copo, nisi prius à rege baculo & annulo insigniretur,' saith he. But let us leave Anastasius, and come unto the next, who, living in those days, passeth over Pope Joan in silence.

Pap. Ado, Bishop of Vienna, who lived at the same time, hath not a word of this your Pope Joan.

2

Prot. Ado lived not at the same time, nor near the same time, if either Gesner, or Possevinus, or Laurentius de la Barre, or Angelus Rocca may be credited: For he, as they say, wrote a brief chronicle, from the beginning of the world to his own time, to wit, to the year 1353; wherefore it is not much material, whether he miss her, or mention her. Say on.

Pap. Theophanus Freculphus wrote, in those days, an history, from the beginning of the world to his own time; and yet he writes nothing of her.

8

Prot. If Freculphus had written an history of that length, yet there was little reason why he should have mentioned her; for we read not, that he lived above the year 840: But, indeed, his history goes not so far; he writ only to the year of Christ 550, as * Bodin observeth; or to the year 560, as Pontacus noteth; or, at furthest, to the year 600. For, having spoken a few words of Gregory the Great, and Boniface, who succeeded him, he ends presently his story. Who is your next man?

Pap. 10 Aimonius, a monk of St. Germains, and a famous French writer, speaks nothing of her.

11

Prot. Aimonius, or Ammonius, or Annonius, (for he is diversely named) your famous French writer, drew out his story, by your own men's confession, but to the year 628, or at furthest to 12 844, which fell nine or ten years short (at least) of Pope Joan's time; and therefore, methinks, you should not look, that he should write of her. Pap. 13 Audomarus, the Parisian, omits her also, in his history. Prot. Where might a man see Audomarus, I pray you? "Canus tells of a bishop, in his country, which was wont to cite authors, that never were: Now I wish you be not of kindred to him in this; for I find no mention of any such historiographer in Trithemius, or in Gesner, or in Possevinus. Neither doth Bellarmine, nor Baronius cite any such, in their disputes about this matter. When you can tell me certain news of such a writer, you shall have a more certain answer: In the mean time proceed.

Pap. Nay, stay a little; for, though neither Bellarmine, nor Baronius, mention Ademarus (for so is his right name, and not Audomarus, as it is erroneously printed) where they speak of this matter,

1 Bellarm lib. iiL de Rom. Pont. cap. 24. N. D. num. 24. p. 393. & alii.

2 In Bibliotheca, verbo, Ado.

3 Apparatus sacer, verbo, Ado.

4 In Hist. vet Patrum, edit. Paris. 1583, ad initium, Chron. Adonis.

5 In Biblioth. Vatican. impress. Rome, anno 1591. Tit. Authores, quorum in opere citantur 6 Florim. pag. 84. 7 Freculphus foruit anno 830,

nomina.

& quod excurrit. Possevin. Apparat. sac. verbo, Freculphus.

8 In method. Hist. Freculph. Historicos ab Orbe condito ad annum Christi 560. Cron. digerit. 9 Chron, lib. ii. pag. 110. 10 Onuphrii Annotat. in Plat. in Vita Johan.

VIII. Harding. loco in initio citato, Florim. p. 84.

annum 898. Historiam texuit, saith Vasq. de Adorat. lib. II. cap. ix. disp. 7. 12 Genebr. Chron lib. iv. ad annum 844.

11 Annonius usque ad

13 N. D. num. 24. p. 392.

14 Episcopus quidam nostras eos Authores citavit interdam, quos nulla unquam habuit ætas Canus, Loc. Com. lib. xi. cap. 6. fol. 327.

yet Ademarus is mentioned by Genebrard and Onuphrius, where they treat of this matter, as B. C. observed well, in his Doleful Knell of Thoma Bell, where he taxeth Sutcliffe for captious quarrelling with father Parsons (as he calls him) for citing Ademarus, calling him a counterfeit.

Prot. B. C. is a fit patron for father Parsons, but an unfit match to deal with Dean Sutcliffe: Dean Sutcliffe, no doubt, scorns him; and good cause why. for who, but a fool, would appeal to one of his own fellows, for trial of his truth? Are not Genebrard and Onuphrius as like to cite a counterfeit author, as Parsons?

3

Prot. Why, what occasion had he to speak of her, since he writ no books of history? Besides, Lupus Servatus migravit ad dominum, Anno 851,' saith Trithemius: That is, Lupus Servatus died in the year 851. So that, though, as a prophet, he might have foretold of her delivery, yet, as an historian, he could not have reported her delivery.

Pap. Yea; but Lupus, abbot of Ferrara, in an epistle of his to Benedict the Third, calls Leo Benedict's predecessor; and thereby sheweth, as Baronius gathereth, that there was no such pope, as Pope Joan, between Benedict and Leo.

6

Prot. What? Doth Baronius gather such a conclusion of such premises? Verily he gathereth where no man streweth; for, I pray you, doth this follow? John the Ninth, speaking of Stephen the Sixth, calls him his predecessor; ergo, there was no pope between John the Ninth and Stephen the Sixth? If not, as indeed it doth not (for there were two popes who came between them, the one called Romanus, the other Theodorus) then neither will it follow, that, because Leo is called Benedict's predecessor, therefore there was no such Pope, as Pope Joan, between Benedict and Leo. Interdum Rom. Pon tifices non solum eos, qui proximi Episcopi fuere, sed plerosque disjunctissimos, illo nomine (prædecessoris) complectuntur.' The Popes of Rome, by the name of Predecessor, do sometimes understand, not such as were popes immediately before them, but such as lived very long before them, saith Massonus.

9

Pap. 10 Yea, but this Lupus, in divers of his epistles, doth complain of the miserable estate of the church in his time. And therefore, if any such horrible matter as this of Pope Joan had fallen out, " doubtless, he would have spoken of it, and mourned pitifully for it.

Prot. Doubtless, Baronius, if you give any credit to him, will make a fool of you. For doth not 12 he mention divers of his complaining epistles, sent to great personages; wherein yet he complains of nothing, but that courtiers robbed his corban, I mean his monastery.

1 Pag. 296 & 297 ad Ann. 851.

3 In Chron. Monasterii Hirsaugiensis, habetur apud Baron. Annal. Tom. x. ad 5 Annal. Tom. x. ad Aunum 853. 7 Idem, ad Annum

2 Florim. pag. 84.. 4 Epistola 103, quæ Annum 856. num. 8. & Florim. cap. 14. num. 4. num. 69. 6 Baron. Tom. x. ad Annum 900. num. 8. 8 Idem, ibid.

901. num. 1.

9 De Urbis Episc. lib. v. in Calest. III. fol. 212.

11 Certè, fi quod tam nefandum scelus

10 Baron. Tom. x. ad Ann. 853. num. 69. accidisset, dicere minimè omisisset, sed implacabili luctu vir zelo plenus planxisset.

12 Tom. x. ad Ann. 846. num. 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17.

'That he wanted an ambling nag to ride to Rome on. That he wanted Tully de Oratore, Quintilian, and Donate upon Terence. And that there was not such licentiousness in France (among the laity) that the people neither feared God nor the Devil. Of faults among the clergy, Lupus complains not at all.

4

Pap. Luitprandus, who writ an history, speaks nothing of her.

Prot. What history of Luitprandus do you mean? that which is intitled De Vitis Pontificum, that is, Of the Popes Lives; which was printed the other year at Mentz with Anastasius; or his history of such accidents as fell out through Europe.

Pap. I mean the latter; for I see the former, though it carry the name of Luitprandus, cast off by the printer, as none of his.

6

Prot. Now then you are a wise man, to tell me that Luitprandus mentions not Pope Joan. For Luitprandus, Ticinensis Diaconus, historiam per Europam gestorum libris 6. ab an. 858. ad 30. usque Othonis magni ferè continuat,'' saith Genebrard; that is, Luitprandus, deacon of such a church in Italy, continues his history of accidents which fell out in Europe, from the year 858, to the thirtieth year (almost) of Otho the Great. By which you may see that he began his history after Pope Joan's time: And therefore had no cause to speak of her.

Pap. Lambertus Schafnaburgensis hath not a word of her.

9

Prot. To this I answer, First, that he lived not in the same time with her; he lived Anno 1077. Secondly, I say that this Lambertus did but touch by the way all ages, from the beginning of the world to the year of Christ 1040, as Pontacus truly observed; though he discoursed at large of the thirty-seven years that followed. Thirdly, this Lambertus, doth not so much as name Stephen the fourth, or Paschalis, or Eugenius, or Valentinus, or Gregory the Fourth, or Sergius the Second, or Leo the Fourth, or Benedict the Third, or Nicholas, or Adrian the Second; and therefore what marvel, if he speak not of this Pope Joan?

Pap. 10 Otho Frisingensis, who lived about the year 1150, makes no mention of this story.

Prot. But he doth. For John the Seventh ("saith he) was a

woman.

Pap. 12 They who lived within a few years after her, and writ at length of all other accidents, write nothing of her; and that is another presumption, it is but a fable which is reported of her.

Prot. Who are they you mean?

Pap.

13

The first is 1 Johannes Diaconus, who, in the year 870, writ of the Popes lives.

7 Chron. lib. iv. ad Ann. 955.

4 N. D. pag. 392. Florim. pag. 84. Lectorem.

9 Lib. ii. Chron.

3 Ad Ann. 856. num. 20. 6 Job. Albinus Præfat. ad

8 N. D. and Florim. locis citatis. 10 Florim. pag. 85 Onuph. in Plat. in. Vita Joh. VIII. 11 Lib. vii cap. 35. Rerum in Orbe. gestarum. Impress. Argentorati, Ann. 1515.

12 Qui paulò post illius ætatem floruerunt, nihil de ea scripserunt, &c. Florim. cap. 10.

pag. 84.

13 Florim. loco citato,

2

Prot. That Johannes Diaconus writ St. Gregory the Great's life,' I grant; and, as some say, Clement's; but that he writ of any more popes, I utterly deny. You have a pretty gift in alledging writings that never were, but say on.

3

Pap. Milo Monachus, who lived Anno 871, saith nothing of her.

Prot. Milo Monachus, I believe, saith nothing of her, nor any other Pope; for he writ no history. They, who commend him, do commend him for a rhetorician, and for a poet, and for a musician, but not for an historiographer.

Pap. Passeratius Rabertus, who lived in the year 881, saith nothing of her.

Prot. This Passeratius is, surely, some author of your own devising. For no man can tell any news of him. But, perhaps, you would say Paschasius Ratbertus, for such a one lived about the time you speak of. Yet this writ no history. This writ neither at length, nor in brief, any of the Popes lives.

Pap. Yea, but Rhegino, who lived in the year 910, and comprehendeth briefly all the choice matters which fell out in the time of this supposed Pope Joan, writes nothing of her.

Prot. Rhegino writes nothing of John the Second, nor of Boniface the Fourth, nor of Deusdedit, nor of Boniface the Fifth. He writes not a word of Sergius the Second, nor of Leo the Fourth, nor of Benedict the Third, and therefore no marvel, though he write nothing of this Joan the woman Pope.

Pap. Why, but the greatest enemies that ever the Popes had, who lived in, and after those times, and were ready to cast in the Popes teeth whatsoever they knew, or knew not, to the end they might disgrace them, yet never objected this of Pope Joan. Which confirms me much in my opinion, that this is but a tale, devised long after by some craftyheaded hereticks.

Prot. Who are these, I pray you?

Pap. John Bishop of Ravenna is one of them, Methodius Illyricus another, and Michael Palæologus, the Emperor of Constantinople, a third.

Prot.. How know you, that these never objected Pope Joan's lewdness to the disgrace of the Roman Papacy? Have you read all that they writ, and all that they spoke?

10

Pap. Nay, their writings are not extant, "I confess. But a man may know how they slandered the Popes by the answers of many godly men, made in defence of the Popes. For as we catholicks at this day are forced to make mention of your objections, when we undertake to answer your books: so in those days the catholicks were driven to

1 For so I read in Trithem. de Script. Ecclesiast. verbo, Joh. Diac. Possevin. in Apparat. sac. verbo, Joh. Diaconus.

◆ Trithem. lib. citato. verbo, Milo. Sigebert. ad ann. 879.

6 Trithem. lib. citato. Possevin. Appar. sac. verbo, Paschasius.

3 Florim. loco citato.

5 Florim. leco citato.

7 Florim, loco citato.

8 Cum omnes scribendi principes, quorum alii hæretici, alii schismatici, alii anathemate separati- -quæcunque odium suggessit, in pontifices ex omni-vitæ præteritæ causa collecti probra turpiter evomuerint -nihil autem de Joanne Pontificatu dixerunt: Existimandum est quæcunque de ea postea divulgata sunt, posteriorum hæreticorum traude fuisse excogitata. Florim. cap. 10. num. 5 & 6. 9 Florim. num. 4.

10 Florim, ib.

make mention of the slanders which they refuted. Now, in their refutation of slanders, there is no such thing as this of Pope Joan.

5

Prot. Why, peradventure, they knew that in this they were slandered with a matter of truth; and therefore they held it best to pass it over in silence. Questionless, your fellows at this day do so often. When Beza objected this very matter in the assembly of Poissy, before the Cardinal of Lorrain, and the Sorbonists of Paris, who answered him? Do not your own men confess, that no man said a word to him? When the Hussites (as you call them) objected the same at the council of Constance, was not silence their answer? We read in a book lately set forth, intitled, Synodus Parisiensis, that *St. Ambrose asked,‘Qua ratione, quáve authoritate, imagines Angelorum vel aliorum Sanctorum adorandæ sint, cùm ipsi sancti angeli vel sancti homines vivos se adorari noluerunt?' What reason, or what warrant men had to worship the images of men and angels, seeing the angels themselves, and holy men alive, refused to be worshipped? Now the two great cardinals, Bellarmine and Baronius, snarl at this book, seeking by all means to disgrace it. Bellarmine expresly professeth the confuting of it: and Baronius sets the most of it down in his annals, even word for word, making glosses here and there upon it, in way of answer to it. But both of them pass slily by the words of St. Ambrose. If we had not had the book itself, we should never have known, by their answers, of such an argument of St. Ambrose's making against images. In like manner these two champions undertake to answer such arguments as are made to justify the report of Gregory's delivering Trajan out of hell. Yet there is one argument made by their 10 opposites, which they never touch: and that is this: That, in St. Gregory's church at Rome, the sum of that story is engraved in an ancient stone. Upon which argument the Jesuit Salmeron "stands much. If their opposites writings were not extant, by their answers, we had never heard of such an objection. Wherefore, if you would persuade me that these eager enemies objected not this against the Pope, you must bring better proof than this, that you find no foot-stepping of it in the answers made unto them. But go on with your argument. What other enemies silence persuades you that this story is a fable?

Pap. 12 Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims, Theodorus de Niem, Waltramus Bishop of Norinberg, Benno the Cardinal, bitter enemies unto the Pope, pass this over in silence. And this is a great argument to me, there was no such thing.

Prot. That Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims should have lived at enmity with your popes, it is not for your popes credit it should be known; for he was singularly well learned, very wise, and very honest,

2 Silentio satisfecerunt catholici

1 Johannes Sanmartinus in fabulam Joanne Pseudopontif. Roman corrupto historiarum albo erasam a Flor. &c. and Florim. cap. 6. pag. 58. doctores, &c. Florim. cap. 6. uum. 6. impress. apud Hæredes Wechel. 1596. pag. 145. 5 Append. ad lib. de. Cultu Imag. 7 Loco citato, in initio.

3 Synodus Parisiensis, ann. Christ: 824. Francofurti 4 lu Epist. Pauli ad Rom.

6 Annal. Tom. ix. ad ann. 825. num. 3.

8 Num. 5, &c.

Baron. Annal. Tom. viii. ad ann. 604. pag. 182, &c. xv. Disput. 27.

9 Bellar. lib. ii. de Purg. cap. 8. 10 Alphons. Salmeron. in 1 Cor. 11 Cujus rei extat insigne Romæ monnnientum lapidi antiquissimo inscriptum in æde sacra ipsius Gregoriiquod ego propis oculi hausi, &c. Salmeron loco citato, pag. 239 & 240.

12 Florim. cap. 10. pag. 87.