A CONFERENCE ABOUT THE NEXT SUCCESSION TO THE CROWN OF INGLAND, DIVIDED IN TO TWO PARTS.  
WHERE-OF THE FIRST CONTAINETH THE discourse of a civil Lawyer, how and in what manner propinquity of blood is to be preferred. And the second the speech of a Temporal Lawyer, about the particular titles of all such as do or may pretend within Ingland or without, to the next succession.  
Where unto is also added a new & perfect arbour or genealogy of the descents of all the kings and princes of Ingland, from the conquest unto this day, whereby each man's pretence is made more plain.  
DIRECTED TO THE RIGHT Honourable the earl of ESSEX of her majesties privy council, & of the noble order of the Garter.  
Published by R. DOLEMAN.  
Imprinted at N. with Licence.  
M. D. XCIIII.  

THE SOMME OF BOTH PARTS MORE IN PARTICULER.  
THe first declareth by many proofs & arguments that the next propinquity or ancetry of blood alone, though it were certainly known, yet that it is not sufficient to be admitted to a crown, without other conditions and circumstances requisite be found also in the person pretendent.  
THe second examineth the titles and pretensions of all such as may have claim or action to the crown of Ingland at this day, what may be said for them, and what against them, and in the end, though he leave the matter extreme doubtful as touching the best right, yet he giveth certain conjectures about some persons that are likest to prevail.    

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE THE EARL OF ESSEX, OF HER majesties PRIVY COUNCIL.  
Wo principal causes among others (right honourable) are wont to invite men to dedicate any book or treatise to a person in authority, the one private duty & obligation, the other publiqueutility, in respect that the matter may concearne that person for the common good. And to confess the truth, both of these jointly, have moved me at this time, to present unto your honour above others, the two books ensuing, which contain a conference had in Holland not long since, about the pretences & pretenders to the crown of Ingland, as your honour shall perceive by the preface of each book, & therefore hereof I shall need say no more, but only declare the foresaid two causes of this dedication.  
First then I say, that my particular obligation towards your honour's person, riseth partly of good turns and benefits received by some friends of mine at your Lordship's hands, in your last voyage & exploits in France, but principally of far greater favours received from your noble ancestors, I mean not only your father whose untimely death was to Ingland no small wound, but of your grandfather also, that worthy Knight Sir Walter Devorax who though he lived not to come to those titles of honour, whereunto he was borne; yet left he behind him so rare a memory for his excellent parts of learning, wit, feuter of body, courtesy, & other such noble commendations, as none in Ingland perhaps the like in our time, wherein also hath lived your honours great grandfather Sir Henry Devorax visconde Ferys well remembered yet by divers of my said friends obliged unto him, as also recorded by our English histories, as well for his merits & worthiness, as in like manner for his match with the heir of the most famous & noble house of the Bourchers earls of Essex, whereof also your honour 
Polyd in vita H. s.  is known to be descended, & to hold at this day as well their nobility of blood as dignity of title, & this shall serve in this place for my particular obligation, whereof perhaps hereafter upon other occasion, I may give further relation and testimony to the world, in token of my gratitude.  
But for the second point of public utility, I thought no man more fit than your honour to dedicate these two books unto, which treat of the succession to the crown of Ingland, for that no man is in more high & eminent place or dignity at this day in our realm, than yourself, whether we respect your nobility, or calling, or favour with your prince, or high liking of the people, & consequently no man like to have a greater part or sway in deciding of this great affair (when time shall come for that determination) than your honour, and those that will assist you & are likest to follow your fame and fortune.  
And for that it is not convenient for your honour to be unskilful in a matter which concerneth your person & the whole realm, so much as this doth, and finding this conference had by two learned Lawyers, to handle the question very, pithily and exactly, and yet with much modesty, and without offence of any, and with particular affection and devotion to her Majesty, & with special care of her safety: I thought not expedient to let it lie unpublished, as also I judged that no hands were fit to receive the same, nor any protection more secure or plausible, then that of your honour, whom God long preserve in all true honour and felicity, to the comfort of your Lordship's faithful servants & clients, & to the public benefit of your country: from my chamber in Amsterdame this last of December. 1593.  
Your honours most affectionate R. DOLEMAN.   

THE CONTENTS OF THE FIRST part.  
THE preface containing the occasion of this treatise, with the subject, purpose, & parts thereof.  
That succession to government by nearness of blood is not by Law of nature, or divine, but only by human & positive Laws of every particular common wealth, and consequently, may upon just causes be altered by the same, Cap. 1. fol. 1.  
Of the particular form of Monarchies & kingdoms, and the different Laws whereby they are to be obtained, holden, and governed in divers countries, according as each common wealth hath chosen and established. Cap. 2. fol. 15.  
Of the great reverence and respect dew to kings, and yet how divers of them, have been lawfully chastised by their common wealths for their misgoverment, & of the good and prosperous suecesse that god commonly hath given to the same; and much more to the putting back of an unworthy pretender. Cap. 3. fol. 37.  
Wherein consisteth principally the lawfulness of proceeding against Princes, which in the former chapter is mentioned, what interest Princes have in their subjects goods or lives: how oaths do bind or may be broken by subjects towards their Princes: and finally the difference between a good king & a Tyrant. Cap. 4. fol. 63.  
Of the Coronation of Princes, and manner of their admitting to their authority, and the oaths which they do make in the same, unto the common wealth, for their good government. Cap. 5. fol. 82.  
What is dew to only succession by birth, and what interest or right an heir apparent hath to the crown, before he is crowned or admitted by the common wealth, and how justly he may be put back, if he have not the parts requisite. Cap. 6. fol. 121.  
How the next in succession by propinquity of blood, have oftentimes been put back by the common wealth, & others further of admitted in their places, even in those kingdoms where succession prevaileth, with many examples of the kingdoms of Israel and Spain. Cap. 7. fol. 140.  
Of divers other examples out of the states of France & Ingland, for proof that the next in blood are sometimes put back from succession, and how god hath approved the same with good success. Cap. 8. fol. 164.  
What are the principal points which à common wealth ought to respect in admitting or excluding any Prince, wherein is handled largely also of the diversity, of religions, and other such Causes. Cap. 9 fol. 197.   

THE CONTENTS OF THE SECOND BOOK.  
THe preface with the intention & protestation of the Lawyer to treat this matter without the hurt or prejudice of any.  
Of divers books & treatises that have been written heretofore about the titles of such as pretend the crown of Ingland, and what they do contain in favour or disfavour of divers pretendors. Cap. 1. fol. 1.  
Of the succession of the crown of Ingland from the conquest unto the time of king Edward the third, with the beginning of three principal lineages of the English blood royal, dispersed into the houses of Brittany Lancaster and York. Cap. 2. fol. 12.  
Of the succession of English kings from king Edward the third unto our days, with the particular causes of dissension between the families of York and Lancaster more largely declared. Cap. 3. fol. 37.  
Of the great and general controversy and contention between the said two houses royal of Lancaster and York, and which of them may seem to have had the better right to the crown, by way of succession. Cap. 4. fol. 56.  
Of five principal and particular houses or lineages that do or may pretend the crown of Ingland at this day, which are the houses of Scotland, of Suffolck, of Clarence, of Brittany, and of Portugal, and first of all the house of Scorland, which containeth the pretensions of the king of Scots, & of the Lady Arbella. Cap. 5. fol. 107.  
Of the house of Suffolk containing the claims aswell of the countess of Derby and of her children as also of the children of the earl of Hartfort. Cap. 6. fol. 130.  
Of the houses of Clarence and Britain, which containeth the claims of the carl of Huntingdon, and of the Lady Infanta of Spain and others of these two families. Cap. 7. fol. 141.  
Of the house of Portugal which containeth the claims as well of the king and Prince of Spain to the succession of Ingland, as also of the dukes of Parma and Bragansa by the house of Lancaster. Cap. 8. fol. 160.  
Whether it be better to be under a foreign or homborne Prince, and whether under a great and mightic monarch, or under a little Prince or king. Cap. 9 fol. 193.  
Of certain other secondary or collateral lines and how extreme doubtful at the pretences be, and which of all these pretenders are most like by probability to prevail in the end, & to get the crown of Ingland. Cap. 10. fol. 233.   

THE PREFACE, CONTAINING THE OCCASION OF THIS TREATIS, with the subject, purpose, and parts thereof.  
THERE chanced not long ago (I mean in the months of April and May of this last year 93.) to meet in Amsterdam in Holland certain Gentlemen of divers nations, qualities and affections, as well in religion as otherwise: (yet the most part English and Irish) and they had been in divers countries, studied different arts, and followed unlike professions: some of soldiers, 
Occasions of meeting.  some of lawyers both temporal & civil, others of mere travelors to learn experience and policy: And for that the advises which daily came from Ingland at that time, (the parliament being then in hand) gave occasion to discourse of English affairs, they fell into divers points concerning the same: but yet none was treated so largely or so seriously, as was the matter of succession 
The matter of succession discussed.  and competitors to the crown, for that it was presumed a great while, that some thing would be determined thereof in that parliament, though one or two of the wisest of that company, held ever the contrary opinion. But when at length news was brought, that nothing at all had been done therein, but rather that one or two (as was reported) had been checked or committed for 
M. Bromely M. V Venrworth.  speaking in the same: then came it in question among thes Gentlemen, what should be the causes of such proceeding in a matter so weighty and so necessary for all English men to know?  
But two Gentlemen Lawyers of the company, one 
Two layers.  of the common law, and the other a Civilian, alleged so many reasons for justifying the Queen's majesties doings in this behalf, as all did seem satisfied: for that it was made plain, that it could not stand with the safety either of her Majesty, or of the realm, or of the party himself who should be preferred, that any declaration of heir apparent should be made, during the life of her Majesty that now is, how dangerons soever the delay thereof may be esteemed for the time to come.  
And so the end of this speech, brought in presently the beginning of an other, to wit, what wear like to be thes dangers, and who might be likest of the pretendors to prevail after her Majesty, about which matter, there was much discoursed by divers parties, but the conclusion of all, was, that both thes points remained very doubtful, but much more the second, who should prevail, of the competitors, which they said, did make the former point less doubtful of the multitude of dangers, that thereby did hang over the common wealth of Ingland, though it wanted not doubt also in particular, what and where they should fall, for (said they) wheresoever many pretenders of the blood royal are known to be competitors to a crown, there cannot choose but many perils also must be imminent to the realm.  
To this, one of the company said, that he did not see how there could be either so many pretenders to the crown as the day before had been spoken of in that place (for the common lawyer before named newly come 
Many pretenders to the crown of Ingland.  out of Ingland, had told them that he had hard of some 9 or 10. or more plots that were debated within the realm, for so many pretenders) or if there were any such great number descended of the blood royal, yet their titles could not be so doubtful, seeing it was an easy matter to discern, who was next in descent of blood, and who not.  
Not so easy, quoth this Gentleman lawyer, for that although it cannot be denied, but that there is among all such as may pretend at this day: a certain known order and degree of nearness in blood to some king or Queen that hath possessed the crown before them: and in this descent it is known also commonly, who descendeth of the elder house, and who of the younger, and other such like vulgar circumstances: yet notwithstanding for that ther be many other points considerable in this affair, as the right of the first stock, 
Succession doubtful & why.  whereof each part doth spring, the disabling of the same stock afterwards by attainders or otherwise: the bastardies or other particular impediments that may have fallen upon each descent or branch thereof: all thes things (said he) may alter the course of common supposed right, in him or her, that is taken to be next in blood, as proving them not to be truly and lawfully the nearest, though they be the next in degree.  
As for example (said he) the whole multitude of 
Three or four principal heads of praetendors.  competitors or pretenders which I conceive may come in consideration, or have action or claim to the crown after her Majesty that now is, may be reduced to three or four first heads or principal stocks, to wit, to the house of Lancaster a part, as descendcd of john of Gant Duke of Lancaster by his first wife Blanch, sole heir of the Duchy of Lancaster. And of this branch or stock the most known offspring in thes our days are 
1. Lancaster.  those Princes that are lineally descended of Don ivan the first surnamed the boa memoria, tenth king of Portugal, who married with Philip the eldest daughter of the said john of Gant by his first wife Blanch: and thes Princes are king Philip of Spain now king also of Portugal, & the Dukes of Parma and Braganza, who descended of the same race, as also the Duke of Savoy one degree after them.  
The second stock is of the house of york a part, 
2. York.  descending of George the Duke of Clarence second brother to king Edward the fourth, who being put to death by the king's order in Cales left a daughter by whom are descended the Earl of Huntingdon with his brothers, which also have children, and the offspring of Geffrey Pole and Sir Thomas Barrington who married the other sister of her that was married to the Hastings.  
The third stock was in king Henry the seventh who being himself of the house of lancaster and 
3. The two houses joined.  warying the eldest daughter of Edward the fourth of the house of york, is presumed to have joined thes two houses together, and from this man by his two daughters (for of his son who was king Henry the eight there remaineth only the Queeve that now is) there hath proceeded the house of Scotland divided into the families of the king of Scots and Arbella, as also the progeny of the two Earls yet living of Hartford and Derby. Unto thes three heads, which are commonly known to all men, some of ourdayes do add also a fourth, which may seem more ancient than either of all thes three, to wit by the Dukes of Britain, who are descended divers ways of the blood royal of Ingland as may easily be declared, whose heir at this day by lineal descent is the Enfanta of Spain named Dona Ysabella Clara Eugenia daughter to king Philipp. So that hereby we come to discover, no less than ten or eleven families that may pretend, and have all of them friends in Ingland, and else where (as yesterday I told you) who do not fail in secret to negotiate and lay plots for them, for that there are none of thes, so far of, but to their friends it seemeth (the times standing as they do) that reasons may be given for their preferment, and good hope conceived of prevalying.  
You do well to add (said a Captain there present) 
Circumstances of the time present.  the times standing as they do, or at least wise as they are like to stand, when this matter must come to trial, at what time, I believe, not you lawyers, but we soldiers must determine this title, and then (no doubt) if there were not only thes ten by you named, but twenty moor also of the blood royal, that would pretend, and had friends and money to stand by them, we should admit their causes to examination and perhaps give sentence for him, that by your laws would soonest be excluded, for when matters come to snatching, it is hard to say who shall have the better part.  
I do not add this circumstance of the time (said the lawyer) as though it were the only or principal point which maketh doubtful the matter of succession, though I confess that it helpeth thereunto greatly, in respect of the great variety of men's affections, at this day in religion, which do incline them commonly to judge for him, whom they best love: but besides this I do say, that were the times never so quiet, and religion never so uniform: yet are there great doubts in many men's heads, about the lawfulness of divers pretensions of the families before named: but if you add unto this, the said wonderful diversity in matters of religion also, which this time yieldeth: you shall find the event much more doubtful, and consequently it is no marvel though many may remain in hope to prevail, seeing that where many are admitted to stand for a preferment, there divers may have probality also of speeding.  
An example you may take, (said the Civilian lawyer) in the Roman Conclave, at the pope's election, where, 
The Roman conclave.  among three or sour score Cardinals that enter in for electors, few there are, that have not hope also to be elected, not for that they see themselves, all as well qualified, as others: but because oftentimes when divers that are more forward by, likelihood cannot be agreed upon: it falleth to the lot of him that is farthest of, and so it may among your pretender's (quoth he) in Ingland.  
Your example (said the temporal lawyer confirmeth somewhat of that I mean though it be not all together in like matter, or manner for that the pope is made by election, & here we talk of a king by succession.  
Your succession, said the Civilian, includeth also an election or approbation of the common wealth and so 
Succession includeth also some kind of election.  doth the succession of all kings in Christendom besides, as well appeareth by the manner of their new admission at their coronations, where the people are demanded again, if they be content to accept such a man for their King: though his title of nearness by 
Of this more afterwards Cap 4. & 5.  blood, be never so clear. And therefore much more it is like to be in this case of English pretenders now, where their lawful nearness in blood is so doubtful as you have signified, & so I do come to confirm your former proposition, of the doubtfulness of the next successor in Ingland with an other reason besides that which you have alleged of the ambiguity of their true propoinquity in blood: for I say further, that albeit the nearness of each man's succession in blood, were evidently known, yet were it very uncertain (as things now stand in Ingland and in the rest of Christendom round about) who should prevail, for that it is not enough for a man to be next only in blood, thereby to pretend a crown, but that other circumstances also must concur, which if they want, the bare propinquity or ancetrie of blood may justly be rejected, and he that is second, 
nearness only in blood not sufficient.  third, fourth, fifth or last, may lawfully be preferred before the first, and this by all law both divine and human and by all reason, conscience, and custom of all nations, christian.  
To this said the temporal lawyer, you go further (Sir) than I had meant to do or did conceive of the matter, for my meaning only was to show how many pretenders there be to the English crown at this day, & how doubtful the pretensions of divers of the chief of them be, in respect of the many exclusions, stops and bars that their adversaries or fellow competitors do lay against them: and now you do add further, that albeit thes stops were taken away, and their propinquity in blood were manifest, yet for other considerations the course of their next succession by birth may be justly altered, upon such considerations as you insinuate, that the English may have in the admission of their next king or Queen, after her Majesty that now is, which in deed (if it be true) maketh the matter of succession much more doubtful, than I pretended, which I confess I have not so much studied or thought of, for that our common law goeth no further ordinarily, then to the next successor in blood, to consider whether he be lawfully descended or no, thereby to give him the crown.  
I confess (said the Civilian) that ordinarily nether your law, nor ours doth go any further, especially in those realms where the government goeth by succession 
More to be considered besides succession in the pretendors.  of blood, which I think to be the best of all other ways, but yet there may happen out such extraordinary cases some times, against this ordinary rule, as your common law must needs take also consideration of them except it willbe contrary to all other law and reason both divine and human, as for example, if it should fall out, that the next in blood should be a natural fool or a mad man: if he should be taken by Turks or Moors in his infancy & brought up in their religion and would maintain the same in your country, with all his forces; and other like urgent cases, wherein it is not probable, but that your common law must needs have further consideration, then of the bare propinquity of blood only, for that otherwise it should be a very imperfect law, that hath not provided for accidents so weighty and important, as thes are, for saving and conserving of your common wealth.  
At this speech, the residue of the company began to smile, to see the two lawyers grow into some heat and comparison of their professions. But yet for that both their asseverations, did tendc to prove one thing, which was the first proposition set down, to wit, that the next successor of Ingland must needs be very doubtful: they requested them both with very great instance, that each one would be content to prove his 
Two principal points handled in this book.  assertion a part, to wit, the temporal lawyer to show that the titles and pretensions of all those ten or eleven families of the English blood royal, which remain at this day, are ambiguous and doubtful, according to the common laws of Ingland: and the civilian to declare that albeit their titles by successiou were clear, yet that as things stand now in that realm, and other countries near adjoining, there may be a great doubt which of them shall prevail.  
This I say, was the request of the whole company, and the lawyers were content to take it upon them, and according to thes two points it was agreed that the whole speech or conference, should be divided into two parts, and that the civil lawyer, should begin first, for 
Two parts of this conference.  that it seemed, that his assertion, being well declared and proved, would give much light to the other, and so he promised to do, and to be as brief, clear & perspicuous as he might, and to reduce all that he would say to certain principal heads and chapters thereby the better to be understood & remembered, and so he began in manner and form following.   


THAT SUCCESSION TO GOVERNMENT BY nearness OF BLOOD IS NOT by law of nature or divine, but only by human and positive laws of every particular common wealth and consequently may upon just causes be altered by the same.  
CAP. I.  
THE examples before alleged (said the civilian lawyer) of a mad or furious heir apparent, or of one that were by education a Turk or Moor in religion, or by nature deprived of his wit, or senses, do plainly prove that propinquity of birth or blood alone, without other circumstances, is not sufficient to be preferred to a crown: for that no reason or law, religion or wisdom in the world, can admit such persons to the government of a common wealth by whom, no good, but destruction may be expected to the same, seeing that government was ordained for the benefit of the weal public and not otherwise.  
And albeit some one or two in thes our days have affirmed the contrary, and published the 
Bellay apollog. pro reg. cap. 20.  same in writing for the defence, flattery, or advancement of some Prince whom they favour, affirming that even a fool, mad or furious man, or otherwise so wicked as he would endeavour to destroy the common wealth, were to be admitted to the seat royal, without further consideration, if he be next in blood yet this is so manifestly against all reason, and conscience, and against the very first end and purpose of institution of common wealths, and magistrates, as it shall not need to be refuted in this place, albeit afterwards there will not want place and commodity for the same.  
Hereof it doth ensue, that some other conditions also must needs be requisite, for coming 
Not only succession sufficient.  to government by succession, besides the only propinquity or prioryty in blood, and that thes conditions must be assigned and limited out by some higher authority than is that of the Prince himself, who is bound and limited thereby, and yet it seemeth evident they are not prescribed by any law of nature or divine, for that then they should be both immutable and the self same in all countries, (as God and nature are one, & the same to all, without change) where notwithstanding we see, that thes conditions and circumstances of succeeding by birth, are divers or different in different countries, as also they are subject to changes according to the diversity of kingdoms, realms, & people, as after shallbe showed more in particular, whereby we are forced to conclude that every particular country and common wealth hath prescribed thes conditions to itself and hath authority to do the same.  
For better proof whereof, it is first of all, to be supposed, that albeit sociability or inclination 
That no particular form of government is of natu re.  to live together in company, man with man, (whereof ensueth both city and common wealth as Aristotle gathereth in his first book of politics) be of nature, and consequently also of God, that is author of nature: though government in like manner and jurisdiction of magestrats which doth follow necessarily upon this living together, in company: be also of nature; yet the particular form or manner of this or that government, in this or that fashion, as to have many governors, few, or one, and those either Kings, Duke's Earls, or the like: or that they should have this or that authority more or less, for longer or shorter time, or be taken by succession or election, themselves and their children, or next in blood: all thes things (I say) are not by law either natural or divine, (for then as hath been said they should be all one in all countries and nations, seeing God and nature is one to all) but they are ordained by particular positive laws of every country as afterwards more largely shallbe proved. 
To live in company, is natural to man & the ground of all commonwealth.   
But now that sociability in mankind, or inclination to live in company, is by nature, and consequently ordained by God, for the common benefit of all: is an easy thing, to prove, seeing that all ground of realms and common wealths dependeth of this point, as of their first principle, for that a common wealth is nothing else but the good government, of a multitude gathered together, to live in one, & therefore all old philosophers, law makers, and wise men, that have treated of government or common wealths, as Plato in his ten most excellent books, which he wrote of this matter intituling them of the common wealth, and Marcus 
Plato de repub. Cicero de repub. Aristotle? polit.  Cicero that famous counselor in other six books that he writ of the same matter, under the same title. And Aristotle that perhaps excelleth them both, in eight books which he called his pollitiques, all thes I say do make their entrance to treat of their common wealth affairs, from this first principle, to wit, that man by nature is sociable, and inclined to live in company, whereof do proceed first, all private houses, than villages, than towns, than cities, than kingdoms, & common wealths.  
This ground & principle then do they prove 
divers praefes.  by divers evident reasons, as first, for that in all nations, never so wild or barbarous, we fee by experience that by one way or other, they 
1. Inclination universal. Pompon. Mesa. lib. 3. cap. 3. 4 Tacit. l. 8.  endeavour to live together, either in cities, towns, villages, caves, woods, tents, or other like manner, according to the custom of each country, which universal instinct could never be in all, but by impression of nature itself.  
Secondly they prove the same, by that the 
2. Aristot. l. 1. pol. c. 1. 2. 3. 4.  use of speech is given to man for this end and purpose; for that little available were this privilege of speaking if men should live alone & converse with none.  
Thirdly not only Aristotle but Theophrastus also Plutarch, and others do confirm the same, 
Imbecilility of man. Theoph. lib. de Plaut. Plu tarch. conde fortuna, & lib. de pietatem in parent.  by the poor estate & condition, wherein man is borne, more infirm than any other creature, though by creation he be lord & governor of all the rest: for where as each other creature is borne in a certain sort armed and defended in itself, as the bull with his horns, the bore with his tusk, the bear & wolf, with their teeth, the bird with her feathers against cold & with her wings to fly away, the hart & hare with their swiftness and the like: only man is borne feeble and naked, not able to provide or defend himself in many years, but only by the help of others, which is à token that he is borne to live in company and to be helped by others, & this not only for his necessity and help at his beginning whiles he is in this imbecility, but also for his more commodious living in the rest of his days afterwards, seeing no man of himself is sufficient for himself, & he that liveth alone can have no benefit of others, or do any to others, wherefore wittily said Aristotle in the 
Note this saying of Aristotle.  second chapter of his first book of politics, that he which flieth to live in society is either Deus aut Bellua, a God or a beft: for that either he doth it because he hath no need, of any which is proper to God, or else for that he will do good to none, and feeleth not that natural instinct, which man hath to live in conversation, which is a sign rather of a beast then of a man.  
Cicero doth add an other reason for this 
4. The use of justice and Frenship.  purpose, to wit, the use of certain principal virtues given unto man, but principally justice & friendship, which should be utterly in vain, and to no utility, if man should not live in company of others, for seeing the office of justice is to distribute to every one his own: where no number is, there no distribution can be used, as also neither any act of friendship, which yet in the society of man is so necessary & usual (sayeth this excellent man) ut nec aqua nec igne nec ipso sole pluribus in locis utamur, quam amicitia, that we 
Cicero lib. de amicitia.  use nether water nor fire nor the son it self in more places or occasions than friendship.  
And to this effect, of using friendship, love and charity the one towards the other, do christian 
The use of charity & helping one an other. August. lib. de amicitia.  doctors also, and especially S. Augustine in his book of friendship, reduce the institution of this natural instinct of living in company: which seemeth also to be confirmed by God him sell in those words of Gcnesis, Dixit quoque Dominus Dcus: non est bonum hominem esse solum, facia 
Gen. 2. v. 18.  mus, ei adiutorium, simile sibi. God said, it is 〈◊〉 good that man should be alone, let us 〈◊〉 unto him, a help or assistant like unto himself, of which words is deduced that as 〈◊〉 first society of our first parents, was of God, & 〈◊〉 so great purpose as here is set down, the 〈◊〉 to be helped by the other: so all other society in like manner which grow of this first, stand upon the same ground of God's ordination for the self same end of man's utility.  
And I have been the longer in speaking of this natural instinct to society, for that it is the first fountain of all the rest, that ensueth in a common wealth, as hath been said: for of this come families, villages, towns, castles, cities, and common wealths, all which Aristotle in his books before named, doth prove to be of nature, for that this first inclination to live together (whereof all those other things do spring) is of nature, as hath been declared.  
Out of this, is the second point before mentioned 
That government & jurisdiction of Magestrats is also of nature.  deduced, to wit, that government also, superiority, & jurisdiction of magistrates, is likewise of nature, for that it followeth of the former, and seeing that it is impossible for men to live together with help and commodity of the one, to the other, except there be some magistrate or other to keep order among them, without 
Necessity.  which order there is nothing else to be hoped for as job sayeth, but horror and confusion, as for example, whersoever a multitude is gathered together, 
job 10. v. 12.  if there be not some to repress the insolent, to assist the impotent, reward the virtuous, chasten the outrageous and minister some kind of justice and equality unto the inhabitants: there living together would be far more hurtful than there living a sunder, for that one would consume and devour the other, and so we see, that upon living together followeth of necessity some kind of jurisdiction in Magistrates, and for that the former is of nature, the other also is of nature.  
All which is confitmed also by the consent & use of all nations throughout the world, which 
2. Consent of nations. Cicero li. 1. de natu ra Deorum.  general consent, Cicero calleth, ipsius vocem naturae the voice of nature herself: for there was never yet nation found either of ancient time or now in our days, by the discovery of the Indies, or else where, among whom men living together, had not some kind of magistrate or superior, to govern them, which evidently declareth 
3. The civil la.  that this point of Magistrates is also of nature, and from god that created nature, which point our civil law doth prove in like manner in the very beginning of our digests, where the second title of the first book is, de origineiuris civilis 
Lib. 1. digest. tit. 2.  & omnium magestratuum, of the beginning of the civil law and of all magistrates which beginning is referred to this first principle, of natural instinct and God's institution: And last of all, 
1. Scripture.  that God did concur also expressly with this instinct of nature, our divines do prove by clear testimony of holy scripture, as when God saith to Solomon, by me kings do reign, and 
Prou. 2. Rom. 13.  S. Paul to the Romans avoucheth, that autbority is not but of God and therefore he which resisteth authority resisteth God. Which is to be understood of authority power or iutisdiction in itself, according to the first institution, as also when it is lawfully laid upon any person, for otherwise when it is either wrongfully taken or unjustly used, it may be resisted in divers cases as afterwards more in particular shallbe declared, for than it is not law full authority.  
Thes two points than are of nature, to wit, the common wealth, and government of the same by magistrates, but what kind of government each common wealth will have, whether Democratia which is popular government by the people 
Particular form of government is free.  itself, as Athens, Thebes, and many other cities of Greece had in old time, & as the Cantons of Switzers at this day have: or else Aristocratia which is the government of some certain chosen number of the best, as the Romans many years were governed by Consuls and senators, and at this day the states of this country of Holland do imitate the same, or else Monarchia which is the regiment of one, and this again either of an Emperor, King, Duke, Earl or the like: thes particular forms of government (I say) are not determined by God or nature, as the other two points before, (for than they should be all one in all nations as the other are, seeing God and nature are one to all as often hath been said) but thes particular forms are left unto every nation and country to choose that form of government, which they shall like best, and think most fit for the natures and conditions of their people, which Aristotle proveth 
Arist. li. 2. polit.  through out all the second and fourth books of his politics very largely laying down divers kinds of governments in his days, as namely in Greece that of the Milesians, Lacedæmonians Candians, and others, and showing the causes of their differences, which he attributeth to the diversity of men's natures, customs, educations and other such causes that made them make choice of such or such form of government.  
And this might be proved also by infinite 
Diversity of government in divers countries and times.  other examples both of times past and present, and in all nations and countries both christian and otherwise, which have not had only different fashions of governments the one from the other, but even among themselves at one time, one form of government, and an other at other times: for the Romans first had Kings and after 
Rome.  rejecting them for their evil government, they chose 〈◊〉, which were two governors for evervycare, whose authority yet they limited by a multitude of senators, which were of their counsel, and thes men's power, was restrained also by adding tribunes, of the people, and some time dictator's, and finally they came to be governed last of all by Emperors.  
The like might be said of Carthage in Africa 
Africa & Greece.  and many cities and common wealths of Greece, which in divers seasons and upon divers causes have taken different forms of government to themselves.  
The like we see in Europe at this day, for in 
Italy.  only italy what different forms of government have you? Naples hath a king for their sovereign, Rome the pope, and under him one senator in place of so many as were wont to be in that common wealth. Venice and Genua, have senators & Dukes, but little authority have their Dukes. Florence, Ferrara, Mantua, Parma, Urbin and Savoy, have their Dukes only without senators, and there power is absolute. Milan was once a kingdom but now a Dukedom, the like is of Burgundy, Lorraine, Bauire Gascony, 
Dukes for kings and kings for dukes.  and Britain the lesser, all which once had their distinct kings, and now have Dukes, for their supreme governors. The like may be said of all Germany that many years together had one king over all, which now is divided into so many Dukedoms, Earldoms & other like titles of supreme Princes.  
But the contrary is of Castille, Arragon, Portugal, Barcelona, and other kingdoms this day in Spain, which were first earldoms only and after Dukedoms, and then kingdoms, and 
Spain.  now a gain are all under one Monarchy. The like is of Boeme and Polonia which were but 
Boeme. Polonia.  Dukedoms in old time, and now are kingdoms. The like may be said of France also after the expulsion of the Romans, which was first a monarchy, under Pharamont their first king, and so continued for many years under Clodion, Merovys' Childrik and Clodovaeus their first christened kings, but after they divided it into four kingdoms, to wit one of Paris an other of Suessons, the third of Orleans, and the fourth of Metts, and so it continued for divers years, but yet afterwards they made it one monarchy again.  
England also was first a monarchy under the 
England.  britains, and then a province under the Romans, and after that divided into seven kingdoms at once under the Saxons, and now a monarchy again under the English and all this by God's permission, and approbation, who in token thereof, suffered his own peculiar people also of Israel to be under divers manners of governments in divers times, as first under Patriarques 
The jew lib. Genes.  Abraham, Isaac and jacob, then under Captains as Moses, josua, and the like, then under judges as Othoniel, Aiod, and Gedion, 
Lib. Exo. Lib. job. Lib. jud. Lib. 1. Reg.  then under high Priests, as Hely and Samuel, then under kings as Saul, David and the rest, & then under captains & high priests again as Zorobabelludas Machabeus, & his brethren, 
Lib. Machab.  until the government was lastly taken from them, and they brought under the power of the Romans, and foreign kings appointed by them.  
So as of all this, there can be no doubt, but that the common wealth hath power to choose 
The realm chooseth her form of government  their own fashion of government, as also to change the same upon reasonable causes, as we see they have done in all times and countries, and God no doubt approveth what the realm determineth in this point, for otherwise nothing could be certain for that of thes changes doth depend all that hath succeeded sithence.  
In like manner, is it evident, that as the common wealth hath this authority to choose and change her government, so hath she also to limit the same with what laws and conditions she pleaseth, whereof ensueth the great diversity of authority and power which each 
The common wealth limiteth the governors authority.  one of the former governments hath, as for example, the Consuls of Rome were but for one year, other officers and Magistrates were for more, or less time, as their common wealth did allot them: The Dukes of Venice at this day are for their lives (except in certain cases wherein they may be deposed) & those of Genua only for two years and their power (as I have said) is very small and much limited, and their heirs have no claim or pretence at all after them to that dignity, as the children and next of kin of other Dukes of Italy have, though in different sort also: for that the Dukedoms of Ferara, Urbin and Parma are limited only to heirs male, and for defect thereof to return to the pope or Sea of Rome, Florence and Mantua for like defects are to return to the empire and do not pass to the heirs female or to the next of kin as Savoy and some others do.  
And now if we respect God and nature, as well, might all thes governments follow one law, as so different, for that neither God not nature prescribeth any of thes particular forms, but concurreth with any that the common wealth itself appointeth, and so it is to be believed, that God and nature concurred as well with Italy when it had but one Prince, as now when it hath so many, and the like with Germany and the like also with Switzerland, which once was one common wealth only under the dukes and marquesses of Austria and now are divided into thirteen Cantons or common wealths under popular Magistrates of their own, as hath been said: so as when men talk of a natural Prince or natural successor (as many times 
A Natural Prince.  I have hard the word used) if it be understood of one that is borne within the same Realm or country and so of our own natural blood, it hath some sense, though he may be both good or bad, (and none hath been worse or more cruel many times than home borne Princes:) but if it be meant as though any Prince had his particular government or interest to succeed by institution of nature, it is ridiculous, for that nature giveth it not as hath been declared, but the particular constitution of every common wealth within itself, and so much for this first point which must be the ground to all the rest that I have to say.   

OF THE FORM OF MONARCHIES AND KINGDOMS IN PARTICULER, AND THE DIF ferent laws, whereby they are to be obtained holden and governed in divers countries according as each common wealth hath chosen & established.  
CAP. II.  
ALL that hitherto hath been spoken, hath appertained to all princely and supreme government in general, but now for that our matter in question, is concerning the succession to a kingdom, good reason that we should reduce our speech unto this form of government in particular.  
First of all then, is to be considered, that of all 
A monarchy the best government.  other forms of government the monarchy of a king in itself, appeareth to be the most excellent and perfect, and so do hold not only Aristotle in his forenamed books of pollitiques, & namely in his third (with this only condition that he govern by laws) but Seneca also and Plutarch in his morales & namely in that special 
A rist. li. 4. pol. a. c. 9 Seneca. Plutarch.  treatise wherein he discusseth, an seni sit Respub: tractanda, whether an old man ought to take upon him the government of a common wealth or no: where he saith that, regnum inter omnes respub: consumatissima & prima est, a kingdom is the most perfect common wealth, among all other, & the very first: that is to say, the most perfect for that it hath most commodities and least inconveniences in it selft, of any other government, and it is the fitst of all other, for that all people commonly made their choice at the beginning of this kind of government, so as of all other it is most ancient, for so we read that among the Sytians, Medes, and Persians 
The antiquity of Monarchy.  their first governors were kings and when the children of Israel did ask a king at the hands of Samuel, which was a thousand years before the coming of Christ, they alleged for 
1 Reg. 8.  one reason that all nations round about them had kings for their governors, and at the very same time, the chiefest cities and common wealths of Greece, as the lacedæmonians, Athenians, Corinthians, and others, whereof divers afterwards took other governments unto themselves, for the abuses in kingly govermet committed, at that time were governed by kings as at large proveth Dyonisius Halicarnasseus, 
Dionys. Haly l. 5. Cornel. Tacit. l. 3. Cicero l. 1. Offic.  Cornelius Tacitus, Cicero & others.  
The Romans also began with kings as before I have noted, and the reason of this is, for that as our Christian doctors do gather, (especially S. Hierome and S. Chrisostome) this kind of government resembleth most of all the government 
Hierom. l. 2. epist. 12 Chrisost. ho. 23.  of God, that is but one: it representeth the excellency of one son that lighteneth all the planets, of one soul in the body that governeth all the powers and members thereof, and finally they show it also to be most conform unto nature, by example of the bees which do choose unto themselves a king, and do live under a monarchy as the most excellentest of all other governments, to which purpose also I have hard alleged sometimes by divers those words of S. Peter. Subiecti estote omni humanae creaturae 
1. Pet. 2.  propter Deum, sive regi quasi precellenti: sive ducibus ab eo missis, etc. Be you subject of every human creature, for God's cause, whether it be to a king, as the most excellent, or to Dukes sent by God for the punishment of evil men and praise of the good. Out of which words some do note two points, first that as one the one side the Apostle doth plainly teach that the magistrates authority is from God, by his first institution, 
Two points to be noted.  in that he sayeth, we must be subject to them for God's cause, so on the other side, he calleth it a human creature or a thing created by man, for that by man's free choice this particular form of government (as all other also) is appointed in every common wealth, as before hath been declared: and that by man's election and consent, the same is laid upon some particular man or woman, according to the laws of every country, all which maketh it rightly to be called both a human creature, and yet from God.  
The second point which divers do note out of thes words, is, that S. Peter calleth a king 
How S. Peter calleth a king most excellent.  most excellent, which though it may be understood in rcspect of the Duke's authority, whereof immediately there followeth mention: yet may it seem also to be taken and verified of kingly authority in respect of all other governments seeing that at this time when the Apostle wrote this epistle, the chief governor of the world, was not called king but emperor, and therefore seeing in such a time S. Peter affirmeth the state of kingly government to be most excellent, it may seem he meant it absolutely signifying thereby that this is the best kind of government among all others, though to confess the truth between the title of king and Emperor there is little or no difference in substance, but only in name, for that the authority is equal, every king is an Emperor in his own kingdom.  
And finally the excellency of this government above all other, is not only proved by the perfection thereof in itself, as for that it is most ancient simple and conform unto nature, & most resembling the government of God himself, as hath been said, but by the effects also and utility that it bringeth unto the subjects, with far 
Vtilites of a kingdom and in conveniences of other govermentes.  less, inconveniences than any other form of government whatsoever if we compare them together: for in the monarchy of one king, there is more unity, agreement, and conformity, and thereby also celerity commonly in dispaching of business, and in defending the common wealth, then where many heads be: less passions also, in one man then in many: as for example in Democratia, where the common people do bear the chief sway, which is bellua multorum capitum as Cicero wisely said, that is, a beast 
Cicerol. x office Democratia.  of many heads, there is nothing but sedition, trouble, tumults, outrages, and injustices committed upon every little occasion, especially where crafty and cunning men may be admitted to incense or assuage them with sugared words, such as were the Orators in Athens, and other cities of Greece, that had this govermenr, and the Tribunes of the people of Rome, and other such popular and plausible men, who could move the waves, raise up the winds, and enkindle the fire of the vulgar people's affections, passions or furies at their pleasure, by which we see that of all other commonwealths, these of popular government, have soon come to ruin, which might be showed not only by old examples of Greece, Asia, and Africa, but also of many cities in Italy, as Florence, Bolonia, Sienna, Pisa, Arezzo, Spoleto, Perugia, 
Miseries of popular government in Italy.  Padua and others, which upon the fall or diminution of the Roman Empire (under which they were before) took unto themselves popular governments, wherein they were so tossed with continual sedition, mutines, and banding of factions, as they could never have end thereof, until after infinite murders massacres and inundation, of blood, they came in the end to be under the monarchy of some one Prince or other, as at this day they remain: so that of all other governments this is the worst.  
The second form, which is called Oligarchia or Aristocratia (for that a few and those presumed to be the best, are joined together in 
Aristocratia.  authority) as it doth participate some thing of both the other governments, to wit, of monarchia and Democratia, or rather tempereth them both: so hath it both good and evil in it; but yet inclineth more to the evil, for the disunion that commonly by man's infirmity & malice, is among those heads, for which cause the states before named of Venice and Genua, which were wont to have simply this government of Aristocratia, in that their regiment was by certain chose senators, were enforced in the end, to choose Dukes also, as heads of their senates, for avoiding of dissension, and so they have them at this day, though their authority be but small as hath been said.  
We see also by the examples of Carthage & Rome where government of Aristocratia, took place, that the division and factions among the senators of Carthage, was the cause why aid and succour was not sent to Hannibal, their Captain 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 30.  in Italy after his so great and important victory at Cannas which was the very cause of the saving of the Roman Empire, and the 
Eutrop. l. 3.  loss of their own. As also afterwards the 
Oros. l. 5. & 6.  emulations, discord, and disunion, of the Roman senators, among themselves in the affairs and contentions of Marius and Silla, and of Pompey and Cesar, was the occasion of all their destruction & of their common wealth with them.  
Evident than it is, that of all other governments the monarchy is the best, & least subject to the inconueviences that other governments have, and if the prince that governeth alone & hath supreme authority to himself, as he resembleth God in this point of sole government, 
The cause why laws be added to Kings.  so could he resemble him also, in wise, discreet, and just government, and in ruling without passion: no doubt, but that nothing more excellent in the world could be desired for the perfect felicity of his subjects: but for that a king or Prince is a man as others be, and thereby not only subject to errors in judgement, but also, to passionate affections in his will: for this cause, it was necessary that the common wealth, as it gave him this great power over them, so it should assign him also the best helps that might be, for directing and rectifying both his will and judgement, and make him therein as like in government to God, whom he representeth, as man's frailty can reach unto.  
For this consideration they assigned to him first ofal, the assistance and direction of law, whereby to govern, which law Aristotle saith. Est mens quaedam nullo perturbata affectu, it is a certain 
Arist. l. 3. pol. c. vlt.  mind disquieted with no disordinate affection, as men's minds commonly be, for that when a law is made, for the most part, it is made upon due consideration and deliberation, and without perturbation of evil affections, as anger, envy, hatred, rashness, or the like passions, and it is referred to some good end and commodity of the common wealth, which law, being once made, remaineth so still without alteration, or partial affection, being indifferent to all and partial to none, but telleth one tale to every man, & in this it resembleth the perfection as it were of God himself, for the which cause the said philosopher in the same place, addeth a notable wise saying, to wit, that he which joineth a law to govern with the Prince, 
A notable saying Arist. l. 3. Pol. c. 12.  joineth God to the Prince, but he that joineth to the Prince his affection to govern, joineth a beast: for that men's affections and concupiscences are common also to beasts: so that a Prince ruling by law is more than a man, or a man deified, and a Prince ruling by affections, is less than a man, or a man brutified. In an other place also the same philpsopher sayeth that a Prince that leaveth law and ruleth himself & others by his own appetite and affections, of all creatures 
Arist. l. 1. Pol. c. 2.  is the worst and of all beasts is the most furious and dangerous, for that nothing is so outrageous, as injustice armed, and no armour is so strong, as wit and authority, whereof the first he hath in that he is a man, and the other in that he is a Prince.  
For this cause then all common wealths have 
divers names & propeties of laws.  prescribed laws unto their Princes, to govern thereby, as by a most excellent, certain & immutable rule, to which sense Cicero, said leges sunt inventae ut omnibus semper una & 〈◊〉 
Cic. lib. 2. office  voce loquerentur, laws were invented to the end, they should speak in one and the 〈◊〉 same sense, to all men. For which very reason in like manner thes laws have been called by Philosophers a rule or square, inflexible, and by Aristotle in particular a mind without passion, as hath been said, but the Prophet David who was also a Prince & king, seemeth to call it by the name of Discipline, for that as discipline 
Law is the discipline of a weal pu blique.  doth keep all the parts of a man or of a particular house in order, so law well ministered, keepeth all the parts of a common wealth in good order, and to sheow how severely God exacteth this at all Prince's hands, he saith these words. And now learn ye kings and be instructed, 
Psal. 2.  you that judge the world: serve God in fear and rejoice in him with trembling, embrace ye discipline, lest he enter into wrath, and so ye perish from the way of righteousness. Which words being uttered, by a prophet and king do contain divers points of much consideration, for this purpose: as first, that kings and Prince are bound to learn law and discipline, and secondly to observe the same with great humility and fear of God's wrath, and thirdly that if they do not, they shall perish from the way of righteousness, as though the greatest plague of all to a Prince wear to lose the way of righteousness, law, and reason in his government, and to give himself over to passion, and his own will whereby they are sure to come to shipwreck, and thus much of the first help.  
The second help that common wealths have given to their kings and Princes especially 
The Counsels of Princes, a great help.  in later ages, hath been cerrayne councils and councillors with whom to consult in matters of most importance, as we see the parliaments of Ingland and France, the courts in Spain and diets in Germany, without which no matter of great moment can be concluded, and besides this commonly every king hath his privy council, whom he is bound to hear, and this was done to temper somewhat the absolute for me of a Monarchy whose danger is by reason of his sole authority, to fall into tyranny as Aristotle wisely noteth, in his fourth 
Arist. l. 4. Pol. c. 10.  book of politics, showing the inconvenience or dangers of this government: which is the cause that we have few or no simple monarchies now in the world, especially among Christians, but all are mixed lightly with divers points of the other two forms of government also, and namely in Ingland all three do enter more 
The monarchy of Inglad rempered.  or less, for in that there is one king or Queen, it is a monarchy: in that it hath certain councils which must be hard: it participateth of Aristocratia, and in that the commonalty have their voices and burgesses in parliament, it taketh part also of Democratia, or popular government, all which limitations of the Princes absolute authority, as you see, do come for the common wealth, as having authority above their Princes for their restraint to the good of the realm, as more at large shallbe proved hereafter.  
From like authority and for like considerations 
The restraints of kingly power in all estates.  have come the limitations of other kings and kingly power in all times and countries, from the beginning, both touching themselves and their posterity and successors as briefly in this place I shall declare.  
And first of all, if we will consider the two most renowned and allowed states of all the world I mean of the Romans and Grecians, we shall find that both of them began with kings, but yet with far different laws and restraints, about their authorities: for in Rome the kings that succeeded Romulus, their first 
Roman Kings.  founder, had as great and absolute authority as ours have now a days, but yet their children or next in blood succeeded them not of necessity, but new kings were chosen partly by the senate, and partly by the people, as Titus Livius 
Liu. lib. 1. dec. 1.  testifieth, so as of three most excellent kings that ensued immediately after Romulus, to wit, Numa Pompilius, Tullius Hostilsus, & Tarqninus Priscus, none of them were of the blood royal nor of kin the one to the other, no nor yet Romans borne, but chosen rather from among strangers, for their virtue and valour, and that by election of the senate and consent of the people.  
In Greece, and namely among the lacedæmonians 
Grecian kings.  which was the most eminent kingdom among others at that time, the succession of children after their fathers was more certain, but yet as Aristotle noteth, their authority & 
Arist. li. 2. c. 8. polit. Plutarch. in Lycurg.  power was so restrained by certain officers of the people named Ephori (which commonly were five in number) as they were not only checked and chastined by them, if occasion served but also deprived and some times put to death: for which cause the said philosopher did justly mislike this eminent jurisdiction of the Ephori, over their kings: but yet hereby we see what authority the common wealth had in this case, and what their meaning was in making laws and restraining their king's power, to wit, thereby the more to bind them to do justice, which Cicero in his offices uttereth in tbes words. justitiae fruendae causae apud maiores 〈◊〉 & i se Asia & in Europe bene morati regesolint 
Cic. lib. 2. 〈◊〉  sunt constituti, etc. at cum ius aequabile ab uno viro 
 〈◊〉 non consequerentur, inventae sunt leges. Good kings were appointed in old time among our ancestors in Asia and Europe to the end thereby to obtain justice, but when men could not ob. teyne equal justice at one man's hands, they invented laws.  
The same reason yieldeth the same philosopher in another place, not only of the first institution of kingdoms, but also of the change thereof again into other governments, when thes were abused. Omnes antiquae gentes regibus 
Ciclib. 3. de 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 paruerunt, etc. That is, all old nations did live under kingdoms at the beginning, which king of government first they gave unto the most just, and wisest men, which they could find, and also after for love of them, they gave the same to their posterity ot next in kin, as now also it remaineth where kingly government is in use: but other countries which liked not that form of government, and have shaken of, have done it not that they will not be under any, but for that they will not be ever under one only.  
Thus far Cicero, and he speaketh this principally in deferice of hisowne cornmon wealth 
 I mean the Roman, which had cast of that kind of government, as before hath been said, for the offence they had taken against cessayne kings of there's, and first of all, against 〈◊〉 himself their first founder, for 〈◊〉 at his pleasure without law, as Titus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
 for which cause the senators at length 〈◊〉 him, and cut him in small pieces. And aftervards they were greatly grieved at the entering of Servius Tullius, their sixth king, for that he gave the crown by fraud and not by election of the senate, and special approbation of the people, as he should have done: but most of all they were exasperated by the proceeding of their seventh king named Lucius Tarquinas, surnamed the proud, who for that (as Livius faith) he neglected 
 the laws of government 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 own head & for that he appointed to himself a guard as though he had mistrusted the people, and for that he did use ininstice to divers particular men, and suffered his children to be insolent, he was expelled with all his posterity and the government of Rome changed from a kingdom unto the regiment of consuls, after two hundredth years that the other had endured.  
And thus much for those kingdoms of Italy and Greece: And if likewise we will look upon other kingdoms of Europe, we shall see 
Restraints of kingdoms in Europe.  the very same, to wit, that every kingdom & country hath his particular laws prescribed to their kings by the common wealth, both for their government, authority, and succession in the same: for if we behold the Roman Empire itself, as it is at this day annexed to the german electors, though it be the first in dignity among christian Princes, yet shall we see it so restrained by particular laws, as the Emperor can do much less in his state, than other kings in theirs, for he can neither make war nor exact any contribution of men, or money, thereunto, but by the free leave and consent of all the states of the German diet or parliament, and for his children or next in kynn, they have no action, interest or pretence at all to succeed in their father's dignity, but only by free election, if they shallbe thought worthy. Nay one of the chiefest points that the Emperor must swear at his entrance, as Sleydan writeth, is this, 
Sleydan lib. 8. An. 1532.  that he shall never go about to make the dignity of the Emperor peculiar or hereditary to his family, but leave it unto the seven electors free in their power, to choose his successor, according to the law made by the pope 
Blond. Di cad. 2. li. 3 Crant. li. cap. 25.  Gregory the fifth, and the Emperor Charles the fourth in this behalf.  
The kingdoms of Polonia & Boemia do go 
Kingdoms of polonia and Boemia.  much after the same fashion, both for there restraint of power, and succession to their kings. For first touching their authority, they have great limitation, nether can they do any thing of great moment, without the consent of certain principal men called Palatines or Castellans, 
Herbert li. 9 hist. Polon.  nether may their children or next of blood succeed except they be chosen, as in the Empire. 
Cromerus lib. 3. Hist. Polon.   
In Spain, France, and Ingland, the privileges 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 succeed, but yet in different manner: for as touching authority it seemeth that the kings of Spain and France, have greater than the 
Kings of Spain France and Ingland.  king of England, for that every ordination of thes two kings, is law in itself, without further approbation of the common wealth, which holdeth not in England, where no general law can be made without consent of parliament: but in the other point of succession, it appeareth that the restraint is far greater in those other two countries, then in Ingland, for that in Spain the next in blood cannot succeed be he never so lawfully descended, but by a new approbation of the nobility and bishops, and states of the Realm, as it is expressly set down in the two ancient councils of Toledo the fourth 
Concil. blet. 4. c. 74. & council. s. c. 3.  and fifth. In confirmation whereof we see at this day, that the king of Spain's own son, cannot succeed not be called Prince, except he be first sworn by the said nobility and states in token of their new consent, and so we have seen it practised in our days towards three or four of King Philip's children, which have succeeded the one after the other in the title of Princes of Spain, and at every change a new oath required at the subjects hands, for their admission to the said dignity, which is not used in the king's children of France or Ingland.  
In France the world knoweth, how women, 
Peculiar manner of succession.  are not admitted to succeed in the crown be they never so near in blood, nether any of their issue, though it be male. For which cause I doubt not but you remember how king Edward the third of Ingland though he were son & heir unto a daughter of France, whose three 
An. 1340. Paul. Anil. hist. Franc. l. 2. Gerard. du Hayllan lib. 14 hist. Franc.  brethren were kings and left her sole heir to her father king Philip the fourth surnamed the fair, yet was he put by the crown, as also was the king of Navarre, at the same time, who was son and heir unto this woman's eldest brothers daughter, named Lewis Huttin king of Ftance, (which king of Navarre thereby seemed also to be before king Edward of Ingland) but yet were they both put by it, and Philip de Vallois, a brother's son of Philip the fair, was preferred to it, by general decree of the states 
Fran. Belfor llb. 5. cap. 1. An. 1327.  of France, and by vardit of the whole parliament of Paris, gathered about the same affair.  
Nether did it avail, that the two kings afore said alleged, that it was against reason & conscience and custom of all nations, to exclude 
Reasons for succession of women.  women, from the succession of the crown which appartayned unto them by propinquity of blood, seeing both nature & God hath made them capable of such succession every where, as it appeareth by example of all other nations, and in the old testament among the people of god itself, where we see women have been admitted, unto kingdoms by succession, but all this (I say) prevailed not, with the French as it doth not also at this day for the admission of Dona Isabel Eugenia Clara, infanta of Spain unto 
The infanta of Spain & Prince of Lorraine.  the said crown of France though by dissent of blood there be no question of her next propinquity for that she is the eldest child of the last king's eldest sister.  
The like exclusion is made against the Prince of Lorraine that now liveth, though he be a man, and nephew to the last king, for that his title is by a woman, to wit, his mother, that was younger sister unto the last king Henry of France.  
And albeit the law called Salica, by the Frenchmen, by virtue whereof they pretend to 
Gerard du Haillan Lib. 13. Hist. Franc. & Anno 1317. & lib. 14. An. 1328. & lib. 3. de l'Estat defrunaee.  exclude the succession of women, be no very ancient law, as the French themselves do confess, and much less made by Pharamont their first king, or in those ancient times as others without ground do affirm: yet do we see that it is sufficient, to bind all Princes and subjects of that realm, to observe the same, and to alter the course of natural descent, and nearnes of blood as we have seen, and that the king of Navarr and some other of his race by virtue of this only law do pretend at this day to be next in succession to this goodly crown, though in nearnes of blood they be farther of, by many degrees from the last king Henry the third, then either the foresaid Enfanta of Spain or the Prince of Lorraine that now is, who are children of his own sisters, which point yet in Ingland were great disorder, and would not be suffered, for that our laws are otherwise, & who made thes laws, but the common wealth itself.  
By all which we see that divers kingdoms, have divers laws and customs in the matter of succession, and that it is not enough (as often I have said) for a man to allege bare propinquity of blood, thereby to prevail, for that he may be excluded or put back by divers other circumstances, and for sundry other reasons which afterward we shall discuss.  
Yea, not only in this point (said he) hath the common wealth authority to put back the next 
Kings lawfully possessed may be deprived.  inheritors upon lawful considerations, but also to dispossess them that have been lawfully put in possession, if they fulfil not the laws and conditions, by which and for which, their dignity was given them. Which point as it cannot serve for wicked men to be troublesome unto their governors, for their own interests or appetits, so yet when it is done upon just and urgent causes and by public authority of the whole body: the justice thereof is plain, not only by the grounds and reasons before alleged, but also by those examples of the Romans and Grecians already mentioned, who lawfully deposed their kings upon just considerations, & changed also their monarchy and kingly government, into other forms of regiment. And it might be proved also, by examples of all other nations, and this perhaps with a circumstance 
A markable circumstance.  which I know not, whether every man here have considered the same, to wit, that God hath wonderfully concurred for the most part, with such iuditial acts of the common wealth against their evil Princes, not only in prospering the same, but by giving them also commonly some notable successor in place of the deposed, thereby both to justify the fact, and to remedy the fault of him that went before.  
To this all the company answered, that they had never much thought, nor made reflection upon any such circumstance, and therefore that it could not be but a point of much novelty, to here the same discussed, requesting him to say what he had observed or read in that behalf.  
I am content (said he) but yet with this preface, 
Against rebellious people and contemnors of Princes.  that I am far from the opinion of those people of our days, or of old, who make so little account of their duty towards Princes, as be their title what it will, yet for every mislike of their own they are ready to band against them wheresoever they think they may make their party good, inventing a thousand calumniations for their discredit without conscience or reason, whom in deed I do think to have little conscience or none at all but rather to be those whom the Apostles S. Peter and S. Jude did speak of when they said. Novit Dominus iniquos 
 in diem judicij reseruare, cruciandos, magis autemeos qui dominationem contemnunt, audaces, sibi placentes, 
 etc. God knoweth how to reserve the wicked unto the day of judgement there to be tormented, but yet much more those which do contemn domination, or government, and are bold and liking of themselves, thus much ther.  
Nay further, I am of opinion, that whatsoever 
 a Prince's title be, if once he be settled in the crown, and admitted by the common wealth (for of all other holds I esteem the tenure of a crown) if so it may be termed (the most irregular and extraordinary) every man is bound to settle his conscience to obey the same, in all that lawfully he may command, and this without examination of his title, or interest, for that (as I have said) God disposeth of kingdoms and worketh his will in Prince's affairs as he pleaseth, and this by extraordinary means, oftentimes so that if we should examine the titles at this day, of all the Princes of Christendom, by the ordinary rule of private men's rights successions or tenors, we should find so many knots and difficulties, as it were hard for any law to make the same plain, but only the supreme law of god's disposition, which can dispense in what he listeth.  
This is my opinion in this behalf for true 
 and quiet obedience, and yet on the other side, as far of am I from the abject and wicked flattery of such as affirm Princes, to be subject to no law or limitation at all, either in authority government, life, or succession, but as though by nature they had been created kings from the beginning of the world, or as though the common wealth had been made for them and not they for the common wealth, or as though they had begotten or purchased or given life to the wealpublique, and not that the wealpublique had exalted them or given them their authority honour and dignity: so thes flatterers do free them, from all obligation, duty reverence or respect unto the whole body whereof they are the heads, nay expressly they say and affirm that: all men's goods bodies and lives, are the Princes at their pleasures to dispose of: that they are under no 
〈◊〉 flatteries 〈◊〉 by Bellay & others.  law or accompt-giving whatsoever, that they succeed by nature and generation only, and not by any authority admission or approbation of the common wealth, and that consequently no merit or demerit of their persons is to be respected, nor any consideration of their natures or qualities, to wit of capacity, disposition, or other personal circumstances, is to be had or admitted, and do they what they list, no authority is there under God, to thasten them.  
All thes absurd paradoxes, have some men of our days uttered in flattery of Princes, and namely of late, one Belloy a French man (as before 
Belloy in apolog. cath. & apolog. pro rege.  I signified) in two books which he called apologies, the one catholic, and the other for the king, both which he seemeth to write in favour of the king of Nauare, (and as other also call him king of France) but in my opinion, he deserveth small commendation, or reward to defend a king's title, with such assertions and propositions, as do destroy all law reason conscience and common wealth, and do bring all to such absolute tyranny as no realm ever did or could suffer among civil people, no not under the dominion of the Turk himself at this day, where yet some proportion of equity is held between the Prince and the people, both in government and succession, though nothing so much as in Christian nations.  
Wherefore to avoid thes two extremes, I shall prove unto you, the mean before mentioned, 
The purpose of the next Chapter.  to wit, that as all the duty, reverence, love, and obedience before named, is to be yielded unto every Prince which the common wealth hath once established: so yet retaineth still the common wealth her authority not only to restrain the same Prince, if he be exorbitant, but also to chasten and remove him, upon due & weighty considerations, and that the same hath been done and practised at many times in most nations, both Christian & otherwise with right good success, to the weal public, and this shallbe the argument (if you think good) of our next meeting, for that now it is late, and I would be loath to have you go away with my tale half told, for that it is a matter of much moment, as to morrow you shall here.  
All wear content with this resolution, and so departed every man, to his loging, with purpose to return the next morning somewhat more early than their accustomed hour to the end the matter might be thoroughly debated.   

OF KING'S LAWFULLY CHASTISED BY THEIR Commonwealths FOR THEIR misgoverment, and of the good and prosperous success that God commonly hath given to the same.  
CAP. III.  
THE company was no sooner come together the next morning, but they were all at the civilian lawyer to perform his promise, and to prosecute the matter he had propounded the night before: to whom he answered, you require of me (if I be 
Two points to be proved.  not deceived) two points jointly to be proved unto you, the first that common wealths have chastised sometimes lawfully there lawful Princes, though never so lawfully they wear descended, or otherwise lawfully put in possession of their crown, and secondly that this hath fallen out ever, or for the most part, commodious to the wealpublique, & that it may seem that God approved and prospered the same, by the good success and successors that ensued thereof. Which two points, I am content (quoth he) to show unto you, by some examples for that the reasons hereof have in part been declared before, & shallbe more in particular hereafter, but yet must I do this with the protestation, before mentioned, that nothing be taken out of this my speech, against the sacred authority 
Nothing hear spoken against due respect to Princes.  and dew respect and obedience, that all men do owe, unto Princes both by God's law and nature as hath been proved, but only this shall serve to show that as nothing under God is more honourable, amiable, profitable or sovereign, than a good Prince: so nothing is more pestilent of bringeth so general destruction and desolation as an evil Prince. And therefore as the whole body is of more authority than the only head, and may cure the head if it be out of tune, so may the Wealpublique cure or cut of their heads, if they infest the rest, seeing that a body civil may have divers heads, by succession, and is not bound ever to one, as a body natural is, which body natural, if it had the same ability that when it had an aching or sickly head, it could cut it of and take an other, I doubt not, but it would so do, and that all men would confess that it had authority sufficient & reason to do, the same rather than all the other parts should perish or live in pain and continual torment: but yet much more clear is the matter that we have in hand for disburdening ourselves of wicked Princes, as now I shall begin to prove unto you.  
And for proof of both the points jointly 
Deprivations of kings recounted in scripture.  which you require, I might begin perhaps with some examples out of the scripture itself, but that some man may chance to say, that thes things recounted there of the jews, were not so much to be reputed for acts of the common wealth, as for particular ordinations of God himself, which yet is not any thing against me, but rather maketh much for our purpose. For that the matter is more authorized hereby, seeing that what soevergod did ordain or put in ure in his common wealth, that may also be practised by other commonwealths, now having his authority and approbation for the same. Wherhfore (said he) though I do hasten to examples that are more nearer home, and more proper to the particulier purpose whereof we treat, yet can I not omit to note some two or three out of the bible, that do appertain to this purpose also, & thes are the deprivation and putting to death of two wicked kings of juda, named Saul and Amon, (though both of 
1. Reg. 31. 4. Reg. 21. 44.  them were lawfully placed in that dignity) and the bringing in of David and josias in their rooms, who were the two most excellent Princes that ever that nation or any other (I think) have had to govern them.  
And first king Saul though he were elected by God (as you know) to that royal throne, yet was he slain by the Philistians by God's order as it was foretold him for his disobedience & not fulfilling the law & limits prescribed unto him. Amon was lawful king also & that by natural descent & succession for he was son & heir to king Manasses whom he succeeded and yet was he slain by his own people, quia non ambulavit in via Domini. for that he walked not in the way prescribed unto him by God: and unto thes two kings so deprived, God gave two successors, as I have named, the 〈◊〉 whereof are 
King josias.  not to be found in the whole rank of kings for a thousand years together: for of josias it is written, Fecit quod erat rectum in conspectu Domini, & non declinavit neque ad dextram neque ad sinistran. 
2. Paralip. 34. 〈◊〉  he did that which was right in the sight of God, nether did he decline unto the right hand nor the left. He reigned 31. years, and Hieremias the prophet that lived in his time, loved so extremely 
2. Paralip. 35.  this good king, as he never ceased afterwards to lament his death as the scripture sayeth.  
As for king David, it shall not be need-ful to 
King David.  say any thing, how excellent a king he was, for as many learned men do note, he was a most perfect pattern for all kings that should follow in the world, not as king Cyrus whom Xenophon 
Xenophon in Cyropaed.  did paint out more according to his own imagination of a perfect king, that he wished, then to the truth of the story, but rather as one that passed far in acts that which is written of him, and this not only in matters of religion, piety, and devotion: but also of chivalry valour wisdom & policy, nether is it true which Nicholas Machavel, the Florentyne, and 
Nich. Machal l. 2. c. 2. in Tit. Livius.  some others of his new unchristian school do affirm, for defacing of christian virtue, that religion and piety are let's ostentymes to politic and wise government, and do break or weaken the high spirits of magnanimous men, to take in hand great enterprises for the common wealth. This (I say) is 
August. l. de Gran.  extreme false, for that as divines are wont to say (and it is most true) grace doth not destroy or corrupt but perfecteth nature, so as he which by nature is valiant, wise, liberal, or politic, shallbe the more, if also he be pious and religious. Which we see evidentlv in king David, who notwithstanding all his piety, yet omitted he nothing appertaining to the state and government of a noble wise and politic Prince. For first of all, he began with reformation of his own court and realm in matter of good 
The wisdom and piety of King David.  life and service of God, wherein he used the counsel and direction of Gad and of Nathan the Prophet, as also of Abiathar and Hitam the chief priests, and of Heman his wise councillor. He reduced the whole clergy into 24. 
1. Paralip. 15.  degrees, appointing four thousand singars with divers sorts of musical instruments, under 
1. Psal. 24. & 25.  Asaph, Heman and other principal men that should be heads of the choir. He appointed all officers needful both for his court and also the common wealth, with the arms of the crown, which was a Lion, in remembrance of the Lion which he had slain with his own hands, 
Thearmes of King David.  when he was a child: he ordained a mint with a peculiar form of money to be stamped: took order for distributing relief unto the poor, & other like acts of a prudent and pious Prince.  
After all this he turned himself to his old exercise 
His valour in chivalry.  of wars, to which he was given from his child hood, being wonderful valiant of his own person as appeareth by the Lion and bear that he slew with his own hands, and the courage wherewith he took upon him the combat with Goliath, and as he had showed himself a great warier and renowned captain many years in the service of Saul, against the Philistians, and had gained many noble victories: 
King Dauides victoires.  so much more did he after he was king himself, for that he conquered not only the Philistians, but also the Amorits, Idumeans, Moabites, with the kings and people of Damascus and all Syria, even unto the river Euphates, & left all thes countries peaceable to his successor and the scripture recompteth in one 
2. Reg. 8.  only chapter, how that in three or four battles wherein David himself was present, with 
Paral. 18 〈◊〉  in the space of two or three years, almost a hundredth thousand horse and foot slain by him, and that himself slew in his days eight hundredth with his own hands, and that he made by his example thirty & seven such Captains 
2. Reg. 23 joseph. l. 7 antiq c. 10  as each one of them was able to lead and govern a whole army, and yet among all thes expenses of wars had he care to lay up so much money and treasure as was sufficient for the building of that huge and wondered temple after him, which he recommended to his son Solomon, and amidst all this valour and courage of so warlike a king and Captain, 
2. Reg. 7.  had he so much humility as to humble himself to Nathan the Prophet when he came to rebuke him for his fault, and so mnch patience 
His humility charity and devotion.  and charity as to pardon Semei that reviled him and threw stones at him in the high way as he went, and among so many and continual businese, both martial and civil, & great affairs of the common wealth, he had time to write so many Psalms as we see, and to sing praises seven times, a day to almighty God, and to feel that devotion at his death which we read of, & finally he so lived and so died, as never Prince (I think) before him nor perhaps after him so-joined together both valour and virtue courage and humility, wisdom and piety, government and devotion, nobility and religion. Wherefore though I have been somewhat longer than I would in this example, yet hath it not been from the purpose to note somewhat in particular what two worthy kings were put up by God in place of two other by him deprived & deposed.  
And now if we will, leave the Hebrues and return to the Romans, of whom we spoke 
King's pur down among the romans & what successors they had.  before, we shall find divers things notable in that state also, to the purpose we have in hand. For before I told you how that Romulus their first king having by little and little declined into 
Halicar l. 1.  tyranny, he was stain and cut in pieces by the senate (which at that time contained a hundred in number) and in his place was chosen Numa Pompilius the notablest king that ever they had, who prescribed all their order of religion and manner of sacrifices, imitating therein and in divers other points, the rites and ceremonies of the jews, as Tertulian and other fathers 
Tertul. li. de praescrip. contta haeres. justin. martyr apolog.  do note he began also the building of their Capitol, added the two months of january and February to the year and did other such notable things for that common wealth.  
Again when Tarqvinius the proud their seventh and last king, was expelled by the same senate, for his evil government, and the whole manner of government changed, as before hath 
Tit. liu. li. 1. dec. 〈◊〉.  been rouched, we see the success was prosperous, for that not only no hurt came thereby to 
Eutrop. l. 1.  the common wealth, but exceeding much good, seeing their government and increase of Empire was so prospetous under their consuls for many years in such sort, that whereas at the end of their king's government, they had but fifteen miles territory without their city, it is known, that when their consul's government ended and was changed by julius Caesar, their territory reached more than fifteen thousand miles in copasse, for that they had not only all Europe under their dominion, but the principal parts also of Afia and Africa, so as this chastisement so justly laid upon their kings was profitable and beneficial to their common wealth also.  
Moreover when julius Caesar upon particular ambition had broken all law both human and divine, and taken all government in to his own hands alone, he was in revenge hereof, 
Caesar Augustus.  slain as the world knoweth, by senators in the senate-house: and Octavianus Augustus preferred 
Dion in Caesa.  in his room, who proved afterwards 
Sueton in Caesa.  the most famous Emperor that ever was. I might note here also how Nero sixth Emperor 
Nero Vespasian.  of Rome which succeeded lawfully his uncle Claudius in the Empire, and being afterward deposed and sentenced to death by the senate for his wicked government (which was the first judicial sentence that ever the senate gave against Emperor) albeit peace ensued not presently, 
Cornel. Tacit. lib. 20. & 21. Egesip. l. 5  but that Galba Otho and Vitellius, three great Captains of the Empire made some little interludes of tragical kill of one the other, yet within few months the whole Empire by that means fell upon Vespasian and his son Titus, two of the best governors that those times ever saw.  
The like might be noted of the noble rank of five excellent good Emperors, to wit, Nerua, trajan Adrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurclius, 
Eutrop. in vita Caesa.  that ensued in the empire by the just death of cruel Domitian, which execution the senate is thought in secret to have procured, (being not able to perform it openly by justice) which was seen by that, that when the act was done, the senate did presently by public decree allow of the same, and disannulled all his barbarous acts for their exceeding cruelty, and commanded his arms and memories to be pulled down every where, and chose for his successor, one 〈◊〉 Nerua, an Italian, a man of excellent virtue, by whom they enjoyed not only the most prosperous time of his government, but of all those other four before named that ensued him no lessc worthy then himself.  
Not long after, the succession of thes excellent good Emperors, there came to the crown 
Heliogabolus.  by lawful descent of blood, a youth named Antoninus Heliogabolus, son of the Emperor Antoninus Caracalla, and nephew to the most famous and noble Emperor Septimius Severus that died in Ingland. Which youth as he was greatly loved and honoured a great while for so worthy a grand father: so afterwards for his own most beaftly life and foul actions, he was deprived 
An. Dni 124.  and put to death by the soldiers of Rome, at the request & common desire both of the people and senate, when he had reigned six years, and yet was but twenty years of age, when he was put down and his death & deprivation 
Alius lamp. in vita Heliog.  was approved by public act of the senate, who ordained also in his detestation, that never Emperor after him should be called more Antoninus' & so it was observed, though no other name had ever been more grateful before, to the world for the remembrance of the good Emperors, that had been so called.  
This man being chastised as is said, there was preferred to the Empire in his room a goodly 
Alexander Severus.  young man, of his next kindred named Alexander Severus, son to Mamonea which was sister to Heliogabolus his mother, and being admitted by common consent, both of the senate people 
Herod. in vit. seven.  and army, he proved one of the most rarest Ptinces for his valour and virtue, that ever the roman Empire hath had, so as the worthiness of Severus seemed to recompencefully the wickedness of Heliogabolus.  
Imight name, divers other such examples & among the rest that of Maxentius, who being 
Maxentiva Constantin.  lawfully possessed of the Empire in Rome, as it seemed (for that he was son to Maximinianus the Emperor that reigned with Diocletian) yet for his tyrannous government that was intolerable, it is supposed that the senate (not being able to match him in open strength) sent prinily into Ingland & France, to invite Constantin to come, and do justice upon him, and so he did, and he being drowned in the river of Tiber Constantin sutnamed afterward the great succeeded in the Empire, and was the man that all men know, and the first Emperor that publicly professed himself a Christian and planted our faith over all the world & this of the roman Empire.  
And if we will come lower down, & nearer home, we have yet an other example, more markable perhaps then all the rest, which was the change of the Empire from the East to the west, for the evil government of Constantin the 
The change of the east empy re.  sixth, who was deposed first and his eyes put, out by his own mother Irene, and the Empire usurped by her, but being not able to rule it in such order as was needful, for so great a monarchy (though otherwise she were one of the rarest women for valour and wisdom that ever the world had) she was deprived thereof by the sentence of Leo the third, pope of Rome, and 
Charles the great.  by consent of all the people and senate of that city, and Charles king of France and of Germany (surnamed aftrrward the great) was crowned Emperor of the west, and so hath that succession 
An. 800.  remained unto this day, and many worthy men have succeeded therein, & infinite acts of jurisdiction have been excersised by this authority which were all unjust and tyrannical, if this change of the Empire, and deposition of Irene and her son for their evil government had not been lawful.  
It were to long to run over all other kingdoms, yet some I shall touch in such points as are most notorious.  
The two famous changes that have been made 
Two changs in France. Belfor. l. 1 Girard. l. 3 AEmil l. 2 Clem. Baudin. en la chro mique des Roys de France.  of the royal line in France, the first from the race of Pharamont and Clodoveus to the line of pepin, and the second from the race of Pepin again to the line of Hugo Capetus, that endureth unto this day, where on are they founded, but upon the judicial chastisement and deposition of two evil Princes, the first of Childeric the third lawful king of France, who after ten years that he had reigned was deposed, by Zaccharie the pope at the request of the whole nobility and clergy of France, or rather his deprivation was by them, and confirmed by the pope, to whom they alleged this reason for their doing in that behalf, as Girard putteth it down in both his French Chronicles, I mean the large and the abbreviation, to wit, that their oath to Childeric was to honour serve 
Reasons of deprivation.  obey, maintain and defend him against all men, as long as he was just, religious, valiant, clement, and would resist the enemies of the crown, punish the wicked and conserve the good, and defend the Christian faith. And for as much as thes promises (said they) were condicional, they ought not to hold or bind longer, then that they were reciprocally observed, on both parts, which seeing they were not, on the part of Childric, they would not be any longer his subjects, and so desired Zacharias to absolve them, from their oaths, which he did, and by this means Childric was deposed and put into a monastery, where he died, and in his place Pepin was chosen and crowned king whos posterity reigned for many years after him, and were such noble kings as all the world can testify.  
And so continued this race of Pepin in the 
Hugo 〈◊〉, anno 988.  royal throne for almost two hundredth years together until Hugo Capetus, who was put into the same throne by the same authority of the common wealth, and Charles of Lorraine last of the race of Pepin, for the evil satisfaction which the French nation had of him was put by it, and kept prisoner during his life in the castle of Orelance. And thus much do affirm all the French Histories, and do attribute to thes changes, the prosperity and greatness of their present kingdom and monarchy, & thus much for France, where many other examples might be alleged, as of king Lewis the third, surnamed Faineant. For that he was unprofitable, and of Charles surnamed Le gros, that succeeded him both of them deposed by the states of France, and other the like, of whom I shall have occasion to speak afterwards, to an other purpose.  
But now if you please, let us step over the pirenie mountains, and look into Spain, 
Examples of Spain  where there will not fail us, also divers examples both before the oppression of that realm by the 
Council Tolet. 4. cap. 4.  moors, as also after: For that before, to wit about the year of Christ 630. we read of a 
Ambros moral. 1. two cap. 17.  lawful king named Flaveo Suintila put down and deprived, both he and his posterity in the fourth council national of Toledo, and one Sissinando confirmed in his place, notwithstanding that Suintila were at the beginning of his reign a very good king, and much commended by S. Isiodorus Arch bishop of Siuil, who yet in the said council was the first man that subscribed 
Isidor. in 〈◊〉 hispan.  to his deprivation.  
After the entrance of the moors also, when Spain was reduced again, to the order & government of Spanish kings, we read that about the year of Christ 1282. one Don Alonso the eleventh of that name, king of Castille, & Leon, 
Esteuan de Garibay. 1. 13 de la hist. de Espa. c. 15.  succeeded his father Fernando surnamed the saint, and himself obtained the surname of Sabio and Astrologo that is to say, of wise and of an ginger, for his excellent learning & peculiar skill in that art, as may well appear by the Astronomy tables that at this day go under 
Tabulae Astron. Alfonsinae.  his name, which are the most perfect and exact that ever were set forth by judgement of the learned.  
This man, for his evil government and especially for tyranny used towards two nephews 
King Don Alonso deposed.  of his, as the spanish Chronicler Garavay writeth, was deposed of his kingdom by a public act of parliament in the town of Valliodolid, after he had reigned 30. years, and his own son Don Sancho the fourth, was crowned in his place, who for his valiant acts, was surnamed el bravo, and it turned to great commodity of the common wealth.  
The same common wealth of Spain some years after, to wit abont the year of Christ 1368. having to their king one Don Pedro, surnamed 
Don Pedro cruel deposed.  the cruel, for his injurious proceeding with his subjects, though, otherwise he were lawfully seized also of the crown, as son and heir to king Don Alonso the twelfth, and had reigned among them 18. years, yet for his evil government they resolved to depose him, and so sent for a bastard brother of his, named Henry that lived in France requesting him that he would come with some force of french men to 
Garibay l. 14. c. 40. 41.  assist them, in that act, and take the crown upon himself, which he did, and by the help of the Spaniards and French soldiers, he drove the said Peter out of Spain, and himself was crowned. And albeit Edward surnamed the black Prince of Ingland, by order of his father king Edward the third restored once again the said Peter, yet was it not durable, for that Henry having the favour of the Spaniards returned again and deprived Peter the second time, and slew him in fight hand to hand, which made show of more particular favour of God in this behalf to Henry, and so he remained king of Spain as doth also his progeny enjoy the same unto this day, though by nature he was bastard as had been said, and not withstanding that king Peter left two daughters which were led away into Ingland and theridamas married to great Princes.  
And this king Henry so put up in his place was called king Henry the second of this name and proved a most excellent king, and for his great nobility in conversation, and prowess in chivalry, was called by excellency, El cavallero the kinghtly king, and for his exceeding benignity and liberality, was surnamed also, el dela mercedes, which is to say, the king that gave many gifts, or the liberal frank, and bountiful king, which was a great change from the other surnamed cruel, that king Peter had before; & so you see that always I give you a good king in place of the bad deposed.  
In Portugal also before I go out of Spain, 
In Portugal.  I will allege you one example more, which is of Don Sancho the second, surnamed Capelo, fourth king of Portugal, lawful son and heir unto Don Alonso surnamed el Gardo, who whas third king of Portugal. This Don Sancho, after he had 
King Don Sancho 2. deposed.  reigned 34. years was deptived for his defects in government by the universal consent of all Portugal, & this his first deprivation from all 
Garibay lib. 4 de hist. Portug. c. 19  kingly rule and authority (leaving him only the bare name of king) was approved by a general council in Lions, pope Innocentius the 4. being there present, who at the petition & instance of the whole realm, of Portugal by their Ambassadors the Archbishop of Braga, bishop of Comibra and divers of the nobility sent to Lions for that purpose, did authorize the said state of Portugal, to put in supreme government one, Don Alonso brother to the said king Don Sancho, who was at that time, Earl of bullen in Picardy, by right of his wife, and so the Portugals did, & further also a little after they deprived their said king, and did drive him out of his realm into Castilia, where he lived all the rest of his life in banishment, and died in Toledo without ever returning, and this decree of the council and Pope at Lions, for authorizing 
Lib 6. decret tit. 6. de supplen da cap. Grand. 1.  of this fact, is yet extant in our Canon law, in the sixth book of Decretals now in print. And this king Don Alonso, the third which in this 〈◊〉 was put up, against his brother was peaceably & prosperously king, of Portugal, all the days 〈◊〉 
Garibay in hist. de Portug li. 34. cab. 20. & 21.  his life & he was a notable king, & among other great exployres, he was the first that set Portugal free from all subjection dependence and homage to the kingdom of Castille, which unto his time it had acknowledged and he left for his successor his son, and heir, Don 〈◊〉 Fabricador, to wit the great builder, for that 〈◊〉 builded and founded above forty and 〈◊〉 great towns in portugal, and was a most 〈◊〉 Prince and his offspring ruleth in Portugal unto this day.  
Infinite other examples could I allege if would examine the lives and discentes of 〈◊〉 and other kingdoms with their Princes, and namely if I would speak of the Greek Emperors, 
The Emperors of Greece.  deprived fortheir evil government, not so much by popular mutyny (which often happened among them) as by consent and grain deliberation of the whole state and wealpublique, 
Glicas in Annal. part. 4. Zon. Annal co. 3. in vita Michael Calapha.  as Michael Calaphates, for that he had trodden the Cross of Christ under his feet, 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, whereof I might name many, but it would be to long.  
What should I name here, the deposition 
In Polonia.  made of Princes, in our days, by other common wealths, as in Polonia, of Henry the third that was last king of France, & before that had been sworn king of Polonia, of which crown of 
In literis reip. Polon. ad Henr. Valesium pag. 182. 184.  Polonia, he was deprived by public act of parliament, for his departing thence without licence, and not returning at his day by the said state appointed and devounced by public 
Vidc Gagneum part. I. de rebus Polon.  letters of peremptory commaundedment, which are yet extant.  
What should I name the deprivations of Henry late king of Suetia, who being lawful 
In Suetia.  successor and lawfully in possession after his father, Gustaws was yet put down by that common wealth and deprived, and his brother made king in his place who if you remember was in Ingland in the beginning of this Queen's 
Poilin. I. 32. histor. de Franc. An. 1568.  reign, & whose son reigneth at this day & is king also of Polonia, and this fact was not only allowed of at home by all the states of that counttey, but also a broad, as namely of Maximilian the Emperor, and approved also by the king of Denmark, and by all the Princes of Germany near about that realm, who saw the reasonable causes which that common wealth had to proceed as it did.  
And a little before that, the like was practised also in Denmark against Cisternus there lawful 
In Denmark.  king if we respect his descent in blood, for he was son to king john that reigned a fore him, and crowned in his father's life, but yet afterwards for his intolerable cruelty, he was deprived and driven into banishment, together with his wife and three children, all which were disinherited & his uncle Frederik Prince of 
Sleydan. l. 4. hist. An. 1532. Munst. l. 3 Cosmogra. in descript. Davide. Paulus lo vius in viris illust.  Holsatia, was chosen king, whose progeni yet remaineth in the crown, & the other, though he were married to the sister of Charles the fifth last Emperor of that name, and were of kin also to king Henry the eight of Ingland, yet could he never get to be restored, but passed his time miserably, partly in banishment and partly in prison until he died.  
But it shallbe best perhaps to end this narration 
Examples of England.  with an example or two out of Ingland itself, for that no where else have I read more markable accidents, touching this point, then in Ingland, and for brevity sake I shall touch only two or three happened since the conquest, for that I will go no higher though I might, as appeareth by the example of K. Edwin & others nether will I begin to stand much upon the example of king john, though well also I might, 
King John deposed.  for that by his evil government he made himself both so odious at home & contemptible abroad (having lost Normandy Gascony Guyenne, and all the rest in effect which the crown of Ingland had in France) as first of all he was both excommunicated and deposed by sentence of the pope at the suit of his own people, and was enforced to make his peace by resigning his crown into the hands of Pandulpho the pope's legate as Polidor recounteth 
Polid. hist. Ang. l. 15. An. 1212.  and afterwards falling back again to his old defects and naughty government, albeit by his promise to the pope, to go and make war against the Turks if he might be quiet at home, and that his kingdom should be perpetually tributary to the sea of Rome, he procured him to be of his side for a time, and against the Barons: yet that stayed not them to proceed to his deprivation which they did effectuate, first at Canterbury and after at London, in the eighteenth & last year of king john's reign, 
An. 1216.  and meant also to have disinherited his son Henry, which was afterward named king Henry the third, and at that time a child of eight years old only: and all this in punishment of the father, if he had lived, and for that cause they called into Ingland Lodouick the Prince of France son to king Philip the second, and father to Saint Lewis the ninth, and chose him for their king and did swear him fealty with general consent in London the year of our Lord 1216. And but that the death of king 
An. 1216.  john that presently ensued, altered the whole course of that designment, and moved them to turn their purposes and accept of his son Henry before matters were fully established for king Lodowick: it was most likely that France and Ingland would have been joined by thes means under one crown.  
But in the end as I have said king Henry the 
King Henry the third.  third was admitted and he proved a very worthy king after so evil as had gone before him, and had been deposed (which is a circumstance that you must always note in this narration) and he reigned more years than ever king in Ingland did before or after him, for he reigned full 53. years, & left his son & heir Edward the first not inferior to himself in manhood & virtue who reigned 34. years and left a son 
King Edward the second deposed.  named. Edward the second, who falling into the same defects of government or worse, than king john his great grandfather had done, was after 19 years reign deposed also by act of parliament holden at London the year 1326. & 
Polyd. 1. 18. hist. Anglicanae Anuo 1326.  his body adjudged to perpetual prison, in which he was at that present in the castle of wallingford, wherher divers both bishop's Lords & knights of the Parliament were sent 
Stow. in the life of King Edward the 2.  unto, him to denounce the sentence of the realm against him, to wit, how they had deptived him, and chosen Edward his son in his place, for which act of choosing his son, he thanked them heartily and with many tears, acknowledged his own unworthiness, whereupon he was digraded, his name of king first taken from him, and he appointed to be called Edward of Carnarvan from that hour forward. 
The man ner of deprimation of a king.  and then his crown and ring were taken away, and the steward of his house broke the n1 of his office in his presence, and discharged his servants of their service, and all other people of 
See Stow. and hollings in this man's life.  their obedience or allegiance toward him: and towards his maintenance he had only a hundredth marks a year allowed for his expenses, and then was he delivered also into the hands of certain particular keepers, who led him prisoner from thence by divers other places using him with extreme indignity in the way, until at last they took his life from him in the castle of Barkley, and his son Edward the 
King Edward the third.  third reigned in his place, who if we respect either valour, prowess, length of reign, acts of chivalry, or the multitude of famous Princes his children left behind him, was one of the noblest kings that ever Ingland had, though he were chosen in the place of a very evil one as you have seen.  
But what shall we say? is this worthiness which God giveth commonly to the successors at thes changes, perpetual or certain by descent? no truly: nor the example of one Princes punishment maketh an other to beware, for the next successor after this noble Edward which was king Richard the second, though he were not his son, but his sons son, to wit son and heir to the excellent and renounced black Prince of wales, this Richard (I say) forgetting 
King Richard 2. deposed.  the miserable end of his great grand father for evil government, as also the felicity, and virtue of his father and grand father: for the contrary, suffered himself to be abused and misled by evil councillors, to the great hurt & disquietness of the realm. For which cause after he had reigned 22. years he was also deposed, by act of parlamant holden in London, the year of our Lord 1399. and condemned 
Polyd. 1. 20. hist. Aug. 1399  to perpetual prison in the castle of Pomfret where he was soon after put to death also and used as the other before had been, and in this man's place by free election was chosen for king the noble knight Henry Duke of Lancaster who proved afterwards so notable a king as the world knoweth, and was father to king Henry the fifth surnamed commonly the Alexander of Ingland, for that as Alexander the great conquered the most part of Asia in the space of 9 or 10. years so did this Henry conquer France in less than the like tyme.  
I might reckon also in this number of Princes 
King Henry the 6. deposed.  deposed for defect in government (though otherwise he were no evil man in life) this king Henry the fourth's nephew I mean king Henry the sixth who after almost forty years 
Polyd. lib. 23. histor. Anglic.  reign was deposed, and imprisoned and put to death also, together with his son the Prince of wales, by Edward the fourth of the house of york, & the same was confirmed by the commons and especially by the people of London, and afterwards also by public act of parliament, in respect not only of the title which king Edward pretended, but also and especially for that king Henry did suffer himself to be overruled by the Queen his wife, and had broken the articles of agreement, made by the parliament, between him and the Duke of York and solemnly sworem on both sides, the 8. of Octob. in the year 1459. In punishment whereof and of his other negligent and evil government, (though for his own particular life he was a good man as hath been said) sentence was given against him, partly by force and partly by law, and king Edward the fourth was put in his place, who was no evil king as all English men well know, but one of the renoumedst for martial acts and justice that hath worn the English crown.  
But after this man again, there fell an other 
King Richard 3. deposed.  accident much more notorious, which was, that Richard Duke of Gloucester, this king Edward's younger brother, did put to death his two nephews, this man's children, to wit, king Edward the fifth and his little brother, & made himself king, and albeit he sinned grievously by taking upon him the crown in this wicked manner yet when his nephews were once dead, he might in reason seem to be lawful king, both in respect that he was the next male in blood after his said brother, as also for that by divers acts of parliament, both before and after the death of those infants, his title was authorized and made good, and yet no man will say (I think) but that he was lawfully also deposed, again afterward, by the common wealth, which called out of France, Henry Earl of 
An. 1487.  Richmond to chastise him, and to put him down, and foe he did, and took from him both life and kingdom in the field, and was king himself after him by the name of king Henry the seventh, and no man I suppose, will say but that he was lawfully king also, which yet cannot be, except the other might lawfully be deposed, & moreover as I said at the, beginning, I would have you consider in all thes mutations, what men commonly have succeeded in the places of such as have been deposed, as namely in Ingland, in the place of those five kings before 
A point much to be noted.  named that were deprived, to wit, john, Edward the second, Richard the second, Henry the sixth, and Richard the third, there have succeeded the three Henry's, to wit, the third, fourth, and seventh, & two Edward's, the third and fourth, all most rare & valiant Princes who have done infinite importanr acts in their commonwealths, and among other, have raised many houses to nobility, put down others, changed states both abroad and at home, distributed ecclesiastical dignities, altered the course of descent in the blood royal, and the like, all which was injust, and is void at this day if the changings and deprivations of the former Princes could not be made, and consequently none of thes that do pretend the crown of Ingland, at this day, can have any title at all, for that from those men they descend who were put up in place of the deprived.  
And this may be sufficient for proof of the two principal points, which you required to be discussed in the beginning of this speech, to wit, that lawful Princes have oftentimes by their common wealths been lawfully deposed, for misgoverment, and that God hath allowed and assisted the same, with good success unto the weal public, 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 there be due reason and causes for the same, which is the head point that first we began to treat of said the Civilian, and with this ended his speech without saying any more.   

WHERE IN CONSISTETH PRINCIPALLY THE LAUFULNES OF PROCEEDING AGAINST Princes which in the former chapter is mentioned: what interest Princes have in their subject's goods or lives, how oaths doth bind or may be broken by subjects towards Princes, and finally the difference between a good king and a Tyrant.  
CHAP. four  
WHEN the Civilian had ended his 
The reply of the temporal lawyer.  speech, the temporal lawyer looked upon the standers by, to see whether any would reply or no, and perceiving all to hold their peace, he began to say in this manner: Truly Sir I cannot deny, but the examples are many that you have alleged, and they seem to prove sufficiently that which you affirmed, at the beginning, to wit, that the Princes by you named, were deprived, and put down by their commonwealths for their evil government. And good successors commonly raised up 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 call thes facts in question, were to embroil and turn upsidedowne all the states of Christian. dom, as you have well signified, but yet for that you have added this word lawfully so many times, in the course of your narration, I would you took the pain to tell us also, by what law, they did the same, seeing that Belloy whom you have named before, and some other of his opinion 
Belloy apolog. catholic. part. 2.  do affirm, that albeit by nature the common wealth have authority over the Prince, 
paragraf. 9 & apol. pro rege. cap. 9  to choose and appoint him, at the beginning, as you have well proved out of Aristotle and other ways: yet having once made him, and given up all their authority unto him, he is now no more subject to their cortection, or restraint, but remaineth absolute of himself without respect to any, but only to god alone. which they prove by the example of every particular man, that hath authority to make his Master or Prince, of his inferior, but not afterwards to put him down again, or to deprive him of the authority which he gave him, though he should not bear himself well and gratefully, but discourtious rather & injuriously towards him that gave him first this authority.  
To which also they do allege the speech of 
An objection out of the prophet Samuel.  the prophet Samuel, in the first book of the kings, where the people of Israel demanded to have a king to govern over them, as other nations round about them had, and to leave the government of the high Priest under whom at that day they were. At which demand both God himself and Samuel were greviously offended, and Samuel by God's express order, protested unto them in this manner, well (quoth be) you will have a king, hearken then to this that I will say. Hoc erit ius regis, qui imperaturus est vobis, this shallbe the rlght and power of the king that shall rule over you, to wit, he shall take from you 
The Power of a King or rather of a Tyrant.  your children both sons and daughters, your fields & vineyards, your harvest also and rents, your servants, handmaids, & herds of cattle, and shall give them to his servants and you shall cry unto God in that day, from the face of this your king, whom you have chosen, and God shall not hear you, for that you have demanded a king to govern you, thus far the Prophet.  
Out of all which discourse and speech of the Prophet, thes men do gather, that a king is nothing so restrained in his power or limited to law as you have affirmed, but rather that his law is his own will, as by thes words of the Prophet may appear, and much less may the common wealth chastise or deprive him for exceeding the limits of law, or doing his will, seeing that here in this place, God doth foretell that Princes oftentimes shall commit excesses and injuries, and yet doth he not therefore will, them to chasten or depose them, for the same but rather insinuateth that they must take it patiently, for their sins, and cry to God for remedy and persever therein though he do not 〈◊〉 the first hearken to them, or grant their redress, hitherto the temporal lawyer.  
Whereunto answered the Civilian, that he confessed that Belloy & other his companions that written in flattery of Princes in thes our days, did nor only affirm thes things, that the temporal lawyer had alleged, and that Princes were lawless and subject to no account, reason, or correction, whatsoever they did, but also (which is yet more absurd and pernicious to all commonwealths) that all goods, chattels, possessions and 
Belloy apolog.  whatsoever else commodities temporal, of the common wealth, are properly the kings, and that their subjects 
part. 2. parag 7. & Apol. pro rege c. 6. & 24. & 26.  have only the use thereof, without any propriety at all, so as when the king will, he may take it from them by right, without injustice or injury, which assertions do over throw wholly the very nature & substance of a common wealth, itself.  
For first to say that a king is subject to no law or limitation at all, but may do what he 
Great absurdities and flatteries.  will, is against all that I have alleged before of the very institution of a common wealth, which was to live together in justice and order, & as I showed out of Cicero speaking of the first kings, justitiae fruendae causa bene morati Reges olim sunt constituti. For enjoying of justice were kings 
Cic. lib. 2. office  appointed in old time that were of good life, but if they be bound to no justice at all, but must be borne and obeyed, be they never so wicked, then is this end and butt of the common wealth, & of all royal authority, utterly frustrate: then may we set up public murderours' ravishers thieves and spoilers to devour us in steed of kings, and governors to defend us, for such in deed are kings that follow no law, but passion and sensuality, and do commit injustice, by their public authority, & then finally, were all those kings before mentioned both of the jews, gentiles, and christians unlawfully deprived, and their successors unlawfully put up in their places, and consequently all Princcs living in Christianity at this day, who are descended of them, are intruders and no lawful Princes.  
By the second saying also, that all temporalities are properly the Princes, and that subjects 
another absurdity.  have only the use thereof without any interest of their own, no less absurdities do follow, then of the former assertion, for that first, it is against the very first principle and foundation of our civil law, which at the first entrance 
Institut. imperial l. 2. Tit. 1.  and beginning maketh this division of goods, that some are common by nature to all men, as the air the sea and the like, other are public to all of one city or country, but yet not common to all in general, as rivers ports and other such: some are of the community 
Division of goods by civil la.  of a city or common wealth, but yet not common to every parttculer person of that city, as common rents, theaters, the public house, and the like: some are of none nor properly of any man's goods, as churches and sacred things, & some are proper to particular men, as those which every man possesseth of his own, which division, of justinian the Emperor and his most learned lawyers is not good, if the Prince be Lord proprietary of all: nay he that made this division, being Emperor, did great injury also to himself, in assigning that to others, which by the opinion of Belloy and his fellows was properly & truly his own, in that he was Emperor and Lord of the world.  
Besides all this, so absurd a saying is this, as it 
Slaves & freemen.  overthroweth the whole nature of a common wealth itself, and maketh all subjects to be but very slaves: For that slaves and bondmen, as Aristotle sayeth in this do differ from freemen, that slaves have only the use of things without 
Arist. lib. 1. polit. c. 4. & 5.  property or interest, and cannot acquire or get to themselves any dominion or true right in any thing, for that what soever they do get, it accrueth to their master, & not to themselves, and for that the condition of an ox or an ass, is the very same in respect of a poor man, that hath no slave, for that the ox or ass getteth nothing to himself, but only to his master, and can be lord of nothing of that for which he laboureth: for this cause wittily also said Aristotle, that bos aut asinus pauperi agricolae pro servo 
Arist. li. 1. cap. 3.  est. An ox or an ass, is to a poor husbandman in steed of a bondman, and so feing that Belloy will needs have the state and condition of all subjects to be like unto this in respect of their Prince, and that they have nothing in propriety, but only the use, and that all dominion 
Mark this reason.  is properly the Princes: what doth the other than make all subjects not only slaves but also oxen and asses, and pecora campi.  
Last of all (for I will not overload you with 
divers evident reasons against Belloy.  reasons in a matter so evident) if all subjects goods be properly the kings, why then was Achab and jezabel king and Queen of Israel, so reprehended by Elias & so punished by god, for taking away Nabothes vineyard? seeing they took but that which was there own? nay why was not Naboth accused of iniquity rebellion and treason, for that he did not yield up presently 
3. Reg. 21.  his vineyard, when his Princes, demanded the same, seeing it was not his, but there's? why do the kings of Ingland France and Spain, ask money of their subjects in parliaments, if they might take it as there own? why are those contributions termed by the names of subsidies, helps, benevolences, lones, priests, contributions, and the like, if all be dew and not voluntary of the subjects part? How have parliaments oftentimes denied to their Princes such helps of money, as they demanded? Why are their judges appointed to determine matter, of suits and pleas between the Prince and his subjects, if all be his and the subject have nothing of his own? And last of all why doth the Cannon Law, which is a part also of my profession, and received in most countries of the world, so straightly inhibit all Princes upon pain of excommunication, 
Cap. inovamusio. de causibus etc. super quibusdam 26. 〈◊〉. de verborum signif.  to impose new impositions & taxes, upon their people without great consideration and necessity, and free consent of the givers, if all be the Princes and nothing of the subject? nay whybe all Princes generally at this day prohibited to alienat any thing of their own crown without consent of their people, if they only be Lords of all, and the people have interest in nothing?  
And hereby also we may gather, what the Prophet Samuel meant, when he threatened 
The answer to the objection out of the prophet Samuel.  the jews with the disorders of kings, that should reign over them, not, that thes disorders were lawful or appertained to a rightious king, but that seeing they refused to be under the moderate government of their high priests, & other governors which God had given them hitherto, and required to be ruled by kings as other heathen nations of Egypt, Babylon, Syria, and Persia were, whose manner of government, not only Historiographers, but Philosophers also, and Aristotle among the rest, doth note to 
Arist. 1. 5. pol. c. 11. Ioseph. 1. 6 antiq. c. 4.  have been very tyrannical: yet for that the jews would needs have that government as a matter of more pomp and glory then that which hitherto they had had, Samuel did first insinuate unto them, what extorsion and wickedness those heathen kings did use commonly over their people, in taking their children, servants, wives, goods, and the like from them, and that many kings of Israel should do the like, and take it for their right and sovereignty, and should oppress and tyrannize over them, and enforce them to cry out to God for help, and they should not find remedy, for that so heddyly they had demanded this change of government, which highly displeased almighty God, and this is the true meaning of that place, if it be well considered, and not to authorize hereby injustice or wickedness in any king, seeing the principal points recorded to all Princes & kings through out the whole course of scripture, are diligere iudictum & justitiam, apprehendere disciplinam, & facere veritatem, that is to say to love judgement and justice to admit discipline & to execute truth, and this is the instruction that God gave to the jews in deuteronomy for their kings when they should have them, which God foretold many 
Deut. 17. 3 Reg. 2. & 10. Psal. 2.  years before they had any, and this is the admonition that king David left unto his son and successor Solomon, at his death, and by him to all other kings and Princcs, and for want of observing thes points of judgement, justice, discipline, & truth we see not only Achab and jezabel. Before mentioned greviously punished, but many other kings also by God himself, as Achaz Manasses, joachim, and the like, which had not been justice on God's part so to punish them if it had been lawful for them to use that manner of proceeding towards their people, as thes good instructors of Princes in our days, most fond and wickedly do affirm, and thus much for that place.  
But to the first point which you asked, by what law the common wealths that are mentioned 
By what la Princes are punished  in the former chapters, did punish their evil Priuces: I have answered you before, that it is by all law both divine and human: divine, for that God doth approve that form of government which every common wealth doth choose unto itself, as also the conditions, statutes and limitations which itself shall appoint unto her Princes, as largely before hath been declared. And by all human law also: for that all law both natural, national, and positive, doth teach us, that Princes are subject to law & order, and that the common wealth which gave them their authority for the common good of all, may also restrain or take the same away again, if they abuse it to the common cull.  
And whereas thes men say, that like as if a 
The difference between a private man & a common wealth.  private man should make his inferior or equal to be his Prince, he could not after restrain the same again, and so nether the common wealth having once delivered away her authority: I answer, first, that the comparison is not altogether like, for that a private man though he give his voice to make a Prince, yet he being but one maketh not the Prince wholly as the common wealth doth, and therefore no marvel though it lie not in a particular man's hand to unmake him again, besides this, a private man having given his voice to make his Prince, remaineth subject and inferior to the same, but the whole body though it be governed by the Prince as by the head, yet is in not inferior but superior to the Prince, nether so giveth the common wealth her authority and power up to any Prince, that she depriveth herself utterly of the same, when need shall require, to use it for her defence, for which she gave it.  
And finally (which is the chiefest reason of all, & the very ground and foundation in deed of all king's authority among christians) the power and authority which the Prince hath from the common wealth is in very truth, not absolute, but potestas vicaria or deligata, as we Civilians 
The Princes authority but subdelegat.  call it, that is to say, a power delegate, or power by commission from the common wealth, which is given with such restrictions cautels and conditions, yea, with such plain exceptions, promises, and oaths of both parties, (I mean between the king and common wealth at the day of his admission or coronation) as if the same be not kept, but wilfully broken, on either part, then is the other not bound to observe his promise nether, though never so solemnly made or sworn, for that in all bargains, agreements and contracts, where one part is bound mutually and reciprocally to the other, by oath, vow, or condition, there, if one side go from his promise, the other standeth not obliged to perform his: and this is so notorious by all law, both of nature and nations, and so conform to all reason and equity, that it is put among the very rules of both the Civil and cannon law, where it is said, frustra fidem sibi quis postulat servari ab eo, cui sidem à se prestitam servare recusat. 
In regulis utrinque juris vide in sine sexti Decret. reg. 75. 69.  He doth in vain require promiss to be kept unto him at an other man's hands, to whom he refuseth to perform that which himself promised, and again. Non abstringitur quis juramento ad implendum. quod iur avit, si ab alio part non impletur, cuius respectu praebuit iuramentum. A man is not bound to perform that which by oath he promised, if on the other part, that be not performed, in respect whereof this oath was made: as for example, if two should swear the one to assist the other upon the way, in all respects, & after falling upon enemies that were either kynn or friends to the one of them, & he should take their part against his fellow, clear it is, that the other were not bound to keep his oath towards that party, that hath so wickedly broken it to him.  
Nay not only, in this case, that is so evident, 
When an oath bindeth not.  and palpable by nature itself: but in many other also, is it both lawful honest and convevient to leave some times the performance of our oath, as namely when the fulfilling thereof, should contain any notable hurt or inconvenience against religion, piety, justice, honesty, or the weal public, or against the party himself to whom it was made, as if a man had sworn to restore a sword to a mad or furious man, where with it were likely he would destroy himself and others, and other like cases, which Cicero putteth down in his first book 
Cicero li. 1. office  of offices, and deduceth them from the very ground of nature, and reason itself, & sayeth, that it were contrary to the duty of a good or honest man, in such cases to perform his promise.  
Our divines also do allege the example of 
A clear example.  Herod that had sworn to the daughter of Herodias, to give her what she demanded, who demanding the head of S. john Baptist, though 
Matth. 24  Herod were sorry for the same, yet sayeth the text, that for his oaths sake he commanded it to be performed, which yet no man will deny, but that it had been far better left unperformed, and the oath better broken then fulfilled, according to an other rule of the law, which sayeth, In malis 
Regul. 68 in fine 6. Decret.  promissis fidem non expedit observari, it is not expedient to keep our promise in things evil promised.  
And finally to this purpose, to wit, to determine how many ways an oath taken may be lawfully broken, or not kept, there is a whole title in the Cannon law, containing 36. chapters, wherein are set down many and divers 
Decret. Greg. l 2. tit. 24.  most excellent, and evident cases, about the same determined by Gregory the first, & other ancient Popes and Doctors, and in the second part of the decretal there is alleged this sentence out of Isidorus, and established for law. In matis promissis rescind fidem, in turpi voto muta decretum, 
Decret. part. 2. causa. 22. quest. 4. c. 5. & qu 5. per totum.  impi a enim promissio, quae scelere impletur, that is, in evil promises perform not your word, in an unlawful vow or oath, change your determination, for it is an impious promiss, which cannot be fulfilled, but with wickedness, and the very same matter is handled in the question following which is the fifth through out 23. whole chapters together.  
So as, nothing is more largely handled in our law both Civil and Canon, than this matter of promises, and oaths, how and when, and why, and in what cases, they hold or bind, and when not. All which to apply it now unto 
Two principal cases when oaths hold not towards a Prince.  our matter of kings, that we have in hand, we are to understand that two evident cases are touched here as you see, when a subjects oath or promise of obedience, may be left unperformed towards his Prince: the first when the Prince observeth not at all his promiss and oath made to the common wealth, at his admission or coronation, & the other when it should turn to the notable damage of the weal public, (for whose only good the Prince's office was ordained, as often before hath been said and proved) if the subject should keep and perform his oath and promiss made unto his Prince.  
And both thes cases are touched in the deprivation of Childerike the last king of France, of the first line of Pharamont which was recounted in the former chapter, for that as Paulus A Enulius, Belforest, Girard, and other French stories do testify, the bishop of wirtsburg, that 
AEmil. l. 2. hist. Franc. Belfor in vita children Girard. lib. 3  in the name of all the nobility and common wealth of France, made his speech to Zacharie the pope, for his deposition, and for the election of Pepin in his place, alleged thes two reasons saying.  
Truth it is, that the French have sworn fidelity 
The speech of the French Ambassador for deprivation of their king.  unto Childerick, as to there true and natural king, but yet with condition, that he on his part, should also perform the points that are incident to his office, which are, to defend the common wealth, protect the church of christ, resist the wicked, advance the good and the like: and if he do this, than the French are ready to continue their obedience and allegiance unto him: but if he be apt for none of thes things, nether fit, either for a Captain in were, or for a head in peace, and if nothing else may be expected whiles he is king, but detriment to the state, ignominy to the nation, danger to christian religion, and destruction to the weal public: than it is law full for you no doubt (most holy father) to deliver the French from this band of their oath, & to testify that no promise can bind this nation in particular, to that which may be hurtful to all christendom in general. Thus far that bishop, & his speech was allowed & Childerick deposed, and Pepin made king in his place as the world knoweth.  
By this then you see, saic the Civilian lawyer, 
The conclusion, how and when oaths do not bind subiestes.  the ground whereon dependeth the rightious & lawful deposition and chastisement of wicked Princes, to wit there failing in their oath & promises, which they made at their first entrance, that they would rule and govern justly, according to law, conscience, equity, and religion, wherein when thev fail, or wilfully decline, casting behind them all respect of obligation & duty to the end for which they were made Princes and advanced in dignity above the rest, then is the common wealth not only free from all oaths made by her of obedience or allegiance to such unworthy Princes, but is bound moreover for saving the whole body, to resist chasten and remove such evil heads, if she be able, for that otherwise all would come to destruction, ruin, and public desolation.  
And here now come in, all those considerations which old philosophers, lawmakers, and such 
The difrence between a King & a tyrant.  others as have treated of commonwealths, are want to lay down, of the difference and contrariety between a king and a tyrant, for that a king (as both Plato and Aristotle do declare 
Plat. dial. 1. de repub. ) when once he declineth from his duty, becometh a tyrant, that is to say, of the best 
Arist. li. 2. Pol. c. 5.  and most sovereign thing upon earth, the worst and most hurt-ful creature under heaven for that as the end & office of a king is to make happy his common wealth, so the butt of a tyrät is to destroy the same. And finally the whole difference is reduced to the principal head that before I have mentioned, to wit, that a king ruleth according to equity, oath, conscience, justice, and law prescribed unto him: and the other is enemy to all thes conditions, whereof if you will read many more particulars & signs to know a tyrant by, I will remit you to a special book set forth of this matter, by one Bartolus father (as you know) of our Civil law, 
Bart. li. de tyrannide.  where the matter is handled largely, as also how lawful and commendable it is to resist any tyrant, and finally he concludeth with Cicero in his books de legibus, where he sayeth, ut populo magistratus, ita magistratui presunt leges. A 
Cicero. li. 3. de legibus.  good Prince or Magistrate maketh his account, that as he is over the people, so laws are over him, and a ryrant the contrary. And greatly is 
Cod. l. 1. tit. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. digha.  commended the saying of Theodosius and Valentinian, two worthy Emperors, recorded in our civil law who said: Digna yox est maiestate regnantis legibus se alligatum fateri. It is a speech worthy of the majesty of him that reigneth, to confess that he is bound unto the laws, and the contrary saying of the Tyrant Caius Calignla, is justly detested by all writers, who said unto one as Suetonius reporteth. Memento mihi omnia & in omnes licere, remember, that all things are lawful 
Suet. c. 23 in Calig.  unto me and against all men without exception. The saying also of the famous Emperor trajan 
Zon. tom. 2 in trajan.  deserveth immortal memory and commendation, who when he delivered the sword to a praetor or governor of Rome, to do justice, he added thes words, Take this sword, and if I do reign justly, use it for me, and if not, then use it against me. Which in effect and substance are the very same words which our christian Princes at this day do use at their entrance and coronations, when they promise and swear to rule justly, and according to the laws statutes, and ordinances of their country, and upon that condition do take the oaths of their subjects obedience, protesting there with-al, that if they perform not this, that then their subjects are free 
See in the chapter fol lowing.  as before from all allegiance, and then may the common wealth as also the very officers themselves of such a king, use their sword against him, who gave it to them, for the public good, if need so require, as trajan commanded.  
It was truly the word of a noble Prince 
The speech of a Soldier.  said a certain Captain of the company there present, and rightly deserved he to be well obeyed, who gave so liberal and just a commission to be disobeyed: but for that you said, they that are Princes now a days do the like in effect at their admission to government and at their coronations: I would be glad to hear what they say or swear at this their entrance, for certain I am that afterwards I find very few Princes, that are contented to have this point put in excecution, I mean to be disobeyed whatsoever they do, or howsoever they live: and moreover I say, that what soever you lawyers sit and talk of, Princes right in your studies, yet I find no way but hanging for a man of my profession, if he shall disobey the worst Prince that liveth, & you lawyers will be the first that shall give sentence against him, if he chance to come before you in judgement.  
True it is, said the Civilian, where martial authority taketh place, there no question of right availeth to be disputed, & if a lavyver or any other man else, be in fear or danger of his own life, he will rather give sentence against an other, then receive it against himself, but we talk not here what men may be driven to do by fear or force of evil Princes, but what 
The occa sion of the next chapter.  in right equity, and good conscience may be done: and this not so much by private or particular men (who may not be over busy in examining Prince's rights, or whether they perform their duties or no) as by the common wealth, upon urgent necessity and dew deliberation had, against evil Princes, that break openly their oaths and promises made at their first entrance, which promises for that you are desirous to understand them, I am content to pass over also unto this point, and so much the rather, for that it maketh much to the purpose we have in hand, or rather it is, the very true ground in deed both of all lawful government and subjection, among christian people. For that by this oath, both the Prince and subject do come to know and agree upon their duties and obligations the one towards the other, as also both of them, towards god & their native country. But for that this morning seemeth now much spent, and my stomach telleth me that our dinner cannot be far of, let us defer this matter if you please until after noon, at what time, we shall crown a king between us here, with much more facility when we shall have less occasions of hunger to distract our cogitations.   

OF THE CORONATION OF PRINCES AND MANNER OF THEIR ADMISSION to their authority and the oaths which they do make in the same unto the common wealth, for their good government.  
CAP. V.  
DINNER being ended, the Civilian lawyer began to prosecute the matter 
The first ground of laws & limits to Princes.  propounded in the end of the former chapter, concerning oaths and promises made by Princes at their first admission to government, wherein first he declared that for as much as not nature, but the election and consent of the people, had made their first Princes from the beginning of the world, as largely before and often had been demonstrated: most certain it appeared, and conform to all reason, that they were not preferred to this eminent power and dignity over others, without some conditions and promises made also on their parts, for using well this supreme authority given unto them: seeing it is not likely (quoth he) that any people would ever yield to put their lives, goods, and liberties in the hands of an other, without some promise and assurance of justice and equity to be used towards them, and here of he said it came to pass, that both the Romans and Grecians to their ancient kings prescribed those laws and limits, which before have been specified.  
And in every common wealth the more orderly the Prince cometh to his crown and dignity, the more express and certain have been ever thes conditions and agrements between him and the people, as on the other side the more violently the Prince getteth his authority or by tyranny and disorder, as those ancient and first tyrants of Assyria to wit Nemrod, Belus, and the like, that by mere force and 
Entrance of tyrants into their government.  guile got rule over others, and the old kings of Egypt and Babylon, and those of the Roman Emperors that by violence of soldiers only got into the Royal seat, and all such as at this day do get by force to reign among the Turks. Among thes (I say) it is no marvel, though few conditions of just dealing may be expected, though I doubt not but yet to their followers and advancers, thes men also do make large promises of good government, at the beginning, as all ambitious men are want to do, though with little intention of performance.  
But in all good and well ordered common weathes where matters pass by reason, conscience, wisdom and consultation, and especially since christian religion hath prevailed, & given perfection to that natural light, which 
The rites of admitting christian Kings.  moral good men had before in matters of government: since that time (I say) this point of mutual and reciprocal oaths between Princes and subjects, at the day of their coronation or admission (for all are not crowned) have been much more established, made clear and put in ure. And this form of agreement and convention, between the common wealth and their christian head or king, hath been reduced to a more sacred and religious kind of union and concord, than before, for that the whole action hath been done by bishops and ecclesiastical Prelates, and the astipulation and promises made on both sides, have passed and been given, received and registered with great reverence in sacred places, and with great solemnity of religious ceremonies, which before were not so much used, though always there wear some. And therefore our examples at this time shallbe only of christian commonwealths, for that they are more peculiarly to our purpose as you will confess.  
First then to begin with the East or Greek Emperors of Constantinople as the most anicient among other, for that after the Empire once translated from Rome to Constantinople, 
The man ner of admitting Greek Emperors at their coronation.  by our Constantine the great, and the first Christian Emperor that ever did publicly show himself for such, thes Greek Emperors were the most eminent Princes of all christianity, among whom I do find that albeit their coming to the crown were nothing so orderly, for the most part as at this day it is used, but many times the means thereof were turbulent and seditious, yet find I (as I say) that above a thousand years gone, they were wont to have an oath exacted at their hands, by the patriarch of Constantinople, who was their chief Prelate, for thus writeth Zonaras of the coronation of Anastatius the first, that succeeded Zeno, about the year of Christ 524. Antequam coronaretur, 
Zonar. tom 3.  fidei confessionem scriptam, qua polliceretur, se in dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis nihil esse novaturum, ab eo exegit 
Annal. in vita Anastas.  patriarcha Euphemius vir sanctus & orthodoxus. The Patriarch Euphemius being a holy and catholic 
Niceph. l. 16. cap. 29 Euagt. l. 2. cap. 32.  man, required of Anastatius elected Emperor, before he was crowned a confession in writing, wherein he should promiss to change or innovate nothing in matters pertaining to the doctrine of the church thus much Zonaras, & the same have Nicephorus Euagrius & others.  
And not only this, but divers other conditions also, doth the same author insinuate, that this Anastatius promised at his corovation, before he could be crowned, as among other things, the taking away of certain tributes and impositions, the giving of offices without money, and other like points, appertaining to reformation and good government, which he performed for a time, in the beginning of his government, but after fell into the heresies of the Eutychians, & banished this same good patriarch Euphemius, that had crowned him, & he thrived thereafter, for that he was slain by a thunder bolt from heaven, after he had reigned 7. years, and was accounted for a very wicked man, by all writers, for that he had broken (as they said) the conditions, quas gravi juramento scriptis relato confirmasset. That is to say, the conditions which he had confirmed & avowed with a grave oath as sayeth Euagrius. 
Vbi supr.   
The like, I read about 300. years after, recorded by the same author of the Emperor 
The Grecian Emperors Qth.  Michael the first, in thes words. Michael ubi diluxit, magnam ecclesiam ingressus, à Patriarcha Nicephoro imperatorio diademate est ornatus, postulaio 
Zon. Tun. 3. in vita Mich.  prius scripto, quo promitteret, se nulla ecclesiae instituta violaturum, neque christianorum sanguine manus contaminaturum. 
An. 820.  Which is, Michael new chosen Emperor, came early in the morning into the great church of Constantinople, and was crowned there with the Imperial crown by the hands of Nicephorus the patriarch, but yet so, as he was first required to swear and promise by writing, that he would not violate the ordinances of the church, nor contaminat his hands with christian blood, which in effect is as much to say, as that he should reign godly & justly, and many other such examples might be alleged, but by this it is easy to see, what was the fashion of admitting and crowning those grecian Emperors by their patriarchs, in the name of all the common wealth, which common wealth was not satisfied with an oath except, also it were set down in writing.  
And if we pass to the latin & west empire which about this very time was restored by Zacharie the pope, and by the whole common wealth of Rome (as before hath been showed and was given to Charles the great and his posterity) we shall find that this point is more settled and more in-violably kept yet in this empire, them in the other, for albeit that this empire of the west went by succession for the most part at the beginning, until afterwards it was appointed by Pope Gregory the fifth to pass by the election of certain Princes in Germany, that now enjoy that privilege to be electors: yet shall we see always, that they even before this constitution, when this dignity went by succession, were never admitted to the same, without this circumstance of swearing to conditions of righteous government: the form and manner of which admission, for that I find it set down more perfectly and particularly in the coronation of Otho the first, then of any other Emperor, and that by many authors, and that this Otho was son and heir unto the famous Emperor Henry the first of that name, Duke of Saxony, surnamed the falconer, for 
Saxo. Gram. li. 10.  the great delight he had in the sight of faucons, for thes causes I mean to begin with 
Cranzius lib. 3. metrop. c. 12.  the coronation of this man before any other.  
This Otho then son (as I have said) to Henry the first, though being his eldest son, 
The crowning of Oath the first.  he were also his heir, and so named by Henry himself to the inheritance of the said crown of Germany: yet was he not admitted thereunto until he had made his oath, and received his new approbation, by the people, for so the story saith that the Archbishop of Moguntia (who is the chief primate of all Germany) bringing him to the altar where he must swear, said thes words unto the people. Behold I bring you hear Otho, chosen by God & appointed out 
Whitichindus gest. Saxon. lib. 1.  by his father Henry our Lord, and now made king by all the Princes of this empire, if this election please you, do you signify the same by boulding up your hands to heaven. Thus far are the words of the historiographer, and then he addeth that all held up their hands, and that thereupon the said archbishop, turned about to the altar where lay all the oruaments and ensigns of the empire, as the sword with the girdle, the cloak with the 
Ensigns of the empire.  bracelets, the staff with the sceptre, and diadem, every one whereof, the archbishop put upon the Emperor, telling him the signification of each thing, and what it did bind him unto: as for example when he put the sword about him he said, accipe hunc gladium quo ijcias omnes Christi adversarios & malos christianos, authoritate 
Witichin l. 2.  divina per Episcopos tibi tradita. Which is, take unto thee this sword whereby thou mayst cast out and drive away all the enemies of Christ, whether they be barbarous infidels, or evil christians, and this by the authority of God delivered unto thee by us that are bishops.  
And thus he did with all other ornaments and ensigns, telling the signification and obligation of every one, and taking the Emperors promise to perform al.  
And after all, the historiographer concludeth 
Vbi supra.  thus. Rex perfufus oleo sancto, coronatur diademate aureo, ab Episcopis, & ab eisdem ad solium regal ducitur & in eo colocatur. That is, the king being anointed with holy oil was crowned by the bishops, and by the same was brought to the royal seat and therein placed. This happened about the year of christ 940. and the ceremony is recounted more amply in this man's coronation, then in any other, both for that he was a very noble Prince, and the very first of the german nation, that was lawfully and orderly preferred to the imperial seat, after that it passed from the children of Charles the great, and there be divers points worthy the noting in this example, and among other that albeit he were lawful king and Emperor by succession, as also by appointment of his father: yet was he chosen 
Election.  and admitted again by the Princes and people, & that he swore to fulfil all those points and conditions, which the signification of the Imperial ornaments did bind him unto.  
After this, about 60. years or more, Pope Gregory the 5. in a synod holden in Rome, did by the consent of Otho the third Emperor, 
German Electors.  and nephew unto this other Otho, of whom we have now treated, appoint a certain form of election for the time to come of the Germane Emperor, to wit, that he should be chosen by six Princes of Germany, three ecclesiastical which are the archbishopes of Moguntia, Colen, & Treuires, & three temporal Lords, to wit, the Duke of Saxony, the Count palatine of 
Blend. decad. 2. li. 3 Crant. l. 4. cap. 25.  Rhine, and the Marquis of Brandeburge, and when thes six voices should happen to be equally divided, then that the Duke of Boemia (for then it was no kingdom) should have place also to determine the election. All which was determined in the year of Christ 996. in Rome, and approved after ward by all the Princes of Germany, and allowed by all other Christian Princes, and states of the world, and so endureth unto this day. And among all other points this of his coronation and his oath to be taken for his well government, was and is most exactly set down, & recorded by many historiographers of that time, and since: But I shall allege them only out of john Sleydan, as the 
Sleyd. li. 1 histor.  most convenient author for this our time and purpose. 
An. 1519   
First of all than he writeth, that after any man 
The man ner of the Emperor's coronation at this day.  is chosen Emperor, he is to be called only Caesar and the king of the Romans, and not Emperor, until he be crowned, and the conditions which he sweareth unto presently after his election, Are, to defend the christian and catholic religion, to defend the pope and church of Rome, whose advocate he is, to minister justice equally to all, to follow peace, to keep and observe all laws rights and privileges of the 
Sleyd. 〈◊〉 supra.  Empire, not to alienate or engage the possessions of the empire, to condemn no man without hearing his cause, but to suffer the course of law to have his place, in all and whatsoever he shall do otherwise, that it be void and of no Validity at al.  
Unto all thes articles, he sweareth first by his legates & then he giveth a copy of his oath in writing to every one of the six electors, and after this he goeth to the city of Aquisgran to be crowned in the great church, where about the middle of the mass, the archbishop of Colen goeth unto him in the presence of all the people, and asketh, whether he be ready to swear and promise to observe the catholic religion, defend the church, 
Interrogatories to the Emperor.  minister justice, protect the widows and fatherless, and yield dutiful honour and 〈◊〉 to the pope of Rome, whereunto he answering that he is ready to do all this, the Archbishop leadeth him to the high altar where he sweareth in express words, all thes articles, wwhich being done, the said archbishop turning himself to the Princes of the empire and people there present doth ask them, whether they be content to swear obedience and fealty unto him, who answering yea, he is anointed by the said archbishop before the altar, and then do come the other two Archbishops of Moguntia and Treveris, and do lead him into the vestery, where certain deacons are ready to apparel him in his robes, and do set him in a chair, upon whom the Archbishop of Colen saith certain prayers, and then delivereth him 
Imperial ornaments.  a sword drawn, and putteth a ring upon his finger, and giveth him a sceptre in his hand, & then all the three Archbishops together, do put on the crown upon his head, and leading him so crowned and apparelled unto the high altar again, he sweareth the second time, that he will do the part of a good christian and Catholic Emperor. Which being ended he is brought 
Second oath.  back and placed in the imperial seat & throne, where all the Princes of the empire do sweat obedience and faith unto him, beginning with the three Archbishops, and continuing on with the three other electors, and so all the rest in order which is a notable and majestical manner of admitting and authorizing of a Prince as you see, and it is to be marked among other things, that the emperor sweareth three 
To be noted.  times, once by his deputies and twice by himself, before his subjects swear once unto him, and yet will Belloy as you have hard, needs have subjects only bound to their Princes, and the Prince nothing at all bound to them again.  
In Polonia, which being first a Dukedom was made a kingdom, about the same time 
The man ner of coronation in Polonia.  that this form of electing of the Germane Emperor was prescribed, the manner of coronation of their kings, is in substance the very same, that we have declared to be of the Emperor. For first of all, the Archbishop of Guesua metropolitan of all Polonia, cometh to the king standing before the high altar, and sayeth unto him thes words. Where as you are right noble Prince to receive at our hands this day who are (though unworthily) 
Alex Gua guinrerun Polon.  in place of Christ for execution of this function, the sacred anointing and other ceremonies, ensigns, and 
Tom. I. & Oricho in Chimer. fol. 90. & 106  ornaments appertaining to the kings of this land, it shaibe well that we admonish yond in a few words, what the charge importeth which you are to take upon you, etc.  
Thus he beginneth, and after this, he declareth unto him for what end he is made king, what the obligation of that place and dignity bindeth him unto, and unto what points he must swear, what do signify the sword, the ring, the sceptre, and the crown that he is to receive, and at the delivery of each of thes things he maketh both a short exhortation unto him, and prayer unto God for him. And the king's oath is in thes words. Promitto coram 
The king of pool lands oath.  Deo & angelis eius, I do promise and swear before God and his angels, that I will do law and justice to all, and keep the peace of christ hisChurche and the union of his catholic faith, and will do and cause to be done dew and canonical honour unto the bishops of this land, and to the rest of the clergy, and if (which God for bid) I should break my oath, I am content that 
Bodin de rep. l. 2. c. 9  the inhabitants of this kingdom, shall owe no duty or obedience unto me as God shall help me and Gods holy gospels.  
After this oath made by the king, and received by the subjects, the Lord Martial general of the whole kingdom, doth ask with a loud voice of all the councillors, nobility, & people there present, whether they be content to submit themselves unto, this king or no Who answering yea: the archbishop doth end the residue of the ceremonies, & doth place him in the royal throne, where all his subjects do homage unto him, and this for Polonia.  
In Spain I do find, that the manner of admitting 
The admiffion of kings in Spain.  their kings was different, and not the same before and after the destruction thereof by the Moors, but yet that in both times their kings did swear in effect the self same points which before have been mentioned in other kingdoms. For first, before the entering of the Moors when spain remained yet one general monatchie, under the Goths, it is recorded in the fourth national council of Toledo which was holden the year of our Lord 633. according to Ambrosio Morales, the most learned & diligent 
Amb. more rales li. 11. c. 17. hist. Hisp. praefat. eiusdem concilij.  historiographer of Spain, (though other do appoint it some few years after) in this council (I say) it is said, that their new king Sissinandus (who had expelled Suintila there fotmer king for his evil government). This king Sissinandus I say coming into the said council 
The humility of King Sissinandus.  in the third year of his reign, accompanied with a most magnificent number of nobles, that weighted on him, did fall down prostrate upon the ground, before the Archbishops, and bishops there gathered together, which were 70. in number, and desired them with tears to pray for him, and to determine in that council, that which should be needful and most convenient both for maintaining of God's religion, and also for upholding and prospering the whole common wealth: whereupon those fathers after matters of religion and reformation of manners, which they handled in 73. chapters. In the end and last chapter, they come to handle matters of estate also. And first 
Concil. Tol. 4. c. 74.  of all they do confirm the deposition of king Suintila together with his wife brother, and children, and all for his great wickedness, which in the council is recounted, and they do deprive them not only of all title to the crown, but also of all other goods, and possessions, movables & immovables, saving only that which the new king's mercy should bestow upon them, and in this council was present and subscribed first of all other, S. Isidorus Archbishop of Siuil, who writing his history of spain dedicated the same unto this king Sissinandus, and speaketh infinite 
Ambros. Maral. l. 11. cap. 17.  good in the same, of the virtues of king Suintila, that was now deposed and condemned in this said council, whereby it is to presumed, that he had changed much his life afterward, and became so wicked a man, as here is reported.  
After this, the council confirmeth the title of Sissinandus, and maketh decrees for the defence thereof, but yet insinuateth what points he was bound unto, and whereunto he had sworn when they said unto him, Te quoque praesentem 
Cap. 74.  regem ac futuros aetatum sequentium principes, etc. We do require you, that are our present king, and all other our Princes that shall follow 
Conditions of reigning in Spain.  here after with the humility which is convenient, that you be meek & moderate towards your subjects, and that you govern your people in justice and piety, and that none of you do give sentence alone against any man in cause of life and death, but with the consent of your public council, and with those that be governors in matters of judgement. And against all kings that are to come, we do promulgate this sentence, that if any of them shall against the reverence of our laws, excercise cruel authority with proud domination, and kingly pomp, only following there own concupiscence in wickedness, that they are condemned by Christ with the sentence of excommunication, and have their separation both from him and us to everlasting judgement, and this much of that council.  
But in the next two years after the end of this council, king Sissinandus being now dead and one Chintilla made king in his place, there were other two counsels gathered in Toledo, the first whereof was but provincial, and the second national, and they are named by the names of the fift and sixth counsels of Toledo. 
Ambros. Moral. 1. 11. cap. 23 & 24.  In the which counsels, according to the manner of the Goths (who being once converted, from the Arrian heresy, were very catholic and devout ever after, and governed themselves most, by their clergy) and not only matters of religion were handled, but also of state and of the common wealth, especially about the succession to the crown, safety of the Prince, 
Concil. 5. cap. 2. 3. 4. 5. & conc. 6. cap. 16. 17. 18.  provision for his children, friends, officers, and favourites after his death, and against such as without election or approbation of the common wealth, did aspire to the same, all thes points I say were determined in thes counsels and among other points a very severe decree was made in the sixth council, concerning the king's oath at his admission in thes words. Consonam uno cord & ore promulgamus Deo placituram 
Concil. Td. 6. c. 3.  sententiam. We do promulgate with one heart and mouth this sentence agreeable & pleasing unto God, and do decree the same with the consent and deliberation of the nobles and peers of this realm, that whosoever in time to come shallbe advanced to the honour and preferment of this kingdom, he shall not be placed in the royal seat, until among other conditions he have promised by the Sacrament of 
The king of Spain's oath at his admission.  an oath, that he will suffer no man to break the Catholic faith, etc. Thus far, that synod or council. By which words especially those (among other conditions) is made evident, that those Princes swear not only to keep the faith, but also such other conditions of good government as were touched before in the fourth council, and thes things were determined while their king Chintilla was present in Toledo, as Ambrosio Morales noteth. And thus much of Spain, before 
Ambros. Moral. lib. 1. cap. 23.  the entrance of the Moors, and before the dividing thereof into many kingdoms which happened about a hundredth years after 
The destruction of Spain.  this, to wit in the year of our Saviour 713. and 714.  
But after the Moors had gained all Spain 
The beginning of the restitution of spain.  and divided it between them, into divers kingdoms, yet God provided that within four or five years the christians that were left and fled to the Mountains of Asturias & Biscay, found a 
Ambros. Moral. li. 13. c. 1. & 2. de la Chron. de Esp.  certain young Prince named Don Pelayo of the ancient blood of the Gothish kings, who was also fled thither and miraculously saved from the enemies, whom they chose strait ways to be their king, and he began presently the recovery of Spain, and was called first king of Asturias, and afterward of Leon, and after his successors gatt to be kings also of Castilia, and then of Toledo, and then of Arragon, Barcelona, Valentia, Murcia, Cartagena, jaen, Cordua, Granade, 
Kingdoms in Spain.  Siuil, Portugal, and Navarra, all which were different kingdoms at that time, so made by the Moors, as hath been said. And all thes kingdoms were gained again, by little and little, in more than 7. hundred years space, which were lost in less than two years, and they never came again in deed into one Monarchy as they were under Don Rodrigo their last king that lost the whole, until the year of our Lord 1582. when Don Philippe now king of Spain reunited again unto that crown the kingdom of Portugal which was the last piece, that remained separated and this was almost 900. years after Spain was first lost.  
But now to our purpose, the chronicler of Spain, named Ambrosio Morales doth record in his chronicle a certain law, written in the Gothish tongue, and left since the time of this 
The goatish la of Don Pelayo King of Spain.  Don Pelayo the first king, after the uninersal destruction of Spain, and the title of the law is this. Como see an de leuantar Rey en Espna, y como el ha de Iurar los fueros, that is to say, how men 
Ambros. Moral. li. 〈◊〉. cap. 2.  must make their king in Spain, and how he must swear to the privileges and liberties of that nation: And then he putteth the articles of the law, whereof the first saith thus. Before all things it is established for a law, liberty, and priutledge of Spain, that the king is to be placed by voius and consent perpetually, and this to the intent that so evil king may enter without consent of the people, seeing they are to give to him, that which with their blood and labours they have gained of the Moors. Thus far goeth this first article, which is the 
Lucas Episcop. Tuyensin histor. Hispan. Lodou. de 〈◊〉. lib. de hered.  more to be marked, for that divers and those most ancient spanish authors do say, that from this Don Pelayo, the succession of kings descended ever by propinquity of blood, and yet we see that election was joined therewithal in express terms.  
The second part of the law containeth the manner of ceremonies used in those old days at the admission of their kings, which is expressed in thes words, let the king be chosen & 
The old Spanish cerimonyes in making their King.  admitted in the metropolitan city of this kingdom, or at least wise in some cathedral church, and the night before he is exalted, let him watch all night in the church, and the next day let him hear mass, and let him offer at mass a piece of scarlet, and some of his own money, and after let him communicate, and when they come to lift him up let him step upon a buckler or target and let the chief and principal men there present hold the target, and so lifting him up let them and the people cry three times, as hard as they can, Real, Real, Real. Then let the king command some of his own money to be cast among the people, to the quantity of a hundredth shillings, and to the end he may give all men to understand, that no man now is above him, let himself tie on his own sword in the form of a cross, & let no knight or other man, bear a sword that day, but only the king.  
This was the old fashion of making kings in spain, which in effect and substance remaineth 
The present manner of Spain.  still, though the manner thereof be somewhat altered, for that the spanish kings be not crowned, but have an other ceremony for their admission equal to coronation, which is performed by the Archbishop of Toledo primate of all spain, as the other coronations before mentioned are by the Archbishop of Moguntia, to the Emperor, and by the Archbishop of Guesna to the king of Polonia, and by the Archbishop of Praga to the king of Boemia, and by the Archbishop of Braga to the king of Portugal, and by the Archbishop of Canterbury to the king of Ingland, and by the Archbishop of Rheims to the king of France, of which realm of France we may not omit to say somewhat in particular, seeing it is so goodly a kingdom, and so near to Ingland, not only in situation, but also in Laws manners & customs, and as the race of English kings have come from them in divers manners, since the conquest, so may it be also supposed that the principal ceremonies and circumstances of this action of coronation, hath been received in like manner from them.  
First then touching the act of coronation 
The man ner of French coronation.  and admission of the king of France, even as before I have said of Spain, so also in this kingdom do I find two manners of that action, the one more ancient which the French do say hath endured in substance from their first Christian king named Clodoveus, unto this day, which is about eleven hundred years, for that Clodoveus was christened the year of our Lord 490. in the city of Rheims by S. Remigius, Bishop of 
The old ceremonies.  that city, and anointed also and crowned king by the same bishop, which manner and order of anointing and coronation endured after for about 6. hundred years, unto the time of Henry the first, & king Philip the first his son, both kings of France. At what time (which is about 500 years a gone) both the Chroniclers and Cosmographers of France do teftifie, that there was a peculiar book in the 
Belfor. l. 3 c. 20. Thevet. cosmograph. vniuers. l. 15. cap. 2. Papir. masson. annal l 3. pag. 2. 15.  library of the church of Bevais, containing the particular order of this action, which had endured from Clodoveus unto that tyme. Which order, for so much as toucheth the solemnity of officers in the coronation and other like circumstances, was far different at that time, from that which is now, for that in those days there were no peers of France, appointed to assist the same coronation, which now are the chief and the greatest part of that solemnirie. Yea Girard du Hailan secretary of France in his third book of the affairs and state of that 
Gerand l. 3 del. b. estate fol. 238.  kingdom, saith, that the ceremonies of crowning their old kings were much after the fashion which I have noted a little before, in this very chapter, out of the law of Don Pelayo first king of Spain, after the Moors, for that they were lifted up and carried about upon a target by the chief subjects there present as the spaniards were.  
But as touching the principal point of that action which is the substance of admitting the king unto his royal authority, and oath by him made of governing well and justly, and of the reciprocal oath of obedience made to him again by his subjects, it was not much different from that which now is, as shall appear by the coronation of the foresaid Philip the first, who was crowned in the life and presence of his father, king Henry, after the fashion then used in the year of Christ 1059. and it was in manner following, as Nangis and Tillet, both authores 
Francis Belfor. hist. fran. lib. 3. c. 20 in vita Philip. 1.  of great authority among the French, do recount it, and Francis Belforest, out of them both repeateth the same at large, in thes words following.  
King Henry the first of this name, seeing himself very old and feeble, made an assembly of 
The coronation of King Philip the first.  all the states of France in the city of Paris in the year of Christ 1059. where bringing in his young son and heir Philip that was but 9 years of age, before them all, he said as followeth.  
Hither to my dear friends and subjects, I have 
The speech of the father.  been the head of your nobility, & men at arms, but now by mine age and disposition of body, I do well perceive, that ear it be long I must be separated from you, and therefore I do desire you that if ever you have loved me, you show it now in giving your consent and approbation that this my son may be admitted for your king, and apparaled with the royal ornaments of this crown of France, and that you will swear fealty unto him, and do him homage.  
Thus said the king, and then having asked every one of the assistance in particular for his consent a part, and afterwards the whole assembly in general, whether they would swear obedience to him or no, and finding all to promise with a good will, he passed over the feast of the ascension with great joy in Paris, and after went to Rheims with all the court and train, to celebrate the coronation upon the feast of whit-sonday.  
Thus far are the words of William de Nangis 
Notes upon the king's speeches.  alleged in the story of France by Belforest, and it is to be nored first, how the king did request the nobility & people to admit his son, and secondly how he did ask there consents a part, for that thes two points do evidently confirm that, which I said at the beginning, that only succession is not sufficient, but that coronation ever requireth a new consent, which also includeth a certain election or new approbation of the subjects.  
This is proved also most manifestly by the very order of coronation which ensueth in Belforest, taken word for word out of Tillet, in 
Memoires du Tillet c. du sacre des Roys. The particular manner of coronation.  his treatise of Records, in the chapter of anointing the kings of France in thes words.  
In the year of grace 1059. and 32. of the reign of king Henry the first of this name of France, and in the 4. year of the seat and bishopric of Geruays Archbishop of Rheims, and in the 23. day of May being whit-sonday, king Philip the first was appointed by the said Archbishop Geruays in the great church of Rheims, before the altar of our lady, with the order & ceremony that ensueth.  
The mass being begun, when it came to the reading of the Epistle, the said Lord Archbishop turning about to Philip the Prince, that was there present, declared unto him what was the Catholic faith, and asked him whether he did believe it, & whether he would 
Procession of faith.  descend it against all persons whatsoever, who affirming that he would, his oath was brought unto him, whereunto he must swear, which he took and read with a loud yoyce, and signed it with his own hand, and the words of the oath were these.  
je Philippe par le grace de Dieu prochain d'estre ordonné Roy de France, promets au iour de mon sacré devant Dieu & ses saints. etc. That is in English, (for I will not repeat all the oath in French seeing it is some what long). I Philip by the grace of God, near to be ordained king of France, do promiss 
The oath of the King of France.  in this day of my anointing, before almighty God, and all his saints, that I will conserve unto you that are ecclesiastical Prelates all canonical privileges, and all law and justice dew unto every one of you, and I will defend you by the help of God so much as shall lie in my power, and as every king ought to do, and as by right and equity he is bound to defend every Bishop and church to him committed within his realm, and further more I shall administer justice unto all people given me in charge, and shall preserve unto them the defence of laws and equity appertaining unto them, so far forth as shall lie in my authority, so God shall help me and his holy Evangelists.  
This oath was read by the king, holding his hands between the hands of the Archbishop of Rheims, and the bishop of Syen and Bisanson, legates of the pope standing by, with a very great number of other bishops of the realm. And the said Archbishop taking the cross of S. Remigius in his hands, he showed first unto all the audience, the ancient authority which the Archbishops of Rheims had even from the time of S. Remigius that baptised their first christian king Clodoveus, to anoint & crown the kings of France, which he said was confirmed unto them by privilege of the pope Hormisda that lived in the year of Christ 516. and after also by pope Victor, and this being done, he 
Belfor. 1. 3 cap. 20.  then (by licence first asked of king Henry the father there present) did chose Philip for king. Il esleut le dit Philippe son sils, en, & pour Roy de France, which is word for word, the Archbishop chose the said Philip king Henry's son, in and for king of France, which the legates of the pope presently confirmed, and all the bishop's Abbots and clergy, with the nobility & people in their order, did the like, crying out three times in thes words. Nous le apprououns, nous le voulons, soit 
The people's election and admifsion.  fait nostre Roy, that is, we approve his election, we will have him, let him be made our king, & presently was song. Te Deum laudamus in the quyar, and the rest of the ceremonies of anointing and coronation were done, according to the ancient order of this solemnity, used in the time of king Phillip's predecessors kings of France.  
Thus far do French stories recount the old & ancient manner of anointing and crowning their kings of France, which had endured as I have said, for all most 600. years that is to say, from Clodoveus unto this king Philip the first, who was crowned in France 7. years before our William conqueror (who also was present at this coronation, & had the third place among 
The later order of coronation in France.  the temporal Princes as Duke of Normandy) entered into Ingland, but after this time the manner and ceremonies was somewhat altered, and made more majestical in outward show, & this especially by king Lewis surnamed the younger, nephew to the foresaid king Philip, who leaving the substance of the action as it was before, caused divers external additions of honour and majesty, to be adjoined thereunto, especially for the coronation of his son Philip the second surnamed Augustus, whom he caused, also to be crowned in his days, as his grand father Philip had been, and as himself had been also in his father's days.  
This man among other royal ceremonies ordained the offices of the twelve peers, of France, 6. Ecclesiastical, and 6. temporal, who are they which ever since have had the chiefest 
The 12. peers of France & their offices in the coronation.  places and offices in this great action, for that the foresaid Archbishop of Rheims entitled also Duke of Rheims, hath the first and highest place of all others, and anointeth & crowneth the king. The bishop & Duke of Laon beareth the glass of sacred oil. The bishop & Duke of Langres the cross: The Bishop and earl of Bevais the mantle royal, The Bishop & Earl of Noyon the king's girdle, and last of all, the Bishop and Earl of Chalons, doth carry the ring, and thes are the six ecclesiastical peers of France with their offices in the coronation.  
The temporal peers are the Duke of Burgundy, deane of the order, who in this day of 
Temperal peers.  coronation holdeth the crown: the Duke of Gasconie & Guyene the first banner quartered, the Duke of Normandy the 2. banner quartered, the Earl of Tholosa the golden spurs, the Earl of Champanie, the banner Royal or standard of war, and the Earl of flanders the sword royal, so as thet are 3. Dukes & 3. Earls in every one of both ranks of spiritual & temporal Lords, and as Girard noteth, the king is appareled on this day 3. times, and in 3, several 
To be noted  sorts, the first as a priest, the second as a king and 
Girard du haillan li. 3. de l'estat. pag. 240. 242. & 258.  warryer, the third as a judge, and finally he saith that this solemnity of anointing and crowning the king of France, is the most mag, nificent, gorgeous, and majestical thing that may be seen in the world, for which he referreth us not only to the particular coronations of thes two ancient king Phillipps, the first & second, but also to the late coronation of Henry the second, father to the last kings of France which is also in print, and in deed is a very goodly and most notable thing to be read, though in deed much more to be seen.  
But to say a word or two more of Philip Augustus before I pass any further, which 
The ceremonies used at this day.  happened in the year 1179. and in the 25. of the reign of our king Henry the 2. of Ingland, who as the French stories say was present also at this coronation, and had his rank among 
Francis Belf. in vita Augustus.  the peers as Duke of Normandy, and held the king's crown in his hand, & one of his sons had his rank also as Duke of Gasconie, & the form used in this coronation was the very same which is used at this day in the admission of the kings of France, in recounting whereof I will let pass all the particular ceremonies Which are largely to be read in Francis Belforest, in the place before mentioned, and I will repeat only the king's oath, which the said author recounteth in thes words.  
The Archbishop of Rheims being vested in 
The coronation of Phillip. 2. Augustus  his pontifical attire, and come to the altar to begin mass (where the king also was upon a high seat placed) he turned to him and said thes words in the name of all the clergy and churches of France: Sire that which we require at your hands this day, is that you promise unto us, that you will keep all canonical privileges law and justice dew to be kept & defended as a good king is bound to do in his realm, and to every bishop and church to him committed: whereunto the king answered. I do promiss and avow to every one of you and to every church to you committed, that I will keep and maintain all canonical privileges law and justice 〈◊〉 to every man to the uttermost of my power, and by God's help shall defend you as a good king is bound to do, in his realm. This being done the king did swear and make his oath, laying his hands upon the gospel in thes words following. Au nom de jesus Christ, ie iure 
The oath of the French king used at this day.  & promets au peuple christien a moy suiect ces choses, etc. Which is in English: In the name of jesus Christ I do swear and promise to all Christian people subject unto me thes points ensuning: first to 〈◊〉 that all my subjects be kept in the union of the church, and I will defend them from all excess, rapine, extorsion, and iniquity, secondly I will take order that in all judgements justice shallbe kept, with equity and mercy, to the end that God of his mercy may conserve unto me with you my people his holy grace and mercy. Thirdly I shall endeavour as much as possibly shall lie in me, to chase and drive out of my realm and all my dominions, all such as the church hath or shall declare for heretics, as God shall help me and his holy gospels. Thus sweareth the king, and then kisseth the gospels, and mediately is song. Te Deum laudamus, and after that are said many particular prayers by the Archbishop, and then is the king vested, and the ring, sceptre, crown, and other kingly ornaments and ensigns are brought & put upon him, with declaration first what they signify, & then particular prayers are made to God, that their signification may be by the king fulfilled.  
And after all ended the Archbishop with the Bishops do bless him, and say thes words 
The archbishopes blessing & speech to the new king.  unto him. God which reigneth in heaven and governeth all kingdoms bless you, etc. Be you stable and constant, and hold your place and right, from hence forth which here is committed and laid upon you by the authority of almighty God, and by this present tradition and delivery which we the bishops and other servants of God do make unto you of the same, and remember you in place convenient, to bear so much more respect & reverence unto the 〈◊〉. by how much nearer than other men you have seen 〈◊〉 to approach to God's altar, to the end that jesus Christ mediator of God and man may confirm and maintain you by the clergy and people, in this your royal seat and throne, who being lord of Lords and king of kings make you reign with him and his father in the life and glory everlasting.  
Thus saith the Archbishop unto him, and after this he is led by him and the other pears, unto the seat royal, where the crown is put upon his head, and many other large ceremoneys used which may be read in the author afore said, and are to long for this place. And yet have I been the larger in this matter of France, for that I do not think it to be improbable which this author and others do note, to wit, that most nations round about have taken their particular forms of anointing and crowning their kings, from this ancient custom of France, 
The man ner of coronations taken from France.  though the substance thereof, I mean of their sacring and anointing, be deduced from examples of far more antiquity, to wit, from the very first kings among the people of Israel, whom God 
1. Reg. 10. & 16.  caused to be anointed by his priests and prophets, 
2. Reg. 2.  in token of his election, and as a singular privilege of honour and pre-eminence unto them, whereof king David made so great account when he said to the soldier that had killed Saul his enemy in the war, quare non timuisti mittere manum tuam in Christum Domini, Why 
2. Reg. 1.  didst thou not fear to lay thy hands upon the anointed of God, and he put him to death for it, notwithstanding that Saul had been long before deposed, and rejected by God, and that himself had lawfully borne arms against him for many days, so much was that ceremony of anointing esteemed in those days, & so hath it been ever since among christian people also, for that kings hereby are made sacred, and do not only participate with priests, but also with Christ himself who hath his name of this circumstance of anointing as all the world knoweth.  
Probable than I say it is, that albeit the substance of this ceremony of anointing kings be much elder than the christian kingdom of France: yet is this particuler and majestical manner of doing the same by way of coronation, the most ancient in France above all other kingdoms round about, especially if it began with their first christian king Clodovaeus not full 500 years after Christ, as french authors do hold. At what time also they recount a great miracle of holy oil sent from heaven 
The holy oil of Rheims.  by an angel for anointing Clodovaeus, whereof they say they have still remaining for the anointing of their kings at Rheims, which point I will not stand to treat or discoursein this place, but rather will refer my reader to the foresaid chapter of Francis Belforest chonicler of France, who allegeth divers writers of almost 500 
Belfo. l. 3. cap. 57  years antiquity that writ of the same, but howsoever that be, very probable it seemeth that all the ceremoneys of coronation in Germany & Polonia before recited (which had their beginning long after the reign of Clodovaeus) might be taken from thence, and so the affinity and likeness of the one to the other doth seem to agree, and Garribay also the chronicler of Spain, and of Navarra, in his 22. book talking of this custom 
Esteuan. Garribay. lib. 22. C 1  of anointing and crowning the kings of Navarra, saith, that this excellent custom began there (I mean in Navarra) above 800. years past and was brought in by certain Earls 
kings crowned in navarra and not in Spain.  of champain of France named Theobaldes who coming to attain that crown brought with them that reverent ceremony of anoyntig & crowning their kings, according to the use of the French, which custom endureth until this day in that part of Navarra, that is under the house of Vandome, albeit in the other that is under the Spaniards (which is far the greater) it wasleft of in the year 1513. When Ferdinand surnamed the Catholic king of spain entered theruppon, for that the Spanish kings are never anointed nor crowned but otherwise admitted by the common wealth as before I have declared.  
But among all other kingdoms it seemeth that Ingland hath most particularly taken this custom, and ceremony from France, not only for the reason before alleged that divers of our English kings have come out of France, as William Conqueror borne in Normandy, king 
The English coronation taken from he french.  Stephen son to the Earl of Blois, and Bollen, a French man, and king Henry the second borne likewise in France, and son to the Earl of Anjou: but also for that in very deed the thing itself is all one in both nations, and albeit I have not seen any particular book of this action in Ingland, as in French there is: yet it is easy to gather 
Le Sacre des Roys.  by stories what is used in Ingland about this affair.  
For first of all, that the Archbishop of Canterbury doth ordinarily do thes ceremony in Inland as the Archbishop of Rheims doth it in France, there is no doubt, & with the same solemnity and honour, according to the condition and state of our country: and Polidor Virgil in 
Polid. lib 13. hist.  his story noteth that pope Alexander did interdict and suspend the Archbishop of York, 
Angliae in vita Henrici.  with his two assistants the bishops of London & Salisbury, for that in the absence of Thomas Becket Archbishop of Canterbury, and without his licence, they did crown king Henry the seconds son, named also Henry, at his father's persuasion, and divers do attribute the unfortunate success of the said king Henry the younger that rebelled against his father, to this disorderly and violent coronation by his father's appointment: secondly that the first thing which the said Archbishop requireth at the new kings hands at his coronation, is about religion, church matters and the clergy (as in France we have seen) it appeareth evidently by thes words which the same Archbishop Thomas (surnamed commonly the martyr) remaining in banishment written to the same king Henry the second which are thes. Memores sitis confessionis quam fecistis & posuistis super altar 
In vita D. Thom. Cantuar. apud sarium in mense Decembris.  apud westmonsterium de servanda Ecclesiae libertate, quando consecrati fuistis, & uncti in regem à praedecessore nostro Thebaldo. Which is, do you call to your remembrance, the confession, which you made and laid upon the altar at westminster, for keeping & defending the liberty of the church when you were consecrated and anointed king by Thebaldus our predecessor. By which words appeareth, that as the king of Ingland was consecrated and anointed in those days by the Archbishop of Canterbury, so did he swear and give up his oath also in writing, and for more solemnity and obligation, laid it down or rather offered it up, with his own hands upon the altar, so much as was repuired of him by the said Archbishop & clergy, for the special safety of religion, and these ecclesiastical liberties, which is the self same point that we have seen before, as well in the oath of the kings of France, as also of Polonia and Spain, and of the Emperors both Grecian and German.  
The very like admonition in effect I find made by an other Thomas Archbishop of Canterbury, 
The speech of an other Archbushop of Canter bury to the King.  to an other king Henry, to wit by Thomas Arundel to king Henry the fourth, when in a parliament holden at Coventry, in the year 1404. the king was tempted by certain temporal men, to take away the temporalities from the clergy, Whereunto when the said Archbishop Thomas had answered by divers reasons, at last turning to the king he besought him (saith Stow) to remember the oath which he voluntarily made, that he would honour & defend 
Stow in vita Henrici 4.  the church and ministers thereof. Wherefore he desired him to permit and suffer the church to enjoy the privileges and liberties which in time of bis predecessors it did enjoy, and to fear that king which reigneth in heaucn, and by whom all other kings do reign moreover he desired him to consider his promise also ro all the realm, which was that he 〈◊〉 preserve unto every man 〈◊〉 and title, so far as in him lay. By which speech of the Archbishop the king was so tar moved, as he would hear no more of that bill of the lain, but said that he would leave the church in as good estate, or better than he found it, and so he did, but yet hereby we come to learn, what oath the kings of Ingland do make at their coronations touching the Church and clergy.  
The other conditions also of good government, 
Holingsh in his Cro. pag. 476. & 1005.  are partly touched in the speech of the Archbishop, and much more expressly set down in the king of Inglands' oath, recorded by ancient writers, for that he sweareth as both Holinshead and others do testify, in there english stories, in thes very words, to wit. That he will during his life, bear reverence & honour 
The Kings of England.  unto almighty God, and to his Catholic church, and unto his ministers, and that he will administer law and justice equally to all, and take away all unjust laws. Which after he had sworn, laying his hands upon the gospels: then doth the Archbishop (turning about to the people) declare what the king hath promised and sworn, and by the mouth of a harold at arms asketh their consents, whether they be content to submit themselves unto this man, as unto their king or no, under the conditions proposed, whereunto when they have yielded themselves, then beginneth the Archbishop to put upon him the regal ornaments as the sword, the ring, the sceptre, and crown, 
Regal ornaments.  as before in the French coronation you have hard, and namely he giveth him the sceptre of S. Eduard the confessor, and then he addeth also the same words of commission and exhottation as the other doth, to wit, stand and hold thy place and keep thy oath, and thereunto adjoineth a great commination or threat, on the behalf of almighty God, if he should take upon him that dignity, without firm purpose to observe the things which this day he hath sworn, and this is the some of the English coronation Which you may read also by piece meal in john Stow (according as other things in that his brief collection are set down) but especially 
Stow in vita 〈◊〉 2. in fine.  you shall seit in the admissions as Well of the said king Henry the fourth now last mentioned, as also of king Edward the fourth, at their first entrances to the crown, for in the admission of king Henry, Stow showeth, how the people were demanded thrice, whether they were content to admit him for their king, and that the 
Admission and Coronation of King Henry 4.  Archbishop of Canterbury (who was the same Thomas Arundel of whom we spoke before) did read unto them what this new king was bound by oath unto, and then he took the ring, wherewith he was to wed him to the common wealth, (which wedding importeth as you know an oath and mutual obligation on both sides in every marriage) and the Earl of Northumberland high Constable of Ingland, for that day, was willed to show the said ring to the people, that they might thereby see the band whereby their king was bound unto them. And then it was put upon his finger, and the king kissed the Constable in sign of acceptance, fell on his knees also to prayer that he might observe his promise, and other like ceremonies saith Stow, were used, and this was done the 13. of October 1359. and therefore upon good reason might this same archbishop put him afterward in mind of this his oath as before I have showed that he did.  
At the admission also of king Edward the 
The coro nation of King Edward 4.  fourth, Stow noteth in his Chronicle, that first the people's consent was demanded very solemnly in S. john's field by London, the 29. of February, in the year 1460. notwithstanding that king Edward had proved his title, by succession before in the parliament holden at westminster, and now this consent of the people 
Stow in vita Her. 6. pag. 709.  being had, (or he being thus elected as Stows words are) he went the next day in procession at paul's, and offered there, and after, Te Deum being song, he was with great roy alty conveyed to westminster, and there in the haul set in the king's seat, with S Edward's sceptre in his hand, and then the people were asked again if they would have him king, and they cried yea yea, thus far john Stow.  
And if any would take exception against thes of king Henry and king Edward the 4. because they entered and began there reigns upon the deprivation of other kings than living, there are yet many living in Ingland that have seen the several coronations of king Edward the 6. Q. Marry & Q. Elizsabeth that now reigneth, & can witness that at all and every of their coronations, the consent of the people and their acceptation of those Princes is not only demanded by the public cry of a harolde at arms, which standeth on both the sides of the high scaffold or stage whereon the Prince is crowned, and the people's answer expected till they cry yea yea: but also that the said Princes gave there, their corporal oath upon the Evangelists unto the Bishop that crowned them, to up hold & maintain the faith afornamed, with the liberties and privileges of the church, as also to govern by justice and law, as hath been said: which oaths no doubt have been sworn and taken most solemnly by all the kings and Queens of Ingland, from, the days of king Edward the Confessor at the least, and he that will see more points of thes oaths set down in particular let him read magna carta, and he willbe satisfied.  
By all which, and by infinite more that might be said and alleged in this matter, and to this purpose, it is most evident, (said the Civilian lawyer) that this agreement, bargain and contract between the king and his common wealth, 
The conclusion of this chapter.  at his first admission, is as certain and firm (nothwitstanding any pretence or interest he hath or may have by succession) as any contract or marriage in the world can be, when it is solemnized by words de praesenti (as our law speaketh) between parties espoused before by words de futuro, which is an act that expresseth this other most lively, as afterward more at large I shall show unto you, and consequently I must needs affirm, to be most absurd base and impious, that flattery before mentioned of Belloy & his companions, in their books before cited, where he holdeth, that only succession of blood, is the, thing without further approbation, which maketh a king, and that the people's consent to him that is 
Absurd aslertions of Bclloy.  next by birth, is nothing at all needful, be he what he will, and that his admission. inunction or coronation is only a matter of external ceremony, without any effect at all, for increase or confirmation of his right; thes (I say) are unlearned, fond & wicked assertions, in flattery of Princes, to the manifest ruin of common wealths and perverting of all law, order & reason, which assertions albeit they have been sufficiently (as I suppose) refuted before, yet mean I to stand a little more upon them in this place for more evident demonstration of so important a truth, as also to see & examine what may duly be attributed to bare succession alone, to the end that no man may think we mean to improve or embase that which we esteem in so high degree, and think that the best and surest way of maintaining kingly government in the world: is to have it go by succesion, as it doth at this day in Ingland, and in most other states of Europe besides, though yet with the limitations & conditions due thereunto, whereof I shall now begin to treat more in particular, but after some little pause if you please, for that this other narration hath well wearied me.   

WHAT IS DUE TO ONLY SUCCESSION BY BIRTH, AND WHAT INTErest or right an heir apparent hath to the crown, before he be crowned or admitted by the common wealth, and how justly he may be put back if he have not the other parts requisite also.  
CHAP. VI  
VERY reasonable it seemed to all the whole assembly that some intermission or pause should be admitted, as the Civilian had required, and this aswell for the commodity of the hearers, who desired to confer together more in particular, of the points already discussed, as also of the speaker, who which reason affirmed 
A pause.  that he was somewhat weary, seeing he had continued his speech so long together. And so which one consent they rose all and went into an orchard adjoining to the house, and after some hours space, returned again, for that every man seemed very desirous to hear this other matter debated, of the interest of Princes before their coronation, for that they said, it touched the very point itself, now in question in Ingland, and that which is like to be in action also, ere it be long, Wherefore they desired the Civilian to begin his discourse, and first of all to set down the very words of Belloy about this matter, as also the places where he writeth the same, for that his assertions appeared to them very straying & opposite to all reason of state & practice of the world, as also contrary to all that which hitherro had been said and treated.  
Whereto the Civilian answered, true it is, that they are so, and more plain and 〈◊〉 flatteries then ever I have read uttered by any man to any prince or tyrant what soever, albeit most of them (as you know) have not failed to find as shameless flatterers, as themselves were 
Grose flattery.  either vain or wicked princes, and for my part I am of opinion, that thes propositions of Belloy will rather hurt and hinder, then profit the prince for whom and in whos favour he is thought to have written them, which is the king of Navarra whom hereby he would advance (as he seemeth) and have admitted to the crown of France, without all consent or admission of the realm. But I for my part, as I doubt not greatly of his title by propinquity of blood, according to the law Salic; so on the other side, am I of opinion, that thes propositions of Belloy in his behalf, that he should enter by only title of birth, without condition consent or approbation of the realm, as also without oath anointing or coronation, yea of necessity, without restraint or obligation to fulfil any law, or to observe any privileges to church, chapel, clergy, or nobility, ot to be checked by the whole realm, if he rule amiss: thes things I say, are rather to terrify, the people and set them more against his entrance, then to advance his title: and therefore in my poor judgement, it was nether wisely written by the one, nor politicly permitted by the other. And to the end you may see what reason I have to give this censure, I shall here 
The propositions of Belloy apolog. ca h. part. 2. §. 7.  set down his own propositions, touching this matter, as I find them in his own words, First then he avoutcheth, that all families which enjoy kingdoms in the world were placed therein by God only, and that he alone can change the same, which if he refer unto gods universal providence quae attingit à fine usque in finem fortiter as the scripture saith, and without which a sparrow falleth not on the ground, as our saviour testifieth, 
Matth. 6.  no man will deny, but all is from God, either by his ordinance or permission, but if we talk (as we do) of the next & immediate causes of empires, princes, & of their changes; clear it is, that men also do & may concur therein, and that god hath left them lawful authority so to do, and to dispose thereof for the public benefit, as largely before hath been declared, & consequently to say that god only doth thes things & leaveth nothing to man's judgement therein is against all reason use & experience of the world.  
The second proposition of Belloy is, that where such princes be once placed in government, and the law of succession by birth established, there the 
2. Apolog. Cathol. part. 1. parag. 7.  prince's children or next of k in do necessarily succeed, by only birth, without any new choice or approbation of the people, nobility, or clergy, or of the whole common wealth together. And to this assertion he joineth an other as straying as this, which is, that a king never dieth for that whensoever or howsoever he ceaseth by any means to govern, then entereth 
3. Apolog. pro rege. 〈◊〉. 6. Sc 34.  the successor by birth not as heir to the former, but as law-ful governor of the realm without any admission at all, having his authority only, by the condition of his birth and not by adoption or choice of any. Which two propositions albeit they have been sufficiently refuted, by that which hath been spoken in the last two chapters going before, yet shall I now again convince more amply the untruth thereof.  
Other two propositions he addeth, which pattly have been touched and answered before, and yet, I mean to repeat them again in this place for that they appertain to this purpose, his former is, that a prince once entered to government, 
4. Apolog. Cathol. part. 2. parag. 7. & pro rege cap. 9  and so placed as hath been said ys under no law or restraincte at all, of his authority, but that himself only is the quick and living law, and that no limitation can be given unto him by any power under heaven, except it be by his own will, and that no nation or common wealth can appoint or prescribe how they will obey or how their prince shall govern them, but must leave his authority free from all bands of law, and this either willingly or by violence, is to be procured. By which words it seemeth that he painteth out a perfect pattern of a tyrannical government, which how it may further the king of Navarre's pretence, in the case he standeth in presently in France, I do not see.  
His other proposition is, That albeit the heir apparent which is next by birth to any crown, should 
5. Apolog. pro rege cap. 20.  be never so impotent, or unfit to govern, as if (for examples sake) he should be deprived of his senses, mad, furious, lunatic, a fool or the like, or that he should be known on the other side to be most malicious, wicked, vicious or abominable, or should degenerate into a very beast, yea if it were known that he should go about to destroy the common wealth, and drown the ship which he had to guide, yet (saith this man) he must be sacred and holy unto us, and admitted without condradiction to his inheritance, which God & nature hath laid upon him, & his direction restaint or punishment must only be remitted to God alone, for that no man or commun wealth, may reform or restrain him. Thus saith Belloy, which I doubt not will feme unto you rather belly and base doctrine, then to come from the head of any learned or discreet man, that regardeth the end why commonwealths and kingdoms and all governments were ordained by God and nature, and not the flattering or adoring of any one miserable man that shall stand over them to destroy the whole.  
But now to the particular matter that we are to treat, which is, what is to be attributed to this succession or propinquity of birth alone, I am of opinion, as before I signified, that albeit their want not reasons on both sides among learned men, what kind of providing 
Succession of princes by birth better than ineere election & why?  governors to commonwealths is best, either by simple and free election only, or by succession of birth: my opinion (I say) is, that succession is much to be preferred, not for that it wanteth all difficulties and inconveniences (which all temporal things upon earth have) but like as before I have showed of the particular government of a monarchy in respect of other forms of regiment, to wit, that it wanted not all, but had fewer inconveniences than other forms of regiment have, so say I also of this, that albeit some inconveniences want not in succession; yet are they commonly far less and fewer, than would follow by mere election, which is subject to great and continual dangers 
2. reason.  of ambition, emulation, division, sedition, and contention, which do bring with them evident peril of universal destruction & desoiation of the whole body, & this at every change of the Prince, which change on the other side, is much assured by succession, for that great occasions of strife and contention are there by cut of.  

2.  And besides this, the Prince who is in present possession knowing that his son or next of kynn, is to be his heir, hath more care to leave the realm in good order, as we see that the husband man hath to till and manure that ground, which is his own, and to remain to his posterity.  

3.  A third commodity also there is, for that less mutations and alterations are seen in the common wealth, where succession prevaileth, for that the son following his father, doth commonly retain the same friends, counsellors, officers, and servants, which his father had before him: pursueth the same actions and intentions, with the same manner of proceeding for the most part; where as he that entereth by election, being an allien to him that went before him, & never lightly his friend, doth change alter and turn upside down, all things.  

4.  Further more (which may be also a fourth reason) he that entereth by succession, for that he is either borne a Prince, or hath been much respected still for his title to the crown, bringeth with him less passions of hatred, emulation, anger, envy, or revenge against particular men (for that no man durst offend him) then doth he which entereth by only election, for that he having been a subject and equal to others before his advancement, and thereby holden contention with many, especially at this election, must needs have matter of quarrel with many, which he will seek easily to revenge when he is in authority, as on the other side also such as were his equales before will bear him less respect & more unwillingly be under him, then if by birth he had been there sovereign.  
Thes and divers other are the commodities 
5. The preheminene of primogenitura.  of succession, whereunto we may also add the pre-eminence and privilegde of primogenitura, and ancestry of birth, so much respected & commended by holy writ, not only in men, but in all other creatures also, whose first born 
Genes. 15 & 49  were dedicated to God himself, and one notable 
Deut. 21. & 15.  example among other occurreth to my 
2. Patalip. 21. & 3.  mind of the two sons of Isaac, of the which two albeit God had ordained to choose the 
Exod. 3. & 2.  younger before he was borne, at S. Paul testifieth, 
Rom. 9 & 13.  and to reject the elder, that is to say, that jacob should inherit the benediction and not 
Genes. 28 & 27.  Esau: Yet would God have this younger to procure the said privilege of elder ship from Esau by divers means as first by bargain, and after by guile according to the story we read in Genes. Out of which story two points may be pond 
Two points to be noted.  red much to our purpose, first that primogenitura or elder ship of birth (as I have said) was greatly respected by God, and according to that, all the descents and successions of kings were commonly among that people, for that ordinarily the eldest son ever succeeded his father in the crown of Jewry. And the second point is, that God would show even in this beginning, that yet this privilege was not so inviolable, but that upon just causes it might be broken, as it was by this his choice of jacob the younger, and rejecting Esau the Elder: and many times after in matter of government the same was practised by God himself, as when juda the fourth tribe and not Reuben the first & eldest 
Genes. 29 & 49.  was appointed by God to enjoy the sceptre and 
Exod. 1.  crown of the jews, as also when king David died, not his first second or third son, but his tenth in order, to wit, Solomon who was also the 
2. Reg. 5.  fourth that he had by Bersabee, was appointed 
1. Paral. 3.  for his successor.  
So that in very deed we have here both out 
Two cases resolved.  two cases, that were propounded in the beginning, overruled and determined by authority and example of holy writ itself, namely and first of all, that priority and propinquity of blood in succession, is greatly to be honoured regarded and preferred in all affairs of dignity and principality, and yet (which is the second point) are we not so absolutely & peremptorily bound thereunto always, but that upon just and urgent occasions that course may be altered and broken.  
Which licence or liberty is indeed, the only 
The remedy of inconveniences by succession.  (or at least wise) the most principal remedy for such inconveniences as do or may ensue of the course of succession, which inconveniences as before I showed to be far less and fewer than are wont to follow of bare election alone, yet did I confess also, that some did or might fall out, as namely that the person who by succession of blood is next, may be unable or unfit or pernicious to govern, in which cases the remedy is (as before hath been declared) either to help and assist; him by laws directions and wise councils, if he be capable thereunto or else to remove him and take in another of the same blood royal (though further of in degree or propinquity) in his place.  
And this is and hath been the custom and practice of all kingdoms and commonwealths from the beginning, since succession hath been established among them, as afterwards I shall demonstrate unto you by great store of evident examples and presidents, & by this means we come to remedy the difficulties and inconveniences of both kinds of making our kings and princes, which are election, and succession, as hath been said: for by succession we do remedy the inconveniences and dangers before mentioned of bare election, to wit of 
Election & succession do help the 〈◊〉 thothen  strife, banding, ambition, and the like: and by this other mean of adding also election consent and approbation of the realm to succession, we remedy the inconveniences of bare succession alone, which inconveniences are principally, that some un-apt impotent or evil prince may be offered some times to enter by priority of blood, whereof the realm may deliver itself, by this other means of not admitting him, so as election by succession, and succession again by election is salved, & the one made a preservative and treacle to the other: & this is the wisdom and high policy left by God and nature, to every common wealth, for there own conservation and maintenance, and every man that is of reason and judgement, and void of passion will not only allow, but also highly commend the same.  
Now then to answer in particular to the two questions made at the beginning of this 
Answer to the 〈◊〉 principal questions  speech, to wit, what is to be attributed to succession alone, and secondly what interest a prince hath thereby to any crown, before he be crowned or admitted by theon cmon weath: To the first I say, that to succession alone or 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉  priority of blood only, great honour, reverence, and respect ought to be borne, as before hath been declared, for that it is the principal circumstance and condition which leadeth us to the next succession of the crown infallibly, and without all strife: if his propinquity be clear and evident, and that other necessary circumstances and conditions do concur also in the same person, which conditions were appointed and set down at the same time, and by the same authority that this law of succession was established, for that both the one & the other of thes two points, were ordained by the common wealth, to wit that the elder and first in blood should succeed, and that he should be such a person as can and will govern to the public weal of all, as often and largely before hath been avouched and proved.  
To the second question I answer, that an heir apparent to a crown before his coronation 
What an heir apparent is before 〈◊〉 coronation  and admission by the realm, if he have the conditions before required, hath the same interest to the kingdom, which the king of Romans, or Caesar hath to the german empire after his election and before he be crowned: or to use a more familiar example to English men, as the Mayor of London hath to the mairalrie, after he is chosen and before he be admitted, or have taken his oath. For as this man in 〈◊〉 is not truly mayor, nor hath not his jurisdiction before his oath and admission, nor the other is properly Emperor before he be crowned, so is not an heir apparent, truly king though his predecessor be dead, and he next in succession, until he be crowned or admitted by the common wealth.  
another example is there in marriage also 
Examples of tnatiage.  whereby our matter is made more plain, for in this contract go both the betrothing and actual joining together of the parties in wedlock, the first is done by words de futuro or for the time to come, and is not properly marriage, but espousal only, the other is by words de presenti that is by mutual present consent given of both parties, and this second is only and properly true marriage, which two points are expressly represented in the state of an heir apparent and of a crowned king, for that the heir apparent by propinquity of blood, is only espoused or betrothed to the common wealth, for the time to come, and is married afterwards by present mutual consent, of both parties, in the contract and knitting up of the matter, at his coronation, by the oaths which either part maketh the one to take the other, & by putting on the ring and other wedding garments before mentioned in their coronations, by all which the heir apparent, (which before was but espouse,) is made now the true king and husband of the common wealth, which before he was not, by only succession, but only a betrothed spouse or designed king, as hath been declared.  
Wherefore it followeth also, that the common 
What respect is due to an heir apparent  wealth oweth no allegiance or subjection unto the heir apparent in rigour of justice, until he be crowned or admitted, though his predecessor be dead, for that in very deed until that time, he is not there true king & sovereign, though for better keeping of order & avoiding of tumults, all common wealths lightly that have their princes by succession, have ordained in thes later ages, that from the death of the former princes, all matters of government shall pass in the name of his next successor (if his succession be clear) and this (as I say) for avoiding of garboils, and under supposal of confirmation and approbation afterward of the common wealth, at his coronation, for which cause also, and for better account of years, it 
Why Princes do count their years from the: death of their predecessors.  was ordained that the beginning of the successors reign, should be reckoned from the day of the death of his predecessor, and not from the day of his coronation, as otherwise in rigour it ought to be, and as in old time it was accustomed to be as Girard secretary and chronicler of France, doth wisely note, in his third book of 
Girard de Haillan l. 3. de l'estate pag. 241.  the estate and affairs of France, to wit, that kings in old time were wotit to account the years of there reigns from the day only of there anointing and coronation.  
This point also that heirs apparent are not 
No heir apparent K. before his coronation.  true kings until their coronatiou, how just soever thet title of succession otherwise be, and though their predecessors be dead; it might be confirmed by many other arguments, but especially and above all others, for that the realm is asked again three times at their coronation, whether they will have such a manto be king, or no, as 
An evident Argument.  before hath been showed, which thing were in vain to ask if he were truly king, as Belloy sayeth, before his coronation.  
Again we see in all the forms and different manners of coronations, before recited, that after the prince hath sworn divers times to govern well and justly, then do the subjects take other oaths of obedience and allegiance and not before, which argueth that before they were not bound unto him by allegiance, and as for the princes of Ingland, it is expressly noted by English historiographers in their coronations, how that no allegiance is dew unto them before they be crowned, & that only it happened to Henry the fifth, among all other kings 
A rare example of King Henry V.  his predecessors to have this privilege, and this for his exceeding towardlynes, & for the great affection of the people towards him, that he had homage done unto him before his coronation, and oath taken. Whereof Polidor writeth in thes words: Princeps Henricus facto patris funere, concilium principum apud Westmonasterium convocandum 
Polydor. virg. lib. 22. hittor. Angliae in vita Henrici V  curate, in quo dum de rege creando more maiorum 〈◊〉, esse ubi, continuo aliquot Principes ultro in eius verba mirare coeperunt, quod benevolentiae officium nulli antea priusquam rex renu nciatus esset, praestitum constat, a 〈◊〉 Henricus ab ineunte aetate spem omnibus optimae inaolis fecit. Which in English is this, Prince Henry after he had finished his father's funetals, caused a parliament to be gathered at Westminster, where while consultation was had, according to the ancient custom of Ingland, about creating a new king, behold upon the sudden certain of the nobility of their own free wills. began to swear obedience and leyaltie unto him, which demonstration of love and Good will, is well known, that is was never showed to any Prince before, until he was declared king: so great was the hope that men had of the towardlynes of this Prince Henry, even from his tender age, thus far Polidor in his story of Ingland. And the very same thing expresseth john Stow also in his chonicle in thes words. To this noble Prince by 
Stow in the beginning of the life of king Henry V.  assent of the parliament all the states of the realm after three days offered to do fealtte before he was crowned, or had solemnized hu oath well and justly to govern the common wealth, which offer before was never found to be made to any Irince of Ingland, thus much Stow. in whose narration as also in that of Polidor it may be noted: that king Henry the fift was not called king until after his coronation, but onlv Prince, though his father king Henry the fourth had been dead now almost a month before, 
Notes of this act. 2.  and secondly that the parliament consulted the Rege creando more maiorum, (as Polidor his words, are) that is, of making a new king according to the ancient custom of their ancestors, which argueth that he was not yet king, though his father were dead, nor that the manner of our old English ancestors, was to account him so, before his admission.  

3.  Thirdly that this demonstration of good will of the nobility to acknowledge him for king before his coronation, and oath solemnized well and justly to govern the realm, was very extraordinary and of mere good wil 
4.  And last of all, that this was never done to any Prince before king Henry the fift, all which points do demonstrate, that it is the coronation and admission, that maketh a perfect and true king, whatsoever the title by succession be otherwise, & that except the admission of the common wealth be joined to succession, it is not sufficient to make a lawful king, and of the two, the second is of far more importance, to wit the consent and admission of the realm, then nearnes of blood by succession alove.  
This I might prove by many examples in 
Admission of more importance then succession.  Ingland itself where admission hath prevailed against right of succession, as in William Rufus that succeeded the Conqueror, and in king Henry the first his brother, In king Stephen, king john and others, who by only admission of the realm were kings, against the order of succession, as after more at large I shall show you in a particular speech which of this point, I shall make unto you, and very specially it may be seen, in the two examples before mentioned of the admission of the two kings Henry and Edward, both surnamed the fourth, whos entrances to the crown, if a man dowel consider, he shall find that both of them, founded the best part and most surest of their titles, upon the election consent, and good will of the people: yea both of them at their dying days having some remorse of conscience (as it seemed) 
See their lastwords to their friends in Sir though Moor & Stow.  for that they had caused so many men to die for maintenance of their several rights and titles, had no better way to appease there own minds, but by thinking that they were placed in that room by the voice of the realm, and consequently might lawfully defend the same, & punish such as went about to deprive them.  
Moreover you shall find, if you look into the doings of Princes in all ages, that such kings as were most politic, and had any lest doubt 
Why diver kings caused their sons to be crowned in there own days.  or suspicion of troubles about the title, after their deaths, have caused their sons to be crowned in their own days, trusting more to this, then to their title by succession, though they were never so lawfully & lineally descended. And of this I could allege you many examples out of divers countries but especially in France, since the last line of Capetus came unto that crown, for this did Hugh Capetus himself procure to be done, to Robert his eldest son, in his own days, and the like did king Robert procure for his younger son Henry the first, as Girard holdeth, and excluded 
Hirrd du Haillan lib. 6. hist.  his elder only by crowning Henry in his own days: Henty also did entreat the states of Frace 
an. 1001.  (as before you have hard) to admit & crown 
An. 1032. An. 1061.  Philip the first, his eldest son, while himself reigned, and this man's son Lewis lc Cros, did the same also unto two sons of his: first 
An. 1131.  to Philip, and after his death to Lewis the younger, both which where crowned in their father's life time, & this Lewis again the younger, which is the seventh of that name, for more assuring of his son named Philip the second, 
An. 1180.  entreated the realm to admit & crown him also in his own days, with that great solemnity, which in the former chapter hath been declared.  
And for this very same cause of security, it is not to be doubted, but that always the prince of Spain is sworn and admitted by the realm, during his father's reign, as before hath been said. The same consideration also moved king David, to crown his son Solomon in 
3. Reg. 1.  his own days, as afterwards more in particular shallbe declared, and finally our king Henry also the second of Ingland, considering the alteration that the realm had made in admitting king Stephen, before him, against the order of lineal succession by propinquity of blood: 
Polyd. & Stow in vita Henrici 11.  and fearing that the like might happen also after him, caused his eldest son named, likewise Henry, to be crowned in his life time, so as ingland had two king Henry's living at one time, with equal authority, and this was done in the 16. year of his reign, and in the year of our lord 1170. but his devise had no good success, for that king Henry the younger made war sore after upon king Henry the elder, & had both the kings of France and Scotland, & many nobles of ingland and Normandy, to take his part, for which cause it is thought, that this thing hath never been put in practice again since that time in Ingland, but yet hereby it is evident, what the opinion of the world was in those days, of the force of coronation, and admission of the common wealth, & how little propinquity of blood prevaileth without that.  
And for more ample proof hereof and fuller 
The occasion of the next chapter.  conclusion of all the whole matter, I had thought to have laid down also in this place, some number of the most nororious examples, that I have read, (for I have read many) wherein the common wealth upon just occasions hath extended her authority to alter the natural course of succession by birth, but for that the thing requireth, some little study and looking over some notes, that I have taken out of stories, for help of memory: I shall defer it until our next meeting, at what time I shall by God's grace make this point very clear, and so end my whole discourse, for I see that I have been much longer then at the beginning I purposed and now I desire much to give place unto our temporal lawyer, here present, who (I doubt not) hath matter to say of more delectation & pleasure, than this, though you of your courtesies have done me so much savour as to hear me hitherto with patience and attention. Whereunto the whole company answered, that not with patience, but with great pleasure delight and contentation, they had hard him, and so they would do the temporal lawer also in his turn, but yet they desired him that nothing of this discourse might be omitted, but wholly finished, for that it gave very great satisfaction to all, and opened many important points unto them, which they had never thought of before, and with this they parted for that night every man unto his loging & habitation.   

HOW THE NEXT IN SUCCESSION BY PROPINQVITY OF BLOOD, HATH OFTEN times been put back, by the commonwealth, & others further of admitted in their places, even in those kingdoms where succession prevaileth, with many examples of the kingdoms of Israel, and Spain.  
CAP. VII.  
AT the next meeting the Civilian camein very pensive, as though his head had been full of study, whereof being asked the reason, he answered, that he had revolved many stories since his departure about the point which he promised to treat of, & that he had found such store and great variety of matter, as he knew 
The Civilian cloyed with copy.  not well where to begin, and much less where to end: for (quoth he) if I should begin with the 〈◊〉 kings before mentioned, it were infinite that might be alleged, and perhaps some man would say, they were over old, and far fetched examples, and cannot be precedents 
Obiectiens  to us in these ages, & if I lay before you the examples of Roman kings and emperors put in and out, against the law and right of succession: the same men perhaps will answer, that it was by force, and injury of mutinous soldiers, whereunto that common wealth was greatly subject. And if I should bring forth any precedents and examples of holy scriptures, some other might chance to reply, that this was by particular privilege, wherein God almighty would deal and dispose of things against the ordinary course of man's law, as best liked himself, whose will is more than law, and whose actions are right itself, for that he is lord of all, and to be limited by no rule, or law of man, but yet that this is not properly the act of a common wealth as our question demanndeth.  
Thus (I say) it may be, that some man would reply, and therefore having store enough of plain and evident matter, which hath no exception, for that it hath happened in settled commonwealths, & those 〈◊〉 home, where the law of succession is received and established, to wit, in Spain, France, and Ingland: I shall retire myself to them alone: but yet putting 
The example of the jew 3. Reg. 8.  you in mind before I pass any further, that it is a matter much to be marked how god dealt in this point with the people of Israel, at the beginning, after he had granted to them, that they should hauve the same government of kings, that other nations round about the had, whos kings did ordinarily reign by succession as ours do at this day, and as all the kings of the jews did afterwards, and yet this notwith standing, God at the beginning, to wit, at the very entrance of their first kings, would show plainly that this law of succeeding of the one the other, by birth and propinquity of blood, (though for the most part, it should prevail) yet that it was not so precisely necessary, but that upon just causes it might be altered.  
For proof whereof, we are to consider, that albeit he made Saul a true and lawful king over the Jews, & consequently also gave him all kingly privileges benefits and prerogatives belonging to that degree and state, whereof one 
King Saul.  principal (as you know) is to have his children succeed after him in the crown: yet after his death God suffered not any one of his generation to succeed him, though he left behind him many children, and among others Is boseth a prince of 40. years of age whom Abner the general 
2. Reg. 2. & 21.  captain of that nation, with eleven tribes followed for a time, as their lawful lord and master by succession, until God checked them for it, and induced them to reject him though heir apparent by descent, and to cleave to David newly elected king, who was a stranget by birth, & no kyne at all to the king deceased.  
And if you say here that this was for the 
An objection ansevered.  sin of Saul, whom God had rejected, I do confess it, but yet this is nothing against our purpose, for that we pretend not that a prince that is next in blood can justly be put back, except it be for his own defects, or those of his ancestors. And moreover I would have you consider, that by this it is evident, that the fault of the father may prejudicate the sons right to the crown, albeit the son have no part in the fault, as we may see in this example not only of Isboseth that was punished and deprived for the offence of Saul his father (not with standing he had been proclaimed king as hath been said) but also of jonathas Saules other son, who was so good a man, and so much praised in holy scripture, & yet he being slain in war, and leaving a son named Miphiboseth 
2. Reg. 9  he was put back also, though by nearnes of blood he had great interest in the succession as you see, and much before David.  
But David being placed in the crown by 
King David made by election  election, free consent, & admission of the people of Israel, as the scripture plainly testifieth (though by motion and direction of God himself) 
2. Reg. 2. & 5.  we must confess, and no man I think will deny, but that he had given unto him there which, all kingly privileges pre-eminences and regalities, even in the highest degree, as was convenient to such a state, and among other, the scripture expressly nameth, that in particular it was assured him by God, that his seed should regine after him: yea and that for ever, but yet 
Psal. 131.  we do not find this to be performed to any 
2. Paral. 6.  of his elder sons (as by order of succession it should seem to appertain) no nor to any of their offspring or descents, but only to Solomon, which was his younger and tenth son, and the fourth only by Bersabce, as before hath been touched.  
True it is, that the scripture recounteth how Adonias David's elder son, that was of rare beauty & a very godly young prince, seeing his father 
Adonias the elder son relected.  now very old & impotent, & to lie on his death bed, & himself heir apparent by antiquity of blood, after the death of Absalon, his elder brother that was slain before, he had determined to have proclaimed himself heir apparent in jerusalem before his father died, & for that purpose had ordained a great assembly & banquet, had called unto it both the high priest Abiathar, & divers of the clergy, as also the general 
3. Reg. 1.  captain of all the army of Israel named joab. With other of the nobility and with than all the rest of his brethren; that were sons to king David, saving only Solomon, together with many other princes & great men, both spiritual & temporal of that estate, and had prepared for 'em a great feast as I have said, meaning that very day to proclaim himself heir apparent to the crown, and to be crowned, as in deed by succession of blood it appertained unto him: and this he attempted so much the rather, by 
The motives of Adonias.  council of his friends, for that he saw the king his father very old and impotent, and ready to die, and had taken no order at all for his successor, and moreover Adonias had understood, how that Bersabee salomon's mother had some hope to have her son reign after David, upon a certain promise that David in his youth had made unto her thereof, as also she had in the special favour and friendship which Nathan the Prophet, and Sadoc the priest (who could do much with the old king David) did bear unto her son Solomon, above all the rest of his brethren.  
hereupon (I say) these two that is to say, Queen Bersabee & Nathan the Prophet, coming 
〈◊〉 to King David to make Solomon his successor.  together to the old man, as he lay on his bed, and putting him in mind of his promise, and oath made to Bersabee for the preferment of her son, and showing besides how that Adonias without his order and consent, had gathered an assembly to make himself king, even that very day (which did put the old king in very great fear and anger) and further also telling him (which pleased him well) quoth oculs 
3. Reg. 1.  totius Isreal in eum respicerent, ut indicaret eyes, quis sederet in solio suo post ipsum: that is, that the eyes of all Israel were upon him to see whom he would commend unto them, to sit in his seat after him, which was as much to say, as that the whole common wealth referred it to his choice, which of his sons should reign after him.  
Upon these reasons and persuasions (I say) the good old king was content that they should 
The coronation of Solomon.  take Solomon out of hand, and put him upon the kings own mule, and carry him about the streets of jerusalem, accompanied which his 
〈◊〉. Reg. 1.  guard and court, and crying which sound of trumpets Vivat Rex Solomon, and that Sadoc, the priest should anoint him, and after that he should be brought back, and placed in the royal throne in the palace, and so in deed he was: at what time king David himself being not able through impotency, to rise out of his bed, did him honour and reverence from the place where he lay: for so saith the scriptures aderavit rex in lectulo suo, king David adored his son Solomon thus crowned, even from his bed, all which no doubt though it may seem to have been wrought by human means and policy, yet must we confess that it was principally by the special instinct of God himself, as by the sequel and success we see, so that hereby also we are taught, that these & like determinations of the people, magistrates, 
A point to be noted.  & commonwealths, about admitting or refusing of princes to reign or not to reign over them, when their designments are to good ends, and for just respects and causes, are allowed also by God, and oftentimes, are his own special dirftes and dispositions, though they seem to come from man.  
Whereof no one thing can give a more evident 
The manner of admission of the prince Roboam.  proof, then that which ensued afterward to prince Roboam, the lawful son and heir of this king Solomon, who after his father's death coming to Sichem where all the people of Israel were gathered together, for his coronation, and admission, according to his right by succession. For until that time we see he was 
3. Reg. 12.  not accounted true king, though his father was dead, and this is to be noted, the people began to propose unto him certain conditions, for taking away of some hard and heavy impositions, laid upon them by Solomon his father, (an evident precedent of the oath and conditions that princes do swear unto in thes days at their coronation) whereunto when Roboam refused to yield, ten tribes of the twelve refused to admit him for their king, but chose rather one jeroboam Roboam's servant, that was a mere stranger and but of poor parentage, 
3. Reg. 11.  & made him there lawful king, & God allowed thereof as the scripture in express words doth testify: and when Roboam that took himself to be openly injuried here by, would by arms have pursued his title, and had gathered together an army of a hundred and four score thousand chosen soldiers (as the scripture 
5. Reg. 12. & 21.  sayeth) to punish thes rebels as he called them, & to reduce thes 10 tribes to their due obedience of their natural prince: God appeared unto one Semeia a holy man, & bade him go to the camp of Roboam, and tell them plainly that he would not have them to fight against their brethren, that had chosen an other king, but that every man should go home to his house, and live quietly under the king, which each party had, and so they did, and this was the end of that tumult, which God for the sins of Solomon had permitted and allowed of. And thus much by the way I thought good to touch out of holy scripture, concerning the jewish commonwealth, even at the beginning, for that it may give light to all the rest which after I am to create of, for if God permitted and allowed this in his own common wealth, that was to be the example and pattern of all others, that should ensue: no doubt but that he approveth also the same in other realms when just occasions are offered, either for his service, the good of the people and realm, or else for punishment of the sins and wickedness of some princes, that the ordinary line of succession be altered.  
Now then to pass on further, and to begin with the kingdoms of Spain, supposing 
Four races of Spanish Kings.  ever this ground of God's ordinance, as hath been declared: first I say, that Spain hath had three or four races or descents of kings, as France also and Ingland have had, and the first race was from the Goths, which began their reign in Spain after the expulsion of the 
Ambros. moral. Lib. 11. 〈◊〉. c. 12.  Romans, about the year of Christ 416. to whom the Spaniard referreth all his old nobility, as the french man doth to the Germane franks, and the English to the Saxons, which entered France and Ingland in the very same age, that the other did Spain, & the race of Gothysh kings endured by the space of 300. years until Spain was lost unto the Moors.  
The second race is from Don Pelayo that was chosen first king of Asturias, and of the mountain 
2. Race.  country of Spain, after the destruction thereof by the Mootes, about the year of Christ 〈◊〉. as before hath been touched, which race 
Ambros. moral. lib. 13. c. 3  continued & increased, & added kingdom unto kingdom for the space of other three hundred years, to wit until the year of Christ 1034. when Don Sancho may or king of Navarra 
Moral. lib. 37. e. 42. 43. 44.  at unto his power, the Earldom also of Arragon and Castilia, and made them kingdoms, and divided them among his children, and to his second son, named Don Fernando, surnamed afterward the great he gave not only the said Earldom of Castilia with title of kingdom, but by mariing also of the sister of Don Dermudo king of Leon, and Asturias, he joined all those kingdoms together, & so began from that day forward the third race of the kings of 
3. Race.  Navarre to reign in castle, and so endured for syvehundred years until the year of Christ 1540 when the house of Austria entered to reign there, by marriage of the daughter and heir of 
Garibay lib 20. c. 〈◊〉  Don Ferdinando surnamed the Catholic, and this was the fourth race of Spanish kings after the Romans, which endureth until this day. 
4. 〈◊〉   
And albeit in all thes four races and ranks 
Examples of the first race.  of royal descents, divers examples might be alleged for manifest proof of my purpose: yet will I not deal which the first race, for that it is evident by the counsels of Toledo before alleged (which were holden in that very time) that in those days express election, was joined with succession, as by the deposition of king Suintila and putting back of all his children: as also by the election & approbation of king Sisinando that was further of by succession, hath been insinuated before, & in the fift council of that age in Toledo, it is decreed expressly in these words: Si quis talia meditatus fuerit (talking of pretending to be king) quem nec electio omnium 
Concil. Tol. 3. c. 3.  perficit, nec Gothicae gentis nobilitas ad hunc honoris apicem trahit: sit consortio Catholicorum privatus, & divino anathemate condemnatus. If any man shall imagine (said thes fathers) or go about to aspire to the kingdom, whom the election & choice of all the 〈◊〉, doth not make perfect, not the nobility of the Gothish nation, doth draw to the height of this dignity: let him be deprived of all Catholic society, and damned by the curse of almighty God, by which words is insinuated, that not only the nobility of Gothish blood, or nearness by succession was required for the making of their king, but much more the choice or admission of all the realm, wherein this council putteth the perfection of his title.  
The like determination was made in an other council at the same place, before this that I have alleged, & the words are these. Nullus 
Conc. tol. 4. cap. 74.  apud nos presumptione regnum arripiat, sed defuncto in pace principe, optimates gentis cum sacerdotibus successorem regni communi concilio constituant. Which in English is thus, let no man with us snatch the kingdom by presumption, but the former Prince being dead in peace, let the nobility of the nation, together with the Priests and clergy, appoint the successor of the kingdom, by common council, which is, as much to say as if he had said, let no man enter upon the kingdom by presumption of succession alone, but let the Lords temporal and spiritual, by common voice, see what is best for the weal public.  
Now then, according to thes ancient decrees, albeit in the second race of Don Pelayo, the 
Examples of the 2. race.  law of succession by propinquity of blood, was renewed, and much more established then before, as the ancient bishop of Tuys and Molina, 
Episcop. Tuyens l. 1. histoin. Ludou. de Molin. li. de hared.  and other spanish writers do testify: yet that the next in blood was oftentimes put back by the common wealth upon just causes, thes examples following shall testify, as briefly recounted as I can possibly.  
Don Pelayo died in the year of our Lord 737. 
King Don Pelayo.  and left a son named Don Favila, who was king after his father, and reigned two years only. After whose death, none of his children were admitted for king, though he left divers, as all writers do testify. But as Don Lucas the Bishop of Tuy a very ancient author writeth, Aldefonsus Catholicus ab univer so populo Gothorum 
Ambros Mor 1. 13. cap. 6. 9 10.  eligitur, that is (as the chronicler Moralis doth translat in spanish) Don Alonso surnamed the Catholic, was chosen to be king by all voices of the Gothish nation. This Don Alonso was son in law to the former king Favila, as Morales sayeth, for that he had his daughter Erneenesenda in marriage, & he was preferred before the kings own sons, only for that they were young & un-able to govern, as the said historiographer testifieth. And how well this fell out for the common wealth and how excellent a king this Don Alonso proved, Morales showeth at large, from the tenth chapter of his thirteenth book until the 17. and Sebastianus Bishop of Salamança, 
Sebast. Episc- Salam in hift. Hisp.  that lived in the same time, writeth that of his valiant acts he was surnamed the great.  
To this famons Don Alonso, succeeded his son Don Fruela the first of that name, who was a 
K. Don Alonso y Dö fruela.  noble king for 10. years space, and had divers excellent victories against the Moors, but afterward declining to tyranny, he became hate full to his subjects, and for that he put to death wrongfully his own brother Don Vimerano, a Prince of excellent parts and rarely beloved of the Spaniards, he was himself put down, and 
Moral. li 13. cap. 17 An. 768.  put to death by them in the year of Christ 768. And albeit this king left two goodly children behind him, which were lawfully begotten upon his Queen Dona Munia, the one of them a son called Don Alonso, & the other a daughter called Dona Ximea: yet for the hatred 
Many breaches of succession.  conceived against their father, neither of them was admitted by the realm to succeed him, but rather his cozen german, named Don Aurelio brother's son to Don Alonso the catholic, was 
Moral. e. 21. King Don Aurelio.  preferred, and reigned peaceably six years, and then dying without issue, for that the hatred of the spaniards, was not yet ended against the memory of king Fruela, they would not yet admit any of his generation, but rather excluded them again the second time, and admitted a brother in law of his, named Don Silo, that was married to his sister Dona Adosinda daughter to 
King Don Sile.  the foresaid noble king catholic Alonso. So that here we see twice the right heirs of king Don Fruela for his evil government were put back.  
But Don Silo being dead without issue, as also 
King Don Alonso the chaste.  Don Aurelio was before him, and the Spaniards anger against king Fruela being now well assuaged, they admitted to the kingdone his foresaid son, Don Alonso the younger, surnamed afterward the chaste, whom now twice before they had put back, as you have seen, but now they admitted him, though hisreigne at the first endured very little, for that a certain bastard uncle of his, named Don Mauregato by help of 
More I 15. cap. 25.  the moors put him out, and reigned by force 6. years, and in the end dying with out issue, the matter came in deliberation again, whether the king Don Alonso the chaste that yet lived, and had been hidden in a monastary of Galitia, during the time of the tyrant, should return again to govern, or rather that his cozen 
A strange deliberation.  german Don vermudo son to his uncle, the Prince Vimerano (whom we showed before to have been slain by this man's father king Fruela) should be elected in his place. And the realm of Spain determined the second, to wit, that Don Vermudo though he were much further of, by propiuquity of blood, and with in ecclesiastical order also (for that he had been made deacon) should be admitted, partly for that he was judged for the more valiant and able Prince, than the other, who seemed to be made more acquainted now with the life of 
Great authority of common wealth.  monks, and religious men, then of a king, having first been brought up among them for 10. or 12. years space, while Don Aurelio and Don Silo reigned after the death of his father king Fruela, and secondly again other six years, during the reign of the tyrant Mauregato, for which cause, they esteemed the other to be fit, as also for the different memories of there two father's king Fruela and prince Vimerano, whereof the first was hateful, & the other most dear, as before hath been declared, neither do any of the four ancient Bishops historiographers of Spain, to wit, that of Toledo, Besa, Salamanca or Ture, that lived all about those days & wrote the story, reprehend this fact of the realm of spain, or put any doubt whether it were lawful or no for the causes before recited.  
True it is, that after three years reign, this king Vermudo being weary of kingly life, and 
K. Alonso the chaste raineth the second tyme.  feeling some scruple of conscience, that being deacon, he had forsaken the life ecclesiastical, and married (though by dispensation of the pope as Morales sayeth) and entangled himself with the affairs of a kingdom, he resigned 
Moral e. 28. & 29. An. 791.  willingly the government unto his said cozen, Don Alonso the chaste, and himself lived after a private life for divers years, but this Don Alonso who now the fourth time, had been deprived of his succession, as you have seen, deceived the expectation of the spaniards, that accounted him a monk, for he proved the most valiant and excellent king that ever that nation had, both for his virtue, valour, victories, against the moors, building of towns, castles, churches, Monasteries, and other such works, of Christianity, as Morales recounteth: and be reigned after this his last admission, one and fifty years, & had great friendship with king Charles the great of France, who lived in the same time with him. And this man among other most noble exploits so tamed the Moors of his country, as during his days, he never paid 
Moral. li. 13. cap. 45 46. Anno 842.  that cruel and horrible tribute which before & after was paid by the christians to the Moors, which was a hundred young maidens and fifty sons of Gentlemen, every year to be brought 
A horrible tribute.  up in the religion of Mahomet, among those infidel tyrants. And finally this man after so much affliction came to be one of the most renowned Princes of the world.  
After this Don Alonso, who left no children, for that he would never marry, but lived all his life in chastity, there succeeded to him by election, his nephew named Don Ramiro son to the former said king Don Vermudo the deacon, that 
King Don Ramiro. 1 by election.  gave this man the crown, as you have hard, of whose election morales writeth these words. Muerto el Rey Don Alonso el casto, fue eligido por los 
Moral e. 51.  〈◊〉 y grandes del reyno, el Rey Don Ramiro primero deste number, hyio del Rey Don vermudo el diaeono. That is, the king Don Alonso the chaste being dead, there was chosen king by the Prelates & nobility of the realm, Don Ramiro the first of this name, son of king Vermudo the deacon, who resigned his crown to Don Alonso, and it is to be noted, that albeit this Don Ramiro was next in blood to the succession, after the death of his uncle Don Alonso without children, yet was he chosen by the states as here it is said in express words.  
Moreover it is to be noted, that albeit this author Ambrosio Morales and other spanish writers do say that in the time of this king Ramiro, the law of succession by propinquity in blood was so revived and strongly confirmed, that as the kingdom of Spain was made as Maiorasgo 
The kingdom of Spain a Maiorasgo.  as he termeth it, which is, an inheritance so entailed and tied only to the next in blood, as there is no possibility to alter the same, and that from this time forward the king always caused his eldest son to be named king or Prince, & so ever to be sworn, by the realm & nobility, yet shall we find this ordinance and succession oftentimes to have been broken upon several considerations, as this author himself in that very chapter, confesseth.  
As for example, after four descents from this man, which were Don Ordonio the first, this man's son, and Don Alonso the third, Don Garzia and Don Ordonio the second, all four kings by orderly succession, it happened that in the year 
K. Don Ordonio. An. 924.  of christ 924. Don Ordonio the second, dying, left four sons and one daughter lawfully begotten, and yet the state of spain displaced them all, and gave the kingdom to their uncle Don Fruela second brother to there father Don Ordonio, and morales sayeth that there appeareth 
Moral. 1. 16. cap. 1. An. 924.  no other reason hereof, but only for that these sons of the king diseased were young, and not so apt to govern well the realm as their uncle was.  
But after a years reign, this king Fruelae died also, & left divers children at man's estate, and then did the spaniards as much against them, as they had done for him before, against the children of his elder brother. For they put them all by the crown, & chose for their king, Don Alonso the fourth which was eldest son 
Don Alonso 4.  to Don Ordonio the second, before named, that had been last king saving one, and this man also (I mean Don Alonso the fourth) leaving afterward his kingdom and betaking himself to a religious habit, offered to the common wealth of spain, his eldest son lawfully begotten named Don Ordonio to be there king, but they refused him, and took his brother (I mean this king's brother) and uncle to the young Prince, 
Don Ramiro Moral. lib. 19 cap. 20. An. 930.  named Don Ramiro, who reigned 19 years, and was a most excellent king, and gained Madrid from the Moors, though noted of cruelty, for imprisoning & pulling out the eyes afterward of this king Don Alonso the 4. and all his children and nephews, for that he would have left his habit, and returned to be king again. But this fact, my author Morales excuseth, saying that it was requisire for peace and safety of the realm, so as here you see two most manifest alterations of lineal succession together by order of the common wealth.  
Furthermore, after this noble king Don Ramiro the second, succeeded as heir apparent to the crown his elder son, Don Ordonio the third, 
Don Ordonio 3. An. 950.  of this name, in the year of our Saviour 950. but this succession endured no longer then unto his own death, which was after 7. years, for than albeit he left a son named el enfante Don Vermudo, yet he was not admitted, but rather his brother, Don Sancho the first of this name, surnamed el Gordo, who was uncle to the young 
Don Sancho 1.  Prince, and the reason of this alteration. Morales giveth in thes words: el succeder en el regno, all hermano, fue por la racon ordinaria de ser el 
Moral. l. 16. cap. 29 An. 950.  enfante, Don Vermudo ninno y no bastante para el govierno y difença de la terra. Which is, the cause why the king's brother and not his son succeeded in the crown, was for the ordinary reason (so often before alleged) for that the infant or young Prince Vermudo, was a little child, and not sufficient for government and defence of the country.  
Truth it is, that after this Don Sancho had reigned, and his son and heir named Don Ramiro the third, after him, for the space of 30. years in all, then was this youth Don Vermudo 
Mor. l. 17. c. 1. 2. 3. 4.  (that is now put back) called by the realm to the succession of the crown, and made king by the name of king Vermudo the second, who left after him Don Alonso, the 5. and he again his son Don Vermudo the third, who marrying his sister Dona Sancha (that was his heir) unto Don Fernando, first earl, & then king of Castille, (who was second son to Don Sancho Mayor king of Navarr as before hath been said) he joined by thes means the kingdoms of Leon and Castille together, which were separate before, 
The end of the race of Don Pelayo.  and so ended the line of Don Pelayo, first Christian king of Spain, after the entrance of the Moors, which had endured now three hundredth years, and the blood of Navarr entered as you see, and so continued therein until the entrance of those of Austria, as before hath been said, which was almost 5. hundredth years together.  
And thus much I thought good to note out 
Of the disceves following.  of the stories of Spain, for this first descent of the spanish kings, after the entrance of the Moors, neither mean I to pass much further, both for that it would be over long, as also for that mine author, Morales, who is the most diligent that hath written the chronicles of that nation, endeth here his story with king Vermudo the third and last of the Gothish blood.  
Notwithstanding if I would go on further, there would not want divers evident examples 
Spanish examples in the second descent.  also to the same purpose, which Stephen Garabay an other chonicler of Spain, doth touch in the continuation of this story, whereof for examples sake only I will name two or three among the rest.  
And first about the year of Christ 1201. there 
〈◊〉. 1201  was a marriage made by king john of Ingland for Dona Blancha his niece, that is to say, the daughter of his sister Dame Elinor, and of Don Alonso the 9 of that name king and Queen of spain, which Blancha was to marry the Prince of France, named Lewis, son & heir to king Philip surnamed Augustus, which Lewis was afterwards 
Carib. li. 11. cap. 12 & 37.  king of France by the name of Lewis the 8. & was father to Lewis the 9 surnamed the saint.  
This lady Blancha was niece as I have said, unto king john and to king Richard, the first of Ingland, for that her mother lady Elinor, was their sister, and daughter to king Henry the second, and king john made this marriage, there by to make peace with the French, and was content to give for her dowrey (for that he 
Lady Elinor an English woman. Q. of Spain.  could not tell how to recover them again) all those towns & countries which the said king Philip had taken upon the English, by this kings evil government in Normandy and Gasconie, and more over, promiss was made, that if the Prince Henry of spain (that was the only brother to the said Lady Blanch) should die without issue (as after he did) then this lady should succeed in the crown of Spain also, but yet afterward the state of Spain would not perform this, but rather admitted her younger sister Dona Berenguela, married to the Prince of Leon, and excluded both Blanch and her son the king S. Lewis of France, against the evident right of succession, and propinquity of 
Garib. l. 13. cap. 10 An 1207.  blood, & the only reason they yielded hereof was not to admit strangers to the crown, as Garabay testifieth.  
This happened then, and I do note by the way, that this Dona Berenguela second daughter of Queen Elinor the English woman, was married (as hath been said) to the Prince of Leon, and had by him Don Fernando the third of that name, king of Castilia, surnamed also the saint, so as the two daughters of an English Queen, had 
An English Qgrand mother to two king saints at once.  two kings saints for their sons at one time, the elder of France and the younger of Spain.  
After this again, about threescore years the Prince of Spain named Don Alonso, surnamed the la cerda, for that he was borne with a great 
another breach of succession.  gristle hear on his breast called cerda in spanish, which Don Alonso, was nephew to the king Fernando the saint, & married with the daughter of saint Lewis king of France, named also Blantha as her grand mother was, and had by her two sons called Alonso & Hernando de la cerda as the Prince their father was named, which father of there's dying before the king, the grand father left them commended to the realm as lawful heirs apparent to the crown, yet for that a certain uncle of there's named Don Sancho younger brother to their father which Do Sancho was surnamed afterward, el bravo for his valour and was a great warrior, and more like to manage well the matters of war than they: he was mad heir apparent of Spain and they put back in their grand father's time, and by his and the realms consent, (their father as I have said being dead) and this was done in a general parliament holden at Segovia, in the year 1276. and 
The Cerdas put bark from the crown 1276.  after this, Don Sancho was made king in the year 1284. and the two Princes put into prison, but afterward at the sure of there uncle king Philip the third of France, they were let out again and endued with certain lands, and so they remain unto this day, and of thes do come the Dukes of Medina Celi, and all the rest of the house of Cerda, which are of much nobility in Spain at this time, and king Philip that raineth cometh of Don Sancho the younger brother.  
Not long after this again, when Don Pedro surnamed the cruel king of Castille, was driven out, and his bastard brother Henry the second set up in his place, as before hath been mentioned: the Duke of Lancaster john of Gant, having 
Garabay l. 15. c. 1. an. 1363.  married Dona Constantia the said king Peter's daughter & heir, pretended by succession the said crown of Castille, as in deed it appertained unto him; but yet the state of spain denied it flatly, and defended it by arms, and they prevailed against john of Gant, as did also the race 
Many alterations of lineal descent.  of Henry the bastard, against his lawful brother, & the race of Don Sancho the uncle, against his lawful nephews, as hath been showed, and that of Dona Berenguela against her elder sister, all which races do reign unto this day, & thes three changes of the true live, happened with in two ages, and in the third and principal descent of the Spanish kings, when this matter of succession was most assuredly and perfectly established, and yet who will deny but that the kings of Spain who hold by the later titles at this day, be true and lawful kings.  
Well, one example will I give you more out of the kingdom of Portugal, and so will I make an end with thes countries. This king Henry the bastard last named king of Spain, had a son that succeeded him in the crown of Spain, named john the first, who married the daughter and heir named Dona Beatrix, of king Fernando the first of Portugal, but yet after the death of the said King Fernando, the states of Portugal would never agree to admit him for their king, for not subjecting themselves by that means to the Castilians, and for that cause they rather took for their king, a bastard 
Don john the first a bastard made king of Portugal.  brother of the said late king Don Fernando, whose name was Don ivan, a youth of 20. years old who had been master of a militare order in Portugal named de avis, and so they excluded 
Garib. l. 15 cap 22. & li. 34. c. 39  Dona Beatrix Queen of Castille that was their lawful heir, and chose this young man, and married him afterwards to the lady Phillippe daughter of john of Gant Duke of Lancaster, by his first wife blanche, Duchess and heir of Lancaster, in whose right the kings of Portugal and their discendents do pretend unto this day a cerrayne interest to the house of Lancaster, which I leave to our temporal lawyer, to discuss but hereby we see what an ordinary matter it hath been in Spain and Portugal, to alter the line of next succession, upon any reasonable consideration, which they imagined to be for their weal public, and the like we shall find in France & Ingland, which even now I will begin to treat of.   

DIVERS OTHER EXAM'PLES OUT OF THE STATES OF FRANCE AND INGLAND, FOR proof that the next in blood are some times put back from succession, and how God had approved the same with good success.  
CAP. VIII.  
AS concerning the state of France, I have 
Of the state of france.  noted before, that albeit since the entrance of their first king Pharamont, with his Frankes, out of Germany, which was about the year of Christ 419. they have never had any stranger 
An. 419.  come to were there crown, which they attribute to the benefit of there law Salic, that for biddeth women to reign, yet among themselves have they changed twice there whole race and lineage of kings, once in the entrance of king Pepin, that put out the line of Pharamont, about the year 751. and again in the 
An. 751.  promotion of king Hugo Capetus. that put out the line of Pepin, in the year 988 so as they 
An. 988.  have had three descents and races of kings, as well as the spaniards, the first of Pharamont, the 2. of Pepin, and the 3. of Capetus, which endureth unto this present, if it be not altered now by the exclusion that divers pretend to make of the king of Navarr, and other Princes of the blood royal of the house of Bourbon.  
Wherefore as I did before in the spaniards, so I will here let pass the first rank of all of the french kings, for that some men may say perhaps, that the common wealth and law of 
Examples of the 2. rank of French Kings.  succession, was not so well settled in those days, as it hath been afterward, in time of king Pepin Charles the great and there discendantes, as also for that it were in very deed over tedious to examine and peruse all three ranks of kings in France, as you will say when you shall see what store I have to allege, out of the second rank only, which began with the exclusion and deposition of their lawful King Childerike the third, and election of king Pepin, as before you have heard at large declared in the third chapter of this discourse, & it shall not be need full to repeat the same again in this place.  
Pepin then surnamed, le brief, or the little, for his small stature (though he were a giant in deeds) being made king of France, by mere 
King Pepin by election An. 751.  election, in the year of Christ 751. after 22. kings that had reigned of the first line of Pharamont for the space of more than three hundredth years, and being so famous and worthy a king as all the world knoweth, reigned 18. years, & then left his states and kingdoms by succession unto his eldest son Charles surnamed afterward the great, for his famous and heroical acts. And albeit the whole kingdom of France appertained unto him alone, by the law of succession, as hath been said, his father 
K. Charles by election.  being king and he his eldest son: yet would the realm of France show their authority in his admission, which Girard setteth down in thes words, Estant Pepin decedé, les Francois esleurent 
Girard du Haillan l. 3. an. 768.  Rois, Charles & Carlomon, ses fils, ala charge, qu'ils partageroient entre eux, egalement, le royaume. Which is, king Pipin being dead, the french men chose for their kings his two sons, Charles and Carlomon, with condition, that they should part equally between them, the realm. Wherein is to be noted, not only the election of the common wealth, besides succession, but also the heavy condition laid upon the heir to part half of his kingdom with his younger brother, and the very same words hath Eginard an ancient French writer, 
Eginard Belfor. li, 2. cap. 5.  in the life of this Charles the great, to wit, that the French state in a public assembly, did chose two Princes to be their kings, with express condition to divide the realm equally, as Francis Belforest citeth his words, which two French authors (I mean Girard and Belforest) I shall use principally hereafter in the rest of my citations.  
After three years, that these two brethren had reigned together, king Carlomon the younger died, and left many sons, the elder whereof 
The uncle preferred before the nephew.  was named Adalgise, but Belforest sayeth, that the Lords ecclesiastical & temporal of France swore fidelity and obedience to Charles, without any respect or regard at all of the children of Carlomon who yet by right of succession, should have been preferred, & Paulus Emilius a latin writer, saith, proceres regni ad Carolum ultro venientes, regem eum totius Galliae salutarunt: 
Paul. mili hist. Franc.  that is, the nobility of the realm coming of their own accord, unto charles saluted him king of all France, whereby is showed, that this exclusion of the children of Carlomon, was not by force or tyranny, but by free deliberation of the realm.  
After Charles the great, reigned by succession 
King Lewis de bonnaire. An. 814.  his only son, Lewis the first, surnamed debonair of his courtesy, who entering to reign in the year 817. with great applause of all men, for the exceeding grateful memory of his father, was yet afterward at the pursuit principally of his own three sons, by his first wife; 
Girard l. 5 An. 834.  (which were Lothair, pepin, and Lewis) deposed; first in a council at Lions, and then again at Compeigne, and put into a monastery, though afterward he came to reign again, and his 
An. 840  fourth son by his second wife, (which son was named Gharles le chawe, for that he was bald) succeeded him, in the states of France, though after many battles against his eldest brother Lothaire, to whom by succession the same appertained.  
After Charles the bald, succeeded Lewis the second, surnamed le begue, for his stuttering, who was not eldest, but third son, unto his father, for the second died before his father, 
An. 878.  & the eldest was put by his succession, for his evil demeanour, this Lewis also was like to have been deprived by the states at his first entrance, for the hatred conceived against his father Charles 
Baudin en la Chroni que, pag. 119.  the bald, but that he calling a solemn parliament at Compeigne, as Girard saith, he made the people, clergy, and nobility many fair 
Girard l. 1 An. 879.  promises, to have their good wills. This Lewis the stuttering, left two bastard sons, by a concubine, 
Two bastards preferred.  who were called Lewis and Carlomon, as also he left a little infant, newly borne of his lawful wife, Adeltrude daughter to king Alfred of Ingland, which infant was king of France afterwards, by the name of Charles the simple, albeit not immediately after the death of his father, for that the nobles of France said, that they had need of a man to be king, & not a child, as Girard reporteth, & therefore the whole state of France, chose for their kings the two foresaid bastards, Lewis the third, and Carlomon the first of that name, jointly and they were crowned most solemnly & divided the whole realm between them, in the year of Christ 
An. 881.  881. and Queen Adeltrude with her child true heir of France, fled into Ingland to her father, and there brought him up for divers years, in which time she saw four or five kings reign in his place in France, one after the other, for breflv thus it passed.  
Of thes two bastard kings the elder named Lewis reigned but four years, & died without issue, the second that is Carlomon lived but one year after him, and left a son called also Lewis, which succeeded in the kingdom by the name of Lewis the fift, and surnamed Faineant 
Lewis faineant K. of France An. 886.  for his idle and sloth full life. For which as also for his vicious behaviour, and in particular for taking out and marrying a Nun of the Abbey of S. Baudour at Chells, by Partis, he was deprived and made a monk in the Abbey of S. Denys, where he died, and in his place was chosen king of France, and crowned with great solemnity, Gharles the 4. Emperor of Rome surnamed le gros, for that he was fat and corpulent, 
Charles 4 le Gros. King of France.  he was nephew to Charles the bald, before mentioned, and therefore the French stories say, that he came to the crown of France partly by 
Girard. li. 5. An. 888  succession, and partly by election, but for succession, we see that it was nothing worth, for so much as Charles the simple the right heir, was alive in Ingland, whom it seemeth that the french men had quite forgotten, seeing that now they had not only excluded him three times already, as you have hard, but afterwards also again, when this gross Charles was for his evil government, by them deposed and deprived, not only of the kingdom of France but also of his Empire, which he had before he was king, & was brought into such miserable penury, as divers write, that he perished for want. At this time I say the states of France would not yet admit Charles the simple (though hither to his simplicity did not appear, but he seemed a goodly Prince) but rather they chose for king one Odo Earl of Paris and Duke of Angiers, and caused him to be crowned. 
Odo a king and after Duke of whom came Hugo Capetus.   
But yet after a few years, being weary of this man's government, and moved also some what with compassion towards the youth that was in Ingland, they resolved to depose Odo, and so they did while he was absent in Gascony, and called Charles the simple out of Ingland, to Paris, and restored him to the kingdom of France, leaving only to Odo for recompense, the state of Aquitaine, with title of a Duke: wherewith in fine, he contented himself, seeing that he could get no more. But yet his posterity by virtue of this election, pretended ever after a title to the crown of France, and never left it of, until at length by Hugo Capetus they got it, for Hugh descended of this king and Duke Odo.  
This king Charles then surnamed the simple, an English woman's son, as you have hard, being thus admitted to the crown of France, he took to wife an English woman, named Elgina or Ogin, daughter of king Edward the elder, by whom he had a son named Lewis, and himself being a simple man, as hath been said, was alured to go to the castle, of peronne in Picardy, where he was made ptisoner, and forced to resign his kingdom unto Ralph 
Ralph 1. King of France. An. 927.  king of Burgundye, and soon after he died through misery in the same castle, and his Queen Ogin fled into Ingland with her little son Lewis unto her uncle king Adelstan, as Queen Adeltrude had done before with her son unto king Alfred, and one of the chief in this action for putting down of the simple, was Count Hugh surnamed the great. Earl of Paris, father unto Hugo Capetus which after was king.  
But this new king Ralph, lived but three years after, and then the states of France considering the right title of Lewis the lawful child of king Charles the simple, which Lewis was commonly called now in France by the name of d'Outremer, that is beyond the sea, for that he had been brought up in Ingland: the said states being also greatly and continually solicited hereunto by the Ambassadors of king Adelstan of Ingland, and by William Duke of Normandy, surnamed long speer, great grand father to 
An. 929:  William the conqueror, who by the king of Ingland was gained also to be of the young prince's part: for these considerations (I say) they resolved to call him into France out of Ingland, as his father had been before him, and to admit and crown him king, and so they did, and he reigned 27. years and was a good Prince, & died peaceably in his bed the year of Christ, 945.  
This king Lewis d'Outremer left two sons behind him, the eldest was called Lothaire the 
Lewis 4. d'Outremer.  first, who succeeded him in the crown of France, and the second was named Charles whom he made Duke of Lorraine. Lothaire dying left one only son named Lewis as his grand father 
The true geyre of France excluded.  was who was king of France, by the name of Lewis the 5. and dying without issue after two years that he had reigned, the crown was to have gone by lineal succession unto his uncle Charles the duke of Lorraine, seconnd son to Lewis d'Outremer, as is evident, but the states of France did put him by it for mislike they had of his person, and did chose Hugo Capetus Earl of Paris, and so ended the second line of Pepin and of Charles the great, and entered the race of Hugo Capetus, which endurcth until this day, and the French stories do say, that this surname 
Hugh Capet otherwise Snatch cap 988  Capet, was given to him when he was a boy for that he was wont to snatch away his fellows caps from their heads, whereof he was termed Snatch cap, which some do interpret to be an abodement that he should snatch also a crown from the true owner's head in time, as afterwards we see it fell out, though yet he had it by election and approbation of the common wealth as I have said.  
And in this respect all the french chroniclers who otherwise are most earnest defenders of their law of succession, do justify t●is title of Hugo Capetus against Charles, for which cause Frances Belforest doth allege the saying of William Nangis, an ancient and diligent 
Belfor. li. 3. cap 1. An. 988.  chronicler of the Abbey of S. Denys in France, who defendeth king Capetus in these words. We may not grant in any case that Hugh Capet may 
Defence of Hugh Capetus title.  be esteemed an invader or usurper of the crown of France, seeing the lords Prelate's princes and governors of the realm did call him to this dignity, and chose him for their king and Sovereign Lord, thus much Nangis: upon which words Belforest saith as followeth, I have laid before you the words and censure of this good religious man for that they seem to me to touch the quick, for in very truth we cannot by any other means defend the title of Hugh Capet from Usurpation and felony, then to justify his coming to the crown by the consent and will of the common wealth, and in this I may well excuse me from inconstancy and contradiction to myself, that have so earnestly defended succession before, for he that will consider how and with what conditions I defended that, shall easily see also that I am not here contrary to the same, thus much Belforest.  
I Think it not a miss also to put down here some part of the oration or speech which the Ambassador that was sent at that time, 
The embassage of the states of France unto Char les of Lorraine.  from the state of France unto Charles of Lorraine, after their election of Hugh Capet, and Charles exclusion, did use unto him in their names, which speech Girard doth recount in these words.  
Every man knoweth (Lord Charles) that the succession of the crown and realm of 
Girard 1. 6 an. 988.  France according to the ordinary Laws and rights of the same, belongeth unto you, and not unto Hugh Capet now our king, but yet the very same laws which do give unto you this right of succession, do judge you also unworthy of the same, for that you have not endeavoured hitherto to frame your life and manners according to the prescript of those laws, nor according to the use & custom of your coumtrey of France, but rather have allied yourself with the Germane nation, our old enemies, and have acquainted yourself with their vile and base manners. Wherefore seeing you have forsaken & abandoned the ancient virtue sweetness and amity of the french, we have also abandoned and left you, and have chosen Hugh Capet for our king, and have put you back, and this without any scruple or prejudice of our consciences at all, esteeming it far better and more just to live under Hugh Capet the present posessor of the crown, with enjoying the ancient use of our laws, customs, privileges and liberties, then under you the inheritor by nearness of blood, in oppression, strange customs, and cruelty For even as those which are to make a 
Note this comparison.  voyage in a ship upon a dangerous sea, do not so much respect, whether the pilot which is to guided the stern, be owner of the ship or no, but rather whether he be skilful, valiant, and like to bring them in safety to their ways end, or to drown them among the waves: even so our principal care is, that we have a good Prince to lead and guided us happily in this way of civil and politic life, which is the end why princes were appointed, for that this man is fit to be our king.  
This message did the states of France send to Charles of Lorraine in defence of their doings, and with this he lost his succession for ever, and afterwards his life also in prison, and the French men thought themselves secure in conscience as you see, for doing the same, which God hath also since seemed to confirm, with the succession and happy success of so many noble and most christian kings as have issued out of this line of Hugo Capetus unto this day.  
And this spoken now of the second line of France, I take to be sufficient for proof 
Examples out of the third time of France.  of our purpose, without going any further, for that if we do but number these kings already named that have reigned in this second race, from king Pepin downwards unto Hugh Capet, (which are about 17. or 18. kings in 238. years) we shall find that not some few, but the most part of them did both enter and enjoy their crowns and dignities contrary to the law of lineal descent, and of next succession by blood. Whereof also there would not want divers examples in the third and last descent, since Hugo Capetus time, if we would pass further to examine the stories thereof. For not to go further down then to the very next descent after Hugh which was king Robert his son, Girard 
Girard li. 6. an. 1032  affirmeth in his story, that of his two sons which he had named Robert and Henry, Robert the elder was put back, and his younger brother Henry made king of France, & rained many years by the name of Henry the first, & 
K. Henry 〈◊〉. preferred before his elder brother.  this he sayeth happened partly for that Robert was but a simple man in respect of Henry, and partly also for that Henry was greatly favoured and assisted in this pretence, by Duke Robert of Normandy father to our William the conqueror, 
William conqueror how he came to be duke of Normandy.  and in recompense hereof, this king Henry afterward assisted the said William bastard son to Robert for the attaining of the dukedom of Normandy, after the death of the said Duke Robert his father, notwithstanding that Duke Robert had two lawful brothers a live at that time, whose names were Manger Archbishop of 
Girard 1. 6. Anno 1032. & 1037.  Rouen, and William Earl of Argues, in Normandy, who pretended by succession to be preferred But the states of Normandy at the request of Duke Robert, when he went to the holy land (in which journey he died) as also for avoiding of dissension and wars that other wise might ensue, were content to exclude the uncles and admit the bastard son, who was also assisted by the forces of the king of France as hath been said, so as no scruple it seemed there was in those days, either to prefer king Henry to the crown of France before his elder brother, or Duke William the bastard son to the Duchy of Normandy before his lawful uncles upon such dow considerations, as those states may be presumed to have had for their doings.  
I read also, that some years after, to wit in 
Sons excluded for the father's offences.  the year 1110. when Philip the first of France son and heir to this king Henry of whose solemn coronation you have hard before in the senenth chapter, was deceased, the people of France were so offended with his evil life and government, as divers were of opinion to disinherit 
Girard. lib. 7. An. 1110.  his son Lewis the sixth, surnamed le Gros, for his sake, and so was he like to have been indeed, as may appear by the chronicle 
Belfor. l. 4 c. 1. &. l. 5  of France, if some of his party had not caused him to be crowned in haste, and out of order, in Orleans, for preventing the matter.  
The like doth Philip Cominaeus in his story 
Commzus in comen tar. l. 1. in vita Ludovic. 11.  of king Lewis the eleventh declare, how that the state of France had once determined, to have disinherited his son Charles, named after the eight, and to put him back from his succession for their hatred to his father, if the said father had not died while the other was very young, as I noted before also, that it happened in king Henry the third of Ingland, who was once condemned by the Barons to be disinherited, for the fault of king john his father, and Lewis the princo of France chosen in his place, but that the death of king john did alter that course intended by the English nobility, so as this matter is nether new not unaccustomed in all foreign countries, and now will I pass also a little to our English stories, to see whether the like may be found in them or no.  
And first of all that the realm of Ingland hath had as great variety, changes, and diversity, in 
Examples of the realm of Ingland.  the races of their kings, as any one realm in the world, it seemeth evident, for that first of all, after the Britain's, it had Romans for their governors for many years, and then of them & their roman blood they had kings again of their own, as appeareth by that valiant king Aurelius Ambrose. Who resisted so manfully and prudently the saxons, for a time, after this they 
divers races of English Kings.  had kings of the saxon & English blood, and after them of the Danes, and then of the normans, & after them again of the French, & last of all, it seemeth to have returned to the Britain's again, in king Henry the 7. for that his father came of that race, and now you know there be pretendors of divers nations, I mean both of Scottish, Spanish, and Italian blood, so that Ingland is like to participate with all their neighbours round about them, & I for my part do feel myself much of the French opinion before alleged, that so the ship be well & happily guided, I esteem it not much important of what race or nation the pilot be, but now to our purpose.  
I mean to pass over the first and ancient ranks of kings, as well of the British & Roman, as also of the Saxon races, until king Egbert the 
Thename of Ingland and English.  first of this name, king of the west Saxons, and almost of all the rest of Ingland beside, who therefore is said to be properly the first monarch of the Saxon blood, and he that first of all, commanded that realm to be called Ingland, which ever since hath been observed.  
This man Egbert being a young gentleman 
King Egbert the first monarch of Ingland.  of a noble house in the west parts of Ingland, was had in jealousy by his king Britricus (who was the 16. King from Cerdicius, first king of the west Saxons, as he was also the last of his blood. And for that he suspected, that this Egbert, for his great prowess, might come in time to be chosen king, he banished him into France, where he lived divers years, and was a captain under the famous king Pepin that was father to Charles the great, and hearing afterwards that king Britricus was dead, he returned into Ingland where Polidor sayeth, omnium consensu 
Polidor hist. aug. li. 4. in fine.  rex creature: that he was created or chosen king, by consent and voice of all men, though yet he were not next by propinquity of blood royal, as is most evident, and yet he proved the most excellent king that ever the saxons had before or perhaps after, and his election happened in the year of Christ 8. hundredth and two, when King Pepin the first of 
An. soz.  that race, reigned (as hath been said) in france, so as this monarchy of Egbert and that of Pepin (whereof we have alleged so many examples 
King Pepin of France.  in the former chapter, began as it were together, and both of them (I mean both Pepin and Egbert) came to their crowns by election of the people as here you see.  
This king Egbert or Egbrich as others do writ him, left a lawful son behind him named 
king Adel wolf. An. 829.  Elthel wolf or Adeluulfe, or Edolph, (for all is one) who succeeded him in the kingdom, and was as worthy a man as his father, and this Adeluulfe again, had four lawful sons, who all in their turns succeeded by just and lawful order in the crown, to wit Ethelbald, Ethelbert, Ethelred, and Alfred, for that none of the former three had any children, and all the later three were most excellent princes, especially Alfred or Alured, the last of all four, whose acts are wonderful, and who among other his revoumed 
King Alfred. 872.  gests, drove Rollo that famous captain of the danes from the borders of Ingland, with all his company into France, where he got the country or province named then Neustria, & now Normandy, and was the first Duke of that province and nation, and from whom our William Conqueror came afterwards in the sixth descent. This man erected also the university of Oxford, being very learned himself, builded divers goodly monasteries and churches, and dying left as famous a son behind him, as 
King Edward elder. An. 900.  himself, which was Edward the first surnamed the signior or elder.  
This king Edward dying left two sons, lawfully begotten of his wife, Edgina, the one named Prince Edmund, and the other Eldred, & a third illegitimate whose name was Adelstan, whom he had by a concubine. But yet for that this man was esteemed to be of more valour than the other, he was preferred to the crown, 
King Aleston the Bastard 〈◊〉. An. 924.  before the two other Princes legitimate, for so restifieth Polidor in thes words, Adelstanus ex concubina Edwardi films, rex a populo consalutatur atque ad king stonum opidum more maiorum ab Athelmo 
Polid. 1. 5. hist. Angl.  Cautuariensi Archiepiscopo coronatur, which is, Adelstan the son of king Edward by a concubine, was made king by the people, and was crowned according to the old custom, by Athelme Archbishop of Caterbury at the town of kingston. Thus far polidor, and Stow addeth further thes words: His coronation was celebrated in the market place, upon a stage, erected on high 
Stow pag. 130. An. 924.  that the king might better be seen of the multitude, he was a Prince of worthy memory, valiant and wife, in all his acts. & brought this land into one perfect monarchy, for he expelled utterly the danes, and quieted the welchme. Thus much Stow, of the success of choosing this king bastard to reign. To whose acts might be added that he conquered Scotland and brought Constantine their king to do him homage, and restored Lewis d'Outremer, his sister's son to the kingdom of France, as before hath been signified.  
This man dying without issue, his lawful brother Edmond, put back before, was admitted 
King Edmond. r. An. 940.  to the crown, who being of excellent expectation, died after 6. years, and left two lawful sons, but yet for that they were young, they 
The uncle preferred before the nephew's 946. Polid. 1. 6.  were both put back by the realm, and their uncle Eldred was preferred before them, so faith Polidor, Genuit Edmondus ex Egilda uxore Fduinum & Edgarum, qui cum etate pueri essent, post Eldredum deinde regnarunt. King Edmond begat of his wife Egilda two sons named Edwin and Edgar, who for that they were but children in years, were put back, and reigned afterward after their uncle Eldred. The like saith Stow and yieldeth the same reason in thes words. Eldred succeeded Edmond his brother for that his sons Edwin, 
Stow in his chronicles.  and Edgar, were thought to young to take so great a charge upon them.  
This Eldred though he entered as you see against the right of the nephews, yet saith Polidor and Stow, that he had all men's good will, and was crowned as his brother had been, at kingston, by Odo Archbishop of Canterbury, and reigned 9 years with great good will and praise of all men. He died at last without issue, and so his elder nephew Edwin was admitted to the crown, but yet after four years he was deposed again, for his lewd and vicious life, and his younger brother Edgar admitted in his place in the year of Christ 959.  
This king Edgar that entered by deposition of his brother, was one of the rarest princes, that 
Edgar a famous king.  the world had in his time, both for peace and war, justice, piety, and valour. Stow sayeth he kept a navy of three thousand and 6. hundredth ships, distributed in divers parts for defence of the realm. Also that he built and restored 47. monasteries at his own charges, and did other many such acts: he was father to king Edward the martyr, & grand father to king Edward the confessor, though by two different wives, for by his first wife named Egilfred he had Edward after martirized, and by his second 
King Edward Martirized.  wife Alfred he had Etheldred father to Edward the confessor, & to the end that Etheldred might reign, his mother Alfred caused King Edward the son of Egilfred to be stain after king Edgar her husband was dead.  
After this so shameful murder of king 
K. Etheldred 978.  Edward, many good men of the realm, were of opinion, not to admit the succession of Etheldred his half brother, both in respect of the murder, of king Edward his elder brother, committed for his sake, as also for that he seemed a man not fir to govern, and of this opinion among others, was the holy man Dunston archbishop of Canterbury, as Polidor sayeth, who 
Polid. 1. 7. hist. Ang.  at length in flat words denied to consecrate him, but seeing the most part of the realm, bend on Etheldreds' side, he foretold them, that it would repent them after, and that in this man's life the realm should be destroyed as in deed it was, and he ran away to Normandy, and left Sweno and his danes in possession of the realm, though afterward Sweno being dead, he returned again and died in London.  
This Etheldred had two wives, the first Ethelgina an English woman, by whom he had prince Edmund surnamed Ironside, for his great 
K. Edmend 〈◊〉.  strength and valour, who succeeded his father in the crown of Ingland, for a year, and at his death left two sons which after shallbe named, and besides this, Etheldred had by his first wife other two sons Edwin and Adelston, and one daughter named Edgina, all which were either slain by the danes, or died without issue.  
The second wife of Etheldred was called Emma, sister to Richard Duke of Normandy, who 
Quere Emma mother to King Edward the 〈◊〉.  was grand father to William the conqueror, to wit, father to Duke Robert, that was father to William, so as Emma was great aunt to this William, and she bore unto king Etheldred two sons, the first Edward, who was afterward named king Edward the Confessor, and Alerud who was slain traitorously by the Earl of kent, as presently we shall show.  
After the death also of king Etheldred, Queen Fmma was married to the Dane king Canutus the first of that name, surnamed the great, that was king of Ingland after Etheldred, & Edmond Ironside his son, and to him she bore a son named Hardicanutus, who reigned also in Ingland, before king Edward the Confessor.  
New then to come to our purpose, he that will consider the passing of the crown of Ingland, 
Many breeches of lineal succestion.  from the death of Edmonde Ironside, elder son of king Eltheldred, until the possession thereof gotten by William Duke of Normandy, to wit for the space of 50. years, shall easily see what authority the common wealth hath in such affairs, to alter titles of succession, according as public necessity or utility shall require, for thus briefly the matter passed.  
King Eltheldred seeing himself to weak for Sweno the king of Danes, that was entered the land, fled with his wife Emma and her two children Edward and Alerud, unto her brother Duke Richard of Normandy, & there remained until the death of Sweno, and he being dead, Etheldred returned into Ingland, made a certain agreement and division of the realm, between him & Canutus the son of Sweno, and so died, leaving his eldest son Edmond Ironside, to succeed him, who soon after dying also, left the whole realm to the said Canutus, and that by plain covenant as Canutus pretended, that the longest liver should have all: whereupon the said Canutus took the two children of king Edmond Ironside named Edmond and Edward, and sent them over into Sweueland (which at that time was subject also 
Sons of King Edmond Ironside.  unto him) and caused them to be brought up honourably, of which two, the elder named Edmond died without issue, but Edward was married and had divers children as after shallbe touched.  
Etheldred and his son Edmond being 
King Canutus the first 〈◊〉.  dead, Canutus the Dane was admitted for king of England by the whole parliament & consent side, as hath been said, and this the third breach of lineal descent.  
But this notwithstanding, Alerud being slain, 
King Edward the confessor made K. against right of succession.  prince Edward was made king, tanta publica laetitia (saith Polidor) ut certatim pro eius faelici principatu, cuncti vota facercnt. That is, he was made king with such universal joy and contentment of all men, as every man contended, who should pray and make most vows to God for his happy reign, and according to this was the success, for he was a most excellent prince, and almost miraculously he reigned with great peace and void of all war at home and a broad, for the space of almost 20. years after so infinite broils as had been before him, and ensued after him, and yet his title by succession can not be justified, as you see, for that his eldest brothers son was the alive, to wit prince Edward surnamed the outlaw, who in this kings reign came into Ingland and brought his wife and 
Prince Edward the out la and his children put back.  three lawful children with him, to wit Edgar, Margaret, & Christian, but yet was not this good king Edward so scrupulous, as to give over his kingdom to any of them, or to doubt of the right of his own title, which 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 all it seemeth they excluded him, that was only next by propinquity in blood, which was Edgar Adelin, son to the said prince Edward the outlaw now departed, and nephew to king Edmond Ironside, and the reason of this exclusion is alleged by Polidor in thes words, is peewit id aetatis nondum regno gubernando maturus 
Polyd l 8.  erat: That is, he b'ing a child of so small years, was not ripe enough to govern the kingdom, 
Harald second K. by election. 1066.  and then he saith that Harald. son of Earl Goodwin, by the daughter of Canutus, the first, proclaimed himself king, and more over he addeth, Non displicait omnino id factum populo, qui plurimum spei in Haraldi virtute habebat, itaque 
Polid. ubi sup.  more maiorum sacratus est, which is, this fact of Harald displeased not at all the people of Ingland, for that they had great hope in the virtue of this Harald, & so was he anointed and crowned according to the fashion of the ancient kings of Ingland, by which words we may fee, that Harald had also the approbation of the realm to be king, notwithstanding that little Edgar was present as hath been said, so as this was the fourth breach of succession at this tyme.  
But in the mean space, William Duke of 
William Duke of Normandy King of Ingland An. 1066. by election.  Normandy pretended that he was chosen before by king Edward the Confessor, and that the realm had given their consent thereunto, and that king Edward left the same testified in his last will and testament, and albert none of our English authors do avow the same clearly, yet do many other foreign writers hold it, and it seemeth very probable that some such thing had passed, both for that duke William had many in Ingland that did favour his pretence at his entrance, as also as Girard in his French story saith, that at his first coming to London, he punished divers by name, for that they had broken their oaths and promises in that behalf: And moreover it appeareth that by alleging 
Girard. li. 6. an. 1065  this title of election, he moved divers princes abroad to favour him in that action, as in a just quarrel, which is not like they should have done, if he had pretended only a conquest, or his title of consanguinity, which could be of no importance in the world, for that effect, seeing it was no other but that his grand father and king Edward's mother, were brother and sister, which could give him no pretence at all to the succession of the crown, by blood, and yet we see that divers princes did assist him, and among others the French chronicler Girard, so often named before, writeth that Alexander the second pope of Rome, 
Chron. Cassin. l. 3. cap. 34.  (who holiness was so much esteemed in those days as one Constantinus Afer, wrote a book of his miracles) being informed by Duke William of the justness of his pretence, did send him his benediction and a precious ring of gold, with a hallowed banner, by which he got the victory, thus writeth Girard, in his French chronicles, and Antoninus Archbishop of Florence surnamed Saint, writing of this matter in his 
Antoninus' part. z. chron. tit 16. cap. 5. 9 1.  chronicles speaketh great good of William Conqueror, and commendeth his enterprise. But howsoever this was the victory we see he got, and God prospered his pretence, and hath confirmed his of spring in the crown of Ingland more than 500 years together, so as now accounting from the death of king Edmond Ironside, unto this man, we shall find (as before I have said) in less than 50. years, that 5. or 6. kings were made in Ingland one after another, by only authority and approbation of the common wealth, contrary to the ordinary course of lineal succession by propinquity of blood.  
And all this is before the conquest, but if we should pass any further down, we should find more examples than before. For first the 
Examples after the conquest.  two sons of the Conqueror himself, that succeeded after him, to wit william Rufus and Henry the first, were they not both younger brothers to Robert Duke of Normandy, to whom the most part of the realm was inclined (as Polydore saith) to have given the kingdom presently after the Conqueror's death, as due 
Polyd. in vita Gul. Conq.  to him by succession, notwithstanding that William for particular displeasure against his elder son, had ordained the contrary in his testament. But that Robert being absent in the war of Jerusalem, the holy and learned man Lanfranke (as he was accounted then). Archbishop of Canterbury being deceived with vain hope of William Rufus good nature, 
William Rufus King An. 1087.  persuaded them the contrary, who was at that day of high estimation, & authority in Ingland, and so might induce the realm to do what he liked.  
By like means got Henry his younger brother 
Henry 1. An. 1100  the same crown afterwards, to wit by fair promises to the people, and by help principally of Henry Newborow Earl of warwick, that dealt with the nobility for him, and Maurice bishop of London with the clergy, for that Anselme Archbishop of Cantetbury was in banishment. Besides this also it did greatly help his cause, that his elder brother Robert, (to whom the crown by right appertained) was absent again this second time in the war of jerusalem, and so lost thereby his kingdom, as before: Henry having no other title in the world unto it, but by election and admission of the people, which yet he so defended afterwards against his said brother Robert, that came to claim it by the sword, and god did so prosper him therein, as he took his said elder brother prisoner, and so kept him for many years, until he died in prison most pitifully.  
But this king Henry dying, left a daughter 
Mathild. the empress.  behind him named Mawde or Mathilde, which being married first to the Emperor Henry the fift, he died without issue, and then was she married again the second time to Geoffrey Plantagenet Earl of Anjow in France, to whom she bore a son named Henry, which this king Henry his grand father, caused to be declared for heir apparent to the crown in his days, but yet after his disease, for that Stephen Earl of Bollogne, borne of Adela daughter to William 
King Stephen entered against successien 1135.  the Conqueror, was thought by the state of Ingland to be more fit to govern, and to defend the land (for that he was at man's age) then was prince Henry a child, or Maude his mother, he was admitted, and Henry put back, and this chief at the persuasion of Henry bishop of winchester, brother to the said Stephen, as also by the solicitation of the Abbot of Glastenbury and others, who thought be like they might do the same, with good conscience for the good of the realm, though the event proved not so well, for that it drew all Ingland into factions and divisions, for avoiding and ending whereof, the states some years after, in a parliament at Wallingford made an agreement, 
An act of parliament about successien 1153.  that Stephen should be lawful king, during his life only, and that Henry and his offspring should succeed him, and that prince William king Stephen's son should be dcprived of his succession to the crown, and made only Earl of Norfolcke, thus did the state dispose of the crown at that time, which was in the year of Christ 1153.  
To this Henry succeeded by order his eldest son than living, named Richard, and surnamed 
King Richard and king john 1190.  Cordelyon, for his Valour, but after him again, the succession was broken. For that john king Henry's youngest son, to wit younger brother to Richard, whom his father the king had left so unprovided as in jest he was called by the french jean sens terre, as if you would say Sir john lacke-land: this man I say, was after the death of his brother, admitted and crowned by the states of Ingland, and Arthur Duke of Britain, son and heir to Geoffrey (that was elder brother to john) was against the ordinary course of succession excluded. And albeit this Arthur did seek to remedy the 
Prince Artur put back.  matter, by war, yet it seemed that god did more defend this election of the common wealth, than the right title of Arthur by succession, for that Arthur was overcome, and taken by king john, though he had the king of France on his side, and he died pitifully in prison, or rather as most authors do hold, he was put to death by king john his uncles own hands in the castle of Rouen, thereby to make his title of succession more clear, which yet could not be, for that as well Stow in his Chronicle, as also Matthew of westminster and others before him, do write, that Geffrey besides this son, left two daughters also by the lady Constance his wife, Countess & heir of Britain, 
Two sisters of prince Artur Duke of Britain.  which by the law of Ingland should have succeeded before john, but of this, small account seemed to be made at that day.  
Some years after, when the Barons and states of Ingland misliked utterly the government 
K. john and his son rejected 1216.  and proceeding of this king john, they rejected him again, & chose Lewis the prince of France to be their king, and did swear fealty to him in London, as before hath been said, and they deprived also the young prince Henry his son, that was at that time, but of 8. years old, but upon the death of his father king john, that shortly after ensued, they recalled again that sentence, & admitted this Henry to the crown by the name of king Henry the third, and disannulled the oath and allegiance made unto Lewis Prince of France, and so king Henry reigned for the space of 53. years afterwards, the longest reign (as I think that any before or after him hath had in Ingland.  
Moreover you know that from this king 
The titles of york & Lancaster.  Henry the third, do take their first beginning the two branches of York and Lancaster which after fell to so great contention about the crown: Into which if we would enter, we should see plainly as before hath been noted, that the best of all their titles after the deposition of king Richard the second, depended of this authority of the common wealth, for that as the people were affected and the greater part prevailed, so were their titles either allowed confirmed altered or disannulled by parliaments, and yet may not we well affirm, but that either part when they were in possession and confirmed therein by thes parliaments, were lawful kings, and that God concurred with them as with true princes for government of their people, for if we should deny this point, as before hath been noted, great inconveniences would follow, & we should shake the states of most princes in the world at this day, as by examples which already I have alleged in part may appear.  
And with this also I mean to conclude and end this discourse in like manner, affirming that as on the one side propinquity of blood is 
The con clusion of this-chapter.  a great pre-eminence towards the attaining of any crown, so yet doth is not ever bind the common wealth to yield thereunto, if weightier reasons should urge them to the contrary, nether is the common wealth bound always to shut her eyes, and to admit at haphazard, or of necessity every one that is next by succession of blood, as Belloy falsely & fond affirmeth, but rather she is bound to consider well and maturely the person that is to enter, whether he be like to perform his duty and charge committed unto him or no, for that otherwise to admit him, that is an enemy or unfit, is but to destroy the common wealth, and him together. This is my opinion, and this seemeth to me to be conform to all reason, law, religion, piety, wisdom, and policy, and to the use and custom of all well governed common wealths in the world, neither do I mean hereby to prejudice any prince's pretence or succession to any crown or dignity in the world, but rather do hold that he ought to enjoy his pre-eminence, but yet so, that he be not prejudicial thereby to the whole body, which is ever to be respected more than any one person, whatsoever Belloy or other of his opinion do say to the contrary.  
Thus said the Civilian, and being called upon and drawn to a new matter by the question that ensueth, he made his last discourse & conclusion of the whole matter, in manner following.   

WHAT ARE THE PRINCIPAL POINTS WHICH A COMMONWEALTH ought to respect in admitting or excluding of any prince, that pretendeth to succeed: wherein is handlid largely also of the diversity of religions and other such causes.  
CAP. IX.  
AFTER the Civilian had alleged all thes examples of succession altered or rejected by public authority of common wealths, and of the allowance and approbation & good success which for the most part god seemeth to have given unto the same, one of the company broke forth and said, that this point appeared so evident unto him, as no doubt in the world could be made thereof, I mean, whether this thing in itself be lawful or no, to alter sometimes the course of succession, seeing that all commonwealths of Christendom, had done it 
Causes of excluding Princes.  so often, Only he said, that it remained somewhat doubful unto him, whether the causes alleged in thes mutations, and changings before mentioned, were always sufficient or no, for that sometimes they seemed to him but weak and slender, as when (for example) the uncle was preferred before the nephews, for that he was a man and the other children, which cause and reason hath oftentimes been alleged in the former examples, both of Spain, France, and Ingland, as also when the younger or bastard brother is admitted, & the elder and legitimate excluded, for that the one is a warrior, & the other not, and other such like causes are yielded (said he) in the exclusions before rehearsed, which yet seem not sometimes weighty enough for so great an affair.  
To this answered the Civilian, that according to their law, both civil and canon (which thing also he affirmed to be founded in great reason) it is a matter most certain, that he who is judge and hath to give the sentence in the thing, itself, is also to judge of the cause, for thereof is he called judge, and if he have authority in the one, good reason he should also have power to discern the other, so as, if we 
When must judge of the lawful causes of exclusions.  grant according to the form & proofs, that the realm or common wealth hath power to admit or put back the prince or pretender to the crown, then must we also confess that the same common wealth, hath authority to judge of the lawfulness of the causes, and considering further that it is in there own affair, & in a matter that hath his whole beginning, continuance and substance from them alone, I mean from the common wealth, for that no man is king or prince by institution of nature, as before hath been declared, but every king and king's son, hath his dignity and pre-eminence above other men, by authority only of the common wealth: who can affirm the contrary said the Civilian? but that god doth allow for a just and sufficient cause in this behalf, the only will and judgement of the weal public itself, supposing always (as in reason we may) that a whole realm will never agree by orderly way of judgement (for of this only I mean and not of any particular faction of private men against their heir appatent) to exclude or put back the next heir in blood and succession without a reasonable cause, in their sight and censure. And seeing that they only are to be judges of this case, (as now I have said) we are to presume that what they determine, is just and lawful for the time, and if at one time they should determine one thing, & the contrary at an other, (as they did often in Ingland during the contention between York & Lancaster and in other like occasions) what can a private man judge otherwise, but that they had different reasons and motions to lead them at different times, and they being properly lords and owners of the whole business, committed unto them, it is enough for every particular man to subject himself to that which his common wealth doth in this behalf, and to obey simply without any further inquisition, except he should see that open injustice were done therein or God manifestly offended, and the fealme endangered.  
Open injustice I call (said he) when not the 
Open injustice to be resisted.  true common wealth, but some faction of wicked men should offer to determine this matter, without lawful authority of the realm committed to them, and I call manifest offence of God, and danger of the realm, when such a man is preferred to the crown, as is evident that he will do what lieth in him to the prejudice of them both, I mean both of God's glory and the public wealth, as for example, if a Turk or Moor (as before I have said) or some other notorious wicked man, or tyrant, should be offered by succession or otherwise to govern among Christians, in which cases every man (no doubt) is bound to resist what he can, for that the very end and intent for which all government was first ordained, is herein manifestly impugned.  
Thus the Civilian discoursed, and the whole company seemed to like very well thereof, for that they said his opinion appeared both prudent and pious, and by this occasion it came also 
What are the cheete points to be regarded in a princes ad mission.  presently in question, what were the true causes and principal points, which ought to be chief regarded, as well by the common wealth as by every particular man, in this great action of furthering or hindering any Prince towards a crown. And they said unto the Civilian, that if he would discuss in like manner this point unto them, it would be a very apt and good conclusion to all his former speech and discourses, which having been of the authority that weal publiques have over princes titles, this other of the causes and considerations that ought to lead them for use and excercise of the same authority, would fall very fit and necessary for the up short of al.  
Hereunto the Civilian answered, that he well saw the fitness and importance of the matter, and therefore that he was content to speak a word or two more thereof, notwithstanding that much had been said already therein, to wit, in all those pointès which had been disputed about the end of government, and why it was appointed, which end (said he) seeing it is (as largely hath been proved before) to defend, preserve, and benefit the common wealth, here hence, that is, 
Whence the reasons of admitting or rejecting a prince are to be taken.  from this consideration, of the weal public, are to be deduced all other considerations of most importance, for discerning a good or evil prince. For that whosoever is most likely to defend, preserve, and benefit most his realm and subjects, he is most to be allowed and desired, as most conform to the end for which government was ordained.  
And on the contrary side, he that is least like to do this, deserveth least to be preferred, and here (quoth he) you see doth enter also that consideration mentioned by you before, which divers commonwealths had in putting back oftentimes children & impotent people (though otherwise next in blood) from succession, and pteferring more able men though further of by descent, for that they were more like to defend well their realm and subjects then the others were.  
But to proceed (said he) more distinctly and more perspicuously in this matter, I would have you call to mind one point among others which I alleged before, out of Girard the french author, to wit, that the king of france in his coronation 
Girard li. 3. de l'Estar pag. 242.  is new apparaled three times in one day, once as a priest, & then as a judge, and last as a king armed. Thereby to signify three things committed to his charge, first religion, than 
Three principal points to be considered.  justice, than manhood and chivalry, for the defence of the realm.  
This division seemeth to me very good and fit (quoth he) and to comprehend all that a wealpublique hath need of, for her happy state and felicity, both in soul and body, and for her end, both supernatural and natural. For by the first which is religion, her subjects do attain unto their end spiritual & supernatural, which is the salvation of their souls, & by the second and third, which are justice and defence, they enjoy their felicity temporal, which is to live in peace among themselves, and safety from their enemies, for which cause it seemeth that these are the three points which most are to be regarded in every Prince, that cometh to government, and much more in him that is not yet admitted thereunto, but offereth himself to the common wealth for the same purpose.  
And for that the later two of thes three points 
Why he resolveth to treat of religion principally.  which are justice & manhood, hath been often had in consideration, in the examples of changes before mentioned, and the first point which is religion, hath rarely or never at all been talked of, for that in former times the prince and the people were alwaves of one and the same religion, and scarce ever any question or doubt fell in that behalf (which yet in our days is the principal difference and chiefest difficulty of all other) for thes causes (I say) shall I accommodate myself to the circumstance of the time, wherein we live, and to the present case which is in question betwixt us about the succession of Ingland, and leaving a side those other two considerations of justice and chivalry in a king, which are far less important, than the other (though yet so highly regarded by ancient common wealths as you have hard) I shall treat principally of religion, in this place, as of the first and highest, and most necessary point of all other, to be considered in the admission of any prince, for the profit of his subjects: for that without this, he destroyeth all, and with this, albeit he should have defects in the other two points of justice and manhood, yet may it be helped, or his defect or negligence may be supplied much by others, as after I shall show more in particular, but if he want fear of God, or care of religion, or be perversely persuaded therein, the damage of the weal public is inestimable. First of all then, for better understanding of this point, we are to suppose, 
The chief end of a common wealth supernatural.  that the first chiefest, and highest end that God and nature appointed to every common wealth, was not so much the temporal felicity of the body, as the supernatural and everlasting of the soul, and this was not only revealed to the jews by holy scripture, but also unto the gentiles and heathens by the instinct and light of nature itself. For by this light of natural reason, the learned sort of them came to understand the immortality of the soul, & that her felicity perfection and full contentment, which they called her final end and summum bonum, could not be in this life, nor in any thing created under heaven, but must needs be in the life to come, and that by attaining to enjoy some infinite endless & immortal object, which could fully satisfy the appetite of our soul, & this could be no other than God, the maker of all himself. And that consequently all other things of this transitory life, and of this human common wealth, subject to man's eyes, are ordained to serve and be subordinate & directed to the other higher end, and that all man's actions in this world, are first of all, and in the highest degree, to be employed to the recognizing, serving, and honouring of this great Lord that governeth the whole, as author and end of al. 
Philosophers and la makers what end they had of their doings.   
To this light I say, came the heathens even by the instinct and direction of nature, whereof ensued that there was never yet pagan Philosopher that wrote of framing a good common wealth as Socrates, Plato, Plutarch, Cicero, and others, nether lawmaker among them that left ordinances for the same purpose, as Deucalion, Minos, Zaleucus, Lycurgus, Solon, jon, Numa, or the like, which besides the temporal end of directing things well for the body, had not especial care also, of matters appertaining to the mind, to wit, of nourishing, honouring, and rewarding of virtue, and for restraining and punishing of vice, and wickedness, whereby is evident that their end and butt was to make their citizens good and virtuous, which was a higher end, then to have a bare consideration of temporal and bodily benefits only, as many governors of our days (though Christians in name) seem to have, who pretend no higher end in their government then bodily wealth, and a certain temporal king of peace and justice among their subjects, which divers beasts also do reach unto, in their congregations and common 
The come mon wealth of beasts.  wealths, as is to be seem among emetts and bees, crane's, lions, and other such creatures, that by instinct of nature are sociable, and do live in company, and consequently also do maintain so mnch order and policy in their common wealth, as is needful for their preservation and continuance.  
But nature taught man a far higher 
The natural end of man's common wealth.  and more excellent end in his common wealth, which was not only to provide for those bodily benefits that are common also to creatures without reason, but much more for those of the mind, and above all for the serving of that high and supreme God, that is the beginning & end of all the rest. For whose service also they learned by the same instinct and instirution of nature, that the chiefest and supremest honour that could be done unto him in this life by man, was the honour of sacrifice and oblations, which we see was begun and practised even 
Sacrifices and oblations by nature.  in those first beginnings of the law of nature, before the levitical law, and the particular forms of this same law, were prescribed by Moses. For so we read in Genesis of Noë, that he made an altar and offered sacrifices to God upon the same, of all the beasts and birds that he had in the ark, odoratusque est Dominus odorem 
Gen 8.  suavitatis, and God received the smell, of thes sacrifices, as a sweet smell. Which is to say, that God was highly pleased therewith, and the like we read of job that was a gentile, and lived before Moses, Sanctificabat filios consurgensque diluculo offerebat holocausta per dies singulos. 
job. 1.  He did sanctify his children, and rising early in the morning did offer for them holocastes or burnt sacrifices every day.  
This men used in those days, and this they were taught by law of nature, I mean both to honour God above all things, and to honour him by this particular way of sacrifices, which is proved also evidently by that which at this day is found and seen in the Indians, where never any notice of Moses' law came, and yet no nation hath ever been found among them, that acknowledgeth not some kind of God, and offereth not some kind of sacrifice unto him.  
And albeit in the particular means of honouring this God, as also in distinguishing between false Gods and the true God, thes people of the India's have fallen into most gross & infinite errors, as also the gentiles of Europe, Asia, & Africa did, by the craft & subtlety of the devil, which abusing their ignorance, did thrust himself into the place of God, and derived & drew those sacrifices and supreme honours unto himself, which were dew to God alone, yet is it evident hereby (and this is sufficient for our purpose) that by God & nature, the highest and chiefest end of every common wealth, is 
The chief end of a common wealth & magistrates is religion.  Cultus Dei, the service of God, and religion, and consequently that the principal care & charge of a prince and magistrate even by nature itself, is, to look thereunto, whereof all antiquity both among jews and Gentiles, were want to have so great regard, as for many years and ages their kings & chief magistrates were also priests: and divers learned men do hold, that the privilege and pre-eminence of primogenitura or the first borne children, 
Genebrard. l 1. Chronolde 1 aetate Genes. 25. & 20. Deut. 21. 2. Paral. 〈◊〉  so much esteemed in the law of nature (as before we have seen) consisted principally in this, that the eldest sons were priests & had the charge and dignity of this greatest action of all other upon earth, which our temporal Magistrates so little regard now.  
And this respect and reverence towards religion 
Regard of religion among gentiles.  was so greatly planted in the breasts of all nations by nature herself, as Cicero pronounced, this general sentence in his tyme. Nulla est gens tam fera, nulla tam immanis, cuius 
Cicero li. 1. quest. tusc. & de natura deorum lib. 1.  mentem non imbuerit deorum colendorum religio. There is no nation so fierce or barbarous, whose minds are not endued whith some religion of worshipping Gods.  
And Plutarch writing against a certain Atheist 
Plutarch adversus Colotem.  of his time saith thus: If you travail far countries, you may chance 〈◊〉 find some cities, without learning, without kings, without riches, without money, but a city without temples, and without Gods and sacrifices, no man yet hath ever seen. And finally Aristotle in his politics having numbered divers things, necessary to a common wealth, addeth 
Aristo. l 7 politi. c. 8.  thes words. Quintum & primum. Circa rem divinam cultus, quod sacerdotium sacrificiumque vocant. In the fift place (which in deed ought to be the first of all other) is necessary to a common wealth, the honour and service dew unto God, which men commonly do comprehend by the words of preesthode and sacrifice.  
All this I have alleged to confute even by the principles of nature herself, the absurd 
The absurd Athisemo of our time in politics.  opinions of divers atheists of our time, that will seem to be gteat politics, who affirm that religion ought not to be so greatly respected in a prince, or by a prince, as though it were his chiefest care or the matter of most importance in his government, which you see how false and impious it is, even among the gentiles themselves, but much more among christians, who have so much the greater obligation to take to heart this matter of religion, by how much greater light & knowledge they have of God, and therefore we see that in all the princes oaths which before you have hard recited to be made & taken by them at their admission & coronation, the first and principal point of all other, is about religion & maintenance thereof, 
See before the oaths made by princes at their coronations in the 4. chapter.  and according to this oath also of supreme princes, not only to defend and maintain religion by themselves in all their states, but also by their lieftenaunts and under governors, we have in our civil law a very solemn form of an oath which justinian the Emperor, above a thousand and 50. years gone, was wont to give to all his governors of countries, cities and other places, before they could be admitted to their charges, and for that it is very effectual, & that you may see thereby what care there was of this matter at that time: and what manner of solemn and religious protestations, as also imprecations they did use therein, it shall not be amiss perhaps to repeat the same in his own words which are thes following.  
The title in the Civil law is: juramentum quod 
The oath to governors for defence of religion.  Praestatur, ijs qui administrationes accipiunt, the oath which is given to them that receive governments, and then the oath beginneth thus.  
juro per Deum omnipotentem & filium eius vnigenitā 
Collatine, 2. Novella constit. juflin, 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Dominum nostrum jesum Christum & Spiritum sanctum, & per sanctam gloriosam Dei genitricem & semper virginem Mariam, & per quatuor evangelia quae in manibus meis teneo, & per sanctos archangelos Michaelem & Gabrielem, puram conscientiam germanumque seruitium me seruaturum sacratissimis nostris Dominis Justiniano & Theodosiae coniugi eius, occasione traditae mihi ab eorum pietate administrationis. Et quod communicator sum sanctissima Dei Catholicae & Apostolicae Ecclesiae, & nullo modo vel tempore adversaborei, nec alium quoncunque permittam quantum possibilitatem habeam, & si vero non haec omnia seruavero, recipiam omnia incomoda hic & in futuro seculo in terribili iuditio magni Domini Dei & salvatoris nostri jesu Christi, & habebo paertem cum juda & cum lepra Giezi, & cum tremore Cain, in super & paenis quae lege eorum pietatis continentur ero subiectus. Which in English is thus, 
Note the form of this oath written. An Dni 560.  I do swear by almighty God, and by his holy son our Lord jesus Christ, and by the holy ghost, and by the holy glorious mother of God, the perpetual virgin Marie, and by the four holy gospels which I do hold in my hand, & by the holy archangel's S. Michael and S. Gabriel, that I will keep a pure conscience, & perform true service unto the sacred persons of our Lords and princes justinian and Theodosia his wife, in all occasions of this government, by their benignity committed unto me. Moreover I do swear that I am communicant and member of the most holy Catholic and apostolic church of God, and that I shall never at any time hereafter be contrary to the same, nor suffer any other to be, as much as shallye in my possibility to let. And if I should break this oath or not observe any point thereof, I am content to receive any punisment both in this world as also in the world to come, in that last and most terrible judgement of our great Lord and savour jesus Christ, and to have my part with judas, as also with the leptosye of Giezi and with the fear and trembling of damned Cain: and besides all this I shallbe subject to all punishments that are ordained in the laws of their Majesties, concerning this affair.  
This oath did all the governors of christian countries take in old time, when christian Emperors did flourish, and it hath remained for a law and precedent ever since to all posterity. And if we join this with the other oaths before set down in the fift chapter, which Emperors and kings did make themselves (unto their ecclesiastical Prelates, at their first admission) about this point: we should see nothing was so much respected in admission of a prince, or Governor (nor aught to be) as religion, for that (as I have said before) this is the chiefest, greatest, & highest end, of every common wealth, intended both by God and nature, to assist their subjects to the attaining of their supernatural end, by honouring and serving God in this life, and by living virtuously, for that otherwise God should draw no other srute or commodity out of human common commonwealths, then of an assembly of brutish creatures, maintained only and governed for to eat drink and live in peace, as before hath been declared.  
But the end of man being far higher than this: it followeth that whatsoever prince of 
How great a defect is want of religion in a magistrate.  magistrate doth not attend with care to assist and help his subjects to this end, omitteth the first and principal part of his charge, and committeth high treason against his lord and master, in whose place he is, and consequently is not fit for that charge and dignity, though he should perform the other two parts, never so well, of temporal justice and valour in his person, which two other points do appertain principally to the human felicity and base end of man's weal public, and much more of a christian.  
Hereof it ensueth also that nothing in the 
Lack of religion the chiefest cause to exclude a pretendor.  world can so justly exclude an heir apparent from his succession, as want of religion, nor any cause what soever justify and clear the conscience of the common wealth, or of particular men, that in this case should resist his entrance, as if they judge him faulty in this point, which is the head of all the rest, and for which all the rest do serve.  
You do remember that before I compared an heir apparent unto a spouse, betrothed only and not yet married, to the common 
Vide Digest. li. 23. fit 1 leg. 8 & 10.  wealth. Which espousal or betrothing, according to allaw both divine and human, may be broken and made void much easier and upon far lesser causes then an actual perfect marrying may, of which our saviour himself said. Quos Deus coniunxit homo non separate, whom God hath joined let to man separate, 
Math. 14. Marc. 10.  and yet saint Paul to the Corinthians determineth plainly, that if two gentiles married together in their gentility, (which 
1. Cor. 7.  none denieth to be true marriage for so much as concerneth the civil contract) and afterward the one of them being made a christian the other will not live with him or her, or if he do, yet not without blaspheming of God & tempting him to sin: in this case (I say) the Apostle teacheth, and out of him the canon law setteth it down for a decree, that this is sufficient to break & dissolve utterly this heathen marriage, 
Lib. 4. decret. Greg. tit. 19 c. 7.  although consummate between these two parties, and that the christian may marry again, and this only for the want of religion in the other party, which being so in actual marriage already made and consummate, how much more may it serve to undo a bare betrothing, which is the case of a 〈◊〉 only to a crown, as before hath been showed.  
But you may say perhaps, that saint 
Whether 〈◊〉 in religion be infidelity.  Paul speaketh of an infidel or heathen, that denieth Christ plainly, and with whom the other party cannot live, without danger of sin and losing his faith, which is not the case of a christian Prince though he be somewhat different from me in religion, to which is answered, that supposing there is but one only religion that can be true among christians, as both reason and Athanasius his Crede, doth plainly teatch us: and moreover seeing, that to me there can be no other faith or religion available for my salvation then only that which I myself do beleene, for that my own 
Act 23. 1. Cor. 8. 2. Cor. 5. 3. Pet. 3.  conscience must testify for me, or against me: certain it is, that unto me and my conscience he which in any point believeth otherwise then I do, and standeth wilfully in the same, is an infidel, for that he believeth not that which in my faith and conscience, is the only and sole truth, whereby he must be saved. And if our saviour Christ himself in his gospel, doth 
Math. 18.  will certain men to be held for heat hens, not so much for difference in faith and religion, as for lack of humility & obedience to the church: how much more may I hold him so, that in my opinion is an enemy to the truth, and consequently so long as I have this opinion of him, albeit his religion were never so true, yet so long (I say) as I have this contrary persuasion of him, I shall do against my conscience and sin damnably in the sight of God, to prefer him to a charge where he may draw many other to his own error and perdition, wherein I do persuade myself that he remaineth. 
How he that doth against his own conscience sinneth.   
This doctrine (which is common among all divines) is founded upon that discourse of S. Paul to the Romans and Corinthians, against such christians as being invited to the 
Rom. 14. 1. Cor. 8. & 10.  banquetts and tables of gentiles and finding meats offered to Idols (which themselves do judge to be unlawful to eat) did yet eat the same, both to the scandal of other infirm men there present, as also against their own judgement and conscience, which the apostle saith was a damnable sin, and this not for that the thing in itself was evil or unlawful, as he 〈◊〉 but for that they did judge it so, and yet did the contrary. Qui discernit si manducaverit, damnatus est, saith the Apostle. He that discerneth or maketh a difference between this meat and others, as judging this to be unlawful and and yet eateth the same, he is damned, that is to sav he sinneth damnably or mortally. Whereof the same Apostle yieldeth presently this reason. Quiae non ex fide, for that he eateth not according to his faith or belief, but rather contrary, for that he believing it to be evil and unlawful, doth notwithstanding eat the same, and here upon S. Paul inferreth this universal proposition, Omne autem quod non est ex fide peccatum est, all that is not of faith or according to a man's 
See upon this place of S. Paul. S. Chrisost. hom. 36. in 〈◊〉 epistolam. Orig. l. to Theodor. in hune locum.  own belief, is sin to him, for that it is against his own conscience, judgement & belief, believing one thing, and doing an other, and seeing our own conscience must be our witness at the last day, to condemn or deliver us, as before I have said, he must needs sin grievously (or damnably as the Apostle here saith) who committeth any thing against his own conscience, though otherwise the thing were not only indifferent, but very good also in itself, for that of the doers part there wanteth no malice or will to sin, seeing he doth that which he apprehendeth to be nought, though in itself it be not.  
And now to apply all this to our purpose for Ingland, and for the matter we have in hand, I 
How dangrous to favour a pretender of a contrary religion.  affirm and hold, that for any man to give his help, consent or assistance towards the making of a king, whom he judgeth or believeth to be faulty in religion, & consequently would advance either no religion, or the wrong, if he were in authority, is a most grievous and damnable sin to him that doth it, of what side soever the truth be, or how good or bad so ever the party be, that is preferred. For if S. Paul have pronounced so absolutely and plainly in the place before alleged, that even in eating of a piece of meat, it is damnable for a man to discern and yet to eat: what may we think will it be in so great and important a matter, as the making of a king is, for a man to dissemble or do against his own conscience, & judgement, that is to say, to discern and judge that he is an infidel, or heretic, or wicked man, or A theist or erronens in religion, and yet to further his advancement and government over christians, where he shallbe able to pervert infinite, and to pull down all honour & service dew unto God, and whether he do this evil afterwards or not yet shall I be guilty of all this, for that knowing and persuading myself, that he is like, or in disposition to do it, yet for fear, flattery carelessness, kindred, emulation against others, vain pretence of title, lack of zeal to god's cause, or for other the like passions or temporal respects, I do favour further or soothe him in his pretences, or do not resist him, when it lieth in my power, by all which I do justly make my self guilty of all the evils, hurts, miseries and calamities both temporal and spiritual, which afterward by his evil government do or may ensue, for that I knowing him to be such a one, did notwithstanding assist his promotion.  
And thus much now for matter of conscience, but if we consider reason of state also, and 
Against wisdom and policy to prefer 〈◊〉 prince of a contrary religien.  worldly policy, it can not be but great folly & oversight for a man of what religion soever he be, to promote to a kingdom in which himself must live, one of a contrary religion to himself; for let the bargains and agreements be what they will, and fair promises & vain hopes never so great, yet seeing the prince once made and settled, must needs proceed according to the principles of his own religion, it followeth also that he must come quickly to break with the other party, though before he loved him never so well, (which yet perhaps is very hard if not impossible for two of different religions to love sincerely) but if it were so, yet so many ielosies, suspicions, accusations, calumniations and other aversions must needs light upon the party that is of different religion from the state and Prince, under whom he liveth, as not only he cannot be capable of such preferments, honours, charges, governments, and the like which men may deserve and desire in their common wealths, but also he shallbe in continual danger and subject to a thousand molestations and injuries, which are incident to the condition and state of him, that is not currant which the course of his prince and realm in matters of religion, and so before he beware, he becometh to be accounted an enemy or backward man, which to remedy he must either dissemble deeply, and against his own conscience make show to favour and set forward that which in his heart he doth detest (which is the greatest calamity & misery of all other, though yet many times not sufficient to deliver him from suspicion) or else to avoid this everlasting perdition, he must break withal the temporal commodities of this life, and leave the benefits which his country and realm might yield him, and this is the ordinary end of all such men, how soft & sweet soever the beginnings be.  
And therefore to conclude at length, all this tedious speech (wherewith I fear me I have 
The conclusion of the whole speech.  wearied you against my will) seeing there be so great inconveniences and dangers both temporal and eternal, and in respect both of God and man, of body and soul, as hath been declared, to advance a prince of contrary religion, to the crown, and considering that in Ingland there is so great diversity of religions, as the world knoweth, between these parties and factions, that have to pretend or admit the next prince after her Majesty that now is: calling to mind also the great liberty, scope, and authority which the common wealth hath in admitting or rejecting the pretenders upon due considerations be there right of succession never so plain or clear, as before hath been showed: and laying finally before our eyes the manifold and different acts, of christiam realms, before mentioned in this affair, all thes things (I say) being laid together, you may see whether I had reason at the beginning, to think and affirm, that it was a doubtful case who should be our next prince after the Queen's Majesty that now sitteth at the stern, and if beyond and above all this that I have said, our friend the common lawyer here present, shall prove also (as at the first entrance he promised) that among such as do or may pretend of the blood royal at this day, their true succession and next propinquity by birth is also incertain and disputable, then is the matter made thereby much more ambigious, and God only knowhwho shall prevail, and to him only is the matter to be commended, as far, as I see, and with this I make an end, thanking you most harrely for your patience, and craving pardon for that I have been over long, or for any other fault that in this speech I have committed.  
FINIS.    

THE PREFACE OF THE SECOND part.  
THE Civilian had no sooner ended his discourse, but all the company being most desirous to here what the temporal lawyer had prepared to say, about the several titles of the present pretendors to the crown of Ingland, began with one accord to request him earnestly for the performance of his promised speech in that behalf, who showing himself nether unwilling nor unready for the same, told them, that he was content to yield to their desires, but yet with one condition, which was, that he would take in hand this matter with the same asseveration and protestation, with the Civilian in some occasions had used before him, and it liked 
A protestation of the lawyer.  him well, to wit, that having to speak in this discourse of many princes, peers, and nobles of the royal blood of Ingland (to all which by law of nature equity and reason he said that he bore reverent honour and respect) and to discuss their several pretensions rights, interests and titles to the crown, he said, that his meaning was, to offend, hunt, or prejudice none: nor to determine any thing 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 or hindrance of any of their pretences or claims, of what side, family, faction, religion, or other party soever he or she were, but rather plainly and indifferently without hatred or partial affection, to or against any, to lay down sincerely what he had hard or read, or of himself conceived, that might justly be alleged in favour or disfavour of every tytler.  
And so much the rather he said that he would do this, for that in very truth the Civiltans' speech had put him in a great indifferency concerning matter of succession, & had taken out of his head many scrupulosites about nice points of 
Why the will not determine of any one title.  nearness in blood, by the many examples & reasons that he had alleged of the proceeding of Christian common wealths in this affair, preferring oftentimes him that was further of in blood, upon other considerations of more weight & importance, which point seemed to him to have been so evidently proved, as no man can deny it, & much less condenne the same, without the inconveniences before alleged & mentioned, of calling all in doubt that now is established in the world, considering that not only foreign countries, but Ingland also itself so often hath used the same putting back the next in blood.  
Wherefore he said, that for as much as common wealths, and the consent, will, and desire of each realm was proved to have high and sovereign authority in this affair, and that as on the one side, nearness of blood was to be respected so on the other, there wanted not sundry considerations & circumstances of as great moment as this, or rather greater, for that oftentimes these considerations had been preferred before nearness of blood, as hath been declared, I do not know quoth he, who of the pretenders may next obtain the garland, what soever his right by propinquity be, so he have some (as I think all have that do pretend) and therefore I mean not to stand upon the justification or impugning of any one title, but rather to leave lafoy to God and to them, that must one day try & judge the same in Ingland to whom I suppose this speech of mine, can not be but grateful & commodious, for the better understanding & discerning of those matters, whereof of necessity ere it be long they must be judges & umpires, when God shall appoint, and consequently for them to be ignorant or unacquainted with the same (as men say that commonly most in Ingland at this day are) cannot be but very inconvenient and dangerous.  
In this manner he spoke, and after this he began his discourse, setting down first of all the sundry books and treatises which he understood had been made or written hitherto of this affair.   


OF THE DIVERS BOOKS AND TREATISES THAT HAVE BEEN WRITTEN heretofore about the titles of such as pretend to the crown of Ingland, and what they do contain in favour or disfavour of sundry pretendors.  
CAP. I.  
ACCORDING to the variety of men's judgements and affections in this behalf, so said the lawyer, that divers had written diversly in sundry books & treatises that had come to light, & went among men from hand to hand though all were not printed. And first of all he said, that not long after her majesties coming to the crown, there appeared a certain book written in the favour of the house of Suffolk, and especially of the children of the Earl of Hartford by the Lady Catherine Gray, which book offended highly the Queen and 
The book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon.  nobles of Ingland and was afterwards found to be written by one Hales surnamed of the club foot, who was clerk of the hamper, & Sir Nicholas Bacon then Lord keeper was presumed also to have had a principal part in the same, for which he was like to have lost his office, if Sir Antony Browne that had been chief judge of the common pleas in Queen Mary's time would have accepted thereof, when her Majesty offered the same unto him, and my Lord of Leicester earnestly exhorted him to take it, but he refused it for that he was of different religion from the state, and so Sir Nicholas Bacon remained with the same at the great instance of Sir William Cecil now Lord Treasurer, who though he were thought to be privy also to the said book, yet was the matter so wisely laid upon Hales and Bacon, as Sir William was kept free, thereby to have the more authority and grace to procure the others pardon, as he did.  
The bent and butt of this book, was (as I have said) to prefer the title of the Lady Catherine 
The but of Hales book.  Gray daughter of the Lady francis Duchess of Suffolk which Francis was daughter to Mary the younger daughter of King Henry the seventh, before the title of the Queen of Scots then living & of her son, which were descended of Lady Margeret eldest daughter of the said king Henry. And the reasons which this book did allege for the same were principally two, the first, that the laws of Ingland did not 
First reason.  admit any sttainger or allien to inherit in Ingland, to wit, any such as were borne out of the allegiance of our realm (for so are the words of the law) and for that the Queen of Scots and her son are known to be so borne, therefore they could not succeed, and consequently that the house of Suffolck descended of the second daughter, must enter in their place.  
The second reason is, for that there is given authority to king Henry the eight by two several 
2. Reasun  acts of parliament in the 28. and 36. year of his reign to dispose of the succession by his last will & testament, as he should think best, among those of his kindred that did pretend after his children, and that the said king according to his commission, did ordain that if his own children did die without issue, than the offspring of his younger sister Mary that were borne in Ingland should be preferred before the issue of the elder that was Margaret married into Scotland, and this was the effect of this first book.  
Against this book were written two other soon after, the first by one Morgan a divine (if 
The book of M. Morgan and judge Browne  I remember well) sometimes fellow of Oriel College in Oxford, a man of good account for learning among those that knew him, & he was thought be have written the said book, by the advise and assistance of the foresaid judge Browne, which thing is made the more credible, by the many authorities of our common law which therein are alleged, and the parts of this book (if I forget not) were three, or rather they were three books of one treatise, the first whereof did take upon it to clear the said Queen of Scots for the murder of the lord Darly her husband, which by many was laid against her. And the second did handle her title to the crown of Ingland: and the third did answer the book of John Knox the Scott, entitled, against the monstrous government of women. Of all which three points, for that the second that conserneth the title, is that which properly appertaineth to out purpose, and for that the same is handled again and more largely in the second book set out not long after by John lesley lord bishop of Rosse in Scotland, who at that time was Ambassador for the said Queen of Scots in Ingland, and handled the same matter more abundantly which M. Morgan had done before him, I shall say no more of this book of M. Morgan; but shall pass over to that of the bishop, which in this point of succession containeth also what soever the other hath, so as by declaring the contents of the one we shall come also to see what is in the other.  
The intent then of this book of the bishope of Rosse, is to refute the other book of Hales and Bacon, and that especially in the two points before mentioned, which they alleged for their principles, to wit, about foreign birth, and king Henry's testament. And against the first of these two points the bishop allegeth 
Answer to the 1. reason.  many proofs that there is no such maxima in the common laws of Ingland to disherit a prince borne out of the land from his or her right of succession, that they have by blood. And this first, for that the statute made for barring of alliens to inherit in Ingland (which was in the 25. year of the reign of king Edward the third) is only to be understood of particular men's inheritance, and no ways to be extended to the succession of the crown, as by comparison of many other like cases is declared: and secondly for that ther is express exception in the same statute of the king's children and of spring: and thirdly for that the practice hath always been contrary both before and after the conquest, to wit that divers princes borne out of the realm have succeeded.  
The other principle also concerning king Henry's testament, the bishop impugneth, first 
To the 2. reason.  by divers reasons & incongruities whereby it may be presumed that king Henry never made any such testament, and if he did, yet could it not hold in law. And secondly also by witness of the Lord Paget that was of the privy council in those days, & of Sir Edward Montague lord chief justice, and of one William Clark that set the king's stamp to the writing, all which anowed before the council and parliament in Queen mary's time, that the said testament was signed after the king was past sense and memory.  
And finally the said bishop concludeth that the line of Scotland is the next every way, both in respect of the house of Lancaster, and also of York, for that they are next heirs to K. Henry the eight, who by his father was heir to the house of Lancaster, and by his mother to the house of york.  
But after these three books, was written a 
Heghingtons' book.  fourth, by one Robart Highinton secretary in time passed to the Earl of Northumberland, a man well read in stories and especially of our country, who is said to be dead some years passed in Paris. This man impugneth all three formet books in divers principal points and draweth the crown from both their pretendors, I mean as well from the house of Scotland as from that of Suffolk, and first against the book of Hales and Sir Nicholas Bacon, written (as hath been said) in favour of the house of Suffolk Heghington holdeth with the Bishop and Morgan that thes two principles laid by the other, of foreign birth, and of king Henry's restament against the Scotish line, are of no Validity, as nether their reasons for legitrimating of the Earl of Hartfords' children, which afterward shallbe handled.  
And secondly he is against both Morgan & the Bishop of Rosse also in divers important points, and in the very principal of all, for that this man (I mean Highington) maketh the king of Spain to be the next and most righful pretender by the house of Lancaster, for proof whereof he holdeth first that king Henry the 7. had no title in deed to the crown by Lancaster; but only by the house of York, that is to say; by his marriage of Queen Elizabeth elder daughter to king Edward the fourth, for that albeit himself were descended by his mother from john of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, yet this was but by his third wife Catherine Swynford, and that the true heirs of Blanch his first wife duchess and heir of Lancaster (to whom saith he appertained only the succession after the death of king Henry the sixth, and his son, with whom ended the line male of that house) remained only in Portugal by the marriage of Lady Philip, daughter of the foresaid Blanch, to king John the first of Portugal, & that for as much as king Philip of Spain saith this man, hath now succeeded to all the right of the kings of Portugal, to him appertaineth also, the only right succession of the house of Lancaster, and that all the other discendents of king Henry the 7. are to pretend only by the title of York, I mean aswell the line of Scotland as also of Suffolk and Huntingdon, for that in the house of Lancaster king Philip is evidently before them al.  
Thus holdeth Heghington, alleging divers stories arguments and probabilities for the same, & then adjoineth two other propositions, which do import most of all, to wit, 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, who was son to king Henry the third and brother to king Edward the first, was eldest to the said Edward and injuriously put back for his deformity in body, as both the said bishop of Rosse and George Lylly, do falsely 
George Lily in fine Epitchronic. Anglic.  hold, and this man refuteth by many good arguments, but for that lohn of Gaunt Duke of Lancaster being the eldest son that King Edward the third had a live when he died, should in right have succeeded in the crown as this man holdeth, and should have been preferred before Richard the second that was the black prince's son, who was a degree further of from king Edward the third his grandfather, than was lohn of Gaunt, to whom king Edward was father, and by this occasion this man cometh to discuss at large the opinions of the lawyers, whether the uncle or the nephew should be preferred in the succession of a crown, to wit, whether the younger brother or the elder brother's son, if his father be dead without being seized of the same (which is a point that in the civil law hath great disputation and many great authors on each side as this man showeth) and the matter also wanteth not examples on both parts in the succession of divers English king's, as our friend the civil lawyer did signify also in his discourse, & we may chance to have occasion to handle the same again, and more largely hereafter.  
These points toucheth Highinton though divers other he leave untouched, which are of much importance for the resolution, as whether after the line extinguished of king Henry the 4. which was the eldest son of John of Gant, there should have entered the line of lady Philippe the eldest daughter lawfully begotten of Blanch first wife of John of Gant, or 
Sundry importag points.  else the race of John Earl of Somersett younger son by his third wife, which then was base borne, but legetimated by parliament, for of Philip do come the kings of Portugal, and of John came king Henry the seventh. And again these points had been to be disputed as well touching the succession to the dukedom of Lancaster alone, as also to the crown joincely, all which articles shall severally afterward be handled in their places, and thus much of this book.  
More than these four books, I have not 
divers other notes and pampletes.  seen witten of his affair, though I have hard of one made in Flanders in the behalf of the Duke of Parma, that is now, who by his mother disceudeth of the same line of Portugal, that the king of Spain doth, and as this book pretendeth (if we respect the ordinary course of English laws in particular men's inheritances) he is to be preferred before the said king, or any other of the house of Portugal for that his mother descended of the younger son, and the king of the elder daughter, of the king of Portugal: and albeit according to the law of Portugal the king was adjudged next heir to that crown, yet say they by our laws of Ingland he cannot be, which after must be examined.  
Thus saith that book, and he allegeth many reasons for the same, as it hath been told me (for as I said I never came to have a view of the whole book) but divers of his arguments I have seen laid together, which I shall afterwards in place convenient allege unto you, with the answers censures and replies that the contrary parties do make thereunto.  
divers other papers notes and memories I have seen also (said he) as well touching the succession of those whom I have named as of others, for that Sir Richard Shelly who died some years a gone in Venice, by the name of Lord 
Sir Richard Shelly.  prior of S. john's of Ingland, had gathered divers points touching these affairs: & many more than he had M. Francis Peto that died in Milan, and was a very curious and well readen 
Franc. Peto.  man in genealogies, as may appear by sundry papers that I have seen of his. Their want not also divers in Ingland who have travailed much in this business, and I have had the perusing of some of their labours, though I dare not discover their names lest thereby I should hurt them, which were not convenient. But one great trouble find I in them all, that every man seeketh to draw the whole water unto his own mill, and to make that title always most clear, whom he most favoureth, and this with so great probability of reason and authority many times, as it is hard to retain a man's consent from that which is said, until he have read the reasons of the other party, and this also is a great proof, of the wonderful ambibiguity and doubtfulness which in this most important affair is to be found.  
And by the way also I had almost forgotten 
A treatise in the behalf of the Infanta of spain.  to tell you, how that of late I have lighted upon a certain new discourse and treatise, made in the behalf of the king of Spain's eldest daughter, whom he had by his wife, Isabel the eldest sister of the last king of France, which Isabel and her daughter the infanta of Spain called also Isabel, are presumed to be the lawful heirs to the state of Britain, and to all other states that by that means of Britain or otherwise by women have come to France, or have or may fall upon a woman of the house of France, as the states of Ingland and other states thereunto annexed may, for that they follow not the law salique of France, and so this treatise proveth that by divers ways and for sundry considerations, this princess of Spain is also of the blood royal of Ingland, and may among others be entitled to that crown, by a particular title of her own, beside the pretence which her father the king or her brother the prince of Spain have for themselves, by the house of Portugal, all which reasons and considerations I shall allege afterward in their place & time, or at leastwise the chief & principal of them.  
And to the end they may be understood the better, as also the clearness and pretensions of all the rest that have interest in this affair, I shall first of all for a beginning and foundation to all the rest that shall or may be spoken hereafter, set down by way of historical narration, all the descents of our English kings and pretenders that may important to this our purpose, from the conquest unto our time, which being compared with the tree itself of genealogies that shallbe added in the end of this conference, will make the matter more plain and pleasant to the reader.   

OF THE SUCCESSION OF THE CROWN OF INGLAND FROM THE CONQUEST UNTO the time of king Edward the third, with the beginning of three principallinages of the English blood royal, dispersed into the houses of Brittany Lancaster and York.  
CAP. II.  
NO man is ignorant said the lawyer how 
Descent of V Villiam the Conqueror.  William the Conqueror came to the crown of Ingland, which was in deed by dint of sword, though he pretended that he was chosen by the will and testament of king Edward the confessor. But howsoever this wear, his posterity hath endured until this day and two and twenty princes of his race have worn the English crown after him, for the space of more than 5. hundredth years, and how many more may yet do the same, God only knoweth; but if we follow probability, we cannot want of them, seeing his blood is so dipersed over the world at this day, as by this declaration ensuring will appear.  
This king William according to Polidor 
The children of the conqueror.  and other chronicles of Ingland, had by his wyf Mathilda daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders, four sons, and five daughters, his eldest son was Robert whom he left duke 
Polid. 1. 2. in fine Stow in vita Guliel  of Normandy, who was afterward deprived of that dukedom by his younger and fowerth brother Henry, when he came to be king of Ingland. His second son was Richard that died in his youth, his third was William, surnamed Rufus, for that he was of red hear, and the fowerth was Henrv, which two last sons, were both kings of England one after the other, as the world knoweth, by the names of William the second, and Henry the first.  
The Conqueror's daughters were first Cecilie that was a Nun, and the second Constantia that was married to Alayn, surnamed fergant duke of Brittany, and the third was Adela or Alis married to Stephen county Palatine of Bloys, Champagne, and Charters in France, and the other two Polidor saith, died before they were married, and so their names were not recorded.  
These are the children of king William the Conqueror, among whom after his death there 
The miseries of Duke Robert and his son.  was much strife about the succession. For first his eldest son duke Robert, who by order of ancestry by birth should have succeeded him in all his estares, was put back, first from the kingdom of Ingland, by his third brother William Rufus, upon a pretence of the Conquerors will and testament, for particular affection that he had to this his said third son William, though as Stow writeth, almost all the nobility of Inglande were against Willians 
Stow in vit Gul. Conquest.  entrance. But in the end agreement was made between the two brothers, with condition that if William should die without issue, then that Robert should succeed him, and to this accord, both the princes themselves, and twelve principal peers of each side were sworn, but yet after when William died without issue, this was not observed, but Henry the fourth son entered, and deprived Robert, not only of this his succession to Ingland, but also of his dukedom of Normandy, that he had enjoyed peaceably before, all the time of his brother Rufus, and moreover he took him prisoner & so carried him into Ingland, and there kept him until his death, which happened in the castle of Cardif in the year 1134.  
And whereas this Duke Robert had a 
William son of Duke Robett.  goodly prince to this son named William, who was duke of Normandy by his father, & earl of Flanders in the right of his grand mother, that was the Conqueror's wife, & daughter of Baldwin Earl of Flanders as hath been said, and was established in both these states by the help of Lewis the 6. surnamed le gros king of France, and admitted to do homage to him for the said states, his uncle king Henry of England was so violent against him, as first he drove him out of the state of Normandy, and secondly he set up and maintained a competitor or two against him in Flanders, by whom finally he was slain in the year of Christ 1128. before the town of Alost, by an arrow, after he had 
Belfor. 1. 3. cap. 42. An. 1128.  gotten the uppet hand in the field, and so ended the race of the first son of king William the Conqueror, to wit of duke Robert, which Robert lived after the death of his said son and heir duke William, six years in prison in the castle of Cardife and pined away with sorrow and misery, as both the French and English histories do agree.  
The second son of the Conqueror named Richard, died as before hath been said, in his father's time, and left no issue at all, as did neither the third son, William Rufus, though he reigned 13. years after his father the Conqueror, in 
King William Rufus.  which time he established the succession of the crown by consent of the stars of Ingland to his elder brother duke Robert's issue, as hath been said, though afterward it was not observed.  
This King Rufus came to the crown principally by the help and favour of Lanfrancus Archbishop of Canterbury, who greatly repent himself afterward of the error which in that point he had committed, upon hope of his good government which proved extreme evil.  
But this king William Rufus being slain afterward by the error of a crossbow, in newforest as is well known, and this at such time as the foresaid duke Robert his elder brother (to whom the crown by succession apparteyned) was absent in the war of the holy land, where (according as most authors do writ) he was chosen king of Jerusalem, but refused it upon hope of the kingdom of Ingland. 
〈◊〉 l. 2 deal hist. del mondo.  But he returning home, found that his fowerth brother Henry, partly by fair promises, and partly by force had invaded the crown, in the 
K. Henry.  year 1100. and so he reigned 35. years, and had issue divers sons and daughters, but all were either drowned in the seas coming out of Normandy, or else died otherwise before 
Polydor. in vita Henrici 1.  their father, except only Mathildis who was first married to Henry the Emperor, fift of that name, and after his death without issue, to Geffrey Platagenet duke of Anjow, Tourayne, and Main in France, by whom she had Henry which reigned after king Stephen, by the name of Henry the second, and thus much of the sons of William the Conqueror.  
Of his two daughters that lived to be married and had issue, the elder named Constance 
The house of Britain by the elder daughter of the Conqueror Belfor. l. 3 Pag. 423.  was married to Alayn fergat duke of Brittany, who was son to Hoel earl of Nantes, and was made duke of Brittany by William Conquerors means, in manner following.  
Duke Robert of Normandy father to the Conqueror, when he went in pilgrimage unto the holy land (in which voyage he died) left for governor of Normandy, under the protection of king Henry the first of france, duke Alayne the first of Brittany, which Allayn had issue Conan the first, who being a stirring prince of about 24. years old when duke William began to treat of passing over into Ingland, he showed himself not to favour much that enterprise, which duke William fearing, caused him to be poisoned with a 
Conan Duke of Brittany poisoned by William Con queror.  pair of perfumed gloves, as the French stories do report, and caused to be set up in his place and made duke, one Hoel earl of Nantes, who to gratify William sent his son Alaine surnamed Fergant with 5000. soldiers to pass over into Ingland with him, and so he did, & William afterward in recompense hereof gave him his eldest daughter Constantia in marriage with the earldom of Richmond, by whom he had issue Conan the second, surnamed le gros who had issue a son and a daughter. The son was called Hoel, as his grand father was, and the daughter's name was Bertha married to Eudo Earl of 〈◊〉 in Normandy, & for that this duke Conan, liked better his 
Belfor. l. 3 cap. 12. An. 1065. ex chronic dionis.  daughter and his son in law her husband than he did Hoel his own son, he disavowed him in his death bed, and made his said daughter his heir: who had by the said Eudo, a son named Conan surnamed the younger, which was the third duke of that name, and this man had one only daughter and heir named Lady Constance who whas married to the third son of king Henry the second named Geffrey & elder brother to king John that after came to rain & by this Lord Geffrey she had issue Arthur the second duke of Brittany, whom king john his uncle put back from the crown of Ingland, and caused to be put to death, as after shallbe showed, and he dying without issue, his mother Constance duchess & heir of Brittany, married again with a prince of her own house, whom after we shall name in the prosecution of this line, and by him she had issue that hath endured until this day, the last whereof hitherto is the lady Isabel infanta of Spain, & that other of Savoy her sister, whom by this means we see 
The daughters of spain are of the blood royal of Ingland.  to have descended from king William the Conqueror, by his eldest daughter lady Constance as also by divers other participations of the blood royal of Ingland, as afterwards will appear.  
Now then to come to the second daughter of king William the Conqueror, or rather the 
The houses of Aloys.  third (for that the first of all was a Nun as before hath been noted) her name was Adela or Alis as hath been said, and she was married in France to Stephen count Palatin of Champagne Charters and Bloys, by whom she had a son called also Stephen, who by his grand mother was earl also of Bollayne in Picardy, and after the death of his uncle king Henry of Ingland, was by the favour of the English nobility, and especially by the help of his own brother the Lord Henry of Bloys, that was Bishop of Winchester and jointly Abbot of Glastenbury, made king of England, and this both in respect that Mathilda daughter of king Henry the first was a woman, and her son 
Why Stephen was admitted king of  Henry duke of Anjou, a very child, & one degree farther of from the Conqueror and from kings Rufus then Stephen was, as also for that this king Henry the first (as hath been signified before) was judged by many to have entered wrongfully unto the crown, and thereby to have made both himself and his posterity incapable of succession by the violence which he used against both his elder brother Robart, and his nephew duke William, that was son and heir to Robert who by nature and law were both of them held for soveraintes to john, by those that favoured them and their pretensions.  
But yet howsoever this were, we see that the duke of Britain, that lived at that day, should 
Girard. l. 6 Belfor. l. 3  evidently have succeeded before Stephen, for that he was descended of the elder daughter, of the Conqueror, and Stephen of the younger, though Stephen by the commodity he had of the nearness of his port and haven of Bullayne unto Ingland, as the French stories do say (for Calais was of no importance at that time) and by the friendship and familiarity he had gotten in Ingland during the reign of his two uncles king Rufus and king Henry, and especially by the help of his brother the Bishop and Abbot as hath been said, he got the start of all the rest, and the states of Ingland admitted him.  
This man although he had two sons namely 
The issue of king Stephen.  Eustachius duke of Normandy, and William earl of Norfolk, yet left they no issue? And his daughter Marie was married to matthew of Fladers of whom if any issue remains, it fell afterward upon the house of Austria, that succeeded in those states.  
To king Stephen who left no issue succeeded by composition after much war Henry duke 
K. Henry the 2.  of Anjou, son and heir to Mathilda before named, daughter of Henry the first, which Henry named afterward the second, took to wife Elinor daughter and heir of William duke of Aquitaine, & earl of Poitiers, which 
Belfor. l. 3 cap. 50. An. 1151. Gerard. l. 8. pag. 549  Elinor had been married before to the king of France Lewis the 7. and bore him two daughters, but upon dislike conceived by the one against the other, they were divorced, under pretence of being within the fowerth degree of consanguinity, and so by second marriage Elinor was wife to this said Henry who afterward was king of Ingland by name of K. Henry the second, that procured the death of Thomas Becket archebishope of Canterbury, and was both before and after the greatest enemy, that ever Lewis the king of France had in the world, and much the greater for his marriage, by which Henry was made far stronger, for by this woman he came to be duke of all Aquitaine, that is of Gascony and Guyene, and earl of all the country of Poitiers, whereas beforealso by his father's inheritance, he was duke both of Anjou, Tourayne, and Main, & by his mother Mathilda king Henry's daughter of Ingland he came to be king of Ingland, & duke of Normandy, and by his own industry, he got also to be lord of Ireland, as also to bring Scotland under his homage, so as he enlarged the kingdom of Ingland most of any other king before or after him.  
This king Henry the second as Stow reconteth, 
K. Henry the 2. his issue Stow in vita Henci.  had by Lady Elinor five sons and three daughters. His eldest son was named William that died young, his second was Henry whom he caused to be crowned in his own life time, whereby he received much trouble, but in the end this son died before his father without issue. His third son was Richard surnamed for his valour Cor de leon, who reigned after his father, by the name of Richard the 
King RIchard.  first, and died without issue in the year of Christ 1199.  
His fourth son named Geffrey, married 
Duke Geffrey.  lady Constance daughter and heir of Brittany, as before hath been said, and dying left a son by her named Arthur, which was duke of Brittany after him, and pretended also to be king of Ingland, but was put by it by his uncle john, that took him also prisoner, and kept him so in the castle first of fallaise in Normandy, and then in Rouen, until he caused him to be put to death, or slew him with his own hands as French stories write, in the year 1204.  
This duke Arthur left behind him two sisters 
Paradyn apud Belforest.  as Stow writeth in his chronicles, but others writ that it was but one, and at least wise, I find but one named by the french stories, which was Elinor, whom they say king john also caused to be murdered in Ingland a 
Belfor. l. 3 cap. 71. An. 1203.  a little before her brother the duke was put to death in Normandy, and this was the end of the issue of Geffrey, whose wife Constance duchess of Brittany married again after this murder of her children, unto one Guy Vicond of Tovars, and had by him two daughters, 
Belfor. l. 4 cap. 4.  whereof the eldest named Alis was duchefse of Brittany, by whom the race hath been continued unto our tyme.  
The fift son of king Henry the second was named john, who after the death of his 
K. john and his issue.  brother Richard by help of his mother Elinor, and of Hubert Archbishop of Canterbury, drawn thereunto by his said mother, got to be king, and put back his nephew Arthur, whom king Richard before his departure to the war of the holy land had caused to be declared heir apparent, but john prevailed and made away both nephew and Niece, as before hath been said, for which fact he was detested of many in the world abroad, and in France by act of parliament deprived of all the states he had in those parts. Soon after also the pope gave sentence of deprivation against him, and his 
Miseries that fell upon king john.  own barons took arms to execute the sentence, and finally they deposed both him and his young son Henry being then but a child of 8. years old, and this in the 18. year of his reign, and in the year of Christ 1215. and Lewis the 8. of that name prince at that time but 
Polid. Haul ling & Stow. in vitae johannis.  afterward king of France, was chosen king of Ingland, & sworn in London and placed in the Tower, though soon after by the sudden death of king john that course was altered again, & Henry his son admitted for king.  
And thus much of the sons of king Henry the second, but of his daughters by the same 
The issue of king Henry the 2. his daughters.  lady Elinor heir of Gascony, Belforest in his story of France hath these words following. King Henry had four daughters by Elinor of Aquiraine, the eldest whereof was married to 
Belfor. l. 3 cap. 49. An. 1152.  Alonso the 9 of that name king of Castille, of which marriage issued Queen Blanch mother to S. Lewis king of France. The second of these two daughters was espoused to Alexis Emperor of Constantinople. The third was married to the duke of Saxony, and the fourth was given to the earl of Tholosa, thus being the french stories of these daughters.  
Of the marriage of the eldest daughter of these four (whose name was Elinor also as her mothers was) with king Alonso the 9 of Castille 
The issue of Lady Eleanor Queen of spain.  there proceeded many children, but only one son that lived, whose name was Henry, who was king of Castille after his father, by the name of Henry the first, and died quickly without issue, and besides this Henry, two daughters also were borne of the same marriage of which the eldest and heir named Blanch, was married by intercession of her uncle king john of Ingland, with the foresaid Prince Lewis of France, with this express condition, as both Polidor in his English story & 
Polidor. l. 15. in vit johan, Stephen Garib li. 22. cap. 31  Garibay the chronicler of Spain do affirm, that she should have for her dowry all the states that king john had lost in France, which were almost all that he had there, and this to the end, he might not seem to have lost them by force, but to have given them with the marriage of his Niece, and so this marriage was made, and her husband Lewis was afterward chosen also king of Ingland by the Barons, and sworn in London, as before hath been said, & hereby also the Infanta of Spain before mentioned, that is descended lineally from both these princes, I mean as well from Queen Blanch as from Lewis, is proved to have her pretence fortified to the interest of Ingland, as afterward shallbe declared more at large in due place.  
The second daughter of king Alonso the 9 by Queen Elinor, was named Berenguela, and 
Queen Berenguela.  was married to the prince of Leon in Spain, and had by him a son named Fernando, who afterward when king Henry her brother was dead, was admitted by the Castilians for their king, by the name of Fernando the fourth, as before the Civilian hath noted, and Blanch with her son S. Lewis though she were the elder, was put by the crown against all right of succession, as Garibay the Spaniard Chronicler 
Garibay li. 12. c. 52  noteth and confesseth.  
Hereby than some do gather, that as the first 
Pretences of the Infanta of spain to English & French states.  interest which the crown of Ingland had to the states of Gascony Guyne and poitiers, came by a woman: so also did it come to France by the right of this foresaid Blanch, whereof the favourers of the Infanta of Spain do say, that she being now first and next in blood of that house, aught to inherit all these and such like states, as are inheritable by women, or came by women, as the former states of Gascony and Guune did to king Henry the second, by Queen Elinor his wife, and Normandy by Mathilda his mother, and both of them to France by this former interest of Blanch, and more they say, that his lady Blanch mother to King S. Lewis, whose heir at this day the infanta of spain is, should by right have inherited the kingdom of Ingland also, after the murder of Duke Arthur and his sister Elinor, for that she was the next of kin unto them, at that time, which could be capable to succeed them, for that king john himself was uncapable of their succession whom he had murdered, and his son Henry was not then borne, nor in divers years after, and if he had been, yet could he receive no interest thereunto by his father, who had none himself: of all which points their will be more particular occasion to speak hereafter.  
Now than I come to speak of king Henry the third who was son to this king john, and 
K. Henry the 3 and his issue.  from whom all the three houses before mentioned of Brittany Lancaster and York, do seem to issue, as a triple branch out of one tree, albeit the royal line of Brittany is more ancient, and was divided before even from William Conquerors time, as hath been showed, yet do they knit again in this king Henry, for that of king Henry the third his eldest son, named 
The meeting of three houses.  prince Edward the first, descended Edward the second, and of him Edward the third, from whom properly riseth the house of York. And of his second son Edmond surnamed crooke-backs 
Prince Edward Duke Edmond.  county Palatine of Lancaster, issued the dukes of Lancaster until in the third dissent, when the Lady Blanch heir of that house matched with john of Gaunt, third son of king Edward the third, from which marriage rose afterward the formal division of these two houses of Lancaster and York, & also two distinct branches of Lancaster.  
Besides these two sons, king Henry the 
Lad. Beatrix daughter of king Henry 3.  third had a daughter named lady Beatrix, whom he married to john the second of that name duke of Brittany, who after was stain at Lions in France, by the fall of an old wall, in the coronation of pope Clement the 5. of that name, in the year of Christ 1298. and for that the friends of the Infanta of Spain, do seek to strengthen her title by this her descent also of the royal blood of Ingland, from Henry the third as afterward shallbe declared, I will briefly in this place continue the pedigree of the house of Brittany from that I left before, even to our days.  
I showed before in this chapter, that Geffrey 
The pedigree of the dukes of Brittany.  the third son to king Henry the second, and duke of Brittany by his wife, being dead, & his two children Arthur and Elinor put to death by their uncle king john in Ingland, as before hath been said, it fell out that Constance duchess and heir of Brittany married again to Guy viscond of Tovars, and had by him two daughters, whereof the eldest named. Alis was duchess of Brittany, and married to Peter Brien earl of Drusse, and by him had john the first of that name, duke of Brittany, which john the first had issue john the second, who married lady Beatrix before mentioned, daughter to king Henry the third, and by her had the second Arthur duke of Brittany to whom succeeded his eldest son by his first wife, named john the third, who dying without issue, left the very same trouble and garboil in Brittany about the succession between the two noble houses of Bloys and Monford, the one maintained by France, and the other by Ingland, as 
The great contention between the houses of Montanus ford and Bloys in Brittany. Burgundy and Orleans.  soon after upon the very like occasion happened in Ingland, between the houses of Lancaster & York as after shallbe showed. And not long after that again the like affliction also ensued in France, (though not for succession but upon other occasions) between the great and royal houses of Burgundy and Orleans, whereby all three common wealths (I mean Ingland Brittany and France) were like to have come to destruction and utter desolation.  
And for that it may serve much to our purpose hereafter, to understand well this contiousie 
The controversy between the house of monford and Bloys.  of Brittany, I think it not amiss in few words to declare the same in this place, thus than it happened.  
The foresaid Arthur the second of that name, duke of Brittany, and son of Lady Beatrix that was daughter (as hath been said) to king Henry the third of Ingland, had two wives, the first named Beatrix as his mother was, and by this he had two sons, john that succeeded him in the state, by the name of duke john the third, and Guye that dying before his elder brother left a daughter and heir, named joan, and surnamed the lame, for that she halted, who was married to the earl of Bloys, that was nephew to Philip of Valois, king of France, for that he was borne of his sister.  
But besides these two children, the said duke Arthur had by his second wife, named joland countess and heir of the earldom of Monford, an other son called john Breno, who in the right of his mother was earl of Monford, And afterward when duke john the third came to die without issue, the question was, who should succeed him in his dukedom, the uncle or the niece, that is to say, his third brother john Breno by half blood or else his Niece joan the lame, that was daughter and heir to his second brother Guye of whole blood, 
A Question about succession betven the uncle and the niece.  that is by father and mother, which lady joan was married to the earl of Bloys as hath been said. And first this matter was handled in the parliament of Paris, the king himself sitting in judgement with all his peers, the 30. day of Septemb. 1341. and adjudged it to the earl of Bloys, both for that his wife was heir to the elder brother, as also for that duke john by his testament and consent of the states, had appointed her to be his heir, but yet king Edward the third and states of Ingland did judge it otherwise, and preferred john Monford, not knowing that the very like case was to fall out very soon after in Ingland, I mean, they judged the state to john Breno earl of monford younger brother to Guye, & they did assist him, and his son after him, with all their forces for the gaining and holding of that state.  
And albeit at the beginning, it seemed that matters went against Monford, for that himself was taken prisoner in Nantes, and carried captive to Paris where he died in prison, yet his son john by the assistance of the English 
The house of Blois over come.  armies got the dukedom afterward, and slew the earl of Bloys, and was peaceably duke of Brittany by the name of john the fourth, and his posterity hath endured until this day, as briefly here I will declare.  
This duke john the fourth of the house of 
The suecession of the Monfords in Brittany.  Monford had issue john the fift, & he, Francis the first, who dying without issue, left the dukedom to Peter his brother, and Peter having no children neither, he left it to his uncle Arthur the third, brother to his father john the fift, and this Arthur was earl of Richmond in Ingland, as some of his ancestors had been before him, by gifts of the kings of Ingland.  
This Arthur dying without issue left the 
Francis last Duke of Britain.  dukdome unto his nephew, to wit his brother's son Francis the second, who was the last male child of that race, and was he that had once determined, to have delivered Henry earl of Richmond, unto his enemy king Edward the fourth, and after him to king Richard the 3. but that Henry's good fortune reserved him to come to be king of Ingland.  
This duke Francis had a daughter and heir named Anna, married first to Charles the eight 
How the dukdome of Brittany was united to france.  king of France, and after his death without issue to his successor Lewis the 12. by whom she had a daughter named Claudia that was heir to Brittany, though not to the crown of France, by reason of the law Salic, that holdeth against women in the kingdom of Frace but not in Brittany, and to the end this dukdome should not be disvnited again from the said crown of France, this daughter Claudia was married to Francis duke of Angoleme heir apparent to the crown of France, by whom she had issue Henry, that was afterward king of France, and was father to the last king of that country, and to Ysabel mother of the Infanta of Spain, and of her sister the duchess 
3.  of Savoy that now is, by which also some do affirm that the said princess or Infanta of spain, albeit she be barred from the succession of France, by their pretended law Salic: yet is her title manifest to the dukdome of Brittany, that came by a woman as we have showed, and thus much of the house of Brittany and of the princess of Spain, how she is of the blood royal of Ingland, from the time of William Conqueror himself by his eldest daughter, as also by other kings after him: and now we shall return to prosecute the issue of these two sons of king Henry the third, to wit of Edward and Edmond, which before we left.  
I showed yond before how king Henry the third had two sons, Edward the prince, that 
The issue male of king Henry the 〈◊〉.  was king after his father, by the name of Edward the first, and Edmond surnamed crokback by some writers, who was the first earl and county Palatine of Lancaster, and beginner of that house.  
And albeit some writers of our time, have affirmed or at least wise much inclined to favour 
The Bishop of Rosle in his book of the Q. of Scots title.  a certain old report, that Edmond should be the elder brother to Edward, and put back only for his deformity of his body, (whereof Polidor doth speak in the beginning of the 
George Lily in fine epitomes chron. Anglic.  reign of king Henry the fourth, and as well the Bishop of Rosse as also George Lylly do seem to believe it) yet evident it seemeth that is was but a fable, as before I have noted and now again I shall briefly prove it by these reasons following, for that it importeth very much for deciding the controversy between the houses of Lancaster and york.  
The first reason than is, for that all ancient historiographers of Ingland and among them 
That Edward was the elder.  Matheus Westmonasteriensis that lived at the same time do affirm the contrary, and do make 
Matheus west in vit Henrici 3. & bollings. Ibidem pag. 654.  Edward to be elder than Edmond by six years and two days, for that they appoint the birth of Prince Edward to have been upon the 16. day of june in the year of Christ 1239, & the 24. of the reign of his father king Henry, and the birth of Lord Edmond to have followed upon the 18. day of the same month 6. years after, to wit in the year of our lord 1245. and they do name the godfathers and godmothers of them both together, with the peculiar solemnities and feasts, that were celebrated at their several nativities, so as it seemeth there can be no ertor in this matter.  

2.  The 2. reason is, for that we read that this Lord Edmond was a goodly wise and discreet prince, notwithstanding that some authors call him crokback, and that he was highly in the favour both of his father king Henry, as also of his brother king Edward, and employed by them in many great wars, and other affairs of state, both in France & other where, which argueth that there was no such great defect in him as should move his father and the realm to deprive him of his succession.  

3.  Thirdly we read that king Henry procured by divers ways and means the advancement of this L. Edmond, as giving him the earldoms of Leicester & Derby besides that of Lancaster, 
Holling head in vit Henrici 3. pag. 740. & 777.  as also procuring by all means possible & with exceeding great charges to have him made king of Naples & Sicily by pope Innocentius which had been no policy to have done, if he had been put back from his inheritance in Ingland, for that it had been to have armed him against his brother the king.  

4.  Fourthly we see that at the death of his father king Henry the third, this Lord Edmond was principally left in charge with the realm, his elder brother prince Edward being scarcely returned from the war of Asia, at what time, he had good occasion to challenge his own right to the crown, if he had had any, seeing he wanted no power thereunto, having three goodly sons at that time alive, borne of his wife Queen Blanch dowager of Navarre, who had been married before to Henry king of Navarre, and contie of Champain, to whom she had borne only one daughter, that was married to Philip le bell king of France.  
But we shall never read that either he, or 
edmond's line never pretended to the crown.  any of his children, made any such claim, but that they lived in very good agreement & high grace with king Edward the first, as his children did also with king Edward the second, until he began to be misled in government, and then the two sons of this Lord Edmond I mean both Thomas and Henry, that successively were earls of Lancaster) made war upon the said Edward the second, and were the principal doers in his deposition, & in setting up of his son Edward the third in his place, at what time it is evident that they might have put in also for themselves, if there title had been such as this report maketh it.  
A fift reason is, for that if this had been so, 
5. Note this consequent.  that Edmond earl of Lancaster, had been the elder brother, than had the controversy between the two houses of York and Lancaster, been most clear and without all doubt at all, for than had the house of York had no pretence of right in the world, and then were it evident, that the heirs general of Blanch duchess of Lancaster wife of john of Gaunt, to wit, the discendentes of lady Philip her daughter, that was married into Portugal, these I say, and none other, were apparent and true heirs to the crown of Ingland at this day, and all the other of the house of York usurpers, as well king Henry the 7. as all his posterity & offspring, for that none of them have 〈◊〉 of the said Blanch as is manifest.  
And therefore lastly the matter standeth (no 
6. The elder ship of Edmond a fiction.  doubt) as Polidor holdeth in the later end of the life of king Henry the third, where having mentioned these two sons Edward & Edmond, he addeth these words. There wanted not certain men long time after this, that affirmed this Edmond to 
Polyd in fine vitae Hent. 3.  be the elder son to king Henry the third, and to have been deprived of his inheritance, for that he was deformed in body, but these things were feigned to the end that king Henry the fourth that came by his mother's side of this Edmond, might seem to have come to the kingdom by right, whereas indeed he got it by force.  
Thus saith Polidor in this place, but afterwards in the beginning of the life of the said K. Henry the 4. he sayeth, that some would have had king Henry to have pretended this title among other reasons, but that the more part accounting it but a mere fable, it was omitted.  
Now than it being clear that of these two sons of king Henry the third, prince Edward was the elder and lawful heir, it remaineth only that we set down, their several descents unto the times of king Edward the third, and his children, in whose days the dissension & controversy between these royal houses of York and Lancaster, began to break fourth.  
And for the issue of Edward that was king after his father, by the name of king Edward 
The issue of king Edward the first.  the first, it is evident that albeit by two several wives he had a dozen children, male and female, yet only his fourth son by his first wife called also Edward (who was king after him by the name of king Edward the second) left issue that remained, which Edward the second being afterward for his evil government deposed, left issue Edward the third, who was made king by election of the people in his place, and after a long and prosperous reign, left divers sons, whereof after we shall speak, and among them his third son named john of Gaunt, married lady Blanch daughter and heir of the house of lancaster, and of the forenamed Lord Edmond Crouchback, by which Blanch, john of Gant became duke of lancaster: so as the lines of these two brethren Edward and Edmond did meet and join again in the fourth descent, as now shall appear by declaration of the issue of the foresaid L. Edmond.  
Edmond then the second son of K. Henry the third, being made county palatine of Lancaster, 
The issue of Edmond Crock-back.  as also earl of Leicester and of Derby, by his father king Henry, as hath been said: had issue three sons, to wit, Thomas Henry and john, among whom he divided his three states, making Thomas his eldest son, county palatine of Lancaster, Henry earl of Leicester, & john earl of Derby. But Thomas the eldest & john the youngest dying without issue, all three states fell again upon Henry the second son, which Henry had issue one son and three daughters, his son was named Henry the second of that name, earl of Lancaster, and made duke of Lancaster, by king Edward the third, and he had one only daughter & heir named Blanch, who was married unto john of Gant as before hath been said. But Duke Henry's three sisters named joan Mary and Elinor, were all married to divers principal men of the realm, for that joan was married to john L. Maubery of whom are descended 
Collateral lines of Lancastez.  the Howards of the house of Norfolk at this day, and Mary was married to Henry lord Percy, from whom cometh the house of the Earls of Northumberland, and Elinor was married to Richard earl of Arundel, whence is issued also by his mother's side the Earl of Arundel that now is, so as of this ancient line of Lancaster their want not noble houses with in the realm at this day, issued thence before the conttoversie fell out between york & this family, of which controversy how it rose and how it was continued, I shall now begin to make more particular declaration, taking my beginning from the children of king Edward the third, who were the causers of this fatal dissension.   

OE THE SUCCESSION OF English KINGS FROM KING EDVARD THE THIRD UNTO OUR days, with the particular causes of dissension, between the families of york and Lancaster more largely declared.  
CAP. III.  
KING Edward the third surnamed by the 
five sons of K. Edward 3.  English the victorious, though he had many children, whereof some died without issue, which appertain not to us to treat of, yet had he five sons, that lest issue behind them, to wit Edward the eldest that was prince of Wales surnamed the black Prince: Leonel duke of Clarence which was the 2. son, john of Gant so called for that he was borne in that city, that was the third son, and by his wife was duke of Lancaster, and four Edmond surnamed of Langley, for that he was also borne there, and was duke of York, & last of all Thomas the fift son surnamed of Woodstock, for the same reason of his birth, and was duke of Gloucester.  
All these five dukes, being great princes and sons of one king, left issue behind them as shallbe declared, and for that the discendents of the third and fourth of these sons, to wit, of the dukes of Lancaster and York, came afterward to strive who had best title to reign, thereof it came, that the controversy had his name of these two families, which for more distinction sake, & the better to be known, took upon them for their ensigns a rose of two 
The red rose and the white.  different colours, to wit, the white rose, and the red, as all the world knoweth, whereof the white served for York, and the red for Lancaster.  
To begin then to show the issue of all these 
issue of the black prince.  five princes, it is to be noted, that the two elder of them, to wit, prince Edward, and his second brother Leonel Duke of Clarence, died both of them before king Edward their father, and left each of them an heir, for that Prince Edward left a son named Richard, who succeeded in the crown immediately after his grandfather, by the name of king Richard the second, but afterwards for his evil government was deposed, and died in prison without issue, and so was ended in him the succession of the first son of king Edward.  
The second son Leonel, dying also before his father, left behind him one only daughter 
The issue of leonel the 2. son.  and heir, named Philip, who was married to one Edmond mortime Earl of march, and he had by her a son and heir named Roger mortime, which Roger had issue two sons named Edmond and Roger, which died both without children, and one daughter named Ann mortime, which was married unto Richard Plantagenet earl of Cambrige, second son unto Edmond Langly duke of York, which duke Edmond was fourth son, as hath been said, unto king Edward the third, and 
The issue of Edmond the 4 son.  for that this Richard Plantagenet married the said Anne as hath been said, hereby it came to pass, that the house of York joined two titles in one, to wit, that of Leonel duke of Clarence, which was the second son of K. Edward the third, & that of Edmond langly duke of york which was the fourth son: and albeit this Richard Plantagenet himself never came to be duke of York, for that he was put to death whiles his elder brother lived, by king Henry the fift for a conspiracy discovered in South hampton against the said king, when he was going over into france with his army: yet he left a son behind him named also Richard, who afterward came to be duke of York, by the death of his uncle, which uncle was 〈◊〉 soon after in the battle of Egencourt in France: & this Richard began first of all to prosecute openly his quarrel for the title of the crown, against the house of Lancaster, as a little afterward more in particular shallbe declared, as also shallbe showed how that this 2. Richard duke of York being slain also in the same quariel, left a son named Edward, earl of march, who after much trouble got to be king, by the name of king Edward the 4. by the oppression and putting down of king Henry the 6. of the house of Lancaster, and was the first king of the house of York, whose gevealogie we shall lay down more largely afterwards in place convenient.  
And now it followeth in order that we should speak of john of Gaunt the third son, but for that his descent is great, I shall first show the descent of the fifth and last son of king Edward who was Thomas of Woodstock duke of Gloucester and earl of Buckingham, 
The issue of Thomas the 5. son.  that was put to death afterward or rather murdered wrongfully, by order of his nephew king Richard the second, and he left only one daughter and heir named Anna who was married to the L. Stafford whose family afterwards in regard of this marriage came to be dukes Buckingham ha', & were put down by king Richard the third, and king Henry the eight, albeit some of the blood and name do remain yet still in Ingland.  
And thus having brought to an end the issue of three sons of king Edward, to wit of the first second & fift, & touched also, some what of the fourth, there resteth to prosecute more fully the issues & descents of the third & fourth sons, to wit of john of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, and of Edmond Langly duke of York, which are the heads of these two noble families, which thing I shall do in this place with all brevity and perspecuity possible, beginning first with the house of Lancaster.  
john of Gaunt third son of king Edward 
The issue of the 3. son duke of Lancan.  being duke of Lancaster by his wife, as hath been said, had three wives in all, and by every one of them had issue, though the bishop of Rosse in his great Latin arbour of the genealogies of the kings of Ingland, printed in Paris in the year 1580. assigneth but one wife only to this john of Gaunt, and consequently that all his childen were borne of her, which is a great and manifest error and causeth great confusion in all the rest which in his book of the Queen of Scots title he buildeth hereon, for that it being evident, that only the first wife was daughter and heir of the house of Lancaster, and john of Gant duke thereof by her, it followeth that the children only that were borne of her, can pretend properly to the inheritance of that house, and not others borne of john of Gaunt by other wives as all the world will confess.  
First then (as I have said) this john of Gaunt married Blanch daughter and heir of Henry 
The issue by Lady Blanch.  duke of Lancaster, and had by her one son only and two daughters. The son was called Henry earl first of Derby, and after made duke of Hereford by king Richard the second, and after that came to be duke also of Lancaster by the death of his father, and lastly was made king by the deposition of his cozen germane the said king Richard, and reigned 13. years by the name of king Henry the fourth, and was the first king of the house of Lancaster, of the right of whose title examination shallbe made afterwards.  
The first of the two daughters which john of Gaunt had by Blanch, was named Philip, 
L. Philip married into Portuganl and her issue.  who was married to john the first of that name king of Portugal, by whom she had issue Edward king of Portugal, and he Alfonsus the fift, & he john the second & so one after another even unto our days.  
The second daughter of john of Gaunt by 
Lady Elizabeth second daughter.  lady Blanch was named Elizabeth, who was married to john Holland duke of Excester, & she had issue by him, an other john, duke of Excester, and he had issue Henry duke of Excester, that died without issue male, leaving only one daughter named Anne, who was married to Sir Thomas Nevil knight, and by him had issue Raffe Nevil third earl of Westmoreland, whose lineal heir is at this day Lord Charles Nevil earl oft Westmoreland, that liveth banished in Flanders.  
And this is all the issue that john of Gaunt had by lady Blanch his first wife, saving only 
The issue of King Henry the 4.  that I had forgotten to prosecute the issue of Henry his first son, surnamed of Bolenbrok, that was afterward called king Henry the fourth which king had 4. sons and two daughters, his daughters were Blanch and Philip, the first married to William duke of Bavaria, and the second to Erick king of Denmark, and both of them died without children.  
The four sons were first Henry that reigned after him by the name of Henry the fift, and the second was Thomas duke of Clarence, the third was john duke of Bedford, and the fourth was Humphrey duke of Gloucester, all which three dukes died without issue or were slain in wars of the realm, so as only king Henry the fift their elder brother had issue one son named Henry also, that was king, and reigned 40. years by the name of Henry the sixth who had issue prince Edward & both of them (I mean both father & son) were murdered by order or permission of Edward duke of York, who afterward took the crown upon him; by the name of king Edward the fourth, as before hath been said so as in this king Henry the 6. and his son prince Edward, ended all the blood royal male of the house of Lancaster, by Blanch the first wife of john of Gaunt, and the inheritance of the said lady Blanch returned by right of succession as the favourers of the house of Portugal affirm though others deny it, unto the heirs of lady Philip her eldest daughter, married into Portugal, whose nephew named Alfonsus the fift king of Portugal lived at that day when king Henry the 6. and his heir were made away, and this much of john of Gaunts first marriage.  
But after the death of the L. Blanch john of Gaunt married the Lady Constance, daughter 
The issue of john of Gant by his 2. wife.  and heir of Peter the first surnamed the cruel king of Castille, who being driven out of his kingdom by Henry his bastard brother, assisted thereunto by the french, he fled to Bordeaux with his wife & two daughters, where he found prince Edward eldest son to king Edward the third, by whom he was restored, and for pledge of his fidelity and performance of other conditions that the said king Peter had promised to the Prince, he left his two daughters with him, which daughters being sent afterwards into Ingland, the eldest of them, 
The controversy in Spain between King Peter the cruel and his bastard brother.  named Constance, was married to john of Gaunt, and by her title he named himself for divers years afterward, king of Castille, and went to gain the same by arms, when Peter her father was stain by his foresaid bastard brother, but yet some years after that again, their was an agreement made between the said john of Gaunt, and john the first of that name, king of Castille, son and heir of the foresaid Henry the bastard, with condition, that Catherine the only daughter of john of 〈◊〉 by lady Constance, should marry with Henry the third prince of Castille, son, and 
Garibay l. 15 c. 26.  heir of the said king john, and nephew to the bastard Henry the 2. and by this means was ended that controusie between Ingland and Castille, and the said L. Catherine had issue by king Henry, john the 2. king of Castille, & he Isabella that married with Ferdinando the Catholic king of Arragon, and joined by that marriage both those kingdoms together, and by him she had a daughter named joan, that married Philip duke of Austria and Burgundy, and by him had Charles the fifth that was Emperor, and father to king Philip that now reigneth in Spain, who (as we see) is descended two ways from john of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, to wit by two daughters begotten of two wives, Blanch and Constance, neither had john of Gaunt any more children by Constance but only this daughter Catherine, of whom we have spoken, wherefore now we shall speak of his third wife that was Lady Catherine Swinford. 
Of Lady Catherine Swinford hollings head in vita Richardi 2. pag. 1088.   
This lady Catherine as English histories do note, was borne in Henalt in Flanders, & was daughter to a knight of that country called Sir pain de Ruet, and she was brought up in her youth in the duke of Lancaster's house, and attended upon his first wife lady Blanch, and being fair of parsonage, grew in such favour with the duke, as in the time of his second wife Constance, he kept this Catherine for his concubine, and begat upon her four children, to wit, three sons, and a daughter, which daughter (whose name was jane) was married to Ralph earl of Westmoreland called commonly in those days Daw Raby, of whom descended the Earls of Westmoreland that ensued. His three sons were john, Thomas, and Henry, and john was first earl and then duke of Somerset, Thomas was first marquis Dorset, and then duke of Excester, Henry was Bishop of Winchester and after Cardinal.  
And after john of Gaunt had begotten all thes 4. children upon Catherine, he married her to a knight in Ingland named Swinford, which knight lived not many years after, & john of Gaunt coming home to Ingland, from Aquitaine, where he had been for divers years, and seeing this old concubine of his Catherine, to be now a widow, and himself also without a wife (for that the lady Constance was dead a little before) for the love that he bore to the children which he had begotten of her he determined to marry her, and thereby the rather to legitimate her children, though himself were old now and all his kindred utterly against the marriage, and so not full two years before his death, to wit, in the year of Christ 1396. he married her, and the next 
The duke of Lancaster's ba stards made legitimate Hollingh in vita Rich. 2. pag. 1090.  year after in a parliament begun at Westminster, the 22. of january anno Domini 1397. he caused all his said issue to be legitimated which he had begotten upon this lady Swinford before she was his wife.  
But now to go forward to declare the issue of thes three sons of john of Gaunt by Catherine Swinford, two of them, that is, Thomas 
The issue of Catherine Swinfords' children.  duke of Excester, and Henry Cardinal and Bishop of Winchester, died without issue, john the eldest son that was earl of Somerset had issue two sons, john and Edmond, john that was duke of Somerset had issue one only daughter, named Margeret who was married to Edmond Tidder earl of Richmond, by whom he had a son named 
K. Henry 7.  Henry, earl also of Richmond, who after was afterward made king, by the name of Henry the seventh, & was father to K. Henry the eight, and grand father to the Q. majesty that now is, & this is the issue of john the first son to the duke of Somerset.  
Edmond the second son to john earl of Somerset, was first earl of Mortaine, and then 
The dukes of Somerset.  after the death of his brother john (who died without issue male as hath been said) was created by king Henry the sixth duke of Somerset, and both he and almost all his kin were slain in the quarrel of the said king Henry the 6. and for defence of the house of Lancaster, against York. For first this Edmond himself was slain in the battle of S. Albans, 
Polidor. hist. Ang. lib. 23.  against Richard duke and first pretender of York, in the year 1456. leaving behind him three goodly sons, to wit, Henry Edmond & 
Hollings in vita Edwadi 4. pa. 1314 & 1340.  john, whereof Henry succeeded his father in the duchy of Sommetset, and was taken and beheaded in the same quarrel at Exham, in the year 1463. dying without issue. Edmond likewise succeeded his brother Henry in the duchy of Somerset, and was taken in the battle of Tewksbury in the same quarrel, and there beheaded the 7. of May 1471. leaving no issue, john also the third brother marquis of Dorset was slain in the same battle of Tewksbury, and left no issue, and so in these two noble men ceased utterly all the issue male of the line of Lancaster, by the children of john of Gaunt, begotten upon lady Swinford his third wife, so that all which remained of this woman, was only Margeret Countess of Richmond, mother to king Henry the 7. which king Henry the 7. and all that do descend from him in Ingland, or out of Inglande, do hold the right of Lancaster, only by this third marriage 
What heirs of Lancaster now roman in  of Catherine Swinford, as hath been showed, and no ways of Blanch the first wife, or of Constance the second, and this is enough in this place of the descents of john of Gaunt, and of the house of Lancaster, and therefore I shall now pass over to show the issue of the house of York.  
I Touched briefly before, how Edmond Langley duke of York fourth son of king 
The issue of the house of York.  Edward the third, had two sons, Edward earl of Rutland, and duke of Aumatle, that succeeded his father afterward in the duchy of York, and was slain without children under king Henry the 5. in the battle of Egencourt in France, and Richard earl of Cambridge which married lady Anne Mortimer, as before hath been said, that was heir of the house of 
Richard Earl of Cambrige executed.  Clarence, to wit of Leonel duke of Clarence, second son to king Edward the third, by which marriage he joined together the two titles, of the second & fourth sons of king Edward, and being himself convinced of a conspiracy against king Henry the 5. was put to death in Southampton in the year of Christ 1415. and third of the reign of king Henry the 5. and fift day of August.  
This Richard had issue by lady Anne Mortimer a son named Richard, who succeeded his uncle Edward duke of York in the same duchy, and afterward finding himself strong, made claim to the crown in the behalf of 
Richard duke of York slain.  his mother, and declaring himself chief of the faction of the white rose, gave occasion of many cruel battles against them of the red rose and house of Lancaster, and in one of the battles which was given in the year 1460. at Wakfilde, himself was slain, leaving behind him three sons, Edward George and Richard, whereof Edward was afteward king of Ingland by the name of Edward the fourth, George was duke of Clarence, and put to death in Calis in a butt of seek or malmsey by the commandment of the king his brother, & Richard was Duke of Gloucester and afterward king by murdering his own two nephews, and was called king Richard the third.  
Edward the eldest of these three brothers, which afterward was king, had issue two 
Edward duke of York and King his issue.  sons Edward & Richard, both put to death in the tower of London by their cruel uncle Richard, he had also five daughters, the last four whereof I do purposely omit, for that of none of them there remaineth any issue, but the eldest of all named Elizabeth was married to king Henry the 7. of the house of Lancaster, and had by him issue, king Henry the 8. and two daughters, the one married unto Scotland, whereof are descended the king of Scots and Arbella, & the other married to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk, whereof are issued the children of the earls of Hartford and Derby, as after more at large shallbe handled, and this is the issue of the first brother of the house of York.  
The second brother George duke of Clarence had issue by his wife lady Isabel heir to the earldoms of Warwick and Salisbury, one son named Edward earl of Warwick, who was put to death 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 time he sent her into wales with the princess Mary) to be counresse of Salisbury, but yet married very meanly to a knight of wales, named Sir Richard Poole, by whom she had four 
The line of the Pools.  sons, Henry, Arthur Geffrey, and Renald, the lastwherof was Cardinal, and the other two Arthur and Geffrey had issue, for Arthur had two daughters Mary and Margaret, Mary was married to Sir john 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 live.  
Now then to return to the first son of the countess of Salisbury named Henry, that was Lord Montague, and put to death both he and his mother, by king Henry the 8. this man I say, left two daughters, Catherine and wenefred, Catherine was married to Sir Francis Hastings earl of Huntingdon, by which 
The line of the hasting.  marriage issued Sir Henry Hastings now earl of Huntingdon, and Sir Georg Hastings his brother, who hath divers children. And Wenefred the younger daughter was married to Sir 
The Baringtons.  Thomas Barington knight, who also wanteth notissue, and this is of the second brother of the house of York, to wit, of the duke of Clarence.  
The third brother Richard duke of Gloucester 
King Richard 3.  and afterward king, left no issue, so as this is all that is needful to be spoken of the house of York, in which we see that the first and principal competitor is the king of Scots, and after him Arbella, and the children of the earls of Hartford and Derby are also competitors of the same house, as descended by the daughter of the first brother, Edward duke of York, and king of England, and then the Earl of Huntingdon and his generation, as also the Pools, barrington's, and others before named, are or may be titlers of York, as descended of George duke of Clarence, second son of Richard duke of York, all which issue yet seem to remain only within the compass of the house of York, for that by the former pedigree of the house of Lancaster it seemeth to the favorets of this house that none of these other competitors are properly of the line of Lancaster, for that king Henry the 7. coming only of john of Gaunt by Catherine Swinford his third wife, could have no part in Lady Blanch that was only inheritor of that house, as to these men seemeth evident.  
Only then it remaineth for the ending of this chapter, to explain somewhat more clearly the descent of king Henry the 7. and of his issue. for better understanding whereof you must consider, that king Henry the 7. being of the house of Lancaster, in the manner that you have heard, and marrying Elizabeth the eldest daughter of the contrary house of York, did seem to join both houses together, & make an end of that bloody controversy, though 
Issue of king Henry the 7.  others now will say no, but how soever that was (which after shallbe examined) clear it is, that he had by that marriage one only son, that left issue, and two daughters, his son was king Henry the 8. who by three several wives, had three children that have reigned after him, to wit king Edward the 6. by Queen jane Seymer, Queen Mary by Queen Catherine of Spain, and Queen Elizabeth by Queen Anne Bullen, of all which three children no issue hath remained, so as now we must return to consider the issue of his daughters.  
The eldest daughter of king Henry the 7. named Margaret was married by her first marriage, 
Issue of the lady Mary of Scotland.  to james the fourth king of Scots, who had issue james the 5. & he again Lady marry, late Queen of Scots, and dowager of France, put to death not long ago in Ingland, who left issue james the 6. now king of Scots. And by her second marriage the said Lady Margeret after the death of king james the 4. took for husband Archebald Douglas, earl of Anguys in Scotland, by whom she had one only daughter, named Margeret which was married to Matthew Steward, earl of Lenox, and by him she had two sons, to wit Henry Lord Darly, and Charles Steward, Henry married the foresaid Lady Mary Queen of Scotland & was murdered in Edinbrough in the year 1566. as the world knoweth, and Charles his brother married Elizabeth the daughter of Sir William Candish in Ingland, by whom he had one only daughter yet living named Arbella, an other competitor of the crown of Ingland, by the house of York, and this much of the first daughter of king Henry the 7. Marry the second daughter of king Henry the 7. & younger 
Issue of marry 2. sister to K. Henry.  sister to king Henry the 8. was married first to Lewis the 12. king of France, by whom she had no issue, and afterward to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk, by whom she had two daughters, to wit, Frances and Elinor, the lady Francis was married first to Henry Gray marquis of Dorset, & after duke of Suffolk, beheaded by Queen marry, and by him she had three daughters, to wit lane, Catherine, and Mary: the lady jane eldest of the three, was married to 
Lady Francis.  L. Guylford Dudley, son to john Dudley late duke of Northumberland, with whom (I mean with her husband & father in law) she was beheaded soon after for being proclaimed Queen, upon the death of king Edward the fixed: the lady Catherine second daughter married first the lord Henry Herbert earl of Penbroke, and left by him again she died afterward 
Stow. An. 7. Edward 6.  in the tower, where she was prisoner for having had two children by Edward Seymer earl of Hartford, without sufficient proof that she was married unto him, and the two children are yet living, to wit, Henry Seymer, commonly called lord Beacham, and Edward Seymer his brother. The lady marry the third sister though she was betrothed to Arthur lord Gray of wilton, and married after to Martin keys gentleman porter, yet hath she left no issue, as far as I understand.  
This then is the end, of the issue of Lady Francis, first of the two daughters of Queen Mary of France by Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk, for albeit the said lady Francis, after the beheading of the said Henry Lord Gray duke of Suffolk her first husband, married again one Adrian Stokes her servant, & had a son by him, yet it lived not, but died very soon after.  
Now then to speak of the younger daughter of the said French Queen and duke, named 
Of Lady Elen or of Suffolk.  Elinor, she was married to Henry Clifford Earl of Comberland, who had by her a daughter named Margaret that was married to Lord Henry Stanley earl of Derby, by whom she hath a plentiful issue, as Ferdinand now earl of Derby William Stanley, Francis Stanley, and others, and this is all that needeth to be spoken of these descents of our English kings, princes, peers or competitors to the crown for this place, and therefore now it resteth only that we begin to examine what different pretensions are framed by divers parties, upon these dissents and genealogies, which is the principal point of this our discourse.   

OF THE GREAT AND GENERAL CONTROVERSY AND CONTENTION BETWEEN the two houses royal of Lancaster and York, and which of them may seem to have had the better right to the crown by way of succession.  
CAP. four  
AND first of all before I do descend to treat in particular of the different pretences of several persons and families, that have issued out of these two royal lineages of Lancaster and York, it shall perhaps not be amiss, to discuss with some attention, what is, or hath, or may be said, on both sides for the general controversy that lieth between them, yet undescided in many men's opinions, notwithstanding their hath been so much stir about the same, & not only writing and disputing, but also fight and murdering for many years. And truly if we look into divers histories records 
Variety of authores opinions about this controversy.  and authors which have written of this matter, we shall find that every one of them speaketh commonly according to the time wherein they lived, for that all such as wrote in the time of the three Henry's, fourth, fift, and sixth kings of the house of Lancaster, they make the title of Lancaster very clear, and undoubted, but such others as wrote since that time (〈◊〉 the house of York hath held the sceptre) they have spoken in far different manner, as namely Polydore that wrote in king Henry the 8. his time, and others that have followed him since, do take all right from the house of Lancaster, and give the same to the house of York, 
Polydor in fine vit. Henr. 3. & initio vit. Henr. 4. & in vit. Rich. An. 1386.  wherefore the best way I suppose willbe, not so much to consider what historiographers do say according to their affections, or interests, as what reasons, and profess be alleged of every side, for that by this, we shall more easily come to judge where the right or wrong doth lie.  
First therefore, the defenders of the house of York do allege, that their title is plain and 
The allegations of the house of york.  evident, for that as in the former chapter hath been declared, Richard duke of York first pretender of this house, whose father was son to Edmond Langley duke of York, fourth son of king Edward the third and his mother Anne Mortimer that was niece once removed, and sole heir to Leonel duke of Clarence, second son of the said king Edward, this Richard (I say) duke of York pretended, that for so much as he had two titles joined together in himself, and was lawful heir as well to duke Leonel the second brother, as to duke Edmond the fourth, that he was to be preferred in succession of the crown after the death of king Richard the second, heir of the first son of king Edward, before the issue of john of Gaunt that was but third son to the said king Edward, and consequently that Henry Bolenbrook john of gaunt's son duke of Lancaster, called afterward king Henry the fourth, entered the crown by tyranny & violence, first for deposing, the true and lawful king Richard, and secondly for taking the kingdom upon himself, which kingdom after the death of the foresaid king Richard (which happened in the year 1399) belonged to Edmond mortime Earl of march, then living, and after his death to Anne Mortimer his sister, married to Richard earl of Cambridge father to this Richard pretendent duke of York, as hath been said, for that this Edmond and Anne Mortimer were children to Roger Mortimer son of Philip that was daughter to duke Leonel, which Leonel was elder uncle to king Richard, and before john of Gaunt the younger brother, whose son took the crown upon him.  
For the better understanding of which pretence and allegation of the house of York 
The story of the controversy between Lancaster & York.  against Lancaster, we must note the story following, to wit, that king Edward the third, seeing in his old age, that prince Edward his eldest son, whom of all his children he loved most dearly, was dead (though their wanted not much doubt in some men's heads as after shallbe showed who ought to succeed) yet the old man for the exceeding affection he bore to the dead prince, would hear nothing in that behalf, but appointed Richard the said prince Edward's only son and heir to succeed him in the kingdom, and made the same to be confirmed by act of parliament, and enforced all his children then a live, to swear to the same, which were john of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, his third and eldest son that then lived, (for Leonel his second son duke of Clarence, was dead before) and Edmond Langley and Thomas Woodstock earls at that time but after dukes of York & Gloucester, & so king Richard reigned with good obedience of his uncles and their children for 20. years together, but in the end when he grew insolent & had put to death his uncle the duke of Gloucester together with the earl of Arundel, and banished many others of the nobility, and among them the Archbishop of Canterbury, as also his own cousin germane Henry duke of Hereford, & after of Lancaster, son and heir of john of Gaunt, and had made many wicked statutes aswell against the church and state Ecclesiastical, as also to entangle 
Polydor. in vita Richard. 2. lib. 20.  the realm and nobility with feigned crimes of treason against his regalty, as than he termed them, the principal men of the realm seeing a fit occasion offered by the king's absence in Ireland, called home out of France the foresaid Henry duke of Lancaster, with the Archbishop of Canterbury, earls of Arundel and Warwick, and others which were in banishment, and by common consent gathered upon the sudden such an army to assist them in Ingland, as they took the king, 
King Richards de position.  brought him to London, and there in a parliament laying together the intolerable faults of his government, they deprived him of all regal dignity, as before they had done to his great grandfather king Edward the second, & then by universal consent of the parliament and people their present, they chose & admitted the said Henry duke of Lancaster to be their king, who continued so all the days of his life, and left the crown unto his son, and sons son, after him, by the space of threescore years, until this Richard before named duke of York, made challenge of the same in manner and form as before hath been showed.  
Now than the story being this, the question is first, whether Richard the second were justly 
Chief points of the controversy between Lancaster and York.  deposed or no, and secondly whether after his deposition the house of York or house of Lancaster should have entered, and thirdly if the house of Lancaster did commit any wrong or injustice at their first entrance to the crown, yet whether the continuance of so many years in possession, with so many approbations and confirmations thereof by the common wealth were not sufficient to legitimate their right.  
Concerning which points many things are alleged by the favourers of both families, and 
Three points about king Richard's deposition  in the first point touching the lawfulness or unlawfulness of king Richard's deposition, three articles especially do seem most considerable, to wit, about the thing in itself whether a lawful king may be deposed upon just causes, & secondly about these causes in king Richard's deposition, to wit, whether they were just or sufficient for deposition of the said king, and lastly, about the manner of doing it, whether the same were good and orderly or not.  
And touching the first of these three points, which is, that a king upon just causes may be 
That a true K. may be deposed.  deposed I think both parties though never so contrary between themselves, will easily agree, and the Civil lawyer seemeth to me to have proved it so evidently before throughout his whole discourse, as I think very little may be said against the same. For he hath declared (if you remember) both by reason authority & examples of all nations Christian, that this may and hath and aught to be done, when urgent occasions are offered. And first by reason he showeth it, for that all kingly authority is given 
〈◊〉. Reason.  them only by the common wealth, & that with this express condition, that they shall govern according to law and equity, that this is the cause of their exaltation above other men, that this is the end of their government, the butt of their authority, the star and pole by which they ought to direct their stern, to wit, the good of the people, by the weal of their subjects, by the benefit of the realm, which end being taken away or perverted, the king becometh a tyrant, a Tigar, a fierce Lion, a ravening wolf, a public enemy, and a bloody murderer, which were against all reason both natural and moral, that a common wealth could not deliver itself from so eminent a destruction.  
By authority also you have heard it proved, of 
2. Authority.  all lawmakers, Philosophers, Lawyers, Divines and Governors of commonwealths, who have set down in their statutes and ordinances that kings shall swear and protest at their entrance to government, that they will observe and perform the conditions their promised, & otherwise to have no interest in that dignity, & sovereignty.  
By examples in like manner of all realms 
3. Examples.  christian he declared, how that oftentimes they have deposed their princes for just causes, and that God hath concurred and assisted wonderfully thesame, sending them commonly very good kings after those that were deprived, and in no country more than in Ingland itself, yea in the very line and family of this king Richard, whose noble grandfather king Edward the third was exalted to the crown by a most solemn deposition of his predecessor king Edward the second, wherefore in this point their can be little controversy, and therefore we shall pass unto the second, which is, whether the causes were good and just for which this king Richard was esteemed worthy to be deposed.  
And in this second point much more difference 
Whether the causes were  their is betwixt York and Lancaster, and between the white rose and the red, for 
sufficient of King Rich. deposition.  that the house of York seeking to make the other odious, as though they had entered by tyranny & cruelty, doth not stick to avouch, that king Richard was unjustly deposed, but against this the house of Lancaster allegeth first, that the house of York can not justly say this, for that the chief prince assistant to the deposing of king Richard, was lord Edmond himself duke of York and head of that family, together with Edward earl of Rutland & duke of Aumarle, his eldest son and heir, yea and his younger son also Richard earl of Cambrige, father to this Richard that now pretendeth, for so do write both Stow Holinshed and other chroniclers of Ingland, that those princes of the house of York, did principally assist Henry duke of Lancaster in getting the crown, and deposing king Richard, & Polidor 
The house of York chief doer in deposing King Richard.  speaking of the wicked government of king Richard, and of the first cogitation about deposing him when king Henry of Lancaster was yet in France, banished, and seemed not to think of any such matter, he hath these words. Sed Edmundo Eboracensium duei, ears cum 
Polyd. lib. 20. histor. Angl.  primis bilem commovit, quod rex omnia iam iura perverteret, quòd antea parricidio, & postea rapinis se obstrinxisset, etc. That is, this matter of the wicked government of king Richard, did principally offend his uncle Edmond duke of York, for that he saw the king now to pervert all law and equity, and that as before he had defiled himself with parricide, that is, with the murder of his own Uncle the duke of Gloucester, brother to this Edmond, so now he entangled himself also with rapine, in that he took by violence the goods and inheritance of john ofGaunt, late deceased, which did belong to Henry duke of Lancaster, his cozen germane, by which words of Polidor as also for that the duke of Lancaster coming out of Britain accompanied only with three 
Addit ad Polycromicon.  score persons, (as some stories say) chose first to go into Yorkshire and to enter at Ravenspurr at the mouth of Humber, as all the world knoweth (which he would never have done if the princes of York had not principally favoured him in that action) all this (I say is an evident argument that these princes of the house of York were then the chief doers in this deposition, and consequently cannot allege now with reason that the said Richard was deposed unjustly.  
Secondly the house of Lancaster, allegeth for the justifying of this deposition, the opinions 
Testimony of stories.  of all historiographers, that ever have written of this matter, whether they be English French Duchess Latin, or of any other nation or language, who all with one accord do affirm, that king Richard's government was intolerable, & he worthy of deposition, whereof he that will see more let him read Thomas of Walsingham, and john Frosard in the life of king Richard.  
Thirdly they of Lancaster do allege, the 
The evil government of king Richard.  particular outrages and insolences of king Richard's government, and first the suffering himself to be carried away with evil counsel of his favourites and then the perverting of all laws generally under his government, as before you have hard out of Polidor, the joining with his minions for oppressing the nobility of which Stow hath these words. The king being at Bristol 
Stow in vit. Rich. 2. pag. 502 regni 11.  with Robert de Vere duke of Ireland, & Michael de la Pole Earl of Suffolk, devised how to take away the duke of Gloucester, the earls of Arundel, Warwick, Derby and Nottingham, and others whose deaths they conspired: thus sayeth Stow. And soon after they executed the most par of their devices, for that Thomas of Woodstock duke of Gloucester, was made away without law or process, the earl of Arundel also was put to death, and Warwick was 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 suffered Robert Vere to dishonour and put from him his wife, a noble and goodly young Lady (as Stow sayeth) and borne of Lady Isabel king Richard's aunt, that was daughter to king Edward the third, and suffered Vere to marry an other openly to her 
Agreat insolency.  disgrace and dishonour of her kindred. And finally in the last parliament that ever he held, which was in the 21. year of his reign, commonly called the evil parliament, he would needs have all authority absolute granted to certain favourites of his, which Thomas Walsingham saith, were not above 6. or 7. to determine of all matters with all full authority, as if they only had been the whole realm, which was nothing in deed but to take all authority to himself only, and Stow in his chronicle hath these words following. This parlameut began about the 15. of September in the year 1397. at the beginning whereof, Edward 
The evil parliament Stow an. 21. regni Richard.  Stafford Bishop of Exeter Lord Chancellor of Ingland made a proposition or sermon, in which he affirmed that the power of the king, was alone, and perfect of itself, and those that do impeatch it were worthy to suffer pain of the law, etc. thus saith Stow, by all which is evident, how exorbitant and contrary to all law and equity this kings government was.  
Fourthly and lastly, those of Lancaster do allege for justifying of this deprivation, that 
The duke of Laneaster called by common request.  duke Henry was called home by express letters of the more and better part of all the realm, and that he came wholly (in a manner) un-armed considering his person, for that frosard sayeth he had but three ships only out of Brittany, and Walsingham saith he had but 15. Lances and 400. footmen, and the additions 
Frosard. Walsingham.  to Polychronicon as before I noted, do avouch, that when he landed at Ravenspurt in the county of York, he had but threescore men in all to begin the reformation of his realm against so potent a tyrant, as King Richard was then accounted, and yet was the concourse of all people so great and general unto him, that within few days he achieved the matter, and that without any battle or bloodshed at all, & thus much for the justness of the cause.  
But now if we will consider the manner and form of this act, they of Lancaster do affirm 
Whether the manner of deposing King Richard were good.  also that it could not be executed in better nor more convenient order. First for that it was done by the choice and invitation of all the realm or greater and better part thereof as hath been said. Secondly for that is was done without slaughter, and thirdly for that the king was deposed by act of parliament, and himself convinced of his unworthy government, and brought to confess that he was worthily deprived, and that he willingly and freely resigned the same: neither can their be any more circumstances required (say these men) for any lawful deposition of a Prince.  
And if any man will yet object and say that notwithstanding all this their was violence, for that duke Henry was armed and by force of arms brought, this to pass, they of Lancaster do answer, that this is true, that he brought the matter to an Roboam for the sins of Solomon his father, 
1. Roboam deposed by his subjects of ten tribes.  and yet spare him also in part for the sake of his grand father David, he caused a rebellion to be raised against him by jeroboam his servant, and more than three parts of four of his people, to rebel against him, and this by Gods own instinct and motion, and by his express allowance thereof after it was done, as the scripture avoucheth, and if Roboam had fought against them, for this fault (as once he had thought to do and was prepared with a main army) no doubt but they might have lawfully stain him, for that now these ten tribes that forsook him had just authority to depose him, for his evil government, and for 
2. Reg. 11 & 12.  not yielding to their just request made unto him, for easing them of those grievous tributes laid upon them, as the scripture reporteth. For 
2. Paralip. cap. 10.  albeit God had a meaning to punish him, for the sins of his father Solomon, yet suffered he that Roboam also should give just occasion himself for the people to leave him, as appeareth by the story, and this is God's high wisdom justice, providence, and sweet disposition in human affairs.  
another example of punishing and deposing evil Princes by force, they do allege out of the first book of kings, where God appointed 
joram & his mother jesabel deposed by force.  Elizens the Prophet to send the son of an other Prophet to anoint jehu, Captain of joram, king of Israel, which joram was son to the Queen jezabel, and to persuade jehu to take arms against his said king, and against his mother the Queen, and to deprive them both, not only of their kingdoms but also of their lives, and so he did, for the scripture saith, Coniuravit ergo Iehu contra joram. jehu did conjure 
4. Reg. 9  and conspite at the persuasion of this Prophet, with the rest of his fellow Captains, against his king joram, and Queen jezabel the kings mother, to put them down, and to put them to death with all the ignomy he could devise, and God allowed thereof, and persuaded the same by so holy a Prophet as Elizeus was, whereby we may assure ourselves that the fact was not only lawful but also most godly, albeit in itself it might seem abominable.  
And in the same book of kings within two chapters after, there is an other example how 
5. Athalia deprived by force.  God moved loiada high priest of jerusalem to persuade the Captains and Colonels of that city to conspire against Athalia the Queen that had reigned 6. years, and to arm themselves with the armour of the temple, for that 
4. Reg. 11.  purpose, and to besiege the palace where she lay, and to kill all them that should offer or go about to defend her, & so they did, and having taken her alive, she was put to death also by sentence of the said high priest, and the fact was allowed by God, and highly commended in the scripture, and joas young king of the blood royal was crowned in her place, & all this might have been done as you see without such trouble of arms, & bloodshed, if God would, but he appointed this several means for working of his will, and for relieving of common wealths oppressed by evil princes. And this seemeth sufficient proof to these men, that king Richard of Ingland might be removed by force of arms, his life and government being so evil and pernicious as before hath been showed.  
It remaineth then that we pass to the second 
Whether Lancaster or York should have entered after king Richard.  principal point proposed in the beginning, which was, that supposing this deprivation of king Richard was just and lawful, what house by right should have succeeded him, either that of lancaster as it did, or the other of York.  
And first of all it is to be understood, that at that very time when king Richard was deposed, the house of York had no pretence or little at all to the crown, for that Edmond Mortimer earl of march, nephew to the lady Philip, was then alive, with his sister Anne mortimer married to Richard earl of Cambrige, by which Anne the house of York did after make their claim, but could not do so yet, for that the said Edmond her brother was living, and so continued many years after, as appeareth, for that we read that he was alive 16. years after this, to wit, in the third year of the reign of king Henry the fift when his said brother in law, Richard earl of Cambrigs was put to death, in Southampton whom this Edmond appeached as after shallbe showed, and that this Edmond was now earl of March when king Richard was deposed, and not his father Roger (as Polidot mistaketh) is evident, by that that the said 
Polidor L. 20. in vit. Richard.  Roger was slain in Ireland, a little before the deposition of King Richard, to wit, in the year 1398. and not many months after he had been declared heir apparent by king Richard, and Roger's father named Edmond also, husband of the lady Philip, died some three years before him, that is, before Roger, as after willbe seen, so as seeing that at the deposition of king Richard, this Edmond Mortimer elder brother to Anne was yet living, the question cannot be whether the house of York should have entered to the crown presently after the deprivation of king Richard, for they had yet no pretence as hath been showed, but whether this Edmond Mortimer, as heir of Leonel duke of Clarence, or else Henry the duke of Lancaster heir of john of Gaunt should have entered. For as for the house of York their was yet no question, as appeareth also by Stow in his chronicle, 
Stow 〈◊〉 vita Richard. 2.  who setteth down how that after the said deposition of Richard, the Archbishop of  asked the people three times, whom they would have to be their king, whether the duke of York their standing present or not, and they answered no: and then he asked the seronde time if they would have his eldest son, the duke of Aumaile, and they said no, he asked the third time, if they would have his yongest-sonne, Richard earl of cambridge, and they said no. Thus writeth Stow, whereby it is evident. that albeit this earl of Cabridge had married now the sister of Edmond Mortimer, by whom his posterity claimed afterward, yet could he not pretend at this time, her brother being yet alive, who after dying without issue, left all his right to her, & by her to the house of York: for albeit this earl Richard never came to be duke of York, for that he was beheaded bv king Henry the fift at Southampton as before hath 〈◊〉 said, while his elder brother was a live, yet left he a son named Richard, that after him came to be duke of York, by the death of his uncle Edmund duke of York that died without issue, as on the other side also by his mother Anne Mortimer, he was earl of March, and was the first of the house of York that made title to the crown.  
So that the question now is, whether after the deposition of king Richard, Edmond Mortimer 
Whether the earl of march or duke of Lancaster should have luc ceded to king Richard.  nephew removed of Leonel (which Leonel was the second son to king Edward) or else Henry duke of Lancaster, son to john of Gaunt (which john was third son to king Edward) should by right have succeeded to king Richard, and for Edmond is alleged, that he was heir of the elder brother, and for Henry is said, that he was nearer by two degrees to the stem or last king, that is to say, to king Richard deposed, than Edmond was, for that Henry was son to king Richard's uncle of Lancaster, and Edmond was but nephew removed, that is to say, daughter's sons son, to the said king Richard's other uncle of York. And that in such a case, the next in degree of consanguinity, to the last king, is to be preferred (though he be not of the elder line) the favourers of Lancaster allege many proofs, where of some shallbe touched a little after: & we have seen the same practised in our days in France, where the Cardinal of Burbone by the judgement of the most part of that realm, was preferred to the crown for his propinquity in blood to the dead king, before the king of Navarre, though he were of the elder line.  
Moreover it is alleged for Henry that his title came by a man, and the others by a woman, 
The title of York is by a Woman.  which is not so much favoured either by nature law or reason, and so they say that the pretenders of this title of lady Phillippe that was daughter of duke Leonel, never opened their mouths in those days to claim, until some 50. years after the deposition & death of king Richard. Nay more 
Stow in vit. Henrici 5 au 3. regni.  over they of Lancaster say, that sixteen years after the deposition of king Richard, when king Henry the fift was now in possession of the crown, cerrayne noble men, & especially Richard earl of Cambridge, that had married this Edmond Mortimer's sister, offered to have slain king Henry and to have made the said Edmond mortimer king, for that he was descended of duke Leonel, but he refused the matter, thinking it not to be according to equity, and so went and discovered the whole treason to the king, whereupon they were all put to death in Southampton, within four or five days after, as before hath been 
The earl of Cambrige executed for conspiracy.  noted, and this happened in the year 1415. and from hence forward until the year 1451. and thirreth of the reign of king Henry the sixth, which was 36 years after the execution, done upon these conspirators, no more mention or pretence was made of this matter, at what time Richard duke of York began to move troubles about it again.  
Thus say those of the house of Lancaster, but now these of York have a great argument for themselves, as to them it seemeth, which is, that in the year of Christ 1385. and 9 year 
An objection for York that Edmond mortimer was declared heir apparent. Polydore l. 20. & Stow. in vit Rich. 〈◊〉 an. 1385  of the reign of king Richard the second it was declared by act of parliament (as Polidor writeth) that Edmond Mortimer, who had married Philip daughter & heir of Leonel duke of Clarence, and was grandfather to the last Edmond by me named, should be heir apparent to the crown, if the king should chance to die without issue.  
To which objection those of Lancaster do answer, first, that Polidor doth ere in the person, when he sayeth that Edmond husband of lady Philippe was declared for heir apparent, for that his Edmond Mortimer that married lady Philippe, died peaceably in Ireland three years before this parliament was holden, to wit, in the year of Christ 1382. as both Hollings 
Hollings-head in vit. Rich. 2. pag. 1088. Stow. an. 1382.  head Stow and other chroniclets do testify, and therefore Polidor doth err not only in this place about this man, but also in that in an other place he sayeth, that this Edmond so declared heir apparent, by king Richard, was slain by the Irish in Ireland 12. years after this declaration made of the succession, to wit 
Polydore li. 20. an. 1394.  in the year 1394. which was in deed not this man, but his son Roger Mortimer, heir to him, and to the Lady Philip his wife who was declared heir apparent, in the parliament afore said, at the instance of king Richard, and that for especial hatred & malice (as these men say) which he did beat against his said uncle the duke of Lancaster, and his son Henry, whom he desired to exclude from the succession.  
The cause of this hatred, is said to be, for that 
The cause of hatred be rweeve king Richard and the house of Lancaster.  presently upon the death of prince Edward father to this Richard, which prince died in the year of Christ 1376. and but 10. months before his father king Edward the third: their wanted not divers learned and wise men in Ingland, that were of opinion that john of Gaunt duke of Lancaster, eldest son than living of the said king Edward, should have succeeded his father, iure propinquitatis, before Richard that was but nephew, and one degree further of then he, but the old king was so extremely affectionate unto his eldest son, the black prince Edward, newly dead, that he would not hear of any to succeed him (as Frosard saith) but only Richard the said prince's son. Wherefore he called presently 
john frosard in histo.  a parliament, which was the last that ever he hold, and therein caused his said nephew Richard to be declared heir apparent, and made his three sons then living, that were uncles to the youth, to wit john of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and Edmond Langhly duke afterward of York, and Thomas woodstock duke of Gloucester, to swear fealty unto Richard, as they did. And albeit john of Gaunt all his life after, for keeping of his oath that he had made unto his father, never pretended any right to the crown, yet king Richard knowing well the pretence that he and his might have, was still afraid of him, and sought infinite means to be rydd of him, first by persuading him to go and make war in Spain where he thought he might miscarry in so dangerous an attempt, and then offering 
Polydor. Hollings Stow in vita 〈◊〉 2  to give him all Aquitaine if he would leave Ingland to go & live there, as he did for three years, with extreme peril, for that the people of Aquitaine would not receive him, but rose against him, and refused his government, and would not admit him for their Lord, but appealed to the king, who also allowed thereof, and so when john of Gaunt came home into Ingland again, king Richard thought no better way to weaken him, then to banish his son, Henry duke of Herford, and so he did. And besides this, the said king Richard practised also by divers secret drifts, the death of his said uncle the duke of Lancaster, as Walsingham witnesseth, 
though wassing in vit Richardi 2. pag. 341. & 344.  and when the said duke came at length to die, which was in the 22. year of king Richard's reign he written such joyous letters thereof (as frossard saith) to his father in law the sixth Charles king of France, as though he 
john Frossard in vit. Henri.  had been delivered of his chiefest enemy, not imagining that his own destruction was so near at hand, and much accelerated by the death of the said duke, as it was.  
And these were the causes, say the favourers of the house of Lancaster, why king Richard caused this act of parliament to pass in favour of Roger Mortimer, & in prejudice of the house of Lancaster, and not for 
Why Roger Mortimer was declared heir apparent.  that the right of earl Mortimer, was better than that of the duke of Lancaster. And this they say is no new thing for princes often times to procure partial laws to pass in parliament, for matter of succession, according to their own affections, for the like (say they) did Edward the third procure in the favour of this Richard, as before I have showed in the last parliament, before his death, and afterward again king Richard the third with much more open 〈◊〉, caused an act of parliament to pass in his days, whereby his nephew john de la pole earl of Lincoln, son to his sister Elizabeth duchess 
Hollings. in vit. Richard 3. pag. 1406. & in vit. Edward 6. pa. 1715  of Suffolk, was declared heir apparent to the crown, excluding thereby the children of his two elder brothers, to wit the daughters of king Edward the fourth, and the son and daughter of Georg duke of Clarence, which yet by all order should have gone before their sister's children.  
And like facility found king Henry the 8. to get the consent of two parliaments, to give him authority to appoint what successor he would, of his own kindred, by which authority afterward he appointed by his testament (as in an other place shallbe showed) that the issue of his younger sister marry, should be preferred before the issue of his eldest sister Margaret, of Scotland.  
A like declaration was that also, of king 
The declaration of king Edward 6. in favour of the Lady jane Gray.  Edward the sixth, of late memory, who appointed, the lady jane Gray his cozen german removed, to be his heir and successor in the crown of Ingland, and excluded his own two sisters, the lady Mary and the lady Elizabeth from the same: but these declarations make little to the purpose when right and equity do repugn, as these men say that it did, in the foresaid declaration of Roger Mortimer, to be heir apparent, for that they hold and avow the house of Lancaster, to have 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, immediately upon the death of king Edward the third, for that john of Gaunt was then the eldest son, which king Edward had living, and nearer to his father by a degree, than was Richard the nephew. About which point to wit, whether the uncle or the nephew should be preferred in succession of kingdoms, it seemeth that in this age of K. Edward the third there was great trouble, and controversy in the world abroad, for so testifieth Girard du Haillan Counselor and secretary of France, in his story of the year of Christ 1346. which was about the midst of king Edward's reign, and therefore no marvel 
Girard de Haillan l. 15. his Fran. initio.  though king Edward took such care of the sure establishing of his nephew Richard in succession, as is before related. And much less marvel is it if king Richard had still great jealousy of his uncle the duke of Lancaster, and of his offspring, considering how doubtful the question was among the wise and learned of those days. For more declaration whereof I think it not amiss to allege the very words of the foresaid chronicler with the examples by him recited, thus than he writeth.  
About this time (sayeth he) their did arise a great and doubtful question in the world, whether 
Whether uncles or nephews to be preferred in Succession.  uncles or nephews, that is to say, the younger brother, or else the children of the elder, should succeed unto realms and kingdoms, which controversy put all christianity into great broils and troubles. For first Charles the second king of Naples begar of Mary his wife Queen and heir of Hungary, divers children, but namely three sons, Marrel, Robert, and Philip, 〈◊〉 dying before his father left a son named Charles, which in his grandmother's right was king also of Hungary, but about the kingdom of Naples the question was, when king Charles was dead, who should succeed him, either Charles his nephew king of Hungary, or Robert his second son, but Robert was preferred and reigned in Naples, and enjoyed the earldom of Province in France also, for the space of 33. years with great renown of valour & wisdom. And this is one example that 〈◊〉 recounteth, which example is reported by the famous lawyer 〈◊〉 
Barthol. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C. 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  in his commentaries, touching the succession of the kingdom of Sicilia, and he saith, that this succession of the uncle before the nephew, was averred also for rightful by the learend of that time, and confirmed for iust by the judicial 〈◊〉 of Pope Boniface, and that for the reasons which afterward shallbe showed, when we shall treat of this question more in particular.  
another example also reporteth Girard, 
The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉  which 〈◊〉 immediately after, in the same place, for that the foresaid king Robert, having a son named Charles, which died before 〈◊〉 he left a daughter and heir named joan, niece unto king Robert, which joan was married to Andrew the younger son of the foresaid Charles king of Hungary, but king Robert being dead; there stepped up one Lewis prince of Tarranto, a place of the same kingdom of Naples, who was son to Philip before mentioned, vonger brother to king Robert, which Lewis pretending his right to be better than that of joan for that he was a man, and one degree nearer to king Charles his grand father then joan was, (for that he was nephew and she niece once removed) he prevailed in like manner, and thus far Gerrard historiographes of France.  
And no doubt, but if we consider examples, that fell out even in this very age only, concerning 
〈◊〉. And example of the uncle before the nephew in spain. Garibay li. 13 cap. 14 and 1276.  this controversy between the uncle and nephew, we shall find store of them: for in Spain not long before this time, to wit, in the year of Christ 1276. was that great and famous determination made by Don Alonso the wise, eleventh king of that name, and of all his realm and nobility in their covites or parliament of Segovia, mentioned before by the Civilian, wherein they disinherited the children of the prince Don Alonso de la Cerda that died (as our prince Edward did) before his father, and made heir apparent Don Sancho bravo younger brother to the said Don Alonso, and uncle to his children, the two young Cerdas. Which sentence standeth even unto this day, and king Philip enjoyeth the crown of Spain thereby and the dukes of Medina Celi and their race that are discendentes of the said two Cerdas, which were put back, are subjects by that sentence, and not sovereigns, as all the world knoweth.  
The like controversy fell out but very little after, to wit in the time of king Edward the 
another example in France and Flanders.  third in france, though not about the kingdom, but about the earldom of Artoys, but yet it was decided by a solemn sentence of two kings of France, and of the whole parliament of Paris, in favour of the aunt against her nephew, which albeit it cost great troubles: yet was it defended, and king Philip of Spain holdeth the county of Artoys by it at this day, Polidor reporteth the story in this manner.  
Robert earl of Artoys a man famous for his chivalry, had two children, Philip a son and Maude a daughter, this maude was married to Otho earl of Burgundy, and Philip 
Polidor l. 25. in vit. 〈◊〉 3.  dying before his father, left a son named Robert the second, whose father Robert the first being dead, the question was who should succeed, either maude the daughter or Robert the nephew, and the matter being remitted unto Philip le Bel king of France, as chief Lord at that time of that state, he adiuged it to Maude, as to the next in blood, but when Robert repined at this sentence, the matter was referred to the parliament of Paris, which confirmed the sentence of king Philip, where upon Robert making his way with Philip de Valois that soon after came to be king of France, he assisted the said Philip earnestly to bring him to the crown, against king Edward of Ingland that opposed himself thereunto, and by this hoped that king Philip would have revoked the same sentence, but he being once established in the crown answered, that a sentence of such importance and so maturely given, could not be revoked. whereupon the said Robert fled to the king of Inglands' part against france, thus far Polidor.  
The very like sentence recounteth the same 
another example of Britanny.  author to have been given in Ingland at the same time, and in the same controversy, of the uncle against the nephew, for the succession to the dukedom of Britain, as before I have related, wherein john Breno earl of Montford, was preferred before the daughter and heir of his elder brother Guy, though he were but of the half blood to the last duke, and she of the whole. For that john the third duke of Britanny, had two brothers, first Guy of the whole blood, by father and mother, and then john Breno his younger brother by the father's side only. Guy dying, left a daughter and heir named jane, married to the earl of Bloys, nephew to the king of France, who after the death of duke john pretended in the right of his wife, as daughter and heir to Guye the elder brother: but king Edward the third with the state of Ingland, gave sentence for john Breno, earl of Montford her uncle, as for him that was next in consanguinity to the dead duke, and with their arms the state of Ingland did put him in possession who flew the earl of Bloys as before hath been declared, and thereby 
Supra c. 2  got possession of that realm and held it ever after, and so do his heirs at this day.  
And not long before this again, the like resolution 
another example in Scotland.  prevailed in Scotland, between the house of Balliol and Bruse, who were competitors to that crown, by this occasion that now I will declare. William king of Scots had issue two sons Alexander that succeeded in the 
The convention of the houses of Balliol & Bruse in Scotland.  crown, and David earl of Huntingdon: Alexander had issue an other Alexander, and a daughter married to the king of Norway, all which issue and line ended about the year 1290. David younger brother to king William, had issue two daughters, Margaret and Isabel, Margaret was married to Alaine earl of Galloway, and had issue by him a daughter that married john Balliol Lord of Harcourt in Normandy, who had issue by her this john Balliol founder of Balliol College in Oxford that now pretended the crown, as descended from the eldest daughter of David in the third descent.  
Isabel the second daughter of David, was married to Robert Bruse, Earl of Cleveland in Ingland, who had issue by her this Robert Bruse, earl of Carick, the other competitor. Now than the question between these two competitors was, which of them should succeed, either john Balliol that was nephew to the elder daughter or Robert Bruise that was son to the younger daughter, & so one degree more near to the stock or stem then the other. And albeit king Edward the first of Ingland, whose power was dreadful at that day in Scotland, having the matter referred to his arbitrement, gave sentence for john Bailliol, and Robert Bruise obeyed for the time, in respect partly of fear and partly of his oath that he had made to stand to that judgement: yet was that sentence held to be unjust in Scotland, and so was the crown restored afterward to Robert Bruise his son, and his posterity doth hold it unto this day.  
In Ingland also itself, they allege the examples 
8. Examples in Ingland.  of king Henry the first preferred before his nephew William, son and heir to his elder brother Robert, as also the example of king john preferred before his nephew Arthur, duke of Britain, for that king Henry the second had four sons, Henry, Richard, Geffrey, and john, Henry died before his father without issue, Richard reigned after him and died also without issue: Geffrey also died before his father, but left a son named Arthur duke of Brittany, by right of his mother. But after the death of king Richard, the question was who should succeed, to wit, either Arthur the nephew or john the uncle, but the matter in Ingland was soon decided: for that john the uncle was preferred before the nephew Arthur, by reason he was more near to his brother dead, by a degree than was Arthur. And albeit the king of France and some other princes abroad opposed themselves for stomach against this succession of king john, yet say these favourers of the house of Lancaster, that the English inclined still to acknowledge and admit his right, before his nephew, and so they proclaimed this king john for king of Ingland, while he was yet in Normandy, I mean Hubert Archbishop of 
〈◊〉 head in vit. Regis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 142.  Canterbury, Elinor the Queen this mother, Geffrey Fitzpeter chief judge of Ingland (who knew also what law meant therein) and others the nobles and Barons of the realm, without making any doubt or scruple of his title to the succession.  
And whereas those of the house of York do allege, that king Richard in his life time, 
How Arthur duke of Britanny was declared 〈◊〉 apparent.  when he was to go to the holy land, caused his nephew Arthur to be declared heir apparent to the crown, and thereby did show that his title was the better, they of Lancaster do answer, first, that this declaration of king Richard, was not made by act of parliament of England, for that king Richard was in Normandy when he made this declaration, as plainly appeareth both by Polidor and Holinshed. 
〈◊〉 1. 14 〈◊〉 in vit. Richar. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 420. 2.  Secondly, that this declaration was made the sooner by king Richard at that time, thereby to repress and keep down the ambitious humour of his brother john, whom he feared least in his absence, if he had been declared for heir apparent, might invade the crown, as in deed without that, he was like to have done, as may appear by that which happened in his said brother's absence.  

3.  Thirdly they show, that this declaration of king Richard was never admitted in Ingland, neither duke john would suffer it to be admitted, but rather caused the bishop of Ely that was left governor by king Richard, with consent of the nobility, to renounce the said declaration of king Richard in favour of Arthur, and to take a contrary oath to admit the said john, if king Richard his brother should die without issue, and the like oath did the said Bishop of Ely together with the Archbishop of Rouen, that was left in equal authority with 
Hollingli. in vit. Richar. 〈◊〉 pag. 496. & 499.  him, exact and take of the citizens of London, when they gave them their privileges and liberties of commonalty, as Hollingshed recordeth.  

4.  And lastly the said Hollingshed writeth, how that king Richard being now come home again from the war of Jerusalem, and void of that jealousy of his brother, which before I have mentioned: he made his last will and testament, and ordained in the same, that his brother 
Holinshed pag. 540.  john, should be his successor, & caused all the nobles there present to swear fealty unto him, as to his next in blood, for which cause Thomas Walsingham in his story writeth these words, joannis Filius junior Henrici 2. Anglorum 
Walsing. in ypodig. Neustriss.  regis, & Alienorae Ducissae, Aquitaniae, non modo iure propinquitatis, sed etiam testamento fratris sui, Richardi designatus est successo: post mortem ipsius. Which is, john younger son of Henry the second king of Ingland, and of Eleanor duchess of Aquitaine, was declared successor of the crown not only by law and right of nearness of blood, but also by the will and testament of Richard his brother. Thus much this ancient chronicler speaketh in the testifying of King john's title.  
By all which examples, that fell out almost within one age in divers nations ovet the world (letting pass many others which the Civilian touched in his discourse before, for that they are of more ancient times) these favourers of the house of Lancaster do infer, that the right of the uncle before the nephew, was no new or strange matter in those days of king Edward the third, and that if we will deny the same now, we must call in question the succession and right of all the kingdoms and states before mentioned, of Naples, Sicily, Spain, Brittany, Flanders, Scotland, & Ingland, whose kings and princes do evidently hold their crowns at this day by that very title, as hath been showed.  
Moreover they say, that touching law in this point, albeit the most famous Civil lawyers 
Opinions of lawyers for the nephew & uncle.  of the world, be some what divided in the same matter, some of them favouring the uncle, and some other the nephew, and that for different reasons. As Baldus Oldratus, Panormitanus and divers others alleged by Guillelmus Benedictus in his repetitions in favour 
Benedict Cap. Ranutius verb in eodem testam.  of the nephew against the uncle, and on the other side, for the uncle before the nephew, Bartolus, Alexander, Decius, Altiatus, Cuiatius and many other their followers, are recounted in the same place by the same man, yet in the end, Baldus that is held for head of 
Baldus in lib. ut in test cap. de suis & leg. hered. & per. li. unicam pro 20. sui autem & novissimo.  the contrary side, for the nephew, after all reasons weighed to and fro, he cometh to conclude, that seeing rigour of law runneth only with the uncle, for that in deed, he is properly nearest in blood by one degree, and that only indulgence and custom serveth for the nephew, permitting him to represent the place of his father, which is dead, they resolve (I say) that whensoever the uncle is borne before the nephew, and the said uncles elder brother died before his father (as it happened in the case of john of Gaunt and of king Richard) their the uncle by right may be preferred, for that the said elder brother could not give or transmitt, that thing to his son, which was not 〈◊〉 himself before his father died, and consequently his son could not represent that which his father never had, and this for the Civil law.  
Touching our common laws, the favourers 
Touching the common la of Ingland.  of lancaster do say two or three things, first that the right of the crown and interest thereunto is not decided expressly in our la, not it is a plea subject to the common rules thereof, but is superior and more eminent, and therefore that men may not judge of this as of other pleas of particular persons, nor is the trial like, nor the common maxims or rules always of force in this thing, as in others, which they prove by divers particular cases, as for example, the widow of a private man shall have her thirds of all his lands for her dowry, but not the Queen of the crown. Again if a private man have many daughters, and die 
Different rules in succession of the crown and of other inheritances.  seized of any lands in fee simple, without heir male, his said daughters by law shall have the said lands as copartners equally divided between them, but not the daughters of a king, for that the eldest must carry away all, as though she were heir male. The like also is seen, if a baron match with a femme that is an inheretrix, and have issue by her, though she die, yet shall he enjoy her lands during his life, as tenant by courtesy, but it is not so in the crown if a man marry with a Queen, as king Philip did with Queen mary: and so finally they say also that albeit in private men's possessions, the common course of our law is, that if the father die seized of lands in fee simple, leaving a younger son and a nephew, that is to say a child of his elder son, the nephew shall succeed his grandfather, as also he shall do his uncle, if of three brethren the elder die without issue, and the second leave a son: yet in the inheritance and succession of the crown it goeth otherwise, as by all the former eight examples have been showed, and this is the first they say about the common law.  
The second point which they affirm is, 
The common la grounded in custom.  that the ground of our common laws, consisteth principally and almost only, about this point of the crown, in custom, for so say they we see by experience, that nothing in effect, is written thereof in the common law, and all old lawyers do affirm this point, as were Ranulfus de Granuilla in his book of the laws and customs of Ingland, which he written in the time of king Henry the second, and judge Fortescue in his book of the praise of English laws, which he compiled in the time of king Henry the sixth, and others. Whereof these men do infer, that seeing there are so many precedents and examples alleged before, of the uncles case preferred before the nephew, not only in foreign countries, but also in Ingland, for this cause (I say) they do affirm, that our common laws, cannot but favour also this title, and consequently must needs like well of the interest of Lancaster, as they avouch that all the best old lawyers did in those times: & for example they do record two by name, of the most famous learned men which those ages had, who not only defended the said title of Lancaster in 
Ancient lawyers that defended the house of Lancaster.  those days, but also suffered much for the same. The one was the forenamed judge Fortescue, Chancellor of Ingland, and named father of the common laws in that age, who fled out os Ingland whith the Queen, wife of king Henry the sixth, & with the prince her son, and lived in banishment in france, where it seemeth also that he written his learned book entitled de laudibus legum Angliae. And the other 
Holling. 〈◊〉 vit. Henric. 6. pag. 〈◊〉 00.  was, Sir Thomas Thorope chief Baron of the exchequer, in the same reign of the same king Henry the sixth, who being afterwards put into the tower by the Princes of the house of York, for his eager defence of the title of Lancaster, remained there a long time, and after being delivered, was beheaded at highgate in a tumult, in the days of king Edward the fourth.  
These than are the allegations which the favourers of the house of Lancaster do lay down 
The sum of this controversy repeated.  for the iustyfying of that title, affirming first, that john of Gaunt duke of Lancaster ought to have succeeded his father K. Edward the third, immediately before king Richard, and that injury 
1.  was done unto him in that king Richard was preferred. And secondly that king Richard (were his right never so good) was justly & 
2.  orderly deposed, for his evil government, by lawful authority of the common wealth. And thirdly that after his deposition, Henry duke 
3.  of Lancaster, son & heir of john of Gaunt, was next in succession every way, both in respect of the right of his father, as also for that he was two degrees nearer to the king deposed then was Edmond Mortimer descended of Leonel duke of Clarence, and these are the principal and substantial proofs of their right and title.  
But yet besides these, they do add also these 
Other arguments of Lancaster.  other arguments and considerations following: first that what soever right or pretence the house of York had, the princes thereof did forfeit and lose the same many times, by their conspiraces, rehellions & attainders, as namely Richard earl of Cambrige, that married the lady 
Stow in vita Henrici 5. pag. 587.  Anne Mortimer, and by her took his pretence to the crown, was convicted of a conspiracy against king Henry the fift in Southampton, as before I have said, and there was put to death 
The princes of York often attained.  for the same, by judgement of the king, and of all his peers, in the year 1415. the duke of York his elder brother, being one of the jury that condemned him. This earl Richard's son, also named Richard, coming afterward by the death of his uncle, to be duke of York, first of all made open clay me to the crown, by the title of York. But yet after many oaths sworn and broken to, king Henry the sixth, he was attainted of treason: I mean both he and Edward his son, than earl of march, which afterwards was king, with the rest of his offspring even to the ninth degree (as Stow affirmeth) in a parliament holden at Coventry 
Stow in vita Henrici 6.  in the year 1459. and in the 38. year of the reign of the said king Henry, and the very next year after the said Richard was slain in the same quarrel: but the house of Lancaster (say these men) was never attainted of any such crime.  
Secondly they say, that the house of York did enter only by violence, & by infinite bloodshedd, and by wilful murdering not only of 
2. York entered by violence.  divers of the nobility both spiritual and temporal, but also of both king Henry the sixth himself and of prince Edward his son, and by a certain popular and mutinous election of a certain few soldiers in Smithfield of London, 
Stow in fine vit. 〈◊〉. 6.  and this was the entrance of the house of York to the crown, whereas king Henry the fourth, first king of the house of Lancaster, entered without bloodshedd as hath been showed, being called home by the requests and letters of the people and nobility, and his election & admission to the crown, was orderly, and authorized by general consent of parliament, in the doing thereof.  
Thirdly they allege, that king Henry the sixth put down by the house of York, was a good 
3. The house of York put down a holy king.  and holy king, and had reigned peaceably 40, years, and never committed any act, worthy deposition, whereas king Richard the second had many ways deserved the same, as himself came to acknowledge, and there upon made a personal solemn and public resignation of the said crown unto his cozen Henry of Lancaster, the which justified much the said Henry's entrance.  
Fourthly they allege that the housa of Lancaster had been in possession of the crown upon 
4. Long pos sessions of the house of Lancaster.  the point of 60. years, before the house of York did raise trouble unto them for the same, in which time their title was confirmed by many parliaments, oaths, approbations, and public acts of the common wealth, and by the nobles peers and people thereof, and by the states both spiritual and temporal, and with the consent of all foreign nations, so that if there had been any fault in their first entrance, yet was this sufficient to authorize the same, as we see it was in the title of king William the Conqueror, and of his two sons king William Rufus, and king Henry the first, that entered before their elder brother, and of king john, that entered before his nephew, & of his son king Henry the third that entered after his father's deprivation, and after the election of prince Lewis of france, as also of Edward the third that entered by deposition of his own father: of all which titles, yet might there have been doubt made at the beginning, but by time and durance of possession, and by confirmation of the common wealth, they were made lawful, & without controversy.  
Fiftly they say, that if we consider the four king Heuryes that have been of the house of 
5. The difference of kings of both houses.  Lancaster to wit the 4. 5. 6. and 7. and do compare them with the other four that have been of the house of York, to wit Edward the fourth, Richard the third, Henry the eight, & Edward the sixth, & all their acts both at home & abroad, what quietness or troubles have passed, & what the common wealth of Ingland hath gotten or lost under each of them, we shall find, that God hath seemed to prosper and allow much more of those of Lancaster, then of those of York, for that under those of Lancaster the realm hath enjoyed much more peace, and gained far greater honour, and enlarged more the dominions of the crown then under those of York, and that it had done also much more if the seditions, rebellions, and troubles raised and brought in by the princes of the house of York, had not hindered the same, as say these men, it was evidently seen in the time of king Henry the sixth, when their contention against the princes of the house of Lancaster, was the principal cause why all the English states in France were lost, and what garboils and troubles at home have ensued afterwards, and how infinite murders and man slaughters with change of nobility have been caused hereby, and increased afterwards under the government and rule of the princes of York, needeth not (say these men) to be declared.  
One thing only they note in particular, which I will not omit (and let it be the sixth 
6. The princes of York cruel one to the other.  note) and that is, that the princes of York have not only been rigorous and very bloody unto their adversaries, but also among themselves, and to their own kindred, which these men take to be a just punishment of God upon them: And for proof hereof, they allege first, the testimony of Polydore, who albeit he were a great advocate of the house of York, as before hath been noted, for that he lived and written his story under king Henry the eight, yet in one place he breaketh forth into these words, of the princes of this house. Cum non haberent iam inimicos in 
Polydor virg. hist. Anglie lib. 24.  quos soevitiam explerent, & saturarent, in semetipsos crudelitatem exercuerunt, proprioque sanguine suas pollure manus. When these princes now had brought to destruction all those of the house of Lancaster, so as they had no more enemies upon whom to fill and satiat their cruelty, than began they to exercise their fierceness upon themselves, and to imbrue their hands with their own blood, thus far Polidor.  
Secondly they do show the same by the 
Great union & faithfulness of the princes of Lancaster.  deeds of both sides, for that the love, union, trust, confidence, faith fullness, kindness, and loyalty of the princes of Lancaster, the one towards the other, is singular and notorious, as may appear by the acts and studious endeavours of the lord Henry bishop of Winchester, and Cardinal, and of the lord Thomas duke of Excester and marquis of Dorset, brothers of king Henry the fourth, to whom and to his children, they were most faithful friendly and loyal, as also by the noble proceed of the lords Thomas duke of Clarence, john duke of Bedford, and Humphrey duke of Gloucester, sons of the foresaid Henry the fourth, and brothers of king Henry the fist, (the first of which three gave his blood in his service, & the other two spent their whole lives in defence, of the dignity of the English crown, the one as regent of France, the other as protector of Ingland: by the worthy acts also and renowned faith fullness of the dukes of Somerset, cozen germane to the said king Henry the fourth, and to his children, and the proper ancestors of king Henry the seventh, all which dukes of Somerset, of the house of Lancaster, (being five or six in number) did not only as Polydore sayeth, assist and help their sovereign, and the whole realm, Vigilijs curis & pcriculis, that is to say with watchfulness, cares, and offering 
Polyd. lib. 23.  themselves to dangers, but also four of them one after an other, to with Edmond with his three sons, Henry, Edmond, and john, (whereof too successively after him were dukes of Somerset, and the other marquis dorset) were all four (I say) as so many Machabyes, slain in the defence of their country and family, by the other faction of the house of York, which thing say these men, showed evidently both a marvelous confidence that these men had in their quarrel, as also a great blessing of God towards that family, that they had such love and union among themselves.  
But now in the house of York these men endeavour 
dissensions in the house of York.  to show all the contrary, to wit that there was nothing else but suspicion, hatred, & emulations among themselves, and extreme cruelty of one against the other, and so we see that as soon almost as Edward duke of York came to be king, George duke of Clarence his younger brother conspired against him, & did help to drive him out again, both from the realm and crown. In recompense whereof his said elder brother afterward notwithstanding all the reconciliation and many oaths that 
King Edward 4. King Richard 3.  passed between them, of new love and union, caused him upon new grudges to be taken & murdered privily at Calis, as all the world knoweth. And after both their deaths, Richard their third brother, murdered the two sons of his said elder brother, and kept in prison while he lived, the son and heir of his second brother, I mean the young earl of Warwick, though he were but a very child, whom king Henry the seventh afterwards put to death.  
But king Henry the eight that succeeded them, passed all the rest in cruelty, toward his 
King Henry 3. how many he put to death of his own kindred.  own kindred, for he weeded out almost all that ever he could find of the blood royal of York, and this either for emulation, or causes of mere suspicion only. For first of all he beheaded Edmond de la Pole duke of Suffolk, son of his own aunt lady Elizabeth, that was sister to king Edward the fourth, which Edward was grand father to king Henry as is evident. The like destruction king Henry went about to bring to Richard de la Pole brother to the 
The de la pools.  said Edmond, if he had not escaped his hands by flying the realm, whom yet he never ceased to pursue, until he was slain in the battle of Pavia in service of the king of France, by whose death was extinguished the noble house of the de la Poles.  
Again the said king Henry put to death Edward duke of Buckingham, high constable 
The house of Buckingam.  of Ingland, the son of his great Aunt, sister to the Queen Elizabeth his grandmother, and thereby overthew also that worthy house of Buckingham, & after again he put to death his cozen germane Henry Courtney marquis of Excester, son of the lady Catherine his Aunt, that was daughter of king Edward the fourth, 
The house of Courtneis.  and attainted jointly with him, his wife the lady Gertrude, taking from her all her goods lands and inheritance, and committed to perpetual prison their only son and heir lord Edward Courtney, being then but a child of seven years old, which remained so there, until many years after he was set at liberty and restored to his living by Queen Mary.  
Moreover he put to death the lady 〈◊〉 Plantagenet, Countess of Salisbury, daughter 
The house of Salisbury.  of George duke of Clarence, that was brother of his grandfather king Edward the fourth, & with her he put to death also her eldest son and heir Thomas Poole, lord Montague, and committed to perpetual prison (where soon after also he ended his life) a little infant named Henry Poole his son and heir, & condemned to death by act of parliament (although absent) Renald Pole brother to the said lord Montague Cardinal in Rome, whereby he overthrew also the noble house of Salisbury and warwick: nether need I to go further in this 
Seymers put to death.  relation, though these men do note also, how Edward the sixth put to death two of his own uncles, the Seymers (or at least it was done by his authority) and how that under her Majesty that now is, the Queen of Scotland, that was next in 〈◊〉 of any other living & the chief 
Queen of Scots.  titler of the house of York, hath also been put to death.  
Lastly they do note, (and I may not omit it) that their is no noble house standing at this day 
7. No old noble house standing in Ingland but such as took part with Lancaster.  in Ingland in the ancient state of calling that it had, and in that dignity and degree that it was in when the house of York entered to the crown (if it be above the state of a barony) but only such as defended the right and interest of the houses of Lancaster, and that all other great houses that took part with the house of York, and did help to ruin the house of Lancaster, be either ceased since, or extirpated and over thrown by the same house of York itself which they assisted to get the crown, & so at this present they be either united to the crown by confiscation, or transferred to other Images that are strangers to them who possessed them before. As for example, the ancient houses of Ingland, that remain at this day & were standing when the house of York begun their title, are, the houses of Arondel, Oxford, Northumberland, 
Sive ancient noble houses.  Westmoreland, & Shrewsbery (for all other that are in Ingland at this day, above the dignity of Barons, have been advanced since that time) and all these five houses were these that principally did stick unto the house of Lancaster, as is evident by all English chronicles. For that the earl of Arondel brought in king 
Arondel.  Henry the fourth, first king of the house of Lancaster, and did help to place him in the dignity royal, coming out of France with him. The earl of Oxford, and his son the 
Oxford.  lord Vere, were so earnest in the defence of king Henry the sixth as they were both slain by king Edward the fourth, and john earl of Oxford was one of the principal assistants of Henry the seventh, to take the crown from Richard the third. The house of Northumberland also was a principal aider to Henry the fourth in getting 
Northum berland.  the crown, and two earls of that name to wit Henry the second and third, were slain in the quarrel of king Henry the sixth, one in the battle of S. Albon, and the other of Saxton, and a third earl named Henry the fourth fled into Scotland with the said king Henry the sixth. The house of Westmoreland also was chief advancer of Henry the fourth to the crown, & the second 
Westmoreland.  earl of that house, was slain in the party of Henry the sixth in the said bartaile of Saxton, and john earl of Shrewsbury was likewise slain in defence of the title of Lancaster in the 
Shrewsbury.  bartaile of Northampton, and I omit many other great services and faithful endeavours which many Princes of these five noble ancient houses, did in the defence of the Lancastrian kings, which these men say, that God hath rewarded with continuance of their houses unto this day.  
But on the contrary side, these men do note, 
Houses that favo red York deftroyed  that all the old houses that principally assisted. The title of York, are now extinguished, and that chief by the kings themselves of that house, as for example, the principal peers that assisted the family of York, were Mowbray duke of Norfolk, de la Poole duke of Suffolk, the earl of Salisbury and the earl of Warwick, of all which the event was this.  
john Mowbray duke of Norfolk the first confederate of the house of York, died soon 
The Monbraies.  after the exaltation of Edward the fourth, without ifsue, and so that name of Mowbray ceased, and the title of the dukedom of Norfolk was transferred afterward by king Richard the third, unto the house of howard's.  
john de la Poole duke of Suffolk, that married the sister of king Edward the fourth, & 
The de la Pools.  was his great assistant, though he left three sons, yet all were extinguished without issue, by help of the house of York, for that Edmond the eldest son duke of Suffolk was beheaded by king Henry the eight, & his brother Richard driven out of the realm to his destruction, as before hath been showed, & john their brother earl of Lincolue, was stain at Stockfild in service of king Richard the third, and so ended the line of de la Pools.  
Richard Nevel earl of Salisbury, a chief 
The house of Salesbury & Warwick.  enemy to the house of Lancaster, and exalter of York, was taken at the battle of Wakefild, and there beheaded leaving three sons, Richard, john and George: Richard was earl both of Salisbuty and Warwick, surnamed the great earl of Warwick, & was he that placed king Edward the fourth in the royal seat, by whom yet he was slain afterward at Barnet, and the lands of these two great earldoms of Salisbury and Warwick, were united to the crown by his attainder. john his younger brother was Marquis of montague, and after all assistance given to the said king Edward the fourth of the house of York, was slain also by him at Barnet, and his lands in like manner confiscate to the crown, which yet were never restored again: George Nevel their younger brother was Archbishop of York, & was taken & sent prisoner by the said king Edward unto Guynes, who shortly after pined away and died, and this was the end of all the principal friends, helpers & advancers of the house of York, as these men do allege.  
Wherefore they do conclude, that for all these reasons, & many more that might be alleged, the title of Lancaster must needs seem the better title, which they do confirm by the general consent of all the realm, at king Henry the seventh his coming in to recover the crown from the house of York, as from usurpers, for having had the victory against king Richard, they crowned him presently in the field 
King 〈◊〉 the 7. crowned in the filled in respect of the house of Lancaster only though his title that way was not great.  in the right of Lancaster, before he married with the house of York, which is a token that they esteemed his title of Lancaster sufficient of itself, to bear away the crown, albeit for better ending of strife he took to wife also the lady Elizabeth heir of the house of York, as hath been said, and this may be sufficient for the present, in this controversy.   

OF FIVE PRINCIPAL HOUSES OR LINEAGES THAT DOOR MAY PRETEND TO THE CROWN of Ingland, which are the houses of Scotland, Suffolk, Clarence Brittany, and Portugal, and first of all, of the house of Scotland, which containeth the pretensions of the king of Scots and the Lady Arbella.  
CAP. V.  
HAVING declared in the former chapter, so much as appertaineth unto the general controversy between the two principal houses and royal families of Lancaster and York, it remaineth now that I lay before you the particular challenges, claims and pretensions, which divers houses and families descended (for the most part) of those two, have among themselves, for their titles to the same.  
All which families, may be reduccd to three or four general heads. For that some do pretend by the house of Lancaster alone, as those families principally that do descend of the line 
A division of the families that do precend.  royal of Portngal: some other do pretend by the house of York only, as those that are descended, of George duke of Clarence, second brother to K. Edward the fourth. Some again will seem to pretend from both houses joined together, as all those that descend from king Henry the seventh, which are the houses of Scotland and Suffolk, albeit (as before hath appeared) others do deny that these families have any true part in the house of Lancaster, which point shall afterward be discussed more at large. And four others do pretend, before the two houses of York and Lancaster were divided, as the Infanta of Spain, duchess of Savoy, the prince of Lorraine & such others, as have descended of the house of Britanny and France, of all which pretences & pretendors, we shall speak in order, and consider with indifferency what is said or alleged of every side, to and fro, beginning first with the house of Scotland, as with that which in common opinion of vulgar men, is taken to be first and nearest (though others deny it) for that they are descended of the first and eldest daughter, of king Henry the seventh, as before in the third chapter hath been declared.  
First then two persons are known to be of 
Of the house of Scotland.  this house at this day that may have action & claim to the crown of Ingland, the first is, Lord james the sixth of that name presently king of Scotland, who descendeth of Margaret eldest daughter of king Henry the seventh, that was married by her first marriage to james the fourth king of Scots, & by him had issue james the fift, and he again the lady Mary mother to this king now pretendant.  
The second person that may pretend in this house, is the lady Arbella, descended of the self 
Arbella.  same Queen Margaret by her second marriage, unto Archibald Douglas earl of Anguis, by whom she had Margaret that was married to Matthew Steward earl of Lenox, and by him had Charles her second son earl of Lenox, who by Elizabeth daughter of Sir William Candish knight in Ingland, had issue this Arbella now alive.  
First then, for the king of Scots, those that do favour his cause, (whereof I confess that I have 
In favour of the king of Scots.  not found very many in Ingland) do allege, that he is the first and chiefest pretendor of all others, and next in succession, for that he is the first person that is descended (as you see) of the 
1.  eldest daughter of king Henry the seventh, and that in this descent there can no bastardy or other lawful impediment be avowed, why he should not succeed according to the priority of his pretension and birth: And moreover secondly they do allege that it would be greatly for the honour and profit of Ingland, for that 
2.  hereby the two Realms of Ingland and Scotland, should come to be joined, a point long sought for, and much to be wished, and finally such as are affected to his religion do add 
3.  that hereby true religion will come to be more settled also and established in Ingland, which they take to be a matter of no small consequence, and consideration, and this in effect is that which the favourers of this prince do allege in his behalf.  
But on the other side, there want not many that do account this pretence of the king of Scots neither good nor just, nor any way expedient 
Argument against the king of Scots.  for the state of Ingland, and they do answer largely to all the allegations before mentioned in his behalf.  
And first of all, as concerning his title, by nearness of succession, they make little account thereof, both for that in itself (they say) it may easily be overthrown, and proved to be of no validity, as also for that if it were never so good, yet might it for other considerations be rejected, and made frustrate, as our friend the Givil lawyer, hath largely & learnedly proved these days; in our hearing.  
To begin then to speak first of the king of Scots title by 〈◊〉 of blood these men do affirm that albeit there be not alleged any ba bastardly in his descent from K. Henry the seventh his daughter as there is in her second marriage against the lady 〈◊〉 yet are there other reasons enough to 〈◊〉 and overthrow this 
1. The king of Scots not of the house of Lancaster.  clay me and pretension and first of all, for that he is not (say these men) of the house of Lancaster by the lady Blanch the only true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as before hath in 〈◊〉 been showed, and shallbe afterwards more largely, but only by Catherine Swinford whose children being unlawfully begotten, and but of the half blood, whether they may by that legitimation of parliament, that was given them, be made inheritable unto the crown before the lawful daughter of the whole blood, shallbe discussed afterward in place convenient, when we shall talk of the house of Portugal: but in the mean space, these men do presume, that the king of Scots is but only of the house of York, and then affirming further that the title of the house of Lancaster, is better than that of York, as by many arguments the favourers of Lancaster have endeavoured to show in the former chapter, they do infer that this is sufficient, to make void all claim of the king of Scots, that he may pretend by nearness of blood, especially seeing there want not at this day pretenders enough of the other house of Lancaster to claim their right, so as the house of York shall not need to enter for fault of true heirs, and this is the first argument which is made against the Scotish king & all the rest of his lineage, by the favourers and followers of the said house of Lancaster.  
A second Argument is made against the said kings succession not by them of Lancaster, but 
2. The king of Scots foreign botne.  rather by those of his own house of York which is founded upon his foreign birth, by which they hold that he is excluded, by the common laws of Ingland from succession to the crown, for that the said laws do bar all strangers borne out of the realm, to inherit within the land, and this is an argument handled very largely between the foresaid books of M. Hales, M. Morgan and my lord of Rosse, & for that the same doth concern much the pretensions and claims of divers others, that be strangers also by birth, and yet do pretend to this succession, as before hath been declared: I shall repeat briefly in this place, the sum of that which is alleged of both parties in this behalf.  
First then, to the general assertion, that no 
The controversy about somayne 〈◊〉.  stranger at all may inherit any thing, by any means in Ingland, the said books of M. Morgan & my lord Rosse do answer, that in that universal sense, it is false, for that it appeareth plainly by that which is sete down by law in the seventh & ninth years of king Edward the fourth, & in the eleventh, & fourteenth of K. Henry the fourth, that a stranger may purchase land in Ingland, as also that he may inherit by his wife if he should marry an inheritrix.  
Secondly they say, that the true maxima or rule against the inheritance of strangers, is 
Mow strangers may inherit.  grounded only upon a statute made in the 25. year of king Edward the third, and is to be restrained unto proper inheritances only, to wit, that no person borne our of the allegiance of the king of Ingland, whose father and mother were not of the same allegiance at the time of his birth (for so are the words of the statute) shallbe able to have or demand any heritage with in the same allegiance, as heir to any person.  
Thirdly they say, that this axiom or general 
Reasons, why the statute toucheth not our case.  rule cannot any way touch or be applied to the succession of the crown, first for that as hath been declared before, no axiom or maxima of our law can touch or be understood of matters concerning the crown, except express mention be made thereof, and that the crown is 〈◊〉 in many points that other private heritage's be not.  
And secondly for that the crown cannot properly be called an inheritance of allegiance or within allegiance, as the words of the said 
The crown not held by allegiance.  statute do stand, for that it is not held of any superior nor with allegiance, but immediately from God. And thirdly for that the statute meaneth plainly of inheritances by descent (for otherwise as is said an allien may hold lands by purchase) but the crown is a thing incorporate, and descendeth not according to the common course of other private inheritances, but rather goeth by succession as other incorporations do, in sign whereof, no king can by law avoid his letters patents by reason of his nonage, as other common heirs under age do, but he is ever presumed to be of full age, in respect of his crown, even as a prior, parson, deane, or other head incorporate, is, which can never be presumed to be within age, and so, as any such head incorporate though he be an allien, might inherit or demand lands in this discourse is set down, and especially by the testimony of the L. Paget, and Sir Edward Montague, that said the stamp was put unto it after the king was past sense, yet they of the house of Suffolk are not satisfied with that answer, for that they say that at least, howsoever that matter of the late sealing be, yet seeing the king willed it to be done, drawn out and sealed, it appeareth hereby that this was the last will and judgement of king Henry, and not revoked by him: which is sufficient (say these men) to answer the intent and meaning of the realm, and the authority committed to him, by the foresaid two acts of parliament, for the disposing of the succession, which two acts (say these men) containing the whole authority of the common wealth, so seriously and deliberately given, in so weighty an affair, may not in reason be deluded or over thrown now by the saying of one or two men, who for pleasing or contenting of the time wherein they spoke, might say or guess that the king's memory was past, when the stamp was put unto his testament, which if it were so, yet if he commanded, as hath been said, the thing to be done, while he had memory (as it may appear he did, both by the witnesses that subscribed, and by the enrolment thereof in the chancery) no man can deny but that this was the kings last will, which is cnoughe for satisfying the parliaments intention, as these men do affirm.  
A fourth argument is made against the king of Scots succession, by all the other competitors 
The king of Scots excluded by the starute of association.  jointly, and it seemeth to them, to be an argument that hath no solution or reply, for that it is grounded upon a plain fresh statute, made in the parliament holden in the 27. year (if I err not) of her Majesty that now is, wherein is enacted & decreed, that whosoever shallbe convinced to conspire, attempt, or procure, the death of the Queen, or to be privy or accessatie to the same, shall lose all right, title, pretence, clay me or action, that the same parties or their heyrcs have or may have, to the crown of Ingland. Upon which statute, seeing that afterward the lady Mary late Queen of Scotland, mother of this king, was condemned and executed by the authority of the said parliament, it seemeth evident, unto these men, that this king who pretendeth all his right to the crown of Ingland by his said mother, can have none at al.  
And these are the reasons proofs & arguments, which divers men do allege against the right of succession, pretended by the king of 
Other considerations against the King of Scots.  Scots. But now if we leave this point which concerneth the very right itself of his succescession by blood, & will come to examine other reasons and considerations of state, and those in particular which before I have mentioned that his favourers do allege, for the utility and common good that may be presumed will rise to the realm of Ingland by his admission to our crown, as also the other point also of establishment of religion by them mentioned, than I say, these other men that are against his entrance do produce many other reasons and considerations also, of great inconveniences, as to them they seem, against this point of his admission and their reasons are these that follow.  
First touching the public good of the English common wealth, by the uniting of both realms of Ingland & Scotland together, these men do say, that it is very doubtful and disputable whether the state of Ingland shall receive good or harm thereby, if the said union could be brought to pass. First for that the state and 
joining of Ingland and Scotland together.  condition of Scotland well considered, it seemeth, that it can bring no other commodity to Ingland, then increase of subjects, and those rather to participate the commodities and riches of Ingland, then to impart any from Scotland. And then secondly, the aversion and natural 
1.  alienationn of that people, from the English, and their ancient inclination to join with the French & Irish against us, maketh it yery probable, that, that subjection of theirs to the crown of Ingland, would not loug endure, as by expetience we have feene, since the time of king Edward the first, when after the death of their king Alexander the third, without issue, they chose king Edward to be their king, delivered their towns and fortresses into his hands, did swear him fealty, received his deputy or viceroy (as Polidor at large declareth). And yet all 
Polydor. lib. 17. in vit. Edwardi primi.  this served afterward, to no other effect but only slaughter, bloodshed, and infinyt losses and charges of Ingland.  

3.  Thirdly they say, that if the king of Scots should come to possess the crown of Ingland, he cannot choose (at least for many years) but to stand in great jealousy of so many other competitors of the English blood royal, as he shall find in Ingland, against whom he must needs fortify himself by those other foreign nations, that may be presumed to be most sure unto him, though most contrary by natural inclination, & least tolerable in government to English men, as are the Scots of whom he is borne, and 
Inconveniences of bringing strangers into Ingland.  danes with whom he is allied, and French of whom he is descended, and of the uncivil part ofIreland, with whom one great piece of his realm hath most conjunction, the authority & sway of which four nations in Ingland, and over Inglishmen, what trouble it may work every wise man may easily conjecture. Besides that; the Scots-men themselves, (specially those of the nobility) do openly profess, that they desire not this conjunction and subordination unto Ingland, which in no wise they can bear, both for the aversion they have, to all English government over them, as also for that their liberties are far greater, as now they live, then in that case it would be suffered, their king coming hereby to be of greater power to force them to the form of English subjection, as no doubt but in time he would.  
And seeing the greatest utility that in this case by reason and probability can be hoped for by this union, is that the Scotish nation should come to be advanced in Ingland, and to be made of the nobility both temporal and spiritual, & of the privy council, and of other like dignities of credit and confidence (for otherwise no 
A consideration of importance.  union or amity durable can be hoped for) and considering that the king, both for his own safety (as before hath been said) as also for gratitude and love to his own nation, and allied friends, must needs plant them about him, in chief place of credit, which are most opposite to English natures, and by little & little through occasion of emulations and of controversies, that will fall out daily betwixt such diversity of nations, he must needs secretly begin to favour and fortify his own, as we read that William Conqueror did his normans, 
Polydot. hist. Ang. l. s. &. 9  and Canutus before him his Danes, to the incredible calamity of the English nation (though otherwise neither of them was of themselves either an evil king, or enemy to the English blood (but driven hereunto for their own safety) and for that it was impossible to stand neutral in such national contentions: if all this (I say) fell out so then, as we know it did, and our ancestors felt it to their extreme ruin, what other effect can be hoped for now, by this violent union of nations, that are by nature so disunited and opposite, as are the English, Scotish, Irish, Danishe, French & other on them depending, which by this means must needs be planted together in Ingland.  
And if we read, that the whole realm of Spain did refuse to admit S. Lewis king of 
Example of Spain.  France, to be their king in Spain (to whom yet by law of succession it was evident, & confessed by the spaniards themselves, as their chronicler Garibay writeth, that the right most 
Garibay l. 20 c 42. An Dni 1207.  clearly did appertain by his mother lady Blanch eldest daughter and heir of K. Alonso the ninth) and that they did this only for that he was a Frenchman, and might thereby bring the french to have chief authority in Spain: and if for this cause they did agree together, to give the kingdom rather to Ferdinando the third that was son of Lady Berenguela, younger sister to the said lady Blanch, and if this determination was thought at that time to be wife and provident (though against all right of lineal succession) and if we see that it had good success, for that it endureth unto this day: what shall we say in this case (say these men) where the king in question is not yet a S. Lewis, nor his title to Ingland so clear, as that other was to spain, and the aversion betwixt his nation and ours, much greater than was that betwixt the french and Spanish, thus they do reason.  
Again we heard out of the discourse made 
Example out of Portugal.  by the Civilian before, how the states of Portugal after the death of their king Don Ferdinando 
Garibay l. 34. c. 38. An. Dni 1383.  the first of that name, who left one only daughter and heir named lady Beatrix married unto john the first king of Castille, to whom the succession of Portugal without all controversy did appertain, they rather determined to choose for their king a bastard brother, of the said Don Fernando, named john, then to admit the true inheretor Beatrix with the government of the Castilians, by whom yet (they being much the richer people) the Portugals might hope to reap far greater utility than English men can do by Scotland, considering it is the poorer country and nation. And this is that in effect which these men do answer in this behalf, noting also by the way, that the Romans themselves with all their power, could never bring union or peace between these two nations of Ingland & scotlan, nor hold the Scots and North-Irish in obedience of any authority residing in Ingland, and so in the end they were enforced to cut them of, & to make 
Stow. pa. 54. 59 95. 76.  that famous wall begun by Adrian, and pursued by other Emperors to divide them from Ingland, and bar them from joining, as all the world knoweth, and much less shall any one king living in Ingland now, hold them all in obedience, let him be of what nation, he will, and this for the utility that may be hoped by this union.  
But now for the other point alleged by the favourers of Scotland, about establishment of true religion, in Ingland, by entrance of this king of Scots, these other men do hold that this is the worst and most dangerous point of all 
Of the religion of Scotland.  other, considering what the state of religion is in Scotland at this day, and how different or rather opposite to that form which in Ingland is maintained, and when the Archbishopes, bishops, deans archdeacon's, and other such of ecclesiastical and honourable dignities of Ingland, shall consider that no such dignity or promotion is left now standing in Scotland, no nor any cathedral or collegiate church is remained on foot, with the rents and dignities thereunto appertaining, and when our nobility shall remember how the nobility of Scotland is subject at this day to a few ordinary and common ministers, without any head, who in their synods and assemblies have authority to put to the horn, and drive out of the realm any noble man whatsoever, without remedy or redress, except he will yield and humble himself to them, and that the king himself standeth in awe of this exorbitant and popular power of his ministers, and is content to yield thereunto: it is to be thought (say these men) that few English be they of what religion or opinion soever, will show themselves forward to receive such a King, in respect of his religion, that hath no better order in his own at home, and thus much concerning the King of Scotland.  
Now than it remaineth, that we come to 
Of the title of lady Arbella.  treat of the lady Arbella, second branch of the house of Scotland, touching whose title, though much of that which hath been said before, for or against the king of Scotland, may also be understood to appertain unto her, for that she is of the same house, yet shall I in this place repeat in few words the principal points that are alleged in her behalf or prejudice.  

1.  First of all then, is alleged for her, and by her favourers, that she is descended of the foresaid lady Margaret, eldest daughter of king Henry the seventh, by her second marriage with Archibald Douglas earl of Anguys, and that she is in the third degree only from her, for that she is the daughter of Charles Steward who was son to Margaret Countess of Lenox, daughter to the said lady Margaret Queen of Scots, so as this lady Arbella is but niece once removed, unto the said Queen Margaret, to wit in equal degree of descent with the king of Scots, which king being excluded (as the favourers of this woman do affirm) by the causes and arguments before alleged against him, no reason (say they) but that this lady should enter in his place, as next in blood unto him.  
Secondly is alleged in her behalf, that she as an English woman, borne in Ingland, and 
2. An English woman.  of parents who at the time of her birth were of English allegiance, wherein she goeth before the king of Scots, as hath been seen, as also in this other principal point, that by her admission no such inconvenience can be feared of bringing in strangers, or causing troubles & sedition within the realm, as in the pretence of the Scotish king hath been considered, and this in effect is all that I have heard alleged for her.  
But against her, by other competitors and their friends, I have hard divers arguments of 
Against Arbella.  no small importance and consideration produced, whereof the first is, that which before hath been alleged against the king of Scotland in like manner, to wit, that neither of them is properly of the house of Lancaster, as in the genealogy set down in the third chapter hath appeared. And secondly that the title of Lancaster is before the pretence of York, as hath been proved in 
1. Not of the house of Lancaster.  the fourth chapter, whereof is inferred, that neither the king of Scots nor Arbella, are next in succession, and for that of these two propositions, there hath been much treated before, I remit me thereunto, only promising that of the first of the two, which is how king Henry the seventh was of the house of Lancaster, touching right of succession, I shall handle more particularly afterward when I come to speak of the house of Portugal, whereby also shall appear plainly what pretence of succession to the crown or duchy of Lancaster the discendentes of the said king Henry can justly make.  
The second impediment, against the lady 
2. The testa meant of king Henry.  Arbella is the aforesaid testament of king Henry the eight and the two acts of parliaments for authorizing of the same, by all which is pretended that the house of Suffolk, is preferred before this other of Scotland.  
A third argument is, for that there is yet living 
3. The countess of derby nearer by a degree.  one of the house of Suffolk, that is nearer by a degree to the stem, to wit, to Henry the seventh to whom after the disease of her Majesty that now is, we must return, then is the lady Arbella or the king of Scots, and this is the lady Margeret countess of Derby, mother to the present earl of Derby who was daughter to lady Elinor, daughter of Queen Mary of France, that was second daughter of king Henry the seventh, so as this lady Margaret countess of Derby, is but in the third degree from the said Henry, whereas both the king of Scotland and Arbella are in the fourth, and consequently she is next in propinquity of blood, & how greatly this propinquity hath been favoured in such cases, though they were of the younger liine, the examples before alleged in the fourth chapter do make manifest.  
fourthly and lastly, and most strongly of 
Illegitimation by bastardy.  all, they do argue against the title of this lady Arbella, affirming that her descent is not free from bastardly, which they prove first, for that Queen Margaret soon after the death of her first husband king james the fourth married secretly one Steward lord of Annerdale, which Steward, was alive long after her marriage with Douglas, and consequently this second marriage with Douglas (Steward being alive) could not be lawful, which they do prove also by an other mean, for that they say it is most certain, and to be made evident, that the said Archibald Douglas earl of Anguis had an other wife also alive, when he married the said Queen, which points they say were so public as they came to king Henry's ears, whereupon he sent into Scotland the lord William Howard, brother to the old duke of Norfolk, and father to the present lord Admiral of Ingland, to inquire of these points, and the said lord Howard found them to be true, 
The testimony of the lord Willian howard.  and so he reported not only to the king, but also afterwards many times to others, and namely to Queen Mary to whom he was lord chamberlain, and to divers others, of whom many be yet living, which can and will testify the same, upon the relation they heard from thesayd lord Williams own mouth, whereupon king Henry was greatly offended, and would have letted the marriage between his said sister and Douglas, but that they were married in secret, and had consummate their marriage, before this was known, or that the thing could be prevented, which is thought, was one especial cause and motive also to the said king afterward, to put back the issue of his said sister of Scotland, as by his forenamed testament is pretended, and this touching Arbellas' title by propinquity of birth.  
But besides this, the same men do allege dimers 
Other reasons of state against Arbella.  reasons also of inconucnience in respect of the common wealth, for which in their opinions it should be hurtful to the real me to admit this lady Arbella for Queen, as first of all for that she is a woman, who ought not to be preferred, before so many men as at this time do or may stand for the crown: and that it were much to have three women to reign in Ingland one after the other, whereas in the fpace of a-bove a thousaid years before them, there hath not reigned so many of that sex, nether together nor a sunder, for that from king Cerdick first king of the west Saxons, unto Egbright the first monarch of the English name and nation, containing the space of more than 300. years, no one woman at all is found to have reigned, and from Egbright to the Conquest, which is almost other 300. years, the like is to be observed, and from the conquest 
Government if women.  downward, which is above 500 years, one only woman was admitted for inheritrix, which was Maude the Empress, daughter of king Henry the first, who yet after her father's death was put back, and king Stephen was admitted in her place, and she never received by the realm, until her son Henry the second was of age to govern himself, & then he was received with express condition, that he should be crowned, and govern by himself, and not his mother, which very condition 
Bolyd. l. 12  was put also by the spaniards not long after, at their admitting of the lady Berenguela younger sister of lady Blauch neese to king Henry the second, whereof before often mention hath been made, to wit the condition was, that her son 〈◊〉 should govern, and not she, though his title came by her, so as this circumstance of being a woman, hath ever been of much consideration, especially where men do pretend also as in our case they do.  
another consideration of these men is, that if this lady, should be advanced unto the crown, 
Garibay li. 〈◊〉. c. 41  though she be of noble blood by her father's side, yet in respect of alliance with the nobility of Ingland she is a mere stranger, for that her kindred is only in Scotland, and in Ingland she hath only the Candishes by her mother's side, who being but a mean family, might cause much grudging among the English nobility, to see them so greatly advanced above the rest, as necessarily they must be, if this woman of their lineage should come to be Queen, which how the nobility of Ingland would bear, is hard to say, and this is as much as I have heard others say of this matter, and of all the house of Scotland: wherefore with this I shall end, and pass over to treat also of the other houses that do remain of such as before I named.   

OF THE HOUSE OF SUFFOLK CONTAINING THE CLAIMS OF THE COUNTESS OF Derby and her children, as also of the children of the earl of Hartford.  
CAP. VI  
IT hath appeared by the genealogy set down before in the third chapter, and oftentimes mentioned since, how that the house of Suffolk is so called, for that the lady Mary second daughter of king Henry the seventh, being first married to Lewis the 12. king of France, was afterward married to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk, who being sent over to condole the death of the said king, got the good will to marry the widow Queen, though the common fame of all men was; that the said Charles had a wife living at that day, and divers years after, as in this chapter we shall examine more in particular.  
By this Chatles Brandon then duke of Suffolk, this Queen Mary of France had two 
The issue of Charles Brandon.  daughters, first the lady Francis, married to Sir Henry Gray marquis Dorset, and afterwards in the right of his wife, duke also of Suffolk, who was afterward behedded by Queen Mary, and secondly lady Elinor married to Sir Henry Clifford earl of Cumberland.  
The lady Francis elder daughter of the 
Issue of lady Fran cis.  Queen and of Charles Brandon, had issue by her husband the said last duke of Suffolk, three daughters, to wit, jane, Catherine, and Mary, which Mary the youngest was betrothed first to Arthur lord Gray of wilton, and after left by him, she was married to one M. Martin keys of kent, gentleman porter of the Queen's 
Stow. an. 7. Edon. 6  household, and after she died without issue.  
And the lady jane the eldest of the three sisters was married at the same time to the lord Guylford Dudley, fourth son to Sir john Dudley duke of Northumberland, and was proclaimed Queen after the death of king Edward, for which act all three of them, to wit, both the father, son and daughter in law, were put to death soon after.  
But the L. Catherine the second daughter, 
The issue of the L. Catherine.  was married first upon the same day that the other two her sisters were, unto lord Henry Herbert now earl of Penbroke, and upon the fall and misery of her house, she was left by him, and so she lived a sole woman for divers years, until in the beginning of this Queen's days, she was found to be with child, which she affirmed to be by the lord Edward Seymer earl of Hartford, who at that time was in France, with Sir Nicholas Throgmorton the Ambassador, and had purpose and licence to have travailed into Italy, but being called home in haste upon this new accident, he confessed that the child was his, and both he and the lady affirmed that they were man and wife, but for that they could not prove it by witnesses, & for attempting such a match with one of the blood royal, without privity and licence of the prince, they were committed both of them to the tower, where they procured means to meet again afterward, & had an other child, which both children do yet live, and the elder of them is called lord Henry Beacham, and the other Edward Seymer, the mother of whom lived not long after, neither married the earl again, until 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 Queen of France.  
The second daughter of duke Charles and 
The issue of L. Eleanor.  the Queen, named L. Elinor, was married to Henry lord Cliford earl of Cumbeiland, and had by him a daughter named Margaret, that married Sir Henry Stanley, lord Strange & after earl of Derby, by whom the said lady (who yet liveth) hath had issue Fernande Stanley, now earl of Derby, William and Francis Stanley, & this is the issue of the house of Suffolk, to wit, this Countess of Derby, with her children, and these other of the earl of Hartford, of all whose claims and titles with their impediments, I shall here briefly give account and reason.  
First of all, both of these families do join together in this one point, to exclude the house of Scotland both by foreign birth, and by the foresaid restament of king Henry authorized by two parliaments, & by the other exclusions which in each of the titles of the king of Scots 
Allegations of the houses of Derby & hartford the one against the other.  and of lady Arbella hath been before alleged. But than secondly they come to vary between themselves, about the priority or propinquity of their own succession, for the children of the earl of Hartford, and their friends do allege, that they do descend of lady Francis the elder sister of lady Elinor, and so by law and reason are to be preferred, but the other house allegeth against this, two impediments, the one, that the lady Margaret countess of Derby now living, is nearer by one degree to the stem, that is to king Henry the seventh, then are the children of the earl of Hartford, and consequently according to that which in the former 
Charles Brandon had a wise a live.  fourth chapter hath been declared, she is to be preferred, albeit the children of the said earl were legitimate.  
Secondly they do affirm, that the said children 
First bastardy against the issue of hartford.  of the eatle of Hartford by the lady Catherine Gray, many ways are illegitimate. First for that the said lady Catherine Gray their mother was lawfully married before to the earl of Penbrok now living, as hath been touched, and public records do testify, and not lawfully separated nor by lawful authority, nor for just 
Stow in vita Edward. An. 〈◊〉.  causes, but only for temporal and worldly respects, for that the house of Suffolk was come into misery & disgrace, whereby she remained still his true wife in deed and before God, & so could have no lawful children by an other whiles he lived as yet he doth.  
Again they prove the illegitimation of these 
2. Bastardy.  children of the earl of Hartford, for that it could never be lawfully proved that the said earl and the lady Catherine were married, but only by their own assertions, which in law is not holden sufficient, for which occasion the said pretended marriage was disannulled in the court of arches, by public & definitive sentence, of Doctor Parker archbishop of Canterbury, and primate of Ingland, not long after the birth of the said children.  
Further-more they do add yet an other bastardy also, in the birth of lady Catherine her 
3. Bastardy.  self, for that her father lord Henry Gray marquis of Docset, was known to have a lawful wife alive when he married the lady Francis, daughter and heir of the Queen of France, & of Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk, and mother of this lady Catherine, for obtaining of which great marriage, the said marquis, put away his foresaid lawful wife, which was sister to the L. Henry Fytzallen earl of Arondel, which disorder was occasion of much unkindness and hatred between the said marquis and earl ever after. But the power of the marquis and favour with king Henry in women's matters, was so great at that time, as the earl could have no remedy, but only that his said sister who lived many years after, had an annuity out of the said marquis lands during her life, & lived some years after the said marquis (afterwards made duke) was put to death in Queen Maries tyme.  
These than are three ways, by which the family of Derby do argue the issue of Hartford to be illegitimate, but the other two houses of Scotland and Clarence, do urge a former bastardy also that is common to them both, to 
The fourth be 〈◊〉 common to both famines of Suffolk.  wit, both against the lady Francis and the lady Eleanor, for that the lord Charles Brandon also duke of Suffolk had a wife a live, as before hath been signified, when he married the lady Mary Queen of France, by which former wife he had issue the lady Powyse (I mean the wife of my lord Powyse of Poystlandes in Wales) & how long after the new marriage of her husband Charles Brandon, this former wife did live, I cannot set down distinctly, though I think it were not hard to take particular information thereof in Ingland, by the register of the church wherein she was buried, but the friends of the countess of Derby do affirm, that she died before the birth of L. Eleanor the second daughter, though after the birth of lady Francis, and thereby they do seek to clear the family of Derby of this bastardy, and to lay all four upon the childen of Hartford before mentioned, but this is easy to be known & verified by the means before signified.  
But now the friends of Hartford do answer 
The answer of those of hartford to the foresaid bastardies.  to all these bastardies, that for the first two pretended by the marriages of the two dukes of Suffolk, they say that either the causes might be such, as their devorces with their former 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be lawful, and prove them no marriages, and so give them place to marry again, or else that the said former wives did die before these dukes that had been their husbands, so as by a post-contract and second new consent, given between the parties when they were now free, the said later marriages which were not good at the beginning, might come to be lawful afterwards, according as the law permitteth, notwithstanding that children begotten in such pretended marriages where one party is already bound, are not made legitimat, by subsequent true marriage of their parents, & this for the first two bastardies.  
But as for the third illegitimation, of the contract between the lady Catherine and the earl of Hartford, by reason of a precontract made between the said lady Catherine and the earl of Penbroke, that now liveth, they say and affirm, that precontract to have been dissolved afterward lawfully and judicially, in the time of Queen Mary.  
There remaineth then only the fourth obiectron, about the secret marriage made between the said lady Catherine and the earl of Hartford, before the birth of their eldest son, now called L. Beacham, which to say the truth seemeth 
Of the marriage between. the earl of hartford and the L. Catherine Gray.  the hardest point to be answered, for albeit in the sight of God, that marriage might be good and lawful, if before their carnal knowledge, they gave mutual consent the one to the other, to be man and wife, and with that mind and intention had carnal copulation, which thing is also allowed by the late council of Trent itself, which disannulleth 
Concil. Trid. Sess. 24. cap. 1.  otherwise all clandestine and secret contracts in such states and countries, where the authority of the said council is received, and admitted, yet to justify these kid of marriages in the face of the church, and to make the issue thereof legitimate and inheritable to estates and possessions: it is necessary by all law, and in all nations, that there should be some witness to testify this consent and contract of the parties before their carnal knowledge, for that otherwise it should lie in every particular man's hand, to legitimate any bastard of his, by his only word, to the prejudice of others that might in equity of succession pretend to be his heirs, and therefore (no doubt) but that the Archbishop of Canterbury had great reason to pronounce this contract of the lady Catherine, and the earl of Hartford to be insufficient and unlawful, though themselves did affirm that they had given mutual consent before, of being man & wife, and that they came together, animo maritali, as the law of wedlock requireth, but yet for that they were not able to prove their said former consent, by lawful witnesses, their said conjunction was rightly pronounced unlawful, and so I conclude that the first son of these two parties, might be legitimate before God, and yet illegitimate before men, and consequently incapable of all such succession, as otherwise he might pretend by his said mother.  
And this now is for the first begotten of 
How the second son of the earl of heart ford mav be legitimate.  these two persons, for as touching the second child, begotten in the tower of London, divers learned men are of opinion that he may be freed of this bastardy, for that both the earl and the lady being examined upon their first child, did confess and affirm that they were man and wife, and that they had meaning so to be, and to continue, which confession is thought to be sufficient, both for ratifying of their old contract, and also for making of a new yfthe other had not been made before. And seeing that in the other former pretended contract and marriage, their wanted nothing for justifying the same before men, and for making it good in law, but only external testimony of witnesses, for proving that they gave such mutual consent of minds before their carnal knowledge (for the presence of priest or minister is not absolutely necessary) no man can say that their wanted witnesses for testifying of this consent, before the second copulation, by which was begotten their second son, for that both the Queen herself and her council, and as many besides as examined these parties upon their first act and child birth, are witnesses unto them, that they gave their full consents and approbations, to be man & wife, which they ratified afterward in the tower by the begetting of their second child, and so for the reasons aforesaid, he must needs seem to be legitimate, whatsoever my lord of Canterbury for that time or in respect of the great offence, taken by the estate against that act, did, or might determine to the contrary.  
And this is the some of that which commonly is treated, about these two families of the house of Suffolk, to wit of Hartford and 
Allegations of the house of Derby.  Derby, both which families of Suffolk, the other two opposite houses of Scotland and Clarence, do seek to exclude by the first bastardy, or unlawful contract between the Queen ofFrance and duke Charles Brandon, as hath been seen: of which bastardy the house of 〈◊〉 doth endeavour to avoid itself, in manner as before hath been declared, and preferreth itself in degree of propinquity not only before the foresaid two houses of Scotland and Clarence, but also before this other part of the house of Suffolk, I mean the family of Hartford, though descended of the elder daughter, for that the countess of Derby doth hold herself one degree nearer in descent, then are the other pretenders of Hartford as hath been showed. And albeit their want not many objections and reasons of some, against this pretence of the house of Derby, besides that which I have touched before, yet for that they are for the most part parsonal impediments, and do not touch the right or substance of the title, or any other important reason of state concerning the common wealth, but only the mystic of the persons that pretend, and of their life and government, I shall omit them in this place, for that as in the beginning I promised, so shall I observe as much as lieth in me, to utter nothing in this conference of ours that may justly offend, and much less touch the honour or reputation of any one person of the blood royal of our realm, when the time of admitting or excluding cometh, then will the realm consider as well of their persons as of their rights, and will see, what account and satisfaction each person hath given of his former life and doings, and according to that will proceed, as is to be supposed: but to me in this place, it shallbe enough to treat of the first point, which is of the right and interest pretended by way of succession, and so with this I shall make an end of these families, and pass over to others that yet do remain.   

OF THE HOUSES OF CLARENCE AND BRITTANY, WHICH CONTAIN THE CLAIMS OF the earl of Huntingdon, with the Pools, as also of the lady Infanta of Spain, and others of those families.  
CAP. VII.  
HAVING declared the claims, rights and pretences, which the two noble houses of Scotland and Suffolk, descended of the two daughters of king Henry the seventh, have or may have to the succession of Ingland, with intention afterward to handle the house of Portugal a part, which pretendeth to comprehend in itself the whole body, or at least the first and principal branch of the ancient house of Lancaster, it shall not be amiss, perhaps by the way, to treat in this one chapter, so much as appertaineth to the two several houses of Clarence and Brittany, for that there is less to be said about them then of the other.  
And first of all, I am of opinion, that the earl of Huntingdon, and such other pretendors as 
Why the earl of Huntington's house is said to be of the house of Clarence.  are of the house of York alone, before the conjunction of both houses by king Henry the seventh, may be named to be of the house of Clarence and so for distinction sake, I do name them, for not to confound them with the houses of Scotland and Suffolk, which are termed also by the Lancastrians to be of the houfe of York alone, for that they deny them to be of the true house of Lancaster, but principally I do name them to be of the house of Clarence, for that in deed all their claim and title to the crown, doth descend from George duke of Clarence, as before in the third chapter and other where hath been declared, which duke George being brother to king Edward the fourth, and put to death by his order, left issue Edward carl of Warwick and of Salisbury, which was put to death by king Henry the 
Issue of the house of Clarence.  seventh in his youth, and Margaret countess of Salisbury, which Margaret had issue by Sir Richard Poole, Henry Poole lord Montague, afterward beheaded, and he again Catherine, married to Sir Francis Hastings earl of Huntingdon, by whom she had Sir Henry Hastings, now earl of Huntingdon, Sir George Hastings his brother yet living, & others, so as the earl of Huntingdon with his said brethren be in the fourth degree from the said George duke of Clarence, to wit his nephews twice removed.  
The faide Margaret countess of Salisbury had a younger son also, named Sir Geffrey 
Issue of S. Geffrey Poole.  Poole, who had issue an other Geffrey, and this Geffrey hath two sons that live at this day in Italy, named Arthur and Geffrey, who be in the same degree of distance, with the said earl of Huntingdon, saving that some allege for them, that they do descend all by male kind from Margaret, and the earl pretendeth by a Woman, whereof we shall speak afterward.  
Hereby than it is made manifest, how the earl of Huntingdon cometh to preteud to the crown of Ingland, by the house of York only, which is no other in deed, but by the debarring and disabling of all other former pretendors, 
The interest pretence of the earl of Huntingdon.  not only of Portugal, and of Brittany, as strangers, but also of the houses of Scotland & Suffolk, that hold likewise of the house of York, and that for the reasons and arguments which in the former two chapters I have set down in particular, against every one of them, and shall hereafter also again those that remain, which arguments and objections, or any of them, if they should not be found sufficient, to exclude the said other houses, then is the claim of this house of Huntingdon thereby made void, for that it is (as we see) by the younger child of the house of York, that is to say, by the second brother: so as if either the pretence of Lancaster in general be better than that of York, or if in the house of York itself, any of the forenamed pretenders descended from K. Edward the fourth as of the elder brother, may hold or take place, then holdeth not this title of Clarence, for that (as I have said) it coming from the younger brother, must needs be grounded only, or principally upon the barring and excluding of the rest, that jointly do pretend: of which bars and exclusions laid by this house of Clarence against the rest, for that I have spoken sufficiently in the last two chapters, going tefore, for so much as toucheth the two houses of Scotland and Suffolk, and shall do afterwards about the other two of Brittany and Portugal, I mean in this place to omit to say any more therein, & only to consider what the other competitors do allege against this house of Clarence, and especially against the pretence 
objections against the earl of Huntingdon. 1.  of the earl of Huntingdon, as chief titler thereof, for to the excluding of him, do concur not only those other of opposite houses, but also the Pools of his own house, as now we shall see.  
First then, the contrary houses do allege generally against all this house of Clarence, that seeing their claim is founded only upon the right of the daughter of George duke of Clarence, second brother to K. Edward the fourth, evident it is, that so long as any lawful issue remaineth of any elder daughter, of the said king Edward the elder brother (as they say much doth and cannot be denied) no claim or pretence of the younger brothers daughter, can be admitted, and so by standing upon this, and answering to the objections alleged before, against the elder houses, they hold this matter for very clear, and all pretence of this house of Clarence utterly excluded.  
Secondly the same opposite houses do allege 
2. Attainders in the house of Huntingdon.  divers attainders against the principal heads of the house of Clarence, whereby their whole interests were cut of, as namely it is to be showed in three descents, the one after the other, to wit in duke George himself, the first head & beginner of this house, that was attainted and executed, and then in the lady Margaret his daughter and heir, countess of Salisbury, and in like manner attainted and executed: thirdly in her son and heir Henry Poole lord Monrague put also to death, from whose daughters both the earl of Huntingdon & his brethren, with the children of Sir Thomas Barrington do descend, and albeit some may say, that the said house of Clarence hath been since those attainders, restored in blood, yet reply these men, that except it can be showed that particular mention was made of reabiliting the same to this pretence of succession to 
Restitution may be in blood without restitution of dignity.  the crown, it will not be sufficient, as in like manner they affirm, that the same restoring in blood (if any such were) hath not been sufficient to recover the ancient lands and titles of honour, which this house of Clarence had before these attainders, for that they were forfeited thereby to the crown, and so say these men was their forfeited thereby in like manner unto the next in blood not attainted, this prerogative of succeeding to the crown, and cannot be restored again by any general restoration in blood, except special mention be made thereof, even as we see, that many houses attainted are restored daily in blood, without restorement of their titles and dignities, and a present example we have in the earl of Arundel restored in blood but not to the title of duke of Norfolk, and this say the opposite houses against this house of Clarence.  
But now thirdly entereth in also against the 
The pretence of the Pools against Huntingdon.  earl of Huntingdon, the opposition of some of his own house, which is of the issue of Sir Geffrey Poole, brother to his grand father, who say, that when the lord Henry Montague was put to death with his mother the countess of Salisbury, and thereby both their pretences and titles cut of in them, than fell all such right as they had or might have, upon the said Sir Geoffrey Poole, and not upon his niece the lady Catherine daughter of the lord Henry his elder brother, and mother of the earl of Huntingdon, and this for three causes. First for that he was not attainted, and so whether we respect his grandfather duke George of Clarence, or his great grand father duke Richard of York, the said right in this respect descended to him, and secondly for that he was a degree nearer to the said dukes his ancestors, than was at that time his niece Catherine, which right of nearest propinquity, say these men, is made good & lawful by all the reasons, examples, precedents, and authorities alleged before in the fourth chapter of this conference, in favour of uncles before their nephews, and it shall not need that we speak any thing more of that matter in this place, but only to remit your remembrance to that which herein hath been said before.  
Fourthly they prove the same in favour of Sir Geffrey, for that the lady Catherine was a woman, and Sir Geffrey a man, whose privilege is so great in a matter of succession (as also hath been touched before) that albeit they had been in equal degree, and that Sir Greffrey were not a degree before her as he was, yet seeing neither of them nor their fathers were ever in possession of the thing pretended, Sir Geffrey should be preferred, as hath been showed before by some precedents, and shallbe seen afterward in the case of Portugal, wherein the king of Spain that now is was preferred to the crown, for that respect only that his competitors were women, and in equal degree of descent with him; and he a man. And the very like allegation of propinquity, I have hard produced for the lady Wenefred wife of Sir Thomas Barrington (if she be yet alive) to wit, that she is before the earl of Huntingdon and his brethren, by this reason of propinquity in blood, for that she is one degree nearer, to the stock than they.  
Fiftly and lastly, both these and other competitors 
Objection of Religion.  do allege against the earl of Hunntington as an important and sufficient bar against his pretence, the quality of his religion, which is (as they say) that he hath been ever known to favour those which commonly in Ingland are called Puritans, and not favoured by the state, but yet this stop is alleged diversly by competitors of divers religions: for that such as are followers and favours of the form of religion received and defended by public authority of Ingland at this day, whom for distinction sake, men are want to call by the name of moderate protestants, these (I say) do urge this exclusion against the earl of Huntingdon, not upon any certain law or statute, extant against the same, but ab aeqno & bono, as men are want to say, and by reason of state, showing infinite inconveniences hurts damages and dangers, that must needs ensue, not only to the state present of religion in Ingland, but also to the whole realm and body politic, if such a man should be admitted to govern. And this consideration of state in their opinion is a more forcible argument for excluding such a man, than any statute or particular law against him could be, for that this comprehendeth the very intention, meaning, and drift of all laws and lawmakers of our realm, whose intentions must needs be presumed to have been in all times, to have excluded so great and manifest incoveniences, & thus say they.  
But now, those that are of the Roman religion, and contrary both to puritan and protetestant do urge a great deal further this argument, against the earl, and do allege many laws, ordinances, decrees, and statutes both of the Canon and imperial laws, as also out of the old laws of Ingland, which in their opinion, do debar all that are not of their religion, and consequently, they would hereby exclude both the one and the other of these pretendents. And in fine they do conclude, that seeing their wanteth not also some of their own religion (called by them the Catholic) in the house of Clarence, they have so much the less difficulty to exclude the earl of Huntington's person for his religion, if one of that house were to be admitted of necessity.  
And this is so much as seemeth needful to be spoken at this time and in this place, of this house of Clarence, and of the pretenders thereof. It resteth then that I treat something also of the house of Brittany and France, which two 
The house of Brittany.  houses are joined all in one, for so much as may appertain to any inheritance or pretence to Ingland, or unto any parcel or particular state thereof, at home or abroad, that may follow the succession or right of women, which the kingdom of France in it selfdoth not, as is known, and consequently a woman may be heir to the one without the other, that is to say, she may be heir to some particular states of France inheritable by women, though not to the crown itself, and so do pretend to be the two daughters of France, that were sisters to the late king Henry the third, which daughters were married, the one to the king of Spain that now is, by whom he had issue, the Infanta of spain yet unmarried, and her younger sister married to the duke of Savoy, and the other to wit the younger daughter of the king of France, was married to the duke of Lorraine, yet living, by whom she had the prince of Lorraine, & other children that live at this day.  
This then being so clear as it is, first, that according to the common course of succession in Ingland, and other countries, and according to the course of all common law, the Infanta of 
The course of inheritance in the crown of France.  Spain, should inherit the whole kingdom of France, and all other states thereunto belonging, she being the daughter and heir of the eldest daughter of king Henry the second king of France, whose issue male of the direct line, is wholly now ended, but yet for that the French, do pretend their law Salik to exclude women, (which we English have ever denied to be good until now) hereby cometh it to pass, that the king of Navarr pretendeth to enter, & to be preferred before the said Infanta or her sister's children, though male, by a collateral line. But yet her favourers say, I mean those of the Infanta, that from the dukedoms of Brittany, Aquitaine, and the like, that came to the crown of France by women, and are inheritable by women, she cannot be in right debarred, as neither from any succession or pretence in Ingland, if either by the blood royal of France, Brittany, Aquitaine or of Ingland itself, it may be proved that she hath any interest thereunto, as her said favourers do affirm that she hath, by these reasons following.  
First, for that she is of the ancient blood 
First pretence of the Infan ta to Ingland.  royal of Ingland, even from the conquest, by the elder daughter of William the conqueror married to Allayne Fergant duke of Brittany, as hath been showed before in the second chapter, and other places of this conference, and of this 
1.  point they infer two or three consequences. First that when the sons of the Conqueror were dead without issue or made uncapable of the crown (as it was presumed at least wife of king Henry the first, last son of the Conqueror, that he lost his right for the violence used to his elder brother Robert, and unto William the said Robert's son & heir) then say these men, ought the said duchess of Brittany to have entered as eldest sister. 
2.  And secondly they say that when duke Robert that both by right of birth and by express agreement with William 
Polydor. in vita Guliel. Rufi.  Rufus, and with the Realm of Ingland, should have succeeded next after the said Rufus, came to die in prison, the said lady Constance should have succeeded him, for that his brother Henry being culpable of his death, could not in right be his heir. 
3.  And thirdly they say that at least wise after the death of the said king Henry the first, she and her son I mean lady Constance and Conan duke of Brittany, should have entered before king Stephen, who was borne of Adela the younger daughter, of William Conqueror.  
Secondly they do allege, that the Infanta of 
Second pretence of the Infanta of Spain.  Spain descendeth also lineally from lady Eleanor eldest daughter of king Henry the second, married to king Alonso the ninth of that name king of Castille, whose eldest daughter & losing by this forfeit, all right he had in the kingdom of Ingland it followeth, that the same should have gone to his said sister, & by her to this lady Blanch her heir, and eldest daughter, married into france as hath been said, which forfeit also of king john, these men do confirm by his deprivation by the Pope that soon after ensued, as also by an other deprivation made by the Barons of his realm, as after shallbe touched.  
Further more they say that when Arthur 
3. Pretence by Arthur duke of Brittany.  duke of Brittany (whom to this effect they do hold to have been the only true heir at that time to the kingdom of Ingland) was in prison in the castle of Rouen, suspecting that he should be murdered by his said uncle K. john, he nominated this lady Blanch his cozen germanie, to be his heir, persuading himself that she by the help of her husband prince Lewis of France, and her father the king of spain, should be better able to defend and recover his or her right, to the crown of Ingland then Eleanor his own sister, should be, who was also in the hands of his said uncle: for that he supposed that she also should be made away by him shortly after, as in deed the french chronicle affirmeth that she was: and howsoever 
Belforest I. 3. cap. 71 hist. Fran.  this matter of duke Arthur's testament were; yet certain it is, that when he and his sister were put to death, the next in kin, that could succeed them in their right to Ingland, was this lady Blanch, and her mother Queen Elinor, that was sister to Arthur's father, Geffrey duke of Brittany. For that king john their uncle was presumed by all men to be uncapable of their inheritance, by his putting of them to death, and child yet he had none, and this is the second point that these men do deduce for the lady Infanta of Spain, by the title of Queence Eleanor and her daughter Blanch, to whom the Infanta is next heir.  
A third interest also the same men do derive 
Election of Lewis the 8. to be King of Ingland.  to the Infanta, by the actual deposition of king john by the Barons and states of his Realm in the 16. year of his reign, and by the election and actual admission of Lewis prince of France, husband of the foresaid lady Blanch, whom they chose with one consent, and admitted and swore him fealtic and obedience in London, for him and for his heirs and posterity, in the year 1217. and gave him possession of the said city and Tower of London, and of many other 
Polydor. l. 15. hist. Angl. Holling & Stow in vita joannis.  chief places of the realm, & albeit afterwatd the most part of the realm changed their minds again, upon the sudden death of the said king john, and chose and admitted his young son Henry the third, a child of nync years old, yet do the favourers of the Infanta say, that their remaineth to her as heir unto the said Lewis, until this day, that interest which by this election oath and admission of 
Belfor. li. 〈◊〉 cap. 67. Girard li. histor. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. france.  the realm, remained unto this prince Lewis, which these men affirm to be the very like case, as was that of Hugo Capetus in France, who came to be king especially, upon a certain title that one of his ancestors named Odo earl of Paris, had, by being once elected king of France, and admitted and sworn, though afterward he were deposed again, and young Charles surnamed the simple was admitted in his place, as Henry the third was in England after the election of this Lewis. But yet as the other continued ever his right and claim until it was restored to Hugo Capetus one of his race, so say these men, may this Infanta continue and renew now the demand of this right of king Lewis her ancestor, for that titles and interests to kingdoms, once rightly gotten, do never die, but remain ever for the posterity to effectuate when they can, & thus much of this matter.  
But after this again, these men do show, how that the said Infanta of Spain, doth descend 
Pretence by dissent from Henry the third.  also from Henry the third, son of king john, by the dukes of Brittany, as before in the second chapter hath been declared, and in the arbour and genealogy following in the end of this conference shallbe seen, for that king Henry besides his two sons Edward and Edmond, which were the beginners of the two houses of York and Lancaster, had also a daughter named Lady Beatrix, married to john the second of that name duke of Brittany, and by him she had Arthur the second, and so lineally from him have descended the princes of that house, until their union with the crown of France, and from thence unto this lady Infanta of Spain, that now is, who taketh herself for proper heir of the said house of Brittany, and heir general of France, as hath been said.  
By this third conjunction then, of the house of Brittany with the blood royal of Ingland, the friends of the Infanta do argue in this manner, that seeing she descendeth of the sister of these two brothers which were the heads of the two opposite houses of Lancaster and York, and considering that each of these houses hath oftentimes been attainted, & excluded from the succession by sundry acts of parliament, and at this present are opposite, and at contention among themselves: why may not this right of both houses (say these men) by way of composition peace and compromise, at 
Admission by composition.  least, be passed over to the issue of their sister which resteth in the Infanta.  
Again they say that all these three branches of the lines of English kings, to wit by the lady Constance daughter of king William Conqueror, by the lady Elinor daughter of king Henry the second, and by the lady Beatrix daughter of king Henry the third, it is evident, that this lady the infanta of Spain, is of the true and ancient blood royal of Ingland, and that divers ways she may have claim to the same, which being granted, they infer, that seeing matters are so doubtful at this day, about the next lawful succession, and that divers of the pretendores are excluded, some for bastardy, some other for religion, some for unaptness to govern, and some for other causes, & seeing the common wealth hath such authority to dispose in this affair, as before the Civil lawyer hath declared, why may there not consideration be had among other pretenders, of this noble princess also (say these men) especially seeing she is unmarried and may thereby commodate many matters, and salve many breaches, & satisfy many hopes, and give contentment to many desires, as the world knoweth.  
And this is in effect as much as I have hard 
Objections against the Infantas pretence.  alleged hitherto in favour of the Infanta of Spain, but against this pretence, others do produce divers arguments and objections, as first of all, that these her claims be very old and worn out, and are but collateral by sisters. Secondly that she is a stranger, and allien borne. Thirdly that her religion is contrary to the state. unto all which objections, the favourers aforesaid do make their answers, and to the first they say, that antiquity hutteth not the goodness of a title, when occasion is offered to advance the same, especially in titles appertaining to kingdoms, which commonly are never presumed to die, as hath been said, and nullum tempus occurrit Regi saith our law. And as for collateral lines, they say, that they may lawfully be admitted to enter when the direct lines do either fail or are to be excluded, for other just respects, as in our case they hold that it happeneth. And as for the second point of foreign birth they say there hath been sufficient answered, before in treating of the house of Scotland, that in rigour it is no bar, by intention of any English law, yet whether in reason of state & politic government, it may be a just impediment or no, it shall after be handled more all large when we come to treat of the house of Portugal. To the last point of religion they answer that this impediment is not universal, not admitted in the judgement of all men, but only of those English that be of different religion from her. But to some others (and those many as these men do ween) her religion will rather be a motive to favour her title then to hinder the same, so that on this ground no certainty can be builded, and this is as much as I have to say at this time of these two families of Clatence and Brittany.   

OF THE HOUSE OF PORTUGAL WHICH CONTAINETH THE CLAIMS AS WELL OF the king and prince of Spain to the succession of Ingland, as also of the dukes of Parma and Bragansa by the house of Lancaster.  
CAP. VIII.  
IT hath been oftentimes spoken before upon occasions offered, that the princes of the house of Portugal at this day, do persuade themselves that the only remainder of the house of 
The princes of Portugal are of the house of Lancaster.  Lancaster resteth among them, as the only true heirs of the lady Blanch duchess and heir of Lancaster, & first wife of john of Gaunt, which point of these prince's descents from the said duchess of Lancaster, though it be declared sufficiently before in the third and fourth chapters: yet will I briefly here also set down and repeat again the reasons thereof, which are these that follow.  
john of Gaunt was duke of Lancaster by the right of his first wife lady Blanch, and had by her only one son, as also one daughter, of whom we need here to speak, for that the other hath left no issue now living. The son was king Henry the fourth, who had issue king Henry the fift, and he again Henry the sixth, in whom was extinguished all the succession of this son Henry.  
The daughter of john of Gaunt by lady 
The issue of lady Philip Queen of Portugal.  Blanch was called Philip, who was married to john the first king of that name of Portugal, who had issue by him king Edward, and he again had issue king Alfonsus the fift king of Portugal, and he and his offspring had issue again the one after the other until our times, and so by this marriage of lady Philip, to their first king john, these princes of the house of Portugal that live at this day, do pretend that the inheritance of Lancaster is only in them, by this lady Philip, for that the succession of her elder brother king Henry the fourth, is expired long ago. This is effect is their pretence, but now we will pass on to see what others say, that do pretend also to be of the house of Lancaster by a latter marriage.  
john of Gaunt after the death of his first wife lady Blanch, did marry again the lady 
Issue of john of Gaunt by his later wives.  Constance daughter of king Peter surnamed the cruel of Castille, and had by her one daughter only named Catherine, whom he married afterward back to Castille again, giving her to wife, to king Henry the third of that name, by whom she had issue king john, and he others, so as lineally king Philippe king of Spain is descended from her, which king Philip being at this day king also of Portugal, and the chief titler of that house unto Ingland, he joineth 
Sceva the arbour in the end of this book.  the inheritance of both the two daughters of john of Gaunt, in one, & so we shall not need to talk of these two daughters hereafter distinctly but only as of one, seeing that both their descents do end in this one man.  
The only difficulty and dissension is then, 
The point of difficulty.  about the issue of the third marriage, which was of john of Gaunt with lady Catherine Swinford, whom he first kept as a Concubine, in the time of his second wife lady Constance, as before hath been showed in the third chapter, and begat of her four children, and after that his wife lady Constance was dead, he took her to wife for the love he bore to his children, a little before his death, and caused the said children to be legitimated by authority of parliament, and for that none of these four children of his, have left issue, but only one, that was john earl of Somerset, we shall speak only of him ommitting all the rest.  
This john then earl of Somerset had issue an other john, which was made duke of Somerset 
Issue of Catherine Swinford.  by king Henry the sixth, who with his three sons, were slain by the princes of the house of York, in the quarrel of Lancaster, & so left only one daughter named Margaret, who by her husband Edmond Tydder, earl of Richmond, was Countess of Richmond, & had by him a son named Henry earl of Richmond, that was after king, by the name of king Henry the senenth, and from him all his discendents both of the house of Scotland and Suffolk, do pretend also to be of the house of Lancaster, which yet can be no otherwise then now hath been declared, to wit, not from Blanch first wife & heir of the duchy of Lacaster, but from Catherine Swinford his third wife, wherein riseth the question whether those men, I mean king 
The principal question.  Henry the seventh, & his discendents, may properly be said to be of the true house of Lancaster, or no, whereunto some do answer with a distinction, to wit, that to the duchy of Lancaster, 
Answer.  whereof the first wife lady Blanch was heir; these of the third marriage cannot be heirs, but only the remainder of the issue of the said lady Blanch that resteth in the princes of the house of Portugal. But yet to the title of the crown 
Duchy of Lancaster.  of Inglande, which came by john of Gaunt himself, in that he was third son of K. Edward the third, and eldest of all his children that lived when the said king Edward died (by which is pretended also that he should have succeeded immediately after him before king Richard the second, as before in the fourth chapter hath been declared) to this right (I say) & to this 
The crown.  interest of the crown, which came by john of Gaunt himself, & not by lady Blanch, or by any other of his wives, the discendents of king Henry the seventh do say that they may and aught to succeed, for that john earl of Somerset eldest son of john of Gaunt by lady Catherine Swinford, though he were begotten out of matrimony, yet being afterward made legitimate, 
An exam ple of Edward the sixth & of the prince of spain.  he was to inherit this right of john of Gaunt his father, before the lady Philip his sister, for that so we see that king Edward the sixth, though younger, and but half brother unto the lady Mary and Elizabeth his sisters, yet he inherited the crown before them, and in like manner is lord Phillippe prince of Spain at this day to inherit all the states of that crown before his two sisters; that be elder than he, & so likewise say these men, ought john of Somerset to have done before Phillippe his eldest sister, if he had been alive at that time, when king Henry the sixth was put down and died, and consequently his posterity, which are the discendents of king Henry the seventh, aught to enjoy the same before the princes of Portugal, that are the discendents of Lady Phillippe his sister, thus say the issue of king Henry the seventh.  
But to this the princes of the house of Portugal do reply, and say, first, that by this it is 
Replies of the house of Portugal.  evident at least, that the dukedom of Lancaster whereof the lady Blanch was the only heir, must needs appertain to them alone, and this without all doubt or controversy, for that they only remain of her issue after extinguishing of the posterity of her elder brother K. Henry the fourth, which was extinguished by the death of king Henry the sixth, and of his only son 
The duke doom of Lancaster.  prince Edward, and for this they make no question or controversy, assuring themselves that all law, right and equity, is on their side. 
The legitimation of Catherine Swinfords' children not lawful.   
Secondly touching the succession and right to the kingdom, they say, that john earl of Somerset being borne out of Wedlock, and in adultery, for that his father had an other wife alive when he begatt him, and he continuing a bastard so many years, could not be made legitimate afterward by parliament to that effect of succession to the crown, and to deprive Queen Philip of Portugal, and her children borne before the others legitimation, from their right and succession, without their consents, for that john king of Portugal, did marry the said lady Philip, with condition to enjoy all prerogatives that at that day were due unto her, and that at the time when john of Gaunt did marry the said lady Catherine Swinford, & made her children legitimate by act of parliament (which was in the year of Christ 1396. and 1397.) the said lady Philip Queen of Portugal, 
Stow in vit. Richardi 2.  had now two sons living, named done Alon so, and done Edwardo, which were borne in the years 1390. and 1391. that is six years 
Garibay his Portugal. l. 33 cap. 4.  before the legitimation of john earl of Somerset, and his brethren, and thereby had ius acquisitum, as the law saith, which right once acquired and gotten, could not be taken away by any posterior act of parliament afrerward, without consent of the parties interressed, for which they do allege, divers places of the canon law, which for that they hold not in Ingland, I do not cite, but one example they put to show the inconvenience of the thing (if it should be otherwise determined than they affirm) 
Note this example. Stow in vit. Henrici 8.  which is, that if king Henry the eight that had a bastard son, by the lady Elizabeth Blunt, whom he named Henry fitzroy, & made him both earl of Nottingham, and duke of Richmond and Somerset in the 18. year of his reign, at what time the said king had a lawful daughter a live, named the princess Mary by Queen Catherine of Spain; if (I say) the king should have offered to make this son legitimate by parliament, with intent to have him succeed after him, in the crown, to the prejudice and open injury of the said lawful daughter, these men do say that he could not have done it, and if he should have done it by violence, it would not have held, and much less could john of Gaunt do the like, being no king. Nor was the act of parliament sufficient for this point, it being a matter that depended especially (say these men) of the spiritual court, and of the Canon law which law alloweth this legitimation no further, but only as a dispensation, and this so farforth only as it doth not prejudice the right of any other.  
Nether helpeth it any thing in this matter, the matriage of john of Gaunt with lady Catherine, 
john of Gaunt's marriage with Catherine Swinford helpeth not the legitimation.  for to make better this legitimation, for that as hath been said, their children were not only naturales but Spurij that is to say begotten in plain adultery and not in simple fornication only, for that the one party had a wife a live, and consequently the privilege that the law giveth to the subsequent marriage of the parties for legitimating such children, as are borne in simple fornication, that is to say between parties that were single and none of them married, can not take place here, so as these men conclude, that albeit this legitimation of parliament, might serve them to other purposes, yet not to deprive the princes of Portugal of their prerogative to succeed in their mother's right, which she had when she was married to their father.  
And this they affirm to have been law and right at that time, if the said Queen Philip & earl john had been alive together, when Henry the sixth and his son was put to death, & that this question had been then moved at the death of king Henry the sixth, whether of the two, to wit either the said Queen Philip or her younger brother john earl of Somerset by the father's 
The question between lord Philip and john of Somerset.  side only, should have succeeded in the inheritance of king Henry the sixth, in which case these men presume for certain, that the said Queen Phillippe legitimatly borne, and not john made legitimate by parliament, should have succeeded, for that by common course of law, the children legitimated by favour, albeit their legitimation were good and lawful (as this of these children is denied to be) yet can they never be made equal, and much less be preferred before the lawful and legitimate by birth.  
But now say these men, the case standeth at this present somewhat otherwise, and more for the advantage of Queen Phillippe, and her offspring, for when king Henry the sixth, & his son were extinguished, and Edward duke of York thrust himself in to the crown (which was about the year of Christ 1471) the foresaid two princes, lady Philip and earl john, were both dead, as also their children, and only their nephews were alive, that is to say, their lived in Portugal king Alfonsus the fift of that name, son to king Edward, which Edward was child to Queen Philip, and the death of king Henry the sixth of Ingland happened in the 38. year of the reign of the said king Alfonsus: and in Ingland lived at the same time, lady Margaret Countess of Richmond, mother of king Henry the seventh and niece of the foresaid john earl of Somerset, to wit the daughter of his son duke john of Somerset, so as these two competitors of the house of Lancaster, that is to say, king Alfonsus and lady Margaret, were in equal degree from john of Gaunt, as also from king Henry the sixth, saving that king Alfonsus was of the whole blood, as hath been said, and by Queen Philip that was legitimate, and the countess of Richmond was but of the half blood, as by john earl of Somerset, that was a bastard legitimated.  
The question than is, which of these two 
The question between the nephews.  should have succeeded by right, of the house of Lancaster, immediately after the death of king Henry the sixth, and the lady Margaret allegeth that she was descended from john earl of Somerset that was a man, and therefore to be preferred, and king Alfonsus alleged that he being in equal degree of nearness of blood with the same countess (for that both were nephews) he was to be preferred before her, for that he was a man, and of the whole blood, to the last kings of the house of Lancaster, and that she was a woman and but of the half blood, so that three prerogatives he pretended before her. First that he was a man and she a woman, and secondly that he descended of the lawful and elder daughter, and she of the younger brother legitimated, and thirdly that he was of whole blood, and she but of half, and for better fortifying of this proof of his title, these men do allege a certain case, determined by the learned of our days as they say, wherein for the first of these three causes only, the succession to a crown was adjudged unto king Philip of Spain, to wit the succession to the kingdom of Portugal, which case was in all respects correspondent to this of ours: for that Emanuel king of Portugal had three children, for so much as appertaineth to this affair (for afterward I shall treat more particularly of his issue) that is to say, two sons and one daughter, in this order, john, Elizabeth and Edward, even as john of Gaunt had Henry, lady Philippe, and john.  
Prince john of Portugal first child of king 
The case of succession to Portugal.  Emanuel, had issue an other john, and he had Sebastian in whom the line of john the first child was extinguished: but john's sister Elizabeth, was married to Charles the Emperor, & had issue K. Philip of Spain that now liveth. Edward also younger brother to Elizabeth or Isabel had issue two daughters, the one married to the duke of Parma, & the other to the duke of Bragansa, so as king Philip was in equal degree with these ladies in respect of king Emanuel, for that he was son to his eldest daughter, and the two duchesses' were daughters to his younger son, & upon this rested the question, which of these should succeed, and it was decided that it appertaineth unto king Philip, for that he was a man, and his mother was the elder sister, though if king Phillip's mother and the two duchesses' father I mean lord Edward of Portugal had been alive together, no doubt but that he being a man should have borne it away, which these men say, holdeth not in our case, but is much more to our advantage, for that it hath been showed before, that if Queen Phillippe had been alive with earl john of Somerset at the death of king Henry the sixth, she should have been preferred as legitimate, by birth, and therefore much more ought her nephew king Alfonsus to have been preferred afterward in that he was a man, before the niece of the said earl john of Somerset, that was but a woman, thus far they. 
The proper interest of K. Henry the 4. cannot descend to king Henry the 7.   
And besides all this, they do add (as often before I have mentioned) that king Alfonsus was of the whole blood unto all the three king Henries of the house of Lancaster, & the countess of Richmond was but of the half blood: and for more strengthening of this argument, they do say further, that besides that interest or right to the crown, which king Henry the fourth (that was the first king of the house of Lancaster) had by his father john of Gaunt, in that the said john was third son of king Edward the third, the said king Henry had divers other interests also which came of himself only, and not from his said father, as were (for example) his being called into the realm by general voice of all the people: his right gotten by arms, upon the evil government of the former king: the personal resignation and delivery of the kingdom by solemn instrument made unto him, by king Richard: his election also by parliament, & coronation by the realm: and finally the quiet possession of him and his posterity, for almost threescore years, with many confirmations of the whole realm, by divers acts of parliament, oaths, and other assurances, as the world knoweth: so many I mean, and so authentical, as could possibly be devised or given: and besides all this, that when king Richard was dead, he was next in degree of propinquity unto him, of any man living, for that the sons of Roger Mortimer, were two degrees further of then he, as hath been showed before. All which particular rights and interests, were peculiar to Henry the fourth his person, and were not in his father john of Gaunt, and therefore cannot possibly descend 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 duchess of Bragansa that yet liveth, hath issue divers goodly princes, as the lord Theodosius, that is now duke of Bragansa, and three younger brothers, to wit, Edward, Alexander and Philip, all young princes of great expectation, and these are the children of king Emanuel whose particular successions and issues, I shall declare somewhat more yet in particular.  
Prince john of Portugal afterward king, by 
Issue of K. john the 3. of Portugal.  name of king john the third, had issue an other john that was prince of Portugal, but died before his father and left a son named Sebastian, who was king, and slain afterward by the Moors in Barbary, and so ended this first line.  
The second son, and fourth child of king Emanuel, was named lord Lewis, and died also 
L. Lewes father of Don Antonio.  without issue legitimate, as is supposed, for that don Antonio his son, that afterward was proclaimed king by the people of Lisbon, and now liveth in Ingland, was taken by all men to be unlawful, as presently more at large shallbe showed, so as after the death of king Sebastian, their entered the Cardinal lord 
King Henry Cardinal.  Henry; which was third son to king Emanuel, and great uncle to king Sebastian lately diseased, for that he was brother to king john the third, that was grand father to king Sebastian, and albeit their wanted not some (according as the authors write which afterward I shall name) who affirmed and held, that king Philip of Spain should have succeeded king Sebastian before the Cardinal, for that he was nearer in consanguinity to him than was the Cardinal, for that besides that king Philip was son of king Emanuel's eldest daughter, he was brother also to king Sebastian's mother, yet the said Cardinal entered peaceably and by consent of all parties, but for that he was old, and unmarried, and not like to leave any child of his own, there began presently the contention in his days, who should be his successor.  
To which succession, did pretend five princes of the blood royal of Portugal, besides the lady Catherine Queen mother of France, who 
The pretence of the Queen mother in France to Portugal.  pretended by her mother's side to be descended of one lord Ralph, earl of Bulayne in Picardy, which Ralph was eldest son of Alfonsus the third king of Portugal; which Alfonsus before he was king, to wit, in the time, of his elder brother king Sanches of Portugal, was married to the countess and heir of Bullayn, named Mathildis and had by her this Ralph: but afterward this Alfonsus coming to be king of Portugal, he married again with the king of Castile's daughter, and had by her a son called Denyse, who reigned after him, and his successors, unto this day, all which succession of king Denyse & his posterity, the said Queen mother would have improved and showed, that it appertained to her by the said Ralph, & for this cause sent she to Portugal, one lord Vrban bishop of Comince in Gasgonie, to plead her cause, which cause of hers was quickly rejected, and only the foresaid five princes descended of king emanuel's children, were admitted to trial for the same, which 
Five pretenders of the Grown of Portugal.  were, Don Antonio son of lord Lewis the king Cardinal's elder brother, and king Philip of Spain son of lady Elizabeth the eldest sisteof t he said Cardinal, and Philibert duke of Savoy son of the lady Beatrix the same Cardinal's younger sister, and the two duchesses' of Parma and Bragansa, named Mary and Catherine, daughters of lord Edward younger brother of the said Cardinal, and youngest child of king Emanuel. And for that the lady Mary duchess of Parma, which was the elder of the two daughters, was dead before this controversy fell out, her eldest son lord Ranutio now duke of Parma, pretended by her right, to the said crown.  
And for that this matter was of so great importance 
The contention about the succession of Portugal.  every part procured to lay down their reasons, and declared their rights, in the best manner they could, and such as could not be present themselves in Portugal, sent thither their agentes, Ambassadors and Attorneys, to plead their causes for them. Don Antonio and the duchess of Bragansa, as inhabitants of that kingdom, were present, and declared their pretences, namely Don Antonio by himself, and for himself, and the lady Mary of Bragansa by her husband the duke, and his learned council.  
The prince of Parma sent thither for his part one Ferdinand Farnese, bishop of Parma. The 
Attorneys sent to Portugal.  duke of Savoy sent Charles of Rovere, afterwards made Cardinal. The king of Spain, as the greatest pretender sent the lord Peter Gyron duke of Osuna afterward Viceroy of Naples, & Sir Christopher de Mora, knight of his chamber at that time, but since of his privy council and lately made earl of castle Rodrigo in Portugal, of which country he is native, and besides these two, a great lawyer named Roderigo Vasques, made since (as I hear say) lord Precedent of Castil, which is as much almost as lord Chancellor with us.  
All these did lay forth before the king Cardinal their several reasons and pretensions to the succession of the crown of Portugal, for the five persons before mentioned, whereof two were quickly excluded, to wit, the duke of Savoy for that his mother was younger sister to king Phillip's mother, and himself also of less age than the said king. And secondly Don Antonio was also excluded by public and judicial sentence, of the king Cardinal his uncle, as illegitimate, and borne out of lawful wedlock, and albeit Don Antonio denied the same, and went about to prove himself legitimat, affirming that his father the lord Lewis, before his death had married with his mother in secret and for this brought forth some witnesses, as namely his mother's sister with her husband, and two others: yet the king Cardinal affirmed, that upon examination he had found them to be suborned which he said was evident to him, partly for that they agreed not in their speeches, and partly for that some of them had confessed the same, to wit, that they were suborned, whom he cast into prison, and caused them to be punished, and so sitting in judgement, 
& sentence of illegitimation against Don Antonio.  accompanied with four bishops, and four lawyers, forasmuch he had called to assist him in this cause, he pronounced the same Don Antonio to be a bastard, for which the Authors that I have read about this matter which are principally two, the first named Hierom Frank, a gentleman of Genua, who wrote ten books in Italian, of the union of the crown of Portugal to the crown of Castilia, and the second is 
Writers of this controversy.  named joanes Antonius Viperanus a Sicilian as I take him, who wrote one book only in latin, de obtenta Portugallia à rege Catholico Philippo, of Portugal got by king Philip the Catholic, both these books (I say) out of whom principally I have taken the points which here I will touch, do severally set down, the causes following, why the king Cardinal did reject the pretence of Don Antonio before all other 
1. The 〈◊〉 why don Antonio was pronounced illegitimate.  pretenders, and pronounced him a bastard.  
First, for that he had been ever so taken all the time of his father's life, and no man ever doubted thereof, or called the matter in question, until now that himself denied the same.  

2.  Secondly for that in the time of julius Tertius the Pope, when certain decres came out from Rome, against the promotion of bastards, the same Don Antonio sued to the said Pope, to be dispensed with all in that case, which argueth that then he knew himself not legitimate.  

3.  Thirdly that his father the lord Lewis had often times both by word and writing testified the same, that this Antonye was his bastard, and had signified also so much in his last will & testament.  

4.  Fourthly the said Cardinal as of himself, also affirmed, that if his brother the lord Lewis, had ever done any such thing, as to marry this Woman, who was but base in birth, and of the jewish race, as these stories do affirm: that it is like, that he would have made some of his own friends & kindred acquainted therewith, as a matter so much important for them to know, but he never did, though the said Cardinal avowed that himself was present with him at his death.  

5.  Fiftly he said, that if Don Antonio had been legitimate, how happened that he did not pretend the succession before the Cardinal himself, next after the death of king Sebastian, seeing that he was to have gone before the said Cardinal by as good right, as his other nephew Sebastian did, if he had been legitimate, for that he was son also to the Cardinals' elder brother, as hath been said.  

6.  Sixtly & lastly, the said king Cardinal avouched against Don Antonio, partly the disagreeing and partly the open confessing of the witnesses, that they were suborned by him, upon all which causes and considerations, he proceeded to the judicial sentence before alleged.  
Thus passed the matter in the case of Don Antonio, who if he had been legitimate, no doubt, but by all right he should have been preferred before all the other pretenders to the crown of Portugal, and must be at this day, towards 
Don Antonio his pretence to Ingland.  the crown of Ingland, before all those that pretend of the house of Portugal, if we grant him to be legitimate, and much more clearly may he pretend to the dukedom of Lancaster, as before hath been declared, for that it must descend to the lawful heir of lady Philip Queen of Portugal, whereof ensueth also, one consideration not impertinent to us in Ingland, that seeing we hold him there for true king of Portugal, I see not how we can deny him his right to the said dukedom, at least of Lancaster, whereof if we would give him but the possession with all the appurtenances, as they lie, it were no evil interteynment for him in our country until he could get the possession of the crown in his own.  
After the exclusions of these two pretenders, 
Three principal pretenderes of Portugal.  to wit of the duke of Savoy, and of Don Antonio, the whole controversy for Portugal, remained, between the other three, which were the king of Spain son of lady Isabel eldest daughter of king Emanuel, and the two duchesses' of Parma and Bragansa, daughters of the younger son of the said king Emanuel, to wit of the lord Edward infant of Portugal.  
And first of all, for that the eldest of these two 
Pretence of the duke of Parma.  Ladies to wit, Marry duchess of Parma, was now dead, her eldest son lord Ranutio now duke of Parma, entered in her place, and alleged that he represented his mother, and she her father lord Edward, which Lord if he had been alive, he should (no doubt) have been preferred before his elder sister, lady Elizabeth mother of king Philip, and consequently that the said lord Edward's issue ought to be preferred before her issue, and this he alleged against king Philip.  
And against the duchess of Bragansa he alleged, that his said mother was the elder sister, and for that cause he which now possessed her right and represented her person, was to be preferred before the said lady Catherine duchess of Bragansa, so that the foundation of this pretence, of the duke of Parma was, that he was nephew to the lord Edward, by his eldest daughter, and that to king Emanuel he was nephew, once removed, by his son, whereas king Philip was nephew but by his daughter only, and that the lady Catherine of he was of the right discendant line of K. john, and the Cardinal was but of the collateral or transuersal line, and that all law alloweth that the right line shall first be served and preferred, before the collateral shallbe admitted, so that hereby representation is nothing furthered.  
This exclusion of representation, did greatly further and advance the pretence of king Philip, for the excluding of both these ladies, and 
K. Phillippes pretence to Portugal.  their issues; for that supposing (as this answer avoucheth) that their is no representation of father or mother or predecessors to be admitted, but that every pretender is to be considered only in his own person, than it followeth, (said these men which plead for the king) that king Philip being in equal degree of propinquity of blood, with the two ladies, in respect as well of K. Henry yet living (for that they were all three children of brother and sister) it followeth that he was to be preferred before them both, as well in respect that he was a man, and they both Women, as also, for that he was elder in age, and borne before them both. And albeit the duke of Parma alleged that he was also a man, yet was it answered that he was one degree further of from the foresaid kings, than was king Philip, so as not respecting representation of their parents, that is to say, not considering at all, that king Philip descended of a Woman, & the two duchesses', of a man, but only, respecting their own persons, as hath been declared, these men avouched, that king Phillipps person was evidently to be preferred, for that he was a degree nearer in blood than the duke of Parma, and superior in sex & age, to the lady Catherine of Bragansa.  
Moreover the lawyers of king Phillipps side affirmed, that he was nearer also in propinquity of blood to king Sebastian, the last king, than was the very king Cardinal himself, & much more than any of the other two pretenders, for that he was brother to the said king Sebastian's 
divers allegations for king Philip.  mother, and the Cardinal was but brother to his grandfather. And besides this, they alleged, that Portugal did belong to the crown of Castil by divers other means of old, as for that it could not be given away by kings of Castil in marriage of their daughters, as the principal parts thereof had been, as also for that whenking john the first, that was a bastard, was made king of Portugal, by election of the people, the inheritance thereof did evidently appertain to king john of Castil, that had to wife, the lady Beatrix daughter and heir of Ferdinand king of Portugal, from which inheritance of that crown, by open injury, both she and her posterity (whose right is in king Philip at this day) were debarred, by the intrusion of the said john, master of avis, bastard brother of the foresaid king Ferdinand.  
These reasons alleged divers lawyers in the behalf of king Philip, and those not only Spaniards but also of divers other countries & nations, as my authors before named do enough, and many books were written of this matter, 
Hieron. Fraki, lo Pet. VipeIanus.  and when the contention was at the hottest, then died the king Cardinal, before he could decide the same controversy, upon which occasion, the king of Spain, being persuaded that his right was best, & that he being a Monarch and under no temporal judge, was not bound to expect any other judgement in this affair, not to subject himself to any other tribunal, but that he might by force put himself in possession, of that which he took to be his own, if otherwise he could not have it delivered unto him (for so write these authors by me named) seeing also done Antonio to pretend the said kingdom, by only favour of some popular party, that he had In Lisbon; the said king Philip entered upon Portugal by force of arms, as all the world knoweth, and holdeth the same peaceably unto the day.  
And I have been the longer in setting down 
The case of pretece of the howl of Portugal to Ingland.  this contention about the succession to the crown of Portugal, for that it includeth also the very same pretence and contention for the crown of Ingland. For that all these three princes before named, may in like manner pretend the succession of that interest to the house of Lancaster, and by that to the crown of Ingland, which doth descend from Queen Phillippe eldest daughter of john of Gaunt, duke of Lancaster, and sister of king Henry the fourth as hath largely been declared.  
And albeit that some men Will say, that this matter is now decided, which of these princes of the house of Portugal hath the interest to Ingland, for that king Philip being now preferred in the succession of Portugal, entereth also thereby to the other right of succession of Ingland, yet others will say no, for that the laws of succession in Portugal and Ingland be different. For that in Ingland representation taketh place, so as the children of the son 
An objection with the answer.  though they be women, shall ever be preferred before the children of the daughter, though they be men, whereof these men do infer, that seeing the lady Phillipps right before mentioned to the dukedom of Lancaster, and thereby also to the crown of Ingland, is to be preferred according to the laws of Ingland, and not by the laws of other foreign countries; it followeth, that the self same right of succession that is pretended at this day by the princes of Portugal for succeeding the said lady Phillippe, should be determined only by the laws of Ingland, where representation taketh place, and not by the laws of any other nation: Thus say they.  
But against this, others do allege, that the question is not here, by what law this pretence of the blood royal of Portugal to the crown of Ingland, is to be tried, but rather who is the true and next heir and successor unto K. john the first, and to his wife Queen lady Phillippe, heir of the house of Lancaster, which two priuces were king and Queen of Portugal, & their true heir at this day hath the forenamed pretence, to the crown of Ingland, which true and next heir, being once known, it little importeth by what law he pretendeth his said right to Ingland, whether by that of Ingland or by this of Portugal, or by both, though to determine this first and chief point, who is the next and true heir unto these foresaid king & Queen of Portugal, the laws of Portugal must needs be judge & not those of Ingland, and so, seeing that by these laws of Portugal, the king of Spain; is now adjudged for next heir, to the said princes, and is in possession of their inheritance at this day, I mean of the crown of Portugal; these men say, that he must consequently inherit also all other rights dignities and prerogatives belonging to the foresaid princes, or to their posterity.  
And thus you see now how great diversity of arguments and objections, are and may be alleged, on different sides, about this affair, whereby also is made manifest, how doubtful & ambiguous a matter this point of English succession, is, seeing that in one only branch of the pretenders, which is in the house of Portugal alone, their are so many difficulties, as here hath been touched.  
But now the common objection against all 
Objections against the pretenders of Portugal.  these titles and titlers, is, that they are old and out of ure, and not to be brought in question again now, especially seeing that both king Henry the seventh and his issue, have enjoyed so long the title of the house of Lancaster, as it hath, and secondly that these titles do appertain unto strangers whose government may be dangerous many ways unto Ingland, and especially in that which toucheth the king of Spain, who being so great and mighty a monarch as he is, may prejudice greatly the English liberty, and easily bring them into servitude, if his pretence should be favoured, as by some it seemeth to be.  
This is the speech of many men in Ingland, and abroad at this day, whereunto yet some 
Answers.  others do answer, that as concerning the first objection of the oldness of the pretence, & title, it hath been showed before, that by law no title to a kingdom dieth ever, but may take place whensoever the party to whom it belongeth, is able to avouch it and get possession, and as for this pretence of the line of Portugal, they say, that it hath not such great age, but that very well it may show itself, and be had in consideration, especially at this time, when now the issue male of king Henry the seventh is ended, and that of necessity, we must return to have consideration of the issue of his daughters, before which daughters, good reason (say these men) is it, that the issue of lady Phillippe Queen of Portugal should be admitted, for that albeit we would have that respect to the issue male of john Earl of Somerset, as to prefer it, or suffer it to enjoy the crown, before the issue of Queen Phillippe (and so they say it seemeth that it was, for that king Henry the seventh was crowned king, his mother being 
Note this.  a live, which yet by ordinary course of succession should have gone before him) yet say they, it is no reason that the issue female of john of Somerset, or of king Henry the seventh should be preferred before the issue male of the said Queen Phillippe.  
Moreover they say, that the house of Clarence and Huntingdon do pretend a title more old and stolen at this day, than this of Portugal, for that they pretend from George duke of Clarence, that never had the crown, and these of Portugal pretend to be next heir to king Henry the sixth, that did were the crown of Ingland, for 40. years together, after whose death, if king Alfonsus of Portugal (who was then old & wearied with evil success of wars) had been so able to prefer and follow his title, as some of that house be at this day, he would never have suffered the house of York to have entered, nor king Henry the seventh to have enjoyed it after them, by the title of Lancaster, which title yet of Lancaster (say these men) king Henry the seventh could not have in himself any way, whether we respect Queen Phillippe, or john of Somerset, for by Queen Phillippe, they of Portugal were evidently 
By what title king Henry the 7. did enter.  before him, and by way of john of Somerset the countess his mother was as clearly before him, neither could he have any title, as yet, by the house of York, for that he was not yet married to the daughter of king Edward; so as his crowning in the field, and whole entrance to the kingdom, was without any actual title at all, but only the good will of the people, as these men do hold.  
To the other objection of foreign princes & 
About foreign power in Ingland.  strange government, that may come to Ingland by these pretences of the princes of Portugal: divers men do answer diversly, for some do grant that it may be so, that by this means Ingland may come to be under foreign kings, and that no hurt, or inconvenience at all would ensue thereof to Ingland, but rather much good and commodity: but other that like not well of this assertion, do say further, that if these foreign pretence should take place, yet that all matters might be so compounded, that albeit the prince himself which is to rule, should be foreign born (which they take to be no inconvenience) yet that his forces and dependence, should be only of the English, for that he should not bring in any straying powers into the land, no more them did king Stephen or king Henry the second, that were borne in France, or then did king Philip of Spain in Queen mary's days, or as it is thought Monsieur of France should have done, if he had married her Majesty that now is, as once it was supposed he should.  
To this said one of the company, and is it 
About foreign government.  possible, that any man, should be of opinion that foreign government in what manner or kind so everit be, should not be iuconuenient and hurtful to Ingland, where the people are wholly bend against it: you remember (quoth he) as concerning the last two examples, that you have alleged, what tumult and stir their was raised by some kind of men, about the coming in of king Philip, and what their was like to have been, about the entrance of Monsieur, if that purpose had gone forward.  
I remember well said the Lawyer, and these men that are of this opinion, will say to this, that it was but a popular mutiney without reason or any good ground at all, and only raised by some crafty heads, that misliked the religion of the princes that were to enter, and for some other drifts of their own, but not of any sound reason or argument of state, which these men think rather to be of their side, & in good sooth they allege so many arguments for their opinion, that if you should hear them, you would say it wear hard to judge which opinion had most truth, but they are to long for this place and so (said he I shall make an end of the matter that I have in hand and leave this point, for others to discuss.  
With this the whole company fhewed marvelous 
The occa sion of the next chapter about foreign government.  great desire to know the reasons, that were in both parties, for this matter, & so much the more, for that it seemed to fall very fit to the purpose, of these pretences of foreign princes, for which cause they entreated him very instantly that before he passed any further, or ended his whole discourse, of the titles, (which hitherto they said had greatly contented them) he would stay himself a little also upon this matter, which though for a time he made great difficulty to do, yet in the end, being so importuned by them he promised that at their meeting the next day, he would satisfy their desire, and so for that time they departed very well contented but, yet as they said, with their heads full of titles and titlers, to the crown.   

WHETHER IT BE BETTER TO BE UNDER A FOREIGN OR HOMBORNE PRINCE. and whether under a great & mighty Monarch, or under a little prince or King.  
CAP. IX.  
THE company being gathered together the next day, and showing much desire to hear the point discussed about foreign government, whereof mention had been made the day before, the lawyer began to say, that for so much, as they would needs have him to enter into that matter, which of itself was full of prejudice, in most men's ears and minds, for that no nation commonly could abide to hear of being under strange governors and governments, he meant to acquit himself in this their request, as he had done in other matters before which was to lay down only the opinions and reasons of other men, that had disputed this affair on both sides before him, and of his own to affirm or deny nothing.  
And first of all against the dominions of strangers, and Foreigners he said, that he might discourse without end, and fill up whole books 
Reasons against foreign government.  and volumes with the reasons and arguments, or at least wise with the dislikes and aversions, that all men commonly had to be under strangers, or to have any aliens to bear rule or charge over them, be they of what condition state or degree soever, and in this he said, that as well philosophers, lawmakers wise and good men, as others do agree commonly, for that we see both by their words writings and facts, that they abhor to subject themselves to strange governments, so as in all the eight books of Aristotle's politics, you shall still see, that in all the 
Polit. Arist.  different forms of commonwealths, that he setteth down, he presupposeth ever that the government shallbe by people of the self same nation, and the same thing do presume in like manner, all those lawmakers that he their mentioneth, to wit, Minois Solon, Lycurgus, Numa Pompilius, and the rest, and he that shall read the famous invectives of Demosthenes against 
Demosthenes' Philipicae, & in AEfhines.  the pretensions of king Philip of Macedonia, that desired to encroach upon the Athenians, and other states of Greece, as also his orations against AEschines, his adversary, that was thought secretly to favour the said foreign prince, shall see what hatred that noble Orator had against foreign government, and he that shall read the books of our time either of the Italians when they spoke of their subjection in times passed to the Lombardes, Germane, or french nations, or to the spaniards at this day, or shall consider what the french do presently write & inveigh against the power of the house of Guise and Lorraine in France, for that they take them to be strangers, shall easily see how deeply this aversion against strangers, is rooted in their hearts, and this for testimony of word.  
But now if we will consider the facts that have ensued about this matter, and how much 
Attempts to deliver realms from strangers.  blood hath been shed, and what desperate attempts have been taken in hand, by divers nations, for avoiding their subjection to strangers, or for delivering themselves from the same again, if once they have fallen into it, you shall behold more plainly, the very impression of nature herself in this affair, for of divers barbarous nations, realms & cities, we read in stories, that they rather chose to slay & murder themselves, then to be under the dominion 
Quint. Curt. li 5. & 6. de gest. Alex.  of strangers, others have adventured strange attempts, & bloody stratagems, as the Sicilians, who in one day and at the self same hour, at the time of evening song, slew all the frenchmen 
Vespere Sicilianae, an. 1265. Leand. in descript. Siciliae.  that were within the Island, whom yet themselves had called and invited thither not long before, and the like is recorded in our English stories of killing the danes, by English men, at one time, in most rueful manner, and 
Polyd. li. 〈◊〉 Hollings in vit. Camiti.  the like was oftentimes thought on also by the English against the Normans, when they oppessed us, and by the French against the English whiles we had dominion in France, though nether the one nor the other of these latter desigments, could be effectuated, for want of forces, and commodity, and by reason of the watchfulness of the contrary part. But yet to speak only of France, the rage and fury of the french was generally so great and implacable, against the English that governed there, in the reign of king Henry the sixth, as both Polidor & other stories do note (at what time, partly by the dissensions of the houses of York & Lancaster in Ingland, and partly by the valour of their own new king Charles the seventh, they 
The rage of the french against English.  had hope to be rid of the English dominion) as no persuasion or reason, no fear of punishment, no force of arms, no promiss or threat, no danger, no pity, no religion, no respect of God nor man, could repress or stay them from rising and revolting every where against the English government and governors, murdering those of the English nation in all parts and corners, wheresoever they found them, without remorse or compassion, until they were utterly delivered, of their dominion.  
So as this matter is taught us (say these men) even by nature herself, that stranger's government 
The conclusion against 〈◊〉.  is not to be admitted, and moreover the reasons before alleged against the king of Scotland's pretence, together with the examples and judgements of the realms of Spain and Portugal, who resolved rather to alter the true order and course of their succession, then to admit strangers over them, do plainly confirm the same.  
And last of all (say these men) the authority of holy scripture is evident, in this behalf, for that when God in deuteronomy, did foretell by 
Authority of scripture against strangers.  Moses, that the jews in time would come to change their government, and to desire a king as other nations round about them had, he added yet this express condition, that he should be only of their own nation, for he sayeth. Constitues eum quem Dominus Deus tuus elegerit de numero fratrum tuorum, non poteris alterius gentis hominem 
Deus. 15.  regem facere, qui non sit frater tuus: that is, thou shalt make king at that time, such a one as thy lord God shall choose for that dignity, out of the number of thy brethren, but thou mayst not make a king of any other nation, but of thy own brethren. Thus say these men, against admitting of strangers, and it seemeth that their opinion and affection, hath many followers, for that generally we see most men affected and inclined this way.  
But yet on the other side there want not other men who appear both wise dis passionate & 
The answer in defence of fortaine government.  grave, that will seem to consider this matter far otherwise, and do say, that all this, is but a common vulgar prejudice, of passionate men, against strangers, rising partly by corruption of nature, whereby men are inclined to think evil of others, and to bear them little affection, especially, such as govern and bear rule over them, and so much the less by how much farther of, they are from us in kindred and acquaintance, and partly also they say that the same riseth of lack of due consideration in the most part of men, for that they weigh not the true reasons, causes, or effects of things, but only the outward show, and so do run away with the opinion and apprehension of the popular, which for the most part hath no other ground or foundation in it but only fancy and imagination, orincitation of others, that endeavour to procure tumults, and so they say it falleth out in this point, as upon examination it shall appear.  
And for proof and declaration of this their assertion, they do require first of all, that this ordinary and common prejudice against strangers or strange governments, be laid a side, so long at least, as the matter is in disputation, and that only the true effects, of good and profitable government may be considered, without that other circumstance, whether these fruits do come from stranger or homborne prince, which effects 
The effect of governments to be con sidered & not the governors.  are peace, rest, justice, defence of the innocent, punishment of the wicked, wealth, security, and other such benefits, that good government is wont to bring with it, to the subjects. These things (say these men) are to be weighed indifferently and without passion, by wisemen, and wheresoever these effects are more abundantly to be found, their the government is best, and their the subjects are in best case, whatsoever the governors be, or of what nation or country, soever they be. And this they show by this example following.  
If in two countries or common wealths, 
An example.  lying nigh together, the subjects of the one, should live in all ease, wealth and prosperity, under a stranger, as divers states did under the Romans, and in the other they should be beaten, whipped, and afflicted under a homborne prince, as we read the Sicilians were under Phalaris and Dionysius their countrymen tyrants, clear it is, (say these men) that the stripes and afflictions would not seem the easier, for that they come from a natural prince, but rather the heavier, and the others happy case under the stranger, must needs seem to be the better, and consequently his government rather to be wished: for that in very truth the goodness & defect of every government, is to be measured by the effects there of, that redound unto the subjects, for whose good it was first ordained, as oftentimes our friend the Civil lawyer hath touched and proved before. And when the subjects do live well, and prosperously, are defended and maintained in peace, safety, and wealth, when justice is done equally to all men, the wicked punished, and the good advanced and rewarded: when God is honoured, and true religion maintained, and virtue promoted, this is that which importeth the realm & subjects and not where or in what country the prince and his officers were borne, or of what nation language, or kindred they be. For that, be the prince of what lineage or kindred soever, 
little importeth the subject of what country his go vernour is so he be good.  yet after he is once established in his dignity, the common subject, can have no more conversation with him, nor receive any more personal benefit of him, then if he were a mere stranger, except only by those common and public effects of his government, before mentioned, for that so soon as he is placed in his dignity, he becometh a stranger to me, and if he govern evil and afflict me, little availeth it to me, whether he be of my blood and country or no, and I may say as the people of Israel, in like case said unto Roboam, who for that he was king David's nephew, and of the house of Isai, thought his ftate assured, for that he was their Lord and natural prince, and so might press and afflict them at his pleasures but they answered him plainly. Que nobis parsin David, vel quae haereditas in filio Isai, what part have 
〈◊〉. Reg. 12  we in David, or what inheritance have we in the son of Isai, and foe they left him, and rather chose to be under jeroboam a stranger, and his servant, then under him.  
This then is the first point, which these men do demand, to wit, that we consider equally and according to reason, wisdom, and truth & without all partial affection, where & by whom and by what government we are likest to receive, and enjoy the good and happy effects a 'bove mentioned, of prosperity to the subject: for that without all doubt (say they) that government is to be deemed best, and that subjection happiest, where those benefits are most enjoyed, let the prince or governor be of what nation or lineage soever. And on the other side, 
Not the country but the good government importeth.  that must needs be the worst government unto me, where I shall reap fewest and participate least of those effects, be the prince never so much my country man or kinsman, and though he were borne in the same city, town, or house, yea in the same belly with me. As for example those men that lived (say they) in Spain under king Peter the cruel, or in Ingland under king Richard the third, commonly called the tyrant, what did it avail them, that those princes were of their own country or blood, seeing 
Note these examples.  they did that unto them, which a stranger though never so barbarous, would scarce have done? As in like manner, all those noble houses before mentioned in our country, of the dela Pools, Staffords, Plantagenets, and others destroyed by king Henry the eight, what availed them, that the said king was not only their country man, but also their near kinsman, what profit or commodity was it unto Thomas of woodstock, duke of Gloucester, that he lived under a king that was his nephew, to wit, king Richard the second, or to George duke of Clarence, in king Edward the fourth's time, that the said king was his own brother, when both of them were pursued, disgraced, and put to death by them, and lost their lives, lands, dignities, goodly possessions, stately manners, & gorgeous houses, with their wives, children, & all other felicities of this world, which perhaps under a straying prince, they might have enjoyed many a fair day and year.  
This is that than which these men do first require, to wit that all fancy and fond opinion 
Who are properly straingers  of the vulgar people, be aparted in this matter, from truth and substance, as also say they, we ought to desire and determine who are properly strangers, or foreigners, seeing that some do take for strangers and foreigners, all those that are not of the same dominion and goverment, though otherwise they be of the same nation, and language, according as those other men that are enemies to strangers, said a little before (if you remember) that the princes of the house of Guise, and their kindred are taken for strangers in france, by them that by that means, would make them odious to the people, for that their ancestors in times past came out of Lorraine, which is a province joining hard upon france, of the same nation, language, and manners, but only under an other prince. And so I myself noted in my traveling through Italy, that the Florantines are hated & called strangers in Sienna, where they govern, albeit the one state be not 30. miles from the other, and both of one nation language manners and education. And on the contrary side, we shall see, that some of different language & nation do hold themselves for country men, as for example, the Biscayns in Spain, do not hold the Castilians for strangers, but are contented to be ruled by them, as by their own countrymen, albeit they be a different nation and have different language and manners, and the same I do note in the britains and Normans towards the French, in the welsh also towards the English, who are a different people and of different language, and yet are they governed peaceably by the English, & the English again do account them for their country men, as may appear by that, when king Henry the seventh, came to be king of Ingland, I do not find, any resistance made against him by the English, for that respect that he was of that nation, as evidently he was by his father's side, that was of the Tidders of wales, so as this point also who be strangers and who be not, seemeth to be a thing that dependeth much of the opinion and affection of each people & nation, the one towards the other.  
And this being so, these men come to treat 
divers manners of being under strangers.  more particularly of the purpose in hand, and do say that in two or three manners a nation may come to be under the government of strangers or foreigners, first as a province, that is to say as a piece or member of an other dominion, as Ingland was in times passed under the Romans, and as Ireland is under Ingland at this day and as the Britons are under France, and as many states of Italy, be under the crowns of Arragon, and Castille. And this may come to pass either by Conquest and force of arms, as the Welsh came to be under the English, and the English to be under the Normans and Danes, and as Sicilia and Naples came to be under the Spaniards, and as Normandye and Aquitaine came to be under the French, & as almost all the world in old time was brought to be under the Romans: or otherwise the same may come to pass by inheritance, as Aquitaine and Normandy in times past came to Ingland, & as Flanders with the states thereof came to the house of Austria, and as Britain to the crown of France, or else thirdly it may happen by mixed means, that is to say, partly by force and partly by other means of composition, as Milan came to Spain, and Ireland to Ingland, according as the Irish do hold, and so Portugal hath in out days come to the king of Spain, for that besides his pretence and right of inheritance, he used also force of arms for getting the same.  
Of all these three ways then evident it is, 
To be under Strangers by Coquest.  that Conquest is the hardest, and most prejudicial to the subjects, for that there, all standeth at the will and clemency of the Conqueror, whom either anger or fear, or jealousy of his assurance, may often drive to hold a hard hand over the conquered, at least wise for a time, until his estate be better settled, so that I marvel not though no people or country commonly would willingly be conquered, but yet policy also teacheth such a Conqueror, whatsoever he be, that as on the one side, it behoveth him to be watchful & so to fortify himself, as the unquiet can do him no hurt, so on the other side, is it necessary by the same rule of policy to use all favour and sweet means to content & gain those that be or may be made quiet, for better establishing of his state, even as a Physician after a vehement purgation, doth minister lenitives and suffer medicines, to calm and appease the good humours left, and to strengthen the whole body again that it may hold out.  
This we see to be true, not only by reason of 
How Conquerors do proceed towards the Conquered.  state and policy, as hath been said, but also by experience of all countries, that have been conquered in Europe or other where, if the continual resisting and revolting of those that are conquered, do not cause a contrary course in the Conqueror, as it did in the conquest of the Danes and Normands upon the English, and in the conquest of the English upon the British or Welsh, where the often rising of them that were overcome, enforced the vanquishers to be much more cruel and rigorous than other wise they would have been, for all our stories do testify, that king Sweno the Dane and much more his son, king Canutus, as also William 
Polydore Virg. lib. 8 histot. 〈◊〉.  conqueror, had a great desire after their victories, to have appeased, and made much of the English nation, but that they were never quiet under them, and so in like manner the English kings oftentimes gave their daughters in marriage to the princes of Wales, and many privileges to that people, thereby to gain them, but that their continual revolting caused much severity and bloodshed to be used, and the like severity did it cause oftentimes in the very Romans towards the said britains conquered.  
But where the people vanquished were content 
Clemency of the Romans.  to be quiet and submit themselves, their the said Romans used all favour and moderation, so as it is written of them in the first book of Machabeis. Et audivit Iudas nomen Romanorum, quia sunt potentes viribus, & acquiescunt ad omnia 
Lib. 5. Mechab. cap. 8.  quae postulantur ab eyes, that is: And judas Machabeus hard the name and fame of the Romans, how they were potent in strength, and yet so gentle, as they yielded to all that was demanded at their hands.  
And finally their government was so just, considerate, sweet and modest, upon all foreign nations, which they had conquered, as it allured divers nations to desire to be under them, and to be rid of their own natural kings, as of the subjects of Antiochus, and Methridates kings of Asia and of Pontus, we do read, and some other princes also thereby to gratify their subjects, did nominate the Roman Empire, for their successor, as did king Attalus king of Pergamus, and Ptolemy of Egypt, and others, and it is the common opinion of learned men that the world was never more happily governed, then under the Romans, and yet were they strangers to most of their subjects, over which they governed, and unto whom they were most strangers, that is to say, unto such as were furthest of from them, to those did they use always most favours, and gave them most privileges, as both wisdom and reason of state did require, for that those people had most ability to rise against them, and to rebel, so as this circumstance of being strangers, hurted them nothing, but rather profited them much.  
The like rule of policy and of state, have all 
Strangers most favoured to wise governments.  great Monarchies used ever since, that is to say, to show most favour to such subjects, as be most strangers, and farthest from them, and on the contrary side, if any be to be pressed more than others, to press and burden them most, that be most natural and nearest home, & most under and in subjection, and surest to obey, and this is evidently seen, felt, and practised by all the great states this day of the world, so as it cannot be denied. For if we look but into france, we shall find that the states of Gascony and Guyne, which are furthest of from the court, & 
Gascoynes.  were once strangers & gotten by force, from the English, do pay far less tributes at this day to the French king then those that be of the isle of france itself, and are properly french, and in like manner, the Britons, which came to that 
Britons.  crown by marriage, and were old enemies, do pay much less yet then the gascoins, and in a manner do pay nothing at all, and the Normans do pay some what more than any of the two, for that they do lie somewhat nearer to Paris, and thereby are more in snbiection to the prince, though yet they pay less than the natural Frenchmen. The Candians also which is 
Candians  an Island, a part, and standeth under the Venetians, do not pay the third part of the impositions (as by my own information I learned when I traviled Italy) that do the natural subjects of the Venetian state in Italy.  
What shall I say of the kingdoms and states of Naples, Sicily, and Milan, subject to the 
States of Italy.  king of Spain, and gotten by conquest, as hath been said, and yet pay they no one penny of that ancient great imposition used in Spain, called the Alcaualla which is the tenth penny of all that is bought and sold, nor are they subject to the Inquisition of Spain (at least Naples and Milan) nor to many other duties tributes and impositions which the natural spaniard is subject unto, nor is their any law or edict made in Spain that holdeth in those countries, except it be allowed ratified and confirmed by those states themselves, nor may any of their old privileges be infringed, but by their own consents, and when the king requireth any extraordinary subsides in Spain, they bear no part thereof. whereupon these men do ask, what it hurteth these states, that they are strangers, or under strangers, or what privilege is it to the spaniard at home, that he is, only under his hom born king, if he receive less benefits by that, then doth the stranger.  
And is not the like also used by the state of 
The condition of Irish under the English.  Ingland towards Ireland, are not the favours and indulgences used towards the civil Irish that live in peace much more than to the English themselves in Inglad? For first, their taxes and payments be much less, the laws of Ingland bind them not except they be allowed and received by their own parliament in Ireland. For matters of religion, they are pressed much less than home-born subjects, albeit their affections to the Roman religion, be known to be much more universal, than it is in Ingland. In all criminal affairs & punishing of delictes, the manner of proceeding against the Irish is much more remiss mild & gentle, then with the subjects of Ingland, so as their being strangers, seemeth rather a privilege then a hindrance unto them.  
But in no other country is this thing more 
Of the states of Flanders.  evidently to be considered, then in the states of Flanders & low countries which by in heritance (as hath been said) came to be under foreign government but so much to their good & advancement (& that in a very few years) as scarce is credible, except to him that understandeth their former state, when they were under their homborne princes, & do compare it with that which after they came unto, under the house of Austria, united unto the crown of Spain.  
For before, for many hundredth years, a man shall read nothing almost, in their stories, but war, sedition, and blood shed among themselves, and this either, one state which an other before they were united together, all under one prince, or else with the kingdom of France, of whom in those days they depended, or else (and this most of all) against their own Princes, of whom some have been so fierce and cruel unto them, as they have shed infinite quantity of their blood, and among others, I read of their Count Lewis, that in one day, he 
Girard du Hailan lib. 18. an. 1381.  put to death, five hundred of them by sentence of justice in Bruxelles, and an other day within the same year, he caused a bout a thousand to be burned to death in a church of the town of Nevel, besides infinite others whom in divers battles and skirimshes he slew, so as often times the country lay almost desolate, through their domestical afflictions.  
But now since the time that the states came 
Prosperity of Flanders under the house of Austria.  to be under Philip the first, Archduke of Austria, and after king of Spain, and so remained under his son Charles the Emperor, and his nephew Philip the second, that now liveth, until the late troubles and rebellions (which was about the space of fifty years that they so continued in peace before their rebellion) it is almost, incredible how those states increased in wealth, peace, and dignity, so that as 
Io. Guicciard. nella descrittione delli pasi bassi.  Guycciardin the Italian historiographer noteth, in his description of those countries, the whole wealth and riches of the world seemed to slow thither, and I myself can remember to have seen such exceeding abundance in very ordinairy men of this country, both for their diet, apparel, furniture of house and the like, as was wonder full, besides that for their nobility they were all great Princes, for that every one had his province or great town in government, which they ruled which that pomp and honour, as if they had been absolute lords themselves, by reason of the far distance of their supreme Prince, and so they were received which public honour of all cities and towns & their charges borne wheresoever they passed, as such high estates are wont to be.  
And albeit they had ever commonly a stranger 
The authority of the Fleminges at home.  for supreme governor among them under their king, which bore the name to be above them, yet did he in deed nothing but as they would have him, and this partly for that his time of government being but short, he always attended principally to get the good wills of the people, and to hold them contented, and thereby to be gratful to his king at his return home, and partly also for that if he should attempt to do any thing against their minds and liking, they made reply by their precedent and Chancellor and other of their own counsellors, residing for the Flemish nation in the court of Spain (for this nation hath always a particular council there about the king as all other foreign nations also have, that are under him) and by this means they obtained lightly what they would, and brought the governor to what they pleased, so as in effect they were absolute kings in themselves, & wrought their wills in every thing, & this in that time while the country was quiet.  
But now since their revolt which hath endured 
The indulgence used to offenders in Flanders.  almose these four or five and twenty years, what hath succeeded, surely their hath not a quarter so many been punished, or put to death in all these years by order of justice of their king absent, as before I have showed that there were in one day, by their own earls and dukes, when they were present, & that upon far less occasion and cause given, then are these, for if we take away the two noble men Egmond and Horn, put to death at the beginning of these Flemish troubles by the duke of Alva (for which some men say also that he had no thank afterward by the king) no man of importance hath been since executed, and the chiefest towns that have been and are against the king in Holland and Zealand, are suffered until this day, to traffic freely into Spain, and yet we know that for a little beginning of a certain tumult this last year passed in Spain, itself, to wit in the kingdom of Arragon, many heads have been strooken of, and much justice done, where of then riseth this difference no doubt for that the Flemings are strangers & far of, and the other near at home & natural borne, so as this circumstance of being a stranger and dwelling far of doth them great pleasure, and giveth them privilege above the homborne subjects.  
The like I might show for this matter of punishment in the foresaid states of Italy, 
The Spaniard punis punisheth in Italy than 〈◊〉 home.  where if a man do compare the number of them that were put to death pulled down, or afflicted by order of justice, and other wise at the commandment of the Prince, in time of their own home-born kings, with that which hath been since, especially of the nobility, you shall not find one for twenty, and the reason of this is, for that their own kings were absolute, and had to give account to no man, of their doings, and for that they were men, and had their passions and emulations with the nobility, and might put the same in execution without account or controlment, they pulled down & set up at their pleasure, and made oftentimes but a jest of noblemen's lives and deaths, but now these that are governors & viceroys for a foreign prince, first they have not so great authority or commission, as to touch any such principal persons lives, without giving relation thereof, first unto their king & council, and receive again particular order for the same, and then they knowing that after 
Viceryes do give account of their government.  their three years government is ended, they must be private men again, and stay their 40. days as subjects under the next new governor, to give a reckoning of their doings against all that shall accuse them (which in these countries they call to make their residence) they take heed what they do, and whom they offend, so as the condition of nobility, is far different under such a straying government, as this is termed, then under a natural Prince of their own country which oppresseth them at his pleasure.  
But now to draw near homeward, if we will 
Much slaughter of nobility in Ingland.  examine and considerer what hath passed in Ingland in this point of massacring our nobility, by our domestical Princes, it is a matter lamentable, for it may seem that they have served oftentimes for our Princes to make disport & to play which their heads. And to let pass all those, which in time of wars, rebellions, & comotions, have been cut of, which occasions may seem more justifiable, I do read also in our chronicles that, 2 Sangue freddo, as the Italian saith, that is to say, in time of peace and by execution of justice, at the Prince's appointment, these noblemen following and knights by name, were put to death, with in the space of one five years in king Henry the fourth his days. The duke of Excester, the duke of Surrey, the Archbis hop of York, the earls of Salisbury, of Gloucester, of Worcester and of Huntingdon, The earl mowbray earl marshal. The Baron of Kinderton S. Roger Clarington, bastard son of Edward the black Prince. S. Thomas Blunr, S. Barnard Rocas, S. Richard Vernon. And again soon afterunder king Edward the fourth, in almost which in as little space. The dukes of Somerset, and of Excester, The earls of Devonshire, of Oxford, and of Keyns'. The Lord Rosse, the Lord Molyns, S. Thomas Tudingham, S. Philip Wentworth, S. Thomas fyndam, and many others afterward, (for this was but at the beginning of his reign (which number of nobility if a man should have seen them alive together with their trains, before they had been put down, he would have said they had been a very goodly company, & pitiful that so many of our own nobility should be brought by our own Princes to such confusion.  
But yet this matter may seem perhaps the 
Execution of nobility by Henry the eight.  less marvelous, and more excusable, under those two kings, for that troubles and contentions had passed a little before in the realm, about the succession, and hereupon so many of the nobility might be cut of, but let us see then what ensued afterwards, when things were established and all doubt of contention about the succession taken away, as in king Henry the eight his days it was, and yet do I find registered in our chronicles these persons following either made away cut of, or put down, by the said king, to wit, two Queens Anne and Catherine, Three Cardinals put down and disgraced Wolsy, Poole, and fisher, whereof the last was beheaded, soon after his dignity given him in Rome, and the first was arrested, the second attainted of imagined treasons. Three dukes put down, to wit, the noble dukes of Buckingham, Suffolk and Norfolk, whereof the last lost his lands dignities and liberty only, the former two both Lands & lives. A marquis with two earls beheaded, Devonshire, kyldare, and Surray, two Countesses condemned, to die, Devonshire and Salisbury, and the latter executed: Lords many, as the Lord Darcy, the Lord Hussy, the Lord Montagne, the Lord Leonard Gray, the Lord Dacres of the south, the Lord Cromwell, and six or seven Abbots. Kinghtes also in great number, as five in one day, with the Lords Hussy, and Darcy, and five in an other day, with the earl os kildare whose uncles they were, and besides them, S. Thomas Moor, S. Rice Griffith, S. Edward Nevel, S. john Nevel, S. Nicholas Carew, S. Adrian fortescue, and divers other knights of great account & then gentlemen almost without end.  
And all these within the space of 20 years, 
Under King Edward and Queen Mary.  of his reign, and in the time of peace, and if we look upon but four or five years together of the reign of this man's children, we shall see the like course continued, for we shall see put to death within the space of four years, all these following by name, The duke of Somerset, the duke of Suffolk, the duke of Northumberland, and the L. Admiral of Ingland, S. Miles Partridge, S. Ralph Vane, S. Michael Stanhope, S. Thomas Arondel, S. john Gates, S. Thomas Palmer kinghtes, with divers other gentlemen of there retinue, and all these by natural, domestical, and homborne Princes, whereas I dare to adventure, the greateft wager that I can make that you shall not find so many put to death of the nobility, by any straying Prince, state, or common wealth christian, in any foreign dominion that they possess, in many ages together, and the reason thereof is evident, by that I said before, neither were it policy or wisdom, nor could the causes be so often, nor ordinarily given by the nobility to a Prince that were absent from them to use such severity, so as by this it may also appear, that to be under a foreign government even in the worst kind thereof, that can be devised, which is to be as a province or piece of an other kingdom, and to come under it by very conquest itself, is not so dangerous a matter, as at the first show it may seem, and much less to be under foreign government, by other sweeter means of succession, or composition, as the present case of Ingland seemeth to import, in respect of those foreign Princes which do pretend to the succession thereof.  
And this is not only showed and declared 
States governed happily by torrayne Princes.  by the state and condition of Flanders, before their tumults, but in like manner it is seen, by the present state of Brittany, Normandy, Aquitaine, Provence, and other dukedoms and countries in France, that were wont to have their own particular Princes, and now are much more commodiously, under the crown of France. The like is seen by the states of Naples, Milan, Sicily, Sardinia & other parts and countries of Italy, which were wont to be under kings and Princes of their own, and now are under the crowns of Arragon and Castille, with infinite odds of peace, rest, security, and wealth, than they were before when they had domestical Princes, and so themselves do confess, I mean the wise & dis-passionate among them, (for of the vulgar in this case no account is to be made) and if they should deny it, yet the thing speaketh itself, and the public stories of their countries would convince them, wherein it is to be read, what Phalaris, what Dionysius, & other home-born tyrants, Sicily (for example) hath had and suffered, and what infinite cruelty they and divers others of their own governors, have exercised upon them, as also what continual turmoils there were in the city of Naples & in all that kingdom for many years together, after it fell from the government, first of the Roman Empire, and then of the Grecian, until it came to the crown of Arragon, I mean between their own domestical kings, now of the blood of Italians, now of the Normans, now of the Hungarians, & now of the french, 
Old afflictions of Naples & Milan.  (for of all these lines, their have reigned among them) and the realm was a perpetual pray to soldiers, and the very like may be said of Milan, after their fall from the Roman Empire, (under which they lived quiet & prosperously) until they came again to be under the crown of Spain, they passed infinite tribulations, first by the contention of their common people against their nobility, and then by the bloody falling out of their chief families, the one against the other, to wit the Furiani, Visconti, Marcelli, Mirabelli, Castilioni, and Sforzi (which family last of all prevailed) he I say that shall remember this, and then behold the present state with the quiet peace, safety, and riches wherein they now live, will easily confess, that they have changed for the better, though they be under foreign government, and thus much of this point.  
Their remaineth to speak a word or two 
Whether a great or little Prince be better.  about the second part of the question, before proposed and included partly in this which already hath been treated, to wit, whether it be better to be under a little or great king, which question though it may be decided in part by that which before hath been alleged, about being under a foreign Prince, yet more particularly to make the same plain, these men do say, that the reasons be many and evident to prove, that the subjection to a great & mighty monarch, is far better: first for that he is best able to defend and protect his subjects, and secondly for that he hath least need ordinarily to pill and pole them, for that a little king, be he never so mean, yet must he keep the state of a king, and his subjects must maintain the same, and if they be but few, the greater will the burden be of every one in particular, and thirdly, for that a great and potent Prince, hath more to bestow upon his subjects for reward of virtue and valour; then hath a poor Prince, and seeing that every particular subject, borne within his Prince's dominions, is capable of all the preferments which his Prince's state or kingdom do yield, if he be worthy of the same, it is a great prerogative (say these men) to be borne under a potent Prince, that hath much to give, which they declare by this example following.  
A man that is borne in the city of Genua 
An example to show the former difference.  or Geneva (for both are cities and states within themselves (let him be of what ability or worthiness soever, yet can he hope for no more preferment, than that common wealth and state can give, and if their should be many worthy men borne their at one time, than were this his condition worse, for than must he part also with other men, though their were not sufficient for himself, and the most he could aspire unto, if he were an ecclesiastical man, were the greatest benefice within that state; and on the other side, if he were a temporal man, he could not hope for much, for that the state hath it not to bestow, but an other that is borne under a great monarch, as is the king of France or Spain, in these our days, that hath so many great bishoprics (for example sake) and other spiritual livings to 〈◊〉 upon the clergy, and so many high governments and employments, both of war and peace, to give unto temporal men that can deserve the same; this man (I say) hath a great advantage of the other, in respect of preferment at this day, but much more was it in old time, to be borne under the Roman Empire, when it had the preferments of all the world to bestow, for that every subject thereof, was capable of all the said preferments, so far fourth as he could make himself worthy, and deserve the same. For better explication of which point yet, I have thought good to cite in this place, the words of a certain learned knight, that in our days hath written the lives of all the 
Pedro Mexia en vit. de Antonino Pio.  Roman Emperors, and in the life of one of them, that was an excellent governor, named Antoninus Pius the said knight hath this discourse ensuing.  
Their was in this man's government (said he) great contentment and joy on all hands, great peace and quietness, and very great justice, and truly it is a thing worthy in this place to be 
The felicity of the Roman government  considered, what was the human power and how infinite the forces of the Roman Empire at this day, and how great was the liberty quietness, security, wealth and contentment of the subjects that lived under that government, when good Princes had the menagingetherof, as was this Antoninus and his son Aurelius, that followed him, and as were Adrian, trajan and divers others. What a thing was it to see their courts frequented freely, by all the noble valiant and learned men of the world, to see the union and friendly dealing of different nations together, when all served one Prince, so as a man might have gone over the whole world, or most and best parts thereof, with all security, and without all fear, all nations and countries being their friends, neighbours, or subjects, nether was their need at that time of any passports or safe-conducts, not of so often change of coin, to travail, as now their is, nether yet were their new laws every foot, as now be found in different countries, neither was their danger of enemies, or to be taken prisoners, and captives, nor could any malefactor do a mischief in one country and fly into an other, thereby to be free from punishment, and he that was borne in the very Orcadeses or furthest part of Europe was at home though he were in Africa, or Asia, & as free denizen as if he had been borne their, merchants also might pass at that day from country to country, with their merchandise, without particular licences or fear of forfeits, and finally the temporal state of a subject was wonderful happy, at that tyme.  
Thus far discourseth that learned knight, & no doubt but that his discourse and consideration is founded in great reason, and he that will leave at this day, the many commodities, of being under a great and potent Prince, (if it lie in his own hands to choose) for this only circumstance that he is not borne in the same country with him, is a man of small judgement and capacity in these men's opinion, and measureth matters of public utility, with a false weight of fond affection,  
And thus much may be said of the first way of being under strangers and foreign government, which is that, which vulgar men do most abhor and inveigh against, to wit, to be under a foreign Prince, that liveth absent and ruleth by his governors.  
But besides this, their is an other manner of being under a foreign Prince, as when an 
The seeond way of being under a foreign Prince.  allien Prince cometh to dwell among us, and this by either of two ways, to wit, that either this Prince cometh without forces, as did king Stephen, and king Henry the second, that were frenchmen, as hath been said, and came to live and govern in Ingland, but without external forces: and as king Philip of Spain, came afterwards when by marriage of Queen Mary he became king of Ingland: and as the last king Henry the third of France went into Polonia, by the free election and invitation of that nation, and as his brother Monsieur Francis duke of Alenson, should have entered afterwards to have been king of Ingland, if the marriage pretended between her majesty and him had gone forward and taken effect, as many thought once that it should. This I say is one way, and an other is, that this Prince do bring forces with him, for his own assurance, and these either present, as the Danish kings Sweno, Canutus, Haraldus, and Hardicanutus did, and as after them the Norman Princes also used, I mean not only William Conqueror, himself, but also his two sons William Rufus, and Henry the first, who either by help of the Normans, all ready in Ingland, or by others brought in by them afterward, wrought their will, or else that this Prince so entering have foreign forces, so at hand, as he may call and use them when he will, for that they have no sea to pass, which is the case of the king of Scots, & of both these ways these men do give their sentence distinctly.  
For as concerning the former way, when a 
A fortayne Prince without forces not prejudicial.  foreign Prince entereth without any forces at all, and with intention to live among us, they hold, that their is no danger, nor yet any inconvenience can justly be feared: for that in this case he subjecteth himself, rather to the realm, and nation, than they to him, and if he live and marry in Ingland, both himself and his children, will become English in a little space. And for his own assurance he must be enforced to favour, and cherish, and make much of the English nation, and be liberal gentle, and friendly to all, for gaining their good wills and friendship. And in one very great and important point, his condition is different, and better for the English, than any English kings can be, which is, that he entereth with indifferent 
Note this utility 〈◊〉 a foreign king.  mind towards all men, hath no kindred or alliance within the land, to whom he is bound, nor enemy against whom he may be enticed to use cruelty, so as only merit or demerit of each man, must move him to favour or disfavour, which is a great foundation (say these men) of good and equal government.  
Again they say, that in respect of the state present of Ingland, and as now it standeth, and for the public good not only of the common 
The manner of foreign Prince more commodious for the present.  subjects, but also of the nobility, and especially and above others, of the English competitors and pretendors that cannot all speed, no way were so commodious, as this to avoid bloodshed, to wit, that some external Prince of this time, should be admitted upon such compositions and agreements, as both the realm should remain which her ancient liberties, and perhaps much more than now it enjoyeth (for such Princes commonly & upon such occasions of preferment, would yield to much more in those cases than a homborne Prince would) and the other pretenders at home also, should remain whith more security than they can well hope to do under any English competitor, if he come to the crown, who shallbe continually egged on by his own kindred, and by the averhon emulation and hatred, that he hath taken already by contention against the other opposite houses, to pull them down, and to make them away and so we have seen it by continual examples, for many years, though no occasion (say these men) hath ever been offied to suspect the same so much as now, if any one of the home English blood, be preferred before the rest, and this is so much as they say to this second kind of being under foreign Princes. To the third, 
A third way of being under foreign government  they confess, that it standeth subject to much danger, and inconvenience, to admit a foreign Prince, to live among us, with forces, either present or so near, as that without resistance he may call them when he listeth, and of this their needeth no more proof (say these men) than the examples before alleged of the Danes and Normans, and the misery and calamity which for many years, the English passed under them, and further more the reason hereof is evident, say these men, for first in this third kind of admitting a stranger king, we are deprived by his dwelling amongst us, of those utilities before mentioned, which Ireland, Flanders, Brittany, Naples, and other states, enjoy by living far of from their Princes, which commodities are, much more liberty, and freedom, less payments, less punishments, more employments of the nobility and others in government, and the like. And secondly, by his coming armed unto us, we cannot expect those commodities, which before I touched in the second kind of foreign government, but rather all the incommodities and inconveniences that are to be found either in domestical or foreign governments all (I say) do fall upon this third manner of admitting a stranger, as easily shallbe seen.  
For first of all the greatest incommodities that can be feared of a domestical Prince, are, pride, cruelty, partiality, pursuing of factions, and particular hatred, extraordinary advancing 
Dangers of domestical government.  of his own kindred, pressing, pinching, and over rigorous punishing of his people, without fear, for that he is ever sure of his party to stand which him within the realm, and so hath he the less respect to others, and for that all these inconveniences, and other such like, do grow for the most part, by the Prince's continual presence among his subjects, they are incident also to this other, though he be a stranger, for that he is also to be present, and to live among us, and so much the more easily he may fall into them, than a domestical Prince, for that he shall have both external council of a people that hateth us, to prick him forward in it, as also their external power to assist him in the same, which two motives every domestical Prince hath not.  
Again they say, that the worst & greatest incommodities of a foreign government, that 
Inconveniences of this go vermin.  may be feared, are, tyranny and bringing into servitude, the people over whom they govern, and filling of the realm with strangers, and dividing to them, the dignities, riches and preferments of the same, all which they say, are incident also by all probability to this third kind of foreign government, where the Prince stranger liveth present and hath forces at hand to work his will, and this is the case, say they, of the king of Scots, who only of any foreign pretender, seemeth may justly be feared, for these and other reasons alleged before, when we talked of his pretence to the crown.  
To conclude then, these men are of opinion, that of all these three manners of being under strangers, or admitting foreign governments, this third kind 〈◊〉 as it were to the king of Scots case, is to be only feared, and none else, for as for the second they say that it is not only not to be feared, or abhorred, but rather much to be desired, for that of all other sorts, it hath the least inconveniences, and most commodities, for which causes, we read 
Strange governors nours desired in some Realines.  and see, that where kings go by election, commonly they take strangers, as the Romans and Lacedæmonians did often at the beginning, and after the beginning of the Roman Monarchy, their foreign born Emperors, were the best and most famous of all the rest, as trajan and Adrian that were Spaniards, Septimius Severus borne in Africa, Constantine the great natural of Ingland, and the like, and the very worst that ever they had, as Caligula, Nero, Heliogabolus, Commodus, and such other like plagues of the weal public, were Romans, and in our days, and within a few years, we have seen that the Polonians, have chosen three kings strangers, one after an other, the first Stephen Battorius Prince of Transiluania, the second Henry of France, and last of all the Prince of Swecia, that yet liveth, and the state of Venetians by way of good polliei, have made it for a perpetual Law, that when they have war to make, and must needs choose a general Captain, and commit their forces into his hands, he must be a stranger, to wit, some Prince of Italy, that is out of their own states, hereby to avoid partiality, and to have him the more indifferent, and equal to them all, which yet so many prudent men would never agree upon, if there were not great reason of commodities therein, so as this point is concluded, that such as speak against this second kind of having a foreign Prince, speak of passion, or inconsideration, or lack of experience in matters of state and commonwealths.  
As for the first manner, of being under foreign government, as a member or province of an other bigger kingdom, and to be governed by a deputy, viceroy or strange governor, as Ireland, Flanders, Naples, and other states before mentioned be, with certain and stable conditions of liberties, and immunities, and by a form of government agreed upon on both sides, these men do confess also, that their may be arguments, reasons, and probabilities alleged on both sides, and for both parties; but yet that all things considered and the inconveniences, hurts, and dangers before rehearsed, that subjects do suffer also oftentimes, at the hands of their own natural Princes, these men are of opinion, for the causes already declared, that the profits are more and far greater, than the damages or dangers of this kind of foreign government are, and so they do answer, to all the reasons and arguments alleged in the beginning of this chapter, against 〈◊〉 government, that either they are to be understood and verified only of the third kind of foreign government before declared, (which these men 
The answer to 〈◊〉 against foreign government  do confess to be dangerous) or else they are founded for the most part, in the error and prejudice only of the vulgar sort of men, who being once stirred up, by the name of stranger, do consider no further what reason or not reason, there is in the matter, and this say these men, aught to move wisemen little, for as the common people did rise in tumult against the french (for example) in Sicilia, and against the English in France, and against the Danes in Ingland, so upon other occasions, would they do also against their own countrymen, and often times have so done, both in Ingland & other where, when they have been offended or when seditious heads have offered themselves to lead them to like tumults, so that of this they say little argument can be made.  
The like in effect they do answer, to the examples 
Answer to the Grecian Philosophers and orators.  before alleged of the Grecian Philosophers and orators, that were so earnest against strangers. And first to Aristotle, they say, that in his politics he never handled expressly this our question, and consequently weighed not the reasons on both sides, and so left it neither decided, nor impugned, and he that was master to Alexander, that had so many foreign countries under him, could not well condemn the same: and as for Demosthenes no marvel 
Demosthenes.  though he were so earnest against king Philip of Macedonia his entry upon the cities of Greece, both for that he was well feed on the one side, by the king of Asia (as all authors do affirm) to the end he should set Athens and other Grecian cities against king Philip, as also for that his own common wealth of Athens was governed by popular government wherein himself held still the greatest sway by force of his tongue with the people, and if any king or Monarch of what nation soever, should have come to command over them, (as Phillipps son king Alexander the great did soon after) Demosthenes should have had less authority, as he had, for that presently he was banished, and so continued all the time that Alexander lived. But if we do consider how this state of the Athenians passed afterward under the great monarchy of Alexander and other his followers, in respect that it did before when it lived in liberty, and under their own government only, he shall find their state much more quiet, prosperous, and happy, under the commandment of a stranger, then under their own, by whom they were continually tossed and turmoiled with brawls, emulations, and seditions, and oftentimes tyrannized, by their own people as the bloody contentions 
The trooblesome state of the Grecian cities.  of their Captains Aristides, Themistocles, Alcibiades, Pericles, Nicias, and others do declare, and as it is evident among other things by their wicked la of Ostracismus 
Arist. l. 2. polit. c 1. 〈◊〉 2.  which was to banish for ten years, whosoever were eminent or of more wisdom, wealth, valour, learning or authority among them then the rest, albeit he had committed no crime or fault at al. And finally their having of thirty most horrible and bloody tyrants at one time in their city of Athens, in steed of one governor, doth evidently declare the same (say these men) and do make manifest how vain and foolish an imagination it was, that vexed them how to avoid the government of strangers, seeing that no straying governor in the world, would ever have used them as they used themselves, or so afflict them, as they afflicted themselves.  
To the objection out of deuteronomy whet 
Answer to the objection out of deuteronomy  God appointed the jews to choose a king only of their own nation, these men do answer, that this was at that time, when no nation besides the jews had true religion among them, 
Deut. 15.  which point of religion, the Civilian hath well declared before, in his last discourse, to be the chiefest and highest thing that is to be respected, in the admission of any magistrate, for that it concerneth the true and highest end of a common wealth, and of all human society, and for that the Gentiles had not this ornament of true religion, but were all destitute generally thereof, the jews were forbidden 〈◊〉 only to choose a king of the Gentiles, 〈◊〉 might pervert and corrupt them, but also 〈◊〉 company converse or eat and drink with them, and this was then: but yet afterwards when Christ himself came into the world, and opened his church both to jew and gentile, he took away this restraint, so as now all Christian nations, are alike, for so much as appertaineth unto government. And consequently to a good and wise Christian man, void of passion and fond affection, it little importeth (as often before hath been said) of what country, nation, or lineage his governor be, so he govern well, and have the parts before required of piety, religion, justice, manhood, and other the like requisite to his dignity degree and charge, by which parts and virtues only, his subjects are to receive benefits, and not by his country, generation, lineage or kindred, and this is so much as I have to say at this rhyme about this affair.   

OF CERTAIN OTHER SECONDARY AND COLLATERAL LINES AND how extreme doubt-ful all these pretences be, and which of all these pretendors are most like to prevail in the end, & to get the crown of Ingland.  
CAP. X.  
AFter the lawyer had ended his discourse, about foreign government, he seemed to be somewhat wearied, and said he would pass no further in this affair, for that he had nothing else to say but only to note unto them that besides these principal titlers, of the five houses mentioned, of Scotland, Suffolk, Clarence, Brittany and Portugal, their were other secondary houses and lines also issued out of the houses of Lancaster and York, as also of Gloucester Buckingam, and some other, as may 
Secondary Lines.  appear by the genealogies set down before in the 2. and 3. chapters, of which lines (said he) their may be perhaps consideration had also by the common wealth when time shall come of choice or admission, the matter standing so as the Civilian hath largely declared & showed before, which is, that upon such just occasions, as these are, the common wealth may consult what is best to be done, for her good and preservation, in admitting this or that pretender, seeing that this is the end why all government was ordained, to benefit the public.  
And for so much as their is such variety of persons pretendents, or that may pretend, in the five houses already named, as before hath been declared, (which persons at least do make some dozen more or less) and that besides these, their want not others also of secondary houses, as is evident as well by the former discourse, as also by the arbour that of these matters is to be seen, the lawyer turned to affirm again, that the event must needs be exceeding doubtful, who shall in the end prevail, for that besides the multitude before named of pretenders, he avouched very seriously, that after all this his speech, he could not well resolve with him 
Ambiguite of prevailing.  self, which of all these titles in true right of succession, was the best, and much less, which of the tytlers was likest to prevail, and this I presume the lawyer told them of himself, for that he did easily foresee and imagine, that after all these arguments, on every side alleged, he should be requested by the company (as vehemently he was) to put down his opinion what he thought and judged of all the whole matter hitherto discussed, and of every man's pretence in particular.  
Which in no case he could be brought to do for a long time, but refused the same utterly and craved pardon, and yielded many reasons why it was not convenient, & might be odious. But all would not serve to acquit the company, which with all earnest importunity urged him to satisfy their request, & so upon large, and earnest entreaty, he was content in the end to yield to this only, that he would lay together by way of discourse, the probabilities of every side, and lastly set down in two or three propositions, or rather conjectures, his private guess which of them in his judgement was likest to prevail.  
First then he began to say, that the probalities 
Two grounds of probability of speeding.  of prevailing or not prevailing of every one of these pretendors in the next succession, of the crown of Ingland these pretendors, may be considered and measured either in respect of the party of religion, that was like in Ingland to favour him, and his pretence, or else in respect of his own particular family, friends, and allies, both at home and abroad. And for that the party of religion is like to weigh most, and to bear the greatest sway, and most potent suffrage and voice, in this action, and that with reason, according to that the Civilian hath proved at large in the last of his discourses: therefore shall I also (quoth the lawyer) first of all treat of this point of religion in this my last speech.  
It is well known (said he) that in the realm 
Three religions in Ingland.  of Ingland at this day, there are three different and opposite bodies of religion, that are of most bulk, and that do carry most sway, and power, which three bodies, are known commonly in Ingland by the names of Protestants, Puritans, and Papists, though the later two, do not acknowledge these names, and for the same cause would not I use them neither, if it were not only for clearness and brevities sake, for that as often I have protested, my meaning is not to give offence to any side or party.  
These three bodies then (quoth he) do comprehend in effect all the force of Ingland, and do make so general a division and separation, throughout the whole land, in the hearts & minds of their friends, favourers, & followers, as if I be not deceived, no one thing is like so much to be respected, in each pretender, for his advancement or depression, as his religion or inclination therein, by them that must assist him at that day, and are of different religions themselves. And more I am of opinion (said he) that albeit in other changes heretofore in Ingland, as in the entrance of king Edward and Queen 
The great importance of religion in this actions.  Mary, and of this Queen's Majesty that now is, divers men of different religions, did for other respects, concur and join together for these Prince's advancements, (notwithstanding that afterwards many of them repent the same) which is to be seen, in that for king Edward all the realm without exception did concur, and for Queen Mary, it is known, that divers protestants did by name, & among other points it is also known that Sir Nicholas Throgmorton a fervent protestant in those days, being of king Edward's privy chamber, did not only, advise her of the sickness and decay of king Edward from day to day, but also was the first that sent an express messenger to advise her of her brother's death, and what the two dukes of Northumberland and Suffolk, did contrive against her, and that with such celerity, that king Edward dying but on thursday night, the tenth of juli the Lady Mary was most certainly, advised thereof, by saturday morning next, and that very early, in kenninghal castle of Norfolk, 80. miles of, and divers other protestants did assist her also, in that her entry, as in like manner all those of the Roman that day (said he) and especially if he can conceal for a time, the disease of her Majesty, until he may be able to put his affairs in order, but this is holden to be either impossible or very hard, for the different judgements and affections which are not thought to be wanting in the court council, and Prince's chamber itself, whereof we saw the effect, (as before I told you) at the death of king Edward, which was as much endeavoured to be kept sectet, as ever any was, and as much it imported the concealers, and yet with in not many hours after, had the Lady Mary, most certain notice thereof, by those that were opposite to her in religion, as I have showed before, so ardent are men's minds in such occasions, & so capable of new impressions designments & desires, are all kind of subjects upon such great changes.  
A chief member of the protestant body (as 
The Clergy.  you know) for wealth and force, is the clergy of Ingland, especially the bishops and other men in Ecclesiastical dignity, which are like to be a great back to this party, at that day, though some men think that it be not very certain, which part of the nobility and council will stick unto them, for that many in heart are presupposed to favour the Puritan. 
The Council and nobilitic.  And for the privy council in particular, though during the Prince's life, their authority be supreme, yet is it not so afterward, nor have they any public authority at all, the Prince having once expired, but only as noblemen or gentlemen according to each man's state and calling in several, and for the next successor, seeing none is known nor sworn in the life of this Prince, (nor were it her safety that any should be) clear it is, that after her majesties disease, every man is free until a new be established, by the common wealth, which establishment doth not depend upon the appointment or will of any few, or upon any man's proclaiming of himself, (for divers are like to proclaim themselves) but upon a general consent of the whole body of the realm, which how it will be brought to pass, God only knoweth, & to him we must commend it.  
I do no know, quoth he, of any certain person pretendent, to whom this protestant 
Persons designed or favoured by the protestant party.  party is particularly devoted, at this day, more than to the rest, though the house of Hartford was wont to be much favoured by them, but of latter years little speech hath been thereof, but rather of Arbella, whom the Lord Treasoreris said especially to favour at this present, though for himself it be held somewhat doubtful whether he be more fast to the protestant, or to the puritan, but if the protestant party, should be divided, than their forces willbe the less. The authority of her majesty is that which at this present over beareth all, when that shall fail, no man knoweth what the event will be, for that now men's hearts are hardly discerned.  
There foreign friends and allies, are of good number, especially if the king of France proceed 
Foraayne friends of the protestants.  well in his affairs, and do not in deed change his religion as he pretendeth that he will, but yet if the puritan do stand against them, he is like to pull much from them, both in France and Holland, and as for Scotland, it must needs be against them both, and this in respect of his own pretence, except the same be favoured by them, I mean by these two factions in Ingland which is hardly thought that any of them both will do, for the reasons before alleged, though some more hope may be that way, of the puritan, then of the protestant, by reason of the said kings nearness to them in religion.  
The puritan is more generally favoured 
Of the party Putitan.  throughout the realm with all those which are not of the Roman religion, then is the protestant, upon a certain general persuasion, that his profession is the more perfect, especially in great towns where preachers have made more impression in the artificers, and burgesses, then in the country people. And among the protestants, themselves, all those that are less interessed in Ecclesiastical livings or other preferments, depending of the state, are more affected commonly to the puritans, or easily are to be induced to pass that way for the same reason. The person most favoured by the puritans hitherto in common voice and opinion of men, hath been the earl of Huntingdon, some speech of late of some diminution therein, and that the Lord Beacham since his 
Persons affected by the Puritans.  marriage, hath entered more in affection with them. The king of Scots (no doubt) if he were not a stranger, and had not the difficulties before mentioned, were for his religion also very plausible. I do not hear that the earl of Derby or his mother, is much forward with these or with the protestant, though of the later sort, some are snpposed to wish them well.  
The friends & allies of the puritan abroad, are the same, that are of the Protestant, to 
External friends.  wit, those of Holland and Zealand, and such towns of France as follow the new king, and jointly have changed their religion, which are not many, for that his greatest forces are yet those of the Roman Religion, but yet if the said king prevail and persever in his religion (which of late as I have said is called in doubt by his often protestations to the contrary and open going to mass) then will he be able to give good assistance, though both these countries (I mean both Holland and France) are liker in some men's opinions, to assist the puritan than the protestant, if the matter come in difference between them, for that in truth they are more conform to the puritan religion. And as for the Germane cities, that keep yet and follow the particular form of Luther 
〈◊〉  in religion, they are like to do little for either party, both for their difference from both parties in religion, and for that they are poor, for the most part, and not active nor provided to give succour abroad, except they be drawn thereunto by force of money.  
The Puritan part at home in Ingland, is 
The Puritan at home.  thought to be most vigorous of any other, that is to say, most ardent, quick, bold resolute, and to have a great part of the best Captains and soldiers on their side, which is a point of no small moment. Greatly will import among other points which way inclineth the city of London, with the tower, whereof the puritan (as is said) wanteth not his probability, as neither doth he of some good part (if not more) of the navy, to be at his devotion, which point perhaps at that day, will be of as great consequence as any thing else, & so much of him.  
The third body of religion, which are those of the Roman, who call themselves Catholics, 
Those of the Roman Religion.  is the least in show, at this present, by reason of the laws and tides of the time, that run against them, but yet are they of no small consideration in this affair, to him that weigheth things indifferently, and this in respect as well of their party at home, as of their friends abroad, for at home, they being of two sorts as the world knoweth, the one more open that discover themselves, which are the recusants, and the other more close and privy, that accommodate themselves to all external proceed of the time, and state, so as they cannot be known, or at least wise not much touched: we may imagine, that their number is not small, throughout the realm, and this partly for the reason I mentioned before, in that the most part of the country people, that live out of cities, and great towns (in which the greatest part of English forces are wont to consist) are much affected ordinarily to their religion, by reason that preachers of the contrary religion are not so frequent with them, as in towns, 
The Roman party great & why.  and partly also for that with these kind of men, as with them that are most afflicted and held down, at this time, by the present state, many other do join (as the manner is) & omnes qui amaro animo sunt, cum illis se coniungunt, as the 
1. Reg. 234  scripture said of those, that followed David's retinue, pursued by Saul and his forces, which is to say, that all that be offended grieved, or any way discontented with the present time, be they of what religion soever, do easily join with these men, according to the old saying Solatium est miseris socios habere miseriae, besides that, their is ever lightly a certain natural compassion, that followeth in men, towards those that are thought to suffer, or be pursued, and this oftentimes in the very enemy himself, and then of compassion springeth as you know affection, and of affection, desire to help, as contrary wise, do rise commonly the contrary effects, to wit, emulation, envy and indignation, against the prosperity of him, that pursueth, and is in prosperity.  
And for that in so great and populous a realm and large a government, as this of her majesty hath been, there cannot want to be many of these kind of discontented men, asalso for that naturally many are desirous of changes, it cannot be supposed, but that the number of this sort is great, which maketh this party, far the bigger.  
Moreover it is noted, that the much dealing with these men, or rather against them, & this 
Effects of pressing an religion.  especially in matters of their religion, for these later years passed, hath much stirred them up, (as also the like is to be noted in the puritan) and made them far more eager in defence of their cause, according to the saying, nitimur in vetitum semper, and as a little brook or river though it be but shallow and tun never so quiet of itself, yet if many bars and stops be made therein, it swelleth and riseth to a greater force, even so it seemeth that it hath happened here, where also the sight & remembrance of so many of their Seminary priests, put to death for their religion (as they account it) hath wrought great impression in their hearts, as also the notice they have received, of so many colleges and English Seminaries remaining yet, and set up of new, both in Flanders, France, Italy and Spain, for making of other priests in place of the executed, doth greatly animate them & holdeth them in hope of continuing still their cause, and this at home.  
As for abroad, it is easy to consider what 
Friends & allies abroad.  their party and confidence is, or may be, not only by the English that live in exile, and have their friends and kindred at home, but also principally by the affection of foreign Princes & states, to favour their religion, whose ports, towns, and provinces lie near upon Ingland round about, & for such a time and purpose, could not want commodity to give succour, which being weighed together with the known inclination, that way, of Ireland, and the late declaration made by so many of the Scotish nobility and gentlemen also, to favour that cause, all these points I say put together, must needs persuade us, that this body is also great, and strong, and like to bear no small sway in the deciding of this controversy for the crown, when time shall offer itself for the same. And so much the more, for that it is not yet known, that these are determined upon any one person whom they will follow, in that action, nor as it seemeth are they much inclined to any one of the pretenders in particular (wherein it is thought that the other two parties either are, or may be divided among themselves, and each part also within itself, for that so different persons of those religions do stand for it) but rather it is thought, that these other of the Roman religion do remain very indifferent, to follow any one that shallbe set up for their religion, and is likest to restore and maintain the same, be he stranger or domestical, which determination and union in general among themselves, if they hold it still and the earl of Derby have the difference 
The Lords Beacham & the earl of Derby.  of titles that before hath been seen, and each one his particular reasons why he ought to be preferred before the other, and for their other abilities and possibilities, they are also different, but yet in one thing both Lords seem to be like, that being both of the blood royal, they are thought to have abased themselves much by their marriages with the two knights daughters S. Richard Rogers, and S. johin Spenfer, though otherwise both of them very worship full, but not their matches in respect of their kindred with the crown, yet doth the alliance of S. john Spenser seem to bring many more friends with it, then that of S. Richard Rogers, by reason of the other daughters of S. john, well married also, to persons of importance, as namely the one to S. Georg Catey governor of the he of Wight, who bringeth in also the Lord Hunsdon his father Captain of Barwick, two of the most important pieces that Ingland hath.  
And for that the said Lord Hunsdon, and 
Alliance of the earl of Derby.  the Lady knowles diseased, were brother and sister, and both of them children to the Lady Mary Bullen, elder sister to Queen Anne, here of it cometh, that this alliance with S. George Carey, may draw after it also the said house of knowles, who are many and of much importance, as also it may do the husbands of the other daughters of S. john Spencer, with their and erents and followers, which are nether, few nor feeble, all which wanteth in the marriage of the Lord Beacham.  
another difference also in the ability of 
Alliance of the Seymers.  these two Lords is, that the house of Seymers in state and title of nobility, is much younger than the house of Stanleys', for that Edward Seymer late earl of Hartford, and after duke of Somerset, was the first beginner thereof, who being cut of together with his brother the Admiral, so soon as they were, could not so settle the said house, especially in the alliance with the residue of the nobility, as otherwise they would and might have done. But now as it remaineth, I do not remember any alliance of that house, of any great moment, except it be the children of S. Henry Seimer of Hamshire, and of S. Edward Seymer of Bery Pomery in Devonshite, if he have any, and of S. john Smith of Essex, whose mother was sister to the late duke of Somerset, or finally the alliance that the late marriage of the earl of Hartford, with the Lady Francis Haward, may bring with it, which cannot be much, for so great a purpose as we talk of.  
But the earl of Derby on the other side, is very strongly & honourably allied, both by father 
Alliance of the Stanleys'  and mother, for by his father not to speak of the Stanleys', (which are many and of good power, and one of them matched in the house of Northumberland) his said father the old earl had three sisters, all well married, and all have left children, and heirs of the houses wherein they were married, for the elder was married first to the Lord Sturton, and after to S. john Arundel, and of both houses hath left heirs male. The second sister was married to the Lord Morley, by whom she hath left the Lord that now is, who in like manner hath mached with the heir of the Lord Montegle who is likewise a Stanley. And finally the third sister was married to S. Nicholas Poynes of Glocestershire, and by him had a son and heir that yet liveth. And this by his father's side, but no less alliance hath this earl also by the side of his mother, who being 
Alliance of the old countess of Derby.  daughter of George Cliford earl of Cumberland, by Lady Eleanor niece of king Henry the seventh, the said Lord George, had afterward by a second wife, that was daughter of the Lord Dacres of the North, both the earl of Cumberland that now is, and the Lady wharton, who hereby are brother and sister of the half blood, to the said Countess of Derby, and the Dacres are their Uncles.  
Besides all this, the states and posfessions of the two foresaid Lords, are far different, for 
The states of the Lord Beacham and the earl of Derby.  the purpose pretended, for that the state of the earl of Hartford is far inferior, both for greatness, situation, wealth multitude of subjects, & the like: for of that of the Stanleys', doth depend the most part of the shires of Lancaster and Chester, and a good part of the North of Wales, (at least wise by way of observance and affection) as also the isle of man, is their own, and Ireland and Scotland is not far of, where friendship perhaps in such a case might be offered, and finally in this point of ability great odds is their seen between these Lords.  
As for their religion, I cannot determine 
Religion of these Lords.  what difference their is, or may be between them. The Lord Beacham by education is presumed to be a protestant, albeit some hold that his father, and father in law be more inclined towards the Puritans. The earl of darby's religion, is held to be more doubtful, so as some do think him to be of all three religions, and others of none, and these again are divided in judgements, about the event hereof, for that some do imagine that this opinion of him, may do him good, for that all sides hereby may (perhaps) conceive hope of him, but others do persuade themselves that it will do him hurt, for that no side in deed will esteem or trust him, so as all these matters with their events, and consequences do remain uncertain.  
But now will I pass to speak of the house 
The earl of Huntingdon.  of Clarence, the chief persons, whereof, and most eminent at this day, are the earl of Huntingdon, and his brethren the Hastings, for that the Pools and barrington's are of far meaner condition and authority, albeit the other also, I mean the house of Hastings, doth not seem to be of any great alliance, for that albeit the old earl of Huntingdon, this earls father, had two brethren, the one S. Thomas Hastings, that married one of the Lord Henry Pools daughters named Lord montague, that was put to death, which daughter was sister to this earls mother, and the other named S. Edward Hastings was made Lord of Lowghborow, by Queen Mary, to whom he was first master of the horse, and afterward Lord Chamberland, neither of them having left issue: and this is all I remember by his father's side, except it be his own brethren as hath been said of which S. George Hastings is the chiefest.  
By his mother's side, he hath only the Pools, whose power as it is not great, so what it 
Alliance of the earl of Huntingdon.  is, is rather like to be against him then with him, partly for their difference from him in religion, and partly for preferment of their own title, upon the reasons before alleged.  
By his own marriage with the daughter of the late duke of Northumberland, and sister to the late earls of Leicester and Warwick, he was like to have drawn a very great & strong alliance if the said two earls had lived, and especially, S. Philip Sidney, who was borne of the other sister of the present Countess of Huntingdon, and his own sister was married to the earl of Penbroke that now is, & himself to the daughter of S. Francis Walsingham chief secretary of the state, by all which means and by all the affection and power of the party puritan, and much of the protestant, this earl was thought to be in very great forwardness. But now these great pillars being failed, and no issue yet remaining by the said Countess, his wife, no man can assure himself what the success will be, especially seeing that of the three bodies of different religions, before described, it is thought that this earl hath incurred deeply the hatred of the one, and perhaps some jealousy and suspicion of the other, but yet others do say (and no doubt but that it is a matter of singular importance if it be so) that 
The power of London.  he is like to have the whole power of London for him, which city did prevail so much in advancing the title of York, in king Edward the fourth his time, as it made him king twice, to wit once at the beginning, when he first apprehended and put down king Henry the sixth, and the second time, when he being driven out of the kingdom by his brother the 
Polydor. 24. Hollingshod in vita Henrici. 6.  duke of Clarence, and Richard earl of Warwick, he returned from Flanders upon hope of the favour of the Londoners, and was in deed received, favoured and set up again by them especially, and by the helps of kent and other places adjoining and depending of London, and so it may be that the favourers of this earl do hope the like success to him in time by this potent city.  
For the houses of Britanny and Portugal, I 
The houses of Britain and Portugal.  shall join them both together, for that they are strangers, and the persons thereof so nigh linked in kindred affinity & friendship, as both their tittles forces and favours, may easily be joined together, and imparted the one with the other, as to themselves shall best appear convenient.  
The lady Infanta of Spain pretendent of 
Infanta of Spain  the house of Brittany, is eldest daughter of king Philip as all the world knoweth, and dearly beloved of him, and that worthily as all men report, that come from thence, for that she is a princess of rare parts both for beauty, wisdom and piety. The two young Princes of 
Duke of Parma.  Parma I mean both the duke and his brother the Cardinal, are imps in like manner of great expectation, and divers ways near of kynn to the said king, for that by their father's side they are his nephews that is the children of his sister, and by their mother's side almost as near, for that they are the nephews of his uncle Prince Edward Infant of Portugal.  
In like nearness of blood are the Duchess 
The duke of Bragansa.  of Bragansa and her children, unto the said king, which children are many as hath been showed, and all of that rare virtue and valour and of that singular affection unto the English nation, as it is wonderful to hear what men writ from those parts, and what others do report that have travailed Portugal and seen those Princes and tasted of their magnificent liberality, so as I have hard divers rejoice that are affected that way, to understand that their do remain such noble ofsping yet in foreign countries of the true and ancient blood royal of Ingland.  
What the powers and possibilities of all these 
Power of foreign pretenders.  Princes of the house of Portugal be, or may be hereafter for pursuing their right, shall not need to be declared in this place, for that all the world doth know and see the same, yet all seemeth to depend of the head & root which is the king of Spain himself, and the young Prince his son, whose states and forces how and where they lie, what alliance, friends, subjects or followers they have or may have, it is easy to consider, but what part or affection of men they have or may have hereafter in Ingland itself, when time shall come, for the determining of this matter, no man can tell at this present, and what plots agreements, compartitions, or other conclusions may be made at that day, time only must teach us, so as now I know not well what to say further in this affair, but only commend it to God's high providence, and therefore I pray you (quoth the Lawyer) let me end with this only that already I have said, and pardon me of my former promiss to put my opinion or guess, about future matters, and what may be the success of these affairs, for besides that I am, no prophet or son of prophet, to know things to come, I do see that the very circumstances of conjecture (which are the only foundation of all prophesy which in this case can be made) are so many and variable; as it is hard to take hold of any of them.  
Thus he said, and fain would have left of here, but that the whole company opposed themselves with great vehemency, against it, and said, that he must needs perform his promiss, made at the beginning of this speech, to give his censure & verdict in the end, what he thought would be the success of all these matters, whereunto he answered, that seeing no nay would serve, he would briefly quit himself by these few words following.  
First of all (said he) my opinion is, that 
The 1. Conjecture that their will be war & why.  this affair cannot possibly be ended by any possibility moral, without some war, at least wise, for some time at the beginning, whereof my reasons be these that do ensue.  

1.  This matter cannot be disputed and determined during the life of the Queen, that now is, without evident danger of her person, for the reasons that all men do know importing such perils as are wont to follow like cases, of declaring heirs apparent, especially her majesty the present possessor growing now to be old & without hope of issue.  

2.  This declaration and determination of the heir apparent to the crown if it should be made now, would move infinite humours, and affections within the realm, and it were to stir coals and to cast fyerbrands over all the kingdom, and further perhaps also, which now lie raked up and hidden in the embers.  

3.  This determination though it should be made now by parliament, or authority of the present Prince, would not end or take away the root of the controversy, for aloeit some that should be passed over or put back in their pretences, would hold their peace perhaps for the time present, yet afterward would they both speak and spurn when occasion is offered.  

4.  This declaration now if it were made, would be hurtful and dangerous for him that should be declared, for on the one side, it would put the Prince regnant in great 〈◊〉 and sufpiction of him, and on the other side, would join and arm all the other pretenders and their favourers against him, and so we read, that of two or three only, that in all our histories are recounted to have been declared heirs apparent to the crown (they being no kings children) none of them, ever came to reign: as namely duke Arthur of Britain, Roger Mortimer earl of March, and john de la Poole earl of Lincoln, and Henry marquis of Exeter as before hath been declared. 
Sup. c. 4.   

5.  Again the multitude of pretenders being such as it is, & their pretensions so ambiguous, as hath been declared, it is to be presupposed, that none or few of them will presently at the beginning cast away their hope & forego their tittles, but will prove at least wise what friends will stand unto them, and how matters are like to go for or against them, especially seeing they may do it without danger, no law being against them, and their rights and pretences so manifest, that no man can say they do it of ambition only, or malice, treason, or conspiracy against others, and for this assay or first attempt, arms are necessary.  
Moreover if any man in process of time, would forego or give over his title (as it is to 
6. A consideration to be marked.  be imagined that divers will at length, and many must, for that one only can speed) yet to the end he be not suddenly oppressed, or laid hands on at the beginning by his adversary part, or made away as in such cases is wont to succeed, it is very likely that each pretender for his own safety and defence, will arm himself and his friends at the beginning, for that better conditions willbe made with armour in hands, then when a man is naked or in the power of his adversary, and no doubt, but the more pretenders shall stand together armed, at the beginning the easier and the surer peace willbe made with him that shall prevail, for that they being many with whom he hath to compound, he will respect them the more, & yield to more reasonable and honourable conditions, then if their were but one, & he weak that should resist, for that a fault or displeasure is more easily pardoned to a multitude, & to a potent adversary, then to one or two alone that are of less account. And on the other side, the peril of these other pretenders, that should not prevail, being common to them all, would knit them better together for their own defence, in living under the person that should prevail and reign, and he would bear more regard unto them as hath been said: and this both for that they should be stronger by this union to defend themselves, and he that reigneth should have less cause to suspect & fear them, to work treason against him, for that they are many, and consequently not so easy to agree betwcene themselves, who should be preferred, if the other were pulled down, which to the person regnant, would be also a ground of much security.  
These are my reasons and conjectures why it is like that arms willbe taken at the beginning in Ingland, before this controversy can be decided.  
My second proposition and conjecture is, 
The second conjecture no main battle probable.  that this matter is not like to come easily to any great or main battle, but rather to be ended at length, by some composition, and general agreement, & my reasons for this be these.  
First, for that the pretenders be many, and their powers and friends lying in divers and different parts of the realm, and if their were but two, then were it more probable, that they would soon come to a battle, but being many each one will fear the other, and seek to sortifie himself where his own strength lieth and especially towards the ports and sea side, for receiving of succours, as easily may be done, by reason of the multitude of competitors as hath been said, which will cause that at home the one will not much urge or press the other, at the beginning, but every part attend rather to strengthen itself for the tyme.  

2.  A second reason of this is, for that the foreign Princes and states round about us, are like to be much divided in this matter, some as pretendents for themselves or their kindred & friends, and others as favourers of this or that party, for religion, so as their will not want presently offers of helps and succours from abroad, which succours albeit they should be but mean or small at the beginning, yet will they be of much importance, when the forces at home be divided, and when their shallbe different ports harbours, and holds, ready within the land, to receive and harbour them, so as I take it to be most likely, that this affuyre will grow somewhat long and so be ended at length by some composition only, and that either by parliament and general consent of all parts pretendentes, and of all three bodies of religion meeting together by their deputes and treat and conclude some form of agreement as we see it practised now in France, or else by some other means of commissaries, commissioners, legates, deputies, or the like, to to make the conclusion with every party a sunder.  
My third & last conjecture is (& for a mere 
The third conjecture who is likest to prevail.  conjecture only, I would have you to hold it) that seeing there be two sorts of pretenders, which stand for this preferment, the one strangers, the other English, my opinion is, that of any one foreign Prince that pretendeth, the Infanta of Spain is likest to bear it away, or some other by her title, laid upon him by her father the kings good will, and on the other side, of any domestical competitors, the second son of the earl of Hartford, or of the issue of the countess of Derby, carrieth much show to be preferred.  
My reasons for the former part, about the 
For the Infanta of Spain  Lady Infanta, are, that she is a woman, and may easily join (if her father will) the titles of Britain and Portugal together, she is also unmarried, and by her marriage may make some other composition, either at home or abroad, that may facillitate the matter, she is a great Princess and fit for some great state, and other Princes perhaps of Christendom would more willingly yield and concur to such a composition, of matters by this Lady, and by casting all foreign titles of Brittany and Portugal upon her, then that the king of Spain should pretend for himself, & there by increase his monarchy, which other Princes his neighbours, in reason of state, would not so well allow to bear.  
In Ingland also itself if any party or person be affected that way, he would think hereby to have the more reason, and if any be against strangers, some such moderation as this would take away much of this aversion, as also of arguments against it: for that hereby it seemeth that no subjection could be feared to any foreign realm, but rather divers utilities to the realm of Inglande, as these men pretend by the reasons before alleged in the precedent chapter.  
I said also, that this Lady Infanta, or some other by her title and her father's good will, was likest of all strangers to bear it away, for that if she should either die or be married in any other country, or otherwise to be disposed of, as her pretence to Ingland should be disenabled before this affair came to be tried, then may her said father and she if they list, cast their foresaid interests and titles (as divers men think they would) upon some other Prince of their own house and blood, as for example, either upon some of the families of Parma or Bragansa before mentioned, or of the house of Austria, seeing their wanteth not many able & worthy Princes of that house, for whom there would be the same reasons and considerations, to persuade their admission by the English, that have been alleged before for the Infanta, & the same 〈◊〉 to the realm, and motives to Inglishmen, if such a matter should come in cousultation, and the same friends and forćes would not want abroad to assist them.  
For the second part of my conjecture, touching 
For the earl of Hartford's second son.  the earl of Hartford's second son, or one of the countess of darby's children, my reasons be, first for that this second son, seemeth to be cleared in our former discourse of that 
1. Sup. c. 〈◊〉.  bastardy that most importeth, and nearest of all other lieth upon those children, which is for lack of due proof of their parent's marriage, for which defect they do stand declared for illegitimate by public sentence of the archbishop of Canterbury, as before hath been declared, from which sentence this second son is made free, by the arguments before alleged, and therein preferred before his elder brother.  

2.  And secondly for that this younger son is unmarried, for any thing that I do know to the contrary, which may be a point of no small moment in such an occasion, as hath been noted divers times before, for joining or fortifying of tittles by marriage, and for making of compositions of peace and union with the opposite parties. 
3.  And finally for that this second son, being young, his religion is not yet much talked of, and consequently every party may have hope to draw him to their side, especially he being also free as I have said to follow what he shall think best, or most expedient for his own advancement, without knot or obligation to follow other men's affections or judgements in that point, as he would be presumed to be if he were married, or much obliged to any other family.  
I do name also in this second point, the children 
For the children of the Countess of Derby 1.  of the countess of Derby first, for that in truth the probabilities of this house be very great, both in respect of their descent, which in effect is holden as it were cleeare from bastardy as before hath been showed, and then again for their nearness in degree, which by the countess yer living is nearer to king Henry the seventh by one degree, than any other competitor whatsoever. Secondly I do name this countess children & not herself, for that I see most men that favour this house, very willing & desirous that some of the said countess children should rather be preferred than she herself, and this for that she is a woman, & it seemeth to them much to have three women reign one after the other, as before hath been noted, so as they would have her title to be cast rather upon one of her children, even as upon like occasion it hath been showed before, that the Spaniards caused the Lady Berenguela niece to king Henry the 
Garibay l. a5. c. 36.  second, to tesigne her title to her son, when she should have succeeded by nearness of inheritance, & as a little before that, the state of Ingland did after king Stephen, unto king Henry 
Polydor in rit Steph.  the first his daughter Maude the Empress, whom they caused to pass over her title to her son Henry the second, though her own right should have gone before him by nearness of succession, as also should have done by orderly course of succession, the right of Margaret, countess of Richmond, before her son king Henry the seventh, as before hath been proved, but yet we see that her son was preferred, & the like would these men have to be observed in the countess of Derby.  

3.  Lastly I do name, the children of this countess in general, and not the earl of Derby particularly above the other, though he be the eldest, for two respects, first, for that his younger brother is unmarried, which is a circumstance whereof divers times occasion hath been offered to speak before, and therefore I need to add no further therein, & secondly for that divers men remain not so fully satisfied & contented with the course of that Lord hitherto, and do think that they should do much better with his brother if so be he shall be thought more fit, yet are these things uncertain, as we see, but not withstanding such is the nature and fashion of man, to hope ever great matters of youths, especially Princes, God send all just desires to take place, and with this I will end, and pass, no further, hoping that I have performed the effect of my promiss made unto you at the beginning.  
FINIS.    


A ●●rfect and exact Arbour and genealogy of all the Kings Queens and Prin●●● of the blood royal of England, from the t●me of William the conqueror unto our t●●e, whereby are to be seen, the grounds o●● the pretenders to the same crown, at thi●●aye, according to the book of M. R. D●●man set forth of the said pretenders and their several claims, this present year. 1594.  
The ancient houses of the blood royal of England are the house of Lancaster that beareth the red rose, and the house of York that beareth the white, and then the house of Brittany and France joined in one. And out of these are made five particular houses, which are, the house of Scotland, of Suffolk, of Clarence, of Brittany & of Portugal, and in these are twelve different persons that by way of succission do pretend each one of them to be next after her Majesty that now is, as by the book appeareth.