The English historical library, or, A short view and character of most of the writers now extant, either in print or manuscript which may be serviceable to the undertakers of a general history of this kingdom / by William Nicholson ...

CHAP. V. (Book 5)

Of our English Historians since the Conquest. (Book 5)

TO give an exact and full Re∣gister of these would be a te∣dious Work; and require a much better acquaintance with our public and private Libraries than I can pre∣tend to. Sir William Temple has rightly observ'd, that tho, since this great period, the face of affairsa 1.1 has not been drawn by any one skilful hand, or by the Life; yet 'tis repre∣sented in so clear a Light as leaves very little either obscure or uncertain in the History of our Kingdom, or Succession of our Kings: And 'twill be enough for my present purpose to pick out the chief of these Lim∣ners, and to give the Reader a View of 'em in their proper Colours.

This I shall endeavour to do as briefly as is possible; ranking them in the several Centuries wherein they wrote.

1066.* 1.2 The first of our English Historians, after the Conqueror's Arrival was Ingulphus: who (because he chiefly treats of the affairs of Crowland, tho he occasionally inter∣mixes the Story of our Kings) will be more properly placedb 1.3 else∣where. The Relation he bore to King William does manifestly byass him in the ill account he gives of Hae∣rold; pelting that Prince with a Vol∣ley of hard Names, all in a breath, Contemptor praestitae fidei, ac nequiter oblitus sui Sacramenti, Throno Regio se intrusit, &c. About the same time wrote Marianus Scotus (a Monk of Mentz in Germany)* 1.4 who brought down our English History, interwoven with a more general one of Europe, as low as the year 1083. This Work met with such an universal and great applause in our Monasteries, that there was hardlyc 1.5 one in the

Kingdom that wanted a Copy of it, and some had several. The frequent transcribing it gave occasion to a deal of errors and mistakes; and the In∣terpolations were so many and con∣fused, that (when it came to bec 1.6 prepar'd for the Press) some of its Genuine and fairest Branches were lopp'd off, for Morbose Tumours and Excrescencies. Nor will the Reader meet with a word of our English affairs in that lame Edition of Mari∣anus's Chronicle byd 1.7 Pistorius: whose business 'twas only to publish the ancient Writers of the German History; and therefore he designedly omitted all that concern'd this King∣dom. The best, and moste 1.8 com∣plete Manuscript Copy is in the pub∣lic Library at Oxford.

1101.* 1.9 The earliestf 1.10 History in the twelfth Century was written by Florence (a Monk) of Worcester, whom I know not whether to call an Epitomizer or Transcriber of Mari∣anus. He seems to giveg 1.11 himself

the latter Character; tho it must be acknowledg'd that he has added very many Collections, out of the Saxon Chronicle and other Writers, with much Care and Judgment. His Book ended, with hish 1.12 Life, in the year 1119; but 'twas continu'd 50 years farther by another Monk of the same Monastery. He soi 1.13 scru∣pulously adheres to his Authorities, that he sometimes retains even their very mistakes; and yet I must do him the Justice, to say he is not guilty of all the Contradictions that have been laid to his charge. An ingenious person has lately observ'd that he makes his Friend Marianus die in the year 1052. and yet affirms that the same Man was made a Pres∣byter (seven years after) A. D. 1059. But, in truth, the Gentleman him∣self is more upon the Blunder than his Author. The Phrase of Saeculum reliquit, does not (as he imagines) im∣port the same thing with mortuus est: But signifies only (as it does, in the same Year, and on the same Occasion,

in Matt. of VVestminster, and others) the Man's leaving the Concerns of this world, Secular Affairs, to turn Regular and Secluse. 'Tis a scandalous reproach, and not worth the an∣swering, which Sir Thomas Craig gives of him: Thatk 1.14 He led his followers into Error, like so many Cattle breaking over a Ditch.

Eadmerus,* 1.15 a Monk of Canterbury, is our next Historian, whose Historia Novorum, &c. wasl 1.16 published by Mr. Selden, and contains the story of the two VVilliams and Henry the First, from the year 1066 to 1122. 'Tis a Work of great Gravity, and unquestionable Authority. It affords no fooleries of Miracles, so very rife in the Writings of other Monks, unless perhaps the Story of the B. Virginsm 1.17 Hair have a smack of the Cloister. He had Temptations e∣nough (being an intimate Acquain∣tance of Archbishop Anselm) to take the Pope's part, in the mighty Dispute of his Time about Investitu••e; and yet he approves himself a person of

that steady Loyalty to his Country as to give a fair account of the ma∣nagement on both sides, and the unanswerable arguments made in Defence of the Regal Power. His comparing of our Saviour's Commis∣sion to St. Peter, and Pope Gregory's to Augustine the Monk (for the esta∣blishing of the Primacy of Canterbury) is notable; and either clears that of Canterbury, or clouds that of Rome. The Character which Selden himself gives of him is, that his Style equals that of Malmesbury, his Matter and Composure exceeds him. His Co∣temporary Aelfred (Monk and Trea∣surer of the Church) of Beverly seems to be no more than an Epitomizer of Jeoffrey of Monmouth: So that all the fourn 1.18 general Treatises said to be written by this Author may proba∣bly well bear the Name of Deflora∣tiones Galfredi.

But William (Monk and Library-Keeper)* 1.19 of Malmesbury was a person of another figure; and has had the highest Commendations imaginable given him by some of our best

Criticks in English History. One calls him ano 1.20 elegant, learned, and faithful Historian: Another says he's thep 1.21 only Man of his Time that has honestly discharg'd the Trust of such a Writer: And the third calls him theq 1.22 chief of all our Histori∣ans. What falls under our present consideration is his Accountr 1.23 De Gestis Regum Anglorum, in five Books; with an Appendix in two more, which he stiles Historiae Novellae. In these we have a judicious Collection of whatever he found on Record, touching the Affairs of England, from the first arrival of the Saxons; con∣cluding his Work with the Reign of King Stephen; to whom he shews himself as hearty an Enemy, as (his Patron) Robert Earl of Glocester could possibly be. We shall have occasion to mention this Author in several of the following Chapters; and therefore I shall now only add, that I think himself has given an

honest account of this part of his Labours, when he tells us,r 1.24 Priva∣tim ipse mihi, sub Ope Christi, gratulor, quod ••ontinuam Anglorum Historiam ordinaverim post Bedam vel solus vel primus. And again: Ego enim veram Legem secutus Historiae, nihil unquam posui nisi quod a fidelibus Relatoribus vel Scriptoribus addidici. Pits says he was epitomiz'd bys 1.25 W. Horman, sometime Master of Eaton-School: But whether all his Works, or some part of 'em only, were so contracted he does not tell us. Possibly, he only transcrib'd whatt 1.26 Simeon Dunelmensis had before drawn up to his hand.

This Simeon,* 1.27 and (his Cotempo∣rary) Ealred, Abbot of Rievaulx, are our next Historians of Note in this Century; and have both de∣serv'd to be remember'd in several parts of this Treatise. The former was Monk and Precentor of Durham, A. D. 1164. and might justly be reckon'd one of the mostu 1.28 learned

Men of his Age. But his two Books De Gestis Regum (which alone are now to be mention'd) are not his Master-pieces: Being only a few in∣digested Collections, chiefly out of Florence of Worcester, whose very words he frequently copies. Abbot Ealred (not ofx 1.29 Revesby in Lin∣colnshire, but of Rievaulx in Yorkshire) gives us a short Genealogy of our Kings; but enlarges chiefly on the Praises of David King of Scots, Founder of a great many Abbies for the Cistertians. His other Books (of the Life of Edward the Confessor, &c.) are treated on elsewhere. I doubt Sir George Mackenzy'sy 1.30 Bal∣dredus Abbas Rynalis is this very Au∣thor: Notwithstanding the great pains he is at to distinguish them.

About the same time flourished* 1.31 Henry Archdeacon of Huntingdon, whose eight Books (concluding with the Reign of King Stephen) were published byz 1.32 Sir Henry Savil. In

the Preface he owns himself a Fol∣lower of Bede, in the main, for the time he wrote in: But says (withal) that he added many things met with in old Libraries. His first Lines will easily convince the Reader that he does really follow Bede; for he Copies him to a word. But I am not satisfy'd that he has added any great matters, as far as that Author goes. He has indeed a great many Lyes out of Jeoffrey of Monmouth, which Bede never heard of; and which the World might have wanted well enough. Af∣ter Bede's time, he has many particu∣lars out of the Saxon Chronicle; which had been omitted by our Histo∣rians before him. He is pleas'd to take notice of one great Truth, that he writes verya 1.33 confusedly. All the Transactions of the Heptarchy he reduces to the several Reigns of the West-Saxon Kings: But has not adjusted them so well as he ought to have done. At the same time liv'd John Serlo (Abbot of Fountains) who, (as Johnb 1.34 Pits tells us) wrote a Trea∣tise

De Bello inter Scotiae Regem & Angliae Barones. We are not so well assur'd of this, as that he wrote a History of the Foundation of his own Monastery; for which he shall be remember'd in a proper place. The general Histories written by Richard of thec 1.35 Devises, and John of d 1.36 Tilbury (a London-Divine) be∣fore the end of this Age, are of the same authority; and that's all I have to say concerning either of 'em.

William of Newburg was so call'd from a Monastery in Yorkshire,* 1.37 of that Name, whereof he was a Mem∣ber, tho his true Surname was Little, whence he sometimes stiles himself Petit or Parvus. His History ends at the year 1197. and therefore (tho he is said to be alivee 1.38 A. D. 1220.) he ought to be reckon'd among the Historians of this Age. John Pits f 1.39 thinks he appears too much a Flatterer of the Grandees at Court to write a true History: But, by the

account he gives of the beginning of it, a Man would be tempted to be∣lieve he never read it. He was a most violent Persecutor of Jeoffrey of Monmouth, of whose History he gives this sharp Character, that it contains only pro expiandis Britonum maculis ridicula figmenta, &c. But g 1.40 D. Powel gives the reason of this bitterness of Spirit. It appears, he says, from some of their Histo∣ries of good Credit and Antiquity, that this William (whom those Welsh Historians call Gwilym Bach. i. Gu∣lielmus Parvus) put in for the Bi∣shoprick of St. Asaph, upon the death of the said Jeoffrey (Bishop there) about the year 1165. and, being disappointed, fell into a mad hu∣mour of decrying the whole Prin∣cipality of Wales, its History, Anti∣quity, and all that belongs to it. He is large in his account of the Life, Manners, &c. of Hugh Bishop of Durham. His Latin Style is pre∣ferr'd to that of M. Paris, and e∣quall'd with those of Eadmerus and

William of Malmesbury byh 1.41 Dr. VVats.

1201.* 1.42 The thirteenth Century begins with Gervase a Monk of Can∣terbury; whoi 1.43 is reported to have been a most judicious Antiquary and Methodical Historian, and to have made excellent Collections of the British and English Story from the coming in of the Trojans down to the year 1200. 'Twere to be wished these dormant Tomes could be discover'd: For the Reigns of three Kings (which are the only part of our General History, of this Author's penning, nowk 1.44 extant) are done with judgment enough. About the same time Nicholas de Fly, Bishop of Durham, isl 1.45 said to have written and Historical Treatise; wherein he relates that memorable passage (men∣tioned also by some other Historians) of one Simon Thurvay's forgetting all that he had learned, which was to a good pitch of Eminence, and turn∣ing perfect Blockhead.

Cotemporary to these two (and a much greater Historian than both of 'em join'd)* 1.46 was Roger de Hoveden, who seems to have been Chaplain for some time to King Henry the Second. His History wasm 1.47 published by Sir H. Savil: But (as Sir H.n 1.48 Spel∣man observes) there are many errors in that foreign Edition of this and all our other Historians; and therefore he well cautions the English Reader attentively to consider the spelling of such words as are of our own growth, as very frequently mistaken by Printers that are Strangers to our Country and Language. 'Tis a heavy Censure which Leland has given of this Author,o 1.49 Qui Scrinia Simeo∣nis, suppresso ejus nomine, strenue com∣pilavit, & aliena pro suis, Gloriae avi∣dulus supposuit. Mr. Selden justifies himp 1.50 against this sharp Sentence; and Sir Henry Savil gives a quite dif∣ferent Character of the Man and his Writings:q 1.51 Huntingdoniensis &

Hovedenus (says he) Authores cu•••• primis boni & diligentes, verissimi{que} superiorum temporum Indices. He may possibly have borrowed something from Simeon of Durham: But, if he did, he has improv'd his Story, ad∣ding the years to many things confu∣sedly related in that Writer. After the year 802. he falls indeed a little into confusion himself; jumbling a great many things touch'd on before, without any manner of Form or Or∣der. But, after three or four Pages, he comes to himself again; and goes on regularly enough. There are in his Book many Letters, Speeches, &c. relating to Ecclesiastical affairs; which are good Materials towards a Gene∣ral Church history of this Kingdom. In the year 1291. King Edward the First is said to have caus'd diligent search to be made in all the Libra∣ries in England for Hoveden's History, to adjust the Dispute about the Ho∣mage due from the Crown of Scot∣land: which (says myr 1.52 Author) it clears effectually. At the same

time Joh. Oxfordius (Bishop of Nor∣wich) iss 1.53 reported to have com∣pil'd an English Chronicle; and we may look for some good Remarks from a person employ'd (as he was) on an Embassy to Rome, there truly to represent to his Holiness an account of Archbishop Be••ket's Behaviour. Hector Boethius pretends to have seen his History; and applauds him as a Writer next to his mighty Jeoffrey of Monmouth, in Authority as well as Time.

The next Historian of Note and Figure is Ralph de Diceto,* 1.54 or Disseto, Dean of London; who wrote about the year 1210. He sometimes refers to at 1.55 Chronological Account of our British Kings of his own Compo∣sure, which must have reach'd much higher than any thing hitherto pub∣lished under his Name. And such a Work in several parts (containing a British Chronicle from Brute to Cad∣wallador, and an English one from Hengist to King Harold) the indu∣strious

Mr. Whartont 1.56 says he had seen and perus'd in the Norfolk-Library. The two Treatises which concern us at present, and are alrea∣dy u 1.57 printed, are his Abbreviationes Chronicorum and his Imagines Historia∣rum: The former whereof contains an Abstract of our History (but chief∣ly in Church-matters) down to the Conquest; and the latter gives the Portraictures of some of our Kings more at length, ending with the first years of King John's Reign. Mr. Sel∣den is much in the Praises of thisw 1.58 Author, and his Works: tho all that is here remember'd is usually copy'd out of other Writers, who are often transcrib'd verbatim. Dr. Gale met with a better Copy of his Abbrevia∣tions than had fallen into the hands of Sir Roger Twisden; and has taken oc∣casion (in discoursingx 1.59 upon that subject) to shew how mischievously the old Monks of Canterbury us'd to corrupt their Manuscripts. Diceto's Talent lay mainly towards Church-history;

and, on that Topick, we shall hereafter meet with him more than once. If Gyraldus Cambrensis ever wrote any such thing as any 1.60 English Chronicle, it ought to come in the same rank of time with these of Diceto's: But I very much suspect the Truth of that Report. Hither also must be referr'd the famousz 1.61 Exchequer-man, King Henry the Se∣cond's Nephew, Gervase of Tilbury; who (besides the Black Book, to be remembered when we come to the Twelfth Chapter) is said to have written a large historical Commenta∣ry upon Jeoffrey of Monmouth, under the Title ofa 1.62 Illustrationes Galfredi, which he dedicated to the Emperor Otho the Fourth.

Walter Monk of Coventry deserves a more particular Remembrance,* 1.63 as perhaps very well meriting the ac∣count given of him by Iohnb 1.64 Le∣land, who says the two main Orna∣ments of an Historian (Sincera sides & lucidus ordo) are to be had in him.

Upon the strength of this Authority, Bale tells us he wase 1.65 Immortali Vir dignus memoria. But his three Books of Chronicles and Annals (for which these men send us to Bennet College) are all one; being chiefly Collections out of Jeoffrey of Monmouth, R. Hove∣den, and H. Huntingdon. Some few things of Note and Consequence he has which are not to be met with in those Authors. He is said to have liv'd in Coventry, A. D. 1217. and therefore Alexanderf 1.66 Essebiensis's Epitome of our English Annals, Peter g 1.67 Henham's history, and R.h 1.68 Niger's (continued by his Namesake i 1.69 Ralph Abbot of Coggeshal) are of the same date.

Soon after these appear'd Matthew Paris, a Monk of St. Albans;* 1.70 one of the most renown'd Historians of this Kingdom. His Historia Major con∣tains the Annals (at large) of Eight of our Kings; from the beginning of the Reign of William the First, to the conclusion of that of Henry the Third.

'Twas first publisht at London, A. D. 1571. and thek 1.71 Zurich Edition on∣ly copy'd from that. It was again verbatim reprinted (the errors of the Press being only corrected) byl 1.72 Dr. Wats, who beautify'd it with ad∣ditions of various Readings; the Au∣thor's large Additamenta, and his Lives of the Abbots of St. Albans; a good Glossary of his own composure, &c. Among other Reasons that prevailed with him to publish the very words of the former Edition, he thought he should hereby effectually stop the Mouths of the Romanists (who pre∣tended that the Hereticks had vilely corrupted that Historian) when they should see their Case was not better'd by comparing it with all the Manu∣script Copies that could be had of it. From the year 1259. (wherein M. Pa∣ris dy'd) to King Henry the Third's Death, it was continu'd by Will. Ri∣shanger, a Monk of the same Frater∣nity; as some inform us. Others will needs affirm, that Paris himself had a very small hand in the whole, ha∣ving

only begun at the year 1235. the rest being done to his hand by one Roger de Windleshore, or Windsor, (the MS. Copy of his History in Cot∣ton's Library calls him Rogerus Wen∣dovre de Wendover prior de Bealvair) one of his Predecessors in the same Monastery. Before that time (they m 1.73 tell us) there are only some few Interpolations of M. Paris's, who (for some reasons best known to him∣self) did not break off at the year 1250. as it appears he design'd, but continued writing to his Death. The Author (whoever he was) did cer∣tainly begin his Chronicle at the Creation, tho we now have lost all that went before the Conquest; un∣less, as then 1.74 Publisher of him guesses, that which now goes under the Name of Matthew of Westminster, be (in reality) the true Work of Mat. Paris. This undoubtedly is as much the Offspring of Roger de Wendover, as that following part now published is the genuine Work of M. Paris, as will sufficiently appear to any that

shall take the pains to consult the abovementioned Manuscript Copy. The whole Book manifests a great deal of Candour and Exactness in its Author, who furnishes us with so par∣ticular a relation of the brave Re∣pulses given by many of our Princes to the Usurping Power of the Roman See, that 'tis a wonder how such an heretical history came to survive thus long. Quam fuit animo infensissim•• in Apostolicam Sedem quivis facile potest intelligere, says Cardinalo 1.75 Baronius. The English whereof is only this; he was a Writer of a singular Courage, and one that durst maintain the Pre∣rogatives of his Soveraign's Imperial Crown against the Usurpations of the Papal Crosier. And yet he is as kind to the Pope, as he is either to the King himself, or the Abbot of St. Al∣bans; for he indiscriminately las••es (upon occasion) every body that comes in his way. The same Author wrote an Abstract of the foremen∣tion'd Work, to which he gave the Title of Chronica, and VV. Lambard

first christen'd it Historia Minor. It begins, as the former, with VVilliam the Conqueror, and ends A. D. 1250 having in it several Particulars of Note omitted in the larger history. The fairest Copy of this Book (sup∣pos'd to be written by the Author••s own hand) is in the King's Library at St. James's. One John Shepshed is p 1.76 supposed to have liv'd at the same time with M. Paris; and is, by John Stow, asserted to be the Author of an English history. We may pro∣bably bring in also Robert of Glocester for another of his Cotemporaries, since Archbishopq 1.77 Vsher, andr 1.78 Mr. Camden are both positive, that he liv'd some time in the Reign of King Henry the Third. His rhyming Chro∣nicle is in English; and the Reader may have a Tast 〈◊〉〈◊〉 it (as much, it may be, as ever he'll desire) either froms 1.79 Mr. Selden, ort 1.80 Mr. VVood.

The Chronicle ofu 1.81 Mailros (tho its Title may seem to rank it among* 1.82

the Records of another Kingdom, yet) may justly challenge a place a∣mong our English Historians, since it chiefly insists upon the affairs of this Nation. The Abbot of Prior of Dun∣drainand (in Galloway, a Nursery under Mailros) is thought to have been the first Compiler of the work; which was afterwards continued, by several hands, down to the year 1270. There's very little relating to the Northern history of this Kingdom before the year 1142. (when the lit∣tle Convent of Dundrainand was founded) save what is borrow'd from Florence of Worcester, and Matthew of Westminster: So that it must be after that time that the Character which the Publisher gives of this Chronicle (exhibet Principum, Procerum, Episco∣porum, Abbatum, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Borealibus istis O∣ris successiones) is most agreeable. From the year 1262, the Continuator (who∣ever had the turn to be Register at that time) is as dull and whimsical as any Monk needs be. 'Twas his busi∣ness to draw the Picture of Simon Monfort, the famous Earl of Leicester; and he has so overdone the matter, that he thought himself oblig'd, in

the Conclusion, to instance in a great many Authors of Note that had pub∣lish'd some Stories a little Romantick, and yet had found the favour to be believ'd.

The rest of the general Historians of this Age are of a much lower form,* 1.83 and less weight, than these already mention'd. Such were Elias de Eve∣sham, and (his Namesake) Elias de Trickingham; who arex 1.84 both said to have flourish'd about the year 1270. There is a Copy of the latter's Chro∣nicle among my Lord Clarendon's Ma∣nuscripts, which ends A. D. 1268. Pe∣ter Ickeham (ay 1.85 Kentish Man born, and sometime a Student in the Uni∣versity of Paris) about the year 1274. collected the British and En∣glish Histories, from the coming in of Brute; and continued them to the Reign of Edward the First. This Chronicle isz 1.86 said to have been some time in the possession of Sir Sy∣monds D' Ewes; and perhaps is the same Book whicha 1.87 Mr. Wharton ac∣quaints

us is now at Lambeth. John Buriensir (Abbot of St. Edmundsbury, where he dy'd A. D. 1280.) wrote alsob 1.88 English Annals, wherein he treats at large of the Disputes betwixt Pope Innocent the Fourth and R. Grost∣est Bishop of Lincoln. Possibly this Buriensis may be the same withc 1.89 Burgensis; and all one with John Ab∣bot of Peterburgh, whose MS. Chro∣nicle is quoted byd 1.90 Mr. VVharton. And then he should have been reserv'd till the next Century, about the mid∣dle whereof that Abbot certainly flou∣rish'd.

1301.* 1.91 Tho. VVikes (call'd by Le∣land, Vicanus; by others VVic••ius) ought to begin the Fourteenth Centu∣ry, tho both Bale and Pits bring him within the foregoing; for his History (which begins at the Conquest) ends at the Death of Edward the First, A. D. 1304. The Author was Canon Regular of Osney near Oxford; and writes as clearly and full (especially in some passages relating to the Baron∣wars) as so compendious a Chronicle

as his is would allow him to do. We are indebted to Dr. Gale for thee 1.92 publishing of this history, together with others of good value, that had long laid imprivate hands John Ca∣storius (call'd alsof 1.93 Fiber and Be∣ver) was a Monk of Westminster, a∣bout this time, and wrote a Chroni∣cle, still extant in some of ourg 1.94 En∣glish Libraries. Leland commends him as an Historian of good credit; and he is also cited, with respect, by John Stow in his Survey. He begins with the coming in of Brute, and ends at his own time. VV. Rishanger (who dy'd, very old, about the year 1312) has been mentioned already; and Rad. Baldoc who dy'd the year fol∣lowing, and whose history is quoted by Leland and Archbishoph 1.95 Vsher) seems hardly to deserve it. Of the like kind is the compendious Chronicle of Tho. 〈◊〉〈◊〉, Canon Regular of Leedes in Kent, whom both Bale and Pits have fix'd at the year 1321. But

i 1.96 J. Weever, from a passage in his Book, which gives an account of the Victories of the Black Prince, shews that he must have liv'd pretty late in the Reign of Edward the Third, if not under (his Grandson) Richard the Second.

Of something better value are the Annals of Nicolas Trivet* 1.97 (Son of Sir Thomas Trivet, Lord Chief Justice) who was Prior of a Monastery of Do∣minican Friars in London; where he was bury'd A. D. 1328. An excellent Copy of his history (which John Pits k 1.98 subdivides into three several Trea∣tises) is now in the Library at Merton College in Oxford, whence several of our most eminentl 1.99 Antiquaries have had very remarkable Observations. 'Tis in French, and bears the Title of Les Gestes des Apostoiles, (or, them 1.100 Popes) Empereurs è Rois. Roger ••e∣strensis (who was a Benedictine Monk of St. Werburg's in Chester) was Trivet's Cotemporary, and wrote a large ac∣count

of the affairs of this Nation. This Work he entitled Polycraticae Temporum, and began it with the co∣ming in of the Romans. He continu'd it at first no lower than the year 1314. but addedn 1.101 afterwards a Supple∣ment of fifteen years more.

About the same time (as Mr. Selden* 1.102 probablyo 1.103 conjectures) liv'd the Author of that Chronicle which goes under the Name of John Brompton, some time Abbot of Joreval (or Jor∣vaulx) in the County of York, which begins (with the coming in of Augu∣stine the Monk) A. D. 588. and ends with the Death of Richard the First, 1198. 'Tis not indeed likely that this History was written by any Member of the Abby of Joreval, since it takes no notice of the Foundation of that Monastery, &c. But only procur'd by Abbot Brompton, and (by him) bestow'd on his Monastery. The Au∣thor (whoever he be) is very full in his Collections for the Saxon times, but takes no notice of the Chronolo∣gical part in the whole story of the

Heptarchy. In this he has not been very inquisitive; ending (for exam∣ple) Northumberland where Bede's Hi∣story leaves him. He gives the Saxon Laws at large, and translates them pretty honestly. In what he borrows from the old Chronicle, in that Lan∣guage, he is not altogether so correct: Otherwise, he had never told us such a rare story of onep 1.104 Sumerled, a Danish Tyrant, who sack'd Reading, &c. His chief Author is Roger Hove∣den. Of Walter Hemmingford the Reader needs no further account than what has been already given of him by his worthyq 1.105 Publisher: Nor have I any more to say of Richard of Chichester than what John Pits has told mer 1.106, that he was a Monk of West∣minster, A. D. 1348. that he travell'd to most of the Libraries of England; and, out of his Collections thence, compil'd a notable History of this Kingdom, from the coming in of the Saxons down to his own time.

Ran. Higden* 1.107 (Monk of St. VVer∣burg's in Chester, where he dy'd very

aged,s 1.108 A. D. 1377) was an indu∣strious Historian, a great Follower of Florence of VVorcester and others of our best Writers; Vnicuique Authorum suorum honorem integrum servans, says Bale. The Character might be true for any thing (perhaps) he knew: But 'tis that Writer's way to give ac∣counts of Men and their Labours at random. It is very evident that, on the Contrary, he falls foul on VVilli∣am of Malmesbury in many places; and yet that person is thought to have deserv'd a Respect, and is usu∣ally better treated by all our other Historians. He is pleas'd to stile his Work Polychronicon: And, if you spell the first Letters of the several Chapters that begin it, you read Praesentem Chronicam conpilavit Ranul∣phus Monachus Cestrensis. What he wrote relating to the times of the Britains and Saxons has been lately t 1.109 publish'd by Dr. Gale, who com∣mends him for preserving many Re∣mains out of ancient Chronicles, now wholly lost or mislaid. (I have a Parch∣ment

Manuscript of this History, which seems to be a better Copy than what the Learned Doctor made use of.) The rest was first translated into English by John de Trevisa (au 1.110 Cornish Man born, and some time Vicar of Berkeley in Glocestershire) who illu∣strated the whole with Annotations of his own, says my Author: But theyx 1.111 that know the matter bet∣ter have observ'd aright that the many Interpolations and Additions in W. Caxton's English Edition, are the Publishers and not Trevisa's. And so is also the Continuation down to the year 1460. For Caxton expressly takes it upon himself, tho our famous y 1.112 Selden says 'twas the Work of Trevisa, who (if the great Man were not mistaken) must have penn'd it near a hundred years after his death.

John Vicar of Tinmouth* 1.113 (whence he is always call'd Tinmuthensis, tho he was afterwardsz 1.114 Monk of St. Albans, A. D. 1366) was a mighty Collector of our English Histories,

which he has left digested in to three very large Volumes; whereof there are now fair Copies in the Libraries at Oxford, Lamboth, &c. This Work he was pleas'd to call Histori•••• 〈◊〉〈◊〉, and, for that reason, the Author himself is bya 1.115 Leland named Chry∣sistoriographus. Out of this large Mass many notable Remarks have been made by the learned Men of this Age: But, because they chiefly relate to the doughty Feats and Miracles of our English Saints, as well as his other Works that more professedly treat on that Subject, we shall defer the further consideration of him tob 1.116 another place.

To humour Bale, Pits and Vossius,* 1.117 we shall here place Matthew (a Bene∣dictine Monk) of Westminster, who, they tell us, flourish'd in the year 1377. 'Tis more probable that he hardly out-liv'd the year 1307. in which hec 1.118 ended his History, tho 'twas afterwards (as we shall see anon) continued by other hands. He was

a choice Collector of the Flowers of former Historians, from whence, and from the Title of his Book; he is usually styl'd Florilegus. His chief Be∣nefactoris Matthew Paris, whom he so accurately transcribes, that he can∣not be perswaded to leave him, even when he warmly treats of the particu∣lars of his own Monastery of St. Al∣bans. Nay, he sometimes refers (in Paris's very words) to that Author's Addilamenta, as to a Work of his own composure; and hence some have concluded that the whole, even that part which precedes the Conquest, was borrow'd from the same hand. But I can hardly agree to that, since the same heedless way of writing (un∣becoming the Accuracy of M. Paris) runs through both of 'em. Hence d 1.119 Vnde Reges Cantiae usque hodie Ae∣skynges vocantur; with a thousand more of the like. 'Tis most likely (as has been already observ'd) that R. de Wendover was a common Parent to both the Matthews; and the main of what is publisht under both their Names came from that hand. There

was an Edition of Westminster's history before that ate 1.120 Francfort, but abo∣minably corrupt and imperfect, espe∣cially after the year 1245. the Au∣thor's punctual Relation of the brisk behaviour of our Kings and Nobility, in opposition to the Encroachments of the Roman See, being wretchedly mangled and purloyn••d. Upon this bottom John Pits divides the History into twof 1.121 several Works, where∣of the former he calls Historia ampla, which (says he) is that which was publish'd atg 1.122 London; and the o∣ther Historiarum Flores. The Distin∣ction he had from Bale; tho the Ap∣plication be his own. This Report seems to have had some slender Foun∣dation; since we are told that, a∣mongst my Lordh 1.123 Clarendon's Ma∣nuscripts, there's another historical Work which bears the Name of Flores Historiarum, which is very different from the Printed Copy, and is con∣tinu'd near forty years further. But

the Reader ought to know that there are many anonymous Historians in this Kingdom, who (beginning at the year 1307,) manifestly shew that they chiefly intended to continue the Work of Matthew of Westminster. The most eminent (indeed) of his Con∣tinuators was Adam Merimuth, Canon Regular of St. Paul's, and an eminent Civilian, who in the latter end of his days, gave himself wholly to the reading and writing of English Histo∣ry. He begins his Worki 1.124 at 1302. and his first part reaches only to 1343. (which, I suppose, makes the Enlargement in my Lord Claren∣don's Copy) but the second conti∣nues the Story to (in all likelihood, the year of his own Death) A. D. 1300. 'Tis observable that his Hi∣story commences at Michaelmas, and for that reason, he always af∣terwards begins the New Year at that Feast.

A few more,* 1.125 of an inferior Rank,

may probably be reckoned amongst the Historians of this Age. As, 1. John Staffort, a Franciscan ••••iar, who is k 1.126 supposed to have written an English History about the year 1800. Tho. Fullerl 1.127 observes very well that the exact time when he wrote (or liv'd) is not known 〈◊〉〈◊〉 only, be∣ing a Francisean (and that, I doubt, is not very certainly known neither) he must have flourished after the year 1226. when that Order first came into England; and, being quoted by John Ross, must come in before 1400. 2. William de Packington, Secretary and Treasurer to the Black Prince in Gascoigne, wrote a Cronique in French from the Ninth year of King John down to (his own time) 1380. out of which several Collections have been made bym 1.128 Leland,n 1.129 Stow and others. 3. Henry de Knyghton, one of the Canons of Leicester, whose o 1.130 History may be said to begin at the Conquest, since he has only a

short Abstract of the Saxon Affairs in his first Book. It is continued down to the year 1395. He fairly owns what he transcribes from Ralph Higden; whom he imitates also in the Crotchet of making the fifteen first Chapters of his Second Book give his Name in their Initial Letters, thus:

HENRICVS CNITTON.

'Tis plain that neither Leland, Bale nor Pits, had ever seen this Work. An Encouragement to the industrious Antiquaries of this Age to continue their Enquiries after such Histories as are presum'd to be irrecoverably lost. 4. Galf, Lingius (a Franciscan of Nor∣wich, about the year 1390.) is also p 1.131 said to have compil'd a History of this Kingdom, from the coming in of Brutus, down to his own Time.

1401.* 1.132 The fifteenth Century was one of the most rude and illiterate Ages, and therefore we are not to look for a large Harvest of Historians, in a Dearth and Scarcity of Persons eminent in other parts of Learning.

Sir John Froissart (sometime Canon q 1.133 and Treasurer of Chimay in the Diocess of Liege) justly deserves to be placed first, as having ended his Life and Story about the beginning of it. His Work contains a General Hi∣story of the Affairs of France, Spain, and other parts of Europe, as well as England; tho it chiefly insists on those of this Nation. The Author was a Frenchman born, but was brought up, in his Youth, in the Court of our King Edward the Third; and, ma∣ny years after, familiarly conversant in King Richard the Second's. He wrote in his own Native Language, which was also, in his Time, ther 1.134 Court-Language of England. The Copies that were taken of him in French (as well Manuscript as ins 1.135 Print) are generally faulty and cor∣rupt in Names and Numbers; where∣as the Author himself, being perfectly acquainted with the English Court and Customs, could not well mistake. Most of these Errors are corrected in

the English Edition, which was pub∣lished by Sir John Bourchier, Deputy of Calais, at the Command of King Henry the Eighth, towards the latter end of his Reign. His Account of matters seems to be plain and honest; and perhaps none gives a better of the Affairs of Edward the Third, and (his unfortunate Successor) Richard the Second. Sleidan epitomiz'd his History int 1.136 Latin; but has not done it with that impartiality and fair∣ness that might have been expected from a Man of his great Name. Take the Censure which our learned Hum∣phry Lhuid long since gave of that piece and its Author:u 1.137 Dum Gal∣lico Nomini nimium faveret, Anglo∣rum Nobilissima Gesta aut Silentio prae∣teritt, aut, ab Authore dissentiens, ali∣ter, quam á Froissardo scriptum est, literis commendavit.

After him follow,* 1.138 down to the mid∣dle of the Century, a set of very or∣dinary Scriblers, such as, 1. Tho. Ot∣terburn, a Franciscan Friar of some of our English Monasteries about the year 1411. whose MS. History is

x 1.139 said to be in our publick Library at Oxford. 2. Tho. Radburn, Bishop of St. Davids,y 1.140 and C••ancellor of the University of Oxford, A. D. 1420. He is usually quoted by the Name of Radburn ••enior, to distinguish him from another little Chronicler of both his Names, who was a Monk of St. Swithin's in Winchester, and Joh. Ross's great Acquaintance. This lat∣ter wrote two Books of our General History; the one whereof he stiles z 1.141 Breviarium Chronicorum, which begins at Brute, and ends A. D. 1234. After the Conquest he copies most from M. Paris, and is very unhappy in his Chronological part Hisa 1.142 Historia Major (as he calls his other Work) consists of large Collections out of other common Historians, save only in what relates to the Church of Winchester. 3 John Sherburn, a Monk, who wroteb 1.143 Chronica Britannorum, from the first coming in of the Tro∣jans, to the Reign of Henry the Sixth.

4. John Henfield, a Monk of Battle-Abby, who drew anc 1.144 Abstract of our Chronicles down to the same time. 5. John Langden,d 1.145 Bishop of Rochester, who possibly is all one with John Langton, (another of the samee 1.146 authentic Gentleman's Hi∣storians) a Carmelite Friar, who is said to die at the Council of Basil, A. D. 1434.

Tho. Walsingham,* 1.147 a Benedictine Monk of St. Alban's, (and very pro∣bably Regins Professor of History in that Monastery, about the year 1440.) made something a better figure than the last mention'd; and accordingly both his Historia brevis and his Hypo∣digma Neustriae, have had the honour to be publish'd by Archbishopf 1.148 Parker. His short History begins at the Conclusion of Henry the Third's Reign, where M. Paris ended his: And he might well seem to be Paris's Continuator, were his Language an∣swerable to his matter. The account he gives is well enough, and we are

indebted to him for many things not taken notice of by any other Writer of those times. Indeed, his Reign of King Edward the Second is wholly borrow'd from Sir Thomas de la More. His Ypodigma Neustriae (as he calls it) has a more particular regard to the Affairs of Normandy; giving an account (at large) of that Duke∣dom, from the time it came first into the hands of Rollo and his Danes, down to the Sixth year of Henry the Fifth; wherein the Reader will find many Occurrences not elsewhere to be met with. About the same time wrote John Wethamstede, the firstg 1.149 Opposer of the story of King Brutus; and Nicolas Cantelupus (the Cambridge Historiographer) who is also reported to have penn'd ah 1.150 General Chro∣nicle of England.

The next Historian of Note was John Harding a,* 1.151 Northerni 1.152 English∣man, and an inveterate Enemy to the Scottish Nation; against whom he carry'd Arms in several Expeditions. He collected out of all our Histories

whatever might tend to the proof of the ancient Vassalage of that King∣dom to the Crown of England; and, hearing there was in Scotland an old Record that put the matter beyond dispute, he went (with great hazard) thither in disguise, and, with much ado, brought it away, and shew'd it. to Hen. V. Hen. VI. and Edw. IV. To the last of these he dedicated his two Books of Chronicles in English Rhime; whereof the curious Reader may have a taste in some of our Mo∣dern k 1.153 Writers. It appears he was living (tho very old) in the year 1461. So that Nic. Montacute (a∣bout that timel 1.154 Master of Eaton-School, and a Collector of English History) may be reckon'd his Co∣temporary; as may also Roger Alba∣nus, am 1.155 Carmelite of London, who drew up the Genealogies of some of our Kings.

William Caxton* 1.156 (of whose conti∣nuation of Trevisa something has been noted already) seems to challenge

the next place after Harding. He was a menial Servant for thirty years together, to Margaret Dutchess of Burgundy (Sister to our King Edward the Fourth) in Flanders. He after∣wards return'd into England; where finding, as he says, an imperfect Hi∣story (begun by one of the Monks of St. Albans, says John Pits, veryn 1.157 unadvisedly) he continu'd it in En∣glish, giving it only the Latin Title ofo 1.158 Fructus Temporum. How small a portion of this Work is owing to this Author, has been observ'd before; but he now usually bears the Name of the whole, which begins with the first inhabiting of his Island, and ends (the last year of Edward the fourth) A. D. 1483. The opportu∣nities he had, of being acquainted with the Court-Transactions of his own time, would encourage his Rea∣der to hope for great matters from him; but his fancy seem to have led him into an Undertaking above his strength.

John Rosse,* 1.159 or Rous, was a person somewhat better qualify'd to write History; being a Man of tolerable Parts, and singular Industry. He was born at Warwick,p 1.160 and bred at Oxford. He travell'd over the greatest part of England; and, ha∣ving made large Collections out of the Libraries where he came, rela∣ting to the History and Antiquities of this Kingdom, he at last retir'd to Guy's Cliff (about a mile from War∣wick, on the Banks of Avon) where he spent the Remainder of his Life, and dy'd A. D. 1491. His History of our Kings is stillq 1.161 extant; wherein are many Collections illustrating the Antiquities of our Universities. Here∣upon, he is frequently quoted by our Oxford-Antriquary; who nevertheless will not allow that his Judgment e∣quall'd his Pains.

1501.* 1.162 The first Post in the Six∣teenth Century is due to Rob. Fa∣bian, an eminent Merchant, (and some time Sheriff of London, where he

dy'd A. D. 1512. Both Bale and Pits subdivide his historical Writings into a great many several Treatises; but I presume that which they call his Historiarum Concordantiae is the sum of all. This Chronicle isr 1.163 publisht, and does indeed consist of seven parts, whereof the six first bring down his Story from Brutus to William the Conqueror, and are chiefly taken out of Jeoffry of Monmouth; and the Seventh gives an account of our several Kings from the Conquest of Henry the VII. He is very particular in the Affairs of London, many good things being noted by him (which concern the Government of that great City) hardly to be had elsewhere. He gives the Names of all the Bailiffs, Mayors, and Sheriffs, with the chief Transactions in their several Years; but, in other matters, he is a great Follower of R. Higden. He mixes all along the French History with the English; but in different Chap∣ters.

He translates his Authors very literally; whence Monmouth's Phrase of Ferro & Flamma vastare is ren∣der'd s 1.164 to wast with Iron and Fire, & c. In the beginning of his Seventh part he observes Higden's method of making his Years commence at Mi∣chaelmas; by which the Reader will understand how William the Con∣queror comes to begin his Reign in October 1067. Cardinal Woolsey is said to have procur'd all the Copies of this History, that he could meet with, to be burn'd; because (says myt 1.165 Author, who is not infal∣lible either in his Reasons or Rela∣tions) the Church's Patrimony was thereby too plainly discover'd. This Cardinal's Menial Servant (John Skuish, Squisus, or Squisius) isu 1.166 reported to have compil'd a notable Epitome of our Chronicles about the Year 1630. but I am not able to direct the Reader where to meet with it.

Polydore Virgil* 1.167 was the most recom∣plish'd Writer, for Elegancy and clear∣ness of Style, that this Age afforded. So much thea 1.168 severest Enemy he had has acknowledg'd of him; and, on this score alone,b 1.169 some have unreason∣ably extoll'd him. But there's so little of the other more Necessary Qualifica∣tions of a good Historian (Truth and Fair Dealing) in all hisc 1.170 Twently-six Books, that he has been justly condemn'd by our Criticks: and 'tis no wonder that some of them have express'd an In∣dignation suitable to the Abuses put up∣on their Country. Sir Henry Savil is war∣mer on this occasion than is usual with him.d 1.171 Polydorus (says he) ut homo Italus, & in rebus nostris Hospes, & (quod Caput est) neque in Republicâ versatus, nec magni alioqui vel Judicii, vel Ingenii, pauca ex multis delibans, & falsa plerumque pro veris complexus, Historiam nobis reliquit cùm coetera mendosam, tùm exiliter sanè & jejunè conscriptam. Some have fan∣sy'd that the severe Character which Sir Henry is here pleas'd to give of this

Author, might chiefly by apply'd to the History of Henry the Eighth: And that a great many Passages in that Reign may be darkly or falsly represented by him, by reason of his being unacquain∣ted with the English Tongue; which could not but very much obstruct his Knowledge in Modern Transactions. Other things, saye 1.172 they, have fallen from him under a borrow'd Light and Colour, out of the Respect he had for Queen Mary, and his great Inclina∣tions to serve the Interests of that Prin∣cess. But does not even this Apology carry a deal of Invective in it? Sir Henry Savil is far from being singular in the severest part of his Censure. Some of our latef 1.173 Writers have agreed to it; and his Cotemporary Humph. Lhuyd out-throws him a Bar or two. For, what think you of theseg 1.174 Expressions? Nominis Britannici gloriam non solum ob∣fuscare, sed etiam Britannos ipsos men∣dacissimis suis Calumniis infamare totis viribus conatur.—Homo Ignotus & Ex∣terus. —Vir perfrictae frontis—Invidiâ & odio tumens.—Infamis Homunculus.—

Os Impudens. Nor ought any thing of this to be attributed to an over-boyling of honest Humphrey's Welsh Blood, if the other Matters he's accus'd on be true. He is said to haveh 1.175 borrow'd Books out of the publick Library at Oxford, without taking any Care to restore them: Upon which the University (as they had good reason) declin'd lending any more, till forc'd to it by a Man∣date which he made a shift to procure from the King. In other places he like∣wise pillag'd thei 1.176 Libraries at his pleasure; and, at last, sent over ak 1.177 whole Ship-load of Manuscripts to Rome. And yet when this Publican himself left England (when there was no further oc∣casion for his Collecting the Papal Re∣venues) King Edward the Sixth is said to have dismiss'd him with several handsome Presents: Which we are not to look upon as a Reward, as a certain l 1.178 late Writer expresses it; but rather to consider, that the young King being about to take his final leave of the Pope, and all that belong'd to him, resolv'd

to do it as courteously as was possi∣ble.

The other Historians of his Time have been much Eclips'd by the glaring Lustre of this Foreigner;* 1.179 insomuch that some of their Writings have hardly ever seen the Light, John Rastal, a Citizen and Printer in London (who marry'd Sir Thomas Meer's Sister, and died A. D. 1536.) wrote anm 1.180 English Chronicle; but I know no more where to find it than another of the same Age, written by Richard Turpin a Leicestershire Gentle∣man, and an Officer in the Garrison at Calais, which I find quoted by his n 1.181 Countryman. Tho. Lanquet (who died at London in the twenty-fourth year of his Age, A. D. 1545.) began an Abbreviation of our Chronicles, but brought it no lower than the Birth of our Saviour. Its third part, which chiefly relates to this Kingdom, was written by the Learned Tho. Cowper (afterwards Bi∣shop of Winchester) and by himo 1.182 pu∣blished. He calls it, as justly he may, an Epitome of our Chronicles, and 'tis a Meagre one too, far short of the Per∣formances

of the same Author on other Subjects. The like slender Abstract of our English History was, about the same time, penn'd by George Lily (son of William the Famous Grammarian) which, together with his short Account of the Wars betwixt the Houses of York and Lancaster, and his Genealogy of our Kings, has had severalp 1.183 Impressions. Somewhat bulkier is the Work of Ed∣ward Hall, who was some time Recor∣der (if I understand myq 1.184 Author right) of London, where he died A. D. 1547. He wrote a large Account of the foremention'd Wars; which, in a very flattering Epistle, he dedicates to Henry the Eighth. If the Reader de∣sires to know what sort of Cloaths were worn in each King's Reign, and how the Fashions alter'd, this is an Hi∣storian for his purpose; but in other Matters his Information is not very valuable. A great Borrower from this Hall was Rich. Grafton, who (asr 1.185 Bu∣chanan rightly observes) was a very heedless and unskilful Writer; and yet

he has the Honour done him to be some∣times quoted by Stow and others.

Of much better Note are the joynt* 1.186 Labours of Will. Harrison and Ra. Ho∣linshead, whoses 1.187 Chronicle has been well receiv'd, and still bears a good Port among our Books of that kind. These Authors aret 1.188 suppos'd to have been both Clergy-men; but 'tis not certainly known where they spent the most of their days. So remarkably careful have they been to benefit the Publick, with∣out the Vanity of making their own Story known to Posterity. Holinshead frequently owns the great Assistance he had from Fran. Thynne, sometime (in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth) Lanca∣ster-Herald, and an eminent Antiquary. He has been severely treated byu 1.189 Sir Thomas Craig, for some Insolencies which that Learned Gentleman suppos'd him guilty of, in Relation to the Kingdom of Scotland: Whereas (in Truth) that part of the Book no farther concern'd poor Mr. Holinshead, than as the whole was sheltered under his Name. In the second Edition the History was conti∣nu'd

(to the year 1586.) by John Hooker, alias Vowel, of whom we shall have oc∣casion to make some further mention hereafter.

1601.* 1.190 Industrious John Stow leads the Van in the present Century, which is now brought near its Conclusion: And he well deserves to be remember'd with Honour. He was a Member of the Merchant-Taylors Company in London, and (as has been already observ'd) a special Benefactor to that City, in en∣quiring after and preserving its Anti∣quities and Records. He travell'd (on w 1.191 foot) through a good part of En∣gland, in search after the Manuscript Historians in the Libraries of our Ca∣thedral Churches, and was very exact and Critical in his Collections. Having spent above Forty Years in these Studies, he was put upon the Correction and Publishing of Reyne Wolf's Chronicle by Archbishop Whitgift; and he had fairly transcrib'd his Work, and made it ready for the Press, when he died A. D. 1605. He always protested (and we may take his honest word for it) that he never was sway'd by Favour or Fear in any of

his Writings; but that he had impar∣tially to the best of his Knowledge, de∣liver'd the Truth. This good Opinion the greatest of our later Historians seem to have of him, since even Sir Francis Bacon and Mr. Camden (not to mention others of a less Repute) have boldly ta∣ken several things upon his single Cre∣dit, and (sometimes) without being so just as to own their Benefactor. Upon his Death, the Revising and Continua∣tion of his Book was committed to Ed. Howes, who says he bestow'd thirty Years in bringing it into that good Or∣der and Method in which wex 1.192 now see it. He is very Unfortunate, if (after so great Pains) he be justly liable to the sharp Sentence thaty 1.193 one has pass'd upon him; That he's as far short of Mr. Stow in Goodness, as 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Age is of the In∣tegrity and Charity of those that went be∣fore it. I am abundantly sensible of the Degenetacy of our Age, and how Cor∣rupt our Morals are, beyond the Pre∣cedents of former Times: But how ap∣plicable this grave Comparison may be to Mr. Howes, I know not: He does

indeed say some great things of King James and King Charles; and if that be a Fault in him. 'tis transgressing with a Multitude. Not long after Mr. Stow, died R. White (Vitus he calls himself) Canon of Doway, who left ninez 1.194 Books of our English, or rather British, Histo∣ry, in a pretty elegant Latin Style: His business is to assert the Rights of the Papacy in this Kingdom; and there∣fore having setled Religion by Augustine the Monk and other Emissaries, he ends his Story A. D. 800.

Our next Historian of Eminence was Sam. Daniel,* 1.195 some time Groom of the Privy-Chamber to Queen Anne. He was a Person of great Wit, a notable Poet, and of an Affable and Winning Conversation. His first and second Part of the History, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 England fell no lower than the end of Edward the Third's Reign; but was penn'd in so accurate and copious a Style, that it took mighti∣ly, and was read with so much Ap∣plause, that it quickly had severala 1.196 Impressions. It was afterwards enlarg'd, andb 1.197 continu'd to the end of King

Richard the Third's Reign, by John Trus∣sel Alderman of Winchester, who has not had the Luck to have either his Lan∣guage, Matter or Method, so well ap∣prov'd, as those of Mr. Daniel. About the same time Will. Martyn (Recorder of Exeter) wrote hisc 1.198 History and Lives of the Kings of England, from William the Conqueror to Henry the Eighth. This came recommended to the World by the Author's own Sons: But I cannot learn that any other Fa∣mily in the Nation could ever discover so much Worth and Beauty in the Book, as they pretended to see in it. Upon a d 1.199 second Edition, it was enlarg'd (by R. B. Master of Arts) with the Reigns of Edward the Sixth, Queen Mary and Queen Elizabeth.

John Speed (who 〈◊〉〈◊〉 London A. D. 1619.)* 1.200 must be acknowledg'd to have had a Head the best dispos'd towards History of any of our Writers; and would certainly have out-done himself, as far as he has gone beyond the rest of his Profession, if the Advantages of his Education had been answerable to those of his Natural Genius. But what could

be expected from ae 1.201 Taylor? How∣ever, we may boldly say that his Chro∣nicle is the largest and best we have hitherto Extant: It begins with the first Inhabitants of the Island, and ends with the Union of the Kingdoms under King James, to whom it is Dedicated. Tho' somef 1.202 say he spent twice seven years in compiling the whole, he himself owns he made more haste than he ought to have done; and that he was forced to trust a deal of his Work in the hands of his Friends and Journey-men. And the Truth of this honest Acknowledgment and Confession is obvious enough to a discerning Reader; who will easily find a mighty Difference in the Style, as well as Matter, of several of the Reigns. Those of King John and Henry the Second, were written by Dr. Barchamg 1.203, Dean of Bocking, a curious Antiquary, who has done them answerably to the good Opi∣nion which Men of Learning had of him. Several Remarkables in that of Henry the Fifth were Collected byh 1.204 George (Ca∣rew) Earl of Totnes; as was his Catalogue of the Monasteries byi 1.205 Will. Burton, &c.

Sir Richard Baker (who died in the Fleet, A. D. 1644.)* 1.206 was a Person of those Accomplishments in Wit and Lan∣guage, that his Chronicle has been the best Read and Liked, of any hitherto publish'd; which looks as if almost every Body in the Kingdom, as well as himself, believ'd it to be Collected with so great Care and Diligence, that, if all other of our Chronicles were lost, this only would be sufficient to inform Posterity of all Passages Memorable or Worthy to be known. His Method is New, and seems to please the Rabble: But Learned Men will be of another Opinion; for 'tis the same with that of Sueronius, which is justly complain'd of byk 1.207 Mr. D••dwell. In thel 1.208 first and second Editions we had nothing more than the Author's own Work, containing the History of our Kings from the Roman Government down to the end of King James the First's Reign: But afterwards it was m 1.209 continu'd to the Restoration of Charles the Second, by Edward Philips; who (having the perusal of some of the Duke ofn 1.210 Alb••••arle's Papers) might

have set that great Revolution in its true Light, had not Ambition and Flattery carry'd him beyond Truth and his Copy. Soon after these Additions were publish'd, the whole Book was examin'd by Tho. Blount a Barrister of the Inner-Temple, whoo 1.211 printed his Animadversions upon it, and gave the World such a Spe∣cimen of its many and gross Errors, as ought to have shaken its Credit. And yet (so little Regard have we for Truth, if a Story be but handsomly told) the Chronicle has been Reprinted since that Time, and Sells as well as ever; not∣withstanding that no notice is taken of the Animadversions, but all the old Faults remain uncorrected. Mr. Blount himself spent some Years in writing an p 1.212 English Chronicle, which we may believe would (at least) want those Er∣rors which he had descry'd in the La∣bours of other Men: But where 'tis to be had I know not.

There are some later Histories,* 1.213 which are so well known to all that are any thing Curious in these Matters, that I need do little more than mention them. Such are, 1. Sir Winston Churchill's

q 1.214 Di••i Britannici, which gives the Reader a diverting View of the Arms and Exploits of our Kings, down to the Restoration in 1660. 2. Fr. Sandford's r 1.215 Genealogical History of the Kings of England and Monarchs of Great Britain, from the Norman Conquest to the year 1677. with their several Effigies, Seals, Tombs, Arms, &c. 3. Let me add Dr. Hoel's s 1.216 Medulla Historiae Anglicanae, which, tho' only a very concise Epitome of our History, is done with that great Judg∣ment, that it deserves a place among the best of our Writers on this Subject. There have been some Additions made to this Treatise, since the Doctor's death in 1683. which (whatever Relish they may have with some Readers) are not to be laid to his Charge. Others, we hear, are now engaged in the bold Work of Compiling General Histories of this Kingdom. The most considerable of these are Sir John Marsham, and James Tyrrel Esq and, if the former writes with the true Spirit of his Father, and the other with that of (Archbishop Vsher) his Grandfather, we have good cause to hope for great things from them both.

There are also many Anonymous Hi∣storians,* 1.217 whose Books are said to remain in several of our publick and private Li∣braries, which ought to be referr'd to in this Chapter. 'Tis true, the Numbers of these might be lessened, if they were veiw'd by proper Persons, before their Titles were sent abroad in our Cata∣logues; whereas we are now told of Forty Nameless Authors, who (upon perusal) prove only imperfect Copies of Paris, Westminster, Hoveden, &c. A few, we are sure, are not of this kind, but ap∣pear to be of good value in themselves, tho' of an unknown Authority. Such are three Manuscripts of good Esteem in the Library at Lambeth, sometimes quoted byt 1.218 Mr Wharton; a Fourth, referred to byu 1.219 Archbishop Vsher; a Fifth and Sixth byw 1.220 Mr. Selden; a Se∣venth now in the Possession of, my worthy Friend, Mr. Thoresby of Leedes in Yorkshire, &c. To which we might add a large Scrole of those that bear only the Names of such Monasteries as they were penn'd in: But these may happen to be remember'd when we

come more particularly to treat of the Registers and Records of those Religious Houses.

Notes

• a 1.1

  Introduct. to Hist. of Engl. p. 319, 320.
• * 1.2

  The Ele∣venth Century.
• b 1.3

  Chap. 10.
• * 1.4

  Marianus
• c 1.5

  Angl. sacr. Tom. 1. Praef. p. 24.
• c 1.6

  Vid. H. Lhuid Fragm, Brit. Descr. f. 27. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• d 1.7

  Fol. Francof. 1583.
• e 1.8

  See J. Gregory's Notes on Ridley's View, &c. p. 171.
• * 1.9

  Cent. 12. Florence of Wor∣cester.
• f 1.10

  Fol. Francof. 1601.
• g 1.11

  Ad Ann. 1043.
• h 1.12

  J. Pits, p. 197.
• i 1.13

  Praef. ad Chron. Sax. p. 6. Et Praef. ad V••t. Aelfr. R. p. 3.
• k 1.14

  Scotland's Soveraignt. Assert. p. 〈◊〉〈◊〉
• * 1.15

  Eadme∣rus.
• l 1.16

  Fol. Lond. 1623.
• m 1.17

  p. 88.
• n 1.18

  J. Pits, p. 204.
• * 1.19

  William of Mal∣mesbury.
• o 1.20

  J. Leland, Assert. Arth. fol. 4. b. & fol. 8. s.
• p 1.21

  D. Hen. Savil. In Epist. Ded. ad 5 Script.
• q 1.22

  Vsher. in Ep. Ded. ad Eccles. Hist.
• r 1.23

  Fol. Francof. 1601.
• r 1.24

  In Prolegom ad Libb. 5. de Gest. Reg.
• s 1.25

  J. Pits. p. 723.
• t 1.26

  Id. p. 228.
• * 1.27

  Simeon Dunelm.
• u 1.28

  Vid. J. Selden. Praef. ad X Script. p, 1.
• x 1.29

  Ut male J. Selden, in Praef. ad X Script. Vid. Monast. Angl. Tom. I. p. 172.
• y 1.30

  Def. of the Royal Line of Scotl. p. 22. & 27.
• * 1.31

  Henry of Hunting∣don.
• z 1.32

  Fol. Fran∣cof. 1601.
• a 1.33

  Lib. 2.
• b 1.34

  J. Pits, p. 224.
• c 1.35

  Id p. 255.
• d 1.36

  Id. p. 258.
• * 1.37

  Neubri∣gensis.
• e 1.38

  D. Whear, Method. Leg. Hist. p. 138.
• f 1.39

  J. Pits, p. 271.
• g 1.40

  In Epist. Ded. ad Pontic. Virun.
• h 1.41

  Praef. ad M. Paris, Hist.
• * 1.42

  Cent. 13.
• i 1.43

  J. Pits, p. 268.
• k 1.44

  Fol. Lond. 1652. inter X Script.
• l 1.45

  J. Pits, p. 889.
• * 1.46

  R. Hove∣don.
• m 1.47

  Fol. Francof. 1601.
• n 1.48

  Glossar. in voce Frithborga.
• o 1.49

  Comment. ad Cygn. Cant. voce Du∣nolm.
• p 1.50

  Praef. ad X Script. p. 2.
• q 1.51

  Epist. Ded. ad 5 Script.
• r 1.52

  J. Pits, p. 272.
• s 1.53

  Id. p. 265.
• * 1.54

  R. de Di∣ceto.
• t 1.55

  Angl. Sacr. Par. II. p. 677.
• t 1.56

  Praef. ad Par. II Angl. Sac. p. 27.
• u 1.57

  Fol. Lond. 1652. inter 10. Script.
• w 1.58

  In Praef. ad 10. Scrip.
• x 1.59

  Praef. ad Hist. Brit•• p. 14.
• y 1.60

  J. Pits, p. 281.
• z 1.61

  H Spelm. Glossar. in voce Scaccarium. J. Stow, Chron. p. 154.
• a 1.62

  J. Pits, p. 274. Bale, Cent. 3.
• * 1.63

  Walter Coventri∣ensis.
• b 1.64

  Apud Jo. Pits, p. 290.
• e 1.65

  Cent. 3. cap. 74.
• f 1.66

  Vid. Hist. & Antiq. Oxon. Par. I. p. 15.
• g 1.67

  J. Pits, p. 297.
• h 1.68

  Id. p. 292.
• i 1.69

  Id. p. 301.
• * 1.70

  Mat. Pa∣ris.
• k 1.71

  Fol. 1606.
• l 1.72

  Fol. Lond. 1640.
• m 1.73

  Vid. D. Watsi•• P••aefa••.
• n 1.74

  ••n Praef. ad Edi∣tionem Tigurin.
• o 1.75

  Annal. Eccles. ad An. 996.
• p 1.76

  J. Pits, p. 313.
• q 1.77

  Hist. Eccles. Brit. p. 29.
• r 1.78

  Remains, p. m. 8.
• s 1.79

  Titles of Hon. p. 535.
• t 1.80

  Hist. & Antiq. Oxon. Par. I. p. 112.
• u 1.81

  Fol. Oxon. 1684.
• * 1.82

  Chronicle of Mail∣ros.
• * 1.83

  Meaner Histori∣ans.
• x 1.84

  J. Pits, p. 350, 351.
• y 1.85

  Id. p. 355.
• z 1.86

  E•• Gibson Catal. Bibl. Tennison. p. 26.
• a 1.87

  Angl. Sacr. Par. I. p. 116.
• b 1.88

  J. Pits, p. 361.
• c 1.89

  Id. p. 448.
• d 1.90

  Angl. Sacr. Par. I. p. 115.
• * 1.91

  Cent. 14. Th. Wikes.
• e 1.92

  Hist. Angl. Vol. II. Fol. Oxon. 1687.
• f 1.93

  J. Le∣land, Assert. Arth. fol. 30. a.
• g 1.94

  Bibl. D' Ewes, Monast. Angl. Tom. I. p. 177.
• h 1.95

  Hist. Eccles. Brit. p. 21.
• i 1.96

  Fun. Mon. p. 206.
• * 1.97

  N. Tri∣vet.
• k 1.98

  J. Pits, p. 422.
• l 1.99

  Vid. H. Spelman. Concil. Tom. l. p. 111. Hist. Oxon. lib. 2. p. 392. & Ab. Whel••c. ••ed. Hist. p. 115.
• m 1.100

  Spelm. Gloss. in voce Apostolici.
• n 1.101

  J. Pits, p. 438.
• * 1.102

  J. Bromp∣ton.
• o 1.103

  Praef. and X. Script. inter quos J. Brompton.
• p 1.104

  Vid. Joh. Spelm. Vit. Aelfr. R. p. 18.
• q 1.105

  Tho. Gale, Hist. Brit. & Angl. vol. II. in Praefat. p. 8, 9, 10.
• r 1.106

  J. Pits, p. 438.
• * 1.107

  R. Hig∣den.
• s 1.108

  Jta Ioh. Pits, p. 517. Verum Balae••s, Anno 1363.
• t 1.109

  Hist. Brit. Vol. I. Fol. Oxon. 1691.
• u 1.110

  J. Pits, p. 567.
• x 1.111

  Vid. Vsserii Hist. Dogm. Edit. ab Hen. Wharton, p. 157, 439.
• y 1.112

  In Praefat. ad 10. Script.
• * 1.113

  J. Tin∣muthensis.
• z 1.114

  J. Pits, p. 500.
• a 1.115

  Assert. Arth. & alibi.
• b 1.116

  Chap. 13.
• * 1.117

  Matthew of West∣minster.
• c 1.118

  Vid. H. Wharton, Praef. ad Angl. S. c. Par. I. p. 32, 33.
• d 1.119

  Ad An. 489.
• e 1.120

  Fol. A. D. 1601.
• f 1.121

  J. Pits, p. 519.
• g 1.122

  Fol. A. D. 1570.
• h 1.123

  Catalog. Bibl. Tenni∣son. p. 1.
• i 1.124

  So says Pits, p. 531. and yet Ex Chron. Ad. Merimuth. in Bibl. Cotton. An. Dom. 1300. W. Pety••'s Quotation runs in his Ancient Right of the Commons, &c. p. 30.
• * 1.125

  J. Staf∣fort, &c.
• k 1.126

  Pits, p. 523.
• l 1.127

  Worthies in Staffordshire, p. 45.
• m 1.128

  MSS. Tom. 1. p. 657.
• n 1.129

  Chron in RR. Joh. Ed. I. &c.
• o 1.130

  De Eventibrs Angliae Fol. Lond. 1652. inter 10. Scrip.
• p 1.131

  J. Pits, p. 555.
• * 1.132

  Cent. 15. Sir J. Froissart.
• q 1.133

  See his Hist. Vol. II. cap. 200.
• r 1.134

  Sel∣den's Tit. of Hon. p. 635.
• s 1.135

  Fol. Paris. 31 Vol. 1505.
• t 1.136

  Quarto Heydelberg. 1587.
• u 1.137

  Comment. Brit. Descrip. fol. 27. a.
• * 1.138

  Tho. Ot∣terburn, &c.
• x 1.139

  Monast. Angl. Tom. II. p. 468.
• y 1.140

  Godwin. de Praesul. in St. David.
• z 1.141

  MS. Bibl. Cotton. Nero, A. 17.
• a 1.142

  MS. in Bibl. Lambeth. & Coll. Ben. Can∣tab.
• b 1.143

  MS. inter Codd. D. Com. Clarendon.
• c 1.144

  8vo. MS. in Bibl. D. Com. Carliol.
• d 1.145

  J. Pits, p. 607.
• e 1.146

  Id. p. 625.
• * 1.147

  Tho. Wal∣singham.
• f 1.148

  Fol. Lond. 1574.
• g 1.149

  J. Stow's Pref. to his Chron.
• h 1.150

  Pits, p 635.
• * 1.151

  John Harding.
• i 1.152

  Id. p. 653. Bale, Cent. 8. cap. 30.
• k 1.153

  Vid. Aelfr. mag. vit. p. 63.
• l 1.154

  J. Pits, p. 656, 657.
• m 1.155

  Id. p. 644.
• * 1.156

  W. Cax∣ton.
• n 1.157

  J. Pits, p. 670, 671.
• o 1.158

  Fol. Lond. 1515.
• * 1.159

  John Rosse.
• p 1.160

  Vid. Hist. & Antiq. Oxon. Par. II. p. 77.
• q 1.161

  MS. Bibl. Cotton. & Coll. Ben. Cantabr.
• * 1.162

  Cent. 16. R. Fabi∣an.
• r 1.163

  Fol. Lond. 1559.
• s 1.164

  P. 42. &c.
• t 1.165

  Bale, Cent. 8. cap. 62.
• u 1.166

  Id. Cent. 9. cap. 19. & I. Pits, p. 709.
• * 1.167

  Polydore Virgil.
• a 1.168

  J. Leland. Comment. ad Cygn. Cant. voce Isis.
• b 1.169

  Sir Tho. Craig's Scotl. Soveraignt. p. 20, 38, 44, 181.
• c 1.170

  Fol. Basil. 1534.
• d 1.171

  Epist. Ded. ad 5 Script. post Bedam.
• e 1.172

  Vid. Mantiss. ad Deg. Wheàr. Method. &c. p. 143.
• f 1.173

  Not. in Aelfr. R. Vit. p. 152.
• g 1.174

  Comment. Brit. Descrip. Frag. fol. 6, 17, 19, &c.
• h 1.175

  Hist. Oxon. Lib. 2. p. 50.
• i 1.176

  S. Taylor's Gavelk. p. 83, 84.
• k 1.177

  Th. Gale, Praef. ad Hist. Angl. Tom. 1.
• l 1.178

  Ant. Harmer, p. 95.
• * 1.179

  John Ra∣stal, &c.
• m 1.180

  Ath. Oxon. vol. I. p. 38. & J. Pits, p. 726.
• n 1.181

  Burton, Descript. Lei••. p. 153.
• o 1.182

  4to Lond. 1560.
• p 1.183

  4to Venet. 1548. Francof. 1565. Basil. 1567. &c.
• q 1.184

  J. Pits, p. 735. Vid. etiam Fuller's Worthies, p. 219. in London.
• r 1.185

  Hist. Scot. lib. 8.
• * 1.186

  R. Holin∣shead.
• s 1.187

  Fol. Lond. 1577, 1587, &c.
• t 1.188

  Ath. Oxon. vol. I. p. 189. & 270.
• u 1.189

  Scotland's Sover. 8vo Lond. 1695. pertotum.
• * 1.190

  Cent. 17 J. Stow.
• w 1.191

  See his Chronicle published by Howes, p. 811.
• x 1.192

  Fol. Lond. 1631.
• y 1.193

  Tho. Fuller's Worthies, p. 220, 221. in London.
• z 1.194

  8vo Duac. 1602.
• * 1.195

  S. Daniel.
• a 1.196

  Fol. Lond. 1618, 1621, &c.
• b 1.197

  Fol. Lond. 1638, &c.
• c 1.198

  Fol. Lond. 1616.
• d 1.199

  Fol. Lond. 1638.
• * 1.200

  J. Speed.
• e 1.201

  So Fuller in his Worthies, p. 181.
• f 1.202

  Deg. Whear. Method. p. 146.
• g 1.203

  Ath. Oxon. vol. II. p. 9, 10.
• h 1.204

  Id. vol. I. p. 452.
• i 1.205

  Sir H. Spelm. Concil. Tom. I. p. 215.
• * 1.206

  Sir Rich. Baker.
• k 1.207

  Praele••t, Ca••••den, p. 36.
• l 1.208

  Fol. Lond. 1641. & 1663.
• m 1.209

  Fol. Lond. 1660, 1671.
• n 1.210

  〈◊〉〈◊〉 vol. II. p. 34.
• o 1.211

  8vo Oxon. 1672.
• p 1.212

  Ath. Oxon. vol. II. p. 34.
• * 1.213

  Sir W. Church∣ill, &c.
• q 1.214

  Fol. Lond. 1675.
• r 1.215

  Fol. Lond. 1677.
• s 1.216

  8vo Lond. 1679.
• * 1.217

  Anony∣mous Hi∣stories.
• t 1.218

  In notis ad vol. I. Angl. Sac. p. 55, 109, 121.
• u 1.219

  Hist. Eccles. Brit. p. 72.
• w 1.220

  Tit. of Hon. p. 25, 83.