The Division of the Work, and the Method of the first Book. CHAP. I.

THE Design beeing to treat of the Dominion or Ownership of the Sea, incompassing the Isle of Great Britain, as belonging to the Em­pire of the same; two main, par­ticulars are chiefly to bee▪ consi­der'd. The one concern's matter of Law, the other matter of Fact; both of them beeing denominated (as is usual) from the major part: For, as [Page 2] the point of Law hath many things mingled with it, which manifestly arise from matter of Fact; so this of Fact comprehend's not a few which relate unto that of Law. As to what concern's the point of Law, this Question fall's chiefly under debate, to wit, Whe­ther by Law the Sea bee capable of private Dominion, or Proprie­tie? And by matter of Fact is meant only such a collecti­on of Testimonies, or clear shewing forth of Evidences by which may bee proved and mainteined, The long and continual conjunction with the British Empire, of enjoiment and possession, or lawful prescription; whereupon as on a most strong Title, the Dominion or Ownership of the same Empire herein may bee founded; it beeing first made manifest, that the Sea it self is not only not repugnant by any Law to Dominion or Ownership, but every way capable thereof. To each of these Particulars a several Book is allotted. In the first, is discussed matter of Law: In the second, that which concern's matter of Fact: For, except manifest proof bee made of the first point, it will bee utterly in vain to discours about the second. But for those things which are to bee handled in the first Book, it seemed meet to observ such a Method, as in the first place to lay open the Rise or Original ground of those Di­sputes that have occasioned this enquirie into the point of Law, together with the Opinions of those men, who denie that the Sea is capable of private Domini­on or Ownership, or that it may pass into the Pro­prietie of any one particular, so as in the mean time to exclude it from beeing common to the rest of man­kinde. Next are premised som things, for explaining the terms of the Questions, that it may bee clearly thence understood, as well what kinde of Mediums are to bee used, as what the Thing is, whereof wee intend to Treat; lest by neglect of such a Cours, wee [Page 3] bee perplex't with Doubts about the notion and ac­ceptation, either of the Terms themselvs, or of the Sub­ject in Controversie. After this preparation thus duly made, it is then demonstrated, that not onely no kinde of Law whatsoëver, rightly understood, doth deny a Dominion over the Sea, but that all kinds of Law, even the most known and approved, whereof there may bee any use in Disputes of this nature, do ac­knowledg and allow a proprietie and private Domi­nion over the Sea, as well as the Land. Lastly, the Objections usually brought against such Dominion or Ownership of the Sea, are cleared and answered; And with these wee shall now begin; for the Method of the second Book is more conveniently put there be­fore it.

What Occurrences seem to oppose the Domi­nion of Sea, and what Arguments are wont to bee made against it. CHAP. II.

THe Arguments usually brought against the Do­minion of the Sea, are of three sorts. Som are drawn from freedom of Commerce, Passage, and Travel; Others from the nature of the Sea; and a third sort from the Writings and Testimonies of learned men. And as to what concern's the freedom of Commerce or Traffick, and Travel, this som men affirm to bee so natural, that they say it can no where bee abolished by any Law or Custom; yea, and that by the Law of Nations it is unjust to denie Mer­chants or Strangers the benefit of Port, Provisions, Commerce, and Navigation; Adding moreover, that [Page 4] wars have been justly commenced upon denial of Port, Trade, and Commerce; And for proof, they produce the example of the Megarans T [...]u [...]idid. lib▪ 1▪ [...] Dio­dor. Si [...] lib. 12. against the Athenians, the Bononians Sigon. de Regno Italiae, lib. 20. against the Venetians, and of the Spaniard against those of the West Indies; for that, the expedition of Spain against the Americans is pretended, by very learned men to bee upon a Franciscus Victoria de Indis, tract. 2. §. 2. 3. & 4. Joannes So­lorzanos de Indiar. Jure lib. 2. cap▪ 20. §. 34 & seqq. Gregor. Lo­pez in Par­tid. 2. tit 23. l. 2. just Ground, becaus they denied them a freedom of Commerce within their Shores and Ports. And in justification hereof, They use that of Virgil, as spoken out of the Law of Nations;

Now, if such a Proprietie or Dominion of the Sea were admitted, that men might bee forbidden the li­bertie of Navigation and Ports, at the will of any Proprietor, then, say they, it would bee an infringe­ment of that Law of Commerce and Travel (by them styled the Law of Nature) which they would not have to bee indured.

Touching the second sort of Objections drawn from the nature of the Sea it self, it is commonly alleged; That the Sea is alter'd and shifted every mo­ment, and the state of it, through a continued Suc­cession of new waters, alway so uncertain, and re­main's so little the same in all things (the Channel onely excepted) that it is impossible it should ever bee retained in the possession of any one Particular. Moreover, they say the nature of Possession consist's chiefly in a separation or distinction of Limits and Bounds, but [Page 5] no such Materials or Instruments can possibly bee found in the Sea, as that the Law for regulation of Bounds, which hath a principal place in all Controver­sies about Dominion or Ownership may bee grounded thereupon. They produce also a saying out ofHexaëmer. lib. cap. 10. S^t Ambrose, speaking about the lurking-holes or holds of Fishes; Geometram audivimus, Thalassometram nunquam audivimus; & tamen Pisces mens [...]ras suas nôrunt. I have heard of a Geometrician, or one that could measure Land; but never of a Thalassometrician, one that could measure or lay out Bounds in the Sea; and yet the Fishes know their own Bounds. They are pleased likewise to insinuate, what a world of Sea room there is, that all Nations may have sufficient for wa­tering, fishing, and Navigation: And therefore that the peculiar Dominion thereof is by no means to bee appropriated unto any.

A third sort of Arguments lie's in those Testimonies that are drawn out of antient Writers; partly out of old Poëts, Divines, and others writing of other subjects; partly from such Lawyers as handle the matter purpose­ly. Of the first kinde is that of Gripus the Fisherman, and Trachalio the Slave, as they are brought upon the Stage by Plautus, quarrelling about a Bag that was found in the Sea.

They produce likewise a piece of a supplicatorie [Page 6] speech of Latona, to a rustick Rout in Lycia, as it in Ovid [...],

And that of Virgil too [...]

Phaenicides saith also in Athenaeus [...]., [...], that the Sea is common. To which may bee added that memorable saying of certain Jewish Rab­bins, who, when they acknowledged Alexander to bee Lord of the whole world, did it nevertheless with this Caution, that they conceived hee had by his Con­quests gained a Soveraigntie onely over the Earth or drie Land, but none at all over the Sea; it beeing subject onely to God himself, as its sole Commander. The words are these out of the Ebrew, Gemara Hierosolymit. [...]. A [...]da Zara, s [...] de cultu extra­neo. fol. 42. col. 3. [...]p. 3. Non Do­minabatur in Mari, sed Deus O. M. Dominatur, tàm in Mari quàm in Tellure. Hee ruled not over the Sea, but God Almightie is hee onely that rule's by Sea as well as by Land.

The second kinde of Arguments here, found among the Lawyers, are of two sorts. Naturali jure, omnium communia sunt illa, Aër, Aqua profluens, & Mare, & per hoc littora Maris. Item, Nemo ad littus Maris accedere pro­bibetur [Page 7] piscandi caussâ, dum tamen villis & aedificiis & Moni­mentis abstineatur; quia non Juris Gentium, sicut & Mare. Idque Divus Pius piscatoribus Formianis & Capenatis re­scripsit. By the Law of Nature, the Aër, Ri­vers, the Sea, and its Shores, are common to all. Also, None are prohibited to use fishing up­on the Shores, as long as they meddle not with Lowns, Buildings and Monuments, in regard these are not common by the Law of Nations, as is the Sea; And this was prescribed by the Emperor Antonius Pius, to the Fisher men of Formiae and Capena; which are the very words used by L. 2. & l. 4. ff. de Rerum Divisione. Marcianus the Lawyer▪ and byTit. eodem, § & quidem. Justi [...]ion in his Institutions. And Ulpian, L. 13. ff. tit. communia praediorum. Mari, quod Naturâ omnibus patet, servitus imponi privatâ lege non potest. The Sea, beeing by Nature free for all, cannot bee vassa­lised by any particular Law. And in another place, saith hee; L. 13. § 7. ff. tit. Injuriis, & vide eum l. 24. ff. de damno infecto. Mare commune omnium est & litora, si­cut Aër. Et est saepissime rescriptum, non posse quem piscari prohiberi. The Sea and Shores are common to all, as the Aër. And wee finde it very often prescribed or commanded by the Emperors, that none bee prohibited from Fishing: With which agree's also that saying of L. 3. ff. N [...] quid in pub­lico [...] 1. Celsus. Maris esse usum commu­nem omnibus hominibus ut Aëris. A freedom of the Sea, as well as of the Aër, is common to all men▪ In like manner, som would have it that the Romane Emperor himself was Lord onely of the Land, and not of the Sea; for proof whereof, they mention an An­swer given by the Emperor Antoninus; D. D. ad lib. 9. ff. ad lege [...] Rhodiam. Se quidem mundi Dominum esse; legem autem Maris; That himself was Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea; pretending this Answer of his to bee commonly understood, as if hee refused to ar­rogate [Page 8] the Dominion of the Sea unto himself. And in the Eclog. ba­silic. lib. 50. tit. 1. cap. 13. Basilica or Laws of the Eastern Empire, wee finde it thus written, [...] The Shores are within the power of all men. So also saith Michaël Attaliates, a man learned in the Laws of that Empire, Pragmat. tit. 2. [...] Som things are common to all, as Aër, Fountains, the Sea, Shores, and Rivers. And the summe is, that som antient Lawyers of both Empires write, that the Sea is common to all men, by the Law of Nature and Na­tions; which if it were truly proved, either from the nature of the Sea it self, or from either of those Laws, then it could not possibly bee admitted, that the Sea might becom the peculiar possession of any one, un­less a change were made of the Law of nature, which is commonly said to bee altogether unchangeable; or that the consent of Nations, that have interest herein, were obteined to admit of such a Dominion or Ownership. And therefore from thence they seem to hold, that a Dominion over the Sea cannot bee atteined by any antient usage, custom or prescription, nor un­der any other pretence or title whatsoëver, for (faie they) no Plea or Barr is to bee allowed against nature, Nor (as Neque prae­scriptio longae possessionis ad obtinenda lo­ca jure Gen­tium publica solet concedi. li. 45. tit. de usucapioni­bus & usur­pationibus. Papinian saith) is a Prescription of long possession wont to bee admitted for the holding of such places as are publick and common by the Law of Nations. And these antient Lawyers here mentioned are followed by no small Train of Interpreters; though nevertheless there are not a few even of them, who restrain and qualifie that antient opinion more waies then one, touching the necessitie of a common Intercours and freedom at Sea, as wee shall shew hereafter.

But of our modern Lawyers, those that have appear­ed [Page 9] most forward in opposing a Right of Dominion over the Sea, are onely two, both indeed very eminent men, but of unequal learning and elegancie of wit; by name Fernandus Vasquius the Spaniard, and Hugo Gro­tius the Hollander: the former an honorable Coun­sellor to King Philip the 3. of Spain in his high Court of Exchequer. The later was heretofore Advocate Fis­cal of Holland, Zeland, and West-Friesland, and most de­servedly adorned with divers other honors in his own Countrie; a man of an acute judgment, and for his excellencie in all kinds of learning incomparable. But Vasquius, in his discours both of the Law of Nature and Nations, as also concerning the Rights of Do­minion, Prescription, and other things of that nature, speak's to this effect. Fernandus Vasq. Contro­vers. illustr: lib. 2. c. 89. [...] § [...]. Ex his apparet quàm suspecta sit &c. From hence (saith hee) it appear's how little esteem is to bee had of their opinion, who suppose that the Genoëses or Venetians may without injurie, forbid others to sail through the Gulph in their respective Seas, as if they could have laid claim to those Seas by Prescription; which is not onely contrarie to the Imperial Laws (above mentioned) but also against the Primitive Law of nature and nations, which cannot bee alter'd. And that it is against this Law, is evident; becaus by the same Law not onely the Seas, but all other immov­able things whatsoëver, were common. And although in after­time that Law came to bee abolish't in part▪ so far as concern's the Dominion and Proprietie of Lands, which beeing enjoied in common, according to the Law of nature, were afterwards distinguish't, divided, and so separated from that common use; yet it hath been otherwise, and is still, as to the Dominion of the Sea, which from the beginning of the world to this pre­sent daie, is, and ever hath been in common, without the least alteration, as 'tis generally known. And though I hear many of the Portugals are of this opinion, that their King hath had such an antient Title by Prescription in that vast Ocean [Page 10] of the West-Indies, so that other Nations have no right to sail through those Seas; and also that the ordinarie sort of our own Nation of Spain seem to bee of the same opinion, that no people whatsoëver, but Spaniards, have any right to sail through that immens and most spatious Sea, to those Indian Countries that have been subdued by the most migh­tie Kings of Spain (as if they onely had a right by Pre­scription thereto;) yet all these men's opinions are no less vain and foolish, then theirs, who use to dream the same things of the Genoeses and Venetians. The follie of which opinions appear's the more clearly even in this respect; becaus neither of those Nations singly consider'd can prescribe ought against themselvs; that is to saie, neither the Re­publick of Venice against it self; nor that of Genoa against it self, nor the Kingdom of Spain against it self, nor that of Portugal against it self; for there ought ever to bee a difference between the Agent and Patient: Much less can they prescribe ought to the prejudice of other Nations, be­caus the Law of Prescriptions is purely Civil. Therefore such a Law can bee of no force, in deciding Controversies that happen betwixt Princes or people that acknowledg no Superior: For the peculiar Civil Laws of every Countrie are of no more value, as to Forrain Countries and Na­tions, or their people, then if such a Law were not in Bee­ing, or never had been; [...]nd therefore in Controversies of that nature recours must bee had unto the common Law of Nations Original or Secondarie; which Law certainly did never admit of such a Prescription or usurpation of Title over the Sea. Other matters hee hath of the same kinde, beeing a very confident opposer of any pe­culiar Dominion over the Sea.

But in the year MD CIX (it beeing the year after that large Treatie held at the Hage betwixt the Spaniard and the Hollander, about freedom of [Page 11] Trade and Navigation to the East-Indies) there was published that Book of Hugo Grotius, entituled MARE LIBERUM, or a discours concerning that Right which the Hollanders have to Trade in the Indies. Wherein hee endeavor's first to prove, that, by the Law of Nations, there ought to bee such a freedom of Navigation for all men whatsoëver, which waie they pleas, so that they cannot, without injurie, bee molested at Sea. Next, that the Atlantick and Southern Ocean, or the Right of Navigation to the Indies, is not, nor indeed can bee, any pecu­liar of the Portugalls: forasmuch as the Sea (saith hee, according to the Mari Libero cap. 5. Mare pro­prium omnino alicujus fieri non potest; Quia natura commune hoc esse nonper­mittit, sed jubet. Laws and reasons already men­tioned) can in no wise becom the Proprietie of any one; becaus nature not onely permit's, but require's it should bee common. Several other passages hee hath about this matter, in his excellent Book De Jure Belli & pacis; of which more hereafter. Thus much in brief, concerning those arguments that are usually brought against the Dominion or Ownership of the Sea. The next thing therefore is to explain the sens of the Question, and its terms.

What is meant by the word SEA, in the Question. Also a division of the LAVV, in order to the discours. CHAP. III.

AS to what concern's the present Question, Whether the Sea bee capable of private Dominion, wee take the word CAPABLE in the same sens, as it was used by the Emperor Traian [Page 12] in an Epistle of his, to his beloved Plinie; Plin. [...]. 10. Epist. 59. Solum peregrinae civitatis capax non esse dedicationis quae fit jure nostro; The soil of a strange Citie is not capable of such a dedication as is made by our Law Moreover, wee shall explain what is meant by the SEA, as also by those Terms of LAW and DOMINION. By the SEA wee understand the whole Sea, as well the main Ocean or Out-land Seas, as those which are within-land, such as the Mediterranean, Adriatick, AEgean or Levant, British, and Baltick Seas, or any other of that kinde, which differ no otherwise from the main, then as Homogeneous or Similary parts of the same bodie do from the whole. But the Law (as it is the rule, measure, and pointing out of things lawful or unlawful) fall's under a twofold consideration. Fither as it is Obligatorie, which is called also Preceptive; or as it is Permissive, which is also by writers commonly termed Con­cessive. As Obligatorie, it is known by such things as are commanded or forbidden, as to give every man his due, not to forswear, and the like. As Per­missive, it is set forth by things whose use is nei­ther commanded nor forbidden, but permitted; as in the very Act of buying, selling, infranchisement, framing conditions of contract according to the will of the contractors, and many more of the same nature. But both these kinds of LAW concern either mankinde in general, that is, all Nations, or not all. That which relate's to the generalitie of mankinde, or all Nations, is either Natural or Divine. That is, either manifested by the light of nature or the use of right reason, beeing elegantly described by Tertullian to bee the Lex com­munis in pub­lico mundi, & Tabulis na­turalibus scripta. Lib. de Corona militis. Common Law writ­ten throughout the whole world, in the very Books of na­ture; [Page 13] and by the Grecians called [...] Thucyd. l. 4. Polyb. l. 2. & alij. the Law of man­kinde, and by the Civilians the Primitive Law of Na­tions; or els it is [...] declared and set down in those Divine Oracles that have been committed to wri­ting: Both which may properly bee termed the universal Law of Nations, or the Common Law of man­kinde. And whatëver is Obligatorie in either of these, either out of the nature of the thing it self, or rather from the autoritie of the father of nature, is reputed by men to bee unchangable; according to that saying so often used by Andronic. Rhodius, Michaël Ephesius,, Eustratius, alii, ad Arist. Nicomach. 5. cap. 10. Cicero, apud Lactantium lib. 6. cap. 8. Philosophers, D. Thom. Aquin. 1. 2^a. q. 94. art. 5. &c. Di­vines, and Instit. de Jure Nat. §. sed Natu­ralia. Lawyers, That the rights and Laws of nature are immutable, Which cannot bee said of the Permissive Law, whether Natural or Divine, re­lateing to mankinde in general: for it is obvious to every man, that as Permissive, it must needs bee various and changable, according to the judgment and pleasure of persons in power; and therefore subject to Repealings, Qualifications, and daily Alterations; whereas in the mean time that kinde which is Obligatorie may admit Additions or Inlarge­ments (such as may serv for more certaintie and convenience of observation,) but no Alterations, in any wise to diminish it's autoritie. Out of such Additions as are made to that which is Obligatorie, and Alterations of that which is Permissive, another kinde of Law takes it's rise, which is of a more narrow Sens and Acceptation, and relate's, not to all Nations or the Universalitie of mankinde, but onely to som particulars thereof, and it is ordinarily well termed Positive (as beeing positively ordained either by God or men;) Somtimes also it is termed Philo Ju­daeus, lib. de Joseph seu de Viro Cl­vili. Civil, and an Addition of right Reason. This Positive Law may bee divided into that which is singular and pe­culiar [Page 14] to any one particular Nation or Societie of mankinde (as was the Instit. tit. de p [...]tri [...] potes­tate [...]. Jus au [...]em Law concerning Paternal power among the Romans, and the custom of the Demost [...]hen. Orat. contra Aristocratem. Athenians touching the same;) or into that which is received by divers Nations. Again this last is di­vided into two parts; either into that which bind's divers Nations jointly, equally, and indifferently, by som common obligation; or ell into that which bind's divers Nations or people, not jointly, and equally, or by any common obli­gation, but singly and by Accident. And of this three­fold kinde of Positive Law, wee may call the first the Law purely Civil, as it relate's to any one particular civil societie. The second the Common Law of divers Nations, so named from som common tie or obliga­tion betwixt them. The third the Law of som or divers Nations, Civil or Domestick, by reason of that Domestick and Civil tie onely, whereby they are bound singly among themselvs, without any obliga­tion to each other in common. As for example, the Laws of the XII Tables that were brought from Athens to Rome, remained in force in both Nations, as well in the Romane, as in the Athenian; but not by any common or mutual obligation between them: And therefore that Law of the XII Tables ought much more properly to bee called the Civil Law of those Na­tions, then simply of both Nations (in any such sens as import's a Joint-Interest or Communion.) But as to that which jointly concern's divers Nations by mutual obligation, that is, the Common Law of divers Nations, it is divisible likewise into two parts, to wit, into that which is Imperative over divers Nations or people; or that which is Intervenient. By the Imperative Law of Na­tions, is meant that which is observed or receiv's Autori­tie among several Nations or people, who are subject to [Page 15] supreme Powers that otherwise are distinct, and this by reason of an Obligation equally common to them all, but derived from som other, and enjoined by som special Command, either from God or man. Of this kinde was that Law of the D [...]lopes, the Magne­sians, Phthiotae, Thessalians, and other people of Greece, who beeing equally obliged by the command of Pausanias in Phocicis, Strabo lib. 9. AEschines in Orat. [...]. Acrisius King of the Argives, submitted to the juris­diction of the grand Parlament or Assembly of Am­phictyones. Of the same kinde likewise was that Deut. 20. 10. Mi­litarie Law enjoined by God, not onely to the People of Israël, but also to the Canaanites with whom they were to wage war: For, they were both obliged by the Autoritie of him that commanded, though after a divers manner. And when any Nations, in obe­dience to the Pope's Autoritie and command, do alike submit to one and the same Law, it may bee rightly called the Imperative Law of Nations. But that is to bee called the Intervenient Law of Nations, which take's it's rise, not from any command imposed upon several Nations in common, but through the intervention ei­ther of som Compact, or Custom; and it is com­monly styled the Secondarie Law of Nations: The princi­pal heads whereof are conteined in the Laws about pro­claiming War, Ambassie, Prisoners of War, Hostages, Right, Remitter upon return from Captivitie, Leagues and Cove­nants, Commerce, and other matters of that Nature which usually intervene betwixt divers Nations. For, as much as in these Laws here spoken of, it is in several Nations wholly composed of such Additions as have been made to the universal Obligatorie Law of Nations, and of such Alterations as have accrued to the Universal Permissive, and no more may challenge the name of Imperative or Intervenient. And it is most plain, that the [Page 16] rest retain's still the name of the Universal or Primitive Law of Nations. Moreover also, the Imperial Law, which usually take's place in all Controversies about the afore­said Particulars of the Intervenient Law, so far as it agree's with the Universal Law of Nations, Natural or Divine, is to bee comprised under the same Notion; But as by the consent of some certain Nations, with whom it is in use, divers principal heads and deter­minations of it (beeing no part of the Universal Law) are so made use of, it most clearly fall's under the name of the Intervenient Law of som Nations. Lastly, as it is re­ceived and used at home by som particular People in their Courts of Judicature, it is to bee called the Law Civil or Domestick of divers Nations. And thus having gi­ven you a plain Scheme of the Law, in all those various Notions and Acceptions that are to bee used in the Controversie; it remain's that in the next place that of Dominion or Ownership bee taken into consideration.

Of Dominion, both Common to all, and Private. Also its Original, either by Distribution, or Primarie Occupation. CHAP. IV.

DOminion, which is a Right of Using, Enjoying, Alienating, and free Disposing, is either Com­mon to all men as Possessors without Distincti­on, or Private and peculiar onely to som; that is to say, distributed and set apart by any particular States, Princes, or persons whatsoever, in such a manner that others are excluded, or at least in som sort barred from a Libertie of Use and Enjoiment. As to the first kinde of Dominion, or that which is Common to All, [Page 17] frequent mention is made of it, in relation to that State of Communitie, which was in antient times. And of which Virgil speak's in his GeorgicksGeorgic.

And Seneca In Octaviâ, Act. 2.,

And Tibullus Ad Messa­lam. Eleg. lib. 1. 3.,

Many more there are of the like nature. But yet Divin. In­stitut. lib. 5. seu de Iusti­tiâ. cap. 5. Lactantius would have them to bee so understood, not that wee should conceiv that nothing at all was private or pecu­liar in those daies; but in a figurative sens after the manner of the Poëts, to let us know that men were then so free and generous, that they did not hoord up the fruits of the Earth for themselvs, nor dwel in an obscure solitarie manner, but admitted the poor to partake of the benefit of their labors. And truly, wee finde divers passages plainly pointing out this state of Communitie, in that Divine Act of Donation, [Page 18] whereby Noah and his three sons Shem, Cham and Japhet (who represented as it were the person of Adam, for the restoring of mankinde after the flood) became Joint-Lords of the whole world. The form of Donation, is expressed in these words, Gen. cap. 9. v. 1. 2. Bee fruitful, and multiply and replenish the Earth. And the fear of you, and the dread of you shall bee upon every Beast of the Earth, and every Foul of the Aër, upon all that moveth upon the Earth, and upon all the Fishes of the Sea, into your hands are they delivered. Also, Ju­stin the Historian speak's aptly and to the purpose, Erant Sa­turni aevo omnia com­munia & in­divisa omni­bus, veluti unum cunctis Patrimonium esset. lib. 43. In the Age of Saturn (saith hee) all things were without distinction common to all, as if all men had lived upon one stock or Patrimo­nie. From whence it came to pass, that in the Festivals of Saturn all things were enjoyed in common. To which likewise accord's that of Cicero Privata nul­li naturâ▪ sed aut veteri oc­cupatione, ut qui quondam in vacua ve­nerunt; aut bello, &c. Offic. lib. 1., No thing is pri­vate or peculiar to any by Nature; but either by occupation of old▪ as in the case of those who first inhabited Vacancies; or who became possess't by right of War and Conquest; or by virtue of som Law; or by Compact, Covenant, or by Lot: Yet'tis not probable, that this kinde of Communitie was of any long continuance. But as for Private Dominion, or that distribution of Possessions and Bounds which de­priveth or in any sort barreth all others, besides the known possessor, from a libertie of use and enjoiment, they say it was not in beeing till those golden daies were over. And so, as the Poêt sings Ovid, Metamorph. 1.,

It appear's also by holy Writ, that the Earth was di­vided by the Posteritie of Noah, som Ages after the Flood. [Page 19] Gen. 10. 5. 5. & 25. By Japhet and his sons were the Isles of the Gentiles divided in their Lands, everie one after his Tongue, after their Families, in their Nations; as it is recorded by Moses: That is to say, they settled themselvs as private Lords, and ap­pointed Bounds accordings to the number of their Families, from the River Tanais even as far as the At­lantick Sea, or through a great part of the Western Asia, as it bend's towards the North, and throughout all Europe. In like manner, Cham and his Posteritie possessed themselvs of that Part which lie's open to the South and South-west; as Shem did the Eastern Countries as far as India: As you may see it in Josephus, Eusebius, the Autor of the Chronicle of Alexandria, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Eustathius of Antioch, Freculphus, and others. It hath been received also by Tradition, that Noah himself, as if hee had been absolute Lord or Ar­biter of the whole world, was the first man after the Flood that revived this kinde of distribution or private Dominion; which they say also hee did by Command from God, and that in the nine hundred and thirtieth year of his Age (which was three hundred and thirtie years after the Floud, and twentie before his death) hee confirmed it by Will, and deliver'd it a little before his death into the hands of Shem his eldest son, admonish­ing them altogether, that no man should invade the Bounds of his Brother, nor should they wrong one another; becaus it would of necessitie occasion Discords and deadly Wars among them: As it is expresly mentioned, both in Eusebius and Cedre­drenus. But howsoever the matter hath been; this is very certain, that private Dominions or Possessions were revived again after the Flood, in the same accu­stomed manner as they had been before from the daies of Adam. For, hee also received such a Gen. cap. 1. 2, 28. Donation from God, as wee have told you Noah and his Sons did [Page 20] afterward, and so became Lord of the whole World, not without such a peculiar possession or proprietie to himself, which (so far as wee are able to judg of Affairs of that Age, according to the waies and means received by Posteritie) did exclude his children from all Right, but by his voluntarie Grant or Resignation: But yet, whether it were by Donation, Assignment, or any other Grant whatsoëver, it appear's (before hee died or left any Heir to succeed him) his children did enjoy their several Bounds and Territories, in a way of peculiar Dominion or Possession. Thus Abel had Cattel and Pastures of his own; as Cain had Lands and Plantati­ons that were his own. Hee possessed himself also of the Land of Nod or Naida, where hee built the Citie of Enoch, and settled his abode. After this, Joseph Orig. Judai [...]. lib. 1. c. 3. Eustath. Antioch. [...]exa [...]m. pag. 46. Exchanges, Buying, and selling came in fashion; and besides Weights and Measures, they appointed Judges of Co­venants and Contracts, and added Bounds or Limits to Fields and Pastures. And of Cain, it is said, that [...] hee first set Bounds unto Fields. So at length came in private Dominions or Possessions; which (whether by vir­tue onely of a preceding universal dominion of a single person, as in Adam; or of som universal and common interest in Things, as betwixt Noah and his Sons) hapned first by the Donation, Assignment, or som other Grant of those whom it concerned, either to Princes, or Communities representing a single per­son, or to any others whomsoëver, as particular Lords. So that neither the Law Natural nor Divine which was universal (except you pleas to credit that Divine Oracle said to bee given unto Noah) hath expresly com­manded or forbidden, but permitted both; that is to say, a common enjoiment, as well as a private domi­nion or possession of the Things of this life.

[Page 21]But in this division of Bounds and Territories, there intervened, as it were, a consent of the whole bodie or universalitie of mankinde (by the mediation of som­thing like a compact, which might binde their posteri­tie) for quitting of the common interest or antient right in those things that were made over thus by distribu­tion to particular Proprietors; in the same manner as when Partners or Co-heirs do share between themselvs any portions of those things which they hold in com­mon. But as for the rest, which neither are possessed in several, nor expressly held in common, that is, which have continued vacant or desert, what shall wee saie? It hath been truly a custom of old, and which hold's to this daie in the more eminent Nations, that Vacancies are his who apprehend's them first by occupa­tion; as wee use to saie of those wee call, no man's Goods. This appear's plain in the Imperial Law; nor do wee know of any Nation where it is not received, save in those where by the Municipal. Civil Law of som Nations, any things of this nature are appropriated to their Princes, that their Subjects gain not an interest by occupation: For there others have sufficiently disclaimed the acqui­ring of any title by occupation; and in the present case wee must ever have respect unto this Qualification. But as concerning such a right by occupation, there is an antient and very famous decision made in a Contro­versie that happened betwixt the people of Andria and Chalcidia. Both of them beeing upon an expedition against Thrace, for the finding out of Plutarch in Quaest. Graec. new habita­tions, news was brought that the Barbarous people had quitted the Town of Acanthus, hereupon, two men were chosen, and sent out as Spies, the one beeing of An­dria, the other of Chalcidia, who beeing informed of the enemies flight, began both to run, and strive [Page 22] which of them should first reach and take possession of the Citie thus forsaken. It happened that hee of Chalcidia out-ran, but the man of Andria darting a Jave­lin stuck it in the Gates: This cried out hee got thither first with his Javelin, but the other, that hee was first with his bodie. A controversie hapning hereupon, the Erythraeans, Samians, and Parians, are called to de­cide it. The Andrians had most voices; for the Samians and Erythraeans gave judgment for them. But the Pa­rians were for the men of Chalcidia. The Reasons al­leged on both sides are very well described by Rerum ju­dicatarum, lib. 5. tit. 21. Petrus AErodius, not fit here to bee repeated: But in the mean time it is manifest, that all those men, even the per­sons contending, as well as the Nations to whose deter­mination the matter was committed, were of opinion, that places abandoned and forsaken becom theirs who first acquire them by occupation; nor is there any other ground in reason for that Law or Custom, whereby wilde-Beasts, Fishes, Birds and the like, whether yet unpossess't or relinquisht, becom theirs who catch them: which is usual likewise, according to the Laws and Customs of the Misna & Gemara utra­que tit. Baba metzia cap. 1. & Maimoni­des tit. Za­chia W [...]mith­na cap. 1. Hebrews and Alcoran. Azoar. 12. de venatu; & Azoari 34. Mahometans, as well as the Christians▪ But now, if so bee that all men were indifferently and without distinction Lords of the whole, before a division was made of som parts, then of necessitie wee must conceiv, they all ought to remain, equally and without distinction, Lords of those parts which never came under a division, even as they were before; unless som Compact or Covenant intervene, whereby all kinde of antient Right or Title of common Interest shall bee so renounced, that any persons whatsoever might afterwards becom particular masters of those places which should remain vacant or undisposed, who should first corporally seiz them, [Page 23] with an intent of possessing, holding, using, and in­joying. Nor can it otherwise bee conceived in the case of Partners or Co-heirs (such as all men seem to have been in the State of Communitie) how those things which com not under division, should not con­tinue common, as before. Therefore (I suppose) it must bee yielded, that som such Compact or Cove­nant was passed in the very first beginnings of private Dominion or possession, and that it was in full force and virtue transmitted to posteritie by the Fathers, who had the power of distributing possessions after the flood▪ So that wee may conclude no less concerning distri­bution by Assignment, then touching Seisure by occu­pation of things relinquish▪t at pleasure, that a general compact or Agreement was made or ratified, either ex­pressly in words, or implicitly by custom. And truly, the self same thing seem's to bee the opinion of the most excellent Hugo Grotius De Jure Belli ac pacis lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 2., who speaking of the original of Proprietie saith▪ Things became appropriate, not by the bare Act or Intent of the minds (for som could not know what others desired to possess, so as to abstein from the same; and perhaps many might desire one and the same thing) but by som Compact and Agreement either express, as in the case of Di­vision; or Tacit, as in that of Seisure or Primarie occupa­tion. For as soon as men grew out of love with Communitie, and no Division was yet appointed, wee must conceiv they agreed all together, that what every man held, hee should possess as his own. And truly there is a pa [...]i [...]ie of Reason also for this; that any man might afterwards make Seizure of that which was left.

The effects of private Dominion. And what regard hath been had of the SEA, in the more antient Distributions and Di­visions of things. CHAP. V.

BY the introducing of private Dominion, in the aforesaid manner, it came to pass, that the same Territorie or Field, whose use before was free for all men alike in Tillage, Building, Pasturage cutting of wood, gathering of Fruits, egress and re­gress, was either by distribution or occupation so pe­culiarly appropriated unto the possessor, that hee might lawfully hinder such a Communitie of use and injoy­ment, nor might any other man use it lawfully with­out his permission▪ And from this Original sprang every Dominion or Proprietie of things, which either by Alienation, or any other kinde of Cession, is transferr'd upon others, or held by a continued pos­session; respect beeing alwaies had to those particular Forms and Qualifications, which usually relate unto Dominion, either by Law, Custom, or compact, according to the various Institutions of several people▪ For by these, the free and absolute power of the Pro­prietor, in what hee enjoie's, is lesned and restrained; but when this Reason wholy ceaseth, then what the Proprietor possesseth is so his own, that it cannot lawfully in any wise, without his consent, becom another man's. And all these things are derived from the alteration of that Universal or Natural Law of nations which is Permissive: For thence came in private Do­minion or Possession, to wit from the Positive Law. [Page 25] But in the mean while it is established by the Universal Obligatorie Law, which provide's for the due observation of Compacts and Covenants.

These things beeing thus premised, wee shall next see what respect hath been had unto the Sea, either in the very first or any more antient Distribution or Divi­sion of things. For if it appear that the Sea also hath been assigned over with Lands, it must certainly bee confessed, that from the same original there spring's a private Dominion of the Sea, as well as the Land, and so that it is equally capable of the same, with this. And truly, in the distribution of Land which was renewed after the flood (so far as wee are able to collect by Tradition from the Antients) wee finde no express mention made of any Sea, as a part assigned: But yet somtimes the Sea is added as a Bound to a part assigned. As where the part first assigned unto the Sons of Cham, is extended from the Borders of Egypt through Africa as far as Hercules's Pillars, or African. apud Euseb. in Chronic. pag. 10. Cedrenus pag. 10. unto the Western and African Sea. And the Portion of the Canaanits (situate within the Territorie of the Sons of Cham) is twice so described in the Samaritan Pentateuch, that it is expressly said to reach from the River of Egypt or Nilus, to the great River, that is, the River Euphrates, and Pentateuch. Samar. M [...]. Genes. 10. 19. & Deuter. 34, 2. unto the utmost Sea, or the remotest, which is the great or Western Sea. Which last words are used in the laying out of that Portion which the Sacred Scripture mention's in Deuteronomie. Somtimes also, som Seas may seem to bee so comprehended in the part assigned, that they appear to bee no less assigned then the Land▪ For unto the Sons of Japhet were assigned Euseb. & Cedrenus lo­cis citatis. those Countries which extend from Media towards the North and the West, as far as Cadiz and the Islands of Britain. [Page 26] Wee see also, that certain Seas are included within the compass of Assignments as the N [...] called the [...]evant. AEgean, Mediterranean, A­driatick, and British Seas: whether by Donation, or not, wee cannot say. But in that antient apportioning of the holy Land (whereof God himself was Autor) the Sea seem's rather to have been accounted a boundarie, then any part of the Territorie allotted. Concerning the South-Quarter, the words are these; Nam. 34. 3, 5, 6, 7, 12. The Bounds of it shall bee the outmost Coast of the salt Sea Eastward. And a little after; The Border shall fetch a Compass from Azmon unto the River of Egypt, and the goings out of it shall bee at the Sea. Also concerning the West-Quarter, its Border shall begin at Sea, & ipso fine claudetur, and by it it shall bee bound­ed, as it is in the vulgar Translation; to which [...]ens agreeth also the modern: But concerning this place, and the rest here quoted, wee shall speak more in the next Chapter. Then it follow's, according to the true sens of the Hebrew, And this shall bee your North-border: From the great Sea you shall point out for you Mount Hor. And a little farther, speaking of the East-Quarter; Its Border shall descend, and shall reach unto the side of the Sea of Chin­nereth Eastward; And the Border shall go down again to Jor­dan, and the goings out of it shall bee at the salt Sea: This shall bee your Land with the Coasts thereof round about. Which is repeated almost word for word, in the distribution that was made by Josh. c. 15. &c. Joshua: And in another place of holy Scripture, the bounds of the Dominion is said to bee Psal. 72. 8. Syracid c. 44. from Sea to Sea. But, suppose at last it were granted, that the Seas came not into those more antient distributions of Territories, then it remain's next to bee consider'd, whether they might not lawfully bee ac­quired afterwards by Title of occupation, as things vacant and derelict; that is, either by the Natural or Divine universal Law which is Permissive, or by the Law [Page 27] of divers Nations, Common or Civil, which, in judging matters of this nature, is the best Interpreter of the na­tural Law which is Permissive. For, if in the Permissive which is Universal, nothing bee repugnant thereto; or (which is in a manner all one) if by the Positive Law of Nations, such a Dominion of the Sea, as wee intend, hath been introduced and admitted by the consent of the more famous Ages and Nations; then (I suppose) it will not bee doubted, but that the Seas are, by all manner of Law, every way capable of private Dominion, as is the Land.

That the Law of God, or the Divine Oracles of holy Scripture, do allow a private Domi­nion of the Sea. And that the wide Ocean al­so, which washeth the Western Coast of the holy Land, or at least a considerable part of it, was, according to the Opinion of such as were learned in the Jewish Law, an­nexed to the Land of Israël, by the Assigna­tion or appointment of God himself. CHAP. VI.

AS to what concern's here the Law of God, wee finde very plain passages therein, which do not a little favor a Dominion of the Sea. In that first and most antient Donation of things after the Flood, whereby God invested Noah and his Posteritie, in the Dominion of the whole Earth (of which Globe the Seas themselvs are a part) and of the conterminous Aër, seem's to bee no otherwise granted, then as mention i [...] [Page 28] made of the living Creatures, the Earth, and the Fowls of the Aër. That is, by an express grant of the free use and benefit of the thing, the thing it self was granted or conferred. Nor is the Dominion of the Sea other­wise granted there, where it is said, Gen. 9. 2. The fear of you, and the dread of you (which are Tearms signifying Do­minion) shall bee also all the Fishes of the Sea. Little different from this is that which was spoken to our first Parents, Gen. 1. 28. Re­plenish the Earth and subdue it, and have Dominion over the Fish of the Sea, and over the Fowl of the Aër, and over everie living thing that moveth upon the Earth: So here also, the grant of the thing it self is signified by its use and en­joiment. 'Tis confess't, that these words were not meant of private Dominion, or that which was not com­mon to all men: But yet it appear's thereby, the Earth and Sea did so pass together at first, and after the same manner, into the common enjoiment of mankinde, that from this Donation or Grant of God, wee may well conclude; that their condition, as beeing both but one Globe, must needs bee alike, at the pleasure of men, in the future distribution of Things, or the in­troducing of private Dominion therein. Neither is the Proprietie, nor the Communitie of either appointed but both seem equally permitted by the very form of Donation. And therefore that is very vain which is objected by som Psal. 115. 16., That the Earth is given to the children of men, but that Psal. 95. 5. the Sea belong's onely to God himself; as if Dominion not common indeed, but onely a com­mon use of the Sea, were permitted by the words of ho­ly Scripture: And as if it were not said in like manner, Psal. 24. 1. 50. 12. 89, 11. 95, 4. The Earth is the Lord's, and fulness thereof: The tops of the Hills are his also. Who know's not, that such sayings as these cannot in any wise weaken the Dominion of Mankinde? For, whatsoëver is acquired by men, still [Page 29] God Almightie, as Father of the Univers, retein's his supreme Dominion both over men, as also all other Things; which never was denied yet by any sober man. But the Controversie is about the Dominion of man, to wit, that which comprehend's any enjoiment or proprietie whatsoëver, saving still that right of the Dominion of God, which cannot bee diminished. And the distinction about this matter is very ordinarie in the Schools: According to the first sort of Dominion, nothing whatsoëver, much less may the Sea belong un­to men: According to the second, all things indeed are or may bee theirs, which can bee apprehended, seized, and possessed. And moreover, that in the old Testa­ment express mention is made more then once of such a Seisure, possession, or private Dominion as this where­of wee Treat; and that as of a Thing lawfully brought in use. There wee finde that the men of Tyre were Lords and Masters of the Phaenician, and the Egyptians of the Alexandrian Sea. Concerning the Phaenician, saith the Prophet unto Tyrus; Ezech. c. 26. v. 16. All the Princes of the Sea shall com down from their Thrones, &c. And they shall take up a lamentation for thee, and say to thee, how art thou destroyed that wast inhabited of Seafaring men! the renowned Citie, which wast strong in the Sea! Here the Dominion of the Tyrians at Sea is plainly set forth. And in the following Chapter Cap. 27. 4., Thy Borders are in the midst or heart of the Sea; as wee read it in the Hebrew, and also in an In Biblio­câ Arundeli­anâ. Arabian Manuscript, which render's it to the same purpose: For, both the Greek and vulgar Translation differ there from the Original. It follow's also thus; Vers. 9. All the Ships of the Sea with their Mariners were thine to occupie thy Merchandize. In stead of which last words, these are put in the Greek Copies, [...], even Westward of the West, or through a great part of the main or Western Sea; that [Page 30] is, the Phaenician or Syrian. Again, Cap. 28. vers. 2. Becaus thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the mid'st of the Sea. Hee threaten's not the Ty­rian, becaus hee had gotten him a Dominion over the neighboring Sea, but becaus beeing lifted up with pride, hee had taken unto himself the name of God. The Ty­rian is called likewise in another Scripture the Isai. 23. 4. Sea it self, and the strength of the Sea. But concerning the Egyptian Sea, another Prophet speak's thus unto Ninive; Art thou better then populous Alexandria (in the Original the Citie is called No, taken here for Alexandria) which is situate among the Rivers, that hath the waters round about it, whose Riches and strength (as it is in the Hebrew) or (as the Greek render's it) [...], that is, whose Empire or Dominion is the Sea. Moreover, it seem's to make mention of Kings of the Sea, as well as of Islands; Ps. 72. 10. The Kings of Tarshish and of the Isles shall bring presents. For, Tarshish or Tharsis in Hebrew signifieth the Sea, Hieronym. ad Isaiae c. 2. as it is often confessed both by the Greek and Chaldee Interpreters. Although Munster, a man otherwise very learned, speak's unadvisedly upon the fore-mention'd place, and will not have Tharsis there to signifie the Sea, becaus (saith hee) Kings have nothing to do at Sea, but rule onely upon Land; forgetting (what wee have alreadie told you) that ex­press mention is made by Ezechiel concerning Princes of the Sea. With which agree's also that saying, Ps. 89. 25. I will set his hand in the Sea, and his right hand in the Flouds; upon which place Aben-Ezra note's, that God Almightie assigned the Dominion of the Sea there unto King David, That hee might rule over those that sailed either through the Sea or the Rivers. It is written thus likewise in the Apocrypha; Esdras. l. 1. chap. 4. O yee men, do not men excel in strength that bear rule over Sea and Land, and all things in them? But yet the King is more mightie; for, hee is Lord of all these things [Page 31] and hath Dominion over them. And in another place, saith the Angel to Esdras, Esdras, l. 2 cap. 7. The Sea is set in a wide place, that it might bee deep and great. But put case the entrance were nar­row, and like a River, who then could enter the Sea, to look upon it, and have Dominion over it, i [...] hee went not through the nar­row? The Dominion of the Sea and of the Land is granted alike in both these places. It is said also of King Ahasuerus; Esther. 10. 1. That hee made not onely the Land, but all the Isles of the Sea to becom tributarie, which words truly do clearly shew a Dominion of the Sea; for, so they are expressed in the vulgar Edition, out of the Hebrew Original, which is lost. But the Greek Copies are more plain there; [...] The King wrote to his Kingdom of the Land and Sea. Nor must wee omit that of Moses when hee blessed the people; Deuteronom. cap. 33. 23. And of Naphtali hee said, Naphtali shall enjoy abun­dance, and bee full with the blessings of the Lord; hee shall possess or inherit the Sea and the South; as the [...]lgar and the Greek do render that place. But by many others, the Sea is taken there for the West-Quarter, as it is often in the Scriptures. Yet truly, it is clear those words are meant of the Sea of Galilee, or of the Lake of Tiberias, not of the great or Phaenician Sea, which lie's Westward, becaus the Land of Naphtali was situate near that Lake, which also is often called the Sea. As it appear's like­wise out of Onkelus his Paraphrase, where express men­tion is made of the Sea of Genesareth, called also the Lake of Tiberias, or the Sea of Chinnereth, and by this name it passeth with the salt Sea, or the Lake of Asphaltites, in the Numb. 34. 11. & 3. sacred description of the Eastern part of the holy Land. But the former place of Deuteronomie is [...]usly rendred by Rupert the Abbot of Tuitiu [...]; Ad Deut. lib. 2. c. 18. Ma [...]e & Me­ridiem possidebit, for Mare & Meridiem, hee shall possess the Morning and the South, for the Sea and the South. However, it is clear (I suppose) out of [Page 32] the places alleged, such plain Testimonies are found in holy Writ touching such a Dominion of the Sea, that in the mean time it must bee granted, that according to the Universal Permissive Law, any man may acquire it as well as the Land. And truly, as for those places quoted in the foregoing Chapter, concerning the South, West or Sea and Northen Bounds of the holy Land, they are so understood both by the Jewish Lawyers and Divines, that they would have either the great or Phaenician Sea it self, or at least som adjoyning part of it to bee assigned also by God unto the Israëlites, as Lords of it for ever; of which point wee shall discours a little more fully. As for that which is rendred there out of the vulgar Edition, touching the South Border, Usque ad Torrentem AE [...]ypti; & ma [...]ni Maris littore fini­ [...]. As far as the river of Egypt; and it shall bee bounded by the shore of the great Sea, the Hebrew saith, ad [...]orrentem AEgypti unto the River of Egypt (or the North entrance of Ni [...]us, which di­vided the [...]and of Israël from Egypt, at the Sea) & erunt exitus ejus in Mare▪ and the goings out thereof shall bee into the Sea. So that concerning that Borders beeing bounded by the shore (as it is in the vulgar) wee finde it no otherwise expressed there in the Original. Then, it is added next, concerning the West-border or that which is at the great Sea, word for word out of the Hebrew. As for your Sea-border, you may have the great Sea, And let this bee your border, or let it bee your Sea border, or border of the Sea And there the Greek Interpreter's render it thus, you shall have the bounds of the Sea, or they shall bee your bounds. The great Sea shall bound you: wherein (af­ter their usual manner) they plainly follow the Text of the Samaritan Copie: For, there wee read it thus, And you shall have a Sea-border. The great Sea shall bound you. Let this bee your Sea or Western-border. And thus the word SEA beeing used as well for the Western Quarter as [Page 33] for the Sea it self, that place is for the most part so ren­dred, that in so short a period the Sea is taken for both. As for the West-Border, you shall have the great Sea. And this Border shall bee your West-Border. As it is expres­sed by the Jews of Spain; y Termino de ponente; y sera à vos el mar el grande: y Termino este sera à vos Termino de ponente. Thus is also in Onkelus and Erpenius his Ara­bick; save that Onkelus render's it thus, But your West­border shall bee the great Sea and the Border thereof; the same shall bee your West-border. But an Arabian Translation in manuscript, for which wee are beholden to the Earl or Arundel's Librarie, after these words, unto the River of Egypt, add's also, And the going out thereof shall bee at the Coasts or parts of the Sea. And the Border of the Sea shall bee your Border. Also the great Sea in their Borders. Thi [...] shall bee your Border from the Sea Coast. But the North part, as appear's by the particulars alleged in the former Chapter, is bounded by mount Hor: so that it ap­pear's hence, that the more Northerly enterance of Ni­lus, that is the Pelusiock (as it seem's; for they are not well agreed about the very particular place) served in­stead of Bounds to the South part of the Land of Israël, which border'd upon the Sea, as also to that part of the Promontorie or foot of mount Hor, which was situated North-East by the Sea. But this mount is that which in the vulgar edition is called an exceeding high mountain. In the Jewish Commentaries it is known also by the name of Amana, and Amanon, and Amanus, and by som it is taken for that mountain in the Canticles, called In gloss'd Jarchii ad cap. 4. Cant. Amana. And in the Jewish Tar­gum, In Num. 34 & vide gloss. talmud ad tit: Gittin. cap. 1. fol. 8. Manus is put for mount Hor. It is taken also for Libanus, by such as in their Lyran. ad Numer. 34. Andr. Mosi­us ad Josu­am. Adrico­mius, Jacob Bar Abra­ham in Tab. Chorographi­ca Terrae san­ctae &c. Et vide Abu­lens. ad Num. 34. q. 2. Descriptions of the Holie Land, are wont to make mount Libanus its Northern Border. But as touching this mount Hor or Amanus [Page 34] (of the same name with that mountain, which but's out into the Gulph now called Golfo dell' Aiazza by som also taken for the same Gloss. ordi­nar. ad nu­mee. 34. or rather mount Taurus) it is described after this manner by Solomon Jarchius, it is seated in a north west corner. It's head bending downward stret­cheth out into the very sea. And it is wash't in divers places by the main. Betwixt these Bounds, to wit, the Southern part or the Pelusiack entrance of Nilus, and the North-East Bound or Promontorie of the aforesaid mount, the great sea, which is reckoned the Western Bound or Bor­der, haivng divers windings and turnings along the shore, is stretcht out in such a manner above 200 miles, that if a streight line should bee drawn from the North-East Border to the Southern, a great part of the Sea that extend's it self within the line for so many miles, must needs bee intercepted▪ which also is very easily to bee understood without the help of a Map.

These things beeing thus premised, briefly, but so far as the matter in hand require's, to discover the western part of the Holie Land, bordering wholy upon the Sea, and that according to the judgment of the antient Hebrews, not by modern Descriptions; it is to bee consider'd, that the Jewish Divines and Lawyers, when they discours about the precepts and Laws belonging to the Land of Israël, that is, of those to which they conceiv themselvs not bound by the Holy Law, without the Limits of that Land, use to treat very precisely, even to an hair, touching the Borders of their Dominion, as it was appointed by the Command of God. To wit, touching the Bounds of their Territorie, as the name Territorie signifie's the whole, not onely Lands and Fields, but Rivers also and all other waters within the cir­cuit of each Citie, as it is rightly taken also by the [Page 35] Caepola de Servitutibus Rustic. Praed. cap. 26. §. 26. Hieronym. de monte, l. de finibus re­gundis cap. 6. § 8. Alberic. Gen­tilis de jure Belli lib. 3. cap. 17. Dd. in l. 9. ff. de judiciis. Civil Lawyers. The Precepts spoken of, are those which are received by the Jews, touching the observation of the Sabbaticall year, oblations of Fruits, the L [...]vitical custom of Tithing, and others of that kinde. For by the Law of God, they will not yield that those things should bee observed out of the Israëlitish Dominions, although, Moses Maimonides halach. The­rumoth cap. 1. & Mikot­zi, Praecep. Affirm. 133. by Tradition of their Ancestors, they were usually observed in Egypt, Jdumaea, the Land of Moab, and Shinar, both by reason of their neighborhood, and the frequent convers of the Israëlits among them. But now so far as concern's the western or Sea-bordering of the Land of Israël, as it was assigned at first by God, in observing Precepts of this kinde, according to the holie Law, wee meet with two opinions in their Commentaries, from both which indeed it will appear, that the Sea was assigned by God Himself unto the Israëlites, as Lords thereof, in the same manner as the Land, though one opinion as­sign's larger Bounds, the other much more narrow: So that they all agree about the thing, differing one­ly about the latitude. The first opinion is of those who affirm, that the whole western Sea (as it lie's before the western Coast of the Land of Israël or as it is bounded inward by streight lines drawn on both sides, from the North-east and South border before mentioned, through that Ocean into the west) together with the Continent was given unto them by God; and therefore that those Precepts are to bee observed in that vast Ocean, as in the Terri­torie of Israël. The chief Autor of this opinion was an antient and very famous Interpreter of the Law, by name Rabbi Jehuda, who also from the express words of the Holie Law above-mentioned, [Page 36] conclud's that the western Ocean, thus bounded on both sides, was assigned. His Doctrine is deliver'd after this manner, as wee finde it in the most antient Digests of the Jewish Law. Gemara Ba­bylonia ad tit. G [...]in, seu de libellis Di­vor [...]ii & manumissionis cap 1. f [...]l 8▪ a. Idem, [...]ed de­pravatè legi­tur in Gemara Hierosolymi­tanâ, ad tit. Sh [...]biith seu de Anno Sab­batico. cap 6. fol. 36. col. 4. Whatsoëver lie's direct­ly opposite to the Land of Israël, it is of the same account with the Land of Israël, according as it is written; Numer. 34. 6. As for your West-Border, let your Border bee, or you shall have, the great Sea. Also let this bee a Border to you, or your Border. To wit, the Border of the Sea, or of the West. Also the Collateral Islands situate on both sides in the same direct line, fall under the same accompt with the sides themselvs. So that if a line were drawn from Cephaloria through the Isles to the main Ocean, and from the River of Egypt to the Ocean, then that which is with­in the line, is to bee taken for the Territorie of Israël, and that which lie's without the line to bee out of the Dominion of Israël. The line drawn from Cephaloria, was di­rected by the Promontorie of mount Hor or Amanus, as is said before: For that Citie was seated on the top of that mountain, which is here the North-east Border; as it is observed in the Gloss upon the place alleged, and in many other. There also this opinion is thus explained. According to this opinion of Rabbi Jehuda, all that Sea which lie's opposite to the length of the Land of Israël, even to the main Ocean, West-ward, where the world it's self is bounded, is to bee reckon'd within the Territorie or Dominion of Israël; even as it is written, the great Sea, and your Border (the whole place wee gave you a little before out of Numbers) where [and your Border] is added the more fully and plainly, to intimate that the great and wide Sea is contained also within it's Border. And it follow's there thus; Between those little Cords or Lines (direct­ed, as wee said, on both sides to the main Sea) [Page 37] there are Islands belonging to the Territorie of Israël; the Islands and waters have both the same Law &c. Hence also the ordinarie Jewish Gloss upon those words in Numbers, And you shall have the great Sea, saith, The Isles that are in the midd [...]st of the Sea, even they also are part of the Bound or Border. But the Jewish Paraphrase is more plain there, And let your Border bee the great Sea, that is, the main Ocean, and it's Isles, and Cities, and Ships, with the principal waters that are in it. Nor was it upon any other ground, that Ad Numer. 34. Rabbi Aben-Ezra, Ad Numer. pag. 199. col. 3. Rabbi B [...]chai, and others, con­ceived so great a part of the Sea, did belong to the Israëlites by this assignation, that they interpret the great Sea also to reach through the Sea [...] that is, the Spanish Sea, distant so many miles Westward from the Continent of Israël. In both the forenamed places, the words are, The great Sea, to wit, the Spanish. And your Bor­der; as if it had been said, The great Sea shall bee your possession, which of it self also is your Border. But in the mean while it is to bee consider'd, that the whole western Ocean as far as the narrow channel of Cadiz▪ is by the Arabians and so by the modern Jews, who were their Disciples, indifferently called the Romane Sea, mare Al-shem, or the Sea of Damascus (that is the Syrian Sea) mare Al-Andalús (or the Spanish) and lastly, the mediterranean Sea; the whole beeing denominated from the Coasts of som particular Countries: As it may bee clearly collected both out of the Nubian Geographie, as also out of the Geographical Abridgment of M [...] ▪ in Bibliothec â Oxoniensi. Abu Elchasen Hali an Arabian. But this is most certain, that the name of the Spanish Sea hath been used here by the Rabbins, not from such a promiscuous or common denomination of the Sea; but according to the explanation of such an antient Assignation of the Dominion of Israël as wee [Page 38] have mentioned. And so this first opinion would have the whole Western Ocean, as far as the streights of Cadiz, which the Antients thought the utmost Bound of the world, to bee reckoned for that part of the Territorie of Israël, which is included within the lines drawn from the Promontorie of mount Hor or Amanus and the entrance of Pelusium, into the West. But by the other opinion, which seem's much more agreeable to reason, it is determined, that the Divine Assignation of the Territorie of Israël is comprehended indeed within more narrow Bounds of this Sea, but yet Sea-room large enough: so that according to this opinion, the North and South-Borders do end at the very shore, or at the utmost point of the said Promon­torie, North-East, and at the entrance of Pelusium, towards the South; not stretching any farther, into the West. But indeed the Autors of this opinion would have a streight line drawn from that Promon­torie to the entrance of Pelusium, to wit from the North-East into the South, thereby to limit and bound the Western part of the Dominion of Israël; so that what portion soëver either of the Sea or the Isles should bee comprehended within such a line, or lie on the East side of it, the whole were to bee reckoned a part of the Territorie of Israël, as well as any Coast upon the Continent or main Land. And so after this manner, the aforesaid line, included within the nooks and wind­ings of the shore of that Territorie (possessed by the Tribes of Asher, Ephraim, Dan, Zabulon, and Simeon) was situate before very large spaces of of the Sea, for above two hundred miles; and supposed to bee of the same accompt with the shore it self. In the Di­gests of the Jewish Law, this opinion is explained thus; In Gemara Babylonic [...] ad tit. Gittin seu de libellis Diver [...]i & Manumissi­onis. cap. 1. fol. 8. That it may bee known what com's under the name [Page 39] of the Territorie of Israël, and what is to bee reckoned out of that Territorie (as to the North-East and Western bounds;) whatsoëver is stretcht forth on this side and within Mount Amanus, is the Territorie of Israël. And that which is placed beyond that Mountain, is without this Territorie. And so by the same reason it is to bee determined touching the Isles of the Sea that are seated over against that Mountain. Let a small Cord or Line bee drawn over those Islands, from Mount Amanus to the river of Egypt; that is conteined within the Line, is the Territorie of Israël; but that which lie's without the Line, is no part of that Territorie. With this agree's that of Ezekiel, concerning the Sea-Coast of the holy Land, after hee had described the South part which is near the Sea; Ezek. cap. 47. 20. The West, side also [shall bee] the great Sea from the border till a man com over against Hamath. This is the West, or Sea­side (or Coast.) The vulgar read's it thus, The great Sea also shall bee its Sea-border, strait along from the border till you com to Emath. This is the Sea-side: Which the Greeks render thus; [...]. This part is South and South-west, according to the tran­slation of the fore-going words. Then, according to what hath been alleged out of the Hebrew, it fol­low's in the Greek, This is part, or this divide's part of the great Sea, untill a man com over against the entrance which lead's to Hemath, even to the entrance thereof. These are they which lie near the Sea of Hemath. So that every Translation speak's to the same purpose. But that which wee have added to the Hebrew, agree's both with the Chaldee Paraphrase, and the Exposition of the Spanish Jews. Moreover, Solomon Jarchius expound's it there after this manner, according to the doctrine of the Antients; From the South-Corner (for, so hee in­terpret's this word, from the Border) which is the river [Page 40] of Egypt, till a man com over against the entrance which lead's to Hamath; that is, to the Corner situated under the North­west, which is the very Mount Hor over against the entrance unto Hamath. For, Hamath was seated on the North-west side near Mount Hor. And so that which is cut off here by the Border in a strait line (as the vulgar hath it) drawn from the entrance of Nilus to the Promontorie of Mount Hor, contein's no small portion of the Sea as assigned unto Israël. And this later Opinion is the bet­ter received, whereby onely the nearer Parts of the Sea are, by God's appointment, conceived to bee in the very same condition with the continent; as appear's not onely out of the more antient Digests, or both Vo­lums of the Talmud, but also by the Testimonie of those most learned Rabbins, Halach Therumoth, seu de Obla­tionibus, c. 1. Moses Maimonides and Praecept. Affirmat. 133. Moses Cotzensis, besides others of a less account, who in express terms imbrace it. Also, according to both these Opinions, that is in the mean time of sufficient Autoritie, which is deliver'd in general terms touching the beyond-Sea Provinces, by Ad Tit. Gittin. cap. 1. fol. 1. Solomon Jarchius, Ad Alphe­sium, part. 2. pag. 554. Rabbenu Nissim, Ad Misnai­oth, tit. Git­tin, cap. [...]. ubi & vide Rabbi Jom Tob. Obadiah Bartenorius, and others; to wit, That whatsoë­ver lie's without the Territorie of Israël, that whole Province or Citie is often comprised under the Notion of the Sea, except Babylon. After the example of the Sea-Provinces, si­tuated afar off in the West, without the Lines drawn according to this or the other Opinion, the Mediter­ranean Provinces and Cities also, which were [...]eated in other remote Parts, without the Borders of Israël, have in stead of beeing called a strange Land, been termed the Provinces or Cities of the Sea. Which point is very well handled by Rabbenu Nissim in the former place. But as these, which were seated without their Territorie in the continent, were onely by the said Custom of speech called Cities of the Sea, so also [Page 41] it is clear by what wee have shewn you, that accor­ding to the same way of speaking it is granted, that other Cities also within their Territorie were seated in the verie Sea. And so at length, from both the Opinions, here recited, wee have sufficiently proved, that such an Exposition of the divine Assignation was received by the antient Interpreters of the Jewish Law, to whom that Assignation was made, that they made no doubt but the Sea was every jot as capable of private Dominion, as the Land; and so reckoned those Islands placed in the neighboring Sea, as belonging to the Territorie of Israël, becaus of their Dominion over the Sea that did flow between them. Nor doth it hinder at all, that in their Assignations or Distri­butions wee so often finde this Particle usque ad Mare, unto the Sea, as appear's in the former Chapter; or that the Sea was their Border. For, the word usque, until or unto, is not onely often Bartol. ad lib. 35. Pa­tronus ff. tit. de legat. 3. & l. Nuptae ff. de Senatori­bus. inclusive, but al­so the Borders or Limits themselves are Archidiac. in. c. Ecclesi­as 13. q. 1. Hieronymus de Monte, lib. de Finibus Regundis, 23. many times all one with the thing limited; after the same manner as all Bounds that are bounded. Touching which Particular, both the Canonists and Civilians are very Copious; as also the Jews in those other Particulars alreadie mention'd. And therefore wee conclude out of the Premisses, that neither the Divine Law which is universal; nor the Positive, as it appear's, in Scrip­ture, to bee Imperative or to have a command over som certain Nations (for, there is a true picture of the Im­perative Law in the aforesaid distribution of Bounds) doth oppose a private Dominion of the Sea; but that both of them do sufficiently allow it; and afford also ve­ry clear examples of such a Dominion (if wee may be­liev the Jews themselvs.) In the next place then, let us consider (what is yet behinde) of the Law natural and of Nations.

That the natural-Permissive Law (whereof any use may bee in this place) is to bee de­rived out of the Customs and Constitu­tions of the more civilized and more noble Nations, both antient and modern. CHAP. VII.

AS to what concern's here the Law Natural, as one head of the universal or Primitive Law of Nations, in our former Division of the Law, commonly de­rived from a right and discreet use of Reason; that it doth in no wise gainsay a private Dominion of the Sea, but plainly permit it, wee shall prove hereby; be­caus by the positive Law of Nations of every kind, which is humane, (for wee have alreadie spoken of the Divine) to wit, as well by the Law Civil or Domestick of divers Nations, as the Common Law of divers Nations, whether it bee Intervenient, or Imperative; that is to say, by the Customs of almost all and the more noble Nations that are known to us, such a Dominion of the Sea is every where admitted. It is not indeed to bee denied, that a right use of humane Reason, which usually serv's as an Index of the natural Law, cannot well bee gather'd from the Customs of several Nations, about things Divine or such as relate unto Divine Worship. Nor are the Points either of the Obligatorie or Permissive kinde of natural Law relating thereunto, to bee thence de­termined. For, it hath been the common Custom of men, in all Ages and throughout all parts of the known World, to conclude of such maters, either without exact and convenient examination, or els for the serving of [Page 43] their own Interests, or els to suit with the humor and disposition of the people whom they are to rule and keep in order; as do the Pagans, Mahometans, and others of that sort, as well modern as antient. And therefore Antisthenes of old taught well and boldly at Athens, Cicero de Naturâ Deo­rum, lib. 1. as many other Philosophers have don, Populares Deos esse multos, sed naturalem unum esse, That there are many National Gods, and but one Natural, contrarie to what the most usual practice of men and Custom had introduced among the ordinarie sort of People. So that as of old in the Jewish Church, so also in the Christian, the use of humane Reason among the vulgar, though free in other things, yet when it dived into the contemplation or debate of Religious matters, it hath often been most deservedly restrained, by certain set-Maxims, Principles, and Rules of holy Writ, as Re­ligious Bolts and Bars upon the Soul; lest it should wantonize and wander, either into the old Errors of most Ages and Nations, or after the new devices of a rambling phansie. And truly, such a cours as this hath ever been observed in Religious Government. But in such things as are meerly humane, and so humane that they reflect only upon matters of dutie betwixt man and man, and are not forbidden by any command of God (of which kinde you cannot so much as imagine any thing more plainly to bee, then a distinction of the Do­minion of Territories, and the manner thereof which is wholly grounded upon the consent of men) that which shall bee permitted by the Law Natural, is no less rightly determined by the Laws, Placarts, and received Customs of divers Ages and Nations, both antient and modern, then it may bee collected what every Clime will or will not bear, by the diligent observation of Countries, Shrubs, Trees, Plants, and other things [Page 44] which belong unto the bodie of Husbandrie. For, as many Nations as have admitted such a private Domi­nion as wee inquire after, whether by a Law Civil or Domestick of their own, or by any Law common to themselvs and their neighbor-Nations, are either to bee allowed competent Witnesses of the natural permissive Law (so far as there is any use of it here;) or els it must bee said (which I believ no man dream's) that so many and those the more famous Nations, have for so many Ages erred against Nature. Concerning the Law Natural, Justinian saith, Instit. de Jure Nat. §. Jus Natu­rale. Quod Naturalis ratio inter omnes homines constituit, id apud omnes populos peraequè custoditur, vocatúrque Jus Gentium, quasi quo Jure omnes Gentes utuntur. What Natural reason establisheth among all men, that is observed by all people alike, and is called the Law of Nations, as it were by a Law which all Nations use. And Caius; L 1. ff. de Adquir. re­rum Domino. Jus Gentium ratione naturali inter omnes homines peraequè ser­vatur; The Law of Nations is by natural reason observed alike among all men. But where are all Nations? It is not yet discover'd how ma­ny there are, much less upon what Customs they have agreed. Nor is that in any wise found in the Customs of all those Nations that are discover'd, which som notwithstanding imbrace as a part of the Law Permissive. What have the midland Nations to do with that Law concerning the Confiscation of wrecks at Sea, which hath been used by the English, Britains, Sicilians, and som other Nations bordering up­on the Sea. The inslaving of Prisoners of War is grown out of date, as a thing not permitted among Christian Nations, which nevertheless is in use still among the Mahometans. In vain therefore is a Rule and Direction sought here out of the [Page 45] Customs of all Nations; but especially seeing som are not wanting who

as hee saith Val. Flacc. Argonauti [...]. 4. of the Bebrycians. That there have been som such Nations, is expresly recorded also by Nicomach. lib. 7. cap. 6. Ari­stotle. And Salust, out of the mouth of In bello Ju­gurthino. Hiempsal, saith concerning the Getuli and Libyans, the antient Inhabitants of Africa, Neque moribus, neque Lege, neque Imperio cujusquam regebantur, They were ruled nei­ther by Custom, nor by Law, nor by the com­mand of any. And in another place concerning the In conju­rat. Catilinar. Aborigines; Genus hominum agreste, sine Legibus, sine Imperio, liberum atque solutum; A rude sort of men, without Laws, without Government, free and dissolute. Therefore wee must have re­cours here unto the more civilized and more emi­nent Nations of the past and present Age, and of such whose Customs wee are best acquainted with. And among them truly, not onely such as those very Nations, whom it may chiefly concern here, have ever highly esteemed; but also those Nations, who are concerned at present, shall bee proved compe­tent Witnesses.

But of the Testimonies, that wee intend to use there is a twofold kinde. Som are those which shew, that a Soveraigntie and private Dominion of the Sea hath been by Historians and other Writers, almost in all Ages, acknowledged and granted to Princes, [Page 46] People, and others. Other Testimonies there are which demonstrate out of Lawyers, also by Leagues and Treaties, and other particulars of that nature, that such a Dominion of the Sea, is in like manner agreeable unto Law. Both which wee interweav, as the order of Things direct's us. But yet so, that what matters, either of Fact or Law, do appertain unto the British Sea, are wholly pretermitted in this collection of Testimonies, with an Intent to dispose them apart in the second Book. And so at length it will bee very clearly manifested together, both what the Civil Law of Nations, as also what the Common Law of divers Nations; and lastly, what the natural permissive Law (which in this case is to bee drawn out of the Customs of Nations) hath determined touching pri­vate Dominion of the Sea.

The manner, whereby the Law Permissive touching private Dominion of the Sea, may bee drawn out of the Customs of many Ages and Nations. That there were Testimonies hereof manifest enough in the Fabulous Age. Also, a word by the way, touching the Mediterranean Sea in possession of the Romanes, when the Command thereof was committed to Cneius Pompeius. CHAP. VIII.

THe Ages, out of whose Monuments and Actions the aforesaid Customs, determinations, and De­cree's of People and Nations, are to bee derived, I divide into two parts. Into the Fabulous Age, and the [Page 47] Historical. But wee do not, according to Varro, call that Fabulous which wholly preceded the beginning of the Olympiads; but that which is obscured onely by the most antient Fables, at least under a fabulous Represen­tation; The Historical beeing in the mean time di­vided into that which is more antient and compre­hend's the Customs of such Empires and Com­mon-wealths as expired som Ages past; And into that which is modern, and shew's the practice of those Nations, in the present case, which are now in Beeing. But in applying our selvs unto the fa­bulous Age, wee do not ground Arguments upon Fables, as they are meer Fables; but wee manifest Historical Truth out of the most antient Historians, though wrap't up in the mysteries of Heathen Priests and Poëts. For, (as De falsa Religione, lib. 1. cap. 11. Lactantius saith well) even Those things which the Poëts speak are true, but cover'd under a certain veil or Figure. And yet they have so veiled the Truth with Fiction, that the Truth it self might not take off from the common belief of the People. They write, that in the fabulous time afore-mentioned, the Ti­tans beeing subdued, the Brother-Deities, Jupiter, Pluto, and Neptune, divided the world by Lot; And that Heaven was allotted unto Jupiter, Hell to Pluto, the Sea to Neptune. But omitting those Trifles, whereby the vulgar suffered themselvs with patience to bee cozen'd, touching the Heaven or Skie, the kingdom of Hell or of the dead, and of the whole Earth's beeing common, after this division, to all the Homer. Iliad. 15. seu [...]. Brothers, som of the Antients have taught, that the Truth it self which lay couched in this Fable, was quite another Thing. They say these were not gods, but men. Also that Jupiter was not King of Heaven, but of the Eastern part from whence the [Page 49] Light first dawn's upon mortal men; by which means also it seemed the higher part, and therefore was called Heaven: And that Pluto was King of the West, which point's at the Sun's setting and Night, from whence it was said to bee lower and Hell. Lastly, that Neptune was Lord of the Sea and the Isles scatter'd therein. Thus it appear's here, that a private Domi­nion of the Sea, no otherwise then of the Land, arose from Humane distribution. And that the case stood thus, it was affirmed long since by Euhemerus Messe­nius, an old Autor, in his Historie of the Affairs of those men who were supposed gods, recorded and translated by Ennius. For, Lactantius saith thus; Loco jam citato. Concerning the lot or share of Neptune, it is manifest I say, that his King­dom was such as was that unlimited command of Cneius Pompeius, who, by decree of the Senate, had Autoritie gi­ven him over all the Sea-Coast for suppressing Pirats, and scouring the whole Sea. Thus all things belonging to the Sea with its Islands fell by lot unto Neptune. But how may it bee proved? To wit, by antient Histories. Eu­hemerus an old Autor, who was of the Citie of Messina, hath collected the Affairs and Atchievments of Jupiter and others that are reputed gods, and compiled a Historie of th [...]se sacred Titles and Inscriptions that were found in the most antient Temples, and especially in the Temple of Jupiter of Triphylia, where a golden Pillar was placed by Jupiter himself, as appeared by the Inscription: Upon which Pillar hee wrote his own Actions, that it might remain a Monu­ment of his Affairs unto Posteritie. This Historie Ennius did both translate and follow, whose words are these; Ju­piter grant's the Dominion of the Sea unto Neptune, that hee might reign over all the Islands, and all Places near the Sea. But both the Translation of Ennius, and the Com­mentaries themselvs of Euhemerus, are utterly lost; nor [Page 49] is it to bee thought, that they were lost without the knowledg and design of the chief Priests of Ju­piter and other Deities. For, doubtless whatsoever had been written touching the Originals of the gods, was so much the more odious, by how much the more it did lay them open, and discover, that those great Names which were magnified in their Chap­pels and Temples, were taken out of the List ei­ther of great Kings, or Heroes, and obtruded upon the credulous vulgar. For, from hence it was, that Euhemerus, with Diagoras and som others, was branded an Atheist, who is used as a singular Autor, not onely by Lactantius, but also by Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, Augustin, Arnobius, and others; to whom wee know very great credit is given in those Arguments that are pieced together against the vain Theologie of the Heathen. It is (I suppose) the same man that is called by Plutarch De Placitis Philosopho­rum, lib. 1. cap. 7. Tegeata, when hee is ranked in the same form with Diagoras. But hee is by the same Autor called Messenius, when as beeing very obstinate in the Plutarch. lib. de Iside & Osiride. superstition of his Ancestors, hee brand's him as a great Patron of Impostures, and beeing induced (it seem's) by hatred against Euhemerus, hee conceit's there never were any such Nation, as the Triphylians or Panchaeans, whereas Panchaea is an Island situate about Arabia in the more Southern O­cean, wherein Euhemerus placeth the Temple of Jupiter Triphylius, from whence that Storie touching the Do­minion of the Sea was taken. Truly Bibliothec. lib. 6. atque apud Eusebi­um de praepa­rat. Evange­lic. lib. 2. c. 4. Adde Gerard. Vos [...]ium de Graecit Hi­storicis, lib. 1. cap. 11. Diodorus useth him also, as a grave Autor. A late Lawyer also make's use of that Neptune in Homer,

[Page 50] But of those things which were distributed by lot, I have taken the Sea for my share, that I might dwell therein for ever; so hee translate's it, that hee may with the more confidence take the whole matter related concerning the three Deities, as meant of Noah's three sons. His words are these; Jo. Gryphi­ander, de In­sulis, cap. 31. §▪ 75. Id proculdubio ex partitione terrarum inter tres filios Noachi, ex quibus Japheto Insulae obvenerunt, causam traxit, It may without question bee proved from that par­tition of Lands which was made verwixt Noah's three sons whereby the Isles of the Sea fell to Japhet.

So that in that fable hee would have Genesis 10. the Domi­nion not onely of the Isles, but also of the Sea, to bee assigned unto Japhet. But that which Lactantius saith touching the unlimited Command of Pompey, as parallel to the example of Neptune's Dominion, it is so to bee understood, that regard bee had also, as well of those that gave the Command to Pompey, as of him to whom the Command was given. As for instance, the Cilicians had infested the Seas (as Florus saith) and having spoiled commerce, behaving them­selvs like enemies of mankinde, they shut up the Sea with warr as it were a tempest. Therefore the Romans, have­ing a special eye to their provision of Corn, did by a decree of the Senate, procured by Gabinius, send out Pompey to Plutarch. in Pompeio, & Appianus Alexandrin. in Mithri­daticis. free the Sea from Pirats. And there was granted unto him by that decree, a Com­mand of the Sea which lie's within Hercules's pillars; and also of the continent about 400 furlongs from the Sea. Hereupon, beeing master of a huge Navie, and having disposed divers Lievtenants through all parts of his Command, Hee so scoured the whole Sea from the straits of Cadiz to the Cilician [Page 51] shore, Dio. lib. 36. that none was able to stand before him either by Sea or Land. Certainely Pompey had a Commission onely as Admiral of the People of Rome, as, Pa­terculus saith; Mark Antony had the like about two years before. But that people which intrusted him, was Lord of this Sea, as the Romane Territorie, as well as of those 400 furlongs of the Continent, which were joined alike with the Sea in the Grant of that Commission, though no more lyable to Dominion then the Sea it self. Florus saith also; lib. 3. cap. 6. that Tiberius Nero (who was one of Pompey'es Lievtenants) blockt up the streights of Cadiz, at the first entrance of our Sea. Hee beeing a Romane rightly call's it our Sea (as also In bello Jugurthino. Salust doth more then once) becaus it was so wholy subdued under the Romane power. And Dio Cassius; Hee scoured the whole Sea, which was under the Romane obedience. And, saith Mela, of the Mediteranean Sea, all that Sea, whencesoëver it flow's, or whithersoëver it spread's it self, is called by one name, Our Sea. So it is called likewise by others. Orosius. lib. 1. cap. 2. And Mela useth the name our Sea very often afterwards. But more of this hereafter, where wee treat more large­ly concerning the Dominion of the Romanes by Sea. Nor did Pompey's commission extend onely against those Pirats, as enemies of humane so­ciety (after the same manner as wee see Com­missions daily granted against Pirats, that rob and spoil in any Sea not yet possessed) but that very Sea-Territorie, which the Cilicians had invaded, was recover'd by Arms. From whence Astronomi [...]. lib. 4. Ma­nilius break's forth in a Poetical rapture,

Therefore, Lactantius ought not so much to have resembled Neptune to Pompey, as to the People of Rome, in beeing Lord of the Sea. Other matters there are in the fabulous time, which beeing spoken of the Gods, may seem to shew, what opinion the Antients were of touching the right and custom of men in this particular. For, when they cloth their Gods with the persons of men, they commonly speak such things of them as belong unto men. From whence H [...]siod sayeth, Jupiter granted unto Hecate, that shee should possess part of the Sea, as well as the Land. Hereunto also belong's that of Oppianus, concerning Halieutic. lib. 1. Amphitrite's beeing made Queen of the Sea by Neptune,

Also Nonnus,Dionysiac. lib. 34.

Instances of this kinde are innumerable. And therefore thus much concerning the fabulous time.

The first Dominion of the Sea among the Greeks in the Historical age; that is, the Dominion of King Minos, or the Cretan. CHAP. IX.

THe former part of the Historical time, or that which comprehend's Kingdoms and Com­monweals, which expired som ages since, wee begin from the Empire of the Cretans at Sea. Afterwards wee trace a catalogue not onely of very many People of old Greece, and other nations fa­mous heretofore in the East, of like Command and Dominion in the Syrian, Egyptian, Pamphilian, Lydian, and AEgean Seas, and the several changes thereof; but also wee shew, that the Dominion both of the Romans and Carthaginians in their adjoy­ning Seas, as the upper, the lower, the more East­erly Sea also, and others of that kinde in the West, hath been received into Custom, as a thing very usual, and agreeable to Law.

That after Minos of Crete, Seventeen Na­tions of Renown in the East, succeeding each other, did for very many years even without Intermission, enjoy a Dominion of the Sy­rian, Egyptian, Pamphylian, Lydian, and AEgean Sea, no otherwise than of the Continent or Islands. CHAP. X.

AFter the times of Minos the Cretian, wee finde in the Chronicles of Eusebius and Africanus no less then seventeen Eastern Nations, part of Eu­rope, part of Asia, who for very many years so held [Page 57] the inner neighboring Sea, as Lords one after ano­ther, that, according to the Intervenient Law of Nations, it is most evident a private Dominion of the Sea took place among them all. For, changing by cours, and by length of time after long possession, through War, Victorie, or som other kinde of Cession, they every one shared their period of Domination, accom­plishing among them all above five hundred and sixtie years without Intermission. But from the be­ginning of the Sea-Dominion of Minos or the Cretan, to the next which follow's in the aforesaid Chro­nicles, there fell out one hundred seventie five years. Those beginnings are placed about the time of the Judges of Israël. They which succeeded, are ranked after this manner.

Touching the Sea-Dominion of the Lacede­monians and Athenians. Moreover al­so, that it was acknowledged not onely by the Greeks, but also by the Persians, in a Treatie of Peace. CHAP. XI.

NOr are those Particulars which are to bee ap­plied hither out of the East, found onely in the Customs and Sea-Dominion of so many famous Nations thus continued one after another (the years of whose Empires have usually been reckoned from their subduing the Sea;) but in the Customs of others also, who truly were more famous, though they bee not registered any where in such a kinde of Cata­logue. It is written of Polycrates, that renowned King of the Samians, who about the beginning of the Persian Empire, vanquished the Lesbians and M [...] ­lesians in a Sea fight, that hee so earnestly aspired af­ter a Soveraigntie of the Sea, that it was manifestly acknowledged to bee capable of Dominion. Herodotu [...] saith, Polycrates is the first of those that wee have known, who had an intent to acquire the Dominion of the Sea unto himself, except Minos of Crete, and if there were any other that enjoyed the Sea before him. Hee speak's, [Page 66] I suppose, of Kings. For, those Greeks in whose hands the Dominion of the Sea was (as wee before have shewn you) so often changed, were common­ly govern'd either by a Popular, or an Aristocratical form of Government. Nor could Herodotus, I think, bee more ignorant of their Dominion, then of King Minos. For, hee lived after the fore-mentioned Do­minion of the People of AEgina was ended, or about the eightieth Olympiad. Therefore, either hee spake onely of Kings, or was extremely mistaken.

About the eightieth Olympiad, and the times fol­lowing unto the Grecian Monarchie, those most renowned People of Greece, not onely the Athenians, but the Lacedemonians also, did somtime enjoy a Do­minion of the Sea flowing about them. Demosthenes saith of the Lacedemonians, Philippic. 3. vide etiam Themisto­clem. Epist. 14. They had Dominion over the Sea and the whole Land. Others also have testified as much. Concerning the Athenians either the same man, or Hegisippus, in that Oration touching An Island in the AE­gean Sea, now called the Levant. Ha­lonesos, making mention of Philip K. of Macedon's af­fecting a Dominion of the Sea, speak's thus, De Prae­donibus aequum esse aït Philippus &c? Concerning Pirates, Philip saith, it is meet, that both hee and you should by common consent, drive away such as offend upon the Sea, requiring no other thing than this, that hee may bee put in command over the Sea by you, and that you would confess your selvs unable to defend and guard the Sea (which hitherto hath been yours) without the help of Philip. They did also by League impose a certain size and propor­tion upon all sorts of Bottoms, both for qualitie and quantitie, which their neighbors should have leav to use. It is an Article of the Treatie made with [Page 67] the Lacedemonians; Thucydides▪ lib. 4. That the Lacedemonians and their Consederates might indeed use the Sea, but not sail in a long ship, but any other kinde of vessel; which beeing rowed with Oares should not exceed the freight of five hundred Talents: That is to say, not in a vessel with one range of Oares, much less in one of two or three ranges, or others that were men of War, but in vessels to bee rowed nevertheless with certain pairs of Oars, bee­ing vessels onely for carriage, and those small enough. other passages of this kinde there are in Thucydides. Hereunto belong's that of AEmilius Probus, touching Timotheus a famous Captain of the Athenians. Hee brought Corcyra (saith hee) under the command of the A­thenians, and made the people of Epirus, the Athamani­ans, Chaonians, and all those Nations which border upon that Sea, to bee their Confederates. Whereupon the Lacedemonians desisted from long contentions, and of their own accord yielded a pre-eminence of Sea Dominion to the Athenians, and setled Peace upon this condition, that the Athenians should bee chief Commanders at Sea. Which Victorie was received with so much joy among the Athenians, that Altars were then erected unto PEACE, and a Temple appointed for that Goddess. And Demost­henes concerning Orat. ad­vers. Lepti­nem. Archebius and Heraclides, who when they had deliver'd Byzantium to Thrasybulus, they made you (saith hee, speaking to the men of Athens) Lords of the Sea, so that yee might sell the Tenth; To wit, the Customs of the Merchandize of such Merchants as should trade in the Hellespont; which is noted there by Ul­pianus the Rhetorician. From hence also, Cicero would have that barbarous Decree of this Nation to have had its rise concerning the people of AEgina somtimes Lords of the Sea. De Offici [...]s lib. 3. sic Va­lerius Maxi­mus, l.. 9. c. 2. The Athenians, saith hee, dealt very cruelly, who passed a Decree, that the AEginetans, who were power­ful [...] [Page 66] [...] [Page 67] [Page 68] in Shipping, should have their thumbs cut off; to the end, that they might not grow strong in Shipping hereafter, or by force enter upon that Sea then pos­sessed by the Athenians: For, in som Books wee read, quia classe valebant, becaus they grew strong in Shipping, as it is noted by Carolus Langius. Though it bee conceived by Var. Hist. lib. 2. cap. 9. AElian the Decree was there­fore made, that they might not bee able to use a Spear, and yet to handle Oars. This crueltie is de­tested by Writers. But it is evident, that by this means they were deprived of a free use of the Sea. Nor was such a Dominion of the Sea approved onely among those people of Greece; but also by the Per­sians, who at that time ruled the East, as appear's in that notable League made after the Victory at Eurymedon. For truly, Cimon Captain of the Athenians having vanquish't the Naval Forces of Artaxerxes Longimanus King of the Persians (which had infested the Sea about the Chelidonian Islands) the King's courage was so broken, That (as Ex Crate­ro in [...]imo­nis vitâ. Plutarch saith, and In Pana­thena [...]câ. Aristides almost the same) hee concluded that notable Peace, upon such terms that hee was to keep the distance of an hors-race from the Greek Sea, and that hee should not have a Ship built long or beaked, within the Cyanean and Chelidonian Islands. So that the King was to keep out of every part of the AEgean, Rhodian, Car­pathian, and Lydian Sea, and that which bend's thence into the West towards Athens: Becaus the Athenians were clearly Lords thereof. For, the Greek, which of old was called the Carick Scholiast. lib. 1. Adde Dionys. Ha­licarnass. lib. 1. Sea, spread its self to a very great latitude, from Caria or the shore of the Western part of Asia. Moreover, subjection was imposed upon the Sea of Pamphylia and Lycia, as also the Euxin Sea, that no Ship of the King's which should [Page 69] bee long-built or beaked (that is to say, a man of War) could according to the League bee admitted, either in this beyond the Cyanean, or in that beyond the Che­lidonian Islands. This certainly was the very meaning of In Pana­thenaïco. Isocrates, when making mention of the Athenian Dominion, hee saith, it was not lawful to sail in long Ships or Gallies beyond Phaselis. For, Phaselis, a Town either of Lycia or Pamphylia, is situate in the same di­rect line with the Chelidonian Islands. But Suidas tell's us, that Castor Rhodius, an antient Writer, had com­piled an Historie [...] of such as have enjoied a Dominion of the Sea Jos. Scali­ger in Euse­bianis ad num. 840. Gerard. Vos­sius de Hi­storicis Grae­cis, lib. 1. cap. 25. Alii. Learned men are upon very good ground of Opinion, that those Lords of the Sea, reckoned up in the former Chap­ter, were taken by Julius Africanus and Eusebius out of that Autor. It is almost out of question too, that hee added the Soveraigntie both of the Athenians and Lacedemonians by Sea. Castor lived about the time of Augustus Caesar. That work of his is utterly lost.

Other Testimonies, which are found scatter'd up and down, touching the Dominion of the Sea, in the Customs of the Eastern Na­tions. CHAP. XII.

MOreover, very many things are found scatter'd up and down in those Writings that concern the Customs of the Eastern Nations, which clearly prove it to have been a most received opinion touching private Dominion of the Sea. Antiochus [Page 70] Epiphanes, King of Syria saith, speaking of the Syrian Sea, Josep [...] [...]n. Gorion. lib. 3. cap. 12. Edit Mun­ster. Ebra o­lat [...]in sol. Are not both the Sea and the Land mine? And Xerxes that Persian King, when in a ridiculous hu­mor hee scourged the Hellespont, stigmatized it, and cast a pair of Fetters into the Waters, said, Herodotus, lib. [...]. [...], Thy Lord inflict's this punish­ment upon thee. Also, whereas Agatharcides, following the storie of Boxus the Persian, write's that the red or Erythrean Sea was so called from King Erythras or Erythrus (that is, from Edom bordering thereupon who also was Jos. Scali [...]er ad Festum, verb. AE [...]p­tinos, & Ni­col. Fuller, Miscellan. lib. 4. cap. 20. Esau, and signifieth the same that Erythrus or Rubrus doth in Ebrew) hee add's also this Expo­sition doth imply apud Pho­tium, cod. 250. [...], A man enjoying the Dominion of that Sea. And truly wee read in De vita Apollonii, lib. 3. cap. 11. Philostratus, that there was an old contract touch­ing the Red-Sea, which King Erythras had contracted, when hee had Dominion over that Sea, that no Egyptian ought to enter that Sea in a long Ship, but to imploy there onely one of Burthen. And De Relus Alexandri, lib. 4. Quintus Curtius saith of the Citie of Tyre, that beeing built by Agenor, shee made not onely the neighboring Sea, but what Sea soëver her▪ Ships sail into, to bee of her Dominion. From whence also Tyria Maria, Tyrian Sea's, became a A [...]ranius apud. Festum, v [...]r [...]. Tyria Maria. Pro­verb, to signifie a Sea so possessed, that free passage could not bee had, without leav of the Lord or Possessor. There was also a very antient Custom used in the Fast, that when great Kings having designs to bring any Nations under their power, commanded the pledges of Empire and Dominion to bee deliver'd to them, they were wont to demand Water and Earth together. That is to say, there quired them [...], to bring earth and water, and [...], to prepare Earth and Water. They conceived that their Dominion of the Sea as well as the Land, was signified by such a [Page 71] kinde of pledg or token. Thus Herodotus lib. 4. Darius demanded Earth and Water from Indathyrsus King of the Scy­thians; Thus Polybius, lib. 9. Xerxes from the Lacedemonians; and thus both of them from the People of Coos, which is witnessed by the Coans themselvs in a publick Decree or Epistle, in answer to Artaxerxes his most imperi­ous demand, that Hippocrates should bee rendred up to him; wherein the Coans slighting the threats of that great King, decreed that what hazzard soêver they might seem to run, Hippocrates should by no means bee rendred. They added also to that Decree Hippocra­tes, Epistol. 9. [...] &c. How that when his Predecessors, Darius and Xerxes, had by their Letters demanded Earth and Water, the people of Coos did in no wise yield it; forasmuch as they were satisfied, that those who had sent unto them were mortal, as well as other men. And in the Greek Copies of the Historie of Judith, Na­buchodonosor beeing about to denounce War against the neighbor-Nations, saith expresly, the form of submission which hee expected was, Judith, cap. 2. 7. Grac [...]. that they should provide for him Earth and Water. Unless they conceiv themselvs to bee Lords of the Waters as well as the Land, I do not well see wherefore they should de­mand Earth and Water as tokens of universal Domi­nion. Moreover also, Achmes Ben Seirim, an Arabian, writing of the Sea saith, that according to the Doctrine of the Indians, Persians, and Egyptians, in expounding of dreams, Cap. 178. If any one (in a dream) seem to himself to bee made Lord of the Sea, hee shall bee heir of the whole Kingdom, and shall reign. Add hereunto that Oracle of Delos concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Athenians. The men of Athens offering sacrifice in Delos, a Boy that drew water to wash their hands, poured Fish out of the pot together with the water. Hereupon this [Page 71] Oracle was delivered by the Priests, [...], That they should becom Lords of the Sea. The Autor is one Semus an antient Writer in Dipnosoph. lib. 8. Athenaeus; where Phylarchus also relate's, how that when Patroclus, a Captain of Ptolomie, the son of Lagus, had sent fish and fresh figs to­gether unto King Antigonus, and those that stood by were in doubt what was meant by that present, Antigonus, said hee, himself very well appre­hended what might bee the meaning of Patroclus: For, saith hee, either Patroclus mean's, [...] That wee must get the Soveraignty or Dominion of the Sea, or els gnaw figs. Or that hee must seem slothful and effemi­nate, or becom Lord of the Sea. Therefore hee made no doubt touching private Dominion of the Sea. And there also the Glutton in Antiphanes the Comedian saith, it is neither profitable for life, nor to bee endured, That som of you should claim the Sea as peculiar to themselvs, and spend much monie up­on it, but no victual for Navigation, not so much as a bit. Add also that of Theocritus, touching the Do­minion of Ptolomeus Philadelphus King of Egypt, over the Sea as well as the Land,

And a little after, hee speak's of the Pamphilian, Ly­cian, and the inner part of the remaining Sea, that the whole Sea, and Land, and Rivers were subject to King Ptolomie. Also, Lib. de plan­tatione Noe. Philo Judeus saith, let not Prin­ces glory in that they have conquer'd many Na­tions, or that they have brought all the rivers and Seas so exceeding vast both in Number and magnitude under their power. Moreover, though Isocrates in his Oration [Page 73] concerning Peace seem's to hint, that the Sea-Domi­nion and Soveraignty, which the Athenians endevored to maintain, brought many mischiefs upon them; and also that it somtimes occasioned them to use Tyrannie against the Neighbor-Cities of Greece; yet hee dispute's it as a thing that may com into exami­nation, under the account of profitable and unpro­fitable, and by accident, of unjust; but hee doth not in anie wise endeavor to prove it unjust from the nature of the thing it self. Yea, in another place hee sufficiently commend's that Dominion, though not all things in preserving it. And the same In Panathe­naïco. Autor saith expresly, of both Cities, the Lacedemo­nian and Athenian; It hapned that both Cities did enjoy a Command of the Sea; which when either of them held, they had most of the other Cities obedient thereto. Wee read also a dispute in Aristotle, [...] concerning a Communion or common enjoyment of the Sea; to wit whether it may bee convenient or not for a well order'd City? whether it were better it should remain common to all men, so that no man might in any wise bee de­nied passage, traffick, merchandise, and fishing; Or that the use of it may bee so restrained, that it might bee received into the Dominion of any Citie, so as to exclude forreiners? Hee dispute's this point whether it bee profitable, or unprofitable, but question's it not at all as unjust; having been abundant­ly instructed out of the Customs of the Nations round about, touching a propriety of the Sea as well as the Land. Also his Scholar Alexander the Macedonian, beeing victorious in the East, prepared for an expedition against Europe, that Hee, might becom Lord of the whole Land and Sea, as saith the Emperor In Oratione 3. seu Euse­biae Encomio. Julian. And truly among the People of Greece, especialy such as border'd [Page 74] upon the Sea, and others of that nature in the East, to hold supreme power and Soveraigntie above o­thers, and to enjoy a Soveraigntie of the Sea, were acoounted almost one and the same thing. Nor did they conceiv that could bee obteined without this. From whence arose that Council of Themisto­cles, which Pompey the great also followed at Rome; Cicero ad Atticum, lib. 10. Epist. 7. Plutarch. in Themistocle. Qui mare teneat, eum necesse esse rerum potiri &c. Hee which can possess the Sea, must need's have Command of all. So also saith Jsaac Comm. in Polybinm pag. 199. Casaubon upon Polybius; To have Dominion of the Sea (which is expressed by the Greeks [...]) is wholly, and ever hath been a great strengthning, and as it were a pledg of extraordinarie power. Therefore, the old writers of Chronicles among the Grecians, seeing before the institu­tion of the Olympiads, there was no Sovereign power of any People of Greece in beeing, upon whose actions a knowledg of times might bee grounded, therefore among the other times that they made use of for the computing of times, they omitted not that particular, but carefully kept an accompt of those People, who had once enjoyed a Dominion of the Sea, and they exactly observed in their Chronologies all such changes as hapned in that matter. But you have more then enough touching those Customs that have been received in the East, about the Dominion of the Sea.

Of the Spinetans, Tuscans, Carthaginians, and other Lords of the Sea in the West. CHAP. XIII.

NOr is such a Dominion of the Sea, as I have mentioned, less clear and evident, in the antient Customs of the Western Nations. The spinetans, so called from the City Spina situate near the [Page 75] entrance of the River Po, were a long time Lords of the upper or Adriatick Sea, beeing wont to send very liberal Tenths out of their profits by Sea, to Apollo at Delphos. So saith Lib. 5. Strabo and De Orig. Rom. lib. 1. Dionysius Halicarnass. Who write expresly in like manner of the Tuscans, that they were [...], in command of the lower Sea, or that which washes the South-Coast of Italy; that is in plain terms that they were Lords of the Sea. And Biblioth. l. 5. [...]. Diodorus Siculus saith, the Tyrrheni (or Tuscans) possessing the Sea a long time as Lords, called it by their own Name. But afterwards, the Diodorus Sic. lib. 20. Carthaginians became Lords of almost the whole Mediterranean, which is more westward, to wit of the Sicilian and African Sea; who beeing overcom in battel, Agatho­cles King of Sicily enjoied the same power for som time; from whom the People of Africa revolting, that Dominion was soon restored to the Carthagini­ans. These things were don in CXVIII Olympiad. Then, for 40. years or thereabout, the Carthaginians con­tinued Lords of the Sea, and gave Laws thereto; that is to say, until the fist Punick War, whch began in the last year of the CXXVIII Olympiad. So also Polybius, Histor. lib. 1. & 3. Adde Appi­an. Alexan­drin. sub. Ini­tiis Belli Pu­nici. The Carthaginians enjoying the Dominion of the Sea without controversie. And a little after; The Carthaginians en­joyed the command of the Sea without all controversie, as re­ceived from their Ancestors. But the Carthaginians enjoyed the same, even long before the time of Agathocles, as it sufficiently appear's by that League of all that was made first of all betwixt them and the Romanes, at the beginning of their Consuls, or about the sixtie eight Olympiad. One Article thereof is in Polybius, who onely mention's it to this effect; That neither the Romanes nor their Confederates were to sail beyond the A Promon­torie of Afri­ca, near Car. fair Promontorie, un­less driven by Tempest, or forced by enemies. That was a [Page 76] promontorie of Africa; and the Carthaginians were so far Lords of the Sea, that they would not permit the Ro­manes or their Confederates, to sail beyond that Pro­montorie: which the Romanes themselvs acknowledged to bee just in the League that they made. But in the second League or Treatie of Peace betwixt these famous Nations in the West, it was farther provided; that no Romane should touch either upon Africa or Sardinia, unless it were either to take in Provision or repair their Ships, as you may see also in Polybius: so that the use of the Sea was taken away, or restrained. And here­unto belong's that of In verbo, Tyria Ma­ria. Pompeius Festus, touching the Paeni or Carthaginians; The Carthaginians having their ori­ginal from Tyre, were so powerful at Sea, that Navigation was hazardous to all men; For, the Carthaginians were the chief of the Poeni. Moreover, De Bello Gallico, lib. 3. cap. 8. Julius Caesar writing of the Veneti a people of Western Gallia about the entrance of the River Loire, and of old very industrious in Sea-affairs above their Neighbors, saith, That in a great and open current of the Sea, having but a few Ports lying here and there which are in their possession, they make almost all men pay Cu­stom, that were wont to use the same Sea. Tribute was paid to them as Lords, for the use of the neighboring Sea. Nor must wee pass by that here, which De Gestis Longoba [...]do­rum lib. 3. cap. 33. quod me­morat etiam Sigonius de regno Italiae, lib. 1. Paulus Warnfredus relate's of Autharis King of the Lombards. There was a Pillar placed within the very waters of the Sea, which wash the City of Rhegium. To that Pillar (saith Warnfredus) King Autharis came on hors back, and touched it with the point of his spear, saying, even in this place shall bee the bounds of Lombard [...]e. But wee must treat next con­cerning the people of Rome, the most noble precedent of all both for Law and Custom.

The Sea Dominion of the people of Rome, and of such as followed their Customs in the Eastern Empire. CHAP. XIV.

BEfore the first Punick War, the Carthaginians and the Romanes, both strove with equal Forces and affections for the Empire of the World; save that they of Carthage seemed the more potent, by reason of that Dominion of the Sea by them held so many years. But then C. Duillius beeing made General of a Navie of CLX Ships, riding at Anchor, and arm'd within sixtie daies after the wood had been cut, almost undid Carthage in that Sea, and wholly reduced it under the Romane power. And Florus saith, Lib. 2. cap. 6. when the Sea and the Isles were taken away, it shamed that noble Nation to pay Tribute, who were wont to command it. So, the Carthaginians beeing deprived of this kinde of Dominion, the Romanes got it by the Law of Arms and Victorie; so great and so constant honor beeing, for this caus, paid to so renowed a Ge­neral, that Minstrels were ever sent to make him mu­sick after Supper, and a Torch was carried before him. Moreover, both the Phaenicians and Cilicians had Dominion over the Romanes Sea, as appear's by the League made betwixt them and Antiochus King of Syria; wherein it was thus provided: That Antio­chus should surrender his long ships and their warlike furni­ture; and not have more than ten nimble Gallies (none of which should bee rowed with above thirty Oares) nor so much as a Galley with one range of Oares when hee shall have any oc­casion [Page 78] to make a War. Nor should hee sail on this side the Promon­tories of Calycadnus or Sarpedon; unless it bee a ship imploied to convey money, pay, or Embassadors, or Hostages. So saith Decad. lib. 8. Livie. But wee read in Polybius, Nullam habeto triginta remis actam navem, Let him have no Ship rowed with 30 Oares. In like manner Hannibal, in a speech made unto Scipio, saith thus, Livie, lib. 30. Wee deny not, but that all those places are yours for which the War hath been undertaken, Sicilie, Sardinia, Spain, and all the Isles contained in the whole Sea, betwixt Africa and Italie. And may wee Cartha­ginians, that are confined within the shores of Africa, see you (when it so pleaseth the Gods) ruling foreign Dominions by Land and Sea. And a little after, the Peace beeing agreed, five hundred Ships of the Carthaginians that were rowed with Oars, were by them seized and burnt. To wit, that they might not use the Sea, which was then to bee in the Dominion of others. Afterwards also, the Senate of Carthage was chastised, Epit. Liv. lib. 48. & 49. becaus they had an Army, and materials for shipping, contrary to the League: And it was decreed, that War should bee proclaimed against them, becaus they had caused their Armie to march beyond their bounds, &c. Also, Plinie saith expresly concerning Pompey the great; Nat. Histor. lib. 7. cap. 26. That hee freed the sea-Coast from Pi­rates, and restored the Dominion to the people of Rome. Moreover, as touching the vast Sea-dominion of the Romane people, Dionysius Halicarnass saith; Orig. Rom. lib. 1. Rome is Ladie of the whole sea, not onely of that which lie's within Hercules's Pillars; but also of the Ocean it self so far as it is navigable. This is indeed an Hyperbole; But in the mean time a clear Testimonie of a very large Sea­dominion. As also that of In praefati­one. Appianus Alexandrinus; The Romanes (saith hee) hold the Dominion of the whole Mediterranean Sea. Other instances there are of the same nature. But truly, that expression of a very [Page 79] Hugo Gro­tius, de Jure Belli & pacis lib. 2. cap. 3. §. 15. Possun [...] enim ut singuli, i [...] & populi, &c. eminent man is not to bee admitted, who saith of examples of that kinde, that they do not prove a posses­sion of the Sea or of a Right of Navigation. For as particu­lar private men, so also people and Nations may be Leagues and Agreements, not onely quit that Right which peculiarly belong's to them, but that also which they hold in common with all men, in favor and for the benefit of any one whom it concern's. And for this hee referr's himself unto Ulpian, who will have that Cessation of fishing for Tunies in the Sea (of which more In capi [...] proximo. hereafter) to bee derived from the Autoritie of som stipulation or Covenant, not from any vassalage imposed upon the Sea. Surely by such a kinde of distinction, whereof Ulpian is indeed the Au­tor, the same may bee said either of Dominion or vassa­lage (as wee call it) of every kinde. If to occupie and enjoy in a private manner, by Right to hinder, and for­bid others, bee not Dominion, it is nothing. More­over Cassandra in Lycophron, prophesied that the people in Rome should have such a Dominion, where shee attri­bute's to them

Hereunto belong those things above mentioned, touch­ing the Command of Pompey held by Commission from the people of Rome, as also those other which wee meet with now and then among writers, concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Romans. Suetonlus saith of Augustus Cesar, In Augusto, cap. 49. Het placed one Navie at Mesinum and another at Ravenna, to guard the upper and lower Sea. But In Rome encomio. Aristides saith this Dominion was not limited to the Romans by certain Bounds (as of old [...] the Athenians) but that it incompassed their Empire round like a girdle. And Themistius speaking of the Emperor [Page 80] Theodosius the elder, saith; Orat. 5. what would you say of him, who is Emperor or Ruler of almost the whole Earth and Sea. In like manner, Procopius making mention of a Statue of a Romane Emperor, holding a Citie in his left hand, saith, that the Statuarie's meaning was, De aedi­ficiis Justini­ani, cap. de Augustaeo. that the whole Land was subject to him, as well as the Sea. To the same purpose speak's Nicephorus Callistus in the Preface to his Ecclesiastical History. And Mathese [...]s, lib. 6. cap. 1. Julius Firmicus, speaking of such persons who have in the Schemes of their Nativities, the Moon encreasing in the thirtieth De­gree of Taurus, fortified with a friendly Aspect of Jupiter, saith, they shall possess the Dominions of Sea and Land, whithersoëver they lead an Armie. Oppianus saith to the Emperor Antoninus,

And Venus to Jupiter, concerning the future Empire of the Romanes

[Page 81]From whence the same Poët, in another place, speak's of Augustus Caesar,

And Claudian of Scipio Africanus,

Or what other business soêver hee did, Ennius was still at his elbow. In like manner, Constantinus Mo­nomachus is, by John Bishop of Euchaïta, in his Iambicks, called indeed Emperor of the East; but according to the custom of the Western Empire,

As also the Emperor Leo by Varadatus, Concil. Chalced. part. 3. Tom. 2. part. 1. Edit. Binianae. 1618. Terrae Ma­risque Dominus, Lord of the Land and Sea. So that in the Empire of Constantinople, which followed the Customs of the Western, the AEgean Sea it self was reckoned among the Provinces, no otherwise then Samos, Cyprus, or other Islands or Territories of any kinde whatsoëver. This appear's out of Lib. 1. Them. 17. Constantinus [Page 82] Porphyrogennetus his Themata, where also the Hellespont is expresly assigned to the Commander in chief of the AEgean Sea, together with the Territories lying round about. And truly the Customs out of this Sea were very great, onely upon the accompt of Fishing. Som­times ten, somtime twelv thousand Crowns, were col­lected out of it yearly. Wee learn this also out of a Decree, whereby Andronicus Palaeologus, one that kept the State of an Emperor, but lived a chambering idle life within his Palace, had for the victualling of himself and his retinue, the yeerly profit of the fishing before Constantinople, wont to b [...]e valued at that time, at ten thousand Crowns, as saith, Lib. [...]. Nicephorus Gregoras. The same is by som called Topiaticum, Vide J. Can­ [...]acuz [...]num, hist. [...]b 2. c. 1. [...] lib. 4. cap. 42. [...]raet [...]r Jo. Meursium in Glossa­rio, verb. [...] Et Jul. Caes. Bullinger. de Imperio Ro­mano, lib. 9. cap 72. Topicum, it is named also Piscinica and Topice. Moreover, in the servey or breviarie of the Dignities of the East, onely three Provinces are reckoned under the Proconsul of Asia, after this manner:

• Asia;
• The Isles;
• Hellespont.

Also, the Office of the Consular Governor of Hellespont is mentioned in the Decree of the Emperors L. unic. C de Officio Comi [...] sacri Patrimonii. Ho­norius and Thedosius, where it is transferr'd out of the power of the Deputie of Asia into that of the Pro­consul of Asia (who at that time was Simplicius.) In another place also, in the Novels of Justinian, wee finde Hellespont joyned with So called from Pole­m [...]on a City of Cappado­cia. Pontus Polemoniacus by the name of a Province or Lievtenantship. I know [Page 83] indeed that Hellespont is taken here by learned men, not so much for that narrow Sea which divide's Eu­rope from Asia, as for the Sea-coast of Asia. So In Notitia Orient. cap. 102. Guidus Pancirollus upon the Breviarie. In this place (saith hee) that Countrey of Asia is signified which is situate near the the shore of Hellespont. Certainly, it is seldom enough I suppose, that wee finde the name of Hellespont used els­where for any Countrie of Vide Orte­lium in The­sauro Geo­graph, verb. Hellespont. Asia, but rather Hellespon­tia. But if not the narrow Sea it self, but a Countrie of the same name were described in the Breviarie, wherefore then is this Countrie onely so remarkably named with Asia, whereof it self could bee but a small part? If you take it for that very Sea, the matter is evi­dent, and seem's to agree very well with it self. It is most consonant to reason, that the spatious Province of the Proconsul of Asia was denoted by Asia it self, the neigh­boring narrow Sea, and the Isles; Not thus, by Asia it self and the Isles, adding moreover I know not what pettie Countrie, obscure enough, and supposed also to bee a part even of Asia. Also the Custom of the following Age seem's to interpret a more antient Government in this place. The very AEgean Sea (which comprehend's almost all this neighboring Sea) is expresly number'd by the aforesaid Constantinus Porphyrogenitus, among the Juris­dictions, Lievtenantships, or Provinces of the East. His words are, Lib. 1. Them. 17. But the AEgean Sea it self also is reckoned among the Provinces. And a little after also concerning the Isles, he saith, There belong to the command or Government of the AEgean Sea the Isles called Cyclades, and the most eminent of the Sporades, Mytilene, and Chios, and Lemnos it self. So that the Isles and the Sea it self might bee conteined here, as particular parts of the Government or Province, as well as any other Regions whatsoëver. Moreover, it is to bee observed out of the Notitia or Breviarie of the [Page 84] East, that in the Badges or signal Ornaments of the Pro­consul of Asia, which were usually painted in that Com­mission whereby hee was established in his Govern­ment, there were contained (besides the effigies of the Princes, and the Book of instructions) representations of three women, set forth alike with towred Diadems on their heads, according to the patern which wee shall present you with by and by, representing those three Provinces together, to wit, Asia, the Isles, and Hellespont in such a manner, and so remarkbly noted by an addition of their names, that there is not the least shadow of Rea­son, why wee should grant the last to have been a part or Region of the first. I thought fit also, to add here Pancirollus his description of those Pictures or Represen­sentations, who hath made use not onely of the printed Books of the Breviarie, set forth by Alciatus (from whom wee have taken the Figure) but also of the Manuscripts of Fulvius Ursinus and others. This Proconsul (saie's Pancirollus) underneath the Book of Instructions, hath the pictures of three women which represent the Provinces committed to their charge, to wit, Asia, the Isles, and Hellespont, as the Inscriptions of their names upon them do shew. These bear a kinde of royal Ornament on the head (the printed Books say, each of them had a towred Diadem) and vessels full of coin in their hands, which signified that the levying of Tributes in those three Provinces, belong'd to the Proconsul. They were apparell'd also in long garments of Gold. The Manuscripts say they have white or skie-colour'd. Asia weareth shoos or Sandals and a skie colour'd Mantle; The other are without shoos: Shee which represent's the Isles weareth a purple Mantle; Shee which represent's Helles­pont a green one. But in the Book of Ursinus, they are all shod high with red Buskins, not differing in their habit. In Mandruci­anus they are set forth in long garments, which almost cover their feet. Thus far hee. And now judg yee, whether it bee like­ly [Page 85] or no, that any pettie Countrie of Asia should bee set forth in these Ornaments in an equal state and majestie with Asia it self, seeing even this had comprehended that also, no otherwise then the whole doth the smallest part.

[Page 86]Their towred Diadems, equal Stature, majestie and wealth not differing at all, seem to point out such an equalitie, that neither of them, can appear, by this form of description, to bee reckoned a part of another. And so, that Hellespont cannot in that place bee any other then the Sea it self, or that Arm of the Sea flowing between; which beeing thus joyned with the Isles to the Pro­consulship of Asia, upon one and the same account of Dominion, the Provinces of Asia and Europe became in a civil sens, either continual or contiguous. Yea, when there was no such distinction of Provinces, the ad­jacent Isles and the Sea it self, made one entire Provincial bodie also with the continent. And hence it came to pass that the Isles of Italy were L. 9. ff. tit. de Judiciis, de quâ vide J. Gryphiand. Tract. de In­sulis, cap. 15. part of Italy; as also of every Province; and such as were divided from Italy by a small arm of the Sea, as Sicily, they L. 99. ff. de verb. signif. were to bee reckoned rather among the Provinces of the Con­tinent. The Seas lying between did not hinder, but that one continued Territorie might bee made of the continent and the Isles. And that also by the Autoritie of Ulpian, who notwithstanding useth to say, that the Sea is common to all men. But of this hereafter in our Answers to the Objections. The same Ulpian also in another place saith, L. 13. §. si quis ff. tit. de Injuriis. Si quis me prohibet in mari piscari vel everriculum, &c. If any man forbid's mee to fish in the Sea, or to draw a Drag▪net (which the Greeks call [...]) may I sue him or no at Law upon an action of Trespass? Som there are of opi­nion that I may sue him upon a Trespass; So Pomponius, and many others say, hee is in the same condition with him that hinder's one to wash in a publick Bath, or to sit in a publick Theatre, or to act, sit, and convers in any other place, or put case, there bee any one that permit's mee not to use that which is my own. But the Antients allowed an Interdict to him that [Page 87] hired the Sea, if so bee hee hired it in a publick manner. For, force by that Interdict is allowed, that hee may enjoy what hee hath hired. Therefore the Sea, becaus it was possessed by the people, was reckoned among publick things; that is, those things which are proper and peculiar to the people of Rome, not common to all men, after ano­ther manner then publick Baths, Theatres, and other things of that kinde. And what doth to hire in a pub­lick manner signifie in this place, but to becom a hirer or Conductor of the Sea, as the people was Lord thereof and Letter or Locator? I suppose no man doth affirm, that any thing may bee let for Rent or hired, which may not so belong to one man, that can not bee ano­thers. But becaus publick Places, by the Roman. Civil Law do serv for the uses of L. 2. ff. Ne quid in Loco. § 2. private persons, there­fore Pomponius and others were of opinion, that there might have been here an action of Trespass. More­over, it was an Edict of the Praetor, That you do nothing in a publick place or cast any thing into it, whereby it may bee endamaged. Hereupon Ulpian saith Loc. citat. §. 8. & 9., against that man who hath cast a Dam or Pile into the Sea, an Interdict is allowed him who perhaps may bee enda­maged thereby. But if no man sustain damage, hee is to bee defended who build's upon the shore, or cast's a Pile into the Sea. If any man bee hinder'd from fishing or Navigation by Sea, hee shall not have an Interdict; nor hee likewise, who may hee restrained from playing in the common Field, or from washing in a publick Bath, or from beeing a spectator in a Theatre. But in all these Cases hee must use an Action of Trespass. Therefore a Prohibitorie Interdict or Decree was to bee used, when dams were cast into the Sea no otherwise then when damage was don to a Theatre, Bath, Court, or any publick place whatsoëver. To these things, which manifestly belonged to the people of Rome, and [Page 88] were not common to all men, is the Sea everie way compared, even by Ulpian himself. There is also the same account made of the shores and Sea Instit. de Rer. Divis. § litorum. Marcianus, l. 2. ff. de Divis. Rer. by those that speak for a Communitie of the Sea. Nor are they said to bee less common by L. 14. ff. de Acquir. Rer. Dom. l. 13. ff. de Injuriis. § 7. som, who treat of them apart, as by Neratius, and Ulpianus. But L. 3. ff Nè quid in publi­co loco. Celsus saith▪ I think those shores do belong to the people of Rome, over which the people of Rome have dominion. But that which follow's there, that the use of the Sea is common to all as the Aër, and that the Piles cast into it belong to him that cast them, is plainly qualified, and manifestly restrained to the manner of the Dominion of the people of Rome, in the words immediately following, where Celsus saith, That is not to bee granted, in case the use of the shore or Sea may by that means becom the wors. Certainly, if the former words were meant of such a Community or enjoyment common to all men, as would not in any wise permit the Dominion or propriety of a par­ticular person, what mean's that then, that the use may becom the wors? For, if a place should becom the proprietie of him that doth possess it, in the same man­ner as that which had before been possessed by no man, and no regard should bee had here of the Dominion or Right of another, then it would bee no less lawful for him that should possess it, to make the use thereof the wors to others for the benefit of him­self, then for him that shall settle in a Field that never was seized yet in the possession of any. Therefore, Celsus would have the Shores and Sea so to belong to the people of Rome, that the condition of them, as serving the uses of all private persons (and that, as hath been said, according to the Roman. Civil Law, and such qualifications as are added out of the Edicts of the Praetors, and the like) could not without injury bee [Page 89] made wors, to the prejudice of the Commonweal. Of the same minde is Scevola, In litore, jure gentium aedificari nisi usus publicus impediret. L. 4. ff. nè quid in loco pub­lico. That by the Law of Nations men may build upon the shore, if the publick con­cernment do not binder. And Aristo, L. 10. de rer. divi­sione. quod Mari occupa­tum est fit publicum, that which is possessed in the Sea becom's publick. It passeth into the patrimonie of the people of Rome; for so the word Publicum Pub­lick doth signifie; which the Greek Lawyers term [...] or that which belong's to the people, not equally common to all men; by whom also the Sea it self is Glossae vet. juris verb. [...]. in that sens called Publick. Other Instances there are of the same nature: Whereby it is made manifest, as well out of the determinations of Lawyers, as the Transcripts of Leagues and Treaties, and the writings of Historians, Orators, and Poëts, that a Dominion of the Sea was in use among the Romans, after the same manner as the Land.

The Dominion of the Sea, as it belonged to private persons under the Roman Em­pire, together with that Sanction esta­blished in the Eastern Empire; whereby the perpetual community of the Sea which was pretended to by som, beeing utterly abolished as a thing unjust, the Dominion even of private persons therein is asserted. CHAP. XV.

WHat hath been delivered in the fore-going Chapter, touching the Dominion of the Sea, [Page 90] hath relation to the Dominion of the whole bodie of the Romane people, that is to say, to the publick patrimo­nie of the State, wherein a private Dominion is proved, no less then in that of particular persons. More­over, there are to bee found among the Romane Customs, very ample testimonies to prove that a proprietie in the Sea hath been instated also on particular men; such, to whom either the people or Emperor of Rome according to the Civil Law and Custom of the Romanes, demised, rented, or made a grant of any part of their Sea within the Empire. The rich and more magnificent sort of Citizens, for the conveniencie of larger▪ Fish-ponds, bringing the Sea into their grounds, made it their own, and became Masters thereof with as good a Title as they had to their adjacent Land. There beeing (saith De re Ru­stica, lib. 3. cap. 1 [...]. Varro) two kindes of Fish-ponds, one of Fresh, the other of salt water; the former sort are ordinarie and little worth, such as our Countrie Fish-ponds that are supplied with water by little streames; but those salt­water-Ponds are to bee found in the possessions of Noble­men, and are supplied by the Sea as well with Fish as water; yet they yield more delight then profit, the filling of those Ponds beeing commonly the draining of the Owners purs. Now what was this, but to becom proprietaries of the Sea, so far forth as it was derived, or in­closed in their possessions?

And De re Ru­sticâ, lib. 8. cap. 16. [...] 1 [...]. Columella, who lived in the time of Clau­dius, relate's that the Romanes in antient times for the most part used none but in-land Fish-ponds, storing them with Spawners of the larger size; presently adding; Not long after that good husbandrie was laid aside, when the wealth and luxurie of the succeeding age made inclosures of the Ocean and Seas themselvs. And the [Page 91] yearly Revenue of such Demains, which bordered upon the Sea, was advanced by those Ponds or In­closures of the Sea as well as by any Lands, Lakes▪ or Vineyards appertaining thereunto. The same Colu­mella discoursing hereupon, hath this passage, But see­ing the custom of the times hath so far prevailed, that these things are not onely in use, but have gotten the reputation of magnificent and noble contrivances, wee also, least wee should seem morose and importune reprovers of so long and settled a practice, will show what profit may redound from them to the Lord of the Manor; how hee may rais an incom by the Sea, if having made a purchase of Islands or Lands bordering upon the Sea, hee cannot reap the fruits of the Earth, by reason of that barrenness of the soil which usually is near the Shore. So that wee see the Revenues of a Manor were improved by managing the Sea, as well as Land; and the Possessor was counted Lord of the one no more then of the other.

This usual right of Dominion over the Sea is mentioned also by Hexa [...]mer. lib. cap. 5. 10. & lib. de Na­buthe cap. 3. S^t Ambrose; For the serving of their prodigious luxurie (saith hee) the Earth by digging of chan­nels is forced to admit the Ocean, for the making of artificial Islands, and bringing litle Seas into their own possessions. They challenge to themselvs large portions of the Sea by right, and boast that the Fishes, like so many bond-slaves, have lost their former libertie, and are subjected to their service. This Creek of the Sea (saith one) belong's to mee, that to another; Thus great men divide the Elements among themselvs.

For Examples, there are the Fish-ponds of Lucullus; famous for his expensiveness in this kinde: Hee, hav­ing made way through a Mountain near Naples, inclo­sed the Sea and became master of those water-courses which In Lucull [...]. Plutarch call's Sea-Courses and Chases for the [Page 92] breeding of Fish. Whereupon Pompey the Great, in mer­riment (saith Histor. lib. 2. Paterculus) was wont to call Lucullus the Xerxem togatum. gowned Xerxes, in regard that by damming up of Chanels and digging down Mountains, [...]ee took the Sea into the Land. The same Lucullus (saith Plin Nat. Histor. lib 9. cap. 54. Plinie) digging down a Mountain near Naples at greater charge then hee built his Villa, took an arm of the Sea into his Manor, which gave occasion to Pompey the Great, to call him the gowned Xerxes. The same conceit in Plutarch is attributed to Tubero the Stoick. That concerning Xerxes is ve­ry famous

When hee commanded the Sea to bee brought round about the Mountain Athos. Lib. 9. cap. 30. And Valerius saith of Caius Sergius Orata, That hee might not have the serving of his palate depend upon the pleasure of Neptune, hee con­trived Seas of his own, intercepting the waves with his trenches, and so inclosing divers sholes of Fishes with dams, that what tempestuous weather soëver happened, Orata's Table was never unfurnished with varietie of Dishes. The same libertie was used upon the Formian shore by Apollinaris, of whose Fish-pond Martial Lib. 10▪ Epigr 30. speak's,

[Page 93]All the varietie of Fish which the wider Sea afforded, Apollinaris had readie at hand in his Fish-pond; which was nothing els but the Sea let in from the shore into his possession.

So saith Horace: and in another place,

And saith Salust; In Conju­rat. Catilinae. To what purpose, should I relate those things which cannot seem credible to any, but those who have been eie-witnesses; how Mountains have been removed by severall private persons, and Seas brought into their places? Of this sort, were the Fish-ponds of Varro, de re Rusticâ, lib. 3. cap. 3. Philippus, Hor­tensius, and others, all made by taking in the Sea. Moreover, wee finde that Soveraigntie and Domi­nion over the Sea, hath been somtimes conferred by the Patents of Princes. The Emperor Trajan, when hee endowed the Citie of Tharsus with Immunities and Privileges, besides the Territorie of Land lying about, added also a grant of Jurisdiction and Dominion over the river Cydnus and the adjacent Sea, as may bee seen in Dion Orat. 34. Chrysostom. And it is very probable, that the Maritimate rights of Neocesarea In Concil. Chalcedon. can. 4. & in can. 12. Sy­nod. 7., which Theodorus Balsamon saies, were compiled by the Metropolitan of that Citie, had respect unto the like Original: as also those privileges in the Sea, which the Emperor Com­nenus [Page 94] granted to a great number of Monasteries, accord­ing to the same Author.

The ancient Lawyers also are not silent, as touching the Dominion of particular persons in the Sea. Lib. 1▪ [...] Injuriis. Paulus, one of greatest note among them, declare's himself ex­presly thus; Verily, whensoëver a proprietie in som part of the Sea belong's to any person, that person may sue out an inter­dict of uti possidetis, in case hee bee [...]indred from the exercise and enjoyment of his right; becaus this matter concern's a private, not a publick caus; seeing the suit is commenced for the en­joying of a right which ariseth not from a publick but pri­vate Title. For, interdicts are proper to bee used in private cases, not in publick. Nothing could have been more plainly spoken, to show, that, beyond all controversie, hee admit's a private Dominion in the Sea, even of single persons. Yea, Ulpian himself, who was so fondly inclined to favor the opinion of a perpetual communitie of the Sea, doth sufficiently acknowledg, that common practice and received custom was for the other part. [...] 13 [...] de [...] In case (saith hee) I forbid any man to Fish before my Hous or Roialtie, what can bee said? may hee sue mee upon an action of Trespass, or no? The Sea and the shores indeed are common to all, as the Aër. And it hath been declared, that no man can bee prohibited from Fishing, or fowl­ing, any otherwise then as hee may bee debarr'd from entring upon another man's ground. Yet for a man to bee forbidden to Fish before my Hous or Royaltie is the common custom, al­though grounded upon no Law. Wherefore if any man bee prohibited, hee hath for all that an Action of Trespass. Hee grant's it was a received use and custom, that subjecti­on should bee thus imposed on the Sea, and so a private Dominion thereof bee admitted; but least hee should bee found unconstant to his espoused opinion of the communitie of the Sea, hee hath presumed to declare [Page 95] it don without any Law or Justice. Yet hee himself deliver's his judgment in another place thus, The vender or seller of the Geronian Farm imposed such a condition on the Botrojan Farm, which hee still kept in his hands, that from that time forward no fishing for Tunies should bee used upon the Coast thereof, although no private contract can lay a restraint upon the Sea which nature set's open to all. Yet in regard honestie and faithful dealing in the agreement require that this Article of the sale bee observed, the persons that are in present possession, and they that succeed into the said Farm, are obliged by the condition of the covenant or bargain. In this case, the owner of the Botrojan Farm renounceth his right of Fishing. And Ulpian might as well have said, that restraint or subjection was imposed upon that adjacent Sea (as indeed it was) but that hee was so unwilling to forgo his Opinion of the Seas unal­terable communitie. Moreover, the purchaser of the Geronian Farm was so fully possessed of the Sea that lay before the Botrojan, that by virtue of this subjection really imposed on that Sea-territorie, the Owner of the Botrojan Farm could never after justly claim or exer­cise a privilege of Fishing for Tunies, without his permission. Whereupon, In Cupidin [...] juris perito. cap. 9. §. 3. Stephanus Forcatulus, once Professor of the Civil Law at Tholose, conclude's to the purpose; That there is nothing to hinder, but that the Sea, though common to all, may by publick decree bee subjected to a Prince by the same right that hee hold's his adjoyning King­dom; since the same thing may in a manner bee effected by virtue of a private compact: Where, by private compact, hee mean's that concerning the Purchaser of the Gero­nian Farm, as hee himself saith expresly in the same place. But the opinion of Ulpianus for a perpetual com­munitie of the Sea, was so entertained as authentick by the Lawyers of the Eastern Empire, that there was no [...] [Page 94] [...] [Page 95] [Page 96] Law in force among them whereby an adjacent Sea might bee made appropriate, or any man bee debarr'd the libertie of Fishing by the Owner of such Lands as border'd thereupon. And if any one were debarr'd, hee might have an Action of Trespass. Which is manifest enough, not onely in the Basilica Eclog. lib. 53. tit. 6. [...]. seu de Pisca­toribus. (which be­fore the dismembring of them were a bodie of the Law of the Grecian or Eastern Empire) but also by the Decrees established by the Emperor Leo; by virtue of which that stale opinion of the communitie of the Sea, beeing utterly cashiered, as not agreeing with equitie, that ancient one of the lawfulness of a possession and pri­vate Dominion in the neighboring Sea, back't with the Autoritie of other eminent Lawyers, was entertain'd again. Moreover also, it was so firmly ratified by an Imperial Sanction, that from that time forward it passed over all the AEgean Sea without controul. That Law (saith that Eastern Leo Impe­rator in No­vel 56. Emperor, who reigned about the nine hundreth year of our Lord) which so take's away the right of possessions bordering on the Sea, as to make the Lord thereof liable to an Action of Tre­spass if hee prohibite others to Fish upon those Coasts, in our judgment [...]. seem's to determine that which is not equitable or just. Hee add's the reason, be­caus whatsoëver com's into the possession of any man, by good and lawful Title, whether by succession, art and industry, or any other way which the Law ap­prove's, there is no reason that other men should have the use and benefit thereof without the owners leav. Thus the matter beeing duly examined hee judged, that hee who held any part of the Sea in the aforesaid man­ner, had a Title grounded upon a very clear Right. Therefore, saith hee, wee decree that every man possess his vesti­bula or Seas lying before his Lands and bee master of them by [Page 97] an unquestionable right, and that hee have power to keep off any persons whatsoëver that go about to enjoy the benefit there­of without his permission. And in that which follow's, hee make's the Proprietie of Sea and Land altogether equal. The Seas which laie thus in the face of Ma­nors, were called [...], Sea-Courts or Entries, nor did this sanction of Leo serv onely for the ratification of former Titles, founded either upon par­ticular possession, or any other, but ordained in ge­neral, that every man for the future should bee Lord of that neighboring part of the Sea which laie before or flowed by his Lands, although hee had never been possessed thereof before. In this very sens it is taken by Constantinus Harmenopulus, a Judg of Thessalonica; Prochir. Juris, lib. 2. tit. 1. Touching Sea-Courts or Entries by Sea (saith hee) it is decreed in the thirtieth Novel of the Emperor Leo, that every one bee master of that which is adjoyning to his Lands, and that power bee given him to prohibit such as at any time go about to make any benefit of these Vestibulas or Entries with­out his permission. Harmenopulus, following a different order of the Novels call's that the thirtieth, which in the printed Copies is the fiftie-sixth.

But now how much of the Sea directly forward did pass into the possession of the same person that was Lord of the adjoyning Lands either by antient custom, or by virtue of this decree is not yet certainly known, nor is it necessarie to our purpose, but for latitude, even as it were in a field, those Vestibulas or Entries of the Sea were bounded by the same limits with the adjacent Lands. And it was the custom for parti­cular owners to have their Epoches or Pens for fish (which the Michaël Athaliates, Pragmatic. tit. 95. later Greeks call T [...]) that is to saie, Nets spread between stakes driven into the Sea; but limited upon this condition that every Epoche should [Page 98] bee distant from the other Leonis Novella 57. 102. 103. 104. & Athaliates lo­co jam citato. three hundred sixtie-five Cubits if so bee the breadth of Land could convenient­ly permit. And such an equal distance was observ­ed on both sides, that a direct line from each Epoche to the extremitie of the Vestibulum or Entrie was ex­tended one hundred eightie two ells and a half; but this rule for limitation became useless after a ten years prescription.

The Lord of a Manor bordering upon the Sea improved his yearly Revenue by these as by other commodities, which profit arising from those Entries is usually stiled by the Eastern Lawyers [...], and [...], which may bee translated locarium, for the price which was paid for hire of a Stall, Shop or Farme, is called in Varro de lingua latina. Et de Topi­atico videlis Jac. Cujaci­um Observat. lib. 14. cap. 1. Latine locarium; so that wee see private persons raised their topiatica or locaria, that is, their Rents, out of the adjacent Sea. And out of those Rents they paied to the Prince a yearly Tribute amounting to no inconsiderable summe (as was shewed before) levyed upon that accompt. So that by the custom of the Eastern Empire, not onely the Soveraigntie of a Prince (which is the point in question) but also the Dominion of private persons in the Sea, beeing ratified by Autoritie of pub­lick decrees, enacting it, and repealing as unjust what­soëver gainsai'd it, it was in use beyond all dispute above five hundred and fiftie years: for so many are reckoned to the taking of Constantinople from the date of the aforesaid decree of Leo; which concerned not onely Bosphorus in Thracia, the Hellespont, the AEgean and the narrower Seas, but all those that were un­der the Dominion of the Emperor of Constantinople. And this may serv to bee spoken of the more antient Historical Age or that which contain's the [Page 99] customs and Laws of Kingdoms and Common-weals that are long since exspired.

Touching the Dominion of the Sea, accor­ding to the Customs of such Nations as are now in beeing. First of the Adriatick Sea belonging to the Venetians, the Mare Li­gusticum is now called Mar Leone, and Mar di Genoua. Ligu­stick to the Genoëses, the Tyrrhen to the Tuscans, and lastly of the Sea belonging to the Church, or Pope of Rome. CHAP. XVI.

IF wee take a view of later times or the Rights and Customs of Nations which at this present are in high repute and autoritie, there is nothing that can more clearly illustrate the point in hand then the Dominion of the Adriatick Sea, which the most noble Common-weal of Venice hath enjoyed for so many Ages. The truth of this is every where attested and acknowledged, not onely by Historians and Chorographers, but by very many Lawyers Ad ff. tit. rer. divis. & ad l. sanè 13. tit. de inju­riis. Bar­tolus, Baldus, Angelus, and a companie of above thirtie the most eminent among them; unless they bee mis-reckoned by Franciscus de Ingenuis, who saith hee counted so many, in that Epistle of his to Liberius Vincentius, written som years ago, in defence of the Dominion of the Venetians over the Adriatick Sea, in answer to Johannes Baptista Valenzola a Spaniard, and Laurentius Motinus a Roman; who (as hee saith) to gratifie the Duke of Ossuna Vice-Roy of Naples whose creatures they were, wrote against the Right of Do­minion which belong's to the Venetians by Sea.

[Page 99] Venice is commonly styled the Mistress of the Sea, and the Queen of the Adriatick Sea, though the Contro­versie ahout its Bounds bee not yet decided. And Epigr. lib. 1. Sannazarius write's thus of this Citie,

Nor doth this Dominion arise from any juris­diction or protection over the persons of such as fre­quent the Sea (as is imagined by som, miserably Vid Jul. Pacium de Dominio Ma­ris Adria­tici. Alb. Gentilis, de Jure Belli, lib. 1. cap. 19. Roderic. Suarium, de▪ usu maris. Angelum Matthaeacium de viâ & ratione arti­ficiosâ juris universi lib. 1. cap. 36. car­ried away with the autoritie of Ulpian, so often affirming that the Sea by the Law of nature is commnn to all men;) nor is it a qualified Dominion (as saith An­gelus Matthaeacius, professor at Padua;) but this Sea doth so properly belong to the Venetians, that it is not lawful for any other to use or enjoie the same with­out their permission; forasmuch as they have right to prohibit any to pass, to impose custom upon those whom they permit, to do any other thing in order to the raising of benefit and advantage out of the water, as any man may do in his proper possessions by Land. As concerning Navigation in that Sea, that it may bee prohibited at their pleasure, and that by approved right, wee have the testimonies of many Lawyers. It cannot bee denied; (saith Consil. 190. Idem ad l. 13. ff. tit. de Injuriis. Angelus de Ubaldis) but the Venetians and their Signiory, for very many Ages, have been and are in possession as it were of the aforesaid Gulf: wherefore the Venetians by virtue of that antient possession which they have had so long, and do yet enjoie, may by putting a restriction into the form of their Covenants, hinder the Genoëses or any other whatsoëver that shall offer [Page 100] to sail through their Gulf. The same sa [...]e others also, quoted by Tract. de Navigatione, §. 8. Benevenutus Straccha, De jure fisci, lib. 8. §. 14. Antonius Peregrinus, De juris dictione, lib. 1. cap. 33. §. 25. & 26. Marta Neopolitanus, Lib. de Do­minio maris Adriatici. Julius Pacius, Fragment. de Venetiis subnex. Epi­tome de juris consultis il­lustr. Mantua Patavinus, Franciscus de Ingenuis, In Epist. de Venet. jure. Franciscus de Ingenuis, and Fulgentius Monachus Venetus, who all have written more particularly, and made it their business to assert the right of the Venetians. And there are examples to bee produc'd which shew, how Princes, as well neighbors as others, have made it their suit to the State of Venice to obtain leav to pass through that Sea, which somtimes was granted, and somtimes denied. In the year 1399, December 12. Radulphus Earl of Otranto made a request to that State in the behalf of Uladislaus King of Naples and William Archduke of Austria, that leav might bee granted to pass through the Adriatick Sea with Galleyes and other Ships, to conveigh the Sister of the King out of Apulia to the Territories of the Archduke her husband, which the Republick granted, but with this condition, that no person that had been banished from Venice, or was guiltie of any capital crime against the State, should bee taken aboard those Ships. Which the Austrians, imbarking at Trieste, faithfully observed both in their voiage and in their return. There are extant also two Letters, Anton. Peregrin. de Jure Fisci, lib. 8. §. 19. wherein the Emperor Frederick the third, in the years 1478, and 1479, desire's of Giovanni Mocenigo Duke of Venice, and of the State, that leav might bee granted him, to transport corn from Apulia through the Adriatick Sea. Franciscus de Ingenuis make's mention of others to the same purpose, written to the same Duke from the Kings of Hungarie. And this they in­treat as a matter of great favor, for which they shall acknowledg themselvs obliged. Matthias King of Hungarie in a Letter to Duke Mocenigo dated 1482. write's, That whereas the State hath been wont to give [Page 102] leav to the Earls of Frangipanis and Zenga, and others whose Territories laie upon the Sea Coasts every year to transport a certain store of corn, from Apulia through that Sea, hee desire's that the same libertie might bee vouchsafed to himself, who had now succeeded into the Dominion of the very same Coun­tries.

And as touching the right which the Venetians had to impose custom on passengers, as travelling through their peculiar Territorie, there are frequent testimonies among the Lawyers. Ad L. 3. De Nautico Foenore. Salicetus mention­eth a Decree of the Venetians, that all who passed through the Sea should bring in their merchandise to Venice, and there paie custom. And saith De servitu­tibus Rusti­ [...]orum Prae­di [...]rum, cap. 26. §. 10. Bartho­lomeus Cepola, The Venetians within their Dominion have several Roialties and Rights belonging to their Exchequer: and, de facto at least, acknowledg no Superior; so that they have power to impose Gabels, to confiscate goods and commodities in the aforesaid Sea, as well as in the Citie of Venice; having as full jurisdiction in the Sea, as in the Citie. Antonius Peregrinus also, who was advocate of the Exchequer at Padua, after a large discours up­on this subject, De Jure Fisci, lib. 8. §. 43. & lib. 1. cap. §. 18. the conclusion, saith hee, is this; that the right of Fishing in the Adriatick Sea is one of the Roialties belonging to the Duke of Venice; and therefore hee hath power to forbid, permit, and charge Gabels up­on it. Julius Pacius, Marta, and others both modern and antient treat at large of this particular. And the reasons of som Neapolitans that are the most obstinate opposers of this right, are onely drawn either from that Franciscus de Ponte, de potestate Pro [...]egis, Collateralis Consi [...], [...]t. 11. [...]. 19. & seqq. opinion for so many Ages since exploded by the custom of Nations, that the Sea is naturally common to all; or from that chimera of the uni­versal Dominion of the Roman Emperor. Whereas [Page 103] De Juris­dictione part. 1. cap. 33. §. 25. Marta himself, who was a Lawyer of Naples, writes thus; The Venetians are Lords of the Adriatick Sea, the extent whereof is 80 miles, reaching from that place here­tofore called Aquae Graduatae unto the Town of Loreto, seated now near the River Po. And Francisco di capo­blanco, a Neopolitan, also De Jure Baronum Pragmatic. 14. §. 27. confesseth that now the Rivers and Seas are passed into the hands of Lords and Patrons. And in a Letter of Apud. Gol­dastum in Constit. Im­perialibus, Tom. 1. pag. 198. & Ba­ronium, An­nal. Tom. 10. ann. 871. Lewis the 2^d to Basilius Emperor of the East, Nicetas Patricius is mentioned under this title, The Protector of the Adriatick Sea. And the Gulph, saith De Jure statuum in Imp. Romano membro 25. Cardinalis Tuschus, doth properly belong to the Ve­netians, by virtue of a long prescription of possession, as it hath been declared in an agreement made between the States of Venice and Genoa. For confirmation whereof, hee cite's Angelus and Jason. But the first time, they saie, wherein custom was charged upon those that passed through the Adriatick Sea, was the year 1263▪ when Lorenzo Tepulo was Duke of Venice. The Republick of Genoa beeing distressed with war and famine, and their neighbors not releiving them with provisions, this Tepulo (saith Decad. 2. Lib. 8. Flavius Blondus), began to impose a new custom, or to speak more plainly, laie a Restraint upon those that sad'd through the Adriatick Sea. For, upon that occision a Law was made, which remain's in force to this very d [...]ie; that all who sailed between the Gulf de Quevera, and the Capo di Pola. Promontory of Sola, and Coast of Ravenna, should com into Venice, to paie Custom, and (if the Officers thought fit) to unlade their Merchandise and Goods. And an Officer was ordained for that pur­pose, to scout daie and night with his Barks, about the Coasts and Harbors of shores to see to the Observation of this Statute. But above all, wee must not pass by that Controversie which happened about this time, between the people of Ancona, and the Venetians, [...] [Page 102] [...] [Page 103] [Page 104] in a general Councel at Lions the Anconitans com­plained that the Venetians had usurped the Sea and Cu­stom, and other things against all right. Pope Gre­gorie the tenth referred the matter to the examinati­on of the Abbot of Nervosia. He rejected the alle­gations of the Anconitans, as weak and wanting proof, and by the Autoritie of the Pope (saith the aforena­med Blondus) commended to the Venetians, the care of defending the aforesaid Coast of the Adriatick Sea, against the Saracens, and Pirats; allowing them withal the rights of their Customs and Impost. Whereat the Ambassadors which were then pre­sent, did not interpose a word; but the debate was thus determined with the approbation of all, except the Complainants. But the Dominion of Venice over that Sea, is of far greater Antiquitie; to signi­fie which, they have an annual cerimonie, instituted, they say, by Pope Anton. Pere­grin de Jure F [...]i, lib. 8. §. 18. Alexander the third, I mean the use of the Ring, which every year, upon Ascension daie, the Duke, in a solemn manner, rowed in the Bucentoro, accompanied with the Clarissimos of the Senate, cast's into the midst of the water, for the per­petuating (saith Cosmograph. part. 2. lib. 4. cap. 36. de quo more it [...]m Stepha­nus Forcatu­lus, de Gallo­rum imperio & philosophia lib. 3, alii, praeter Scri­ptores d [...] Venetorum Republica. Paulus Merula) of their dominion over the Sea; signifying by that love-token, that hee betroth's the Sea to himself in the manner of a law­ful Spous, using such a form of matrimonie, Wee take thee to our wedded wife, O Sea, in token of a true and perpetual Dominion. What should hinder then, but that wee may conclude, that the Venetians were loo­ked upon, not onely by themselvs, but by their neighbor Princes, as Lords of that Sea, by as un­questionable and full a title, as of their Land and Citie?

There are other States also in Italy, that have Ma­ritim [Page 105] Rights of the same nature. Princes (saith Lib. de Cen­sibus artic. 16. [...] 40. Be­nedictus Bonius) have right to laie impositions upon the Sea shores, forasmuch as what nature [...]ad left at libertie, is brought by them into servitude and proprietie: as the Tyr­rhen Sea, which is under the command of Pisa and Tus. canie, the Adriatick of Venice; the Ligustick of Genoa, which is affirm'd in like manner by Consil 290. Angelus, Ad l. [...]. & de Sentent. ex Brevic. reci­tan [...]a. Bal­dus, De Servitu­tibus Rustic. praed. cap. 26. Cepola, and others. The Bishop of Rome also hath his Sea, which is called likewise the Churches Sea. The Bull, intituled Coenae Domini, which is Laertius Cherubinus in Bullario, [...]m 3 p. 251. wont to bee published every good Friday, for the excommunication or Delinquents, run's thus; Item, wee excommunicate and anathematize all Pirats, Rovers, and Robbers upon the sea, th [...]se that haunt and infest our sea, especiallie that part lying between the Mountain Argentaro, and Terracina. And De Censuris Pontifici re­servatis, part. 2. cap. 3. § 1. Bartholomaeus Ug [...]inus, a famous Lawyer, saith, that this Excommunication did involv Pirats, Rovers, or Robbers upon the Sea, such as haunted the Churches sea, especially that part lying between the Mountain Argentaro, and Terracina. The same is called by others the Pope's Sea. And although a Graffi [...]s, lib. 4. dec [...]s. cap. 18. n. 53. certain Autor would there by Our Sea, have the whole Sea understood in all parts of Christendom, yet it is the unanimous consent of the most famous Interpreters of that Bull, as Summa, li. 1. cap. 20. Tolet, De Censuris Disp. 21. [...]ect. 2. num. 18. Suarez Ugolinus, Relict. de Censuris Bul­l [...] Coenae, cap. 4. disp. 25. & seqq. Antonius de Sousa, and o­thers, that by that name is signified the Sea which is part of the peculiar patrimonie of the Pope▪ Nay, more then this, som of those Autors now mentio­ned, will have this curs of Excommunication to bee incurred not onely by committing piracie, but by a harmless passage of Pirats through this sea; it being all one as if a profanation or injurie were committed upon Church-land. So that such a domi­nion over the sea is plainly avouched by the Ca­non [Page 106] Law. And it is confirmed by what may bee gathered out of the gloss of that body. If Herrings were taken upon an holy day, a convenient part of them, by the Canon Law, are due to the next neigh­boring Churches. There the Gl. ad C. li­cet. 3. tit. de Ferris. gloss add's especially to those in whose. Territories the Fish were caught. By a De­cree of a General Councel at Lions, if the Pope dyed beeing out of the Citie, the Cardinals are to meet for the Election of his Successor in that Citie, within whose Territorie of Jurisdiction hee died. If the Pope die upon the Sea, the Election is to bee made in that Citie or Gl. ad C. ubi peri [...]u­lum, §. 3. por­rò 6. de Ele­ctione, & ibi Jo. Andraeas. place which is next to the Sea. This inti­mation is given by the gloss, and acknowledged by others.

But notwithstanding this, the Citizens of Rome were allowed the privilege of Fishing, in the Sea of the Church (as they call it) or of the Pope; as the Inhabitants of a Village bordering upon a pasture-ground, may by vir­tue of som compact, usage, or custom, put in their Cattel to grase there, though perhaps it bee in the possession of som particular person. This is a Statute of the Citie of Statuta, urbis Romae, lib. 3. cap. 72. Rome. Everie Citizen of Rome and Inhabitant of the Citie, and within the liberties thereof, shall have libertie to Fish, at any time, and with any instruments whatsoëver, in the stream both of Tiber, Anien, and in the Sea, so far as the Banks of the Ri­vers and the Sea shore do reach. And no person ought to prohibit or forcibly take any thing away from them, so long as they forbear to trespass upon any Lands, Houses, and Fish-ponds, which belong to private Owners; or to com upon the Banks of the Coast of Arenula, namely, of S^t Se­veria and Paul, in which places it is not lawful for any to Fish without warrant from the State's Advocate. And such a kinde of privilege as this, qualified either [Page 107] by grant, or covenant, or custom, is verie often found in such places as enjoy a Dominion of the Sea.

Concerning the received Customs of the Portu­gals and Spaniards, about the Dominion of the Sea. CHAP. XVII.

THat Dominion over the Sea, is acknowledged in the Customs of the Portugals, is apparent to any man that will but observ the usual Title of their Kings; King Emmanuel in his preface to the Laws of Portugal style's himself; Dom Manuel, per grace de Deos Rey, &c. Senhor de Guinee, & da conquista & Na­vagaçam & commercio d' Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia, & da India à todos &c. which elswhere is rendred in Concil. ge­neral. Late­ran. sub. Le­one, 10. se [...]. 9. Barbarous Latine thus, Emanuel Dei gratiâ Rex &c. Dominus Guineae & conquistae Navigationis ac commercii AEthiopiae, Arabiae, Persiae &c. Emmanuel▪ by the grace of God King &c. Lord of Guinee, and by Conquest of the Na­vigation and Commerce of Ethiopia, Arabia, Persia where conquista in the language of Spain and Portugal, signifieth that which is acquired by War. The same Title is often found in the Letters Pa­tent and Commissions of the ancient Kings of Por­tugal: whereupon Jacobus De dignita­te Regum Hispan c. 12. V [...]ldesius write's, that they are, and are acknowledged to bee Lords and Masters of Com­merce, Traffick, and Navigation. But for any person to bee Lord of Navigation and Traffick by Sea, with­out Dominion over that Sea, is all one, as to use and enjoy a piece of Land, to have right to pro­hibit all other from doing the like, and yet not to [Page 108] bee owner thereof. But among the Laws of Portugal there are yet clearer evidences for private Dominion over the Sea; even of the Atlantick or Ocean it self. For, therein it is forbidden that any person either For­raigner or Native (the words of the Law areO Quinto libro de [...] Or­denn [...]mes, tit. 112. Assi Na­ral commo estrangeiro) in any shipping whatsoëver to pass, ditas partees, mares de Guinee & Indias, & qualsquer outras terras & mares & lugares de nossa conquista, tratar, resgatar, nem guerrear, sem nossa licenca & autoridade, sob pena que fazendo [...]o contrario moura por ello morte natural & por esso mesmo seito percapera nos todos seus beens moveis & de rays; that is to say, to the said countries, lands and Seas of Guinee, and the Indies, or any other Lands, Seas, and places un­der our Dominion, for Commerce, or Tra [...]i [...]k, or making of W [...]r without our Licence and Autoritie, under pain of death and total confiscation of estate, to bee inflicted upon any that shall presume to do the contrarie. And for the execution hereof, the Commanders of those Fleets, who had leav from the King to sail thither, had Commission given them, to call to account all whom they found in any kinde transgressing this Law. So that, wee see the Nation of Portugal also made no question, but that Dominion might bee justly acquired over the Ocean it self. And this Law, in the extent of at, reached as well to forraign­ers, as to the King's subjects. Although forraigners do not acknowledg that Portugal hath acquired any such right. However, that in the Law of Nature which is obligatorie, there is nothing to hinder, but that such a right may bee acquired, is (I suppose) acknow­ledg'd by all the Nations in Europe, except som perhaps who are not yet in fair and lawful possession of any Sea; if so bee at least a man may rightly gather their acknowledgments from their received customs. And truly, about the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's reign, [Page 109] there was a hot dispute between In Schedis ejusd. Temp. in Biblioith. Cottoniana. her and Sebastian King of Portugal touching the Dominion of the Atlan­tick and South-Sea that open's the way to the East-Indies, which was claimed by the Portugals. But the question in that dispute was not, whether or no Sebastian could bee Lord of that Navigation or Sea, but whether hee had made any lawful acquisition of such a Dominion. But in the Common Law of Spain or Castile, although, it bee true, that the use of the Sea is most free, and that in such a manner almost as if no positive Law had ever laid any restraint upon the naturalVide Al­phons. ad Azeved. ad Constit. Re­gias, l. 7. tit. 8. Partid. 3. tit. 28. l. 3. Recopilat. l. 7. tit. 10. l. 9. & Partid. 5. tit. 9. l. 7. & 8. Commu­nitie thereof; yet the Spanish Lawyers, and those not of the meanest account, do in most express terms declare it capable of Dominion, yea, and that it was acquired by the King. The Prince (saith Gregorius Ad Alphon­sinas, Partid. 3. tit. 28. l. 11. Lopez) may grant any man a priviledg to fish in a certain part of the Sea. And the Sea (saith Joannes Lib. de ex­pensis & Me­liorationibus, cap. 21. num. 34. Garcias a Spaniard) belong's to him, who is Lord of the adjoyning land: This hee speak's of som particular Sea belonging to Spain; for to speak it of the sea in general, were idle. There are other also, as Didacus Couvaruvias, Laberinto de Commercio, lib. 3. cap. 1. §. 12. Joannes de Hevia, who are plainly for the Dominion of the Prince, as well for a controlling the libertie of Navigation, as restraining the common use of Fishing. And how frequent this Opi­nionIn Relect. peccatum, part. 2. §. 8. is among the Lawyers of Spain and Portugal, is acknowledged by Fernandus Vasquius, (though hee him­self do extremely oppose it) as appear's by those words of his alreadie cited in the second Chapter.

Moreover, it is sufficiently manifest, out ofConsil. de usu Maris § 13. Rodericus Suarius, that such rights & priviledges were exercised by private persons, grounded either upon custom, or som grant of the Prince, which demonstrate a dominion over the Sea among the Spaniards; although that Autor taking the measure of Law, rather from the Dictates of the [Page 110] Schools, then the received Customs of Nations, is the more earnest for that antient opinion of a perpetual communitie. Yea, the verie title of the King of Spain hath that in it which may seem to import, that hee call's him­self King of the Ocean; especially, if you consider those words which wee finde somtimes among Germane Writers, in the Title of Charls the fifth Emperor, and King of Spain. In the Preface to the constitution concerning publick Judicatories, in the Empire, hee is called King of the Canarie Ilands, also of the Islands of the Indies, and of the Continent, and of the Ocean, Archduke of Austria &c. And in the Imperial Sanctions published in high Dutch Konig-under Jnsulen Canariae, auch der Jnsulen Indiarum, und Terrae firmae, des Maers Oceant &c. as you may meet with it at least six hundred times. The word Ocean is added, as if hee entitled himself King of the Ocean. But this is a mistake: for, the same in Spanish is Rey &c. de las Islas, y terra firma del mar Oceano &c. that is, King of the Islands and of the Terra firma of the Ocean; namely, the Islands or Continents of, or lying in the Ocean, (which PopeLaërt. Cheru. bin. Bullar. tom. 1. pag. 392. de qua donatione fuse Joannes Solorzanus de Jure Indi­arum, lib. 2. cap. 22. Alexander the Sixth, gave to Ferdinand the Fifth King of Spain, all of them lying Westward from the very first Meridian) of those hee entitle's himself King, not of the Ocean it self.

How far private Dominion over the Sea is admitted, according to the Customs, or opi­nion of the French. CHAP. XVIII.

AS concerning Dominion of the Sea according to the Customs of the French, som perhaps may seem to have met with verie ancient evidences thereof, in those Officers deputed for the guard of the Sea-Coasts, whom wee read of in theCapitular. Caroli & Ludovici Impp. lib. 4. tit. 5. Statute-Books, and in that Rotlandus, Governor of the British (that is, the Aremorican) shore, mentioned in the life of Charle-maign by Eginhartus a Writer of that time. But those dignities have relation, not so much to the Sea it self, as to the shore and Sea-Coast, or the border of the Land confining with the Sea; notwithstanding that Rot­landus is, by the French-men of this and the former Age, promiscuously styled Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 1. tit 15. Pasquier, en les recerches de la France, lib. 2. cap. 14. Simon Mari­on, Plai­doye, 5. edit. Paris. 1591. Tilius, & alii. Governor both of the Sea and Shore, as if there were no difference. But it cannot bee denied, that Princes heretofore upon the Shore of Aremorica or Bretaign (as the Veneti The Veneti were an an­tient people inhabiting that part of France now called Bre­taigne. of whom wee spake before, did upon the same Shore) im­pose Custom upon Ships, as for the use of the Road upon their Coasts, and challenge to themselvs other Rights of the like nature, called Nobilitates super navi­bus. So it is to bee read in an ancient Record, made in the time of Duke Alanus in the year MLXXXVII, concerning Precedence of Place among the Nobles of Bretaigne. In that Record, the second place is assigned to the Viscount of S^t Pol de Leon, who (as the very Apud. Ber­trand. Argen­traeum, in hist. Britan. mi­nori [...], lib. 1. cap. 13. words of it are) had verie many of those [Page 112] Customs called Nobilitates super navibus, imposed on such as passed the Ocean upon the Coasts of Osismer or Leon; which (as it was said) Budicius, an antient King of Aremorica or Bretaign in France. Bretaign, did give and grant to one of his pre­decessors, upon Marriage, in reward of the virtue, fidelitie and valor of that Viscount: but with the consent of the Prelates, Counts, Barons, and Nobles of Bretaign. What these Nobilitates were, and whence they had their o­riginal, is partly declared by Bertrandus Argen­traeus, somtime President of the Province of Renes, where hee discourseth also of the right of giving Pass ports (which they call brefs de conduicte) at this time in use on that shore. Ad Consuet. Brit. Art. 56. § 44. That (saith hee) whereas till then it had been a right peculiar to the Princes, beeing given, by way of Dowrie, to the Barons of Leon (of which wee have alreadie spoken out of the afore­said Record) remained an hereditarie and proper right to that Familie, until Joannes Ruffus the Duke redeemed it for a vast sum of monie, of Guynomarius Baron of Leon, after that Peter Mauclerc of Dreux, Duke of Bretaign had in vain attempted to re assume it by force of arms. It had its original, they say, upon this occasion: When our Princes and antient Kings considered the daily Ship­wracks made upon that shore, where there were many Rocks and but few Havens, they made a Law that none should set to Sea without their leav. Such as did set out, paying a certain rate, had passes, and guides appointed them, that were well acquainted with the Sea and Shores: They that refused, forfeited their ships with all their tackling and furniture thereof: and if the Ship were cast away, their goods also were confiscate. They that had leav were in no danger of confiscation, and if they suffered Shipwrack, had libertie to recover as many of their goods as they could. And these guides were paid their [...] or Conduct-money, which [Page 113] wee have mentioned elswhere, called by them droit de salvage. These Tickets or Passes are given out now, as heretosore, at a certain price: And among other Revenues of the Exchequer, they also were rented out to the Farmers of the Custom. So far Bertrandus, from whom Renatus De Dómae­nio, lib. 1. tit. 15. §. 10. & & Thom. Cormer. Cod. Hen. 4. lib. 7. tit. 1. cap. 6. §. 106. Choppinus borrow­eth almost the very words. But In Consue­tud. Brit. Art. 51. Petrus Berlordaeus, Advocate of the Parlament of Reines, tell's us, that the Custom of taking forfeiture in that manner of all shipwrack't goods, was abolished there, by an Edict, in the year MDLXXXIII. But in the mean time, for so much as concern's any part of that We­stern Sea lying next the Shore, these are manifest evi­dences, either of Dominion or of subjection in the Sea; which indeed sufficiently prove, by the Customs of that people, that the Sea is capable of Dominion. Moreover, upon occasion of these Passes, there have been controversies raised somtimes between the Dukes of Bretaign, and the Kings of England; as may bee seen in certain In Biblio­theca Cotto­niana. memorials of the affairs of Bretaign, which have relation to the times of our Richard the second, and John the Fourth, Duke of Bretaign. But this wee know for certain, that in the agreement made between our Edward the Fourth, and Francis the second, Duke of Bretaign, in the year MCCCCLXVIII, concerning mutual traffick and free passage to and fro for the subjects of each Na­tion, during a Ibid. & Rot. Franciae 8 Ed. 4. mem­bran. 20. & seqq. truce of thirtie years, there is an ex­press proviso concerning Wrecks; but such a one as left an equal right to both of them; not altogether unlike that which for many ages hath been in use upon the English Shore: No mention at all beeing made in the Articles of the Truce, either of the right or use of these aforesaid Passes, as beeing a thing in no wise admitted by the English. But som modern Lawyers [Page 114] among the French do vainly affirm, that their King is Lord not onely of a part of the Sea neighboring upon the Territorie of Bretaign, but of the whole Sea that is adjoyning to any part of France, and so of the British or English Sea also: By which very Assertion of theirs, they sufficiently declare their judgment, that there may bee a soveraign over the Sea. The King, saith In n [...]t. al Co [...]ic. Hen­rici, 3. l. 20. tit. 7. Constit. 28 & con­stit. 1. Charondas Caronaeus, is supreme Lord of the Seas, which flow about his Kingdom: the ground whereof is this, becaus the Universal right of all those things which were common, either by the Law of nature or Nations, is transferred into his Dominion. And other passages hee hath much to the same purpose; as also R [...]cerches, liv 2. c. 14. Stephanus Paschasius, Playdotes t [...]m. 2. playd. 11 Lu­dovicus Servinus, somtime Sollicitor general for the King, [...] Amiral de France. Popellinerius, and others. If they speak of the Sea of Ma [...]seille or Narbon, wee shall not op­pose them. But as to what concern's the bodie of the Sea which lie's Northward or Westward of the French, or that flow's between France and the Islands of great Britain (for that which lie's Westward from them upon that crooked Shore, or the gulf of Aquitaine, doth indeed flow between the more We­sterly Coasts of our British Isles, and of France, as well as that which lie's Northward from them, flow's be­tween England and Normandie) they neither produce any Testimonies of Antiquitie, nor indeed can they if they would: Unless you will have that admitted which hath been cited out of Caesar concerning the Veneti of Now Bre­taign in France. Aremoriça, and that which wee said before of the Sea bordering upon that shore. Both which indeed do rather import som service, called heretofore Nobilitates super navibus, then any kinde of Domi­nion. But the soveraigntie of this Sea which flow's between them and us, became absolutely [Page 115] appropriate to the Kings of England, as wee shall make it appear in the next Book. And the truth is, if wee look upon the Customs most in use among the French, or the Civil Law of that Nation, there is nothing in it that derogate's from the antient com­munitie of the Sea, but as to them it remaine's as yet not possessed, but common to all men, and therefore not to bee reckoned among the Re­venues or Patrimonie of their Kings; if so bee credit may bee given to that Treatise lately publish­ed of the Civil Romane and French Law, by Thomas Cormerius Counsellor to Francis Duke of Anjou in his Parlament of Alençon. The matter that it pre­tend's to treat of, is the Romane Gallick Law. There are in it the Customs of France, decrees of Princes, and Privileges often [...]ntermingled. But under the Cod. Hen. 4. lib. 3. tit. 1. cap. 2. Title of things common [...]o all, hee make's the Sea and Shores common to all, according to the antient Law of the Romanes, as if in this matter it did ex­actly agree with the Law of France: which certain­ly is an argument, that the French have no Domi­nion over the Sea. Nor must wee let it pass, that somwhile since, there were two Constitutions pre­tended to in France, one of Ann. 1555. Henrie the Second, the other of Ann. 1584. Henrie the Third, wherein they required that the Ships of Forraigners which sailed through the Sea bordering upon France, should strike their top-sail forsooth, in acknowledgment of that Domi­nion the French had over the Sea. But neither of them were autorized, or (as they speak) simply verified by the Estates in Parlament, yea, nor so much as admitted into Custom. Nay, the later of them was plainly rejected as to any effect in Law. And this the French Lawyers themselvs confess [Page 116] in a [...]ud. Servi­nus in [...]la. it. vol. 2. P [...]a [...]it. 11, 12. d [...]c. 1592. pa [...]. 26 [...]. b Edit. 1609. notable case between som Merchants of Hamburgh, that were Plaintiffs, and Michaël Butar­dus and others Defendants, in a Parlament held at Tours, in the time of Henry the Fourth. But that cerimonie hath by most ancient right and cu­stom been observed and paid to the ships of the Kings of England, out of respect, and in acknowledgement of their Dominion, as is shewn in the following Book, where wee treat of this particular more at large. I know very well, Edict. Fran­cis [...]. 1. pro­mul [...]. 1513. art. 11. Chop­ [...]in. de dom. Franc. lib 1. [...]15 & E­dict. Franc. tom 3. tit. 2. it was ordained by an Edict of the French King, that one third part of all goods, recovered out of the Sea, should belong to the King, another to the Admiral, and the re­mainder to the Sea-men that found them. And that the French do reckon very many Commanders in Chief at Sea, or Admirals in a line somtime con­tinued, and somtime interrupted, which for the most part they begin from the time of Philip the son of S^t. Lewis; that is, from the year MCCLXXXIV. as is to be seen in Catalo [...]. Ad­miral. Franc. Joannes Feronius, Recerches, lib. 2. cap. 14. Stephanus Paschasius, and others. But that division of goods recovered out of the Sea beeing simply considered, doth prove any Dominion over the Sea, no more then the Tenths of any Prizes taken from an Enemie at Sea, which, by the grant of the King also, were allotted to the Edict Fran. Tom. 3 [...]it 2. Constit. 4. & 5. Admiral of the Navie. Rights of this nature are grounded upon the consent of persons, to wit, sub­jects; transferr'd unto the King, not upon any title of Dominion, whereby any Pretence may bee made to an acquiring of the Sea it self; and they are paid no otherwise then Imposts or Customs, in the im­portation or exportation of Merchandise. But no man (I suppose) will imagin that from such Im­posts or Customs upon Merchandise any proof may [Page 117] bee made of a Dominion over those passages through which the Merchants sail before they arrive. Neither indeed was there any such custom as this in use among the French, before the time of Francis the first; that is to say, plainly, not beeing Lord of the Sea, hee de­sired to bee and was made a Sharer of those goods which should bee drawn by his subjects, out of any Sea whatsoëver. Whereas the King of Great Britain by virtue of his Dominion over the Sea, is wont to take as his own whatsoëver is left or lost in the sea, besides other emoluments of the like nature, and that by so ancient a right, as (for ought wee know) bear's a date no less ancient then the Kingdom it self. And as for those Admirals of France, they were no other then Chief Commanders of Navies and Persons, and of the Forces by sea, and Judica­tories at home: but not qualified as Presidents of a Sea-Province or Territorie, as the Custodes ipsius Ma­ris, the Guardians of the sea among the English, and the Admirals of England. But more of this in the Second Book. Nevertheless, from what hath been al­leged concerning the Customs, Opinions, or Con­stitutions, among the French, I suppose it sufficiently appear's, that they do also acknowledg, that private Dominion over the sea, is not repugnant to the Law either of Nature, or Nations; which serve's fully for the clearing of the point in question.

The private Dominion of the Sea, accor­ding to the received Customs of the Danes, the People of Norway, the Swedes, Polanders, and Turks. CHAP. XIX.

WEE finde clear Testimonies in the Customs of other Nations, also of Europe, touching private Dominion of the sea; as the Danes, the peo­ple of Norway, the Polanders, to whom may bee added also the Turks. Wee have observed by the Tolls or Customs of Denmark and Norway, what Revenue the King of Denmark raiseth out of the very Navigation of the Baltick Sea (as is commonly known) and what is paid out of the Roialtie of the Norwegian sea to the King of Norway, who at this time is also King of Denmark. For, in the year MDLXXXIII. Frederick, the second, King of Denmark and Norway, made a Grant of the use of the Northern or Norwegian sea, for a certain time, to our Merchants of the Muscovie Companie in such a manner, as if hee had rented out any Land whereof hee stood fully seized and posses­sed. Hee limited the Grant also with such conditi­ons, as hee thought fit. The publick Instruments or Records about this Particular, are In Thesauro Cottoniano. yet extant; whereby the King had an annual Tribute in recom­pence, other Merchants were excluded, and the Grant it self was to continue no longer then the Peace made between that King and the Moscovit. Wee read also in the ancient Histories of Denmark, of King Harald Hildetan; that no man did presume to usurp a Domination [Page 119] in the Sea without his consent. And that which follow's next, ought especially to bee taken notice of as to this Particular, becaus the Empire of Land and Sea was once divided in the Republick of Denmark. And Olo (who afterwards was King) succeeding his Father in the Do­minion of the Sea, vanquish't LXX Kings of the Sea by Sea-Fight. Which things are written by Daniae Hist. lib. 7. Saxo Grammati­cus, and other also of that kinde. And in the 20 Jan. 1613. in Rot Tract. A­micit. Temp. Jacobi Regis. Trea­tie held at Koppenhagen betwixt Christiern the fourth of Denmark, and Gustavus Adolphus of Swedland, the King of Swedland renounceth the right, Soveraigntie, and Do­minion of the Sea, and the other Roialties by him formerly claimed over the said sea, in Norway, Norland, and in the Jurisaiction of Wardhuisen. But touching the Sea of Norway, as it lie's more Northward, wee shall add more at the latter end of the second Book.

Mention is made likewise of the Sea belonging to the Re [...]lm of Poland, and the Dominion thereof, in that Promise which was made by the French Ambassadors, in the name of Henrie III of France, when hee was elected King of Poland. The afore­said Ambassadors do promise, in the name of the most illu­strious King now chosen, that assoon (God willing) as hee shall com to his Kingdom, hee will at his own charge maintain a convenient Navie, sufficient to defend the Ports and the Soveraigntie of the Sea, belonging to the Kingdom and the Provinces adjoyning, even to the utmost bounds of the whole Dominion of Poland; as it is recorded by Janus Januszowskius in his Lib. 3. tit. 1. fol. 109. Syntagma of the statutes of Po­land. But the Turkish Emperor, (who by Conquest succeeded in the right of the Emperors of Constanti­nople, and so purchased both the AEgean and Euxin sea, calling this the black, the other the white sea) is wont solemnly to intitle himself Lord both of the white [Page 120] and black sea; as you may see in the League betwixt Achmet the Ottoman Emperor, and Henry the IV. of France, made above thirty years since, and 20 Martii, 1604. Pari­sti [...], 1615. prin­ted both in the French and Turkish Tongue. Moreover, in the same League, the Turk grant's the French free leav to Fish, and search for Coral, in certain Streits and Creeks of the African Sea, within his Kingdoms of Algier and Tunis. And hee farther confirm's all that had been granted to them by his Predecessors, for freedom of Fishing in those parts. In like man­ner De Ast [...]tico Bello, lib. 2. Coriolanus Cippicus, relating the Actions of Pietr [...] Mocenigo, General of the Venetians, saith; The Ottoman Emperor built two Castles very well fortified, over against each other, on both sides the Hellespont in its narrowest pas­sage, which hee stored with Ordnance of an extraordinary bigness, and charged the Governors of the Castles to shoot and sink any ship, that should endeavor to pass without leav. Which is plainly to domineer over the Sea, and agreeable to his Title, of Lord of the white and black Sea. Neither is that to bee sleighted here, which wee finde in the Letters of David, Emperor of E­thiopia, or the Abassins, to Emmanuël King of Portugal. Hee entituleth him Apud Fran­ [...]l [...]m A [...]a­rum d [...] rebu [...] A [...]hiopicis, [...] Da [...]ianus a [...] [...]s, lib. de [...]pum mo [...]lus. Lord of Africa and Guinee, and the Mountains and Island of the Moon, and of the Red Sea, Arabia and Persia, and Armutia, great India, &c. Hee useth here an Hyperbole, after the manner of the Afri­can Princes, and attribute's those things to Emmanuël which were none of his: But in the mean time, hee admit's that hee might have been Lord of the Red Sea, as well as of any other Territorie, and that that Title doth not intrench upon the Law of Na­ture or Nations, any more then this.

Now that wee may at length conclude this part touching the Dominion of the Sea, as admitted [Page 121] among those things that are lawful, and received into the Customs of Nations; there are not onely very many Testimonies every where (as hath been shewn you) concerning it; but nothing at all (I suppose) can bee found to impugn it in the Customs of those Nations that have been of any note in later times; unless it bee where som of them, that are Borderers upon the Sea-Dominions of others, do strive to violate or infringe the Rights of their Neighbors, under pretence of that Natural and per­petual communitie, so often insisted on out of Ul­pian by such Writers, as too much prefer that obso­lete Opinion before the Universal and most antient Customs of Nations. Of which kinde truly the first Article of that League seem's to bee, which was made above twentie or about thirtie years past, be­twixt the States of the United Provinces and som of the Hans-Towns, as it was translated out of Low-Dutch by a Eman. Meteranus, Histor. Bel­gic. lib. 36. & apud. Gas­per. Flock­um, lib. de Contributio­nibus, c. 14. Dutch-man, to this effect: That this Conjunction or Union ought not to bee intended for the offence of any, but onely for the preservation and maintenance of the freedom of Na­vigation, Commerce and Merchants, in the Eastern and Northen Seas, and also in all Rivers and Streams running into the Eastern and Northern Seas; nor ought any other thing to bee meant in this place, so that their Citizens and Subjects joyned in this League respectively, may ac­cording to the Law of Nations use and enjoy the Liber­ties acquired and obtained, together with the Rights, Pri­vileges, and Customs received from their Ancestors, through­out the Eastern and Northern Seas aforesaid, and in the aforesaid Rivers, Streams, and waters, without any Let or Impediment. They promise also to aid each other, in opposing any that should hinder such a freedom of Navigation in that Northern and Eastern Sea; [Page 122] that is to say, the Baltick, and that which washeth the Coasts of Denmark, Lituania, Pomerania, and the Dominions of the King of Poland: where it seem's they pretend not onely Rights and Liberties peculiar­ly granted to them long since, but also to the very Law of all Nations. It is no hard matter to guess what the Intent of that League might bee; For, about that time, the King of Denmark had raised his Toll in the Baltick Sea, and in like manner the King of Poland within his Territories by Sea. And that for the maintenance of that Dominion which they enjoyed; which that kinde of League betwixt the States of the Hans Towns and United Provinces did seem to oppose. But, to pass over these things, seeing a private Dominion of the Sea, which is the point in Question, is founded upon such clear Testimonies, out of the Customs of so many famous Nations both antient and modern (whereto wee shall add many other also, when wee treat of the British Sea in the next Book) nothing now, I suppose, hinder's why wee may not determine, that the Sea is capable of Dominion as well as the Land, not only by the Law Natural-Permissive, but also by the Law both Civil and Common of divers Nations, and in many places almost according to the Intervenient Law (which in cases of this nature is the surest demon­stration of the Natural-Permissive) unless there remain any impediment in the objections, which are next to bee handled.

An Answer to the Objection, concerning Free­dom of Passage to Merchants, Strangers, and Sea-men. CHAP. XX.

THe usual Objections (as hath been more fully shewn before in the second Chapter) are de­rived, som from the Freedom of Commerce, Travel, and Passage, pretended to bee common to all: Som also from the very Nature of the Sea: And others out of the Testimonies of Writers. As to what concern's the first sort; the Offices of humanitie require, that entertainment bee given to Strangers, and that inoffensive passage bee not denied them. So Caus. 23. Quest. 2. c. 3. & videsia Hug. Groti­um de Jure Belli & Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 13. Gratian out of In Numer q. 41. Augustin saith, It is to bee observed how the war of the Israêlites became just against the Amo­rites: For, they were denied an inoffensive Passage, which ought in all equitie to lie open by the Law of humane Societie. And Offic. lib. 3. Cicero saith, It is an inhumane thing, to denie Strangers the use of a Citie. Verie many other Passages there are of that sort, which seem to strengthen the Objection; to wit, as it relate's unto the Office of Hu­manitie, not disturbed by war, fear, jealousie, enmi­ties, or any other of the same kinde. But what is this to the Dominion of that thing, through which both Merchants and Strangers are to pass? Such a freedom of Passage would no more dero­gate from it, (if so bee it were without question free and open to all upon that accompt) then the allowing of an open waie for the driving of Cattel, or Cart, or passing through upon a journie, or any other Service of that nature, through [Page 124] another man's Field, could prejudice the Owner­ship thereof. Suppose it bee granted, that, by the Law of all Nations, the Spaniards had a free Passage over the Pyrenean Mountains into France; the French over the Alps into Italie; the Italians into Germanie: What doth this concern a Domi­nion of the Pyrenies or the Alps? And for any man to allege here, what is commonly talked, of the lighting of one Candle by another, of the not deny­ing a common use of Water, and other things of that nature, it is plainly to give over the dis­quisition of Law and Right, to insist upon that of Charitie. At the request indeed of Asclepiades Bishop of the Citie of Chersonesus, under the Emperors C. Theodos. lib. 10. tit. [...]. l. 24. & C. just. tit. [...] [...]is▪ l. 25. Ar­cadius and Honorius, certain persons, who had taught the barbarous people the Art of building ships, whereof they were ignorant before, were for Cha­ritie's sake freed from the pains of Prison and pu­nishment. And though the Art of those that taught them was no whit the less, becaus of that skill which the Barbarians had gained; yet by the Law, it was death to communicate that Art unto them. And at this day, there are other instances of the same nature: So that it in no wise diminisheth from any man's Right or Power, to permit another to participate of what is his, when hee himself loseth nothing thereof. And that wee may determine this point in brief, it is most evident from the Customs of all times, that free Passage (as they call it) is wont ever to bee so limi­ted by Princes in their Territories, that it is permitted or prohibited, according to the various concernments of the Publick Good, and not otherwise. Albericus Gentilis, upon that Passage concerning the Amorites, saith, De Jure belli, lib. 1. cap. 19. I am of the same opinion, with Augustine, in case there bee no fear of [Page 125] hurt; and an assurance that no hurt may bee don. Princes are concerned to bee warie and careful, that they admit no such strangers, or Commerce, where, pro re natâ, the Common-weal may receiv any damage thereby. Upon which ground also it is often provided in Leagues; Induciae Hispan. & Ordin. Foede­ [...]at. Belg. An­no 1609. & Art. 12. &c. That it shall not bee lawful for either Partie to sail unto each others Ports, Coasts, or Harbors, (and this when neither of them hath any right to the waie by which they pass) with such a number of ships or Men of War, as may give a just occasion of any fear or jealousie that force is intended, ex­cept leav bee first had of that Partie under whose Jurisdiction those Places are; or unless they bee driven thither by Tempest or som other necessity, to avoid a greater force, or the danger of Shipwrack. According to the fear or suspition of the Lord in possession, and at his discretion, all Merchants, Strangers, and Foreigners whatsoëver may bee prohibi­ted, unless som other special right or custom do inter­vene. And Polit. lib. 7. cap. 6. Aristotle saith plainly, Provision ought to bee made by Laws, with whom subjects may, or may not convers. De Repub. lib. 1. cap. 7. & 6. & vide eum, lib. 4. ca. 1. & lib. 6. cap. 2. ubi de Aditu ad Moluccas. Bodin also saith well, That the Laws of Commerce are contained in the particular Compacts and A­greements of People and Princes. And in another place hee add's, It is lawful to forbid a Foreigner from entring the Borders, and also to force him out if hee have entred the Borders, not onely if a War bee on foot, but also in time of Peace, that the manners of the Inhabitants may not bee corrup­ted by convers with Strangers. But that Wars have been lawfully undertaken for a denial of Commerce, unless the denial were given contrary to som antient League, or unless that freedom depended upon som special Title to Commerce, wee do as easily deny as any other man can affirm. And though, according to the opinion of Tit. de In­dis. Franciscus Victo­ria, who also is followed chiefly by De Jure In­diar. lib. 2. cap. 20. § 55. Joannes Solorzanus [Page 126] I. V. D. it bee affirmed, that the Spaniard had a law­ful Right to subdue the Indians, becaus they denied Commerce and Entertainment; yet they are in plain tearms opposed by De Justi­tiá & Jure, Tract. 2. Dis­putat. 105. Ludovicus Molina, who will have no Nation or Common weal bound, either with or without danger to it self, to admit Commerce or Fo­reigners, but in case of great and imminent necessitie, or unless any League, Agreement, or som other spe­cial privilege do intervene. But there are other preten­ces not a few which the Spaniards allege for the Con. quest of the Indies: For, they pretend also a Right of Discoverie, primarie occupation, Conversion to the Faith, and other things of that nature, besides the Donation of the Pope. Of all which, Solorzanus treat's at large. And it is strange, how the Spani­ards should have a Right to acquire the Indies, upon a denial of Commerce, since it is Georgius de Cabedo De­cis. Lusitan. part. 2. Decis. 47. & di­ploma Regis Hispan Mari Libero. Hug. Grot. sub­nexum. very well known, that both They and the Portugals do openly profess, that they may lawfully prohibit Commerce in both the Indies. Nor doth it prejudice the point at all, that according to the Imperial Law, no Prince, nor any other holding Royalties by his Grant, can Rothens [...]l. de Jure Feu­dali, cap 5. de Regalibus, conclus. 21. Sixtinus de Regalibus, lib 2. cap. 2. &c. for­bid men passage in the common Road without som just caus, which must bee determined in an Imperi­al Diet; nevertheless, it is wrested by som to prove a freedom of Navigation at Sea. For that happen'd by a particular Law, agree'd upon by the Estates of the Empire, who themselvs also are subject to a Di­et. But other Nations that are under several and di­stinct Soveraignties, have not as yet made any such Agreement, that there should alwaies bee a libertie of Passage to and fro; nor have they (like the Germanet, and others within their Dominion) referr'd themselvs unto an Umpire to determine the business.

An Answer to that Objection concerning the uncertain fluid nature of the Sea, and its continual Alteration. It is proved, that Rivers also, and the adjoyning Aër (which are more fluid and uncertain) may becom appropriate. CHAP. XXI.

BUT they say, that the very Nature of the Sea render's it unfit for privat Dominion; both becaus it is ever in Motion, and in no wise remain's the same; as also becaus a convenient matter, as well as Instruments, are wanting therein to make a distin­ction of Bounds; without which private Domini­ons cannot well consist: yea, and becaus by reason of its vast and spatious Body, it is alwaies sufficient for all. As to what concern's its fluid Nature, are not Rivers and Fountains much more in a perpetual Flux or Motion? Rivers alwaies run forward, where­with the Sea beeing compared, it seem's to stand im­movable, as saith Geograph. lib. 1. Strabo. And Ad Iliad. [...] Eustathius saith, that Homer therefore call's the Sea by the name of a stan­ding Pool; becaus it run's not forward (as Rivers do) but is very stable. And Seneca, Suaser. 1. another saith, the Sea stands with­out Motion, as it were som dull heap of matter that Nature could not bring to perfection. But suppose wee grant it bee so fluid, as is usually said of the most Northernly Seas and Channels; yet certainly the Channels and places out of which the waters flow, remain ever the same, though the waters themselvs do shift and [Page 128] change continually. Nor yet can it be supposed that the Right of private Dominion over Rivers, is any whit prejudiced thereby. In the Romane-Germane Em­pire, Rivers, according to the Civil Law, are of pub­lick use; yet they are reckoned in the Emperor's Feud. lib. 5. tit. Quae sint Regalia. Ro­the [...]sal. de Jure Feud. cap. 5. Con­clus. 23. [...]. 2 [...]. Sixtinus de Regalibus, lib. 2. cap. 3. &c. private Patrimonie, and among the Rights or Roialties belon­ging to his Exchequer: so that either the Emperor or others by his Grant, have in like manner a yearly Re­venue out of the Fisheries in them. Upon which ac­compt it come's to pass, that they of Lombardy, and o­ther particular People throughout Italy, enjoie all the Rivers of their Territories, as proper and peculiar to themselvs by Prescription, as wee are told by De Servi­ [...]. Rusti [...]. Praediorum, cap. 31. Caepola. Nor is any thing more common, then an asserting of the private Dominion of Rivers as well as their Banks, in the Laws of Spain, France, Poland, and Ve­nice; and in a word, of all Nations whose Customs are known to us. Nor, as to what concern's this Objection (fetch't from the fluid Constitution of the sea) is there any difference in nature between a grea­ter and a lesser, a private and a publick River. Even Lib. 1. § 4. [...] de [...]lumi­nibus. Ulpian himself concerning Rivers, saith, There is no difference between a private River, and other private Places. And [...] ▪ 7. ff. de Divers. Temp. Pr [...] ­ [...]ript. Vide l. 45. ff. de Usucapioni­bus. Martianus; If a man hath fish't all alone many years in a Corner of a publick River, hee may hinder any other from using the same Libertie. Moreover, oftentimes hereto­fore in the Romane Empire, Rivers were made over as well as other Parts, after the manner of Lands assign­ed. Lib. de Conditioni­bus Agrorum. Siculus Flaccus saith, In som Countries, even the Rivers themselvs are assigned out by measure. But in som the subcesive or remanent part onely is left out unassigned; and yet it is excepted out from the parts assigned, as belong­ing still onely to the river it self. After the same manner also Comm. ad Jul. Frontin. de limitibus Agrorum. Aggenus Urbicus. For, it was never conceived, that [Page 129] the Rivers were otherwise acquired by the People or Emperor of Rome then the adjoyning Lands; accord­ding to that of the river Danubius, speaking to the Emperors;

Wee know, that an Island newly sprung up in a river, as also a Chanel that is deserted, is even by an­tient Custom L. 7. 29, 30 65. F. de Ac­quir. Rer. do­minis & In­stit. de Re­rum divis. [...] Insula. common to such, as upon the Bank of any river do possess Lands that are not limited, that is to say, after the manner of Lands or Possessions; unless there bee som special Law or Custom to the contrary. And touching the Division of such an Island according to the nature of several Lands, situate near one Bank or both, Bartolus in Tiberiade, hath writ­ten long since; but of later time Joannes Buteo, Bapti­sta Aymus, Antonius Maria, Joannes Gryphiander, and others. Therefore, in that case, a Proprietie of the Chanel, and so of the River (even of that which according to the Civil Law, is of publick and common use; as well as of a Field that hath a common Thorow­fare) was common before to the Owners that had Lands lying on both sides. By the same reason al­most, an Island newly sprung up in any sea, that never was possessed by any, and whatsoêver shall bee built upon it, become's his that first enter's it by [Page 130] occupation: For, the Chanel and that Sea, at first be­long'd to all men in general. But by virtue of that U­niversal Compact or Agreement (before mentioned) whereby things not yet possessed, were to becom the Proprietie of him that should first enjoie them by Oc­cupation; hee that shall so possess them by Occupa­tion, receiv's the Island and Building as it were by a Surrender of Right from former Owners. Seeing therefore that a Proprietie and private Dominion of Rivers hath been every where acknowledged, why should it not bee acknowledged in like manner that there may bee Owners of any Sea whatsoëver? Since the fluid nature of water can no more hinder a Do­minion in the one, then in the other. Yea, the Ri­vers themselvs are onely lesser Seas, as also the Fenns and Lakes; even as the Sea it self (as to its fluid Con­stitution) is no other then a River, Fen, or Lake, differing onely in bigness from the rest: And so it hath been taken by the Antients. In the very storie of the Creation, all the Gatherings together of the waters are called Seas; which hath been observed also by the Eucherius ad Genes. 1. D. Hierony­mus. & alii. Adde Jo. Phil [...]ponum de Mundi Creatione, lib. 4. cap. 6. Fathers to this purpose. There are also very eminent examples in holy Scripture touching the two Lakes of Asphaltites, and Tiberias, both which are equally called Seas; Asphaltites, is by Pliny, Ptolomy, Josephus, Solinus, and Vitruvius, tearm'd a Lake: But by Moses Gen. 14. 3. the salt Sea; and by most of the late Writers, the dead Sea. Tiberias is in like manner by the Antients, and also by S^t Luc. 5. 1. Luke, called a Lake; by the other Evan­gelists a Sea, as also in the Syriack and Arabick Tran­slation of S^t Luke. And Meteorolo­gic. lib. 1. cap. 13. Aristotle saith, that about the Mountain Caucasus, there is a Lake or [...], but the neighbouring People call it a Sea. Hee speak's of the Lake Maeotis, which by reason of that abundance of [Page 131] Waters which it dischargeth through the Cimmerian Bosphorus into the Euxin Sea, is by the Antients called Herodotus, in Melpo­mene. Plin. lib. 6. cap. 7. Dionys. After, & ad eum Eustathius. Mother of the Sea, or Mother of the Euxin Sea. From whence also it was the opinion of som, that Maeotis stood in the same relation unto Pontus, Propontis, and the AEgean Sea, as the Ocean doth to the Mediterranean.

As Pharsal. 3. Lucan saith concerning it. But Histor. lib. 13. Agathia tell's us, that in Justinian's daies, it was called The little Sea. And saith In oris Ma­ritinis. Festus Avienus to Probus; Thou did'st question mee (if thou dost remember) about the situation of the Maeotick Sea. By which means it hath happen'd, that even at this day it is called Mar delle Zabach, and Mar della Tana. So seven Lakes of the River Po in Italy are usually tearmed Plin. lib. 3. c. 16. Herodi­an. lib. 8. Seven Seas. And wee read in Variar. lib. 11. Formul. 14. Cassiodorus, that Addua, a River of Cisalpin Gallia, emptie's it self into the Lake called Lago di Como, as into its proper Sea. Hence it is, that in Hesychius and Suidas, a Lake or [...] denote's the Ocean and Sea, and [...], or a River, the Ocean it self. Nor is it in this place impossible, that a River should contend with the Sea; However, otherwise it hath been used as a Proverb, of such as strive with men mightier then themselvs. Also in Homer,

The depth of a deep Lake is used for the depth of the Sea. And in another place hee put's [...], a very fair Lake in stead of the Sea, as it is obser­ved also by Ad Aristot. Meteorolog. lib. 1. prax. 16. Olympiodorus. Yea, som of the Antients [Page 132] have said, that the Ocean it self is one of those Plato in Phaedone. four huge Rivers, which spring out of such a Hell, or such a deep Gulf; as Vide Gi­rald. Cam­brens. Topo­graph. Hi­bern. dist. 2. cap. 14. som feign to bee found to­wards the North; the other three beeing imprisoned in secret Passages of the Earth. Moreover, Lucan call's the British Ocean,

And in barbarous Latin, the word Mariscus, as a Di­minutiveClaudius Salmasius, in Plin. Exer­citat. ad So­linum, pag. 577. of Mare the Sea, is used in many Places for a Marsh or Lake, under which notion also it hath been Translated into som other Languages, beeing varied according to their divers forms of Expressi­on. Other observations have been made by J. Drus. Obs. 9. cap. 20. & ad difficil. loca. Numer. cap. 133. & Al­bericu [...] Gen­tilis in Lecti­onibus Vir­gilianis, cap. 17. Coel. Rho­digin. lect. Antiq. lib. 26. cap. 14. others to the same purpose. So then, both in Substance, Nature, and Name, the Seas, Rivers, and other Bo­dies of Waters (so far as concern's the Point in que­stion) are all the same, that whatsoêver may bee said of these, may bee applied in like manner also to the other; save that there may som difference bee alleged onely from the largeness of the one and the narrowness of the other, which in the Point of Dominion (as it relate's to Possession) is of no ac­count. Add moreover, that the usual Objection touching their fluid Nature, or the continual shift­ing of Waters in the Chanel, doth here no more prejudice the caus of Dominion and Possession, then the fluid nature of the Aër doth the Dominion and Possession of that space which confine's a Hous from the Foundation upward. That space seem's as a Chanel to the whirling Aër; whereof notwithstan­ding hee, according to the Civil Law, is the un­doubted Owner, who possesseth the Ground and [Page 133] Building. Hereupon Servitutes sunt Jura Praediorum. Servitudes have been impo­sed, against the rearing of Houses higher then ordi­nary, also against hindring of Light, or Prospect, and other of that kinde in the very ambient Aër; So that where a In novo Opere Nun­ciato. Prohibition of a new Building hath issued, Pomponius saith, the Aër ought to bee measured as well as the Ground. And it is evident, that the AêrL. 21. ff. tit. quod vi aut Clam. § 2. is his who is owner of the plot of ground. So that as to that saying of Paulus, that a Tree growing in the very Confine betwixt two Lands is L. 83. ff. tit. Pro Socio. common to the Owners on both sides, for so much as grow's in the ground of either; Joannes Buteo discoursing of the Division of the fruit of such a Tree, saith, Tract. de Divisione Fructûs ar­boris in confi­nio natae. wee must suppose the ground to bee the Aër it self that is spread over the ground, which hee measureth by direct lines from the outmost boughs. And therefore, surely, wee are owners of the ground, hous, and space, which wee possess in several as owners, that every one, for his best advantage, may freely and fully use and en­joy his own bordering Aër, (which is the element of mankind) how flitting so ever it bee, together with the space thereof in such a manner, and re­strain others thence at pleasure, that hee may bee both reputed and settled owner thereof in Particular. Much less then doth the fluid nature of Waters, which is far less then the other, in any wise hin­der an ownership or Dominion over them. And even those things which naturally are thus flitting, do notwithstanding in a Civil sens remain ever the same; as the ship of Theseus, a Hous, or a Theatre, which hath been so often mended and repaired, that there is not so much as one part or plank left of the first building.

But they which make use of so frivolous a subtil­tie [Page 134] as this to oppose a Dominion of the Sea, should bee turned over to the Philosophers; especially Diog. La­ert [...]in Hera­clito, &c. He­raclitus, and Epicharmus, whose Doctrine was, that every thing is so changed, altered, and renewed every moment, that nothing in the world conti­nue's at this instant, the same, that it was in the instant immediately going before. No man (saith Epist. 58. Seneca, in imitation of Heraclitus) is the same in the Morning, that hee was the day before. Our Bodies are hurried like Rivers. Whatsoëver thou see'st, run's with time. Not one of all those things that are visible, continue's. I, even whil'st I speak of these Changes, am changed my self.

It was seriously affirmed also by Heraclitus, that not onely the same River could not receiv a man twice, but also that the same man could not enter twice into the same stream. So that to cast all into Heraclitus his River, became an usual Proverb, to express a continued and perpetual change of every thing from it self. But let such as dream, that the fluid inconstant nature of the Sea disprove's the pri­vate Dominion of it; entertain the same opinion (if they pleas) with these men, of things that fall under a Civil consideration, and then they must of neces­sity grant also, that themselvs are not Owners or Possessors, either of Land, Houses, Clothes, Mo­nie, or any other thing whatsoêver.

An Answer to the Objections touching the de­fect of Bounds and Limits in the Sea; as also concerning its magnitude and inex­haustible abundance. CHAP. XXII.

THe Objection, touching the defect of Limits and and Bounds, follow's next. And truly, where Dominions are distinguished, nothing can bee more desirable then known and certain Bounds in every place: Nor was it without caus, that Plutarch. in Numâ. Ter­minus, the God of Bounds, was received heretofore among the Romanes for the God of Justice. But the nature of Bounds is to bee consider'd either upon the Shores, or in the open Sea. And why Shores should not bee called and reputed lawful Bounds, whereon to ground a distinction of Dominion in the Sea, as well as Ditches, Hedges, Meers, rows of Trees, Mounds, and other things used by Surveyors in the bounding of Lands, I cannot fully understand. Nor is Sylvanus, made by Heathens the God of the woods, and Neptune of the Sea. Sylvanus any whit more a Guardian of Bounds, then Neptune. But yet a very learned man saith, Hugo Grot. de Jure Belli ac Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 11. §. 3. there is a Reason in nature, why the Sea under the aforesaid consideration cannot bee possessed or made appropriate; be­caus possession is of no force, unless it bee in a thing that is bounded; So that Thucydides call▪s a Land unpossessed, [...] unbounded; and Isocrates the Land possessed by the Athenians, a Land bounded with Limits. But liquid things, becaus of themselvs they are not bounded, cannot bee possessed, save onely as they are conteined in som other thing; after which manner Lakes and Ponds are possessed, [...] [Page 134] [...] [Page 135] [Page 136] and Rivers also, becaus they are conteined within Banks. But the Sea is not conteined by the Earth, it beeing of equal bigness, or bigger then the Earth; so that the Antients have affirmed the Earth to bee conteined by the Sea. And then hee bring's divers Testimonies of the Antients, whereby it is affirmed more then once, that the Sea is the girdle or Bond of this Globe of Earth, and that fetching a compass, it incloseth all the Parts thereof together; and it is very often said by the Antients, that the Land is conteined and bounded by the water or Sea; as if the whole Earth made as it were one Island, beeing Cicero in Sonn. Scipi­ous. & vide Jo. Philopon­de Mundi Creat [...]ne, lib. 4 cap. 5. surrounded by the Sea. But admit it were to bee granted (which, I suppose, neither that learned man nor any other will grant;) yet I do not well see, why the thing conteining should not in truth bee bounded by the thing conteined, as well as this by that. May not a lesser bodie that is spherical, or of any other form, beeing conteined by a greater which is every way contiguous to it, bee said to bound and limit the Concave of the greater Bodie, as well as this to limit the Convex of the lesser? But Julius [...]xe [...]. 37. Scaliger saith very well of the Sea and Land; That the one is not so conteined by the other, but that it may also contein. Nor are they so disjoyned from each other, but that they may both encroach upon each other and retire by Turns. The Sea and Land mutually imbrace one another with crooked windings and turnings; this with Penin­sula's, and Promontories butting forth, and Creeks bending inward; that working up its waves about all the Passages of its vast Bodie. Thus it is evident that the one indifferently set's Bounds to the other, no otherwise than Banks, and Lakes, or Rivers; which also appear's more evident in the A Sea near [...], like a huge Lake, beeing incompassed with Land, and hath no passage into any other S [...]a. Caspian [Page 137] Sea that is encompassed with Land. And in like manner in the Mediterranean; before that Hercules, or (as the Geograph▪ Nubiens. Cli­mat. 4. part. 1 Arabians say) Alexander the great did, by cut­ting the Mountains, let in the Atlantick Ocean through the streights of Cadiz. And thereby it is made up one single Globe, wherein divers Seas are bounded, as well as the Isles or main Land: as it is more clearly proved out of holy Scripture. There the waters are gathered together, and limited by their Places and Damascen. de Or [...]hodoxd fide, lib. 2. cap. 9. Bounds. And saith the Lord himself of the Sea, Job 38. 10. I encompassed it with my Bounds, and set Bars and Doors; and said, hitherto shalt thou com, but no farther. And in another place, Pro. 8. 29. Hee gave unto the Sea his Bounds, his Decree unto the waters that they should not pass their Bounds: So that it cannot bee doubted every Sea hath its Bounds on the Shore; as the Land it self. Nor had I made mention of this Particular, had I not found it impugned by so eminent a person. And truly there is but a very little more difficultie, to finde out Limits and Bounds in the main Sea, for distinguishing of private Do­minions. Wee have high Rocks, Shelvs, Promon­tories opposite to each other, and Islands dispersed up and down, from whence as well direct Lines, as crooked windings and turnings, and angles, may bee made use of, for the bounding of a Territorie in the Sea.

[Page 138]The antient Cosmographers also reckon up the Seas of the world, no otherwise then Towns, Rivers, Islands, and Mountains, as beeing no less distin­guished from each other by their respective Bounds. In Cosmo­graphia. AEthicus saith, Every Globe of Land hath XXX Seas, CCCLXX Towns, LXXII Islands, LVII Rivers, and XL Mountains, &c. After this also, hee reckon's the Seas of the Eastern, Western, Northen, and Southern Ocean one after another, after the same manner as hee doth the Provinces and their Isles. How truly, I dispute not; but in the mean time hee made no question, but that the Seas are sufficiently distingui­shed by their Names and Bounds. Add hereunto that useful invention of the sea-man's Compass, and the help of Celestial degrees either of Longitude or Latitude, together with the doctrine of Triangles arising therefrom. Also in those Plantations that in our time have been carried out of Europe into America, the de­grees of Latitude and Longitude do serv the Pro­prietors in stead of Bounds; which with as little dif­ficultie are found in the Sea. In like manner A [...]ial. [...] ­manu [...]l. M [...] ­tera [...] ▪ Rer. [...]. lib. 28. som would have had the Tropick of Cancer and the Equinoctial Line to have been the Bounds in the Sea, for the limiting of that Agreement, which was to have been made in the year MDCVIII, between the States of the United Provinces, and the Hous of Austria. And in the late Agreement betwixt the Kings of Great Britain and Spain, Anno 1630. Art. 2. the Equinoctial Line is the Bound appointed in the Sea. Other Instances there are of the same nature: Eor, Sarpedon and Calycadnus, two Promontories of Cilicia, were designed as Bounds for distinguishing the Dominion of the Sea, in that League made betwixt the Polyb. in Eclog. de Legationi­bus, cap. 35. & Livius, decad. 4 lib. 8. Romanes and Antiochus King of Syria. Also, by Decree of the Emperor [Page 139] Leo, of which wee have alreadie spoken, the An Epoche was a device to keep store of Fish, made of Nets that were spread between Stakes dri­ven into the Sea. Fishing Epoches or Fish-pens that were by men placed in the Sea lying over against their Lands, were limited to certain number of Cubits. The case was the same likewise touching the Cyanean and Chelidonian Islands, in the League made by the Plutarch. in vitâ Cimonis. Athenians with the King of Persia; which hath been mentioned also be­fore.

Moreover, Pope Alexander VI and his Cardinals, or the King of Spain's Agents made no scruple touch­ing Bounds of this nature, when the King obteined that famous Bull, whereby hee had a Grant of the Western world; but so to bee limited, that the thing given should, in the hither part of it, bee bounded by an imaginarie Line drawn from the Artick to the Antarctick Pole, Laërt. Che­rubin. Bullar. Tom. 1. pag. 393. which should bee distant from each of those Islands called de Los, Azores y cabo verde, one hundred Leagues towards the West and South (which are the verie words of the Bull.) Where­upon Tractat. de finibus re­gundis, cap. 7. 8. Hieronymus de Monte, saith, Bounds were set in Heaven and in the Aër, in the time of Pope Alexander VI between the Portugals and Castilians, in dividing the Indian Isles then newly discover'd by the degrees of Heaven; and so all that was found Eastward, was allot­ted to the Portugals, and that which lay Westward to the Castilians. Certainly, in this place, no more regard was had to the portions of Land, whether Islands or continent, in the measuring of Bounds, then to the spaces of the Sea. Moreover, it is ordinarie among the Lawyers, even those who are most earnest for a Communitie of everie Sea, to limit an hundred miles Bartolus Tract. de Ti­beriade & D. D. in l. Insulae Italiae ff. tit. de Ju­diciis. jurisdiction to the Lord of the ad­jacent Coast. Somtimes wee finde sixtie. It is in a manner received (saith De Repub. lib. 1. cap. 10. Bodin) by the common custom of all [Page 140] Princes bordering upon the Sea, that for sixtie miles from the shore, any Prince may give Law to those that sail near their Coast; and it was so adjudged in the Case of the Duke of Savoy. Which hee observeth out of Cache­ranus his decisions of Piemont. Yea, and it is main­teined by very Hieronym. de Monte, Tract. de Finibus regundis, cap. 39. Baldus, & alii ibi cita­ti. eminent Professors of the Civil Law, that an Action at Law may bee allowed for regulating of Bounds in the Borders of the Sea. Therefore they sufficiently acknowledg the Custom of measuring and setting Bounds, even in the Sea.

But as to what concern's that saying of Ambrose; Geometram audivimus, Thalassometram nunquam audi­vimus, Wee have heard of a Geometrician, one that measureth land; but never of a Thalassometrician, or one that could measure and lay out Bounds in the Sea; This truly is rather a quibling of words, then any Argument against the point in hand. And the holy man speak's in that place, of the va­rious lurking-holes, or holds of divers Fishes, which God hath appointed for them in the Sea, not touch­ing a civil distribution of the Sea. Nor was there any reason why hee should speak thus of a Tha­lassometrician, as a thing never heard of before. For, wee know that even Thalassometricians were ordinarie among the Grecians, who had Dominions by Sea, with very frequent and various distinctions of those Dominions; And that the Sea was measured accord­ing to the Rules of Geometrie, no less then the Land. Proelus a famous Mathematician, treating about the excellencie of Geometrie, saith, In Euclidis, lib. 1. lib. 2. cap. 3. in Craecis, pag. 18. It hath discover'd the Situations of places, the measures also of Voiages by Sea, as well as journies by Land. Moreover, they had Instruments to measure the Sea, which the [Page 141] Grecians, or at least the modern Greeks, called [...] ▪ measures of Sea-voiages; and have written that Hero, Anthemius, and other antient Mathematici­ans, learn't the Art from Archimedes, and transmitted it to Posterity. Yea, it is said by Chiliad. 13. cap. 457. Joannes Tzetzes, that those men discover'd both water and winde-instru­ments out of the Books of Archimedes, and Engines to move things of weight, and instruments called Thalassodo­metrae, for measuring of Sea-voiages: so that as con­cerning the business of measuring the sea, there is no­thing to hinder, but that both matter and instruments may bee had for the distinguishing of its Domini­ons.

Lastly, that which is objected, touching the vast magnitude of the Sea, and its inexhaustible abun­dance, is of very little weight here. Suppose it bee inexhaustible, so that hee which shall appropriate it to himself, can receiv no dammage by other men's using it, what more prejudice is this to the right of Ownership or Dominion, then it is to the Owner of a Fire or Candle, that another man's should bee lighted by his? Is hee therefore less Master of his own Fire or Candle? But truly wee often see, that the Sea it self, by reason of other men's Fishing, Na­vigation, and Commerce, becom's the wors for him that own's it, and others that enjoie it in his right; So that less profit ariseth, then might otherwise bee received thereby. Which more evidently appear's in the use of those Seas, which produce Pearls, Co­ral, and other things of that kinde. Yea, the plen­tie of such seas is lessned every hour, no otherwise then that of Mines of Metal, Quarries of stone, or of Gardens, when their Treasures and Fruits are ta­ken away. And it is a custom of the Mahometans [Page 142] (who are very great and Potent Nations) to estimate their seas no less upon this accompt, then by the Revenue either of Fishing or Navigation; as wee may see in that their fals Prophet, when speaking of the most holy God hee saith, [...]. It is hee that hath pre­pared the Sea for your use, that thence yee may take fresh Food (and use Fishing) and also that out of it yee may draw ornaments to adorn you, Mahomet Ben Achmed, the best Expositor of the Alcoran, interpret's those orna­ments by Coral and Pearls; which words also are used in another Azoar. 55. [...] in Cod. [...]. 65. place of the Alcoran, for the chief Commodity of the Sea. From whence also it is, that a special Licence to search for Coral, hath som­times been granted in Leagues made by the grand Seignieur, as is observed before. Yea, and Hist. Nat. [...]. cap. 35. Pliny speaking, especially of the more Easternly Seas, saith; It had been counted a small matter, that men swallowed whole Seas into their throats, if both men and women also did not wear them up and down upon their hands, ears, heads, and all parts of the Body. But it is well known to us, that precious Stones and Pearls, are very of­ten found also in the Western Seas, and hee tell's us, they were frequently found in antient time. More­over (saith hee) It is certain that in Britain they are produced, though small and ill colored (as wee all see at this day) forasmuch as Julius Caesar would have it un­derstood, that the breast▪plate which hee consecrated to Ve­nus in her Temple, was made of British Pearl. Yea, it is written by many, and testified by [...]. Suetonius, that Caesar went to Britain in hope of Pearls. It is obvi­ous therefore to every man, that the gain of such a Voiage into Britain, may bee lessned, and that the abundance either of Pearls themselvs, or of those shell-fishes, which produce them, may through a [Page 143] promiscuous and common use of the Sea, bee dimi­nished in any Sea whatsoêver. Where then is that inexhaustible abundance of Commodities in the sea, which cannot bee impaired? There is truly the same reason also, touching every kinde of Fishing. But what need many words about this Matter? Do wee not at this day finde it pressed home to the utmost every where by Lawyers, especially those of the Em­pire? and was it not a thousand times said of old when the Romane Empire was in its prime, L. 9. ff. tit. ad Legem Rhodiam. &c. that Caesar is Lord of the whole world? Thus Ovid, accor­ding to the Romane custom, saith;

The Sea (I suppose) is not more inexhaustible then the whole world. That is very much inferior to this, as a part is to the whole, in greatness and plenty. And therefore a Dominion of the Sea is not to bee opposed upon this accompt, unless also wee in like manner affirm, that not onely that saying of the Emperor's Dominion over the world is mani­festly fals, (as it must bee) but also contrary to na­tural reason it self, becaus of the worlds extraordina­ry greatness and abundance. Therefore they are more justifiable in their Opinion, who, as they say, that the Roman Emperor, according to the antient Law, is Lord of the World or Land, (that is to say, a large part of it) so also Jo. Gri­phiander Ju­risdictione Insulae▪ cap. 14. § 65. &c. they would have him to bee Lord of the Sea.

[Page 144]Nor is there any difficulty in that expression of the Emperor Antoninus, wherein hee call's himself Lord of the World, but the Law (as 'tis common­ly understood) Lady of the Sea; which (if it were granted that his Answer ought L D pre­cati [...] 9. ff. ad l [...]m [...]di­am. so to bee understood) doth signifie no other thing, then that the Rhodian Laws, where they did not thwart the Romane, were so far in force about Sea-affairs, that (however hee were Moderator and Lord of both) hee would by no means determin ought contrary to those Laws, by any Rescript of his own. Dispunctio­num lib. 2. [...]. 5. Alcialus, and other very Learned men also, make almost the same interpretati­on: But concerning that Answer of Antoninus, I shall add more In the 25 Chapter. by and by. So that it seem's the Antients, in that so often repeated speech, concerning universal Dominion, conceived the Romane Empire to bee no less or narrower, then it is represented by Pe­tronius Arbiter, who set's forth the matter in these words;

And [...]. the Ancient Inscription in honor of Augustus Caesar was, ORBE MARI ET TERRA PACATO, IANO CLUSO, &c. Peace beeing restored to the world by Sea and Land, hee shut up the This [...]e [...] ­ple [...] o­p [...]n in time of w [...], but was [...]t in time of pe [...]. Temple of Janus; ac­cording to which sens it is recorded also by Suetonius [...] Octavio, cap [...]2. Histo­rians, that hee shut Janus his Temple three times, having settled Peace by Sea and Land; whereby they would [Page 145] have us to understand (the verie same thing which wee have proved more fully before) that the Seas were comprehended as well as the Land, within the huge Bodie of the Romane Empire.

An Answer to such Testimonies as have faln from Writers treating of other subjects, and which are usually alleged against Do­minion of the Sea. CHAP. XXIII.

IT remain's in the next place, that wee consider of what validitie the contrarie Opinions of Writers are whereof wee formerly made mention. As to what concern's those Passages of the Poêts, Plautus and Phaenicides; it is clear in Plautus, that the lewd slave Trachalio was but in jest with Gripus the Fisherman: Hee saith in general, that the Sea is common to all, which signifieth a Sea that never was possessed, as well as that which is necessarily and naturally common; and in that place, that, rather then this. Wherefore it may bee understood, that Fishing was common or not yet appropriated; that, is, that the people either of Rome or Greece, had such a Dominion over any kinde of Sea (for, by what hath been alreadie mentioned, it appear's both of them had a Dominion over som Sea before Plautus his time) that either of them might use their re­spective Seas at their own pleasure, in hindling others from sailing through them, and removing such impediments of Trade and Commerce as should happen therein: And yet that hitherto they had [Page 146] prohibited no man from fishing in that Sea (menti­oned by Plautus and Phaenicides) in such a manner, but that the use of it might remain common either to Natives or Neighbors, as the use of a ground for feeding of Cattel; though there may indeed bee a particular Owner in possession, reserving the other Commodities of it to himself, as it often come's to pass. But afterwards also, especially in the Eastern Empire, or among the Greeks, it is clear out of what wee have alreadie shewn you, that a peculiar Right of Sea-fishing hath passed into the hands of private persons, as well as of Princes: So that such Expressions as these beeing applied against private Dominion of the Sea, soon vanish and com to no­thing.

As to that passage out of Ovid, Quid prohibetis aquas? Why do yee forbid water? &c. (then which no­thing is more usual in Disputes about this matter) it is not so much an Assertion of the communitie of waters, as a vehement and hyperbolical reproof of the inhumanitie of that rustick Rout in Lycia. Latona beeing thirstie and wearie, asked for a draught of water; and that out of a Lake. The barbarous people denie her; and therefore shee most deserved­ly reprove's them. But shee doth it not more ear­nestly, then Ampelisca in In Rudent [...]. Act. 2. Plautus did merrily, to Sceparnio a slave that denied her water; ‘Cur iu (inquit Ampelisca) aquam gravare amabò, quam hostis hosti commodat?’ ‘Why (saith Ampelisca) art thou so loth to let mee have water, which one stranger afford's another.’

For, whatsoëver may bee afforded or communicated [Page 147] without prejudice of the Owner, hee is concerned many times in humanitie to impact it to a meer stranger that asketh him. For, the word Hostis in that place signifie's a Stranger, as wee often finde among the Festus in verb. Hostis, & Cic. de Offic. lib. 1. Antients; And it appear's also by the question of Sceparnio, whereby hee jeer's the wench, ‘Cur tu (ait ille) operam gravare mihi, quam civis civi commodat?’ ‘Why (saith hee) dost thou denie mee that help, one Citizen afford's another?’

Here hee opposeth Citizen to Stranger. From the same Office of humanitie those particulars are derived; as not to denie running Water; to suffer one Fire, or one Candle to light another; and other things of that na­ture, which are profitable to the Receiver, and not troublesom to him that give's or permit's the Favor. And upon this Rule of Moralitie onely, which is the Rule of Charitie, are those demands both of Latona and Ampelisca grounded. They denie not the private Dominion of waters: Neither Latona of the Lake (whose private Dominion is confess't by all) nor Ampelisca of the Well, from whence shee de­manded water for the Priest of Venus. Moreover, those words of Latona are spoken concerning a Lake of little water; as Ovid sheweth in that place,

And after shee had said that shee came to claim a publick gift, shee add's,

Nothing in that place opposeth a Dominion of the waters, more then of any other things whatsoëver, whereto that saying of Ennius may have relation,

And as Cicero tell's us, all things of the same kinde seem common to men. Which communitie not­withstanding derogate's nothing at all from the Do­minion here in Question, unless any will bee so unadvised as to affirm, that the Laws of friendship (wherein Philosophers say all things are common) with those of Charitie and Liberalitie, may overthrow private Dominion.

Nor is there any more weight in that which is objected out of Virgil. What is this to the purpose? Virgil, or Ilioneus speaking of the Tyrrhen Sea, said, That the water is open to all. Ergò, by Law the water must lie open at all times to all men. A verie trifling Argument! There was no Land that was omitted in the first distribution of things, which did not re­main open to all, before it came under particular possession. But in that passage of Virgil, there is no demand made of Right, but onely an Office of humanitie requested from the King of Latium. Yea, and a promiss made of recompence, saying;

Therefore in the Poëts sens, the benefit was to bee received and acknowledged from the grace and favor of the Prince, not claimed by any Law of nature common to all. Yea, wee know that in many places an excise or paiment is made somtimes for the very use of water. As among the Hollanders they have in Delph-land a Custom called Jus Grutae; which hath ever been under the care of those Officers called in Latine Comites Plumarii or Officers of the Fea­ther; their place is to see that Birds or foul bee not transported thence. Comites Plumarii, in Dutch, Pluymgraven, and whereby the Beer-brewers (as In Histor. Bat. c. 19. Hadrianus Junius tell's us) are bound to pay them the hundreth part for the use of water. Other in­stances there are to bee found of the same nature.

Lastly, as to that saying of the Jewish Rabbins concerning Alexander, it shew's onely they were of Opinion that Alexander had not gotten a Dominion over the Sea. They do not say at all, that hee could not lawfully get it; nor truly could they say it with­out gross indiscretion, unless they would renounce their own Right (which wee have alreadie mentio­ned out of their determinations) in the great or Phaenician Sea. And whatsoëver those Rabbins may lightly say of Alexander; yet truly Flavius De Bello Judaïco, lib. 3. cap. 27. Josephus a Jew; and (if wee may believ himself) the most eminent Lawyer of his time among the Jews, call's the Emperor Vespasian, Lord both of Sea and Land. And Orat. 3. Julian saith, that Alexander aspired after an Empire by Sea as well as by Land: which hath been mentioned also by Suasor [...] Seneca.

[Page 150]But all these Objections are brought out of Writers treating of other matters, which ought also to bee consider'd. And therefore in the last place, let us take such opinions of the Lawyers into consideration, as are opposed against it.

An Answer to the Objections taken out of Antient Lawyers. CHAP. XXIV.

OF those Lawyers that are of the contrarie opi­nion, som are antient, som modern. If wee look into the most notable Testimonies of the An­tients, this onely is to bee collected from them touch­ing the Communitie of the Sea, that som of the most eminent were indeed of Opinion, that by the Law natural and of Nations the Sea is perpetually and ne­cessarily common to all men; which nevertheless, most clearly appear's to bee far otherwise, if a dili­gent survey bee made of the Laws and Customs, ei­ther Civil or Intervenient, of most Ages and Nations; As wee have verie abundantly proved in what hath been alreadie shewn you. And that not onely out of the most approved Historians (whereof there is verie oftentimes most use, in searching out the most common Customs of Nations, and other things re­lating to the Laws themselvs Vide Gas­par. Knoc­kium, lib. de contributio­nibus, cap. 20. §. 463. & seqq.) but also out of the verie Leagues or Intervenient Law of divers Nations, yea, and other Lawyers of no less note, together with the principal Edicts in the Eastern Empire, besides, manie other, from whence any one may easily learn what, according to the Natural Permissive Law, ought to bee determined in this matter.

[Page 151]Som of the Antients have been of Opinion, that according to the Law Natural or of Nations, it is lawful to hunt and hauk in another man's L. 3. ff. de acquir. rer. dom. & instit. de rer. divis. § Ferae igitur bestiae & l. Injuriar. 13. ff. de injuriis §. ult. wood or Ground, and to Fish in another man's Pond or Lake, much more in a River, except it were pro­hibited by the Owner in possession. These things, saith Observat. lib. 4. cap. 2. Cujacius, were so determined by the prudent Romans, who adhered most to the Law of Nations. But Custom hath now over-ruled the Law of Nations, so that it is not lawful to Fish so much as in a publick River, nor to hunt or hauk freely in the Fields. And saith the same Ad lib. 5. Feud. tit. de Regalibus. Au­tor in another place; The Exchequer is to bee justified onely by Custom, in laying claim to the Fisheries, in a pri­vate manner, contrarie to the Law of Nations. Whereas notwithstanding, in the Feudal Laws, the Revenues of Fisheries are counted among the Regalia or Royalties of the Prince; and reckoned by learned men among the Antients belonging to the Guid. Pan­cirol. variar. lect. utrius­que Juris, lib. 3. cap. 31. Romane Exchequer or Treasurie, who cite Ulpian himself for a witness. For, hee among the publick Customs or Revenues numbreth the Revenues L. 17. ff. de U. S. Piscariarum (as som would have it read) of Fisheries. Others in­stead of it put Picariarum Pitch-pits, for those places from whence Pitch is digged. Surely, even L. 4. §. 6. ff. tit. de Censi­bus. Ulpian himself reckon's Fish-ponds among those things that are liable to assessments. But howsoëver the later Customs of Nations have subverted or over­ruled that more antient Law of Fishing, Hunting, and fouling freely, whether it were the Law natural (as they term'd it)▪ or of nations; as sufficiently ap­pear's by the Vide Se­bastianum Medicem [...] d [...] [...]venati [...]e [...]. Edicta & consuetudi de [...] Forestis Galliarum collect per Sanctyonium, Andream Gaill. pract. Observat. lib. 2. 67. Matth: Stephani de Juris­dictione, lib. 2. [...]act 1. cap. 7. §. 432. & [...]ejusmodi allos de Ve [...] Jure [...]h imperio Roma­no-Germanico, &c. Law of those places which they call [...] [Page 150] [...] [Page 151] [Page 152] Forests de wildt bahne or Bannum ferinum, and of Rivers, as it is variously established in several Countries. And so without any prohibition of the Owner in Possession, that antient Freedom hath been abrogated many Ages since by most received Custom: which may bee said in like manner of the Sea, whatsoêver those Antients and their Followers have written to the contrarie.

Moreover, the Emperor Leo hath (as wee have shewn you) expressly declared by Edict, that the antient Right concerning a necessarie communitie of the Sea, was not without injustice pretended in the Eastern Empire. Wherefore Michaël Attaliates truly did ill, and so hath any other Lawyer of the East (if any there bee) since the daies of Leo, that hath opposed its private Dominion. Nor indeed hath that emi­nent man dealt any better, who write's that Leo made a change against reason of Law. And here, especial care must bee taken to avoid that which som have presumed to affirm, touching those most excellent Books of Justinian, which make up an entire Bodie of the antient Law; Albericus Gentilis de Jure Belli, l. 1. cap. 3. That the Law pre­scribed in those Books is not the Law onely of a Citie, but even of Nations and nature; and that the whole is so fitted unto nature, that after the Empire was extinct, though the Law was a long time buried; yet it rose again, and spread it self through all the world. And therefore that it concern's even Princes, although it was framed by Ju­stinian for private persons. As if the law natural and of Nations were to bee derived onely out of those Books. For, not to mention, how that not onely very many Decrees, and Custome's introduced in the Romane-Germane Empire it self and other places abroad, have extremly alter'd many things conteined [Page 153] in those Books; but also that wee finde divers Kings both of Gregor. Lopez in Alphonsin. 3. tit. 4. l. 6. Azevedo ad reg. constit. in rubric. tit. De las leyes. Spain and Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 2. tit. 15. §. 5. & Bo­din de Repub. lib. 1. cap. 8. & vide Guil. Burlaeum in Prooem. ad Comm. in Arist. Physi­ca. France have som­times heretofore prohibited the use of them in any kinde within their Courts of Justice; there are truly som things in the very Law of the Nations of Europe (who receiv those Books, and that upon very good ground, both into their Schools and Courts, so far as the particular Laws of their Kingdoms will permit) I mean in their Law Com­mon, or Intervenient, which are not grounded at all upon the Law of Justinian, but have had their origi­nal from Customs quite contrarie thereto. Prisoners of war are not now made slaves, nor are the Laws concerning captivitie or Remitter upon return from Captivitie, touching the Boërius Decis. 178. Alvarus Ve­lasc. Consult: tom. 1. 30 Fra. Suarez de Legibus, l. 2. cap. 20. persons of men, in any use at all, which notwithstanding take up a Title in the Digests. Ships driven by wrack upon a Shore do by the C. tit. de Naufragiis, & l. 1. & 3. ff. de Incendio & l. 21. §. 1. ff. tit. de acquir. velamit. pos­sessione. Law of Justinian (which is confirmed also in the Frederic. 2. in C. de Fur­tis, c. Navi­gia, & Con­stit. Caroli 5. de Judiciis Capitalibus, cap. 118. Roman▪ German Empire) belong either to the former Owners, or as things relinquished and unpossessed, to the first Finders; nor doth the Ex­chequer interpose any Claim, whereas nevertheless, according to the Law of divers Nations, intervenient to themselvs and their Neighbors, it bee most certain, that those Ships are very often confiscated according to the varietie of Custom: As among the English, the Bertrand. Argentraeus in Consuet. Brit. Art. 56. §. 45. Britains, Choppinus de Domanio, lib. 1. tit. 15. §. 10. Sicilians, som Luc. de Pennâ ad C. tit. de Naufrag. Matth. de Afflict. in Cons. Neapolit. lib. 1. consuet. 59. vide Garsiam Mastrillum de Magistratibus, lib. 3. cap. 10. §. 393. Borderers upon the Shores of Italie, and others. And although it bee accounted crueltie by som to persue profit upon so sad an occasion, as it was also by the Andr. Gail. practic. Observat. lib. 1. cap. 18. Bodin. de Repub. l. 1. cap. 10. Stat. Romae Vrbis. l. 3. cap. 85. Emperor, [Page 154] either Constantine or Antoninus, who made a Law thereupon; yea, and though besides the Decree of the Lateran Councel, the Bull Sub. Alex. 3. c. Excom­municationi extrait de Raptoribus. Coenae Domini do blast those every year with Excommunication that plunder the goods of such as suffer Shipwrack, in Barthole­meus v [...]li­nus de Cen­suris Ponti­fici reserva­tis, part. 2. cap▪ 4. any Sea, upon any pretence of Law or Custom whatsoêver; yet the Custom of confiscation in this case derived not its Original from the rude and barbarous Ages, but it flowed first from the most antient Maritim Laws of the Rhodians (which were in use among the Grecians in their flourishing condition) as shall bee shewn by and by, and from thence was received by divers Princes. Also, when the Emperor's Ambassador, as Bodin saith, made complaint before Henrie the second King of France, that two Ships beeing driven a Shore were seized by one Jordanes Ursinus, and demanded a restitution of them; Annas of Momorancie Master of the Hors made Answer, that all things which had been cast upon Shore, did by the Law of all Nations belong to such Princes as have commanded the Shores. So far hath Custom taken place in this particular, that Andraeas Doria did not so much as complain about those Ships that were cast upon the French Shore, and made prize by the Admiral of France. So far hee. In like manner, Whales and other Fish of extraordinarie bigness, do not, according to the known Law of England, [...] de [...]a [...]edo De­ [...]. Lusit in. part. 2. 48. Portugal, and other Nations, belong to him that first seizeth them, but either to the Exchequer, or (which is all one) to such as the Prince shall grant a Royaltie of that nature.

Other instances might bee brought, sufficiently to shew that the Law natural and of Nations is not wholly to bee drawn out of such Decrees or De­terminations as are found in the Books of Justinian; [Page 155] And so that what is there inserted touching a Com­munitie of the Sea, doth not in any wise diminish the Autoritie of the received Customs of so many Ages and Nations. But it is to bee observed, that the Sea is said in those Books to bee common, as the A [...]r, and as wilde Beasts are common. As if indeed the neighboring A [...]r it self could not pass into private Dominion, as well as a River that is possels' [...], and wilde Beasts that are taken. More­over, those Antients do ordinarily conjoin a com­munitie of Shores and Ports, not unlike to that which they teach of the Sea: As if the very reason of the Dominion of Ports and Shores, as they be­longed either to the people of Rome, or (which is all one here) to the Prince himself, were not manifestly drawn, as wee have expressly shewn alreadie out of Cap. 14. Celsus, from the Imposts and Customs which are fre­quent enough both in the Shores and Cic. Oral. pro lege Ma­nilia. Sym­machus, l. 5. Ep. 62. 65. Tacitus An­nal. lib. 13. Alii obiter. Ports of the [...]o­man Empire, and in the Books of Tit▪ de Pub­licanis, in ff. & tit. de ve­ctigalibu [...] in C. Justinian (as in many other places.) For, as the L. 1. C. tit. de diversis▪ Praediis, & l. 5. ff. tit. de O­peribus pub­licis, §. 1. paiment of that Tribute which is called Solarium à Solo, and thence by the Greek Lawyers Eclog. Basi­lic. lib. 58. p. 488. ut eti­am simili no­tione in l. 15. ff. tit. Qui po­tior in Pig­nore. [...], for an hous that is built upon the ground of the Common-weal or the publick ground, was a sufficient Argument that the Common-weal or the Prince was Lord of the Soil; so indeed also the Custom paid for the use of Ports, manifested that there was the same kinde of Dominion over Them. Also, Ports themselvs are rightly supposed to bee a part even of the Continent, as appear's in L. 15. Caesar, ff. tit. de Pub­licanis. another place. More­over also, Justinian appropriated the Hellespont to himself in such a manner, that hee would not permit Merchants and Sea-men to enjoy a freedom of that Sea and the Ports, but at an extraordinarie rate, if wee [Page 156] may believ In Arcanâ Historiâ, pag. 110. Procopius, who was his comtemporarie and wrote his Affairs.

Nor did they imagine there was any difference betwixt the Dominion of the Sea, and that over the Land or People, who about 400 years since put this Inscription upon the Monument of the Empe­ror Georg. Gualtherus in Tabulis antiq. Sici­liae, &c. pag. 93. Frederick the second,

To wit, in the Cathedral Church of Palermo, in which place notwithstanding, the Imperial Law flourished at that time, as well as in the rest of the Roman-Ger­man Empire. The sum of all is, that those antient Lawyers do deliver many things carelessly touch­ing this matter, not onely such as thwart the most received Customs of Nations through almost all Ages, but such also as do sufficiently contradict one another; especially, whilst they join the Shore it self, and consequently the Ports together, as it were in an equal state of Communitie. So that they are equally refuted as well by their own indiscretion, as by the Autoritie of others.

Touching the Emperor Antoninus his Answer; that himself was Soveraign of the world, but the Law (as 'tis commonly translated) of the Sea; in L. Deprecatio, ff. tit. de Lege Rhodiâ. The true mean­ing of the said Answer, and a new, but genuine Exposition of it. Also, that it comprehend's nothing which may in any wise oppose a Dominion of the Sea. CHAP. XXV.

BUt seeing that among those particulars, which are usually drawn out of Antient Lawyers, against Dominion of the Sea, that Answer of the Emperor Antoninus to Eudaemon several times before­mentioned, is of so principal an account; therefore it seem'd meet to treat of it apart by it self, and search into the genuine sens thereof; concerning which, whosoëver shall look into the whole matter with a little more care then ordinarie, will I suppose bee very well satisfied, not onely that most Interpreters have hitherto been wholly ignorant thereof, but also that it in no wise contradict's a Dominion of the Sea.

Eudaemon having been Shipwrack't at Sea, had pe­titioned the Emperor, for a restitution of those wrack't goods that had been seized by the Receivers of his Customs. The words, according to L. 9. [...] ff. de Lege. Rhodiâ. Volusius Maetianus who was one of the Emperor's Privie [Page 158] Councellors, are these; [...]; O Emperor Antoninus, our Lord; wee having made Shipwrack, have been spoiled of all by those Receivers of the Customs that inhabit the These Isles are part of those that lie in the Archipela [...]. Cyclades Islands. Hee received an Answer from the Emperor, pointed for the most part af­ter this manner, in the printed Books. [...]. Which is usually thus translated; I indeed am Soveraign of the world, but the Law, of the Sea. Let it bee determined by the Rhodian Law which is prescribed for the regulation of Sea-affairs, so far as it is not opposed by any of our Laws. For, the Emperor Augustus also was of this Opinion. There ne­ver was any Controversie about the reading or Tran­slation of this Answer, unless it were in those words, [...], whereto answereth, but the Law of the Sea with a period or full point after it; as for the most part it is taken, and as wee have according to the received translation re­lated it Cap. [...]. alreadie in the Objections. Of those that would have it so rendred, there have been not a few who were of Opinion, that from the Adver­sative [...] autem is implied, that the Emperor an­swer'd that himself indeed was Lord of the rest of the world, but not of the Sea; and that the Law onely, not any man was Lord of this. Andraeas Dispuncti­onum, lib. 2. cap. 5. Alciatus saith; Whereas it is said, I indeed am Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea; som French Doctors were of Opinion becaus of that Adversative, that a Soveraigntie of the Sea did not appertain unto the Em­perors. [Page 159] But hee add's; which truly is very ridiculous: Although In [...]ub. de Rer. Divis. Baldus and L. ex hoc Jure, ff. tit de Justitiâ. Jason conceived for this reason, that the Venetians were not subject to the Roman Em­pire. But the sens of this Law is this (to wit, that Sea­affairs were to bee determined by the Rhodian Law, as hee declare's a little before.) For, seeing the Emperor is Lord of the world, surely, not the Land onely but the Sea also, ought to submit to his Laws, and hee to appoint Laws therein: though notwithstanding hee do not determine matters by his own Law in the Sea, but by the Rhodian Law, which was by him approved. Understand therefore, when it is said, I am Lord of the world, becaus I go­vern the world according to my own Law. But the Law, suppose the Rhodian Law; of the Sea; becaus by it, Ju­stice is administred upon the Sea. Add hereunto, that this Particle [...], that is, Autem, is not so opposed, that it al­waies exclude's what goeth before. And therefore Alcia­tus also rendreth it thus, But the Law of the Sea, by which Law of the Rhodians concerning Navigation, let it bee determined, &c. And therefore truly, it is upon exceeding good ground that hee call's their opinion very ridiculous, who would have it hence con­cluded, that a Dominion of the Sea did not belong unto the Emperors. For, suppose the Emperor did answer so, as it is commonly rendred. Doth hee there­fore deny himself a Dominion of the Sea, becaus hee affirm's the Law to have Dominion at Sea? was hee not in the mean time Soveraign Lord and Arbitrator of the world (as hee implied indeed by his Answer) and so also of the Law? whatsoëver hee pleased, was L. 7. ff. tit. de Constitut. Principum. Law. Therefore to say, that any thing which the Law had Dominion over, was not also under the Emperor's Dominion (to whom the Law it self was subject) is so absurd, as nothing can bee more.

[Page 160]Others there are that render the sens of the words after this manner. Although I my self bee Lord and Emperor of the world, and so, free from all Laws, nor bound by any Rule to give any account to my Subjects, yet notwithstanding the Law shall bee Empress and Queen at Sea, that is, it shall bear sway by Sea, in such Cases as have faln out at Sea, since it concern's Sea affairs, nor shall my Exchequer bee advanced by the loss of my Sub­jects, but Justice ought to bee equally administred between the Exchequer and private persons, and therefore the Ex­chequer shall bee liable to give an account. So saith, Fran­ciscus de O [...]at. [...], lib. 1. cap.1. [...]. Amaya, Advocate in the King's Court of Ex­chequer within the Kingdom of Granada. So you see, here is not the least Track admitted of a denial of Sea-Dominion.

Som also there are, who would have the mean­ing bee, that Antoninus should expressly say that hee himself was as well the Law of the Sea, as Lord of the world. I indeed am Lord of the world, and I am also the Law of the Sea. So Joannes Igneus: And som [...] others there are that incline this way: with whose opinion if wee shall concur, wee must needs confess also, that the Emperor did sufficiently at­tribute the very Dominion of the Sea unto himself. But M [...]an, [...]. 3 cap. 1 [...]. Samuel Petit, a very learned French-man saith, Antoninus doth not deny himself to bee Lord of the Sea, that hee cannot give Law and do Justice to those which deal upon the Sea; for, you see his meaning was, that Right should bee don betwixt Eudaemon and the Customers which dwelt in the Cyclades Islands, according to the Rho­dian Law; nor doth hee say also that hee is so tied by this Rhodian Law, that hee can by no means reliev Eudaemon against this Law, if any injurie bee don him, but his mean­ing is, that Eudaemon should have Right don him accord­ing [Page 161] to this Law, but yet so that this do not thwart any of the Roman Laws. Thus hee interpret's it, though the vulgar reading bee reteined; which hee would ra­ther have to bee rejected, and the name of Law to bee put out there; Beeing of opinion that the words [...] but the Law of the Sea, are cor­rupted from [...], but the winde of the Sea. As if the Emperor had said, that hee himself indeed was Lord of the Sea, but that the [...]ea nevertheless is so subject to the power and alterations of winde and weather, that it was not in his power, though Lord thereof, to prevent Ship­wracks. Moreover also, Petit correct's the Cosmo­graphie of the Petition. Hee is of opinion, that those words, [...] in Italie, crept in through the negligence of Transcribers in stead of [...] being understood) in the Telian or AEgean Sea, which is about the Island Telos. What a mon­strous thing were (saith hee) that those who were ship­wrack't in the Sea upon the Coast of Italie, should have been pillaged by Publicans or Customers dwelling in the Cyclades Islands? what Cosmographie is this? what rela­tion have the Publicans or Customers of those Isles unto Italie? which is most judiciously spoken: For, it appear's a manifest error there concerning Italie. And it is most certain, that the Island Telos, whether it bee one of the The Cy­clades and Sporades make up the Isles in the Archipelago. Cyclades or Sporades, is so placed in the AEgean or Levant Sea (as wee finde in Lib. 10. Strabo, Lib. 4. cap. 12. Plinie, and Stephanus de urbibus) that the matter hang's well together, if wee say that the Customers of the Cyclades seized upon wrack't Goods in the Telian Sea, which to say of the Italian Sea or Shore is too monstrous in reason. Perhaps also, in that Catalogue of Seas summ'd up by AEthicus, an antient Cosmo­grapher, [Page 162] the Ionian and AEgean Sea, the Sea called Mare Lautades (which learned men suppose to bee corruptly read for Leucadium) and Mare Tillae, the Telian Sea it self, beeing taken out of this very Pe­tition, before it was corrupted, was signified by the name of Tilla. And thus you have in a manner the opinion of learned men, so far as concern's the matter in hand, touching that Answer, and the Pe­tition of Eudemon.

For my part, I most willingly yield my assent to the emendation of the Cosmographie: But do conceiv, that the antient and received reading of the Answer ought not to bee alter'd, save onely in the pointing. Oftentimes no regard hath been had, nor any use of points in antient Books: So that succeeding Generations have been puzzled now and then with a confusion of Syntax. But by a very small alteration of them in this place (for they are the very same with those in the Vide Al­ciat. Disp. lib. 2. cap. 5. Books that are published) the sens appear's to mee not onely suited to the matter of the Petition, and clear; but also plainly freed, both from that Phansie, as if Do­minion of the Sea were denied the Emperor in that place; and also from that fiction there expresly deli­vered touching the Sea-Dominion of the Law. Nor can I bee perswaded, that Interpreters hitherto have sufficiently hit upon the Emperor's meaning. For, what is this to the purpose? I indeed am Lord of the world, but the Law of the Sea. If it were spoken of the Law in general, certainly the Law had Dominion as well upon the main Land, The Emperor himself was Lord of every kinde of Law, even by Land as well as by Sea: And so truly, the Answer had hitherto, con­cerned the Petition nothing at all. If you would [Page 163] understand it of the Rhodian Law, in such a sens (as Alciatus did) that the Emperor's meaning was that the Law had Dominion over the Sea, what then is the Consequence? that the matter was to bee determined by the Rhodian Law, so far as it was not opposed by any of the Roman Laws. What, was the Rhodian Law simply supreme over the Sea, and yet notwithstanding that high Title subject to restraint by the Roman Laws? These things do not cotten well. Let it bee pointed therefore, either after this manner; [...], I indeed am Lord of the world. But of this kinde, or this is the Law or the Custom of the Sea. Let it bee determined by the Rhodian Law concerning Navigation, so far as none of our Laws do oppose the same. Or let it bee pointed thus; [...] &c. I indeed am Lord of the world. But let that Law or that Custom of the Sea bee judged or determined by the Rhodian Law concerning Navigation, so far as &c.

The Case was this: Eudemon Asiaticus, born in Nicomedia, a Citie of Bithynia, having suffer'd Shipwrack in the Telian Sea (or the AEgean, which is about Telos) complain's that his Goods were seized by the Customers of the Cyclades, petitioning the Emperor for relief, in such a manner as if the Customers had made an advantage by his misfortune in a most injurious manner. Hee salute's him with the style of Lord and Emperor. The Emperor in his Answer readily owneth himself to bee a Lord, and so far a Lord, that hee saith the whole Earth, yea, and the world it self was comprised within his [Page 164] Lordship or Jurisdiction. Therein also hee signifie's that it belong's to him to reliev Petitioners when wrong is don them: But as to what concern'd the matter of complaint, or the Petition about the wrack't Goods that had been seized by the Customers, that it did not sufficiently appear whether those Customers had don it wrongfully. Becaus (if our former reading, or pointing bee admitted) in general, saith hee, and according to Rule, the Sea-Custom, or that Law of the Sea which give's wrack't Goods to the Customers, hold's good. For, so these words [...] [but that Custom or that Law of this kinde belong's to the Sea] hath relation to the thing don by the Customers, as it was in brief set sorth in the Petition. But in regard that to this Cu­stom or Law of the Sea, there might, either through som privilege, or becaus of the qualitie of the goods, or som other Custom no less in force, certain Qua­lifications arise, according to circumstance, in respect whereof perhaps either the Customers ought, in this case, to have forborn medling with the goods, or the Complainant might have a special exception to privilege his goods from Seizure; therefore hee did well to leav it, beeing a matter so succinctly and without any addition of circumstance expressed in the Petition, to bee determined by the Naval Laws of the Rhodians; but yet so far onely as the Roman Laws in the mean time were not contrarie thereto. Nor doth the sens much differ, if the latter pointing and translation bee admitted: I indeed am Lord of the world, and the Sea as well as the Land is con­teined within my Jurisdiction: in both, I willingly right those that are wronged, according to Law: But truly what the Custom of the Sea may bee in [Page 165] this case, and whether the Complainant ought to bee relieved, let it bee determined by the Rhodian Laws, which, by my permission, are in use upon the Sea, where they are not contrarie to our own. But it seem's to mee not a little conducing to a confirma­tion of the fore-going sens, whereby the Maritim Law touching Wrecks and the Right of the Custo­mers (that is, of the Exchequer, whose Right is trans­ferr▪d into their hands) is, asserted, if it shall bee made appear that such a Law or Custom was in force at that time, which Interpreters are not wont here to grant. It is indeed certain enough according to the Imperial Law (as wee have it now compiled in the Books of Justinian) that L. 3. & 21. ff. tit. de ad­quir. & amit­tend. possess. l. 44. ff. de ad­quir. rer. dom. l. 1. 3. & seqq. ff. tit. de Incen­dio. l. 1. C de Naufragiis. Wrecks are reserved to the former Owners, and so that both the Exchequer and the Customers are thence excluded: Yea, and that the Custom whereby they are confiscated, is condemned by the received determinations of the Roman-German Empire, as well as the Canon Law, as wee hinted in the former Chapter. But it is col­lected by manifest evidences, that the Law or Cu­stom for Confiscation of Wrecks was in force, in the time of this Emperor Antoninus (I mean Antoni­nus Pius) who, as Julius Capitolinus write's did in the establishing of this Law, make use of Volusius Me­tianus the Lawyer, out of whose Books the Petition and Answer here spoken of was transcribed into the Digests Locis supe­riùs citatis.. It is clear, that almost all those Passages that wee finde in the Digests for reserving them to the former Owners, were taken out of Paulus, Callistratus, and Ulpian, who lived many years af­ter this Antoninus. There is somwhat also to this purpose out of L. 21. ff. tit. de adquir. & amit. possess. §. 1. Priscus Javolenus, who lived at the same time with this Antoninus. But this Emperor [Page 166] reigned XXII years, and as appear's out of Javolenus, hee did by Decree mitigate the rigor of Confiscation in this Case. From which it might easily com to pass, that under the same Emperor such a Law and Custom as wee have mentioned might bee in force, and under the same it might either bee abrogated, or the rigor of it abated. The principal Constitution, which, according to the L. 1. C de Naufragiis. Book of Justinian, would not have the Exchequer to interpose in this case, is by Antonius Contius, a very eminent Lawyer, attri­buted to the Emperor Antoninus, according to the Testimonie of an antient Book in Manuscript; al­though the name of Constantine bee put before those that are published. The words are these; If at any time a Vessel bee driven a Shore by Shipwrack, or if at any time it run aground, it shall belong to the Owners. My Exchequer shall not interpose it self. For, what right hath the Exchequer by another man's misfortune, that it should seek after profit upon so sad an occasion? Yea, and Ulpian shew's, that such a kinde of Constitution there was also under Adrian, who was this man's Father by Adoption. It is decreed (so saith L. 12. ff. tit▪ de Incen­dio. Ulpian) that it may bee lawful for every man, to recover his losses by Ship­wrack freely; and thus much was ordained by the Em­peror Antoninus, with the Emperor his Father. There are in these very clear Evidences, that about that time, there was such a Law or Custom of Confis­cation, as wee have mentioned; which wee know very well was wont to take place often, even con­trarie to the Autoritie of antient Decrees. For, it may bee concluded from the Shipwrack of Valgius, or Victor, related by Epist. 37. ad Micarium. Paulinus, that it was in som use even under Theodosius the elder. There are the like Exam­ples upon the Chronic. Albert. S [...]a­densis, ann. 1112. videsis Frederic [...]inde [...]ro [...]. in Glossario▪ pag. 1443. Shore of the Roman-German Empire: [Page 167] And others may bee brought, whereas notwith­standing som Laws were made to the contrarie.

Moreover also, the antient Orators, both Greek and Latin, whilst they allege Examples about the stating of Questions in pleading, do mingle this very Law or Custom about Shipwrack with other usual and antient Customs in the Greek and Roman Empire, as a thing that was very frequently received. Sopater and [...], pag. 107. Ve­netiis, 1509. Syrianus in Hermogenem say; The Law is, that spoils which are found, do belong to him that is General of the Army; In like manner the Law is, that Wrecks do belong to the Customers. In a tempestuous Sea, spoils are brought into Port. Hereupon ariseth a controversie about them, between the Commanders and the Customers of the Customs. In this case it be [...]ove's us not to vex our selvs in vain with reading of Laws, but to look into the very nature of things. For, in truth the Question is, whether the Goods bee now to bee called Spoils or Wrecks. In like manner saith, Artis Rbe­toricae Scho­licae, lib. 1. pag. 46. edit. Paris. 1599. Curius Fortunatianus; what is a simple definition? when wee define a particular thing simply. Put case, that Wrecks do belong to the Pub­licans or Customers. The bodie of a certain man that was lost by Shipwrack, clothes and all, beeing driven ashore was cover'd by the Sands. The Customers came and drew it out. Therefore they are guiltie of the violation of Sepulcre. For here the Question is simply, what it is to violate a Se­pulcre.

Moreover, that, Volusius Metianus wrote that Peti­tion and the Answer, appear's in Libris Publicorum ex Lege Rhodiâ; that is, in his summarie of those Laws which belong either to the Exchequer or the Customers, wherein also is conteined either the Law or Custom of Confiscation of Wrecks. It suit's very well with these Particulars, that in that Answer of [Page 168] the Emperor Antoninus those words, [...], should bee rendred, but that Law of the Sea or that Custom of the Sea, which hee meant should bee so examined and determined, according to the Rho­dian Laws, that in the mean time, those Rhodian Laws should not bee of force, if any Rescript or any Roman Law were against it. And of what Au­toritie Adrian's Decree was at that time (whereof Ulpian speak's in the places before quoted) per­haps it did not sufficiently appear, no not to the Lawyers themselvs without a more curious exa­mination, whose assistance Antoninus made use of in his Answer. But, that wee may at length dispatch this particular; no man whatso [...]ver, whether hee ap­prove the common Translation, or mine, will (I suppose) unless hee renounce his own reason, con­ceiv, upon a due consideration of the whole mat­ter, that any denial is made of the Dominion of the Sea in that Answer, or that the least Tittle can bee found in it against the Dominion thereof.

An Answer to the Opinions of modern Lawyers, so far as they oppose a Do­minion of the Sea; especially of Fer­nandus Vasquius, and Hugo Grotius. CHAP. XXVI.

HAving thus refu [...]ed, or upon good ground removed som Opinions of antient Lawyers, which are usually alleged for the mainteining of a perpetual Communitie of the Sea; it is no [Page 169] hard matter in like manner to wave the Autoritie of those of later time, that oppose a Dominion. For, if wee consider the great number of those, who, whether they comment upon the bodie of Justinian, or treat apart of this particular, would not have us to recede from that natural Communitie; wee shall finde plainly that they deal in the same man­ner, as they that have pinn'd their Faith, more then was meet, upon the sleev of Ulpian, or som other such antient Autor: Unless wee conceiv that som of them did not so much explain the Law in this point, as recite the opinions of Lawyers, so far as they have been by them deliver'd: Just in the same manner, as if a man should so discours upon Aristotle's Astronomie, or the opinion of Thales touching the Earth's floating, like a Dish in the Sea, and that of the Sto [...]cks of its encompas­sing the Earth like a Girdle, with that of the An­tients concerning an extreme heat under the Equi­noctial, and other opinions of that kinde, which are rejected and condemned, by the observation and experience of Posteritie; that hee might seem not so much to search into the thing it self, as to represent the person of the Autor, thereby to trace out his meaning, onely for the discovering of his opinion. But as the root beeing cut, the Tree fall's, so the Autoritie of those antient Lawyers beeing re­moved out of the way, all the determinations of the modern which are supported by it, must bee extremely weakned.

Now therefore, as to what hath been former­ly alleged out of Fernandus Vosquius, it is grounded upon such Arguments as are either manifestly fals, or impertinent. For, what is this to the purpose? [Page 170] That the Sea, from the beginning of the world to this present day, is, and ever hath been in common, without the least alteration, as 'tis generally known. Whereas the quite contrarie is most certainly known to those, who have had any insight into the received Laws and Customs of Ages and Nations. That is to say, that by most approved Law and Custom, som Seas have passed into the Dominion and partrimonie, both of Princes and private persons; as is clearly made manifest out of what hath been alreadie shewn you. Moreover also hee Illustrium Controvers. lib. 1. cap. 51. §. 23. unde & V. Cl. Hu­go Grotius in Mari Libero, cap. 7. would have pre­scription to ceas betwixt Foreigners in relation to each other, and not to take place in the Law of Nations, but in the Civil onely; so that by his Opinion pre­scription should bee of no force between those (as be­tween two supreme states or Princes) who are not indifferently subject to the Civil Law, which admit's prescription; then which not any thing can bee said or imagined more absurd. Almost all the prin­cipal points of the Intervenient Law of Nations, beeing established by long consent of persons using them, do depend upon prescription or antient Custom. To say nothing of those Princes, whose Terri­tories were subject heretofore to the Roman Empire, and who afterwards became absolute within them­selvs, not onely by Arms, but also by prescription (which is every where admitted among the Laws of Nations;) whence is it that Prisoners of war are not now made slaves among Christians, unless it bee becaus that Custom began to grow out of date som Ages since upon a ground of Suarez de Legibus, lib. 2 [...]. Christian bro­therhood, and by prescription ratified betwixt Nations. Whence is it that the ransoms of prisoners are to bee paid, som to the Princes, and som to the Persons [Page 171] that take them? As for instance, when the ransom is not above ten thousand Crowns, it goe's to him that took the Prisoner; when it exceed's, it is to bee paid to the Prince. Becaus (saith In Decist­sionibus Bur­degal. decisi­one 178. num. 4. Nicolaus Boërius) if it exceed, as when any one hath taken a Duke, a Count, a Baron, or any other great man, then it belong's to the Prince, and so it is observed in the Kingdoms of France, England and Spain. It hath by prescription of time been observed among Princes; and so it became Law. And truly, to deny a Title of prescription wholly among Princes, is plainly to abrogate the very intervenient Laws of Nations. As for those other things men­tioned by Vasquius, concerning Charitie and the in­exhaustible abundance of the Sea (whereby hee make's a difference betwixt Rivers and Seas) and other things of the like nature, they have no rela­tion at all to the point of Dominion; as you have been sufficiently told alreadie.

In the next place, wee com to the other, to wit, Hugo Grotius, a man of great learning, and ex­traordinarie knowledg in things both Divine and Humane; whose name is very frequent in the mouths of men every where, to maintein a natural and perpetual Communitie of the Sea. Hee hath handled that point in two Books; in his Mare Li­berum, and in that excellent work De Jure Belli & pacis. As to what concern's Mare Liberum, a Book that was written against the Portugals about trading into the Indies through the vast Atlantick and Southern Ocean; it contein's indeed such things as have been delivered by antient Lawyers touching communiti [...] of the Sea; Yea, and disputing for the Profits and Interests of his Countrie, hee draw's them into his own partie; and so endeavor's to prove that the Sea [Page 172] is not capable of private Dominion. But hee hath so warily couched this subject with other things, that whether in this hee did hit or miss, the rest how­soëver might serv to assert the point which hee was to handle. Moreover, hee discourseth about the Title of Discoverie, and primarie occupation (pretended to by the Portugals) and that also which is by Donation from the Pope. And hee seem's in a manner, either somtimes to quit that natural and perpetual Com­munitie, which many Civil Lawyers are eager to maintein, and hee himself, in order to his design, endeavored to confirm; or els to confess that it can hardly bee defended. For, concerning those Seas that were inclosed by the antient Romans; the na­ture of the Sea, saith Mari libe­ro, cap. 5. hee, differ's from the Shore in this, that the Sea, unless it bee in som small part of it self, is not easily capable of Building or Inclosure. And put case it were, yet even this could hardly bee without the hindrance of common use. Nevertheless, if any small part of it may bee thus possessed, it fall's to him that enter's upon it first by occupation. Now, the difference of a lesser and a grea [...]er part, cannot take place (I sup­pose) in the determining of private Dominion. But in express words hee except's even a Bay or Creek of the Sea. And a little after, saith hee, Wee do not speak here of an I [...]-land Sea, which in som places being streightned with Land on every side, exceed's not the breadth even of a River, yet 'tis clear that this was it the Ro­man Lawyers spake of, when they set forth those notable determinations against private Avarice. But the Question, is concerning the Ocean, which Antiquitie called immense Infinit, the Parent or Original of things, confining with the Aër. And afterwards hee saith, The Controversie is not about a streight or Creek in this Ocean, nor of so [Page 173] much as is within view when one stand's upon the shore. A little farther also, speaking of Prescription, hee saith, Cap. 7. It is to bee added, that their Autoritie who are of the contrarie opinion, cannot bee applied to this Question. For, they speak of the Mediterranean Sea, wee of the Ocean. They of a Creek or Bay, wee of the broad and wide Sea, which differ very much in the point of Occupation. And certainly, there is no man but must conceiv it a very difficult thing to possess the whole Ocean: Though if it could bee held by occupation, like a narrow Sea, or a Creek, or as the whole world was said to bee possessed at first by antient Princes, it might even as well pass into the Dominion or Ownership of him that should enter upon it first by occupation. How­soêver, there have been Jo. Gryphi­ander, de Insulis, c. 25. §. 52. som others, who by the same Rule distinguish in like manner the inner and neigh­boring Seas from the open Sea or main Ocean.

But it is by no means to bee omitted, that they, for whose sakes Hugo Grotius wrote that Book, that is to say, the State [...] of Holland, did, not unwillingly, but rather (as it seem's) according to their own hearts desire, give ear to the condemnation of that Opinion (especially becaus it was owned by Grotius) concerning a Communitie of the Sea and freedom of Fishing therein according to the Law natural and of Nations, by the Embassador of James King of great Britain, in a speech of his deliver'd openly in Holland; and that others were gravely admonished from his misfortune, not to maintein the like. Of vvhich thing Grotius himself bear's vvitness. In Apolege­tico eorum qui Hollandiae praefuerunt [...]nte mutatio­nem 1618. p. 387. edit. Heidelberg. cap. 19. pag. 257. I have labored, saith hee, as much as any to maintein the Right of Navigation to the Indies, and for the preservation of Clothdressing in our Countrie. But for the freedom of Fish­ing at Sea so much, that Carleton the King of great [Page 174] Britain's Embassador, beeing incited by my enemies to speak somwhat in publick against mee beeing at Hee was imprisoned for having an hand in Barnevel's business. that time in Prison, hee had no [...]ing els to say, but that I had begun to make som Discourses in defence of that freedom, as a thing grounded upon the Law of Nations, and Custom, time out of minde; whereas notwithstanding, nothing had been said or written by mee upon that subject, different from those things which the State's Embassadors had mainteined in Britain in the year MDCX; and our Ancestors before, even for som Ages past. And yet that Embassador said, that others ought to bee terrified by the example of my misfortune, from de­fending that Opinion. It is true indeed, that persons in power usually take a libertie to aspers men as they pleas when they are in question: But these things were not spoken so much against Hugo Grotius, as against that natural Right of Commu­nitie at Sea (injuriously pretended to) which many men have defended more expressly and plainly then himself; but none, with so much learning and in­genuitie. Nor, did that Speech of the Embassador, for ought wee know, as things then stood, displeas the States of Holland.

But in his Books De Jure Belli & Pacis, lib. 2. cap. 2. §. 2. & 3. de Jure Belli & Pacis, having indeed set down the reason of the original of private Dominion to bee upon this ground, that those places which became peculiarly assigned were not sufficient for the maintenance of all men, hee conclude's that the Sea, becaus of its bigness and inexhaustible abundance, beeing sufficient for all, cannot bee ap­propriated to any. Hee add's other things also, touch­ing the nature of the Seas not beeing distinguishable by Bounds; of both which wee have said enough alreadie. But at length hee betake's himself to the received Customs of Nations and speak's more then [Page 175] once concerning the proprietie or private Dominion of the Sea, as of a thing somtimes to bee yielded without Controversie. The Land, saith Ibidem. §. 13. hee, and Rivers, and any part of the Sea, in case it com under the proprietie of som Nation, ought to bee open for such as have need of passage upon just and necessarie occasions. Afterwards also, speaking of the Ibid Cap. 3. §. 8. proprietie of Rivers, After this example, saith hee, it seem's that even the Sea may bee possessed by him that is Owner of the Land on both sides, although it lie open either above, as a Creek; or above and below too, as a streight or narrow Sea: So that it bee not so great a part of the Sea, that beeing compared with the Lands it cannot seem to bee any portion of them. And that which is lawful for one Prince or People, the same seem's lawful also for two or three, if in the like manner they pleas to enter up­on the Sea flowing between. For so, Rivers that flow be­tween two Nations, have been entred upon by both, and then divided. Hee allegeth other things also touching the Right of primarie occupation by Sea; but so, that for the most part hee contein's himself within Creeks and streights. Ibidem. §. 19. Hee saith, that not by any natural Right or Reason, but by Custom it came to pass, that the Sea was not appropriated, or that it could not lawfully bee entred upon by Right of Occupation. And that the Custom beeing changed, if there were any in the antient Law that might hinder a private Dominion of the Sea, the reason of Com­munitie must bee changed also. But that it hath been sufficiently changed, appear's abundantly (if I bee not deceived) out of what wee have hitherto shewn you. Yea, the very Laws as well The same with Muni­cipal. Civil as Intervenient of most Nations make abundantly to this purpose, as it hath been proved. [...] [Page 174] [...] [Page 175]

[Page 176]Moreover, that nothing may bee wanting to weigh down the Ballance, therefore, besides the opinions of the Civil Lawyers before alleged out of France, Spain, and Italie, for a private Dominion of the Sea, let this over and above bee added, which is taken out of that sort of Lawyers also, discoursing in general terms about the Sea. I here give it you as it was composed by a Lawyer, none of the meanest in the Roman-German Empire, by name De Regali­bus, lib. cap 4. §. 97. Re­generus Sixtinus, who was indeed against private Dominion of the Sea. The matter in question, saith hee, concerning the Sea and its Shore, is, whether as Rivers that are navigable, and by which others are made navi­gable, they may bee reckoned inter Regalia among the Prince's Roialties? (for, whatsoëver is reputed a part of those Regalia or Roialties, is as private or peculiar to Princes, as that is to subjects which is their own; for which caus the Revenues of the Exchequer are private after the same manner;) so also, whether the Sea it self and its Shore, bee comprised within those Regalia? Cacheranus, Decis. 155. n. 81. Ferrarius Monta­nus, de Feud. lib. 5. c. 7. Versic. Ta­metsi Jus piscandi. reckon's the regulation and the very dominion also of the Sea among the Regalia, nor doth hee make any difference betwixt the Sea and a publick River. Mynsingerus also, Resp. 1. nu. 162. Decad. 11. saith, that the proprietie of the Sea is a part of those Regalia. But Sixtinus himself, discoursing upon this matter, just as they do that are more addicted than they ought to the words of Ulpian, and num­bring up those Autors that are of the contrarie opi­nion, conclude's thus, But more true it is that a proprietie of the Sea and Shore, is not by the Common Law to bee reckoned among the Regalia. But upon due consideration of all those particulars, which hither­to [Page 179] have been produced out of the Customs of so many Ages and Nations, and as well out of the Civil, as the Common or Intervenient Law of most Nations, no man (I suppose) will question but that there remain's not either in the nature of the Sea it self, or in the Law either Divine, Natural, or of Nations, any thing which may so oppose the private Dominion thereof, that it cannot bee ad­mitted by every kinde of Law, even the most ap­proved; and so that any kinde of Sea whatsoëver may by any sort of Law whatsoëver bee capable of private Dominion; which was the thing I inten­ded to prove.

The order or Method of those things that are to bee handled in this Book. The British Ocean divided into four parts. CHAP. I.

HAving made it evident, in the former Book, that the Sea is capable of pri­vate Dominion as well as the Land, and that by all kindes of Law, whe­ther wee seriously consider the Di­vine, or Natural, or any Law of Na­tions whatsoëver; it remain's next that wee discours touching the Dominion of great Britain in the Sea [...] [Page] [...] [Page 181] [Page 182] encompassing it about, and of those large Testimonies whereby it is asserted and mainteined. Wherein this Method is observed, that in the first place wee premise both the distribution and various appellation of the Sea flowing about it, in order to the Discours. Then it shall bee shewn, from all Antiquitie, down to our times without interruption, that those, who by reason of so frequent alterations of the state of Affairs, have reigned here, whether Britains, Romans, Saxons, Danes, and Normans, and so the following Kings (each one according to the various latitude of his Empire) have enjoied the Dominion of that Sea by perpetual occupation, that is to say, by using and enjoying it as their own after a peculiar manner, as an un­doubted portion either of the whole bodie of the estate of the British Empire, or of som part thereof, according to the state and condition of such as have ruled it; or as an inseparable appendant of this Land. Lastly, that the Kings of Great Britain have had a peculiar Dominion or proprietie over the Sea flowing about it, as a Bound not bounding their Empire, but (to borrow the Terms used by Surveiors of Land) as bounded by it; in the same manner as over the Island it self, and the other neighboring Isles which they possess about it.

The Sea encompassing great Britain, which in ge­neral wee term the British Sea, is divided into four parts, according to the four Quarters of the World. On the West lie's the Vergivian Sea, which also take's the name of the Deucaledonian, where it washeth the Coast of Scotland. And of this Vergivian, wherein Ireland is situate, the Irish Sea is reckoned to bee a part, called in antient time the Gildas, Epist. de Excidio Bri­tannia. Scythian Vale, but now the Channel of S^t George. So that as well that which [Page 183] washeth the Western Coast of Ireland, as that which flowe's between great Britain and Ireland, is to bee called the British Sea. For, not onely this (which of old was called great Britain, and somtimes sim­ply the Aristides, in Oratione AEgyptiacà. Great Island) but also the Isle of Ireland, with the other adjacent Isles, were termed Britanniae: So that many times Albion and Ireland are equally called British Isles and Britannides; as you may see in Strabo, Ptolomie, Marcianus Heracleötes, Plinie, Eustathius upon Dionysius Afer, and others. Moreover, Ireland is called by Ptolomie Magnae. Constructio­nis, lib. 2. [...] little Britain. And, saith Ethelward, an antient Writer, Lib. 4. c. 4. They go to Ireland, called heretofore Britannides by the great Julius Caesar. Perhaps hee had a more perfect Copie of Julius Caesar's Book: For in none of his Commen­taries which wee use, is Ireland called by that name. And it hath been observed by Lips. Episto­licar. quaest. lib. 2. cap. 3. & Elect. lib. 2. cap. 7. learned men, that that book hath been maimed and alter'd by one Julius Celsus, whose name wee finde now and then in the Manuscript Copies.

Towards the North this Sea is named the Northern, Caledonian, and Deucaledonian Sea, wherein lie scatter'd the Orcades Islands, Thule, and others, which beeing called the British or Albionian Isles; yea, and Jo. Tze [...]zet, Chiliad. 8. cap. 218. Bri­tannides, gave name to the neighboring Sea. And indeed Thule (which som would have to bee Island; others, and that with most reason, do conceiv it to bee the biggest of the Guil-Cam­den. in Insul. Brit. p. 850. Shetland or Zetland Isles, called [...]hilensel by the Gaspar. Peucerus, lib. de Terrae di­mensione. Seamen, and som there are again that think otherwise) was of old not onely termed a British Isle, but also by som expresly placed in Britain it self. Mahumedes Acharranides an Arabian, called likewise Aracensis and Albategnius, a famous Mathe­matician, who lived above nine hundred years ago, [Page 184] saith, De Scien­tiis Stella­rum, lib. cap. 6. Som observing the breadth of the Earth from the Equinoctial Line towards the North, have found it to bee determined by the Isle Thule which is in Britain, where the longest day is XX [...]ours; that is to say, Pto­lomie and his [...]ollowers, who by drawing a Line on the Northside of Thule or the Shetland Isles, through 63 degrees, and a quarter of Northern Lati­tude, have set it down for the utmost Bound of the habitable world. Yea, and som have used the name of Thule for Britain it self or England. In times past, the Emperor of Constantinople was wont to have trustie Guards called Barrangi, con­stantly attending his person; who were taken out of England, as appear's out of Hist. Graec. lib. 2. Nicetas Choniates; and Codinus also who was keeper of the Palace, De Officiis Constantinop. write's that they were wont to salute the Em­peror with a loud voice [...] in the English Tongue. But in the Storie of Alexia­dos, lib. 2. Anna Comnena, the Daughter of Alexius, it is said expressly, that they came [...] from the Island of Thule. In like manner, all the Islands either known or heard of in this Northern Sea, were at length called by the name of British; the utmost Bounds whereof, as also of Thule it self, som of the Antients would have to reach unto 67 degrees of Latitude, or there­about. And Albategnius, speaking of the Sea as it look's toward Spain, saith; De Scien­tiis Stella­rum, cap. 6. There are XII Bri­tish Isles in it towards the North; and beyond these it is not habitable; and how far it stretcheth, is un­known.

Upon the Eastern Coast of Britain flow's the German Sea (so called by Ptolomie, becaus it lie's before the German Shore.) On the South, flow's that which is particularly noted by Ptolomie to [Page 185]

bee the British Sea. But all that was called also the British Sea, which extend's it self like a half Moon along the French Shore, through the Bay or Creek [Page 186] of Aquitain, unto the Northern Coast of Spain. For this wee have the Testimonie of Mela, who saith the Pyrenean Promontories do butt out into the British Sea. De Situ O [...]lis, lib. 2. cap 3. The Pyrenie, saith hee, run's first from hence into the British Sea; then turning towards the conti­ment, it stretcheth as far as Spain. Yet every man knowe's it is called likewise either the French, or Contabrian, or the Aquitanick Sea, from the several Shores which it washeth. But so far even the name both of the British and English Sea was inlarged either by that extraordinarie Command of the people of Britain at Sea, or of such as had atteined the Rights of Do­minion in Great Britain (which is all one to our purpose.) And it is stretch't likewise by som of the Antients as far as the Promontorie Nerium, now cal­led Capo di S^t Maria. The Arabian Geographer saith; Climat. 4. part. 1. Towards the North, Andaluzia (so the Arabians use to call Spain) is environed by the Sea of the people of England, who are of the Romans, that is, who are of the peo­ple of Europe; for, it is usual with those Eastern Na­tions to call the people of Europe, generally either Romans or French. And then hee saith, There are nine Stages from Toledo to S^t James, which is seated upon the English Sea. Moreover, hee call's the Place, where that Citie of S^t James is seated, Climat. 5. part. 1. a Promontorie of the English Sea; and hath divers other passages of the same kinde. Thus at length great Britain, with the Isles lying about it, and the Sea imbracing it on everie side, became as it were one Civil Bodie, so that the whole together is comprehended in the name of British or Britannick. Also, this Sea and Great Britain have in­deed given mutual names as it were of Dignitie to each other. That is to say, this Island was called by the Antients simply In Cata­lectis Virgi­lii, de Sabi­no. Insula Caeruli, the Isle of the Sea, [Page 187] as that was called Oceanus Insulae, the Ocean of the Isle, or the British Sea.

Having made this preparation, then wee treat first concerning the Sea-Dominion of the Britains, be­fore they were reduced under the Roman power; Next, touching a Dominion of that kinde belong­ing to the Romans while they ruled here, continually and necessarily accompanying the Soveraigntie of the Island. Afterwards, it is made evident by such Testimonies as are found among the Antients, that the English Saxons and others who enjoied the supreme Power in Britain, before the Norman's Invasion, had such a kinde of Dominion. Lastly, according to the fourfold division of the British Sea, wee set forth the antient Occupation, together with the long and continued possession of every Sea in particular, since the Norman's time; whereby the true and lawful Dominion and Customs of the Sea, which are the subject of our Discours, may bee drawn down, as it were by a twin'd thred, until our own times. Moreover, seeing both the Northern and Western Ocean do stretch to a very great Latitude (this to America; that not onely to Island and the Shores of Groenland, but to parts utterly unknown) and so it cannot all bee called the British Seas; yet becaus the Nation of great Britain have very large Rights and Privileges of their own in both those Seas, even beyond the bounds of the British name, therefore it was thought fit to touch a little upon these Par­ticulars.

That the antient Britains, did enjoy and possess the SEA of the same name; espe­cially the Southern and Eastern part of it, as Lords thereof, together with the Island, before they were brought under the Roman power. CHAP. II.

IT is true indeed which an eminent man saith; Hugo Gro­tius, de Jure Belli & Pa­cis, lib. 2. c. 3. §. 11. That the Sea hath been enjoyed by Occupation, not for this reason onely, becaus men had so enjoied the Land, nor is the Act or intent of the minde sufficient thereto; but that there is a necessitie of som external Act, from whence this Occupation may bee understood. Therefore Arguments are not to bee derived altogether from a bare Occupation or Dominion of Countries, whose Shores are washed by the Sea: But from such a private or peculiar use or enjoiment of the Sea, as consist's in a setting forth Ships to Sea, ei­ther to defend or make good the Dominion; in prescribing Rules of Navigation to such as pass through it; in receiving such Profits and Commo­dities as are peculiar to every kinde of Sea Dominion whatsoêver; and, which is the principal, either in ad­mitting or excluding others at pleasure. Touching which particular, wee shall make diligent inquirie into those things which concern the Isle of Bri­tain, through the Ages past, down to the present time.

It is upon good ground concluded, that the most [Page 189] antient Historie, whereto any credit ought to bee given about the affair's of Britain, is not elder then the time of Caius Julius Caesar; the Ages before him bee­ing too obscured with Fables. But at his coming wee finde clear passages of the Britain's Ownership and Dominion of the Sea flowing about them, especially of the South and East part of it, as a perpetual Ap­pendant of the Soveraigntie of the Island. For, they not onely used the Sea as their own at that time for Navigation and Fishing; but also permitted none besides Merchants to sail unto the Island without their leav; nor any man at all to view or sound the Ports and Sea-Coast. And that the Case stood cer­tainly thus, it is no slight Argument which wee shall insert here out of Caesar himself. But allowance must bee given ever to Arguments and Conjectures, touching times so long since past and gon; especially when there is a concurrence in the Customs and Testimonies of following times. And as things bee­ing placed at too remote a distance, so that they cannot bee certainly discerned by the eie, are wont to bee more surely discover'd by the help of a triangle at hand; So what uncertainty soêver may bee in those proofs that are to bee brought out of so remote Antiquitie, I question not but it will bee made sufficiently manifest by the continued and more certain usage and Custom of later times, as shall bee abundantly made evident in the following Discours.

As to what concern's the Britains particular use of Navigation, in that antient time, without which an Occupation of this kinde cannot bee had; notwith­standing that at Caesar's first arival, they were Caesar de Bello Gallico, lib. 4. & 5. terrified with the sight of that unusal kinde of long Ships; [...] [Page 188] [...] [Page 189] [Page 190] and though at his second coming with a multitude of Vessels of all kindes (beeing Guil. Picta­viensis, in gestis Willi­ [...]lmi Re [...]is 1. re-inforced to the number of eight hundred; or, as som would have it, to a thousand) they fled in a great fright from the Shore, not beeing sufficiently provided for such a Sea-fight as was then at hand, and which they had never been acquainted with; nevertheless, it is most certain, that they had Vessels of their own, wherein they used to coast about the neighboring Sea, and so entred upon it corporally by Occupati­on. Mention is made indeed by Writers of som of their Vessels more notable then the rest, which they frequently used, beeing framed with twigs (as the fashion hath been in the more antient Nations) and cover'd with Ox-hides after their usual manner. Moreover, Festus Avienus, speaking of the antient In­habitants of the OEstrymnides, or the Islands called the Andr. Schot. Observat. Historic. lib. 3. 22. §. 6. Sillyes, with the rest lying about, thus expresseth himself;

And what hee saith of their continual care of Traf­fick and Custom of Navigation, concern's others as well that were under the British Government. Yet it is not to bee conceived, that these twig and Leathern Vessels of the Britains, were all of them unfit for making war by Sea (according to the man­ner of that Age and of the neighboring Nations) [Page 191] nor that they were less fit for long journies at that time; seeing Hist. Na­tur lib. 4. c. 16. Plinie write's expressly, that somtimes they sailed through the Sea in the space of six daies. In like manner wee read in the British Henric. Huntingdon. Hist. lib. 1. Historie, that about Caesar's time, Lud King of Britain seized upon many Islands of the Sea in a way of war, which denote's that hee had a very considerable strength at Sea, and a well accomplished Navie. It is true indeed, that there were small Vessels among these (as they are no where without them) which doubtless were unfit to bear the brunt of a Fight or Tempest; that is to say, such as Caesar made to trans­port his Souldiers over the River, when hee was streightned by Asranius his Armie, as hee had been taught (they are his De Bello Civili. lib. 1. cap. 54. & videsis So­linum, ca. 25. own words) som years before by the Custom of Britain. The Keels and Ribs were first made of slight matter. The rest of the bulk of their Vessels, beeing wrought together with Twigs, was cover'd with Hides; which wee finde mentioned also by Lucan,

Others there are also that write of these small Vessels. But they are not (I suppose) at least in that Age, to bee called small Ships, which sailed through the [Page 192] Sea in six daies space, nor such as Caesar made one­ly to transport his Souldiers, and conveied them by Cart above XXII miles, according to his own Relation. It cannot bee doubted therefore, but that the Britains had Vessels made even of the aforesaid matter, big enough and very fit for service at Sea. Moreover, there will bee very good ground to con­ceiv out of what wee shall deliver by and by, about the excluding of their Neigbors from the adjacent Sea, that they were wont to build and set forth Ships of war, of a far more commodious and solid sub­stance, for the guarding of their Sea and the Isles. But their use of frequent Fithing (though Dio Cassius, lib. 76. som write that the more Northerly Britains did never eat fish) may bee collected upon this ground, that the better and more Civil sort of them were wont to embellish the Hilts of their Swords with teeth of the bigger Fishes. So saith Solinus Polyhist. cap. 25., They which endeavor to bee neat, do burnish the hilts of their Swords with the teeth of such great Animals as swim in the Sea, becaus they are as white and clear as Ivorie: For, the men take an extraordinarie pride in the brightness of their Arms. Now, I suppose, that without an extraordinarie abundance of such kinde of Animals, which could not bee caught without great pains and numbers of Fishermen, there could not have been matter enough of this kinde to serv for the triming of a most warlike Nation; where­in it was a Custom for the Mother of every man­child to put the first Food that hee received into his mouth, upon the point of its Father's Sword, in token of a warlike disposition. And the Mothers usual Blessings were to this effect, that their Sons might die no other death then in War and Arms. I know these words of Solinus are commonly taken by [Page 193] Writers, as if they had been spoken onely of the Inhabi­tants of Ireland: wherein, if I understand any thing, they are plainly mistaken. The words of Solinus in his Chapter concerning Britain, are these; The ex­tremitie of the French Shore had been the utmost bound of the world, did not the Isle of Britain deserv the name almost of another world. For it is stretch't above 800 miles in length, if so bee wee measure it as far as the utmost point in the North of Scotland, where Ulysses once arrived, as appear's by an Altar there with an Inscrip­tion upon it in Greek Letters. It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness. It is a barbarous Countrie, by reason of the rude behavior of the Inhabitants; otherwise, of so rank a pastu­rage, that unless Cattel bee somtimes driven from the Pastures, they run a hazard by too much feeding. There is no Ser­pent to bee found, and but few birds; The people are in­hospitable and warlike: And after a victorie, they first take a draught of the bloud of the slain, and then besmear their [...]s. Right or wrong is all one to them. A woman, w [...]n shee bring's forth a male, put's its first food upon her [...]nds Sword, and stealing it into the little ones mouth [...] the very point, shee pronounceth her blessing according [...] the Custom of the Nation; with this wish, That hee may die no other death but in War and Arms. They that endevor [...] bee neat, do burnish the Hilts of their Swords, & caetera, [...] it followeth above. Hee treat's next of som [...]nds that lie about it; as Thanet, the Hebrides, [...]es, and Thule; and as to what concern's their manners, hee conclude's that Britain is inhabited in [...]t by barbarous people, who from their child­hood, by artificial stripes of divers forms, imprint the likeness of several living Creatures, up and down their bodies: As is sufficiently known out of Caesar [Page 194] and other Writers. But now, if those words which follow that brief description, wherein the first mention of Ireland is made, were to bee understood of the Irish, not of the people of great Britain, then it would fol­low there, that Solinus forgetting what hee had pro­posed in the very entrance of his Discours, passed immediately from great Britain unto Ireland and the neighboring Isles; and that hee made not any men­tion of the Customs of its Inhabitants, besides the striping of their skins with divers shapes, and this at the latter end of the Chapter: which I can not in any case believ. Nor is it agreeable to the scope of his discours, that Ireland should bee meant in this place, as well as great Britain. For, of Britain hee saith, It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness. It is a barba­rous Countrie, by reason of the rude behavior of the Inha­bitants, &c. Then, this more large description of its manners and Customs which immediately follow­eth, is no otherwise joined to the mention of Ire­land in the Edition of Delrio, and most of the rest which wee have followed in the place before-al­leged. And who seeth not that the beginning of that description, and so what follow's, ought with much more reason to bee referr'd thus to Britain, concerning which his purpose is to treat, then to Ireland, whose name is inserted onely by the way. Nor doth that hinder at all which wee read there about Serpents. I confess it to bee most true indeed, if spoken of Ireland, wherein there is no venemous Creature; and fals, if of Britain. But yet even this also hath been believed of our Countrie of Britain, and that in the clearer light of learning in time past; As appear's not onely by the Books of Cardan de Subtilitate, wherein hee [Page 195] De Subtili­tate, lib. 10. denieth that Britain entertain's any such Creature,) but also out of Sealiger's Exercitat. 200. Exercitations upon him, who in like manner affirm's this, and spend's Di­scours to no purpose to finde out the reasons why Britain hath not any venemous Creatures: which is strange indeed, since hee wrote so eagerly against the other; yea, and both of them beeing very famous men, and most expert Naturalists, lived som time in Britain. But errors of this kinde (as wee see also in Solinus concerning Birds and Bees) are not un­usual among Writers: And it was a common cours for a Roman Writer to attribute extreme Barbarism (as Solinus doth in this place) to such forreign Na­tions as were not in amitie with the Romans. Now, as to this passage which is found in som Editions; [It is encompassed with many considerable Islands, whereof Ireland is next to it in bigness, a Edit. Claudi [...] Salmasi; At­que ita [...]anè Cod. Ms. vet. in Bibli­othecâ Cotto­nianâ. barbarous Countrie becaus of the rude behavior of the Inhabitants &c.] as if the following words did by a continued sens and order relate unto Ireland; it beeing indeed contrarie to the truth of som antient Copies and the most ap­proved Editions, arose (I think) upon this ground, becaus it was falsly supposed by the vulgar, that Ireland alone is treated of in som following Lines. Not­withstanding, even so also those words which fol­low the word [bigness] may as well, and ought to refer unto Britain, not unto Ireland. Moreover also, Tacitus saith expresly of the Irish of that Age, In vitâ▪ Julii Agri­colae. The men in their dispositions and habits do not differ much from Britain.

But now, that wee may return unto that trimming which was made of Fishes teeth; Auxiliaries were wont (as Caesar saith) to bee supplied out of Britain, in almost all those wars that the Gauls mainteined [Page 196] against the Romans. And therefore it must bee said, either that the Britains were for the most part an abject savage people, yea and a dull slothful Generation (which appear's to bee most fals,) or els it must bee conceived that the Nation used Fishing very much, which together with the frequent use of Navigation and Commerce, shew's that they did enter upon the Sea corporally by Occupation. But if to such a cor­poral occupation, as this, wee add also, that they ex­cluded others from the Sea, shutting it up in such a manner, that they restrained them at pleasure from passage and entrance, what hinder's why wee may not conclude, that they acquired a manifest Domi­nion of their own, both by an Intentional and Cor­poral possession? But that the Sea was thus shut up by them, Caesar himself seem's to inform us plainly enough. For, when hee, upon his first attempt to cross the Sea into Britain, made diligent enquirie among the Gauls, touching the Shore and Situation of the ports, and to this end had summoned the Gallick Merchants together from all Quarters, hee was so deceived in his expectation about this matter, that hee was necessitated to send C. Volusenus before with a long Ship to sound them, as beeing wholly un­known: For as much as the Gauls were utterly ig­norant of these Shores, becaus they were prohibited entrance, and so excluded from a free use of the Sea. For, hee write's expresly, De Bello Gallico, lib. 4. not a man of them went thither without leav, besides Merchants; nor was any thing known even to those Merchants, besides the Sea Coast, and those parts which lay over against Now France. Gaul or Gallia. Therefore, according to the usual Custom, no man, besides Merchants, could touch upon the Shore, without leav of the Britains; nor was it lawful for [Page 197] those Merchants to make a narrow search or prie into such places ashore as were convenient or inconve­nient for landing, or what Havens were fit to en­tertain Shipping. For, although hee saith they knew the Sea-Coast; yet, as Caesar affirm's, they were utterly ignorant, what ports were fit to receiv a number of the greater sort of Ships. And it seem's, Merchants were permitted to visit the Sea-Coasts, onely by Coasting about, and using Commerce in the very Sea with the Inhabitants of the Island. The old Greek Interpreter of Caesar, saith also upon the place, None els, besides Merchants, were easily admitted among the Britains: That is to say, neither by Land nor by Sea, whereof they had (as hath been shewn) a very fre­quent use, and from which they excluded all For­reigners, except Merchants, as from a part of that Territorie, whereof they were Lords in possession. From whence it follow's also, that they also who were wont to cross the Sea often out of Gaul into Britain, to bee train'd up in the learning and disci­pline of the Druïdes, could not do it without rendring themselvs liable to punishment for their boldness, if leav were not first had from the pettie Kings or Lords of the Island. From those pettie Kings, I mean, that ruled upon the Sea-Coast: For, the Bri­tains at that time were not subject to the Govern­ment of a single Person. They were Lords of the Sea, who governed those Cities or Provinces that lay next to the Sea; Cingetorix, Carvilius, Taxim [...]gulus, and Segonax in Kent; others also that ruled over the Regni, the Belgae, Durotriges, Damnonii, Trinobantes, Iceni, Coritani, (being the people that inhabited Sussex, Surrie, Hampshire, Dorsetshire, De [...]on, [...], Essex, Norfolk, Lincolnshire) and the like. For, even Caesar [Page 198] himself saith, the inner part of the Island was in­habited by such as were said by Tradition to have been born there; but the Sea-Coasts by such as had cross't the Sea thither out of Belgium, to make war and gain bootie, who were called all for the most part by the names of those Cities from whence they came, and having seated themselvs there by force of Arms, they betook themselvs to Husbandrie. But hee according to that little knowledg hee had of a small part of the Island, called those onely maritime Cities, or Provinces, which lie South of the River Thames; especially Kent, the The Regni were the In­bitants of Surrie, Sus­sex, and the Sea-Coasts of Hamp­shire. Regni, and the The Bel­gae, Inhab [...] ­tants o [...] So­merset, Wilt­shire, and Hampshire. Belgae. But although the Sea-Coasts were thus divided at that time into several Jurisdictions, nevertheless it cannot bee doubted, but that they used to consult together in common against an Fnemie, or to guard the Sea (the defence where­of belonged to all the Princes bordering upon it;) just after the same manner as they used to do upon other occasions of war against forreign Enemies, as you may see in De Bello Gallico, lib. 5. Caesar, where the principal admini­stration of the Government, with the business of war, was put into the hands of Cassivellaunus, by a common Council of the whole British Nation. Nor is that any prejudice against such a Dominion of the Bri­tains by Sea, which wee finde in Caesar concerning the Veneti, a people of Gallia, that were seated at the entrance of the River of Loire; to wit, that they had a very Caesar de Bello Galli­co, lib. 3. cap. 8. & 12. large command upon the Sea-Coast of We­stern Gallia, and that they were better skill'd then any other of their own Countrimen in the Use and Art of Navigation, and that in the Sea-fight with Decius Brutus, they had Ships made all of Oak, very well built, and whether you consider their leathern Sails, or their Iron Chains in stead of Cordage, or their Masts, [Page 199] fitted to bear the brunt of any assault whatsoëver; and that CCXX sail or thereabout in number, went out of the Haven very well manned and pro­vided with all necessaries for War, to oppose the Ro­man Navie. It is very probable, that the most of these were Auxiliaries fetched by the Veneti out of Britain, or how great soëver the Venetan strength was at Sea, yet that it was not greater then the Bri­tains, may bee collected from the same Author: For, hee write's expresly, that Auxilaries were not onely sent for at that time by the Veneti out of Britain, but also that they had very many Ships wherewith they used to sail into Britain: But yet, as it hath been shewn out of him alreadie, no man might sail hand over head into Britain, or without leav of the Britains. It is not to bee doubted there­fore, but that, besides their Twig or leathern Vessels, they had a stout gallant Navie, which was able even at pleasure to exclude those Ships of the Veneti that were best armed. Els, how could it bee, that none but Merchants were admitted out of Gaul upon the Sea-Coast of Britain? Moreover, the whole Senate of the Veneti having been put to death by Caesar, not a man was found among those who remained alive after Brutus his Victorie, that could discover (so much as one Port of Britain; as appear's out of the same Author. Which how it might bee admitted, I do not at all understand, if the strength of those Veneti that were wont to sail thither, had been greater then the British, or if the British had not been much greater then theirs. But the reason why at Caesar's arrival afterwards, no Ship of that kinde was found upon the British Sea or Shore (which De C. Julii Caesaris mili­tiâ, cap. de praelio Na­vali. Peter Ramus won­der's at very much) and why the Roman Writers [Page 200] mention not any other Ships then such as were made of Twigs, seem's evident: For, the Veneti had got all the Shipping together into one place from all parts, to maintein the afore-said fight, as Caesar saith ex­pressly. Therefore, if the British Navie were called forth to their assistance, as tis probable it was, then questionless it was all lost before Caesar's arrival: For, the whole strength and Forces of the Veneti perished in that Sea▪fight. Moreover also, Peter Ramus, speak­ing of that great tempest, whereby Caesar's Ships were scatter'd up and down in this Sea with great hazard, saith, The Sea raised this Tempest, as it were revenging the British bounds, and disdaining to bear a new and strange Lord. As if hee had said, that the Bounds of the British Empire were in the very Sea, and the Sea it self angrie, that it should bee transferr'd into the hands of any other Lord. But as to that which wee finde in a certain In Panegy­rico Maxi­miano dicto; si mihi. Panegyrist, touching the time of Julius Caesar; that Britain was not arm'd at that time with any Shipping fit for War by Sea; it was spoken either in a Rhetorical way onely, and highly to magnifie that Victorie of the Emperor Constantius Chlorus (whereby having slain C. Allectus, who had invaded Britain, hee reduced the Island together with the Sea, as is shewn hereafter) or els it is to bee taken onely of the very time of Caesar's arrival. Otherwise, it is expressly contrarie to those reasons here alleged, and ground­ed upon good Autors; and therefore not to bee admitted for Truth. But after that the Island was reduced under the Roman power, doubtless the Bri­tains were prohibited from having any Ships of war, that they might bee the better held in obedience. Which is the reason why Writers afterwards make mention of such onely as were made of Twigs.

That the Britains were Lords of the Nor­thern Sea, before they were subdued by the Romans. And that the Sea and the Land made one entire Bodie of the British Empire. CHAP. III.

THat the Britains were Lords also at that time of the Northern, or Deucalidonian Sea, is a thing proved by sufficient Testimonie. They called this part of the Sea Mario sui secretum, The secret or Closet of their Sea. Tacitus, relating the Navigation of Julius Agricola into this part, saith, the Britains, as it was understood by the Prisoners, were amazed at the sight of his Navie, as if upon thi [...] opening the Closet or secret part of their Sea, there remained no farther refuge in case they were overcom. And in that stout Oration of Galgacus the Caledonian, wherein hee encouraged his Souldiers to fight, Tacit. in vitâ Agrico­lae. Now, saith hee, the Bound of Britain is laid open. The secret part of their Sea or their Sea-Territorie in the North, they called their Bound. Moreover, saith the same Gal­gacus, beyond us there is no Land, and not the least se­curitie at Sea, the Roman Navie beeing at hand; giving them to understand, that the Dominion hereof was to bee defended as was the Island, as a thing acquired before. Add also, that among the Writers of that Age, vincula dare Oceano, and to subdue the Britains, signified one and the same thing. So that place of Lucan is to bee understood, where hee reckon's what pompous Shew [...] and Triumphs might have [Page 202] usher'd Caesar into Rome, had hee returned onely with Conquest over the Gauls and the North;

But for all that, our Sea was not as yet subdued by the Romans, Julius Caesar onely shewed the Island, rather then deliver'd it into the hands of Posteritie: neither was any part of it reduced under the Roman power, before the Emperor Claudius his time; nor the Soveraigntie of the Sea transferr'd into the hands of any other. And although in Augustus his time, Drusus Germanicus Dio Cas­sius▪ lib▪ 54. Plin. lib. 2. cap. 67. Sue­ton in Claud. cap. 1. sailed through that part of the Sea which lie's betwixt the entrance of the Ri­ver Rhine and Denmark, and subdued the Fri [...]slanders, nevertheless, not any part of the Sea was added by that Victorie to the Roman Empire; for, the Britains held it all in possession, they beeing not yet fully sub­dued. Nor is it unworthie observation here, that C. Caligula, beeing near Britain, and coming out of Germanie to the Coasts on the other side of our Sea, as if (saith Adde Au­rel. Vict [...]rem, ut emenda­tur ab An­draea Scho [...]o, Observat. Historic. lib. 3. [...]ap. 21. Dio) hee intended to make war in Britain, and having drawn up his Armie, made readie all his slings and other warlick Engines, and given the sig­nal or word for Battel, no man knowing or imagi­ning what his intent was, hee on a sudden com­manded them to fall a gathering of Cockles, and fill [Page 203] their Laps and Helmets; Then, saying these Spoils of the Sea belong'd to the Capitol and Mount Palatin, hee vaunted as if hee had subdued the Ocean it self. At last, for a token or Trophie of this mock-victorie, hee rear'd a very lofty Tower hard by, out of which (as if it had been another Pharos was a Tower built in the Island Pharos by Cleopatra Q. of Egypt, where lights were hung out to guide Marriners by night. Pharos) Lights were hung forth by night for the direction of Sea▪men in their Courses; the ruins whereof beeing not yet wholly demolished, but for the most part over­whelm'd with water near Cattwiick, and very sel­dom discover'd, it is called by the Hollanders that dwell near it, Britenhuis and L'Huis te Briten, that is the British Hous, or the British Tower. Certain it is out of Suetonius, that a Tower was raised by Caligula in that place: yea, and it is mainteined by divers learned men, as In Bataviâ, cap. 16. Hadrianus Junius the Hollan­der, In insulis Britann. pag. 852. William Camden our Countriman, and Histor. lib. 4. not. 56. Richardus Vitus, that these were the ruins of the same Tower; though others denie it, as Ortelius, Gotzius, and De Rheni Alveis, cap. 14. & videsis Ortelium in Thesaur. Geo­graph. verb. Brittanni. Clu­verius: And they make a doubt both about the Original of the name, and also its signification; concerning which wee dispute not. But am ex­tremely mis-taken, if Caligula, by this Action of his, did not so much neglect the conquest of Britain it self, which hee hoped or at least thought of, as seem to sport himself with the conceit of having found out so compendious a way of Victorie. Hee carried the matter as if hee had had an intent to subdue Britain; and supposed those Cockles, which hee called Spoils of the Sea, to bee Tokens of Sea-Dominion, and as a most sure pledg of the British Empire.

Moreover, it is upon good ground to bee con­ceived, that there was one entire Territorie of the [Page 204] British Empire, made up of the Land or continent of great Britain, with the Isles lying about it, and the Seas flowing between in their respective Chan­nels: which may bee collected, both from that one single name of British, comprehending an entire Bodie of such a kinde of Territorie (as was shewn you before) and also from hence, that the very Sea it self is, by Albategnius and som others, described by the name of Britain, in the same manner as the Island, when as hee placeth Thule, an Isle of the Sea, in Britain. That is to say, just as Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia, and other Isles in the Tyrrhen Sea, have L. 9. ff. tit. de Judicus & l. 99. ff. tit. de V. S. in Law been reckoned parts of Italie, yea, and continent thereto: For, Sicily (after that the Romans became Lords of the adjoining Sea flowing between) was called Cicero Acti­one 2. in Ver­rem, & Flo­rus, lib. 3. cap. 19. Regio Suburbana, as if it had been part of the Suburbs of Rome; and all these together with Italie and the Sea it self, made one Bodie or Province; so all the British Isles before mentioned, with great Britain and the Seas flowing about it, might well bee termed one Bodie of Britain or of the British Empire, forasmuch as the Seas as well as the Isles, passed alwaies into the Dominion of them that have born Rule within this Nation: From whence per­haps it hapned, that the Romans conceived the British Empire consider'd apart by it self, to bee of so great a bigness, that Panegyric. Maximiano dict. Si mihi. Britain did not seem to bee com­prehended by the Sea, but to comprehend the Sea it self, as it is express't by that Panegyrist.

That the Dominion of the British Sea, fol­lowed the Conquest of great Britain it self, under the Emperors Claudius and Domitian. CHAP. IV.

AFter that the more Southerly part of Britain had been brought into subjection by the Emperor Claudius, and the Isle of Wight taken in by surrender, the British Sea, as of necessitie following the fate of the Island, was together with it annexed to the Roman Empire; at least so far as it was stretched before that part of the Isle which was sub­dued. Whereupon, a Anonymu [...], Epigr. vet. lib. 2. & in Catalect. vet. Poët. lib. 1. tit. 7. Poët of that Age write's thus to the Emperor Claudius touching the Conquest of Britain,

[Page 206]And then hee goe's on,

Here hee saith, that the Sea it self was with Britain subdued to the Roman Empire; as afterward also hee speak's more expressly.

The British Sea was the Bound of the Roman Empire between France and Germanie. But immediately after the Conquest of Britain it became a part of the Em­pire. Hee proceed's again thus;

And then,

[Page 207]Hee call's the Sea Our water, beeing no less conquer'd, than the Island it self. From whence also hee write's, that the Roman Empire was begirt with the Ro­man Sea, to wit, after Britain was subdued,

The Empire of the waters ever followed the Domini­on of the Island. And In Octaviâ, Act. 1. Seneca, concerning the same Emperor and this Sea, saith;

Moreover, the same Author in Apocolocynthosi;

This is plainly to bee understood of the British Sea. And Hegisippus an old Autor▪ (representing the person of King Agrippa speaking to the Emperor Claudius) saith, De Excidio Hierosolymit. lib. 2. cap. 9. It was more to have passed over the Sea to the Britains, then to have triumphed over the Britains them­selvs. [Page 208] But what could they do, when the Elements were once subdued to the Roman Empire? The Sea taught them to bear the yoke of servitude, after that it self had upon the arrival of the Roman Shipping acknowledg'd an unusual subjection. Hence it was also, (asIn Claudio, cap. 17. Suetonius saith) that in honor of the Prince, the resemblance of a Ship was fixed upon the top of the imperial Pa­lace. But these particulars relate onely to the more Southerly part of the Sea. Claudius never had any Navie sail to the North; For, his Conquest reached not so far. But the Romans sail'd about the Island first in the daies of Domitian, and then it was, that they first discover'd and subdued that remotest part of the Sea. Tacitus, in the life of Agricola who was Lievtenant in the Province of Britain, saith, the Roman Navie sailing then the first time (under Domitian) about the Island, affirmed this Coast of the remotest (Caledonian) Sea to bee the Isle of Britain, and hee discover'd and subdued also those Isles called the Orcades, which had been unknown till that time. To the same purpose also speak's Juvenal,

Lately taken hee saith, that is, in the time of Domi­tian. And therefore it is a manifest error in Eusebius Hieronymianus, who saith, That Claudius added the Or­cades Isles to the Roman Empire: yet hee is followed by Orosius, Cassiodorus, Eutropius, Bede, Nennius, Ethel­werdus, and others. But the contrarie is sufficiently [Page 209] proved out of Tacitus alone, a very grave Autor, and one that lived at the same time. But as to those passages found in Arg [...]nautic. lib. 1. Valerius Flaccus, Punic. lib. 1. Silius Italicus, Sylvarum, lib. 5. in Pro­treptico ad Crispinum, Vectii Bolani propraetoris, sub Vitellio, Britanniae filium. Statius, and others, touching the Caledonians and Thule's beeing subdued before the daies of Domitian, they are so to bee understood onely, that wee are to conceiv either after the manner of the Poêts, that the name of the more Northerly Britains, is, by the figure Synecdoche, used for all whatsoêver, and Thule it self for any part of Britain; or els that the Caledonians ge­nerally among the Romans, signified those Britains that were but a little removed from the Southern Shore. For, even Lib. 3. cap. 10. Florus write's, that Julius Caesar pursued the Southern Britains into the Caledonian Woods: That is, plainly, into the Woods of the more Southerly part of Britain: But when Julius Agricola had, in Domi­tian's time, reduced the Isle by force of Arms both by Sea and Land, and sailing round about with a Navie, had discover'd the Caledonian Sea properly so named on every side, which the Britains (as hath been observed alreadie) called the secret part or Closet of their Sea, and had taken in the Orcades; wee ought to conclude that then that more Northerly Sea also was added to the Roman Empire, and so that the Romans were Lords over all the British Sea, no otherwise then of the Island: Which also is con­firmed in plain terms by Tacitus, who speaking of Agricola's design to war upon the Caledonians, saith, hee first provided a Fleet, which attended in gallant Equi­page to back his Forces; at which time hee prosecuted the war at once both by Sea and Land, and oftentimes in the same Camp, the Hors and Foot and the Sea-Souldiers ming­ling mirth and companie together, extoll'd every one their own hazards and Adventures; one while they boasted the [Page 210] heights of Woods and Mountains; another while the dangers of Storms and Tempests; som vaunted of their exploits against the Enemie by Land, others of their Conquests by Sea, making comparisons, souldier-like, with many brava­do's. The Britains also, as it was understood by the Pri­soners, were at their wits end upon the sight of his Navie, as if upon this opening the Closet or secret part of their Sea, there remained no farther refuge in case they were overcom. This is a most clear Testimonie touching the Do­minion of the British Sea, shewing that the Britains and Caledonians first, and the Romans afterward be­came Lords thereof. A doubt hath been made by learned men, whether inlargement of Dominion, or Con­quest by Sea, should bee read in that place: But both the Readings plainly point out an acquisition of Do­minion. And if you read inlargement of Dominion by Sea, it signifie's that the Caledonian Sea was then an­nexed▪ to the other Sea, which together with the more Southerly part of the Isle, had by the Emperor Claudius been added to the Roman Empire. And that the British Sea was thus reduced at that time under the Roman power, as a perpetual and inseparable ap­pendant of the Island, was perhaps conceited by Thebaidos, lib. 1. Papinius, when hee thus bespake Domitian, in whose time this Conquest was made of the Britains;

Truly, a Jac. Chi [...] ­ [...]e [...]ius, in E­pist. Dedicat. ad Libellum, de Portu Iecio. late Writer also saith, that Julius Caesar did assert to himself a Dominion over British Isle and Sea. And this hee saith upon very good ground, whilst hee join's the Dominion of both together, as undi­vided; [Page 211] but upon none at all, when hee ascribe's onely a Dominion of the Isle to the same Caesar.

Touching the Dominion of the Romans in the British Sea, as an appendant of the Island, from the time of Domitian to the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, or Dio­cletian. CHAP. V.

BUt the Romans having (as wee told you before) subdued both the Island and the Sea that roll's about it; as they managed the Government by Presidents and Lieutenants at Land, so by a chief Governor called Archigubernus, with a numerous Fleet at Sea. For, by that name was the Commander of the British Navie called (or els Archigubernius, as it is in the Antoninus Augustin. de nominibus propriis. Pan­dect. Floren­tin. Florentine Pandects) which appear's also by the Epistles of Javolenus, a Lawyer, that lived un­der the Emperors Adrian and Antoninus Pius. Seius Saturninus, F. tit. ad Senotuscon­sult. Trebelli­an. lib. 46. saith hee, Archigubernus ex classe Britannicâ, chief Governor of the British Navie, left Valerius Maximus, Captain of a three-Oard Gally, his heir or Feofee in trust by Will; requiring him to yield back the inheritance to his Son Seius Oceanus, as soon as hee should bee seventeen years of Age. But the Romans foreseeing there would bee a great deal of trouble and but small benefit, in subduing and holding the Caledonian Britains, they, lea­ving the North part of the Isle to the barbarous people, and retiring towards the South, did so li­mit their Land-dominion by rearing up Mounds or Walls before it, that wee must of necessitie suppose their Dominion was but small likewise by Sea. Those Mounds or Fences are frequently mentioned, [Page 212] in the Histories concerning the Emperors Adrian, An­toninus Pius, and Severus. But by that hence which Adrian made and Severus repaired, beeing either a Wall or a Trench drawn through the That is to say, [...]ork­shire, [...], B [...] [...] [...], [...] est­ [...]d, and [...]d. North parts, from the Eastern to the Western Shore, the Territorie of the Ro­mans was confined almost within the same Limits which had bounded the Conquest of Claudius. But the other, which parted the Island in the middle between the Estuaries of * [...]lotta and * Bodotria, bounded [...] and [...]. the Roman-British Empire under Antoninus Pius, and after that in the time of Valentinian, Valens, and divers other Emperors their Successors: So that per­haps the Romans afterward had not much more of the Northen Sea in their Dominion, then what washed the Borders of these Territories. But after seius saturninus, the afore-mentioned Commander in chief of the British Navie under Adrian or Antoninus Pius, there is a deep silence among Writers touching the Sea affairs of Britain, and almost concerning Britain it self, till the daies of Diocletian. And under Diocletian, the British Sea beeing infested, all along the Coast of Britanie and Belgium, by the French and Saxons, care was taken to quiet and secure it by sending forth C. Carausius, a man indeed of mean parentage, Eutropius, [...]ist. 9. but expert both in Counsel and Action. And Geffrie of Monmouth write's, that hee made suit for this Govern­ment of the Sea, and promised to perform so many and so great matters for the advantage and inlargement of the Commonweal, more then if the Dominion of Britain should bee committed to his charge. Eutropius also, speaking of the Infesters of the British Sea, over which this man was made Commander in chief by the Em­peror as Lord thereof, so far as hee enjoied the Do­minion of Britain, saith, that hee oftentimes taking many [Page 213] of the barbarous people, and not delivering the prizes to the Liutenants of the Province, nor sending them to the Emperors, reserved them to himself; therefore when it be­gan to bee suspected, that hee permitted the barbarous peo­ple on purpose to fall upon those that conveyed the Prizes, that by this means hee might enrich himself, a command bee­ing given by the Emperor Maximianus to kill him, hee thereupon turn'd Usurper; and possessed himself of Britain. At length, having fortified himself both by Sea and Land, hee held the joint-Dominion of both for 7 years, as inseparable; beeing slain by his companion C. Alle­ctus, who enjoied the same 3 years as his Successor. And then hee also (after hee was brought to so low a pass by the Emperor Constantius Chlorus, who had cros't the Sea in person on purpose to reduce him, that hee knew not what to do, and seem'd to bee imprisoned rather then fortified by the Sea, as saith the Panegy­rick. Si mihi Caesar. Autor of the Panegy­rick to Maximianus) was at length, by the valor and con­duct of the Pretorian prefect Asclepiodotus, overcom and slain: And thus both the Isle and the Sea together was recover'd after ten years time, so far as it flow'd before that part which was under the Roman Jurisdi­ction. Nor was it upon any other ground, then this ten years usurpa­tion in Britain, that those Coins were made with the Inscriptions both of C. Carausius and C. Allectus [...]MP. C. CARAUSIUS P. F. AUG. and [...]MP. C. ALLECTUS. P. F. AUG. But wee have placed here a counterfeit of that brass Coin which was made by Allectus, that you may observ the three-oar'd Gally on the revers of it, with the Inscription VIRTUS AUGUSTA, whereby I

[Page 214] conceiv hee gave to understand, that this Empire of Britain chiefly depended upon the Dominion of the Sea flowing about it. Touching the recovery of Bri­tain thus together with the Sea, there is also a notable Testimonie in that Panegyrick, whereof som conceiv Mamertinus, others Eumenius to bee the Autor. O how great is this Victorie (saith hee) and worthie of innumerable Triumphs! whereby Britain is recovered, whereby the French are utterly destroyed, whereby moreover those many Nations that were engaged in the same mischievous conspi­racie, are forced to a necessitie of yielding; And lastly, for our perpetual peace, the Seas are scour'd and rid of Pirats! Glory then, O unconquerable Caesar (hee speak's to Constantius Chlorus, the afore-named Emperor) that thou hast pur­chased another world, and added to the Empire an Element greater then all the Earth, by restoring the glorie of the Ro­man power by Sea. Hee saith a greater Element, in a rhetorical flourish, in stead of the British Sea, which hee thus expressly affirm's to have been recover'd together with Britain it self. It is observable also, that the Romans alwaies so spake concerning the Em­pires, of Britain, and of the Sea called by its name, as inseparable. Making mention likewise of that pest, which consumed onely within the bowels of Britain, or of the imminent danger then attending the Roman Empire, It w [...] bounded (saith hee) with no mountain or river, which was not secured by Guards at the place appointed. But although wee shared in your valor and selicitie, yet like a Ship it was exposed in every place [...]o great terrors, wheresoëver the Seas are spred or the winds do blow. And a little after, saith hee, By this Victorie not onely your Britain is redeem'd from vas­s [...]lage, but securitie of traffick restored to all Nations, which might have run as great hazard at Sea in time of war, as they gain benefit by peace. Hee expressly call's the [Page 215] Government also of Allectus a Force of Rebellion by Sed, and it appears, saith hee, that the [...]ery Is [...] of Britain, which had harbor'd a treason of so long continuance, is m [...]de sensible of your Victorie by beeing restored unto it self. Together with the Conquest of Britain it self, all the strength of Shipping was lost, which, upon Allectus his usurpa­tion in Britain, must needs as a perpetual Concomi­tant of the Island, have been of very great use against the Emperors. But the Panegyrist goe's on▪ In other parts indeed som things remain which yee may acquire, as you pleas or see caus; but beyond the Sea what was left except onely Britain? which you have so recover'd, that those Nations also which border upon that Island, are wholly at your devotion. There is no occasion to proceed farther, except you design (that which is impossible in nature) to finde out the bounds of the [...]ea. What Nations are those here that border upon Britain, except those that lie be­yond-Sea, whose Shores were conjoined with the British Empire as it was then accounted, or with the Sea-bounds of the Province of Britain, that is, in the British Sea? As the French, and the other adjoining Nations. For, it is not to bee understood of those little Isles which are next to us; their Inhabitants not beeing worthie the repute of Nations. Not was it agree­able to the Majestie of a Panegyrick, to aggrand [...]se the Emperor's glorie by such pettie things. But by and by in the following Chapters wee shew▪ that those Nations adjoining to the bounds of Britain, or whose bounds are united to the bodie of the British Empire, were those very Inhabitants of the continent of France, whose Shores are contiguous to the bounds of the British Sea, which in a civil sens was accounted a part of the Isle it self, or Territorie united therewith. For, the Panegyrist proceed's thus to the explanation [Page 216] of those words: By the means of thy Victories, O Constantius, most victorious Emperor, all those parts that lay waste and desolate about the Countrie of Amiens, and Beauvois, and Troies, and Langres, now thrives again by the labor of the rude Husbandman. In like man­ner, Carolus Sigonius, out of the same Autor, saith, De [...]cciden­ [...]ali imperto, lib. 1. By this victorie not onely Britain it self was recover'd, but the Coasts of France also, Spain, Italie, and Africa, were freed from the perpetual incursions of Pirats. That is to say, by the taking in of Britain, with the Sea, and the naval strength that was its Guard, not onely the neighboring but even the remotest Provinces bordering on the Sea, were made secure and free, seeing they were all threatned by this war or rather rebellion by Sea, which might have raged and wandred as wide as the Ocean, and into the streights of the Mediterranean Sea; which are indeed the very words of the Panegy­rick. So that you see, to restore or reduce Britain, to recover it, to suppress a Sea-Rebellion here, and to scoure this Sea, were esteemed under such a con­sideration, that, the one beeing don, the other fol­lowed, by reason of the inseperable Dominion of the British Isle and Sea together. And when Britain was lost, the Naval Forces of the Romans, whereby the Sea was guarded, were lost in like manner. But when it was reduced, even these also were reduced together with the Sea.

Touching the Dominion of the Southern and Eastern Sea, as an Appendant of the British Empire, from the time of Constantine the Great till the Romans quitted the Island. That it was all un­der the Command of the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain. Also concerning the British Navie, under the Romans. CHAP. VI.

IN the following Age, the manner of Admini­stration of Government beeing changed about the time of Constantine; as the Pretorian Prefect of Gallia had a Deputie under him to order the Civil affairs of Britain; and as the Magister Militum occi­dentis; Hee that commanded the Militia of the West had an Officer under him called Comes Britanniarum, Count of Britain, and Dux Britanniarum, Duke of Britain, who commanded Forces for defence of the Midland parts of the Isle: So the said Magister Mi­litum was wont at his own discretion to appoint som person of eminent dignitie to bee his Substi­tute, by the Title of Notitia Dignitatum Imperii Oc­cidenti [...]. Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain, with Command over the Garrisons and Fortifications placed upon the South and Eastern Shore of Britain, and over all that Sea which flow's between France, Spain, Holland, Denmark, and great Britain, as over a part or bound, not bounding, but bounded by the British Empire, no otherwise then [Page 218] as a distinct Province of the same Empire; as most eminently appear's by the very Title of the Dignitie or Command. For, the Duke of Britain, and Count of Britain, were as the Count of Tingitania, the Count of Spain, and very many others of the like kinde, denominated from those Lands and Countries over which they were put in Command. And such of these Dignities or Commands as were for defence of any Frontiers or Borders, took name ever from the Borders. Upon which account it is, that among the Imperial Offices or Commands wee meet with Comes limitis AEgypti, the Count of the Egyptian Border, No itiâ Pig [...]. Ori­ent. the Prefect of Euphrates, the Inscript. Gruter. fol. 1090. 21. Ibid fol 490. Prefect of the Bank of Danubius, and the S [...]don [...]us Apollinaris in [...]ane [...]yric. Authemio Count of Danubius, and those L. 9. C. Theodos. lib. 7. tit. 1. to whom the Charge and Defence of the river Rhine was committed: For these Rivers were Bounds or Limits of the Roman Empire. And it is the opinion of Marquard. Freher. O­rig. Palatin. part. 1. cap. 3. learned men upon good ground, that the Counts or Dukes of Rhine are meant by those words concerning the River of Rhine. But as the Northern and Eastern Bounds of the Roman Empire were denoted by the names of the Rivers Danubius, Rhine, and Euphrates, so clearly also the name or Limit of the Saxon Shore pointed out the Eastern and more Southerly bound of the British Empire, or that which was reduced by the name of British, as an entire bodie, under the Roman power. So that whatsoever reached as far as that Limit, lay properly under the command of the Count of the Saxon Shore in Britain, as Governor of the Sea-Territorie, as an appendant of the Isle. But that Territorie or Province subject to this particular Dignitie or Com­mand, reached through the very British Sea, from the Shore of Britain to the Shores on the other side [Page 219] of the Sea, or those which lie over against ou [...] Isle of Britain, in France, the Low Countries, Holland, and Denmark; so that what Sea or Islands soever lay between near the British Shore, appertained all to the Command of the aforesaid Co [...]t, as to the charge of an Admiral belonging to a Province or Territorie.

But that those opposit Shores were all known at that time by the name of the Saxon Shore, is evident both out of Ptolomie, Marcianus Heracleotes, Zosimus, and the like, and also out of the Register or Brevi­arie of the Dignities of both the Empires. For, Geograph. lib. 2. Ptolomie and In Peripl [...]. Marcianus place the Saxons at the en­trance of the River Elbe which lie's near Cimbrica Chersonesus or the West-part of the Kingdom of Den­mark, as also in Cimbrica Chersonesus it self. And that Shore took the name of Saxon from their first and most antient habitations. But beeing the most emi­nent people of Germanie, they by driving out their Neighbors enlarged their habitations Southward, all along the Batavian, Belgick, and French Shore. From whence Histor. lib 3. Zosimus write's, that about Constantine's time, they possessed themselvs of the Hollander's Countrie at the entrance of Rhine. And becaus they seated themselvs near these Shores, and by their fre­quent excursions thence infested both Sea and Land all along the Sea-Coast of France, it was called not onely the Shore of those Saxons, or the Eastern bound of the British Empire; but also that Belgick and the whole Gallicane Shore, which lie's over against our Isle of Britain, was term'd the Saxon Shore, and the Saxon limit or Border. Touching the Shore of Denmark and Holland, where they had more inlarged their habitations, the point is manifest by [Page 220] what wee have alreadie mentioned. And the Regi­ster or Breviarie of the Imperial Dignities speak's expressly in like manner touching the Belgick and Gallican Shores. For, in it wee finde, that under the charge or command of the Duke of the Tract of Bre [...]aign in France. Aremorica (which reacheth from the Western Gal­lia, or from the mouth of the River of Loire to the entrance of Seine) there was a Tribune of the first new band of Souldiers of Armonica and Grammona upon the Saxon Shore. There, the French Shore lying over against our South part of Britain, is called in plain terms the Saxon Shore. For, in the same Breviarie, under the Command of the Duke of that part of Belgica secunda, (which reacheth from the entrance of the River Seine to that of the River Maze, and com­prehend's Flanders) wee finde Equites Dalmatas Mar­cis in littore Saxonico, Dalmatian Horsmen at the Borders on the Saxon Shore. And the Saxon Shore is evidently set forth in the signal Ornaments of the same Duke. So all that which reacheth from Cimbrica Chersonesus or the West-part of Denmark to the Western Gallia, is expressly call'd in the Breviarie the Saxon Shore, which hapned not onely from the frequent depredations made then upon that Sea-Coast by the Saxons, but by their Excursions and often acquiring of habitations all along that Shore. So that nothing could have been more plainly spoken, to shew that the whole Sea lying between, was possessed at that time, as an appendant of the Island, by the Lords of the South-part of [...]he Isle; except a man should suppose, that those places which are extended from the proper habitation of a Count, Duke, or any other Officer in Command for defence of Borders, unto those Borders from whence [Page 221] hee was denominated or entitled, were not subject either to his Jurisdiction or to the Dominion of those that bestowed the Command upon him. Which truly is absurd, and wholly different from the usual administration of the Roman Empire. But that Count of the Saxon Shore in Britain, had his proper places of abode onely in Britain; and, under the Romans, that Magistrate belonged onely to Bri­tain. Nor were those Saxons any other then Ene­mies. And their Shore, so far as they possessed it, was an Enemies Countrie. Moreover, this Count had Houses, at his own pleasure, in either of those Garrisons, Towns, or nine Maritim Cities, which beeing seated upon the Shores of Sussex, Kent, Essex, and Norfolk, hee alwaies had them painted out near the Sea, and added to his grand Commission, for the signal Ornaments of his Office. The names of these Ci­ties were Othona, Dubris, Lemmanis, Branodunum, Gari­anum, Regulbis, Rittupae, Anderidos (or Anderida) and Portus Adurni. Besides, both the Deputie of Bri­tain, and the Duke, and Count of Britain, had their sig­nal Ornaments given in like manner with their Commands. This had a pourtraicture of the Isle it self, drawn in the form of a Castle fortifi­ed in the Sea. The Duke had certain Mid­land Towns. And the Deputie those five Pro­vinces into which the Isle was divided by the Romans; as you may see in the Breviarie of Dig­nities. Where the afore-mentioned Arms of the Count of the Saxon Shore are represented after this manner, [Page 222]

to wit, the very same that was wont to bee drawn in his Commission. But as to what concern's those Maritim Cities or Towns in these Ornaments; if wee may believ [...]. Cam­den in Sus­sexia, Cantio, Essexia, Nor­folcia. such as are well verst in the affairs of Britain, Othona was seated upon the Shore of the Trinobantes which lie's before Dengy hundred in [Page 223] the Countie of Essex. Dubris is the same with Do­ver. Lemannis was placed about Hith on the Kentish Shore. Branodunum was no other but Branchester upon the Shore of Norfolk near the washes between that and Lincolnshire. Garianum was either Gerne­mutha, or som place near it. Regulbium or Regulbis was situate upon the Northen Coast of Kent, bee­ing called now Reculver. Rittupis or Rhutupiae was seated in Kent at the entrance of the River Wantsum; Perhaps it was the same with Richborow. Ande­ridos stood upon the Bank of the River Rothermouth, and is now called Newenden. And lastly, Portus Adurni became a little Village, now called Aldrington, near Shoreham upon the Coast of Sussex. But the very Form and Fashion of the Book pictured in those Ornaments, which in the Manuscript Copies of the Breviarie (as Pancirollus saith) is of a purpleAd Notiti­am Digna­tum occiden­tis, cap. 72. or yellowish color, did signifie the Instructions of the Emperor. And if wee may believ Pancirollus, the Let­ters inscribed upon it signified in the Notaries lan­guage, Felix Liber injunctus Notariis laterculi, continens Mandata ordine Principis, seu Primicerii, who was the principal Notarie. The very same Inscription is somtimes found in the Ornaments of other Go­vernors. But who they were which the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain had under his own Command, for defence of the afore-mentioned Do­minion by Sea, and what manner of Officers, is expressed in the Breviarie after this manner;

• Praepositus numeri Fortensium, Othonae.
• Praepositus Militum Tangricanorum, Dubris.
• [Page 224]Praepositus numeri Turnacensium, Lemannis.
• Praepositus equitum Dalmatarum Branodunensis, Brano­duno.
• Praepositus equitum Stablesiani Garrianensis, Gariann [...]n [...].
• Tribunus cohortis primae Vetasiorum, Regulbio.
• Praepositus Legionis II Aug. Rutupis.
• Praepositus numeri Abuleorum, Anderidae.
• Praepositus numeri Exploratorum portu Adurni.

• Principem ex officio Magistri Praesentalium à parte pe­ditum.
• Numerarios duos, ut suprà, ex officio supradicto.
• Cornicularium;
• Adjutorem;
• Subadjuvam;
• Regendarium;
• Exceptores;
• Singulares, & reliquos Officiales.

The names both of the Souldiers and Officers are to bee found in Pancirollus; this beeing no place for a Commentarie, to explain them to such Readers as are not well vers't in the Storie of the Roman Empire in its declining state. But I shall give an account of their numbers, as it is cast up by Pancirollus, that you may the better know what those Garrisons were which were imploied at that time, to guard this Sea­appendant of the British Empire. Ad notitiam dignit▪ Occid. cap. 72. Under this Count (saith hee) was one Legion or Regiment perhaps of a thousand Foot, and six Companies; perhaps one thousand two hundred, and two Troops of Hors almost two hundred. The whole amount's to almost two thousand two hundred [Page 225] Foot, and two hundred Hors. For, Lib. de Thema [...]ibus. Constantinus Por­phyrogenneta write's, that at this time there was a Regi­ment of a thousand Foot. So hee. Now, the Ships and Souldiers belonging to the Navie are not mentioned in the Breviarie, at least not by this name. But as there were Troops of Hors disposed against the Landings of Enemies (in case any should happen;) so there is no reason to doubt, but that the Souldiers belonging to the Navie were listed in the Companies and Le­gion. After which manner likewise Flavius Vegetius saith, that De Re mi­litari, lib. 4. cap. 21. at Misenus (now called Monte Miseno) and at Ravenna, several of the Roman Legions continued with the Fleets, that they might not bee at too great a distance from guarding the Citie, and that they might as occasion required, bee transported in Shipping to all parts of the world. Hee reckon's those Souldiers be­longing to the Navie, among the Regiments of Foot, or under their Name. But in the mean time it is to bee observed, that the Lipsius de Magnitu­dine Roma­nâ, lib. 11. cap. 5. sed & vide Jul. Caes. Bullin­ger. de Impe­rio Romano, lib 6. cap. 6. most diligent In­quirers into the Roman affairs, whilst they Treat of their Fleets, do besides that of Ravenna and De quibus item Tacitus lib. 4. Annal. Miseno (of which this latter lay nearest to France, Spain, Barbarie, Africk, Egypt, Sardinia, and Sicily; the other was wont to sail in a direct cours to Epirus, Macedonia, Achaia, Propontis, Pontus, the East, Crete, and Cyprus; which are Vegetius his own words; both of them beeing first instituted and appointed there by Suetoniu [...] in August [...], cap. 49. Augustus Caesar, to guard the Provinces bordering upon the Sea, with the Sea it self, and called also Pretorian, for the more reputation) they do (I say) for the most part add onely two more that were set forth to Sea, but of less account. The one was placed at Friuli, in that part of France called Tacit. An­nal. 4. Strabo, lib. 4. Gallia Narbonensis, The other in the [Page 226] very Joseph. Ha­los. lib. 2. cap. 26. Euxin Sea. And it is for the most part agreed, that the Romans had onely four constant or more eminent Fleets at Sea. They do indeed rightly add also som other constant Fleets which belonged to Rivers, as that of the Rhine, and Danubius, of which sort also may bee reckoned that belonging to Mysia called Maesica, and another also belonging to Pannonia or Hungarie called Pannonica, and others of the like nature. But among these there were certain Barks or nimble Vessels call Cod. Theo­dos. 7. tit. 17. de Lusor [...]s Danub [...]. Lusoriae or Lusuriae (in English wee may call them Flie-boats) wherein they scouted out as far as the remotest Banks and the Castles built upon them, to guard the Bounds of the Empire. And under this notion the name of these Lusoriae, was restored by [...]. 4. C [...]de Offic. Milit. Ju [...]ic. & l. 4. C [...]de Offic. Magistri Of­ficiorum. Claudius Salmasius, according to two Laws in the In notis ad Flavium vo­piscum, pag. 475. Code of Justinian which were before sufficiently corrupted. And as in Rivers they for the most part used these Lusoriae or lesser Vessels; so in the Sea they made use of Pinnaces, the least whereof had single Ranges of Ores; those that were a little bigger, double Ranges; and those of a middle size or proportion had three or four, and somtimes five, as wee are told by Vegetius. But now, notwithstanding that those diligent Inquirers into the defences and Fortifications of all sorts be­longing to the old Roman Empire, are wont, when they mention any Navie of Britain, to speak slightly or in terms obscure enough; this nevertheless is most certain, that there was among the standing Guards of the Romans, not onely a particular Fleet of Pinnaces or light Vessels belonging to Britain, wherewith they guarded this Sea whereof wee speak, as an appendant of the Isle of great Britain; but also that they had not any other Navie in the outer Sea, or [Page 227] any Shipping at all upon the Sea-Coasts of Spain or France, without the Mediterranean Sea. At least, it is no where mentioned by antient Writers. Which is no slight Testimonie, that the Sea and the Isle together made up one entire Bodie of the British Empire, as it was then devolved unto the Romans, and also that such a Custom was at that time in force upon the Sea, so far as it belong'd to Britain, that the like could no where bee found at least in the more Western parts, there beeing no other Sea-Province among them. There is (besides that or­dinarie instance Chap. V. alleged before out of the L. 46. ff. tit. ad Senatus consul. Tre­bellianic. Digests of the Civil Law, concerning Seius Saturninus Com­mander in chief of the British Navie under Antoninus or Adrian the Emperor) express mention made also by Historiar. lib. 4. Tacitus of this British Navie, where speaking of the affairs of Cerealis and Civilis under the Emperor Vespasian, Another fear, saith hee, had possessed the minde of Civilis, lest the fourteenth Legion beeing assisted by the Navie of Britain, should infest the Hollanders. Batavians upon the Sea-Coast. And therefore that learned man Lipsius had no ground to conceiv that this was part of that Fleet of small Vessels called Lusoriae, whereby the River Rhine was guarded; to wit, that part of it which guarded the entrance of the River near that place called the British Tower, whereof wee spake before in the third chapter of this book. For, it was even the whole Navie of Britain, and that which belonged wholly to the Sea, not having any relation at all to the Rivers. And that it belong'd to the Sea, appear's not onely by the thing it self, but also by what hath been alreadie spoken, and what shall bee said in the next chapter touching the Count of the Saxon Shore; so far at least as wee may [Page 228] bee able to judg of the former (as wee often use to do) by the latter cours that was taken in ordering affairs, and disposing of Guards and Garrisons. But that this was a compleat Navie, and had a pecu­liar Prefect or Commander in chief over it, is testified by a fragment of an antient Inscription in a Palace at Rome, called Palatium Capranicense, Janus Gru­ [...] us, p. 493. wherewith tru­ly that name of Prefect of the British Navie was utterly lost. Yet it appear's thereby that such a Pre­fecture or Command there was, not of the least note among those antient dignities of the Romans, and that it was committed to the same man that was likewise Prefect of the two Navies called Classis Moe­sica and Pannonica; as also Proconsul and President of the Alps, Sub-Prefect of the Pretorian Navie, and Tribune of the sixteenth Legion. The form of the Inscription stand's thus. ‘. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
PRAEF. CLASS. BRIT. ET MOESIC.
ET PANNONIC. PROC. ET PRAESIDI
ALPIUM SUBPRAEF. CLASS.
PRAET. TRIB. LEG. XVI.
FL. ECPREPUSA.’

Moreover, it is no light Argument to prove, that in those times there was frequent use of that Navie in guarding the British Sea, as a part of the Province of Britain (as hath been alreadie said;) and that upon this ground, becaus the very name of those scouting Skiphs which were joined with the bigger sort of Pinnaces or light Vessels upon the Guard, was [Page 229] borrowed by the Romans in their writings from the Britains, after the same manner as they took the name of those Boats called Copuli from the Germans, which Videsis Lips. ad Ta­cit. Hist. lib. 5. num. 36. & de Magnitud. Romanâ, lib. 1. cap. 5. were likewise of that sort of Vessels called Lusoriae, [...]ploied in guarding the Rhine. The Romans observed that the Britains called those Vessels Pyctas. Flavius Vegetius, who in the Reign of the two Va­lentinians, composed his Books concerning the affairs of the Roman Militia, out of the Commentaries of Cato, Celsus, Trajan, and Hadrian, saith, De re Mili­tari, lib. 4. cap. 37. scouting Skiphs are joined with the bigger sort of Pinnaces, that had about twentie Rowers in all; which Skiphs the Britains call Pyctas. In these they use to make assaults and in [...]es upon a sudden, and somtimes intercept the provision and supplies of their Enemies Shipping, and by diligent watchfulness discover their approaches or counsels. And that their Scouts may not bee discover'd by their whiteness, they die the Sai [...]s and Tackling with a blewish color, like the waves of the Sea. They besmear them also with wax as they use to trim their Ships. Yea, and the Seaman or Souldiers put on clothes of the same blewish color, so that they are the less discernable as they scout about, not onely by night, but also by day. So far hee. And the printed Books do generally render these Vessels here Pictas or Pyctas. But som Manu­scripts, that have been used by Godesca [...]cus Stewechius, call them Picatas; and also wee read Picatas in two Manuscripts belonging to the King's Librarie at S^t James, as I was inform'd by that learned man and my very good friend Patrick Young; from whence it is, that, in the old French translations of Vegetius, it is rendred one while Picaces, another Pigaces. But saith Stewechius upon the afore-mentioned place, It seem's more probable to mee that they were called Pincas, Pinks; For, even at this very day there is such a kinde of [Page 230] Vessel known both in Britain and Holland. And the or­dinarie name is Een Pincke. But howso [...]ver the case hath stood, here wee see in Vegetius, that the scouting Vessels were emploied together with the Pinnaces, and their name so observed according to the British language of that Age, that there appear's not the least ground to doubt, but that Vegetius was of opinion also, that those Vessels were either con­stantly or very frequently in use among the Britains, and in the Sea-Province of Britain. So, it is acknow­ledged by every man, that those words Gesum a Javelin, Trimarcia Three Horses, Essedum a Chariot, Petoritum a Wagon of four Wheels, Braccae Breeches, and others of that kinde, borrowed either from the Gauls or Britains, and received by the Ro­mans into their own Language, do sufficiently set forth the use of those things which they signifie either in Gaul or Britain. Moreover also, Vegetius in this place so join's together the manner of guarding the Sea and the subtile sleights they made use of for that purpose, that there is no reason at all why wee should not believ, that they were then used by the British Souldiers which served at Sea, or who had com­mand over the small Vessels called Pyctae or Picatae in those Guards by Sea.

An Examination of the Opinion of som learned men, who would have the Saxon Shore, from whence that Count or Com­mander of the Sea throughout Britain had his Title, to bee the British Shore on this side of the Sea; which is plainly proved to bee fals. CHAP. VII.

BUt truly certain learned men, either treating (as it often fall's out) of som other subject, or els beeing too careless in considering the matter, do otherwise interpret that Dignitie or Command of the Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain; And in such a manner, that if their determination were to bee admitted, the proof or testimonie before-alleged touching a Joint-Dominion of the Sea together with the Isle, in that Command under the Romans, would plainly fall to the Ground. These men are of two diffe­rent Opinions. Som would have the Shore of Britain it self or that which is on this side the Sea, to bee called onely the Saxon, in the naming of this Dignitie or Command: Others would have it to bee both the Shore of Britain, and all that Shore also which [...]etche's a compass like a half Moon from the Western part of Denmark as far as the West of France, and lie's over against Britain. But truly, they are both ex­tremely mistaken.

The Autor of the former opinion is Guidus Ad Notiti­am Dignit. Occid. cap. 72. Panci­rollus, who write's that the Shore or Limit within [Page 232] the Island was so denominated from those Saxons, who were called in hither by Vortigern King of the South part of Britain, to his assistance. The Saxons (saith hee) possessed part of the Island, from whence a limit or bound that was rear'd over against them by one that was made Count, was called Saxon. Then which nothing could have been more ignorantly spoken, if you re­flect either upon the thing it self, or the cours of times. For, omitting this, that in the Breviarie of Dignities it self no mention is made at all of a Saxon Bound or Limit, but of a Shore (notwithstanding that Pancirollus in the Inscription of his Commentarie entitle's the Commander that wee speak of, Count of the Saxon Limit throughout Britain) the Breviarie was written in the Reign of Theodosius the yonger, or in the year CCCCX, as learned men do commonly agree. That is to say, of that time, the frame of the whole Government of the Empire, both in the East and West, having been over-grown long be­fore, was with very great diligence digested as it were into one entire Book of Offices and Dignities. But the Saxons, as most of the Antients tell us, came first into Britain in the year of our Lord CCCCXLIX. But suppose, what upon better consideration may perhaps bee allowed, that their arrival ought to bee reckoned in the Apud Guil. Camden. in [...]it. pag. 95. & vide Tho. Lidi [...] in Temp. Emen­dat. pag. 238. year CCCCXXVIII. that is in the XXI year of the Reign of Theodosius the yonger, yet in the mean time this is most certain (which is here in the first place to bee observed) that Britain was utterly abandoned by the Roman Governors, be­fore they were called in. Doubtless they were as In Epist. de Excidio Bri­tanniae.▪ Gildas write's brought in by King Vortigern to drive back the Northern Nations, the Picts, and Scots; not the Romans, who had bidden farwel to the Island. Nei­ther [Page 233] had tho Romans or their Dukes or Counts any thing at all to do within the Isle with the Saxons. So that it must needs bee gross ignorance in Histories, and in the Calculation of time, to set down any Saxon Limit or Saxon Shore in the Island it self, whilst the Roman Empire flourished, or had any kinde of Autoritie in this Countrie. No­thing therefore is more evident then that the Shore lying on the other side of the Sea over against the South and Eastern Coast of Britain, as wee described it before, was called the Saxon in that Dignitie or Command. Moreover also that Count of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain was far more antient, and known by an addition thereto of the Sea Coast or of that Sea which was comprehended in the Roman jurisdiction throughout Britain, or in the bodie of the British Province. For, Nectaridius was invested with this Dignitie in the time of Valentinian the first, or about the year of our Lord CCCLXX; as is testified by Histor. lib. 27. Ammianus Marcellinus, where hee saith, information was given by a Messenger, that Britain was reduced to an extreme low condition by a barbarous Conspiracie; and that Nectaridius Count of the Sea-Coast, and Buchobaudes the Duke were surprized unawares by the craft of the Ene­my. Nor is any difference to bee imagined between the Dignitie of the Count of the Saxon Shore, in this sens, throughout Britain, and that which the fore-named C. Carausius received at Boloigne in France, to scour the Sea along the Coast of Gaul was by the Ro­mans divi­ded into four parts; of which Belgica was one, con­teining Pi­cardie part of Champagne, Burgundy, with so much of Germanie and the Netherlands as lie's on this side the Rhine. Belgica and Bretaigne, which (as Eutropius and Orosius say) was infested by the French and Saxons. For, that even hee also had places of strength and Mansion-houses belonging to his Government in Britain, appear's sufficiently upon this ground; that when Maximianus had given order to [Page 234] put him to death, hee immediately usurp't in Bri­tain, and reigned after for the space of seven years. So, the Governor here or Count of the Sea-Coast, and the Count of the Saxon Shore, beeing ever accounted the same, held the sole Government of Britain and the Sea belonging thereto. To whom also wee may add, as differing onely in name, not really, the Prefect or Admiral of the British Navie, under the Romans, mentioned in the former chapter. Wee confess in­deed, that the Duke of Belgica secunda and the Duke of the Countrie of Aremorica before-mentioned, was by the verie nature of his place to afford supplies for the guarding the Sea and this Shore beyond Sea: For, they also, as hath been observed, had Garrisons seated upon this Saxon Shore. But it is chiefly to bee observed here, that these beyond-Sea-Dukes were according to the nature of their Dignitie or Office to take care, not so much of the Shore or Sea, as the Continent; and that from thence, as you see, they took their names. This from the Tract of Praeter Notitiam & Pancirollum, vide Joseph. Scaligerum ad Ausonium, lib. 2. cap. 6. Aremo­rica and Ebroicae now called E [...]reux. Ebroicae; which beeing extended through five Provinces, Aquitania prima and secunda, Senonia, Lugdunensis secunda and Tertia (which comprehend's the lesser Britain and Normandie) conteined almost all that which was commonly called by the name of Gallia; But the other had its name from Belgica se­cunda. Nor was there one Count or Duke of the Midland Countrie, and another of the Shore or Sea-Coast in Gaul. But in Britain, the Counts or Dukes of the midland parts and the Count of the Sea-Coast or Saxon Shore, had distinct charges, distinct Forces, and the signal Ornaments of their Offices wholly distinct. Just as if the Roman Emperors would have it signified by this very thing, that as the Sea it [Page 235] self did by particular Right alwaies belong unto the Empire of the Island, so the Sea-affairs and their protection to the British Command and Juris­diction of the Saxon Shore or that beyond-Sea; but that both the Dukes of the Continent or main Land of Gaul lying right before it, were bound so to send relief, as occasion should require, against the Saxon Invasions, that in the mean time the sole care of the sea it self, as a particular Province given in charge, lay upon him that was made Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain. And if any Duke or Count ei­ther of Aremorica or Belgica secunda, was called by the name of Duke or Count of the Saxon shore (as Jos. Scali­ger. in lect. Auson. lib. 2. cap. 6. & Guil. Cam­den. in Brit. pag. 96. som would have) it was don doutless upon this ground, becaus the Saxon shore, lying over against us on the other side of the sea, did bound their Land-Go­vernment; as it did also the Sea-Jurisdiction of the aforesaid Count throughout Britain.

Nor indeed is that other Opinion any more to bee admitted, which saith; That our British shore was at that time called Saxon, as well as that which lie's over against it or beyond sea: And so that the name in the Dignitie or Office of the aforesaid Count, doth signifie the shore on this side the sea. Of this Opi­nion is In Thesaur. Geograph. Abrahamus Ortelius; I conceiv, saith hee, that the Saxon shore, in the Breviarie, doth signifie the Eastern part of Kent, seeing that Dubris, Rutupis, and other Towns of Kent are described therein. Hee hath indeed very eminent men for his Followers, In Kent, pag. 230. William Cam­den, Cosmograph. part. 2. lib. 3. cap. 31. Paulus Merula, German. Antiqua, lib. 1. cap. 18. Philippus Cluverius, and som others. And they add this for a reason; becaus both shores, as well this on this side the sea, as that on the other side, took name from the Saxons that used Piracie in very great numbers upon this sea: And therefore that [Page 236] the British shore also is set forth in the Title of that Count. But this is a manifest Error. Wee know indeed the Writers of that time do say, that both the shore over against ours and the neighboring Sea, was infested by the frequent depredations and Inva­sions of the Saxons, and (to say nothing of their antient habitations upon the Danish and Batavian shore) that they setled their abode there: And therefore that it was thence named Saxon, is in a manner out of doubt among learned men. But concerning the Saxons thus frequenting that shore, there are testimonies be­yond all exception. Panegyric. ad Avitum August seu Carm. 7. Adde eum lib. 8. Epist. 6. Sidonius Apollinaris, of the Coast of Bretaign in France, saith,

And Histor. lib. 27. Ammianus Marcellinus saith, that under the Em­perors Valentinian and Valens, the Coasts of Gallia were wasted by the Franks and Saxons bordering upon them, every one making excursions as far as they could by Land or Sea, with grievous plunderings, firings, and slaughters of such as they took Prisoners. Add moreover, that Saxones Baiocassini, the Saxons of Baieux are mentioned by Lib. 5. cap. 26. Gregorie of Tours, as antient Inhabi­tants upon the shore of Aremorica: So that the reason is evident, why the name of Saxon was given to the shore over against ours. But truly wee read not any where, that the Saxons had at that time either setled themselvs upon the shores of Britain, or were wont to sail thither, or that they infested any thing of Britain, except the Sea. Nor do wee finde so much [Page 237] as the least sign or evidence, whereby to conjecture that the name of Saxon was either due or given at that time to the shore of Britain. And it was never heard (I suppose) that any shores, which have been of any ac­count or fame, should have taken a new name either from a meer passage, or a bare infesting of the Sea by such as sail along the Coast, without landing. Especially, in the setting forth of a Dignitie or Com­mand, which cannot bee don, except an addition bee made in the mean time of the name of the Land, whereto the shore it self did indeed belong. Run over all the Dignities which are recorded in the Bre­viarie of both Empires, you will finde none set forth by any other denomination, then either from a Bound or Frontier it self, as those that were appointed for the defence of Bounds and Frontiers; or els from a more known and certain name of some Province, as the rest. Wee know indeed, there was a Haven among the The Mo­rini were a people of Belgica, bor­dering upon the Sea, and seated be­tween Ar­tois and Pi­cardie. Morini, which lay over against us on the other side of the Sea, called heretofore British, or, as Nat Histor. lib. 4. cap. 23. Plinie name's it, Portum Morinorum Britannicum the British Port of the Morini: which name Jacob Chif­fletius, in Portu Iccio, cap. 6. learned men would have to bee derived from our Britain. But (supposing it to bee Calais) they would have it so denominated becaus of Julius Caesar's crossing over from that Port into Britain. Now, it doth not ap­pear by the like, or any equivalent reason, that the shore, which belong's to Britain, was called Saxon, in the time of that Dignitie whereof wee speak. And doubtless, there is no improbabilitie in reason, that the British Port of the Morini, might in the daies of Plinie, or of the Emperor Vespasian (which is all one) bee denominated from the riding of such Ships as were imploied under the Romans to guard the neigh­boring [Page 238] Sea, so far as it was British, and subject to the Lievtenancie or Jurisdiction of Britain. But truly if the very shore of the Island had been meant in the Dignitie of that Count, whereof wee speak, whose Of­fice was to guard the Bounds, how compendiously might hee have been called Count of the British shore? For, what ground had there been for so singular a cir­cumlocution of words, as Count of the Saxon shore throughout Britain, if it had been the very shore of Britain? It is plain, that as in the Imperial Offices there was an Officer called Magister Militum per Orientem, Magister Militum per Thracias, per Illyricum, peditum per Oc­cidentem; a Master ▪or Commander) of the Militia throughout the East, a Master of the Militia over all Thrace, Illyricum, and of the Jnfantrie or Foot throughout the West; [...]o also that this Officer was called Count throughout Britain. That is to say, every where throughout Britain, so far as it belonged to his particular charge, that is, as far as was necessarie to guard the bounds of the Empire, placed next to the Saxon shore, or that which is on the other side of the Sea. And so the words, whereby this Dignitie is expressed, are to bee distinguished that hee may bee plainly called Count throughout Britain; but of the Saxon shore, or Bound beyond-Sea, upon the same account as other Dukes or Counts in Command over Bounds or Frontiers were wont to bee entitled. And there is an eminent example to this purpose in the Bound of the German Empire, which was held by the Romans. It was the River Rhine. The Guard of the Rhine was wont to bee com­mitted to a Lievtenant or Governor; as appear's by Zonaras, Tom. 2. alit. Historians, and out of L. 9. C. The­odos. lib. 7. tit. 1. the Code of Theodosius. But yet the Bank on the other side of Rhine was the bound [Page 239] of this Government, and so of the German Empire, not the Bank on this side. From whence also Posthianius beeing entrusted with this charge under the Emperor Gallienus, is by the Emperor Valerian, in an Epistle of his sent unto the French, called Duke of the Bound beyond Rhine; as wee learn out of In trigenta Tyrannis. Trebellius Pollio. Also, the Bound beyond Rhine, that is, the Bank be­yond the Rhine is recorded by In Tacito Augusto. Flavius Vopis [...]us. Thus, usually the Proconsul of Asia had the whole streight of Hellespont under his Command as far as the shores of Europe, as is shewn in the fourteenth chapter. And certainly, the Count of the Saxon shore throughoue Bri­tain, is after the same manner to bee reckoned Count of the shore or bound on the other side of the Sea, and so of the whole Sea flowing between, as an established Officer in the Government of Britain. And this also is very much confirm'd out of another place of the very Breviarie of Dignities, where mention is made of the several Jurisdictions of those Counts which were under the Command of that eminent person entitled Magister Militum Praesentalis. In the printed Copies of the Breviarie, wee read it thus;

• Italiae,
• Africae,
• Tingitaniae,
• Tractûs Argentoratensis,
• Britanniarum,
• Litoris Saxonici per Britannias.

[Page 240]In the Edition both of Alciatus and Pancirollus, it is read, as wee render it here, Militum infrascriptorum. Yet doubless the word Limitum Limits ought to bee put in stead of Militum Souldiers: For it is not agreeable to the nature of the Imperial Offices, that the word Militum should bee admitted in that place. And it appear's most certain by those things which follow, that Italie, Africa, the Tract of Strasburgh, Britain, and the Saxon Shore, had their respective Counts, as Comites Limitum Counts of the Limits or Bounds, no otherwise than those Territories which are added there next after; as Mauritania Caesariensis, Tripolis, and other Provinces in like manner, besides Britain, which had their re­spective Dukes likewise, by the name of Duces Limi­tum Dukes of the Limits. But now both the Duke and Count of Britain had the very Shore of the Island for their Limit or Bound. And therefore seeing it is so, what Limit had that Count relation to, was who entitled of the Saxon Shore throughout Britain, if you will not yield that hee took his Title from the Shore lying over against us? There was a Duke, and a Count of Britain (simply so called) besides a Vicarius or Deputie of Britain, who governed the whole Island according to their several charges; and wee finde in the Breviarie, that both the Duke and the Count and the Deputie had for the signal Orna­ments of their Offices, the whole Island, but in several Forms, encompassed with the Sea; even as the Count of the Saxon Shore had the Isle in like manner, encompassed with Sea-Towns or Ports. Al­so, it is manifest by those which are set forth in the Breviarie of Dignities, that the Deputie, Duke, and Count of Britain had the very Territories of the Isle for the [Page 241] Limits of their Government, and so also that they ex­tended themselvs to the very Shores every where throughout the Jurisdiction of the Romans. So that also both the Duke and Count of Britain ought to have been entitled in like manner from the Saxon Shore as from a Limit or Bound, if the Shore of Britain had been called by this name at that time. For, wee plainly see, that the Islands of Britain themselvs, so far as the Isles about it are comprehended under that name, are expressly described under the notion of Limits, in that Catologue of Dignities relating to Limits, which wee have cited out of the Breviarie. Therefore from hence also it appear's, that Limit which was the Saxon Shore is to bee reckoned without the Island, and so in the Shore over against us or which lie's beyond Sea, according to that which wee proved before in our Discours. Nor truly, is it to bee passed over without observation, seeing there are very many signal Ornaments of Sea-Provinces and Jurisdictions, as well as of those within Land, pictured in the Breviarie, and this according to the Form or Fashion received from those that had the supreme power, by the principal Secretaries or others who drew up the Com­missions; That not only no Ornaments at all are found in the Dignities of the West, wherein there is any Tract of the Sea, except those which belong to the Government of Jurisdiction of Britain, nor indeed in the Dignities of the East, except the Counts of Egypt and Isauria (both whose Ornaments had a Sea-bor­der about them;) but also that the Sea was ever placed round about in the signal Ornaments belonging to the four several Governments or Jurisdictions of Britain, that is to say, that of the Deputie, the Duke, the Count, and lastly, the Count of the Saxon Shore through­out [Page 242] Britain. Just as if the Romans would have had it signified thereby, that no other Province at all, nor any other Jurisdiction whatsoëver had either a Do­minion of the Sea so amply conjoined, mingled, and as it were incorporated within it self, or a protection and command of a Territorie by Sea.