with those Kings who were killed by secret Conspiracies nor with open Vsurpers such as Nathalocus and Donald of the Isles but I onely set down what these Historians deliver as to the Right and Authority which the Nobles assumed to themselves in case of Male-administration to shew that if these Mens Accounts must be received the Heads of the Clanns did not part with their share in the Government so much but upon occasion they did resume it And therefore I have been apt to suspect from the Controversie about Regency at the time when Hector wrote that all this History of the first Race of Kings was framed on purpose out of ill will to the Monarchy and with a design to advance the Power of the Nobility And now let any true friend to the Monarchy judge whether those who shorten the Royal Line or those who so earnestly contend for this Story of Fergus and his Successours be more liable to be charged with any degree of Lese-Majesty 4. But after all the Advocate saith That Fordon the most ancient of their Historians affirms that Fergus made himself King Indeed Fordon doth say That Fergus the Son of Ferard as he calls him hearing there were many Scots in the Northern parts of Albion living without order and Government and hearing a good account of the Countrey he was prompted by his Ambition to go over to them and taking with him a good number of young Men he gathered together the dispersed Scots and joining them all together in the Western parts he made himself King over them Which is no improbable Account but Fordon saith not a word of all the former passages in the other Historians And if Fordon be the most ancient of their Historians what becomes of Veremundus and Cornelius Hibernicus the two great supporters of Hector Boethius his History If they were after Fordon how come they to be so well instructed in so many particulars in the first Succession which Fordon was wholly unacquainted with I cannot deny that Fordon speaking of the Coronation of Alexander III. as he calls him mentions an old Highlander who in the Irish Tongue repeated the Genealogy of their Kings backward as far as Fergus the Son of Ferquard But therein he comes not up to the number either in Fordon or Hector Boethius and hath very considerable differences from the Accounts either in him or in Lesly and Buchanan For after Fergus he leaves out Feritharis and makes Main his next Successour the next he calls Arindal whom they call Dornadilla his Son Roveyn they Nothatus and his Rether is the same with their Reuther but here they interpose a Reutha to make their Story agree with Bede's Reuda But this Genealogist next names Ther whom they call Thereus and his Son Rosin but they say Josina succeeded Thereus being his Brother After this we find a greater difference for instead of Finnanus Durstus Euenus Gillus Euenus II. Ederus Euenus III. Metellanus Caratacus we find there onely Dethach Jaw Aliela Euen Ederskeol Comermore Some agreement there is but a far greater diversity and Hector's famous Caratacus quite omitted Then succeeded Corbre whom they call Corbred after him Daradiamore by them stiled Dardanus then another Corbre instead of their Galdus and then Luthach Lugtacus in them then Mogalama their Mogallus Coner their Conarus Ethath their Ethodius Fiachrath their Satrahel then another Ethath whom they call Ethodius II. before whom they place King Donald in whose time they say Christianity was first received in Scotland who is utterly excluded by this ancient Genealogy For after this Ethodius follows in it Athirkiwr which is their Athirco then Findachar which is their Findocus and so Nathalocus is shut out and so after him are the two Donalds for the next that follows is Thrinklind whom they call Crathlintus then Fencormach their Fincormacus after him Romaich their Romachus then Enegussa which is plainly their Angusianus and Fethelmech their Fetelmachus then Engusafich and Etheat instead of which they put Eugenius and Ethodius his Brother whom both make Grandfather to Fergus II. whose Father they call Erthus but the ancient Genealogy and Fordon Eirch Now by comparing this Genealogy and Hector Boethius together I am convinced that he did not forge all the Names of his first Race of Kings between the two Fergusses but yet from hence it appears 1. That Hector did insert many things contrary to this ancient Genealogy and when he did so he had some end to serve in it As when he puts in Regents which the Genealogy never owns but this was to support his Law of incapacity but in all this Genealogy there is a direct lineal Descent and when he puts in Reutha it is to answer Bede's Reuda and Galdus for Tacitus his Galgacus and Caratacus for the famous British King of that Name and King Donald to answer our King Lucius that they might have a Christian King in the time of the Pope next succeeding Eleutherius 2. That this Genealogy may be allow'd without any advantage to the Succession of Kings in Scotland from Fergus I. so long before the Nativity of Christ for it is very observable that this ancient Genealogist doth very much shorten the Succession between Fergus II. and this Alexander For he leaves out Eugenius II. and makes Dongard to succeed him after him Cobren and then Edanius whereas here they insert Constantius I. Congallus Conranus Eugenius III. Convallus Kinnatillus between Dongard and Aidanus After him he names his Son Occahebind whom Fordon calls Eothodius-bind which he saith is the same with Eugenius and about him Hector Boethius as Buchanan observes contradicts the Book of Pasly for this saith he lived in continual Wars and the other that he enjoy'd a constant Peace so that Boethius slights the authority of their Ancient Annals Next after him they place Ferquard of whom the Genealogy saith nothing at all Fordon next to nothing In cujus nihil actum est tempore saith he but the other Historians tell sad Stories of his vitious Life and tragical End After Eugenius in the Genealogy we find Donewald breck Fordon saith he died after 14 years Reign and to him succeeded Ferquard his Brother's Son not mentioned in the Genealogy nor Malduinus Son to Donald for the next is Ethac i. e. Eugenius and here they put in another Eugenius Ambirkelethus Eugenius VIII and Mordacus between Ethac and Ethfin whereas the Genealogist makes Ethafind Son to Ethdre to whom succeeded Ethas i. e. Eugenius VIII in their Account after him follows Alphin but between these they have inserted Fergus III. Solvathius Achaius Convallus and Dongallus They all agree with the Genealogist that Kenneth immediately succeeded Alphin but then follows a wonderfull difference for here they put in no fewer than 13 Kings between Kenneth and Malcolm the Son of Kenneth whom the Genealogist places next after him then follows Duncan in all between whom and Malcolm Canmoir they put in Machabaeus After
years Now I desire to have some evident proof brought me of some Event in the World which happened 1308 years before Christ's Nativity to which the Irish descent must be coincident To make this more plain by Example suppose the Question be in what Age of the World the Peloponnesian War began we should by no means think it sufficient for any Man presently to set down it was such a year of the World such a year from the Floud so long before Christ but we demand some certain Character of this time i. e. such which agrees to that and to no other and here whosoever intends to give satisfaction will search Thucydides Diodorus and Ptolemy to find out some undoubted Character as that Thucydides saith that Pythodorus was then Archon at Athens and it was the year of the Olympick Solemnities Diodorus saith this was the 87 Olympiad and that Apseudes was Archon the year before Ptolemy saith he was Archon in the year of Nabonassar 316. So by comparing the Olympiads and the years of Nabonassar with the years of the World we may come to a certainty in this matter And besides Thucydides mentions a great Eclipse the first year of the War which the Astronomers say was 317 of Nabonassar when Euthydemus succeeded Pythodorus at Athens Such a method of proceeding by certain Characters of time is a Way to convince reasonable Men but without any of these to think to impose upon Mankind under a pretence of exact Calculation argues too great presumption upon the Credulity of Mankind Thus as to the coming of Fergus I into Scotland just 330 years before Christ which the Advocate saith all their Historians affirm let them produce any one certain Character of that time out of such Annals as were written within the compass of knowing the Truth of it and we will never dispute this matter more But to proceed 4. As to the French Antiquities which the Advocate saith may be more justly questioned on these Grounds than theirs we onely desire them to be as ingenuous as the late learned Writers of their Antiquities have been who reject all before the Merovingian Race as either Fabulous or so doubtfull and uncertain that they make no Account of it unless it be what they find in the Roman Authours concerning the Franks as may be seen in Hadrianus Valesius a learned Historian Antiquary and Critick 5. As to the Spanish which are joined with the French what relates to their Antiquities before the Romans War in Spain we grant to be parallel with theirs For although Strabo saith they had the use of Letters and had some Records of ancient times among them yet they are utterly lost And although Reinesius de Deo Endovellico seems to think that Annius had some Fragments of those Antiquities which he mixed with his own Inventions yet I can see no reason for it because he would then have alledged the old Spanish Records and not have fathered his Antiquities on Persons so remote as Berosus and Manetho But if they had the use of Letters and Records among them might not the Irish and Scotish derive both from them I answer That the coming of the Irish immediately from Spain and not from Britain is not so evidently proved that any thing can be built upon it Camden and Sir James Ware two learned Antiquaries both think Ireland first peopled from Britain and Camden offers good Reasons for his Assertion as the agreement of the British and Irish Languages in very many words the similitude of Customs and Manners it 's being anciently called the lesser Britain and the inhabitants Britains the conveniency of passage from Britain thither which seem to be of far greater moment than any thing brought to prove the Legend of Gathelus and Scota and their posterity coming out of Spain But because this opinion doth not seem to give any account of the Scoti in Ireland from whence they certainly went into Scotland as is now confessed on all hands therefore I shall endeavour to clear this Matter by proposing what seems most probable to me concerning the first Peopling of these Islands We are then to consider that the most ancient Geographers as Strabo observes out of Ephorus divided the then known World into four Parts the Eastern they called India the Southern Aethiopia the Western Celtia and the Northern Scythia And in the European Parts they knew but of two Nations beside the Greeks and those are the Celtae and the Scythae Those that inhabited Northward saith Strabo were called Scythae and those to the West Celtae who were likewise called Iberi and Celtiberi as he affirms and these peopled Spain and Gaul and from thence spread into the Neighbour Countries and among the rest came over into Britain Which in the Book de Mundo commonly attributed to Aristotle but by Buchanan to Theophrastus is said together with Ireland which are both there called the British Islands to be situate in the Ocean not far from the Scythae and the Celtae But the latter were so much nearer in Gaul that it is very reasonable to believe the first habitation here was by the Celtae who came from thence And Tacitus truly observes the agreement was so very great between the Gauls and the old Britains that although he suspected the Silures might come immediately from Spain or rather from the Iberi which Strabo saith was a more general Name and some of these went into Ireland but upon the whole matter he concluded all the Southern parts of Britain to have been peopled immediately from Gaul But as to the Caledonians he affirms them to have been of a German extraction i. e. taking Germany in the extent he took it in which went as far as Sarmatia and took in Scandinavia from whence in probability the Northern Parts of Britain were first peopled It is true that Tacitus calls them Britains as well as the Celtae and however they were united in interest against the Romans as Galgacus shews in his excellent Speech to them yet Tacitus we see makes them of a different Extraction And these were originally from the European Scythae or from Scandinavia which was abundantly peopled and supplied other Countries as Jornandes saith and that they were provided of Shipping very early I have proved in the following Book where I speak of the Original of the Picts And besides what is there said to shew that those who dwell in those Northern parts were then called Scythians Scymnus Chius lately published out of Holstenius his Papers affirms that the Scythians extended from the Palus Maeotis to Countries wholly unknown to the Greeks For being tempted by the Rivers as Olaus Rudbeck conjectures having no skill in Navigation or Astronomy and the Woods in the first Ages of the World being unpassable the People still went farther and farther by the Rivers side till at last finding themselves bounded by the vast Mountains in those Northern parts and the Sea beyond
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
North against Ambrosius among the Britains who were overcome by him and put to flight but afterwards he hired a Saxon to poison Ambrosius at Winchester This saith Matthew Westminster happen'd Anno Dom. 497. But we are not to pass over what he affirms of him Anno Dom. 485. viz. That he commanded in the Battel at Mecredsburn against Aella and his Sons in which they were so much worsted as to send home for Supplies as he saith This Aella and his Sons Cymen Plenting and Cissa came into Britain Anno Dom. 477. and landed at a place from his eldest Son called Cymenshore on the Coasts of Sussex Camden saith it hath lost its Name But he proves from a Charter of Cedwalla to the Church of Selsey it must be near Wittering Here Aella and his Army fought the Britains at his first Landing and forced them to retire to Andredeswald say the Saxon Annals and Matt. Westminster Florentius and Huntingdon The Saxon Annals and Huntingdon call it Andredesleage by that no question is meant the vast Wood which began in Kent and ran through Sussex into Hampshire called by the Britains Coid Andred by the Saxons Andred and Andreswald from whence as Mr. Somner observes that part of Kent where the Wood stood is still called the Weald and Lambard observes that no Monuments of Antiquity are to be met with in the Weald either of Kent or Sussex The Saxons after this Battel continued to inhabit on the Shore till at last the Britains finding them to incroach farther resolved to fight them at a place called Mecredsburn And a different account is given of the Success of this Battel The Saxon Annals and Ethelwerd onely mention it boasting of no Victory Florentius makes it a clear Victory on the Saxon side Matt. Westminster saith Aella quitted the field but confesseth the Britains had great loss H. of Huntingdon saith It was a drawn Battel both Armies having sustained great damage and avoiding each other After this Aella and Cissa say the Saxon Annals besieged Andredescester and killed all the Inhabitants leaving not one Britain alive and so Florentius and Matt. Westminster relate it But he saith That the Britains came out of the Wood and galled the Saxons so much that they were forced to divide their Army and the Inhabitants perished by Famine as well as by the Sword And he observes that the Saxons utterly demolished the City and the place where it stood was in his time shewed to Travellers Therefore the question among our Antiquaries which was the Anderida of the Ancients Newenden or Hastings or Pemsey is quite out of doors unless one of these be proved to be built in the place of Anderida since Matt. Westminster's days which were towards the end of Edw. 3. Those words Camden applies onely to H. of Huntingdon and he saith it was new built in Edw. 1. his time and therefore called Newenden but they are likewise Matt. Westminster 's who lived after that time and therefore it cannot be Newenden if it were rebuilt in the time of Edw. 1. for he saith The desolate place was shewed in his time unless one transcribed the other without any regard to the difference of their own times After Ambrosius his death according to the British History his Brother Vther Pendragon succeeded who routed the Saxons in the North relieved York besieged by them took the Sons of Hengist Prisoners marched to London and there called a Parliament and was solemnly Crowned and fell out with Goalois Duke of Cornwall about his Wife Igerna and under his shape had King Arthur by her but her Husband was killed at the Siege of his Castle After which it is said that he overcame the Saxons at Verulam where he was after poisoned by their means and his Son Arthur succeeded This is the summ of what is there more at large related but taking it all together it is a very blind and partial account of the proceedings between the Britains and Saxons of that time For even Matt. Westminster Anno Dom. 494 takes notice of Cerdic and Kenric his Son Landing with new Forces at a place called from him Cerdicshore near Yarmouth saith Camden where the name Cerdicsand still remains and fought the Britains at their first Landing till they were forced to withdraw and leave room for them who after went into the Western parts and laid the foundation of the Kingdom of the West Saxons To the same purpose Florentius Ethelwerd and Huntingdon Seven years after him came Port and his two Sons Bleda and Magla and arrived at Portsmouth which had its Name from him as the same Authours inform us from the Saxon Annals Now how comes Geffrey to think of none of these but onely of Hengist's two Sons in the North Besides he lets slip one of the greatest Battels that was fought between Cerdic and Nathanleod and pretends to give no account at all of it This the Saxon Annals Florentius Ethelwerd and Matt. Westminster all place Anno Dom. 508. But Huntingdon the sixtieth year after the first coming of the Saxons This Nazaleod as he calls him was the greatest King of the Britains one of great Fame and Pride from whom the Countrey about Charford did take its Name At this place the whole Forces of the Britains were gathered together and Cerdic procured assistence from Aesc of Kent from Aella of Sussex from Port and his Sons so that here was a pitched Battel of the Strength of both sides and Nazaleod behaved himself with so much Courage that he drove Cerdic out of the Field and pursued him which his Son who commanded the other Wing perceiving followed him close and cut him off and 5000 of his Men who fled upon the death of their King And from this memorable Battel the Place was called Cerdicsford and since Charford upon the Aven between Salisbury and Ringwood But who was this mighty King of the Britains who lost his Life in this Battel Mr. Camden professes he cannot ghess unless it were Aurelius Ambrosius whose Name he observes the Saxon Annalists never mention nor the Battels wherein they were worsted And the British History is even with them for that which takes no notice of this great Fight wherein their King was slain Matt. Westminster will not have him to be King but onely to be General under Vther who was then sick which contradicts Ethelwerd and Huntingdon and Florentius who affirm him to have been then King and as Huntingdon saith Rex Maximus Britannorum which seems to imply that there were more Kings then among the Britains as there were among the Saxons and that one was the Chief as in the Heptarchy Archbishop Vsher thinks this King was the same whom the British History calls Vther and that Nathanleod was his true Name and Vther was a Nick-name to denote his fierceness as the Annotatour on Nennius calls Arthur Mab Vter in the British Tongue for the same reason And so Arthurus in Latine
them they sate down there and in time so replenished those parts that they were willing to discharge themselves by sending Colonies abroad To which end they accustomed themselves to the Sea and so from thence these Scythians came into the Northern parts of Britain where they had the Name of Caledonians and upon new Supplies coming after the Romans had subdued the Southern Parts of Britain were then called Picts But of these things afterwards That which I now design is to shew that some of these Scythae being encouraged by the Adventures of others who had settled in Britain passed by the Northern Islands and went into Ireland and so the Celtae from Britain who were called Iberi in Strabo and these Scythae met there as they did in Britain But Britain still retained its Name and therefore to distinguish themselves from those who remained there their Countrey was called Ibernia from the Iberi and Scotia from these Scythae for saith Walsingham Scythae Schythici Scoti Scotici are all one which he took from Radulphus de Diceto Imag. Histor. ad A. 1185. and Nennius expresly calls them Schythae and Gildas the Irish Sea Vallem Scythicam and Alfred in the English Translation of Orosius calls the Scots Scyttan and the Germans both Scythians and Scots Scutten and the old Britains Yscot as Cambden hath already observed And it is considerable that a late Irish Antiquary tells us that a Part of their Countrey in their own Language is called Gaethluighe i. e. Gothland from the Goths or Scythians who took possession of it He rather thinks the Getuli a People of Africa gave the Name but of their coming into Ireland there is no probability And in the same place he saith that Lamfinnus was the first who brought a Colony thither out of Scythia which he proves out of one of their most ancient Monuments And Colganus observes on the Life of St. Cladroe that whereas they are said to be derived from Scota who is said to be Pharaoh 's Daughter the true Name he saith was Scytha and that Name was given her because her Husband came from Scythia And the same Antiquary confesses that it appears by all their ancient Records that they had their original from the Scythians and Keting himself he saith at last yields it and that the Name of Scota was given because the Milesian Race came out of Scythia And to confirm the peopling of Ireland from Britain and Scandinavia we are to observe that the Irish Antiquaries from their best Records do speak of two great Colonies which came thither from Britain the one of the Belgae of which Slangius or Slanius was the Head who was the first Monarch of Ireland wherein Giraldus Cambrensis is confessed to agree with their own Antiquities and another of the Dannanae from the Northern parts of Britain under Nuadus But besides both these and long after them they place the Dynasty of the Scots or Scythians under Herimon and the Psaltir Na-rann a Book of great Authority among them saith that Herimon was the first King of the Scots in Ireland And in his time they say the Picts follow'd them thither But that seems to be too soon However that they came from the same parts will appear very probable from what Bede speaks of the Picts coming from Scythia i. e. Scandinavia in their long Boats and being carried by Tempest to the Northern parts of Ireland he saith they there found gentem Scotorum i. e. their Countreymen the Scythians and they would fain have settled there with them And when they came to treat we find no difficulty as to their understanding one another which there would have been if the Scots had come out of Spain and the Picts out of Scandinavia I know Bede there makes the Picts and Scots Languages to be different but so they might be in continuance of time although at first of the same original as appears by the several Languages now in Europe derived from the Original Gothick or Scythick Tongue which is Mother to most of them onely the Celtick and Latin being mixed with it But to return to Bede he saith the Scots persuaded the Picts to go to Britain and take Possession of the Northern Parts as the Britains had done of the Southern After this they obtained Wives from the Scots in Ireland which shews familiarity and mutual confidence as being of the same extraction and the Picts engaged that in a disputable Case the Scotish Line should be prefer'd to their own In process of time saith Bede some of the Scots themselves hearing of the Goodness of the Western parts of Scotland went thither under the Conduct of Reuda and either by Force or Friendship took possession of them and from thence they were called Dalreudini from this Reuda and Daal which signifies a share or portion This is all the Account Bede gives of this matter wherein there is not a Word of Gathelus and Scota or of Fergus his coming in the time of Alexander or any time after And it is somewhat strange that such a Man as Bede so inquisitive into these matters so well acquainted with the Story of Icolmkil or of the Monks of Hy or Jona should say nothing of all this For he seems to have concealed nothing he knew or had heard of and stuffs out his Books with some not very probable Relations And therefore it is not likely he would have omitted the former Stories if he had heard of them 2. The second Argument of any seeming force in the Advocate 's Discourse is That their Histories were first transmitted to Posterity by the Druids in Verses and it is probable some of these Druids being converted became their first Monks and so it was easie for them to inform their Monasteries and that the Monks at Iona or Icolmkill kept the Records there from the foundation of the Monastery about A. D. 560. where their Kings were buried untill the Reign of Malcolm Can-more that they had Annals in other Monasteries as at Scoon Paslay Pluscardin and Lindesfern Abercorn and Melross and that they had Historians who compiled Histories from them among whom he reckons as the most ancient Veremundus a Spaniard A. D. 1076. who dedicated his History to Malcolm Can-more and Joh. Campbell Turgott and Alredus Rivallensis who wrote of their affairs before Fordon And he goes about to prove Veremundus could not be counterfeited by Hector Boethius because he is cited by Balaeus Holinshed Gesner Chambers and because Hector gives an account to James V. that he was sent him from Icolmkill Which is the substance of what he saith about their old Histories before Fordon To which I answer 1. That here we have a very formal Pedigree of Historians which might with equal probability have been carried back to Gathelus his first coming out of Egypt For it is very hard to suppose so great a Prince and Son to a King of
tunc rudis soli Britanni Pictis modo Hibernis assueta hostibus adhuc feminudis facile Romanis armis signÃsque cesserunt The design of the Oratour was to lessen the Reputation of Caesar's Victory in comparison of that of Constantius and to that purpose it was very material to shew that he fought with the Britains alone who were themselves a rude People and had no other Enemies but such as were as rude as themselves the Picts and Irish. Now to what great purpose was it for him to say that the Britains fought with the Irish of the British Soil Were they so much better disciplined and so much more famous among the Romans for deeds of Arms than the original Irish that such an Emphasis must be laid upon that But the Advocate saith the comparison lies in this that then they had been used onely to the Picts and Irish but Constantius overcame them when they had been long trained up in War But if he had been pleased to have read the next Paragraph he would have found the Oratour taking no notice of the Britains greater experience in War but of a Roman Legion corrupted foreign Souldiers and Gallican Merchants drawn out of the Provinces to strengthen Carausius and Allectus in their Rebellion so that the Comparison lies between the Britains alone in Caesar's time and the strength of a well disciplined Roman Army in the time of Constantius And it is to be observed that according to Eumenius his own manner of speaking if he were to be understood in Buchanan's sense it should have been Soli Britannici for the British Soil For so he hath Victoria Britannica at the end of the same Oration and in another Britannica Trophaea So that neither Sense nor Grammar do favour Buchanan's Construction But he saith Ioseph Scaliger approves Buchanan 's Construction in his Notes on Tibullus I have searched the place and can find no such thing but I am afraid he mistook his own Notes for there Scaliger speaks about the Scoto-Brigantes and which is more he saith the Scots were yet in Ireland And because he is so accustomed to Maxims of Law I shall put him in mind of one that a Witness which a Man brings for himself he is bound to receive against himself 2. As to Claudian's Expression Scotorum cumulos flevit glacialis Ierne he saith this is not to be understood of Ireland but of a Countrey of Scotland of that Name near to which the Romans had a Camp the remainders whereof are still discernible and in which there are Stones found with Roman Inscriptions designing the stations of the Legions and Strathern in Scotland is more subject to long Frosts than Ireland is This I confess is ingeniously observed But I do not understand what the Roman Inscriptions prove as to the Scots being in those parts of Britain if the question were about the Romans they would be of some use I do not deny that Strathern had its Name from the River Ern and the Countrey might in Latin be called Ierne from thence But how doth it appear that Claudian or the Romans knew it by that Name We are certain that Ierne commonly passed for Ireland among them and that it was then accounted the Countrey of the Scots as appears by the express Testimony of Orosius who lived in that Age. And Dempster who fixes the Scots in Britain long before yet is so convinced by these words of Claudian that they were in Ireland that he supposes them driven thither by Theodosius and there destroyed by him And Claudian explains himself elsewhere when he saith Totam cum Scotus Iernen Movit infesto spumavit remige Tethys Where it seems ridiculous to say that the Scots put all Strathern into commotion and this Ierne had the Sea lying between it and Britain in whose Name Claudian speaks and Buchanan understands this of Ireland 3. He urges the great improbability that the Scots should manage so long a War for 600 years and not settle in Britain But this is that which is called begging the Question for the dispute is how long the Scots in Britain did make War upon the Britains Claudian saith in his time the Scots came from Ierne and made the Sea foam with their Oars Gildas saith the Irish usually returned home intending to come back and the Picts then rested for a time in the farthermost parts of the Isle Why should not Gildas have said that the Irish and Picts went back to the remote parts of the Island if they both inhabited there at that time If Gildas his Authority be allowed in this case I think it is clear enough to decide the Controversie For 1. Upon Maximus his withdrawing the Roman Legions and British Infantry which never returned he saith the Britains were then first infested with two cruel transmarine Nations the Scots from the Southwest and the Picts from the North. If there had been a War of 600 years from before Julius Caesar's time as the Advocate saith how comes Gildas to be so extremely mistaken as to say the first War began after Maximus his withdrawing the Roman Militia 2. He still speaks of their coming by Sea and carrying away their anniversary Prey beyond the Seas and trans Maria fugaverunt saith he of the Roman Forces driving them back How comes Gildas still to mention the Seas if they then inhabited the same Island But the Advocate saith that by Seas the Friths are understood and that in their old Laws the Frith of Forth is called Mare Scotiae the Sea of Scotland and the Frith of Dumbritton is called one part of the Mare Scoticum by the English Authours and this passage to and fro he makes to be easie but the other home to Ireland almost impossible with their Boats in the Irish Seas from whence he saith that the Bishop of St. Asaph 's Hypothesis is absurd and incredible but his very consistent To clear this we may observe 1. That to make these Friths to be called Seas not improperly he saith they are 40 Miles broad in some places and so makes the passage more difficult over them than from Ireland to Scotland for as Camden observes there is hardly 13 Miles distance between some part of Scotland and Ireland But this is to demonstrate the consistency of his own Hypothesis and the absurdity of the Bishop's 2. The Irish Writers say their Curroghs or light Boats cover'd with Leather were very convenient for transporting an Army though not so proper for a Sea-fight Adamnanus in the Life of St. Columba describes one of them in which St. Cormac went to Sea with all the Parts of a Ship and with Sails and Oars and a Capacity for Passengers and he saith he was out at Sea 14 Days Northward in it Now what absurdity or incredibility is there in it that such Vessels should convey the Irish forwards and backwards over so narrow
wonder at the Advocate 's looking on Baronius as more disinterested when the Conversion from a Pope was in question Which shews him to be such a stranger to Baronius that one would think he had never looked into him For Dempster is displeased with Baronius as one injurious to their Nation as to this first Conversion saying that there were no Christians in Scotland before Palladius but such as fled thither out of this part of Britain because of persecution And Baronius doth wonder that such a Conversion should be omitted not onely by Bede but by Marianus Scotus 5. The Magdeburgian Centuries he saith agree with Baronius and these are the Standards of Ecclesiastick History to the Professours of both Religions He had as good have said they were the Hercules Pillars and there is no passage beyond them But no learned Professours of either Religion allow these to be Standards How many Errours in Baronius have been discovered by the learned Antiquaries of his own Communion What Complaints have been made of his partiality to the Court of Rome not onely by the Sorbonists but by the King's Advocates in France And as to the Magdeburgians we commend them for their noble attempt and great diligence and industry but matters of Ecclesiastick Antiquity are extremely improved since that time More ancient Authours having been published out of MSS. and better Editions by comparing the Authours before printed with MSS. and many counterfeit Authours discovered and far greater Enquiries have been made into all parts of Ecclesiastick Antiquities so that after so many new discoveries to make these the Standards were almost as absurd as to make Ptolemy the Standard for modern Geography We do not disparage what he hath done when we say many things have been found out since his time 2. As to the mission of Palladius into Scotland the Advocate insists on these three things 1. That Bede affirms that he was sent to the Scots in Britain 2. That there is no probability in the Circumstances of his being sent into Ireland 3. That Dr. Hammond yields that the Scots were converted before Celestine 's time and therefore it is more probable that Palladius was sent Bishop to them To these particulars I shall give a distinct Answer 1. To Bede's Testimony he affirms that in the eighth of Theodosius the younger Palladius was sent by Celestine the first Bishop to the Scots believing in Christ. Wherein Bede onely applies Prosper's Words to the eighth of Theodosius which he had placed under Bassus and Antiochus Consuls but he doth not determine whether these Scots were in Ireland or in Britain But the Advocate saith all that which Bede saith before and after concerning the Scots relates to the Scots in Britain and therefore these Words are so to be understood Whereas Bede in the very beginning declares that Ireland was the proper Countrey of the Scots and that Dumbritton Frith did anciently separate the Picts and the Britains but the Scots coming afterwards to the Northern part of that Frith there setled themselves Which Words do evidently prove that Bede did not look on the Scots as ancient Inhabitants there for then he would have said that the Frith did antiquitus gentem Britonum à Scotis secernere but he never mentions the Scots but the Picts as the ancient Inhabitants on the Northern part of the Frith But saith the Advocate Bede 's Title of his Chapter is of the ancient Inhabitants of Britain and he mentions the Scots among them Very true but shall not Bede explain himself whom he means by the ancient Inhabitants viz. the Britains and Picts For by the Advocate 's reasoning the Saxons will be proved to have been in Britain before Julius Caesar as well as the Scots for they make up one of the five Nations spoken of in that first Chapter And so Bede doth not onely settle the Scots and the Picts in this Countrey by his first Chapter but the English too And it is an extraordinary sagacity that can discover this Chapter in Bede to be clear to a Demonstration that he makes the Scots to be ancient Inhabitants in Britain whereas to my dull apprehension Bede is clear the other Way But the Advocate proceeds to shew that the Name of Scots doth originally belong to the Scots in Britain and onely by way of communication to those in Ireland This were indeed to the purpose if it were proved And there ought to be the more care in doing it since it is so new and singular an opinion For even Buchanan saith that the Irish were at first called Scots and from thence they passed into Albany and that by the Name Scots their coming from the Irish is declared Joh. Major saith that Scotia among their Ancestours was the common Name for Ireland And if their ancient Annals may be believed the Name of Scot came from Scota the Wife of Gathelus whose Posterity went first into Ireland and then carried the Name into Scotland In Fordon and Elphinston there is another Scota mentioned as a Leader of the first Colony into Ireland who gave the Name to that Countrey of Scotia and Joh. Major saith She was the Mother of Hiber But whichsoever of these stands unless the Advocate will at last give up the Cause of their Ancient Annals which he hath contended so warmly for he must renounce this opinion of his that the Name of Scots doth originally belong to the Albian Scots and onely by way of communication to the Irish so that there is no need to produce the plain Testimonies of Orosius Bede and Isidore which make Ireland the proper Countrey of the Scots But it is a wonderfull subtilty from hence to infer as the Advocate doth as if it might have been justly doubted and were not true in all senses Doth he mean proper or improper senses Their words are plain that Ireland in a strict and proper sense was the Countrey of the Scots i. e. the Patria Originis though the other might afterwards be Patria incolatus Domicilii as the Advocate himself doth distinguish but that which follows from hence is that if the Scots came originally from Ireland then the Name of Scots doth not originally belong to the Scots in Britain but to those in Ireland unless he can shew that the Reason of the Name doth agree to them onely upon their removal into Britain As to take his own instance no one will question that the Colony of Virginia are called English because the Inhabitants of the Countrey from whence they came are so called But were not the Irish called Scots before they went into Scotland If not that could not be propriè Scotorum Patria as Orosius and Bede and Isidore affirm as England could not be said to be the proper Countrey of the English unless the Inhabitants were called English and the Colony of Virginia received its denomination of being English because they came from
long before their own it were a vain thing to hope for any Credit unless they could produce some Testimonies nearer those times which might be of some weight if they were Authentick And this is the Reason why these Inventers of History have still given out that they met with some Elder Writers out of whom they have pretended to derive their Reports Thus Hunibaldus pretends as much to follow the Old Sicambrian Manuscripts of Wasthald for the remote Antiquities of the Franks as Geffrey doth the Old British Manuscripts either for the Succession of the British Kings or the first bringing of Christianity hither But which makes this matter yet stranger Nennius himself who sometimes passes under the Name of Gildas saith nothing of this Tradition where he speaks of the first receiving of Christianity in Britain and yet Bale saith of him That he collected his Writings out of the former British Historians such as Teliesin Melkin Gildas and Elvodugus and it is not probable he would have left it out if he had found it in any of them But Bale quotes one of these British Authours viz. Melkinus Avalonius for this Tradition about Joseph of Arimathea and Arviragus but withall he confesses him to be a very fabulous Writer Leland saith That he met with the Fragments of Melkinus in the Library at Glassenbury by which he understood that he had written something of the British affairs but more especially concerning the Antiquity of Glassenbury and Joseph of Arimathea Which saith Leland he affirms without any certain Authour and which himself could not approve not thinking it at all Credible that Joseph of Arimathea should be buried there but rather some Eremit of that Name from whence the mistake first arose And elsewhere when he speaks of the Glassenbury Tradition He saith That twelve Eremits are reported to have come thither with one Joseph in the Head of them but not be of Arimathea as he supposes But still the Testimonies that concern this matter are derived from Glassenbury insomuch that even the British Historian hath the name of Avalonius from thence But some make use of this Testimony however to prove the Antiquity of this Tradition since this Authour is said to have lived Anno Dom. 550. under King Vortuporius so Bale but Pits places him ten years later under Magoclunus They might as well have made him contemporary with Gildas Cambrius or to have been Secretary to Joseph of Arimathea when he wrote his Epistles for they have no more Evidence to shew for the one than for the other The truth is there was an old Legend which lay at Glassenbury which Leland saw and out of which Capgrave hath transcribed that part which concerns this matter from whom Bale took it But it is so grosly fabulous that even Capgrave himself whose Stomach was not very nice as to Legends put an c. in the middle of it as being ashamed to set down the passage of Abaddar a great man in Saphat and the hundred and four thousand which were buried with Joseph of Arimathea at Glassenbury Yet this sensless and ridiculous Legend is by some thought to be the British History which William of Malmsbury appeals to for the proof of this Tradition and which he found in the Libraries of St. Edmund and St. Augustin But Malmsbury having designed to set the Antiquity of Glassenbury as high as he could called that a British History which is now found to be written by an English Monk as Archbishop Vsher hath evidently proved having several times perused it in the Cotton Library there being the very same passage in it which Malmsbury quotes And that he was no Britain is most certain because he calls the Saxon his Mother Tongue and England his Countrey And yet after all there is not a word of Joseph of Arimathea or his Companions in it all that is said is That in the Western parts of Britain there is a Royal Island called Gleston large and compassed about with Waters full of Fish and having other conveniences of humane life but which was most considerable it was devoted to the Service of God Here the first Disciples of the Catholick Law found an ancient Church not built as was reported by mens hands but prepared by God himself for the benefit of Men and which by Miracles was shewed to be consecrated to himself and to the Blessed Virgin To which they adjoined another Oratory made of Stone which they dedicated to Christ and to St. Peter The question is Who are here meant by these first Disciples of the Catholick Law not Joseph of Arimathea and his Companions who are never mentioned by him and who are never said to have found a Church there built to their hands but he speaks of some of the first Saxon Christians in those parts who might probably find there such a low Wattled Church as is described in Sir H. Spelman a Remainder of the British Christianity in that Island And this Passage affords us the best light into the true Original of this Tradition which was after so much heightned and improved as the Monks of Glassenbury thought convenient for the honour and privileges of their Monastery That which seems most agreeable to Truth from hence is That in the latter times of the British Churches when they were so miserably harassed and persecuted by the Pagan Saxons they were forced to retire into places of most difficult access for their own Security and there they made them such Churches as were suitable to their present condition and lived very retired lives being in continual fear of their barbarous Enemies Such a place this Island of Avalon or Glassenbury was which might be of far greater request among the Britains because it was the place where King Arthur was buried for I see no reason to question that which Giraldus Cambrensis relates concerning the finding the Body of King Arthur there in the time of Henry II. with an Inscription on a Leaden Cross which in Latin expressed that King Arthur lay there buried in the Island of Avalon For Giraldus saith he was present and saw the Inscription and the Body which is likewise attested by the Historians of that time as Leland proves at large And the account given that his Body was laid so deep in the Earth for fear of the Saxons farther confirms That this was a place of retreat in the British times but not without the apprehension of their Enemies Invasion This Church according to the Inscription on the Brass Plate on the Pillar in Glassenbury Church was in length 60 Foot in breadth 26. But that Inscription as the learned and judicious Antiquary Sir H. Spelman observes was by the Character not of above 300 years Antiquity and savours very much of the Legend In it we reade That the Church was first built by Joseph and his Companions but was consecrated by Christ himself to the Honour of his Mother This
till Cuthbert Archbishop of Canterbury obtain'd leave for it about Anno Dom. 758. Upon this Alford and Cressy charge him with a manifest mistake and great impertinency A mistake in that Ethelbert and Augustine were both buried in the Church of St. Peter and Saint Paul And what then Doth Sir H. Spelman say there was no burying in Churches before Cuthbert's time No. But that there was no Burying Place in Cities before that time For the Church of St. Augustine or St. Peter and St. Paul was without the City For so the MS. Chronicle of St. Augustine 's saith That when the Bodies of the Kings and Archbishops were carried thither to burial they follow'd our Saviour who suffer'd without the Gate And that it was like the children of Israel 's going out of Egypt c. Which is sufficient to prove the truth of Sir H. Spelman's Observation which relates to Burying in Cities and not in Churches And withall the Reason alledged in one of the Charters of King Ethelbert why that place was assigned for a Burying place is because the City is for the Living and not for the Dead But why do they not prove the Antiquity of Church-yards to be so great which was the most to the purpose But they say Sir H. Spelman 's Observation was impertinent Glassenbury being then a solitary place and very far from being a City It is true If the weight had been laid by him onely upon that there being no Evidence of any Roman City there But his design was to prove That Church-yards were not then adjoining to Churches because the Cemeteries were without the City and the Churches within in the British times And even in the Saxon times he saith although they buried in Churches yet those Churches in which they buried were without the Cities till Cuthbert first procured the alteration by Royal authority and some say by Papal too But the Monks of St. Augustine's denied the Pope's confirmation But the main Circumstance I shall insist upon is the Incongruity of this Story with the condition of the Roman Province at that time For there was no such British King then as Arviragus and in that Countrey as will appear by the more Southern parts of the Island being reduced into the form of a Province before Anno Dom. 63. when the Glassenbury Tradition saith Joseph of Arimathea came first to Britain For Tacitus saith it was done as to the nearest part of the Island when A. Plautius and Ostorius Scapula were Governours here and between them and Suetonius Paulinus were Didius Gallus and Veranius In probability the Belgae were subdued by Vespasian of whom Suetonius saith That he conquer'd here two powerfull Nations aboue twenty Towns and the Isle of Wight By which we find his employment was Westward and the Belgae and Damnonii were the two powerfull Nations that way And in all the Actions afterwards we find no Care taken by the Roman Generals to secure themselves against the Belgae as they did against the Brigantes and Silures among whom Caractacus commanded so that there could be no such British King at that time among the Belgae as Arviragus is supposed to have been For if there had been when Ostorius marched Northwards having suppressed the Iceni it is not to be supposed that he would have fixed his Garrisons on the Severn and the Avon to secure the Province For as our Judicious Antiquary hath well observed The design of Ostorius therein was to keep the Provincial Britains from joining with the others and therefore all on this side those Garrisons were within the Roman Province Now the Places where the Garrisons were placed are by Tacitus said to be Antona and Sabrina The latter is certainly the Severn which parted the Belgae and the Silures For Antona Camden reads Aufona although Northanton comes nearer the former Name and Southanton had its Name from the River Anton which there runs into the Sea and Ptolemy calls Trisanton i. e. saith Camden Traith Anton the Mouth of Anton But he chuses Aufona for this reason because the two Avons rise both in the Country of Northampton and so cut the Island that none can pass out of the North but they must cross one or the other of them or else fall upon the Roman Garrisons between the Remainders whereof he takes notice of between the rise of the two Avons at Gildsborough and Daintry by which means he hindred all intercourse between the Brigantes and the Roman Province as the other did between the Silures and them But if there had been such a British King as Arviragus among the Belgae what would the fortifying the Severn have signified when the Enemies to the Romans lived on the Roman side Tacitus indeed mentions an Expedition of Ostorius against the Cangi whom Camden sometimes thought a small People among the Belgae but upon better consideration he places them in Cheshire where he found an Inscription concerning the CEANGI And Tacitus saith They were not far from the Sea coast which looks towards Ireland R. White of Basingstoke supposes this Arviragus to bestow the Island on Joseph of Arimathea when Trebellius Maximus was Governour here who succeeded Petronius Turpilianus the year C. Suetonius Paulinus was Consul at Rome Which according to the Savilian Fasti was in the twelfth year of Nero and Anno Domini 67. four years after Joseph's coming according to the Glassenbury Tradition but that is no great matter if at that time we are sure there was such a King as Arvinagus among the Belgae But he again contradicts the Glassenbury Story For Malmsbury saith That the Barbarous King obstinately refused to quit his Religion but out of pity to them gave them the Island to live in but White saith He was well affected to the Christian Religion and was in all respects an admirable Prince This Arviragus he takes out of the British History where pleasant Stories are told of him and from thence in Matthew Westminster as of his opposing Claudius and then marrying his Daughter Genissa and the reconciliation between him and Vespasian by her means c. And how his Son Marius succeeded him and then Coillus who was wonderfully beloved by the Roman Senate Here we have found at last the three Kings of Glassenbury Arviragus Marius and Coillus as they are exstant in Capgrave and others So that the Glassenbury Tradition had not its perfection till it had received these improvements from the British History For William of Malmsbury though he took so great pains in this matter yet knew nothing of Arviragus Marius and Coillus He speaks indeed of three Pagan Kings giving twelve portions of Land to the twelve Brethren but he knew not their Names Which Grant he saith was confirmed by King Lucius to twelve others who were placed there in imitation of the first twelve And this continued to the coming of St. Patrick And yet towards the Conclusion of this Book
suppress them and the latter sent Lupicinus his General who arrived at London about the time the Council of Ariminum was dissolved and therefore in a time of such Confusion in the British Province it is not strange that these Churches should not be in so plentifull a condition as those which were the Seat of Trade and Government And Ammianus Marcellinus observes that the Provincial Bishops lived in a much meaner condition than those of the greater Cities especially of Rome And although a Heathen he very much commends them for their Temperance Humility and Modesty But Arianism was not the onely Heresie the British Churches were charged with For Gildas from hence makes every following Heresie to find a passage hither among which the chief was Pelagianism And Bede doth insinuate That Pelagius being a Britain and spreading his Doctrine far and near did corrupt these Churches with it which some late Writers having taken up have affirmed that both Pelagius and Coelestius after their Repulse at Rome came over into Britain and dispersed their Doctrine here Leland sadly laments the Condition of the Church of God that had no sooner recover'd it self from Arianism but a new Heresie sprung up to disturb the Peace and infect the minds of Christians But as Egypt brought forth the Authour of the former Heresie so did Britain the Authour of this which took his name from hence And is supposed to have been Morgan in British which by his conversation at Rome he turned into Pelagius And St. Augustine saith He was commonly called Pelagius Brito to distinguish him as he supposed from another Pelagius of Tarentum Leland observes that some made him a Britain as being born in that Bretagn which was called Aremorica on the Continent But I do not find that it had then lost its name of Aremorica The first time we find the name of Britannia given to that Countrey is in the Subscription of Mansuetus to the Council of Tours where he is named Episcopus Britannorum after which time it was frequently called Britannia Cismarina Minor Celtica c. Dempster not a Jesuit but a Lawyer takes it very ill of Browerus the Jesuit that he makes Pelagius a Scot But not as Dempster understands him For he explains himself That he meant one that came out of Ireland and therefore was Scoticae Originis For which he quotes Saint Jerome But Archbishop Vsher hath observed That he speaks there not of Pelagius but of Coelestius whom he makes the Cerberus to the Pluto according to his usual way of complementing his Adversaries But both he thinks came out of the British Islands The late Publisher of Marius Mercator endeavours to shew That our learned Primate was herein mistaken And that Saint Jerome doth not speak of Coelestius but of Pelagius himself And that by Pluto he means Ruffinus dead in Sicily three years before St. Jerome 's writing these Words But notwithstanding he did still bark through Pelagius his Mouth whom he compares to a great Scotch Mastiff from which Countrey he is derived in the Neighbourhood of Britain If these Words relate onely to Ruffinus and Pelagius it is certain that St. Jerome would have it believed That Pelagius came out of Ireland That which makes it most probable that he means them is That in the Preface to his Commentaries on Ezekiel he mentions the death of Ruffinus and then saith he hoped now he should be quiet to go on with his Commentaries on the Scriptures But not long after he complains That there were others which in his Room open'd their Mouths against him In the beginning of his Commentaries on Jeremiah which he undertook after he had finished those on Ezekiel he mentions one who carped at his Commentaries on the Ephesians and calls Grunnius i. e. Ruffinus his Forerunner And saith he was Scotorum pultibus praegravatus made fat with Scotch Flummery All this agrees very well with Pelagius whom Grosius describes as a very corpulent Man But there is one thing which makes the former Opinion not improbable which is That St. Jerome himself takes so much notice that Pelagius at that time wrote little or nothing about these matters but Coelestius was the Man who appeared especially in the two main Points about Original Sin and the Possibility of Perfection In his Epistle to Ctesiphon he saith That the Author of the Sect still held his Peace and his Disciples wrote for him Magistrorum silentia profert rabies Discipulorum Methinks Rabies agrees well enough with Cerberus and here it is meant of the Disciple Coelestius and not of Pelagius Which Expression answers very well to the other Mutus Magister latrat per Albinum Canem And he speaks as if he designed to draw him from his closeness and retirement Which doth far better agree to the mute Person than to the barking Cerberus There is then no Improbability that Coelestius and Pelagius may be both meant But if any other Countrey hath a mind to challenge Coelestius to themselves I think they may be allow'd to put in their Claim notwithstanding these Expressions But it is very unworthy in the same Author to prove Pelagius to have been an Irish Scot and at the same time to charge his Vices on the British Nation He cannot deny That Pelagius had a great natural sharpness of Wit since St. Augustine and his other Adversaries allow it But then he saith it was fierce and contentious after the fashion of his Countrey and which he could not shake off by his long Conversation at Rome He grants that his Exhortations to Piety were vehement and earnest but written in an uncouth and imperious Style more Gentis according to the humour of his Nation But why must the British Nation be reproached for the particular faults of Pelagius It is a very ill way of confuting Pelagius to attribute Mens Vices and Vertues to their Countries And is contrary both to the discretion of a Philosopher and to the Grace of a Christian Pelagius might have had the same temper if he had been so happy as to have been born in a Neighbour Countrey And I do not see how his Way of writing doth affect the British Churches Where the Christians might be very wise and humble notwithstanding this severe and unjust Character of the British Nation Which as all National Reproaches is not so great a Reproach to any as to him that gives it But the greatest Adversaries to Pelagius did not give him so ill a Character Saint Augustine saith he had the esteem of a very Pious man and of being a Christian of no mean rank Was this Pro more Gentis too And of his Learning and Eloquence St. Augustine gives sufficient Testimony in his Epistle to Juliana the Mother of Demetrias to whom Pelagius wrote an Epistle highly magnified for the Wit and Elegance of it But Garnerius will not allow that Pelagius was able to write it
himself without the assistance of his Disciples Coelestius and Annianus But why should this be so hard a thing for a Man whom he confesses to have had a great deal of Natural Wit and St. Augustine saith He lived long yea very long in Rome and kept the best Company there Could a Britain never attain to so much Purity of the Roman Language as to write an Epistle to the Envy of those meliore solo prognatorum as he speaks who were born in more happy soils What mean such unbecoming reflexions on the Countrey of Pelagius when himself confesses he had so much Mother Wit And one would think of the two that is the better soil which produceth more Wit than Words Our Monkish Historians make Pelagius not onely a Monk at Bangor but the Abbat there So the Authour of the Polychronicon and John of Tinmouth Leland takes it from them To whom Bale adds That he was made Bishop in the East But without any Authority Leland saith That he went over into Aremorica to visit his Countreymen who were newly settled there being carried over by Maximus Gildas seems to imply That Maximus was originally a Britain when he calls him Germen plantationis suae But Bede takes no notice at all of his Countrey The Saxon Annals Fabius Ethelwerd Huntingdon and others say he was born in Britain But Zosimus affirms That he was a Spaniard and took it ill that he was no more prefer'd when his Countreyman Theodosius was made Emperour However this were it is certain that he was declared Emperour in Britain and that he went out of Britain with the Forces here And that Gratian's Legions revolted to him upon which he fled and was killed And that Maximus being unsatisfied with Gratian's share of the Empire went into Italy against Valentinian and was after four years destroyed at Aquileia But in all the Proceedings of Maximus I see no ground for the settling the Colonies of Britains in Aremorica For he landed at the Mouth of the Rhine saith Zosimus and was well received by the Roman Legions there abouts What occasion then was there for his coming against the Aremorici Or if he had driven them out had he nothing to doe with his Souldiers but to people Countries with them But we find the Aremorici in quiet possession of their Countrey after this time So that we see no reason at all for Pelagius to go to his Countreymen in Aremorica From thence Leland carries him to all the Places of Learning in Gaul As there were many at that time And while he was thus passing up and down he met with Julianus of Campania whose Wit and Learning recommended him to Pelagius But this cannot hold For Pelagius lived a long time in Rome before his Heresie was discovered After the Discovery of it many years passed before Julian appeared in it And in the last Work of St. Augustine just before his death He calls Julian a young man Although he had been a Bishop in Campania at a Place called Aeculanum thence his Title was Episcopus Eclanensis The Town stood faith Holstenius near Mirabella But since its Destruction the See was removed to Frigento and the Bishop called Episcopus Frequentinus If Pelagius passing through Gaul made so long a Stay in Rome as St. Augustine saith before he was suspected of Heresie there is no probability at all in the Monkish Tradition of his being Abbat of Bangor And there is not much more of Bangor's being so famous a Monastery at that time or of Pelagius his being a Monk therein For the British Monasteries were no elder than St. Patrick's time as I may have occasion to shew afterwards And even at Rome it self the Monastick state had not been long known there being brought out of the East by Athanasius and Eusebius of Vercelles And in Pelagius his time those were called Monks at Rome who had no Office in the Church but yet retired from the common Emploiments of the World for Sacred Studies and Devotion and where any Number of these lived together that was called a Monastery Such was the Monasterium Pinneti mention'd by Ruffinus not far from Rome Probably a House of Melania whither they were wont to retire in times of greater Devotion Garnerius confesses that Pelagius was no otherwise a Monk than as those were then called so who led stricter Lives than others within their own Houses of which Number he reckons Pammachius Paulinus Melania Demetrias and others at that time to whom Pelagius was well known and much esteemed by them before his Heresie was discover'd The chief Emploiment of these Persons next to their Devotions was the Study of the Scriptures as appears by St. Jerome's Epistles And some grave Person made it his business to instruct his Disciples therein So St. Jerome did at Bethlehem So Ruffinus did Pammachius Melania and her Family And so Pelagius did at Rome where he had Scholars whom he brought up as appears both by Coelestius and Julianus whom he instructed very young and by Timasius and Jacobus From this Emploiment it was that he wrote his short Commentaries on St. Paul's Epistles and his Epistles to Melania and Demetrias But after he was accused of Heresie his time was spent in Vindication of himself in Africa Asia and Rome and after many Bandyings to and fro from want of understanding the meaning of Pelagius he was besides the Councils in Africa at last condemned in a Council at Antioch under Theodotus as Marius Mercator shews And from thence forward he spent the Remainder of his Life in Obscurity dying somewhere in the East From whence it appears that there is no probability that Pelagius and Coelestius should come back to Britain to spread their Heresie here For he complain'd of his Age when he set forth his Commentaries at Rome about Anno Domini 404. And he was certainly in the East at the Council of Diospolis Anno Domini 415. from whence he sent Coelestius to Rome but abode there himself with Albina Pinianus and Melania And wrote Letters to clear himself first to Innocentius and then to Zosimus who was so well satisfied therewith that he wrote a sharp Letter to the African Bishops who had condemned him in his Vindication severely taxing his Accusers Although there were Heresie in that Confession which Coelestius tendred to Zosimus and which he esteemed Orthodox And St. Augustine is fain to make use of all his Wit to bring the Pope off from approving of Heresie Henr. de Noris confesseth that he was circumvented by the Pelagians But it was in a matter of Fact saith Jansenius What when he denied Original Sin in that very Paper he delivered in to Zosimus Cappellus thinks it better to deny Zosimus his Letter but therein he is condemned by Petavius and others who have lately written about this matter and say that Cappellus his Opinion is singular and false being contradicted by the Testimonies of Marius Mercator
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
condemned But if this had been done by Gelasius is it probable that Hormisdas his Successour would have stuck so much at it as Maxentius saith that he did But he refers them for the sense of the Church to St. Augustine and Prosper and Hilary And the Definitions of his Predecessours Maxentius rails against this Answer as unsatisfactory and next to heretical and sets St. Augustine's Sayings against those of Faustus Afterwards Caesarius Bishop of Arles not onely wrote against Faustus his Doctrine but by his means chiefly it was condemned in the Second Council of Orange Which asserted the Necessity of Preventing Grace The denying whereof was the main Errour charg'd on Faustus not so much as to good Works for Jansenius hath at large proved That the Semipelagians did yield the Necessity of Internal Grace as to them but Faustus and Cassian and Gennadius denied it as to Faith or Good Inclinations But to return to St. Germanus and his Companions into Britain If we give Credit to our Antiquaries they did other Kindnesses to the British Churches besides the confuting Pelagianism whereof two are most considerable 1. The Institution of Schools of Learning among the Britains 2. The Introduction of the Gallican Liturgy into the use of these Churches 1. As to Schools of Learning none were more famous among the Britains than those of Dubricius and Iltutus who are both said to have been the Disciples of St. German The Anonymous Authour of the Chronicle in Leland saith that St. Germanus and Lupus having rooted out Pelagianism consecrated Bishops in several parts of Britain and among the rest they placed a Cathedral at Landaff and made Dubricius Archbishop who disposed of his Disciples to several Churches He made Daniel Bishop of Bangor and sent Iltutus to a Place from him called Lan Iltut or the Church of Iltutus Camden saith to this day it is called Lantuit where the Foundations of many Houses are still to be seen Near the Place called Bovium in the Itinerary now Boverton But there is another Place near Nidum or Neath whose name comes very near it Llanylted The old Register of Landaff after it hath mention'd the frequent Messages the Britains sent to the neighbour Bishops of Gaul for assistence against the Pelagians and the coming of Germanus and Lupus sent by them it adds that they consecrated Bishops in many Places and made Dubricius Archbishop over all the Britains Dextralis partis Britanniae Of the right hand part of Britain With which John of Tinmouth and Capgrave agree What this Right hand part of Britain was at the time of the Consecration of Dubricius is not so easie to understand Archbishop Vsher takes it for South Wales it being the custome of the Britains to call the South the Right hand side so Asserius Menevensis calls Sussex the Region of the Right hand Saxons But it is observable that Asserius there makes Demetia or South Wales to be but a part of what he calls Dextralis pars Britanniae For when he saith in general That all the Countrey of the Right hand of Britain submitted to King Alfred he then instanceth particularly in Hemeid King of Demetia and Houil and other Kings of Guent by which North Wales is as much understood as South Wales is by the other And therefore I rather think Dubricius was made Archbishop over all the Britains in those parts For Ranulphus Cestrensis saith The Bishop of Caerleon had seven suffragan Bishops under him And Matt. Westminster saith That Dubricius was made Archbishop of Caerleon although he might have a Seat at Landaff as the Register of that Church affirms by the Gift of Mouricus But it appears that he had then Archiepiscopal Power And possibly upon the Disturbance of those times the See might for a time be removed to Landaff From whence it was again removed by St. David to the Town bearing his Name But the Bishops of Landaff who succeeded were so unsatisfied with it That the Register of that Church saith That from Oudoceus the second from Dubricius for he succeeded Teliaus in that See They chose rather to be consecrated by the Archbishops of Canterbury than by their own Metropolitan of St. David 's as appears by the Protestation made by the Bishop of Landaff to Calixtus II. in the Council of Rhemes Anno Dom. 1119. But I confess it doth not seem very probable that a British Bishop should go for Consecration to Augustine the Monk or his Successours For the British Bishops did all look on them as Intruders And if any should have done it how would they have been received by the British Churches at that time It is therefore far more probable either that they went over to the British Archbishop at Dol in Britannie or that there was a Succession preserved for some time of the Archbishops of London among the Britains after the retirement of Theonus and Thadiocus the two other Metropolitans of London and York who as Matt. Westminster saith did withdraw when their Churches were destroyed by the Saxons with many of their Clergy into Wales where as long as that Succession continued they might exercise some parts of their Function leaving the main to the Archbisbop of Caerleon to whom of right it belonged And Ranulphus saith That Province extended as far as the Severn and so took in Chester Hereford and Worcester But before Dubricius was so much advanced the Authours of his Life speak of the great number of Scholars which flocked to him from all parts of Britain Not the Rude and Vulgar onely but Persons of greatest Reputation among whom they name St. Theliaus Samson Aidanus and many others Two Places they mention where he received and instructed his Disciples one at Hentlan on the River Wye where they say he had a Thousand Students with him whom he brought up in humane and divine Literature And the other was at Moch-rhos where he had a Place for Study and Devotion Iltutus by Vincentius and the Authour of the Life of Samson is said positively to have been a Disciple of St. Germanus And the Authour of the Life of Gildas saith That in the School of Iltutus many Noblemens Sons were brought up among whom he reckons as the chief Samson afterwards Archbishop of the Britains viz. at Dol in Britannie Paulus Bishop of the Oxismii the most Northern of the Aremorici which Bishoprick is since divided into three Treguier St. Pol de Leon and St. Brieu and Gildas called Sapiens of whom afterwards Leland to these adds David and Paulinus And saith his School flourished like an Vniversity among the Britains Bollandus and Henschenius make a very probable Conjecture That when St. German came into Britain and found the decay of Learning to have been the great occasion of the spreading of Pelagianism he appointed Dubricius and Iltutus to undertake the Education of the British Clergy And that by these means as Bede saith these Churches continued
afterwards pure and free from this Heresie Which was a wise and seasonable Institution And hereby we see the British Churches were not defective in Learning in their lowest Condition when the Britains were forced to leave their Habitations and to fly into Corners Of which besides these Nurseries of Dubricius and Iltutus we have a famous Instance in the Monastery of Banchor which even Bede saith was furnished with learned Men at the coming of Augustine into England This Banchor was distant but ten or twelve miles from Chester as Ranulphus Cestrensis and Bradshaw in his Life of St. Werburg say Leland in his Itinerary describes the Place as standing in a Valley and having the compass of a walled Town and two Gates remaining half a mile distant from each other Camden supposes it to be the Bomium in Antoninus being ten miles distant from Deva i. e. Chester That which was most observable in this British Monastery was that Men there were bred up to Learning and Devotion together and so more resembling our Colleges than the Egyptian Monasteries where men were brought up to Ignorance and Labour as much as to Devotion Wherein the Benedictines followed them according to their first Institution For St. Benedict himself not onely despised Learning as the Writers of his Life say But he takes no care about it in the Rule of his Order And when Boniface gave an account to Zachary of his setting up a Benedictine Monastery at Fulda he sets the Monks out by their Abstinence and hard Labour with their own Hands without Servants It is true that Trithemius speaks much of the Schools of Learning in the Benedictine Monasteries but not before Anno Dom. 890. which was after the Constitutions of Charles the great who appointed Schools for instructing Youth both in Monasteries and Cathedrals Which gave the first Countenance and Encouragement to Learning at that time And Lupus Ferrariensis saith That the reviving of Learning was then owing to him But although these Constitutions extended no farther than to Grammar Schools yet from hence those who were inclined to Learning in the Monasteries applied themselves more to it and by degrees gained a great Reputation by it as Rabanus Maurus at Fulda whose esteem drew Lupus thither and many others Which example prevailing and the Monks finding such resort to increase their Wealth as well as Reputation as Aub. Miraeus observes from that time the Monasteries were desirous to have some of their Number to be eminent for Learning which had been before so much neglected by them as wholly besides the Rule of their Order But the Monasteries of the Western Churches before St. Benedict's time such as that of St. Ambrose St. Eusebius of Vercelles St. Augustine in Africa St. Martin in Gaul were chiefly intended as Nurseries to the Church and the Persons educated therein were brought up with a design to doe the Church service afterwards This method of Education taking so much in other Churches as in Gaul where so many eminent Bishops were taken out of the Monastery of Lerins according to the Rule of Caprasius St. German who was so well acquainted with St. Honoratus St. Hilary of Arles and others of that Education might probably be the first Instrument of setting up this way in the British Churches And to confirm this St. Patrick who carried over this Monastick Education into Ireland spent many years under the Discipline of St. German as Probus and Jocelin the Writers of his Life do agree And those who have written of St. German have mention'd him as one of his Disciples as Erricus of Auxerre And William of Malmsbury saith he was not onely a Disciple of Saint German but being made Bishop by Celestine he was sent by St. German into Ireland And in the Irish Monasteries there were Schools like those of Dubricius and Iltutus for the breeding of Youth in Learning For therein as Rouse an Antiquary in Edward IV. time saith The Masters did teach secundum formam Studiorum antiquorum according to the ancient method of Learning Which our learned Primate understands of joining the Studies of humane Learning with divine of which he produces an Instance in a MS. of the Library of Worcester Being a Commentary of an Irish Bishop upon Martianus Capella's Astrology which he read to his Disciples in the Monastery of St. Remigius in Down And the Authour of the Opus Tripartitum of the Life of St. Patrick saith That he set up at Armagh Summum studium literale Which in the Language of that time is the same with an Vniversity onely this is a Law-term and implies a Legal Society incorporated for the Profession of Learning which the Civilians tell us None but the Supreme Authority of a Nation can doe In this School at Armagh Caradoc of Lancarvan in his Life of Gildas saith That he was a Professour Studium regens praedicans in Civitate Ardmaca But the Anonymous Authour of his Life published out of an ancient MS. by Joh. Ã Bosco saith That Gildas going over into Ireland in the time of Ammeric i. e. about Anno Dom. 566. found both Religion and Learning much decay'd there and that he built many Churches and Monasteries and brought up many Noble Mens Sons therein In his younger days he saith Gildas went to Iren and visited the Schools of many Learned Men and enquired their Opinions in Philosophical and Divine matters Some question hath been made by Learned Men what this Authour means by Iren The most easie and obvious sense is to take it for Ireland where there were so many Schools of Learning in the Monasteries of St. Patrick's foundation And Iris is used by Diodorus Siculus for Ireland And Ierne in the Book de Mundo and Apuleius and the Inhabitants are called Irenses by Ordericus Vitalis and the Countrey is called Erin by the Inhabitants as Archbishop Vsher observes But the marginal Note of Joh. Ã Bosco hath led some quite out of their way in seeking for this Place Which is That Iren was an Vniversity then in Great Britain And from hence they have proceeded to prove our famous University of Oxford to be meant by it First Iren say they was mistaken for Icen and that for Ychen and Ychen for Rydychen and Rydychen in the British Tongue signifies the same with Vadum Boum and that is the same with Oxford I cannot think Learned Men write these things any otherwise than as Sports of Wit which are intended for the diversion and not for the conviction of the Reader As likewise when the same Authours produce out of Constantius his Life of St. German Regionis illius Vniversitas to prove the Antiquity of their Vniversity But that Passage in the Copy of Asserius printed by Camden is more material viz. That St. German staid half a year in Oxford and approved the Orders made by Gildas Melkin Nennius and
retiring thither out of Impatience of the Roman Yoke who by degrees grew up into a considerable number of People It is not to be question'd that there was a Stock of Old Britains in those Northern Parts as appears by the Army under Galgacus and the Actions against Vrbicus Agricola Marcellus and Severus But their continual Wars with the Roman Legions who were placed about the Wall on purpose to take all Advantages against them must needs exhaust them by degrees and lessen them so much as to leave room enough for new Recruits to come in and take up part of their Countrey And although for their own Security the Parts near the Wall might be well supplied on that side yet when so much Bloud retired to the Heart as was necessary to support Life a great deal must be called off from the extreme parts for a fresh supply of it and those parts must needs be left destitute of natural heat and Strength enough to maintain themselves For during the War which continued for several Ages the very Life of the British Nation beyond the Wall was in perpetual danger And not onely the Duty and Service but the many Diseases and Accidents of War could not in so long a tract of time but very much impair the British Strength and leave the remoter Parts if not wholly void of Inhabitants yet not in a Condition to withstand a foreign Invasion I grant that Tacitus Dio Herodian Vopiscus c. take no notice of any other Enemies the Romans hād at that time in those Parts besides the Britains But then I think the Argument may be thus turned upon Camden What makes the latter Writers so expresly and distinctly mention the Picts if they were no other than the Old Britains so often spoken of by Roman Historians I do not understand why their continuing an old Custome should now give them a new Name The Britains however rude were no more Picts then than they were at Caesar's coming What makes the Roman Writers so of a sudden alter their Style and leave off a Name so famous among the Romans for the name of Picts which was not heard of before The first mention we find of them is in Eumenius his Panegyrick to Constantius where he takes notice of the different State of the Britains when Caesar subdued them from what they were in Constantius his time Then saith he they were a rude half naked People and so easily vanquished But now the Britains were exercised by the Arms of the Picts and the Irish. Nothing can be plainer than that Eumenius here distinguishes the Picts from the Britains and supposes them to be Enemies to each other Neither can we reasonably think this a Name then taken up to distinguish the barbarous Britains from the Provincial For that distinction had now been of a very long standing and if it had been applied to that purpose we should have met with it in Tacitus or Dio or Herodian or Zosimus who speak of the Extra-provincial Britains under no other Name but of Britains Dio is so exact as to set down the Names of distinction then used for those Britains and he saith they were of two sorts the Maeatae and the Caledonii If the name of Picts had then comprehended them all no doubt he would have mention'd it on that occasion Zonaras likewise calls them all then by the name of Britains But it is said That the Panegyrist himself calls the Caledonians Picts who were certainly Britains His words are Non dico Caledonum aliorúmque Pictorum Silvas Paludes where H. Valesius observes it ought to be read Non Dicaledonum aliorúmque Pictorum For Ammianus Marcellinus saith the Picts were divided into the Dicaledones and the Vecturiones It is ingeniously conjectured by Mr. Camden that these Names were taken from the Situation of the People the first from Dehe◠and Caledones or the Caledonians on the Right-hand and the other from Chwithic which signifies the Left-hand in the British Language But Archbishop Vsher observes that he is mistaken in supposing the Right-hand among the Britains to be the West and the Left-hand the East for he plainly proves that by the one is understood the South and the other the North. And Bede shews that the Northern and Southern Picts were divided from each other by a Ridge of Mountains which John Fordon saith was Mount Grampius which parted the Scots and the Picts For the Scots came into that part of the Picts Countrey which lay next to Ireland from whence they came thither under the conduct of Reuda as Bede saith Who as some think was the Chief of the Six Sons of the King of Ulster who as Giraldus Cambrensis saith with no small Fleet came into the Northern Parts of Britain and there settled themselves from whom that Countrey was called Scotia Which if it happen'd in the time of Constantius as Archbishop Vsher proves from the Anonymous Life of St. Patrick it agrees very well with what Ammianus Marcellinus saith That in the latter end of his Reign the Scots and the Picts were both joined against the Britains The Scots as Gildas and Bede say coming from the West and the Picts from the North And so Fabius Ethelwerd saith the Picts came from the North and the Scots from the West who took possession of the Southwest parts of Caledonia beyond Glota and Bodotria or Dumbritton and Edenborough Frith And so the Mons Grampius or the Dorsum Britannicum as some call it parted the Picts and the Scots the Old Britains still living between the Wall and the two Friths For Bede expresly saith That both the Scots and the Picts lived beyond them and he likewise adds That upon the remove of the Roman Legion they took in all the Countrey as far as Severus his Wall where the Britains dwelt before I confess the Roman Province had different Bounds at several times it sometimes extending as far as Antoninus his Wall or Graham's Dike between the two Friths Sometimes again it was brought within the Compass of Hadrian and Severus his Wall id est between the Tine and the Esk And Bede thinks that the last Wall made by the Romans was where Severus his Wall stood If so that whole Countrey between the two Walls must be then abandon'd for 100 Miles Which some object against as an improbable thing The Wall being so much longer and consequently more indefensible by the Britains But in probability the Britains were then willing to let their Enemies have the more room to prevent being disturbed by them And this was the main Security they always had the Linea Valli relating to this Wall from Hadrian's time And although sometimes in a bravery the Roman Souldiers would march to Antoninus his Wall and drive the Britains before them yet generally the Roman Province was bounded by Severus his Wall and therefore Gallio Ravennas might at last chuse rather to make
not were the Original Picts but not called by that Name till new Colonies came over to people the Countrey after the terrible Devastation of it by the Continuance of the Roman Wars For Claudian makes Thule the Countrey of the Picts And after all the Disputes which have been about it Olaus Rudbeck hath made it very probable that Scandinavia is meant by it Which he proves not onely from the Testimony of Procopius who affirms it but from the exact Agreement of the Relations of Pytheas Isidorus and others with that and neither with Iseland nor any other Place Besides Bede saith The common Tradition was that the Picts came out of Scythia Which is affirmed by Matt. Westminster and many others But they do not mean the Asian but the European Scythia Which comprehended under it all the most Northern Nations Ab extremo Aquilone saith Pliny And elsewhere he saith That the Getae the Daci and Sarmatae and even the Germans were called Scythians Herodotus mentions the Northern Scythians to whom there was no access by those who dwelt near the Palus Maeotis without the help of seven Languages And when Darius fought with them they retired Northwards towards their own Countrey Ptolemy places the Royal Scythians near the Hyperborean Mountains Which could never be found in the vast Plains of Poland and Muscovy There being no Mountains there answering to their Description as Hebersteinius and Matthias à Micou confess And therefore Olaus Rudbeck hath undertaken to prove not without great shew of Reason That these Mountains were no other than the Ridge of Mountains in Sweden where the seat of the ancient Scythians was And that Ptolemy was extremely mistaken in the Situation of the Northern Nations removing them several Degrees more Eastward than they ought to have been and so very much straitning Scandinavia Which Jornandes calls the Work-house of Nations and the same Jornandes affirms from Josephus That the Sueones were the true Scythians whom Xenophon takes to be the Governing People of Europe in his time As the Persians were in Asia and the Carthaginians in Africa And the old Greek Geographers as is said before knew of but two Nations in Europe besides themselves viz. the Scythae towards the North and the Celtae towards the West These European Scythians did make frequent Expeditions by Sea as appears by the old Gothick Histories And Olaus Rudbeck observes from them That it was a Custome for them to go abroad by Sea under the Conduct of one of their Princes to see for Booty And Tacitus saith particularly of the Sueones that they were well provided of Shipping And therefore there can be no improbability that these Northern Nations should people that part of Britain which lay nearest to them And Sueno the first Historian of Denmark saith That Helghi the Son of Haldan the Son of Skiold the first Monarch there was so powerfull at Sea that he was called Rex Maris the King of the Sea And Saxo Grammaticus saith That having subdued the King of the Sclavi he sailed into divers Passages of the Sea Andreas Velleius gives this Reason why the Northern Nations were so soon and so much given to Expeditions by Sea because their Kings having many Children they thought them best employ'd abroad in seeking other Countries and getting Spoils at Sea And upon the old boast of the Scythians concerning their Antiquity and Nobility might be grounded that Saying of Galgacus That the Caledonian Britains were the most noble of any of them Among these Scythians Pliny reckons the Agathyrsi Who had their Name saith Olaus Rudbeck from Aggathyr one of the Gothick Names for Neptune From Agga signifying Power at Sea and Tyr Power at Land These Agathyrsi saith he were a sort of People who lived near the Sea in the Sinus Codanus and were wont to prey upon the Spoils of the Sea Iornandes places them in Scandia and calls them Agantzyrios They were remarkable in Antiquity for Painting their Bodies as not onely appears from Virgil's Pictique Agathyrsi But from what Solinus saith of them That their Bodies were painted Colore caeruleo just as the old Picts were Tacitus observes of the Arii a fierce Northern People That they had Tincta Corpora i. e. were Picts And the same Virgil saith of the Geloni who were next Neighbours to the Agathyrsi So that Hector Boethius his Conjecture is not at all improbable who deduces the Picti from the Agathyrsi i. e. from the Maritime Inhabitants of the Baltick Sea or as he expresses it from those who came first out of Sarmatia into the Cimbrick Chersonese and from thence into Scotland This being to me the most probable Account of the Original of the Picts I now come to that of the Scots And to doe right to all Pretenders I shall impartially set down the several Claims of the Scotish and Irish Antiquaries and in passing make some Remarks upon them I begin with the Scotish Pretences Dempster hath given a large Catalogue of the Scotish Antiquaries whom he never saw such as Marcerius the first Writer of their History whom he places Anno Dom. 53. From him he saith Veremundus took his Materials whom Hector Boethius professes to follow and Cornelius Hibernicus another of Hector's great Authours who is said by him to have lived Anno Dom. 1160. about 80 years after Veremundus according to Dempster's computation Lesly or Robert Turner as some think mentions some ancient Annals which Hector takes no notice of in particular but Dempster doth as those of Paslet and Scone and other Monasteries It would tend very much to the clearing of the Scotish Antiquities if some of these ancient Annals or Lieger Books were printed by some of their Learned Men who have never been wanting in that Nation since Hector's time And it hath rendred their Credit the more suspicious because they have been so long kept up when all the old Annals which have been found among us have either been carefully published or our Writers have on all Occasions appealed to their Authority and made use of their own Words to justifie their Assertions Whether this hath been done by Hector Buchanan or Lesly as to these Annals I leave the Reader to determine I omit Dempster's other ancient Authours who were never heard of by any besides himself But it is somewhat strange that even such as Veremundus and Cornelius should never fall into any hands that I can find but those of Hector Boethius And that he should never so much as mention John Fordon's Scoti-chronicon Pits confounds this Authour with John de Fordam Confessour to our King John and so places him Anno Dom. 1210. Wherein he is follow'd by the Learned Ger. Vossius He was Abbat of Ford in Devonshire saith Leland and he mentions no Historical Writings of his But it is certain that John Fordon who wrote the Scoti-chronicon lived after
before Which Expedition of his happen'd Anno Dom. 343. after his success over the Franks and he passed an Edict still exstant in the Theodosian Code when he was at Bologn in his Passage which bears date that year And a Coin of his is mention'd by Du Cange and Spanheim wherein the Effigies of Constans is on one Side and on the Reverse an armed Man on Shipboard with the Image of Victory and the Inscription of Bononia Oceanen being Coined on purpose to preserve the memory of this Passage And upon his coming over things were quieted here but not long after they began to make new Incursions within the Bounds of the Province as is evident from the foregoing Passage of Ammianus Marcellinus when Lupicinus was sent over who arrived at London saith he in the middle of Winter to take Counsel how to proceed In the time of Valentinian the same Historian saith That there seem'd to be a general disturbance through the whole Empire by the barbarous Nations who lay near them And among the rest he mentions the Picts whom some render Redshanks the Saxons the Scots and the Attacots who were continually vexing and doing mischief to the Britains so that in a little time the Britains were reduced to a miserable condition by a new Conspiracy of the Barbarians wherein Nectaridus the Comes Maritimi Tractûs or Roman Admiral and Fallofaudes the General were both killed And then Valentinian sent over Theodosius a famous Captain Father to the first Emperour of that Name with considerable Forces For at that time the Picts of both kinds the Deucalidones and Vecturiones the Attacotti a fierce Nation and the Scots dispersing themselves up and down did abundance of mischief But Theodosius leaving London dispersed his Forces likewise into several parts who surprized the Enemies and recover'd their Booty which they restored to the Owners onely reserving a small share for the Souldiers And so in a short time he put the City out of its fears and difficulties and entred it as it were in Triumph And then took care to have good Officers placed here Civilis for Administration of Justice and Dulcitius for Military Affairs Who these Attacotti were who joyn'd with the Picts and Scots our Antiquaries are not agreed But because of their joining with the other and yet being distinguished from them it seems most probable that they were the Wild Britains For St. Hierome doth say they were a British People But what the Reason of the Name was is not yet understood and I doubt will not be unless some happen to derive it from the Phoenician Language What great mischief had been done to the Britains by this Combination of their Enemies appears by the care taken by Theodosius after his beating them out of the Countrey to restore the Cities and Garrisons and to settle the Guards upon the Frontiers which being done That part of the Countrey which he recover'd from them he obtained leave to have it named a New Province And it was called Valentia from the Emperour's Name This was done Anno Domini 368. And the next year Theodosius returned to the Emperour's Court. From that time we reade no more of their Incursions till Maximus in the time of Gratian Son to Valentinian was set up by the Souldiery in Britain to be Emperour Then Prosper set out by Pithaeus saith Maximus overcame the Picts and Scots making new Incursions Which he thought he had done so effectually as to fear no disturbance on that Sides And therefore took away from hence all the Flower both of the Roman and British Souldiery to make good his Title against Gratian and Valentinian and after against Theodosius So that there was no possibility of their return to secure the Frontiers from their Enemies And this proved the fatal Blow to the Britains For the Empire being so divided and Maximus forced to keep his Army together those parts were left open to the Rage and Fury of their Merciless Enemies And if the Authour of the Eulogium and Giraldus Cambrensis may be believed Gratian and Valentinian entred into a League with the Gothick Picts and helped them with Shipping to convey them into the Northern parts of Britain on purpose to withdraw Maximus his Army out of Gaul Who coming thither in great Numbers and finding the Countrey naked and without defence settled themselves in those Parts Not as though the Picts had not come hither before but they never came over in so great Numbers and with so much Incouragement as they did now And it seems not improbable that Gratian and Valentinian should at that time deal with the Gothick Nation to give a diversion to Maximus For Zosimus assigns that as one of the great Causes of Gratian's Ruine that he seemed more fond of the barbarous Nations than of the Romans And Maximus charged Valentinian with making use of the Hunns and the Alani against him Which is not denied by St. Ambrose who was sent by Valentinian on an Embassy to him These Hunni and Alani were as is commonly said Inhabitants of Sarmatia Europaea near to the Palus Maeotis The Alani did live upon the Tanais saith Hadrianus Valesius And the Hunni saith he were a Scythian People between the Pontus and the Caspian Sea upon the Northern Parts of the Caucasus from whom the Abares Turks and Hungarians are descended But whosoever observes Ammianus Marcellinus his Description of them will find that the Hunni were the Asiatick Tartars and the Alani the European The Hunni in the time of Valens passed over the Palus Maeotis in vast Numbers and after having killed many of the Alani took the rest into Confederacy with them and having conquer'd the Goths in those Parts inlarged their Power as far as the Danube Where they lay ready to come into the Roman Empire on any Occasion And it is not to be wonder'd if Gratian should employ Persons into Scandinavia to draw out greater Forces from thence thereby to make a Revulsion as to Maximus his Designs in the Northern Parts of Britain However this were Gildas from this time dates the miserable Condition of the Britains as being in no Posture to defend themselves at Home Nennius saith That Maximianus as he calls him carried all the Forces out of Britain and killed Gratian the Emperour And would not let the British Souldiers return to their Wives Children or Possessions but gave them another Countrey instead of it In the Western parts of Gaul saith the Interpolatour of Nennius And these saith Nennius are the Aremorican Britains who never after returned to their own Countrey And from hence he saith Britain was seized upon by foreign Nations and its own Natives were driven out and would so continue till God helped them But the British History set forth by Geffrey hath improved the Story in many Particulars First It makes this Maximianus to marry the Daughter of Octavius and so to come to the Kingdom of
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
Name was Suana Daughter to Vectgistus a great Man about Hamburgh If he suppose Hamburgh then built he was extremely mistaken for it was onely a Castle erected on the Elb in the time of Charles the Great for preventing the Incursion of the Sclavi as appears by the Testimonies of Eginhardus and Albertus Stadensis After which he built a City and founded a Church there as Adamus Bremensis and Helmoldus agree Which City had its Name from a Neighbour Wood called in the Saxon Hamme as Lambecius saith in Ditmarse there are two Woods still called Suderhamme and Norderhamme But to return to Suffrifridus When according to Custome saith he a Colony of Frisians was to be drawn out Hengist and Horsa were their Captains and so went for old England or Anglen in Jutland where they were kindly received by means of Vetgistus and from thence took the opportunity of coming into Britain From hence he finds fault with Crantzius for making Angria in Westphalia to be Old Anglen and saith That Bede onely reckons the Mother's Line and not the Father's But his Occa Scarlensis on whom he chiefly relies is much such another Authour as Hunibaldus or Geffrey or Hector's Veremundus and therefore I shall say no more of him For I perceive scarce any of the Northern Nations wanted such Authours who endeavour'd to supply the defect of their Histories by their own Inventions So that it is necessary to lay open the pretended Antiquities in order to the setting forth the true The late Bishop of Munster a Person of far greater Judgment and Learning than Suffridus Petrus calls his Originals of the Saxons by no better a Title than of Canorae Nugae Sounding Trifles having no foundation in good Authority The Account he gives of the Saxons is this That they at first lived beyond the Elb where they had the same Situation with Tacitus his Angli whom he makes the farthest of the Suevi and therefore might well be the same People That in Bede's time they were come on this side the Weser and were settled in Westphalia and so they made a threefold Saxony of the Ostphali Angrivarii and Westphali who were called Olt-saxons by Bede and others Not that these were all originally Saxons But they bore the same Name being united in one common League So that as all the Germans which went into Gaul were called Franks so those who prevailed in Germany and went into Britain were called Saxons But Olaus Rudbeck after all hath found the Seat of the Saxons more North than Jutland where saith he The Name of the Saxons could never yet be found and where are no Mountains to be met with upon which Ptolemy places them on the back of the Cimbrick Chersonese but in that part of Sweden which lies between Vermelandia and Angermannia he hath found Norsaxen and Sodersaxen and Saxehundari and Saxewall and Saxen c. And in Smaland he hath discovered many Places taken from the Angles as Anglested Hundred Angloridia Anglodorpia Engelbeck c. But for our better understanding the Condition of that People who were called in by the Britains it will be most material to consider what is said of them by those who descended from them and lived here not long after their coming Bede who was himself a Saxon and lived nearest the time of the Saxons coming hither must be presumed to have understood best who they were and whence they came And although at the beginning he makes the Angles and Saxons all one saying the Angles or Saxons being invited by King Vortigern came hither in three Keels or long Boats at first yet when he adds that Numbers came afterwards he then distinguisheth them into three distinct sorts of People viz. the Saxons Angles and Jutes The Saxons he saith came from that Place which was then called Saxony The Angles from the Countrey called Angulus which remained desart to this day and lay between the Provinces of the Jutes and Saxons And much to the same purpose Fabius Ethelwerd onely he saith that they came de Saxonia Anglia atque Giota Saxony he saith was then called Ealdsexe and for Anglia he saith it lay between the Saxons and the Gioti whose chief Town in the Saxon Tongue was called Sleswic and by the Danes Haithaby But by this Account all these People who came hither to assist the Britains and after conquer'd them and possessed their Land must come out of that Chersonese called Jutland taking it in the largest extent not onely to the Eidore but from the Eidore to the Elb. For if the Angli came from about Sleswic and lay between the Jutes and the Old Saxons then the Jutes possessed all that part of the Chersonese which is now called the Northern Iutland and the Southern Iutland takes within it all that was possessed by the Angli which reached no farther than between Sleswic and Flensburgh which in the modern Maps is still called Angelen And so the Countrey lying between the Elb and the Eidore comprehending Hostein Dithmars and Stormar must be the Seat of the Old Saxons which by Adamus Bremensis and Helmoldus is called Nortalbingia and by Eginhartus Saxonia Transalbiana by Albertus Stadensis Transalbia where the Saxons remained in so great Numbers that Charles the Great could not totally subdue them till after a War of above thirty years as the foremention'd Authours assure us And Eginhartus whose Authority is unquestionable saith That Charles had no War more tedious or more fierce than that which he had with the Saxons And in the conclusion of it he was forced to remove 10000 Saxons on both sides the River Elb and to disperse them in several Parts of the Empire And as to that part of Jutland which Bede saith was left desolate to his time upon the remove of the Angli Adamus Bremensis gives another Reason for it saying That Jutland was the most uncultivated part of all Germany and the least fit for humane habitation being so barren and unfruitfull and so obnoxious to Pirates from both Seas But since the Saxons Angles and Jutes coming into Britain took Possession of so great a part of it as our Historians tell us viz. The Jutes Kent the Isle of Wight and part of Hampshire The Saxons Sussex Essex Middlesex the South part of Hartfordshire Surrey the other part of Hampshire Berkshire Wiltshire Dorsetshire Somersetshire Devonshire and part of Cornwall The Angles Norfolk Suffolk Cambridge the Midland and Northern Counties It deserves to be considered whether since there were so few Inhabitants then in Jutland and so many Saxons left behind there be not far greater probability that these should come from all the Maritime Coasts from the Rhine to Jutland than merely out of such an unpeopled Countrey as that was I do not deny the distinction of People that Bede mentions nor their coming originally out of Jutland or rather through Jutland But I think all Circumstances
some Domestick Fear that was the Occasion of Vortigern 's sending for the Saxons as well as that of their common Enemies i. e. he was very apprehensive of a sudden Rising of the Roman Party yet left in the Island and of Ambrosius But he leaves it wholly in the dark who this Ambrosius was and what Cause Vortigern had to be afraid of him Gildas speaks of Ambrosius Aurelianus as of a modest Man and as almost the onely person of the Roman Nation then surviving whose Parents were killed enjoying the Purple and whose Posterity was living in Gildas his time but much degenerated from the Vertues of their Ancestours This is the onely Passage which gives us any light into this matter which is repeated by Bede who more plainly saith That his Parents had Royal Authority and were killed Who these Parents of his were we are left onely to conjecture The British History would clear the matter if it deserved Credit for there we reade That Aurelius Ambrosius was one of the younger Sons of Constantine King of Britain who was forced to fly from Vortigern after the Murther of their Brother Constans by his contrivance But we know that Constantine and his Sons Constans and Julian were killed abroad and it is not probable the Romans would have permitted any one of his Sons to have remained here or if they did this Ambrosius must have been of Ripe years for Government long before this time For Constantine's Life was taken away when Theodosius was IV. Consul as Idatius and Marcellinus agree Anno Dom. 411. So that Ambrosius could not be very young when Vortigern took the Government in whose fourth year they say The Saxons were called in But there is another Passage in Gildas which helps to explain this For he saith That after they found themselves deserted by the Romans they set up Kings of their own and soon after put them down again and made choice of worse in their room This setting up of Kings he expresses by their being anointed whether that Custome were then used or not it is plain that he supposes that the Britains in that Confusion they were in took upon them without regard to their Duty to place and displace them But that he takes anointing in a metaphorical Sense appears by what follows That the Anointers were those who destroy'd them Among these in all probability was the Father of Ambrosius and the rather because it is said he was of Roman Descent For the Britains thought none then able to defend them that had not a Roman Spirit in him At this time the Britains were left to their full Liberty by the Roman Empire which as Bede reckons had the Dominion here for 470 years And then there was no Line remaining to succeed in the Government nor so much as to determine their choice which made them so easily to make and unmake their Kings who lost their Purple and their Lives together This must needs breed infinite Confusions among them and every one who came to be King lived in perpetual fear of being served as others had been before him And the natural consequence of this Jealousie of their own Subjects was looking out for Assistence from abroad which I doubt not was one great Reason of Vortigern's sending for the Saxons hoping to secure himself by their means against his own People although it proved at last the Ruine both of himself and his People But this Jealousie could not but increase upon them while there was a Person descended from a former King and of Roman Parentage in being So that Nennius seems to have hit upon one of the main Reasons which sway'd Vortigern to send for the Saxons Some have gon about to defend Vortigern so far as to say That he took the most prudent course he could for the benefit and security of his Subjects by placing the Saxons upon the Picts Wall and upon the Kentish Shores which were thought fit to be secured by the Romans But against whom Was it not against these very Saxons And is it the best way to secure the Flock to set the Wolves to watch them If they had the Command of those Shores could not they let in what Numbers they pleased of their own People to strengthen themselves against the Britains And was this for the Peoples Security What Success had there been in that Age in letting in the Barbarous Nations upon the several parts of the Roman Empire And what could be expected in such a Condition as the Britains were in otherwise than what did happen when a fierce ungovernable military People were called in to defend a Nation so long kept under and wholly almost unacquainted with the exercise of Brutish Valour and unexperienced in the Arts of War Especially when the Air Situation Fruitfulness and all sorts of Conveniencies were so much above those of the Countrey which they came from So that Gildas seems to have a great deal of Reason when he attributes this Act of Vortigern's with a respect to the Nation to mere Sottishness and Infatuation Witikindus tells a formal Story of a Speech made by the British Ambassadours to the Saxons wherein they magnifie the Saxons courage and lament their own Miseries and in short tell them If they would come and help them their Land and themselves would be at their Service for they knew none more worthy to command them since the Romans had left them But neither Bede nor Ethelwerd although both Saxons mention the least Promise of Submission And it is apparent by their Quarrel with the Britains afterwards that they came as Mercenary Souldiers upon promise of Pay For Gildas saith The first Pretence of Quarrelling was for greater allowance which he calls their Epimenia and Bede Annonae Which shews upon what Terms they came And Witikindus himself makes no other Pretence for their Rising against the Britains but that the Countrey pleased them and they found they were able to subdue the Inhabitants For after Hengist and his Company had tasted the Sweetness of it they never left Wheedling that weak and vitious King as all describe him with fair Promises and necessity of more Succours to secure himself and to defend his Countrey till they had by degrees got over Strength enough to bid defiance to the Britains At first they seem'd very zealous and hearty against their common Enemies and did great Service in beating the Picts and Scots insomuch that Buchanan confesses they were driven beyond Adrian 's Wall And some think their King Eugenius was then killed Fordon saith They went into Albany and brought away great booty from thence and confesses that he found in a certain History that he was killed South of Humber by the Britains and the English And it is easie to imagine how insolent such a Barbarous People would grow upon their Success when they knew the Britains durst not oppose them Bede saith That they entred into a secret League with the