A PLAIN AND easy LAYING open of the meaning and understanding of the Rules of Construction in the English ACCIDENCE, appointed by authority to be taught in all Schools of her majesties dominions, for the great use and benefit of young beginners: by JOHN STOCKWOOD sometime Schoolmaster of Tunbridge.  
Imprinted at London, by the Assigns of Francis Flower. 1590.   

THE BOOK TO THE young Punies and Petits of the Grammar School.  
WHen painful Master hath no time,  
In plainest sort your rules to teach,  
Or clubbish fellows shall refuse,  
Their friendly help herein to reach:  
Because you come with empty hand,  
And proffer not thrice welcome fee,  
(which thing some scholars much desire)  
Then boldly make resort to me.  
I will you help, make proof who list,  
And set you down the easy way,  
Your English rules to understand,  
Their meaning open for to lay.  
For each example to his rule,  
I teach you aptly how to fit:  
Thus may you laugh, where others cry,  
when up they go for missing it.  
Now, as for see I none do crave,  
I ask no other recompense,  
The pain is mine, the profit thine,  
Using this book with diligence.   

TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL (unto whom in the Lord for sundry considerations I stand most singularly beholding) Master WILLIAM LEWIN, Doctor of both Laws, justice of peace, one of her majesties high Commission for causes ecclesiastical, judge of the court of Prerogatives, etc. JOHN STOCKWOOD Minister and preacher of the word of God, wisheth a plentiful increase of all heavenly graces, for the good of God his Church, and benefit of the Commonwealth.  
SUCH (RIGHT WORSHIPFUL) have been the many and manifold bounties and favours, ever since my first being acquainted with you until this day, extended from your W. in most courteous manner not only unto myself, but also vouchsafed sundry other of my good friends at my request, that howsoever unto others I have peradventure given such worthy testimony of the same, as wherewithal they have been contented, and supposed me to be a thankful recounter of benefits received, yet could I never heerwithall satisfy and content myself, because the greatness of your deserts towards me and my friends hath seemed worthily to be further published unto the knowledge of all posterity, unto whom (as duty bindeth me) I do most willingly acknowledge, that the grateful remembrance of the same, so long as life doth last, and breath not fail, shall never be extinguished, nor buried in the loathsome lake of odious oblivion, but always be reserved fast locked up in the safe custody of a most dutiful and thankful mind. And to this end having no other means of better value, to testify my thankful duty, I have presumed under your worshipful and learned patronage to send abroad this plain and easy laying open of the English rules of Construction for the young Punies of the Grammar school, in so familiar and evident a manner, as the meanest wits, and slenderest capacities may to their no small benefit and profit (as I am persuaded) understand and bear away the same. And herein though I have chief framed myself unto the simplicity of the little ones and younglings that are occupied in these kind of studies, yet some thing here and there I have inserted, not unworthy altogether of the observation and marking of those which are of further reading.  
If it shall of any be laid unto me for a fault, that I spend time in these small trifles, and Grammar matters, the which might better be employed about things more serious and of greater moment and importance, my defence is, that to have laid well the ground work, and as it were the foundation, whereupon the whole frame and building in a manner of the Latin tongue must be settled, is not in deed and in truth, to be deemed a light and toyish matter, but that shall bring great ease unto the master, and also good furtherance unto the young beginners, if with diligence and heedfulness they look into the same. Besides that I know not how it cometh to pass, that as, Navita de stellis, de bobus narrat arator, and every one as he hath been brought up, delighteth to be talking of those things for the most part wherein he hath been most exercised: so I having spent many years about the instructing of youth in the principles and rudiments of the latin tongue, can not choose but ever now and then be harping on those matters, with the which in former times I have been so long and well acquainted. If any benefit may grow thereby unto those little ones, for whose sake, as well to save them from the rod, as also to encourage them by this plain laying open of the meaning of their rules, with more willingness, and cheerfulness to go forward in their studies: I shall have obtained my desire, submitting in all humility this my simple travel, such as it is, unto your wise and learned censure, whom I most heartily pray and beseech after your accustomed and wont clemency in such sort to accept of the same, as by me towards your W. it hath been meant, namely an unfeigned token of most dutiful and hearty good will, the which for many courtesies I own unto your Worship, whom I pray the Almighty long to preserve in peace and prosperity to your good contentment, and benefit of your Country. Tunbridge this 16. November, 1590.  
Your W. most bounden, and humble in the Lord to be commanded, JOHN STOCKWOOD.   

TO THE FRIENDLY READER concerning the profit of this book.  

Why this labour hath been taken in the English rules.  NOT being altogether ignorant (right gentle Reader) of the slender capacity of many young beginners in the Grammar schools, having myself by the space of twenty years exercised the office of a poor Schoolmaster, during the which time I have had the trial of many wits, and finding by experience, that one and the self-same thing being often repeated in teaching, and as it were by small drops instilled into the tender ears of the little Punies and Petites: yet by reason of the weakness of their wits in those young years, it hath quickly passed away without any great profit, I have wished many times, that some good body would take pains for to lay open the rules of construction in our English Accidence, in such a plain and ready manner, as that the little ones, might as it were by themselves easily conceive of the meaning of the same, by the apt applying of every example unto his several rule. For this being well performed, a ready way is opened to the more easy passing through the examining and parsing of such lectures, as their teachers afterwards shall think good to read unto them. Which labour, because none hitherto hath entered upon, I myself in the vacation time of the twel●●●aies (as they call it) have taken upon me, and with God his help ●●nished the same. And I have the rather made choice to deal with the English rules, because it is the first thing that the Accidentiaries do enter into, after they have learned their eight parts of speech, and as it were the foundation of all the rest of the Grammar building, the which being well laid, they shall be the better able to proceed to the understanding of Latin Authors. And for as much as there lieth a great weight in the manner of teaching the young beginners the understanding of these rules, which is chief to be attained by letting them familiarly and plainly see, how every example agreeth with his rule, I hope that I have in such sort performed this point, as that the child of meanest conceit, if he diligently read and mark this book, may almost without any help of his master, be able of himself, by the example, to show the meaning of every rule, to every one that shall demand the meaning of the same. So that the long time, the which the master was wont to spend before, about the beating into their heads of the understanding of their rules, may now be spent about other matters tending to their profit, and they themselves, when as their master's words oftentimes were no sooner in at the one ear, but that they were as quickly out again at the other to his great grief, and many times to their greater smart, when they were well whipped for their dullness, may by the help of this book opened and laid before them, have such a master as will at all times most gently and plainly teach them, if they will but vouchsafe to repair and resort unto him.  

Pains spared to the schoolmaster.  The Schoolmaster than shall by this book be eased of much pains, that he was forced to use before to little purpose, because that the sound of his words striking their ears for the time, was straight ways forgotten: 
Ease to the scholar.  and the scholar that carrying away many a stripe for his dullness and forgetfulness was much discouraged, and not daring for fear to ask his master again the thing which he told him twenty times before, may resort hither, and without any blows hear again and again the same thing even so often as he list, the which neither time nor tediousness will suffer his master to repeat unto him.  

Every father regarding the profit of his child.  Yea every loving and careful father for the profit of his son, the which hath sometimes in his youth been a smatterer in Grammar, and now through continuance of time, and other business almost clean forgotten the same, by using this book, and questioning at spare times with his child, when he cometh from the Grammar school, may partly increase his forlorn knowledge, and partly help forward by his riper wit, the tender understanding of his little child, and perceive how he profiteth, so far forth as concerneth the conceiving of the meaning of every rule, by applying every example unto the same, to which purpose I dare boldly pronounce, that nothing is omitted, that any way concerneth the fitting of every example to every rule throughout the whole rules of construction, having framed myself to be as it were dunstically plain, for the better understanding of the young ones, unto whom nothing can be made too plain, in which respect the learneder sort will vouchsafe me their pardon, knowing that these pains were purposedly taken for the profit of the small ones: yet it may be that same things are here set down, the which being well marked, may save my master scholars of the higher forms now and then a scouring, and also make a way for them by themselves to do the like to their great profit, in the applying the examples of their latin Syntaxis, unto the rules of the same, the which will be the easier for them by the help of this book, wherein they may behold the like to be performed in all the English rules, in which respect they will also be the willinger to have the English Accidence bound with this, to aid them in the same.  

This book will further the sale of the English Accidence.  And by this means my friends the Printers of the English Accidence shall stand not a little beholding unto me, in as much as this Book will be so far off from hindering the sale thereof, as that it will cause the same to sell much faster, every one minding to buy this, being desirous also to have that, to join with it, that they may the better confer the one with the other, and see in the Accidence the rule naked by itself seeming to be hard, here made plain by the example, to appear most clear and easy for the capacity of the very meanest, besides that, for the marking of the order observed both in the one and the other, it shall be very behoveful to have them both bound together.  

The commendation of the Grammar allowed by authority.  Now if any curiously conceited, and given unto novelties, liking better of the later, though darker devices of others, then being content to use the more ancient and plainer Grammar of our own, will demand of me, wherefore I did not rather bestow these pains upon the making familiar the Grammar precepts of some stranger, then in opening the rules of our own Countryman: mine answer shall be, that concerning myself (under the correction of others be it spoken) I know none in this argument (all circumstances considered) to whom our Grammar allowed by public authority, aught to yield one foot of ground, in regard of plainness and easiness, if it be rightly understood, and taught accordingly. And for the profitableness of the same, if there were nothing else to be alleged, but the great number of most excellent learned men, shining as notable lights, both in the church, and also the commonwealth, yet might this in the judgement of all wise men, seem for to plead for the same sufficiently. So that I would wish our own auctorized Grammar so long to be publicly propounded in schools unto youth, until these admirers of new things, can avouch so much profit to have comen by their new devices, as we know by experience to have proceeded already of this our old Grammar, wherein so many profitable instruments in the civil and church government have hitherto been trained.  
Wherefore as I judge our own Grammar to be, if not more profitable, yet in every point as profitable as any others whatsoever, so have I been hereby moved to labour in it before in any other, 
What is performed in this book.  and in this part of it especially, the which most concerneth the young beginners, for whose sake I have not only applied all the examples of all the rules of construction in the English Accidence, to express the meaning of every several rule, but have also Englished all the examples, which hitherto have gone only in Latin, whereby the little ones may be much furthered.  
And moreover for their greater profit, I have borrowed from the Latin Grammar so many rules, as I have thought most convenient and necessary, and have set them down here also in English in their several places, as may well appear unto so many as binding the English accidence with this shall take pains to compare the rules of the one with the other. As many as shall reap commodity hereby (as I hope all those youths especially shall, the which with diligence shall be occupied in the same) let them give unto God alone all the glory, and in consideration of my pains afford me their earnest and faithful prayers, that whilst I live, I may always carry a mind continually to do good in his church and commonwealth, to his praise, and benefit of my country. From my study at Tunbridge the 14. of jan. 1588.  
Thy poor brother in Christ, unfeignedly tendering thy good, wherein he may: JOHN STOCKWOOD.   

rules OF CONSTRUCTION made plain for young beginners in the Grammar school.  
Question.  
WHat is next to be done, after that you have once perfectly learned the eight parts of speech set down in your Accidence?  
Answer. We do then commonly, and for the most part use to enter into the rules of construction, that we may be able to learn some easy Author in the Latin tongue, meetest for the capacity and understanding of young beginners.  
Quest. To what end do these rules of construction principally, and especially serve?  

The use of the rules of construction.  An. To teach which of these eight parts of speech may most aptly and fitly in making of Latin, or construing of authors be joined together, and agree the one with the other in some certain properties, or else be governed and as it were ruled the one of the other.  

Rules of concord and rules of governing.  Qu. It seemeth then by this your answer, that for teaching sake, all your rules of construction may be in such sort divided, as that they may be referred unto either concord and agreeing, or else unto ruling and government.  
An. So it is indeed, and so far forth as is sufficient for the Punies and Petites in the Grammar school to know, reserving the more curious divisions for such as are of riper and further years.  
Qu. Tell me therefore, how many things are chief to be marked in these your English rules of construction?  

Two things to be marked in construction.  An. There are two things especially to be regarded and considered.  
Qu. What are they?  
An. The concord and agreeing of words together: and the governing or ruling one word of another.  
Qu. What call you a Concord?  

What a concord is.  An. A Concord is the agreeing and joining together of two Latin words at the least, in certain conditions and properties, the which of the Grammarians are called accidents, as of the verb personal and his nominative case, in number and person: of the substantive and the adjective, in case, gender, and number: of the relative and antecedent, in gender, number and person.  
Qu. How many concord's are there?  

Three concord's properly.  An. There be three concord's.  
Qu. Which be they?  
An. The first, between the nominative case and the verb: the second, between the substantive and the adjective: the third, between the antecedent and the relative. Unto these some do add two other, that is, two substantives, when they be joined together in one case: and the agreeing together of the word that asketh a question, and the word that answereth unto the same question, the which they call the interrogative and his redditive. But because these are not so properly concord's, we will follow our own Accidence, and content ourselves with the three first named.  
Qu. Wherefore were these concord's at the first invented?  

The use of the concord's.  An. They do serve (as we are taught in the very first words of our English rules) to learn us how to join words duly and orderly together in construction.  
Qu. Is there then any order to be kept in the joining of words together in construction?  

What order is to be kept in construing.  An. If there be a vocative case in the sentence, you must first begin your construing with it, next must follow the nominative case with such other words as are to be joined with it: after the nominative case cometh the principal verb with such words in the same sentence as he doth govern, or do depend upon him, wherewith by the help of your master, and often practise in construing you shall easily be acquainted.  
Qu. What is first to be done then in turning an English into Latin, or in construing of your lesson?  

The principal verb.  An. First of all the principal verb must be sought out, because without the verb the sentence is unperfect.  
Qu. How shall you find out the principal verb?  

How he is to be found out.  An. Our book doth teach us, that if there be but one verb in the sentence, the same is the principal verb: but if there be more verbs than one in the sentence, the first is the principal verb, except it be the infinitive mood, or have before it a relative, as that, whom, which, and in Latin qui, quae, quod: or a conjunction, as ut, that, cum, when, si, if, and such others: or else some adverb of wishing, as utinam, I would to God, o, si, o that, and such like.  
Qu. After that you have the principal verb, what must next be done?  

The nominative case.  An. I must seek out his nominative case, unless it be a verb impersonal, which will have no nominative case.  
Qu. By what means may the nominative case be found out?  

How he is to be found out.  An. By ask this question who, or what: for the word that answereth to this question, shall be the nominative case to the verb.  
Qu. Show me this by some example.  
An. When I say in English: God is good, if I would know which word in this sentence is the nominative case, I shall find it by putting this question who, or what before the verb is, after this manner, saying, who, or what is good, and the answer is, God, the which hereby I know to be the nominative case: so in this sentence, Good scholars use diligence, if I ask, who use diligence, the answer is, Good scholars, which is the nominative case. And so forth in the like.  
Qu. How must the nominative case be placed in making or construing of Latin?  

The ordinary place of the nominative case in construction.  An. He must be set next before the verb, except a question be asked.  
Qu. What if a question be asked?  

1 The first exception altering the place of the nominative case  An. Then the nominative case is to be set after the verb, or after the sign of the verb.  
Qu. Show me this by the examples set down in your Accidence?  
An. Amas tu, lovest thou? In this question the word tu, thou, being the nominative case, is set after the verb Amas. In the other example, venitne rex, doth the king come? the word rex, the king, being the nominative case, is in the English set after this word doth, which is in this place the sign of the verb come.  
Qu. How shall I know the sign of the verb, from the verb itself?  

How the sign of the verb is to be known from the verb itself.  An. That is well asked of you, because it is not expressed in the Accidence, and yet may be some trouble unto a young beginner.  
Qu. Let me see then what you can answer unto this question.  
An. There be divers words in English, the which sometimes are signs of a verb, and sometimes they are verbs themselves.  
Qu. Which be they?  

Words that sometimes are signs of the verb, and sometimes verbs themselves, and when they be so, or not so.  An. These among the rest: Do, dost, doth, did, didst, have, haste, hath, had, hadst, shall, shalt, will, wilt, may, can, might, would, should, ought, oughtest, am, art, are, was, waist, been, be, and such like, the which being set before other verbs, are but signs of the verb, and sometimes are tokens of the tense of the verb, and sometimes are tokens of the voice of the verb, as namely whether he be active, passive, or neuter. And sometimes they are verbs themselves, and that for the most part, being set alone.  
Qu. Give me one or two examples of this, and so shall I know that you understand what you say.  
An. When I say in English, I do love, thou dost love, he doth love, etc. these words do, dost, doth, are signs of the verb love, and tokens of the present tense. But in these sayings, I do, thou dost, he doth, these words, do, dost, doth, are verbs themselves, and the like is to be said of all the rest for the most part.  
Qu. Are there no more exceptions causing the nominative case to be set after the verb?  
An. Yes, there are two other.  
Qu. Rehearse them.  

The second exception altering the place of the nominative case  An. If the verb be of the imperative mood, the nominative case shall be set after the verb, or after the sign of the verb, as Ama tu, love thou, where the nominative case, tu, thou, is set after the verb ama, love. Amato ille, let him love, in which example the nominative case ille in Latin, is set after the verb amato, and in English after this word let, being the sign of the imperative mood, before the verb love.  
Qu. What is the third exception?  

The third exception altering the place of the nominative case  An. Sometime when this sign it, or there, cometh before the English of the verb, the nominative case shall be set after the verb: as Est liber meus, It is my book, where this word liber, book, is set after the verb est, is, because this sign it is placed before the verb. Again, Venit ad me quidam, There came one unto me, in which example, quidam, one, is set after the verb venit, came, because this sign there cometh before it.  

Words placed one way in Latin, and another way in construing the same into English.  Further it is to be noted, that oftentimes in Latin the nominative case for elegancy sake is set after the verb, with a far better grace than it could be set before the verb, the which notwithstanding in construing of the same into English, is to be set before the verb.  
Qu. You have said that the word the which in construing cometh before the verb, is the nominative case, and that his most usual place is to be set before the verb: but what case shall that word be, the which in Latin making, and in construing cometh next after the verb?  

The usual place of the accusative case.  An. If it be a casual word, that is, such a word as is declined with case, and answereth to this question whom, or what, made by the verb, it shall commonly be the accusative case, unless the verb do require some other case to be governed withal, as Deum coal, Worship God. Ask this question whom or what, saying, Worship whom, you answer God, which hereby you know to be the accusative case.  
Qu. Yea but you said (me thought) Deum coal, where the word Deum, which you say signifieth God, and is also the accusative case, the which should follow the verb, is placed notwithstanding (as you see) before the verb.  

Note.  An. Albeit that in the words as they lie in Latin, Deum be set before the verb coal, yet in construing it cometh after the verb, as coal, worship thou, Deum, God. And here you must mark that like as many times in Latin (as it was said immediately before) the nominative case is set after the verb, and yet in construing is to be placed before the verb: so contrariwise the accusative case is often in Latin set before the verb, when as notwithstanding in construing it must be placed after the verb.  
Qu. Now recite the example of your book, where the word following the verb, is not the accusative case, but is put in some other case, and show me withal the reason of the same.  
An. Si cupis placere magistro, utere diligentia, nec sis tantus cessator, ut calcaribus indigeas. If thou covet to please the master, use diligence, and be not so slack (or so great a sluggard) that thou shalt need spurs.  

Please, Whom? The master. Use, What? diligence. Need, What? spurs,  In this example there be three several casual words, following three several verbs, and answering to the question whom or what to be made by the verb (as placere magistro, please the master, utere diligentia, use diligence, calcaribus indigeas, need spurs) and yet neither of them are the accusative case, but magistro, the dative case, because placere will have a dative case, diligentia the ablative case, because utere will have an ablative case, calcaribus also the ablative case, because the verb indigeas doth govern an ablative case, by such rules as follow hereafter. And the like is to be answered for other casual words in this manner following after verbs, and yet being not put in the accusative, but in some other cases.  

The first Concord.  

The first concord.  Qu. THese things in your Accidence are set down as necessary points generally to be known before you come unto the concord's, the which being after this plain and easy manner run over, tell me now which is the first concord.  

Between the nominative case and the verb. They agree.  An. The first concord is between the verb personal and his nominative case.  
Qu. In how many things doth a verb personal and his nominative case agree?  

In number, and person.  An. They agree in these two things, that is, in number and person.  
Qu. In this manner of speaking, what mean you by this word Agree.  

What is meant by this word Agree in the rules of the three concord's.  An. Where my rule saith that A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case in number and person, the meaning is, that look what number and person the nominative case is, of the same number and person must the verb be: as if the nominative case be the singular number and first person, the verb must likewise be the singular number and first person. If the nominative case be the singular number, and second person, the verb must be the singular number and second person. If the nominative case be the singular number and third person, the verb must be the singular number and third person, and so forth of the persons of the plural number.  
Qu. Make this plain by some few examples.  

Examples of agreement.  An. When I say in Latin, Ego amo, I love, the verb amo is the singular number and first person, because the nominative case Ego is the singular number and first person. Tu amas, thou lovest, the verb amas is the singular number and second person, because the nominative case Tu is the singular number and second person. Ille amat, he loveth, the verb amat is the singular number and third person, because the nominative case Ille is the singular number, and third person.  
Qu. May I not then say in Latin, Ego amas, or Tu amatis etc.  

Examples of disagreement.  An. You may not: because in the first example, though amas the verb be the singular number like as the nominative case Ego, is, yet is it not the first person, but the second, and therefore is there no true agreement, for that the verb must be the singular number and first person, like as the nominative case Ego, is. And in the second example Tu amatis, albeit the verb amatis be the second person, as his nominative case Tu, is, yet is not the verb the singular number, as the nominative case Tu, is, and therefore there is no agreement.  
Qu. Now rehearse the rule for your first concord.  

The rule of the first concord.  An. A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case in number and person, as Praeceptor legit, vos verò negligitis, The master readeth, and ye regard not.  
Qu. How fit you this example to express the meaning of this rule?  

The fitting of the example of the rule of the first concord, to show the meaning of the same.  An. In this example there are two verbs, and two nominative cases. The verbs are legit, readeth, and negligitis, regard not.  
The nominative case unto the verb legit, is praeceptor, master, and the nominative case unto the verb negligitis, is vos.  
In the first part of the sentence praeceptor legit, the verb legit, is the singular number, and the third person, because his nominative case praeceptor, is the singular number and third person, by this rule, A verb personal agreeth with his nominative case, etc.  
In the latter part of this sentence, vos negligitis, the verb negligitis is the plural number and second person, because his nominative case vos is the plural number and second person, by this self-same rule.  

Objection.  Qu. But how can there be agreement between the verb and the nominative case, when as the verb is many times put without any nominative case at all?  

Answer.  An. The nominative case in verbs of the first and second person, and also sometimes in verbs of the third person is not expressly set down always, but yet is it notwithstanding always to be understood, and so the verb hath always a nominative case, either expressly, or else by understanding.  

The worthiness of the three persons, one above another.  Qu. To what end is the rule following added, which saith, Here is to be noted, that the first person is more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third.  
An. To make a way unto the exception immediately following, which teacheth, when two or more nominative cases of the singular number are joined together with a conjunction copulative, and are of divers persons, with which of them the verb shall agree, and after what manner.  
Qu. In what respect then is the first person said to be more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third?  

How one person is more worthy than another.  An. This worthiness of one person above another, is not of birth or blood, or wealth, or in any such like consideration, but rather of privilege and prerogative (as I may so term it) that the one hath above the other, in binding the verb to agree with him, rather than with the other, that is, in causing the verb to be of the same person, the which in this respect is said to be the more worthy.  
Qu. Make this yet somewhat more plainer for the helping of young beginners.  

The making plain of the former rule.  An. Where my note saith, that the first person is more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third, the meaning is, that when two nominative cases one of the first person, and the other of the second, or one of the second person, and the other of the third, being coupled together by a conjunction copulative coming between them, be set before a verb, that then the verb referred to the nominative cases of the first sort, shall be of the first person, and not of the second: and referred to the nominative cases of the second sort, shall be put in the second person, and not in the third.  
Qu. You have said well, and yet shall this more plainly appear in applying of the examples of the next exception unto the opening of the meaning of the same. But tell me first, whether the verb personal doth always agree with his nominative case in number and person.  

The verb not always the same number with his nominative case The nominative case not always a casual word.  An. There are certain exceptions from this rule, and the same of two sorts, the one concerning the verb, and the other concerning the nominative case. For the verb is not always of the same number that his nominative case is of: and the nominative case unto the verb, is not always some one casual word, that is, a word declined with case, but sometimes some other thing.  
Qu. How many are the exceptions concerning the verb?  

Three exceptions for the verb. 1 Exception.  An. They are three. Whereof the first is this: Many nominative cases singular with a conjunction copulative coming between them, will have a verb plural, the which verb plural, or of the plural number, shall agree with his nominative case of the most worthy person: as Ego & tu sumus in tuto, I and thou be in safeguard. Tu & pater periclitamini, Thou and thy father are in jeopardy. Pater & praeceptor accersunt te, Thy father and thy master do send for thee.  
Qu. What do you learn by this exception?  

Two things to be learned by this exception. The first.  An. First, that two or more nominative cases of the singular number, joined together by a conjunction copulative (as et, atque, nec neque, and come put for et) do notwithstanding require a verb of the plural number.  

The second.  Secondly, that the same verb must in person agree with his nominative case of the most worthy person, that is, must be of the same person, that his nominative case of the most worthy person is, so that if among the nominative cases one be of the first person, and the rest of any other person, yet must the verb be only of the first person: or if among the nominative cases one be of the second person, and the other of the third, then shall the verb be of the second person.  
Qu. But what if the nominative cases thus coupled together, be all of the third person?  
An. Then must the verb be likewise of the third person.  
Qu. Now show the meaning of this exception by the examples of the same.  

The showing how the first example of the exception before going agreeth with the rule.  An. The first example is, Ego & tu sumus in tuto. Here are two nominative cases Ego and tu coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, coming both of them before the verb sumus, and being both of them of the singular number, yet do they cause the verb sumus to be the plural number, because that many nominative cases singular being joined together with a conjunction copulative, will have a verb of the plural number. And because the one of the nominative cases namely Ego, is of the first person, therefore the verb sumus doth agree with him in person, rather than with the other nominative case tu, being of the second person, for that the first person is more worthy than the second, that is, causeth the verb rather to be of the first person than of the second, when the nominative cases of the first and second person are so coupled together.  

The applying of the second example unto the rule.  The second example is, Tu et pater periclitamini. In this example two nominative cases Tutor and pater both of the singular number, coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, do come before the verb periclitamini, and therefore they cause him to be of the plural number, because many nominative cases singular coupled with a conjunction copulative, will have a verb of the plural number. And because the first nominative case tu is the second person, therefore the verb periclitamini rather agreeth with him in person, than with pater the nominative case of the third person, that is, is rather of the second person than of the third, because the second person is more worthy than the third, that is, in such kind of coupling together of the second and third person, causeth the verb to be of the second person, and not of the third.  

The fitting of the third example unto the rule  The third example is, Pater et praeceptor accersunt te. Here are two nominative cases singular, pater and praeceptor, coupled together like as the other before mentioned, by a conjunction copulative et, and coming before the verb accersunt, which therefore is the plural number, though both the nominative cases be of the singular number, because many nominative cases of the singular number being coupled together with a copulative conjunction will have a verb of the plural number. And because these nominative cases pater and praeceptor are both of the third person, therefore is the verb accersunt also of the third person.  
Qu. What is the second exception, where the verb seemeth to disagree with his nominative case, that is, seemeth not to be of the same number with his nominative case?  

The second exception concerning the verb. This rule is to be understood of such verbs as are called substantives for the most part, as Sum, forem, fio, existo, etc.  An. When a verb cometh between two nominative cases of divers numbers (that is, one being of the singular number, and the other of the plural, or one being of the plural number, and the other of the singular) the verb may indifferently accord with either of them, so that they be both of one person: as Amantium irae, amoris redintegratio est, The falling out of lovers, is the renewing of love. Quid enim nisi vota supersunt? For what remaineth saving only prayers? Pectora percussit, pectus quoque robora fiunt, She struck her breast, and her breast turned into oak also.  

Objection.  Qu. There is not one of these examples the which can fitly be applied unto this second exception.  
An. Why so I pray you?  
Qu. Because the exception speaketh of a verb coming between two nominative cases, and in all the examples the verb cometh not between, but after the nominative cases.  

Answer to the former objection  An. This maketh no matter at all: for we must have regard how the verb is placed in the English and construing of the sentence, and not how it is set in the Latin. For albeit that in the frame of words as they lie in Latin, the verb do come last in these and such like examples, yet as you may easily see by the English, the verb in construing is put between the nominative cases according unto the rule.  
Qu. Go to then, declare by your examples the meaning of this exception.  

The applying of the first example.  An. Hmantium irae, amoris redintegratio est. In this sentence the verb est, in English, is, being in the construing to be placed between these two nominative cases irae, the falling out, and redintegratio, the renewing, the which are of divers numbers, for irae is the plural number, and redintegratio the singular: the verb est agreeth with the nominative case redintegratio, being of the singular number as redintegratio is. But you may make it agree in the plural number with the nominative case irae, the which is likewise of the plural number, saying, Amantium irae, sunt amoris redintegratio.  

The applying of the second example.  In the second example, Quid enim nisi vota supersunt? The verb supersunt, remaineth, in construing being to be put between these two nominative cases of divers numbers Quid, what, and vota, prayers, Quid the singular number, and vota the plural number, the verb supersunt (I say) is the plural number, and agreeth with the nominative case vota of the same number: but it may also agree with the nominative case Quid of the singular number, if you say thus, Quid enim superest nisi vota?  

The applying of the third example.  In the third sentence, Pectora percussit, pectus quoque robora fiunt. The verb fiunt, turned, in the construing coming between these two nominative cases of divers numbers, pectus, breast, and robora, oak, pectus the singular number, robora the plural number, the verb fiunt (I say) agreeth with the nominative case robora of the plural number. But it may be made to agree with pectus the singular number, if you say thus, pectus quoque fit robora.  
Qu. But in these and such like examples, when you make the verb to agree with the other nominative case, is it to be counted as good Latin, as the former?  

A profitable note.  An. It is congrue, or true Latin. But in this behalf you must mark how the best writers use to speak, and follow them, which is always most safest for you to do, and so shall you be sure to speak and write the best Latin. And for your better help in these and such like examples belonging to this rule, 
As Literae sunt vera studiorum voluptas. As Omnia pontus erat.  understand you thus much by the way, that when a verb is put between two nominative cases of divers numbers, the verb doth most commonly agree with the former nominative case: but when the verb is set before or after nominative cases of divers numbers, then doth it most usually agree with the latter, rather than with the former.  
Qu. Now let us come unto the third exception, where the verb and his nominative case are not both of one number.  

The third exception concerning the verb.  An. Many times when the nominative case coming before the verb is the singular number, and yet is such a word as doth signify a multitude, or company, or more than one person, in such cases the verb is often put in the plural number, as Pars abiere, Part of them are gone away. Suo quisque tempore adierunt, They went unto him every man in his time.  
Qu. How frame you these examples unto this rule of exception?  

The applying of the first example.  An. Pars abiere, Here the verb abiere is the plural number, because his nominative case pars is a word signifying a multitude in the singular number.  

The applying of the second example.  Suo quisque tempore adierunt, In this place also the verb adierunt is the plural number, because his nominative case quisque in the singular number doth signify more than one.  
Qu. Thus much of the exceptions concerning the verb, where he seemeth to disagree from his nominative case. Now tell me how many exceptions there are likewise concerning the nominative case.  

Exceptions concerning the nominative case before the verb.  An. It was said before that the verb must have a nominative case coming before him for the most part, if it be a verb personal: but because that he hath not always a word declined with case to serve this turn, but hath this supplied by some other means, therefore here also are certain exceptions to be marked.  
Qu. How many are there of these exceptions?  
An. There be three, whereof the first two are set down in the Accidence in these words.  
Here note also, that sometime the infinitive mood of a verb, or else a whole clause afore going, or else some member of a sentence may be the nominative case to the verb, as Diluculo surgere, saluberrimum est, To arise be time in the morning, is the most wholesome thing in the world. Multum scire, vita iucundissima, To know much is the most pleasant, or sweetest life of all.  

The first exception.  Qu. Set down the meaning of this rule in fewer words, and supply the examples from elsewhere, if any be wanting in any part of the same.  

The infinitive mood put for the nominative case.  An. Sometime the infinitive mood before a verb, is put in stead of the nominative case unto the same verb, as Mentiri non est meum, It is not my guise or property to lie.  
Qu. How serveth this example unto this rule?  

The example applied unto the rule.  An. Here the verb est, hath no casual word to be his nominative case, but in stead of it, the infinitive mood mentiri supplieth the room of the nominative case unto the said verb est.  
Qu. What is the second exception?  

The second exception. A whole sentence put for the nominative case  An. Sometimes a whole clause, that is, a whole sentence going before the verb is the nominative case to the verb, and sometime some piece of a sentence is put for the nominative case unto the verb. Of a whole sentence put for the nominative case before the verb, let this example serve being borrowed out of the Latin rules of construction: Add quod ingenuas didicisse fideliter arts: Emollit mores, nec sinit esse feros. Add unto the things before spoken, that to have learned the liberal arts faithfully, or well and thoroughly, doth make the manners or behaviour of men to be civil, and suffereth them not to be rude or barbarous.  

The example applied to the rule.  In this example the whole sentence, Add quod ingenuas didicisse fideliter arts, is put in stead of the nominative case unto the verb emollit.  
Qu. What are the examples of the other part of this exception, where part of the sentence supplieth the room of the nominative case before the verb?  

Part of a sentence put for the nominative case The first example applied.  An. They be two, and expressed in these words in our Accidence. Diluculo surgere saluberrimum est, where Diluculo surgere, part of this sentence, is nominative case unto the verb est.  
The other example is, Multum scire, vita iucundissima.  
Qu. But how will this example frame to this rule, seeing there is no verb at all in this sentence?  

The second example applied.  An. The verb est is to be understood in this sentence: before which verb so understood, this part of the sentence, Multum scire, is put for the nominative case.  
Qu. Is there nothing else to be noted concerning this rule?  

A necessary note.  An. Yes truly. For if but one infinitive mood, or but part of a sentence be put in stead of the nominative case unto the verb, then shall the verb be of the singular number and third person. But if (as many times it cometh so to pass) more than one infinitive mood, or more than one sentence, or piece of a sentence, especially joined together by a copulative conjunction, be put for the nominative case, then shall the verb be of the plural number, and third person.  
Qu. Now set down the third exception concerning the nominative case before the verb.  

The third exception of the nominative case before the verb borrowed from the Latin rules.  An. Sometime an adverb with his genitive case is in stead of the nominative case unto the verb, and then, if the genitive case governed of the adverb be the plural number, the verb shall likewise be the plural number, and third person, as Partim virorum ceciderunt in bello, Part of the men were slain in battle. Partim signorum sunt combusta, Part of the ensigns were burned.  

The examples applied. The first example.  In the first of these examples the adverb partim with his genitive case virorum of the plural number, is put for the nominative case before the verb ceciderunt, and therefore is the verb ceciderunt the plural number and third person by this rule.  

The second example.  In the second example also, the adverb partim with his genitive case signorum of the plural number, is put for the nominative case before the verb sunt, and therefore is the said verb sunt the plural number and third person by this rule.  

An adverb with his genitive case singular.  But if the genitive case governed of the adverb, and together with the adverb supplying the room of the nominative case before the verb, be the singular number, then shall the verb also be the singular number, and third person, as Satis pecuniae est mihi, I have money enough. 
The example applied.  In this example the adverb satis with his genitive case pecuniae of the singular number, is put for the nominative case before the verb est, and therefore is the same verb the singular number and third person by this rule.   

The second Concord.  

The second concord.  Qu. WHat is the second concord, or rather between what things is the second concord?  
An. The second concord is between the substantive and the adjective.  
Qu. How shall you find out the substantive unto the adjective?  

How the substantive unto the adjective is to be found out.  An. By ask this question Who, or what, and the word that answereth to the question, shall be the substantive, as in these examples, It is my master, ask this question who, or what, saying, My who, or what is it, and the answer is, master, the which hereby I do know to be the substantive unto this adjective my. Again, when I say thus in English, A sure friend, if I ask this question who, or what, and say, a sure what? the answer is, friend, the which hereby I know to be the substantive unto the adjective sure, and the like is to be done for the finding out of other substantives in like cases.  
Qu. In how many things doth the adjective and the substantive agree?  

Wherein the adjective and substantive agree.  An. The adjective and his substantive do agree in three things, namely, in case, gender, and number.  
Qu. What call you to agree in case, gender, and number?  

What it is to agree in case, gender, and number.  An. To be of the same case, gender, and number that the substantive is of, as if the substantive be the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, the adjective also must be the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number.  
If the substantive be the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, the adjective must likewise be the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, and so forth, as appeareth by the examples of this second concord.  
Qu. What is the rule in your Accidence concerning this concord between the substantive and the adjective?  

The rule for the agreeing of the substantive and adjective together.  An. The adjective, whether it be a noun, pronoun, or participle, agreeth with his substantive in case, gender, and number: as Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur, A sure friend is tried in a doubtful matter. Homo armatus, A man armed. Ager colendus, A field to be tilled. Hic vir, This man. Meus herus est, It is my master.  
Qu. What do you by the way, gather generally out of this rule?  

Three sorts of adjectives.  An. That there are three kinds of adjectives, that is to say, a noun adjective, a pronoun adjective, and a participle adjective.  
Qu. Show by the examples of the rule by you rehearsed before, how the adjective agreeth with his substantive in case, gender, and number.  

The applying of the examples of the rule for the agreement of the substantive and the adjective. The first example.  An. Amicus certus in re incerta cernitur. In this example there be two substantives, and two noun adjectives, namely, Amicus certus, and re incerta, where the first noun adjective certus agreeth with the first substantive amicus in case, gender, and number, that is to say, the first adjective certus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and the singular number, because his substantive amicus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by this rule, The adjective whether it be a noun, etc. And the second noun adjective incerta, agreeth with the second substantive re, in case, gender, and number, that is to say, the second adjective incerta, is the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, because his substantive re, is the ablative case, the feminine gender, and singular number, by the same rule.  

The 2. example applied.  In the second example Homo armatus, the participle adjective armatus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive homo is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by this same rule.  

The 3, example applied.  In the third example Ager colendus, the participle adjective colendus, is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because so is his substantive ager, by the same rule.  

The 4. example applied.  In the fourth example Hic vir, the pronoun adjective hic is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive vir is so, by the same rule.  

The 5. example applied.  In the fift example, Meus herus est, the pronounce adjective meus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, because his substantive herus is the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, by the same rule, The adjective whether it be a noun, pronoun, and so forth, as it is in the words of this rule.  

Some show of disagreement between the substantive & the adjective, and when?  Qu. Is this rule so general concerning the agreement of the substantive and the adjective, that it hath no exception?  
An. Yes, there falleth out sometimes some show of disagreement between the substantive and the adjective both in gender and in number, especially when many substantives singular, that is, of the singular number, are joined together with a conjunction copulative.  
Qu. What reason is there of this?  
An. Because that then the adjective must first be of the plural number, though the substantives be all of the singular number, and secondly the adjective doth not agree with all the substantives in gender, if they be of divers genders, but with some one of them, that is, the adjective is not of the same gender that all the substantives are of, but of the same gender of the which some one of the substantives is of, the which they call the substantive of the most worthy gender, because (as it was said before in the worthiness of the three persons one above the other) he hath this prerogative, to cause the adjective to agree with him in gender, that is, to be of the same gender that he himself is of.  
Qu. What are the rules in your Accidence touching these points?  
An. They be in number two, whereof the first is of the worthiness of one gender above another: and the second of the adjectives being of the plural number, and agreeing with the substantive of the most worthy gender.  
Qu. Set down the words of the first rule.  

The rules for the worthiness of the genders.  An. Where note, that the masculine gender is more worthy than the feminine, and the feminine more worthy than the neuter.  
Qu. What is the meaning of this rule?  

The meaning of the rule of the worthiness of the genders.  An. When an adjective hath for his substantive more than one word, that is, two or more substantive of divers genders coupled together with a copulative conjunction, if one of the substantives be the masculine gender, and the other the feminine, or neuter gender, yet shall the adjective be the masculine gender: or if one of the substantives be the feminine gender, and the other the neuter gender, then shall the adjective be the feminine gender, and not of the neuter gender. For where there is diversity of genders in the substantives unto the adjective, there the adjective shall rather agree with the substantive of the masculine gender, than with the substantive of the feminine gender, and with the substantive of the feminine gender, than with the substantive of the neuter gender, except it be in substantives betokening things without life, of the which some thing shall be spoken hereafter in handling the next rule.  
Qu. What is your second rule of the adjective his being of the plural number, albeit the substantives be of the singular number, and of his agreeing with the substantive of the most worthy gender.  

The rule, of the adjective his seeming to disagree with his substantive in number and gender.  An. Many substantives singular, having a conjunction copulative coming between them, will have an adjective plural, which adjective shall agree with the substantive of the most worthy gender: as Rex et regina beati, The king and the queen are blessed.  
Qu. How do you apply this example unto your rule?  

The applying of the example unto the rule.  An. In this example there are two substantives Rex and regina coupled together by this conjunction copulative et, wherefore they do cause the adjective beati, to be the plural number, and because one of these substantives, namely Rex, is the masculine gender, and the other regina, the feminine gender, therefore doth the adjective beati agree with the substantive Rex in gender, rather than with the substantive regina, that is to say, is rather the masculine gender with Rex, than the feminine gender with regina, because Rex the masculine gender is more worthy than regina the feminine gender, that is, causeth the adjective rather to be put in the masculine, than in the feminine gender.  
Qu. Doth the adjective being referred unto substantives of divers genders, always rather agree with the masculine gender than with the feminine, and with the feminine rather than with the neuter?  

A subexception, or an under-exception from the exception before.  An. If the substantives betoken things without life, then is the neuter gender the most worthy gender, that is, if there be any of them the neuter gender, the adjective shall likewise be the neuter gender: nay if one of them be the masculine gender and the other the feminine, and none of them the neuter, yet shall the adjective be the neuter gender.  

An example of the first branch of the former rule, and the same also applied unto the rule.  Qu. Bring some examples for the making more plain of this that you have said.  
An. Coelum et terra sunt à Deo condita: Heaven and earth were made by God. In this sentence are two substantives coelum and terra, coelum the neuter gender, and terra the feminine gender, and because that both of them do signify things not having life, therefore doth the participle adjective condita agree in gender with the substantive coelum, and not with the substantive terra, with the which, if they had signified things having life, it ought to have agreed, that is, therefore in this example the adjective condita, is of the neuter gender with the substantive coelum, and not the feminine gender with the substantive terra, because that in things not having life, the neuter gender is the most worthy, that is, doth make the adjective to be of the neuter gender rather than of any other gender.  
Qu. Give an example, of the adjective being the neuter gender, when one of the substantives is the feminine gender, and the other the masculine gender, and none of them of the neuter gender.  

An example of the second branch of this rule, and the same applied. More examples Labour & voluptas sunt natura dissimillima. Ira & aegritudo permixta sunt.  An. Requies et iocus in vita necessaria esse videntur, Rest and sport do seem in life to be necessary. Here are two substantives Requies and iocus, Requies the feminine gender, and iocus the masculine gender, betokening things without life, and yet is the adjective necessaria the neuter gender, because that in substantives betokening things without life, though none of them be the neuter gender, yet shall the adjective notwithstanding be put in the neuter gender.  
And in both the examples before going, the adjective condita in the first, and likewise the adjective necessaria in the second is the plural number, though the substantives be the singular number, because that many substantives of the singular number being coupled together with a conjunction copulative, will cause the adjective to be of the plural number.  
Qu. But is there nothing else to be marked as touching this rule of the adjective to be put in the neuter gender, when he is to be referred unto substantives signifying things without life?  

Figurative speeches do cause the substantive and the adjective not to agree. Objection.  An. The figures called Syllepsis and Zeugma, do often cause an alteration in this rule. But because that these are with the hardest for young beginners, we will leave them to be opened by their learned masters, at such time as for their capacities, they shall think most convenient.  
Qu. What if the substantives signifying things without life be both of one gender, that is, either both the masculine gender, or both the feminine gender?  

Answer.  An. Then may the adjective agree with them in gender, that is, if the substantives be the masculine gender, the adjective may be the masculine gender: if the substantives be the feminine gender, the adjective may also be the feminine gender.  
Qu. Show this by example, for the young beginners sake.  

Example of the masculine gender.  An. I may say in latin, Codex et culter meus sunt amissi, My book and my knife are lost: where the participle adjective amissi, is the masculine gender, because both the substantives codex and coulter are the masculine gender.  

Example of the feminine gender.  So I may say, justitia & temperantia sunt amplectendae, justice and temperance are to be embraced, where the participle adjective amplectendae is the feminine gender, because both the substantives justitia and temperantia, are the feminine gender, but yet in these kind of speeches it is more usual to have the adjective put in the neuter gender. 
A note worth the marking. As Polypus & chameleon glabra sunt. ex Solino, testante Despauterio.   
And here is further to be understanded, that sometimes when as both the substantives do signify things having life, yet is the adjective found to be put in the neuter gender, though the substantive be of the masculine or feminine gender, but this is a thing that falleth out very seldom, but yet not to be passed over without marking.  
Qu. What else have you to say concerning this concord of the substantive and the adjective?  
An. Some Grammarians give this rule, that when a participle adjective that cometh either of a verb substantive as factus of fio, or of a verb passive having the signification of calling, or the like, as dictus, of dicor, appellatus, of appellor, 
another rule to be marked. 
Made, 
Factus.  Called 


Dictus  
Appellatus  
Nominatus  
Vocatus    Salutatus 
Saluted  Habitus 
Accounted  Visus 
Seen or seemed  Existimatus 
Esteemed   These and such like are said to be participle adjectives signifying calling, etc.  is put between two substantives of divers genders, then shall that adjective agree with the first substantive, that is, be of the same gender that the first substantive is of, as, pecunia dicta est neruus belli, Money is called the sinews, or strength of war, where the participle adjective dicta, called, coming of dicor to be called, being put between two substantives of divers genders, namely pecunia the feminine gender, and neruus the masculine gender, it doth agree with pecunia the former substantive, and not with neruus the latter substantive. But if the adjective participle coming of such verbs as is aforesaid, or the like be put after two substantives of diverse genders, than he may indifferently agree with either of the substantives, that is, be of the same gender, that either of the substantives is of, 
Terentius; Nunquam aeque ac modò paupertas mihi onus visum est, & miserum & grave. Here the participle visum agreeth with onus by this rule.  as Ludos Megalesia appellatos, Plays called Megalesia: Gens universa Veneti appellati, The whole people called Venetians. In these two examples there are two participle adjectives of calling, whereof appellatos in the first example being set after these two substantives of divers genders ludos and Megalesia, Ludos the masculine gender, and Megalesia the neuter gender, the adjective participle appellatos is the masculine gender with the first substantive ludos.  
In the second example the same participle adjective appellati, being set after gens & Veneti, gens the feminine gender, and Veneti the masculine gender, it doth agree with the latter substantive Veneti being the masculine gender, as it is, showing that in such like placing of the substantives, the adjective may agree with whether of them you will, so that you may say, Ludos Megalesia appellatos, or Ludos Megalesia appellata. Gens universa Veneti appellati, or Gens universa Veneti appellata: Paupertas onus visum est, or Paupertas onus visa est, & so of such like, if the nature of the word will bear the same.  
Qu. Why say you if the nature of the word will bear the same?  
An. Because you can not say in latin, Verbum caro facta est, but Verbum caro factum est. nor Aqua vinum factum est, but aqua vinum facta est, for otherwise you should speak against the nature and truth of the matter.  
Qu. Have you now done with this second concord?  

Figures do cause disagreement between the substantive and the adjective.  An. There is yet further to be considered, that many times the adjective and the substantive are of divers numbers and genders, and cases by reason of certain figurative speeches, as by Synthesis, Antiptosis, Enallage and such like, whereof when scholars are of further learning and understanding, their masters must instruct them.  

What gender and number the adjective must be, when he hath no casual word for his substantive.  Lastly the adjective (like as the verb before spoken of in the first concord) hath for his substantive sometimes, the infinitive mood, sometimes a whole sentence, or piece of a sentence, and sometimes an adverb with his genitive case, and then in the three former, he shall be the singular number and neuter gender: but if the adjective have more than one infinitive mood, or more than one sentence, or more than one piece of a sentence, coupled with a conjunction copulative, for his substantive, then shall the adjective be the neuter gender and plural number.  
And when an adjective hath for his substantive an adverb with his genitive case, than the adjective must be the same gender and number, that his genitive case coming after the adverb, is of.   

The third Concord, between the antecedent and the relative.  

The third Concord.  Qu. WHat is the third concord, or between what things is the third concord?  
An. The third concord is between the antecedent and the relative.  
Qu. In how many things doth the antecedent and the relative agree?  
An. In three things, that is to say, in gender, number and person.  
Qu. By what rule?  

The rule of the third Concord.  An. By this rule: the relative agreeth with his antecedent in gender, number, and person: as, Vir sapit, qui pauca loquitur, That man is wise, that speaketh few things or words.  
Qu. How shall you know the antecedent unto the relative.  

How to find out the Antecedent.  An. The antecedent is a word that commonly goeth before the relative, and therefore hath his name in latin of foregoing, and is known by ask this question, who, or what, for the word next before the relative, and being rehearsed again of the relative by ask this question who, or what, and answereth unto the same, is the antecedent.  
An. Show this by the example of your rule before going.  
Qu. The man is wise that speaketh few things or words. In this example this word that is the relative, & this word man going before him is the antecedent, the which by ask this question who, or what with the relative that, is rehearsed again by the relative, & answereth to the question who, or what, whereby I know it to be the Antecedent: as for example, The man is wise that speaketh, etc. Ask the question who, or what, by the Relative that, saying, That who or what is wise, the answer is, that man, where the word man answereth to the question, who or what, & is rehearsed again of the relative before whom in the sentence it went, and therefore it is the antecedent. And thus you must do for the finding out of the antecedent in all other sentences.  
Qu. Now let me hear you apply the Latin example unto the rule of the third concord between the antecedent and the relative.  

The example applied to the rule of the third Concord.  An. Vir sapit, qui pauca loquitur. Here the relative qui agreeth in gender, number, and person with his antecedent vir, that is to say, the relative qui is the masculine gender, the singular number, and the third person, because his antecedent vir, is the masculine gender, the singular number, and the third person by this rule, The relative agreeth with his antecedent in gender, number and person.  
Qu. How is the relative qui, quae, quod englished for the most part?  
An. It is most commonly englished by this word which, and sometime by this english that, which may be turned into this English which, as in my example before alleged, The man is wise, that speaketh few things or words. The relative that may be englished also by the word which: for I may say as well, The man is wise, which speaketh few things or words.  
Qu. Wherefore serveth this note?  

A difference in english between the Relative That, and the conjunction That.  An. To put a difference between the relative that, when it may be turned into this English which, being in Latin called qui, quae, quod, and the conjunction quod or ut, the which is also englished by this word that. But this is the difference, that this word that, when it is a relative, may be turned into this English which, but this word that, when it is a conjunction, cannot so be turned.  
Qu. What rule have you for this in your Accidence?  

The rule for the difference between the Relative That, and the conjunction That.  An. When this English that, may be turned into this english which, it is a relative, otherwise it is a conjunction, which in Latin is called quòd, or ut: and in Latin making it may elegantly be put away by turning the nominative case into the accusative case, and the verb into the infinitive mood: as Gaudeo quòd tu bene vales: Gaudeo te bene valere, I am glad that thou art in good health. jubeo ut tu abeas: jubeo te abire, I bid that thou go hence.  
Qu. Is this the only cause of making this rule, thereby to put a difference between the relative that, and the conjunction that?  

another use of the rule aforegoing.  An. No, there is yet a further use of this rule, namely this, to teach that when this English that, is not a relative, but a conjunction, called in Latin quòd or ut, coming between two verbs personals, that then in Latin this word quòd or ut may elegantly for the most part be put away, by turning the nominative case before which it is set, into the accusative case, and the latter of the two verbs into the infinitive mood.  
Qu. Show me this by the two examples in your rule before.  

The examples applied unto the rule.  An. Gaudeo quod tu bene vales. Here is in Latin the conjunction quòd, in English that, put before two verbs personals, Gaudeo and vales, and because that this English that, cannot be turned into this English which, for it is no good English to say, I am glad which you are in good health, but, that you are in good health, therefore I know this word that to be a conjunction and no relative: this quòd therefore may be better put away, turning the nominative case tu coming after it, into the accusative case te, and the latter verb vales into the infinitive mood valere, saying, Gaudeo te bene valere.  

The second example applied.  So in the second example, jubeo ut tu abeas, the conjunction ut, in English that (therefore a conjunction, and not a relative, because it cannot in this sentence be turned into this English which, for it is no English to say, I am glad which thou art in good health, but, that thou art in good health) this conjunction ut (I say) coming between these two verbs personals jubeo and abeas, may elegantly be put away, by turning the nominative case tu, into the accusative case te, and the latter verb of the subiunctive mood abeas, into the infinitive mood abire, saying, jubeo te abire.  
Qu. Why, is it not good Latin to say, Gaudeo quòd tu bene vales: or jubeo ut tu abeas?  
An. It is congrue or true Latin, but not good and fine Latin, but rather Portuis or Popish priests Latin for the most part, in all such kind of speeches, and therefore young scholars were better not to know it, than to be acquainted with it. So that this rule is much better for them borrowed from the Latin Grammar: Verbs of the infinitive mood coming after verbs personals, in stead of a nominative case, will have an accusative case before them.  
Qu. Hath the relative always for his antecedent a word declined with case?  

A whole sentence put for the antecedent.  An. No: for sometimes the whole reason or sentence before going, is put for the antecedent, and then shall the relative be the neuter gender, and the singular number.  
Qu. What is your rule for this?  

The rule for the same.  An. Sometime the relative hath for his antecedent the whole reason that goeth before him, and then he shall be put in the neuter gender, and singular number: as In tempore veni, quod omnium rerum est primum, I came in season, which is the chiefest thing of all.  
Qu. Declare the meaning of this rule by the example?  

The example applied to the rule.  An. In this sentence, these words In tempore veni, being the whole reason or sentence before the relative quod, is put for the antecedent unto the said relative, and therefore is quod the neuter gender, and singular number by this rule.  

More than one sentence put for the antecedent.  Qu. But what if there be two, or more sentences, or pieces of sentences put in stead of the antecedent?  
An. Then the relative shall be the neuter gender, and plural number by this rule:  

The rule for the same.  But if the relative be referred to two clauses, or parts of sentences, or more, the relative shall be put in the plural number, and neuter gender: as, Tu multùm dormis, & saepe pota● quae ambo sunt corpori inimica, Thou sleepest much, and drinkest often, which both things are nought for the body.  
Qu. Apply the example to make plain the meaning of the rule.  
An. In this example, these two clauses or parts of a sentence, Tu multum dormis, and & saepe potas, are put for the antecedent unto the relative quae, and therefore is the said relative put in the plural number, and the neuter gender by this rule.  

An adverb with his genitive case put for the antecedent.  And further here is to be understood, that like as hath been already noted in the two concord's before going, sometime the relative hath for his antecedent an adverb with his genitive case, and then shall the relative be the same gender and number, that the genitive case governed of the adverb is of.  
Qu. Let these exceptions suffice to have showed, that the relative sometime hath for his antecedent a word that is not declined with case. And now go to the next exception, where the antecedent and the relative do seem to be of contrary gender and number.  

Another exception of disagreement in show between the antecedent and the relative.  An. Many antecedents singular (that is, of the singular number) having a conjunction copulative between them, will have a relative plural (that is, of the plural number) which relative shall agree with the antecedent of the most worthy gender: as, Imperium & dignitas, quae petijsti, The rule and dignity, which thou hast required.  
Qu. Let me hear how you can make this example agree with the rule.  

The example applied to the rule.  An. Here are many antecedents (for by many in this place is meant more than one) of the singular number, namely Imperium and dignitas, having the conjunction copulative et, coming between them, and therefore by this rule they cause the relative quae to be the plural number, and because these two antecedents are of divers genders, that is, Imperium the neuter gender, and dignitas the feminine gender, therefore doth the relative quae agree with the antecedent imperium, the most worthy gender, that is, the relative quae is the neuter gender with the antecedent imperium, and not the feminine gender with the antecedent dignitas.  

Objection.  Qu. You said before in the second concord, that the feminine gender was more worthy than the neuter, that is, doth cause the adjective or relative to be rather the feminine gender than the neuter, when two substantives or antecedents one of the feminine gender, and the other of the neuter gender do come before an adjective or relative?  

Answer.  An. So it is indeed in substantives or antecedents being the names of things that have life, but in things having no life the neuter gender is most worthy, that is, causeth the adjective or relative rather to be of the neuter gender.  
Qu. Have you a rule for this in relatives?  

The rule for the gender of the relative referred unto antecedents signifying things without life.  An. This is the rule: In things not apt to have life, the neuter gender is most worthy, yea and in such case, though the substantives or antecedents, be of the masculine, or of the feminine gender, and none of them of the neuter, yet may the adjective or relative be put in the neuter gender: as Arcus et calami sunt bona, The bow and the arrows are good: Arcus et calami, quae fregisti, The bow and the arrows which thou hast broken.  
Qu. Fit the examples to express the meaning of this rule.  

The first example applied.  An. Arcus et calami sunt bona, this is an example of an adjective referred unto substantives of contrary gender, for here these two substantives arcus and calami, being both the masculine gender, are notwithstanding joined with the adjective bona of the neuter gender, because that in substantives of things without life, though none of them be the neuter gender, yet may the adjective be the neuter gender, as here it is by this rule.  

Note.  Yet note, that because both these substantives are of one gender, namely the masculine, therefore may the adjective also be the masculine gender, so that you may say, Arcus et calami sunt boni, as well as bona.  

The second example applied.  The second example is more proper unto this place, for that it is of a relative referred unto antecedents of things without life. In the latter example therefore, Arcus et calami quae fregisti, the relative quae is the neuter gender, though his antecedents arcus and calami be both of the masculine gender, because that in antecedents betokening things without life (as bow and arrows do) the relative shall be the neuter gender, as here it is, though the antecedents be both of the masculine gender, as here they are by this rule.  

Let this be well marked.  Note also that if the antecedents be both of one gender, as here they are, the relative also may be of the same gender, so that you may say, Arcus et calami, quos fregisti, as well as quae fregisti.  
Qu. What other exceptions have you yet behind containing some show of disagreement between the relative and the antecedent?  
An. There are yet two, the one to be fet from the end of the treatise of the case of the relative following, because it is fit to be handled here, in as much as it agreeth with the matter in hand, and the other is to be supplied from else where.  
Qu. Rehearse the exception set down in the end of the treatise of the case of the relative.  

A rule for the gender of the relative between two substantives of divers genders.  An. When a relative cometh between two substantives of divers genders, it may indifferently agree with either of them: as avis, quae passer appellatur, or avis, qui passer appellatur, The bird which is called a sparrow.  
Yea though the substantives be of divers numbers, yet may the relative agree with either of them: as, Est nè ea Lutetia, quam nos Parisios' dicimus? Is not that called Lutetia, that we do call Paris? or else, Est nè ea Lutetia, quos nos Parisios' dicimus?  
Qu. Show how these examples agree with this exception.  

The first example applied.  An. avis quae passer appellatur. Here the relative quae being put between these two substantives avis the feminine gender, and passer the masculine gender, agreeth with avis the feminine gender. And where it is said avis qui passer appellatur, there the relative qui agreeth with passer the latter substantive of the masculine gender by this rule.  

The second example applied.  Est nè ea Lutetia quam nos Parisios' dicimus. In this sentence the relative quam being put between these two substantives Lutetia and Parisios', of divers genders and also numbers, Lutetia the feminine gender & singular number, and Parisios' the masculine gender and plural number, it doth agree with the substantive Lutetia of the feminine gender and singular number, according to this rule. And in the other saying, Est nè ea Lutetia, quos nos Parisios' dicimus, the relative quos agreeth with the latter substantive Parisios' of the masculine gender and plural number by the same rule. For in such like cases the relative may aswell agree with the one substantive as with the other.  
Qu. What is your other exception?  

The other exception, which appertaineth unto adjectives also.  An. Sometime the relative agreeth not with the thing or antecedent that went next before, 
This rule being somewhat dark must with examples be made plain by the diligence of the master.  but with the person unto whom the thing belongeth, as Laudabant fortunam meam, qui filium haberem tali ingenio praeditum, They praised my fortune, which had a son endued with such a disposition or nature. Here the relative qui agreeth not with fortunam, that went next before, for it is the feminine gender, and qui the masculine gender, but qui is referred to the person whereof he speaketh, namely himself, of whom he speaketh in the first person ego understood, which being the masculine gender, the relative qui also is in this sentence put in the masculine gender.  

Figurative speeches.  Further it is here also to be noted, that figurative speeches do often cause the relative and antecedent to be of divers genders, numbers, and persons, the which for the hardness sake, we will not cumber young wits withal, trusting to the help of their painful teachers in this behalf.   

The case of the relative.  
Qu. TO what use or purpose serve these rules following, which have this title set over the head of them, The case of the relative?  
An. To show what case the relative shall be, as well when he cometh before the verb, as after the verb, or after any other part of speech, for although the relative be always set before the verb in respect of his placing, yet in order of construction he is often in such sort considered as following the verb, or else some other part of speech, whereof he is governed.  
Qu. What is your first rule?  

The first rule for the case of the relative.  An. When there cometh no nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall be the nominative case unto the verb: as Miser est, qui nummos admiratur, Wretched is that person, which is in love with money.  

The example applied.  In this example the relative qui, is the nominative case unto the verb admiratur, because there is no other nominative case coming before him and the verb.  
Qu. Rehearse the second rule.  

The second rule  An. But when there cometh a nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall be such case as the verb will have after him: as Foelix, quem faciunt aliena pericula cautum, Happy is he, whom other men's harms do make to beware.  

The example applied.  Here this word pericula though in the latin it be set after the verb, yet is it in construing the nominative case, and to be set before the verb faciunt, between whom and the relative quem in construing it doth come, and therefore is the relative quem the accusative case governed of the verb faciunt, by the rule of verbs transitives following here after among the rules for the cases which verbs do govern.  

The third rule.  As the relative may be the nominative case unto the verb, so it may be the substantive unto the adjective, that is joined with him, or cometh next after him: as Divitias amare noli, quod omnium est sordidissimum, Will not thou love riches, which to do, is the most beggarly thing in the world.  

The example applied.  Here the relative quod, being the nominative case before the verb est, is also substantive unto the adjective sordidissimum by this rule. And mark, that whatsoever may be the nominative case unto the verb, or antecedent unto the relative, the same also may be the substantive unto the adjective.  

The fourth rule  Nouns interrogatives and indefinites follow the rule of the relative: as Quis, who, uter, whether, qualis, what manner one, quantus, how great, quotus, how many, etc. And these evermore come before the verb, like as the relative doth: as Hei mihi, qualis erat? talis erat, qualem nunquam vidi, Woe is me, what manner of person was he? such a one he was, the like whereof I never saw.  

The example applied.  In this example, the noun interrogative qualis, is nominative case unto the verb est, because there is no other nominative case between him and the verb, and so is talis also the noun redditive, or indefinite, and qualem is the accusative case in construction after the verb vidi, because that the nominative case ego, understood cometh before the verb: for these kind of nouns do follow the rule of the relative, that is, if there come no nominative case between them, and the verb, then are they the nominative case unto the verb, like as the relative is, but if there come a nominative case between them and the verb, then shall they be such case as the verb will have after him, like as the relative must be.  
Qu. Have you nothing else to say concerning these kind of nouns?  

A rule for nouns interrogatives and indefinites.  An. As the relative agreeth in gender, number and person with his antecedent, the which for the most part goeth before the relative, so these nouns do always agree with the word that followeth after them: as, quot homines, tot sententiae, So many men, so many minds, where in the first place quot agreeth with homines following after him, and in the second place tot is the same case, gender, and number that his substantive sententiae, which followeth after him, is of.  

An objection against this rule.  Qu. What say you then unto this sentence of the poet Horace: Mammaeque putres, equina quales ubera, And rotten breasts, such as are the udders of a mare: Where you see this noun quails, to be the feminine gender, with the former substantive mammae, and not the neuter gender, with the latter substantive ubera?  

Answer.  An. This saying of Horace is to be noted of young scholars, but not to be followed: for he should rather have said, qualia, than quails, making it to agree with ubera the substantive following, according to the rule.  
Qu. What is the next rule of relatives?  

The fift rule of relatives.  An. Yet here is to be understanded and noted, that the relative is not always governed of the verb that he cometh before, but sometime of the infinitive mood that cometh after the verb: as Quibus voluisti me gratias agere, egi, What persons thou willedst me to thank, I have thanked.  

The example applied.  In this sentence the relative quibus is not governed of the verb voluisti, before whom he cometh, but of the infinitive mood agere, coming after the verb voluisti, and it is the dative case, by a rule of verbs governing a dative case, which rule followeth in his due place.  

The sixth rule. The example applied: yet Quibus rather indeed agreeth with rebus, than is governed of adductus. The 7. rule. The example applied.  Sometime of a participle: as Quibus rebus adductus fecisti? With what things moved didst thou it?  
Here quibus the relative is the ablative case governed of the participle adductus, by the rule of participles governing such case, as the verb they come of.  
Sometime of the gerund: as Quae nunc non est narrandi locus, Which things at this present it is no time to tell.  
In this place the relative quae is the accusative case plural, governed of the gerund narrandi by the rule of gerunds, which will have such case as their verbs, whereof they come, do require.  

The 8. rule.  Sometime of a preposition set before him: as Quem in locum deducta res sit, vides, Into what state the matter is now brought, thou seest.  

The example applied and corrected.  In this example the relative quem is governed of the preposition in, which in construction is set before him, albeit in the order of words, as they lie in Latin, this preposition in be put between quem and locum. But in truth qui in this example is rather an indefinite than a relative, and agreeth with locum in case, gender, and number, by the rule of the adjective agreeing with his substantive, so that locum and not quem is here governed of the preposition in, albeit that it is not to be denied, but that sometimes the preposition in may cause the relative quem to be put in the accusative case, like as other prepositions may cause him to be put in other cases also.  

The 9 rule.  Sometime of the substantive, that he doth accord or agree with: as Senties qui vir siem, Thou shalt perceive what a fellow I am. Albeit in this manner of speaking, qui is an indefinite, and not a relative.  

The example applied.  Here the relative qui, agreeth with the substantive vir being the nominative case, the masculine gender, and singular number, as vir is by the rule last before set down: for qui is in this place a noun indefinite, that is, noting no any one certain thing, and not a relative.  

The 10. rule.  Sometime of a noun partitive, or distributive: as Quarum rerum utram minus velim, non facile possum existimare, Of the which two things, whether I would with less will have, I cannot easily esteem.  

The example applied, and corrected.  In this example the relative quarum is the genitive case plural governed of the partitive utram by the rule of interrogatives, partitives, distributives, governing a genitive case, as shall be showed afterward: yet here also qui is rather an indefinite, and agreeth with the genitive case rerum in case, gender, and number, which genitive case rerum is governed of the partitive utram by the rule aforesaid, albeit the relative is notwithstanding sometime put in the genitive case, by the same rule of interrogatives and partitives, and such like, governing a genitive case.  

The 11. rule.  Sometime it is put in the genitive case, by reason of a substantive coming next after him: as Ego illum non novi, cuius causa hoc incipis, I knew him not, for whose cause thou beginnest this matter.  

The example applied.  Here the relative cuius is the genitive case governed of the substantive causa coming after him, by the rule of substantives coming together betokening divers things, whereof the latter must be the genitive case. Where note that in such cases the relative cuius supplieth the room of a substantive, and in construction is taken to be the latter substantive, albeit that in Latin he be always set foremost.  

The 12. rule.  Sometime it is otherwise governed of a noun substantive: as, Omnia tibi dabuntur, quibus opus habes, All things shall be given thee, which thou hast need of.  

The example applied.  In this place the relative quibus is the ablative case plural, governed of the substantive opus, which requireth an ablative case by a rule to be set down in his place.  

The 13. rule.  Sometime it is put in the ablative case with this sign than, and is governed of the comparative degree coming after him: as Vtere virtute, qua nihil est melius, Use virtue, than the which nothing is better.  

The example applied.  In this example the relative qua is the ablative case singular, having in the construing in English this sign than before it, and is governed of the comparative degree melius, which will have an ablative case, when it may be expounded by this adverb quàm, in English than, as shall be showed hereafter.  

The 14. rule.  Sometime it is not governed at all, but is put in the ablative case absolute: as Quantus erat julius Caesar, quo imperatore, Romani primum Britanniam ingressi sunt? How worthy a man was julius Caesar, under whose conduct (or who being emperor) the Romans first entered into Britain?  

The example applied.  Here the relative quo hath no word whereof it may be governed, but is put in the ablative case, which in this kind of speaking, is called the ablative case absolute, for a cause to be showed hereafter.  

The 15. rule.  Also when it signifieth an instrument wherewith a thing to be done, it is put in the ablative case: as Ferrum habuit, quo se occideret, He had asword, wherewith he would have killed himself.  

The example applied.  In this example the relative quo is the ablative case singular, governed of the verb occideret, because the said quo in this place signifieth an instrument to do some thing withal, and therefore must be put in the ablative case by a rule hereafter following concerning this matter.  

The 16. rule.  Sometime the relative is governed of an adverb: as Cui utrum obuiam procedam, nondum statui, Whom, whether I will go to meet with, I have not yet determined.  

The example applied.  Here the relative cui, is the dative case singular governed of the adverb obuiam, which with such other like will have a dative case, as hereafter shall be declared more at large.  

Admonition.  There are beside these, many other rules whereby a relative may be governed, yea almost by all the rules of all other parts of speech, but these before are the most principal by which the young beginners may be learned to judge of the rest.   

The construction of nouns substantives, or what cases they may govern.  
Qu. YOu have said at the beginning, that all the parts of speech do either agree together in some certain conditions and properties, or else are governed and ruled one of another. Of Concord or agreement hath been spoken at large, wherefore now order requireth that we entreat of government. Tell me therefore what you call government?  

What government is, in Grammar matters.  An. Government properly in Grammar matters, is the requiring of some certain case to be put after an other word in order of construction: As for example, to make this as plain as may be for the very simplest to conceive, when I say, some nouns do govern a genitive case, I mean that some nouns require a genitive case, that is, do cause the casual word that in construction doth follow next after them to be put in the genitive case. Some verbs do govern an accusative case, in thus saying my meaning is, that some verbs require an accusative case, that is, do cause the word that in construing doth come next after them, to be put in the accusative case.  
Qu. You mean then that the word which requireth such, or such a case after him, is said to govern, and that the word put in this or that case after an other word going before it, is said to be governed.  
An. That is my meaning, so that when I say in latin: Amor dei, The love of God, this first substantive amor, is said to govern, and the second substantive dei being the genitive case after amor the former, is said to be governed of amor.  
Qu. This is plain enough for all the rest of like sort. Now seeing in this whole treatise as well that which hath gone before, as this also which cometh here after we deal with construction, show me briefly, what construction is, and what it is conster? for the little petits are peradventure to seek in this.  

Construction.  An. Construction, is the due and orderly joining and knitting of the parts of speech together, according unto the right order of grammar.  

To conster.  And to conster, is to set the words in due or right frame, as they ought to go before, or to follow the one the other, when you turn latin into english (for taking this pains for young beginners, we will content ourselves with latin only) so that it be placed first, that aught in construing to have the first place, and that second, the which is to be set in the second place, and so of the rest, whereof some thing hath been spoken at the beginning.  
Qu. Now then following the order of your Accidence, we will first begin with the construction of nouns substantives, declaring what cases they will govern or have after them in construction. Tell me therefore how many cases a noun substantive may govern?  
An. A noun substantive may govern three cases, that is a genitive, a genitive or an ablative, and an ablative case alone.  
Qu. What is your rule for a substantive governing a genitive case?  

The first rule of substantives.  An. When two substantives come together betokening divers things the latter shall be the genitive case: as, Facundia Ciceronis, The eloquence of Cicero. Opus Vergilij, the work of Virgil. Amator studiorum, a lover of studies. Dogma Platonis, the opinion of Plato.  
Qu. Apply the examples of this rule to declare the meaning of the same.  

The examples applied.  Facundia Ciceronis, here are two substantives betokening divers things, and therefore the latter substantive Ciceronis is the genitive case governed of the former Facundia, by this rule.  

The second example.  Opus Vergilij. In this example opus and Vergilij two substantives coming together, and betokening divers things, Vergilij the latter of them is the genitive case governed of opus the former by this rule.  

The third example.  Amator studiorum. Here are two substantives, amator, and studiorum coming together, and betokening divers things, wherefore studiorum the latter substantive is put in the genitive case being governed of amator the former, by this rule.  

The fourth example.  Dogma Platonis. In this example these two substantives dogma and Platonis do come together and do betoken divers things, wherefore Platonis the latter of them is put in the genitive case, being governed of dogma the former, by this rule.  
Qu. But what if the two substantives coming together do appertain both unto one thing?  
An. Then they shall be put both in one case by the rule following, which is this,  

An exception.  But if they belong both unto one thing, they shall be put both in one case: as Pater meus vir, amat me puerum, My father being a man, loveth me a child.  

The example applied. Sometime the latter of these substantives is put also in the genitive case.  In the first branch of this sentence, there are two substantives pater and vir coming together, and because they do belong both unto one thing, therefore are they put both in one case, that is, vir the latter substantive is the nominative with pater the former substantive. And so likewise in the latter part of this same sentence, there are other two substantives me and puerum, coming together, and because they also do appertain both to one thing, they are put both in one case, so that puerum the latter substantive is put in the accusative case with me, the former, by this exception.  
Qu. What have you further to note concerning this first rule?  

another profitable note.  An. Sometime the former of the two substantives coming together, and being referred unto divers things, and the which should cause the latter subsantive to be put in the genitive case, is not expressly set down, but understood: as Vbi ad Dianae veneris, When you come unto the temple of Diana. Here is only the latter substantive Dianae the genitive case expressly set down, and the former substantive Templum, which causeth it to be put in the genitive case is understood, whereof in authors you shall find many more such like examples.  

Objection.  Qu. But sometime you shall have an adjective in the neuter gender to govern a substantive after him in the genitive case.  

Answer. How an adjective put alone in the neuter gender, may have a genitive case.  An. When this cometh to pass, then is the same adjective said to be put absolutely, that is, by himself alone having no substantive to agree with, and being thus put, he looseth the nature of an adjective, and is taken for a substantive, causing the other substantive following to be put in the genitive case, as if he himself were a substantive, by this rule:  

The rule for an adjective put alone in the neuter gender.  An adjective in the neuter gender, put alone without a substantive, standeth for a substantive, and may have a genitive case after him, as if he were a substantive: as Multum lucri, Much gains. Quantum negotij? How much business? Id operis, That work.  
Qu. How apply you these examples unto the rule?  

The first example applied.  An. Multum lucri. In this example the adjective Multum of the neuter gender, being set alone without a substantive to agree with, causeth the substantive lucri to be the genitive case, as if he himself were also a substantive.  

The second example applied.  Quantum negotij? In this second example the adjective quantum being set alone in the neuter gender without any substantive, wherewith he may agree, doth stand for a substantive, and causeth the substantive negotij following after him, to be put in the genitive case, as if quantum itself had been a substantive.  

The third example applied.  Id operis. In this third example the adjective id is set alone in the neuter gender without a substantive to agree with, and therefore doth he cause the substantive operis coming after him, to be put in the genitive case, as if he were a substantive.  

Objection.  Qu. Wherefore do you say in all these examples, that the adjective is set alone without a substantive to agree with, seeing that in every one of them, every several adjective hath his several substantive joined with him.  

Answer.  An. Because that albeit every adjective hath a several substantive following him, yet doth not any of the adjectives agree with any of the substantives, or is put in the same case, gender, and number, that the substantive following him is of, but doth govern the said substantives, causing them to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  
Qu. There is yet one rule put in here among the rules of substantives, concerning the English of this word Res, a thing, put with an adjective, and causing the adjective to become a substantive, the which, I see not how it can very fitly agree with this place.  
An. This rule I grant, might more properly have been handled in the second concord between the substantive and the adjective, in as much as an adjective being so put as this rule requireth, doth oftentimes become a substantive, with the which the adjective following in the same sentence doth agree in case, gender, and number. But yet seeing that this place treateth of substantives, and that in such consideration as in this rule is specified, and adjective may become a substantive: for this cause as I take it, the Author of our Accidence thought good to set down this rule among the other rules of substantives, the which is as followeth.  

A rule for the english of this word Res put with an adjective.  When the English of this word Res, a thing, is put with an adjective, ye may put away Res, and put the adjective in the neuter gender, like a substantive: as Multa me impedierunt, Many things have letted me.  
And being so put, it may be the substantive to an adjective: as, Pauca his similia, A few things like unto these. Nonnulla huiusmodi, Many things of like sort.  

The first example applied. If you resolve this sentence by the word Res, you must say, Multae res me impedierunt. The second example applied. You may resolve this sentence thus by the word, Res, Paucae res his similes.  In the first example the adjective multa, many things, having in English the signification of this word res, a thing, joined with him, in Latin shutteth clean out this word res, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number, being the nominative case unto the verb impedierunt, as if he were a substantive by this rule.  
In the second example, Pauca his fimilia, the adjective pauca, few things, having in English the signification of this word res, a thing, joined with him, in Latin shutteth out the said word, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number like a substantive, with the which the adjective similia doth agree in case, gender, and number, being the nominative case, the neuter gender, and the plural number, like as pauca is, by this rule.  

The third example applied.  In the third example, Nonnulla huiusmodi, the adjective nonnulla, many things, having in English the signification of this word res joined with him, 
This sentence by Res may be resolved thus, Nonnullae res huiusmodi.  doth in Latin shut out the word res, and is put alone in the neuter gender, and plural number, like a substantive, with the which the adjective huiusmodi doth agree in case, gender, and number, being the nominative case, the neuter gender, and plural number, like as nonnulla is, by this rule.  
Qu. Thus much concerning substantives governing a genitive case only, with such other matters as appertained thereunto. What is now your next rule?  

Substantives governing a genitive case, or an ablative.  An. Our next rule is of the second kind of construction of substantives, where they do govern indifferently a genitive case, or an ablative.  
Qu. By what rule?  

The rule.  An. Words importing indument of any quality or property, to the praise or dispraise of a thing, coming after a noun substantive, or a verb substantive, 
By a verb substantive is meant the verb Sum, es, fui, etc.  may be put in the genitive case, or in the ablative: as Puer boni ingenij, or Puer bono ingenio, A child of a good wit. Puer bona indole, or Puer bona indolis, A child of a good towardness.  
Qu. Can you not express the meaning of this rule in fewer words?  
An. It may be shortly set down thus: A noun substantive betokening praise or dispraise of a thing (the which commonly is perceived by the adjective joined with him) coming after a noun substantive, or a verb substantive, may be put in the genitive, or ablative case.  
Qu. Now apply your examples unto the rule.  

The examples applied.  An. Puer boni ingenij. Here the substantive ingenij being a word of praise, is put in the genitive case coming after the other noun substantive puer by this rule. And in the other saying, Puer bono ingenio, the substantive of praise ingenio, is put after the other substantive puer in the ablative case by the same rule, because such kind of substantives in such manner of speaking, may be put either in the genitive case, or else in the ablative.  
Puer bona indole. Here indole a substantive of praise is put in the ablative case after the other substantive puer by this rule. And in the other saying puer bonae indolis, the substantive of praise indolis, is put after the other substantive puer in the genitive case by the same rule, because that in such like speaking the substantive of praise or dispraise may be put in the ablative or genitive case.  

Substantives usually having only an ablative case.  Qu. Let us now come unto the third kind of substantives governing only an ablative case.  
An. They are but two in number, namely, opus and usus, and are in such kind of construction undeclined, that is having in all their cases the same termination.  
Qu. What are the words of your rule?  

The example applied. Opus & usus.  An. Opus and usus when they be latin for need, require an ablative case: 
Opus sometime hath also a genitive case, and sometime an accusative case, and usus also an accusative case, but this is very seldom.  as Opus est mihi tuo judicio, I have need of thy judgement, Viginti minis usus est filio, My son hath need of twenty pounds.  
Opus est mihi tuo judicio. In this example judicio is the ablative case, governed of opus by this rule.  
Viginti minis usus est filio. Here is the ablative case, governed of usus by this rule.  
Sometime this word opus is taken for an adjective, and hath the signification of necesse, or necessarius, needful, or necessary, and then it may have a nominative or an accusative case to be construed withal, and some other construction also.   

The construction of nouns adjectives or what case they will have after them. And first of such adjectives, as require a genitive case.  
Qu. Having passed through the rules set down in your Accidence for such case as nouns substantives will have after them, let us now hear what is to be said for the construction of adjectives. What cases may adjectives have after them?  

Cases of adjectives.  An. Some adjectives have only a genitive case; some a dative only: some only an accusative case: and some only an ablative: and some may have one, or more of these cases together.  
Qu. We will then take this course, that we will first handle such adjectives, as have but one case after them only, and afterwards deal with them that have more than one case. And first of adjectives governing a genitive case, for the which what is your first rule?  

Rules for adjectives, governing a genitive case only.  An. adjectives that signify desire, knowledge, remembrance, ignorance, or forgetting, and such like, require a genitive case: as, Cupidus auri, Covetous of money. Peritus belli, Expert of warfare. Ignarus omnium, Ignorant of all things. Fidens animi, bold of heart. Dubius mentis, Doubtful of mind. Memor praeteriti, Mindful of that is past. Reus furti, Accused of theft.  
Qu. Show the meaning of this rule, by the several examples of the same.  


The examples applied.  
The first example.   This rule hath seven examples, whereof the first is, Cupidus auri, in which example the adjective cupidus signifying desire, doth cause the substantive auri coming after him to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  

The second example.  Peritus belli. Here the adjective peritus betokening knowledge, causeth the substantive belli coming after him, to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  

The third example.  Ignarus omnium. In this example, the adjective ignarus, signifying ignorance, causeth omnium the word following him, to be the genitive case by this rule.  

The fourth example.  Fidens animi. Here fidens an adjective signifying boldness, causeth the substantive animi to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  

The fift example.  Dubius mentis. In this sentence the adjective dubius betokening doubtfulness, causeth the substantive mentis to be the genitive case by this rule.  

The sixth example.  Memor praeteriti. Here memor the adjective signifying remembrance, causeth praeteriti the word following to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  

The seventh example.  Reus furti. In this example the adjective reus betokening accusing, doth govern the substantive furti in the genitive case by this rule.  
Qu. Are there no other adjectives of like signification unto these expressed in the former rule, the which do govern also a genitive case?  

A note for other adjectives governing a genitive case.  An. There are beside these a great number of adjectives derived of verbs, the which do also govern a genitive case, whereof some end in us, some in axe, some in idus, or ius, some in rus, and tus with many others, the which cannot be comprehended under any certain rule, and therefore are to be marked by diligent reading of good authors.  
Qu. Rehearse the next rule for adjectives governing a genitive case.  

Nouns partitives.  An. Nouns partitives, and certain interrogatives, with certain nouns of number, require a genitive case: as Aliquis, Some body. Uter, Whether. Neuter, Nether. Nemo, No body. Nullus, None. Solus, Alone. unus, One. Medius, The middlemost. Quisque, Every one. Quisquis, Whosoever. Quicunque, Whosoever. Quidam, Some. quis for Aliquis, Some body: or, quis an interrogative, Who. unus, one, duo, two, tres, three, primus, first, secundus, second, tertius, third, etc. As, Aliquis nostrum, Some of us. Primus omnium, First of all.  
Qu. Apply your examples unto this rule.  

The examples applied.  An. Aliquis nostrum. Here the noun partitive aliquis doth make the pronoun nostrum to be the genitive case by this rule.  
Primus omnium. In this example primus a noun of number doth cause omnium to be put in the genitive case by this rule.  
Qu. What do you call a noun partitive?  

Nouns partitives.  An. Those are called nouns partitives, the which do either signify many, as quisque, every one, or else one among many, as alter, another.  
Qu. And what are nouns interrogatives?  

Nouns interrogatives  An. Such as do ask a question, as quis, who, and such like.  
Qu. What else is there to be noted concerning this rule?  

The adjective and the genitive case which by this rule he governeth, are sometime of divers genders.  An. The adjectives, which by this rule do govern a genitive case, must be of the same gender that the genitive case is, the which they do govern for the most part, except the genitive case be either this word rerum, or else some noun collective, that is, such a noun as in the singular number doth signify a multitude: for than may the adjective, and the genitive case which he governeth, be of contrary genders.  
Qu. What have you more to say, as touching this rule?  

A rule borrowed from the latin.  An. Sometimes the adjectives appertaining unto this rule, are construed with a dative case, and sometimes with an accusative case with a preposition, and sometime with an ablative case with a preposition.  
Qu. What is the next rule?  

The rule of ask and answering a question.  An. When a question is asked, the answer in Latin must be made by the same case of a noun, pronoun, or participle, and by the same tense of a verb, that the question is asked by: as Cuius est fundus? Vicini. Whose ground is it? My neighbours. Quid agitur in ludo literario? Studetur. What do they in the school? They study.  

Objection.  Qu. To what purpose is this rule brought in here among adjectives governing a genitive case, when as oftentimes in the examples of this rule there is neither adjective, nor yet genitive case at all?  

Answer.  An. Yet for as much as many times the question is asked by Cuius, the genitive case of quis the interrogative, and for that the word that answereth the same question, is oftentimes the genitive case also, this rule is not unfitly placed here among the other rules of adjectives governing a genitive case.  
Qu. Let us see then how the examples agree with the rule.  

The examples applied. The first.  An. Cuius est fundus? Vicini. In this example the question is asked by the genitive case Cuius, and the answer is made by this word vicini, being put in the genitive case by this rule, which will have the word ask the question, and the word answering the question to be put both in one case.  

The second.  Quid agitur in ludo literario? Studetur. Here the question being asked by quid and the verb agitur of the present tense, the answer is made by studetur, a verb likewise of the present tense, by the second branch of the same rule requiring, if the question be asked by a verb, that the answer be made by another verb of the same tense.  
Qu. How many exceptions are there from this rule?  

Three exceptions from the rule afore going.  An. There are three exceptions. The first, when the question is asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium, Whose? The second, when the question is asked by a word that may govern divers cases. The third, when the answer must be made by one of these pronouns possessives, Meus, mine, tuus, thine, suus, his, noster, ours, vester, yours.  
Qu. Rehearse these in order as they are set down in your Accidence.  
An. Except a question be asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium: as Cuia est sententia? Ciceronis. Whose sentence is it? Cicero's.  
Qu. This exception is somewhat dark for a young beginner: Make it therefore more plain: for it seemeth to be an unperfect sentence.  

The exceptions made plain, and their examples applied. The first exception.  An. If a question be asked by Cuius, cuia, cuium, the nominative case, than the answer must be made not by the same case, but by the genitive, as Cuia est sententia? Ciceronis, where the question is asked by the nominative case Cuia, and answered by the genitive case Ciceronis, by this exception.  
Qu. What is the second exception?  
An. Or by a word that may govern divers cases, as Quanti emisti librum? parvo. For how much bought you the book? For a little.  
Qu. Make this exception also more plain.  

The second exception and his example made plain.  An. When a question is asked by a word that may govern divers cases, the word that asketh the question, and the word that answereth the same, shall not be both of one case, as in this example: Quanti emisti librum? parvo: the question is asked by the genitive case quanti, because the verb emisti doth cause this adjective with certain others being set without substantives, to be the genitive case: and the answer is made by the word parvo in the ablative case, because the same verb also will have an ablative case of this adjective, and certain others, and so because it governeth divers cases, the word quanti ask the question, and the word parvo answering the question, are in this example put in divers cases.  
Qu. What is the third exception?  

The third exception.  An. Or except I must answer by one of these possessives, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, vester: as Cuius est domus? Non vestra, sed nostra. Whose house is it? Not yours, but ours.  
Qu. Make this exception also as plain as may be.  

The exception and his example made plain.  An. If the question must be answered by any of those pronouns possessives, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, vester: then the word ask the question, and the word answering the question shall not be both of one case, as in the former example the word Cuius is the genitive case ask the question, and the word vestra a pronoun possessive answering the question, is the nominative case by this exception.  
Qu. Come to the next rule of adjectives governing a genitive case.  

Comparatives and Superlatives governing a genitive case, with whom for the most part they must be of the same gender. The first example applied.  An. Nouns of the comparative and the superlative degree being put partitively, that is to say, having after them this English, Of, or Among, require a genitive case: as Aurium mollior est sinistra, Of the ears, the left is the softer. Cicero oratorum eloquentissimus, Cicero the most eloquent of orators.  
In this first example, Aurium mollior est sinistra, the word aurium is the genitive case, governed by the comparative degree mollior, the which hereby I know to be put partitively, because aurium hath before it in English this sign Of, according unto this rule.  

The second example applied.  In the second example, Cicero oratorum eloquentissimus, this word oratorum is put in the genitive case governed of the superlative degree eloquentissimus, being put partitively, the which I know by this sign of, going in English before the word oratorum, when it is construed, by this rule.   

Of adjectives governing a dative case.  

A dative case after adjectives.  adjectives, that betoken profit, or disprofit, likeness, unlikeness, pleasure, submitting, or belonging to any thing, require a dative case: as Labour est utilis corpori, Labour is profitable for the body. Aequalis Hectori, Equal to Hector. Idoneus bello, Fit for war. jucundus omnibus, Pleasant to all persons. Parenti supplex, Suppliant to his father. Mihi proprium, Proper to me.  

The examples applied. The first.  In this rule are six examples, whereof the first is, Labour est utilis corpori, in the which corpori is the dative case governed of the adjective utilis signifying profit by this rule.  

The second.  In the second example, Aequalis Hectori, this word Hectori is the dative case governed of aequalis, an adjective signifying likeness by this rule. 
Note.  Where note that many adjectives signifying likeness do sometimes govern a genitive case.  

The third.  In the third example, Idoneus bello, the word bello is the dative case governed of the adjective idoneus, signifying profit by this rule. 
A note borrowed from the latin.  Where note also that this adjective idoneus, fit, or profitable, with certain others, as Natus, borne, commodus, profitable, incommodus, unprofitable, utilis profitable, inutilis, unprofitable, vehemens, darnest, aptus, fit, will some time have an accusative case with the preposition ad, to.  

The fourth.  In the fourth example jucundus omnibus, the word omnibus is the dative case governed of the adjective iucundus, betokening pleasure by this rule.  

The fift.  In the fift example Parenti supplex, parenti is the dative case governed of the adjective supplex betokening submitting, by this rule.  

The sixth.  In the sixth example Mihi proprium, this word mihi is the dative case governed of the adjective proprium, signifying a belonging to a thing, by this rule. And this adjective proprium doth sometime also govern a genitive case.  
Qu. What is your next rule for adjectives requiring a dative case?  

another rule for a dative case after adjectives.  An. Likewise nouns adjectives of the passive signification in bilis, and participials in dus, require a dative case: as Flebilis, flendus omnibus, To be lamented of all men. Formidabilis, formidandus hosti, To be feared of his enemies.  

The first example applied.  In the first of these examples, Flebilis, flendus omnibus, the adjective flebilis of the passive or suffering signification, and the participial adjective flendus ending in dus, do govern the word omnibus in the dative case by this rule.  

The second example applied.  In the second example Formidabilis, formidandus hosti, the adjective formidabilis of the passive or suffering signification ending in bilis, and the participial adjective formidandus ending in dus, do govern the word hosti in the dative case by this rule.  

What is meant by a participial.  Qu. What do you call a participial in dus?  
An. A participial in this place is taken for an adjective like a participle, but yet in deed no participle, because he doth not signify time, as when he is a participle, he always ought to do.  

adjectives construed with divers cases. This rule is borrowed from the latin-Grammar.  And further here is to be noted that many adjectives compounded with the preposition con, do also govern a dative case, and that these adjectives, communis, common, alienus, strange, immunis, free, are construed with divers cases, as sometimes a dative, sometimes a dative with an ablative, sometimes with a genitive, sometimes with an ablative with a preposition only, saving that the variety of this kind of construction is to be diligently observed in these adjectives, joining them in latin writing with such cases only, as the best approved writers do use to match them withal.   

adjectives governing an accusative case for the most part.  


An accusative case after adjectives.  
And sometimes these substantives are put also in the genitive case. This rule is borrowed from the latin. The first example applied. The second example applied.   THe measure of length, breadth, or thickness of any thing, is put after adjectives in the accusative case, and sometime in the ablative case: as, Turris alta centum pedes, A tower an hundredth foot high. Arborlata tres digitos, A tree three fingers broad. Liber crassus tres policies, vel tribus pollicibus, A book three inches thick.  
In the first example. Turris alta centum pedes, this word pedes betokening the height of a thing, that is, of the tower spoken of in this sentence, is put after the adjective alta in the accusative case by this rule.  
Arbour lata tres digitos. In this sentence the word digitos betokening the measure of breadth, is put after the adjective lata in the accusative case by this rule.  

The third example applied.  In the third example. Liber crassus tres policies, vel tribus pollicibus, after the adjective crassus, the word policies is put in the accusative case, being a word that here resembleth thickness, and it may be said also in the ablative case pollicibus, because that these words of the measure of any thing, may be put after adjectives in the accusative or ablative case indifferently.  

Objection.  Qu. But how shall a young Puny know whether the word of measure do signify, either the depth, height, length, thickness, squareness, roundness, or any such other quantity of a thing?  

Answer.  An. That is to be gathered by the signification of the adjective going before it in the same sentence, for if the adjective have the signification of thickness, then is the substantive, which he governeth to be understood to be spoken of thickness in that place also: if the adjective signify breadth, the word of measure, which he governeth, carrieth the signification of breadth, in that sentence also: if the adjective signify height, the substantive of measure governed by him in the same sentence is to be supposed to be meant of height also, as appeareth in all the examples before, and the like is to be said of all such other like, as for example when I say, thirty foot high, here the word foot is understood of height, ten foot broad, here it is spoken of breadth, two foot deep, in this place it is to be referred unto depth, and so forth in all other measures.  
Qu. Set down this rule then in fewer words for the ease of the younger one.  

The former rule set down more briefly.  An. The word of measure may be put after adjectives in the accusative case, and sometime in the ablative or genitive.  
Note also that many adjectives do govern an accusative or an ablative case by the figure Synecdoche, of the which, as time serveth, the good schoolmaster will instruct his scholars according to their capacity.   

adjectives governing an ablative case.  

An ablative case after adjectives.  Nouns of the comparative degree, having then or by after them, do cause the word following to be the ablative case: as Frigidior glacie, More cold than ye. Doctior multo, Better learned by a great deal. uno pede altior, Higher by a foot.  

The first example applied.  This rule hath three examples, in the first of the which Frigidior glacie, the substantive glacie, when you do construe it, being englished with this sign than before it, is the ablative case governed of the comparative degree frigidior, by this rule.  

The second example applied.  In the second example Doctior multo, the comparative degree doctior doth cause the word multo coming after him, and when it is englished, having this sign by before it, to be put in the ablative case by this rule.  

The third example applied.  In the third example, uno pede altior, the word altior of the comparative degree causeth the substantive pede to be the ablative case, 
The second rule for adjectives with an ablative case.  because it followeth in construction the said word altior, and hath before it this sign by, by this rule.  
The adjectives Dignus, Worthy, Indignus, Unworthy, Praeditus, Endued, Captus, Taken, Contentus, Content, with such others, 

Add to these cinctus, girded, fretus, trusting, ornatus, decked, and such others.  
The examples applied.   will have an ablative case: as Dignus honore, Worthy of honour, captus oculis, Taken in his eyes, or blind, virtute praeditus, Endued with virtue, paucis contentus, Content with few things.  
In these examples, honore after dignus, oculis after captus, virtute after praeditus, paucis after contentus, are the ablative case by this rule.  


Dignus indignus with a genitive case. Dignus, indignus, and contentus, with an infinitive mood.  
The first example applied.   Note also that dignus and indignus sometime do govern a genitive case.  
And note further, that dignus, indignus, and contentus, may in stead of the ablative case have an infinitive mood of a verb: as, Dignus laudari, Worthy to be praised, contentus in pace vivere, Content to live in peace.  
Dignus laudari, in this example the infinitive mood laudari, is put after the adjective dignus, in stead of an ablative case, by this rule.  

The second example applied.  Contentus in pace vivere, in this example the infinitive mood vivere is put after the adjective contentus, in stead of an ablative case, by this rule.  
Qu. Are there no other rules besides these, for adjectives governing an ablative case?  

Other rules for adjectives with an ablative case  An. There are yet three other rules in the Latin grammar, the which in English are as followeth.  

The first rule. Sometimes these adjectives have a dative case.  Nouns that betoken diversity, will have an ablative case with a preposition: as Diversus ab isto, divers from this man, where the adjective diversus betokening diversity, causeth isto to be put in the ablative case with the preposition ab, by this rule.  

The second rule.  adjectives will have an ablative case signifying the cause of a thing: as Livida armis brachia, Arms black and blue with weapons, where the adjective livida governeth the word armis in the ablative case, signifying the cause of the same by this rule.  

The third rule.  adjectives will have an ablative case signifying the form or manner of a thing: as, Fancies miris modis pallida, a face pale after a marvelous manner. In this example the adjective pallida hath modis an ablative case after him, signifying the manner of the paleness by this rule.   

adjectives governing an ablative case, or a genitive case.  

adjectives with an ablative or genitive case.  adjectives signifying fullness, emptiness, plenty or wanting, require an ablative case, and sometimes a genitive: as, copijs abundans, abounding in riches, crura thymo plenae, bees having their thighs full of thyme: vacuus ira, irae, ab ira, void of anger. Nulla epistola inanis re aliqua, No epistle without some matter. Ditissimus agri, most rich in land. Stultorum plena sunt omnia, all places are full of fools. Quis nisi mentis inops, oblatum respuat aurum? Who, except he be void of wit, will refuse gold offered him? Integer vitae, scelerisque purus, non eget Mauri iaculis, nec arcu, He that is innocent of life, and clear of wickedness, needeth neither the darts, nor bow of the Moor. Expers omnium, void of all thiags. Corpus inane animae, a body without a soul.  
Qu. Because the many examples of this rule mingled together, do cause the same to be long and dark for the younger sort, divide the examples of the same into their several heads by themselves.  

The examples of this rule of two sorts.  An. The examples of this rule are of two forts, the one of adjectives with an ablative case according to this rule, and the other of adjectives with a genitive case by the same rule.  
Qu. How many are the examples of adjectives of this rule with an ablative case?  

The examples of the first branch applied.  An. They are in number four, whereof the first is, copijs abundans, in which example the adjective abundans signifying plenty, doth govern the substantive copijs in the ablative case by this rule.  
In the second example, crura thymo plenae, the adjective plenae betokening fullness, doth govern the substantive thymo in the ablative case by this rule.  
Vacuus ira, irae, ab ira. In this example vacuus the adjective signifying emptiness, doth govern ira the substantive in the ablative case by this rule, so like wise he may be construed with agenitive case, saying vacuus irae, by the same rule, and moreover he may have an ablative case with a preposition, as vacuus ab ira.  
In the fourth example, Nulla epistola inanis re aliqua, the adjective inanis signifying emptiness, doth govern the substantive re in the ablative case, by this rule.  
Qu. How many examples are there of adjectives by this rule governing a genitive case?  

The examples of the second branch of the former rule applied.  An. There be six, whereof the first is, Ditissimus agri, in which example the adjective ditissimus betokening plenty, doth govern the substantive agri in the genitive case by this rule.  
In the second example, Stultorum plena sunt omnia, the adjective plena signifying fullness, causeth stultorum to be the genitive case by this rule.  
In the third example, Quis nisi mentis inops, etc. the adjective inops betokening wanting, doth govern the substantive mentis in the genitive case by this rule.  
In the fourth example, Integer vitae, scelerisque purus, etc. the adjective integer betokening wanting, doth govern vitae in the genitive case, and the adjective purus likewise signifying wanting, doth govern the substantive sceleris in the genitive case by this rule.  
In the fift example, Expers omnium, the adjective expers signifying emptiness, doth govern omnium in the genitive case by this rule.  
In the sixth example, Corpus inane animae, the adjective inane betokening wanting, governeth the substantive animae in the genitive case by this rule.   

Construction of certain Pronouns, and how they are governed.  

Mei, tui, sui, nostri, vestri.  THese genitive cases of the primitives, Mei, tui, sui, nostri and vestri, be used when the passion or suffering is signified: as Pars tui, Part of thee, Amor mei, The love of me.  
But when possession of a thing is signified, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester be used: as Ars tua, thine art. Imago tua, thine image.  

The examples applied.  Pars tui, in this example the genitive case tui of the primitive Tutor, signifying suffering, is put after the substantive pars by this rule.  
Amor mei, in this example, the genitive case mei of the primitive ego, betokening suffering, is put after the substantive amor by this rule.  
Ars tua, here because possession of a thing is signified, the possessive pronoun tua is joined with arse, and not tui the genitive of the primitive tu, by this rule.  
Imago tua, in this example likewise the possessive pronoun tua, is used with the substantive imago, and not the genitive tui, of the primitive tu, because possession of a thing is signified, by this rule.  

An admonition  For the better understanding of this rule the which in deed is too hard for young beginners, let the learned master teach them, when the genitive case is taken actively, when passively, & when possessively, whereof let the scholars of more learning read Despauterius in his rule of Mei, tui, sui, nostri, and vestri.  

Nostrum, vestrum.  These genitive cases, Nostrum, vestrum, be used after distributives, comparatives, partitives, and superlatives: as Aliquis nostrum, Some of us. Maior vestrum, The greater of you. Maximus natu nostrum, The elders of us.  

The examples applied.  In the first example, Aliquis nostrum, the genitive case nostrum, is used after the distributive aliquis by this rule.  
Maior vestrum, in this place the genitive case vestrum, is used after the comparative mayor, by this rule.  
In the third example, Maximus natu nostrum, the genitive case nostrum, is used after the superlative degree maximus, by this rule.  

another rule borrowed from the latin Grammar.  Also these possessives Meus, tuus, suus, noster and vester, have after them sometimes these genitive cases: Ipsius, solius, unius, duorum, trium, omnium, plurium, paucorum, cuiusque, and sometimes the genitive case of a participle.   

Construction of verbs, or what cases verbs do govern: and first of verbs governing a nominative case.  

Verbs with a nominative case after them.  SVm, I am, Forem, I were, fio, I am made, existo, I am, and certain verbs passives, as dicor, I am said, or called, vocor, I am called, salutor, I am saluted, appellor, I am named, habeor, I am counted, existimor, I am esteemed, videor, I am seen, or accounted, with other like, will have such case after them, as they have before them: as, Fama est malum, Fame is an evil thing. Malus cultura fit bonus, An evil person by due ordering or governance is made good. Croesus' vocatur dives, Croesus is called rich. Horatius salutatur poëta, Horace is saluted by the name of poet. Malo te divitem esse quàm haberi, I had leifer thou were rich in deed, than so accounted.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath five examples: four of a nominative case after the verb, and the fift of an accusative case after the verb.  
In the first example Fama est malum, the verb est having fama the nominative case before him causeth malum also to be the nominative case after him by this rule.  
Malus cultura fit bonus, In this second example malus is the nominative case before the verb fit, and therefore doth the same verb cause bonus to be the nominative case after him by this rule.  
Croesus' vocatur dives, In this third example Croesus is the nominative case before the verb passive vocatur, and therefore is dives the nominative case after him by this rule.  
Horatius salutatur poëta. In this fourth example Horatius is the nominative case before the verb passive salutatur, and therefore is poëta the nominative case after the said verb by this rule.  
In the fift example, Malo te divitem esse quàm haberi, te is the accusative case before the infinitive mood esse, and therefore in construction divitem is likewise the accusative case after the same verb by this rule.  

Another rule for a nominative case after the verb.  Also verbs that betoken bodily moving, going, resting, or doing, which be properly called verbs of gesture, as, Eo, I go, incedo, I go, curro, I run, sedeo, I sit, cubo, I lie, appareo, I appear, bibo, I drink, studeo, I study, dormio, I sleep, somnio, I dream, and such other like, as they have before them a nominative case of the doer, or sufferer, so may they have a nominative case after them, 
This rule in fewer words is thus: Verbs of gesture have such case after them, as they have before them.  of a noun or a participle, declaring the manner of circumstance of the doing, or suffering: as Incedo claudus, I go lame, Petrus dormit securus, Peter sleepeth void of care. Tu cubas supinus, Thou liest in bed with thy face upward. Somnias vigilans, Thou dreamest waking. Studeto stans, Study thou standing.  
And likewise in the accusative case: as, Non decet quenquam meiere currentem aut mandentem, It doth not become any man to piss, running, or eating.  

The examples applied to the meaning of this rule, as I have briefly set it down before, for the ease of the little ones.  This rule hath six examples, of the which the first five are of a nominative case after such kind of verbs as are mentioned in this rule, which are called verbs of gesture, and the sixth is of an accusative case after the said verbs.  
In the first example Incedo claudus, as this verb of gesture incedo hath ego understood for his nominative case before him, so hath he claudus the nominative case after him by this rule.  
Petrus domit securus, in this second example, as Petrus is nominative case before dormio a verb of gesture, so is securus nominative case after him by this rule.  
Tu cubas supinus, in this third example tu is nominative case before the verb of gesture cubas, and therefore is supinus nominative case after him by this rule.  
Somnias vigilans, in this fourth example as the pronoun tu understood is nominative case before the verb of gesture somnias, so is vigilans the nominative case after him by this rule.  
In the fift example studeto stans, like as the pronoun tu understood is the nominative case before the verb of gesture studeto, so is stans the nominative case after him by this rule.  
Non decet quenquam meiere currentem, aut mandentem, in this sixth example this word quenquam is the accusative case before the infinitive mood meiere, a verb of gesture, and therefore currentem is the accusative case after the said verb by this rule.  

An admonition.  It had been long and tedious in every one of these examples to have showed how the nominative case before the verb signified doing or suffering, and how the nominative after the verb declared the manner of circumstance of the doing or suffering, and therefore the examples are applied unto the rule as it is shorter set down in the margin before, nevertheless the master, if he think the capacity of his scholar will beat it, may apply the examples in the other manner: that is more large.  

The third rule for the nominative case after the verb.  And generally, when the word that goeth before the verb, and the word that cometh after the verb, belong both to one thing, that is to say, have respect either to other, or depend either of other, they shall be put both in one case, whether the verb be transitive or intransitive, or of what kind soever the verb be: as, Loquor frequens, I speak often. Taceo multus, I hold my peace much. Scribo epistolas rarissimus, I writ letters very seldom. Ne assuescas bibere vinum ieiunus, Accustom not thyself to drink wine next thine heart, or not having eaten somewhat before.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath four examples, whereof the first is, Loquor frequens, in which example, as ego understood is nominative case before the verba loquor, so frequens is the nominative case after him, as having respect unto ego the nominative case before the verb by this rule.  
Taceo multus. In this second example also ego is nominative case before the verb taceo, and multus nominative case after the verb taceo, because they belong unto one thing by this rule.  
Scribo epistolas rarissimus. In this example rarissimus is nominative case after the verb scribo, because it hath respect unto ego understood, which is the nominative case before the same verb, by this rule.  
Ne assuescas bibere vinum ieiunus. In this fourth example ieiunus is nominative case after the verb assuescas, because it hath respect unto tu the nominative case understood before the said verb, by this rule.   

Verbs governing a genitive case after them.  

Verbs with a genitive case after them.  THis verb Sum, when it betokeneth or importeth possession, owing, or otherwise pertaining to a thing, as a token, property, duty, or guise, it causeth the noun, pronoun, or participle following to be put in the genitive case: 
This rule shorter is thus. This verb Sum, with all his moods and persons, when they betoken possession, or pertaining to a thing, require a genitive case.  as, Haec vestis est patris, This garment is my fathers. Insipientis est dicere, non putâram, It is the property of a fool to say, I had not thought. Extremae est dementiae discere dediscenda, It is a point of the greatest folly in the world to learn things that afterward must be learned otherwise. Orantis est, nihil nisi coelestia cogitare, It is the duty of a man that is saying of his prayers to have mind on nothing but heavenly things.  

The examples applied.  There be four examples in this rule, in the first whereof Haec vestis est patris, this word patris is the genitive case governed of the verb est betokening possession, or showing whose the garment is, by this rule.  
In the second example, Insipientis est dicere, non putâram, this word insipientis is the genitive case, governed of the verb est betokening a property, by this rule.  
In the third example, Extremae est dementiae discere dediscenda, this word dementiae is the genitive case governed of the verb est, signifying the pertaining or belonging unto a fool, or the point and token of a fool, by this rule.  
In the fourth example, Orantis est, nihil nisi coelestia cogitare, this participle orantis is the genitive case governed of the verb est, signifying a duty, by this rule.  
Qu. Is this rule always true, so that it hath none exception?  
An. Not so. For if any of these pronouns, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester be used after this verb Sum in such manner of speaking, when it betokeneth or importeth possession, or pertaining to a thing, they shall be put in the nominative case, and not in the genitive, by this exception following:  

An exception from the former rule.  Except that these pronouns, Meus, tuus, suus, noster, and vester shall in such manner of speaking be used in the nominative case: as Hic codex est meus, This book is mine. Haec domus est vestra, This house is yours. Non est mentiri meum, It is not my guise, or property to lie. Nostrum est iniuriam non infer, It is our parts not to do wrong. Tuum est omnia juxta pati, It is thy part or duty, to suffer all things in like.  

The examples applied.  This exception hath five examples, whereof the first is, Hic codex est meus, in which example because this pronoun meus cometh after the verb est betokening possession, it is put in the nominative case by this exception.  
In the second example Haec domus est vestra, this pronoun vestra being put after the verb est signifying possession, is the nominative case by this exception.  
In the third example Non est mentiri meum, the pronoun meum coming after the verb est betokening a property, is put in the nominative case, & not in the genitive by this exception.  
In the fourth example Nostrum est iniuriam non infer, the pronoun nostrum is the nominative case after the verb est betokening a part or duty, by this exception.  
In the fift example Tuum est omnia juxta pati, the pronoun tuum coming after the verb est betokening a duty, is put in the nominative case, and not in the genitive case by this exception.  
Qu. But can you show me any reason, why in these kinds of speaking, these pronouns after the verb Sum should rather be used in the nominative case, than in the genitive?  


A reason why these pronouns set down in the former exception are rather put in the nominative case, than in the genitive after the verb Sum.  
another rule, for the genitive case after verbs.   An. These pronouns after the verb Sum, in these kinds of speaking, are rather put in the nominative case than in the genitive, because that they have substantives always as nominative cases unto the verb, either expressed or understood, with the which they must agree in case, gender, & number, the which substantives, if they be expressed are many & divers: if they be understood, it is for the most part this word officium, in english duty.  
Verbs that betoken to esteem or regard, require a genitive case betokening the value: as, parvi ducitur probitas, Honesty is reckoned little worth. Maximi penditur nobilitas, Nobleness of birth is very much regarded.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples. The first is parvi ducitur probitas, in the which this word parvi betokening the value, is the genitive case after the verb ducitur, signifying esteeming by this rule.  
In the second example Maximi penditur nobilitas, Maximi betokening the value is the genitive case after penditur, a verb of regarding, by this rule.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Here is to be noted that this verb aestimo, to esteem or regard, may have an ablative case also, as well as a genitive.  

another rule for verbs with a genitive case, and sometime an ablative.  Verbs of accusing, condemning, warning, purging, quitting, or assoiling, will have a genitive case, of the crime, or of the cause, or of the thing that one is accused, condemned, or warned of: or else an ablative case most commonly without a preposition: as Hic furti se alligat, vel furto, This man accuseth himself of theft. Admonuit me errati, vel errato, He admonished me, or gave me warning of my fault. De pecunijs reperundis damnatus est, He is condemned of bribery.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath three examples, in the first whereof Hic furti se alligat vel furto, this word furti, the genitive case betokening the crime, is governed of the verb of accusing alligat, by this rule, and you may say it also in the ablative case furto, after the same verb, thus, Hic furto se alligat, by this rule.  
In the second example, Admonuit me errati, vel errato, admonuit a verb of warning doth govern the word errati betokening the crime, in the genitive case, by this rule, and it may also be said errato in the ablative case thus, admonuit me errato vel de errato, by the same rule.  
In the third example, De pecunijs repetundis damnatus est, the word pecunijs betokening the crime is put in the ablative case with the preposition de after damnatus est, a verb of condemning by this rule.  

another rule for verbs with a genitive case.  These verbs Satago, to have as much as one can do, misereor, to have mercy, miseresco, to have pity, require a genitive case: as, Rerum suarum satagit, He hath as much as he can do of his own matters. Miserere mei deus, Have mercy on me O God.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof, Rerum suarum satagit, the word rerum is the genitive case after the verb satagit by this rule.  
In the second example Mei is the genitive case after the verb miserere, by this rule, but misercor and miseresco have sometimes also a dative case, but this is very seldom.  

another rule for verbs with a genitive, and sometime an accusative case.  These verbs Reminiscor, to remember, obliviscor, to forget, recordor, to remember; and memini, to remember, will have a genitive or an accusative case: as, Reminiscor historiae, I remember the history. Obliviscor carminis, I forget the verse. Recordor pueritiam, I call to remembrance my childhood. Obliviscor lectionem, I forget my lesson. Memini tui vel te, I remember thee. Memini de te; I spoke of thee.  

The examples applied.  The examples of this rule are five, whereof the first is Reminiscor historiae, in the which reminiscor doth govern the word historiae, in the genitive case by this rule, and you may say it by the accusative case thus, Reminiscor historiam, by the same rule.  
In the second example Obliviscor carminis, the verb obliviscor governeth the genitive case carminis, by this rule, and it may be said by the accusative case, Obliviscor carmen, by the same rule.  
In the third example Recordor pueritiam, the verb recordor causeth pueritiam to be put in the accusative case by this rule, and it may be said by the genitive case recordor pucritiae, by the same rule.  
In the fourth example Obliviscor lectionem, the word lectionem is the accusative case after the verb obliviscor by this rule, and it may be said by the genitive case Obliviscor lectionis, by the same rule.  

A note for the verb Memini.  In the fift example Memini tui vel te, the verb memini doth govern the genitive case tui, and the accusative case te by this rule. And in the other sentence, Memini de te, the same verb memini doth govern the word te in the ablative case with the preposition de, but in another signification. For the verb memini with a genitive or an accusative case doth signify to Remember, and with an ablative case with the preposition de, doth signify to make mention, or to speak of a thing.  

Objection.  Qu. But wherefore is this sentence, Indigeo tui vel te, I have need of thee, set here in this place?  

Answer.  An. To show that the verb indigeo may have either a genitive case, as tui in this example is, or that it may be construed with an ablative case, as te in the same example is: but indeed this example doth more properly belong unto the rule of verbs betokening fullness, emptiness, etc. following hereafter.  

A rule for the verb potior.  This verb Potior to conquer, enjoy, or obtain, will have a genitive, or an ablative case: as, Potior urbis, I conquer the city, Potior voto, I obtain my desire.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof Potior urbis, the verb potior hath a genitive case by this rule.  
In the second example Potior voto, the verb potior governeth an ablative case by the same rule.   

Verbs governing a dative case.  

Verbs with a dative case.  ALl manner of verbs put acquisitively, that is to say, with these tokens to or for after them, will have a dative case: as, Non omnibus dormio, I sleep not to all men. Huic habeo, non tibi, I have it for this man, and not for thee.  

The examples applied.  In this rule be two examples, in the first, Non omnibus dormio, the verb dormio being put acquisitively, doth govern omnibus in the dative case with this token to, before it in English, by this rule.  
In the second example, Huic habeo, non tibi, the verb Habeo put acquisitively doth govern the dative case tibi, with this sign for, before it in English, by this rule.  
This rule is very large, and hath many heads or branches, and therefore unto the same do belong these kind of verbs following signifying  
To 

1 Profit or disprofit: as, commodo, to profit, incommodo, to disprofit, noceo. to hurt. 
All these verbs most commonly have a dative case: and sometimes they are confirmed with other cases also.   
2 Give or restore: as, dono, to give, reddo, to restore, refero. to give again.  
3 Promise, or to pay: as, promitto, to promise, polliceor, to promise, soluo. to pay.  
4 Command, or show: as, impero, to command, indigo, to show, monstro. to show.  
5 Trust: as, fido, to trust, confido, to trust, fidem habeo. to trust.  
6 Obey or to be against: as, obedio, to obey, adulor, to flatter, repugno. to resist.  
7 Threaten or to be angry with: as, minor, to threaten, indignor, to be angry, irascor to be angry  
8 Compare: as, comparo, to compare, compono, to compare, confero. to compare.    

The verb sum, with a dative case.  Also this verb sum, with his compounds, except possum, as Absum, to be absent, adsum, to be present, desum, to be wanting, insum, to be in, intersum, to be present, praesum, to be chief, prosum, to profit, will have a dative case.  

Satisfacio, benefacio, malefacio with a dative case.  Also verbs compounded with these adverbes satis, bene, and male: as satisfacio, to satisfy, benefacio, to do a good turn, malefacio, to do an ill turn, will have a dative case.  

A dative case after verbs compound with certain praepositions.  Finally, certain verbs compound with these prepositions, prae, ad, con, sub, ante, post, ob, in, and inter, will have a dative case: as praeluceo, to excel, or to bear light before one, adiac●o, to lie near, condono, to pardon, suboleo, to smellou●, antesto, to stand before, or to excel, posthabeo, to set less by, obijcio, to lay against one, insulto, to leap upon, intersero, to put between, with many other such like, the which sometimes are joined with other cases also.  


This rule more shortly & more easily is thus: This verb est, set for habeo, will have a dative case.  
The examples applied.   This verb Sum, es, fui, may oftentimes be set for habeo, to have, and then the word that seemeth in the english to be the nominative case, shall be put in the dative case, and the word that seemeth to be the accusative case, shall be the nominative: as, Est mihi matter, I have a mother, Non est mihi argentum, I have no money.  
This rule hath two examples, the first is, Est mihi matter, which sentence being Englished, it appeareth that this verb est is set for habeo, and therefore the word I, which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, is put into the dative in the Latin by this word mihi, and mother, which in English seemed to be the accusative case, in Latin is the nominative case by this word matter, by this rule.  
In the second example Non est mihi argentum, by Englishing the same it appeareth that this verb est is set for habeo, and therefore the word I, the which in the English seemed to be the nominative case before the verb I have, in the Latin is after the verb est turned into the dative case tibi, and the word money, which in English seemed to be the accusative case after the verb have, in Latin is turned into the nominative case argentum unto the verb est by this rule.  

An exception from the former rule very dark and hard for a young scholar.  But if sum (that is the word which cometh of sum) be the infinitive mood, this nominative case shall be turned into the accusative case; as Scio tibi non esse argentum, I know thou hast no money.  
This rule hath one example, the which one hundredth scholars, which think themselves some body, may at the first brunt be peradventure set up with, and unless it be thus to be applied to express the meaning of the exception, I for my part confess that I know not what may be the meaning.  

The example applied.  In this example therefore, Scio tibi non esse argentum, this word argentum is the accusative case in construing before the infinitive mood esse, coming of this verbs sum, in this sentence in English, set for habeo, the which accusative case here, before the infinitive mood, if the sentence were to be uttered by any other mood of the verb sum, should in the Latin be the nominative case, as est tibi argentum, thou hast money, utinam esset illi liber, I would he had a book, and so forth of the like speeches: where when they are to be made by the infinitive mood, the word which before in the Latin was the nominative case, must be turned before the infinitive mood of sum, into the accusative case: as Laetor illi esse librum, I am glad he hath a book, but all this much a do, and tedious for the little Punies, may be remedied, by teaching them briefly, that when est hath in English the signification of habeo, to have, it doth require a dative case.  

Sum with two dative cases.  Also when sum, hath after him a nominative case, and a dative, the word that is the nominative case, may be put also in the dative: so that sum may in such manner of speaking be construed with a double dative case: as, Sum tibi praesidio, I am to thee a safeguard. Haec res est mihi voluptati, This thing is to me a pleasure.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, in the first whereof Sum tibi praesidio, the word praesidio which in the English I am to thee a safeguard, seemed to be the nominative case after the verb sum, I am, the which had after it this dative case thee, in Latin tibi, this word I say praesidio is put in the dative case, and so hath sum a double, or two dative cases by this rule.  
In the second example, Haec res est mihi voluptati, this thing is to me a pleasure, this word voluptati, which in English after the verb is, with his dative case to me, seemed to be the nominative case after the same verb, is put into the dative, & so the verb sum hath a double dative case, by this rule. But this rule more shortly and easily for young scholars is thus:  

The former rule set down shorter.  This verb sum may oftentimes be construed with a double dative case.  

Other verbs with a double dative case.  And not only sum, but also many other verbs, may in such manner speaking have a double dative case, one of the person, and an other of the thing: as, Do tibi vestem pignori, I give thee a garment for a pledge. Verto tibi vitio, I lay it to thee for a fault. Hoc tu tibi laudi ducis, Thou accountest this for a praise unto thee.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath three examples, in the first, Do tibi vestem pignori, the verb do hath two dative cases tibi and pignori, tibi of the person, and pignori of the thing by this rule.  
In the second example Verto tibi vitio, the verb verto hath a double dative case, tibi of the person, and vitio of the thing, by this rule.  
In the third example Hoc tu tibi laudi ducis, the verb ducis hath too dative cases, tibi of the person, and laudi of the thing, by this rule.   

Verbs with an accusative case.  

An accusative case after verbs.  Verbs transitives are all such as have after them an accusative case of the doer or sufferer, whether they be actives, common, or deponent: as, Vsus promtos facit, Use maketh men ready or cunning. Foeminae ludificantur viros, Women do mock men. Largitur pecuniam, He giveth money.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are three examples. In the first the verb transitive facit hath promtos in the accusative case by this rule.  
In the second, foeminae ludificantur viros, the verb transitive ludificantur governeth viros in the accusative case by this rule.  
In the third example, Largitur pecuniam, the verb largitur doth govern an accusative case, being a verb transitive by this rule.  

What are verbs transitives.  Qu. What call you a verb transitive?  
An. A verb transitive deriving his name of transeo, to pass over, is such a verb as passeth over his signification into some other thing, as when I say, I love God, this verb love passeth over his signification into this word God, which is the thing loved.  
Qu. Wherefore serveth this note, whereby some verbs are termed by the name of transitives?  
An. To make a difference between them and certain other verbs neuters, the which are called intransitives, or absolute, because they do not pass over their signification into any other thing, but do finish it in themselves: as Dormio, I sleep, aegroto, I am sick, which verbs and such like do determine their action in themselves, and do not pass it over into any other thing, like as verbs transitives do.  

Verbs neuters with an accusative case.  Also verbs neuters may have an accusative case of their own signification: as Endymionis somnum dormis, Thou sleepest the sleep of Endymion. Gaudeo gaudium, I joy a joy. Vivo vitam, I live a life.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are three examples: in the first whereof Endymionis somnum dormis, the verb neuter dormio to sleep, hath the accusative case somnum sleep, of his own signification after him by this rule.  
In the second example Gaudeo gaudium, the verb neuter gaudeo to joy, hath after him the accusative case gaudium joy, of his own signification by this rule.  
In the third example Vivo vitam, the verb neuter vivo to live, hath after him vitam life, an accusative case of his own signification by this rule.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Where note that this accusative case after verbs neuters is turned sometime into the ablative case.  

another note borrowed from the latin.  There are also certain verbs neuters, the which sometimes have an accusative case, not of their own signification, but this is by a figure called Enallage in the most of them: as Viwnt Bacchanalia, for Bacchanaliter.  

Verbs with two accusative cases  Verbs of ask, teaching, and araying, will have two accusative cases, one of the sufferer, and another of the thing: as Rogo te pecuniam, I ask thee money. Doceo te literas, I teach thee letters. Quod te iamdudum horror, Which thing this good while I exhort thee unto. Exuo me gladium, I put off my sword from me.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath four examples, the first is Rogo te pecuniam, where this verb of ask rogo hath too accusative cases, namely te of the sufferer, & pecuniam of the thing, by this rule.  
In the second example Doceo te literas, the verb of teaching doceo hath by this rule two accusative cases, namely te of the sufferer, and literas of the thing.  
Quod te iamdudum horror. In this third example the verb of ask horror hath two accusative cases by this rule, to wit, te of the sufferer, and quoth of the thing.  
In the fourth example Exuo me gladium, this verb exuo, of araying, or rather indeed of unaraying, hath two accusative cases, me of the sufferer, and gladium of the thing, by this rule.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Here note that verbs of ask do sometime turn one of the accusative cases into the ablative case with a preposition.  

Borrowed from the latin.  Also verbs of araying, or unaraying, do sometime turn one of the accusative cases either into the dative, or else into the ablative, without a preposition.   

Verbs governing an ablative case after them.  

Verbs with an ablative case.  ALl verbs require an ablative case of the instrument, put with this sign with, before it, or of the cause, or of the manner of doing: as Ferit eum gladio, He striketh him with a sword. Taceo metu, I hold my peace for fear. Summa eloquentia causam egit, He pleaded the cause with great eloquence.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are three examples. In the first, Ferit eum gladio, the verb ferit hath after him this word gladio the ablative case of the instrument, with this sign with before it in English, by this rule.  
Taceo metu, in this second example the verb taceo hath after him this word metu, the ablative case of the cause, by this rule.  
In the third example, Summa eloquentia causam egit, the verb egit hath after him the ablative case eloquentia of the manner of doing, by this rule.  

another rule for an ablative case after verbs.  The word of price is put after verbs in the ablative case: as, Vendidi auro, I sold it for gold. Emtus sum argento, I was bought for money.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are two examples, in the first whereof vendidi auro, the verb vendidi doth govern auro in the ablative case, being a word of price, or a word that signifieth the price or value, wherefore the thing was sold, by this rule.  
In the second example, Emtus sum argento, the verb emtus sum hath after him the ablative case argento, being the word of price, or signifying the value wherefore the thing was bought, by this rule.  


Two exceptions from the rule before.  
The first exception.   This former rule hath two exceptions, which are as followeth.  
Except these genitive cases, when they be put alone without substantives (for if they have substantives they shall be put in the ablative case) Tanti, so much, quanti, how much, pluris, for more, minoris, for less, tantidem, for so much, tantivis, for so much, quantivis, for how much soever, quantilibet, for as much as you list, quanticunque, for how much soever: as quanti mercatus es hunc equum? for how much bought you this horse? certe pluris quàm vellem, truly for more than I would.  

The examples applied.  This exception hath two examples. The first is, Quanti mercatus es hunc equum? where quanti a word of price, because it is put without a substantive, is put in the genitive case after the verb mercatus es, by this exception.  
In the second example, Certè pluris quam vellem, the word of price pluris, being put alone without a substantive, is put in the genitive case after the verb mercatus sum understood, by this rule.  

The second exception.  Saving that after verbs of price, we shall always use these adverbes in steed of their casuals: carius, more dear, vilius, better, cheap, melius, better, peius, worse, not that these words and no other are to be used after verbs of price, that is, verbs betokening, buyeng, selling, bargaining, and such like, but that when occasion is offered of such kind of speaking, than these adverbes are to be used, and not their comparatives being nouns adjectives, unless their substantives be joined with them, and then they shall both be put in the ablative case.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Note also that after this verb valeo, betokening the value, or worth of a thing, the word of price may sometimes be put in the accusative case.  

another rule for an ablative case after verbs. Some of the verbs belonging unto this rule have sometimes a genitive case also.  Verbs of plenty, or scarceness, filling, emptieng, loading, or unloding, will have an ablative case; as affluis opibus, thou flowest in wealth: cares virtute, thou art void of virtue: expleo te fabulis, I fill thee with tales: spoliavit me bonis omnibus, he spoilt or rob me of all my goods: oneras stomachum cibo, thou lodest thy stomach with meat: levabo te hoc onere, I will ease thee of this burden.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath six examples,  
in the first whereof, affluis opibus, this verb of plenty affluis hath the ablative case opibus, by this rule.  
Cares virtute, in this second example virtute is the ablative case after the verb of wanting or scarceness cares, by this rule.  
In the third example expleo te fabulis, the verb of filling expleo, hath after him the ablative case fabulis by this rule.  
Spoliavit me bonis omnibus, in this fourth example bonis is the ablative case after the verb of emptieng spoliavit, by this rule.  
In the fift example oneras stomachum cibo, this word cibo is the ablative case after the verb of loading oneras, by this rule.  
Levabo te hoc onere. In this sixth example this word onere is the ablative case after the verb of unloding levabo, by this rule.  

another rule for an ablative case after verbs. Some of these verbs are sometimes read with an accusative case.  Also these verbs following, with certain other like, will have an ablative case: as Vtor, to use, fruor, to enjoy, fungor, to execute an office, potior, to obtain, laetor, to rejoice, gaudeo, to be glad, dignor, to vouchsafe, or think one worthy, muto, to change, munero, to reward, communico, to make partaker of, afficio, to trouble, prosequor, to pursue, impertio, impertior, to bestow, and such like. And here is to be marked, that these two verbs afficio and prosequor are for the most part to be englished accordingly as the ablative case which they govern, will give occasion: as, afficio te dolore, I make thee sorry. Prosequor te odio, I hate thee, etc.  

another rule for an ablative case after verbs.  Verbs that betoken receiving, distance, or taking away, will have an ablative case with these prepositions, a, ab, e, ex, or de: as, Accepit literas à Petro, He received letters of Peter. Audivi ex nuncio, I heard it of the messenger. Long distat à nobis, It is far distant, or far off from us. Eripui te è malis, I delivered thee out of troubles.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath four examples. In the first Accepit literas à Petro, this word accepit a verb of receiving, hath an ablative case with the preposition a, namely à Petro, by this rule.  
In the second example, Audivi ex nuncio, the verb of receiving audivi, hath an ablative case with the preposition ex, namely ex nuncio, by this rule.  
Long distatà nobis. In this third example, the verb of distance distat, hath an ablative case with the preposition à, namely à nobis, by this rule.  
In the fourth example, Eripui te è malis, the verb of taking away eripui, hath an ablative case with this preposition è, namely è malis, by this rule.  


An exception from the former rule.  
The examples applied.   And this ablative after verbs of taking away, may be turned into the dative: as, Subtraxit mihi cingulum, He took from me my girdle. Eripuit illi vitam, He took from him his life.  
This exception hath two examples. In the first, Subtraxit mihi cingulum, the word subtraxit, being a verb of taking away, hath after him the dative case mihi by this exception.  
Eripuit illi vitam. In this second example, eripuit being a verb of taking away, hath after him the dative case illi, by this exception.  

another rule for verbs with an ablative case.  Verbs of comparing or exceeding, may have an ablative case of the word that signifieth the measure of exceeding: as, Praefero hunc multis gradibus, I prefer this man by many degrees. Paulo interuallo illum superat, He is beyond the other but a little space.  

The examples applied.  The examples of this rule are two. The first is, Praefero hunc multis gradibus, in which example praefero a verb of comparing or rather of exceeding, hath after him the word gradibus an ablative case betokening the measure of exceeding, by this rule.  
Paulo interuallo illum superat. In this second example, superat a verb of exceeding, hath after him the word interuallo in the ablative case, betokening the measure of exceeding, by this rule.  

The ablative case absolute.  A noun or a pronoun substantive joined with a participle, expressed or understood, and having no other word whereof it may be governed, it shall be put in the ablative case absolute, that is, the ablative case set alone without any word to govern him: as, Rege veniente, hosts fugerunt, The king coming, the enemies fled. Me duce vinces, I being captain, thou shalt overcome.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples. In the first, Rege veniente, hosts fugerunt, the noun substantive rege joined with the participle veniente here expressed, and having no other word to govern it, is put in the ablative case absolute by this rule.  
In the second example, Me duce vinces, the pronoun substantive me joined with the participle existent understood, and having no other word whereof it may be governed, is put in the ablative case absolute, by this rule.  

A note for the younger sort.  Where note, that if there be no participle expressly set down with the ablative case absolute, then for the most part you are to understand this participle existens, the which causeth always the substantive following to be the ablative case, by the rule of participles governing such case as the verb that they come of. And because that Existo will have such case after him as he had before him, therefore the participle existens understood with the ablative case absolute before him, doth cause the substantive following, if there be any, to be put also in the ablative case, as appeareth in this example, Me duce, where the participle existent understood with the ablative case absolute me, causeth the substantive duce following, to be the ablative case also, by the rule next before in this note alleged: and the like is to be said of all other such speeches.  

How to resolve this ablative case absolute.  And this ablative case absolute may be resolved, or turned into other Latin by any of these words, dumb, whilst, cum, when, quando, when, si, if, quanquam, although, postquam, after that, and then the ablative case must be turned into the nominative case, and the participle into the verb, as in these examples, Rege veniente, the king coming, id est, that is to say, dum veniret rex, whilst, or when the king came. Me duce, I being captain, i 
This i thus set in latin with two pricks, standeth for id est, that is to say.  si ego dux fuero, or rather extitero, turning the participle existent understood, into the verb extitero.  

Synecdoche. aegrotat animo. Rubet capillos. discrucior animi.  Some verbs may have an ablative case by the figure Synecdoche, and sometime a genitive, and sometime an accusative, after such manner as Poets use to speak.  

divers cases after one verb. Borrowed from the latin.  One and the same verb, in divers respects, or by divers rules, may have divers cases, as a double dative case, an accusative case, an ablative case absolute, the ablative case of the instrument, and such like, whereof in the Latin grammar there is this example: Dedit mihi vestem pignori, te present, propria manu, He gave me a garment to pledge, you being present, with his own hand.   

The Construction of verbs passives, or what case they will govern.  

An ablative after passives, and sometime a dative. The participles of verbs passives, have more often a dative, than an ablative.  A Verb passive will have after him an ablative case with a preposition, or sometime a dative of the doer: as, Virgilius legitur à me, Virgil is read of me. Tibi fama petatur, Let fame be sought after by thee.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are two examples, whereof in the first, Virgilius legitur à me, the verb passive legitur doth govern the ablative case of the doer me, with the preposition à, by this rule.  
In the second example, Tibi fama petatur, the verb passive petatur doth govern the word tibi the dative case of the doer, by this rule.  

How these passives and such like, may be turned by the actives.  And this ablative or dative shall be turned into the nominative case, and the nominative into the accusative, if the sentence be turned by the active voice: as, Ego lego Virgilium, I read Virgil, where me the ablative case in the sentence of the rule before, is here turned into the nominative ego, and the passive legitur, into the active lego, and the nominative case Virgilius into the accusative case Virgilium.  

Verbs passives may have other cases by the rules of their actives.  Petas tu famam, Seek thou fame, where tibi the dative case in the former rule is turned into the nominative tu, the passive petatur into the active petas, and the nominative fama, into the accusative famam, by this rule.  
These five verbs called neuter passives, will have such construction as passives by the first rule had: vapulo, to be beaten, vaeneo, to be sold, liceo, to be set at a price, fio, to be made, exulo, to be banished.   

The construction of gerunds, or how they are used, and what cases they govern.  

The case of gerunds.  Gerunds will have such cases, as the verbs that they come of: as, Ocium scribendi literas, Leisure to write letters. Ad consulendum tibi, To counsel thee.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, the first is Ocium scribendi literas, where the gerund scribendi doth govern literas in the accusative case, because that the verb scribo whereof it cometh, will have an accusative case by the rule of verbs transitives, etc.  
Ad consulendum tibi, in this example the gerund ●●●sulendum hath the dative case tibi, because consulo the verb whereof he cometh will have a dative case in this signification, by the rule of verbs of giving or restoring, etc.  

The gerund in Diego to be used after certain substantives.  When the English of the infinitive mood cometh after any of these nouns substantives, 
This rule borrowed from the latin is shorter thus. The gerund in di is put after certain substantives, and certain adjectives.  studium, desire, causa, cause, tempus, time, gratia, cause, ocium, leisure, occasio, occasion, libido, lust, spes, hope, opportunitas, fit occasion, voluntas, will, modus, manner, ratio, reason, gestus, gesture, satietas, fullness, potestas, power, licentia, leave, consuetudo, custom, consilium, counsel, vis, force, norma, a rule, amor, love, cupido, desire, locus, place, and others like, if the verb should be of the active voice, it shall be made by the gerund in di, as when I say Ocium scribendi, leisure to write, here in the English to write, the English of the infinitive mood to write, cometh after the substantive leisure, in Latin ocium, and therefore it is put in the gerund in di, by this rule, and so of the rest.  


The gerund in di, after adjectives.  
Sometime the genitive case plural, is put after the gerund in di.  
The examples applied.  
Sometime the infinitive mood is put after Substantives & adjectives, in stead of the gerund in di.  
Borrowed from the latin.  
The gerund in do.  
The example applied.   And the same gerund in di, is used also after certain adjectives: as, Cupidus visendi, desirous to go see, Certus eundi, determined to go. Peritus iaculandi. skilful in darting, Gnarus bellandi, cunning in warring.  
In all these four examples, after these adjectives, cupidus, Certus, Peritus, Gnarus, these words Visendi, Eundi, jaculandi, Bellandi, are put in the gerund in di, by this rule.   

The gerund in do.  
WHen you have the English of the participle of the present tense, with this sign of or with, coming after a noun adjective, it shall in Latin making be put in the gerund in do, as, Defessus sum ambulando, I am weary of walking, here in this sentence is the english of the participle of the present tense walking, with this sign of before it, coming after the adjective weary, and therefore is the said english of the participle of the present tense with of before it, as namely, of walking, in Latin turned into the gerund in do, faieng, defessus sum ambulando, I am weary of walking, by this rule.  

another rule for the gerund in do.  Also the english of the participle of the present tense, coming without a substantive, with this sign in or by, before him, shall in Latin making be put in the gerund in do: as, Caesar dando, sublevando, ignoscendo, gloriam adeptus est, Caesar by giving, by helping, by forgiving, got praise and renown. In apparando totum hunc consumunt diem, They spend this whole day in making ready.  

The examples applied.  Here are two examples in this rule, whereof the first is Caesar dando, sublevando, ignoscendo, gloriam adeptus est, in the which example being Englished, there is in three places the English of the participle of the present tense put alone without a substantive with this sign by, before it, as namely, by giving, by helping, by forgiving, and therefore in the Latin it is turned into the gerund in do, saying, dando, sublevando, ignoscendo, by this rule.  
In the second example, In apparando totum hunc consumunt diem, here in this sentence being Englished, as appeareth before in the rule, there is the English of the participle of the present tense set alone without a substantive, with this sign in before it, namely thus, in preparing or making ready, and therefore in Latin it is made by the gerund in do, apparando, by this rule.  

The gerund in do used either without a preposition, or else with certain preposition.  And the same gerund in do, is used either without a preposition, or else after one of these prepositions, A, ab, de, ex, cum, in: as, Deterrentà bibendo, they fear them from drinking. Ab amando, from loving. Cogitat de edendo, he thinketh upon eating. Ratio bene scribendicum loquendo coniuncta est, the way to write well is joined with speaking.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are four examples, in the first of the which deterrent à bibendo, the gerund in do, bibendo, is used after the preposition a, by this rule.  
Ab amando, in this second example the gerund in do, amando, is used with the preposition ab, by this rule.  
In the third example, cogitat de edendo, the gerund edendo is used with the preposition de by this rule.  
In the fourth example, Ratio bene scribendi cum loquendo coniuncta est, the gerund loquendo is used with the preposition cum by this rule. And of the gerund in do used without a preposition, you had an example before in this sentence, Caesar dando, etc.   

The gerund in dum.  

The gerund in Dum  THe English of the infinitive mood coming after a reason, and showing the cause of the reason, may be put in the gerund in dumb: as, 
The example applied.  Dies mihi ut satis sit ad agendum, vereor, I fear that a whole day will not be enough for me to do my business, in the English of this sentence or reason there cometh the English of the infinitive mood, namely, to do my business, and showeth the cause of the reason, and therefore it is in Latin put in the gerund in dumb, agendum, by this rule. But this example more properly belongeth unto the next rule, yea and the rule itself is more hard than that young beginners can easily understand the meaning of the same.  

another rule for the gerund in dum.  The gerund in dum is used after one of these prepositions, Ad, ob, propter, inter, ante: as, Ad capiendum hosts, to take the enemies. Ob, vel propter redimendum captivos, for to redeem the prisoners. Inter coenandum, whilst they are at supper. Ante damnandum, before they are condemned.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath four examples, in the first the gerund in dumb, capiendum is used after the preposition ad, by this rule.  
In the second the gerund redimendum is used after the prepositions ob vel propter, by this rule.  
In this third the gerund coenandum, is used after the preposition inter, by this rule.  
In the fourth the gerund damnandum, is used after the preposition ante, by the same rule.  

another rule for the gerund in dum.  And when ye have this English must, or aught in a reason, where it seemeth to be made by the verb oportet, it may be put in the gerund in dumb, with this verb est set impersonally: and then the word which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, shall be put in the dative: as, abeundum est mihi, I must go hence.  

The example applied.  In this reason or sentence in English we have this word must before the word go, whereby it may seem that it is in latin to be made by the verb oportet, and therefore it is put in the gerund in dumb, abeundum, with this verb est set impersonally, and the word I which in the English, when I say, I must go hence, seemeth to be the nominative case, is in Latin turned into the dative case mihi, by this rule, saying abeundum est mihi.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Here is to be noted, that sometimes these gerunds are turned into adjectives called gerundives, because they come of the gerunds, and when they be thus turned, you shall know them by this, that they govern no case, but agree with their substantives in case, gender and number, like as other adjectives do.   

Supines, and of their construction, and how they are used.  

The case of supines.  SVpines do govern such case, as the verbs that they come of: as, Auditum poëtas, to hear poets. In which example the first supine auditum doth govern poëtas in the accusative case by this rule, because the verb audio, of which he cometh will have an accusative case by the rule of verb transitives, etc.  

The signification of the first supine.  The first supine hath his active signification, saving that in some few verbs it signifieth passively: And it is put after verbs and participles that betoken moving to a place: as Ego cubitum, I go to rest. Spectatum admissi, risum teneatis amici? my friends, being let in to behold such a sight, can you forbear laughing? 
Sometime the infinitive mood is put after verbs in stead of the first supine.   

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, in the first Eo cubitum, the supine cubitum is put after eo a verb of moving or betokening moving by this rule.  
Spectatum admissi, etc. In this second example the supine spectatum is put after the participle admissi, by this rule.  

A note borrowed from the latin.  Where note that sometime the first supine is put absolutely or alone after the verb est, and doth not follow any other verb betokening any moving at all: as many Grammarians do note, as Cessatum est satis. But under their correction, I would say that in such manner of speaking it were rather a verb impersonal, than a supine.  

The latter supine.  The latter supine hath his passive signification, and is put after nouns adjectives: as dignus, worthy, indignus, unworthy, turpis, filthy, foedus, foul, proclivis, ready, facilis, easy, odiosus, hateful, mirabilis, wonderful, optimus, best, & such like: as facile factu, easy to be done. Turpe dictu, unhonest to be spoken.  

The examples applied.  Here are two examples, whereof in the first Facile factu, the latter supine factu signifying passively, is put after the adjective facile, by this rule.  
In the second example Turpe dictu, the latter supine dictu, signifying passively is put after the adjective turpe, by this rule.  

The latter supine turned into the infinitive mood passive.  And this latter supine after nouns adjectives may be turned into the infinitive mood passive, as, Facile fieri, Easy to be done, Turpe dici, unhonest to be spoken.   

The Time, or in what case words betokening time, shall be put after verbs.  

Part of time.  Nouns that betoken part of time, be commonly put in the ablative case: as, Nocte vigilas, Thou watchest in the night. Luce dormis, Thou sleepest in the day.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples. The first is Nocte vigilas, where this word nocte signifying part of time, or taken for part of the night, is in construction put in the ablative case after the verb vigilas, by this rule. 
Sometimes, but very seldom, the word betokening part of time is put in the accusative case.   
In the second example, Luce dormis, the word luce signifying part of time, or taken for part of the day, is in construction put in the ablative case after the verb dormis, by this rule.  

Continual term of time.  But nouns that betoken continual term of time, without intermission or ceasing, be commonly used in the accusative case 
b and sometime in the ablative case. : as, Sexaginta annos natus est, He is threescore years old. Hyemem totam stertis, Thou sleepest the whole winter.  

The examples applied.  There be two examples in this rule. The first is, Sexaginta annos natus est, in the which this word annos betokening continual term of time, is in construction set after the verb natus est in the accusative case, by this rule.  
In the second example, Hyemem totam stertis, this word hyemem betokening continual term of time, or being taken for the whole winter, is in construction put in the accusative case after the verb stertis, by this rule.   

Space of place, or in what case a word that signifieth space of place, shall be put after verbs.  

Space of place. Sometime the space of place is put in the genitive case, but then this word spacium, or iter, or some such like is understood.  Nouns that betoken space between place and place, be commonly put in the accusative case, and sometimes also in the ablative: as, Pedem hinc ne discesseris, Go thou not a foot from this place.  
In this one example, the word pedem betokening space of place, is in construction put after the verb discesseris in the accusative case, by this rule.   

A place, or the case wherein such names of places as are either nouns common, or nouns proper, shallbe put after verbs.  


The construction of common names of places, or proper names of countries.  
Sometimes, but very seldom these nouns are put without a preposition.   Nouns appellatives, or names of great places, be put with a preposition, if they follow a verb that signifieth in a place, to a place, from a place, or by a place: as Vivo in Anglia, I live in England. Veni per Galliam in Italiam, I came through France into Italy. Proficiscor ex urbe, I go forth of the city.  
Here are three examples of this rule. The two first are of proper names of countries, and the third is of a common name of a place.  

The examples applied.  In the first example, Vino in Anglia, this word Anglia being the proper name of a great place or country, is put with the preposition in, in the ablative case signifying in a place, after the verb vivo, by this rule.  
In the second example, Veni per Galliam in Italiam, the word Galliam signifying a great place or country, is put with the preposition per in the accusative case after the verb veni signifying going by a place, by this rule, and so is Italiam with the preposition in put into the accusative case, being the name of a country, and following the same verb signifying to a place, by the same rule.  
In the third example, Proficiscor ex urbe, the word urbe being a noun appellative, or common name of a place, is put in the ablative case with a preposition ex after the verb proficiscor, signifying the going from a place, by this rule.  

A note for the better understanding of this rule.  Here note, that by nouns appellatives in this rule is meant nouns common, signifying the names of places, as a city, a country, a town, an island, the market, the church, the school, and such like. And by names of great places are understood the proper names of Countries and islands, as France, Italy, Spain, Scotland, England, and such like: for the proper names of smaller places, as cities, towns, and villages belong to the rules following.  

The proper names of cities or towns in the genitive case. The examples applied.  In a place or at a place, if the place be a proper name, and of the first or second declension, and singular number, it shall be put in the genitive case: as, Vixit Londini, he lived at London. Studuit Oxoniae, he studied at Oxford. 
Sometimes the names of islands are found also in the genitive case, but not usually.   
This rule hath two examples. In the first, Vixit Londini, the word Londini being the proper name of a city, signifying in or at a place, and being also of the second declension, and singular number, it is put in the genitive case, by this rule.  
In the second example, Studuit Oxoniae, the word Oxoniae signifying in a place or at a place, being the name of a city, and of the first declension, and singular number, is put in the genitive case, by this rule.  

Humi, domi, militiae, belli.  And these nouns, Humi, on the ground, domi, at home, militiae, at warfare, belli, at war, be likewise used, that is, after verbs signifying in a place or at a place, they are put for the most part in the genitive case, like as the proper names of places in the rule before going: as, Procumbit humi bos, The ox lieth on the ground. Militiae enutritus est, He was brought up in warfare. Domi, bellique ociosi vivitis, Ye live idly both at home and in war.  

The examples applied.  In these three examples, humi in the first, Militiae in the second, domi and belli in the third, are put in the genitive case, like as if they were proper nouns belonging to the former rule, by this rule.  

Proper names of places, in the dative, or ablative case.  But if the place be of the third declension, or of the plural number, it shall be put in the dative, or in the ablative case: as Militavit Carthagini, or Carthagine, He served in the wars at Carthage. Athenis natus est, He was borne at Athens.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples. In the first, Militavit Carthagini, vel Carthagine, the word Carthagini being the proper name of a city, and signifying at or in a place, because it is the third declension, is put in the dative case by this rule, or you may say it by the ablative case Carthagine, thus, Militavit Carthagine, by the same rule.  
In the second example, Athenis natus est, the word Athenis being the proper name of a city, and betokening in or at a place, because it is the plural number is put in the dative or ablative case, by this rule.  

Ruri or rure.  Likewise we use this word ruri or rure, betokening in or at a place, in the dative or ablative case, as in this example: Ruri or rure educatus est, He was brought up in the country.  

Proper names in the accusative case.  To a place, if the place be a proper name, it shall be put in the accusative case, without a preposition: as, Eo Romam, I go to Rome.  

The example applied.  In this example this word Romam being the proper name of a city, and signifying to a place, is put in the accusative case without a preposition, by this rule. But sometimes it is also put in the accusative case with a preposition, but very seldom, and then rather to be marked than followed.  

Domus & rus  So also are these words domus and rus signifying to a place put in the accusative case: as Confero me domum, I go home. Recipio me rus, I go into the country.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are two examples. In the first Confero me domum, the word domum betokening to a place is put in the accusative case by this rule.  
In the second Recipio me rus, the word rus signifying to a place, is put in the accusative case also by the same rule.  

Proper names of places in the ablative case.  From a place, or by a place, if the place be a proper name, it shall be put in the ablative case without a preposition, and sometime in the accusative case with a preposition betokening by or through a place: as, Profectus est Londino (vel per Londinum) Cantabr●●am, He went from London, or by London to Cambridge. In this example Londino, the proper name of a city, and signifying from a place, is put in the ablative case without a preposition, by this rule, and it may also with the preposition per, be put in the accusative case, 
Per Londinun.  signifying by or through a place, by the same rule, and the like is to be said of all such other examples.  

Domus & rus  Domus and rus be likewise used in the ablative case signifying from a place: as, Abijt domo, He went from home. Rure reversus est, He returned from the country. 
The examples applied.  In which two examples domo in the first, and rure in the second both signifying from a place, are put in the ablative case by this rule.   

Verbs impersonals and what case they govern.  

It, or there, signs of verbs impersonals for the most part.  A Verb impersonal hath no nominative case before him, and this word it or there, is commonly his sign: as, Decet, it becometh. Oportet aliquem esse, there must be some body.  

The examples applied.  In the first of these examples Decet, I know the said verb to be an impersonal, by this sign it before him in English, when I say, it becometh, by this rule.  
In the second example, Oportet aliquem esse, I know this word oportet, to be a verb impersonal, because in English he hath this sign there before him, when I say there must, by this rule.  

What is to be done when neither of these signs it, or there, are before a verb impersonal.  But if the verb impersonal have neither of these signs, it or there, before him, than the word that seemeth to be in the English the nominative case, shall in Latin be such case as the verb impersonal will have after him: as Me oportet, I must, tibi licet, thou mayest.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath two examples, Me oportet, I must, is the first, where because this impersonal must, oportet, hath none of these signs it or there before him in English, therefore this word I that seemeth to be the nominative case, is in Latin turned into the accusative case me, by this rule, because oportet will have an accusative case after him.  
In the second example, Tibi licet, thou mayest, the impersonal mayest, hath neither it nor there, before it, and therefore the word thou, which in the English seemeth to be the nominative case, is in the Latin put into the dative, by this rule, because licet will have a dative case after him.  

Interest, refert, and est.  These impersonals, interest, it behoveth, refert, it belongeth, or appertaineth, and est set for interest, require a genitive case of all casual words, that is, words declined with case, except Mea, tua, sua, nostra, vestra, and cuia, the ablative cases of the pronouns possessives: as, Interest omnium rectè agere, It behoveth all men to do rightly. Tua refert teipsum nosse, It appertaineth unto thee, or it is thy part to know thyself.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are two examples. In the first, Interest omnium rectè agere, the impersonal interest hath the genitive case omnium, by this rule.  
In the second, Tua refert teipsum nosse. The impersonal refert hath tua the ablative case of the pronoun possessive tuus, by this rule.  

Impersonals with a dative.  Certain impersonals require a dative case: as, Libet, it listeth, licet, it is lawful, patet, it is manifest, liquet, it is evident, constat, it is certain, placet, it pleaseth, expedit, it is expedient, prodest, it profiteth, sufficit, it is sufficient, vacat, it hath leisure, accidit, it chanceth, convenit, it is meet, contingit, it happeneth, and such other like.  

Impersonals with an accusative case. Impersonals with an accusative case, and a genitive.  Some will have an accusative case only: as, Delectat, it delighteth, decet, it becometh, jwat, it delighteth or helpeth, oportet, it behoveth.  
Some besides the accusative case, will have also a genitive: as, Nostri nosmet poenitet, We are weary of our own estate. Me civitatis taedet, I am weary of the city. Pudet me negligentiae, I am ashamed of my negligence. Miseret me tui, I take pity on thee. Me illorum miserescit, I have pity on them.  

The examples applied.  Here are five examples in this rule. In the first, Nostri nosmet poenitet, the impersonal poenitet beside the accusative case nos, hath the genitive case nostri, by this rule.  
In the second, Me civitatis taeder, the impersonal taedet besides the accusative case me, hath also the genitive case civitatis, by this rule.  
In the third, Pudet me negligentiae, the impersonal pudet besides the accusative case me, hath the genitive case negligentiae, by the same rule.  
In the fourth, Miseret me tui, the impersonal miseret besides the accusative case me, hath the genitive case tui, by this rule.  
Me illorum miserescit. In this fift example the impersonal miserescit, besides the accusative case me, hath also the genitive case illorum, by this rule.  

Impersonals passives, coming of verbs neuters.  Verbs impersonals of the passive voice being form of neuters, do govern such case, as the verbs neuters which they come of: as, Parcatur sumtui, Let cost be spared, where the passive impersonal parcatur, coming of the verb neuter parco, to spare, hath the dative case sumtui, because the neuter parco will have a dative case, as when we say, Parcamus pecuniae, Let us spare money.  

Verbs personali passives  A verb impersonal of the passive voice hath like case as other verbs passive have: as, Benefit multis à principe, Many are pleasured by the prince.  

The example applied.  In this example, the verb impersonal benefit having the passive signification, hath an ablative case after him of the doer, with a preposition à principe, like as other verbs personals passives have, by the first rule of verbs personals passives, in their place set down before.  

The case understood.  Yet many times this case is not expressed, but understood: as, Maxima vi certatur, (subaudi understand) ab illis, They fight with most great force, where the ablative case with the preposition, ab illis, is understood, by this rule. And the like is to be said of all other such speeches.  

A deed signified to be done of many by a verb neuter.  When a deed is signified to be done of many, the verb being a verb neuter, we may well change the verb neuter into the impersonal in tur: as, 
The example applied.  In ignem posita est, fletur, She was put into the fire, they wept. In this example when I say they weep, there is a deed signified to be done by many, and because that the verb weep is a verb neuter, in Latin flent, it may be turned into the impersonal in tur fletur, by this rule.   

A Participle, and his case.  

Participles have the cases of their verbs.  PArticiples govern such case as the verbs that they come of: as, Fruiturus amicis, one that will use his friends. Consulens tibi, one giving counsel unto thee. Diligendus ab omnibus, one to be beloved of all men.  

The examples applied.  There be three examples in this rule. In the first example the participle fruiturus hath the ablative case amicis, because the verb fruor of which he cometh, will have an ablative case.  
In the second example, the participle Consulens hath the dative case tibi, because his verb consulo will have a dative case.  
In the third example, the participle diligendus hath an ablative case with a preposition, namely ab omnibus, because his verb diligor by the rule of passives, will have an ablative case with a preposition.  

Participles 4. ways turned into nouns.  Here note that participles may four manner ways be changed into nouns, and so, oftentimes govern not the case of their verbs.  
The first way is, when the voice of a participle is construed with another case than the verb that it cometh of: as, Appetens vini, greedy of wine, where appetens is a noun and not a participle, because it hath a genitive case, when as his verb appeto will have an accusative case.  
The second, when it is compounded with a preposition, which the verb it cometh of cannot be compounded withal: as, Indoctus, unlearned, Innocens, innocent, or guiltless, both which words are nouns and not participles, because their verbs doceor and noceo, cannot be compounded with the preposition in, as they are.  
The third, when it formeth all the degrees of comparison, as, Amans, loving, amantior, more loving, amantissimus, most loving.  
The fourth, when it hath no respect or express difference of time: as, Homo laudatus, a man laudable, where laudatus, because it signifieth no time present, past, or to come, is a noun and not a participle. Puer amandus, a child worthy to be loved, where amandus is a noun, because it hath no express difference of time. And all these are properly called nouns participials.  

Participles turned into nouns require a genitive case.  Participles when they be changed into nouns, require a genitive case: as, Fugitans litium, avoiding strife. Indoctus pilae, not skilful to play at the baull. Cupientissimus tui, most desirous of thee. Lactis abundans, having store of milk, all which four words are known hereby to be nouns and not participles, because they govern a genitive case, by this rule. 
Fugitans, 1. Indoctus, 2. Cupientissimus, 3. Abundans, 4. Exosus, perosus, pertaesus, have always the active signification, namely when they govern an accusative case. But exosus and perosus signifying passively require a dative case.   
These participial voices, Perosus, hating deadly, exosus, detesting or loathing, pertaesus, weary or loathing, have always the active signification, and govern an accusative case: as, Exosus saevitiam, hating cruelty. Vitam pertaesus, weary of life.  
Here are two examples in this rule. In the first, Exosus saevitiam, this participial voice exosus hath the active signification, and doth govern the word saevitiam in the accusative case, by this rule.  
In the second example, Vitam pertaesus, this participial voice pertaesus signifying actively, doth govern the word vitam in the accusative case, by this rule. 
Borrowed of the latin.   

Natus, prognatus, satus, ortus, cretus, creatus, editus.  Here note, that these participles, Natus, borne, prognatus, coming of some stock or lineage, cretus, borne, ortus, borne, editus, sprung or begotten, satus, borne, creatus, created, will have an ablative case. 
Borrowed of the latin.    

The adverb, or what case adverbs do govern.  

Aduerbas with a genitive case.  Adverbs of quantity, time, and place, require a genitive case: as, Multum lucri, much gain. Tunc temporis, at that time. ubique gentium, in all places.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath three examples. In the first, Multum lucri, the adverb multum being an adverb betokening quantity, hath the genitive case lucri after him by this rule, but multum indeed is rather a noun than an adverb, as hath been seen before, yet are there many other adverbes of quantity which do govern a genitive case. 
These adverbes En and Ecce will have a nominative case, and sometime an accusative. Borrowed of the latin.   
Tunc temporis. In this second example the adverb of time tunc doth govern the genitive case temporis by this rule.  
In the third example, ubique gentium, the adverb of place ubique doth govern gentium in the genitive case by this rule.  

adverbs with a dative case.  Certain adverbs will have a dative case, like as the nouns that they come of: as, Venit obuiam illi, He came to meet him. Canit similiter huic, He singeth like unto him.  

The examples applied.  In this rule are two examples. The first is Venit obuiam illi, where the adverb obuiam doth govern the dative case illi, by this rule, because the noun adjective obuius whereof the adverb obuiam cometh doth govern a dative case.  
Canit similiter huic. In this second example the adverb similiter, doth govern the dative case huic, by this rule, because the noun adjective similis, whereof similiter cometh, will have a dative case.  

Tempori, luci, vesperi, used like adverbes.  These dative cases Tempori, In time, Luci, In the day time, Vesperi, At night, are used adverbially, that is, like as if they were adverbs: as, Tempori surgendum, We must arise in time. Vesperi cubandum, We must lie down at night. Luci laborandum, We must work in the day time.  

adverbs with an accusative case.  Certain adverbes will have an accusative case, like as the prepositions which they come of: as, Propius urbem, near to the city. Proxime castra, Next to the tents.  

The examples applied.  Here are two examples in this rule. In the first whereof propius urbem, the adverb propius doth govern the accusative case urbem by this rule, because the preposition prope, whereof propius cometh, will have an accusative case.  
In the second example proxime castra, the adverb proximè doth govern the accusative case castra by this rule, because the preposition prope whereof the adverb proximè cometh will have an accusative case.  

How prepositions are turned into adverbes.  Where note, that prepositions, when they be set without a case, or else do form the degrees of comparison, be changed into adverbes.  
The adverb plus, more, may have a genitive, an accusative, or an ablative case. 
A note borrowed from the latin.   

adverbs of the comparative and superlative degree.  adverbs of the comparative and superlative degree, will have such case as the nouns adjectives which they come of, of the same degree will have. 
Borrowed from the latin.    

Of the construction of conjunctions.  

Conjunctions copulative, and disjunctive.  Conjunctions copulatives, and disiunctives, with these four, Quàm, then. Nisi, except, or unless. Praeterquam, beside. An, whether, do couple like cases: as, Xenophon & Plato fuere aequales, Xenophon and Plato were equal.  
In this example because Xenophon is the nominative case before the conjunction copulative &, therefore doth the said conjunction cause Plato likewise to be the nominative case by this rule.  
Exception. Where the word after the conjunction, by some other rule is not suffered to be the same case with the word before the conjunction.  
And sometimes the conjunctions aforesaid are put between divers cases: as, Studui Romae et Athenis, I studied at Rome, and at Athens. Est liber meus et fratris, It is my book and my brothers. Emi fundum centum nummis et pluris, I bought the ground for a hundredth pieces of money, and more.  

The examples applied.  This rule hath three examples. In the first Studui Romae et Athenis, the conjunction et is put between divers cases, namely, Romae the genitive, and Athenis the dative by this rule.  
In the second, Est liber meus et fratris, the conjunction et is put between liber the nominative case, and fratris the genitive case, by this rule.  
In the third example Emi fundum centum nummis et pluris, the conjunction et is put between nummis the ablative case, and pluris the genitive case by this exception.  

Like moods coupled together.  Conjunctions copulatives and disiunctives most commonly couple like moods and tenses together: as, Petrus et joannes precabantur et docebant, Peter and john did preach and pray.  

Sometimes diverse moods are coupled together. The example applied.  In this example the conjunction copulative et doth join these two verbs precabantur and docebant, in the indicative mood and preterimperfect tense, by this rule.  

diverse tenses joined together.  And sometime divers tenses are coupled together: as, Et habeturet referetur tibi à me gratia, I do both thank you, and will also requite you.  

The example applied.  In this example the conjunction et doth join habetur, the present tense, and referetur the future tense together by this rule.   

The preposition and his case.  
SOmetime this preposition In, is not expressed but understood, and the casual word nevertheless is put in the ablative case: as, Habeo te loco parentis, I have, or account thee in steed of my father.  
In this example the preposition in, is not expressed before the word loco, but understood, and yet loco be put in the ablative case by this rule.  
Not only In. but any other preposition of the ablative case being understood, may cause the word whereunto it is understood, to be the ablative case.  

A verb compound with a preposition. Sometime besides the verb compound, the preposition also wherewith he is compounded, is added before his case.  A verb compound with a preposition, sometime requireth the case of the preposition that he is compounded withal: 
The examples applied.  as, Exeo domo, I go from home. Praetereo te insalutatum, I pass by thee unsaluted. Adeo templum, I go to church.  
In the first example exeo domo, the verb exeo compounded with the preposition ex, doth govern domo, in the ablative case by this rule, because the preposition ex, wherewith he is compounded, will have an ablative case.  

The preposition In, being englished by any of these words, To, towards, or against will have an accusative case: and without these, an ablative case for the most part.  In the second example praetereo te insalutatum, the verb praetereo doth govern te in the accusative case, being compounded with the preposition praeter, the which out of composition will have an accusative case, by this rule.  
In the third example adeo templum, the verb adeo being compounded with the preposition ad, doth govern templum, in the accusative case, by this rule, because the preposition ad out of composition will have an accusative case.   

An interjection, and his case.  


This interjection hath also an accusative, & a vocative case. The example applied.  
The ●●●ection V●● or Veb, hath also a dative case, and sometime is put alone without any case.  
The interjections Eheu and Ah, have also an accusative case.  
Proh hath also a nominative case sometime. The interjection Him, hath a nominative, a dative, an accusative, & a vocative case.   Certain interjections require a nominative case: as, O festus dies hominis, O joyful day of man.  
In this example the interjection o doth govern dies in the nominative case by this rule.  
Certain interjections require a dative case: as, Hei mihi, we is one, where mihi is the dative case governed of the interjection hei, by this rule.  
Certain interjections have an accusative case: as, Heu stirpem invisam, Alas the hated stock, where the interjection heu doth govern the accusative case stirpem, by this rule. And this heu hath sometimes also a nominative case.  
Certain interjections have a vocative case: as, Probsancte jupiter, O holy jupiter, where jupiter is the vocative case governed of prô, or proh, by this rule.  
And this proh will have also an accusative case: as, proh deûm atque hominum fidem, O the faith of gods and men, where proh governeth fidem in the accusative case by this rule.  
The rest of the interjections for the most part do govern no case at all.  
Qu. Having thus gone through all the English rules of construction, tell me now in a word, how the little Punies of the Grammar school, in examining and parsing their lessons may find out the rules to show them the case of every part of speech in the same?  

How to find the rules for the case of a word.  An. They must first learn perfectly what part of speech every word of their lesson is, and then consider of what word he is governed, and also what part of speech the same is, and so shall he easily turn to the rule, that showeth the case of his word.  
As for example, if the word governing (which for the most part is the word that in construing goeth next before the word governed) be a substantive, turning to the rules of substantives, you shall there find what case he governeth: if he be an adjective, look among the adjectives: if a verb, look among the rules for verbs, and so of all other parts of speech accordingly.  

General rules of construction.  Qu. Now to make an end of this Treatise, set down some few general rules to be marked of young beginners, in construction, as you find them else where.  
An. Look what case the singular number will have, she same also hath the plural: as, Memor praeteriti, Memoros praeteriti.  
Look what case the nominative case hath after him, the same may all the rest of the cases have.  
Look what case the positive degree hath, the same hath the comparative, and the superlative.  
Look what case the indicative mood hath, the same all the other moods may have also.  
Look what case the verb active hath, the same may the verb passive likewise have, except the accusative case of the sufferer.  

To God alone be laud and praise,  
Who must direct in all our ways.    
FINIS.