Discourse with the Bishop of Winchester And for the Narrative the Doctor whom I have talked with in this business doth not shame to say that he borrowed it from that great Treasury of Academical Antiquities Mr. Brian Twine whose learned Works stanâ— good against all Opponents and that he found the passage justified by Sir Isaack Wake in his Rex Platonicus Two Persons of too great wit and judgement to relate a matter of this nature on no better gâ—ound then common 〈◊〉 talk and that too spoke in merriment by Sir Henry Savil. Assuredly Sir Henry Savil was too great a Zealot for that University and too much a friend to Mr. Wake who was Fellow of the same Colledge with him to have his Table-talk and discourses of merriment to be put upon Record as grounds and arguments for such men to build on in that weighty Controversie And therefore when our Author tells us what he was told by Mr. Hubbard Mr. Hubbard by Mr. Barlow Mr. Barlow by Mr. Bust and Mr. Bust by Sir Henry Savil it brings into my minde the like Pedegree of as true a Story even that of Mother Miso in Sir Philip Sidney telling the young Ladies an old Tale which a good old woman told her which an old wise man told her which a great learned Clerk told him and gave it him in writing and there she had it in her Prayer-book as here our Author hath found this on the end of his Creed Not much unlike to which is that which I finde in the Poet Quae Phoebo Pater omnipotens mihi Phoebus Apollo Praedixit vobis Furiarum ego maxima pandâ— That is to say What Iove told Phoebus Phoebus told to me And I the chief of Furies tell to thee But to proceed Fol. 190. This was that Nevil who for Extraction Estate Alliance Dependents Wisdom Valour Success and popularity was superior to any English Subject since the Conquest Our Author speaks this of that Richard Nevil who was first Earl of Warwick in right of Anne his Wife Sister and Heir of Henry Beauchamp the last of that Family and after Earl of Salisbury by descent from his Father a potent and popular man indeed but yet not in all or in any of those respects to be match'd with Henry of Bullenbrook son to Iohn of Gaunt whom our Author must needs grant to have lived since the time of the Conquest Which Henry after the death of his Father was Duke of Lancaster and Hereford Earl of Leicester Lincoln and Darby c. and Lord High Steward of England Possessed by the donation of King Henry the third of the County Palatin of Lancaster the forfeited Estates of Simon de Montfort Earl of Leicester Robert de Ferrars Earl of Darby and Iohn Lord of Monmouth by the compact made between Thomas Earl of Lancaster and Alice his Wife of the Honor of Pomfret the whole Estate of the Earl of Lincoln and a great part of the Estates of the Earl of Salisbury of the goodly Tertitories of Ogmore and Kidwelly in Wales in right of his descent from the Chaworths of the Honor and Castle of Hartford by the grant of King Edward the third and of the Honor of Tickhill in Yorkshire by the donation of King Richard the second and finally of a Moity of the vast Estate of Humphry de Bohun Earl of Hereford Essex and Northampton in right of his Wife So royal in his Extraction that he was Grandchilde unto one King Cousin german to another Father and Grandfather to two more So popular when a private person and that too in the life of his Father that he was able to raise and head an Army against Richard the Second with which he discomfited the Kings Forces under the command of the Duke of Ireland so fortunate in his successes that he not only had the better in the battail mentioned but came off with Honor and Renown in the War of Africk and finally obtained the Crown of England And this I trow renders him much Superior to our Authors Nevil whom he exceeded also in this particular that he dyed in his bed and left his Estates unto his Son But having got the Crown by the murther of his Predecessor it stay'd but two descents in his Line being unfortunately lost by King Henry the sixth of whom being taken and imprisoned by those of the Yorkish Faction our Author telleth us Fol. 190. That States-men do admire how blind the Policy of that Age was in keeping King Henry alive there being no such sure Prison as a Grave for a Captive King whose life though in restraint is a fair mark for the full Aim of mal-contents to practise his enlargement Our Author might have spâ—r'd this Doctrine so frequently in practise amongst the wordly Politicians of all times and ages that there is more need of a Bridle to hold them in then a Sput to quicken them Parce precor stimulis fortiùs utere loris had been a wholesom Caveat there had any friend of his been by to have advis'd him of it The muâ—thering of depos'd and Captive Princes though too often practised never found Advocates to plead for it and mâ—â—h less Preachers to preach for it until these latter times First made a Maxim of State in the School of Machiavel who lays it down for an Aphorism in point of policy viz. that great Persons must not at all be touched or if they be must be made sure from taking Revenge inculcated afterwards by the Lord Gray who being sent by King Iames to intercede for the life of his Mother did undeâ—-hand solicit her death and whispered nothing so much in Queen Elizabeths ears as Mortua non mordet if the Scots Queen were once dead she would never bite But never prest so home never so punctually apply'd to the case of Kings as here I finde it by our Author of whom it cannot be â—ffirm'd that he speaks in this case the senâ—e of others but positively and plainly doth declare his own No such Divinity pâ—each'd in the Schools of Ignatius though fitter for the Pen of a Mariana then of a Divine or Minister of the Church of England Which whether it passed from him before oâ— since the last sad accident of this nature it comes all to one this being like a two-hand-sword made to strike on both â—â—des and if it come too late for instruction will serve abundantly howsoever for the justification Another note we have within two leaves after as derogatory to the Honor of the late Archbishop as this is dangerous to the Estate of all Soveraign Princes if once they chance to happen into the hands of their Enemies But of this our Author will give me an occasion to speak more in another place and then he shall hear further from me Now to go on Fol. 197. The Duke requested of King Richard the Earldom of Hereford and Hereditary Constableship of England Not so it was not the Earldom that is
Temporal Subjects And this they did by their own sole Authority as before was said ordering the same to be levyed on all such as were refractory by Sequestration Deprivation Suspension Excommunication Ecclesiastical Censures all without relating to any subsequent confirmation by Act of Parliament which they conceiv'd they had no need of Nor finde we any thing of the Convocations of Queen Elizabeths time except that of the year 1562. and that not fairly dealt with neither as is elsewhere shewed though there passed many Canons in the Convocation of the year 1571. and of the year 1585. and the year 1597. all Printed and still publickly extant besides the memorable Convocation of the year 1555. in which the Clergy gave the Queen a Benevolence of 2â— in the pound to be levyed by Ecclesiastical Censures without relating to any subsequent confirmation by Act of Parliament as had accustomably been used in the Grant of Subsidies It might have been expected also that we should have found in a Church History of Britain the several degrees and steps by which the Heterodoxies and Superstitions of the Church of Rome did creep in amongst us and the degrees by which they were ejected and cast out again and the whole Reformation setled upon the Doctrine of the Apostles attended by the Rites and Ceremonies of the Primitive times as also that some honorable mention should be found of those gallant Defences which were made by Dr. Bancroft Dr. Bilson Dr. Bridges Dr. Cosins and divers others against the violent Batteries and Assaults of the Puritan Faction in Queen Elizabeths time and of the learned Writings of B. Buckeridge B. Morton Dr. Suâ—cliff Dr. Burges c. in justification of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England against the remnants of that scattered and then broken Faction in the time of King Iames of which we have Negry quidem not a word delivered Nor could it stand with his design which will discover it self in part in this Introduction and shall more fully be discovered in the Animadversions that it should be otherwise All which together make it clear and evident that there is too little of the Church or Ecclesiastical History in our Authors Book And that there is too much of the State or Civil History will be easily seen by that unnecessary intermixture of State-Concernments not pertinent to the business which he hath in hand Of this sort to look back no further is the long Will and Testament of King Henry the eighth with his Gloss or Comment on the same taking up three whole sheets at least in which there is not any thing which concerns Religion or which relates unto the Church or Church-affairs although to have the better colour to bring it in he tells us that he hath transcribed it not onely for the rarity thereof but because it contained many passages which might reflect much light upon his Church-History Lib. 5. â—ol 243. Of this sort also is his description of the pomp and order of the Coronation of King Charls which though he doth acknowledge not to be within the Pale and Park of Ecclesiastical History yet he resolves to bring it in because it comes within the Purlews of it as his own words are But for this he hath a better reason then we are aware of that is to say That if hereafter Divine Providence shall assign England another King though the transactions herein be not wholly precedential something of state may be chosen out grateful for imitation Lib. 11. fol. 124. As if the Pomp and order of a Coroâ—nation were not more punctually preserved in the Heralds Office who have the ordering of all things done without the Church and are eye-Witnesses of all which is done within then in our Authors second-hand and imperfect Collections The like may be said also of the quick and active Reigns of King Edward the sixth and Queen Mary in which the whole Body of the reformed Religion was digested setled and destroyed sufficient of it self to make a competent Volumn but contracted by our Author like Homers Iliads in the Nut shell into less then 25 sheets And yet in that small Abstract we finde many Impertinencies as to the work he hath in hand that is to say The great proficiency of King Edward in his Grammar Learning exemplified in three pieces of Latine of his making when he was but eight or nine years old the long Narrative of Sir Edward Mountague chief Iustice of the Common Pleas to vindicate himself from being a voluntary Agent in the business of the Lady Iane Gray the full and punctual relation of Wâ—ats Rebellion and the issue of it though acted upon some false grounds of Civil Interess without relating to Religion or to Church Affairs Infinitum esset â—re per singula It were an infinite labor to look into all particulars of this nature which are found in our Author make up a great part of the Book but we may guess by this brief view as Ex pede Hereulem that his diversion upon Civil Matters and Affairs of State which neither have relation to nor any influence at all upon those of the Church do make up a considerable part of the rest of the Book Which Civil Matters and State-Concernments being discharg'd also as in all reason they ought to be we next proceed to the Church-History it self In which if we should make the like defalkation and expunge every passage which is either positively false or ignorantly mistaken by him there would be very little left to inform the Reader as by the following Animadversions will appear sufficiently 8. But well it were if onely Abberrations from Historical truth were to be met with in our Author In whom we find such a continual vein of Puritanism such dangerous grounds for inconformity and Sedition to be raised upon as easily may pervert the unwary Reader whom the facetiousness of the stile like a hook baited with a painted Fly may be apt to work on Murthering of Kings avowed for necessary prudence as oft as they shall fall into the power of their Subjects Lib. 4 fol. 109. The Coronation of the Kings and consequently their succession to the Crown of England made to depend upon the suffrage and consent of the People Lib. 11. fol. 122. The Sword extorted from the Supream Magistrate and put into the hands of the common People whensoever the Reforming humor shall grow strong amongst them Lib. 9. fol. 51. The Church depriv'd of her Authority in determining controversies of the Faith and a dispute rais'd against that clause of the Atticle in which that Authority is declared whether forg'd or not Lib. 9. f. 73. Her power in making Canons every where prostituted to the lust of the Parliament contrary both to Law and constant practice the Heterodoxies of Wickliff Canoniz'd for Gospel and Calvins Opinions whatsoever they were declar'd for Orthodox the Sabbatarian Rigors published for Divine and Ancient Truths though there be no Antiquity nor Divinity
69. A place so marked being foretold fortunate to Aeneas to found Alba since Rome therein A passage as well stor'd with Errors as the rest before and such a piece of fine new learning as never any Antiquary had found out till now For first Aeneas was not the founder of Alba though that the place design'd unto him for the fear of his Kingdom The building of that City was the work of Ascanius as we finde in Virgil. At puer Ascanius Regnumque à sede Lavini Transferet longam multa vi muniet Albam That is to say Ascanius from Lavinum shall translate To Alba strongly fenc'd the Regal State And secondly Alba was not built in the place where Rome since stood but duodecimo ab urbe Lapide about twelve miles off For though the River Tiber in some ancient Writers hath the name of Albula yet I never found many Writer either old or new till I incounter'd it â—n our Author that Rome was anciently called Alba. Fol. 104. It is admirable to consider what Sholes of People were formerly vented out of Cimbrica Chernonesus take it in the largest extent for Denmark Norway and Swedeland And in the largest extent it is taken indeed such as no Author ever gave it before this time The Cimbrick Chersonese truly and properly so call'd comprehended only those parts of the Kingdom of Denmark which we now call Iuitland divided by the River Eydore from the Dukedom of Hostein Ortelius and some 〈◊〉 Geographers make it to take up all that Languel or piece of Land on the North of Germany extended from the River Albis in the South and stretching Northward to that part of the Ocean which leads into the narrow Strait or passage now called Sundt But never any till our Author extended this name over those great Kingdoms of Denmark Norway and Swedeland or unto any part of either beyond the Sundt And yet he had need stretch it a great deal further before he can finde place in it for his Huns and Vandals of which the first inhabited in Asia beyond the Fens of Maeotis the last upon the Coast of the Baltick Sea in Germany now the Dukedom of Mecklenburg Fol. 125. Datum in Grantecestria Anno ab incarnatione Domini 915. venerabili Fratri Frithstano Civitatis Scolaâ—ium Cantabrig Cancellario Doctori per suum c. These words are the conclusion of an ancient Charter suppos'd to have been given to the Scholars of Cambridge by King Edward the elder against which our Author fancies one objection which he thinks easie to be answered but utterly leaves out another which I think upanswerable The objection which our Author makes against it is the barbarous style and language of it which if it be a good objection against this Charter will be as strong against all the Charters of this age as some ages following in which there 〈◊〉 but little of the Elegancies of the Latine tongue Anâ— therefore this objection might have well been spared but that our Author would be thought to deal verâ— equally in the business by saying all that might bâ— said against himself But yet I have another objectiâ—on which he takes no notice of because not so easiâ— to be answered which is that Frithstan whatsoever he was is here honored with the degree of Doctor and the title of Chancellor But first I would fain know where Frithstan took the degree of Doctor and iâ— what faculty he took it that title in those early daies being so unusual as hardly to be found amongst the Attributes of the learnedest men Secondly I conceive it to be very hard I had almost said impossible for him to prove that the chief Officer of Cambridge admitting it at that time for a place of learning had theâ— name of Chancellor When I shall see some proof oâ— this and some satisfaction I shall give some credit to the Charter till then none at all Fol. 139. Cambridgeshire men claim an ancient new antiquated priviledge to lead the Van in all Battels Zealous alike not only for the Vniversity but the County of Cambridge his zeal in both transporting him beyond his knowledge into dark adventures Some Authors he pretends to for the University for this priviledge none telling us only that he hath read it though he know not where But I can tell him when and where I have read the contrary that is to say in learned Camden who ascribes this honour to the Kentish For this he cites not only the authority of a nâ—melesse Monk but the words of Iohannes Sarisburiensis in his Polycratiaeon which are these that follow For good desert saith he of that notable valour which Kent shewed so puissantly and patiently against the Danes it retaineth still unto these daies in all Battails the honour of the first and foreward yea and of the first conflict with the Enemy And if this priviledge was given the Kenâ—ish for their valour shew'd against the Danes it could â—either be given to the men of Cambridge-shire as our Author would nor on the same occasion as he saith it was Fol. 141. It did not afterwards embolden him to the anticipation of the Crown attending till it descended upon him He speaks this of King Edward the Confesâ—or who had he tarryed till the Crown had descended on him might possibly have found a place amongst the Confessors but not amongst the Kings of England For the truth is the right title to the Crown was at that time in Edward surnamed the Outlaw the eldest Son of Edmund Ironside who flying into Hungary to avoid the fury of the Danes married the Kings sister of that Countrey and was by her the Father of Edgar Atheling and of Margaret wife to Malcolm Conmor King of the Scots But these being absent at that time Emma the Mother of Prince Edward and Widow to Canutus the Dane took the opportunity to set her Son upon the Throne as being not only half-brother to King Edmund Ironside but also half-brother and consequently â—earest kinsman to Canutus the second which if it were a good descent will plead almost as strongly for King Harald as it did for him But by what means soever he got the Crown he deserved to wear it our Author telling us Ibid. That whereas formerly there were manifold Laws in the Land made some by the Britains others by the Danes others by the English c. He caused some few of the best to be selected and the rest as captious and unnecessary to be rejected from whence they had the name of the Common Lawes That the Common-Law was so call'd because compounded of the Saxon British and Danish Lawes which were before of force only in such places where the Danes Britans and Saxon had the greatest sway though it be easie to be said will be hard to be proved The Britans at that time liv'd under their own Princes and were governed by their own Lawes and so they were for a long time after so that
have produc'd those arguments by which some shameless persons endeavoured to maintain both the conveniency and necessity of such common Brothel houses Had Bishop Iewel been alive and seen but half so much from Dr. Harding pleâ—ding in behalf of the common women permitted by the Pope in Rome he would have thought that to cal to him an Advocate for the Stews had not beeen enough But that Doctor was nor half so wise as our Author is and doth not fit each Argument with a several Antidâ—te as our Author doth hoping thereby by but vainly hoping that the arguments alleadged will be wash'd away Some of our late Criticks had a like Design in marking all the wanton and obscene Epigrams in Martial with a Hand or Asterism to the intent that young Scholars when they read that Author might be fore-warn'd to pass them over Whereas on the contrary it was found that too many young fellows or wanton wits as our Author calls them did ordinarily skip over the rest and pitch on those which were so mark't and set out unto them And much I fear that it will so fall out with our Author also whose Arguments will be studied and made use of when his Answers will not Fol. 253. Otherwise some suspect had he survived King Edward the sixth we might presently have heard of a King Henry the ninth Our Author speaks this of Henry Fitz Roy the Kings natural Son by Elizabeth Blunt and the great disturbance he might have wrought to the Kings two Daughters in their Succession to the Crown A Prince indeed whom his Father very highly cherished creating him Duke of Somerset and Richmond Earl of Nottingham and Earl Marshal of England and raising him to no small hopes of the Crown it self as appears plainly by the Statute 22 H. 8. c. 7. But whereas our Author speaks it on a supposition of his surviving King Edward the sixth he should have done well in the first place to have inform'd himself whether this Henry and Prince Edward were at any time alive together And if my Books speak true they were not Henry of Somerset and Richmond dying the 22. of Iuly Anno 1536. Prince Edward not being born till the 12. of October An. 1537. So that if our Author had been but as good at Law or Grammar as he is at Heraldry he would not have spoke of a Survivor-ship in such a case when the one person had been long dead before the other was born These incoherent Animadversions being thus passed over we now proceed to the Examination of our Authors Principles for weakning the Authority of the Church and subjecting it in all proceedings to the power of Parliaments Concerning which he had before given us two Rules Preparatory to the great business which we have in hand First that the proceedings of the Canon Law were subject in whatsoever touched temporals to secular Laws and National Customs And the Laitie at pleasure limited Canons in this behalf Lib. 3. n. 61. And secondly that the King by consent of Parliament directed the proceedings of the Ecclesiastical Court in cases of Heresie Lib. 4. n. 88. And if the Ecclesiastical power was thus curbed and feâ—â—ered when it was at the highest there is no question to be made but that it was much more obnoxious to the secular Courts when it began to sink in reputation and decline in strength How true and justifiable or rather how unjustifiable and false these two principles are we have shewn already and must now look into the rest which our Author in pursuance of the main Design hath presented to us But first we must take notice of another passage concerning the calling of Convocations or Synodical meetings formerly called by the two Archbishops in their several Provinces by their own sole and proper power as our Author grants fol. 190. to which he adds Fol. 190. But after the Statute of Praemunire was made which did much restrain the Papal power and subject it to the Laws of the Land when Archbishops called no more Convocations by their sole and absolute command but at the pleasure of the King In which I must confess my self to be much unsatisfied though I finde the same position in some other Authors My reasons two 1. Because there is nothing in the Statute of Praemunire to restrain the Archbishops from calling these meetings as before that Act extending only to such as purchase or pursue or cause to be purchased or pursued in the Court of Rome or elsewhere any such translatations Processes Sentences of Excommunication Bulls Instruments or any other things whatsoever which touch the King against him his Crown and his Regality or his Realm or to such as bring within the Realm or them receive or make thereof notification or any other Execution whatsoever within the same Realm or without c. And 2. because I finde in the Statute of the submission of the Clergy that it was recognized and acknowledged by the Clergie in their Convocation that the Convocation of the said Clergie is always hath been and ought to be assembled always by the Kings Writ And if they had been always call'd by the Kings Writ then certainly before the Statute of Praemunire for that the whole Clergy in their Convocation should publickly declare and avow a notorious falsehood especially in a matter of fact is not a thing to be imagined I must confess my self to be at a loss in this intricate Labyrinth unless perhaps there were some critical difference in those elder times between a Synod and a Convocation the first being call'd by the Archbishops in their several and respective Provinces as the necessities of the Church the other only by the King as his occasions and affairs did require the same But whether this were so or not is not much material as the case now stands the Clergie not assembling since the 25 of King Henry the eighth but as they are convocated and convened by the Kings wâ—it only I only adde that the time and year of this submission is mistook by our Author who plâ—ceth it in 1533. whereas indeed the Clergy made this acknowledgement and submission in their Convocation Anno 1532. though it pass'd not into an Act or Statute till the year next following Well then suppose the Clergy call'd by the Kings Authority and all their Acts and Constitutions ratiâ—ied by the Râ—yal assent are they of force to binde the Subject to submit and conform unto them Not if our Author may be judge for he tels us plainly Fol. 191. That even such Convocations with the Royal assent subject not any for recusancy to obey their Canons to a civil penalty in person or property untill confirmed by 〈◊〉 of Parliament I marvel where our Author took up this opinion which he neither finds in the Registers of Convocation or Records of Parliament Himself hath told us fol. 190. that such Canons and Constitutions as were concluded on in Synods or Convocations before the
74. But leaving him to stand or fall to his own Master I would fain know what text of Scripture ancient Writer or approved Councel can be brought to justifie Bounds Doctrines which he affirms for ancient truths and consonant to holy Scripture But more particularly where he can shew me any ground for the third Position viz. That there is as great reason why we Christians should take our selves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath it being one of the moral Commandements whereof all are of equall authority This if it be a truth is no ancient truth and whensoever it be received and allowed for truth will in conclusion lay as heavy and insupportable Burthens upon the consciences of Gods people as ever were imposed upon the Jewes by the Scribes and Pharisees And secondly I would fain know the meaning of the following words in which it is said that others conceived them grounded on a wrong bottom but because they tended to the manifest advance of Religion it was pity to oppose them I would fain know I say considering that the foundation of the Christian faith is laid on the Doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles Christ himself being the chief corner stone how any thing which is not built upon this foundation but grounded on a wrong bottom as this seemed to be could tend to the manifest advance of the true Religion That it tended to the manifest advance of some Religion I shall easily grant and if our Author mean no otherwise we shall soon agree But sure I am no part of the true Religion was ever grounded upon â—alshood and therefore is 〈◊〉 Doctrine were grounded on so ill â— bottom aâ— they say it was it might â—onâ—â—â— to the advancement of a Faction and mens private 〈◊〉 but to the true Religion it was likely to contribute nothing but disgrace and scandal Lâ—stly I am to minde our Author that he makes Mr. Greenhams Treatise of the Sabbath to be published in pursuance of Bounds opinions which could not be till in or after the year 1595. Whereas he had laid him in his grave above two years before telling us that he died of the Plugue in London Anno 1592. fol. 219. By which it seems that Greenham either writ this Treatise after his decease oâ— else our Author hath done ill in giving the fâ—â—st honour of these new Doctrins unto Dr. Bound In the next place we shall see our Author engage himself in defence of the Calviâ—an Doctrins about Predestâ—ation Grace c. of which he telleth us that Fol. 229. Having much troubled both the Schools and Puâ—pit Archbishop Whitgift out of his Christian care to propogate the truth and suppress the opposite errors 〈◊〉 used a solemn meeting of many grave and learned 〈◊〉 at Lanibâ—th The occasion this The controversâ—â— about Predestination Grace c. had been long 〈◊〉 in the Schools between the Dominicant on the one side and the Francisâ—ans on the other 〈◊〉 the Dominicans grounding their opinion on the Authority of St. Augustin Prosper and some others of the following 〈◊〉 the Franciscans on the general current of the 〈◊〉 Fathers who lived ante motâ— certamina Pelagiana before the rising of the Pelagian Hereâ—ies 〈◊〉 disputes being after taken up in the 〈◊〉 Churches 〈◊〉 moderate Lutherans as they 〈◊〉 them followed the Doctrine of Melanchâ—hon conformable to the 〈…〉 those particulars The others whom they 〈…〉 or rigid Lutherans of whom 〈◊〉 Illyricus was the chief go in the same way with the Dominicans The authority of which last opinion after it had been entertained and publishe in the works of Calvin for his sake found admiâ—â—ance in the Schools and Pulpits of most of the Reformed Churches And having got footing here in England by the preaching of such Divines as had fled to Geneva in Queen Maries time it was defended in the Schools of Cambridge without opposition till Peter Barâ— a French man came and setled there Who being the Lady Margarets Pâ—ofessor in that University and liking better of the Melanchthonian way then that of Calvin defended it openly in the Schools many of parts and qâ—ality being gained unto his opinion Which gave so much displeasure to Dr. Whitaker Dr. Tyndall Mr. Perkins and some other leading men of the contrary judgement that they thought best to use the Argument ab Authoritatâ— to convince their Adversaries and complained thereof to the Archbishop and in the end prevailed with him to call that meeting at Lambeth which our Author speaks of in which some Articles commonly called the Nine Articles of Lambeth were agreed upon and sent down to Cambridge in favour of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates But our Author not content to relate the story of the Quarrel must take upon him also to be a judge in the Controversie He had before commended the Dominicans for their Orthodoxie in these points of Doctrine as they were then in agitation betwixt them and the Iesuits He now proceeds to do the like between the two parties men of great piety and learning appearing in it on both sides disputing the same points in the Church of England honouring the opinion of Dr. Whitaker and his Associates with the name of the truth and branding the other with the Title of the opposite error And yet not thinking that he had declared himself sufficiently in the favour of the Calvinian party he telleth us not long after of these Lambeth Articles fol. 232. that though they wanted the Authority of Provincial Acts yet will they readily be received of all Orthodox Christians for as far as their own purity bears conformity to Gods word Which last words though somewhat perplextly laid down must either intimate their conformity to the word of God or else signifie nothing But whatsoever opinion our Author hath of these Nine Articles certain it is that Queen Elizabeth was much displeased at the making of them and commanded them to be supprest which was done accordingly and with such diligence withall that for long time a Copy of them was not to be met with in that University Nor was King Iames better pleased with them then Queen Elizabeth was Insomuch that when Dr. Renalds mov'd in the Conference of Hampton-Court that the Nine Articles of Lambeth might be superadded to the 39. Articles of the Church of England King Iames upon an information of the true staâ—e of the businesse did absolutely refuse to give way to it But of this more at large elsewhere I only add a Memorandâ—m of our Authors mistake in making Dr. Richard Bancroft Bishop of London to be one of the Bishops which were present at the meeting at Lambeth whereas indeed 〈◊〉 was Richard Fletcher Bishop elect of London and by that name entituled in such Authors as relate this story Dr. Bancroft not being made Bishop of London or of any place else till the year 1597. which was two years after this Assembly Alike mistake relating to this business
secrets of the heart of man Interest tenebris interest cogitationibus nostris quasi alteris tenebris as Minutius hath it The man here mention'd had been in the Confeâ—sion of our Aâ—thor himself Archbishop of Spalato in Dalmatia â— dignity of great power and reputation and consequently of a fair Revenue in propoâ—tion to it He could not hope to mend his Fortunes by his coming hither or to advance himself to a more liberal entertainment in the Church of England then what he had attain'd unto in the Church of Rome Covetousness therefore could not be the motive for leaving his own estate of which he had been possessed 14 years in our Authors â—eckoning to betake himself to a strange Countrey where he 〈◊〉 promise himself nothing but protection and the â—â—eedom of conscience Our Author might have said with more probability that covetousness and not consâ—ience 〈…〉 cause of his going hence no bâ—it of proâ—â—t or preferment being laid before him to invite him 〈◊〉 â—s they were both by those which had the managing 〈…〉 him hence He had given great 〈◊〉 to the Pope by his defection from that Church and no 〈◊〉 councenance to the Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 Churches by his coming oâ—er unto ouâ—s The 〈◊〉 of â—o great a 〈…〉 of that Church was not like to stand And yet he gave greater blows to them by his Pen then by the defection of his Person his learned Books entituled De Republica Ecclesiasticâ being still unanswered In which respect those of that Church bestird themselves to disgrace his person devising many other causes by which he might be mov'd or forc'd to forsake those parts in which he durst no longer tarry But finding little credit given to their libellous Pamphlets they began to work upon him by more secret practises insinuating that he had neither that respect nor those advancements which might incourage him to stay that the new Pope Gregory the fifteenth was his special friend that he might chuse his own preferments and make his own conditions if he would return And on the other side they cunningly wrought him out of credit with King Iames by the arts of Gondomar and lessened his esteem amongst the Clergy by some other Artifices so that the poor man being in a manner lost on both sides was forc'd to a necessity of swallowing that accursed bait by which he was hook'd over to his own destruction For which and for the rest of the story the Reader may repair for satisfaction to this present History Fol. 96. Besides the King would never bestow an Episcopal charge in England on a foreiner no not on his own Countrey-men the Scots This must be understood with reference to the Church of England King Iames bestowing many Bishopricks upon his Countrey-men the Scots in the Realm of Ireland And if he did not the like here as indeed he did not it neither was for want of affection to them nor of confidence in them but because he would not put any such discouragement upon the English who looked on those preferments as the greatest and most honourable rewards of Arts and Industry Quis enim virtutem exquireret ipsum Proemia si â—ollin Fol. 100. All mens mouthes were now 〈◊〉 with discourse of Prince Charles his match with 〈…〉 Infanta of Spain The Protestants grieved thereat fearing that this marriage would be the Funerals of their Religion c. The buâ—â—ness of the match with Spainâ—ath â—ath already been sufficiently agitated between the Authoâ— of the History of the Reign of King Charles and his Observator And yet I must adde someâ—hing to let our Author and his Reader to understand thus much that the Protestants had no cause to fear such a Funeral They knew they liv'd under such a King who lov'd his Soveraignty too well to quit any part thereof to the Pope of Rome especially to part with that Supremacy in 〈◊〉 matters which he esteemed the fairest Flower in the Royal Garland They knew they liv'd under â—â—ch a King whose interest it was to preserve Religion in the same state in which he found it and could not fear but that he would sufficiently provide for the 〈◊〉 of it If any Protestants â—eared the funeral of their Religion they were such Protestants as had been frighted out 〈…〉 as you know who us'd to call the Puritans 〈…〉 under the name of Protestants had â—ontriv'd themselves into a Faction not only against Episcopacy but even Monarchy also And to these nothing was more 〈◊〉 then the match with Spain fearing â—nd perhaps 〈◊〉 fearing that the Kings 〈◊〉 with that Crown might aâ—m him both with power and counsel to suppress those practices which have since prov'd the Funeral of the Church of England But as it seems they 〈…〉 fear was our Author telling us fol. 112. that the 〈…〉 State had no minde or meaning of a match and that this was quickly discovered by Prince Charles at his coming 〈◊〉 How so Because saith he Fol. 112. They demanded 〈…〉 in education of the 〈…〉 English Papists c 〈…〉 nothing For thus the argument seems to stand viz. The Spaniards were desirous to get as good conditions as they could for themselves and their Party Ergo they had no minde to the match Or thus The demands of the Spaniards when the business was first in Treaty seem'd to be unreaâ—onable Ergo they never really intended that it should proceed Our Author cannot be so great a stranger in the shops of London as not to know that Trades-men use to ask many times twice as much for a commodity as they mean to take and therefore may conclude as strongly that they do not mean to sell those wares for which they ask such an unreasonable 〈◊〉 at the first demand Iniquum petere ut aequum obtineas hath been the usual practice especially in driving Sâ—aâ—e-bargains of all times and ages And though the Spaniards at the first spoke big and stood upon such points as the King neither could nor would in honour or conscience consent unto yet things were after brought to such a temperament that the marriage was agreed upon the Articles by both Kings subscrib'd a Proxie made by the Prince of â—ales to espouse the Infanta and all things on her part prepared for the day of the wedding The bâ—each which â—ollowed came not from any aversness in the Court of Spain though where the fault was and by what means occasioned need not here be said But well â—are our Author for all that who finally hath absolv'd the Spaniard from this breaâ—h and laid the same upon King Iames despairing of any restitution to be made of the Palatinate by the way of Treaty Ibiâ— Whereupon King James not only broke off all Treaty 〈◊〉 pain but also called the great Councel of his Kingdom together By which it seems that the breaking off of the Treaty did precede the Parliâ—ment But multa apparent quae non sunt Every thing is not as it seems The Parliament
in this caâ—e came before by whose continual importunity and 〈◊〉 the breach of the Treaties followed after The King lov'd peace â—oo well to lay aside the Treaties and engage in War before he was desperate of success any other way then by that of the Sword and was assur'd both of the hands and hearts of his subjects to assist him in it And therefore ouâ— Author should have said that the King not only called together his great Councel but broke off the Treaty and not have given us here such an Hysteron Proteron as neither doth consist with reason not the truth of story ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Eleventh Book OF The Church History OF BRITAIN Containing the Reign of King Charles THis Book concludes our Authors History and my Animadverâ—â—ons And 〈◊〉 the end be 〈◊〉 unto the beginning it is like to 〈…〉 enough our Author stumbling at the Threshold 〈◊〉 â—moâ—gst superstitious people hath been 〈…〉 presage Having placed King Charles upon 〈…〉 he goes on to tell us that Fol. 117. On the fourtâ—enth 〈…〉 James his Funerals were 〈…〉 Collegiat Church at 〈…〉 but the fourth saith the 〈…〉 Reign of King Charls and 〈…〉 was on the 〈…〉 â—â—venth of May on which those solemn Obsequies were 〈…〉 Westminster Of which if he will not take my word seâ— him consult the Pamphleâ— called the 〈…〉 â—ol 6. and he shall be satisfied Our 〈…〉 muâ—â— keep time better or else we shall neveâ— know how the day goes with him Fol. 119. As for Dr. Preâ—â—on c. His party would 〈◊〉 us that he might have chose his own Mitre And 〈…〉 his party would perswade us That he had not only large parts of suâ—â—icient receipt to manage the broad 〈…〉 but that the Seal was proffered to him fol. 131. But we are not bound to believe all which is said by that party who look'd vpon the man with such a reverence as came near Idolaâ—â—y His Principles and engagements were too well known by those which governed Affairs to ventâ—â—e him â—nto any such great trust in Church or State and his activity so suspected that he would not have been long suffered to continue Preacher at Lincolns Inn. As for his intimacy with the Duke too violent to be long lasting it proceeded not from any good â—pinion which the Duke had of him but that he found how instrumental he might be to manage that prevailâ—â—g party to the Kings advantage But when it was 〈◊〉 that he had more of the Serpent in him then of the 〈◊〉 and that he was not tractable in steering the 〈◊〉 of his own Party by the Court Compass he was discountenanc'd and â—aid by as not worth the keeping He seemed the Court Mâ—reor for a while 〈◊〉 to a sâ—dden height of expectation and having 〈◊〉 and blaz'd a 〈◊〉 went out again and was as suddâ—â—nly â—oâ—gotten â—ol 119. Next day the King coming from Canterbury 〈…〉 with all solemnity she was 〈…〉 in London where a Chappel 〈…〉 her Devâ—tionâ— with a Covent 〈…〉 to the Articles of her 〈…〉 how â—ame he to be suffered to be present at 〈◊〉 in the capacity of Lord Keeper For that he did so is affirmed by our Author saying That the King took a Sâ—role of Parchment out of his bosom and gave it to the Lâ—rd 〈…〉 who read it to the Commons four sevâ—raâ— times East-West North and South fol. 123. Thirdly the Lord Keeper who read that Scrole was not the 〈◊〉 Keeper Williams but the Lord Keeper Coventry 〈◊〉 Seal being taken from the Bishop of Lincoln and 〈◊〉 to the custoâ—y of Sir Thomas Coventry in October before And therefore fourthly our Author is much ouâ— in placing both the Coronation and the following Parliament befoâ—e the change of the Lord Keeper and sending Sir Iohn Suckling to feâ—ch that Seal at the end of a Parliâ—ment in the Spring which he had brought away with him before Michaelmas Term. But as our Author was willing to keep the Bishop of Lincoln in the Deaâ—â—y of Westminster for no less then five or six years after it was confer'd on another so is he as desirous to continue him Lord Keeper for as many months after the Seal had been entrusted to another hand Fol. 122. The Earl of Arundel as Earl Marshal of 〈◊〉 and the Duke of Buckingham as Lord High Constâ—ble of England for that day went before his Majesty in that great Solemnity In this passage and the next that follows ouâ— Author shews himself as bad an Herald in marshalling a Royal shew as in stating the true time of the câ—eation of a Noble Peer Here in this place he plaâ—eth the Earl Marshal before the Constable whereas by the 〈◊〉 31 H. 8. c. 10. the Constable is to have 〈◊〉 before the Marshal Not want there Precedents to shew that the Lord High-Constable did many times direct his Mâ—ndats to the Earl Marshal as one of the Miniâ—â—ers of his Court willing and requiring him to perform such and such services as in the said Precepts were expâ—essed In the next place we are informed that Ibid. That the Kings Train being six yards long of Purple Velvet was held up by the Lord Compton and the Lord Viscount Dorcester That the Lord Compton was one of them which held up the Kings Train I shall easily grant he being then Master of the Robes and thereby châ—llenging a right to peâ—foâ—m this service But that the Lord Viscount Dorcester was the other of them I shall never grant there being no such Viscount at the time of the Coronation I cannot 〈◊〉 but that Sir Dâ—dley Carleton might be one of those which held up the Train though I am not sure of it But sure I am that Sir Dudley Carleton was not made Baron of Imber-Court till towards the latter end of the following Parliament of An. 1626 nor created Viscount Dorcester until some years after Fol. 122. The Lord Archbishop did present his Majesty to the Lords and Commons East West North South asking their mindes four several times if they did consent to the Coronation of King Charles their lawful â—overaign This is a piece of new State-doctrine never known before that the Coronation of the King and consequently his Succession to the Crown of England should depend on the consent of the Lords and Commons who were then assembled the Coronation not proceeding as he after â—elleth us till their consent was given four times by â—cclamations And this I call a piece of new State-doctrine never known before because I finde the contrary in the Coronation of our former Kings For in the form and manner of the Coronation of King Edward 6. described in the Catalogue of Honor â—et â—orth by Tho. Mills of Canterbury Anno 1610. we finde it thus The King being carried by certain Noble Courtiers in another Chair â—nto the four sides of the Stage was by the Archbishop of Canterbury declared unto the people standing round about both by Gods and mans Laws to be the right and lawâ—ul King of
false But I must needs say that there was small ingenâ—ity in acknowledging a mistake in that wherein they 〈◊〉 not been mistaken or by endeavouring to avoid a reputed Rock to run themselves on a certain Rock even the Rock of scandal For that the English Bishops had their vote in Parliament as a third 〈◊〉 and not in the capacity of temporal Barons will evidently appear by these reasons following For first the Clegy in all other Christian Kingdoms of theâ—e Noâ—thwest pâ—rts make the third Estate that is to say in the German Empire as appears by Thuanus the Historian lib. 2. In France as is affirmed by Paulus Aemilius lib. 9. in Spain as testifieth Bodinus in his De Bepub lib. 3. Foâ— which consult also the General History of Spain as in point of practice lib. 9 10 11 14. In Hâ—ngâ—ry as witnesseth Bonfinius Dec. 2. l. 1. In 〈…〉 by Thuanus also lib. 56. In Denmarkâ— as 〈◊〉 telleth us in Historia 〈…〉 observing antiently the same form and order of Government as was us'd by the Danes The like we finde in Camden for the Realm of Scotland in which antiently the Lords Spiritual viz. Bishops Abbots Priors made the third Estate And certainly it were very strange if the Bishops and other Prelates in the Realm of England being a great and powerful body should move in a lower Sphere in England then they doe elsewhere But secondly not to stand only upon probable inferences we finde first in the History of Titus Livius touching the Reign and Acts of King Henry the fifth that when his Funerals were ended the three Estates of the Realm of England did assemble together and declared his Son King Henry the sixth being an Infant of eight moneths old to be their Soveraign Lord as his Heir and Successor And if the Lords Spiritual did not then make the third Estate I would know who did Secondly the Petition tendred to Richard Duke of Glocester to accept the Crown occurring in the Parliament Rolls runs in the name of the three Estates of the Realm that is to say The Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons thereof Thirdly in the first Parliament of the said Richard lately Crowned King it is said expresly that at the request and by the consent of the three Estates of this Realm that is to say the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons of this Land assembled in this present Parliament and by Authority of the same it be pronounced decreed and declared That our said Soveraign Lord the King was and is the very and undoubted King of this Realm of England c. Fourthly it is acknowledged so in the Statute of 1 Eliz. cap. 3. where the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and the Commons in that Parliament assembled being said expresly and in terminis to represent the three Estates of this Realm of England did recognize the Queens Majesty to be their true lawful and undoubted Soveraign Liege Lady and Queen Adde unto these the Testimony of Sir Edward Cooke though a private person who in his Book of the Jurisdiction of Courts published by order of the long Parliament chap. 1. doth expresly say That the Parliament consists of the Head and Body that the Head is the King that the Body are the three Eâ—tates viz. the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons In which words we have not only the opinion and tesâ—imony of that learned Lawyer but the Authority oâ— the long Parliament also though against it self Thoâ—e aged Bishops had been but little studied in their own concernments and betray'd their Rights if any of them did acknowledge any such mistake in châ—llenging to themselves the name and priviledges of the third 〈◊〉 Fol. 196. The Convocation now not sittingâ— and matters of Religion being brought under the cognizance of the Parliament their Wisdoms adjudged it not only convenient but necessary that some prime Clergy men might be consulted with It seems then that the setting up oâ— the new Assembly consisting of certain Lords and Gentlemen and two or more Divineâ— out of every County must be ascrib'd to the not sitting of the Convocation Whereas if that had been the reaâ—on the Convocation should have been first waâ—ned to reassemble with liberty and safe conducts given them to attend that service and freedom to debate such matters as conduced to the Peace of the Church If on those terms they had not met the substituting of the new Assembly might have had some ground though being call'd and nominated as they were by the Hoâ—se of Commons nothing they did could binde the Clergy further then as they were compellable by the power of the sword But the truth is the Convocation was not held fit to be trusted in the present Designs there being no hope that they would 〈…〉 change of the Goverâ—â—ent or to the abrogating of the Liturgy of the Church of England in all which the Divines of their own nomination were presum'd to serve them And so accordingly they did advancing their Presbyteries in the place of Episcopacy their Directory in the room of the Common Prayer Book their Confession to the quality of the Book of Articles all of them so short liv'd of so little continuance that none of them past over their Probationers year Finally having seâ—v'd the turn amus'd the world with doing nothing they made their Exit with far fewer Plaudites then they expected at their entrance In the Recital of whose names our Author craves pardon for omitting the greatest part of them as unknown to him whereas he might have found them all in the Ordinance of the Lords and Commons by which they were called and impowered to be an Assembly Of which pardon he afterwards presumes in case he hath not marshalled them in their Seniority because saith he Fol. 198. It â—avours something of a Prelatical Spirit to be offended about Precedency I â—ee our Author is no Changeling Primus ad extremum similis sibi the very same at last as he was at the first Certainly if it â—avour of a Prelatical Spirit to contend about Precedencies that Spirit by some Pythagorean Metempsychosis hath passed into the bodies of the Presbyterians whose pride had swell'd them in conceit above Kings and Princes Nothing more positive then that of Travers one of our Authors shining Lights for so he cals him Lib. 9. fol. 218. in his Book of Discipline Huic Discipline omnes Principes submittere Fasces suos necesse est as his words there are Nothing more proud and arrogant then that of the Presbyterians in Queen Elizabeths time who used frequently to say That King and Queens must lay down their Scepters and lick up the very dust of the Churrches feet that is their own And this I trow doth not savour so much of a Prelatical as a Papal Spirit Diogenes the Cynick affecting a vain-glorious poverty came into Plato's Chamber and trampled the Bed and other furniture thereof under his feet using these words Calco Platonis fastum
Earl of Essex that he went Deputy into Ireland Fol. 234. Whereas indeed he was not sent over into Ireland with the Title of Deputy but by the more honourable Title of Lord Leviâ—enant having power to create a Lord Deputy under him when his occasions or the the necessities of the state should require his absence Fol. 2â—1 The 26. of February 1â—00 was born the Kings third son and Christnâ—â— Charles at Dunferling The Kings third son and afterwards his Successor in the Crown of England was not born on the 26. of February but on the 19. of Noveâ—â—er as is averred by all others who have written of it and publickly attested by the annual ringing of Bells upon that day in the City of London during the whole time of his pâ—wer and prosperity The like mistake we finde in the tiâ—e and day of the Birth of Queen Elizabeth of whom it is â—â—id Fol. 261. 25. That she gave up the Ghost to Gâ—d oâ— that day of her Birth from whom she had it intimating thaâ— she died on the Eve of the same Lady-day on which she was born But the truth is that she was born on the Eve of the Nativity of the Virgin Mary being the seventh day of September and died on the Eve of the Annuntiation being the 24. of March And so much for the History of the Reign of Queen Mary and King Iames her Son as to the Realm of Scotland onely both of them Crowned as Iames the fift had also been in their tenderest infancy But whereas our Author tells us Fol. 8. that Q Mary 〈◊〉 the kingdom to her son who was born a King I can by no means yeild to that I finde indeed that our Saâ—iour Christ was born King of the Iews and so proclaimed to be by the Angel Gabriel at the very time of his Conception And I have read that Sapores one of the Kings of Persia was not onely born a King but crowned King too before his birth for his Father dying withouâ—â—â—ue as the story saith left his wife with child which child the Magi having signified by their Art to be a Male the Persian Princes caused the Crown and Royal Ornaments to be set upon his Mothers Belly acknowledging him there by for their King and Sovaraign But so it was not with King Iames who was born on the 19 of Iune Anno. 1566. and Crowned King on the 24. of Iuly being the 5. day after his Mothers resignation of the Crown and Government Anno. 1567. ADVERTISEMENTS ON THE REIGN DEATH OF KING IAMES Of GREAT BRITAIN FRANCE and IRELAND the first WE are now come unto the Reign of King Iames as King of England or rather as King of England and Scotland under the notion of Great Britain of whose reception as he passed through Godmanchestâ—r the Historian telleth us that Fol. 270. At Godmanchester in the Counâ—y of Notthamptonshire they presented him with 70 Teem of Horses c. beâ—â—g his Tenants and holding their Land by that Tenure But first Godâ—aâ—chester is not in Northampton but in Huntiâ—gtonshire And secondly Though it be a custom for those in Godmanchâ—ster to shew their Bravery to the Kings of England in that rustical Pomp yet I conceive it not to be the Tenure which they hold their Lands by For Camden who is very punctual in observing Tenures mentions not this as a Tenure but a Custom onely adding withal that they make their boast That they have in former time received the Kings of England as they passed in their progress this way with ninescore Ploughs brought forth in a rustical kinde of Pomp for a gallant shew If onely for a gallant shew or a rustical Pomp then not observed by them as their Tenure or if a Tenure not 〈◊〉 from ninescore to 70. all Tenures being â—ixt not variable at the will of the Tenants Fol. 273. This most honorable Order of the Garter was instituted by King Edward the third c. So far our Author right enough as unto the â—ounder and rigâ—â— enough as to the time of the institution which he placeth in the year 1350. But whereas he telleth us withal that this Order was founded by King Edward the third 〈◊〉 John of France and King James of Scotland being then Prisâ—ners in the Tower of London and King Henry of Castile the Bastard expulst and Don Pedro restored by the Prince of Wales called the Black Prince in that he is very much mistaken For first It was David King of the Scots not Iames who had been taken Prisoner by this Kings Forces there being no Iames King of the Scots in above fifty years after Secondly Iohn of France was not taken Prisoner till the year 1356. nor Henry of Castile expulsed by the Prince of Wales till ten years after Anno 1366. By consequence neither of those two great Actions could precede the Order But worse is he mistaken in the Patron Saint of whom he tells us that Fol. 273. Among sundry men of valor in ancient days was Geo. born at Coventry in England c. This with the rest that follows touching the Actions and Atchievements of Sir George of Coventry is borrowed from no better Author then the doughty History of the Seven Châ—mpions of Christendom of all that trade in Knighthood-errant the most empty Bable â—But had our Author look'd so high as the Records of the Order the titles of Honor writ by Selden the Catalogue of Honor publisht by Mills of Canterbury Camdens Britannia or any other less knowing Antiquary he might have found that this most noble Order was not dedicated to that fabulous Knight Sâ—â— George of Coventry but to the famous Saint and Soldier of Christ Jesus St. George of Cappadocia A Saint so universally received in all parts of Christendom so generally attested to by the Ecclesiastical Writers of all Ages from the time of his Martyrdom till this day that no one Saint in all the Calender those mentioned in the holy Scriptures excepted onely can be better evidenced Nor doth he finde in Matthew Parts that St. George fought in the air at Antioch in behalf of the English the English having at that time no such iâ—â—eress in him but that he was thought to have been seen figâ—ting in behalf of the Christians Fol. 275. Earldoms without any place are likewise of two kindes either in respect of Office as Earl-Morshal of England or by Birth and so are all the Kings Sons In the Authority and truth of this I am much unsatisfied as never having met with any such thing in the course of my reading and I behold it as a diminution to the Sons of Kings to be born but Earls whereby they are put in an equal rank with the eldest sons of Dukes in England who commonly have the Title of their Fathers Earldoms since it is plain they are born Princes which is the highest civil Dignity next to that of Kings It was indeed usual with the Kings of England to bestow upon
their yongest Sons some Earldom or other until the time of Edward the third after which time they were invested with the Title of Dukes as appears evidently to any who are studied in their Chronologies But that they or any of them were Earls by Birth is a new piece of learning for which if the Historian can give me any good proof I shall thank him for it Fol. 278. Henry the eight thus cousened into some kindness both by his own power and purse makes Charls Emperor and the French King his Prisoner 1519. Neither so nor so For first though King Henry did contribute both his power and purse to the taking of the French King Prisoner yet to the making of Charls Emperor he contributed neither the one nor the other And secondly though Charls were created Emperor Anno 1519 yet the French King was not taken Prisoner till six years after Anno 1525. Fol. 31â— Oswald united the Crowns of England and Scotland which were 〈◊〉 afterwards for many Ages 3â— That Oswald King of Northumberland here mentioned was a Puiâ—â—ant Prince as being the ninth Monarch of the English I shall easily grant but that he united the two Kingdoms of England and Scotland is not any where found Our Author therefore must be understood of his uniting the two Realms of Deâ—ra and Pernicia part of which last hath for long time been accounted part of Scotland which after his decease were again divided Fol. 317. Whose Results notwithstanding are not to be obtruded on the Sâ—culars to be obsâ—rved with the Authority of Laws until they be allowed by assent of the King and both Houses An error far more pardonable in our present Author to whom the concernments of the Church are not so necessary to be known or studied then in our Church Historian where before we had it and which hath had a full Conâ—utation in our Animadversions to which for brevity sake I shall now refer Fol. 320. Rory Duke of Solia from France Either the Printer or the Author are mistaken here The Ambassador who was sent from France was neither called Rory nor Duke of Solia but Marquess of Rhosney created afterward Duke of Sully and Lord High Treasurer of that Kingdom by King Henry 4. A Protestant and therefore purposely selected for that imployment Of whom it is reported in the conference at Hampton-Court that having observed the order and gravity of our Church Service in the Cathedral Chuâ—ch at Câ—nâ—erbury he was heard to say that if the like had been used in France there would have been many thousands of Protestants more then were at that present Fol. 329. Ceâ—il foâ— his good Service was created Earl of Salisbury That is to say for so it must be understood for his activity and diligence in discovering the Powder-Treason But he was Earl of Salisbury before that Discovery call'd so by the Historian himself in the course of thaâ— Naâ—rative and made so by King Iames in the Mâ—y foregoâ—ng at what time also his Brother Thomas Lord Burley was made Earl of EXCESTER The like mistake I finde in the advancement of Thomas Lord Buckhurst to the Earldom of Dorcet plac'd by the Author fol. 342. in the year 1605. whereas indeed he was created Earl of Dorcet in the first year of King Iames March 13. Anno 1603. Fol. 333. The Earl of Flanders c. being by Storm cast upon our Coast c. was fain to yield to all the Kings demands in delivering up the Countess of Warwick and other Fugitives resident in Flanders This story is well meant but not rightly told there being at that time no Earl of Flanders commonly so called to be cast upon the Coast of England nor any such Woman as a Countess of Warwick whom King Henry the seventh could be afraid of the truth is that the person here meant was Philip King of Castile Duke of Burgundy Earl of Flanders c. who in his return from Spain was driven by Tempest on the Coast of England and being Royally Feasted by King Henry the seventh was detained here till he had delivered into the Kings hands the Earl of Suffolk who had fled into the Nether-lands for protection and began to work new troubles against his Soveraign The story whereof we have at large in the History of King Henry the seventh writ by the Lord Viscount St. Alban from fol. 222. to 225. Fol. 334 The fate of that Family evermore false to the crown This spoken of the Piercies Earls of Northumberland too often false to the Crown though not always so For Henry the second Earl of this Family lost his life fighting for King Henry the sixth in the Battle of St. Albans as Henry his Son and Successor also did at the Battle of â—owton And so did Henry the fifth Earl in the time of King Henry the seventh for his Fidelity to that King in a tumultuous Insurrection of the Common People not to say any thing of his Son and Successor who dyed without any imputation of such disloyalty Fol. 362. Zutphen and Gelders did of right belong to the Dukâ— Arnold who being Prisoner with the last Duke of Burgundy who died before Nancy that Duke intruded upon his Possession c. 40. Not so it was not Arnold Duke of Gelders that was Imprisoned by Charls Duke of Burgundy but his Son Adolphus who having most ungratiously Imprison'd his aged Father was vanquished by Duke Charls and by him kept Prisoner and the old Duke restored again to his power and liberty In a grateful acknowledgement of which favor he made a Donation of his Estates to Duke Charls and his Heirs to commence after his decease though it took no effect till Conquered under that pretence by Charls the fifth uniting it unto the rest of his Belgick Provinces Anno 1538. Fol. 423. Sir William Seymour Grandchilde to the third Son and the Heir of the Earl of Hertford created by Henry the eighth whose sister he marryed c. And being thus near the Crown c. In this business of Sir William Seymer now Marquess of Hertford there are two mistakes For first the Earl of Hertford from whom he derived his discent married not any of the Sisters of King Henry the eighth he having but two Wives in all the first the Daughter of Filol of Woodland from whom comes Baronet Seymer of the West the second Anne Daughter of Sir Edward and Sister to Sir Michael Stanhop from whom discends the House of Hertford still in being It s true King Henry married a Sister of Sir Edward Seymer by him created Earl of Hertford but not é contra the Earl of Hertford married not with a sister of his Secondly The nearness of this House to the Crown of England came not from any such Marriage of this first Earl with that Kings Sister but from the Marriage of Edward the second Earl with a Neece of that Kings that is to say with 〈◊〉 Daughter of Henry Duke of Suffolk and of Fâ—aâ—ces his Wife