handle her tytle to the crowne of Ingland and the third dyd answer the booke of Ihon Knox the Scott intituled against the monstruous gouerment of women Of al vvhich three pointes for that the second that conserneth the tytle is that vvhich properly appertayneth to out purpose and for that the same is handled agayne and more largely in the second booke set out not longe after by Ihon lesley lord bishope of Rosse in Scotland vvho at that tyme was Embassador for the saide Queene of Scottes in Ingland and handled the same matter more abundantly vvhich M. Morgan had donne before hym I shal saye no more of this booke of M. Morgan but shal passe ouer to that of the bishope vvhich in this point of succession conteyneth also vvhat soeuer the other hath so as by declaring the contentes of the one vve shal come also to see vvhat is in the other The intent then of this book of the bishope of Rosse is to refute the other booke of Hales and Bacon and that especially in the two points before mentioned which they alleaged for their principles to witt about forrayne birth and king Henries testament And against the first of these two pointes the bishop alleageth many proofes that ther is no such maxima in the cōmon lawes of Ingland to disherit a prince borne out of the land from his or her right of succession that they haue by blood And this first for that the statute made for barring of alliens to inherit in Ingland vvhich was in the 25. yeare of the reigne of king Edward the third is only to be vnderstood of particuler mens inheritance and no wayes to be extended to the succession of the crowne as by comparison of many other like cases is declared and secondly for that ther is expresse exception in the same statute of the kings children and of spring and thirdly for that the practise hath alwayes bin contrary both before and after the conquest to vvit that diuers princes borne out of the realme haue succeded The other principle also concerning king Henryes testament the bishop impugneth first by diuers reasons incongruities vvherby it may be presumed that king Henry neuer made any such testament and if he did yet could it not hold in law And secondly also by vvitnes of the Lord Paget that was of the priuy councel in those dayes of Sir Edward Montague lord chiefe iustice and of one VVilliam Clark that set the kings stamp to the writing al which anowed before the councel and parlament in Queene Maryes tyme that the said testament vvas signed after the king vvas past sense and memory And finally the said bishop concludeth that the line of Scotland is the next euery way both in respect of the house of Lancaster and also of York for that they are next heyres to K. Henry the eight who by his father was heyre to the house of Lancaster and by his mother to the house of york But after these three bookes was vvritten a fourth by one Robart Highinton secretary in tyme past to the Earle of Northumberland a man wel read in storyes and especially of our coūtrey who is said to be dead some yeares past in Paris This man impugneth al three formet bookes in diuers principal points and draweth the crowne from both their pretendors I meane as wel from the house of Scotland as from that of Suffolk and first against the booke of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon writen as hath bin said in fauour of the house of Suffolk Heghington holdeth with the Bishop and Morgan that thes two principles layd by the other of forayne birth and of king Henries restament against the Scotish line are of no Validity as nether ther reasons for legitrimating of the Earle of Hartfords children vvhich afterward shal be handled And secondly he is against bothe Morgan the Bishop of Rosse also in diuers important points and in the very principal of al for that this man I meane Highington maketh the king of Spayne to be the next and most righful pretender by the house of Lancaster for proofe vvherof he holdeth first that king Henry the 7. had no title in deede to the crowne by Lācaster but only by the house of York that is to saye by his marriage of Queene Elizabeth elder daughter to king Edward the fourth for that albeit himselfe were discended by his mother from Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster yet this vvas but by his third vvife Catherin Swynford and that the true heyres of Blanch his first vvife duches and heyre of Lācaster to whom sayth he apperteyned only the successiō after the death of king Henry the sixth and his sonne with whom ended the line male of that house remayned only in Portugal by the mariage of Lady Phillip daughter of the foresaid Blanch to kinge Ihon the first of Portugal that for as much as king Phillip of Spaine saith this man hath now succeded to al the righte of the kings of Portugal to him appertayneth also the only right succession of the house of Lancaster and that al the other discendents of king Henry the 7. are to pretend only by the title of Yorke I meane aswel the line of Scotland as also of Suffolk and Huntington for that in the house of Lancaster king Phillip is euidently before them al. Thus holdeth Heghington alleaginge diuers stories arguments and probabilities for the same then adioyneth two other propositions which do importe most of al to vvit that the title of the house of Lancaster was far better then that of York not for that Edmond Crokback first founder of the house of Lancaster vvho was sonne to king Henry the third and brother to king Edward the first was eldest to the said Edward and iniurioufly put back for his deformity in body as both the said bishop of Rosse and George Lylly do falsly hold and this man refuteth by many good arguments but for that lohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being the eldest sonne that King Edward the third had a liue when he dyed should in right haue succeded in the crowne as this man holdeth and should haue bin preferred before Richard the second that was the black princes sonne vvho vvas a degree further of from king Edward the third his grandfather then vvas lohn of Gaunt to whom king Edward vvas father and by this occasion this man cometh to discusse at large the opinions of the lawyers vvhether the vncle or the nephew should be preferred in the succession of a crowne to vvit vvhether the yonger brother or the elder brothers sonne if his father be dead vvithout being seased of the same which is a point that in the ciuil law hath great disputation and many great authors on each side as this man sheweth and the matter also wanteth not examples on both pattes in the succession of diuets Inglish kings as our frend the ciuil lawyer did signifie also in his discourse
and she neece once remoued he preuailed in like manner and thus farr Gerrard historiographes of France And no doubt but if we consider examples that fell out euen in this very age only concerning this controuersie betweene the vncle and nephew we shal finde store of them for in Spaine not long before this tyme to wit in the yeare of Christ 1276. vvas that great and famous determination made by Don Alonso the wise eleuenth king of that name and of al his realme and nobility in their couites or parlament of Segouia mentioned before by the Ciuilian wherin they disinherited the children of the prince Don Alonso de la Cerda that dyed as our prince Edward did before his father and made heyre apparent Don Sancho brauo yonger brother to the said Don Alonso and vncle to his children the two yong Cerdas Which sentēce standeth euen vnto this day and king Phillip enioyeth the crowne of Spaine therby and the dukes of Medina Celi and their race that are discendentes of the said two Cerdas vvhich vvere put backe are subiects by that sentence and not soueraines as al the world knoweth The like controuersie fel out but very litle after to vvit in the tyme of king Edward the third in frāce though not about the kingdome but about the earldome of Artoys but yet it was decided by a solemne sentence of two kings of France and of the whole parlament of Paris in fauour of the aunte against her nephew which albeit it cost great troubles yet vvas it defended and king Phillip of Spaine holdeth the county of Artoys by it at this day Polidor reporteth the story in this manner Robert earle of Artoys a man famous for his chiualry had two children Phillip a sonne and Maude a daughter this maude vvas marryed to Otho earle of Burgundy and Phillip dying before his father left a sonne named Robert the second vvhose father Robert the first being dead the question was vvho should succede ether maude the daughter or Robert the nephew and the matter being remitted vnto Phillip le Bel king of France as chiefe Lord at that tyme of that state he adiuged it to Maude as to the next in blood but vvhen Robert repyned at this sentence the matter vvas referred to the parlament of Paris vvhich confirmed the sentence of king Phillip wher vppon Robert making his way with Phillip de Valoys that soone after came to be king of France he assisted the said Phillip earnestly to bring him to the crowne against king Edward of Ingland that opposed himselfe therunto and by this hoped that king Phillip would haue reuoked the same sentence but he being once established in the crowne answered that a sentence of such importance and so maturely giuen could not be reuoked Wheruppon the said Robert fled to the king of Inglands part against france thus far Polidor The very like sentence recounteth the same author to haue bin giuē in Ingland at the same tyme and in the same controuersie of the vncle against the nephew for the succession to the dukedome of Britany as before I haue related wherin Iohn Breno earle of Montford vvas preferred before the daughter and heyre of his elder brother Guy though he vvere but of the halfe blood to the last duke and she of the whole For that Iohn the third duke of Britanny had two brothers first Guy of the vvhole blood by father and mother and then Iohn Breno his yonger brother by the fathers side only Guy dying left a daughter and heyre named Iane married to the earle of Bloys nephew to the king of France vvho after the death of duke Iohn pretended in the right of his wife as daughter and heyre to Guye the elder brother but king Edward the third with the state of Ingland gaue sentence for Iohn Breno earle of Montford her vncle as for him that vvas next in consanguinity to the dead duke and with their armes the state of Ingland did put him in possession vvho flew the earle of Bloys as before hath bin declared and ther-by gat possession of that realme and held it euer after and so do his heyres at this day And not long before this againe the like resolution preuayled in Scotland betweene the house of Balliol and Bruse who were competitors to that crowne by this occasion that now I wil declare VVilliam king of Scots had issue tvvo sonnes Alexander that succeded in the crowne and Dauid earle of Huntington Alexander had issue an other Alexander and a daughter marryed to the king of Norway al which issue and lyne ended about the yeare 1290. Dauid yonger brother to king William had issue two daughters Margaret and Isabel Margaret vvas married to Alaine earle of Galloway and had issue by him a daughter that married Iohn Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normādie vvho had issue by her this Iohn Balliol founder of Balliol College in Oxford that now pretended the crowne as discended from the eldest daughter of Dauid in the third discent Isabel the second daughter of Dauid vvas married to Robert Bruse Earle of Cleueland in Ingland vvho had issue by her this Robert Bruse earle of Carick the other competitor Now then the question betweene these two cōpetitors was vvhich of them should succeede ether Iohn Balliol that was nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruse that vvas sonne to the yonger daughter so one degree more neere to the stock or stemme then the other And albeit king Edward the first of Ingland whose power vvas dreadful at that day in Scotland hauing the matter referred to his arbitrement gaue sentence for Iohn Bailliol and Robert Bruse obeyed for the tyme in respect partly of feare and partly of his oth that he had made to stand to that iudgment yet vvas that sentence held to be vniust in Scotland and so vvas the crowne restored afterward to Robert Bruse his sonne and his posterity doth hold it vnto this day In Ingland also it selfe they alleage the examples of king Henry the first preferred before his nephew William sonne and heyre to his elder brother Robert as also the example of king Iohn preferred before his nephew Arthur duke of Britany for that king Henry the second had fower sonnes Henry Richard Geffrey and Iohn Henry dyed before his father vvithout issue Richard reygned after him and dyed also vvithout issue Geffrey also dyed before his father but left a sonne named Arthur duke of Britanie by right of his mother But after the death of king Richard the question vvas vvho should succeede to vvit either Arthur the nephew or Iohn the vncle but the matter in Ingland vvas soone decided for that Iohn the vncle was preferred before the nephew Arthur by reason he vvas more neere to his brother dead by a degree then vvas Arthur And albeit the king of Frāce and some other princes abroad opposed themselues for stomack against this succession of king Iohn yet say these
vvife the lady Gertrude taking from her al her goodes landes and inheritance and committed to perpetual prison their only sonne and heyre lord Edward Courtney being then but a childe of seuen yeares old vvhich remayned so there vntil many yeares after he vvas set at libertie and restored to his liuing by Queene Mary Moreouer he put to death the lady 〈◊〉 Plantagenet Countesse of Salisbury daughter of George duke of Clarence that vvas brother of his grandfather king Edward the fourth vvith her he put to death also her eldest sonne and heyre Thomas Poole lord Montague and committed to perpetual prison where soone after also he ended his life a little infant named Henry Poole his sonne and heyre condemned to death by act of parlament although absent Renald Pole brother to the said lord Montague Cardinal in Rome wherby he ouerthrew also the noble house of Salisbury and vvarwick nether need I to go further in this relation though these men do note also how Edward the sixt put to death two of his owne vncles the Seymers or at least it vvas done by his authority and how that vnder her Maiestie that now is the Queene of Scotland that vvas next in 〈◊〉 of any other liuing the chiefe titler of the honse of Yorke hath also bin put to death Lastly they do note and I may not omit it that their is no noble house standing at this day in Ingland in the ancient state of calling that it had and in that dignity and degree that it vvas in vvhen the house of Yorke entred to the crowne if it be aboue the state of a barony but only such as defended the right and interest of the houses of Lancaster and that al other great houses that toke parte vvith the house of Yorke and did helpe to ruine the house of Lancaster be either ceased since or extyrpated and ouer throwne by the same house of Yorke it selfe which they assisted to gett the crowne so at this present they be either vnited to the crowne by confiscatiō or transferred to other Images that are strangers to them who possessed thē before As for example the ancient houses of Inglād that remaine at this day were stāding whē the house of Yorke begā ther title are the houses of Arōdel Oxford Northūberland Westmerland Shrewsbery for al other that are in Ingland at this day aboue the dignity of Barons haue bin aduanced since that tyme and al these fiue houses vvere these that principally did stick vnto the house of Lancaster as is euident by al Inglish chronicles For that the earle of Arondel brought in king Henry the fourth first king of the house of Lancaster and did helpe to place him in the dignity royal comming out of France vvith him The earle of Oxford and his sonne the lord Vere were so earnest in the defence of king Hēry the sixt as they were both slayne by king Edward the fourth and Iohn earle of Oxford vvas one of the principal assistāts of Hēry the seuēth to take the crowne frō Richard the third The house of Northumberland also was a principal ayder to Henry the fourth in getting the crowne and two earles of that name to wit Henry the second and third were slayne in the quarrel of king Henry the sixt one in the battel of S. Albons and the other of Saxton and a third earle named Henry the fourth fled into Scotlād vvith the said king Henry the sixt The house of Westmerland also vvas chiefe aduācer of Hēry the fourth to the crowne the secōd earle of that house vvas slayne in the party of Henry the sixt in the said bartaile of Saxton and Iohn earle of Shrewsbury vvas likevvise slayne in defence of the title of Lancaster in the bartaile of Northamptō and I omit many other great seruices and faithful endeuours vvhich many Princes of these fiue noble anciēt houses did in the defence of the Lancastrian kings vvhich these men say that God hath revvarded vvith continuance of their howses vnto this day But on the contrary side these men do note that al the old houses that principally assisted The title of Yorke are now extinguished and that chiefly by the kings themselues of that house as for example the principal peeres that assisted the family of Yorke vvere Moubray duke of Norfolke de la Poole duke of Suffolk the earle of Salisbury and the earle of Warwick of al which the euent was this Iohn Moubray duke of Norfolke the first confederat of the house of Yorke dyed soone after the exaltation of Edward the fourth vvithout ifsue and so that name of Moubray ceased and the title of the dukedome of Norfolke vvas transferred afterward by king Richard the third vnto the house of Howards Iohn de la Poole duke of Suffolke that married the sister of king Edward the fourth was his great assistant though he left three sonnes yet al were extinguished vvithout issue by helpe of the house of Yorke for that Edmond the eldest sonne duke of Suffolke vvas beheaded by king Henry the eight his brother Richard driuen out of the realme to his destruction as before hath bin shewed Iohn their brother earle of Lincolue was stayne at Stockfild in seruice of king Richard the third and so ended the line of de la Pooles Richard Neuel earle of Salisbury a chiefe enemy to the house of Lancaster and exalter of York vvas taken at the battaile of VVakefild and there beheaded leauing three sonnes Richard Iohn and George Richard vvas earle both of Salisbuty and Warwick surnamed the great earle of Warwick vvas he that placed king Edward the fourth in the royal seate by whome yet he vvas slayne afterward at Barnet and the landes of these two great earldomes of Salisbury and Warwick were vnited to the crowne by his attainder Iohn his yonger brother vvas Marques of montague and after al assistance giuen to the said king Edward the fourth of the howse of Yorke vvas slayne also by him at Barnet and his lands in like māner confiscate to the crowne vvhich yet vvere neuer restored againe George Neuel their yonger brother vvas Archbishop of Yorke vvas taken sent prisoner by the said king Edward vnto Guynes vvho shortly after pined avvay and dyed and this vvas the ende of al the principal frendes helpers aduancers of the house of Yorke as these men do alleage Wherfore they do conclude that for al these reasons many more that might be alleaged the title of Lancaster must needes seeme the better title which they do confirme by the general consent of al the realme at king Henry the seuenth his comming in to recouer the crowne from the house of Yorke as from vsurpers for hauing had the victory against king Richard they crowned him presētly in the field in the right of Lācaster before he married with the house of Yorke
good king and much commended by S. Isiodorus Arch bishop of Siuil who yet in the said councel vvas the first man that subscribed to his depriuation After the entrance of the moores also when Spayne vvas reduced agayne to the order gouerment of Spanish kings vve read that about the yeare of Christ 1282. one Don Alonso the eleuenth of that name king of Castile Leon succeded his father Fernando surnamed the sainct and himselfe obteyned the surname of Sabio and Astrologo that is to say of wise and of an Astrologer for his excellent learning peculier skil in that arte as may vvel appeare by the Astronomy tables that at this day go vnder his name which are the most prefect and exact that euer vvere set forth by iudgment of the learned This man for his euel gouerment and espetially for tyranny vsed towards two nephews of his as the spanish Chronicler Garauay writeth vvas deposed of his kingdome by a publique acte of parlament in the towne of Valliodolid after he had reigned 30. yeares and his owne sonne Don Sancho the fourth vvas crowned in his place vvho for his valiant actes was suruamed el brauo and it turned to great commodity of the common wealth The same common vvealth of Spayne some yeares after to wit abont the yeare of Christ 1368. hauing to their king one Don Pedro surnamed the cruel for his iniurious proceding with his subiects though otherwise he were lawfully seased also of the crowne as sonne and heyre to king Don Alonso the twelfth and had reygned among them 18. yeares yet for his euel gouerment they resolued to depose him and so sent for a bastard brother of his named Henry that liued in France requesting him that he would come with some force of french men to assist them in that acte and take the crowne vppon him self which he did and by the help of the Spaniards and Frēch souldiars he draue the said Peter out of Spaine and himselfe vvas crowned And albeit Edward surnamed the black Prince of Ingland by order of his father king Edward the third restored once agayne the said Peter yet vvas it not durable for that Henry hauing the fauour of the Spaniards returned agayne and depriued Peter the second tyme and slew him in fight hand to hād which made shew of more particuler fauour of God in this behalfe to Henry and so he remayned king of Spayne as doth also his progenie inioye the same vnto this day though by nature he vvas bastard as had bin said and not withstanding that king Peter left two daughters vvhich vvere led awaye into Ingland and ther maryed to great Princes And this king Henry so put vp in his place vvas called king Henry the secōd of this name and proued a most excellent king and for his great nobility in conuersation and prouesse in chiualry vvas called by excellency El cauallero the kinghtly king and for his exceding benignity and liberality vvas surnamed also el dela mercedes which is to say the king that gaue many giftes or the liberal franck and bounteful king which was a great change from the other surnamed cruel that king Peter had before so you see that alwayes I gyue you a good king in place of the bad deposed In Portugal also before I goe out of Spayne I wil alleage you one example more which is of Don Sancho the secōd surnamed Capelo fourth king of Portugal lawful sonne and heyre vnto Don Alonso surnamed el Gardo who whas third king of Portugal This Don Sancho after he had raigned 34. yeares was deptiued for his defects in gouerment by the vniuersal consent of al Portugal this his first depriuation from al kingly rule and authority leauing him only the bare name of king vvas approued by a general councel in Lions pope Innocentius the 4. being ther present who at the petition instāce of the vvhole realme of Portugal by their Embassadors the Archbishop of Braga bishop of Comibra and diuers of the nobility sent to Lyons for that purpose did authorize the saide state of Portugal to put in supreme gouerment one Don Alonso brother to the said king Don Sancho vvho was at that tyme Earle of bullen in Picardy by right of his wife and so the Portugales did further also a lytle after they depriued their said king and did driue him out of his realme into Castilla wher he liued al the rest of his life in banishment and dyed in Toledo without euer returning and this decree of the councel and Pope at Lyons for authorizing of this fact is yet extant in our Canon law in the sixt booke of Decretals now in prynt And this king Don Alonso the third vvhich in this 〈◊〉 was put vp against his brother was peaceably prosperously king of Portugal al the dayes 〈◊〉 his lyfe he was a notable king amōg other great exployres he vvas the first that set Portugal free from al subiection dependence and homage to the kingdome of Castile vvhich vnto his tyme it had acknowledged and he left for his successor his sonne and heyre Don 〈◊〉 Fabricador to wit the great buylder for that 〈◊〉 buylded and founded aboue forty and 〈◊〉 great townes in portugal and was a most 〈◊〉 Prince and his ofspring ruleth in Portugal vnto this day Infinite other examples could I alleage if would examyne the lyues and discentes of 〈◊〉 and other kingdomes with their Princes and namely if I would speake of the Greeke Emperors depriued fortheir euel gouerment not so much by populer mutyny which often happened among them as by consent and grane deliberation of the whole state and wealpublique as Michael Calaphates for that he had troden the Crosse of Christ vnder his feete and was otherwise also a wicked man as also the Emperor Nicephorus Botoniates for his dissolute life and preferring wicked men to authority and the like wherof I might name many but it would be to longe What should I name heere the deposition made of Princes in our dayes by other commō wealthes as in Polonia of Henry the third that was last king of France before that had bin sworne king of Polonia of which crowne of Polonia he vvas depriued by publique acte of parlament for his departing thence vvithout licence and not returning at his day by the said state appoynted and deuounced by publique lettres of peremptory commaundedmēt which are yet extant What should I name the depriuations of Henry late king of Suetia vvho being lawful successor and lawfully in possession after his father Gustauus vvas yet put downe by that common vvealth and depriued and his brother made king in his place who if you remember was in Ingland in the beginning of this Queenes reigne whose sonne reygneth at this day is king also of Polonia and this fact was not only allowed of at home
for that I do not thinke it to be improbable which this author and others do note to wit that most nations round about haue taken their particuler formes of anoynting and crowning their kings from this anciēt custome of France though the substance therof I meane of ther sacring and anoynting be deduced from examples of far more antiquity to wit from the very first kings among the people of Israel whō God caused to be anoynted by his priestes and prophets in token of his election and as a singuler priuiledge of honor and preheminence vnto them wherof king Dauid made so great accōpt when he said to the souldiar that had killed Saul his enimye in the warr quare non timuisti mittere manum tuam in Christum Domini VVhy diddest thow not feare to lay thy hands vppon the anoynted of God and he put him to death for it notwithstanding that Saul had bin long before deposed and reiected by God and that himselfe had lawfully borne armes against him for many daies so much was that ceremony of anoynting estemed in thos dayes so hath it bin euer since among christian people also for that kings hereby are made sacred and do not only perticipate vvith priests but also vvith Christ himselfe vvho hath his name of this circumstance of anoynting as al the vvorld knoweth Probable then I say it is that albeit the substance of this ceremony of anoynting kings be much elder then the christian kingdome of France yer is this partic uler and maiestical manner of doing the same by waye of coronation the most ancient in France aboue al other kingdomes round about especialy if it began vvith ther first christian king Clodouaeus not ful 500. yeares after Christ as french authors do hold At what tyme also they recount a great miracle of holy oyle sent from heauen by an angel for anoynting Clodouaeus vvherof they say they haue stil remaining for the anoynting of their kings at Rhemes vvhich point I vvil not stand to treat or discoursein this place but rather wil refer my reader to the foresaid chapter of Francis Belforest chonicler of Frāce vvho alleageth diuers vvriters of almost 500. yeares antiquitie that write of the same but howsoeuer that be very probable it semeth that al the ceremoneys of coronation in Germany Polonia before recited which had ther beginning long after the reigne of Clodouaeus might be taken frō thence and so the affinity and likenes of the one to the other doth seeme to agree and Garribay also the chronicler of Spayne and of Nauarra in his 22. booke talking of this custome of anoynting and crowning the kings of Nauarra saith that this excellent custome began ther I meane in Nauarra aboue 800. yeares past and vvas brought in by certaine Earles of Champayn of France named Theobaldes who comming to attayne that crowne brought with them that reuerent ceremony of anoyntig crowning ther kings according to the vse of the French which custome endureth vntil this day in that part of Nauarra that is vnder the house of Vandome albeit in the other that is vnder the Spaniardes which is far the greater it vvasleft of in the yeare 1513. When Ferdinande surnamed the Catholique king of spayne entred ther-vppon for that the Spanish kings are neuer anoynted nor crowned but otherwise admitted by the common vvealth as before I haue declared But among al other kingdomes it semeth that Ingland hath most particularly taken this custome and ceremony from France not only for the reason before alleaged that diuers of our Inglish kings haue come out of France as William Conqueror borne in Normandy king Stephen sonne to the Earle of Blois and Bollen a French man and king Henry the second borne likwise in France and sonne to the Earle of Aniou but also for that in very deede the thing it selfe is al one in both nations and albeit I haue not sene any particuler booke of this action in Ingland as in French ther is yet it is easy to gather by storyes what is vsed in Ingland about this affaire For first of al that the Archbishop of Canterbury doth ordinarily do thes ceremony in Inland as the Archbishop of Rhemes doth it in France ther is no doubte with the same solemnity and honor according to the condition and state of our countrey and Polidor Virgil in his story noteth that pope Alexander did interdict and suspend the Archbishop of Yorke with his two assistants the bishops of Londō Salisbury for that in the absence of Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury and without his licence they did crowne king Henry the seconds sonne named also Henry at his fathers perswation and diuers do attribute the vnfortunate successe of the said king Henry the yonger that rebelled against his father to this disorderly and violent coronation by his fathers appointment secondly that the first thing which the said Archbishop requireth at the new kings hands at his coronatiō is about religion church matters and the cleargie as in France vve haue seene it appereth euidently by thes vvords which the same Archbishop Thomas surnamed commonly the martyr remayninge in banishment vvrote to the same king Henry the second which are thes Memores sitis confessionis quam fecistis posuistis super altare apud westmonsterium de seruanda Ecclesiae libertate quando consecrati fuistis vncti in regem à praedecessore nostro Thebaldo Which is do you cal to your remembrance the confession which you made and laid vppon the aulter at vvestminster for keping defending the libertie of the church when you vvere consecrated and annoynted king by Thebaldus our predecessor By which wordes appereth that as the king of Ingland vvas consecrated and annoynted in thos dayes by the Archbishop of Canterbury so did he sweare and giue vp his oth also in vvriting and for more solemnity and obligation layd it downe or rather offered it vp vvith his owne handes vppon the aulter so much as vvas repuired of him by the said Archbishop cleargie for the special safety of religion and theis ecclesiastical liberties which is the selfe same pointe that vve haue sene before as vvel in the oth of the kings of France as also of Polonia and Spayne and of the Emperors both Grecian and German The very like admonition in effect I finde made by an other Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury to an other king Henry to wit by Thomas Arundel to king Henry the fourth vvhen in a parlament holden at Couentry in the yeare 1404. the king vvas tempted by certayne temporal men to take away the temporalityes from the cleargie Wherunto vvhen the said Archbishop Thomas had answered by diuers reasons at last turning to the king he besought him saith Stow to remember the oth which he voluntarily made that he would honor defend the church and ministers therof VVherfore he desired him to permit and
he said that he bare reuerent honor and respect and to discusse their seueral pretentions rightes interestes and titles to the crowne he said that his meaning was to offēd hunt or preiudice none nor to determyne any thing 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 or hinderance of any of their pretences or claymes of what side family faction religion or other party soeuer he or she were but rather playnly and indifferently without hatred or partial affection to or against any to lay downe sincerly what he had hard or reade or of himselfe conceaued that might iustly be alleaged in fauour or disfauour of euery tytler And so much the rather he said that he would do this for that in very truth the Ciuiltans speech had put him in a great indifferēcy concerning matter of successiō had takē out of his head many scrupulosites about nyse points of neernes in blood by the many examples reasons that he had alleaged of the proceeding of Christian cōmon wealthes in this affayre preferring oftentymes him that was further of in blood vppon other cōsideratiōs of more waight importance which point seemed to him to haue bin so euidently proued as no man can deny it much lesse cōdēne the same without the incōueniēces before alleaged mētioned of calling al in doubt that now is established in the world considering that not only foraine countries but Inglād also it selfe so often hath vsed the same putting back the next in bloode VVherfore he said that for as much as common wealthes and the consent wil and desire of each realme was proued to haue high and soueraine authority in this affayre and that as on the one side nerenes of blood was to be respected so on the other ther wāted not sundry considerations circumstāces of as great moment as this or rather greater for that oftentymes these considerations had bin preferred before neernes of blood as hath byn declared I do not know quoth he who of the pretenders may next obteyne the garland what soeuer his right by propinquity be so he haue some as I thinke al haue that do pretend and therfore I meane not to stand vppon the iustification or impugning of any one title but rather to leaue la to God and to them that must one day try iudge the same in Inglād to whome I suppose this speech of myne can not be but grateful commodious for the better vnderstanding discerning of those matters wherof of necessity er it be longe they must be iudges vmpires when God shal appoint and consequently for them to be ignorant or vnaquainted with the same as men say that commonly most in Ingland at this day are cannot be but very inconuenient and dangerous In this manner he spake and after this he began his discourse setting downe first of al the sundry bookes and treatises which he vnderstood had bin made or written hitherto of this affaire OF THE DIVERS BOOKES AND TREATISES THAT HAVE BIN VVRITTEN heretofore about the titles of such as pretend to the crowne of Ingland and what they do conteyne in fauour or disfauour of sundry pretendors CAP. I. ACCORDING to the variety of mens iudgments and affections in this behalfe so said the lawyer that diuers had written diuersly in sundry bookes treatises that had come to light went among men frō hand to hand though al were not printed And first of al he said that not long after her maiesties comming to the crowne ther appeered a certayne booke vvritten in the fauour of the house of Suffolke and especially of the children of the Earle of Hartford by the Lady Catherin Gray vvhich booke offended highly the Queene and nobles of Ingland and vvas aftervvards found to be written by one Hales surnamed of the clubb foote vvho was clarke of the hamper Sir Nicholas Bacon then Lord keeper was presumed also to haue had a principal part in the same for vvhich he vvas like to haue lost his office if Sir Antony Browne that had bin cheef iudge of the comon pleas in Queene Maries tyme vvould haue accepted therof vvhen her Maiestie offred the same vnto him and my Lord of Lecester earnestly exhorted him to take it but he refused it for that he was of differēt religion from the state and so Sir Nicholas Bacō remayned vvith the same at the great instance of Sir William Cecill now Lord Treasorer who though he vvere thought to be priuy also to the said booke yet vvas the matter so vvisely laid vppon Hales and Bacon as Sir William was kept free therby to haue the more authority and grace to procure the others pardon as he did The bent and butt of this book vvas as I haue said to preferr the title of the Lady Catherin Gray daughter of the Lady frauncis Duches of Suffolk which Frauncis was daughter to Mary the yonger daughter of King Henry the seuenth before the title of the Queene of Scotts then liuing of her sonne which were discended of Lady Margeret eldest daughter of the said king Hēry And the reasons which this book did alleage for the same were principally two the first that the lawes of Ingland did not admitt any sttainger or allien to inherit in Ingland to vvit any such as were borne out of the alleageance of our realme for so are the wordes of the law and for that the Queene of Scotts and her sonne are knowne to be so borne therfore they could not succeed and consequently that the house of Suffolck descended of the second daughter must enter in ther place The second reason is for that ther is giuen authority to king Hēry the eight by two seueral acts of parlament in the 28. and 36. yeare of his reigne to dispose of the succession by his last will testament as he should think best among those of his kinred that did pretend after his children and that the said king according to his commission did ordeyne that if his owne children did dye vvithout issue then the of-spring of his yonger sister Mary that vvere borne in Ingland should be preferred before the issue of the elder that vvas Margaret marryed into Scotland and this was the effect of this first book Against this booke were vvryten two other soone after the first by one Morgan a diuine if I remember vvel some-tymes fellow of Oriel College in Oxford a man of good accompt for learninge amonge those that knew hym he vvas thought be haue written the saide book by the aduise and assistance of the forsaide Iudge Browne which thinge is made the more credible by the many authorites of our cōmon law vvhich therin are alleaged and the partes of this booke if I forget not vvere three or rather they were three bookes of one treatise the first wherof dyd take vppon it to cleare the saide Queene of Scottes for the murder of the lord Darly her husband which by many vvas layde against her And the seconde dyd
Polydor that wrote in king Henry the 8. his tyme and others that haue followed him since do take al right from the house of Lancaster and giue the same to the house of Yorke wherfore the best waye I suppose wil be not so much to consider vvhat historiographers do say according to their affections or interests as vvhat reasons and profes be alleged of euery side for that by this we shal more easely come to iudge where the right or wrong doth lye First therfore the defendors of the house of Yorke do alleage that their title is playne and euident for that as in the former chapter hath bin declared Richard duke of Yorke first pretender of this house vvhose father vvas sonne to Edmond Langley duke of Yorke fourth sonne of king Edward the third and his mother Anne Mortimer that vvas neece once remoued and sole heyre to Leonel duke of Clarence second sonne of the said king Edward this Richard I say duke of York pretended that for so much as he had tvvo titles ioyned together in himselfe and vvas lawful heyre as vvel to duke Leonel the second brother as to duke Edmond the fourth that he vvas to be preferred in succession of the crowne after the death of king Richard the second heyre of the first sonne of king Edward before the issue of Iohn of Gaunt that vvas but third sonne to the said king Edward and consequently that Hēry Bolenbrook Iohn of Gaunts sonne duke of Lancaster called afterward king Henry the fourth entred the crowne by tyrāny violēce first for deposing the true and lawful king Richard and secondly for taking the kingdome vppon himselfe vvhich kingdome after the death of the foresaid king Richard which happened in the yeare 1399 belonged to Edmond mortimer Earle of march then liuing and after his death to Anne Mortimer his sister marryed to Richard earle of Cābridge father to this Richard pretendent duke of Yorke as hath bin said for that this Edmond and Anne Mortimer were children to Roger Mortimer sonne of Phillip that vvas daughter to duke Leonel vvhich Leonel vvas elder vncle to king Richard and before Iohn of Gaunt the yonger brother vvhose sonne tooke the crovvne vppon him For the better vnderstanding of which pretence and allegation of the house of Yorke against Lancaster we must note the story following to wit that king Edward the third seing in his old age that prince Edward his eldest sonne whom of al his children he loued most dearly was deade though their vvanted not much doubt in some mēs heads as after shal be shewed vvho ought to succede yet the old man for the exceeding affection he bare to the dead prince vvould heare nothing in that behalfe but appointed Richard the said prince Edwards only sonne and heyre to succed him in the kingdome and made the same to be confirmed by act of parlament and inforced al his children then a liue to svveare to the same which were Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster his third and eldest sonne that then liued for Leonel his second sonne duke of Clarence vvas dead before and Edmond Langley and Thomas Woodstock earles at that tyme but after dukes of Yorke Glocester so king Richard reigned with good obedience of his vncles and their children for 20. yeares together but in the end when he grew insolent had put to death his vncle the duke of Glocester together vvith the earle of Arundel and banished many others of the nobility and among them the Archbishop of Canterbury as also his owne cosin germaine Henry duke of Hereford after of Lancaster sonne and heyre of Iohn of Gaunt and had made many wicked statutes aswel against the church and state Ecclesiastical as also to intangle the realme and nobility with fayned crymes of treason against his regaltie as then he termed them the principal men of the realme seing a fit occasion offred by the kings absence in Ireland called home out of France the foresaid Henry duke of Lancaster vvith the Archbishop of Canterbury earles of Arundel and Warwick and others which vvere in banishment and by common consent gathered vppon the suddaine such an army to assist them in Ingland as they took the king brought him to London and there in a parlament laying together the intollerable faults of his gouerment they depriued him of al regal dignity as before they had done to his great grandfather king Edward the second then by vniuersal consent of the parlament and people their present they chose admitted the said Henry duke of Lancaster to be their king vvho continewed so al the daies of his life and left the crowne vnto his sonne and sonnes sonne after him by the space of threescore yeares vntill this Richard before named duke of Yorke made chalenge of the same in manner and forme as before hath bin shewed Now then the storie being this the question is first whether Richard the second were iustly deposed or no and secondly whether after his deposition the house of Yorke or house of Lācaster should haue entred and thirdly if the house of Lancaster did commit any wronge or iniustice at their first entrance to the crowne yet whether the continuance of so many yeares in possession vvith so many approbations and confirmations therof by the common vvealth vvere not sufficient to legitimate their right Concerning vvhich points many things are alleaged by the fauourers of both families and in the first pointe touching the lawfulnes or vnlawfulnes of king Richards deposition three articles especially do seeme most considerable to wit about the thing in it selfe whether a lawful king may be deposed vppon iust causes secōdly about these causes in king Richards deposition to vvit vvhether they vvere iust or sufficient for deposition of the said king and lastly about the manner of doing it vvhether the same were good and orderly or not And touching the first of these three pointes vvhich is that a king vppon iust causes may be deposed I thinke both parties though neuer so contrary betweene themselues vvil easely agree and the Ciuil lawyer seemeth to me to haue proued it so euidently before throughout his vvhole discourse as I thinke very litle may be said against the same For he hath declared if you remember both by reason authority examples of al nations Christian that this may and hath and ought to be done vvhen vrgent occasions are offred And first by reason he sheweth it for that al kingly authority is giuen them only by the common wealth that with this expresse condition that they shal gouerne according to law and equity that this is the cause of their exaltation aboue other men that this is the end of their gouerment the butt of their authority the starr and pole by vvhich they ought to direct their sterne to witt the good of the people by the vveale of their subiects by the benefite of the realme
the house of Yorke their was yet no question as appereth also by Stow in his chronicle vvho setteth downe how that after the said deposition of Richard the Archbishop of Canterbuty asked the people three tymes whom they would haue to be their king vvhether the duke of Yorke their standing present or not and they answered no and then he asked the seronde tyme if they vvould haue his eldest sonne the duke of Aumaile and they said no he asked the third tyme yf they would haue his yongest-sonne Richard earle of cambridge and they said no. Thus writeth Stow vvher-by it is euident that albeit this earle of Cabridge had married now the sister of Edmōd Mortimer by whom his posterity claymed afterward yet could he not pretend at this tyme her brother being yet aliue who after dying vvithout issue left al his right to her by her to the house of Yorke for albeit this earle Richard neuer came to be duke of Yorke for that he vvas beheaded bv king Henry the fift at Southampton as before hath 〈◊〉 said vvhile his elder brother vvas a lyue yet left he a sonne named Richard that after hym came to be duke of Yorke by the death of his vncle Edmund duke of Yorke that dyed vvithout issue as on the other side also by his mother Anne Mortimer he vvas earle of March and was the first of the house of Yorke that made title to the crowne So that the question now is whether after the deposition of king Richard Edmond Mortimer nephew remoued of Leonel which Leonel vvas the second sonne to king Edward or els Henry duke of Lancaster sonne to Iohn of Gaunt which Iohn vvas third sonne to king Edward should by right haue succeded to king Richard and for Edmond is alleaged that he was heyre of the elder brother and for Hēry is said that he vvas neerer by two degrees to the stemme or last king that is to say to king Richard deposed then Edmond was for that Henry vvas sonne to king Richards vncle of Lancaster and Edmond was but nephew remoued that is to say daughters sonnes sonne to the said king Richards other vncle of Yorke And that in such a case the next in degree of consanguinitie to the last king is to be preferred though he be not of the elder lyne the fauourers of Lancaster alleage many proofes wher of some shal be touched a litle after we haue seene the same practized in our dayes in France where the Cardinal of Burbone by the iudgement of the most part of that realme was preferred to the crowne for his propinquity in blood to the dead king before the king of Nauarre though he were of the elder lyne Moreouer it is alleaged for Henry that his title came by a man and the others by a vvoman vvhich is not so much fauoured either by nature law or reason and so they saye that the pretenders of this title of lady Phillippe that vvas daughter of duke Leonel neuer opened their mouthes in those dayes to clayme vntil some 50. yeares after the deposition death of king Richard Nay more ouer they of Lancaster say that sixteene yeares after the deposition of king Richard vvhen king Henry the fift vvas now in possession of the crowne cerrayne noble mē especially Richard earle of Cambridge that had marryed this Edmond Mortimers sister offred to haue slayne king Henry and to haue made the said Edmōd Mortymer kinge for that he was discended of duke Leonel but he refused the matter thinking it not to be according to equitie and so vvent and discouered the whole treason to the king wheruppō they vvere al put to death in Southampton within fowre or fiue dayes after as before hath bin noted and this hapened in the yeare 1415. and from hence foreward vntil the yeare 1451. and thirreth of the reigne of king Henry the sixt vvhich vvas 36 yeares after the execution done vppon these conspirators no more mention or pretēce was made of this matter at vvhat tyme Richard duke of Yorke began to moue troobles about it againe Thus say those of the house of Lancaster but now these of Yorke haue a great argument for themselues as to them it seemeth vvhich is that in the yeare of Christ 1385. and 9 yeare of the reigne of king Richard the second it vvas declared by act of parlament as Polidor writeth that Edmond Mortimer vvho had marryed Phillip daughter heyre of Leonel duke of Clarence and was grandfather to the last Edmond by me named should be heyre apparent to the crowne if the king should chance to dye without issue To which obiection those of Lancaster do answere first that Polidor doth err in the person when he sayeth that Edmond husband of lady Philippe was declared for heyre apparent for that his Edmond Mortimer that married lady Philippe dyed peacably in Ireland three yeares before this parlament vvas holden to witt in the yeare of Christ 1382. as both Hollings head Stow and other chroniclets do testifie and therfore Polidor doth erre not only in this place about this man but also in that in an other place he sayeth that this Edmond so declared heyre apparent by king Richard vvas slayne by the Irish in Ireland 12. yeares after this declaration made of the succession to vvit in the yeare 1394. vvhich vvas in deede not this man but his sonne Roger Mortimer heyre to him and to the Lady Phillip his wife vvho vvas declared heyre apparent in the parlament afore said at the instance of king Richard and that for especial hatred malice as these men say vhich he did beate against his said vncle the duke of Lancaster and his sonne Henry vvhom he desired to exclude from the succession The cause of this hatred is said to be for that presently vppon the death of prince Edvvard father to this Richard which prince dyed in the yeare of Christ 1376. and but 10. monethes before his father king Edward the third their vvanted not diuers learned and vvise men in Ingland that were of opinion that Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster eldest sonne then liuing of the said king Edward should haue succeded his father iure propinquitatis before Richard that vvas but nephew and one degree further of then he but the old king vvas so extremly affectionate vnto his eldest sonne the blacke prince Edward newly dead that he vvould not heare of any to succede him as Frosard saith but only Richard the said princes sonne Wherfore he called presently a parlament vvhich vvas the last that euer he hold and therin caused his said nephew Richard to be declared heyre apparent and made his three sonnes then liuing that were vncles to the youth to vvitt Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster and Edmond Langhly duke afterward of Yorke and Thomas woodstock duke of Glocester to sweare fealtie vnto Richard as they did And albeit Iohn of Gaunt al his life
of three bretheren the elder dye without issue and the second leaue a sonne yet in the inheritance and succession of the crowne it goeth otherwise as by al the former eight examples haue bin shewed and this is the first they saye about the common law The second pointe which they affirme is that the ground of our common lawes consisteth principally and almost only about this pointe of the crowne in custome for so say they we see by experience that nothing in effect is written therof in the common law and al old lawyers do affirme this pointe as vvere Ranulfus de Granuilla in his booke of the lawes and customes of Ingland vvhich he vvrote in the tyme of king Henry the second and Iudge Fortescue in his booke of the prayse of Inglish lawes vvhich he compiled in the tyme of king Henry the sixt and others Wherof these men do inferr that seing there are so many presidēts and examples alleaged before of the vncles case preferred before the nephew not only in forayne countryes but also in Ingland for this cause I saye they do affirme that our cōmon lawes cannot but fauour also this title and cōsequently must needs like vvel of the interest of Lancaster as they auouch that al the best old lawyers did in those tymes for example they do record two by name of the most famous learned men vvhich those ages had who not only defended the said title of Lancaster in those dayes but also suffred much for the same The one vvas the forenamed iudge Fortescue Chancelor of Ingland and named father of the common lawes in that age vvho fled out os Ingland vvhith the Queene vvife of king Henry the sixt vvith the prince her sonne and liued in banishment in france vvhere it seemeth also that he vvrote his learned booke intituled de laudibus legum Angliae And the other vvas Sir Thomas Thorope chiefe Baron of the excheker in the same reigne of the same king Henry the sixt vvho being aftervvard put into the tower by the Princes of the house of Yorke for his eger defence of the title of Lancaster remayned ther a long tyme and after being deliuered was beheaded at hygate in a tumulte in the dayes of king Edward the fourth These then are the allegations which the fauourers of the house of Lācaster do lay downe for the iustyfying of that title affirming first that Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster ought to haue succeded his father K. Edward the third immediately before king Richard and that iniury vvas done vnto him in that king Richard vvas preferred And secondly that king Richard vvere his right neuer so good vvas iustly orderly deposed for his euil gouerment by lawful authority of the common wealth And thirdly that after his deposition Henry duke of Lancaster sonne heyre of Iohn of Gaunt vvas next in succession euery vvay both in respect of the right of his father as also for that he vvas two degrees neerer to the king deposed then vvas Edmond Mortimer descended of Leonel duke of Clarence and these are the principal and substancial proofes of their right and title But yet besides these they do add also these other arguments and cōsiderations following first that vvhat soeuer right or pretence the house of Yorke had the princes therof did forfeit and leese the same many tymes by their cōspiraces rehellions attainders as namely Richard earle of Cambrige that married the lady Anne Mortimer and by her tooke his pretence to the crowne vvas conuicted of a conspiracy against king Henry the fift in Southampton as before I haue said and there vvas put to death for the same by iudgment of the king and of al his peeres in the yeare 1415. the duke of Yorke his elder brother being one of the iury that condēned him This earle Richards sonne also named Richard comming afterward by the death of his vncle to be duke of York first of al made open clay me to the crowne by the title of Yorke But yet after many othes sworne and broken to king Henry the sixt he was attaynted of treason I meane bothe he and Edward his sonne then earle of march which aftervvard vvas king vvith the rest of his ofspringe euen to the nynth degree as Stow affirmeth in a parlament holden at Couentry in the yeare 1459. and in the 38. yeare of the reigne of the said king Henry and the very next yeare after the said Richard was slayne in the same quarrel but the honse of Lācaster say these mē was neuer attainted of any such crime Secondly they saye that the house of Yorke did enter only by violence by infinite blood-shedd and by wilful murthering not only of diuers of the nobilitie both spiritual and temporal but also of both king Hēry the sixt hym self and of prince Edward his sonne and by a certaine populer and mutinous election of a certaine few souldiers in Smithfield of Lōdon and this vvas the entrance of the howse of Yorke to the crowne vvheras king Henry the fourth first king of the house of Lancaster entred vvithout bloodshedd as hath bin shewed beinge called home by the requestes and letters of the people and nobility and his election admission to the crowne vvas orderly and authorized by general consent of parlament in the doing therof Thirdly they alleage that king Hēry the sixt put downe by the house of Yorke was a good and holy king and had reigned peaceably 40 yeares and neuer committed any act vvorthy deposition vvheras king Richard the second had many waies deserued the same as him selfe came to acknowledge and ther vppon made a personal solemne and publique resignation of the said crowne vnto his cosen Henry of Lancaster the which iustified much the said Henries entrance Fourthly they alleage that the housa of Lancaster had bin in possession of the crowne vppon the pointe of 60. yeares before the house of Yorke did raise trouble vnto them for the same in vvhich tyme their title was confirmed by many parlaments othes approbations and publique acts of the common vvealth and by the nobles peeres and people therof and by the states both spiritual and temporal and vvith the cōsent of al foraine nations so that if there had bin any fault in their first entrance yet vvas this sufficient to authorize the same as we see it vvas in the title of king William the Conqueror and of his two sonnes king William Rufus and king Henry the first that entred before their elder brother and of king Iohn that entred before his nephew of his sonne king Henry the third that entred after his fathers depriuation and after the election of prince Lewis of france as also of Edward the third that entred by deposition of his owne father of al which titles yet might there haue bin doubt made at the begining but by tyme and durance of possession and
vvhich they hold that he is excluded by the common lawes of Ingland from succession to the crowne for that the said lawes do bar al strangers borne out of the realme to inherite within the land and this is an argumēt hādled very largely betweene the foresaid bookes of M. Hales M. Morgan and my lord of Rosse for that the same doth concerne much the pretentions and claymes of diuers others that be strangers also by birth and yet do pretend to this succession as before hath bin declared I shal repeate breefly in this place the summe of that vvhich is alleaged of both parties in this behalfe First then to the general assertion that no stranger at al may inherite any thing by any meanes in Ingland the said bookes of M. Morgan my lord Rosse do answere that in that vniuersal sense it is false for that it appeareth playnely by that vvhich is ser downe by law in the seuēth nynth yeares of king Edward the fourth in the eleuēth fourteēth of K. Hēry the fourth that a stranger may purchase land in Ingland as also that he may inherite by his wife if he should marry an inheritrix Secondly they saye that the true maxima or rule against the inheritance of strangers is grounded only vppon a statute made in the 25. yeare of king Edward the third and is to be restrayned vnto proper inheritances only to wit that no person borne our of the allegeance of the king of Ingland whose father and mother vvere not of the same allegeance at the tyme of his birth for so are the wordes of the statute shal be able to haue or demande any heritage vvith in the same alleageance as heyre to any person Thirdly they say that this axiome or general rule cannot any way touch or be applied to the succession of the crowne first for that as hath bin declared before no axiome or maxima of our law can touch or be vnderstood of matters concerning the crowne except expresse mention be made therof and that the crowne is 〈◊〉 in many pointes that other priuate heritages be not And secondly for that the crowne cannot properly be called an inheritance of allegeance or vvithin allegeance as the wordes of the said statute do stande for that it is not holdē of any superiour nor vvith allegeance but immediatly from God And thirdly for that the statute meaneth plainly of inheritances by discent for otherwise as is said an allien may hold landes by purchase but the crowne is a thing incorporate and discendeth not according to the cōmon course of other priuate inheritances but rather goeth by succession as other incorporations do in signe wherof no king can by law auoide his letters patents by reason of his nonage as other common heyres vnder age do but he is euer presumed to be of ful age in respect of his crowne euen as a prior parson deane or other head incorporat is vvhich can neuer be presumed to be vvithin age and so as any such head incorporate though he be an allien might inherite or demaund landes in this discourse is set downe and especially by the testimonie of the L. Paget and Syr Edward Montague that said the stamp was put vnto it after the king vvas past sense yet they of the house of Suffolke are not satisfied vvith that answere for that they say that at least howsoeuer that matter of the late sealing be yet seing the king willed it to be donne drawen out and sealed it appeareth hereby that this was the last vvil and iudgment of king Henry and not reuoked by hym vvhich is sufficient saye these men to answere the intent and meaning of the realme and the authority committed to him by the foresaid two acts of parlament for the disposing of the succession vvhich tvvo acts say these men conteyning the vvhole authority of the common vvealth so seriously and deliberately giuē in so weightie an affaire may not in reason be deluded or ouer throwne now by the saying of one or two men who for pleasing or contenting of the tyme wherin they spake might say or gesse that the kings memorie vvas past vvhen the stampe was put vnto his testament vvhich if it vvere so yet if he commanded as hath byn saide the thing to be done vvhile he had memory as it may appeare he did both by the wittnesses that subscribed and by the enrolement therof in the chancery no man can deny but that this vvas the kings last wil vvhich is cnoughe for satisfying the parlamēts intention as these men do affirme A fourth argument is made against the king of Scotts succession by al the other competitors iointly and it seemeth to them to be an argument that hath no solution or reply for that it is grounded vppon a playne fresh statute made in the parlament holden in the 27. yeare if I erre not of her Maiesty that now is vvherin is enacted decreed that whosoeuer shal be cōuinced to conspire attempt or procure the death of the Queene or to be priuy or accessatie to the same shal loose al right title pretence clay me or action that the same parties or their heyrcs haue or may haue to the crowne of Ingland Vppon which statute seing that afterward the lady Mary late Queene of Scotlād mother of this king was condemned and executed by the authority of the said parlament it seemeth euident vnto these men that this king vvho pretendeth al his right to the crowne of Ingland by his said mother can haue none at al. And these are the reasons proofes arguments which diuers men do alleage against the right of succession pretended by the king of Scots But nowe if we leaue this pointe which concerneth the very right it self of his succescession by blood wil come to examine other reasons and considerations of state and those in particuler vvhich before I haue mentioned that his fauourers do alleage for the vtility and common good that may be presumed will rise to the realme of Ingland by his admission to our crowne as also the other point also of establishment of religiō by them mētioned then I say these other mē that are against his entrance do produce many other reasons and considerations also of great inconueniences as to them they seeme against this pointe of his admission and their reasons are these that follow First touching the publique good of the Inglish common wealth by the vniting of both realmes of Ingland Scotland together these men do saye that it is very doubtful and disputable whether the state of Ingland shal receaue good or harme therby if the saide vnion could be brought to passe First for that the state and condition of Scotlād wel cōsidered it seemeth that it can bring no other commodity to Ingland then increase of subiects and those rather to participate the commodities and riches of Ingland then to impart any from Scotland And then secondly
of Portugal that are the discēdents of Lady Phillippe his sister thus say the issue of king Henry the seuenth But to this the princes of the house of Portugal do reply and say first that by this it is euident at least that the dukedome of Lancaster vvherof the lady Blanch vvas the only heyre must needs apperteyne to them alone and this vvithout al doubt or controuersie for that they only remaine of her issue after extinguishing of the posterity of her elder brother K. Henry the fourth which vvas extinguished by the death of king Henry the sixt and of his only sonne prince Edward and for this they make no question or controuersie assuring themselues that al law right and equity is on their side Secondly touching the succession and right to the kingdome they saye that Iohn earle of Somerset being borne out of Wedlock and in adultery for that his father had an other vvife aliue vvhen he begatt him and he continuing a bastard so many yeares could not be made legitimate afterward by parlament to that effect of succession to the crowne and to depriue Queene Phillip of Portugal and her children borne before the others legitimation frō their right and succession vvithout their consents for that Iohn king of Portugal did marry the said lady Phillip vvith condition to enjoy al prerogatiues that at that day vvere due vnto her and that at the tyme vvhen Iohn of Gaunt did marry the said lady Catherine Svvinford made her children legitimate by act of parlament vvhich vvas in the yeare of Christ 1396. and 1397. the said lady Phillip Queene of Portugal had now tvvo sonnes liuing named don Alon so and don Edwardo vvhich vvere borne in the yeares 1390. and 1391. that is six yeares before the legitimation of Iohn earle of Somerset and his brethren and therby had ius acquisitum as the law saith vvhich right once acquired and gotten could not be taken away by any posterior act of parlament afrervvard vvithout consent of the parties interressed for vvhich they do alleage diuers places of the canon law vvhich for that they hold not in Ingland I do not cite but one example they put to shew the inconuenience of the thing if it should be otherwise determined then they affirme vvhich is that if king Henry the eight that had a bastard sonne by the lady Elizabeth Blunt vvhom he named Henry fitzroy made him both earle of Notingham and duke of Richmond and Somerset in the 18. yeare of his reigne at vvhat tyme the said king had a lawful daughter a liue named the princesse Mary by Queene Catherin of Spayne if I say the king should haue offred to make this sonne legitimate by parlament with intent to haue him succeede after him in the crowne to the preiudice and open iniury of the said lawful daughter these men do say that he could not haue done it and if he should haue done it by violence it would not haue held and much lesse could Iohn of Gaunt do the like being no king Nor was the act of parlament sufficiēt for this pointe it being a matter that depended especially say these men of the spiritual court and of the Canon law which law alloweth this legitimation no further but only as a dispensation and this so farforth only as it doth not preiudice the right of any other Nether helpeth it any thing in this matter the matriage of Iohn of Gaunt with lady Catherin for to make better this legitimation for that as hath bin said their children vvere not only naturales but Spurij that is to saye begotten in playne aduoutrie and not in simple fornication only for that the one partie had a wife a liue and consequently the priuelege that the law giueth to the subsequent marriage of the parties for legitimating such children as are borne in simple fornication that is to say betweene parties that vvere single and none of them married can not take place here so as these men conclude that albeit this legitimation of parlament might serue them to other purposes yet not to depriue the princes of Portugal of their prerogatiue to succede in their mothers right which she had vvhen she vvas married to their father And this they affirme to haue bin law and right at that tyme if the said Queene Phillip earle Iohn had bin aliue together vvhen Henry the sixt and his sonne vvas put to death that this questiō had bin then moued at the deathe of king Henry the sixt whether of the two to vvit either the said Queene Phillip or her yonger brother Iohn earle of Somerset by the fathers side only should haue succeded in the inheritance of king Henry the sixt in vvhich case these men presume for certaine that the said Queene Phillippe legitimatly borne and not Iohn made legitimate by parlamēt should haue succeded for that by common course of law the children legitimated by fauour albeit their legitimation vvere good and lawful as this of these children is denyed to be yet can they neuer be made equal and much lesse be preferred before the lawful and legitimate by byrthe But now say these men the case standeth at this present somewhat otherwise and more for the aduantage of Queene Phillippe and her ofspring for vvhen king Henry the sixt his sonne were extinguished and Edward duke of Yorke thrust hym selfe in to the crowne which vvas about the yeare of Christ 1471 the foresaid two princes lady Phillip and earle Iohn vvere both dead as also their children and only their nephewes vvere aliue that is to saye their liued in Portugal king Alfonsus the fift of that name sonne to king Edward vvhich Edward vvas child to Queene Phillip and the death of king Henry the sixt of Ingland happened in the 38. yeare of the reigne of the said king Alfonsus and in Inglād liued at the same tyme lady Margaret Countesse of Richmond mother of king Henry the seuenthe and neece of the foresaid Iohn earle of Somerset to vvit the daughter of his sonne duke Iohn of Somerset so as these tvvo competitors of the house of Lancaster that is to say king Alfonsus and lady Margaret were in equal degree from Iohn of Gaunt as also from king Henry the sixt sauing that king Alfonsus vvas of the vvhole blood as hath bin said and by Queene Phillip that vvas legitimate and the countesse of Richmond vvas but of the halfe blood as by Iohn earle of Somerset that vvas a bastard legitimated The question then is which of these tvvo should haue succeded by right of the house of Lancaster immediatly after the death of king Henry the sixt and the lady Margaret alleageth that she vvas descended from Iohn earle of Somerset that vvas a man and therfore to be preferred and king Alfonsus alleaged that he being in equal degree of neernes of blood with the same countesse for that both vvere nephewes he vvas to be preferred
wherof the first he hath in that he is a man and the other in that he is a Prince For this cause then al common wealthes haue prescribed lawes vnto their Princes to gouerne therby as by a most excellent certayne immutable rule to which sense Cicero said leges sunt inuentae vt omnibus semper vna 〈◊〉 voce loquerentur lawes were inuented to the ende they should speake in one and the 〈◊〉 same sense to al men For which very reason in lyke maner thes lawes haue bin called by Philosophers a rule or square inflexible and by Aristotle in particular a mynde without passion as hath bin said but the Prophet Dauid who was also a Prince king semeth to cal it by the name of Discipline for that as discipline doth keepe al the partes of a man or of a particuler house in order so law vvel ministred keepeth al the partes of a common vvealth in good order and to sheow how seuerely God exacteth this at al Princes handes he sayth these wordes And now learne ye kinges and be instructed you that iudge the world serue God in feare and reioyse in him with trembling embrace ye discipline least he enter into wrath and so ye perish from the way of righteousnes Which wordes being vttered by a prophet and king do conteyne diuers poynts of much cōsideration for this purpose as first that kings and Prince are bound to learne law and discipline and secondly to obserue the same vvith great humility and feare of Gods wrath and thirdly that if they do not they shal perish frō the way of righteousnes as though the greatest plage of al to a Prince weare to lose the way of righteousnes law and reason in his gouerment and to giue himselfe ouer to passion and his owne vvil whereby they are suer to come to shipwrack and thus much of the first helpe The second help that common wealthes haue giuen to their kings and Princes especially in later ages hath bin cerrayne councelles and councellors with whom to consult in matters of most importance as we see the parlaments of Ingland and France the courtes in Spayne and diets in Germany vvithout which no matter of great moment can be concluded and besides this commonly euery king hath his priuy councel whom he is bound to heare and this vvas done to temper somwhat the absolute for me of a Monarchy whose danger is by reason of his sole authority to fal into tiranny as Aristotle vvisely noteth in his fourth booke of politiques shewing the incōuenience or dangers of this gouerment vvhich is the cause that vve haue few or no simple monarchies now in the world especially among Christians but al are mixt lightely with diuers pointes of the other two formes of gouerment also and namely in Ingland al three do enter more or lesse for in that ther is one king or Queene it is a monarchy in that it hath certayne councelles which must be hard it participateth of Aristocratia and in that the commonalty haue their voices and burgesses in parlament it taketh part also of Democratia or populer gouerment al which limitations of the Princes absolute authority as you see do come for the common wealth as hauing authority aboue their Princes for their restraint to the good of the realme as more at large shal be proued hereafter From like authority and for like considerations haue come the limitations of other kings and kingly povver in al tymes and countries from the beginning both touching themselues and their posterity and successors as breefly in this place I shal declare And first of al if we vvil consider the tvvo most renoumed and allowed states of al the world I meane of the Romans and Grecians vve shal finde that both of them began vvith kings but yet vvith far different lawes and restraints about their authorityes for in Rome the kings that succeded Romulus their first founder had as great and absolute authority as ours haue now a dayes but yet their children or next in blood succeded them not of necessity but new kings were chosen partly by the senate and partly by the people as Titus Liuius testifieth so as of three most excellent kings that ensewed immediatly after Romulus to wit Numa Pompilius Tullius Hostilsus Tarqninus Priscus none of them were of the blood royal nor of kyn the one to the other no nor yet Romans borne but chosen rather from among straingers for their vertue and valor and that by election of the senate and consent of the people In Greece and namely among the lacedemonians which vvas the most emynent kingdom among others at that tyme the succession of children after their fathers was more certayne but yet as Aristotle noteth ther authority power was so restrayned by certayne officers of the people named Ephori which commonly vvere fiue in number as they were not only checked and chastined by them if occasion serued but also depriued and some tymes put to death for which cause the said philosopher did iustly mislike this emynent iurisdiction of the Ephori ouer their kings but yet hereby we see vvhat authority the common wealth had in this case and what their meaning vvas in making lawes and restrayning their kings power to wit therby the more to binde them to do iustice which Cicero in his offices vttereth in tbes vvordes Iustitiae fruendae causae apud maiores 〈◊〉 I se Asia in Europe bene morati regesolint sunt constituti c. at cum ius aequabile ab vno viro 〈◊〉 non consequerentur inuentae sunt leges Good kings vvere appoynted in old tyme among our ancestors in Asia and Europe to the end therby to obteyne iustice but when men could not ob teyne equal iustice at one mans handes they inuented lawes The same reason yealdeth the same philosopher in another place not only of the first institution of kingdomes but also of the chainge therof agayne into other gouerments when thes vvere abused Omnes antiquae gentes regibus 〈◊〉 paruerunt c. That is al old nations did liue vnder kingdomes at the beginning which king of gouerment first they gaue vnto the most iust and wisest men which they could finde and also after for loue of them they gaue the same to their posterity ot next in kynne as now also it remayneth vvher kingly gouerment is in vse but other countries which liked not that forme of gouerment and haue shaken of haue done it not that they wil not be vnder any but for that they wil not be euer vnder one only Thus far Cicero and he speaketh this principally in deferice of his-owne cornmō wealth I meane the Roman which had cast of that kinde of gouerment as before hath bin said for the offence they had taken agaynst cessayne kings of thers and first of al agaynst 〈◊〉 himselfe their first founder for 〈◊〉
at his pleasure without law as Titus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for which cause the senators at length 〈◊〉 him and cut him in smal peces And aftervards they were greatly greeued at the entring of Seruius Tullius their sixt king for that he gaue the crowne by fraude and not by election of the senate and special approbation of the people as he should haue done but most of al they were exasperated by the proceeding of their seuenth kinge named Lucius Tarquinas surnamed the proud who for that as Liuius faith he neglected the lawes of gouerment prescribed no him by the common wealth as namely in that he consulted not with the senate in matters of great importance for that he made war peace of his owne head for that he appoynted to himselfe a gard as though he had mistrusted the people and for that he did vse ininstice to diuers particuler men and suffred his children to be insolent he was expelled with al his posterity and the gouerment of Rome changed from a kingdome vnto the regiment of consuls after two hundreth yeares that the other had endured And thus much for those kingdomes of Italy and Greece And if likewise we wil looke vppon other kingdomes of Europe we shal see the very same to wit that euery kingdome countrey hath his particuler lawes prescribed to their kings by the common vvealth both for their gouerment authority and succession in the same for if we behold the Romā Empire it selfe as it is at this day annexed to the Germaine electors though it be the first in dignity among christian Princes yet shal we see it so restrayned by particuler lawes as the Emperor can do much lesse in his state then other kings in theirs for he can nether make vvarr nor exact any contribution of men or money therunto but by the free leaue and consent of al the states of the Germayne diet or parlament and for his children or next in kynn they haue no action interest or pretence at al to succed in their fathers dignity but only by free electiō if they shal be thought vvorthy Nay one of the chiefest poynts that the Emperor must sweare at his entrance as Sleydan writeth is this that he shal neuer go about to make the dignity of the Emperor peculiar or hereditary to his family but leaue it vnto the seuen electors free in their power to chuse his successor according to the law made by the pope Gregory the fyfth and the Emperor Charles the fourth in this behalfe The kingdomes of Polonia Boemia do go much after the same fashion both for there restrainte of power and succession to their kings For first touching their authority they haue great limitation nether can they do any thing of great moment without the consent of certayne principal men called Palatines or Castellans nether may their children or next of blood succede except they be chosen as in the Empire In Spayne France and Ingland the priuileges of kings are far more eminent in both thes points for that both their authority is much more absolute and their next in blood do ordinarily succede but yet in different manner for as touching authority it semeth that the kings of Spayne and France haue greater then the king of England for that euery ordination of thes two kings is law in it selfe without further approbatiō of the common wealth which holdeth not in England where no general law can be made without consent of parlament but in the other pointe of succession it appeareth that the restraint is far greater in thos other two countries then in Ingland for that in Spayne the next in blood cannot succede be he neuer so lawfully descended but by a new approbation of the nobility and bishops and states of the Realme as it is expresly set downe in the two ancient councelles of Tolledo the fourth and fifth In confirmation wherof we see at this day that the king of Spaynes owne sonne cannot succede not be called Prince except he be first sworne by the said nobility and states in token of their new consent and so we haue seene it practized in our dayes towards three or fower of King Philips children which haue succeded the one after the other in the title of Princes of Spaine and at euery chainge a new oth required at the subiects handes for their admission to the said dignity which is not vsed in the kings children of France or Ingland In France the world knoweth how women are not admitted to succed in the crowne be they neuer so neare in blood nether any of their issue though it be male For which cause I doubt not but you remēber how king Edward the third of Ingland though he were sonne heyre vnto a daughter of France whose three brethren were kings and left hir sole heyre to hir father king Phillip the fourth surnamed the fayre yet vvas he put by the crowne as also was the king of Nauar at the same tyme who was sonne and heyre vnto this womans eldest brothers daughter named Lewis Huttin king of Ftance which king of Nauar therby seemed also to be before king Edward of Ingland but yet were they both put by it and Philip de Vallois a brothers sonne of Phillip the faire was preferred to it by general decree of the states of France and by vardit of the whole parlament of Paris gathered about the same affayre Nether did it auayle that the two kings a fore said alleaged that it was agaynst reason conscience and custome of al nations to exclud vvomen from the succession of the crowne which appartayned vnto them by propinquity of blood seing both nature God hath made them capable of such succession euery where as it appereth by example of al other nations and in the old testament among the people of god it selfe wher we see women haue bin admitted vnto kingdomes by succession but al this I say preuayled not vvith the French as it doth not also at this day for the admission of Dona Isabella Eugenia Clara infanta of Spayne vnto the said crowne of France though by dissent of blood ther be no question of her next propinquity for that she is the eldest child of the last kings eldest sister The like exclusion is made agaynst the Prince of Lorayne that now liueth though he be a man and nephew to the last king for that his title is by a woman to wit his mother that vvas yonger sister vnto the last king Henry of France And albeit the law called Salica by the Frenchmen by vertue vvherof they pretend to exclude the succession of vvomen be no very ancient law as the French themselues do confesse and much lesse made by Pharamond ther first king or in thos ancient tymes as others without ground do affirme yet do vve se that it is sufficient to bynd al Princes and subiects of
by al the states of that counttey but also a broad as namely of Maximilian the Emperor and approued also by the king of Denmarke and by al the Princes of Germany neere about that realme who saw the resonable causes which that common wealth had to proceed as it did And a litle before that the like was practised also in Denmarke agaynst Cisternus ther lawful king if we respect his discent in blood for he vvas sonne to king Iohn that reigned a fore him and crowned in his fathers life but yet afterwards for his intolerable cruelty he vvas depriued and driuen into banishment together with his vvife and three children al vvhich were disinherited his vncle Frederik Prince of Holsatia vvas chosen king whose progeni yet remayneth in the crowne the other though he were marryed to the sister of Charles the fifth last Emperor of that name and vvere of kyn also to king Henry the eight of Ingland yet could he neuer get to be restored but passed his tyme miserably partly in banishment and partly in prison vntil he dyed But it shal be best perhapps to ende this narration with an example or two out of Ingland it selfe for that no where els haue I read more markable accidents touching this poynt then in Ingland and for breuity sake I shal touch only two or three happened since the cōquest for that I wil go no higher though I might as appeareth by the exāple of K. Edwin others nether vvil I beginne to stand much vppon the example of king Iohn though wel also I might for that by his euel gouerment he made himselfe both so odious at home contemptible abroade hauing lost Normandy Gascony Guyenne and al the rest in effect which the crowne of Ingland had in France as first of al he vvas both excommunicated and deposed by sentence of the pope at the sute of his owne people and vvas inforced to make his peace by resigning his crowne into the handes of Pandulfe the popes legate as Polidor recounteth and afterwards faling back agayne to his old defects and naughtie gouerment albeit by his promise to the pope to go and make warr against the Turkes if he might be quiet at home and that his kyngdome should be perpetually tributary to the sea of Rome he procured him to be of his side for a tyme and against the Barōs yet that stayed not them to proceed to his depriuation which they did effectuate first at Canterbury and after at London in the eighteenth last yeare of king Iohns reigne and meant also to haue disinherited his sonne Henry which vvas afterward named king Henry the third and at that tyme a childe of eight yeares old only and al this in punishement of the father yf he had liued and for that cause they called into Ingland Lodouick the Prince of France sonne to king Philip the second and father to Saynt Lewis the nynth and chose him for their king and did sweare him fealtye with general consent in London the yeare of our Lord 1216. And but that the death of king Iohn that presently ensued altered the vvhole course of that designment and moued them to turne their purposes and accept of his sonne Henry before matters were fully established for king Lodowick it vvas most likely that France and Ingland would haue bin ioyned by thes meanes vnder one crowne But in the end as I haue said king Henry the third vvas admitted and he proued a very wor thi king after so euel as had gon before him and had bin deposed which is a circumstance that you must alwayes note in this narration and he reigned more yeares then euer king in Ingland did before or after him for he reigned ful 53. yeares left his sonne heyre Edward the first not inferior to himselfe in manhode vertue vvho reigned 34. yeares and left a sonne named Edward the second vvho falling into the same defects of gouerment or vvorse then king Iohn his great grandfather had donne was after 19. yeares reigne deposed also by act of parlament holden at London the yeare 1326. his body adiudged to perpetual prison in which he was at that present in the castle of vvallingford vvherher diuers both bishops Lordes knights of the Parlament vvere sent vnto him to denounce the sentence of the realme agaynst him to wit how they had deptiued him and chosen Edward his sonne in his place for vvhich act of choosing his sonne he thanked them hartely and vvith many teares acknowledged his owne vnwoorthines wheruppon he was digraded his name of king first taken from him and he appoynted to be called Edward of Carnaruan from that howre forward and then his crowne and ring were taken away and the steward of his house brake the stafe of his office in his presence and discharged his seruants of their seruice and al other people of ther obedience or allegeance toward him and towardes his mayntenance he had only a hundreth markes a yeare allowed for his expences and then was he delyuered also into the hands of certayne particuler keepers vvho led him prisoner from thence by diuers other places vsing him with extreme indignity in the way vntil at last they tooke his life from him in the castle of Barkley and his sonne Edward the third reigned in his place who if we respect eyther valor provvesse length of reigne acts of cheualry or the multitude of famous Princes his children left behinde him vvas one of the noblest kinges that euer Inglād had though he were chosen in the place of a very euel one as you haue séen But vvhat shal we say is this worthines vvhich God giueth commōly to the successors at thes changes perpetual or certayne by discēt no truly nor the example of one Princes punishment maketh an other to beware for the next successor after this noble Edward vvhich vvas king Richard the second though he were not his sonne but his sonnes sonne to wit sonne and heyre to the excellent and renounced black Prince of vvales this Richard I say forgetting the miserable end of his great grand father for euel gouerment as also the felicity and vertue of his father and grand father for the contrary suffered himselfe to be abused and misled by euel councellors to the great hurte disquietnes of the realme For vvhich cause after he had raigned 22. yeares he was also deposed by act of parlamāt holden in London the yeare of our Lord 1399. and condemned to perpetual prison in the castel of Pomfret vvher he was soone after put to death also and vsed as the other before had bin and in this mānes place by free electiō was chosen for king the noble knight Henry Duke of Lācaster who proued afterwards so notable a king as the world knoweth and vvas father to king Henry the fifth surnamed commonly the Alexander of Ingland for that
as Alexander the great conquered the most parte of Asia in the space of 9. or 10. yeares so did this Henry conquere France in lesse then the like tyme. I might recon also in this number of Princes deposed for defect in gouermēt though otherwise he vvere no euel man in lyfe this king Henry the fourths nephew I meane king Henry the sixt vvho after almost forty yeares reigne vvas deposed and imprisoned and put to death also together vvith his sonne the Prince of wales by Edward the fourth of the howse of yorke the same was confirmed by the commons and especially by the people of London and afterwards also by publique act of parliament in respect not only of the title which king Edward pretended but also and especially for that king Henry did suffer himselfe to be ouerruled by the Queene his wife and had broken the articles of agrement made by the parlament betwene him and the Duke of Yorke and solemnly sworē on both sides the 8. of Octob. in the yeare 1459. In punishment vvherof and of his other negligent and euel gouermēt though for his owne particuler life he vvas a good man as hath bin said sentence was giuen agaynst him partly by force and partly by law and king Edward the fourth vvas put in his place who was no euel king as al Inglish men vvel know but one of the renoumedst for martial actes and iustice that hath worne the Inglish crowne But after this man agayne ther fel an other accident much more notorious vvhich was that Richard Duke of Glocester this king Edwards yonger brother did put to death his two nephewes this mans children to vvit king Edward the fifth and his litle brother made him selfe king and albeit he synned greuously by taking vppon him the crowne in this wicked manner yet when his nephewes were once dead he might in reason seeme to be lawful king both in respect that he was the next male in blood after his said brother as also for that by diuers acts of parlament both before and after the death of thos infantes his title vvas authorized and made good and yet no man vvil say I thinke but that he vvas lawfully also deposed agayne afterward by the cōmō wealth which called out of France Henry Earle of Richmond to chastise him and to put him downe and fo he did and tooke from him both life and kingdome in the fielde and vvas king himselfe after him by the name of king Henry the seuenth and no man I suppose vvil say but that he vvas lawfully king also vvhich yet cannot be except the other might lawfully be deposed moreouer as I sayd at the beginning I vvould haue you consider in al thes mutations what men commonly haue succeded in the places of such as haue bin deposed as namely in Ingland in the place of thos fiue kings before named that vvere depriued to vvit Iohn Edward the second Richard the second Henry the sixt and Richard the third ther haue succeded the three Henryes to wit the third fourth and seuenth two Edwards the third and fourth al most rare valiant Princes who haue donne infinit importanr acts in their cōmon vvealthes and among other haue raysed many houses to nobility put downe others changed states both abroad and at home distributed ecclesiastical dignityes altred the course of discent in the blood royal and the like al which was iniust and is voyd at this day if the chainges and depriuations of the former Princes could not be made and consequently none of thes that do pretende the crowne of Ingland at this day can haue any title at al for that from thos men they discende vvho were put vp in place of the depriued And this may be sufficient for proofe of the two principal poynts which you required to be discussed in the beginning of this spech to wit that lawful Princes haue oftentymes by their common wealthes bin lawfully deposed for misgouerment and that God hath allowed and assisted the same with good successe vnto the weal publique and if this be so or might be so in kings lawfully set in possession then much more hath the said common wealth power authority to alter the succession of such as do but yet pretend to that dignity if ther be dew reason and causes for the same which is the head poynt that first we began to treate of saide the Ciuilian and with this ended his speech vvithout saying any more VVHER IN CONSISTETH PRINCIPALLY THE LAVFVLNES OF PROCEEDING AGAYNST Princes which in the former chapter is mētioned what interest Princes haue in their subiect 's goods or liues how othes doth binde or may be broken by subiects towards Princes and finally the difference betwene a good king and a Tirant CHAP. IIII. VVHEN the Ciuilian had ended his speech the temporal lawyer looked vppon the stāders by to see whether any would reply or no and perceauing al to hold ther peace he began to say in this māner Truly Syr I cannot deny but the examples are many that you haue alleaged and they seme to proue sufficiently that which you affirmed at the beginning to wit that the Princes by you named were depriued and put downe by their common vvealthes for ther euel gouerment And good successors commonly raysed vp in their places and that the common wealth had authority also to do it I do not greatly doubt at least wise they did it de facto and now to cal thes factes in question were to embroyle and turne vp-side-downe al the states of Christen dom as you haue wel signified but yet for that you haue added this vvord lawfully so many tymes in the course of your narration I vvould you tooke the payne to tel vs also by vvhat law they did the same seing that Belloy whom you haue named before and some other of his opinion do affirme that albeit by nature the common vvealth haue authority ouer the Prince to chuse and appoynt him at the beginning as you haue vvel proued out of Aristotle and other vvayes yet hauing once made him and giuen vp al their authority vnto him he is now no more subiect to ther cortection or restraynt but remayneth absolute of himselfe without respect to any but only to god alone vvhich they proue by the example of euery particuler man that hath authority to make his Master or Prince of his inferior but not afterwards to put him downe agayne or to depriue him of the authority vvhich he gaue him though he should not beare himselfe vvel and gratefully but discourtious rather iniuriously towards him that gaue him first this authority To which also they do alleage the speech of the prophet Samuel in the first booke of the kings vvher the people of Israel demaunded to haue a king to gouerne ouer them as other nations round about them had and to leaue the gouerment of the high Prieste vnder
whom at that day they were At which demaund both God himselfe and Samuel vvere greuiously offended and Samuel by Gods expresse order protested vnto them in this manner wel quoth be you wil haue a king harken then to this that I wil say Hoc erit ius regis qui imperaturus est vobis this shal be the rlght and power of the king that shal rule ouer you to vvit he shal take frō you your children both sonnes and daughters your fieldes vinyards your haruest also and rents your seruants handmaydes heards of catle and shal giue them to his seruants and you shal cry vnto God in that day from the face of this your king whom you haue chosen and God shal not heare you for that you haue demaunded a king to gouerne you thus far the Prophet Out of al vvhich discourse and spech of the Prophet thes men do gather that a king is nothing so restrayned in his power or limited to law as you haue affirmed but rather that his law is his own vvil as by thes vvordes of the Prophet may appeare and much lesse may the common vvealth chastice or depriue him for exceding the limites of law or doing his vvil seing that here in this place God doth foretel that Princes oftentymes shal commit excesses and iniuries and yet doth he not therfore wil them to chasten or depose them for the same but rather insinuateth that they must take it paciently fot their sinnes and cry to God for remedy and perseuer therin though he do not 〈◊〉 the first harken to them or grant their redresse hitherto the temporal lavvyer Wherunto answered the Ciuilian that he confessed that Belloy other his companions that vvrote in flattery of Princes in thes our dayes did nor only affirme thes things that the temporal lawyer had alleaged and that Princes were lawlesse and subiect to no accompt reason or correction whatsoeuer they did but also vvhich is yet more absurd and pernicious to al common vvealthes that al goods chattels possessions and whatsoeuer els commodityes temporal of the common wealth are properly the kings and that their subiects haue only the vse therof without any propriety at al so as when the king wil he may take it from them by right vvithout iniustice or iniury vvhich assertions do ouer throw wholy the very nature substance of a common vvealth it selfe For first to say that a king is subiect to no law or limitation at al but may do vvhat he wil is against al that I haue alleaged before of the very institution of a commō vvealth which vvas to liue together in iustice and order as I shewed out of Cicero speaking of the first kings Iustitiae fruendae causa bene morati Reges olim sunt constituti For enioying of Iustice were kings appointed in old tyme that vvere of good life but if they be boūd to no iustice at al but must be borne and obeyed be they neuer so wicked then is this end and butte of the common wealth of al royal authority vtterly frustrat then may vve set vp publique murderours rauishers theeues and spoylers to deuowre vs in steed of kings and gouernours to defend vs for such in deede are kings that follow no law but passion and sensualitie and do commit iniustice by their publique authority then finally vvere al thos kings before mentioned both of the Iewes gentiles and christians vnlawfully depriued and ther successors vnlawfully put vp in their places and consequently al Princcs liuing in Christianity at this day who are descended of them are intruders and no lawful Princes By the second saying also that al temporalityes are properly the Princes and that subiects haue only the vse therof without any interest of their owne no lesse absurdityes do follow then of the former assertion for that first it is against the very first principle and foundation of our ciuil law which at the first entrance and beginning maketh this diuision of goods that some are common by nature to al men as the ayer the sea and the like other are publique to al of one citty or country but yet not common to al in general as riuers portes and other such some are of the community of a citty or common wealth but yet not common to euery parttculer person of that citty as common rents theators the publique house and the like some are of none nor properly of any mans goods as churches and sacred things some are proper to particuler men as thos which euery man possesseth of his owne which diuision of Iustinian the Emperor and his most learned lavvyers is not good if the Prince be Lord proprietarie of al nay he that made this diuision being Emperor did great iniury also to himselfe in assigning that to others which by the opinion of Belloy and his fellowes vvas properly truly his owne in that he was Emperor and Lord of the vvorld Besides al this so absurd a saying is this as it ouerthroweth the whole nature of a common wealth it selfe and maketh al subiects to be but very slaues For that slaues and bondmen as Aristotle sayeth in this do differ from freemen that slaues haue only the vse of things vvithout property or interest and cannot acquire or gett to themselues any dominion or true right in any thing for that what soeuer they do gett it accreweth to their master not to theselues and for that the condition of an oxe or an asse is the very same in respect of a poore man that hath no slaue for that the oxe or asse getteth nothing to himselfe but only to his master and can be lord of nothing of that for which he laboreth for this cause wittely also sayed Aristotle that bos aut asinus pauperi agricolae pro seruo est An oxe or an asse is to a poore husbādman in steed of a bondman and so feing that Belloy wil needes haue the state and condicion of al subiects to be like vnto this in respect of their Prince and that they haue nothing in propriety but only the vse and that al dominion is properly the Princes vvhat doth the other then make al subiects not only slaues but also oxen and asses and pecora campi Last of al for I vvil not ouerlode you vvith reasons in a matter so euident if al subiects goods be properly the kings why then vvas Achab and Iezabel king and Queene of Israel so reprehended by Elias so punished by god for taking away Nabothes vineyard seing they tooke but that vvhich was ther owne nay why vvas not Naboth accused of iniquity rebellion and treason for that he did not yeald vp presently his vineyard when his Princes demaunded the same seing it vvas not his but thers why do the kings of Ingland France and Spayne aske money of their subiects in parlaments if they might take it as ther owne why
suffer the church to enioy the priuileges and liberties which in tyme of bis predecessors it did enioy and to feare that king which reygneth in heaucn and by whom al other kings do reigne morouer he desired him to consider his promise also ro al the realme which was that he 〈◊〉 preserue vnto euery man 〈◊〉 and title so far as in him lay By vvhich speech of the Archbishop the king was so tar moued as he vvould heare no more of that bil of the layne but said that he would leaue the church in as good estate or better then he found it and so he did but yet hereby we come to learne vvhat oth the kings of Ingland do make at ther coronations touching the Church and cleargie The other conditions also of good gouerment are partely touched in the speach of the Archbishop and much more exprefly set downe in the king of Inglands oth recorded by ancient wryters for that he sweareth as both Holinshead and others do testifie in ther inglish stories in thes very words to vvit That he wil during his life beare reuerence honor vnto almightie God and to his Catholique church and vnto his ministers and that he wil administer law and iustice equally to al and take away al vniust lawes Which after he had sworne laying his handes vppon the gospels then doth the Archbishop turning about to the people declare vvhat the king hath promised and sworne and by the mouthe of a harold at armes asketh ther consents whether they be content to submit themselues vnto this man as vnto ther king or no vnder the conditions proposed wherunto when they haue yealded themselues then beginneth the Archbishop to put vppon him the regal ornaments as the sword the ring the scepter and crowne as before in the French coronation you haue hard and namely he giueth him the scepter of S. Eduard the consessor and then he addeth also the same wordes of commission and exhottation as the other doth to wit stand and hold thy place and kepe thy oth and therunto adioyneth a great commination or threat on the behalfe of almightie God if he should take vppon him that dignity without firme purpose to obserue the things which this day he hath sworne and this is the somme of the Inglish coronation Which you may read also by piece meale in Iohn Stow according as other things in that his breefe collection are set downe but especially you shal seit in the admissions as Wel of the said kinge Henry the fourth now last mentioned as also of king Edward the fourth at ther first entrances to the crowne for in the admission of king Henry Stow sheweth how the people vvere de maunded thrise whether they were content to admit him for ther kinge and that the Archbishop of Canterbury who was the same Thomas Arundel of whom vve spake before did read vnto them what this new king vvas bound by oth vnto and then he tooke the ring vvherwith he vvas to vved hym to the common wealth which vvedding importeth as you know an oth and mutual obligation on both sides in euery marriadge and the Earle of Northumberland high Constable of Ingland for that day was vvilled to shew the said ring to the people that they might therby see the band wherby ther king vvas bound vnto them And then it vvas put vppon his finger and the king kissed the Constable in signe of acceptāce fel on his knees also to prayer that he might obserue his promise and other like ceremonyes saith Stow vvere vsed and this vvas done the 13. of October 1359. and therfore vppō good reason might this same Archbishope put him afterward in mynde of this his othe as before I haue shewed that he did At the admission also of king Edward the fourth Stow noteth in his Chronicle that first the peoples consent was demaunded very solemly in S. Iohns feilde by London the 29. of February in the yeare 1460. notwithstanding that king Edward had proued his title by succession before in the parlament holden at westminster and now this consent of the people being had or he being thus elected as Stowes words are he went the next day in procession at paules and offered ther and after Te Deum being song he was with greate roy alty cōueyed to westminster and ther in the haule set in the kings seat with S Edwards scepter in his hand and then the people were asked agayne if they would haue him king and they cryed yea yea thus far Iohn Stow. And if any would take exception against thes of king Henry and king Edward the 4. bicause they entred and began ther reignes vppon the depriuation of other kings then lyuing ther are yet many liuing in Ingland that haue seene the seueral coronations of king Edward the 6. Q. Mary Q. Elizsabeth that now reigneth can witnes that at al and euery of ther coronations the consent of the people and their acceptation of thos Princes is not only demanded by the publique cry of a harolde at armes which standeth on both the sydes of the high scaffolde or stage wherō the Prince is crowned and the peoples answere expected till they cry yea yea but also that the said Princes gaue there their corporal othe vpon the Euangelists vnto the Bishop that crowned them to vp holde maynteyne the faith afornamed with the liberties and priuileges of the church as also to gouerne by iustice and law as hath bin said which othes no doubt haue bine sworne and taken most solemnly by all the kings and Queenes of Ingland from the dayes of king Edward the Confessor at the least and he that wil see more poyntes of thes othes set down in particuler let hym reade magna carta and he wil be satisfied By al which and by infinite more that might be said and alleaged in this matter and to this purpose it is most euident said the Ciuilian lawyer that this agreement bargayne and contract betwene the king and his cōmon wealth at his first admission is as certayne and firme nothwitstanding any pretence or interest he hath or maye haue by succession as any cōtract or mariage in the vvorld can be vvhen it is solemnized by wordes de praesenti as our law speaketh betwene parties espoused before by vvordes de futuro vvhich is an act that expresseth this other most liuely as afterward more at large I shal shew vnto you and consequently I must nedes affirme to be most absurd base and impious that flattery before mentioned of Belloy his companions in their bookes before cited where he holdeth that only successiō of blood is the thing without further approbation which maketh a king and that the peoples consent to him that is next by birth is nothing at al needful be he what he wil and that his admission inunction or coronation is only a matter of external ceremony without any effect at al for
of obedience and allegiance and not before which argueth that before they were not bounde vnto him by allegeance and as for the princes of Ingland it is expresly noted by Inglish historiographers in ther coronatiōs how that no allegeance is dew vnto thē before they be crowned that only it happened to Henry the fifth among al other kinges his predecessors to haue this preuilege and this for his exceding to-wardlynes for the great affection of the people towards him that he had homage donne vnto him before his coronation and oth taken Wherof Polidor writeth in thes wordes Princeps Henricus facto patris funere concilium principum apud VVestmonasterium conuocandum curat in quo dum de rege creando more maiorum 〈◊〉 esse ubi continuo aliquot Principes vltro in eius verba mirare coeperunt quod beneuolentiae officium nulli antea priusquam rex renu nciatus esset praestitum constat a 〈◊〉 Henricus ab ineunte aetate spem omnibus optimae inaolis fecit Which in Inglish is this Prince Henry after he had finished his fathers funetals caused a parlament to be gathered at Westminster wher vvhiles consultation vvas had according to the ancient custome of Ingland about creating a new king behold vppon the sudden certaine of the nobility of ther owne free vvilles began to sweare obedience and leyaltie vnto him vvhich demonstration of loue and Good vvil is wel knowne that is was neuer shewed to any Prince before vntil he vvas declared king so great vvas the hope that men had of the towardlynes of this Prince Henry euen from his tender age thus far Polidor in his story of Inglād And the very same thing expresseth Iohn Stow also in his chonicle in thes vvordes To this noble Prince by assent of the parlament al the states of the realme after three dayes offred to do fealtte before he was crowned or had solemnized hu oth wel and iustly to gouerne the common wealth which offer before was neuer found to be made to any Irince of Ingland thus much Stow. in vvhose narration as also in that of Polidor it may be noted that king Henry the fift vvas not called king vntil after his coronation but onlv Prince though his fathe king Henry the fourth had bin dead now almost a month before and secondly that the parlament consulted de Rege creando more maiorum as Polidor his vvords are that is of making a new king according to the ancient custome of ther auncestors vvhich argueth that he vvas not yet king though his father were dead nor that the manner of our old Inglish ancestors vvas to accompt him so before his admission Thirdly that this demonstration of good wil of the nobility to acknowlege him for king before his coronation and oth solemnized wel and iustly to gouerne the realme was very extraordinary and of meere good wil. And last of al that this was neuer donne to any Prince before king Henry the fift al which pointes do demonstrate that it is the coronation and admission that maketh a perfect and true king whatsoeuer the title by succession be otherwise that except the admission of the common wealth be ioyned to succession it is not sufficient to make a lawful king and of the two the second is of far more importance to vvit the consent and admission of the realme then nearnes of blood by succession a-loue This I might proue by many examples in Ingland it selfe wher admission hath preuayled against right of succession as in William Rufus that suceeded the Conquerer and in king Henry the first his brother In king Stephen king Iohn and others vvho by only admission of the realme were kings against the order of succession as after more at large I shal shew you in a particuler spech vvhich of this point I shal make unto you and very specially it may be seene in the two examples before mentioned of the admission of the two kings Henry and Edward both surnamed the fourth vvhos entrances to the crowne if a man dovvel consider he shal find that both of them founded the best part and most surest of their titles vppon the election consent and good wil of the people yea both of them at their dying dayes hauing some remorse of cōscience as it semed for that they had caused so many men to dye for mayntenance of ther seueral rightes and titles had no better way to appease ther owne mynds but by thinking that they were placed in that rome by the voice of the realme and consequētly might lawfully defend the same punish such as went about to depriue them Moreouer you shal finde if you looke into the doings of Princes in al ages that such kings as vvere most politique and had any lest doubt or suspicion of trobles about the title after ther deathes haue caused their sonnes to be crowned in their owne dayes trusting more to this then to their title by succession though they vvere neuer so lawfully lineally discended And of this I could alleage you many examples out of diuers countryes but especially in France since the last lyne of Capetus came vnto that crowne for this did Hugh Capetus himselfe procure to be donne to Robert his eldest sonne in his owne dayes and the like did king Robert procure for his yonger sonne Henry the first as Girard holdeth and excluded his elder only by crowning Henry in his owne daies Henty also did entreat the states of Frace as before you haue hard to admitt crowne Phillip the first his eldest sonne vvhiles himselfe reigned and this mans sonne Luys lc Cros did the same also vnto tvvo sonnes of his first to Phillip and after his death to Luys the yonger both vvhich vvhere crowned in ther fathers life time this Luys agayne the yonger vvhich is the seuenth of that name for more assuring of his sonne named Phillip the secōd entreated the realme to admit crowne him also in his owne dayes vvith that great solemnity vvhich in the former chapter hath bin declared And for this very same cause of securitie it is not to be doubted but that alvvayes the prince of Spayne is sworne and admitted by the realme during his fathers reigne as before hath bin said The same consideration also moued king Dauid to crowne his sonne Salomon in his owne dayes as aftervvard more in particuler shal be declared and finally our king Henry also the second of Ingland considering the alteration that the realme had made in admitting king Stephen before him against the order of lineal successiō by propinquity of blood and fearing that the like might happen also after him caused his eldest sonne named likewise Henry to be crowned in his life time so as ingland had two king Henries liuing at one tyme vvith equal authoritie and this was done in the 16. yeare of his reigne and in the yeare of
the longest liuer should haue al wheruppon the said Canutus tooke the tvvo children of king Edmond Ironside named Edmond and Edward and sent them ouer into Sweuelād which at that tyme vvas subiect also vnto him and caused them to be brought vp honorably of vvhich two the elder named Edmond dyed without issue but Edward vvas maried and had diuers children as after shal be touched Etheldred and his sonne Edmond being dead Canutus the Dane was admitted for king of England by the vvhole parlament consent side as hath bin said and this the third breache of lineal discent But this notwithstanding Alerud being slayne prince Edward was made king tanta publica laetitia saith Polidor vt certatim pro eius faelici principatu cuncti vota facercnt That is he vvas made king vvith such vniuersal ioy and contentment of al men as euery man contended who should pray and make most vowes to God for his happie reygne and according to this was the successe for he vvas a most excellent prince and almost miraculously he reygned with great peace and void of al war at home and a broad for the space of almost 20. yeares after so infinit broyles as had bin before him and insued after hym and yet his title by succession can not be iustified as you see for that his eldest brothers sonne was the aliue to wit prince Edward surnamed the outlaw vvho in this kinges reygne came into Ingland and brought his vvife and three lawful children with him to wit Edgar Margaret Christian but yet vvas not this good king Edward so scrupulous as to giue ouer his kingdome to any of them or to doubt of the right of his owne title vvhich he had by election of the common wealth against the order of succession This king Edward being dead without issue Polidor saith that the states made a great consultation whom they should make king and first of al it semeth they excluded him that was only next by propinquity in blood vvhich vvas Edgar Adelin fonne to the said prince Edward the outlaw now departed and nephew to king Edmond Ironside and the reason of this exclusion is alleaged by Polidor in thes vvordes is puet id aetatis nondum regno gubernando maturus erat That is he bing a child of so smale yeares vvas not ripe enough to gouerne the kingdome and then he saith that Harald sonne of Earle Goodwin by the daughter of Canutus the first proclaymed himselfe king and more ouer he addeth Non displicait omnino id factum populo qui plurimum spei in Haraldi virtute habebat itaque more maiorum sacratus est vvhich is this fact of Harald displeased not at al the people of Ingland for that they had great hope in the vertue of this Harald so vvas he annoynted and crowned according to the fassion of the anciēt kings of Ingland by which vvordes vve may fee that Harald had also the approbation of the realme to be king notwith standing that lytle Edgar vvas present as hath bin said so as this was the fourth breach of succession at this tyme. But in the meane space William Duke of Normandy pretended that he vvas chosen before by king Edward the Confessor and that the realme had giuen their consent therunto and that king Edward left the same testified in his last wil and testament and albert none of our Inglish authors do auow the same cleerly yet do many other forrayne writers hold it and it semeth very probable that some such thing had past both for that duke William had many in Ingland that did fauor his pretence at his entrance as also as Girard in his French storie saith that at his first comming to London he punished diuers by name for that they had broken their othes and promises in that behalfe And moreouer it appereth that by alleaging this title of election he moued diuers princes abroade to fauour him in that action as in a iust quarrel vvhich is not like they should haue done if he had pretended only a conquest or his title of consanguinity vvhich could be of no importance in the vvorld for that effect seing it was no other but that his grand father and king Edwards mother vvere brother and sister which could giue him no pretence at al to the succession of the crowne by bloode and yet vve see that diuers princes did assist him and among others the French chronicler Girard so often named before vvriteth that Alexander the second pope of Rome vvhos holines vvas so much estemed in those dayes as one Constantinus Afer wrote a booke of his miracles being informed by Duke William of the iustnes of his pretence did send him his benediction and a precious ring of gold vvith a hallowed banner by vvhich he gott the victory thus writeth Girard in his French chronicles and Antoninus Archbishop of Florence surnamed Sainct vvriting of this matter in his chronicles speaketh great good of William Cōqueror and commendeth his enterprise But howsoeuer this was the victory vve se he gat and God prospered his pretence and hath confirmed his of spring in the crovvne of Ingland more then 500. yeares together so as now accounting from the death of king Edmond Ironside vnto this man we shal finde as before I haue said in lesse then 50. yeares that 5. or 6. kings vvere made in Ingland one after another by only authority and approbation of the common wealth contrary to the ordinary course of lineal succession by propinquitie of blood And al this is before the conquest but if vve should passe any further downe we should finde more examples then before For first the two sonnes of the Conqueror himselfe that succeded after him to vvit william Rufus and Henry the first were they not both yonger brothers to Robert Duke of Normandie to whom the most part of the realme vvas inclined as Polydor sayth to haue giuen the kingdome presently after the Conquerors death as devv to him by succession notwithstanding that VVilliam for particuler displeasure against his elder sonne had ordeyned the contrary in his testament But that Robert being absent in the war of Hierusalem the holy and lerned man Lanfranke as he vvas accompted then Archbishop of Canterbury being deceaued vvith vaine hope of VVilliam Rufus good nature perswaded them the contrary who vvas at that day of high estemation authority in Ingland and so might induce the realme to do what he liked By like meanes gat Henry his yonger brother the same crowne afterwards to wit by faire promises to the people and by helpe principally of Henry Newborow Earle of warwick that dealt with the nobility for him and Maurice bishop of London with the cleargie for that Anselme Archbishop of Cantetbury vvas in banishment Besides this also it did greatly healpe his cause that his elder brother Robert to vvhom the crowne by right apperteyned vvas absent againe
this second tyme in the warr of Ierusalem and so lost therby his kingdome as before Henry hauing no other title in the world vnto it but by election and admission of the people which yet he so defended afterwards against his said brother Robert that came to clayme it by the sword and god did so prosper him ther-in as he tooke his said elder brother prisoner and so kept him for many yeares vntil he dyed in prison most pitifully But this king Henry dying left a daughter behind him named Mawde or Mathilde which being married first to the Emperor Henry the fift he dyed without issue and then vvas she married agayne the secōd tyme to Geffry Plantagenet Earle of Anjow in France to whom she bare a sonne named Henry vvhich this king Henry his grand father caused to be declared for heyre apparent to the crowne in his dayes but yet after his disceasse for that Stephē Earle of Bollogne borne of Adela daughter to William the Conqueror was thought by the state of Ingland to be more fitt to gouerne and to defend the land for that he was at mans age then vvas prince Henry a child or Maude his mother he vvas admitted and Henry put back and this chiefly at the perswasion of Henry bishop of winchester brother to the said Stephen as also by the solicitation of the Abbot of Glastenbury and others vvho thought be like they might do the same with good conscience for the good of the realme though the euent proued not so wel for that it drew al Ingland into factions and diuisions for auoyding and ending wherof the states some years after in a parlament at Wallingford made an agrement that Stephen should be lavvful king during his life only and that Henry and his ofspring should succede him and that prince William king Stephens sonne should be dcpriued of his succession to the crowne and made only Earle of Norfolcke thus dyd the state dispose of the crowne at that tyme vvhich vvas in the yeare of Christ 1153. To this Henry succeded by order his eldest sonne then liuing named Richard and surnamed Cordelyon for his Valor but after him agayne the succession vvas broken For that Iohn king Henries yongest sonne to vvit yōger brother to Richard vvhom his father the king had left so vnprouided as in iest he vvas called by the french Iean sens terre as if you vvould saye Sir Iohn lacke-land this man I say vvas after the death of his brother admitted and crowned by the states of Ingland and Arthur Duke of Britaine sonne and heyre to Geffery that vvas elder brother to Iohn vvas against the ordinarie course of succession excluded And albeit this Arthur did seeke to remedy the matter by warr yet it semed that god did more defend this election of the common wealth then the right title of Arthur by succession for that Arthur vvas ouer-come and taken by king Iohn though he had the king of Fraunce on his side and he dyed pitifully in prison or rather as most authors do hold he was put to death by king Iohn his vncles own handes in the castle of Roan therby to make his title of succession more cleare which yet could not be for that as wel Stow in his Chronicle as also Mathew of westminster and others before him do write that Geffrey besides this sonne left two daughters also by the lady Cōstance his wife Countesse heyre of Britaine which by the law of Ingland should haue succeded before Iohn but of this smal accōpt seemed to be made at that day Some yeares after when the Barons and states of Ingland misliked vtterly the gouerment and proceeding of this king Iohn they reiected him agayne chose Luys the prince of France to be ther king and dyd sweare fealtie to him in London as before hath bin saide and they depriued also the yong prince Hēry his sonne that was at that tyme but of 8. yeares ould but vppon the death of his father king Iohn that shortly after insued they recalled agayne that sentence admitted this Henry to the crowne by the name of king Henry the third and disanulled the oth and allegeance made vnto Luys Prince of France and so king Henry reigned for the space of 53. yeares afterwards the lōgest reygne as I thinke that any before or after him hath had in Ingland Moreouer you know that from this king Henry the third do take their first beginning the two branches of York and Lācaster which after fell to so great contention about the crowne Into which if we vvould enter vve should see playnly as before hath bin noted that the best of al their titles after the depositiō of king Richard the second depended of this authority of the common wealth for that as the people were affected and the greater parte preuailed so were their titles ether allowed cōfirmed altered or disa nulled by parlaments and yet may not we wel affirme but that ether part vvhen they vvere in possession and confirmed therin by thes parlaments were lawful kings and that God concurred vvith them as vvith true princes for gouermēt of their people for if vve should deny this pointe as before hath bin noted great inconueniences vvould follow vve should shake the states of most princes in the world at this day as by examples which alredy I haue alleaged in part may appeare And vvith this also I meane to conclude and end this discourse in like manner affirming that as on the one side propinquity of bloode is a great preheminence towards the atteyning of any crowne so yet doth is not euer bynde the commō wealth to yeald ther-vnto if waightier reasons should vrge them to the contrary nether is the common wealth bound alwayes to shutt her eyes and to admit at hap-hazard or of necessity euery one that is next by succession of bloode as Belloy falsely fondly affirmeth but rather she is bound to consider vvel and maturely the person that is to enter vvhether he be like to performe his duety and charge committed vnto him or no for that otherwise to admitt him that is an enimye or vnfitt is but to destroy the common wealth and him together This is my opinion and this seemeth to me to be conforme to al reason law religion piety vvisdome and pollicy and to the vse and custome of al vvel gouerned common wealthes in the vvorld nether do I meane heereby to preiudice any princes pretence or succession to any crowne or dignitie in the vvorld but rather do hold that he ought to enioy his preheminence but yet so that he be not preiudical therby to the whole body which is euer to be respected more then any one person vvhatsoeuer Belloy or other of his opinion do say to the contrary Thus said the Ciuilian and being called vppon and drawne to a new matter by the question that ensueth he made his last discourse conclusion
discended from king VVilliam the Cōqueror by his eldest daughter lady Cōstance as also by diuers other participations of the blood royal of Ingland as aftervvards vvil appeare Now then to come to the second daughter of king VVilliam the Conqueror or rather the third for that the first of al vvas a Nonne as before hath byn noted her name vvas Adela or Alis as hath bin saide and she vvas marryed in France to Stephen counte Palatin of Champagne Charters and Bloys by whom she had a sonne called also Stephen vvho by his grand mother was earle also of Bollayne in Picardie and after the death of his vncle king Henry of Ingland vvas by the fauour of the Inglish nobility and especially by the helpe of his owne brother the Lord Henry of Bloys that vvas Bishop of Winchester and iointly Abbot of Glastenbury made kinge of England and this both in respect that Mathilda daughter of king Henry the first was a woman and her sonne Henry duke of Anjou a very childe one degree farther of from the Conqueror and from kings Rufus then Stephen vvas as also for that this king Henry the first as hath bin signified before vvas iudged by many to haue entred vvrongfully vnto the crowne and therby to haue made both himselfe and his posterity incapable of succession by the violence vvhich he vsed against both his elder brother Robart and his nephew duke VVilliam that vvas sonne and heyte to Robert vvho by nature and law were bothe of them held for soueraintes to Iohn by those that fauored them and their pretentions But yet howsoeuer this were we see that the duke of Britany that liued at that day should euidently haue succeded before Stephen for that he was discended of the elder daughter of the Conqueror and Stephen of the yonger though Stephen by the commodity he had of the neernes of his porte and hauen of Bullayne vnto Ingland as the French stories do saye for Calys vvas of no importance at that tyme and by the frendship and familiarity he had gotten in Ingland during the raigne of his two vncles king Rufus and king Henry and especially by the help of his brother the Bishop and Abbot as hath bin said he gat the start of al the rest and the states of Ingland admitted him This man although he had two sonnes namely Eustachius duke of Normandy and William earle of Norfolk yet left they no issue And his daughter Marie was maried to mathew of Fladers of whom if any issue remaines it fell afterward vppon the house of Austria that succeded in those states To king Stephen who left no issue succeded by compositiō after much warre Henry duke of Aniou sonne and heyre to Mathilda before named daughter of Henry the first which Henry named afterward the second tooke to wife Elenor daughter and heyre of VVilliam duke of Aquitaine earle of Poytiers which Elenor had bin marryed before to the king of France Lewis the 7. and bare him two daughters but vppon dislike conceaued by the one against the other they were deuorced vnder pretēce of being within the fowerth degree of consanguinitye and so by second marriage Elenor vvas vvife to this said Henry who afterward was king of Ingland by name of K. Henry the fecōd that procured the deathe of Thomas Becket archebishope of Canterbury and vvas both before and after the greatest enimye that euer Lewis the king of France had in the vvorld and much the greater for his marriage by vvhich Henry vvas made far stronger for by this woman he came to be duke of al Aquitaine that is of Gascony and Guyene and earle of al the coūtrey of Poytiers wheras beforealso by his fathers inheritance he vvas duke both of Anjou Tourayne and Mayne by his mother Mathilda king Henries daughter of Ingland he came to be king of Ingland duke of Normandie and by his owne industry he gat also to be lord of Ireland as also to bring Scotland vnder his homage so as he enlarged the kingdome of Ingland most of any other king before or after him This king Henry the second as Stow reconteth had by Lady Elenor fyue sonnes and three daughters His eldest sonne vvas named VVilliam that dyed yonge his seconde vvas Henry vvhom he caused to be crowned in his owne life tyme vvherby he receaued much trouble but in the end this sonne died before his father without issue His third sonne vvas Richard surnamed for his valour Cor de leon who reigned after his father by the name of Richard the first and died vvithout issue in the yeare of Christ 1199. Hys fovverth sonne named Geffrey maried lady Constance daughter and heyre of Britanie as before hath bin said and dying left a sonne by her named Arthur which vvas duke of Britanie after him and pretended also to be king of Ingland but vvas put by it by his vncle Iohn that tooke him also prisoner and kept him so in the castel first of fallaise in Normandie and then in Roan vntil he caused him to be put to death or slew him vvith his owne hands as Frēch stories vvrite in the yeare 1204. This duke Arthur left behind him two sisters as Stow writeth in his chronicles but others write that it was but one and at least wise I fynde but one named by the french stories which vvas Elenor whom they saye king Iohn also caused to be muthered in Ingland a a litle before her brother the duke vvas put to death in Normandie and this was the end of the issue of Geffrey whose vvife Constance duchesse of Britanie marryed againe after this murther of her children vnto one Guy Vicond of Touars and had by him two daughters wherof the eldest named Alis was duchefse of Britanie by vvhome the race hath bin continued vnto our tyme. The fift sonne of king Henry the second was named Iohn who after the death of his brother Richard by help of his mother Elenor and of Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury drawen therunto by his said mother gat to be king and put back his nephew Arthur vvhom king Richard before his departure to the war of the holy land had caused to be declared heyre apparent but Iohn preuayled and made away both nephew and Neece as before hath bin saide for which fact he vvas detested of many in the world abroade and in France by acte of parlament depriued of al the states he had in those partes Soone after also the pope gaue sentence of depriuation against him and his owne barons tooke armes to execute the sentence and finally they deposed both him and his yong sonne Henry being then but a child of 8. yeares old and this in the 18. yeare of his reigne and in the yeare of Christ 1215. and Levvis the 8. of that name prince at that tyme but afterward king of France was chosen king of Ingland sworne in Londō and
vvhich end being taken away or peruerted the king becommeth a tyrant a Tigar a fearse Lion a rauening wolfe a publique enimy and a bloody murtherer vvhich vvere against al reason both natural and moral that a common wealth could not deliuer it selfe from so eminent a distruction By authority also you haue heard it proued of al law-makers Philosophers Lawyers Diuines and Gouernours of common vvealthes vvho haue set downe in their statutes and ordonances that kings shal sweare and protest at their entrance to gouerment that they vvil obserue and performe the conditions their promised otherwise to haue no interest in that dignity soueraintie By examples in like manner of al realmes christian he declared how that often-tymes they haue deposed their princes for iust causes and that God hath concurred and assisted wonderfully the-same sending them commonly very good kings after those that vvere depriued and in no country more then in Ingland it selfe yea in the very lyne and familye of this king Richard vvhose noble grand-father king Edward the third vvas exalted to the crowne by a most solemne deposition of his predecessor king Edvvard the second vvherfore in this point their can be litle controuersie and therfore vve shal passe vnto the second vvhich is vvhether the causes vvere good and iust for which this king Richard vvas esteemed vvorthy to be deposed And in this second pointe much more difference their is betwixt Yorke and Lancaster and betwene the vvhite rose and the redd for that the house of Yorke seeking to make the other odious as though they had entred by tyrannie cruelty doth not stick to auouch that king Richard vvas vniustly deposed but against this the house of Lancaster alleageth first that the howse of Yorke cā not iustly saye this for that the chiefe prince assistant to the deposing of king Richard vvas lorde Edmond hymselfe duke of Yorke and head of that familie together with Edward earle of Rutland duke of Aumarle his eldest sonne and heyre yea and his yonger sonne also Richard earle of Cambrige father to this Richard that now pretēdeth for so do write both Stow Hollingshead and other chroniclers of Ingland that those princes of the howse of Yorke did principally assist Hēry duke of Lancaster in getting the crowne and deposing king Richard Polidor speaking of the wicked gouerment of king Richard and of the first cogitation about deposing him vvhen king Henry of Lancaster vvas yet in France banished and seemed not to thinke of any such matter he hath these words Sed Edmundo Eboracensium duei eares cum primis bilem commouit quod rex omnia iam iura peruerteret quòd antea parricidio postea rapinis se obstrinxisset c. That is this matter of the wicked gouerment of king Richard did principally offend his vncle Edmond duke of Yorke for that he saw the king novv to peruert al law and equity and that as before he had defiled himselfe vvith parricide that is with the murther of his owne Vncle the duke of Glocester brother to this Edmond so now he intangled himselfe also vvith rapine in that he tooke by violence the goods and inheritance of Iohn ofGaunt late deceased vvhich did belong to Henry duke of Lancaster his cosen germaine by which wordes of Polidor as also for that the duke of Lancaster cōming out of Britayne accompaned only with three score persons as some stories say chose first to goe into Yorke-shire and to enter at Rauenspurr at the mouthe of Humber as al the vvorld knoweth which he would neuer haue done if the princes of Yorke had not principally fauoured him in that action al this I say is an euident argumēt that these princes of the house of Yorke were then the chiefe doers in this deposition and consequently cannot alleage now with reason that the said Richard was deposed vniustly Secondly the house of Lancaster alleageth for the iustifying of this deposition the opinions of al historiographers that euer haue written of this matter vvhether they be Inglish French Duch Latine or of any other nation or language vvho al with one accord do affirme that king Richards gouerment vvas intolerable he worthy of deposition wherof he that wil se more let him reade Thomas of Walsingham and Iohn Frosard in the life of king Richard Thirdly they of Lancaster do alleage the particuler outrages and insolences of king Richards gouerment and first the suffring himselfe to be carryed away with euil counsel of his fauorites and thē the peruerting of al lawes generally vnder his gouerment as before you haue hard out of Polidor the ioyning vvith his my niōs for opressing the nobility of which Stow hath these vvordes The king being at Bristow with Robert de Vere duke of Ireland Michael de la Pole Earle of Suffolke deuised how to take away the duke of Glocester the earles of Arundel VVarwick Darby and Notingham and others whose deathes they conspired thus sayeth Stow. And soone after they executed the most par of their deuises for that Thomas of Woodstock duke of Glocester vvas made away vvithout law or processe the earle of Arundel also vvas put to death and VVarwick vvas banished and so was also Thomas Arundel Archbishop of Canterbury by like injustice and the like was done to Henry duke of Hereford and after of Lancaster and among other insolences he suffred Robert Vere to dishonour and put from him his vvife a noble and goodly yong Lady as Stow sayeth and borne of Lady Isabel king Richards aunt that vvas daughter to king Edward the third and suffred Vere to marry an other openly to her disgrace and dishonour of her kynred And finaly in the last parlament that euer he held which vvas in the 21. yeare of his reigne commonly called the euel parlament he would needs haue al authority absolute graunted to certaine fauourits of his which Thomas Walsingham saith were not aboue 6. or 7. to determine of all matters vvith al ful authority as if they only had bin the vvhole realme vvhich vvas nothing in deede but to take al authority to him selfe only and Stow in his chronicle hath these wordes following This parlameut began about the 15. of September in the yeare 1397. at the beginning wherof Edward Stafford Bishop of Exceter Lord Chancellor of Ingland made a proposition or sermon in which he affirmed that the power of the king was alone and perfit of it selfe and those that do impeatch it were worthy to suffer paine of the law c. thus saith Stow by al vvhich is euident how exorbitant and contrary to al law and equity this kinges gouerment vvas Fourthly and lastly those of Lancaster do alleage for iustifying of this depriuation that duke Henry vvas called home by expresse lettres of the more and better part of al the realme and that he came vvholy in a manner vn-armed considering his person for that
frosard sayeth he had but three shippes only out of Britanie and Walsingham saith he had but 15. Lances and 400. footmen and the additions to Polychronicon as before I noted do auouch that when he landed at Rauenspurt in the county of Yorke he had but threescore men in al to begin the reformation of his realme against so potent a tyrant as King Richard was then accompted and yet vvas the concourse of al people so great and general vnto him that within few dayes he achiued the matter and that without any battaile or bloodshed at al thus much for the iustnes of the cause But now if we vvil consider the manner and forme of this act they of Lancaster do affirme also that it could not be executed in better nor more conuenient order First for that it vvas done by the choise and inuitation of al the realme or greater and better parte therof as hath bin said Secondly for that is vvas done vvithout slaughter and thirdly for that the king vvas deposed by act of parlament and himselfe conuinced of his vnworthy gouerment and brought to confesse that he vvas vvorthely depriued and that he vvillingly and freely resigned the same nether can their be any more circumstances required saye these men for any lavvful deposition of a Prince And if any man wil yet obiect and saye that notwithstanding al this their vvas violence for that duke Henry was armed and by force of armes brought this to passe they of Lancaster do answere that this is true that he brought the matter to an Roboam for the sinnes of Salomon his father and yet spare him also in parte for the sake of his grand father Dauid he caused a rebellion to be raysed against him by Ieroboam his seruant and more then three partes of foure of his people to rebell against him and this by Gods owne instinct and motion and by his expresse allowance therof after it vvas done as the scripture auoucheth and if Roboam had fought against them for this fault as once he had thought to do and vvas prepared vvith a mayne army no doubt but they might haue lawfully stayne him for that now these tenn tribes that for-sooke him had iust authority to depose him for his euel gouerment and for not yealding to their iust request made vnto him for easing them of those greuous tributes laid vppon them as the scripture reporteth For albeit God had a meaning to punish him for the sinnes of his father Salomon yet suffred he that Roboam also should giue iust occasion him selfe for the people to leaue him as appereth by the story and this is Gods highe vvisdome iustice prouidence and swete disposition in humane affaires An other example of punishing and deposing euel Princes by force they do alleage out of the first booke of kings wher God appointed Elizens the Prophet to send the sonne of an other Prophet to annoynt Iehu Captaine of Ioram king of Israel vvhich Ioram was sonne to the Queene Iezabel and to persuade Iehu to take armes against his said king and against his mother the Queene and to depriue them both not only of their kingdomes but also of their liues and so he did for the scripture saith Coniurauit ergo Iehu contra Ioram Iehu did coniure and conspite at the persuasion of this Prophet vvith the rest of his fellow Captaines against his king Ioram and Queene Iezabel the kinges mother to put them downe and to put them to death with al the ignomy he could deuise and God allowed therof and perswaded the same by so holy a Prophet as Elizeus vvas wherby we maye assure our selues that the fact was not only lawfull but also most godly albeit in it selfe it might seeme abhominable And in the same booke of kings within two chapters after there is an other example how God moued loiada high priest of Ierusalem to persuade the Captaines and Coronels of that cittye to conspire against Athalia the Queene that had reigned 6. yeares and to arme them selues with the armor of the temple for that purpose and to beseige the pallace wher she lay and to kill al them that should offer or goe about to defend her so they did and hauing taken her aliue she vvas put to death also by sentence of the said high priest and the fact vvas allowed by God and highly commended in the scripture and Ioas yong king of the blood royal was crowned in her place al this might haue bin done as you see without such trouble of armes bloodshed if God vvould but he appointed this seueral meanes for working of his wil and for releeuing of common wealthes oppressed by euel princes And this seemeth sufficient proofe to these men that king Richard of Ingland might be remoued by force of armes his life and gouerment being so euel and pernitious as before hath bin shewed It remayneth then that vve passe to the second principal pointe proposed in the begining vvhich was that supposing this depriuation of king Richard vvas iust and lawful vvhat house by right should haue succeded him ether that of lācaster as it did or the other of Yorke And first of al it is to be vnderstood that at that very tyme vvhen king Richard vvas deposed the house of Yorke had no pretence or little at al to the crowne for that Edmond Mortimer earle of march nephew to the lady Phillip vvas then aliue with his sister Anne Mortymer marryed to Richard earle of Cambrige by vvhich Anne the howse of Yorke did after make their clayme but could not do so yet for that the said Edmond her brother was liuing and so continued many yeares after as appeareth for that wee reade that he vvas aliue 16. yeares after this to witt in the third yeare of the raigne of king Henry the fift vvhen his said brother in law Richard earle of Cambrigs vvas put to death in South-hampton vvhom this Edmond appeached as after shal be shewed and that this Edmond vvas now earle of March when king Richard vvas deposed and not his father Roger as Polidot mistaketh is euident by that that the said Roger vvas slayne in Ireland a litle before the depositiō of King Richard to witt in the yeare 1398. and not many monethes after he had bin declared heyre apparent by king Richard and Rogers father named Edmond also husband of the lady Phillip dyed some three yeares before him that is before Roger as after wil be seene so as seing that at the deposition of king Richard this Edmond Mortimer elder brother to Anne was yet liuing the question cannot be whether the house of Yorke should haue entred to the crowne presently after the depriuation of kinge Richard for they had vet no pretence as hath bin shewed but whether this Edmond Mortimer as heyre of Leonel duke of Clarence or els Henry the duke of Lancaster heyre of Iohn of Gaunt should haue entred For as for
after for keping of his oth that he had made vnto his father neuer pretended any right to the crowne yet king Richard knowing vvel the pretence that he and his might haue vvas stil afraid of him and sought infinite meanes to be rydd of him first by perswading him to goe and make vvarr in Spaine vvher he thought he might miscarry in so dangerous an attempt and then offering to giue him al Aquitaine if he vvould leaue Ingland to goe liue there as he did for three yeares vvith extreme peril for that the people of Aquitaine would not receaue him but rose against him and refused his gouerment and vvould not admitt him for their Lord but appealed to the king vvho also allowed therof and so vvhen Iohn of Gaunt came home into Ingland againe kinge Richard thought no better way to vveaken him then to banish his sonne Henry duke of Herford and so he did And besides this the said king Richard practised also by diuers secret drifts the death of his said vncle the duke of Lancaster as Walsingham witnesseth and vvhen the said duke came at lenghte to dye which vvas in the 22. yeare of king Richards raigne he vvrote such ioyous letters therof as frossard saith to his father in law the sixt Charles king of France as though he had bin deliuered of his chiefest enemy not immagining that his owne distructioÌ„ was so neere at hand and much accelerated by the death of the said duke as it was And these vvere the causes say the fauorers of the house of Lancaster why king Richard caused this acte of parlament to passe in fauour of Roger Mortimer in preiudice of the house of Lancaster and not for that the right of earle Mortimer vvas better then that of the duke of Lancaster And this they say is no new thing for princes often tymes to procure partial lawes to passe in parlament for matter of succession according to their owne affections for the like say they did Edward the third procure in the fauour of this Richard as before I haue shevved in the last parlament before his death and afterward againe king Richard the third vvith much more open 〈◊〉 caused an act of parlament to passe in his dayes vvherby his nephew Iohn de la pole earle of Lincolne sonne to his sister Elizabeth duchesse of Suffolke vvas declared heyre apparent to the crowne excluding therby the children of his two elder brothers to vvit the daughters of king Edward the fourth and the sonne and daughter of Georg duke of Clarence vvhich yet by al order should haue gone before their sisters children And like facilitie founde king Henry the 8. to get the consent of two parlaments to giue him authority to appointe what successor he would of his owne kynred by which authority afterward he apointed by his testament as in an other place shal be shewed that the issue of his yonger sister mary should be preferred before the issue of his eldest sister Margaret of Scotland A like declaration was that also of king Edward the sixt of late memory vvho appointed the lady Iane Gray his cosen germane remoued to be his heyre and successor in the crowne of Ingland and excluded his owne tvvo sisters the lady Mary and the lady Elizabeth from the same but these declaratioÌ„s make litle to the purpose vvhen right and equity do repugne as these men say that it did in the fore said declaratioÌ„ of Roger Mortimer to be heyre apparent for that they hold and auow the house of Lancaster to haue had the true right to enter not only after the death of king Richard the second as it did but also before him that is to say immediatly vppon the death of king Edward the third for that Iohn of Gaunt vvas then the eldest sonne which king Edward had lyuing and neerer to his father by a degree then vvas Richard the nephew About vvhich pointe to wit vvhether the vncle or the nephew should be preferred in succession of kingdomes it seemeth that in this age of K. Edward the third there vvas great trouble and controuersy in the world abroad for so testifieth Girard du Haillan Counceler and secretary of France in his story of the yeare of Christ 1346. vvhich vvas about the middest of king Edwards reigne and therfore no maruaile though king Edward tooke such care of the sure establishing of his nephew Richard in succession as is before related And much lesse maruail is it if king Richard had stil great ielosy of his vncle the duke of Lancaster and of his ofspring considering how doubtful the question vvas among the wise and learned of those dayes For more declaration vvher-of I thinke it not amisse to alleage the very vvordes of the foresaid chronicler with the examples by him recited thus then he vvriteth About this tyme sayeth he their did arise a great and doubtful question in the world whether vncles or nephewes that is to say the yonger brother or els the children of the elder should succed vnto realmes and kingdomes vvhich coÌ„trouersy put al christianity into great broyles and troobles For first Charles the secoÌ„d king of Naples begar of Mary his wife Queene and heyre of Hungary diuers children but namely three sonnes Marrel Robert and Phillip 〈◊〉 dying before his father left a sonne named Charles vvhich in his grandmothers right vvas king also of Hungary but about the kingdome of Naples the question vvas vvhen king Charles was dead who should succeed him either Charles his nephew king of Hungary or Robert his second sonne but Robert vvas preferred and reygned in Naples and enioyed the earldome of Prouince in France also for the space of 33. yeares vvith great renowne of valor wisdome And this is one example that 〈◊〉 recounteth vvhich example is reported by the famoê° lawyer 〈◊〉 in his commentaries touching the succession of the kingdome of Sicilia and he saith that this succession of the vncle before the nephew vvas auerred also for rightful by the learend of that tyme and confirmed for inst by the iudicial 〈◊〉 of Pope Boniface and that for the reasons which afterward shal be shewed vvhen vve shal treat of this question more in particuler An other example also reporteth Girard vvhich 〈◊〉 immediatly after in the same place for that the forsaid king Robert hauing a sonne named Charles which dyed before 〈◊〉 he left a daughter and heyre named Ioan neece vnto king Robert which Ioan was married to Andrew the yonger sonne of the foresaid Charles king of Hungary but king Robert being dead ther stept vp one Lewis prince of Tarranto a place of the same kingdome of Naples who vvas sonne to Phillip before mentioned vonger brother to king Robert vvhich Lewis pretending his right to be better then that of Ioan for that he vvas a man and one degree neerer to king Charles his grand father then Ioan was for that he was nephew
fauourers of the house of Lancaster that the Inglish inclined stil to acknowlege and admitt his right before his nephew and so they proclaymed this kinge Iohn for king of Ingland vvhiles he vvas yet in Normandie I meane Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury Elenor the Queene this mother Geffrey Fitzpeter chiefe iudge of Ingland vvho knew also vvhat law meant therin and others the nobles and Barons of the realme vvithout making any doubt or scruple of his title to the succession And vvheras those of the house of Yorke do alleage that king Richard in his life tyme vvhen he was to goe to the holy land caused his nephew Arthur to be declared heyre apparent to the crowne and therby did shew that his title vvas the better they of Lancaster do answere first that this declaration of king Richard vvas not made by act of parlament of England for that king Richard vvas in Normandy vvhen he made this declaration as playnly appeareth both by Polidor and Hollingshead Secondly that this declaration was made the sooner by king Richard at that tyme therby to represse and kepe downe the ambitious humor of his brother Iohn vvhom he feared least in his absence if he had bin declared for heyre apparēt might inuade the crowne as in dede vvithout that he was like to haue done as may appeare by that which happened in his saide brothers absence Thirdly they shew that this declaration of king Richard vvas neuer admitted in Ingland neither duke Iohn would suffer it to be admitted but rather caused the bishop of Ely that vvas left gouernour by king Richard vvith cōsent of the nobility to renownce the said declaration of king Richard in fauour of Arthur and to take a contrary oth to admitt the said Iohn if king Richard his brother should dye vvithout issue and the like oth did the said Bishop of Ely together withe the Archbishop of Roan that was left in equal authority with him exact and take of the citizens of London vvhen they gaue them their priuileges and liberties of cōmunaltie as Hollingshed recordeth And lastly the said Hollingshed vvriteth how that king Richard being now come home againe from the warr of Hierusalem and void of that ielosy of his brother vvhich before I haue mentioned he made his last wil and testament and ordeyned in the same that his brother Iohn should be his successor caused al the nobles there present to sweare fealtie vnto him as to his next in blood for which cause Thomas Walsingham in his story vvriteth these wordes Ioannis Filius iunior Henrici 2. Anglorum regis Alienorae Ducissae Aquitaniae non modo iure propinquitatis sed etiam testamento fratris sui Richardi designatus est successo post mortem ipsius Which is Iohn yonger sonne of Henry the second king of Ingland and of Eleanor duchesse of Aquitaine vvas declared successor of the crowne not only by law and right of neernes of blood but also by the wil and testament of Richard his brother Thus much this ancient chronicler speaketh in the testifying of King Iohns title By al which examples that fell out almost vvithin one age in diuers natiōs ouet the world letting passe many others which the Ciuilian touched in his discourse before for that they are of more ancient tymes these fauourers of the house of Lancaster do inferr that the right of the vncle before the nephew vvas no new or straunge matter in those dayes of king Edward the third and that if we vvil deny the same now vve must cal in question the succession and right of al the kingdomes and states before mentioned of Naples Sicilie Spayne Britanie Flanders Scotland Ingland whose kings and princes do euidently hold their crownes at this day by that very title as hath bin shewed Moreouer they saye that touching law in this pointe albeit the most famous Ciuil lavvyers of the world be some vvhat deuided in the same matter some of them fauouring the vncle and some other the nephew and that for different reasons As Baldus Oldratus Panormitanus and diuers others alleaged by Guillelmus Benedictus in his repetitions in fauour of the nephew against the vncle and on the other side for the vncle before the nephew Bartolus Alexander Decius Altiatus Cuiatius and many other their follovvers are recompted in the same place by the same man yet in the end Baldus that is held for head of the contrary side for the nephew after al reasons weighed to and fro he commeth to conclude that seing rigour of law runneth only with the vncle for that in deed he is properly neerest in blood by one degree and that only indulgence and custome serueth for the nephew permitting him to represent the place of his father vvhich is dead they resolue I say that vvhensoeuer the vncle is borne before the nephew and the said vncles elder brother dyed before his father as it happened in the case of Iohn of Gaunt and of king Richard their the vncle by right may be preferred for that the said elder brother could not giue or transmitt that thing to his sonne vvhich vvas not 〈◊〉 himselfe before his father dyed and consequently his sonne could not represent that vvhich his father neuer had and this for the Ciuil law Touching our common lawes the fauourers of lancaster do say two or three things first that the right of the crowne and interest therunto is not decided expresly in our lavv not it is a plea subiect to the common rules therof but is superiour and more eminent and therfore that men may not iudge of this as of other pleas of particuler persons nor is the tryal like nor the common maximes or rules alwaies of force in this thing as in others which they proue by diuers particuler cases as for example the vvidow of a priuate man shal haue her thirdes of al his landes for her dowry but not the Queene of the crowne Againe if a priuate man haue many daughters and dye seazed of any landes in fee simple vvithout heyre male his said daughters by law shal haue the said landes as coparteners equally deuided betweene them but not the daughters of a king for that the eldest must carry away al as though she vvere heyre male The lyke also is seene if a baron matche vvith a femme that is an inheretrix and haue issue by her though she dye yet shal he enioye her landes during his lyfe as tenant by curtesie but it is not so in the crowne if a man mary with a Queene as king Phillip dyd with Queene Marye and so finally they saye also that albeit in priuate mens possessions the common course of our law is that if the father dye seazed of landes in fee simple leauing a yonger sonne and a nephew that is to say a child of his elder sonne the nephew shal succede his grandfather as also he shal do his vncle if
or collegiate church is remayned on foote vvith the rents and dignities therunto apperteyning and vvhen our nobilytie shal remember how the nobilitie of Scotland is subiect at this day to a few ordinary and common ministers vvithout any head vvho in their synodes and assemblies haue authority to put to the horne and driue out of the realme any noble man vvhatsoeuer vvithout remedy or redresse except he vvil yeald and humble himselfe to them and that the king himselfe standeth in avve of this exorbitant and populer povver of his ministers and is content to yeld therunto it is to be thought say these men that few Inglish be they of vvhat religion or opinion so-euer vvil shevv themselues forvvard to receaue such a King in respect of his religion that hath no better order in his ovvne at home and thus much concerning the King of Scotland Now then it remayneth that we come to treat of the lady Arbella second branch of the house of Scotlād touching whose title though much of that vvhich hath bin said before for or against the king of Scotland may also be vnderstoode to apparteyne vnto her for that she is of the same house yet shal I in this place repeat in few wordes the principal points that are alleaged in her behalfe or preiudice First of al then is alleaged for her and by her fauourers that she is descended of the foresaid lady Margaret eldest daughter of king Henry the seuenth by her second marriage vvith Archibald Duglas earle of Anguys and that she is in the third degree only from her for that she is the daughter of Charles Steward vvho was sonne to Margaret Countesse of Lenox daughter to the said lady Margaret Queene of Scots so as this lady Arbella is but neece once remoued vnto the said Queene Margaret to vvit in equal degree of discent vvith the king of Scots vvhich king being excluded as the fauorers of this vvoman do affirme by the causes and arguments before alleaged against hym no reason say they but that this lady should enter in his place as next in blood vnto him Secondly is alleaged in her behalfe that she as an Inglish vvoman borne in Ingland and of parents vvho at the tyme of her birth vvere of Inglish alleageance vvherin she goeth before the king of Scots as hath bin seene as also in this other principal pointe that by her admission no such inconuenience can be feared of bringing in strangers or causing troobles sedition vvith-in the realme as in the pretence of the Scotish king hath bin considered and this in effect is al that I haue heard alleaged for her But against her by other competitors and their frendes I haue hard diuers arguments of no smale importance and consideration produced vvherof the first is that vvhich before hath bin alleaged against the king of Scotlād in like māner to wit that neither of them is properly of the house of Lancaster as in the genealogie set downe in the third chapter hath appeared And secondly that the title of Lācaster is before the pretence of Yorke as hath bin proued in the fourth chapter wherof is inferred that neythere the king of Scots nor Arbella are next in successiō and for that of these two propositiōs ther hath bin much treated before I remitte me therunto only promising that of the first of the tvvo vvhich is how king Henry the seuēth vvas of the house of Lancaster touching right of succession I shal handle more particulerly afterward vvhen I come to speake of the house of Portugal vvherby also shal appeare playnly vvhat pretence of succession to the crowne or duchy of Lancaster the discendentes of the said king Henry can iustely make The second impediment against the lady Arbella is the aforesaid testament of king Henry the eight and the two acts of parlaments for authorising of the same by al vvhich is pretended that the house of Suffolke is preferred before this other of Scotland A third argument is for that there is yet liuing one of the house of Suffolk that is neerer by a degree to the stemme to vvit to Hēry the seuenth to vvhom after the discease of her Maiesty that now is we must returne then is the lady Arbella or the king of Scots and this is the lady Margeret countesse of Darby mother to the present earle of Darby vvho was daughter to lady Elenor daughter of Queene Mary of France that vvas second daughter of king Henry the seuēth so as this lady Margaret coūtesse of Darby is but in the third degree from the said Henry wheras both the king of Scotland and Arbella are in the fourth and consequently she is next in propinquitie of blood how greatly this propinquity hath bin fauoured in such cases though they vvere of the yōger liine the examples before alleaged in the fourth chapter do make manifest Fourthlie and lastely and most strongly of al they do argue against the title of this lady Arbella affirming that her discent is not free from bastardly vvhich they proue first for that Queene Margaret soone after the death of her first husband king Iames the fourth marryed secretly one Steward lord of Annerdale which Steward vvas alyue longe after her marriage vvith Duglas and consequently this second marriage vvith Duglas Steward being aliue could not be lawful vvhich they do proue also by an other meane for that they saie it is most certaine and to be made euident that the said Archibald Duglas earle of Anguis had an other vvife also aliue vvhen he married the said Queene vvhich points they say vvere so publique as they came to king Henries eares vvhervppon he sent into Scotland the lord William Howard brother to the old duke of Norfolke and father to the present lord Admiral of Ingland to enquire of these pointes and the said lord Howard founde them to be true and so he reported not only to the king but also aftervvards many tymes to others and namely to Queene Mary to vvhom he vvas lord Chamberlayne and to diuers others of vvhom many be yet liuing which can and will testefy the same vppon the relation they heard from the-sayd lord Williams owne mouthe vvheruppon king Henry vvas greatly offended and would haue letted the marriage betweene his said sister and Duglas but that they were married in secret and had consummate their marriage before this was knowne or that the thing could be preuented vvhich is thought vvas one especial cause and motiue also to the said king afterward to put back the issue of his said sister of Scotland as by his fornamed testament is pretended and this touching Arbellas title by propinquitie of byrthe But besides this the same men do alleage dimers reasons also of inconucnience in respect of the common vvealthe for vvhich in their opinions it should be hurtful to the real me to admitt this lady Arbella for Queene as first of al for that she is a
vvoman vvho ought not to be preferred before so many men as at this tyme do or may stand for the crowne and that it vvere much to haue three women to reigne in Ingland one after the other vvher-as in the fpace of a-boue a thousaid yeares before them there hath not reigned so many of that sexe nether together nor a sunder for that from king Cerdick first king of the vvest Saxons vnto Egbright the first monarch of the Inglish name and nation conteyning the space of more then 300. yeares no one vvomā at al is founde to haue reigned and from Egbright to the Conquest which is almost other 300. yeares the like is to be obserued and from the conquest downeward vvhich is aboue 500. yeares one only vvoman was admitted for inheritrix vvhich was Maude the Empresse daughter of king Henry the first vvho yet after her fathers death vvas put back and king Stephen vvas admitted in her place and she neuer receaued by the realme vntil her sonne Henry the second vvas of age to gouerne himselfe then he vvas receaued vvith expresse condition that he should be crowned and gouerne by himselfe and not his mother which very conditiō vvas put also by the spaniards not long after at their admitting of the lady Berenguela yonger sister of lady Blauch neese to king Henry the second vvherof before often mention hath bin made to vvit the condition vvas that her sonne 〈◊〉 should gouerne and not she though his title came by her so as this circumstance of being a woman hath euer bin of much consideration especially where men do pretend also as in our case they doe An other consideratiō of these men is that if this lady should be aduanced vnto the crowne though she be of noble blood by her fathers side yet in respectt of alliance with the nobility of Ingland she is a meere strainger for that her kyndred is only in Scotland and in Inglād she hath only the Candishes by her mothers side vvho being but a meane familie might cause much grudging amōg the Inglish nobility to see them so greatly aduanced aboue the rest as necessarily they must be yf this womā of their linage should come to be Queene vvhich how the nobility of Ingland vvould beare is hard to say and this is as much as I haue heard others saye of this matter and of al the house of Scotland vvherfore vvith this I shal end and passe ouer to treat also of the other houses that do remayne of such as before I named OF THE HOVSE OF SVFFOLK CONTEYNING THE CLAYMES OF THE COVNTESSE OF Darby and her children as also of the children of the earle of Hartford CAP. VI. IT hath appeared by the genealogie set downe before in the third chapter and oftētymes mentioned since how that the house of Suffolk is so called for that the lady Mary secōd daughter of king Henry the seuenth being first married to Lewis the 12. king of France vvas afterward married to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolke who being sent oner to condole the death of the said king gat the good will to marry the widow Queene though the common fame of al men vvas that the said Charles had a vvife lyuing at that day and diuers yeares after as in this chapter vve shal examine more in particuler By this Chatles Brandon then duke of Suffolk this Queene Mary of France had tvvo daughters first the lady Francis married to Syr Henry Gray marques Dorset and aftervvard in the right of his vvife duke also of Suffolke vvho vvas afterward be-hedded by Queene Mary and secondly lady Elenor married to Syr Henry Clifford earle of Cumberland The lady Francis elder daughter of the Queene and of Charles Brandon had issue by her husband the said last duke of Suffolke three daughters to wit Iane Catherin and Mary which Mary the yongest vvas betrothed first to Arthur lord Gray of wilton and after lefte by hym she was marryed to one M. Martin keyes of kent gentlemā porter of the Queenes housholde and after she dyed without issue And the lady Iane the eldest of the three sisters was married at the same tyme to the lord Guylford Dudley fourth sonne to Syr Iohn Dudley duke of Northumberland and vvas proclaymed Queene after the death of king Edward for which acte al three of thē to vvit both the father sonne and daughter in law were put to death soone after But the L. Catherin the second daughter vvas married first vppon the same day that the other two her sisters vvere vnto lord Henry Herbert now earle of Penbroke and vppon the fal and misery of her house she was left by him and so she liued a sole vvoman for diuers yeares vntil in the begining of this Queenes dayes she was found to be vvith child which she affirmed to be by the lord Edward Seymer earle of Hartford vvho at that tyme was in France vvith Syr Nicholas Throgmorton the Embassador and had purpose and licence to haue trauailed into Italie but being called home in haste vppō this new accident he cōfessed that the child vvas his and both he and the lady affirmed that they were man and vvife but for that they could not proue it by witnesses for attempting such a match with one of the blood royal without priuity and licence of the prince they were committed both of them to the tower vvhere they procured meanes to meete againe afterward had an other childe vvhich both children do yet liue and the elder of them is called lord Henry Beacham and the other Edward Seymer the mother of whom liued not long after nether married the earle againe vntil of late that he married the lady Francis Howard sister to the lady Sheffeild and this is all the issue of the elder daughter of Charles Brandon by lady Mary Queene of France The second daughter of duke Charles and the Queene named L. Elenor vvas married to Henry lord Cliford earle of Cumbeiland and had by him a daughter named Margaret that married Syr Hēry Stanley lord Strāge after earle of Darby by vvhom the said lady who yet liueth hath had issue Fernande Stanley now earle of Darby William and Francis Stanley this is the issue of the house of Suffolk to vvit this Countesse of Darby with her children and these other of the earle of Hartford of al whose clayme 's and titles vvith their impediments I shal here briefly giue accompt and reason First of al both of these families do ioyne together in this one pointe to exclude the house of Scotland both by foraine birth and by the foresaid restament of king Henry authorized by two parlaments by the other exclusions which in each of the titles of the king of Scots and of lady Arbella hath bin before alleaged But then secondly they come to vary betweene themselues about the priority or propinquitie of their owne succession for the children of the earle
before her for that he was a man and of the vvhole blood to the last kings of the house of Lancaster and that she was a vvoman and but of the halfe blood so that three prerogatiues he pretended before her First that he vvas a man and she a vvoman and secondly that he descended of the lawful and elder daughter and she of the yonger brother legitimated and thirdly that he vvas of vvhole blood and she but of halfe and for better fortifying of this proofe of his title these men do alleage a certayne case determyned by the learned of our dayes as they say vvherin for the first of these three causes only the succession to a crowne vvas adiudged vnto king Phillip of Spayne to vvit the succession to the kingdome of Portugal vvhich case was in al respects correspondent to this of ours for that Emanuel king of Portugal had three children for so much as apperteyneth to this affaire for afterward I shal treat more particulerly of his issue that is to say two sonnes and one daughter in this order Iohn Elizabeth and Edward euen as Iohn of Gaunt had Hēry lady Philippe and Iohn Prince Iohn of Portugal first child of king Emanuel had issue an other Iohn and he had Sebastian in whom the line of Iohn the first child vvas extinguished but Iohns sister Elizabeth vvas married to Charles the Emperor had issue K. Phillip of Spayne that now liueth Edward also yōger brother to Elizabeth or Isabel had issue two daughters the one married to the duke of Parma the other to the duke of Bragansa so as king Phillip vvas in equal degree vvith these ladies in respect of king Emanuel for that he vvas sonne to his eldest daughter and the two duchesses vvere daughters to his yonger sonne vppon this rested the question vvhich of these should succeede and it vvas decided that it apperteyneth vnto king Phillip for that he vvas a man and his mother vvas the elder sister though if king Phillips mother and the two duchesses father I meane lord Edward of Portugal had bin aliue together no doubt but that he beinge a mā should haue borne it away vvhich these men say holdeth not in our case but is much more to our aduantage for that it hath bin shewed before that if Queene Phillippe had bin aliue vvith earle Iohn of Somerset at the death of king Henry the sixt she should haue bin preferred as legitimate by birth and therfore much more ought her nephew king Alfonsus to haue bin preferred afterward in that he vvas a man before the neece of the said earle Iohn of Somerset that vvas but a vvoman thus farr they And besides all this they do adde as often before I haue mentioned that king Alfonsus vvas of the vvhole blood vnto al the three king Henries of the house of Lancaster the countesse of Richmond vvas but of the halfe blood and for more strengthening of this argument they do say further that besides that interest or right to the crowne vvhich king Henry the fourth that vvas the first king of the house of Lancaster had by his father Iohn of Gaunt in that the said Iohn vvas third sonne of king Edward the third the said king Henry had diuers other interestes also which came of himselfe only and not from his said father as vvere for example his being called into the realme by general voyce of al the people his right gotten by armes vppon the euil gouerment of the former king the personal resignation and deliuery of the kingdome by solemne instrument made vnto him by king Richard his election also by parlament coronation by the realme and finally the quiet possession of him and his posteritie for almost threescore yeares vvith many confirmations of the whole realme by diuers acts of parlament othes and other assurāces as the world knoweth so many I meane and so autētical as could possibly be deuised or giuen and besides al this that vvhen king Richard vvas dead he vvas next in degree of propinquitie vnto him of any man liuing for that the sonnes of Roger Mortimer vvere two degrees further of then he as hath bin shewed before Al vvhich particuler rightes and interestes vvere peculier to Henry the fourth his person and vvere not in his father Iohn of Gaunt and therfore cannot possibly discend from him left by the last duke of Parma lord Ranutius that is now duke of Parma and lord Edward that is Cardinal and the lady Catherine duchesse of Bragansa that yet liueth hath issue diuers goodly princes as the lord Theodosius that is now duke of Bragansa and three yonger brothers to vvit Edward Alexander and Phillip al yong princes of great expectation and these are the children of king Emanuel vvhose particuler successions and issues I shall declare somwhat more yet in particuler Prince Iohn of Portugall afterward king by name of king Iohn the third had issue an other Iohn that vvas prince of Portugal but dyed before his father and left a sonne named Sebastian vvho vvas king and slayne afterward by the Moores in Barbary and so ended this first lyne The second sonne and fourth childe of king Emanuel vvas named lord Lewis and dyed also vvithout issue legitimate as is supposed for that don Antonio his sonne that afterward vvas proclaymed king by the people of Lisbone and now liueth in Ingland vvas taken by al men to be vnlawful as presently more at large shal be shewed so as after the death of king Sebastian their entred the Cardinal lord Henry vvhich vvas third sonne to king Emanuel and great vncle to king Sebastian lately disceased for that he was brother to king Iohn the third that vvas grand father to king Sebastian and albeit their vvanted not some accordinge as the authors wryte vvhich afterward I shal name vvho affirmed and held that king Phillip of Spayne should haue succeded king Sebastian before the Cardinal for that he vvas neerer in consanguinitie to him then vvas the Cardinal for that besides that king Phillip was sonne of king Emanuels eldest daughter he vvas brother also to king Sebastians mother yet the said Cardinal entred peceably and by consent of al parties but for that he vvas old and vnmarried and not like to leaue any child of his owne there began presently the contention in his dayes vvho should be his successor To vvhich succession did pretende fiue princes of the blood royal of Portugal besides the lady Catherine Queene mother of France who pretended by her mothers side to be discended of one lord Raphe earle of Bulayne in Picardy vvhich Raphe vvas eldest sonne of Alfonsus the third king of Portugal which Alfonsus before he vvas king to wit in the tyme of his elder brother king Sanches of Portugal was married to the countesse and heyre of Bullayn named Mathildis and had by her this Raphe but afterward this Alfonsus comming to be king of Portugal he married agayne
primogenitura Genes 15 49 Deut. 21. 15. 2. Patalip 21. 3. Exod. 3. 2. Rom. 9. 13. Genes 28 27. Tvvo points to be noted Genes 29 49. Exod. 1. 2. Reg. 5. 1. Paral. 3. Tvvo cases resolued The remede of inconueniences by succession Election succession do helpe the 〈◊〉 thothen Ansvver to the 〈◊〉 principal questions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 VVhat an heyre apparent is before 〈◊〉 coronatiō Examples of tnatiage VVhat respect is devv to an heyre apparent VVhy Princes do cōpt ther yeares from the death of ther predecessors Girard de Haillan l. 3. de l'estate pag. 241. No heyre apparent K. before his coronation An euident Argument A rare example of King Henry V. Polydor. virg lib. 22. hittor Angliae in vita Henrici V. Stovv in the beginning of the life of king Henry V. Notes of this act 2. 3. 4. Admissiō of more importan ce then successiō See ther lastvvords to ther frendes in Sir Tho Moore Stovv VVhy diuer kings caused ther sonnes to be crovvned in ther ovvne dayes Hirrd du Haillan lib. 6. hist. an 1001. An. 1032. An. 1061. An. 1131. An. 1180. 3. Reg. 1. Polyd. Stovv in vita Henrici 11. The occasion of the next chapter The Ciuilian cloyed vvith copy Obiectiēs The example of the Ievves 3. Reg. 8. King Saule 2. Reg. 2. 21. An obiection ansevered 2. Reg. 9. King Dauid made by electiō 2. Reg. 2. 5. Psal. 131. 2. Paral. 6. Adonias the elder sonne relected 3. Reg. 1. The motiues of Adonias 〈◊〉 to King Dauid to make Salomō his successor 3. Reg. 1. The coronation of Salomon 〈◊〉 Reg. 1. A poynt to be noted The manner of admission of the prince Roboam 3. Reg. 12. 3. Reg. 11. 5. Reg. 12. 21. Foure races of Spanish Kings Ambros. moral Lib. 11. 〈◊〉 c. 12. 2. Race Ambros. moral lib. 13. c. 3 Moral lib. 37. e. 42. 43. 44. 3. Race Garibay lib 20. c. 〈◊〉 4. 〈◊〉 Examples of the first race Concil Tol. 3. c. 3. Conc. tol 4. cap. 74. Examples of the 2. race Episcop Tuyens l. 1. histoin Ludou de Molin li. de hared King Don Pelayo Ambros Mor 1. 13. cap. 6. 9. 10. Sebast. Epise Salam in hift Hisp. K. Don Alonso y Dö fruela Moral li 13. cap. 17 An. 768. Many breaches of succession Moral e. 21. King Don Aurelio King Don Sile. King Don Alonso the chast Mor I 15. cap. 25. A strange deliberation Great authoritie of comon vvealth K. Alonso the chast reyneth the secōd tyme. Moral e. 28. 29. An. 791. Moral li. 13. cap. 45 46. Anno 842. A horible tribute King Dō Ramiro 1 by election Moral e. 51. The kingdom of Spayne a Maiorasgo K. Don Ordonio An. 924. Moral 1. 16. cap. 1. An. 924. Don Alonso 4. Don Ramiro Moral lib. 19 cap. 20. An. 930. Don Ordonio 3. An. 950. Don Sancho 1. Moral l. 16. cap. 29 An. 950. Mor. l. 17. c. 1. 2. 3. 4. The end of the race of Don Pelayo Of the disceues follovving Spanish examples in the second discent 〈◊〉 1201 Carib li. 11. cap. 12 37. Lady Elenor an Inglish vvoman Q. of Spayne Garib l. 13. cap. 10 An 1207. An Inglish Qgrād mother to tvvo king saints at once An other brech of successiō The Cerdas put bark from the crovvne 1276. Garabay l. 15. c. 1. an 1363. Many alterations of lineal discent Dō Iohn the first a bastard made king of Portugal Garib l. 15 cap 22. li. 34. c. 39. Of the state of france An. 419. An. 751. An. 988. Examples of the 2. rancke of French Kings King Pepin by election An. 751. K. Charles by election Girard du Haillan l. 3. an 768. Eginard Belfor li 2. cap. 5. The vncle preferred before the nephevv Paul mili hist. Franc. King Luys de bonnaire An. 814. Girard l. 5 An. 834. An. 840 An. 878. Baudin en la Chroni que pag. 119. Girard l. 1 An. 879. Tvvo bastards pre ferred An. 881. Luys faineant K. of France An. 886. Charles 4 le Gros. King of France Girard li. 5. An. 888 Odo a king and after Duke of vvhom came Hugo Capetus Rafe 1. King of France An. 927. An. 929 Luys 4. d'Outremer The true geyre of France excluded Hugh Capet othervvise Snatch cappe 988 Belfor li. 3. cap 1. An. 988. Defence of Hugh Capetus title The embassage of the states of France vnto Char les of Loraine Girard 1. 6 an 988. Note this comparison Examples out of the third tyme of France Girard li. 6. an 1032 K. Henry 〈◊〉 preferred before his elder brother VVilliam conqueror hovv he came to be duke of Normandie Girard 1. 6. Anno 1032. 1037. Sonnes excluded for the fathers offences Girard lib. 7. An. 1110. Belfor l. 4 c. 1. l. 5 Cōmzus in comen tar l. 1. in vita Ludouic 11. Examples of the realme of Ingland Diuers races of Inglish Kinges Thename of Ingland and Inglish King Egbert the first monarch of Inglād Polidor hist. aug li. 4. in fine An. soz King Pepin of France king Adel vvolfe An. 829. King Alfred 872. King Edvvard elder An. 900. King Aleston the Bastard 〈◊〉 An. 924. Polid. 1. 5. hist. Angl. Stovv pag. 130. An. 924. King Edmond r. An. 940. The vncle preferred before the nephevvs 946. Polid. 1. 6. Stovv in his chronicles Edgar a famous king King Edvvard Martirized K. Etheldred 978. Polid. 1. 7. hist. Ang. K. Edmēd 〈◊〉 Quere Emma mother to King Edward the 〈◊〉 Many breches of lineal succestiō Sonnes of King Edmond Ironside King Canutus the first 〈◊〉 King Edvvard the confessor made K. against right of successiō Prince Edvvard the out lavv and his children put back Polyd l 8. Harald second K. by election 1066. Polid. vbi sup VVilliam Duke of Normādy King of Ingland An. 1066. by election Girard li. 6. an 1065 Chron. Cassin l. 3. cap. 34. Antoninus part z. chron tit 16. cap. 5. 9. 1. Examples after the conquest Polyd. in vita Gul. Conq. VVilliam Rufus King An. 1087. Henry 1. An. 1100 Mathild the empresse King Stephen entred against successiē 1135. An act of parlamēt about successiē 1153. King Richard and king Iohn 1190. Prince Ar tur put back Tvvo sisters of prince Artur Duke of Britaine K. Iohn and his sonne reiected 1216. The titles of york Lācaster The con clusion of this-chapter Causes of excluding Princes VVhe must iudge of the lavvful causes of exclusiōs Open iniustice to be resisted VVhat are the cheete pointes to be regarded in a princes ad mission VVhence the reasons of admitting or re iecting a prince are to be taken Girard li. 3. de l'Estar pag. 242. Three principal points to be considered VVhy he resolueth to treat of religion principally The cheef end of a common vvealth supernatural Philosophers and lavv makers vvhat end they had of ther doings The com mon vvealth of beastes The natu ral end of mans cōmon vvealth Sacrifices and oblations by
nature Gen 8. Iob. 1. The chife end of a common vvealth magestrates is religion Genebrard l 1. Chronolde 1 aetate Genes 25. 20. Deut. 21. 2. Paral. 〈◊〉 Regard of religion among gentiles Cicero li. 1. quest tusc. de natura deorum lib. 1. Plutarch aduersus Colotem Aristo l 7 politi c. 8. The absurd Athisemo of our tyme in politiques See before the othes made by princes at their coronations in the 4. chapter The oth to gouernors for defence of religion Collat 2. Nouella constit Iuflin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Note the forme of this othe vvryten An Dn̄i 560. Hovv great a defect is vvant of religion in a Magestrate Lack of religion the chefest cause to exclud a pretendor Vide Digest li. 23. fit 1 leg 8 10. Math. 14. Marc. 10. 1. Cor. 7. Lib. 4. decret Greg. tit 19. c. 7. VVhether 〈◊〉 in religiō be infidelity Act 23. 1. Cor. 8. 2. Cor. 5. 3. Pet. 3. Math. 18. Hovv he that doth agaynst his ovvne consciēce sinneth Rom. 14. 1. Cor. 8. 10. See vppō this place of S. Paul S. Chrisost hom 36. in 〈◊〉 epistolā Orig. l. to Theodor. in hune locum Hovv dāgrous to fauour a pretender of a contrary religion Against vvisdom and policy to preferre 〈◊〉 prince of a contrary religiē The conclusion of the vvhole speech A protestation of the lavvyer VVhy the vvil not determyne of any one title The book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon The but of Hales book First reason 2. Reasun The booke of M. Morgan and iudge Browne Ansvver to the 1. reason To the 2. reason Heghingtons booke George Lilly in fine Epitchronic Anglic. Sundry importag pointes Diuers other notes and pampletes Sir Richard Shelly Franc. Peto A treatise in the behalfe of the Infāta of spaine Discent of V Villiam the Conqueror The children of the conqueror Polid. 1. 2. in fine Stovv in vita Guliel The miseries of Duke Robert and his sonne Stovv in vit Gul. Cōquest VVilliam soune of Duke Robett Belfor 1. 3. cap. 42. An. 1128. King VVilliam Rufus 〈◊〉 l. 2 del hist. del mondo K. Henry Polydor. in vita Henrici 1. The house of Britany by the elder daughter of the Conqueror Belfor l. 3 Pag. 423. Conan Duke of Britanie poysened by VVilliam Con queror Belfor l. 3 cap. 12. An. 1065. ex chronic dionis The daughters of spaine are of the blood royal of Ingland The houses of Aloys VVhy Stephen vvas admitted king of Girard l. 6 Belfor l. 3 The issue of king Stephen K. Henry the 2. Belfor l. 3 cap. 50. An. 1151. Gerard. l. 8. pag. 549 K. Henry the 2. his issue Stovv in vita Henci King RIchard Duke Geffrey Paradyn apud Belforest Belfor l. 3 cap. 71. An. 1203. Belfor l. 4 cap. 4. K. Iohn and his issue Miseries that fell vppō king Iohn Polid. Hol lings Stovv in vitae Iohannis The issue of king Henry the 2. hys daughters Belfor l. 3 cap. 49. An. 1152. The issue of Lady Eleanor Queene of spaine Polidor l. 15. in vit Iohan Stephen Garib li. 22. cap. 31 Queene Berenguela Garibay li. 12. c. 52 Pretences of the Infanta of spayne to Inglish French states K. Henry the 3 and his issue The meeting of three houses Prince Edvvard Duke Edmond Lad. Beatrix daughter of king Henry 3. The pede gree of the dukes of Britanie The great contention betvveene the houses of Mō ford and Bloys in Britanie Burgundy and Orleance The controuersie betvveene the house of monford and Bloys A Questiō about successiō betven the vncle and the neece The house of Blois ouer come The suecession of the Monfords in Britanie Francis last Duke of Britany Hovv the dukdome of Britanie vvas vnited to france 3. The issue male of king Hēry the 〈◊〉 The Bishop of Rosle in his booke of the Q. of Scotts title George Lilly in fine epitomes chron Anglic. That Edvvard vvas the elder Matheus vvest in vit Henrici 3. bollings Ibidem pag. 654. 2. 3. Holling head in vit Henrici 3. pag. 740. 777. 4. Edmonds line neuer pretended to the crovvne 5. Note this consequent 6. The elder ship of Edmond a fiction Polyd in fine vitae Hent 3. The issue of king Edvvard the first The issue of Edmond Crock-back Collateral lynes of Lācastez Fyue sonnes of K. Edvvard 3. The redd rose and the vvhite issue of the black prince The issue of leonel the 2. sonne The issue of Edmond the 4 sonne The issue of Thomas the 5. sonne The issue of the 3. sonne duke of Lancan The issue by Lady Blanch. L. Phillip marryed into Portugāl and her issue Lady Elizabeth second daughter The issue of King Henry the 4. The issue of Iohn of Gant by his 2. vvife The controuersie in Spaine betvveene King Peter the cruel and his bastard brother Garibay l. 15 c. 26. Of Lady Catherin Svvinford hollings head in vita Richardi 2. pag. 1088. The duke of Lancasters ba stards made legitimate Hollingh in vita Rich. 2. pag. 1090. The issue of Catherin Svvinfords chil dren K. Hēry 7. The dukes of Somerset Polidor hist. Ang. lib. 23. Hollings in vita Edvvadi 4. pa. 1314 1340. VVhat heyres of Lancaster novv romaine in The issue of the house of York Richard Earle of Cambrige executed Richard duke of York slayne Edvvard duke of York and King his issue The lyne of the Pooles The lyne of the hastings The Baringtons King Richard 3. Issue of king Henry the 7. Issue of the lady Mary of Scotland Issue of mary 2. sister to K. Henry Lady Francis Stovv An. 7. Edvvard 6. Of Lady Elen or of Suffolk Varietie of authores opinions about this controuersie Polydor in fine vit Henr. 3. initio vit Henr. 4. in vit Rich. An. 1386. The allegations of the house of yorke The storie of the controuersie betvveene Lancaster York Polydor. in vita Richard 2. lib. 20. King Richards de position Cheefe points of the controuersie betvveene Lancaster and York Three pointes about king Richards depositiō That a trevv K. maye be deposed 〈◊〉 Reason 2. Authority 3. Examples VVhether the causes vvere sufficient of King Rich. deposition The house of York chiefe doer in deposing King Richard Polyd. lib. 20. histor Angl. Addit ad Polycromicon Testimony of stories The euil gouermēt of king Richard Stovv in vit Rich. 2. pag. 502 regni 11. Agreat insolēcy The euel parlamēt Stovv an 21. regni Richard The duke of Laneaster called by common request Frosard VValsingham VVhether the manner of deposing King Richard vvere good 1. Roboam deposed by his subiects of ten tribes 2. Reg. 11 12. 2. Paralip cap. 10. Ioram his mother Iesabel deposed by force 4. Reg. 9. 5. Athalia depriued by force 4. Reg. 11. VVhether Lancaster or Yorke should haue entred after king Richard Polidor L. 20. in vit Richard Stovv 〈◊〉 vita Richard 2. VVhether the earle of march or duke of Lancaster should haue luc ceded
and after made duke of Hereford by king Richard the second and after that came to be duke also of Lancaster by the death of his father and lastely vvas made king by the deposition of his cosen germaine the said king Richard and reigned 13. yeares by the name of king Henry the fourth and vvas the first king of the house of Lācaster of the right of vvhose title examination shal be made afterwards The first of the two daughters vvhich Iohn of Gaunt had by Blanch vvas named Phillip vvho was marryed to Iohn the first of that name king of Portugal by whom she had issue Edward king of Portugal and he Alfonsus the fift he Iohn the second so one after another euen vnto our dayes The second daughter of Iohn of Gaunt by lady Blanch vvas named Elizabeth vvho was marryed to Iohn Holland duke of Excester she had issue by him an other Iohn duke of Excester and he had issue Henry duke of Excester that dyed without issue male leauing only one daughter named Anne vvho vvas marryed to Sir Thomas Neuill knight and by him had issue Raffe Neuill third earle of Westmerland whose lineal heyre is at this day Lord Charles Neuill earle oft Westmerland that liueth banished in Flanders And this is al the issue that Iohn of Gaunt had by lady Blanch his first vvife sauing only that I had forgotten to prosecute the issue of Henry his first sonne surnamed of Bolenbrok that vvas afterward called king Henry the fourth which king had 4. sonnes and tvvo daughters his daughters vvere Blanch and Phillip the first marryed to William duke of Bauaria and the second to Erick king of Denmarke and both of them dyed without children The four sonnes vvere first Henry that reygned after him by the name of Henry the fift and the second vvas Thomas duke of Clarence the third vvas Iohn duke of Bedford and the fourth vvas Humfrey duke of Glocester al vvhich three dukes dyed vvithout issue or vvere slaine in vvarres of the realme so as only king Henry the fift their elder brother had issue one sonne named Henry also that vvas king and reigned 40. yeares by the name of Henry the sixt who had issue prince Edward both of them I meane both father sonne were murthered by order or permissiō of Edward duke of Yorke vvho afterward tooke the crowne vppon him by the name of king Edward the fourth as before hath bin said so as in this king Henry the 6. and his sonne prince Edward ended all the blood royal male of the house of Lancaster by Blanch the first wife of Iohn of Gaunt and the inheritance of the said lady Blanch returned by right of succession as the fauorers of the howse of Portugal affirme though others deny it vnto the heyres of lady Phillip her eldest daughter marryed into Portugal vvhose nephew named Alfonsus the fift kinge of Portugal liued at that day when king Henry the 6. and his heyre were made away and this much of Iohn of Gaunts first marriage But after the death of the L. Blanch Iohn of Gaunt marryed the Lady Constance daughter and heyre of Peter the first surnamed the cruel king of Castile who being driuen out of his kingdome by Henry his bastard brother assisted therunto by the french he fledd to Burdeaux vvith his wife tvvo daughters where he founde prince Edward eldest sonne to king Edward the third by vvhom he was restored and for pledge of his fidelity and performance of other conditions that the said king Peter had promised to the Prince he left his two daughters withe hym which daughters being sent afterwards into Inglād the eldest of them named Constance was marryed to Iohn of Gaunt and by her title he named himselfe for diuers yeares afterward king of Castile and went to gayne the same by armes when Peter her father vvas stayne by his foresaid bastard brother but yet some yeares after that againe their vvas an agrement made betweene the said Iohn of Gaunt and Iohn the first of that name king of Castile sonne and heyre of the foresaid Henry the bastard vvith condition that Catherine the only daughter of Iohn of 〈◊〉 by lady Cōstance should marry vvith Henry the third prince of Castile sonne and heyre of the said king Iohn and nephew to the bastard Henry the 2. and by this meanes vvas ended that controusie betweene Ingland and Castile and the said L. Catherine had issue by king Henry Iohn the 2. king of Castile he Isabell that marryed with Ferdinando the Catholique king of Aragon and ioyned by that marriage both those kingdomes together and by him she had a daughter named Ioan that marryed Phillip duke of Austria and Burgundy and by him had Charles the fifth that vvas Emperor and father to king Phillip that now reigneth in Spaine vvho as we see is descēded tvvo waies from Iohn of Gaunt duke of Lancaster to vvit by two daughters begotten of two wiues Blanch and Constance nether had Iohn of Gaunt any more childrē by Constance but only this daughter Catherine of vvhom vve haue spoken vvherfore now vve shal speake of his third vvife that vvas Lady Catherine Swinford This lady Catherin as Inglish histories do note vvas borne in Henalt in Flanders was daughter to a knight of that country called Sir Payne de Ruet and she vvas brought vp in her youth in the duke of Lancasters house and attended vppon his first wife lady Blanch and being fayre of personage grew in such fauour vvith the duke as in the tyme of his second wife Constance he kept this Catherin for his concubin and begat vppon her fower children to vvit three sonnes and a daughter vvhich daughter vvhose name vvas Iane was marryed to Raph earle of Westmerland called commonly in those dayes Daw Raby of whom descended the Earles of VVestmerland that insued His three sonnes were Iohn Thomas and Henry and Iohn vvas first earle and then duke of Sommerset Thomas vvas first marques Dorset and then duke of Excester Henry vvas Bishop of VVinchester and after Cardinal And after Iohn of Gaunt had begotten al thes 4. children vppon Catherin he marryed her to a knight in Ingland named Swinford vvhich knight lyued not many yeares after Iohn of Gaunt comming home to Ingland from Aquitaine vvher he had bin for diuers yeares and seing this old concubine of his Catherine to be now a widow and himselfe also without a wife for that the lady Cōstance vvas dead a litle before for the loue that he bore to the children which he had begotten of her he determyned to marry her and therby the rather to legitimate her childrē though himselfe vvere old now and al his kyndred vtterly against the marriage and so not ful two yeares before his death to wit in the yeare of Christ 1396. he married her and the next yeare after in a parlament begun at Westminster the 22. of Ianuary
anno Domini 1397. he caused al his said issue to be legitimated which he had begotten vppon this lady Swinford before she vvas his wife But now to go foreward to declare the issue of thes three sonnes of Iohn of Gaunt by Catherine Swinford two of them that is Thomas duke of Excester and Henry Cardinal and Bishop of Winchester dyed vvithout issue Iohn the eldest sonne that vvas earle of Somerset had issue two sonnes Iohn and Edmond Iohn that vvas duke of Somerset had issue one only daughter named Margeret vvho vvas married to Edmond Tidder earle of Richmond by whom he had a sonne named Henry earle also of Richmond vvho after vvas afterward made king by the name of Henry the seuēth was father to K. Henry the eight and grand father to the Q. maiestie that now is this is the issue of Iohn the first sonne to the duke of Somerset Edmōd the secōd sonne to Iohn earle of Somerset was first earle of Mortaine and then after the death of his brother Iohn vvho dyed vvithout issue male as hath bin said vvas created by king Henry the sixte duke of Somerset and both he and almost al his kyn vvere slayne in the quarrel of the said king Henry the 6. and for defence of the house of Lācaster against York For first this Edmōd himselfe was slayne in the battel of S. Albanes against Richard duke and first pretender of Yorke in the yeare 1456. leauing behind him three goodly sonnes to wit Henry Edmond Iohn vvherof Henry succeded his father in the duchy of Sommetset and vvas taken and beheaded in the same quarrel at Exham in the yeare 1463. dying vvithout issue Edmond likewise succeded his brother Henry in the duchy of Sommerset and vvas taken in the battel of Tewkesbury in the same quarrel and ther beheaded the 7. of May 1471. leauing no issew Iohn also the third brother marques of Dorset vvas slayne in the same battel of Tewkesbury and left no issue and so in these tvvo noble men ceased vtterly al the issue male of the line of Lancaster by the children of Iohn of Gaunt begotten vppon lady Swinford his third vvife so that al vvhich remayned of this vvoman vvas only Margeret Countesse of Richmond mother to king Hēry the 7. which king Henry the 7. and al that do descende from him in Ingland or out of Inglande do hold the right of Lancaster only by this third mariage of Catherine Swinford as hath bin shewed and no wayes of Blanch the first vvife or of Constance the second and this is enough in this place of the discents of Iohn of Gaunt and of the house of Lancaster and therfore I shal now passe ouer to shew the issue of the howse of York I Touched breefly before how Edmond Langley duke of Yorke fourth sonne of king Edward the third had two sonnes Edward earle of Rutland and duke of Aumatle that succeded his father afterward in the duchy of Yorke and vvas slayne vvithout childrē vnder king Henry the 5. in the battayle of Egencourt in France and Richard earle of Cambridge vvhich marryed lady Anne Mortimer as before hath bin said that was heyre of the house of Clarence to wit of Leonel duke of Clarence second sonne to king Edward the third by vvhich marriage he ioyned together the two titles of the second fourth sonnes of king Edward and being himselfe conuinced of a conspiracy against king Henry the 5. vvas put to death in Southampton in the yeare of Christ 1415. and third of the reygne of king Hēry the 5. and fift day of August This Richard had issue by lady Anne Mortimer a sonne named Richard vvho succeded his vncle Edward duke of Yorke in the same duchy and afterward finding himselfe strong made clayme to the crowne in the behalfe of his mother and declaring himselfe chiefe of the faction of the white rose gaue occasion of many cruel battailes against them of the red rose and house of Lancaster and in one of the battels vvhich vvas giuen in the yeare 1460. at Wakfilde himselfe was slayne leauing behind him three sonnes Edward George and Richard wherof Edward vvas afteward king of Ingland by the name of Edward the fourth George was duke of Clarence and put to death in Calis in a butte of secke or malmesie by the commandement of the king his brother Richard was Duke of Glocester and afterward king by murthering his owne two nephewes and was called king Richard the third Edward the eldest of these three brothers which afterward was king had issue two sonnes Edward Richard both put to death in the tower of London by ther cruel vncle Richard he had also fiue daughters the last fowre wherof I do purposly omitt for that of none of them ther remayneth any issue but the eldest of al named Elizabeth was marryed to king Henry the 7. of the house of Lancaster and had by him issue king Henry the 8. and tvvo daughters the one marryed vnto Scotlād vvherof are discended the king of Scots and Arbella the other matryed to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk vvherof are issued the children of the earles of Hartford and Darby as after more at large shal be handled and this is the issue of the first brother of the house of Yorke The second brother George duke of Clarence had issue by his wife lady Isabel heyre to the earldomes of Warwick and Salisbury one sonne named Edward earle of Warwick vvho vvas put to death afterward in his youth by King Henry the 7. and left no issue this duke George had also one daughter named Margaret admitted by King Henry the eight at what tyme he sent her into wales with the princesse Mary to be coūresse of Salisbury but yet marryed very meanely to a knight of vvales named Syr Richard Poole by whom she had foure sonnes Henry Arthur Geffrey and Renald the lastvvherof vvas Cardinal and the other two Arthur and Geffrey had issue for Arthur had two daughters Mary and Margaret Mary was married to Sir Iohn Stanny Margaret to Sir Thomas fitzharbert Sir Geffrey Poole had also issue an other Geffrey Poole and he had issue Arthur and Geffrey which yet liue Now then to returne to the first sonne of the countesse of Salisbury named Henry that vvas Lord Montague and put to death both he and his mother by king Henry the 8. this man I say left two daughters Catherine and vvenefred Catherine was married to Sir Francis Hastings earle of Huntington by vvhich marriage issued Sir Henry Hastings now earle of Huntington and Sir Georg Hastings his brother who hath diuers children And Wenefred the yonger daughter vvas married to Sir Thomas Barington knight vvho also wanteth notissue and this is of the second brother of the house of Yorke to vvit of the duke of Clarence The third brother Richard duke of Glocester and afterward king left no issue