Titles of honor by Iohn Selden

Speaking in the Plurall number. Why 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is for any barbarous Nation to the Iews. The Rabbins reason of the Plurall. Inferiors honord, if namd by Superiors. Otherwise if Superiors namd by Inferiors. An exam∣ple in our English law for the Plurall. Dei gratia. By whom vsd. The Princes of the Empire their Royal∣ties. Dei Gratia anciently vsd by Bishops and Abbots. Expressing of Princes by the Abstract of their quality. Tua Maxima Fatuitas, to the Pope. Maiesty anciently in Rome, how afterward vsd. Celsitude, and Serenitie, to Dukes. No proper word for Maiestie in Greek. The Goddesse Maiestie. Crimen Maiestatis. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in la∣ter Grecians for Maiestie. The Despot, Sebastocrator, and Caesar; how they were formally to be spoken to, or of. Maiestie, to our Soueraigns, when first. Grace, and Excellent Grace. Worship, and Worshipfull. Soue∣rain Lady, to a Dutchesse. The disserence of speaking in the Concret or Abstract. The Spanish Pragmati∣ca

for the formality of the Kings stile in directions to him.

CHAP. VI.

OTher appendants of Maiestie are, which giue a speciall form to the expressing of Titles. Speaking in the Plurall Number is one obseruable. As, We com∣mand: in the Person of One being a Monarch. Its cer∣tain that among ancient Latins the plurall Number often was for a singular Person in common language. and (against rules of Grammar) ioind with a singular word. Not with Accius, Naeuius, or Plautus only, but in later. Catullus hath Insperanti Nobis; and Tibullus, to his false Mistresse:

Perfida nec merito Nobis inimica merenti.

But these, not to our purpose. You shall as often find the Persian and Greek Emperors in Esther, Ezra, the Macchabees, Hippocrates his Epistles and such more, to vse the singular as Plurall: Somtimes is a mixture of Both: as in that of Ptolemy Philopator to his Egypti∣ans a 1.1 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. i. I am well my self and so are Our affaires. The Iewes say that in their language for the plurality of Virtues and Po∣wer (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) supposd in a superior, they vse the Plurall number to or of one Man. Their Adoni is plurall, yet often vsd as singular. Euery tongue (saith one of b 1.2 them) hath its property. As it is honorable in the Italian (so vsually 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is interpreted; but questionles 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was in∣differently, at first, vsed by them for any strangers or Gentils c 1.3 Country where their Religion was not, ha∣uing its being out of the sigles for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. Cul∣tus alienus siue extraneus, or Idolatrie, which they com∣monly expresse by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in abbreuiature, and somtimes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, for secundum cultum extraneum) as its honorable in the Italian for an inferior to speak to a Great man by

the plurall number: so in the Arabique (the Ismaelitish he calls it) it is honorable for a Great man, as a King, to speake in the plurall. So likewise in the holy tongue it is honorable to speake of a Potentat Plurally, as Adonim & Baalim. For they say 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. Domini durus, and also 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. Et accepit Domini eius. And vpon this conceit do they interpret the plurall of Elohim ioind with a singular Verb, which most of our Men take for a mysticall expressing the Holy Trinity. Their Grammarians make it an Enallage of Number, chiefly to expresse excellencie in the Persons, to whom its re∣ferd. With this, well agrees that which is obseru'd vp∣on Iuno's ruminating on Aeneas his too good fortune;

—Méne incepto desistere victam? Nec posse Italiâ Teucrorum auertere Regem?

Rex est (saith d 1.4 Seruius) & mirè Aeneam noluit nomi∣nare. Honorantur n: Minores à Maioribus si suo nomine fuerint nominati. Contrà, Contumelia est si Maiores à Mi∣noribus suo nomine nominentur. For the speaking to them, in the singular Number, is very proportionat to their proper names. The vse of this for the Plurall, is known common at this day, but not propèr to supreme Princes. In our Law-annalls, a e 1.5 Quare impedit being brought by the King for the Prebendary of Oxgate, in the Diocesse of London, the Writ was Praecipite Mi∣chaeli de Northumbergam, against which the Serieants except, as against False Latine. But, saies Thorp, False Latine it is not, for it is a word of the plurall number, and therefore is of greater reuerence; and this is a com∣mon Fashion for the King to send to a man by the word, VO BIS. But, saies the Counsell on the other side, a man hath not seen such reuerence made to a Sherife. And afterward, the Writ was lookt on by the Iudges, and they saw it was Praecipite, and at the end Habeatis ibi

nomina Sammonitorum &c. Whereupon it was adiudg∣ed to abate. They held, it seems, the plurall Number not to be formally applied to any, but, at least, of the grea∣ter Nobilitie. That of adding DEI GRATIA in stiles, f 1.6 is now more proper to supremacie. The Earldom of Flanders, hath diuers prerogatiues, among which, one is that its Prince may write himself Dei gratia Comes Flandriae, which is a part of Royaltie. Et sunt alia ple∣rá{que} leuissima (are the words of a great g 1.7 Politician) quae Principum propria ducunt, vel ad Decus vel ad Dignita∣tem, vt Rescriptis addere DEI GRATIA; The vse whereof, as he reports, Lewes XI. Prohibited Francis then Duke of Bretagne, as a forme proper to a Kings Title, and so a French Lawier h 1.8 expresly affirms it. Yet Fer∣dinand brother to Charles v. and Archduke of Austria hath it in i 1.9 his Letters to the Emperor. And the Duke of Saxony vses it, being a Prince of the Empire, and ac∣knowledging to it a kind of supremacie, as Others like him. His k 1.10 Chancelors words are these; Cum illud non fiat in despectum Domini concedentis, sed ad Amplifican∣dam Maiestatem eius & dignitatis concessae tuitionem re∣ctè immemoriabili interstitio Principes nostri saepè dicta locu∣tione (he means DEI GRATIA) vsi sunt & etiamnum v∣tuntur. Neither do I conceiue, why Princes that want not the substance, but as it were the name of a King only, should of necessitie abstain from it. In more an∣cient times it is familiar in the stiles of farre meaner Persons then supreme Princes. Rex Venerabili in Chri∣sto Patri I. eadem Gratia Dunelmensi Episcopo; and Guilielmo eadem Gratia Archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, are a∣mongst * 1.11 our Writs. And, in the Epistles of Iohn of Sarisbury, is Rogerus Dei Gratia Eboracensis Archiepis∣copus & Apostolicae sedis Legatus Uenerabili Fratri H. Dei gratia Dunelmensi Episcopo. And from Iohn of Sa∣risbury himself, Venerabili D. & Patri Carissimo Willi∣elmo Dei Gratia Senonensi Archiepiscopo. The like is of∣ten

in the Epistles of Fulbert Bishop of Chartres, Gil∣bert of Vendosme, Anselm, and such more of the old times. So B. de Blancesfort l 1.12 Master of the Temple vses it in his Letters to S. Lewes K. of France. Its frequent in the m 1.13 Charters of the Archbishop of Saltzburg, and other Church-men of meaner note in those times. And in a Leiger book of the Abbey of Malmesbury I haue seen Iohannes Dei Gratia Abbas Malmesburiensis & e∣iusdem loci conuentus salutem in Domino. All these shew that heretofore those curious differences of Prouiden∣tia or Clementia Dei, which are now vsd by Bishops and inferior Princes, were not so distinguisht from Dei Gratia, as later times (whose beginning I know not) haue made them. To expresse them by ABSTRACTS from the Concret of their qualitie, is Ordinary. As Maie∣stie, Highnes, Grace, &c. But the Forme is not proper to them; it being vsuall in old autors with such Sub∣stantiues to designe out the subiect denominated of the Adiectiue; as

Virtus n 1.14 Scipiadae & Mitis Sapientia Laeli.

for Scipio and Laelius, which are but as f 1.15 Appietas and Lentulitas, For the induidualite, as it were, of Appius and Lentulus, or Patauinitas g 1.16 for Liuies stile. In like forme 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 are familiar for Hercules and Telemachus. And wanton Catullus, com∣paring a heauie fellow, vnworthily blest with a Deli∣cacie in his marriage bed, to a log, hath this Ithyphallique:

Talis iste meus Stupor nil videt, nihil audit.

such more often occurre, and, especially, in Epistles of later times, written with Probitas, serenitas, Sanctitas tua, and the like; where, by the way, you may remem∣ber that of Philip le Beau of France a 1.17 to Pope Boni∣face the VIII. Sciat tua maxima Fatuitas, Nos, in Tem∣poralibus,

Alicui non subesse. The occasion b 1.18 was from this most arrogant Pope his calling himselfe Dominus Totius Mundi tam in Temporalibus quam in Spiritualibus. And for Bishops, its noted in old Annals, that Leude∣rique g 1.19 Bishop of Breme (about DCCCXL.) was a proud fellow, because he would somtimes title himself Custos, somtimes Pastor Bremensis Ecclesiae. Whereupon, (saies * 1.20 Crantzius) Uide Temporum simplicitatem quod non paterentur PASTORIS Vocabulum. Quid facerent, si ritum nostrae aetatis ambitiosum cernerent, vbi ex ore E∣piscopi insonare audirent, Nostra gratia, Nostra Pontifi∣calis Dignitas, & reliqua his etiam gloriosiora. But in this kind som abstracts are proper notes of Soueraign∣tie: as Maiestie which is now competent to none but supreme Princes; And that, in substance, very anciently. For, in Rome, the highest power of Gouernment be∣ing in the People (not the multitude but the whole Com∣mon-welth) as, in an absolute Monarchy and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the Monarch; the word Maiestie was proper to them. As Authoritas in Senatu, Potestas in Plebe, Im∣perium in Magistratibus, So Maiestas was in Populo, which c 1.21 Cicero with others, will iustifie. And Maiesta∣tis Crimen (saith d 1.22 Vlpian) illud est, quod aduersus Pop. Rom. vel aduersus securitatem eius Commititur, which well agrees, with what was in that State before the Emperors. Intentio est (as for an example e 1.23 Tully faines) Maiestatem minuisti, quod Tribunum Plebis de Templo de∣duxisti. And Maiestas est Magnitudo quaedam Populi Rom. in eius potestate & iure retinendo. But when the summe of all things was transferd into the Emperors from the People, the Crimen Maiestatis became chiefely against them and their State. Lex Iulia Maiestatis (so f 1.24 Iu∣stinian) in eos qui contra Imperatorem vel Remp. aliquid moliti sunt; suum vigorem extendit. And then, towards the declining times, they tooke to themselues Perennitas nostra, Eternitas g 1.25 Nostra, Numen Nostrum, Tranquillitas

Nostra, Screnitas Nostra Maiestas h 1.26 Nostra, and such like often occurring in the two Codes of Theodosius, and Iustinian. But long before that, although not with the first person, yet it was attributed to them. Sueton re∣porting that Augustus after the ciuill warres would not himself, nor suffer his neer kindred to call his souldi∣ers Commilitones, but Milites, giues the reason; because he did think it ambitiosius, quàm aut ratio militaris, aut temporum quies, aut sua Domús{que} suae Maiestas postularet. And in Claudius he speaks of leuior Maiestati Princi∣pali titulus. And, one i 1.27 that liu'd in Sueton's time vnder Traian, to Traian. Huius (he means Crimen Maiestatis) tu metum penitùs sustulisti, contentus Magnitudine, qua nul∣li magis caruerunt quam qui sibi Maiestatem vindicabant. I know, Trebellius k 1.28 Pollio seems to make against this. He, speaking of Gallien's brother Valerian slain about Millan, and of the doubt whether he had been a Cae∣sar or not, adds; Constat de Genere, non satis tamen con∣stat de Dignitate, vel, vt caeperunt alij loqui de MAIE∣STATE. As if Maiestie had then been a word first vsd for Dignitie. But as the most learned Casanbon obserues, that must be vnderstood of the Greater Ro∣man Dignities beside the Empire. So that then first Court-flatterie began to stile the Dignities of the Em∣perors fauorits and such as were of higher Note, with Maiestie. For plainly to the Emperors, as you see, it was not before vnusuall. And, vntill this time of Tre∣bellius, it may be well affirmd proper only to suprema∣cie amongst them. Let it not moue, that Maiestas in another sense, was common to others, as Maiestas Pu∣eritiae, and Maiestas Matronarum obserud in Liuy and Plinie. That was in a regard of their priuat Quality, not publique Dignitie; and in a sense of that nature hath Valerius Maximus the last chapter of his 11. book titled de Maiestate. Est quasi (saith he) priuata censura Maiestas Clarorum Virorum, sine Tribunalium fastigio, sine

Apparitorum ministerio, potens in sua amplitudine obtinen∣da—quam rectè quis dixerit longum & beatum honorem esse sine honore. But, this Maiestie, publiquely applied, was an expressing of Power and high place, not admi∣ration only of qualitie. So it may be well seen in that of a noble Graecian, deliuering l 1.29 the Maiesty of the Pope of Rome by 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i. the Empire and Power of the People of Rome. And this Publique Maiestie was after the dimminution of the Peoples libertie, conueyed solely to the Emperor; and (howsoeuer that new application in Pollio's time, was) the Ciuilians since haue referd the proper Crimen Ma∣iestatis only to the m 1.30 Emperor. So, at this day, they do by the Imperialls alone, as in France and with vs, in respect of our Soueraigns only. But, by their leaue, its not easily conceiud how Crimen Maiestatis must not bee referd to Princes acknowledging indeed the Emperors supremacie, But withall hauing all Regall and Imperiall right in their Dominions; as diuers of the German Princes haue: although they abstain from this abstract in their titles, as, of the Dukes of Saxonie, Ba∣uier, Sauoy, Lorraine, Ferrara, Florence, Mantoua, and such accounting themselues as absolute as any that haue but the Name of Duke, Bodin n 1.31 affi••ms; and that they are Celsitudinis verbo contenti, aut Serenitatis, quam sibi Dux Venetorum tribuit. But this title of Serenitas, Excellentia, Sublimitas, and the g 1.32 like many are anciently giuen by Emperors to their Lieutenants and others indistinctly, as you may see in the Codes, Nouells, and Epistles of Cassiodore. Its among the Greeks 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 o 1.33 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. Nostra Serenitas. So p 1.34 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, i Serenissima Maiestas Sacrato∣rum Imperatt. Nostrorum. If, at least, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 be Maie∣stas. Its hard to find a better word interpreting it. But indeed, as Casaubon obserues, Greek hath not an ex∣presse word for Maiestie. Som haue q 1.35 turned 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,

Maiestas and Magnitudo, but it properly signifies the last, not so well the first, which comes plainly from a Comparatiue. Maiestas ita{que} (are Casaubons words) si verbi proprietatem spectamus, Numinis est solius: quod omnibus ijs, quae magna dici possunt, est maius. Usurpatio est cum Principibus maiestas tribuitur. But obserue their tradition of the Godesse Maiestie. They fained that at first there was no distinction of Place or Pre∣cedence among the Gods, but that the meanest would somtimes sit in Saturns own Throne. And this, they say, r 1.36 continued

Donec Honor placido{que} decens Reuerentia vultu Corpora legitimis imposuere toris. Hinc sata Maiestas, quae mundum temperat omnem, Quá{que} die partu est edita, Magna fuit. Nec mora consedit medio sublimis Olympo, Aurea purpureo conspicienda sinu.

As Maiestie was there bred of Honor and Rēuerence, so proportionatly mongst men, and thence the word ap∣plied to the supreme of Men. But also they vsd Nu∣men Imperatoris, and Oracula Augusti, for Edicta, and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 for 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as if you should say diuinitùs sancimus for statuimus. And before this great commu∣nicating of Maiesty, the Emperors s 1.37 had the attribute of Sanctissimus, and such like. These beginning vnder Heathenisme, continued after Christianitie. Whence, when they speak of the Crimen Maiestatis, they t 1.38 vse 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, which may be interpreted, a iudgment or accusation touching what is committed a∣gainst a thing sanctified or sacred. But I think 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 will be most proper, in substance, for Maiestie; al∣though George Codin translated hath alwaies Regnum for his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: Vnder fauour, not without error. They had also their u 1.39 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. sacred Maiestie: which was proper only to the Emperor, and that when others

spake to him; he himself in modestie omitting Sacred, and speaking only 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. But Maiestie exprest in this word was communicated also to the Despote, Se∣bastocrator, and Caesar. The Despot was the heire or successor apparant of the Constantinopolitan Empire (vn∣derstand, of the times since Alexius Comnenus, though before him it were a generall name, as My Lord) the Sebastocrator the second from him in dignitie, and next the Caesar, Protosebastus and so forth. But, to our pur∣pose, receiue this out of their c 1.40 traditions. Before the Emperor they calld the Despote, My Lord (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) and Maiestie was applied to him: the Sebastocrator, My Lord (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) Sebastocrator: the Caesar, my Lord Cae∣sar, in those words as the other; and to both these al∣so was Maiestie (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) applied. But if any other Great men about the Court (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) had occa∣sion to vse the Despot's name to the Emperor, they thus; My Lord (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) Your sonne the Despote. If they speaking among themselus mention'd him then: 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. Our Lord the Despote. For in later Greek 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is Our, either corruptep from their ancient own, or induced by Tartarian or Turkish, wherein Babamus is our Father. If a great man spake to the De∣spote, he might either call him My Lord the Despote (with the word last remembred) or, for greater honor, Our Lord the Despote. If any of the Despot's seruants or followers, vsd his masters name to the Emperor, hee might not call him 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (which I interpret to be in fashion the same with Our, My Lord, when we speake indifferently of any Noble∣man) but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 i. My Lord and Master, your sonne the Despote. For so I thinke, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 is best here translated. If a man spake to any of their other Great men (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) hee neuer vsd 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. On the other side 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was neuer vsd to the Despote, but 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Neither could they

render reason for all those, but because vse and cu∣stome had brought them to it. Neither hath the Gram∣maticall difference of 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: any thing to do here. For our Kingdome; Maiestie (saith the lear∣ned Author of the Remains) came hither in time of Henry the Eight, as Sacred Maiestie lately in our me∣mory. Vnderstand him, as it was commonly in vse, and properly to the King applied. For in the Epistles of Iohn of Sarisbury, is Maiestas tua, diuers times to Henry Fitz-lempresse, vnder whom hee liu'd, and the same is there vsd also to Pope Adrian. Grace mongst vs began in time of Henry IV. and Excellent grace, as you read in the Remains, vnder Henry the Sixt. High and mighty Prince vnder Edward the fourth. But, a∣bout those times it was not solely proper to the King, as it seems by the Concord (touching the title of the Crowne) twixt Henry the sixt, and Richard Duke of Yorke, made in XXXIX. Henry VI. in Parliament at West∣minster, with this title, Betwixt the most High and most mighty Prince, Henry the fixt, King of England and of France, and Lord of Ireland, on the one partie, and the right High and mightie Prince Richard Plantagenet Duke of Yorke, on the other partie; and the Duke of Glocester vnder Henry the a 1.41 sixt, is calld High and mightie Prince and the Duke of Excester, Hault and Puissant Prince. Anciently how our Soueraigns were, in this kind tit∣led, may be obserud, vpon these examples. Au Tres∣noble & tréshonorable Prince & son trescher Seignior si luy pleist Monsieur Edward per la grace de Dieu Roy d' Engleterre, Signior D'irland, & Duc D' Aquitaine le sone Henry Percy reuerence & honeurs: In a letter b 1.42 to Edward 1. writen from Dunwich; and the like, in diuers other Records, is. And there the Barons of the Ex∣chequer send to the King with Nous maund à vostre hautesse, &c. But also in times later then Edward 1. ti∣tles and notes of Greatnes being not in that distincti∣on

or Curiositie as now, som such as are with vs mean, were competent to highest Princes. I remember, I once saw a Petition by a Bishop to Henry v. subscribd with Your Worships Beadsman. About the same time a trea∣tise writen of the order of the Coronation, hath thus: After this the King shall be clothed agen with other clothes, and Worshipfully shall go to the Auter of Seynte Edwardes shryne; and the King is there calld Worshipfull Prince. So the Monk of Bury, Dan Lid∣gat speaking of Henry the fifts commanding him to writ the Troian Warre, saith

The which emprise anon I ginn shall In his Worship, as for memoryall.

Hee vsually calls him Most worthy, or worthy, or No∣ble Prince, and Soueraign Lord. And plainly worship is but an abstract from worthy, and signifies, as estimation, properly. to wuruld wurþscipe sy he þegen lage wyrþe i. To worlds worship (i. in worldly estimation) hee shall be in equall degree with a Thane, saies a Canon of Canutus his laws, speaking of a Priest that liud free from incontinencie: and in those so ancient times it was a generall title, but according to the person qualified. In an old Saxon b 1.43 tradition of their Nobilitie; Then were the wisest of the people weorþscipeswyrða aelc be his maðe Eorl & Ceorl, {that}egn & {that}eoden i. worshipworthy, euery one in his Dignitie, the Earle and Cheorl, Thane, & Vnderthane. So in later times Dukes and Earles haue had Worshipfull and Right worshipfull applied to them. An Epitaph c 1.44 is at Warwick in S. Maries Church there, in part, thus.

Pray Deuoutly for the Soule, whom God assoile, of one of the most Worshipfull Knights, in his daies, of manhood & cunning,

RICHARD d 1.45 BEAVCHAMPE late Earle of Warwick, Lord Despenser of Burgaueny, and of many other great Lordships, whose Body resteth here vnder this Tomb.

And his daughter the Countesse of Shrewsbury was buried in S. Faith's vnder Paules, with

Here, before the Image of Ihesu, lieth the Worshipfull and right Noble Lady Margaret Countesse of Shrewsbury, &c.

But now euery Gentleman of better (rather richer) Rank is saluted Worshipfull. And, on the other side, what now is one of our particular Notes of Maiestie, not giuen to any but the supreme, I mean Soueraign Lord or Lady, hath been anciently bestowed on others. The preface and dedication of Alexanders life, writen vnder Henry VI. by a Dominican Frier thus speaks,

To my souerayn Lady benigne and honorable, Discrete, full of wisdome, of Gloucetre Duchesse, I symple seruant, thogh I be vnable, With deuoute hert with all my besynesse, Send ioye, worschepp, welth, pess, and stabylnesse, Betwix you and yowre euere more to leste, And so be schad widde w^e grace that it neuer breste.

What, that hater of Monarchs, Buchanan hath in his malicious dislike of giuing titles and attributes of great honor to Princes, I omit, and leaue him to his error, conuinced by the generall consent and allowance of Antiquitie. But, touching these, it hath been e 1.46 questioned, which is the more both elegant and honorable to speak in the Concret or Abstract. That is, whether to say Serenissime Princeps à te peto, or A Serenitate Vestrâ

peto. And some haue thought the first forme the best, because in that the Accidents and Subiects are toge∣ther exprest, in the other the Accidents only being the note of Honor. But howsoeuer for elegancie, it seems the Abstract tastes as if it were more honorable. For that quality denominats, and, from it inherent in the Person, is the Honor giuen. Now, as it is inherent, and not predicated of the Person, its best exprest for its own Essence; Neither is it otherwise (as Logique teaches) properly in any Predicament. As Album, al∣though in a formall signification of the thing designd, it expresse a Certain Ens per se, yet as the formall and materiall or connotatiue signification, of it, is, it's f 1.47 Ens per accidens, id est, aggregatum quid ex ijs quae diuersis Praedicamentis ponuntur. And Albedo is the Ens per se. Then, where the quality is, neerest to its own single essence, exprest, that is in the Abstract, it seems, the Person is with somwhat more honor saluted, then if it were only connotatiuè as they call it. For, Vir excel∣lentissime doth but connotatiuè, or by way of consequent speak excellentia; as indeed in euery Concret, but in like form and by an accidentall consequence, is both the ••••cident and the substance. But this is a most friuo∣lous disquisition, which I had not spoken to, if I had not seen it questiond. I adde out of the Spanish Prag∣matica, publisht vnder Philip II. against the multipli∣citie of Titles giuen both to the King and other great Men, in the yeer 〈◊〉〈◊〉. D. LXXXVI. the VIII. of October, at S. Lawrence; that the King there would haue no other title in the beginning of any Letter to him, but Senor; in the subscription only his name that wrote it; in the end of the Letter, only God preserue your Catholique Maiestie; and the superscription, To the King our Lord. The petitions to the Counsells, Chan∣ceries, and Tribunals, might be titled with Most mighty Lord, but no more. The signing of Letters, scedules, and

such like should bee only with By the King our Lord. Diuers other particulars are in it, touching these kind of Titles to Other Great men, which in their more due place shall succeed.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Lib. 3. Mac∣chab.
• b 1.2

  Aben-Ezra in Genes. cap 1.
• c 1.3

  Elias Thisbit. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, omnes linguas, praeter Ebraeam, ita di∣ctas scribit.
• d 1.4

  Ex Ms. Fuld. excerpt. & Ser∣uio Danielis inter alia additum.
• e 1.5

  29. Ed. 3. fol. 44.
• f 1.6

  Apud Orteli∣um in Theatro.
• g 1.7

  Bodin. 1. de Repub. cap. 10.
• h 1.8

  Rebuff. ad Constit. Reg. Tom. 2. vt Be∣nefic. ante vac. art. 2.
• i 1.9

  In Edit. Fre∣heriana Sigis∣mundi Baronis de Herbestein.
• k 1.10

  Andr. Kni∣chen. in Comm. Iuris Saxon. Duc. Sax. cap. 1.
• * 1.11

  Fitzh. Nat. ••r. fol. 132. & 2. E.
• l 1.12

  Epist. Regum & Principum Edit. in Tom. 2. Orient. Hist. pag. 1176.
• m 1.13

  Chronic. Richerspergens. sub ann. M. CL. & seqq.
• n 1.14

  Horat. lib. 2. Satyr. 1.
• f 1.15

  Cicer. lib. 3. Fam. Epist. 7.
• g 1.16

  Asinius Pol∣lio apud Quin∣tilian. lib. 8. cap. 1.
• a 1.17

  Mart. Polon. Chronic.
• b 1.18

  Rolewinck in Fascicul. Temp. sub anno 1294.
• g 1.19

  Adam Bre∣mens. hist. Eccles. cap. 20.
• * 1.20

  Metropol. lib. 1. cap. 32.
• c 1.21

  Orat. pro. C. Rabirio.
• d 1.22

  ff. ad leg. Iul. Maiest. l. 1. §. 1.
• e 1.23

  De Inuenti∣one lib. 2. §. 10. Et Orat. Partit. §. 50.
• f 1.24

  Instit. tit. de Public. Iudicijs. §. 3.
• g 1.25

  C. Theodos. tit. de Fabricens. l. 3.
• h 1.26

  C. tit. de Si∣lentiarijs l. 1. & de Agēt. l. Nulli.
• i 1.27

  Plin. in Pane∣gyric. Traiano dicto.
• k 1.28

  In Gallicnis.
• l 1.29

  Polyb. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. in Foedere Ae∣tolorum.
• m 1.30

  Wesenbech. in Paratit. & ff. ad leg. Iul. Ma∣iestatis vide & Gothofred. ad dict. tit. & ad C. eodem, l. 5.
• n 1.31

  De Repub. 1. cap. 10.
• g 1.32

  De his con∣sulas licet G. Panciroll. ad Notit. Dignitat. cap. 3. v••iid genus pluria.
• o 1.33

  Harmenopul. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 5. cap. 9.
• p 1.34

  Schol. ad Con∣stantin. Tom. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• q 1.35

  Glossar. Vet. Graeco-lat. v. 2. Petri cap. 1. com. 16. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• r 1.36

  Ouid. Fastor. 5.
• s 1.37

  Paul. ff. de le∣gat. 2. l. 87. §. Lucius & Scoe∣uola ff. lib. 40. tit. ••1. l. 3.
• t 1.38

  Athaliat. tit. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 66. & Glossar. Vet. & Sanctitas Regum ap. Iul. cas. in Tranq.
• u 1.39

  Codin. & Meurs. Gloss. Graeco. Barb. in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• c 1.40

  Curopalat. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. quem tamen, absque Iunij Restitutione locorum, ne legas.
• a 1.41

  Parl. 3. Hen. 6. art. 1. & 26.
• b 1.42

  Rot. 25. Ed. 1. in Arce Lon∣dini de Rebus Scotiam tan∣gentibus memb. 4. 6. & saepius.
• b 1.43

  Ap. Lambard. in Peramb. Kant.
• c 1.44

  Camden. Brit. Edit. Anglic. Idiomatis. & in Reliquijs.
• d 1.45

  Rothomagi fatis concessit A. M.CD.XXXIX.
• e 1.46

  Christoph. Becman. Schedi∣asm. Philologic.
• f 1.47

  Aristot. Meta∣phys. 7. cap. 6. text. 21.