altogether the history of Leland. De Catalogo virorum illustrium, which booke beyng borowed of maister Cheke, I my selfe did see in the handes of the foresayde Iohn Bale, what tyme we were both together, dwelling in the house of the noble Lady Duches of Richmond. Wherfore if he think me so lewd to speake without myne authors, he is deceyued. And if he thinke myne authors not to be beleued, then let this Nomothetes, or iolly Dictator, come forth and prescribe vs a law, what authours he would haue vs to take, and what to refuse. For els why is it not as free for me to credit Iohn Bale, and Leland, as for hym to credite Rob. Fabian, and Edw. Hall, especially seyng they had sene hys bookes and workes left behynd hym, wherupon they might better iudge, and so did neuer these?

MarginaliaTo the third obiection. Thirdly, for the name of Roger Onley, if Cope deny that there was any such name in stories mentioned, but that there was one called Roger Bolingbroke, &c. hereby it may appeare that either his prompter out of England deceyued him, or els that he goyng no further but to Fabian, & Hall, lacketh no good will in hym, but onely a little matter to make a perfect Sycoph. And admit the saide name of Onley could not be found in those writers, yet it were not vnpossible for a man to haue two names, especially if he were a religious man, to beare the name of the towne where he was borne, beside his owne proper surname. But now what if I (M. Cope) can auouch and bryng forth to you the name of Roger Onley out of sufficient recorde, which you seeme not to haue yet reade? Haue ye not then done well and properly (thinke you) so bitterly to flee in my face, and to barke so egerly all this while at Mooneshine in the water, hauyng no more cause almost against me, then agaynst the man in the Moone? And now least you should thinke me so much vnprouided of iust authority for my defence, as I see you vnprouided of modesty and patience, write you to your prompter or suborner (where so euer he lurketh here in England) to send you ouer vnto Louane the booke of Iohn Hardyng a Chronicler, more auncient then either Fabian or Hall, printed in the house of Richard Grafton, an. 1543. where turne to the fol. 223. fac. b. lin. 19. and there shall you finde and reade these wordes.

Agayne the Church and the king cursedly,
By helpe of one maister Roger Onley. &c.

By the which wordes ye must necessarily confesse Roger Onley to be the name of the man, eyther els must ye nedes deny the author. For otherwyse that maister Roger Bolyngbroke was the onely helper to the Duchesse in that fact, by no wyse it can stand with the story of these authors, which say,MarginaliaVid. Centu. 8. Ral. ca. 4. that 4. other besides him were condemned for the same crime. &c. And moreouer though the said sir R. Onley was no knight (as I haue sayd in my former edition) yet this ye cannot deny, by the testimony of them that haue sene his workes, but that he was a priest, which you will graūt to be a knights felow. And thus much for the name and condition of M. Roger Onley.

MarginaliaTo the 4. obiection. Fourthly, as concerning Margaret Iourdeman whom ye call the witch of Eye, ye offer me herein great wrong, to say that I make her a martyr, which was a witch: when as I here professe, confesse, and ascertaine both you and all English mē, both present and all posteritie hereafter to come that this Margarete Iourdeman I neuer spake of, neuer thought of, neuer dreamed of, nor did euer heare of, before you named her in your booke your selfe. So farre is it of, that I either with my will or agaynst my will, made any Martyr of her.

Furthermore, I professe and denounce in lyke manner, that neither haue you any iust or congrue occasiō in my boke so to iudge, much lesse to rayle of me.MarginaliaM. Cope rayleth without a cause. For where, in expresse wordes I do speake of the mother of the Lady Yong, what occasion haue you therby to slaunder me and my boke with Margarete Iourdeman? which Margarete whether she was a witch or not, I leaue her to the Lord. As for me, neither did I know of her then, nor did I meane of her now. But because I couple her in the same story, you say. To this I say, because she was þ^e mother of a lady, I thought to ioyne her with an other Lady in the same story as in one pue together, although in one cause I will not say. And yet notwithstanding I do so couple the sayd mother wyth the Duchesse, in such distinct difference of yeares, that you maister Cope might easily haue vnderstande, or beside you, no man els would haue thought the contrary, but that Margaret Iourdeman was neyther here in my booke, nor yet in my memento. For the woordes of my story are playne, where as the condemnation of the Lady Eleanor, & of the mother of Lady Young beyng referred to the yeare of our Lord. 1441. I doe also in the same story (through the occasion of that Lady) inferre mention of the mother of the Lady Yong, declaryng in expresse woordes, that she folowed certein yeares after, & in the end of that Chapter, do name also the yeare of her burnyng to be. 1490.MarginaliaSee the former edition pag 371. which was. 50. yeares after the death of Onley, and Margarete Iourdeman: by the computation of which yeares it is plaine, that no other woman could be noted in that place, but onely the Lady Younges mother.

But M. Cope continuyng still in his wranglyng mood, obiecteth agayn, for that in my Callender, the sayd Ladye Younges mother hath the next day in the Catalogue next after the death of Roger Onley, whiche day perteyneth properly to Margaret Iourdeman, which was burned the same day in smithfield, and not to the Ladyes mother. &c.

What order was taken in placyng the names and dayes, what is that to me? If he which had the disposing of the Catalogue, did place them so in monethes, as he sawe thē ioyned in chapters, not perusing peraduenture nor aduising the chapters. that doth nothyng preiudice the truth of my story, which sufficiently doth clare it selfe in distincting thē rightly in names and also in yeares, as is afore declared.

MarginaliaTo the 5. obiection. Fiftly and lastly, hauinge thus sufficiently aunswered to your circumstances of persons, names, and tymes (M. Cope)MarginaliaThe story of the Lady Eleanor & Rog. Oneley here pretermitted. I wil nowe enter to encoūter with you concernyng the facte and cryme obiected to the Lady Duches, and to the reste: with this protestation before premised vnto the reader, that if the facte be true and so done as is reported in the historyes of Fabian, Halle and hardyng, I desire the reader then so to take me, as though I doe not here deale withall, nor speake of the matter, but vtterly to haue pretermitted, and dispuncted the same.MarginaliaA question whether Eleanor the Duches was culpable in treason agaynst the king. But for somuch as the dede and offence layde & geuen forth agaynst these parties, may be a matter made, and of euell will compacted, rather then true in dede: therfore I doo but onely moue a question by way of historie, not as defendyng, nor commendyng nor cōmemorating the thing, if it be true, but onely mouing the question, whether it is to be iudged true, or suspected rather to be fals and forged, and so hauyng briefly, propounded certeine coniecturall suspicions or supposals concernyng that matter, to passe it ouer, neither medling on the one side nor on the other.

MarginaliaCertaine coniectures of the crime not to be true.
1. Coniecture. The first coniecter, why it may be possible that this act of treason layd to the charge of the Duches, & Roger Onley, agaynst the king, may be vntrue, is this: that the sasd Onley (otherwise named Bolyngbroke) toke it vpon hys death, that they neuer intended any such thyng as they were condemned for.

Marginalia2. Coniecture. The second coniecture: for that the Lady Eleanor, & Onley semed then to fauour and sauour of that religion set forth by Wickleffe, and therefore lyke enough, that they were hated of the clergy.,Furthermore, what hatred and practise of Papistes can do, it is not vnknowne.

Marginalia3. Coniecture. The thyrd coniecture: for that the sayd master Roger Oneley falsely noted & accused of Nicromancie, wrote a booke in purgation of him selfe, intituled: De Innocentia sua. Also an other boke intituled, Contra vulgi superstitiones, recorded in Centu. 8. Bale. cap. 4. Whereupon it is not credible, that he which wrot professedly agaynst the superstitiōs of the people, was ouer taken with that filthe of Nicromancie him selfe.

Marginalia4. Coniecture. The fourth coniecture: because this accusation agaynst the Duches of Glocester, Duke Humfreis wife beganne not before, but after the grudge kindled betwene the cardinall of Wint. and Duke humfrey, her husband.

Marginalia5. Coniecture. An other coniecture may be hereof, for that, if the duches had entended any such haynous treason agaynst the kinges lyfe, as by burning of a waxe candle to consume him, it is not lyke (neither was there any such nede) that she would haue made so many priuy to such a pernicious counsayle, as the Witch of Eye, M. Rog. Bolingbroke, M. Tho. Southwel and Iohn Hume.

Marginalia6. Coniecture. Sixtly, it is not to be supposed, if any such hie treason had bene wrought or pretended against the kings person by these that either the Duches should so escape with bearing a taper and banishment, or that Iohn Hume should be pardoned his lyfe, the fact being so hainous, that neither any durst aske his pardon, nor if it had bene asked, it had not bene lyke to be graunted.

Marginalia7. Coniecture. To these we may also adde an other supposall, rising vpon the wordes and forme of their accusation as it standeth in Harding, Polychronicon and other mo wherin they wer accused for working sorcery, and inchauntmēts agaynst the church and the kyng. Now what sorcery can be wrought agaynst the church: that is, the whole multitude of christiās, let the Reader iudge, and by the truth of this, consider also