02485nam 2200397Ia 450 99638753310331620221108023645.0(CKB)1000000000626941(EEBO)2240902458(OCoLC)15500985(EXLCZ)99100000000062694119870408d1682 uy |engurbn||||a|bb|Argumentum anti-Normannicum, or, An argument proving, from ancient histories and records, that William, Duke of Normandy, made no absolute conquest of England by the sword, in the sense of our modern writers being an answer to these four questions ..[electronic resource]London Printed by John Darby1682[10], clxiv p., [1] leaf of plates ill"This publication, occasioned by a work of William Pettyt's, entitled Antient rights of the commons of England, 1680, was answered by Brady in his Introduction to old English history. It is by some attributed to Atwood, and by others to Cooke or Johnson." cf. Lowndes. Has also been attributed to Petyt and to Sir Edward Coke.Identified on UMI microfilm and reel guide as variant of C4907 (number cancelled in Wing 2nd ed.).Reproduction of original in the Huntington Library.Includes bibliographical references.(from t.p.) I. Whether William the First made an absolute conquest of this nation at his first entrance? -- II. Whether he cancelled and abolished all the Confessor's laws? -- III. Whether he divided all our estates and fortunes between himself and his nobles? -- IV. Whether it be not a grand error to affirm that there were no English-men in the common council of the whole kingdom?eebo-0113Great BritainHistoryWilliam I, 1066-1087Atwood Williamd. 1705?793136Coke EdwardSir,1552-1634.626804Cooke Edwardof the Middle Temple.793688Johnson Samuel1649-1703.1001074Petyt William1636-1707.1004013EAKEAKWaOLNBOOK996387533103316Argumentum anti-Normannicum, or, An argument proving, from ancient histories and records, that William, Duke of Normandy, made no absolute conquest of England by the sword, in the sense of our modern writers being an answer to these four questions .2417417UNISA