THE XVIJ. CHAPTER.
After that Iulius Cesar had thus made the Britains tributaries to the Romans, and was returned into Gallia, Cassibellane reigned 7 yeares, and was vanquished in the ninth or tenth yeare after he began first to reigne so that he reigned in the whole about 15 or as some haue 17 yeares, and then died, leauing no issue behind him. There hath bin an old chronicle Fabian. (as Fabian recordeth) which he saw and followeth much in his booke, wherein is conteined, that this Cassibellane was not brother to Lud, but eldest sonne to him: for otherwise as may be thought (saith he) Cesar hauing the vpper hand, would haue displaced him from the gouernement, and set vp Androgeus the right heire to the crowne, as sonne to the said Lud. But whatsoeuer our chronicles or the British histories report of this matter, it should appere by that which Cesar writeth (as partlie ye haue heard) that Britaine in those daies was Cæsar. not gouerned by one sole prince, but by diuers, and that diuers cities were estates of themselues, so that the land was diuided into sundrie gouernements, much after the forme and maner as Germanie and Italie are in our time, where some cities are gouerned by one onelie prince, some by the nobilitie, and some by the people. And whereas diuers of the rulers in those daies here in this land were called kings, those had more large seigniories than the Cassibellane a King. other, as Cassibellane, who was therefore called a king.
And though we doo admit this to be true, yet may it be, that in the beginning, after Brute entered the land, there was ordeined by him a monarchie, as before is mentioned, which might continue in his posteritie manie yeares after, and yet at length before the comming of Cesar, through ciuil dissention, might happilie be broken, and diuided into parts, and so remained not onelie in the time of this Cassibellane, but also long after, whilest they liued as tributaries to the Romans, till finallie they were subdued by the Saxons. In which meane time, through the discord, negligence, or rather vnaduised rashnes of writers, hard it is to iudge what may be affirmed and receiued in their writings for a truth; namelie, concerning the succession of the kings that are said to haue reigned betwixt the daies of Cassibellane,
Cor. Tacit.
in uita. lib. Agr. and the comming of the Saxons. The Roman writers (and namelie Tacitus) report, that the Britains in times past were vnder the rule of kings, and after being made tributaries, were drawne so by princes into sundrie factions, that to defend and kéepe off a common ieopardie, scarselie would two or thrée cities agrée togither, and take weapon in hand with one accord, so that while they fought by parts, the whole was ouercome. And after this sort they say that Britaine was brought into the forme of a prouince by the Romans, from whom gouernors vnder the name of legats and procurators were sent that had the rule of it.
But yet the same authors make mention of certeine kings (as hereafter shall appeare) who while the Romane emperors had the most part of the earth in subiection, reigned in Britaine. Gildas in epist. The same witnesseth Gildas, saieng: Britaine hath kings, but they are tyrants: iudges it hath, but the same are wicked, oftentimes spoiling and tormenting the innocent people. And Cesar (as ye haue heard) speaketh of foure kings that ruled in Kent, and thereabouts. Some take Prasutagus and Aruiragus to be one man. Cornelius Tacitus maketh mention of Prasutagus, and Cogidunus, that were kings in Britaine: and Iuuenal speaketh of Aruiragus: and all the late writers, of Lucius. Hereby it appeareth, that whether one or mo, yet kings there were in Britain, bearing rule vnder the Romane emperors.
Gal. Mon. On the other part, the common opinion of our chronicle-writers is, that the chiefe gouernment remained euer with the Britains, & that the Romane senat receiuing a yearelie tribute, sent at certeine times (Ex officio) their emperors and lieutenants into this Ile, to represse the rebellious tumults therein begun, or to beat backe the inuasion of the enimies that went about to inuade it. And thus would these writers inferre, that the Britains euer obeied their king, till at length they were put beside the gouernement by the Saxons. But whereas in the common historie of England, the succession of kings ought to be kept, so oft as it chanceth in the same that there is not anie to fill the place, then one while the Romane emperors are placed in their steads, and another while their lieutenants, and are said to be created kings of the Britains, as though the emperors were inferiors vnto the kings of Britaine, and that the Romane lieutenants at their appointments, and not by prescript of the senat or emperours, administred the prouince.
This may suffice here to aduertise you of the contrarietie in writers. Now we will go foorth in following our historie, as we haue doone heretofore, sauing that where the Romane histories write of things done here by emperors, or their lieutenants, it shall be shewed as reason requireth, sith there is a great appearance of truth oftentimes in the same, as those that be authorised and allowed in the opinion of the learned.
Of Theomantius, the tearme of yeares that he reigned, and where he was interred; of Kymbeline, within the time of whose gouernment Christ Iesus our sauiour was borne, all nations content to obeie the Romane emperors and consequentlie Britaine, the customes that the Britaines paie the Romans as Strabo reporteth.