ed as if they had lost their hearts. As the king had gotten many towns and villages, so he also subdued many strong castles, and that with little difficulty. His enemy being at the same time at Rouen had reared a great army, yet he ever kept on the other side of the river Seine, breaking down all the bridges that we should not come over to him. And although the country round about was spoiled, sacked, and consumed with fire for a circuit of twenty miles; yet the French king, being distant scarcely the space of one mile from us, either would not, or else dared not (when he might easily have passed over the river) make any defence of his country and people. And so our king journeying forward, came to Pusiake or Poissy, where the French king had also broken down the bridge, and kept on the other side of the river."

After coming to Poissy, this chaplain and confessor to the king, named Michael Northburgh, describes the king's progress, and the acts of the English from the town of Poissy, to his coming to Calais as follows :

A Letter of William Northburgh the King's Confessor, describing the King's Progress into France.

"Salutations premised, we give you to understand, that our sovereign lord the king came to the town of Poissy, the day before the assumption of our lady, where was a bridge over the Seine, broken down by the enemy, but the king waited there, till the bridge was again made. And while the bridge was repairing, there came a great number of men-at-arms, and other soldiers, to hinder the works. But the earl of Northampton issued out against them and slew more than one thousand; the rest fled away, thanks be to God. At another time our men passed the water, although with much difficulty, and slew a great number of the common soldiers about the city of Paris, and adjoining country; so that our people now made other good bridges, God be thanked, without any great loss or damage to us. On the morrow after the assumption of our lady, the king passed the river Seine and marched toward Poissy, a town of great defence and strongly immured, and a very strong castle within it. When our vanguard was passed the town, our rear-guard gave an assault and captured it, there were slain more than three hundred men-at-arms of our enemies. The next day, the Earl of Suffolk and Sir Hugh Spenser marched forth upon the commons of the country assem. bled and well armed, and discomfited them, and slew more than two hundred, and took six hundred gentlemen prisoners, beside others. After that, the king marched toward Grand Villers, and while he was encamped there, the vanguard was descried by the men-of-arms of the king of Bohemia; whereupon our men issued out in great haste, and joined battle with them, but were forced to retire. But thanks be unto God, the earl of Northampton issued out, and rescued the horsemen with other soldiers; so that few or none of them were either taken or slain, (except only Thomas Talbot,) but had the enemy in chase within two leagues of Amiens, of whom we took eight, and slew twelve of their best men-at-arms; the rest being well horsed, reached the town of Amiens. After this, the king of England marched toward Pountife upon Bartholomew day, and came to the water of Somme where the French king had laid five hundred men-at-arms, and three thousand footmen, purposing to have stopped our passage, but thanks be to God, the king of England and his host entered the water of Somme, without the loss of any of our men. After that he encountered with the enemy, and slew more than two thousand of them; the rest fled to Abbeville, in which chase there were taken many knights, squires, and men-at-arms. The same day Sir Hugh Spenser took the town of Croylay, where he and his soldiers slew four hundred men-at-arms, and kept the town, where they found great store of victuals. The same night the king of England encamped in the forest of Cressy upon the same water, for the French king's host came on the other side of the town near to our passage; and so marched toward Abbeville. And upon the Friday following, the king being still encamped in the forest, our

scouts descried the French king, marching toward us în four great divisions. And having then information of our enemies, a little before the evening we drew to the plain field, and set our forces in array; and immediately the fight began, it was sore, cruel, and long, for our enemies behaved themselves right nobly. But thanks be given to God, the victory fell on our side, and our adversary was discomfited with all his host, and put to flight: there was slain the king of Bohemia, the duke of Lorrain, the earl of Dabeson, the earl of Flanders, the earl of Blois, the earl of Arcot, with his two sons, the earl of Damerler, the earl of Navers, and his brother, the lord of Tronard, the archbishop of Meymes, the archbishop of Saundes, the high prior of France, the earl of Savoy, the lord of Morles, the lord de Guis, seignior de St. Novant, seigniour de Rosinburgh, with six earls of Germany and other earls, barons, knights and squires, whose names are unknown. Philip (the French king) himself, with another marquess, who was called Lord Elector among the Romans, escaped from the battle. The number of the men-at-arms found dead in the field, besides the common soldiers and footmen, were one thousand five hundred and forty-two. And all that night the king of England with his host, remained armed in the field where the battle was fought. On the next morrow before the sun rose, there marched toward us another great army, mighty and strong. But the earl of Northampton, and the earl of Norfolk issued out against them in three divisions; and after a long and terrible fight, they discomfited them by God's great help and grace (for otherwise it could never have been) where they took of knights and squires a great number, and slew above two thousand, pursuing the chase three leagues from the place where the battle was fought. The same night the king encamped again in the forest of Cressy, and on the morrow marched toward Boulogne, and by the way took the town of Staples; and from thence he marched toward Calais, which he intends to besiege. And therefore our sovereign lord the king commands you, to send to the siege, convenient supplies of victuals. For after the time of our departing from Chaam, we have travelled through the country, with great peril and danger of our people, but yet always had plenty of victuals, thanks be to God. But now as the case stands, we need your help to be refreshed with victuals. Thus fare you well. Written at the siege before the town of Calais the 14th day of September."

After the siege and winning of Poissy, the third day of September A.D. 1346, the king through the midst of France, directed his course to Calais, and besieged it; which siege he continued from the 3rd of September, till the 3rd of August next ensuing, upon which day it was surrendered and subdued to the crown of England.

After thus winning Calais, King Eward, remaining in the town, was in consultation concerning his proceeding further into France. But by means of the cardinals, a truce for a time was accepted, and instruments made that certain noblemen as well for the French king, as for the king of England, should come to the pope, there to debate upon the articles. To which King Edward, for peace sake, was not much opposed (A. D. 1347).

In A. D. 1350, the town of Calais was, by the treason of the keeper of the castle, almost betrayed and won from the Englishmen. And within the same year Philip the French king died. After whom King John his son, succeeded to the crown.

About A. D. 1354, concord and agreement began to come well forward, and instruments were drawn upon the same between the two kings. But the matter being brought up to Pope Innocent VI., partly by the quarrelling of the Frenchmen, partly by the winking of the pope, who ever held with the French side, the conditions were repealed, which were these: that to the king of England all the dukedom of Aquitaine with other lands there, should be restored without homage to the French king. And that King Edward again should surrender to him all his right and title, which he had in France; whereupon rose the occasion of great war and tumult which followed after between the two realms. It followed after this, (A. D. 1355,) that King Ed

ward hearing of the death of Philip the French king, and that King John his son, had granted the dukedom of Aquitaine to Charles his eldest son and dauphin of Vienna, sent over Prince Edward with the earls of Warwick, of Salisbury, of Oxford, and with them a sufficient number of able soldiers into Aquitaine. Where he being willingly received by some, he subdued the rest, partly by force of sword, partly by their submitting themselves to his protection.

and title to the donation and gift of all manner of temporalties, of offices, prebends, benefices and dignities ecclesiastical, held of him in capite, as in the right of his crown of England. Secondly, in expostulating with the pope for intruding himself into the ancient right of the crown of England, intermeddling with such collations, contrary to right and reason, and the example of all his predecessors. Thirdly, intreating him that he would henceforth abstain and desist from molesting the realm with such novelties and strange usurpations; and so much the more, because in the parliament lately held at Westminster, it was agreed by the universal assent of all the estates of the realm, that the king should stand to the defence of all such rights and jurisdictions as to his regal dignity and crown any way appertained.

The same year, when King Edward had recovered Berwick, and subdued Scotland, Prince Edward being in Gascony, made toward the French king. The victorious prince made way with his sword, and after much slaughter of the French, and many prisoners taken, he at length came up with the French king at Poictiers, and with scarcely two thousand men, overthrew the French with seven thousand men of arms and more. In which conflict, the French king himself, and Philip his son, with Lord James of Bourbon, the archbishop of Senon, eleven earls, and twenty-two lords were taken. Of other warriors and men of arms two thousand. Some affirm, that in this conflict there were slain two dukes, of lords and noblemen twenty-four, of men of arms two thousand and two; of other soldiers about eight thousand. The common report is, that more Frenchmen were there taken prisoners, than the whole English army which took them. This noble victory gotten by the grace of God, excited no little admiration among all men.

It were too long, and little pertaining to the purpose of this history, to comprehend in order all the doings of this king, with the circumstances of his victories, of the bringing in of the French king into England, of his abode there, of the ransom levied on him, and of David the Scotish king; of which, the one was rated at one million of pounds, the other at an hundred thousand marks, to be paid in ten years.

Thus having treated of all martial affairs and warlike exploits in the reign of this king between him and the realms of France and Scotland: now, to return to our ecclesiastical matters, it follows to notify the troubles and contentions growing between the king and the pope, and other ecclesiastical persons in matters touching the church, taken out of the records in the Tower. In the fourth year of his reign, the king wrote to the archbishop of Canterbury to this effect: that whereas King Edward I. his grandfather, gave to his chaplain, the dignity of treasurer of York, (the archbishoprick of York being then vacant and in the king's hands,) in the quiet possession of which the chaplain continued, until the pope would have displaced him, and promoted a cardinal of Rome to that dignity, the king therefore straitly charges the archbishop of York not to suffer any matter to pass, that may be prejudicial to the donation of his grandfather, upon pain of his highness's displeasure.

The like precepts were also directed to these bishops following: to the bishop of Lincoln, bishop of Worcester, bishop of Sarum, archdeacon of Richmond, archdeacon of Lincoln, the prior of Lewen, the prior of Lenton, to Master Rich of Bentworth, to Master Iherico de Concore, to the pope's nuncio, to Master Guido of Calma. And he wrote letters to the pope consisting of three parts. First, in the declaration and defence of his right

The tenth year of his reign he wrote also to the pope to this effect: that whereas the prior and chapter of Norwich nominated a clerk to be bishop of Norwich, and sent him to Rome for his investiture, without the king's knowledge; therefore the pope would withdraw his consent, and not intermeddle in the matter appertaining to the king's peculiar jurisdiction and prerogative.

After this, in the sixteenth year of this king, it hap

mine matters appertaining to the right of patronages of benefices; the king perceiving this to tend to the no small derogation of his right, and the liberties of his subjects, writes to the said legates, admonishing and requiring them not to proceed therein, nor attempt any thing unadvisedly, otherwise than might stand with the lawful ordinances and customs of the laws of his realm, and the freedom and liberties of his subjects.

The year following, which was the seventeenth of his reign, he wrote another letter to the pope, against his provisions and reservations of benefices.

The year following, another letter likewise was sent by the king to the pope, upon occasion taken of the church of Norwich, requiring him to cease his reservations and provisions of the bishoprics within the realm, and to leave the elections thereof free to the chapters of such cathedral churches, according to the ancient grants and ordinances of his noble progenitors.

Proceeding now to the nineteeth year of this king's reign, there came to the king certain legates from Rome, complaining of certain statutes passed in his parliament, tending to the prejudice of the church of Rome, and the pope's primacy, viz., that if abbots, priors, or any other ecclesiastical patrons of benefices should not present to to the benefices within a certain time, the lapse should come to the ordinary or chapter thereof, or if they did not present, then to the archbishop, if the archbishop likewise did fail to present, then the gift to pertain not to the lord pope, but to the king and his heirs. Another complaint also was this, that if archbishops should be slow in giving such benefices as properly pertained to their own patronage in due time, then the collation thereof likewise should appertain to the king and his heirs. Another complaint was, that if the pope should make void any elections in the church of England for any defect found therein, and so had placed some honest and discreet persons in the same, that then the king and his heirs was not bound to render the temporalties to the parties placed by the pope's provision. Whereupon, the pope being not a little aggrieved, the king wrote to him, certifying that he was misinformed, denying that there was any such statute made in that parliament. And further, as touching all other things, he would confer with his prelates and nobles, and would return answer by his legates.

In the twentieth year of his reign, another letter was written to the pope by the king, the effect whereof was this: "That in respect of his great charges sustained in his wars, he had by the counsel of his nobles, taken into his own hands the fruits and profits of all his benefices in England."

To proceed in the order of years, in the twenty-sixth year of this king, one Nicholas Heath, clerk, a busyheaded body, and a troubler of the realm, had procured some bishops, and others of the king's council to be

cited up to the court of Rome, there to answer such complaints as he had made against them. Whereupon commandment was given by the king to all the ports of the realm for the restraint of all passengers out, and for searching and arresting all persons bringing in any bulls or other process from Rome, tending to the derogation of the dignity of the crown, or molestation of the subjects.

The same year the king wrote also to the pope's legate resident in England, requiring him to cease from exacting divers sums of money of the clergy, in the name of first fruits of benefices.

The thirty-eighth year of his reign an ordinance was made by the king and his council, and proclaimed in all port towns within the realm,-"That good and diligent search should be made, that no person whatsoever coming from the court of Rome, &c., do bring into the realm with him any bull, instrument, letters patent, or other process that may be prejudicial to the king, or any of his subjects; or that any person, passing out of this realm toward the court of Rome, do carry with him any instrument or process that may redound to the prejudice of the king or his subjects; and that all persons passing to the said court of Rome, with the king's special license, do, notwithstanding, promise and find surety to the lord chancellor, that they shall not in any wise attempt or pursue any matter to the prejudice of the king or his subjects, under pain to be put out of the king's protection, and to forfeit his body, goods, and chattels, according to the statute made in the twenty-seventh year of his reign."

And thus much concerning the letters and writings of the king, with such other domestic matters and troubles as passed between him and the pope, taken out of the public records of the realm, whereby I thought to give the reader to understand the horrible abuses, the intolerable pride, and the insatiable avarice of that bishop, more like a proud Lucifer than a pastor of the church of Christ, in abusing the king, and oppressing his subjects with immeasurable exactions; and not only exercising his tyranny in this realm, but raging also against other princes, both far and near, amongst whom he did not spare, even the emperor himself. In the history of the Emperor Lewis, whom the pope excommunicated upon Maunday Thursday, and the same day placed another emperor in his room, mention was made of certain learned men, who took the emperor's part against the pope. In number of whom was Marsilius of Padua, William Ockam, John of Ganduno, Leopold, Andrew Landensis, Ulric Hangenor, treasurer of the emperor, Dante, Aligerius, &c. Of whom Marsilius compiled a worthy work entitled 'Defensor Pacis,' written in the emperor's behalf against the pope. Wherein (both godly and learnedly disputing against the pope) he proves all bishops and priests to be equal, and that the pope has no superiority above other bishops, much less above the emperor. That the word of God ought to be the only chief judge in deciding and determining causes ecclesiastical; that not only spiritual persons, but laymen also being godly and learned, ought to be admitted unto general councils; that the clergy and the pope ought to be subject to magistrates; that the church is the university of the faithful, and that the foundation and head of the church is Christ, and that he never appointed any vicar or pope over his universal church; that bishops ought to be chosen every one by their own church and clergy ; that the marriage of priests may lawfully be permitted; that St. Peter was never at Rome; that the clergy and synagogue of the pope is a den of thieves; that the doctrine of the pope is not to be followed, because it leads to destruction; and that the corrupt manners of the christians do spring and flow out of the wickedness of the spiritualty. He disputes moreover in another work of free justification by grace, and extenuated merits, saying that they are no efficient causes of our salvation, that this is to say, that works are ro cause of our justification, but yet our justification goes not without them. For which doctrine, most sound and catholic, he was condemned by the pope, A. D. 1324, (by the pope's decree Extravagant. cap. Licet inter doctrinam.) Concerning which man and his doc.

trine, I thought good to commit thus much to history, to the intent men may see that they which charge this doctrine now taught in the church, with the note of novelty or newness, are ignorant of the histories of past times. In the same number and catalogue comes also Ockam, (A. D. 1326), and who wrote likewise in defence of the emperor against the pope; and also in defence of Michael, general of the Grayfriars, whom the pope had excommunicated and cursed for a heretic. Several treatises were set forth by Ockam, of which some are extant and in print, some are extinct and suppressed. Some again are not published under the name of the author, as the dialogue between the soldier and the clerk, wherein it is to be conjectured, what books and works this Ockam had collected against the pope. Of this Ockam, John Sleidan in his history makes mention, to his great commendation; his words are these: "William Ockam, in the time of the Emperor Lewis IV., flourished about A. D. 1326, who, among other things, wrote of the authority of the bishop of Rome. In which book he handles these eight questions very copiously: whether both the administrations of the bishop's office, and of the emperor's, may be in one man? Secondly, whether the emperor takes his power and authority only from God, or else from the pope? Thirdly, whether the pope and church of Rome have power by Christ to set and place kings and emperors, and to commit to them their jurisdiction? Fourthly, whether the emperor being elected, has full authority upon his election, to administer his empire? Fifthly, whether other kings besides the emperor and the king of the Romans, in that they are consecrated by priests, receive of them any part of their power? Sixthly, whether the kings in any case be subject to their consecrators? Seventhly, whether if the kings should admit any new sacrifice, or should take to themselves the diadem without any further consecration, they should thereby lose their kingly right, and title? Eighthly, whether the seven princes electors give as much to the election of the emperor, as succession rightfully gives to other kings? Upon these questions he disputes and argues with many arguments and various reasons on both sides, at length he decides the matter on the part of the civil magistrate; and by occasion thereof enters into the mention of the pope's "Decrees extravagant," declaring how little force or regard is to be given thereto."

Trithemius makes mention of one Gregory of Arimini, a learned and a famous and right godly man, who, not much differing from the age of this Ockam, (about A. D. 1350), disputed in the same doctrine of grace and free will as we do now, and dissented therein from the papists and sophisters, counting them worse than Pelagians.

And what should I speak of the duke of Bungundy, named Eudo, who, at the same time (A. D. 1350), persuaded the French king not to receive in his land the new found constitutions, decretal and extravagant, nor to suffer them within his realm, whose sage counsel then given, yet remains among the French king's records?

Dante, an Italian writer, a Florentine, lived in the time of Lewis the emperor, (about A. D. 1300), and took part with Marsilius against three sorts of men, who he said were enemies to the truth, that is, the pope; secondly, the order of monks and friars, who count themselves the children of the church, when they are the children of the devil their father; thirdly, the doctors of decrees and decretals. Certain of his writings are still extant, wherein he proves the pope not to be above the emperor, nor to have any right or jurisdiction in the empire. He proves the donation of Constantine to be a forged and a feigned thing, for which he was thought by many to be an heretic. He complains very much, that the preaching of God's word was omitted, and instead of it, the vain fables of monks and friars were preached and believed by the people, and so the flock of Christ was fed not with the food of the gospel, but with wind. The pope," saith he, "of a pastor is made a wolf, to waste the church of Christ, and to procure with his clergy, not the word of God to be preached, but his own decrees." In his canticle of purgatory, he declares the pope to be the whore of Babylon.

Here may be added the saying out of the book of Jornand, imprinted with Dante; that, forsomuch as antichrist comes not before the destruction of the empire, therefore such as strive to have the empire extinct, are in so doing forerunners and messengers of antichrist. "Therefore let the Romans," saith he, "and their bishops beware, lest their sins and wickedness so deserving, by the just judgment of God, the priesthood be taken from them. Furthermore, let all the prelates and princes of Germany take heed," &c.

And because our adversaries who object to us the newness of our doctrine shall see and perceive the course and form of this religion now received, not to have been either such a new thing now, or a thing so strange in times past; I will add to these above recited, Master Taulerus, a preacher of Argentine in Germany, (A. D. 1350), who, contrary to the pope's proceedings, taught openly against all human merits, and against invocations of saints, and preached sincerely of our free justification by grace, referring all man's trust only to the mercy of God, and was an enemy to all superstition.

With whom also may be joined Francis Petrarch, a writer of the same age, who, in his works and Italian verses, speaking of Rome, calls it "The whore of Babylon, the school and mother of error,-the temple of heresy,—the nest of treachery, growing and increasing by the oppressing of others ;" and saith further, that she extols herself against her founders, that is, the emperors who first set her up, and did so enrich her, and seems plainly to affirm, that the pope was antichrist, declaring that no greater evil could happen to any man, than to be made pope. This Francis Petrarch was

about A. D. 1350.

About the year, (A. D. 1340), in the city of Herbipoli, was one named Master Conrad Hager, who, (as appears by the old bulls and registers of Otho, bishop of the city), is there recorded to have maintained and taught for the space of twenty-four years together, that the mass was no sacrifice; and that it profits not any man, either quick or dead, and that the money given by the dying for masses, are very robberies and sacrileges of priests. He said too, that if he had a store full of gold and silver, he would not give one farthing for any mass. For this doctrine, this good preacher was condemned, and inclosed in prison; but what afterward became of him was never heard.

There is among other old and ancient records of antiquity, belonging to this time, a certain monument in verses poetically compiled, but not without a certain moral, intitled, "Poenitentiarius Asini," i. e. The Asses' Confessor; bearing the date and year A. D. 1343. In this treatise are brought forth the wolf, the fox, and the ass, coming to confess, and doing penance. First, the wolf confesses to the fox, who easily absolves him from all his faults, and also excuses him in them. In like manner the wolf, hearing the fox's confession, showed to him the like favour in return. After this comes the ass to confession, whose fault was this: that he being hungry took a straw out from the sheaf of a man that went on a pilgrimage to Rome. The ass, repenting of this act, and thinking it not so heinous as the faults of the others, hoped the more for his absolution. But what followed? After the silly ass had uttered his crime in auricular confession, immediately the discipline of the law was executed upon him with severity. neither was he judged worthy of any absolution, but was apprehended upon the same, slain, and devoured. Whoever was the author of this fabulous tale, he had a moral in it; for by the wolf was meant the pope ; but the fox represented the prelates, courtesans, priests, and the rest of the spiritualty. By the spiritualty the pope is soon absolved, as, in return, the pope soon absolves them in like manner. By the ass is meant the poor laity, upon whose back the strict censure of the law is executed; especially when the German emperors come under the pope's inquisition, to be examined by his discipline, there is no absolution or pardon to be found, but in all haste he must be deposed, as in these histories may partly appear before.

Not long after this, (about A. D. 1350), Gerhard

Riddler wrote against the monks and friars a book, in. titled, "Lacryma Ecclesiæ," wherein he disputes against the order of the begging friars; proving that kind of life to be far from christian perfection, as being against charity to live upon others, when a man may live by his own labour; and affirms them to be hypocrites, filthy livers, and such as for man's favour, and for lucre sake, do mix with true divinity, fables, apocryphas, and dreams of vanity. Also that, under pretence of long prayer, they devour widows' houses, and with their confessions, sermons, and burials, trouble the church of Christ. And therefore he persuaded the prelates to bridle and keep short the inordinate license and abuses of these monastical persons, &c.

As yet I have made no mention of Michael Sesenas, provincial of the Gray Friars, nor Peter de Corbaria, of whom Antonine writes and says they were condemned in the "Extravagant" of Pope John, with one John de Poliaco. Their opinions, says Antonine, were these,That Peter the apostle was no more the head of the church than the other apostles; and that Christ left no vicar behind him, or head of his church; and that the pope has no authority to correct and punish, to institute or depose the emperor; also, that all priests, of what degree soever, are of equal authority, power, and jurisdiction, by the institution of Christ: but by the institution of the emperor, the pope may be superior, who, by the same emperor also, may be revoked again. Also, that neither the pope, nor yet the church, may punish any man with bodily restraint or compulsion; unless they receive the license of the emperor. This Michael, master of the Gray Friars, wrote against the tyranny, pride, and primacy of the pope, accusing him to be antichrist, and the church of Rome to be the whore of Babylon, drunk with the blood of saints. He said there were two churches, one of the wicked, which was flourishing, wherein reigned the pope; the other of the godly, which was afflicted. Also, that the truth was almost utterly extinct; and for this cause he was deprived of his dignity, and condemned by the pope. Notwithstanding, he stood constant in his assertions. This Michael was about A. D. 1322. And he left behind him many favourers and followers of his doctrine, of whom a great part were slain by the pope: some were condemned, as William Ockam; some were burned, as John de Castilione, and Francis de Arcatara.

Much about this time the nuns of St. Bridget's order began first. About this time also was built the Queen's College, in Oxford, by Queen Phillippa, of England, wife to King Edward III. (about A. D. 1360.)

And here to make an end of this Fourth Book; it now remains to prosecute the race of the archbishops of Canterbury, contained in this Fourth Book, beginning, where we before left off, (page 108), at Lanfranc.

A Table of the Archbishops of Canterbury, contained in the Fourth Book.

34. Lanfranc.
35. Anselm.
36. Radulph.

37. William Curboil.
38. Theobald.
39. Thomas Becket.
40. Richard.
41. Baldwin.
42. Hubert.

43. Stephen Langton.
44. Richard Magnus.
45. Edmund, of Abingdon.

46. Boniface.

47. Robert Kilwarby. 48. John Peckham. 49. Robert Winchelsey. 50. Walter Reynald. 51. John Stratford. 52. John Offord. 53. Thomas Braidwarden. 54. Simon Islip.

THUS having discoursed in these former books the order and course of years, from the first tying up of Satan to A. D. 1360, I have a little overpassed the limit of time in the scripture, appointed for the loosing out of him again. For so it is written by St. John, (Rev. xx. 3), that after a thousand years, Satan, the old dragon, shall be let loose again for a season, &c.

For the better explanation of which mystery, let us first consider the context of the scripture: afterwards let us examine by history, and course of times, the meaning of the same. And first, to recite the words of scripture, the text of the prophesy is this, (Rev. xx. 1.)

"And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit, and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the devil and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years should be fulfilled and after that he must be loosed a little season. And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them; and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus," &c.

By these words of the Revelation, here recited, three special times are to be noted.

First, Satan's being abroad to deceive the world.
Secondly, The binding of him.

Thirdly, The loosing of him again, after a thousand years, for a season.

Concerning the interpretation of which times, I see the common opinion of many to be deceived by ignorance of histories, and state of things done in the church; they supposing that the chaining up of Satan for a thousand years, spoken of in the Revelation, was meant from the birth of Christ our Lord. Wherein I grant that spiritually, the strength and dominion of Satan, in accusing and condemning us for sin, was cast down at the passion and by the passion of Christ our Saviour, and locked up, not only for a thousand years, but for ever. Although, as to the malicious hatred and fury of that serpent, against the outward bodies of Christ's poor saints, (which is the heel of Christ) to afflict and torment the church outwardly; that I judge to be meant in the Revelation of St. John, not to be restrained till the ceasing of those terrible persecutions of the primitive church, when it pleased God to pity the sorrowful affliction of his poor flock, being so long under persecution, the space of three

hundred years, and so to assuage their griefs and torments: which is meant by the binding up of Satan, the worker of all those mischiefs: understanding thereby that as the devil, the prince of this world, has now, by the death of Christ the Son of God, lost all his power and interest against the soul of man, he should turn his furious rage and malice, which he had to Christ, against the people of Christ, (which is meant by the heel of the seed, Gen. iii. 15.) in tormenting their outward bodies. Which yet should not be for for ever, but for a determinate time, as it should please the Lord to bridle the malice, and snaffle the power of the old serpent, and give rest to his church for the term of a thousand years. Which time being expired, the serpent shall be suffered loose again for a certain or a small time.

And I am led by three reasons thus to expound this prophetical passage of scripture:

The first is, that the binding up of Satan, and closing him in the bottomless pit by the angel, imports as much as that he was at liberty, raging and doing mischief before. And certainly, those terrible and horrible persecutions of the primitive time universally through the whole world, during the space of three hundred years of the church, do declare no less. Wherein it is to be thought and supposed, that Satan all that time, was not fastened and closed up.

The second reason, moving me to think that the closing up of Satan was after the ten persecutions of the primi tive church, is taken out of the twelfth chapter of Revelations; where we read, that after the woman, (meaning the church) had travailed of her man-child; the old dragon, the devil, the same time being cast down from heaven, drawing the third part of the stars with him, stood before the woman with great anger, and persecuted her (that is, the church of God), with a whole flood of water, (that is, with abundance of all kinds of torments), and from thence went moreover to fight against the residue of her seed, and stood upon the sands of the sea; whereby it appears that he was not as yet locked up.

The third reason I collect out of the thirteenth chapter of Revelation; where it is written of the beast, sig nifying the imperial monarchy of Rome, that he had power to make war forty and two months. By which months is meant, no doubt, the time that the dragon, and the persecuting emperors, should have in afflicting the saints of the primitive church. The computation of which forty-two months (counting every month for a