I.

It was then in the year 1374 that Heresie began in England, by occasion of the Bishoprick of Winchester. John Wicliff, Parson of Enthlerod, in the Diocess of Lincoln, pretended to the said Bishoprick, and thought he had so well taken his measures, that it could not otherwise escape him, than by such an extraordinary accident as humane prudence could not foresee, pag. 11.] It might be rational to expect that a French Historian would have taken a particular care to inform himself about the Chronology of Edward the Thirds Reign; a Prince, whose acti­ons France above all Countrys has reason to remember: But Monsieur Varillas takes leave to be altogether ignorant of it, not doubting perhaps but he should meet with Gentlemen, [Page 4]and Readers that would not be so un­civil as to contradict the first word of an Author. But a plain Englishman, that has been taught to ask for Truth in History, and not to believe a thing, only because another has affirmed it, whatever may be the consequence, and though he is sure to be called the Rashest of all men, will however dare to tell him, that it was not in the year 1374. that Heresie began in England, &c. For first, John Wicliff had published his Opi­nions, and gained a fame by the year 1360. Dr. James, in Wicliffs life, af­ter the Apology. Secondly, he was never Parson of Enthlerod; nor is there any such Parish in the Diocess of Lincoln, or in the King of Eng­lands Dominions. If he means Lut­terworth, he has so disfigured it, that even a Leicestershire-man could not know it again. Thirdly, what de­signs could the Parson of Lutter­worth have upon a Bishoprick that was full, and had been so for several [Page 5]years before? For if William of Wickam was in disgrace, must his Bishoprick be therefore void? Or would Wicliff grow discontented for a preferment not vacant, and raise a Heresy because the Bishop would not dye for him? After this, unless it appear, that Wicliff, amongst his other measures, had intended to dis­patch my Lord of Winchester, it is plain, he had not laid his designs so deep, as Mr. Varillas would per­swade us. Fourthly, an Author of equal credit with Mr. Varillas, Po­lydore Virgil, has imputed Wicliffs ill humours to the loss of the Bisho­prick of Worcester. From whose Latin, Florimond de Raymond has falsly translated it; the Bishop of Wiorn and Varillas more falsly, Winton.

II.

He goes on (in page the 12th.) to give a Character of the Heretick, That he understood the Theology of the Schools, which he taught publickly in the Ʋniversity of Oxford, in quality [Page 6]of Regius Professour; That that place had commonly been a step to a Bishoprick, That at present Wicliff found his Am­bition oppos'd by the Popes Officers, either because they had entertain'd a Suspicion of him, or Favour for another.] 1. It must be confest, that Wicliff might deserve the Title Mr. Varillas has bestow'd upon him; but 'tis something strange, that he should stand possess'd of a Dignity which was not founded till about 150 years after, by the Magnificence of Henry the Eighth; before whose time there was no Regius Professour ever heard of in Oxford. In the Paragraph be­fore, Mr. Varillas made Wicliff so vain as to desire an impossibility, and in this he has put him in real possession of one. 2. The Popes Officers, and what follows, Mr. Varillas will lay no great stress upon, as being only a flourish inserted by a Figure of the modern Rhetorick, which the Wits have call'd Banter.

III.

We are told, that Wicliff thus disappointed, resolves to revenge him­self upon the Holy See: In expectation of a fit opportunity he sets himself to read the Schismatical Books of such as had defended the Emperours and Anti­popes, against the Popes. His first advance was, the maintaining, That the English were not bound in Consci­ence to the payment of Peter-pence, gi­ven by King John to Pope Innocent the Third, p. 13.] 1. It may be observed, that Wicliff was a man of a very ill temper, to ground all his dislike and aversion to the Church of Rome upon an affront, which we have prov'd it impos­sible for him ever to have receiv'd. 2. It shall be own'd, that he was ever a profest admirer of Grosthead the famous Bishop of Lincoln, of Oc­cam and Bradwardin; that had lately flourish't in Merton College, where he himself had part of his Education: To accuse him of having read these and such-like writers, had indeed [Page 8]been a proper objection in the mouth of an Italian; But, I admire that an Author who had a pension from the same Master with the Marquiss de Lavardin, should so far forget himself, as to call those Doctors Schismatical, who stood up for the Civil Rights of Princes, against the encroachments of his Holiness. The whole Collection of Goldastus may be read in France, and an English Historian, whom Varillas has reason to know, is said to have been re­warded for writing in the behalf of that cause, the defenders of which Wicliff must not be allow'd to peruse without a crime. 3. I find Mr. Va­rillas is much enamoured on the History of the Peter-pence: This is the great Epoche, from whence he has decreed the Historians of the English Reformation ought to have started. At present he is much in­cens'd against Wicliff for advising the people not to pay them, and asser­ting that they might with a safe [Page 9]Conscience obey their Prince, who in the year 1364. had prohibited their payment, and left Wicliff nothing to do in 1374. but to magnify the action. 4. We intreat, with Dr. B. that if ever Mr. Varillas shall have any farther use of the Peter-pence, he would ascribe their Original to King Ina, since they were not first given away by King John, nor received first by the Pope, whose name, as Mr. Pulton thinks, is so hard to be remembred.

IV.

He says that in 1374. the Duke of Lancaster, upon having heard Wic­liff Preach, became his Convert, hoping by his Doctrine to support his own inte­rest; He was then the eldest of King Edward the Third's Sons; but had not been so always: The Prince of Wales was born afore him; but he was dead; having left but one Son, so young, that the Duke suppos'd it not impossible to exclude him from the Crown. He found­ed his Ambition upon this, that the right of Representation was not clearly enough [Page 10]made out in the Laws which William the Conquerour had given to England: so he hop'd to get over the House of Com­mons, by encouraging a party against the Clergy, whom they had always hated, p. 14, 15, 16.] First of all, the Duke of Lancaster was not eldest Son to Edward III. in the year 1374. for the Prince of Wales died not till July 1376. I could have easily excus'd Mr. Varillas, if the falseness of his date had lain only in days or months: But it seems he was resolv'd to kill the Black Prince two years before his time, and it had been for the in­terest of France if he could have dis­patch'd him sooner. 2. Mr. Varillas has given us a truth, that the Duke of Lancaster had not always been the Eldest Son: which is well observ'd of him, for he had Three elder, Two of which Mr. Varillas has omitted; one of whom left a Daughter, that the Duke ought to have excluded, as well as his Nephew Richard; and 'tis not to be doubted, but there had [Page 11]also been a Plot against Philippa, Heiress to the Duke of Clarence, had Mr. Varillas ever heard there had been such a person. 3. The Gentle­men of the Long Robe would desire to know what those Laws are, made by King William, in relation to the Succession; and if Mr. Varillas has any Manuscript of them among his Anecdotes, he is intreated to send it over, and in requital he shall receive from hence two very necessary im­plements for a Trader in History, a Play and a Chronicle. 4. In Eng­land, where we pretend no Salique, the Crown descends by the Law of Nature; by which, the whole Right Line takes place of the Collateral, and Nephews are preferr'd to their Uncles. If any of our Kings, con­trary to this Maxim, have posses'd themselves of the Throne, 'tis the respect Englishmen bear to a person that has wore the Crown, that keeps them from being severe upon his Memory; but no friend to our Mo­narchy [Page 12]will pretend to justifie the practice. The Tumults rais'd against King John only, which have made him esteem'd the most unfortunate of our Princes since the Conquest, are sufficient to testifie, that the peo­ple ever look'd upon him as an U­surper, and pitied the distress'd Ar­thur when they could not serve him. 5. If the Duke of Lancaster had any design upon the Crown, he must have been the most impolitick man in the World, to hope for any furtherance of his project, by declaring himself for Wicliff: The whole course of our History shews us, that in such cases the contrary Methods have been always taken, and the Clergy have been ever most powerful in altering the Succession. William Rufus had the friendship of Lanfranc; Stephen was assisted by his Brother Henry, Bishop of Winchester, and Legate to the Pope. King John found a Hubert to set the Crown upon his Head. Even the event De­monstrates, [Page 13]that the Clergy were the persons, by whom the unfortu­nate Richard must be dethron'd, and the Archbishop of Canterbury must carry a strong influence in his Ruine.

IV.

After the doubt concerning the Right of Representation, Mr. Varillas makes a short digression cross the Sea into Bretagn, whence he brings us a parallel case, where the English took part with the Uncle in pre­judice of the Neice; The Eldest Son of the Duke of Bretagn died before his Father, leaving but one Daughter, who was afterwards married to Charles de Blois. The Youngest Son the Earl of Montfort pretended to be heir to the Dutchy, p. 15.] 1. In this passage Mr. Varillas has put the Eldest Son in­stead of the Second Son, and has made the Daughter succeed her Grand­father, when he ought to have said her Uncle: For there is no Herald will deny, but this is the case in re­lation to Genealogy, Arthur, Duke of Bretagn, by a first venter had two [Page 14]Sons, John and Guy, and by a second Marriage, one more, John of Mont­fort: Thus he dyed; The elder John succeeding; after a time, his Brother Guy deceasing, and himself childless, settles the Succession upon Jane, Guy's Daughter: Against this Jane it was, after John's death, that John Earl of Montfort put in his preten­sions. 2. It is very unreasonable, we see, to expect a good account of Foreign matters from Mr. Varillas, when we find him so unpardonably mistaken in his own; and it would be but a vain thing to imagine that writing of the Reformation in Eng­land, he should have read Dr. Burnet; when quoting a Remark out of the French History, he could not afford to consult Mezeray.

V.

One acquainted with the con­duct of Mr. Varillas, would be apt to wonder, that in five Pages toge­ther there has no Lady appear'd, nor any thing of an Amour: But he can forbear no longer; for p. 16. The [Page 15]Kings Mistress is brought into the Party: She was a Spaniard; by Name Alex Perez; who joyn'd her self to the interest of John of Gaunt, in hopes to be secur'd by him from a Parliament, after the decease of the old King; who by the discourses of her, and the Duke, had begun to think well of Wicliff, and would have declar'd himself in favour of Him, but for fear of the Popes. p. 16, 17.]

1. Having read that Wicliff was a person of great Accomplishments, improv'd by Travel and a large con­versation, I began to be afraid that Mr. Varillas, who has an Ambition to improve all things into a Love-Intrigue, would have made the King's Mistress have a design of kindness upon him. But finding he had fail'd me there, I began to be­think me who that Alex Perez might be, and whether 'twas true, that King Edward had fetch'd a Mistress out of the same Country, that Duke John had brought his [Page 16]Wife from. But who would suspect that this Court-Beauty, whom Va­rillas has dress'd up a l' Espagnole, should prove to be no body else but our own Alse Pierce, English born and English bred.

2. Our best Historians have left us no remembrance of any concern she ever had with Church-Affairs; only 'tis said, indeed, that her first step to the Royal Favour was ow­ing to a Dominican; and that thus preferr'd, she did once employ her Interest with the King in behalf of the Bishop of Winchester; who had no reason to be thought one of Wi­cliff's Friends, if it were true that He, as Mr. Varillas has before rela­ted, had entertain'd a contrivance to thurst him out of his See. 3. This is certain, King Edward the Third had a great esteem for Wicliff, so as some have affirm'd he made him his own Chaplain: And to see how the man is mistaken, in saying, the King dissembled the favour he had for him, [Page 17]lest the Pope should be displeas'd by it, it will be fit to tell him that the first occasion of Wicliff's rising in the Kings good opinion, was, be­cause he manfully oppos'd the Papal pretences; and that if ever any of our Princes till King Henry the VIII. have Asserted themselves from a dread of the Popes, it must be rea­dily allow'd that this King was not much overaw'd by them, in the beginning of whose Reign the (a) 5 Ed. 3: Religious were forbid to send Money to their Supe­riours beyond Sea; in the middle of whose Reign were Enacted the fa­mous Statutes of (b) 25 Ed. 3. Provisors and (c) 27 Ed. 3. Praemunire; and both confirm'd again by a Par­liament of his about ten years after.

VI.

We are next amus'd with the reasons King Edward had to be dis­pleas'd with the Papacy: It was by the Popes ill Offices (caus'd by a jealousie they had of the King) that He saw his [Page 18]pretensions to the Empire Defeated; and among other things, Guienne was lost to the French, by his not being able to obtain leave from Rome for the taking the new Tenths of His Clergy. pag. 17, 18, 19.] This whole Para­graph wants but a Translation for its confutation; and Mr. D. might have been as effectual as Dr. B. We shall dismiss it at present with only one Remark, That as never any of our Kings deserv'd better of the Native Clergy of England than King Edward, so he had no need to ask the Popes leave for Them to be grate­ful to Him: That very year that he apprehended the designs of Charles upon Guienne, he borrow'd of them great Sums; and the next, He had given Him by them no less than 50000 l. to be paid in the same year. And here again he betrays his igno­rance of the English Policy and Con­stitutions: For the Clergy met in Convocation, have always had the priviledge of taxing themselves, with­out [Page 19]sending for a Foreign consent; which our Author would make us believe was sollicited by King Ed­ward in a Formal Embassy to the Pope; but what was that Ambassadours Name we must not know; for perhaps Mr. Varillas has wisely put himself under his old obligation of Secrecy. The credentials of that Embassy will be no where found, unless it be in the company of Cardinal Bellay's invisible Letters, or the Original Salique Law. Which Simile I take occasion to mention here the second time, because I'd have Mr. Varillas to understand, that I am as fond of my notion of the Salique, as he is of his Peter-Pence.

VII.

We are at length arriv'd to what he calls the depth of the Intrigue, and is really beyond my Fathom: He begins, That before William the Con­querer there were no written Laws in England; William made a Collection still remaining, of such of the unwritten Laws as he design'd should be abolisht: [Page 20]The Laws he left in force, if strictly observ'd, would have subjected England to the conditions of a Conquer'd Coun­trey; and the goods of the Ecclesiasticks (which by his Laws he had made his own, p. 2.) would have preserv'd his Mi­nisters in a dependance upon him, p. 19, 20.]

1. Our Author, who has div'd so deeply into the Cabinets of Princes, and discover'd so many Manuscript Memoires, inaccessable to other Mor­tals, is a little unhappy here, in not having heard of our Saxonlege, or Mercenlege, or Danelege of the Laws of King Ina, he that gave the never-to-be-forgotten Peter-pence, or King Elfred, or King Edward the Con­fessor, and other our Princes before the Conquest, with which Mr. Lam­bard has made a shift to fill a Folio.

2. That Collection he talks of made by William the Conquerour, and still remaining, would bear a great price in England, if he is willing to part with it, for we could [Page 21]never yet get the sight of such a Re­cord: We have indeed a work of that Reign, a noble piece of English Antiquity, the Doomsday-book, but the subject of that does not answer our Authors Character. 3. That William the First affected the name and advantage of a Conquerour, and design'd to use the English not as Sub­jects but Slaves, will never be grant­ed by the most impartial of our Hi­storians. 4. Least of all will it be allow'd, that that Prince did ever pretend by the right of Conquest to the Revenues of Holy Church; The confirming of which in all its privi­ledges was the first solemn act of his entrance; and the encreasing of it with the Foundation of a goodly Ab­bey, was what he chose to be the pi­ous and lasting memorial of his Victory.

VIII.

What follows is so gross and unpardonable, that I shall refer him to be corrected by the Almanack, or the Man that shews the Kings at [Page 22] Westminster. If the Compositor does not step in to relieve the credit of the Author, and bring him out of this in­convenience, as he calls it, by taking shame to himself, no man hereafter will endure his Books, but in such a Library as Don Quixot's, or in such a Catalogue as Mr. Langbanie's. He gravely tells us, That the Two Stephens of the House of Blois, who succeeded the Sons of William, took no care of the unwritten Laws, &c. Sure he penn'd this passage at a certain season when they say men are us'd to see double: Otherwise, how is it possible for him to make us Two Kings of one Usurp­er? Who ever heard of King Stephen the Second of England? Who was his Wife? What Children had he? What did he do? Which King of France did he beat? Where was he Buried? 'Tis a Miracle that all this should escape the World; and whilst we, the ignorant, thought there ne­ver had been any more than one Ste­phen, Mr. Varillas should produce [Page 23]another. However, it will be hard for him to prevail with the wary Citizens of London, amongst the Sta­tues Royal erected in the Exchange, to raise an Essigies to the memory of the Second King Stephen.

IX.

To the Stephens, he says, suc­ceeded the House of Anjou; who were reduc'd to implore the authority of the Holy See, to put them in their possessi­on of England: In them the Preroga­tive was weakned, by some reasons no man but Varillas would give, and first the Clergy and Nobility, and after that the Populacy getting the ascendant of the Crown, the Parliament took its birth. The power of which, during its Session was so great, as to leave almost no hing but the Title to the King: Henry II. was the first that would have shook off the Yoke, p. 20, 21.] 1. The House of Anjou was so formidable in Maud and her Son Henry, and the People so well dispos'd to receive them, that he had no need of any such assistance from abroad. 2. How [Page 24]could the House of Anjou bring a Par­liamentary Yoke upon themselves, which Henry II. should be the first that endeavour'd to shake off, when before Henry II. the House of Anjou never reign'd in England. 3. 'Tis a shame Mr. Varillas should know so little of that august Assembly, the Parliament, as to date the rise of it from Henry II. whereas at least it ought to have been carried as high as his Grandfather. 4. He may think perhaps to make it amends by ano­ther mistake, having falsly rais'd them in their Session so far above the King, as in a manner to annihilate his power for the time. One that reads this in a French-man, would think he was discoursing of the Doge of Genoa; and not of a Monarch, who, as his present Majesty has been pleas'd publickly to observe, has e­nough power by Law to make him as great as he can wish; though he suffers his Parliament to maintain their just priviledges at another rate, [Page 25]than the long-disus'd Estates of a neighbouring Kingdom. And here 'tis probable our Author may think himself safe behind a Quotation fetch'd from Bologna; and 'tis likely he will be so: For a Subject of Eng­land will not presume to interpose, because the matter is of so high a na­ture, nor a Prince condescend so low as to take notice of an affront, when the Author is Varillas.

X.

He goes on to tell us, That Henry II. his designs were prevented by Becket's murder; which happen'd by two indiscreet Souldiers, explaining in too great a latitude some words let fall by the King in relation to the Arch­bishop. So this project was set on foot no more till Edward the Third's time, who taking up the same design of de­pressing the States of Parliament, began with that of the Clergy, which by Wie­liff's proceedings he was in hopes to mortifie, p. 22.] 1. Those Two Souldiers of his were Four Knights, Sir Hugh Merville, Sir William Tra­cy, [Page 26]Sir Richard Brittain, and Sir Ray­nold Fitz-Ʋrs. An Historian ought to understand so much Blazon, as to know a Knight from a Souldier; and not to suffer himself to be so much in haste, as to leave half his number behind him: But Mr. Varillas may think he has done the Gentlemen no wrong, in giving them a name so much admir'd in modern France; and I am the more willing to excuse him for being too short in this ac­count, because he allows for it in the Two Stephens. 2. He told us in p. 18, 19. That the reason of King Ed­ward's designs upon the Clergy, was a desire he had of revenging himself upon the Popes, who had done him, as he thought, so many injuries, there recount­ed: But here that resolution is made to proceed from an intent of his, to bring down the power of Parliaments. Now I begin to have some hopes of our Author: For I see he knows him­self so well, as not to rely upon his own relation laid down before; and [Page 27]Mr. Varillas will not believe Mr. Va­rillas: He guesses again; and thinks 'tis here, as in Arithmetick, where two false Suppositions may produce a Truth.

XI.

After this long deduction, in which, it seems as though he had been resolv'd to spend at once all the little stock of knowledge he has in the English Chronicles, he returns to Wicliff; who finding himself thus secure, taught openly, that the English Lords might resume the goods given by their Ancestors to the Church, that neither Pope nor Bishops might Excom­municate; that Sacraments administred by wicked Priests were ineffectual. p. 23.] Mr. Varillas having fram'd to himself a notion, that Wicliff was only us'd as a State-Instrument a­gainst the Clergy, he has accordingly pickt only these out of his many Doctrines, as appearing most proper to serve his Hypothesis; as if these three misrepresented Articles, were the only, or the chief Tenets by [Page 28]which Dr. Wicliff grew to be so con­siderable: It was his great esteem for the Holy Scriptures, of which his Translation still remains a memo­rable instance; his right notion of the blessed Eucharist, the opposition he made to the encroaching Mendi­cants in behalf of the Secular Clergy; not to mention his confess'd Excel­lencies in Polemick Divinity and Philosophy, with a strictness of life, which his Acquaintance rever'd; which his Adversaries, amongst all their Accusations, have never pre­tended to call in question; and which engag'd in his favour the major part of the University where he liv'd, and particularly the Chan­cellour and both the Proctors of the year 1382. It would be too large a work, and not becoming such a Pamphlet as this, to enter into a Desence of that great Man, and all his particular Opinions, and to shew how industrious the Friers have been to blacken him since his Death; [Page 29]when even in his Life time, he was charg'd with the sancies and errours of other Men; which, when in open Court, he declar'd never to have been his; this his Remonstrance, has by some since, been pleasantly term'd a Recantation: For the pre­sent, the diligent Dr. James may be consulted by the curious, for their farther satisfaction, till some gene­rous Pen shall appear more fully in the Cause of Wicliff, and do justice to so eminent a Confessor.

XII.

He keeps us still in the year 1374. and in that it was, as he tells us, that Pope Gregory XI. hearing of the Novelty, wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Bishop of London, by any means to suppress it. They Cite Wicliff, who appears, but in the posture of one that expected a Reward, and not a Punishment. He pleaded, that he had never design'd to alter the Christian Truth; that if any thing offensive had escap'd him, he revok'd it sincerely, and submitted to Pennance [Page 30]and publick Correction: Ʋpon. this they put into his hands a Billet of the three Errours he had taught; which having explain'd, to their content, there was nothing left for the two Bishops, but to Absolve him, upon pro­mise made never more to maintain in publick any equivocal Propositions. p. 23, 24.]

At the first reading this Narration, drawn up with so much seriousness and formality, it would look like confidence to suspect it; and yet upon search, it will be manifest, that 'tis false and sophisticate in almost all its parts. Having made this ge­neral observation, how cautious our Author has been, in avoiding those unlucky things call'd Dates, as not having hitherto specified so much as the Month in which any Adventure fell out; we must not expect he should tell us what was the date of the Popes Bull, of the Episcopal Citation, or the time of Wicliff's appearance; all which would have been look'd for [Page 31]in an exact History; and if they had here been set down by Mr. Va­rillas would have supplied us with matter for a Consutation. 1. All our Annals and Registers place this Hear­ing two years later, about the 19th. of February, 1377. 2. That Wicliff's behaviour there, was contrary to what Mr. Varillas has represented it: I will at present take no other care to demonstrate, than by setting down the words of Knighton: l. 5. Cumque die Statuto ad objecta respondere deberet, omnem prejactita­tem cordis audaciam sine mora dimi­sit, &c. 3. I shall ask of Mr. Varillas, whether it be the way of the French Law, or any other he has studied, for a Man to plead before his Indict­ment be known, and to answer an Accusation, when 'tis not yet pre­ferr'd against him. If Wicliff did so, yet this we know, that he made no such set harangue; that after that, he had no such Billet of 3 Articles presented him; that the Exposition [Page 32]our Author ascribes to him is ficti­tious; and in short, all that follows. For a Tumult happening, the Court was oblig'd to break up abruptly before Nine of the Clock in the Morning; and never came to give such an Absolution, or to receive such a promise. 4. If he had ever read any writer upon the present particular, he could never have made so defective a discourse of it, in which he has not told us so much as that this Trial was at London; that the great Duke of Lancaster, and Henry, Marshal of England, appear'd in favour of the Criminal; and finally, the occasion the Bishops found to leave the Court sooner than was intended.

XIII.

We are acquainted, That after this Wicliff Relaps'd: The same Pope hearing of it, complain'd of the English Prelates, and to shew what they ought to have done, condemn'd the Propositions of Wicliff himself: The Prelates being asham'd to be out-done, [Page 33]Assembled themselves at Canterbury in the form of a Council, and ponounc'd by the mouth of the Archbishop of the place, who was their Primate an Anathema a­gainst his Doctrine: And all this in King Edward's Reign, and the year 1374. p. 25.]

1. To set him right in his Chro­nology, this second Convocation is on all hands affirm'd to have fall'n out in the Reign of Richard II. which began June 21, 1377. 2. Whereas he makes our Bishops so complaisant, as immediately to fall about what the Pope had hinted to them by his example; 'tis evident by the Original Acts still remaining, and to be seen in their proper Ar­chieves, that he was forc'd to oblige them to it by formal Letters; bear­ing Date from Rome, 11 Cal. Jun. Anno 7. Pontificatus; though not put in Execution till after the Death of King Edward. Why does Mr. Va­rillas mention nothing of this Bull? or is not the Popes Letter of as great [Page 34]moment, and as well deserving to be taken notice of, as a Love-Letter or a Lampoon. 3. He is very un­happy in descending to particulars, and not keeping aloof in generals, and at a due distance: For as in the first Convocation he assigns us no place for their Session, so here he has given us a wrong one, and Lam­beth is many Miles from Canterbury. 4. The Bishops met at Lambeth were so far from pronouncing an Ana­thema against Wicliff's Doctrine, that they found reasons not to give any definitive Sentence; which had they done, it would have appear'd on Register, amongst other Acts we have remaining of the same Council.

XIV.

This 1374. has been a very long year, and at last King Edward dies in it; who, however, I am well satisfied, was in the Throne above two years after. In his life time he had tenderly lov'd the Duke of Lanca­ster, and had given him outward demon­strations, that he would leave him the [Page 35]Crown; nevertheless when he was dead, a Will was found written and sign'd with his Hand, which rendred Justice to the Prince of Wales, in the Person of his Son Richard, then but 12 years old, and declared him Successour, in Exclusion to the Duke of Lancaster, and the Dukes of Gloucester and Cam­bridge, his Brothers. The Parliament of England approved this VVill, p. 25, 26.] 1. Mr. Varillas is the first dis­coverer of any Demonstrations given by Edward the III. to the Duke of Lancaster, that should put him in hopes of the Crown: On the con­trary, Walsingham tells us in express words, Eo tempore, nondum finito Parliamento, Hyp. Neust. Dominus Edwardus, Princeps Walliae, 8. die Julii in die S. Trinitatis defun­gitur. Dominus Richardus de Burde­galia, filius Dom. Edw. Principis in hoc Parliamento factus est Comes Ce­striae & non multo post Dux Cornubioe, & Princeps Wallioe est creatus. Ed­wardus in festo S. Georgii apud Winde­leshores [Page 36]contulit Richardo de Burdegel, Haeredi suo, ordinem militarem. From hence any man of inference, will see what reason the Duke of Lancaster had to enlarge his hopes, and pro­mise himself that Prince Richard was not design'd for the Crown by his Royal Grand-father. 2. Here is a Will produc'd, never known in the World, till Mr. Varillas printed his History: Nothing of this in any of our Authors, but counterfeited by him, who is one of the first men that ever forg'd a Testament, without hopes of getting by it so much as a Legacy. 'Tis something observable, that he should deal so by a Prince, who is the first in England, that has made a Statute about Pillories. 3. A man that goes about a cheat, should not be in haste, but let his In­vention tarry for his Judgment: This Will is so awkardly contriv'd, that it betrays it self at first sight. The Duke of Cambridge (as he calls him) is put after his younger Bro­ther; [Page 37]neither was he ever Duke of Cam­bridge, but Earl only, in which cha­racter he continued till 1386. when his Nephew created him Duke of York. Thomas of Woodstock, is yet more beholding to Mr. Varillas, for having excluded him by the name of the Duke of Gloucester; whereas he had no title when his Father dy'd, nor did he arrive to this Dukedom till the abovenamed year 1386. Now 'tis a pretty hard conceit to suppose, that the King did not know which of his Sons was the El­der, or that he should put by from the Crown two Dukes he had never heard of; or lastly, that prophesying of the future honours of his Chil­dren, he should guess right about one, and be mistaken about the other. 4. Not to harrass him any more; as for what concerns the Par­liament after the Kings Death, I de­sire to know who should call it, if the new King was not yet approv'd, as he is pleas'd to term it. And [Page 38]about the Act of Approbation, I request of him to tell us where it is to be found, that so it may be put into the next Edition of Keeble.

XV.

He informs us, p. 26, 27. That the unfortunate Alix Perez avoid­ed the punishment prepar'd for her, by embarking with what she had most pre­cious upon a Flemmish Vessel, which carryed her to the Coasts of Galicia. And the Tutors of the young King for­bore to seek after her, either because they thought her below their anger, or that they were perswaded the King of Castile would not abandon her to their discretion, because of the Riches which she brought from England into Spain, or of the pretensions which the Duke of Lancaster had upon his Crown. Thus far our Romancer: His friend Tacitus has begun his Annals with a Verse, and Mr. Varillas improving the hu­mour, and advancing upon those grounds, has made his whole Histo­ry into a Poem. Had he liv'd in the days of Knight-errantry, he would [Page 39]certainly have been invited over to the Honourable Employment of Imperial Historiographer in the Court of Trebizond, and deserved a Pension extraordinary from his Highness Don Alphebo. Having here to do with a Female, he has acquit­ted himself extreme civilly, and much like a Gentleman, to re-con­duct the strange Lady to her own Countrey, with all her Jewels and other her stoln accoutrements. But our rough Historians deal more un­kindly by her, and tell us, that by a Parliament at Westminster, Alice Pierce had all her goods confiscate, and herself banisht, so as really to be left the Ʋnfortunate Alix Perez.

XVI.

We are now coming on to Tyler's Rebellion; and here our Au­thor has given a master-stroke of his fancy, and has found a contri­vance to draw in Wicliff for the Au­thor of the whole commotion. Viclof taking advantage of the Kings minority, past on from the Clergy to [Page 40]vent his doctrine against the Lay-No­bility and Magistracy; and at length came to a conclusion, that there ought to be no inequality in goods, but a com­munity of all things. Having thus dis­pos'd the Peoples minds, he receiv'd into his party one John Balee, a man the most turbulent and seditious of all England: He was a Priest by profession, and had escap'd out of Prison, where his Ordi­nary had secur'd him. He fearing to be re-taken, and not having means of subsistance beyond the Seas, found there could be no safety for him without kin­dling a Civil War. So having often conferr'd with Wicliff, he preach'd and improv'd his opinions, so as to draw after him to the number of 200000 persons, pretending to esta­blish an Equality, but indeed to put himself into the dignities of Simon de Saberia, Arch-bishop of Canterbury, and Lord Chancellour of England, p. 27, 28, 29.] 1. I love an Histo­rian of a great Soul and free thoughts, that scorns to be beholding to for­mer [Page 41]accounts, and will go no far­ther than himself for his relations: 'Tis an argument of a Vulgar Spirit to be content to take up with what is written already, and present the World with nothing that's new. Wicliff's Preaching had no more re­lation to this Rebellion, than the Edition of Confucius in France had to the Sufferings of the Hugonots, or than Mr. Varillas's Conclusions are us'd to have to his Premises. 'Tis well known by all men of Judgment and Reading, that Wicliff always de­fended Order and Distinction; that he himself took his Degree of Doctor, and that his Friends and Patrons were of the Nobility; and that all his troubles took their rise from his zeal in maintaining the Supremacy of his Prince: So far was he from being Author of this Tumult against him. To pass by our Authors for­getfulness, who having (p. 12.) brought in Wicliff, as designing no­thing but to revenge himself upon [Page 24]the Popes Officers and the Clergy, for a suppos'd affront receiv'd from them, does here undeservedly, and without reasons assign'd, set him as hotly against the Laicks and Nobi­lity. All agree, that the Rebellion proceeded from the seeming Opres­sions, and from the Taxes, the great­est that had ever been in England, thought to be unreasonably impos'd, and insolently exacted in Kent, and the neighbouring parts. 2. Now for John Ball, the Seditious Ecclesi­astick, he was clapt up for tenets of his own; and was so far from ha­ving escap'd Prison, to go and enter into frequent consults with Wicliff; and from thinking it necessary after that, to raise the People of England for the securiry of himself, an incon­siderable Curate; that the Peasantry was first up in arms; and amongst their other extravagancies, having broke open the Prisons, they set free with the rest this John Ball, who then indeed joyn'd with his Deliverers.

XVII.

The Multitude (he says) march'd on to the Palace of the Arch­bishop; where forcing entrance, they find the Prelate upon his knees, and with all the circumstances of horrour, cut off his Head. The Troubles were renew'd soon after in the Provinces of Essex and Kent, and quickly past into those of Norfole, Suffolc, Erfolc, and Cambridge. Thence the Wicliffists advanc'd towards London in a body innumerable: They were a charge to no man; they paid for what they had, and punisht with death any that were convicted of having stoln. When they were arriv'd at Bloquet, King Ri­chard sent to demand the reason of their taking Arms, but receiv'd an an­swer full of insolence: And when the Mayor would have shut the City-Gates against them, he was hindered by those of the ordinary sort. The Seditious enter London, burn the Count of Lan­casters Palace, and throw the goods of the Count into the River: Then they invest the Tower, whither the King [Page 44]and Court had fled for refuge, gain entrance, and murder the Chancellour, the Treasurer, and other Officers, hid in the Tower, and several other Churches of London, p. 29, 30, 31.] 1. I would have been glad if Mr. Varil­las would have told us where this Palace of the Arch-bishop stood, and whither it was not that at Lambeth, near Candamart? It is sure, that the Arch-bishop was not massacred in any Palace he had, and before I end this Paragraph, I will undertake that Mr. Varillas himself shall tell me so. 2. Amongst the Provinces concern'd in the Tumults, we meet with Er­folc for one: Mr. Camden and Mr. A­dams knew nothing of such a place; and if Mr. Varillas will come over hither, and discover where this County lyes, I engage my Honour that at least the Freeholders of it shall chuse him Knight of the Shire. 3. That the Rebels were so exact in paying for what they had, I must beg his pardon if I believe a mistake, [Page 45]not only by their Actings, but also by their Principles, which Mr. Va­rillas told us before, were to make all things common. But let us follow them to Bloquet; which however we cannot do without a guide; for 'tis impossible to find any such place, unless by that name he means to understand Black-heath, or Barnet, or rather Mile end 4. The Mayor not being suffered [to change the City Locks, or so much as] to shut the Gates, the Peasantry came on, and Plundered the Earl of Lancasters house in the Savoy. Sure one would think they had depriv'd him of his Dukedome too: for otherwise how comes it to pass that he who has hi­therto been all along Le Duc de Lan­castre, should be now on a sudden diminish'd into Le Conte de Lancastre? By this figure of Varillism it was, that the Lord Darley was brought down into a private Gentleman, and the Knights of King Henry into Souldiers. If there were nothing [Page 46]else to be said about the present Rebellion, this single passage were enough to evince the Rebels not to have been the Disciples of Wicliff; for if so, this Illustrious Patron of his must needs have met with ano­ther sort of usage at their hands: Tho farther yet it may be noted, that Jack Straw in his last confession declared, Their design was to save the Mendicant Friers, an Order of men, who had always shew'd them­selves the most violent Enemies to Wicliff. 4. We are now come to the business of Simon de Suberia. Mr. Varillas mention'd above, that the Archbishop was beheaded in his Palace; and now assures us, That the Chancellour is murdered in the Tower, either forgetting what he had told us before (p. 28.) that both those dignities were in one Person, Sudbury; or designing to deter peo­ple from Ambition and a desire of Plurality in high Offices, by shew­ing that a man must under go as ma­ny [Page 47]several deaths as he holds prefer­ments; and in this example, that the same person was first put to death in his Spiritual capacity of Archbishop, and again Massacred some time after for his temporal qualification of State-Minister: For that a man may be two-fold, was formerly seen, in the Case of Charles V. The truth is this, Sudbury from the first beginning of these distur­bances had follow'd the fortune and person of the King, and was at pre­sent retir'd with him into the Tow­er, where the multitude seiz'd and beheaded him. So dyed a Prelate, of whom our Authors have given us a very honourable mention; and yet Mr. Varillas has been pleas'd to assign him so ill-natur'd and unjust a character, (p. 23. & p. 28, 29.) that one who reads it, would think he had mistaken his Man, and was describing the Heretick Wicliff, in­stead of Sudbury the Legate of the Holy See. 5. Besides the Chancel­lour, [Page 48]he tells us more of the Kings Ministers were kill'd in the Tower and other Churches. Really Sir, if the Tower be a Church, it is one of the largest and best fortified Churches in Europe. I have so good an opinion of his Friend Mr. Sorbeir, as to think that out of the little knowledge of England he pickt up here, he could have inform'd our Author, that the Tower is never lookt upon by us as a Cathedral, but as an Arsenal: Whither by this Paper I invite Mr. Varillas to come over, and see the famous Canons, with which Henry the VIII. of Glorious Memory took Boleign.

XVIII.

Ʋpon a Pardon proclaim'd, great numbers deserted; but a consi­derable party still kept together in a Body, under the conduct of Gauthier Igler, the most adroit and most reso­lute person amongst them. After the story of whose death, and some other passages, we find, that Ball preach'd at Seblaker, to 20000 people, upon [Page 49]whose being seiz'd and executed, the Troubles had an end: At last he says, That Wicliff was never present either at the Assemblies of the Seditious, or at the Assassination of the Archbishop of Canterbury, p. 32, 33, 34.] 1. Our Author would have deserv'd much commendation, and sav'd the Reader a great deal of thinking, had he plac'd a Key at the end of his Book, as we see done in another work of the like natare, call'd Bar­clays Argenis; it would have been easie then to have known a proper name under all its disguises, we should then have perceiv'd, that Haviet was put for Wiat; Gauthier Igler for Wat Tyler; and what had been the meaning of the not yet deciphered Seblaker; which we can only guess to be Black-heath. 2. By this last sentence, which Truth has extorted from Mr. Varillas, it ap­pears, that Wicliff was altogether innocent, and that our Author would never have brought him into [Page 50]this Rebellion, but to gain the To­pick of describing it; which Image with all its graceful circumstances must otherwise have been lost, for want of an opportunity to introduce it.

XIX.

A Schism happening between the Popes, Wicliff in the year 1382. makes his advantage of it; but his offers being rejected by the Parliament, he found himself obliged to retire into the Province of Wales, newly subjected to the English. There he attack'd the Benedictines by a Writing: Ʋpon this, Archbishop Courtney assembles a Council at London, soon after Easter, where were condemn'd these Propositions of Wicliff, That the Substance of the Bread and Wine, &c. These Articles thus condemn'd, Wicliff himself being cited, made his appearance, where he abjured all he had taught without ex­ception. This Recan [...]ation they obliged him to put in writing, and recite over again. And this piece had been seen in its place amongst the other Acts of [Page 51]this Council, if the English Compiler, too passionate for the Glory of his Nation, Spelman. or unwilling to give Arms to the Catholicks against the Heresie of Calvin, of which he made profession, had not suppress'd this retractation, and plac'd instead of it a profession of Faith, which properly speak­ing, is nothing but plainly a captious Qualification of the Errours of this Heretick. The last act of the Council was an Ecclesiastick procedure against his three famous Disciples, Rippendon, Hereford, and Aston. p. 36. ad p. 42.

1. What is said in the beginning of this Paragraph, we find no where warranted; nor that Wicliff ever was in Wales: which our Author makes newly Conquered by the Eng­lish; an Expression something im­proper for a Countrey, that we had acquir'd no less than a Hundred years before. 2. What he says was Penn'd against the Benedictines, I have reasons to believe to have been [Page 52]no other than the Two Treatises written by Wicliff, and in the last Century, printed against the Mendi­cants. 3. 'Tis acknowledged that Court­ney in a Council, call'd upon May 17. did condemn several Conclusions, and that the same Archbishop upon June 20. sat upon Hereford, Reppingdon and Ayshton, accus'd of holding those Conclusions: Ayshton pleaded apart; The Two other put into the Court a Paper, which the learned Sir Henry Spelman has publish'd in his Councils from the MSS. Copy, in the princi­pal Registry of the Archbishop of Canterbary, Nuncupat. Courtney. Fol. 25. At neither of these conventions, nor at any other time throughout this whole year did Wicliff appear at all at London before the Arch­bishop: What assurance then must that Man be Master of, who dares affirm that he made, wrote, recited in this Council a formal Recantation of all his opinions whatever, without reserve; whereas there is not so [Page 53]much as any pretended retraction of his of any kind, that can possibly be brought to concern any more than the single Article about the blessed Eucharistt? As for that Accurate and Honoured Collector Sir H. Spel­man, as this is the first time he has ever been accus'd of Falsifying, so his confident Accuser could not do it, without giving matter to any exa­mining Reader of returning the Charge, and Convicting him of his own Calumny. For had this Histo­riographer of France but once vouch­safed to look into the Book he has pass'd so blind a censure upon, he would easily have found that his Latin Friends, who told him of such a palliation in behalf of Wicliff, had a little misinform'd him. For such a palliation is so far from being there, that there is nothing that can possibly be thought like it, or mi­staken for it, unless it be the above­named Paper of Hereford and Rep­pingdon: Which if he shall please to [Page 54]doubt of, whether it be Authentick or no, upon his acceptance of my former Invitation of him into Eng­land, I shall be willing, after we have seen his Cathedral the Tower, to wait upon him up the Water to Lambeth; where his worthy Coun­tryman, the learned Mr. Colomiez, on my account, will condescend to let him into the Archives; upon pro­mise, that he makes better use of the MSS. he sees there, than of those he calls Cardinal Bellay's; which are of so nice and so retir'd a hu­mour, that they will endure no visit from any other person besides Mr. Varillas: Of whom I shall for­bear to observe at present, how little he understands of the Consti­tutions of the Church of England, whatever pretences he makes to be a Critick in the History of Here­sies, who takes Sir H. Spelman for a Calvinist, and thinks there is no diffe­rence between Geneva and Great Britain.

XX.

But to proceed, Mr. Varillas tells us, that the aforesaid Council, held at London, forbid all Persons whatsoever to preach without permission from the Bishops. Farther he adds, That the Decisions of this Convocation at London, were inserted in a Decree of the Ʋniversity of Oxford, approv'd by Wicliff; which Spelman has also suppress'd, to put in its place a Piece, which can be manifestly convicted of Forgery, by the Testimony of Vington, an irreproachable Author in this matter. p. 43.]

1. I have so great a respect for the pious and worthy Sir H. Spelman, so basely handled by this Transcriber of Florimond, this Successour of Sorbier; not at all acquainted with the Character. of Books or Credit of Authors, that I cannot prevail with my self to discover how false the former part of this Paragraph is, till I have clear'd the latter. There has never been, perhaps, any Lay-man, that has so devoutly [Page 56]serv'd the Cause of his Mother the Church, as this incomparable Gen­tleman. He has not only display'd with Truth the former state of the English Church, but better'd the present, and has left a work, which if well considered, will do her justice, as to the rights of her Patri­mony in after Ages. What can be said great of any man, that might not be said of him, who was so admi­rably learn'd, so judicious, so sincere, so pious, and in short, was every thing that Mr. Varillas is not? Yet for all this, the Frenchman has been pleas'd to reflect upon him, as Sup­pressing a certain decree of Oxford; which Animadversion betrays the Author not only not to have read the Book, as we observ'd before, but farther yet, not to have seen so much as the Title of it. For how absurd is it, to ask for a Censure of the Ʋniversity, in a work that pro­fesses no more than a Collection of Church Constitutions; when by a [Page 57]parity of reason, he might as well fall upon the Author of the Oxford Antiquities, for omitting the relation of what has been acted in the Synods at London. And now to compare Vington (I suppose he means Knyghton) to Sir H. Spelman, shews who does it. What use he can pretend to make of Knyghton, is to me a Mystery; for in him nothing is seen of the De­cisions of a Council of London, inserted in a Decree of the Ʋniversity of Ox­ford, approv'd by Wicliff. All that can be gathered from him, is, that Wicliff made a Recantation, there in full set down; which as yet only concerns the point of the Eucharist; so it is so far from being indeed a Recantation, that it is a free and re­solute Confession of that Faith which is now maintain'd in the Church of England; declaring, that our Sa­viours body is verily and really pre­sent in the Sacrament, the Bread how­ever retaining its proper Species. And I leave it even to Mr. Cockquelin [Page 58]to determine between us, whether that Man may be concluded to re­nounce his opinion, the Opposers of which he brands with Heresie; and affirms, that at what time it was condemn'd by Authority, a Prodigy interven'd to deter the Judges from their unjust Proceedings. Neither would Tyssington and Winterton, and Wellys, and many more of his zea­lous Adversaries have written pur­posely against this Retractation, had it been so, and not rather a Remon­strance; which, because we submit the whole matter to the Readers judgment, we have affix'd at the end of these Papers from the Copy in Knyghton. Of whom, seeing Mr. Va­rillas has made mention, as an Au­thor to be relied on in this matter, though in truth he was always an open enemy to Wicliffism; I desire leave to digress into a Quotation or two out of him, to shew the state of the Wicliffists in those days: In his Fifth Book he says, In those days [Page 59]this Sect was in great esteem, and so much increast in number that a man could not see Two people walking toge­ther, but One of them was a Wicliffist. And in another place, That that Party had gain'd half, or above half the Nation to their side. And these not Mechanicks, or the lowest sort of people, but, amongst them, many Knights, of whom he instances in some, and Dukes, and Earls. That since Wicliff had Translated the Bible, even the Women of that Profession un­derstood more than their Clergy did: For which he makes a long melan­choly Lamentation, and would fain perswade us, out of Gui de Sancto Amore, that Wicliff is indeed Anti-Christ. To whom, however, he has done so much justice in his cha­racter, as to acknowledge him a most eminent Philosopher and Divine; and that as his Scholars always Foil'd their Adversaries in their Reasonings, so that he himself went beyond all Men of that Age in Disputing.

Upon the whole matter, if my opinion were to be ask'd, whether this Annalist Monsieur Vington be so altogether irreproachable, not to take any notice how small a mans credit ought to be in his own Cause; I am affraid I should declare that to me he seem'd a Person of but a mild understanding, and a very narrow information. Otherwise, in these few leaves Mr. Varillas pretends to have consulted, How could he have been so impos'd upon as to think that Wat Tyler and Jack Straw were one and the same man? How could he so forget himself as to call that in words at length The second year of King Richard, which by his own account, a little way of is the Fourth? Or lastly, why should he exclaim against a Preacher for this harmless remark, That amongst all the Prose­lytes our Saviour made, he is never read to have gain'd a Priest? And all these things printed in his Works, out of a Manuscript thought to be [Page 61]of his own writing, by a person of unsuspected Integrity, Sir Roger Twisden, who has given us at the beginning of the Book the Authors own judgement of Himself;

Which ingenuous confession may serve indeed to attone for the mi­stakes of the well-meaning Canon; but will take away all pretences of excuse from Mr. Varillas, who with­out discretion embraces him as irre­proachable. 2. It remains that we speak something to the former part of this Paragraph; where we deny that in the London-Convocation held by Courtney 1382. Preaching with­out the Episcopal License was forbid: For in that Synod, it was only re­solv'd that Hereford and Reppingdon, and Ayshton, should be silenc'd and [Page 62]hindred from the Pulpit: But for any general Constitution to prohi­bit all men whatever from Preach­ing without permission from the Ordinary, it was the Act of Th. Arundel, Successour to Courtney, in the See of Canterbury, who first procur'd it to be De­creed. This may be seen in Lynwood and Athon, and (a) Dict. Theol. M. S. in Coll. Linc. Ox. Gascoign, famous Authors of the Century in which he liv'd. Nor are we bound to enquire if any of the little Writers have said the contrary, since 'tis the duty of an Historian not to take the advantage of any Authority, but to be restless till he has the best. In the late consus'd account of the Convocation, I had almost let pass without remark, an intrigue of the Duke of Lancasters, where he makes all the right of that Prince to the Kingdom of Castile, to proceed from an Excommunication of the King in possession, and a Donation of it to Duke [Page 63]John by the Pope, (p. 27. & p. 40.) not knowing any thing of a propri­ety and just title he had acquired himself by his marriage with Constance, eldest Daughter to the Deceased King Piedro.

XXI. To make our last observati­on upon what we have undertaken to consider: He relates the Death of Wicliff, which he represents as an ex­traordinary act of God in striking him with a mortal Palsy, upon the Feast of St. Th. Becket, against whom he had prepared a Sermon for the Day. After that, he acquaints us, that his Scholars acknowledg'd him for a Saint, and attributed false miracles to him, till in the year 1486. Archbishop Arundel, in a Council at London, not content to condemn his Doctrines as before, did also burn his Books by the hand of the Hangman, p. 45, &c.] 1. Thomas Becket is so well known, that no Loyal Englishman can believe Providence would interpose in savour of him, which is still the less proba­ble [Page 64]at present, because our better Writers report this fit to have come upon Wicliff on the Festival of Holy Innocents, which is the day preceding. Dr. Gascoign, (b) In pag. ante Hist. Ivonis Car­notens. M S. in Bibl. Cotton. whose testimony about Wic­liff must be unquestionable, has in­form'd us, that having been troubled with a Palsy for two years before, it then became fatal to him; which in the decayed state of Old Age, after a life spent in action, and the Ori­ginal heat now of course abated, can be no wonder. If the Monks were resolv'd not to let him dye without a Prodigy, it would have seem'd much more plausible and taking, had they inflicted upon him the Rickets, or the Small-pox. 2. If the Scholars of Wicliff thought him a Saint, and that he was assumed into Glory, they did but as became Men of Reason, and those who had been witnesses of the Sanctity of his Life, and Purity of his Doctrines. [Page 65]But for what follows about the false Miracles, it is sheer invention; nei­ther was Mr. Varillas very wary to mention any thing of that nature in the same page with Thomas of Canter­bury: For Wicliff's Followers made no Pilgrimages to Lutterworth, nor did they ever turn up the Cloaks of their Adversaries to look for their Tails. 3. As to the business of Arundel, and the burning of the books, which in words, at length, he makes to be done in the year 1486. it is impossible to be reconcil'd to truth: That action in reality fell out about the year 1410, so we are willing to think Mr. Varillas's Pen has slipt, and by chance mistaken a hundred years, and that he meant to ascribe it to Ann. Dom. 1386. because, (in p. 42.) he tells us, that in the preced­ing year 1385 Courtney died, and Arundel succeeded in the Archbisho­prick of Canterbury: Which how­ever is notoriously false; For Courtney died not till July 31. 1396. (unless [Page 66]he died twice, in imitation of his Predecessour Sudbury) and the same Year, about Christmas, was Arun­del translated to Canterbury.

I have at last, not without great violence us'd upon my inclination, pass't through what relates to Eng­land in the First Book of Mr. Varillas; and I think I may have deserv'd as many Livres for my Patience, as He has had for his Invention. If nothing will perswade him to re­nounce his Pen and Ink, but he has sworn still to go on writing Legends, to the utter destruction of Monsieur Barbin and his Family, and to the everlasting disgrace of Mr. Cocquelin; and in the mean time is willing to continue his Scene in England, I shall take the boldness to recommend to his Fancy the renowned Story of the Ten thousand Ʋrsulins, which at present labours under a few incon­veniences, and is not so well receiv'd as it deserves, by some Scrupulous Hereticks. For the Truth of what [Page 67]He shall say, I confess I am not able to help him to any such Manuscripts as he commonly makes use of; but in lieu, I can tell him where at a very cheap rate he may furnish himself with Witnesses. But to let him know in truth what the World thinks of him: He has writ away all his Credit; his last defence of himself has prov'd him Inexcusable, and made men apt to think that as in England at present, so in France too, the same person that is Histo­riographer, is also Laureat: Hence it might be, that Monsieur Varillas in his Revolutions, takes all the liber­ties of a Poet, and Mr. Dr— in his Conference between the Hind and Panther, tho in Verse, has aim'd at all the plainness and gravity of an Historian.

For History is indeed a serious mat­ter, not to be written carelessly like a Letter to a Friend, nor with Passion, like a Billet to a Mistress; nor with Biass, like a Declamation for a par­ty [Page 68]at the Bar, or the Remonstrance of a Minister for his Prince; nor in fine, by a man unacquainted with the World, like Soliloquies and Medita­tions. It requires a long Experience, a sound Judgement, a close Attention, an unquestionable Integrity, and a style without Affectation: All which glorious accomplishments, as they are wanting in the Author of The Revolu­tions in Matters of Religion, so there is no Historian that I know of, in whom they have shew'd themselves to so high and admirable a degree, as in a Physician of our Age, who has ob­lig'd the World with a History of Dis­eases; and whose Name is too great to mention in a Pamphlet of this Character.