The Antiquities of the British Churches, Book · Chapter 5 (1 of 3)

The Antiquities of the British Churches · Book · Chapter 5 (1 of 3)

p. 238CHAP. V. Of the Declension of the British Churches.

BRitain never totally subdued by the Romans.

That, the Occasion of the Miseries of the Britains in the Province, by the Incursions from beyond the Wall.

Of the Picts, and Scots their mortal Enemies.

The true Original of the Picts from Scandinavia.

That Name not given to the Old Britains, but to the New Colonies.

The Scotish Antiquities enquired into.

An Account of them from John Fordon compared with that given by Hector Boethius and Buchanan.

Of Hector's Authours, Veremundus, Cornelius Hibernicus and their ancient Annals.

An Account of the Antiquities of Ireland, and of the Authority of their Traditions and Annals, compared with the British Antiquities published by Geffrey of Monmouth in point of Credibility.

A true Account of the Fabulous Antiquities of the Northern Nations. Of the first coming of the Scots into Britain.

The first Cause of the Declension and Ruine of the British Churches was, the laying them open to the fury of the Scots and Picts.

Of Maximus his withdrawing the Roman Forces; And the Emperour's sending numbers of Picts to draw them back.

The miserable Condition of the Britains thus forsaken; And supplies sent them for a time, and then taken away.

Of the Walls then built for their Security, and the Roman Legions then placed.

Of the great degeneracy of manners among the Britains.

Of Intestine Divisions, and calling in of Foreign Assistence.

The Saxons first coming hither.

Who they were, and whence they came.

p. 239Bede's Account examin'd, and reconciled with the Circumstances of those times.

His fixing the time of their coming justified.

Of the Reasons of Vortigern's calling in the Saxons.

And the Dissatisfaction of the Britains upon their coming, and Vortigern's League with them.

Of the Valour of Vortimer and Aurelius Ambrosius against the Saxons.

The different Account of the Battels between the Britains and Saxons among our Historians.

The sad condition of the British Churches at that time.

The imperfect Account given by the British History.

Of King Arthur's Story and Success.

Of Persons of greatest Reputation then in the British Churches, and particularly of St. David.

Of the Britains passing over to Aremorica.

The beginning of that Colony stated.

Gildas there writes his Epistle; The Scope and Design of it.

The Independency of the British Churches proved from their carriage towards Augustine the Monk.

The Particulars of that Story cleared; And the whole concluded.

BEing now to give an Account of the fatal Declension of the British Churches, it will be necessary to look back on the time when their Miseries first began. For which we are to consider, That the Romans having never made an entire Conquest of the whole Island; but contenting themselves with the better part, and excluding the rest by a Wall; They still left a backdoor open for the poor Provincial Britains to be disturbed, as often as the Roman Garrisons neglected their Duty or were overpowred by their Enemies. Who were now very much increased in those remoter parts of Britain; Which being abandon'd by the Romans, they became an easie Prey to the Scots and Picts; Who, from different parts, took Possession of those Coasts which lay nearest to the Place from whence they came. Thus, the Scots coming from Ireland, entred upon the Southern and Western Parts, as the Picts from Scandinavia had before p. 240done on the Northern. Our Learned (a)(a)Camd. Brit. p. 82.Antiquary was of Opinion, That the Picts were no other than the ancient Britains, partly settled in those Parts, before the Roman Invasion, and partly retiring thither out of Impatience of the Roman Yoke, who by degrees grew up into a considerable number of People. It is not to be question'd, that there was a Stock of Old Britains in those Northern Parts, as appears by the Army under Galgacus, and the Actions against Vrbicus, Agricola, Marcellus and Severus; But their continual Wars with the Roman Legions, who were placed about the Wall, on purpose to take all Advantages against them, must needs exhaust them by degrees, and lessen them so much as to leave room enough for new Recruits to come in and take up part of their Countrey. And although for their own Security, the Parts near the Wall might be well supplied on that side, yet when so much Bloud retired to the Heart as was necessary to support Life, a great deal must be called off from the extreme parts for a fresh supply of it, and those parts must needs be left destitute of natural heat, and Strength enough to maintain themselves. For during the War, which continued for several Ages, the very Life of the British Nation, beyond the Wall, was in perpetual danger; And not onelyonly the Duty and Service, but the many Diseases and Accidents of War, could not, in so long a tract of time, but very much impair the British Strength, and leave the remoter Parts, if not wholly void of Inhabitants, yet not in a Condition to withstand a foreign Invasion. I grant that Tacitus, Dio, Herodian, Vopiscus, &c. take no notice of any other Enemies the Romans hād at that time in those Parts besides the Britains; But then, I think, the Argument may be thus turned upon Camden, What makes the latter Writers so expresly and distinctly mention the Picts, if they were no other than the Old Britains, so often spoken of by Roman Historians? I do not understand, why their continuing an old Custome should now give them a new Name? The Britains, however rude, were no more Picts then, than they were at Caesar's coming. What makes the Roman Writers so of a sudden alter their Style, and leave off a Name so famous p. 241among the Romans, for the name of Picts, which was not heard of before? The first mention we find of them is in (b)(b)Paneg. Const. n. 11.Eumenius his Panegyrick to Constantius, where he takes notice of the different State of the Britains, when Caesar subdued them, from what they were in Constantius his time: Then, saith he, they were a rude, half naked People, and so easily vanquished; But now the Britains were exercised by the Arms of the Picts and the Irish. Nothing can be plainer, than that Eumenius here distinguishes the Picts from the Britains, and supposes them to be Enemies to each other. Neither can we reasonably think this a Name then taken up to distinguish the barbarous Britains from the Provincial: For that distinction had now been of a very long standing, and if it had been applied to that purpose, we should have met with it in Tacitus, or Dio, or Herodian, or Zosimus, who speak of the Extra-provincial Britains, under no other Name but of Britains. (c)(c)Xiphil. in Sever.Dio is so exact as to set down the Names of distinction then used for those Britains, and he saith, they were of two sorts, the Maeatae, and the Caledonii; If the name of Picts had then comprehended them all, no doubt he would have mention'd it on that occasion. (d)(d)Zonar. in Sever.Zonaras likewise calls them all then by the name of Britains. But it is said, That the (e)(e)Eumen. n. 7.Panegyrist himself calls the Caledonians, Picts, who were certainly Britains. His words are, Non dico Caledonum, aliorúmque Pictorum, Silvas & Paludes: where H. Valesius observes, it ought to be read, Non Dicaledonum aliorúmque Pictorum; For (f)(f)Am. Marcel. l. 27. c. 8.Ammianus Marcellinus saith, the Picts were divided into the Dicaledones and the Vecturiones. It is ingeniously conjectured by Mr. Camden, that these Names were taken from the Situation of the People, the first from Dehe… and Caledones, or the Caledonians on the Right-hand, and the other from Chwithic, which signifies the Left-hand in the British Language; But Archbishop (g)(g)De Primord. p. 1021.Vsher observes, that he is mistaken, in supposing the Right-hand among the Britains to be the West, and the Left-hand the East; for he plainly proves, that by the one is understood the South, and the other the North. And (h)(h)Bed. Hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 4.Sir 50:3Bede shews, that the Northern and Southern Picts were divided from each p. 242other by a Ridge of Mountains; which (i)(i)Scotichron. l. 2. c. 7.John Fordon saith, was Mount Grampius, which parted the Scots and the Picts. For the Scots came into that part of the Picts Countrey which lay next to Ireland; from whence they came thither under the conduct of Reuda, as (k)(k)Hist. l. 1. c. 1.Bede saith. Who, as some think, was the Chief of the Six Sons of the King of Ulster, who, as Giraldus Cambrensis saith, with no small Fleet, came into the Northern Parts of Britain, and there settled themselves; from whom that Countrey was called Scotia. Which, if it happen'd in the time of Constantius, as Archbishop (l)(l)De Primord. p. 547.Vsher proves from the Anonymous Life of St. Patrick, it agrees very well with what (m)(m)Am. Marcel. l. 20.Ammianus Marcellinus saith, That in the latter end of his Reign, the Scots and the Picts were both joined against the Britains. The Scots, as (n)(n)Gild. Epist.Gildas and (o)(o)Bed. l. 1. c. 12.Bede say, coming from the West, and the Picts from the North; And so Fabius Ethelwerd saith, the Picts came from the North, and the Scots from the West; who took possession of the Southwest parts of Caledonia beyond Glota, and Bodotria, or Dumbritton, and Edenborough Frith. And so, the Mons Grampius, or the Dorsum Britannicum, as some call it, parted the Picts and the Scots; the Old Britains still living between the Wall and the two Friths; For Bede expresly saith, That both the Scots and the Picts lived beyond them; and he likewise adds, That upon the remove of the Roman Legion they took in all the Countrey as far as Severus his Wall; where the Britains dwelt before. I confess, the Roman Province had different Bounds at several times, it sometimes extending as far as Antoninus his Wall, or Graham's Dike between the two Friths; Sometimes again it was brought within the Compass of Hadrian and Severus his Wall, id est, between the Tine and the Esk; And Bede thinks that the last Wall made by the Romans was where Severus his Wall stood. If so, that whole Countrey between the two Walls must be then abandon'd for 100 Miles; Which (p)(p)Usser. de Prim. p. 1027.some object against as an improbable thing, The Wall being so much longer, and consequently more indefensible by the Britains. But, in probability, the Britains were then willing to let their Enemies have the more room to prevent being disturbed by them; And this was the main Security p. 243they always had, the Linea Valli relating to this Wall from Hadrian's time; And although sometimes in a bravery the Roman Souldiers would march to Antoninus his Wall, and drive the Britains before them, yet generally the Roman Province was bounded by Severus his Wall, and therefore Gallio Ravennas might at last chuse rather to make up and fortifie this for the Britains, when the Roman Souldiers left them to defend themselves.

But, as to the several Inhabitants beyond the Wall, it will be necessary, in order to the following History, to set down a more particular Account in this Place of the different Original of them, which hath been so perplexed by the partial Conjectures of the Scottish and Irish Antiquaries, that it is no easie matter to find out the plain Truth amongst them. But I shall endeavour to trace the Footsteps of it by the best Light which ancient or modern Authours afford. And I am so far from any pique or partiality in this matter that I shall be glad to receive any better information from learned and ingenuous Men. For it will appear by this enquiry that the Antiquities of both Nations do yet stand much in need of being cleared to the satisfaction of inquisitive Men. But to the business.

It is certain that in the time of Tacitus, the Northern Parts of this Island were well inhabited, as appears by the following Account from him. The Brigantes, who extended as far as the Tine, were, as (q)(q)Tacit. Agric. c. 17, 18.he saith, subdued by Petilius Cerealis; The Silures, by Julius Frontinus; The Ordovices, the other People of Wales; by Julius Agricola in his first entry upon this Province. But in his third year he went as far as the Frith of Taus: By which Sir H. Savil saith, Some understand the Tweed; For that it cannot be understood of the Taus, which parts the Northern and the Southern parts of Scotland, seems evident from Tacitus, who saith, That the Romans had leisure to build Castles there: But this Taus is a great way beyond the two Friths; And Tacitus, in the fourth year of Agricola, makes the Roman Power to reach no further than to Glota and Bodotria, where he thought the Romans might have conveniently fixed the Bounds of their Empire that way. But, I confess, p. 244Tacitus his words may bear another meaning, viz. That although the Romans had made Excursions as far as the Taus, and set up some Forts there; Yet when Agricola went about to settle the Province, he reduced it within the compass of the two Friths; There being the most convenient Place for the Garrison to be fixed; There being so small a Neck of Land between the Armes of the two Seas, which was then very well fortified. But the boundless Ambition of the Romans, in the fifth year of Agricola, carried them beyond these Limits; And then he subdued Nations before that time unknown; And furnished with Forces that part of Britain which lieth against Ireland: Not out of fear of any Invasion from thence; But rather in hopes of subduing that Countrey by their means. Which shews that Ireland was then well peopled; and thought by Agricola very fit for the Roman Army to conquer; Because it lay so convenient for uniting the parts of the Empire together; And it would help much towards the total subduing of Britain, if there were no appearance of Liberty left within their view. And Tacitus insinuates that Agricola had it in his Design, if he had been suffer'd to continue longer after his Victory over Galgacus: Which Domitian's incurable Jealousie of Great Men would not permit. However, in order to it, Agricola had taken an account of the Ports, and condition of the People, whom he found not unlike the Britains; And he kept with him till Occasion served, one of the Princes of that Countrey, who was driven from thence by a domestick Sedition. But in the mean time, in his sixth year, he applied himself to the Conquest of the several Nations beyond Bodotria, among whom a general Insurrection was apprehended, and all Passages by Land were supposed to be beset; And therefore Agricola set out a Fleet for discovery of the Countrey; the sight whereof struck great Terrour into the Britains. And then he saith, the Caledonians armed themselves and set upon the Romans with all the Force they could make; and falling upon the ninth Legion unexpectedly, had like to have totally defeated them, if the rest of the Army had not come in to their timely rescue. By which good success, the Roman Army, being p. 245much incouraged, cried out to march into Caledonia; That they might at last come to the utmost Bounds of Britain. But the Britains attributed this not to the Valour of the Romans, but to the ill Conduct of their General; And therefore resolved to fight it out, and to that end they disposed of their Wives and Children in Places of Safety, and by frequent Meetings and solemn Sacrifices they entred into a strict Confederacy, to stand it out to the utmost against the Romans. And in this Case of common danger, all the Cities were united together, and raised an Army of 30000 Men, under the Command of Galgacus, who, in his brave Oration, so much commended by Lipsius, tells his Souldiers, they were the last of the Britains, there being no Nation beyond them; And he calls them, the most noble of the Britains, who had never beheld the Slavery of others; Upon this the fatal Battel was fought at the Foot of Mons Grampius, where 10000 Britains were killed, and the rest dispersed; After which Agricola was recalled. This is the Substance of Tacitus his Relation, wherein we may observe; (1.) That these Britains were not merely such as were driven thither by the stress of War, but such as had long inhabited there, and had so little Communication with the other Britains, that they had never seen the Condition of Slavery which the Romans had brought them to. (2.) That they were not inconsiderable for their Numbers or Valour, who were able to oppose the whole Roman Army, and make their Victory so doubtfull. (3.) That these had a distinct Name from the rest, being in general called the Caledonian Britains: And Tacitus thinks they had a different Original from the Silures, and other Britains. Those who adjoined to Gaul, he concludes came at first from thence, and had several Colonies follow'd them afterwards, as appears by their Names, Customes and Language; the Silures he deduced from Spain, which he proves from their Complexion and Situation; And so probably enough, he thinks them a Colony of the old Iberi; some whereof went into Ireland, and peopled some part of it: But, besides these two, he makes a third Race of Men in Britain, whom he fetches out of Germany, and these were the Caledonian Britains; But p. 246rrTacit. de Mor. Germ. c. 1.he takes Germany in a very large Sense, so as to extend as far as the Sarmatae; And to comprehend under it,c. 43, 44. the Northern Nations of the Cimbri, and the Gothones, and the Sucones; From whom it seems very probable, that the Caledonian Britains descended; As the Southern Britains came from the Celtae; Whose Language and Religion were kept up among them. But the Caledonians came from the European Scythians, to whose Coasts they lay much nearer than to those of the Celtae, and their larger Proportions, which Tacitus observes agree very well with this Supposition.

And these, if I mistake not, were the Original Picts, but not called by that Name, till new Colonies came over to people the Countrey, after the terrible Devastation of it by the Continuance of the Roman Wars. For ssClaud de quarto Consul. Honorii.Claudian makes Thule the Countrey of the Picts; And after all the Disputes which have been about it, ttOla. Rudbeck, Atlantic. c. 19.Olaus Rudbeck hath made it very probable, that Scandinavia is meant by it; Which he proves, not onelyonly from the Testimony of Procopius, who affirms it; but from the exact Agreement of the Relations of Pytheas, Isidorus, and others with that, and neither with Iseland, nor any other Place. Besides, uuBed. l. 1. c. 1.Bede saith, The common Tradition was, that the Picts came out of Scythia; Which is affirmed by Matt. Westminster, and many others: But they do not mean the Asian, but the European Scythia; Which comprehended under it all the most Northern Nations, Ab extremo Aquilone, saith wwPlin. l. 6. c. 13.Pliny; And elsewhere he saith, xxl. 4. c. 12.That the Getae, the Daci and Sarmatae, and even the Germans were called Scythians: yyHerod. l. 4.Herodotus mentions the Northern Scythians to whom there was no access by those who dwelt near the Palus Maeotis without the help of seven Languages; And when Darius fought with them, they retired Northwards towards their own Countrey. zzProl. Tab. 8. Europa.Ptolemy places the Royal Scythians near the Hyperborean Mountains; Which could never be found in the vast Plains of Poland and Muscovy; There being no Mountains there answering to their Description as aaRe…. Muscov. p. 61.Hebersteinius and bbSarm. Europ. l. 2. c. 3, 4.Matthias à Micou confess; And therefore ccAtlantic. c. 9.Olaus Rudbeck hath undertaken to prove, not without great shew of Reason, That these Mountains were p. 247no other than the Ridge of Mountains in Sweden, where the seat of the ancient Scythians was; And that Ptolemy was extremely mistaken in the Situation of the Northern Nations, removing them several Degrees more Eastward than they ought to have been, and so very much straitning Scandinavia. Which ddDe Rebus Get. l. 1. c. 4.Jornandes calls the Workhouse of Nations; and the same Jornandes affirms from Josephus, That the Sueones were the true Scythians, whom eeMem. l. 2. p. 581. ed. M. St.Xenophon takes to be the Governing People of Europe in his time; As the Persians were in Asia and the Carthaginians in Africa. And the old Greek ffv. Strabo, l. 1. & 11.Geographers (as is said before) knew of but two Nations in Europe besides themselves, viz. the Scythae towards the North, and the Celtae towards the West. These European Scythians did make frequent Expeditions by Sea, as appears by the old Gothick Histories; And ggAtlantic. c. 7.Olaus Rudbeck observes from them, That it was a Custome for them to go abroad by Sea, under the Conduct of one of their Princes, to see for Booty; And hhGerm. c. 44.Tacitus saith particularly of the Sueones, that they were well provided of Shipping; And therefore there can be no improbability that these Northern Nations should people that part of Britain which lay nearest to them. And iiSuenon. Opusc. c. 1.Sueno, the first Historian of Denmark, saith, That Helghi, the Son of Haldan, the Son of Skiold, the first Monarch there, was so powerfull at Sea, that he was called Rex Maris, the King of the Sea. And kkHist. Dan. l. 2.Saxo Grammaticus saith, That, having subdued the King of the Sclavi, he sailed into divers Passages of the Sea. llv. Not. Steph. in Sax. Gram.Andreas Velleius gives this Reason why the Northern Nations were so soon and so much given to Expeditions by Sea, because their Kings having many Children, they thought them best employ'd abroad, in seeking other Countries and getting Spoils at Sea. And upon the old boast of the Scythians concerning their Antiquity and Nobility might be grounded that Saying of Galgacus, That the Caledonian Britains were the most noble of any of them.

Among these Scythians mmL. 4. c. 12.Pliny reckons the Agathyrsi; Who had their Name, saith nnAtlantic. c. 30.Olaus Rudbeck, from Aggathyr, one of the Gothick Names for Neptune: From Agga, signifying Power at Sea; and Tyr, Power p. 248at Land; These Agathyrsi, saith he, were a sort of People who lived near the Sea, in the Sinus Codanus, and were wont to prey upon the Spoils of the Sea. Iornandes places them in Scandia, and calls them Agantzyrios. They were remarkable in Antiquity for Painting their Bodies, as not onelyonly appears from Virgil's

Pictique Agathyrsi,

But from what ooSolin. c. 15.Solinus saith of them, That their Bodies were painted Colore caeruleo, just as the old Picts were. ppDe Moribus Germ.Tacitus observes of the Arii, a fierce Northern People, That they had Tincta Corpora, i. e. were Picts. And the same qqGeorg. 2.Virgil saith of the Geloni, who were next Neighbours to the Agathyrsi: So that rrHist. Scot. s. 4.Hector Boethius his Conjecture is not at all improbable, who deduces the Picti from the Agathyrsi, i. e. from the Maritime Inhabitants of the Baltick Sea; or, as he expresses it, from those who came first out of Sarmatia into the Cimbrick Chersonese, and from thence into Scotland.

This being to me the most probable Account of the Original of the Picts, I now come to that of the Scots. And, to doe right to all Pretenders, I shall impartially set down the several Claims of the Scotish and Irish Antiquaries, and in passing make some Remarks upon them.

I begin with the Scotish Pretences, ssApparat. ad Hist. Scotic. l. 1. c. 2.Dempster hath given a large Catalogue of the Scotish Antiquaries (whom he never saw) such as Marcerius, the first Writer of their History, whom he places Anno Dom. 53. From him, ttHist. Eccles. l. 12. n. 881.Sir 50:12he saith, Veremundus took his Materials, (whom Hector Boethius professes to follow) and Cornelius Hibernicus, another of Hector's great Authours, who is said by him to have lived Anno Dom. 1160. about 80 years after Veremundus, according to Dempster's computation. Lesly (or Robert Turner, as some think) mentions some ancient Annals, which Hector takes no notice of in particular, but Dempster doth, as those of Paslet and Scone, and other Monasteries. It would tend very much to the clearing of the Scotish Antiquities if some of these ancient Annals or Lieger Books were printed by some of their Learned Men, who have never been wanting in that Nation since Hector's p. 249time. And it hath rendred their Credit the more suspicious, because they have been so long kept up, when all the old Annals which have been found among us have either been carefully published, or our Writers have on all Occasions appealed to their Authority, and made use of their own Words to justifie their Assertions. Whether this hath been done by Hector, Buchanan or Lesly, as to these Annals, I leave the Reader to determine.

I omit Dempster's other ancient Authours, who were never heard of by any besides himself; But it is somewhat strange, that even such as Veremundus and Cornelius should never fall into any hands (that I can find) but those of Hector Boethius; And that he should never so much as mention John Fordon's Scoti-chronicon. Pits confounds this Authour with John de Fordam, Confessour to our King John, and so places him Anno Dom. 1210. Wherein he is follow'd by the Learned uuDe Hist. Lat. l. 2. c. 56.Ger. Vossius. He was Abbat of Ford in Devonshire, saith Leland, and he mentions no Historical Writings of his. But it is certain that John Fordon, who wrote the Scoti-chronicon, lived after this time, by the Authours he quotes (such as the wwScoti-chron. l. 3. c. 8. l. 1. c. 38.Poly-chronicon of Ranalphus Higden, the Polycraticon of Roger of Chester, who both lived in the fourteenth Century.) And xxHist. Eccles. l. 12. n. 911.Sir 50:12Maculloch, who transcribed and inlarged it, lived, saith Dempster, Anno Dom. 1482. For it appears by the Preface, Debitor sum fateor, &c. That John Fordon (who is there called a Presbyter, and no Monk) finished no more than five Books of the Scoti-chronicon; But left the Materials to make up the rest; And that Fordon's own Work was but lately done, before Maculloch undertook to finish and inlarge it, who professes himself a Disciple of Fordon's; And distinguishes his own Additions from Fordon's Copy, by putting in the Margin Scriptor & Autor. But yyAppar. ad Hist. Scot. l. 1. c. 2.Dempster makes Maculloch, Scoti-chronicon, and Fordon, three several Authours, which is a Sign he never saw them. Mr. zzBrit. p. 71….Camden takes notice how much the later Scotish Historians are beholding to Fordon's diligence. And therefore out of him I shall give a short Account of the Scotish Antiquities; And then shew how far Major, Hector Boethius and Buchanan differ from him: For Lesly p. 250doth very faithfully contract Hector where Buchanan was ashamed to follow him; as will appear by what follows.

There was, saith aaScoti-chron. l. 1. c. 9.Fordon, One Gaithelos, Son of Neolus, one of the Kings of Greece, who, having displeased his Father, was banished his Countrey, and went into Egypt, where he was married to Scota, the King's Daughter. But he quotes another Chronicle, which saith, that he was sent to the assistence of the King of Egypt, against the Ethiopians; Who gave him his onelyonly Daughter Scota to Wife; And the Legend of St. Brendan to the same purpose; And another Chronicle, which makes him to be Grandchild to Nimrod, who was driven into Egypt, and there married this Scota. However they differ in lesser Circumstances, they agree in the main Point; For Scota he must have, or else the Name of Scotia would be quite lost.c. 12. After the destruction of Pharaoh in the Red Sea, Gaithelos is chosen King; But, Discontents arising, he and his Wife Scota, with their Company, put to Sea, and made Westward; But, after many Difficulties, they landed in Spain, where, after the Conquest of the Inhabitants, he built the City Brigantia;c. 14. But, being wearied out with continual Wars, he sent some of his Company to Sea to find out an Island without Inhabitants; upon discovery whereof they returned to Gaithelos; Who soon after died,c. 16. and charged his Children and Friends to go thither;c. 17. And accordingly his Sons, Iber and Imec, c. 18.went to take Possession of this Island, which from him was called Ibernia, and from his Mother Scotia; Which Name was after given to part of Britain; Because the Inhabitants of the other Island settled, there (saith Maculloch, in his Additions to Fordon) as appears by the affinity of their Language and Customs, which, c. 21.saith he, continues to this day. In Spain some of that Race abode, saith Fordon, out of an old Chronicle, 240 years; Then arose a King, whom he calls Micelius, c. 22.who had three Sons, Hermonius, Partholomus and Hibertus, whom he sent into Ireland with a great Army; The eldest returned to Spain; But the other two continued there. Afterwards p. 251Simon Brek with his Company made a third descent into Ireland, who sprang from Hermonius, c. 27.and carried along with him the Marble Chair in which their Kings were wont to sit, and which Gathelus brought out of Egypt, as some think;c. 29. but others say, Simon drew it up from the bottom of the Sea with an Anchor in a great Tempest, and therefore was preserved as a precious Relict; And he took it as a Presage of his Kingdom, which was to continue wherever that Stone was; as the Southsayers said. From Ireland, Ethachius Rothay, a Descendent from Simon Brek, took possession of the Island Rothsay;c. 30. And many Scots associated with the Picts in the Northern parts of Britain; But being hardly used,c. 33. and having no Head, Fergus, the Son of Fercard, or Ferard, being descended of the Royal Family, went over, and took upon him the Government of them.c. 37. Which, he saith, was before Christ 330 years, in the time of Alexander the Great; who carried the Fatal Chair into Scotland, and was crowned in it.l. 2: c. 12. Some time after him succeeded Rether, whom Bede calls Reuda, who endeavour'd to inlarge the Borders of the Scots in those Parts, and fixed himself in that which from him was called Retherdale, but since Rydisdale;c. 13. And this he makes the Second coming of the Scots out of Ireland. After this, he tells how the Kings of the Britains, of the Scots, and the Picts lived very lovingly together till Julius Caesar disturbed them all, who, he saith,c. 14. went to the very Borders of Scotland; And there sent Letters to the Kings, both of the Scots and Picts, who both returned Answers in Latin, although but the Chapter before he saith, The very Britains had never heard of the Name of the Romans. But it happen'd, That Caesar, hearing of the Revolt of the Gauls, made a speedy return out of those Parts.c. 28. Then he relates the bloudy Wars of the Scots and Picts against the Britains; and how Fulgentius, 29.Head of the Britains, joined with the Picts and Scots against Severus, and killed him at York: c. 36.And so proceeds in the Story of Carausius and Maximus, 37.and their Wars with the Scots and Picts, 38.till he comes to Fergus II. With whom he begins his Third Book; And p. 252between the two Fergusses he reckons Forty five Kings; But he confesses he cannot distinguish the times of their Reign;l. 3. c. 2. as he can do those from Fergus II. And he gives this considerable Reason for it, Nam ad plenum Scripta non reperimus, i. e. He could not find any full Account of them in any ancient Annals or Records. And therefore it ought to be considered from whence Hector, Buchanan and Lesly should be able to give such a particular Account of the Reigns of those Kings which were wholly unknown to Fordon. This is the short Account of what Fordon delivers about these Remoter Antiquities of the Scots.

(b)(b)De Gestis Scot. l. 1. c. ….Joh. Major confesseth, That the Scots were derived from the Irish, which, he saith, is plain by the Language; For in his time, half the Nation spake Irish, and before that time, more. And so he tells the Story of their coming from Spain, of the City Braganza, of Iberus and his Mother Scota, and then repeats the Tradition of Gathelus, as Fordon relates it; But very honestly saith, That he looks on that part of it, about coming out of Greece and Egypt as a Fiction; And very probably conjectures it was done, because the Britains derived themselves from the Trojans. Which was subtily done of the Scots to claim Kindred rather with the Conquering Greeks, than the subdued and banished Trojans. All that Major asserts is, That the Irish came out of Spain, and the Scots out of Ireland: And the Story of Simon Brek he rejects as a Fable: And he makes the first settling of the Scots in Britain, to be that under Reuda;c. 11. But he mentions their Annals for Fergus, the Son of Ferchard, before Reuda; and Rether and Ryddesdale, as it is in Fordon. But he makes the Kingdoms of the Picts, Scots and Britains to be distinct in Caesar's time; And that they all joined against him: And so relates Fordon's Story to the time of Fergus II. But between the two Fergusses he makes but 15 Kings, and 700 Years.

(c)(c)Hist. Scot. l. 1.Hector Boethius, before he begins the Tradition of Gathelus, very ingenuously confesses, that their Nation follow'd the Custome of other Nations, therein making themselves the Offspring of the Greeks and Egyptians; And so he tells all the Story from Gathelus, as p. 253Fordon has done, onelyonly here and there making Additions and Embellishments of his own; As when he derives the Brigantes from Brigantia in Spain; When he sets down the Deliberation about the Form of Government upon Fergus his coming to Scotland; And the Speeches of Fergus and the King of the Picts; The Death of Coilus King of the Britains; The entring the fundamental Contract of the Scots, with the Posterity of Fergus in Marble Tables in the way of Hieroglyphicks; The Agrarian Law, and Partition made by Seven, and the Division of the Tribes; The bringing the Silures, Ordovices, Camelodunum, as well as the Brigantes, within the Compass of Scotland; These are the proper Inventions of Hector, unless he had them from his Spaniard Veremundus, which no one could tell but himself; Thence Leland and (d)(d)Monae Descrip. ad fin.Lluyd charge him with innumerable Falshoods. (e)(e)Hist. Eccles. l. 2. n. 175.Sir 50:2Dempster confesses, that Buchanan frequently chastises him; But he would have it rather on the Account of Religion than Learning: But it is plain, that he owns his Mistakes and (f)(f)Buch. Hist. l. 2. ad fin.Vanity, onelyonly he charges Lluyd with as great on behalf of the Britains.

In the Second Book Hector inlarges more. For (g)(g)Scotiahr. l. 2. c. 12.Fordon passeth on from Fergus to Rether, or Bede's Reuda, having nothing to say; But Hector acquaints us with the Contest about the Regency upon Fergus his Death, and the Law then made concerning it, the attempt of Resignation of Feritharis, to Ferlegus, the Son of Fergus, and his Imprisonment upon it; The Death of Feritharis after fifteen years Reign; The Flight of Ferlegus into Britain, with the Choice of Main, his younger Brother, to be King; His good Government and Annual Progress for Justice through all Places of his Dominions; His appointing Circles of great Stones for Temples, and one in the middle for the Altar; And the Monthly Worship of the New Moon; And several Egyptian Sacrifices (which one would have thought had been more proper for Gathelus himself) with the Succession of his Son Dornadil, his making the Laws of Hunting, which were still observed there; And of his Brother Nothatus, his Son Reuther being an Infant: Who came in by the Law of Regency, saith Hector; By p. 254the Power of the People saith Buchanan; but in truth by neither. For all this Succession seems to have been the product of Hector's fruitfull Invention, which Buchanan follows without Authority; as he doth in all the rest of the Succession of that Race of Kings from Reuther to Fergus II.

To make way for Bede's Account of Reuda's coming into those Parts of Britain, This Reuther is forced back into Ireland; from whence he is said to return with new Supplies after twelve years; From whom the Scots were then called Dalreudini: But this return of Reuther, Hector places in the year before Christ 204. And after him Reutha, his Kinsman; In whose time, Hector relates an Embassy from Ptolemy Philadelphus to him; And the Account of Scotland which he began in a large Volume for his satisfaction, which was after finished by Ptolemy the Cosmographer. This Buchanan had the Wit to leave out (and even (h)(h)Hist. Eccles. l. 16. n. 1065.Sir 50:16Dempster himself; though he mentions him for a Writer of their History) and so he doth the Voyage of the two Spanish Philosophers in the time of Josina, and their Preaching against the Egyptian Worship in Scotland; (but Lesly hath it.) And if Buchanan had believed it, he would have set it down, as well as Josina's bringing Physick and Chirurgery into so much request. That there was not a Noble Man that could not practise the latter. And yet Hector declares immediately after the Story of the Philosophers, that hitherto he had followed Veremundus, John Campbell and Cornelius Hibernitus, the most approved Authours of their History. It would have been some satisfaction to the World, if any other Person had seen these Authours besides; Fordon never mentions them; And yet he used great diligence to search their Antiquities; And, if (i)(i)Appar. ad Hist. Scot. l. 1. c. 6.Dempster may be believed, had the Sight of their most ancient MSS. Buchanan passes them over; Dempster names them, on the authority of Hector: What became of these great Authours afte… Hector's time? Did he destroy them, as some say Polydore Virgil did some of ours after he had used them? But this were Madness, to quote their Authority and destroy the Authours; For these were his Vouchers; which ought most carefully to have been p. 255preserved. And in truth Hector himself gives no very consistent Account of his Authours: For in his Epistle to James 5. he mentions Veremundus, Archdeacon of St. Andrew's, who deduced the Scotish History from the Original to Malcolm III. And Turgott, Bishop of St. Andrew's, and John Campbell, which were brought from the Island Iona; To whom he adds an Anonymous Authour, and the imperfect History of William Elphinston, Bishop of Aberdeen. But, saith he, if any ask such a material Question, How came these Authours to be seen no where else? He answers, That Edw. I. destroy'd all their Monuments of Antiquity; So that had not those been preserved in the Island Iona with the Chest of Books which Fergus II. brought from the sacking of Rome, in the time of Alaric, They had been able to give no account of their Antiquities. From whence it is evident that Hector never saw or heard of any ancient Authours of their History, but such as were conveyed to him from the Island Iona. But in his (k)(k)L. 7. p. 118.Seventh Book, where he gives a more particular account of those Books which were brought to him from thence, he onelyonly mentions some broken Fragments of Latin Authours; But whose they were, where Written, whence they came, he knew not; And, as to their own Histories, he names indeed Veremundus and Elphinston, and no more. The latter he said before was imperfect, and lately done; So that the whole Credit of Hector's Antiquities rests entirely upon Veremundus; For here he never takes notice of Campbell or Cornelius Hibernicus; But he saith, Edw. I. had destroy'd all their Antiquities, but such as were preserved in the Island Iona or Hy. And is this now a good Foundation to build a History upon? For is it not very strange, that no one Copy of Veremundus should be heard of since that time; When there were several of Fordon, not onelyonly there, but in our Libraries, some with the Inlargements and some without? But if our King Edw. I. destroy'd all their ancient Histories, how came Turgott's to be preserved? He was Bishop of St. Andrew's in the time of Malcolm III. and Queen Margaret, whose Lives he wrote; And whose History, Hector saith, he had. So that not onelyonly Turgott's History of the Church of Durham is preserved in p. 256the Cotton Library, with his own Name written in an ancient Character (the same that is printed under the Name of Simeon Dunelmensis, with some Alterations, as (l)(l)Praefat. ad 10 Script.Mr. Selden hath shewed; But if Hoveden be so much to blame, as (m)(m)Leland. de Script. in Simeon.Leland saith, for concealing what he borrow'd from Simeon Dunelmensis, Simeon himself is at least as much to blame for assuming to himself the proper work of Turgott.) But it seems Hector had seen what he wrote in relation to the Scotish History: And Bale and Pits say, he wrote of the Kings of Scotland. But Dempster saith, he wrote onelyonly the Annals of his own time, i. e. I suppose, the Lives of Malcolm and Margaret: If so, Hector mentions him to little purpose, with respect to the Scotish Antiquities. But however, from the forementioned Authours, Hector pretends to give an Account of the Institution of the Great Council by Finannus, of the Order of the Druids, and their Chief Seat in the Island Mona, (which he would have to be the Isle of Man, to the great regret of Humphrey Lluyd, who hath written a Book on purpose to disprove him and Polydore Virgil about it.) Of the Tyranny and violent Death of King Durstus; Of the choice of Euenus his Kinsman to succeed him, and his first requiring an Oath of Allegeance; Of the Disturbances by Gillus his natural Son, and his flying into Ireland: And his Death by Cadallus; And Euenus his setting up Edecus, the Grandchild of Durstus; with which he ends his Second Book.

In his Third Book he gives an Account of the Troubles from Ireland by Bredius, a Kinsman of Gillus; Of Cassibellan's Message to Ederus for Assistence against Julius Caesar: And the Speech of Androgeus before the Council: and Ederus his Answer, and sending 10000 Men under the Command of Cadallanus, Son to Cadallus; Who, with the British Forces, quite overthrew Caesar, by the help of Tenantius, Duke of the Cambri and Corinei; for which, as we may easily conceive, there was wonderfull rejoicing in Scotland: And great Friendship upon it, between the Britains, the Picts and the Scots. But next Summer they hear the sad News of Caesar's coming again; And then the Britains refused the Scots assistence (and it is easie to imagine what p. 257must follow) the poor Britains were miserably beaten; And Cassibellan yields himself to Caesar, and Caesar marches towards Scotland; but before he enters it, he sends a more Eloquent Letter to them than that in Fordon; And the Scots and Picts returned a resolute Answer. But it seems Caesar had so much good Nature in him as to send a Second Message to the Scots, which was deliver'd with great Eloquence, but it did not work upon them; For, saith Hector, had it not been for the Law of Nations, they had torn the Messengers to pieces. But it happen'd luckily, that while Caesar was making Preparations to enter Scotland, he received Letters from Labienus of the Revolt of the Gauls; upon which Caesar returns, having scarce so much as frighted the Picts and the Scots. And here again Hector vouches the Authority of Veremundus and Campbell; But notwithstanding, Buchanan very wisely leaves all this out, which Lesly, believing Veremundus, or rather Hector before Caesar, keeps in. But here Hector becomes very nice and critical, rejecting the vulgar Annals (which it seems were not destroy'd by Edw. I.) which say, that Caesar went as far as the Caledonian Wood, and besieged Camelodunum, and left there his Pretorian House which he used to travell with, called Julis Hoff. But for his part, he would write nothing that might be found fault with, and therefore he follows Veremundus again, That this was the Temple of Victory, built by Vespasian, not far from Camelodunum; OnelyOnly the Inscription was defaced by Edw. I. Buchanan in the Life of King Donald saith, This was the Temple of the God Terminus: being near the Roman Wall. It was a round Building, made of square Stones, and open onelyonly at the top 24 Cubits in height, 13 in breadth, as (n)(n)Brit. p. 700.Camden describes it. (o)(o)Nenn. c. 19.Nennius saith, It was built by Carausius, in token of his Triumph. But this looks no more like a Triumphal Arch, than Caesar's travelling Palace: And therefore Buchanan's opinion seems most probable, since Hector saith, That there was within it a Stone of great magnitude, which was the Representation of the God Terminus, especially, if the hole in the top were over the Stone, as it was in the Capitol at Rome. Then follow the wicked Life and tragical End of Euenus III. the good Reign of Metellanus, p. 258and his Friendship with Augustus, which he goes about to prove from Strabo: But he had better kept to Veremundus. After him succeeded Caratacus, born at Caractonium, a City of the Silures, saith Hector, and that he might be sure to confound all, he saith, his Sister Voada was married to Arviragus, King of the Britains; But he divorced her, and married Geuissa, a Noble Roman; upon which Caratacus joined the Britains against the Romans, and was at last beaten by them, and betrayed by Cartumandua, his Mother-in-law, who, after his Father's death, was married to Venusius, and was by Ostorius carried in Triumph to Rome, from whence, he saith, he returned to Scotland, and remained to his death a Friend to the Romans; After Caractacus, Corbred his Brother was chosen King; who joined with Voada against the Romans; And partaking of her misfortune returned into Scotland, and there died. His Sons being under Age, Dardannus succeeded; Who designing to destroy the right Heirs of the Crown, was himself taken off: And thereby Way was made for Galdus the true Heir to succeed; Who was the same, saith Hector, with Tacitus his Galgacus; and, he confesses, was beaten by Petilius Cerealis. This King, Buchanan thinks, was the first of their Kings who fought with the Romans. What becomes then of the Credit of Hector and Veremundus, from whom we have such ample Narrations of their engaging with the Romans so long before? From hence it is plain that Veremundus his Authority signified nothing with him; And yet he follows Hector where he professes to rely upon his Authority. For Buchanan evidently abridges Hector as to the Scotish Affairs, leaving out what he found inconsistent with the Roman History.

Hector begins his Fifth Book with the short Reign and dolefull End of Luctacus, Galdus his Son; who was succeeded by Mogallus, his Sisters Son; who continued for some time a brave Prince, but at last degenerating, was killed by his Subjects. After him Conarus his Son, who was confined for ill management, and the Government committed to Argadus; Upon his death the Kingdom fell to Ethodius, Nephew to Mogallus, who was strangled in his Bed by an Irish Harper: And p. 259so was Satrael that succeeded him, by those of his Bed-chamber. These are sad Stories, if they were true, but the comfort is, there appears yet no better Authority than that of Hector for them. For Fordon hath nothing of all this; And Buchanan and Lesly take them upon Hector's Credit. They served Buchanan's purpose well enough, as appears by his Book De jure Regni apud Scotos; And therefore he was willing to let them stand in History, being none of his Invention, and knowing what use was to be made of them. Donaldus, Brother to Ethodius, was chosen in his room, and here Hector falls in with Fordon about Fulgentius, one of the Royal British Race, who revolted from the Romans, which Fordon had from Geffrey of Monmouth, who calls him Fulgenius, and saith, he was driven with the Britains into Albany: But after, in a Fight with Severus at York, they were both killed. But in this Hector was ashamed to follow them; allowing Severus to die a natural death, and Fulgentius to survive him. As to Donald's embracing Christianity, he follows Fordon, but never quotes him; And here he never mentions Veremundus; As though so considerable a Point of History needed no Authority but his own. He concludes this Book with a brief Account of Ethodius, Son to the former, who for his ill Government was confined by his Nobles and killed by his Guards.

In the Sixth Book he begins with a Convention of the Estates for the choice of a new King. And they set up his Son Athirco, who gave great hopes at first, but falling into Debauchery, his Nobles combined against him, and finding no way to escape, he killed himself. Nathalacus, Head of the Conspiracy, succeeds, who was for a time Popular, afterwards Cruel, to that degree, as raised a general hatred of him, which ended in a Design to destroy him; Wherein they were prevented by one of his greatest Confidents, who stabbed him. Then Findocus, eldest Son to Athirco, recover'd the Crown, who proved an excellent Prince, but was at last murthered by two Villains, his Brother Carantius being privy to it: The Murtherers were executed, but Carantius fled, and was afterwards a great Souldier under Probus, Carus and Dioclesian. This p. 260Carantius is the same whom the Roman Writers call Carausius, as Hector afterwards confesses, who set up for himself in Britain; But, saith he, he purposely disguised himself abroad. Geffrey of Monmouth makes him a Britain, and calls him Carassius. (p)(p)Scoti-chron. l. 2. c. 44.Fordon tells the main of the Story of Carausius well enough; onelyonly inlarging on the Leagues he made with the Scots and Picts; And Gothorius, Nephew to Fulgentius, who ruled over the Northern Britains. But whence had Hector this Information, That he was Carantius, Son to Athirco, and Brother to Findocus? Buchanan is not ashamed to relate the Story of Carantius as far as to his passing into the Roman Army, and there stops. But afterwards he speaks of Carausius his Actions in Britain, without any farther mention of Carantius; Which shews that Buchanan took, and left what he pleased out of Hector's History without being obliged by any Authority he produced to carry it on as he found it there.

After the Death of Findocus, his Brother Donald succeeded, who was soon killed by Donald of the Isles, who usurped the Kingdom, and was at last killed by a Conspiracy whereof Crathlintus, Son to Findocus was the chief; Who immediately took possession of the Crown: After him succeeded Fincormachus; both these died peaceably. Then arose a mighty Contest about the Regency between the three Nephews of Crathlintus; At first Romachus prevailed, but Governing cruelly, he was taken off: Then follow'd Angusianus, who was killed in Battel by the Picts; After him Fethelmachus, killed in his Bed by his Harper; And last of all Eugenius, killed in Battel by the Romans: And soon after, by the Instigation of the Picts their mortal Enemies, the Scots were universally banished out of Britain by order of Maximus the Roman General; whither they returned not till about forty years after, under Fergus II. And in this, as to the main part of this last Tragedy, Fordon agrees with Hector, viz. That it was occasion'd by the Romans joining with the Picts against the Scots, in the time of Eugenius, who were not onelyonly beaten by them, but driven out of Britain into Ireland, and Norway, and other Countries.

p. 261This is the Substance of what these Scotish Antiquaries deliver concerning their remotest Antiquities to the time of Fergus II.

But several Arguments are of late produced to justifie the History of Scotland, as it is delivered by Hector Boethius out of Veremundus and his other Authours; which must be briefly considered, before I proceed to the Irish Antiquities. And it is alledged, that the Scotish Antiquities, as delivered by him (for it is concerning Hector's Authority which I dispute) have been received with great Applause for many hundreds of years, by all Historians, Antiquaries and Criticks of other Nations, who had any occasion to mention their Affairs. It will go a great way with me, if it be made appear, that there was any such account received among Learned Antiquaries in any part of the World before Hector's time. But I cannot find any one Antiquary, no not in Scotland, before his time, who gives the same Account that Hector doth. The Tradition of the Scots peopling that part of the Island long before Fergus II. I grant was a much elder Tradition, and is embraced by Fordon, and probably by others before him. But Fordon doth not own the Succession of the same number of Kings, and in such a manner as Hector delivers them. From whence then came Hector to know so much more than Fordon in these matters? I yield that there were some ancient Chronica before Fordon, which he often quotes. But still the Argument is the stronger against Hector. For if Fordon had all those Helps, and yet knew nothing of those particulars, it is a vehement Presumption against Hector, that he took too much Liberty in those many particulars, which Fordon passed over, as having nothing to say about them. The more Copies they have of Fordon in their Monasteries, the more easily they may be convinced, how little Hector and he agree about the first Succession between the two Fergusses. And if Fordon did agree with all their Annals, as is now pleaded, Hector Boethius could not, because they differ so much from each other; as will appear to any one that compares them. Why do we not reade in Fordon the Authorities of Veremundus and Cornelius Hibernicus, who were certainly before his time, if ever? For we are told, p. 262that he was Archdeacon of St. Andrew's. A. D. 1076. and dedicated his Book to Malcolm Canmore; which was long enough before Fordon's time. But it is said, that he is cited in a particular part of Fordon's Book; which could not be copied from Boethius. It had been a much clearer Evidence, if that Place had been produced; for then we might have consider'd whether it was a Passage of Fordon, or of one of those several Writers who it seems wrote Additions and Continuations to him; such, as besides Maculloch, Arelat and Walter Bowmaker are said to have been, who continued the Histories to the Reign of James II. And yet I would be glad to see any Testimony of Veremundus of that Antiquity. As to the Testimony of Chambers, who saith, he had these principal Authours, Veremund, a Spaniard, Turgott, Swinton, Campbell, &c. till some farther Proof be produced, I have reason to suppose, it was the same Case as to him with that of Sir R. Baker, which immediately follows; For we are told, that he likewise quotes this Veremund among the Authours out of whom he compiled his History, and likewise Campbell and Turgott. And if we have no more ground to believe that Chambers had them, than Sir R. Baker, the matter must remain in as much obscurity as before. For no one imagines that Sir R. Baker had all those Authours by him which he there mentions; but he sets down the Names of those whose Authorities he relied upon, although he found them quoted by others. And he is not the onelyonly person in the World who hath cited the Authority of Books which he never saw▪ The same is to be said of Hollinshed. But if such kind of Proofs must pass for evident Demonstrations, that the Scots had such Historians as Veremundus and the others before mentioned; I wonder the same Learned Authour should shrink so much the Faith of History as to allow that despicable thing, called Moral Certainty, to be a sufficient Probation for it; For scarce any History can be mention'd, but may have such kind of evident Demonstrations to prove it. Well, but Balaeus, a Learned English-man, and Gesner, and other famous Strangers, quote Veremundus. But so do not Boston of Bury, nor Leland, who had written of the British and other Writers p. 263before the time of Hector Boethius. And those were Men who searched all our Libraries for the ancient Books in them, and have digested them with great Care; and if Veremundus with other MSS. were brought into England by Edw. I. as is now suggested, it could hardly have escaped the diligence of those Men. But those who lived after Hector Boethius published his History, took his word for Veremundus, and entred him into their Catalogues; as Vossius hath done many whom he never saw. But Erasmus saith that Hector was a Person who could not lie. That was more than Erasmus could know, unless he had been by when he wrote his History and compared it with the Authours he pretended to follow. As to Paulus Iovius, he was a fit Second to Boethius; but I am sure Erasmus would not have said of him, that he could not lie. For Hector's pretending to have his Books from the Island Iona, I have given an Account of it already, and shew'd how inconsistent his own relation thereof is. But all this while, Where is the great Applause of these Scotish Antiquities for many hundreds of years by all Historians, Antiquaries and Criticks of foreign Nations? When not so much as one is produced, who lived before Hector Boethius, and, I think, that was not many hundred years since.

But whatever becomes of Veremundus, we are told, That the Black-book of Scoon, containing the Scotish Histories from the beginning, was among President Spotswood's Books, and given to Lambert, and by him to Collonel Fairfax. All this, I am afraid, is a great mistake for a Black-book of Fordon's, which was brought out of Scotland and presented to the late King by a Gentleman of that Name, as some yet living can attest. But no such thing as the Black-book of Scoon was ever heard of here; and if any such could be found, we should be so far from suppressing any thing that tended to the Glory of the Scotish Nation, that some here would be very glad to publish it, with all other ancient Annals which themselves would think fit to be printed; whether it be the Black-book of Paslay, Pluscardin, or any others. We do not deny that they had any ancient Annals or Registers in their Monasteries; but we desire to be better acquainted with them; and it is no p. 264good Argument, they can tell us where to find them, that they are so carefull to let us know how they came to lose them.

But, after all this Fencing, it is positively said, that the surest foundation of all History is the common belief and consent of the Natives. But what if the Natives of several Countries differ from each other? It may be reasonable to believe neither, but it is not possible to believe both. What if they had for a long time no certain way of conveying their Histories from one Age to another? It is possible Oral Tradition may preserve some general strokes of the ancient History of a Countrey; but it is hardly credible, that so many particulars as Boethius hath in the first Race of Kings could be kept so distinctly by the force of Tradition. The case of the old World is vastly different from any other People since the shortning of Mens Lives; and whatever Nation wanted Records, could never make out the Credibility of their History to other People. We do not deny the Annals of the Jewish or Roman Priests; but we think Annals and Oral Tradition are two things; when Annals are produced, we must weigh and consider them, and compare the Annals of several Nations together, that we may better judge which are to be relied upon.

And yet we are told again, that when Histories are already formed out of ancient Records, there is no farther need to produce them; for Papers may be lost by accident, but the Histories taken out of them are to be believed, although the Records cannot be found; as it is in respect of the Histories of Rome and Greece, whose Authority remains, although the Testimonies on which they relied are not extant.

So that at last Geffrey of Monmouth must be believed as to the British Antiquities, as well as Hector Boethius as to the Scotish. For Geffrey doth no more pretend to invent his History than Hector: and Hunibaldus is as good an Authour as either of them; and Keting as good as Hunibaldus. For they all equally pretend to derive their Histories from ancient Records and the Tradition of the Natives; and all these having formed their Histories out of these substantial Grounds, we are to search no farther; but to believe them all however improbable p. 265in themselves and contradictions to one another.

The case is very different as to the Learned Greek and Roman Histories, from those of the modern barbarous Nations; which were plainly made in imitation of them, as will appear afterwards. And as to the Greeks and Romans, there is a considerable difference to be made between the Histories that related to the times before they had written Annals and after. Can any Man imagine that there is as great reason to believe the first Accounts of Greece as those that were written after the Peloponnesian War? Or, that the first beginnings of the Roman Monarchy by Romulus are delivered with as much certainty as the Carthaginian War? The most judicious Writers among the Greeks and Romans did make allowance for the Obscurity of Ancient times, when many things were utterly lost, and others very imperfectly delivered: What Reproach then is it to any modern Nations to suppose their Histories to have had the same Fate the Greeks and Romans had? OnelyOnly in this respect they are liable to greater Dispute, because they pretend to give an exact Account of those times before they had any Annals or written Records; and in this Case, the more exact and particular, the more suspicious. And we have more certain Rules of trying their ancient Histories, than the Greeks and Romans had; because we have the Accounts of several Nations to compare together; and undoubted Testimonies of other Writers to examine them by. And if they be not found faulty by some of these ways, we are contented to let them pass.

But as to the Scotish Antiquities, we not onelyonly object the Want of sufficient Antiquity in their written Records, but their Inconsistency with approved Writers, in the most ancient Account they give of the first settling of the Scots so early in Britain. And which yet adds more to the suspicion, the Irish, from whom they descend, give a far more different Account of their first coming than themselves do; as will appear by what follows.

For, The Irish Antiquaries will by no means allow the Account given by Hector Boethius; And say, He p. 266had not regard to Truth in the Writing of it; Particularly, as to Simon Brek's coming out of Spain, and bringing the fatal Chair with him, which they say are both false, and the main ground they insist upon is, That they are contrary to the Relation of the (q)(q)Cambrensis eversus per Grat. Lucian. c. 8. p. 61.Old Irish Antiquaries who deserve far more Credit.

I shall therefore set down the Account they give, and consider the Credit they deserve.

The best Account we have from (r)(r)Prospect of Ireland by P.W. p. 6.them is this;

(1.) That Ireland was first planted after the Floud, by one Ciocal, with a Fleet, wherein every Vessel had fifty Men and fifty Women; And this, Keting saith, happen'd about 100 years after the Deluge. But since such remote Antiquities are very tender things, I shall not with a Besom sweep them all away at once, but gently take them in Pieces, and lay them open as I pass along. Now I desire to know what Foundation there is for our believing a thing so unlikely, as the Peopling of Ireland in this manner, with such a Fleet, so soon after the Floud? It was a long time after this before the Phoenicians had any skill in Shipping; to whom the Romans attributed the Invention of it. And certainly the Expedition of the Argonautae had not made such a noise among the Greeks so long after the Floud (but twenty years before the Destruction of Troy, as (s)(s)Animad. in Euseb. Chron. p. 46.Scaliger saith, which happen'd in the time of the Judges) if the Skill in Shipping had been so great within 100 years after it? Yet, if that Expedition were such as (t)(t)Atlant. c. 26.Olaus Rudbeck describes it, it was far more considerable than is commonly thought. For he saith, They not onelyonly entred the Euxine Sea, but he proves from Orpheus and Diodorus Siculus, that they sailed up the Tanais, from whence Hornius in his Map saith, They went into the Mare Cronium, and so came round Egypt, passing between Britain and Ireland, and returning home by the Straits. But Rudbeck finds a Passage for them from the Tanais to the Volga, and so to the Lake of Fronoe, the Head of the Volga, and then by Rivers into the Baltick Sea, and so about the Scythian Promontory to Ierne (Ireland) and Peucessa (Britain) and to Ausonia (Italy) and Trinacria (Sicily) and so home to Iolcos. If this were a mere Poetical Fancy, p. 267yet it was extraordinary, since it agrees with the exact Description of the Northern Countries, saith Rudbeck far more than Ptolemy doth. I will suppose this Orpheus, who wrote the Argonauticks, to be neither the Old Orpheus, nor Onomacritus, but Orpheus of Crotona, to whom Suidas attributes the Argonauticks, who lived in the time of Pisistratus; yet it is very much for him then to describe these Parts of the World, as he doth; and to mention Ireland as a Countrey then known to the Greeks. And Festus Avienus, describing the Voyage of Himilco the Carthaginian (spoken of by (u)(u)L. 2. c. 67.Pliny) speaks of Ireland as then esteemed Sacred in these remarkable Verses:

Ast hinc, duobus, in sacram, sic Insulam

Dixere prisci solibus cursus rati est

Haec inter Vndas multum cespitem jacit

Eámque latè Gens Hibernorum colit

Propinqua rursus Insula Albionum patet.

Nothing can be plainer, than that he here speaks of Ireland and Britain, as then known by Himilco; For Festus Avienus saith, He took this Description from the Phoenician Annals, in which this Voyage was inserted. And it is very strange to me that (w)(w)Atlantic. p. 475.Olaus Rudbeck should here change the Hiberni into Hyperborei, especially when he allows Albion to stand for Britain. But these are undoubted Testimonies of the ancient Peopling of Ireland: and of far greater Authority than those domestick Annals now so much extolled. But must we follow Keting, because he follows the old Annals in this Tradition of the first Peopling of Ireland? And why not then in the Story of Seth and three Daughters of Cain viewing Ireland? And of the three Fishermen of Spain being Wind driven thither the year before the Floud? And of Keasar the Daughter of Bajoth, Son of Noah, coming thither with three Men and fifty Women, to save themselves from the Floud? Are not all these fine Stories in the same Irish Annals? But Keting rejects them; And what then? Doth this make for or against the Authority of these Annals, that even Keting looks on these as Poetical Fictions? But he saith, The best Irish Antiquaries p. 268did of Old look on these as fabulous. Possibly the two former they might; But do they indeed reject the Story of Keasar and her Companions? (x)(x)Topogr. Hib. Dist. 3. n. 1.Giraldus Cambrensis quotes the most ancient Histories of Ireland for this Tradition; and they confirm it by the Names of the Place where she landed, and where she was buried. And (y)(y)Cambrensis evers. p. 40.Gratianus Lucius confesses, that he had the sight of their ancient Annals; and he suspects that he made away many of them. If so, Keting had fewer advantages than Giraldus for the Old Irish Antiquities. But if these Old Annals be of so little Authority in this Story, What Credit do they deserve in this early Plantation after the Floud? But to proceed in the Irish Account, It is said,

(2.) That Bartholanus and his three Sons, about three hundred years after the Floud, landing in Ireland with a thousand fighting Men, had many doughty Battels with the Posterity of Ciocal; And at the end of three hundred years they were all consumed by a Pestilence.

This Story, I confess, is in (z)(z)Nenn. c. 6.Nennius, and (a)(a)Dist. 3. c. 2.Giraldus Cambrensis; But it is a very obvious Question, if they all died, How their memory came to be preserved, and even the memory of that Pestilence which destroy'd them all? But to this Giraldus gives a very substantial Answer out of the ancient Annals, viz. That onelyonly one Ruanus escaped, who lived to St. Patrick's days, and was baptized by him: (in a good old Age certainly, for he must be born within six hundred years after the Floud; And it was above four hundred and thirty years after Christ before St. Patrick was designed for Ireland.) This Ruanus, say the Irish in Giraldus, was the true Relatour of the ancient History of Ireland to St. Patrick, and who can question the Testimony of such an authentick and truly ancient Witness? A late (b)(b)Ogyg. Insula, p. 4.Irish Antiquary saith, he continued so long by a Pythagorean Transmigration; but it was much he could retain these things in his Memory under all his Transmutations.

But as to this Bartholanus (who is called by Nennius Bartholomeus, but by Geffrey, Partholomeus, by Fordon, Partholomus) we reade in the (c)(c)De Orig. & Gestis Briton. l. 1. c. 20.British History, That when Gurguintus returned from Dacia, he found 30 Ships near the Orcades full of Men and Women, and, sending to p. 269enquire who they were, their Commander, (c)(c)De Orig. & Gestes Briton. l. …. c. 20.Bartholomeus, said, They were driven out of Spain to seek a Countrey to live in, and beg'd some part of Britain, for they had been a year and a half at Sea; But he sent them into Ireland, then void of Inhabitants, which they planted, and there continued to this day. It seems there was a Tradition in Nennius his time, Anno Domini 830. That Ireland was peopled from Spain; And that one Bartholonus, or Bartholomeus, was the Leader of them; But Geffrey would not let them go thither without leave from the Britains; But Nennius hath nothing of it, and that part concerning being a year and a half at Sea, Nennius applies to Nimech, as he calls him, but the Irish, Nimead; and he saith, after his abode in Ireland, he returned to Spain. Then, Nennius saith, Three Sons of a Spaniard came with thirty Vessels, and thirty Women in each of them, who saw a Towre of Glass in the middle of the Sea, and Men upon it, who would give no Answer, wherefore they resolved to assault it with all their Vessels, except one, which was shipwreck'd, having thirty Men, and as many Women, in it, all the rest were sunk in the Attempt of the Castle, and from those thirty Men and thirty Women, saith Nennius, all Ireland was peopled. Here we see how far Geffrey differs from Nennius; and alters the old Traditions as he thought fit. But Nennius goes on, and saith, That more still came from Spain, and the last was one whom he calls Clamhochor, and his Company. But the Interpolatour of Nennius (whether Samuel Beulanus or another) there observes, That there is no certain Account of the Original of the Scots; So the Irish were then called. But yet Nennius relates, from the Irish Antiquaries, the Story of the Noble Scythian, who was Son-in-law to Pharaoh, and his Expulsion out of Egypt, and coming at last to Spain, and thence to Ireland above a thousand years after the Egyptians were drowned in the Red Sea; And first settled in Dalrieta, which he understands of that Region in Ireland; But the Scotish Antiquaries apply it to the Countrey which had the same Name in Scotland. So that here we have very different Accounts, that were given so long since as the time of Nennius; and no way found then, to distinguish the true from the false, or the certain from the uncertain. p. 270But of that more afterwards. Now to go on to a farther Account from the Irish Authours who say,

(3.) That thirty years after, Nemedus, another Scythian, with his four Sons, arrived in Ireland with a good Fleet, and fought with the remainder of the Giants, but by another Pestilence were driven off, under the Conduct of three Captains, Simeon Breac, Ibaath, and Briotan, and the two former sailing to Greece; Briotan, with his Adherents, landed in the North of Britain, now called Scotland; And by these, and their Posterity remaining there, gave the Denomination of Britain to the whole Island. And this we are told is affirmed by the Holy Cormach, King of Munster and Bishop of Cashel, in the Psalter of Cashel. And all the Chronologers of Ireland agree with him. This Psalter of Cashel is one of the most authentick Histories among them, and so called because done in Verse; And (d)(d)Prospect of Ireland, p. 350.it is said, That the more remote Antiquities in it were taken from another Book made 1200 years since, collected out of all the former Chronicles of that Nation and allowed in a solemn Convention of the Estates at Tarach, under Laogerius,p. 46. in the time of St. Patrick, who was one of the Committee appointed for the supervising of it. And this Book was called the Psalter of Tarach.

This I confess goes much beyond what can be said for Geffrey of Monmouth, or Hector Boethius. But yet methinks there seem to be some Reasons, why these Annals should not have such a mighty authority with us. For we cannot be certain that there ever were such Annals, or that these Annals, if they were so exactly drawn up, are still preserved. For not onelyonly (e)(e)Cambrensis evers. p. 40.Gratianus Lucius complains for the loss of their old Annals; But (f)(f)Vita Patricii, c. 196.Jocelin, in the Life of St. Patrick, concludes with saying, that many of their Writings relating to him were burnt by the fury of the Pagans while they governed in Ireland. By these Pagans the Danes are meant, and the Slavery under them is (g)(g)Prospect of Ireland, p. 139.said to be worse than Egyptian, Circassian, or any other mention'd in History. And particularly it is said, That the Clergy were banish'd into Bogs, Woods and Caves, where they were fain to lurk several years like wild Beasts;p. 141. And that none were suffered to keep School, or to be taught any kind of Learning, not even in their own Houses: And which is yet more to the purpose, p. 271None were suffer'd to have any kind of Book; But all Books the Danes could light upon, were either burnt, or taken away from them. It is possible their Annals might escape such a Storm as this, but it doth not seem altogether probable; Especially considering that this first Slavery under the Danes continued Forty years, in which, they say, all their famous Monasteries, Cells, p. 14….Vniversities, Colleges were destroyed, not one being left in the Land. And it is withall said, That although other Losses might be recover'd, yet their Libraries were never recover'd. p. 15▪OnelyOnly some few Religious Men preserved some of their Books. But we have no assurance that the old Annals were among them. Or if they were then, That they could escape the Second Danish Invasion, which continued for a hundred and fifty years. In which (h)(h)Acta. Sanct. Hibern. Praef. ad Lector.Colganus saith, The Irish Antiquities had an irrecoverable Loss, at least, he saith, not yet recover'd. And yet he had Cormach's Psalter, or the Psalter of Cashel, Tigernacus his Annals, or the Annales Cluanenses, the Annales Insulenses, composed by one Magraidin, in the Island of All-saints, in the County of Longford, which he deduces to Anno Domini 1405. The Annals of Vlster, by one Maguir, Canon of Armach, deduced to his own time, who died An. Dom. 1498. And the Annals of Dungall composed by four modern Authours out of all their former Annals; But among all these, there is nothing pretending to Antiquity, but the Psalter of Cashel and Tigernacus; yet the Psalter of Cashel falls short of the time of Nennius, for Cormach, King of Munster, the supposed Authour of it, lived after the beginning of the tenth Century, being killed by Flanmhac Siona (called Flannus Siuna by (i)(i)Grat. Lucius Cambr. evers. p. 78.Gratianus Lucius) who died An. Dom. 914. or as Sir James (k)(k)Antiq. Mibern. p. 26.Ware thinks, An. Dom. 916. And for Tigernacus his Annals, the four Magistri, as Colgunus calls them, or the Annals of Dungall are positive, that Tigernacus ô Braion, the Authour of them, died (l)(l)Acta Sanct. Hibern. p. 108.in the eleventh Century, An. Dom. 1088. There remains onelyonly the Psaltuir Na-Ran, written by Aonghais Ceile de, or by Aengusius, one of the Culdees, who lived in the latter end of the eighth Century, as the same Irish Antiquary confesses,p. 8 who withall saith, That all the Works contained therein relate p. 272onelyonly to Matters of Piety and Devotion, p. 579.582.which therefore can signifie nothing to our purpose. So that nothing appears of the Irish Antiquities which can pretend to be written before the Danish Invasion; And although we are told, that these Annals were taken out of others more ancient; yet we have barely their Word for it; for those ancient Annals, whatever they were, are irrecoverably lost; So that there can be no comparison of one with the other. And how can they be so certain of the exactness used in the Parliament of Tarach to preserve their Annals, if there be no ancient Annals to preserve the Memory of the Proceedings at that time? It was a very extraordinary Care for the Estates of the whole Nation to preserve their Annals; if we could be assured of it: Which doth much exceed the Library of Antiquities which (m)(m)De Orig. Fr…si. l. 3. c. 4.Suffridus Petrus speaks of, set up, as he saith, by Friso, the Founder of the Frisians, at Stavera, near the Temple of Stavo, in which not onelyonly the ancient Records were preserved from time to time; But the Pictures of the several Princes, with the times of their Reigns, from An. 313. before Christ's coming, to Charlemagns time; The like whereof, he saith, no German Nation can boast of; But yet methinks the Posterity of Gathelus exceeds that of Friso's in the Care of Preserving their Antiquities; For the Wisedom of the whole Nation was concerned in it. But I never read of any who ever saw this Library of Antiquities at Stavera, but we must believe Cappidus Staverensis and Occa Scarlensis, as to these things; And that they saw the Records, as Hector did Veremundus, although none else ever did. But as to this Parliament of Tarach, which was carefull to preserve the Irish Antiquities; Whence have we this Information? Are the Acts of that Assembly preserved? Are any Copies of those Annals still in being? Yes, we (n)(n)Prospect of Ireland, p. 47.are told, that the keeping of the Original Book was entrusted by the Estates to the Prelates, and those Prelates, for its perpetual Preservation, caused several authentick Copies of it to be fairly engrossed, whereof some are extant to this day, and several more faithfully transcribed out of them; their Names being the Book of Ardmach, the Psalter of Cashel, &c. It seems then, these are the Transcripts of the Original Authentick Book, p. 273allowed by all the Estates of the Kingdom. But the Book of Ardmach is a late thing, being the same with the Annals of Vlster composed by a Canon of Armach: So that the whole rests upon the Psalter of Cashel, which must be composed 500 years after the meeting of that famous Assembly. For St. Patrick was one of the number, and it was done in the time of Laogirius, or Leogarius, King of Ireland, who died, saith (o)(o)Cambr. c. vers. p. 73.Gratianus Lucius, An. Dom. 458. But King Cormach lived in the tenth Century; And therefore an account must be given, how this Original Book or Authentick Copies were preserved for that 500 years and more, in the miserable Condition that Nation was in, a great part of that time.

So that the Difference is not so great between the Authority of Geffrey of Monmouth and these Annals, as is pretended. For I see no Reason why the Story of Brutus should be thought more incredible than that of Ciocal, Bartholanus and Nemedus, with his Son Briotan that gave the name to Britain; And especially the Story of Gathelus himself, his Marriage in Egypt to Scota, coming to Spain, and thence his Posterity to Ireland; which seems to me to be made in imitation of Geffrey's Brutus. For Brutus married Pandrasus his Daughter, the King of Greece, and then was forced to seek his Fortune at Sea, and passing by Mauritania, just as Gathelus did, the one landed in Gaul, and came for Albion; And the other in Spain, and sent his Son for Ireland. And I wonder to find (p)(p)Prospect of Ireland, p. 338. p. 7.Brutus his Giants in Albion of so much larger Proportions than the Giants in Ireland, who are said not to exceed the tallest growth of Men; For I had thought Giants had been Giants in all Parts of the World.p. 347. Suppose some Learned Men have question'd, Whether there were such a person as Brute; I should think it no more Heresie, than to call in question, Whether there were such Persons as Ciocal, Bartholanus, Briotan or Gathelus; If the silence of good Authours, the distance of time, and want of Ancient Annals complained of, makes the History of Brutus so hard to be believed, I onelyonly desire that these Irish Traditions may be examined by the same Rules, and then, I believe, the Irish Antiquities will be reduced to the same p. 274Form with the British; OnelyOnly Geffrey had not so lucky an Invention, as to have his History confirm'd by Parliament. For, if he had but thought of it, he could have made as general an Assembly of the Estates at Lud's Town, and as select a Committee of Nine, as ever was at Tarach. But all mens Inventions do not lie the same way; And in this, I confess, Keting or his Authours have very much exceeded Geffrey and his British MS. And upon the whole matter I cannot see that the Irish Chronologers and Historians have so much more probability in their Story of Briotan than the British Writers had in the Tradition of Brute. For it is certain, it was not originally the Invention of Geffrey, onelyonly he might use some art in setting it off, as he thought, with greater advantage than the Britains had done before him.

But still we are referr'd to the Authority of the Irish Monuments in the Psalter of Cashel written 800 years since by the holy Cormach, both King and Bishop of Munster. Let us then, for once, examine one part of the History taken from thence, and then leave the Reader to judge, whether it deserves so much more Credit than the British Antiquities; And that shall be concerning the Kingdom of the Picts, because we are told, (q)(q)Prospect of Ireland, p. 490.This is the way to end the vexatious Questions about them, being taken out of the most authentick Records of Ireland, which are of such irrefragable Authority, That some are persuaded, had they been known to Camden, he would never have disputed the matter. And so I think too. But this irrefragable Authority is that of the Psalter of Cashel; From whence we are instructed in these Particulars: (1.) That the Picts served in Thracia, under one Policornus,p. 491. a King of that Countrey; where their General Gud took away the King's Life, to prevent an Attempt on his Daughter. And did not Brutus serve King Pandrasus with his Army not far off in Greece? And methinks Pandrasus is as good a Name for a King of Greece as Polycornus for the King of Thrace. But where are either of them to be met with elsewhere? (2.) That upon this the General and his Army fled the Countrey, roamed up and down at Sea till they came to Gaul, and there they founded the City of Pictavia. This is just Geffrey. For p. 275Brutus came to Gaul too, and there fought with Groffarius, King of the Picts, and founded the City of Tours, which had its Name from Turonus, Brutus his Nephew. (3.) That upon the same Occasion they were forced to leave Gaul, and to go for Ireland, (as Brutus did for Albion) where they were entertained, to fight with the Britains; Who it seems made very early Invasions upon Ireland, which still agrees with Geffrey's History. (4.) The Story of the Advice of Trosdan, the Pictish Magician, for the Irish Army to bath in the Milk of 150 White, Crumple-horned Cows, as an effectual Antidote against the envenom'd Arrows of the Britains, and the strange Success upon it, is hardly to be matched in Geffrey. (5.) That the Picts, growing insolent, were forced by Herimon to retire to the Northern Parts of Britain, OnelyOnly with three Irish Women, whatever Bede saith of more; or, how differently soever he relates the whole Story of the Picts; For what is Bede's, a poor Monk's Authority, to King Cormach's? (6.) That from Cathluan, Son to Gud, there was a constant Succession of Kings of the Picts in that Countrey. But not more exact than the Succession of British Kings from King Brutus. And now I leave the Reader to judge whether Geffrey be not hardly dealt with, when such Authours are preferr'd so much before him. We now return to the farther Account which the Irish Antiquaries give of their own Antiquities.

(4.) We are then to understand, that, besides the Race descended from Nemedus, p. 11.there was another called Clanna Gaoidhel, or, Posterity of Gathelus; concerning whom these things are affirmed.p. 324. (1.) That he was descended from Niul, a younger Son to Feanusa Farsa, King of Scythia, who, travelling into Egypt, had a Countrey there given him by Pharaoh Cingeris called Capacyront (I suppose in the old Egyptian Language) who was married to Pharaoh's daughter called Scota. Whereas the Scotish Antiquaries do peremptorily affirm, it was Gathelus himself was married to her. But we ought not to forget,p. 332. that this Scythian King had a celebrated School on the Plain of Sennaar, and one Gaodel, being there employ'd to compose or refine the Irish Language, called from him Gaodhelc or Gaodhlec. This is a Strain beyond p. 276Geffrey, who never thought of bringing the British Language from the Plain of Sennaar. (2.) That Gaodhel's Posterity continued in Egypt till the time of his Grandchild Sruth, and then being forced thence, they landed in Creet, where he died. And his Eldest Son Eibhir Scot went into Scythia; where one of his Descendents killed Restoir, the King of that Countrey, and was forced with his Company to the Caspian Sea, and landed in an Island there (just like Geffrey's Large…ia, where Brutus landed.) But they went from thence to Caronia, another Island in the Pontick, and from thence to the North end of the Riphean Mountains; (a pretty kind of Compass!) And here, instead of Diana's Oracle to Brutus, an old Druyd told them, they should never fix till they came to the Western Island, and so they removed to Gothia, and in the eighth Generation, they went to Spain. And doth not this exceed the Story of Brute, in the great Probability of it, which their latest (r)(r)Ogygia Insul. p. 8, 9.Antiquary knows not what to make of? It is certain whoever invented it, designed to go beyond the Authour of the former. But this is not all; For we are told farther from the same Authentick Irish Annals. p. 331.(3.) That Calamb (called Milead Espain, or Milesius the Spaniard) great Grandchild to Bratha, who brought them into Spain, went back into Scythia; and there served as General under Refloir,p. 12. King of the Scythians; From whence, upon Suspicions, he fled into Egypt, and there married Pharaoh's Daughter called Scota; And at last returned to Spain, and there founded Braganza: And here the Scotish Antiquities fall in. But is it not a little improbable to have the same Scene acted twice over? Two Gaodel's, two Refloir's, two Scota's, twice passing to and fro after much the same manner? We may well say,p. 333. as our Authour doth, enough of these profound remote Antiquities. For I shall not need now to add any thing about the eight Sons of this Milesius coming to Ireland; And how the rest being killed, the Countrey was divided between Eibhir and Erimthon; and the former being killed, the latter became the first Monarch of Ireland, from whom descended 181 Monarchs of this Milesian Race: which must depend on the Credit of their Annals, of which I have already spoken.

p. 277But, in short, to give the true Account of these Fabulous Antiquities. We are then to consider, That when the Northern Nations began to have some smattering of the Greek and Roman Learning, they were never satisfied; till by one means or other, they could deduce their Original from some of the Nations most celebrated in ancient Books; Such were the Trojans, the Greeks and the Egyptians. As to the Trojans, the Romans themselves had shewed the Way to other Nations. For there are considerable Arguments to prove that neither Aeneas, nor Ascanius, ever came into Italy; as may be seen in (s)(s)Dionys. l. 1. p. 39.Dionysius Halycarnasseus, (t)(t)Geogr. l. 13.Strabo and Festus, in the Word Roma. Hellanicus, in Dionysius, saith, That Ascanius (from whom Brutus is derived) never left Phrygia; But onelyonly withdrew for a time to Dascylites, near the Lake (from him called the Ascanian) and afterwards returned to Troy. Strabo saith, That Ascanius reigned at Scepsis, near the Ruins of Troy, and that his Posterity continued there a long time after, with a Royal Title. Festus shews, that the old Authours were not agreed where Aeneas was buried; Many were of Opinion, that he lay buried in the City Berecinthia. And some in Dionysius say, he died in Thrace, others in Arcadia. But the Romans making it so great a part of their Glory to be descended from the Trojans; Other Nations of Europe, upon the Dissolution of the Roman Empire, would not seem to come behind them in this. So (u)(u)Trithem. Comp. Hist. l. 1.Hunibaldus gives as formal an Account of the descent of the Franks from Antenor, and as good a Succession of their Kings down from him; with the particular Names of Persons, and the time of their Reigns, as either Geffrey doth of the British Kings from Brutus; or Hector of the Scots from Fergus; or the Irish Annals from Gathelus or Heremon. And that this is no late Invention appears from hence; That Aimoinus, Ado Viennensis, Abbas Vrspergensis, Rorico, Gaguinus, Aeneas Silvius, and others, agree with Hunibaldus in the Substance of his Story. And (w)(w)De Origine Francor.Vignier mentions several Diplomata of the ancient Kings of the Franks, to prove the Authentickness of this Tradition. And it is less to be wonder'd at, that the Britains should pretend to be derived from the Trojans because of the mixture of the p. 278Romans and them together, while Britain continued so long a Roman Province. From whence I suppose the first Occasion was taken, which continued as a Tradition among the Britains for a long time before it was brought into such a History as we find in Geffrey. That the Tradition it self was elder than his time is certain; For even those who despised Geffrey embraced it, as appears by (x)(x)Cambr. Descript. l. 2. c. 7.Giraldus Cambrensis; And in the Saxon times this Tradition was known, as is evident by the Saxon Poet, mention'd by (y)(y)Not. in Bed. c. 1. p. 25.Abr. Whelock; But Nennius his MS. puts it out of dispute, That there was then a Tradition about the Britains coming from Brute; but he could not tell what to make of this Brute; sometimes he was Brito the Son of Ysicion, the Son of Alan, of the Posterity of Japhet: And for this he quotes the (z)(z)Nenn. c. 13.Tradition of his Ancestours; But this being uncapable of much Improvement or Evidence, he then runs to Brutus the Roman; and sometimes it is Brutus the Consul; But that, not suiting so well, he then produces the Story of Aeneas, and Ascanius, and Silvius, and the Prediction of the Magician, c. 2, 3.that his Son should kill his Father and Mother; she died in Labour, and his Father was killed by him by chance; However he was banished from Italy into Greece; And from thence again banished, and so came into Gaul, and there built Tours, having its Name from one of his Companions; And from thence he came for Britain, which took its Name from him, and he filled it with his Progeny, which continue to this day. So that here we have the Foundation of Geffrey's History laid long before his time; And Nennius his Account is mention'd by (a)(a)De Gestis Reg. l. 1. c. 1.William of Malmsbury, under the Name of Gesta Britonum; And follow'd by Henry of Huntingdon, and Turgott, or Simeon Dunelmensis; But when Geffrey's Book came abroad, it was so improved and adorned with Particulars, not elsewhere to be found, that the generality of the Monkish Historians, not onelyonly follow'd, but admir'd it, and pitied those that had not seen it, (as they supposed) as (b)(b)Polychr. l. 1. c. 47, 48.Ranulphus Cestrensis doth William of Malmsbury; But there were some Cross-grained Writers who called it an Imposture, as Gul. Newburgensis; or a Poetical Figment, as John Whethamsted. But these were but few in Comparison p. 279with those who were better pleased, with the Particulars of a Legend than the dryness of a true History.

But this humour was not peculiar to the Franks and Britains; For the Saxons derived (c)(c)Witikind. l. 1.themselves from the Macedonian Army of Alexander, which had three Captains saith. (d)(d)De Orig. F…. l. 2. c. 5.Suffridus Petrus, Saxo, Friso and Bruno; From whom are descended the Saxons, Frisians and those of Brunswick. And (e)(e)A. D. 51….Abbas Stadensis adds, That not onelyonly the Saxons, but those of Prussia, Rugia and Holstein came from them. (f)(f)Cosm…drom. …t. 5. c. 11.Gobelinus Persona relates the Particulars as exactly as Geffrey, or Hector, or the Irish Annals do; how they were left on the Caspian Mountains, and wandred up and down just as Brutus and Gathelus did, till they settled in Prussia, Rugen and Saxony. The Danes, saith (g)(g)Saxo Gram. l. 1.Dudo S. Quintin derived themselves from the Danai; The (h)(h)Matth. à Mich. l. 2. c. 8. Orig. Pruss. n. 7.Prussians from Prusias, King of Bithynia, who brought the Greeks along with him. OnelyOnly the Scots and Irish had the Wit to derive themselves from the Greeks and Egyptians together.

We are now to sit down and consider, what is to be said to all these glorious Pretences? Must they be all allowed for good and true History? If not, what marks of distinction can we set between them? They all pretend to such Founders as came afar off, wandred from place to place, consulted Oracles, built Cities, founded Kingdoms, and drew their Succession from many Ages; So that it seems unreasonable to allow none but our own. And yet these Antiquities will hardly pass any where, but with their own Nation; And hardly with those of any Judgment in any of them. But when all this is said, every one will believe as he pleases; But it is one thing to believe with the Will, and another with the Vnderstanding.

To return now to the Irish Antiquities. And it onelyonly remains that we enquire, How the Irish Antiquaries give an Account of their Nations coming into the Northern Parts of Britain: And here is something which deserves Consideration, viz. That they (i)(i)Prospect of Ireland, p. 22.charge the Scotish Antiquaries with placing the time of Fergus I. 819 years before he landed in Britain. For, say they, the Irish Monuments fix on Anno Dom. 498. as the time wherein p. 280p. 367.Fergus Mor the Son of Erch (whom the Scotish Writers call the Son of Ferchard) with his five Brothers invaded the North of Britain. To this purpose they produce the Testimony of Tigernacus, who in his Annals saith, Fergus Mor mhac Ercha cum gente Dalraida partem Britanniae tenuit, & ibi mortuus est. This he writes about the beginning of Pope Symmachus, which was about six years after the death of St. Patrick, and very near the end of the fifth Century. Besides another Irish Authour who writes of the Kings of Albany who were contemporary with the Monarchs of Ireland, reckons twenty years between the Battel of Ocha, and the going of the six Sons of Erc into Albany: And the Annals of Vlster place the Battel of Ocha A. D. 483. so that Fergus his coming into Scotland could not be before the beginning of the sixth Century. (k)(k)Cambr. c. vers. p. 73.Gratianus Lucius saith, that the Battel of Ocha, wherein Oilliol Molt, the Irish Monarch, who succeeded Leogarius, was killed, was Anno Dom. 478. Which makes but five years difference. Farther, say they, The Scotish Antiquaries make Reuda the sixth King after Fergus, Whereas it appears by their Annals, (l)(l)Cambr. c. vers. p. 69.That their Monarch Conair had three Sons, called the three Cairbres, and the third (m)(m)Prospect of Ireland, p. 370.was Cairbre Riada; from whom that part of Britain was called Dal Riada, or Dal Reuda; But Conair was killed An. Dom. 165. and therefore this (n)(n)p. 90.Reuda must be 300 years before Fergus. The Old MS. cited by (o)(o)Brit. p. 707.Camden, makes Fergus to be descended from Conair, with which as (p)(p)Usser. Prim. p. 611.Archbishop Vsher observes the old Irish Genealogies agree: But he saith, Conair reign'd Anno Dom. 215. however, long enough before the time of Fergus. According to this supposition, that part of Scotland called Dalrieta, p. 612.or Dalreuda, (the bounds whereof are described by the Learned Primate) was inhabited long before the coming of Fergus; and so agrees with what (q)(q)Bede, l. 1. c. 1.Bede saith, That the Scots came first out of Ireland under the conduct of Reuda, and either by Force or Friendship found habitations for themselves there, which they still enjoy'd, and from their Leader to this time they were called Dalreudim; Daal signifying a share in their Language. This Reuda seems to be the same with Cairbre Riada, the third Son of Conair; And p. 281if Fergus were descended from the same Conair, it gives a probable Account of Fergus his coming afterwards into those Parts; and taking the Government upon him. For (r)(r)Prospect of Ireland, p. 93.Keting saith, That Eochac Mumreamhar of the Progeny of Cairbre Redhfadac or Riada had two Sons Earcha and Elchon; And from the former the Families of Dal Riada in Scotland are descended, from the latter those of Dal Riada in Ulster. Which must be understood of that part of the Vlster Dal riadans, which Fergus carried with him: For there were the Descendents from Riada in Scotland before, according to the former account. But the whole matter about the Reign of Fergus remains still very obscure. For (1.) It seems strange that Bede takes no notice at all of him, which in all probability he would have done, as well as of Reuda, who was less considerable. (2.) (s)(s)V…. …. Pu… cii, c. 137.Jocelin in the Life of St. Patrick saith, That Fergus was one of the twelve Sons of the King of Dalredia, and was excluded from his share by his Brethren, of whom St. Patrick prophesied, That from him Kings should rise, who should not onelyonly reign at home, but in a foreign Countrey; After which, saith he, Fergus in no long time came to be King in his own Countrey; And from him sprang Eanus, who subdued Albany, and other Islands, and whose Posterity still reigns there; So that if Jocelin's authority be good, Fergus himself never came into Scotland; But the mistake arose, because he was King in Dalrieda; Which the Scots understood of their own, and thought they had Reason, because the Posterity of Fergus reigned there. (3.) (t)(t)Topogr. Hib. Dist. 3. c. 16.Giraldus Cambrensis, who had a Sight of the Irish Annals, never mentions Fergus, but onelyonly saith, That in the time of Nellus the Monarch of Ireland, six Sons of Mured King of Ulster sailed into the Northern Parts of Britain, and there planted themselves, from whom the Scotish Nation is derived. This Nellus, whom the Irish call Niall the Great, was killed, saith Gratianus Lucius, Anno Dom. 403. And if the Sons of the King of Vlster came then over to plant and settle in Scotland, this must be 100 years before the time of Fergus, and consequently he could be none of that Number: And yet the (u)(u)Cambr. … vers. p. 73. Prospect of Irland, p. 93.Irish Annalists make the two Fergusses, the two Aengusses, and the two Loarns, to be the six Sons p. 282of Muriedhach, King of Ulster, who came over to settle in Scotland. But if Giraldus his Authority be allow'd, the Scots came not to settle in Britain, till the beginning of the fifth Century; And the Monarchy in the Posterity of Fergus, according to Jocelin, could not be till towards the middle of the sixth Century. And if Edan, King of the Scots in Bede's History, be the same with that Edan in Jocelin who descended from Fergus, Then the Scotish Kingdom did not begin till the seventh Century, as appears by (w)(w)Bede, l 1. c. 34.Bede. But in matters of so much Obscurity I determine nothing.