Selected quad for the lemma: daughter_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
daughter_n	brother_n	john_n	marry_v	6,701	5	9.1028	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A16294	Bohemica iura defensa. = The Bohemian lawes or rights defended, against the informer or an answer to an information, falsly so called, secretly printed and divulged against the writings published by the states of Bohemia. Translated out of Latin by I.H.; Bohemica jura defensa. English.	Harrison, John, fl. 1610-1638, attributed name.; Holy Roman Empire. Emperor (1619-1637 : Ferdinand II); Holy Roman Empire. Emperor (1612-1619 : Matthias); Spain. Sovereign (1598-1621 : Philip III)	1620 (1620)	STC 3205; ESTC S121199	29,084	53

and meaning of this disposall onely to assure the States of the Education and Marriage of the Children of Vladislaus Now whatsoeuer is there said concerning the Succession of Anne the Kings Daughter that is only spoken incidentally and by way of narration not to prooue any thing at all Neither was it in the Kings power in this case by expresse Law to dispose and although the said disposall were of some weight yet it is to be vnderstood not of all in infinitum descending from the said Anne but onely of her selfe and so the same for Ferdinand appeareth to be of no efficacie As for the third Argument of the Informer to wit the Reuersals of Ferdinand euen now and before is answered so as it is to be iudged of no moment For Ferdinand himselfe Anno 1526. not as then ignorant of his owne pretences nor needing to be informed thereof nineteene yeares after to haue vnderstood of them doth clearely confesse and declare sufficiently both by his Ambassadours at that time sent and Letters reuersals that thereby hee doth renounce all those his pretences Surely that those Reuersals either after the space of nineteene yeares or for other aduerse accidents Anno 1545. and in the yeares following whereof more in their due time and place should suffer shipwracke and miscarrie there is no reason that can indure to heare of it And in whatsoeuer manner and sense the Reuersals of the yeare 1545. be taken yet they doe alwayes make mention of the forepassed ELECTION saying Of their owne free and meere good will they haue elected and receiued vs for their King and Lord which forwardnesse of the States and ELECTION and receiuing of our Person for King wee will both prosecute and recompence with all clemencie And this is that which the States of right desire Ferdinand the first also himselfe approued but to Ferdinand the second of whom now the question is this is altogether displeasing Wherefore the States doe so often complaine of the said Ferdinand the second both that he offered violence to their Priuiledges and Liberties as also that the alleaged Confirmations and Reuersals sometimes approuing Hereditarie Succession sometimes ELECTION of free and meere good will with promise of gratuitie are altogether contradictorie and so the Kingdomes Hereditarie as the Austrians contend to make Bohemia to haue nothing common with the Electiue rend●ing of thankes and other promises therevpon And it remayneth more then manifest Hereditary and Electiue to be incompatible and cannot agree together and herevpon necessarily the most strong Arguments of the Austrians to be vaine and of no effect Hitherto we haue answered the grounds of the Informer which he hath produced vnder the title A. 1. 2. 3. 4. Vnder the Letter B. hee alleageth the Constitutions of the Kingdome X. but heere the Originals are to bee sought out of the Records at Prague and not of Vienna from whence the Informer tooke the concordances But the States of Bohemia doe alleage apply and expound their Constitutions according to the fundamentall Lawes of the Kingdome practise obseruations and by their Priuiledges and confirmed Customes And why should the Bohemia●s who euen to this day as before at large is declared haue had and exercised alwayes a free ELECTION admit any restraint or limitation thereof Vnder the Letter C. is alleaged the Parliament of the Kingdome of the yeare 1547. inserted in the Tables of Kingdome but in the Margine onely neither is there any Argument worthy of an Answere drawne from thence Vnder the Letter D. are againe cited the Constitutions of the Kingdome B. 3. B. 7. B. 8. but without any further deduction In the end hee doth alleage the Oath of the Inhabitants of Prague and Leutmeritz made in the time of Iohn and Charles his Sonne but that serueth onely for that time neither can be drawne to any further consequence and the tenor of the said Oath doth seeme to disagree with the intent of the Informer For behold the expresse words of the Oath The Heires and Successours descending of the Line Masculine Hence it appeareth that the vigor of that Oath was expired for default of the Line Masculine of Luxemburgh and rather to make against the Austrians whose pretence is grounded vpon the Female The Informer saith That Iohn of the House of Luxemburgh attayned to the Kingdome it was because hee had to Wife the Daughter of the King of Bohemia For confirmation hereof the Informer alleageth Historians when as it is altogether manifest that they meant another thing For they say it was done by ELECTION and the States of Bohemia to haue offered the Kingdome to Iohn the Sonne of Henrie the Emperour which though the Emperour rather desired for his Brother Walramus then for his onely Sonne as yet of more tender age notwithstanding vpon the great instance of the Ambassadours as they had in command at length the said Iohn marryed to Wife the Daughter of the King of Bohemia And so was first elected and afterwards by reason of this ELECTION marryed to the Kings Daughter See the words of Dubrauius In the Parliament at Numburge there publikely in the Assembly with open voyces they desired another more fit King hereunto enclined the voyces and suffrages of all that Iohn of Luxemburgh the sonne of Henrie the Emperour should be made choice of for King to the Kingdome of Bohemia And this history by Haiecius is more at large described by reason of Henrie of Carinthia who marryed the eldest Daughter of Wenceslaus The Informer saying that hee was deiected from the Throne of Bohemia for rebellion against the Romane Empire speaketh childishly for not the pretended rebellion of the Informer but his extortions and cruelties made him odious to the people The words of Dubrauius are these That they might bee deliuered from the intollerable Gouernment of Henrie Neither could the Wife and Daughter of Henry had the Kingdome beene Hereditarie for his fault haue been depriued of their Right Neither did the Daughter of Henrie although nobly marryed or his Sonne euer pretend any right at all to this Kingdome It is false therefore that the Kingdome fell to the younger Sister by the elder Sister and her Husbands falling from their right but by vertue of Election and this Henrie to haue been ELECTED and not to haue obtained the Kingdome by right of Succession Dubrauius testifieth expresly in these words The States assembled in a lawfull Parliament doe striue with great contention for ELECTING of a King some altogether despising a stranger-King the rest distracted betwixt Rodolph the sonne of Albertus the Emperour and Henrie of Carinthia who was present As for the Succession of the House of Luxemburgh and of Albertus the Emperour as also the ELECTION of the Duke of Bauaria those things that follow is alreadie answered and the solemne and free ELECTION of Albertus sufficiently proued Neither is it materiall that the Morauians did expostulate with the Bohemians whereof notwithstanding the

the aforesaid acts lawes and priuiledges some things might be obiected yet the reuersals of Rodolph and Matthias now alreadie produced doe proue an vndoubted right of ELECTION And if the pretended right of Succession were or euer had beene so manifest what needed so many words and reuersals Also it is to be noted that the said treaties of the two brothers Rodolph and Matthias which they begun by a mutuall consent with the States are of more force than all other declarations and precedent disposals not onely in respect of time but also in respect of forme and matter For there expresly the common consent of all the States is alledged which no otherwhere neither in the priuiledge of Charles the Fourth or the disposall of Vladislaus or in any other writing is to be seene nor yet the said priuiledge or disposall of any Emperour one or other found to be confirmed which surely doth put vpon this whole matter no small suspition And by good right Charles the Fourth Vladislaus and Ferdinand seeing they alwaies spake in fauour of themselues and their posteritie are reported to haue beene but bad witnesses in their owne cause neither were their letters confirmed by the succeeding Emperour But if they had bin approued by the common consent of the States they might in some sort haue beene borne withall but seeing the Kings are both actors and witnesses verie well in this case may their testimonie be reiected By all these things may any one not ouer-taken with passion easily see that the States in all ages euen to this day by force of their proper libertie haue strongly maintained and preserued the free and absolute power of ELECTING Kings so that none whosoeuer is able lawfully to pretend any right at all to the Crowne of Bohemia but onely by the lawfull and free ELECTION of the States ELECTED And also he that shall attempt any thing against the free ELECTION of the States ipso facto doth disable himselfe of the Crowne Now let vs see the Arguments of the contrarie INFORMATION First of all hee citeth priuiledges and in the Margen the Golden Bull Imperiall of Charles the Fourth But the Author of the Information seemeth to haue put the same of purpose out of the List of the other fundamentall reasons for by the former alledged words of the said Bull it is manifest that the same doth rather make against him than for him no mention at all beeing made of the Royall issue either Male or Female Therefore the first fundamentall reason in order is the confirmation of Charles the Fourth of the said priuiledge of Fredericke the Second Hereunto euen now and alreadie is answered and to any one looking well into this information it may easily appeare First That the same is called the Golden Bohemian Bull in title onely Secondly That it is no other thing then the confirmation of the priuiledge of Fredericke the Second Thirdly Further that nothing else was demaunded from the Deputies of the States at that time whose Names are prefixed in the said writing Fourthly The words of the said writing doe testifie the same Fifltly Therefore that the clause of the succession of the royall issue annexed by Charles the Fourth to the aduantage of himselfe and his children was inserted to the great preiudice of the libertie of the Bohemians Sixtly Neither did the Bohemians euer allow the same Also in later times although there were many Emperors of the house of Austria there appeareth yet no ratification of any Emperour all which doe argue the manifest inualiditie of the said clause and the imperfection of their pretence or claime There is yet in the said confirmation this clause In case or euent where the Male or Female not suruiuing or by any other way shall happen to be vacant By the force of this confirmation and clause in other places alledged against the Bohemians it seemeth easie to proue that these things make for the States and that the vacancie of the Kingdome doth not simply and meerely consist in the default of heires Males or Female but also in other defaults But howsoeuer this be daily practise as is aforesaid is altogether contrarie to the strict restraint of this confirmation And although the often repeated clause of the said Bull together with the consequence of the Austrians drawn from thence were of some moment yet it is manifest that the Ofspring descending from the house of Luxemburg by the elder sister Anne the wife of William Duke of Saxon the eldest daughter of the Emperour Albert of the house of Austria should rather come nearer the Crowne of Bohemia then those of the house of Austria at this day liuing For the Austrians doe descend from the younger sister to wit Elizabeth the second daughter of Albertus the Emperour and wife of Casimire King of Polonia the great grandfather of Anne wife to Ferdinand of Austria the brother of Charles the Fift Emperour Now on the other side let vs see the ofspring of the said William Duke of Saxon. Surely among them of the house of Brandenburgh of Denmark of Mekelburgh and others are found so many that euen the most renowned Queene of Bohemia Elizabeth the daughter of Great Brittaine may deriue from thence her pedegree Wherefore this argument th● of the Austrians without all exception the greatest as they would haue it may easily be ouerthrowne Charles the Fourth Emperour King of Bohemia the Author of the often repeated clause Sigismund Elizabeth the wife of Albert of the house of Austria Emperour and King of Bohemia Anne the eldest daughter of Albert wife of William Duke of Saxon. Margaret the wife of Iohn Elector of Brandenburgh Anne the wife of Frederick the First King of Denmarke Christianus the Third King of Denmarke Fredericke the Second King of Denmarke Anne the wife of Iames King of Great Britaine Charles Prince of Wales Elizabeth Queene of Bohemia Elizabeth the yonger daughter of Albert the wife of Casimir King of Polonia Vladislaus Elizabeth after her name changed and called Anne the wife of Ferdinand of the house of Austria Maximilian Empe. Rodulph Matthias Charles Ferdinand now Emp. Sophia the wife of Frederick Marquesse of Brandenburg Marie the wife of Frederick Simm●rensis Elector Palatine Lodwick the Fourth Elector Palatine Frederick the Fourth Elector Palatine Frederick the Fift King of Bohemia c. Elector Palatine c. The clause hath thus the Male or Female of the royall Linaege But the most renowned King and Queene of Bohemia Frederick and Elizabeth are as you see of the royall linage Ergo. The second Argument of the Informer is the disposall of Vladislaus but this is both of lesse force than that and in some sort doth seeme to make for the States where to wit he doth affirme King Lodwick of the meere free 〈◊〉 will of the States of Bohemia to haue been receiued King which free will surely ouerthrowing Succession doth againe seeme to stablish ELECTION And it was the true intent

Historie maketh no mention for the said free ELECTION of Albertus For to the deciding of our case this doth nothing at all appertayne The ELECTION of Podiebratius was not onely lawfull but also confirmed by Frederick the Emperour himselfe the head of the House of Austria and to Podiebratius his Predecessor Ladislaus at the point of death speaketh thus I must now dye the Kingdome to come into thy hands I aske of thee two things one that thou gouerne the Prouincials iustly c. The other that those who haue followed mee out of Austria and the other Prouinces thou send them backe safe into their Countrie without any violence offered them Where is this Hereditary Succession Wherefore the words of the Informer concerning the Successor of Podiebratius where he saith After the death of George although hee left Heires Males yet the Kingdome to haue returned againe of right to the ordinarie Succession Is nothing but a meere Cauill and idlenesse for these are the expresse words of Cromerus Podiebratius signified to Casimire King of Polonia that hee would ordayne one of his sonnes with the consent of the States of Bohemia for his Successour his owne sonnes neglected not by any Hereditarie right of a Kingdome which is none at all among a free Nation but by a singular inclination and affection of all the Bohemians towards Casimire and communion of Language with the Polonians Where is this ordinarie succession which the Informer dreameth of Is it to bee found in the designation of Podiebratius or in the inclination of the Bohemians or in the communion of Language with the Polonians or lastly in the words now repeated Not by any Hereditarie Right of the Kingdome which is none at all among a free Nation Here for conclusion it is to be knowne and noted wel that Lodwick King of Hungarie and Polonia had two Daughters the elder whereof Marie marryed Sigismund the Emperour and King of Bohemia the younger Iagellus Prince of Lituania After the death of Lodwicke Sigismund was ELECTED King of Hungarie and Iagellus of Polonia And although afterwards the Queenes both of them dyed without any issue at all yet the Kingdomes remayned to both the Kings the reason because they were both of them not Hereditarie otherwise they had falne to the Queenes next Allies but meerely Electiue And although after that the said Kings contracted other marriages nothing at all pertaining to the Bloud-royall of the aforesaid Lodwicke or his Daughters yet the children by them begotten were ELECTED afterwards for Kings You see here succession nothing at all to haue preuailed but onely the free ELECTION of the States Surely in Kingdomes hereditarie it is farre otherwise Philip the Second King of Spaine being ioyned in marriage with Marie Queene of England after her death was forced to quitte all and be gone and the Kingdome fell to Elizabeth the sister of Queene Marie the reason because it was hereditarie and not as the aforesaid Kingdomes ELECTIVE Ferdinand of Aragon and his wife Isabel heire of Castile dying leauing behind them many daughters the eldest daughter the wife of Philip of Austria was preferred before the rest in the succession of all those Kingdomes The reason because all those Kingdomes were hereditarie and not as ours is ELECTIVE Robert King of Naples leauing behind him three Neeces the eldest of them the two younger excluded was admitted into the possession of the whole kingdome the reason because that Kingdome is hereditarie And so this is to be obserued in all Kingdomes where women succeed You see here betweene the Kingdomes of Poland Bohemia and Hungarie which are ELECTIVE and the Kingdomes of England Castile Naples c. which are hereditarie that also women succeed verie great differences of succession For if our Kingdomes should haue beene translated to women surely Sigismund and Iagellus their wiues being dead should haue beene forced to haue left all and departed Which not being done it necessarily followeth the said Kingdomes to sauour of no hereditarie succession at all Hitherto briefly the ELECTIONS successiuely following one another with their principall circumstances haue beene declared to demonstrate the Bohemians not to be guiltie at all of rebellion disloyaltie and conspiracie as the preiudicate Informer vrgeth And if the Informer doe truely accuse them of such crimes why doth he not expresse their cases which if he had done without doubt the Bohemians would easily haue confuted them Also the Informer doth proceed to that audacitie as to denie those Kings whom he nameth to haue been ELECTED and so by his glosses is not ashamed to offer violence to a language whereof perhaps he is ignorant Whenas notwithstanding the same Kings themselues especially Iohn Albert and Ferdinand in their letters yea and that in the Latine Tongue and Latine phrases written doe confesse that they were ELECTED by the free ELECTION of the States The Informer proceedeth Neither an absolute nor conditionall ELECTION doth belong to the States but in case c. Answer What further conditions therefore haue the Bohemians prescribed to Rodolph of Austria Podiebratius and others who obtained the Crowne through no precedent consanguinitie but onely by ELECTION then to the rest which were either brothers or sonnes of the precedent Kings And the Letters reuersall and the solemne oathes taken by all the Kings what are they else but conditions or couenants of great force and conditionall ELECTIONS But the Informer persisteth Although they did not obserue them yet ought they not to be depriued of the Kingdome Answer Surely the contrarie by the aforesaid examples doth clearely appeare and what other consequence can there be implied in the reciprocall obligation of a King and his subiects The Informer saith Such penaltie is not prouided for by Couenant Lawes nor Parliaments Answer The ancient obserued customes of the kingdome of Bohemia are in stead of written Lawes yea among other constitutions the States in the reigne of Sobislaus expressely decreed That if at any time the King of Bohemia should without reason make warre against the Bohemians then the States and people ought to be exempted free and absolued from all obedience and subiection The Informer proceedeth It is against equitie that any one should be both an accuser a witnesse and a Iudge at once Answer The examples of Henrie of Carinthia of Iohn in respect of his exchange of Bohemia and of other Kings doe teach that this is nothing at all against equitie For the States euer haue beene and are yet the Censors and Guardians of their priuiledges yea also the later Emperours ordained them to be Defendors of their Edicts and Liberties and chiefly of Religion To the examples of Wenceslaus and Podiebratius is alreadie answered The excuse vpon the receiuing of Matthias made Anno 1608. and 1611. that it was in the middest of Garboyls and warres without any exact order and that it maketh nothing for a free ELECTION is altogether ridiculous For the order