Berecinthia And some in Dionysius say he died in Thrace others in Arcadia But the Romans making it so great a part of their Glory to be descended from the Trojans Other Nations of Europe upon the Dissolution of the Roman
Empire would not seem to come behind them in this So Hunibaldus gives as formal an Account of the descent of the Franks from Antenor and as good a Succession of their Kings down from him with the particular Names of Persons and the time of their Reigns as either Geffrey doth of the British Kings from Brutus or Hector of the Scots from Fergus or the Irish Annals from Gathelus or Heremon And that this is no late Invention appears from hence That Aimoinus Ado Viennensis Abbas Vrspergensis Rorico Gaguinus Aeneas Silvius and others agree with Hunibaldus in the Substance of his Story And Vignier mentions several Diplomata of the ancient Kings of the Franks to prove the Authentickness of this Tradition And it is less to be wonder'd at that the Britains should pretend to be derived from the Trojans because of the mixture of the Romans and them together while Britain continued so long a Roman Province From whence I suppose the first Occasion was taken which continued as a Tradition among the Britains for a long time before it was brought into such a History as we find in Geffrey That the Tradition it self was elder than his time is certain For even those who despised Geffrey embraced it as appears by Giraldus Cambrensis And in the Saxon times this Tradition was known as is evident by the Saxon Poet mention'd by Abr. Whelock But Nennius his MS. puts it out of dispute That there was then a Tradition about the Britains coming from Brute but he could not tell what to make of this Brute sometimes he was Brito the Son of Ysicion the Son of Alan of the Posterity of Japhet And for this he quotes the Tradition of his Ancestours But this being uncapable of much Improvement or Evidence he then runs to Brutus the Roman and sometimes it is Brutus the Consul But that not suiting so well he then produces the Story of Aeneas and Ascanius and Silvius and the Prediction of the Magician that his Son should kill his Father and Mother she died in Labour and his Father was killed by him by chance However he was banished from Italy into Greece And from thence again banished and so came into Gaul and there built Tours having its Name from one of his Companions And from thence he came for Britain which took its Name from him and he filled it with his Progeny which continue to this day So that here we have the Foundation of Geffrey's History laid long before his time And Nennius his Account is mention'd by William of Malmsbury under the Name of Gesta Britonum And follow'd by Henry of Huntingdon and Turgott or Simeon Dunelmensis But when Geffrey's Book came abroad it was so improved and adorned with Particulars not elsewhere to be found that the generality of the Monkish Historians not onely follow'd but admir'd it and pitied those that had not seen it as they supposed as Ranulphus Cestrensis doth William of Malmsbury But there were some Cross-grained Writers who called it an Imposture as Gul. Newburgensis or a Poetical Figment as John Whethamsted But these were but few in Comparison with those who were better pleased with the Particulars of a Legend than the dryness of a true History But this humour was not peculiar to the Franks and Britains For the Saxons derived themselves from the Macedonian Army of Alexander which had three Captains saith Suffridus Petrus Saxo Friso and Bruno From whom are descended the Saxons Frisians and those of Brunswick And Abbas Stadensis adds That not onely the Saxons but those of Prussia Rugia and Holstein came from them Gobelinus Persona relates the Particulars as exactly as Geffrey or Hector or the Irish Annals do how they were left on the Caspian Mountains and wandred up and down just as Brutus and Gathelus did till they settled in Prussia Rugen and Saxony The Danes saith Dudo S. Quintin derived themselves from the Danai The Prussians from Prusias King of Bithynia who brought the Greeks along with him Onely the Scots and Irish had the Wit to derive themselves from the Greeks and Egyptians together We are now to sit down and consider what is to be said to all these glorious Pretences Must they be all allowed for good and true History If not what marks of distinction can we set between them They all pretend to such Founders as came afar off wandred from place to place consulted Oracles built Cities founded Kingdoms and drew their Succession from many Ages So that it seems unreasonable to allow none but our own And yet these Antiquities will hardly pass any where but with their own Nation And hardly with those of any Judgment in any of them But when all this is said every one will believe as he pleases But it is one thing to believe with the Will and another with the Vnderstanding To return now to the Irish Antiquities And it onely remains that we enquire How the Irish Antiquaries give an Account of their Nations coming into the Northern Parts of Britain And here is something which deserves Consideration viz. That they charge the Scotish Antiquaries with placing the time of Fergus I. 819 years before he landed in Britain For say they the Irish Monuments fix on Anno Dom. 498. as the time wherein Fergus Mor the Son of Erch whom the Scotish Writers call the Son of Ferchard with his five Brothers invaded the North of Britain To this purpose they produce the Testimony of Tigernacus who in his Annals saith Fergus Mor mhac Ercha cum gente Dalraida partem Britanniae tenuit ibi mortuus est This he writes about the beginning of Pope Symmachus which was about six years after the death of St. Patrick and very near the end of the fifth Century Besides another Irish Authour who writes of the Kings of Albany who were contemporary with the Monarchs of Ireland reckons twenty years between the Battel of Ocha and the going of the six Sons of Erc into Albany And the Annals of Vlster place the Battel of Ocha A. D. 483. so that Fergus his coming into Scotland could not be before the beginning of the sixth Century Gratianus Lucius saith that the Battel of Ocha wherein Oilliol Molt the Irish Monarch who succeeded Leogarius was killed was Anno Dom. 478. Which makes but five years difference Farther say they The Scotish Antiquaries make Reuda the sixth King after Fergus Whereas it appears by their Annals That their Monarch Conair had three Sons called the three Cairbres and the third was Cairbre Riada from whom that part of Britain was called Dal Riada or Dal Reuda But Conair was killed An. Dom. 165. and therefore this Reuda must be 300 years before Fergus The Old MS. cited by Camden makes Fergus to be descended from Conair with which as Archbishop Vsher observes the old Irish Genealogies agree But he saith Conair reign'd Anno
Gaul So that if they were driven out by Julian they quickly returned and fixed their Habitations by the Sea as the Salii who were Franks did in Taxandria which was more within Land and where as Godfrey Wendelin hath endeavoured to prove the Salick Law was first made Which Taxandria according to him was bounded by the Maes on the East and North by the Tamera on the South and by the Scheld on the West And here upon Submission the Franks were permitted to live And this was thence forward called Francia Minor and he mentions a place there still called Vranrijck the Kingdom of France but a very small one and others called Seilberg the Mountain of the Salii Seelbendens the Salian Meadows Seleheim the House of the Salii But the other Franks being by Stilicho's means driven out of their Possessions beyond the Rhine they came into the parts about Tongres near to Taxandria and there joined in one Body and set up Kings among themselves as he shews from Gregorious Turonensis and then they made that Body of Laws called the Salick Laws But to return to the Saxons Vbbo Emmius a learned and judicious Historian gives this Account of the Saxons and their Neighbour Nations who inhabited on the Northern Parts of Germany The Frisii dwelt from the middle Stream of the Rhine about Vtrecht to the River Amasus Eems From thence to the Elb lived the Chauci divided into the greater and lesser by the Weser A great part of these leaving their Native Soil joined with the Sicambri on the Rhine who from their affecting liberty were called Franks beyond the Elb were the Saxons and the Cimbri These Saxons being pressed by the more Northern People or for their own conveniency came Southwards and took Possession first of those Places where the Chauci dwelt And by degrees prevailing all the other People who joined with or submitted to the Saxons were called by their Name and among the rest the Frisii From whose Coasts he supposes the two Brothers Hengist and Horsa to have gon into Britain and returning thither carried over a far greater Number with them not so much to fight as to inhabit there He thinks it most probable that Hengist and Horsa by their Descent were originally Saxons But that the greatest part of the People who went over with them were rather Frisians than Saxons Which he proves not onely from the greater facility of Passage from the Coasts of Friseland and the Testimony of their own Annals but from the greater agreement of the English Language with theirs than with the Saxon or any other German Dialect And because Bede reckons the Frisians among those from whom the English are derived and Wilfrid Wickbert Willibrord preach'd to the Frisians in their own Tongue as he proves from Marcellinus his Life of Suîdbert And Procopius reckons the Frisians among the Inhabitants of Britain But he saith farther That the Affinity of the Languages continues still so very great that from thence he concludes many more to have gon out of Friseland into Britain than either of the Saxons Iutes or Angles But to all this our Learned Primate answers That Hengist and Horsa might be true Frisians there being a Frisia in the Southern parts of Jutland which Saxo Grammaticus calls the lesser Frisia and is parted by the Eidore from the Countrey of the Angli on the East and of the Saxons on the South But whatever Suffridus Petrus or such Authours contend for as to Hengist and Horsa being originally Frisians Vbbo Emmius quits that Point upon Bede's Genealogy and grants they were Saxons being the Sons of Victgilsus whose Father was Vitta the Son of Vecta whose Father was Voden of whose Race the Kings of many Provinces are descended It doth not seem at all probable That these lived in the lesser Frisia which is hardly taken notice of by any but by Saxo Grammaticus and Pontanus tells us is not above four German miles in length upon the Sea-shore But suppose that Saxo comprehended Dithmars under it yet we have no certainty that the Colony of Frisians was removed thither before Hengist and Horsa came for Britain and Helmoldus seems to imply that it was brought thither by Adolphus II. Count of Holstein about Anno Dom. 1137. But the Question is not concerning Hengist and Horsa but the greater Number of the People which might be still of the greater Frisia For which the affinity of the Language is a considerable Argument which doth not depend merely upon the Credit of Marcellinus his Life of Suîdbert but upon the probability of the thing For since several English went thither to Preach and the Affinity of the Language continues so great still it is a good Argument to prove either that the Frisians came over hither or that the Frisian and Saxon Languages were then the same And Procopius his Testimony is not to be slighted who places the Frisians in Britain for although he calls it Brettia it is certain he means great Britain because he places the Angles together with the Frisians in it So that he might as well question the Angles as the Frisians coming hither if Procopius his Authority signifie any thing I know that our most Learned Primate takes this Brettia for the Island of the Batavi because Joh. Leidensis saith That upon the Saxons Invasion some of the Britains fled into Holland and there in the Mouth of the Rhine built that famous Castle called Britton and subdued the People thereabout But this seems to be very improbable for any one that looks into the Description of it in Scriverius his Antiquitates Batavicae will conclude it to have been a Roman Work which a Person of his Judgment could not but discern But he saith it was possessed then by the Britains Which depends wholly on the Credit of this Joh. Gerbrandus of Leyden who was a late Writer and of no great Esteem with him as appears by many Passages in his Book But how came the Angles to live here with the Frisians and Britains For that the same Gerbrandus is cited who saith That when part of Hengist 's Army was driven out of Britain they built the Castle of Leyden And so we have the Britains dwelling there being driven out by the Saxons and the Saxons driven out by the Britains onely to make this to be the Island Brettia in Procopius distinct from Great Britain But to proceed Adamus Bremensis who lived near to Jutland saith That the Saxons who went over into Britain lived near the Rhine Engelhusius lately published out of MSS. by Maderus and who lived in the lower Saxony saith That Hengist and Horsa went out of Westphalia from a Place called Enghere and instead of Engerschen called themselves Engelschen Suffridus Petrus saith Those People were called Angrivarii and the Countrey Angria which was subdued by Udolphus Father to Hengist and Horsa and Prince of Frisia But their Mother's
into Britain the 39th saith William of Malmsbury But neither of them mentions any violent Death by the hands of his Enemies and that after a Victory by the Britains under Aurelius Ambrosius which are such Circumstances they could not easily have omitted if they had then heard of them But if they had heard of them and yet left them out it is a shrewd Sign they gave no Credit to them We are then to consider that Geffrey of Monmouth according to Leland flourished in the time of H. I. Of King Stephen say Bale and Pits but Leland observes That he dedicated his Translation of Merlin to Alexander Bishop of Lincoln the same that was Henry of Huntingdon 's Patron And William of Malmsbury dedicates his History to the same Robert of Gloucester Son to Henry I. to whom Geffrey dedicates his Translation of the British History who died 12 of King Stephen So that in all probability Geffrey's Book was seen by both these Historians and since they do not follow him where they have occasion to mention the same matters They plainly discover they preferr'd Nennius before him whom both of them follow But it appears by H. Huntingdon he then passed under the Name of Gildas But these two Historians thought it best for them to decline taking any publick notice of Geffrey's History it being so great a Novelty then and probably enough in some esteem with Robert of Gloucester whose Father as Giraldus Cambrensis saith had lately subdued the Britains in Wales and such a History seemed to add to his Father's Glory But after Robert's death William of Newborough very frankly delivers his Opinion of it charging the Original with Falshood and the Translatour with Insincerity Geffrey in the Conclusion of his History mentions William of Malmsbury and H. of Huntingdon as then Writing the English History But he bids them not to meddle with the British Kings since they had not the British MS. which Walter of Oxford brought out of Britany But they do not forbear to make use of Nennius and Huntingdon transcribes several things out of him But they do not inlarge or alter or adorn their History in one Point from the British MS. although in all likelyhood set forth before their Death As to what he next adds That after his Victory over the Saxons Aurelius Ambrosius called the Princes and Great Men together at York and gave order for repairing the Churches which the Saxons destroyed there is far greater probability in it For after the Battel at Wippedsfleet which was seventeen years after the Saxons coming H. Huntingdon saith Things remained quiet for a good while between the Britains and Saxons and in that time it is reasonable to presume that Ambrosius and the Nobles and People did their endeavour towards the recovering the honour of their Churches as well as of the Kingdom And after the care he took in other places saith Geffrey he marched to London which had suffered as well as other Cities and having called the dispersed Citizens together he went about the repairing of it all his design being the restoring the Church and Kingdom From thence he went to Winchester and to Salisbury And in the passage thither Geffrey launches out to purpose in his History of Stonehenge translated saith he by Merlin out of Ireland to make a Monument for the British Nobles slain there by Hengist 's Treachery Which is such an Extravagancy that it is to be wondred any should follow him in it and yet Matt. Westminster transcribes the main of it and Walter Coventry sets it down for authentick History But he adds two circumstances which make it seem probable that Stonehenge had some Relation to Ambrosius viz. That here Ambrosius was Crowned and was not long after buried from whom Polydore Virgil makes it the Monument of Ambrosius and John of Tinmouth in the Life of Dubricius calls it Mons Ambrosii And the Name of Ambresbury near it doth much confirm the probability That it had rather a respect to Ambrosius than either to the Romans or the Danes But I cannot now insist on this Matthew Westminster confirms Geffrey's Relation concerning the great Zeal of Ambrosius in repairing the British Churches every where and setting up Divine Worship in them and giving great incouragement to the Clergy to perform all Divine Offices and particularly to pray for the Prosperity of the Church and Kingdom But Geffrey adds yet farther concerning him that in a solemn Council of the Britains he appointed two Metropolitans for the two Vacant Sees at that time viz. Sampson one of eminent piety for York and Dubricius for Caer-leon This saith Matt. Westminster was done An. Dom. 490. and he makes them both to live and flourish An. Dom. 507. But he saith That Sampson was afterwards driven over to Aremorica and there was Archbishop of Dole among the Britains For Anno Dom. 561. he saith Another Sampson succeeded in that See the former who came out of Great Britain to the Less Sigebert of the old Edition Anno Dom. 566. speaks of Sampson then Archbishop of Dole Kinsman to Maglorius who came from the Britain beyond the Sea to that on this side This second Sampson's Life is extant in the Bibliotheca Floriacensis where he is said to have been born in Britain and the Scholar of Iltutus and consecrated by Dubricius But Giraldus Cambrensis saith The Pall was carried over from Wales to Dole in the time of another Sampson who was the 25 th from St. David and went over because of the Plague which discoloured People like the Iaundice and therefore called Flava Pestis Which is transcribed by Roger Hoveden But here are several Mistakes in this Account For there was no such thing as a Pall then known or used in the Western Church And if this Sampson went over on the occasion of that Plague there could not be 25. between St. David and him For in the Life of St. Teliaus St. David's Sister's Son that Plague is described and then Sampson is said to be Archbishop of Dole and to have received Teliaus and his Company with great joy having been School-fellows under Dubricius and Sampson being consecrated by him But still we have two Sampsons Archbishops of Dole and in the time of the great Controversie about that Archbishoprick of which afterwards it was a Question from which the Title was derived And Innocent III. as Giraldus relates said it was from this Sampson Archbishop of York but the Sammarthani onely mention him that came from St. Davids when Maglorius succeeded among the Aremorican Britains but we are not yet come to them It is observed by H. of Huntingdon that after the Britains had a little respite from their Enemies they fell into Civil dissensions among themselves which is very agreeable to what Gildas had said Of this the British History gives no improbable account when it relates that one of Vortigern's Sons called Pascentius raised a Rebellion in the
shall after all find the Life of St. David not much clearer than that of his Nephew Arthur for he is supposed to have been Uncle to him by the Mother's side whose Name is said to be Nonnita in Capgrave Nonna in the Utrecht MS. Nemata in Colganus Melari in the Life of St. Kenna so Colganus and Bollandus say But in Capgrave I find Melari said to be the Mother to the Father of St. David i. e. to Xantus King of the Provincia Ceretica i. e. Cardiganshire so called from Ceretus Father to Xanctus say some from Caraticus who ruled here as Camden seems inclinable to believe That Melari was one of the 12 Daughters of Braghanus King of Brecknock from whom Giraldus saith the County took its Name And he said from the British Histories that he had 24 Daughters but Capgrave saith he had 12 Sons and 12 Daughters D. Powell in his Notes on Giraldus saith this Brachanus his Father was Haulaphus King of Ireland and his Mother a Britain viz. Marcella Daughter to Theodoric Son of Tethwaltus King of Garthmathrin afterwards called Brecknock Another Daughter of Brachanus he saith was Wife to Congenus Son to Cadel King of Powisland and Mother of Brochmiel who killed Etheldred King of Northumberland and routed his Army about Anno Dom. 603. By this we see what a Number of Petty Princes there was about that time among the Britains but whether St. David were Vncle by the Mother to King Arthur or not we have not light enough to discover I shall pass over all the Legendary parts of his Life and consider onely what relates to the Church-History of those times His Domestick Education is said to have been under Pauleus or Paulinus a Disciple of St. German with whom he continued ten years in the Isle of Wight saith Giraldus but it seems more probable to have been Whiteland in Caermardenshire the School of Iltutus being not far off in Glamorganshire at Lantwitt i. e. Fanum Iltuti and in his Life it is said that he came to the King of Glamorgan and after that Sampson Paulinus Gildas and David were his Scholars But Bollandus shews that there must be a mistake as to David and that instead of him it should be read Daniel who was a Disciple of Iltutus and consecrated first Bishop of Bangor by Dubricius After this it is said that David and Eliud or Teliaus and Paternus went to Jerusalem and David was there consecrated Bishop by the Patriarch And it is not to be wondred that in such a distracted time at home they should go to Jerusalem when Saint Jerome in his time mentions the Britains going thither especially such as were more inclined to Devotion which humour spread so much that Gregory Nyssen wrote against it as a thing very much tending to Superstition if not arising from it But it was most excusable in such a troublesome time at home Not long after his return the famous Synod at Brevy was held at a place called Lhandewy-brevy the Church of Saint David at Brevy Here the Vtrecht MS. saith was a Synod assembled of all the Bishops of Britain upon the account of the Pelagian Controversie then revived Giraldus saith It was a general Convention of Clergy and Laity But the former MS. saith there were present 118. Bishops besides Abbats and others One would think it hard to find so many Bishops in Britain at that time And Bollandus startles at it but Colganus undertakes to defend it having premised that Giraldus and Capgrave leave it out But he saith there were more Bishops at that time than afterwards and more Bishops than Bishopricks Dioceses not being then so limitted as afterwards And every Monastery almost having a Bishop its Superiour By which means he justifies Saint Patrick 's consecrating as Jocelin saith 350 Bishops with his own hands But after all this Giraldus did much better to omit such a number in such a time unless there were better Testimony concerning it However there was a considerable number there present yet St. David was absent and first Paulinus was sent to him but he prevailed not then Daniel and Dubricius went upon whose intreaty he came and by his Authority and Eloquence put an effectual stop to Pelagianism And before the end of the Synod it is said That by general Consent he was chosen Archbishop of Caerleon Dubricius desiring to retire on the account of his Age. But here we meet with a considerable difficulty concerning the Succession to Dubricius viz. That Teliaus is said to succeed Dubricius at Landaff and to have power over all the Churches of the Western parts of Britain How can this be consistent with St. David's succeeding Dubricius in the See of Caerleon which had the Metropolitan Power over those Churches Bishop Godwin out of Bale and as he supposeth out of Leland saith That St. Dubricius was first Bishop of Landaff being there consecrated by Germanus and Lupus and that afterwards he was removed by a Synod to Caerleon and Teliaus placed in Landaff But this by no means clears the difficulty for although Bale doth there exactly follow Leland yet Leland himself did not seem to have consulted the Book of Landaff Where it is said That when Dubricius was made Archbishop he had the See of Landaff conferr'd upon him by the Gift of Mouricus then King and the three Estates i. e. the Nobles Clergy and People and all the Land between the Taff and Elei And Leland himself out of another Authour saith That when Dubricius was made Archbishop Landaff was made his Cathedral Church After Dubricius his time Teliaus is said to be Archbishop several times in the Book of Landaff and after him Oudoceus is called Summus Episcopus and the Bishop of Landaff in 〈◊〉 Sermon to Calixtus 2. Anno Dom. 1109. saith That it appears by the hand writing of St. Teliaus That the Church of Landaff was superiour in dignity to all other Churches in Wales That which seems to me the most probable account of this matter is That when Landaff was given to Dubricius then Archbishop he fixed his See there and so Landaff was the Seat of the Archbishop of Caerleon But afterwards when St. David removed the Archiepiscopal See to Menevia a remote barren and inconvenient place as Giraldus himself confesseth The Bishops of Landaff assumed the Archiepiscopal Power which had been in that See and would not submit to the Bishops of St. Davids This is apparent from that passage of Oùdocëus who succeeded Theliaus in the Book of Landaff that he would not receive Consecration from the Bishop of St. Davids as his Metropolitan but had it from the Archbishop of Canterbury This is a very improbable thing at that time considering the hatred the Britains did bear to the Saxons and their Bishops to Augustin the Monk It is far more likely that they received it from the Archbishop of Dole in Britany or from the Archbishop of London then resident in those parts