Constance as also by divers other participations of the Bloud-Royal of England as afterwards will appear Now then to come to the second Daughter of King William the Conquerour or rather the third for that the first of all was a Nun as before hath been noted her name was Adela or Alice as hath been said and she was Married in France to Stephen Count Palatine of Champagne Charters and Bloys by whom she had a Son called also Stephen who by his Grand Mother was Earl also of Bullaine in Picardy and after the death of his Uncle King Henry of England was by the favour of the English Nobility and especially by the help of his own Brother the Lord Henry of Blâ—is that was Bishop of Winchester and Jointly Abbot of Glastenbury made King of England and this both in respect that Mathilda Daughter of King Henry the first was a Woman and her Son Henry Duke of Anjou a very child and one degree farther off from the Conqueror and from King Rufus then Stephen was as also for that this King Henry the first as hath been signified before was judged by many to have entred wrongfully unto the Crown and thereby to have made both himself and his posterity incapable of Succession by the violence which he used against both his elder Brother Robert and his Nephew Duke William that was Son and Heir to Robert who by nature and Law were both of them hold for Soverains to John by those that favoured them and their pretentions But yet howsoever this were we see that the Duke of Britainy that lived at that day should evidently have succeeded before Stephen for that he was descended of the elder Daughter of the Conqueror and Stephen of the younger though Stephen by the commodity he had of the nearness of his Port and Haven of Bullain into England as the French stories do say for Calis was of no importance at that time and by the friendship and familiarity he had goten in England during the Reign of his two Uncles King Rufus and King Herny and especially by the heâ—p of his Brother the Bishop and Abbot as hath been said he got the start of all the rest and the states of England admitted him This man although he had two Sons namely Eâ—stachius Duke of Normandy and William Earl of Norfolk yet left they no Issue And his Daughter Mary was Married to Matthew of Flanders of whom if any Issue remains it fell afterwards upon the House of Austria that succeeded in those States To King Stephen who left no Issue succeeded by composition after much War Henry Duke of Anjou Son and Heir to Mathilda before named Daughter of Henry the first which Henry named afterward the second took to his Wife Eleanor Daughter and Heir of William Duke of Aquitain and Earl of Poytiers which Eleanor had been Married before to the King of France Lewis the VII and bare him two Daughters but upon dislike conceaved by the one against the other they were Divorced under pretence of being within the fourth degree of Consanguinity and so by second Marriage Eleanor was Wife to this said Henry who afterwards was King of England by name of King Henry the II. that procured the death of Thomas Backet Archbishop of Canterbury and both before and after the greatest Enemy that ever Lewis the King of France had in the World and much the greater for his Marriage by which Henry was made far stronger for by this Woman he came to be Duke of all Aquitain that is of Gascony and Guiene and Earl of all the Country of Poytiers whereas before also by his Fathers inheritance he was Duke both of Anjou Touraine and Maine and his Mother Mathilda King Henries Daughter of England he came to be King of Enland and Duke of Normandy and his own industry he got also to be Lord of Ireland as also to bring Scotland under his homage so as he enlarged the Kingdom of England most of any other King before or after him This King Henry the II. as Stow recounteth had by Lady Eleanor five Sons and three Daughters His eldest Son was named William that dyed young his second was Henry whom he caused to be crowned in his own Life time whereby he received much trouble but in the end this Son dyed before his Father without issue His third Son was Richard sirnamed for his valour Cor de Leon who reigned after his Father by the name of Richard the I. and dyed without issue in the Year of Christ 1199. His fourth Son named Geffrey married Lady Constance Daughter and Heir of Britany as before hath been said and dying left a son by her named Arthur which was Duke of Britany after him and pretended also to be King of England but was put by it by his Uncle John that took him also Prisoner and kept him also in the Castle first of Fallaise in Normandy and then in Rouan until he caused him to be put to death or slew him with his own hands as French Stories write in the Year 1204 This Duke Arthur left behind him two Sisters as Stow writeth in his Chronicles but others write that it was but one and at least wise I find but one named by the French Stories which was Eleanor whom they say King John also caused to be murthered in England a little before her Brother the Duke was put to death in Normandy and this was the end of the Issue of Geffrey whose Wife Constance Dutchess of of Britany married again after this Murther of her Children unto one Guy Vicount of Touars and had by him two daughters whereof the eldest named Alice was Dutchess of Britany by whom the Race hath been continued unto our time The Fifth Son of King Henry the II. was named John who after the death of his Brother Richard by help of his Mother Eleanor and of Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury drawn thereunto by his said Mother got to be King and put back his Nephew Arthur whom King Richard before his departure to the War of the Holy Land had caused to be declared Heir apparent but John prevailed and made away both Nephew and Neece as before hath been said for which Fact he was detested of many in the World abroad and in France by Act of Parliament deprived of all the States he had in those parts Soon after also the Pope gave sentence of Deprivation against him and his own Barons took Arms to execute the sentence and finally they deposed both him and his young Son Henry being then but a Child of eight years old and this in the eighteenth year of his Reign and in the Year of Christ 1215. and Lewis the VIII of that name Prince at that time but afterwards King of France was chosen King of England and sworn in London and placed in the Tower though soon after by the sudden death of King John
the great and Royal Houses of Burgundy and Orleans whereby all three Commonwealths I mean England Britany and France were like to have come to destruction and utter desolation And for that it may serve much to our purpose hereafter to understand well this controversie of Britany I think it not amiss in few words to declare the same in this place Thus then it happened The foresaid Arthur the second of that name Duke of Britanie and Son of Lady Beatrix that was Daughter as hath been said to King Henry the III. of England had two Wives the first named Beatrix as his Mother was and by this he had two Sons John that succeeded him in the State by the name of Duke John the III. and Guye that dying before his elder Brother left a Daughter and Heir named Joan and surnamed the lame for that she halted who was married to the Earl of Bloys that was Nephew to Phillip of Valois King of France for that he was born of his Sister But besides the two Children the said Duke Arthur had by his second Wife named Joland Countess and Heir of the Earldom of Monford another Son called John Breno who in the right of his Mother was Earl of Monford And afterward when Duke John the III. came to die without Issue the question was who should succeed him in his Dukedom the Uncle or the Neece that is to say his third Brother John Breno by half bloud or else his Neece Joan the lame that was Daughter and Heir to his second Brother Guye of whole bloud that is by Father and Mother which Lady Joan was married to the Earl of Bloys as hath been said And first this matter was handled in the Parliament of Paris the King himself sitting in Judgment with all his Peers the 30 day of September 1341 and adjudged it to the Earl of Bloys both for that his Wife was Heir to the elder Brother as also for that Duke John by his Testiment and consent of the States had appointed her to be his Heir but yet King Edward the III. and States of England did Judge it otherwise and preferred John Monford not knowing that the very case was to fall out very soon after in England I mean they Judged the State to John Breno Earl of Monford younger Brother to Guy and they assisted him and his Son after him with all their Forces for the gaining and holding of that State And albeit at the beginning it seemed that matters went against Monford for that himself was taken prisoner in Nantes and carried captive to Paris where he died in prison yet his Son John by the assistance of the English Armies got the Dukedome afterward and slew the Earl of Bloys and was peaceably Duke of Britanie by the name of John the IV. and his posterity hath endured until this day as briefly here I will declare This Duke John the IV. of the House of Monford had Issue John the V. and he Francis the first who dying without Issue left the Dukedom to Peter his Brother and Peter having no Children neither he left it to his Uncle Arthur the III Brother to his Father John the V. and this Arthur was Earl of Richmond in England as some of his ancestors had been before him by gifts of the Kings of England This Arthur dying without Issue left the Dukedom unto his Nephew to wit his Brothers Son Francis the II. who was the last male Child of that race and was he that had once determined to have delivered Henry Earl of Richmond unto his enemy King Edward the IV. and after him to King Richard the III. but that Henry's good fortune reserved him to come to be King of England This Duke Francis had a Daughter and Heir named Anna married first to Charles the VIII King of France and after his death without Issue to his Successor Lewis the XII by whom she had a Daughter named Claudia that was Heir to Britanie though not to the Crown of France by reason of the Law Salique that holdeth against women in the Kingdom of France but not in Britany and to the end this Dukdome should not be disunited again from the said Crown of France this Daughter Claudia was married to Francis Duke of Angolome Heir apparent to the Crown of France by whom she had Issue Henry that was afterward King of France and was Father to the last King of that Country and to Isabel Mother of the Infanta of Spain and of her Sister the Dutchess of Savoy that now is by which also some do affirm that the said Princess or Infanta of Spain albeit she be barred from the Succession of France by their pretended Law Salique yet is her title manifest to the Dukdome of Britanie that came by a woman as we have shewed and thus much of the House of Britany and of the Princess of Spain how she is of the Bloud Royal of England from the time of William the Conqueror himself by his eldest Daughter as also by other Kings after him and now we shall return to prosecute the Issue of these two Sons of King Henry the III. to wit of Edward and Edmond which before we left I shewed you before how King Henry the III. had two Sons Edward the Prince that was King after his Father by the name of Edward the first and Edmond surnamed Crouchback by some Writers who was the first Earl and County Palatine of Lancaster and beginner of that House And albeit some Writers of our time have affirmed or at least wise much inclined to favour a certain old report that Edmond should be the Elder Brother to Edward and put back only for his deformity of his body whereof Polidor doth speak in the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the IV. and as well the Bishop of Ross as also George Lilly do seem to believe it yet evident it seemeth that it was but a fable as before I have noted and now again shall briefly prove it by these reasons following for that it importeth very much for deciding the controversie between the Houses of Lancaster and York The first reason then is for that all Ancient Historiographers of England and among them Mattheus Westmonasteriensis that lived at the same time do affirm the contrary and do make Edward to be elder then Edmond by six years and two days for that they appoint the Birth of Prince Edward to have been upon the 16. day of June in the year of Christ 1239 and the 24. of the Reign of his Father King Henry and the Birth of Lord Edmond to have followed upon the 18. day of the same month 6 years after to wit in the year of our Lord 1245 and they do name the Godfathers and Godmothers of them both together with the peculiar solemnities and feasts that were celebrated at their several Nativities so as it seemeth there can be no error in this matter The 2d
Lancaster Joan eldest Daughter married to L. Mowbray Mary second Daughter married to Hen. L. Percy Hen. 2d Son Earl of Lancaster Darby and Lâ—icester H. II. 1st D. of Lancaster made by Edward III. J. of Ga. 3d. Son of Ed. D. of Lanâ— by his 1st Wife Blanch Heir of Lancaster first Wife to Jo. of Gaunt 13. Hen. IV. first King of the House of Lanc. 1406. 14. Henry V. King of England 1414. 15. Hen. VI. deposed by the House of York Edw. Prince of Wâ—les slain by the house of York Eleanor 3â— Daughter married to â— E. of Arunâ—el The 1st Son Earl of Lancaster died without issue John the 3d. Son Earl of Darby Edmond Crockbâ—â—k 2d Son Earl of Lancaster 8. Henry III. succeeded his Father John 1316. 9. Edward I. Son of Henry III. reigned 1272. 10. Edward II. afterward deposed 11. Edw. III fâ—om whom bâ—gan the â—â—uses of Lan â— York 1326. Edw. Prince of Wales 1st Son died before his Fath. 12. Richard II. deposed by H. D. of Lanc. 1460. The House of Britany by the Second â—â—ay Beatrix married to John II. Duke of Britany Arth. II. D. of Brit. whose title ends in the Inf. of Sp. John II. that married Beatrix John the first of that name D. of Britany The House of Devonshire H. D. of Exeter had no issue and left all to 's sister Ann married to Siâ— T. Nevil Father of R. J. E. of West John Holland D. of Exeter Son of Elizabeth Elizabeth 2d Daughter married to J. H. D. of Exet. The House of PORTUGAL Philippa eldest daughter married to John I. K. of Port. Edward I. K. of Port. Son of Queen Philippa Alfonsus V. eldest Son King of Portugal John II. King of Portugal Ferdinand â—d Son D. of Viseo in Portugal Emmanuel King of Portugal Son of D. Ferdinand Henry 3d. Son Cardinal and K. of Portugal John III. eldest Son K. of Portugal John Prince of Portugal died before his Father Sebastian K. of Portugal slain in Barbary Lewis 2d Son never married Anthony Illegitimate Son of Lewis Isabel eldest Daughter of K. Em. born next K. John The Line of Castile Const. Heir of K of Castile 2d Wife of Jo. of Gaunt Catherine married to K. Henry III. of Castile John I. King of Castile Son of Catherine Isab. married to Ferd. K. of Aragâ—n sirnam'd Cathaâ— Joan marrito Philip I. Arch-Duke of Austria Chacees V. Emperour and King of Spain Philip II. King of Spain Isabel 〈◊〉 ta of Spain eldest Daughter Philip III. prince of Spain Cathar 2d Daughter married the D. of Savâ—y Edward Infanta of Portugal younger Son Katharine 2 daughter married to John D. of Bragansa Theodosius Duke of Bragansa Edward Alexander Philip Brothers of Theâ—dosius Mary eldest Daughter married Al. D. of Parma Ranutius the first Son D. of Parma Edward 2d Son Cardinal The House of Clarence Lionel 2d son D. of Clarence died before his Father Philipa married to Edm. Mortimer E. of March Roger Mort. 4th E. of March died in Ireland Ed. Mortim. E. of March slain in Irel. without Issu Mortim. younger son died without Issue The House of Buckingham Edm. of Langly D. of York 4th Son of K. Edward Edw. eldest Son D. of York had no Issue Th. of Woodst D. of Glo. 5th son of E. III. slain by his Neph Rich. Ann mar to â— L. Staf. whereby they become Duke of Bucks The House of YORK Richard â—d Son D. of York husband of Ann Ann Mort. mar the D. of York by which they claim R. Plantagâ—net D. of York 1 st pretendâ—r of that house 18. Rich. III. 2d Son of Rich. D. of York 1483. Edw. Prince of Wales died without Issue George Duke of Clarence 2d Son of Richard Edward Earl of Warwick put to death by H. VII Margaret Countess of Salisbury married of Rich. Pâ—ol Reginald Pool died Cardinal so England Hon. I. Mâ—â—tague â—â—t Son put to death by Henry VIII Winifred 2d daughter maried to S. T. Barington Catharine married to S. F. Hâ—stings E. of Hunting H. Hastings â—arl of Hantington and his Brethren Geffry Pool Knight Geffry Pool Arthur and Geffry Pool Sons of Geffry 18. Edw. IV. first K. of the House of York 1460. 17. Edw. V. put to death hy his Unkle Richard The Line of Somerset and of K. H. 7. The Uniting of York and Lancaster Catharine Swinford 3â— Wife to John of Gaunt John Earl of Somerset John Duke of Somerset Margaret married to Edm. Tuder â— of â—ichm 19. Henry VII King of England 1485. 20. Henry VIII King of England 1507. 21. Edw. VI. Son of Henry VIII 1546. 22. Mary eldest Daughter Queen of England 23. Elizab. â—d daughter of K. Henry 1558. Eliz. eldest Daughter of Ed. IV. married to H. VII Mary 2d daughter married Cha. Br. D. of Suf. Franc. eldest Daughter married Hen. Gr. D. of Suf. Cathar Gray had by the E. of Harts two sons Edward Seymour called Lord Bâ—aâ—ham Hen. Seymor ad Son begoten in the Tower Eleanor 2d Daughter married H. E. of Camb. Margaret married to H. Earl of Darby Ferdinand L. Strange and his Brother Jama IV. K. of Scots first husband of Margaret Margar. eldest daughter married twico Arch. Doug. E. of Angus 2d Husband of Margaret James V. King of Scotland Margaret married to Matthew E. of Lanox Mary Queen of Scotland put to death in England Henry Lord Darly Husband of Mary Charles 2d Son married to Eliz. Candish James VI. King of Scotland The Lady Arabella Polyd. in vita â— VIII Occasions of meeting The matter of Succession discussed Mr. Promely Mr. Wentworth Two Lawyers Many pretenders to the Crown of England Sucession doubtful and why Three or four principal heads of pretendors 1. Lancaster 2 York 3. The two houses joyned Circumstances of the time present The Romman Conclave Succession includeth also some kind of election Of this more afterwards Cap. 4 5. Nearness only in bloud not sufficient M◠〈…〉 in 〈◊〉 pretenders Two principal points handled in this book Two parts of this conference Bellay apollog pro reg cap. 20. Not only Succession sufficient That no particular form of Government is of Nature To live in Company is Natural to man and the ground of all Common-Wealths Plato de repub Cicero de repub Aristotle polit Divers Praeses 1. Inclination universal Pompon Mela. lib. 3. cap. 3 4. Tacit. l. 8. 2. Speech Aristot. l. 1.1 pol. c. 1.2.3.4 3. Imbecility of man Theoph. lib. de Plaut Plutarch conde fortuna lib. de pietatem in parent Note this saying of Aristotle 4. The use of Justice and Friendship Cicero lib. de amicitia The use of charity and helping one an other August lib. de amicitia Gen. 2. v. 18. That Government and Jurisdiction of Magistrates is also of Nature 1. Necessity Job 10. v. 22. 2. Consent of Nations Cicero li. 1. de natura Deorum 3. The Civil Law Lib. 1. digest tit 2. Scripture Prov. 8. Rom. 13. Particular form of Government is free Arist. li. 2.
People and by help principally of Henry Newborow Earl of Warwick that dealt with the Nobility for him and Maurice Bishop of London with the Clergy for that Anselm Archbishop of Canterbury was in banishment Besides this also it did greatly help his cause that his elder Brother Robert to whom the Crown by right appertained was absent again this second time in the War of Jerusalem and so lost thereby his Kingdom as before Henry having no other Title in the World unto it but by Election and Admission of the People which yet he so defended afterwards against his said Brother Robert that came to claim it by the Sword and God did so prosper him therein as he toâ—k his said elder Brother Prisoner and so kept him for many Years until he dyed in Prison most pitifully But this King Henry dying left a Daughter behind him named Mawde or Mathilde which being married first to the Emperour Henry the V. he dyed without issue and then was she married again the second time to Geffry Plantagenet Earl of Anjow in France to whom she bare a Son named Henry his Grandfather caused to be declared for Heir Apparent to the Crown in his Days but yet after his decease for that Stephen Earl of Bollogne born of Adela Daughter to William the Conquerour was thought by the State of England to be more fit to Govern and to defend the Land for that he was at Mans age then was Prince Henry a Child of Maude his Mother he was admitted and Henry put back and this chiefly at the perswasion of Henry Bishop of Winchester Brother to the said Stephen as also by the Solicitation of the Abbot of Glassenbury and others who thought belike they might do the same with good Conscience for the good of the Realm though the event proved not so well for that it drew all England into Factions and Divisions for avoiding and ending whereof the States some Years after in a Parliament at Walâ—ingford made an agreement that Stephen should be Lawful King during his Life only and that Henry and his Off-spring should succeed him and that Prince William King Stephen's Son should be deprived of his Succession to the Crown and made only Earl of Norfolk thus did the State dispose of the Crown at that time which was in the Year of Christ 1153. To this Henry succeeded by Order his Eldest son then living named Richard and sirnamed Cordelyon for his Valor but after him again the Succession was broken For that John King Henry's youngest Son to wit younger Brother to Richard whom his Father the King had left so unprovided as in jest he was called by the French Jean sens terre as if you would say S r John Lacke Land This man I say was after the death of his Brother Admitted and Crowned by the States of England and Arthur Duke of Britain Son and Heir to Geffery that was elder brother to John was against the ordinary course of Succession excluded And albeit this Arthur did seek to remedy the matter by War yet it seemed that God did more defend this Election of the Commonwealth than the right Title of Arthur by Succession for that Arthur was overcome and taken by King John though he had the King of France on his side and he dyed pitifully in prison or rather as most Authors do hold he was put to death by King John his Uncles own hands in the Castle of Roan thereby to make his Title of Succession more clear which yet could not be for that as well Stow in his Chronicle as also Matthew of Westminster and others before him do write that Geffrey besides this Son left two Daughters also by the Lady Constance his Wife Countess and Heir of Britaine which by the Law of England should have succeeded before John but of this small account seemed to be made at that day Some years after when the Barons and States of England misliked utterly the Government and proceeding of this King John they rejected him again and chose Luys the Prince of France to be their King and did swear Fealty to him in London as before hath been said and they deprived also the young Prince Henry his Son that was at that time but eight years old but upon the death of his Father King John that shortly after insued they recalled again that sentence and admitted this Henry to the Crown by the name of King Henry the III. and disanulled the Oath and Allegiance made unto Luys Prince of France and so King Henry Reigned for the space of 53. years afterwards the longest Reign as I think that any before or after him hath had in England Moreover you may know that from this King Henry the third do take their first beginning the two branches of York and Lancaster which after fell to so great contention about the Crown Into which if we would enter we should see plainly as before hath been noted that the best of all their titles after the deposition of King Richard the second depended on this authority of the Commonwealth for that as the People were affected and the greater part prevailed so were their titles either allowed confirmed altered or disanulled by Parliaments and yet may not we well affirm but that either part when they were in possession and confirmed therein by these Parliaments were lawful Kings and that God concurred with them as with true Princes for Government of their People For if we should deny this point as before hath been noted great inconveniencis would follow and we should shake the States of most Princes in the World at this day as by examples which alreay I have alledged in part may appear And with this also I mean to conclude and end this discourse in like manner affirming that as on the one side propinquity of Bloud is a great preheminence towards the attaining of any Crown so yet doth it not ever bind the Commonwealth to yield thereunto if weightier Reasons should urge them to the contrary neither is the Commonwealth bound always to shut her Eyes and to admit at hap-hazard or of necessity every one that is next by Succession of Bloud as Belloy falsly and fondly affirmeth but rather she is bound to consider well and maturely the Person that is to enter Whether he be like to perform his duty and charge committed unto him or no for that otherwise to admit him that is an enemy or unfit is but to destroy the Common-wealth and him together This is my opinion and this seemeth to me to be conform to all Reason Law Religion Piety Wisdom and Policy and to the use and custom of all well governed Common-wealths in the World Neither do I mean hereby to prejudice any Princes pretence or Succession to any Crown or Dignity in the World but rather do hold that he ought to enjoy his Preheminence but yet so that he be not prejudiciae thereby to the whole
and Chartres in France and the other two Polidor said dyed before they were Married and so their names were not Recorded These are the Children of King William the Conqueror among whom after his death there was much strife about the Succession For first his eldest Son Duke Robert who by order of Ancestrie by birth should have succeeded him in all his Estates was put back first from the Kingdom of England by his third Brother William Rufus upon a pretence of the Conquerors Will and Testament for particular affection that he had to this his said third Son William though as Stow Writeth almost all the Nobility of England were against William's entrance But in the end agreement was made between the two Brothers with the condition that if William should dye without Issue then that Robert should succeed him and to this accord both the Princes themselves and twelve principal Peers of each side were Sworn but yet after when William dyed without Issue this was not observed but Henry the fourth Son entred and deprived Robert not only of this his Succession to England but also of his Dukedom of Normandy that he had enjoyed peaceably before all the time of his Brother Rufus and moreover he took him Prisoner and so carried him into England and there kept him till his death which happened in the Castle of Cardif in the year 1134. And whereas this Duke Robert had a goodly Prince to this Son named William who was Duke of Normandy by his Father and Earl of Flanders in the right of his grand Mother that was the Conquerors Wife and Daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders as hath been said and was established in both these States by the help of Lewis the VI. surnamed Le Gros King of France and admitted to do homage to him for the said States his Uncle King Henry of England was so violent against him as first he drove him out of the state of Normandy and secondly he set up and maintained a Competitor or two against him in Flanders by whom finally he was slaine in the year of Christ 1128. before the Town of Alost by an Arrow after he had gotten the upper hand in the Field and so ended the race of the first Son of King William the Conquerour to wit oâ— Duke Robert which Robert lived after the Death of his said Son and Heir Duke William Six years in Prison in the Castle of Cardiff and pined away with sorrow and misery as both the French and English Histories do agree The second Son of the Conqueror named Richard dyed as before hath been said in his Fathers time and left no Issue at all as did neither the third Son William Rufus though he Reigned 13. years after his Father the Conqueror in which time he established the Succession of the Crown by consent of the States of England to his elder Brother Duke Roberts issue as hath been said though afterwards it was not observed This King Rufus came to the Crown principally by the help and favour of Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury who greatly repented himself afterward of the error which in that point he had committed upon hopes of his good Government which proved extream evil But this King William Rufus being slayn afterward by the Arrow of a Cross-bow in Newforrest as is well known and this at such time as the foresaid Duke Robert his elder Brother to whom the Crown by Succession apperteined was absent in the War of the Holy Land where according as most Authors do Write he was chosen King of Hierusalem but refused it upon hope of the Kingdom of England But he returning home found that his fourth Brother Henry partly by fair promises and partly by force had invaded the Crown in the year 1110. and so he Reigned 35. years and had Issue divers Sons and Daughters but all were either drounded in the Seas coming out of Normandy or else dyed otherwise before their Father except only Mathildis who was first Married to Henry the Emperour fifth of that name and after his death without Issue to Geffrey Plantagenet Duke of Anjow Touraine and Maine in France by whom she had Henry which Reigned after King Stephen by the name of Henry the II. And thus much of the Sons of William the Conqueror Of his two Daughters that lived to be Married and had Issue the elder named Constance was Married to Alayn Fergant Duke of Britain who was Son to Hoel Earl of Nants and was made Duke of Britain by William the Conquerors means in manner Following Duke Robert of Normanyd Father to the Conqueror when he went on Pilgrimage unto the Holy Land in which Voyage he dyed left for Governour of Normandy under the protection of King Henry the first of France Duke Alayne the first of Britain which Allayn had Issue Conan the first who being a stirring Prince of about 24. years old when Duke William began to treat of passing over into England he shewed himself not to favour much that enterprise which Duke William fearing caused him to be Poysoned with a pair of perfumed Gloves as the French stories do report and caused to be set up in his place and made Duke one Hoel Earl of Nantes who to gratifie William sent his Son Alaine surnamed Fergaâ—t with 5000. Souldiers to pass over into England with him and so he did and William afterward in recompence thereof gave him his eldest Daughter Constantia in Marriage with the Earldom oâ— Richmond by whom he had Issue Conan the second surnamed le Gross who had Issue a Son and a Daughter The Son was called Hoel as his Grand-Father was and the Daughters name was Bertha Married to Eudo Earl of Porhet in Normandy and for that this Duke Conan liked better his Daughter and his Son in-law her Husband then he did Hoel his own Son he disavowed him on his Death Bead and made his said Daughter his Heir who had by the said Eudo a Son named Conan surnamed the younger which was the third Duke of that name and this man had one only Daughter and Heir named Lady Constance who was Married to the third Son of King Henry the second named Geffrey and elder Brother to King John that after came to Reign and by this Lord Geffrey she had Issue Arthur the second Duke of Britain whom King John his Uncle put back from the Crown of England and caused to be put to death as after shall be shewed and he dying without Issue his Mother Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britain Married again with a Prince of her own House whom after we shall name in the prosecution of this Line and by him she had Issue that hath endured until this day the last whereof hitherto is the Lady Isabella infant of Spain and that other of Savoy her Sister whom by this means we see to have descended from King William the Conqueror by his eldest Daughter Lady
shall now begin to make more particular declaration taking my beginning from the Children of King Edward the third who were the causers of this fatal dissention CHAP. III. Of the succession of English Kings from King Edward the third unto our days with the particular causes of dissention between the Families of York and Lancaster more largely declared KIng Edward the third surnamed by the English the Victorious though he had many Children whereof some died without Issue which appertain not to us to treat of yet had he five Sons that left Issue behind them to wit Edward the eldest that was Prince of Wales surnamed the Black Prince Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son John of Gaunt so called for that he was born in that City that was the third Son and by his Wife was Duke of Lancaster and fourthly Edmond surnamed of Langley for that he was also born there and was Duke of York and last of all Thomas the fifth Son surnamed of Woodstock for the same reason of his birth and was Duke of Gloucester All these five Dukes being great Princes and Sons of one King left Issue behind them as shall be declared and for that the descendents of the third and fourth of these Sons to wit of the Dukes of Lancaster and York came afterward to strive who had best Title to Reign thereof it came that the controversie had his name of these two Families which for more distinction sake and the better to be known took upon them for their Ensigns a Rose of two different colours to wit the White Rose and the Red as all the World knoweth whereof the White served for York and the Red for Lancaster To begin then to shew the Issue of all these five Princes it is to be noted that the two elder of them to wit Prince Edward and his second Brother Leonel Duke of Clarence dyed both of them before King Edward their Father and left each of them an Heir for that Prince Edward left a Son named Richard who Succeeded in the Crown immediately after his Grand-father by the name of King Richard the second but afterward for his evil Government was deposed and dyed in prison without Issue and so was ended in him the Succession of the first Son of King Edward The second Son Leonel dying also before his Father left behind him one only Daughter and Heir named Philippa who was married to one Edmond Mortimer â—arl of March and he had by her a Son and Heir named Roger Mortimer which Roger had Issue two Sons named Edmond and Roger which dyed both without Children and one daughter named Anne Mortimer who was married unto Richard Plantagenet Earl of Cambridge second Son unto Edmond Langly Duke of York which Duke Edmond was fourth Son as hath been said unto King Edward the third and for that this Richard Plantagenet married the said Anne as hath been said hereby it came to pass that the House of York joyned two titles in one to wit that of Leonel Duke of Clarence which was the second Son of King Edward the third and that of Edmond Langly Duke of York which was the fourth Son and albeit this Richard Plantagenet himself never came to be Duke of York for that he was put to death while his elder Brother lived by King Henry the fifth for a conspiracy discovered in Southampton against the said King when he was going over into France with his Army yet he left a Son behind him named also Richard who afterward came to be Duke of York by the death of his Uncle which Uncle was slain soon after in the Batteâ— of Ageâ—couâ—t in France and this Richard began first of all to prosecute openly his quarrel for the Title of the Crown against the House of Lancaster as a little afterward more in particuler shall be declared as also shall be shewed how that this 2 Richard Duke of York being slain also in the same quarrel left a Son named Edward Earl of March who after much trouble got to be King by the name of King Edward the 4 by the oppression and putting down of King Henry the 6 of the House of Lancaster and was the first King of the House of York whose Genealogy we shall lay down more largely afterwards in place convenient And now it followeth in order that we should speak of John of Gaunt the third Son but for that his descent is great I shall first shew the descent of the fifth and last Son of King Edward who was Thomas of Woodstock Duke of Glocester and Earl of Buckingham that was put to death afterward or rather murthered wrongfully by order of his Nephew King Richard the second and he left only one daughter and Heir named Anne who was married to the Lord Stafford whose Family afterward in regard of this marriage came to be Dukes of Buckingham and were put down by King Richard the third and King Henry the eighth albeit some of the bloud and name do remain yet still in England And thus having brought to an end the Issue of three Sons of King Edward to wit of the first second and fifth and touched also somewhat of the fourth there resteth to prosecute more fully the Issues and descents of the third and fourth Sons to wit of John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster and of Edmond Langly Duke of York which are the Heads of these two Noble Families which thing I shall do in this place with all brevity and perspicuity possible beginning first with the House of Lancaster John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward being Duke of Lancaster by his Wife as hath been said had three Wives in all and by every one of them had issue though the Bishop of Ross in his great Latine Arbour of the Genealogies of the Kings of England Printed in Paris in the year 1580. assigneth but one Wife only to this John of Gaunt and consequently that all his Children were born of her which is a great and manifest errour and causeth great confusion in all the rest which in his Book of the Queen of Scots Title he buildeth hereon for that it being evident that only the first Wife was Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and John of Gaunt Duke thereof by her it followeth that the Children only that were born of her can pretend properly to the inheritance of that house and not others born of John of Gaunt by other wives as all the World will confess First then as I have said this John of Gaunt married Blanch Daughter and Heir of Henry Duke of Lancaster and had by her one Son only and two Daughters The Son was called Henry Earl first of Darby and after made Duke of Hereford by King Richard the second and after that came to be Duke also of Lancaster by the death of his Father and lastly was made King by the deposition of his Cousen German the said King
Richard and Reigned 13. years by the name of King Henry the fourth and was the first King of the House of Lancaster of the right of whose title examination shall be made afterwards The first of the two daughters which John of Gaunt had by Blanch was named Philippa who was married to John the first of â—hat name King of Portugal by whom she had Issue Edward King of Portugal and he Alfonsus the fifth and he John the second and so one after another even unto our days The second daughter of John of Gaunt by Lady Blanch was named Elizabeth who was married to John Holland Duke of Exeter and she had Issue by him another John Duke of Exeter and he had Issue Henry Duke of Exeter that died without Issue Male leaving only one Daughter named Anne who was married to Sir Thomas Nevil Knight and by him had Issue Ralph Nevil third Earl of Westmerland whose Lineal Heir is at this day Lord Charles Nevil Earl of Westmerland that liveth banished in Flanders And this is all the Issue that John of Gaunt had by Lady Blanch his first Wife saving only that I had forgotten to prosecute the Issue of Henry his first Son surnamed of Bullenbroke that was afterward called K. Henry the fourth which King had four Sons and two daughters his daughters were Blanch and Philippa the first married to William Duke of Bavaria and the second to Erick King of Denmark and both of them died without Children The four Sons were first Henry that Reigned after him by the name of Henry the fifth and the second was Thomas Duke of Clarence the third was John Duke of Bedford and the fourth was Humphry Duke of Glocester all which three Dukes died without Issue or were slain in Wars of the Realm so as only King Henry the fifth their elder Brother had Issue one Son named Henry also that was King and Reigned 40 years by the name of Henry the sixth who had Issue Prince Edward and both of them I mean both Father and Son were murthered by order or permission of Edward Duke of York who afterward took the Crown upon him by the name of King Edward the fourth as before hath been said so as in this King Henry the sixth and his Son Prince Edward ended all the bloud-Royal male of the House of Lancaster by Blanch the first Wife of John of Gaunt and the Inheritance of the said Lady Blanch returned by right of succession as the favourers of the House of Portugal affirm though others deny it unto the Heirs of Lady Philip her eldest daughter married into Portugal whose Nephew named Alfonsus the fifth King of Portugal lived at that day when King Henry the sixth and his Heir were made away and thus much of John of Gaunt's first marriage But after the death of the Lady Blanch John of Gaunt married the Lady Constance daughter and Hâ—ir of Peter the first surnamed the Cruel King of Castile who being driven out of his Kingdom by Henry his Bastard-brother assisted thereunto by the French he fled to Bourdeaux with his Wife and two daughters where he found Prince Edward eldest Son to King Edward the third by whom he was restored and for pledge of his fidelity and performance of other conditions that the said King Peter had promised to the Prince he left his two daughters with him which daughters being sent afterwards into England the eldest of them named Constance was married to John of Gaunt and by her Title he named himself for divers years afterwards King of Castile and went to gain the same by Arms when Peter her Father was slain by his foresaid Bastard-brother But yet some years after that again there was an agreement made between the said John of Gaunt and John the first of that name King of Castile Son and Heir of the foresaid Henry the Bastard with condition that Catharine the only daughter of John of Gaâ—nt by Lady Constance should marry with Henry the third Prince of Castile Son and Heir of the said King John and Nephew to the Bastard Henry the second and by this means was ended that controversie between England and Castile And the said Lady Catharine had Issue by King Henry John the second King of Casâ—â—â—e and he Isabel that married with Ferdinando the Catholick King of Aragon and joyned by that marriage both those Kingdoms together and by him she had a daughter named Joan that married Philip Duke of Austria and Burgundy and by him had Charles the such that was Emperor and Father to King Philip that now reigneth â—n Spain who as we see is descided two ways from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster to wit by two daughters begotten of two Wives Blanch and Constance neither had John of Gaunt any more Children by Constance but only this daughter Catharine of whom we have spoken wherefore now we shall speak of his third Wife that was Lady Catharine Swinford This Lady Catharine as English Histories do note was born in Heinalt in Flanders and was daughter to a Knight of that Country called Sir Payne de Ruet and she was brought up in her youth in the Duke of Lancasters house and attended upon his first Wife Lady Blanch and being fair of personage grew in such favour with the Duke as in the time of his second Wife Constance he kept this Catharine for his Concubine and begat upon her four Children to wit three Sons and â— daughter which daughter whose name was Jane was married to Ralph Earl of Westmorland called commonly in those days Daw Raby of whom descended the Earls of Westmorland that ensued His three Sons were John Thomas and Henry and John was first Earl and then Duke of Summerset Thomas was first Marques of Dorset and then Duke of Excester Henry was Bishop of Winchester and after Cardinal And after John of Gaunt had begotten all these four Children upon Catharine he married her to a Knight in England named Swinford which Knight lived not many years after and John of Gaunt coming home to England from Aquitaine where he had been for divers years and seeing this old Conâ—â—â—â—ne of his Catharine to be now a Widow and himself also without a Wife for that the Lady Constance was dead a little before for the love that he bore to the Children that he had begotten of her he determined to marry her and thereby the rather to legitimate her Children though himself were old now and all his Kindred utterly against the Marriage and so not full two years before his death to wit in the Year of Christ 1396. he married her and the next Year after in a Parliament begun at Westminster the 22 of January Anno Domini 1397. he caused all his said Children to be legitimated which he had begotten upon this Lady Swinford before she was his Wife But now to go forward to declare the Issue of these three Sons of John of Gaunt by Catharine
same House as descended by the daughter of the first Brother Edward Duke of York and King of England and then the Earl of Huntington and his generation as also the Pools Barringtons and others before named are or may be Titlers of York as descended of George Duke of Clarence second Son of Richard Duke of York all which Issue yet seem to remain only within the compass of the House of York for that by the former Pedegree of the House of Lancaster it seemeth to the favourers of this House that none of these other Competitors are properly of the Line of Lancaster for that King Henry the 7th coming only of John of Gaunt by Catharine Swinford his third Wife could have no part in Lady Blanch that was only Inheritor of that House as to these men seemeth evident Only then it remaineth for the ending of this Chapter to explain somewhat more clearly the descent of King Henry the 7th and of his Issue For better understanding whereof you must consider that King Henry the 7th being of the House of Lancaster in the manner that you have heard and marrying Elizabeth the eldest daughter of the contrary House of York did seem to joyn both Houses together and make an end of that bloudy controversie though others now will say no But howsoever that was which after shall be examined clear it is that he had by that marriage one only Son that left Issue and two daughters his Son was King Henry the 8th who by three several Wives had three Children that have reigned after him to wit King Edward the 6th by Queen Jane Seymer Queen Mary by Queen Catharine of Spain and Queen Elizabeth by Queen Anne Bullen of all which three Children no Issue hath remained so as now we must return to consider the Issue of his daughters The eldest daughter of King Henoy the seventh named Margaret was married by her first mariage to James the fourth King of Scots who had Issue James the fifth and he again Lady Mary late Queen of Scots and Dowager of France put to death not long ago in England who left Issue James the sixth now King of Scots And by her second marriage the said Lady Margaret after the death of King James the fourth took for husband Archibald Douglas Earl of Angus in Scotland by whom she had one only daughter named Margaret which was married to Matthew Steward Earl of Lenox and by him she had two Sons to wit Henry Lord Darly and Charles Steward Henry married the foresaid Lady Mary Queen of Scotland and was murthered in Edenbrough in the year 1566. as the World knoweth and Charles his Brother married Elizabeth the daughter of Sir William Candish in England by whom he had one only daughter yet living named Arabella another competitor of the Crown of England by the House of York and thus much of the first daughter of King Henry the seventh Mary the second daughter of King Henry the seventh and younger Sister to King Henry the eighth was married first to Lewis the XII King of France by whom she had no Issue and afterward to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk by whom she had two daughters to wit Frances and Eleanor the Lady Frances was married first to Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset and after Duke of Suffolk beheaded by Queen Mary and by him she had three daughters to wit Jane Catharine and Mary the Lady Jane eldest of the three was married to Lord Guilford Dudly Son to John Dudly late Duke of Northumberland with whom I mean with her Husband and Father in Law she was beheaded soon after for being proclaimes Queen upon the death of King Edward the sixth the Lady Catharine second daughter married first the Lord Henry Herbert Earl of Pembroke and left by him again she dyed afterward in the Tower where she was prisoner for having had two Children by Edward Seymer Earl of Hertford without sufficient proof that she was married unto him and the two Children are yet living to wit Henry Seymer commonly called Lord Beacham and Edward Seymer his Brother The Lady Mary the third Sister though she was betrothed to Arthur Lord Gray of Wilton and married after to Martin Keyes Gentleman-Porter yet hath she left no Issue as far as I understand This then is the end of the Issue of Lady Frances first of the two daughters of Queen Mary of France by Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk for albeit the said Lady Frances after the beheading of the said Henry Lord Gray Duke of Suffolk her first Husband married again one Adrian Stokes her Servant and had a Son by him yet it lived not but dyed very soon after Now then to speak of the younger daughter of the said French Queen and Duke named Eleanor she was married to Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland who had by her a daughter named Margaret that was married to Lord Henry Stanley Earl of Darby by whom she hath a plentiful Issue as Ferdinand now Earl of Darby William Stanley Francis Stanley and others and this is all that needeth to be spoken of these descents of our English Kings Princes Peers or Competitors to the Crown for this place and therefore now it resteth only that we begin to examine what different pretentions are fram'd by divers Parties upon these descents and Genealogies which is the principal point of this our discourse CHAP. IV. Of the great and general controversie and contention between the two Houses Royal of Lancaster and York and which of them may seem to have had the better Right to the Crown by way of Succession ANd first of all before I do descend to treat in particular of the different pretences of several persons and families that have issued out of these two Royal lineages of Lancaster and York it shall perhaps not be amiss to discuss with some attention what is or hath or may be said on both sides for the general controversie that lyeth between them yet undecided in many mens opinions notwithstanding there hath been so much stir about the same and not only writing and disputing but also fighting and murthering for many years And truly if we look into divers Histories Records and Authors which have written of this matter we shall find that every one of them speaking commonly according to the time wherein they lived for that all such as wrote in the time of the three Henries fourth fifth and sixth Kings of the House of Lancaster they make the title of Lancaster very clear and undoubted but such others as wrote since that time while the House of York hath held the Scepter they have spoken in a far different manner as namely Polydor that wrote in King Henry the VIII his time and others that have followed him since to take all right from the House of Lancaster and give the same to the House of York wherefore the best way I suppose will be not so much to consider
Richard had still great jealousie of his Uncle the Duke of Lancaster and of his off-spring considering how doubtful the question was among the Wise and Learned of those days For more declaration whereof I think it not amiss to alledge the very words of the foresaid Chronicler with the examples by him recited thus then he writeth About this time saith he there did arise a great and doubtful question in the World whether Uncles or Nephews that is to say the younger Brother or else the Children of the elder should Succeed unto Realms and Kingdoms which controversie put all Christianity into great broils and troubles for first Charles the second King of Naplis begat of Mary his Wife Queen and Heir of Hungary divers Children but namely three Sons Marâ—el Robert and Philip Martel dying before his Father left a Son named Charles which in his Grand-mothers right was King also of Hungary but about the Kingdom of Naples the question was when King Charles was dead who should Succeed him either Charles his Nephew King of Hungary or Robert his second Son but Robert was preferred and Reigned in Naples and enjoyed the Earldom of Provence in France also for the space of 33. years with great renown of Valor and Wisdom And this is own example that Girard recounteth which example is reported by the famous Lawyer Bartholus in his Commentaries touching the Succession of the Kingdom of Cicilia and he saith that this Succession of the Uncle before the Nephew was averred also for rightful by the Learned of that time and confirmed for just by the judicial sentence of Pope Boniface and that for the reasons which afterward shall be shewed when we shall treat of this question more in particular Another example also reporteth Girard which ensued immediately after in the same place for that the foresaid King Robert having a Son named Charles which died before him he left a daughter and Heir named Joan Neece unto King Robert which Joan was married to Andrew the younger Son of the foresaid Charles King of Hungary but King Robert being dead there stept up one Lewis Prince of Tarranto a place of the same Kingdom of Naples who was Son to Philip before mentioned younger Brother to King Robert which Lewis pretending his right to be better then that of Joan for that he was a man and one degree nearer to King Charles his Grand-father then Joan was for that he was Nephew and she Neece once removed he prevailed in like manner and thus far Girard Historiographer of France And no doubt but if we consider examples that fell out even in this very age only concerning this controversie between the Uncle and Nephew we shall find store of them for in Spain not long before this time to wit in the year of Christ 1276. was that great and famous determination made by Don Alonso the wise eleventh King of that name and of all his Realm and Nobility in their Courts or Parliament of Segovia mentioned before by the Civilian wherein they disâ—inherited the Children of the Prince Don Alonso de la Cerda that died as our Prince Edward did before his Father and made Heir apparent Don Sancho Bravo younger Brother to the said Don Alonso and Uncle to his Children the two young Cerda's Which sentence standeth even unto this day and King Philip enjoyed the Crown of Spain thereby and the Dukes of Medina Celi and their race that are descendents of the said two Cerda's which were put back are Subjects by that sentence and not Soveraigns as all the World knoweth The like controversie fell out but very little after to wit in the time of King Edward the third in France though not about the Kingdom but about the Earldom of Artoys but yet it was decided by a solemn sentence of two Kings of France and of the whole Parliament of Paris in favour of the Aunt against her Nephew which albeit it cost great troubles yet was it defended and King Philip of Spain holdeth the County of Artoys by it at this day Polydor reporteth the story in this manner Robert Earl of Artoys a man famous for his Chivalry had two Children Philip a Son and Maude a daughter this Maude was married to Otho Earl of Burgundy and Philip dying before his Father left a Son named Robert the second whose Father Robert the first being dead the question was who should Suâ—â—eed either Maude the daughter or Robert the Nephew and the matter being remitted unto Philip le Bel King of France as chief Lord at that time of that State he adjudged it to Maude as to the next in bloud but when Robert repined at this sentence the matter was referred to the Parliament of Paris which confirmed the sentence of King Philip whereupon Robert making his way with Philip de Valoys that soon after came to be King of France he assisted the said Philip earnestly to bring him to the Crown against King Edward of England that opposed himself thereunto and by this hoped that King Philip would have revoked the same sentence but he being once established in the Crown answered that a sentence of such importance and so maturely given could not be revoked Whereupon the said Robert fled to the King of Englands part against France Thus far Polydor. The very like sentence recounteth the same Author to have been given in England at the same time and in the same controversie of the Uncle against the Nephew for the Succession to the Dukedom of Britany as before I have related wherein John Breno Earl of Monford was preferred before the daughter and Heir of his elder Brother Guy though he were but of the half bloud to the last Duke and she of the whole For that John the third Duke of Britany had two Brothers first Guy of the whole bloud by Father and Mother and then John Breno his younger Brother by the Fathers side only Guy dying left a daughter and Heir named Jane married to the Earl of Bloys Nephew to the King of France who after the death of Duke John pretended in the right of his Wife as daughter and Heir to Guy the elder Brother but King Edward the third with the State of England gave sentence for John Breno Earl of Monford her Uncle as for him that was next in consanguinity to the dead Duke and with their Arms the State of England did put him in possession who slew the Earl of Bloys as before hath been declared and thereby got possession of that Realm and held it ever after and so do his Heirs at this day And not long before this again the like resolution prevailed in Scotland between the House of Balliol and Bruse who were competitors to that Crown by this occasion that now I will declare William King of Scots had Issue two Sons Alexander that Succeeded in the Crown and David Earl of Huntington Alexander had Issue another Alexander and a daughter
married to the King of Norway all which Issue and Line ended about the year 1290. David younger Brother to King William had Issue two daughters Margaret and Isabel Margaret was married to Alain Earl of Galloway and had Issue by him a daughter that married John Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normandy who had Issue by her this John Balliol Founder of Balliol Colledge in Oxford that now pretended to the Crown as descended from the eldest daughter of David in the third descent Isabel the second daughter of David was married to Robert Bruse Earl of Cleveland in England who had Issue by her this Robert Bruse Earl of Carick the other competitor Now then the question between these two competitors was which of them should Succeed either John Balliol that was Nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruse that was Son to the younger daughter and so one degree more near to the Stock or Stem then the other And albeit King Edward the first of England whose power was dreadful at that day in Scotland having the matter referred to his arbitrement gave sentence for John Balliol and Robert Bruse obeyed for the time in respect partly of fear and partly of his Oath that he had made to stand to that Judgment yet was that sentence held to be unjust in Scotland and so was the Crown restor'd afterward to Robert Bruse his Son and his posterity doth hold it unto this day In England also it self they alledge the examples of K. Henry the first preferred before his Nephew William Son and Heir to his elder Brother Robert as also the example of K. John preferred before his Nephew Arthur Duke of Britany for that King Henry the second had four Sons Henry Richard Geffery and John Henry died before his Father without Issue Richard Reigned after him and died also without Issue Geffery also died before his Father but left a Son named Arthur Duke of Britany by right of his Mother But after the death of King Richard the question was who should Succeed to wit either Arthur the Nephew or John the Uncle but the matter in England was soon desided for that John the Uncle was preferred before the Nephew Arthur by reason he was more near to his Brother dead by a degree then was Arthur And albeit the King of France and some other Princes abroad opposed themselves for stomack against this Succession of King John yet say these favourers of the House of Lancaster that the English inclined still to acknowledge and admit his right before his Nephew and so they proclaimed this King John for King of England while he was yet in Normandy I mean Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury Eleanor the Queen this Mother Geffery Fitz-peter chief Judge of England who knew also what law meant therein and others the Nobles and Barons of the Realm without making any doubt or scruple of his title to the Succession And whereas those of the House of York do alledge that King Richard in his life time when he was to go to the holy Land caused his Nephew Arthur to be declared Heir apparent to the Crown and thereby did shew that his title was the better they of Lancaster do answer first that this declaration of King Richard was not made by act of Parliament of England for that King Richard was in Normandy when he made this declaration as plainly appeareth both by Polidor and Hollingshed Secondly that this declaration was made the sooner by King Richard at that time thereby to repress and keep down the ambitious humor of his Brother John whom he feared least in his absence if he had been declared for Heir apparent might invade the Crown as indeed without that he was like to have done as may appear by that which happened in his said Brothers absence Thirdly they shew that this declaration of King Richard was never admitted in England neither would Duke John suffer it to be admitted but rather caused the Bishop of Ely that was left Governour by King Richard with consent of the Nobility to renounce the said declaration of King Richard in favour of Arthur and to take a contrary Oath to admit the said John if King Richard his Brother should die without Issue and the like Oath did the said Bishop of Ely together with the Archbishop of Roan that was left in equal Authority with him exact and take of the Citizens of London when they gave them their Priviledges and Liberties of Commonalty as Hollingshed recordeth And lastly the said Hollinshed writeth how that King Richard being now come home again from the War of Jerusalem and void of that jealousie of his Brother which before I have mentioned he made his last Will and Testament and ordained in the same that his Brother John should be his successor and caused all the Nobles there present to swear Fealty unto him as to his next in bloud for which cause Thomas Walsingham in his story writeth these words Johannis filius junior Henrici 2. Anglorum regis Alienorae Ducissae Aquitaniae non modo jure propinquitatis sed etiam testamento fratris sui Richardi designatus est successo post mortem ipsius which is John younger Son of Henry the second King of England and of Eleanor Dutchess of Aquitain was declared successor of the Crown not only by Law and right of nearness of bloud but also by the Will and Testament of Richard his Brother Thus much this ancient Chronicler speaketh in the testifying of King John's Title By all which examples that fell out almost within one age in divers Nations over the World letting pass many others which the Civilian touched in his discourse before for that they are of more ancient times these favourers of the House of Lancaster do infer that the right of the Uncle before the Nephew was no new or strange matter in those days of King Edward the third and that if we will deny the same now we must call in question the succession and right of all the Kingdoms and States before-mentioned of Naples Sicily Spain Britany Flanders Scotland and England whose Kings and Princes do evidently hold their Crowns at this day by that very Title as hath been shewed Moreover they say that touching Law in this point albeit the most famous Civil Lawyers of the World be somewhat divided in the same matter some of them favouring the Uncle and some other the Nephew and that for different reasons as Baldus Oldratus Panormitanus and divers others alledged by Gulielmâ—â— Benedictus in his Repetitions in favour of the Nephew against the Uncle And on the other side for the Uncle before the Nephew Bartolus Alexander Decius Altiatus Cujatius and many other their followers are recounted in the same place by the same man yet in the end Baldus that is held for head of the contrary side for the Nephew after all reasons weighed to and fro he cometh to conclude
English Nobility to see them so greatly advanced above the rest as necessarily they must be if this Woman of their Lineage should come to be Queen which how the Nobility of England would bâ—ar is hard to say And this is as much as I have heard others say of this matter and of all the House of Scotland wherefore with this I shall end and pass over to treat also of the other Houses that do remain of such as before I named CHAP. VI. Of the House of Suffolk containing the Claims of the Countess of Darby and her Children as also of the Children of the Earl of Hartford IT hath appeared by the Genealogy set down before in the third Chapter and often-times mentioned since how that the House of Suffolk is so called for that the Lady Mary second Daughter of King Henry VII being first married to Lewis XII King of France was afterwards married to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk who being sent over to condole the death of the said King got the good will of the Widow-Queen though the common Fame of all men was That the said Charles had a Wife living at that day and divers years after as in this Chapter we shall examine more in particular By this Charles Brandon then Duke of Suffolk this Queen Mary of France had two Daughters first the Lady Frances married to Sir Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset and afterwards in the right of his Wife Duke also of Suffolk who was afterwards beheaded by Queen Mary And secondly Lady Eleanor married to Sir Henry Clifford Earl of Cumberland The Lady Frances elder Daughter of the Queen and of Charles Brandon had Issue by her Husband the said last Duke of Suffolk three Daughters to wit Jane Katharine and Mary which Mary the youngest was betrothed first to Arthur Lord Gray of Wilton and after left by him she was married to one M. Martin Keyes of Kent Gentleman-Porter of the Queens Houshold and after she died without Issue And the Lady Jane the eldest of the three Sisters was married at the same time to the Lord Guilford Dudley fourth Son to Sir John Dudley Duke of Northumberland and was proclaimed Queen after the death of King Edward for which act all three of them to wit both the Father Son and Daughter-in-law were put to death soon after But the Lady Katharine the second Daughter was married first upon the same day that the other two her Sisters were unto Lord Henry Herbert now Earl of Pembroke and upon the fall and misery of her House she was left by him and so she lived a sole Woman for divers years until in the beginning of this Queens days she was found to be with-child which she affirmed was by the Lord Edward Seymor Earl of Hartford who at that time was in France with Sir Nicholas Throgmorton the Embassador and had purpose and license to have travelled into Italy but being called home in hast upon this new accident he confessed that the Child was his and both he and the Lady affirmed that they were man and wife but for that they could not prove it by Witnesses and for attempting such a Match with one of the Blood Royal without Privity and License of the Prince they were Committed to the Tower where they procured Means to meet again afterward and had an other Child which both Children do yet live and the Elder of them is called Lord Henry Beacham and the other Edward Seymor the Mother of whom lived not long after neither married the Earl again until of late that he married the Lady Frances Howard Sister to the Lady Sheffield And this is all the Issue of the elder Daughter of Charles Brandon by Lady Mary Queen of France The second Daughter of Duke Charles and the Queen named Lady Eleanor was married to Henry Lord Clifford Earl of Cumberland and had by him a Daughter named Margaret that married Sir Henry Stanely Lord Strange and after Earl of Darby by whom the said Lady who yet liveth hath had Issue Ferdinando Stanley now Earl of Darby William and Francis Stanley And this is the Issue of the House of Suffolk to wit this Countess of Darby with her Children and these other of the Earl of Hartford of all whose Titles with their Impediments I shall here briefly give an account and reason First of all both of these Families do joyn together in this one point to exclude the House of Scotland both by foreign Birth anh by the aforesaid Testament of King Henry authorized by two Parliaments and by the other Exclusions which in each of the titles of the King of cots and of Lady Arabella hath been before-alledged But then secondly they come to vary between themselves about the Priority or Propinquity of their own Succession for the Children of the Earl of Hartford and their Friends do alledge That they do descend of Lady Frances the elder Sister of Lady Eleanor and so by Law and Reason ought to be preferred But the other House alledgeth against this two Impediments the one That the Lady Margaret Countess of Darby now living is nearer by one degree to the Stem that is to King Henry VII then are the Children of the Earl of Hartford and consequently according to that which in the former fourth Chapter hath been declared she is to be preferred albeit the Children of the said Earl were legitimate Secondly they do affirm That the said Children of the Earl of Hartford by the Lady Katharine Gray are many ways illegitimate First for that the said Lady Katharine Gray their Mother was lawfully married before to the Earl of Pembroke now living as hath been touched and publick Records do testifie and not lawfully separated nor by lawful authority nor for just Causes but only for temporal and worldly respects for that the House of Suffolk was come into misery and disgrace whereby she remained still his true Wife and before God and so could have no lawful Children by any other whiles he yet lived as yet he doth Again they prove the illegitimation of these Children of the Earl of Hartford for that it could never be lawfully proved that the said Earl and the Lady Katharine were married but only by their own assertions which in Law is not holden sufficient for which occasion the said pretended Marriage was disannulled in the Court of Arches by publick and definitive Sentence of Doctor Parker Archbishop of Canterbury and Primate of England not long after the Birth of the said Children Furthermore they do add yet another Bastardy also in the Birth of Lady Katharine her self for that her Father Lord Henry Gray Marquess of Dorset was known to have a lawful Wife alive when he married the Lady Frances Daughter and Heir of the Queen of France and of Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk and Mother of this Lady Katharine for obâ—aining of which said Marriage the said Marquess put away his foresaid
Succession or Right of Women which the Kingdom of France in it self doth not as is known and consequently a Woman may be Heir to the one without the other that is to say she may be Heir to some particular states of France inheritable by Women though not to the Crown it self and so do pretend to be the two Daughters of France that were Sisters to the late King Henry III. which Daughters were married the one to the King of Spain that now is who had Issue by her the Infanta of Spain yet unmarried and her younger Sister married to the Duke of Savoy and the other to wit the younger Daughter of the King of France was married to the Duke of Lorrain yet living by whom she had the Prince of Lorrain and other Children that live at this day This then being so clear as it is first that according to the common course of Succession in England and other Countries and according to the course of all Common Law the Infanâ—a of Spain should inherit the whole Kingdom of France and all other States thereunto belonging she being the Daughter and Heir of King Henry II. of France whose Issue-male of the direct line is wholly extinct but yet for that the French do pretend their Law Salique to exclude Women which we English have ever denied to be good until now hereby cometh it to pass that the King of Navarr pretendeth to enter and to be preferred before the said Infanta or her Sisters Children though Male by a Collateral Line But yet her favourers say I mean those of the Infanta that from the Dukedoms of Britany Aquitain and the like that came to the Crown of France by Women and are Inheritable by Women she cannot be in right debarred as neither from any Succession or Pretence to England if either by the Bloud-Royal of France Britany Aquitain or of England it self it may be proved that she hath any Interest thereunto as her favourers do affirm that she hath by these reasons following First for that she is of the ancient Bloud-Royal of England even from the Conquest by the elder Daughter of William the Conquerour married to Allain Fergant Duke of Britany as hath been shewed before in the second Chapter and other places of this Conference And of this they infer three Consequences First when the Sons of the Conquerour died without Issue or were made uncapable of the Crown as it was presumed at least-wise of King Henry I. last Son of the Conquerour that he lost his Right for the violence used to his elder Brother Robert and unto William the said Robert's Son and Heir they say these men ought the said Dutchess of Britany to have entred as eldest Sister Secondly they say That when Duke Robert that both by right of Birth and by express Agreement with William Rufus and with the Realm of England should have succeeded next after the said Rufus came to die in Prison the said Lady Constance should have succeeded him for that his Brother Henry being culpable of his Death could not in right be his Heir And thirdly they say That at least wise after the death of the said King Henry I. she and her Son I mean Lady Constance and Conan Duke of Britany should have entred before King Stephen who was born of Adela the younger Daughter of William the Conquerour Secondly they do alledge That the Infanta of Spain descendeth also lineally from Lady Eleanor eldest Daughter of King Henry II. married to King Alonso the ninth of that name King of Castile whose eldest Daughter and Heir named Blanch for that their only Son Henry died without Issue married with the Prince Lewis VIII of France who was Father by her to King St. Lewis of France and so hath continued the Line of France unto this day and joyned the same afterwards to the House of Britany as hath been declared So as the Infanta cometh to be Heir general of both those Houses that is as well of Britany as France as hath been shewed And now by this her descent from Queen Eleanor Daughter of King Henry II. her favourers do found divers Pretences and Titles not only to the States of Aquitain that came to her Father by a Woman but also to England in manner following First for Aquitain they say it came to King Henry II. by his Wife Eleanor Daughter of William Duke of Aquitain as before in the second Chapter at large hath been declared and for that the most part thereof was lost afterwards to the French in King John's time that was fourth Son to the aforesaid King Henry it was agreed between the said King John and the French-King Philip that all the States of Aquitain already lost to the French should be given in Dowry with the said Blanch to be married to Lewis VIII then Prince of France and so they were And moreover they do alledge That not long after this the same States with the residue that remained in King John's hands were all adjudged to be forfeited by the Parliament of Paris for the Death of Duke Arthur and consequently did fall also upon this Lady Blanch as next Heir capable of such Succession unto King John for that yet the said King John had no Son at all and for this cause and for that the said States are Inheritable by Women and came by Women as hath been often said these men affirm That at this day they do by Succession appertain unto the said Lady Infanta of Spain and not unto the Crown of France To the Succession of England also they make pretence by way of the said Lady Blanch married into France and that in divers manners First for that King John of England by the Murther of Duke Arthur of Britany his Nephew which divers Authors do affirm as Stow also witnesseth was done by King John's own hands he forfeited all his States though his right to them had been never so good and for that this Murther happened in the fifth year of his Reign and four years before his Son Henry was born none was so near to succeed at that time as was this Lady Blanch married into France for that she was Daughter and Heir unto King John's elder Sister Eleanor or the said Lady Eleanor her self Queen of Spain should have succeeded for that she yet lived and died not as appeareth by Stephen Garribay Chronicler of Spain until the year of Christ 1214. which was not until the fifteenth year of the Reign of King John and one year only before he died so as he having yet no Issue when this Murther was committed and losing by this forfeit all the right he had in the Kingdom of England it followeth that the same should have gone then to his said Sister and by her to this Lady Blanch her Heir and eldest Daughter married into France as hath been said which forfeit also of King John these men do confirm by his
Bragansa before mentioned or of the House of Austria seeing there wanteth not many able and worthy Princes of that House for whom there would be the same reasons and considerations to perswade their admission by the English that have been alledged before for the Infanta and the same utilities to the Realm and motives to English-men if such a matter should come in consultation and the same Friends and Forces would not want abroad to assist them For the second part of my Conjecture touching the Earl of Hartford's second Son or one of the Countess of Darbyes Children my Reasons be First for that this second Son seemeth to be cleared in our former Discourse of that Bastardy that most importeth and nearest of all other lieth upon those Children which is for lack of due proof of their Parents Marriage for which defect they do stand declared for illegitimate by publick sentence of the Archbishop of Canterbury as before hath been declared from which sentence this second Son is made free by the arguments before alledged and therein preferred before his elder Brother And secondly for that this younger Son is unmarried for any thing that I do know to the contrary which may be a point of no small moment in such an occasion as hath been noted divers times before for joining or fortifying of Titles by Marriage and for making of compositions of Peace and Union with the opposite Parties And finally for that this second Son being young his Religion is not much talked of and consequently every Party may have hope to draw him to their side especially he being also free as I have said to follow what he shall think best or most expedient for his own advancement without knot or obligation to follow other mens affections or judgments in that point as he would be presumed to be if he were married or much obliged to any other Family I do name also in this second Point the Children of the Countess of Darby first for that in truth the probabilities of this House be very Great both in respect of their Descent which in effect is holden as it were clear from Bastardy as before hath been shewed and then again for their nearness in degree which by the Countess yet living is nearer to King Henry the VII by one degree than any other Competitor whatsoever Secondly I do name this Countess Children and not her self for that I see most men that Favour this House very willing and desirous that some of the said Countess Children should rather be preferred than she her self and this for that she is a Woman and it seemeth to them much to have three Women reign one after the other as before hath been noted so as they would have her Title to be cast rather upon one of her Children even as upon like occasion it hath been shewed before that the Spaniards caused the Lady Berenguela Niece to King Henry the II. to resign her Title to her Son when she should have succeeded by nearness of Inheritance and as a little before that the State of England did after King Stephen unto King Henry the I. his Daughter Maude the Empress whom they caused to pass over her Title to her Son Henry the II. though her own Right should have gone before him by nearness of Succession as also should have done by Orderly Course of Succession the Right of Margaret Countess of Richmond before her Son King Henry the VII as before hath been proved but yet we see that her Son was preferred and the like would these men have to be observed in the Countess of Darby Lastly I do name the Children of this Countess in general and not the Earl of Darby particularly above the other though he be the eldest for two respects First for that his younger Brother is unmarried which is a circumstance whereof divers times occasion hath been offered to speak before and therefore I need to add no further therein And secondly for that divers men remain not so fully satisfied and contented with the Course of that Lord hitherto and do think that they should do much better with his Brother if so be he shall be thought more fit yet are these things uncertain as we see but notwithstanding such is the nature and fashion of man to hope ever great matters of Youths especially Princes God send all just Desires to take place and with this I will end and pass no fupther hoping that I have performed the effect of my Promise made unto You at the beginning FINIS A Perfect and Exact Arbor and Genealogy of all the Kings Queens and Princes of the Blood-Royal of England from the time of William the Conquerour unto our time whereby are to be seen the grounds of the Pretenders to the same Crown at this day according to the Book of R. Doleman set forth of the said Pretenders and their several Claims in the year 1594. THe Antient Houses of the Blood-Royal of England are the House of Lancaster that bears the Red Rose and the House of York that bears the White And then the House of Britany and France joyn'd in one And out of these are made Five particular Houses which are the House of Scotland of Suffolk of Clarence of Britainy and of Portugal And there are 12 different Persons that by way of Succession do pretend each one of them to be next after Her Majesty that now is as by the Book appears 1. Wil. the conqueror reigned 1066. The House of Flanders Robert 1st Son put back by his Brethren 2. Wil Rufus 2d Son of the Conquerour 1087. Wil. D. of Norm E. of Flan. slain before Alest 3. Henry I. 3d. Son of the Conquerour 1101. Mathild married H. V. and then Gâ—ffry D. of Anjon The House of Bloys Consta eldest Daughter married to Alain Fergant D. of Britan Adâ—la 2d daughter married to Steven Earl of Blâ—ys 4. Steven B. of Bloys and Bulloin reigned 1135. The House of Succession of Britany Conan II. D. of Britany surna med Le Gross Hâ—â—l disinherited by his Father Berthaâ—eir to Conan married to Eudo E. of Pâ—rret Conan III. D. of Britany Son to Bertha Const. mar 1st to Ges â— Son to H. II. aâ—d after to Guy Viseâ— Touan Alice heir of Britany married to the E. of Druce Isabel second Daughter of Constance The House of France Hen. 1st Son crown'd but died in his Fathers days 6. Richard I. 2d Son reigned 1190. Arth. D. of Brit. slain by his Uukle Jo. in Roan Cast. Geffry 3d. Son Duke of Britany by his Wife 5. Henry II. Duke of Anjou reigned 1254. 7. John 4th Son of Henry II. reigned 1200. Elean eldest Daughter married to K. Alfonsus IX of Casâ—â—ile Blanch eldest daughter c Heir marri'd to Lâ—w VIII of France Lewis VIII K. of Fr. chosen K. of Eng. in place of John depriv'd Lewis IX K of France from whom descendeth â— Infan of Sp. The first Antient House of
the first Race for that it is evident by the Councils of Toledo before-alledged which were holden in that very time that in those days express Election was joined with Succession as by the deposition of King Suintilla and putting back of all his Children as also by the Election and Approbation of King Sisinando that was further off by Succession hath been insinuated before and in the Fifth Council of that age in Toledo it is decreed expressly in these words Si quis taliâ— meditatus fuerit talking of pretending to be King quem nec electio omnium perfecit nec Gothicae gentis nobilitas ad hunc honoris apicem trahit sit consortio Catholicorum privatus Divino anathemate condemnatus If any man shall imagin said these Fathers or go about to aspire to the Kingdom whom the Election and Choice of all the Realm doth not make perfect nor the Nobility of the Gothish Nation doth draw to the height of this Dignity let him be deprived of all Catholick Society and damned by the Curse of Almighty God By which words is insinuated that not only the Nobility of Gothish Bloud or nearness by Succession was required for the making of their King but much more the Choice or Admission of all the Realm wherein this Council putteth the Perfection of his Title The like determination was made in another Council at the same place before this that I have alledged and the words are these Nullus apud nos presumptione regnum arripiat sed defuncto in pace Principe optimates Gentis cum sacerdotibus successorem regni communi concilio constituant Which in English is thus Let no man with us snatch the Kingdom by presumption but the former Prince being dead in peace let the Nobility of the Nation together with the Priests and Clergy appoint the Successor of the Kingdom by Common Council Which is as much as to say as if he had said Let no man enter upon the Kingdom by presumption of Succession alone but let the Lords Temporal and Spiritual by common voice see what is best for the Weal-Publick Now then according to these antient Decrees albeit in the second race of Don Pelayo the Law of Succession by propinquity of Bloud was renewed and much more established than before as the antient Bishop of Tuys and Molina and other Spanish Writers do testify yet that the next in Bloud was oftentimes put back by the Commonwealth upon just causes these Examples following shall testify as briefly recounted as I can possibly Don Pelayo dyed in the Year of our Lord 737 left a son named Don Favilla who was King after his Father and Reigned two Years only After whose death none of his Children were admitted for King though he left divers as all Writers do testify But as Don Lucas the Bishop of Tuy a very antient Author writeth Aldefonsus Catholicus ab universo populo Gothorum eligitur that is as the Chronicler Moralis doth translate in Spanish Don Alonso sirnamed the Catholick was chosen to be King by all voices of the Gothish Nation This Don Alonso was son in Law to the former King Favilla as Morales saith for that he had his daughter Ermenesenda in Marriage and he was preferred before the King 's own Sons only for that they were young and unable to Govern as the said Historiographer testifyeth And how well this fell out for the Commonwealth and how excellent a King this Don Alonso proved Morales sheweth at large from the tenth chapter of his thirteenth Book unto the seventeenth and Sebastianus Bishop of Salamanca that lived in the same time writeth that for his Valiant Acts he was sirnam'd the Great To this Famous Don Alonso succeeded his son Don Fruela the first of that name who was a Noble King for ten Years space and had divers excellent Victories against the Moores but afterwards declining to Tyranny he became hateful to his Subjects and for that he put to death wrongfully his own Brother Don Vimerano a Prince of excellent parts and rarely beloved of the Spaniards he was himself put down and put to death by them in the Year of Christ 768 And albeit this King left two goodly children behind him which were lawfully begotten upon his Queen Dona Munia the one of them a son called Don Alonso and the other a daughter called Dona Ximea yet for the hatred conceived against their Father neither of them was admitted by the Realm to succeed him but rather his Cousin German named Don Aurelio brothers son to Don Alonso the Catholick was preferred and reigned peaceably six years and then dying without issue for that the hatred of the Spaniards was not yet ended against the memory of King Fruela they would not yet admit any of his Generation but rather excluded them again the second time and admitted a Brother in Law of his named Don Silo that was married to his sister Dona Adosinda daughter to the foresaid Noble King Catholick Alonso So that here we see twice the right Heirs of King Don Fruela for his evil Government were put back But Don Silo being dead without issue aâ— also Don Aurelio was before him and the Spaniards anger against King Fruela being now well asswaged they admitted to the Kingdom his foresaid son Don Alonso the younger sirnamed afterwards the Chast whom now twice before they had put back as you have seen but now they admitted him though his Reign at the first endured very little for that a certain bastard uncle of his named Don Mauregato by help of the Moores put him out and reigned by force six years and in the end dying without issue the matter came in deliberation again whether the King Don Alonso the chast that yet lived and had been hidden in a Monastery of Galatia during the time of the Tyrant should return again to Govern or rather that his Cousin-german Don Vermudo son to his Uncle the Prince Vimerano whom we shewed before to have been slain by this mans Father King Fruela should be elected in his place And the Realm of Spain determined the second to wit that Don Vermudo though he were much further off by propinquity of Bloud and within Ecclesiastical Order also for that he had been made Deaconâ— should be admitted partly for that he was judged for the more Valiant and Able Prince than the other who seemed to be made more acquainted now with the Life of Monks and Religious men than of a King having first been brought up among them for ten or twelve Years space whilst Don Aurelio and Don Silo reigned after the death of his Father King Fruela and secondly again other six Years during the Reign of the Tyrant Mauregato for which cause they esteemed the other to be fitter as also for the different memories of their two Fathers King Fruela and Prince Vimerano whereof the first was hateful and the
other most dear as before hath been declared neither do any of the four antient Bishops Historiographers of Spain to wit that of Toledo Beza Salamanca or Ture that lived all about those days and wrote the Story reprehend this fact of the Realm of Spain or put any doubt whether it were lawful or not for the causes before-recited True it is that after three years reign this King Vermudo being weary of Kingly life and feeling some scruple of Conscience that being Deacon he had forsaken the life Ecclesiastical and married though by dispensation of the Pope as Morales saith and entangled himself with the affairs of a Kingdom he resigned willingly the Government unto his said Cousin Don Alonso the Chaste and himself lived after a Private Life for divers Years But this Don Alonso who now the fourth time had been deprived of his Succession as you have seen deceived the expectation of the Spaniards that accounted him a Monk for he proved the most valiant and excellent King that ever that Nation had both for his vertue valour victories against the Moores building of Towns Castles Churches Monasteries and other such Works of Christianity as Morales recounteth and he reigned after his last Admission one and fifty years and had great friendship with King Charles the Great of France who lived in the same time with him And this man among other most noble Exploits so tamed the Moors of his Countrey as during his days he never paid that cruel and horrible Tribute which before and after was paid by the Christians to the Moors which was an hundred young Maids and fifty Sons of Gentlemen every Year to be brought up in the Religion of Mahomet among those Infidel Tyrants And finally this man after so much Affliction came to be one of the most renowned Princes of the World After this Don Alonso who left no Children for that he would never marry but lived all his Life in Chastity there succeeded to him by Election his Nephew named Don Ramiro son to the former said King Don Vermudo the Deacon that gave this Man the Crown as you have heard of whose Election Morales writeth these words Muerto el Rey Don Alonso el casto sue eligido por los perlados y grandes del reyno el Rey Don Ramiro primero deste nombre hyio del Rey Don Vermudo el diacono That is the King Don Alonso the chast being dead there was chosen King by the Prelats and Nobility of the Realm Don Ramiro the first of this Name son of King Vermudo the Deacon who resigned his Crown to Don Alonso and it is to be noted that albeit this Don Ramiro was next in Bloud to the Succession after the death of his Uncle Don Alonso without Children yet was he chosen by the States as here it is said in express words Moreover it is to be noted that albeit this Author Ambrosio Morales and other Spanish Writers do say that in the time of this King Ramiro the Law of Succession by propinquity in â—loud was so revived and strongly consumed that as the Kingdom of Spain was made as Majorasgo as he termeth it which is an Inheritance so entailed and tied only to the next in bloud as there is no possibility to alter the same and that from this time forward the King always caused his Eldest son to be named King or Prince and so ever to be sworn by the Realm and Nobility yet shall we find this Ordinance and Succession oftentimes to have been broken upon several considerations as this Author himself in that very chapter confesseth As for Example after some descents from this man which were Don Ordonio the first this man's son and Don Alonso the Third Don Garzia and Don Ordonio the Second all four Kings by Orderly Succession it happened that in the Year of Christ 924 Don Ordonio the Second dying left four Sons and one Daughter lawfully begotten and yet the State of Spain displaced them all and gave the Kingdom to their Uncle Don Fruela second brother to their Father Don Ordonio and Morales saith that there appeareth no other reason hereof but only for that these Sons of the King deceased were young and not so apt to Govern well the Realm as their Uncle was But after a Years Reign this King Fruela dyed also and left divers Children at mans Estate and then did the Spaniards as much against them as they had done for him before against the Children of his Elder Brother For they put them all by the Crown and chose for their King Don Alonso the Fourth which was eldest son to Don Ordonio the Second before-named that had been last King saving one and this man also I mean Don Alonso the Fourth leaving afterwards his Kingdom and betaking himself to a Religious habit offered to the Commonwealth of Spain his eldest Son lawfully begotten named Don Ordonio to be their King but they refused him and took his Brother I mean this Kings Brother and Uncle to the young Prince named Don Ramiro who reigned 19 Years and was a most excellent King and gained Madrid from the Moors though noted for Cruelty for imprisoning and pulling out the eyes afterwards of this King Don Alonso the Fourth and all his Children and Nephews for that he would have left his Habit and returned to be King again But this Fact my Author Morales excuseth saying that it was requisite for the peace and safety of the Realm so as here you see two most manifest alterations of Lineal Succession together by Order of the Commonwealth Furthermore after this Noble King Don Ramiro the Second succeeded as Heir apparent to the Crown his elder Son Don Ordinio the Third of this name in the Year of our Saviour 950. But this Succession endured no longer than unto his own death which was after seven years for then albeit he left a Son named El Enfante Don Vermudo yet he was not admitted but rather his Brother Don Sancho the First of this Name sirnamed El Gordo who was Uncle to the young Prince and the reason of this Alteration Morales giveth in these express words el succeder en el regno al hermano fue por la racon ordinaria de ser el enfante Don Vermudo nino y no bastante para el govierno y difenca de la terra Which is the cause why the Kings Brother and not his son succeeded in the Crown was for the ordinary reason so often before alledged for that the Infant or young Prince Vermudo was a little child and not sufficient for the Government and Defence of the Countrey Truth it is that after this Don Sancho had reigned and his Son and Heir named Don Ramiro the Third after him for the space of thirty years in all then was this youth Don Vermudo that is now put back called by the Realm to the Succession of the Crown and made King
Darly her Husband which by many was laid against her And the second did handle her Title to the Crown of England and the third did answer the Book of John Knox the Scot entituled Against the Monstrous Government of Women Of all which three Points for that the second that concerneth the Title is that which properly appertaineth to our purpose and for that the same is handled again and more largely in the second Book set out not long after by John Lesley Lord Bishop of Ross in Scotland who at that time was Embassadour for the said Queen of Scots in England and handled the same matter more abundantly which M. Morgan had done before him I shall say no more of this Book of M. Morgan but shall pass over to that of the Bishop which in this Point of Succession containeth also whatsoever the other hath so as by declaring the Contents of the one we shall come to see what is the other The Intent then of this Book of the Bishop of Ross is to refute the other book of Hales and Bacon and that especially in the two Points before mentioned which they alledged for their Principles to wit about Foreign Birth and King Henry's Testament And against the first of these two Points the Bishop alledgeth many Proofs that there is no such Maxim in the common Laws of England to disinherit a Prince born out of the Land from his or her Right of Succession that they have by Blood And this first for that the Statute made for barring of Aliens to inherit in England which was in the 25. Year of the Reign of King Edward III. is only to be understood of particular mens inheritance and no ways to be extended to the Succession of the Crown as by comparison of many other like Cases is declared And secondly for that there is express exception in the same Statute of the Kings Children and Off-spring And thirdly for that the practice hath always been contrary both before and after the Conquest to wit that divers Princes born out of the Realm have succeeded The other Principle also concerning King Henry's Testament the Bishop impugneth first by divers Reasons and Incongruities whereby it may be presumed that King Henry never made any such Testament and if he did yet could it not hold in Law And secondly also by Witness of the Lord Paget that was of the Privy Council in those days and of Sir Edward Montague Lord Chief Justice and of one William Clark that set the Kings Stamp to the Writing all which avowed before the Council and Parliament in Queen Maries time that the said Testament was signed after the King was past sense and memory And finally the said Bishop concludeth that the Line of Scotland is the next every way both in respect of the House of Lancaster and also of York for that they are next Heirs to King Henry VIII who by his Father was Heir to the House of York But after these three Books was written a fourth by one Robert Highinton Secretary in time past to the Earl of Northumberland a man well read in Stories and especially of our Countrey who is said to be dead some years past in Paris This man impugneth all the three former Books in divers principal Points and draweth the Crown from both their Pretenders I mean as well-from the House of Scotland as from that of Suffolk and first against the Book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon written as hath been said in favour of the House of Suffolk Highington holdeth with the Bishop and Morgan that these two Principles laid by the other of Foreign Birth and of King Henry's Testament against the Scotish Line are of no Validity as neither their reasons for legitimating of the Earl of Hartfords Children which afterwards shall be handled And secondly he is against both Morgan and the Bishop of Ross also in divers important Points and in the very Principal of all for that this man I mean Highinton maketh the King of Spain to be the next and most rightful Pretender by the House of Lancaster for proof whereof he holdeth first that King Henry VII had no Title indeed to the Crown by Lancaster but only by the House of York that is to say by his Marriage of Queen Elizabeth elder Daughter to King Edward IV For that albeit himself were descended by his Mother from John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster yet this was but by his Third Wife Catharin Swinford and that the true Heirs of Blanch his first Wife Dutchess and Heir of Lancaster to whom saith he appertained only the Succession after the death of King Henry the VI. and his Son with whom ended the Line Male of that House remained only in Portugal by the Marriage of Lady Philip Daughter of the foresaid Blanch to King John the I. of Portugal and that for as much as King Philip of Spain saith this man hath now succeeded to all the Right of the Kings of Portugal to him appertaineth also the onely Right of Succession of the House of Lancaster and that all the other Descendents of King Henry VII are to pretend only by the Title of York I mean as well the Line of Scotland as also of Suffolk and Huntington for that in the House of Lancaster King Philip is evidently before them all Thus holdeth Highington alledging divers Stories Arguments and Probabilities for the same and then adjoineth two other Propositions which do import most of all to wit that the Title of the House of Lancaster was far better than that of York not for that Edmond Crookback first Founder of the House of Lancaster who was Son to King Henry the III. and Brother to King Edward the I. was eldest son to the said Edward injuriously put back for his deformity in Body as both the said Bishop of Ross and George Lylly do falsly hold and this man refuteth by many good Arguments but for that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being the eldest Son that King Edward the III. had alive when he dyed should in Right have succeeded in the Crown as this man holdeth and should have been preferred before Richard the II. that was the black Princes Son who was a degree further off from King Edward the III. his Grandfather than was John of Gaunt to whom King Edward was Father and by this occasion this man cometh to discuss at large the opinions of the Lawyers whether the Uncle or the Nephew should be preferred in the Succession of a Crown to wit whether the younger Brother or the elder Brothers son if his Father be dead without being seased of the same which is a Point that in the Civil Law hath great Disputation and many great Authors on each side as this man sheweth and the matter also wanteth not examples on both parts in the Succession of divers English Kings as our Friend the Civil Lawyer did signify also in his discourse and we may chance to have occasion
that course was altered again and Henry his Son admitted for King And thus much of the Sons of King Henry II. But of his Daughters by the same Lady Eleanor Heir of Gascony Belforest in his Story of France hath these words following King Henry had four Daughters by Eleanor of Aquitain the eldest whereof was married to Alonso the IX of that name King of Castile of which Marriage issued Queen Blanch Mother to S. Lewis King of France The second of these two Daughters was espoused to Alexis Emperour of Constantinople The third was married to the Duke of Saxony and the fourth was given to the Earl of Tholosa Thus being the French Stories of these Daughters Of the marriage of the eldest Daughter of these four whose name was Eleanor also as her Mothers was with King Alonso the IX of Castile there succeeded many Children but only one son that lived whose name was Henry who was King of Castile after his Father by the name of Henry the I and â—ied quickly without Issue and besides this Henry two Daughters also were born of the same marriage of which the eldest and Heir named Blanch was married by intercession of her Uncle King John of England with the foresaid Prince Lewis of France with this express condition as both Polydor in his English Story and Garibay the Chronicler of Spain do affirm that she should have for her Dowry all the States that King John had lost in France which were almost all that he had there and this to the end he might not seem to have lost them by force but to have given them with the marriage of his Neece and so this marriage was made and her Husband Lewis was afterward chosen also King of England by the Barons and sworn in London as before hath been said And hereby also the Infanta of Spain before mentioned that is descended lineally from both these Princes I mean as well from Queen Blanch as from Lewis is proved to have her pretence fortified to the Interest of England as afterwards shall be declared more at large in due place The second Daughter of King Alonso the IX by Queen Eleanor was named Berenguela and was married to the Prince of Leon in Spain and had by him a Son named Fernando who afterwards when King Henry her Brother was dead was admitted by the Castilians for their King by the name of Fernando the IV. as before the Civilian hath noted and Blanch with her Son S. Lewis though she were the elder was put by the Crown against all right of Succession as Garibay the Spanish Chronicler noteth and confesseth Hereby then some do gather that as the first Interest which the Crown of England had to the States of Gascony Guyenne and Poyters came by a woman so also did it come to France by the right of this foresaid Blanch whereof the favourers of the Infanta of Spain do say that she being now first and next in bloud of that House ought to inherit all these and such like States as are inheritable by women or came by women as the former States of Gascony and Guyenne did to King Henry the II by Queen Eleanor his wife and Normandy by Mathilda his mother and both of them to France by this former interest of Blanch. And more they say that this Lady Blanch mother to King S. Lewis whose Heir at this day the Infanta of Spain is should by right have inherited the Kingdom of England also after the murther of Duke Arthur and his Sister Eleanor for that she was the next of â—in unto them at that time which could be capable to succeed them for that King John himself was uncapable of their succession whom he had murthered and his Son Henry was not then born nor in divers years after and if he had been yet could he receive no Interest thereunto by his Father who had none himself of all which points there will be more particular occasion to speak hereafter Now then I come to speak of King Henry the third who was Son to this King John and from whom all the three Houses before mentioned of Britany Lancaster and York do seem to issue as a triple branch out of one Tree albeit the Royal Line of Britany is more ancient and was divided before even from William the Conquerors time as hath been shewed yet do they knit again in this King Henry for that of King Henry the third his eldest Son named Prince Edward the first descended Edward the second and of him Edward the third from whom properly riseth the House of York And of his second Son Edmond surnamed Crookback County Palatine of Lancaster issued the Dukes of Lancaster until in the third descent when the Lady Blanch Heir of that House matched with John of Gaunt third Son of King Edward the third from which marriage rose afterward the formal division of these two Houses of Lancaster and York and also two distinct branches of Lancaster Besides these two Sons King Henry the third had a Daughter named Lady Beatrix whom he married to John the second of that name Duke of Britany who after was slain at Lions in France by the fall of an old Wall at the Coronation of Pope Clement the 5th of that name in the year of Christ 1298. and for that the Friends of the Infanta of Spain do seek to strengthen her Title by this her descent also of the Royal bloud of England from Henry the third as afterward shall be declared I will briefly in this place continue the Pedegree of the House of Britany from that I left before even to our days I shewed before in this Chapter that Geoffry the third Son to King Henry the second and Duke of Britany by his wife being dead and his two Children Arthur and Eleanor put to death by their Uncle King John in England as before hath been said it fell out that Constance Dutchess and Heir of Britany married again to Guy Viscount of Tours and had by him two Daughters whereof the eldest named Alice was Dutchess of Britany and married to Peter Brien Earl of Drusse and by him had John the first of that name Duke of Britany which John the first had issue John the second who married Lady Beatrix before-mentioned Daughter to King Henry the third and by her had the second Arthur Duke of Britany to whom succeeded his eldest Son by his first Wife named John the third who dying without Issue left the very same trouble and garboil in Britany about the succession between the two noble Houses of Blois and Monford the one maintained by France and the other by England as soon after upon the very like occasion happen'd in England between the Houses of Lancaster and York as after shall be shewed And not long after that again the like affliction also ensued in France though not for succession but upon other occasions between
reason is for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly wise discreet Prince notwithstanding that some Authors call him Crouchback and that he was highly in the favour both of his Father King Henry as also of his Brother King Edward and imployed by them in many great Wars and other affairs of State both in France and other where which argueth that there was no such great defect in him as should move his Father and the Realm to deprive him of his Succession Thirdly we read that King Henry procured by divers ways and means the advancement of this Lord Edmond as giving him the Earldoms of Leicester and Darby besides that of Lancaster as also procuring by all means possible and with exceeding great charges to have made him King of Naples and Sicilie by Pope Innocentius which had been no policy to have done if he had been put back from his Inheritance in England for that it had been to have Armed him against his Brother the King Fourthly we see that at the death of his Father King Henry the III. this Lord Edmond was principally left in charge with the Realm his elder Brother Prince Edward being scarsly returned from the War of Asia at what time he had good occasion to challenge his own right to the Crown if he had had any seeing he wanted no power thereunto having three goodly Sons at that time alive born of his Wife Queen Blanch Daugher of Navarre and County of Champain to whom she had born only one Daughter that was married to Philip le Bel King of France But we shall never read that either he or any of his Children made any such claim but that they lived in very good agreement and high grace with King Edward the first as his Children did also with King Edward the II. until he began to be mis-led in Government and then the two Sons of this Lord Edmond I mean both Thomas and Henry that Successively were Earls of Lancaster made War upon the said Edward the II. and were the principal Actors in his deposition and in setting up of his Son Edward the III. in his place aâ— what time it is evident that they might have put in also for themselves if their title had been such as this report maketh it A fifth reason is for that if this had been so that Edmond Earl of Lancaster had been the elder Brother then had the controversie between the two Houses of York and Lancaster been most clear and without all doubt at all for then had the House of York had no pretence of right in the World and then were it evident that the Heirs general of Blanch Dutchess of Lancaster Wife of John of Gaunt to wit the descendents of Lady Philip her Daughter that was married into Portugal these I say and none other were apparent and true Heirs to the Crown of England at this day and all the other of the House of York usurpers as well King Henry the VII as all his posterity and off-spring for that none of them have descended of the said Blanch as is manifest And therefore lastly the matter standeth no doubt as Polidor holding in the latter end of the life of King Henry the III. where having mentioned these two Sons Edward and Edmond he addeth these words There wanted not certain men long time after this that affirmed this Edmond to be the elder Son to King Henry the III. and to have been deprived of his Inheritance for that he was deformed in body but these things were feigned to the end that King Henry the IV. that came by his Mothers side of this Edmond might seem to have come to the Kingdom by right whereas indeed he got it by force Thus saith Polidor in this place but afterward in the beginning of the life of the said King Henry the IV. he saith that some would have had King Henry to have pretended this Title among other reasons but that the most part accounting it but a meer fable it was omitted Now then it being clear that of these two Sons of King Henry the III. Prince Edward was the Elder and Lawful Heir it remaineth only that we set down their several descents unto the times of King Edward the III. and his Children in whose days the dissention and controversie between these Royal Houses of York and Lancaster began to break forth And for the Issue of Edward that was King after his Father by the name of King Edward the first it is evident that albeit by two several Wives he had a dozen Children male and female yet only his fourth Son by his first Wife called also Edward who was King after him by the name of King Edward the II left Issue that remained which Edward the II being afterward for his evil Government deposed left Issue Edward the III. who was made King by election of the people in his place and after a long and prosperous Reign left divers Sons whereof after we shall speak and among them his III. Son named John of Gaunt married Lady Blanch Daughter and Heir of the House of Lancaster and of the forenamed Lord Edmond Crouchback by which Blanch John of Gaunt became Duke of Lancaster so as the lines of these two Brethren Edward and Edmond did meet and joyn again in the fourth descent as now shall appear by declaration of the Issue of the foresaid Lord Edmond Edmond then the second Son of King Henry the third being made County Palatine of Lancaster as also Earl of Leicester and of Darby by his Father King Henry as hath been said had issue three Sons to wit Thomas Henry and John among whom he divided his three States making Thomas his eldest Son County Palatine of â—ancaster Henry Earl of Leicester and John Earl of Darby But Thomas the eldest and John the youngest dying without Issue all three States fell again upon Henry the second Son which Henry had Issue one Son and three Daughters his Son was named Henry the second of that name Earl of Lancaster and made Duke of Lancaster by King Edward the third and he had one only Daughter and Heir named Blanch who was married unto John of Gaunt as before hath been said But Duke Henry's three Sisters named Joan Mary and Eleanor were all married to divers principal men of the Realm for that Joan was married to John Lord Maubery of whom are descended the Howards of the House of Norfolk at this day and Mary was married to Henry Lord Percy from whom cometh the House of the Earls of Northumberland and Eleanor was married to Richard Earl of Arundel thence is issued also by his Mothers side the Earl of Arundel â—hat now is so as of this ancient Line of Lancaster there want not noble Houses within the Realm at this day issued thence before the controversie fell out between York and this Family of which controversie how it rose and how it was continued I
Swinford two of them that is Thomas Duke of Exeter and Henry Cardinal and Bishop of Winchester dyed without Issue John the eldest Son that was Earl of Somerset had Issue two Sons John and Edmond John that was Duke of Somerset had Issue one onely Daughter named Margaret who was married to Edmond Tidder Earl of Richmond by whom he had a Son named Henry Earl also of Richmond who after was afterwards made King by the name of Henry the VII and was Father to King Henry the VIII and Grandfather to the Queens Majesty that now is And this is the issue of John the first Son to the Duke of Somerset Edmond the second Son to John Earl of Somerset was first Earl of Mortaine and then after the death of his Brother John who dyed without Issue make as hath been said was created by King Henry the VI. Duke of Somerset and both he and almost all his Kin were slain in the quarrel of the said King Henry the VI. and for defence of the House of Lancaster against York For First this Edmond himself was slain in the battel of S. Albans against Richard Duke and first Pretender of York in the Year 1456. leaving behind him three goodly Sons to wit Henry Edmond and John whereof Henry succeeded his Father in the Dutchy of Somerset and was taken and beheaded in the same quarrel at Exham in the Year 1463. dying without Issue Edmond likewise succeeded his Brother Henry in the Dutchy of Somerset and was taken in the battel of Tewkesbury in the same quarrel and there beheaded the 7 th of May 1471. leaving no Issue John also the third Brother Marquess of Dorset was slain in the same battel of Tewkesbury and left no Issue and so in these two Noblemen ceased utterly all the Issue Male of the Line of Lancaster by the Children of John of Gaunt begotten upon Lady Swinford his third Wife So that all which remained of this Woman was only Margaret Countess of Richmond Mother to King Henry the VII which King Henry the VII and all that do descend from him in England do hold the Right of Lancaster only by this third Marriage of Catharine Swinford as hath been shewed and no ways of Blanch the first Wife or of Constance the second and this is enough in this place of the Descents of John of Gaunt and of the House of Lancaster and therefore I shall now pass over to shew the Issue of the House of York I touched briefly before how Edmond Langley Duke of York fourth Son of King Edward the III. had two Sons Edward Earl of Rutland and Duke of Aumarle that succeeded his Father afterwards in the Dutchy of York and was slain without children under King Henry the V. in the battel of Agencâ—urt in France and Richard Earl of Cambridge which married Lady Anna Mortimer as before hath been said that was Heir of the House of Clarence to wâ—t of Leonel Duke of Clarence second son to King Edward the III. by which marriage he joyned together the two Titles of the Second and Fourth Sâ—â—â— of King Edward and being himself convinced of a Conspiracy against King Henry the V. was put to death in Southampton in the Year of Christ 1415. and 3 d. of the Reign of King Henry the V. and 5 th day of August This Richard had Issue by Lady Anna Mortimer a Son named Richard who succeeded his Uncle Edward Duke of York in the same Dutchy and afterwards finding himself strong made claime to the Crown in the behalf of his Mother and declaring himself Chief of the Faction of the White Rose gave occasion of many cruel battels against them of the Red Rose and House of Lancaster and in one of the battels which was given in the Year 1460. at Wakefield himself was slain leaving behind him three Sons Edward George and Richard whereof Edward was afterwards King of England by the name of Edward the IV. George was Duke of Clarence and put to death in Calis in a butt of Sack or Malmesy by the Commandment of the King his Brother and Richard was Duke of Glocester and afterwards King by murthering his own two Nephews and was called King Richard the III. Edward the Eldest of these three Brothers which afterwards was King had Issue two Sons Edward and Richard both put to death in the Tower of London by their Cruel Uncle Richard he had also five Daughters the last four whereof I do purposely omit for that of none of them there remaineth any Issue but the eldest of all named Elizabeth was married to King Henry the VI. of the House of Lancaster and had by him Issue King Henry the VIII and two Daughters the one married unto Scotland whereof are descended the King of Scots and Arabella and the other married to Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk whereof are issued the Children of the Earls of Hartford and Darby as after more at large shall be handled and this is the Issue of the first Brother of the House of York The Second Brother George Duke of Clarence had Issue by his Wife Lady Isabel Heir to the Earldoms of Warwick and Salisbury one Son named Edward Earl of Warwick who was put to death afterwards in his Youth by King Henry the VII and left no Issue this Duke George had also one Daughter named Margaret admitted by King Henry the VIII at what time he sent her into Wales with Princess Mary to be Countess of Salisbury but yet married very meanly to a Knight of Wales named Sir Richard Poole by whom she had four Sons Henry Arthur Geffrey and Reginald the last whereof was Cardinal and the other two Arthur and Geffrey had Issue for Arthur had two Daughters Mary and Margarit Mary was married to Sir John Stanny and Margaret to Sir Thomas Fitzherbert Sir Geffrey Poole had also Issue another Geffrey Poole and he had Issue Arthur and Geffrey which yet live Now then to return to the first Son of the Countess of Salisbury named Henry that was Lord Montague and put to death both he and his mother by King Henry the VIII This man I say left two daughters Catharine and Winefred Catharine was married to Sir Francis Hastings Earl of Huntington by which Marriage issued Sir Henry Hastings now Earl of Huntington and Sir George Hastings his brother who hath divers Children And Winefred the younger daughter was married to Sir Thomas Barrington Knight who also wanteth not Issue and this is of the second Brother of the House of York to wit of the Duke of Clarence The third Brother Richard Duke of Gloucester and afterward King left no Issue so as this is all that is needful to be spoken of the House of York in which we see that the first and principal Competitor is the King of Scots and after him Arabella and the Children of the Earls of Hertford and Derby are also Competitors of the
that seeing rigour of Law runneth only with the Uncle for that indeed he is properly nearest in bloud by one degree and that only indulgence and custom serveth for the Nephew permitting him to represent the place of his Father who is dead they resolve I say that whensoever the Uncle is born before the Nephew and the said Uncle's elder Brother died before his Father as it happened in the case of John of Gaunt and of King Richard there the Uncle by right may be preferred for that the said elder Brother could not give or transmit that thing to his Son which was not in himself before his Father died and consequently his Son could not represent that which his Father never had and this for the Civil Law Touching our Common Laws the favourers of Lancaster do say two or three things first that the right of the Crown and interest thereunto is not decided expresly in our law nor is it a plea subject to the common rules thereof but is superiour and more eminent and therefore that men may not judge of this as of other pleas of particular persons nor is the Tryal alike nor the common maxims or rules always of force in this thing as in others which they prove by divers particular cases as for example the Widow of a private man shall have her thirds of all his Lands for her Dowry but not the Queen of the Crown Again if a private man have many daughters and die seized of Lands in Fee-simple without Heir Male his said daughters by law shall have the said Lands as co-partners equally divided between them but not the daughters of a King for that the eldest must carry away all as though she were Heir male The like also is seen if a Baron match with a Feme that is an Inheritrix and have Issue by her though she die yet shall he enjoy her Lands during his life as Tenant by courtesie but it is not so in the Crown if a man marry with a Queen as King Philip did with Queen Mary and so finally they say also that albeit in private mens possessions the common course of our law is that if the Father die seized of Land in Fee-simple leaving a younger Son and a Nephew that is to say a Child of his Elder Son the Nephew shall succeed his Grandfather as also he shall do his Uncle if of three Brethren the elder die without Issue and the second leave a Son yet in the inheritance and succession of the Crown it goeth otherwise as by all the fotmer eight examples have been shewed and this is the first they say about the common law The second point which they affirm is that the ground of our Common Laws consisteth principally and almost only about this point of the Crown in custom for so say they we see by experience that nothing in effect is written thereof in the common law and all old Lawyers do affirm this point as were Ranulfus de Granvilla in his books of the laws and customs of England which he wrote in the time of King Henry the second and Judge Fortescue in his book of the praise of English laws which he compiled in the time of King Henry the sixth and others Whereof these men do infer that seeing there are so many presidents and examples alledged before of the Uncles case preferred before the Nephew not only in foreign Countries but also in England for this cause I say they do affirm that our common laws cannot but favour also this title and consequently must needs like well of the interest of Lancaster as they avouch that all the best old Lawyers did in those times and for example they do Record two by name of the most famous learned men which those ages had who not only defended the said title of Lancaster in those days but also suffered much for the same The one was the forenamed Judge Fortescue Chancellor of England and named Father of the common laws in that age who fled out of England with the Queen Wife of King Henry the sixth and with the Prince her Son and lived in banishment in France where it seemeth also that he wrote his learned book intituled de laudibus legum Angliae And the other was Sir Thomas Thorpe chief Baron of the Exchequer in the same Reign of the same King Henry the sixth who being afterward put into the Tower by the Princes of the House of York for his eager defence of the title of Lancaster remained there a long time and after being delivered was beheaded at High-gate in a tumult in the days of King Edward the fourth These then are the allegations which the favourers of the House of Lancaster do lay down for the justifying of the title affirming first that John of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster ought to have succeeded his Father King Edward the third immediately before King Richard and that injury was done unto him in that King Richard was preferred And secondly that King Richard were his right never so good was justly and orderly deposed for his evil Government by lawful authority of the Commonwealth And thirdly that after his deposition Henry Duke of Lancaster Son and Heir of John of Gaunt was next in succession every way both in respect of the right of his Father as also for that he was two degrees nearer to the King deposed then was Edmond Mortimer descended of Leonel Duke of Clarence and these are the principal and substantial proofs of their right and title But yet besides these they do add all these other arguments and considerations following first that whatsoever right or pretence the House of York had the Princes thereof did forfeit and lose the same many times by their conspiracies rebellions and attainders as namely Richard Earl of Cambridge that married the Lady Anne Mortimer and by her took his pretence to the Crown was convicted of a conspiracy against King Henry the fifth in Southampton as before I have said and there was put to death for the same by Judgment of the King and of all his Peers in the year 1415. the Duke of York his elder Brother being one of the Jury that condemned him This Earl Richards Son also named Richard coming afterward by the death of his Uncle to be Duke of York first of all made open claim to the Crown by the title of York But yet after many oaths sworn and broken to King Henry the sixth he was attainted of Treason I mean both he and Edward his Son then Earl of March which afterward was King with the rest of his off-spring even to the ninth degree as Stow affirmeth in a Parliament holden at Coventry in the year 1459. and in the 38. year of the Reign of the said King Henry and the very next year after the said Richard was slain in the same quarrel but the House of Lancaster say these men was never attainted of any such
of Mâ—ubray ceased and the title of the Dâ—kedâ—m of Norfolk was transferred afterward by King Richard the third unto the House of the Howardâ— Johâ— de lâ— Poole Duke of Suffolk that married the 〈◊〉 of King Edward the fourth and was his great asisstant though he left three Sons yet all were extinguished without Issue by help of the House of York for that Edmond the eldest Son Duke of Suffâ—â—k was beheaded by King Henry the eighth and his Brother Richard driven out of the Realm to his destruction as before hath been shewed and John their Brother Earl of Lincolne was slain at Stock-field in service of King Richard the third and so ended the Line of de la Pooles Richard â—ovel Earl of Salisbury a chief enemy to the House of Lancaster and exalter of York was taken at the battel of Wakefield and there beheaded leaving three Sons Richard John and George Richard was Earl both of Salisbury and Warwick surnamed the great Earl of Warwick and was he that placed King Edward the fourth in the Royal Seat by whom yet he was slain afterward at Barnet and the Lands of these two great Earldoms of Salisbury and Warwick were united to the Crown by his attâ—â—inder John his younger Brother was Marquess of Montague and after all assistance given to the said King Edward the fourth of the House of York was slain also by him at Barnet and his Lands in like manner confiscated to the Crown which yet were never restored again George Nevel their younger Brother was Archbishop of York and was taken and sent prisoner by the said King Edward unto Guyens who shortly pined away and died and this was the end of all the principal friends helpers and advancers of the House of York as these men do alledge Wherefore they do conclude that for all these reasons and many more that might be alledged the title of Lancaster must needs seem the beter title which they do confirm by the general consent of all the Realm at King Henry the seventh his coming in to recover the Crown from the House of York as from usurpersâ— for having had the victory against King Richard they Crowned him presently in the Field in the right of Lancaster before he married with the House of York which is a token that they esteemed his title of Lancaster sufficient of it self to bear away the Crown albeit for better ending of strife he took to Wife also the Lady Elizabeth Heir of the House of York as hath been said and this may be sufficient for the present in this controversy CHAP. V. Of five Principal Houses or Lineages that do or may pretend to the Crown of England which are the Houses of Scotland Suffolk Clarence Britany and Portugal and first of all of the House of Scotland which containeth the pretentions of the King of Scots and the Lady Arabella HAving declared in the former Chapter so much as appartaineth unto the general controversie between the two principal Hâ—â—ses and Royal families of Lancaster and York it remaineth now that I lay before you the particular challenges claims and pretentions which divers houses and families descended for the most part of these two have among themselves for their titles to the same All which families may be reduced to three or four general heads For that some do pretend by the House of Lancaster alone as those families principally that do descend of the Line Royal of Portugal some other do pretend by the House of York only as those that are descended of George Duke of Clarence second Brother to King Edward the fourth Some again will seem to pretend from both Houses joyned together as all those that descend from King Henry the seventh which are the Houses of Scotland and Suffolk albeit as before hath appeared others do deny that these families have any true part in the House of Lancaster which point shall afterward be discussed more at large And fourthly others do pretend before the two Houses of York and Lancaster were divided as the Infanta of Spain Dutchess of Savoy the Prince of Loraign and such others as have descended of the House of Britany and France of all which pretences and pretenders we shall speak in order and consider with indifferency what is said or alledged of every side to and fro beginning first with the House of Scotland as with that which in common opinion of vulgar men is taken to be first and nearest though others deny it for that they are descended of the first and eldest daughter of King Henry the seventh as before in the third chapter hath been declared First then two persons are known to be of this house at this day that may have action and claim to the Crown of England The first is Lord James the sixth of that name presently King of Scotland who descended of Margaret eldest daughter of King Henry the seventh that was married by her first marriage to James the fourth King of Scots and by him had Issue James the fifth and he again the Lady Mary Mother to this King now pretendant The second person that may pretend in this house is the Lady Arabella descended of the self same Queen Margaret by her second marriage unto Archibald Douglas Earl of Anguis by whom she had Margaret that was married to Matthew Steward Earl of Lenox and by him had Charles her second Son Earl of Lenox who by Elizabeth daughter of Sir William Candish Knight in England had Issue this Arabella now alive First then for the King of Scots those that do favour his cause whereof I confess that I have not found very many in England do alledge that he is the first and chiefest pretender of all others and next in succession for that he is the first person that is descended as you see of the eldest daughter of King Henry the seventh and that in this descent there cannot bastardy or other lawful impediment be avowed why he should not succeed according to the priority of his pretention and birth And moreover secondly they do alledge that it would be greatly for the honour and profit of England for that hereby the two Realms of England and Scotland should come to be joyned a point long sought for and much to be wished and finally such as are affected to his Religion do add that hereby true religion will come to be more settled also and establishes in England which they take to be a matter of no small consequence and consideration and this in effect is that which the favours of this Prince do alledge in his behalf But on the other side there want not many that do accompt this pretence of the King of Scots neither good nor just nor any way expedient for the State of England and they do answer largely to all the allegations before mentioned in his behalf And first of all as concerning his title by nearness of succession they make little
lawful Wiâ—e which was Sister to the Lord Henry Fitz Allen Earl of Arundel which disorder was occasion of much unkindness and hatred between the said Marquess and Earl ever after But the power of the Marquess and favour with King Henry in Womens matters was so great at that time as the Earl could have no remedy but only that his said Sister who lived many years after had an Annuity out of the said Marquesses Lands during her life and lived some years after the said Marquess afterwards made Duke was put to death in Queen Maries time These then are three ways by which the Family of Darby to argue the Issue of Hartford to be Illegitimate but the other two Houses of Scotland and Clarence do urge a former Bastardy also that is common to them both to wit both against the Lady Frances and the Lady Eleanor for that the Lord Charles Brandon also Duke of Suffolk had a Wife alive as before hath been signified when he married the Lady Mary Queen of France by which former Wife he had Issue the Lady Powis I mean the Wife of my Lord Powis of Poistlands in Wales and how long after the new Marriage of her Husband Charles Brandon this former Wife did live I cannot set down distinctly though I think it were not hard to take particular information thereof in England by the Register of the Church wherein she was buried But the Friends of the Countess of Darby do affirm that she died before the Birth of the Lady Eleanor the second Daughter though after the Birth of the Lady Frances and thereby they do seek to clear the Family of Darby of this Bastardy and to lay all four upon the Children of Hartford before-mentioned But this is easie to be known and verified by the means before-signified But now the Friends of Hartford do answer to all these Bastardies That for the first two pretended by the marriages of the two Dukes of Suffolk that either the Causes might be such as their Divorces with their Wives might be lawful and prove them no Marriages and so give them place to marry again or else that the said former Wives did die before these Dukes that had been their Husbands so as by a â—oâ—t-contract and second new Consent given between the Parties when they were now free the said latter Marriages which were not good at the beginning might come to be lawful afterwards according as the Law permitteth notwithstanding that Children begotten in such pretended Marriages where one party is already bound are not made legitimate by subsequent true Marriage of their Parents And this for the first two Bastardies But as for the third Illegitimation of the Contract between the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford by a Prae-contract made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Pembroke that now liveth they say and affirm that Prae-contract to have been dissolved afterwards lawfully and judicially in the time of Queen Mary There remaineth then only the fourth Objection about the secret Marriage made between the said Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford before the Birth of their eldest Son now called Lord Beacham which to say the truth seemeth the hardest point to be answered For albeit in the sight of God that Marriage might be good and lawful if before their carnal knowledge they gave mutual consent the one to the other to be man and Wife and with that mind and intention had carnal Copulation which thing is also allowed by the late Council of Trent it self which disannulleth otherwise all clandestine and secret Contracts in such States and Countries where the authority of the said Council is received and admitted yet to justifie these kind of Marriages in the face of the Church and to make the Issue thereof legitimate and inheritable to Estates and Possessions it is necessary by all Law and in all Nations that there should be some witness to testifie this Consent and Contract of the parties before their carnal knowledge for that otherwise it should lie in every particular mans hand to legitimate any Bastard of his by his only word to the prejudice of others that might in equity of Succession pretend to be his Heirs and therefore no doubt but that the Archbishop of Canterbury had great reason to pronounce this Contract of the Lady Katharine and the Earl of Hartford to be insufficient and unlawful though themselves did affirm that they had given mutual Consent before of being Man and Wife and that they came together animo maritali as the Law of Wedlock requireth but yet for that they were not able to prove their said former consent by lawful Witnesses their said Conjunction was rightly pronounced unlawful and so I conclude that the first Son of these two Parties might be legitimate before God and yet illegitimate before men and consequently incapable of all such Succession as otherwise he might pretend by his said Mother And this now is for the first begotten of these two persons for as touching the second Child begotten in the Tower of London divers men of opinion that he may be freed of this Bastardy for that both the Earl and the Lady being examined upon their first Child did confess and affirm that they were Man and Wife and that they had meaning so to be and continue which Confession is thought to be sufficient both for ratifying of their old Contract and also for making of a new if the other had not been made before And seeing that in the former pretended Contract and Marriage there wanted nothing for justifying the same before men and for making it good in Law but only external Testimony of Witnesses for proving that they gave such mutual Consent of minds before their Carnal knowledge for the presence of Priest or Minister is not absolutely necessary no man can say that there wanted Witnesses for testifying of this Consent before second Copulation by which was begotten the second Son for that both the Queen her self and her Council and as many besides as examined these Parties upon their first Act and Child-birth are Witnesses unto them that their full Consents and Approbations to be Man and Wife which they ratified afterward in the Tower by the begetting of their second Child and so for the reasons aforesaid he must needs seem to be legitimate whatsoever my Lord of Canterbury for that time or in respect of the great Offence taken by the Estate against that Act did or might determine to the contrary And this is the sum of that which commonly is treated about these two Families of the House of Suffolk to wit of Hartford and Darby both which Families of Suffolk the other two opposite Houses of Scotland and Clarence do seek to exclude by the first Bastardy or unlawful Contract between the Queen of France and Duke Charles Brandon as hath been seen Of which Bastardy the House of Darby doth endeavour to avoid it self in manner as
States of that Crown before his two Sisters that be elder then he and so likewise say these men ought John of Somerset to have done before Philippa his eldest Sister if he had been alive at that time when King Henry the sixth was put down and died and consequently his posterity which are the descendents of King Henry the seventh ought to enjoy the same before the Princes of Portugal that are the descendents of Lady Philippa his Sister Thus say the issue of King Henry the seventh But to this the Princes of the House of Portugal do reply and say first That by this it is evident at least that the Dukedom of Lancaster whereof the Lady Blanch was the only Heir must needs appertain to them alone and this without all doubt or controversie for that they only remain of her Issue after extinguishing of the posterity of her elder Brother King Henry the fourth which was extinguished by the death of King Henry the sixth and of his only son Prince Edward and for this they make no question or controversie assuring themselves that all Law right and equity is on their side Secondly Touching the Succession and right to the Kingdom they say that John Earl of Somerset being born out of Wedlock and in Adultery for that his Father had an other Wife alive when he begot him and he continuing a Bastard so many years could not be made Legitimate afterward by Parliament to that effect of Succession to the Crown and to deprive Queen Philippa of Portugal and her Children born before the other Legitimation from their right and Succession without their consents for that John King of Portugal did Marry the said Lady Philippa with condition to enjoy all Prerogatives that at that day were due unto her and that at the time when John of Gaunt did Marry the said Lady Catherine Swinford and made her Children Legitimate by Act of Parliament which was in the year of Christ 1396. and 1397. the said Lady Philippa Queen of Portugal had now two Sons living named Don Alonso and Don Edwardo which were born in the years 1390. and 1391 that is six years before the Legitimation of John Earl of Somerset and his Brethren and thereby had jus acquisitum as the Law saith which right once acquired and gotten could not be taken away by any Posterior Act of Parliament afterward without consent of the parties Interessed for which they do alledge divers places of the Canon Law which for that they hold not in England I do not cite but one example they put to shew the inconvenience of the thing if it should be otherwise determined then they affirm which is that if King Henry the eighth that had a Bastard Son by the Lady Elizabeth Blunt whom he named Henry Fitz-roy and made him both Earl of Nottingham and Duke of Richmond and Somerset in the 18 th year of his Reign at what time the said King had a lawful Daughter alive named the Princess Mary by Queen Catherine of Spain if I say the King should have offered to make this Son Legitimate by Parliament with intent to have him succeeded after him in the Crown to the prejudice and open injury of the said lawful Daughter these Men do say that he could not have done it and if he should have done it by violence it would not have held and much less could John of Gaunt do the like being no King Nor was the Act of Parliament sufficient for this point it being a matter that depended especially say these men of the Spiritual Court and of the Canon Law which Law alloweth this Legitimation no further but only as a Dispensation and this so far forth only as it doth not prejudice the right of any other Neither helpeth it any thing in this matter the Marriage of John of Gaunt with Lady Catherine for to make better this Legitimation for that as hath been said their Children were not only naturales but Spurij that is to say begotten in plain Adultry and not in simple Fornication only for that the one party had a Wife alive and consequently the priveledge that the Law giveth to the Subsequent Marriage of the Parties for legitimating such Children as are born in simple Fornication that is to say between parties that were single and none of them married cannot take place here So as these men conclude that albeit this Legitimation of Parliament might serve them to other purposes yet not to deprive the Princes of Portugal of their Prerogative to succeed in their Mothers Right which she had when she was married to their Father And this they affirm to have been Law and Right at that time if the said Queen Philippa and Earl John had been alive together when Henry the sixth and his Son were put to death and that this Question had been then moved at the death of King Henry the sixth Whether of the two to wit either the said Queen Philippa or her younger Brother John Earl of Somerset by the Fathers side only should have succeeded in the Inheritance of King Henry the sixth In which case these men presume for certain that the said Queen Philippa legitimately born and not John made legitimate by Parliament should have succeeded for that by common course of â—aw the Children legitimated by favour albeit their legitimation were good and lawful as this of these Children is denied to be yet can they never be made equal and much less be preferred before the lawful and legitimate by Birth But now say these men the case standeth at this present somewhat otherwise and more for the advantage of Queen Philippa and her Off-spring For when King Henry the sixth and his Son were extinguished and Edward Duke of York thrust himself in to the Crown which was about the year of Christ 1471. the foresaid Princess and Prince Lady Philippa and Earl John were both dead as also their Children and only their Nephews were alive that is to say there lived in Portugal King Alfonsus the fifth of that name Son to King Edward which King Edward was Child to Queen Philippa and the death of King Henry the sixth of England happened in the 38 th year of the Reign of the said Alfonsus And in England lived at the same time Lady Margaret Countess of Richmond Mother of King Henry the seventh and Neece of the foresaid John Earl of Somerset to wit the Daughter of his Son John Duke of Somerset So as these two Competitors of the House of Lancaster that is to say King Alfonsus and Lady Margaret were in equal degree from John of Gaunt as also from King Henry the sixth saving that King Alfonsus was of the whole Bloud as hath been said and by Queen Philippa that was legitimate and the Countess of Richmond was but of the half bloud as by John Earl of Somerset that was a Bastard legitimated The Question then is Which of these two should have
succeeded by Right of the House of Lancaster immediately after King Henry the sixth And the Lady Margaret alledgeth That she was descended from John Earl of Somerset that was a man and therefore â—o be preferred And King Alfonsus alledged That he being in equal degree of nearness of Bloud with the same Countess for that both were Nephews was to be preferred before her for that he was a man and of the whole Bloud to the last Kings of the House of Lancaster and that she was a woman and but of the half Bloud so that three Prerogatives he pretended before her First That he was a man and she a woman Secondly That he descended of the lawful and elder Daughter and she of the younger Brother legitimated And thirdly That he was of whole Bloud and she but of half And for better fortifying of this proof of his Title these men do alledge a certain Case determined by the Learned of our days as they say wherein for the first of these three Causes only the Succession to a Crown was adjudged unto King Philip of Spain to wit the Succession to the Kingdom of Portugal which Case was in all respects correspondent to this of ours For that Emmanuel King of Portugal had three Children for sâ— much as appertaineth to this Affair for afterward I shall treat more particularly of his Issue that is to say two Sons and one Daughter in this order John Elizabeth and Edward even as John of Gaunt had Henry Lady Philippa and John Prince John of Portugal first Child of King Emmanuel had Issue another John and he had Sebastine in whom â—he Line â—f John the first Child was extinguished But Joâ—n's Sister Elizabeth was married to Charâ—â—s the Emperour and had Issue King Philip of Spain that now liveth Edward also younger Brother to Elizabeth or Isabel had Issue two Daughters the one married to the Duke of Parma and the other to the Duke of Bargansa so as King Philip was in equal degree with these Ladies in respect of King Emmanuel for that he was Son to his eldest Daughter and the two Dutchesses were Daughters to his younger Son And upon this rested the Question Which of these should succeed and â—â— was decided That it appertaineth unto King Philip for that he was a man and his Mother was the elder Sister though if King Philip's Mother and the two Dutchesses Father I mean Lord Edward of Portugal had been alive together no doubt but that he being a man should have born it away which these men say holdeth not in our Case but it is much more to our advantage for that it hath been shewed before that if Queen Philippa had been alive with John Earl of Somerset at the death of King Henry the sixth she should have been preferred as legitimate by Birth and therefore much more ought her Nephew King Alfonsus to have been preferred afterward in that he was a man before the Neece of the said John Earl of Somerset that was but a Woman Thus far they And besides all this they do add as often before I have mentioned that King Alfonsus was of the whole Bloud unto all the three King Henries of the House of Lancaster and the Countess of Richmond was but of the half bloud And for more strengthening of this Argument they do say further that besides that Interest or Right to the Crown which King Henry the fourth who was the first King of the House of Lancaster had by his Father John of Gaunt in that the said John was third Son of King Edward the third the said King Henry had divers other interests also which came of himself only and not from his said Father as were for example his being called into the Realm by general voice of all the people his right gotten by Arms upon the evil Government of the former King the personal resignation and delivery of the Kingdom by solemn instrument made unto him by King Richard his Election also by Parliament and Coronation by the Realm and finally the quiet Possession of him and his Posterity for almost sixty years with many Confirmations of the whole Realm by divers Acts of Parliament Oaths and and other Assurances as the World knoweth So many I mean and so authentical as could possibly be devised or given And besides all this that when King Richard was dead he was next in degree of Propinquity unto him of any man living for that the Sons of Roger Mortimer were two degrees further off than he as hath been shewed before All which particular Rights and Interests were peculiar to Henry the fourth's person and were not in his Father John of Gaunt and therefore cannot possibly descend from him to the Issue of John Earl of Somerset but must pass rather to the Issue of King Henry s true Sister the Queen Philippa of Portugal And this though it be supposed that otherwise it might be granted as they say it may not that John Earl of Somorset and his Successors might succeed to John of Gaunt before Lady Philippa which thing say these men if it should be granted yet cannot he succeed to King Henries the fourth fifth and sixth that descended of Blanch. And this is in effect all that I have heard disputed about this point what Line is true Heir to the House of Lancaster to wit whether that of John Earl of Somerset born of Katharine Swinford from whom descendeth King Henry the seventh and his Posterity or else that of Queen Philippa of Portugal born of Lady Blanch from whom are come the foresaid Princes of Portugal But now it remaineth to examine somewhat in this place also what and who are these Princes of the House of Portugal so often named before and what pretence of Succession they and every of them have or may have unto the Crown of England For better understanding whereof it shall be needful to explain somewhat more at large the foresaid Pedigree of King Emmanuel of Portugal who albeit by divers Wives he had many Children yet six only that he had by one Wife of whom there remaineth hitherto Issue are those which may appertain unto our purpose to speak of in respect of any pretence that may be made by them towards England supposing always which is most true that the said King Emmanuel was descended lineally as true and direct Heir from the foresaid Lady Philippa Queen of Portugal that was Daughter of John of Gaunt by his first Wife Lady Blanch Dutchess and Heir of the Dukedom of Lancaster and Sister to King Henry the fourth first King of the House of Lancaster so as by her doth or may pretend the whole Posterity of the said King Emmanuel unto whatsoever the said Phillippa might Inherit from her Father or Mother or from her said Brother King of England or his Posterity The six Children then of King Emmanuel were these following and each of them born as here they are set down first Prince