THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND, DEATH OF GEORGE THE SECOND TO THE CLOSE OF THE SIXTH SESSION OF THE FIRST PARLIAMENT OF BY JOHN WATKINS, LL.D. LONDON: Printed at the Caxton Press, BY HENRY FISHER, SON, AND CO. PUBLISHED AT 38, NEWGATE-STREET, AND SOLD BY ALL BOOKSELLERS. 1825. PREFACE. THE History of England, by Dr. Goldsmith, has so long and fully secured a fixed reputation, by the perspicuity of the style, and the fidelity of the narrative, that any observations upon its peculiar merits would be superfluous. Though confessedly nothing more than a compendium of our national annals, it exhibits all the prominent events necessary to be known, correctly, and delineates the characters that pass under review with impartiality. The plan of the work, however, has been so clearly explained by the author himself, that it would be unjust to state it in any other language than his own. "To attain the greatest number of advantages with the fewest inconveniences, is all that can be attained in an abridgment, the very name of which implies imperfection. It will be sufficient, therefore, to satisfy the writer's wishes, if the present work be found a plain, unaffected, narrative of facts, with just ornament enough to keep attention awake, and with reflection barely sufficient to set the reader upon thinking. Very moderate abilities were equal to such an undertaking; and it is hoped the performance will satisfy such as take up books to be informed or amused, without much considering who the writer is, or envying him any success he may have had in a former compilation. "As the present publication is designed for the benefit of those who intend to lay a foundation for future study, or desire to refresh their memories upon the old, or who think a moderate share of history sufficient for the purposes of life, recourse has been had only to those authors which are best known, and those facts only have been selected, which are allowed on all hands to be true. Were an epitome of history the field for displaying erudition, the author could shew that he has read many books which others have neglected, and that he also could advance many anecdotes which are at present very little known. But it must be remembered, that all those minute recoveries could be inserted, only to the exclusion of more material facts, which it would be unpardonable to omit. He foregoes, therefore, the petty ambition of being thought a reader of forgotten books; his aim being, not to add to our present stock of history, but to contract it. Of "The books which have been used in this present abridgment, are chiefly Rapin, Carte, Smollet, and Hume. They have each their peculiar admirers, in proportion as the reader is studious of historical antiquities, fond of minute anecdote, a warm partisan, or a deliberate reasoner. these I have particularly taken Hume for my guide, as far as he goes; and it is but justice to say, that wherever I was obliged to abridge his work, I did it with reluctance, as I scarce cut out a line that did not contain a beauty. "But though I must warmly subscribe to the learning, elegance, and depth, of Mr. Hume's history, yet I cannot entirely acquiesce in his principles. With regard to religion, he seems desirous of playing a double part, of appearing to some readers as if he reverenced it, and to others as if he ridiculed it. He seems sensible of the political necessity of religion in every state; but, at the same time, he would every where insinuate that it owes its authority to no higher an origin. Thus he weakens its influence, while he contends for its utility, and vainly hopes, that while freethinkers shall applaud his scepticism, real believers will reverence him for his zeal. "In his opinions respecting government, perhaps, also, he may be sometimes reprehensible; but in a country like ours, where mutual contention contributes to the security of the constitution, it will be impossible for an historian, who attempts to have any opinion, to satisfy all parties. It is not yet decided in politics, whether the diminution of kingly power in England, tends to increase the happiness or the freedom of the people. For my own part, far from seeing the bad effects of the tyranny of the great, in those republican states that pretend to be free, I cannot help wishing that our monarchs may still be allowed to enjoy the power of controlling the encroachments of the great at home. A king may easily be restrained from doing wrong, as he is but one man; but if a number of the great are permitted to divide all authority, who can punish them if they deserve it? Upon this principle, therefore, and not from any empty notion of divine or hereditary right, some may think I have leaned towards monarchy. But, as in the things I have hitherto written, I have neither allured the vanity of the great by flattery, nor satisfied the malignity of the vulgar by scandal, as I have endeavoured to get an honest reputation by liberal pursuits, it is hoped the reader will admit my impartiality." Of the continuation of the history, it must suffice to say, that the Editor has, throughout, been careful to keep his prototype in view, by a studious regard to simplicity of diction, and candour of sentiment. He has avoided all affectation of ornament, that he might compress as much fact as possible within a limited space, and he has abstained from political reflections, that he might not, while traversing ground covered with latent fire, lose his own temper, and mislead instead of informing the reader. HISTORY OF ENGLAND. CHAPTER I. Of the BRITONS before the Arrival of the ROMANS. IT is fortunate for mankind, that those periods of history which are the least serviceable, are the least known. It has been the study of many learned men to rescue from obscurity, and throw light upon, those early ages when the Britons were wholly barbarous, and their country uncultivated. But these researches have generally terminated in conjecture; so that whence Britain was at first peopled, or took its name, is still uncertain. The variety of opinions upon this head serve to prove the futility of all. It will, therefore, be sufficient to observe, that this beautiful island, by some thought the largest in the world, was called Britannia by the Romans long before the time of Cæsar. It is supposed that this name was originally given to it by the merchants, who resorted hither from the continent. These called the inhabitants by one common name of Briths, from the custom among the natives of painting their naked bodies and small shields with an azure blue, which in the language of the country was called brith, and which served to distinguish them from those strangers who came among them for the purpose of trade or alliance. The Britons were very little known to the rest of the world before the time of the Romans. The coasts opposite Gaul, indeed, were frequented by merchants who traded thither for such commodities as the natives were able to produce. These, it is thought, after a time, possessed themselves of all the maritime places where they had at first been permitted to reside. There, finding the country fertile, and commodiously situated for trade, they settled upon the sea-side, and introduced the practice of agriculture. But it was very different with the inland inhabitants of the country, who considered themselves as the lawful possessors of the soil. These avoided all correspondence with the new-comers, whom they considered as intruders upon their property. The inland inhabitants are represented as extremely numerous, living in cottages thatched with straw, and feeding large herds of cattle. Their houses were scattered all over the country, without observance of order or distance, being placed at smaller or greater intervals, as they were invited' by the fertility of the soil, or the convenience of wood and water. They lived mostly upon milk, or flesh procured by the chase. What clothes they wore to cover any part of their bodies, were usually the skins of beasts; but much of the body (as the arms, legs, and thighs) was left naked, and those parts were usually painted blue. Their hair, which was long, flowed down upon their backs and shoulders, while their beards were kept close shaven, except upon the upper lip, where it was suffered to grow. The dress of savage nations is every where pretty much the same, being calculated rather to inspire terror than to excite love or respect. |