NEPTUNE to the commonwealth of England.  

(1)  
OF Thee (great STATE!) the God of Waves  
In equal wrongs, assistance craves, defend thyself and me:  
For if o'er Seas there be no sway,  
My Godhead clean is ta'en away, the sceptre plucked from thee.  
Such as o'er Seas all sovereignty oppose  
Though seeming friends, to both are truly foes.   

(2)  
Nor can I think my suit is vain,  
That Land the Sea should now maintain, since retribution's due:  
And England hath great wealth possessed  
By Sea's access, and thereby blest with plenties not a few:  
Which, next the virtue of thy watchful eyes,  
Will her secure from foreign miserles.   

(3)  
Thy great endeavours to encreas  
The Marine power, do confess thou act'st some great design.  
Which had Seventh Henry done, before  
Columbus launched from Spanish shore, the Indies had been thine.  
Yet do thy Seas those Indian Mines excel  
In riches far: the Belgians know it well.   

(4)  
What wealth or glory may arise  
By the North-West discoveries is due unto thy care.  
Th' adopting them with English names,  
The greatness of thy mind proclaim's, and what thy actions are.  
New Seas thou gainest; & to the ancient FOUR  
By Edgar left, thou addest many more.   

(5)  
If little Venice bring's alone  
Such waves to her subjection as in the Gulf do stir;  
What then should great Britannia pleas,  
But rule as Lady o'er all seas, and thou as Queen of her.  
For Sea-Dominion may as well be gained  
By new acquests, as by descent maintained.   

(6)  
Go on (great STATE!) and make it known  
Thou never wilt forsake thine own, nor from thy purpose start:  
But that thou wilt thy power dilate,  
Since Narrow Seas are found too strait For thy capacious heart.  
So shall thy rule, and mine, have large extent:  
Yet not so large, as just, and permanent.   
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Of the DOMINION, Or, Ownership of the SEA  
TWO BOOKS.  
In the FIRST is showed, that the SEA, by the law OF NATURE, or NATIONS is not common to all men, but capable of PRIVATE DOMINION or propriety, as well as the LAND.  
In the SECOND is proved, that the Dominion of the BRITISH SEA, or that which incompasseth the Isle of GREAT BRITAIN, is, and ever hath been, a Part or appendent of the Empire of that Island.  
Writen at first in Latin, and entitled, MARE CLAUSUM SEU, De Dominio Maris, By JOHN SELDEN, Esquire.  
Translated into English; and set forth with some Additional Evidences and Discourses, By MARCHAMONT NEDHAM. Published by special Command.  
LONDON, Printed by William dugard, by the appointment of the Council of State: and are to be sold at the Sign of the Ship at the New-Exchange. Anno Domini 1652.   

TO The Supreme authority OF THE NATION, The parliament of the commonwealth of ENGLAND.  
(Right honourable!)  
I Should not have presumed thus, in the midst of so many great affairs, to press into your presence, did I not bring a Present in my hand most worthy of your acceptance. It is that Learned and elaborate Work, entitled MARE CLAUSUM; A Piece so fully vindicating your Right of sovereignty over the Seas, by the clearest evidences of Reason, and Record from all antiquity, that it stands more impregnable against the Pens, than the Island itself against the Attempts of foreign Nations. It was written Originally in Latin, for the asserting of this Right before all the world; and how they have been convinced by it, appears hitherto by the universal Admiration that attends it: But considering what pity it was, that so rare a Jewel as this, which hath drawn the envy of some few, but the Approbation of All, should lie so long locked up in a Language unknown to the greatest part of that Nation whom it most concerns; and how necessary it is, in this present Juncture, to let the People have a clear understanding of their nearest interest, and how that Right hath been received in all Ages, which a strange People in this latter Age have been bold to undermine; it was judged very requisite to unlock the Cabinet, and expose the Jewel to the view of the whole Nation, that they may prise it, and apprehend not only their own Interests and Concernments, but how far we and our posterity must stand indebted to the name and memory of the noble SELDEN.  
As for myself, though it be accounted one of the meanest Services to Translate; yet when I consulted with my own Thoughts, which way I might best express my duty and affection to your present Caus, and considered, that little could be said or collected upon this subject of the Sea, which is not abundantly set forth in this irrefragable Treatise, I conceived it a Task of no less importance than difficulty. And now it is done, if it were well done, I should believ myself to have atteined no small happiness, in having my name any way related to the Learned author; who shall ever live like himself in this excellent Book, as long as there is any memory of Britain, or of the Sea that flows about it.  
It was a work begun (it seems) in the Reign of King James, and then laid aside again for above sixteen years; but afterwards revived, altered, and enlarged by the Learned author (as he saith in his Epistle) at the command of the late Tyrant; And as it was written for him, so it was dedicated to him, as being supposed one who was, or aught to have been, a fit Patron of the Dominion here asserted: However, this I find, that as he seemed, by his naval Preparations in the year 1635, to resent the many injurious usurpations of our unruly neighbours, and did in words also strenuously assert the Jurisdiction at Sea; so he set a value upon this Book, as it's main Evidence: and in the 12 year of his Reign it was upon his special command, delivered by the hands of Sir William Beecher (one of the Clerks of his Council) to the Barons of the Exchequer in open Court; and by immediate Order of that Court, it was placed among their public Records, where it remain's to this day. Now, had he persisted with the same firm resolution in this honourable business of the Sea, as he did in other things, that were destructive to the Nation's interest, the Netherlanders had been prevented from spinning out their long opportunity to an imaginary Claim of Prescription; so that they would have had less Pretence to Act those insolences now, which in former times never durst enter the Thoughts of their Predecessors. The truth is, too much easiness and indulgence to the Fathers and grandfathers of the present Generation, was the first occasion of elevating them to this height of Confidence, in pressing upon the Seas of England: For, who knows not with what tenderness, and upon what terms, they were first taken into the bosom of Queen Elisabeth? yet they were no sooner warm, but they showed their sting, and proved the only great vexation (because deceitful friends) to that excellent Lady, who, in those infant-days, was both Mother and nurse of their ungrateful republic. Too much of the same tenderness was expressed afterward by King James, because (as in the former Reign, so in his) it was counted Reason of State to permit them to thrive; but they turning that favourable Permission into a Licentious Encroaching beyond due Limits, put the King to a world of Trouble and Charge, by Ambassies and otherwise, to assert his own interest, and dispute them into a reasonable submission to those Rights which had been received before as indisputable by all the world. For the truth whereof, I am bold to refer your honours to the Memorials of several Transactions in those days, which I have added at the end of this Book; and for which I stand indebted (as I am also for many other favours) to a Right honourable Member of your own great Assembly. By the same also it will appear, how this People perceiving that King to be of a temper disposed to use no other arguments but words, held him in play with words again, and while they trifled out his Reign in Debates and Treaties, carried on their design still to such a height, by a collusion of Agencies and Ventilations to and again, and a daily intrusion upon the territory by Sea, that in time they durst plead and print Mare Liberum; and after his Son Charles came to the Crown, they in effect made it so: For, though he were not ignorant of his own Right, as appears by his esteem of this Book, his Preparations, and Proclamation for Restraint of Fishing without Licence, etc. Yet he never made any farther use of them, than to milk away the Subjects money under pretence of building Ships to maintain his authority by Sea; which end of his being served, he immediately let fall the prosecution of what he pretended: So that through the overmuch easiness and indulgence of preceding Princes, they in a short time arrived to so lofty a Presumption, as to seem to forget and question, and now at length, by most perfidious actings, to defy the Dominion of England over the Sea.  
These things being considered, it was supposed this Translation (it being a noble Plea asserting that Dominion) would be a very seasonable Service; which (how poorly soëver it be apparelled in our English dress) is bold to lay Claim unto your honours as its proper Patrons, conceiving it ought to be no less under your Protection than the Sea itself: And therefore let me have leave here (without flattery or vanity) to say, though in other things I may injure the eminent author, yet in this he will be a Gainer, that his Book is now fallen under a more noble Patronage, in the tuition of such heroïck Patriots, who, observing the errors and defects of former Rulers, are resolved to see our sea-territory as bravely maintained by the Sword, as it is by his Learned Pen. It is a gallant sight to see the Sword and Pen in victorious Equipage together; For, this subdue's the souls of men by Reason, that only their bodies by force. The Pen it is which manifests the Right of Things; and when that is once cleared, it give's spurs to resolution, because men are never raised to so high a pitch of action, as when they are persuaded, that they engage in a righteous cause; according to that old Versicle, 
Frangit, & attollit vires in Milite causa.   
Wherefore seeing you (Right honourable!) have had so frequent experience of the truth of this in our late Wars, wherein the Pen Militant hath had as many sharp rencounters as the Sword, and born away as many Trophies from homebred Enemies in prosecution of your most righteous cause by Land, certainly you will yield it no less necessary for the Instruction of this generous and ingenious people, in vindicating your just Rights by Sea, against the vain Pretences and Projects of encroaching neighbours. For, what true English heart will not swell, when it shall be made clear and evident (as in this Book) that the sovereignty of the Seas flowing about this Island, hath, in all times, whereof there remain's any written testimony, both before the old Roman Invasion and since, under every Revolution, down to the present Age, been held and acknowledged by all the world, as an inseparable appendent of the British Empire; And that by virtue thereof the Kings of England successively have had the sovereign Guard of the Seas; That they have imposed Taxes and Tributes upon all ships passing and fishing therein; That they have obstructed and opened the passage thereof to strangers, at their own pleasure, and done all other things that may testify an absolute Sea-Dominion; what English heart (I say) can consider these things, together with the late Actings of the Netherlanders, set forth in your public Declaration, and not be inflamed with an indignation answerable to their Insolence; That these People raised out of the dust at first into a state of liberty, and at length to an high degree of Power and felicity, by the Arms and Benevolence of England; or that they, who in times past durst never enter our Seas to touch a Herring, without Licence first obtained by Petition from the Governor of Scarborough-Castle, should now presume to invade them with armed Fleets, and by a most unjust war bid defiance to the United Powers of these three Nations? Had they dared to do this in the days of our Kings, I suppose, they (even the worst of them) would have checked and chastised them with a Resolution suitable to their monstrous Ingratitude; For, however some of them were wholly busied in vexing and undermining the people's Liberties at home, yet they were all very jealous of the Rights and Interests of the Nation at Sea; and good reason they had for it, since without the maintenance of a sovereignty there, the Island itself had been but a great Prison, and themselves and the Natives but so many Captives and Vassals to their neighbours round about; not so much secluded, as excluded from all the world beside. Upon this ground it was, that Kings ever conceived and maintained themselves as much monarches by Sea as by Land; and the same you will find here was received by all other States and Princes, the Land and Water that surround's it, making one entire body and Territorie. Moreover, our own Municipal Constitutions every where declare the same, as may be seen by the several precedents and proceed thereunto relating; which manifestly show, that by the Common Law of the Land, our Kings were proprietary Lords of our Seas; That the Seas of Engl. were ever under the Legiance of our Kings, and they sovereign Conservators of the peace as well upon the Sea as landlord.  
Now therefore (Right honourable!) when I look upon you, and behold you more highly entrusted than Kings, and far more nobly adorned upon a better Ground than they were, with all the Rights, Interests, and Privileges of the People; when I consider how God hath wrested the Sword out of their hands, and placed it in yours for our Protection, with the Conservation of our Peace and Liberties, and made you the happy Instruments of freeing us from the yoke of Kings; When I call to mind, how nobly you asserted the Rights of England against domestic tyranny, upon the neck of the late King, and laid the foundation of our Freedom upon the highest Act of Justice (when Justice sat more gloriously enthroned than ever it did before on any earthly Tribunal) I am raised with more than ordinary confidence, that the same Spirit of Justice, which acted you in your former achievements, for our establishment by Land, against him and his posterity, will carry you on (as you have begun) with the like zeal and magnanimity, to vindicate those Rights by Sea, against all foreign violations and invasions. It is your honour, that God hath made you Founders of the most famous and potent republic this day in the world; and your felicity, that all your Enemies have no other Ground of quarrel, but that you are a republic: For, though these Netherlanders speak it not out in words, yet they have often told you so in behaviour; not only as they saw a barbarous stab given you in the person of Dr Dorisla, yet let slip the murderers by delay, (the States-General not having issued out so much as a warrant for their apprehension) but after, in neglecting, slighting and slender protecting (to say no more) of your two Ambassadors, and at length in the louder language of the Cannon, during a treaty of Peace for a more strict League and Union; when Tromp proclaimed to all the world, that their infamous design was by treachery to surprise and destroy our Fleets at Sea, which (to use your own language) are, under God, the Walls and Bulwarks of this Nation. It is not my business here to recite their many unkindnesses throughout the late wars, their designed protracting them by a mischievous underhand-siding and supplying the public enemy, together with the many indignities, affronts, injuries, and intolerable provocations, both before and since your settling in a State of Freedom. That egregious attempt upon your Shipping, under pretence of a friendly salutation, considered in all its Circumstances, may serve in stead of all, it being indeed such a Barbarism, that the world cannot parallel, and none but themselves would have acted; And therefore we may the less wonder at their denying it when done, since the owning must have rendered them and their present enterprise detestable to the Nations. Nor is it any great marvel, that after the many matchless affronts given you, when your honours out of a Christian inclination to Peace, were pleased to over-pass them all, and in your Answer of the 25 of June to their Ambassadors, to declare notwithstanding, that, if you might have satisfaction for the Charges they put you to in that Summer's Preparations, and security for time to come by both States contracting a firm Alliance, you were ready to set an end to the present differences (it is no marvel, I say, after so great condescension on your part) they should choose War rather than Peace, since it now appears they had War in their hearts from the very beginning, and stood resolved to propagate their ambitious ends by ways of violence, and become yet more unjust, rather than do any thing, though never so reasonable, that might seem to import an acknowledgement of their late injustice. And to the end that England may have a true taste of their intentions, it is well worthy consideration, that as they have refused to give any reasonable satisfaction or security, and with a brazen-front outface the matter in their public Manifest, declaring therein, That they will never lay down arms so long as you steer the course you are now in; so by consequence they seem resolved never to admit Peace, but upon such terms as are inconsistent with your honour and Interest, and six themselves (as long as they so continue) in an irreconcilable enmity to the Good of our Nation. In Cases of this nature, when Adversaries place themselves at an unreasonable distance, there is no security for a State, but in a strict bend to its own Interest; nor any thing more dangerous than Middle-Counsels, while an enemy stands out upon extremities; And what greater extremity than to invade a Neighbor's territory, and prosecute the Invasion by a design of Conquest: The Sea is indeed your territory no less than the Land; It hath been held so by all Nations, as unquestionably subject, under every Alteration of Government, to them that have enjoied the Dominion by Land; so that the Netherlanders having entered your Seas, in defiance of your Power, are as absolute Invaders, as if they had entered the Island itself. It is just as if Hannibal were again in Italy, or Charles Stuart at Worcester; and the late affront given near Dover, was like the one's braving it before the walls of Rome, and as if the other had come and knocked at the gates of London, or rather at your very Chamber-door; for, that insolent Act was done in that place, which our Kings heretofore were wont to call and account their Chamber. How nearly these things touch the honour of your selus and the Nation, is well apprehended by your faithful friends, who have been very amply instructed and quickened by your public Declaration: And it is their exceeding joy, while they see you acting and engaging upon just and honourable Grounds, to make good that Right and Reputation which you have received as inviolable from our Ancestors. For, it hath been their great satisfaction to observe, with what excellent expressions you acquit your selus, when, stating the case of this Quarrel, you make it known, with what affection and constancy you have laboured for the friendship of the United Provinces; how carefully you have avoided all differences, and occasions of a war between the Nations; yet that all Overtures of amity and nearest Alliance have been rejected; and how that in stead of giving satisfaction for all the injuries they have done you, nothing would satisfy them, unless you should quietly and tamely have laid your selves down at the feet of those who have thus endeavoured to ruin you; or unless you should have betrayed into those hands the Rights and safety of the People of this Nation: So that beeing compelled and necessitated into a most unwelcome war begun upon you, you resolve to use such ways and means, wherewith God shall enable you, to defend your selus, and thereby to gain that just satisfaction and security, which cannot otherwise be had. May you ever persist in this heroïck Resolution, as to do no wrong to any, so to defend your own Rights against all that shall dare to ravish them; May you always have an ear open to receiv full Satisfaction and security, when offered, and a heart nobly enkindled with a magnanimous indignation, to retort violence in the faces of bold Usurpers and Invaders. Had the Netherlanders been content to keep within their proper Bounds, it had been still our Interest (as of old) to have had Peace with them above other Nations; but since they break out like an Inundation, and with a drawn Sword declare prodigious Principles of enmity against the Rights and Liberties of England, it is presumed a thing unquestionable, that due Defences ought to be made, till they be reduced within their ancient Limits: For, if they should be permitted in the least to Lord it at Sea; as they want not will and advantages, and have given you experience of their encroaching and ambitious temper, so it's to be feared they would be ever seeking opportunity, to impose a Lord upon you by landlord.  
May you go on therefore (Right honourable!) as you have begun, and do, and the God of Heaven go along with you, upon terms of honour & Justice, in such a way, that men may understand (as you will do no wrong) at what rate they must offend you. Not only our eyes, but the eyes of all the world, are fixed upon the carriage and conduct of this noble enterprise by Sea; when you have acquitted your selus there▪ as not doubt you will do, having already given the same demonstrations of wisdom and courage that you have done by Land, your Wars (through God's blessing) will at once be ended; It will draw such a reverence & repute to your affairs, that men will beware how they provoke you, and your worst enemies despair of any future opportunity. The late Engagements & Successes of your Fleets at Sea have shown, that the great God hath owned you there; That he hath not left you destitute of means; That the old English blood & since of honour, runs still in the veins of your seamen; and thereby given you to understand, that he who hath appeared so gloriously for you, in the midst of wondrous difficulties, by Land, will also manifest his wonders in the Deep, to make a final Accomplishment of the good work by Sea; and being himself alone invested with the absolute sovereignty of Sea & Land, be pleased to continue you and your Successors his lieutenants in both, for the establishment of this commonwealth, in a plenary possession of its Rights and Liberties to all posterity. I am in my prayers and endeavours  
(RIGHT honourable!) Your honour's most humble, and faithful Servant Marchamont Nedham. November 19 1652.   

THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE.  
Some things there are that I thought fit here to forewarn the Reader; part whereof may be necessary even for those who are in other things very well instructed. The rest likewise not unprofitable for them, who, while they salute Books by the way, are wont through a customary vice of temereity to stumble in the very Threshold. Those things concern either the place of such Testimonies, as are alleged; or some Circumstances of the Sea-Dominion which is proved; or the Title of the Work. Among Testimonies, besides such as are in Print, and Manuscripts reserved in private men's Libraries, there are not a few (especially in the second Book) brought out of Records or public Monuments, whose credit I suppose every indifferent judge of matters will, as once the 
a Marcellus, l. 9 ff. tit. de Probationibus.  Senate of Rome did, allow better than other Witnesses (at least if there be any difference) and therefore full. Those which lie in private men's Libraries, you will find where they are kept, in the Margin: If omitted there, they are in my own. But as to the Testimonies taken often out of public Records, some likewise have the Place either of the Archive or Rolls, or the name of the Record-keeper's Office so noted in the Margin, that thereby you may know immediately where to find them. But some of these Records (that are very frequently cited) have no place at all, nor any name of the Record-keeper expressed, but the King for the most part and the Year, besides the name of the Court-Roll, are only noted. As many as are of this kind, do relate some to those years that pass betwixt the beginning of the reign of King John and the end of Edward the Fourth; others to those years that succeed down to our time. They which are of the former sort, having no place nor name of the Record-keeper noted, are kept in the Archive of the Tower of London; but those of the latter sort in the Chapel of the Rolls. It had been too slight a matter, to have signified thus much here to such as are acquainted with our English Records; because by the very name of the Court-Roll (as Rotulorum Patentium, Rotulorum Clausorum, Rotulorum Parl●mentariorum, Rotulorum Franciae, Vasconiae, Alemanniae, and others of that kind, which are Records belonging to the English chancery) and by the name of the King, the very place also of the Records is sufficiently known. But it is necessary to premise this in the first place, as well for the sakes of my own countrymen who have been Strangers to the Rolls, as in the behalf of Foreiners, to the end that, if either of them perhaps have a mind exactly to consult the Original of any testimony thence alleged, they might, when the Places are so described, the more conveniently do it themselves at their own leisure, if present, or, if absent, obtain it by the assistance of friends. For, the Record-keepers (who have a special care to preserv them safely) do usually give admittance, at seasonable hours, to all that pleas to consult them, and have them so placed (as 
b Novel Constit. 15. cap. 5. § 2.  Justinian commanded concerning the Records of the Empire) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that they may easily be found by them that search.  
As to what concerns the aforesaid circumstances of Sea-Dominion, whereas there are two Propositions here (so far as the term may be born in things of a civil nature) made evident; The one, That the Sea, by the Law of Nature or Nations, is not common to almen, but capable of private Dominion or propriety as well as the Land; The other, That the King of Great Britain is Lord of the Sea flowing about, as an inseparable and perpetual appendent of the British Empire; it is not to be conceived, that any other kind either of Causes or Effects of Sea-Dominion are here admitted, than such as have been of the Dominion of an Island, Continent, Port, or any other territory whatsoëver or Province, which is wont to be reckoned in the Royal patrimony of Princes. Nor that a less Dominion of the Sea than of the Land, is derived from the nature of the Law received among Nations about the acquiring of Dominion and of Justice itself, as from the Causes; nor that the Effects thereof are any other than what are variously subservient to Compacts, Agreements, Leagues and Treaties, Constitutions or Prescriptions of servitudes, and other things of that nature, in the same manner as the effects of Dominion by landlord. And therefore 
c Seneca in Medeâ, Act. 2.  he said well of old, 
Nunc jam cessit Pontus, & Omnes  
Patitur leges;  
The Seals now made appropriate,  
And yield's to all the Laws of state.   
That is to say, all which are admitted in any other kind of Territories, according to the difference of things, persons, times, and the Law of War and Peace. And so Valerius to the Emperor Tiberius, The consent of men and gods, saith 
d Prologo.  he, would have the regiment of Sea and Land be in thy power. There are other Passages of the same kind in ancient Authors, whereby the Dominion of Land and Sea is so conjoined, that they would by no means have it divided in respect of each other, or that either the effects or causes of the Dominion of this should be different from that of the other. But this, I suppose, is sufficiently manifest to the more intelligent sort of men, without any Advertisement; though it be necessary for such as too rashly, without any regard had to the interposition of Leagues and Treaties, Agreement, or Law, dare boldly affirm sometimes, that the cause of Sea-Dominion consists only in the strength of powerful Fleets, sometimes also of such as belong to 
e videses Lud. Servin. in placit. tom. 2. pag. 260.  Pirates; but the effect in restraining all others simply and perpetually.  
But the Title of the Book need's a defence also among some, whose palate I hear it doth not pleas very well. They would not have, forsooth, the Mare Clausum here handled, as an assertion of the Dominion of the Sea, but to denote the time wherein the Seas were said to be shut or closed by the ancients, as not fit for Navigation. Every man knows, that from the third of the ideses of 
f Vegetius, de Re Militari, lib. 4. cap 39  November until the sixth of the ideses of March, or betwixt some other 
g l. 3. C. tit. de naufragiis, & l. 3. tit eod.. in Cod. Theodosiano; Jul Ferret. de R. Navali, lib. 11. § 2. & 3.  beginning and ending of such a kind of winter-season, the Sea was, and was so called, heretofore Clausum Shut; as the rest of the time, or in the Summer-season, it was called Apertum Open, that is to say, more apt and convenient for shipping. According to which since it was said by 
h Ad Quinctum Fratrem, lib. 2. Epist. 5.  Cicero, while he was in expectation of Letters from his brother Quinctus; Adhuc Clausum Mare scio fuisse, I know the Sea hath been shut until now. So that in this since, the surnames both of Clusius and Patulcius, might rightly enough have been given to Neptune, as well as Janus. But yet, though the Title had been taken from this Nation of the Seas being shut or closed, it would not truly have been so reprovable. For, seeing it is in the power of an Owner, so to use and enjoy his Own, that without some Compacts of Agreement, Covenants or some special Right supervening, he may lawfully restrain any others whatsoëver, it cannot be amiss for any one to say, that the Seas, which might pass into the Dominion of any person, are by the Law of Dominion shut to all others who are not Owners or that do not enjoy such a peculiar Right; in the same manner almost as that, whereby in that Winter-season they become unnavigable by the Law of Nature, as saith Vegetius. But truly there is another and far clearer meaning of the Title. The simple sens of its terms doth denote, that the Sea is so shut up or separated and secluded for private Dominion, no otherwise than the Land or a Port, by bounds, limits, and other Notes and circumstances of private Dominion, and that by all kind of Law, that without the consent of the Owner and those special restrictions & qualifications of Law, which variously intervene, vanish, and return, all others are excluded from a use of the same. For, most certain it is, that Claudere, to shut doth not only denote the mere simple Act of shutting, as we say de Januis oculisve clausis of gates or one's eyes being shut, clauso agmine, or as it is in that of 
i Pharsal. 3.  Lucan,▪ 
Brachia nec licuit vasto jactare Profundo;  
Sed Clauso periere Mari.—   
(which is spoken of the Seamen's being covered with the keel of their ship turned upward) but also it very often signifies that which is consequent either to a denial of the free use of the thing shut, as also the propriety and Dominion of him that shut's it; So saith Venus in 
k AEneid. 1.  Virgil to Jupiter; 
Quid Troes potuere? quibus tot funera passis  
Cunctus ob Italiam Terrarum Claudiditur Orbis.   
Clauditur Orbis, the World shut; that is to say a free use of the world is forbidden them, or not permitted. And 
l Lib. 4. Eleg. 10.  Propertius,  
Non Clausisset aquas ipsa Noverca suas. he speaks of the sacred Fountains of Juno, which were appropriate to the Female Sex as Owners, and so prohibited to Hercules and all Males whatsoëver. The Ambassador of the Tencteri speaks to the same sens also to the Agrippinenses in 
m Historiar. 4. ●▪  Tacitus; we rejoice in your behalf, that at length ye shall be free among them that are free. For, to this day, the Romans had shut up the Rivers and Lands, and in a manner the very Aër, to hinder and restrain our Conferences and Meetings. And in the same Author, Cerialis pleads to the Treveri and Lingones. Except Tributes, saith he, Other things remain in common, ye your selus for the most part command our Legions; ye rule these and other Provinces. Nihil separatum Clausúmve, Nothing is separate or shut. Many other passages there are of that kind. Pliny also saith of the Seas themselves, 
n Hist. Nat. ● lib. 2. cap. 9  Interiora Maria Clauduntur ut portu, the inner Seas are shut as in a Haven. And the same Author in 
o Ibid. lib. 36. cap. 15.  another, saith, Mare Tyrrhenum à Lucrino molibus seclusum, the Tyrrhen Sea was secluded or shut apart by Piles from the Lucrine. And 
p Histor. 2.  Tacitus, tutum, seclusum Mare, the Sea was safe, being secluded. I hat Panegyrist also to Constantius, saith of the Franks that rob heretofore in a piratic manner, as well in the Mediterranean as the open Sea, eventu temeritatis ostenderant nihil esse Clausum piraticae disperationi quo navigiis pateret accessus, they made it appear by the event of their rashness, that nothing could be shut against the desperation of Pirates, where there might be an access for Shipping. That is to say, the Sea was not so shut against Pirates by the Roman Emperor, but that they freely used depredation therein. In a word, that which is said by 
q Hexaemer. lib. 5. ca 10.  Ambrose, possidere fretum, & spatia Maris sibi vendicare Jure Mancipii, to possess a Narrow Sea and challenge spaces of the Sea by right of subjection, is the very same with that of 
r De Re Rustica, lib. 8. cap. 16.  Columella; Maria ipsa Neptunúmque claudere, to shut the Seas themselves and Neptune; and so Mare Clausum is the Sea possessed in a private manner, or so secluded both by Right and Occupation, that it ceaseth to be common; that is, being claimed by Right of subjection. Upon this ground it was, that those Angles were called Anguli Clausares, whereby the 
A Centurie 200 Acres  Centuries in the Assignations of the ancient Romans did so touch one another, that it might be known thereby, how far the right of the possession of particular persons did extend, as you may see in 
s Lib. de Limitibus Constituendis.  Hygenus. Neither is it necessary, that what may be rightly said in this since to be shut, should be shut or enclosed by some continued Fence, or by a continued Tract of some eminent Limit like a Mound: But any kind of imaginary Line, by straight Lines, crooked wind and turn and Angles, hath taken place in the designation of private Dominions, or in the shutting or enclosing of a thing possessed in a civil acception (as it was usual among the ancients in those Fields which were termed Agri Occupatorii and Arcifinii) as well as any eminent and continued Limit or Mound whatsoëver. From whence it came to pass, that in the Assignations of Colonies, they called those places Clausa and Extraclusa whose Limits were divided only by such kind of Lines. 
t Lib. de Limitibus Agrorum.  Julius Frontinus saith; That Field my bee called Ager extraclusus which lies within the bordering Line and the Centuries, and therefore extraclusus, because it is closed with the bordering line beyond the limits. So the Territories, assigned as well in the Colonies at this day carried into America, as in that prodigious gift of Pope Alexander VI in the former Age, which is bounded by an imaginary Line from the 
u Laërtius Cherubinus, Bullar. tom. 1. pag. 393. Hieronym. de Monte Brixiano, lib. de sinious regundis, cap. 7. ●8.  Artic to the Antarctic Pole, are closed by Lines of Longitude and Latitude drawn through the degrees of Heaven, that they may be possessed in a private manner. So the Greek Sea, which is within the Cyanean and Chelidonian Islands, was by 
x Plutarch. vitâ Cimonis.  Agreement shut and prohibited by the Athenians to the Persian Emperor. So the Sea flowing about is shut or closed within the compass of the Royal patrimony of the British Empire. Other passages there are every where of the same kind. But I enlarge myself too much in a thing so manifest. Therefore I forbear to light a Candle to the Sun. farewell Reader. From the Inner Temple, IV November MDCXXXV.   


The Contents of the first BOOK, according to the several Chapters.  

CHAP. I. THe Division of the Work, and the Method of the first Book. Pag. 1  
CHAP. II. What Occurrences seem to oppose the Dominion of the Sea, and what Arguments are wont to be made against it. pag. 3  
CHAP. III. What is meant by the word SEA, in the question. Also a division of the Law, in order to the discourse. pag. 11  
CHAP. iv Of Dominion, both common to all, and Private. Also its Original, either by Distribution, or primary Occupation. pag. 16  
CHAP. v The Effects of private Dominion. And what regard hath been had of the SEA, in the more ancient Distributions and Divisions of things. pag. 24  
CHAP. vi That the Law of God, or the Divine Oracles of holy Scripture, do allow a private Dominion of the Sea. And that the wide Ocean also, which washeth the Western Coast of the holy Land, or at least a considerable part of it, was, according to the Opinion of such as were learned in the Jewish Law, annexed to the Land of Israël, by the Assignation or appointment of God himself. pag. 27  
CHAP. VII. That the Natural-Permissive Law (whereof any use may be in this place) is to be derived out of the Customs and Constitutions of the more civilised and more noble Nations, both ancient and modern. pag. 42  
CHAP. VIII. The manner, whereby the Law Permissive touching private Dominion of the Sea, may be drawn out of the Customs of many Ages and Nations. That there were Testimonies hereof manifest enough in the Fabulous Age. Also a word by the way, touching the Mediterranean Sea, in possession of the Romans, when the command thereof was committed to Cneius Pompeius. pag. 46  
CHAP. IX. The first Dominion of the Sea among the Greeks in the Historical Age; that is, the Dominion of King Minos, or the Cretan. pag. 53  
CHAP. X. That after Minos of Crete, seventeen Nations of renown in the East, succeeding each other, did for very many years even without intermission enjoy a Dominion of the Syrian, Egyptian, Pamphylian, Lydian, and AEgean Sea, no otherwise than of the Continent or Islands. pag. 56  
CHAP. XI. Touching the Sea-Dominions of the Lacedæmonians and Athenians. Moreover also, that it was acknowledged not only by the Greeks, but also by the Persians, in a treaty of Peace. pag. 65  
CHAP. XII. Other Testimonies, which are found scattered up and down, touching the Dominion of the Sea, in the Customs of the Eastern Nations. pag. 69  
CHAP. XIII. Of the Spinetans, Tuscans, Carthaginians, and other Lords of the Sea in the West. pag. 74  
CHAP. XIV. The Sea-Dominion, of the people of Rome, and of such as followed their Customs in the Eastern Empire. pag. 77  
CHAP. XV. The Dominion of the Sea, as it belonged to private persons under the Roman Empire, together with that Sanction established in the Eastern Empire; whereby the perpetual community of the Sea which was pretended to by some, being utterly abolished as a thing unjust, the Dominion even of private persons therein is asserted. pag. 89  
CHAP. XVI. Touching the Dominion of the SEA, according to the Customs of such Nations as are now in being. First of the Adriatic Sea belonging to the Venetians; the 
Mare Ligusticum is now called Mar Leone, and Mar  di Genova.  Ligustick to the Genoêses, the Tyrrhen to the Tuscans, and lastly of the Sea belonging to the Church, or Pope of Rome. pag. 99  
CHAP. XVII. Concerning the received Customs of the Portugals and Spaniards, about the Dominion of the Sea. pag. 107  
CHAP. XVIII. How far private Dominion over the Sea is admitted according to the Customs, or opinion of the French. pag: 111  
CHAP. XIX. The private Dominion of the Sea, according to the received Customs of the Danes, the people of Norway, the Swedes, Polanders, and Turks. pag. 118  
CHAP. XX. An Answer to the objection, concerning Freedom of Passage to Merchants, Strangers, and seamen. pag. 123  
CHAP. XXI. An Answer to that Objection concerning the uncertain fluid nature of the Sea, and its continual Alteration. It is proved, that Rivers also, and the adjoining Aër (which are more fluid and uncertain) may become appropriate. pag. 127  
CHAP. XXII. An Answer to the Objections touching the defect of Bounds and Limits in the Sea; as also concerning its magnitude and inexhaustible abundance. pag. 135  
CHAP. XXIII. An Answer to such Testimonies as have fallen from Writers treating of other subjects, and which are usually alleged against Dominion of the Sea. pag. 145  
CHAP. XXIV. An Answer to the Objections taken out of Ancient Lawyers. pag. 150  
CHAP. XXV. Touching the Emperor Antoninus his Answer that himself was sovereign of the world, but the Law (as 'tis commonly translated) of the Sea; in L. Deprecatio, ff. tit. de lege Rhodiâ. The true meaning of the said Answer, and a new, but genuine Exposition of it. Also, that it comprehends nothing which may in any wise oppose a Dominion of the Sea. pag. 157  
CHAP. XXVI. An Answer to the Opinions of modern Lawyers, so far as they oppose a Dominion of the Sea; especially of Fernannandus Vasquius, and Hugo Grotius. pag. 168    

The Contents of the second BOOK.  

CHAP. I. THe order or Method of those things that are to be handled in this Book. The British Ocean divided into four parts. pag. 181  
CHAP. II. That the ancient Britain's, did enjoy and possess the SEA of the same name; especially the Southern and Eastern part of it, as Lords thereof, together with the Island, before they were brought under the Roman power. p. 188  
CHAP. III. That the Britain's were Lords of the Northern Sea, before they were subdued by the Romans. And that the Sea and the Land made one entire body of the British Empire. pag. 201  
CHAP. iv That the Dominion of the British Sea, followed the Conquest of great Britain itself, under the Emperors Claudius and Domitian. pag. 205  
CHAP. v Touching the Dominion of the Romans in the British Sea, as an appendent of the Island, from the time of Domitian to the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, or Diocletian. pag. 211  
CHAP. vi Touching the Dominion of the Southern and Eastern Sea, as an appendent of the British Empire, from the time of Constantine the Great till the Romans quitted the Island. That it was all under the Command of the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain. Also concerning the British navy under the Romans. pag. 217  
CHAP. VII. An Examination of the Opinion of some learned men, who would have the Saxon Shore, from whence that Count or Commander of the Sea throughout Britain had his Title to be the British Shore on this side of the Sea; which is plainly proved to be fals. pag. 231  
CHAP. VIII. Some Evidences concerning the sovereignty and inseparable Dominion of the Isle of Britain and the Sea belonging thereto, out of Claudian, and certain Coins of the Emperor Antoninus Pius. pag. 242  
CHAP. IX. Touching the Dominion of the British Sea, after that the Inhabitants had freed themselves from the Roman power. pag. 247  
CHAP. X. It is proved, both from the very beginning of the Saxon's Reign, as also from their Forces and Victories by Sea, that the English-Saxons, and Danes, who ruled the South part of Britain, had Dominion over the Sea. pag. 251  
CHAP. XI. The Sea-Dominion of the English-Saxons, and Danes, during their Reigns in Britain, observed in like manner, from such Tributes and Duties of their fiduciary Clients or Vassals, as concerned the maintenance of the navy. Also concerning the Tribute or Paiment called Danegeld, which was wont to beelevied for the Guard of the Sea. pag. 259  
CHAP. XII. The Testimonies of Edgar and Canutus, Kings of England, with others, expressly declaring the Dominion which they and their predecessors had over the Sea. Together with an observation touching the Nations which in that Age were seated upon the opposite Shore. pag. 273  
CHAP. XIII. Several Testimonies concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, since the Norman Conquests, set forth in general heads. pag. 284  
CHAP. XIV. That the Kings of England since the coming in of the Normans, have perpetually enjoied the Dominion of the Sea flowing about them, is in the first place proved from the Guard or Government thereof, as of a Province or Territorie; that is to say, from the very Law of the English admiralty. pag. 287  
CHAP. XV. The Dominion of the English Sea asserted from those Tributes or Customs that were wont to be imposed, paid, and demanded for the Guard or Protection thereof after the Norman Conquest. pag. 295  
CHAP. XVI. Observations touching the Dominion of the English and Irish Sea, from the tenor and variety of those Letters Patents or Commission royal, whereby the Admirals of England were wont to be put in authority. pag. 305  
CHAP. XVII. It is proved by words plain enough in the form of the Commissions for the Government or command of the high Admiral of England, from ancient to the present time, that the Sea, for whose guard or defence, he was appointed by the King of England as Lord and sovereign, was ever bounded towards the South, by the shore of Aquitain, Normandy, and Picardy. pag. 312  
CHAP. XVIII. Touching the Admirals of the Kingdom of France, or those constituted upon the opposite Shore; their Original, nature, and variety. That the Sea itself flowing between Britain and France, is not contained in that command of his, as of one that is Governor of a Territory or Province; nor is there any thing in it that may oppose the Dominion of the King of England by Sea. pag. 321.  
CHAP. XIX. That in the Dominion of those Islands lying before the shore of France, which hath ever been enjoied by the Kings of England, it appears that the possession of the Sea wherein they are situate, is derived from their Predecessors. pag. 333  
CHAP. XX. The Dominion and possession of the Sea asserted on the behalf of the Kings of England, from that leave of preter-Navigation or passage which hath been usually either granted by them to Foreiners or desired from them. pag. 344  
CHAP. XXI. That Licence hath been usually granted to Foreiners, by the Kings of England, to fish in the Sea; Also, that the Protection given to fishermen by them, as in their own territory, is an ancient and manifest Evidence of their Dominion by Sea. pag. 355  
CHAP. XXII. The Dominion of England made evident from the Laws and Limits usually set by our Kings in the Sea, to such Foreiners as were at enmity with each other, but in amity with the English. And concerning the King's Closets or Chambers in the Sea. Also touching that singular privilege of perpetual truce (or exemption from hostility) in the Sea about those Isles which lie before the shore of Normandy. pag. 363  
CHAP. XXIII. Certain public Records, wherein of old the Dominion of the Sea is, by the way, ascribed to the Kings of England, both by the King himself, and also by the Estates of parliament, debating of other matters, and that in express words, and with very great deliberation, as a known and most undoubted Right. pag. 375  
CHAP. XXIV. Of divers Testimonies in our own Law-books, and the most received Customs, whereby the Sea-Dominion of the King of England, is either asserted or admitted. pag. 382  
CHAP. XXV. Son ancient Testimonies of less account, touching the Sea-Dominion, whereof we treat. pag. 394  
CHAP. XXVI. That the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England is acknowledged by Foreiners, whom it most concerns, by their usual striking of Sails, according to ancient Custom. Also concerning two Edicts or Ordinances that were set forth about this thing, by the Kings of France. pag. 398  
CHAP. XXVII. A Recognition or acknowledgement of the Sea-Dominion of the King of England, made by very many of the Neighbor-Nations round about, in an ancient Libel publicly exhibited, or in a Bill of Complaint instituted by them, together with the English, against Reyner Grimbald Governor of the French navy. Also, touching a Recognition of this kind implied in his defence. pag. 403  
CHAP. XXVIII. A copy, or Transcript of the Libel or Bill of Complaint, mentioned in the former Chapter. pag. 415.  
CHAP. XXIX. A Recognition or acknowledgement of the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, made by the Flemings in an embassy to Edward the Second. pag. 429  
CHAP. XXX. Of the Dominion of the King of Great Britain in the Irish and Western Sea, considered singly and apart by itself. pag. 433.  
CHAP. XXXI. Touching the Dominion of the King of Great Britain in the Scotish Sea, especially toward the East and North. pag. 443  
CHAP. XXXII. Touching that Right which belongs to the King of Great Britain, in the main and open Sea of the North. And the Conclusion of the Work. pag. 447     

Amend the Errors thus.  
PAg. 2. lin. 31. read Question. p. 15. l. 25. r. Hostages, blot out Right. p. 29. l. 2. also over all other. p. 33. l. 7. r. Thus it is. p. 38. l. 27. r. within the Creeks, p. 49. l. 31. r. that of Neptune. p. 53. l. 29. r. in any wise. p. 56. l. 6. r. or which. ibid. l. 14. r. translation. p. 61. l. 2. r. hereto. p. 64. l. 22. r. in the first. p. 70. 31. r. they required. p. 71. l. 9 r. Antigonus wittily replied, that he himself: p. 74. l. 6. r. Counsel. p. 75. l. 21. r. first. ibid. l. 28. r. League that was. p. 79. l. 28. r. Misc●um. p. 82. l. 5. r. account. ibid. l. 26. r. Theodosius. p. 87. l. 13. r. that it cannot. p. 94. l. 30. r. that servitude. p. 95. l. 14. r. that servitude was imposed. p. 95. l. 19 r. this servitude. p. 98. l. 2. r. Ells. p. 105. l. 12. r. of. p. 106. l. 10. r. or. p. 123. l. 25. r. places according. p. 129. l. 11. r. I run. p. 142. l. 32. r. might be. p. 144. l. 11. r. Alciatus. p. 156. l. 1. r. contemporatie. p 161. l. 19 r. were it (saith. p. 163. l. 9 r. cotton. p. 184. l. 12. r. Bacang●. p. 189. l. 4. r. too much. p. 190. l. 23. r. Their. p. 192. l. 27. r. trimming. p. 203. l. 2●. r. I am. p. ●●●. l. 4. r. thrive. p. 218. l. 30. r. throughout Britain. p. 221. l. 6. r. throughout Britain. p. 232. l. 17. r. at that time. p. 243. l. 31. r. or strand. p. 250. l. 28. r. Danemarc. p. 255. in the margin. r. Cottonianâ. p. 281. l. 12. r. Achilles Tatius. p. 303. l. 29. r. intend. p. 306. l. 8. r. Office of our. p. 315. l. 25. r. Guisnes. p. 316. l. 20. r. Guisnes and Amiens. p. 317. l. 6. r. the opposite. p. 322. l. 31. r. piecemeal. p. 328. l. 24. r. Account. p. 333. l. 14. r. Caesarea. p. 336. l. 2. r. so that it. ibid. l. 5. r. knew. ibid. l. 23. r. English by Norman. p. 339. l. 16. r. the Islanders. p. 384. l. 31. r. of a public. p. 413. l. 1. r. was his Plduciarie. p. 448. l. 11. r. Noy.   


OF THE DOMINION, OR, Ownership of the Sea. BOOK I.  

The Division of the Work, and the Method of the first Book. CHAP. I.  
THE Design being to treat of the Dominion or Ownership of the Sea, encompassing the Isle of Great Britain, as belonging to the Empire of the same; two main, particulars are chief to be▪ considered. The one concerns matter of Law, the other matter of Fact; both of them being denominated (as is usual) from the major part: For, as the point of Law hath many things mingled with it, which manifestly arise from matter of Fact; so this of Fact comprehends not a few which relate unto that of Law. As to what concerns the point of Law, this Question falls chief under debate, to wit, Whether by Law the Sea be capable of private Dominion, or propriety? And by matter of Fact is meant only such a collection of Testimonies, or clear showing forth of Evidences by which may be proved and maintained, The long and continual conjunction with the British Empire, of enjoiment and possession, or lawful prescription; whereupon as on a most strong Title, the Dominion or Ownership of the same Empire herein may be founded; it being first made manifest, that the Sea itself is not only not repugnant by any Law to Dominion or Ownership, but every way capable thereof. To each of these Particulars a several Book is allotted. In the first, is discussed matter of Law: In the second, that which concerns matter of Fact: For, except manifest proof be made of the first point, it will be utterly in vain to discourse about the second. But for those things which are to be handled in the first Book, it seemed meet to observe such a Method, as in the first place to lay open the Rise or Original ground of those Disputes that have occasioned this enquiry into the point of Law, together with the Opinions of those men, who deny that the Sea is capable of private Dominion or Ownership, or that it may pass into the propriety of any one particular, so as in the mean time to exclude it from being common to the rest of mankind. Next are premised some things, for explaining the terms of the Questions, that it may be clearly thence understood, as well what kind of Mediums are to be used, as what the Thing is, whereof we intent to Treat; lest by neglect of such a Cours, we be perplexed with Doubts about the notion and acceptation, either of the Terms themselves, or of the Subject in controversy. After this preparation thus duly made, it is then demonstrated, that not only no kind of Law whatsoëver, rightly understood, doth deny a Dominion over the Sea, but that all kinds of Law, even the most known and approved, whereof there may be any use in Disputes of this nature, do acknowledge and allow a propriety and private Dominion over the Sea, as well as the landlord. Lastly, the Objections usually brought against such Dominion or Ownership of the Sea, are cleared and answered; And with these we shall now begin; for the Method of the second Book is more conveniently put there before it.   

What Occurrences seem to oppose the Dominion of Sea, and what Arguments are wont to be made against it. CHAP. II.  
THe Arguments usually brought against the Dominion of the Sea, are of three sorts. Some are drawn from freedom of Commerce, Passage, and Travel; Others from the nature of the Sea; and a third sort from the Writings and Testimonies of learned men. And as to what concerns the freedom of Commerce or traffic, and Travel, this some men affirm to be so natural, that they say it can no where be abolished by any Law or Custom; yea, and that by the Law of Nations it is unjust to deny Merchants or Strangers the benefit of Port, Provisions, Commerce, and Navigation; Adding moreover, that wars have been justly commenced upon denial of Port, Trade, and Commerce; And for proof, they produce the example of the Megarans 
a Thucidid. lib▪ 1▪ 〈◊〉 Diodor. Sic. lib. 12.  against the Athenians, the Bononians 
b Sigon. de Regno Italiae, lib. 20.  against the Venetians, and of the Spaniard against those of the West Indies; for that, the expedition of Spain against the Americans is pretended, by very learned men to be upon a 
c Franciscus Victoria de Indis, tract. 2. §. 2. 3. & 4. Joannes Solorzanos de Indiar. Jure lib. 2. cap▪ 20. §. 34 & seqq. Gregor. Lopez in Partid. 2. tit 23. l. 2.  just Ground, because they denied them a freedom of Commerce within their Shores and Ports. And in justification hereof, They use that of Virgil, as spoken out of the Law of Nations; 
Quod genus 
d AEneid. 1.  hoc hominum, quaeve hunc tam barbara morem  
Permittit patria? hospitio prohibemur Arenae.  
What barbarous Land this custom own's? what sort  
Of men are these? We are forbid their Port.   
Now, if such a propriety or Dominion of the Sea were admitted, that men might be forbidden the liberty of Navigation and Ports, at the will of any Proprietor, then, say they, it would be an infringement of that Law of Commerce and Travel (by them styled the Law of Nature) which they would not have to be endured.  
Touching the second sort of Objections drawn from the nature of the Sea itself, it is commonly alleged; That the Sea is altered and shifted every moment, and the state of it, through a continued Succession of new waters, always so uncertain, and remain's so little the same in all things (the Channel only excepted) that it is impossible it should ever be retained in the possession of any one Particular. Moreover, they say the nature of Possession consists chief in a separation or distinction of Limits and Bounds, but no such Materials or Instruments can possibly be found in the Sea, as that the Law for regulation of Bounds, which hath a principal place in all Controversies about Dominion or Ownership may be grounded thereupon. They produce also a saying out of 
e Hexaëmer. lib. cap. 10.  St Ambrose, speaking about the lurking-holes or holds of Fishes; Geometram audivimus, Thalassometram nunquam audivimus; & tamen Pisces mensuras suas nôrunt. I have heard of a Geometrician, or one that could measure Land; but never of a Thalassometrician, one that could measure or lay out Bounds in the Sea; and yet the Fishes know their own Bounds. They are pleased likewise to insinuate, what a world of Sea room there is, that all Nations may have sufficient for watering, fishing, and Navigation: And therefore that the peculiar Dominion thereof is by no means to be appropriated unto any.  
A third sort of Arguments lies in those Testimonies that are drawn out of ancient Writers; partly out of old poets, Divines, and others writing of other subjects; partly from such Lawyers as handle the matter purposely. Of the first kind is that of Gripus the Fisherman, and Trachalio the Slave, as they are brought upon the Stage by Plautus, quarrelling about a Bag that was found in the Sea. 

a In Rudente, Act. 4.  Gr. Mare quidem commune certò est omnibus. Tr. Assentio.  
Quî minùs hunc communem quaeso mihi oportet esse vidulum?  
In Mari inventum est. Commune est.—  
Gr. The Sea is common certainly to all.  
Tr. True.  
Why not this Bag to me then too, thou brawl▪  
It was found within the Sea.  
Therefore common it must be.   
They produce likewise a piece of a supplicatory speech of Latona, to a rustic Rout in Lycia, as it in Ovid 
b 〈…〉 , 
Quid prohibetis Aquas? usus communis Aquarum est.  
Nec Solem proprium Natura, nec Aëra fecit,  
Nec tenues Undas. In publica munera veni.  
— why hinder you, said she,  
The use of Water, that to all is free?  
The Sun, Aër, Water, Nature did not frame  
Peculiar; a public Gift I claim.   
And that of Virgil too 
c 〈…〉  
— Littúsque rogamus  
Innocuum, & cunctis undámque, Aurámque patentem.  
Nothing but what is common we implore,  
Free Aèr, and Water, and a harmless shore.   
Phaenicides saith also in Athenaeus 
d 〈…〉. , 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that the Sea is common. To which may be added that memorable saying of certain Jewish Rabbins, who, when they acknowledged Alexander to be Lord of the whole world, did it nevertheless with this Caution, that they conceived he had by his Conquests gained a sovereignty only over the Earth or dry Land, but none at all over the Sea; it being subject only to God himself, as its sole Commander. The words are these out of the Hebrew, 
e Gemara Hierosolymit. 〈◊〉. Abada Zara, seu de cultu extraneo. fol. 42. col. 3. cap.. 3.  Non Dominabatur in Mari, sed Deus O. M. Dominatur, tàm in Mari quàm in Tellure. He ruled not over the Sea, but God almighty is he only that rule's by Sea as well as by landlord.  
The second kind of Arguments here, found among the Lawyers, are of two sorts. Naturali jure, omnium communia sunt illa, Aër, Aqua profluens, & Mare, & per hoc littora Maris. Item, Nemo ad littus Maris accedere probibetur piscandi caussâ, dum tamen villis & aedificiis & Monimentis abstineatur; quia non Juris Gentium, sicut & Mare. Idque Divus Pius piscatoribus Formianis & Capenatis rescripsit. By the Law of Nature, the Aër, Rivers, the Sea, and its Shores, are common to all. Also, None are prohibited to use fishing upon the Shores, as long as they meddle not with Lowns, Buildings and Monuments, in regard these are not common by the Law of Nations, as is the Sea; And this was prescribed by the Emperor Antonius Pius, to the Fisher men of Formiae and Capena; which are the very words used by 
f L. 2. & l. 4. ff. de Rerum Divisione.  Marcianus the Lawyer▪ and by 
g Tit. eodem, § & quidem.  Justi●●ion in his Institutions. And Ulpian, 
h L. 13. ff. tit. communia praediorum.  Mari, quod Naturâ omnibus patet, servitus imponi privatâ lege non potest. The Sea, being by Nature free for all, cannot be vassalised by any particular Law. And in another place, saith he; 
i L. 13. § 7. ff. tit. Injuriis, & vide eum l. 24. ff. de damno infecto.  Mare common omnium est & litora, sicut Aër. Et est saepissime rescriptum, non posse quem piscari prohiberi. The Sea and Shores are common to all, as the Aër. And we find it very often prescribed or commanded by the Emperors, that none be prohibited from Fishing: With which agrees also that saying of 
k L. 3. ff. Nè quid in publico § 1.  Celsus. Maris esse usum communem omnibus hominibus ut Aëris. A freedom of the Sea, as well as of the Aër, is common to all men▪ In like manner, some would have it that the Roman Emperor himself was Lord only of the Land, and not of the Sea; for proof whereof, they mention an Answer given by the Emperor Antoninus; 
l D. D. ad lib. 9 ff. ad legem Rhodiam.  Se quidem mundi Dominum esse; legem autem Maris; That himself was Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea; pretending this Answer of his to be commonly understood, as if he refused to arrogate the Dominion of the Sea unto himself. And in the 
m Eclog. basilic. lib. 50. tit. 1. cap. 13.  Basilica or Laws of the Eastern Empire, we find it thus written, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Shores are within the power of all men. So also saith Michaël Attaliates, a man learned in the Laws of that Empire, 
n Pragmat. tit. 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some things are common to all, as Aër, Fountains, the Sea, Shores, and Rivers. And the sum is, that some ancient Lawyers of both Empires write, that the Sea is common to all men, by the Law of Nature and Nations; which if it were truly proved, either from the nature of the Sea itself, or from either of those Laws, than it could not possibly be admitted, that the Sea might become the peculiar possession of any one, unless a change were made of the Law of nature, which is commonly said to be altogether unchangeable; or that the consent of Nations, that have interest herein, were obtained to admit of such a Dominion or Ownership. And therefore from thence they seem to hold, that a Dominion over the Sea cannot be atteined by any ancient usage, custom or prescription, nor under any other pretence or title whatsoëver, for (faith they) no Plea or bar is to be allowed against nature, Nor (as 
o Neque praescriptio longae possessionis ad obtinenda loca jure Gentium publica solet concedi. li. 45. tit. de usucapionibus & usurpationibus.  Papinian saith) is a Prescription of long possession wont to be admitted for the holding of such places as are public and common by the Law of Nations. And these ancient Lawyers here mentioned are followed by no small Train of Interpreters; though nevertheless there are not a few even of them, who restrain and qualify that ancient opinion more ways than one, touching the necessity of a common Intercours and freedom at Sea, as we shall show hereafter.  
But of our modern Lawyers, those that have appeared most forward in opposing a Right of Dominion over the Sea, are only two, both indeed very eminent men, but of unequal learning and elegancy of wit; by name Fernandus Vasquius the Spaniard, and Hugo Grotius the Hollander: the former an honourable Counsellor to King Philip the 3. of Spain in his high Court of Exchequer. The later was heretofore Advocate Fiscal of Holland, Zealand, and West-Friesland, and most deservedly adorned with divers other honours in his own country; a man of an acute judgement, and for his excellency in all kinds of learning incomparable. But Vasquius, in his discourse both of the Law of Nature and Nations, as also concerning the Rights of Dominion, Prescription, and other things of that nature, speaks to this effect. 
p Fernandus Vasq. Controvers. illustr: lib. 2. c. 89. ● § ●. Ex his apparet quàm suspecta sit etc.  From hence (saith he) it appears how little esteem is to be had of their opinion, who suppose that the Genoëses or Venetians may without injury, forbidden others to sail through the gulf in their respective Seas, as if they could have laid claim to those Seas by Prescription; which is not only contrary to the Imperial Laws (above mentioned) but also against the Primitive Law of nature and nations, which cannot be altered. And that it is against this Law, is evident; because by the same Law not only the Seas, but all other immovable things whatsoëver, were common. And although in aftertime that Law came to be abolished in part▪ so far as concerns the Dominion and propriety of Lands, which being enjoied in common, according to the Law of nature, were afterwards distinguished, divided, and so separated from that common use; yet it hath been otherwise, and is still, as to the Dominion of the Sea, which from the beginning of the world to this present day, is, and ever hath been in common, without the least alteration, as 'tis generally known. And though I hear many of the Portugals are of this opinion, that their King hath had such an ancient Title by Prescription in that vast Ocean of the West-Indies, so that other Nations have no right to sail through those Seas; and also that the ordinary sort of our own Nation of Spain seem to be of the same opinion, that no people whatsoëver, but Spaniards, have any right to sail through that immense and most spacious Sea, to those Indian Countries that have been subdued by the most mighty Kings of Spain (as if they only had a right by Prescription thereto;) yet all these men's opinions are no less vain and foolish, then theirs, who use to dream the same things of the Genoeses and Venetians. The folly of which opinions appears the more clearly even in this respect; because neither of those Nations singly considered can prescribe aught against themselves; that is to say, neither the republic of Venice against itself; nor that of Genoa against itself, nor the Kingdom of Spain against itself, nor that of Portugal against itself; for there ought ever to be a difference between the Agent and Patient: Much less can they prescribe aught to the prejudice of other Nations, because the Law of Prescriptions is purely Civil. Therefore such a Law can be of no force, in deciding Controversies that happen betwixt Princes or people that acknowledge no Superior: For the peculiar Civil Laws of every country are of no more value, as to foreign Countries and Nations, or their people, then if such a Law were not in being, or never had been; and therefore in Controversies of that nature recours must be had unto the common Law of Nations Original or secondary; which Law certainly did never admit of such a Prescription or usurpation of Title over the Sea. Other matters he hath of the same kind, being a very confident opposer of any peculiar Dominion over the Sea.  
But in the year MD CIX (it being the year after that large treaty held at the Hage betwixt the Spaniard and the Hollander, about freedom of Trade and Navigation to the East-Indies) there was published that Book of Hugo Grotius, entitled MARE LIBERUM, or a discourse concerning that Right which the Hollanders have to Trade in the Indies. Wherein he endeavor's first to prove, that, by the Law of Nations, there ought to be such a freedom of Navigation for all men whatsoëver, which way they pleas, so that they cannot, without injury, be molested at Sea. Next, that the Atlantic and Southern Ocean, or the Right of Navigation to the Indies, is not, nor indeed can be, any peculiar of the portugals: forasmuch as the Sea (saith he, according to the 
q Mari Libero cap. 5. Mare proprium omnino alicujus fieri non potest; Quia natura commune hoc esse nonpermittit, sed jubet.  Laws and reasons already mentioned) can in no wise become the propriety of any one; because nature not only permit's, but require's it should be common. Several other passages he hath about this matter, in his excellent Book De Jure Belli & pacis; of which more hereafter. Thus much in brief, concerning those arguments that are usually brought against the Dominion or Ownership of the Sea. The next thing therefore is to explain the sens of the Question, and its terms.   

What is meant by the word SEA, in the Question. Also a division of the law, in order to the discourse. CHAP. III.  
AS to what concerns the present Question, Whether the Sea be capable of private Dominion, we take the word CAPABLE in the same sens, as it was used by the Emperor Traian in an Epistle of his, to his beloved Pliny; 
a Plin. 〈◊〉. 10. Epist. 59  Solum peregrinae civitatis capax non esse dedicationis quae fit jure nostro; The soil of a strange city is not capable of such a dedication as is made by our Law Moreover, we shall explain what is meant by the SEA, as also by those Terms of LAW and DOMINION. By the SEA we understand the whole Sea, as well the main Ocean or Out-land Seas, as those which are within-land, such as the Mediterranean, Adriatic, AEgean or Levant, British, and Baltic Seas, or any other of that kind, which differ not otherwise from the main, then as Homogeneous or Similary parts of the same body do from the whole. But the Law (as it is the rule, measure, and pointing out of things lawful or unlawful) falls under a twofold consideration. Fither as it is obligatory, which is called also Preceptive; or as it is Permissive, which is also by writers commonly termed Concessive. As obligatory, it is known by such things as are commanded or forbidden, as to give every man his due, not to forswear, and the like. As Permissive, it is set forth by things whose use is neither commanded nor forbidden, but permitted; as in the very Act of buying, selling, enfranchisement, framing conditions of contract according to the will of the contractors, and many more of the same nature. But both these kinds of LAW concern either mankind in general, that is, all Nations, or not all. That which relate's to the generality of mankind, or all Nations, is either Natural or Divine. That is, either manifested by the light of nature or the use of right reason, being elegantly described by Tertullian to be the 
b Lex communis in publico mundi, & Tabulis naturalibus scripta. Lib. de Corona militis.  Common Law written throughout the whole world, in the very Books of nature; and by the Grecians called 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thucyd. l. 4. Polyb. l. 2. & alij.  the Law of mankind, and by the Civilians the Primitive Law of Nations; or else it is declared and set down in those Divine Oracles that have been committed to writing: Both which may properly be termed the universal Law of Nations, or the Common Law of mankind. And whatëver is obligatory in either of these, either out of the nature of the thing itself, or rather from the authority of the father of nature, is reputed by men to be unchangeable; according to that saying so often used by 
d Andronic. Rhodius, Michaël Ephesius,, Eustratius, alii, ad Arist. Nicomach. 5. cap. 10. Cicero, apud Lactantium lib. 6. cap. 8.  Philosophers, 
e D. Thom. Aquin. 1. 2 a. q. 94. art. 5. etc.  Divines, and 
f Instit. de Jure Nat. §. sed Naturalia.  Lawyers, That the rights and Laws of nature are immutable, Which cannot be said of the Permissive Law, whether Natural or Divine, relateing to mankind in general: for it is obvious to every man, that as Permissive, it must needs be various and changeable, according to the judgement and pleasure of persons in power; and therefore subject to repealing, Qualifications, and daily Alterations; whereas in the mean time that kind which is obligatory may admit Additions or Inlargements (such as may serve for more certainty and convenience of observation,) but no Alterations, in any wise to diminish its authority. Out of such Additions as are made to that which is obligatory, and Alterations of that which is Permissive, another kind of Law takes its rise, which is of a more narrow Sens and Acceptation, and relate's, not to all Nations or the universality of mankind, but only to some particulars thereof, and it is ordinarily well termed Positive (as being positively ordained either by God or men;) sometimes also it is termed 
g Philo Judaeus, lib. de Joseph seu de Viro Clvili.  Civil, and an Addition of right Reason. This Positive Law may be divided into that which is singular and peculiar to any one particular Nation or society of mankind (as was the 
h Instit. tit. de patriâ potestate ●. Jus autem  Law concerning Paternal power among the Romans, and the custom of the 
i Demost●hen. Orat. contra Aristocratem.  Athenians touching the same;) or into that which is received by divers Nations. Again this last is divided into two parts; either into that which binds divers Nations jointly, equally, and indifferently, by some common obligation; or ell into that which binds divers Nations or people, not jointly, and equally, or by any common obligation, but singly and by Accident. And of this threefold kind of Positive Law, we may call the first the Law purely Civil, as it relate's to any one particular civil society. The second the Common Law of divers Nations, so named from some common tie or obligation betwixt them. The third the Law of some or divers Nations, Civil or domestic, by reason of that domestic and Civil tie only, whereby they are bound singly among themselves, without any obligation to each other in common. As for example, the Laws of the XII Tables that were brought from Athens to Rome, remained in force in both Nations, as well in the Roman, as in the Athenian; but not by any common or mutual obligation between them: And therefore that Law of the XII Tables ought much more properly to be called the Civil Law of those Nations, then simply of both Nations (in any such sens as imports a Joint-Interest or Communion.) But as to that which jointly concerns divers Nations by mutual obligation, that is, the Common Law of divers Nations, it is divisible likewise into two parts, to wit, into that which is Imperative over divers Nations or people; or that which is Intervenient. By the Imperative Law of Nations, is meant that which is observed or receives authority among several Nations or people, who are subject to supreme Powers that otherwise are distinct, and this by reason of an Obligation equally common to them all, but derived from some other, and enjoined by some special Command, either from God or man. Of this kind was that Law of the Dolopes, the Magnesians, Phthiotae, Thessalians, and other people of Greece, who being equally obliged by the command of 
k Pausanias' in Phocicis, Strabo lib. 9 AEschines in Orat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Acrisius King of the Argives, submitted to the jurisdiction of the grand parliament or Assembly of Amphictyones. Of the same kind likewise was that 
* Deut. 20. 10.  military Law enjoined by God, not only to the People of Israël, but also to the Canaanites with whom they were to wage war: For, they were both obliged by the authority of him that commanded, though after a divers manner. And when any Nations, in obedience to the Pope's authority and command, do alike submit to one and the same Law, it may be rightly called the Imperative Law of Nations. But that is to be called the Intervenient Law of Nations, which takes its rise, not from any command imposed upon several Nations in common, but through the intervention either of some Compact, or Custom; and it is commonly styled the Secondary Law of Nations: The principal heads whereof are contained in the Laws about proclaiming War, embassy, Prisoners of War, Hostages, Right, Remitter upon return from captivity, Leagues and Covenants, Commerce, and other matters of that Nature which usually intervene betwixt divers Nations. For, as much as in these Laws here spoken of, it is in several Nations wholly composed of such Additions as have been made to the universal obligatory Law of Nations, and of such Alterations as have accrued to the Universal Permissive, and no more may challenge the name of Imperative or Intervenient. And it is most plain, that the rest retain's still the name of the Universal or Primitive Law of Nations. Moreover also, the Imperial Law, which usually takes place in all Controversies about the aforesaid Particulars of the Intervenient Law, so far as it agrees with the Universal Law of Nations, Natural or Divine, is to be comprised under the same Notion; But as by the consent of some certain Nations, with whom it is in use, divers principal heads and determinations of it (being no part of the Universal Law) are so made use of, it most clearly falls under the name of the Intervenient Law of some Nations. Lastly, as it is received and used at home by some particular People in their Courts of Judicature, it is to be called the Law Civil or domestic of divers Nations. And thus having given you a plain Scheme of the Law, in all those various Notions and Acceptions that are to be used in the controversy; it remain's that in the next place that of Dominion or Ownership be taken into consideration.   

Of Dominion, both Common to all, and Private. Also its Original, either by Distribution, or primary Occupation. CHAP. iu.  
DOminion, which is a Right of Using, Enjoying, Alienating, and free Disposing, is either Common to all men as Possessors without Distinction, or Private and peculiar only to some; that is to say, distributed and set apart by any particular States, Princes, or persons whatsoever, in such a manner that others are excluded, or at least in some sort barred from a liberty of Use and Enjoiment. As to the first kind of Dominion, or that which is Common to All, frequent mention is made of it, in relation to that State of community, which was in ancient times. And of which Virgil speaks in his georgics 
a Georgic.  
Nec signare quidem, aut partiri limit Campum  
Fas erat; in medio quaerebant—  
Nor was it lawful than their Lands to bond;  
They lived in common All upon the Ground.   
And Seneca 
b In Octaviâ, Act. 2. , 
— pervium cunctis iter;  
Communis usus omnium rerum fuit.  
All men might pass what way they pleased to choose,  
And all things were exposed for common use.   
And Tibullus 
c Ad Messalam. Eleg. lib. 1. 3. , 
Non domus ulla fores habuit; non fixus in agris,  
Qui regeret certis finibus arva, lapis.  
Men did not then with doors their Houses build,  
Nor were they wont with stones to bond the Field.   
Many more there are of the like nature. But yet 
d Divin. Institut. lib. 5. seu de justitiâ. cap. 5.  Lactantius would have them to be so understood, not that we should conceiv that nothing at all was private or peculiar in those days; but in a figurative sens after the manner of the poets, to let us know that men were then so free and generous, that they did not hoard up the fruits of the Earth for themselves, nor dwell in an obscure solitary manner, but admitted the poor to partake of the benefit of their labours. And truly, we find divers passages plainly pointing out this state of community, in that Divine Act of Donation, whereby Noah and his three sons Shem, Cham and Japhet (who represented as it were the person of Adam, for the restoring of mankind after the flood) became Joint-Lords of the whole world. The form of Donation, is expressed in these words, 
e Gen. cap. 9 v. 1. 2.  Be fruitful, and multiply and replenish the Earth. And the fear of you, and the dread of you shall be upon every Beast of the Earth, and every Foul of the Aër, upon all that moveth upon the Earth, and upon all the Fishes of the Sea, into your hands are they delivered. Also, Justin the Historian speaks aptly and to the purpose, 
f Erant Saturni aevo omnia communia & indivisa omnibus, veluti unum cunctis Patrimonium esset. lib. 43.  In the Age of Saturn (saith he) all things were without distinction common to all, as if all men had lived upon one stock or patrimony. From whence it came to pass, that in the Festivals of Saturn all things were enjoyed in common. To which likewise accords that of Cicero 
g Privata nulli naturâ▪ sed aut veteri occupatione, ut qui quondam in vacua venerunt; aut bello, etc. Offic. lib. 1. , No thing is private or peculiar to any by Nature; but either by occupation of old▪ as in the case of those who first inhabited Vacancies; or who became possess't by right of War and Conquest; or by virtue of some Law; or by Compact, Covenant, or by Lot: Yet'tis not probable, that this kind of community was of any long continuance. But as for Private Dominion, or that distribution of Possessions and Bounds which depriveth or in any sort barreth all others, besides the known possessor, from a liberty of use and enjoiment, they say it was not in being till those golden days were over. And so, as the Poêt sings 
h Ovid, Metamorph. 1. , 
Communémque priùs, ceu lumina solis & Aurae,  
Cautus humum longo signavit limit Menser;  
The Earth, as commou once as Light or Aër,  
They then by Art did measure, bound and share.   
It appears also by holy Writ, that the Earth was divided by the posterity of Noah, some Ages after the Flood. 
i Gen. 10. 5. 5. & 25.  By Japhet and his sons were the Isles of the Gentiles divided in their Lands, every one after his Tongue, after their Families, in their Nations; as it is recorded by Moses: That is to say, they settled themselves as private Lords, and appointed Bounds accordings to the number of their Families, from the River Tanais even as far as the Atlantic Sea, or through a great part of the Western Asia, as it bend's towards the North, and throughout all Europe. In like manner, Cham and his posterity possessed themselves of that Part which lies open to the South and South-west; as Shem did the Eastern Countries as far as India: As you may see it in Josephus, Eusebius, the author of the Chronicle of Alexandria, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Eustathius of Antioch, Freculphus, and others. It hath been received also by Tradition, that Noah himself, as if he had been absolute Lord or Arbiter of the whole world, was the first man after the Flood that revived this kind of distribution or private Dominion; which they say also he did by Command from God, and that in the nine hundred and thirtieth year of his Age (which was three hundred and thirty years after the flood, and twenty before his death) he confirmed it by Will, and delivered it a little before his death into the hands of Shem his eldest son, admonishing them altogether, that no man should invade the Bounds of his Brother, nor should they wrong one another; because it would of necessity occasion Discords and deadly Wars among them: As it is expressly mentioned, both in Eusebius and Cedredrenus. But howsoever the matter hath been; this is very certain, that private Dominions or Possessions were revived again after the Flood, in the same accustomed manner as they had been before from the days of Adam. For, he also received such a 
k Gen. cap. 1. 2, 28.  Donation from God, as we have told you Noah and his Sons did afterward, and so became Lord of the whole World, not without such a peculiar possession or propriety to himself, which (so far as we are able to judge of Affairs of that Age, according to the ways and means received by posterity) did exclude his children from all Right, but by his voluntary Grant or Resignation: But yet, whether it were by Donation, Assignment, or any other Grant whatsoëver, it appears (before he died or left any Heir to succeed him) his children did enjoy their several Bounds and Territories, in a way of peculiar Dominion or Possession. Thus Abel had cattle and Pastures of his own; as Cain had Lands and Plantations that were his own. He possessed himself also of the Land of Nod or Naida, where he built the city of Enoch, and settled his abode. After this, 
l Joseph Orig. Judaïc. lib. 1. c. 3. Eustath. Antioch. Hexaëm. pag. 46.  Exchanges, Buying, and selling came in fashion; and besides Weights and Measures, they appointed Judges of Covenants and Contracts, and added Bounds or Limits to Fields and Pastures. And of Cain, it is said, that 
m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  he first set Bounds unto Fields. So at length came in private Dominions or Possessions; which (whether by virtue only of a preceding universal dominion of a single person, as in Adam; or of some universal and common interest in Things, as betwixt Noah and his Sons) happened first by the Donation, Assignment, or some other Grant of those whom it concerned, either to Princes, or Communities representing a single person, or to any others whomsoëver, as particular Lords. So that neither the Law Natural nor Divine which was universal (except you pleas to credit that Divine Oracle said to be given unto Noah) hath expressly commanded or forbidden, but permitted both; that is to say, a common enjoiment, as well as a private dominion or possession of the Things of this life.  
But in this division of Bounds and Territories, there intervened, as it were, a consent of the whole body or universality of mankind (by the mediation of something like a compact, which might bind their posterity) for quitting of the common interest or ancient right in those things that were made over thus by distribution to particular Proprietors; in the same manner as when Partners or coheirs do share between themselves any portions of those things which they hold in common. But as for the rest, which neither are possessed in several, nor expressly held in common, that is, which have continued vacant or desert, what shall we say? It hath been truly a custom of old, and which holds to this day in the more eminent Nations, that Vacancies are his who apprehend's them first by occupation; as we use to say of those we call, no man's Goods. This appears plain in the Imperial Law; nor do we know of any Nation where it is not received, save in those where by the 
* Municipal.  Civil Law of some Nations, any things of this nature are appropriated to their Princes, that their Subjects gain not an interest by occupation: For there others have sufficiently disclaimed the acquiring of any title by occupation; and in the present case we must ever have respect unto this Qualification. But as concerning such a right by occupation, there is an ancient and very famous decision made in a controversy that happened betwixt the people of Andria and Chalcidia. Both of them being upon an expedition against Thrace, for the finding out of 
n Plutarch in quaest Graec.  new habitations, news was brought that the Barbarous people had quitted the Town of Acanthus, hereupon, two men were chosen, and sent out as Spies, the one being of Andria, the other of Chalcidia, who being informed of the enemy's flight, began both to run, and strive which of them should first reach and take possession of the city thus forsaken. It happened that he of Chalcidia outran, but the man of Andria darting a Javelin stuck it in the Gates: This cried out he got thither first with his Javelin, but the other, that he was first with his body. A controversy happening hereupon, the Erythraeans, Samians, and Parians, are called to decide it. The Andrians had most voices; for the Samians and Erythraeans gave judgement for them. But the Parians were for the men of Chalcidia. The Reasons alleged on both sides are very well described by 
o Rerum judicatarum, lib. 5. tit. 21.  Petrus AErodius, not fit here to be repeated: But in the mean time it is manifest, that all those men, even the persons contending, as well as the Nations to whose determination the matter was committed, were of opinion, that places abandoned and forsaken become theirs who first acquire them by occupation; nor is there any other ground in reason for that Law or Custom, whereby wilde-Beasts, Fishes, Birds and the like, whether yet unpossess't or relinquished, become theirs who catch them: which is usual likewise, according to the Laws and Customs of the 
p Misna & Gemara utraque tit. Baba metzia cap. 1. & Maimonides tit. Zachia Wemithna cap. 1.  Hebrews and 
q Alcoran. Azoar. 12. de venatu; & Azoari 34.  Mahometans, as well as the Christians▪ But now, if so be that all men were indifferently and without distinction Lords of the whole, before a division was made of some parts, then of necessity we must conceiv, they all ought to remain, equally and without distinction, Lords of those parts which never came under a division, even as they were before; unless some Compact or Covenant intervene, whereby all kind of ancient Right or Title of common Interest shall be so renounced, that any persons whatsoever might afterwards become particular masters of those places which should remain vacant or undisposed, who should first corporally seize them, with an intent of possessing, holding, using, and enjoying. Nor can it otherwise be conceived in the case of Partners or coheirs (such as all men seem to have been in the State of community) how those things which come not under division, should not continue common, as before. Therefore (I suppose) it must be yielded, that some such Compact or Covenant was passed in the very first beginnings of private Dominion or possession, and that it was in full force and virtue transmitted to posterity by the Fathers, who had the power of distributing possessions after the flood▪ So that we may conclude no less concerning distribution by Assignment, then touching seizure by occupation of things relinquish▪ t at pleasure, that a general compact or Agreement was made or ratified, either expressly in words, or implicitly by custom. And truly, the self same thing seems to be the opinion of the most excellent Hugo Grotius 
t De Jure Belli ac pacis lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 2. , who speaking of the original of propriety saith▪ Things became appropriate, not by the bare Act or Intent of the minds (for some could not know what others desired to possess, so as to abstain from the same; and perhaps many might desire one and the same thing) but by some Compact and Agreement either express, as in the case of Division; or Tacit, as in that of seizure or primary occupation. For as soon as men grew out of love with community, and no Division was yet appointed, we must conceiv they agreed all together, that what every man held, he should possess as his own. And truly there is a parity of Reason also for this; that any man might afterwards make Seizure of that which was left.   

The effects of private Dominion. And what regard hath been had of the SEA, in the more ancient Distributions and Divisions of things. CHAP. V.  
BY the introducing of private Dominion, in the aforesaid manner, it came to pass, that the same territory or Field, whose use before was free for all men alike in Tillage, Building, Pasturage cutting of wood, gathering of Fruits, egress and regress, was either by distribution or occupation so peculiarly appropriated unto the possessor, that he might lawfully hinder such a community of use and enjoyment, nor might any other man use it lawfully without his permission▪ And from this Original sprang every Dominion or propriety of things, which either by Alienation, or any other kind of session, is transferred upon others, or held by a continued possession; respect being always had to those particular Forms and Qualifications, which usually relate unto Dominion, either by Law, Custom, or compact, according to the various Institutions of several people▪ For by these, the free and absolute power of the Proprietor, in what he enjoie's, is lessened and restrained; but when this Reason wholly ceaseth, than what the Proprietor possesseth is so his own, that it cannot lawfully in any wise, without his consent, become another man's. And all these things are derived from the alteration of that Universal or Natural Law of nations which is Permissive: For thence came in private Dominion or Possession, to wit from the Positive Law. But in the mean while it is established by the Universal obligatory Law, which provide's for the due observation of Compacts and Covenants.  
These things being thus premised, we shall next see what respect hath been had unto the Sea, either in the very first or any more ancient Distribution or Division of things. For if it appear that the Sea also hath been assigned over with Lands, it must certainly be confessed, that from the same original there spring's a private Dominion of the Sea, as well as the Land, and so that it is equally capable of the same, with this. And truly, in the distribution of Land which was renewed after the flood (so far as we are able to collect by Tradition from the ancients) we find no express mention made of any Sea, as a part assigned: But yet sometimes the Sea is added as a Bound to a part assigned. As where the part first assigned unto the Sons of Cham, is extended from the Borders of Egypt through Africa as far as Herculeses Pillars, or 
a African. apud Euseb. in Chronic. pag. 10. Cedrenus pag. 10.  unto the Western and African Sea. And the Portion of the Canaanites (situate within the territory of the Sons of Cham) is twice so described in the Samaritan Pentateuch, that it is expressly said to reach from the River of Egypt or Nilus, to the great River, that is, the River Euphrates, and 
b Pentateuch. Samar. Ms. Genes. 10. 19 & Deuter. 34, 2.  unto the utmost Sea, or the remotest, which is the great or Western Sea. Which last words are used in the laying out of that Portion which the Sacred Scripture mentions in Deuteronomie. Sometimes also, some Seas may seem to be so comprehended in the part assigned, that they appear to be no less assigned than the Land▪ For unto the Sons of Japhet were assigned 
c Euseb. & Cedrenus locis citatis.  those Countries which extend from Media towards the North and the West, as far as Cadiz and the Islands of Britain. we see also, that certain Seas are included within the compass of Assignments as the 
* Now called the the.  AEgean, Mediterranean, Adriatic, and British Seas: whether by Donation, or not, we cannot say. But in that ancient apportioning of the holy Land (whereof God himself was author) the Sea seems rather to have been accounted a boundary, than any part of the territory allotted. Concerning the South-Quarter, the words are these; 
d Nam. 34. 3, 5, 6, 7, 12.  The Bounds of it shall be the outmost Coast of the salt Sea Eastward. And a little after; The Border shall fetch a Compass from Azmon unto the River of Egypt, and the go out of it shall be at the Sea. Also concerning the westquarter, its Border shall begin at Sea, & ipso fine claudetur, and by it it shall be bounded, as it is in the vulgar Translation; to which sense agreeth also the modern: But concerning this place, and the rest here quoted, we shall speak more in the next Chapter. Then it follow's, according to the true sens of the Hebrew, And this shall be your North-border: From the great Sea you shall point out for you Mount Hor. And a little farther, speaking of the East-Quarter; Its Border shall descend, and shall reach unto the side of the Sea of Chinnereth Eastward; And the Border shall go down again to Jordan, and the go out of it shall be at the salt Sea: This shall be your Land with the Coasts thereof round about. Which is repeated almost word for word, in the distribution that was made by 
e Josh. c. 15. etc.  Joshua: And in another place of holy Scripture, the bounds of the Dominion is said to be 
f Psal. 72. 8. Syracid c. 44.  from Sea to Sea. But, suppose at last it were granted, that the Seas came not into those more ancient distributions of Territories, than it remain's next to be considered, whether they might not lawfully be acquired afterwards by Title of occupation, as things vacant and derelict; that is, either by the Natural or Divine universal Law which is Permissive, or by the Law of divers Nations, Common or Civil, which, in judging matters of this nature, is the best Interpreter of the natural Law which is Permissive. For, if in the Permissive which is Universal, nothing be repugnant thereto; or (which is in a manner all one) if by the Positive Law of Nations, such a Dominion of the Sea, as we intent, hath been introduced and admitted by the consent of the more famous Ages and Nations; then (I suppose) it will not be doubted, but that the Seas are, by all manner of Law, every way capable of private Dominion, as is the landlord.   

That the Law of God, or the Divine Oracles of holy Scripture, do allow a private Dominion of the Sea. And that the wide Ocean also, which washeth the Western Coast of the holy Land, or at least a considerable part of it, was, according to the Opinion of such as were learned in the Jewish Law, annexed to the Land of Israël, by the Assignation or appointment of God himself. CHAP. vi  
AS to what concerns here the Law of God, we find very plain passages therein, which do not a little favour a Dominion of the Sea. In that first and most ancient Donation of things after the Flood, whereby God invested Noah and his posterity, in the Dominion of the whole Earth (of which Globe the Seas themselves are a part) and of the conterminous Aër, seems to be no otherwise granted, then as mention is made of the living Creatures, the Earth, and the Fowls of the Aër. That is, by an express grant of the free use and benefit of the thing, the thing itself was granted or conferred. Nor is the Dominion of the Sea otherwise granted there, where it is said, 
a Gen. 9 2.  The fear of you, and the dread of you (which are terms signifying Dominion) shall be also all the Fishes of the Sea. Little different from this is that which was spoken to our first Parents, 
b Gen. 1. 28.  Replenish the Earth and subdue it, and have Dominion over the Fish of the Sea, and over the Fowl of the Aër, and over every living thing that moveth upon the Earth: So here also, the grant of the thing itself is signified by its use and enjoiment. 'Tis confessed, that these words were not meant of private Dominion, or that which was not common to all men: But yet it appears thereby, the Earth and Sea did so pass together at first, and after the same manner, into the common enjoiment of mankind, that from this Donation or Grant of God, we may well conclude; that their condition, as being both but one Globe, must needs be alike, at the pleasure of men, in the future distribution of Things, or the introducing of private Dominion therein. Neither is the propriety, nor the community of either appointed but both seem equally permitted by the very form of Donation. And therefore that is very vain which is objected by some 
c Psal. 115. 16. , That the Earth is given to the children of men, but that 
d Psal. 95. 5.  the Sea belongs only to God himself; as if Dominion not common indeed, but only a common use of the Sea, were permitted by the words of holy Scripture: And as if it were not said in like manner, 
e Psal. 24. 1. 50. 12. 89, 11. 95, 4.  The Earth is the Lord's, and fullness thereof: The tops of the Hills are his also. Who knows not, that such say as these cannot in any wise weaken the Dominion of mankind? For, whatsoëver is acquired by men, still God almighty, as Father of the Univers, retein's his supreme Dominion both over men, as also all other Things; which never was denied yet by any sober man. But the controversy is about the Dominion of man, to wit, that which comprehends any enjoiment or propriety whatsoëver, saving still that right of the Dominion of God, which cannot be diminished. And the distinction about this matter is very ordinary in the Schools: According to the first sort of Dominion, nothing whatsoëver, much less may the Sea belong unto men: According to the second, all things indeed are or may be theirs, which can be apprehended, seized, and possessed. And moreover, that in the old Testament express mention is made more than once of such a seizure, possession, or private Dominion as this whereof we Treat; and that as of a Thing lawfully brought in use. There we find that the men of Tyre were Lords and Masters of the Phaenician, and the Egyptians of the Alexandrian Sea. Concerning the Phaenician, saith the Prophet unto Tyrus; 
f Ezech. c. 26. v. 16.  All the Princes of the Sea shall come down from their Thrones, etc. And they shall take up a lamentation for thee, and say to thee, how art thou destroyed that wast inhabited of Seafaring men! the renowned city, which waste strong in the Sea! Here the Dominion of the Tyrians at Sea is plainly set forth. And in the following Chapter 
g Cap. 27. 4. , Thy Borders are in the midst or heart of the Sea; as we read it in the Hebrew, and also in an 
h In Bibliocâ Arundelianâ.  Arabian Manuscript, which renders it to the same purpose: For, both the Greek and vulgar Translation differ there from the Original. It follow's also thus; 
i Vers. 9  All the Ships of the Sea with their Mariners were thine to occupy thy merchandise. In stead of which last words, these are put in the Greek Copies, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, even Westward of the West, or through a great part of the main or Western Sea; that is, the Phaenician or Syrian. Again, 
k Cap. 28. vers. 2.  Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the Sea. he threatens not the Tyrian, because he had gotten him a Dominion over the neighbouring Sea, but because being lifted up with pride, he had taken unto himself the name of God. The Tyrian is called likewise in another Scripture the 
l Isai. 23. 4.  Sea itself, and the strength of the Sea. But concerning the Egyptian Sea, another Prophet speaks thus unto Ninive; Art thou better then populous Alexandria (in the Original the city is called No, taken here for Alexandria) which is situate among the Rivers, that hath the waters round about it, whose Riches and strength (as it is in the Hebrew) or (as the Greek renders it) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, whose Empire or Dominion is the Sea. Moreover, it seems to make mention of Kings of the Sea, as well as of Islands; 
m Ps. 72. 10.  The Kings of Tarshish and of the Isles shall bring presents. For, Tarshish or Tharsis in Hebrew signifieth the Sea, 
n Hieronym. ad Isaiae c. 2.  as it is often confessed both by the Greek and Chaldee Interpreters. Although Munster, a man otherwise very learned, speaks unadvisedly upon the forementioned place, and will not have Tharsis there to signify the Sea, because (saith he) Kings have nothing to do at Sea, but rule only upon Land; forgetting (what we have already told you) that express mention is made by Ezechiel concerning Princes of the Sea. With which agrees also that saying, 
o Ps. 89. 25.  I will set his hand in the Sea, and his right hand in the floods; upon which place Aben-Ezra note's, that God almighty assigned the Dominion of the Sea there unto King David, That he might rule over those that sailed either through the Sea or the Rivers. It is written thus likewise in the Apocrypha; 
p Esdras. l. 1. chap. 4.  O ye men, do not men excel in strength that bear rule over Sea and Land, and all things in them? But yet the King is more mighty; for, he is Lord of all these things and hath Dominion over them. And in another place, saith the Angel to Esdras, 
q Esdras, l. 2 cap. 7.  The Sea is set in a wide place, that it might be deep and great. But put case the entrance were narrow, and like a River, who then could enter the Sea, to look upon it, and have Dominion over it, if he went not through the narrow? The Dominion of the Sea and of the Land is granted alike in both these places. It is said also of King Ahasuerus; 
r Esther. 10. 1.  That he made not only the Land, but all the Isles of the Sea to become tributary, which words truly do clearly show a Dominion of the Sea; for, so they are expressed in the vulgar Edition, out of the Hebrew Original, which is lost. But the Greek Copies are more plain there; 
s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  The King wrote to his Kingdom of the Land and Sea. Nor must we omit that of Moses when he blessed the people; 
t Deuteronom. cap. 33. 23.  And of Naphtali he said, Naphtali shall enjoy abundance, and be full with the blessings of the Lord; he shall possess or inherit the Sea and the South; as the vulgar and the Greek do render that place. But by many others, the Sea is taken there for the westquarter, as it is often in the Scriptures. Yet truly, it is clear those words are meant of the Sea of Galilee, or of the Lake of Tiberias, not of the great or Phaenician Sea, which lies Westward, because the Land of Naphtali was situate near that Lake, which also is often called the Sea. As it appears likewise out of Onkelus his Paraphrase, where express mention is made of the Sea of Genesareth, called also the Lake of Tiberias, or the Sea of Chinnereth, and by this name it passeth with the salt Sea, or the Lake of Asphaltites, in the 
u Numb. 34. 11. & 3.  sacred description of the Eastern part of the holy landlord. But the former place of Deuteronomie is ●…usly rendered by Rupert the Abbot of Tuitium; 
x Ad Deut. lib. 2. c. 18.  Mane & Meridiem possidebit, for Mare & Meridiem, he shall possess the Morning and the South, for the Sea and the South. However, it is clear (I suppose) out of the places alleged, such plain Testimonies are found in holy Writ touching such a Dominion of the Sea, that in the mean time it must be granted, that according to the Universal Permissive Law, any man may acquire it as well as the landlord. And truly, as for those places quoted in the foregoing Chapter, concerning the South, West or Sea and Northern Bounds of the holy Land, they are so understood both by the Jewish Lawyers and Divines, that they would have either the great or Phaenician Sea itself, or at least some adjoining part of it to be assigned also by God unto the Israëlites, as Lords of it for ever; of which point we shall discourse a little more fully. As for that which is rendered there out of the vulgar Edition, touching the South Border, 
y Usque ad Torrentem AEgypti; & magni Maris littore finietur.  As far as the river of Egypt; and it shall be bounded by the shore of the great Sea, the Hebrew saith, ad Torrentem AEgypti unto the River of Egypt (or the North entrance of Nilus, which divided the Land of Israël from Egypt, at the Sea) & erunt exitus ejus in Mare▪ and the go out thereof shall be into the Sea. So that concerning that Borders being bounded by the shore (as it is in the vulgar) we find it not otherwise expressed there in the Original. Then, it is added next, concerning the West-border or that which is at the great Sea, word for word out of the Hebrew. As for your Sea-border, you may have the great Sea, And let this be your border, or let it be your Sea border, or border of the Sea And there the Greek Interpreter's render it thus, you shall have the bounds of the Sea, or they shall be your bounds. The great Sea shall bond you: wherein (after their usual manner) they plainly follow the Text of the Samaritan copy: For, there we read it thus, And you shall have a Sea-border. The great Sea shall bond you. Let this be your Sea or Western-border. And thus the word SEA being used as well for the Western Quarter as for the Sea itself, that place is for the most part so rendered, that in so short a period the Sea is taken for both. As for the West-Border, you shall have the great Sea. And this Border shall be your West-Border. As it is expressed by the Jews of Spain; y Termino de ponente; y sera à vos el mar el grande: y Termino este sera à vos Termino de ponente. Thus is also in Onkelus and Erpenius his Arabic; save that Onkelus renders it thus, But your West-border shall be the great Sea and the Border thereof; the same shall be your West-border. But an Arabian Translation in manuscript, for which we are beholden to the Earl or Arundel's library, after these words, unto the River of Egypt, adds also, And the going out thereof shall be at the Coasts or parts of the Sea. And the Border of the Sea shall be your Border. Also the great Sea in their Borders. This shall be your Border from the Sea Coast. But the North part, as appears by the particulars alleged in the former Chapter, is bounded by mount Hor: so that it appears hence, that the more Northerly entrance of Nilus, that is the Pelusiock (as it seems; for they are not well agreed about the very particular place) served instead of Bounds to the South part of the Land of Israël, which bordered upon the Sea, as also to that part of the promontory or foot of mount Hor, which was situated North-East by the Sea. But this mount is that which in the vulgar edition is called an exceeding high mountain. In the Jewish Commentaries it is known also by the name of Amana, and Amanon, and Amanus, and by some it is taken for that mountain in the Canticles, called 
x In glossed Jarchii ad cap. 4. Cant.  Amana. And in the Jewish Targum, 
z In Num. 34 & vide gloss. talmud ad tit: Gittin. cap. 1. fol. 8.  Manus is put for mount Hor. It is taken also for Libanus, by such as in their 
a Lyran. ad Numer. 34. Andr. Mosius ad Josuam. Adricomius, Jacob Bar Abraham in Tab. Chorographica Terrae sanctae etc. Et vide Abulens. ad Num. 34. q. 2.  Descriptions of the holy Land, are wont to make mount Libanus its Northern Border. But as touching this mount Hor or Amanus (of the same name with that mountain, which but's out into the gulf now called Golfo dell' Aiazza by some also taken for the same 
b Gloss. ordinar. ad numee. 34.  or rather mount Taurus) it is described after this manner by Solomon Jarchius, it is seated in a north west corner. It's head bending downward stretcheth out into the very sea. And it is washed in divers places by the main. Betwixt these Bounds, to wit, the Southern part or the Pelusiack entrance of Nilus, and the North-East Bound or promontory of the aforesaid mount, the great sea, which is reckoned the Western Bound or Border, haiung divers wind and turn along the shore, is stretched out in such a manner above 200 miles, that if a straight line should be drawn from the North-East Border to the Southern, a great part of the Sea that extends itself within the line for so many miles, must needs be intercepted▪ which also is very easily to be understood without the help of a Map.  
These things being thus premised, briefly, but so far as the matter in hand require's, to discover the western part of the holy Land, bordering wholly upon the Sea, and that according to the judgement of the ancient Hebrews, not by modern Descriptions; it is to be considered, that the Jewish Divines and Lawyers, when they discourse about the precepts and Laws belonging to the Land of Israël, that is, of those to which they conceiv themselves not bound by the Holy Law, without the Limits of that Land, use to treat very precisely, even to an hair, touching the Borders of their Dominion, as it was appointed by the Command of God. To wit, touching the Bounds of their territory, as the name Territorie signifies the whole, not only Lands and Fields, but Rivers also and all other waters within the circuit of each city, as it is rightly taken also by the 
c Caepola de Servitutibus Rustic. Praed. cap. 26. §. 26. Hieronym. de monte, l. de finibus regundis cap. 6. § 8. Alberic. Gentilis de jure Belli lib. 3. cap. 17. Dd. in l. 9 ff. de judiciis.  Civil Lawyers. The Precepts spoken of, are those which are received by the Jews, touching the observation of the sabbatical year, oblations of Fruits, the Levitical custom of Tithing, and others of that kind. For by the Law of God, they will not yield that those things should be observed out of the Israëlitish Dominions, although, 
d Moses Maimonides halach. Therumoth cap. 1. & Mikotzi, Praecep. Affirm. 133.  by Tradition of their Ancestors, they were usually observed in Egypt, Jdumaea, the Land of Moab, and Shinar, both by reason of their neighbourhood, and the frequent convers of the Israëlits among them. But now so far as concerns the western or seabordering of the Land of Israël, as it was assigned at first by God, in observing Precepts of this kind, according to the holy Law, we meet with two opinions in their Commentaries, from both which indeed it will appear, that the Sea was assigned by God Himself unto the Israëlites, as Lords thereof, in the same manner as the Land, though one opinion assign's larger Bounds, the other much more narrow: So that they all agree about the thing, differing only about the latitude. The first opinion is of those who affirm, that the whole western Sea (as it lies before the western Coast of the Land of Israël or as it is bounded inward by straight lines drawn on both sides, from the North-east and South border before mentioned, through that Ocean into the west) together with the Continent was given unto them by God; and therefore that those Precepts are to be observed in that vast Ocean, as in the territory of Israël. The chief author of this opinion was an ancient and very famous Interpreter of the Law, by name Rabbi Jehuda, who also from the express words of the holy Law abovementioned, conclud's that the western Ocean, thus bounded on both sides, was assigned. His Doctrine is delivered after this manner, as we find it in the most ancient Digests of the Jewish Law. 
e Gemara Babylonia ad tit. Gittin, seu de libellis Divortii & manumissionis cap 1. 1 8▪ a. Idem, sed depravatè legitur in Gemara Hierosolymitanâ, ad tit. Sh●biith seu de Anno Sabbatico. cap 6. fol. 36. col. 4.  Whatsoëver lies directly opposite to the Land of Israël, it is of the same account with the Land of Israël, according as it is written; 
f Numer. 34. 6.  As for your West-Border, let your Border be, or you shall have, the great Sea. Also let this be a Border to you, or your Border. To wit, the Border of the Sea, or of the West. Also the Collateral Islands situate on both sides in the same direct line, fall under the same account with the sides themselves. So that if a line were drawn from Cephaloria through the Isles to the main Ocean, and from the River of Egypt to the Ocean, then that which is within the line, is to be taken for the territory of Israël, and that which lies without the line to be out of the Dominion of Israël. The line drawn from Cephaloria, was directed by the promontory of mount Hor or Amanus, as is said before: For that city was seated on the top of that mountain, which is here the North-east Border; as it is observed in the Gloss upon the place alleged, and in many other. There also this opinion is thus explained. According to this opinion of Rabbi Jehuda, all that Sea which lies opposite to the length of the Land of Israël, even to the main Ocean, westward, where the world it's self is bounded, is to be reckoned within the territory or Dominion of Israël; even as it is written, the great Sea, and your Border (the whole place we gave you a little before out of Numbers) where [and your Border] is added the more fully and plainly, to intimate that the great and wide Sea is contained also within its Border. And it follow's there thus; Between those little Cords or Lines (directed, as we said, on both sides to the main Sea) there are Islands belonging to the territory of Israël; the Islands and waters have both the same Law etc. Hence also the ordinary Jewish Gloss upon those words in Numbers, And you shall have the great Sea, saith, The Isles that are in the midst of the Sea, even they also are part of the Bound or Border. But the Jewish Paraphrase is more plain there, And let your Border be the great Sea, that is, the main Ocean, and its Isles, and Cities, and Ships, with the principal waters that are in it. Nor was it upon any other ground, that 
g Ad Numer. 34.  Rabbi Aben-Ezra, 
h Ad Numer. pag. 199. col. 3.  Rabbi Bechai, and others, conceived so great a part of the Sea, did belong to the Israëlites by this assignation, that they interpret the great Sea also to reach through the Sea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is, the Spanish Sea, distant so many miles Westward from the Continent of Israël. In both the forenamed places, the words are, The great Sea, to wit, the Spanish. And your Border; as if it had been said, The great Sea shall be your possession, which of itself also is your Border. But in the mean while it is to be considered, that the whole western Ocean as far as the narrow channel of Cadiz▪ is by the Arabians and so by the modern Jews, who were their Disciples, indifferently called the Roman Sea, mare Al-shem, or the Sea of Damascus (that is the Syrian Sea) mare Al-Andalús (or the Spanish) and last, the mediterranean Sea; the whole being denominated from the Coasts of some particular Countries: As it may be clearly collected both out of the Nubian Geographie, as also out of the Geographical abridgement of 
h Ms▪ in Bibliothec â Oxoniensi.  Abu Elchasen Hali an Arabian. But this is most certain, that the name of the Spanish Sea hath been used here by the Rabbins, not from such a promiscuous or common denomination of the Sea; but according to the explanation of such an ancient Assignation of the Dominion of Israël as we have mentioned. And so this first opinion would have the whole Western Ocean, as far as the straits of Cadiz, which the ancients thought the utmost Bound of the world, to be reckoned for that part of the territory of Israël, which is included within the lines drawn from the promontory of mount Hor or Amanus and the entrance of Pelusium, into the West. But by the other opinion, which seems much more agreeable to reason, it is determined, that the Divine Assignation of the territory of Israël is comprehended indeed within more narrow Bounds of this Sea, but yet Sea-room large enough: so that according to this opinion, the North and South-Borders do end at the very shore, or at the utmost point of the said promontory, North-East, and at the entrance of Pelusium, towards the South; not stretching any farther, into the West. But indeed the Autors of this opinion would have a straight line drawn from that promontory to the entrance of Pelusium, to wit from the North-East into the South, thereby to limit and bond the Western part of the Dominion of Israël; so that what portion soëver either of the Sea or the Isles should be comprehended within such a line, or lie on the East side of it, the whole were to be reckoned a part of the territory of Israël, as well as any Coast upon the Continent or main landlord. And so after this manner, the aforesaid line, included within the nooks and wind of the shore of that territory (possessed by the Tribes of Asher, Ephraim, Dan, Zabulon, and Simeon) was situate before very large spaces of of the Sea, for above two hundred miles; and supposed to be of the same account with the shore itself. In the Digests of the Jewish Law, this opinion is explained thus; 
i In Gemara Babylonica ad tit. Gittin seu de libellis Diver●●i & Manumissionis. cap. 1. fol. 8.  That it may be known what comes under the name of the territory of Israël, and what is to be reckoned out of that territory (as to the North-East and Western bounds;) whatsoëver is stretched forth on this side and within Mount Amanus, is the territory of Israël. And that which is placed beyond that Mountain, is without this territory. And so by the same reason it is to be determined touching the Isles of the Sea that are seated over against that Mountain. Let a small Cord or Line be drawn over those Islands, from Mount Amanus to the river of Egypt; that is contained within the Line, is the territory of Israël; but that which lies without the Line, is no part of that territory. With this agrees that of Ezekiel, concerning the Sea-Coast of the holy Land, after he had described the South part which is near the Sea; 
k Ezek. cap. 47. 20.  The West, side also [shall be] the great Sea from the border till a man come over against Hamath. This is the West, or seaside (or Coast.) The vulgar read's it thus, The great Sea also shall be its Sea-border, straight along from the border till you come to Emath. This is the seaside: Which the Greeks render thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This part is South and South-west, according to the translation of the foregoing words. Then, according to what hath been alleged out of the Hebrew, it follow's in the Greek, This is part, or this divide's part of the great Sea, until a man come over against the entrance which leads to Hemath, even to the entrance thereof. These are they which lie near the Sea of Hemath. So that every Translation speaks to the same purpose. But that which we have added to the Hebrew, agrees both with the Chaldee Paraphrase, and the Exposition of the Spanish Jews. Moreover, Solomon Jarchius expound's it there after this manner, according to the doctrine of the ancients; From the South-Corner (for, so he interpret's this word, from the Border) which is the river of Egypt, till a man come over against the entrance which leads to Hamath; that is, to the Corner situated under the Northwest, which is the very Mount Hor over against the entrance unto Hamath. For, Hamath was seated on the northwest side near Mount Hor. And so that which is cut off here by the Border in a straight line (as the vulgar hath it) drawn from the entrance of Nilus to the promontory of Mount Hor, contein's no small portion of the Sea as assigned unto Israël. And this later Opinion is the better received, whereby only the nearer Parts of the Sea are, by God's appointment, conceived to be in the very same condition with the continent; as appears not only out of the more ancient Digests, or both volumes of the Talmud, but also by the testimony of those most learned Rabbins, 
l Halach Therumoth, seu de Oblationibus, c. 1.  Moses Maimonides and 
m precept. Affirmat. 133.  Moses Cotzensis, besides others of a less account, who in express terms embrace it. Also, according to both these Opinions, that is in the mean time of sufficient authority, which is delivered in general terms touching the beyond-Sea Provinces, by 
n Ad Tit. Gittin. cap. 1. fol. 1.  Solomon Jarchius, 
o Ad Alphesium, part. 2. pag. 554.  Rabbenu Nissim, 
p Ad Misnaioth, tit. Gittin, cap. ●. ubi & vide Rabbi Jom Tob.  Obadiah Bartenorius, and others; to wit, That whatsoëver lies without the territory of Israël, that whole Province or city is often comprised under the Notion of the Sea, except Babylon. After the example of the Sea-Provinces, situated afar off in the West, without the Lines drawn according to this or the other Opinion, the Mediterranean Provinces and Cities also, which were seated in other remote Parts, without the Borders of Israël, have in stead of being called a strange Land, been termed the Provinces or Cities of the Sea. Which point is very well handled by Rabbenu Nissim in the former place. But as these, which were seated without their territory in the continent, were only by the said Custom of speech called Cities of the Sea, so also it is clear by what we have shown you, that according to the same way of speaking it is granted, that other Cities also within their territory were seated in the very Sea. And so at length, from both the Opinions, here recited, we have sufficiently proved, that such an Exposition of the divine Assignation was received by the ancient Interpreters of the Jewish Law, to whom that Assignation was made, that they made no doubt but the Sea was every jot as capable of private Dominion, as the Land; and so reckoned those Islands placed in the neighbouring Sea, as belonging to the territory of Israël, because of their Dominion over the Sea that did flow between them. Nor doth it hinder at all, that in their Assignations or Distributions we so often find this Particle usque ad Mare, unto the Sea, as appears in the former Chapter; or that the Sea was their Border. For, the word usque, until or unto, is not only often 
q Bartol. ad lib. 35. Patronus ff. tit. de legate. 3. & l. Nuptae ff. de Senatoribus.  inclusive, but also the Borders or Limits themselves are 
r Archidiac. in. c. Ecclesias 13. q. 1. Hieronymus de Monte, lib. de Finibus Regundis, 23.  many times all one with the thing limited; after the same manner as all Bounds that are bounded. Touching which Particular, both the Canonists and Civilians are very Copious; as also the Jews in those other Particulars already mentioned. And therefore we conclude out of the premises, that neither the Divine Law which is universal; nor the Positive, as it appears, in Scripture, to be Imperative or to have a command over some certain Nations (for, there is a true picture of the Imperative Law in the aforesaid distribution of Bounds) doth oppose a private Dominion of the Sea; but that both of them do sufficiently allow it; and afford also very clear examples of such a Dominion (if we may believ the Jews themselves.) In the next place then, let us consider (what is yet behind) of the Law natural and of Nations.   

That the natural-Permissive Law (whereof any use may be in this place) is to be derived out of the Customs and Constitutions of the more civilised and more noble Nations, both ancient and modern. CHAP. VII.  
AS to what concerns here the Law Natural, as one head of the universal or Primitive Law of Nations, in our former Division of the Law, commonly derived from a right and discreet use of Reason; that it doth in no wise gainsay a private Dominion of the Sea, but plainly permit it, we shall prove hereby; because by the positive Law of Nations of every kind, which is humane, (for we have already spoken of the Divine) to wit, as well by the Law Civil or Domestic of divers Nations, as the Common Law of divers Nations, whether it be Intervenient, or Imperative; that is to say, by the Customs of almost all and the more noble Nations that are known to us, such a Dominion of the Sea is every where admitted. It is not indeed to be denied, that a right use of humane Reason, which usually serves as an Index of the natural Law, cannot well be gathered from the Customs of several Nations, about things Divine or such as relate unto Divine Worship. Nor are the Points either of the obligatory or Permissive kind of natural Law relating thereunto, to be thence determined. For, it hath been the common Custom of men, in all Ages and throughout all parts of the known World, to conclude of such matters, either without exact and convenient examination, or else for the serving of their own Interests, or else to suit with the humour and disposition of the people whom they are to rule and keep in order; as do the Pagans, Mahometans, and others of that sort, as well modern as ancient. And therefore Antisthenes of old taught well and boldly at Athens, 
a Cicero de Naturâ Deorum, lib. 1.  as many other Philosophers have done, Populares Deos esse multos, sed naturalem unum esse, That there are many National Gods, and but one Natural, contrary to what the most usual practice of men and Custom had introduced among the ordinary sort of People. So that as of old in the Jewish Church, so also in the Christian, the use of humane Reason among the vulgar, though free in other things, yet when it dived into the contemplation or debate of Religious matters, it hath often been most deservedly restrained, by certain set-Maxims, Principles, and Rules of holy Writ, as Religious Bolts and Bars upon the Soul; lest it should wantonise and wander, either into the old Errors of most Ages and Nations, or after the new devices of a rambling fancy. And truly, such a course as this hath ever been observed in Religious Government. But in such things as are merely humane, and so humane that they reflect only upon matters of duty betwixt man and man, and are not forbidden by any command of God (of which kind you cannot so much as imagine any thing more plainly to be, than a distinction of the Dominion of Territories, and the manner thereof which is wholly grounded upon the consent of men) that which shall be permitted by the Law Natural, is no less rightly determined by the Laws, Placarts, and received Customs of divers Ages and Nations, both ancient and modern, than it may be collected what every Clime will or will not bear, by the diligent observation of Countries, Shrubs, Trees, Plants, and other things which belong unto the body of husbandry. For, as many Nations as have admitted such a private Dominion as we inquire after, whether by a Law Civil or domestic of their own, or by any Law common to themselves and their neighbor-Nations, are either to be allowed competent Witnesses of the natural permissive Law (so far as there is any use of it here;) or else it must be said (which I believ no man dream's) that so many and those the more famous Nations, have for so many Ages erred against Nature. Concerning the Law Natural, Justinian saith, 
b Instit. de Jure Nat. §. Jus Naturale.  Quod Naturalis ratio inter omnes homines constituit, id apud omnes populos peraequè custoditur, vocatúrque Jus Gentium, quasi quo Jure omnes Gentes utuntur. What Natural reason establisheth among all men, that is observed by all people alike, and is called the Law of Nations, as it were by a Law which all Nations use. And Caius; 
c L 1. ff. de Adquir. rerum Domino.  Jus Gentium ratione naturali inter omnes homines peraequè servatur; The Law of Nations is by natural reason observed alike among all men. But where are all Nations? It is not yet discovered how many there are, much less upon what Customs they have agreed. Nor is that in any wise found in the Customs of all those Nations that are discovered, which some notwithstanding embrace as a part of the Law Permissive. What have the midland Nations to do with that Law concerning the Confiscation of wrecks at Sea, which hath been used by the English, Britain's, Sicilians, and some other Nations bordering upon the Sea. The enslaving of Prisoners of War is grown out of date, as a thing not permitted among Christian Nations, which nevertheless is in use still among the Mahometans. In vain therefore is a Rule and Direction sought here out of the Customs of all Nations; but especially seeing some are not wanting who 
— non foedera Legum  
Ulla colunt, placidas aut Jura tenentia mentes;  
Whom neither League nor lawful compact binds;  
Nor Laws that rule and pacify men's minds.  as he saith 
d Val. Flacc. argonautic 4.  of the Bebrycians. That there have been some such Nations, is expressly recorded also by 
e Nicomach. lib. 7. cap. 6.  Aristotle. And Sallust, out of the mouth of 
f In bello Jugurthino.  Hiempsal, saith concerning the Getuli and Libian, the ancient Inhabitants of Africa, Neque moribus, neque Lege, neque Imperio cujusquam regebantur, They were ruled neither by Custom, nor by Law, nor by the command of any. And in another place concerning the 
g In conjurat. Catilinar.  Aborigines; Genus hominum agreste, sine Legibus, sine Imperio, liberum atque solutum; A rude sort of men, without Laws, without Government, free and dissolute. Therefore we must have recours hear unto the more civilised and more eminent Nations of the past and present Age, and of such whose Customs we are best acquainted with. And among them truly, not only such as those very Nations, whom it may chief concern here, have ever highly esteemed; but also those Nations, who are concerned at present, shall be proved competent Witnesses.  
But of the Testimonies, that we intent to use there is a twofold kind. Some are those which show, that a sovereignty and private Dominion of the Sea hath been by Historians and other Writers, almost in all Ages, acknowledged and granted to Princes, People, and others. Other Testimonies there are which demonstrate out of Lawyers, also by Leagues and Treaties, and other particulars of that nature, that such a Dominion of the Sea, is in like manner agreeable unto Law. Both which we interweav, as the order of Things directs us. But yet so, that what matters, either of Fact or Law, do appertain unto the British Sea, are wholly pretermitted in this collection of Testimonies, with an Intent to dispose them apart in the second Book. And so at length it will be very clearly manifested together, both what the Civil Law of Nations, as also what the Common Law of divers Nations; and lastly, what the natural permissive Law (which in this case is to be drawn out of the Customs of Nations) hath determined touching private Dominion of the Sea.   

The manner, whereby the Law Permissive touching private Dominion of the Sea, may be drawn out of the Customs of many Ages and Nations. That there were Testimonies hereof manifest enough in the Fabulous Age. Also, a word by the way, touching the Mediterranean Sea in possession of the Romans, when the Command thereof was committed to Cneius Pompeius. CHAP. VIII.  
THe Ages, out of whose Monuments and Actions the aforesaid Customs, determinations, and Decree's of People and Nations, are to be derived, I divide into two parts. Into the Fabulous Age, and the Historical. But we do not, according to Varro, call that Fabulous which wholly preceded the beginning of the Olympiads; but that which is obscured only by the most ancient Fables, at least under a fabulous Representation; The Historical being in the mean time divided into that which is more ancient and comprehends the Customs of such Empires and commonwealths as expired some Ages past; And into that which is modern, and shows the practice of those Nations, in the present case, which are now in being. But in applying our selus unto the fabulous Age, we do not ground Arguments upon Fables, as they are mere Fables; but we manifest Historical Truth out of the most ancient Historians, though wrapped up in the mysteries of Heathen Priests and poets. For, (as 
a De falsa Religione, lib. 1. cap. 11.  Lactantius saith well) even Those things which the poets speak are true, but covered under a certain veil or Figure. And yet they have so veiled the Truth with Fiction, that the Truth itself might not take off from the common belief of the People. They writ, that in the fabulous time aforementioned, the Titans being subdued, the Brother-Deities, Jupiter, Pluto, and Neptune, divided the world by Lot; And that Heaven was allotted unto Jupiter, Hell to Pluto, the Sea to Neptune. But omitting those Trifles, whereby the vulgar suffered themselves with patience to be cozened, touching the Heaven or sky, the kingdom of Hell or of the dead, and of the whole Earth's being common, after this division, to all the 
b Homer. Iliad. 15. seu ●.  Brothers, some of the ancients have taught, that the Truth itself which lay couched in this Fable, was quite another Thing. They say these were not gods, but men. Also that Jupiter was not King of Heaven, but of the Eastern part from whence the Light first dawn's upon mortal men; by which means also it seemed the higher part, and therefore was called Heaven: And that Pluto was King of the West, which points at the Sun's setting and Night, from whence it was said to be lower and Hell. Lastly, that Neptune was Lord of the Sea and the Isles scattered therein. Thus it appears here, that a private Dominion of the Sea, no otherwise then of the Land, arose from Humane distribution. And that the case stood thus, it was affirmed long since by Euhemerus Messenius, an old author, in his history of the Affairs of those men who were supposed gods, recorded and translated by Ennius. For, Lactantius saith thus; 
c Loco jam citato.  Concerning the lot or share of Neptune, it is manifest I say, that his Kingdom was such as was that unlimited command of Cneius Pompeius, who, by decree of the Senate, had authority given him over all the Sea-Coast for suppressing pirates, and scouring the whole Sea. Thus all things belonging to the Sea with its Islands fell by lot unto Neptune. But how may it be proved? To wit, by ancient Histories. Euhemerus an old author, who was of the city of Messina, hath collected the Affairs and achievements of Jupiter and others that are reputed gods, and compiled a history of those sacred Titles and Inscriptions that were found in the most ancient Temples, and especially in the Temple of Jupiter of Triphylia, where a golden Pillar was placed by Jupiter himself, as appeared by the Inscription: Upon which Pillar he wrote his own Actions, that it might remain a Monument of his Affairs unto posterity. This history Ennius did both translate and follow, whose words are these; Jupiter grant's the Dominion of the Sea unto Neptune, that he might reign over all the Islands, and all Places near the Sea. But both the Translation of Ennius, and the Commentaries themselves of Euhemerus, are utterly lost; nor is it to be thought, that they were lost without the knowledge and design of the chief Priests of Jupiter and other Deities. For, doubtless whatsoever had been written touching the Originals of the gods, was so much the more odious, by how much the more it did lay them open, and discover, that those great Names which were magnified in their chapels and Temples, were taken out of the List either of great Kings, or Heroes, and obtruded upon the credulous vulgar. For, from hence it was, that Euhemerus, with Diagoras and some others, was branded an Atheist, who is used as a singular author, not only by Lactantius, but also by Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, Augustin, Arnobius, and others; to whom we know very great credit is given in those Arguments that are pieced together against the vain theology of the Heathen. It is (I suppose) the same man that is called by Plutarch 
d De Placitis Philosophorum, lib. 1. cap. 7.  Tegeata, when he is ranked in the same form with Diagoras. But he is by the same author called Messenius, when as being very obstinate in the 
e Plutarch. lib. de Iside & Osiride.  superstition of his Ancestors, he brand's him as a great Patron of Impostures, and being induced (it seems) by hatred against Euhemerus, he conceit's there never were any such Nation, as the Triphylians or Panchaeans, whereas Panchaea is an Island situate about Arabia in the more Southern Ocean, wherein Euhemerus placeth the Temple of Jupiter Triphylius, from whence that story touching the Dominion of the Sea was taken. Truly 
f Bibliothec. lib. 6. atque apud Eusebium de praeparat. Evangelic. lib. 2. c. 4. Add Gerard. Vossium de Graecit Historicis, lib. 1. cap. 11.  Diodorus useth him also, as a grave author. A late Lawyer also makes use of that Neptune in Homer, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉—   
But of those things which were distributed by lot, I have taken the Sea for my share, that I might dwell therein for ever; so he translates it, that he may with the more confidence take the whole matter related concerning the three Deities, as meant of Noah's three sons. His words are these; 
g Jo. Gryphiander, de Insulis, cap. 31. §▪ 75.  Id proculdubio ex partitione terrarum inter tres filios Noachi, ex quibus Japheto Insulae obvenerunt, causam traxit, It may without question be proved from that partition of Lands which was made verwixt Noah's three sons whereby the Isles of the Sea fell to Japhet.  
So that in that fable he would have 
h Genesis 10.  the Dominion not only of the Isles, but also of the Sea, to be assigned unto Japhet. But that which Lactantius saith touching the unlimited Command of Pompey, as parallel to the example of Neptune's Dominion, it is so to be understood, that regard be had also, as well of those that gave the Command to Pompey, as of him to whom the Command was given. As for instance, the Cilicians had infested the Seas (as Florus saith) and having spoiled commerce, behaving themselves like enemies of mankind, they shut up the Sea with war as it were a tempest. Therefore the Romans, having a special eye to their provision of Corn, did by a decree of the Senate, procured by Gabinius, send out Pompey to 
i Plutarch. in Pompeio, & Appianus Alexandrin. in Mithridaticis.  free the Sea from pirates. And there was granted unto him by that decree, a Command of the Sea which lies within Herculeses pillars; and also of the continent about 400 furlongs from the Sea. Hereupon, being master of a huge navy, and having disposed divers lieutenants through all parts of his Command, he so scoured the whole Sea from the straits of Cadiz to the Cilician shore, 
k Dio. lib. 36.  that none was able to stand before him either by Sea or landlord. certainly Pompey had a Commission only as Admiral of the People of Rome, as, Paterculus saith; Mark Antony had the like about two years before. But that people which entrusted him, was Lord of this Sea, as the Roman territory, as well as of those 400 furlongs of the Continent, which were joined alike with the Sea in the Grant of that Commission, though no more liable to Dominion then the Sea itself. Florus saith also; 
l lib. 3. cap. 6.  that Tiberius Nero (who was one of Pompey'es' lieutenants) blocked up the straits of Cadiz, at the first entrance of our Sea. he being a Roman rightly calls it our Sea (as also 
m In bello Jugurthino.  Sallust doth more than once) because it was so wholly subdued under the Roman power. And Dio Cassius; he scoured the whole Sea, which was under the Roman obedience. And, saith Mela, of the Mediterranean Sea, all that Sea, whencesoëver it flows, or whithersoëver it spread's itself, is called by one name, Our Sea. So it is called likewise by others. 
n Orosius. lib. 1. cap. 2.  And Mela useth the name our Sea very often afterwards. But more of this hereafter, where we treat more largely concerning the Dominion of the Romans by Sea. Nor did Pompey's commission extend only against those pirates, as enemies of humane society (after the same manner as we see Commissions daily granted against pirates, that rob and spoil in any Sea not yet possessed) but that very sea-territory, which the Cilicians had invaded, was recovered by Arms. From whence 
o astronomic lib. 4.  Manilius break's forth in a Poetical rapture, 
Quis te Niliaco peritarum littore, Magne,  
Post victas Mithridatis Opes, pelagúsque receptum,  
Crederet?—  
Who would have thought, great Pompey, when for Rome  
Thou Mithridates forces hadst o'recom,  
And didst from pirate's hands the Sea restore,  
Thou shouldst have perish'ton th' Egyptian shore?   
Therefore, Lactantius ought not so much to have resembled Neptune to Pompey, as to the People of Rome, in being Lord of the Sea. Other matters there are in the fabulous time, which being spoken of the Gods, may seem to show, what opinion the ancients were of touching the right and custom of men in this particular. For, when they clothe their Gods with the persons of men, they commonly speak such things of them as belong unto men. From whence Hesiod sayeth, Jupiter granted unto Hecate, that she should possess part of the Sea, as well as the landlord. Hereunto also belongs that of Oppianus, concerning 
p Halieutic. lib. 1.  Amphitrite's being made Queen of the Sea by Neptune, 
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
He constituted Her Queen of the Sea.   
Also Nonnus, 
q Dionysiac. lib. 34.  
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
Beroë had the Empire or Dominion of the Sea.   
Instances of this kind are innumerable. And therefore thus much concerning the fabulous time.   

The first Dominion of the Sea among the Greeks in the Historical age; that is, the Dominion of King Minos, or the Cretan. CHAP. IX.  
THe former part of the Historical time, or that which comprehends Kingdoms and Commonweals, which expired some ages since, we begin from the Empire of the Cretans at Sea. Afterwards we trace a catalogue not only of very many People of old Greece, and other nations famous heretofore in the East, of like Command and Dominion in the Syrian, Egyptian, Pamphilian, Lydian, and AEgean Seas, and the several changes thereof; but also we show, that the Dominion both of the Romans and Carthaginians in their adjoining Seas, as the upper, the lower, the more Easterly Sea also, and others of that kind in the West, hath been received into Custom, as a thing very usual, and agreeable to Law.  

I.  
Minos' the son of Lycastus, said to be the son of Jupiter King of 
a Now called Candia.  Crete, possessed the Cretan Sea on every side and a great part of the 
b Now called the Levant.  AEgean as Lord and Sovereign. So sayeth Thucydides, 
c lib. 1.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Minos held the greatest part of the Greek Sea as Lord thereof. So truly, the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to be construed both here and in the following instances. Nor is it any wise to be imagined, that so to have Command (as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commonly signifies) can be otherwise meant, than very plainly thus, that any one who is Lord, or at least doth Act as Deputy or by permission of him who is Lord, may prescribe Rules and Laws to the number of other men's ships, and passage, Tolls or Tributes, throughout the several limits of the Sea, after the same manner as when he withold's or permit's the use of his Land to husbandmen, according to his own will and pleasure. Which in this case is all one. Howsoêver, we are not ignorant, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes signifies only 
d Is. Casaubon in Comment. ad Polyb. pag. 209.  to be strong and powerful in shipping. In like manner, 
e Biblioth. 4.  Diodorus Siculus, 
f Apud Stobaeum Eclog. cap. 42.  Nicolaus Damascenus, 
g Geograph. 10.  Strabo, 
h Pag. 11.  Cedrenus, 
i In Minoe.  Suidas, and others speak expressly. And Phaedra likewise in Seneca.. 

k In Hippolyto act. 1.  O magna vasti Creta Dominatrix freti,  
Cujus per omne littus innumerae rates  
Tenuere pontum; quicquid Assyriâ tenus  
Tellure, Nereus pervium rostris secat.  
O mighty Crect, thou Mistress of the main, 
l Fuseb. Hieronym. Num. 765.   
Whose many ships have filled both Sea and shores;  
As far as Nereus doth, to Ashur's Land,  
Blow out a passage with his stemms and oars.   
And the first Dominion of the Sea, that is, the first possession of that part of it which was not yet possessed but remained vacant (from whence this kind of Dominion doth arise) they attribute for the most part unto Minos. But there is an error touching this matter, in Jerom's Traslation of the Chronicle of Eusebius; nor is it to be passed by, unless we will carelessly neglect that which in plain terms may seem to oppose the most eminent sovereignty of the Sea among the Grecians. The Translation runs thus, Minos Mare obtinuit & Cretensibus Leges dedit, ut Paradius memorat, quod Plato falsum esse convincit, Minos possessed the Sea, and gave Laws to the Cretans, as Paradius recordeth, which Plato proves to be fals. What then? Doth Plato prove it to be falls, that Minos gave Laws to the Cretans, and held the command of the Sea? or that either of Them is falls? The place is plainly falls and very much corrupted, both in the feigned name of Paradius, an author, never heard of in any other place, as also in the very Translation of the Greek words of Eusebius. Paradius, I know not by what negligence (for I would not believ it of Jerom a pious and most learned man; but perhaps of some smatterer in learning, who presumed to enlarge those brief summary discourses of his in that Chronicle) did arise even from Para Dios, that is, ex Jove, from Jupiter, which is found in the Greek words of Eusebius? For, there Eusebius saith, 
Chronic. Canon. 110. in Thesauro Temporum.  Minos' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 possessed the Sea, and gave Laws unto the Cretans, which he brought 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from Jupiter, out of the Cave where he had retired himself for nine years. Touching those Laws received from Minos, which 
n Eutropius, lib. 6.  expired not before Crete was subdued by Caecilius Metellus, also concerning his Cave in Mount Ida, and the nine years, the matter appears very plain out of Homer, Plato, Porphyry, and others. But in the Greek of Eusebius it immediately follow's; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which certainly here signifies, id quod Plato in Legibus adprobat seu confirmat, that which Plato in his Laws approves or confirms. For, Minos his receiving of of such Laws is the very 
o Plato de legibus, lib. 1.  foundation of Plato's Books concerning Laws. So little reason is there it should have been translated, Quod Plato falsum esse convincit, aut quod Plato refellit, which Plato proves to be falls, which Plato disprove's: whereas notwithstanding that eminent man Joseph Scaliger, using far less diligence here then was meet, or then he hath been wont to do, would have the latter to be added in that place. For, howsoêver according to the meaning and more common usage of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, it may seem rightly translated; yet the matter itself, and the other signification of the word, doth manifestly prove our trans-action to be true. But we read the very same too, according to Jerom's Translation, as copied out, by Marianus Scotus 
p Anno Mundi, 2944. , and Florentius of Worcester, save that in Florentius we read Plato falsum esse affirmat, Plato affirms to be fals.    

That after Minos of Crete, Seventeen Nations of Renown in the East, succeeding each other, did for very many years even without Intermission, enjoy a Dominion of the Syrian, Egyptian, Pamphylian, Lydian, and AEgean Sea, no otherwise than of the Continent or Islands. CHAP. X.  
AFter the times of Minos the Cretian, we find in the Chronicles of Eusebius and Africanus no less than seventeen Eastern Nations, part of Europe, part of Asia, who for very many years so held the inner neighbouring Sea, as Lords one after another, that, according to the Intervenient Law of Nations, it is most evident a private Dominion of the Sea took place among them all. For, changing by course, and by length of time after long possession, through War, victory, or some other kind of session, they every one shared their period of Domination, accomplishing among them all above five hundred and sixty years without Intermission. But from the beginning of the Sea-Dominion of Minos or the Cretan, to the next which follow's in the aforesaid Chronicles, there fell out one hundred seventy five years. Those beginnings are placed about the time of the Judges of Israël. They which succeeded, are ranked after this manner.  

II.  
IN the second place the Lydians were Lords of the Sea. The Greek of Eusebius saith, 
a Pag. 31. & pag. 115. num. 940.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Lydians, called also Maeonians, were Lords of the Sea XCII years. The beginnings of this Dominion are reckoned about the time of AEneas. But as to what concerns the number of years, although it hath been the same both throughout the whole history of Eusebius, as also in his Chronicle; yet since the Empire of the Pelasgi, which next follow's, is severed by the space of CXX years or thereabout, perhaps it ought to be amended, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or CXX to be put in its place. Which that most excellent man Isaac Casaubon observed doubtingly, also in his commentary upon Polybius, where he treats very learnedly concerning those, who have had Dominion of the Sea in the East. Likewise, Marianus Scotus and Florentius the Monk do mention the Sea-Dominion of the Lydians, as also of the Pelasgi, without any number of years.   

III.  
THe third Lords of the Sea in this Catalogue, were the Pelasgi. Yet Eusebius saith, 
b Chronic. lib. 1. p. 34. & num. 960.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Pelasgi in the second place possessed the Sea LXXXV years. Which is referred to the times of Solomon, and those which follow. But the beginnings of the Thracians, who immediately succeed, require that they should be reckoned here rather LV years. And indeed the Pelasgi were second Lords of the Sea, if (according to some) you either make the Lydians the first, or place them the first after Minos or the Cretans. For, so the Pelasgi are plainly the second, otherwise the third. Which also is to be observed in the following particulars.   

iv  
Fourthly, the Thracians were Lords of the Sea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or LXXIX years (as we find in the 
c Ibid. & num. 1014.  Greek of Eusebius;) which nevertheless are not reckoned above nineteen in Jerom's Translation. But Isaac Casaubon is of Opinion, being induced thereto from the beginnings of the Rhodians, who were next Lords, that it ought to be written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or LXXXIX. Marianus and Florentius, following the translation of Eusebius, account only XIX years to the Dominion of the Thracians. And it is observed more than once by them, as well as in the aforesaid translation, that the Thracians were Lords of the Sea. This was in the time of King Jeroboam.   

V  
FIfthly, the Rhodians held the Sea, as Lords 
d Chron. Canon. pag. 128. & num. 1100.  XXIII years. And hereupon 
e Lib. 4.  Strabo commends their industry in matter of Navigation, who saith, Rhodes was sovereign Lady of the Sea a long time, and suppressed Pirates. In the Latin of Eusebius, the Rhodians are said to have been the fourth in order that were Lords of the Sea. But in the Greek, that they were the fourth Lords of the Sea, and according to some, the fifth. Whence this difference arose, appears by that which hath been said about the Pelasgi. Of all the ancient Lords of the Sea the Rhodians are most renowned; chief in this respect, because the Sea-Laws which were used and in full force and virtue in both the Empires, were borrowed from them, and put into the Digests by Justinian. Saith the Emperor Antoninus to Eudaemon of Nicomedia 
f Ad Legem Rhodians ff. l. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 De Legibus hisce vide etiam Basilic. lib. 53. tit. 8. , Lege Rhodiorum decidantur lites Nauticae, Let Suits about Navigation be decided according to the Law of the Rhodians. And by the testimony of Constantinus Harmenopulus a 
g Prochir. Juris lib. 2. tit. 11.  judge of Thessalonica, they are the most ancient of all Sea-Laws, that have not been lost. They were taken into use among the Romans from the time of 
h Jus Graeco▪ Rom. Tom. 2. pag. 265.  Tiberius. Their beginnings are placed about the Reign of Jehosaphat: But the Rhodians are wholly omitted both by Marianus and Florentius.   

VI  
SIxthly, the Phrygians had dominion over the Sea XXV years; but (as it is in the 
i Chro. Canon. p. 129. num. 1127.  Greek of Eusebius) according to others XXVI. In the Latin we find only XXV, as also in Marianus and Florentius. But yet seeing, in the Greek of Eusebius, the Phrygians are (for the aforesaid reason) counted the fifth Lords of the Sea, Isaac Casaubon (I think) well observe's that that number of six doth not denote the years, but the order of Dominion. This Lordship is reckoned in the time of Lycurgus.   

VII.  
SEventhly, the Cyprians possessed the Sea, as some say, XXIII years; according to others, XXXI. For, this is found in some 
k Edit. Basil. 1549.  Editions of Jerom's Translation of Eusebius. That in the Chronicles of Marianus and Florentius, compiled for the most part out of Eusebius and Jerom. But neither in the Greek Copies of Eusebius, which are extant, nor in the Translation set forth by Joseph Scaliger, is any mention made of the Cyprians: nor truly in the account of Isaac Casaubon. This was in the time of Joas.   

VIII.  
EIghtly, the Phaenicians possessed the Sea. So Eusebius, Marianus, and Florentius; save that they make them the seventh by reason of that different manner of account, which hath been shown you. Touching their Dominion the holy Scriptures themselves speak plainly enough; which also we have noted before in our discourse concerning the Divine Law. The memorial of this Dominion is placed about the Reign of Uzziah King of Judah. Also this Nation of the Phaenicians became renowned for their skill in Navigation, as we are instructed by Pliny, and others. And heretofore (perhaps) that aught to be referred, which is delivered by Antipater Tarsensis and Manaseas, two ancient writers, touching Gatis Queen of the Syrians (who themselves also were Phenicians) whom they will have therefore to be called Atergatis, because (as Antipater saith) she set forth an Edict, 
l 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Apud Athenaeum, dipnosoph 8.  that none should eat fish without Gatis; or, as Manaseas saith, that no man should eat fish without her licence and permission, but that every one should bring the fish they caught unto her. That which they hold concerning the Original of the word appears sufficiently ridiculous, whilst they derive a Syrian or Phenician name from the Greek fountain. But the very thing which (I suppose) they would have, is this; That Atergatis was Queen or Sovereign Lady, not only of Syria or Phenicia (which is the Sea-cost of Syria) but also of the Sea lying before it, in such a manner that it was not lawful for any one to fish freely therein, at least not to enjoy the benefit of fishing, without her consent. From whence it was a Custom to consecrated fishes of Gold and Silver to her, after she was placed among the Deities.   

IX.  
NInthly, after the Phoenicians, the Egyptians 
m Euseb.. Num. 1230.  possessed the Sea under their King's Psamnitis, and Bocchoris who lived immediately before the beginnings of the Olympiads. Mention is made of them also in Marianus and Florentius.   

X.  
IN the tenth place, the Milesians were Lords of the Sea. The books of Eusebius do not show the number of years. But both in Marianus and Florentius we read, that the Milesians possessed the Sea XVIII years. Stephanus, concerning Cities, saith, Naucratis, a city of Egypt, was built 
n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  by the Milesians then possessing the Sea. And Eusebius also mention's the building of that city, together with their Dominion at Sea, about the time of Romulus. In like manner they built Sinope, seated by the Euxine Sea, which (as Strabo saith) 
o lib. 12.  commanded that Sea which flows within the Cyanean Islands.   

XI.  
ELeventhly the 
p Euseb. Num. 1281.  Carians possessed the Sea. Their Sea▪ Dominion is remembered by 
q Biblioth. 5.  Diodorus Siculus. It was about the time of Hezekiah.   

XII.  
TWelfthly, and next to the Carians, the Lesbians held the Sea in possession. 
r Euseb. Num. 1341.  LXIX years. So it is in the Latin of Eusebius. But Marianus rendereth it LVIII years.   

XIII.  
THirtenthly, the Phoceans possessed the Sea, about the captivity of Babylon. Their Dominion lasted XLIV years. So saith the Greek of Eusebius, 
s Chron. lib. 1. pag. 42.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Phoceans were Lords of the Sea XLIV years. Before which words the number 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or of twelve is prefixed, whereby it is signified, that they were the twelfth after the Lydians, and the thirteenth from Minos.   

XIV.  
FOurteenthly, the Corinthians were Lords of the Sea. I do not find, that they were thus ranked. But it appears clearly out of 
t lib. 1.  Thucydides, that they were very potent are Sea, and did so repress Piracies by their strength in shipping, that they gained themselves a very large command by Sea, as well as by land. The same author also mentions their extraordinary industry in restoring the affairs of Navigation. Nor doth time gainsay, but that we may well place them here, as also the Iönians next. But we do not as yet find, that these fourteenth and the fifteenth are received by writers into the Catalogue of those, who have thus held the Sea in possession.   

XV.  
FIfteenthly the Iönians were neighbouring Lords of the Sea. Concerning them Thucydides saith, 
u Lib. citato:  A good while after, (to wit after the power of the Corinthians by Sea) the power and interest of Navigation was in the hand of the Iönians, in the time of Cyrus the first King of the Persians, and of his son Cambyses; And 
x 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  contending also with Cyrus, they enjoyed their own Sea for some time. where the old Scholiast adds by way of observation, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the neighbouring Sea; but not all.   

XVI.  
SIxteenthly, the Naxians, were Lords of the Sea. Eusebius saith, 
w Chronic. lib. 1. pag. 43.  In the fifteenth place the Naxians possessed the Sea, ten years. About the time of Cambyses. It is spoken of the Naxians, named from the Island Naxos, which is one of the Cycladeses, or Isles in the Archipelago.   

XVII.  
SEventeenthly, the Eretrians succeeded into this Sea-Dominion. Eusebius, when he speaks of the Naxians, saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. And after them the Eretrians, in the seventeenth place, held it VII years. Eretria was heretofore a famous and wealthy city in the Island of Euboea.   

XVIII.  
And lastly, the last or eighteenth Lords of the Sea in this Catalogue were the People of AEgina. The Latin of Eusebius saith, 
y Num. 1058.  the People of AEgina possessed the Sea XX years, even until Xerxes his passage; which is noted in the fourth year of the sixty seventh Olympiad. But Xerxes made his passage in the seventy fift Olympiad, and in first year thereof. Therefore there passed XXVIII years between. But truly Joseph Scaliger observe's here, from this carelessness in counting of years, that those are mere triflings which are found in the Latin. And he saith, they are s discovered by the Greek, wherein we read only 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The people of AEgina held possession of the Sea X years. Which truly we find as well in the former Chronicle of Eusebius, as in his Canon: nor is it otherwise placed then in the Latin. Also 
Lib. 8.  Strabo and 
Var. Histor. lib. 12.  AElianus make mention of their Sea-Dominion.    

Touching the Sea-Dominion of the Lacedæmonians and Athenians. Moreover also, that it was acknowledged not only by the Greeks, but also by the Persians, in a treaty of Peace. CHAP. XI.  
NOr are those Particulars which are to be applied hither out of the East, found only in the Customs and Sea-Dominion of so many famous Nations thus continued one after another (the years of whose Empires have usually been reckoned from their subduing the Sea;) but in the Customs of others also, who truly were more famous, though they be not registered any where in such a kind of Catalogue. It is written of Polycrates, that renowned King of the Samians, who about the beginning of the Persian Empire, vanquished the Lesbians and Milesians in a Sea fight, that he so earnestly aspired after a sovereignty of the Sea, that it was manifestly acknowledged to be capable of Dominion. Herodotus saith, Polycrates is the first of those that we have known, who had an intent to acquire the Dominion of the Sea unto himself, except Minos of Crete, and if there were any other that enjoyed the Sea before him. he speaks, I suppose, of Kings. For, those Greeks in whose hands the Dominion of the Sea was (as we before have shown you) so often changed, were commonly governed either by a Popular, or an Aristocratical form of Government. Nor could Herodotus, I think, be more ignorant of their Dominion, then of King Minos. For, he lived after the forementioned Dominion of the People of AEgina was ended, or about the eightieth Olympiad. Therefore, either he spoke only of Kings, or was extremely mistaken.  
About the eightieth Olympiad, and the times following unto the Grecian monarchy, those most renowned People of Greece, not only the Athenians, but the Lacedæmonians also, did sometime enjoy a Dominion of the Sea flowing about them. Demosthenes saith of the Lacedæmonians, 
a Philippic. 3. vide etiam Themistoclem. Epist. 14.  They had Dominion over the Sea and the whole landlord. Others also have testified as much. Concerning the Athenians either the same man, or Hegisippus, in that Oration touching 
* An Island in the AEgean Sea, now called the Levant.  Halonesos, making mention of Philip K. of Macedon's affecting a Dominion of the Sea, speaks thus, De Praedonibus aequum esse aït Philippus & c? Concerning Pirates, Philip saith, it is meet, that both he and you should by common consent, drive away such as offend upon the Sea, requiring no other thing than this, that he may be put in command over the Sea by you, and that you would confess your selus unable to defend and guard the Sea (which hitherto hath been yours) without the help of Philip. They did also by League impose a certain size and proportion upon all sorts of Bottoms, both for quality and quantity, which their neighbours should have leave to use. It is an Article of the treaty made with the Lacedæmonians; 
b Thucydides▪ lib. 4.  That the Lacedæmonians and their confederates might indeed use the Sea, but not sail in a long ship, but any other kind of vessel; which being rowed with oars should not exceed the freight of five hundred Talents: That is to say, not in a vessel with one range of oars, much less in one of two or three ranges, or others that were men of War, but in vessels to be rowed nevertheless with certain pairs of Oars, being vessels only for carriage, and those small enough. other passages of this kind there are in Thucydides. Hereunto belongs that of AEmilius Probus, touching Timotheus a famous Captain of the Athenians. He brought Corcyra (saith he) under the command of the Athenians, and made the people of Epirus, the Athamanians, Chaonians, and all those Nations which border upon that Sea, to be their Confederates. Whereupon the Lacedæmonians desisted from long contentions, and of their own accord yielded a pre-eminence of Sea Dominion to the Athenians, and settled Peace upon this condition, that the Athenians should be chief Commanders at Sea. Which victory was received with so much joy among the Athenians, that Altars were then erected unto PEACE, and a Temple appointed for that Goddess. And Demosthenes concerning 
c Orat. advers. Leptinem.  Archebius and Heraclides, who when they had delivered Byzantium to Thrasybulus, they made you (saith he, speaking to the men of Athens) Lords of the Sea, so that ye might sell the Tenth; To wit, the Customs of the merchandise of such Merchants as should trade in the Hellespont; which is noted there by Ulpianus the Rhetorician. From hence also, Cicero would have that barbarous Decree of this Nation to have had its rise concerning the people of AEgina sometimes Lords of the Sea. 
d De Officiis lib. 3. sic Valerius Maximus, l.. 9 c. 2.  The Athenians, saith he, dealt very cruelly, who passed a Decree, that the AEginetans, who were powerful in Shipping, should have their thumbs cut off; to the end, that they might not grow strong in Shipping hereafter, or by force enter upon that Sea then possessed by the Athenians: For, in some Books we read, quia classe valebant, because they grew strong in Shipping, as it is noted by Carolus Langius. Though it be conceived by 
e Var. Hist. lib. 2. cap. 9  AElian the Decree was therefore made, that they might not be able to use a Spear, and yet to handle Oars. This cruelty is detested by Writers. But it is evident, that by this means they were deprived of a free use of the Sea. Nor was such a Dominion of the Sea approved only among those people of Greece; but also by the Persians, who at that time ruled the East, as appears in that notable League made after the Victory at Eurymedon. For truly, Cimon Captain of the Athenians having vanquished the Naval Forces of Artaxerxes Longimanus King of the Persians (which had infested the Sea about the Chelidonian Islands) the King's courage was so broken, That (as 
f Ex Cratero in Cimonis vitâ.  Plutarch saith, and 
g In Panathena●câ.  Aristides almost the same) he concluded that notable Peace, upon such terms that he was to keep the distance of an hors-race from the Greek Sea, and that he should not have a Ship built long or beaked, within the Cyanean and Chelidonian Islands. So that the King was to keep out of every part of the AEgean, Rhodian, Carpathian, and Lydian Sea, and that which bend's thence into the West towards Athens: because the Athenians were clearly Lords thereof. For, the Greek, which of old was called the Carick 
* Scholiast. lib. 1. Add Dionys. Halicarnass. lib. 1.  Sea, spread its self to a very great latitude, from Caria or the shore of the Western part of Asia. Moreover, subjection was imposed upon the Sea of Pamphylia and Lycia, as also the Euxin Sea, that no Ship of the King's which should be long-built or beaked (that is to say, a man of War) could according to the League be admitted, either in this beyond the Cyanean, or in that beyond the Chelidonian Islands. This certainly was the very meaning of 
h In Panathenaïco.  Isocrates, when making mention of the Athenian Dominion, he saith, it was not lawful to sail in long Ships or galleys beyond Phaselis. For, Phaselis, a Town either of Lycia or Pamphylia, is situate in the same direct line with the Chelidonian Islands. But Suidas tell's us, that Castor Rhodius, an ancient Writer, had compiled an history 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of such as have enjoied a Dominion of the Sea 
i Jos. Scaliger in Eusebianis ad num. 840. Gerard. Vossius de Historicis Graecis, lib. 1. cap. 25. Alii.  Learned men are upon very good ground of Opinion, that those Lords of the Sea, reckoned up in the former Chapter, were taken by Julius Africanus and Eusebius out of that author. It is almost out of question too, that he added the sovereignty both of the Athenians and Lacedæmonians by Sea. Castor lived about the time of Augustus Caesar. That work of his is utterly lost.   

Other Testimonies, which are found scattered up and down, touching the Dominion of the Sea, in the Customs of the Eastern Nations. CHAP. XII.  
MOreover, very many things are found scattered up and down in those Writings that concern the Customs of the Eastern Nations, which clearly prove it to have been a most received opinion touching private Dominion of the Sea. Antiochus Epiphanes, King of Syria saith, speaking of the Syrian Sea, 
a troye Ben. Gorion. lib. 3. cap. 12. Edit Munster. Ebra olat●in sol.  Are not both the Sea and the Land mine? And Xerxes that Persian King, when in a ridiculous humour he scourged the Hellespont, stigmatised it, and cast a pair of Fetters into the Waters, said, 
b Herodotus, lib. ●.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Thy Lord inflict's this punishment upon thee. Also, whereas Agatharcides, following the story of Boxus the Persian, writes that the red or Erythraean Sea was so called from King Erythras or Erythrus (that is, from Edom bordering thereupon who also was 
c Jos. Scaliger ad Festum, verb. AE●●ptinos, & Nicol. Fuller, Miscellan. lib. 4. cap. 20.  Esau, and signifieth the same that Erythrus or Rubrus doth in Hebrew) he adds also this Exposition doth imply 
d apud Photium, cod. 250.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, A man enjoying the Dominion of that Sea. And truly we read in 
e De vita Apollonii, lib. 3. cap. 11.  Philostratus, that there was an old contract touching the Red-Sea, which King Erythras had contracted, when he had Dominion over that Sea, that no Egyptian ought to enter that Sea in a long Ship, but to employ there only one of burden. And 
f De Relus Alexandri, lib. 4.  Quintus Curtius saith of the city of Tyre, that being built by Agenor, she made not only the neighbouring Sea, but what Sea soëver her▪ Ships sail into, to be of her Dominion. From whence also Tyria Maria, Tyrian Sea's, became a 
g Afranius apud. Festum, verb. Tyria Maria.  Proverb, to signify a Sea so possessed, that free passage could not be had, without leave of the Lord or Possessor. There was also a very ancient Custom used in the Fast, that when great Kings having designs to bring any Nations under their power, commanded the pledges of Empire and Dominion to be delivered to them, they were wont to demand Water and Earth together. That is to say, there quired them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to bring earth and water, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, to prepare Earth and Water. They conceived that their Dominion of the Sea as well as the Land, was signified by such a kind of pledge or token. Thus 
h Herodotus lib. 4.  Darius demanded Earth and Water from Indathyrsus King of the Scythians; Thus 
i Polybius, lib. 9  Xerxes from the Lacedæmonians; and thus both of them from the People of Coos, which is witnessed by the Coans themselves in a public Decree or Epistle, in answer to Artaxerxes his most imperious demand, that Hypocrates should be rendered up to him; wherein the Coans slighting the threats of that great King, decreed that what hazard soêver they might seem to run, Hypocrates should by no means be rendered. They added also to that Decree 
k Hypocrates, Epistol. 9  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. How that when his Predecessors, Darius and Xerxes, had by their Letters demanded Earth and Water, the people of Coos did in no wise yield it; forasmuch as they were satisfied, that those who had sent unto them were mortal, as well as other men. And in the Greek Copies of the history of Judith, Nabuchodonosor being about to denounce War against the neighbor-Nations, saith expressly, the form of submission which he expected was, 
l Judith, cap. 2. 7. Graecé.  that they should provide for him Earth and Water. Unless they conceiv themselves to be Lords of the Waters as well as the Land, I do not well see wherefore they should demand Earth and Water as tokens of universal Dominion. Moreover also, Achmes Ben Seirim, an Arabian, writing of the Sea saith, that according to the Doctrine of the Indians, Persians, and Egyptians, in expounding of dreams, 
m Cap. 178.  If any one (in a dream) seem to himself to be made Lord of the Sea, he shall be heir of the whole Kingdom, and shall reign. Add hereunto that Oracle of Delos concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Athenians. The men of Athens offering sacrifice in Delos, a Boy that drew water to wash their hands, poured Fish out of the pot together with the water. Hereupon this Oracle was delivered by the Priests, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That they should become Lords of the Sea. The author is one Semus an ancient Writer in 
n Dipnosoph. lib. 8.  Athenaeus; where Phylarchus also relate's, how that when Patroclus, a Captain of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, had sent fish and fresh figs together unto King Antigonus, and those that stood by were in doubt what was meant by that present, Antigonus, said he, himself very well apprehended what might be the meaning of Patroclus: For, saith he, either Patroclus mean's, 
o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  That we must get the sovereignty or Dominion of the Sea, or else gnaw figs. Or that he must seem slothful and effeminate, or become Lord of the Sea. Therefore he made no doubt touching private Dominion of the Sea. And there also the Glutton in Antiphanes the Comedian saith, it is neither profitable for life, nor to be endured, That some of you should claim the Sea as peculiar to themselves, and spend much money upon it, but no victual for Navigation, not so much as a bit. Add also that of Theocritus, touching the Dominion of Ptolomeus Philadelphus' King of Egypt, over the Sea as well as the Land, 

p Jellio. 17.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
He is Lord of much Land, and also of much Sea.   
And a little after, he speaks of the Pamphilian, Lycian, and the inner part of the remaining Sea, that the whole Sea, and Land, and Rivers were subject to King Ptolemy. Also, 
q Lib. de plantatione Noe.  Philo Judeus saith, let not Prince's glory in that they have conquered many Nations, or that they have brought all the rivers and Seas so exceeding vast both in Number and magnitude under their power. Moreover, though Isocrates in his Oration concerning Peace seems to hint, that the Sea-Dominion and sovereignty, which the Athenians endeavoured to maintain, brought many mischiefs upon them; and also that it sometimes occasioned them to use tyranny against the Neighbor-Cities of Greece; yet he dispute's it as a thing that may come into examination, under the account of profitable and unprofitable, and by accident, of unjust; but he doth not in any wise endeavour to prove it unjust from the nature of the thing itself. Yea, in another place he sufficiently commends that Dominion, though not all things in preserving it. And the same 
r In Panathenaïco.  author saith expressly, of both Cities, the Lacedaemonian and Athenian; It happened that both Cities did enjoy a Command of the Sea; which when either of them held, they had most of the other Cities obedient thereto. we read also a dispute in Aristotle, 
s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  concerning a Communion or common enjoyment of the Sea; to wit whether it may be convenient or not for a well ordered City? whether it were better it should remain common to all men, so that no man might in any wise be denied passage, traffic, merchandise, and fishing; Or that the use of it may be so restrained, that it might be received into the Dominion of any city, so as to exclude foreigners? He dispute's this point whether it be profitable, or unprofitable, but question's it not at all as unjust; having been abundantly instructed out of the Customs of the Nations round about, touching a propriety of the Sea as well as the landlord. Also his Scholar Alexander the Macedonian, being victorious in the East, prepared for an expedition against Europe, that he, might become Lord of the whole Land and Sea, as saith the Emperor 
t In Oratione 3. seu Eusebiae Encomio.  Julian. And truly among the People of Greece, especially such as bordered upon the Sea, and others of that nature in the East, to hold supreme power and sovereignty above others, and to enjoy a sovereignty of the Sea, were acoounted almost one and the same thing. Nor did they conceiv that could be obtained without this. From whence arose that Council of Themistocles, which Pompey the great also followed at Rome; 
u Cicero ad Atticum, lib. 10. Epist. 7. Plutarch. in Themistocle.  Qui mare teneat, eum necesse esse rerum potiri etc. He which can possess the Sea, must need's have Command of all. So also saith Jsaac 
w Comm. in Polybinm pag. 199.  Casaubon upon Polybius; To have Dominion of the Sea (which is expressed by the Greeks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) is wholly, and ever hath been a great strengthening, and as it were a pledge of extraordinary power. Therefore, the old writers of Chronicles among the Grecians, seeing before the institution of the Olympiads, there was no Sovereign power of any People of Greece in being, upon whose actions a knowledge of times might be grounded, therefore among the other times that they made use of for the computing of times, they omitted not that particular, but carefully kept an account of those People, who had once enjoyed a Dominion of the Sea, and they exactly observed in their Chronologies all such changes as happened in that matter. But you have more then enough touching those Customs that have been received in the East, about the Dominion of the Sea.   

Of the Spinetans, Tuscans, Carthaginians, and other Lords of the Sea in the West. CHAP. XIII.  
NOr is such a Dominion of the Sea, as I have mentioned, less clear and evident, in the ancient Customs of the Western Nations. The spinetans, so called from the City Spina situate near the entrance of the River Po, were a long time Lords of the upper or Adriatic Sea, being wont to send very liberal Tenths out of their profits by Sea, to Apollo at Delphos. So saith 
a Lib. 5.  Strabo and 
b De Orig. Rom. lib. 1.  Dionysius Halicarnass. Who writ expressly in like manner of the Tuscans, that they were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in command of the lower Sea, or that which washes the South-Coast of Italy; that is in plain terms that they were Lords of the Sea. And 
c Biblioth. l. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Diodorus Siculus saith, the Tyrrheni (or Tuscans) possessing the Sea a long time as Lords, called it by their own Name. But afterwards, the 
d Diodorus Sic. lib. 20.  Carthaginians became Lords of almost the whole Mediterranean, which is more westward, to wit of the Sicilian and African Sea; who being overcome in battle, Agathocles King of Sicily enjoied the same power for some time; from whom the People of Africa revolting, that Dominion was soon restored to the Carthaginians. These things were done in CXVIII Olympiad. Then, for 40. years or thereabout, the Carthaginians continued Lords of the Sea, and gave Laws thereto; that is to say, until the fist Punic War, which began in the last year of the CXXVIII Olympiad. So also Polybius, 
e Histor. lib. 1. & 3. Add Appian. Alexandrin. sub. Initiis Belli Punici.  The Carthaginians enjoying the Dominion of the Sea without controversy. And a little after; The Carthaginians enjoyed the command of the Sea without all controversy, as received from their Ancestors. But the Carthaginians enjoyed the same, even long before the time of Agathocles, as it sufficiently appears by that League of all that was made first of all betwixt them and the Romans, at the beginning of their Consuls, or about the sixty eight Olympiad. One Article thereof is in Polybius, who only mentions it to this effect; That neither the Romans nor their Confederates were to sail beyond the 
* A promontory of Africa, near Car.  fair promontory, unless driven by Tempest, or forced by enemies. That was a promontory of Africa; and the Carthaginians were so far Lords of the Sea, that they would not permit the Romans or their Confederates, to sail beyond that promontory: which the Romans themselves acknowledged to be just in the League that they made. But in the second League or treaty of Peace betwixt these famous Nations in the West, it was farther provided; that no Roman should touch either upon Africa or Sardinia, unless it were either to take in Provision or repair their Ships, as you may see also in Polybius: so that the use of the Sea was taken away, or restrained. And hereunto belongs that of 
f In verbo, Tyria Maria.  Pompeius Festus, touching the Paeni or Carthaginians; The Carthaginians having their original from Tyre, were so powerful at Sea, that Navigation was hazardous to all men; For, the Carthaginians were the chief of the Poeni. Moreover, 
g De Bello Gallico, lib. 3. cap. 8.  Julius Caesar writing of the Veneti a people of Western Gallia about the entrance of the River Loire, and of old very industrious in Sea-affairs above their neighbours, saith, That in a great and open current of the Sea, having but a few Ports lying here and there which are in their possession, they make almost all men pay Custom, that were wont to use the same Sea. Tribute was paid to them as Lords, for the use of the neighbouring Sea. Nor must we pass by that here, which 
h De Gestis Longobardorum lib. 3. cap. 33. quod memorat etiam Sigonius de regno Italiae, lib. 1.  Paulus Warnfredus relate's of Autharis King of the Lombard's. There was a Pillar placed within the very waters of the Sea, which wash the City of Rhegium. To that Pillar (saith Warnfredus) King Autharis came on horse back, and touched it with the point of his spear, saying, even in this place shall be the bounds of Lombardy. But we must treat next concerning the people of Rome, the most noble precedent of all both for Law and Custom.   

The Sea Dominion of the people of Rome, and of such as followed their Customs in the Eastern Empire. CHAP. XIV.  
BEfore the first Punic War, the Carthaginians and the Romans, both striven with equal Forces and affections for the Empire of the World; save that they of Carthage seemed the more potent, by reason of that Dominion of the Sea by them held so many years. But then C. Duillius being made General of a navy of CLX Ships, riding at Anchor, and armed within sixty days after the wood had been cut, almost undid Carthage in that Sea, and wholly reduced it under the Roman power. And Florus saith, 
a Lib. 2. cap. 6.  when the Sea and the Isles were taken away, it shamed that noble Nation to pay Tribute, who were wont to command it. So, the Carthaginians being deprived of this kind of Dominion, the Romans got it by the Law of Arms and victory; so great and so constant honour being, for this cause, paid to so renowned a General, that Minstrels were ever sent to make him music after Supper, and a Torch was carried before him. Moreover, both the Phaenicians and Cilicians had Dominion over the Romans Sea, as appears by the League made betwixt them and Antiochus King of Syria; wherein it was thus provided: That Antiochus should surrender his long ships and their warlike furniture; and not have more than ten nimble galleys (none of which should be rowed with above thirty oars) nor so much as a Galley with one range of oars when he shall have any occasion to make a War. Nor should he sail on this side the Promontories of Calycadnus or Sarpedon; unless it be a ship employed to convey money, pay, or ambassadors, or Hostages. So saith 
b Decad. lib. 8.  Livy. But we read in Polybius, Nullam habeto triginta remis actam navem, Let him have no Ship rowed with 30 oars. In like manner Hannibal, in a speech made unto Scipio, saith thus, 
c Livy, lib. 30.  We deny not, but that all those places are yours for which the War hath been undertaken, Sicily, Sardinia, Spain, and all the Isles contained in the whole Sea, betwixt Africa and Italy. And may we Carthaginians, that are confined within the shores of Africa, see you (when it so pleaseth the Gods) ruling foreign Dominions by Land and Sea. And a little after, the Peace being agreed, five hundred Ships of the Carthaginians that were rowed with Oars, were by them seized and burnt. To wit, that they might not use the Sea, which was then to be in the Dominion of others. Afterwards also, the Senate of Carthage was chastised, 
d Epit. Liv. lib. 48. & 49.  because they had an Army, and materials for shipping, contrary to the League: And it was decreed, that War should be proclaimed against them, because they had caused their army to march beyond their bounds, etc. Also, Pliny saith expressly concerning Pompey the great; 
e Nat. Histor. lib. 7. cap. 26.  That he freed the sea-Coast from Pirates, and restored the Dominion to the people of Rome. Moreover, as touching the vast Sea-dominion of the Roman people, Dionysius Halicarnass saith; 
f Orig. Rom. lib. 1.  Rome is Lady of the whole sea, not only of that which lies within Herculeses Pillars; but also of the Ocean itself so far as it is navigable. This is indeed an Hyperbole; But in the mean time a clear testimony of a very large Sea-dominion. As also that of 
g In praefatione.  Appianus Alexandrinus; The Romans (saith he) hold the Dominion of the whole Mediterranean Sea. Other instances there are of the same nature. But truly, that expression of a very 
h Hugo Grotius, de Jure Belli & pacis lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 15. Possunt enim ut singuli, ita & populi, etc.  eminent man is not to be admitted, who saith of examples of that kind, that they do not prove a possession of the Sea or of a Right of Navigation. For as particular private men, so also people and Nations may be Leagues and Agreements, not only quit that Right which peculiarly belongs to them, but that also which they hold in common with all men, in favour and for the benefit of any one whom it concerns. And for this he refers himself unto Ulpian, who will have that Cessation of fishing for Tunies in the Sea (of which more 
* In capil proximo.  hereafter) to be derived from the authority of some stipulation or Covenant, not from any vassalage imposed upon the Sea. Surely by such a kind of distinction, whereof Ulpian is indeed the author, the same may be said either of Dominion or vassalage (as we call it) of every kind. If to occupy and enjoy in a private manner, by Right to hinder, and forbid others, be not Dominion, it is nothing. Moreover Cassandra in Lycophron, prophesied that the people in Rome should have such a Dominion, where she attribute's to them 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
The sceptre and monarchy both of Land and Sea.   
Hereunto belong those things above mentioned, touching the Command of Pompey held by Commission from the people of Rome, as also those other which we meet with now and then among writers, concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Romans. Suetonlus saith of Augustus Cesar, 
i In Augusto, cap. 49.  Haet placed one navy at Mesinum and another at Ravenna, to guard the upper and lower Sea. But 
k In Rome encomio.  Aristides saith this Dominion was not limited to the Romans by certain Bounds (as of old 〈◊〉 the Athenians) but that it encompassed their Empire round like a girdle. And Themistius speaking of the Emperor Theodosius the elder, saith; 
l Orat. 5.  what would you say of him, who is Emperor or Ruler of almost the whole Earth and Sea. In like manner, Procopius making mention of a Statue of a Roman Emperor, holding a city in his left hand, saith, that the Statuarie's meaning was, 
m De aedificiis Justiniani, cap. de Augustaeo.  that the whole Land was subject to him, as well as the Sea. To the same purpose speaks Nicephorus Callistus in the Preface to his Ecclesiastical History. And 
n Matheseos, lib. 6. cap. 1.  Julius Firmicus, speaking of such persons who have in the Schemes of their Nativities, the Moon increasing in the thirtieth Degree of Taurus, fortified with a friendly Aspect of Jupiter, saith, they shall possess the Dominions of Sea and Land, whithersoëver they lead an army. Oppianus saith to the Emperor Antoninus, 
— 
o Halieutic. lib. 3.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
Under thy Laws or sceptre the Sea roles,  
And Fishes swim throughout thy Sea in shoals.   
And Venus to Jupiter, concerning the future Empire of the Romans 

p Virgil AEneid. 1.  Certè hinc Romanos, olim volventibus annis,  
Hinc fore ductores, renovato sanguine Teucri,  
Qui Mare, qui Terras omni ditione tenerent,  
Pollicitus: quae te, genitor, sententia vertit?  
Hence Romans their Original should take  
In after-years, thou once didst promise make,  
And Leaders spring, to rule both Land and Sea,  
From Teucer's blood: what alter's thy decree?  From whence the same poet, in another place, speaks of Augustus Caesar, 

q Georgic. lib. 1.  An Deus immensi venias Maris, ac tua Nautae  
Numina sola colant; tibi serviat ultima Thule,  
Téque sibi generum Tethys emat omnibus undis.  

* Translated by my worthy friend Thomas May.  Or whether thou the God wilt be  
Of the vast Sea, and Thule's farthest shore,  
Or thee alone the Sailors shall adore,  
As Thetys' Son-in-law with all her Seas  
Given for a dower, etc.  And Claudian of Scipio Africanus, 

r Praefat in lib. 3. de Laudibus Stiliconis.  Ergò seu patriis primaevus Manibus ultor  
Subderet Hispanum legibus Oceanum.  
Then whether in revenge to's Father's ghost,  
He quelled the Sea upon the Spanish Coast.   
Or what other business soêver he did, Ennius was still at his elbow. In like manner, Constantinus Monomachus is, by John Bishop of Euchaïta, in his iambics, called indeed Emperor of the East; but according to the custom of the Western Empire, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,  
Lord and absolute sovereign both of Land and Sea.   
As also the Emperor Leo by Varadatus, 
s Concil. Chalced. part. 3. Tom. 2. part. 1. Edit. Binianae. 1618.  Terrae Marisque Dominus, Lord of the Land and Sea. So that in the Empire of Constantinople, which followed the Customs of the Western, the AEgean Sea itself was reckoned among the Provinces, no otherwise than Samos, Cyprus, or other Islands or Territories of any kind whatsoëver. This appears out of 
t Lib. 1. Them. 17.  Constantinus Porphyrogennetus his Themata, where also the Hellespont is expressly assigned to the Commander in chief of the AEgean Sea, together with the Territories lying round about. And truly the Customs out of this Sea were very great, only upon the account of Fishing. Sometimes ten, sometime twelv thousand Crowns, were collected out of it yearly. We learn this also out of a Decree, whereby Andronicus Palaeologus, one that kept the State of an Emperor, but lived a chambering idle life within his Palace, had for the victualling of himself and his retinue, the yearly profit of the fishing before Constantinople, wont to be valued at that time, at ten thousand Crowns, as saith, 
u Lib. ●.  Nicephorus Gregoras. The same is by some called Topiaticum, 
x Vide J. Can●acuz●num, hist. lib 2. c. 1. 〈◊〉 lib. 4. cap. 42. praeter Jo. Meursium in Glossario, verb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Et Jul. Caes. Bullinger. de Imperio Romano, lib. 9 cap 72.  Topicum, it is named also Piscinica and Topice. Moreover, in the servey or breviary of the Dignities of the East, only three Provinces are reckoned under the Proconsul of Asia, after this manner:  

These Provinces under-written are under the charge of that eminent person the Proconsul of Asia.  
Asia;  
The Isles;  
Hellespont.   
Their towered Diadems, equal Stature, majesty and wealth not differing at all, seem to point out such an equality, that neither of them, can appear, by this form of description, to be reckoned a part of another. And so, that Hellespont cannot in that place be any other than the Sea itself, or that Arm of the Sea flowing between; which being thus joined with the Isles to the Proconsulship of Asia, upon one and the same account of Dominion, the Provinces of Asia and Europe became in a civil sens, either continual or contiguous. Yea, when there was no such distinction of Provinces, the adjacent Isles and the Sea itself, made one entire Provincial body also with the continent. And hence it came to pass that the Isles of Italy were 
c L. 9 ff. tit. de Judiciis, de quâ vide J. Gryphiand. Tract. de Insulis, cap. 15.  part of Italy; as also of every Province; and such as were divided from Italy by a small arm of the Sea, as Sicily, they 
d L. 99 ff. de verb. signif.  were to be reckoned rather among the Provinces of the Continent. The Seas lying between did not hinder, but that one continued territory might be made of the continent and the Isles. And that also by the authority of Ulpian, who notwithstanding useth to say, that the Sea is common to all men. But of this hereafter in our Answers to the Objections. The same Ulpian also in another place saith, 
e L. 13. §. si quis ff. tit. de Injuriis.  Si quis me prohibet in mari piscari vel everriculum, etc. If any man forbids me to fish in the Sea, or to draw a Drag▪ net (which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) may I sue him or no at Law upon an action of Trespass? Some there are of opinion that I may sue him upon a Trespass; So Pomponius, and many others say, he is in the same condition with him that hinders one to wash in a public Bath, or to sit in a public Theatre, or to act, sit, and convers in any other place, or put case, there be any one that permit's me not to use that which is my own. But the ancients allowed an Interdict to him that hired the Sea, if so be he hired it in a public manner. For, force by that Interdict is allowed, that he may enjoy what he hath hired. Therefore the Sea, because it was possessed by the people, was reckoned among public things; that is, those things which are proper and peculiar to the people of Rome, not common to all men, after another manner then public Baths, Theatres, and other things of that kind. And what doth to hire in a public manner signify in this place, but to become a hirer or Conductor of the Sea, as the people was Lord thereof and Letter or Locator? I suppose no man doth affirm, that any thing may be let for Rent or hired, which may not so belong to one man, that can not be another's. But because public Places, by the 
* Roman.  Civil Law do serve for the uses of 
f L. 2. ff. Ne quid in Loco. § 2.  private persons, therefore Pomponius and others were of opinion, that there might have been here an action of Trespass. Moreover, it was an Edict of the Praetor, That you do nothing in a public place or cast any thing into it, whereby it may be endamaged. Hereupon Ulpian saith 
g Loc. citat. §. 8. & 9 , against that man who hath cast a Dam or Pile into the Sea, an Interdict is allowed him who perhaps may be endamaged thereby. But if no man sustain damage, he is to be defended who build's upon the shore, or casts a Pile into the Sea. If any man be hindered from fishing or Navigation by Sea, he shall not have an Interdict; nor he likewise, who may he restrained from playing in the common Field, or from washing in a public Bath, or from being a spectator in a Theatre. But in all these Cases he must use an Action of Trespass. Therefore a Prohibitorie Interdict or Decree was to be used, when dams were cast into the Sea no otherwise then when damage was done to a Theatre, Bath, Court, or any public place whatsoëver. To these things, which manifestly belonged to the people of Rome, and were not common to all men, is the Sea every way compared, even by Ulpian himself. There is also the same account made of the shores and Sea 
h Instit. de Rer. Divis. § litorum. Marcianus, l. 2. ff. de Divis. Rer.  by those that speak for a community of the Sea. Nor are they said to be less common by 
i L. 14. ff. de Acquir. Rer. Dom. l. 13. ff. de Injuriis. § 7.  some, who treat of them apart, as by Neratius, and Ulpianus. But 
k L. 3. ff Nè quid in publico loco.  Celsus saith▪ I think those shores do belong to the people of Rome, over which the people of Rome have dominion. But that which follow's there, that the use of the Sea is common to all as the Aër, and that the Piles cast into it belong to him that cast them, is plainly qualified, and manifestly restrained to the manner of the Dominion of the people of Rome, in the words immediately following, where Celsus saith, That is not to be granted, in case the use of the shore or Sea may by that means become the worse. Certainly, if the former words were meant of such a Community or enjoyment common to all men, as would not in any wise permit the Dominion or propriety of a particular person, what mean's that then, that the use may become the worse? For, if a place should become the propriety of him that doth possess it, in the same manner as that which had before been possessed by no man, and no regard should be had here of the Dominion or Right of another, than it would be no less lawful for him that should possess it, to make the use thereof the worse to others for the benefit of himself, then for him that shall settle in a Field that never was seized yet in the possession of any. Therefore, Celsus would have the Shores and Sea so to belong to the people of Rome, that the condition of them, as serving the uses of all private persons (and that, as hath been said, according to the 
* Roman.  Civil Law, and such qualifications as are added out of the Edicts of the Praetors, and the like) could not without injury be made worse, to the prejudice of the Commonweal. Of the same mind is Scevola, 
l In litore, jure gentium aedificari nisi usus publicus impediret. L. 4. ff. nè quid in loco publico.  That by the Law of Nations men may build upon the shore, if the public concernment do not hinder. And Aristo, 
m L. 10. de rer. divisione.  quod Mari occupatum est fit publicum, that which is possessed in the Sea becomes public. It passeth into the patrimony of the people of Rome; for so the word Publicum public doth signify; which the Greek Lawyers term 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or that which belongs to the people, not equally common to all men; by whom also the Sea itself is 
n Glossae vet. juris verb. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  in that since called public. Other Instances there are of the same nature: Whereby it is made manifest, as well out of the determinations of Lawyers, as the Transcripts of Leagues and Treaties, and the writings of Historians, Orators, and poets, that a Dominion of the Sea was in use among the Romans, after the same manner as the landlord.   

The Dominion of the Sea, as it belonged to private persons under the Roman Empire, together with that Sanction established in the Eastern Empire; whereby the perpetual community of the Sea which was pretended to by some, being utterly abolished as a thing unjust, the Dominion even of private persons therein is asserted. CHAP. XV.  
WHat hath been delivered in the foregoing Chapter, touching the Dominion of the Sea, hath relation to the Dominion of the whole body of the Roman people, that is to say, to the public patrimony of the State, wherein a private Dominion is proved, no less then in that of particular persons. Moreover, there are to be found among the Roman Customs, very ample testimonies to prove that a propriety in the Sea hath been instated also on particular men; such, to whom either the people or Emperor of Rome according to the Civil Law and Custom of the Romans, demised, rent, or made a grant of any part of their Sea within the Empire. The rich and more magnificent sort of Citizens, for the conveniency of larger▪ fishponds, bringing the Sea into their grounds, made it their own, and became Masters thereof with as good a Title as they had to their adjacent landlord. There being (saith 
a De re Rustica, lib. 3. cap. 1●.  Varro) two kinds of fishponds, one of Fresh, the other of salt water; the former sort are ordinary and little worth, such as our country fishponds that are supplied with water by little streams; but those saltwater-Ponds are to be found in the possessions of Noblemen, and are supplied by the Sea as well with Fish as water; yet they yield more delight than profit, the filling of those Ponds being commonly the draining of the Owners purse. Now what was this, but to become proprietaries of the Sea, so far forth as it was derived, or enclosed in their possessions?  
And 
b De re Rusticâ, lib. 8. cap. 16. ● 1●.  Columella, who lived in the time of Claudius, relate's that the Romans in ancient times for the most part used none but inland fishponds, storing them with Spawners of the larger size; presently adding; Not long after that good husbandry was laid aside, when the wealth and luxury of the succeeding age made enclosures of the Ocean and Seas themselves. And the yearly Revenue of such Demains, which bordered upon the Sea, was advanced by those Ponds or enclosures of the Sea as well as by any Lands, Lakes▪ or Vineyards appertaining thereunto. The same Columella discoursing hereupon, hath this passage, But seeing the custom of the times hath so far prevailed, that these things are not only in use, but have gotten the reputation of magnificent and noble contrivances, we also, lest we should seem morose and importune reprovers of so long and settled a practice, will show what profit may redound from them to the Lord of the Manor; how he may raise an incom by the Sea, if having made a purchase of Islands or Lands bordering upon the Sea, he cannot reap the fruits of the Earth, by reason of that barrenness of the soil which usually is near the Shore. So that we see the Revenues of a Manor were improved by managing the Sea, as well as Land; and the Possessor was counted Lord of the one no more than of the other.  
This usual right of Dominion over the Sea is mentioned also by 
c Hexaêmer. lib. cap. 5. 10. & lib. de Nabuthe cap. 3.  St Ambrose; For the serving of their prodigious luxury (saith he) the Earth by digging of channels is forced to admit the Ocean, for the making of artificial Islands, and bringing little Seas into their own possessions. They challenge to themselves large portions of the Sea by right, and boast that the Fishes, like so many bondslaves, have lost their former liberty, and are subjected to their service. This Creek of the Sea (saith one) belongs to me, that to another; Thus great men divide the Elements among themselves.  
For Examples, there are the fishponds of Lucullus; famous for his expensiveness in this kind: he, having made way through a Mountain near Naples, enclosed the Sea and became master of those watercourses which 
d In Lucullo.  Plutarch calls Sea-Courses and Chases for the breeding of Fish. Whereupon Pompey the Great, in merriment (saith 
e Histor. lib. 2.  Paterculus) was wont to call Lucullus the 
* Xerxem togatum.  gowned Xerxes, in regard that by damning up of channels and digging down Mountains, he took the Sea into the landlord. The same Lucullus (saith 
f Plin Nat. Histor. lib 9 cap. 54.  Pliny) digging down a Mountain near Naples at greater charge than he built his Villa, took an arm of the Sea into his Manor, which gave occasion to Pompey the Great, to call him the gowned Xerxes. The same conceit in Plutarch is attributed to Tubero the Stoic. That concerning Xerxes is very famous 

g Epigramm. Vet. lib. 2.  Hoc terrae fiat; hâc Mare, dixit, eat:  
Here run the Sea, he said;  
There, let firm Land be made;  When he commanded the Sea to be brought round about the Mountain Athos. 
h Lib. 9 cap. 30.  And Valerius saith of Caius Sergius Orata, That he might not have the serving of his palate depend upon the pleasure of Neptune, he contrived Seas of his own, intercepting the waves with his trenches, and so enclosing divers shoals of Fishes with dams, that what tempestuous weather soëver happened, oratas Table was never unfurnished with variety of Dishes. The same liberty was used upon the Formian shore by Apollinaris, of whose fishpond Martial 
i Lib. 10▪ Epigr 30.  speaks, 
Si quando Nereus sentit AEoli regnum,  
Ridet procellas tuta de suo Mensa.  
Piscina Rhombum pascit, & Lupos vernas.  
When winds do Lord it o'er the Sea, & fright  
The Fisher, his Table laughs at their spite;  
By its own private store secured from need,  
While captived Pikes and Turbot's fishponds breed.  All the variety of Fish which the wider Sea afforded, Apollinaris had ready at hand in his fishpond; which was nothing else but the Sea let in from the shore into his possession. 
Contracta pisces AEquora sentiunt,  
Jactis in altum molibus.—  
Such dams are cast into the main,  
The Fish for want of room complain.  So saith Horace: and in another place, 

k Lib. 3. odd. 1. & 24.  Caementis licèt occupes  
Tyrrhenum omne tuis Mare Ponticum.  
— though thou thy walls do raise  
Through all the Tuscan and the Pontic Seas.  And saith Sallust; 
m In Conjurat. Catilinae.  To what purpose, should I relate those things which cannot seem credible to any, but those who have been eie-witnesses; how Mountains have been removed by several private persons, and Seas brought into their places? Of this sort, were the fishponds of 
n Varro, de re Rusticâ, lib. 3. cap. 3.  Philippus, Hortensius, and others, all made by taking in the Sea. Moreover, we find that sovereignty and Dominion over the Sea, hath been sometimes conferred by the Patents of Princes. The Emperor Trajan, when he endowed the city of Tharsus with Immunities and Privileges, besides the territory of Land lying about, added also a grant of Jurisdiction and Dominion over the river Cydnus and the adjacent Sea, as may be seen in Dion 
o Orat. 34.  Chrysostom. And it is very probable, that the Maritimate rights of Neocesarea 
p In Concil. Chalcedon. can. 4. & in can. 12. Synod. 7. , which Theodorus Balsamon says, were compiled by the Metropolitan of that city, had respect unto the like Original: as also those privileges in the Sea, which the Emperor Comnenus granted to a great number of Monasteries, according to the same Author.  
The ancient Lawyers also are not silent, as touching the Dominion of particular persons in the Sea. 
q Lib. 1▪ 〈…〉 Injuriis.  Paulus, one of greatest note among them, declares himself expressly thus; Verily, whensoëver a propriety in some part of the Sea belongs to any person, that person may sue out an interdict of uti possidetis, in case he be hindered from the exercise and enjoyment of his right; because this matter concerns a private, not a public cause; seeing the suit is commenced for the enjoying of a right which ariseth not from a public but private Title. For, interdicts are proper to be used in private cases, not in public. Nothing could have been more plainly spoken, to show, that, beyond all controversy, he admit's a private Dominion in the Sea, even of single persons. Yea, Ulpian himself, who was so fond inclined to favour the opinion of a perpetual community of the Sea, doth sufficiently acknowledge, that common practice and received custom was for the other part. 
r ● 13 〈◊〉 de 〈…〉  In case (saith he) I forbidden any man to Fish before my house or royalty, what can be said? may he sue me upon an action of Trespass, or no? The Sea and the shores indeed are common to all, as the Aër. And it hath been declared, that no man can be prohibited from Fishing, or fowling, any otherwise then as he may be debarred from entering upon another man's ground. Yet for a man to be forbidden to Fish before my house or royalty is the common custom, although grounded upon no Law. Wherefore if any man be prohibited, he hath for all that an Action of Trespass. he grant's it was a received use and custom, that subjection should be thus imposed on the Sea, and so a private Dominion thereof be admitted; but lest he should be found unconstant to his espoused opinion of the community of the Sea, he hath presumed to declare it done without any Law or Justice. Yet he himself deliver's his judgement in another place thus, The vender or seller of the Geronian Farm imposed such a condition on the Botrojan Farm, which he still kept in his hands, that from that time forward no fishing for Tunies should be used upon the Coast thereof, although no private contract can lay a restraint upon the Sea which nature set's open to all. Yet in regard honesty and faithful dealing in the agreement require that this Article of the sale be observed, the persons that are in present possession, and they that succeed into the said Farm, are obliged by the condition of the covenant or bargain. In this case, the owner of the Botrojan Farm renounceth his right of Fishing. And Ulpian might as well have said, that restraint or subjection was imposed upon that adjacent Sea (as indeed it was) but that he was so unwilling to forgo his Opinion of the Seas unalterable community. Moreover, the purchaser of the Geronian Farm was so fully possessed of the Sea that lay before the Botrojan, that by virtue of this subjection really imposed on that sea-territory, the Owner of the Botrojan Farm could never after justly claim or exercise a privilege of Fishing for Tunies, without his permission. Whereupon, 
s In Cupidine juris perito. cap. 9 §. 3.  Stephanus Forcatulus, once Professor of the Civil Law at Tholose, concludes to the purpose; That there is nothing to hinder, but that the Sea, though common to all, may by public decree be subjected to a Prince by the same right that he holds his adjoining Kingdom; since the same thing may in a manner be effected by virtue of a private compact: Where, by private compact, he mean's that concerning the Purchaser of the Geronian Farm, as he himself saith expressly in the same place. But the opinion of Ulpianus for a perpetual community of the Sea, was so entertained as authentic by the Lawyers of the Eastern Empire, that there was no Law in force among them whereby an adjacent Sea might be made appropriate, or any man be debarred the liberty of Fishing by the Owner of such Lands as bordered thereupon. And if any one were debarred, he might have an Action of Trespass. Which is manifest enough, not only in the Basilica 
t Eclog. lib. 53. tit. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. seu de Piscatoribus.  (which before the dismembering of them were a body of the Law of the Grecian or Eastern Empire) but also by the Decrees established by the Emperor Leo; by virtue of which that stolen opinion of the community of the Sea, being utterly cashiered, as not agreeing with equity, that ancient one of the lawfulness of a possession and private Dominion in the neighbouring Sea, backed with the authority of other eminent Lawyers, was entertained again. Moreover also, it was so firmly ratified by an Imperial Sanction, that from that time forward it passed over all the AEgean Sea without control. That Law (saith that Eastern 
u Leo Imperator in Novel 56.  Emperor, who reigned about the nine hundreth year of our Lord) which so takes away the right of possessions bordering on the Sea, as to make the Lord thereof liable to an Action of Trespass if he prohibit others to Fish upon those Coasts, in our judgement 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  seems to determine that which is not equitable or just. he adds the reason, because whatsoëver comes into the possession of any man, by good and lawful Title, whether by succession, art and industry, or any other way which the Law approves, there is no reason that other men should have the use and benefit thereof without the owners leave. Thus the matter being duly examined he judged, that he who held any part of the Sea in the aforesaid manner, had a Title grounded upon a very clear Right. Therefore, saith he, we decree that every man possess his vestibula or Seas lying before his Lands and be master of them by an unquestionable right, and that he have power to keep off any persons whatsoëver that go about to enjoy the benefit thereof without his permission. And in that which follow's, he makes the propriety of Sea and Land altogether equal. The Seas which lay thus in the face of Manors, were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Sea-Courts or Entries, nor did this sanction of Leo serve only for the ratification of former Titles, founded either upon particular possession, or any other, but ordained in general, that every man for the future should be Lord of that neighbouring part of the Sea which lay before or flowed by his Lands, although he had never been possessed thereof before. In this very sens it is taken by Constantinus Harmenopulus, a judge of Thessalonica; 
x Prochir. Juris, lib. 2. tit. 1.  Touching Sea-Courts or Entries by Sea (saith he) it is decreed in the thirtieth Novel of the Emperor Leo, that every one be master of that which is adjoining to his Lands, and that power be given him to prohibit such as at any time go about to make any benefit of these Vestibulas or Entries without his permission. Harmenopulus, following a different order of the Novels calls that the thirtieth, which in the printed Copies is the fiftie-sixth.  
But now how much of the Sea directly forward did pass into the possession of the same person that was Lord of the adjoining Lands either by ancient custom, or by virtue of this decree is not yet certainly known, nor is it necessary to our purpose, but for latitude, even as it were in a field, those Vestibulas or Entries of the Sea were bounded by the same limits with the adjacent Lands. And it was the custom for particular owners to have their Epoches or Pens for fish (which the 
y Michaël Athaliates, Pragmatic. tit. 95.  later Greeks call T 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that is to say, Nets spread between stakes driven into the Sea; but limited upon this condition that every epoch should be distant from the other 
z Leonis Novella 57 102. 103. 104. & Athaliates loco jam citato.  three hundred sixtie-five Cubits if so be the breadth of Land could conveniently permit. And such an equal distance was observed on both sides, that a direct line from each epoch to the extremity of the Vestibulum or entry was extended one hundred eighty two els and a half; but this rule for limitation became useless after a ten years' prescription.  
The Lord of a Manor bordering upon the Sea improved his yearly Revenue by these as by other commodities, which profit arising from those Entries is usually styled by the Eastern Lawyers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which may be translated locarium, for the price which was paid for hire of a Stall, Shop or farm, is called in 
a Varro de lingua latina. Et de Topiatico videlis Jac. Cujacium Observat. lib. 14. cap. 1.  Latin locarium; so that we see private persons raised their topiatica or locaria, that is, their Rents, out of the adjacent Sea. And out of those Rents they paid to the Prince a yearly Tribute amounting to no inconsiderable sum (as was showed before) levied upon that account. So that by the custom of the Eastern Empire, not only the sovereignty of a Prince (which is the point in question) but also the Dominion of private persons in the Sea, being ratified by authority of public decrees, enacting it, and repealing as unjust whatsoëver gainsaied it, it was in use beyond all dispute above five hundred and fifty years: for so many are reckoned to the taking of Constantinople from the date of the aforesaid decree of Leo; which concerned not only Bosphorus in Thracia, the Hellespont, the AEgean and the narrower Seas, but all those that were under the Dominion of the Emperor of Constantinople. And this may serve to be spoken of the more ancient Historical Age or that which contain's the customs and Laws of Kingdoms and commonweals that are long since exspired.   

Touching the Dominion of the Sea, according to the Customs of such Nations as are now in being. First of the Adriatic Sea belonging to the Venetians, the 
* Mare Ligusticum is now called Mar Leone, and Mar di Genova.  Ligustick to the Genoëses, the Tyrrhen to the Tuscans, and lastly of the Sea belonging to the Church, or Pope of Rome. CHAP. XVI.  
IF we take a view of later times or the Rights and Customs of Nations which at this present are in high repute and authority, there is nothing that can more clearly illustrate the point in hand then the Dominion of the Adriatic Sea, which the most noble Common-weal of Venice hath enjoyed for so many Ages. The truth of this is every where attested and acknowledged, not only by Historians and Chorographers, but by very many Lawyers 
a Ad ff. tit. rer. divis. & add l. sanè 13. tit. de injuriis.  Bartolus, Baldus, Angelus, and a company of above thirty the most eminent among them; unless they be mis-reckoned by Franciscus de Ingenuis, who saith he counted so many, in that Epistle of his to Liberius Vincentius, written some years ago, in defence of the Dominion of the Venetians over the Adriatic Sea, in answer to Johannes Baptista Valenzola a Spaniard, and Laurentius Motinus a Roman; who (as he saith) to gratify the Duke of Ossuna viceroy of Naples whose creatures they were, wrote against the Right of Dominion which belongs to the Venetians by Sea.  
Venice is commonly styled the Mistress of the Sea, and the Queen of the Adriatic Sea, though the controversy about its Bounds be not yet decided. And 
b Epigr. lib. 1.  Sannazarius writes thus of this city, 
Viderat Adriacis Venetam Neptunus in undis  
Stare urbem, & toto ponere jura Mari.  
Neptune saw Venice in the Gulf to stand  
Of Adria, and all the Sea Command.   
Nor doth this Dominion arise from any jurisdiction or protection over the persons of such as frequent the Sea (as is imagined by some, miserably 
c Vid Jul. Pacium de Dominio Maris Adriatici. Alb. Gentilis, de Jure Belli, lib. 1. cap. 19 Roderic. Suarium, de▪ usu maris. Angelum Matthaeacium de viâ & ratione artificiosâ juris universi lib. 1. cap. 36.  carried away with the authority of Ulpian, so often affirming that the Sea by the Law of nature is commnn to all men;) nor is it a qualified Dominion (as saith Angelus Matthaeacius, professor at Milan;) but this Sea doth so properly belong to the Venetians, that it is not lawful for any other to use or enjoie the same without their permission; forasmuch as they have right to prohibit any to pass, to impose custom upon those whom they permit, to do any other thing in order to the raising of benefit and advantage out of the water, as any man may do in his proper possessions by landlord. As concerning Navigation in that Sea, that it may be prohibited at their pleasure, and that by approved right, we have the testimonies of many Lawyers. It cannot be denied; (saith 
d Consil. 190. Idem ad l. 13. ff. tit. de Injuriis.  Angelus de Ubaldis) but the Venetians and their Signiory, for very many Ages, have been and are in possession as it were of the aforesaid Gulf: wherefore the Venetians by virtue of that ancient possession which they have had so long, and do yet enjoie, may by putting a restriction into the form of their Covenants, hinder the Genoëses or any other whatsoëver that shall offer to sail through their Gulf. The same say others also, quoted by 
c Tract. de Navigatione, §. 8.  Benevenutus Straccha, 
f De jure fisci, lib. 8. §. 14.  Antonius Peregrinus, 
g De juris dictione, lib. 1. cap. 33. §. 25. & 26.  Marta Neopolitanus, 
h Lib. de Dominio maris Adriatici.  Julius Pacius, 
i Fragment. de Venetiis subnex. Epitome de juris consultis illustr.  Mantua Patavinus, 
k Franciscus de Ingenuis, In Epist. de Venet. jure.  Franciscus de Ingenuis, and Fulgentius Monachus Venetus, who all have written more particularly, and made it their business to assert the right of the Venetians. And there are examples to be produced which show, how Princes, as well neighbours as others, have made it their suit to the State of Venice to obtain leave to pass through that Sea, which sometimes was granted, and sometimes denied. In the year 1399, December 12. Radulphus Earl of Otranto made a request to that State in the behalf of Uladislaus King of Naples and William Archduke of Austria, that leave might be granted to pass through the Adriatic Sea with galleys and other Ships, to convey the Sister of the King out of Apulia to the Territories of the Archduke her husband, which the republic granted, but with this condition, that no person that had been banished from Venice, or was guilty of any capital crime against the State, should be taken aboard those Ships. Which the Austrians, embarking at Trieste, faithfully observed both in their voyage and in their return. There are extant also two Letters, 
l Anton. Peregrin. de Jure Fisci, lib. 8. §. 19  wherein the Emperor Frederick the third, in the years 1478, and 1479, desire's of Giovanni Mocenigo Duke of Venice, and of the State, that leave might be granted him, to transport corn from Apulia through the Adriatic Sea. Franciscus de Ingenuis makes mention of others to the same purpose, written to the same Duke from the Kings of Hungary. And this they entreat as a matter of great favour, for which they shall acknowledge themselves obliged. Mathias King of Hungary in a Letter to Duke Mocenigo dated 1482. writes, That whereas the State hath been wont to give leave to the Earls of Frangipanis and Zenga, and others whose Territories lay upon the Sea Coasts every year to transport a certain store of corn, from Apulia through that Sea, he desire's that the same liberty might be vouchsafed to himself, who had now succeeded into the Dominion of the very same Countries.  
And as touching the right which the Venetians had to impose custom on passengers, as travelling through their peculiar territory, there are frequent testimonies among the Lawyers. 
m Ad L. 3. De Nautico Foenore.  Salicetus mentioneth a Decree of the Venetians, that all who passed through the Sea should bring in their merchandise to Venice, and there pay custom. And saith 
n De servitutibus Rusticorum Praediorum, cap. 26. §. 10.  Bartholomeus Cepola, The Venetians within their Dominion have several royalties and Rights belonging to their Exchequer: and, de facto at least, acknowledge no Superior; so that they have power to impose Gabels, to confiscate goods and commodities in the aforesaid Sea, as well as in the city of Venice; having as full jurisdiction in the Sea, as in the city. Antonius Peregrinus also, who was advocate of the Exchequer at Milan, after a large discourse upon this subject, 
o De Jure Fisci, lib. 8. §. 43. & lib. 1. cap. §. 18.  the conclusion, saith he, is this; that the right of Fishing in the Adriatic Sea is one of the royalties belonging to the Duke of Venice; and therefore he hath power to forbid, permit, and charge Gabels upon it. Julius Pacius, Marta, and others both modern and ancient treat at large of this particular. And the reasons of some Neapolitans that are the most obstinate opposers of this right, are only drawn either from that 
p Franciscus de Ponte, de potestate Proregis, Collateralis Consilii, tit. 11. ●. 19 & seqq.  opinion for so many Ages since exploded by the custom of Nations, that the Sea is naturally common to all; or from that chimaera of the universal Dominion of the Roman Emperor. Whereas 
q De Jurisdictione part. 1. cap. 33. §. 25.  Marta himself, who was a Lawyer of Naples, writes thus; The Venetians are Lords of the Adriatic Sea, the extent whereof is 80 miles, reaching from that place heretofore called Aquae Graduatae unto the Town of Loreto, seated now near the River Po. And Francisco di capoblanco, a Neapolitan, also 
De Jure Baronum Pragmatic. 14. §. 27.  confesseth that now the Rivers and Seas are passed into the hands of Lords and Patrons. And in a Letter of 
s Apud. Goldastum in Constit. Imperialibus, Tom. 1. pag. 198. & Baronium, Annal. Tom. 10. ann. 871.  Lewis the 2d to Basilius' Emperor of the East, Nicetas Patricius is mentioned under this title, The Protector of the Adriatic Sea. And the gulf, saith 
t De Jure statuum in Imp. Romano membro 25.  Cardinalis Tuschus, doth properly belong to the Venetians, by virtue of a long prescription of possession, as it hath been declared in an agreement made between the States of Venice and Genoa. For confirmation whereof, he cite's Angelus and Jason. But the first time, they say, wherein custom was charged upon those that passed through the Adriatic Sea, was the year 1263▪ when Lorenzo Tepulo was Duk of Venice. The republic of Genoa being distressed with war and famine, and their neighbours not relieving them with provisions, this Tepulo (saith 
u Decad. 2. Lib. 8.  Flavius Blondus), began to impose a new custom, or to speak more plainly, lay a Restraint upon those that sad'd through the Adriatic Sea. For, upon that occision a Law was made, which remains in force to this very day; that all who sailed between the Gulf de Quevera, and the 
* Capo di Pola.  Promontory of Sola, and Coast of Ravenna, should come into Venice, to pay Custom, and (if the Officers thought fit) to unlade their Merchandise and Goods. And an Officer was ordained for that purpose, to scout day and night with his Barks, about the Coasts and harbours of shores to see to the Observation of this Statute. But above all, we must not pass by that controversy which happened about this time, between the people of Ancona, and the Venetians, in a general council at Lions the Anconitans complained that the Venetians had usurped the Sea and Custom, and other things against all right. Pope Gregory the tenth referred the matter to the examination of the Abbot of Nervosia. He rejected the allegations of the Anconitans, as weak and wanting proof, and by the authority of the Pope (saith the aforenamed Blondus) commended to the Venetians, the care of defending the aforesaid Coast of the Adriatic Sea, against the Saracens, and pirates; allowing them withal the rights of their Customs and Impost. Whereat the Ambassadors which were then present, did not interpose a word; but the debate was thus determined with the approbation of all, except the Complainants. But the Dominion of Venice over that Sea, is of far greater antiquity; to signify which, they have an annual ceremony, instituted, they say, by Pope 
x Anton. Peregrin de Jure Fisci, lib. 8. §. 18.  Alexander the third, I mean the use of the Ring, which every year, upon Ascension day, the Duke, in a solemn manner, rowed in the Bucentoro, accompanied with the Clarissimos of the Senate, casts into the midst of the water, for the perpetuating (saith 
y Cosmograph. part. 2. lib. 4. cap. 36. de quo more item Stephanus Forcatulus, de Gallorum imperio & philosophia lib. 3, alii, praeter Scriptores de Venetorum Republica.  Paulus Merula) of their dominion over the Sea; signifying by that love-token, that he betroths the Sea to himself in the manner of a lawful Spous, using such a form of matrimony, We take thee to our wedded wife, O Sea, in token of a true and perpetual Dominion. What should hinder then, but that we may conclude, that the Venetians were looked upon, not only by themselves, but by their neighbour Princes, as Lords of that Sea, by as unquestionable and full a title, as of their Land and city?  
There are other States also in Italy, that have maritime Rights of the same nature. Princes (saith 
Lib. de Censibus artic. 16. ● 40.  Benedictus Bonius) have right to lay impositions upon the Sea shores, forasmuch as what nature have left at liberty, is brought by them into servitude and propriety: as the Tyrrhen Sea, which is under the command of Pisa and Tus. canie, the Adriatic of Venice; the Ligustick of Genoa, which is affirmed in like manner by 
a Consil 290.  Angelus, 
b Ad l. ●. & de Sentent. ex Brevic. recitanda.  Baldus, 
c De Servitutibus Rustic. praed. cap. 26.  Cepola, and others. The Bishop of Rome also hath his Sea, which is called likewise the Churches Sea. The Bull, entitled Coenae Domini, which is 
d Laertius Cherubinus in Bullario, tom 3 p. 251.  wont to be published every good Friday, for the excommunication or Delinquents, runs thus; Item, we excommunicate and anathematise all pirates, Rovers, and Robbers upon the sea, those that haunt and infest our sea, especially that part lying between the Mountain Argentaro, and Terracina. And 
e De Censuris Pontifici reservatis, part. 2. cap. 3. § 1.  Bartholomaeus Ug●inus, a famous Lawyer, saith, that this Excommunication did involv Pirates, Rovers, or Robbers upon the Sea, such as haunted the church's sea, especially that part lying between the Mountain Argentaro, and Terracina. The same is called by others the Pope's Sea. And although a 
f Graffius, lib. 4. decis. cap. 18. n. 53.  certain author would there by Our Sea, have the whole Sea understood in all parts of Christendom, yet it is the unanimous consent of the most famous Interpreters of that Bull, as 
g Summa, li. 1. cap. 20.  Tolet, 
h De Censuris Disp. 21. 21.. 2. num. 18.  Suarez Ugolinus, 
i Relict. de Censuris Bullae Coenae, cap. 4. disp. 25. & seqq.  Antonius de Sousa, and others, that by that name is signified the Sea which is part of the peculiar patrimony of the Pope▪ Nay, more than this, some of those Autors now mentioned, will have this curs of Excommunication to be incurred not only by committing piracy, but by a harmless passage of pirates through this sea; it being all one as if a profanation or injury were committed upon churchland. So that such a dominion over the sea is plainly avouched by the Canon Law. And it is confirmed by what may be gathered out of the gloss of that body. If Herrings were taken upon an holy day, a convenient part of them, by the Canon Law, are due to the next neighbouring Churches. There the 
k Gl. ad C. licet. 3. tit. de Ferris.  gloss adds especially to those in whose. Territories the Fish were caught. By a Decree of a General council at Lions, if the Pope died being out of the city, the Cardinals are to meet for the Election of his Successor in that city, within whose territory of Jurisdiction he died. If the Pope die upon the Sea, the Election is to be made in that city or 
l Gl. ad C. ubi periculum, §. 3. porrò 6. the Electione, & ibi Jo. Andraeas.  place which is next to the Sea. This intimation is given by the gloss, and acknowledged by others.  
But notwithstanding this, the Citizens of Rome were allowed the privilege of Fishing, in the Sea of the Church (as they call it) or of the Pope; as the Inhabitants of a Village bordering upon a pasture-ground, may by virtue of some compact, usage, or custom, put in their cattle to graze there, though perhaps it be in the possession of some particular person. This is a Statute of the city of 
m Statuta, urbis Romae, lib. 3. cap. 72.  Rome. Every Citizen of Rome and Inhabitant of the city, and within the liberties thereof, shall have liberty to Fish, at any time, and with any instruments whatsoëver, in the stream both of Tiber, Anien, and in the Sea, so far as the Banks of the Rivers and the Sea shore do reach. And no person ought to prohibit or forcibly take any thing away from them, so long as they forbear to trespass upon any Lands, Houses, and fishponds, which belong to private Owners; or to come upon the Banks of the Coast of Arenula, namely, of St Severia and Paul, in which places it is not lawful for any to Fish without warrant from the State's Advocate. And such a kind of privilege as this, qualified either by grant, or covenant, or custom, is very often found in such places as enjoy a Dominion of the Sea.   

Concerning the received Customs of the Portugals and Spaniards, about the Dominion of the Sea. CHAP. XVII.  
THat Dominion over the Sea, is acknowledged in the Customs of the Portugals, is apparent to any man that will but observe the usual Title of their Kings; King Emmanuel in his preface to the Laws of Portugal style's himself; Dom Manuel, per grace de Deos Rey, etc. Senhor de Guinee, & da conquista & Navagaçam & commercio d' Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia, & da India à todos etc. which elsewhere is rendered in 
a Concil. general. Lateran. sub. Leone, 10. sess. 9  Barbarous Latin thus, Emanuel Dei gratiâ Rex etc. Dominus Guineae & conquistae Navigationis ac commercii AEthiopiae, Arabiae, Persiae etc. Emmanuel▪ by the grace of God King etc. Lord of Guinee, and by Conquest of the Navigation and Commerce of Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia &c. where conquista in the language of Spain and Portugal, signifieth that which is acquired by War. The same Title is often found in the Letters Patent and Commissions of the ancient Kings of Portugal: whereupon Jacobus 
b De dignitate Regum Hispan c. 12.  Valdesius writes, that they are, and are acknowledged to be Lords and Masters of Commerce, traffic, and Navigation. But for any person to be Lord of Navigation and traffic by Sea, without Dominion over that Sea, is all one, as to use and enjoy a piece of Land, to have right to prohibit all other from doing the like, and yet not to be owner thereof. But among the Laws of Portugal there are yet clearer evidences for private Dominion over the Sea; even of the Atlantic or Ocean itself. For, therein it is forbidden that any person either foreigner or Native (the words of the Law are 
c O Quinto libro des Ordenn●●mes, tit. 112.  Assi Naral commo estrangeiro) in any shipping whatsoëver to pass, ditas parties, mares de Guinee & India's, & qualsquer outras terras & mares & lugares de nossa conquista, tratar, resgatar, nem guerrear, sem nossa licenca & autoridade, sob pena que fazendo ho contrario moura por ello morte natural & por esso mesmo seito percapera nos todos seus beens moveis & de rays; that is to say, to the said countries, lands and Seas of Guinee, and the Indies, or any other Lands, Seas, and places under our Dominion, for Commerce, or traffic, or making of War without our Licence and authority, under pain of death and total confiscation of estate, to be inflicted upon any that shall presume to do the contrary. And for the execution hereof, the Commanders of those Fleets, who had leave from the King to sail thither, had Commission given them, to call to account all whom they found in any kind transgressing this Law. So that, we see the Nation of Portugal also made no question, but that Dominion might be justly acquired over the Ocean itself. And this Law, in the extent of at, reached as well to foreigners, as to the King's subjects. Although foreigners do not acknowledge that Portugal hath acquired any such right. However, that in the Law of Nature which is obligatory, there is nothing to hinder, but that such a right may be acquired, is (I suppose) acknowledged by all the Nations in Europe, except some perhaps who are not yet in fair and lawful possession of any Sea; if so be at least a man may rightly gather their acknowledgements from their received customs. And truly, about the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, there was a hot dispute between 
d In Schedis ejusd. Temp. in Biblioith. Cottoniana.  her and Sebastian King of Portugal touching the Dominion of the Atlantic and South-Sea that open's the way to the East-Indies, which was claimed by the Portugals. But the question in that dispute was not, whether or no Sebastian could be Lord of that Navigation or Sea, but whether he had made any lawful acquisition of such a Dominion. But in the Common Law of Spain or Castille, although, it be true, that the use of the Sea is most free, and that in such a manner almost as if no positive Law had ever laid any restraint upon the natural 
e Vide Alphons. ad Azeved. ad Constit. Regias, l. 7. tit. 8. Partid. 3. tit. 28. l. 3. Recopilat. l. 7. tit. 10. l. 9 & Partid. 5. tit. 9 l. 7. & 8.  community thereof; yet the Spanish Lawyers, and those not of the meanest account, do in most express terms declare it capable of Dominion, yea, and that it was acquired by the King. The Prince (saith Gregorius 
f Ad Alphonsinas', Partid. 3. tit. 28. l. 11.  Lopez) may grant any man a privilege to fish in a certain part of the Sea. And the Sea (saith Joannes 
g Lib. de expensis & Meliorationibus, cap. 21. num. 34.  Garcias a Spaniard) belongs to him, who is Lord of the adjoining land: This he speaks of some particular Sea belonging to Spain; for to speak it of the sea in general, were idle. There are other also, as Didacus Couvaruvias, 
i Laberinto de Commercio, lib. 3. cap. 1. §. 12.  Joannes de Hevia, who are plainly for the Dominion of the Prince, as well for a controlling the liberty of Navigation, as restraining the common use of Fishing. And how frequent this Opinion 
In Relect. peccatum, part. 2. §. 8.  is among the Lawyers of Spain and Portugal, is acknowledged by Fernandus Vasquius, (though he himself do extremely oppose it) as appears by those words of his already cited in the second Chapter.  
Moreover, it is sufficiently manifest, out of 
k Consil. de usu Maris § 13.  Rodericus Suarius, that such rights & privileges were exercised by private persons, grounded either upon custom, or some grant of the Prince, which demonstrate a dominion over the Sea among the Spaniards; although that author taking the measure of Law, rather from the Dictates of the Schools, than the received Customs of Nations, is the more earnest for that ancient opinion of a perpetual community. Yea, the very title of the King of Spain hath that in it which may seem to import, that he calls himself King of the Ocean; especially, if you consider those words which we find sometimes among German Writers, in the Title of Charles the fifth Emperor, and King of Spain. In the Preface to the constitution concerning public Judicatories, in the Empire, he is called King of the canary lands, also of the Islands of the Indies, and of the Continent, and of the Ocean, Archduke of Austria etc. And in the Imperial Sanctions published in high Dutch Konig-under Jnsulen Canariae, auch der Jnsulen Indiarum, und Terrae firmae, des Maers Oceant etc. as you may meet with it at least six hundred times. The word Ocean is added, as if he entitled himself King of the Ocean. But this is a mistake: for, the same in Spanish is Rey etc. de las Islas, y terra firma deal mar Oceano etc. that is, King of the Islands and of the Terra firma of the Ocean; namely, the Islands or Continents of, or lying in the Ocean, (which Pope 
l Laërt. Cheru. Been. Bullar. tom. 1. pag. 392. de qua donatione fuse Joannes Solorzanus de Jure Indiarum, lib. 2. cap. 22.  Alexander the Sixth, gave to Ferdinand the Fifth King of Spain, all of them lying Westward from the very first Meridian) of those he entitles himself King, not of the Ocean itself.   

How far private Dominion over the Sea is admitted, according to the Customs, or opinion of the French. CHAP. XVIII.  
AS concerning Dominion of the Sea according to the Customs of the French, some perhaps may seem to have met with very ancient evidences thereof, in those Officers deputed for the guard of the seacoasts, whom we read of in the 
a Capitular. Caroli & Ludovici Impp. lib. 4. tit. 5.  Statute-Books, and in that Rotlandus, Governor of the British (that is, the Aremorican) shore, mentioned in the life of charlemaign by Eginhartus a Writer of that time. But those dignities have relation, not so much to the Sea itself, as to the shore and Sea-Coast, or the border of the Land confining with the Sea; notwithstanding that Rotlandus is, by the Frenchmen of this and the former Age, promiscuously styled 
b Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 1. tit 15. Pasquier, en les recerches de la France, lib. 2. cap. 14. Simon Marion, Plaidoye, 5. edit. Paris. 1591. Tilius, & alii.  Governor both of the Sea and Shore, as if there were no difference. But it cannot be denied, that Princes heretofore upon the Shore of Aremorica or Bretaign (as the Veneti 
* The Veneti were an ancient people inhabiting that part of France now called Bretaigne.  of whom we spoke before, did upon the same Shore) impose Custom upon Ships, as for the use of the Road upon their Coasts, and challenge to themselves other Rights of the like nature, called Nobilitates super navibus. So it is to be read in an ancient Record, made in the time of Duke Alanus in the year MLXXXVII, concerning Precedence of Place among the Nobles of Bretaigne. In that Record, the second place is assigned to the Viscount of St Pol de Leon, who (as the very 
c Apud. Bertrand. Argentraeum, in hist. Britan. minoris, lib. 1. cap. 13.  words of it are) had very many of those Customs called Nobilitates super navibus, imposed on such as passed the Ocean upon the Coasts of Osismer or Leon; which (as it was said) Budicius, an ancient King of 
* Aremorica or Bretaign in France.  Bretaign, did give and grant to one of his predecessors, upon Marriage, in reward of the virtue, fidelity and valour of that Viscount: but with the consent of the Prelates, Counts, Barons, and Nobles of Bretaign. What these Nobilitates were, and whence they had their original, is partly declared by Bertrandus Argentraeus, sometime precedent of the Province of Renes, where he discourseth also of the right of giving Pass ports (which they call brefs de conduct) at this time in use on that shore. 
d Ad Consuet. Brit. Art. 56. § 44.  That (saith he) whereas till then it had been a right peculiar to the Princes, being given, by way of dowry, to the Barons of Leon (of which we have already spoken out of the aforesaid Record) remained an hereditary and proper right to that family, until Joannes Ruffus the Duke redeemed it for a vast sum of money, of Guynomarius Baron of Leon, after that Peter Mauclerc of Dreux, Duke of Bretaign had in vain attempted to re assume it by force of arms. It had its original, they say, upon this occasion: When our Princes and ancient Kings considered the daily shipwrecks made upon that shore, where there were many Rocks and but few Havens, they made a Law that none should set to Sea without their leave. Such as did set out, paying a certain rate, had passes, and guides appointed them, that were well acquainted with the Sea and Shores: They that refused, forfeited their ships with all their tackling and furniture thereof: and if the Ship were cast away, their goods also were confiscate. They that had leave were in no danger of confiscation, and if they suffered shipwreck, had liberty to recover as many of their goods as they could. And these guides were paid their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Conduct-money, which we have mentioned elsewhere, called by them droit de savage. These Tickets or Passes are given out now, as heretosore, at a certain price: And among other Revenues of the Exchequer, they also were rent out to the Farmers of the Custom. So far Bertrandus, from whom Renatus 
e De Dómaenio, lib. 1. tit. 15. §. 10. & & Thom. Cormer. Cod. Hen. 4. lib. 7. tit. 1. cap. 6. §. 106.  Choppinus borroweth almost the very words. But 
f In Consuetud. Brit. Art. 51.  Petrus Berlordaeus, Advocate of the parliament of reins, tell's us, that the Custom of taking forfeiture in that manner of all shipwrecked goods, was abolished there, by an Edict, in the year MDLXXXIII. But in the mean time, for so much as concerns any part of that Western Sea lying next the Shore, these are manifest evidences, either of Dominion or of subjection in the Sea; which indeed sufficiently prove, by the Customs of that people, that the Sea is capable of Dominion. Moreover, upon occasion of these Passes, there have been controversies raised sometimes between the Dukes of Bretaign, and the Kings of England; as may be seen in certain 
g In Bibliotheca Cottoniana.  memorials of the affairs of Bretaign, which have relation to the times of our Richard the second, and John the Fourth, Duke of Bretaign. But this we know for certain, that in the agreement made between our Edward the Fourth, and Francis the second, Duke of Bretaign, in the year MCCCCLXVIII, concerning mutual traffic and free passage to and fro for the subjects of each Nation, during a 
h Ibid. & Rot. Franciae 8 Ed. 4. membran. 20. & seqq.  truce of thirty years, there is an express proviso concerning Wrecks; but such a one as left an equal right to both of them; not altogether unlike that which for many ages hath been in use upon the English Shore: No mention at all being made in the Articles of the Truce, either of the right or use of these aforesaid Passes, as being a thing in no wise admitted by the English. But some modern Lawyers among the French do vainly affirm, that their King is Lord not only of a part of the Sea neighbouring upon the territory of Bretaign, but of the whole Sea that is adjoining to any part of France, and so of the British or English Sea also: By which very Assertion of theirs, they sufficiently declare their judgement, that there may be a sovereign over the Sea. The King, saith 
i In not. All Codic. Henrici, 3. l. 20. tit. 7. Constit. 28 & constit. 1.  Charondas Caronaeus, is supreme Lord of the Seas, which flow about his Kingdom: the ground whereof is this, because the Universal right of all those things which were common, either by the Law of nature or Nations, is transferred into his Dominion. And other passages he hath much to the same purpose; as also 
k Recerches, liv 2. c. 14.  Stephanus Paschasius, 
l Playdotes tom. 2. played. 11  Ludovicus Servinus, sometime solicitor general for the King, 
m ● Amiral de France.  Popellinerius, and others. If they speak of the Sea of iniquitie or Narbon, we shall not oppose them. But as to what concerns the body of the Sea which lies Northward or Westward of the French, or that flows between France and the Islands of great Britain (for that which lies Westward from them upon that crooked Shore, or the gulf of Aquitaine, doth indeed flow between the more Westerly Coasts of our British Isles, and of France, as well as that which lies Northward from them, flows between England and Normandy) they neither produce any Testimonies of antiquity, nor indeed can they if they would: Unless you will have that admitted which hath been cited out of Caesar concerning the Veneti of 
* Now Bretaign in France.  Aremoriça, and that which we said before of the Sea bordering upon that shore. Both which indeed do rather import some service, called heretofore Nobilitates super navibus, than any kind of Dominion. But the sovereignty of this Sea which flows between them and us, became absolutely appropriate to the Kings of England, as we shall make it appear in the next Book. And the truth is, if we look upon the Customs most in use among the French, or the Civil Law of that Nation, there is nothing in it that derogate's from the ancient community of the Sea, but as to them it remaines as yet not possessed, but common to all men, and therefore not to be reckoned among the Revenues or patrimony of their Kings; if so be credit may be given to that Treatise lately published of the Civil Roman and French Law, by Thomas Cormerius Counsellor to Francis Duke of Anjou in his parliament of Alencon. The matter that it pretends to treat of, is the Roman gallic Law. There are in it the Customs of France, decrees of Princes, and Privileges often intermingled. But under the 
n Cod. Hen. 4. lib. 3. tit. 1. cap. 2.  Title of things common to all, he makes the Sea and Shore's common to all, according to the ancient Law of the Romans, as if in this matter it did exactly agree with the Law of France: which certainly is an argument, that the French have no Dominion over the Sea. Nor must we let it pass, that somwhile since, there were two Constitutions pretended to in France, one of 
o Ann. 1555.  Henry the Second, the other of 
p Ann. 1584.  Henry the Third, wherein they required that the Ships of foreigners which sailed through the Sea bordering upon France, should strike their topsail forsooth, in acknowledgement of that Dominion the French had over the Sea. But neither of them were authorized, or (as they speak) simply verified by the Estates in parliament, yea, nor so much as admitted into Custom. Nay, the later of them was plainly rejected as to any effect in Law. And this the French Lawyers themselves confess in a 
q Lud. Servinus in Placit. vol. 2. 2 11, 12. dec. 1592. pag. 26●. b Edit. 1609.  notable case between some Merchants of Hamburgh, that were Plaintiffs, and Michaël Butardus and others Defendants, in a parliament held at Tours, in the time of Henry the Fourth. But that ceremony hath by most ancient right and custom been observed and paid to the ships of the Kings of England, out of respect, and in acknowledgement of their Dominion, as is shown in the following Book, where we treat of this particular more at large. I know very well, 
r Edict. Francisc. 1. promulg. 1513. art. 11. Choppin. de dom. Franc. lib 1. ●●15 & Edict. Franc. tom 3. tit. 2.  it was ordained by an Edict of the French King, that one third part of all goods, recovered out of the Sea, should belong to the King, another to the Admiral, and the remainder to the seamen that found them. And that the French do reckon very many Commanders in Chief at Sea, or Admirals in a line sometime continued, and sometime interrupted, which for the most part they begin from the time of Philip the son of St. Lewis; that is, from the year MCCLXXXIV. as is to be seen in 
s catalogue Admiral. Franc.  Joannes Feronius, 
t Recerches, lib. 2. cap. 14.  Stephanus Paschasius, and others. But that division of goods recovered out of the Sea being simply considered, doth prove any Dominion over the Sea, no more than the Tenths of any Prizes taken from an enemy at Sea, which, by the grant of the King also, were allotted to the 
u Edict Fran. Tom. 3 which 2. Constit. 4. & 5.  Admiral of the navy. Rights of this nature are grounded upon the consent of persons, to wit, subjects; transferred unto the King, not upon any title of Dominion, whereby any Pretence may be made to an acquiring of the Sea itself; and they are paid no otherwise then Imposts or Customs, in the importation or exportation of Merchandise. But no man (I suppose) will imagine that from such Imposts or Customs upon Merchandise any proof may be made of a Dominion over those passages through which the merchant's sail before they arrive. Neither indeed was there any such custom as this in use among the French, before the time of Francis the first; that is to say, plainly, not being Lord of the Sea, he desired to be and was made a Sharer of those goods which should be drawn by his subjects, out of any Sea whatsoëver. Whereas the King of Great Britain by virtue of his Dominion over the Sea, is wont to take as his own whatsoëver is left or lost in the sea, besides other emoluments of the like nature, and that by so ancient a right, as (for aught we know) bear's a date no less ancient than the Kingdom itself. And as for those Admirals of France, they were no other than Chief Commanders of Navies and Persons, and of the Forces by sea, and Judicatories at home: but not qualified as precedents of a Sea-Province or territory, as the Custodes ipsius Maris, the Guardians of the sea among the English, and the Admirals of England. But more of this in the Second Book. Nevertheless, from what hath been alleged concerning the Customs, Opinions, or Constitutions, among the French, I suppose it sufficiently appears, that they do also acknowledge, that private Dominion over the sea, is not repugnant to the Law either of Nature, or Nations; which serve's fully for the clearing of the point in question.   

The private Dominion of the Sea, according to the received Customs of the Danes, the People of Norway, the Swedes, Polanders, and Turks. CHAP. XIX.  
WE find clear Testimonies in the Customs of other Nations, also of Europe, touching private Dominion of the sea; as the Danes, the people of Norway, the Polanders, to whom may be added also the Turks. We have observed by the Tolls or Customs of Denmark and Norway, what Revenue the King of Denmark raiseth out of the very Navigation of the Baltic Sea (as is commonly known) and what is paid out of the royalty of the Norwegian sea to the King of Norway, who at this time is also King of Denmark. For, in the year MDLXXXIII. Frederick, the second, King of Denmark and Norway, made a Grant of the use of the Northern or Norwegian sea, for a certain time, to our Merchants of the Muscovie company in such a manner, as if he had rent out any Land whereof he stood fully seized and possessed. He limited the Grant also with such conditions, as he thought fit. The public Instruments or Records about this Particular, are 
a In Thesauro Cottoniano.  yet extant; whereby the King had an annual Tribute in recompense, other Merchants were excluded, and the Grant itself was to continue no longer than the Peace made between that King and the Moscovit. We read also in the ancient Histories of Denmark, of King Harald Hildetan; that no man did presume to usurp a Domination in the Sea without his consent. And that which follow's next, ought especially to be taken notice of as to this Particular, because the Empire of Land and Sea was once divided in the republic of Denmark. And Olo (who afterwards was King) succeeding his Father in the Dominion of the Sea, vanquished LXX Kings of the Sea by Sea-Fight. Which things are written by 
b Daniae Hist. lib. 7.  Saxon Grammaticus, and other also of that kind. And in the 
c 20 Jan. 1613. in Rot Tract. Amicit. Temp. Jacobi Regis.  treaty held at Koppenhagen betwixt Christiern the fourth of Denmark, and Gustavus Adolphus of Swedland, the King of Swedland renounceth the right, sovereignty, and Dominion of the Sea, and the other royalties by him formerly claimed over the said sea, in Norway, Norland, and in the Jurisaiction of Wardhuisen. But touching the Sea of Norway, as it lies more Northward, we shall add more at the latter end of the second Book.  
Mention is made likewise of the Sea belonging to the realm of Poland, and the Dominion thereof, in that Promise which was made by the French Ambassadors, in the name of Henry III of France, when he was elected King of Poland. The aforesaid Ambassadors do promise, in the name of the most illustrious King now chosen, that assoon (God willing) as he shall come to his Kingdom, he will at his own charge maintain a convenient navy, sufficient to defend the Ports and the sovereignty of the Sea, belonging to the Kingdom and the Provinces adjoining, even to the utmost bounds of the whole Dominion of Poland; as it is recorded by Janus Januszowskius in his 
d Lib. 3. tit. 1. fol. 109.  Syntagma of the statutes of Poland. But the Turkish Emperor, (who by Conquest succeeded in the right of the Emperors of Constantinople, and so purchased both the AEgean and Euxin sea, calling this the black, the other the white sea) is wont solemnly to entitle himself Lord both of the white and black sea; as you may see in the League betwixt Achmet the Ottoman Emperor, and Henry the iv of France, made above thirty years since, and 
e 20 Martii, 1604. Parisiis, 1615.  printed both in the French and Turkish Tongue. Moreover, in the same League, the Turk grant's the French free leave to Fish, and search for Coral, in certain Streits and Creeks of the African Sea, within his Kingdoms of Algiers and Tunis. And he farther confirms all that had been granted to them by his Predecessors, for freedom of Fishing in those parts. In like manner 
f De Ast●tico Bello, lib. 2.  Coriolanus Cippicus, relating the Actions of Pietro Mocenigo, General of the Venetians, saith; The Ottoman Emperor built two Castles very well fortified, over against each other, on both sides the Hellespont in its narrowest passage, which he stored with Ordnance of an extraordinary bigness, and charged the Governors of the Castles to shoot and sink any ship, that should endeavour to pass without leave. Which is plainly to domineer over the Sea, and agreeable to his Title, of Lord of the white and black Sea. Neither is that to be slighted here, which we find in the Letters of David, Emperor of Ethiopia, or the abassins', to Emmanuël King of Portugal. He entitleth him 
g Apud Fran●●l●●m Alvarum de rebus A●hiopicis, 〈◊〉 Damianus à Goes, lib. de Aethiopum moribus.  Lord of Africa and Guinee, and the Mountains and Island of the Moon, and of the Red Sea, Arabia and Persia, and Armutia, great India, etc. He useth here an Hyperbole, after the manner of the African Princes, and attribute's those things to Emmanuël which were none of his: But in the mean time, he admit's that he might have been Lord of the Red Sea, as well as of any other territory, and that that Title doth not entrench upon the Law of Nature or Nations, any more than this.  
Now that we may at length conclude this part touching the Dominion of the Sea, as admitted among those things that are lawful, and received into the Customs of Nations; there are not only very many Testimonies every where (as hath been shown you) concerning it; but nothing at all (I suppose) can be found to impugn it in the Customs of those Nations that have been of any note in later times; unless it be where some of them, that are Borderers upon the Sea-Dominions of others, do strive to violate or infringe the Rights of their neighbours, under pretence of that Natural and perpetual community, so often insisted on out of Ulpian by such Writers, as too much prefer that obsolete Opinion before the Universal and most ancient Customs of Nations. Of which kind truly the first Article of that League seems to be, which was made above twenty or about thirty years past, betwixt the States of the United Provinces and some of the Hans-Towns, as it was translated out of Low-Dutch by a 
h Eman. Meteranus, Histor. Belgic. lib. 36. & apud. Gasper. Flockum, lib. de Contributionibus, c. 14.  Dutchman, to this effect: That this Conjunction or Union ought not to be intended for the offence of any, but only for the preservation and maintenance of the freedom of Navigation, Commerce and Merchants, in the Eastern and Northern Seas, and also in all Rivers and Streams running into the Eastern and Northern Seas; nor ought any other thing to be meant in this place, so that their Citizens and Subjects joined in this League respectively, may according to the Law of Nations use and enjoy the Liberties acquired and obtained, together with the Rights, Privileges, and Customs received from their Ancestors, throughout the Eastern and Northern Seas aforesaid, and in the aforesaid Rivers, Streams, and waters, without any Let or Impediment. They promise also to aid each other, in opposing any that should hinder such a freedom of Navigation in that Northern and Eastern Sea; that is to say, the Baltic, and that which washeth the Coasts of Denmark, Lituania, Pomerania, and the Dominions of the King of Poland: where it seems they pretend not only Rights and Liberties peculiarly granted to them long since, but also to the very Law of all Nations. It is no hard matter to guests what the Intent of that League might be; For, about that time, the King of Denmark had raised his Toll in the Baltic Sea, and in like manner the King of Poland within his Territories by Sea. And that for the maintenance of that Dominion which they enjoyed; which that kind of League betwixt the States of the Hans Towns and United Provinces did seem to oppose. But, to pass over these things, seeing a private Dominion of the Sea, which is the point in Question, is founded upon such clear Testimonies, out of the Customs of so many famous Nations both ancient and modern (whereto we shall add many other also, when we treat of the British Sea in the next Book) nothing now, I suppose, hinders why we may not determine, that the Sea is capable of Dominion as well as the Land, not only by the Law Natural-Permissive, but also by the Law both Civil and Common of divers Nations, and in many places almost according to the Intervenient Law (which in cases of this nature is the surest demonstration of the Natural-Permissive) unless there remain any impediment in the objections, which are next to be handled.   

An Answer to the Objection, concerning Freedom of Passage to Merchants, Strangers, and Seamen. CHAP. XX.  
THe usual Objections (as hath been more fully shown before in the second Chapter) are derived, some from the Freedom of Commerce, Travel, and Passage, pretended to be common to all: some also from the very Nature of the Sea: And others out of the Testimonies of Writers. As to what concerns the first sort; the Offices of humanity require, that entertainment be given to Strangers, and that inoffensive passage be not denied them. So 
a Caus. 23. Quest. 2. c. 3. & videsia Hug. Grotium de Jure Belli & Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 13.  Gratian out of 
b In Numer q. 41.  Augustin saith, It is to be observed how the war of the Israêlites became just against the Amorites: For, they were denied an inoffensive Passage, which ought in all equity to lie open by the Law of humane society. And 
c Offic. lib. 3.  Cicero saith, It is an inhuman thing, to deny Strangers the use of a city. very many other Passages there are of that sort, which seem to strengthen the Objection; to wit, as it relate's unto the Office of humanity, not disturbed by war, fear, jealousy, enmities, or any other of the same kind. But what is this to the Dominion of that thing, through which both Merchants and Strangers are to pass? Such a freedom of Passage would no more derogate from it, (if so be it were without question free and open to all upon that account) than the allowing of an open way for the driving of cattle, or Cart, or passing through upon a journey, or any other Service of that nature, through another man's Field, could prejudice the Ownership thereof. Suppose it be granted, that, by the Law of all Nations, the Spaniards had a free Passage over the Pyrenean Mountains into France; the French over the Alps into Italy; the Italians into Germany: What doth this concern a Dominion of the Pyrenies or the Alps? And for any man to allege here, what is commonly talked, of the lighting of one Candle by another, of the not denying a common use of Water, and other things of that nature, it is plainly to give over the disquisition of Law and Right, to insist upon that of charity. At the request indeed of Asclepiades Bishop of the city of Chersonesus, under the Emperors 
c C. Theodos. lib. 10. tit. 〈◊〉. l. 24. & C. just. tit. 〈◊〉 Poenis▪ l. 25.  Arcadius and Honorius, certain persons, who had taught the barbarous people the Art of building ships, whereof they were ignorant before, were for charity's sake freed from the pains of Prison and punishment. And though the Art of those that taught them was no whit the less, because of that skill which the Barbarians had gained; yet by the Law, it was death to communicate that Art unto them. And at this day, there are other instances of the same nature: So that it in no wise diminisheth from any man's Right or Power, to permit another to participate of what is his, when he himself loseth nothing thereof. And that we may determine this point in brief, it is most evident from the Customs of all times, that free Passage (as they call it) is wont ever to be so limited by Princes in their Territories, that it is permitted or prohibited, according to the various concernments of the public Good, and not otherwise. Albericus Gentilis, upon that Passage concerning the Amorites, saith, 
d De Jure belli, lib. 1. cap. 19  I am of the same opinion, with Augustine, in case there be no fear of hurt; and an assurance that no hurt may be done. Princes are concerned to be wary and careful, that they admit no such strangers, or Commerce, where, pro re natâ, the Common-weal may receiv any damage thereby. Upon which ground also it is often provided in Leagues; 
e Induciae Hispan. & Ordin. Foederat. Belg. Anno 1609. & Art. 12. etc.  That it shall not be lawful for either party to sail unto each others Ports, Coasts, or harbours, (and this when neither of them hath any right to the way by which they pass) with such a number of ships or Men of War, as may give a just occasion of any fear or jealousy that force is intended, except leave be first had of that party under whose Jurisdiction those Places are; or unless they be driven thither by Tempest or some other necessity, to avoid a greater force, or the danger of shipwreck. According to the fear or suspicion of the Lord in possession, and at his discretion, all Merchants, Strangers, and Foreigners whatsoëver may be prohibited, unless some other special right or custom do intervene. And 
f Polit. lib. 7. cap. 6.  Aristotle saith plainly, Provision ought to be made by Laws, with whom subjects may, or may not convers. 
g De Repub. lib. 1. cap. 7. & 6. & vide eum, lib. 4. ca 1. & lib. 6. cap. 2. ubi de Aditu ad Moluccas.  Bodin also saith well, That the Laws of Commerce are contained in the particular Compacts and Agreements of People and Princes. And in another place he adds, It is lawful to forbid a Foreigner from entering the Borders, and also to force him out if he have entered the Borders, not only if a War be on foot, but also in time of Peace, that the manners of the Inhabitants may not be corrupted by convers with Strangers. But that Wars have been lawfully undertaken for a denial of Commerce, unless the denial were given contrary to some ancient League, or unless that freedom depended upon some special Title to Commerce, we do as easily deny as any other man can affirm. And though, according to the opinion of 
h Tit. de Indis.  Franciscus Victoria, who also is followed chief by 
i De Jure Indiar. lib. 2. cap. 20. § 55.  Joannes Solorzanus I. v D. it be affirmed, that the Spaniard had a lawful Right to subdue the Indians, because they denied Commerce and Entertainment; yet they are in plain terms opposed by 
k De Justitiá & Jure, Tract. 2. Disputat. 105.  Ludovicus Molina, who will have no Nation or Common weal bound, either with or without danger to itself, to admit Commerce or Foreigners, but in case of great and imminent necessity, or unless any League, Agreement, or some other special privilege do intervene. But there are other pretences not a few which the Spaniards allege for the Con. quest of the Indies: For, they pretend also a Right of discovery, primary occupation, Conversion to the Faith, and other things of that nature, besides the Donation of the Pope. Of all which, Solorzanus treats at large. And it is strange, how the Spaniards should have a Right to acquire the Indies, upon a denial of Commerce, since it is 
l Georgius de Cabedo Decis. Lusitan. part. 2. Decis. 47. & diploma Regis Hispan Mari Libero. Hug. Grot. subnexum.  very well known, that both They and the Portugals do openly profess, that they may lawfully prohibit Commerce in both the Indies. Nor doth it prejudice the point at all, that according to the Imperial Law, no Prince, nor any other holding Royalties by his Grant, can 
m Rothens●l. de Jure Feudali, cap 5. de Regalibus, conclus. 21. Sixtinus de Regalibus, lib 2. cap. 2. etc.  forbid men passage in the common Road without some just cause, which must be determined in an Imperial Diet; nevertheless, it is wrested by some to prove a freedom of Navigation at Sea. For that happened by a particular Law, agreed upon by the Estates of the Empire, who themselves also are subject to a Diet. But other Nations that are under several and distinct sovereignty's, have not as yet made any such Agreement, that there should always be a liberty of Passage to and fro; nor have they (like the Germanet, and others within their Dominion) referred themselves unto an Umpire to determine the business.   

An Answer to that Objection concerning the uncertain fluid nature of the Sea, and its continual Alteration. It is proved, that Rivers also, and the adjoining Aër (which are more fluid and uncertain) may become appropriate. CHAP. XXI.  
BUT they say, that the very Nature of the Sea renders it unfit for private Dominion; both because it is ever in Motion, and in no wise remain's the same; as also because a convenient matter, as well as Instruments, are wanting therein to make a distinction of Bounds; without which private Dominions cannot well consist: yea, and because by reason of its vast and spacious Body, it is always sufficient for all. As to what concerns its fluid Nature, are not Rivers and Fountains much more in a perpetual Flux or Motion? Rivers always run forward, wherewith the Sea being compared, it seems to stand immovable, as saith 
a Geograph. lib. 1.  Strabo. And 
b Ad Iliad. ●  Eustathius saith, that Homer therefore calls the Sea by the name of a standing Pool; because it runs not forward (as Rivers do) but is very stable. And 
c Seneca, Suaser. 1.  another saith, the Sea stands without Motion, as it were some dull heap of matter that Nature could not bring to perfection. But suppose we grant it be so fluid, as is usually said of the most Northernly Seas and Channels; yet certainly the Channels and places out of which the waters flow, remain ever the same, though the waters themselves do shift and change continually. Nor yet can it be supposed that the Right of private Dominion over Rivers, is any whit prejudiced thereby. In the Romane-Germane Empire, Rivers, according to the Civil Law, are of public use; yet they are reckoned in the Emperor's 
d Feud. lib. 5. tit. Quae sint Regalia. Rothe●sal. de Jure Feud. cap. 5. Conclus. 23. ●. 2●. Sixtinus de Regalibus, lib. 2. cap. 3. etc.  private patrimony, and among the Rights or royalties belonging to his Exchequer: so that either the Emperor or others by his Grant, have in like manner a yearly Revenue out of the Fisheries in them. Upon which account it comes to pass, that they of Lombardy, and other particular People throughout Italy, enjoie all the Rivers of their Territories, as proper and peculiar to themselves by Prescription, as we are told by 
e De Servitut. Rustic. Praediorum, cap. 31.  Caepola. Nor is any thing more common, than an asserting of the private Dominion of Rivers as well as their Banks, in the Laws of Spain, France, Poland, and Venice; and in a word, of all Nations whose Customs are known to us. Nor, as to what concerns this Objection (fetched from the fluid Constitution of the sea) is there any difference in nature between a greater and a lesser, a private and a public River. Even 
f Lib. 1. § 4. 〈◊〉 de Fluminibus.  Ulpian himself concerning Rivers, saith, There is no difference between a private River, and other private Places. And 
g ●▪ 7. ff. de Divers. Temp. Prescript. Vide l. 45. ff. de Usucapionibus.  Martianus; If a man hath fished all alone many years in a Corner of a public River, he may hinder any other from using the same liberty. Moreover, oftentimes heretofore in the Roman Empire, Rivers were made over as well as other Parts, after the manner of Lands assigned. 
h Lib. de Conditionibus Agrorum.  Siculus Flaccus saith, In some Countries, even the Rivers themselves are assigned out by measure. But in some the subcesive or remanent part only is left out unassigned; and yet it is excepted out from the parts assigned, as belonging still only to the river itself. After the same manner also 
i Comm. ad Jul. Frontin. de limitibus Agrorum.  Aggenus Urbicus. For, it was never conceived, that the Rivers were otherwise acquired by the People or Emperor of Rome then the adjoining Lands; accordding to that of the river Danubius, speaking to the Emperors; 

k Ausonius, Epigr▪ 4.  Danubius' penitis caput occultatus in oris,  
Totus sub vestrâ jam Ditione fluo:  
Et quà Dives aquis Scythico solvo ostia Ponto,  
Omnia sub vestrum flumina mitto Jugum.  
Danubius, I, whose Fountain few do know,  
Now wholly under your Dominion flow:  
And when full-charged run to the Euxin sea,  
I make all Rivers to you Tribute pay.   
We know, that an Island newly sprung up in a river, as also a channel that is deserted, is even by ancient Custom 
l L. 7. 29, 30 65. F. de Acquir. Rer. dominis & Instit. de Rerum divis. ● Insula.  common to such, as upon the Bank of any river do possess Lands that are not limited, that is to say, after the manner of Lands or Possessions; unless there be some special Law or Custom to the contrary. And touching the Division of such an Island according to the nature of several Lands, situate near one Bank or both, Bartolus in Tiberiade, hath written long since; but of later time Joannes Buteo, Baptista Aymus, Antonius Maria, Joannes Gryphiander, and others. Therefore, in that case, a propriety of the channel, and so of the River (even of that which according to the Civil Law, is of public and common use; as well as of a Field that hath a common thoroughfare) was common before to the Owners that had Lands lying on both sides. By the same reason almost, an Island newly sprung up in any sea, that never was possessed by any, and whatsoêver shall be built upon it, becomes his that first enters it by occupation: For, the channel and that Sea, at first belonged to all men in general. But by virtue of that Universal Compact or Agreement (before mentioned) whereby things not yet possessed, were to become the propriety of him that should first enjoie them by Occupation; he that shall so possess them by Occupation, receives the Island and Building as it were by a Surrender of Right from former Owners. Seeing therefore that a propriety and private Dominion of Rivers hath been every where acknowledged, why should it not be acknowledged in like manner that there may be Owners of any Sea whatsoëver? Since the fluid nature of water can no more hinder a Dominion in the one, then in the other. Yea, the Rivers themselves are only lesser Seas, as also the fens and Lakes; even as the Sea itself (as to its fluid Constitution) is no other than a River, Fen, or Lake, differing only in bigness from the rest: And so it hath been taken by the ancients. In the very story of the Creation, all the Gatherings together of the waters are called Seas; which hath been observed also by the 
m Eucherius ad Genes. 1. D. Hieronymus. & alii. Add Jo. Phil●ponum de Mundi Creatione, lib. 4. cap. 6.  Fathers to this purpose. There are also very eminent examples in holy Scripture touching the two Lakes of Asphaltites, and Tiberias, both which are equally called Seas; Asphaltites, is by Pliny, Ptolemy, Josephus, Solinus, and Vitruvius, termed a Lake: But by Moses 
n Gen. 14. 3.  the salt Sea; and by most of the late Writers, the dead Sea. Tiberias is in like manner by the ancients, and also by St 
o Luc. 5. 1.  Luke, called a Lake; by the other Evangelists a Sea, as also in the Syriack and Arabic Translation of St Luke. And 
p Meteorologic. lib. 1. cap. 13.  Aristotle saith, that about the Mountain Caucasus, there is a Lake or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but the neighbouring People call it a Sea. he speaks of the Lake Maeotis, which by reason of that abundance of Waters which it dischargeth through the Cimmerian Bosphorus into the Euxin Sea, is by the ancients called 
q Herodotus, in Melpomene. Plin. lib. 6. cap. 7. Dionys. After, & ad eum Eustathius.  Mother of the Sea, or Mother of the Euxin Sea. From whence also it was the opinion of some, that Maeotis stood in the same relation unto Pontus, Propontis, and the AEgean Sea, as the Ocean doth to the Mediterranean. 
Oceanúnque negant solas admittere Gades,  
They do deny, that Cadiz straight  
Alone, admit's the Ocean's Freight;   
As 
r Pharsal. 3.  Lucan saith concerning it. But 
s Histor. lib. 13.  Agathia tell's us, that in Justinian's days, it was called The little Sea. And saith 
t In oris Maritinis.  Festus Avienus to Probus; Thou didst question me (if thou dost remember) about the situation of the Maeotick Sea. By which means it hath happened, that even at this day it is called Mar delle Zabach, and Mar della Tana. So seven Lakes of the River Po in Italy are usually termed 
u Plin. lib. 3. c. 16. Herodian. lib. 8.  Seven Seas. And we read in 
x Variar. lib. 11. Formul. 14.  Cassiodorus, that Addua, a River of Cisalpin Gallia, empties itself into the Lake called Lago di Como, as into its proper Sea. Hence it is, that in Hesychius and Suidas, a Lake or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denotes the Ocean and Sea, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or a River, the Ocean itself. Nor is it in this place impossible, that a River should contend with the Sea; However, otherwise it hath been used as a Proverb, of such as strive with men mightier than themselves. Also in Homer, 
— 
y Iliad. v ᵉ  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
The depth of a deep Lake is used for the depth of the Sea. And in another place he put's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a very fair Lake in stead of the Sea, as it is observed also by 
z Ad Aristot. Meteorolog. lib. 1. prax. 16.  Olympiodorus. Yea, some of the ancients have said, that the Ocean itself is one of those 
a Plato in Phaedone.  four huge Rivers, which spring out of such a Hell, or such a deep Gulf; as 
b Vide Girald. Cambrens. Topograph. Hibern. dist. 2. cap. 14.  some feign to be found towards the North; the other three being imprisoned in secret Passages of the Earth. Moreover, Lucan calls the British Ocean, 
— 
c Pharsal. 2.  Incerti stagna profundi  
An unstable deep standing pool.   
And in barbarous Latin, the word Mariscus, as a Diminutive 
d Claudius' Salmasius, in Plin. Exercitat. ad Solinum, pag. 577.  of Mare the Sea, is used in many Places for a Marsh or Lake, under which notion also it hath been Translated into some other Languages, being varied according to their divers forms of Expression. Other observations have been made by 
e J. Drus. Obs. 9 cap. 20. & ad difficil. loca. Numer. cap. 133. & Albericus Gentilis in Lectionibus Virgilianis, cap. 17. Coel. Rhodigin. lect. Antiq. lib. 26. cap. 14.  others to the same purpose. So then, both in Substance, Nature, and Name, the Seas, Rivers, and other Bodies of Waters (so far as concerns the Point in question) are all the same, that whatsoêver may be said of these, may be applied in like manner also to the other; save that there may some difference be alleged only from the largeness of the one and the narrowness of the other, which in the Point of Dominion (as it relate's to Possession) is of no account. Add moreover, that the usual Objection touching their fluid Nature, or the continual shifting of Waters in the channel, doth here no more prejudice the cause of Dominion and Possession, than the fluid nature of the Aër doth the Dominion and Possession of that space which confines a house from the Foundation upward. That space seems as a channel to the whirling Aër; whereof notwithstanding he, according to the Civil Law, is the undoubted Owner, who possesseth the Ground and Building. Hereupon 
* Servitutes sunt Jura Praediorum.  Servitudes have been imposed, against the rearing of Houses higher than ordinary, also against hindering of Light, or Prospect, and other of that kind in the very ambient Aër; So that where a 
* In novo Opere Nunciato.  Prohibition of a new Building hath issued, Pomponius saith, the Aër ought to be measured as well as the Ground. And it is evident, that the Aêr 
f L. 21. ff. tit. quod vi aut Clam. § 2.  is his who is owner of the plot of ground. So that as to that saying of Paulus, that a Tree growing in the very Confine betwixt two Lands is 
g L. 83. ff. tit. Pro Socio.  common to the Owners on both sides, for so much as grows in the ground of either; Joannes Buteo discoursing of the Division of the fruit of such a Tree, saith, 
h Tract. de Divisione Fructûs arboris in confinio natae.  we must suppose the ground to be the Aër itself that is spread over the ground, which he measureth by direct lines from the outmost boughs. And therefore, surely, we are owners of the ground, house, and space, which we possess in several as owners, that every one, for his best advantage, may freely and fully use and enjoy his own bordering Aër, (which is the element of mankind) how flitting so ever it be, together with the space thereof in such a manner, and restrain others thence at pleasure, that he may be both reputed and settled owner thereof in Particular. Much less than doth the fluid nature of Waters, which is far less than the other, in any wise hinder an ownership or Dominion over them. And even those things which naturally are thus flitting, do notwithstanding in a Civil sens remain ever the same; as the ship of Theseus, a house, or a Theatre, which hath been so often mended and repaired, that there is not so much as one part or plank left of the first building.  
But they which make use of so frivolous a subtlety as this to oppose a Dominion of the Sea, should be turned over to the Philosophers; especially 
i Diog. Laert●in Heraclito, etc.  Heraclitus, and Epicharmus, whose Doctrine was, that every thing is so changed, altered, and renewed every moment, that nothing in the world continues at this instant, the same, that it was in the instant immediately going before. No man (saith 
k Epist. 58.  Seneca, in imitation of Heraclitus) is the same in the Morning, that he was the day before. Our Bodies are hurried like Rivers. Whatsoëver thou see'st, runs with time. Not one of all those things that are visible, continues. I, even whilst I speak of these Changes, am changed myself.  
It was seriously affirmed also by Heraclitus, that not only the same River could not receiv a man twice, but also that the same man could not enter twice into the same stream. So that to cast all into Heraclitus his River, became an usual Proverb, to express a continued and perpetual change of every thing from itself. But let such as dream, that the fluid inconstant nature of the Sea disprove's the private Dominion of it; entertain the same opinion (if they pleas) with these men, of things that fall under a Civil consideration, and then they must of necessity grant also, that themselves are not Owners or Possessors, either of Land, Houses, Clothes, money, or any other thing whatsoêver.   

An Answer to the Objections touching the defect of Bounds and Limits in the Sea; as also concerning its magnitude and inexhaustible abundance. CHAP. XXII.  
THe Objection, touching the defect of Limits and and Bounds, follow's next. And truly, where Dominions are distinguished, nothing can be more desirable then known and certain Bounds in every place: Nor was it without cause, that 
a Plutarch. in Numâ.  Terminus, the God of Bounds, was received heretofore among the Romans for the God of Justice. But the nature of Bounds is to be considered either upon the Shores, or in the open Sea. And why Shores should not be called and reputed lawful Bounds, whereon to ground a distinction of Dominion in the Sea, as well as Ditches, Hedges, Meers, rows of Trees, Mounds, and other things used by Surveyors in the bounding of Lands, I cannot fully understand. Nor is 
b Sylvanus, made by Heathens the God of the woods, and Neptune of the Sea.  Sylvanus any whit more a Guardian of Bounds, than Neptune. But yet a very learned man saith, 
c Hugo Grot. de Jure Belli ac Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 11. §. 3.  there is a Reason in nature, why the Sea under the aforesaid consideration cannot be possessed or made appropriate; because possession is of no force, unless it be in a thing that is bounded; So that Thucydides call▪ s a Land unpossessed, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unbounded; and Isocrates the Land possessed by the Athenians, a Land bounded with Limits. But liquid things, because of themselves they are not bounded, cannot be possessed, save only as they are contained in some other thing; after which manner Lakes and Ponds are possessed, and Rivers also, because they are contained within Banks. But the Sea is not contained by the Earth, it being of equal bigness, or bigger than the Earth; so that the ancients have affirmed the Earth to be contained by the Sea. And then he bring's divers Testimonies of the ancients, whereby it is affirmed more than once, that the Sea is the girdle or Bond of this Globe of Earth, and that fetching a compass, it encloseth all the Parts thereof together; and it is very often said by the ancients, that the Land is contained and bounded by the water or Sea; as if the whole Earth made as it were one Island, being 
d Cicero in son. Scipious. & vide Jo. Philoponde Mundi Creatione, lib. 4 cap. 5.  surrounded by the Sea. But admit it were to be granted (which, I suppose, neither that learned man nor any other will grant;) yet I do not well see, why the thing containing should not in truth be bounded by the thing contained, as well as this by that. May not a lesser body that is spherical, or of any other form, being contained by a greater which is every way contiguous to it, be said to bond and limit the Concave of the greater body, as well as this to limit the Convex of the lesser? But Julius 
e Exercit. 37.  Scaliger saith very well of the Sea and Land; That the one is not so contained by the other, but that it may also contain. Nor are they so disjoined from each other, but that they may both encroach upon each other and retire by Turns. The Sea and Land mutually embrace one another with crooked wind and turn; this with Peninsula's, and Promontories butting forth, and Creeks bending inward; that working up its waves about all the Passages of its vast body. Thus it is evident that the one indifferently set's Bounds to the other, no otherwise than Banks, and Lakes, or Rivers; which also appears more evident in the 
f A Sea near 〈◊〉, like a huge Lake, being encompassed with Land, and hath no passage into any other Sea.  Caspian Sea that is encompassed with landlord. And in like manner in the Mediterranean; before that Hercules, or (as the 
g Geograph▪ Nubiens. Climate. 4. part. 1  Arabians say) Alexander the great did, by cutting the Mountains, let in the Atlantic Ocean through the straits of Cadiz. And thereby it is made up one single Globe, wherein divers Seas are bounded, as well as the Isles or main Land: as it is more clearly proved out of holy Scripture. There the waters are gathered together, and limited by their Places and 
h Damascen. de Or●hodoxd fide, lib. 2. cap. 9  Bounds. And saith the Lord himself of the Sea, 
i Job 38. 10.  I encompassed it with my Bounds, and set Bars and Doors; and said, hitherto shalt thou come, but no farther. And in another place, 
k Pro. 8. 29.  He gave unto the Sea his Bounds, his Decree unto the waters that they should not pass their Bounds: So that it cannot be doubted every Sea hath its Bounds on the Shore; as the Land itself. Nor had I made mention of this Particular, had I not found it impugned by so eminent a person. And truly there is but a very little more difficulty, to find out Limits and Bounds in the main Sea, for distinguishing of private Dominions. We have high Rocks, Shelus, Promontories opposite to each other, and Islands dispersed up and down, from whence as well direct Lines, as crooked wind and turn, and angles, may be made use of, for the bounding of a territory in the Sea. 
Mille jacent mediae, diffusa per aequora, terrae;  
Innumeri surgunt Scopuli, montésque per altum.  
A thousand Lands within the main do lie;  
Rocks numberless, and Mountains rise on high  
Throughout the deep.   
The ancient Cosmographers also reckon up the Seas of the world, no otherwise then Towns, Rivers, Islands, and Mountains, as being no less distinguished from each other by their respective Bounds. 
l In Cosmographia.  AEthicus saith, Every Globe of Land hath XXX Seas, CCCLXX Towns, LXXII Islands, LVII Rivers, and XL Mountains, etc. After this also, he reckons the Seas of the Eastern, Western, Northen, and Southern Ocean one after another, after the same manner as he doth the Provinces and their Isles. How truly, I dispute not; but in the mean time he made no question, but that the Seas are sufficiently distinguished by their Names and Bounds. Add hereunto that useful invention of the sea-man's Compass, and the help of Celestial degrees either of Longitude or Latitude, together with the doctrine of Triangles arising therefrom. Also in those Plantations that in our time have been carried out of Europe into America, the degrees of Latitude and Longitude do serve the Proprietors in stead of Bounds; which with as little difficulty are found in the Sea. In like manner 
m axial. Emanuel Meteran▪ Rer. 〈…〉. lib. 28.  some would have had the tropic of Cancer and the Equinoctial Line to have been the Bounds in the Sea, for the limiting of that Agreement, which was to have been made in the year MDCVIII, between the States of the United Provinces, and the house of Austria. And in the late Agreement betwixt the Kings of Great Britain and Spain, 
n Anno 1630. Art. 2.  the Equinoctial Line is the Bound appointed in the Sea. Other Instances there are of the same nature: Eor, Sarpedon and Calycadnus, two Promontories of Cilicia, were designed as Bounds for distinguishing the Dominion of the Sea, in that League made betwixt the 
o Polyb. in Eclog. de Legationibus, cap. 35. & Livius, decade 4 lib. 8.  Romans and Antiochus King of Syria. Also, by Decree of the Emperor Leo, of which we have already spoken, the 
p An epoch was a device to keep store of Fish, made of Nets that were spread between Stakes driven into the Sea.  Fishing Epoches or Fish-pens that were by men placed in the Sea lying over against their Lands, were limited to certain number of Cubits. The case was the same likewise touching the Cyanean and Chelidonian Islands, in the League made by the 
q Plutarch. in vitâ Cimonis.  Athenians with the King of Persia; which hath been mentioned also before.  
Moreover, Pope Alexander VI and his Cardinals, or the King of Spain's Agents made no scruple touching Bounds of this nature, when the King obtained that famous Bull, whereby he had a Grant of the Western world; but so to be limited, that the thing given should, in the hither part of it, be bounded by an imaginary Line drawn from the Arctic to the Antarctick Pole, 
r Laërt. Cherubin. Bullar. Tom. 1. pag. 393.  which should be distant from each of those Islands called de Los, Azores y cabo verde, one hundred Leagues towards the West and South (which are the very words of the Bull.) Whereupon 
s Tractat. de finibus regundis, cap. 7. 8.  Hieronymus de Monte, saith, Bounds were set in Heaven and in the Aër, in the time of Pope Alexander VI between the Portugals and Castilians, in dividing the Indian Isles then newly discovered by the degrees of Heaven; and so all that was found Eastward, was allotted to the Portugals, and that which lay Westward to the Castilians. Certainly, in this place, no more regard was had to the portions of Land, whether Islands or continent, in the measuring of Bounds, then to the spaces of the Sea. Moreover, it is ordinary among the Lawyers, even those who are most earnest for a community of every Sea, to limit an hundred mile's 
t Bartolus Tract. de Tiberiade & D. D. in l. Insulae Italiae ff. tit. de Judiciis.  jurisdiction to the Lord of the adjacent Coast. sometimes we find sixty. It is in a manner received (saith 
u De Repub. lib. 1. cap. 10.  Bodin) by the common custom of all Princes bordering upon the Sea, that for sixty miles from the shore, any Prince may give Law to those that sail near their Coast; and it was so adjudged in the Case of the Duke of Savoy. Which he observeth out of Cacheranus his decisions of Piedmont. Yea, and it is maintained by very 
x Hieronym. de Monte, Tract. de Finibus regundis, cap. 39 Baldus, & alii ibi citati.  eminent Professors of the Civil Law, that an Action at Law may be allowed for regulating of Bounds in the Borders of the Sea. Therefore they sufficiently acknowledge the Custom of measuring and setting Bounds, even in the Sea.  
But as to what concerns that saying of Ambrose; Geometram audivimus, Thalassometram nunquam audivimus, we have heard of a Geometrician, one that measureth land; but never of a Thalassometrician, or one that could measure and lay out Bounds in the Sea; This truly is rather a quibbling of words, than any Argument against the point in hand. And the holy man speaks in that place, of the various lurking-holes, or holds of divers Fishes, which God hath appointed for them in the Sea, not touching a civil distribution of the Sea. Nor was there any reason why he should speak thus of a Thalassometrician, as a thing never heard of before. For, we know that even Thalassometricians were ordinary among the Grecians, who had Dominions by Sea, with very frequent and various distinctions of those Dominions; And that the Sea was measured according to the Rules of geometry, no less than the landlord. Proelus a famous Mathematician, treating about the excellency of geometry, saith, 
y In Euclidis, lib. 1. lib. 2. cap. 3. in Craecis, pag. 18.  It hath discovered the Situations of places, the measures also of voyages by Sea, as well as journeys by landlord. Moreover, they had Instruments to measure the Sea, which the Grecians, or at least the modern Greeks, called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉▪ measures of Sea-voiages; and have written that Hero, Anthemius, and other ancient Mathematicians, learned the Art from Archimedes, and transmitted it to Posterity. Yea, it is said by 
z Chiliad. 13. cap. 457.  Joannes Tzetzes, that those men discovered both water and winde-instruments out of the Books of Archimedes, and Engines to move things of weight, and instruments called Thalassodometrae, for measuring of Sea-voiages: so that as concerning the business of measuring the sea, there is nothing to hinder, but that both matter and instruments may be had for the distinguishing of its Dominions.  
Lastly, that which is objected, touching the vast magnitude of the Sea, and its inexhaustible abundance, is of very little weight here. Suppose it be inexhaustible, so that he which shall appropriate it to himself, can receiv no damage by other men's using it, what more prejudice is this to the right of Ownership or Dominion, than it is to the Owner of a Fire or Candle, that another man's should be lighted by his? Is he therefore less Master of his own Fire or Candle? But truly we often see, that the Sea itself, by reason of other men's Fishing, Navigation, and Commerce, becomes the worse for him that own's it, and others that enjoie it in his right; So that less profit ariseth, than might otherwise be received thereby. Which more evidently appears in the use of those Seas, which produce Pearls, Coral, and other things of that kind. Yea, the plenty of such seas is lessened every hour, no otherwise then that of Mines of Metal, Quarries of stone, or of Gardens, when their Treasures and Fruits are taken away. And it is a custom of the Mahometans (who are very great and Potent Nations) to estimate their seas no less upon this account, then by the Revenue either of Fishing or Navigation; as we may see in that their falls Prophet, when speaking of the most holy God he saith, 
〈…〉.  It is he that hath prepared the Sea for your use, that thence ye may take fresh Food (and use Fishing) and also that out of it ye may draw ornaments to adorn you, Mahomet Ben Achmed, the best Expositor of the Alcoran, interpret's those ornaments by Coral and Pearls; which words also are used in another 
b Azoar. 55. 〈…〉 in Cod. 〈…〉. 65.  place of the Alcoran, for the chief Commodity of the Sea. From whence also it is, that a special Licence to search for Coral, hath sometimes been granted in Leagues made by the grand Seignieur, as is observed before. Yea, and 
c Hist. Nat. 〈…〉. cap. 35.  Pliny speaking, especially of the more Easternly Seas, saith; It had been counted a small matter, that men swallowed whole Seas into their throats, if both men and women also did not wear them up and down upon their hands, ears, heads, and all parts of the Body. But it is well known to us, that precious Stones and Pearls, are very often found also in the Western Seas, and he tell's us, they were frequently found in ancient time. Moreover (saith he) It is certain that in Britain they are produced, though small and ill coloured (as we all see at this day) forasmuch as Julius Caesar would have it understood, that the breast▪ plate which he consecrated to Venus in her Temple, was made of British Pearl. Yea, it is written by many, and testified by 
d 〈…〉.  Suetonius, that Caesar went to Britain in hope of Pearls. It is obvious therefore to every man, that the gain of such a voyage into Britain, may be lessened, and that the abundance either of Pearls themselves, or of those shell-fish, which produce them, may through a promiscuous and common use of the Sea, be diminished in any Sea whatsoêver. Where then is that inexhaustible abundance of Commodities in the sea, which cannot be impaired? There is truly the same reason also, touching every kind of Fishing. But what need many words about this Matter? Do we not at this day find it pressed home to the utmost every where by Lawyers, especially those of the Empire? and was it not a thousand times said of old when the Roman Empire was in its prime, 
c L. 9 ff. tit. ad Legem Rhodiam. etc.  that Caesar is Lord of the whole world? Thus Ovid, according to the Roman custom, saith; 

f Fastorum, lib. 2.  Gentibus est aliis tellus data limit certo:  
Romanae spatium est urbis & orbis idem.  
All other States have Limits to their Ground:  
Rome and the world, have but one common Bound.  The Sea (I suppose) is not more inexhaustible than the whole world. That is very much inferior to this, as a part is to the whole, in greatness and plenty. And therefore a Dominion of the Sea is not to be opposed upon this account, unless also we in like manner affirm, that not only that saying of the Emperor's Dominion over the world is manifestly falls, (as it must be) but also contrary to natural reason itself, because of the world's extraordinary greatness and abundance. Therefore they are more justifiable in their Opinion, who, as they say, that the Roman Emperor, according to the ancient Law, is Lord of the World or Land, (that is to say, a large part of it) so also 
g Jo. Griphiander Jurisdictione Insulae▪ cap. 14. § 65. etc.  they would have him to be Lord of the Sea.  
Nor is there any difficulty in that expression of the Emperor Antoninus, wherein he calls himself Lord of the World, but the Law (as 'tis commonly understood) Lady of the Sea; which (if it were granted that his Answer ought 
h L D precati● 9 ff. ad legem Rhodiam.  so to be understood) doth signify no other thing, then that the Rhodian Laws, where they did not thwart the Roman, were so far in force about Sea-affairs, that (however he were Moderator and Lord of both) he would by no means determine aught contrary to those Laws, by any Rescript of his own. 
Dispunctionum lib. 2. 〈◊〉. 5.  Alcialus, and other very Learned men also, make almost the same interpretation: But concerning that Answer of Antoninus, I shall add more 
k In the 25 Chapter.  by and by. So that it seems the ancients, in that so often repeated speech, concerning universal Dominion, conceived the Roman Empire to be no less or narrower, than it is represented by Petronius Arbiter, who set's forth the matter in these words; 
Orbem jam totum victor Romanus habebat,  
Quà Mare, quà Terrae, quà Sidus currit utrumque.  
The Roman Conqu'rer then the world,  
Both Sea and Land did sway,  
Wheresoever the Moon travel's by night,  
Or the bright Sun by day.  And 
〈…〉.  the Ancient Inscription in honour of Augustus Caesar was, ORBE MARI ET TERRA PACATO, Jano CLUSO, etc. Peace being restored to the world by Sea and Land, he shut up the 
m This temple 〈…〉 open in time of war, but was shut in time of peace.  Temple of Janus; according to which since it is recorded also by 
n Suetonius 〈◊〉 Octavio, cap ●2.  Historians, that he shut Janus his Temple three times, having settled Peace by Sea and Land; whereby they would have us to understand (the very same thing which we have proved more fully before) that the Seas were comprehended as well as the Land, within the huge body of the Roman Empire.   

An Answer to such Testimonies as have fallen from Writers treating of other subjects, and which are usually alleged against Dominion of the Sea. CHAP. XXIII.  
IT remain's in the next place, that we consider of what validity the contrary Opinions of Writers are whereof we formerly made mention. As to what concerns those Passages of the Poêts, Plautus and Phaenicides; it is clear in Plautus, that the lewd slave Trachalio was but in jest with Gripus the Fisherman: he saith in general, that the Sea is common to all, which signifieth a Sea that never was possessed, as well as that which is necessarily and naturally common; and in that place, that, rather than this. Wherefore it may be understood, that Fishing was common or not yet appropriated; that, is, that the people either of Rome or Greece, had such a Dominion over any kind of Sea (for, by what hath been already mentioned, it appears both of them had a Dominion over some Sea before Plautus his time) that either of them might use their respective Seas at their own pleasure, in hindling others from sailing through them, and removing such impediments of Trade and Commerce as should happen therein: And yet that hitherto they had prohibited no man from fishing in that Sea (mentioned by Plautus and Phaenicides) in such a manner, but that the use of it might remain common either to Natives or neighbours, as the use of a ground for feeding of cattle; though there may indeed be a particular Owner in possession, reserving the other Commodities of it to himself, as it often comes to pass. But afterwards also, especially in the Eastern Empire, or among the Greeks, it is clear out of what we have already shown you, that a peculiar Right of Sea-fishing hath passed into the hands of private persons, as well as of Princes: So that such Expressions as these being applied against private Dominion of the Sea, soon vanish and come to nothing.  
As to that passage out of Ovid, Quid prohibetis aquas? Why do ye forbidden water? etc. (than which nothing is more usual in Disputes about this matter) it is not so much an Assertion of the community of waters, as a vehement and hyperbolical reproof of the inhumanity of that rustic Rout in Lycia. Latona's being thirsty and weary, asked for a draught of water; and that out of a Lake. The barbarous people deny her; and therefore she most deservedly reprove's them. But she doth it not more earnestly, than Ampelisca in 
a In Rudente. Act. 2.  Plautus did merrily, to Sceparnio a slave that denied her water; Cur in (inquit Ampelisca) aquam gravare amabò, quam hostis hosti commodat? Why (saith Ampelisca) art thou so loath to let me have water, which one stranger affords another.  
For, whatsoëver may be afforded or communicated without prejudice of the Owner, he is concerned many times in humanity to impact it to a mere stranger that asketh him. For, the word Host in that place signifies a Stranger, as we often find among the 
b Festus in verb. Host, & Cic. de Offic. lib. 1.  ancients; And it appears also by the question of Sceparnio, whereby he jeer's the wench, Cur tu (ait ille) operam gravare mihi, quam civis civi commodat? Why (saith he) dost thou deny me that help, one Citizen affords another?  
Here he opposeth Citizen to Stranger. From the same Office of humanity those particulars are derived; as not to deny running Water; to suffer one Fire, or one Candle to light another; and other things of that nature, which are profitable to the Receiver, and not troublesome to him that give's or permit's the favour. And upon this Rule of morality only, which is the Rule of charity, are those demands both of Latona and Ampelisca grounded. They deny not the private Dominion of waters: Neither Latona of the Lake (whose private Dominion is confessed by all) nor Ampelisca of the Well, from whence she demanded water for the Priest of Venus. Moreover, those words of Latona are spoken concerning a Lake of little water; as Ovid showeth in that place, 
Fortè lacum mediocris aquae prospexit in imis  
Vallibus.—  
By chance a little Lake she did espy,  
Which in the Uallies far beneath did lie.   
And after she had said that she came to claim a public gift, she adds, 
Quae tamen ut detis, supplex peto.—  
Which notwithstanding I humbly beg you would bestow.   
Nothing in that place opposeth a Dominion of the waters, more than of any other things whatsoëver, whereto that saying of Ennius may have relation, 

c Cic. de Offic. lib. 1.  Nihilo minùs ipsi lucet, quum illi accenderit,  
His own light is not the less, when he hath lent light to another.   
And as Cicero tell's us, all things of the same kind seem common to men. Which community notwithstanding derogate's nothing at all from the Dominion here in Question, unless any will be so unadvised as to affirm, that the Laws of friendship (wherein Philosophers say all things are common) with those of charity and liberality, may overthrow private Dominion.  
Nor is there any more weight in that which is objected out of Virgil. What is this to the purpose? Virgil, or Ilioneus speaking of the Tyrrhen Sea, said, That the water is open to all. Ergò, by Law the water must lie open at all times to all men. A very trifling Argument! There was no Land that was omitted in the first distribution of things, which did not remain open to all, before it came under particular possession. But in that passage of Virgil, there is no demand made of Right, but only an Office of humanity requested from the King of Latium. Yea, and a promise made of recompense, saying; 
Non erimus regno indecores, nec vestra feretur 
AEneid. li. 7.   
Fama levis, tantique abolescet gratia facti.  
we'll not disgrace your Realm, nor lightly set  
Your Fame, and so great courtesy forget.  Therefore in the poets sens, the benefit was to be received and acknowledged from the grace and favour of the Prince, not claimed by any Law of nature common to all. Yea, we know that in many places an excise or payment is made sometimes for the very use of water. As among the Hollanders they have in Delph-land a Custom called Jus Grutae; which hath ever been under the care of those Officers called in Latin 
d Comites Plumarii or Officers of the Feather; their place is to see that Birds or foul be not transported thence.  Comites Plumarii, in Dutch, Pluymgraven, and whereby the Beer-brewers (as 
e In Histor. Bat. c. 19  Hadrianus Junius tell's us) are bound to pay them the hundreth part for the use of water. Other instances there are to be found of the same nature.  
Lastly, as to that saying of the Jewish Rabbins concerning Alexander, it shows only they were of Opinion that Alexander had not gotten a Dominion over the Sea. They do not say at all, that he could not lawfully get it; nor truly could they say it without gross indiscretion, unless they would renounce their own Right (which we have already mentioned out of their determinations) in the great or Phaenician Sea. And whatsoëver those Rabbins may lightly say of Alexander; yet truly Flavius 
f De Bello Judaïco, lib. 3. cap. 27.  Josephus a Jew; and (if we may believ himself) the most eminent Lawyer of his time among the Jews, calls the Emperor Vespasian, Lord both of Sea and landlord. And 
g Orat. 3.  Julian saith, that Alexander aspired after an Empire by Sea as well as by Land: which hath been mentioned also by 
h suasory  Seneca.  
But all these Objections are brought out of Writers treating of other matters, which ought also to be considered. And therefore in the last place, let us take such opinions of the Lawyers into consideration, as are opposed against it.   

An Answer to the Objections taken out of Ancient Lawyers. CHAP. XXIV.  
OF those Lawyers that are of the contrary opinion, some are ancient, some modern. If we look into the most notable Testimonies of the ancients, this only is to be collected from them touching the community of the Sea, that some of the most eminent were indeed of Opinion, that by the Law natural and of Nations the Sea is perpetually and necessarily common to all men; which nevertheless, most clearly appears to be far otherwise, if a diligent survey be made of the Laws and Customs, either Civil or Intervenient, of most Ages and Nations; As we have very abundantly proved in what hath been already shown you. And that not only out of the most approved Historians (whereof there is very oftentimes most use, in searching out the most common Customs of Nations, and other things relating to the Laws themselves 
a Vide Gaspar. Knockium, lib. de contributionibus, cap. 20. §. 463. & seqq. ) but also out of the very Leagues or Intervenient Law of divers Nations, yea, and other Lawyers of no less note, together with the principal Edicts in the Eastern Empire, besides, many other, from whence any one may easily learn what, according to the Natural Permissive Law, aught to be determined in this matter.  
Some of the ancients have been of Opinion, that according to the Law Natural or of Nations, it is lawful to hunt and hauk in another man's 
b L. 3. ff. de acquir. rer. dom. & instit. de rer. divis. § Ferae igitur bestiae & l. Injuriar. 13. ff. de injuriis §. ult.  wood or Ground, and to Fish in another man's Pond or Lake, much more in a River, except it were prohibited by the Owner in possession. These things, saith 
c Observat. lib. 4. cap. 2.  Cujacius, were so determined by the prudent Romans, who adhered most to the Law of Nations. But Custom hath now overruled the Law of Nations, so that it is not lawful to Fish so much as in a public River, nor to hunt or hawk freely in the Fields. And saith the same 
d Ad lib. 5. Feud. tit. de Regalibus.  author in another place; The Exchequer is to be justified only by Custom, in laying claim to the Fisheries, in a private manner, contrary to the Law of Nations. Whereas notwithstanding, in the Feudal Laws, the Revenues of Fisheries are counted among the Regalia or Royalties of the Prince; and reckoned by learned men among the ancients belonging to the 
e Guid. Pancirol. variar. lect. utriusque Juris, lib. 3. cap. 31.  Roman Exchequer or treasury, who cite Ulpian himself for a witness. For, he among the public Customs or Revenues numbereth the Revenues 
f L. 17. ff. de U. S.  Piscariarum (as some would have it read) of Fisheries. Others instead of it put Picariarum Pitch-pits, for those places from whence Pitch is digged. Surely, even 
g L. 4. §. 6. ff. tit. de Censibus.  Ulpian himself reckons fishponds among those things that are liable to assessments. But howsoëver the later Customs of Nations have subverted or overruled that more ancient Law of Fishing, Hunting, and fouling freely, whether it were the Law natural (as they termed it)▪ or of nations; as sufficiently appears by the 
h Vide Sebastianum Medicem 〈…〉 d●●venati●●e 〈…〉. Edicta & consuetudi de 〈…〉 Forestis Galliarum collect per Sanctyonium, Andream Gaill. pract. Observat. lib. 2. 67. Matth: Stephani de Jurisdictione, lib. 2. part 1. cap. 7. §. 432. & ●ejusmodi allos de Ve●… Jure●h imperio Romano-Germanico, etc.  Law of those places which they call Forests the wildt bahne or Bannum ferinum, and of Rivers, as it is variously established in several Countries. And so without any prohibition of the Owner in Possession, that ancient Freedom hath been abrogated many Ages since by most received Custom: which may be said in like manner of the Sea, whatsoêver those ancients and their Followers have written to the contrary.  
Moreover, the Emperor Leo hath (as we have shown you) expressly declared by Edict, that the ancient Right concerning a necessary community of the Sea, was not without injustice pretended in the Eastern Empire. Wherefore Michaël Attaliates truly did ill, and so hath any other Lawyer of the East (if any there be) since the days of Leo, that hath opposed its private Dominion. Nor indeed hath that eminent man dealt any better, who writes that Leo made a change against reason of Law. And here, especial care must be taken to avoid that which some have presumed to affirm, touching those most excellent Books of Justinian, which make up an entire body of the ancient Law; 
i Albericus Gentilis de Jure Belli, l. 1. cap. 3.  That the Law prescribed in those Books is not the Law only of a city, but even of Nations and nature; and that the whole is so fitted unto nature, that after the Empire was extinct, though the Law was a long time buried; yet it risen again, and spread itself through all the world. And therefore that it concerns even Princes, although it was framed by Justinian for private persons. As if the law natural and of Nations were to be derived only out of those Books. For, not to mention, how that not only very many Decrees, and Custome's introduced in the Romane-Germane Empire itself and other places abroad, have extremely altered many things contained in those Books; but also that we find divers Kings both of 
k Gregor. Lopez in Alphonsin. 3. tit. 4. l. 6. Azevedo ad reg. constit. in rubric. tit. De las leys.  Spain and 
l Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 2. tit. 15. §. 5. & Bodin de Repub. lib. 1. cap. 8. & vide Guil. Burlaeum in Prooem. ad Comm. in Arist. Physica.  France have sometimes heretofore prohibited the use of them in any kind within their Courts of Justice; there are truly some things in the very Law of the Nations of Europe (who receiv those Books, and that upon very good ground, both into their Schools and Courts, so far as the particular Laws of their Kingdoms will permit) I mean in their Law Common, or Intervenient, which are not grounded at all upon the Law of Justinian, but have had their original from Customs quite contrary thereto. Prisoners of war are not now made slaves, nor are the Laws concerning captivity or Remitter upon return from captivity, touching the 
m Boërius Decis. 178. Alvarus Velasc. Consult: tom. 1. 30 Fra. Suarez de Legibus, l. 2. cap. 20.  persons of men, in any use at all, which notwithstanding take up a Title in the Digests. Ships driven by wrack upon a Shore do by the 
n C. tit. de Naufragiis, & l. 1. & 3. ff. de Incendio & l. 21. §. 1. ff. tit. de acquir. velamit. possessione.  Law of Justinian (which is confirmed also in the 
o Frederic. 2. in C. de Furtis, c. Navigia, & Constit. Caroli 5. de Judiciis Capitalibus, cap. 118.  Roman▪ German Empire) belong either to the former Owners, or as things relinquished and unpossessed, to the first Finders; nor doth the Exchequer interpose any Claim, whereas nevertheless, according to the Law of divers Nations, intervenient to themselves and their neighbours, it be most certain, that those Ships are very often confiscated according to the variety of Custom: As among the English, the 
p Bertrand. Argentraeus in Consuet. Brit. Art. 56. §. 45.  Britain's, 
q Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 1. tit. 15. §. 10.  Sicilians, some 
r Luc. de Pennâ ad C. tit. de Naufrag. Matth. de Afflict. in Cons. Neapolit. lib. 1. consuet. 59 vide Garsiam Mastrillum de Magistratibus, lib. 3. cap. 10. §. 393.  Borderers upon the Shores of Italy, and others. And although it be accounted cruelty by some to pursue profit upon so sad an occasion, as it was also by the 
s Andr. Gail. practic. Observat. lib. 1. cap. 18. Bodin. de Repub. l. 1. cap. 10. Stat. Romae Vrbis. l. 3. cap. 85.  Emperor, either Constantine or Antoninus, who made a Law thereupon; yea, and though besides the Decree of the Lateran council, the Bull 
t Sub. Alex. 3. c. Excommunicationi extrait de Raptoribus.  Coenae Domini do blast those every year with Excommunication that plunder the goods of such as suffer shipwreck, in 
u Bartholemeus v●●linus de Censuris Pontifici reservatis, part. 2. cap▪ 4.  any Sea, upon any pretence of Law or Custom whatsoêver; yet the Custom of confiscation in this case derived not its Original from the rude and barbarous Ages, but it flowed first from the most ancient maritime Laws of the Rhodians (which were in use among the Grecians in their flourishing condition) as shall be shown by and by, and from thence was received by divers Princes. Also, when the Emperor's Ambassador, as Bodin saith, made complaint before Henry the second King of France, that two Ships being driven a Shore were seized by one Jordanes Ursinus, and demanded a restitution of them; Annas of Momorancie Master of the horse made Answer, that all things which had been cast upon Shore, did by the Law of all Nations belong to such Princes as have commanded the Shores. So far hath Custom taken place in this particular, that Andraeas Doria did not so much as complain about those Ships that were cast upon the French Shore, and made prize by the Admiral of France. So far he. In like manner, Whales and other Fish of extraordinary bigness, do not, according to the known Law of England, 
x 〈◊〉 de Cabedo Decis. Lusitan. part. 2. 48.  Portugal, and other Nations, belong to him that first seizeth them, but either to the Exchequer, or (which is all one) to such as the Prince shall grant a royalty of that nature.  
Other instances might be brought, sufficiently to show that the Law natural and of Nations is not wholly to be drawn out of such Decrees or Determinations as are found in the Books of Justinian; And so that what is there inserted touching a community of the Sea, doth not in any wise diminish the authority of the received Customs of so many Ages and Nations. But it is to be observed, that the Sea is said in those Books to be common, as the Aër, and as wild Beasts are common. As if indeed the neighbouring Aër itself could not pass into private Dominion, as well as a River that is possessed, and wild Beasts that are taken. Moreover, those ancients do ordinarily conjoin a community of Shores and Ports, not unlike to that which they teach of the Sea: As if the very reason of the Dominion of Ports and Shores, as they belonged either to the people of Rome, or (which is all one here) to the Prince himself, were not manifestly drawn, as we have expressly shown already out of 
y Cap. 14.  Celsus, from the Imposts and Customs which are frequent enough both in the Shores and 
z Cic. Oral. pro lege Manilia. Symmachus, l. 5. Ep. 62. 65. Tacitus Annal. lib. 13. Alii obiter.  Ports of the Roman Empire, and in the Books of 
a Tit▪ de Publicanis, in ff. & tit. de vectigalibus in C.  Justinian (as in many other places.) For, as the 
b L. 1. C. tit. de diversis▪ Praediis, & l. 5. ff. tit. de Operibus publicis, §. 1.  payment of that Tribute which is called Solarium à Solo, and thence by the Greek Lawyers 
c Eclog. Basilic. lib. 58. p. 488. ut etiam simili notione in l. 15. ff. tit. Qui potior in Pignore.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, for an house that is built upon the ground of the Common-weal or the public ground, was a sufficient Argument that the Common-weal or the Prince was Lord of the Soil; so indeed also the Custom paid for the use of Ports, manifested that there was the same kind of Dominion over Them. Also, Ports themselves are rightly supposed to be a part even of the Continent, as appears in 
d L. 15. Caesar, ff. tit. de Publicanis.  another place. Moreover also, Justinian appropriated the Hellespont to himself in such a manner, that he would not permit Merchants and seamen to enjoy a freedom of that Sea and the Ports, but at an extraordinary rate, if we may believ 
In Arcanâ Historiâ, pag. 110.  Procopius, who was his comtemporarie and wrote his Affairs.  
Nor did they imagine there was any difference betwixt the Dominion of the Sea, and that over the Land or People, who about 400 years since put this Inscription upon the Monument of the Emperor 
f Georg. Gualtherus in Tabulis antiq. Siciliae, etc. pag. 93.  Frederick the second, 
Qui Mare, qui Terras, Populos, & Regna subegit,  
Who subdued the Sea, the Land, Nations, and Kingdoms;   
To wit, in the Cathedral Church of Palermo, in which place notwithstanding, the Imperial Law flourished at that time, as well as in the rest of the Roman-German Empire. The sum of all is, that those ancient Lawyers do deliver many things carelessly touching this matter, not only such as thwart the most received Customs of Nations through almost all Ages, but such also as do sufficiently contradict one another; especially, whilst they join the Shore itself, and consequently the Ports together, as it were in an equal state of community. So that they are equally refuted as well by their own indiscretion, as by the authority of others.   

Touching the Emperor Antoninus his Answer; that himself was sovereign of the world, but the Law (as 'tis commonly translated) of the Sea; in L. Deprecatio, ff. tit. de Lege Rhodiâ. The true meaning of the said Answer, and a new, but genuine Exposition of it. Also, that it comprehends nothing which may in any wise oppose a Dominion of the Sea. CHAP. XXV.  
BUt seeing that among those particulars, which are usually drawn out of ancient Lawyers, against Dominion of the Sea, that Answer of the Emperor Antoninus to Eudaemon several times beforementioned, is of so principal an account; therefore it seemed meet to treat of it apart by itself, and search into the genuine sens thereof; concerning which, whosoëver shall look into the whole matter with a little more care then ordinary, will I suppose be very well satisfied, not only that most Interpreters have hitherto been wholly ignorant thereof, but also that it in no wise contradicts a Dominion of the Sea.  
Eudaemon having been shipwrecked at Sea, had petitioned the Emperor, for a restitution of those wracked goods that had been seized by the Receivers of his Customs. The words, according to 
a L. 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ff. de Lege. Rhodiâ.  Volusius Maetianus who was one of the Emperor's privy councillors, are these; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; O Emperor Antoninus, our Lord; we having made shipwreck, have been spoiled of all by those Receivers of the Customs that inhabit the 
* These Isles are part of those that lie in the Archipelago.  Cycladeses Islands. He received an Answer from the Emperor, pointed for the most part after this manner, in the printed Books. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Which is usually thus translated; I indeed am sovereign of the world, but the Law, of the Sea. Let it be determined by the Rhodian Law which is prescribed for the regulation of Sea-affairs, so far as it is not opposed by any of our Laws. For, the Emperor Augustus also was of this Opinion. There never was any controversy about the reading or Translation of this Answer, unless it were in those words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, whereto answereth, but the Law of the Sea with a period or full point after it; as for the most part it is taken, and as we have according to the received translation related it 
b Cap. ●.  already in the Objections. Of those that would have it so rendered, there have been not a few who were of Opinion, that from the Adversative 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 autem is implied, that the Emperor answered that himself indeed was Lord of the rest of the world, but not of the Sea; and that the Law only, not any man was Lord of this. Andraeas' 
c Dispunctionum, lib. 2. cap. 5.  Alciatus saith; Whereas it is said, I indeed am Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea; some French Doctors were of Opinion because of that Adversative, that a sovereignty of the Sea did not appertain unto the Emperors. But he adds; which truly is very ridiculous: Although 
d In rub. de Rer. Divis.  Baldus and 
e L. ex hoc Jure, ff. tit de Justitiâ.  Jason conceived for this reason, that the Venetians were not subject to the Roman Empire. But the since of this Law is this (to wit, that Sea-affairs were to be determined by the Rhodian Law, as he declares a little before.) For, seeing the Emperor is Lord of the world, surely, not the Land only but the Sea also, aught to submit to his Laws, and he to appoint Laws therein: though notwithstanding he do not determine matters by his own Law in the Sea, but by the Rhodian Law, which was by him approved. Understand therefore, when it is said, I am Lord of the world, because I govern the world according to my own Law. But the Law, suppose the Rhodian Law; of the Sea; because by it, Justice is administered upon the Sea. Add hereunto, that this Particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, Autem, is not so opposed, that it always excludes what goeth before. And therefore Alciatus also rendereth it thus, But the Law of the Sea, by which Law of the Rhodians concerning Navigation, let it be determined, etc. And therefore truly, it is upon exceeding good ground that he calls their opinion very ridiculous, who would have it hence concluded, that a Dominion of the Sea did not belong unto the Emperors. For, suppose the Emperor did answer so, as it is commonly rendered. Doth he therefore deny himself a Dominion of the Sea, because he affirms the Law to have Dominion at Sea? was he not in the mean time sovereign Lord and Arbitrator of the world (as he implied indeed by his Answer) and so also of the Law? whatsoëver he pleased, was 
f L. 7. ff. tit. de Constitut. Principum.  Law. Therefore to say, that any thing which the Law had Dominion over, was not also under the Emperor's Dominion (to whom the Law itself was subject) is so absurd, as nothing can be more.  
Others there are that render the since of the words after this manner. Although I myself be Lord and Emperor of the world, and so, free from all Laws, nor bound by any Rule to give any account to my Subjects, yet notwithstanding the Law shall be Empress and Queen at Sea, that is, it shall bear sway by Sea, in such Cases as have fallen out at Sea, since it concerns Sea affairs, nor shall my Exchequer be advanced by the loss of my Subjects, but Justice ought to be equally administered between the Exchequer and private persons, and therefore the Exchequer shall be liable to give an account. So saith, Franciscus de 
g O●…at. 〈…〉, lib. 1. cap. 1. 〈…〉.  Amaya, Advocate in the King's Court of Exchequer within the Kingdom of Granada. So you see, here is not the least Track admitted of a denial of Sea-Dominion.  
Some also there are, who would have the meaning be, that Antoninus should expressly say that he himself was as well the Law of the Sea, as Lord of the world. I indeed am Lord of the world, and I am also the Law of the Sea. So Joannes Igneus: And some 
h 〈…〉  others there are that incline this way: with whose opinion if we shall concur, we must needs confess also, that the Emperor did sufficiently attribute the very Dominion of the Sea unto himself. But 
i M●…an, 〈◊〉. 3 cap. 1●.  Samuel Petit, a very learned Frenchman saith, Antoninus doth not deny himself to be Lord of the Sea, that he cannot give Law and do Justice to those which deal upon the Sea; for, you see his meaning was, that Right should be done betwixt Eudaemon and the Customers which dwelled in the Cycladeses Islands, according to the Rhodian Law; nor doth he say also that he is so tied by this Rhodian Law, that he can by no means reliev Eudaemon against this Law, if any injury be done him, but his meaning is, that Eudaemon should have Right done him according to this Law, but yet so that this do not thwart any of the Roman Laws. Thus he interpret's it, though the vulgar reading be retained; which he would rather have to be rejected, and the name of Law to be put out there; being of opinion that the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the Law of the Sea, are corrupted from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but the wind of the Sea. As if the Emperor had said, that he himself indeed was Lord of the Sea, but that the Sea nevertheless is so subject to the power and alterations of wind and weather, that it was not in his power, though Lord thereof, to prevent shipwrecks. Moreover also, Petit corrects the cosmography of the Petition. He is of opinion, that those words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Italy, crept in through the negligence of Transcribers in stead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being understood) in the Telian or AEgean Sea, which is about the Island Telos. What a monstrous thing were (saith he) that those who were shipwrecked in the Sea upon the Coast of Italy, should have been pillaged by Publicans or Customers dwelling in the Cycladeses Islands? what cosmography is this? what relation have the Publicans or Customers of those Isles unto Italy? which is most judiciously spoken: For, it appears a manifest error there concerning Italy. And it is most certain, that the Island Telos, whether it be one of the 
* The Cycladeses and Sporades make up the Isles in the Archipelago.  Cycladeses or Sporades, is so placed in the AEgean or Levant Sea (as we find in 
k Lib. 10.  Strabo, 
l Lib. 4. cap. 12.  Pliny, and Stephanus de urbibus) that the matter hang's well together, if we say that the Customers of the Cycladeses seized upon wracked Goods in the Telian Sea, which to say of the Italian Sea or Shore is too monstrous in reason. Perhaps also, in that Catalogue of Seas summed up by AEthicus, an ancient Cosmographer, the Ionian and AEgean Sea, the Sea called Mare Lautades (which learned men suppose to be corruptly read for Leucadium) and Mare Tillae, the Telian Sea itself, being taken out of this very Petition, before it was corrupted, was signified by the name of Tilla. And thus you have in a manner the opinion of learned men, so far as concerns the matter in hand, touching that Answer, and the Petition of Eudemon.  
For my part, I most willingly yield my assent to the emendation of the cosmography: But do conceiv, that the ancient and received reading of the Answer ought not to be altered, save only in the pointing. Oftentimes no regard hath been had, nor any use of points in ancient Books: So that succeeding Generations have been puzzled now and then with a confusion of Syntax. But by a very small alteration of them in this place (for they are the very same with those in the 
m Vide Alciat. Disp. lib. 2. cap. 5.  Books that are published) the since appears to me not only suited to the matter of the Petition, and clear; but also plainly freed, both from that fancy, as if Dominion of the Sea were denied the Emperor in that place; and also from that fiction there expressly delivered touching the Sea-Dominion of the Law. Nor can I be persuaded, that Interpreters hitherto have sufficiently hit upon the Emperor's meaning. For, what is this to the purpose? I indeed am Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea. If it were spoken of the Law in general, certainly the Law had Dominion as well upon the main Land, The Emperor himself was Lord of every kind of Law, even by Land as well as by Sea: And so truly, the Answer had hitherto, concerned the Petition nothing at all. If you would understand it of the Rhodian Law, in such a sens (as Alciatus did) that the Emperor's meaning was that the Law had Dominion over the Sea, what then is the Consequence? that the matter was to be determined by the Rhodian Law, so far as it was not opposed by any of the Roman Laws. What, was the Rhodian Law simply supreme over the Sea, and yet notwithstanding that high Title subject to restraint by the Roman Laws? These things do not cotton well. Let it be pointed therefore, either after this manner; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I indeed am Lord of the world. But of this kind, or this is the Law or the Custom of the Sea. Let it be determined by the Rhodian Law concerning Navigation, so far as none of our Laws do oppose the same. Or let it be pointed thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. I indeed am Lord of the world. But let that Law or that Custom of the Sea be judged or determined by the Rhodian Law concerning Navigation, so far as etc.  
The Case was this: Eudemon Asiaticus, born in Nicomedia, a city of Bythinia, having suffered shipwreck in the Telian Sea (or the AEgean, which is about Telos) complain's that his Goods were seized by the Customers of the Cycladeses, petitioning the Emperor for relief, in such a manner as if the Customers had made an advantage by his misfortune in a most injurious manner. He salute's him with the style of Lord and Emperor. The Emperor in his Answer readily owneth himself to be a Lord, and so far a Lord, that he saith the whole Earth, yea, and the world itself was comprised within his Lordship or Jurisdiction. Therein also he signifies that it belongs to him to reliev Petitioners when wrong is done them: But as to what concerned the matter of complaint, or the Petition about the wracked Goods that had been seized by the Customers, that it did not sufficiently appear whether those Customers had done it wrongfully. Because (if our former reading, or pointing be admitted) in general, saith he, and according to Rule, the Sea-Custom, or that Law of the Sea which give's wracked Goods to the Customers, holds good. For, so these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 [but that Custom or that Law of this kind belongs to the Sea] hath relation to the thing done by the Customers, as it was in brief set forth in the Petition. But in regard that to this Custom or Law of the Sea, there might, either through some privilege, or because of the quality of the goods, or some other Custom no less in force, certain Qualifications arise, according to circumstance, in respect whereof perhaps either the Customers ought, in this case, to have forborn meddling with the goods, or the Complainant might have a special exception to privilege his goods from Seizure; therefore he did well to leave it, being a matter so succinctly and without any addition of circumstance expressed in the Petition, to be determined by the Naval Laws of the Rhodians; but yet so far only as the Roman Laws in the mean time were not contrary thereto. Nor doth the sens much differ, if the latter pointing and translation be admitted: I indeed am Lord of the world, and the Sea as well as the Land is contained within my Jurisdiction: in both, I willingly right those that are wronged, according to Law: But truly what the Custom of the Sea may be in this case, and whether the Complainant ought to be relieved, let it be determined by the Rhodian Laws, which, by my permission, are in use upon the Sea, where they are not contrary to our own. But it seems to me not a little conducing to a confirmation of the foregoing sens, whereby the maritime Law touching Wrecks and the Right of the Customers (that is, of the Exchequer, whose Right is transferr▪ d into their hands) is, asserted, if it shall be made appear that such a Law or Custom was in force at that time, which Interpreters are not wont here to grant. It is indeed certain enough according to the Imperial Law (as we have it now compiled in the Books of Justinian) that 
n L. 3. & 21. ff. tit. de adquir. & amittend. possess. l. 44. ff. de adquir. rer. dom. l. 1. 3. & seqq. ff. tit. de Incendio. l. 1. C de Naufragiis.  Wrecks are reserved to the former Owners, and so that both the Exchequer and the Customers are thence excluded: Yea, and that the Custom whereby they are confiscated, is condemned by the received determinations of the Roman-German Empire, as well as the Canon Law, as we hinted in the former Chapter. But it is collected by manifest evidences, that the Law or Custom for Confiscation of Wrecks was in force, in the time of this Emperor Antoninus (I mean Antoninus Pius) who, as Julius Capitolinus writes did in the establishing of this Law, make use of Volusius Metianus the Lawyer, out of whose Books the Petition and Answer here spoken of was transcribed into the Digests 
o Locis superiùs citatis. . It is clear, that almost all those Passages that we find in the Digests for reserving them to the former Owners, were taken out of Paulus, Callistratus, and Ulpian, who lived many years after this Antoninus. There is somewhat also to this purpose out of 
p L. 21. ff. tit. de adquir. & amit. possess. §. 1.  Priscus Javolenus, who lived at the same time with this Antoninus. But this Emperor reigned XXII years, and as appears out of Javolenus, he did by Decree mitigate the rigour of Confiscation in this Case. From which it might easily come to pass, that under the same Emperor such a Law and Custom as we have mentioned might be in force, and under the same it might either be abrogated, or the rigour of it abated. The principal Constitution, which, according to the 
q L. 1. C de Naufragiis.  Book of Justinian, would not have the Exchequer to interpose in this case, is by Antonius Contius, a very eminent Lawyer, attributed to the Emperor Antoninus, according to the testimony of an ancient Book in Manuscript; although the name of Constantine be put before those that are published. The words are these; If at any time a Vessel be driven a Shore by shipwreck, or if at any time it run aground, it shall belong to the Owners. My Exchequer shall not interpose itself. For, what right hath the Exchequer by another man's misfortune, that it should seek after profit upon so sad an occasion? Yea, and Ulpian shows, that such a kind of Constitution there was also under Adrian, who was this man's Father by Adoption. It is decreed (so saith 
r L. 12. ff. tit▪ de Incendio.  Ulpian) that it may be lawful for every man, to recover his losses by shipwreck freely; and thus much was ordained by the Emperor Antoninus, with the Emperor his Father. There are in these very clear Evidences, that about that time, there was such a Law or Custom of Confiscation, as we have mentioned; which we know very well was wont to take place often, even contrary to the authority of ancient Decrees. For, it may be concluded from the shipwreck of Valgius, or Victor, related by 
s Epist. 37. ad Micarium.  Paulinus, that it was in some use even under Theodosius the elder. There are the like Examples upon the 
t Chronic. Albert. Stadensis, ann. 1112. videses Frederic Lindebrog. in Glossario▪ pag. 1443.  Shore of the Roman-German Empire: And others may be brought, whereas notwithstanding some Laws were made to the contrary.  
Moreover also, the ancient Orators, both Greek and Latin, whilst they allege Examples about the stating of Questions in pleading, do mingle this very Law or Custom about shipwreck with other usual and ancient Customs in the Greek and Roman Empire, as a thing that was very frequently received. Sopater and 
u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, pag. 107. Venetiis, 1509.  Syrianus in Hermogenem say; The Law is, that spoils which are found, do belong to him that is General of the Army; In like manner the Law is, that Wrecks do belong to the Customers. In a tempestuous Sea, spoils are brought into Port. Hereupon ariseth a controversy about them, between the Commanders and the Customers of the Customs. In this case it be●ove's us not to vex our selus in vain with reading of Laws, but to look into the very nature of things. For, in truth the Question is, whether the Goods be now to be called Spoils or Wrecks. In like manner saith, 
x Artis Rbetoricae Scholicae, lib. 1. pag. 46. edit. Paris. 1599  Curius Fortunatianus; what is a simple definition? when we define a particular thing simply. Put case, that Wrecks do belong to the Publicans or Customers. The body of a certain man that was lost by shipwreck, clothes and all, being driven ashore was covered by the Sands. The Customers came and drew it out. Therefore they are guilty of the violation of sepulchre. For here the Question is simply, what it is to violate a sepulchre.  
Moreover, that, Volusius Metianus wrote that Petition and the Answer, appears in Libris Publicorum ex Lege Rhodiâ; that is, in his summary of those Laws which belong either to the Exchequer or the Customers, wherein also is contained either the Law or Custom of Confiscation of Wrecks. It suit's very well with these Particulars, that in that Answer of the Emperor Antoninus those words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, should be rendered, but that Law of the Sea or that Custom of the Sea, which he meant should be so examined and determined, according to the Rhodian Laws, that in the mean time, those Rhodian Laws should not be of force, if any Rescript or any Roman Law were against it. And of what authority Adrian's Decree was at that time (whereof Ulpian speaks in the places before quoted) perhaps it did not sufficiently appear, no not to the Lawyers themselves without a more curious examination, whose assistance Antoninus made use of in his Answer. But, that we may at length dispatch this particular; no man whatsoever, whether he approve the common Translation, or mine, will (I suppose) unless he renounce his own reason, conceiv, upon a due consideration of the whole matter, that any denial is made of the Dominion of the Sea in that Answer, or that the least Tittle can be found in it against the Dominion thereof.   

An Answer to the Opinions of modern Lawyers, so far as they oppose a Dominion of the Sea; especially of Fernandus Vasquius, and Hugo Grotius. CHAP. XXVI.  
HAving thus refuted, or upon good ground removed some Opinions of ancient Lawyers, which are usually alleged for the maintaining of a perpetual community of the Sea; it is no hard matter in like manner to wave the authority of those of later time, that oppose a Dominion. For, if we consider the great number of those, who, whether they comment upon the body of Justinian, or treat apart of this particular, would not have us to recede from that natural community; we shall find plainly that they deal in the same manner, as they that have pinned their Faith, more than was meet, upon the sleev of Ulpian, or some other such ancient author: Unless we conceiv that some of them did not so much explain the Law in this point, as recite the opinions of Lawyers, so far as they have been by them delivered: Just in the same manner, as if a man should so discourse upon Aristotle's astronomy, or the opinion of Thales touching the Earth's floating, like a Dish in the Sea, and that of the Stoics of its encompassing the Earth like a Girdle, with that of the ancients concerning an extreme heat under the Equinoctial, and other opinions of that kind, which are rejected and condemned, by the observation and experience of posterity; that he might seem not so much to search into the thing itself, as to represent the person of the author, thereby to trace out his meaning, only for the discovering of his opinion. But as the root being cut, the Tree falls, so the authority of those ancient Lawyers being removed out of the way, all the determinations of the modern which are supported by it, must be extremely weakened.  
Now therefore, as to what hath been formerly alleged out of Fernandus Vosquius, it is grounded upon such Arguments as are either manifestly falls, or impertinent. For, what is this to the purpose? That the Sea, from the beginning of the world to this present day, is, and ever hath been in common, without the least alteration, as 'tis generally known. Whereas the quite contrary is most certainly known to those, who have had any insight into the received Laws and Customs of Ages and Nations. That is to say, that by most approved Law and Custom, some Seas have passed into the Dominion and partrimonie, both of Princes and private persons; as is clearly made manifest out of what hath been already shown you. Moreover also he 
a Illustrium Controvers. lib. 1. cap. 51. §. 23. unde & V. Cl. Hugo Grotius in Mari Libero, cap. 7.  would have prescription to cease betwixt Foreigners in relation to each other, and not to take place in the Law of Nations, but in the Civil only; so that by his Opinion prescription should be of no force between those (as between two supreme states or Princes) who are not indifferently subject to the Civil Law, which admit's prescription; than which not any thing can be said or imagined more absurd. Almost all the principal points of the Intervenient Law of Nations, being established by long consent of persons using them, do depend upon prescription or ancient Custom. To say nothing of those Princes, whose Territories were subject heretofore to the Roman Empire, and who afterwards became absolute within themselves, not only by Arms, but also by prescription (which is every where admitted among the Laws of Nations;) whence is it that Prisoners of war are not now made slaves among Christians, unless it be because that Custom began to grow out of date some Ages since upon a ground of 
b Suarez de Legibus, lib. 2●.  Christian brotherhood, and by prescription ratified betwixt Nations. Whence is it that the ransoms of prisoners are to be paid, some to the Princes, and some to the Persons that take them? As for instance, when the ransom is not above ten thousand Crowns, it goes to him that took the Prisoner; when it exceeds, it is to be paid to the Prince. Because (saith 
c In Decistsionibus Burdegal. decisione 178. num. 4.  Nicolaus Boërius) if it exceed, as when any one hath taken a Duke, a Count, a Baron, or any other great man, than it belongs to the Prince, and so it is observed in the Kingdoms of France, England and Spain. It hath by prescription of time been observed among Princes; and so it became Law. And truly, to deny a Title of prescription wholly among Princes, is plainly to abrogate the very intervenient Laws of Nations. As for those other things mentioned by Vasquius, concerning charity and the inexhaustible abundance of the Sea (whereby he makes a difference betwixt Rivers and Seas) and other things of the like nature, they have no relation at all to the point of Dominion; as you have been sufficiently told already.  
In the next place, we come to the other, to wit, Hugo Grotius, a man of great learning, and extraordinary knowledge in things both Divine and Humane; whose name is very frequent in the mouths of men every where, to maintain a natural and perpetual community of the Sea. he hath handled that point in two Books; in his Mare Liberum, and in that excellent work De Jure Belli & pacis. As to what concerns Mare Liberum, a Book that was written against the Portugals about trading into the Indies through the vast Atlantic and Southern Ocean; it contein's indeed such things as have been delivered by ancient Lawyers touching community of the Sea; Yea, and disputing for the Profits and Interests of his country, he draw's them into his own party; and so endeavors to prove that the Sea is not capable of private Dominion. But he hath so warily couched this subject with other things, that whether in this he did hit or miss, the rest howsoëver might serve to assert the point which he was to handle. Moreover, he discourseth about the Title of discovery, and primary occupation (pretended to by the Portugals) and that also which is by Donation from the Pope. And he seems in a manner, either sometimes to quit that natural and perpetual community, which many Civil Lawyers are eager to maintain, and he himself, in order to his design, endeavoured to confirm; or else to confess that it can hardly be defended. For, concerning those Seas that were enclosed by the ancient Romans; the nature of the Sea, saith 
d Mari libero, cap. 5.  he, differs from the Shore in this, that the Sea, unless it be in some small part of itself, is not easily capable of Building or enclosure. And put case it were, yet even this could hardly be without the hindrance of common use. Nevertheless, if any small part of it may be thus possessed, it falls to him that enters upon it first by occupation. Now, the difference of a lesser and a greater part, cannot take place (I suppose) in the determining of private Dominion. But in express words he except's even a Bay or Creek of the Sea. And a little after, saith he, We do not speak here of an In-land Sea, which in some places being straightened with Land on every side, exceeds not the breadth even of a River, yet 'tis clear that this was it the Roman Lawyers spoke of, when they set forth those notable determinations against private Avarice. But the Question, is concerning the Ocean, which antiquity called immense infinite, the Parent or Original of things, confining with the Aër. And afterwards he saith, The controversy is not about a straight or Creek in this Ocean, nor of so much as is within view when one stands upon the shore. A little farther also, speaking of Prescription, he saith, 
e Cap. 7.  It is to be added, that their authority who are of the contrary opinion, cannot be applied to this Question. For, they speak of the Mediterranean Sea, we of the Ocean. They of a Creek or Bay, we of the broad and wide Sea, which differ very much in the point of Occupation. And certainly, there is no man but must conceiv it a very difficult thing to possess the whole Ocean: Though if it could be held by occupation, like a narrow Sea, or a Creek, or as the whole world was said to be possessed at first by ancient Princes, it might even as well pass into the Dominion or Ownership of him that should enter upon it first by occupation. Howsoêver, there have been 
f Jo. Gryphiander, de Insulis, c. 25. §. 52.  some others, who by the same Rule distinguish in like manner the inner and neighbouring Seas from the open Sea or main Ocean.  
But it is by no means to be omitted, that they, for whose sakes Hugo Grotius wrote that Book, that is to say, the States of Holland, did, not unwillingly, but rather (as it seems) according to their own hearts desire, give ear to the condemnation of that Opinion (especially because it was owned by Grotius) concerning a community of the Sea and freedom of Fishing therein according to the Law natural and of Nations, by the ambassador of James King of great Britain, in a speech of his delivered openly in Holland; and that others were gravely admonished from his misfortune, not to maintain the like. Of which thing Grotius himself bear's witness. 
g In Apolegetico eorum qui Hollandiae praefuerunt ante mutationem 1618. p. 387. edit. Heidelberg. cap. 19 pag. 257.  I have laboured, saith he, as much as any to maintain the Right of Navigation to the Indies, and for the preservation of Clothdressing in our country. But for the freedom of Fishing at Sea so much, that Carleton the King of great Britain's Ambassador, being incited by my enemies to speak somewhat in public against me being at 
h he was imprisoned for having an hand in Barnevel's business.  that time in Prison, he had nothing else to say, but that I had begun to make some Discourses in defence of that freedom, as a thing grounded upon the Law of Nations, and Custom, time out of mind; whereas notwithstanding, nothing had been said or written by me upon that subject, different from those things which the State's ambassadors had maintained in Britain in the year MDCX; and our Ancestors before, even for some Ages past. And yet that ambassador said, that others ought to be terrified by the example of my misfortune, from defending that Opinion. It is true indeed, that persons in power usually take a liberty to aspers men as they pleas when they are in question: But these things were not spoken so much against Hugo Grotius, as against that natural Right of community at Sea (injuriously pretended to) which many men have defended more expressly and plainly then himself; but none, with so much learning and ingenuity. Nor, did that Speech of the ambassador, for aught we know, as things than stood, displeas the States of Holland.  
But in his Books 
i De Jure Belli & Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 2. & 3.  de Jure Belli & Pacis, having indeed set down the reason of the original of private Dominion to be upon this ground, that those places which became peculiarly assigned were not sufficient for the maintenance of all men, he concludes that the Sea, because of its bigness and inexhaustible abundance, being sufficient for all, cannot be appropriated to any. He adds other things also, touching the nature of the Seas not being distinguishable by Bounds; of both which we have said enough already. But at length he betake's himself to the received Customs of Nations and speaks more than once concerning the propriety or private Dominion of the Sea, as of a thing sometimes to be yielded without controversy. The Land, saith 
k Ibidem. §. 13.  he, and Rivers, and any part of the Sea, in case it come under the propriety of some Nation, aught to be open for such as have need of passage upon just and necessary occasions. Afterwards also, speaking of the 
l Ibid Cap. 3. §. 8.  propriety of Rivers, After this example, saith he, it seems that even the Sea may be possessed by him that is Owner of the Land on both sides, although it lie open either above, as a Creek; or above and below too, as a straight or narrow Sea: So that it be not so great a part of the Sea, that being compared with the Lands it cannot seem to be any portion of them. And that which is lawful for one Prince or People, the same seems lawful also for two or three, if in the like manner they pleas to enter upon the Sea flowing between. For so, Rivers that flow between two Nations, have been entered upon by both, and then divided. he allegeth other things also touching the Right of primary occupation by Sea; but so, that for the most part he contein's himself within Creeks and straits. 
m Ibidem. §. 19  he saith, that not by any natural Right or Reason, but by Custom it came to pass, that the Sea was not appropriated, or that it could not lawfully be entered upon by Right of Occupation. And that the Custom being changed, if there were any in the ancient Law that might hinder a private Dominion of the Sea, the reason of community must be changed also. But that it hath been sufficiently changed, appears abundantly (if I be not deceived) out of what we have hitherto shown you. Yea, the very Laws as well 
* The same with Municipal.  Civil as Intervenient of most Nations make abundantly to this purpose, as it hath been proved.  
Moreover, that nothing may be wanting to weigh down the balance, therefore, besides the opinions of the Civil Lawyers before alleged out of France, Spain, and Italy, for a private Dominion of the Sea, let this over and above be added, which is taken out of that sort of Lawyers also, discoursing in general terms about the Sea. I here give it you as it was composed by a Lawyer, none of the meanest in the Roman-German Empire, by name 
n De Regalibus, lib. cap 4. §. 97.  Regenerus Sixtinus, who was indeed against private Dominion of the Sea. The matter in question, saith he, concerning the Sea and its Shore, is, whether as Rivers that are navigable, and by which others are made navigable, they may be reckoned inter Regalia among the Prince's royalties? (for, whatsoëver is reputed a part of those Regalia or royalties, is as private or peculiar to Princes, as that is to subjects which is their own; for which cause the Revenues of the Exchequer are private after the same manner;) so also, whether the Sea itself and its Shore, be comprised within those Regalia? Cacheranus, Decis. 155. n. 81. Ferrarius Montanus, de Feud. lib. 5. c. 7. 
o Versic. Tametsi Jus piscandi.  reckons the regulation and the very dominion also of the Sea among the Regalia, nor doth he make any difference betwixt the Sea and a public River. Mynsingerus also, Resp. 1. nu. 162. Decad. 11. saith, that the propriety of the Sea is a part of those Regalia. But Sixtinus himself, discoursing upon this matter, just as they do that are more addicted than they ought to the words of Ulpian, and numbering up those Autors that are of the contrary opinion, concludes thus, But more true it is that a propriety of the Sea and Shore, is not by the Common Law to be reckoned among the Regalia. But upon due consideration of all those particulars, which hitherto have been produced out of the Customs of so many Ages and Nations, and as well out of the Civil, as the Common or Intervenient Law of most Nations, no man (I suppose) will question but that there remain's not either in the nature of the Sea itself, or in the Law either Divine, Natural, or of Nations, any thing which may so oppose the private Dominion thereof, that it cannot be admitted by every kind of Law, even the most approved; and so that any kind of Sea whatsoëver may by any sort of Law whatsoëver be capable of private Dominion; which was the thing I intended to prove.   
The End of the first Book.   

Touching the DOMINION, OR, Ownership of the Sea. BOOK II.  

The order or Method of those things that are to be handled in this Book. The British Ocean divided into four parts. CHAP. I.  
HAving made it evident, in the former Book, that the Sea is capable of private Dominion as well as the Land, and that by all kinds of Law, whether we seriously consider the Divine, or Natural, or any Law of Nations whatsoëver; it remain's next that we discourse touching the Dominion of great Britain in the Sea encompassing it about, and of those large Testimonies whereby it is asserted and maintained. Wherein this Method is observed, that in the first place we premise both the distribution and various appellation of the Sea flowing about it, in order to the discourse. Then it shall be shown, from all antiquity, down to our times without interruption, that those, who by reason of so frequent alterations of the state of Affairs, have reigned here, whether Britain's, Romans, Saxons, Danes, and Normans, and so the following Kings (each one according to the various latitude of his Empire) have enjoied the Dominion of that Sea by perpetual occupation, that is to say, by using and enjoying it as their own after a peculiar manner, as an undoubted portion either of the whole body of the estate of the British Empire, or of some part thereof, according to the state and condition of such as have ruled it; or as an inseparable appendent of this landlord. Lastly, that the Kings of Great Britain have had a peculiar Dominion or propriety over the Sea flowing about it, as a Bound not bounding their Empire, but (to borrow the Terms used by Surveiors of Land) as bounded by it; in the same manner as over the Island itself, and the other neighbouring Isles which they possess about it.  
The Sea encompassing great Britain, which in general we term the British Sea, is divided into four parts, according to the four Quarters of the World. On the West lies the Vergivian Sea, which also takes the name of the Deucaledonian, where it washeth the Coast of Scotland. And of this Vergivian, wherein Ireland is situate, the Irish Sea is reckoned to be a part, called in ancient time the 
a Gildas, Epist. de Excidio Britannia.  Scythian Vale, but now the Channel of St George. So that as well that which washeth the Western Coast of Ireland, as that which flowe's between great Britain and Ireland, is to be called the British Sea. For, not only this (which of old was called great Britain, and sometimes simply the 
b Aristides, in Oratione AEgyptiacà.  Great Island) but also the Isle of Ireland, with the other adjacent Isles, were termed Britanniae: So that many times Albion and Ireland are equally called British Isles and Britannides; as you may see in Strabo, Ptolemy, Marcianus Heracleötes, Pliny, Eustathius upon Dionysius Afer, and others. Moreover, Ireland is called by Ptolemy 
c Magnae. Constructionis, lib. 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 little Britain. And, saith Ethelward, an ancient Writer, 
d Lib. 4. c. 4.  They go to Ireland, called heretofore Britannides by the great Julius Caesar. Perhaps he had a more perfect copy of Julius Caesar's Book: For in none of his Commentaries which we use, is Ireland called by that name. And it hath been observed by 
e Lips. Epistolicar. quaest. lib. 2. cap. 3. & Elect. lib. 2. cap. 7.  learned men, that that book hath been maimed and altered by one Julius Celsus, whose name we find now and then in the Manuscript Copies.  
Towards the North this Sea is named the Northern, Caledonian, and Deucaledonian Sea, wherein lie scattered the Orcadeses Islands, Thule, and others, which being called the British or Albionian Isles; yea, and 
* Jo. Tze●zet, Chiliad. 8. cap. 218.  Britannides, gave name to the neighbouring Sea. And indeed Thule (which some would have to be Island; others, and that with most reason, do conceiv it to be the biggest of the 
f Guil-Camden. in Insul. Brit. p. 850.  Shetland or Zetland Isles, called ●hilensel by the 
g Gaspar. Peucerus, lib. de Terrae dimensione.  Seamen, and some there are again that think otherwise) was of old not only termed a British Isle, but also by some expressly placed in Britain itself. Mahumedes Acharranides an Arabian, called likewise Aracensis and Albategnius, a famous Mathematician, who lived above nine hundred years ago, saith, 
h De Scientiis Stellarum, lib. cap. 6.  Some observing the breadth of the Earth from the Equinoctial Line towards the North, have found it to be determined by the Isle Thule which is in Britain, where the longest day is XX hours; that is to say, Ptolemy and his followers, who by drawing a Line on the Northside of Thule or the Shetland Isles, through 63 degrees, and a quarter of Northern Latitude, have set it down for the utmost Bound of the habitable world. Yea, and some have used the name of Thule for Britain itself or England. In times past, the Emperor of Constantinople was wont to have trusty Guards called Barrangi, constantly attending his person; who were taken out of England, as appears out of 
i Hist. Graec. lib. 2.  Nicetas Choniates; and Codinus also who was keeper of the Palace, 
k De Officiis Constantinop.  writes that they were wont to salute the Emperor with a loud voice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the English Tongue. But in the story of 
l alexiadoes, lib. 2.  Anna Comnena, the Daughter of Alexius, it is said expressly, that they came 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the Island of Thule. In like manner, all the Islands either known or heard of in this Northern Sea, were at length called by the name of British; the utmost Bounds whereof, as also of Thule itself, some of the ancients would have to reach unto 67 degrees of Latitude, or thereabout. And Albategnius, speaking of the Sea as it looks toward Spain, saith; 
m De Scientiis Stellarum, cap. 6.  There are XII British Isles in it towards the North; and beyond these it is not habitable; and how far it stretcheth, is unknown.  
Having made this preparation, than we treat first concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Britain's, before they were reduced under the Roman power; Next, touching a Dominion of that kind belonging to the Romans while they ruled here, continually and necessarily accompanying the sovereignty of the Island. Afterwards, it is made evident by such Testimonies as are found among the ancients, that the English Saxons and others who enjoied the supreme Power in Britain, before the Norman's Invasion, had such a kind of Dominion. Lastly, according to the fourfold division of the British Sea, we set forth the ancient Occupation, together with the long and continued possession of every Sea in particular, since the Norman's time; whereby the true and lawful Dominion and Customs of the Sea, which are the subject of our discourse, may be drawn down, as it were by a twined thread, until our own times. Moreover, seeing both the Northern and Western Ocean do stretch to a very great Latitude (this to America; that not only to Island and the Shores of Groenland, but to parts utterly unknown) and so it cannot all be called the British Seas; yet because the Nation of great Britain have very large Rights and Privileges of their own in both those Seas, even beyond the bounds of the British name, therefore it was thought fit to touch a little upon these Particulars.   

That the ancient Britain's, did enjoy and possess the SEA of the same name; especially the Southern and Eastern part of it, as Lords thereof, together with the Island, before they were brought under the Roman power. CHAP. II.  
IT is true indeed which an eminent man saith; 
a Hugo Grotius, de Jure Belli & Pacis, lib. 2. c. 3. §. 11.  That the Sea hath been enjoyed by Occupation, not for this reason only, because men had so enjoied the Land, nor is the Act or intent of the mind sufficient thereto; but that there is a necessity of some external Act, from whence this Occupation may be understood. Therefore Arguments are not to be derived altogether from a bare Occupation or Dominion of Countries, whose Shores are washed by the Sea: But from such a private or peculiar use or enjoiment of the Sea, as consists in a setting forth Ships to Sea, either to defend or make good the Dominion; in prescribing Rules of Navigation to such as pass through it; in receiving such Profits and Commodities as are peculiar to every kind of Sea Dominion whatsoêver; and, which is the principal, either in admitting or excluding others at pleasure. Touching which particular, we shall make diligent inquiry into those things which concern the Isle of Britain, through the Ages past, down to the present time.  
It is upon good ground concluded, that the most ancient history, whereto any credit ought to be given about the affair's of Britain, is not elder than the time of Caius Julius Caesar; the Ages before him being too obscured with Fables. But at his coming we find clear passages of the Britain's Ownership and Dominion of the Sea flowing about them, especially of the South and East part of it, as a perpetual appendent of the sovereignty of the Island. For, they not only used the Sea as their own at that time for Navigation and Fishing; but also permitted none besides Merchants to sail unto the Island without their leave; nor any man at all to view or sound the Ports and Sea-Coast. And that the Case stood certainly thus, it is no slight Argument which we shall insert here out of Caesar himself. But allowance must be given ever to Arguments and Conjectures, touching times so long since past and gone; especially when there is a concurrence in the Customs and Testimonies of following times. And as things being placed at too remote a distance, so that they cannot be certainly discerned by the eye, are wont to be more surely discovered by the help of a triangle at hand; So what uncertainty soêver may be in those proofs that are to be brought out of so remote antiquity, I question not but it will be made sufficiently manifest by the continued and more certain usage and Custom of later times, as shall be abundantly made evident in the following discourse.  
As to what concerns the Britain's particular use of Navigation, in that ancient time, without which an Occupation of this kind cannot be had; notwithstanding that at Caesar's first arrival, they were 
b Caesar de Bello Gallico, lib. 4. & 5.  terrified with the sight of that unusual kind of long Ships; and though at his second coming with a multitude of Vessels of all kinds (being 
c Guil. Pictaviensis, in gestis Willielmi Regis 1.  reinforced to the number of eight hundred; or, as some would have it, to a thousand) they fled in a great fright from the Shore, not being sufficiently provided for such a Sea-fight as was then at hand, and which they had never been acquainted with; nevertheless, it is most certain, that they had Vessels of their own, wherein they used to coast about the neighbouring Sea, and so entered upon it corporally by Occupation. Mention is made indeed by Writers of some of their Vessels more notable than the rest, which they frequently used, being framed with twigs (as the fashion hath been in the more ancient Nations) and covered with Ox-hides after their usual manner. Moreover, Festus Avienus, speaking of the ancient Inhabitants of the OEstrymnides, or the Islands called the 
* Andr. Schot. Observat. Historic. lib. 3. 22. §. 6.  Sillyes, with the rest lying about, thus expresseth himself; 
— 
d In Oris Maritimis.  rei ad miraculum,  
Navigia junctis semper aptant pellibus,  
Corióque vastum saepe percurrunt Salum.  
'tis strange! There Ships they frame with Oxes-hide,  
And scout in Leather through the Ocean wide.  And what he saith of their continual care of traffic and Custom of Navigation, concerns others as well that were under the British Government. Yet it is not to be conceived, that these twig and Leathern Vessels of the Britain's, were all of them unfit for making war by Sea (according to the manner of that Age and of the neighbouring Nations) nor that they were less fit for long journeys at that time; seeing 
e Hist. nature lib. 4. c. 16.  Pliny writes expressly, that sometimes they sailed through the Sea in the space of six days. In like manner we read in the British 
f Henric. Huntingdon. Hist. lib. 1.  history, that about Caesar's time, Lud King of Britain seized upon many Islands of the Sea in a way of war, which denotes that he had a very considerable strength at Sea, and a well accomplished navy. It is true indeed, that there were small Vessels among these (as they are not where without them) which doubtless were unfit to bear the brunt of a Fight or Tempest; that is to say, such as Caesar made to transport his soldiers over the River, when he was straightened by Asranius his army, as he had been taught (they are his 
g De Bello Civili. lib. 1. cap. 54. & videses Solinum, ca 25.  own words) some years before by the Custom of Britain. The Keels and Ribs were first made of slight matter. The rest of the bulk of their Vessels, being wrought together with Twigs, was covered with Hides; which we find mentioned also by Lucan, 

h Pharsal. 4.  Primùm cana salix, madefacto vimine, parvam  
Texitur in puppim, ●aesóque inducta juvenco,  
Vectoris patience, tumidum cireumnatat amnem▪  
Sic Venetus stagnante Pado, fusóque Britannus  
Navigat Oceano.—  
— 
* Translated by my learned friend Mr Thomas May.  Of twigs and willow board,  
They made small Boats covered with Bullocks hid,  
In which they reached the river's farther side.  
So sail the Veneti, if 〈◊〉 flow,  
The Britain's sail on their calm Ocean so.  Others there are also that writ of these small Vessels. But they are not (I suppose) at least in that Age, to be called small Ships, which sailed through the Sea in six day's space, nor such as Caesar made only to transport his soldiers, and conveied them by Cart above XXII miles, according to his own Relation. It cannot be doubted therefore, but that the Britain's had Vessels made even of the aforesaid matter, big enough and very fit for service at Sea. Moreover, there will be very good ground to conceiv out of what we shall deliver by and by, about the excluding of their Neigbors from the adjacent Sea, that they were wont to build and set forth Ships of war, of a far more commodious and solid substance, for the guarding of their Sea and the Isles. But their use of frequent Fithing (though 
i Dio Cassius, lib. 76.  some writ that the more Northerly Britain's did never eat fish) may be collected upon this ground, that the better and more Civil sort of them were wont to embellish the Hilts of their Swords with teeth of the bigger Fishes. So saith Solinus 
k Polyhist. cap. 25. , They which endeavour to be neat, do burnish the hilts of their Swords with the teeth of such great Animals as swim in the Sea, because they are as white and clear as ivory: For, the men take an extraordinary pride in the brightness of their Arms. Now, I suppose, that without an extraordinary abundance of such kind of Animals, which could not be caught without great pains and numbers of Fishermen, there could not have been matter enough of this kind to serve for the triming of a most warlike Nation; wherein it was a Custom for the Mother of every manchild to put the first Food that he received into his mouth, upon the point of its Father's Sword, in token of a warlike disposition. And the mother's usual Blessings were to this effect, that their Sons might die no other death then in War and Arms. I know these words of Solinus are commonly taken by Writers, as if they had been spoken only of the Inhabitants of Ireland: wherein, if I understand any thing, they are plainly mistaken. The words of Solinus in his Chapter concerning Britain, are these; The extremity of the French Shore had been the utmost bound of the world, did not the Isle of Britain deserv the name almost of another world. For it is stretched above 800 miles in length, if so be we measure it as far as the utmost point in the North of Scotland, where Ulysses once arrived, as appears by an Altar there with an Inscription upon it in Greek Letters. It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness. It is a barbarous country, by reason of the rude behaviour of the Inhabitants; otherwise, of so rank a pasturage, that unless cattle be sometimes driven from the Pastures, they run a hazard by too much feeding. There is no Serpent to be found, and but few birds; The people are inhospitable and warlike: And after a victory, they first take a draught of the blood of the slain, and then besmear their ●…s. Right or wrong is all one to them. A woman, when she bring's forth a male, put's its first food upon her ●…nds Sword, and stealing it into the little ones mouth 〈…〉 the very point, she pronounceth her blessing according 〈…〉 the Custom of the Nation; with this wish, That he may die no other death but in War and Arms. They that endeavour 〈…〉 be neat, do burnish the Hilts of their Swords, & caetera, 〈◊〉 it followeth above. He treats next of some ●…nds that lie about it; as Thanet, the Hebrides, ●…es, and Thule; and as to what concerns their manners, he concludes that Britain is inhabited in ●…t by barbarous people, who from their childhood, by artificial stripes of divers forms, imprint the likeness of several living Creatures, up and down their bodies: As is sufficiently known out of Caesar and other Writers. But now, if those words which follow that brief description, wherein the first mention of Ireland is made, were to be understood of the Irish, not of the people of great Britain, than it would follow there, that Solinus forgetting what he had proposed in the very entrance of his discourse, passed immediately from great Britain unto Ireland and the neighbouring Isles; and that he made not any mention of the Customs of its Inhabitants, besides the striping of their skins with divers shapes, and this at the latter end of the Chapter: which I can not in any case believ. Nor is it agreeable to the scope of his discourse, that Ireland should be meant in this place, as well as great Britain. For, of Britain he saith, It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness. It is a barbarous country, by reason of the rude behaviour of the Inhabitants, etc. Then, this more large description of its manners and Customs which immediately followeth, is no otherwise joined to the mention of Ireland in the Edition of Delrio, and most of the rest which we have followed in the place before-alleged. And who seethe not that the beginning of that description, and so what follow's, aught with much more reason to be referred thus to Britain, concerning which his purpose is to treat, then to Ireland, whose name is inserted only by the way. Nor doth that hinder at all which we read there about Serpents. I confess it to be most true indeed, if spoken of Ireland, wherein there is no venomous Creature; and falls, if of Britain. But yet even this also hath been believed of our country of Britain, and that in the clearer light of learning in time past; As appears not only by the Books of Cardan de Subtilitate, wherein he 
l De Subtilitate, lib. 10.  denieth that Britain entertain's any such Creature,) but also out of Sealiger's 
m Exercitat. 200.  Exercitations upon him, who in like manner affirms this, and spend's discourse to no purpose to find out the reasons why Britain hath not any venomous Creatures: which is strange indeed, since he wrote so eagerly against the other; yea, and both of them being very famous men, and most expert Naturalists, lived some time in Britain. But errors of this kind (as we see also in Solinus concerning Birds and Bees) are not unusual among Writers: And it was a common course for a Roman Writer to attribute extreme Barbarism (as Solinus doth in this place) to such foreign Nations as were not in amity with the Romans. Now, as to this passage which is found in some Editions; [It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness, a 
n Edit. Claudii Salmasi; Atque ita ●anè Cod. Ms. vet. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  barbarous country because of the rude behaviour of the Inhabitants etc.] as if the following words did by a continued sens and order relate unto Ireland; it being indeed contrary to the truth of some ancient Copies and the most approved Editions, arose (I think) upon this ground, because it was falsely supposed by the vulgar, that Ireland alone is treated of in some following Lines. Notwithstanding, even so also those words which follow the word [bigness] may as well, and aught to refer unto Britain, not unto Ireland. Moreover also, Tacitus saith expressly of the Irish of that Age, 
o In vitâ▪ Julii Agricolae.  The men in their dispositions and habits do not differ much from Britain.  
But now, that we may return unto that trimming which was made of Fishes teeth; Auxiliaries were wont (as Caesar saith) to be supplied out of Britain, in almost all those wars that the Gauls maintained against the Romans. And therefore it must be said, either that the Britain's were for the most part an abject savage people, yea and a dull slothful Generation (which appears to be most falls,) or else it must be conceived that the Nation used Fishing very much, which together with the frequent use of Navigation and Commerce, shows that they did enter upon the Sea corporally by Occupation. But if to such a corporal occupation, as this, we add also, that they excluded others from the Sea, shutting it up in such a manner, that they restrained them at pleasure from passage and entrance, what hinders why we may not conclude, that they acquired a manifest Dominion of their own, both by an Intentional and Corporal possession? But that the Sea was thus shut up by them, Caesar himself seems to inform us plainly enough. For, when he, upon his first attempt to cross the Sea into Britain, made diligent enquiry among the Gauls, touching the Shore and Situation of the ports, and to this end had summoned the gallic Merchants together from all Quarters, he was so deceived in his expectation about this matter, that he was necessitated to send C. Volusenus before with a long Ship to sound them, as being wholly unknown: For as much as the Gauls were utterly ignorant of these Shores, because they were prohibited entrance, and so excluded from a free use of the Sea. For, he writes expressly, 
p De Bello Gallico, lib. 4.  not a man of them went thither without leave, besides Merchants; nor was any thing known even to those Merchants, besides the Sea Coast, and those parts which lay over against 
* Now France.  Gaul or Gallia. Therefore, according to the usual Custom, no man, besides Merchants, could touch upon the Shore, without leave of the Britain's; nor was it lawful for those Merchants to make a narrow search or pry into such places ashore as were convenient or inconvenient for landing, or what Havens were fit to entertain Shipping. For, although he saith they knew the Sea-Coast; yet, as Caesar affirms, they were utterly ignorant, what ports were fit to receiv a number of the greater sort of Ships. And it seems, Merchants were permitted to visit the seacoasts, only by Coasting about, and using Commerce in the very Sea with the Inhabitants of the Island. The old Greek Interpreter of Caesar, saith also upon the place, None else, besides Merchants, were easily admitted among the Britain's: That is to say, neither by Land nor by Sea, whereof they had (as hath been shown) a very frequent use, and from which they excluded all foreigners, except Merchants, as from a part of that territory, whereof they were Lords in possession. From whence it follow's also, that they also who were wont to cross the Sea often out of Gaul into Britain, to be trained up in the learning and discipline of the Druïdes, could not do it without rendering themselves liable to punishment for their boldness, if leave were not first had from the petty Kings or Lords of the Island. From those petty Kings, I mean, that ruled upon the Sea-Coast: For, the Britain's at that time were not subject to the Government of a single Person. They were Lords of the Sea, who governed those Cities or Provinces that lay next to the Sea; Cingetorix, Carvilius, Taximagulus, and Segonax in Kent; others also that ruled over the Regni, the Belgae, Durotriges, Damnonii, Trinobantes, Iceni, Coritani, (being the people that inhabited Sussex, Surrie, Hampshire, Dorsetshire, Devon, 〈…〉, Essex, Norfolk, Lincolnshire) and the like. For, even Caesar himself saith, the inner part of the Island was inhabited by such as were said by Tradition to have been born there; but the seacoasts by such as had crossed the Sea thither out of Belgium, to make war and gain booty, who were called all for the most part by the names of those Cities from whence they came, and having seated themselves there by force of Arms, they betook themselves to husbandry. But he according to that little knowledge he had of a small part of the Island, called those only maritime Cities, or Provinces, which lie South of the River Thames; especially Kent, the 
* The Regni were the Inbitants of Surrie, Sussex, and the seacoasts of Hampshire.  Regni, and the 
* The Belgae, inhabitants of Somerset, Wiltshire, and Hampshire.  Belgae. But although the seacoasts were thus divided at that time into several Jurisdictions, nevertheless it cannot be doubted, but that they used to consult together in common against an Fnemie, or to guard the Sea (the defence whereof belonged to all the Princes bordering upon it;) just after the same manner as they used to do upon other occasions of war against foreign Enemies, as you may see in 
q De Bello Gallico, lib. 5.  Caesar, where the principal administration of the Government, with the business of war, was put into the hands of Cassivellaunus, by a common Council of the whole British Nation. Nor is that any prejudice against such a Dominion of the Britain's by Sea, which we find in Caesar concerning the Veneti, a people of Gallia, that were seated at the entrance of the River of Loire; to wit, that they had a very 
r Caesar de Bello Gallico, lib. 3. cap. 8. & 12.  large command upon the Sea-Coast of Western Gallia, and that they were better skilled than any other of their own countrymen in the Use and Art of Navigation, and that in the Sea-fight with Decius Brutus, they had Ships made all of Oak, very well built, and whether you consider their leathern Sails, or their Iron Chains in stead of Cordage, or their Masts, fitted to bear the brunt of any assault whatsoëver; and that CCXX sail or thereabout in number, went out of the Haven very well manned and provided with all necessaries for War, to oppose the Roman navy. It is very probable, that the most of these were Auxiliaries fetched by the Veneti out of Britain, or how great soëver the Venetan strength was at Sea, yet that it was not greater than the Britain's, may be collected from the same Author: For, he writes expressly, that Auxilaries were not only sent for at that time by the Veneti out of Britain, but also that they had very many Ships wherewith they used to sail into Britain: But yet, as it hath been shown out of him already, no man might sail hand over head into Britain, or without leave of the Britain's. It is not to be doubted therefore, but that, besides their Twig or leathern Vessels, they had a stout gallant navy, which was able even at pleasure to exclude those Ships of the Veneti that were best armed. Else, how could it be, that none but Merchants were admitted out of Gaul upon the Sea-Coast of Britain? Moreover, the whole Senate of the Veneti having been put to death by Caesar, not a man was found among those who remained alive after Brutus his victory, that could discover (so much as one Port of Britain; as appears out of the same Author. Which how it might be admitted, I do not at all understand, if the strength of those Veneti that were wont to sail thither, had been greater than the British, or if the British had not been much greater than theirs. But the reason why at Caesar's arrival afterwards, no Ship of that kind was found upon the British Sea or Shore (which 
s De C. Julii Caesaris militiâ, cap. de praelio Navali.  Peter Ramus wonder's at very much) and why the Roman Writers mention not any other Ships than such as were made of Twigs, seems evident: For, the Veneti had got all the Shipping together into one place from all parts, to maintain the aforesaid fight, as Caesar saith expressly. Therefore, if the British navy were called forth to their assistance, as 'tis probable it was, then questionless it was all lost before Caesar's arrival: For, the whole strength and Forces of the Veneti perished in that Sea▪ fight. Moreover also, Peter Ramus, speaking of that great tempest, whereby Caesar's Ships were scattered up and down in this Sea with great hazard, saith, The Sea raised this Tempest, as it were revenging the British bounds, and disdaining to bear a new and strange Lord. As if he had said, that the Bounds of the British Empire were in the very Sea, and the Sea itself angry, that it should be transferred into the hands of any other Lord. But as to that which we find in a certain 
t In Panegyrico Maximiano dicto; si mihi.  Panegyrist, touching the time of Julius Caesar; that Britain was not armed at that time with any Shipping fit for War by Sea; it was spoken either in a Rhetorical way only, and highly to magnify that victory of the Emperor Constantius Chlorus (whereby having slain C. alectus, who had invaded Britain, he reduced the Island together with the Sea, as is shown hereafter) or else it is to be taken only of the very time of Caesar's arrival. Otherwise, it is expressly contrary to those reasons here alleged, and grounded upon good Autors; and therefore not to be admitted for Truth. But after that the Island was reduced under the Roman power, doubtless the Britain's were prohibited from having any Ships of war, that they might be the better held in obedience. Which is the reason why Writers afterwards make mention of such only as were made of Twigs.   

That the Britain's were Lords of the Northern Sea, before they were subdued by the Romans. And that the Sea and the Land made one entire body of the British Empire. CHAP. III.  
THat the Britain's were Lords also at that time of the Northern, or Deucalidonian Sea, is a thing proved by sufficient testimony. They called this part of the Sea Mario sui secretum, The secret or Closet of their Sea. Tacitus, relating the Navigation of Julius Agricola into this part, saith, the Britain's, as it was understood by the Prisoners, were amazed at the sight of his navy, as if upon this opening the Closet or secret part of their Sea, there remained no farther refuge in case they were overcome. And in that stout Oration of Galgacus the Caledonian, wherein he encouraged his soldiers to fight, 
a Tacit. in vitâ Agricolae.  Now, saith he, the Bound of Britain is laid open. The secret part of their Sea or their sea-territory in the North, they called their Bound. Moreover, saith the same Galgacus, beyond us there is no Land, and not the least security at Sea, the Roman Navy being at hand; giving them to understand, that the Dominion hereof was to be defended as was the Island, as a thing acquired before. Add also, that among the Writers of that Age, vincula dare Oceano, and to subdue the Britain's, signified one and the same thing. So that place of Lucan is to be understood, where he reckon's what pompous shows and Triumphs might have ushered Caesar into Rome, had he returned only with Conquest over the Gauls and the North; 
— 
b Pharsal. 2.  ut vincula Rheno,  
Oceanóque daret! celsos ut Gallia currus  
Nobilis, & flavis sequeretur mista Britannis.  
What Stories had he brought! how the vast Main,  
And Rhine, he by his Conquests did restrain!  
The noble Gauls and yellow Britain's tread  
Behind his lofty Chariot, being led!  But for all that, our Sea was not as yet subdued by the Romans, Julius Caesar only shown the Island, rather than delivered it into the hands of posterity: neither was any part of it reduced under the Roman power, before the Emperor Claudius his time; nor the sovereignty of the Sea transferred into the hands of any other. And although in Augustus his time, Drusus Germanicus 
c Dio Cassius▪ lib▪ 54. Plin. lib. 2. cap. 67. Sueton in Claud. cap. 1.  sailed through that part of the Sea which lies betwixt the entrance of the River Rhine and Denmark, and subdued the Frieslanders, nevertheless, not any part of the Sea was added by that victory to the Roman Empire; for, the Britain's held it all in possession, they being not yet fully subdued. Nor is it unworthy observation here, that C. Caligula, being near Britain, and coming out of Germany to the Coasts on the other side of our Sea, as if (saith 
d add Aurel. Victorem, ut emendatur ab Andraea Schotto, Observat. Historic. lib. 3. cap. 21.  Dio) he intended to make war in Britain, and having drawn up his army, made ready all his slings and other warlike Engines, and given the signal or word for battle, no man knowing or imagining what his intent was, he on a sudden commanded them to fall a gathering of Cockles, and fill their Laps and Helmets; Then, saying these Spoils of the Sea belonged to the Capitol and Mount Palatin, he vaunted as if he had subdued the Ocean itself. At last, for a token or trophy of this mock-victorie, he reared a very lofty Tower hard by, out of which (as if it had been another 
* Pharos was a Tower built in the Island Pharos by Cleopatra Q. of Egypt, where lights were hung out to guide mariners by night.  Pharos) Lights were hung forth by night for the direction of Sea▪ men in their Courses; the ruins whereof being not yet wholly demolished, but for the most part overwhelmed with water near Cattwiick, and very seldom discovered, it is called by the Hollanders that dwell near it, Britenhuis and L'Huis te Briten, that is the British house, or the British Tower. Certain it is out of Suetonius, that a Tower was raised by Caligula in that place: yea, and it is maintained by divers learned men, as 
e In Bataviâ, cap. 16.  Hadrianus Junius the Hollander, 
f In insulis Britann. pag. 852.  William Camden our countryman, and 
g Histor. lib. 4. not. 56.  Richardus Vitus, that these were the ruins of the same Tower; though others deny it, as Ortelius, Gotzius, and 
h De Rheni Alveis, cap. 14. & videses Ortelium in Thesaur. Geograph. verb. Brittanni.  Cluverius: And they make a doubt both about the Original of the name, and also its signification; concerning which we dispute not. But am extremely mistaken, if Caligula, by this Action of his, did not so much neglect the conquest of Britain itself, which he hoped or at least thought of, as seem to sport himself with the conceit of having found out so compendious a way of victory. He carried the matter as if he had had an intent to subdue Britain; and supposed those Cockles, which he called Spoils of the Sea, to be Tokens of Sea-Dominion, and as a most sure pledge of the British Empire.  
Moreover, it is upon good ground to be conceived, that there was one entire territory of the British Empire, made up of the Land or continent of great Britain, with the Isles lying about it, and the Seas flowing between in their respective Channels: which may be collected, both from that one single name of British, comprehending an entire body of such a kind of Territorie (as was shown you before) and also from hence, that the very Sea itself is, by Albategnius and some others, described by the name of Britain, in the same manner as the Island, when as he placeth Thule, an Isle of the Sea, in Britain. That is to say, just as Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, and other Isles in the Tyrrhen Sea, have 
i L. 9 ff. tit. de Judicus & l. 99 ff. tit. de V. S.  in Law been reckoned parts of Italy, yea, and continent thereto: For, Sicily (after that the Romans became Lords of the adjoining Sea flowing between) was called 
k Cicero Actione 2. in Verrem, & Florus, lib. 3. cap. 19  Regio Suburbana, as if it had been part of the Suburbs of Rome; and all these together with Italy and the Sea itself, made one body or Province; so all the British Isles before mentioned, with great Britain and the Seas flowing about it, might well be termed one body of Britain or of the British Empire, forasmuch as the Seas as well as the Isles, passed always into the Dominion of them that have born Rule within this Nation: From whence perhaps it happened, that the Romans conceived the British Empire considered apart by itself, to be of so great a bigness, that 
l Panegyric. Maximiano dict. Si mihi.  Britain did not seem to be comprehended by the Sea, but to comprehend the Sea itself, as it is expressed by that Panegyrist.   

That the Dominion of the British Sea, followed the Conquest of great Britain itself, under the Emperors Claudius and Domitian. CHAP. iu.  
AFter that the more Southerly part of Britain had been brought into subjection by the Emperor Claudius, and the Isle of Wight taken in by surrender, the British Sea, as of necessity following the fate of the Island, was together with it annexed to the Roman Empire; at least so far as it was stretched before that part of the Isle which was subdued. Whereupon, a 
a Anonymus, Epigr. vet. lib. 2. & in Catalect. vet. Poet. lib. 1. tit. 7.  poet of that Age writes thus to the Emperor Claudius touching the Conquest of Britain, 
Ausoniis nunquam tellus violata triumphis,  
Icta tuo, Caesar, fulmine procubuit.  
Oceanúsque tuas ultra se respicit arras;  
Qui finis mundo est, non erat Imperio.  
That Land where Roman Triumphs ne'er appeared,  
Struck by thy lightning, Caesar, down is hurled.  
Since thou beyond the Sea hast Altars reared,  
Thy Empire's bound is larger than the world.  And then he goes on, 
Euphrates Ortus, Rhenus recluserat Arctos,  
Oceanus medium venit in Imperium.  
Euphrates Eastward did thy Empire bound,  
And on the North the Rhine,  
The Ocean in the middle being placed,  
Did lie as part between.  Here he saith, that the Sea itself was with Britain subdued to the Roman Empire; as afterward also he speaks more expressly. 
At nunc Oceanus geminos interluit orbs:  
Pars est Imperii, Terminus antè fuit.  
But now the Sea betwixt two worlds doth flow;  
The Empirs part, which was its Bound till now.  The British Sea was the Bound of the Roman Empire between France and Germany. But immediately after the Conquest of Britain it became a part of the Empire. He proceeds again thus; 
Oceanus jam terga dedit; nec pervius ulli  
Caesareos fasces, imperiúmque tulit.  
The Sea's subdued; and though it were till now  
Open to none, to Caesar's Sword doth Bow.  And then, 
Illa procul nostro semota, exclusáque caelo  
Alluitur nostrâ victa Britannis aquâ.  
Though conquered Britain far from us do lie  
The water's ours that on the shore flows by.  he calls the Sea Our water, being no less conquered, than the Island itself. From whence also he writes, that the Roman Empire was begirt with the Roman Sea, to wit, after Britain was subdued, 
Quam pater invictis Nereus vallaverat undis.  
Which the Sea had fortified with unconquered waters.  The Empire of the waters ever followed the Dominion of the Island. And 
b In Octaviâ, Act. 1.  Seneca, concerning the same Emperor and this Sea, saith; 
— paruit liber diu  
Oceanus, & recepit invitus rates.  
En qui Britannis primus imposuit jugum,  
Ignota tantis classibus texit freta.  
The long unconquered Sea obedience gave,  
And, though unwilling, did his ships receiv.  
He first the Britain's to the yoke brought down,  
And with huge Navies covered Seas unknown.  Moreover, the same Author in Apocolocynthosi; 
Jussit & ipsum  
Nova Romanae  
Jura Securis  
Tremere Oceanum.  
He gave new Laws unto the Sea, as Lord,  
And made it treamble at the Roman Sword.  This is plainly to be understood of the British Sea. And Hegisippus an old author▪ (representing the person of King Agrippa speaking to the Emperor Claudius) saith, 
c De Excidio Hierosolymit. lib. 2. cap. 9  It was more to have passed over the Sea to the Britain's, then to have triumphed over the Britain's themselves. But what could they do, when the Elements were once subdued to the Roman Empire? The Sea taught them to bear the yoke of servitude, after that itself had upon the arrival of the Roman Shipping acknowledged an unusual subjection. Hence it was also, (as 
d In Claudio, cap. 17.  Suetonius saith) that in honour of the Prince, the resemblance of a Ship was fixed upon the top of the imperial Palace. But these particulars relate only to the more Southerly part of the Sea. Claudius never had any navy sail to the North; For, his Conquest reached not so far. But the Romans sailed about the Island first in the days of Domitian, and then it was, that they first discovered and subdued that remotest part of the Sea. Tacitus, in the life of Agricola who was lieutenant in the Province of Britain, saith, the Roman Navy sailing then the first time (under Domitian) about the Island, affirmed this Coast of the remotest (Caledonian) Sea to be the Isle of Britain, and he discovered and subdued also those Isles called the Orcadeses, which had been unknown till that time. To the same purpose also speaks Juvenal, 
— 
e satire. 2.  arma quidem ultra  
Littora Juvernae promovimus, & modò captas  
Orcadas.—  
W' have born our Arms beyond the Irish Main,  
And th' Orcad's Islands which were lately ta'en.  Lately taken he saith, that is, in the time of Domitian. And therefore it is a manifest error in Eusebius Hieronymianus, who saith, That Claudius added the Orcadeses Isles to the Roman Empire: yet he is followed by Orosius, Cassiodorus, Eutropius, Bede, Nennius, Ethelwerdus, and others. But the contrary is sufficiently proved out of Tacitus alone, a very grave author, and one that lived at the same time. But as to those passages found in 
f argonautic lib. 1.  Valerius Flaccus, 
g Punic. lib. 1.  Silius Italicus, 
h Sylvarum, lib. 5. in Protreptico ad Crispinum, Vectii Bolani propraetoris, sub Vitellio, Britanniae filium.  Statius, and others, touching the Caledonians and Thule's being subdued before the days of Domitian, they are so to be understood only, that we are to conceiv either after the manner of the Poêts, that the name of the more Northerly Britain's, is, by the figure Synecdoche, used for all whatsoêver, and Thule itself for any part of Britain; or else that the Caledonians generally among the Romans, signified those Britain's that were but a little removed from the Southern Shore. For, even 
i Lib. 3. cap. 10.  Florus writes, that Julius Caesar pursued the Southern Britain's into the Caledonian Woods: That is, plainly, into the Woods of the more Southerly part of Britain: But when Julius Agricola had, in Domitian's time, reduced the Isle by force of Arms both by Sea and Land, and sailing round about with a navy, had discovered the Caledonian Sea properly so named on every side, which the Britain's (as hath been observed already) called the secret part or Closet of their Sea, and had taken in the Orcadeses; we ought to conclude that then that more Northerly Sea also was added to the Roman Empire, and so that the Romans were Lords over all the British Sea, no otherwise then of the Island: Which also is confirmed in plain terms by Tacitus, who speaking of Agricola's design to war upon the Caledonians, saith, he first provided a Fleet, which attended in gallant Equipage to back his Forces; at which time he prosecuted the war at once both by Sea and Land, and oftentimes in the same Camp, the horse and Foot and the sea-soldiers mingling mirth and company together, extolled every one their own hazards and Adventures; one while they boasted the heights of Woods and Mountains; another while the dangers of Storms and Tempests; some vaunted of their exploits against the enemy by Land, others of their Conquests by Sea, making comparisons, soldierlike, with many bravadoes. The Britain's also, as it was understood by the Prisoners, were at their wits end upon the sight of his navy, as if upon this opening the Closet or secret part of their Sea, there remained no farther refuge in case they were overcome. This is a most clear testimony touching the Dominion of the British Sea, showing that the Britain's and Caledonians first, and the Romans afterward became Lords thereof. A doubt hath been made by learned men, whether enlargement of Dominion, or Conquest by Sea, should be read in that place: But both the Readins plainly point out an acquisition of Dominion. And if you read enlargement of Dominion by Sea, it signifies that the Caledonian Sea was then annexed▪ to the other Sea, which together with the more Southerly part of the Isle, had by the Emperor Claudius been added to the Roman Empire. And that the British Sea was thus reduced at that time under the Roman power, as a perpetual and inseparable appendent of the Island, was perhaps conceited by 
k Thebaidos', lib. 1.  Papinius, when he thus bespoke Domitian, in whose time this Conquest was made of the Britain's; 
— maneas hominum contentus habenis,  
Undarum Terraeque potens—  
Long Mayst thou joy in the Command,  
Of men, and sway both Sea and landlord.  Truly, a 
l Jac. Chiffletius, in Epist. Dedicat. ad Libellum, de Portu jecio.  late Writer also saith, that Julius Caesar did assert to himself a Dominion over British Isle and Sea. And this he saith upon very good ground, whilst he join's the Dominion of both together, as undivided; but upon none at all, when he ascribe's only a Dominion of the Isle to the same Caesar.   

Touching the Dominion of the Romans in the British Sea, as an appendent of the Island, from the time of Domitian to the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, or Diocletian. CHAP. V.  
BUt the Romans having (as we told you before) subdued both the Island and the Sea that rolls about it; as they managed the Government by precedents and Lieutenants at Land, so by a chief Governor called Archigubernus, with a numerous Fleet at Sea. For, by that name was the Commander of the British navy called (or else Archigubernius, as it is in the 
m Antoninus Augustin. de nominibus propriis. Pandect. Florentin.  Florentine Pandects) which appears also by the Epistles of Javolenus, a Lawyer, that lived under the Emperors Adrian and Antoninus Pius. Seius Saturninus, 
n F. tit. ad Senotusconsult. Trebellian. lib. 46.  saith he, Archigubernus ex classe Britannicâ, chief Governor of the British Navy, left Valerius Maximus, Captain of a three-Oard galley, his heir or Feofee in trust by Will; requiring him to yield back the inheritance to his Son Seius Oceanus, as soon as he should be seventeen years of Age. But the Romans foreseeing there would be a great deal of trouble and but small benefit, in subduing and holding the Caledonian Britain's, they, leaving the North part of the Isle to the barbarous people, and retiring towards the South, did so limit their Land-dominion by rearing up Mounds or Walls before it, that we must of necessity suppose their Dominion was but small likewise by Sea. Those Mounds or Fences are frequently mentioned, in the Histories concerning the Emperors Adrian, Antoninus Pius, and Severus. But by that hence which Adrian made and Severus repaired, being either a Wall or a Trench drawn through the 
* That is to say, yorkshire, 〈…〉, B●… 〈◊〉 〈…〉, 〈◊〉 est●…d, and ●…d.  North parts, from the Eastern to the Western Shore, the territory of the Romans was confined almost within the same Limits which had bounded the Conquest of Claudius. But the other, which parted the Island in the middle between the Estuaries of * Ksitta and * Bodotria, bounded 
〈…〉 and 〈…〉.  the Roman-British Empire under Antoninus Pius, and after that in the time of Valentinian, Valens, and divers other Emperors their Successors: So that perhaps the Romans afterward had not much more of the Northern Sea in their Dominion, than what washed the Borders of these Territories. But after seius saturninus, the aforementioned Commander in chief of the British navy under Adrian or Antoninus Pius, there is a deep silence among Writers touching the Sea affairs of Britain, and almost concerning Britain itself, till the days of Diocletian. And under Diocletian, the British Sea being infested, all along the Coast of Brittany and Belgium, by the French and Saxons, care was taken to quiet and secure it by sending forth C. Carausius, a man indeed of mean parentage, 
o Eutropius, hist. 9  but expert both in Counsel and Action. And Geffrie of Monmouth writes, that he made suit for this Government of the Sea, and promised to perform so many and so great matters for the advantage and enlargement of the Commonweal, more than if the Dominion of Britain should be committed to his charge. Eutropius also, speaking of the Infesters of the British Sea, over which this man was made Commander in chief by the Emperor as Lord thereof, so far as he enjoied the Dominion of Britain, saith, that he oftentimes taking many of the barbarous people, and not delivering the prizes to the Liutenants of the Province, nor sending them to the Emperors, reserved them to himself; therefore when it began to be suspected, that he permitted the barbarous people on purpose to fall upon those that conveyed the Prizes, that by this means he might enrich himself, a command being given by the Emperor Maximianus to kill him, he thereupon turned Usurper; and possessed himself of Britain. At length, having fortified himself both by Sea and Land, he held the joint-Dominion of both for 7 years, as inseparable; being slain by his companion C. alectus, who enjoied the same 3 years as his Successor. And then he also (after he was brought to so low a pass by the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, who had crosed the Sea in person on purpose to reduce him, that he knew not what to do, and seemed to be imprisoned rather then fortified by the Sea, as saith the 
p panegyric. Si mihi Caesar.  author of the panegyric to Maximianus) was at length, by the valour and conduct of the Praetorian perfect Asclepiodotus, overcome and slain: And thus both the Isle and the Sea together was recovered after ten years' time, so far as it flowed before that part which was under the Roman Jurisdiction. Nor was it upon any other ground, than this ten years' usurpation in Britain, that those Coins were made with the Inscriptions both of C. Carausius and C. Allectus IMP. C. CARAUSIUS P. F. AUG. and IMP C. alectus. P. F. AUG. But we have placed here a counterfeit of that brass Coin which was made by alectus, that you may observe the three-oared galley on the revers of it, with the Inscription VIRTUS AUGUSTA, whereby I conceiv he gave to understand, that this Empire of Britain chief depended upon the Dominion of the Sea flowing about it. Touching the recovery of Britain thus together with the Sea, there is also a notable testimony in that panegyric, whereof some conceiv Mamertinus, others Eumenius to be the author. O how great is this victory (saith he) and worthy of innumerable Triumphs! whereby Britain is recovered, whereby the French are utterly destroyed, whereby moreover those many Nations that were engaged in the same mischievous conspiracy, are forced to a necessity of yielding; And lastly, for our perpetual peace, the Seas are scoured and rid of pirates! Glory then, O unconquerable Caesar (he speaks to Constantius Chlorus, the afore-named Emperor) that thou hast purchased another world, and added to the Empire an Element greater than all the Earth, by restoring the glory of the Roman power by Sea. he saith a greater Element, in a rhetorical flourish, in stead of the British Sea, which he thus expressly affirms to have been recovered together with Britain itself. It is observable also, that the Romans always so spoke concerning the Empires, of Britain, and of the Sea called by its name, as inseparable. Making mention likewise of that pest, which consumed only within the bowels of Britain, or of the imminent danger then attending the Roman Empire, It was bounded (saith he) with no mountain or river, which was not secured by Guards at the place appointed. But although we shared in your valour and felicity, yet like a Ship it was exposed in every place to great terrors, wheresoëver the Seas are spread or the winds do blow. And a little after, saith he, By this victory not only your Britain is redeemed from vassalage, but security of traffic restored to all Nations, which might have run as great hazard at Sea in time of war, as they gain benefit by peace. he expressly calls the Government also of alectus a Force of Rebellion by Sed, and it appears, saith he, that the very Isle of Britain, which had harboured a treason of so long continuance, is make sensible of your victory by being restored unto itself. Together with the Conquest of Britain itself, all the strength of Shipping was lost, which, upon alectus his usurpation in Britain, must needs as a perpetual Concomitant of the Island, have been of very great use against the Emperors. But the Panegyrist goes on▪ In other parts indeed some things remain which ye may acquire, as you pleas or see cause; but beyond the Sea what was left except only Britain? which you have so recovered, that those Nations also which border upon that Island, are wholly at your devotion. There is no occasion to proceed farther, except you design (that which is impossible in nature) to find out the bounds of the Sea. What Nations are those here that border upon Britain, except those that lie beyond-Sea, whose Shores were conjoined with the British Empire as it was then accounted, or with the Sea-bounds of the Province of Britain, that is, in the British Sea? As the French, and the other adjoining Nations. For, it is not to be understood of those little Isles which are next to us; their Inhabitants not being worthy the repute of Nations. Not was it agreeable to the majesty of a panegyric, to aggrandise the Emperor's glory by such petty things. But by and by in the following Chapters we show▪ that those Nations adjoining to the bounds of Britain, or whose bounds are united to the body of the British Empire, were those very Inhabitants of the continent of France, whose Shores are contiguous to the bounds of the British Sea, which in a civil since was accounted a part of the Isle itself, or Territorie united therewith. For, the Panegyrist proceeds thus to the explanation of those words: By the means of thy Victories, O Constantius, most victorious Emperor, all those parts that lay waste and desolate about the country of Amiens, and Beauvois, and Troy's, and Langres, now thrives again by the labour of the rude Husbandman. In like manner, Carolus Sigonius, out of the same author, saith, 
* De occidentali, lib. 1.  By this victory not only Britain itself was recovered, but the Coasts of France also, Spain, Italy, and Africa, were freed from the perpetual incursions of pirates. That is to say, by the taking in of Britain, with the Sea, and the naval strength that was its Guard, not only the neighbouring but even the remotest Provinces bordering on the Sea, were made secure and free, seeing they were all threatened by this war or rather rebellion by Sea, which might have raged and wandered as wide as the Ocean, and into the straits of the Mediterranean Sea; which are indeed the very words of the panegyric. So that you see, to restore or reduce Britain, to recover it, to suppress a Sea-Rebellion here, and to scour this Sea, were esteemed under such a consideration, that, the one being done, the other followed, by reason of the inseparable Dominion of the British Isle and Sea together. And when Britain was lost, the Naval Forces of the Romans, whereby the Sea was guarded, were lost in like manner. But when it was reduced, even these also were reduced together with the Sea.   

Touching the Dominion of the Southern and Eastern Sea, as an Appendent of the British Empire, from the time of Constantine the Great till the Romans quitted the Island. That it was all under the Command of the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain. Also concerning the British navy, under the Romans. CHAP. vi  
IN the following Age, the manner of Administration of Government being changed about the time of Constantine; as the Praetorian perfect of Gallia had a deputy under him to order the Civil affairs of Britain; and as the Magister Militum occidentis; he that commanded the Militia of the West had an Officer under him called Comes Britanniarum, Count of Britain, and Dux Britanniarum, Duke of Britain, who commanded Forces for defence of the Midland parts of the Isle: So the said Magister Militum was wont at his own discretion to appoint some person of eminent dignity to be his Substitute, by the Title of 
a Notitia Dignitatum Imperii Occidentis.  Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain, with Command over the Garrisons and Fortifications placed upon the South and Eastern Shore of Britain, and over all that Sea which flows between France, Spain, Holland, Denmark, and great Britain, as over a part or bound, not bounding, but bounded by the British Empire, no otherwise then as a distinct Province of the same Empire; as most eminently appears by the very Title of the dignity or Command. For, the Duke of Britain, and Count of Britain, were as the Count of Tingitania, the Count of Spain, and very many others of the like kind, denominated from those Lands and Countries over which they were put in Command. And such of these Dignities or Commands as were for defence of any Frontiers or Borders, took name ever from the Borders. Upon which account it is, that among the Imperial Offices or Commands we meet with Comes limitis AEgypti, the Count of the Egyptian Border, 
b No itiâ Dignit. Orient.  the Perfect of Euphrates, the 
c Inscript. Gruter. fol. 1090. 21. Ibid fol 490.  Perfect of the Bank of Danubius, and the 
d Sidonius Apollinaris in panegyrics Authemio  Count of Danubius, and those 
e L. 9 C. Theodos. lib. 7. tit. 1.  to whom the Charge and Defence of the river Rhine was committed: For these Rivers were Bounds or Limits of the Roman Empire. And it is the opinion of 
f Marquard. Freher. Orig. Palatin. part. 1. cap. 3.  learned men upon good ground, that the Counts or Dukes of Rhine are meant by those words concerning the River of Rhine. But as the Northern and Eastern Bounds of the Roman Empire were denoted by the names of the Rivers Danubius, Rhine, and Euphrates, so clearly also the name or Limit of the Saxon Shore pointed out the Eastern and more Southerly bound of the British Empire, or that which was reduced by the name of British, as an entire body, under the Roman power. So that whatsoever reached as far as that Limit, lay properly under the command of the Count of the Saxon Shore in Britain, as Governor of the sea-territory, as an appendent of the Isle. But that Territorie or Province subject to this particular dignity or Command, reached through the very British Sea, from the Shore of Britain to the Shores on the other side of the Sea, or those which lie over against our Isle of Britain, in France, the Low Countries, Holland, and Denmark; so that what Sea or Islands soever lay between near the British Shore, appertained all to the Command of the aforesaid Count, as to the charge of an Admiral belonging to a Province or Territorie.  

Sub dispositione viri spectabilis, Comitis litoris Saxonici, per Britanniam.  
Praepositus numeri Fortensium, Othonae.  
Praepositus Militum Tangricanorum, Dubris.  
Praepositus numeri Turnacensium, Lemannis.  
Praepositus equitum Dalmatarum Branodunensis, Branoduno.  
Praepositus equitum Stablesiani Garrianensis, Gariann●n●.  
Tribunus cohortis primae Vetasiorum, Regulbio.  
Praepositus Legionis TWO Aug. Rutupis.  
Praepositus numeri Abuleorum, Anderidae.  
Praepositus numeri Exploratorum portu Adurni.   

Officium autem habet idem Vir Spectabilis Comes, hoc modo.  
Principem ex officio Magistri Praesentalium à parte peditum.  
Numerarios duos, ut suprà, ex officio supradicto.  
Cornicularium;  
Adjutorem;  
Subadjuvam;  
Regendarium;  
Exceptores;  
Singulares, & reliquos Officiales.   
The names both of the soldiers and Officers are to be found in Pancirollus; this being no place for a commentary, to explain them to such Readers as are not well versed in the story of the Roman Empire in its declining state. But I shall give an account of their numbers, as it is cast up by Pancirollus, that you may the better know what those Garrisons were which were employed at that time, to guard this Seaappendant of the British Empire. 
m Ad notitiam dignit▪ Occid. cap. 72.  Under this Count (saith he) was one Legion or Regiment perhaps of a thousand Foot, and six Companies; perhaps one thousand two hundred, and two Troops of horse almost two hundred. The whole amounts to almost two thousand two hundred Foot, and two hundred Hors. For, 
n Lib. de Thematibus.  Constantinus Porphyrogenneta writes, that at this time there was a Regiment of a thousand Foot. So he. Now, the Ships and soldiers belonging to the navy are not mentioned in the breviary, at least not by this name. But as there were Troops of horse disposed against the Landings of Enemies (in case any should happen;) so there is no reason to doubt, but that the soldiers belonging to the navy were listed in the Companies and Legion. After which manner likewise Flavius Vegetius saith, that 
o De Re militari, lib. 4. cap. 21.  at Misenus (now called Monte Miseno) and at Ravenna, several of the Roman Legions continued with the Fleets, that they might not be at too great a distance from guarding the city, and that they might as occasion required, be transported in Shipping to all parts of the world. he reckons those soldiers belonging to the navy, among the Regiments of Foot, or under their Name. But in the mean time it is to be observed, that the 
p Lipsius' de Magnitudine Romanâ, lib. 11. cap. 5. sed & vide Jul. Caes. Bullinger. de Imperio Romano, lib 6. cap. 6.  most diligent Inquirers into the Roman affairs, whilst they Treat of their Fleets, do besides that of Ravenna and 
q De quibus item Tacitus lib. 4. Annal.  Miseno (of which this latter lay nearest to France, Spain, Barbary, afric, Egypt, Sardinia, and Sicily; the other was wont to sail in a direct course to Epirus, Macedonia, Achaia, Propontis, Pontus, the East, Crete, and Cyprus; which are Vegetius his own words; both of them being first instituted and appointed there by 
r Suetonius in Augusto, cap. 49.  Augustus Caesar, to guard the Provinces bordering upon the Sea, with the Sea itself, and called also Praetorian, for the more reputation) they do (I say) for the most part add only two more that were set forth to Sea, but of less account. The one was placed at Friuli, in that part of France called 
s Tacit. Annal. 4. Strabo, lib. 4.  Gallia Narbonensis, The other in the very 
t Joseph. Halos. lib. 2. cap. 26.  Euxin Sea. And it is for the most part agreed, that the Romans had only four constant or more eminent Fleets at Sea. They do indeed rightly add also some other constant Fleets which belonged to Rivers, as that of the Rhine, and Danubius, of which sort also may be reckoned that belonging to Mysia called Maesica, and another also belonging to Pannonia or Hungary called Pannonica, and others of the like nature. But among these there were certain Barks or nimble Vessels call 
u Cod. Theodos. 7. tit. 17. de Lusoriis Danubii.  Lusoriae or Lusuriae (in English we may call them Flie-boats) wherein they scouted out as far as the remotest Banks and the Castles built upon them, to guard the Bounds of the Empire. And under this notion the name of these Lusoriae, was restored by 
x ●. 4. C. de Offic. Milit. Judic. & l. 4. C. de Offic. Magistri Officiorum.  Claudius Salmasius, according to two Laws in the 
y In notis ad Flavium vopiscum, pag. 475.  Code of Justinian which were before sufficiently corrupted. And as in Rivers they for the most part used these Lusoriae or lesser Vessels; so in the Sea they made use of Pinnaces, the least whereof had single Ranges of oars; those that were a little bigger, double Ranges; and those of a middle size or proportion had three or four, and sometimes five, as we are told by Vegetius. But now, notwithstanding that those diligent Inquirers into the defences and Fortifications of all sorts belonging to the old Roman Empire, are wont, when they mention any navy of Britain, to speak slightly or in terms obscure enough; this nevertheless is most certain, that there was among the standing Guards of the Romans, not only a particular Fleet of Pinnaces or light Vessels belonging to Britain, wherewith they guarded this Sea whereof we speak, as an appendent of the Isle of great Britain; but also that they had not any other navy in the outer Sea, or any Shipping at all upon the seacoasts of Spain or France, without the Mediterranean Sea. At least, it is not where mentioned by ancient Writers. Which is no slight testimony, that the Sea and the Isle together made up one entire body of the British Empire, as it was then devolved unto the Romans, and also that such a Custom was at that time in force upon the Sea, so far as it belonged to Britain, that the like could not where be found at least in the more Western parts, there being no other Sea-Province among them. There is (besides that ordinary instance 
z Chap. V.  alleged before out of the 
a L. 46. ff. tit. ad Senatus consul. Trebellianic.  Digests of the Civil Law, concerning Seius Saturninus Commander in chief of the British navy under Antoninus or Adrian the Emperor) express mention made also by 
b Historiar. lib. 4.  Tacitus of this British navy, where speaking of the affairs of Cerealis and Civilis under the Emperor Vespasian, Another fear, saith he, had possessed the mind of Civilis, lest the fourteenth Legion being assisted by the navy of Britain, should infest the 
* Hollanders.  Batavians upon the Sea-Coast. And therefore that learned man Lipsius had no ground to conceiv that this was part of that Fleet of small Vessels called Lusoriae, whereby the River Rhine was guarded; to wit, that part of it which guarded the entrance of the River near that place called the British Tower, whereof we spoke before in the third chapter of this book. For, it was even the whole navy of Britain, and that which belonged wholly to the Sea, not having any relation at all to the Rivers. And that it belonged to the Sea, appears not only by the thing itself, but also by what hath been already spoken, and what shall be said in the next chapter touching the Count of the Saxon Shore; so far at least as we may be able to judge of the former (as we often use to do) by the latter course that was taken in ordering affairs, and disposing of Guards and Garrisons. But that this was a complete navy, and had a peculiar perfect or Commander in chief over it, is testified by a fragment of an ancient Inscription in a Palace at Rome, called Palatium Capranicense, 
c Janus Gruterus, p. 493.  wherewith truly that name of perfect of the British navy was utterly lost. Yet it appears thereby that such a Prefecture or Command there was, not of the least note among those ancient dignities of the Romans, and that it was committed to the same man that was likewise perfect of the two Navies called Classis Moesica and Pannonica; as also Proconsul and precedent of the Alps, Sub-Prefect of the Praetorian navy, and Tribune of the sixteenth Legion. The form of the Inscription stands thus. ................................ 
 ................................ 
 PRAEF. CLASS. BRIT. ET MOESIC. 
 ET PANNONIC. PROC. ET PRAESIDI 
 ALPIUM SUBPRAEF. CLASS. 
 PRAET. TRIB. LEG. XVI. 
 FL. ECPREPUSA.  
Moreover, it is no light Argument to prove, that in those times there was frequent use of that navy in guarding the British Sea, as a part of the Province of Britain (as hath been already said;) and that upon this ground, because the very name of those scouting Skiphs' which were joined with the bigger sort of Pinnaces or light Vessels upon the Guard, was borrowed by the Romans in their writings from the Britain's, after the same manner as they took the name of those Boats called Copuli from the Germans, which 
d videses Lips. ad Tacit. Hist. lib. 5. num. 36. & de Magnitud. Romanâ, lib. 1. cap. 5.  were likewise of that sort of Vessels called Lusoriae, employed in guarding the Rhine. The Romans observed that the Britain's called those Vessels Pyctas. Flavius Vegetius, who in the Reign of the two Valentinians, composed his Books concerning the affairs of the Roman Militia, out of the Commentaries of Cato, Celsus, Trajan, and Hadrian, saith, 
e De re Militari, lib. 4. cap. 37.  scouting Skiphs' are joined with the bigger sort of Pinnaces, that had about twenty Rowers in all; which Skiphs' the Britain's call Pyctas. In these they use to make assaults and inroads upon a sudden, and sometimes intercept the provision and supplies of their enemy's Shipping, and by diligent watchfulness discover their approaches or counsels. And that their Scouts may not be discovered by their whiteness, they die the sails and Tackling with a bluish colour, like the waves of the Sea. They besmear them also with wax as they use to trim their Ships. Yea, and the Seaman or soldiers put on clothes of the same bluish colour, so that they are the less discernible as they scout about, not only by night, but also by day. So far he. And the printed Books do generally render these Vessels hear Pictas or Pyctas. But some Manuscripts, that have been used by Godescalcus Stewechius, call them Picatas; and also we read Picatas in two Manuscripts belonging to the King's library at St James, as I was informed by that learned man and my very good friend Patrick Young; from whence it is, that, in the old French translations of Vegetius, it is rendered one while Picaces, another Pigaces. But saith Stewechius upon the aforementioned place, It seems more probable to me that they were called Pincas, Pinks; For, even at this very day there is such a kind of Vessel known both in Britain and Holland. And the ordinary name is E'en pink. But howsoever the case hath stood, here we see in Vegetius, that the scouting Vessels were employed together with the Pinnaces, and their name so observed according to the British language of that Age, that there appears not the least ground to doubt, but that Vegetius was of opinion also, that those Vessels were either constantly or very frequently in use among the Britain's, and in the Sea-Province of Britain. So, it is acknowledged by every man, that those words Gesum a Javelin, Trimarcia Three Horses, Essedum a Chariot, Petoritum a Wagon of four Wheels, Braccae Breeches, and others of that kind, borrowed either from the Gauls or Britain's, and received by the Romans into their own Language, do sufficiently set forth the use of those things which they signify either in Gaul or Britain. Moreover also, Vegetius in this place so join's together the manner of guarding the Sea and the subtle sleights they made use of for that purpose, that there is no reason at all why we should not believ, that they were then used by the British soldiers which served at Sea, or who had command over the small Vessels called Pyctae or Picatae in those Guards by Sea.   

An Examination of the Opinion of some learned men, who would have the Saxon Shore, from whence that Count or Commander of the Sea throughout Britain had his Title, to be the British Shore on this side of the Sea; which is plainly proved to be fals. CHAP. VII.  
BUt truly certain learned men, either treating (as it often falls out) of some other subject, or else being too careless in considering the matter, do otherwise interpret that dignity or Command of the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain; And in such a manner, that if their determination were to be admitted, the proof or testimony before-alleged touching a Joint-Dominion of the Sea together with the Isle, in that Command under the Romans, would plainly fall to the Ground. These men are of two different Opinions. Some would have the Shore of Britain itself or that which is on this side the Sea, to be called only the Saxon, in the naming of this dignity or Command: Others would have it to be both the Shore of Britain, and all that Shore also which fetches a compass like a half Moon from the Western part of Denmark as far as the West of France, and lies over against Britain. But truly, they are both extremely mistaken.  
The author of the former opinion is Guidus 
a Ad Notitiam Dignit. Occid. cap. 72.  Pancirollus, who writes that the Shore or Limit within the Island was so denominated from those Saxons, who were called in hither by Vortigern King of the South part of Britain, to his assistance. The Saxons (saith he) possessed part of the Island, from whence a limit or bond that was reared over against them by one that was made Count, was called Saxon. Then which nothing could have been more ignorantly spoken, if you reflect either upon the thing itself, or the course of times. For, omitting this, that in the breviary of Dignities itself no mention is made at all of a Saxon Bound or Limit, but of a Shore (notwithstanding that Pancirollus in the Inscription of his commentary entitles the Commander that we speak of, Count of the Saxon Limit throughout Britain) the breviary was written in the Reign of Theodosius the younger, or in the year CCCCX, as learned men do commonly agree. That is to say, of that time, the frame of the whole Government of the Empire, both in the East and West, having been overgrown long before, was with very great diligence digested as it were into one entire Book of Offices and Dignities. But the Saxons, as most of the ancients tell us, came first into Britain in the year of our Lord CCCCXLIX. But suppose, what upon better consideration may perhaps be allowed, that their arrival ought to be reckoned in the 
b Apud Guil. Camden. in Brit. pag. 95. & vide Tho. Lidiat in Temp. Emendat. pag. 238.  year CCCCXXVIII. that is in the XXI year of the Reign of Theodosius the younger, yet in the mean time this is most certain (which is here in the first place to be observed) that Britain was utterly abandoned by the Roman Governors, before they were called in. Doubtless they were as 
c In Epist. de Excidio Britanniae.▪  Gildas writes brought in by King Vortigern to drive back the Northern Nations, the Picts, and Scots; not the Romans, who had bidden farewell to the Island. Neither had though Romans or their Dukes or Counts any thing at all to do within the Isle with the Saxons. So that it must needs be gross ignorance in Histories, and in the Calculation of time, to set down any Saxon Limit or Saxon Shore in the Island itself, whilst the Roman Empire flourished, or had any kind of authority in this country. Nothing therefore is more evident than that the Shore lying on the other side of the Sea over against the South and Eastern Coast of Britain, as we described it before, was called the Saxon in that dignity or Command. Moreover also that Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain was far more ancient, and known by an addition thereto of the Sea Coast or of that Sea which was comprehended in the Roman jurisdiction throughout Britain, or in the body of the British Province. For, Nectaridius was invested with this dignity in the time of Valentinian the first, or about the year of our Lord CCCLXX; as is testified by 
d Histor. lib. 27.  Ammianus Marcellinus, where he saith, information was given by a Messenger, that Britain was reduced to an extreme low condition by a barbarous conspiracy; and that Nectaridius Count of the Sea-Coast, and Buchobaudes the Duke were surprised unawares by the craft of the Enemy. Nor is any difference to be imagined between the dignity of the Count of the Saxon Shore, in this since, throughout Britain, and that which the forenamed C. Carausius received at Boulogne in France, to scour the Sea along the Coast of 
* Gaul was by the Romans divided into four parts; of which Belgica was one, containing Picardy part of Champagne, Burgundy, with so much of Germany and the Netherlands as lies on this side the Rhine.  Belgica and Bretaigne, which (as Eutropius and Orosius say) was infested by the French and Saxons. For, that even he also had places of strength and Mansion-houses belonging to his Government in Britain, appears sufficiently upon this ground; that when Maximianus had given order to put him to death, he immediately usurped in Britain, and reigned after for the space of seven years. So, the Governor here or Count of the Sea-Coast, and the Count of the Saxon Shore, being ever accounted the same, held the sole Government of Britain and the Sea belonging thereto. To whom also we may add, as differing only in name, not really, the perfect or Admiral of the British navy, under the Romans, mentioned in the former chapter. We confess indeed, that the Duke of Belgica secunda and the Duke of the country of Aremorica beforementioned, was by the very nature of his place to afford supplies for the guarding the Sea and this Shore beyond Sea: For, they also, as hath been observed, had Garrisons seated upon this Saxon Shore. But it is chief to be observed here, that these beyond-sea-dukes' were according to the nature of their dignity or Office to take care, not so much of the Shore or Sea, as the Continent; and that from thence, as you see, they took their names. This from the Tract of 
Praeter Notitiam & Pancirollum, vide Joseph. Scaligerum ad Ausonium, lib. 2. cap. 6.  Aremorica and 
* Ebroicae now called Eureux.  Ebroicae; which being extended through five Provinces, Aquitania prima and secunda, Senonia, Lugdunensis secunda and Tertia (which comprehends the lesser Britain and Normandy) contained almost all that which was commonly called by the name of Gallia; But the other had its name from Belgica secunda. Nor was there one Count or Duke of the Midland country, and another of the Shore or Sea-Coast in Gaul. But in Britain, the Counts or Dukes of the midland parts and the Count of the Sea-Coast or Saxon Shore, had distinct charges, distinct Forces, and the signal Ornaments of their Offices wholly distinct. Just as if the Roman Emperors would have it signified by this very thing, that as the Sea it self did by particular Right always belong unto the Empire of the Island, so the Sea-affairs and their protection to the British Command and Jurisdiction of the Saxon Shore or that beyond-Sea; but that both the Dukes of the Continent or main Land of Gaul lying right before it, were bound so to send relief, as occasion should require, against the Saxon Invasions, that in the mean time the sole care of the sea itself, as a particular Province given in charge, lay upon him that was made Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain. And if any Duke or Count either of Aremorica or Belgica secunda, was called by the name of Duke or Count of the Saxon shore (as 
e Jos. Scaliger. in lect. Auson. lib. 2. cap. 6. & Guil. Camden. in Brit. pag. 96.  some would have) it was done doutless upon this ground, because the Saxon shore, lying over against us on the other side of the sea, did bound their Land-Government; as it did also the Sea-Jurisdiction of the aforesaid Count throughout Britain.  
Nor indeed is that other Opinion any more to be admitted, which saith; That our British shore was at that time called Saxon, as well as that which lies over against it or beyond sea: And so that the name in the dignity or Office of the aforesaid Count, doth signify the shore on this side the sea. Of this Opinion is 
f In Thesaur. Geograph.  Abrahamus Ortelius; I conceiv, saith he, that the Saxon shore, in the breviary, doth signify the Eastern part of Kent, seeing that Dubris, Rutupis, and other Towns of Kent are described therein. He hath indeed very eminent men for his Followers, 
g In Kent, pag. 230.  William Camden, 
h Cosmograph. part. 2. lib. 3. cap. 31.  Paulus Merula, 
i German. Antiqua, lib. 1. cap. 18.  Philippus Cluverius, and some others. And they add this for a reason; because both shores, as well this on this side the sea, as that on the other side, took name from the Saxons that used piracy in very great numbers upon this sea: And therefore that the British shore also is set forth in the Title of that Count But this is a manifest Error. We know indeed the Writers of that time do say, that both the shore over against ours and the neighbouring Sea, was infested by the frequent depredations and Invasions of the Saxons, and (to say nothing of their ancient habitations upon the Danish and Batavian shore) that they settled their abode there: And therefore that it was thence named Saxon, is in a manner out of doubt among learned men. But concerning the Saxons thus frequenting that shore, there are testimonies beyond all exception. 
k Panegyric. ad Avitum August seu Carm. 7. Add eum lib. 8. Epist. 6.  Sidonius Apollinaris, of the Coast of Bretaign in France, saith, 
Quin & Aremoricus piratam Saxona tractus  
Sperabat.—  
— hope then revived the bretaigns' stout,  
The Saxon Pirates being driven out.  And 
l Histor. lib. 27.  Ammianus Marcellinus saith, that under the Emperors Valentinian and Valens, the Coasts of Gallia were wasted by the Franks and Saxons bordering upon them, every one making excursions as far as they could by Land or Sea, with grievous plunderings, firings, and slaughters of such as they took Prisoners. Add moreover, that saxons Baiocassini, the Saxons of Baieux are mentioned by 
m Lib. 5. cap. 26.  Gregory of Tours, as ancient Inhabitants upon the shore of Aremorica: So that the reason is evident, why the name of Saxon was given to the shore over against ours. But truly we read not any where, that the Saxons had at that time either settled themselves upon the shores of Britain, or were wont to sail thither, or that they infested any thing of Britain, except the Sea. Nor do we find so much as the least sign or evidence, whereby to conjecture that the name of Saxon was either due or given at that time to the shore of Britain. And it was never heard (I suppose) that any shores, which have been of any account or fame, should have taken a new name either from a mere passage, or a bare infesting of the Sea by such as sail along the Coast, without landing. Especially, in the setting forth of a dignity or Command, which cannot be done, except an addition be made in the mean time of the name of the Land, whereto the shore itself did indeed belong. Run over all the Dignities which are recorded in the breviary of both Empires, you will find none set forth by any other denomination, then either from a Bound or Frontier itself, as those that were appointed for the defence of Bounds and Frontiers; or else from a more known and certain name of some Province, as the rest. We know indeed, there was a Haven among the 
* The Morini were a people of Belgica, bordering upon the Sea, and seated between Artois and Picardy.  Morini, which lay over against us on the other side of the Sea, called heretofore British, or, as 
n not Histor. lib. 4. cap. 23.  Pliny name it, Portum Morinorum Britannicum the British Port of the Morini: which name 
o Jacob Chiffletius, in Portu Iccio, cap. 6.  learned men would have to be derived from our Britain. But (supposing it to be Calais) they would have it so denominated because of Julius Caesar's crossing over from that Port into Britain. Now, it doth not appear by the like, or any equivalent reason, that the shore, which belongs to Britain, was called Saxon, in the time of that dignity whereof we speak. And doubtless, there is no improbability in reason, that the British Port of the Morini, might in the days of Pliny, or of the Emperor Vespasian (which is all one) be denominated from the riding of such Ships as were employed under the Romans to guard the neighbouring Sea, so far as it was British, and subject to the lieutenancie or Jurisdiction of Britain. But truly if the very shore of the Island had been meant in the dignity of that Count, whereof we speak, whose Office was to guard the Bounds, how compendiously might he have been called Count of the British shore? For, what ground had there been for so singular a circumlocution of words, as Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain, if it had been the very shore of Britain? It is plain, that as in the Imperial Offices there was an Officer called Magister Militum per Orientem, Magister Militum per Thracias, per Illyricum, peditum per Occidentem; a Master▪ or Commander) of the Militia throughout the East, a Master of the Militia over all Thrace, Illyricum, and of the Jnfantrie or Foot throughout the West; so also that this Officer was called Count throughout Britain. That is to say, every where throughout Britain, so far as it belonged to his particular charge, that is, as far as was necessary to guard the bounds of the Empire, placed next to the Saxon shore, or that which is on the other side of the Sea. And so the words, whereby this dignity is expressed, are to be distinguished that he may be plainly called Count throughout Britain; but of the Saxon shore, or Bound beyond-Sea, upon the same account as other Dukes or Counts in Command over Bounds or Frontiers were wont to be entitled. And there is an eminent example to this purpose in the Bound of the Germane Empire, which was held by the Romans. It was the River Rhine. The Guard of the Rhine was wont to be committed to a lieutenant or Governor; as appears by 
p Zonara's, Tom. 2. alit.  Historians, and out of 
q L. 9 C. Theodos. lib. 7. tit. 1.  the Code of Theodosius. But yet the Bank on the other side of Rhine was the bound of this Government, and so of the Germane Empire, not the Bank on this side. From whence also Posthianius being entrusted with this charge under the Emperor Gallienus, is by the Emperor Valerian, in an Epistle of his scent unto the French, called Duke of the Bound beyond Rhine; as we learn out of 
r In trigenta Tyrannis.  Trebellius Pollio. Also, the Bound beyond Rhine, that is, the Bank beyond the Rhine is recorded by 
s In Tacito Augusto.  Flavius Vopiscus. Thus, usually the Proconsul of Asia had the whole straight of Hellespont under his Command as far as the shores of Europe, as is shown in the fourteenth chapter. And certainly, the Count of the Saxon shore throughove Britain, is after the same manner to be reckoned Count of the shore or bound on the other side of the Sea, and so of the whole Sea flowing between, as an established Officer in the Government of Britain. And this also is very much confirmed out of another place of the very breviary of Dignities, where mention is made of the several Jurisdictions of those Counts which were under the Command of that eminent person entitled Magister Militum Praesentalis. In the printed Copies of the breviary, we read it thus;  

Sub dispositione viri illustris Magistri peditum Praesentalis, Comites Militum infrà-scriptorum;  
Italiae,  
Africa,  
Tingitaniae,  
Tractûs Argentoratensis,  
Britanniarum,  
Litoris Saxonici per Britannias.   
In the Edition both of Alciatus and Pancirollus, it is read, as we render it here, Militum infrascriptorum. Yet doubless the word Limitum Limits ought to be put in stead of Militum soldiers: For it is not agreeable to the nature of the Imperial Offices, that the word Militum should be admitted in that place. And it appears most certain by those things which follow, that Italy, Africa, the Tract of Strasburgh, Britain, and the Saxon Shore, had their respective Counts, as Comites Limitum Counts of the Limits or Bounds, no otherwise than those Territories which are added there next after; as Mauritania Caesariensis, Tripoli, and other Provinces in like manner, besides Britain, which had their respective Dukes likewise, by the name of Deuces Limitum Dukes of the Limits. But now both the Duke and Count of Britain had the very Shore of the Island for their Limit or Bound. And therefore seeing it is so, what Limit had that Count relation to, was who entitled of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain, if you will not yield that he took his Title from the Shore lying over against us? There was a Duke, and a Count of Britain (simply so called) besides a Vicarius or Deputy of Britain, who governed the whole Island according to their several charges; and we find in the breviary, that both the Duke and the Count and the deputy had for the signal Ornaments of their Offices, the whole Island, but in several Forms, encompassed with the Sea; even as the Count of the Saxon Shore had the Isle in like manner, encompassed with Sea-Towns or Ports. Also, it is manifest by those which are set forth in the breviary of Dignities, that the Deputy, Duke, and Count of Britain had the very Territories of the Isle for the Limits of their Government, and so also that they extended themselves to the very Shores every where throughout the Jurisdiction of the Romans. So that also both the Duke and Count of Britain ought to have been entitled in like manner from the Saxon Shore as from a Limit or Bound, if the Shore of Britain had been called by this name at that time. For, we plainly see, that the Islands of Britain themselves, so far as the Isles about it are comprehended under that name, are expressly described under the notion of Limits, in that catalogue of Dignities relating to Limits, which we have cited out of the breviary. Therefore from hence also it appears, that Limit which was the Saxon Shore is to be reckoned without the Island, and so in the Shore over against us or which lies beyond Sea, according to that which we proved before in our discourse. Nor truly, is it to be passed over without observation, seeing there are very many signal Ornaments of Sea-Provinces and Jurisdictions, as well as of those within Land, pictured in the breviary, and this according to the Form or Fashion received from those that had the supreme power, by the principal Secretaries or others who drew up the Commissions; That not only no Ornaments at all are found in the Dignities of the West, wherein there is any Tract of the Sea, except those which belong to the Government of Jurisdiction of Britain, nor indeed in the Dignities of the East, except the Counts of Egypt and Isauria (both whose Ornaments had a Sea-border about them;) but also that the Sea was ever placed round about in the signal Ornaments belonging to the four several Governments or Jurisdictions of Britain, that is to say, that of the deputy, the Duke, the Count, and lastly, the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain. Just as if the Romans would have had it signified thereby, that no other Province at all, nor any other Jurisdiction whatsoëver had either a Dominion of the Sea so amply conjoined, mingled, and as it were incorporated within itself, or a protection and command of a territory by Sea.   

Some Evidences concerning the Sovereignty and inseparable Dominion of the Isle of Britain and the Sea belonging thereto, out of Claudian, and certain Coins of the Emperor Antoninus Pius. CHAP. VIII.  
FRom the Dominion of the British Sea, as being continually united to the Island, or an inseparable concomitant thereof (as hath been already shown you) proceeded, as it is very probable, those passages of Claudian, who seldom speaks of the quieting, recovering, or subduing of Britain, but he adds also the Sea itself, as that which did necessarily accompany it. Speaking in honour of the Emperor Honorius, touching the original of his Family, which was out of Spain, he saith, 
— 
a Panegyric, de 4. Consulatu Honorii  Cunabula fovit  
Oceanus. Terrae dominos pelagique futuros  
Immenso decuit rerum de Principe nasci.  
Hinc processit avus.—  
The Ocean rocked his Cradle. It became  
Those who as Lords both Sea and Land should claim,  
Of nature's mighty Prince derived to be.  
From hence thy Grandsire had his pedigree.  That is to say, Theodosius, who after that Nectaridius Count of the Saxon Shore, as is before related, and Buchobaudes Duke of the Island, were slain, was sent into Britain by the Emperor Valentinian the first. But that which Claudian saith, concerning the affairs and actions of this Theodosius, relate's very little to the Sea, save that he calls him Conqueror of the British Shore, and adds that having vanquished the Saxon's, he washed the Orcadeses with their blood. Which is plainly to be understood of his scouring the British Sea that was wont to be infested by the Saxons. A little after also, concerning Theodosius the son of this man, or the Father of Honorius, that is, the Emperor Theodosius the first, he saith, 
Sed laudes genitor longè transgressus avitas  
Subdidit Oceanum sceptris.—  
His Father did his Grandsir's worth transcend▪  
And brought the Ocean under his command.  Which without question relate's to the recovery of Britain, after the slaughter of Maximus at Aquileia, who had tyrannically usurped the sovereignty of the Island. The same author writing also in commendation of Flavius Stilico Tutor or Guardian of Honorius the younger, bring's in Britain herself saying, Stilico hath so fortified and secured me, 
— 
b De laudibus Stiliconis. lib. 2.  ne Litore toto  
Prospicerem dubiis venturum Saxona ventis,  
I could not see throughout the Shore, or stand  
One Saxon ready to cross o'er and land.  That is to say; he rendered the Sea quiet and secure for me, he hath guarded and kept it for me; he hath driven away the Saxons from the use of it. In another place also, he bring's in the Goddess piety speaking to Honorius, 
— 
c In Eutropium, lib. 1.  Quantum, te principe, possim,  
Non longinqua docent: domito quòd Saxone Tethys  
Mitior, aut fracto secura Britannia Picto.  
What progress I may make, during thy Reign,  
Some late examples tell us; since the Main,  
The Saxon being tamed, is grown more sure,  
And Britain from the conquered Picts secure.  The Protection of the Sea is in this place plainly conjoined with that of the Island. The same poet also, to Manlius Theodorus the Consul, saith, 
— Hispana tibi Germanáque Tethys  
Paruit, & nostro diducta Britannia mundo.  
Spanish and Germane Seas both yield to thee,  
And Britain severed from our world by Sea.  There was the same Dominion, the same victory, and the same Guardianship or Protection always both of the British Tethys, or Sea, and the Isle itself. For, the Germane Tethys in this place is that part of the British Sea which flows between Belgium, Holland, Friesland, the Jutae, and Britain.  
A little before, there he set's forth the hair of Spain with leavs of the palmtree, and her mantle embroidered with the River Tagus; And Africa with ears of Corn and ivory, after the same manner as it was stamped in the Coins of Antoninus Pius. Both these are washed, and almost encompassed by the Sea. But the poet then understood, that the Dominion of the adjacent Sea belonged to neither of them, as it did to Britain: But as the Palms, and the River Tagus were peculiar to Spain; as the ears of Corn and ivory to Africa; so he would have it understood, that the Province of Britain had the Sea of the same name peculiar thereunto. But yet it is to be conceived, that the Dominion of the Romans was so limited in this Sea, according to their possession of the shore, that they had little power in that part of the British Sea, which bordered upon the shores of those British Nations, who were not under their obedience: This is to be taken chief of the Irish Sea, and the rest that lies northwest. For when the Roman Empire began to decline, not only Ireland, but the Isle of Man also, and the other Isles of the Western Sea, and a great portion of the more Northerly part of Britain, was possessed by the Scots and Picts; so that we have sufficient ground to conceiv, that they also had an ancient Dominion of their own in the neighbouring Sea. And so let this serve to have been spoken concerning the Empire or Dominion of the British Sea, in the time of the Romans, as that which by ancient Right no less belonged to the Isle and the Empire thereof, then either a Wall or Suburbs unto a city. Now we pass on to the times of their Successors.   

Touching the Dominion of the British Sea, after that the Inhabitants had freed themselves from the Roman power. CHAP. IX.  
WHen the Roman Empire was declining under the Emperors Theodosius the younger, and Honorius, and Valentinian the third, insomuch that they had not Forces sufficient to guard the city itself, than the Britain's freed themselves wholly from their Power, about CCCCLXXX. years after the arrival of Julius Caesar, or in the year of our Lord CCCCXXX. That is to say, as 
a Histor. li. 6.  Zosimus writes, They cast off the Roman Government, and settled a Common weal after their own liking. Then the Dominion of the Sea, as well as of that part of the Isle which was possessed before by the Romans, returned unto the Natives. In the mean time, the Saxons inhabiting the shore over against us, hankered after it, who being a people extremely given to piracy, the Romans were wont to appoint an Officer to drive them away, called the Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain, as hath been shown at large already. Nevertheless being sent for by the Southern Britain's destitute of all manner of succour from the Romans, to assist them against the Scots and Picts, they at length got the whole Power here into their own hands. And so in that famous heptarchy of theirs, the Kingdom was ever accounted of in such a manner, that even before the time of King Egbert, it was under the Power of some one King, which all the rest acknowledged as Supreme. These were driven out by the Danes; but questionless, they both had a Dominion by Sea conjoined with that upon landlord. For it is not to be imagined, that they who were so accustomed to the Sea, and to whom before that time 
— 
b Sidon. Apollinaris Panegyric. ad Avitum Aug. seu Carm. 7.  pelle salum sulcare Britannum  
Ludus, & assuto glaucum mare findere lembo;  
It was a sport to cut the British Main  
In Leathern Barks, and blow the azure plain.  And whose Rowers or Mariners had you beheld, you would have thought you had seen so many Arch-Pirats, as 
c Li. 8. Epist. 6.  Sidonius Apo●tinaris saith of the Saxons; And who did not only know, but were familiarly acquainted with the dangers of the Sea; The very same thing is to be said of the Danes also and Normans, (for, these names being promiscuously used, do very often signify the same Nation) as is sufficiently attested by Regino, Dudo, the Monk of Malmsburie, Abbo, Gemiticensis, and others; It is not, I say, to be imagined, that these people having gotten possession either of the Isle or shore, to which the sovereignty of the Sea did so nearly appertain, should not in like manner have possessed the Sea, also lying before it, by right of Dominion. Nor is it perhaps altogether unworthy to be considered, that these Saxons had so great, so singular and admirable an acquaintance with the Sea and Sea-affairs, that by an exquisite observation of the Tides and 
* The Ebbs they called Ledones or Lidunas; the Tides they called Malinas.  ebb of the Sea, they were wont to reckon their months and years, yea, and to frame Computations of years thereby. A thing not to be paralleled by any example. And as the more ancient Husbandmen used to reckon days and hours by the time of yoking their Oxen; and as most other Nations measured years and days by the course of the Sun and Moon, (as things most to be regarded before others, in the improvement and various use of those Lands that they possessed): so these alone distinguished their yearly and monthly periods, by the mere reciprocal motion of the Sea, which they were so well acquainted with, and by its various beating upon the shore in Ebbing and Flowing, as that whereof special notice was to be taken in that kind of life. Moreover, as they say the Egyptians derived their skill in geometry from the measuring of their Fields, after the Inundation of their River Nilus; so it is not to be doubted, but that our Saxons derived this strange artifice, never heard of in any other country, from a very frequent use and perpetual observation of the Sea. Concerning which, he that would know more, may peruse our venerable 
d De Naturâ Rerum, cap. 28.  Bede first, and after him 
e De emendatione temp. lib. 2. pag. 162. & in Appendice ad conjectan. in Varronem pag. 181. Edit. 1581.  Joseph Scaliger, 
f De Doctrinâ temp. li. 2. cap. 70.  Dionysius Petavius, and Olaus 
g In Fastis Danicis, lib. 1. cap. 11.  Wormius. But that the whole Nation was very much accustomed to Sea-affairs, and not only those that bordered upon the Sea, may be collected from thence, that otherwise it would hardly be believed, that the Nation itself could have kept an account of Times and Seasons, by the various course of the Sea: For it could not possibly be, but that such an account would have been either useless, or too difficult for those that were not used to the Sea. Yea, without doubt it was no small cause of their calling the Saxons into the Island, that they being most expert seamen, might guard the Sea, which having been newly deserted by the Roman navy, lay open at that time to the Invasions of Enemies on every side. Thus much indeed seems to be signified by 
h Lib. 1.  Ethelwerd an ancient Writer, speaking of their coming hither. In those days, (saith he) the Britain's herd that the Saxon was a Nation active in piracy or Navigation, and strong in all kinds of Necessaries for war, throughout all the Sea-Coast from the River Rhine, as far as the city Donia, which is now commonly called Danemare. To them therefore they sent Messengers with extraordinary great Presents, desiring aid, promising them a peaceable intercours and amity. Thus they that were wont before to infest the British Sea, are invited to its protection and amity. And truly, that the Britain's had a very special care at that time of the Sea-affairs, and so of the Guardianship of their Sea, appears from thence; that in the story of Britain, we read concerning the most famous King Arthur and Prince Malgo, that by many bloody battles they either added or recovered six Comprovincial Isles of the Sea, (which are the very words of Geofferie of Monmouth) that is to say, Ireland, and Shetland, Gotland, the Orcadeses, Norwey, and 
* By Dacia, here is meant Denmark.  Dacia, to their Dominion; yea, and Groenland, and all the other Countries and Islands of the Eastern Sea as far as Russia, and many other Islands beyond 
i Vide Guil. Lambard de priests Anglorum legibus pag. 137.  Scantia, even to the farthest part of the North. And that which we find in Nennius the Scholar of 
k Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Elvodugus, is to be understood of this time, to wit, that Cuneda the Grandfather of Magolcunus a Prince of the Southern Britain's, drove the Scots out of all the Countries and Islands of Britain. Certainly, for the effecting of this, it was necessary there should be a very great strength in shipping, for the guard and security of the neighbouring Sea.   

It is proved, both from the very beginning of the Saxons Reign, as also from their Forces and Victories by Sea, that the English-Saxons, and Danes, who ruled the South-part of Britain, had Dominion over the Sea. CHAP. X.  
BEsides what hath been already said of the Saxons, during their Reign here, there are also in ancient Records divers other particulars, which more plainly show, that both they and the Danes had Dominion over the Sea, whilst they reigned in Britain. Those particulars I divide into four parts: The first respects the Original of the most Potent Kingdom of the Saxons. The second, the Naval Forces and Victories of the following time. The third, the Tributes and Duties of fiduciary Clients or Vassals belonging to the maintenance of the navy. Lastly, several plain and most evident testimonies concerning the sovereignty of the English-Saxon Kings at that time over the Sea.  
In the first beginning of the Reign of the English-Saxons, I reckon both the coming of Octha and Ebissa, invited hither by Vortigern upon the persuasion of Hengist, as also the arrival of King AElla in Sussex. He possessed himself of the Sea, and the Southern shores; they of the Northern. Concerning the Naval Forces of Octha and Ebissa, 
a Ms. in bibliotheca Cottonianâ, & partim apud Camden. in Britan. p. 91.  Nennius the Scholar of El. vodugus, who usually passeth up and down also by the name of Gildas, speaks thus; They sailing about the Picts, with forty Vessels, called 
* These Ciulae were full of Saxons, which Sidonius calls Pandos Myoparones, Vessels built somewhat long and narrow.  Ciulae, spoiled the Orcade's Islands, and came and possessed very many Isles and Regions beyond Mare ●resicum, (meaning Bodotria or the Firth of Edinburgh) which lies between us and the Scots, even as far as the Borders of the Picts. And Hengist by degrees drew those Ciulae to himself, so that they forsook the Isles which they inhabited. It could hardly be more plainly expressed, that the Nation being accustomed to the Affairs of Navigation and Wars by Sea, having thus gotten a great part of Britain, did first secure that inseparable appendent of the Island or the Sea; having brought over a numerous Force, for the accomplishment of this design. As to what concerns AElla, they writ, that he with his sons Cissa and Cimenus, and a navy very well appointed with military Forces, arrived upon the shore of Sussex, near Witering, 
b Cart. C●dwallae R. apud Camden in Britann. pag. 223  Cimenshore, so called heretofore from this Cimenus; and that having driven away the Britain's, he possessed the 
c Ethelwerd lib. 1. & 3. ca 3. Henric. Huntindon. lib. 2.  Sea-Coast; and sending daily for new Aids out of Germany, he at length enlarged his Kingdom along the Eastern shores, as far as the River Humber, and was the first of the English Saxons that attained here to so large a Dominion. Also, that his posterity enjoied this Kingdom about LXX years. But truly it could hardly be, that they who were eminently powerful in shipping, and had made so happy a Progress upon the shore, should not in like manner be Masters of the Sea itself; especially seeing we find not the least testimony that any others were at that time, of any considerable strength in shipping upon this Coast.  
But as for the Naval Forces and Victories of the succeeding Kings, both Danes and English-Saxons, they are to be seen every where in Joannes Asserius Bishop of Shirburn, William the Monk of Malmsburie, Henry archdeacon of Huntingdon, Roger Hoveden, Florentius of Worcester, and Florilegus; but especially in the Acts of K. Alfred, Edward the elder, Athelstan, Edgar, Ethelred and Harold. And questionless, long after the beginning of the Saxons Reign, this country flourished not a little in shipping, for the maintaining of the sovereignty of the Sea, as may be collected both from the Customs of the Nation already mentioned, and the frequent use of Navigation, from which the Merchants that used to traffic on both the shores were prohibited, upon the occasion of a difference that arose betwixt Charles of France, (afterwards Emperor) and Beroea King of the Mercians among the English-Saxons, to whom the rest were in subjection. Yet a freedom thereof was restored not long after, by an agreement of extraordinary benefit and advantage to the English-Saxon, as we find in 
d In Epist. apud Guil. Malmsbur. de de gostis Regum, lib. 1. c. 5 Et in operibus Alcuini inter Epistolas, p. 1669.  Alcuinus, and William of Malmsburie. But before K. Alfred, their power began to decreas by Sea, and that especially in the time of K. Ethelwolph, when the 
e Gesta Normann. ann. 840. Malmsb. lib. 2. cap. 2. etc.  Danes or Normans infested not only the shores, but also almost the whole Island, after a most grievous manner, and seized upon most of the Isles by force, which lie on the west of Britain. And so all was exposed to the mercy of pirates. But after that Alfred was invested in the Kingdom, the defence of the Sea was restored, and its Dominion established; concerning whom, that Asserius Bishop of Shirburn, his Tutor, writes thus: He gave command for the building of Boats and galleys, that is, long ships through, out the Kingdom, that he might prevent his enemies, and fight them by Sea, and putting pirates aboard them, he charged them to guard the passages of th' Sea. And a little after, He commanded also his seamen, to keep all relief of Victual from going to the enemy by Sea. he used the word pirates in this place (as others of that age have done) not for Robbers, as 'tis commonly taken; but for such as being skilled in Sea-affairs, were appointed to set upon the enemy's Fleets, and defend the Dominion by Sea: Touching the derivation of the word, the old Scholiast upon Sophocles his Aiax, saith; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That is, Pira, in the Attic Tongue, signifies craft or art, and hence it is, that they are called pirates which infest the Sea. But when the English-Saxons and Danes, in the time of K. Alfred, were ever and anon struggling for the sovereignty in England (for, Gurmundus, or Guthrunus King of the Danes, was at that time settled in Northumberland as a fiduciary Client or Vassal to Alfred, and had very large Territories in the East-part of England) their Fights were mostly by Sea, as if they had both been of opinion, that he which could get the Dominion of the British Sea, would by necessary consequence become Lord also of the Land, or of that part of the Isle which lies before it. For this cause also it was, that the Danes growing strong at Sea, K. Alfred mightily augmented his Naval Forces, by building ships twice as long as the Danish ships, deeper, nimbler, and less rocking or rolling, and so much more convenient for Sea-Fights. Florentius the Monk saith, In the same year (that is to say, the year of our Lord MCCCXCVII.) the Forces of the Pagans residing in East-England and Northumberland, using piracy upon the seacoasts, did grievously infest the West-Saxon's country, with very long and nimble ships, which they had built divers years before. Against whom ships were built by the Command of K. Alfred, twice as long, deeper, nimbler, and less waving or rolling by whose force he might subdue the aforesaid ships of the enemy. It is related also in the same words by Roger Hoveden. But Henry of Huntingdon, speaking expressly of the number of Oars that served for the rowing of these ships of Alfred, saith, King Alfred caused long ships to be made ready; to wit, of 40 Oars or more, against the Danish ships. But there are 
f Ms. Codices bini, in Bibliothecâ Collonianâ, anno 897.  Chronicles written in the Saxon Tongue, that speak of ships of 60 Oars, and larger, built by him at that time; out of which these Writers abovementioned, and others of the like sort, have compiled theirs. The words of the Chronicles are these, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That is to say, King Alfred gave command for the building of long ships to encounter the Danish. But they were twice as long as these; whereof some had sixty Oars, some more. They were also more nimble, less rolling, and deeper than the other. Not built after the Frisian or Danish manner; but such as he conceived most convenient for fight. So that there is no doubt but the business of shipping was mightily advanced in his Reign, among the English-Saxons, in order to the defence and maintenance of their Dominion by Sea. And we very often find, that those Sea fights managed by Alfred and his son Edward, with various success, against the Danes, and Normans, were undertaken not without great numbers of Shipping. But in the time of King Athelstan, who was very strong at Sea, upon the Irish Nation (saith 
g Histor. l. 5.  Huntingdon) and those that dwelled in ships, there fell a fatal destruction. The English-Saxon words in the ancient Chronicles, from whence Huntingdon translated those, and which agree with these, are, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which fully signify the same thing. For, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the Scotish Nation and Scots are by the ancients often taken for the Irish. he also (saith the same author) led an huge army by Land and Sea into Northumberland and Scotland, and in regard there was none appeared to make any opposition, be marched up and down the country, and wasting it at pleasure, returned with Triumph; whereupon saith a 
h Apud Guil. Malmsbur. de gestis Regum 2. cap. 6.  poet of that time, 
Jam cubat in terris fera barbaries Aquilonis;  
Jam jacet in campo, pelago, pirata, relicto,  
Illicitas toruásque minas Analavus anhelans.  
Now is the wild and barbarous North brought down;  
Now Analave, the pirate, is o'erthrown,  
Who having left the Sea, on Land doth lie,  
And spiteful threats breath's out against the sky.   
This Analavus was King of the 
i Roger Hovedenius, Annal. part. 1. Ann. 937. & Florent. Wigorn. ann. 938.  Irish, and of many Islands, who invading the Coasts of Athelstan with a Fleet of DCXV ships, at the mouth of the River Humber, received a great overthrow, and was put to a most shameful Flight. But King Edgar (as saith 
k In anno 937.  Florentius of Worcester) sailing about the North of Britain with a great navy, arrived at Chester, where his eight petty Kings met him, as he had given order, who swore fealty to him, and that they would assist him both by Sea and landlord. Or, as 
l Anno Edgari, 13. Huntingdon. l. 5.  Huntingdon saith of the same thing, they all did homage to him, declaring themselves ready at his command to serve him by Sea and landlord. Among these petty Kings there was one Maccusius, whom Hoveden and Florentius call a King of very many Islands; and Florilegus, a King of Man, and very many Islands. William of Malmsburie calls him an Arch pirate, Moreover, the same King Edgar, as if he intended to set forth the splendour, magnificence, and as it were an Epitome of his whole Empire in Sea-affairs and Shipping, did (as say Florentius and Hoveden, during his abode at Chester) enter into a Boat, wherein he was rowed by those petty Kings, himself holding the Stern, and steering it about the River Dee; and being attended by all his Dukes and Peers in such another Vessel, be sailed from the Palace to the monastery of S. John Baptist, where an Oration being made to him, he returned in the same pomp unto the Palace. In the very entry whereof he is reported to have said to his Lords, that then his Successors might boast themselves Kings of England, when they should be thus attended by so many Kings, and enjoy the state and glory of such honours; or, as Malmsburie writes of the same thing, when they should enjoy so great a Prerogative of honours: So many Kings as Vassals, to be ready always to assist with their Forces, whensoëver they should be required, both by Sea and landlord. There is also a notable testimony in the same Florentius, and the Monk of Malmsburie, how that this King sailed round about his Sea every year, and secured it with a constant Guard and Forces. Every Summer, saith Malmsburie, immediately after Easter, be commanded his ships upon every shore to be brought into a body, sailing usually with the Eastern Fleet to the West part of the Island, and then sending it back, he sailed with the Western Fleet unto the Northern, and thence with the Northern he returned to the Eastern, being indeed very diligent to prevent the Incursions of pirates; that is, behaving himself in this manfully (as say Florentius also, and Hoveden) for the defence of his Kingdom against Foreiners, and the training up of himself and his people for warlike employments. Thus the Guardianship or maintenance of the Dominion by Sea is evident.  
But as concerning the Fleets aforementioned, they each of them consisted of MCC ships, and these, as Writers say expressly, very stout ones; so that in the time of his Reign, the British navy consisted of such ships to the number of Three thousand six hundred Sail, as 
m In anno 975.  Florentius and Hoveden speak expressly. But others writ, that these Fleets amounted to Four thousand ships; as 
u Ms. In Bibliothecâ Coltoniana.  John Bramton Abbot of Jorvaux, others adding to these Three a Fourth Fleet, whereby the number is increased to Four Thousand Eight hundred Sail; as you may see in Florilegus. So, as Florentius also saith, He by the help of God governed and secured the bounds of his Kingdom with Prudence, Fortitude, Justice, and Temperance, as long as he lived, and having the courage of a fierce Lion, he kept all the Princes and Lords of the Isles in awe. we read also in Ordericus Vitalis, of King Harold or Herald, that he so guarded the Sea with a force of soldiery and shipping, that none of his Enemies could without a sore conflict, invade the Kingdom. So that we cannot otherwise conceiv, but that these Naval Forces were at that time disposed, and the Sea-Fights undertaken, for the defence and guard of the Sea, as an appendent of the English-Saxon Dominion in this Island. Especially, if we duly compare these things already manifest, with those which are added by and by to this particular, touching the same age.   

The Sea-Dominion of the English-Saxons, and Danes, during their Reigns in Britain, observed in like manner, from such Tributes and Duties of their fiduciary Clients or Vassals, as concerned the maintenance of the navy. Also, concerning the Tribute or Paiment called Danegeld, which was wont to be levied for the Guard of the Sea. CHAP. XI.  
HEre follow next the Tributes and Duties of Vassals, concerning the maintenance of the navy or Guard of the Sea; which are evidences also of that Sea-Dominion which was in the time of the English-Saxons. I call those Tributes, which were wont to be levied for the reinforcing of the navy, and for provision of Victuals for the seamen. Of which kind were those that were levied, according to the value of men's estates in Land, for the setting forth of ships in the time of King Ethelred. For, at that time whosoever possessed CCCX. Cassatos, or Hides of Land, was charged with the building of one ship. And they were all rated proportionably, after this manner, who were owners of more or less Hides, or of part of an Hide; as 
a Ms. anno 1008. in Bibliotheca Cottoniana.  Marianus Scotus, Hoveden, and Florentius do all tell us in the very same words. Ethelred King of England (say they) gave strict command that one galley should be charged upon CCCX Cassati, but a Coat of armour and an Helmet upon nine, and that ships should be built throughout all England, which being made ready, he victualled and manned them with choice soldiers, and appointed their Rendezvous at the Port of Sandwich, to secure the Bounds of his Kingdom from the eruptions of Foreiners. But 
b Histor. minor. Ms. in Bibliotheca Cottoniana.  Henry of Huntingdon, as also Matthew Paris, and Florilegus, speaking of the same thing say; The King charged one ship upon three hundred and ten Hides of Land through all England; also a Coat-Armor and Helmet upon eight Hides. Then Huntingdon tell's what an Hide doth signify. But an Hide in English, saith he, is so much Land as a man can till with one blow for a year. Others there are that determine otherwise touching the quantity of an Hide: And most certain it is, that it was very various, according to the different Custom of Countries; but the same with Cassata and 
* A Carve of I and, i. e. as much as may be tilled by one blow in a year.  Carucata. Indeed, the English-Saxon Chronicles of the abbey of 
c Mr. in Bibliotheca Cottoniana.  Abingdon, do likewise mention Hides here expressly. In the year MVIII. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (say they) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hund 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tynumaenne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 helm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, That is to say, the King gave command for the building) of Ships carefully throughout all England; to wit, that one galley should be charged upon CCCX Hides of Land; but a Coat-Armor and Helmet upon eight Hides. And it was usual, according to the Laws of that Age, that the richer sort should be taxed by the number of Hides; as we see also throughout that breviary of England or the Book of Rates called 
d Mss. penes Camerarios Scaccarii.  doomsday, which was first written in the time of King William▪ Huntingdon adds also, that there never had been so great a number of Ships in the time of any one in Britain; which is testified in like manner by the Saxon Chronicles before cited. So that, that most numerous navy of King Edgar (mentioned in the former chapter) was not to be compared with this. But yet that most learned man and great Light of our Island, Mr 
e In Brit. pag. 114.  Camden, hath so cast up the number of Hides throughout England, out of the ancient Records of that Age, that they do not exceed 243600. If this had been so, than they could have set forth no more than 785 Ships by this Tribute, which is a lesser number than that of King Edgar by some thousands: So that some other account is to be made concerning Hides, which is not to be handled in this place.  
Hereunto belongs that of Huntingdon, touching King Canutus and his Son Harald. In the days of Harald (saith he) as also in the time of his Father, eight Marks were paid by every Port for XVI Ships. In the like manner, Hoveden saith, there was a Tax imposed which was paid for the maintenance of the navy, when King Canutus and King Edmond made an agreement in an Isle in the midst of Severn, called Oleney. Moreover, Huntingdon writes, that 11048 pounds were raised by Hardecanute King of England, before he had reigned two years, for thirty two Ships (that is to say, for the building of two and thirty Ships.) He gave Command also (as 
f Anno 1040.  Matthew Westminster saith) that eight marks should be paid to every Rower of his navy, and ten marks to each Commander, out of all England. he saith again also of the same King; that he appointed Officers through all parts of the Kingdom, to collect the Tax imposed, without favouring any, and therewith to provide all things necessary for his Forces at Sea. And Florentius saith; 
g Anno eodem.  He gave command for the paying of eight marks to every Rower of his navy, and twelve (so we read it in that author) to every Commander, out of all England; a Tax indeed so grievous, that scarce any man was able to pay it. But these things spoken of Canutus, his son Harald, and Hardecanute relate perhaps unto that Tribute or Tax called Danegeld: which was paid yearly for the maintenance of the navy and guarding the territory or Dominion by Sea.  
Among the old Laws of England it appears; that the payment of Danegeld was first imposed because of Pirates (either Robbers or others invading the Sea.) For, they infesting the country, wasted it as far as they were able. Therefore for the repressing of their insolence, it was determined that an yearly payment should be made of Danegeld; that is to say, twelve pence upon every hide through the whole Land, for the pay of those that should be employed to hinder the eruption of Pirates.; So we read it in some 
h Apud Roger. Hoveden, part. 2. pag. 344. in Edit. Londin. pag. 603. in Edit. Francofurt.  Copies; 
i Apud G. Lambard. de priscis Anglorum Legibus, fol. 128. & G. Camden. Brit. pa. 102.  others render it Irruption. But the other reading seems to signify, that this Tax was imposed, for the raising and maintaining of Naval Forces, so to guard the Sea, that Pirates or Enemies might not be able to make any eruption from the Shore on the other side of the Sea. Nor can the word Eruption otherwise be well put in that place. So that even that ancient dignity of the Count of the Saxon shore (whereof we have already spoken) is therefore not obscurely represented by him who commanded as Admiral over the Fleets of that Age. This Tribute or Tax had its beginning under King Ethelred. For, he being brought into miserable straits by swain King of Denmark, being forced to buy a Peace of him, hired XLV Danish Ships also by Agreement, for the guarding and securing of his Dominion in the Sea, who were to receiv their pay yearly out of this Tribute for their maintenance. For the right understanding whereof, it is to be observed out of the English Saxon story, that the Tribute or Tax usually paid at that time to the Danes, was of more kinds than one. There was one Tribute or sum of money, wherewith the English-Saxons were forced sometimes to buy Peace of such as grievously infested the Island. But another was levied to pay the Danish navy, which was hired to guard the Sea and defend the seacoasts. The first kind of Tribute appears by that of Florentius and Hoveden, in the year MVII. Ethelred King of England by the advice of his Lords, sending ambassadors to the Danes, gave them Commission to declare, that he was willing to defray their Charges and pay them a Tribute upon this condition, that they would desist from rapine, and establish a firm Peace with him. To which demand of his they yielded. And from that time their charge was defrayed by all England, and a Tribute paid, which amounted to 36000 pounds. That is, he effected this only for the present, that he obtained a peace for a time by money, which he could not by Arms, as Florilegus saith well. Four years after also, all the great Lords of England of both Orders, met together at London before Easter, and there they stayed so long till payment was made of the Tribute promised to the Danes, amounting to forty eight thousand pounds; which we read of likewise both in Florentius and 
k Anno 1012  Hoveden. But this was paid to the intent, that all Danes which were in the Kingdom, should in every place dwell peaceably by the English, and that both People should have as it were one heart and one soul, as it is expressed by Florilegus. Other passages of the same kind there are in the story of that Age, yea and some of an elder date. Yet this first kind of Tribute was not wont to be paid yearly, but levied now and then, as occasion required. Notwithstanding it may be true perhaps which 
l author Chronici Melrosensis, Ms. in Bibliotheca Cottoniana.  some writ, that Ethelred in the aforesaid agreement of the year MVII yielded to pay every year a Tribute of thirty six Thousand pounds to the Danes, for a longer continuation of the peace. we read here that he yielded or granted, but no where likewise that he paid it. But as for the second kind of Tribute, which was to be paid (as we have told you) for hire of the Danish navy, it was a yearly Tribute, and levied at the same time, at least in the same year, (to wit, of our Lord MXII.) wherein these forty eight thousand pounds were paid to procure a peace. Nor was it limited by any setsumme of money, but so much as would serve for victualling, and clothing the Forces at Sea. Florentius and Hoveden in the aforesaid year say; After these things, upon payment of the Tribute, (meaning that of forty eight thousand pounds) and a confirmation of the peace by Oaths, the Danish Navy which was before in a body, was disposed and dispersed abroad afar off. But XLV ships remained with the King, and swore fidelity to him, and promised to be ready to defend England against Foreiners, upon condition that he would provide them Victuals and Clothing. This is related likewise in the English-Saxon Chronicles of the abbey of 
m In Bibliotheca Cottoniana. Anno 1012.  Abingdon; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That is, the Tribute being paid, and Oaths of amity taken, the army (or navy) which was before in a body, was dispersed abroad. But forty five ships of that navy remained with the King, and promised upon Oath to be ready for the defence of this Land, upon condition the King did find them Victuals and clothing. Swain was at that time King of Denmark, with whom Ethelred made this agreement. But both the kinds of payment aforementioned, were called Danegelo, Danegeld, or Danageld, that is to say, Danish Tribute. The first kind is expressly intimated by this name in 
n In Polycratico, seu de Nugis Curialium, lib. 8. cap. 21.  Joannes Sarisburiensis; where he saith, Swain wasted and spoiled the Island of Britain, the greatest part whereof he had in his possession, and afflicted the Members of Christ with many persecutions, by an imposition of Tribute, which in the English Tongue they call Danageld. But the second kind which was paid for the maintenance of the Forces by Sea was called likewise by the same name, both because it was occasioned by the agreement with the Danes, as also because it was wont to be paid to the Danish Fleet, that was hired to guard the territory by Sea. For which cause also it retained the same name, not only under these Danish Kings, Canutus, Harold the first, and Hardecanutus, but also under the English-Saxon or English. And that this which we have spoken was the Original hereof, is affirmed also by Ingulphus the Abbot of Crowland, a witness beyond all exception, who lived at that time. He speaking of the affairs of Edward the Confessor, saith, 
o Edit. Londin. pag. 510. Francofurt. 897.  In the year MLI. (which was the tenth of King Edward) in regard the Earth did not bring forth its Fruits in such plenty as it was wont, but devoured very many people by famine, insomuch that many Thousands of men died through the scarcity of Corn, and want of Bread; therefore the most pious King Edward, being moved with compassion towards the people, released that most grievous Tribute called Danigeld, to all England for ever. It is reported by some, that this most Religious King being brought by his Officers into the Exchequer, to see the Danigeld that was collected, and to take a view of so vast an heap of treasure, stood amazed at the first sight, protesting that he beheld the devil dancing upon the heap of money, & extremely rejoicing; whereupon he immediately commanded to restore it to the former Owners, and would not keep one jot of so cruel an exaction; but remitted it for ever, to wit, in the thirty eighth year after swain King of Denmark commanded it to be paid every year to his navy, in the time of his Father Ethelred. By dis-counting 38 years from the year 1051. that year 1012. is sufficiently manifest, wherein the beginning of this Danegeld is placed, according to that which hath been already spoken. Nor is it any prejudice at all, that there seems perhaps to be one year over and above. For, such as are versed in the Chronicles of the Monks, know well enough, that differences of that kind are very frequent among them, especially by reason of their careless confounding of the years of our Lord, and of the Kings, whose beginnings do variously differ, as every man knows. Nor is it probable, that they were sufficiently agreed touching the Tribute and Taxes before the next, or one thousand and thirteenth year. For, concerning that year, Florentius, Hoveden, and others speak expressly thus; In the mean time the Tyrant swain gave command to make ready Provisions in abundance for his navy, and for payment of an almost intolerable Tribute. In like manner Turkillus sent out his commands every where; that it should be paid to his Fleet, which lay at Greenwich. That Fleet of XLV. ships road now and then in the Thames near Greenwich, and then first received their promised pay. That is, in that very year, which being discounted is the thirty eight year, as Ingulphus would have it: wherefore its beginning was not ill placed in that year. Without all question, that Ingulphus was a Courtier in the time of King William the first, or a man of no mean account, at the time wherein that was done which he relate's: so that especial credit is to be given him in this particular. Whereas also he saith, that King Edward remitted Danegeld for ever, the same thing is affirmed also by Roger Hoveden, and Matthew the Monk of Westminster; who saith, In the year of Grace MLI. King Edward absolved the people of England from that most grievous Tribute of 38 thousand pounds, which was usually paid to the Danish Auxiliaries, during his Father's Reign. Whereof we read also in 
p Hist. minot. Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Matthew Paris. But Hoveden saith, K. Edward absolved the people of England from that grievous Tribute, in the thirty eight year after that his Father K. Ethelred had commanded it to be paid to the Danish soldiers. Others there are also that writ to the same purpose. Some of the 
q Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ. Compacti cum Guil. Gisburnensis Annalibus.  English, Saxon Chronicles place the same thing in the following year, and so affirm, that there intervened 39 years from the beginning of this Tribute (which also they call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Heregild, that is, a military or Naval Tribute) to that abolishment of it by King Edward; Nevertheless, as to what concerns its beginning, they agree with Ingulphus and Hoveden, to wit, in the year MLII those Chronicles render it thus; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. That is to say, K. Edward abolished that military Tribute, or Heregild, which had been formerly imposed by K. Ethelred▪ to wit, in the nine and thirtieth year after it began. But yet in the author of that 
r Ms. Penès Camerarios Scaccarii▪ c. 27. Idem habetur Dialogus etiam in Codice Rubro, penes Rememoratorem Regis.  Dialogue concerning the Exchequer, written in the time of K. Henry the second, (commonly supposed to have been Gervasius Tilburiensis) we read it was paid yearly even till the time of K. William the first or the Norman Conquest; that is to say, for fourteen years complete, immediately after that abolishment. For, so long K. Edward reigned, whom that William succeeded. The Autor's words are these; The pirates of the adjacent Islands, having made an irruption, and spoiling the seacoasts, carried away Gold, Silver, and all things of any value. But assoon as the King and his Subjects set forth any preparations of war, for the defence of their Nation, they presently fled away by Sea. But the chief among them, and ever more inclined to mischief, was that warlike and populous Nation of the Danes, who besides their ordinary desire of prey; pressed on the more furiously, because they laid claim to somewhat of ancient Right in the Government of the Kingdom, as the British History relate's more at large. Therefore for the repelling of them, it was ordained by the Kings of England, that two shillings silver upon every Hide of Land should by a kind of Custom for ever be paid for the maintenance of valiant men, who by scouting about continually, and guarding the seacoasts, might repress the Invasion of Enemies. And in regard this Revenue was appointed chief because of the Danes, therefore it was called Danegeld. And thereupon it was paid by yearly Custom (as hath been said) under the English Kings, until the time of K. William the first, who was of the Norman Stock and Nation. So that author, who would have this Tribute to derive its name from the Danes, as if the navy had been maintained thereby chief to drive them from the Coasts of England. But questionless, the first reason of the name, is to be received, as it hath been alleged out of the passages above mentioned; though afterwards there was a subsidy raised and Tribute paid for the like Fleet, consisting of such as were not Danes, or of English, for the repelling of the Danes themselves, which was not improperly called by the same name. Touching the payment hereof after the Norman Conquest, I shall add more 
s Cap. 15.  by and by. But as concerning what he saith here, that two shillings silver upon every Hide were wont to be paid yearly for the raising of this Tribute, the same is affirmed also by other ancient Autors, as 
t Edit. Londin. pag. 276. Edit. Francofurt. pag. 482.  Roger Hoveden, and 
u Hist. minore Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ; in Stephani R. initiis.  Matthew Paris: So that these men make the payment double to that which is before alleged out of the Laws of the English-Saxons. The yearly payment of this Tribute is valued also by Matthew of Westminster, & Matthew Paris, at thirty eight thousand pounds, as appears by the particulars already cited: which truly was written by them with very little discretion. Nor have they dealt any better, who set down that payment at the rate of thirty thousand pounds, as the author of the Chronicle called 
x Ms. ibid.  Chronicum Melrosense. For, at what rate soëver that Tribute was paid to the King, according to the alteration of times, it appears for certain, that the Stipends usually allowed to the Danish Fleet were so uncertain, that they were set sometimes higher, sometimes lower (as we must suppose it could not otherwise happen) according to the number of Ships and Forces that were necessary for the Guard of the Sea. Of which also there are examples among Historians. Florentius in the year MXIV. saith, K. Ethelred gave command, that the Tribute amounting to thirty thousand 〈◊〉 should be levied for the Fleet which lay at Greenwich; So also Hoveden. But the 
y Ms. in Bibliot hecâ Cottonianâ.  English-Saxon Chronicles of the abbey of Abingdon say of the same year; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The King commanded that 21000▪ should be paid to his army; (For so that Fleet is called every where in English Saxon) which road at Greenwich. Here (you see) is no small difference in the number of pounds. But howsoever, if it be to be conceived of the yearly Tax or Tribute, than it was far less this year than it is reckoned by those Monks, who speak of thirty eight thousand pounds. Four years after, in the Reign of King Canutus, (who was a Dane) a far greater sum of money was raised for the maintenance of this Fleet. That Florentius, whom we have often cited, saith; In this year, (that is, MXVIII. seventy two thousand pounds out of all England, and one thousand and fifty pounds out of London, were paid to the Danish Fleet; and there remained forty ships with K. Canutus. But the rest were returned to Denmark. Of which year Hoveden speaks thus; Out of all England seventy two, and out of London 410 pounds were paid to the Danish Army or Fleet. And there remained, etc. They differ about the sum, not the Thing, wherein they agree with the English-Saxon Chronicles before mentioned. Yet these altogether speak contrary to that account of the certain sums, as it is set down by the aforesaid Monks. But 
z Histor. Minor. Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Matthew Paris and Matthew Westminster say of the same Time, that Cnute sent home the Danish Fleet, and stipendary soldiers, (except forty ships, as appears by what hath been said already) having paid them out of all England eighty two thousand pounds in silver. Also, in the second year of King Hardecnute, a Tax was levied for the Danish Army or Fleet, amounting to 21000 pounds, and 89 pounds, as Huntingdon tell's us. All which particulars do, I suppose, sufficiently demonstrate, that the Danish Tribute here mentioned was not fixed to any certain sum of yearly payment; and also that an huge sum of money was wont to be paid yearly at that time to the Kings of England, for the Guard of the Sea, (for, to what purpose else was that Fleet always kept, and so great Taxes levied every year for the maintenance thereof?) But in the Reign of King Henry the second, the name of Danegeld grew out of use, Tributes or Taxes being usually paid still, notwithstanding by other names that are very well known, for the Guarding of the Sea; as we shall show by and by. But they are extremely mistaken, even they who agree either with John 
a Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ, anno 13. Ethelredi Regis, seu Christi 991. pa. 57  Bramton the Abbot of Jorvaux, or some other author out of whom he wrote it, or any others of that kind, in deriving the Original of that yearly Danegeld, so often mentioned every where, from the former kind of Tribute, which was paid to the Danes, for the procuring of a peace; and they also who 
b Apud Jacob. Thuanum. Historiar. li. 95.  would have the war to have been undertaken by the Danes and Saxons against the Britain's, because they denied them a freedom of Navigation, and that the end thereof was, that this Tribute was upon that account imposed upon the Nation when it was subdued.  
Now, as concerning the Duties of fiduciary Clients or Vassals, wont to be paid in that Age for Naval Expeditions and the Guard of the Sea, we have set them down among those particulars which were spoken of King Edgar in the former Chapter. The petty Kings or Lords of the neighbouring Isles were bound to him by Oath to be ready at his command to serve him by Sea and landlord. And in that famous breviary or Register of England called 
c Ms. penès Camerarios Scaccarii.  doomsday, (containing very many Customs in use among the English-Saxons, besides the assessment of the Provinces, and written in the time of William the first) we read thus; It is a Custom at Warwick, if the King went by Sea against his Enemies, to send him either IV. Batsueins (sea-soldiers or Rowers) or else IV. pounds in money. And at Excester, when he made any Expedition by Land or by Sea, this city served after the rate of V. Hides of landlord. Barnestaple, Lydeford, and Totenais served as far as that city. That is, these three Towns paid as much as Excester alone. Moreover, Gloucester yielded XXXVI. Dicres of Iron and C. iron Rods fitted to make nails for the King's ships. Leicester also, if the King went against his Enemies by Sea, sent him four horses from that Town to London, to carry Arms or other necessaries. Concerning jews also, a chief Town in Sussex; there K. Edward (the Confessor) had CXXVII. Burghers at his service. Their Custom was, if the King went not himself in person, but sent others to guard the Sea, than they collected XX. Shillings of every man, of what country soëver he were, and provided men who were to look to the Arms on shipboard. Here very express mention is made of the defence or Guardianship of the Sea itself. And in Colchester▪ an eminent Town of Essex, we find it was the Custom of that Age, to pay out of every house six pence a year, that was able to pay it, for maintenance of the King's soldiers upon an Expedition by Land or Sea, etc. And this aught to be the rate, if the King shall entertain soldiers▪ or make any Expedition. All these particulars are in that Register: And others there are in it of the same kind. But an Expedition by Sea signified in these testimonies, not a war to be undertaken for subduing the Dominions of their neighbour's lands, but most clearly a preparation and enterprise of war, for the guarding, scouring, and keeping the Sea, as a part of the Empire of Britain: As it sufficiently appears out of the Histories of that time. For, we do not read, that our English-Saxons or Danes had any other quarrel at that time, with any of their neighbours whatsoëver, unless it concerned either the British Islands or the Sea belonging thereunto. Which also is especially to be considered.   

The Testimonies of Edgar and Canutus, Kings of England, with others expressly declaring the Dominion which they and their predecessors had over the Sea; together with an observation touching the Nations which in that age were seated upon the opposite Shore. CHAP. XII.  
THat we may at length set an end to that fourfold distribution which we made of the Testimonies of that Age, let us in the last place add the express determinations of King Edgar and Canutus concerning their own Dominion over the Sea. As for Edgar, the title which he commonly used, ran thus; 
a Apud Guil. Malmsbur. de gest. Regum. lib. 2. cap. 8.  I Edgar Sovereign Lord of all Albion, and of the maritime or Insular Kings inhabiting round about. So he makes the body of the British Empire to comprehend all the maritime Kingdoms that lay about, that is to say, all that are Situate in the British Sea. And this he more plainly declares in the Charter or Deed by which he settled revenues on the Cathedral Church of Worcester, in the year DCCCCLXIV; if so be the copy were rightly rendered by those who many years since printed so much of it as concerns this title. The words are these, 
b Inspeximus in Rot. Pat. 1. Ed. 4. part. 6. Sic habetur apud Joannem Dée in Monarch. Britannic. pag. 58. & 60. And in Purchas his Pilgrimage, part. 3. lib. 3. cap. 19 pag. 619.  Altitonantis Dei largifluâ clementia qui est Rex Regum, Ego Edgarus Anglorum Basileus omniúmque Regum insularum, Oceanique Britanniani circumjacentis (so John Dee, a man very well seen in most parts of Learning, did read it a good while since, save only that in stead of (Britannian) he hath (Britanniani) while 
c Edward Coke, in his Preface ad Commentariorum Juris, lib. 4. And James Usher Bishop of Armagh, in Epistol. Hibernicarum Sylloge, pag. 121. ubi vide item▪ p. 163.  others read, Insularum Oceani quae Britanniam circumjacent) cunctarúmque nationum quae infra eam includuntur Imperator & Dominus; gratias ago ipsi Deo omnipotenti Regimeo qui meum imperium sic ampliavit & exaltavit super regnum patrum meorum; qui licèt Monarchiam totius Angliae adepti sint à tempore Athelstani (qui primus regnum Anglorum & omnes nationes quae Britanniam incolunt, sibi armis subegit) nullus tamen illorum ultra ejus fines imperium suum dilatare aggressus est. Mihi autem concessit propitia divinitas cum Anglorum imperio omnia regna Insularum Oceani cum suis ferocissimis regibus usque Norwegiam, maximámque partem Hiberniae cum suâ nobilissimâ civitate Dublinia, Anglorum regno subjugare. Quos etiam omnes meis imperiis colla subdere (Dei favente gratiâ) coëgi.— By the abundant goodness of almighty God who is the King of Kings, I Edgar King of England, and of all the Kings of the Islands, and of the Ocean lying round about Britain, and of all the Nations that are included within the circuit thereof, Supreme Lord and Governor, Do render thanks to the same almighty God my King who hath enlarged my Empire thus, and exalted it above the Royal Estate of my Progenitors, who although they arrived to the monarchy of all England ever since the time of Athelstane (who was the first that by force of Arms subdued the English, and all the Nations that inhabit Britain) yet none of them ever attempted to promote their Empire beyond the bounds thereof. But the divine goodness hath favoured me so far as beside the English Empire▪ to enable me to subdue all the Kingdoms of the lands in the Ocean with their most stout and mighty Kings, even as far as Norway, and the greatest part of Irland, together with their most famous city of Dublin. All which (by God's grace and assistance) I have subdued and made their necks to stoop under the yoke of my command. Whereas he saith, that none of his Progenitors had attempted to enlarge their Empire beyond the bounds of Britain, it must be so understood, that it be taken for the Northern and Western bounds of the British Empire, as sufficiently appears by the mention of Irland and Norway. So that then more Islands than the name of Britain did comprehend, or than the Isles of that Sea, together with the Sea itself, were brought under his Dominion.  
But King Canutus (or Cnute) hath left a testimony also, whereby he most expressly asserts the Sea to be a part of his Dominion. He placing himself on a seat by the Sea side as it flowed upon Southampton Shore, having a mind to demonstrate to his flatterers, that Kings themselves are but men, is reported to have made trial of the obedience of the Sea (it being flood) after this manner, Thou, O Sea, art under my dominion, as the Land also upon which I sit is mine. And there never was any that disobeied my Command without punishment. Therefore I command thee not to ascend up upon my Land, nor do thou presume to wet the feet or garments of thy Sovereign. But the Tide (saith Huntingdon, and Florilegus who relate this story) swelling as at other times, did very unmannerly wet not only the feet, but legs of his majesty. Whereupon the King leaping up proclaimed with his own mouth none to be worthy the name of King, but him alone who command's both the Sea and land, and they obey. And from that time he refused to wear his Crown of Gold; consecrating it to a Crucifix. In the mean time, he here openly professed himself to be the sovereign of the Sea as well as of the land. Hereunto may be added some testimonies of other Writers, which although they are of a later date than the Kingdom of the English-Saxons, yet they are transmitted to posterity by the hands of such as were perfectly acquainted with the English history, and by the Tradition of their Ancestors well infouned of the most authentic Opinions and resolus concerning the English Dominion over the Sea. Geof●rie Chaucer (who was not only the most famous Poêt of his time, but, as Learning went in those days, a very well accomplished Scholar) in one of his Canterbury Tales, bring's in his Man of Law telling a story which he would have relate to the time of Alla King of Northumberland, who reigned thirty years; and his Reign began in the year of our Lord DLIX. In this Tale there is brought in a Lady, called Constantia, the Daughter of I know not what Roman Emperor, married to the King of Syria; driven she was by weather to a place which lay under the command of a Fortress upon the Shore of Northumberland, and there the Ship ran aground; she was a Christian, banished for her Religion, and there taken Prisoner by the Commander of that Fortress. In this Relation of the sad adventures of Constantia, he saith (what indeed is true) that Christian Religion was not received into any part of that territory, but that Pagans had overrun and did hold those Northern Countries under their Dominion as well by Sea as landlord. His words to this purpose are these, 
In all that land dursten non Christian rout;  
All Christian folk been fled from the country  
Through Paynims that conquered all about  
The plagues of Northumberland by land & See.  he said discreetly, that the neighbouring Sea fell to the conquerors of this Isle as well as the Land, knowing what was the resolution and generally received opinion of his Ancestors concerning that matter he lived two hundred and thirty years ago in the time of Richard the Second. Nor is it any prejudice to this authority, that the other things there related are fabulous; For we know that out of the Fables of Heliodorus, Achilles, Tatius, Theodorus Prodromus, Eustathius, and such others, whether of an amorous or any other strain, sometimes many useful observations may be gathered concerning the customs, manners, and received opinions, as well of the men among whom they are feigned to be acted, as of the times to which they are related. John Harding also, who, in the time of Edward the Fourth, wrote an history of the affairs of England in verse, when he reckons up those Princes that swore fealty to King Canutus for the Lands which they held of him, 
d Chap. 117.  he adds 
So did the Kings of Wales of high parage,  
And all the northwest Ocean  
For their kingdoms and for their lands than;  That is to say, the same was done at that time by the greatest Kings of Wales, and of all the North-western Sea, for their respective Kingdoms and Territories. Thus Canutus was King of the Kings of that Sea, which he himself also sufficiently declares, when he expressly affirms in what was before related, that the Sea itself was under his Dominion. And so much for testimonies, to prove that the British Sea hath been possessed not only by the Britain's, after they had cast off the Roman yoke, but also by the English-Saxon, and Danish Kings.  
Moreover, it seems they did use to take a kind of course for the strengthening and preservation of their Dominion, both by Sea and Land, as the ancient Germans (of whom both Danes and Saxons are a part) were wont to do for the defence of their midland Cities. Among them (saith 
e De Bello Gallico, l. 6.  Caesar) it was the highest glory to make very large depopulations, and lay all the country round about them waste; measuring their honour by their distance from any neighbour, and accounting it the only token of valour when none durst plant themselves within their reach; and besides, they thought by this means to render themselves more secure by removing the fear of any sudden incursion. So it hath been the manner of those that at any time have made themselves Masters of the Kingdom of Britain, to extend their Dominion in the circumambient Sea to the largest Circuit, scouring the Seas about, and keeping other Nations at a distance, as it were from the Wall or Precinct of the Island. Nor were those Germane Cities more Masters of that waste part of the country that lay about them, than the King's of Britain were over the Sea of the same name. But as we observed before of the Scots and Picts, in the time of the Romans, so here also it is to be noted of the Norwegians or Normans, (for many times they are to be taken for one and the same people) and other Northern Nations, That those British Isles which are situated in the West and Northern Sea, were sometimes so possessed by the Scots and Picts, as also by the Norwegians, and such others as infested the Northern Sea, and invaded the Isles lying between them and Britain, that it is not to be doubted, but they also according to the various alteration of their Dominions by Land, succeeded one another for that interval of time, in the possession of a proportionable part of the Sea also, as an appendent to every one of the shores of Britain The Scots (saith an 
f In Gestis Normannorum, pag. 2. Vide Aimoinum, de Gestis Francorum, lib. 4. ca 90. & 100 de Normannis.  unknown author, speaking of the year DCCCXLVI) for many years became Tributaries to the Normans, who without any resistance entered and settled themselves in the Isles lying round about. And as touching the Naval affairs of the Normans in our Sea, there are many passages to be seen in Regino the abbot, Aimoinus and other Writers of that Age. But in the mean time it is sufficiently manifest, that as by reason of the tumultuary & unsettled posture of affairs in those days, the Dominion of the Island itself was very often tossed to and fro; so also the Dominion of the Sea was in like manner attempted, disturbed, invaded, recovered, and defended, as that which did inseparably follow the Dominion and sovereignty of the Island. We are not ignorant that in the French Histories there are now and then some passages that speak of their Naval power in this Age, which are collected by 
g L'Amiral de France, chap. 6. & 7.  Popelinerius. But there is nothing to be gathered from them that may set forth the least sign or shadow of a sovereignty or Dominion over the Sea. Very few indeed are to be found, and such as either concern only the defending the mouths of their Rivers against the Normans and Danes than roving up and down our Sea, or the subduing of the Friezlanders, and some of the Neighbor-Nations. Whereunto also some other passages relate, which we shall mention by and by, when we come to speak of the Admirals of France.   

Several Testimonies concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, since the Norman Conquest, set forth in General Heads. CHAP. XIII.  
FOllowing the Order and Method of our Enquirie, in the next place we treat of the Sea-Dominion of the Britain's, since the coming of the Normans into England. And in the first place our discourse shall be of the Dominion of the English Sea, or that which flows between England and the opposite shores or Havens of the Neighbor-Nations. Now whereas it is confessed on all hands, that all Dominion is chief founded upon just possession or occupation, and its continuance, and that possession is not supposed to be had, by the act either of the mind or body singly and apart (as 
a L. 3. F. tit. de Acquir. vel amitt. possessione.  Paulus long since hath well determined) but is most firmly gotten and retained by the joint concurrence of mind and body; whereupon it is distinguished into 
b Hugo Donellus, de Jure Civili, l. 5. Cujacius, observat. l. 9 ca 37. l. 10. C. tit. de acquir. possess. & retinendâ.  Civil, that is, where there is a right or title by Law, and Natural or Corporal, and it is requisite that this Dominion receiv a signal confirmation by a long continued assent, a free and public confession or acknowledgement of such neighbours whom it most concerns: First then, as concerning the Corporal or Natural possession of this Sea, as well as that which is Civil or by Law, and is retained by the act of the mind, we shall give you very ample Testimonies since the time of the coming in of the Normans. And in the next place, we will show how this Dominion of the Kings of England hath been acknowledged by those Foreign or Neighbor-Nations, whom it most concerns. But forasmuch as what we shall thus speak of the English Sea in general, will chief relate to the Southern and Eastern, or that which hath the English shore on one side, and France and Germany on the other, we will therefore discourse severally of that which lies to the West of England, and also of the Scotish Sea, or that which lies more Northerly.  
As concerning the possession of the English Sea, both Corporal and Mental, or Civil, continued for that space of time which we now speak of, with the like Dominion arising and retained thereupon, there are divers notable and very clear testimonies thereof, which for Methods sake we divide into eight heads; whereof  

I. The Custody, Government, or admiralty of the English Sea, as a territory or Province belonging to the King.  
II. The Dominion of those Islands that lie before the French shore.  
III. The Leave of passage through this Sea granted to Foreiners upon request.  
IV. The Liberty of Fishing therein allowed upon courtesy to Foreiners and neighbours, and the Protection given to fishermen.  
V. Prescribing of Laws and Limits to Foreiners, who being in hostility one with another, but both in amity with the English, made Prize of each other in this Sea.  
VI. The Records whereby this Dominion is expressly asserted by the By, as a most undoubted right; and that not only by the King, but by the parliaments of England, when they debated of other matters.  
VII. The Commentaries of the Law of the Land, and common customs of the Nation, which do either assert or at least allow such a Dominion.  
VIII. Some ancient Testimonies of inferior note.   
All the testimonies almost that are comprehended in this Division, are indeed domestic; but so public, and of so approved credit, that hardly any thing can be imagined, which might give a clearer proof of possession whether Civil, as they call it, consisting in the act and intention of the mind, or Natural, which require's the presence of the body. As it will appear to any man that pleas to make enquiry. Especially if he add hereunto the judgement or acknowledgement of such foreign Nations whom it chief concerned, whereof we shall treat also by and by▪ But of these things severally, and in order.   

That the Kings of England, since the coming in of the Normans, have perpetually enjoied the Dominion of the Sea flowing about them, is in the first place proved from the Guard or Government thereof, as of a Province or Territorie; that is to say, from the very Law of the English admiralty. CHAP. XIV.  
AS concerning the Guard or Government of this Sea, there are three things therein that deserv special consideration. 1. The bare mention and nature of the Guard of the Sea, and of the Guardians or Admirals thereof, in public Records and Histories. 2. The Tributes and Customs imposed, demanded or accustomed to be paid for, and in consideration of the said custody. And lastly, the tenor and variety of Commissions belonging to this Guard, and English admiralty, or Government by Sea. Since the coming in of the Normans, there is frequent mention of a Guard or Government instituted for the defence and guarding of the Sea. Here call to mind those observations touching this kind of Guard, which have been already gathered out of that Record or breviary of England called doomsday. And King Henry the first, saith Florentius of Worcester, gave order to his Butsecarli to guard the Sea, and take care that no person from the parts of Normandy, approach the English Coasts. The same saith Roger Hoveden, in the very same words almost, save only that the printed Copies err in putting Buzsecarlis for Butsecarlis. These Butsecarli, or Butescarles, in the old English Language, are Officers belonging to the navy, or sea-soldiers, as Hutesecarli, were domestic Servants or Officers in Court. And that to guard the Sea here signified to secure the Sea itself, not to defend the seacoasts (as sometimes, though seldom it did) with Land-forces, plainly appears out of Henry of Huntingdon, in whom it is clear, that the persons who thus guarded the Sea were employed by the King, to make war by Sea against Robert Duke of Normandy, who was then preparing an Expedition against England. Now those public Records are lost, wherein the royal Commissions for the delegation of this Command or Government were wont to be registered all that space of time betwixt the coming in of the Normans, and the Reign of K. John. But from thence through all the succeeding ages unto this present time, it is as clear as day, that the Kings of England have been wont to constitute Governors or Commanders, who had the charge of guarding the English Sea, and were the Guardians or Governors thereof, in the same manner as if it had been some Province upon landlord. First of all there were 
a Rot. Pat. 6. Joannis R. Membr. 8. vide Rot. Pat. 8 Hen. 3. part. 1. M. 3. & 4. Claus. 9 Hen. 3. Membr. 15. Pat. 9 Hen. 3. part. 2. M. 9  entrusted with the Government of the Sea, or the Maritimae and Marinae, the Maritime and Marine part of the Empire (understanding by those words not only some country lying upon the seacoasts, but comprehending the British Sea itself, though I confess it was not always so) such as were to guard and keep it, under the title (sometimes) of Custodes Navium, Guardians of the ships, but more frequently Custodes Maritimae, or Marinae, in the sens aforesaid. And in the time of Henry the third, Thomas de Moleton is styled 
b Rot. Pat. 48 Hen. 3. part. 1. memb. 3. & Rot. Claus. 48 Hen. 3. Membran. 3.  Captain and Guardian of the Sea, and hath authority given him to guard the Sea and the maritime parts of the Eastern Shore. In the same King's Reign also, the Inhabitants of the Cinque-Ports are said to guard the 
c Rot. Pat. 27. Hen. 3. part. 1. Membran. 3. in dorso.  Coast of England, and the Sea. So Hugh de Crequeur was Warden of the 
d Rot. Pat. 19 Hen. 3. Memb. 14.  Cinque-ports and of the Sea in those parts. Afterward the title of Guardians or Wardens very often changed into that of Admirals. Edward the First, saith Thomas of 
e 22. Ed. 1. seu anno 1295.  Walsingham, for the keeping of the Sea divided his Shipping into three Fleets, setting over them three Admirals, namely over the Ships at Yarmouth and the road thereabout John de Botetort; over those at Portsmouth, William de Leyburn; and over the Western and Irish Ships, a certain Irish Knight.; Moreover also, that John de Butetort is in the 
f Rot. pat. 23. Edw. 1. m. 5.  Records of that time styled custos Maritimae; as were others also. After this, in the Reign of Edward the Second, three Admirals of the three several Coasts of England (saith 
g 18. Ed. 2. seu ann. 1326. & vide Rot. Pat. 19 Ed. 2. part. 1. Mem. 12. & 20. Ed. 2. Mem. 22.  Walsingham) had the guarding of the Sea, namely, Sir John Oturvin, Sir Nicolas Kyriel, Sir John Felton.. we find moreover in our 
h Rot. Parlam. 14. Ed. 3. art. 2.  public Records, that the principal end of calling a parliament in the fourteenth year of Edward the Third was, De Treter sur la gard de la pees de la terre, & de la March d'Escoce, & de la mere, i. e. That consultation might be had concerning keeping the peace of the Land, also of the Borders of Scotland, and of the Sea. The same regard they had to the defence of the Sea, as of the Island or Land-Province: giving us to understand, that the Land and Sea together made one entire body of the Kingdom of England. Other evidences of the same nature we find in the 
i Rot. Parlam. 13. Ed. 3. part. 1. art. 6, 9 & 11. & Rot. Parlam. 20. Ed. 3. artic. 21.  Records of parliament of the same King's time, or in the consultations of the estates of the Realm had about this matter, that whilst they Treat indifferently De la saufegard de la terre, concerning the safeguard or defence of the Land or Island, and de la saufeguard de la Mere, the safeguard of the Sea, they seem sufficiently to declare, being well informed by their Ancestors, that the Dominion of this as well as of that, did belong unto the Crown of England. For the business debated by them was not only how to provide a navy to make resistance against their Enemies by Sea, but for the guarding the Sea itself as well as the securing of the Isle, and so for the maintaining the ancient right of their King in both. In the time of Richard the Second, Hugh Calverlee was made Admiral of the Sea (saith 
k 2. Rich. 2. Rot. Par.  Walsingham) and Mr Thomas Percy joined in Commission with him to scour the roads of the Sea for one year. And in the Reign of the same King, and likewise of the two succeeding Henries the Fourth and the Fifth, debate was had in 
l lamb Parlam. 2. Rich. ●. part. 2▪ art. 3●▪ & 7. 〈◊〉. 2. Membran. 9 art. 13. & 14. & 7. Hen▪ 4. art. 18 ● 19 & 8. Hen art. 6.  parliament about the Guard of the Sea. In the Reign of Henry the Sixth, the Guard 
m hight Par. 33. Hen. 6. artic. 27.  of the Sea was with a numerous navy Committed to Richard Earl of Salisbury, John Earl of Shrewsburie, John Earl of Worcester, and James Earl of Wilts, to whom was added Baron Sturton; and afterward to John Duke of 
n Rot. Franciae. 32. Hen. 6. m. 4. & 6. etc.  Excester. And in those days it was usual to procure King's Letters commonly called, in the language of the Law, Protections▪ whereby Privilege and exemption from all suits was granted to those that were employed in this kind of Guard or Defence of the Sea, or that spent their time super saluâ custodiâ & defension Maris, 
o Stat. ●. Hen ●. cap. 1.  For the safeguarding and defence of the Sea, as the form of the words hath it, which we frequently find in the Archives. Moreover, in the Acts of parliament of the same King's Reign, mention is made of the safeguarding of the Sea, or de la saufegard de la mire, as of a thing commonly known, and for which it was the Custom of the English to make as diligent provision as for the Government of any Province or country. And in the 
p Rot. Parlam. 20. Hen. 9 Artic. 29.  twentieth year of the same King, the Commons preferred a Bill, that a strong and well accomplished navy might be provided for the defence of the Sea, because It is thought fit be all the commons of this Land that it is necessary the See be kept. very many other passages there are to the same purpose. Geoffrie Chaucer (who lived in the time of Richard the Second, and was a man very knowing in the affairs of his country) among other most elegant and lively characters of several sorts of men, written in the English Tongue, describe's the humour of an English Merchant of that time, how that his desire above all things is, that the Sea be well guarded, never left destitute of such protection as may keep it safe and quiet. Which he speaks to set out the whole generation of Merchants in that age, whose custom it was to be solicitous for traffic above all things, and consequently about the Sea itself, which would not afford them safe Voyages, did not the Kings of England, as Sovereigns thereof, according to their Right and Custom, provide for the security of this, as a Province under their Protection. The words of Chaucer are these, 
His reasons spoke he full solemnly,  
Showing always the encreas of his winning;  
He would the See were kept for any thing  
Betwixe Middleborough and Orewel.  Orewel is an Haven upon the Coasts in Suffolk. Middleborough is in Zealand. The whole Sea that floweth between Britain and Zealand the English Merchants would have secured, this they were wont solemnly and unanimously to pray for, knowing that the Sea was part of the Kingdom, and the Protection of them part of the duty of the Kings of England. For, as concerning any Protection herein by any foreign Princes, any farther than in their own harbours, or at the most within the winding Creeks between those Islands which they possessed upon the Coasts of Germany or Gallia Belgica, there is nothing, as far as we can find, to be gathered from any Testimonies of former Ages. In the succeeding Ages likewise, there is frequent mention of this kind of Guard, Defence, and Government of the same Sea, as will hereafter more fully appear when we come to speak of Tributes, and of the tenor and variety of the Commissions given to our Admirals. But now, it is to be observed, that both the name and nature of this Guard is very well known, not only by the use of the word both in the 
q L. 〈◊〉. tit. Commodati, §. 5. & 8.  Imperial and Canon 
r Extr. tit. de Officio Custodis Feclesiae.  Law, wherein it denotes that the Guardian ought to take a diligent care of that thing, whereof he is owner, who doth either lend it, or commit it to his oversight, but also by the common and obvious use which the English make of the same word in other Offices or Governments. For in those days of old, when the title of Guardians or Wardens of the Sea was more usual, there were appointed Wardens of the Ports, even as at this day there are Wardens of the Counties (who are those Commanders of Counties called Sheriffs, and in the usual form and tenor of their Writ have custodiam comitatûs the Guard or Defence of the county committed to their charge Wardens) or Keepers of the Marches or Borders, Keepers of Towers or Castles, Parks, Houses, and the like. Yea, and the Lord lieutenant of Ireland was especially in the time of King 
s Rot. Cart. 2. Joann. R. in Dors. & Rot. Pat. 17. Joannis.  John and 
t Rot. Pat. 3. Hen. 3. Membran▪ 4. etc.  Henry the Third, styled usually Warden or Keeper of Ireland, and his Office or dignity, commonly called the Keepership of Ireland; after the same manner as John Duke of Bedford, and Humphrey Duke of Gloucester, whom Henry the fift during the time of his absence in France, deputed to govern the Kingdom of England, by turns, were called Custodes Angliae, Keepers of England, as we very often find both in 
u Th. Walsingham, ann. 1420, etc.  Histories and 
x Rot. Parl. 8 Hen. 5. etc.  Records. So Arthur Prince of Wales was made 
y Rot. Pat. 8 Hen. 7. part. 1.  Keeper of England▪ while Henry the seventh was beyond the Seas. So Piers Gaveston was keeper of England, while Edward the second remained in France. So were others also in like manner. The Governors also of the Islands of Jarsey and Garnesey, and the rest that are situated in this Sea, who now are styled Governors, Keepers, or Captains, were in 
z Rot. Pat. 3 Hen. 3. in Junio; Philippo de Albiniaco, etc.  ancient times called only by the name of Guardians, or Keepers. This then being so, what reason have we to think that our Ancestors did not use the same Notion of Guardian or Keeper, and of guarding or keeping, in the name of the Guardian and the Guard of the Sea, which they were wont to use in the Guard and keeping of the Island, and in the other dignities or offices before mentioned? Doubtless, in all these the peculiar Dominion and sovereignty of him that conferred the Dignities, is so clearly signified and included, that his Dominion or Ownership of the thing to be kept and guarded, as well as authority over the person dignified, is plainly implied in this Title. Nor is it to be omitted, that in ancient times before the authority of the high Admirals of England was sufficiently established by our Kings, and settled so distinct, that the Command and Government of the Sea did belong only to them, the Governors or Keepers of the Provinces whom we call Sheriffs of the Counties, by virtue of their Office had also some custody or Command of part of that Sea which adjoined to their respective Provinces, as of a part of the Kingdom of England. Which truly (to let pass other proofs) is sufficiently evident by this, that many times in those days, they who, by the Common Law of the Land, were wont, as at this day, to put in execution the Commands of the King in those places only that were committed severally to their charge and custody, did do the same also in the Sea itself as well as in any Land-Province belonging to him from whom they received their authority. For, by virtue of their ordinary power derived from the King, and such as was founded upon the very same right by which they held the Government of the county or Province, they did oftentimes remove the King's Ships and Fleets from one Port to another by Sea, as through the territory of the Province that was committed to their charge. Which indeed is a thing we hear not of in later times; but that so it was in the Reigns of King Henry the third, and Edward the first, the Records 
a Rot. Claus. 7 Hen. 3. dors. 6. 14. 〈◊〉. 3. Memb. 22. & 17. in dors. Claus. 17 〈◊〉. 3. Membr. 7. in dors. Rot. Pat. 24 Ed. 1. Membr. 17. & Claus. 25 Ed. 1. Membr. 12. in Dorso etc.  of those times do testify. But afterwards, the Universal custody of the Sea, excepting only what was extraordinary, was committed by our Kings to the high Admirals of England, and to them alone or their Deputies, and appertaineth unto them now by an unquestionable right. But when any person is entrusted with that Guardianship or custody, the possession and dominion of the King who intrust's or give's him the authority, is comprehended in that Government or Command; which also is confirmed by words most express and home to the business in hand▪ that are to be seen in a Libel, or Bill of Complaint 
b Chap. XXVII. & XXVIII. , hereafter mentioned, which was exhibited by a great number of the neighbor-Nations, to the Commissioners of our Edward the first, and Philip the fair King of France.   

The Dominion of the English Sea asserted from those Tributes or Customs that were wont to be imposed, paid, and demanded, for the Guard or Protection thereof, after the Norman Conquest. CHAP. XV.  
COncerning the Tributes or Customs that were wont to be imposed, paid, and demanded, for the Guard of the English Sea, there are very ample ancient Testimonies, all along since the Reign of the Normans: And those things which have been already mentioned touching the Guard of the Sea, do not a little confirm it. It is manifest, that the Tribute imposed, in the time of the English-Saxons, for the Guard of the Sea, which was called Danegeld (of whose Original and use we have 
a Chap. 11.  already spoken) was wont now and then to be paid heretofore under the Norman Kings. After the words there cited out of the ancient Dialogue touching the Exchequer, about the payment thereof before the Norman Conquest, it immediately follow's thus in the same Dialogue: In his Reign (that is to say, the ●●ig● of William the first) the Danes, as well as other Robbert of Land and Sea, restrained the Invasions of Enemies, knowing this to be true which is written, When a strong man armed keep's his house, he possesseth his goods in peace. For they were not ignorant, that resolute and valiant men would not let injuries pass unrevenged. Therefore whereas the Land had paid it along time in the same King's Reign, they were unwilling to pay that every year, which had been exacted upon urgent necessity in time of war: But yet they would not have it wholly cashiered, because of sudden occasions. Therefore it was seldom paid in his Reign, or the Reign of his Successors▪ that is, only then, when they either had or suspected a war with Foreiners. And among the 
b Apud Roger. Hovedenium in Annal. part. 2. pag. 344. Edit. Londin. & 603. in Edit. Francofurt. & apud G. Lambard. in Archaeonomia pag. 128.  old Laws of England we find that William Rufus requiring aid of the Barons for the regaining of Normandy out of the hands of his brother Robert, surnamed Cortehole, who was upon a voyage to the Holy Land, Danegeld was granted to him, not established, nor confirmed by a Law; that is to say, four shillings upon every Hide of Land, which were paid for defending the Dominion by Sea. For, that was the intent and end of Danegeld, according to its nature and original.  
Moreover, 
c Annal. part. 1. pag. 276. Edit. Londin. pag. 482. Edit. Francofurt.  Roger Hoveden saith expressly, that it was usually paid until the time of King Stephen. He speaking of the promises which he made at the time of his Coronation, saith, Thirdly, he promised that he would remit Danegeld for ever, that is, two shillings upon an Hide, which his Predecessors were went to take every year. The same also is affirmed by Matthew Paris, and 
d Ms. in bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Roger of Wendover, out of whom the Chronicles set forth by Matthew until the nineteenth year of Henry the third, or the year of our Lord MCCXXXV. were wholly taken. They say of King Stephen, Tertiò vovit quòd Danegeld, id est, & qualibet ydâ terrae duos solidos, quos Antecessores ejus consueverant accipere in aeternum annis singulis condonaret. So indeed we read it in the 
e In Biblioth. Cottoniana.  Manuscript Books of this Matthew, whereby the Printed ones are to be amended, who render it only thus: Tertiò vovit, quòd Antecessores ejus accipere consueverant, in aeternum annis singulis condonaret. But this also is added by Hoveden; These especially, and divers other things he promised before God, but kept none of them, as we are told likewise by Paris and Wendover▪ So that this Tribute was wont to be paid in the Reigns of William the first, and the second, Henry the first, and King Stephen also, for the guard of the Sea. And it appears by the accounts of the Exchequer, that it was paid sometimes in the time of Henry the second. And after that it grew out of date, another course was wont to be taken very frequently, and used as the Custom of the Land, that Pay, and Provisions might not be wholly wanting, to maintain the Dominion of the Kingdom of England by Sea. Mention is made touching this particular in the Court-Rolls of Edward the first 
f M. 25. Ed. 1. Comm.. Banc. Rot. 72. Penès Camerarios Scaccarii. , Terrarum ad Custodiam Maris agistatarum; that is, of such Lands as were charged with a payment or Tribute for the guard of the Sea. we know indeed also, that it was in the same manner collected at that time, under pretence of the Sea, for the pay and maintenance of Land-Forces near the Shore. But certain it is, that the Sea itself was guarded then with Naval-Forces, as well as the Shore by Land-Forces, and so that that Paiment belonged either to the Sea itself, or else to the Shore as well as the Sea. Moreover, Subsidies have been demanded of the people in parliament, Pour 
g Rot. Parl. 13 Edw. 3. Art. 6.  la salvation du Royalme & de eux Mesines & auxint de la mere, de la March d' Escoce, de Gascoign & des Isles; that is, for defence of the Kingdom, the Sea belonging thereunto, the Scotish Border, Gasooign, and the Isles. Thus the Sea, and its defence and Dominion is reckoned in an equal right and condition with that of the Kingdom, the Borders, and the Isles. Several other instances there are of that kind. But that especially is to be observed in this place, which we find in the parliamentary Records of King Richard the second, concerning a Tribute or Custom that was imposed upon every ship that passed through the Northern admiralty, that is, in the Sea which stretcheth itself from the Thames mouth along the Eastern shore of England towards the North-East, for the pay and maintenance of the Guard or Protection of the Sea. Nor was it imposed only upon the ships of such Merchants and fishermen as were English, but also by the same right in a manner upon those of any Foreiners whatsoëver, no otherwise than if a man that is owner of a Field, should impose a yearly Revenue, or rend for the liberty of thoroughfare, or driving of cattle, or Cart, through his Field. Paiment was made at the rate of six pence a tun upon every Vessel that passed by; except such ships only as brought Merchandise out of Flanders to London, or that carried wool and Skins from any other place within the Jurisdiction of that admiralty to Calais. If a Vessel were employed to fish for Herrings, it paid the rate of six pence a week upon every Ton. If for other kinds of Fish, so much was to be paid every three weeks; as they who brought coals hither from Newcastle, paid it every three months. But if a Vessel were bound for Prussia, Norway, Scone, or any of the neighbouring Countries, it paid a particular Custom, according to the weight and proportion of the Freight. And if any were unwilling, it was lawful to compel them to pay. That is to say, there were certain Officers that had authority to exact it, having the Command of six ships, Men of War, for this kind of Guard or Protection. But the whole matter I here faithfully set down out of the 
h Rot. Parl. 2 Rich. 2. part. 2. art. 38. in scheduld.  Original, in the same language it was written, that is, the Norman Language of that time.  

C'est l'Ordinance & Granté, per l'aduis des Marchaunds de Londres, & des autres Marchaunds verse la North, per ●ossent de touz les Communes de parliament, par devant le Comte de Northomberland & le meaire de Londres, pur la garde & tuition du mire & costers del Admiralté de North ove deux Niefs, deux Bargis, & deux Ballingers armez & arraiez pur guerre sur les coustagis que s'ensuient.  
Primerement, pur prendre de Chescun Nief & Craier, de quele portage q'il soit que pass per la mier dedeinz le dicte Admiralté alant & returnant pur la voiage de chescun tonnetight VI d.. horspris Niefs chargez ove vins, & Niefs chargez ove merchandises en Flandres qe serront frettez & dischargez à Londres, & Niefs chargez ove leynes & peves à Londres ou ailleurs dedeinz la dicte Admiralté que serront dischargez à Caleis; les quieux Niefs les Gardeins de la dicte mire ne serront tenuz de les conduire sans estre allovez  
Item, de prendre de chescun vesseau pessoner qe pessent sur la mier du dit Admiralté entour harang, de quelle portage q'il soit, en un semain, de chescun tonnetight VIᵈ.  
Item, de prendre des autres Niefs & vesseauz pessoners que pessont entour autres pessons sur la mier dedeinz la dicte Admiralté, de quele portage q'il soit, en trois semaignes de chescun tonnetight VIᵈ.  
Item, de prendre de touz autres Niefs & vesseaux passanz par mier dedeinz la dicte Admiralté, chargez ove Charbons ou Novel Chastiele seur Tyne de quele portage q'il soit, en le quarter de un an, de chescun tonnetight VIᵈ.  
Item, de prendre de touz autres Niefs, Craiers & vesseaux passanz per mire dedeinz la dicte Admiralté, chargez ove biens des Marchanz queconques en Espreux, ou en Northway ou en Scone, ou en ascune lieu en mesme les parties de pardela, pur le voyage alant & retornant, de chescun last Squar, viz. lastas graves VIᵈ.   

This is the Ordinance and Grant by the advice of the Merchants of London, and other Merchants towards the North, by the Assent of all the Commons in parliament, before the Earl of Northumberland, and the Mayor of London, for the Guard and tuition of the Sea, and the Coasts of the admiralty of the North, with two Ships, two Barges, and two Ballingers, armed and fitted for war, at these rates following.  
First, To take of every Ship and Bark, of what burden soever it be, which passeth through the Sea within the said admiralty, going & returning, for the Uoiage, upon every Tun VIᵈ, Except Ships laden with Wines, and Ships laden with Merchandises in Flanders, which shall be unladen and discharged at London, and ships laden with wools & skins at London, or elsewhere within the said admiralty, which shall be discharged at Calais; which ships the Guardians of the said Sea shall not be bound to convoy without allowance.  
Item, To take of every fisherboat that fisheth upon the Sea of the said admiralty for Herrmgs, of what burden soëver it be, for each week, of every Tun VIᵈ.  
Item, To take of other Ships and Fisher-boats, that Fish for other kinds of Fish upon the sea, within the said admiralty, of what burden soëver they be, for three weeks, of every Tun VId.  
Item, To take of all other ships and Uessels passing by Sea, within the said admiralty, laden with coals from Newcastle upon Tyne, of what burden soever they be, for a Quarter of a year, of every Tun VId.  
Item, To take of all other ships, Barks, and Uessels passing by sea, within the said admiralty, laden with Goods of any Merchants whatsoever for Prussia or for Norway, or for Scone, or for any other place in those Parts beyond the sea for the Uoiage going and returning of every Last VId.   
So run the Records of parliament, which in that Age were almost all written in this kind of Language; Not such as arrived at shore were charged here (as in most other places) with Customs, as upon the Account only of the shore; but those that passed or sailed by, or used Fishing, as well Strangers as Natives. And this was upon the request also of the Estates in parliament under Henry the fift in the preferring of a certain Bill, which I have taken out of the Records, and set down at large 
i Chap. 23.  hereafter. That is to say, they desired it as being very well instructed in the ancient Law and Custom touching that particular, and of the King's Dominion. Nor can any thing be said more expressly, for asserting the Dominion of the King of England over the Sea itself. For, it is clearly the interest of him who is Lord or Owner of the place, to impose payments and services within a territory.  
Moreover, in the time of Henry VI, William de la Poole Duke of Suffolk being accused in 
k Rot. Parlam. 28. Hen. 6. art. 38.  parliament, the principal head of the Charge was, that he had converted the subsidy money to other uses, which had been imposed and levied for the Guard of the Sea. The words in the English are, For the Defence and tuytion and saufe keeping of the Sea, as we read it in the Records. A demand was made also in 
l Rot. Parlam. 32. Hen. 6. articul. 30. & 41.  parliament, in the two and thirtieth year of the same King, of forty thousand pounds, For the defence and saufegard of the Sea; as we read likewise in the Records. But why do I cite them here? In those 
m Stat. 1. Edward. 6. 1. Mariae Reginae, 1. Elizabethae, 1. Jacobi Regis.  Acts of parliament which are published abroad in Print, we very often find it, as a thing asserted by the Estates of the Realm in parliament, that the Kings of England have time out of mind, by authority of parliament, taken large sums of money, by way of subsidy or Custom, upon Merchandise either imported or exported, For the defence of the Realm, and the keeping and the saufegard of the Seas, for the intercourse of merchandise safely to come into and to pass out of the same (which is the usual form of words.) That is to say, these words are part of the Preface or Preamble which was usually placed in the beginning of any Law or Statute, whereby that most known Custom or Impost of Tonnage and Powndage was wont to be imposed, For the keeping and sure defending of the Seas against all persons intending or that shall extend the disturbance of us your said Commons in the intercourse and the invading of this your Realm. So that the King of England hath ever been so accounted the Arbitrator and Lord of Commerce throughout these Seas, that it could not lawfully be hindered without his Commission. Which truly is a manifest evidence of that Dominion or Ownership, whereof we treat. And here you see also that the defence of the Realm, that is, of the Island (for sometimes the Isle alone, and sometimes the Sea also, as I shall show by and by, is comprehended in that name) and of the Sea, as of those things which are held and possessed by one and the same Right, is joined together. The Tribute or Custom aforementioned, which was wont to be imposed, and the usual form of the same Imposition, may be seen complete in the printed Acts of parliament of K. Kdward the sixth, and others following. But it appears most certain by the Rolls, that the Predecessors also of this Edward, whose Records are yet extant, did enjoy the same or the like, according to the various Custom of the Times.   

Observations touching the Dominion of the English and Irish Sea, from the tenor and variety of those Letters Patents or Commissions royal, whereby the Admirals of England were wont to be put in authority. CHAP. XVI.  
THe usual form of Commission, whereby the High Admiral of England is wont to be invested with authority for the Guard of the Sea, runs thus at this day, as it hath done also for very many years past. 
We give and grant to N. the Office of our great Admiral of England, Ireland, Wales, and of the Dominions and Islands belonging to the same, also of our Town of Calais and our Marches thereof, Normandy, Gascoigne, and Aquitain; And we have made, appointed, and ordained, and by these Presents we make, appoint, and Ordain him the said N. our Admiral of England, Ireland, and Wales, and our Dominions and Isles of the same, Our Town of Calais and our Marches thereof, Normandy, Gascoign, and Aquitain; as also general Governor over all our Fleets and Seas of our said Kingdoms of England and Ireland, our Dominions and Islands belonging to the same. And know ye further, that we of our especial grace and upon certain knowledge etc. Do give and grant to the said N. our great Admiral of England and Governor general over our Fleets and Seas aforesaid, all manner of Jurisdictions, Autorities, Liberties, Offices, Fees, Profits, Duties, Emoluments, Wrecks of the Sea, Ejectments, Regards, Advantages, Commodities, preeminences and Privileges Whatsoëver, to the said Office our great Admiral of England and Ireland, and of the other Places and dominions aforesaid in any manner whatsoëver belonging and appertaining.   
And afterwards there follow very many other particulars in the King's Commission, setting forth that most ample Command and Jurisdiction. In former times, as hath been already shown you, this kind of Commanders were called Custodes Maris, Guardians or Keepers of the Sea, who afterward began to be invested with the name of Admirals, in the Reign of Edward the First. But their Commands were usually restrained to certain Limits of Coasts; So that particular Commanders were sometimes set over each of the Three, Western, Southern, and Northern Coasts, but for the most part over the Western and Northern. Seldom was one set over both, before that the Title of Admiral of England, Ireland, and Aquitain was put into the Commissions; of which more by and by. But as the name of Guardian of the Sea was taken from the Sea itself, whereof he was Governor as of a Province; so that of Admirals (a word, whose Original is very uncertain; but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 
a Georgius Codinus, de Officiis Constantinopolit. cap. 2.  Amiralius was used of old for a Commander of a Fleet or navy, not only in the West, but also in the Eastern Empire) derived its name of dignity, either from the Fleet wherewith he defended his Jurisdiction at Sea (as it was usual heretofore) or else from the Land, either bordering upon that Jurisdiction or joined therewith, as it hath been in the later Form of Commissions. Whereupon, from the time of Edward the first, unto Henry the Fourth, about one hundred and fifty years, they were in solemn manner created Admirals of the Fleet or Navis of our Ships, towards the Northern Parts, or towards the Western Parts or the Southern, or (as it fell out sometimes) of both together. For, the Southern and Western Coast did, as appears by the thing itself, signify one and the same: That is to say, the Coast stretched here and there along the Shore from the North of the Thames. But as the dignity of those Officers called Comes and Magister Equitum of the West, Magister Equitum throughout Gallia, Magister Militum throughout the East, Magister Militum throughout Thrace, and others of that kind in the Imperial Offices, did no less denote the authority and Jurisdiction of them that commanded in these Provinces, who before were Lords of the Provinces, than if they had been called Comes and Magister of the West, Magister throughout Gallia, throughout the East, and throughout Thrace; so it is evident, that the Admirals of the Fleets and Navies (whereby the Sea is guarded after the same manner, as the Land is possessed by Land-Forces) did no less set forth the Command and Dominion, and civil possession of those that had authority over the Sea (who before were Lords of the Sea) then if they had been styled Guardians of the Sea, Commanders, or Admirals, in their Commissions. And such as were so constituted▪ Admirals of both Coasts, or of the whole English navy, were sometimes by a general name 
b Rot. Pat. 10. Rich. 2. part. 2. Memb. 19 & 11. Rich. 2. part. 2. m. 12. ubi Richardus Comes Arundeliae sic nuncupatur in Protectionis revocatione.  called Admirals of England over the Sea, before that form of words was put into the Royal Commissions. And of this sort of Admirals you have a Catalogue set down by that eminent man Sir Henry Spelman in his glossary, where there are others also that follow.  
But such a change happened in the Form of the Commissions, in the time of Henry the Fourth, that there was one man appointed Admiral not only of the fleets or Navies, but of England and Ireland (over whose Fleet of Ships or navy for Defence of the Irish Sea, sometimes a particular person was made Admiral, as was 
c Rot. Pat. 21. Rich. 2. part. 2. m. 15.  Thomas Percy Earl of Worcester) yea and in express words also Admiral of Aquitain and Picardy; As was Thomas Beaufort (who also was Duke of Excester under Henry the Fifth) in the 
d Ms. Formularum de Rebus Maritimis, in Biblioth. Cottonianâ. 3. Maii, 13. Hen. 4.  thirteenth year of Henry the Fourth, after he had surrendered the Commission, whereby he had before been made Commander of the Fleets: And he was the first (for aught we know) that was created in this manner. But in the next Form of Commission the name of Picardy was left out▪ So indeed in the fourth year of Henry the Sixth, or Anno Dom. MCDXXVI. John Duke of Bedford was by Commission 
e Rot. Pat. 4. Hen. 6. part. 2. Mem. 11. 26. Julii.  made Admiral of England Ireland and Aquitain. That Form continued about 88 years, or throughout the Reigns of Henry VI, Edward IV Richard III, Henry VII, and the three first years of Henry VIII. And about that time, ten others were in like manner made Admirals, for the most part perpetual, of England, Ireland, and Aquitain; the last of which was John Earl of Oxon, who was Commissionated in that 
f Rot. Part. 1▪ Hen. 8. part. 1.  Form, in the first year of Henry the Eight. But there followed another alteration, or addition of Titles, in the fourth year of that King, Anno Dom. MDXIII. At that time, Sir Edward Howard Knight, son of Thomas Earl of Surrie, afterwards Duke of Norfolk, was made 
g Rot. Pat. 4. Hen. 8. part. 2. Augusti. 15.  Admiral of England, Wales, Ireland, Normandy, Gascoign, and Aquaitain. To which words, 
h Rot. Pat. 28. Hen. 8. part. 2. Augusti. 16.  Calais and the Marches thereof are added in the Commission of William Fitzwilliams (who also was Earl of Southampton) being appointed Admiral in the twenty eight year of King Henry the Eight. This Form of Commissions held in use afterward, through the whole Reign of that Henry, adding (according to ancient Custom) the clauses touching Jurisdiction. But in the beginning of Edward the sixth, Thomas Baron Seymour of Sudeley, brother to Edward Duke of Somerset, was made Admiral 
i Rot. Pat. 1. Edw. 6. part. 6. 17. Febr. membran. 9  almost in the same words, as that William Earl of Southampton; inserting after the name of Calais, Boloign and the Marches of the same. After him followed John Earl of Warwick, who was created by Edward the sixth, in the third year of his Reign, 
k Rot. Part. 3. Ed. 6. part. 2 Novemb. 28.  our Admiral of England, Ireland, Wales, Calais, and Boloign, and our Marches of the same, of Normandy, Gascoign, and Aquitain; as also Governor general over all our Fleets and Seas; And in the same Commission he is styled afterwards, Great Admiral of England and Governor of our Fleets and Seas. But after a while, the name of Boloign being omitted, the next high Admiral of England was created in the very same Form of words, as is mentioned before in the beginning of the Chapter. For, in the same 
l Rot. Pat. 1. Mariae Reginae, part. 5. ●0. Martii. Membr. 3.  Form was William Baron Howard of Effingham Son of Thomas Duke of Norfolk, made Admiral in the beginning of Queen Marie, or Anno Dom. MDLIII. And the Command or Government of those Seas, as the principal charge of that Office or dignity, is more notably expressed there, as you may see, than in the Commission of the Earl of Warwick. From that time forwards, the very same Form was kept always; as in the Commission of the high Admiralship granted to Edward Baron Clinton (afterwards Earl of Lincoln) in the Reign of 
m Rot. Pat. 4. & 5. Phil. & Mariae, par. 1. Feb. 10.  Philip and Marie; also in the Commission of Charles Baron of Effingham, afterwards Earl of Nottingham, in the time of Q. 
n Rot. Pat. 27 Eliz. R. part. 10. 8. Julii.  Elizabeth; and of Charles Duke of York, in the time of King 
o Rot. Pat. 9 Jacobi Regis, part. 9 Jan. 27.  James; besides George Duke of Buckingham, who enjoied the same Office or Command in the same words, in the Reigns of 
p Rot. Pat. 16 Jacobi Regis, part. 17.  James and Charles. So that for above eighty years or thereabout (that is, from the beginning of Q. Marie) the whole form, as it is set down in the beginning of this Chapter, was ever expressly retained in the Commissions of the high Admiralship of England, so far as they denote either the Countries, or the Seas, or the Dominion of the same. But therein the Admiral is styled Governor General over all our Fleets and Seas, (just as John Earl of Warwick was likewise expressly appointed in general terms under Edward the sixth) or over our Seas aforesaid. But what were those Seas, or the Seas aforesaid? They are in the foregoing words expressly called the Seas of our said Kingdoms of England and Ireland, our Dominions and Islands of the same. That is, in plain terms, Mere d' Engleterre, d' Ireland, & Gales, or the Sea of England, Ireland, and Wales; after which manner the Seas belonging to the Dominion of England, are sometimes also described in 
q Stat. 20 H. 6. cap. 11.  our Laws, which are called likewise now and then by 
r 2 Ed. 3. fol. 9 seu 36 a. pl. 6.  our Lawyers, Les quatre Miers d'Engleterre, or the four Seas of England, divided according to the four Quarters of the World. So that in the most received form of this Commission, after the beginning of Queen Mary's Reign (out of which also the sens and meaning of former Commissions is to be collected) we have a continual possession or Dominion of the King of England by Sea, pointed out in express words for very many years. And what we have already spoken by way of Collection out of these that followed the beginning of marry, touching the since or meaning of former Commissions, wherein a positive Command of the Sea is not expressed, is truly (to omit the thing itself, which sufficiently intimates as much of its own nature) not a little confirmed upon this ground, that he also, who before any express mention of our Seas, took place in the form of the Commission of the high Admiralship, was next preferred to the same dignity, was immediately after his Creâtion, according to the whole Title of his Office (as being the same title which indeed always belonged to the Admirals of England) styled; Great Admiral of 
s Rot. Pat. 1 Ed. 6. part. 6. membran. 5. Augusti, 30.  England, and Governor General of the navy and our Seas. So verily Thomas Baron Seymour (whom I mentioned before) is styled Admiral of England in the Patent Roll granted to him by Edward the sixth.   

It is proved by words plain enough in the form of the Commissions for the Government or command of the high Admiral of England, from ancient to the present time, that the Sea, for whose guard or defence, he was appointed by the King of England as Lord and sovereign, was ever bounded towards the South, by the shore of Aquitain, Normandy, and Picardy. CHAP. XVII.  
BUT in the Form already shown, which hath continued in use for so many years, you see mention is made only of the Seas of our Kingdoms of England, and Ireland, our Dominions, and Islands belonging to the same, as the Province, for whose guard or defence the Admiral was appointed; that is, (as we have told you) the English, Irish, and Welsh Sea, all which is contained under the name of the British, as it hath been obseruéd at the beginning of this Book. Yet the names of Normandy, Gascoign, and Aquitain, besides Calais, are added, which are Provinces seated upon the shore over against us. As to what concerns them in this place, they are either to be considered in the same manner as if they had been always held in subjection by the English from the time of the first mention of them in the Commission; or as they have already for some Ages passed been out of their Jurisdiction.  
But suppose in the first place, that they had always remained in the Jurisdiction and Possession of the English. Questionless, howsoêver the Admiral of England might then, according to this Form of Commission, have had Courts of admiralty in those Provinces (as there is no place almost without Courts of admiralty, even where not any Dominion of the Sea at all is pretended to belong unto the place, wherein they are held) yet by no means might he thence be called Commander of the Sea itself (if so be you except the Ports, and such like Creeks of the Sea, which are as it were incorporated within Land) either as it may be said to belong to Normandy, or to Aquitain, Gascoign or Picardy: But by virtue of this form of Commission, he had exercised maritime Jurisdiction in those Provinces beyond Sea, no otherwise almost than our Admiral in England, and Ireland, or others the like do at this day, over men's persons & goods upon the African, Mediterranean, Indian, or any other Sea at a remote distance: For, the extent of such a Jurisdiction by Sea is without bounds. But the extent of his Jurisdiction, or of the Sea, over which he is placed Admiral, as Warden, Guardian, or precedent, to defend and keep it under the Dominion of him who is Lord thereof, are bounded. And it sufficiently appears by express words of the ancient form of Commission, that no Sea is contained therein, as a Province to be defended, but that which is either English, Welsh, or Irish, or relate's to England, Wales, and Ireland, as an appendent. From whence it follow's, that those names of the opposite shores in the Commissions do not at all mention the Sea flowing between as proper to those shores, or belonging to them in any kind, but serve only as a limit beyond the Sea (so far as concerns the limiting of the English and Irish Sea;) as those names also of England, Wales, and Ireland, serve in stead of a limit on this side of the Sea, so far as in the Commissi▪ on they denote the Sea under the Admiral's Charge or Protection: So that, even as that Officer called the Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain, was eminently according to the name of his dignity, Commander of the whole Sea flowing between Gallia and Britain, as of a particular Province, (which hath been shown 
a Chap. 6. of this Book.  already) and had the name of the opposite shore for the limit of his Jurisdiction; so the high Admiral of England, or Commander of the Sea belonging to the English Empire, hath in the King's Commission the shore of Normandy, Gascoign, Aquitain, and Picardy, to set forth only the beyond-Sea limits of his Jurisdiction or Command (so far as he hath charge of defending the Sea-Province or Dominion belonging to England) in those shores which lie over against us. For, if any say, that the case is otherwise, wherefore then is not the sea over which he hath command, denominated from some of these shores over against us, as well as of the English, Irish, and Welsh, or the Seas of the Kingdoms of England, Ireland, and Wales, and of the Dominions and Isles belonging to the same? The Reason is, because no other Sea, as it falls under a Civil consideration (for we speak not here of the denomination given by Geographers) doth flow between the Territories on this and the other side of the Sea which are mentioned in his Commission. Therefore as in that Roman dignity of the Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain, the shore was the transmarine bound or limit of that dignity, so also in the Command of the high Admiral of England (so far only as he hath a Province or Jurisdiction by Sea, as a Governor of a territory) those opposite shores or transmarine Provinces, named in his Commission, are to be reckoned the Bounds of the Sea under his Charge or Protection. And this truly is sufficiently apparent from the words of the Commission already handled, if so be we suppose (as hitherto we have done for discourse sake) that the Kings of England did, all the while that form of Commission was in use, retain those Beyond sea Provinces under their Dominion as the Romans had done of old. But the matter is made more evident, if we observe how the names of those Provinces have, at least, from the time of Queen Marie, been so kept in the form of this Commission, that since her Reign there remain's not the least ground for any of those in the Commission, to signify any other thing than what we have already declared: For, in her Reign Calais was yielded up to the French, and since that time, the English have not been possessed of any Province upon any part of the opposite shore.  
Moreover also, in the one and thirtieth year of King Henry the sixth, or Anno Dom. MCCCCLIII. the English were driven out of Gascoign, Aquitain, and the other Provinces of France, by the French King, Charles the seventh: Nor was there after the time of this Henry, any Officer or Governor of Note appointed, or that could conveniently be appointed by the English either in Normandy, or in Aquitain itself; yea, nor in Normandy, either after or long before the loss of Aquitain. It is true indeed, that the county of Guise, Calais, and some other Towns in Picardy, besides those neighbouring one's that Henry the eight gained by force of arms in the same country, remained long after in subjection to the Kings of England; yea, and that a small part of 
b Rot. Vascon. 6. & 7 Ed. 4. etc. in Capellâ Rotulorum.  Aquitain yielded obedience, though not constantly, to the King of England, for some years after Henry the sixth; but not the whole duchy. Nor doth it make to the contrary, that sometimes under some of our later Kings, there was one appointed Captain General or Governor over all our subjects in Normandy, with which Title both Ambrose Earl of Warwick, and Adrian Poynings were honoured in the time of Queen 
c Rot. Pat. 4. Eliz. R. part. 1. in dorso.  Elisabeth. For, they were merely Generals of the Forces that were transported thither to assist the King of France, not invested at all with any Government or Command of the duchy of Normandy. But yet, even after the time of Henry the sixth, the name of Aquitain was constantly retained in the Commission of the High Admiralship of England: That is, for one hundred and fourscore years, or thereabout, after the English were driven out of Aquitain, as appears in the former Chapter. Hereto at length was added (as is shown there also) the name of Normandy, in the beginning of Henry the eight: whereas notwithstanding the King of England, was not possessed of Normandy a long time before, nor in any wise after; nor did he in that agreement 
d Rot. Franciae, 2 Hen. 8.  made a little before with the King of France, claim any other possession in Picardy, besides that of Calais, and the territory of Guise, and hams. And so it hath continued now for one hundred twenty two years also in the Commission of maritime Government or high Admiralship of England, without any relation at all had to the Government or Command of the duchy itself, but only of the shore, which bounded the Sea under his Master's protection, upon the Coast of France. For, although Aquitain indeed was first added to the names of England and Ireland, in that Commission, while the English possessed the duchy of Aquitain, nevertheless it not only so remained likewise in that form of Commission constantly, even after the expulsion of the English, until our times, but Normandy also (which had never been named before in the Commission of high Admiral of England) was added, and this some Ages after that the English were wholly deprived of the duchy itself: So that either these names do serve in stead of a Limit to the Sea under his protection, or else we must perforce admit contrary to reason, that they signified nothing in the Commission for so many years. For, we see that those names of opposite Shore were retained in the Admiral's Commission, even from the end of Queen Mary's Reign until our times, or for the space of 77 years, though the English in the mean time were not possessed of the least part of France; as also that Normandy was added many years before, but yet long after the English were outed of its possession. Nor ought any man fond to imagine that these Names were inserted, because of that right the King of England had to the Crown of France. For indeed, the Kings of England have, by an ancient Right, usually entitled themselves Kings of France: Also the Dutchies of Aquitain and Normandy and the other Provinces of France mentioned in this Commission, are comprehended in that name of the Kingdom, as the lesser in the greater. But if that had been the cause, certainly the name of France should have been ascribed to our Admiral; yea, and other Officers of that Kingdom have been made in the same manner by the King of England after he was driven thence: Of which thing there is not the least evidence indeed any where exstant. And it is to be observed, as soon as ever an alteration was made in the Draught of the Commission, from that denomination of the Command of the Admirals of England, which was derived from the Fleets and Coasts over which they had command, unto that which is made up of the Kingdoms and Provinces, that then an Addition was made of Aquitain; to the end that the limit or Bound, as well on this as the other side of the Sea, might be pointed out by the Shores: The name of Normandy being added afterwards, and retained still together with Calais and the Marches thereof and Aquitain, upon the same account. But while that the Kings of England were in former times possessed of Normandy, Aquitain, and other Countries in France, there are not found in the form of Commission, wherein the Kingdoms and Provinces (as hath been already shown) are expressly nominated, any other Admirals or Governors of the maritime Province or Dominion by Sea made by them, besides those to whose care the Fleets and Coasts were committed in the manner already mentioned; that is to say, the whole Sea flowing between our British Isles and the Provinces over against them, and the Fleets belonging to any Territories whatsoëver of the Kings of England, were at that time by a peculiar right of the Kingdom of England in the Sea, so subject to them who were so put in Command over the English Fleets and Coasts, that there remained neither place nor use for any other Commanders of that kind. Which may be said likewise of those times, wherein some of the Kings of England stood possessed also of the Kingdom of France; as Edward the Third, and the two Henry's 5th and 6th. Nor is it a bare conjecture, that they did not put any others in command over the Sea and Fleets, besides those to whom, by right only of the Kingdom of England, the power was committed (to wit, according to that right which comprehended the whole Sea flowing between) but it is sufficiently proved also upon this ground, that we have the ancient public 
Rotuli Franciae, Norman▪ 〈◊〉, Vasconiae, Archivo arcis Londinensis, Regum ferè singulorum annis distincti.  Records of those times, touching the Offices constituted by our Kings in France, and those Provinces beyond Sea, in most whereof I find not the least sign of the contrary.  
And if it be demanded here, wherefore it was that the Shore of Bretaign was omitted (which in like manner lies over against our Isle of Britain, and together with the Shore of Picardy, Normandy, and Aquitain, sufficiently takes up that whole Tract which stretcheth itself in the Realm of France, before the English and Irish Sea;) certainly, if the aforementioned reason take place, there is little cause to doubt that it happened thence, because the King of England was not at any time so possessed of Bretaign, that being outed of it, he needed to be very solicitous touching the Bounds of the sea-territory adjoining. Distinct Lords of Territories confining on each other (as were the King of England and Duke of Bretaign heretofore; for Bretaign had Kings and Dukes of its own before Charles the Eight, under whom, Anno Dom. 1491. it was united to the Realm of France) do for the most part keep their Bounds so distinct, that they may be the more evidently taken notice of by all; but when of such kind of Territories there is but one and the same Lord (as the King of England was while he possessed either Normandy or Aquitain or any other maritime Province in France together with England) he being outed of either, aught above all things to take care that the past confusion of possession be not prejudicial to the future distinction of Bounds. For fear then, lest it might have been pretended that even the Sea adjoining or confining with those maritime Provinces, which were a long time heretofore possessed by the English and afterwards taken away, was taken away together with the Provinces, whenas perhaps, by reason of the past confusion of possession in one and the same Lord, all men might not be sufficiently instructed touching the Bounds of the English Sea placed, as we have said, upon the Shore over against us; therefore for the setting forth of those Bounds, the name first of Aquitain after its being lost was retained in the Admiral's Commission, and then that also of Normandy was added. And afterwards both of them, with the name of Calais and the Marches, in stead of the Shore of Picardy, were for the same reason continued down to our times. Which reason truly could not concern Bretaign at all; nor Flanders likewise, nor any other Shores lying Eastward over against us: All which nevertheless do, after the same manner, bound the sea-territory of England. Moreover, those things that have been hitherto observed, shall be confirmed, by what we shall add next, touching the Office of Admiral among the French.   

Touching the Admirals of the Kingdom of France, or those constituted upon the opposite Shore; their Original, nature, and variety. That the Sea itself flowing between Britain and France, is not contained in that command of his, as of one that is Governor of a Territory or Province; nor is there any thing in it that may oppose the Dominion of the King of England by Sea. CHAP. XVIII.  
THat there were Admirals also constituted by the French King upon the opposite Shore of France, is known to every man. And as there is an Admiral appointed in Gallia Narbonensis to oversee maritime Affairs there, so also on the opposite Shore, there are distinct Offices of the Admiral of Aquitain, Bretaign, and Normandy and the adjoining Coasts. But the French Lawyers of late are wont to call their Admiral in Latin Praefectus Maris, Governor of the Sea, as if the Sea were subject to him also as a Governor; whereas notwithstanding, if the thing be rightly considered that Government of the Sea by what name soëver it be called, doth not signify (as among the English) any Dominion of one having command in any nearer part of the Sea (for, we speak not of the Sea of Marseille, which hath no relation hereunto but only of their Naval Forces in any Sea whatsoëver; together with the Government of the seamen and Jurisdiction over their persons and moveables, which may fall under the determination of a judge pour raison ou occasion (as they 
a Arrest. ann. 1377. sub Carolo 5. Edict. Fram. Tom. 3. Tit. 2.  say) the faict de la mer, that is, by reason or upon occasion of any suit or controversy arising about Sea-Affairs. For the more plain understanding whereof we must make farther enquiry.  
In the more ancient times, there were indeed Admirals or Governors of Sea affairs among the French, yet so that their Writers do not a little differ about the original of the dignity. They for the most part say, that Rotlandus is found to have been Governor of the Sea of Aremorica or 
b Choppin. de Domanio Franciae, lib. 1. tit. 1st. 11. Pasquier en les Recerches, liv. 2. cap. 14. J. Tilius de de Rebus Gallicis, lib. 2. Alii.  Bretaign under Charlemaign, whom they fetch out of Eginhartus who wrote the life of Charles at that time. But in Eginhartus he is expressly called Governor, not of the British Sea, but only of the Shore of Britaign, as we told you in the 
* Cap. 18.  former Book: In which name there is a description, not of one that govern's the Sea as a Province, but who command's the Shore as the limit of his dignity. That is to say, of the same kind as those Counts (or officers) were, who were 
c Capitular Caroli & Ludovic. R R. lib. 5. cap. 4.  deputed in that Age to guard the Sea Coast, and secure it from the incursions of enemies by Sea. There is also a 
d In Gest. Normannorum, pag. 22.  nameless author of a Chronicle belonging to a monastery called Monasterium Besuense, who writes that this guarding of the Shores under the Caroline Kings was given over a little after the time of Charlemaign. But in the following Ages, the Kingdom of France, being divided as it whereby piece-meals into several principalites, that which a long retained this name of the Kingdom of France, was reduced into so narrow a compass, that the Province of Narbon was held by Sovereign Earls of its own, Aquitain or the Western Shore which lies more Southerly with Normandy by the English; Bretaign either by Kings or Dukes of the same, and Flanders by Earls: So that whilst the whole Sea-Coast, except Picardy, remained separate from that Kingdom, there was Sea little enough lying before it. Yea, and the Naval Forces were small enough, of which (before the accession of a larger Sea-Coast to the French Kingdom) there was most use in the expedition of the holy War. Nor was any other Governor wont to be appointed there by the name of Admiral, than he who as occasion required was put in Command over the navy and military Affairs by Sea, yea, and was borrowed from some Nation bordering upon the Sea, as the Genoeses or others of that kind. But the Kings themselves had at that time no Command over the Sea, as it is expressly written by Johannes Tilius, a clerk of the parliament of Paris. His words are these; 
e De Rebus Gallicis, lib. 2. Add Laurent. Bochel. in Thesauro Juris Gallicani. part. 1. pag. 90.  After that the Kingdom of France was lessened by divisions, and the Kings confined to more narrow Dominions, because they had potent Vassals who enjoied Feuds with absolute sovereignty, if you except their homage (for, the King of England held the Dutchies of Normandy and Aquitain; Britain had a Duke of its own; and slanders, Tholouse, and Provence had their Earls) the Kings of France for a long time had no command over the Sea, and therefore had no need of Admirals, until they undertook the Expedition for the holy Land, at which time they made use of Genoeses whom they hired, with Spaniards, or other of their neighbours that were well skilled in Sea-affairs, to under-take the care of transportation, having no office appointed for that purpose; and by this means they had many Admirals in one single Expedition. But after that the English had quitted Normandy, and the Kingdom of France had gotten ground upon the Sea-Coast, the use of Sea-Affairs also was somewhat augmented; That is to say, about the times of John and Henry the third Kings of England. So that the first Admiral that they reckon in the Catalogue of French dignities, of whom any memory is left to posterity, was Enguerandus Coucaeus, in the time of Philip the Bold King of France, or about the year 1280, as it is related by Joannes Feronius. And what kind of dignity his was, appears sufficiently thence, that his next Successors Matthew Momorancie, and John Harcourt were only, upon a particular occasion, put in command over the Sea-Forces by Philip the fair; as we 
f Apud Andraeam Chesnium, in Historia Familiae Momoranciae, lib. 3. pag. 183.  understand by their Commission. Yea, and they are mentioned by William de Nangis, by the title of Admirals; as others also are by 
g In Chronic. Episcoporum ultraject. & Com. Hollandiae.  Joannes de Beka, in the time of Philip the fair. Although 
h De Rebus Gallicis, lib. & vide Paschasium, en les Recerches, l. 2. c. 14.  Joannes Tilius reckon's Amaurius Viscount of Narbonne, to be the first that bore the dignity of Admiral in France, as a constant settled Office over the Affairs of the Sea; to wit, in the time of John and Charles the fift Kings of France, that is, about the year 1300; whilst 
i Popelliner. en l'Amiral de France.  others are too busy in summing up divers other particulars, touching the antiquity of this command among the French. Afterwards Aquitain was added to the Dominion of the King of France, in the year 1453. Henry the sixth of England being driven out. But in the year 1481. the Province of Narbonne; in the year 1491. the duchy of Bretaign; and lastly, in the space of some years, all that the English held in Picardy, was added also. So all the Sea-Coast, except Belgium, returned into the patrimony of the Kingdom of France. Hereupon it came to pass, that four Sea-Governments or Admiralships were afterwards in use therein, notwithstanding that sometimes one and the same person held several together. But of these, the Government that belongs to the shore of Normandy and Picardy, is at this day usually called the Admiralship of France, because before that the Province of Narbonne, Aquitain, and Bretaigne were annexed to the patrimony of the Crown; the only maritime Government in the Realm of France, was that of Picardy, whereto Normandy was added afterward, as the next Province; the other three being denominated from their respective Provinces. The whole matter is very well set forth by Renatus Choppinus. 
k De Domanio Franc. lib. 1. tit. 15. § 13. Add Popelliner. En l'Amiral de France, chap. 12.  There are (saith he) four Governors of the French Sea, who bear an equal command under a different title, and upon several Coasts of the Sea. For, in ancient time, Aquitain was possessed by the English, Bretaign by its Dukes, Provence by hereditary Earls, not by the Kings of France. And therefore at that time, the Admiral of France had command only over the Belgic Sea of Picardy, and Normandy, as far as the Coast of Bretaign. But then all the other bordering Princes chose Governors of the Sea, or admiral's▪ peculiarly for themselves. And therefore the English being driven out of Aquitain, and the Countries of Provence, and Bretaign, being brought into subjection to the Crown of France, the King supposing it not fit to innovate any thing, appointed a lieutenant and Admiral of Aquitain; likewise a Governor of Bretaign, with the government of the Sea; as also in the province of Gallia Narbonensis, in a manner distinct and apart from the rest. But the chief Courts of Judicature belonging to the French Admiral, are settled at Paris, and Rouen. So he. And a little after he writes, that there were Princes, not a few, who held the seacoasts as Beneficiaries, that enjoied the power of Admiral in their Territories. But we have Edicts and Decrees concerning the Admiral's Jurisdiction over the maritime Forces, Affairs, and Persons, in the times of 
l Edict. Regum Franciae, lib. 3. tit. 5. & Popelliner. Ca 10.  Charles the fift and sixth, Lewis the 12th, Francis the first, Henry the 2d & 3d, and other Kings of France; as also touching the Tenths of Spoils taken from Enemies, and other things of that kind which relate unto the Goods and Persons of such as are subject to the Crown of France, upon the account of any manner of Navigation whatsoêver. And in these Edicts he is sometimes called by the King, Nostre 
m Edict. Ludovici, 12. 148●.  Lieutenant general per la mer & greves d'icelle, that is, our Lieutenant general throughout the Sea and the shores thereof. But this Lieutenant or Governor (as they pleas to call him) of the Sea, was never at all in command over any part of the Sea flowing between France and Britain, as over a Province or Territorie to be defended for the King of France, (after the same manner as the Admiral of England) but in the Sea only over the 
n Petrus Gregor. Tholosan. in Syntagm. Juris, lib. 1. cap. 3.  Naval Forces, Persons, and Affairs belonging to the French Jurisdiction; much after the same manner, as a sovereign Prince takes cognizance of offenders of his own Retinue in a foreign territory, and rule's them as at home; but without any pretence of his to a right of Dominion in that territory. Which truly there is no man but will conceiv, that shall in the first place observe the defect and deep silence of ancient Testimonies, touching such a kind of Dominion among the French, besides the quality of that Government among them, and at length the entire and most ample Power always exercised throughout the Sea and the shore lying about it, under the sole command of the English, and will but compare it for so many Revolutions of years, with those so long broken and divided Dominions upon the opposite shore of France, and with the late addition of the Sea-Coast to the Kingdom of France, according to those things which have been already spoken about it. It is clear, that there are no Testimonies before our time, concerning any Dominion of this sea, belonging to the King of France. Nor are there any in our time, except certain Lawyers, who speak of it either by the By, or in a Rhetorical flourish only, not in a way of asserting it by strength of Arguments. Of these things I have spoken already in the former Book; where also other matters are alleged, of special observation, which confirm what is handled in this particular. But now let us add hereunto, that the very French Historians, both of the past and present Age, do affirm, that in ancient times the Kings of France therefore either had no Admirals at all, or else that they were constituted now and then (only as occasion required) because they had no Empire over the Sea, as Tilius saith expressly in the place abovementioned. In vain therefore doth 
o L'Amiral de France, chap. 9  Popellinerius reprehend those Historians, in saying it is falls, because Normandy, Picardy, and Flanders, were heretofore under the French Dominion. For, not to mention this, that the Kings of France reigned a long time without the possession of Normandy and Flanders, and retained not any other shore besides that of Picardy, (as appears by what hath been already shown, and by the frequent testimony of Historians) and the consequence doth not appear to be good, that they had any command over the Sea, because they were in possession of some Sea-Coast; no more truly than it may be concluded, that a man is Lord of a River in France, because he hath Lands lying by it: whereas by received Custom according to the 
p Sanctyon des Coustomes des Eaus & Forests, liv. 2. chap. 1. cod. Hen. 3. lib 16.  Law of France, the King is Owner of all Rivers that are Navigable, where they belong not to some subject by a particular prescription of possession, or some other title, besides the possession of the adjacent Land, as the Custom is not unusual also in other places.  
But as to what concerns the quality of this maritime Government among the French; it is to be considered, that as every one of the more eminent Offices or Governments, hath a peculiar place in their high Court of parliament, and that according to the nature of the Government, as it chief respects any Province or Government within the limits of the French Dominion, as the Constable, the Grand Escuyer, or Master of the horse, the Grand Master, and others; yet the Admiral of France, hath no place at all upon that account: As it was determined in the time of 
q Ann. 1552. 12 Jan. ut Notatur in Edict. Regum Franciae, tom. 3. tit. 5. in margin. Jo. Tilius, l. 2. Simon Marion in Placit. 5.  Henry the second, when such a place was plainly denied to Gaspar Collignie Admiral of France, as he was Admiral, or had the maritime Government; but it was granted him as Governor of the Isle of France (as they call it) under the King. For, by the title of Admiral, he had no Government in Chief within the limits of the Kingdom; but because being Admiral of the Fleets and Sea (in the aforesaid since) which is out of the King's Dominion, he exercised Jurisdiction over Persons and Affairs only upon the account of the Sea; therefore in this respect he was to be denied any place. For which cause likewise it came to pass (as it seems) that those four distinct admiral's beforementioned, have in like manner also a Government of Provinces, from which they are wont to be denominated, as we understand by these passages already cited out of Choppinus, and others that writ of this matter. So they that have any principal command within the limits of the Kingdom, that is, within the shores of France, do enjoie an equal privilege with the other more eminent dignities, of the Realm. Moreover also, the Regulation of those Rivers whereof the King of France is Lord, are not under the Admiral's Government, but under the special charge of those Officers, that are called precedents or 
r De quibus volumen grande conscripsit Sanctyonius, & vide Cod. Hen. 3. l. 16.  Masters of the Waters and Forests. That is to say, the public Waters which are within the Bounds of the Kingdom, and over which the King hath Dominion, do belong to another dignity; not at all to the Admiral, who, according to the general nature of his Office, is not appointed to take charge of any Province there, much less of the Rivers (as in England.) The principal intent therefore of this Office or dignity is only to command the Fleets by Sea; For which cause also some years since Henry of Momorancie Admiral of France, having set up a Statue on horse back at Chantillie in honour of his Father Henry Duke of Momorancie 
s Apud Andraeam Chesnium, in Hist. de Familiâ Momoranciacâ, l. 5. pa. 445. Anno 1612. , calls himself in Latin only Navalis Militiae Magistrum, Master of the Militia by Sea, instead of Admiral, So that never any Admiral constituted by the French King either of France, or Britain, or Aquitain, had any authority in the Sea itself, whereby he might challenge a Dominion to himself as Governor or Commander in Chief; which may be said in like manner of all the Admirals of the Belgic and the neighbouring shore on this side, and of the Cantabrian or Spanish shore on the other side: For, the authority of them all, so far as concerns this particular, hath been and is alike. We know indeed, that this dignity was wont to be styled Admiral of France, and Governor of the royal navy, as the same dignity among the English was usually called in the same manner, Admiral of England, and Governor of the royal navy, in 
t Rot. Franc. 10 Hen. 8. seu 1518. 4. Octob. cum Francisco primo. Rot. Foeder. & Tract. Jacobi Regis cum Ludovico 13. etc.  several Leagues that have been made betwixt the English and French▪ But it is clear by what hath been shown, that they bore the Office or dignity called by the same name upon a different account; And the quality of a dignity is to be valued by the nature of the Charge, not by the bare name or title. And let so much serve to be spoken touching the defect of ancient Testimonies, and the Nature or quality of the Government.  
But now as to what concerns the most ample and entire Command of the English for very many Ages, and the comparing of it with those several Governments heretofore on the opposite shore; it is most certain, that there was almost from the very beginning of the very first Times of the English-Saxons one entire Empire throughout England, and so on the whole shore which lies over against Germany, France, and that part of Spain, called Biscay, and this also in the time of that heptarchy which is mentioned by Writers: For, there was always some one person who had most power therein, and to whom the rest yielded obedience, as we are told by 
u Hist. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 5. & vide Camden. in Brit. pag. 97.  Beda. And touching that particular there is a notable testimony in Alcuinus, where by reason of the Quarrels betwixt Offa King of the Mercians, that is indeed, of the most large, and in a manner the most midland part of the heptarchy, and Charles (surnamed the Great) King of France, Navigation was so 
x Alcuinus apud G. Malmsbur. de gestis Regum, l. 1 c. 5. & inter Epist. Alcuini in operibus ejus, pa. 1669  prohibited on both sides, that Trade was wholly obstructed; which truly cannot be conceived, unless these large Territories near the Sea had been under the Dominion of Offa; yea, the Inscription whereby Offa was wont to set forth his royal Title, was often expressed after this manner, 
y Hemmingus Ms. in Cod. Eccles. Wigorn. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ fol. 44. b. & 150. etc.  Offa, by the Grace of God, King of the Mercians, and also of the Nations round about. But after the time of Egbert or the 800 year of our Lord, there is a continued Catalogue plain enough of those Kings whether English-Saxons, or Danes, who (unless you fond except Edmund the Anglo▪ Saxon, and Canutus the Dane, by whom the Kingdom was for some little time divided) did Reign without any other sharer in the Dominion upon this shore. No wonder then that the Kings of England being entire and absolute Lords in command of so ample a shore, for so many Ages, did also take special care to retain the Dominion of the Sea lying before it, as an appendent of the Island; especially seeing they not only had so long and large a command likewise on the shore over against us, but also there were not any of their neighbours that could in any wise hinder it, except such as possessed some petty Countries bordering on the Sea (which truly may be so called, being compared to the spacious shore of the English Empire) and those also that were under distinct Jurisdictions.  
The sum of all this is, seeing that about the beginning of our great Grand-Father's days, there was only a very small shore contained within the bounds of the French Kingdom, and the Lords of the maritime Provinces, by the addition whereof that Kingdom (as we have already shown) was afterwards enlarged, did not so much as pretend any Right to the Dominion of the neighbouring Sea, upon the interest of those Provinces; and seeing no testimony can be had in the Monuments of ancient Writers concerning such a kind of Dominion, but that very many are found touching the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, they having continually possessed the whole English shore in its full latitude under one entire Empire for above a thousand years, and concerning the perpetual enjoiment of the Sea, as an appendent of the Kingdom; Therefore it follow's, that their Right is very manifest in this particular, and so that the Sea itself is a Province under the tuition or protection of the Admiral of England, as part of the Kingdom; but that the Admirals of the shore lying over against us are not in reason to be called Governors of the Sea, in such a sens as may signify any Dominion of a Commander in Chief in the Sea itself, out of the Ports or other In-lets of that kind. For which cause also it was, that some Ages since very many of the Neighbor-Nations understanding well enough the Right of England, made their Complaint in express terms against Reyner Grimbald Admiral of the King of France, because that l' Office del Admiralté en la mier d' Engleterre per Commission de Roy de France tourcenousment Emprist & usa un an & plux, etc. That is, because he had arrogated to himself and for the space of a year exercised the Office of admiralty, by the King of France his Commission in the English Sea. The old Records from whence this is taken, are set down entire by and by; where you have more also that make to the same purpose. And so much may serve to be spoken touching the Guard or Government of the English Sea, as a part of the King's territory or Province and patrimony of the Crown.   

That in the Dominion of those Islands lying before the shore of France, which hath ever been enjoied by the Kings of England, it appears that the possession of the Sea wherein they are situate, is derived from their Predecessors. CHAP. XIX.  
THat a Possession and Dominion of this Southern Sea, hath been held also of old by the Kings of England, is not a little manifest by the Dominion of those Islands that lie before the shore of France. For, 'tis generally known, that after King John and Henry the third were driven out of Normandy itself, that the Isles Caesaria and Sarnia (which we call Jersey, and Garnesey) Aureney, and some other neighbouring Isles lying near the shores of Normandy and Bretaign, yea and situated within that Creek of Sea which is made by the shore of Bretaign on the one side, and that of Normandy on the other, have in the following Ages, 
b Rot. Claus. 2 Hen. 3. membr. 1. part. 1. Pat. 3 Hen. 3. membr. 3. & 5.  both now and heretofore, remained in the Dominion of England. But by the sentence passed against K. John, as Duke of Normandy, for the murder of his Nephew Arthur, the French would have him deprived of all the Right he had to Normandy. And afterwards 
c Jo. Buchetus in Annalibus Aquitaniae, part. 4. & Cod. vet. Foederum, etc. Ms. in Archivo Fiscali, fol. 1.  Henry the third resigned his Right to Normandy. But suppose we grant what is commonly received, that these Islands were of the Norman Jurisdiction, or belonging to the duchy of Normandy; yet truly even so, they neither could be taken away by the sentence, nor did they fall to the French by Resignation, forasmuch as the possession of the Sea, and so of the Islands placed therein, was still retained; after the same manner almost as many Priories were in England itself, who though they were belonging to the Norman Government in Church-matters, yet even as they were of the Government of Normandy, they ever remained under the Dominion of England, as long as the Privileges of Monasteries were in force among the English; as being situate within the undoubted bounds of the English Empire. Nor is it easily understood wherefore the Islands could have been so retained, unless they also had been seated within the bounds of the English Empire in the Sea.  
But the thing chief to be considered here is, that very many Foreign Nations, as well as the Estates of England, did in a Libel or Bill of Complaint publicly exhibited in the time of King Edward the First, and King Philip the Fair, before a Court of Delegates specially in that behalf by them appointed, in express terms acknowledge that the King of England hath ever been Lord not only of this Sea, but also of the Islands placed therein, par raison du Roialme d' Angleterre, upon the account of the Realm of England or as they were Kings of England. Which truly is all one, as in most express terms to ascribe this whole Sea unto them, as far as the Shores or Ports lying over against us. But concerning that Libel, I shall add more by and by. Nor is it to be omitted, that the addition of a Shore, larger than that of Picardy, to the Kingdom of France, happened first at that time, wherein those Isles were so retained by the English after they were outed of Normandy: For before, the Shores of Aquitain, Bretaign, and Normandy, were in the possession of other Princes; that of Aquitain and Normandy being possessed by the English, and that of Bretaign by the Duke or Earl of that country: So that the French King had neither any shore almost, nor any considerable use of Sea-affairs at that time; by which means also the English did with the more ease retain the aforesaid ancient possession of the Sea and the Isles, after they were deprived of the Norman duchy. And this sufficiently appears also by that Sea-Fight performed between the French Fleet (commanded by Eustachius the Monk, in the time of Philip Augustus King of France) and the English Fleet under the Command of Philip de Albenie Governor of the aforesaid Islands, and John Marshal, who both carefully guarded the passages of the Sea, in the beginning of the Reign of Henry the Third. That is to say, a French Fleet of about 80 Sail was designed to transport auxiliary Forces out of France for Lewis (afterwards the Eight of that name that was King of France) who through the Treason of some Conspirators, made War upon the English King in England. This of the French was assailed by an English Fleet of 40 Sail. But 
d Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Roger of Wendover and Matthew Paris tell us, that part of the French, who had not been used to Sea-Fight, was in a short time wholly defeated. observe here, they say that hitherto the French were not accustomed to Fights by Sea. But of the English they say, the English being warlike and skilled in Sea-Fight galled them with Darts and Arrows, ran them through with their Lances, did execution with their Swords, sank their Ships, and them with Lime (which they did by throwing the Powder of Lime into the Aër, so it might be driven by the wind into the French-men's eyes) They were deprived also of all hope of relief and succour, and know not which way to sly. The English at that time time being expert in Sea-Fight, did by this means make good the possession of their Sea, and the Isles also that are situate therein: For, even this Fight relate's to the second year of Henry 
e Matth. Paris, pag. 398. Edit. Londin.  the Third, or the year of our Lord MCCXVIII, that is, at the same time almost when the English were first deprived of Normandy. But as to that which is commonly said, that these Islands first belonged to the English Norman 
f 〈◊〉. Coke, in Comm. Juris 〈◊〉. part. 7. in Calvini casu, fol. 20. c. 21. Guil. Camden●●sulis Brit. pag. 855. Alii; quod & admittitur in dipliomatum aliquot recentiorum proemiis, veluti Rot. Pat. 7. Elisabethae R. part. ●. Herelio de Carteret, Rot. Pat▪ 2. Jacobi, part. 19 & 9 Jacobi part. 24. ubi de Insularum privilegiis.  right, or by the right of the duchy of Normandy, it is as easily denied as affirmed by any. Nor is there any weight in this Reason, that because those Islands have and ever had certain Customs like the Norman, therefore they do belong to Normandy: For, the Norman Customs are often used in England, as the Roman are sometimes by other Nations; yet every man knows this can be no ground for such an Argument. Nor is it any more to the purpose, that those Islands were within the diocese of the Bishop of Constances' in Normandy, until that in our Grand-father's days they became subject to the Bishop of 
g videses Rot. Pat. 11. Elisabethae, R. part. 8. in dorso.  Winchester. Their ecclesiastic Government was a long time derived out of Normandy, with more convenience indeed because of the nearness of the place; which began, as it is to be supposed, in those days when the English possessed the Shores on both sides: But it doth not follow thence, that those Islands belonged to the duchy of Normandy, any more than that the many Priories heretofore in England, who were of foreign Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical matters, did therefore belong to the Dominion of foreign Princes, and not to that of the English Kings, as Kings of England. That is every jot as weak also which they use to allege about the Norman Languages being in use among the Inhabitants of those Islands. The people of Cornwal in England have always used the Welsh Tongue, at least with a little alteration in the Dialect, as the Bretaigns do also in France; In like manner the Inhabitants of the Isle of Man use the Irish Tongue; yet no man will conclude thence, either that this paie's obedience to the Kings of England, as Lords or King of Ireland, or that the other are subject to their Princes by any right of the Welsh principality. We know indeed, that sometimes slight mention is made not only in the proêms of some Charters of later times, but also in several ancient Petitions of the islanders, that those Islands belonged heretofore to the duchy of Normandy, and upon that account were held by the Kings of England: But yet we know as well, that those Provinces which in ancient time were derived by Inheritance to our Kings in France (of which kind truly these Islands are to be reckoned, if they were held as parts of Normandy) were always permitted so to use their own Customs and ancient Forms of Jurisdiction, that they were not at all subject to the 
h Vide 〈◊〉. Hen. 8. Keleway, fol. 202. plac. 19  ordinary Jurisdiction of the Courts of England. The same privilege was ever allowed likewise to the people of Aquitain, Anjou, Normandy, and others. Yea, and some Ages since, the Kings of England were pleased to order, that such Controversies as happened there should not be decided in any other place out of the Islands, but in their own Courts of Judicature: whereas notwithstanding it is most certain, that in the Reigns of Edward the 
i Rot. Placit. de Insulis, 2., 2. 2 & Rot. Pat. 15. Ed. ● part 1. Membran. 2●.  Second and 
k Mich 5. Ed. 3. rot. 〈◊〉. coram Rege, & Mich. 6. Ed. 3 rot. 1●1. coram Rege, penès Camerarios Scaccarii, 2. Ed. 3. fol. 5. seu 32. ●. & 〈◊〉. Tempore Ed. 3. fol. 1●8 a.  Third (times which without doubt made good search into that Right, whereby those Islands were annexed to the patrimony of the Kings of England) there were Justices Itinerant, that is, Officers created of old, who were often by ordinary right to take cognisance especially of the more heinous crimes through all the Counties of England; also of such Rights and Privileges of the Crown as were usurped and arrogated by any, and of other matters for the most part that are usually brought into Courts of Justice, who being 
l Jo. Saresburiensis, de Nugis Curialium, lib. 5. cap. 15. & 16.  sometimes also called Justitiae errantes, Justice's errand, were wont to be sent forth into those Islands as well as into the Counties of England; though the Inhabitants did indeed exclaim, and sometimes preferred their Petitions against this kind of Jurisdiction. But yet it is most certain that the opinion of those very Officers (who were themselves learned in the Law) then was, that those Commissions whereby they were so enabled to administer Justice in those Islands were not only grounded upon Law (which was the opinion also of those who ruled at that time in this Nation) but also that the very Provinces of the Islands were so incorporated one with another, as they are all with England, throughout the extent of that Sea which lies between, after the manner of our English Custom in the Provinces or Countries, that, a Caus being sometimes enlarged, they might appoint days of Appearance to any Inhabitants of those Islands, in the King's Bench in England, as well as to the Inhabitants of any one of the Isles in the other, after the same manner as is used within England itself: Which appears by the Commission of John de Scardeburgh and his Fellow-Justices in the time of 
m Mich. ●. Ed. 3. Rot. 183. coram rege, & Mich. rot. 5. & 6. Ed. 3. paulo antè citatis, 181. coram Rege, penès Camerarios Scaccarii.  Edward the Third, and 
n Rot. Placit. de Insulis, 2. Ed. 2. rot. 30. in dorso; in Arce Londinensi.  others of that Age. But it was never heard, I suppose, that upon such an enlargement, a time of Appearance might by our Common Law be appointed in any other place but that which is of the same Jurisdiction (as contained within the patrimony of the Crown) whereto also that place belongs out of which any one is so adjourned. Nor do I remember, that any such thing was ever so much as attempted in those Provinces, which were not reckoned in the patrimony of the English Empire; yet possessed upon another Title by the King of England; as the Dutchies of Anjou, Normandy, Aquitain, and the like. Moreover also, in the more ancient Charters of some of our Kings, in confirmation of the 
o Rot. Pat. 2. Ed. 6. part. 7. ubi Inspeximus. 1. Henrici. 8. etc.  Privileges of Islanders, they are noted more than once for such Privileges as they or their Ancestors or Predecessors have enjoied under the obedience of any of our Progenitors being Kings of England. Surely, if it had been then believed, that those Islands were a part of the duchy of Normandy, it is not to be doubted but they had added also or Dukes of Normandy, which we find truly in some Charters of 
p Rot. Pat. 2. Jacobi, part. 19  later time, yet so that in these also those Isles are said in express terms, and that upon very good ground, to be retained in sealtie and obedience to our Crown of England. But, in the time of Edward the Third, the Islanders petitioning the King in parliament for their Privileges and Custom's which had been established time out of mind, annexed the Customs of some of the Islands, among which are these; Item, that no man ought to be questioned about his Freehold, after he hath quietly enjoied it a year and a day, unless it be by Writ taken out of the chancery of our Lord the King, making special mention both of the Tenement itself and of the Tenant. Item, That they shall not be put to Answer before the King's Justices of assize, until they first give them Copies of their Commissions of assize under their Seals. Item, that the King's Justices assigned by Commission for the holding of assize, ought not to hold Pleas here longer than the space of three weeks. Truly, these ancient Customs seem so to relish, as if those Islands had been subject to our Kings & their ordinary Jurisdiction, by the right of English Empire, not by the Norman; although the Islanders insinuate also in the same Petitions, that they were a part of the neighbouring Province of Normandy. Add hereto also, that the isle of Serk was granted by Queen 
q Rot Pat▪ 7 Elis part 3  Elisabeth to Herelie de Carteret, to be held in Capite by him and his heirs; that is to say, as a Feud belonging to the patrimony of the Crown of England; notwithstanding that it be unawares, or else carelessly admitted in the Charter of this Grant, to be within the duchy of Normandy. But in the treaty held at Chartres, when Edward the third renounced his claim to Normandy; and some other Countries of France that bordered upon the Sea, it was added, that no controversy should remain touching the Islands, but that he should hold all Islands whatsoëver which he possessed at that time, whether they lay before those Countries that he held, or 
r Tho. Walsingham, Anno 1360. 1360. 3● Ed. 3.  others: For, reason required this to maintain the Dominion by Sea. Yea, both Jersey, and Gernsey, as also the Isles of Wight and Man are said in divers Treaties held betwixt the Kings of England and other Princes, to belong unto the Kingdom of England, and to lie 
s Foeder. 1542. inter Caesarem & Hen. 8. & Foeder. 1585. inter Elisah. R▪ & Ordines Foederatos Belgii, quorum transsumpta in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  near the Kingdom of England. These Isles also were granted heretofore by King 
t Rot. Franciae, 3 Hen. 5. Membran. 6. num. 12 Arab 27.  Henry the fift to his brother John Duke of Bedford, without any recognition to be made unto Us or Our Heirs, notwithstanding any Prerogative of the Crown for any other Tenure held of Us out of the said Islands, which may in any wise belong unto the said Islands, Castles, or Dominions. Which words seem not in the least measure to admit any Right of the duchy. Perhaps also that ancient custom was as a token or pledge of the Sea's Dominion being conjoined with that of the Isles, whereby all the Fish (as it is in the Records of 
u Rot. Finium, 31 Ed. 3. Membran. 18.  Edward the third) taken by the Fishermen of our Isles of Gernesey, Jersey, Serk, and Aureney, in the Sea, between Easter and Michaelmas, is according to the Custom of those places acknowledged to belong unto Us at a reasonable rate to be paid therefore, and that the said Fishermen are bound to carry all the Fish by them taken between the Times aforesaid, unto certain places in those Isles appointed, that the Officers under our Governor of the aforesaid Isles, may take thence for our use, at what price they shall think fit and reasonable. Nor is that to be slighted, which we find in the Chronicles of the abbey or monastery of Teuxburie, concerning Henry Beauchamp Duke of Warwick, who was invested by Henry the sixth with the Title and dignity of King, not only of the Isle of Wight but also of Gernesey, and Jersey, whereunto the other Isles in this Tract do in a civil sens belong. The same thing is recorded of the Isle of Wight by that Learned man 
x In Britann. pag. 200. & 430.  William Camden, and that out of the same Book. The 
y Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  Book itself speaks after this manner; But the noble Lord Henry Duke of Warwick and first Earl of England, Lord Le Dispenser, and de Abergeveney, King of the Isles of Wight, and Gardsey, and Jardsey, Lord also of the Castle of Bristol, with the appurtenances thereunto belonging, died 3 Idus Junii, Anno Dom. 1446. in the twenty second year of his Age, at the Castle of Hanley, and was buried in the middle of the choir at Teuxburie. And a little before it is said of the same man, that he was Crowned King of Wight by the King's own hand, no express mention being made in that place of the other islands, but they reckoned in the same condition with this, as they were part of the patrimony of the Kings of England. But it is not to be believed, that those Isles which lie before the shore of Normandy, had been so turned into a Kingdom, though subject to the Crown of England, unless even they also who made them a Kingdom, had conceived that they possessed them before by a Title superior to that of the duchy; that is to say, by a Kingly Title. As King Richard the second, when he had determined that Robert Earl of Oxford (who also was marquis of Dublin, and Duke of Ireland) should be creâted 
Tho. Walsingham in Rich. 2. anno 1●86. pag. 352. Edit. Londin.  King of Ireland, questionless did not doubt but that he himself in the mean time possessed that Island by no less a Title and dignity than of King, although the name of Lord was wholly used there at that time 
a Statut. Hibernic. 33▪ H. 8. cap. 1.  in stead of King, as also until the latter end of the Reign of Henry the eight. So it is conceived upon good ground, that those Isles, and the Sea lying about them did, though they used different Customs, constitute one entire body of Empire with the Kingdom of England. Whereunto also that special privilege of theirs doth relate, whereby through the favour of the Kings of England, they enjoie the benefit of freedom from hostility by Sea, though there be a war on foot between the Neighbor-Nations round about; but of this more 
b Cap. 22.  hereafter. And in their Court-Records which contain the Acts or Decrees of the aforesaid Justices Itinerant, we very often find Pleas of the Crown, which phrase is an Evidence of the English Government. Also, in 
c Rot. Placit. de Insulis, 2. Ed. 2. Rot. 21 & 30 etc. in arce Londin.  their Trials, those Forms [In contempt of our Lord the King, his Crown and dignity] and [Our Lord the King was seized of the aforescid Advousen in time of Peace, as of his Fee, and in Right of his Crown] and others not a few of that kind we meet with, which savour not of any Right of the duchy. Add moreover, that the King of England so held the Right heretofore, not only of the Isles over against the shore of Normandy, but of those also which are opposite to Aquitain (as a pledge or concomitant of his possession of that Sea, so far as it belonged to the patrimony of the Kingdom of England) that though our Henry the third renounced his claim to no small part of Aquitain, yet that Isle lying before it, called Oleron, (no less famous in the West for 
d Of which see more in the twenty fourth chapter.  Naval Laws, than Rhodes was of old) he granted to his eldest son Edward to be held in time to come, as a perpetual appendent of the English Crown: For, this Claus was added to the Grant [so 
e Cod. vet. Foederun, etc. Ms. anno 1259. Penes Camerarios Scaccarii.  that the said Isle may always remain to the Crown of England, and never be alienated from the same.] Also in his Letters granted to the Inhabitants of Oleron, he saith, 
f Cod. Vet. Ms. in Biblioth. Cottonlanâ, de Rebus Aquitanicis, fol. 3.  We will not in any wise sever you from the Crown of England. some years before also, he in like manner made a Grant of 
g Rot. Vascon. 38 Hen. 3. membr. 8. Matth. Paris, pa. 1187. seu 1207. Edit. Lond. Florilegus, ann. 1254. & Cod. Vet. Ms. de reb. Aquitan. in Biblioth. Cotton. fol. 66.  Gascoign (or those parts which lie upon the shore of Aquitain near the Sea) to Prince Edward, upon condition it should remain entirely and for ever to the Crown of England. So without doubt his intent was, that both the seacoasts, and this Isle should in a special manner be possessed by the said Prince, but by no means be disjoined from the English Empire, any more than the Sea its self, which washed their shores. And although after a while, both this and some other neighbouring Isles, did many Ages since, for divers reasons, follow the fate of those French shores which lie next to them, yet in the mean time the Dominion of the Sea remained entire, as it did before, to the Kings of England; as it sufficiently appears by those other passages which we have shown.   

The Dominion and possession of the Sea asserted on the behalf of the Kings of England, from that leave of praeter-Navigation or passage which hath been usually either granted by them to Foreiners, or desired from them. CHAP. XX.  
THose things which we have hitherto alleged concerning this possession and dominion, are confirmed by several Passports that have been obtained from the Kings of England, for leave to pass through this Sea; whereof we have clear Testimonies in Records: that is to say, granted at the entreaty of Foreiners. Our Henry the 
a Rot. Franciae, 5. Hen. 4. membr. ●1. Jan. 5.  fourth granted leave to Ferrando Urtis de Sarachione, a Spaniard, to fail freely from the Port of London, through our Kingdoms, Dominions, and Jurisdiction, to the Town of Rochel. It is manifest, that in this place our Dominions and Jurisdiction do relate to the Sea flowing between. And when Charles the sixth King of France sent Ambassadors to Robert the third King of Scots, to treat about the making of a League, they upon request made to the same Henry obtained Passports for their safe passage par touse 
b Ibid. mem. 14.  noz povoirs, destrois & signories, par Mer, & par Terre, that is, through all places under our Power, Territories, and Dominions, as well by Sea as by landlord. There are innumerable other Letters of Passport (called safe Conducts) in the Records, especially of Henry the fift and sixth, whereby safe Port and Passage was usually granted as well by Sea as by Land and Rivers, that is to say, throughout the whole Dominion of him that made the Grant. And it is worthy of observation, that this kind of Letters were usually superscribed and directed by our Kings to their Governors of the Sea, Admirals, vice-admirals', Sea-Captains, to wit, the Commanders appointed by the King to take care of his territory by Sea; whereas notwithstanding we find no mention at all of any such Commanders in those Passports of that kind which were granted heretofore by the French King to the King of England, when he was to cross over into France. Letters of that kind were given to our Edward the second by King Philip the Long, superscribed only thus, 
c Rot. Claus. 13 Ed. 2. membr. 7. in dorso.  Phelip par la grace de Dieu, Roy de France, A touse noz Justiciers, & subgies salut. Philip by the grace of God, King of France; To our Judges and Subjects greeting. But the reason is evident, why the K. of England was wont to direct his Letters to his Commanders of the Sea, and the French King at that time only to his Judges and Subjects in general: To wit, because the King of England had his Sea-Commanders throughout this whole Sea, as Lord of the same, and therefore when he crossed over, it was not reasonable that the French K. should secure him by Sea, it being within the bounds of the English territory: And yet the King of France might perhaps have an Admiral at that time, but only upon the shore of Normandy and Picardy; For, that of Aquitain, Bretaign, and Narbonne, were not as yet added to the patrimony of that Crown: And it was about that time, or a little before, that they are placed, who are first ranked in the Catalogue of the Admirals of France. But of later time it is true indeed, that in those Passports or Letters of safe Conduct, which have been granted even by the 
d Stilus & protocol. Cancellariae Franc. cap. de Pa●●aiges & Sauf-Conduits.  French King, and other Princes bordering upon the Sea, Admirals are usually named in express terms among the other kinds of royal Officers; to the end that they to whom the Passports are granted, may be secured in every place and part of their Dominion. But as touching the English Command over such as pass or sail through their Sea, there are many other Arguments taken (as we shall show by and by) from the manner of our King's prescribing limits to such as sail in this Sea; as also from those passages which we have 
e Chap. 14 of this Book.  already cited out of Records, concerning the Tributes or Customs imposed by the English upon such as passed through the Sea. And truly it is very considerable also, that the Kings both of Denmark and Sweden, together with the Hans-Towns, very often and earnestly begged of Queen Elisabeth, that they might have free passage through the English Sea with Provisions towards Spain, during the war betwixt her and the Spaniard. I know indeed that such a Licence was denied them not only in respect of the Dominion of the Sea, but chief to prevent the conveying of Provisions to the enemy. For which cause also divers Ships belonging to the Hans-Towns laden with Corn, were 
f 30 Junii, 1589. quâ de re Declaratio tunc Londini typis Edita.  taken by English men of war, in the very straits of Lisbon, without the sea-territory of England, which went by the 
g Thuanus, Histor. l. 95.  Scotish Sea, and the West towards Portugal; which was done doubtless that they might not presume to use the English Sea, without the leave of the Queen. But the Hans-Towns cried out thereupon, that the Laws of Nations, Commerce, and Leagues, were violated; because their ships were so taken by the English only upon this account, that they carried Provisions to the enemy; that is, in a territory, where the English did not in the least pretend to any Dominion. And concerning this particular, there is a notable Question controverted by very 
h Albericus Gentilis, de Jure Belli, li. 1. cap. 21. Hispanic. Advocate. li. 1. cap. 20. & Hugo Grot. de Jure Belli & Pacis, l. 3. cap. 1. § 5.  Learned men, How far they that are not enemies, or would not be called enemies, may by the Law of Nations afford supplies unto an enemy. But some years before the taking of these ships, when the Hamburgers (who in the name also of the rest of the Hans-Towns, desired leave to pass through this Sea to Portugal and Spain) were more than once denied any kind of liberty to transport either Corn or Warlike necessaries; they did not at all suggest, that their Petition at that time was grounded upon the Law of Nations or Commerce, nor that the Queen's denial was contrary to this kind of Law. That is to say, they were by her first 
i 1585. As you may read in the Queen's Declaration, 1589.  Answer enjoined to abstain from transporting Arms with other Warlike Necessaries and Corn, but (saith the Queen) in transporting other commodities, we shall not hinder you at all, but shall with all favour permit the ships of your Subjects to abide and pass after the accustomed manner, that they may perform their voyage. This Answer they did not seem to take amiss. But two years after they sent into England Sebastian à Berghen their Ambassador with petitionary Letters, desiring that the Exception in the Licence formerly granted might be taken away, and a freedom to transport all kinds of Merchandise permitted. Their Petition was denied again, and this moreover added, That such as should presume to do the contrary, should for their bold presumption suffer the loss of all their Goods and Merchandise so carried against her majesty's will and pleasure, if they fell into the hands of her Men of war, or any other of her majesty's Subjects. Thus they ever addressed themselves by Petitions; and the Queen gave Answers according to her pleasure. They did not so much as pretend the Laws of Nations or of Commerce, before that they understood their ships were seized in another Sea, to wit, that of Portugal, which they conceived free for themselves by the Law of Nations and Commerce, without leave from the Queen of England. Then it was they began to plead, that liberty ought not by any Law to be denied; even these men who but some years before, had humbly Petitioned the Queen of England, more than once for free passage through the English Sea: So that, that principal point (as some would have it) of the Law of Nations, that relief ought not to be conveyed to Enemies by a Friend, was not only the ground either of the Hans-Town's Petition, or the Queen's denial, but her right of Dominion by Sea was concerned also, which the Hans-Towns well knew they should violate, if they should pass the Queen's Seas without her leave.  
Hereunto for the same reason those particulars relate, which we find concerning this matter in those points that were to be insisted on in the year MDXCVII. by Witfeldius, and Bernicovius, Ambassadors from Christiern the fourth, King of Denmark, to the Queen of England. 
k In the Records of the embassy in Sir Robert Cotton's library.  We were (say they) strictly enjoined by our King, to mediate with her majesty, that our country men may be permitted a freedom to transport Corn or Provision towards Spain, even as we have done formerly, and do now again with all earnestness desire, especially since it is supposed, that the same Licence of transporting Corn is granted sometimes both to English and Dutch; that our countrymen may not be used in a worse manner than your own Subjects, and that at least some certain ships might in favour of the King's majesty, have leave granted them once a year at least, during the war, to carry Provisions; and that we may be able to certify the King our Master, how far we in this case prevail. But the Ambassadors had this Answer; that the Queen cannot in reason be induced to consent it should be done as they desired. And whereas you allege a supposal, that both English and Netherlanders have Licence given them sometimes to transport Corn, we (to wit, the Chief men of her majesty's Privie-Council, who gave the Answer) dare confidently affirm, that never any such matter was granted by the Queen, nor will she ever incline to grant the like, during the war. If the Queen had not in the opinion of the Danes, (as well as of the Hans-Towns before) been sovereign of the sea-territory, through which they were to pass, to what end then was this so earnest a Petition, and so imperious an Answer? Here, in this often iterated Petition, no liberty is pretended besides that which depended upon the Queen's pleasure, as sovereign of the Passage.  
For this cause also it was, that John King of Sweden, in that Letter of his scent to Queen Elisabeth in the year 1587. wherein he desired leave for Olavus Wormaeus a Swede, to carry Merchandise into Spain, acknowleged, that he must of necessity Maritimas Reginae ditiones pertransire, pass through the Sea-Dominions of the Queen, which are the very 
l In Sir Robert Cotton's library.  words of the Letter. Nor is it any new thing, that this kind of passage should be denied to Foreiners: For, in very many of those passports that were granted to the Merchants of Neighbor-Nations by Edward the first, during the war between him and the French, this claus is usually added, 
m Rot. Pat. 24 Ed. 1. memb. 5. & 25 Ed. 1. par. 1. membran. 2. 7. 16. etc.  upon condition, that they neither conveie nor cause any thing to be conveied to the French party, nor communicate any thing 〈◊〉 all to our Enemies there in any manner whatsoever, as we read it in the Records, where are many others of the same kind. From hence it is, that in the same King's instructions, it is required, that his sovereignty by Sea be preserved with extraordinary care and diligence, as belonging to him by ancient right, as Arbiter and Moderator of the Laws or Customs, and Persons, of such as pass therein. The words themselves, which signify the same, are these, 
n Fascic. de Superioritate Maris Angliae, in Arce Londinensi.  Especialment à retenir & maintenir la Sovereigneté qe ses ancestor's Royes d'Engleterre soloyent avoir en la dite Mier d'Engleterre, quant à l'amendement, declaration & interpretation des lois per eux faits à Governer toutes Maneres des gentz passanz per la dite mire, especially to retain, and maintain the sovereignty which his Ancestors the Kings of England were wont to have in the said sea so far as concerns the amendment, declaration, and interpretation of the Laws by them made to govern all manner of Nations passing through the said sea. Hereunto also belongs that Commission of King John, whereby he required in very imperious terms, that all kinds of ships whatsoëver which could be found throughout the English Sea (it being expressed by the general name of the Sea, as flowing round about) should be stayed and be brought near his shores: For, it hath been a Custom in all Ages, that the ships of any persons whatsoëver, as well Strangers as Subjects, may sometimes be stayed in the Ports. But it was King John's intent, that his whole Sea as well as the Ports themselves, should be plainly signified in this Commission. In witness whereof I here set down the Commission itself. The 
o Rot. Pat. 9 Johann. ●. Membran. 1. Num. 3.  KING to all the Sturemanni and Marinelli and Merchants of England that sail by Sea greeting. Be it known unto you, that we have sent Alanus Juvo de Sorham and Walter Stattun, and Vincent de Hastings and Wimund de Winchelsey, and others of our Barons of the Cinque-Ports, and other our faithful Sturemanni, and Marinelli of our galleys, to arrest all ships that they shall find, and them safely to bring, with all that shall be found in them, into England. And therefore we command you, that ye be attending upon them in this business, so that ye be in England with all your Ships and Merchandises at such Port and Coast as they shall appoint you. And if any shall attempt to resist them contrary to our command, you, our Liege-men, are required to assist them with all your strength, as you tender your selus and your chattels, and peace and residence in our Land for you or any of your Generation. Witness hereunto William Briwr at Lutegar, the eight day of February. These Sturemanni here do signify Sea-Captains, and Marinelli sea-soldiers. But to command that all ships should be arrested throughout the Sea, that is, stayed or taken, and brought into England, what else was it but undoubtedly to declare himself Lord of the Sea through which they passed? Now let no man object, that this Commission extended only to the Ships of English men, or of the Subjects of him that gave the Commission. It is true indeed, that the Commission before cited, was sent and directed only to the Sea-Captains, Men of war, and Merchants of England: But yet it is manifest thereby, that the four persons there named, and others Barons of the Cinque-Ports, and the rest that are added, were obliged by the aforesaid Commands to arrest all the ships that they should find throughout the Sea, and bring them safely into England, with all that should be found in them. But this part of the Commission was added (as it plainly appears) that no English Sea-Captain, or soldier, or Merchant whatsoëver, might be wanting in their assistance, in staying the ships of Foreiners; If any one shall attempt to resist them contrary to our command, you, our Liegemen, are required to assist them with all your, etc. Our Liege-men in this place, or they that ought to give assistance in making stay of ships, are all the seamen and Merchants of England that sail up and down throughout this Sea: They therefore whose ships were to be stayed, did not come under the name of Liege-men, or Subjects; and that it so appears to be by the very Form of this Commission, that there need's not any thing more be added touching this matter, I suppose no man will doubt, who takes it into his more serious consideration. Nor do the words make mention of the ships of Enemies, but of any whatsoëver; as being delivered by a sovereign Prince, who was concerned at that time, for his own occasion, and at discretion, to use not only his own sea-territory, but also the ships sailing therein, as well as those that were in Port.  
We find a Commission of the like nature, and which speaks to the same purpose, in the time of King Edward the third, wherein Command is given to make stay of all ships of ten Tuns and upward, that should be found in the South and Western Sea (except some that were newly designed to cross over into Bretaign) that they might be armed and set forth in the King's service. The Title of this Commission is, De Navibus arrestandis & capiendis, For arresting and seizing of ships. The Form of it runs thus; The KING to his beloved Thomas de Wenlok his sergeant at Arms, Lieutenant of our beloved and trusty Reginald de Cobham, Admiral of our Fleet of ships from the mouth of the River Thames towards the Western parts, greeting. Be it known unto you, that we have appointed you with all the speed that may be used by you, and such as shall be deputed by you, to arrest and seize all ships, Flie-Boats, Barks, and Barges of ten Tuns burden and upward, which may happen to be found in the aforesaid admiralty, (that is, in the Sea reaching from the Thames mouth toward the South and West) and to cause the Flie-Boats, Barks and Barges aforesaid▪ to be well and sufficiently armed and provided for the war, by the Masters and owners of the same, and to bring them speedily so provided and armed to Sandwich, except only the ships that are ordered for the passage of our beloved and trusty Thomas de Dagworth and his men that are bound for Bretaign; so that you be ready there in your own person, together with the Ships, Flie-Boats, Barks, and Barges aforesaid, so well provided and fitted for the war, upon the Saturday next before the Feast of the Apostles Simon and Judas, next ensuing at the farthest, to go thence upon our Command, according to such direction as shall then on our part be given, to the Masters and Mariners of the aforesaid Ships, Flie-Boats, Barks, and Barges, and to take sufficient Provision for the enabling of you to do the premises, in such places as you shall see most convenient (except only churchland) you making due payment for the same; and also to seize and arrest all those that you shall find to oppose or resist you in the execution of the premises, and them to commit into our Prisons, there to abide till we shall think fit to take farther order, etc. All Officers also in the said admiralty are commanded to yield obedience and assistance upon the same occasion. The usual subscription in that Age showing the Original authority of the Commission was, By the King himself and his Council. But that the aforesaid Sea itself was conterned under the name of the admiralty, is clearly manifest by what we have already shown you. And King Edward the third used his ancient Right, as other Kings of England did also therein, as well as in the Ports themselves, or Shores of England (for, there are innumerable examples of the staying of all Ships whatsoêver, by the King's Command in Port or Shore.) But that which hath been alleged about the staying of Ships, and Listing them for the King's Service, you are always to understand it was so done according to equity, that competent Pay was to be allowed them answerable to the proportion of Tuns, and also to the number of seamen, that were so taken into employment. Touching which particular, there are several Testimonies also to be found in the 
p Rot. Par. 3 Hen. 5. par. 1. num. 6. seu 31.  Records of parliament.   

That Licence hath been usually granted to Foreiners, by the Kings of England, to fish in the Sea; Also, that the Protection given to fishermen by them, as in their own territory, is an ancient and manifest Evidence of their Dominion by Sea. CHAP. XXI.  
AS a freedom of passage, so also we find that a liberty of Fishing hath been obtained by Petition from the Kings of England. There is a clear testimony hereof in that which was alleged 
a Cap. XV.  before out of the Records of parliament, concerning those Tributes or Customs that were imposed in the time of Richard the Second, upon all persons whatsoëver that used Fishing in the Sea. Moreover, it appears by Records, that Henry the sixth gave leave particularly to the French and very many other Foreiners, 
b Rot. Francie 38. Hen. 6. Membran▪ 9 & 14.  for one whole year only (sometimes for six Months) etc. to go and fish throughout the Sea at all times and as often, etc. But this leave was granted under the name even of a Passport or safe conduct; yea, and a size or proportion was prescribed to their Fishing-boats or Busses; that they should not be above XXX Tuns. And it is true indeed, there was a kind of consideration or condition added, that some others, who were subjects of the King of England, might in Fishing enjoy the same security with Foreiners: Which was for this cause only put into the Licence, that if the Foreiners did disturb or molest them, they should lose the benefit of their Licence. The words of that consideration or condition, in the beginning of those Licences, run after this manner; To the end that the business of the Herring-fishing and of other Fish, may be advanced, continued, and maintained for the public good; yea and that the like security may be yielded and afforded to some certain fishermen under our obedience. I suppose that those certain Fisher men under our Obedience were also the French, who at that time continued in subjection to the English; whereas almost all in France, except the Shore of Picardy, had newly revolted from the King of England: That is to say, at the latter end of the reign of Henry the Sixt. But that which we find either here touching equal security, or in other places sometimes also, about the giving of safe conduct even to the Fishermen of England, by Licence granted, either to French, or Flemings, or Bretaigns; that usually happened when the heat of War was over & a Cessation agreed on to treat of Peace or amity. In the mean time, security of that kind was given on both sides now and then by agreement: But by the King of England as well in respect of his being Lord of the place, as his being a party that was treating about a League or amity. By others upon this account only, not upon that; unless you understand the question to be about the use of Ports and Shores: For so, no man denies but these were Lords as well as he. Moreover also, in our time, leave was wont to be asked of our Admiral, for Frenchmen to fish for Soles in the neighbouring Sea, for King Henry the Fourth of France his own Table; as it is affirmed by such as have been Judges of our admiralty and Commanders at Sea of an ancient standing; yea, and that the Ships of those French were seized, as trespassers upon the Sea, who presumed to fish there without this kind of Licence.  
But in the Eastern Sea, which washeth the Coasts of Yorkshire and the neighbouring Counties, it hath been an ancient Custom for the Hollanders and Zelanders to obtain leave to fish, by Petition to the Governor of Scarborough Castle, situate by the seaside in the county of York; and this for very many years past, as is affirmed by that learned man Mr Camden speaking of those Coasts; It is worth the while, saith he, to note what an extraordinary plentiful and gainful Herring-Fishing the Hollanders and Zelanders use to have in the neighbouring Sea, having first obtained leave from this Castle according to the ancient Custom. For, the English have ever granted them leave to fish; reserving always the honour and privilege to themselves, but through a kind of negligence resigning the profit to Strangers. For, it is almost incredible what a vast sum of money the Hollanders make by this Fishing upon our Coast. So he. There is another man also of very great skill and knowledge in Sea-affairs, who, in the time of Q. Elisabeth, presented a Book to the parliament, written in the English Tongue, about the commodity of Fishing, wherein he writes, that the Hollanders and Zelanders every year, toward the later end of Summer, send forth four or five hundred Vessels called buffs, to fish for Herrings in this Eastern Sea, 
c Hitcho●●● New years Gift. Edit. Londinens. 1580.  Where before they fish they ask leave of Scarborough, which are his very words. Care was taken also by Proclamation, in the time of 
d Proclmaat. 7. of King James, May 6.  K. James, that no Foreiner should Fish in the English or Irish Sea, or that which belongs to the other Isles of the Realm of England, without leave first obtained, and every year at least renewed, from the Commissioners appointed for this purpose at London. And touching the liberty of fishing granted at other times also to Foreiners by the Kings of England, there are many Testimonies in 
e Gerard. Malinius in Lege Mercatoriâ, cap. 35.  other Writers. But the cause why we do not often meet with the Forms of those Licences, granted either for passage or fishing in the English Sea, was plainly this; because by the Leagues that were made with the neighbour Princes, a Licence or freedom of that kind (as also of Ports, Shores, Passage, and other things) was so often allowed by both Parties, that, as long as the League was in force, the Sea served, as if it were a common Field, as well for the Foreiner that was in amity, as for the King of England himself who was Lord and Owner. But yet in this kind of Leagues, sometimes the Fishing was restrained to certain Limits, which is a thing chief to be considered. The limits related both to place and time: So that according to agreement, the Foreiner in amity might not fish beyond these Limits; the K. of England retaining a Dominion over the whole adjoining Sea. Touching this, there is a notable Example in the time of our Henry the Fourth. An agreement was made betwixt the Kings of 
Rot. Franciae, 5. Hen. 4. 29. Septemb.  England and France, that the Subjects of both might freely use Fishing throughout that part of the Sea, which is bounded on this side by the Ports of Scarborough & Southampton, and on the other side by the Coast of Flanders and the mouth of the River Seine. The time also was limited betwixt Autumn & the Kalends of Januarie following. And that the French might securely enjoy the benefit of this agreement, our King directed Letters to that end, unto all his Sea-Captains and Commanders. Here you see plainly, those Limits wholly excluded the French from that part of the Sea which lies toward the West and South-west▪ and also from that which lies North east of them, as being so limited by our Henry, at his own pleasure, as its Lord and sovereign. Nor was there so much as the least shadow of right or Prerogative, whereby the French King might seem to have any interest as a Lord or Owner in the setting of these Limits; seeing that part of the Sea which was secluded did not touch upon any Shore of his in the North, nor had he any country lying before the Sea in the South (except Normandy) or in the West; the rest being held either by the Duke of Bretaign or by the King of England, as we have already observed. From hence truly it was a Custom, for the Kings of England to give protection to fishermen that were Strangers, sometimes by Proclamation, and sometimes with a Fleet of men of War, when they went to Fish either by agreement made upon treaty, or by leave obtained, qualifications being added according to the English King's pleasure. There is among the Records of the time of Edward the First, an Inscription, Pro hominibus Hollandiae etc. For the men of Holland and Zealand, and Friesland, to have leave to fish near Jernemuth. The King's Letter for their 
g Rot. Patent. 23. Ed. 1. Membr. 5.  protection follow's thus. The KING to his Beloved and Trusty John de Buteturte Warden of his Port de Jernemuth Greeting. For as much as we have been certified, that many men out of the parts of Holland, Zealand and Friesland also, who are in amity with us, intent now to come and fish in Our Sea near Jernemuth; we command you, that you cause public Proclamation to be made once or twice every week, that no persons whatsoëver employed abroad in our service presume to cause any injury, trouble, damage, hindrance or grievance to be done unto them, but rather, when they stand in need, that ye give them advice and assistance in such manner, that they may fish and pursue their own advantage without any let or impediment. In testimony whereof, we have caused these our Letters to be made Patents, to continue in force till after the Feast of St; Martin next ensuing. Witness the King at Wengham, the XXVIII day of September. Which was in the XXIII year of his Reign, and of our Lord MCCXCV. The same day also, in favour of the Earl of Holland and his Subjects, he set forth three men of War toward the farther Coast of the Sea, for the safeguard (as he saith in another Letter) of those Uessels belonging to your and our own country, that are in these days employed about the Herring Fishing &c. and to guard your Coasts near the Sea. Here he grant's a Protection to fish. And in both the Letters, he limits it within the space of two Months. He alone also protected the fishermen upon the German Coasts (which, by reason of its nearness, he calls here your Coast near the Sea, in his Letter to the Earl of Holland) as well as upon the English. Nor might the fishermen use any other kind of Vessels, but that which was prescribed by our Kings. Upon which account, all kinds of Fishing were sometimes prohibited, and sometimes admitted, this restriction only being added, that they should fish in such Vessels only as were under thirty Tuns burden. This appears by those Letters of King Edward the Third concerning the Laws of Fishing, which were directed unto his several Governors of Yarmouth, Scarborough, Whitby, and Donwich, Towns seated upon the Eastern Shore. The words are these; 
h Rot. Claus. 11. Fd. 3. Membran. 35.  Forasmuch as we have given Licence to the Fishermen of the aforesaid Town, and to others who shall be willing to come unto the said Town for the benefit of Fishing, that they may fish and make their own advantage with Ships and Boats under thirty Tuns burden, any prohibition, or Commands of ours whatsoever to the contrary notwithstanding, we command you to permit the fishermen of the aforesaid Town, and others who shall be willing to come to the said Town for the benefit of Fishing, to fish and make their own advantage with Ships and Boats under thirty Tuns, without any let or impediment, any Prohibitions or Commands of ours made to the contrary in any wise notwithstanding, as we have said. witnesss the King at the Tower of London, August. X.. Which was in the 11th year of the Reign of Edward the Third, or of our Lord MCCCXXXIX. But if any heretofore undertook the protection of the fishermen in this Sea, without leave of the English, they were to be seized and imprisoned, as Invaders of the Right of Dominion, and to expect to be dealt with accordingly, for the injury done to the King of England.  
This is evident also in the Records of our K. Edward the Fourth. For, he erected a Triumvirate or invested three Persons with Naval Power, whom the Records call Custodes, Conductores, & Waftores, Guardians, Conductors, and Waftors, whose Office it was to protect and guard the fishermen upon the Coasts of Norfolk and Suffolk. To the end therefore that the expenses of the Guard might be defrayed by the fishermen, and all others whatsoëver be excluded from meddling with this kind of Guard or protection, he appointed four men, by name Sir John Hemingham Knight, William Hopton, Edmund Yve,, and John Wansfleet Esquires, as well (say the 
i Rot. Pat. 22. Ed. 4. Membran. 2.  Records themselves) to oversee those Guardians, Conductors, and Waftors, as to give notice to all Fishermen of what country soêver they be, who shall desire to fish in the Parts aforesaid under the protection of the said N. N. that those fishermen and every of them, do contribute to all and all manner of Costs, Charges, and Expenses belonging to the same Guardians and Conductors in the time of fishing, and charge all such Costs, Charges, and expenses according to a proportion, and to levy and collect those Costs, Charges, and expenses, out of this kind of Fishings belonging to the fishermen aforesaid, wheresoêver they may be found; As also to arrest and apprehend all others, except the afore named, who presume or attempt to become Guardians, Conductors, or Wastors, and to commit them to our next Gaol, there to be kept safely and securely, till we shall take order for their delivery. In the very same words almost, to the same purpose, we find divers Letters Patents of King Henry the 
k Rot. Pat. 3. Hen. 7. part. 2. in dorso 15. August. & part. 1. in dorso. 18. Septembris.  Seventh; yea, and of Richard the 
l Rot. Pat. 2. Rich. 3. part. 1. Membran. 2.  Third, save that in the form hereof, after those words [charge all such expenses according to a proportion] this considerable Claus here is inserted [Although the same Fishermen, whether any one or more of them, may have had Letters of safe Conduct from any other King, Prince, or Governor of any Kingdom whatsoëver.] So that by the received and usual Custom, the Charges of the Guard were to be defrayed by the fishermen of this Sea, at the pleasure of our Kings, though they might have had Letters of public security and protection from any other Princes. Nor were any other persons to be admitted to a partnership in this kind of Guard, except those that were appointed by the King of England, lest by this means perhaps it might derogate from the English Right. Which is a manifest sign or evidence of the Dominion and Possession of the place.   

The Dominion of England made evident from the laws and limits usually set by our Kings in the Sea, to such Foreiners as were at enmity with each other, but in amity with the English. And concerning the King's Closets or Chambers in the Sea. Also touching that singular privilege of perpetual truce (or exemption from hostility) in the Sea about those Isles which lie before the shore of Normandy. CHAP. XXII.  
Promontoriorum series. Rumbi Leucae. Ad the souter in Phoenicem, S. S. E. 17⅓ Ad Whitby in Notapeliotem S. E. 12 Ad Flamborough head in Notapeliotem S. E. ½ versus Austrum. 8 Ad the Sporne in Phoenicem S. S. E. versus Apeliotem. 13⅓ Ad Cromar in Meleu●um S. E. and by E. 24⅓ Ad Minterton nes in Hypophoenicem S. E. and by S. 4. Ad Caster-nes in Phoenicem S. S. E. 21/13 Ad Layestof in Austrum S. 3¾ Ad East-nes in Austrum S. ½ versus Occidentem. 1⅚ Ad Orforth-nes in Mesolybonotum S. and by W. 6⅙ Ad North-foreland. in Austrum S. ⅓ versus Occidentem. 15⅙ Ad South-foreland. in Austrum S. 6⅓ Ad Dunge-nes in Notolybicum S. W. ¼ versus Austrum. 7 Ad Beach in Africum W. S. W. ¼ versus Austrum. 13 Add Dune-noze in Africum W. S. W. ¾ versus Occidentem. 24 ●/● Ad Portland in Hypafricum W. and by S. verse. Austrum. 161/12 Ad the Start in Africum M. S. M. ⅕ in Occidentem. 18⅔ Ad the ram. in Occidentem M. ¼ versus Boream. 6½ Ad the Dudman. in Africum M. S. M. ⅙ versus Occidentem. 8½ Ad the Lizard. in Africum M. S. M. ●/●● versus Austrum. 9 Ad the Landsend in Caurum M. N. M. versus Boream. 7 Ad Milford in Boream N. ⅔ versus Orientem. 31⅔ Ad S. David's head. in Boream N. ½ versus Occidentem. 5½ Ad Beardsie. in Hypaquilonem N. and by E. ⅛ vers. Orientem. 12⅙ Ad Holy head. in Boream N. ⅙ versus Occidentem. 9 Ad Monam in Hypaquilonem N. and by E. ⅕ versus Boream. 26  
Here you see very large spaces of Sea, intercepted sometimes for above ninety Miles (for, three English miles here go to every League) whereby those Chambers or Sea-Closets are made. But we find the management of that business concerning these Chambers, at the time of the aforesaid Proclamation, set forth after this manner, in the subscription of the twelv men that were sworn, and added to the aforesaid distances and courses of sailing. We whose names are subscribed, being called before the Right honourable Sir Julius Caesar Knight, judge of his majesty's High Court of admiralty, and there being enrolled, admitted, and sworn, for the describing of the limits and bounds of the King's Chambers, Havens, or Ports, in their full extent, do by these presents make answer, and to the best of our knowledge and understanding, declare, that the said Chambers, Havens or Ports of his majesty, are the whole seacoasts which are intercepted or cut off by a straight line drawn from one point to another, about the Realm of England. For the better understanding whereof, we have made a Table concerning that business; whereto we have annexed this our Schedule, showing therein how one Point stands in a direct line towards another, according to that Table. Given the fourth day of March, Anno Dom. 1604. and in the second year of the Reign of our sovereign Lord King James, etc. And then in the Schedule there follow the names of the twelv men; who were all persons of very great knowledge in naval or maritime Affairs. So, the spaces within the straight lines drawn from one point to another, are the Chambers or Ports of the King of England, who being Lord in like manner of all those parts of the Sea, as fare as the opposite Shores or Ports, whilst he commanded a keeping of the peace within these Creeks or Closets, did, as Arbiter, permit those that were in amity with him; but enemies among themselves, to make prize of one another, in the rest of the Sea; yet not without some qualifications or restrictions added concerning the use of the more open part of the Sea. And truly, the Spaniards alleged afterward, that themselves ought to be protected from hostility also, without these limits, in the more open part of the Sea; and that by virtue of the agreement of peace, whereby the Kings of Spain and England were obliged to protect one another's subjects, in all parts of their Kingdoms: which is as much as to say, that the rest of the Sea flowing between comes no less under the name of the Kingdom of England. And this appears also from the dispute held by their Advocate in England, about the protection of the territory by Sea, against the Hollanders, who mightily exclaimed (as 
c Albericus Gentilis in advocate. Hispanica, lib. 1. cap. 8.  he saith) that they should be intercepted and stayed by the King's Officer at Sea, with the prize that they had taken from their enemies the Spaniards. That it was an unjust violence; that being disturbed and spoiled, they ought to have reparation made them, and to be beard against those Spaniards, who being prisoners were discharged with the goods that were taken. But that the King of England might justly give the Spaniards protection against the Hollanders, in the British Sea, either within or without those limits, he pleads after this manner. You see (saith he) how far the Dominion of the King of England stretche's toward the South, North, and West. The 
d Tacit. in vitâ Agricolae▪ Caes. de Bello Gallico, l. 5.  Northern Coasts of Britain, having no Countries lying against them, are washed by the main and open Sea. And the Southern Coasts of Ireland are bounded upon Spain; the Western upon the Indian Countries under the Dominion of Spain; And so the Jurisdiction of our King by Sea, is of a mighty vast extent. Nor was it restrained or lessened by that subsequent Proclamation of the King (the same above mentioned) whereby certain limits were appointed, beyond which the King declared the power of his territory should not be extended, in these Acts of hostility betwixt the Spaniards and Hollanders. But it's said, that the Hollanders were intercepted by the Officer without these limits. Also according to the Articles of Peace lately agreed on betwixt our King and the King of Spain, they ought to protect one another's Subjects in all places throughout their Dominions: And therefore both aught to give protection throughout that immense Jurisdiction. For, there are limits 
e Menoch. Consil. 14.  founded upon right, and there are limits by compact or agreement: And an argument taken from the one, doth not conclude against the other. And here we are to follow the limits of right, concerning which certainly the articles of Peace and Agreement ought to be understood; because the other Bounds being set afterward, were not then in imagination. But the authority of the Proclamation extends not to things past. Certain it is, that Laws and Constitutions do give a being to 
f ●. 7. 〈…〉 110. A 1.  future businesses, and are not to be recalled unto things done and passed. Nor is this a Declaration of the King's right (therefore the more easily to be 
g 〈…〉.  admitted) made in the Proclamation, but a disposition and law wholly new. For, a 
h 〈…〉. 1. 〈…〉 8. 〈…〉 18. 〈…〉▪  Declaration induceth nothing new, and changeth nothing. But this Proclamation would change much, seeing the power of the King's territory extends itself much beyond those limits now constituted. To this an 
i 〈…〉  Answer may be given also, which is acknowledged by all, that a Declaration is of no force to another's prejudice, which here might be done to the ship that was intercepted; for which right was sought according to common Custom, and also according to the special agreement of the peace, that those Princes should suffer no violence to be done to one another's Subjects in their Territories. And it is much more strong in respect of that express article of the treaty, for that it could not be meet to take off from the full force of the Contract; which would now be lessened notwithstanding, if it were granted that the territory is solessened, within which only our King might protect the Spaniards. Moreover, it hinders not which is objected, that these limits which are now expressed in the Proclamation, were observed long before by long Custom in Controversies of this nature. For, to omit those most difficult things which are delivered in 
k 〈◊〉. 1. Consil. 74. num. 10.  proving the Custom, certainly the intent of our King in the Contract of peace seems not to have had respect unto that Custom, if any there hath been, or also unto the Statute, which is alleged here to be ancient. For, neither are those things common and understood by the other Prince in amity, nor perhaps by our King himself; to wit, matters of fact, in his new Kingdom. All which things I thought fir to add here out of Albericus Gentilis, because they belong not only unto these Limits, Creeks, or royal Chambers in the Sea, but to the Dominion of the whole British Sea. And truly Gentilis was ill understood by Joannes 
l Tract, de Insulis, cap. 14. § 46.  Gryphiander, who discoursing at large concerning Sea-Affairs, allegeth the place before-cited out of him in so brief a manner, as if by that Proclamation of King James, his Jurisdiction had been restrained simply to those limits. The Jurisdiction of England (saith Gryphiander) by Sea, although it be extended to the South, North, and West, yet by a Proclamation of James the present King, it is circumscribed by certain limits in the Sea. he quotes Albericus Gentilis, for his author. But truly, the King had no intent in that Proclamation, that his Jurisdiction should be circumscribed simply by those Limits, but only in relation to the acts of hostility at that time betwixt the Spaniards and Hollanders; he being Lord and Moderator of the British Sea for ever, as well as his Predecessors: which is sufficiently manifest out of the Proclamation itself, & out of Gentilis. Nor indeed is it easily to be conceived, from whence that special and perpetual privilege of Truce or Freedom from hostility had its original, which the inhabitants of Jersey, Garnsey, and the other isles lying before the shore of Normandy, do enjoy even in this very Sea, though war be between the Neighbor-Nations round about, unless it be derived from this Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England. Concerning that privilege, Master Camden being well informed by ancient Testimonies, speaks after this manner in brief. 
m In Insulis●▪ Brit. p. 855.  By an ancient privilege of the Kings of England, here is as it were a perpetual Truce, and though a war be on foot, yet the French and others have a liberty to come hither to and again without danger, and use Commerce securely. But we find the same more at large, in some 
n Rot. Pat. 2. Ed. 6. part. 7. Rot. Pat. 2. Elizab. part. 6. 〈◊〉 Rot. Pat. 2. Jacobi Regis, part. 19  King's Patents, expressed thus concerning Jersey; that in time of war, Merchants of all Nations, and others as well Strangers as Natives, Enemies as well as Friends, may freely, lawfully, and without peril, go unto, pass to and fro, and frequent the said Isle and the places upon the Coasts thereof, with their Shipping, Merchandise, and Goods, as well for shelter from foul weather, as upon any other their lawful occasions, and there to use free Commerce and traffic, and to abide with safety and security, and to come away thence, and return at pleasure, without any damage, trouble, or hostility whatsoëver, in their Affairs, Merchandise, Goods or Bodies; and that not only near the Island and places aforesaid upon the Coasts, and their Precinct, but also within the spaces distant from them as far as a man may ken, that is▪ so far as the sight of the eye can attain. And this is called a privilege, which you see extends so far into the Sea itself, as the sight of the eye can pierce from the shore. And if so be this privilege did not proceed from the Kings of England, as they are Lords both of the Sea and the Isles, (and by the same right that the Isles themselves belong to them, as hath been said 
o Cap. XIX.  before) it cannot in reason be imagined from whence it had its original. There is not (so far as we know) so much as a pretence of a Grant made by any other Princes. But only by the Kings of England, who unless themselves were Lords of the whole Sea flowing about, by what Title and authority did they ordain such a Truce so far within the Sea on every side, between enemies of all Nations whatsoëver that came unto those Islands? But as our Kings have very often commanded that all manner of persons should cease from hostility, not only within the aforesaid Creeks, but also throughout the spaces extended thence at pleasure, into their territory by Sea; so in like manner they indulged the like kind of privilege for ever throughout these Coasts of the French shore, that all manner of persons, though enemies to one another, might securely sail to and fro, as it were under the wings of an Arbiter or Moderator of the Sea, and also freely use the Sea according to such spaces or limits as they were pleased at first to appoint. Which, without doubt, is a clear evidence of Dominion.   

Certain public Records, wherein of old the Dominion of the Sea is, by the way, ascribed to the Kings of England, both by the King himself, and also by the Estates of parliament, debating of other matters, and that in express words, and with very great deliberation, as a known and most undoubted Right. CHAP. XXIII.  
I Shall next of all cite several public Records, which are kept in the Tower of London, wherein the Dominion and possession of the Sea is by the way expressly asserted as belonging to the King of England, and that both by the King himself, as also by the Estates of the parliament of England, as they were debating about other matters. For, that is the sixth head of the former Division. King Edward the third intitles himself and his Predecessors Lords of the whole Sea flowing round about, in the several Commissions given to Geoffry de Say Governor or Commander of the Southern and Western Sea, and John de Norwich of the Northern (the limit of distinction beginning, as it was usual, at the Mouth of the Thames) out of which Records we here set down theform, which is especially to be considered, so far as it makes to this purpose. 
a Rot. Scotiae, 10. Ed. Memb. 16.  The KING to his Beloved and Trusty Geoffry de Say, Admiral of his Fleet of Ships, from the Mouth of the River Thames toward the Western parts, greeting. Whereas we have of late commanded you by Our Letters, that you together with certain Ships out of the Cinque-ports, which we have ordered to be furnished and made ready for war according to our Command, should set forth to Sea, to oppose and resist certain galleys, provided and enforced with men of war in divers foreign Parts, which, as we were informed, were set out towards the parts of our Dominion to aggriev Us and Our people, or else to turn their course toward the Coasts of Scotland, for the relief and succour of our Enemies there; And in regard it hath been related by some, that galleys of that kind to the number of XXVI are newly come to the Coasts of Bretaign and Normandy, and do still abide there, as it is supposed, to do what mischief they can against Us and Ours, or to succour Our said Enemies, as is aforesaid; we calling to mind that OUR PROGENITORS THE KINGS OF ENGLAND have before these times been LORDS OF THE ENGLISH SEA ON every SIDE, yea, and defenders thereof against the Invasions of Enemies; and seeing it would very much grieve Us, if our Kingly honour in this kind of defence should (which God forbidden) be lost in our time, or in any sort diminished; and desiring, with God's help, to prevent dangers of this nature and provide for the safeguard and defence of the Realm and our Subjects, and to restrain the malice of our Eenemies; we do therefore strictly require and charge you, by the duty and allegiance wherein you stand bound, according to the special trust reposed in you, that immediately upon sight of these presents and without any farther delay, you do set forth to Sea with the Ships of the Ports aforesaid and the other Ships which are now ready; and that you arrest the other Ships in obedience to our command, which we lately required you to arrest (But so that they might be ready and provided to set forth according to Our aforesaid Command, seeing we caused the Masters and mariners of the same Ships to be prepared, and gathered together, whether they were within your Liberties or without, and to cause them, being well provided of men of war and other necessaries, to hasten out to Sea with the aforesaid Ships) and that with all diligence you make search after the aforesaid galleys and other Ships of War abroad against us, and stoutly and manfully set upon them, if they shall presume to bend their course for the end aforesaid, toward the parts of Our Dominion, or the Coasts of Scotland. And if they steal away from you, so that you cannot meet with them, than you are with the aforesaid Ships of our Fleet without any delay to follow after the same galleys and Ships of War set out against Us, if they shall make towards our Kingdom or the Coasts of Scotland aforesaid, and courageously to destroy them, for the conservation of our Royal honour. But yet we will not that you occasion any hurt or hindrance to Merchants or others passing by Sea, who have no intention to offend Us and our Subjects, or to secure our Enemies. Then follow's a power to press Seamen, and some other matters of that kind. The day also and authority is subscribed after this manner. Witness the King at the Town of St John, the sixteenth day of August. By the King himself and his Council. The like Commission was at the same time, and by the same time and by the same authority given to John de Norwich Admiral of the Northern part:  
In the preferring of a certain Bill also in parliament (which was the voice of the Estates of the Realm) in the reign of the same Edward, we find that he was usually accounted and styled King or sovereign of the Sea by all Nations. The words are, 
b Rot. Parl. 46 Ed. 3. num. 20.  qe XX ans passez & toutdiz adevant, lafoy navy de dit roialme estoit en touz portz & bones villes sur mire & sur riviers si noble & si plentinouse, qe touse les pais tenoient & appelloyen● nostre avantdit Seignieur, LE ROY DE LA MIER, & tout son pays dotoyent le pluis per mire & per terre per cause de la dite navy etc. Which being translated out of the old Norman speaks to this effect; That the English were ever in the Ages past renowned for Sea affairs in all Countries near the Sea, and they had also so numerous a navy, that the people of all Countries esteemed and called our King, the King or sovereign of the Sea. There is likewise a notable testimony touching this business in the Parlament-Records of Henry the Fifth, where the tenor of the Bill ran (as was usual) after this manner; Item priont les 
c Rot. Parl. 8 〈◊〉. 5. memb. 3. art. 6.  commons que, per lou nostre tressoverain seigneur LE ROY ET Sesse NOBLES PROGENITORS DE TOUT TEMPS ON't ESTE signior deal mere, & o'er par la grace de Dieu est venuz que nostre dit seigneur le Roy est seigneur des costes d' ambeparties deal mere, d' ordeigner sur touts estrangers' passants per my le dit mere, tiel imposition all oeps nostre dit seigneur le Roy à prendre que à luy semblera reasonable pur la safeguard del dite mere. That is to say▪ Item, the Commons do pray, that (seeing our sovereign Lord the King and his illustrious Progenitors, have ever been Lords of the Sea, and now that through God's gtace it is so come to pass, that our said Lord the King is Lord of the Shores on both sides of the Sea) such a tribute may be imposed upon all Strangers passing through the said Sea, for the benefit and advantage of our said Lord the King, as may seem agreeable to reason for the safeguard of the said Sea. The Answer subscribed to this Bill was, Soit avise par le Roy, that is, let the King himself be advised of it. For, the King resided in France at that time, being Lord of that country by Inheritance and Conquest, and Humphrey Duke of Gloucester was precedent of the parliament, being then Keeper or Lieutenant of England, by whom, as the King's deputy, this kind of Answer was usually given to Bills, as often as an assent to them was delayed; but when the King was present in person, le Roy s' advisera, the K. will advise, served in stead of an Answer from ancient down to the present time, in such Bills as were not passed into Acts. That is to say, in those Bills to which the Lords and Commons had given their assent before, that is, the Estates of the parliament of England, which is here especially to be considered. For, most certain it is, that, according to Custom, no Answer is given either by the King or in the King's name, to any parliamentary Bills, before that the Bill, whether it be brought in first by the Lords or by the Commons, hath passed both Houses, as it is known to all that are versed in the Affairs and Records of parliament. And when the name of either of them is left out in the draught of the Bill, (as the Lords are in that before alleged) it was wont to be supplied, as it is also at this day, by the brief form of Assent, which is added by that house, to whom the Bill is sent and transmitted. For, that house which first prefers it, transmit's it to the other, who either give's an assent, or rejects it. And when both Houses have so given their assent, then after a while, either the King give's his assent (whereby it becomes an Act or Law) or else he laie's it aside, and (as I have already shown) takes time to advise; Neither of which is ever done by the King, according to the course of parliament, till both Lords and Commons have first given their assent. But the whole form of the aforementioned Bill, which is full of all kind of story concerning things transacted in parliament, is taken out of the very Schedules annexed to the Bill, (wherein the Forms of this kind of assent were wont expressly to be added) and registered according to ancient Custom, among the Records of parliament, in the very same words wherein it was at first exhibited; no express mention being made of the assent both of Lords and Commons which is annexed to the Body of the Form (for, the assent of both sufficiently appears, in that according to the course of parliament it was so presented to the King) and the King's assent only or intent of deliberation being added by way of subscription, as I have shown. But most of those Schedules annexed to that kind of Bills which relate to the more ancient times are lost; whereas notwithstanding the Records wherein they were wont to be registered, have been carefully preserved in the Tower for above CCC years. All which we thought meet to mention here, to the end that in the Bill before alleged out of the parliamentary Records of Henry the fift, these three things may be observed, which make very much to the point in hand. First, that the Estates in parliament, according to the Custom of their Ancestors, that is to say, both Houses of Lords and Commons, being well-informed of the matter perhaps by some ancient Testimonies whereof we are bereft by the injury of time, did with one consent affirm it as a thing unquestionable, that the King of England is Lord of the Sea: As it appears also in that former Record which relate's to the Reign of Edward the third; for, both the Bills are placed alike in the aforesaid Records. Secondly, that the Sea whereof they speak is the whole that flows between France and England: For, they say in express terms, that King Henry, being Lord of the Sea, was at that time Lord des costs d▪ amb●parties deal mere, that is, of the Coasts or Shores on both sides of the Sea, or those that include the Sea on both sides, which cannot be understood of any other or greater Sea, than of that which was mentioned there immediately before: And so it is in plain terms to be taken of that whole Sea. Thirdly, that those Estates did not question but that Tributes might be imposed by authority of parliament, upon all strangers whatsoëver, wheresoëver they pass through this Sea; as well as Customs in Port; And that they did not at all conceiv, that a Bill ought to be presented touching that business unto the King, as he was at that time King of France, but only as King of England, that is, as Lord of the whole Sea flowing between. And it is very improbable, and not in reason to be admitted, that they would so upon deliberation (for both Lords and Commons use to debate such matters a long time before they pass a Bill) that they would, I say, so upon deliberation require an imposing of Customs by the Act of an English parliament, in a place that was not subject, as a part of the royal patrimony, to the King of England, as King of England. From hence it was also, that our present King Charles did this last year declare, that himself and his progenitors the Kings of England have in all times hitherto, by an ancient and most just title, been Lords of this Sea; to wit, in his 
d Brev. 10. Caroli R. Octob. 20. seu 1634.  Letters Patents sent to the maritime Counties of England, whereby ship-monie was imposed for the defence of his Dominion by Sea. Add moreover hereunto, that in the agreement made betwixt our Edward the first and Guy Earl of Flanders about the wearing of Colors or Flags in every ship, and punishing offenders by Sea, William de Leyburn is called 
c 1286. seu 15 Ed. 1. in Fascic. de superioritate, Maris, in Arce Londinensi.  Admiral de la mier du dict Roy d Engleterre, or Admiral of the Sea of the said King of England. Other Testimonies of the same kind there are in Records touching the Dominion of the Sea, as it hath been received and acknowledged according to the Common Law and Custom of our country, which I shall discourse of in the next place, and after that, concerning the testimony of Foreiners.   

Of divers Testimonies in our own Law-Books, and the most received Customs, whereby the Sea-Dominion of the King of England, is either asserted or admitted. CHAP. XXIV.  
THE seventh of those Heads, according to the former Division, which manifest the aforesaid Dominion of the Kings of England, relate's to our Law-Book's, and the received Customs therein, which prove it from the most ancient times. There are also in them many Particulars that may relate hereunto, which are explained now and then touching the Guard of the Sea, the English admiralty, and other things already handled. But in this Chapter we shall use either the determinations and Commentaries of our own Lawyers, or chief such Court-Records as explain their opinions. I confess indeed in some of the Authors of our Law who wrote above CCCL. years ago or thereabout, after they had (as the manner than was) read through the Civil Law also, they were so strict in following those determinations word for word, which they found concerning the Sea in that Law, that when they treated the acquirendo Rerum Dominio of the manner of acquiring the Dominion of things, they tranferred them into their own writings. From thence it is, that Henry Bracton, who was a very famous Lawyer at the later end of the reign of Henry the Third, saith, 
a Lib. 1. seu de Rerum divisione, cap. 12. §. 5. & 6.  Naturali jure communia sunt omnia haec, aqua Profluens, aër, & Mare, & litora Maris quasi Maris accessoria. By the Law of Nature all these things are common, running water, the Aër, and the Sea, and the shores of the Sea as accessories or dependants of the Sea. Also, aedificia, si in mari five in litore posita fuerint, aedificantium sunt de Jure gentium, If Buildings be raised in the Sea, or upon the shore, they become theirs that build them by the Law of Nations. And a little after, Jus piscandi omnibus commune est in portu & in fluminibus, a Right of fishing is common to all in a Haven and in Rivers. Which we find likewise in 
b Author Fletae Ms. lib. 3. cap. 1. Breton lib. 2. cap. de Purchas.  some other of our Law-Books of that Age, as a passage that fell from some Writers (of whom I spoke at large in the former Book) that were more affected than was meet with the words of Ulpian and Justinian, in the general division of things. But these very men in other places, showing the Customs of our country, do sufficiently admit the King's Dominion by Sea. For Bracton himself afterward speaks of them that by the King's grace and favour 
c Bracton lib. 2. cap. 24. § 2. & 5. fol. 56. & 57  quieti sint de Theolonio & consuetudinibus Dandis per totum regnum Angliae in terrâ & mari, & per totum Regnum tam per terram quàm per mare, Were exempted from paying Tolls and Customs, throughout the whole Kingdom of England in the Land and in the Sea; and throughout the whole Kingdom both by Land and by Sea. And in the same King's time a freedom from some payments was granted to the Citizens of London 
d Rot. Pat. 〈◊〉 Hen 3. membr. 11.  per totum Regnum tam per mare quàm per terram, throughout the whole Kingdom as well by Sea as by landlord. And so Bracton, when he returns to speak of the Customs of our country, acknowledged that the Dominion of the Sea belonged to his King no less than the landlord. And hence it came to pass also, that inter Capitula Coronae (as they call them) that is to say, those Articles or chief Heads, whereof enquiry was to be made according to the usual custom, by judge's delegated throughout England for the conservation of the public peace, we find this also, de Purpresturis factis super Dominum Regem, sive in Terrâ sive in Mari, etc. Of 
* pourpresture is properly, when a man encroacheth, or when any thing is done to the nuisance of the King's Tenants.  Pourprestures made upon our Lord the King, either on Land or in the Sea, or in sweet waters, either within the liberty or without, or in any other place whatsoëver. And it is placed among the Articles of this kind recited by 
e Lib. 3. de Corona, cap. 1. § 3. & cap. 2. § ●. fol. 116b. & 118a.  Bracton himself, and in the 
f Tholousa, Ms. lib. 1. cap. 20.  author of the Book called Fleta. But in the language of the Law we call those things Pourprestures, whereby detriment is done to any public place belonging to the patrimony of the Crown, as a public thoroughfare, a River, and the like: So that according to the nature of this ordinary Article touching Pourprestures, in the general form of enquiry, the Dominion or Ownership of the Sea is ascribed to the King, no less than of the Land, or of public Road or thoroughfare, and River. agreeable hereto is that Article about any kind of salt-waters being enclosed by any subject, or possessed in any other manner; which in the ancient Records of our Court of admiralty is said to be done, to the disherison of the King. The words are there, 
g Cod. Ms. de Admirallatu, fol. 18b. Artic. in Admirallat. inquirend. Edit. anno 1595. num. 33.  Item soit enquis de ceulx qui acrochent à eulx eaveses salees en desheretison du Roy. And at this day, enquiry is wont to be made, about that business, by authority of the high Admiral. Robert Belknap also, an eminent judge in the time of Richard the Second, 
h 6. Rich. 2. Fitzherbert tit. Protection. 46.  saith that the Sea is subject to the King, as a part of his English Kingdom or of the patrimony of the Crown. His words in the Norman tongue run thus; Le Mere est del ligeans' del Roy, come de son corone d' Angleterre. he added to his words, in a remarkable way, as belonging to the Crown of England, or as belonging to the Royal patrimony of England, to the end that no man might question, whether the Sea belonged to his King by the Right of the Kingdom of England, or of the duchy of Normandy, or of any other Province in France. Another also, who wrote in the time of Henry the Eighth, saith, it hath been received by ancient custom, that it is a duty lying upon the King of England, as Lord of the British Sea, to scour the Sea of Pirates, and to render the use thereof as of a public Road or thoroughfare whose soil is within his patrimony) safe for Shipping. For, he expresseth himself in English thus; 
i Seingerman. lib. 2. cap. 51.  The King of the old custom of the realm, as the Lord of the narrow Sea, is bound, as it is said, to scour the Sea of the Pirates and petit robbers of the Sea. So much also, as to what concerns Dominion, is without controversy admitted by our 
k Ed. Coke part. 5. fol. 108. & in Comm. ad Littleton sect. 439. fol. 260.  Lawyers of later time. And it appears by public Records, containing divers main points, touching which the Judges were to be consulted for the good of the Common-weal in the time of King Edward the Third, that the King's Sea-Dominion, which they called the ancient superiority of the Sea, was a matter out of question among our Lawyers of that Age. But consultation was had for the more convenient guarding of it: For, the whole Bench of Judges were advised with to the end (so we read it in the 
l In Fascic. de superioritate maris, in Arce Condinensi.  Records; and that is especially to be observed which we find here about the first beginning of the Naval Laws of the Isle of Oleron, seated in the Creek of Aquitain at the mouth of the River Charente) that the form of proceeding heretofore ordained and begun by Edward the first, grandfather of our Lord the King and his Council, at the prosecution of his Subjects, may be resumed and continued, for the retaining and conserving of the ancient superiority of the Sea of England, and the authority of the Office of admiralty in the same, as to the correcting, expounding, declaring, and conserving the Laws and Statutes long since made by his Predecessors Kings of England, for the maintaining of Peace and Justice among all people of what Nation soëver passing through the Sea of England; and to take cognisance of all attempt to the contrary in the same; and to punish Offenders and award satisfaction to such as suffer wrong and damage; Which Laws and Statutes were by the Lord Richard heretofore King of England, at his return from the holy Land, interpreted, declared, and published in the Isle of Oleron, and named in French le ley Olyroun. Here you have it declared as a thing most received and certain, that the King of England hath, by ancient right, been Lord of the Sea, of the same name, or that which flows about it. But that whereof the Bench of Judges were to consult, was only about the orderly maintenance of this right. Nor is it truly a small sign of this Dominion, that Richard the First King of England, being in the Isle of Oleron, which he possessed as seated in his own Sea, not so much for that he was Duke of Aquitain as King of England (whereof we have already spoken) did, as sole Ruler and Moderator of Sea-affairs, first publish those Naval or Sea-Laws in that his Island, which hold in force to this day, and from that time gave them so large and perpetual an authority by that name, that as the Rhodian Naval Laws (as the case stands) do prove, that the Rhodians in ancient time were Lords of the Grecian Sea, so the Laws of Oleron having 
m Edict. France, tom. 3. tit. 2. Juribus & privilegiis Admiralli §. 19  obtained such a kind of authority by Sea, from their first Institution, must ever declare the King of England as the author, to be Lord of the neighbouring Sea round about. But some printed Copies of these Laws, make them about sixty years later than the Reign of that Richard; by what authority, I cannot tell. For, they relate them to have been made in the year MCCLXVI, which is the fiftieth year of our Henry the third. Also, in the Law of the Land, it is reckoned among the Privileges of such as are absent, that they, who shall be out of the Realm of England at the levying of a Fine of any Land, and making Proclamations thereupon, are not so bound either by a yearly prescription, as heretofore, or by a five years' prescription, as is usual of later time, but that their Right remain's entire to them upon their return home, if they make their claim, within the like spaces of time. But intra regnum within the Kingdom is by the same Law taken, and that in the usual phrase for that which is intra (or as it is wont to be barbarously rendered infra) Quatuor Maria, within the 
Stat. 18. Ed. 1. seu de modo levandi Fines. Bracton, lib. 5. de exceptionibus, cap. 30. fol. 437. 2. Ed. 3. fol. 9a. 4. Ed. 3. fol. 46. pl. 30. Fitzherbert 8. Rich. 2. tit. Continual Claim, 13. Plowden, Comment. 1. part. fol. 359. & 360. etc.  four Seas, to wit, the Southern, Western, Eastern, and that Northern Sea which washeth both the sides of that neck of Land, whereby Scotland is united to England. That is to say, within the outmost bounds of the English Empire in those four Seas, or within the opposite Shores of the Eastern and Southern Sea or Ports belonging to other Princes, and within the bounds of the Northern and Western Sea, which indeed are to be bounded after another manner; but yet to be bounded: that is, accordirng to the extent of possession westward beyond the Western Shores of Ireland, and by the first beginning of that Sea, which is of the Scotish name and jurisdiction. But that which is opposed to this Particle intra quatuor maria, within the four seas, is that 
o Bracton ib. & Coke 7. Jacobi R. part. 8. fol. 100 Cas. Rich. Lichford.  extra quatuor Maria, without the four seas, or to be in the parts so beyond the Seas, that they be beyond the bounds of the Sea-Dominion of the King of England; from whence we are to determine of the bounds or exterior limit of the Seas. And although the Land of England be sometimes used for that which is the whole Realm, or English Empire, as signifying the same, a more ordinary and indeed more brief expression being applied (as is usual) in stead of a more large; yet it certainly appears, that extra quatuor maria, without the four seas, and extra Regnum, without the Realm, do in our Law-Books signify the very same thing (that is to say, so far as the extent and latitude of the whole English Empire is comprehended in the name of Realm, not as the Realm of England, is now and then distinguished in 
p Coke, part. 7. in cas. Calvini, fal. 23.  our Law from Ireland, which also is a distinct Dominion of the same Empire, or from the other Islands which are reckoned in the royal patrimony of the Kings of England.) For, it is usual in the Language of the Law, so to describe him, who, in that since, shall be out of the Realm. And whereas in the Reign of Richard the second to an objection made against one that would avoid the yearly prescription as not bound by it, for that he was not in England, it was excepted that he was in Scotland, and so within the four Seas; It was thereupon 
q Fitzherbert, tit. Continual Claim, 13.  answered and ruled by the Court, that the Exception was of no force, for that Scotland was not within the Bounds and Limits of England. So that within the four Seas, and within the Realm, signified one and the same thing; from whence these terms, out of the Realm, and without the four Seas, become one and the same also. To be out of the Realm, is very 
r Sect. 440. & 441.  often repeated in this sense also, by Littleton, the most excellent of all our Law-Writers, signifying no other thing than what he renders it in 
s Sect. 677. & videses Plowden, Comment. part. 1. fol. 359. & 360  another place, by one who ala oustere le mere, crossed the Sea, or, went beyond sea. ●rom thence also it seems to have proceeded, that, whereas with us, among the several temporal excuses of Defendants, who are summoned to appear in Court (in our Law we call them 
* Essoin is an alledgment of an excuse for him that is summoned, or sought for to appear, and answer to an action. It is as much as excusatio with the Civilians.  Essoins) there are two alleged, whereof the one is entitled de ultra Mare, the other De Malo veniendi, and this latter is allowed to him that is hindered by any kind of misfortune whatsoever, within the Seas, or on this side of the more remote bounds of those Seas, which belong to England; but the former to him who lives without, or beyond the Seas, belonging to the English Empire; From thence it seems, I say, to have proceeded, that, in former times, when there was a more frequent use in Court of this kind of excuses, a Defendant being absent in Ireland, might lawfully make use of the latter form of Essoin, but not of the former. Nevertheless, if through ignorance he did make use of this, it took on the nature of the latter, that is, wholly quitting all its own nature, it depended upon this, that the Defendant, according to the more vulgar sense or acception, lived beyond-Sea. For, according to received Custom, the nature of them both was such, that when any one might lawfully use the former, he might also after a while likewise enjoy the benefit of the latter. But in the said kind of Essoins or Excuses, the former not being lawfully made use of, but yet turned into the latter by construction of Law, lest it should become of no use, there was no place for the latter; to the end it might not be iterated contrary to Custom. The matter itself was thus decided in the time of K. Henry the third, as it is described by Henry Bracton, after this manner. Esto, saith 
Lib. 5. tract. de Essoniis, cap 8. §. 2.  he, quòd quis se Essoniaverit de Ibernia quasi de ultra Mare; attornatur Essonium illud ad simplex Essonium de Malo veniendi ut coram Martino de Patteshul in Banco, anno Regis Henrici Sexto de Gilberto Mariscallo & Ceciliâ uxore ejus & Allano de Hyda, qui vocavit ad Warrantum Willielmum Mariscallum in Comitatu Pembroke, & qui se essoniavit de Ibernia, & non fuit allocatum, & postea fecit de hoc quòd aliud essonium de malo veniendi ad alium diem non fuit allocatum. So much we find also in the ancient author of that Book entitled 
Ms. lib. 6. cap. 8.  Fleta. Doubtless, Ireland is no less seated beyond sea, than either France or Spain, unless you take that decision, as relating only to the Civil notion of this kind of situation; to wit, that it is not situate beyond that Sea which is a part and territory of the English Empire, but placed therein, and comprehended under one and the same Supreme Power with England; and so that an Excuse or Essoin de ultra mare, is not in that kind to be admitted. In the ancient 
x Ms. fol. 12b.  Records also concerning the Customs of our Court of admiralty, we read it was an usual Custom in the time of King Henry the first (who died Anno Dom. MCXXXVI.) and of other Kings both before and after him, That, if any man accused of a capital crime done by Sea, being publicly called five times by the voice of the Crier, (after so many several days assigned) did not make his appearance in the Court of admiralty, he was banished out of England & de mer appurtenant au Roy d Angleterre, or out of the Sea belonging to the King of England, for forty years, more or less, according to the pleasure of the Admiral. Other particulars there are that relate hereunto about Actions for matters arising in this Sea, that were wont to be entered in express terms heretofore, in the 
y Temp. Ed. 1. Fitzherbert tit. Avowry 192. & Placit. 37. & 38 Hen. 3. Rot. 10. Devon. Itin. Suffer. 47 Hen. 3. Rot. 10. Trin. 50 Hen. 3. Rot. 22. & Trin. 24 Ed. 3. in Brevibus Regis inter Pilke & Uenore; quae in Arcis Londinensis Archivo. Ejusmodi item sunt alia.  ordinary Courts of our Common Law, whose Jurisdiction was ever esteemed of such a nature, that an Action instituted about a matter arising in any other place than within the bounds of the Realm, was by the ancient strict Law, always to be rejected by them. After which manner as it hath been a Custom now for many years, that an action ought to be rejected, unless the matter have its rise within the body, (as they call it) of the county, that is, within some Province or county of the Island, usually given in charge to certain Governors or Officers, known to us by the name of Sheriffs. So also is it in this Sea-Province, belonging, by the ancient received Custom, to the high Admiral, or his Deputies, not only so far as concerns its defence and guard, but also as to matter of Jurisdiction. So that at length it is manifest, that the Sea-Dominion of the King of England, is without controversy admitted and asserted also, both by the Determinations and Customs of the Law of the Land, and by the express words of the Writs and Forms of the Actions themselves.  
Nor is that of any force at all to the contrary, which either our countryman Bracton the Lawyer, (as hath been said) or some others, of late as well as ancient time, that are Followers of him, but in too careless a manner, (while they 
z Jo: Cowel. Instit. Juris Anglicani lib. 2. tit. 1. sect. 3. & 4.  set down the Institutions of our English Law) have unadvisedly uttered by the way, touching that ancient community of the Sea, and of Fishing also in Rivers, according to the Books of Justinian; as if such a kind of community were admitted in our Law. Truly, that which they have so let slip, is not so much to be taken as contrary to the known Law of the Land in this particular (for, even Bracton himself, as I have shown, hath divers other passages that signify this Dominion of the King) as it is to be reckoned for some of the relics of Ulpian, or of the School of the Imperial Law, too slightly and carelessly added by the way in writing. And the like may be said of 
a Andraeas' Horn Ms. in speculo Justitiariorum, lib. 2. & Joannes Dee in Monarch. Britan. pag. 21.  one or two more of our Writers, who after the manner of reasoning, received for the most part in the Imperial Law, touching the middle of a River, and an Island risen therein, do by the way, but ignorantly, make the middle of the Sea flowing between to be the bound of this Sea-Dominion of our Kings. Moreover, the same may be said likewise of the 
b Anno 1602 apud Camden. in Annalibus, Tom. pag. 272. Edit. Londinens.  Commissioners of Queen Elisabeth, who treating at Bremen with the Commissioners of Christiern the fourth King of Denmark▪ about a freedom of Navigation through the Northern Sea, object a perpetual community of every kind of Sea, from the Law of Nations, deny a Dominion, and wrest other things by way of Argument out of the Writers of the Imperial Law, which are clearly contrary to our English Right, as also to the Intervenient Law of Nations, which hath continued in force for so many Ages about the Dominion of the Sea. Either, I say, the same must be said of them, or else that they did not so much make choice of Arguments which they thought were true, to serve the present occasion, as of such that might seem to have the greater force and authority among those Civil Lawyers with whom they were in treaty. Nor is it a new thing, that Civilians should speak of a natural and perpetual community of the Sea, even where it is most certain that a Dominion thereof is admitted from all antiquity, in the very territory wherein they themselves are comprehended; as I have formerly declared. There are also very many Rights among us, belonging either to the Exchequer, or to such as enjoy the Right of the Exchequer by Grant from the King, which some conceiv to be grounded upon that Sea-Dominion, whereof we discourse: As the confiscation of Goods derelict in the Sea, and of some of the greater sort of Fish, as wale-fish, Sturgeons, and others. And for the most part that of the satirist holds good, 

c Juvenal. satire. 4.  Quicquid conspicuum pulchrúmque ex aequore toto est,  
Res Fisci est ubicunque natat.—  
Goods in the sea of any worth and note,  
Belong to th'Chequer wheresoëre they float.   
Besides wrecked goods cast out ashore, when no living creature belonging to the ship remain's alive. But these things do not only appertain to him that is Lord of the Sea, but sometimes also to others in other Nations. And they for the most part depend, either upon the Law or Custom of some Land, as in the case of Goods cast ashore, or of such as are found and imported; or else upon a Right over such Persons as shall first possess them, as in the case of any Goods whatsoever derelict or found in the Sea, and others of that kind. Therefore I thought it not meet to draw those things here into controversy.   

Some ancient Testimonies of less account, touching the Sea-Dominion, whereof we Treat. CHAP. XXV.  
But his intent is, earnestly to persuade the English that it is their main interest diligently to guard the Sea (whereof the Kings of England are Lords) and to defend it with all their might, as the perpetual prop and support of their Empire. He saith also, that the same advice was given by the Emperor Sigismond, at his interview with our Henry the Fifth, for the procuring of on peace betwixt him and Charles the Sixth King of France. Give me leave to set down his words. 
The true process of English policy  
Of utterward to keep this region  
Of our england (that no man may deny  
Nor say of sooth but it is one of the best)  
Is this; that who seethe South, North, East, and West,  
Cherish merchandise, keep the admiralty,  
That we be Masters of the narrow See.  
For Sigismond the great Emperor,  
(Which yet reigneth) when he was in this land  
With King Henry the fift, Prince of honour,  
Here much glory, as him thought, he found;  
A mighty land which had taken in hand  
To war in France, and make mortality,  
And ever well kept round about the See.  
And to the King thus he said, My brother  
(When he perceivaed two towns Calys and Dover)  
Of all your towns to choose, of one and other,  
To keep the Sea and soon to come over  
To were outwards and your reign to recover,  
Keep these two towns sure, and your Majesty,  
As your twain eyen, so keep the Narrow See.  
For if this See be kept, in time of war  
Who can here pass without danger and woe?  
Who can escape? who may mischief differre  
What marchandie may for by be ago?  
For needs hem must take truce every foe,  
Flanders and Spain, and other, trust to me,  
Or else hindered all for this Narrow See.   
What is contained more at large in these Rhythmes, you have the sens of it contracted above in few words. It is not worth while to render the words themselves. The same Versifier also proceeds thus; 
But King Edward made a siege royal  
And won the town; and in special  
The Sea was kept, and thereof he was Lord;  
Thus made he 
* By Nobles here are meant the Rose Nobles that he coined.  Nobles comed of Record.   
We have also divers other very large domestic Testimonies of this thing, which are added in the next place, being mingled together with the ancient Recognition or acknowledgement of foreign Nations concerning the same.   

That the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England is acknowledged by Foreiners, whom it most concerns, by their usual striking of Sails, according to ancient Custom. Also concerning two Edicts or Ordinances that were set forth about this Thing, by the Kings of France. CHAP. XXVI.  
We are come now to Foreiners. And it is clearly evident, by what we have discoursed before, either touching the limits set for Navigation by the King of England, or the Licence of passage through this Sea often desired by Petition, that some of them have indeed acknowledged this Dominion. But there are two Testimonies more notable than the rest, which show (if you consider chief, as you ought, their being neighbours, and such whom it concerned) that they generally did the same. The one is the usual striking of the topsails, by every Ship of any foreign Nation whatsoêver, if they sail near the King's navy or any Ship belonging to the same navy in the Sea. The other is a Libel published of old, or a Bill of complaint instituted, wherein very many foreign Nations heretofore, in the time our Edward the First, did all together, and by common consent with the English, acknowledge the Dominion of the Kings of England by Sea. Whereto I shall add also a particular declaration of that kind, made by the Flemings, in an embassy to our Edward the Second.  
But that the striking of Sails is done, not only in honour of the English King, but also in acknowledgement of his sovereignty and Dominion in this Sea, is, I suppose, a thing out of question. Certainly, the French cannot doubt of it, who, by such a kind of striking, would have had themselves heretofore acknowledged Lords of our Sea; but in vain. That is to say, they were as much over-seen in the former Age, in setting forth two Edicts or Ordinances, to require and ratify such a kind of striking Sail to themselves by all Foreiners, as they were in so rashly vindicating the Sea-Dominion of the King of England. Concerning those Edicts we spoke before in the 
a Cap. 18.  former Book; Neither of which was received as valid in any Court of Justice, according to a decision made in the 
b Ludovic. Servin. Placit. 11. Tom. 2. 1592. pag. 262. Edic. 1609.  supreme Court of parliament, which we have observed also in that place. Yea, and here I shall set down the very words used by Ludovicus Servinus Advocate general to the King of France, to magnify the authority of those Edicts or Ordinances, at the time of that Decision. The one of them being set forth by King Henry the Second of France, or in the year MDLV; the other by Henry the Third, or in the year MDLXXXIV, they were both objected by those, who required a striking of Sail to them in the name of the French King, even without the bounds of France (for, the words of the Edicts did not relate only to the Sea confining upon France;) upon which ground also they offered violence to certain Hamburgers who refused to do this, and seized them as guilty of contempt against the dignity and Dominion of the French by Sea. But as to this thing, saith Servinus, it may be said on the contrary, That the (Edicts or) Ordinances of the Realm making injunction to strike and come aboard, have not been observed and are not to this day; And it doth not appear that of the year 1555. hath been verified in the Court of parliament, but the Defendants do report only an extract out of the Register of Broüage (which indeed is evident enough when that Edict is objected by the 
d Servinus, placit. citat. pag. 254.  same man.) Moreover, it was an old obsolete Law, and that which proves it, is the new Ordinance of the year 1584. For, there had been no need of a new Law if the old one had been kept; And notwithstanding that the last hath not been verified simply, but as it was promoted by persons in Power at that time, it did not pass without resistance, but was registered and Published with the Qualification required by the Procurator General, at the charge of the Executor, according to the ancient Forms, and such as the Officers of the admiralty had made in former time, without doing any thing anew. The former Edict, which was objected, was never admitted by the Estates of the Realm; for, nothing of that matter is to be found in the Records of parliament, which is the proper place for a testimony of its admission. But the later was indeed admitted, though as to any effect of a Law, either at that time to be enacted or introduced, or as received before into Custom, it was plainly rejected, and that at the instance of the King's Procurator; who desired it might be so qualified, as you see, that what was grounded upon ancient Custom, it only might be ratified, even after this Edict was so admitted in favour of some great Ones. Which was discreetly done; seeing both the Edicts were extremely contrary to the Custom of their neighbours, yea, and of all Foreiners. But as to the business of striking sail, which they would have to be a special Sign or pledge of their sovereignty and Dominion in those Edicts, which notwithstanding, upon second thoughts, were rejected afterwards in Law (as hath been shown;) truly, it having been usually and perpetually acknowledged due for so many Ages to the English, and performed accordingly both by stranger, and by the French themselves (as a matter grounded upon long prescription) can be no slight argument among the French, to confirm that Dominion of the English, whereof we treat.  
Moreover, it is affirmed by all that are used to the Sea as a thing out of Question, that this intervenient Law or Custom of striking sail hath been very usual to the English and other Nations; And that it is very ancient and received for above four hundred years, appears by this, that at Hastings, a Town situate upon the Shore of Sussex, it was decreed by King John, (in the second year of his Reign, or of our Lord MCC) with the assent of the Peers; that if the Governor or Commander of the King's navy in his Naval Expeditions (which were all in that Age upon the Southern Sea) shall encontre sur la mer (so the words run in the 
c Ms. Commentar. de rebus Admiral, fol. fol. 28. ●.  Norman Tongue) aucunes Nefs ou vesseaulx charges ou void, qui ne vevillent avaler & abeisser leurs triefs, au commandement du Lieutenant du Roy ou de l' Admiral du Roy ou son Lieutenant, mais combatant encontre ceulx de la float, que, silz puent estre pris, quills soient reputez come enemies, & leurs Ness vesseaulx & biens pris & forfeits come biens des enemies, tout soit que les Maistres ou possessours d' iceulx voudroient venir apres & alleguer mesmes les Nefs vesseaulx & biens estre des amies du Roy nostre seigneur; & que la menye estant en iceulx soient chastiez per emprisonement de leur corps pur leur rebelleté par discretion; That is to say, shall meet any Ships whatsoëver, by Sea, either laden or empty, that shall refuse to strike their Sails at the command of the King's Governor or Admiral, or his lieutenant, but make resistance against them which belong to his Fleet; That then they are to be reputed enemies if they may be taken, yea and their Ships and Goods be confiscated as the Goods of Enemies. And that, though the Masters or Owners of the Ships shall allege afterward that the same Ships and Goods do belong to the friends and Allies of our Lord the King. But that the Persons, which shall be found in this kind of Ships, are to be punished with imprisonment, at discretion, for their Rebellion. It was accounted Treason, if any Ship whatsoëver had not acknowledged the Dominion of the King of England in his own Sea, by striking Sail: And they were not to be protected upon the Account of amity, who should in any wise presume to do the contrary. Penalties also were appointed by the King of England, in the same manner as if mention were made concerning a crime committed in some territory of his Island.   

A Recognition or acknowledgement of the Sea-Dominion of the King of England, made by very many of the Neighbor-Nations round about, in an ancient Libel publicly exhibited, or in a Bill of Complaint instituted by them, together with the English, against Reyner Grimbald Governor of the French navy. Also, touching a Recognition of this kind implied in his Defence. CHAP. XXVII.  
THe other testimony concerning the Recognition of most foreign Nations in this particular, is that Libel or Bill of Complaint heretofore instituted by very many Nations together, wherein they unanimously declared the King of England and his Predecessors to be Lords of teh Sea flowing about, and brought them to give an account in a Court of Judicature, who presumed to violate that Right: For the well understanding whereof, I shall relate the whole matter more at large.  
A war being on foot between our Edward the First, and King Philip the Fair of France, it was so concluded sometimes by agreement, that there might notwithstanding be a Freedom of Commerce on both sides, and so a Truce with all Merchants whatsoëver on either side; but as to other things, hostility proceeded in the mean time (as it was wont) betwixt both the Nations. This special kind of Truce was called 
a Rot. Claus. 25 25. 1. in S●bed. annex. Membranae 26. Rot. Alemanniae à 22 Ed. 1. ad ●1 Ed. 1 etc.  Sufferentia guerrae, sufferance of war, and during war, there were certain persons appointed by both Princes, to take cognisance of things done contrary to this Truce, and pass their judgements, according to the▪ 
b Rot Pat. Ed. 1. part 2. mem. 24▪ in dorso.  La or Custom of Merchants, and the Form of Sufferance. After a revolution of some years (wherein this kind of Truce took place, and sometimes not) a League was made in the year of our Lord MCCCIII. which is the one and thirtieth of Edward the first. The first Article of that League is, 
c 〈◊〉 integ●●on habetur in 〈◊〉▪ Alemanniae, 31 31. 1. Membranâ 2.  that those Kings should not only be at amity with each other, but also that they should defend one another in all manner of Rights, against any others whomsoêver, except the Church of Rome, and on the part of the King of England; his son in law John Duke of Brabant; but on the part of the King of France, Albertus' King of the Romans, and John Earl of Henault. But the third Article thereof (for the first and third is of singular use in that Libel or Bill of Complaint, as will appear by and by) is this, Item il est accorde qe l'un ne receptera, ne sustendra, ne confortera, ne fera comfort, ne aid as Enemies de l' autre, ne soffera qu' ils eient comfort, souccors, ne aid, soit de gent d' arms, ou de victuals, ou d' autres choses queles q' eles soient de ses terres ou de son poiar, mais adiondera sur peine de forfature de corpse & d' avoir & empeschera à tot son poair loiaument en bon foi qe les dits enemy ne soient resceipts ne comforts es terres de sa seignurie ne de son poiar, ne q'ils en aient comfort soccours ne aid soit gents d' arms, des chevaux, d' armeures, de victuals, ou d' autres choses queles q' eles soient: which is in English to this effect; that, according to this contract of amity, they were neither of them in any wise to cherish the enemies of the other, nor suffer any kind of aid or relief to be afforded them in their Territories. The war being thus at an end, because there arose very many complaints concerning injuries done up and down, as well in the more open as in our own Sea, during the special Truce afore▪ mentioned, but also it was probable that others of that kind might arise perhaps after the League was made, especially by reason of the differences at that time betwixt the French King and the Earl of Flanders; therefore Commissioners were appointed by both Princes to hear and decide them. And those at that time on the behalf of the King of England were Robert 
d Rot. Pat. 31 Ed. 1. membr. 16. ult. Junii.  de Burghershe Constable of Dover Castle, and John de Banquell Steward of Pontoise, Baraldus de Sescas, and Arnaldus Ayquein Knights; on the French King's behalf were appointed the Lord Saquilly, Mittonius Blanvillius, Bertrandus Jordanus, and Gulielmus Ralastansius, Knights also: To the end that they might take cognisance (so it is in the King of England's Commission) des enterprises, mesprises, & forfaites en Treve ou en Sufferance, entre nos & le dit Roy de France, d' un part & d' autre, es costeres de la mer d' Engleterre & autres per decea & ausint per devers Normandy & autres costeres de la mer per de la; that is, of encroachments, injuries and offences committed on either side in time either of the League or Sufferance, or, of the Truce agreed on between Us and the said King of France, for freedom of Commerce only, either upon the seacoasts of England, or any other neighbouring Coasts of the Sea, either towards Normandy, or others more remote. But the aforesaid parties were authorised by two Commissions, in such manner, that the one Commission contained four, and the other also four, an equal number being appointed by both the Kings. They both bear date the last day of June, MCCCIII. To these Commissioners or others of that kind, the Libel was jointly exhibited by Procurators, on the behalf of the Prelates and Peers of England, also of the high Admiral of England, yea, and of the Cities and Towns throughout England; and lastly, of the whole English Nation, and others subject to the King of England; and how this could be done otherwise than by authority of the Estates in parliament, is not to be imagined. With these in like manner were joined the Procurators of most Nations bordering upon the Sea throughout Europe, as the Genoëses, Catalonians, Spaniards, Almains, Zelanders, Hollanders, Frieslanders, Danes, and Norwegians, besides others under the Dominion of the Roman German Empire. All these together instituted an Action or Complaint against Reyner Grimbald, who being Governor of the French navy, had, during the war between King Philip of France, and Guy Earl of Flanders, intercepted and spoiled Merchants of their Goods in this Sea, that were bound for Flanders. And all these Complainants jointly say, that the King of England and his Predecessors, have time out of mind, without controversy, enjoied the sovereignty and Dominion of the English Sea, and the Isles of the same, by right of their Realm of England, that is to say, by prescribing Laws, Statutes, and Prohibitions of Arms, and of Ships otherwise furnished than with such necessaries as belong to Merchants, and by demanding surety, and affording protection in all places where need should require, and ordering all other things necessary for the conservation of Peace, Right and equity, between all sorts of people passing through that Sea, as well strangers, as others, in subjection to the Crown of England. Also, that they have had, and have the sovereign Guard thereof, with all manner of Conisance and Jurisdiction in doing Right and Justice, according to the said Laws, Statutes, Ordinances, and Prohibitions, and in all other matters, which may concern the exercise of sovereign Dominion in the said places. To wit, such matters as concerned the office and jurisdiction of the Admirals, that were wont to be appointed by the Kings of England. Then, adding the first Article aforementioned of the League made but a little before, whereby both Kings were obliged to defend one another's right, they proceed in their Accusation against Grimbald, saying; That he is only Master of the navy of the King of France; but calls himself Admiral of the said Sea; and pretends that he was authorised under that title by the King of France, upon occasion of his making war against the Flemings. And that after the making of the said League, and contrary to the intent and meaning of the same, he had for above a years time unjustly assumed and usurped the office of Admiral in the said Sea, by authority of the King of France his Commission; taking the People and Merchants of England, and other Nations passing through that Sea, imprisoning and spoiling them of their Goods, and delivering them up to the King's Officers, as Goods forfeited and confiscate. And whereas he hath in a very insolent manner justified these actions of his in writing, as don by authority of the King his Master's Commission, as also according to a Prohibition made by the King of England, and proclaimed, according to the intent of the aforesaid third Article of the treaty, throughout his Dominions, (that is to say, a Prohibition which forbade a giving any relief to the French King's enemies within the Dominion of the King of England) and so endeavoured to defend himself before the Commissioners; it was alleged to be done to the great damage and prejudice both of the King of England, and of the Prelates, Peers, and all the rest, who jointly preferred the Bill, as aforesaid. Therefore they all with one consent pray, that the persons so imprisoned being set at liberty, and restitution made of the Goods injuriously taken, they might be referred to the Jurisdiction of the Admiral of England (to whom alone this kind of Jurisdiction, both in respect of Things and Place, as well as Persons, did appertain) and that, by order of the Commissioners, Reyner Grimbald himself might be enjoined to repair the losses of the Complainants, in case he wore able to make satisfaction; or otherwise, that the King of France, who gave him Commission for that Command, might be adjudged to do the same. But after reparation made, that then also the said Reyner might receiv such punishment for violating the League, as might deter others from the like attempt in time to come.  
Now what was done by the Commissioners, is not very well known: It seems it was a matter of such moment, that it was thought more convenient to make an end by agreement, than bring the matter to a trial. But in the mean time, nothing is more evident, than that a right of Dominion over the Sea, and that ancient and confirmed by long Preseription, was in express terms here acknowledged by almost all the Neighbor-Nations, to belong to the King of England; and so, that he might, at his own pleasure, give protection, and set Laws and Limits to all that sailed through this Sea, and used it in any manner whatsoever; nor could this kind of Right be altered or diminished by the differences of the Neighbor-Nations between each other, or by any Right of war belonging to others, otherwise than in any other territory of his Dominion. And it is to be observed, that the Flemings themselves, betwixt whom and the French there was a war on foot at that time, were not, nor could they rightly have been parties in that Charge or Accusation: For, by virtue of the aforesaid League made between the English and French, they were to assist one another by Arms to defend each other's Rights; so that according to the League, the French King was permitted to use the Sea, to infest the Flemings being his enemies, but not to intercept such as passed this way from any other Nations, or that were bound with Merchandise for Flanders. And Paulus 
c De gestic Franc. li. 8.  AEmilius, speaking of this very time, saith; The French King threatened ruin to Flanders. The King of England protected the Flemings. For, Edward was so far only a friend of the King of France, that yet he would not have the Flemings ruined. Thus our King orders the matter, both as a Defender of his own Right, and supreme Moderator also of Navigation in respect of others. Nor truly is it to be omitted, that Grimbald himself here, being Governor of the French navy, did not only arrogate this power in this Sea from the authority granted him by his King's Commission, but in express terms also made use of that Prohibition of the King of England, which was in force according to the Third Article of the said League, thereby to defend himself; as if he had also acknowledged, that himself could not have lawfully held that office of. Admiralty in this Sea, without such a Permission as he conceived himself to enjoy, by virtue of that Prohibition. For, by that Prohibition, it was required that no relief should be given to the French King's Enemies, nor any aid afforded them within the Dominion of the King of England, (that is, per my son poere, which were the very words of Grimbald, as you may see in the Libel itself set down hereafter.) And so Grimbald expressly objected the authority of that Prohibition, together with the power of his Master's Commission in defence of himself: As if he had said, I use this power, it being given me by the King of France, who put me in Command over his navy, and Affairs belonging to the Sea: But besides this, the King of England having set forth his Prohibition, commanded that no kind of relief should be given to any enemy of the French, within his Dominion, according to the League made between both the Kings. And therefore, seeing I have not taken either the Persons or Goods of any but such as are Enemies, or at least such as according to the Intervenient Law of Nations, are to be reckoned upon an hostile Account (for, doubtless he pretended, that they were to be taken as Enemies of what Nation soêver they were, who relieved the Flemings by Merchandise or otherwise) I conceiv it a sufficient ground of defence in my behalf, that the King of England, according to the League made, did by public Proclamation require, that no succour or relief should be given to the Enemies of France in any part of his Dominion. Upon which account, not to these, whom I took at Sea. The sum of all in brief is this; That Grimbald did not so much as imagine, that his office of admiralty or Power given him by Commission depended upon any Dominion of the King of France by Sea, but altogether upon the authority of his King's Commission, the League, and the King of England's Prohibition: As if the English King had openly declared by that League and Prohibition, that he would not take it for any injury to himself, during that kind of League and Prohibition, although the French should fall upon any of their Enemies in his Dominion, or though they, which is all one here, should be taken in his Sea, by the French King's Officers. Certainly, unless you so understand Grimbald, I do not see wherefore he should at all join that Prohibition together with the King his Master's Commission, in defence of himself, as it is expressed in the Libel, or why mention was made there of the Dominion of the King of England, throughout which that Prohibition was proclaimed, seeing the controversy arose touching things done only by Sea. But if he be so to be understood, certainly than he did not only forbear to oppose the ancient right of the King of England by Sea, but also sufficiently acknowledged it, while he seems to affirm that a temporary restriction only was added thereto, by an accession of the League and the Prohibition: So that we have a tacit acknowledgement even of the French themselves at that time, in this their Admiral. But how the principal points of the League ought to be expounded, it is no place here to discourse; for; we observe only that the Sea. Dominion of the Kings of England was acknowledged, in that Libel, by so many Nations.  
Moreover truly, it is worthy observation; that about the very same time, to wit, a little before the making of the League, the King of England did homage to the French King for the duchy of 
f Rot. Alemann. 30 & 31 Ed. 1. Du Tillet en le recueil des Traictes, etc. fol. 40b.  Aquitain, the Earldom of Pontois, and other Provinces that he held in France; that he was also wholly deprived of them some time before by decree of the parliament of 
g Florilegus, ann. 1293. 3. Thomas Walsingham▪ ann. 1294. Alii.  Paris; yea, and that about one hundred years before, King John was outed of Normandy; and yet afterward that the King of England now and then regained a possession of it, and that before the time of the League, and of the publication of this Libel; which serve all to this end, that we may observe, that when the aforesaid famous controversy arose about the use and sovereignty of the Sea flowing between France and Britain, and the absolute Dominion thereof was ascribed by so many Nations, upon a Title derived time out of mind, to the King of England and his Predecessors, yet in the mean time no title at all was pretended in right to their possession either of Normandy, or Aquitain, whereupon a Dominion of any part of the Sea might in any sort be grounded, but claimed upon the sole right of the English Empire. And it appears evident by the thing itself, that the things complained of by those Nations in the Libel, were done by that Governor of the French navy, chief in the Sea near the shores of France and Flanders, which were in hostility with each other: And so certainly they all unanimously affirm, that the whole Sea, whereof they speak, is under the Dominion of the King of England, and that upon the sole Account and right of the English Empire. And as for Grimbald, he did not defend himself, either by a pretence of any Dominion of the King of France, or by disproving of that Prescription; whereupon the English Title depends, as a thing not declared according to Truth or ancient Right; nor did he at all pretend, that the Right which the Kings of England had in the Sea board ring upon France, did belong to them either upon the account of Normandy, or any other French Province whatsoêver, as fiduciary Clients or Vassals of the King of France, though it had been convenient and very seasonable for him to have alleged all these Particulars, if the Truth had been so indeed. Whereby also that is not a little confirmed, whereof we discoursed before, about taking the names of the shore over against us, in the later Commissions of the Office of high Admiral of England, for limits only of the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, and of the Province thereof under their protection. Moreover also, about seven years before the exhibiting of the aforesaid Libel to the Commissioners, when as the King of France, by reason of divers heinous injuries done to his Subjects by the English in this Sea, required that the King of England (as he was the fiduciary Client or Vassal, because of Aquitain and other Provinces that he held under him in France) should be questioned not only for wrong done, but also for his right to those Lands which he held, and be summoned to appear in the parliament of Paris; the matter being set down at large in the Letter of Summons, he inserted nothing therein whereby he might seem to arrogate any Sea-Dominion at all to himself, or diminish that which belonged to the King of England; as you may see in 
h Anno 1293.  I lorilegus, who hath set down an entire copy of them in his Annals. The same author also, speaking of the same Time, saith, 
i Anno 1294.  At that time, there was neither Lord, nor Law over the Sea men; but what every man was able to catch, or snatch, he called his own; which plainly denotes an extraordinary Licence or of Depredation, and infesting the Sea; yet so to be understood, that in the mean time the incomparable power of the English in Shipping, which guarded their Dominion by Sea according to the Custom of their Ancestors, was chief signified thereby, the King very freely permitting his Subjects to use depredations by Sea, as long as the war continued. For, Florilegus himself relate's, that great numbers both of French and Spaniards, were then taken at Sea by the English. Yea, and about 
k Anno 1297  that time, Thomas of Walsingham writes, that either a French or Norman navy of two hundred Sail, which roved about this Sea to rob the English, were overcome by a Fleet of sixty English Ships, and brought into England. There is also another ancient author of the same time, when these affairs were acted, who saith, 
l Ms.  That in the Month of May, MCCXCIV. there fell out a Quarrel between the seamen of the Cinque-Ports of England, and the seamen of France, and it was determined by a fight at Sea, wherein the English with a Fleet of one hundred Sail, took two hundred Ships of France, and drowned or killed almost all the seamen of France, for which cause, Philip King of France, endeavoured to take away Gascoign from the King of England. Others there are likewise, that have other expressions touching these things, whereby it is easy to collect what is meant by that of Florilegus, when he saith, that there was neither Lord, nor Law, over seamen, at that time; that is to say, the King of England had let the reins loose to his Subjects, as Moderator of this Sea, and this he did, that they might not only restrain his enemies, but them also that should reliev his enemies in any manner whatsoêver, or that should use the Sea otherwise than at his pleasure, who was Lord thereof. But as concerning the like acknowledgement, made singly and apart by the Flemings, of the Dominion of the Kings of England over the Sea, I shall Treat by and by; after that I have in the next place set before you the Libel itself in its own, that is, the Norman Tongue, as it stands recorded in the Tower of London.   

A copy, or Transcript of the Libel or Bill of Complaint, mentioned in the former Chapter. CHAP. XXVIII.  
IN the Archives of the Tower of London, where Records of above four hundred years are kept, there is a bundle of Parchments, which contain some affairs relating to the times of Henry the Third, and of Edward the First and Third. The first contein's an agreement made between Edward the First and Guy Earl of Flanders, touching their Ships bearing of Colors about this Sea, to the end that they might be the more easily known. Then there are annexed three either Originals or Copies of the said Libel written at the same time. For (as it seems) the several Procurators of those Nations, that were parties in the Complaint, had their several Libels, though expressed in the name of all together. So that one is endorsed thus, De Baiona, as if that Libel had been exhibited singly by the men of Bayonne; but the title runs thus, De Superioritate Maris Angliae, & Jure Officii Admirallatûs in eodem, that is, Of the superiority (or sovereignty) of the Sea of England and the right of the Office of admiralty in the same, as it is also in the said agreement between the King and the Earl of Flanders. Also, in one of the Libels, to those words is added retinendis & confirmandis; All being very plainly written in the usual Character of that Age, whereunto the matter relate's. And there can be no scruple touching the reality and truth of them to any one that seethe them, who is but a little acquainted with the ancient writing and such kind of Records. I gave you the whole sens, yea and partly the words before; but now have thought fit to set down an entire copy of the Libel, as it was written at that time in the French or Norman Tongue; which runs after this manner.  
A vous, signior, auditors Deputez per les Rois d' Engleterre & de France, a redresser les dammages faits as gentzes de lour Roiaulmes & des altres terres subgitz a leur seignuries, per mire & per terre, en temps de Pees & truce, monstrent les Procurors des Praelatz et Nobles, & deal Admiral de la mier d' Engleterre, & des Comminalties des cities, & des Villes, & des Marchaunz, Mariners, Messagiers, & Peleringes, & de tous autres du dit Roiaulme d' Engleterre & des autres terres subgits a in segnurie du dit Roy d' Engletterre & d' aillours, si comme de la Marine de Genue, Cateloigne, Espaigne, Alemaigne, Seland, Hoyland, Frise, Denemarch, & Norway, & de plusours autres lieux del Empire, que come LES ROYES D' ENGLETERRE PAR RAISON DU DIT ROYALME, DU TEMPS D' ON't IL nigh AD MEMOIRED DU contrary, EUSSENT ESTE EN PAISIBLE POSSESSION DE LA SOVUEREIGNE signory DE LA MIER D' ENGLEIERRE ET DES ISLES ESTEAUNS EN YCELLE, par ordinance & establisement des lois, estatutes, & defences d▪ arms, & des vesseaux autrement garnies que vesseaux de merchandise, et de seurté prendre et safeguard donor en tous cas que mestier sirrah, et par ordinance de tous autres faits necessaries a la garde des pees, droiture, et equite entre toute manere des gentzes taunt d' autre signory come leur propre par illeque's passanz, et par sovereign guard et tote manere de conisance et Justice haute et basse sur les dites lois, estatuts, ordinances et defences et par toutz aultres faitz queux à le governement de sovereign signory appertenir purront es lieux avant ditz. Et A. de B. admiral de la dite mire deputez per le Roy de Engleterre, et touz les autres admirals per meisme celui Roy d' Angleterre et ses auncestres' jadis Rois d' Engleterre, eussent este in paisible possession de la dite soverein garde ove la conisance et Justice et toutz les aultres apertenances avantdites (forspris en cas d' appell et de querele fait de eux à lour sovereigns Roys d' Engleterre de deffault de droit, ou de malvais juggement) et especialment par empechement metere, et Justice fair, seurte prendre de la pees de toute manere des gentzes usaunts' arms en la dite mire, uo menans niefs aultrement apparallez ou garniez que n' appartenoit au nief Marchande, et en toutz aultres points en queux home peut aver reasonable cause de suspection verse eaux de robberie ou des autres mesfaits. Et come les Maistres des Neifs du dit Royalme d'Engleterre, en absence des dits admirals, eussent este en paisible possession de conustre et jugger des touse faicts en la dite mire entre toute manere des gentzes solonc les lois estatuts et les defenses et Custumes. Et come en le pimier article de l' Alliance nadgairs faite entre les dits Roys, en les traitz sur la darrain pees de Paris, soient comprises les paroles que ●ensujent en un cedule annex à yceste (At non in schedulâ annexâ, sed in eâdem membranâ descriptum est quod sequitur; unde non tam ipsos libellos, qui cognitoribus edebantur, quàm sive formulas eorum archetypas sive exemplaria descripta haec esse conjiciendum fortè est; utì etiam ex eo quòd Admiralli Angliae nomen aliter ac per A. de B. non inseratur; quae prima elementa non sunt nominis alicujus tunc temporis Angliae Admiralli in sacris Scriniis reperti) Primierement il est traict & accord entre nous & les messengers & les procurers susdits, en nom des dits Roys, que iceux Roys serront l'un à l'autre, desores enavant, bons, urayes, & loyaux amiss, & eydans contre tout home (sauve l' Esglise de Rome) en tiele manner que si ascun ou plusieurs quicunques ils fuissent voloient depointier, empescher, ou troubler les dits royes es franchises, es liberties, privileges, es drois, es droitures, eu es custumes de eux & de leur royalmes q'ils seront bons & loyaux amiss & aydans contre tout home que puisse viure & morir à defendre gardir & maintenir les franchises, les liberties, les privileges, les droitures, et les custumes desusdites; Except pur le dit Roy d' Angletterre, Monsieur Johan Melchisedec de Braban en Brabant, et ses heirs dessendans de lui et de la fille le roy d' Angleterre, et except, pur le dite nostre seigneur le roy de France l' excellent Prince Monsiur Aubert Roy d' Alemaigne et ces heirs royes d' Alemaine, et Monsieur Johan Count de Henau en Henau. Et que l'un ne serra en consail ne en aide ou l' autre perde vie, member, estate ou honour; Monsieur Reyner Grimbaltz Maistre de la Navie du dit Roy de France,  
In English it runs thus:  
To you, our Lords, 
* Or Commissioners.  Auditors deputed by the Kings of England and France, to redress the wrongs done to the People of their Kingdoms, and of other Territories subject to their Dominion, by Sea and by Land, in time of Peace and Truce.  
The Procurators of the Prelates, Nobles, and of the Admiral of the Sea of England, and of the Commonalties of Cities and Towns, and of the Merchants, Mariners, Messengers, Inhabitant strangers, and all others belonging to the said Realm of England, and the other Territories subject to the Dominion of the said King of England, and of others under the jurisdiction of the same; As also of divers other Nations, Inhabitants of the Sea-Costs of Genoa, Catalonia, Spain, Almaign, Zealand, Holland, Friesland, Denmark, and Norway, and of divers other places of the Empire, do declare; That whereas THE KINGS OF ENGLAND, By Right OF THE SAID KINGDOM, FROM TIME TO TIME, WHEREOF THERE IS NO MEMORIAL TO THE CONTRARY, HAVE BEEN IN PEACEABLE POSSESSION OF THE sovereign LORDSHIP OF THE SEA OF ENGLAND, AND OF THE ISLES WITHIN THE SAME, with power of making and establishing Laws, Statutes, and prohibitions' of people, as well of other Dominions as their 〈◊〉 passing through the said Seas, and the Saveraign Guard thereof. And also 〈…〉 all manner of Cognisance in Causes, and of doing right and justice, to high and low, according to the said Laws, statutes, Ordinances, and Prohibitions, and all other things which may appertain to the exercises of sovereign jurisdiction in the places aforesaid. And whereas A. de B. deputed Admiral of the said Sea by the King of England, and all other Admirals appointed by the said king of England, and his Ancestors▪ heretofore king's of England, of appeal and complaint made of them to their sovereigns the kings of England, in default of justice, or for evil judgment▪ and especially of making Prohibitions, doing▪ justice, and taking surety of the peace of all manner of people▪ using arms in the said Sea, or carrying Ships otherwise furnished and set forth than merchantmen use to be; and in all other points where a man may have reasonable cause to suspect them of Robbery or other ●…uors. And whereas the Masters of the Ships of the said kingdom of England, in the absence of the said Admiral, have been in peaceable possession of taking cognisance and judging of all Actions done in the said Sea, between all manner of people, according to the Laws, Statutes, Prohibitions and Customs. And whereas in the first Article of the League lately made between the said Kings, in the treaty upon the last peace at Paris, there are comprised the words here following, in a Schedule annexed to these Presents. (But that which follow's is not written in a Schedule annexed, but in the same Parchment; from whence it may perhaps be conjectured, that these are not so much the very Libels themselves, which were exhibited to the Commissioners or Auditors, as ancient Copies taken from the Original; as also from this, that the name of the Admiral is set down A. de B. which two first Letters do not agree with the name of any one that we can find in Record, to have been Admiral of England at that time.) First, it is concluded and accorded between Us and the Agents and Procurators aforesaid, in the names of the said Kings, that the said Kings shall from this time forward, become to each other good, true, and faithful friends, and be aiding to one another against all men (saving the Church of Rome) in such manner, that if any one or more, whosoever they be, shall intent to disturb, hinder, or molest the said Kings, in the Franchises, Liberties, Privileges, Rights, and Customs of them and their Kingdoms, They shall be good and faithful friends to each other, and aiding against all men living, and ready to die, to defend, keep and maintain the Franchises, Liberties, Privileges Rights, and Customs aforesaid; Except on the behalf of the said King of England John Duke of Brabant in Brabant, and his heirs descending from him and the daughter of the King of England; and except on the behalf of our Lord the said king of France, the excellent Prince Monsieur Albert king of Almaign, and his heirs kings of Almaign, and Monsieur John Earl of Henault in Henault, and that the one shall not be of Counsel, nor aiding, where the other may lose life, member, estate, or honour.  
Monsieur Reyner Grimbald, Master of the navy of the said king of France, who calls himself Admiral of the said Sea, being deputed by his aforesaid Lord, in his war against the Flemings, did, after the said League made and confirmed, against the tenor and obligation of the said League, and the intent of them that made it, wrongfully assume and exercise the office of admiralty in the said Sea of England, above the space of a year by Commission of the said king of France, taking the people and Merchants of the kingdom of England, and of other places, passing through the said Sea with their Goods, and committed them so taken to the prison of his said Lord the king of France, and delivered their Goods and Merchandises to the Receivers of the said king of France by him deputed in the Ports of his said kingdom, as forfeited and due unto him, to remain at his judgement and award. And the taking and detaining of the said people with their said goods, as also his said judgement & award, for the forfeiture & acquest of them, he hath justified before you, Lords, Auditors, in writing, by virtue of the authority of his said Commission of admiralty aforesaid, by him usurped after this manner, and during a Prohibition or Restraint generally made and proclaimed by the king of England, in right of his Dominion (according to the tenor of the third Article of the League aforesaid, which contain's the words above-written) requiring that he may thereupon be acquitted and discharged of the same, to the great damage and prejudice of the said king of England, and of the Prelates & Nobles, & others abovementioned.  
Wherefore, the said Procurators, in the names of their said Lords, do pray your lordship's Auditors, that you would cause due and speedy deliverance of the said people, with their Goods and Merchandises so taken and detained, to be made to the Admiral of the said king of England, to whom the cognisance of the same of right appertaineth, as is before expressed; So that, without disturbance from you or any other, he may take cognisance thereof, and do what belongs to his office aforesaid; And the said Monsieur Reyner be condemned and constrained to make satisfaction for all the said damages, so far forth as he shall be able, and in his default his said Lord the king of France, by whom he was deputed to the said office; and that after satisfaction given for the said damages, the said Monsieur Reyner may be so duly punished for the violation of the said League, that his punishment may be an example to others in time to come.  
So far the Libel of so many Nations, manifestly acknowledging the sovereignty and Dominion of our Kings over the Sea, and thereupon demanding protection for themselves. And whereas no mention is made of this thing in the Histories either of the French, English, or others, it is no wonder since the proceed of Courts of judicature are very seldom set down in Histories▪ But we understand by the French history, that this Ovid was Governor of the French navy at the very same time. Paulus AEmilius writing of Philip the Fair, saith, 
a De Gestis Francorum, lib. 8.  He hired sixteen galleys from Genoa, over which Reyner Grimbald was Governor or Commander. He sailing about by Sea, infested the Sea-Coast of Flanders. Regimerus, Reginerus, or Reynerus Grimbaldus, is one and the same man; and among the Genoêses, there is an eminent Family of that name: But because he was a Foreiner and mercenary, therefore (it seems) Joannes Feronius left him out of the Catalogue of the Admirals of France; yet 
b De rebus Gallicis, li. 2.  Joannes Tilius placing him among the Governors of the French navy, calls him Roverius Grimaldus. He also is that Admiral of the King of France, who, as Joannes de 
c Chronic. Episcop. Ultraject. & Comit. Holland. pag. 93.  Beka saith, had command of three hundred and fifty galleys, that were sent by Philip the Fair, in the year MCCCIV. to aid the Hollanders against the Flemings. There are also several particulars in the Records of France, which relate to the differences then on foot between the English and French: And although that Libel or any copy of it be not found therein (if we may credit Tilius, who set forth a Catalogue of that kind of Records) yet there is that Commission among them, whereby the aforesaid Auditors or Commissioners were authorised to determine of things done contrary to the League. It is described by 
d Recueil des Traictes, etc. fol. 40.  Tilius after this manner; Pouvoir donè par le Roy Edovard à deux nommez & accordez de sa part pour avec les deux eleuz de la part du dit Roy (Phelippe) d' enquerir & amendir les forfaictes durant lour trefue, le Dernier Juin MCCCIII. Ou tresor; layette Procurationes, posse, & potestates Angliae; K. Power was given by king Edward to two persons named and appointed on his part, to meet with two persons chosen on the behalf of the said king (Philip) to make enquiry and give remedy touching Injuries committed during the Truce betwixt them the last of June MCCCIII. in the Treasury; in the Box entitled, Procurationes, posse, & potestate●s Angliae; K. The Commissions bear date the same day and year; whereby these Auditors or Commissioners were appointed for this purpose, as we observed before out of our own Records. Nor is it of any force here to the contrary, that Commissioners were sometimes 
e Rot. Claus. 2●1 Ed. 3. par. 1. membran. 25. dors. Rot. Franciae, 10 Hen. 8. etc.  deputed in the same manner by the Princes of the shores on both sides of the Sea, as also by the aforesaid Kings, to determine complaints about robberies and other injuries usually done by private persons to one another by Sea and landlord. For, if any one will collect thence, that the Princes which deputed them had both an equal right in the Sea, it may as well be concluded upon the same ground, that they were but part-owners of their own Countries, and had an equal interest in each other's landlord. Besides, in such a kind of deputation as that, there is more regard had of the persons offending, that are to be tried, than of the Dominion of Territories; which truly is wholly to be discovered some other way.   

A Recognition or acknowledgement of the Sea-Dominion of the Kings of England, made by the Flemings in an embassy to Edward the Second. CHAP. XXIX.  
TO these let us add now the assent and voluntary acknowledgement of the Flemings in the parliament of England, in the Reign of Edward the Second. When as the Ambassadors of Robert Earl of Flanders complained of the taking of their Goods away at Sea, imploring remedy of the King of England, they said more than once that they were taken upon the English Sea towards the parts about Crauden, within the power of the King of England, and brought into England; but that it appertained to the King of England to take cognisance of the crime, for that he is Lord of the said Sea, and the aforesaid depredation was committed upon the aforesaid Sea within his territory and Jurisdiction; which are the words of the Record; but I shall set down the 
f Rot. Pat. 14 Ed. 2. part. 2. Membran. 26. in dorso.  whole, so far as it relate's to this business. 
Memorandum, That whereas for the reformation of certain injuries in an amicable way, done by the Subjects of the Earl of Flanders, to the Subjects of the Kingdom of England, and by the Subjects of the said Kingdom to those of Flanders, since the time that our said Lord the king undertook the Government of his kingdom, several Treaties had been held between the Council of our said Lord the king, and the Ambassadors of the said Earl often sent into England, upon the aforesaid occasion, which Treaties, by reason of some impediments that happened, did not attain the desired effect▪ at length in the parliament of our said Lord the king, held▪ at Westminster in octabis Sancti Michaëlis, in the fourteenth year of his Reign▪ there appeared certain Ambassadors of the said Earl, to treat about reforming the aforesaid injuries in the form aforesaid. And when as the said Ambassadors had been admitted by our said Lord the king to treat anew of this kind of injuries, these Ambassadors, as other Ambassadors of the aforesaid Earl, in the aforesaid Treaties did, among other particulars that they required, before all things make supplication; That the said Lord the king would at his own suit, by virtue of his royal authority, cause enquiry to be made, and do Justice, about a certain depredation lately made by the subjects of England (as they said) upon the English Sea, of Wines and divers other Merchandises belonging to certain men of Flanders, towards the parts about CRAUDEN, within the territory and Jurisdiction of our said Lord the king; alleging that the aforesaid Wines and Merchandises taken, from the said Flemings, were brought within the Realm and Jurisdiction of the said Lord the king, and that it belonged to the king himself so to do, for that HE IS LORD OF THE SAID SEA, and the aforesaid depredation was made upon the said Sea within his Territory and Jurisdiction. In conclusion, after diligent consideration had of the premises in the same parliament, with the Prelates, Earls, Barons, and other Peers of the said Realm being there present, it was concluded upon their advice by the said Lord King, that, to preserv the benefit of Peace between the Subjects of England and Flanders, the said Lord king do by his royal authority cause enquiry to be made about the Goods taken at that time upon the aforesaid English Sea towards the said place of CRAUDEN, and brought within the said Realm, in those places where the Malefactors went with the goods so taken to the said Land of England, and cause the same depredation to be heard and determined according to Law and Reason, and that the Owners of the Ships who had a hand in the said depredation, and others, who knowingly received the said offenders with the Goods so taken in whole or in part, may be charged and punished thereupon, as partakers, of the aforesaid depredation.   
So far that Record. And Commissioners were appointed with power of Jurisdiction by the King's Commission, through most of the maritime Counties, to make reparation of damages. But because there are upon the shores over against us (especially those of Zealand, and there are also upon other neighbouring shores) besides Inlets of Rivers, very many wind and turn of the Sea flowing in, whereby the land is so interwoven up and down, that it cannot well be but that the Sea also which flows in, and oftentimes remove's Banks and makes harbours there in the same manner almost as a River or Brook, must be contained under the same Jurisdiction, as an entire body with the Land; therefore sometimes mention is made also of this kind of Sea flowing in, as of a Sea reckoned within the Jurisdiction & Current of the Sea of the opposite shores; as for example, of the Sea Flanders, or (as I find it in some ancient 
b Ms. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ 3 Hen. 5.  Manuscripts which seem to be the Originals of certain Letters of King Henry the Fift to the Earl of Carolois, and to the Governors of Ypres, Gaunt, and Bruges) deins la Jurisdiction & l'estrem de la meer de Flanders, within the Jurisdiction and stream of the Sea of Flanders, which is all one. For, setting aside the Sea so flowing in or making an inlet or harbour before the opposite shore, all that which remains, or the Sea flowing between those opposite Countries and England, was ever esteemed to be of the English Dominion, according to what I have formerly shown. So that a late Writer doubtless was in a dream, when, upon the repairing of the Dock at Mardike, he writes, 
c Jacobus Chiffletius, in Epistolá Dedictori● ad Comitem de Olivares, Portui Iccto praefixâ.  that he saw the Empire of the British Sea restored to the King of Spain. And so I have done with this point, touching the Declaration and acknowledgement of the Sea. Dominion of our Kings, made by those foreign and Neighbor-Nations, who were most concerned in the Business.   

Of the Dominion of the King of Great Britain in the Irish and Western Sea, considered singly and apart by itself. CHAP. XXX.  
I have already spoken in general, of the English or British Sea, which is a part of the patrimony of the Crown of England, but chief as it lies either East or South. It rests now, that we treat of the Western, as also the Scotish and Northern, and in a word of the whole British Sea that remain's. It is evident to all, that part of the Western Sea, lying before England, is understood as well in that Libel which was exhibited by so many Nations to the Commissioners deputed by the Kings of England and France, above three hundred and thirty years ago, wherein we so often read le mer d' Angleterre or the sea of England, as in the King's Commission-before mentioned, wherein our Kings are expressly-declared Lords of the English Sea on every side; and therefore I shall forbear to repeat what is 
a CAP. 24.  cited out of Bracton, about the Essoyning or excusing of a man absent in Ireland, and other things of that kind alleged before, which make to this purpose. Moreover also, we read every where, that all the Isles in this neighbouring Sea were called British (as we observed at the beginning of this Book) just as if the narrow Seas flowing between, like Rivers or turn of Rivers, did disjoin those Banks or Shores from great Britain, as 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Fragments of the same. Whereby it appears, that the narrow Seas themselves with the Isles, even as Rivers with their Banks, are to be reckoned a part of the British territory. And hereunto especially relate's also that expression in the Libel so often cited; to wit, that the Kings of England have ever been Lords both of the English Sea (or of the British, so far as it stretcheth before England) and also of the Isles situate therein, par raison du Royalme d' Angleterre, by right of the Realm of England. So that the Isle of Man, which (as Giraldus Cambrensis saith) stands in this Sea, in the very midst betwixt the Northern Parts of England and Ireland, was (if I understand any thing) reckoned of old among the Land-Provinces of England, even as the Isle of Wight, Lundie, and others of that kind. Nor doth it seem to be understood otherwise by those men of ancient time, who, upon occasion of a dispute, whether this Isle ought by right to be taken for an appendent of England or Ireland being placed in the midst of the Sea flowing between, determined the controversy on this manner. They brought venomous serpents; and observing that the Isle did entertain and cherish them, as well as England and the rest of great Britain, but on the contrary that Ireland destroyed them, it was concluded (saith 
b Topograph. Hiberniae, dist. 2. cap. 15.  Giraldus Cambrensis, who lived under Henry the Second) by the common censure of all, that it ought to be ascribed unto England. For, if they had so thought the territory either of Ireland or England, as it consisted of Land and Sea, to be dis-joined from this Isle of Man, that they had conceived the Sea lying between, either common to all men, or by ancient right subject to other than the Kings either of Ireland or Britain, they might seem to have raised a very ridiculous controversy: For, I suppose, the Question could be no other, than touching the bounds of England or great Britain, and Ireland. But that a Question about bounds may be admitted between Owners that are neighbours, where the Territories of both are not continual or contiguous, is beyond my understanding. It is well said by 
c L. 4. § 11 l. 5. & 6. ff. tit. Finium Regundorum.  Paulus; that if a public thoroughfare, or public River intervene, which belongs to neither of the neighbouring Owners, an Action cannot be brought upon that Title of the Law, Finium Regundorum. And truly, after that Quintus Fabius Labeo, being 
d Cicero de Officiis, lib. 1.  appointed Arbiter by the Senate betwixt the Nolans and Neapolitans about the bounds of a Field, had so craftily persuaded both of them to retire backwards apart from each other, that a portion of the Field was left in the middle which he adjudged to the people of Rome, there could not any controversy arise farther between them about the bounds of this Field; because there ceased to be any confine betwixt them: But if any Question arose afterwards, they were both to contend with the people of Rome. Even so it is to be conceived of that Question, to which of the two Countries the Isle of Man ought by Right to be ascribed; it arising chief upon this ground, because it lay in the midst between the Territories belonging to Ireland and Britain, and at the confine of both. For, by an Argument drawn from the nature of the very soil only, without a civil consideration of Dominion (though they would have here the very nature of the soil to be the evidence thereof, as a Lot for decision) it ought no more to be ascribed either to Britain or Ireland, than to Norway, Spain, or France, where every man knows that venomous Creatures are bred as well as in Britain. Therefore, to be ascribed to England or Britain in that ancient Decision, is, so immediately to be annexed to the British territory, that the Isle of Man may truly, and in a civil sens, be called a Land-Province of England or Britain, seeing the English territory is so continually extended as far as its Western Coasts; that which bend's Westward from the very Confine, being ascribed to Ireland. And therefore Queen Elisabeth's Commissioners let fall those words too unadvisedly in the 
d 1602. apud G. Camden. in Annalib. tom 2. pag. ●●3. 〈…〉.  treaty, held at Bremen, with the Danish Commissioners, about free Navigation and Fishing in the Norwegian Sea; That the Kings of England never had prohibited Navigation and Fishing in the Irish Sea between England and Ireland; as if they would have had it proved from thence, that the Dane ought not to be prohibited Fishing or Navigation between Island and Norway, because neither were Lords of the Sea, but had possessed the shore's only on both sides by an equal Right. There were other particulars also no less rashly spoken touching a community of the Sea, as we observed before. Concerning Navigation and Fishing in the Norwegian Sea, I shall add more by and by. But as it was ill done of those Commissioners in that treaty to make use of an Argument drawn from a necessary community of the Sea, so there is no truth in that which they let fall concerning the Irish Sea. For, we know, that not only those petty Potentates bordering near the Sea heretofore, that were in Rebellion and had usurped the Kings Right in many places of Ireland, did exact grievous Tributes of Foreiners for the very liberty of Fishing; but also it was expressly provided by Act of 
e Stat. Hibernic. 5. Ed. 4. cap. ●.  parliament, that no Foreiner should Fish in the Irish Sea, without leave first obtained to this purpose from the Lord lieutenant, or some other lawsul deputy or Officer of the King of England; yea, and that all Foreiners should pay yearly, for every fisherboat of XII Tons or upward, thirteen shillings and four pence, and for every lesser Vessel two shillings; upon pain of forfeiting their Vessels, Furniture, and all Goods whatsoëver, if so they refused this kind of payment or did not acknowledge this Soveraignite of the Lord of the Sea. But I shall insert the whole Act touching this business, that we may understand what was the most received Opinion of all the Estates of Ireland, touching this Right here of the King. 
Item, at the request of the Commons, that where divers vessels of other lands from one day to other going to fish amongst the kings Irish enemies in divers parts of this said land by which the kings said enemies be greatly advanced and strengthened aswell in vitualles, harness, armour, as dyvers others necessaries, also great tributes of money given by every of the said vessels to the said enemies from day to day to the great augmentation of their power and force against the King's honour and wealth, and utter destruction of this said land, thereupon the premises considered, it is enacted and ordained by authority of the said Parliament, that no manner vessel of other lands shall be no time nor season of the year from henceforth, from the feast of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ's next coming, go in no part of the said land betwixt the said Irish enemies to no manner fishing without one special licence of the Lieutenant, his deputy or Justice of the land for the time being, or licence of another person having the King's power to grant such licence, upon pain of forfeiture of the ship and goods to the king. And that whatsoever person or persons that find or impeach any of the said vessels, rumpants or forfaites against this act by the authority of the same, it be lawful to them so making any claim in behalf of the King, and approving the said forfeitures by any of the said vessels to be made, that the king shall have th'one moitye of the said forfeiture, and the said person or persons shall have th'other without any impechment, and that all manner vessels of other lands coming in the said land of Ireland a fishing, being of the burden of twelve tons or less, having one Drover or boat, every of them to pay for the maintenance of the King's wars there xiii. s. iiii. d. by the year. And all other small vessels as scarves or boats, not having Drover nor lighter being within the said burden of twelve runs, every of them shall pay twoe shillings go a fishing in the like manner. Provided always that no vessel fishing in the North part of Wicklo, be charged by reason of this art; and that the Lieutenant, his deputy or Justice of the land for the time being, shall have the foresaid sums and duties of money so paid to be employed in the King's wars for the defente of the said land, and that the Customers and Collectors of the same sums shall account before the said Justice, Lieutenant, or Deputy for the time being, or such Auditors that shall be for the same appointed by the king or them, and not before the Barons of th'exchequer in the said land; and that none of the said vessels so coming from other parts in the said land shall not departed out of the said land, till every of them pay their said duties upon pain of forfeiture of the vessels and goods to the King.   
There are some also who affirm, that the King of Spain 
f Gerardus Malinius, in Lege mercatoriâ cap. 35. pag. 189.  obtained leave by request from our Queen Marie, for XXI years, to fish in the more Northerly part of the Irish Sea, and that thereupon a Revenue of one thousand pounds per annum was advanced to the Exchequer in Ireland. A Proclamation also was set forth by 
g Proclam. 7. Jacobi 6. Martii.  James King of great Britain, prohibiting any foreiner, without leave first obtained, to fish in this Irish Sea. But as to what concerns that controversy about the Isle of Man, although it be remembered by Giraldus (who wrote in the Reign of Henry the Second) nevertheless it is to be conceived, that it arose in the more ancient times of the English-Saxons, when all that lies betwixt England and Ireland, was in subjection either to the Kings of Ireland, or Britain, that is, when both of them had in this Sea distinct Territories of their own, whose Bounds were in question. Certain it is, as 
h Hist. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 9  Beda writes, that Edwin the most potent King of the Nortbumbrians, or rather of all the English-Saxons, subdued the Mevanian Isles to the Dominion of England, about the year DCXXX. That is to say, both that Mevanian which we call Anglesey, & the other also which is Man, whereof we discoursed. But in the later time of the Anglo-Saxon Empire, the Norwegians or Danes, who exceedingly infested both this and the North-east Sea with very frequent Robberies, at length seized both this Isle and the Hebrides, and held them almost two hundred years: So that in the mean time, this of Man could not in a Civil sens be ascribed either to Ireland or Britain. But that the Kings thereof were at that time Lords as well of the neighbouring Sea as of the Isles, may be collected out of their Annals, where we find that Godred, whose surname was Crovan, King of Man, in the year of our Lord MLXVI brought Dublin and a great part of Laynster 
j ●…m 〈…〉 ●40.  under his subjection. And so throughly subdued the Scots, that no man, who built a Ship, durst drive in more than three Nails: So that he gave both limitation and Law to the Shipping of his neighbours; which is all one, as to enjoy the very Dominion of the Sea, as I have shown in what hath been already spoken. And from hence perhaps it is, that the more ancient Arms of the Kings of Man were a Ship with a Sail folded together, and this Inscription added, Rex Manniae & Insularum, King of Man & of the Isles; as Mr 
k 〈…〉, pag. 847.  Camden observes from their Sails: For, the three legs of humane shape, now every where known, are but of later time. But afterwards, when Ireland was subdued by Henry the Second, and King John, and Reginald King of Man 
l Chronic. Manniae, anno. 〈…〉 ●…t. cart. 14. Joannis R. membran. in dorso.  brought into the power of King John (the English possessing this Sea at that time with a very numerous navy) there is no reason at all to doubt, but that the neighbouring Sea round about was taken also into the Dominion of the English. For, in that Age the King of Man was no absolute Prince; but being subdued, he paid homage to the King of England, & yielded under his subjection. But in a short time after Alexander the Third, 
m 〈…〉, hist Scot lib. 13.  King of Scots, annexed it to the Dominion of Scotland, and put in a Governor, who was to assist him upon occasion with thirteen galleys & five hundred Seamen. He recovered the Hebrides also, by driving out the Norwegians, & transmitted it to his posterity. Then, Man returned again to the English; who enjoied Ireland a long time together with it & that sea-territory. But the Kings of the Hebrides and of Scotland enjoied the Northern part of this Western Sea, after that they had expelled the Norwegians who were Lords here of the Sea. And from hence it is, that, as Scotland, England, this Isle of Man, the Hebrides, and Ireland with other adjacent Isles, so even the Vergivian and Deucaledonian Sea itself washing the West of Scotland, and surrounding these Isles with wind and turn, ought now also to be accounted the ancient patrimony of the King of great Britain.  
But there is moreover, in the more Westerly part of this open and main Sea, another Right belonging to the King of Great Britain, and that of a very large extent upon the Shore of America. Whenas Sr Humfery Gilbert Knight, did by authority of Queen Elisabeth transport a colony into the New World, with design to recover certain Lands in the East parts of the Northern America, which of Right belonged to the English Dominion, the Queen was by him, as her Procurator put into a possession, for ever to be held by her and her heirs, both of the Port, called by the name of St John (which is in the Island of Baccalaos) and also of the whole Sea as well as Land on every side, 
n ●acklu●s, in his Voyages, Tom. 2. pag. 151.  for the space of six hundred miles. Then he received this new Kingdom of the Queen, as her beneficiary, having a Branch and a Turf delivered in his hands, according to the usual ceremony of England in transferring the Ownership of Lands and Possessions. Nor truly was it necessary, that he should otherwise get the Possession, from whence this Dominion of the Queen and her posterity had its Original. For (as Paulus saith well) there is no necessity that he who 
o L. 3. ff. tit. de acquir. Rer. Dom.  intends to take possession of a Field, should walk about the whole, but 'tis sufficient if he enter any part of that Field, so long as he doth it with a mind, thought and intent, to possess the Field to its utmost extent and Bound: Which saying may relate to Seas, as well as Lands, that were never taken into possession. So that as 
p De Conditionibus Agrorum.  Siculus Flaccus Treating of Occupatorie Lands, saith, Men did not possess so much land as they were able to till, but they reserved as much as they were in hope they might be able to till, the like also may be said of a Sea so taken into possession. Look how much was reserved in hope of using and enjoying, so much also was bounded. But perhaps the first original of the Dominion of this main Sea of America, did not proceed from the Possession that was acquired by Gilbert. He rather restored and enlarged the Right of the Crown here: For, that Island called Baccalaos, was added to the English Empire by 
q His Commission you may find, Rot. Franc. 12. Hen. 7.  Sebastian Chabot, in the time of Henry the Seventh. And it is certain, that afterwards it grew to be a Custom, for the Officers belonging to the High Admiral of England (in whose charge are all the Seas subject to the King of England and Ireland, as King of England and Ireland) to demand Tributes of such as fished also in this Sea; which was (I suppose) a most evident token of the King's Dominion. But it was 
r Stat. 2. & 3. Ed. 6. cap. 6.  provided by an Act of parliament, in the Reign of Edward the Sixth, that no Tributes of that kind, to the grievance of Fishermen, should be paid any longer. How far our English Colonies, lately transported into America, have possessed themselves of the Sea there, I have as yet made but little enquiry.   

Touching the Dominion of the King of Great Britain in the Scotish Sea, especially toward the East and North. CHAP. XXXI.  
THose particulars which were cited before out of the 
b Proclam. 7▪ Jacobi & Martii, 6.  Proclamation of James King of Great Britain, about the Prohibition of Fishing, relate as well to the Scotish Seas, on every side; from whence also you must acknowledge their possession hath been retained together with an ancient Sea-Dominion. That is to say, all Foreiners were prohibited to Fish in these Seas, without leave first obtained at Edinburgh. And in those Scotish Acts of parliament, they are not so much new Laws made, as old ones revived, whereby it was ordained. That all manner of 
c Parlam. 4. Jacobi R. 6. cap. 60. & parliament. 6. ejusdem cap. 86.  Fischeres, that occupies the Sea, and utheres persons quhat sumever that happenis to slay hearing or quihte Fish upon the Coast, or within the isles or out with the samen within the Frithes bring them to free Ports, etc. where they may be sold to the Inhabitants of the same kingdom, quhairby his majesty's customs be not defrauded, and his hienes' liege's not frustrate of the commodity appointed to them be God under the pain of confiscation and tynsel of the veschelles of them that cumes in the contrair hereof, and escheiting of all their movable guddes to our sovereign Lords use. So that use and benefit is claimed hence, by a special right in that Sea: otherwise truly, that use and been; fit would of right no more appertain either to the King of Scotland or his Subjects, than to any other whomsoêver. But the Law was made concerning all fishermen, as well strangers as Scotchmen; as being ordained by all the Estates of that Kingdom, who so well understood both the King's Right, and also their own (as subordinate to the King's) by Tradition from their Ancestors, or by long-continued possession and Dominion, that there remained not the least ground of scruple touching that business. And a Scotish Lawyer speaking about Fishing in the Eastern Sea of Scotland, I cannot, saith 
d Guil. Welwodus, de Dominio Maris, cap 3.  he, omit to tell you, that in the past Age, after a most bloody quarrel between the Scots and Hollanders about occasions belonging to the Sea, the matter was composed after this manner, that in time to come the Hollanders should keep at least fourscore mile's distance from the Coasts of Scotland. And if by accident they were driven near through violence of weather, they paid a certain Tribute at the Port of Aberdene before their return, where there was a Castle built and fortified for this and other occasions; and this was duly and really paid still by the Hollanders within the memory of our Fathers, until that by frequent dissensions at home, this Tribute, with very many other Rights and Commodities, came to nothing, partly through the negligence of Governors, and partly through the boldness of the Hollanders. So you see, how limits were by agreement prescribed heretofore in this Sea, to the Fishing of Foreiners. But the more Northerly Sea, which lies against Scotland, was for the most part in subjection heretofore to the Norwegians, and Danes, who were Lords of the Isles there: So that the people of the Orcadeses speak the Gothish Language to this day. Robertus de 
e In Append. ad Sigebert. Gemblac. Anno 1197.  Monte tell's us, that he, who was called King of the Isles, was possessed of XXXII Islands in that Sea above four hundred and sixty years ago, paying such a Tribute to the King of Norway, that at the succession of every new King, the King of the Isles presents him ten marks in Gold, and makes no other acknowledgement to him all his life long, unless another King succeed again in Norway. And 
f Topograph. Hiberniae, dist. 2. cap. 11.  Giraldus Cambrensis, writing of these things saith, that in the Northern Sea, beyond Ulster and Galloway, there are several Islands, to wit, the Orcadeses and Inchades (or Leucades, which some would have to be the Hebrides) and many other, over most of which the Norwegians had Dominion and held them in subjection. For, although they lie much nearer to other Countries, yet that Nation being more given to the Sea, usually prefers a piratic kind of life above any other. So that all their Expeditions and Wars are performed by Sea▪ Fight. This he wrote in the time of Henry the second. So that sometimes those Sea-Appendants of the Dominion of Britain, in the Northern parts, were invaded by Foreiners. Hence also it is, that 
g Historia Ecclesiastica, lib. 10. pag. 767.  Ordericus Vitalis, speaking of Magnus the son of Olaus' King of Norway, saith; he had a great power in the Isles of the Sea; which relate's unto the time of William the Second King of England. The same Ordericus also saith, that the Orcadeses, Finland, Island also and Groênland, beyond which there is no other country Northward, and many other as far as Gothland, are subject to the King of Norway, and wealth is brought thither by shipping from all parts of the world. So we have here a clear description of the Dominion of the Norwegians heretofore, as well in this neighbouring Sea of Scotland, as in the more open. But in after time, when as by 
h Ex Tabulis publicis, Ferrerius, in Appendice. Hist. Hectoris Boëtii subjunctâ, pag. 388.  agreement made between Alexander the third King of Scots, and Magnus the fourth of Norway, as also between Robert Bruce King of Scotland, and Haquin of Norway, it was concluded touching these Isles, that they should be annexed to the Scotish Dominion; this could not be done, but there must be a session also of that Sea-Dominion, which bordered round upon the Coast of Norway. Yet the Norwegian King possessed it for the most part; and afterwards the Dane, by an union of the two Kingdoms of Denmark and Norway; until that Christiern the first, King of Norway and Denmark, upon the marriage of his daughter Margarite to James the third King of Scotland, made an 
i Munster. Cosmograph. lib. 2. & Gui lielm. Camden. in Insulis Brit. pag. 849.  absolute Surrender of these Islands; and in the year of our Lord MCDLXX. Transferred all his right both in the Isles of Orcadeses and Shetland, and the rest lying in the hither part of the Northern Sea, upon his Son in law, and his Successors. And as concerning this business, I shall here set down the words of Joannes Ferrerius, who was indeed Native of Piedmont, but supplied with matter of history out of the Records of Scotland, by Henry Sainclair, Bishop of Ross. Moreover in the Deucaledonian Sea toward the North-East, there are the Isles of Orcades, seated next to the Coast of Scotland, whereof only twenty eight are at this day inhabited; and above an hundred miles beyond the Orcadeses towards Norway, are the Shetland Isles in number eighteen, which are at this day inhabited, and in subjection to the King of Scotland; concerning which, there was a great quarrel in former Ages between the Scots and Danes, yet the Dane kept possession. All these Islands did Christiern King of Denmark peaceably surrender, together with his daughter in marriage to James King of Scots, until that either he himself or his posterity paid to the Scotish King or his Successors, in lieu of her dowry, the sum of fifty thousand Rhenish florins, which were never discharged to this day. For, so much I myself have seen and read in the Deeds of marriage betwixt Lady Margarite daughter of the King of Denmark and James the third King of Scotland, drawn up and fairly signed with the Seals of both Kingdoms Anno Dom. 1468. etc. But afterwards, when Lady Margarite being Queen had been delivered of her eldest son James Prince of Scotland, the Danish King willing to congratulate his daughter's good delivery, did for ever surrender his right in the Islands of the Deucaledonian Sea, to wit, the Isles of Orcades, Shecland, and others, which he delivered in pledge with his daughter, upon her marriage to the Scotish King. I hear the deeds of this surrender are kept among the Records belonging to the Crown of Scotland. And so at length those Isles, and the Dominion of this Sea, returned to the Kings of Scotland, which they enjoy at this day. The Kings of Scotland have a pledge of Dominion also in this Sea, that is to say, Tributes or Customs imposed upon fishermen, for Fishing; of which by the way you may read in their 
k Parlam. 6. Mariae, Reginae scot c. 54.  Acts of parliament.   

Touching that Right which belongs to the King of Great Britain, in the main and open Sea of the North. And the Conclusion of the Work. CHAP. XXXII.  
COncerning that neighbouring Sea, which is a territory belonging to the Scots, I have spoken in the former Chapter. But I must not omit to treat here of that Sea, which stretcheth itself to a very large extent toward the North, washing the Coasts of Friesland, Island, and other Isles also under the Dominion of the King of Denmark, or of Norway. For, even this Sea also is ascribed by some to the King of Great Britain. Albericus Gentilis, applying that of 
b In the life of Messala.  Tacitus, The Northern Coasts of Britain, having no Land lying against them, are washed by the main and open Sea; you see, 
c In advocate. Hispanic. lib. 1 cap. 8.  saith he, how far the Dominion of the King of Great Britain extends itself toward the South, North, and West. As if almost all that which lay opposite to the Isles of Britain, in the open Sea, were within the Dominion of the King of Great Britain. And concerning the Northern Sea also, which reacheth there to parts unknown, the very same thing in a manner was acknowledged by a subject of the King of Denmark's, no mean man, in a Letter that he wrote some years since to a friend of his in England, his name is Gudbrandus Thorlacius, Bishop of Hola in Island, who in a Letter 
d Hackluit in his voyages. Tom. 1. pag. 590.  sent hither Anno MDXCV, to Hugh Branham Pastor of Harwich, calls the Britain's almost. Lords there of the whole Sea. There is, saith he, a report now at this day, that you of Britain (whom I had almost called Lords of the Sea) have Negotiations every Year in Groenland. But the Kings of Denmark deny it here; and this more Northerly Sea which belongs to Island, they challenge to themselves, as they are Kings of Norway; and that by ancient right, if not unjustly pretended. To this purpose let us observe, that passage which I find in a speech of the Ambassadors of Erricus the tenth King of Norway and Denmark, delivered unto our Henry the fift, which runs to this effect. 
e 3 Hen. 5. seu Anno Dom. 1453. in Schedis ve●ultis bibliothecae cottoniavae.  Most victorious King of England, may it pleas your majesty to understand, that our most gracious Lord the King of Norway, etc. aforesaid, hath certain Islands, to wit, Island, Jeroy, Hietland, and many more belonging to his Kingdom of Norway, whereunto of old no persons were wont to repair out of other Countries, upon any occasions whatsoëver either of Fishing or merchandising, under peril of life and limbs; nor might the men of the Kingdom of Norway, more than those of other Countries, without special licence from his majesty. Nor might they after Licence obtained, set forth out of any other place than the city of Bergen, nor return to the same place but upon inevitable necessity, or when they ought to pay Customs and other Duties to the King's Exchequer, according to the most ancient Custom of Norway, which hath been constantly observed time out of mind in that Kingdom. Also, in the year MCCCCXLV. Christophor King of Denmark and Norway, 
f Isaacus Pontanus in Hist. Danicâ, & Zuer. Boxhorn. in Apologiâ pro Navigatione Holland.  granted the Inhabitants of Zirickzee in Zealand a freedom of Navigation into his Kingdom, Island and other Isles being excepted and prohibited, which are the very words of the Grant. Moreover, out of the League made at Koppenhagen in the year of our Lord 
g Foed. Hen. 6 Augliae, & Errici 10. Daniae R. 1432. art. 6. Ex Tabulis Legationis Danicae seu Dissertationis Bremensis, 1602. in in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ.  MCDXXXII. between our Henry the sixth and the same Erricus King of Norway, and Denmark, the Commissioners of the King of Denmark who held a treaty at Bremen with the Commissioners of our Queen Elisabeth, in the year MDC TWO about the free use of this Sea, alleged this Article almost to the same sens; It is provided, that all Merchants, and all other men whatsoëver in subjection to the King of England and France, do not presume hereafter, under peril of loss of life and goods, to visit the Countries of Island, Finmarck, Halghaland, or any other prohibited places and unlawful Ports whatsoëver, in the Kingdoms of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. Yea, and some years before, the use of this Sea was prohibited both to Merchants and fishermen, unless they were bound with Merchandise to North-barn, the most eminent Town of traffic under the King of Norway. And touching that particular, there is an Act of parliament of Henry the sixth, whereby 
h Stat. 8 H. 6 cap. 2. & Rot. Parlam. 8 Hen. 6. num. 35.  such a kind of Prohibition continued in force for certain years, in favour of the King of Norway. So that there were many Letters Patents afterwards granted by 
i Rot. Franciae, 18 H. 6. membran. 16. Rotul. Franc. 12 H. 7. Rot. Franc. 1 Ed. 5. etc.  our Kings to their subjects of England, whereby they had Licence to go unto Island, Finmark, and other Dominions of the King of Norway and Sweden. But that Statute, the rigour whereof was dispensed with at the King's pleasure, by such kind of Grants, became 
k Stat. Hen. 8. 〈◊〉. 1.  repealed at the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the eight. And Joannes mayor making mention of that time, saith, 
l De Gest s Scotorum, l. 1.  A Fleet of English went every year to Island, beyond the Arctic Circle to catch Fish. But what manner of determination soêver ought to be made touching the Dominion of this more Northerly Sea; yet certain it is, such a perpetual servitude at least was, by several agreements betwixt the Kings of England, and Norway, imposed upon it, that to this day also the subjects of England enjoy a perpetual right of sailing unto Island, and of using and enjoying this sea. For, by a League made at Koppenhagen in the year MCDXC. betwixt Henry the seventh of England and John the second King of Denmark and Norway, it was concluded, 
m Foed. Danic. 11 Hen. 7 art. 4. quod in Tabulis Legationis 1602. etiam habemus.  that all Merchants and Liege-men, fishermen, and any other persons whatsoëver being subjects of the King of England and France, might for ever in time to come sail freely to the Island Tyle, that is to say, Island (for, in that age it was generally taken for Thule, as it is now also by some) thither to have recours and to enter with their ships and goods, and merchandise, victuals, and any other commodities whatsoever, upon occasion of buying, selling, fishing, or merchandising; and there to abide and convers after the manner of Merchants, and from thence freely to return as often as they pleas, without any Prohibition, molestation, or impediment of Us or our heirs and successors in the Kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, or of any of our Officers; they paying the due rights and usual Customs as well in that Island as also in the Ports belonging to the same where they shall happen to arrive. Provided always, that seven years immediately after the date of these presents, they do Petition to renew their Licence from us and our successors Kings of Denmark and Norway, to the end that so from seven years to seven years, Merchants, and all other persons aforesaid, may for ever acknowledge us and our successors Kings of Denmark and Norway, in the renewing of their Licence. But that this League was not limited by any time, but concerned the heirs and successors of both the parties, appears not only in part by what hath been alleged already, but by the very form of the Preface, which I thought meet to add in this place. We John by the Grace of God King as aforesaid, by the unanimous advice and consent of our beloved Counsellors, and others the Lords and Nobles of our Kingdom of Denmark, have caused a treaty to be had, with the Orators of the most illustrious Prince Henry, by the Grace of God, King of England, and France, our most dear Brother, James Hutton, Doctor of the Civil Law, Thomas Clarentieux King of Arms, Thomas Carter, and John Beliz, Merchants of Lyn, about the restoring of peace, and establishing a perpetual concord between our Kingdoms; which Counsellors of ours, and the Orators, authorised in our city of Koppenhagen, by special Commission of the afore named King of England, our most dear Brother, and with full power, whereof we are assured by the Letters of the said King of England, have concluded, that between us, our heirs, and successors, well willers, friends and allies, and the most illustrious Prince Henry King of England and France, our most dear Brother, his heirs and successors, well willers, friends, and allies, there be and shall be for ever in time to come, a perpetual peace, inviolable friendship, and firm concord, in the following form. Yea, and that League was renewed in the year MDXXIII. by Henry the eight of England, and Christiern the second King of Denmark and Norway, in the same form. The right therefore is perpetual, and transmitted to the heirs of the K. of England, that the English should have a free use of this more Northerly Sea belonging to Island. But frequent Ambassies notwithstanding passed on both sides about that business, in the Reigns of Frederick the second, and Christiern the fourth, Kings of Denmark, and of Elisabeth Queen of England. The Danes alleged, that the English had no right to use this kind of liberty, without leave first obtained of the Kings of Denmark, and that renewed every seven years, according to that league made in the time of John the second and Henry the seventh. Moreover, Nicolas Craig, who was sent Ambassador into England by Christiern the fourth in the year MDXCIX. pretended the agreement at Haderslabe, in the year MDLXXXIII. between Frederick the second and Queen Elisabeth, as if it had therein been expressly provided, that this servitude in the Sea of Island, established by the English, might be limited by a denial of Licence at the pleasure of the King of Denmark. But it was answered both by the Lords at home in England, as also by the Queen's Commissioners sent to Bremen for the transacting of this business, that this right or Sea-servitude is so confirmed to the English, as well by Prescription of time, as by perpetual agreements of Leagues, that that particular which occurr's in the agreements of King John the second, and Henry the seventh about ask of Licence, doth in no wise relate to this effect; that whether it were denied or not requested by Petition, that right or servitude could be diminished, but to this end only, that the English, by a customary Petitioning every seven years, might acknowledge the Norwegian right in this Sea. There was neither manner, nor condition, nor time annexed to the servitude, but it took place there only to this end, that the memory merely of the benefit of the League or of the Original of the servitude established, might be renewed now and then by Petition. Yea, Frederick the second in his letters to Queen Elisabeth, dated the fourth of May, MDLXXXV, most expressly disclaim's this Claus of the League, which concerns Petitioning for Licence. And truly the whole right of the English in that Sea, was not first claimed by them upon the account of that League at Koppenhagen, whatever they of Norway may pretend to the contrary. For, when the Ambassadors sent heretofore by Erricus the tenth to our Henry the fift, made complaint about English men's fishing in this Sea, the King of England (I suppose) intimate's plainly enough, that he had some right before in that Sea, while at that time he granted this only in favour of the King of Norway, that the English should not otherwise use Fishing there for the year immediately ensuing, than as it had been usual in ancient time, and this he commanded by public Proclamation made in the more eminent Ports and Cities. The time limited, and the ancient Custom of Fishing, do plainly import some former right. But here I give you the form of the Proclamations; 
n Vet. Schod. de Temp. Hen. 5. in Bibliothecâ Cottonianâ. & Rot. Claus. 3 Hen. 3. Membran. 5. in dorso.  It is required, that none of the liege's of our Lord the King, for certain causes specially moving our Lord the King himself, do, for one year next ensuing, presume to go unto the Islands belonging to the kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, and especially towards the Iste of island, for the cause of Fishing or any other occasion, to the prejudice of the King of the aforesaid kingdoms, otherwise than they were wont in ancient time.  
It appears also by parliamentary 
o Rot. Parl. 3 Hen. 5. par. 1. membr. n. 33.  Records of the same King's Reign, that the English used Fishing in that Sea very many years before. But that League made at Haderslabe (pretended before by Craig) doth not relate unto Fishing either in the Sea of Island, or in this of Norway, but to the traffic and Merchandise used then by our Merchants of the Moscovie-Companie. For, this only was agreed, that the Merchants of that company, being constrained by Tempests, or otherwise, might freely have access to the shores and Ports both of Island and Norway; but with this Reserv, that they do not in any kind traffic, and use Mercbandise, in the Ports of Norway or Island before prohibited, nor molest the Subjects of the King of the said places in any thing against the Laws of hospitality, and that they wholly abstain from all manner of injury; which is the sum of that Answer which was given to Craig, by the Peers of England. But all things are clearly explained about this business, and that right of the English defended at large in the Letters sent by Queen Elisabeth to Christiern the fourth bearing date Cal. Septembris Anno MDXCIX. So much whereof as concerns this particular, I think meet to insert. At the request of the most excellent Prince your highness' Father, we sent (say the Queen's Letters) an Ambassador into Germany, Anno MDLXXVII. who Treated with his Commissioners about all matters in controversy, and especially about the Fishing of Island and Norway, where it was found, that the King insisted only upon a former treaty of two years' 
p Sub Edwardo iu. Angliae R.  Truce, wherein it was at that time agreed, that the English should not sail beyond Hagaland. But there were several Treaties with the Kings John and Christiern alleged on our part, wherein, all former controversies being composed, it was otherwise agreed and concluded; and both parties were to stand to this treaty of general peace made afterwards, not to the preceding two years Truce. Which the most excellent Prince your Father, acknowledging, desired by his Letters, that that controversy might be referred to another disquisition. But since that time, no such disquisition hath been made. Nevertheless we understand that our subjects fishing have been taken, tormented, and handled in a hostile manner. Whether this be justly done, all men will be able to judge who shall weigh our Reasons with an impartial mind. We do not deny, but that the Lord Chancellor Whitfeld and de Barnico, when 
q They were Ambassadors in England anno 1597.  they came unto Us, did in words pretend that the fishing of Island and Norway was used by the English, contrary to the Leagues and Agreements of the Kingdoms. But seeing they neither did nor could produce any proof, and we have authentic evidences attested by the Kings John and Christiern to the contrary, whereto more credit ought to be given than to bare Allegations, the matter was put off to another time. It was answered also too Dr Craig, that the Transaction which was concluded with King Frederick at Haderslabe in the year of our Lord MDLXXXIII belongs nothing at all to this Business, for the reason before mentioned. And a little after the Letters speak thus. But that which is pretended from the treaty with King John, (the aforesaid treaty at Koppenhagen) that licens for fishing aught to be renewed by petition from seven years to seven years (as a thing which for very many was not omitted) we answer, that the fault of its omission proceeded not from the English, but from the Danes. For, that seven years Licens was petitioned for till the time that King Christiern was expelled, about the year of our Lord MDXX. But afterward it ceased to be renewed, because of the uncertainty to whom the succession of the Kingdom did lawfully belong. And since the time of the said expulsion of King Christiern, neither King Frederick your great Grandfather, nor Christiern your Grandfather, nor Frederick your highness' Father, ever urged any such petition for Licens. But concieving former Treaties sufficient, which were made between the Kings and Kingdoms, they would not innovate any thing after a prescription of very many years, seeing they were otherwise sufficiently secure that the same thing would never be attempted, which was the first occasion of ordaining such a Licens. And to this end, the Letters of King Frederick your highness' Father written to Us, and bearing date the fourth of May, Anno MDLXXXV were shown to Doctor Craig, purporting that if the English abstained from doing injuries, they should enjoy the wont liberty and favour, without any mention or requiring of a Petition for Licens; whereas nevertheless we offered you, that our Merchants should hereafter petition you from seven years to seven years, according to the ancient and long continued Custom, which offer we understand your Highness would not admit. For, the most excellent Queen would not otherwise acknowledge the Jurisdiction and Empire of the King of Denmark and Norway in this Sea, than that the whole servitude or right of fishing aforementioned, there established (as aforesaid) might (as a considerable part of the ancient patrimony) be retained to her and her Successors. There were other Letters and Treaties also about this business, in the year 
r Camden. in Annal. Elisabeth ● an. 2. anno. 1602.  MDCII. But the controversy being deferred, nothing was concluded. But it appears the King of Great Britain hath Empire and Dominion also in the Sea which lies far more Northerly than Island. To wit, in that of Groënland. For, this Sea having never been entered by occupation, nor used in the Art and Exercise of Fisheries, was first in the memory of our Fathers rendered very gainful, through a peculiar fishing for Whales, by those English Merchants of the Moscovie-Companie who sailed that way. The use of a Sea never entered by Occupation and such a kind of profit being first discovered, doth according to the manner of the claim, give a Dominion to the discoverer who claim's it in the name of another (as here in the name of the sovereign of England) as well by a corporal as intentional possession, no otherwise than doth the first both natural and civil possession of any other things whatsoever that were never yet possessed. Upon which ground it was, that King James, in his Letters of credence given to the worthy and most accomplished S Henry Wotton Knight his Ambassador in Holland, and others employed by him to treat about that business, did very justly call the Fishings in the North Sea near the Shores of Groenland, 
s 29 Septemb. A copy of which Letters is in Sr Robert Cotton's library.  acquired for Us only and Ours by right.  
But that we may at length conclude; whatsoever hath been discoursed hitherto touching the Right and Sea-Dominion of the Kings of Great Britain, and the ancient extent of their Royal patrimony in the Sea, give me leave to sum up the whole in certain Verses of the most excellent Hugo Grotius (of whose Law-writings, so far as they concern either a private Dominion of the Sea, or a community, we have spoken in the former Book) which were very elegantly written heretofore to K. James, upon his Inauguration in the Kingdom of England. Saith he, 
— 
t Sylvarum, lib. 2.  Tria sceptra Profundi  
In Magnum coiere Ducem.—  
Three sceptres of the Deep their powers do bring,  
To make a Trident for a mighty King.   
And then addressing his Speech to the Sea, that is wont to receiv its motion from the Moon, 
Sume animos à Rege tuo, meliore levatus  
Sidere, nec cela populos quocunque calentes  
Sole, per immensum quem circumvolveris orbem,  
Quis det Jura Mari.—  
Take courage from thy royal Governor,  
As by the influence of a better Star,  
And in thy course about the World explain  
To all mankind, who 'tis that rule's the main.   
And in another place, 
— licèt omnia casus  
Magna suos metuant, Jacobo promissa potestas  
Cum Terris Pelagóque manet.—  
Though all great things a fall do fear,  
Yet James his power must stand,  
Being enlarged and composed  
Both of the Sea and landlord.   
A little after also, he proceeds thus; 
— Rerum Natura creatrix  
Divisit populos, & metas ipsa notavit.  
Sic juga Pirenae, sic olim Rhenus & asps  
Imperiis mensura suit: Te flumine nullo  
Detinuit, nullâ nimbosi verticis arce;  
Sed Totum complexa parens hic terminus ipsa  
Substitit, atque uno voluit sub limit claudi.  
Te tibi seposuit, supremo in gurgite, Nereus.  
Finis hic est, qui Fine caret. Quae meta Britannis,  
Litera sunt aliis; Regnique accessio tanti est,  
Quod ventis velisque patet.—  
Nature herself the mistress of mankind  
Hath severed Nations, and their bounds designed.  
So the Pyren'ean Tops, asps, and Rhine,  
As bounds to Empires she did once assign.  
Yet Thee she with no River-hath confined,  
Nor lofty Tow'er that dares the stormy wind;  
But having thrown her wide embraces round  
The Univers, here fixed herself thy Bound,  
And meant one limit should you both contain,  
thou Nereus hath secluded in the main.  
This Bound unbounded is. Great Britain stands  
Confined by the Shores of other lands;  
And all that may by Winds and Sails be known  
Is an accession of so great a Crown.   
And without question it is true, according to the Collection of Testimonies before alleged, that the very Shores or Ports of the Neighbor-Princes beyond-Sea, are Bounds of the sea-territory of the British Empire to the Southward and Eastward; but that in the open and vast Ocean of the North and West, they are to be placed at the utmost extent of those most spacious Seas, which are possessed by the English, Scots, and Irish.    
FINIS.  
Prais and glory be to God our Saviour.   

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES, Concerning the RIGHT OF sovereignty and Dominion of ENGLAND in the SEA;  
Collected Out of certain public Papers, relating to the Reigns of K. JAMES, and K. Charles.  
LONDON, Printed by William dugard. An. Dom. 1652.   

ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES Concerning the RIGHT OF sovereignty and Dominion of ENGLAND in the SEA; Collected Out of certain public Papers, relating to the Reigns of K. JAMES, and K. Charles.  
THE Learned author having fully evinced the Right of this Island in the Sea, and that from all antiquity, it were superfluous to seek after any farther Testimonies relating to elder times, wherein he himself hath been so abundant, and already set down the most material; And therefore it is conceived requisite to add a few such Evidences only, as are found among several Papers of public Transaction, which are still to be produced, and will serve to show how that claim which hath been made successively by all our Kings of the English Race, was continued down to the present Times, by the two Princes of the Scotish Extraction.  
In the seventh year of the Reign of King James, this Right was stoutly asserted by Proclamation, and all persons excluded from the use of the Seas upon our Coasts, without particular Licence; the Grounds whereof you have here set down in the Proclamation itself.  

A Proclamation TOUCHING FISHING.  
JAMES by the Grace of God King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, defender of the Faith, etc. To all and singular persons to whom it may appertain, Greeting. Although we do sufficiently know by Our Experience in the Office of Regal dignity (in which, by the favour of almighty God, we have been placed and exercised these many years) as also by the observation which we have made of other Christian Princes exemplary actions, how far the absoluteness of sovereign Power extendeth itself, and that in regard thereof, we need not yield account to any person under God, for any action of Ours, which is lawfully grounded upon that Just Prerogative: Yet such hath ever been, and shall be Our care and desire to give satisfaction to Our Neighbor-Princes, and friends, in any action which may have the least relation to their Subjects and Estates, as we have thought good (by way of friendly premonition) to declare unto them all, and to whomsoever it may appertain, as followeth.  
Whereas we have been contented since Our coming to the Crown, to tolerate an indifferent and promiscuous kind of liberty to all Our Friends whatsoever, to Fish within Our Streams, and upon any of Our Coasts of Great Britain, Ireland, and other adjacent Islands, so far forth as the permission or use thereof might not redound to the impeachment of Our Prerogative royal, nor to the hurt and damage of Our loving Subjects, whose preservation and flourishing Estate we hold ourselves principally bound to advance before all worldly respects: So finding that Our continuance therein, hath not only given occasion of overgreat encroachments upon Our Regalities or rather questioning for Our Right, but hath been a means of daily wrongs to Our own People that exercise the Trade of Fishing, as (either by the multitude of strangers▪ which do preoccupy those places, or by the injuries which they receiv most commonly at their hands) Our subjects are constrained to abandon their Fishing, or at least are become so discouraged in the same, as they hold it better for them, to betake themselves to some other course of living, whereby not only divers of Our Coast Towns are much decayed, but the number of Mariners daily diminished, which is a matter of great consequence to Our Estate, considering how much the strength thereof consisteth in the power of Shipping and use of Navigation; we have thought it now both just and necessary (in respect that we are now by God's favour lineally and lawfully possessed, as well of the Island of Great Britain, as of Ireland, and the rest of the Isles adjacent) to bethink Our selus of good lawful means to prevent those inconveniences, and many others depending upon the same. In consideration whereof, as we are desirous that the world may take notice, that we have no intention to deny Our neighbours and allies, those fruits and benefits of Peace and Friendship, which may be justly expected at Our hands in honour and reason, or are afforded by other Princes mutually in the point of Commerce, and Exchange of those things which may not prove prejudicial to them: so because some such convenient order may be taken in this matter as may sufficiently provide for all these important considerations which do depend thereupon; we have resolved first to give notice to all the world, that Our express pleasure is, That from the beginning of the Month of August next coming, no person of what Nation or quality soever, being not Our natural born Subject, be permitted to Fish upon any of Our Coasts and Seas of Great Britain, Ireland, and the rest of the Isles adjacent, where most usually heretofore any Fishing hath been, until they have orderly demanded and obtained Licenses from Us, or such Our Commissioners, as we have authorised in that behalf, viz. at London for Our Realms of England and Ireland, and at Edinburgh for Our Realm of Scotland; which Licenses Our intention is▪ shall be yearly demanded, for so many Uessels and Ships, and the Tonnage thereof, as shall intent to Fish for that whole year, or any part thereof, upon any of Our Coasts, and Seas as aforesaid, upon pain of such chastisement, as shall be fit to be inflicted upon such wilful offenders.  
Given at our Palace of Westminster the 6 day of May, in the 7th year of Our Reign of Great Britain, Anno Dom. 1609.   
Notwithstanding this Proclamation, the Netherlanders proceeded still in their way of encroachment upon our Seas and Coasts, through the whole Reign of that King, and were at length so bold as to contest with him, and endeavour to baffle him out of his Rights, pretending, because of the long connivance of himself and Queen Elisabeth, that they had a Right of their own by immemorial possession; which some Commissioners of theirs that were sent over hither, had the confidence to plead in Terminis, to the King and his Council. And though the King, out of his tenderness to them insisted still upon his own Right, by his Council to those Commissioners, and by his Ambassador to their Superiors, yet they made no other use of his Indulgence, than to tyre out his whole Reign, and abuse his Patience by their artificial delays, pretences, shifts, dilatory addresses, and evasive Answers. And all that the King gained by the tedious disputes, overtures, and dispatches to and again, was in conclusion only a verbal acknowledgement of those Rights; which at the same times that they acknowledged, they usually designed to invade with much more insolence than before. But you have the main of what passed in those days in this particular, with their insolent demeanour, lively described in these following Collections, taken out of several Dispatches that passed betwixt secretary Naunton, and Dudley Carlton Lord Ambassador from the King, to the States of the United Provinces.  
In a Letter of secretary Naunton's to the said Ambassador, dated at White-Hall, the 21 of December, 1618. I find these passages.  
I Must now let your Lordship know, that the State's Commissioners and Deputies both having attended his majesty at Newmarket, and there presented their Letters of Credence, returned to London on Saturday was a seven-night, and upon Tuesday had Audience in the Council-Chamber, where being required to communicate the points of their Commission, they delivered their meditated Answer at length. The Lords upon perusal of it, appointed my Lord Bining and me to attend his majesty for directions, what Reply to return to this Answer of theirs; which I represented to their Lordships yesterday to this effect; That his majesty found it strange, that they having been so often required by your Lordship his majesty's Ambassador, as from himself, in their public Assembly, to send over Commissioners fully authorised to treat and conclude, not only of all differences grown between the Subjects of both States, touching the Trade to the East-Indies, and the Whale-Fishing, and to regulate and settle a joint and an even traffic in those Quarters, but withal to take order for a more indifferent course of determining other Questions growing between our Merchauts and them about their Draperies and the Tare; And more especially to determine his Majesties Right for the sole Fishing upon all the Coasts of his Three Kingdoms, into which they had of late times encroached farther than of Right they could; And lastly, for the reglement and reducing of their Coins to such a proportion and correspondence with those of his majesty's and other States, that their Subjects might make no Advantage to transport our moneys by enhancing their valuation there. All which they confessed your Lordship had instanced them for in his majesty's name, that after all this attended on his majesty's part, and so long deliberation on theirs, they were come at last with a Proposition to speak only to the two first points, and instructed thereunto with bare Letters of Creance only, which his majesty takes for an Imperious fashion of proceeding in them, as if they were come hither to Treat of what themselves pleased, and to give Law to his majesty in his own Kingdom, and to propose and admit of nothing but what should tend merely to their own ends.  
To the second; Whereas they would decline all debate of the Fishings upon his majesty's Coasts, first by allegations of their late great losses and an Esmeute of their people, who are all interessed in that Question, and would be like to break out into Jom combustion to the hazard of their State which hath lately scaped Naufrage, and is not yet altogether calmed; What is this but to raise an advantage to themselves out of their disadvantage? But afterwards they profess their lothness to call it into doubt or question, claiming an immemorial possession seconded by the Law of Nations; To which his majesty will have them told, that the Kings of Spain have sought leave to Fish there by treaty from this Crown; and that the King of France (a nearer neighbour to our Coasts than they) to this day request's leave for a few Vessels to Fish for Provision of his own household; And that it appears so much the more strange to his majesty, that they being a State of so late date, should be the first that would presume to question his majesty's ancient Right so many hundred years inviolably possessed by his Progenitors, and acknowledged by all other ancient States and Princes▪ That themselves in their public Letters of the last of June, sent by your Lordship, seemed then to confirm their immemorial possession (as they term it) with divers Treaties, as are of the year 1550; and another between his majesty's Predecessors and Charles the fift, as Prince of those Provinces, and not by the Law of Nations. To which their last Plea, his majesty would have them told, that he being an Islander-Prince, is not ignorant of the Laws and Rights of his own Kingdoms, nor doth expect to be taught the Laws of Nations by them, nor their Grotius, whose ill thriving might rather teach others to disavow his Positions; And his honesty called in question by themselves, might render his Learning as much suspected to them, as his person. This his majesty takes for an high point of his sovereignty, and will not have it slighted over in any fashion whatsoëver.  
Thus I have particulated unto you the manner of our proceeding with them. Let them advise to seek leave from his majesty, and to achnowledg him his Right, as other Princes have done, and do; or it may well come to pass, that they that will needs bear all the world before them, by their Mare Liberum, may soon come to have neither Terram & Solum, nor Rempublican liberam.  
And in a Letter of the said Ambassador Carlton to secretary Naunton, of the 30 of December, 1618., from the Hague, we find this Return, touching the business of Fisheries.  
WHether the final resolution here will be according to his majesty's desire, in that point concerning the Fishing upon the Coasts of his three Kingdoms, I cannot say; And by somewhat which fell from the Prince of Orange, by way of discourse when he took leave of me on Monday last, at his departure, I suspect it will not, in regard the Magistrates of these Towns of Holland, being newly placed, and yet scarce fast in their seats, who do authorise the Deputies which come hither to the Assembly of the States in all things they are to Treat and resolve, will not adventure, for fear of the people, to determine of a Business, on which the livelihood of fifty thousand of the Inhabitants of this one single Province doth depend. I told the Prince that hows●ëver his majesty, both in honour of his Crown and Person, and Interest of his Kingdoms, neither could nor would any longer desist, from having his Right acknowledged by this State, as well as by all other Princes and Commonweals, especially finding the same openly oppugned both by their statesmen, and men of war, as the writings of Grotius, and the taking of John Brown the last year may testify; yet this acknowledgement of a Right and a Due was no exclusion of Grace and Favor; and that the people of this country paying that small Tribute upon every one of their Busses, (which is not so much as disputed by any other Nation whatsoëver) such was his majesty's well-wishing to this State, that I presumed of his permission to suffer them to continue their course of Fishing; which they might use thereby with more Freedom, and less apprehension of molestation, and let than before, and likewise spare the Cost of some of their Men of War, which they yearly send out to maintain that by force, which they may have of courtesy.  
The Prince answered, that for himself at his return from Utrecht, he would do his best endeavour to procure his majesty contentment, but he doubted the Hollanders would apprehend the same effect in their payment for Fishing, as they found in the passage of the Sound, where at first an easy matter was demanded by the King of Denmark, but now more exacted than they can possibly bear: And touching their Men of War he said, they must still be at the same charge with them, because of the pirates. Withal, he cast out a question to me, whether this freedom of Fishing might not be redeemed with a sum of money? To which I answered, it was a matter of royalty more than of utility, though Princes were not to neglect their profit.  
And in another Letter of the said Ambassador from the Hague to secretary Naunton, of the 14 of Januarie 1618. He give's him to understand, That having been expostulated with, but in friendly manner, by certain of the States about his late Proposition, as unseasonable and sharp, they said, they acknowledge their Commissioners went beyond their limits in their terms of Immemorial Possession and immuable Droict de Gens; for which they had no order. Then, saith he, I desired them to consider what a wrong it is to challenge that upon right, which these Provinces have hitherto enjoied, either by connivance or courtesy, and yet never without claim on his majesty's side, etc.  
In another Letter of secretary Naunton's to the Lord Ambassador Carlton, of the ●1 of Januarie, 1618. we read thus:  
AS I had dictated thus far, I received direction from his majesty to signify to the State's-Commissioners here, That albeit their earnest entreaty and his gracious consideration of the present trouble of their Church and State, had moved his majesty to consent to delay the treaty of the great Fishing, till the time craved by the Commissioners; yet understanding by new and fresh complaints of his Mariners and Fishers upon the Coasts of Scotland, that within these four or five last years, the Low Countrie-Fishers have taken so great advantages of his majesty's Toleration, that they have grown nearer and nearer upon his majesty's Coasts year by year, than they did in preceding▪ Times, without leaving any Bounds for the country People and Natives to Fish upon their Prince's Coasts, and oppressed some of his Subjects of intent to continue their pretended possession; and driven some of their great Vessels through their Nets to deter others by fear of the like violence from Fishing near them, etc. His majesty cannot for bear to tell them, that he is so well persuaded of the equity of the States, and of the honourable respect they bear unto him, and to his Subjects for his sake, that they will never allow so unjust and intolerable Oppressions; for restraint whereof, and to prevent the inconveniences which must ensue, upon the continuance of the same, his majesty hath by me desired them to write to their Superiors to cause Proclamation to be made, prohibiting any of their Subjects to Fish within fourteen miles of his majesty's Coasts this year, or in any time hereafter, until order be taken by Commissioners to be authorised on both sides, for a final settling of the main business. His majesty hath likewise directed me to command you from him, to make the like Declaration and Instance to the States there, and to certify his majesty of their Answer, with what convenient speed you may.  
Thus far secretary Naunton to the Ambassador.  
Now what effect the Ambassador's Negotiation with the States had, appears by a Letter of his from the Hague, of the 6 of February, 1618., to King James himself; where, among other passages he hath this:  
I find likewise in the manner of proceeding, that treating by way of Proposition here, nothing can be expected but their wont dilatory and evasive Answers; their manner being to refer such Propositions from the State's General to the States of Holland. The States of Holland take advice of a certain Council residing at Delft, which they call the Council of the Fisheries. From them such an Answer commonly comes, as may be expected from such an Oracle. The way therefore (under correction) to effect your majesty's intent, is to begin with the Fishers themselves, by publishing, against the time of their going out, your resolution, at what distance you will permit them to Fish, whereby they will he forced to have recours to their Council of Fisheries; that Council to the States of Holland; and those of Holland to the States-General, who then in place of being sought unto, will for contentment of their Subjects seek unto your majesty.  
By these you may perceiv how earnestly the ancient Rights of England were asserted, and the old Claim made and renewed, and a recognition made also in the Reign of that King by the Netherlanders themselves, though all proved to no purpose, the King and his Council being afterward lulled again into a connivance one way or other. And it give's sufficient cause to suspect, that the men in Power at that time might be charmed with money; since it was a Quaere put by the Prince of Orange to the Ambassador Carlton, in the heat of all the controversy, Whether the Freedom of Fishing might not be redeemed with a sum of money? For, turning over the Papers of Transactions of the Time immediately following, I perceiv the dispute was let fall on a sudden, and thereupon an opportunity given the Netherlanders, to encroach more and more every year, upon the Seas and Shores of this island. And so far they proceeded in this presumptuous Cours, through the Toleration given them in the later end of the Reign of King James, and the beginning of the late Tyrant his son, that at length they fell to a downright impeachment of our Rights, not in words only, but by contemning the commands of the King▪ s Officers, prohibiting us free Commerce within our own Seas, abusing and disturbing the Subjects at Sea, and the King himself in his very Ports and Chambers; and by many other actions of so intolerable a nature, that in the year 1635 he was awakened and constrained to see to the preservation of our Rights at Sea, and give order for the setting forth of a powerful Fleet, to check the audacious designs and attempts of those ungrateful neighbours. And the following year, in prosecution of his purpose, he set forth this ensuing Proclamation, entitled, 

A Proclamation For restraint of Fishing upon His majesty's Seas and Coasts without LICENCE.  
WHereas Our Father of Blessed memory King James, did in the seventh year of His reign of Great Britain, set forth a Proclamation touching Fishing; whereby for the many important reasons therein expressed, all persons, of what Nation or quality soever (being not His natural born Subjects) were restrained from Fishing upon any the Coasts and Seas of Great Britain, Ireland, and the rest of the Isles adjacent, where most usually heretofore Fishing had been, until they had orderly demanded, and obtained Licences from Our said Father, or His Commissioners in that behalf, upon pain of such chastisement as should be fit to be inflicted upon such wilful offenders: Since which time, albeit neither Our said Father, nor ourselves have made any considerable execution of the said Proclamation, but have with much patience expected a voluntary conformity of Our neighbours and Allies, to so just and reasonable Prohibitions and Directions as are contained in the same.  
And now finding by experience, that all the inconveniences which occasioned that Proclamation, are rather increased then abated: we being very sensible of the premises, and well knowing how far we are obliged in honour to maintain the rights of Our Crown, especially of so great consequence, have thought it necessary, by the advice of Our privy Council, to renew the aforesaid restraint of Fishing upon Our aforesaid Coasts and Seas, without Licence first obtained from Us, and by these presents to make public Declaration, that Our resolution is (at times convenient) to keep such a competent strength of Shipping upon Our Seas, as may (by God's blessing) be sufficient, both to hinder such further encroachments upon Our Regalities, and assist and protect those Our good Friends and Allies, who shall henceforth, by virtue of Our Licences (to be first obtained) endeavour to take the benefit of fishing upon Our Coasts and Seas, in the places accustomed.  
Given at Our Palace of Westminster the tenth day of May, in the twelfth year of Our Reign of England, Scotland, France, and Ireland.    
This Proclamation being set forth in the year 1636. served to speak the intent of those naval preparations made before in the year 1635. which were so numerous and well-provided, that our Netherland-Neighbors being touched with the apprehension of some great design in hand for the Interest of England by Sea, and of the guilt that lay upon their own Consciences, for their bold Encroachments, soon betrayed their Jealousies and Fears, and in them a since of their offences, before ever the Proclamation was made public: As I might show at large (if it were requisite) by certain Papers of a public Character yet in being. But there is one, Instar omnium, which may serve in stead of all; and it is an acute Letter of secretary Coke's, that was written to Sir William Boswel, the King's Resident then at the Hague, the Original whereof is still reserved among the public Papers: In which Letter, he set's forth the Grounds and Reasons of preparing that gallant navy, with the King's resolution to maintain the Right derived from his Ancestors, in the Dominion of the Seas; and therefore I here render a true copy of it, so far as concerns this business, as most pertinent to our purpose.  
(SIR!)  
BY your Letters and otherwise, I perceiv many jealousies and discourses are raised upon the preparations of his majesty's Fleet, which is now in such forwardness, that we doubt not but within this Month it will appear at Sea. It is therefore expedient both for your satisfaction, and direction, to inform you particularly what was the occasion, and what is his majesty's intention in this work.  
First, we hold it a principle not to be denied, That the King of Great Britain is a Monarch at Land and Sea to the full extent of his Dominions, and that it concerneth him as much to maintain his sovereignty in all the British Seas, as within his three Kingdoms: because without that these cannot be kept safe; nor he preserv his honour and due respect with other Nations. But commanding the Seas, he may cause his neighbours and all Countries to stand upon their guard whensoever he thinks fit. And this cannot be doubted that whosoëver will encroach upon him by Sea, will do it by Land also, when they see their time. To such presumption Mare liberum gave the first warning piece, which must be answered with a defence of Mare Clausum: not so much by Discourses, as by the louder Language of a powerful navy, to be better understood, when overstrained patience seethe no hope of preserving her Right by other means.  
The Degrees by which his majesty's Dominion at Sea hath of later years been first impeached and then questioned, are as considerable as notorious.  
First, to cherish, and as it were to nurs up our unthankful neighbours, we gave them leave to gather wealth and strength upon our Coasts, in our Ports, by our Trade and by our People. Then they were glad to invite our Merchant's Residence with what privileges they would desire. Then they offered to us even the sovereignty of their Estates, and then they sued for Licence to fish upon the Coasts, and obtained it under the Great Seal of Scotland, which now they suppress. And when thus by leave or by connivance, they had possessed themselves of our Fishings, not only in Scotland, but in Ireland and England, and by our staple had raised a great stock of Trade; by these means they so increased their shipping and power at Sea, that now they endure not to be kept at any distance: Nay, they are grown to that confidence to keep guards upon our Seas; and then to project an Office and company of Assurance for the advancement of Trade; and withal, prohibit us free commerce even within our Seas, and take our ships and goods, if we conform not to their Placarts. What insolences and cruelties they have committed against us heretofore, in Ireland, in Reynold, and in the Indies, is too well known to all the world. In all which, though our sufferings and their wrong may seem forgotten, yet the great interest of his majesty's honour, is still the same, and will refresh their Memories as there shall be cause. For, though charity must remit wrongs done to private men, yet the reflection upon the public may make it a greater charity to do Justice on crying crimes. All this notwithstanding, you are not to conceiv that the work of this Fleet, is either revenge or execution of Justice for these great offences past, but chief for the future to stop the violent current of that presumption whereby the Men of War and freebooters of all Nations (abusing the favour of his majesty's peaceable and gracious Government, whereby he hath permitted all his Friends and Allies, to make use of his Seas and Ports in a reasonable and free manner, and according to his Treaties) have taken upon them the boldness, not only to come confidently at all times into all his Ports and Rivers, but to conveie their Merchant's ships as high as his chief city, and then to cast Anchor close upon his magazines, and to contemn the commands of his Officers, when they required a farther distance. But which is more intolerable, have assaulted and taken one another within his majesty's Chamber, and within his Rivers, to the scorn and contempt of his Dominion and Power; and this being of late years an ordinary practice which we have endeavoured in vain to reform by the ways of Justice and Treaties, the world I think will now be satisfied, that we have reason to look about us. And no wise man will doubt that it is high time to put our selus in this Equipage upon the Seas, and not to suffer that Stage of action to be taken from us for want of our appearance.  
So you see the general ground upon which our Counsels stand. In particular, you may take notice, and publish as cause require's, That his majesty by this Fleet intendeth not a Rupture with any Prince or State, nor to infringe any point of his Treaties; but resolveth to continue and maintain that happy peace wherewith God hath blessed his Kingdom; and to which all his Actions and Negotiations have hitherto tended, as by your own Instructions you may fully understand. But withal considering, that Peace must be maintained by the arm of power, which only keep's down War by keeping up Dominion, his majesty thus provoked, finds it necessary even for his own defence and safety to reassume and keep his ancient and undoubted Right in the Dominion of these Seas, and to suffer no other Prince or State to encroach upon him, thereby assuming to themselves or their Admirals, any sovereign command: but to force them to perform due homage to his Admirals and Ships, and to pay them acknowledgements, as in former times they did. He will also set open and protect the free Trade both of his Subjects and Allies: And give them such safe Conduct and Convoie, as they shall reasonably require. He will suffer no other Fleets or Men of war to keep any guard upon these Seas, or there to offer violence or take prizes or booties, or to give interruption to any lawful intercours. In a word, his majesty is resolved, as to do no wrong, so to do Justice both to his Subjects and Friends, within the limits of his Seas. And this is the real and royal design of this Fleet, whereof you may give part as you find occasion to our good neighbours in those parts, that no Umbrage may be taken of any hostile act or purpose to their prejudice in any kind. So wishing you all health and happiness, I rest  
Your assured friend and Servant, JOHN COOK. Whitehall, 16 April. 1635. our style.  
In this Letter you see first, how it was held for an undeniable principle, that the King was King by Sea as well as by Land; That neither the honour nor safety of this Island and Ireland could be maintained, but by preserving the Dominion by Sea; and that it is an argument, that they that encroach upon us by Sea, will do it also by Land when they see their time. He declares also, how our unthankful neighbours are risen to this height and insolence, partly by grant, partly by connivance, but principally through their many injurious abuses of our Patience and Indulgence. And lastly, you may observe here what resolutions were then taken to prevent the like injuries, and preserv our English Interest in time to come. But how those Resolutions were followed in the succeeding part of his Reign, I shall not stand to examine; only it sufficeth here to take notice, that the Claim of Sea-Dominion was made by him, as well as by his Father, and for a time strenuously asserted; though afterward he slackened his hand in the prosecution; whereof the Netherlanders taking advantage, and of our late commotions (which were their halcyon-days, and time of Harvest) are now advanced to such a monstrous pitch of pride, malice, and ingratitude, that they dare bid defiance to those ancient Rights which we have received from all antiquity, and justify their actions by a most unjust and bloody war, in the view of all the world. What remain's then, but that the parliament and People of England should lay these things to heart, with an indignation answerable to so prodigious violations and invasions? They have now an opportunity and strength given them by God (O let not hearts be wanting!) to make good the Claim, and accomplish that work of establishing our Interests by Sea, beyond the possibility of future impeachments. Let it not be said, that England, in the state of monarchy, was able to hold the sovereignty of the Seas so many hundred years, and then lost it in the state of liberty. It is, as now established with its Appendants, the greatest and most glorious republic, that the Sun ever saw, except the Roman. God hath made it so by Land, and will by Sea; for, without this, the Land is nothing. It was ever so apprehended by Kings, yea by the last and worst of our Kings: And shall the Founders of this famous structure of Government now in being, who have cashiered Kings, and vindicated the Rights and Liberties of this Nation upon his head and his whole posterity and party, not assert them against perfidious neighbours? It were unpardonable in any to harbour a thought of that nature, or to yield that such a blemish should be brought upon all those glorious actions and achievements, whereby God hath freed and ennobled our Land and Nation.  
But that the people of England may be excited to a valuation, maintenance, and improvement of their interest by Sea, it is necessary to let them understand what advantages are to be made thereby, and are made by others, who of Usufructuaries by permission, have in design now to make themselves absolute Lords of the Fee. And therefore it is very convenient here to set down an excellent discourse which was written in the time of the late King, and presented by the following Title. 

The inestimable Riches and Commodities of the British Seas.  
THE Coast of Great Britain do yield such a continual Sea-harvest of gain, and benefit to all those that with diligence do labour in the same, that no time or season in the year passeth away without some apparent means of profitable employment, especially to such as apply themselves to Fishing, which from the beginning of the year unto the latter end, continueth upon some part or other upon our Coasts, and therein such infinite shoals and multitudes of Fishes are offered to the takers as may justly move admiration, not only to strangers, but to those that daily be employed amongst them.  
The Summer-Fishing for Herring, beginneth about midsummer, and lasteth some part of August.  
The Winter-Fishing for Herring, lasteth from September to the midst of November, both which extend in place from Boughones in Scotland, to the Thame's mouth.  
The Fishing for Cod at Alamby Whirlington, and White Haven, near the Coast of Lancashire, from Easter until Whitsuntide.  
The Fishing for Hake at Aberdenie, Abveswhich, and other places between Wales and Ireland, from Whitsuntide to Saint James tide.  
The Fishing of Cod and Ling, about Padstow, within the Land, and of Severn from Christmas to Mid-Lent.  
The Fishing for Cod on the West part of Ireland frequented by those of Biscay, Galicia, and Portugal, from the beginning of April until the end of June.  
The Fishing for Cod and Ling on the North, and North-East of Ireland, from Christmas until Michaëlmas.  
The Fishing for Pilchers on the West coast of England from Saint James-tide until Michaëlmas.  
The Fishing for Cod, and Ling upon the North-East of England, from Easter until Midsummer.  
The Fishing of great Staple-Ling and many other sorts of Fish lying about the Island of Scotland, and in the several parts of the British Seas all the year long.  
In September, not many years since upon the Coast of Devonshire near Minigal, 500 tun of Fish were taken in one day. And about the same time three thousand pound worth of Fish in one day were taken at St Ives in Cornwall by small Boats, and other poor provisions.  
Our five-men-Boats, and cobles adventuring in a calm to launch out amongst the Holland Busses, not far from Robinhood's Bay returned to Whitbie full fraught with Herrings, and reported that they saw some of those Busses take ten, twenty, twenty four lasts, at a draught, of Herrings, and returned into their own country with forty, fifty, and an hundred Lasts of Herrings in one Buss.  
Our Fleet of Colliers not many years since returning from Newcastle, laden with Coals about the Well, near Flanborough head, and Scarborough, met with such multitudes of Cod, Ling and Herring, that one amongst the rest with certain ship-hooks, and other like iustruments, drew up as much Cod, and Ling in a little space of time, as were sold well near for as much as her whole Lading of Cole. And many hundred of ships might have been there laden in two days and two nights.  
Out of which wonderful affluence, and abundance of Fish swarming in our Seas, that we may the better perceiv the infinite gain which foreign Nations make, I will especially insist upon the Fishing of the Hollanders in our Coasts, and thereby show how by this means principally they have increased.  

1. In Shipping.  
2. In Mariners.  
3. In Trade.  
4. In Towns and Fortifications.  
5. In Power extern or abroad.  
6. In public Revenue.  
7. In private wealth.  
8. In all manner of Provisions, and store of things necessary.   

1. Encreas of Shipping.  
BEsides 700 Strand-Boats, 400 Evars, and 400 Sullits, Drivers and Tod-boats, wherewith the Hollanders fish upon their own Coasts, every one of those employing another Ship to fetch salt, and carry their Fish into other Countries, being in all 3000 sail, maintaining and setting on work at least 4000 persons, Fishers, Tradesmen, Women, and Children; They have 100 Doyer Boats, of 150 Tuns a piece, or thereabouts, 700 Pinks and Well-Boats from 60 to 100 Tuns a piece, which altogether fish upon the Coasts of England and Scotland for Cod, and Ling only. And each of these employ another Vessel for providing of salt, and transporting of their Fish, making in all 1600 ships, which maintain and employ persons of all sorts, 4000 at least.  
For the Herring-season, they have 1600 Busses at the least, all of them Fishing only upon our Coasts from Boughonness in Scotland to the mouth of Thames. And every one of these maketh work for three other ships that attend her; the one to bring in salt from foreign parts, another to carry the said salt, and cask to the Busses, and to bring back their Herrings, and the third to transport the said Fish into foreign Countries. So that the total number of ships and Busses plying the Herring-Fair, is 6400; whereby every Buss, one with another, employeth forty men, Mariners and Fishers within her own hold, and the rest ten men a piece, which amounteth to 112000 Fishers and Mariners. All which maintain double, if not triple so many Tradesmen, Women, and Children a land.  
Moreover, they have 400 other Vessels at least, that take Herring at Yarmouth, and there sell them for ready money: so that the Hollanders (besides 300 ships beforementioned fishing upon their own shores) have at least 4800 ships only maintained by the Seas of Great Britain, by which means principally Holland being not so big as one of our shires of England, containing not above 28 miles in length, and three in breadth, have increased the number of their shipping to at least ten thousand sail, being more than are in England, France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Sweden, and Russia. And to this number they add every day; although their country itself affords them neither materials or victual, nor merchandise to be accounted of towards their setting forth.  
Besides these of Holland, Lubeck hath 700 great ships, Hamborough six hundred, Embden fourteen hundred, whereunto add the ships of Bremer, Biscay, Portugal, Spain, and France, which for the most part fish in our Seas, and it will appear that ten thousand sail of foreign Vessels and above are employed and maintained by fishing upon our Coasts. So that in Holland there are built a thousand sail at the least to supply shipwrecks, and augment their store, which as the Prince, and common nursery, is the chiefest means only to encreas their number.   

2. Encreas of Mariners.  
THE number of ships fishing on our Coasts, as being aforesaid 8400. If we allow but twenty persons to every ship one with another, the total of Mariners and Fishers, amounteth to 168000, out of which number they daily furnish their longer voyages to all parts of the world; for by this means they are not only enabled to brook the Seas, and to know the use of the tackles and compass, but are likewise instructed in the principles of Navigation, and Pilotage, insomuch as from hence their greatest Navigators have had their education and breeding.   

3. Encreas of Trade.  
BY reason of those multitude of Ships and Mariners, they have extended their Trade to all parts of the world, exporting for the most part in all their voyages our Herring, and other Fish for the maintenance of the same. In exchange whereof they return the several commodities of other Countries.  
From the Southern parts, as France, Spain, and Portugal, for our Herrings they return Oils, Wines, prunes, honey, Wools, etc. with store of Coin in Specie.  
From the Straits, Velvets, satins, and all sorts of Silks, Allomes, currants, Oils, and all grocery ware, with much money.  
From the East-Countries for our Herrings, and other French and Italian commodities before returned, they bring home Corn, Wax, Flax, Hemp, Pitch, Tar, soap-ashes, Iron, Copper, Steel, Clap-board, Wainscot, Timber, Deal-board, dollars, and Hungary Gilders.  
From Germany for Herrings, and other salt Fish, Iron, Steel, Glass, millstones, Rhenish wines, Button-plate for armour, with other Munition, Silks, Velvets, Rash's, Fustians, Baratees, and such like Frankford commodities, with store of rixdollers.  
From Brabant they return for the most part ready money with some Tapestries, and Hull-shop. Yea, some of our Herring are carried as far as Braseil.  
And that which is more strange and greatly to our shame, they have four hundred Ships with Fish, which our men of Yarmouth, within ken almost at land do vent our Herrings amongst us here in England, and make us pay for the Fish taken upon our own Coast ready money, wherewith they store their own country.   

4. Encreas of Towns and Forts.  
BY this their large extent of Trade, they are become as it were Citizens of the whole world, whereby they have so enlarged their Towns, that most of them within these four hundred years are full as great again as they were before; Amsterdam, Leyden, and Middleburgh having been lately twice enlarged and their streets and buildings so fair, and orderly set forth, that for beauty and strength, they may compare with any other in the world, upon which they bestow infinite sums of moneys, all originally flowing from the bounty of the Sea, from whence, by their labour and industry, they derive the beginning of all that wealth and greatness, and particularly for the Havens of the aforesaid Towns whereof some of them cost forty, fifty, or an hundred thousand pound. Their Fortifications also both for number, and strength, upon which they have bestowed infinite sums of money, may compare with any other whatsoëver.   

5. Encreas of power abroad.  
SUch being then the number of the Ships and Mariners, and so great their Trade, occasioned principally by their Fishing; they have not only strengthened, and fortifieed themselves at home to repel all foreign Invasions, as lately in the war between them and Spain; but have likewise stretched their power into the East and West-Indies, in many places whereof they are Lords of the seacoasts, and have likewise fortified upon the main, where the Kings and people are at their devotion. And more than this, all Neighbor-Princes, in their differences, by reason of this their power at Sea, are glad to have them of their party. So that, next to the English, they are now become the most re-doubted Nation at Sea of any other whatsoëver.   

6. Encreas of public Revenue.  
MOreover how mighty the public Revenue, and Customs of that State are increased by their fishing, may appear in that above thirty years since, over and above the Customs of other Merchandise, Excises, Licences, Waftage, and Lastage, there was paid to the State, for Custom of Herring, and other saltfish, above three hundred thousand pound in one year, besides the tenth Fish, and Cask paid for Waftage, which cometh at the least to as much more among the Hollanders only, whereunto the tenth of other Nations being added, it amounteth to a far greater sum.  
We are likewise to know, that great part of their Fish is sold in other Countries for ready moneys, for which they commonly export of the finest gold, and silver, and coming home recoin it of a base allay, under their own stamp, which is not a small means to augment their public treasure.   

7. Encreas of private Wealth.  
AS touching their private wealth, if we consider the abundant store of Herrings, and other fish by them taken, and the usual prices that they are sold for, as also the multitude of Tradesmen and artisans, that by reason of this their Fishing are daily set on work, we must needs conclude that the gain thereof made by private men must of necessity be exceeding great, as by observing the particulars following will plainly appear.  
During the wars between the King of Spain, and the Hollanders before the last Truce, Dunkirk by taking, spoiling, and burning the Busses of Holland, and setting great ransom upon their fishermen, enforced them to compound for great sums that they might Fish quietly for one year, whereupon the next year after the fishermen agreed amongst themselves to pay a dolor upon every last of Herrings, towards the maintenance of certain Ships of War to waft and secure them in their Fishing, by reason whereof there was a Record kept of the several lasts of Herrings taken that year, and it appeared thereby that in one half year there were taken thirty thousand lasts of Herrings which at twelv pound per last, amounteth to 3600000, and at sixteen, twenty, thirty pound the last, they are ordinarily sold, then transported into other Countries, it cometh at least to 5000000 l. Whereunto if we add the Herrings taken by other Nations together with the God, Ling, Hake, and the Fish taken by the Hollanders, and other our neighbours upon the British Coasts all the year long, the total will evidently arise to be above 10000000 l.  
The great Trade of Fishing employing so many men and ships at Sea, must likewise necessarily maintain as great a number of Tradesmen, and Artizens on Land, as Spinners, and Hemp-winders to Cables, Cordage, Yarn-twine for Nets and Lines, Weavers to make Sail-Cloaths, Cecive Packers, Tollers, Dressers, and Cowchers to sort and make the Herring lawful merchandise. Tanners to tan their Sails and Nets; Cooper's to make Cask, Block, and Bowl-makers for ships, keelmen, and Laborers for carrying and removing their Fish, sawyer's for Planks, Carpenters, shipwrights, Smiths, carmen, Boat-men, Brewers, Bakers, and a number of others, whereof many are maimed persons, and unfit to be otherwise employed. Besides the maintenance of all their several wives, and children, and families. And further every man and maid-servant, or orphan, having any poor stock, may venture the same in their Fishing-Voiages, which affords them ordinarily great encreas, and is duly paid according to the proportion of their gain.   

8. Encreas of Provisions.  
AND to conclude, it is manifest that Holland only affording in itself some few Hops, Madders, Butter and cheese aboundeth notwithstanding (by reason of this Art of Fishing) in plentiful manner with all kind of provisions as well for life, as in Corn, Beef, Muttons, Hides, and clothes; as for luxury, in Wines, Silks and Spices; and for defence, as in Pitch, Tar, Cordage, Timber. All which they have not only in competent proportion for their use, but are likewise able from their several Magazines to supply their Neighbor-Countries.  
The premises considered, it maketh much to the ignominy and shame of our English Nation, that God and Nature offering us so great a treasure even at our own doors, we do notwithstanding neglect the benefit thereof, and, by paying money to strangers for the Fish of our own Seas, impoverish our selus to make them rich. Insomuch that for want of industry and care in this particular two hundred twenty five Fisher-Towns are decayed and reduced to extreme poverty; whereas on the contrary by diligent endevoring to make use of so great a blessing, we might in short time repair these decayed Towns of the Kingdom, and add both honour, strength, and riches to our King and country, which how easily it may be done, will appear by some few observations following.  
By erecting two hundred and fifty Busses of reasonable strength and bigness, there will be employment made for a thousand Ships, and for at least ten thousand fishermen and Mariners at Sea, and consequently for as many Tradesmen and Laborers at land.  
The Herrings taken by the Busses will afford his majesty two hundred thousand pound yearly custom outward, and for commodities returned inward thirty thousand pound and above.  
We have Timber sufficient, and at reasonable rates, growing in our own Kingdom for the building of Busses, every Shire affordeth hardy and able men fit for such employment who now live poorly and idle at home.  
We have victuals in great plenty sold at easy rates without payment of Excises, or Impost.  
Our shores and harbours are near the places where the Fish do haunt.  
For drink, or nets, salting and packing our Fish; and for succour in stress of weather, we may bring our Fish to land, salt and pack it, and from some part of his majesty's Dominions be at our Markets in France, Spain, or Italy, before the Hollanders can arrive in Holland.  
We have means to transport our Fish into some Northern Countries, where the Hollanders seldom or never come. And though we had as many Busses as the Hollanders, yet is there vent for all, or more, for in the East and Northern Countries, and in many other places, Herrings are every day's meat, Winter and Summer, as well to draw on drink, as to satisfy hunger, and in most places the greatest part of the year they be scarce to be had; for presently after Michaëlmas the Sound and Rivers are frozen up so as no Herrings can be transported into twenty several Kingdoms, and free States until July, which is for thirty week's space together, so that when Lent comes, there are few to be bought for money.  
Lastly, since by care and industry we gained from the Flemings, doubtless so by the means we may as easily grow expert in the Art of Fishing, and in time make it a staple commodity of our own.  
But this we shall the better and sooner do, if we consider and endeavour to reform certain wants and abuses which hitherto have hindered us from effecting that good and great work, whereof these that follow are none of the least.  

1. General liberty of eating flesh contrary to old custom, and the Statute-Laws provided for observing fish-days, from whence our scarcity and dearth of Fish proceedeth; for where Flesh is ordinarily spent, Fish will not be bought, and want of sale decayeth all Trade, gain being the nurse of industry.  
2. Want of order and discretion in our Fishing, every man being left to himself and permitted to Fish as best liketh him: whereas amongst the Hollanders two of the best experienced fishermen are appointed to guide the rest of the Fleet, all others being bound to follow them, and to cast their lines according to their direction.  
3. The Hollanders and other Nations set forth with their Busses in June, to find the shoal of Fish, and having found it, dwell amongst it till November, whereas we stay till the Herring come home to our rode-steads, and sometimes suffer them to pass by ere we look out, our Herring-Fishing containing only seven weeks at the most, and theirs twenty.  
4. The Hollander's Busses are great and strong, and able to brook foul weather, whereas our Cobles, Crayers, and Boats being small, and thin sided, are easily swallowed by a rough Sea, not daring to adventure far in fair weather by reason of their weakness for fear of storms.  
5. The Hollanders are industrious, and no sooner are discharged of their lading, but presently put forth for more, and seek for Markets abroad as well as at home; whereas our English after they have been once at Sea, do commonly never return again until all the money taken for their fish be spent, and they in debt seeking only to serve the next Market.  
6. The Hollanders have certain Merchants, who, during the Herring-season do only come to the places where the Busses arrive, and joining together in several companies, do presently agree for the lading of thirty or forty Busses at once, and so being discharged, they may speedily return to their former shipping; whereas our fishermen are uncertain of their chapmen, and forced to spend much time in putting off their Fish by parcels.   
These and other defects would carefully be taken into consideration, and certain orders made to make our Fishing prosperous, and successful, especially considering the fearful mischiefs the neglect hereof hath brought to the King and Kingdom in general, and to many good Towns and Corporations in particular, as by authority even of parliament itself in the Statute of 33 Hen. the eight, is plainly testified, which I have summarily here set down, to avoid the prolixity of the original.  
Because the English fishermen dwelling on the seacoasts did leave off their Trade of Fishing in our Seas, and went the half-Seas over, and there upon the Seas did buy Fish of pickard's, Flemings, Normans, and Zelanders, by reason whereof many incommodities did grow to the Realm, viz. the decay of the wealth and prosperity as well of the Cinque-Ports, and Members of the same, as of other Coast-Towns by the seaside, which were builded, and inhabited by great multitudes of people by reason of using and exercising the craft and feat of Fishing. Secondly, the decay of a great number of Boats and Ships. And thirdly, the decay of many good Mariners, both able in body by their diligence, labour, and continual exercise of Fishing, and expert by reason thereof in the knowledge of the seacoasts, as well within this Realm as in other parts beyond the Seas. It was therefore enacted, that no manner of persons English, Denizens, or strangers at that time, or any time after dwelling in England, should buy any Fish of any strangers in the said Ports of Flanders, Zealand, Picardy, France, or upon the Sea between shore and shore, etc.  
This act by many continuances was continued from parliament to parliament, until the first of Queen Marie, and from thence to the end of the next parliament, and then expired.  
For conclusion, seeing, by that which hath formerly been declared, it evidently appeareth, that the Kings of England, by immemorable prescription, continual usage, and possession, the acknowledgement of all our Neighbor-States, and the Municipal Laws of the Kingdom, have ever held the sovereign Lordship of the Seas of England, and that unto his majesty, by reason of his sovereignty, the supreme command and Jurisdiction over the passage, and Fishing in the same rightfully appertaineth; considering also the natural site of those our Seas that interpose themselves between the great Northern Commerce of that of the whole world, and that of the East, West, and Southern Climates, and withal the infinite commodities that by Fishing in the same is daily made; It cannot be doubted, but his majesty, by means of his own excellent wisdom and virtue, and by the industry of his faithful subjects and people, may easily, without injustice to any Prince or person whatsoever, be made the greatest Monarch for Command and Wealth, and his people the most opulent and flourishing Nation of any other in the world. And this the rather, for that his majesty is now absolute Commander of the British Isle, and hath also enlarged his Dominions over a great part of the Western Indies; by means of which extent of Empire, (crossing in a manner the whole Ocean) the Trade and persons of all Nations (removing from one part of the world to the other) must of necessity first, or last, come within compass of his power and jurisdiction.  
And therefore the sovereignty of our Seas, being the most precious Jewel of his majesty's Crown, and (next under God) the principal means of our Wealth and safety, all true English hearts and hands are bound by all possible means and diligence to preserv and maintain the same, even with the uttermost hazard of their lives, their goods and fortunes.  
Thus you see what wondrous advantages may redound to the felicity, and glory of this Nation, if God give hearts and resolutions to vindicate those rights which are now most impiously and injuriously invaded. And so much for what concerns England.  
Now that I may reflect a little upon the point of Sea-Dominion in general, to show how far it hath been asserted, and maintained by others, who have enjoied a Dominion in other Seas, when they have been concerned in the like Case with England, having their sovereignty at Sea impeached and questioned by encroaching neighbours; it was thought meet here to annex an ingenious and learned Plea touching the Dominion of the Sea; which was very succinctly written in Italian, but faithfully rendered in English by an honourable Member of this commonwealth, and published some time since, under the following Title.      

Dominium Maris: OR, THE DOMINION OF THE SEA..  
Expressing the Title, which the Venetians pretend unto the sole dominion, and absolute sovereignty of the Adriatic Sea, commonly called The Gulf of Venice.  
Manifested in a Pleading or Argument, betwixt the republic of Venice, and the Emperor Ferdinand.  
Whereby is sufficiently proved, That the Sea as well as the Land▪ is liable to the Laws of propriety▪ and may be brought under the jurisdiction and protection of particular Princes and States. Contrary to the Assertion of those, who affirm, the Sea to be free, and under the Dominion of no man.  
Translated out of Italian.  
LONDON, Printed by William Du Gard. An. Dom. 1652.   

AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READDER.  
I Thought it fitting not to instruct, but rather to remember the Reader, that this Sea, over which the Venetians challenge sovereignty and Dominion, being commonly called the Gulf, is nothing else but a large Bay or inlet of the Sea, which entering in betwixt two lands, and severing them for many miles countinuance, in the end receives a stop or interruption of further passage, by an opposite shore, which join's both the said lands together. It is called the Gulf of Venice, from the city of Venice, situated upon certain broken Islands near unto the bottom thereof. It is also called the Adriatic Sea, from the ancient city of Adria, lying not far distant from the former. From the entrance thereof unto the bottom, it contein's in length about 600 Italian miles: where it is broadest, it is 160 miles over, in others but 80, in the most 100 The south-west shore of it is bounded by the Provinces of Puglia, and Abruzzo in the Kingdom of Naples, the Marquisate of Ancona and Romagna in the Pope's State, and the marquisate of Trevisana in the Venetian State. The North part of it, or bottom, hath Friuli for its bounds, the North-East is limited by Istria, Dalmatia, Albania, and Epirus: whereof Istria doth not so entirely belong unto the Venetians, but that the archduke of Gratz, of the Austrian family, who at this present is Emperor, doth possess divers maritime Towns therein. In Dalmatia, saving Zara, Spalleto, and Cattaro, they have nothing of importance, the rest belonging to the republic of Ragusa, and to the Turks. In Albania and Epirus, they possess nothing at all, it being entirely the Turks. So that he, who shall examine the circuit of this Sea, which must contain above 1200 miles, shall find the shores of the Venetian signory, not to take up entire 100ls of them, omitting some scattered towns and dispersed Islands, lying on the Turkish side of the Adriatic shore. For the securing hereof from the depredation of Pirates, and the pretences of divers Potent Princes, as the Pope, Emperor, King of Spain, and the great Turk, who have each of them large territories lying thereupon; also to cause all such ships, as navigate the same, to go to Venice, and there to pay custom and other duties, the republic maintein's continually in action a great number of ships, galleys and galliots, whereto they also add more, as there may be occasion, whereof some lie about the bottom of the Gulf in Istria, others about the Islands of Dalmatia, to clear those parts of Pirates, who have much infested those seas: others, and those of most force, have their stations in the Island of Corfu, and in that of Candia: in the first of which commonly reside's the Captain of the Gulf, whom they call by the name of Proveditor, or Provisor general, whose office it is to secure the Navigation of the Gulf not only from the Corsari or Pirates, but to provide that neither the galleys nor Ships of the Pope, the King of Spain, or great Turk, do so much as enter the same, without permission of the signory, or republic, and upon such conditions as best pleaseth them; which they are so careful to effect, that in the year 1638 the Turkish Fleet entering the Gulf without licence, was assailed by the Venetian General, who sunk divers of their vessels, and compelling the rest to fly unto Valona, he held them there besieged, although the same city, and Port whereon it stands, be under the jurisdiction of the Grand signior. And notwithstanding that a great and dangerous war was likely to ensue thereupon, betwixt the Grand-Signor and the republic, because the Venetian General, being not content to have chased them into their own Ports, did moreover then that, sink their vessels, and landing his men, slew divers of their Mariners who had escaped his fury at Sea: yet after that a very honourable peace was again concluded betwixt them, wherein, amongst other things, it was agreed, that it should be lawful for the Venetians, as often as any Turkish vessels did without their licence enter the Gulf, to seize upon them by force, if they would not otherwise obey. And that it should likewise be lawful for them so to do, within any Haven, or under any Fort of the Grand-Signor's, bordering on any part of the Venetian Gulf. Out of all which, when I considered the real and absolute sovereignty, which this republic doth actually enjoy over this sea, which they have ever defended, as well by the sword as the pen; and withal how that some neighbouring Nations of late years, did seem to envy the title of England to the narrow seas, affirming in some of their writings, the Sea to be free; that it neither aught, nor could be under the jurisdiction of any; that it was a wild beast which could not be ruled; that, possessio being Pedis positio, there could no possession be either taken or kept of it; that the limits thereof, being a fluent element, could not be scored out, or certainly determined, that it was as free for all mankind to use, and as common as the aër, with many other things to that purpose; I chancing some years past to be at Venice, upon consideration of the premises, did labour with a great desire, to know the grounds of that title, whereupon the Venetians founded their Dominion of the Sea; and after much search, even to the despair of obtaining of it, I happened upon this ensuing argument, containing a Plea or Dispute, betwixt the Austrians and Venetians, touching the Dominion of the Adriatic Sea, not fictitious or devised only to colour the cause, but faithfully transcribed from out the public Registers of that city, which I offer herewith to the Reader in English, and withal these two considerations,  
First, that hereby it will appear, that the commonwealth of England's challenge to the Dominion of the Sea, is neither a novelty or singularity; especially, when it is besides most apparent that the King of Denmark, doth not only pretend to the sovereignty of the Sound, but causeth all such Ships as pass through it, to pay what toll he pleaseth. The great Turk prohibit's all Nations, saving his own Vassals, to enter the black Sea, or Pontus Euxinus; the like he doth to the red Sea, which contein's at the least 1200 miles in length, beginning from the streits of Babelmandel, which give's entrance thereinto, and ending at the Town of Sues, which is seated at the bottom thereof. The King of Portugal opposeth, to the utmost of his power, any, but his own subjects to sail into the East-Indies, affirming those Seas to be entirely under his dominion, as well by Conquest, as the Pope's donation, insomuch as the smallest vessel, even of the natives of those parts, cannot sail from Port to Port, without the passport of the Viceroy of Goa, or of some other by him deputed thereto, styling himself, amongst others his Titles, to be King of the Conquest, Navigation, and Commerce, or traffic of AEthiopia, Arabia, Persia, India, etc. which hath been hitherto so punctually observed, as no Castilian, or Spaniard, might at any time, or for any occasion, sail into the East-Indies, though both those Nations were for many years together united under one King.  
Secondly, if the Dominion of these Seas dotruely and properly belong to the Commonwealth of England (as hath been so sufficiently cleared and proved to the whole world, by that learned Book entitled Mare Clausum) why may not, or ought not the People of England, by all lawful ways procure, that the Dominion of these Seas that so justly appertein's unto them, may be secured from any force, violence, or opposition, how great soever, of their most powerful neighbours; whenas we see the Venetians to be so jealous in preservation of the title they pretend to their Seas, as rather than to suffer it to be in the least sort questioned, they do upon all occasions oppose themselves by force, or otherwise, against the most potent Princes of Europe and Asia. Vale.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

Dominium Maris: OR, THE DOMINION OF THE SEA..  
AFter a long peace, betwixt the Progenitors of the Emperor Maximilian the first, and the republic of Venice, in the year 1508, there began certain slight differences, which concluded in a notable, and most memorable war: insomuch as the republic, for 22 years following, were with the said Prince, and with his posterity, for divers respects, sometimes in war, sometimes in peace, and sometimes in truce, until in the year 1529 all differences betwixt them were composed, and a peace concluded in Bolonia, which continued all that Age, with the Emperor Charles the Fifth, together with his brother Ferdinando King of Hungary, and Archduke of Austria. But because by the division, made betwixt the said brethren, seven years before, all the Austrian lands which confined with the Venetians, were laid by agreement unto the part which belonged unto King Ferdinand, the confines of which as they had conjuncture with the lands of the republic, were very intricate; and of great difficulty to conclude, unto whether party they did belong, as well for the public reasons of the said Princes, as for those of their private subjects; To end all which in quiet, it was agreed that there should be an arbitrary Tribunal erected in Trent, for the deciding of these doubts, which in the year 1535, pronounced sentence, whereby all the differences (being more than an hundred) were definitively concluded.  
Here notwithstanding the difficulty ceased not, because some did travers the execution of the sentence, so, as in progress of time, new quarrels did arise from both sides, each one pretending new wrongs offered by the advers party. Whereupon to put an end to all these differences, there was by the common consent, as well of Ferdinando (who succeeded in the Empire by the resignation of his brother) as of the republic, a convention appointed in Friuli 1563, of five Commissaries, one Procurator, and three Advocates, for each part, who should treat of the differences, as well old as new, and should have power to conclude them, under the ratification of the several Princes. And this so great a number of Judges, was desired by the Emperor, the better to give satisfaction to his subjects, of several Provinces, interessed in the cause.  
Of the Imperial side, the Commissaries were Andrew Preghel a Baron of Austria, Maximilian Dorimbergh, Elenger de Goritia, Stephen Sourz, and Anthony Statemberger: the Procurator was, Giacomo Campana, Chancellor of Goritia: the Doctors or Advocates were Andrea Rapicio, Gervasio Alberto, and Giovan Maria Gratia Dei. For the Venetians the Commissaries were, Sebastian Venier, Marino de Cavalli, Pietro Sanudo, Giovan Baptista Contarini, and Augustin Barbarigo: The Procurator was, Giovan Antonio a secretary: the Advocates Marquardo Susanna, Francisco Gratiano, and Giacomo Chizzola.  
At this Convention the complaints on both sides were opened, which being argued, and the other public differences partly composed, and partly decided, there was taken into consideration a Petition of the Imperial Procurator, in this form, Ejusden Majestatis nomine requiritur, ut posthac illius subditis, atque aliis in sinu Adriatico tutò navigare, ac negotiari liceat. Item ut damna, Tergestinis Mercatoribus atque aliis illata, restituantur. It is required in the name of his majesty, that hereafter it may be lawful for his subjects, and others, to traffic and navigate safely in the Adriatic Gulf. Likewise that recompense be made for the damages sustained by the merchants of Trieste, and others. And Rapicio the advocate did accompany this demand with saying; that this was not a cause to be handled with any subtlety, it being a thing most notorious, that navigation ought to be free, notwithstanding the subjects of his majesty had been constrained to go with their ships to Venice, and there to pay custom, at which his majesty was aggrieved, and made instance that it might be remedied.  
To this Chizzola, Advocate of the republic made Answer, saying, that it was a clear case indeed, that Navigation ought to be free; but yet those things, whereat they were aggrieved, were no ways repugnant to this freedom; forasmuch as in countries which are most free, those who have the dominion thereof receiv custom, and order by which way all Merchandise shall pass; and therefore no body should be grieved, if the Venetians, for their own respects, did use so to do in the Adriatic Sea, which is under their dominion; and he added, that if they intended to dispute of the business in question, he was to advertise them, that this cause could not by any pretense be brought into judgement, at that convention, which was only instituted, for the execution of such things as were formerly sentenced, and for righting of such new wrongs, which succeeded after the sentence; it being besides a thing most notorious, that the republic, as Lord of the Adriatiok Sea, did exercise that dominion at the present, which from time out of mind, it had always done, without any interruption, as well in receiving of customs, as in assigning of places for the exaction of it, and that the pretense now alleged was new, and never before used by any predecessor of the Emperor, either as King of Hungary, or as archduke of Austria, or the countries thereto adjacent, or of his majesty then being, for many years, until this present time. He challenged the Imperialists to show, when ever any such thing was before pretended; certainly not before the peace of Bolonia; for then such a difference as this (if there had been any such) had been there determined, or referred over to the arbitrary Tribunal, wherein were handled above 120 controversies; but of this not any mention made, neither, from that time to this, was there any such pretention once set a foot. But if this were a new wrong, succeeding after the sentence of Trent, they should show what it was, and when it had beginning, because he was prepared to show unto them, that any thing concerning the same, was of most ancient use and continuance, without the least novelty in the world; and therefore they ought not to be heard, who came with demands, which could take no original either from the sentence of Trent, or from any innovation of wrongs succeeding thereupon.  
To this Rapicio replied, that he intended not to lay his principal foundation upon that, which to all is so well known, which is to say, that the Sea is common and free, and that by reason thereof, not any might be prohibited, to sail unto any place, which best pleased him: and if any Doctors should happen to say, that the republic hath a prescript Dominion over the Adriatic Sea, with a long possession, notwithstanding they prove it not: and to Doctors who affirm a thing barely out of fact, without any manner of proof, little belief is to be given; for which cause, he would not dwell upon that; but would come to his principal reason, which was, that admitting the republic to be Patron of the Sea, yet the Emperor's Subjects might navigate freely by the Capitulations, which were established betwixt the Princes on both sides, and therefore the Petition proposed was pertinent to be handled by the said Convention; to which (he being so required by the Venetians) added this for a foundation, Quia libera navigatio Maris Adriatici cùm Majestatis suae Caesareae, tum subditorum damno & incommodo, ab Illustrissimi Domini Veneti triremium Praefectis impedita fuerit, contra Capitula Vormatiae, Bononiae, Andegavi, & Venetiis inita: Forasmuch as the free navigation of the Adriatic Sea, hath been hindered by the Captains of the Venetian's galleys, to the loss and prejudice of his Imperial majesty, and of his subjects, against the Capitulations of Worms, Bolonia, Angiers, and Venice. And here he produced a passage of the Capitulation of Bolonia which spoke as followeth; Quòd communes subditi liberè, tutè, & securè possint in utriusque statibus & dominiis tam ●errâ, quàm Mari, morari & negotiari cum bonis suis, ac si essent incolae, & subditi illius Principis, ac Dominii, cujus patrias, & Dominia adibunt; provideatúrque, nè vis aut aliqua injuria, ulla de causa, eye inferatur, celeritérque jus administretur. That the subjects of either party may freely, safely, and securely abide, and traffic with their goods, in the States and Dominions of one another, in like manner as if they were inhabitants, and subjects of that Prince and State, into whose country or Dominion they do come: and that it be provided, that no violence or injury, be for any cause whatsoëver offered them; and moreover that justice be speedily administered. He also recited the capitulations of the truce of Angiers and Worms, and of the peace of Venice, which is not necessary here to repeat, being of the same tenor. He did rest much upon the word liberè, considering that liberè is joined to the word Navigare: by which it ought to be understood, according to the common construction of Law, That every one might navigate freely; but he cannot be said to be free, who is constrained to go to Venice. He added moreover, that the word liberè could not be imagined to be superfluous, but must of necessity operate something; that the two words, tutè & securè, could import nothing else, 〈◊〉 but without impediment, or molestation, or paying of Customs; to this he added, that there were then 400 complaints of his majesty's subjects, whose vessels were compelled to go to Venice, and there made to pay Custom, for happening only to arrive in the ports of the Venetians, either by fortune or some other occasion. He read the sentence of a Rector of Liesina, who freed a ship, which touched upon that Island by chance; and he made a narration, that certain barks with salt were suffered by the Venetian Fleet, to pass upon their voyage, without sending them to Venice. He concluded, that his request extended to these three points. 1. That the Austrian subjects might Navigate whither it pleased them. 2. That arriving in any Port of the republic, only per transitum, they should not pay any thing. 3. Lastly, that coming to Trade in any of them, they should not pay more than the subjects of the republic. Chizzola answered hereto, promising clearly to solv all the objections introduced by the other, so as there should not remain any place of reply, and to show with true and lively reasons, that what was done by the Ministers of the republic in the Gulf, was done by lawful authority. And reserving himself, to speak of the Dominion of the Sea afterwards, howsoëver presupposing it in the first place, he began with the Capitulations; and first he said, that the word liberè, was not joined, as Rapicio said, to any such word as Navigare, but to the words Morari & negotiari tam terrâ, quàm Mari: & therefore by liberè is to be understood as the common construction of Law intends, when one doth either dwell, or do business in the house, or land of another, that is to say, observing the Laws, and paying the Rights of the country. he added also, that those Capitulations, betwixt the house of Austria, and the republic, were equally reciprocal, and not made more in favour of the Austrians, in the State of the Venetians, then of the Venetians in the State of the Austrians; neither was there greater liberty granted to the Sea, then to the Land; and that the words were clear enough, which import, that the subjects on both sides might stay, trade, and merchandise, in the state of one another, as well by Land as by Sea, and be well entreated; insomuch as the subjects of the Venetians were to have no less liberty in the Lands of the Austrians, than the Austrian subjects in the Sea of Venice; And that by virtue of those words, what his majesty would have in the State of the republic, it is fitting that he allow to them in his own State; and if his Imperial majesty within his own State, upon the Land, will not yield that the subjects of the republic shall go which way they list, but coustrain's them to pass by such places only, where Custom is to be paid, he cannot with justice demand, that his subjects may pass by or through the Sea of the republic which way they list, but aught to content himself, that they go that way only, which shall best stand with the commodity of those who have the Dominion over it; and if his majesty cause Custom to be paid, upon his Land, why may not the Venetians likewise do it, upon their Sea? He demanded of them, if by the Capitulation they would have it, that the Emperor was restrained, or hindered, from taking of Custom? and if not, why would they have the Venetians tied thereunto by a Capitulation, which speaks of both Potentates equally with the same words? He shown by particular Narration, that from the Peace of Venice 152●, until that present, the Emperor had increased his Customs, to the grievance of the Venetian's subjects, in victuals and Merchandise, which passed from the one State unto the other; insomuch as that which formerly paid but one, was now increased in some to 16, and in others to 20. and he instanced in iron and other commodities, which were wont to pay little or nothing, were now raised to such an excessive Custom, as proved much to the damage of the Venetians, besides they were forced to pass only by such places, where they should pay Custom, out of which to pass, it was Contra banda, and their goods confiscated. And if his majesty think's it lawful to do what it pleaseth within his own estate, without breaking of the Capitulations, he cannot think that the Venetians doing but the same, should, contrary thereunto, any ways offend. He added, that in every Peace established betwixt two Princes, after a war, it is necessary that their subjects may live and trade together, not to the excluding of Customs, although there be excluded the violences, hostilities, and other impediments of trade, which were formerly used in time of war, neither is the authority of the one, or other Prince, thereby taken away or restrained by Sea or by landlord.  
At the force and clearness of this discourse, the Austrians remained as it were in a trance, looking one upon another, insomuch that Chizzola judging it not to be necessary to dwell longer upon this, passed to the proof of the presupposed truth, viz. That the republic had the Dominion of the Sea, and said; that the proportion was most true, that the Sea was common and free, but yet not otherwise that could be understood, then as it is commonly said, The highways are common and free, by which is meant, that they cannot be usurped by any private person, for his sole proper service, but remain to the use of every one: not therefore that they are so free, as that they should not be under the protection and government of some Prince, and that every one might do therein licentiously, all that which it pleased him, either by right or wrong; forasmuch as such licentiousness or anarchy is abhorred both of God and nature, as well by Sea as by landlord. That the true liberty of the Sea, excludes it not from the protection and superiority of such as maintain it in liberty, nor from the subjection to the laws of such, as have command over it, rather necessarily it includes it. That no less the Sea, than the Land, is subject to be divided amongst men, and appropriated to Cities and Potentates, which long since was ordained by God from the beginning of mankind, as a thing most natural, which was well understood by Aristotle, when he said, that unto Sea or maritime Cities, the Sea is the territory, because from thence they take their sustenance and defence; a thing which cannot possibly be, unless part of it might be appropriated in the like manner as the Land is, which is divided betwixt Cities and Governments, not by equal parts, nor according to their greatness, but as they have been, or are able to rule, govern, and defend them. Bern is not the greatest city of Switzerland, and yet it hath as large a territory, as all the rest of the twelv Cantons together. And the city of Norimberg is very great, and yet the Territories thereof hardly exceed the walls. And the city of Venice for many years was known to be without any possession at all upon the firm landlord. Upon the Sea likewise, certain Cities of great force and valour have possessed a large quantity thereof, others of little force, have been contented with the next waters; neither are there wanting Examples of such, who notwithstanding they are maritime, yet having fertile Lands lying on the back of them, have been contented therewith, without ever attempting to gain any Sea-dominion; Others, who being awed by their more mighty neighbours, have been constrained to forbear any such attempt; for which two causes, a city, notwithstanding it be maritime, may happen to remain without any possession of the Sea.  
He added that God did instant Principalities, for the maintenance of Justice, to the benefit of mankind, which was necessary to be executed, as well by Sea as by landlord. That S. Paul said, That for this cause there was due to Princes, Customs and Contributions: that it should be a great absurdity to prais the well governing, regulating, and defence of the Land, and to condemn that of the Sea: that if the Sea in some parts for the ampleness and extreme distance thereof from the Land, was not possible to be governed and protected, that proceeded from a disability and defect in mankind; as also there are deserts so great upon the Land, as it is impossible to protect them; witness the many sandy parts of Africa, and the immense vastities of the new world. And as it is a gift of God, that a Land by the Laws and public power, be ruled, protected and governed; so the same happens to the Sea: that those were deceived by a gross equivocation, who said, that the Land by reason of its stability might be governed, but not the Sea, for being an unconstant element, no more than the aër; forasmuch as if, by the Sea and the Aër, they intent all the parts of those fluent elements, it is a most certain thing, that they cannot be governed; because, whilst a man serves himself with any one part of them, the other escape's out of his power; but this chanceth also to Rivers, which cannot be retained. But when it is said to rule over a Sea or River, it is not understood of the Element, but of the site, where they are placed. The water of the Adriatic Sea continually runs out of it, neither can it all be kept in, and yet it is the same Sea, as well as the Tiber, Po, or the Rhine are the same Rivers now, which they were 1000 years past. And this is that which is subject to the protection of Princes.  
He asked the Austrians if their pretense were, that the Sea should be left without protection, so that any one might do therein well or ill, robbing, spoiling, and making of it un-navigable; this would be so absurd, as he durst answer for them, no: therefore he concluded, that by a necessary consequence his majesty would acknowledge, that it should be kept, governed and protected by those unto whom it did appertain by divine disposition: which if it were so, he desired to know, if it seemed to them a just thing that such should do it, with the expense of their own pains, charges, and blood; or rather that such should contribute towards it, who did equally enjoy the benefit: To this also he durst answer for them, that they would say the doctrine of St Paul is too clear in the point (not to allege matter of Law) that all such who are under government and protection, are thereby bound to pay Customs and Contributions. And thereupon he concluded, that if the republic were that Prince, to whom it did appertain to govern and protect the Adriatic Sea, it followed necessarily, that whosoëver Navigate's it, aught to be subject to their laws, in the same manner as such are, who travel through a country upon the landlord.  
From thence he went on to show, that this Dominion over the Sea, from time out of mind, did belong to the republic, and thereupon caused to be read out of an Abstract which he had taken, the Opinions of thirty Lawyers, who, from the year 1300, until that present time, did speak of the Dominion which the republic had over the Sea, as of a thing most notorious, and of which, even in their times, the mind of man knew not the contrary: some of them affirming, that the republic had no less Dominion over the Sea, then over the city of Venice; others saying, that the Adriatic Sea is the territory and demesnes of the said city, making mention of the lawful power which the Venetians had to establish laws over Navigaon, and to impose Customs upon such as navigate those Seas; and he added that he never read any Lawyer, which ever said the contrary. And turning himself to R●picio he said, that if he would not believ those Writers which testified that the Sea belonged to the Venetians, whereof they had possession from time out of mind, before the age wherein the Autors lived, although they prove it not, yet he could not deny to receiv them for testimonies of such things which they saw and knew in their times, and to hold them as witnesses, far above all exception, being famous men, and dead so many years ago, as they could not be any ways interessed in the present differences. And because more than 250 years were passed, from the time that the first Autors, which he alleged as witnesses hereof did write, to the time of those, which he last cited in that behalf; by their attestation it was sufficiently proved, that for long time more than so many years, the republic hath commanded the Sea, and therefore he could not deny the immovable possession thereof to the present.  
Afterwards turning himself to the Judges, he prayed them, that upon the Autorities alleged, they would be pleased to listen unto a short consideration of his, which he did not doubt, but would leave in them a full impression of the Truth. And first he desired them to consider, that notwithstanding some of the aforesaid cited Autors speak with general words, saying, the Sea of the Venetians, neither declaring the quality nor quantity thereof; yet others do specify it, using the name of the Gulf; and others with terms more expressive, saying, the Adriatic Sea; which clearly demonstrate's, not only the site, but also the quantity of the Sea possessed; and so showed, that those who speak more expressively, aught to clear the passages of those, who writ more generally, according to the common precept, that with clear places the more obscure are to be illustrated. he considered also, that the divers manner of speaking of the same Doctors, some deriving the Dominion of the republic over the Sea, from Custom, some from prescription, others from an induced subjection, and others from a privilege, did arise all out of this reason, because as they were most assuredly informed of the possession and jurisdiction of the said Seas, which they both saw and heard to belong to the republic from time out of mind; so they writing upon that matter, not at the instance of any one, but of their own proper motions, and by way of Doctrine only, each one of them judged it most convenient to express the title of that jurisdiction, some with one term, some with another, without coming to use the sole and true proper term, as they would have done, if they had been put to write for the interest of any one; in which cases the Counsellors are always conformable, receiving from the person interested equally the like instructions.  
He added, that, through the variety of expressing themselves, the truth of the cause was no ways diminished, but rather increased; as St Augustine saith, speaking of the diversity which is observed to be betwixt the holy Evangelists; because by the divers manner of expression, used by the said Writers, every one may rest assured, that none of them did write nè pagato, nè pregato, neither paid, nor prayed. In which cases they are never wont to vary, from the single form prescribed unto them by the party interessed; but rather he that shall well examine it, shall see amongst the Doctors a wonderful concord in this one point most true, that after the declination of the Constantipolitane Empire, the Adriatic Sea was found to be for many years abandoned, (as also many Islands and Cities of that State) in such manner, as it remained unguarded and without the protection and government of any Prince, and under the jurisdiction of no body, until by the Venetians, who, to receiv their livelihood thereby, were constrained to maintain it in freedom; and thereupon taking it into their protection, got thereby the government and dominion over it, in like manner as by the law of Nature and of Nations, the Land, the Sea, and other things, which are not under the Dominion of any other, come justly unto those who first get the possession of them; by which reason the first Empires were founded, as well upon the Land as at Sea, and daily there are new ones in the same manner form, when any of them, either through age or vice, becoming weak, wanteth force, and sinks of itself. The which costodie and government of the Sea, so acquired, the republic hath daily advanced, by the keeping of potent Fleets and greater Armadoes every day than other, with the expense of a great deal of Treasure, and the profusion of a world of blood, both of their Citizens and Subjects, continuing without interruption, in sight of all the world, the said begun Dominion and custody, overcoming and removing all such impediments, as either by Pirates or Potentates, as well of Italy as of the opposite shore, at divers times have been raised. And for the clearing of such doubts, as might arise by the subtle construction of words, he added; that although those who took upon them to speak in the strict terms of the Law, were wont to say, that such things only were gained by Custom, which by the Civil Law, being to be common, were notwithstanding converted to a private benefit, yet without any impeachment of the public profit, as to fish in a River without impeachment of Navigation; yet for all that, the Title of Custom cannot be unproperly given, where there shall be gained and continually kept in possession and Dominion, a quantity either of Sea or Land abandoned, and of no man possessed, as Bartholus, Baldus, Castro, and others do affirm. And although that by title of Prescription a thing cannot possible be said to be possessed, unless, by the occupation of it, another be thereof spoiled and dispossessed, which title comes not in this place, forasmuch as the republic hath not spoiled any of the possession of the Sea, but hath seized upon it, finding it abandoned & without Patron or Possessor: notwithstanding in some sort, it may be called Prescription, as if a Falcon were let fly and cast off by its master, and thereupon growing wild, should after be taken up by another, and by him manned, and for a long time fed; although not properly, yet not absurdly it may be said, that this second master hath it by Prescription. Likewise, to speak in terms of Law, the propriety of speech doth not admit the use of this word Servitude, unless to the proper territory of a State, there be gotten some power over another State, and yet that State remain's Patron of its own notwithstanding; in this since the republic hath not brought the Sea in servitude to the city of Venice, because it hath not gotten any special use or command over it, the Dominion for all that remaining to another Patron, but hath assumed the total and entire Dominion thereof, which was before abandoned, neither by any governed or protected: nevertheless it may in a certain proportion be called Servitude, inasmuch as the republic hath been constrained to assume the total Dominion and Government thereof, for the service of the city of Venice, whereof it had necessary use.  
Now as touching the Privilege of keeping this Sea, and who was the Donor, this neither can here have any place, forasmuch as at the time of the assumption of it, there was not any who could make any grant thereof, the Emperor of the West never having any Power or authority over it; and as little superiority or jurisdiction had any other western Prince; and therefore could so much the less give it to another. The Emperor of the East, not having force sufficient to keep it, had long since abandoned it, and being thereupon divested of all the Power he had over it, and of the Possession thereof, never made any grant thereof in the successive Peace and Treaties which happened afterwards betwixt the said Empire and the republic. Notwithstanding all which the Italian Lawyers, as Professors of the Cesarean Law, & sworn to the very words of it, being besides most devoted to his Imperial majesty, as if at this present day Augustus or Antoninus did reign, do force themselves with all extortion, to verify upon the western Emperor that saying, Imperator est Dominus Mundi, The Emperor is Lord of the world. Which at that very time when it was first pronounced, was not true in the hundred part of the world, and at this present not in any considerable proportion. And whilst they would honour the Emperor, and give him, with such words as these, that which he neither hath nor can have, they consider not the absurdity of the speech, as if they should say, that no King possessed any estate lawfully, unless it were granted him by the Emperor, which is as true, as when they affirm that the Venetians possess the Adriatic Sea, by an Imperial privilege. But it appears clear enough, in what since this is spoken by them, because there is none of them do intent thereby, that there was ever any such Grant made thereof by the Emperor; but by that they do figuratively intent a privilege assumed by immemorable possession, which possession they interpret to be with the knowledge and sufferance of the Emperor, which is as much as if they should say, that Christian Kings possess their Kingdom, and the republic possesseth the Adriatic Sea, as lawfully by their title of acquiring it, as if those Kingdoms and that Sea had belonged to the Emperor, and from and by him to those Princes, and to the republic afterwards granted. So spaciously did Chizzola dilate in speaking of the opinion of the Lawyers, it being the field of his profession: he concluded, that any one might rest satisfied, as well in truth, as in reason, that by the authority of the said Doctors, there were sure foundations laid to the cause, which he did defend.  
After the testimony of the Lawyers, he added that of the Historians, who do relate, that the republic, for more than 300 years past, did receiv Custom, of such as sailed that Sea, and kept armed vessels in a readiness, for to compel all such Ships so sailing, to go to Venice, testifying moreover, that even unto their present time the same Custom was observed. But upon their attestations he dwelled not much, saying, that though they were good Testimonies of preceding occurrences; yet when one goeth about to prove the interests of Princes, or of private persons, he ought to help himself by authentic writings, and to use the Historians with great discretion; some of them being moved by love, others with hatred, and others with hope of preferment; which constrain's them oftentimes to use flattery, or Hyperboles, upon which cannot be laid any sure foundation.  
Wherefore he produced an act of the general Council of Lions, anno 1274, where the Abbot of Nervesa, being delegated by the Pope (upon a pretention of those of Ancona to have free Navigation upon the Adriatic Sea) sentenced, that the demand should be rejected, and that the Venetians should not be molested in the defence and protection thereof, from the Saracens and Pirates, neither should be disturbed from exacting thereupon their Rights and Customs, which they had of victuals, merchandise and other portable Commodities.  
Chizzola likewise added, that it is clean out of memory, when first of all there was created in Venice, a Captain of the Gulf, because in the year 1230, the chancery was burned, with the memorial of all such elections; but from that time to this present, he could show out of the public Registers, the continual succession of the said elected Captains without any interruption. Likewise he added moreover, that there remain the Registers from that time to this, of the Licenses granted to pass the said Sea, with armed vessels or ships of war, and to the persons and goods belonging to their use, at the request of divers Princes, who had their Possessions upon the shore of the Adriatic Sea, and that as well by sundry Popes, Legates, Vicars, Governors, and commonalty of the Land of Romania and Marca, as by the Kings of Naples for Puglia, of which many were granted, some denied and others yielded to, but in part; But it being superfluous to allege the Acts of those, the Successors of whom do not so much as question this Title, he descended to particularise only the Predecessors of his majesty, as Kings of Hungary, and Arch-duke's of Austria. He recited a Brief of Pope Urbane the sixth, directed to Antonio Veniero the Duke of Venice, bearing date Luca 14 Junii 1388. where he give's him thanks, that with his galleys deputed for the keeping of the Gulf, marry Queen of Hungary had been enlarged, who had been kept prisoner in castelnovo; with two other congratulatory Letters, the one to the said Queen, the other to King Sigismond, who after was Emperor, being her Husband, rejoicing with them likewise of the said enlargement made by means of the Captain of the Venetian galleys, deputed to the custody of the Gulf. Afterwards he caused to be read a safe Conduct granted at the Petition of Rodulph Earl of Sala, in the name of Ladislaus King of Naples, and of William archduke of Austria anno 1399. 12 Decembris, that the sister of the said King (espoused to the aforenamed archduke) might be conducted by Sea from Puglia, to the Coasts of her Husband, with galleys and other Vessels, in all to the number of about twelv; with condition that there should not be suffered to pass upon them any Bandito or banished person of Venice, who had done any thing against the republic, which did merit death: which safe-conduct should be available to the Austrians, as well in going as in coming, so as by the same, they might also reimbark at Trieste and return unto Puglia. But yet this safe Conduct was not made use of, because the King having deferred the departure of his sister for a small time, in the interim she died.  
Also he produced two letters of the Emperor Frederick, unto Duke Giovanni Mocenigo, the first dated in Gratz 24 Sept. 1478. the other 2 Apr. 1479. from the same place, where he tell's him that he having taken order that there should be brought from Puglia and Abruzzo, to his castles of Castro and of Istria, a certain quantity of corn, he request's that it may be permitted him to do it freely, which being to him a great pleasure, he shall acknowledge it with many thanks.  
This he seconded with a letter of Beatrice Queen of Hungary, to Giovanni Mocenigo Duke of Venice, dated the last of Jan. 1481. whereby desiring for her proper use to have divers things from the parts of Italy, which she could not bring from thence by Sea, without the permission of the republic, she desired that, for courtesy sake and friendship, it might be granted her, which she should take for a great favour, and correspond upon the like occasion.  
And another of Mathias King of Hungary to the said Duke dated 26 Febr. 1482. where relating how the republic was accustomed to give Licence every year to Count Frangipani Patron of Segna and other maritime places, to bring from Puglia and Marca a certain quantity of victuals, and that after the said places, were passed over into his hands, he had omitted to desire it; wherefore he now prayed, that the same grace might be showed unto him, and that concerning this, he would write his letters and give them to a person which he had sent expressly to receiv them; which he should acknowledge as a favour and correspond accordingly.  
And another of the same King to Augustino Barbarigo the Duke, dated 18 Oct. 1487. in the which relating, that he having need of wood for the reparation of a fortress standing in the mouth of Narenta, he prayed, that he might have leave to carry it unto Segna by Sea, and that there might be Letters Patents made thereof, offering to gratify him in a greater matter.  
He added to this a Letter of Anne Queen of Hungary 30. Aug. 1502. in the which recounting the sterility of the country of Segna, she desire's leave to bring certain victuals from Puglia and Marca, and that he would give to the bearer, who was sent on purpose, Letters of Licens for the same, promising to acknowledge it as a great favour and courtesy.  
Lastly, he produced a Letter dated 3 Sept. 1504 of Giovanni de Dura Captain of Pismo, servant to the Emperor Maximilian, which he writ unto the Duke Leonardo Loredano, importing, that Giacomo Croato, a subject of his Majesties, parting from Fianona, entered into the Sea, which is under the Dominion of the republic, for to go to Segna, and was there assailed by an armed Bark of Pirates in contempt of the signory or republic, and supplicate's that some order might be taken therein.  
Upon all which particulars, he weighed most that which ought best to be considered, having respect to the times, persons, and qualities of the several Princes, and for greater confirmation of their assent, he remembered the yearly ceremony used at Venice; where the Duke, in presence of the Ambassadors of other Princes, particularly of his Majesties, did use to espous the Sea, by the casting of a Ring into it, with these words: Desponsamus Te Mare in signum veri & perpetui Dominii: we do marry the Sea, in sign of our true and perpetual Dominion over it. Which ceremony as the foresaid writers do affirm, had beginning when Pope Alexander the Third was in Venice, notwithstanding they add withal, that it was instituted in sign of the Dominion which the republic had formerly gotten, jure belli.  
To the 400 complaints of the Emperor's Subjects, and to the sentence of Liesina, he answered, giving thanks for the remembering of them, as a thing brought in much to his favour, because the complaints do presuppose the prohibition, and the sentences, either condemning or absolving, do prove the jurisdiction.  
And to the salt-barks, he said, that they were not suffered to go to Venice, as never any are suffered to go, all foreign salt being prohibited to enter into that city; and if it were not cast into the Sea, it was a courtesy, which ought not to be imputed to them to their prejudice.  
He concluded, that he had delivered the true sens of the Capitulations, and proved the immemorable possession of the Adriatic Sea; that he could have said much more, but it seemed to him superfluous, and these two points were made most clear; First, That this pretence of the Austrians was but new; And secondly, That their Petition at this Convention could have no place.  
The Imperialists after they had conferred together, took a resolution not to persevere in the demand of Justice, and the Baron with Suorz said openly, that the Republic was Patron of the Gulf, and might impose what Customs they thought fitting; and that they thought so in their consciences: but therewithal they were of an opinion, that for honesty sake, and for the friendship which the republic had with the house of Austria, it should be done with the least incommodity of the subjects to that house, as could be possible. The other three said, that it was now no time, either to approve or to disapprove the Dominion of the Sea, but rather to find by way of courtesy some kind of temperature, whereby the republic might receiv the Rights belonging thereunto from the Austrian subjects sailing those Seas, and on the other side, that such conditions annexed formerly thereunto, might be taken away, which were incommodious to the Austrians, and no ways profitable to the Venetians. Whereupon divers ways to effect it were examined, and a conclusion taken to refer all to their several Princes, as it was necessary to refer all things else; the Commission being to be only perfected by their ratification, and so this Convention ended.  
FINIS.