ANIMAD VERSIONS UPON S r RICHARD BAKER'S CHRONICLE, AND It's CONTINUATION.

Wherein many Errors are discover'd, and some Truths advanced.

By T. B. Esq

Cicero de Orat.

Prima est Historiae Lex, ne quid falsi dicere audeat, deinde ne quid veri non audeat.

OXON.

Printed by H. H. for Ric. Davis.

1672.

The PREFACE.

SInce Cronicles are the public Records of a Na­tion, I wonder'd not a little to see S r Rich: Ba­kers twice Printed by it self, and three times with a Con­tinuation, and no person learned in our History of England, or concern'd in the actions of the late Rebellion, or in the adulteration of his own, or his Ancestors Name or Title should im­pugn it; being stuff'd with so many contradictions and repetitions, so ma­ny mistimings and mistakings, as of other things of moment; so especially of the Pedegrees, Names, and Place of our ancient Nobility, Bishops, Ba­ronets, Gentry, &c. For.

—Non ego paucis.
Offendor maculis.

[Page] And yet the wonder increased▪ to see the Continuator (a person, as it ap­pears, of incompetent parts for so great an undertaking) presume to de­dicate a Work so many ways imper­fect to the Kings most excellent Ma­jestie, of whom (as Cicero said to Cae­sar) nil vulgare dignum videre possit.

As I am conscious this Age affords many more knowing in our English History then my self, so doubtless the publishing their Notions had been very necessary, that the public Cronicle of our Nation might have had the true properties of a Record, which are, Vetustatis & veritatis vestigia.

But finding in all this time no stop put to so great a stream of Error by any better Hand, I thought my self ob­lig'd to lay these few Animadversi­ons in the way, lest such muddy waters should at last totally overflow the land of Truth.

[Page] Nor have I presumed herein to in­termeddle with the affairs of State and those great revolutions in the raign of King CHARLES the first of ever blessed memory; Though I am wel as­sured the Continuator has in many passages neither don right to His sa­cred Memory, nor to those of his sub­jects, who most faithfully serv'd Him.

For the Errors which slip'd S r Rich. Bakers pen, some Excuses may be as­sign'd, as old Age, and the confine­ment of a Prison &c. but none for that his confident Assertion, (upon which the Continuator builds much in his Preface) That this Cronicle was col­lected with so great care and dili­gence, That if all other of our Cro­nicles should be lost, this onely would be sufficient to inform po­sterity of all passages memorable and worthy to be known.

S r Rich: acknowledges his VVork [Page] to be a Collection out of other Author; wherein he took up some Coin upon con­tent, which was not sterling, and that wherein he onely excell'd, was the di­gesting the whole into a better Method; yet he confesses some Passages (he might have said many) are omitted in the reign of King James, which was the tyme he liv'd in, and had bin fit for the Continuator to have sup­ply'd; who, instead thereof has sweld the Continuation into such a Bulk of indigested matter, as is not at all suta­ble to the rest of the History.

Besides the many failings both of the Author and Continuator, the Printer has, with supine negligence, added a grosse number of Errata's, without any advertisement of them, but leaving all upon the Authors account, yet the un­derstanding Reader wil, for the most part, discern, which ought to be laid at the Authors Study dore, and which at the Printers Case.

[Page] If particular information may be rely'd on, we may ere long expect a compleater Cronicle of the Kings of England, with a more exact and im­partial account of the late Rebellion, and the happy restauration of his Ma­jesty, from a Hand better qualified for such an undertaking.

Mean time these few leaves (not ta­king in a Third of what is justly lyable to exception) may help to rectify some of the Errors already printed, and may contribute in some measure, to­wards the observing a greater care and exactnesse in publishing Books of so general a concern in time to come.

Errors Committed in the printing.

PAg. 6. lin. ult. Auther for Author.

p. 10. l. 8. praefix'd for prefix'd.

p. 12. 25. l. 1. Barker's for Baker's.

p. 41. l. 9, where for were.

p. 57. l. 5. Eale for Earle.

p. 63. nu. 50. l. 7. Abbanets for Albanets.

p. 85. l. 3. Continua— for Continuator.

p. 88. nu. 73. to Mr Woolfs add at.

p. 89. nu. 74. l. 5. acscended for ascended.

p. 99. l. 7. perticularly for particularly.

ANIMADVERSIONS On the Catalogue of Writers.

THe first thing we meet with, after the Dedication and Preface, is

A Catalougue of Writers both an­cient and modern, out of whom this Cronicle hath been collected.

Gildas Britanicus, Sir named the Num. 1. wise, the first Writer of our English Nation—

When as there were no lesse then threescore before him, as Leland, Baleus, and Pitseus attest. And (I take it) this Gildas (for there were two of them) was called Badoni­cus; because born in the same year the great Battle was fought be­tween the Britains and Saxons at the mountain Badonicus.

[Page 2] Ethelwardus, a Writer next to Bede 4. the most ancient,—

This is also a mistake; for he flou­rished not til the year 925, which was after Sigebert whom our Au­thor mentions.

Radulphus de Diceto or Dicetentis, 5. who lived about the year 685.—

He lived not til the year 1210, as may be seen in his Chronicle prin­ted about xx. years Since.

Asserius Menevensis, Bishop of Sa­lisbury 9. lived about the year 890.

A gross mistake; for no Bishops See was setled at Salisbury, til af­ter the Conquest. There was in­deed one Asserus Bishop of Sher­burne, Anno 880, and continued so but 4 years.

[Page 3] Osbertus, a Benedictine Monk, wrote 11. the life of—

For Osbernus Cantuariensis, a Be­nedictine Monk and Chantor of Canterbury.

Culmanus Anglicus, writ a Cronicle— 12. and lived about the year 1040—

He should have said Colemannus sapiens, who flourished An. 1200.

Gulielmus Gemetecensis —lived A o 1135. 13.

He flourished in the year 1160.

Ingulphus, Abhot of Croyland—lived 18, in the time of william the first—

He dyed in the year 1109, which was in the 9 th year of Henry the first.

Turgotus, an English man, first Dean 19. of Durham &c. lived in the year 1098.

[Page 4] This Turgotus, was not first Dean of Durham, but Prior, and is cal­led in latin Authors Turgotus Du­nelmensis; He dyed An: 1115.

Gnalterus Mappaeus, writ a book de­nugis 21. Curialium and lived about the Conquerors time.

His name is Mape Latin'd by wri­ters Mapus; His book in MS. is in the Bodleyan Library; He flou­rished in the year 1210, long after the Conquerors time; And I think his Book affords nothing for our Authors purpose.

Raradocus, born in Wales— 25. for Caradocus Lancarvanensis—

Gervasius Derobernensis —lived a­bout the year 1120. 26.

Which should be 1200.

[Page 5] Johannes Fiberius commonly called de Bever —lived about the year 1110. 27.

This Iohannes Fiberius, was other­wise called Castorius, and flouri­shed not til the later end of Ed­ward the first's time, about the year 1306.

Radulphus de Rizeto.—

Which should be Radulphus de Di­ceto, 45. and is mentioned before num. 5. but this is the more proper place for him, in point of time.

Thomas Spottey, a Benedictine Fri­er 48. of Canterbury—

His name was Sport or Spot, a Be­nedictine Monk.

Matthaeus Westmonasteriensis —li­ved 49. about the year 1307—for 1377,

Mathew Paris, —wrote a History— 51. from Will: 1. to the last year of Hen.

[Page 6] 3. and lived about the time of K. Ed­ward. 3.

Mistakes enough —Math. Paris dyed many years before Edw: 3. time, viz. A o 1259. To which year he brought down his Histo­ry, and after his death it was con­tinued for some years by ano­ther.

Bartholomeus Anglicus —wrote a 53. Cronicle of the Scots—

His right Sirname was Glanvile; he did not write a Cronicle de Scotis, but a History de Sanctis.

Alex. Essebiensis, Prior of the mona­stery 55. of Regular Canons—lived in the year 1360.—

By the word (the) we are to be­leive there was but one Mona­stery of that Order, of which there were many; this Auther flouri­shed [Page 7] in the year 1220.

John Froyssart, born in the Low Countrys, writ a Cronicle—ending 56. with Henry the 4th—

He was born at Hennault in Flan­ders; His History ends in the year 1400, which is the first year of Hen. 4th.

Thomas Rodburn, an English man 58. and a Bishop, wrote a Cronicle—and lived 1412.

He was Bishop of St Davids; but the Cronicle our Author aims at, was written by another Thomas Rodburn, a monk of Hide Abby, who lived A o. 1480. and is extant in M.S. in Lambeth Library.

John Trevisa, born in Glocestershire— 59.

He was born in Cornwall.

John Capgrave, born in Kent, a Her­mit 61. [Page 8] Friar-

He was an Augustin Friar of Canterbury.

John Lydgate, Monk of St. Edmunds 62. bury—lived in the year 1470. in the time. of King Edw. the 4 th.

He dyed in the year 1440 tempore Hen. 6.

Doctor Goodwin, Bishop of Here­ford 78. wrote—and lived in the time of Q. Eliz.

He means Doctor Francis Godwin Bishop—who lived in the time of K. James. and K. Charles 1. and dyed Anno 1633.

Doctor Heyward, writ the History of— 79.

This was S r John Heyward Knight Doctor of Law.

[Page 9] Thomas Cowper, Bp of VVinche­ster 83., writ Chronicle notes of all Na­tions—

These notes were written by Tho: Lanquet, and onely continued for some years by Cowper.

Nicholas Harpsfeild —hath written 88. a Chronicle of all the Bishops of Eng­land.—

He wrote an Ecclesiastical Histo­ry of England in folio, but no such Cronicle of Bishops was ever be­fore heard of.

John Speed, a Londoner wrote— 90.

He was born in Ches-shire:

William Abington Esquire hath 91. written—

His name was Habington. &c.

These Notes have been with some [Page 10] pains collected out of Leland, Bale, Pits, and other Authors of good au­thority, to shew the mistakes and anticronisms of our Author, even in his first Effort; who thinking to give a greater reputation to his Book, has (not without much suspi­tion of vanity) praefix'd a Catalogue of 93. Authors Ancient and Mo­dern, out of whom he saies his Chro­nicle is collected, of which number it may justly be suspected he never saw above the one half; otherwise he could not, without great inad­vertence, so grosly have mistaken what is here noted; Besides if his wine had bin good, it would not have needed such a Bash.

ANIMADVERSIONS on the Catalogue of the Nobi­lity, Bishops, Baronets, &c.

BEfore we come to the Book it self, the Continuator has thought fit to entertain the Reader with an Antipast, consisting of a Catalogue of the Nobility, Bishops, and Baronets of England, which is so ill cook'd, that it must needs offend the understan­ding Readers stomac, especially that dish of the Baronets.

Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk Baron John Howard his Ancestor created Duke of Norfolk by King Rich. 3 d July 4. 1483. whose an­cestor S r John Howard Knight was created a Baron in 1461. by King Edward (4.) and afterwards by Richard 3. was created Duke June 28. 1483.

[Page 12] If this were true, there should be two Dukes of Norfolk, and both Howards created by the same K. Rich: within 7. daies one of ano­ther. But this Baron John Ho­ward, and Sr Iohn Howard was one and the same person, not created Baron, but made so by Writ of Summons. For thus Camden, Iohn Lord Howard (who was sum­mond Brit. fol. 483. a Baron to Parliament by Edw. 4) was created Duke of Nor­folk by Rich. 3 d. and his son Tho­mas created Earle of Surry. It is an ill proof of the Continuators skil in Heraldry, thus to mistake the Pedegree of the Primier Peer of the Realm.

William Cavendish, Duke of—Baron Bolsomer, twice—for Bolsover.

[Page 13] Edward Fines,—Earle of Lincoln—for Fiennes—

His true name is Clinton.

William Ley Earle of Marleburgh—whose father James was created Earle—

Iames Ley was the first Earle, Hen­ry his son the 2 d, and Iames the 3 d, who was slain at Sea, in the late war with the Dutch, and leaving no issue, the title went to his uncle William yet living.

Henry Germaine, Earle of S t Albans, and Baron Germaine of S t Edmunds­bury—

should be Iermyn in both places.

[Page 14]

Archbishops and Bishops.
  • Gilbert Shelden, for Sheldon.
  • John Couzens, for Cousin.
  • William Fuller—consecrated Bishop of—in Ireland
    • add Limerick—A o 1663.
  • —Davies Bishop of Landaff.
    • add Francis.

BARONS.

Nevil Baron of Abergavenny, crea­ted by King Harold the second—

A grosse mistake. The rise of the Lord Bergavenny's honor was by writ of Summons, and not by Pa­tent of Creation. VVilliam Beau­champ de Bergavenny was first called by writ, in 16. Ric. 2 d. And [Page 15] Edw. Nevile de Bergavenny was first Summond to Parliament in 29. Hen. 6.

James Barfue, Baron Norris—

for Bertue.

—Smith, Baron Carington of Wor­ton in England, and Viscount Ca­rington of Barefore in Ireland.

which should be Baron of Wot­ton-VVawen in England, and Vis­count Berisford in Ireland.

William Widdington, Baron Wid­dington—

for VViddrington.

John Freshville, Baron Freshville—and elsewhere Fretswell.

for Freschevile.

Thomas Windzor—Baron Wind­zor—

for VVindesor.

[Page 16] The Lord Howard of Estrich (for Escrick) in severall places of the Con­tinuation.

BARONETS.

In the Catalogue of Baronets, about twenty, are totally omitted, divers are postpon'd from their true place, whereby disputes have arisen touch­ing precedency; For (say some) what more obliging authority can you have in that behalfe, Then the English Cronicle; not considering that these Catalogu's are published without any licence or authority from the Kings at Armes, the proper Registers, Approvers, and Judges herein. Again many of these Ba­ronets names are so grosly mistaken that, the Reader had need be a little skilld in Divinails, to raise a conje­cture who are meant by them; for Example. [Page 17] num:

num:  
137 S r. Iohn Hornet.
184 S r. VVill: Skerington.
323 S r. Iohn Rarisly.
468 S r. Hugh Smithford.
558 S r. Charles Koyde. &c.

Then we find S r Francis Eagles­feild, for Englefeild; S r VVilliam Therrold, for Thorold; S r Henry H [...]rn▪ for Hen; S r Iohn Husband for Hu­band, S r John VVray, for Kay. S r Henry Green of Sonpford, for S r Edw: Green of Samford. S r Anthony Ar­cher, for Aucher, Barker for Baker. Clare for Clere, with a number more; Besides the mistake of many of the names of their cheif Dwellings and ancient Seats; In so much as of 704 Baronets conteyned in the List, I no­ted above 100 mistakes of some of the kinds here mentioned.

ANIMADVERSIONS upon S r Richard Baker's Cronicle.

I

OUr Author saies, The eleventh King of Kent was Withred who Fol. 5. 6. founded the Priory of Merton at Dover.

I do not find any such Priory founded by that King at Dover or elsewhere; Camden saies Do­ver had a fair Church consecrated Bri­tan. f 344. to S t Martin, founded by Wi­thred, (Wightred, son of Egbert) King of Kent, and an House of the Knights Templars,—without mention of any Priory of Mer­ton there. And Bishop Parker [Page 19] (in his Antiq. Britan.) agrees in effect with Camden. Howbeit there was a Priory at Merton in Surry founded by King Henry the first.

II

The ninth King of the East Saxons f. 6. a was Sebba, who after 30 years peace­able reign, relinquish'd the Crown and took upon him a Religious habit in the Monastery of S t Paul, London.

There was never any Monastery (properly so called) of S t Paul in London; Howbeit Bede saies, That this holy King took the ha­bit of religion, brought Wald­here then Bishop of London a great sum of money to be di­stributed to the poor, and was bu­ried in St Pauls Church.

III

That King Edmund was slain at his f. 10. b Mannor of Pucklekerk by interpo­sing himself to part a fray betwixt two of his servants—

This is otherwise related by M r Hist. of En­gl. fo. 231. Milton out of the Saxon Annals; viz. That King Edmund received a mortal wound in the brest with a dagger by one Leof, a noted Theif whom the King had bani­shed, yet finding him at the Ta­ble among his Nobles at a Feast, the King was so much moved, that by offering to attach him, the Villain gave Him his deaths wound.

IV

That King Canutus set himself to the f. 26. a making of good Lawes in a Parlia­ment at Oxford—

And soon after he saies, That King fo. 40. Henry the first did first institute the forme of the high Court of Parlia­ment—

And neither true, For the word Parliamentum, to denote a Parli­amentary great Council, was ne­ver used in any of the ancient great Councils, Synods, Lawes, Char­ters or Records, nor yet in any of our old Historians, living in the raigns of our Saxon or Danish Kings before, or of our Norman or English Kings, after the Con­quest, til the reign of King Hen­ry the 3 d; as you may read in [Page 22] S r Henry Spelmans Glossary, ver­bo, Parliamentum. The first Record wherein the word is so used, is Claus, 28 Hen. 3 d. mem. 12. dorso, according to M r Prin, in his Animadversions. Before which time, it was called Concili­um magnum, Commune Concili­um Regni, Magnatum Conventus, and the like.

V

Our Author, after he has laid ble­mishes f. 18. b on Edward the pious King and Confessor, of severity to his Mother Queene Emma, and unkind­nesse to his wife Editha; concludes —So as what the vertues were, for which after his death, he should be reputed a Saint, doth not easily ap­pear.

[Page 23] My thinks this is irreverently said of so great a King of this Na­tion, and a Confessor, as our Author himself calls him. Though his Mother had been unkind to him; yet her pious Son was in a man­ner enforced to permit her to passe the severe trial of Fier Or­deal, by the importunity of Ro­bert a Norman Bishop and other her enemies, who bore great sway in the government. But when the pious King saw her innocence cleered, he, with many tears and sighs, begged her pardon, and not content to restore her and Brom­ton fo. 942. Alwin Bishop of Winchester (ac­cused with her) to their liberty and possessions, he moreover, in punishment of his credulity, obliged them both to inflict on him a disciplin on the bare back: Besides this, in penance, for ha­ving [Page 24] permitted his Mother to be Camd. in Dor. set. so unjustly accused, he bestowed on the Church of VVinchester the Isle of Portland, with other pos­sessions &c.

Next his unkindness to Edi­tha his Queen Consort, is assign­ed to his not conversing with her as a wife, onely at board, but not at bed, or if at bed, no other­wise then David with Abishah &c. For cleering this, you may read Capgrave and other ancient Au­thors cited by him, who affirm, It was by mutual agreement, that they both consecrated their Virgini­ty to God.

Then for his Sanctity, he is re­corded to have been ful of Devo­tion, humility and Charity. He rebuilt that most magnificent Spel. in Cō ­cil. [...] f. 636 Church at VVestmister dedicated to S t Peter; a Church, which that [Page 25] Age could not parallel, either for the august Majesty or excel­lent contrivance of the building; for that Church afforded to po­sterity a pattern of framing Chur­ches in the figure of a Crosse, as S r Henry Spelman sayes. Having thus built the Church, he most liberally endowed it with possessi­ons, and adorn'd it with privile­ges, exemptions, a most famous Sanctuary and many other royal gifts. During this pious Kings reign all the Houses of God (saies another Author) prosper'd won­derfully, for he himselfe spared not his Treasure in adorning them and encouraged others to do the like. Twas this pious King that first miraculously cured the Kings Eal­red in vita S. Ed­wardi evil, and left that royal vertue hereditary to his successors Kings of England; which yet at this day [Page 26] (our Author saies) is ordinary with Kings, but cannot shew where any other King pretends to the like, Except the Kings of France, who (as Dupleix the French Hi­storian observes) never had that vertue, til King Philip the first and his son Lewis's time; where­in they are posterior to the Kings of England. He also founded (saies our Author) the College of S t Mary Ottery in Devonshire, and gave unto it the village of Ottery. And was just in his go­vernment, which lasted 23 years and six moneths. These, to o­mit other vertues, works of pie­ty and miracles, recorded by some Authors, might reasona­bly (if wel considered) have wrought in our Author a dispo­sition of the word Saint.

[Page 27] Besides we read at the end of f. 761 our Authors book, that St Ed­wards Staff, S t Edwards Scepter, and S t Edwards Crown were born before his Majesty at his Coro­nation 23 April. 1661 And in another place our Author saies, That to carry S t Edwards Crown, before the King at a Coronation, is the greatest honor that can be gi­ven a subject. Which surely ar­gues some more then ordinary e­stimation and reverence for this pious King; in whose memory (by the decree of a Synod, held at Oxford A o. 1162) a festival day was ordaind on the 13 th day of October, being the day of his Translation, but the 5 th of Ja­nuary was that of his death.

At Westminster, we find this Epitaph of Him.

[Page 28]
Omnibus in signis virtutum laudibus Heros
Sanctus Edwardus Confessor, Rex venerandus,
Quinto die Jani moriens super aethera scandit.
Sursum Corda. Moritur 1065.

He saies William the firsts sons f. 29. b were Robert, Richard, William and Henry—And soon after f. 32. a Sayes William Rufus was second son to William the Conqueror.

VI.

—The Castle of Sherburne in Norfolk. f. 23. b For when Sherburne, who was owner of it—

This should be Sharnborn in both places. The name of a very anci­ent Family.

VII.

—A Hide of land containing, as some f. 26. b account it, twenty acres, but, as M r Lambert proveth, one hundred acres.

There is no Author I ever read, accounts it so little as xx. acres. Beae says it is as much as wil main­tein a Family; many others agree it to be a Plough-land, Tanta fundi portio quanta unico per san­num coli poterit aratro, says Hen. of Huntingdon. But Sr Edw: Coke says expresly, That a Knights Fee, a Hide or Plough-land do not contain any certain number of acres. on Littleton. fol. 69.

VIII.

By a Law of King Edward (the f. 27. a [Page 30] Confessor) all matters in question were upon special penalty, decided in their Gemote or Conventicle, held monethly in every Hundred—

Where he most improperly expounds Gemote by Conventicle, which are of very different signifi­cations; For Gemote signifies in the Saxon tongue, a Court or Convention, where Causes of De­bate were tryed and determined; As the Saxons had their Scirege­mot, Hundredgemot &c. Their County and Hundred Court. And Conventicle (a word in those times not in use) is a little private meet­ting for the exercise of Religion, well known in these days, and first taken up in those of Wicklif.

IX

In William the first's time, he says, f. 29. a Waring Earle of Shrewsbury built two Abbyes, one in the Suburbs of Shrewsbury and another at Wenlock.

And in William the second's time, f. 36. a That, Warren Earle of Shrewsbury built two Abbyes, one in the Suburbs of Shrews bury, and another at Wen­lock.

Doubtless this Waring and Warren are intended for the same person; but there was never any such Earle of Shrewsbury, there was indeed one Warren, who came in with the Conqueror, & was ad­vanc'd to the Earldom of Surrey by K. Wil. Rufus. The Abby of Shrewsbury was founded by Roger de Mountgomery Earle of Arun­dell [Page 32] and Shrewsbury, Anno 1081. and that of Wenlock by the same person.

X.

—Appeals had been seldom used, til f. 35. b Anselm, in William Rufus Reign, appealed to the Pope.—

And in the same breath, he says, In this Kings time was the first Ap­peal f. 36. a to Rome, made by Anselm, that ever before had bin made in Eng­land.

In this contradiction, the first part hath most affinity to truth—For Mr Pryn (no friend to Rome) Animad. on Cokes 4. Inst. fo. 238. says, The first Appeal out of Eng­land to Rome I meet with, was that of Wilfrid, Archbishop of York—which was in the year 678. above 400. years before William Rufus Reign.

XI

He saies, The Abby of Hide was foun­ded f. 41. b by King Henry the first.

Whose Founder was King Alured or Alfred long before.

XII

In the raign of Henry the first,—He saies —This Lady Juga, Lady of f. 42. a little Dunmow and late wife of Bay­nard, that first built Baynards Castle in London—And in the reign of Henry the 2 d, he saies Barnard Bay­liol, of whom Baynards Castle in f. 54. b London took name—And, in the reign of Edward 1. was laid the foun­dation f. 101. of Baynards Castle; strange contradictions?

[Page 34] Camden, in his Britan. saies, we f. 424 term Baynards Castle, of Wil­liam Baynard, a noble man, Lord of Dunmow, who built it. For tis improbable it could take name from Bernard Bayliol; who was great Grandfather to John Balliol (not Bayliol) King of the Scots, and built Bernard Castle f. 736 in the Bishopric of Durham, from whence arose our Authors mi­stake.

XIII

—Stephen Harding, a Benedictine fo. 45. Monk, who was founder to the Ci­stercian Order. Tempore Hen. 1

A great mistake; For that Or­der was instituted by Robert Ab­bot of the Monastery of Ciste­aux i [...] Burgundy, whence the Or­der took denomination, and this [Page 35] was in the year 1088, before Henry the first came to the Crown.

XIV

He speaks of Roger Bishop of Sa­lisbury, and in the same page calls f. 46. [...] him Robert and fo. 49 he calls him Raph—

It seems, so they all begin with the same letter, it matters not whether it were Roger, Robert or Raph—The first was his name, who was also chief Justice of En­gland Anno 1107. and afterwards Lord Chancelor and Lord Trea­surer of England.

XV

The King (Stephen) replied by his Lawyer Alveric de Vir—For Alberi­cus f. 50. a [Page 36] or Awbrey de Vere. And in the same page —The Abby of Bury in Norfolk—for Suffolk.

XVI

The Abby of Garradon in Leicester­shire, he saies, was founded in King f. 50. a Stephens time—And afterwards, That Robert de Boscu, Earle of Lei­cester f. 58. b, in Hen. the 2 ds time, foun­ded the Monastery of Garradon, and that of Leicester, called S t Mary de Pater (for de pratis)—

The foundation of this Abby of Garradon ought to have no place in King Stephens time; For it was founded by the said Robert de Boscu, Earle of Leicester, in Henry the 2 ds time, & that of Lei­cester in King Stephens.

XVII

He saies, The four Knights that slew f. 57. b Thomas Becket Archbishop of Can­terbury; 30 December, Anno 1172. were Reynold Fitzurse or Bereson, Hugh Morvile, William Tracy and Richard Britton—

When as tis recorded in Monasti­chon par. 2. folio 607 a. Anglicanum (a surer Au­thor) That Robertus filius Ra­nulfi, was one of the four Knights that slew Thomas Becket; in ex­piation of which fact he founded the Priory of Beauchef in Derby­shire. And for Rich: Britton I have seen, in an ancient Manuscript, Rich: le Brut. And instead of 30 December, he should have said 29.

XVIII

That Robert Harding, a Burgess of f. 58. b Bristow, built the Monastery of S t Austins in Bristow.

Which was the foundation and work of King Henry the 2 d ac­cording to Monastichon Angli­canum.

XIX

King John gave the Citizens of fo. 74. London liberty to alter their Mayor and Sherifs every year, which before continued during life.—And after saies —To this time the City had bin 75. govern'd by two Bailifs—and at their sute King John granted them a May­or and two Sherifs to be yearly cho­sen 9 daies before Michaelmas.

This is a contradiction in it self, [Page 39] but a greater to the truth of Hi­story; For 'twas King Rich. the first, who by his Charter Anno 1189, changed the Bailifs of Lon­don into a Mayor and Sherifs.

XX

The title of a Chapter, viz. Of f. 91. a King Henry the 3 ds Personage and Conditions, with two lines of the subject matter, are wholy omitted, The Chapter beginning confusedly thus —of his eye-lids hanging down—an unpardonable fault in the Prin­ter.

XXI

Leolyn Prince of Wales surprizes f. 95. b the Castles of Flint and Rutland—

This makes some Readers won­der, How that Prince should [Page 40] march from Flint to Rutland­shire; when as that Castles name in Welch is Ruddlan, in our Re­cords Rotholan and Rodolan and is seated in Flintshire.

XXII

Edward the 1. (in his 17 th year) f. 100. a Fineà all his Iudges for corruption; S r Raph Higham, cheif Iustice of the higher Bench, in 7000 Marks; S r John Loveton, Iustice of the lower Bench in 3000 Marks &c.

These were S r Raph de Hengham and S r Iohn Lovetot. And where does our Author find those Courts ever called the Higher Bench and Lower Bench; but Bancus Regis or Aula Regis, and Bancus Communis.

XXIII

In the 12 th year of Edward the 1▪ in fol. 101. a the Quindenes of S t Michael, the Iu­stices Itinerants began to go their ge­neral Circuit.

This is a mistake; for Camden saies, King Henry the 2 d sent some Cam. Brit. f. 179. of his Judges and others year­ly into every County of the Realm, who where called Iu­stiees Itinerant and commonly Iustices in Eyre; which is con­firmed by M r Dugdale, who In O­rig. Juri. dic. names certain Iustices Itinerant, that were sent into Kent, Mid­dlesexs, Berks &c. Anno 16 Hen. 2.

XXIV.

He places the degrading and exe­cution [...]. 115 a. of S r Andrew Harkley, Earle of Carlisle, in the year, 1321.

Which S r Edward Coke in his In­stitutes saies was in Hillary Terme 18 Edward 2 d four years after. And our Author omits a memo­rable part of the story, That Cam. writes his name Harcla. and that more truly. when Judgment was pronounced against S r Andrew, his sword bro­ken over his head, and his spurs hewn of his heeles, S r Anthony Lucy the Judge said to him, An­drew, now art thou no Knight but a Knave.

XXV.

In Edward the 2 ds time, digging the foundation of a work about Pauls, f. 117 b were found more then one hundred heads of Oxen and Kine; which con­firmed [Page 43] the opinion, That of old time it had bin the Temple of Jupiter, and that there was the Sacrifice of Beasts.—

S t Pauls Church had of old been the Temple of Diana; For See Cam. Brit. f. 426 in Doctors Commons, (anciently an appurtenant to that Temple) there was a Chamber, which re­tained the name of Diana's Cham­ber, even til the late dreadful Conflagration. And our ancient Historians write of Tauropolia, Beef-head Sacrifices, which were immolated to Diana in that Temple.

XXVI

The Book called Domus Dei— ib. which should be Domesday, (liber judiciarius) as the learned Spelman asserts, with good reason.

XXVII

King Edward 2 d was buried with­out any funeral Pomp in the Mona­stery f. 118 b. of S t Peter at Glocester, by the Benedictine Friers.

Monks he would have said; For there never were any Benedictin Friers.

XXVIII.

Our Author tels us That John Sconer, Iustice of the Bench, among f. 122. b. others, was committed to Prison by Edward 3. sub A o 1339.

This was Iohn Stonore, who was constituted Iusticiarius ad Pat. 1. 1. 14 Ed. m. 15. Placita coram Rege, 16 Oct 14. Edward 2 d and was made cheif Justice by Edw 3 d Sept. 3. A o 1330. He lyeth buried in the Abby Church of Dorchester in Com. Oxon. and hath a Monument over [Page 45] him with his effigies in its robes cut in stone. He was one of the Ancestors of the Stonors of Stonor in the same County.

XXIX.

Speaking of David King of Scots, f. 123 b. being with an Army in the Province of Durham, he says, from thence he passed to the Castle of Salisbury.—

He should have said to the Castle of Werk, then belonging to William Montacute, Earle of Salisbury, and now the Lord Grey of VVerk.

XXX.

The next year after all the goods f. 131 b. of 3. Orders of Monks, Lombards, Cluniacs, and Cistercians, were seized into the Kings hands—

[Page 46] These Lombards were an Uto­pian Order of Monks, which all the diligence of the most industri­ous Dugdale could never discover.

XXXI.

Richard Aungervil, Bishop of f. 137 b. Durham, and Lord Chanceler of England.

Our Records call him Richard de Bury, and say, he was both Lord Chanceler, and Lord Trea­surer of England about the year 1333.

XXXII.

S r John Dimmock, for his Man­nor f. 140 a of Scribolvy claims the Office of the Kings Champion—And in the Index 'tis, the Mannor of Scrive­ling.

[Page 47] And neither true; for tis the mannor of Scrivels by in the Coun­ty of Line. To which the Office of the Kings Champion, has bin appurtenant ever since the Coro­nation of K. Ric. 2.

XXXIII.

About this time S r John Annesley Knight accused Tho: Katrington f. 142 a. Anno 1382 Esq, for betraying the Fortress of S t Saviour to the French, which Ka­trington denying, a solemn Combat is permitted between them, wherein through the justness of his cause the Knight prevailed, and Katrington the day after the combat dyed; Fabian says he was drawn to Tiburn, and there hang'd for his false accusation.

Whereas tis plain, that Annesley was the accuser; and so the Story is nonsensical.

XXXIV —till this time (viz. Rich. 2 d) women used to ride a stride as men f. 157 b▪ doe—

This I conceave to be unwar­rantable; For I have seen in S r Iohn Cottons famous Library a deed of the Lady Iohanna de Stuttevile made in Henry 3 d time, with a fair Seal, wheron the Lady is sculped sitting sidewaies on horse­back, with her shield or Coat of armes in her hand.

XXXV

—he says, New-College in Ox­ford f. 168 a An. 1379 was built where Noetus College stood—

Which should be S t Neots hall; [Page 49] built by K. Alfred at St Neots in­treaty, if M r Fox may be cre­dited.

XXXVI.

In the sixth year of Henry the 4th, f. 168. b the King call'd a Parliament at Co­ventry, and sent Process to the Sherifs, that they should choose no Knights nor Burgesses that had any knowledg in the Lawes of the Realm, by reason whereof it was called the Laymens Parlia­ment.

This is repeated three times in less then two leaves.

And shortly after another Parlia­ment Ibid. was called, and named the Un­learned Parliament, either for the unlearneáness of their persons, or for their malice to learned men.

This which our Author divides [Page 50] into two Parliaments, was but one and the same, improperly by him called The Laymens Parliament: which Walsingham and the Parlia­ment Rols of 6. Hen. 4. call Par­liamentum Indoctorum, by reason the Lawyers were excluded.

XXXVII.

That Queen Katharine (wife to fol. 175. b Anno 1421. Henry 5th.) was Crowned at VVest­minster upon St Mathews day the 4th of February.—and so I find it in for­mer Impressions.

Every Almanac would have told him, that neither is St Mathews day in February, nor St Mathias on the 4th, but the 24th.

XXXVIII.

Our Author tels us of an unkind­ness fol. 184. b [Page 51] which brake out between the Duke of Bedford Regent of France, and the Duke of Burgoigne. A time and place (saies he) was appointed for them to meet, to compound some dif­ferences; The place agreed upon was S t Omers, a Town in Burgoigne: when the time came they stood upon this nice point, Which of them should first come to the place, as thinking he that did so, should thereby acknow­ledge himself to be the meaner per­son. The Duke of Richmond thought he had no reason to doe it, seeing he was Regent of France, and therefore superior to any subject in the King­dome. And the Duke of Burgoigne thought he had no reason to do it, see­ing it was to be done in his own Do­minions, where he was himself the Soveraigne Lord. Upon this nice point they parted without meeting—This Duke of Bedford on the 14 th of [Page 52] Sept. 1435. ended his life at Paris —and was buried in our Ladies Church at Roan, where as the nobi­lity of Normandy much repined, who would have had their own Territory honord with his Sepulchre &c.

Here are not a few mistakes. 1. S t Omers is in Artois, and so no part of Burgoigne 2. He varies the Duke of Bedfords name into Duke of Richmond, and in the same page saies he was Earle of Richmond, which confounds an unknowing Reader, For though Earle (not Duke) of Richmond were one of his many Titles, yet Bedford was the first and most known. Suppose we had occa­sion to mention the present Duke of Buckingham, and in the same Paragraph should say the Earle of Coventry; This would seem [Page 53] absurd, though it be also one of his Titles, but not the principal, & that by which he is usually sty­led. 3. They parted without meeting,—is an incongruous expression, but let it pass. 4. He dyed not on the 14 th but 13 th of Sept. as appears by this his Epitath, yet to be seen in Nostredame Church at Roan.

Cy gist feu de noble memoire haut & puissant, Prince Iean en son vivant Regent du Royaume de France, Duc de Bethfort; Pour lequel est fondè un Messe estre par chacun iour perpetuelle­ment celebre en cest Autel par le College des Clementines inconti­nent apres Prime. Et trespassa le 13 Septembre 1435. Au quel 13 iour Semblablement est fondè pour [Page 54] luy un Obit en cest Esglise. Dieu face pardon à son Ame.

5. That He was buried in our Ladyes Church at Roan (the cheif City of Normandy) yet the Nobility of Normandy repind at it, because not buried in their Territory, seems a contradi­ction.

XXXIX

Among men of note in Hen. 6. time, Our Author puts down Peter f. 201. a. Clerk, a Student in Oxford—and within eight lynes Peter Paine, an earnest professor of Wicklifs Doctrine &c.

This was one and the same per­son, whose name we find written Peter Clerk, alias Paine.

XL

Among men of note in Edward f. 218. b. the 4 th time our Author puts down Julian Bemes; a Gentleman (saies he) of excellent gifts, who wrote certain Treatises of Hawking and Hunting &c.

A wonderful Conversion. This was a woman and her name Juli­ana Barnes; her works are yet extant.

XLI

He says, Richard Fox (A o 1485) f. 237 b. was made Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal, and Bishop of Winchester—and so far he is in the right; But in the very next page, he says —Richard Fox, lately made Bishop of [Page 56] Exeter. Besides he mistimes it; For Richard Fox was not made Bishop of Winchestter til the year 1502. according to D r Godwyn's History of Bishops.

XLII

And upon the matter was to be disloyal to King Henry; but for f. 242. b. want of better: and withall it strook upon a string, which,—

Here we have not tactus Phy­sicus, neither Grammer nor sence.

XLIII

This Edward Bohun, Duke of f. 267. Anno 1520. Buckingham, was the last High Con­stable of England, the greatest place next the High Steward in the King­dom.

[Page 57] Here are as many errors as lines; This Edward Bohun should be Edward Stafford; the Bohuns were Earles of Essex and Here­ford, and Humfry the last Eale of that family dyed Anno 1371. ac­cording to D r Heylin. 2. He had several High Constables since, as the Earle of Lindsey, for the in­tended Trial between the Lord Ree and Ramsey; the Earle of Northumberland at the Corona­tion of his Majesty that now is &c. But he might have said and truely, that this Edward Duke of Buckingham was the last Heredi­tary High Constable of England, and that he was decended from an heir female of Bohun. 3. The Lord High Constables place is before the Lord High Steward.

XLIV

That S t Austin gave credit to ma­ny f. 282. b. lying Miracles—

Tis boldly said; for fo. 5. a. he says, Ethelbert was the first Sax­on Christian King of this Island, converted by Austin the Monk &c. Why does he call him St Austin since he thinks he had so weak a Judgment, or so little Faith, as not to discern Miracles from lyes. And we read in Do­ctor Fullers Church History fo: 57 and 68. of the Miracles done by f. 140. St Austin. And even Milton says King Ethelbert was converted by Miracles. Besides our Author imposes upon our beleif divers later Miracles, one in particuler f. 310. b. relating to the body of one Ar­den [Page 59] murderd in Kent in Edward sixt's time,

XLV

But we shal do him (Henry 8.) f. 299. a. extreme wrong to think that all the bloud shed in his time, was of his shedding; they were the Bishops that were the Draco to make the bloudy Lawes, the Bishops that were the Phalaris to put them in execution.

It seems our Author was no friend to the Bishops; else he might have remembred that that King did not spare even the Bi­shops themselves, as Rochester and others; and needed no o­ther incentives to severity, then his own Nature.

XLVI

The Duke of Somerset at the Bat­tle of Muscleborough made three f. 302. a. Bannerets, which is a dignity a­bove a Knight and next to a Ba­ron, and these were the last that from that time to this did ever receave this dignity.

Baneret is not properly a dig­nity above a Knight but an ad­dition of honor to a Knight, nor is it next in place to a Baron; since Knights of the Garter in those times did, and Baronets in these do precede them, that is, such Banerets as these, made by a subject, but such Banerets, as are made sub vexillis regijs in exercitu regali, do take place of all Baronets, according to [Page 61] the decree of King Iames. And 10 & 14. Jac. in contradiction to the last part, The Continuator says, S r Iohn Smith, for rescuing the Kings Standard Royal at the Battle of fo. 543. a Edgehill, was made a Baneret; when as he was onely a Knight Bachiler, dub'd Honorably in the feild, and lyes buried in Christs Church Cathedral at Oxford., where there was a Monnument lately laid over his body by one of his Relations.

XLVII

Our Author, speaking of a mutinous f. 303. a. Commotion at Exeter in Devonshire, says —All this while, the Lord Russel Lord Privy Seal, who had bin sent down to suppress the Commotion, lay at Huntington, expecting more forces—

[Page 62] As if Huntington were the rea­dy rode from London to Exe­ter. Perhaps he intended Hon­nyton.

XLVIII

S r Thomas was instituted Lord of St Johns of Hierusalem— f. 320. b.

He leaves us to ghess, who this S r Thomas was and to beleeve he intended to say Lord Prior of St Johns—

XLIX

King Edw. 3. made Kerry (in f. 374. b. Ireland) a County Palatine and gran­ted to the Earles of Desmond all Royol libertyes, excepting Wreck by fire, Forestall and Treasure trove.

[Page 63] This Wreck by fire, is a pret­ty word; yet Wreck by water had bin better. But there is no­thing of Wreck in the Case; if you wil beleeve Camden, who saies, Brit. tit. Coun­ty of Kerry That King granted to the Earle all Regal Liberties, except four Pleas, namely of Burning, Rape, Forstal and Treasure trouve.—

L

About this time Henry Fitz f. 380. a. Alan Earle of Arundel dyed, in whom the Sirname of a most noble family ended, which had flouri­shed in this Honor for above 300. years, from Richard Fitzalan, who being descended from the Abba­nets (ancient Earles of Arun­del and Sussex in the reign of King Edward 1.) obtained the title of [Page 64] Earle, by reason of the possession of Arundel Castle, without Creation. He had 3 daughters by his wife Kathe­rine, Daughter to Thomas Grey Marques Dorset, all whom he out li­ved; Henry a young man of great hope who dyed at Brussels, Jean Wife to the Lord Lumley, and Ma­ry, who being married to Thomas Howard Duke of Norfolk, brought forth Philip in her right, Earle of Arundel.

Here the Albanets is mistaken for Albeneys or D'aubeneys; and the reign of Edward the 1. for Henry 1. And when he comes to particularize the 3. Daugh­ters of Richard Fitzalan, he names Henry, a young man —Joan and Mary—Of which thus Camden.

[Page 65] S r John Fitz Alan, Lord of Clun Cam. Brit. f. 309- who having married one of the sisters and heyrs of Hugh de Albeney, fifth Earle of Arundel and Sussex his great Grandson Richard (by reason of his possession of the Castle of Arundel) was by Parl. adjudged to be E. of Arundel. 11 Hen. 6.

LI

—Soon after him dyed S r John Crofts, who had don good service in f. 400. a. Scotland in Edw: the Sixths time.

This was S r James Croft of Croft Castle in Herefordshire, great Grandfather to Herbert Croft at present Lord Bishop of Here­ford; a Family of very ancient ex­traction, and this S r James was by Q. Eliz. made Governor of Ber­wic, and soon after Comptroller of her House.

LII.

19 February 1594 Henry Prince of Scotland was born, to whom the f. 403 a. [Page 66] Queen was Godmother, and sent Ro­bert Earle of Sussex for her Deputy—

—Which should be Robert Earl of Essex.

LIII

It was now the year 1596 (says our f. 406. b. Author) when Thomas Arundell of Warder returned into England from the war in Hungary against the Turk, whom, for his good service don there, the Emperor by his Let­ters Patents, had created Earle of the sacred Empire &c. And after­ward he says, King James made f. 428. b. Thomas Arundell of Devonshire, Lord Arundell of Warder.

This to a common Reader will seem to be two severall Thomas Arundells; For VVarder is in Wiltshire, and his principall Seat, and to Devonshire he had no re­lation. Besides our Author makes [Page 67] not that honorable mention of a Person of that singular valor and Desert; who had gain'd so much honor abroad to the English Na­tion, as he justly deserv'd; For among other examples of his Gallantry, he threw down with his own hand, the Turkish stan­dard at the seige of Strigomium in Hungary (now called Gran) and encourag'd his Ensign Rook Church to advance the Christian Colors in its place. Which, with much more in his due praise, will best appear by Quen Elizabeths commendatory Letters of him to the Emperor Rudolphus; and his Imperial Majesties Letters Patent of Creation; a true Co­py of the first, and an abstract of the other (which is vere long) are here exhibited, and deserve a place in the best of English Croni­cles.

Elizabetha, Dei gratiâ Angliae, Franciae, et Hiberniae Regina, Fidei De­fensor, &c.
Serenissimo & Potentissimo Principi ac Domino Rudolpho, divinâ favente Clementiâ Romanorum Impe­ratori semper Augusto, Fratri, Con­sanguineo & amico nostro charissimo, Salutem & rerum prosperarum foeli­cissima incrementa.
Serenissimè Prin­ceps,

Frater & Consanguinee noster charissime, Is, qui has perfert, Tho­mas Arundelius, Consanguineus no­ster perdilectus, Adolescens in melio­ribus liter is probe institutus, ad re­rum usum colligendum, & nobilium Provinciarum mores perdiscendos, in Germaniam hoc tempore, alias (que) non­nullas Europae regiones proficiscitur. Ideo (que) suppliciter à nobis discedens petiit, ut se Imperatoriae tuae Majestati literis nostris commendaremus. Quod nos pro nostra in optimae spei Adole­scentem, [Page 69] & nobis sanguinis propinqui­tate conjunctum charitate fecimus per­libentèr; orantes summoperè Majesta­tem tuam, ut Thomam hunc non solùm in Imperio clementèr protegas, & principali favore juves, verùm etiam literis (si Italiam, Regnúmve Neo­politanum petere volet) de mulieri notâ commendare velis. Hoc ut nobis pergratum erit, sic nos vicissim Impe­ratoriam tuam Majestatem sororiis omnibus officiis demereri studebimus: Quam Deus Opt. Max. in omni flo­rente foelicitate diutissimè conservet.

Dat. ex Palatio nostro VVestmonaste­rii die decimo Februarii. Anno Do­mini M.D.LXXIX o. Regni verò no­stri vicesimo secundo.
Vestrae Ser tis bona soror & Consanguinea ELIZABETH R.

[Page 70] Rudolphus secundus Divina fa­vente clementia Electus Romanorum Imperator semper Augustus &c. Il­lustri sincerè nobis dilecto Thomae Arundelio nostro, & sacri Romani Imperii Comiti gratiam nostram Caesaream & omne bonum.

Considerantes ita (que) perantiquam & illustrem generis tui originem, in inclito Angliae Regno ex stemmate Regio q [...]emadmodum antehac ex Se­renissimae Principis & Dominae Eli­zabethae Reginae Anglia, Franciae, & Hibereiae, sororis & consanguineae no­strae clarissimae literis ac testimonia accepimus, due is: insignes etiam vir­tutes, quibus illustre genus tuum magis ac magis domi feris (que) illustras; at liberalibus primum disciplinis pectus imbueris; peregrinas provincias adi­eris; multorum mores, multorum & urbes videris, magnum rerum usum acquisieris, ut deni (que) tandem in hoc [Page 71] sacro, quod contra communem Chri­stiani nominis Hostem Turcam geri­mus, bello, raro ac singulari zelo exci­tus tam longinquis ac remotis ex parti­bus in Hungariam propriis stipendiis nobis militatum veneris, te (que) in apertis praeliis & in Civitatum & Castrorum oppugnationibus ita fortitèr ac strenuè tegesseris, ut omnibus Nationibus ad­mirationi Nobis (que) & a Serenissimo Principe Archiduce Mathia Fratre nostro charissimo, & a primariis Exer­citus nostri Fraefectis majorem in mo­dum commendatus fueris, insigni hoc inter alia fortitudinis exemplo specta­to, quod in expugnatione oppidi ag­natici juxta Strigonium vexillum Turcis tua manu eripueris, & in principiis tempore pugnae te spectan­dum praebueris &c. Motu itaque proprio &c. te supradictum Thomam Arundelium, qui jam antè Comitum consanguin itatem à Majoribus accep­tam [Page 72] in Anglia obtines, omnesque & singulos liberos, haeredes poste­ros, & descendentes tuos legitimos natos utrius (que) sexus, aeterna (que) serie nascituros, etiam veros Sacri Romani Imperii Comites & Comitissas crea­vimus, fecimus, & nominavimus, &c.

Datum in Arce nostra Regia Pragae die 14. mensis Dec. An. Dom. 1595.
RUDOLPHUS.

At the bottom of the Patent are found these words: ‘ Erectio in Comitem Imperii pro Thomâ Arundelio.’

LIV.

—And two Fosters, brothers of the Earle of Kildare, whose death— f. 408. b.

How could these Fosters be brothers to the Earle of Kildare, [Page 73] whose name was Fitz-Girald. But we must lay the fault on the Printer, and guess he intended to say Foster brothers.

LV.

—In the Town of Ossestry in Wales f. 419. b. 200 houses consumed with fire—

By this he intends Oswestre or Oswaldstre in Shropshire; It taking Cam. Brit. f. 597. name from Saint Oswald, King of the Northumbers;

LVI.

In the first year of King Iames, in f. 44 [...]: b. a Parliament then holden, it was enacted, That neither Archbishop nor Bishop should alienate, grant or de­mise, or in any sort convey, no not to the King himself any of their Houses, lands, tenements, or heredi­taments, being percels of the posses­sion [Page 74] of his Archbishopric or Bishop­ric.

By this Act of Parliament (as it is here misrecited) the un­knowing Reader wil judge that neither Archbishop nor Bishop has power to demise or let Lea­ses of any of their lands &c. to any person whatsoever. Where­as this Act of 1 Iac. 3. recites that of 18. Eliz. whereby they are enabled to demise or let Lea­ses for XXI years or 3 lives, and disable them onely from aliena­ting, giving, granting, or demi­sing any of their Mannors, lands &c. to the King, his heirs or Successors,

LVII.

Under the title of Works of Piety f. 443. b. [Page 75] our Author tels us that, VVhere K. James at his coming found onely four Judges in the Courts of Law at VVestminster he added a fifth with the like allowance as the former had.

By this expression he would insinuate as if there never had bin but 4 Iudges in each Court; Whereas our Records testify, that both in Edward the thirds, Hen. See O­rig. ju­ridic. in the Cron. Series! 6. and Edwards the 4 th time, there were usually five Judges, sometimes 6. or 7. in the Court of Common Pleas.

LVIII

In the year 1609, so great a Frost, as f. 445. a. much herbage in gardens were de­stroyd, especially Artichokes and Rosemary.

This had been fitter for an Al­manac [Page 76] then a Cronicle; since winter scapes us without such la­mentable disasters.

LVIII.

The Isles of Bermudas are above f. 448. a. three thousand three hundred Leagues distant from England.

This out-goes Truth full two thirds, it being but 930 Leagues or there abouts.

ANIMADVERSIONS on the Continuation.

LIX.

THat the Lords Iustices in Ire­land f. 473. a. delivering some Priests and Friars into the hands of Pursuivants, seized their Houses of Religion into the Kings hands—two Priests hang'd themselves at the apprehension of this (as they then call'd it) persecu­tion.

This the Continuator places in the year 1631. and probably many persons are yet alive who might remember it, had it been a truth. But I can meet with none [Page 78] that own it for such; Therefore it must at best pass as apocry­phal.

LX.

—This year (1634) Generall All­dringer f. 474. b. was slain at Lansbut, and the whole Army totaly routed by the King of Hungary and the Cardi­nal Infaule at the Battle of Norling­ton.

This General Aldringer was not slain at Lansbut but neer Lan­shut, and before the Battle of Nortlinghen (not Norlington) which was 6 Sept. 1634. where the King of Hungary and Car­dinal Infante (not Infaule) were victors.

LXI

—The French, by their insolencies f. 475. a. at Diet and Tellemont, inflamed and encouraged the peoples hearts a­gainst them—

Here Diet, being false written for Diest and the Character not changed, a common Reader would think he meant the French were insolent at their meat—but Di­est and Tellemont are two Townes in lower Germany.

LXII

Our Continuator tels us that in f. 532. a. the year 1640, the Parliament passed a Pole Bill, therein the whole King­dome was assessed, and among others, Knights Bachilers at 201, Esquires [Page 80] at 10 l and every Gentleman dispen­ding 100 l Per An. 15 l—

Which last is doubtlesse a mi­stake, though the Act is not Prin­ted among our Statutes; for 'twere very unreasonable a Gen­tleman of 110 l a year should pay more then an Esquire, who sel­dome has lesse that 500 l Per An.

LXIII.

The Religion of the Scots is foun­ded f. 532. b. on more pious Principles then that of the Irish.

I hope our Continuator does not think it was any branch of their pious Principles to sell their own native King. Besides he says in the very next page, It was generally said, the late In­surection (we must not call it Rebel­lion) [Page 81] in Scotland gave the first encouragement to that in Ireland, & the pretences were many of them the same, namely Liberty of Con­science.

LXIV

The King, having set up his Stan­dard f. 540. b. at Nottingham, moved on slowly with those forces he had through Darby shire, Staffordshire, Leicester­shire and Nottinghamshire, and so on to Shrewsbury.

Our Continuator it seems is but meanly skild in the Geography of his owne Country; For, if he were to go from the Royal Ex­change to VVestminster, he might in like order go to Ludgate, Long­lane Cateaten street, Threadnedle street and so on to Westminster.

LXV.

He tells us of the surrendry of f. 567. a. Oxford, in pursuance of a Trinity, wherein, among other Commissio­ners for the beseiged, he names Colonel Gosvell and Thomas Chrisly, Esquier—

Two strange names; mista­ken I beleeve, for Colonel Gos­nel or Gosnold, and Thomas Chich­ley.

LXVI.

—Cromwel and Ireton (who yet wish'd well to the King) did what they f. 574. b. could to oppose—

I think few but the Continua­tor himself do beleeve they ever wish'd well to Him, I'm sure we [Page 83] could never hear or see any visi­ble tokens of it.

LXVII.

Our Continuator puts down a­mong f. 593. a. those ever to be detested Jud­ges of King Charles the first of bles­sed memory, Thomas Adams, Al­derman of London.

Which is an unpardonable in­jury to the vertue and loyalty of that worthy person, who suffe­red both imprisonment and se­questration for his fidelity to his Soveraign; And when his me­mory should deservedly live with honour it is most injuriously blacken'd with this cloud of in­famy.

LXVIII

Among men of Note in King Charles the firsts time, As some are deservedly nominated, why are o­thers of at leastequal desert omitted? such were

  • Spencer Earle of Northampton.
    f. 603. b.
  • The Earl of Litchfeild and his two brothers.
  • The Lord Francis Villier.
  • S r John Smith, who rescued the Standard royal.
  • Col: Charles Cavendish, brother to the Earl of Devonshire.
  • Col: Thomas Howard, two of them.
  • [Page 85] S r John Digby—
  • S r Henry Lingein &c.

Its strange also the Continua­should forget to name S r Bevil Greenvile Elder Brother to S r Richard, a Person of Known and Eminent Loyalty and who did gallantly in His Majesties ser­vice.

LXIX.

The Earl of Eglington, the Father of the Lord Mountgomery, with one f. 622. b. l. ult. of his brothers, were taken at Dun­barton by one Captain Crook of Col: Berrys—

[Page 86] And so tis left imperfect, and a new Section followes.

LXX.

Speaking of the Battle of Worce­ster f. 626. b. (3. Sept. 1651) and the Rebels entring and plundering that City; he says, There was not an inhabitant in Worcester; friend or foe, left worth a Shilling of what they had in the Town.—

Which is strangely hyperbolical and beyond all likelyhood of truth, though the Conquerors were never so rapacious & severe.

LXXI

At Newport in the pursuit, there ibid. were taken (among others) the now Earle of Shrewsbury &c.

[Page 87] Here our Continuator is again mistaken; For the Earle of Shrews­bury was not taken at Newport nor was at all there, but from Boscobel escaped to his house at Longport in Shropshire, where the Rebels searched narrowly for him, but missed him, and from thence he made a shift to passe o­ver Sea.

LXXII.

It was resolv'd by my Lord of Der­by, f 627. a. that they should make what speed they could and recover a place cal­led White Ladyes before morning—

My Lord of Derby advis'd the King first to goe to Boscobel, where himself had been concea­led after the Battle of VViggen; but M r Charles Giffard (the Kings [Page 88] chief guide in that sad night) prevail'd to conduct Him first to VVhite Ladyes.

LXXIII

His Majesty, being at M r Woolfs Madeley, understood, that the f 627. b. t passes over the water and the river Wye were so guarded, that it was unseasonable for him to adventure in­to Wales—

Here our Continuator is out a­gain in his Geographics, For there is no part of the river Wye (or Wey) within 24 myles of Made­ley, but Severn runs neer it, which was the River His Majesty designed to passe over.

LXXIV.

That, his Majesty by Ladders ibid. ascended into the top of that most cele­brated Oake—

There were no Ladders in the Case, for the King aescnded the Oake, by the help of Col: Carlos and two of the Pendrels, and his own agility.

LXXV

George Yates, for Francis Yates Ibid., thats more venial—

So is—Col: Windhams house at Trent in Dorsetshire, for Somerset­shire—

LXXVI.

Having finish'd (though imperfect­ly) the relation of his Majesties mi­raculous f. 628. b.. Escape from Worcester he concludes with no lesse then 52. persons being privy thereto.

I have nothing to object against the number, beleeving it could not be lesse; but doubtlesse there were many which did act Gallantly in that honorable and loyal undertaking which he hath not mentioned, whose loyalty ought to have its due.

LXXVI.

This year (1652) dyed the Lady f. 635. a. [Page 91] Elianor Davys who was the Fifth Daughter of the Lord George Aud­ley, Earle of Castlehaven, and was married to S r John Davys, the Kings first Serjeant at Law in En­gland &c.

Our Continuator endeavors by many Encomiums of this Lady, to raise her to the reputation of a Prophetess; when as she was generally reputed little better then a mad Woman, and was actually in Bethlem Hospital; by order (if I mistake not of King See Hey­lins life of Archb Laud. Charles the first) For I remember, whilst she was yet living, this Anagram pass'd of her, and is printed in Camdens Remains.

Dame Elianor Davis.
Never so mad a Lady.

[Page 92] Then he mistakes her Fathers name, For we read not of any Au­dley to be Earle of Castlehaven, but Touchet, at least he should have said George Lord Audley. And, by the Kings first Serjeant at Law in England, an unwary Reader wil possibly misunder­stand he was the first Serjeant at Law, that any King of England ever had; whereas most men know they are of great antiquity. We read, indeed that, S r Iohn Anne. 1606. Davis fut primier Serjeant Del Roy, (K. James) where primi­er ought to be understood, as el­dest or principal.

LXXVIII.

An Army having been sent under f. 644 a. the Marquesse of Piaenella and the Earle of Quince, Commander of the [Page 93] French forces in Italy, by Charles Emanuel Duke of Savoy against his Protestant subjects in the valleys of Peidmont, upon occasion of some high displeasure taken against them, and the souldiers left to their own unbridled licence, having committed many out­rages and massacres upon the poor mi­serable people; Cromwel taking this opertunity—appointed a solemne day of humiliation, and caused a large contribution to be gather'd for them throughout the Nation, &c.

Here the Continuator describes the Duke of Savoys punishment of his subjects, but does not expresse their crime; a course that may condemn all the Tribunals in the world of barbarousness, and in­justice. About the time that M r Stouppe (Agent for these Piedmon­tois) came hither to addresse him­self [Page 94] to Cromwel in their behalf, which was in the year 1655, There was published in London, A faith­full Account of the late commotions in the valleys of Piedmont—wherein we read, That the Duke of Savoy had given his Protestant subjects an absolute toleration of Religion; which grace they so much abused, that they reviled the Catholic, especially their Masse and religious people, as at Tour they dressed an Asse in a Monks habit, and afterwards in a rage fell furiously upon two Priests at Fenil in the lower vale of Lucerne, and slew them at the Altar, as they were saying Masse. This with much more of their tu­multuous carriage, and the Dukes lenity first, and then Justice, to­wards them, you may read at large in that printed paper, which [Page 95] seems, in a great measure, to justi­fie the Dukes proceedings in that affair. He omits the sum that was collected here upon that account, which was

38097 l—7 s—3 d

20233—17—0 paid out by Bils of Exch.

17863—10—3 remaining in ready mony at the death of O­liver.

LXXIX.

The Continuator speaks of a Plot f. 646. b. against Olivers person, the crimi­nals said to be of this Plot were Miles Sindercom, a cashierd and dissatis­fyd Army man, Toop, one of Crom­wels lifeguard, Cecil and Bois, the last of whom a Priest belonging to Don Alonso de Cardenas (once Lei­gir Embassador here from Spain) [Page 96] and by him instructed as it was gi­ven out, to hire and set those other his Agents a work, comes off him­self with a non est inventus, &c.

That Embassador (as I am credibly informed) had never a­ny such Priest, as Boys, belon­ging to him; Therefore that part of the Story must passe as a fiction, the rest of it may be true, for ought I know.

LXXIX.

The next that were try'd by the high f. 651. b. Court of Iustice, were M r Robert Woodcock, Captain Henry Mallo­ry, and S r Humfrey Bennet—

The first was M r Thomas Wood­cock, since Deservedly Knight­ted by his Majesty, for his eminent service and fidelity to Him.

LXXX.

Cromwell in all hast sends for f. 651. b. the Lord Mayor (Tichburn was then the man) and Aldermen—and this was in the year 1658. And in the Catalogue of Mayors and Sherifs at the end, Robert Tichburn is placed Mayor in the year 1656.

Which last is the truth; for in 1658 Ireton was Mayor.

Now come we to the year 1659▪ f. 657. which takes up neer thirty leaves of paper, and conteins more words, though lesse substance, than the sea­ven Kings Reigns next after the Cō ­quest, of which the two first Henryes Reigned 70. years. 'Tis true, that year comprehends several great Acti­ons, [Page 98] and in particular that greatest, most happy, and most memorable, the restoring His sacred Majesty to His Crown and Dignity, by the faithfull endeavours of the never­enough honoured General Monk, af­ter deservedly created Duke of Al­bemarle, with the concurrence and assistance of many loyall subjects; But that the relation of this Noble design, and atchievment should be stuffed with so many perticular con­ferences, placing and displacing petty Officers, Letters, Messages, and De­bates of private persons, seems in most mens judgments very superflu­ous, and not agreeable to the nature of a Chronicle, which requires a more compendious method, and properly admits of nothing common and tri­vial. I shall endeavour (says a late ingenious Historian) with plain and Mil­ton f. 3. lightsom brevity, to relate well and [Page 99] orderly things worth the noting, so as may best instruct and benefit them that read. For allowing that prolix way of Chronologizing, if all the memo­rable actions since the Conquest (and there were many such) had been thus perticularly expatiated, 'tis more then ptobable the Book would have bulk'd it self into three greater volums then Foxes Martyrs, and burn'd the edge of most Readers patience in its perusal.

LXXXI.

Speaking of the Lords in Parlia­ment f. 730. a. proclaiming his Majesty in the Palace yard, 1660, he adds M r Bish, one of the Heralds, and Mr Rily that officiated as King at Armes—

By this you would Judge M r [Page 100] Bysshe (not Bish) to be som smal pursuivant at Armes; who was in those times Garter, prin­cipal King at Armes, and both then and since a member of the house of Commons, a person of worth and since Knighted by the name of S r Edward Bysshe, and M r Rily was but Norroy and much his inferior, both in quality and literature.

LXXXII.

In the 4 th Edition our Continuator f. 807. says, Knights of the Bath are never made but at a Coronation; Now he has better bethought himselfe and says, Likewise, in order to their at­tendance f. 758. a. upon this grand solemnity (the Coronation) there were crea­ted 68 Knights of the Holy Trinity called Knights of the Bath; they be­ing [Page 101] a Society of Knights never made but at a creation of a Prince of Wales or Duke of York.

Our Continuator has given these Knights of the Bath a new title; For they were never til now cal­led Knights of the Holy Trinity. And he might have found in M r Seldens Titles of Honor, and Cam­dens Brit. f. 172. Britannia; That Knights of the Bath have also been made at Royal Marriages, Christning, or Knighting the Prince, or other of the Kings Sons, and such like occasions.

Note likewise, that the Founda­tions of the Colleges of the the Uni­versities, especially of Oxford, are for the most part mistaken either in the point of time or names of the Founders, Which I attempted not alwaies to rectify, both in that it [Page 102] cxceeded my skil, but cheifly be­cause the History of that Universi­ty, as I am informed, is now in the Presse, Which will cleer those mis­takes, with much certainty and sa­tisfaction, being perform'd by the hand of that Faithfull and most in­dustrious Searcher of Antiquities M r Anthony Wood of Merton College.

Nonsences, and false Syntax.

The last King was Oswald, after f. 6. b. whom —Egbert—

—being in a sort the fountain of f. 18. a those, which at this day we term the Common of Lawes.—

Nor he kept not his word—twice f. 34. b in the same page.

—such as one as in this Kings time f. 89. b brake out most loathsome.—

[Page 103] —He would come with power to f. 86. b aid the King, take order for guar­ding the Ports, which intend to hinder his landing; but finding.—

The Viscount Montacute mar­cheth f. 204. b. towards King Henry, and by the way encountreth the Lord Hun­gerford at Hegley Moor, but he, with Lord Basse, upon the charge ran away, leaving S r Raph Darcy alone with his own Regiment, who were valiantly fighting, dyed.

—To utter the impoverishing Of f. 83. a the Kingdome—

—And here they bind the King to f. 86. a lose to their loyal obedience, when­soever he infringed this Charter.

—But he, with Lord Basse, ran a­way— f. 204. b.

—A book of account of Empsons, f. 248. a. [Page 104] that had the Kings hand almost to every leaf by way of singing.

—He then left Q. Elizabeth see­ing she would not be his, to him­self—&c. f. 351 b.

But within two houres all these f. 431. q. clouds were slain and dispersed.—

—And five Companies of fire­locks, f. 569. a. for people they wanted not, a good pretence, that the people might be eased.—

Difference, for Deference; for­ward, for the Foreward of a Battle. Seemless Coat, for Seamlesse &c. with a number such like.

[Page 105]

A List of some of those Names of our ancient Nobility and Gentry of En­gland, which the Author and Continuator have strange­ly mangled and meta­morphosed.
For he writes
Sharnborn Sherborne.
Touchet Twitchet.
Abergevenny Abergain and A­bergainy.
Burnell Brunel & Burvel.
Chandois Chandowes.
Strangways Strangwish.
Fortescu Foskew.
Ayscoughe Ascue.
Huddleston Hurlston.
Frescshevile Fretswell.
Trockmorton Frogmorton.
Widdrington Widdington.
Wenman Wainmā & Waymās
Guldeford Gilford.
Tildesley Tiderlsley & Tilseley.
Bedingfeild Benefeild.
Sulyard or Sylyard Sulland.
Trelaune Trelanny.
Coningesby Conisby.
Elwes Yelvis.
Salwey Salloway.
Fanshaw Fanshall.
Walsh VVelsh.
Marshal Martiall.
Roos Rosse.
Monthermer or de Mounthemere.
Monte Hermerij  
Hobart Hubbard.
Perot Parret.
Trigory Triegury.
Wingfield VVinkefeild.

The names of some Lords and o­thers mentioned by our Author, which are of his own or his Prin­ters creation.

  • The Lord Dangledas.
  • The Lord Mawle.
  • William the Lord Aldenham.
  • The Lord Basse.
  • The Lord Stinton.
  • The Lord Winson.
  • The Lord Wandsor.
  • The Lord Brinningham.
  • The Lord Burvell.
  • The Lord Sudelly.
  • The Lord William Carnaby.
  • The Lord Carews—
  • S r John Meincle.
The family of Patternae in Lincoln­shire.
  • S r Rich: Pawle.
  • S r Tho: Trevon.
  • S r Will: Causey.
  • Golonel Mozen.
Garrisons and Towns in England, not heard of before.
  • [Page 108]The Garrisons of Leige and Dainton.
  • Brahan.
  • Belgran.
  • Nun Baton Abby—
  • Yorthbrook—
  • Dunston Castle.
  • Cakewish &c.
Names of Persons and places in Scotland mistaken.
  • The E. of Canworth for Carnwarth.
  • The E. of Agnus for Angus.
  • The L. Dunferling for Dumfermlin.
  • The L. Wimmes for VViemes.
Places.
  • Linlithew— for Lithquo or Linlithquo.
  • The C. of Candstraines for Candstreās
  • Tantallon Castle. for Timptallon.
The like in Ireland.
  • [Page 109]Adam Lofthouse Archbishop of Dublin—for Loftus.
  • The Lord Jinkillen for Ineskellen.
  • The L. Clanrickford for Clanrickard.
  • The L. Ballimote for Ballimore.
  • Mack Gilparick Baron of Ebrankle▪ for Gilpatricke.
  • Murrough Obrine for Murtogh Brian.
  • S r Walter Dungar. for Dungan. Mnivere Okely. &c.
Forrein names of Persons and pla­ces likewise mistaken.
  • Alex: Furnasse Prince of Parma.
  • The Prince of Austurgus.
  • The Duke of Andyn.
  • The Duke of Lunceburg.
  • The Duke of Guysne.
  • Pedraca delay Syerra.
Places
  • Biskey.
  • Mountpleasier.
  • [Page 110] Terwin.
  • Bullen.
  • Landersey.
  • Obignie.
  • Saint yon &c. with many such like.

The INDEX.

Neither is this of a more accurate composure, then the Book it self; For in once casting my eye superficially over it, I met with these Bulls and unpardonable faults.

  • The Bishop of Carlisles bold speech in battail of King Richard—
  • John Pole a Priest wrote the life of Sir Marborail a woman—Knighted by the Printer. In the Book it is St Walhoraile, an English woman—ne­ver I think reaá or heard of but in this Author.
  • Priests—not sufferd to execute de­vine Service.
  • [Page 111] Raph, Bishop of Salisbury, how from a poor Prince, he came to his greatness.
  • For Roger —a poor Priest.
    • Through voices thought to be begd by Cecil and others.
  • Religius Bishop of Dorchester.
  • Oward Bishop of Salisbury.
  • The Abby of St Petroius.
  • Hereford taken by Colonel Rich.
  • The fight at Aldern —I was desirous to see what fight this was, which I ne­ver heard of before, but could find no such thing in the place directed to; For, what through the misfolio's in the Book and the carelesness of the Index maker, 'tis odds you find not above 3 things of five which the Index pre­tends to point at.
FINIS.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.