Philadelphus, or a defence of Brutes, and the Brutans history Written by R. H.

A DEFENCE OF BRVTES HISTORIE.

MAster Buchanan, though some call you the trumpet of Scotland, and some the noble Scholler, yet I will be so bold, as answere your larum, touching the history of mighty Brute: because your inuec∣tiue treatise, is in trueth, more fac∣tious, then effectuall. You and such hotbraines, haue deuised a faction, and diuorce∣ment of opinions, (I dare say) without fruit, and I be∣leeue, without cause: For my part, your deniall is not able once to moue me, and your reasons against Brutes historie, shall neuer perswade any sufficient reader, to agree with you, and remoue the markes and circuites, that Geffry Monmouth hath set downe. Yet by reading your allegations and probations, we may best areede, who is most credible, he or you, a Monmouth or a Scot, a Moonke or a Trauailer, and if neither barrell be better her∣ring, then by their wordes they shalbe saued from blame, and by their wordes they shalbe damned, sayth the wise Iudge: wherefore I take you of your worde, and I say: that

We seeke no Noilitie, from Brute, we count not of our forefathers noblenesse, but of our owne. Nobilitie I can tell you, goeth not by byrth and riches in Brutany,

but by vertue: it standeth not vpon antiquitie, but vp∣on right: we euer say, that noblenesse is a superioritie or dominion in vertuous actes, and that other thinges without vertue are but minoritie and subiection, and colours, and naught worth.

We cannot thinke that Brute was ••atricide: let them that iudge him so, proue him so. I passe not for that he hath done aforetime in other landes, but I onely respect his Actiōs in this Iland. Yet, if he were in that huge and maine fault, hee may well enter into Sanc∣tuarie, till you and yours haue proued the deede volun∣tary. Mishap is not rashnesse, chaunce is not counsell, there is a folly in meeting an arrowe, there is no sinne in shooting it at a beast in the forrest.

We compare not Brutus with Romulus, no more then we compare your Chronicle now with this that shall write one 200. or 300. yeares heereafter: but this is your florish, to no other purpose, then to shew reading, where it doth no good, and may do some little hurt to a young Reader; who by your wordes will go nigh to say, that Brute and Romulus are much of a time, because you set them together in a Chronicle, which should re∣port that is past, or record that is present onely.

We are not Brittons, we are Brutans: we account not Brute our authour & founder, seeing here dwelt as Noble men afore Brute as euer since that time. No good coun∣try or bad, hath been without noble men from the be∣ginning, and to let go all Histories, I dare say this word, That nature hath made as auncient a genera∣tion of men vpon the earth, as of other creatures, and of chiefe men in their companies at first, aswell as of o∣ther chiefe creatures in their kindes and their heardes

at first, yea and much rather of men, because of more go∣uernment and order.

We speake not of Brutes wealth and language, be∣fore he came hither, neither can you proue, that hee had not wealth inough to serue his vses, or tongue enough in euery place of his trauell. Cannot an Egle flie from place to place, and take heere a lambe, there a kid, here a goose, there a swanne, vnlesse hee can speake the lan∣guage of lambes, and kids and geese and swannes? what traffique should a venturer haue with any peo∣ple, when he hath set all the earth or one part therof be∣fore him, to make himselfe king in some place or other? He will not aske, what price beareth your marchaun∣dise? but a Brute will haue it for taking: hee will be a∣boue your commercies, and throw you into the mar∣shes, if you giue him not whatsoeuer you would not, whensoeuer he will.

What if the Romans coulde scarsely set foote in this I∣land, when they were in their greatest fortune and strength? could not Brute therefore possibly get into it? how know you, whether his natiuitie, or his good hap, or his maner of entering, were not better or happier then Caesars?

If one company cannot enter by force, cannot ano∣ther company enter by wit and fairer meanes? It is not number, nor money that make a Conquerour, it is good successe, which commeth of a good forecast, that is in a Grecian more then in a Roman, and why not in Brute more then in Caesar? If Brutes Chronicles had been preserued aswell as Caesars, I doubt not of this matter and of Brutes immortalitie in all writinges, then Caesar had beene halfe a Brute.

We haue not any thing heere for Italians, till wee be serued our selues, we are onely in Brutanie and among Brutans. Let other men haue leaue to speake of Saturne and Latium, of Ianus and Ianiculum, and other thinges before Brute, who might be among his neighbours, as singular and fortunate a man for foresight, as Noah was among the men of former times. It is no reason that Brute coulde not be giuen to trauell, because the Italians were not giuen to trauelling, among whome you say hee dwelt afore. So you may deny almost eue∣ry actors Actes, that hath liued admirably in the worlde. It may bee, that Brute and is fellowes swornemen were worth all the rest in liuely and manly action abroad, as Abraham and his company were singular among the Assyrians, and proued the rare man of the world.

Wee say not, that Brute walked on the Sea, or came hither by land, and therefore your Alpes, and your Her∣cules haue no present vse, but as table talke to passe time, and make a noyse. Yet men hauing liued more then 2800. yeares from Adam to Hercules vppon the earth, and Comer the sonne of Lamech, and Cham and Sabati, and other great men lying in Italy before Hercu∣les was borne, and seeking out the partes of the earth euery way, we can beleeue reasonably, that they pas∣sed ouer the Alpes before him. Or if Hercules must needes be the onely man, what a single reason is it? that Brute might not follow him that way, because Hercules onely had gone before. I had rather conclude thus: Hercules made a way through the Alpes so easily, that any hardy trauailer might followe him that way. Since Brutes time the Alpes haue been passable enough, and the

Gaules haue ouerrunned them; and other people trode on them, your Adhuc alienis is somwhat vnskilfully writ∣ten of you.

Truely I would Tamerlane were euen now here, to answere your Ocean argument: hee could tell you, that his multitude of rude Scythians and shepheardes could do more Actes then all the fine gay troopes and rankes of Baiazete, that it is no good consequent which you bring forth, as if the Albane shepheardes and clownes might not be as valiant in vanquishing the Alpes, as the Carthagi∣nian souldiers: vnlesse it be an infallible Item, that the iolliest men are euer greatest actors by sea and land: your argument à maiori is easily set à minori in this ma∣ner: The lightheaded Grecians and such other haue pas∣sed the Ocean, much more is it probable, that the manly and most hardy Albanes haue done the same thing, ha∣uing neither lesse wit by comparison of their Actes, nor lesse courage in any point. The actions of one doe not proue any thing of another, but of that one pro or contra: or else howe should we haue argumentes of contradic∣tories, of vnequals, of vnlikes, of diuisions? or if your reason be an historie, I see no cause, why mine historie of Brute, may not be credited aswell as yours of the Mas∣silians, who were long enough after Noahs Arke and o∣ther shippes of other men, I beleeue, to haue some aunce∣stors in shipmastry and many fellowes. He that goeth aspying goeth aspeeding: opportunitie maketh men doe straunge workes: haue you neuer heard of players and iesters, that by deuises of games and pastimes haue obtained very great victories? Remember man, I say, the famous and strong name of Brute, and consider the nature of warly trauailers, and neuer stand so stiffly

in your naked coniecture.

How knoweth Buchanan, that there was no such re∣nowmed Brute in the world before the bannishment of the Tar∣quines in Rome? might there not be another Brute 500. yeares before this counterfeit Brute of Rome? or was there none such, are you sure, because the Roman and Greeke Historians of other nations, forsooth, haue made no such record? It is no sufficient reason, to carry Bru∣tans from their owne old Registers by the wordes and silence of outlandish writers. You knowe and I am sure, there are no meane matters left out of prophane Histories, which are in ecclesiasticall Histories, and ne∣uerthelesse allowed. The more they leaue out the glo∣rie of our land, the more I presume by the nature of for∣raine countries, that our land was enuied, because it was most glorious. I tell you I cannot thinke it ne∣cessarie, that he which is named Brute in our Chronicle must bee so named in other Chronicles: the same man may haue diuers names seuerally set downe in seueral bookes of seuerall languages, and as for this most No∣ble Brute, it is like enough, he chaunged his name, as he chaunged his habitation.

You may easily say, A Moonke was the deuiser of this Brute, you will say, that he played the Poet, that hee carued & painted him in this maner: but you cannot yet proue in this hast, that the Moonke or student had not good proofe in his readings of this Brute, that he had not his Authour for them. It is out of question, that manie books haue been written but once, and that many such singular bookes haue been lost for want of coppies, and it is probable, that this Moonke had some olde monu∣ment or booke, which may bee in Cambry to this day,

though Buchanan and Liuy neuer heard of it, and may be as true of Brute, as their olde Scottish Thinges and Ro∣mish Decades are accounted true by their fauourers and countrimen. If the historie of Brute be not true, be∣cause they haue not seene the proofe thereof, no more is their historie true, because we haue not seene the proofe thereof, which was acted so many yeares ere we were borne: thus it is as lawfull to coniecture for Brute as a∣gainst him, seeing he is but denied onely by coniectures and probabilities.

But what is this you say? are mens mouthes stopped with a maske and shewe of Religion? cannot men tell what to say against A shewe and appearance? doe men that name the heathenish religion account it religion in Chri∣stendome? I warrant you, the Moonke was so far from purposing, to stop mens mouthes with the idolatry of Diana, that he neuer esteemed halfe the tenth part so much of her, as Demetrius did for his profite in Ephesus, and I dare say, that the Religious Authour thought it no reli∣gion, or imagined, that the Brutanes would so esteeme it, but onely named Diana, as Castor and Pollux are named of S. Luke the Euangelist.

Your Synchronisme of Faunus, of Sybilla and Praene∣stine is to no purpose: it seemeth by this History of Brute, that Dianaes Oracle was not vnknowne, as you seeme to a∣uouch. But heere you will take the Moonke at a dead lift, as you suppose, and yet I tell you me-thinkes you and very bookishly and literally wise, not reasonably and discoursiuely. Must Diana needes speake latine, be∣cause this Historian reporteth her Oracle in latine? Are you not aduised, how many things are writtē in Greek and Latine of the Beginning of the world, though there

were neither Greeke nor Latine 2000. yeares and more after the Creation of heauen and earth? and such a rea∣son might partly be brought against your selfe in your first king Fergusius, if I would follow so needlesse a cause, in comparing his time with the times of the latine tongue, wherein you write of him. You might haue done well, to proue that the Moonke saith, howe Brute receiued his answere of Diana, and asked her Counsell in latine speach, which because you haue not proued, your Horatius and your Saliare carmen, and your Numa, and your wordes are but winde. Cannot an Historian report the Orati∣ons of the Indians, of the Germans, of the Numidians in la∣tine, vnlesse the Numidians & Germans and Indians spake latine? were the Orations in your Chronicles, Master Buchanan, spoken first in latine? So your Penitus obliti and ne tenue quidem, and other bootlesse words are vain and little, or nought worth in this present question. Tis not euer true that hath a quidem. I cannot certainly say, that the Brutans language was vsed in Italy in the dayes of Brute: but I may well say, notwithstanding your trifling mycterisme, that if the Oracles and men had spo∣ken it, they had been neuer the worse, nor the language neuer the better. But you were in a running thought and supposed your selfe subtle enough, when you had brought your inuention to a disiunctiue proposition, with much effect, I promise you, when it tendeth hi∣therto, euen to proue, that the Brutan speach then was not the same our Brutans vse now in Cambry.

Yet by your leaue, Buchanan, it is no proofe against this language, in that many tongues appeare in it in your time, seeing Brutanisme might at first bee as full of diuerse tongues by reason of much trauell as it is nowe, and then

your argument hath nor vse nor force in your question: and in trueth, though Scots be called generally false, yet Buchanan may be true: so Moonks may dreame dreames, and yet Geffry Monmouth write a trueth. Why should not a Moonke be as credible as a Paedanty? or a solitarie student vnderstand that he readeth as much as a busie schoole∣master? or a Cambrian read Chronicles which a Scot ne∣uer saw? or Geffry be as plaine and verifiable as Bucha∣nan, being not so deep ouer head and eares in verses and Poetry as he? yet now at last the George confesseth, that his owne reasons are but minims, and minute persecuti∣ons and slender thinges, and is faine to say, that the Moonke himselfe seemeth to acknowledge his fiction, though it appeareth not so by the Moonkes wordes. Thus it can∣not be proued euidently, that the history of Brute is a fai∣ned and poeticall narration, vnlesse it be first proued, that there were no more Intelligences and Registers in the life of Geffrey then of George, and that Geffrey had no Au∣thours for his defence, because George cannot knowe them. If nothing be true in one country which hath not suffragees from another Countrey, I cannot tell what historie may stand irrefragably by this determination, no not when we read the auncientest partes and primi∣tiue recordes of best historiographers. Was there not an Apostle Paul vnder Nero, because Suetonius and Taci∣tus name none such? much Iustine teach the Iewes howe to thinke of the deliuery of Israel? But I omit those in∣stances which might be giuē against you, because in a question I regard the argument more then the illustra∣tion thereof, and so should you too by your leaue, for all your 24. yeares trauell.

Are they malè callidi, and is vanitie in them that call

Diana an huntresse and say, that in the time of Brute Diana was accounted a Goddesse? I confesse, I cānot see, how they are lewdly and fraudulently vaine that write thus: then it remaineth, that you make these words good, if you can: The chast body the painfull bodie, but labour and conti∣nencie in mans body breede a kinde of diuinitie in man. I pray, when you in your Psalmes, as they call them yours, deuise the most kindes of verses that you can, do you confesse, that Dauid made them at first in so many sortes of verses as you haue written them? surely you will denie it. Iwis, it is not necessarie, that Brute and Diana should speake verses, because Geffry Monmouth recordeth their wordes in verses. But, let be, suppose they did speake in these or in other verses, then he, doubtlesse, or some other for him translated their words into hexameters and pentameters, as you see. What vanitie or falshood is on either side? neuer thinke to carry it away with threed∣bare wordes, or to leade your Readers where you list.

A wise perswader are you: is Diana called Loxias in your bookes? or if Apollo be oblique and crooked, and in∣tricate in his answeres, must Diana needes be so? or if Dianaes Priest be commonly obscure & foulded vp in speach, cannot it be, that hee should be perspicuous at anie one time? are you to appoint him how to speake so manie yeares after his death? I pray, if Pythia be euer doubtfull, and oblique, because shee is so for the most part, what doubtfulnesse or obliquitie is in this aunswere? You are come to my rich temples, Lycurgus beloued of God and of all that inhabite the heauenly houses, I am in doubt whe∣ther I should call thee a mon or a God, but I much rather beleeue, that thou art a God, Lycurgus, as Herodotus hath recorded in his Clio: and what ambiguitie is in that An∣swere

which Pythia gaue vnto Craesus in the same booke of Herodotus? what saye to Aristodocus in the same booke, who neither asked in verse nor was answered in verse? what saye to them of Marea and Apia, which asked Ham∣mons Oracle in prose, and were answered in prose? as it appeareth in Euterpe. What saye to the Doue of Dodo∣na, or the Oracle of the cittie Butis giuen to Pheron that spake in prose? in the same booke: to let passe such an∣sweres a good manie giuen without verse or ambiguitie: Or if they were giuen in verse being nowe written o∣therwise with allowance of Readers, what hath the Moonke done amisse in the maner of these verses? he may aswell register prose in verse, as they register verse in prose.

As for your Opinor, this may bee well answered in your verball manner, O pinor narras? non rectè accipis: you know the maker Terentius. I that am young may as∣well bestowe my labour to answere you, as you being olde may obiect so vnfruitfully. Howe is that proued a manifest fiction that this Iland at Brutes comming was a wil∣dernesse, being yet so this daie still in manie places? Can two Gyantes and their two families, or so manie Giantes as make an Armie, so fill this countrie, that it shall not rightly be called a desart? when they are all in one shire, the other shires are verie desarts: when they being so few, are scattered into so manie shires betweene the Orcades and the Ile of Wight, how can they so fill it, that it may not be well named of Diana a desart? in comparison of the Cities and Kingdomes in other landes, where she abode most.

The name of Gogmagog is no more monstrous then the name of Onosconcoleros, nor Tentagol more vast and strange

then Nabuchodonozor, neither shall those Names preiudice the Historie more with vs then these Names haue done with other in the Historie of the Assyrians.

Thus I may verie iustly and reasonably maintaine and vphold the historie of Brute, for anie thing that master Buchanan hath said against it. Concerning Dioclesian and his daughters, I haue willingly lost all that delight of reading and answering, although I see euidently, that this Historie which you account a tale may be defen∣ded for ought you haue alledged. Yet master Buchanan taketh much vpon him and chargeth some bodie with impudencie and a lye, and plaieth the Terrible schoolema∣ster, and yet when he hath done his best and his worst, it is not proued, that 24. yeares were not sufficient for Brutes retinue, and the inhabitantes of this land, togi∣ther with other of their kindred that resorted hither and remained here, to replenish the Country with men of War, to erect three kingdomes, to accomplish great Actes by sea and land. Let him looke into the kingdomes of Grecia in olde time, and he shall finde fewer men in a kingdome then Brute alone with his companie might raise in 24. yeares: let him remember the huge kingdomes of three men, Sem, Ham, and Iaphet: let him consider, that mightie Actions are not done by money and number, but by industry and vertue: let him proue, eyther that this Generation of Brute cannot possibly be true, or else cease to spend his time with opinions and likelihoodes, that may be repelled with the like againe: rusty Antiquities more reuerend then scou∣red Nouelties. Yet, we are not desirous, that Brute should be our Conquerour, we wish not subiection to him, or anie other outlandish Nobleman: we had rather winne the land that this Brute came from, and subdue it vnder

our feete: but when Brutans haue published an Historie and allowed it a long time, we would not haue a Scot so presumptuous, as to controll it, much lesse to reiect it, as this one Scot hath done very rawly and vnaduisedly.

So I leaue you, master Buchanan, and wishe you to sacrifice vnto the wiser dimi-goddesse Palinodia.