Selected quad for the lemma: king_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
king_n	daughter_n	duke_n	marry_v	22,419	5	8.8071	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A33624	Argumentum anti-normannicum, or, An argument proving, from ancient histories and records, that William, Duke of Normandy, made no absolute conquest of England by the Sword, in the sense of our modern writers being an answer to these four questions, viz. I. Whether William the First made an absolute conquest of this nation at his first entrance?, II. Whether he cancelled and abolished all the confessor's laws?, III. Whether he divided all our estates and fortunes between himself and his nobles?, IV. Whether it be not a grand error to affirm, that there were no English-men in the Common Council of the whole Kingdom?	Atwood, William, d. 1705?; Johnson, Samuel, 1649-1703.; Coke, Edward, Sir, 1552-1634.; Petyt, William, 1636-1707.; Cooke, Edward, of the Middle Temple.	1682 (1682)	Wing C4907; ESTC R1971	61,200	184

hither either out of Normandy or any other part of Fran●e but are our Ancient Native Law● I must now come to indeavour also to satisfy the Wonder If they were not brought out of Normandy or some other part of France how come they then to be written in the French Language Sir It is to me an Argument That because they are written in French therefore they were not brought in by Duke William the Norman for the French Tongue was not the Language of Duke William and the Normans They had not been then in Duke William's Time past four descents in that part of France and it is improbable that they in so short a Time should lose their Native Tongue and take up and use the Language of another Countrey which was conquered by them The Normans came from Sweden Gothland Norway and Denmark between whose Languages and with the High-Dutch their Neighbours there is a great affinity but between these Languag● and the French there is none at al. Vlphilus holds that the Dutch Tongue came from the Goths Iornandus saith The Goth's Tongue came from the Dutch All agree That between those Languages and the French there is no affinity It is so improbable that Duke William should cause our Laws to be in French that when he proclaimed them as Ingulphus testifies he commanded that they should be used in the same Language they were written in English to his Justices and gives the Reason Lest by Ignonorance we should happen to break them But it hath been further objected If Duke William did not cause our Laws to be written in French what then should be the Reason that the Grand Custumary of his Norman Laws were written in the French Tongue The Reason thereof is given That the Normans being a Rough and Martial People had few Clerks amongst them but made use of those French amongst whom they then lived and whose Language they then began to be acquainted with and to understand But when they were in England they had not so much use of those Clerks and that Language but more of the English And probably it might be that the Confessor had been so long in France that he was more Master of that Language than the Normans and that the Normans understood that Language better than the English and thereupon the Custumary was written in the French Tongue But it doth not therefore follow that Duke William must cause the English Laws to be written in the French Tongue but it is more likely that he might cause them to be continued in their Native Idiom which was much nearer in affinity to his own Northern Language than the French was That the French Tongue was not introduced as to our Laws and other things by Duke William into England appears in that the French was in great use with us here both before and some-time after his Invasion Beda affirms That in Anno 640 it was the Custom of England to send their Daughters into the Monasteries of France to be brought up there and that Ethelbert Ethelwulf Ethelred and other Saxon Kings married into the Royal Blood of France G●●bor notes That before the Time of Duke William the Normans and English did so link together that they were a Terror to Forreign Nations Ingulphus saith That the Saxon Hand was used until the Time of King Alfred long before the Time of Duke William and that he being brought up by French Teachers used the French Hand And he notes many Charters of Edward and Edgar written in the French Hand and some Saxon mixt with it as in the Book of Dooms-day That Edward the Confesso● by reason of his long being in France was turned into the French Fashion and all England with him But that William the first commanded our Laws to be written in the English Tongue because most Men understood it and that there be many of his Patents in the Saxon Tongue I suppose we may be satisfied that William the first did not cause our Laws to be written in French though the French Language was much in use here before his Time And if he did not introduce the French Language into England the Argument falls That because they are written in French therefore he brought them in But Sir I shall offer you some Conjectures how it came that our Laws were Written in French which I suppose might be begun in the Time of our K. Hen. 2. who was a Frenchman born and had large Territories and Relations in France and with French-men of whom great Numbers came into England and they and the English matched and lived together both here and in some parts of France Hence it came to pass as Giraldus Cambrensis notes that the English Tongue was in great use in Burdeaux and in other parts of France where the English-men were resident and conversant the like was when the French-men were so conversant in England Mathew Westminster writes That he was in hazard of losing his Living because he understood not the French Tongue and that in King Hen. 2. and King Stephen's Time who had large Dominions in France their Native Country and the Number of French and of Matches with them was so great that one could hardly know who was French and who English Gervasius Tilsberiensis observes the same And Brackland writes That in Rich. 1. Time preaching in England was in the French Tongue Probably Pleading might be so likewise and in King Iohn's Time French was accounted as the Mother Tongue There are scarce any Deeds of our Kings in French before Hen. 2. his Time the most are in Ed. 1. and Ed. 2. their Time That our Laws were pleaded and written in French before Edw. 3. his Time appears by the Stat. 36. Edw. 3. c. 15. which recites the Mischief of the Law being in French and enacts That the Law shall thereafter be pleaded in English and enrolled in Latin This is one ground of the mistaken Opinion of Lambard Polydore Speed and others That Duke William brought in hither both the Norman Laws and Language which I apprehend to be fully answered and the contrary manifested by what I have said before on this Subject Polydore's Mistake may appear the more when he asserts that by the Stat. 36. Edw. 3. Matters are to be enrolled in English which is contrary to the express Words that they are to be enrolled in Latin Many of our Law-Books were written in Latin before the Norman Invasion as appears by the Ancient Rolls of Mannors and Court Barons and our Old Authors Glanvill Bracton Tilsbury Hengham Fleta the Register and the Book of Entries The Records at Westminster and the Tower and other Records yet extant are in Latin and many Books of our Law in Latin were translated into English about Edw. 3. his Time Most of our Statutes from Edw. 1. his Time till about the middle of Hen. 7. his Reign are enrolled in French notwithstanding this Stat. 36. Edw. 3. except the Stat. 6. R. 2. some others

or Distress and in the same sence are used in the Custumary That which puts it further out of scruple is That there are yet extant the Manuscripts themselves of the Saxon Laws made in the Parliamentary Councils held by them here which are in the Language and Character of those Times and contain in them many of those things which are in the Norman Custumary It is no improbable Opinion That there was a former Establishment of our Laws in Normandy before the Time of Hen. 1. and that it was by Edward the Confessor who as all Writers of our History agree was a great Collector and Compiler of our English Laws He lived a long time with his Kinsman Duke William in Normandy who was willing to please the Confessor in hopes to be appointed by him to be his Suc●essor wherein the Duke's Expectation did not fail him The Confessor having no Children and finding Normandy without a setled Government and wanting Laws advised with his Kinsman Duke William to receive from him the Laws of England which he had collected and to establish them in Normandy which Duke William and his Lords readily accepted for the good of their People and thereby obliged the Confessor Another proof hereof is That such Laws as the Normans had before the Time of Duke William were different from those in the Custumary and from the English Laws As their Law That the Husband should be hanged if his Wife were a Thief and he did not discover it The meaner People were as Slaves and the like and the Trial of Theft by Ordeil which then was not in England Wigorniensis reports That the Normans who came in with Queen Emma the Wife of Etheired were so hated of the English for their injustice and false Iudgment that in the Time of King Canutus they were for this cause banished and it is the less probable that they being so unjust themselves should introduce so just Laws as ours are Between the Conquest of Normandy by Rolio and the Invasion of England by Duke William there were not above 160 Years that of Normandy was about Anno 912. that of England Anno 1060. It is not then consonant to Reason that those Normans Pagans a rough Martial People descended from so many Barbarous Nations should in the time of 150 Years establish such excellent Laws among themselves and so different from the French Laws among whom they were and all parts in the World except England And such Laws which were not only fit for their Dukedom and small Territory but fit also for this Kingdom which in those days was the second in Europe for Antiquity and Worth by confession of most Forreign Historians If we will give credit to their own Authors this Point will be sufficiently evinced by them These words are in the Proem of the Custumary which is entituled Descriptio Normanniae Hucusque Normannicae CONSVETVDINES LATOREM sive Datorem SANCTVM EDWARDVM Angliae Regem c. The same is witnessed by Chronica Chronicorum That St. Edward King of England gave the Laws to the Normans when he was long harboured there And that he made both the Laws of England and Normandy appears sufficiently by the conformity of them for which he cites several Particulars as of Appeals and the Custom of England ad probandum aliquid per credentiam duodecim hominum vicinorum which he saith remained in Normandy to that day Polydore forgetting himself what he wrote in another place saith of King Henry the Seventh that when a Doubt was made upon the Proposal of Marriage of his Daughter to Scotland that thereby England might in time be subject unto Scotland The King answered No and that England as the Greater will draw it to Scotland being the less and incorporate it to the Laws of England as saith the Historian it did Normandy though the owner thereof was Conqueror of England And Sir Roger Owen in his Manuscript affirms That there is not any of our Historians that lived in the space of 200 Years immediately after the Conquest which doth describe our Laws to be taken away and the Norman Custom introduced by the Conqueror Some of them and not improbably mention the alteration of some part of them and the bringing in some Norman Customs effectual for the keeping of the Peace There is yet behind the great Argument most insisted on and often urged by the Gentlemen of another Opinion which is the Title of William who is called the Conqueror from whence they conclude That by his Conquest he changed the Laws and Government of this Nation and that his Successors reckon the beginning of their Reigns from his Conquest To this is answered That a posse ad esse non valet Argumentum the Conquering of the Land is one thing the introducing of new Laws is another thing but there is direct proof to the contrary of this Argument Duke William never Sir-named himself the Conqueror nor was so called in his life-time as may appear by all the Letters Pattents and Deeds that he made wherein he is called Guilielmus Rex Dux c. never Conquestor and our Ancient Historians give him the same Titles and not that of Conqueror In the Title of Nubrigensis's Book he is Sirnamed William the Bastard Malmsbury calls him William the First Hoveden William the Elder Adam de Monmoth saith That 1. Ed. 3. this word Conquest was found out to denote and distinguish the certain Edward because two of the same name were Predecessors to this King and to the Conqueror who claimed the Crown as Heir to Edward the Confessor but saith he we call him the Conqueror for that he overcame Harold Duke William himself claimed to be King of England as Successor and Adopted Heir of the Confessor by his Will and Harold's renounceing of his Title by Oath The Register of St. Albans Matth. Paris and others attest That the Barons of England did homage to him as Successor and he relied on them in his Forreign Wars and the Check given to him by the Kentish Men and the Forces gathered by the Abbot of St. Albans brought him to engage to confirm the Laws of the Confessor and as his Successor by legal Right they admitted him to be their King Volaterus writes That he was made Heir to the Confessor and was Vncle to him Another affirms That Edward by his Will left England to him Paulus AEmilius and Fulgasius are to the same purpose Pope Alexander the 11 th sent him a Banner as Witness that with a safe Conscience he might expel Harold the Tyrant because the Crown was due to him by the Confessors Will and by Harold's Oath Agreeable hereunto are Gemiticensis Walsingham Malmesbury Huntington Ingulphus Paris Pike Wendover Gaxton Gisburn and others The Antient Deeds of the Abby of Westminster which were sometime in my Custody do prove this King William in his Charter to them sets forth his own Title to the Crown thus Beneficio Concessionis Cognati mei gloriosi