Kingdoms and to show how they succeed to all who ever pretended to Monarchy in any of them As to the British part of the Isle Aurelius Ambrosius was by common consent chosen sole Prince of all the Britons And he had no other Succession save two Daughters Anna married to the King of the Picts and Ada married to the King of the Scots Mordredus King of the Picts Grand-child to the foresaid Aurelius finding himself debarr'd from the Succession of the British Crown employ'd the Scots who fought for him against the Britons But the Britons having called in the Saxons after a bloody Battel both Parties were forced to withdraw and the King of the Picts was induc'd to desist from his Pretentions at that time But thereafter Hungus King of the Picts and the direct Heir of the same Mordredus and consequently of Ambrosius King of the Britons gave his Sister Fergusiana to Achaius King of the Scots and in her Right Alpin King of Scotland succeeded both to the British and Pictish Crowns Hungus having died without any Children Kenneth the 2d Son to Alpin was forc'd to conquer the Picts who refus'd unjustly to receive him as their lawful King Our Kings are likewise Lineal Heirs of the Danish-Race who were Kings of England for 27 or as others say 29 Years they being the only Lineal Successors of Canutus King of the Danes in Britain for Margaret Wife to King Malcolm the 3d was Sister to Edgar which Edgar was Grand-child to St. Edward who was Brother to Hardiknut Son to Canutus After this the Kingdom of England return'd to the old Stock in King Edward's Time to whom succeeded Edgar whose Sister the pious Queen Margaret married King Malcolm the 3d of Scotland by whom he came to have right to the Crown of England there being none extant of the old Royal-Saxon-Line besides her self And with her came very many of the Nobility who fled from William the Conquerour after he conquer'd England and with whom King Malcolm would not make Peace till such of them as resolved to return were restored to their Estates The next Royal-Race which flourished in England was the Norman and to that Race our Kings succeeded thus The Line of William the Conqueror was branch'd out in the Houses of Lancaster and York To the House of Lancaster they succeed as Heirs by the marriage betwixt Ioan Daughter to the Duke of Somerset and undoubted Successor of the Family of Lancaster And to both Lancaster and York they succeed by being Heirs to Henry the 7th in whom these Successions were again happily reconcil'd he having married Elizabeth eldest Daughter to Edward the 4th who had transferred the Succession of the Crown from the House of Lancaster to that of York or at least had united the two in one For clearing whereof it is fit to know that Henry the 7th had only four Children Arthur Henry Margaret and Mary Arthur and Henry dying without Succession the Right of the Crown was certainly devolv'd upon the Children of Margaret the Daughter who did bear King Iames the 5th in a first Marriage with King Iames the 4th and Margaret Dowglas by a second Marriage with the Earl of Angus which Margaret being married to Matthew Earl of Lenox had two Sons the eldest whereof was Henry who thereafter married Queen Mary Daughter to King Iames the 5th and begot upon her King Iames the 6th and thus King Iames the 6th was upon all sides Heir to William the Conquerour and to Henry the 7th The Histories also of both Nations confess that our King is the undoubted Successor of the Blood-Royal of Wales for Walter Stuart from whom our Kings are descended was Grand-Child to the King of Wales by his Daughter who married Fleanchus Son to Banqhuo and Henry the 7th to whom King Iames the 6th was the true Successor was also the righteous Heir of Cadwallader the last Prince of Wales The Histories both of Scotland and Ireland do acknowledg that our Kings are undoubtedly descended from the Royal Race of the Kings of Ireland and all the debate that can be is only whether they be desended from King Ferquhard Father to King Fergus the first or from Eeric Father to King Fergus the second or from some other Irish Kings as Vsher pretends From all which I may draw two Conclusions First that God has from an extraordinary kindness to those Kingdoms lodged in the Person of our present Soveraign King Iames the 7th whom GOD Almighty long preseve all those opposite and different Rights by which our Peace might have been formerly disturb'd 2. That His Majesty who now Reigns has deriv'd from His Royal Ancestors a just and legal Right by Law to all those Crowns without needing to found upon the Right of Conquest so that the very endeavour to exclude him from all those Legal Rights by Arbitrary Insolence under a Mask of Law was the height of Injustice as well as Imprudence FINIS BOOKS Printed for and Sold by RICHARD CHISWELL FOLIO SPeed's Maps and Geography of Great Britain and Ireland and of Foreign Parts Dr. Cave's Lives of the Primitive Fathers in 2 Vol. Dr. Cary's Chronological Account of Ancient Time Bp Wilkins real Character or Philosophical Language Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity Guillim's Display of Heraldry with large Additions Dr. Burnet's History of the Reformation of the Church of England in 2 Vol. Account of the Confessions and Prayers of the Murderers of Esquire Thynn Burlace's History of the Irish Rebellion Herodoti Historia Gr. Lat. cum variis Lect. The Laws of this Realm concerning Jesuits Seminary Priests Recusants the Oaths of Supremacy and Allegiance explained by divers Judgments and Resolutions of the Iudges with other Observations thereupon By William Cawley Esq Sanford's Genealogical Hist. of the Kings of England Modern Reports of select Cases in the reign of King Charles the 2d Sir Tho. Murray's Collection of the Laws of Scotland Dr. Towerson's Explication on the Creed the Commandments and Lord's Prayer in 3 Vol. The History of the Island of CEYLON in the East-Indies Illustrated with Copper Figures and an exact Map of the Island By Capt. Robert Knox a Captive there near 20 Years QVARTO DR Littleton's Dictionary Latin and English Bp Nicholson on the Church-Catechism History of the late Wars of New-England Atwell's Faithful Surveyer Mr. Iohn Cave's seven occasional Sermons Dr. Crawford's Serious Expostulation with the Whigs in Scotland Dr. Parker's Demonstration of the Divine Authothority of the Law of Nature and the Christian Religion Mr. Hook's new Philosophical Collections Bibliotheca Norfolciana OCTAVO BIshop Wilkin's Natural Religion His Fifteen Sermons Mr. Tanner's Primordia Or the Rise and Growth of the first Church of God described Lord Hollis's Vindication of the Judicature of the House of Peers in the Case of Skinner Jurisdiction of the House of Peers in case of Appeals Jurisdiction of the House of Peers in case of Impositions Letters about the Bishops Votes in Capital Cases Spaniards Conspiracy against
these Druids having been converted from the Pagan Religion whereof they were the Priests became our first Monks being thereto much inclin'd by the severity of their former Discipline as the Therapeutae did for the same Reason become the first Anchorits in Egypt and so it was easie for them to inform the Monasteries of what they knew so well And this Hint is confirm'd by a very clear passage in Leslies Preface to his History who being a Bishop himself should be believ'd by another of the same Character in a probable matter of Fact Nor can there be a clearer Confirmation of our having had the Druids amongst us than that in several places of the Irish Version of the New Testament the wise Men or Priests are translated Druids and so where the English Translation saith That the Wise Men from the East came to worship our Saviour Our Irish Translation has the Druids c. Our Predecessors also being descended from the Spanish Gallicks or Galicians as is acknowledg'd by Historians and they having had the use of Letters and of Grammar long before this time as Strabo confesses it cannot be imagined but that we as a Colony of them would have likewise a part of their Art and Learning Our Predecessors also had their Sanachies and Bards The first whereof were the Historians and the latter the Poets of their Traditions as Luddus himself acknowledges and by either of these means the Memory of our Kings and their Actions might have been preserv'd until the 5th Century at which time we got Monasteries in which as I shall hereafter prove were written and preserv'd the Annals of our Nation And since nothing but great Improbabilities and fundamental Inconsistencies should be allow'd to refute a History already receiv'd I shall offer these Considerations for clearing that this way of preserving the Memory of our Kings is as probable a mean as any can be in History 1. It is probable that our Nation as all the rest of Mankind who are warlike and in constant action would be desirous to preserve the memory of those Actions for which they had hazarded their Lives and by which they design'd to preserve that Fame which they preferr'd to Life it self And that the Kings likewise whose Authority and Right was much reverenc'd for its Antiquity would be as careful to preserve those Marks of their ancient Dominion 2. We do not in this serious Debate pretend to such ancient Originations and Descents as might through Vanity tempt Men to lie as those do who endeavour to derive themselves from the Trojans All that we pretend to in this Debate being only that we are a Colony who probably came first from Greece to Spain but settled certainly in Ireland for some time and that we came from them after the time in which Cambden and Vsher acknowledge that the Nation of the Scots whose Name we only now bear were long settled there Would not our Accusers have us trust the British Antiquities for 2500 years and the Irish for a longer time than our own without any written History or Manuscript now extant before Gilda's time And tho Lycurgus would not suffer his Laws to be written yet they were preserv'd in the Memories of Men for more than 600 Years as Plutarch observes and we and other Nations have preserv'd some Laws for much longer time without the help of writing And the only Points here controverted being the first Settlement of our Nation and that we continue Subjects to the same race of Kings these are matters so remarkable that most Nations know when such Changes happened to one another As for instance tho there were no History yet extant we should easily have known that the Saxons Danes and Normans conquer'd the Britons and alter'd the Race of their Kings That Ireland had many little Monarchs till they were swallow'd up by Henry the 2d of England And that Edward Bruce Brother to our glorious King Robert the first was chosen King of Ireland with universal Consent there and might have continued in that Government if from too great a love to Fame and to gain a Victory without his Brother he had not lost it and himself And though all these controverted Points fell out in a time after the use of Letters was known to most Nations and particularly to the Druids and Romans the one whereof were our Priests and the other our Neighbours very long yet there remains not the least vestige of a doubt that our Scepter was ever sway'd by any other Race 3. Though we had wanted the use of Letters as most probably we did not Yet the Tradition controverted is at most of about 800 years For after that time it shall be proved that we had Records and Annals And the things said of our Kings during that time are so few and so remarkable that Men might have taught the same to their Children in a weeks time And Men lived so long at that time that ten or twelve Men might have transmitted the Tradition to one another As also since private Families do preserve to this day their Tradition for as long time as this it was much more easy for a Nation and their Kings to preserve theirs Nor can I tell why my Lord St. Asaph in his Preface can controvert our Tradition though we could not produce Writers who lived in those Times wherein these Actions are said to be done since he thinks it reasonable to judge that there was the same Government here in Britain though for want of Ancient Writings there could be produced no plain Instances of it And if this be allowed to Episcopacy in these times why should he not have allow'd the same favour to his Monarch's Predecessors in the same and more ancient Ages 4. It was much easier for us to preserve our Traditions than for the English we being all descended from the same Race and being still the same People living under the uninterrupted succession of the same Royal-Line Whereas they were oblig'd to suppress the Traditions and Memorials of the People whom they had conquer'd 5. As no Man is presum'd to lie or cheat without some great Temptation so the most glorious things that are said of us are true beyond debate As our having defended the Ground in which we setled against all opposition to this very day Our having put the first stop to the Roman Greatness our having beat the far more numerous Britans though defended by strong Walls and stronger Romans All which cannot be deny'd to have been done by us and are equally noble whether we were setled here or not when we did them After those controverted Times it cannot be deny'd that we carried our Conquests further into Britain than formerly That we fought long with success against the Saxons and Picts and did at last extirpate the latter And when we were alone we continued and extended our former Conquests against the Danes and Normans which proves also that in the Wars which
we had against the Romans in conjunction with the Picts the Victories we then got are chiefly to be ascrib'd to us And to crown all we have generously contributed all that was in our power to support that Ancient and Royal Family so unparallell'd for its antiquity by which we were animated and instructed to do all those great Actions till they are now become the Monarchs of the whole Isle having by a happier way extinguished those Wars and Animosities and may he be unhappy who revives them For clearing how this Tradition might have been and was preserv'd Our History tells us of a probable way among many others which was That at the Coronation of our Kings one appeared and recited his whole Genealogy I shall trouble my Reader only with a proof of this Custom which is such as confirms also the Genealogy of King Alexander the 3d in the year 1249 prior to Fordon's time or to the view of any such Debate and is related by Fordon and Major in the Life of that King and being so memorable a Fact and so near Fordon's own time his Relation cannot but be credited His words are That the King being plac'd in the Marble-Chair the Crown upon his Head and the Scepter in his Hand and the Nobility being set below Him a Venerable old High-landed Gentleman stept out and bowing the Knee express'd himself to the King in the High-land Language thus God bless you King Alexander Son of Alexander Son of William c. And so carried up the Genealogy to Fergus the First Which Custom was most solemnly us'd at the Coronation of King Charles the Martyr at which time their Pictures were expos'd and noblest Actions recited As also the reciting of their Genealogy was usual at the Burial of ours Kings a written Proof of which Tradition is to be seen in a Manuscript of Baldredus Abbas Rynalis for that which is the Abbacy of Melros was so called before King David's time who designs them so in the Foundations of the Lands of Melros which he gives to them and is related verbatim by Fordon consisting of eighteen Chapters mentioning the memorable Actions of King David upon whom the Lamentation is made who died 1151 and running up the Genealogy of the said St. David to Fergus the First dedicated to Henry Prince of England Grand Nephew to St. David who came to the Crown of England Anno 1154 under the name of Henry the Second In both which at least Fordon is to be believ'd having sufficient Vouchers This also being ordinary in our High-land Families to this very day not only at Burials but Baptisms and Marriages and in which Families Men continue still to be design'd from their Fathers Grandfathers and very many Generations upwards as is a sufficient Historical Proof of Tradition tho we had no other Warrant for those few Ages Before I come to clear that we had Manuscripts and Records it is fit to consider that is very probable that as the History of most Nations was preserv'd by their Priests and Church-men so ours would be very ready to oblige the Kings under whom and the People among whom they liv'd by writing their Annals And therefore we may reasonably conclude that since we were very early Christians we had therefore ancient Histories written by our Church-men besides those which we may pretend to have been transmitted to them by the Druids And the Bishop himself acknowledges that the Monastery of Hy call'd by us Icolm-kill that is Hy the Cell of Columba was founded about the year 560 and it is undeniable that 48 of our old Kings were buried and our Records were kept there since its Foundation until the Reign of Malcolm Canmore and it is also certain that our Annals were written in our Monasteries such as Scoon Pasley Pluscardin and Lindesfern govern'd by three Scotish-Bishops Aidan Finan and Colman and Abercorn mention'd by Beda and Melross the Chronicle whereof begins where Beda ends as their History now printed shews though certainly that English Manuscript is very unfaithful for most of the things relating to our Nation are omitted as particularly about the beginning in the year 844. Our Manuscript observes which the English has not That Alpin King of the Scots died to whom succeeded his Son Kenneth who beat the Picts and was declared first King of all Scotland to the Water of Tine and after it expresses in his Epitaph Primus in Albania fertur Regnasse Kenedhus Filius Alpini praelia multa gerens And it observes that he was called the first King of Albany not because he was the first who made the Scotish Laws but because he was the first King of all Scotland And each of our Monasteries had two Books the one call'd their Register or Chartulary containing the Records relating to their private securities and another call'd their Black-book containing an account of the memorable things which occur'd in every Year And as it is strongly presumable that our Historians would have compil'd our Histories from those So this being a matter of Fact is probable by Witnesses and I thus prove it in such a way and manner as is sufficient to maintain any History Verimundns a Spaniard Arch-deacon of St. Andrews in Anno 1076 as is remarked by Chambers of Ormond declares in the Epistle to his Book of the Historians of Scotland dedicated to King Malcolm call'd Can-more That albeit there are many things in the said Histories which may seem to the Readers to be a little difficult to be believed because they are not totally confirmed by Foreign Historians Yet after have they heard how the Scots were setled in the North Part of the Isle of Albion separated by the Sea from the firm Land and so seldom troubled by Strangers to whom they give no occasions to write their Actions and also that they have not been less happy in having almost always among them the Druids Religious People and diligent Chroniclers before the Reception of the Christian Faith and continually since Monks faithful Historians in the Isles of Man and Icomkill where they kept securely their Monuments and Antiquities without giving a sight or Copy of them to strangers they will cease to wonder This Chambers was a Learned Man and a Lord of Session who wrote anno 1572 and in his Preface says That he had those principal Authors Verimund a Spaniard Turgot Bishop of St. Andrews John Swenton John Campbel and Bishop Elphinstoun c. and many great Histories of the Abbacies of Scoon called the Black-book and of other like Chronicles of Abbacies as that of Inch-colm and Icolmkill the most part whereof he took pains to consider as much as was possible for him He cites Verimund for an account of the Scots and Picts and after he also cites him for the Miracle of St. Andrews in Hungus's time and he gives an account of the tenor of the League betwixt Charles the Great and Achaius and asserts that
Tacitus says that the third Year opened new Nations whereas Agricola knew the Britans before and these must have been the Scots and Picts for they could not be any other being beyond the River Tay. And Galgacus could be no Pictish King for we have a Manuscript bearing all the Names of the Pictish Kings 2. From this passage it is clear that Cambden does err grosly in making the Horesti to be a People in Eskdale which is a Scotish Country on the Borders of England For beside that all Authors agree that they are known to be the Inhabitants of Angus and Merns it is here demonstrated by Tacitus that after the Romans past Forth they came to Tay which is known to be the Marches or Boundary of Angus and from thence they marched to the Grampian Hills where they fought with Galgacus And from which he return'd to the Borders of the Horesti where finding the Fleet in the Frith of Tay where he had left it he Embarqu'd the Hostages and sent the Fleet back to that part of Britain whence they came And how could all this be in Eskdale That being very remote from the place of Battel and Eskdale an inland Country very remote from all Sea 3. Tacitus writing of us under the name of Caledonians mentions the Marishes of those who fought which were appropriated to us by Eumenius and Pacatius as I formerly observ'd By all which we may observe how little English Writers are to be credited when they write upon design to lessen our Country or magnify their own And all this is confirm'd by the learned Ferrarius a stranger And to this I may add that we have to this day a Barony call'd Galdgirth or the Girth of Galdus and ten great Stones in Galloway called King Galdus's Monument Marks of Antiquity far preferable to any Manuscript as the testimony or consent of a whole Nation is to that of one privat Person Two of which Arguments are us'd by Chambers in the Life of Galdus and he had seen Verimund and our old Manuscripts And should he not then be our King Galdus who reigned at that time and who as all our Histories relate fought against the Romans in this place which was within the Scotish Territories The third Citation shall be from Seneca and is a clear testimony for us in the judgment of the great Scaliger Ille Britannos ultra noti littora ponti Et caeruleos Scoto-Brigantes dare Romuleis Colla catenis jussit ipsum nova Romanae Iura securis tremere oceanum To which Cambden answers That for Scoto-Brigantes we should read Scuta-Brigantes But this is very ridiculous for we read that the Picts were call'd Picti for painting their Bodies but never for painting their Shields I know likewise that Hadrianus Iunius reads Cute-Brigantes but this would be ill verse for the first syllable in Cute is by it's own nature short but according to this reading it would be long I might to this add that Answer made by Florus the Poet to Adrian in Spartianus Ego nolo Caesar esse Ambulare per Britannos Scoticas pati pruinas For why should we read Scythicas since Adrian was never in Scythia but did fight against the Scots and caus'd make the vallum Adriani 2. Why should not rather Scotia than Scythia be joyn'd to Britannia as Vsher argues most justly upon the like occasion 3. the Pruinae Scoticae were famous about that time for Claudian hath Ille Caledoniis posuit qui castra pruinis And Claudian does so expresly and so frequently speak of the Scots as setled here and describes them to be those People who constantly fought against the Romans with the Picts that the citing him against us may convince the Reader that our Adversaries are not serious Which will appear when I have cited and illustrated him In his Panegyrick upon the third consulat of Honorius he complements him upon the victory of his Gandfather Theodosius who behov'd to come into Britain long before the Year 382 wherein Theodosius his Father was chosen Emperour Facta tui numerabat avi quem littus adusti Horrescit Lybii ratibusque impervia Thule Ille leves Mauros nec falso nomine Pictos Edomuit Scotumque vago mucrone secutus Fregit hyperboreas remis audacibus undas And in the fourth Consulat of the same Honorius Ille Caledoniis posuit qui castra pruinis maduerunt Saxone fuso Orcades incaluit Pictorum sanguine Thule Scotorū cumulos flevit glacialis Ierne And de bello Getico he speaks of the Roman Legion that return'd from fighting with the Picts and us of which Beda makes express mention Venit extremis legio praetenta Britannis Quae Scoto dat fraena truci ferroque notatas Perlegit exanimes Picto moriente figuras That all this is applicable to us is clear because 1. We had War with the Romans and the Irish had not And all these Verses in Claudian are spoke to magnify the Roman man Conquest 2. Since we have prov'd by other Authors that the Scots were setled here it is proper and suitable to common sense to apply the same to us only as being the only Persons concern'd in those Battels and to the Isle in which it is known that the same were fought And these Passages are attributed to us by Selden l. 2. c. 8. Mar. Claus. 3. Have the Irish made any mention of this War in any of their Histories and consequently though Scotia had been a common Name to Scotland and Ireland in those days yet the Circumstances of the Action related by the Poet determine which of the two is here meant This is yet further clear from the Panegyrick of Sidonius Appollinaris Victricia Caesar Signa Caledonios transvexit adusque Britannos Fuderit quamquam Scotum cum Saxone Pictum As to which all that cambden much better acquainted with citing than reasoning can answer is 1. That the Poet here wrote a Complement according to the vulgar Opinion of his own Times which cannot be true as he says because the Saxons were not then come to Britain But he should have considered that 1. If this was the Opinion in Sidonius's Age who liv'd Anno 480 as Gesner affirms which was very near to Claudian's Time who liv'd in 497 as the Bishop of St. Asaph calculates we must conclude that it is the rather to be believ'd that then the Scots liv'd here for that is not inconsistent with History as the other is and so should be believ'd though the other be not 2. There were Saxons living then in Zetland or Orknes tho they were not setled in Britain as is clear by Claudian himself who says Maduerunt Saxone fuso Orcades And whereas it is said that Flevit glacialis Ierne Does make the same applicable to Ireland since Ierna is call'd Ireland To this it is answered that 1. It is clear that there is a Country in Scotland call'd Ierna near to which the Romans
Apology against Edward the first of England about the Year 1300 we assert the Tradition of a wonderful Victory obtain'd by our King Hungus against the Saxons by the Relicts of St. Andrew the Apostle by virtue whereof the Scots first receiv'd the Faith of Christ. To which it is shortly answer'd that every Contradiction does not overturn the Truth of a whole History otherwise we need not be troubled to give any other answer to the Bishop's own Book nor is this pretended to be a Contradiction amongst our Historians for they all agree that King Donald was our first Christian King but in that Apology which is alledg'd to contradict our Histories our Predecessors design'd as most Pleaders do and this Eloquent Author does in his Book to gain their Point at any rate For understanding whereof it is fit to know that King Edward the first having upon the Competition betwixt Bruce and Baliol interpos'd with design to make himself Lord Paramount of Scotland he caus'd his Parliament write to the Pope to whom afterwards he wrote himself in which Letter of his it is pretended that we were Vassals to England as descended from Albanactus the second Son to Brutus 2. Because several of our Kings had become Vassals to his Predecessors in the Times of the British Saxon and Norman Kings To which we answer in our Apology That without debating whether the first Inhabitants of the Isle were descended from Albanactus or his Albanians it is asserted that we came from Spain by Ireland and conquer'd the first Inhabitans for which we cite Beda and so tho they had been Vassals we were free not being lyable to the Conditions of the People we conquer'd and as such fought constantly against the Britons who were forc'd to build Severus's Wall against us And as to any homage made by our Kings it was either for the Three Northen Countries of Cumberland Westmoreland and Northumberland confirm'd to us by the Britons to defend them against the Saxons and thereafter again confirm'd by both Saxons and Britons to assist them against the Danes Or was extorted by force from one or two young Captive Kings upon which heads the Popes had declar'd us free which Bulls Edward himself had robb'd unjustly out of our Treasure with other Records which he could not deny but to cajole the Pope their Judg they insinuate that though they were not Tributaries to his Holiness as England was yet they ought to be protected by the Pope because they had been converted by St. Andrew his Predecessors Brother-german St. Andrew having in Hungus's reign obtain'd for them a Victory over the Saxons and so became subject and subservient to the Pope in having converted the Saxons by Aidan Finan and Colman From this Matter of Fact I observe 1. That we own'd the same origination there that our Historians do to this day and so our Ancestors differ'd not from our Historians much less are they irreconcilable as St. Asaph alleadges 2. That the English acknowledg'd us to be as ancient as the Britons they and we being descended from two Brothers 3. That what we said of St. Andrew must needs be upon design to have oblidg'd the Pope meaning certainly either that we were then first effectually converted to the Church of Rome from the Oriental Observations in which we were very long very obstinate and that Rome consider'd that as the true Conversion or that after that time we first became subject tho not feudatary to the Pope as these forecited words subjoyn'd do insinuate But that our conversion from Paganism was more than 400 Years before the Saxons is positively asserted in that same Apology Nor can this have another meaning for it is undeniable that we were Christians long before the reign of Hungus who reign'd 800 Years after Christ and Colman c. liv'd long before that King Nor was Hungus our King we being only Auxiliaries to him then as King of the Picts after which Apology King Robert the 1st being crown'd and having defeated King Edward at Banock-burn where he gain'd a most signal Victory over the English they then being low made application to the Pope and he having discharg'd us by a formal Interdiction to pursue the Victory into England the Nobility to pacify that Pope and to remove the Interdiction at the desire of the King wrote Letter wherein they own the Antiquity of our Nation and Religion and Royal-Line mentioning when we came from Spain as our Historians do with whom they agree exactly Vt ex antiquorum gestis libris collegimus says the Letter which being prior to Fordon proves that all this was not Fordon's Dream and that our History is well founded on old Records prior to Fordon And lastly it appears that our Kings were not Vassals to England for their Crown but only for these Provinces as my Lord St. Asaph confesses and as I have prov'd in my Treatise of Precedency albeit our Independency was as much controverted of old as our Antiquity is now and I hope that the one will shortly appear as unjust a Pretence as the other is already confest to be From this it appears that there is rather a Harmony than real Contradiction here and that any seeming Contradiction is far less than the real ones betwixt Beda and the Bishop of St. Asaph and the following Contradictions wherein he differs from himself For clearing whereof observe That the Bishop says he questions not the truth of any thing that is said to have been within 800 nay within 1400 Years but so it is that this would bring us to be setled here before the Year 300 after Christ for substract 1400 out of 1684 which is the Year in which the Bishop prints his Book his Lordship can controvert nothing except what was done within 284 Years after Christ And yet he decryes our Historians for saying that we were settl'd here before the Year 503 and denies our being Christians for many Years after the Year 300 and to improve this learn'd Bishop's just Concession I must remark that all our Historians agree that Gregory the great King of Scotland who died Anno 892 added Northumberland to the Merse and having defeated the Britons at Lochmaben he forc'd them to renew their ancient League and to confirm to him the former Right his Predecessors got from them to Cumberland and Westmorland for assisting them against the Picts and Saxons which shews also what great things we could do not only alone without but even against the Picts All which being said by our Historians not only within the 1400 Years but the 800 are not controvertible by the Bishop's concession and therefore I understand not why he asserts that we had nothing but the Kingdom of Argyle before the beating and extirpating of the Picts who gave us their possession beyond Drumalbain Nor can I reconcile how the Bishop asserts all alongst and particularly that the Picts had nothing besouth Grahams-dyke or the
is That no Author mentions our Country by the name of Scotia for the first 1000 years whereas most of all the former Authors both within and without the Isle prove Scotia to have been the name of our Country and the whole Tract of Beda's History proves that since the year 560 this Country was generally so called Whereas neither Gildas nor Beda who lived near that Time and wrote whole Books of us do once call it Dalrieda or Argyle and consequently as I observ'd before the Bishop of St. Asaph's whole Sect. 9. of the first Chapter wherein he asserts that about the Year 500 the Scots erected the Kingdom of Argile or Dalrieda is most unwarrantable for though Beda calls us once Dalreudini yet this is spoken of us by him in the Time of our King Reuda and so near 70 Years before the 503 after Christ. And from this also arises a clear confutation of what the Bishop of St. Asaph asserts that no Author writing within the 1000 Years and naming Scotia means Us which is so far from being so that no Author of Credit Isidore only excepted did then by Scotia mean Ireland And the best Authority that Arch-bishop Vsher gives us for Dalrieda is Iocelin which my Lord St. Asaph hath improved by a new authority out of a Manuscript of the Lord Burghlie's where the Author thinks that Dalrieda and the Kingdom of Argile are the same Authors not to be once mentioned with those whom we cite 7. The distinction of Scotia Major and Minor is lately invented for either Ireland was called Scotia Major before the Year 1000 or only since if the first then it necessarily implyeth that at that Time our Country was also call'd Scotia Minor there being no other place assignable But this is contrary to Arch-bishop Vsher and my Lord St. Asaph's Position who deny our Country was called Scotia at all for the first 1000 Years If it be asserted that this distinction was after the 1000 Years then there was little or no use for it For Vsher tells us that Nubiensis Geographus about the Year 1150 describes Ireland by the name of Hibernia and describes our Country by the name of Scotia and so it seems at that time Ireland had lost the name in our favour and it is not to be imagin'd that Nubiensis remarked the first Periods of the change of the Name and Geographers do describe Countries by their ordinary Names Nor does Vsher produce any other Testimony save a Letter of Dovenaldus Oneil Prince of Vlster to Pope Iohn 22d wherein there is this passage Beside the Kings of lesser Scotland who all came originally from our greater Scotland And a Patent of Sigismund the Emperor To the Convent of the Scots and Irish of Greater Scotland of a Monastery in Ratisbone Now Vsher acknowledgeth the eldest of these two Citations were in the 14th or 15th Century when I hope no body will assert that Ireland was called Scotia Major or that ever the Kings of England who were Lords of Ireland were ever called Lords Majoris Scotiae and it is probable they would have very much affected that Title if the Country had had that name altho they could never make themselves Masters Scotiae Minoris But it is no wonder that the Irish should be glad to tell Foreigners that they were our Chief and so their Country ought to be called Scotia Major notwithstanding that our Nation was then become great and glorious and that Vsher can find no better authority for his distinction of Scotia Major and Minor than these borrowed and magnifying Names used long after he himself acknowledgeth that Ireland had lost the name of Scotia and that We were only in possession of it 8. The mistaking of the Names of Scotia and Hibernia and of that assertion Scotia eadem Hibernia and applying these Names still to Ireland and not to our Country hath been the Ground whereupon we have been injured as to the antiquity of our Kings and Country Saints and learned Men Monasteries and greatness Abroad For admitting it to be true that we were not setled here till the Year 500 yet we have been so happy as to have such excellent Men and to have done so considerable Actions as have been sufficient to tempt our Neighbours and particularly the Irish to take great pains to have both pass for their own In order to which the Irish have lately invented the distinction of Scotia Major and Minor to the end that when any considerable Person is called a Scots-man in History they might claim him as descended from the Greater Scotland But besides that this distinction is too new to be extended to ancient Writers How can it be imagined that our Country only having passed under the Name of Scotland before the 300 and after the 1100 as has been proved Ireland should have assumed the Name of Scotland in that Interval Is it not more reasonable to think that our Country which alone was design'd by that Name before the 300 and after 1100 bore it likewise only or at least chiefly during that interval But to assert that during that space another Country had our old and present designation in a more peculiar manner than we and that in dubious Cases it must be appropriated to them is a piece of confidence which even eminent Wit and Learning cannot support And yet we find in Malcom the Second's Time as was formerly observ'd who began to Reign in the Year 1004 That the Frith of Forth in his Laws in the Book of Regiam Majestatem is call'd Mare Scotiae And it is said there that the same King did distribute omnem Terram Scotiae hominibus suis and it is not to be concluded that this was the first time that our Country was so call'd And about that time Ireland was expressed only by the name of Hibernia for King Henry the 2d of England who began to Reign in the Year 1154 is stiled Lord of Ireland And to clear further that Scotia about those times was the ordinary name for Scotland and Hebernia for Ireland I shall only add some few Passages out of Marianus Scotus who was born in the Year 1028 and died in the Year 1086 who sayes that about the Year 1016 Brianus King of Ireland was killed and a little thereafter at the Year 1034. Malcolm King of Scotland died and Duncan the Son of his Daughter succeeded him And after that he sayes at the Year 1040 Duncan King of Scotland was killed and the son of Finlay succeeded in his Kingdom whom afterward he calls Machetad King of Scotland All which passages agree exactly with our History and the summary of our Kings Lives as they are recorded in our Acts of Parliament and prove that Marianus treats of Scotland and Ireland as different Kingdoms in his Time In the last place I shall make some Remarks upon the most palpable of these Mistakes and of the chief Authors
thereof wherein I shall vindicate the Right and Dignity of our Country and assert these worthy Persons controverted to be ours I shall not insist much against Stanihurst he being solidly confuted by Camerarius and with that severity by Dempster that his Nephew Bishop Vsher as the Duke of Lauderdail remarked in some Judicious Reflections of his upon this occasion did highly resent it and in this Matter hath exceeded his usual Temperament and Moderation And yet Stanihurst never speaks injuriously of our Nation for though he mistakes many things and applys them to his own Country yet it appears to be rather of Design to magnifie it than injure ours for he acknowledeth ingenuously That he doth not clearly see from what time the Name of Scotland commenced And though thereafter he taxeth Boethius upon the Subject of Gathelus and Scota and that he mixeth Fables and Vain glory with his History yet he neither disapproves of Buchannan nor follows he Luddus both of whom he cites and who were immediatly before him his Book being printed at Antwerp in the Year 1584. In his Appendix also Commenting upon Giraldus Cambrensis a Welsh-man and Scretary to King Henry 2d of England and flourished before the end of the 12th Century He translates Cambrensis who describes Ireland by the name of Hibernia and makes frequent mention of our Country under the name of Scotia as when he speaks of the extent of Ireland he says as Stanihurst interprets it that it is equal in largeness to Wales and Scotland And elsewhere he says that Scotland is called the North part of the Isle of Britain And afterwards he tells the Story of Moreds six Sons and that from them the Inhabitants of the North part of Britain by a specifick word were called the Scotish Nation And Stanihurst in his Annotations on these two Chapters contends that before St. Patrick's time our Country was called Scotia and brings for proofs St. Ierome who asserts that the Scots were Gens Britannica but with great concern he vindicates us from the calumny of eating Mens Flesh and for our Antiquity he cites Beda who says that Sub duce Rendâ we made a third Nation in Britain So that we see that neither the Welsh in Giraldus's time nor the Irish in Stanihurst's time had the Opinion of our late Settlement and that our Country was not call'd Scotia for 1000 Years after Christ which their Successors Luddus Cambden Vsher and St. Asaph have had And the Irish in those days took a far better way for advancing their own interest in doing us justice since from all the considerable Actions we did there did arise a measure of that Honour to them from whose Country we came as a Colony Whereas since they were influenc'd by Strangers they have suffer'd themselves to be impos'd upon so as to lessen our true Merit in appropriating immediatly to themselves those devout persons who were really our Country-men not considering that the material unjustice was much greater than the imaginary honour And this Plagiarism and Man-stealing became easie to them since our Reformation from Popery because after that time we became too careless of those eminent Persons both at home and abroad who had liv'd in the Roman Communion or before that time But I will not insist on this for I hope their native kindness will incline them to return to their first just methods If I had leisure I would make larger Reflections to prove how unconsequential Arch Bp Vsher is in making Sedulus and Marianus Irish since by all Writers they are both call'd Scots and Balaeus an Englishman tells us that Sedulius flourish'd under Fergus 2d and Marianus under Macbeth both our Kings and Baronius asserts also this positively And Sedulius having liv'd before St. Patrick's Time who was the first Apostle of Ireland and being Disciple to Hildebert an acknowledg'd Scot and who liv'd in the 390 must be prior to the Irish Christianity which Giraldus and Stanihurst acknowledge to have been first planted by St. Patrick in the Year 432. Nor can Vsher in all his vast reading find any Christians in Ireland betwixt the Year 400 and 432 which was St. Patrick's Time but Kiaranus Ailbeus Declanus Ibarus Tho if Sedulius had been an Irish he had been certainly mention'd and employ'd before those obscure Persons and certainly he would have employed himself before St. Patrick's Time in the Conversion of his own native Country if he had been truly Irish. And as to Marianus Scotus it is a wonder how it can be controverted that he was a Scots-man since our Country was then called Scotland by the Bp of St. Asaph's own confession and Ireland was just then losing that name and Marianus in his whole Book distinguishes betwixt Scoti and Hiberni and mentions the forementioned three Kings of Scotland about whose Time he liv'd and also makes mention of one King of Ireland about that time as has been observed already and particularly speaking of the Conversions by Palladius and St. Patrick he expresly distinguishes betwixt Scoti and Hibernenses But passing these I confess it is pretty ridiculous to see a whole Book written by the above-mentioned Vardaeus and glossed by Sirin and published at Louvain 1662 to prove that Rumoldus Arch-Bishop of Mechlin was an Irish-man since the Arms of Scotland which are Or a Lion Rampant Gules within a doubles Tressure flowred and counterflowred with Flower de lis of the same are plac'd upon every Window of the Catherdral Church built by him and are to this day a part of the Arms of that Archi-Episcopal See Rumoldus himself being a younger Brother of the Royal-Family of Scotland And in which witty Book the Author to confute this is forced to maintain that the Scotish Lion is born by several Irish Familes And the double Tressure tho anciently born by Scotland and which is Blazon'd in that Archi-Episcopal Coat of Arms might have been born by the Irish because that famous League betwixt the Scots and Charlemaigne was made with the Kings of Ireland and not with the Kings of Scotland and that our Kings had never any Leagues with the French till the reign of Charles 7th who was contemporary with our King Iames 1st Whereas the whole French Histories as well as ours and all Foreign Historians as well as either the Leagues yet extant the Priviledges granted thereupon to us recorded in the French Registers and ours many Decisions in Parliaments and other Courts and the universal consent of all the French who ever liv'd since that Time do in all Humility seem to be sufficient Warrants for laughing at this monstruous Assertion as I do at him and others who pretend that the Scotish Monasteries in Germany are Irish since they were founded in Charle-Maigne's Time by William Brother to our King Achaius and others that went there with him and they are to this day govern'd by Abbots and Priors of our Country Nor can it
in the transition from that 2d to the 3d Chapter tells after that he had spoke of the Scots Dominion of their own Sea that he will treat of the succeeding Ages and so proceeds to the Saxons which demonstrates that we were setled here before the Saxons though my Lord St. Asaph makes their settlement here more ancient than ours And in this Beda agrees with Selden but both contradict the Bishop And lastly this passage clears that the Testimonies not only of Claudian concerning Ierna but even of Tertullian when speaking of the Inhabitants of Britain not conquer'd by the Romans and of Ierom speaking of the Britannick Nations are only applicable to us And therefore I hope my Lord St. Asaph will not take it ill if we in a Matter of Antiquity prefer an impartial Antiquary to an interested Divine as I would not be offended if the Bishop of St. Asaph were preferr'd to me in a Theological Controversy The first general Objection against our Histories is that they were not written by those who lived in the Time but more than 1400 Years after the things happened of which they wrote And it were strange that if Gildâ—s who liv'd 500 Years before the eldest of them could find no sufficient Instructions save from Foreigners that our Historians should have found sufficient Warrants for a History after so long a time To which my Answer is That our Histories giving only an account of one Nation it was easier to find the true and sincere Tradition as to us than it was in other Nations where the Conquerors were not concern'd to preserve the Traditions and Records and though I have made it very probable that this Isle had the use of Letters before or at least soon after we settl'd in it and so might have preserv'd the Story Yet albeit our History were only founded on Tradition until about 600 Years after Christ before which the Monastery of Iona or Icolm-kill was founded that Tradition might have been sufficiently preserv'd for so few Generations by the means and methods that I have formerly condescended upon Nor can I see how the Origin of a Nation could not have been preserv'd by those who were of it or how being established it could have vanished when People became more polite and curious And after the Year 600 I have prov'd that our Historians might have been and were sufficiently warranted in what they have said by old Manuscripts and Records nor is there any thing urg'd in this Objection against us but what might as unanswerably be urg'd against the Greek and Latin Historians A receiv'd History cannot be overturn'd from what I have formerly represented without Arguments which necessarily conclude that the History impugn'd must be false which cannot be alledg'd here where the Warrants of the History controverted not only might have been but probably were true and are so far from contradicting other Histories that they are confirm'd by them I desire also to know what old Manuscripts and Records Luddus the Antiquary so far preferr'd to ours had for proving that much elder Succession of History from Brutus to his own Time And whereas St. Asaph says that Buchannan should not have tax'd Luddus for deriving the Britons from Brutus since he own'd a Succession of our Kings from Fergus there being as few Documents to support the one as the other To this my Answer is That there have been very solid grounds brought for sustaining the one which cannot be alledg'd for the other and ours are adminiculated by the Roman History whereas theirs is inconsistent with it for it is palpably inconsistent with the Roman History to say that Brutus was the Son of Ascanius whom he kill'd for which being banish'd from Italy he came over to Britain and that Britain was govern'd by Consuls which should rather be laugh'd at than confuted The Bishop is most unjust to us in asserting that we have no Author of our own before Fordon and that no Author mentions our Antiquity but such as have follow'd Fordon who wrote about 300 Years ago For Fordon cites his Vouchers many of which are extant and those who are lost are prov'd to have been extant Within the Isle we could have no Authors till there were Writers and Gildas and Beda the eldest in the Isle prove our Antiquity Without the Isle none could know us being so remote but either by the Wars they had with us or the Christianity that was common to them and us As to our Wars all the Roman Authors above-related speak of us Orosius about the Year 417. Claudian 397. Ammianus before the Year 360. Beda and Eumenius speak of us as before Iulius Caesar as hath been prov'd All which we have collaterally supported by a gradation of Ecclesiastick Historians abroad and all our own Historians at home Beda brings us to Reutherus who was the 6th King from Fergus the first and he living within 150 Years of Fergus this short step may be trusted to Tradition though we had wanted the help of the Druids and Phaenician Letters for a Father might have inform'd his Son of so near a Time nor was this worthy of a fiction And I may modestly say of the foregoing Citations from forraign Authors that if they be not strong enough to overturn the Bishop's Hypothesis yet they are at least as strong as those produc'd by Iosephus in defence of the Jewish History and yet all the learn'd World has acquiesc'd in them Nor is there any thing to be concluded from the silence of Adamnanus and Marianus the eldest of our Historians though as the Bishop alleadges they had certainly mention'd our Antiquitiy if they had known it For Adamnanus wrote no History save of Columba and Marianus going to Germany when he was very young could know little of us and mentions only the three Kings of Scotland in whose time he liv'd and so if this Argument prov'd any thing it would prove too much For certainly we had Kings before those three whom he mentions and these negative Arguments are of no moment in Matters of History and are justly reprobated by the learned Scaliger in his Notes on Eusebius and by Vossius The second Objection is That our Historians contradict one another concerning the Origin of the Picts which ought to lessen their credit But to this it is answered That our Historians were not concern'd to consider the Origin of the Picts as they were to consider their own And this Objection subsumes not what is true in Matter of Fact For our Historians generally agree in the Origin of the Picts whom all of them make to be Scythians and though Fordon relates three different accounts of them yet he does not settle upon any thing that is different from our other Historians as is fully to be seen The third Objection is That our Historians are contradicted by our own Antecessors for our Historians assert that King Donald the first was our first Christian King whereas in our