a grandfon of William the Conqueror, by his fourth daughter Adela, had been nominated by Henry with the consent and approbation of parliament, fuch, nomination and approbation' might have rendered him capable of fucceeding to the crown, according to the principles of the Anglo-Norman conftitution. All his pretenfions, however, were cut off by the settlement which Henry had made with the concurrence of his parliament; and according to his lordship, Stephen, in invading the family difpofitions of Henry the First, added the crime of ingratitude to that of perjury.

Among the difficulties which opposed that difpofition, the noble author reckons the inveterate prejudices which the English in those days entertained against the idea of a female fucceffion.

In all the history (fays he) of the Anglo-Saxons, fince the first day of their fettling in Britain, there is but one inftance of a lady's being allowed to fucceed to the crown, viz. Sexburge, the wife of Cenwalch king of the Weft Saxons. She reigned but a year, and Matthew of Westminster says, he was expelled with disdain by the nobles, who would not fight, under a woman. This account is the more credible, because if we look back to the first origin of monarchical power in all the German nations, we hall find that among them the office of a king grew from that of a general, and always implied a military command; for which the fofter fex being lefs fitted by nature, they might therefore be fuppofed improper to reign, From the diffolution of the heptarchy down to this period the crown of England was never placed on a female head. Nor had the Normans any example of the fovereignty among them being vefted in a woman, from the foundation of their dukedom in France; or in the kingdoms of Denmark and Norway, from whence they came; fo that Matilda's fucceffion was no lefs a novelty to them than to the English. Accordingly, an ancient hiftorian relates, that, when the bishops and barons fwore fealty to Stephen, they declared it as the cause of their taking that engagement in direct violation of former oaths, that it would be too fhameful a thing if Jo many noblemen should submit to a woman. It muft, however, be obferved, that, fome time before this, fiefs had begun to de fcend to females, in default of heirs male.'

The noble author, by the length of his notes upon this paffage, feems to be aware that he had gone too far as to what he fays of Sexburge; and here the neceffity of the criterion we mentioned in the beginning of this article, is apparent. William of Malmesbury, who is the polar ftar of Stephen's reign,no fooner clashes with a favourite fentiment, or rather fuppofition, by vindicating the character of Sexburge, than his lordship tells us, that this author may have avoided to publish a fact, which.

was

was fo unfavourable to the cause of the empress Matilda, in a book which he dedicated to her brother, the earl of Glocefter; whereas Matthew of Weftminster, who published his hiftory long after her death, when there was no queftion about a female-fucceffion, had no reason to disguise the truth of this matter; I therefore have followed him, as a better authority than William of Malmesbury, with regard to this point.' This is certainly a very ready way of folving difficulties With all due

deference to the noble author, we cannot think that Matthew of Westminster, who wrote, or rather transcribed his history in the year 1307, is an author to be placed in competition with Malmesbury, whofe hiftory ends about the year 1147, and may be said to have been an original author. Ought not his lordship to have informed us, that fome hiftorians fay, that this queen retired to a house of devotion, and there,died. That Matthew of Westminster (fays his lordship) was not the inventor of this fory, but took it out of fome Saxon chronicle, can hardly be doubted.' We must be of opinion that the fact is very much to be doubted; and we have in the hiftory of the fame kingdom of Effex, an instance of Ethelburga the wife of Ina, who in her husband's abfence headed an army against Eadbert, a pretender to her husband's crown, took and demolished his caftle of Taunton, and drove himself into Weffex. His lordship has even mentioned Elfleda, whom he allows fome writers call queen of the Mercians, but without remarking that her military exploits equalled those of the greatest warriors of that age.

His lordship very justly obferves, that admitting the first oath taken to Matilda had been upon condition that the king (Henry) should not marry her to any perfon in the kingdom, without his advice, and that of his barons, this could not be alledged to invalidate Matilda's right of fucceffion, because the Englishy had twice, fince her marriage with Geoffrey, bound themselves to maintain it by the moft folemn oaths, the laft of which they had taken both to her and her fon. If we mistake not, his lordfhip has left the pretenfions of Stephen's family to the dutchy of Normandy unexplained. Though (fays he) the Normans had admitted a female fucceffion in private eftates, they had not yet applied that rule of law to their dukedom; and it was more difficult ftill to extend it to the inheritance of the imperial crown of England. Ancient and rooted opinions, of the unfitnefs of a female hand to wield a fceptre, would not easily yield to arguments of analogy drawn from a late practice in private fucceffions, or even in principalities that were under a feudal fubjection. The exclufion of women from reigning over the French is, by fome of the best of their lawyers and historians, fuppofed to be rather founded upon an unwritten custom, de

B 4

rived

rived from the temper and genius of the nation, than upon any written law and the temper and genius of the Normans and English had certainly appeared, hitherto, no lefs repugnant than their's to the idea of being ruled by a distaff. Nor do we find that our ancestors made any distinction at this time, as the French afterwards did in the dispute that arose upon the death of Louis Hutin, between the fucceffion to fiefs and the fucceffion to the crown. They put England and Normandy upon the fame foot: Matilda's right to both was acknowledged during the life of her father, and denied to both after his death."

We do not, however, find that there was the least dispute concerning the poffibility of a female fucceffion to the dukedom of Normandy among the nobility of that province. If any objection of that kind had been made, it must have come from the king of France, who might have refused to give the inveftiture of it to a female, upon the well known feudal principle of her not being able to perform the fervices by which she was to hold the fief. With regard to the Normans themselves, the differences among them arose from a doubt whether Henry the Second, or Thibauld earl of Blois, ought, upon the principles of their fucceflion, to be duke of Normandy; that is, whether the fon of the Conqueror's daughter, or the fon of the Conqueror's grand-daughter, ought to have the preference. Though fuch a difpute could not be maintained at prefent, yet it was then of fo great difficulty, that the majority of the Norman barons actually offered to receive Thibauld for their duke.

According to his lordship's calculation, the treasures of Henry the First, which had been seized by Stephen in Winchester castle, were equivalent to fifteen hundred thousand pounds at present. The characters his lordship has drawn of the bishops of Salisbury (who was originally a poor Norman curate) and Winchester, and Stephen himfel, are just and masterly. We cannot, however, help thinking (though omitted by the noble author) that the egotifm contained in the bishop of Salisbury's declaration renders that prelate's veracity highly questionable; because it is fcarcely credible that fo great and wife a prince as Henry the Firft, fhould make his advice, as well as that of his barons, one of the conditions of the royal oath. But to return to the three characters we have mentioned.

The bishop of Salisbury (fays his lordship) in thus deferting Matilda broke every bond of human fociety: for no man in the whole kingdom, not Stephen himself, had been fo highly obliged to Henry, who took him into his service when he was only a curate in Normandy, during the reign of William Rufus, and finding him dextrous in bufinefs, especially in the management.

of

of money affairs, grew fo fond of him, and put fuch an unlimited confidence in his fidelity, that when he came to the crown he first made him his chancellor, then bishop of Salisbury, and at laft grand jufticiary, by which high dignity he was, on the demife of the crown, the constitutional guardian and regent of the kingdom. Thus, it fell out, that, Henry dying abroad, and Matilda being abfent, the whole ftrength of the government remained in his hands; and, had he kept his engagements, it would not have been in the power of any other to defeat her fucceffion. What induced him to betray her, we are not told : but this we know, that he obtained of the king, immediately after his coronation, the town of Malmbury for himself, the office of chancellor for his natural son, and that of treasurer for one of his nephews, whom he had before made bishop of Ely. Probably these were the terms upon which he had treated with the bishop of Winchester to fell himself to Stephen, who was fo fenfible how neceffary it was to buy him, that in a confidential discourse about him, with fome of his own friends, he used this expreflion, "By the nativity of God, if he were to ask of me one half of my kingdom, I would grant it to him, till this feafon be paft. He fhall himself be tired of afking fooner than I will of giving."

These words are remarkable, and very expreffive of the character of this king. In bargaining for the crown, he thought no price required of him too great; but, when that feafon was past, he meant to take other measures; and the bishop of Salifbury himself was one of the first who felt the effects of this intention. The bishop of Winchefter, who had been the chief inftrument in seducing that prelate from his loyalty to Matilda, was almost as powerful by the force of a bold and extraordinary genius, as the other was by his office. William archbishop of Canterbury, being a man of a feeble mind and mean parts, gave way to him in all things; and he acquired fuch an influence over the clergy, that he abfolutely governed the English church, though there never was a mind lefs fuited than his to the duties of a churchman. But profufe liberality, princely magnificence, the courage of a foldier, the addrefs of a courtier, and the cunning of a statesman, with a peculiar dexterity in the management of a party, supplied the want of all Chriftian and epifcopal virtues, which he hardly deigned even to counterfeit, except in pretending an ardent zeal for religion. By every art of cabal and of corruption, he sustained, he cemented, he animated, he directed the faction of his brother; and to his abilities, more than to his own, did Stephen owe the crown he gained. Yet that prince had himself some popular qualities, which might well recommend him to the favour of the nation.

He

He was brave, affable, good-natured, and generous, in the highest degree. Having received his education in the English court, he had formed many connexions of acquaintance and friendship among the nobility, and had rendered himself agreeable to the people, not only from policy, but from the bent of his temper, which naturally inclined him to let down his dignity and conform his manners to theirs. The citizens of London were particularly affectionate to him, and faluted him as king, at his return from Boulogne, where he happened to be at the time when his uncle died, and from whence, upon an early intelligence fent him of that event, he paft over to England with all poffible expedition. Another advantage to him was, that the Welfh having revolted before the death of Henry, and remaining unfubdued, the prefent circumftances of the ftate appeared to require a warlike prince on the throne.'

In the curious account of the illegality (as found by the pope) of the marriage between Henry the First and his queen Matilda, we do not recollect his lordfhip having mentioned that Matthew Paris, or rather Wendover, reprefents the bride as having been extremely reluctant to the match; a circumstance which very probably was laid hold of by Stephen's advocates in prejudice of the marriage.

In relating the fecond irruption which David king of Scots made into England, we must be of opinion, that the noble author has omitted fome circumstances of weight, particularly that of Henry, the prince royal of Scotland, being carried by Stephen to the English court, where the honours he paid him, as being the first prince of the Anglo-Saxon blood, procured him the envy and hatred of the archbishop of Canterbury, the eark of Chefter, and other peers; and that David, meeting with nothing but evafions with regard to the inveftiture of Northumberland, ordered his fon to return to Scotland. His lordship is of opinion, that David's claim of the earldom of Northumberland for his fon prince Henry, was ill-founded; because though the mother of Henry was heiress to Waltheof earl of Northumberland, yet, as that nobleman had fuffered for high treason, his earldom was forfeited, and could not legally defcend from him to his daughter. We do not apprehend that David ever pretended it could, or that he did more than demand that Henry fhould be reinftated in his grandfather's fortune. From the complection of that tranfaction it appears, however, that Stephen gave David and his fon fufficient encouragement to believe their fuit for Northumberland should be complied with, as foon as he returned to London. His lordship even fays, that Stephen promised that he would not difpofe of that earldom to any other lord without having judicially determined his (David's)

claim.'