history of england_david hume

1 ordered that his body should not be buried till

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: [n]W. Malmes. p. 188. This author, a judicious man, was present, and says, that he was very attentive to what passed. This speech, therefore, may be regarded as entirely genuine. [o]W. Malmes. p. 188. [p]P.4. Were this account to be depended on, London must at that time have contained near 400,000 inhabitants, which is above double the number it contained at the death of queen Elizabeth. But these loose calculations, or rather guesses, deserve very little credit. Peter of Blois, a contemporary writer, and a man of sense, says there were then only forty thousand inhabitants in London, which is much more likely. See Epist. 151. What Fitz-Stephen says of the prodigious riches, splendor and commerce of London, proves only the great poverty of the other towns of the kingdom, and indeed of all the northern parts of Europe. [q]Brompton, p. 1031. [r]Contin. Flor. Wig. p. 677. Gervase, p. 1355. [s]Epist. St. Thom. p. 225. [t]Chron. W. Thorn. p. 1807. [u]Epist. St. Thom. p. 226. [w]Hagulst. p. 275, 276. [x]W. Malmes. p. 180. [y]M. Paris, p. 51. Hagul. p. 312. [z]H. Hunt. p. 395. [a]Matth. Paris, p. 65. [b]Gul. Neubr. p. 381. [c]Fitz-Steph. p. 13. M. Paris, p. 65. Neubr. p. 381. Chron. T. Wykes, p. 30. [d]Neubr. p. 382. [e]Hoveden, p. 491. [f]Hoveden, p. 491. Fitz-Steph. p. 13. M. Paris, p. 65. Neubr. p. 381. Brompton, p. 1043. [NOTE [N]]William of Newbridge, p. 383. (who is copied by later historians) asserts, that Geoffrey had some title to the counties of Maine and Anjou. He pretends, that count Geoffrey, his father, had left him these dominions by a secret will, and had PLL v5 (generated January 22, 2010) 365 http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/695 Online Library of Liberty: The History of England, vol. 1 ordered that his body should not be buried, till Henry should swear to the observance of it, which he, ignorant of the contents, was induced to do. But besides, that this story is not very likely in itself, and savours of monkish fiction, it is found in no other ancient writer, and is contradicted by some of them, particularly the monk of Marmoutier, who had better opportunities than Newbridge of knowing the truth. See Vita Gauf. Duc. Norman. p. 103. [g]Neubr. p. 383. Chron. W. Heming. p. 492. [h]M. Paris, p. 70. Neubr. p. 383. [i]Neubr. p. 387. Chron. W. Heming. p. 494. [*]Madox, p. 435. Gervase, p. 1381. [NOTE [O]]The sum scarcely appears credible; as it would amount to much above half the rent of the whole land. Gervase is indeed a cotemporary author; but churchmen are often guilty of strange mistakes of that nature, and are commonly but little acquainted with the public revenues. This sum would make 540,000 pounds of our present money. The Norman Chronicle, p. 995. says, that Henry raised only 60 Angevin shillings on each knight’s fee in his foreign dominions: This is only a fourth of the sum which Gervase says he levied on England: An inequality no wise probable. A nation may by degrees be brought to bear a tax of 15 shillings in the pound, but a sudden and precarious tax can never be imposed to that amount, without a very visible necessity, especially...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online