Examen historicum, or, A discovery and examination of the mistakes, falsities and defects in some modern histories occasioned by the partiality and inadvertencies of their severall authours / by Peter Heylin ...

ANIMADVERSIONS ON The Third and Fourth Books OF The Church History OF BRITAIN. (Book 3)

From the time of the Norman Conquest, to the time of King Henry the Eighth. (Book 3)

WE are now come unto the times of the N••r∣man Government, when the ••hurch beg••n to settle on a surer bottom, both fo•• 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and polity; the Bishops lesse obnoxious to the Ki•••••• then fo••merly, because elected by the Monks and C••∣nons of their own Cathedrals▪ their Con••istories free 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the intermixture of Lay-assistance, and their Syn••••s m••∣nag'd by themselves. Wherein tho••gh the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 power of making such Synodicall Cons••i••••tions 〈…〉〈…〉 facto binde all pa••ties, yet our Author is resolv'd to have ••••otherwise.

Fol. 19. The Pr••ceedings (saith he) of the Canon Law were never wholly received into practice in the Land; but so as made subject in whatsoever touched temporals, to Se∣cular Lawes, and National Customs. And the Laity at 〈◊〉〈◊〉 limited Canons in this behalf.] How false this is, ••ow contrary to the power and practice of the Church be••ore the ••ubmission of the Clergy to King Henry the ei••••••; and ••inally how dangerous a g••ound is hereby 〈◊〉〈◊〉 to weaken the Authority of Convocations, will 〈◊〉〈◊〉 appear by ••••ying down the sum of a Petition pre∣••••••••ed by the House of Commons to the same King H••nry, together with the Answer of the P••elates and in∣ferior Clergy, then being Synodically assembled, to the said Petition.

The substance of the Petition was as followeth, viz.

THat the Clergy of this your Realm, being you▪ Highness Sub••ects, in their Convocation by th••m holden within this your Realm, have made and dayly make divers Sanctions or Laws conce••ning Temporal things,* 1.1 and some of them be ••ep••gnant to the Lawes and Statu••e•• of your Realm, not having 〈◊〉〈◊〉 requirin•• your most Royall assent to the same Lawes so by them made, nother any assent or know∣ledge of your Lay Subjects, is had to the same, no••he•• to them published and known in their Mother tongre al••••it dive••s and sundry of the said Lawes extend in certain causes to your excellent Pe••son, your liberty and Pre••ogative Royall, and to the inte••diction 〈◊〉〈◊〉 your Lawes and Possessions, and so likewise to the Good•• and Possessions of your Lay Sub••ects, decla••in•• the in••ringers of the same Lawes so by them ma••e

not only to incur the terrible censure of Excommunica∣tion, but also to the detestable crime and sin of Her••••e, by the which divers of your humble and obedient Lay Subjects be brought into this Ambiguity, whether they may do and execute your Laws according to your Juris∣diction Royal of this Realm, for dread of the same Censures and pains comprised in the same Lawes so by them made in their Convocations, to the g••eat trouble and inquietation of your said humble and obedient Lay sub••ects, &c. the impeachment of your Jurisdiction and Prerogative Royal.

The Answer thereunto was this.

TO this we say, that forasmuch as we 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and take our Authority of making Lawes to be grounded upon the Scripture of God, and the deter∣mination of holy Church, which must also be 〈◊〉〈◊〉 rule and squier to try the justice and righteousness of all Lawes, as well Spiritual as Temporal; we verily trust that considering the Lawes of this Realm be such as have been made by most Christian, religious and devout Princes and People, how both these Lawes proceeding from one fountain the same being sincerely interpreted, and after the good meaning of the makers, there shall be found no repugnancy, nor contrariety, but that the one shall be found as aiding, maintaining and supporting the other. And if it shall otherwise appear, as it is our duty (where∣unto we shall alwayes most diligently 〈◊〉〈◊〉 ourselves) to reform our O••dinance▪ to Gods Commis∣sion, and to conform our Statutes and Lawes; and those of our predecessors, to the determination of Scripture and holy Church; so we hope in 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and shall dayly pray for the same, that your Highness will,

〈…〉〈…〉 came why, with the assent of your 〈…〉〈…〉 temper your Graces Lawes accordingly. 〈…〉〈…〉 shall 〈◊〉〈◊〉 a most happy and perfect 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and agreement, as God being Lapis angula∣•••• to agree and con••oyn the same. And as concer∣ning 〈…〉〈…〉 of your Highness Royall assent to the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of such Lawes as have been by our 〈◊〉〈◊〉, or shall be made by us in such points and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as we have by God authority to rule and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 by such Provisions and Lawes; we knowing your Highness wisdom, and vertue, and learning, no∣thing doubt but the same perceiveth how the granting hereunto dependeth not upon our will and liberty. And that we your most humble Subjects may not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the execution of our charge and duty certain∣ly prescribed by God, to you•• Highness assent, although in very deed the same is most worthy for your most Noble, Princely, and excellent vertues, not only to give yo•••• Royall assent, but also to devi••e and com∣m••nd what we should fo•• good order and 〈…〉〈…〉 Statutes and Lawe provide in the Church, ne∣vertheless conside••ing we may not so ne in such sort refrain the doing of our office in the ••ee••ing and ruling of 〈◊〉〈◊〉 people your Graces Subjects; we most humbly desiring your Grace as the same hath heretofore, so from hence forth to shew your Graces 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and opinion unto us, what your high Wisdom shall think convenient, which we shall most gladly hear and follow i•• it shall please God to in∣•••••• is so to do, with all submission and humility be••••ech the same, following the step•• of your most Noble Progenitors, and conformably to your our own Acts do maintain and defend such Lawes, and Ordinance••, as we according to our cal∣ling and by Authority of God, shall for his honour make, to the ••di••ication of vertue, and maintaining

Christs faith, of which your Highness is named De∣fender, and hath been hitherto indeed a special Pro∣tector.

Furthermore whereas your said Lay Subjects say, that sundry of the said Laws extend in certain causes to your excellent Person, your Liberty and Prerogative Royal, and to the interdiction of your Land and Pos∣sessions: To this your said Orators say, that having submitted the tryal and examining of the Laws made in the Church by us and our Predecessors, to the just and straight Rule of Gods Laws, which giveth measure of Power, Prerogative, and Authority to all Emper∣ors, Kings, Princes, and Potentates, and all other; we have conceiv'd such opinion, and have such estimati∣on of your Majesties goodness and vertue, that what∣soever any persons not so well learned as your Grace is would pretend unto the same, whereby we your most humble Subjects may be brought in your Graces dis∣pleasure and indignation, surmising that we should by usupation and presumption, extend our Laws to your most noble Person, Prerogative and Realm, yet the same your Highness being so highly learn'd, will of your own most bounteous goodness facilly discharge and deliver us from that envy, when it shall appear that the said Laws are made by us, or our Predecessors conformable and maintenable by the Scripture of God, and determination of the Church, against which no Laws can stand or take effect.

Somewhat to this pur∣pose had been before endevoured by the Commons in the last Parliament of King Edw. 3. of which, because they got nothing by it, but only the shewing of their teeth without hurting any body; I shall say nothing in this place, reserving it to the time of the long Par∣liament, in the Reign of King Charles, when this point was more hotly followed, and more powerfully prose∣cuted than ever formerly.

What says our Author unto this? Findes he here any such matter, as that the Laity at their pleasure could li∣•••••• the Canons of the Church? Or that such Canons in whatsoever t••uched temporals were subject unto secular Laws and National Customs? And hereof I desire the Reader to take special notice, as that which is to serve for a Catholicon, of general Antido••e against those many venomous insi••nations, which he shall meet with up and down in the course of this History. As for the case in which our Author grounds this pestilent Position, it was the Canon made in a Synod at Westminster, in the [ 62] time of Anselm, Anno 1102. prohibiting the sale of men and women like brute beasts in the open Market. Which Canon not finding presently an universal obedi∣ence over all the Kingdom (as certainly ill customs are not easily left, when they are countenanced by profit) occasioned our Author to adventure upon this bold asser∣tion.

[ 63] Fol. 24. Indeed St. Davids had been Christian some hundred of years, whilest Canterbury was yet Pagan.•• Not many hundred years I am sure of that, nor yet so many as to make a plural number by the Latin Grammar; Kent being conquered by the Saxons, who brought in Pae∣••••nism, Anno 455. Converted unto Christianity by the preaching of Austin, An. 569. Not much more then 140 years betwixt the one and the other.

[ 64] Fol. 29. To whose honor he (viz. King Stephen) erected St. Stephens Chappel in Westminster neer the place whero lately the Court of Requests was kept.] Our Author is here 〈…〉〈…〉, and will not parler le tout, as the French men say. For otherwise he might have told us that this Chappel is still standing, and since the ••••endry of it to King Edward the sixth,* 1.2 ha•••• been 〈◊〉〈◊〉 for a Parliament House, im∣pl••yed to that purpose by the Common, as 〈…〉〈…〉

be thus reserved, I can hardly tell; unless it be to prevent such inferences and observations, which by some wanton wits might be made upon it.

Fol. 40. By the same title from his Father Jeffery [ 65] Plantagenet, he possessed fair lands in Anjou and Maine. I had thought he had possessed somewhat more in An∣jou and Maine, then some fair Lands only, his Father Ieffery Plantagenet being the Proprietary Earl of Anjou, Maine, and Toureine, not a••itular only, succeeded in the same by this King Henry and his two sons, Richard, and Iohn, till lost unhappily by the last with the rest of our Estates on that side of the Sea. From this Ieffery descended fourteen Kings of the name of Plantagenet, the name not yet extinguished, though it be impoverished: our Au∣thor speaking of one of them, who was found not long since at the Plow. Lib. 2. p. 170. Another of that name publishing a Book about the Plantation of new Albion, An. 1646. or not long before.

Fol. 53. King John sent a base, degenerous and unchri∣stian [ 66] Embassage to Admiralius Murmelius a Mahometan King of Morocco, then very puissant, and possessing a great part of Spain.] This Admiralius Murmelius, as our Au∣thor and the old Monks call him, was by his own name called Mahomet Enaser, the Miramomoline of Morocco; to whom if King Iohn sent any such Message, it was as base, unchristian and degenerate as our Author makes it. But being the credit of the ••ale depends upon the credit of the Monkish Authors, to which b••ood of men that King was known to be a professed Enemy ••ha••ing and hated by one another•• it is not to be esteemed so highly as a piece of Apocrypha, and much less to be held for Gospel Pos∣sible it is, that being overlaid by his own subjects, and distressed by the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 he might send unto that King for aid in his great extremities. And doing this 〈◊〉〈◊〉 this were a••••) he did no 〈…〉〈…〉 and in ignation, and 〈…〉〈…〉

so much as was done afterwards upon far weaker grounds by King Francis the first, employing the Turks Forces both by Sea and Land against Charles the fifth. But the Monks coming to the knowledge of this secret practise, and const••••ing his actions to the worst, improv'd the Molehil to a Mountain, rendring him thereby as odious to posterity, as he was to themselves.

[ 67] Fol. 63. I question whether the Bishop of Rochester (whose Countrey house at Brumly is so nigh) had ever a House in the City.] There is no question but he had, St••w finding it in Southwark by the name of Rochester 〈◊〉〈◊〉 adioyning on the South side to the Bishop of Win∣chesters, minons, and out of ••eparation in his time (as possibly not much frequented since the building of Bromly House) and since converted into Tonements for private [ 68] persons. But since our Author hath desired others to reco∣ver the rest from oblivion, I shall help him to the know∣ledge of two more, and shall thank any man to finde out the third. The first of these two is the Bishop of Lin∣colns House, situate neer the old Temple in Holborn, first built by Robert de Chesney Bishop of Lincoln, Anno 1147. Since alien'd from that See to the Earls of Southampton, and passing by the name of Southampton House. The second is the Bishop of Bangors, a fair House situate in Shoo-lane neer St. Andrews Church, of late time Leased out by the Bishops, and not long since the dwelling of Dr Smith Doctor in Physick, a right honest and inge∣nuous person, and my very good Friend. Of all the old Bishops which were founded before King Harry the eight, there is none whose House we have not found but the Bishop of A••aph▪ to the finding whereof, if our Author, or any other will hold forth the Candle, I shall follow the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the best I can, and be thankful for it.

[ 69] Fol. 67. And though some high Royalists look on it as the product of subjects, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 themselves on their 〈…〉〈…〉 Our Author tells us in his

〈1 page〉〈1 page〉

Brerewood upon a diligent enquiry hath found it other∣wise then our Author doth▪ letting us know, That the first Countrey in Christendom, whence the Jews were expelled without hope of return,* 1.3 was our Countrey of England, whence they were banished, Anno 1290. by King Edward the first; and not long after out of France, Anno 1307. by Phi••ippus Pulcher. Not out of France first, out of England afterwards, as our Author would have it.

[ 72] Fol. 100. Thus men of yesterday have pride too much to remember what they were the day before.] An observation true enough, but not well applyed. The two Spen∣••••rs whom he speaks this of, were not men of yesterday, or raised out of the dirt or dunghill to so great an height;* 1.4 but of as old and known Nobility as the best in England: insomuch that when a question grew in Parliament, whether the Baronesse de Spencer, or the Lord of Abur∣gaveny were to have precedency, it was adjudg'd unto de Spencer, thereby declar'd the antientest Barony of the Kingdom at that time then being. These two Spencers, Hugh the Father was created Earl of Win∣chester for term of life; and Hugh the Son by marrying one of the Daughters and co-heirs of Gilbert dt Cl••re, became Earl of Gloster. Men more to be commended for their Loyalty, then accused for their pride, but that the King was now declining, and therefore it was held fit by the prevalent faction to take his two supporters from him, as they after did.

[ 73] Fol. 113. The Lord Chancellor was ever a Bishop.] If our Author by this word ever understands 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, most commonly, or for the most part, he is right enough; but then it will not stand with the following words, viz. as if it had been against equity to employ any other 〈◊〉〈◊〉. 〈…〉〈…〉 he take the word

ever in its proper and more natural sense, as if none but Bishops had ever been advanced unto that office, he doth not only misinform the Reader, but confute himself, he having told us fol. 31. of this present book, that Thomas Becket being then but Archdeacon of Can∣terbury, was made Lord Chancellor, and that as soon as he was made Archbishop, he resign'd that office. But the truth is, that not only men in holy Orders, but many of the Laity also had attained that dignity, as will appear to any who will take the pains to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 the Catalogue of the Chancellors and 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of the Gr••at Seal, in the Glossary of Sir Henry 〈◊〉〈◊〉: in which appear not only some of inferior dignity, as Deans, Archdeacons, House-hold Chaplains; but ma∣ny also not dignified with any Ecclesiasticall ••••••••∣or Notification, and therefore in all probability to be looked on as meer Laymen, Counsellors, and Ser∣vants to the Kings in whose times they lived, or otherwise studied in the Lawes, and of good affection••, and consequently capable of the place of such trust and power.

Fol. 116. This year•• viz. 1350. as Authors gene∣rally agree, King Edward instituted are Order of the Garter.] Right enough as unto the time, but much mistaken in some things which relate unto that an∣tient and most noble Order: our Author taking up his Commodities at the second hand, neither con∣sulting the Records, no•• dealing in this business with men of credit. For first there are not 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Ca∣nons [ 74] resident in the Church of Win••or, but thirteen only with the Dean: it being King Edwards purpo••e when he founded that O••de••, consisting of twenty 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Knights, himself being one, to 〈◊〉〈◊〉 as many greater and lesser Canons, and as many old Souldiers commonly called poor Knights•• to be pensioned there. Though in this last the number was 〈…〉〈…〉

[ 75] up to his first intention. He tels us secondly, that if he be not mistaken (as indeed he is) Sir Thomas Row was the last Chancellor of the Order; whereas Sir Iames Palmer one of the Gentlemen Huishers of the Privy Chamber succeeded him in the place of Chancellor af∣ter his decease, Anno 1644. He tels us thirdly, that [ 76] there belongs unto it one Register being alwayes the Dean of Winsor, which is nothing so. For though the Deans of late times have been Registers also, yet ab initio non suit sic, it was not so from the begin∣ning; The first Dean who was also Register, being Iohn Boxul, Anno 1557. Before which time, beginning at the year 1414. there had been nine Registers which were not Deans; but how many more before that time I am not able to say, their names not being on Record. And so••••thly he tels us, that the Garter is one of the extraordinary Habiliments of the Knights of this Order, their ordinary being only the blew Ribbon about their necks, with the picture of St. George appendant, and the Sun in his glory on the left shoulder [ 77] of their Cloak; whereas indeed the Garter is of com∣mon wearing, and of such necessary use, that the Knights are not to be seen abroad without it,* 1.5 upon pain of paying two Crowns to any Officer of the Order who shall first claim it, unless they be to take a journey; in which case it is sufficient to wear a blew Ribbon under [ 78] their Boots to denote the Garter. Lastly, whereas our Author tels us, that the Knights he••eof do wear on the left shoulder of their Cloaks a Sun in his glory, and attributes this wearing, as some say, to King Charles; I will first put him out of doubt, that this addition was King Charles his; then shew him his mistake in the matter it self. And first, in the first year of that King, Ap. 26, 1626. it was thus enacted at a publick Chapter of the O••der, viz.

That all Knights and Companions

of the Order, shall wear upon the left part of their Cloaks, Coats, and riding Cassacks, at all times when they shall not wear their Roabs, and in all places of Assembly, an Escocheon of the Armes of St. George, id est, a Crosse within a Garter, not en∣riched with Pearls or Stones: in token of the ho∣nour which they hold from the said most noble Order, instituted and ordained for persons of the highest worth and honour.

Our Authour, secondly, may perceive by this Act of the Kings, that St. Georges Crosse within the Garter is the main device injoyned to be worn by all the Knights of that noble Order; to which the adding of the Sun in his glory served but for ornament and imbellishing, and might be either used or not used (but only for conformities sake) as they would themselves. So many errors in so few lines one shall hardly meet with.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Acts 〈…〉〈…〉 An••o ••532.
• * 1.2

  〈…〉〈…〉
• * 1.3

  Brevewoods ••nq. cap 13.
• * 1.4

  Camden in Monmouthsh.
• * 1.5

  Hist. of St George L. 3. cap. 3, 8.