XVIII. HENRY III AND THE POLITIQUES. THE PEACE OF MONSIEUR (1576) (part 1 of 2)

XVIII. HENRY III AND THE POLITIQUES. THE PEACE OF MONSIEUR (1576) (part 1 of 2)

The attention of Europe was fixed upon France by these events. What was going to happen in the absence of the heir to the throne? Would a frightful wave of retaliatory vengeance for the massacre of St. Bartholomew and the process of Vincennes sweep over the land? These were the questions that were asked, not only everywhere in France, but in many quarters of Europe. The Tuscan ambassador wrote that the châteaux of the Montmorencys were filled with provisions and munitions of war.[1657]

The Politiques, as a class, being imbued with Hotman’s teachings in the Franco-Gallia, inveighed against Catherine for having assumed the regency without consent of the estates. They and the political Huguenots were at one, and demanded searching reform. It was their hope to prevail upon the queen mother to come to a definite agreement before the arrival of Henry III in France, in the expectation that the King upon his arrival would find it expedient to accept it. They demanded the reorganization of justice and the army; they condemned the alienation of the crown lands, increase of the tithe, and the new taxes; they insisted upon an examination of the accounts of those who had managed the public finances and the royal revenue, this investigation to include not only the ministers who had enriched themselves, but also the superintendents of finance from Henry II down to the present time, not excepting the cardinal of Lorraine. They demanded the expulsion of the “foreigners,” naming the chancellor Biragues, the marshal de Retz, and the duke of Nevers who were all Italians. They hated the Guises as a foreign house and quasi-German.[1658]

It was high time for some sort of settlement. The country was crying out against the thieves and brigands, who frequented the roads in great numbers under the guise of war and pretended to be in the service of the King.[1659]

But Catherine refused to deal with any matter of state until the arrival of the King. She showed an almost feverish anxiety for her son’s coming, fearing that the duke of Alençon would be put forward for the crown by the Politiques.[1660] In Germany, at the same time, the Orange party, with the aid of Schomberg, labored to promote the cause of the Politiques and liberal Huguenots, and in September a deputation came from the count palatine to urge the cause of toleration in France.[1661] But it was slow and hard work, for as La Noue had bitterly said the year before: “The iron of the German nation was heavy and hard to work; it was silver that made things move.”[1662] Moreover, the agents of Spain and the Guises were encountered at every turn.

In the meantime Henry III had left Cracow on June 16, running away from his kingdom like a thief in the night,[1663] and came home by way of Italy, via Venice, where he was extravagantly entertained by the senate,[1664] Ferrara (July 29), Mirandola, Mantua, and Turin, which he left on August 28, and arrived at Lyons on September 6.[1665] Catherine, who showed great impatience, met him there (she arrived at Lyons on August 27). So fearful was she lest Alençon and Henry of Navarre would escape that the young princes had traveled in the coach with her.[1666] The procession moved as if through a hostile country by way of Burgundy and Chalons-sur-Saône, some of the guard marching in advance, the rest bringing up the rear. “Marshal de Retz was always on the wing of her. Some of the guard marched two leagues before and some two leagues after.”[1667]

Those who were at all optimistic had clung to the belief, until the development of events shattered their hopes, that Henry III would endeavor to pacify his subjects, arguing that if he were inclined to war, he would not have refused the assistance proffered him in Italy of men and money, and that the French crown could not further hazard the reduction of the kingdom piecemeal.[1668] Damville had met the King at Turin, having come there under a safe-conduct of the duke of Savoy, to persuade Henry III to adopt a conciliatory policy, which he at first inclined to follow.

But the moment he came under the sinister influence of Catherine de Medici, he cast this prudent advice to the winds. It was she who dissuaded him from what was wisely counseled[1669] and in advance of his arrival had made military preparations to resume the war by importing Swiss mercenaries and German reiters again.[1670] Accordingly, instead of extending the olive branch, the King expressed his determination to wage unremitting war upon the Huguenots and Politiques rather than grant the demands they made. The deputies of La Rochelle who came to Lyons, requesting a surcease of arms, were repulsed by the King and told it was but a scheme of the Huguenots to gain time for preparation. The establishment of three camps was ordered, one in Dauphiné, the second in Provence and Languedoc, and the third in Poitou. At the same time Schomberg and Fregoso were sent into Germany for assistance.[1671]

When Henry III definitely resolved to follow out a policy of suppression Damville was summoned to Lyons to answer for his governorship. It was a fatal blunder on the part of the King, for the action of the crown hardened the tentative co-operation of the Protestants and the Politiques into a positive alliance. At Milhau, in August, 1574 the Protestants recognized Damville, while he in turn admitted their leaders into his council. The form of government established at Montauban the year before acquired new strength and greater extent. Provincial and general assemblies were formed without distinction between Protestants and Politiques, upon the basis of mutual toleration; in places where the two creeds obtained each side promised to observe the peace and Damville engaged not to introduce the Catholic religion in any town of which the Huguenots were masters.

The men who took this step justified it by alleging that a foreign faction had acquired control over the sovereign; that it was destroying the kingdom, the nobles, the princes of the blood, and with them the very institutions and civilization of France; and that it was their hope to arrest this process. The programme of the Huguenot-Politique party, in addition to complete religious toleration, insisted upon the abolition of the practice of selling offices, the convocation of the States-General, the reduction of the taxes. In this demand they were supported by the provincial states of Dauphiné, Provence, and Burgundy. The confessional idea was deliberately kept in the background. Men no longer talked of a war of religion, but of a “Guerre du Bien Public” as in the reign of Louis XI.

With the nobles Damville’s was a name to conjure with. A large portion of the Catholic nobility, who for a long time had been severely reproached for not seriously opposing the Huguenots, sympathized with his attitude. If the bench and bar of France was strongly attached to the principles of the Catholic religion, the nobility who were hereditary enemies of the legists, whose teachings had for three centuries tended to abridge their feudal rights, out of sheer self-interest, aside from any other motives, now inclined toward the Calvinists. Only radical Calvinists, like Du Plessis-Mornay, opposed the union and were bitter in denunciation of the overtures made by their more moderate brethren, notably La Noue, to Damville and the Politiques.[1672]

A royal edict let the Huguenots understand what was to be expected. The King’s determination was to clear the valley of the Rhone from Lyons to Avignon with the aid of the Swiss and then to subdue Languedoc on the one side and Dauphiné on the other. Such a plan was more bold than practicable, and Henry was likely to find it too hard to accomplish, especially by winter sieges. The Protestants had fortified themselves in Livron on the left bank of the Rhone and at Pouzin across the river, which was inaccessible except by one approach and then only four men could advance abreast.

But there was another matter, the difficulty of which Henry III underestimated, namely the army. The Protestants were so entrenched in their strongholds as to make the use of horsemen against them impracticable. The Swiss were low-class mercenaries, good as ordinary footmen but useless for a siege. Moreover, all of them, reiters and Swiss, were not disposed to move unless they saw their pay in their hands and were utter strangers to discipline, wasting the country “to make a Christian man’s heart bleed.”[1673] In one case the wretched peasantry followed their despoilers to the confines of Lyons and fell upon them in desperation, recovering what had been taken from them. What did the King do? He actually had to punish these wretched subjects of his in order to retain the services of the reiters at all!

Yet the King for a moment showed some of the old fire he displayed at Moncontour and amazed the Protestants by taking Pouzin after three weeks of siege. The victory was marred, though, by the shameful conduct of the Swiss, the reiters, and the Italians in the royal army, who sacked and burned it. Much the same state of things prevailed wherever these riotous plunderers penetrated—in Picardy, in Champagne, in Poitou. But Henry III having reached Avignon, discovered that he was no better off for his success. Meanwhile Damville, with whom the duke of Savoy had honorably dealt, returned from Turin, and reached the vicinity of Montpellier and Beaucaire before the King was aware of it.[1674]

When the King sent the cardinal of Bourbon to talk with him, Damville sent back word that he thought the example of his brother “too dangerous to come to court where they who sought the ruin of his house had too much credit,”[1675] and advised the King to remove the strangers within his gates, meaning Biragues and De Retz.[1676] Henry III could accomplish nothing at Avignon and yet knew not how to get away. He could not go up-river on account of the current. The Huguenots at Livron barred the road on the left bank; Montbrun was in the hills in Auvergne; La Noue’s men were stopping the King’s post daily and Damville controlled Provence and Languedoc; La Haye, King’s lieutenant in the séné-chaussée of Poitou seceded to the Politiques.[1677] Vivarais declared its neutrality and refused to side with King or Politiques. The people of Tulle refused to pay taxes either to Catholics or Protestants until overpowered by the latter, and thus the country continued to endure a war which it hated. Henry truly was in a plight. He was without money, too, and could not hope to get any so far from Paris. He even feared that the soldiery with him might be bribed to desert.[1678] To crown the royal anxiety Damville’s declaration was so public and so bold that the King feared that foreign aid would soon be forthcoming in the Protestant service. The fear was not without ground. For the marshal actually proposed to make a league with the Sultan and introduce a Turkish fleet into the harbor of Aigues-Mortes.[1679] Coupled with this possibility was a projected enterprise against Spain in Franche-Comté in which the Huguenots of Champagne and Burgundy were interested, but which was primarily the project of the elector palatine and the prince of Orange.[1680]

It is a significant fact that the war has now lost almost all confessional character and become a factional conflict between the rival houses of Guise and Montmorency. Catholicism and political corruption on the one hand were opposed to administrative reform and religious toleration. After the creation of the Politique party, the Huguenots of state had merged with them. Except in the case of radical Calvinists and bigoted Catholics, religion had become a minor issue with the French unless it were artificially exaggerated.[1681] It was a mortal enmity on either side, and one which there was slight hope of settling. The hostility of the Guises and the Montmorencys was the real seed of the civil war.[1682] It depended upon the individual in almost every case whether his participation one way or the other was motived by convictions as to the public good or by private interests. The number of those who directly or indirectly were attached to the warring houses almost divided the realm between them and the wretched people were badly treated by both parties.[1683] So widespread and deep rooted was this mutual enmity throughout France, that the Venetian ambassador, no mean observer, wondered when it would end, because it was to the interest of each to sustain it. The King was a shuttlecock in this game of political battledore. The ruin of the crown, instead of being feared by them, was regarded as a possible way to give their enmity freer rein. Each party counted not only upon paying its debts, which were enormous, by victory, but in establishing the power of its house more permanently than ever for the future. While the war cost the King and the country écus par milliers, it cost them nothing, at least of their own. The weakness of the crown was the strength of the rivals. They fattened on war, for peace deprived them of their authority, their power, and their partisans. Until one or the other faction was crushed, the hostility was certain to endure, and thus the war seemed doomed to last indefinitely. If, as the result of fatigue or a truce, a respite was made, the time was brief, and was terminated as soon as one or the other side had accumulated some substance again. The only remedy for such a state of affairs was to be found in a foreign war, either in Flanders or Italy.[1684]

The union of the Huguenots and the Politiques made them very strong, especially in the south. But on the other hand the duke of Guise received much assistance from Flanders. When the successor of Alva, Requesens, learned of the death of Charles IX, he had offered the aid of Spanish troops to Catherine de Medici.[1685] Although the proffer was declined, the practical result was the same, for owing to lack of pay in the Low Countries, thousands of reiters and Walloon and German footmen flocked across the border in the summer and autumn, where they were welcomed by the duke of Guise, who, somewhere and somehow, found the means to pay them.[1686] But below the stratum of professional soldiers in France there was another class in arms which feudal society was not used to see in such a capacity. This was the people; not town militia, for town and provincial leagues had made men familiar with them, but the peasantry. The protracted wars by economically ruining and morally debauching this class had generated a breed of men who sprang from the soil like the dragon’s teeth of Greek fable, men who by observation and practice were used to the matchlock and the sword, brutalized by oppression, long made desperate by burdensome taxes and the wrongs of war.[1687]

The weariness of vigil in the depth of winter and overconfidence seem to have relaxed the alertness of Henry III’s foes. At any rate, having extorted 50,000 francs from the noblemen and gentlemen in his train in order to pay the soldiery around him, the King, raising the siege of Livron on January 24, 1575, managed to slip through the defiles to Rheims for his coronation. The coronation was a triumph of the Guises. For far from being set back by the death of the cardinal of Lorraine on December 29, at Avignon[1688] their star seemed to be higher than before. The cardinal of Guise took the place of his deceased uncle as primate of Rheims; the duke of Guise was grand chamberlain; and the duke of Mayenne and the marquis d’Elbœuf were the chief lay peers. The sole outsider was De Retz who officiated as constable for the occasion. The crowning took place on February 15. Shortly after the event, apparently in a sudden whim of passion, Henry III married Louise de Vaudmont, whose father was uncle of the duke of Lorraine and whose mother had been sister of the unfortunate Egmont. But the marriage was without political significance—indeed the new queen was of so little station that Catherine de Medici, in a letter to Queen Elizabeth, expressed her humiliation at her son’s marriage.[1689]

The main issues of France, religious toleration and political reform, were now more obscured than ever by the rivalry of the factions around the throne. The queen mother bore the Guises greater hatred than before because of their new ascendency and had little less spleen toward the Montmorencys, but carefully dissimulated and sought on one pretext and another to remove them from around her son. For this purpose Bellegarde, who was an old attaché of the house of Montmorency and owed his popularity with the King to a handsome face and a well-turned leg, was made a special ambassador to Poland in order to get him out of the way. His comrade on the mission was Elbœuf—an ill-matched pair indeed. Their business was to carry 200,000 crowns of the Paris bourgeois to Poland to bribe the Polish diet not to elect a successor to the absent Henry. If the Poles were obdurate, Elbœuf was to advocate the election of the duke of Ferrara, who had Guisard blood in his veins. At the same time Biron and Matignon were made marshals to counterpoise the influence of De Retz who forthwith resigned his office and vowed he would “meddle no more.” There were heart-burnings, also, over the bestowal of the government of Normandy, vacated by the death of the duke of Bouillon. The duke of Nevers claimed that it had been promised him while in Poland; the duchess of Nemours demanded the post for the duke and declared that Nevers was “a foreigner.” Henry III finally sought to compromise by giving the office to his insignificant father-in-law, whereupon the duke of Nevers quit the court in a rage. Squabbles of precedence, too, vexed the King’s mind. Montpensier challenged the claims of the Guises to court precedence before the Parlement, and Madame de Nemours therefore quarreled with her daughter. “They were all bent to preparations of war,” quaintly wrote Dale to Walsingham, “but these domestic discords do tame them. It is a very hell among them, not one content or in quiet with another, nor mother with son, nor brother with brother, nor mother with daughter.”[1690]

The state of the finances was deplorable, and Henry resorted to various devices to provide himself with funds. The mission of Elbœuf and Bellegarde to Poland was delayed, while the King implored the Pope, the duke of Savoy, and Venice for the money needed;[1691] the pay of the King’s household servants was nine months in arrears and the last money wages of his guards had been paid by an assessment levied by the King upon the noblemen and gentlemen of the court. Paris, as usual, was heavily mulcted by a forced loan of 600,000 francs, besides heavy contributions extorted from the foreign merchants there. But the mass of the money had to come from the church lands. A letter-patent in the form of an edict was forced through the Parlement authorizing the alienation of 200,000 livres de rente of the temporalities of the clergy, the King reckoning to raise a million and a half of francs by the process, but few were ready purchasers. In addition to these practices the “parties casuelles” were farmed to a Florentine money-broker named Diaceto for 60,000 francs per month. Henry III resorted to worse expedients than these, though. He sold four seats in his council for 15,000 livres each; forced the collectors of the revenue to anticipate the revenue for a twelve-month and then dispossessed them of their posts after he had deprived them of the profits thereof and sold them to others; and dilapidated the forest domain by selling two trees in each arpent.[1692]

The position and conduct of Damville afforded the greatest hope for the future if Henry III could have been made to see things in the right way. Damville himself dominated all Languedoc and Provence; his lieutenant, Montbrun, controlled Dauphiné; Turenne was in possession of Auvergne; the Rochellois had agents at court seeking for a firm settlement of affairs; even the cardinal Bourbon and the duke of Montpensier leaned to the side of the Politiques. In 1575 the existence of the old party of Huguenots, the Huguenots of religion, was practically at an end. Individual radical Calvinists there were in plenty but the Protestant organization was that of the political Huguenots.

It was manifest by the spring of 1575 that the prince of Condé and Henry of Navarre on the one hand, and Damville and his brother, together with Alençon, were bound to join hands in the common purpose to establish permanent religious and greater civil liberty in France. “Liberty and reform” was the policy of the hour, if not the watchword. The declaration of the assembly of Milhau in August of the previous year had been the handwriting on the wall—a message which the misguided Henry III obdurately refused to read. On April 25, 1575, that message was repeated in even clearer terms in the form of a manifesto issued by Damville which defined the joint policy of the Politiques and the political Huguenots. It was the declaration of a patriot, and not a partisan, least of all a rebel, who, like Cromwell, found himself compelled to lead a movement for political reform against an obstinate crown that either would not or could not understand the issues.[1693]

Reading between the lines of the constitution agreed upon at Nîmes, the republican nature of the government therein provided for is noticeable.[1694] The right to exercise the sovereign rights of legislation, of justice, of taxation, of making war and peace, of regulating commerce no longer were vested in the King where the Act of Union prevailed, but in a representative body. Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné were de facto independent of the crown.[1695] Supplementary articles of Condé and Damville, and of the Catholics and Protestants of Languedoc, Provence, and Dauphiné demanded (1) that freedom of exercise of religion without distinction be permitted; (2) that the parlements should be composed half of Catholics, and half of Protestants, the latter to be nominated by the prince of Condé; (3) that justice be done upon the authors of the massacre of St. Bartholomew and the forfeit and attainder of the admiral be reversed; (4) that the places at present held by the Huguenots be retained besides Boulogne and La Charité, and that for additional defense the King should give them in each province two out of three towns to be named to him by the prince of Condé; (5) that the King pay 200,000 crowns for expenses of the war; (6) that neither the marshal de Retz, nor the chancellor Biragues should have any part in the negotiations for peace; (7) that the duke of Montmorency and the marshal Cossé should be set at liberty, and their innocence declared in full Parlement “en robe rouge;” (8) that the heirs of those who have been murdered should have their estates returned to them; (9) that the queen of England, the elector palatine, and the dukes of Savoy and Deuxponts should be parties to the peace; (10) that within three months after peace the States-General be assembled to establish good order in France.[1696]

For a while there seemed to be a prospect of the King yielding to these demands. He was growing jealous of the influence of the Guises, and began to perceive that coercion was impossible.[1697] At the first audience Henry received the deputies graciously, saying he “liked their speech, but their articles were hard.” The articles were debated seriatim by the King, both with the deputies and with the council. The chief hitch was upon the fourth demand. The King was willing to permit exercise of Protestant worship in one town in each bailiwick, except closed towns, whereas the deputies demanded freedom of worship in all places in the suburbs as provided by the Edict of January. As a matter of prudence, it would seem to have been better policy for the crown to permit worship in the suburbs of all towns rather than exact a provision requiring concentration of the Protestants in one place in each bailiwick; however, the King probably thought Calvinism would be less likely to spread under such a restriction than if the Huguenots enjoyed numerous places of worship.[1698] The queen mother sought to persuade Montmorency to use his influence to abate the demands with promise of release from the Bastille as his reward. But the duke replied that “if his imprisonment might do the King pleasure or profit he was content to be there all his life; but to meddle in the peace, or to write of that matter, never understanding their doings, were to make himself guilty in it, and to be thought to make himself to be an instrument to their ruin, and therefore it were ill for him.”[1699] Thereupon Henry III broke off the negotiations hoping still, as earlier, to be able to separate the Huguenots and the united Catholics.

Events thereafter thickened rapidly. Narbonne, Perigueux, and Tournon in Lyonnais were taken by the Huguenot-Politique armies. The last place was got by Damville himself. Tournon was an especially strong town on the Rhone about three leagues from Valence, with Livron to the south of it. The capture so discouraged the duke d’Uzes that he requested leave to resign on account of the desertions among his following.[1700] Instead command was given him, “to spoil Languedoc in order to famish them against winter.” But the duke was too wise to obey and Damville was permitted to gather in the harvest without molestation. For if the King had tried ravaging, the whole country would have risen against him. St. Jean-d’Angély, Angoulême, and Nérac revolted so far as to expel the garrisons in the town. In Burgundy, where Tavannes had founded the League of the Holy Spirit, a Politique league was formed.[1701] The narrow escape Damville had at this time from death by poison drew men more than ever to him. As a climax to the woes of Henry III on July 15, 1575, the Polish diet declared the throne vacant, absolving all from allegiance to him.[1702]

The spontaneous nature of the rising of the country in the summer of 1575 is an interesting historical phenomenon. It was by no means confined to the south of France. In Champagne, the nobles, some of them vassals of Guise, and peasants united to fall upon the reiters. Madame de Guise fled from Joinville in fear of being surprised by a sixteenth-century Jacquerie. In Brittany there was a similar stir when the King attempted to confiscate the extensive lands of the duke of Rohan upon his death. Certain things remind one of happenings in the French Revolution. Many in Champagne left the land and went into the borders of Germany like the “émigrés” after August 4, 1789. In Paris there were house-to-house visits not unlike those of September, 1793. There was universal feeling against the reiters. In Normandy an association of gentlemen was formed for the special purpose of protecting the country from them.[1703]

The anxiety of the government was all the greater because it was not exactly known what relations existed between the Huguenots and Politiques and the English. The treaty which had obtained between Charles IX and Elizabeth was renewed by the latter on April 1, 1575, and confirmed by Henry III on May 4.[1704] But Elizabeth was not the person to be bound by official word. On the Picardy-Flemish border mutual distrust prevailed. In December, 1574, Requesens had advised Philip II of his fear of the renewal of Huguenot activity in the Low Countries, which had been dead since the Genlis disaster,[1705] and the garrisons on the frontiers had been increased accordingly. The marriage of Henry III to Louise de Vaudemont gave the Spanish governor great inquietude, for the unfortunate Egmont was her uncle, and Egmont’s eldest son, in March, visited his royal cousin of France.[1706] Requesens was apprehensive, too, of a marriage between the duke of Alençon and the daughter of William of Orange,[1707] and over the fact that the French envoy in Flanders, the sieur de Mondoucet, prudently avoided using the official post, but employed his own couriers in dispatching missives to Paris.[1708] “All the neighboring states are actuated by malicious intentions,” he wailed to Philip II. “The French and the English are in correspondence, and both are inspired by the same spirit of hostility against the Catholic religion and against your majesty, as the sole protector thereof.”[1709]

The arrest of a secretary of Montmorency at Boulogne in March, as he arrived from England, and who admitted he was going to find Damville,[1710] coupled with the absence of the prince of Condé and Charles de Meru, the youngest Montmorency, in Germany, so disquieted the King that early in June Schomberg was dispatched across the Rhine to discover what Condé was doing; if he found that levies of cavalry were being made for service in France, he was instructed to enroll 8,000 soldiers for the service of the King.

Schomberg proved a good agent, for he shortly afterward wrote that he believed a secret engagement existed between Queen Elizabeth, some of the German princes, and the enemies of the French King at home; and that Condé, having expended 30,000 crowns, had raised 8,000 cavalry which might be expected to arrive at the frontier by the middle of August, although it was given out, and believed by some, that these reiters were intended for service in the Netherlands.[1711] On the strength of these suspicions, especially when the duke of Guise sent word in the first week of September that 2,500 reiters had crossed the Rhine, the English ambassador, Dr. Dale, who hitherto had lodged in the Faubourg St. Germain, was advised to remove into the city, ostensibly for his greater security, but really to prevent him from receiving unknown persons secretly at night, as was possible where he resided.[1712]

At this juncture, when everything was tense and everybody was on edge, the duke of Alençon managed to make his escape from the court (September 15). While not actually confined, like the duke of Montmorency, he and Henry of Navarre had both been kept under continuous surveillance for months and various efforts made by them to get away had failed. Dismay prevailed at court when the escape was known. The King was “as a man out of courage,” and betook himself to extravagant religious demonstration, as before, when at Avignon, “going from church, as though deserted by all his people.”[1713] He knew that his brother’s presence would draw many of the gentry, who were yet hesitating, to the ranks of the Politiques.[1714] He had no means to levy an army, nor the resources to sustain it.

In this crisis Catherine de Medici kept the clearest head of all at the court. While she sought to wheedle the runaway prince with smooth words, going as far as Dreux to meet him, detachments were ordered out from Rouen, Orleans, and Chartres to surround him. But Alençon was not to be trapped and rode swiftly off toward the Loire in the hope of falling in with La Noue or the viscount of Turenne. At the same time the duke of Guise was ordered to make a vigorous resistance against the coming of Condé’s reiters. But even his army was in a bad state on account of the defection of officers and men, who had gone over to Alençon, so that new troops had to be sent him.[1715] Almost all the soldiery in the service of the King was withdrawn from Dauphiné and Languedoc and concentrated in Burgundy and Champagne.[1716] Much depended upon the result of the coming battle with the reiters. If the King’s troops were beaten, Paris would be in a serious strait between the King’s enemies. Already, in consequence of the withdrawal of troops, all Auvergne, Bourbonnais, Nivernais, Gâtinais, and the Beauce were in arms, and the gentlemen of these regions had gone over to the duke of Alençon. Only the vigilance of the garrisons at Orleans and Tours, Moulins and Nevers, enabled the crown to maintain the line of the Loire river.

The reiters attempted to evade Guise and find another way of entrance into France, so that the duke left his artillery in Lorraine and by forced marches went to Sedan, with the intention of giving battle there. But the reiters, about 2,500, under Thoré, avoided an engagement and maneuvered to join a Protestant force of 2,000 Picards, and Guise fell back on Rheims in order to hold the crossing of the Aisne, meantime asking the King for reinforcements which were so slow in coming that the duke was compelled to retire to the Marne. On October 9 he established his headquarters between Château-Thierry and Epernay, near Port-à-Pinson. The encounter took place near Fismes, on the Marne, above Dormans, on October 10. Not more than fifty were killed on either side and the combat did not deter the reiters from continuing their course and crossing the Seine near Nogent-sur-Seine, which they were able to do on account of low water. Their chief loss was of two or three cornets of reiters whom Guise bribed to desert. De Thoré owed his easy escape, however, to the serious wound which the duke of Guise sustained. For a bullet struck him in the side of the face, tearing his ear clear away and so mangling the cheek that he was fearfully scarred for the rest of his life and always wore a velvet mask.[1717]

The insignificance of the victory of the duke, however, did not deter the King from proclaiming a solemn procession and Te Deum in honor of the day. The “victory” also was made the justification of a new tax. On October 12, 1575, by command of the King, the burgesses of Paris assembled in the grand room of the Hôtel-de-Ville where the provost of the merchants, Charron, made known a new demand of the King for aid in the form of a capitation tax upon the burgesses of the city and other places in the prévôté of Paris for the payment of 3,000 Swiss, making half of the 6,000 which the King required for defense of the realm, in addition to the sum of 15,000 francs expected for each of the ensuing months.

Once again were the people of Champagne made the victims of the spoiler. All the horses of the poor laborers whom the reiters encountered on the road were forcibly seized, as was also the case in the hostelries where they lodged. A single parish lost thirty horses. The only payment the poor peasantry got was to be beaten for their protests.

For the space of three or four days one might see along the roads and in the villages soldiers all of the time, making for the crossing of the Seine at La Motte de Tilly. Two troopers rode one horse and their presence was hard upon the merchants and the priests, whom they met in the way. The smaller merchants were despoiled of their property, and those known to be wealthy had their riches extorted from them by force, or else were held prisoner until ransomed. To make matters worse, in the wake of the army came a rabble of looters and plunderers, mostly French.[1718]

It was obvious that as long as the reiters were in the field, the King could send no force against his brother. He blamed the queen mother for everything that had happened, especially for the escape of Alençon, and Catherine, by way of reply, is said to have sent him a copy of Commines to read with the advice to emulate the policy of his crafty predecessor. But as a contemporary scornfully observed, Henry of Valois was not Louis XI. What could be expected from a King who spent his time “going from abbey to abbey and devising with women.”[1719] In sorrow and anxiety, sustained by the dukes of Montmorency and Montpensier and the fine old marshal Cossé, Catherine made earnest efforts to negotiate a truce with the duke of Alençon.

Prefacing his demands by the caution that he could not negotiate finally without Condé or Damville, Alençon demanded surrender of Pont-de-Cé on the Loire, besides La Charité, Bourges, Angoulême, Niort, Saumur, and Angers for the Huguenots; and Mezières in Champagne, Langres in Burgundy, or La Fère in Picardy for the prince of Condé;[1720] a large settlement for himself; a promise that the States-General should be convened for the Politiques; the crown to pay 200,000 crowns to the Protestant reiters; the exercise of Calvinist worship in as ample terms as obtained in 1570 (till more fully provided for in the ultimate articles of peace); the revolted provinces to remain in arms, except in the case of mercenaries, it being understood that no acts of hostility be done and commerce and trade to be free during the interim. The King’s council, when these sweeping terms were laid before it, advised the King to yield, seeing no way out on account of lack of means to carry on the war. But Henry III was furious and threw the articles in the fire. In defiance of the advice of his friends, who told him to employ what few funds he had in corrupting the reiters with Condé, he sent 30,000 crowns more to Germany to purchase assistance.

In this strait, money came suddenly, as from heaven. The papal nuncio proffered 100,000 crowns at once and promised 200,000 more, while the Venetian government, in memory of his visit there in the year previous, made him a gift of his jewels that were in pawn. Finally, to crown the King’s jubilation at this sudden turn of events, word came from Germany that the reiters hired by Schomberg and Bassompierre were coming “and would not be stayed by the truce.” Henry III at once broke off negotiations. The hope was to sever Alençon from the prince of Condé and then, preferably by bribery, by war if necessary, overcome the latter, for Schomberg persuaded the King that this course was practicable. To this end commissioners were sent abroad to levy new taxes.[1721] Great ingenuity was shown in the devising of new forms of taxation. In June, 1575, two edicts had been issued, one requiring the fixing of new seals to bolts of woolen cloth and the establishment of a greffier des tailles in each parish;[1722] the other creating the office of four arpenteurs (land commissioners) in each jurisdiction of the realm. The number of notaries was also augmented.[1723] In December the King made a pretext of the coming of the reiters to demand a new subsidy from the pliant and obedient people of France, under cover of raising men for the war. Of the Parisians he demanded the sum of 200,000 livres, to pay three thousand Swiss. Another pretext was the repair of the bridge at Charenton, which the Huguenots had broken in 1567.[1724] These taxes fell all the more heavily because in addition to the ruin of the country by war, the crops were short throughout the land on account of the dry summer. “The rivers everywhere were so low that in many places one could wade them. Every morning the sun rose and every evening it set red and inflamed.”[1725]

In the meantime, fear prevailed in Paris lest the forces of Damville and the viscount of Turenne would effect a junction with those of the duke of Alençon and the united body march upon Paris, and garrisons were hastily put in Montereau, Corbeil, Charenton, St. Cloud, and St. Denis. The old trenches on both sides of the river were repaired and platforms erected in the fields around the city. Montmartre especially was fortified. The townspeople of the capital as well as villagers from the outside were impressed into the work with picks, shovels, and baskets. Mills were erected within the city, and the city was provisioned. The King issued an edict ordering the peasantry within thirty leagues around the capital to thrash their grain and to store it in fortified towns known to be faithful to the crown, unless they were dwelling within nine leagues of Paris, in which case the grain was to be brought into the city. All the passages of the Loire were guarded. The result of all this was a reign of terror in the Ile-de-France. The soldiery indulged in all sorts of brigandage, so that in sheer desperation the villagers sometimes fired their towns. Provisions were commandeered without recompense. To such outrages were the poor people subjected that the inhabitants of one town, Jogny, begged the commander to have mercy upon them. But instead of so doing, Puygaillard loaded the little deputation with reproaches and had them beaten by the soldiers in the presence of all.[1726]

With the memory of the elder prince of Condé’s presence before the walls of Paris, and the battle of St. Denis, where the constable Montmorency was killed, the Parisians were willing to labor in the trenches for the safety of Paris. But they were not willing to be taxed further. In a remarkable remonstrance, joined in by the clergy, the Parlement, the Chambre des Comptes, the Cour des Aides, the provost of Paris, and the bourgeois and citizens of every quarter of the city, protest was made against the extortion of 200,000 livres, which Henry III proposed to raise in this hour of extremity. After reciting that civil discord had prevailed in France since 1560, and that during the space of fifteen years the crown had obtained 36,000,000 francs from Paris and other towns, and 60,000,000 from the clergy, besides other gifts and subsidies, with little progress to show either in politics or religion, the memorial proceeded to point out some of the causes of this universal corruption in scathing terms:

Simony is openly permitted. Benefices are held by married gentlewomen who employ the revenues far differently to the intention of the founders. The people are left without religious instruction and thus stray from the true religion. There is but little justice to be obtained through the venality of the tribunals, causing their neighbors to hold them in abomination. The number of those holding office is very great and part of them notoriously incapable and the rest poor, being thereby prone to evil actions. Justice is further impeded by the impunity with which murder is committed. Great cruelties and barbarities are committed by the foot soldiers and by the gendarmerie, which does not now consist of gentlemen but of persons of vile condition. Not only by these, but by the soldiers of his guard, is pillage made on the houses of his people, ecclesiastical holdings, and hospitals even in Paris itself, so that the poor cannot obtain common necessaries.[1727]

During these weeks Montmorency had earnestly labored in favor of peace, pleading, arguing, expostulating both with his own younger brothers and Alençon. He was as earnestly supported by Catherine de Medici, now converted to a peace policy by the force of events,[1728] but both were continually thwarted either by the King’s inconstancy or the machinations of the Guises.

The illness of the queen mother—she suffered so much from sciatica that often she was unable to leave her chamber—and the frivolity of the King were a positive advantage to the Guises’ policy.

It will be remembered that the fortress of La Fère had been tentatively demanded of the King for the prince of Condé. Henry III had replied offering Doulens in Picardy instead of either La Fère or Peronne, which was later suggested, on the plea that he could not exact obedience from the inhabitants of the latter places. This demand for a border fortress near Flanders was made by the duke of Alençon, in reality to further his own advantage in the Spanish Netherlands, and he took the method of having Condé take title to it as a means of concealing his purpose.

The possible disposal of any border fortress in Picardy in such a way tremendously alarmed the king of Spain and the Guises who concerted to break the peace.[1729] This plan is the true origin of the formation of the famous Holy League, which, although it assumed organized form only after the peace of Bergerac (September 17, 1576), nevertheless existed in a tentative state this early, in the combined action of the dukes of Guise, Nemours, Mayenne, and Nevers, Biragues the chancellor, and other satellites of the house of Guise to prevent peace being made on such terms, and to break it in event of its being made.[1730] Twice this cabal called upon the King to give battle before all the forces of the opposition were united and twice the queen mother foiled their purpose by securing delay. On February 22 a violent scene took place between her and the council—Henry III was sick—in which Catherine branded those who said her son was a traitor as liars and declared that in spite of opposition “it shall be peace.”

The indifference of Henry III to the gravity of the situation and his supreme egotism are remarkable, yet thoroughly in keeping with his character. For hours together he would prate of poetry and philosophy—“de primis causis, de sensu et sensibili and such like questions”—with his favorites, in the retirement of a cabinet, while the realm was going to rack and ruin. The Venetian ambassador describes one of these symposiums with minute care in a dispatch of February 3, 1576.

For the last few days [he says] his Majesty has taken his pleasure by retiring into a small apartment which has no window, and to his apartment his Majesty summons four or five youths of the city who follow the profession of poets and light literature, and to meet these people his Majesty invites the Duke of Nevers, the Grand Prior, Biragues, Monseigneur, De Soure, the queen of Navarre, his sister, Madame de Nevers, and the marshal de Retz, all of whom profess to delight in poetry. When they are thus assembled his Majesty orders one of these youths to speak in praise of one of the virtues, exalting it above all the others, and as soon as he has concluded his reasoning each person in turn argues against the proposal which has been made. His Majesty consumes many hours in this exercise, to the small satisfaction of the queen mother and everybody else, who would desire to see in times so calamitous his Majesty attending to his urgent affairs, and not to amusements, which, however praiseworthy at other times, are now from the necessity of the case condemned by all, seeing that the King for this cause fails to be present at his council and there to discuss matters which are of the greatest importance and which having regard to his own position and that of his kingdom can easily be imagined to require attention.[1731]

Strange as it may seem, the Guises’ determination to continue the war comported with the wishes of some of their enemies—a circumstance which illustrates how singular was the alliance existing between the Huguenots and the Politiques. The religious Huguenots already, in the middle of December, had remonstrated against the terms of peace proposed on the ground that the offers made did not promise as much of advantage or security as a continuation of the war. It was argued that the truce would result in greater prejudice to them since the King would still be prepared for war and that if they now let the opportunity pass of establishing their fortune by the aid of the reiters, the result would bring calamity to them.[1732] These narrow-minded dissidents looked with ill favor upon the politic course of the duke of Alençon in avoiding the pillage of the towns he took, even of trusting to their loyalty and refraining from putting garrisons in them (some of these towns were Dreux, Romorantin, Thouars, and Loudun), and censured him for his pacific overtures to the Parlement of Paris.[1733] Accordingly they hailed with delight the escape of Henry of Navarre (February 5, 1576), and his immediate abjuration[1734] of the Catholic faith which he had been forced to confess on St. Bartholomew’s Day, and the renewed advance of the reiters into Burgundy and Auvergne and thence across the Loire into Bourbonnais, notwithstanding the fact that these mounted mercenaries “made a terrible spoil with fire and fagots” wherever they went.

The reiters took the road toward Langres, crossed the Seine above Châtillon into Auxerre, making for the passage of the Loire River at La Charité, in order to effect a junction with the duke of Alençon, who was in Berry, not far from Bourges. Champagne and Brie were filled with robbers in the wake of their advance, who, pretending that they were soldiers, plundered the townspeople and robbed wayfarers and travelers. There were regular bands of these freebooters, the members of which were paid regular wages by their captains. But the anarchy in the provinces did not compel the King to stop his dallying with philosophy, or his love for mad-cap pranks. He went off on a Shrovetide frolic in March, “riding about the town to cast eggs and such other disorders,” leaving Mayenne to labor with those nobles who refused to be commanded “by a boy that never saw wars and a soldiery whose pay was a whole quarter in arrears.”[1735] Mayenne made his headquarters at Moulins to prevent the reiters uniting with Alençon and the Huguenots of Poitou and Guyenne. It required all the address of the marshal Biron to restrain the young commander from throwing himself upon them, almost careless of the outcome, for defeat could have been little worse than the daily shrinkage of his army from desertion.[1736]

Henry III at first had pretended to make light of the escape of his cousin. But the presence of Henry of Navarre in the field soon had an important influence. It was the one thing needful to complete the organization of the Huguenots, many of whom looked upon the prince of Condé more as a Politique than as one of them. The harmonious working of the two parties opposed to the crown was now possible in greater degree than before. Henry of Navarre, the prince of Condé, the duke of Alençon, and Damville united, were in a position to bring things to a focus. The actual territory controlled by Henry III at this time was little, if any, greater than the ancient Ile-de-France, Burgundy, and Champagne of his ancestors in the twelfth century. The Huguenots and Politiques so divided the realm among themselves that a map of the kingdom at this time reminds one of that of France in the feudal age. Henry of Navarre had made his headquarters at Saumur and thus was able easily to control Anjou; the allegiance of Guyenne, Béarn, and Poitou was certain; the duke of Alençon was in occupation of the “midlands”—Berry (except Bourges) and most of Bourbonnais and Nivernais. Young Coligny, who had succeeded Montbrun, was in Dauphiné, and his fealty to the religion was unswerving; Damville and his lieutenants controlled all Languedoc, Provence, and Auvergne; young Montgomery was in Lower Normandy where English assistance secretly helped him, while the prince of Condé, backed by the count palatine, endangered Picardy.

The winning cards were all in the hands of the Huguenots and the Politiques. Without territory, without funds, with an unpaid army or hireling mercenaries only, the crown had no other recourse than to accept the situation and make peace unless Henry III and the queen mother stooped to the worse humiliation of receiving the support of Philip II. And so it came to pass that while Paris daily expected to withstand a siege and the faubourgs and gates were so crowded with those living outside the walls and refugees from the environs “that a man could scarce enter the gates for the people, carriages, and cattle,”[1737] Henry III signed the Act of Peace, May 2, 1576.

The peace of 1576, sometimes called the Peace of Monsieur, from the duke of Alençon’s prominent part in its formation, was the most complete and elaborate charter yet given the Huguenots, embodying the wisdom that experience had taught. It is to be noticed that the settlement involved both toleration of the religion and political reform. The provisions of this composite peace may be classified under four heads, each of which was an essential element in the late opposition to the crown, viz:—the Huguenots, Henry of Navarre, the duke of Alençon, the Politiques.

The King granted to the Huguenots public exercise of the Calvinist religion throughout France except within two leagues of the court and four leagues of Paris. The Huguenots were declared eligible to all offices and dignities without discrimination on account of religion. As a security for the King’s justice against possible abuse of these rights, the crown engaged to establish mixed parlements, half Catholic, half Protestant, at Poitiers, Bordeaux, Toulouse, Montpellier, Grenoble, Aix, Dijon, Rheims, and Rouen, and a new chamber in the Parlement of Paris with two presidents and eighteen councilors, nine of them Catholic, nine Protestant. Protestant advocates, procureurs-généraux and greffiers civil and criminal were to be connected with each of these mixed parlements.

For further protection of the Huguenots, eight cautionary towns were to be ceded to them, to wit: Aigues-Mortes and Beaucaire in Languedoc; Périgueux and Le Mas de Verdun in Guyenne; La Rochelle in Poitou; Yssoire in Auvergne; Nions and Serres (château included) in Dauphiné; Cennes “la grande tour et le circuit” in Provence. Additional demands were for general oblivion for all conduct and action by persons of either side; revocation of all decrees, judgments, and proclamations hitherto made; rehabilitation of the memory of Admiral Coligny and restoration of their livings and honors to his children as well as in the cases of Montgomery, Montbrun, Bricquemault, and Cavagnies. No prosecution was to be made with regard to the actions done at St. Germain-en-Laye and Bois de Vincennes.

Two of these provisions were received with great dissatisfaction by the Huguenot deputies and when published were decried by many of the Protestants. The first of them was the prohibition of Protestant worship within the faubourgs of Paris, the act specifically declaring that St. Denis, St. Maur-des-Fosses, Pont-de-Charenton, Bourg-la-Reine and Port de Neuilly were within the prohibited confines. The other one which met with great objection was that touching the security towns.[1738] The deputies demanded two towns in every government (there were fourteen governments). But the King would yield only eight, these to be chosen from the towns already in possession of the Huguenots, a proviso which eliminated such important points as Niort, Angoulême, and Cognac. In the case of La Charité and Saumur, over which the longest discussion arose, a compromise was reached by giving them to Alençon in appanage. Long and acrimonious debate was made over this article, and at one stage the negotiations were so nearly broken off that Paris was notified to be prepared for a renewal of the war. The crown’s demands in this matter were really not unreasonable, for these eight towns were not included in the number given to Henry of Navarre or the prince of Condé, or in the appanage of the duke of Alençon.[1739]

If the demands of the Huguenots were excessive, those of Henry of Navarre were still more sweeping. He not only aimed to live like a king in the future in his own country of Béarn, but sought to commit the crown to the recovery of the kingdom of Navarre as well. All the past claims and grievances of his ancestry were embodied. He demanded: That the King of Navarre command in his government of Guyenne extending from Pilles to Bayonne, in such manner as his ancestors had done; that all captains and governors obey him as the governor and lieutenant-general of the King; that he have the providing of the necessary garrisons; that all his lands and seignories should recognize no other government than he appointed and that all towns and fortresses belonging to him should be at once surrendered; that his right to his kingdom be preserved, and that his subjects should not be taxed for the services of the king of France, according to their ancient immunities; that all gentlemen being his servants, officers, or subjects should come and go and traffic freely through all France without molestation; that his officers and servants should enjoy such privileges as if they served the royal family of France; that he and his heirs should be discharged from the guarantee given by himself and his mother toward the purchases of ecclesiastical property, and for the payment of the reiters; that in view of the fact that the late king had granted 200,000 livres to his mother, the late queen of Navarre, for the celebration of the nuptials of himself and his queen, the King’s sister, which has never been paid, and furthermore, because there was also yet due 120,000 livres, arrears of the pension of the late king of Navarre, he prayed the King to deal with him as favorably as he could for payment; that if any offices or benefices fell vacant in seignories of the king of Navarre, he should have the nominating and presenting of such persons; that the King would preserve to him in his lands and seignories his privileges and accustomed sources of revenue, such as the droit de tabellionage and de sceaux.

Having so far required everything that could conceivably be based upon things present, Henry endeavored to revive the ancient claims of his house in a startling fashion. The old feudal spirit of William of Aquitaine and Raymond of Toulouse seems to have been reincarnated in his person at this time. For Henry demanded further that he be recompensed for the 6,000 livres promised in time past, in virtue of the right that Françoise de Bretagne, wife of Aleyne, sieur d’Albret, father of John of Navarre, had had to the duchy of Brittany.[1740] But even this was not all, for Henry of Navarre finally made the demand that the pension of 46,000 livres which his grandfather had enjoyed in recompense for the loss of Navarre, from which his great grandfather had been expelled in 1512 by Ferdinand of Aragon, be continued to him, and that the King of France should promise to help him to recover Navarre![1741]

In the nature of things, not a tithe of these demands could be granted by the crown, least of all the last. The massacre of St. Bartholomew had proved how perilous it was to try to drive Catholic France into a war with Spain, and France was less ready now than in 1570-72 to join battle with Philip. Perforce Henry of Navarre had to be content with a restoration of things as they were on August 24, 1572.[1742]

The duke of Alençon had created for him a position stronger than that of Henry of Navarre. As a prince of the blood and as a Politique he occupied middle ground between the crown and the Huguenots; in consequence, many of the places which neither of the chief principals was willing to resign were included in the grant to him. While technically all the territories so concerned were regarded as appanages,[1743] it is plain that a distinction may easily be made between the duchies of Alençon, Maine, Anjou, Touraine, and La Roche—which had originally been given him as a prince of the blood—and places like Bourges, Moulins, Loches, Saumur, La Charité, Pont-de-Sel, Amiens, Moulans, and Mantes. These latter possessions were practically a class apart of security cities intrusted by compromise to the duke. This was particularly true of Saumur and La Charité, which insured the Protestants of passage across the lower and upper Loire, and so linked the South with Normandy on the North and the Palatinate and the German Protestant states to the east. Moreover, Moulins in Bourbonnais and Bourges in Berry assured the Protestants of position there, so that the whole left bank of the Loire from Auvergne to Nantes was in their control. Mantes was meant to compensate the Huguenots in the vicinity of Paris for the loss of Charenton.

The King yielded the government of Picardy again to the prince of Condé, but the matter of what town should be his created much heated argument. The prince himself at first stoutly contended for Boulogne, although he did not say that its convenience to England was the chief reason for his desire. But Henry III as stoutly refused. Then Amiens was suggested, and as compromise this city was given to the King’s brother. Condé then demanded Peronne. Although the King would have preferred Doulens or even St. Quentin to this concession, he yielded. The only other detail concerning the prince was the obligation to pay his and his father’s debts in Germany, which the crown assumed.

Damville did not come in for as much honor as his colleagues, but was far from being ignored. As the chief of the Politiques or “les catholiques associez,” as they were defined in the interest of peace, Damville was and remained the leading man in Languedoc. Aside from the retention of Damville in his government, promise was made the Politiques to summon the States-General at Blois within six months for the reformation and reorganization of the administration.[1744]

It follows as a matter of course that the maintenance and protection of the multitude of social and civil rights that made the web and woof of a civilized society was guaranteed, such as the validity of Protestant marriage, land and property titles, freedom of education, commerce and trade, etc.

A very delicate matter to adjust was the future relation of the electoral count palatine and the duke John Casimir, his son. A secret alliance had existed between the count palatine, England, and the prince of Condé since July, 1575. In November, Alençon and the Politiques joined the alliance. One of the terms of that alliance was that Metz, Toul, and Verdun were to pass to Casimir as the price of his support and both Huguenots and Politiques—at least Alençon—stood pledged to assist him in securing these Three Bishoprics. But it was manifestly impossible to expect the French crown to grant such a cession, nor is it probable, now that peace had come, that any in France looked with amiability upon this article of the contract of Heidelberg. It were too great a humiliation to have this brilliant conquest of 1552 thus passively surrendered. Fortunately it was found possible to placate John Casimir with less distinguished sacrifices. His claims were purchased for an enormous sum of money—or at least the promise of it; no less than two million florins (three million francs), part to be paid in the coming June and the balance at the next two fairs at Frankfurt, in addition to which he received the whole seigneury of Château-Thierry[1745]—worth 20,000 francs per annum—a perpetual colonelcy of 4,000 horse, a company of 100 men-at-arms and 12 reitmeisters, all of which was confirmed by Henry III’s declaration that he would “repute and esteem the count palatine and Duke Casimir as good neighbors.”

The terms of the Peace of Monsieur[1746] were exceedingly unpopular in Paris, whose citizens had been the heaviest contributors to the expenses of the war thus closed and who had made strenuous military preparations in defense of the capital, and the unpopularity of Henry III was not enhanced in the eyes of the Parisians by the King’s repudiation of a part of the rentes, the incomes of which were the chief means of support with many. But when Charron, the provost of the merchants, and the counselor Abot, at the head of a deputation of the foremost citizens of the capital protested against this high-handed action to the King’s own face, Henry III with a sneer which carried with it a covert threat rejoined: “Hang a man and he tells no tales.”[1747]

The camps of the duke of Alençon and the Protestants were broken up when the peace was published. The soldiery around La Rochelle and in Poitou, Anjou, and Berry, returned home, except some troops which were reserved until it was seen what Casimir and his reiters, who were near Langres, would do. These marauders with many French of Champagne and Brie, crossed the Yonne above Sens and arrived in Champagne between May 10 and 11 and remained there for a week, living on the land. After having sojourned six or seven days between the Seine and the Vauluisant, on the 16th they moved on to a place between Troyes and the village of Mery-sur-Seine, where they remained for fifteen days to the distress of the people and absolutely destroyed the little village of Marigny, which had but two persons left in it. In order to find food they foraged for miles. The peasantry turned their cattle loose or drove them, together with their possessions, into the fortified towns or châteaux. But the gentry were less safe than the peasantry even, for the latter had already been so despoiled that nothing was left to be taken. Out of this frightful state of affairs rose an organized resistance which is very interesting to observe, for the nobility and gentry of the region and the local peasantry, forgetting their class antagonism, made common cause together. Whenever these “vigilance committees” found themselves to be stronger or happened upon stragglers from the main band, they threw themselves upon them; sometimes the victims were bound and cast alive in the river Aube or Seine. Between St. Loup-de-la-Fosse-Gelane and St. Martin-de-Bossenay, a group of ten or twelve reiters were thus set upon and only one escaped. But the vengeance their comrades meted out upon the offenders was terrible, for the troopers, numbering over a hundred horsemen, the next night burned all the villages round about.[1748]

Not until September was this scourge removed from the land. By that time they were bought off and were conducted to the frontier by Bassompierre, the Alsatian gentleman in the King’s service, who was well rewarded, as he deserved to be, for the accomplishment of the perilous task. But the licensing of the regular troops immediately afterward still prolonged the agony of the province for a season.[1749]

The Peace of Monsieur may fittingly be said to have terminated the period of the religious wars of France. The dominant issue of the succeeding years of conflict from 1576 to 1598 was not a religious, but a political one. Why permanent peace did not result it is not the work of this volume to narrate. Suffice to say that Spain and Spain’s instrument, the Holy League, were to blame for the ensuing years of strife.

The germ of the provincial Catholic leagues had been the desire, on the part of the Catholics of France, to resist the progress of Calvinism. But in the hands of the French nobles these local leagues, controlled by the aristocracy and welded into one mighty organization under the leadership of the duke of Guise, backed by Spanish gold, became a new league of the public weal, which, under the cloak of religion revived the feudal ambition of the French nobility to acquire power at the expense of the crown.

CHÂTILLON—COLIGNY

John III, † 1480 │ ├——————————————————┐ │ │ James II Gaspard I, married † 1512 † 1522 │ ┌——————————————————┼————————————————————————┐ │ │ │ Odet, Gaspard II, Admiral Coligny François d’Andelot bishop of murdered at † 1569 Beauvais St. Bartholomew, 1572 † 1571 │ │ Louise m. a) Charles de Teligny, † 1572 b) William the Silent

MONTMORENCY

William, † 1531 │ ┌————————————————————————————————┤ │ │ Louise of Anne, d. of Montmorency and constable of France, Montmorency killed at battle of St. Denis, 1567 │ ┌—————————————————┬———————————┴—————┬—————————————┬——————————┐ │ │ │ │ │ Francis, Marshal Henry Damville, Gabriel, sieur de Charles, William, Montmorency governor of Montberon, killed sieur sieur † 1579 Languedoc at battle of Dreux de Méru de Thoré † 1614 1562 │ ┌————————┴——————————┐ │ │ Henry II, Charlotte, m. Henry II, † 1632 Prince of Condé │ Louis II, The Great Condé

HOUSE OF LORRAINE AND GUISE

René le Bon, d. of Anjou and titular king of Naples and Sicily. m. Isabella, d. of Lorraine │ ┌—————————————————┬————————————————————————————┤ │ │ │ Margaret, m. John II, d. of Yolande, d. of Lorraine, m. Henry VI, k. of Lorraine and Ferri II, c. of Vaudemont, England Bar Guise, etc. │ │ │ │ Nicholas, d. of Lorraine René II, d. of Lorraine and Bar. † 1473, no and Bar, c. of Vaudemont, male issue Guise, etc. † 1508 │ ┌—————————————————————————————————————————┴——————┐ │ │ Antoine, d. of Lorraine Claude I, c. of Aumale, and Bar, † 1544 d. of Guise, † 1527 │ │ │ ┌———————┬————————┬——————┬———┴———┐ │ │ │ │ │ │ Francis I, d. of │ Charles, Card. │ Louis, Card. │ Lorraine and Bar │ of Lorraine, │ of Guise, │ │ │ † 1574 │ † 1578 │ │ │ │ │ │ Francis, d. of Claude, d. Mary, m. James V │ Guise, assassinated of Aumale of Scotland │ before Orleans, 1563 │ │ │ │ Charles I, m. │ Mary, queen of Claude of France │ Scots, † 1587 │ │ │ │ │ ├—————————————————┬——————————————┐ │ │ │ │ Charles II, d. Henry, d. of Guise, Charles, d. Louis, Cardinal of Lorraine assassinated of Mayenne, of Guise, and Bar, † 1608 1588 † 1611 † 1588

HOUSE OF BOURBON

Louis IX, † 1270 │ ┌——————————————————┴———————————————┐ │ │ Philip III, † 1285 Robert, c. of │ Clermont, m. ┌———————————┴—————————————┐ Beatrix, heiress │ │ of Bourbon, † 1317 Philip IV, † 1314 Charles, c. of │ │ Valois., † 1325 Louis, d. of ┌———————┼————————————┐ │ Bourbon, † 1341 │ │ │ │ │ Louis X Philip V Charles IV Philip VI, ┌———————┴———————┐ † 1316 † 1322 † 1328 † 1350 │ │ │ │ Peter, d. James, c. de la │ John II, of Bourbon, Marche, † 1361 John I, † 1364 † 1356 │ † 1431 │ │ John, c. de la │ Louis, d. Marche, † 1393, ┌——————————┬—————————┬————┴——┐ of Bourbon, m. Catharine │ │ │ │ † 1410 heiress of Charles V, Duke of Duke of Duke of │ Vendôme † 1380 Anjou Berri Burgundy │ │ │ │ │ ┌————┴————————————————┐ John, d. ┌———————┴—┐ │ │ of Bourbon, │ │ Charles VI, Louis, d. of † 1433 │ Louis, c. † 1422 Orleans, † 1407 │ │ of Vendôme, │ │ │ │ † 1446 │ │ │ │ │ Charles VII, │ │ James, c. de la │ † 1461 │ │ Marche, † 143 │ │ │ │ │ │ ┌———————┴—————┐ ┌———┴————————┐ John, c. of │ │ │ │ │ Vendôme, │ │ │ │ │ † 1478 │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Charles, d. John, c. of Charles, Louis, c. of │ Louis XI, of Orleans, Angoulême, d. of Montpensier │ † 1483 † 1467 † 1467 Bourbon, │ │ │ │ │ † 1456 │ Francis, c. │ │ │ │ │ of Vendôme, │ │ │ │ │ † 1495 │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Gilbert, c. o │ │ │ │ │ Montpensier, │ │ │ │ │ † 1496 │ Charles VIII Louis XII Charles, c. ┌——┴—┬————┐ │ │ † 1498 † 1515 of Angoulême, │ │ │ │ │ † 1496 │ Charles │ │ │ │ │ † 1488 │ │ Charles, d. │ │ │ │ of Vendôme, │ John II Peter II │ † 1537 │ † 1488 │ │ │ │ │ ┌————————————————————————————┘ ┌————————————————┘ ┌————┘ │ │ │ Francis I, ┌———————————————┴———————┐ │ † 1547 │ │ │ │ Charles, constable Francis, │ │ of France, † 1527 † 1525 │ │ │ │ ┌—————————————┬———————————┬——————————————┬————————┴————┐ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Antoine, d. Francis, c. Charles, Louis, prince Marguerite, │ of Vendôme, of Enghien cardinal of Condé, m. Duke of │ m. Jeanne † 1546 of Bourbon killed at Nevers. │ d’Albret, q. Charles (X) Jarnac, 1569 │ of Navarre, │ │ † 1562 │ │ │ │ Henry II, │ Henry I, of Condé, † 1588 † 1559 │ │ │ │ │ │ Henry IV, † 1610. │ │ m. (1) Margaret of Henry II, of Condé, │ Valois m. (2) Mary m. Charlotte of Montmorency, │ de Medici of whom was born the Great Condé. │ ├——————┬——————┬——————┬———————┬————————┬———————┐ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ Francis II │ Henry III │ Elizabeth m. │ Margaret m. † 1560 │ † 1589 │ Philip II │ Henry IV │ │ │ Charles IX Francis, d. of Claude m. † 1574 Alençon † 1584 Charles, d. of Lorraine

APPENDICES

APPENDIX I

[P. 49, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XIII, NO. 456

[The Cardinal of Lorraine and Duke of Guise to the Queen-Dowager of Scotland]

Madame nous avons receu votre lettre par ce marinier present porteur et sceu par icelle lestat en quoy sont les affaires de dela [two pages in cipher].

Quant aux nouvelles de deca nous voullons bien que vous sachez que depuis quinze ou vingt jours aucuns malheureux ont essaye icy demectre a fin une conjuration quilz avoient faicte pour tuer le Roy et ne nous y oublyoient [pas][1750] tout cela fonde sur la religion dont aucuns des principaulx autheurs [ont este pris] et pugniz. Maiz tant plus nous allons avant et plus trouvons nous [que ceste conspiration] a longue queue ayant este bastie de longue main et appuyee par daucuns gr[andz qui se] sont trouvez bien trompez. Car nostre Seigneur a bien sceu defendre sa cause. S’est quasi le mesmes train qui ont prins voz Rebelles mais ilz voulloient commancer par le sang et lespee une autre fois vous en scaurez plus par le menu. Et pour fin de ceste lettre vous dirons madame que la compaignye faict Dieu mercy tresbonne chere et nous recommandons treshumblement a votre bonne grace, Priant Dieu ma dame vous donner en sante tresbonne et treslongue vye. De Marmoustre le ixº jour davril 1559.

[Signed] Voz treshumbles et tresobeissans freres C. Car^[al] de Lorraine Francoys s^[r] de Lorraine.

[Addressed] A la Royne Douairiere et regente Descosse.

[Not endorsed]

[Pencil note by editor] This is dated “more Gallicano” which commences the year at Easter. In 1560, Easter day fell on the 14 of April, consequently this letter dated on the 9th would appear to be, as it is dated, in 1559, being in fact 1560.

No. 460

[“A portion of the previous letter in French” (Calendar)]

Estant que avecques plus de commodité et de moyen vous navez esté et nestez secourue autant que nous voyons et jugeons trop bien quil seroit necessaire ce que n’a pas este retardi par faulte de debvoir de soing et de diligence. Car nous en avons cherche ...[1751] moyenes possibles et mesmes po^[r] essayer si ceste Royne dangleterre s ... addoucir et contenir par quelques remedes qui n’ont ... en son endroict, car apres avoir faict du cousté du Roy tout ... de penser po^[r] luy oster la jalousie et le soupcon qu’elle monstre au ... nous y avons employe le Roy catholicque tant que par son ambassadeur il luy ... quil ne souffriroit pas que elle donnast faveur aux rebelles ... aulcune chose au preiudice des droictz et authorite du Roy et de ... fille en Escosse. Depuis y a este envoyé l’evesque de Valence conseillier au ... po^[r] luy rendre raison plus pertinente de l’intention du Roy, et quil ne ch ... l’obeissance de ses subiectz, resolu de retirer ses forces apres qu ... restablies au bon chemin, tout cela n’a de rien servi si elle n’a ... vous avez peu veoir par les articles qu’elle a f ... son Ambassadeur si honteux que nous croyons qu’elle sass ... nous n’en ferions rien et par ainsy elle passeroit oultre ... qui est de la guerre, dont nous veryons peu de moyen de ... si ce n’est po^[r] ... refuge l’ ... de Sieur de Glayon ques^[r] les ... y envoye po^[r] luy en parler des grosses contz ayant delibere si ... obstinee de secourir le Roy de tout ce de luy qu’il vouldra et ... a accorde luy bailler gens et vaiss ... po^[r] remettre lobeissance ... dont il a este prins au mot. Et y a este envoye ... scavoir de la duchesse de Parme de quel nombre ou ... lad. dame charge expresse d’en accommoder le Roy de tout.... Cependant Madame nous ne perdons point le temps a faire ad ... qui sera dun si bon nombre de vaisseaulx et si bien formy de gens et de toutes choses convenables que nous esperons que lad. Royne ne ses forces n’auront pas le moyen de les garder de vous secourir tout le p ... veryons est qu’elle ne peult estre preste que vers la fin de Iuillet. Mais si ferons nous tout ce que sera possible au monde po^[r] la mettre plustost a la voyle et ne espargner argent soing ni diligence comme nous nous asseurons que vous croyez bien. Et neantmoins cherchons nous tous aultres moyens de vous faire secourir de deniers soit de Flandres ou d’ailleurs et aussy ne craindrons nous en adventurer par petites pommes cependant et pour y commencer avons nous advise vous renvoyer ... eur dedans vng aultre petit vaisseau que luy avons faict equipper, ne luy ... espargne aussy argent car il a eu po^[r] estre venu icy et le hazard qu’il a douze centz francz que le Roy luy a donnes et trois centz escus po^[r] son retour. Avecq luy nous vous envoyons par ung clerc qui l’accompaigne la somme de mille livres et vingt cacques de pouldre menue grevée par ce que nous avons sceu par les lettres des sieurs de la Brosse et Doysell qui vous en avez besoing par dela ce sera pour attendre toutz jours mieulx estantz bien deliberez de ... perdre une seule occasion de vous secourir ainsy par le menu au danger ... perdre quelque chose.

Cependant, Madame, il fauldra que de vostre coste vous faciez le mieulx ... pourrez et sur tout qu’il soit donné ordre a tenir les places bien.... rnies louant sa ma^[te] bien fort la defensive sur la quelle les capitaines de dela sont d’advis que vous vous mettiez qui est ung moyen pour avoir la raison de la legerete et mal consyderée entreprise de lad. Royne dont nous esperons que le mal tombera a la fin sur elle et qui Dieu ne laissera impunye la faulte qu’elle faict.

... a este grande consolation au Roy et a toute ceste compaignie d’avoir entendu ... les souldatz de dela ayent si bonne volonté, cela nous faict ... Dieu qui tout yra mieulx qu’elle ne vouldroit car si led.... gneur Roy catholicque chemine en cecy de bon pied dont il nous asseure il est impossible que la chose ne tourne a sa confusion.

Quant aux nouvelles de ca nous voulons bien que vous scachez que depuis xv ou vingt jo^[rs] aulcuns malheureux ont essaye icy de mettre a fin une conjuration quilz avoient faicte po^[r] tuer le Roy et ne nous y oublioient pas. Tout cela fondé sur religion dont aulcuns des principaulx autheurs ont esté pris et punis. Mais tant plus nous allons avant et plus trouvons nous que ceste conspiration a longue queue ayant este bastie de longue main et appuyee par daulcuns grandz qui se sont trouvez bien trompez. Car nostre Seign^[r] a bien sceu defendre sa cause. Ceste [quasi le mesmes][1752] train qui ont prins voz rebelles, mais ilz vouloient [commancer par le] sang et l’espee. Un autre foys vous en scaurez [plus par le menu] Et po^[r] fin de ceste lettre.

[Not signed]

[Not addressed]

[Endorsed] 12 April, 1559[1753] (1560) Card. & D of Guise to the queen Dowager whereof another copy was sent to the Q. Ma^[te] the 3 of Aprill and was dated at Mayremoustier the viij^[th] of the same.

STATE PAPERS, SCOTLAND

ELIZABETH, VOL. III, NO. 58. (Translation. The parts in italics have been deciphered.)[1754]

[The cardinall of Lor: and duke of Guise to the Quene douag:][1755]

[April 29]

Madame This bearar hath made verie good diligence to bring us yo^[r] lettres wherof we wer verie gladde, for that by the same we understoode yo^[r] newes, and the rath^[r], for that we had receyvid none from yo^[w], sins the comminge of Protestant the courrone. Sins which tyme the Quene of England hath ever kept us in allarme to begynne the warre and to shew by all her dealinges that she had sent to be doinge and sturringe the coles. We beleeve she hath forgotten nothinge, wherby she might thinke to draw anye fruict of her evell disposicion: yf she had fownde thinges in cace to go through w^[th] her businesse. Neverthelesse shee hath gyven us the fairest wordes of the world. Wherunto the Frenche King hath not so muche trustyd but that he hathe advertisid the king of Spaine of all that she hath doon who having well considered the mater, hath made answer that there is no cause why to disalow his entent specially to go through w^[th] the maters on that side, and that to chastise the Rebelles he will gyve the King, as manye vessells, men, and vitailes, as he will, and so hath writen to the said queene, who knowing that she can hope for nothing of that, that she maketh a rekening of, begynnithe to use oth^[r] languaige, and causythe her ambassad^[r] to saye that that she hath done hath ben for none oth^[r] cause, but for the jalousye she hath of her Realme, and fearinge to be sodaynly taken unwares. So that it seemithe, that she repentethe to have gon so farre furth in the mater. And we beleeve that before theese lettres come to yo^[r] handes, yo^[w] shall have well perceyved, that her intentes ar waxed verye colde. And yf that which she hathe caused to be said by her Ambassado^[r] be true, yo^[w] shall have understand all the hole storie, by a man whome the S^[r] de Sevre the kinges ambassad^[r] in Englande, hathe sent unto yo^[w]. Neverthelesse we have thought good to sende yo^[w] backe againe this said bearar, by the waye of Flandres to advertise yo^[w], that we thinke that your Rebelles wilbe farre from their rekeninge, yf they make their accompte of the said Ladyes protection. Or elles there is much dissimulation.

And yet the King knowing after what sorte he must trust Englishemen, leavithe not of, to prepare xxiiij great ships to thintent (yf neede requyre, and that it do appeere, that the sayd Ladye doth contynue her evell disposicion) to gyue ordre w^[th] the same and oth^[r] forces w^[ch] he keepith in a readinesse, to souccour yo^[w] in such sorte, as he shall have the reason that he requyrethe, of thone and thoth^[r].

Yn the meane tyme he hathe sent the busshoppe of Valence, counsello^[r] in the K^[es] pryvie counsell, towardes the Queene, to understande plainely her meaninge, and in cace that the same be good, then to come to yo^[w] w^[th] good and large memorialles, to assaye to appease thinges on that side and to fynde the meanes to wynne tyme.

The thing (Madame,) that greevithe us most, is, that the meanes is hindred and stopped, to soucco^[r] yow w^[th] money as ofte and as readily as we wold be glad to do, and as yo^[w] have neede of it. Which we durst not aventure, nor also o^[r] brother Mons^[r] le Marquis for the evident danger that might happen. But yt cannot be longe before we see some waye open, and yow maye be sure (Madame) that we will not lose one quarter of an houre.

Now (Madame) we must w^[th] yo^[w], lament the Evell, that the mater of religion maye bring into a Realme, which hath so gone to worke on this side, that w^[th]in these xij or xv dayes, there is discouvered a conspiracy, made to kill us bothe, and then to take the King, and gyve him masters and gouvernours to instruct and bring him up in this wretched doctryne. For which pourpose there shuld assemble a great nombre of personnes heerabowtes who ar not w^[th]out the comforte and favour of some great ones. And betwixt the sixth and xv^[th] of this monethe, they shuld execute the same. So that w^[th]out the healpe of God and thintelligences w^[ch] we have had from all partes of christendome, and also of some of the conspiratours, that have disclosed it, the matter had taken effect. But God hath provyded heerin for us. The mater being discouvered, and manye beinge prissoners, we hope that the same shall be bowlted out, and so the danger avoyded. Wherof, and how the same shall breake out, yo^[w] shalbe more particularly advertised heerafter, specially if the waye be freer, then hitherto it hath ben. Yn the meane tyme yo^[w] shall receyve (if yt please yo^[w]) our humble commendacions prayeng God &c. Montignac is presently arryved upon the depeche, wherupon ordre shall be taken out of hande.

[Not signed]

[Not addressed]

[This and other deciphered letters (Queen Dowager of Scotland to MM. d’Oysel and de la Brosse 29 [April] and “a private man’s letter to d’Oysell” [29 April] 1560) are written on the same sheets of paper, and are endorsed together: “The interceptyd lettres discyphred,” and endorsed in Burghley’s hand: “B. 12. Martii. 20. Martii lettres deciphred from France to the Q. dowag.”[1756]]

APPENDIX II

[P. 98, n. 1]

ARCHIVES NATIONALES,

K. 1,494, PIÈCE NO. 70

[L’Ambassadeur de France, Mr. de L’Aubespine, évêque de Limoges, au Roi d’Espagne, Philippe II]

Tolède, 4 avril 1561

[Suscription] Au Roy.

[Au dos, alia manu] A Su Magestad. Del obispo de Limoges, a IIIIº de Abril 1561.

Sire, par ce que la Royne aura peu escrire à Vostre Majesté et Monsieur le Prince d’Evoly aussi, vous aurez entendu l’estat auquel les choses se retrouvoient parmy les Estatz particuliers en France il y a vingt jours par la malice de quelques ungs mal sentans de la foy, lesquelz avoient faict une menée en certaines provinces afin que l’on feist tomber le gouvernement du royaume en autre main que celuy de la Royne vostre mere, la sentans ferme et constante a n’endurer leurs erreurs et a les punir. Depuis est arrivé l’un de mes gens avec deux pacquetz de Monsieur de Chantone, lesquelz j’ay faict mectre entre les mains de Sajas.[1757] M’advertissant ladicte dame par le mesme courrier que le Roy de Navarre s’est monstré si conforme en tout ce qu’elle a desiré et peu approuvant la temerité de telles entreprinses, qu’il s’est accommodé pour aussi recevoir quelque lieu et contentemant d’estre seul lieutenant general du Roy vostre bon frere en France soubz ladicte dame, afin que la multitude des autres seigneurs et gouverneurs de tout le royaume n’amenast point la confuzion qui y estoit, que l’on eust quelque adresse, et que, par ce moien aussi il feust plus honnoré et respecté d’ung chascun sans aucune diminution de l’authorité de ladicte dame, laquelle, Sire, demeure chef de toutes choses, ayant les quatre secrétaires d’Estat soubz elle, les pacquetz, finances, dons et autres graces avec la personne du Roy, et commande au conseil ainsi que de coustume, tellement que chacun espere, comme aussi faict Sa Majesté et ainsi qu’elle me commande vous dire, Sire, que desormès il y a certaine apparance de toute tranquilité et repos, car ce que dessus est passé, arresté et signé entre eulx et de leurs mains pour articles irrevocables, ayant pour ceste cause mandé aux Estatz qu’ilz eussent à ne penser ne disputter plus sur telz pointz, ains seulement en ce qui concerne le mesnaige du royaume, les reculans et remettans a s’assambler a la fin de l’esté prochain. Et ce pendant, suivant l’instante requeste du peuple, le Roy vostre bon frere, Sire, partira de Fontainebleau incontinent après ce Quasimodo pour se faire sacrer à Reims dedans le XX^[e] de May, et incontinent après sus le mois de Juing faire son entrée à Paris, d’autant que ces deux actes sollemnelz donnent plus d’authorité et contentement à tous nos subjectz, et que, cela faict, la Royne vostre mère pourra aussi, comme elle désire, plus soigneusement user de la main forte et justice en tout ce qui se presentera. Ce que dessus, Sire, amandera, s’il vous plaist, en vostre endroit l’opinion mauvaise que nous avions quant je parlay a Monsieur le prince d’Evoly de l’yssue de noz Estatz, lesquelz, par ce remede, sont frustrez de plus rien toucher ne negotier qui concerne le gouvernement. Me commandant tres expressement la Royne de remercier fort affectionneement Vostre Majesté des bons et roiddes offices desquelz Monsieur de Chantoné a usé près d’elle pendant ces disputz, et asseurant Vostre Majesté que ce luy est obligation telle qu’elle peult faire estat de son amour et affection autant que de sa propre mère, comme de son costé elle se confie tant en sa bonté et amitié que, si l’on eust voulu faire plus de tord a son honneur et preminance, elle eust usé de ce que Dieu a mis. Sire, soubz vostre obeissance, comme de son meilleur amy, desirant que Vostre Majesté face en semblable estat de tout ce que sera en elle. Ceulx, Sire, qui avoient tramé ce que dessus pensoient remuer en nostre conseil et autres endroitz les hommes et honneurs à leur guise; mais, par ce moien, ilz sont hors de leurs desseings. S’estant Monsieur le prince de Condé contenté d’une declaration qu’on luy a donnée pour sa justification, à la charge qu’il peust, quant bon luy sembleroit, estre à la Court près ladicte dame, ainsi qu’il y a esté permis. Monsieur le connestable a, Sire, faict de bons et saiges offices en cet establissement, me chargeant de vous presenter ses tres humbles recomandations, vous requerant, comme font Leurs Majestez, qu’il vous plaise en sa faveur confirmer en Flandres une abbaie de dames à l’une de ses parentes que les religieuses desirent fort depuis le decez de feu madame de Lallain, comme j’éscris à Monsieur le conte d’Horne. Ce que, Sire, j’eusse de bouche esté faire entendre à Vostre Majesté; mais la crainte que j’ay eu de le troubler parmy ces sainctz et devots jours m’excusera s’il luy plaist, et commandera á Monsieur le prince d’Evoly qui cy est, de me faire donner quelque responce sur ceste lettre et sus une precedente que je vous escrivis il y a deux jours, afin que je puisse faire entendre à la Royne vostre bonne mère le contentement que recevrez de ce que dessus et vostre bon conseil. Quant mon courrier partit, Monsieur le conte d’Heu avoit desja esté licencié du Roy et de la Royne mère, et suis attendant, Sire, Monsieur de Montrueil, lieutenant de Monsieur le prince de la Roche-sur-Yon, lequel arrivera icy dedans quatre ou cinq jours, venant devant pour preparer ce qu’il sera de besoing et pour aussi visiter la Royne, qui me faict estimer que ledict seigneur Conte ne sera pas en ceste ville que quatre ou cinq jours après Quasimodo,[1758] dont noz dames ne sont pas contentes, la Royne pour le desir qu’elle a de reveoir Vostre Majesté plustost, et les autres pour leur interest particulier

Sire, je me recommande très humblement à vostre bonne grâce, priant le Créateur vous donner entres bonne santé tres heureuse et longue vye.

De Toledo, ce IIII^[e] d’avril 1561.

Vostre tres humble serviteur S. DE L’AUBESPINE E[vesque] de Lymoges

APPENDIX III

[P. 153, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XXXVIII, NO. 179

[Letter of the duke of Guise to the cardinal of Lorraine]

[1562, June 25]

Extraict de la lettre de Guyse escripte de sa main au cardinal.

Ie vous envoye ce porteur en dilligence pour vous advertir que tout fut yer accorde. Et puis vous dire que le commancement est l’honneur de Dieu service du Roy bien et repoz de ce royaume. Cedit porteur est suffisant et nauront noz chers cardinaulx que part ceste lettre comme aussi nostre mareschal de Brissac qui congnoistra quil y en a qui sont bien loing de leurs desseins. Nostre mere et son frere ne jurent que par la foy quilz nous doibvent et quilz ne veullent plus de conseil que de ceulx que scavez qui vont le bon chemyn. Conclusion la Religion reformee en nous conduisant et tenant bon sen va a baz leaue et les amyraulx mal ce qui est de possible. Toutes noz forces nous demeurent entierement les leurs rompues les billeez rendues sans parler dedictz ne de preches et administracion des sacremens a leur mode. Ces bons seigneurs croiront sil leur plaist cedit porteur de ce quil leur dira de la part de trois de leurs meilleurs amys et bayse la main. De Baugency ce xxv^[e] jour de Iuing 1562.

[No signature]

[No address]

[Endorsed] Extraict d’une lettre escripte de la main de m^[r] de Guyse au Cardinal de Lorraine deXXV^[e] Iuing 1562.

APPENDIX IV

[P. 155, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XXXIX, NO. 211, vj

[Letter of the duke of Aumale to Catherine de Medici]

[1562, Iuly 9]

Madame, je viens presentement de recevoyr la lettre quil vous a pleu mescripre touchant quelques marchandz anglois que lambassadeur de leur Royne vous a faict entendre avoyr este prys par les gens de guerre qui sont icy pres de moy pour le service du Roy et le vostre. Dont encores Madame je navois ouy parler, bien de quelques soldatz anglois qui furent pris y a assez long temps par le s^[r] Dallegre qui voulloient entrer a Rouen et lesquelz tost aprez je feiz renvoyer sinon quelques ungs qui se sont voluntairement mys a vostre service parmy noz bandes vous pourrant asseurer Madame, que tant sen fault que je permecte telles choses Que tout ce que jay en plus grande recommendation, est de les laisser librement et tous les autres estrangers qui sont icy mesmes voz subiectz de quelque religion quilz soient de trafficquer et negotier comme ilz faisoient au paravant ses troubles, sachant trop bien de quelle consequence cella est pour vostre service. Et ne puis penser dou viendroit ceste prise si ce nest par ceulx mesmes de Rouen Dieppe et le Havre qui pillent et prennent indifferemment sur les ungs et les autres sans aucune exception. Toutesfois Madame, je mectray peyne de faire si bien rechercher parmy ses trouppes que sil y en a aucuns qui en ayent quelque chose je la feray delivrer et nen sera perdu ung seul denyer, ainsy que je lay faict entendre a ce present porteur que ledit ambassadeur ma envoye expres.

Madame je prye Dieu vous avoyr en sante et donner tresbonne et longue vye. Au Mesnil devant S^[te] Catherine le ix^[e] jour de Juillet 1562.

Vostre treshumble et tresobeissant serviteur et subiect CLAUDE DE LORAYNE

[No address]

[Endorsed] 9 Iulii 1562.

The coppye of the duke d’aumalles letter to the Quene mother.

[Enclosed in a letter from Throckmorton to the Queen, from Paris, 12 July, 1562 (No. 211)]

APPENDIX V

[P. 177, n. 3]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XLVI, NO. 973

[Letter of the prince of Condé to the earl of Warwick]

[1562, December 14]

Mons^[r] le Conte. Attendant que la commodite se presente plus propre de vous pouvoir voir et diviser privement avecques vous envoiant maintenant ceste depesche en Angleterre je nay voulu oublier a vous ramentevoir le besoing que nous avons de joir en vostre secours, auquel jespere moiennant la grace de Dieu me joindre de brief pour par apres mectre quelque fin a tant de calamitez. Si Mons^[r] le Conte de Montgoumery est de retour avecques quelques forces, je serois bien dadvis se pour nous devancer, vous vous acheminissiez droict a Honnefleur pour plus faciliter le chemin et a lune et a laultre armee. Me recommandant sur ceste esperance a vostre bonne grace je supplieray le Createur vous donner Mons^[r] le Conte avecques sa tressaincte grace ce que plus desirez. Escript au camp de S^[t] Arnoul ce xiiij^[e] jour de Decembre 1562.

Vostre plus afecsionne et parfayt amy LOYS DE BOURBON

[Addressed] A Mons^[r]

Mons^[r] le Conte de Quarruich.

[Endorsed in Cecil’s hand] 184 December. Prince of Cond. to the Er. of Warwyk.

APPENDIX VI

[P. 203, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, DOMESTIC

ELIZABETH, VOL. XXIX, NO. 50

[Admiral Clinton to Cecil]

S^[r] I am sure that yo^[w] are advertysed of the Appoyntement for New haven I would gladly understand the quenes ma^[tes] plesure for my farther Servyce. I lefte the Philipp and Mary the Lyon the Sakar and twoo gales w^[th] viij victualers wyth m^[r] Wynter in the roade of New haven to joyne w^[th] the shipps under his charge for the Dyspayche of the men and such thinges as is to be brought thense and lefte m^[r] Holstocke to assyste m^[r] Winter and I w^[th] the Elizabeth Jonas and the Victorie cam hither this evenyng and synse my comyng w^[th] the advyse of m^[r] vycechamberlen I have dyspayched a suffycyent nomber of shippes that I founde presentely here to goo to New haven to fetch all thinges thense that is to be brought. I cam to New haven yester day at one a cloke in the after none & departyd thense at twoo a clok this morning fyndyng my lord of Warwycke a shippborde redy to departe and at my fyrst coming Edward Horsey came to me w^[th] monser de Lynerols from the Frenche King the quene and the constable as he sayd to vysyt me w^[th] offer of any thing that was their for my comoditie and sayd that the king desyryd me to com on land to hym and their w^[th] he tould me the Appoyntement for New haven. I sayd to hym that the plage of dedly infexion had don for them that I thynke all the force of France could never a don for yf the mortalitie had not taken a way and consumynyd our Captens & Soldiors in so grete nombers they could never a prevailyd nor a proched so neare the towne yet ys it apparant vnto yo^[w] the noble coraige of the lorde lyevetenaunt and the valeantnes of his soldiors hath bene shewyd as moch as might be in men having fought agaynst an unsesable plage of pestylence & the whole force of France. And as I doo reioyce that my contreymen hath so worthely behavyd them selfes so am I hartely sorry that yo^[r] chanse is to recover that towne, and so I desyryd hym to geve my humble thankes to the King the quene & the constable for their corteous mesaige and offer sent to me but I having charge by the quenes Ma^[tes] comandement my mistres of thes shipps and nombers of men I can not departe from them and so we departyd and afore the comyng of Edward Horsey & the sayd frenshe man to me I not knowyng at that tyme where my L of Warwyk was sent William Drury w^[th] a Trompet to New haven to speke w^[th] my lord from me. And at his landing the Prynce of Condy & dyverse of the noble men found hym their and usyd hym verey curteosly and offeryd hym a horse to ryde to se the towne and a jentilman to attend on hym and declaryd to hym that my lord of Warwyk was gone to the See and had taken a shipp to departe. And this moche I thought mete to let yo^[w] understand prayng yo^[w] that I may know the quenes Ma^[tes] plesure for my dyspayche hense. Thus I take my leave. From Portesmowth the last of Iuly a^[o] 1563.

[Signed] Your assured friend to comand E. CLYNTON

[Addressed] to the right hono^[r]able

S^[r] William Cicill Knight pryncipall Secretare to the quenes Ma^[ty].

[Endorsed] xxxj. July 1563.

to m^[r] Secretary from the L. admyrall.

APPENDIX VII

[P. 253, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. LXXVII, NO. 846

[Letter of the prince of Condé to his sister]

[1565, March]

The copy of the Prynce of Condes letter to his sister the Abbesse of Chelis.[1759]

Ma Soeur, lennuy ou je suis de linjure que lon a faict a Monsieur le Cardinal de Lorraine m’a mis au lict, comme vous dira vostre homme, de la fascherie que jay de veoir ainsy traicter les Princes. Qui me faict dire que lunion de noz maisons est plus que necessaire; comme il le peult bien congnoistre a ceste heure, et sil leust plustost faict, il leust tenu en peur et crainte ceulx qui nous doibvent obeissance et non par les armes eussent puissance de commandement. Surquoy jay faict a ce porteur entendre mon oppinion, et de la facon que mondict seigneur le Cardinal se doibt gouverner. Qui me gardera vous en faire plus longue lettre, hors mir que je veux confesser que si jeusse sceu ce qui cy est passe; jeusse veu lhistoire pour empescher une telle honte et oultraige, qui est plus grand que je nay jamais ouy parler que Prince ayt eu. Je luy suis et seray, tel que je luy ay promis. Et si jeusse este aupres de luy, je luy eusse faict prevue de ma volunte, plus par effect que par parolle. Je vous iray veoir quand le me manderez. Qui sera la fin apres avoir prie Dieu etc.

[No signature]

[No address]

[Endorsed in Cecil’s hand] March 1565.

Copy[1760] of a letter from the Marischall Montmorency to the Duke of Montpensyar and a letter from the Prince of Conde to the Abbass of Cheliss.

APPENDIX VIII

[P. 259, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXI, NO. 612

[Montluc’s Treason]

[1570, March 27]

[Sidenote: Ont deferes avec luy les sieurs de Larride de Mirepoix et Negrepelice]

[Sidenote: Le sieur de Marchassetel est ung jeune gentilhomme dune maise de xii a xv. mille livres tournois de rente et a fiance nagueres la soeur de Monsieur de Crussol]

Le sieur de Montluc charge davoir intelligence avec le Roy despaigne pour mettre en ses mains le pais de Guienne de quoy il reste accuse envers le Roy de France et la Royne sa mere par le sieur de Peres en Quercy et son filz le sieur de Marchassetel beau frere du sieur de Crussol qui ont envoye tout expres ung gentilhomme en court a ceste fin instruit de lettres et memoires par lesquelles est porte que le seneschal de Quercy a dit ausdits sieurs de Peres et Marchassetel quil avoit este solicitte de faire mutiner la ville de Montaubain a fin de donner occasion audit de Montluc de la piller se plaignant que ses services nestoient recongneuz mais quil sen vengeroit et plusieurs autres propos sembles quilz veullent maintenir avoir este proferez par ledit de Montluc qui est aussi charge de sestre assemble lieu ung lieu nomme Granale distant quatre lieues de Tholose avec le cardinal Darmaignac et ung seigneur despaigne pour conferer de cest affaire d aultre part que les prelats de Guyenne et Languedoc ont fait certaines assemblees et accorde entre eulx quelques levees de deniers et contribucions necessaires a cest entreprise et ont deputte secrettement levesque de Lodene vers le roy despaigne.

Le seneschal de Quercy arrivant nagueres en court adverti de ce que dessus se veult purger a levesque de Vallence frere dudit sieur de Montluc disant ne scavoir que cestoit et quon le mettoit a tort en cest affaire. Toutesfoys ledit sieur de Vallence homme collere de son naturel et passionne et laffaire de son frere aisne estant de telle consequence obtient du roy que lesdits seneschal de Quercy et gentilhomme seroient ouis au conseil prive ou le seneschal a nye publicquement ce que dessus Neantmoings le bruit est quen particulier parlant a la royne luy aie dit beaucoup de grandes choses. Le gentilhomme apersevere monstrant sesdites lettres et memoires et quil estoit prest se rendre prisonnier ou submettre a telle autre peine pour soustenir son dire. Comme aussi feroient ceulx qui lavoient envoye lesquelz viennent maintenant en court pour maintenir tout le contenu desdites memoires et proposer plusieurs aultres griefs contre ledit de Montluc tel est le bruit la royne apres avoir ouy lesdits seneschal et gentilhomme depesche ung nomme Duplessis varlet de chambre du roy vers ledit sieur de Montluc. Pour entendre la veritte lequel de Montluc au lieu de se purger commenca a hault louer ses faicts et services et a se plaindre de la mescognoissance quen avoit le roy et dont pouvoit venir quon soubson de luy et mauvaise oppinion que sestoit tousjours honnestement acquicte des charges quon luy avoit donnees. Bien aict confesse avoir parle a Granale avec le Cardinal Darmagnac mais que cestoit en passant chemin pour aller a Tholose et communicquer avec luy des affaires du roy ou lon dit sestre trouve ou ung nomme Don Pierre de Navarre bastard dalbert evesque de Cominges. Ce quencores est trouve mauvais pour ce que lun et lautre nen ont rien escript au roy ny a la royne. Pourquoy sont mandez en court lesdits de Montluc et Marchassetel pour se representer devant leurs maiestez.

Cest la cause pourquoy le sieur de Montluc a envoye cartel contre tous ses adversaires &c. disant que tous ceulx que vouldront maintenir quil aict intelligence avec le roy despaigne ont menty sauf et excepte les princes du sang et autres ses superieurs ausquelz il doit honneur et reverence quil est prest de les combatre a toutes sortes darmes en quoy il espere ne faire moings de devoir que il navoit que vingt ung ans &c.

[No signature]

[No address]

[Endorsed] 27º Martii. Informacion contre Mons^[r] de Monluc.

APPENDIX IX

[P. 303, n. 2]

BIBLIOTHEQUE NATIONALE

FONDS FRANÇAIS, MS. NO. 3,197, F^[O] 92, RECTO

[The Cardinal’s War]

[2 juillet 1565]

[Au dos] Coppie. De Mons^[r] de Salzede à Mons^[r] d’Auzances, du II^[e] Juillet 1565.

Cause de l’empeschement faict à Monseigneur le Cardinal par le S^[r] de Salcede.

Monsieur, comme le diable qui ne cerche jamais que de mectre des choses en avant, il est survenu que, estant arrivé Monseigneur le cardinal de Lorraine a Ramberviller, ses officiers m’ont dict aultre commandement de publier et attacher par touttes les villes et chastellenyes la protection et sauvegarde qu’il a recouvert de l’Empereur, le double de laquelle je vous envoye signé et collationné de son chancellyer. Et avec cela, je suis esté adverty de bon lieu certainement qu’il veult et a despeché capitaines pour mettre ès place lesquelles je conserve il y a environ dix ans aux despens du Roy et avec ses soldatz; et veoir à ceste heure ung remuement devant moy avec ceste saulvegarde et[1761] une particularité que je sçay je ne suis deliberé de le souffrir que premièrement le Roy et la Royne ou vous (comme les representans) vous n’ayez bien pensé le faict et la consequence que cela peult advenir pour l’advenir.[1762] Je vous asseure, Monsieur, que je suis bien mary qu’ayant tant faict de services à Monseigneur le Cardinal et à sa maison, comme tout le monde sçayt bien, il[1763] me contraigne pour mon honneur de thumber en sa malle grace. Et quant luy au aultre vouldront mectre quelques particularitez en avant, vous vous bien asseurer avec tous mes seigneurs et amys que je mouray et me coustera ma vye et mon bien que je ne serviray jamais aultre que à monseigneur et roy, auquel je suis tant tenu. S’il vous plaist de me envoyer la coche de madame d’Auzances[1764] par Florymont,[1765] je vous envoyeray à Metz en charge ma femme et enffans avec le peu de bien que j’ay en France, pour vous asseurer que je ne feray jamais chose qui ne soit pour le service du Roy, synon pour sa grandeur et authorité. Et, en ce pendant que j’aurai de voz nouvelles, j’entretiendray les choses en l’estat que j’ay deliberé, avec la plus grande modeste que je pouray, sy je ne suis contrainct aultrement. Et sur ce, je me recommande de bien bon cuer a vostre bonne grace et prye Dieu

Monsieur, vous donner très heureuse et longue vye.

De Vic, ce II^[e] jour de Juillet. Ainsy signé:

P^[O] DE SALCEDE.

APPENDIX X

[P. 307, n. 7]

STATE PAPERS, DOMESTIC

ELIZABETH, ADDENDA, VOL. XIII, NO. 71

[George Poulet to Sir Hugh Poulet]

[1567, April 22]

It may pleas yo^[u] to be advertysed that wheras (aswell at my last being w^[th] yowe, as by your severall letters) yowe have geven me specyall charg for then quyring of such currauntes as might be learned from the frenche partyes, wherin having hetherto desysted, rather for want of convenient matter then of dew remembraunce, I have therefore thought yt my duty w^[th] all convenyent speede to advertise yo^[u] of soche newes, as I have benne presently enfourmed of by certeyne of this isle w^[ch] came upon Satterday last from Normandy, who have declared that there was a greate rumo^[r] of warres, and the newes so certayne as a boy of myne being at Constaunces for the recovery of a grief w^[ch] he hath, was hydden by his host the space of one day, and so pryvely w^[th] dyvers others of this Isle conveyed over with all speede. Moreover I understand that there were taken up at Constaunces and theraboutes iij^[c] soldio^[r]s w^[ch] ar now in garrisson at Graundville and that there ar viij^[xx] soldio^[r]s in Shawsey and two greate shippes well appointed. Also that a servaunte of the frenche Kinges hath passed alongest the sea coastes of Normandy and hath taken the names of the principall masters and marryners in thos partes. The leke brute of warres and preparacion for the same ys in Bryttayne as I have learned by a barke of Lyme w^[ch] came from S^[t] Malos and aryved in this Isle upon Sonday last at night, who declareth that they were prevely admonished w^[th] all speede to departe from thens, and that Mons^[r] Martigues governo^[r] of Bryttayne was appointed to com this present Tusday with a greate company in to the sayd towne of S^[t] Malos where greate preparacion was made for the receyving of him and his retynewe. Thes ar the specialst and most credybel yntellygences w^[ch] I have as yet lerned from thos partes, the presumpcions wherof as they ar very manyfest and dangeros so can they not be to myche credyted and dylligently prevented, wherefore I have w^[th] all speede sent this bearer unto yo^[u] w^[th] thes my advertysementes whom I have charged not to slacke his duty in conveyaunce of the same, to thend that yo^[u] being enfourmed of thes premysses may returne youre pleasure and advise for ower better procedinges in the same, as to yo^[r] discrete wysdom may seme most expedyent, beseching yo^[u] yt may be as briefly as ys possyble. And in this meane tyme I shall not fayle God willing to enforce and make redy the power of this castle and isle for the resisting of all daungers and sudden attemptes w^[ch] may be geven by the ennymy to the uttermost of ower power. Although the estate and furnyture of this castle ys not unknowen unto yo^[u], yet have I thought good to send herew^[th] enclosed a byll of suche necessaryes as ar specyally wanting in the same. There ys no other speciall matter worthy the certifyeng for this present from this yo^[r] charge where all thinges remayne in the accoustomed good and quyet estate thankes be to God, whom I beseche long to preserve yo^[u]. From Iersey the xxij^[th] of Aprill 1567.

Yowr most obedyent sonne GEORGE POULET

[Addressed] To his right wurshipfull father S^[r] Hugh Poulet Knight.

[Endorsed] 22 April, 1567.

M^[r] George Poulett to his father S^[r] Hugh Poulet from Jersey.

APPENDIX XI

[P. 326, n. 3]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XCIV, NO. 1,338

[Sir Henry Norris to Queen Elizabeth]

Yt may like yo^[r] Maiesty to be advertized.... Wryttin at Paris this last of Septemb^[r] 1567, in haste.

Yt is here reported for truthe that Amyans Abevill and Calleis are takin to the princes beholfe wherof I doubte not by y^[r] Ma^[ty] is advertized or this. Also they have Lanne[1766] Soyzon[1767] Abevill Bollein[1768] Ameins and so alonge the riuer of Sene which be the best appointid townes of Artillery in Fraunce.

By y^[r] highnes most humble and obedient subiect and servant HENRY NORREYS

[Addressed] To the Quene’s most excellent Maiesty:

[Endorsed] 30 September 1567 S^[r] H. Norreys to the Q. Ma^[ty].

APPENDIX XII

[P. 334, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XCV, NO. 1,457

[Printed Pamphlet of 6 pages]

LETTRES DU ROY, | PAR LESQUELLES | IL

ENIOINT DE FAI | RE DILIGENTE PERQUISITION & RE | CHERCHE DE TOUS LES GENTILS-HOM | MES, TANT D’VN PARTY QUE D’AUL | TRE, QUI SE SONT RETIREZ EN LEURS | MAISONS DEPUIS LA BATAILLE DONN | EE PRES S. DENYS. A. PARIS, PAR ROB. ESTIENE IMPRIMEUR DU ROY M. D. LXVII AUEC PRIUILEGE AUDICT SEIGNEUR DE PAR LE ROY.

Nostre amé & | feal, Pource que | nous desirons sça | voir & entendre à | la vérité quels Ge | ntils hommes de vo | stre s’y sont retirez depuis | la bataille dernièrement donnee | pres S. Denys, tant ceulx qui e | stoyent en nostre armee, ou ail | leurs pour nostre service, que les | aultres qui ont suyvi le party du | Prince de Condé: |

A ceste cause nous vous | mandons, & tres-expresseement en | joignons, Que incontinent la pre | sente receue, vous ayez à faire di | ligente perquisition & recherche par tout vostredict ressort, de tous | lesdicts Gentils-hommes tant d’un | costé que d’aultre, qui se sont, ain | si que dict est, retirez en leurs mai | sons. Et ceulx que vous trouverez | estants de la Religion pretendue | reformee, lesquels se seront pre | sentez ou Greffe de vostre siege, & | faict les submissions portees par nostre Ordonnance & Declaration | sur ce, qui est de vivre paisible | ment en leurs maisons sans jamais | ung se mouvoir à prendre les armes, | sinon avec nostre exprès comman | dement & lesquels au demeurant | observeront en cela nostredicte | Ordonnance & Declaration, ne | faisants aucun monopole, ne cho | se qui tende à sedition: Vous don | nerez ordre & tiendrez la main | quils soyent maintenus en la joys | sance du contenu en icelle Ordonnance & Declaration, pour vivre | & demeurer doucement en leurs | dictes maisons, sans souffrir ne | permettre qu’il leur soit mesfaict | ne mesdict en corps ne en biens. | Et là où il s’en trouveroit qui feis | sent autrement, vous leur interdi | rez ladicte joyssance, les faisant | punir & chastier selon que vous | sçaurez le cas le requerir.

Et au regard de ceulx desdicts | Gentils-hommes qui seront venus | en nostre armee, ou auront esté | employez ailleurs pour nostre ser | vice & en nostre obeissance, s’e | stans semblablement retirez en | leurs maisons apres la bataille, | vous les manderez venir par de | uers vous, ou bien les advertirez | par lettres, & leur remonstrerez de | nostre part le tout qu’ils font à no | stredict service & à leur honneur | & reputation, n’estant maintenant | heure de nous abandonner en ce | ste occasion: Les exhortant de ve | nir incontinent retrouver nostre | camp & armee, & les asseurant qu’il | ne se presentera paradventure ja | mais occasion où nos bons, fidèl | les & affectionnez subiects puis | sent faire meilleure preuve de | leur bonne volonté & affection en | nostre service, que en ceste cy, & dont nous recevions plus de con | tentement, que nous sçaurons bien | recognoistre envers eulx. Et | au contraire vous leur ferez sça | voir que oultre la juste cause d’in | dignation, que nous aurons alen | contre de ceulx qui y defauldront, | nous ferons proceder au saisisse | ment en nostre main de tous & | chascuns leurs fiefs & tenemens | nobles, pour estre regis par Con | missaires. Mais sur tout ne fail | lez de nous envoyer incontinent | les noms & surnoms, qualitez & | demeurances de tous les dessus | dicts Gentils-hommes de costé & | d’aultre retirez en leursdictes mai | sons. Et vous nous ferez service | tresaggreable. Donné à Paris le douziesme jour de Decembre, | mil cinq cens soixante sept.

[Signé] CHARLES

[Et au dessous] ROBERTET

[Et sur la superscription est es | cript]

A nostre ami & fealle le Prevost de | Paris, ou son Lieutenant.

Leves & publiees à son de trompe | & cry public par les carrefours de ce | ste ville de Paris, lieux & places ac | coustumez à faire cris & publications, | par moy Pasquier Rossignol sergent, cri | eur juré pour le Roy ès ville, Prevosté | & Viconté de Paris, accompaigné de | Michel Noiret commis par le Roy pour | trompete esdicts lieux, & d’un aultre | trompete, le dixseptieme iour de Decem | bre, l’an mil cinq cens soixante sept.

ROSSIGNOL

APPENDIX XIII

[P. 352, n. 2]

BIBLIOTECA BARBERINIANA

VATICAN LIBRARY, NO. 5,269, FOLIO 63

[Discorso sopra gli humori del Regno di Francia, di Mons. Nazaret]

Quante uolte il Rè Christianissimo ha ricerco Nostro Sig^[re] di danari contanti, ò di permissioni di cauarne somme maggiori, et grossissime dal Clero di Francia, ò di soccorso di gente Italiana, ò di altro aiuto, che si potesse cauare da sua Beatitudine, tante n’è stato in somma compiaciuto, conciosia, che la bontà del Papa, et la prontezza, et uolontà grande, che Sua Santità ha del continuo hauuto d’ impiegare ogni sua forza, et autorità a salute di quella Corona, et ad esterminatione degli Heretici gli ha fatto prestare più fede alle promesse, che loro M^[ta], faceuano a parole del ben futuro che alle uere ragioni di coloro, i quali predicauano il Male, et la corruttione presente, et palpabile tale, secondo essi da mettere per perduto qualunque cosa si donaua ò porgeua per quel aiuto con il medesimo zelo ha proceduto sua Santità nell’ aduertire al Re, alla Reina, et alli altri Ministri suoi fideli, et Catholici degl’ inganni, et male opere di certi, i quali si uedeua chiaramente, come proponendo fallacie, et usando falsità et tradimenti, cercauano con sommo artificio di leuare l’ obedienza al Rè, et corrompere la giustitia, et Religione di quel Regno, come in gran parte è loro riuscito, cosi non ha mancato di mettere qualche uolta in consideratione qualche rimedio per troncare i disegni delli Ugonotti, parendoli, come Papa et Padre commune, che se gli appartenesse di ricordar quello tocca al bene de fideli, et come Vicario di Christo in Terra di doversi intromettere in cosa appartenente all’ uffitio suo per quanto concerne il riformare la Chiesa di Dio, cioè renderle in quel Paese la sua debita forma, et dignità essendouene il bisogno, ò la necessità grandissima, mà in parte alcuna non è mai riuscito di far frutto, anzi quando le loro M^[ta] non hanno hauto per fine di ualersi degli aiuti; et autorità del Papa, manco hanno tenuto conto, nè pur mostro di curarsi di corrispondere con quella dimostratione di parole, che ci conuiene ad ubedienti fig^[li] et deuoti a questa Santa Sede; Perciochè all’ altre cose, che l’hanno dechiarato, lo fece manifesto, et palpabile, quando dopo la battaglia ultima di Mócontor, essendo il tempo appunto proprio de uenire a dare castigo à chi lo meritaua, come ricordauano i Ministri di Nostro Sig^[re] per parte sua, che era tempo di fare, et ne mostrauano il modo, fu risposto loro dalla Reina propria con parole assai espresse, come il Rè si trouaua in età di autorità, et con forze, et prudenza di saper gouernare lo Stato suo, da sè, senza hauere à pigliare consiglio, nè Legge da Principi esterni. Onde meritamente da quel tempo in quà è parso a Sua Santità di uolere andare un poco più consideratamente, non giudicando che se gli conuenisse di doversi ingenire in cosa d’altri più oltre di quelche fosse grato alli Padroni, sperando pure, che come l’ era affirmato, così asseueratamente l’età del Rè con il ualoroso animo suo, et con le prouisioni, che loroM^[ta] presumeuano di fare più che à bastanza per trouarsi al sicuro in ogni accidente, potessero superare la peruersità de Ribaldi, et ogni altra difficultà.

Hora che dalli intollerabili Capitoli da questa ultima impia pace apparisce tutto il contrario, ueggendosi come restano del tutto oppressi i Cat^[ci] et gli Ugonotti tanto solleuati, che non si preuagliano in qualche parte: mà che mettano necessità, et in loro soggettione il Rè medesimo.

Non può ne deue sua Beatitudine mancare di tutti quei Uffity, che si appartengono al grado suo per aprire la mente del Rè con modo, che sia cauato dalle tenebre, oue altri cerca di tenerlo, et sia illuminato delle prouisioni, che Sua M^[ta] può porgere per la salute, et conseruatione dello Stato, et uita di tutti i buoni, che senza pronto, et potente rimedio se ne andranno in perditione, non potendo mai reggersi quel Regno senza buona giustistia, et religione; le quali sono corrottissime con l’Intervento delli Heretici in esse, li quali Heretici non accade dubitare, che hanno sempre hauuta, et hanno tutavia più che mai la principale mira loro fissa alla rouina del Rè et uaglionsi apparentemente di quelle due cose, che sono generalissime per chiunque cerca di distruggere un Dominio, ò una Monarchia, cioè la prima di mettere in diffidenza à chi lo regge quei Prencipi massimamente, che lo possono sostenere, et porgere consigli; et aiuti da conseruarsi il suo debito imperiò, come si sà, che hanno tanto tempo procurato di conseguire più, et sopra ogni altra cosa li Ugonotti del Rè di Spagna con dar ombra, et metter gelosia, che Sua M^[ta] Catt.^[ca] et suoi Ministri ancor d’auantaggio fussero sempre per procurare, non che desiderare la divisione della Francia; perchè la bassezza del Rè Christianissimo, redondaua à grandezza del l’altro interpretando perpetuamente, et le parole, et i fatti, che ueniuano da quella parte al peggior senso, il quale argomento, sebene in superficie hauesse del propabile in qualche parte, nondimeno la natura del Rè Cat.^[co] tanto inclinata al bene, et alla quiete, fà conoscere a pieno il contrario, come dimostra pur troppo chiaramente l’occasione, che ha lassato passare, con il non havere con effetto animo di nuocere alla Francia per pensiero di accrescere se stesso; Ma è assai alli Ugonotti di hauere messo Zizania da ogni parte, tanto che l’uno non si fidi dell’ altro, sicome hanno cerco, che gli riesca di consequire del Papa, sebene non è uenuto loro fatta, perche Sua Beat.^[ne] per sua troppa bontà pospone ogni altra occasione, hauendo risguardo solo al seruitio di Dio, et al bene di quella Corona et del Rè.

L’altra seconda cosa è di mettere diuisione nel Popolo, che di ciò non accade produrne ragioni, ueggendosi pur troppo per gl’ istessi capitoli dell’ accordo. E necessaria adunque inanzi ad ogni altra cosa di provare con buone ragioni, come la setta delli Ugonotti con li suoi capi, sono sforzati a tenere in perpetuo la persona del Rè per inimica implacabile, perchè oltre à quello che è detto di sopra l’hanno troppo grauemente offesa, nello Stato nell’ honore, et quanto ad essi nella uita sicome testifica quella giornata di Meos, nella quale fu forza a Sua M^[ta] trottare sino a Parigi nel modo che è notorio.

Molte altre congiure, et conspirationi fatte da essi contra la persona di Sua M^[ta] et tanti trattati, et ribellioni usate per occuparle le sue Terre, sono palesi, et n’appariscono i processi fatti per le scritture, che furono trovate à Sciantiglione di Coligni, et che offende non perdona, onde considerata la natura loro, non resta dubbio, che come consij di havere macchinato contra alla uita del Suo Sovrano Padrone, et offesolo nell’ honore, et nello Stato tante uolte così abbomineuolmente, come è nonsolo palese; ma prouato a chiunque lo uole sapere, non potranno in eterno essere fideli, nè obedienti Vassalli; anzi non staranno mai quieti se non per fraude, et con intentione d’ingannare Sua M^[ta] quando uegghino le cose in termine, che li habbia da riuscire, et se gli mancarà il modo con l’ Armi scoperte, et con congiurationi palesi, come per lo passato; perchè la loro setta hauesse declinato, forse per il danno riceuuto nelle battaglie, che Dio benedetto hà fatto loro perdere, ò perchè dubitino di poter essere oppressi dal ualore, et uirtu, che uede essere nel Rè è non solo uerisimile, ma chiara, et sicura cosa, che procureranno di aiutarsi per ogni uia etia indirettissima, et seguitaranno il lor costume solito, et però non perdoneranno à ueleno, nè ad altra sorte di scelerata uiolenza, come la morte del Marescial di Bordiglione, quella di Monsig^[r] di Ghisa, et infinite altre simili ci ammaestrano, perchè conosceranno, come niuna uia è più certa di assicurarli ad ogni misfatto, et insieme da conseguire il fine del colorire i loro peruersi dissegni; onde si può fare uera conseguenza, che niuna persona fidele al Rè, et prudente possa, ne debba persuadere Sua M^[ta] a disarmare, ò à fidarsi in alcun modo poco, ne molto delli ribelli di Christo, et suoi.

Hè che intenda d’huer concordato con essi altrimenti, che con l’intentione, che hebbe già il Rè Luigi XI. il quale considerata l’unione de Grandi contra di se uolse rendersi facile di promettere ogni condittione, benchè iniqua, che da ciascuno l’ era chiesta, mà dissipati che hebbe i capi della ribellione, come furono deposte l’ armi, incontinente gli troncò tutti, senza indugio, ne risguardo alcuno. Anzi hà da guardarsi Sua M^[ta] ben diligentemente da tutti coloro i quali con si gran carità gridano pacis bona, et abusando della clemenza, et benignità del Rè, si sforzano d’ingannarlo, commendando questa pace particolare con le lode della pace in genere; perchè con le sue proprie non lo potriano fare: Chi non sà che la pace per se stessa è buona? Mà chi non sa ancora che Sicary, i Venefici, gli Assassini gli Assassinatori, gli Incendiarij, i Sacrilegij, gli Heretici, et gli huomini senza fede, ne honore meritano punitione, et esterminatione. Chi non sà similmente, che hauer preso per trattata la Roccella per forza Angolem, et tante, et tante altre Città, et Terre in tutti i modi, che l’ hauere assediato il suo Rè, che l’abbruciare le Chiese, dar il guasto alle Prouincie, et distruggere, et esterminare, ò ribellare i Popoli è cattiva cosa, et peccato irremediabile. Mà che il liberarsi da si graue indignità, et oppressioni, et che il cauar lo Stato suo, et suoi buoni Vassalli, et se stesso da tale calamità, et miserie, come è la uile, et abbietta seruitù di chiunque si troua sottoposto alle crudeli Tirannide, et rapina de’ capi delli Ugonotti, non è esser seuero, et rigido, mà à fare il douere, il dritto, et quelche ricerca la Giustitia; Come può il Rè uolgere gli occhi pieni di quel generoso spirito che hanno mostro i suoi antecessori in tante et si grande Imprese, da i quali ha riceuuto il titolo di Christianissimo, acquistato d’essi per i loro meriti verso la Roccella, et tutto il Paese, che chiamano di conquista, et tolerare di uederselo tolto con i Popoli ribellati, et in tutto alienati dalla sua obedienza, et Religione con le Chiese antichissime, et si eccellenti, et nobili edifitij tutte demolite, la qual cosa auuiene non solo ne Paesi doue hanno pensato d’annidarsi, ma da tutte le parti del Regno, douunque sono passati con l’armi, che se ne uederanno i uestigii per li secoli auuenire, nonchè per li successori nostri, talmente hanno adoperato il ferro, et il foco contro la fede di Christo, et la giurisdittione, et l’autorità Regia.

Si che quando per qualsiuogla mondana ragione pur uolesse Sua M^[ta] scordarsi l’offese si graui fatte alla Corona, à sè, et all’honore, et dignità sua, non può, ne deue posponere quelle, che sono commesse contra Christo, et alla sua legge, et non può mancare di giustitia alli suoi Popoli fideli, et Cat.^[ci] che chieggono pietà, et gridano uendetta, chiari di non douere, nè poter, ne uoler havere mai pace, nè triegua à modo alcuno, sapendo di non potersi mai fidare d’essi, come l’esperienza gli ha dimostro molte uolte a troppo loro gran costo. Però quando uedessero di essere abbandonati, et derelitti dal Rè, et dal Gouerno, piutosto che restare a descrittione di gente si scelerata per fuggire la rapacita, et enormissime crudeltà loro saranno forzati di ricorrere ad ogni ultimo refugio.

Si può dunque proporre in consideratione al Rè qual sia più pietoso uffitio, quanto a Dio, et più glorioso quanto al mondo, hauer fatto un accordo con l’inique, et intollerabili condittioni, che si ueggano con Vassalli, et ribelli reintegrandoli nè beni, et dignità, gradi preminentie, uffitij, et benefitij, cedendoli parte dello Stato proprio, con il lassar loro delle principali Fortezze del suo Regno in diverse Prouincie, pagandoli danari di nuouo, oltre all’assoluerli di quanto hanno rubbato alla Corona, et al Popolo, et quello che importa più di tutto il resto, permetterli il libero esercitio delle loro Heresie, o l’hauere liberato i suoi fideli soggetti, et se la Casa Sua, et il suo Regno, et la Christianità, da si pestifera et perniciosa Canaglia, Bella usanza certo si potrebbe chiamare l’usurpare con la Tirannia, che s’hanno fatto gli Ugonotti, le Città et gli Stati pertinenti alla Corona, saccheggiare et espilare tutte le Prouincie, doue si sono potuti cacciare con ogni sorte di tradimento, et quando non si hà havuto altro refugio, ricorrere alla pace, et al perdono per non restituire quello che si è rubbato, et occupato à forza, et Tirannicamente. Tollerassi, che uno, ò pochi transfugi, infame, si facciano capi di una setta, et senza cagione, ò ragione pur finta, ò apparente; non chè con autorità, et giusto titolo, sotto colore di uolersi fare riformatori dé Preti diformati, et disobedienti, pigliano l’ armi contra il Rè, lo minacciano, faccino le battaglie seco, lo mettino nelle necessità, doue Sua M^[ta], è stata, et si truoua tuttauia, et li diano le leggi piutosto, che castigare chi lo merita, et reintegrare la giustitia, et la Religione nel suo Dominio, senza le quali due cose mai si uisse, nè si potrà uiuere rettamente in alcun luogo.

Anzi è troppo chiara cosa, come questo male non corretto: mà così trasandato andarà augumentando si ogni giorno maggiormente di sorte, che si habbia da mutare Imperio, come si uede che desiderano, et procurano con ogni diligenza gli Ugonotti che segua. E adunque la pace, cosi fatta pericolosa, et dannosa, come si è dimostro, sicome al punir li malfattori sarà sempre trouato necessario, honesto, et utile. Bisogna hora poi considerare, posto, che si debba fare se il Rè hà il modo da reintegrarsi nel suo prestino Stato, et autorità, et obedienza, et di ciò forse si potrebbe uenire in certa cognitione col misurare qual sia più il numero de Cat^[ci] ò quello degli Ugonotti, qual siano maggiori, et più gagliarde le forze, et armi de ribelli, ò quelle del Rè, quale delle due parti habbia più facile il modo da cauare gente forastiera, et sia meglio appoggiata d’amicitie de Prencipi Potentati, et de danari.

Et in fine secondo tali propositioni farne la conseguentia, per due Ugonotti, che siano nel Regno, si ode calcolare, che si ha da contraporre più di otto Cat.^[ci] gli ribelli hanno perduto nelle battaglie oltre alla reputatione, et la quantità degli huomini molti Capi grandi, che haueuano come il Prencipe di Condè, Dandalotto, et tanti altri, talmente che non accade far paragone dell’ armi sue a quelle del Rè, essi sono senza denari, et non possono così a loro posta più cauare nuoui soccorsi d’Alemagna, et Sua M^[ta] ne ha da sborsare ad essi a millione, et può hauer Reistri, Suizzari, Italiani, et Spagnuoli quanto li piace, et purchè uolesse sarebbe aiutato da tutta la Christianità, et quello che importa non meno di tutto il Resto, ha ad arbitrio, et disposition sua la giustitia, con la quale sola non è dubbio, che sarebbe bastante de regolare il tutto.

Sono accettate queste ragioni perchè non si può negare, Ma si risponde, che la Nobiltà di Francia, che è quella dalla quale depende il Popolo, totalmente è corrotta per la maggior parte, et da questo procede tutto il male, che la grandezza del Rè proprio in ogni tempo è stata principalmente per il seguito, et obedienza de i Nobili, et mancandogli essi Sua M^[ta] resterebbe debolissima, et allegano le battaglie guadagnate per diuina dispositione, che non si sono poi proseguite, nè cauatone quel frutto, che si speraua, et douenasi. Onde si uà imprimendo nell’ animo di Sua M^[ta] che per quel verso mai si potrà uedere il fine, et che però manco mal sia essere ricorso all’ accordo in quei modi, che si è potuto, perchè il tempo farà ben lui. Le quali fallacie sono troppo palpabili, toccandosi con mano, et uedendosi con l’occhio chiaramente doue stà la magagna: percioche il Re uorrà recarsi la mente al petto, e redursi a memoria delle cagioni, perchè non fù seguitata la Vittoria dopo la battaglia di San Dionigi, et perchè si diede tempo tante, et tante settimane alli Ribelli di riunirsi, et stabilirsi nelloro capo, et non si uolse mai obedire d’andare a cauarli da Monteri, o Faulnona, come sa chiunque si trouò, che si poteua fare senza alcun pericolo, et perchè a Craton in Campagna, quando si seguitauano li Ribelli non si uolse combatterli, nè manco andarli appresso da uicino, ò tagliargli i passi, come è palese, che si poteua per non impedirgli la congiuntione con il soccorso, che ueniua loro di Germania, conoscerà manifestamente Sua M^[ta] di essere stata tradita, et sa da chi, et lo proua da far punire i malfattori per giustitia, ma non è stata consigliata da uenirne mai all’ esecutione, perchè Sua M^[ta] non hà uoluto consigliarsi con altri, che con coloro che la tradiscono. Veggasi quel che seguì poi con l’altra pace fatta con mira, et intentione di dare la stretta alii capi di quella maledetta setta, dopo che hauessero deposte l’ armi, et reso le Fortezze; acciochè con tal mezo si conseguisca l’ intento, che si deue hauere senza tanto sangue per non debilitare le forze proprie. Ma i traditori, che dauano il Consiglio, o almeno erano partecipi di esso, seppero guidare le cose in modo, et si lasciò uscire la uolpe dalla tana, et portò il caso, che appunto quelli di cui altri si fidaua più, et che haueua l’ordine di fare l’ essecutione, auuertissero si a tempo i Ribelli, che furono i primi a repigliare l’ armi, et uscirne di Noyrs, et conseruaronsi la Roccella, et hebbero in ordine di poter pigliare Angoslen per forza, prima che le forze del Re fossero unite esse da opponesseli, che anco questo, come il resto uiene procedette tutto dalli traditori tiranti adrieto le prouisioni Regie per dar tempo a complici di lauorare, Piacque pur poi a Dio, che miracolosamente fosse ammazzato, il Prencipe di Condè, et disfatto parte delle genti di Moners, ma non si seguitò, come si poteua doueua, et conueniuasi. Venne ancora il Duco di Dupponti, che si poteua combatterlo, et uincerlo al sicuro, et non si fece per le cagioni, che si seppero, et pure non ci si prouidde.

Fu seguitato, et verso Limoges si hebbero diuerse occasioni di romperlo senza alcun risico, et non fù esseguito per la colpa di chi n’ impediua la essecutione con l’autorità, che haueua nell’ essercito Regio; accioche si lasciasse se unire col Coligni, anzi fù procurato con buona cura di guardare l’ Essercito Regio in forma, et in siti, che la fame, et gli stenti l’ hauessero a fare sbandare, dando andito, commodità, et aiuto à ribelli di godere il Paese, et d’impatronirsi de’ magazzeni, de uittouaglie munitioni, et artigliarie preparate da alcune persone, che si era troppo apparentemente ueduto, che erano colpeuoli, in ciò si uenne al paragone, come questi tali scellerati traditori erano di più autorità, essi appresso le loro Maestà, che qualunque recordaua la salute, et il seruitio di esse, come riusci similmente quando si era fatta deliberatione de Suizzeri, et Italiani, così all’ ingrosso, che il Re auesse facoltà di farsi la ragione con l’ armi à malgrado de Francesi, che la seruiuano male, i quali misero sù Mons^[r] Duca d’Angiù che la impregnò, come cosa che offendesse la dignità, et honor proprio di Sua Altezza, conoscendo chiaramente, che l’ intenteone de chi gouernaua, et consigliaua Sua M^[ta] non era uolta ad altro fine, che fargli inimici, ouero diffidenti tutti gli altri Prencipi, et in somma priuarlo di tutti gli aiuti esterni.

Le difficoltà, che furono interposte, per consumar tempo nell’ andare al soccorso di Poiters, sono anco loro ben note, perchè ùhebbero da interuenire diuersi capi, che andarono con le genti Italiane, finalmente, come Piacque a Dio seguì la battaglia di Moncontor, dopo la quale il Rè medesimo sa, come fù tenuto a bada sotto San Giouanni d’Angelin, nè si uolse mai mandare parte della Cauallaria, non che tutto l’Essercito dietro alli Ribelli rotti, et in fuga, di sorte che non era possibile, che si riunissero, se non se gli fusse lasciato in preda le migliori, et più opulenti Prouincie di Francia per accrescere loro il seguito de Padroni, et lasciarli reinferscare, et rimettere insieme. Dalle quali cose si ode, che il Rè medesimo hà scorto qualche cosa, che gli ha fatto nausea. Ma essendo Sua M^[ta] attorniata di gente, che lo cerca d’ingannare, et tradire per ogni uerso, ella non può discernere i Lacci, che gli sono tesi ne i pericoli doue si troua, però e da cercare di far la molto ben capace delle sopradette cose, mostrandoli, che es non si lieua da torno quei ribaldi, che cercauano così grandi artificij di rouinarla, ella si prouocherà l’ ira di Dio, ne douerà più sperare nella sua diuina misericordia, che così miracolosamente l’ ha sostenuto, et protetto fino al presente, ma restarà in preda di coloro, che non hanno altra mira, che di fare andare in precipitio la Sua Corona.

Di sopra e fatto mentione di alcuni particolari dè più sostantiali, accioche accadendosi si sappiano addurre per essempio al Rè, alla persona del quale pare, che si debba far capo direttamente, et parlare a Sua M^[ta] senza maschera, perchè certo non se gli può far maggior benefitio, che id storarli le orecchie, et aprirgli occhi, et la mente per farli bene intendere liberamente, come non resta, che da lei medesima, se non uorrà porre rimedio a tanti mali, à quali tutti può prouedere facilmente, con punire quelli, che nominatamente si daranno in una lista, et degli altri, che gli paia, che lo meritino, secondo il riscontro, che trouarà su le scritture cauate da Casa Coligni, et ancora, che alli ribelli di Christo, et suoi, che hanno fatto tutte, et si grandi, et inaudite sceleratezze, secondo l’ opinione di alcuni, non accade considerare di guardar Fede ò promessa fatta, nondimeno si può fare di castigare solo quelli, che hanno tradito, mentre seruiuano nel campo, ò nel Consiglio regio, che fia senza alcun dubio a bastanza.

Hassi d’ auuertire ancora il Rè, come fin che Sua M^[ta] se n’ è ita presso alle grida, et è stata con effetti del tutto Ingannata, ella può esser scusata appresso Dio, et al Mondo, ma dopo che saranno scoperte le magagne, et rappresentatole la uerità, et il modo di non star più in preda, et alla descrittione de’ traditori se non ci può: uederà la colpa di tutti i male, si ridurranno sopra le sue spalle, et restarà abbandonata da Sua Diuina M^[ta] appresso della quale più non uarranno i prieghi, et oratione del Papa, et de gli buoni, et fedeli, che forse hanno giouato più di ogni altro aiuto humano a sostenerla. Vedesi, che gli Heredi uanno cercando sottilmente a qualunque occasione di fare che il Rè offenda Dio per prouocargli il suo giusto sdegno, mettendogli inanzi con la sua pelosa carità di conseruarsi l’ amicitia del Turco di usurpare i beni Ecc^[ci]. et fino a mettersi a fare nuove Imprese fuora del Regno col mezo delle loro Armi, la qual ultima cosa non è incredibile in alcun mode se già il Re non uolesse darsi loro in preda del tutto, perciochè quando quell’ armi si uoltassero contra qualunque si sia stato di Prencipe Catholico Nostro Sig^[re] non potrebbe mancare di far quanto si appartiene al debito dell’ offitio suo, senza risguardo d’ altra mondana consideratione, trattandosi della gloria di Dio, et conseruatione della Sua Santa Legge, nel qual caso Sua Beatitudine sarebbe forzata di procurare con la medesima caldezza di souuenire, et aiutare altri contra gli Heretici, che ha fatto con il Rè Cat^[co]. et con Venettiani, la qual Lega si hà da ricercare, che sia uolta contra gli Heretici, et Infedeli, piutosto, che altroue.

Sopra la competenza, et gara de grandi, si possono dir moltj particolari in uoie, che sarià troppo lunga cosa mettere in scrittura, basta, che tutto seruono a negare la debita obedienza al Padrone, et al uoler portar l’ armi con le quali s’ impedisce la giustitia, et fino a tanto che il Re non punisce a qualche uno de buoni, che lo meriti, perchè altri non preuarichi poi in modo, che una parte, et l’ altre si chiarisca per effetto, come Sua M^[ta] uuole conseruarsi la superiorità, che se gli conuiene, mai sarà libera da queste molestie, et sempre si starà in preda di ogni uno.

E. uerisimile, che la Reina ami più di tutti gli altri lo Stato, et la uita del Re et l’ unione, et conseruatione de gli altri suoi Figliuoli, essendo essa prudente quanto si sa, et hauendo tanta cognitione delli humori, quanta le ha fatta imparare la lunga amministratione del Gouerno, che ella ha hauuto, però non si può dubitare, che Sua M^[ta] per ambitione di conseruarsi l’ autorità preuarichi in parte alcuna di quel che deue, ma la proua ci ammonisce troppo, che da lei non si può aspettare quelle esecutioni, che ha mostro al Duca d’Alua in Fiandra, che basta a stabilire le solleuationi, et ribellione, perchè il sesso non gli lo promette, et anco in uerità di essere scusata, essendo stata Forastiera, et senza appoggio di potersi reggere secondo lei in simili casi, bisognando delle cotai deliberationi persona di gran cuore, et che habbia oltre l’ autorità l’ attitudine di fare con le mani proprie, quando l’ occasioni lo ricerchi, però con la M^[ta] della Reina, non pare che accada pensare di poter profittare per tal uerso, si che il trattarne con essa non si deue hauere per opportuno, et anco di questo si potrebbe pigliar Conseglio sul luogo per gouernarsene secondo che giudicassero meglio quelli che si sà, che sono buoni, et ueri Cat^[ci] et che non hanno più mira alle passioni particolari per il desiderio di hauer maggior partecipatione nel Gouerno, che al seruitio, et ben publico.

Intorno alle quali cose è ben necessario, che chi sarà impiegato habbia molta prattica, et gran prudenza da saper usare la descrittione essendoci bisogno di somma consideratone, percioche quando si trouasse tanto in preda a chi gl’ Inganna, che altri si disperasse di poter illuminarlo, et che si restasse ben chiaro di non douer cauar Frutto dalla persona di Sua M^[ta] sarebbe da uoltarsi forse ad altra strada, cioè uerso quei Prencipi, et grandi, che si conseruano Catholici, et che restano essosi et esclusi dal Re, et dal gouerno, et priui di autorità, et reputatione, i quali se haueranno un capo dependente dal Papa del quale sappino di potersi fidare, sono atti a uolersene, et con il mezo della sua autorità far tale unione d’ arme di Cat^[ci] in quel Regno, che il Re sia forzato a riconoscersi del suo errore, perchè la maggior parte delle Prouincie di quel Regno sono sotto il gouerno de Prencipe, o Sig^[re] Cat^[co]. ciascuno de quali saprà, et potrà ridurre le associationi, che furono incominciate con i loro Capi minori, et mediocri, et supremi da ualersi dell’ arme, nel modo stesso, che hanno sempre usato gli Ugonotti, et con esse dare adosso a gli Ugonotti da ogni parte per estinguerne la prima razza, che anco sopra ciò in uoce si può esprimere uarie cose, le quali sarebbono noiose a mettere in scritto, et a tal proposito si può ridarre a memoria quello che loro M^[ta] mandarono ad offerire al Papa per sicurtà della loro rissolutione di non uolere mancare subbito, che potessero liberare quel Regno dalla Heresia, cioè di capitulare espressamente, che a detti Gouernatori delle Prouincie se le usurpassero in caso di tal mancamento.

L’ abbandonare questa causa non è secondo la bontà, et pietà di Nostro Sig^[re] nè a ragion di Stato conciosiache non si prouedendo è da dubitare, et da tener per certo, che gli Ugonotti anderanno sependo, et cercando d’ impatronirsi se gli riuscisse à fatto del Regno per procedere poi anco più oltre con imprese esterne, et forse hanno dissegno col mettere su il Re a nuoue Imprese di conseguir l’ una, et l’ altra Impresa in un medesimo tempo col far morire il Re, et li Fratelli, et altri grandi, che potessero per uia di congiure, et di tradimenti preualersi dell’ entrata della Corona, et del Clero a sostenere solo l’ Imprese cominciate in compagnia del Re, la qual consideratione, sebene paresse lontana non è da gettarsi dopo lè spalle; anzi è consentaneo alla ragione di permeditarsi, et fare con la prudenza quei rimedy, che sono giudicati più conuenienti.

Frà quali s’ intenda il mandare al Re, et alli Cat^[ci]. una persona sola, o due, una diretta a Sua M^[ta]. et l’ altra alli Cat^[ci]. che si riferisca, et obedisca al principale.

Forse non sarebbe inconueniente di mandare anco uerso il Re Cat^[co]. persona ben confidente, et sincera et rissoluta, che potesse cauare Sua M^[ta] Cat^[ca]. de Generali, parlandogli con buona intelligenza delli humori prefati di Francia, et mostrandogli quanto sia il pericolo, che portano gli Stati di Fiandra, si perchè con il tempo diuentando Heretica la Francia, quelli Stati infetti di già non si potranno a modo alcuno conseruare da Sua M^[ta]. Cat^[ca] quali remedij ella presume di farci, et sapere, accioche si potesse disponere, et pensare se con i Vinetiani et altri Prencipi si potesse fare simili offitij per tastarli il polso douendo essi presumere, che sempre, che fusse mosso guerra alli Stati del Re di Spagna a loro non rincrescesse di potersi aiutare della Lega fatta, ma necessario, non che opportuno, in ogni caso pare il far prouisione quà de danari, de quali Sua Beat^[ne]. ha a ualersi grossamente, si per aiutare quelle cose, come per diffondere Italia, et il resto della Christianità dalle forze di questa scelerata setta. Et perchè le deliberationi di tanta importanza, nella quale si tratta della salute del Regno, et della conseruatione della Santa Sede, et della Christianità si hanno da fare con matura consideratione, si potrebbe per auentura discernere meglio qual partito fosse da pigliare prima, o poi, et come, et fino a qual termine udendone il parere di quelle persone, che paressero, et fussero giudicate intelligenti, et confidenti. Quanto alle richieste fatte adesso dal Re, la risposta fatta da N^[ro] Sig^[re] sopra la dispensa del Duca di Ghisa, et della Prencipessa di Portiano, non può essere più giusta, ma è facile a temperarla col mandare la dispensa del tutto spedita per chi andasse, accioche si uaglia di darla, o non appalesarla, secondo, che trouerà, che sia più a proposito per li humori; Conciosiache se si conclude affatto il Matrimonio di Portogallo, come è da stimare, che sia il disegno, chi sa che Madama Margherita non diuentasse moglie del Duca di Ghisa, piutosto che del Prencipe di Nauarra. Et circa il permettere che gli Ugonotti possino habitare sicuramente nella Città, et Contado di Auignone, non parche accada stare in dubbio, che Sua Santità, non lo può, ne deue concedere, ma di restituire i loro beni, et lasciarli contrattare, perchè ne sgombrano, si può ben forse hauerci consideratione, se con questa gratia fatta al Re si uedesse di accomodare con Sua M^[ta] qualche una delle cose più sostantiali, et anco ciò pare, che bisogni rimettere alla descrittone, et prudenza di chi si uolesse mandare, il quale deue hauere per massima, che sempre, che il Re uoglia essere così impio, che si risolua di fare quello, che può per leuare al Papa, et alla Santa Sede quello Stato, non ci è rimedio a diffendersi, ne essendo Auignone troppo circondato dalle sue forze, però conuiene auitarsi di conseruarselo, come si è fatto per l’ adietro in tutti i tempi con l’ autorità, et beneuolenza, et fauore del Re, al quale se può rimostrare che N^[ro] Sig^[re]. non uuole, ne intende tenere con l’ armi perturbato il suo Regno, mà solo tanta guardia nella Città, et Terre, che ui sono, che basti a non lasciarle rubbare per tradimento a quattro di quei scalzi Ugonotti, come ne sono state tolte tante a Sua M^[ta].

Douendo questa scrittura seruire solo per informatione delli humori di quel Regno, non pare, che accade farla ordinata, ne limitata, però sarà fatta, come si è potuto all’ imprescia &c.

APPENDIX XIV

[P. 354, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. XCVII, NO. 1,711

[Printed pamphlet of 6 pages]

[Title page]

ESTABLISSEMENT DE LA FRATERNITE DES CATHOLICQUES DE CHAALON SUR SAONE ERIGÉE À L’HONNEUR DU BENOIST SAINCT ESPRIT EN L’AN 1568

[Woodcut representing the Holy Trinity]

AU NOM DE DIEV AMEN

Nous soubscritz bien | acertenez que la sain | cte Eglise Catholique | ne peut faillir, errer, ny | vaciller en l’observan | ce de la pure, sincere | & vraye volonté de Iesu-Christ nostre | souverain Dieu, comme estant co | lumne & fermeté de verité, qui est, & | doit estre de consequent fondée & esta | blie sur la doctrine des Prophetes, des | Evangelistes, & des Apostres. Dont Je | su-christ mesme est la maistresse Pierre | angulaire qui a voulu le sainct Esprit | demeurer à iamais tant que le monde | sera monde eternellement avec sadicte | Eglise Catholique. Dont n’est à croy | re, comme nous ne croyons que | Dieu ayt permis son peuple Chre | stien vivant soubz ladite Eglise, estre | par aveuglement en erreur, & idolatrie | par l’espace de mil cinq cens & plus | d’ans. Soit par les celebrations de la sain | cte Messe, assistance du peuple & cere | monies d’icelle, entretenue par tant de | sainctz & grandz personages en scavoir, | religion, saincte vie, martyrisés pour le | nom de Dieu, Confesseurs vivans austere | ment en toute parfaicte doctrine, Vier | ges, que autres bons fidelles d’icele Egli | se catholique. Par l’approbation de la | quelle (non autrement) nous avons pure | credence des sainctes escritures, du Viel | & Nouueau Testament, donc d’icelle | lon ne se doit devoyer, retirer, ny demen | tir en maniere, que ce soit, sans blasphe | me, erreur, & damnation. Mais doit lon | par l’ayde supplication, & prieres à | Dieu, & illumination de son S. Esprit | estre fermes & stables, reiectant tous flots | des persuasions de nouvelle doctrine, | soubs quelconque pretexte quelle puis | se estre suggerée.

A ceste consideration par in | tention Chrestienne soubs la divine puissance | & espoir par l’inflammation du | benoist S. Esprit d’estre maintenus & | conservez en nos consciences, en l’union, | mansuetude, crainte, & obeissance d’icel | le Eglise catholique, à l’imitation de la | maiesté du Roy nostre sire, & soubs sa | protection & bon plaisir, desirans nous | efforcer de luy rendre & rapporter sub | mission & prompte obeissance, en tou | tes les choses, que nous voyons, & sca | vons estre observées, selon la saincte vo | lonté de Dieu, au salut eternel de nos | ames, par sadicte maiesté royale & ses | tresexcellens predecesseurs, qui ont ve | scu & sont decedez puis l’heure qu’ilz | ont estez oinctz & sacrez de la celeste | unction par le mystere de la saincte Mes | se dont ilz remportent le nom de tres | chrestiens. |

Nous avons soubz ledict bon vou | loir & plaisir du Roy faict entre nous & | pour tous autres Catholiques qui ad | ioindre se vouldront une fraternité qui | s’appellera Confrairie & société des Ca | tholicques. En laquelle sera esleu un | Prieur pour luy obeir es choses & en | droicts concernans les poincts dessusdicts | circonstances & deppendances à mesme | fin sera chascun dimanche a noz fraiz | celebree une Messe du Benoist sainct | Esprit en l’eglise de nostre dame des Car | mes de Chaalon & aultres iours qui sera | avisé par ledict Prieur ou seront tenuz | d’assister ceulx qui seront appellez pour | ladicte assemblee en bonne & louable de | votion & continuer en prieres qu’il plaise | à nostre pere celeste conserver sa dicte | Eglise & la purger de toutes perturba | tions & remettre icelle en une seule foy & | donner prosperité a nostre Roy en tous | ses affaires & luy prolonger la vie a la gloi | re & sanctification du nom de Dieu à l’avan | cement & manutention de la religion Catholique | & courone de France & sil adve | noit (que Dieu ne vueille) que quelques | uns par une effrenee volonté entreprins | sent contre l’intention de sa dicte maie | sté d’user d’emotions, iniures, detractions | contre ladicte religion Catholique, vio | lences sacrileges, invasions, conventicules, | à l’effect dessusdict, batteries, meurtres, | pilleries d’Eglise, rouptures d’aultelz | images, croix, & choses dediees au servi | ce divin. Promettons y resister par tous | deux moyens tant par promptz advertis | semens aux superieurs & iusques à sa di | cte maiesté que aultrement comme il sera | de besoin. Et si les effortz estoyent si pe | tulentz qu’ilz requissent prompt empe | schement: Promettons y tenir par une | unanimité la main & faire tout ce que | par nos superieurs sera ordonné pour la | manutention de ladicte religion, resister | aux entreprinses contraires. Et au cas | qu’il advint que Dieu ne vueille que les | persones de sa maiesté & de messieurs | ses freres qui maintiennent & maintien | dront nostredicte religion & Corone fus | sent oppressees de sorte que ne sceussions | avoir advertissemens de leurs volontez. | Promettons rendre toute obeissance au | general chef qui sera esleu sur la presen | te société. En tesmoin desquelles cho | ses susdictes & pour l’observance & ac | complissement d’icelles, Nous les avons | tous soubsignez & marquez de noz | seings & marques accoustumez audict | Chaalon, le dimanche vingtcinquiesme | iour du mois d’Avril l’an mil cinq cens | soixante huict.

Comme Secretaires esleus en ladicte fraternité & par ordonnance du superieur en icelle.

LAMBERT. [1769] BELYE.

[Not endorsed]

APPENDIX XV

[P. 354, n. 4]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. C, NO. 1,862

[Catholic League in Maine]

Nous soubsignez confederez et alliez par saincte et divine alliance pour la continuation et maintention de lhonneur souverain deu a notre Dieu le createur et aux commandementz & ordonnances de la saincte eglise catholique apostolique & romaine et pour la maintention de lestat du Roy treschrestien et trescatholique, notre souverain prince esleu & a nous baille par la grace et providence divine pour notre chef & souverain terrien debateur & conservateur de lad. eglise catholique & romaine et des sainctz decretz & concilies dicelle, et de lobeissance que nous et tous ses bons subiectz luy devons et a noz seigneurs ses freres aussi treschrestiens & trescatholiques, repoz de son Royaume & de tout son peuple Et afin de maintenir lad. eglise et religion catholique apostolique & romaine pour obvier par tous moyens licites raisonnables et permis de Dieu aux damnees entreprinses machinations et conspirations que Sathan a mys es cueurs daucuns malheureux qui ont tendu & tendent par tout lesd. artz dyaboliques de non seulement imminer mais du tout subvertir lad. religion catholique apostolique & romaine et lestat & auctorite du Roy notre bon souverain catholique et treschrestien Prince & legitime defenseur dicelle et de nosd. s^[rs] ses freres, et pour tenir moyennant layde de Dieu et le consentement & accord de leurs ma^[tes] tout le peuple en repoz Pour servir a Dieu & a notre mere saincte eglise et rendre lobeissance deue a leurs Ma^[tes], faire obeir la justice tant de ses courtz de parlementz que autres ses juges magistratz, Promettons et jurons vivre et mourir en lad. religion catholique apostolique & Romaine et lobeissance deue ausd. Ma^[tes] et a leur justice Nous promettons aussi & jurons ensemble toute obeissance service et ayde et de noz personnes & biens pour empescher & courir sus avec leurs auctoritez contre tous perturbateurs innovateurs et contrevenantz a lad. religion; en estats desd. ma^[tes] & a leurs sainctz & catholiques edictz & ordonnances divines & polytiques et de nous secourir les ungs les autres aux effectz susd. par tous moyens contre tous rebelles heretiques sectaires de la nouvelle religion en quelque lieu quilz soient & qui en sont suspectz ou nadherentz a notre party et tendans a fins contraires. Le tout jusques a la mort inclusivement. Le xj^[e] Iuillet 1568.

Depuis ces presentes signees par la noblesse mercredy dernier elles furent signees en cahier distinct toutesfois en mesme livre par les presbytres. Et vendredy portees par lesd. presbytres auturs estat Et y ont soubsigne les eschevins & procureurs de la ville plusieurs des officiers du Roy et des bourgeois avec menasses a ceulx qui nont voulu signer destre tenuz suspectz. Et par la conference quils ont eue tous ensemble, la noblesse sest chargee du reiglement pour assembler et dresser les gens de guerre et ceulx qui peuvent porter les armes et dadviser et eslire les chefz pour leur communte. Et les presbytres et le tiers estat sen sont de tout submys a la noblesse. Ils font signer & jurer par les bourgades aux procureurs & plus apparentz des parroisses.

Lesgail sest faict en la ville du Mans pour la solde des harquebuziers a cheval pour mons^[r] le seneschal de Maine. Et ayant a son arrivee trouve les portes assez mal gardies a faict publier la garde avec injunction des peynes.

[Not signed]

[Endorsed] Copie de lassociation faicte | par les provinces.

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. C, NO. 1,863

Cest le Roole de la saincte union contenant quarante rooles en parchemin cestluy compris.

Nous soubsignez confederez & alliez par saincte et divine aliance es Duché Canton et Conté du Maine, pour la continution et manutention de l’honneur deu a Dieu notre createur, de ses sainctz comandementz, et ordonnances de la saincte Eglise catholicque, apostolicque et Romaine: Et pour la manutention de lestat du Roy treschrestien et trescatholicque notre Souverain Prince, esleu et a nous baille par la grace et providence divine pour notre Chef et Souverain terrien dominateur et conservate^[r] de lad. saincte Eglise Catholicque, Apostolicque et Romaine, et des sainctz decretz et conciles d’icelle, et de lobeyssance que nous et tous ses bons subiectz luy debuons, et a tous nos Seigneurs ses freres aussy treschrestiens et trescatholicques Princes, repos de son Royaume, et de tout son peuple: Et afin de maintenir lad. s^[te] eglise et Religion catholicque, Apostolique et Romaine, po^[r] obvier par tous moyens licites raisonnables et permis de Dieu, aux damnees entreprinses, machinations et conspirations que Sathan a mises es cueurs d’aucuns malheureux qui ont tendu et tendent par tous artz diaboliques de non seulement imminuer mais du tout subvertir lad. Religion catholique; Prince treschrestien et legitime defenseur, et de nosd. Sieurs ses freres. Et pour tenir moyennant layde de Dieu, consentement et accord de leurs maiestez, tout le peuple en repos pour servir a Dieu et rendre lobeyssance deue a leursd^[es] maiestes, faire obeyr la justice, tant de ses Cours de parlement que aultres des juges et magistratz. Promettons et jurons vivre et mourir en lad^[e] Religion Catholique Apostolique et Romaine et obeyssance deue ausd^[es] Maiestes Ausquelles Maiestez et Iustice nous promettons et jurons toute obeyssance, secours, et ayde, et de nos personnes empescher et courir sus, aveq leurs authoritez, a tous perturbateurs, innovateurs, et contrevenants a lad. Religion, et Estatz desd^[es] Maiestez, et a leurs sainctz et catholiques Edictz, et ordonnances divines et politiques: Et nous secourir les uns les autres aux effectz susd^[es] par tous moyens contre tous rebelles, heretiques, sectaires tendantz a fin contraires. Le tout jusques a la mort inclusivement. Faict et arresté au Mans lunz^[me] jour de Iullet 1568.

[Not signed]

[Endorsed in Cecil’s hand]

Copy of a Conspyracion by | vow, in France by the | Catholicques ag. the contraryes.

APPENDIX XVI

[P. 359, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, DOMESTIC

ELIZABETH, VOL. XLVII, NO. 72

[Walsingham to Cecil]

S^[r]

Notw^[th]standynge my frend doothe assure me that he is advertysed by sooche as he doothe imploye in that behalfe, that ther wer of late certeyne lodged in Sowthewerke whoe nowe are departed, whos clos keping of them selves gave great cause of suspytion of no dyrect meanynge. At this p^[r]sent s^[r] I am requested by him to advertyce you that in taulke that passed of late betwene the new come Cardynaule and him, towching the undyrect dealynges of the Cardynaule of Loreyne emongest other thinges he shewed him that thre of late were sent by the sayde Car. of Loreyne to exequte the lewde practyce in the searche wherof yt pleasethe you to imploye us two of the partyes, he thus descrybed them unto him as followethe. The one to be of natyon an englysheman, of complexion sangwine, his beard read, and cot (as commonly they terme yt marchesetto) of vysage leane, of stature hye. The other of natyon an Italyan, of complexion cholerycke and swarte, his bearde of leeke hue, and cot, of vysage full faced, of stature and proportyon lowe, and sooche as commonly we tearme a trubbe. After I had herde the descryptyon of them I declared unto him that alreadye ye were advertysed of the leeke and that you towld me that thos descryptyons were so generayle, as they myght as well towche the innocent as the gyltye. I further towlde him (as of my selfe) that the Cardynall Shatyllglion myght use this as a meane to make his ennemye the more odyowse to this estate. To the fyrst he replyed, that the rather he had cause to be iealowse of thos descryptyons, for that he knewe an Inglysheman of leeke descryptyon, havinge the Italyan tonge verry well, and the Frenche reasonably well, that passed to and fro betwene the pope and the Card. of L. and also the seyde partye resorted myche to the noble man that at that tyme was lodged in my frendes howse; and therfor the rather he seyde he was leeke to be imployed in so lewd a practyce. To the seconde he seyd that he hath had so good exsperyence of the synceryte and dyrect dealynge of the howse of Shatiglion as he knowethe assuredly that they woold not seeke by so undyrect a meane to make any man odyowse: And saythe he further to assure you, that sooche a practyce may be in hande: I knowe by letters that I sawe by a secret meane wrytten from Roome unto the bysshop of Viterbo, abowt syxe years passed, in the tyme of B. Francys (of late memorye) the leeke practyce was in hande the cavse also I knowe whie yt tooke no place, and therof can advertyce m^[r] Secretarye when yt shall please him to deal w^[th] me in that behalfe. Besides to provoke me to wryte he added further, that he understood by sooche as he imployed in searche at Sowthewerk that one of thos whom they holde for suspected shoold have a redd berde, w^[th] the rest of the merks aboverecyted: and therfor for that he is not to be fownde in Sowthewerke, he dowbtethe he may be repeyred to the coorte: wherfor he desyerethe you most earnestly, that ther may be some appoynted by you fytt for the purpose to have regarde in that behalfe. Thus levinge any further to troble your honor I commyt you to God. From London the xv^[th] of September a^[o] 1568.

Y^[r] honors to commaunde FRA: WALSYNGHAM

[Addressed] To the right Honorable S^[r] William Cicill principall Secretarye and one of her Ma^[tes] privie counsell At the Court.

[Endorsed] 15 fbr, 1568. M^[r] Francis Walsingham to my m^[r]

APPENDIX XVII

[P. 375, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CX, NO. 533

[News from La Rochelle]

Monsieur l’Amiral escript du commencement du moys de Ianvier, que larmee de Messeigneurs les Princes se trouve fort gaillarde et plus saine quelle n’a esté depuis ung an, et estime quele changement d’air a esté ung des moyens, dont Dieu s’est servy pour faire cesser les maladies qui y ont regné jusques a lors. Lad. armee estoit au port de s^[te]. Marie a trois lieues d’Agen et tenoit tout le bord de la riviere de la Garonne depuis les portes d’Agen jusqs pardela Marmande et du long de la riviere du Loth jusqs a Villeneufve ou y a de petites villes mais riches & abondantes de toutes choses necessaires a une armee, et desquelles on tire quelques finances.

Mon: le Conte de Montgommery est de l’autre bord de la riviere de la Garonne tenant tout le pais de la jusqs en Bearn et jusques a Lengon, et au hault de la riviere jusqs a Haultvillar qui de son coste amasse le plus de finances quil peut. Il ny a point dennemys qui facent teste, ou donnent empeschemt. Ilz se tiennent clos & couverts dedans les villes et laissent la campaigne libre aux dictzs^[rs] Princes. Mons. le Mar^[al] Danville se tient a Tholose, et mons^[r] de Montluc a Agen. Ilz ont des forces mais separees & mal unies de voluntez et de lieux. Le S^[r] de la Vallette avoit este envoyé pour les rassembler et s’essayer de faire plus que lesditz S^[rs] Danville et Montluc mais il s’en est retourné sans rien faire.

Mons^[r] de Pilles et ceux qui estoient dedans S^[t] Iehan sont venuz au camp bien sains et gaillards, ayans soubstenu le siege tant que les pouldres ont duré & faict actes aussy belliqueux & magnanimes qui se sount faictz de notre cage en siege de ville.

Il avoit este faict ung pont a batteaux sur lad. riviere de la Garonne sur lequel hommes, chivaux charettes et artillerie avoient passé huyt jo^[rs] durant, mais tant par la rive des eaux que par la faulte dung qui estoit alle prendre ung moulin des ennemys po^[r] lamener aud. port de S^[te] Marie. lad. moulin luy est eschappe et a choque et rompu led. pont. Si est ce quon y a depuis donne tel ordre quon ne laisse de passer.

Il y a plus^[rs] advertissements quil y a quatre mil Espaignolz a la frontiere d’Lespaigne & que le Prince Daulphin s’en va les trouver avec une troupe de cavalerie po^[r] le^[r] faire escorte.

M^[r] de Lavauguyon est venu entre les deux rivieres de la Dordogne et du Loth avec vingt cornettes de cavalerie pour tenir les passages desdictes rivieres. doubtant que Mess^[rs] les Princes les veillent repasser, mais cela na empesché le S^[r] de Pilles de passer le Loth, et saprocher desdictes cornettes, esperant les reveoir de plus pres en brief.

Les reistres des dictz seigneurs Princes ont receu ung payement, et son, si bien satisfaictz et contens que jamais ne fut veu une plus obeissante nationt. Ilz sont partie dela la riviere auec M. le Conte de Montgommery et partie decha, ne faisans difficulte de se separer et recevoir le commandant de tous ceux quil est ordonné et d’aller en tous lieux ou il le^[r] est commande.

Mons. le Conte de Mansfeld faict infiniz bons offices tous les jo^[rs], esquelz il monstre ung zele a ceste cause avec une magnanimité, de laquelle il ne cede a person quelconques. Et ne fault doubter que Dieu ne layt envoyé pour ung tresgrand bien et necessaire comme aussy le Conte Ludovic de Nassau prince tresvertueux et fort advisé.

Quand a la negotiation de la paix, les admis de la Rochelle portent que ung moys durant le Roy et la Royne ont souvent envoye devers la Royne de Navarre pour l’exhorter a entendre au bien de la paix et haster les deputez, lesquelz ont longuement differé a cause des difficultez qui ont este mises en avant tant po^[r] le peu de seurete quon trouvoit aux passeportz qui estoient envoyez de la partie de le^[rs] majestez, que po^[r] la distance du lieu, ou le pourparte de lad. paix estoit assigné et ordonné, qui est la ville d’Angiers, en laquelle a Co^[rt] se retrouve a present.

Finalement leurs majestes ont renvoyé autres passeportz, et depesché le s^[r] du Croq le^[r] m^[e] d’hostel, pour conduire lesdictz deputez, lesquelz furent nomez au conseil tenu a la Rochelle le x^[me] de Ianvier, ascavoir, les s^[rs] de Beauvoir la Nocle lieutenant de feu Mons. d’Andelot, Cargeoy gentilhomme de Bretaigne, Compain chancelier et la Chassetiere Brodeau secretaire de la Royne de Navarre. Le S^[r] de Theligny est aussy des deputez, mais avec sauf conduit pour et retourner quand bon luy semblera et besoing sera, pour raporter no^[les] de lad. negotiation a lad. Dame Royne et a Messeigneurs les Princes et Mons. l’Amiral selon les occurrences.

Et encore qu il semble que le Roy desire la paix et quon ayt advis quil la veult faire a quelque pris que ce soit, si est ce que pour le peu de foy et seurete quon a esprouve par deux foys en celle qui a este faute, on est resolu de la faire a ce coup avec laide de Dieu bonne, asseuree et inviolable. Et a ceste fin on a baille aux dictz deputez ung pouvoir si restraint quilz ne peuvent rien conclure sans premier avoir ladvis de lad. dame Royne desdicts S^[rs] Princes et dud. S^[r] Amiral, et jusqs a ce quil ayt este par les susdictz dame Princes et S^[rs] arreste. Ce qui ne se fera sans pallablement avoir surce le conseil et deliberation de nos confederez et de ceux qui nous ont favorise, aide et secouru en ceste cause comme il est raisonable, et a fin de pouvoir mieux asseurer lad. paix; esperans que en y procedant de ceste facon et establissant le pur service de Dieu par dessus toutes choses il honora les actions de ceux qui y seront employez.

Au reste la charge desdictz deputez consiste en trois points ascavoir la liberte des consciences et exercice de la Religion sans distinction de lieux ou personnes. La seurete & protection de nos vies et personnes & la restitution de biens honne^[urs] charges, estatz et dignites.

Ceux qui sont hors de ce Roy^[me] quon a resolu dadvertir premier que de conclure aucune chose sur le traicte et pourparte de la paix sont dune pt les princes D’allemaigne et mesmes monsie^[r] le Prince d’Aurenge, et dautre pt Monsie^[r] Le Car^[al] de Chastillon par ce quil y a eu si estroictes promesses et obligations faictes par ceux qui ont en pouvoirs de Messeu^[rs] les Princes, quil a este trouvé raisonable de ne rien faire sans le commun advis de tous ceux qui sont participans en ceste cause et qui lont favorisee.

Le Baron de la garde se vante desja si la paix se conclut de faire ung voyage en Escosse avec ses galeres.

[Not signed]

[Not addressed]

[Endorsed in Cecil’s hand] Ianvar 1569 Extract of letters from Rochelle &c.

APPENDIX XVIII

[P. 387, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CVIII, NO. 359

[Catherine de Medici to the duke of Anjou]

[1569, September 10]

Extraict de la lettre de la Royne escritte de sa propre main a Monseigneur le Duc du dix^[me] Sep^[re] Dclxix escritte au Plessis les Tours.

Mon filz, Sanger irent tout a ceste heure darriver de vostre frere par lequel nous a mande la bonne et utile nouvelle de l’heureux desassiegement de Poittiers avec ung tresgrand honeur de mons^[r] de Guise et de tous ceulx qui y estoient pour le grand et notable service quilz ont fait a Dieu au roy et a ce royaume et de vostre frere de les avoir si bien secouruz qen faisant semblant dassieger Chastellerault et de donner ung faulx assault il a fait a quil vouloit et pourquoy le roy lavoit envoye et a ceste heure il regardera de mettre peine dabreger toute ceste guerre que avec layde de Dieu il mettra bien tost le repoz en ce royaume et me semble que jamais ny eust plus doccacion de remercier Dieu et le continuer de prier a fin quil nous mette hors de tant de maulx.

[No signature]

[No address]

[Endorsed] Copie de la lettre de la Royne a Monseigneur le Duc.

APPENDIX XIX

[P. 389, n. 4]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CIX, NO. 444

[Norris to Cecil]

Right honorable The Admirall hathe lately written to the Cap^[en] of la Charite that praise be givin to Gode he maye now joyne w^[th] the vicountes at his pleas^[r] & that he hadd forces sufficient to make hedd to his Ennemis, Praying the Governo^[r] to loke carefully to the places on the frontiers & provide all thinges necessarie for the commyng of Mons^[r] de Lizy, withe the Armey of Allemagnes whiche puttithe these in great feare & use all meanes to treat a Peax that possibly the can. Wrytten at Tours thise 19^[th] of December 1569.

Yo^[r] honours ever assuride to commaunde HENRY NORREYS

[Addressed] to the Right Honorable S^[r] William Cisill Knight principall Secretarie to the Quene’s most Excellent Maiestie & of hir highnes preavy Cownsell.

[Endorsed] 19 xbr 1569 S^[r] Henry Norreys to my m^[r] from Tours.

APPENDIX XX

[P. 392, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXI, NO. 580

Double de la responce faicte par le Roy aux ar^[cles] presentez a sa Ma^[te] par les deputez de la Roine de Navarre.

Le Roy ayant entendu ce qui luy a este exposé de la part des deputez de la Roine de Navarre des Princes de Navarre de Conde S^[rs] Gentils-hommes & autres de toutes qualitez qui sont avec eulx les treshumbles requestes faictes a sa Ma^[te] de leur donner la paix avec les seuretez qui sont en son pouvoir pour les faire jouir du benefice dicelle. Ensemble les submissions qui luy ont este faictes de luy rendre lobeissance & fidelité quilz lui doibvent Sadite Ma^[te] pour la singuliere affection quelle a tousjours portée a la Roine de Navarre Princes de Navarre & de Conde pour la proximité de sang dont ilz luy appartiennent. Le desir quelle a de la conservacion de ses subgectz speciallement de sa noblesse pour monstrer a eulx & a tous les dessusditz son affection & clemence paternelle & royalle envers eulx et la volunté quelle a de voir ses subgectz ensemble revinz soubz son obeissance & son royaulme en repos de troubles qui y sont de present leur a accordé pour parvenir a une bonne syncere & entiere pacification desditz troubles les choses qui sensuyvent.

Car les treshumbles req^[tes] presentees a sa Ma^[te] de la part de la Royne de Navarre et de Messeigneurs les Princes il est manifeste que le but de lad. dame et desd. Seigneurs Princes n’est et ne fut onques d’oster au Roy sa couronne comme ilz ont esté calumniez, mais d’entretenir le vray pur et libre service de Dieu, come le Roy suyvant la req^[te] des estatz la accordé a tous ses subgectz.

Nous sommes persuadez de la bonne affection que sa Ma^[te] a portee a la Roine de Navarre et a Messieurs les Princes au paravant que ceulx qui aujourdhuy soubz le nom du Roy oppriment le Royaulme eussent chassé d’aupres de sa personne tous ses meilleurs et plus loyaux conseillers et mesmes qu’au paravant ces dernieres troubles nonobstant les fausses accusations calumnies et impostures dont on avoit charge lad. Dame Roine et Messieurs les Princes, ce neantmoins n’avoient tant sceu faire ceulx de Guyse que de faire oublier a sa Ma^[te] son bon naturel, tellement que personne na doubté si sa Ma^[te] se fust conduicte selon sa bonne inclination que sa bonne affection ne se fust tousjours monstree en leur endroict et eussent este traictez comme bons et prochains parens loyaulx subgectz et tresobeissans serviteurs. Toutesfois il est cogneu notoirement que par les mauvaises praticques desquelles ont use ceulx qui sont aupres de sa Ma^[te] lad. dame Messieurs les Princes, les S^[rs] Gentils-hommes et autres estans a leur suyte ont este beaucoup plus cruellement traictez que les poures Chrestiens qui tombent entre les mains des Turcqs et Infidelles.

Ceulx de Guise ont assez faict de preuve de la bonne affection quilz ont a la conservation des subgectz de sa Ma^[te], quand par les secrettes Intelligences quilz ont avec la maison Despaigne et speciallement avec le Duc d’Albe depuis huict ans en ça ils ont faict mourir la meilleure partie de la noblesse et autres subgectz de lune et lautre religion et mesmement les plus loyaulx & affectionnez au service de sa Ma^[te]. Et quant a aymer la noblesse il est certain que ce sont ceulx qui la haissent et craignent le plus et apres eux les gens de lettres comme ceulx qui naturellement sont ennemys de la tyrannie, et de lusurpation quilz ont voulu faire de la couronne et en particulier des comtez d’Aniou et de Provence, et que ne promections jamais lalienation de la souveraincté de Bar, que ceulx de Guise ont essaie de praticquer depuis la mort du Roy Henry plus^[rs] fois et on scait encores ce quilz ont faict dernierement. Et quant au repos public il est certain que la paix et le Cardinal de Lorraine ne peuvent loger en ung mesme royaulme.

Premierement que la memoire de toutes choses passées demeurera esteincte & supprimée comme de choses non jamais advenues. Quil ne sera loizible ne permis en quelque temps ne pour quelque occasion que ce soit den faire jamais mention ne procés en quelque court jurisdiction que ce soit ne ailleurs, et a ceste fin sera imposé silence a ses procureurs generaulx en toutes ses courtz de parlemens & leurs substitudz, sera aussy defendu a toutes personnes princes d’en renouveller la memoire ny en faire reproche sur peine destre puniz comme infracteurs de paix & perturbateurs du repos public.

Semblables choses nous ont este promises deux foix mais les courtz de parlemens et autres juges inférieures n’ont laisse de faire mourir ceulx quilz ont peu apprehender, le peuple a massacre par tout ou ils a esté le plus fort, les assassinats ont este tous publics, de justice ils ny en a point eu les injures plus grandes que jamais ce mot de rebelle a este familier en la bouche des Gouverneurs des Provinces et singulierement des soubz Gouverneurs dont la France est infectée, et consequemment des pctis, partant pour effectuer ceste promesse est de besoing que sa Ma^[te] pourveoie a la justice et a son prive conseil comme elle seulle le peult et doibt faire autrement ces promesses sont trappes et pieges.

Que tous arrestz sentences jugemens & procedures faictes en quelque Court et devant quelques juges que ce soit durant les presens troubles & aux precedens pour raison des choses passees durant ou a cause desditz troubles a lencontre des dessusditz ou aucuns deceulx seront mis a neant cassez & revoquez.

Il nest rien si naturel que tous affaires soyent dissoutes par le moyen quel les ont este assemblees et partant est de besoing que les courtz qui ont faict la playe facent la guarison donnans arrestz et sentences contraires a leurs premiers arrestz et sentences, aillent en personne despendre les effigiez et ossemens des executez ou en effigie ou apres leur mort pour le moins en semblable sollemnité quilz les ont executez comme il fut faict a Rouen en la personne des seigneurs de Harcourt et de Granville. Et quant a ceulx qui ont este executez de faict que punition exemplaire soit faicte des Iuges qui ont este autheurs de telles sentences mesmes contre le vouloir et intention du Roy et que les heritiers des defunctz prennent leurs interestz sur les biens desd. criminelz.

Quilz ou aucuns d’eulx ne pourront jamais estre recerchez pour raison des praticques ou intelligences quilz pourront auoir eves avec Princes Potentatz Communautez ou personnes privees estrangeres ny a cause des traictez ou contractz quilz pourraient avoir faictz ou passez avec eulx pour raison des choses concernans lesdictz troubles & dependances diceulx dont le Roy les a entierement deschargez et leur en baillera toutes tres & seuretez qui seront a ceste fin necessaires en la meilleure & plus autentique forme que faire se pourra.

Ce seroit a ceulx de Guise a prendre lettres d’abolition pour avoir eu secrettes praticques avec les antiens ennemys de la couronne, les avoir mis dedans le Royaulme pour parvenir a leur damnable desseing dusurper le Royaulme et au contraire ceulx qui en une extreme necessité ont eu recours a leurs antiens amys et confederez pour secouer ce joug et mainitenir le Roy et la Couronne meritent toutes sortes de louanges et de recognoissance pour leur grande valleur & pour tant de pertes.

Que par le benefice de ceste paix tous les dessusditz seront remis & reintegrez en leurs honneurs & biens pour diceulx jouir eulx leurs enfans heritiers successeurs ou ayans cause paisiblement et sans aucun empeschement.

Cest article ne peult avoir lieu si ce que est dict cy dessus sur lar^[cle] 3 nest execute. Item puis que ceulx qui ont tué de sang froid Monseigneur le Prince de Condé et contre la loy de la guerre. Ceulx qui ont emprisonne Monsieur d’Andelot et ce trahistre qui a tué le s^[r] de Mouy ont este hault esleuez et renumirez Messieurs leurs enfans ne peuvent estre remis en leurs honneurs sinon que punition exemplaire soit faicte de si pernicieux hommes de leurs complices & adherens que si Dieu mesmes a desja faict la vangeance d’aucuns (comme il la faict) si leur memoire nest condamne.

Et pour gratifier particulierement lesditz Princes & ceulx de la noblesse qui auront estatz charges & pensions de sadite Ma^[te] le Roy les remectra en sesditz estatz charges et pensions pour en jouir ainsy comme dessus est dit.

Cest article ne tend qu’a diviser les grands davec les petis pour les opprimer les ungs apres les autres.

Et quant au faict de la religion le Roy, leur permectra de demeurer & vivre paisiblement dedans son Royaulme en entiere liberté de leur conscience sans estre recerchez en leurs maisons ny les abstreindre a faire chose pour le regard de ladite religion contre leur volunté. Et encores pour plus grande seureté sadite Ma^[te] leur accordera deux villes lesquelles le s^[r] de Biron leur nommera, dedans lesquelles ilz pourront faire tout ce que bon leur semblera et quilz vouldront sans estre recerchez. Et neantmoins en chascune desdites villes sadite Ma^[te] aura ung Gentilhomme capable & ydoine pour avoir loeil a ce quil ne soit faict chose qui contrevienne a son auctorité & repos de son Royaulme et qui mainctienne ung chacun en paix et repos. Ne voulant sadite Ma^[te] quil y ayt au reste de tout son Roiaulme aucun ministre ne quil soit faict autre exercice de religion que de la sienne.

Dautant que cest ar^[cle] est le noud de la matière il est aussy captieux en toutes ses parties.

Premièrement il est couché si a propos quon ne scavoit recueillir sil s’entend seulement des Princes et de la noblesse oubien generallement de tous. Et on scait comment on sest servy par cydevant de telles facons de parler.

Secondement il y a de la contradiction manifeste en ce quil est dict expres, quil y aura entiere liberté de conscience et neantmoins quil ny aura point de ministres en France.

Tiercement de limpossibilité, car quelle peut estre la liberté de la conscience ou il n’y a point dexercice de religion? Le Cardinal de Lorraine pense que liberte de conscience et stupidite de conscience soit ung. Or la liberte de conscience est en la liberté de la foy qui est en Christ comment se peut engendrer entretenir et augmenter la foy que par la parolle delaquelle estans privez il ne reste aucune liberté. Le Cardinal se trompe en ce quil pense que la liberté gise a avoir congé de n’aller point a la Messe, de n’aller point aux pardons et choses semblables, mais la liberte de la conscience ne gist point a ne point faire ce qui est mauvais, mais a faire ce qui est bon. La verite dict qui oyt ma parolle et qui la mect en effect est bien heureux. Il sensuyt doncq que qui ne loyt point est malheureux Il ne dit point qui ne va point a la Messe. En somme notre liberte nest point composee de negatives, mais fondee sur propositions affirmatives quil fault faire. Item si le Cardinal ne peut comprendre quelle est ceste liberté des Chrestiens, comme il ne peult ne luy ne quiconques soit en ce monde sil n’est regendre denhault, au moins peult il bien entendre que quand nous n’avons moyen de contracter mariages, baptizer les enfans, et enterrer noz mortz que nous n’avons aucune liberté en noz consciences, mainctenant quil me dise comment (ayans en horre^[r] les actes de la papauté) nous pouvons faire ces choses estans privez du ministere de la parolle de Dieu, et consequemment de pasteurs legitimes, mais il semble que nous sommes comme luy cest adire que la religion ne nous est que jeu et que nous serions contentz que tous le monde vinst en Atheisme comme il est certain que si cest ar^[cle] avoit lieu avant peu de temps la France seroit pleine de Payens et en peu de temps il seroit a craindre comme desja il est de trop, que ce mauvais conseil ne fust dommageable a ceulx qui l’ont donné et mesmes a tout lestat en general.

Quartement, cest ar^[cle] est ung piege pour attrapper tous ceulx qu’on vouldra exposer a la mercy dung juge de village, car jusques on sestendra ceste liberté? Si ung homme prie soir et matin ou a quelque autre heure du jour, on dire quil aura faict acte de ministere comme on trouvera desja assez de gens condamnez voire a la mort et executez pour avoir prie Dieu, si on chante ung pseaume en sa maison ou en sa bouticque on en sera recerché car on dira comme il a esté desja souvent juge que cest autre exercice que de la religion du Roy cest adire de ceulx qui sont prez de sa personne qui toutesfois nen ont point du tout. Si on lit en la bible ou en quelque bon livure si ung maistre apprend a ung enfant a lire dedans ung nouveau testament, si on luy apprend son oraison en francoys on sera en peine. Brief, accorder aux hommes une telle liberté de conscience est autant comme qui osteroit les fers a ung homme et neantmoins on luy osteroit aussy tous les moyens de recouvrer pain et vin et le laisserait en mourir de faim.

Finallement quant aux villes qui nommera le S^[r] de Biron, on verra quils nommera ou des bicocques ou sil nomme de bonnes villes que ce sera pour praticquer de les aliener de la cause commune soubz lumbre de quelque promesse; mais quoy quil y ayt, comment se peult accorder que dedans ces villes on fera ce quon vouldra, et quil y ayt ung Gentilhomme qui y commande, il est aise a juger que mectre ung homme de Commandement dedans une place, cest lavoir a se devotion toutesfois et quantes et quand cela ne sera point, quest ce que deux villes en France quelques grandes et fortes quelles puissent estre les forces estans une fois rompues et divisees, et mesmes en ung si grand Royaulme quelle commodite pourraient apporter deux villes a ceulx qui en seraient infiniment eslougnez, mais le but de tout cela est faictes comme en lan 1568, et on vous traictera aussy de mesmes.

Et quant aux offices de justice finances & autres inferieurs actendu que depuis la privation faicte diceulx par decretz & ordonnances de justice suyvant les edictz du Roy autres ont esté pourveuz en leurs places et sont aujourdhuy en exercice diceulx. Que largent qui en est provenu a este despendu & emploie pour soustenir les fraiz de la guerre le Roy ne les peut aucunement restituer ne retracter lexecution de ses edictz pour ce regard Actendu mesmes les grandes plainctes & demandes que font ceulx du clerge de sondict Royaulme & autres ses subgectz catholiques pour avoir reparation du dommage par eulx souffert tant en leurs biens qu’en la desmolition des eglises et maisons du patrimoine dicelles par tous les endroictz de sondit royaulme a lencontre de ceulx qui ont faict lesdites demolitions & dommages. Ausquelz ne pourrait justement desnier de faire droict & justice a lencontre de ceulx contre lesquelz ilz vouldroient pretendre sil falloit entrer en cognoissance de cause et reparation des dommages souffertz dune part & dautre.

Il ne s’est jamais veu et ne se peult faire sinon par une tirannie extreme (ce que nous n’estimons pas que sa Ma^[te] face jamais) qu’en France les officiers n’ayant forfaict soient deposez de leur charge, si que quand les Roys lont voulu procurer les particuliers ont tousjours en droict gaigne leur cause contre les Roys mesmes. Et quant a largent despensé il y a assez de moyens recouvrer argent par la vendition des biens temporelz des ecclesiastiques Car puisque nous ne sommes point autheurs des troubles, ains deffendeurs en necessité extreme, que ceulx qui se pouvoient bien passer de la guerre et vivre en paix, en leurs maisons, puis quilz ont tant desiré la guerre quilz ne cornoyent entre chose doibvent aussy en porter la folle enchere comme encores silz ne nous font autre raison nous esperons que Dieu la nous fera et en briefe. Que si il estoit question d’entrer en compensation il se trouvera que nous avons souffert infinies pertes plus que les autheurs des troubles, en quoy quil y ayt tant de gens et bien meurdriz par des juges et officiers massacrez par le peuple depuis la derniere pacification tant de femmes violees par les gens de guerre et mesmes des plus remarquez qui cela surpasse toute perte & que toutes fois nous esperons que Dieu ne laissera pour impuny quoy que les vivans en rien ne regardans point aux jugemens quil en a desja faictz sur les plus mauvais d’entreulx qui se jouoient ainsy de son Nom de Ma^[te] glorieuse.

Voulant sadite Ma^[te] pour lobservation des choses susdites avec toute bonne foy & syncerité leur bailler toutes leurs seuretez qui sont en son pouvoir et quilz luy vouldront honnestement & raisonnablement requerir lesquelles seuretez le Roy fera esmolloguer & passer par ses courtz de parlemens & autres juges quil appartiendra.

Les bons subgectz (telz que nous sommes) n’ont point acoustumé de demander les formes de seuretez cest a sa Ma^[te] de nous les donner bonnes et asseurees, et puis quil na este en sa puissance de nous garder sa foy il nous donnera sil luy plaist les moyens de nous garentir contre ceulx qui la vouldroient enfraindre en notre endroict, et quant a ses courtz de parlemens nous ne pensons pas que pendant quelles serons composees de telles gens quelles sont quil nous garde foy et administre justice veu quilz sont noz parties formelles.

Veut et entend sadite Ma^[te] que les dessusditz reciproquement pour luy rendre la fidele obeissance quilz luy doibvent ayent a se departir de toute alliance, confederation, et association quilz, ont avec les Princes Potentatz ou Communautez estrangeres hors du Roiaulme pareillement de toutes intelligences praticques & associations quilz ont dedans & dehors icelluy.

Quilz ne feront aucunes assemblées contribution ne cullettes de deniers sans expresse permission du Roy declarée par ses lettres patentes.

Quant a ces deux ar^[cles] sa Ma^[te] scait que nous n’avons rien promis que nous n’ayons tenu ce que nous ferons encores la paix estant bien asseurer.

Quentieront & feront sortir hors sondit Roiaulme dedans ung moys apres la conclusion de ladite Pacification par le chemin qui leur sera prescript par sadite Ma^[te] sans foulle ne oppression de ses subgectz tous estrangers estans a leur service, et conviendront avec eux de leur paiement a leurs propres coustz & despens. Et a ceste fin leur donnera le Roy telle permission quil sera besoing pour entr’eulx leuer les sommes qui leur seront necessaires.

Cest ar^[cle] est impossible en toutes ses parties, car les estrangers ne peuvent en ung mois se retirer, ilz ne peuvent ny ne doibvent sortir par le chemin qui leur sera prescript sinon quilz veulent se precipiter eulx mesmes a leur mort, ce que nous ne leur conseilleront jamais, plustost choisirons nous de mourir avec eulx. Et davantage ilz sont assez fortz pour se faire voye par ou bon leur semblera. Si nous promectons que les subgectz de sa Ma^[te] ne soient point foullez cest une trappe, car nestant aucunement en notre puissance de laccomplir ceulx de Guise diront que nous avons rompu la paix. Il ne nous est non plus possible de les paier de noz deniers particuliers car la cruauté de noz ennemys nous a osté tous les moyens que nous avions au paravant et mesmes dedans ung mois une telle cuillette ne sa pourrait faire et quand elle le seroit il nous souvient comment nous fusmes traictez a Auxerre et qui est le pis les particuliers ne vouldront contribuer, se souvenans bien comme ilz ont esté traictez pour avoir contribué aux troubles precedens suyvant les tres patentes de sa Ma^[te].

Laisseront aussy les armes et separeront toutes leurs autres forces tant de pied que de cheval par mer & par terre se retireront chacun en leurs maisons qon bon leur semblera incontinent apres la conclusion de ladite paix pour la ou ilz seront vivre paisiblement.

Les seuretez de la paix estans bonnes se departiront voluntairement des armees, mais ilz se ressentent de plus de dix mil hommes des leurs qui ont esté cruellement meurdriz aux dernières troubles obeissans a ung semblable article que cestuy. Partant il est necessaire que sa Ma^[te] y pourveoie.

Remectront entre les mains du Roy ou de ceulx quil commectra les villes chasteaux & places quilzdetiennent pour le present et en feront sortir les forces quilz y ont y déllaissant semblablement lartillerie & autres munitions qui sont en icelles, au pouvoir de ceulx qu’ordonnera sadite Ma^[te].

Et generallement restitueront de bonne foy a sadite Ma^[te] ou a ceulx quil commectra toutes les choses a elle appartenantes qui se trouveront encores en nature soit es villes & places quilz tiennent ou autres lieux quilz soient ou par mer ou par terre. Faict a Angiers le iiij^[e] jour de Feburier 1570. Ainsy signe CHARLES et au dessoubz DE LAUBESPINE.

Quant a ces deux ar^[cles] la paix estant asseuree feront ce quilz promectront. Toutesfois lexperience a monstre a Orleans, Auxerre, Autun, Vallence, Montpellier et autres villes comment sil ne plaist a sa Ma^[te] de pourveoir a lestat de gouverneurs de gens dautre humeur que ceulx qui ont este commis au gouvernement des places depuis les secondes troubles il seroit beaucoup plus expedient aux poures habitans des villes de mourir vaillamment a la breche que de voir devant leurs yeulx les horribles meschancetez quilz ont veues, et qui sont telles que nous avons honte seullement de les nommer.

[Not signed]

[Endorsed in Burghley’s hand] 8 Martii 1569 (1570). Respons to the articles of the fr. K^[es] answer to the Q. of Navarrs Deputees.

APPENDIX XXI

[P. 396, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXV, NO. 990

Distribution des gouvernementz d’aulcunes Provences en France dernièrement faict par les Protestantz et Premierement

Le Segneur de Montbrun general pour le pais de daulphine et Provence, Monser de S^[t] Romain general pour le duche de Nismes, Montpellier. Mande, Vivaretz, Uses, et le puis avec 600 livres en pention per chascun moys 200 harquebusiers et trois cornettes de Cavallerie.

Le vicounte de Paulin pour les duches d’alby, Castres, S^[t] Pol, Carcassonne, Narbonne, Bessiers, Aix et Lodesve.

Le S^[r] de Serignac Montauban et tout le pais bas, Quercy, Agenois, diocese de Thoulouse, Rioux, La Nur Mereboix et Albert.

Le Cap: de Guynieres pour les dioceses de Palmes Costrance Comiges, et toute la counte de Foix.

Le Baron darroy les pais de Ricaon, Besomiris, Cascogne et Armignac.

Le Viconte de Pimal toute la seneschalce d’avergne.

Le Visconte de Gordon Loyer et le hault guibry Limosin et leurs adjacentes.

Laissant lentier sang aux S^[rs] de la Noe et de Montgomery des affaires qui concerneront la Rochelle lesquieux pourvoieront de choses aux gouvernementz des paix de Guienne, Poictou, Torenne, Le Meine, Bourgoigne, Bretaigne, Normandie et autres adjacentes.

A este en oultre ordonne par l’assemblee generalle desdits protestantz que chascun desdict chefs comandiria en son departement quilz prendrent tous les deniers du Roy. Item tous les revenus des ecclesiastiques cotiseront de gre ceulx de la Religion selon l’exigence des affaires, et les Catholiques de gre ou de force, et contrainderont le solvable pour insolvable.

[Not signed]

[Endorsed] Distribution de provences par les protestans.

APPENDIX XXII

[P. 399, n. 1]

ITINERAIRE DE MONTGOMERY EN GASCOGNE

PENDANT L’ANNEE 1569[1770]

8 juin. Quitte Nontron, nanti des pleins pouvoirs de la reine de Navarre (France protestante).

21 juin. Arrive à Castres et y organise l’expédition du Béarn.

27 juillet. Part de Castres à midi pour se rendre en Béarn (Mémoires de Jacques Gaches. Lettre de Montgomery à Jeanne d’Albret).

28 juillet. Occupe Mazères, en Foix, et traverse l’Ariège (Mémoires de J. Gaches.)

Il franchit l’Ariège probablement au pont d’Auterive, puis le Salat. Il était le i^[er] août à Montbrun; le 2, ayant passé sans encombre la Garonne au pont de Miramont (Courteault, Blaise de Montluc, p. 544).

2 août. Pille Saint-Gaudens (Durier, Huguenots en Bigorre).

5 et 6 août. Traverse la plaine de Tarbes et loge à Pontac, le 6 au soir (ibid.; Bordenave, Histoire de Béarn, p. 259).

7 août. Passe le Gave à Coarraze (Bordenave, loc. cit.).

9 août. Entre à Navarrenx (Lettre du 11 août).

11 août. Quitte Navarrenx et arrive sous les murs d’Orthez vers midi (Bordenave, p. 266; Lettre du 11 août).

12-14 août. Assiège Orthez.

15 août. Signe la capitulation.

16 août. Occupe la ville, où il a une entrevue avec le comte de Gramont (Bordenave, p. 276).

18-19 août. Prend Artix et fait massacrer les frères mineurs du couvent (ibid., p. 280).

22 août. Fait rendre des actions de grace à Pau (ibid., p. 280).

23 août. Séjourne à Pau (Lettre à Jeanne d’Albret).

24-29 août. Oleron, Mauleon de Soule.

30 août. Entre en Bigorre, par le Vic-Bilh.

31 août. Traverse Maubourguet.

1^[er] septembre. S’empare de Tarbes et met tout à feu et à sang (Durier, Huguenots en Bigorre).

2-4 septembre. A Tarbes.

5 septembre. Quitte cette ville (Lettre à Jeanne d’Albret), pour aller en Chalosse (Bordenave, p. 286).

6 septembre. Occupe et rançonne Marciac (Lettre).[1771]

7 septembre. Entre à Aire-sur-Adour (Lettre).

11 septembre. A Grenade-sur-Adour (Lettre).[1772]

12-18 septembre. Capitulation de Sainte Sever (Bordenave, p. 287) et Mont de Marsan vers Montault et Mugron delà l’Adour (Courteault p. 553 n. 2).

19 septembre. Traverse Amou (ibid.).[1773]

20-28 septembre. A Orthéz (Courteault, p. 555). Va à Navarrens, ou il ordonne l’exécution de Bassillon, gouverneur de cette ville.

28 septembre. Arrive à Salies de Béarn (Lettre).[1774]

1-6 octobre. Séjourne à Salies, où il réorganise la justice.

10 octobre. Ouvre le synode de Lescar et part pour la Bigorre.

13 octobre. Occupe Betplan (Huguenots en Bigorre).

14-17 octobre. Etablit son camp à Lahitole (ibid.).

18 octobre. Quitte Lahitole et se dirige vers Marciac (ibid.).

21 octobre. Arrive à Nogaro (Lettre), qu’il pille et brûle (Huguenots en Bigorre).

22 octobre. Traverse Eauze (Comment.).

3 novembre. Occupe Condom (Huguenots en Bigorre), d’où il écrit aux consuls d’Auch.

3-17 novembre. Fait des courses dans l’Armagnac; menace Auch et Lombez; ravage Samatan (ibid.).

17 novembre. Rentre à Condom (Dupleix), d’où il écrit aux consuls de Bagnères (Huguenots en Bigorre).

Décembre. Faict sa jonction avec l’armée des princes.

APPENDIX XXIII

[P. 402, n. 1]

ARCHIVES NATIONALES

K 1,515, PIÈCE NO. 23 A

[Montauben, janvier 1570.]

[Au dos] Proclamation des Rebelles de France.

De par Messeigneurs les Princes de Navarre et de Condé.

Il est tres expressement commandé et enjoinct a tous gentilzhommes, capitaines, soldatz faisans profession de la religion reformée non enrollés soubz les enseignes et compaignies retenues pour la garde et deffence des villes tenues soubz l’obeyssance du Roy et desdictz Sieurs Princes, de in continent et sans delay se rendre en leur armée pour y estre employez au service de Dieu et du Roy sellon leur degré et quallité, et ce, sur peyne d’estre tenuz pour ennemys de la cause de Dieu et de la religion. Enjoinct aux gouverneurs des villes ou ilz seront sans expresse licence desdictz S^[rs] Princes, d’iceulx faire vuyder et desloger promptement, deffendre leur estre baillé logis ne vivres et les soldatz desvalizés et desgradés de leurs armes et chevaulx. Sy ont lesdictz Sieurs Princes estroictement deffendu et inhibé a toutz capitaines, soldatz et aultres estans de la presente armée de brusler, desmolir ny ruyner aulcuns chasteaulx, maisons ne ediffices apartenans aux gentilzhommes de quelque religion qu’ilz soyent, ne aussy des paisans et peuble estans ez bourez et villages du plat pais. Et d’aultant que les Courtz de Parlement et aultres officiers de la justice et conseil des villes, principalement ceulx de la ville de Tholouze se sont renduz, par une hayne trop cruelle et incapable, refracteurs, voyre directement oppozés à la publication et entretenement de la paciffication dernierement establye en ce royaulme, jusques à faire mourir inhumainement et ignominieusement le Sieur Rappin, maistre d’hostel du Sieur feu prince de Condé, nostre tres chere et tres amé oncle et tres honnoré seigneur et pere, contre toute foy et seureté publique a luy octroyée tant par le edict de paciffication que par expres sauf conduict et passeport a luy baillés especiallement par Sa Majesté aux fins d’apporter et faire publyer ledict edict de la paciffication; oultre le cruel meurtre contre les loix et debvoirs de la guerre commis en la personne du baron de Castelnau et aultres gentilzhommes, capitaines et soldatz prins en guerre durant les troubles. Lesdictz Sieurs Princes, pour reprimer et faire cesser de leur pouvoir telles inhumanitez non ouyes entre les plus barbares nations de la terre, et, par le chastiment des perturbateurs de la paix et foy publicque, parvenir à quelque tranquillité stable entre ceulx qui désirent la seureté et conservation de cest Estat et coronne de France, ont habandonné en proye, pillage et feu toutes maisons, ediffices, bestail, meubles, danrées et biens quelzquonques qui se trouveront appartenir aux presidents conseilliers de ladicte Court de Parlement de Tholouze et aultres lieux, justiciers et administrateurs et generallement officiers de ladicte ville, pappistes ou atteistes; et pour cest effect permis aux capitaines, soldatz et aultres quelzconques estans en ceste armée uzer de tous lesdictz actes d’hostillité à l’endroict des dessusdictz. Deffendant tres expressement mesfaire en aulcune façon, ains conserver de tout leur pouvoir les maisons et biens appartenans à ceulx qui font profession de la religion reformée, de quelque qualité ou condition qu’ilz soyent. Et, affin que nul ne puisse ignorer lesdictes deffences et provision, ensemble les causes et occasions d’icelle, ont volu ces presentes estre cryées a cry publicque tant en la ville de Montauban que en la presente armée.

Faict à Montauban, au mois de janvier mil cinq cens soixante dix.

APPENDIX XXIV

[P. 412, n. 2]

ARCHIVES NATIONALES

K 1,515, PIÈCE NO. 68

[11 mars 1570.]

[Au dos, propria manu] Lo que se dixo de parte de los Principes de Bearne y Conde a Biron.

Dicho y pronunciado a los XI de março, a tres horas despues de mediodia, delante de Mos^[res] los Principes y Almirante, gentileshombres y cabeças de lexercito de los dichos Señores Principes.

Mos de la Caçe ha dicho a Mos de Biron que tenia mandamiento de todos los Señores y gentileshombres del exercito para dezirle:

Que, como ellos loan infinitamente a Dios por la gracia que ha hecho al Rey de le tocar el coraçon e inclinarle a la paz tan necessaria, assi davan muy humildes gracias a Su Magestad de la buena voluntad que tenia de les estender sus braçocs y abraçallos como buenos y fieles subditos, mas, porque estiman y creen que la privacion de los exercicios de la religion es para ellos mas dura muerte que ninguna que se les pudiesse dar, supplican muy humilmente a Su Magestad les otorgue un medio con que acquieten sus consciencias para con Dios, al qual si se mostrassen desleales, Su Magestad no podria esperar que ellos le fuessen muy fieles, porque quien no es fiel á Dios no lo puede ser á los hombres, que no es libertad de consciencia estar sin palabra de Dios, sino una insoportable servidumbre, que si huvieran consentido de vivir en esta licencia llamandola libertad de consciencia, Su Magestad con razon devria tomar resolucion de no se fiar jamas dellos y de no los tener jamas en estima de hombres de bien.

Que Dios dize que sobre nosotros ha embiado la muerte, es a saber que cien muertes nos vienen mas a cuenta que alexarnos voluntariamente del derecho camino de la vida eterna.

En lo demas dize que ellos havian (con muy grande desplazer suyo) sido forçados por muchas causas de emplear sus vidas por defender a los que avian sido sus defensores, cosa que no les devia ser imputada a mal, ni delante de Dios, ni delante de los hombres, sino solo a aquellos que contra justicia y contra las leyes han siempre oprimido sus consciencias y sus honrras y sus vidas. Al presente, dessearian por quanto su dever les obliga, podellos emplear en el servicio de Su Magestad y cumplimiento de su Estado, en prejuyzio de aquellos que se reyan de sus miserias comunes y esperavan dello provecho.

Por el particular de Mos^[r] de Biron, el dize que todos sentian una grande obligacion para con el, por la buena intencion que mostrava al acrescentamiento del reposo publico, que si fuesse en su mano de le poder mostrar quanto lo estimavan, el veria en lo que tenian y estimavan aquellos que, como el, no dependian de alguna particularidad, mas de la sola voluntad del Rey y de la consideracion de la utilidad publica; que el Rey no podia hazer election de señor de su Corte mas agradable a toda la compañia ni mas proprio para la execucion divina entan sancta impressa, en la qual rogava a Dios le llegasse a effecto, de manera que ellos viessen presto un buen fin que fuesse a gloria de Dios y contentamiento de Su Magestad y reposo de sus consciencias y alegria de todos sus subditos.

Finalmente le dixo que ellos quedavan persuadidos que, como el avia valerosamente aventurado su vida en campaña por les hazer mucho mal sin razon, agora con razon el emplearia sus officios y buenos medios para les procurar el bien que desseavan, sin el qual podian menos passar que sin el pan que comian ordinariamente.

A loqual Mos de Biron respondio lo mas sabia y graciosamente que fue possible, dandoles siempre segundad del desseo que Su Magestad tenia de hazer paz, y representandoles el alegria que ternia de representar a Su Magestad las buenas razones que el les avia oydo, y hazerle testimonio del buen proposito en que todos en general y en particular estavan de querer dar a Su Magestad la obediencia que le era devida, y que este era solo el medio por el qual podia Su Magestad ser vencido. En fin, el uso de muy honestos agradescimientos, y assi mismo dio seguridad de emplear sus buenos officios en un negocio que el creya havia de causar tanta utilidad al Rey y a sus subditos.[1775]

APPENDIX XXV

[P. 413, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXII, NO. 693, j

[Extraict des Lettres du S^[r] card^[al] de Lorraine]

Quant a la paix discessum est re infesta, qui nous faict esperer bien. Et se reassemblent a cest heure tant de grandes personnaiges mesmes messieurs de Conseil de Paris. Chacun y fera & dira son opinion et oyra parler le Roy ainy chacun en pourra dire a cueur ouverts. Les offres que leur auroent este faictez cestoient les villes de la Rochelle Sancerre & Montauban usque ad biennium ut civitates refugii sans tenir offices ny benefices. Et que les haultz justiciers & plains fiefs de haubert en Normandie ne seroient empesches ny recherches faisant dedans leurs maisons & ceulx presant tantum tout ce que bon leur sembleraient en leur religion alibi nusquam itaque ilz ont demande temps de deliberer & feront respons dedans six sepmaines. Ce Chateaubriant ce iiij^[e] May 1570.

[Enclosed in a letter by Sir Henry Norris to Sir William Cecil from Paris, May 24, 1570]

APPENDIX XXVI

[P. 417, n. 3]

ARCHIVES NATIONALES

K. 1,515, PIÈCE NO. 118

[Au dos, alia manu] Copia de carta del Nuncio a Su Magestad. De Madrid al Escurial, a 26 de Junio 1570.

Para escrivir a Francia, como se hizo. Lo de Mos. de Fox.

Copia di una lettera, che il Nuntio scrisse a S. M^[ta] Cat^[ca].]

Mi è doluto assai intendere che V. M^[ta] Cat^[ca] senta qualche indispositione di stomaco, il che deve ser residuo de la incomodità del camino. Il Signor Dio la mantenga sana lungamente, con ogni contento et felicita.

Per le ultime lettere d’Italia ch’io trovai in Madrid, quali sono di 17 de maggio, S. S^[tà] mi avvisa d’havere inteso che la Regina di Francia sta in animo di far cancelliere di quel regno di Francia Mons^[r] di Foys, hora Imbasciatore in Venetia. Et perche questo homo, oltre l’essere indiciato grandemente nel Santo Offitio de la Inquisitione di Roma e parente e dependente da quella buona donna chiamata la Regina di Navarra, et è persona superba, inquieta di spirito, amica di novita et discordia, et di piu si tiene offeso da Sua Santità per non havere consentito ch’egli vadi a Roma, et credo il medesimo sia con V. M^[tà] por una causa simile di non haverlo accettato in Spagna; queste cause, dico, et altre che Sua Santita considera, gli da gran sospetto che, se questo homo fosse posto in tale administratione, la quale può infinitamente in quel regno, come nel Cancellier passato s’è veduto per esperientia, non cercarebbe altro che di unire le voluntà de queste due donne, et non solo, favorendo la parte ugonota, travagliare le cose di Francia (pur troppo travagliate), ma anchora quelle de li circunvicini, maxime nelli Stati ecclesiastici et di V. M^[tà] Cat.^[ca], non solo per vendetta de la offesa, et per l’odio che a l’uno et l’altro verisimilmente porta, ma anchora per la propria inclinatione sua. Onde Sua Beatitudine, facendo sopra cio quello che puo per la sua parte, desidera e ne prega V. M^[tà] a volere similmente cercare ogni via di impedire tale elettione, et quando non si possi altro, si degni scrivere a l’Imbasciatore, et vedendo passar inanti tal cosa, si unisca con il Nuntio, et insieme si lassino intendere apertamente dalla Regina che Sua Beatitudine et S. M^[tà] Cat^[ca] haveranno per male ch’ella dia uno orficio di tanta importantia in mano di persona tale il che non deve fare, si ella desidera di essere tenuta fautrice de la fede cattolica desiderosa de la grandezza et quiete del Re suo figliuo lo et della unione e^[t] bene de la Christianità. Spera Sua Santità che, con questo rimedio si possi obviare a quello inconveniente, peroche la Regina prefata mostra pure di havere qualche consideratione in simili attioni di non far cosa che possi con ragione dispiacere a Sua Santità et a V. M^[tà]. Et perche da una parte questo negotio ricerca presta provisione, et da l’altra non è honesto che in questo tempo io dia perturbatione a V. M^[tà] con la mia presentia, ho voluto communicarla con il Cardinale, et scrivere a V. M^[tà] Cat^[ca] la presente, supplicandola humilmente si degni farmi dare quella grata risposta che comandara ch’io scriva a Sua Beatitudine sopra questa materia. Et, basando reverentemente le regali mani a V. M^[ta], prego N. S^[r]. Dio la concervi longamente felice.

Di Madrid, li 26 di Giugno 1570.

APPENDIX XXVII

[P. 422, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXV, NO. 937.

[The Vidame de Charters to Marshal Montmorency]

Monseigneur, j’ay receu une lettre quil vous a pleu m’escripre pour responce a ce que vous avois escript par monsieur de Saragosse. Iay congneu que pensiez que je fusses encores au lieu dont vous avois escript. Si jeuse pense que ma presente y eust este requise j’euse differé tant quil vous eust pleu le me faire entendre. Mais il vous estoit fort aise a penser que si lon prenoit goust par deça a ceste negociation elle seroit adressee a monsieur le cardinal de Chastillon, ou a l’ambassadeur du roy. On seroit envoye quelqu’ng des francoys favoris. Quand a moy ie n’ay pretendu en cest affaire que le service du roy et de la couronne de France, et si les affaires succedoient comme je y voy une telle espoirance et asseurance sil estoit poursuivy diligemment. Le contentement que je desire ne me pouroit fuir. Il est vray que je serais fort marry si jamais j’oyois dire que par faulte de diligence cest affaire fust demoure imparfaict, aussy seroit ce ung domage public oultre le particullier du prince au quel les premiers fruicts en appartiennent. Monsieur une lettre que jay receue de mons^[r] de Saragosse me faict entrer en soupçon et craincte que en atendant entre deux personnes qui ne se sont jamais veues qui ostera prenner le bonnet il ne se mette quelqung entre deux qui face perdre l’occasion de contracter une grande amitie & fort utille a la France, la quelle estant perdue sensuyviroit le dommage et le regret (mais en vain). Je suis bien asseure que larcheduc d’Austriche ne sendormira pas et ne laisera perdre l’occassion qui se presente a une assemblee des estatz qui se vont tenyr voire les previendra sil peult ne perdra pas une heure, que pendant quil voyt que la royne est en deffiance et doubte pour les affaires de la royne D’escosse et des differens quelle a avec le roy D’espaigne et quilz voyoient que l’empereur avent en pouppe, et quil faict des mariages telz quil scavroit souhaiter. Il ne se serve de l’occassion & faveur du temps et pendant que les amis simulez paistront la jeunesse animeuse et la rempliront de grande espoirance, luy prometant par adventure des plus grandes choses (combien quelles ne soient pas aysees a trouver), et pour moy je ne les scay pas ilz prendront cest advantage sur la partye et renforceront leur grandeur de la puissance et faveur d’un royaulme qui nest point petit. Et vous ose bien dire quil y a de la part de ceux en qui gist la resolucion de cest affaire une grande inclinacion et une grande consideracion de long service de cest ancyen serviteur et de la subjection et humiliacion quil a monstree de la quelle vous scavez que le sexe se delecte. Ausy est ce leur façon de regner la quelle toutes veulent exercer, tant plus les roynes. Il ne fault penser que les dificultes pour la religion puissent engendrer quelques difficultez aux capitulacions qui facent plus de retardement. Car je scay par la bouche de la dame et ausy par ceux qui ont sceu toute ceste negotiacion passee, et par ung qui y a este employe qui ne parle pour metre le beau devers elle nestant de ses subjects mais estranger, que la charte blanche luy a este donnee. Et sest contente l’Archeduc pour le faict de la religion de si peu que cella se doibt estimer pour rien. Davantage la consideracion de lage qui est plus vivill et meur donne ung beau lustre aux persuasions et jugement de ceux qui tendent de ce costé la. Avec ses advantages du long service et age convenable, je crains que ceux qui tiennent le party contraire ne persuadent avec aparence a cause du trop long silence ou froide poursuite quil y aye du contemnement ou de la froideur en ceux de la France estant chose propre au sexe de faire plus de choses par despit que par amour est a craindre quel la froideur de ceste part ne soit cause de l’eschauffer et faire haster plus quelle ne fairoit si nestoit pour se faire regretter apres a loisir par ceulx qui se seroient portez trop froidement en son endroit. Larticle de la lettre du gentilhomme qui vous porta ma lettre (qui me faict craindre que en voulant traicter de la part de la France avec fort grand respect et par adventure prendre l’honneur devers nous l’affaire nen sera pire) est quil dict que si lon estoit asseure par deça de la bonne volonte de ceux de dela la mer on y pouroit entendre ce qui me semble estrange de vouloir qu’une ville se rende avant quelle soit sommee. Il me semble que cest beaucoup quelle parlamente, sans avoir ouyr parler le canon. Et nest par peu de chose qu’estant sa principalle defence de la difference de laage et de linconstance de la jeunesse et la crainte destre dicy a quelques anees, peu aymes et mesprisee et en danger de veoir de ses yeulx aymer dautres, lon luy a faict abandonner ceste contre escarppe et le corrider tellement que lon peult veoir au pied de la muraille que je vous asseure nest point veue de flans. Des particularitez et moyens que lon a tenue en ses approches jusques la jen ay dice quelque chose a ce gentilhomme qui est fort affectionne a cest affaire en faveur du bien de la France. Et dabondant en hayne de la grandeur qui se voit preparer a la maison d’Autriche si elle s’impatronize de ce royaume, tellement quil nest a craindre si non que la tradiuite ne donne loisir a ceux qui de long temps ont faict deseing de se saisir de ce pais de venyr au bout de leur intencions lesquelles sont fort favorablement receues, et croy quils jouyront en bref si leurs conseilz ne sont troublez par une diuersion & par obiect nouveau plus desirable que celuy qui ce presente Ce qui me semble estre indubitablement en la jeunesse d’un prince qui a la reputacion davoir le sens meur devant les ans et ausi courageux et dausy grande espoirance que prince ne soit ne de lage des hommes. Monsieur vous scavez trop bien combien la maisson d’Autriche seroit agrandie sur la maison de France si elle estoit renforcee de ce royaume. Et ny a point de doubte quelle ne donnast pour tousjours par cy apres la loy a la France et est chose seure quelle contraindroit le roy a rompre la paix quil a donnee a ses subiectz. Davantage si par ce mariage nest donne satisfaction au grand coeur de mons^[r] frere du roy pour loccuper et luy donner matiere de faire plus grandz deseingz Il ne fault point doubter que tous ceux qui prennent la couleur et pretexte de la religion pour advancer les moiens de la divission et ruyne de la France afin d’agrandir la maison d’Autriche ne proposent a monsieur duc danjou quelques mariages qui sera au despens de la couronne de France si la bonne nature et amitie dentre les freres ne resiste a leur malicieux deseingz. Mais il ne sen scauroit proposer du quel se doive espoirer plus de grandeur, non seulement a luy mais a toute la maison de France en gaignant le dessus sur la maison d Autriche, la quelle veult soubz couverture & douceur du mariage du roy faire avaller ceste curee & gaigner ung royaume sans ce quil luy soit donne empeschement et ne fault point doubter que si le mariage de larcheduc se faict quil ne soit en peu de temps mieulx obey que na este le roy Philippe et ce moiennant le danger de la religion et leur sera aise de nous donner la loy ou pour le mains de nous faire redoubler la ruyne de la France par division et guerre civille. Au contraire si ce bien est resceue pour noz princes il y aura bien de quoy rendre la pareille a ceux qui ont dresse tous leurs conseilz a procurer que la France se ruynast par une guerre civille Voyans que par guerres ouvertes jamais ilz n’auroient peu paruenir a leur intencion. Pour amour du mal quilz ont faict mons^[r] pouroit iustement avec forces du roy faveur dangleterre et moiens du prince dorenge avoir la confiscacion de la Flandre par droict de feodalite pour felonnie commise. Et ausy la maison d Autriche qui se bastit lempire hereditaire et la monarchie se trouveroit en ung instant deux freres roys ausy puissans lun que lautre pour contrepois de son ambition liggnez avec les princes protestans de lallemaigne et auroient les deux freres plus de part en lempire que ceux qui se veulent atribuer par la ruyne des anciennes maisons de la Germanye come de la maison de Saxe et des princes palatins qui sont amateurs de la couronne de France. Le partage de monsieur d allençon seroit aise a trouver en la duche de Millan auec la faueur de lallemaigne, des Suises ausy et des princes Italliens devotieux de la France Et si besoing estoit po^[r] le recouvrement du royaume de Naples, la fave^[r] du Turc se trouveroit par apres ung a propos. Mons^[r] il ma semble que cela est si aparent, et si facille a persuader que puis que vous en aurez une fois ouvert la bouche il ny faudra plus autre soliciteur que le roy mesmes qui peult veoir par ce moyen son royaume luy demourer uny ses freres partagez. Sa force telle et si grande quil ne poura estre offence ny commande par menasses qui contraignent faire la guerre a ses subiects pour complaire a ceux qui sont envieux de sa grandeur et n’ont peu trouver moyen de la diminuer que par elle mesmes. Lors ce pouroit faire une legue parfaicte entre noz princes & les protestans de la Germanie & les suisses. De ceste facon ung grand plaisir viendroit a la royne de veoir tous ses enfans roys. Lors leglisse galicane pouroit sexempter des erreurs de leglisse Romayne comme elle a faict plusieurs fois le temps passe, lors se pouroit faire ung concille general au quel les erreurs introduictes par lambition et advarice de leglisse romayne ne seroient favorisses et confirmees par praticques et corruptions, et en la France l’allemaigne et langleterre s’introduiroient une ordre et pollice de religion et unite de doctrine que toutes les autres provinces de la cristiente seroient contraintes dembrasser et finiroient les differens des subiectz avec leurs princes desquelles Sathan se sert pour la destruction de la Christeente et pour donner loisir au turc d’usurper pendant que les princes Chrestiens s’amussent a defendre les supersticions du Pape et maintenyr sa grande^[r].

Monseigneur je me recommande treshumblement a votre bonne grace et vous suplie de rechef me departir de votre faveur et conseil touchant comment je me doibs gouverner a escripre a leurs ma^[tes] ou non: Mons^[r] je prie Dieu vous donner tresheureuse et treslongue vye. De la Ferte ce—— [1776] jour doctobre 1570.

[Not signed]

[Not addressed]

[Endorsed in Cecil’s hand] Octob. 1570. The vidam of Chartres to the Marshall Montmorency.

[Enclosed by Sir Henry Norreys to Cecil, 4 November, 1570.][1777]

APPENDIX XXVIII

[P. 426, n. 3]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXVIII, NO. 1,174

[Marshal Montmorency to Cecil]

Mons^[r] jay este tresaise davoir entendu tant par la lettre que mauez escripte du xxij^[e] du passe, que par le s^[r] du Pui present porteur le desir qui vous avez de veoir bien tost affectuer ce qui a este miz en avant pour estraindre une bonne & ferme alliance, entre ces deux royaumes, ayant par votre prudence & longue experience de lestat & cours des affaires, passez & presens tresbien cogneu combien cella seroyt en ce temps, non seullement convenable Mais aussi necessaire, pour le bien seurette & grandeur de lun & de lautre, a quoy de ma part je ne fauldray de tenir la main de tout mon pouvoir et de my employer syncerement, de cueur & daffection Vous priant a ceste cause Mons^[r], que desormays avec une bonne Intelligence & correspondance, que pour cest effect nous aurons ensemble Nous mections peine de vaincre les difficultez & rompre les obstacles. Que aucuns y mectent tous les jours, artificieusement, de sorte que au plustost, avecques votre bon ayde, nous y puissyons veoir lheureux suites, que nous desirons. Qui tourne avec occasion, de raisonable tantement dune part & dautre, au repoz unyon & grandeur de ces deux couronnes, et a la confuzion de ceux qui sefforcent d empescher ung si bon euvre ce que masseurant, que vous vouldrez faire et cheminer en ce faict avec votre Integritte acoustumee, je ne mestandray plus avant en ce propoz. Si ce nest pour vous prier de creoire ced. porteur, de ce quil vous dira de ma part, come moy mesmes Qui surce me recomanderan tresaffectueus^[t] a votre bonne s^[r] Priant Dieu vous donner Mons^[r] en parfaicte sante bonne & longue vye. De Gaillon le xxv^[e] jour de May 1571.

[Signed] Votre obeissant et parfaict amy MONTMORENCY

[Addressed] A Mons^[r] Mons^[r] de Burghley.

[Endorsed] 20 May 1571 Montmorency to my L.

APPENDIX XXIX

[P. 448, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, DOMESTIC

ADDENDA, ELIZABETH, VOL. XXI, NO. 58

[French-English Alliance, 1572]

Good m^[r] Hoggyns.... We allso here of a gret lege made w^[th] France w^[ch] ys thowghte that thereby the Frenche pretendith some further feche to serve there tourne: God of his goodnesse kepe the noble yle of Inglande to lyve w^[th]out givynge ower much credith to forren fryndshipe. Here ys gret preparation as ever I sawe for w^[th] in this xx dayes there wyll be x thousant horsmen & fyfty thousant fotmen: lykewyse by se 80. saylle of men of warre. Don Jhon de Austria ys come w^[th] his galles to Genova & the Venecians goith outwarde agaynst the tourke who hath augmentyd there forces. The deuke of Savoye armyth for the Kynge 8000 fottemen and as it ys sayd commyth hym sellf in parson. Flushynge saluted the deuk de Medina cely very vyle at his commynge & burnte iij shipes of marchantes onlye by treson of a Floshynge verlet that came out of Spayne w^[th] them & toke apon hym to led them in to the port of Sleuce & set then on grond hym sellf wente his waye yet the daye after the wynd beynge very good the rest of the deuks armey housted vp saylle, and in dyspite of the toune of Flushynge passed to the Raynykyns w^[th] out hurt more then one gonner slayne. The portyngall flyte of this contry lyke fallse trayters strok ancker before Flushynge w^[ch] ys lyk that many thereby ar undone. The gensys tok off the iij shyppes that wer bornet xxvj. spaynyardes & in the toune honge them. Lykewyse the Spayniardes aboute xv. dayes past toke xxx frenche horsmen commynge to Monsse amonge w^[ch] as yt ys sayd the sone of monsir Mongomvrey was one who offerryd for his ransome 5000 crounes he & the rest his compaynyons wer hanged at Flyford vj. dayes past so that here ys no favor but hangynge on both sydes. Our cuntrymen & wemen as my lade of Northumberland lieth at Maklynge & so doth m^[r] Daykeres where not dayes past [two] of my l. Setones sones wer lyk to have byn slayne in the tumolte w^[ch] standeth yet but in a mamerynge yet nowe they begyne to come coler & to obbey the maigestrates. The pore erle of Westmarland lieth at Lovayne & so doth my lade Hungerford my old knyght & otheres. Thoughe I begone, wryte I pray you to me & send yo^[r] letters to my l. to Brugys & in so doynge I wyll wryt to you wekelye from the campe of our occurrance, in hast wryten this present tewsdaye the xvij of Iune at Brugys 1572.

Yo^[r] lovynge frende THOMAS PARKER

[Addressed] To his lovyng fryend m^[r] Robert Hoggyns at m^[r] Edmunde Hoggyns his house in Mylke Streete give thes. At London.

[Endorsed]17 Iunii 1572. m^[r] Tho. Parker to m^[r] Hogans from Brugis.

APPENDIX XXX

[P. 457, n. 3]

BIBLIOTHEQUE DE L’INSTITUT, COLLECTION GODEFROY

VOL. 256, FO. 71, RECTO (NO. 39 DU CATALOGUE)

[Le duc d’Anjou à Charles IX.]

[La Guerche, 19 janvier 1573.]

[Suscription, au dos] Au Roy, Monseigneur et frere.

[Au dos, alia manu] Monseigneur, de XIX^[e] janvier 1573.

Monseigneur, par la depesche que je vous fiz hyer, je vous ay adverty que le S^[r] de Biron m’avoit escript que, quand toutes les compaignyes de gens de pied françoyses dont nous avons faict estat seroient la, après avoir demeuré dix ou douze jours aux tranchées, il n’en scauroit rester plus hault de six mil hommes, et qu’il estoit nécessaire d’en avoir plus grand nombre. Sur quoy j’avois advisé d’envoyer devers Mons^[r] l’amyral pour avoir quarante enseignes de celles qui sont auprès de luy. Et estant presentement, venu devers moy le S^[r] de Beaulieu Ruzé, que le S^[r] de Biron m’a depesché expres, tant pour aucunes particularitez que j’ay donné charge au S^[r] de Lanconne (que j’envoye devers vous) vous dire, que pour m’advertir, encores que les forces y soient si petites qu’elles sont, qu’ilz estoient neanmoins d’adviz que je ne laissasse pas de m’acheminer au camp. Ce que j’ay resolu de faire et de partir demain de ce lieu, pour m’en aller a Châtellerault et de la à Poictiers. Et cependant je renvoye ledict Ruzé devers ledict S^[r] de Biron pour me revenir trouver en chemin, et me rapporter au vray ce que sera survenu depuis. Et ay depesché incontinant ung courrier devers ledict S^[r] Amyral, pour faire partir tout aussy tost lesdictes quarante enseignes, ou ce qu’il me pourra envoyer, et qu’il les face embarquer à Moyssac, d’ou elles peulvent venir par eaue, jusques à La Rochelle, luy ayant mandé les lieux par ou elles auront a passer et par mesmes moien audict S^[r] admiral et de Montferrant de pourveoir qu’il y ait des batteaulx et estappes des vivres. Et ne veoy aucune chose qui puisse apporter retardement a vostre service, que de n’avoir les deniers, pour pouvoir faire faire monstre a mon arrivée au camp, principallement aux gens de pied, d’autant qu’il est a craindre que, n’estans poinct payez et s’asseurans que je ferois porter argent avec moy (comme je l’avois promis a celles de vostre garde et du capitaine Gadz), ilz se desbendent et que le nombre que je m’attendz y estre n’y soit poinct. Je vous supplie tres humblement, Monseigneur, de commander que l’on regarde de cercher tous les moyens dont l’on se pourra adviser pour m’envoyer les troys cens mil livres que je debvois avoir avant mon partement de la Court.

Au demeurant, Monseigneur, j’ay receu la lettre qu’il vous a pleu m’escripre du XIII^[e] de ce moys, et veu par le contenu d’icelle comme vous avez resolu deux poinctz. Le premier, de la suppression de tous offices qui vacqueront, pour congnoistre la grand charge que cela apporte à vous et à voz subgectz, pour les gaiges qu’il leur fault payer. Et l’autre, que vous avez commandé qu’il ne soit depesché cy apres aucun office ou benefice dont il vous sera baillé memoire ou placet, que troys moys apres que vous verrez les roolles qui en seront faictz, pour les departir à ceulx qui font service, principallement en ce camp auprès de moy. Ce que je ne fauldray leur faire entendre, suivant ce qu’il vous plaist me mander. J’ay aussy veu le memoire que vous a esté baillé de ce que l’on vous propose pour la conqueste que vous pouvez faire à l’Yndie avec peu de despence, laquelle je ne puis trouver que très bonne, lorsque vous serez en paix et que voz affaires le pourront permectre, y estans les richesses et commoditez portées par ledict memoire. Vous sçavez combien telles entreprises et conquestes ont apporté de proffict au feu Empereur et Roy Catholique, pour le grand nombre d’or qu’il a tiré et tire ordinairement du Peyrou, tellement que, sans cela, il n’eust eu moyen d’entretenir et soldoyer les armées et forces qu’il a entretenues jusques à present, qui me faict vous conseiller (soubz vostre meilleur adviz) de ne laisser poinct perdre ceste occasion, quand vous congnoistrez qu’elle pourra estre mise a execution. Presentement, j’ay eu nouvelles que le S^[r] Paul Emille a tant faict que ceulx de La Rochelle qui le detiennent prisonnier l’ont mis à rançon pour mil escruz, dont aulcuns de ses amys ont respondu pour luy. Laquelle somme il n’a aucun moyen de fournir, si ce n’est de vostre liberalité, grace et specialle faveur, laquelle je vous supplie vouloir estendre en luy pour cest effect, et luy faire paroistre la souvenance que vous avez tousjours eu de ceulx qui vous font service. Aussy, Monseigneur, j’ay esté adverty que l’estat de viceneschal de la Haulte et Basse Marche, qui est ès terres de mon apennaige est a present vacant par mort, la disposition et provision duquel neanmoins vous appartient. A ceste cause, je vous supplie encores le vouloir accorder aux Sieurs de Villequier, pour lesquelz je vous en faictz requeste, et commander que la depesche et provision soit faicte en leur faveur au nom de tel personnaige suffisant et cappable qu’ilz nommeront et non autrement. Sur ce je supplieray le Createur vous donner,

Monseigneur, en tres bonne santé, très longue et très heureuse vie.

Escript à la Guierche, le XIX^[me] jour de janvier 1573.

[Propria manu] Vostre tres humble et tres obeissant frere et subget.

HENRY

[Original]

APPENDIX XXXI

[P. 458, n. 3]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXXVI, NO. 419

[Charles IX to Montgomery]

Mons^[r] le Conte j’ay este bien ayse d’entendre par le s^[r] de S^[t] Iehan votre frere la bonne volunte en laquelle il vous trouva de vous contenir doulcement par dela et sans entreprendre ou favoriser aucune chose qui soit contre le bien de mon service, qui est ce que je desire de vous, et me semble que ne scauriez mieulx faire pour votre honne^[r] & advantaige, ayant pour ceste cause advise vous envoyer le s^[r] de Chasteauneuf present porteur expres pour vous dire & asseurer que vous comportant d[1778] je vous feray conserver en tout ce qui vous touchera il vous maintiendray ainsy que mes autres bons & loyaulx subjects comme vous entenderez plus particullierem^[t] dud. S^[r] de Chasteauneuf Sur lequel me remectant du surplus dont je vous prie le croire, je priray Dieu Mons^[r] le Conte vous avoir en sa s^[te] & digne garde. Escript a Paris le ix^[me] jo^[r] de feurier 1573.

[Signed] CHARLES PINART

Mons^[r] le Conte, j’ay faict desgaiger votre vaisselle de trois cens escuz, et ay commande au tresor^[r] de mon eschiequer la garde po^[r] la vous faire rendre comme je luy ay ordonne.[1779]

[Addressed] Mons^[r] le Conte de Montgommery.

[Endorsed in Burghley’s hand] 9 Februar, 1572. (Sic.) fr. Kyng to the Count Montgomery by Chasteaunevff.

APPENDIX XXXII

[P. 461, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXXI, NO. 1,428

Liste des villes des quelles ceuex de la relligion sasseurent en France.

Mons^[r] le Prince de Conde et Mons^[r] de Rohan y commaundent

En Xainctongne, La Rochelle

S^[t] Jehan, S^[t] Angely ou commaunde Mons^[r] de S^[t] Mosmes.

Roian, Port de Mer

Pons

Bouteville, et quelques Chasteaux

_Mons^[r] de S^[t] Geniez, Mons^[r] de Longe_

Sur la Riviere de Dordonne

Bergirac imprenable

S^[t] Foy

Chastillon

Pinnoymant &c. Et sur disces il ny a presques pas un Papiste, ny mesme en tout le Pays.

_Mons^[r] de Madailham, Le Baron de Beauville_

Sur le Riviere du Lot

Villeneufve d’Agenois

Clerac.

S^[t] Linerade.

Mons^[r] de Turène

En Perigort, Perigueux Ville Capitale et Plusieurs Chasteaux

Montflanquin

Mons^[r] de Chappes, Lieutenan: le Baron d’Uzac, &c.,

Figiac

Bellie

Puynirol } Tournon } ces trois sont imprenables; et sont au R. de N. Lanzarte }

Turene ave toutes les terres de Monsieur de Turene en Lymosin.

Briene la gagliarde.

Usurstie. qui sont des meilleures: Toutes les surd. places sont bien accommodees et sont toutes deçe la Riviere de Garonne.

Mons^[r] le Baron de Luzignian, Mons^[r] de Fauaz

Sur la Garonne au bord de deca sont

Agen ville Capitale d’Agenois grande et riche

La Reolle, Lonne ville, dont le Chasteau est imprenable; et sur le Rivage dela sont

Lengon

Millau

Le mas de Verdoun &c.

Le Roy de Navar parce que c’est son patrimonie y a partout Portien de les plus affectionez

Entre le Garonne et le pays de Bearn nous tenons

Leystoure ville Episcopale richen et imprenable patrimonie de R. de N.

Mauvesin

Fleurance

Cauze, bonne et forte ville

Nerac

Castel Jalouz

Balas ville riche, episcopale

Le mont de Marsan; forte

Tout le conte de Bigorces et les pays de Marsan, Tarsan Gavardan

Tarbe} Aire } villes episcopales

La principaute de Bearn

La basse Navarre

Le Pays des basques, a quoy on a donne tiel ordre que nouristant la paix il ne si changera rien.

Au contrarie de puis la paix Grenade Beaumont et Verdun villes ont reconut le Roy de Navarre p^[r] governeur et se sont mises soubz sa protection et tous les jours si la paix tient quelque peu si en mettra de nouvelles. M. L. Amirall a assiege Beaumont a cause de cela ou il a este tresbien battu.

M. le Vicount de Terides

Pays de Quercy nous tenons

Montauban imprenable et une des belles villes de guerre du monde.

M. la Vicount de Gourdon

Figeac capitale de Haut Quercy

Caussade

Realville

S^[t] Antonin

Villemur &c. en ces villes tout le peuple est de la religion.

Vicont de Paulini

Au pays de Rourgue.

Millaut ville episcopale

Vabres ville episcopale

Creissel et autres en grand nombre fortes d’assietes dont nous ne scavons le nom. Le peuple aussi est de fort longtemps de la religion et sont en tous ces pays des relliques des vieux.

_Le Baron de Audon_

En Languedoc, toute la Conte de Foix qui tient depuis les montz Pirenees jusques aux portes de Thoulouse Patrimonie du R. de N. en icelle sont Pasmicas ville forte peuplee, presque de la religion episcopale.

Foix ville et chasteu imprenable.

Sa Verdan

Mazores

Le Carla

Le mas d’Azil, toutes riches et imprenables. Et ceste derniere se faict une quantite purniable de Saltpetre pour muner tout le pays de poudre.

_Le baron de Monbardies_

En Lauraignais partie du bas Languedoc sont

Puylaurens

Revel

Soureze

S^[t] Paul

Cramain &c.

Castres ville episcopale imprenable

L’Isle d et plusieurs autres en la montagne.

_M. de Chastilon, M. de Thore, M. de S^[t] Romain, &c._

Au hout Languedoc, y en a infinies, les plus notables sont

Monpelier

Nismes

Aiguesmortes

Lunel

Aimargnes

Marsilargnes

Sommieres

Uzez

Auz

Aleth

Lodeve la pluspart episcopale

Tout le Pays de Vivarez; et le Pays de Sevènes.

M. de [L] Ediguieres

En Daulphine nous tenons tout le haut Pays, et du bas pays presque toutes les villes[1780] quatre ou cinq. Gap et Dis villes principales sont a nous et cinq cens gentilihomines tous de la religion entre les quels y a tresbon ordre.

Le Baron d’Alemagne

En Provence nous avons quelques bonnes villes, entre autres Seine, le grand Tour, et tout le meilleur du Conte de Venisse, appartenant au Pope à cause d’Avignon.

Le Roy de Navarre ces places fournies de garnissons necessaires tant de pied que de cheval, peut sans sortir de Guienne mettre huict mil hommes de pied en campagne et mille gentilihomines et fournir l’equippage de six canons et deux couleurines &c. et quand il sera joinct avec les forces de Languedoc (car le Daulphine a le Rhosne entredeux) il poura faire estat de 10000 hommes de pied 2000 chevaux des meilleurs qui se virent jamais en France, et 10 canons, quatre couleurines et la pouldre et munitions et equipage d’iceux.

Pour les affaires de la guerre en son conseil il est assisté de M^[r] de Meru. Monsieur de Turene qui a esgarde sur la Perigort et Lymosin en sa absence.

M^[r] de la Nouë chef et superintendant de sa maison.

M^[r] de viconte de Terride, Baron de Serignac, vieux Capitaine.

M^[r] de S^[t] Geniez, vieux Capitaine et homme de bon entendement.

M^[r] le Baron de Lusignan. Gouverneur de Agenois.

M^[r] de Fontralles, M^[r] le Baron d’ Audon.

M^[r] de Guitry qui sont tous des meilleurs Cap: de France.

Pour le mainement des negotiations, outre les susd. il est assiste de M^[r] de Grateinx son Chauncelier, M^[r] des Aginz President et M^[r] des Requestes et plus^[rs] autres de mesme reing.

Outre ceux y y a plusieurs Princes, Seignurs, Vicontes, et Barons affectes de tout temps au party de la religion. Toutesfois je les ay lieu voulu mettre icy croire ilz me sont vennues en memorie.

Le R. de N. M’ le P. de Conde M. de Rohan M. de Nemours M. de Laval M. de Rochebernard son frere M. de Meru M. de Thore M. de Turene M. de Chastillon M. de Clermont M. de la Noué M. de S. Genie et ses freres M. le Viconte de Tirrede M. de St. Romain Le Baron de Fontrailles Le Baron de Ardon Le Baron de Senegaz Le Baron de Mirambeau M. de Languillier Le Baron de Verac Le Vic: de Savailhan Le Baron de S. Gehniz Le Baron de Mombardices Le Vicount de Lalant Le Baron de Montanhils Le Baron de Monlieu Le Baron de la Rochalais Le Prince de Chalais M. de Mouy M. de la Forse gendre de M. de Biron Le Vicont de Chasteauneuf Le Baron de Piersebuffiere Le Baron de Salignac Le Baron de Beinac Le Baron de Bresolles Le Vicont de Paulini Le Vicont de Panart Le Vicont de Gourdon Le Vicont de Arpajon Le Baron de Cabrere M. de Ediguires M. de Guitry Le Baron de Longa M. de Campagnac M. de Boesse M. de Montguiron Le Baron de Montandie Le Baron de Luzignan M. de Bonevall M. de Ussac Le Vicont de Rochouart Le Baron de Almagne Le Baron de Beauville Le Baron de Reine Le Baron de Vercillac Le Baron de S. Nauphan Le Baron de S. Arlaye Le Vicont de Meherin Le Vicont de Belsane et autres.

Tous les desus nommes sont en Guienne et de Guienne ou Languedoc ou p^[r] le moins ont porte les armes a ceste dernier guerre. Quant aux autres Seigneurs et Capitaines des autres Provinces de France qui ont pareille ulcouse[?] et la monsteront au besoing, ascavoir es provinces assises deca la Riviere de Loure, ilz sont sans comparison en plus grand nombre pour respost des lieux ou ilz sont; nous ne les avons point nommés pas ce quilz ont attendu une armée de Reistres present s’y jettes, attendant la quelle ilz se sont le mieux quilz ont peu compertes en leurs maisons.

[Not signed]

[Endorsed] Les villes des quelles ceux de la Religion s’asseurent en France.

APPENDIX XXXIII

[P. 474, n. 2]

BIBLIOTHEQUE D L’INSTITUT, COLLECTION GODEFROY

VOL. 256, FO. 83 RECTO, NO. 45 DU CATALOGUE

[Le duc d’Anjou à Charles IX][1781]

[Camp devant La Rochelle, 17 février 1573].[1782]

Monseigneur. Par le jeune Seguier que j’ay depesché depuis deux jours devers Vostre Majesté, elle aura entendu comme j’estois sur le poinct envoyer devers icelle le S^[r] de Bourrique, l’un de mes maistres d’hostelz, pour la sattisfaire de tout ce que je pouvois avoir à luy faire entendre de l’estat de ceste armée. Suivant ce, je l’ay presantement faict partir si bien instruict de touttes choses que je ne doubte qu’il ne luy en sçache rendre très bon compte. Me restera à supplier, comme je fais très humblement, Vostre Majesté le voulloir en ce qu’il vous dira de ma part oyr avec la mesme foy et creance dont elle a tousjours voullu m’honnorer. J’ay veu ce qu’il luy a pleu me mander par sa depesche du XI^[me] de ce mois sur la proposition que aucuns avoient faicte de donner la charge de vostre armée de mer à mon frere Mons^[r] le Duc et au Roy de Navarre chose que je rejectay aussi tost pour les mesmes considérations, que Vostredicte Majesté a bien sceu prendre, et n’estois pour le permectre en aucune sorte, de maniere que Vostredicte Majesté demourera, s’il luy plaist, en repos de ce cousté la.

Monseigneur, je supplie le Createur donner à Vostredicte Majesté en très bonne santé et prosperité tres longue et tres heureuse vye.

Escript au camp devant La Rochelle, le XVII^[me] jour de febvrier 1573.

* * * * *

Monseigneur, j’ay veu par les dernieres depesches qui vous sont venues d’Angleterre de S^[r] de La Mothe Fenellon, la demonstration que ceulx de vos subiectz qui sont refugiez par dela font de procurer de leur part l’entier repos de vostre royaume avec ceulx de leur religion. Chose qui me semble estre très avantageuse au bien de vostre service, et que, pour l’effect de leur bonne intention, il vous plaise leur bailler touttes les seuretez necessaires pour venir par deça. Estant ceste voye, si elle peult proffiter, beaucoup plus aisée et seure que celle de la force, outre le moien que ce vous seroit de conserver beaucoup de voz bons subiectz et serviteurs et soulaiger d’autant vostre bourse.[1783]

[Propria manu] Vostre treshumble et tres obeissant frere et subget

HENRY.

[Au dos, Suscription] Au Roy, Monseigneur et frere.

[Au dos, alia manu] Monseigneur, du XVII^[me] febrier. M^[r] de Bourricques.

[Original]

APPENDIX XXXIV

[P. 503, n. 1]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXXXIV, NO. 186, iij

[Dr. Valentine Dale to Lord Burghley]

Es co tempore quo proximè ad te scripsi nullum fuit mihi prorsus tempus animi laxandi, ita fui partim itineribus partim multis gravibus & impeditis rebus administrandis distractus, nec satis etiam nunc scio an mihi liceat aliqua intermissione frui ut de liberioribus ac amœnioribus studiis possim aliquantisper cogitare. Neque verò tuam nunc volo sive tarditatem sive negligentiam in scribendo accusare nulla est enim mihi remissæ erga me tuæ amicitiæ vel minima suspitio. Ut scias igitur quid rerum hic agatur Nunquam tanta animorum consentione ad pacem conspiratum est nec unquam tamen magis diversis studiis de pacis conditionibus ineundis actum est Coguntur enim planè jam omnes longo & ancipiti bello fessi & ad inopiam atque egestatem usque redacti necessario nunc tandem ac serio de pace cogitare. Neque enim aut æris alieni quo infinito premuntur dissolvendi ratio est, nec sumptus qui sunt apud istos profusissimi diutius sustinere possunt. Vectigalia autem ac ceteri reditus regii aut oppignorata aut distracta sunt ut annui regis proventus ne ad erogationes quidem domesticas satis sufficiant. Vident igitur omnes si bellum gerendum sit, infinita contributione opus esse, cum nullæ sint principis ad bellum gerendum facultates, & omnis qua opus sit regi pecunia ab aliis sumenda aut potius extorquenda sit. Homines autem nobiles per quos bellum precipuè geritur quorum amplissimæ sunt facultates (nam hi pæne soli prædia possident & vicena aut tricena aut etiam centena plerique millia aureorum nummum habent annua). Hi quantam alicunde pecuniam corradere possunt eam prodige & profuse ilico profundunt, nulla est enim eis cura rei familiaris, sed tanqam in diem viventes quibus opus habent rebus quantivis comparant eam quam habent pecuniam negligentes & quam non habent quibusvis rationibus vel quamvis cum jactura conquirentes. Solent autem illis ut plurimum belli presertim tempore sumptus a rege subministrari. Nunc autem quum videant nihil esse regi, quod det, corpora sua periculis libenter non subjiciunt, inviti autem hoc presertim tempore ad bellum non adiguntur, itaque fit ut qui ferè uni pro principe soliti sint decertare hi bellum in primis detrectent. Plebs autem rustica inops semper est atque egena, non enim ut nostri improvidos reperiunt prediorum dominos, a quibus prerogata quadam modica pecunia exili reditu conductis agris, ad magnas opes perveniant, sed aut Coloni partiarii agrum magno labore parvo autem cum compendio colunt, aut justum fructuum precium pendunt. Hoc verò tempore vastationibus populationibus & direptionibus ita sunt expilati, ut nec bos ad arandum nec frumentum ad sementes faciendas supersit: tantum abest ut illorum pecunia bellum geri possit. Reliqua sunt oppida que sanè sunt multa & cives certe ditissimi Nam que magna ut scis nostris est trium millium coronatorum pecunia, apud istos ducentorum aut trecentorum millium exiguè sunt facultates, & qui urbes incolunt soli aut sub pignoribus & hypothecis nobilium proventus possident, aut eorum facultates fœnere exhauriunt. Inter istos autem cives opifices non nomino, quorum infinitus est numerus qui admodum difficulter victum magnis laboribus in urbibus querunt non enim in agris locus illis est ubi se ac suos tenuiter colendis agris aut pecore pascendo, ut nostri faciunt, alant. Itaque in urbis quisque proximas se confert, ubi officinas instituunt & vitam labore producunt. Multo minus inter cives numerandi sunt hi, qui passim in viis scatent omnibus oratoriis preceptis ac artibus instructi quo hominum mentes ad elemosinam & commiserationem permoveant. Neque etiam bonos illos viros hic nomino, quorum magnus est numerus qui se fratres dici volunt, quamvis inter se odiis plusquam fraternis dissideant quos ego planè eos esse existimo quos Chaucerus noster ex loco illo parum honesto sese proripere scribit, qui nugas ac nenias venditando in eam authoritatem pervenerunt. Ut æquum existiment rogari potius sese quam rogare: tanquam viri omnibus virtutibus excellentes ad quorum pedes bona nostra projicere debeamus, quanquam illorum pæne jam explosa est disciplina ab illis quorum novum est ancupium qui se Jesuistas appellant, & perfecti volunt esse, juxta illud. Estote perfecti sicut ego sum, inter quos Darbesherus noster non est minimus apostolorum si noster dicendus est qui & nos & seipsum deservit & aliam vitam alios mores sequitur, illi autem quos dixi Cives qui tantum opibus valent, clientelis miseorum opificum in quos imperium habent & suis divitiis freti, pecuniam sibi imperari non patiuntur, sciunt enim neminem esse qui eos cogere possit, cum rex parum fisus nobilibus, tutelam urbium arma, machinas, bellicas, mœnia, & quicquid est roboris illis commiserit, rogati autem immensas & crebras priores pensitationes & tributa causantur itaque pauxillulam tandem aliquam pecuniam prout nec causa postulat tanquam ab invitis quasi vi sibi exprimi patiuntur. Jam Episcopi Abbates & alii quibus opima sunt sacerdotia cum videant omnium oculos in se ac bona sua esse conjectos nec aliquam aliam esse rationem conficiende pecuniæ nisi quæ ex eorum bonis & prediis distrahendis redigatur. Quis erit (inquiunt) tandem nostri expilandi finis si bellum adhuc duret. An non sex decimas annuas fructuum nostrorum pensitamus. Vix annus adhuc est quod octingenta millia francorum que sunt centena millia librarum nostrarum in profectionem Polonicam dedimus jamque nos urgent Questores regii ad solutionem unius millionis & dimidiæ francorum, que summa est quingentorum millium coronatorum gallicorum, quos rex approbante pontifice nobis extorquet: cujus pecuniæ solvendæ rationem nullam adhuc habemus. Non tametsi pontifex ad rem tam piam nempe ad bellum intestinum alendum, predia ecclesiastica ad eum summam venire permiserit, emptores tamen non reperiuntur, coguntque nos officiales & ministri regii pecuniam quam non habemus, nostro periculo representare: recepturos aliquando ex distractione bonorum, si qui tandem reperiantur, qui tam dubio jure litem futuram presenti pecunia velint comparare non enim ignotæ sunt artes pontificiæ: Veniet namque facile tempus cum Pontifex iste aut successor aliquis ejus restitutionem in integrum pro ecclesia non sine dirarum etiam imprecatione a se impetrari facillime patiatur, nulla habita eorum ratione qui in bona ecclesiastica pecuniam impenderunt. Itaque eo ventum est ut hi quorum causa bellum hoc geritur & qui evangelicos plurimum oderunt hi nunc pacem maximè expetant, & quemvis Dei cultum potius permittant, quam se indies argento emungi patiantur imò quidvis inquiunt potius in malam rem doceant Hugonoti, neque enim magis ab illis quam ab istis possumus expilari. Nec est illorum non inepta sanè oratio. Jam homines miseri qui sedibus pulsi patria carent, inopes vagantur, quibus insidiæ undique tenduntur, supplicia & mortes intentantur, qui deserti ab omnibus, perpetuas excubias ad sese tuendos agunt hi pacem si unqam antehac nunc certè fessi ac defatigati miserè cupiunt, ut aliquis tandem sit laborum finis & patria terra quiescere liceat. Nemo est igitur qui non uno ore pacem affectet, ad pacem oculos, animum & omnes cogitationes convertat. Quin & Pontifex ipse sibi timens & veritus quem res nec sit habitura exitum, & precipuè de comitatu Avinionensi sollicitus, alios non lacessitos esse malit, quam de suis rebus in periculum venire: sperans futurum ut rex intermisso bello integris viribus eos facile opprimat, quos nunc lacerato regno satis vexare non possit. Ex qua re factum est, ut sermonibus hominum certa pax facta, & negocium prorsus transactum esse diceretur, & ea fama per uniuersum orbem sparsa sit, pacem jam manibus teneri. Sed cum de pacis conditionibus agi ceptum est, longe fuerunt alie hominum voluntates, longè alius rei exitus. Nam quibus antea sua facilitate impositum est, ne in idem discrimen inciderent Evangelicæ libertati & saluti sue presidiis, urbibus ac rebus aliis que ad vitam tuendam pertinent sibi consulere voluerunt, nec se aliorum fidei committendos esse censuerunt quin rebus omnibus integris arma sumere possent, ut si non melior at saltem non deterior istis pactionibus illorum conditio fieret. Alii contra qui spe miseros illos homines devorarant & sibi occasionem egregiam oblatam existimabant, incautos homines vafricia & insidiis prorsus opprimendi, cum viderent non esse locum dolis quin potius futurum ut Evangelium propagaretur, nec esse in illorum potestate, ut istis conditionibus homines Evangelici exterminarentur, quidvis potius faciendum esse suadebant, quam locum illis dari quos extinctos esse cupiunt, hi & se & sua omnia regi offerunt, & quoduis discrimen subeundum esse censent. Itaque nunc Pontifex bellum alioqui formidans pecuniam mutuam satis amplam u(l)troneus offert: (sibi tamen satis callide pignoribus cavens) ut regis animum a pacis cogitatione avertat. Sunt etiam alii viri providi & rebus suis prospicientes, qui sciunt vetus illud esse, mobilia esse gallorum ingenia ad suscipiendum bellum (neque enim in tanta penuria & tantes difficultatibus de aliis perturbandis desinunt cogitare, nec istis unquam aut voluntas aut pecunia ad alios vexandos deest) qui ista penitius perspiciunt & sibi prudenter cavent, hi frigidam suffundunt, pristinam gloriam nominis gallici commemorantes, & ignominiam ob oculos ponentes, si tale dedecus subeatur ut quasi victi manus tendere, & leges jam non dare sed accipere cogantur, futurum ut tempore vires regia crescant, alii contra vel simultatibus solvantur, vel insidiis opprimantur, vel premiis & pollicitationibus separentur, qua ex re fiet aliquando ut rex victor stirpem illam hominum prorsus exterminet, & ecclesiæ Romane vindex eternam sibi famam ad posteros transmittat. Hic ego si tibi que fuerint postulata, que responsa, que argumenta in utramque partem adducta, qua constantia permansum sit in petitis, quibus artibus Evangelicorum legati tentati sint, quibus intercessoribus res tractata sit, historiam tibi non epistolam scriberem nolo tamen tibi ignotum esse egregiam fuisse in hac re Helvetiorum protestantium operam, ego autem quod potui porro ut est apud comicum nostrum. His igitur rebus effectum est ut post multas & longas de pace disceptationes incertiores simus multo quam dudum, pacem enim facere noluit bellum autem gerere non possunt.

Cum ista superiora aliquot dies scripta apud me haberem, nec describendi esset ocium accepi tandem tuas vicesimo quarto Maii scriptas, ex quibus intelligo esse etiam apud vos fidefragos, ut tuo verbo utar, nam fœdifragos usquam gentium reperiri non est fas dicere, itaque nactus ocium te istis quibuscunque carere nolui, nec si tibi sit cordi ullum laborem recusabo, quin priores etiam meas queas tu le amisisse tantopere quereris descriptas ad te mittam. Vale & nostros omnes meo nomine diligenter saluta nam eos de mea salute sollicitos esse scio. Lutetie Parisiorum ultimo Junii 1575.

Tui amantissimus V. D.

[Not addressed]

[Endorsed] Ult^[o]. Junii[1784] 1575 M^[r] D. Dale to m l. from Paris.

[In Burghley’s hand] a lettre wrytten in latin concerning the state of France.

APPENDIX XXXV

[P. 503, n. 2]

STATE PAPERS, FOREIGN

ELIZABETH, VOL. CXXXI, NO. 895

[Henry III to Queen Elizabeth]

Treshaulte tresexellente, et trespuissante princesse Nostre treschere et tresamee bonne seur et cousine ayant entendu le trespas ces jours passez advenu du feu Roy nostre trecher s^[r] et frere nous en avons receu ung tresgrand regret enuy & desplaisir pour la singulliere affection et fraternelle amitie quil nous a tousjours portee et demonstrée par tous bons offices. Et aussy pour la perte grande qui en demeure generallement a toute la Chrestiente, et a nous particulierement, qui luy avions tant dobligation comme nous avons encores en sa memoire, pour tant d’honneurs et de faveurs quil luy a pleu tousjours nous departir de son vivant. Ce que saichant que les princes ses voisins auront pareillement porte avec douleur, et mesmement vous, avec qui il avoit et a tousjours eu si bonne & parfaicte amitye, voisinaige et intelligence. Nous avons pense estre bien convenable a l’amitye mutuelle qui est aussy entre nous noz Royaumes et pais de nous en condoulloir avec vous, comme nous faisons par la presente en attendant qu’estant arrivé en nostre Royaume de France (ainsy que nous l’esperons bien tost avec layde de Dieu) nous puissions nous acquicter plus dignement de cest office. Voullans bien vous dire & asseurer cependant que si vous avez congneu le feu Roy notred. S^[r] et frere desireulx de conserver la bonne et sincere amitye voisinance et intelligence que vous aviez ensemble, vous n’en debuez pas moings attendre & esperer de nous son successeur a la corone de France Ne voullant seullement continuer en lad. amitye, mais la fortifier asseurer et augmenter par tous honnorables & dignes offices que doibuent les princes amis les ungz aux autres ainsy qu’avons donne charge au s^[r] de la Mothe Fennelon vous faire entendre que vous prions recevoir et avoir agreable aupres de vous pour y estre notre conseiller et ambassadeur resident, tout ainsy quil estoit du feu roy nostre feu S^[r] et frere Et ne pouvons aussy trouver que tresbon l’exercice quil a faict de ladicte legation de puis ledict decedz advenu, tant suivant les tres de feu notred. S^[r] & frere que celles de la Royne nostre treshonnoree dame et mere qui en avoit tout pouvoir et a laquelle nous envoyons presentement le nostre le plus ample quil nous est possible. Saichant combien elle merite de cested. corone, et combien elle sest aussy tousjours rendue affectionnée au bien de nous tous ses enfens, et des affaires et prosperite de notred. Royaulme, vous priant croire ledict s^[r] de la Mothe de ce quil vous dire sur tout ce que dessus et y adjouster foy comme feriez a nous mesmes Qui prions Dieu treshaulte tresexellente et trespuissante princesse Nostre treschere et tresamee bonne seur et cousine vous avoir en sa tressainte et tresdigne garde. Escript a Cracovye le xv^[ne] jour de Juing 1574.

[Signed] Vostre bon frere et cousin HENRY WARSEVICZ

[Addressed] A treshaulte tresexcellente et trespuissante princesse Nostre treschere et tresamee bonne seur & cousine la Royne D’Angleterre.

[Endorsed] June xv^[th] 1574. From the K. of Polonia to her Ma^[tie]. Dated at Cracovia. He condolethe the deathe of the K. his brother offreth and requireth lyke contynewance of amitie as was betwene her and his brother Desiereth her Ma^[tie] to accept Mon^[sr] de la Mothe for his Ambassadeur.

APPENDIX XXXVI

[P. 504, n. 2]

ARCHIVES NATIONALES

K. 1,537, PIECE NO. 22

[Report of a Spanish Spy about Calais (Deciphered)]

[Au dos] Descifrado.

Avisos de Cales à XVIIIº de Março 1575

[En tete] Avisos de Cales à XVIIIº de Março 1575

Quiero dezir el runrun que anda entre estos Franceses, no porque me passe por el pensamiento que deva ser assi, pero en secreto se dize que el Rey de Francia anda tramando para yr sobre los Estados, ó tomarlos, y que su her, mano se casa con hija del Principe, y otros muchos casamientos que se hazen-y que se haze armada en toda Francia para ello, y oy ha llegado aqui aquel Embaxador con treynta cavallos, que va á la Reyna de Inglaterra, y viene de Paris, y assi mismo se aguarda (segun se dize) el que esta en Brusselas, para yr tambien a la dicha Inglaterra. De suerte que no se sabe otro sino esto, que, como digo, se dize en secreto, y en partes que nos lo han dicho. Plegue a Dios que nos guarde dello, que bien creo si suspection dello huviesse, lo sabria el Embaxador que esta en Paris y lo advertiria a essa Bolsa, pues importa. Aunque, como digo, no creo nada dello, y no he querido dexar de escrivirlo en esta, para que se tenga aviso dello, sin que se entienda, pues no se suffre dezir.

APPENDIX XXXVII

[P. 505, n. 3]

STATE PAPERS, DOMESTIC

ELIZABETH, VOL. CV. NO. 51

[Walsingham to Lord Burghley]

My verry good L. I send your L. sooche letters as I receyved from owre Imb. dyrectid unto you by the w^[ch] yt may appeare unto you that Q. mother had some intentyon under the cullore of a Parle w^[t] her sonne to have intrapped him. I thinke the gentleman hathe to good exsperyence of her to truste her (thowghe nature myght somewhat move him therin) I longe to heare that he were past the Ryvere of Loyre: for before that tyme I shall be greatly jealouse of his savetye. Her ma^[t] was perswaded under the cullor of scooryng the seas to have set owt two of her shipps to have receyved him yf being not well assysted he shoold be forced to flye but she can not be drawen to yelde therto. This daye ther came letters from the justyces of Devonshire that the seconde of this monethe ther arryved on ther cost 48 sayle of Spanyshe men of warre whoe desyered herborrowynge but were denyed for that they had no passeporte of her ma^[t]. Notw^[t]standyng they suffered the Admyrall and vyceadmirall to come in to the porte of Darmouthe: wher as the gentlemen advertyce yt is thowght they wyll lande some treasvre to be conveyed by lande unto London The rest of the ships are gon towardes Dunkyrke. The Generall of them is Don Petro de Baldis whoe maryed Petro Malendas daughter. The arryvall of this armye makethe me greatly to dowbt the P. of Oranges well doinge: whoe alreadye seamethe to be in verry harde case. I praye God owre merchauntes fynde them good neyghebowres. Owt of the northe we have hearde nothing laetly And so having nothing ells to advertyce I commyt your L. to Goods good kepyng most humbly takyng my leave. At Rycot the vj^[th] of Octobre 1575.

Y^[r] L. to commavnde FRA: WALSYNGHAM

[Addressed] To the right honorable my vearie good Lord the L. treasurer.

[Endorsed] 6. Octob. 1575. M^[r] Secret: Walsingham the Spanish flete in the west.

INDEX

INDEX

Abbeville, riot at, 133.

Acuna, Don Juan de, mission of, to Savoy, 308.

Adresse, baron des, Huguenot chieftain in Dauphiné, 147; prince of Condé thinks of joining, 153; lieutenant of, in Provence, 395.

Agde, court at, 252.

Agen, riot at, 133, 134; Catholic league of, 215, 225, 254; Montluc thinks of retiring to, 403; Montluc fortifies, 406.

Aides, 82.

Aigues Mortes, Damville introduces Turkish fleet into, 492.

Aix, association of Provence formed at, 214, 225; court at, 251.

Alava, Spanish ambassador in France: theft of cipher of, 266, 317, n. 6; exceeds instructions in threatening war, 266, n.; charges Catherine de Medici with duplicity, 315; protests against overtures for peace, 417; incident with Tavannes, 418, 419; haughty reply of Charles IX to, 441.

Albanian troops with Alva, 307, 310.

Albi, 395, 405, 406. See also Viscounts.

Albret, Jeanne d’, queen of Navarre, wife of Antoine of Bourbon and mother of Henry IV: mentioned, 120; Antoine of Bourbon quarrels with, 132; demand for banishment of, by Spanish ambassador, 133; consideration shown, 239; plot of Montluc and Spain to kidnap, 260; excommunicated, 261; maintains court preacher to anger of Catholics, 288; mobilizes troops in Béarn, 307; territories of, 350; crushes Catholic League at St. Palais, 355; crosses Garonne River “under the nose of Montluc”, 368, n.; pawns her jewels, 378; directs foreign negotiations with Huguenots, 379; negotiations of government with, 391-93.

Alençon, François, duke of, youngest brother of Charles IX: governor of Paris, 358; marriage negotiations with Queen Elizabeth, 430 ff.; character and appearance of, 432; Huguenot-Politique plot to recognize, as heir apparent, 477, 478; complaint of, to Charles IX, 479; arrested, 480; escape of, 505; revolt of provinces to, 506; terms demanded of Henry III, 508; privileges of, in Peace of Monsieur, 519, 520.

Alessandria de la Paille, Alva at, 311.

Alexander VI, bull of, 300.

Allny, secretary sent to confer about peace, 344.

Alsace, Baron Bolwiller of, 301.

Alva, duke of, proxy for Philip II at marriage of Elizabeth of Valois, 3; suspected of urging inquisition in France, 12; favors repressive policy of Henry II, 117; upon commerce of Low Countries, 163; purposes to have Havre put in hands of Philip II for mediation between France and England, 198; advises fortification of Gravelines, 267, 268; instructions at Bayonne, 273; advises execution of Huguenot leaders, 274; relations with Catherine de Medici at Bayonne, 277; influence over duke of Montpensier, 304; Philip II determines to send, to Netherlands, 305; march of, through Savoy, Franche Comté, and Lorraine, 305-11; sails from Cartagena and arrives at Genoa, 309; arrives at Brussels, 312; and the Gueux, 314; arrests Egmont and Hoorne, 318; opinion of, of cardinal of Lorraine, 336, n.; appealed to by cardinal of Lorraine, 336, 337; offers aid to Catherine of Medici, 338; suggests coming in person to relief of French crown, 338; instructions to, 351; protests against Huguenot activity in Flanders, 360; defeats Louis of Nassau at Jemmingen, 361; executes Egmont and Hoorne, 361; offer of aid accepted by France, 380; Jeanne d’Albret protests against, 393; tyranny of, in the Netherlands, 441; revolt of Flushing and Middelburg against, 444; determines to retire his forces into Ghent and Antwerp, 444; desperate straits of, 446; intercepts Genlis’ relief column, 447.

Amboise, 140; drownings at, 154; royal chest at, 346. See also Amboise, Edict of.

Amboise, conspiracy of: origin, 28-31; participation of D’Andelot in, 30; secret of, discovered, 32; crushed, 33-39; Condé accused of complicity in, 40; Catherine de Medici accused of being secret party to, by Tavannes, 42, n.; return of French exiles after, 194; memory of, haunts Catherine de Medici, 288.

Amboise, Edict of, 191; hostility of Spain to, 194; cannot be enforced, 207; overtures to break, 209; rupture of, 250; amendments to, 295, 318.

Amiens, three-fourths of population said to be Huguenot, 230.

Amsterdam, endangered, 444; all Holland lost to Spain, save Rotterdam and, 446.

Andelot, François de Châtillon, sieur d’, 6, 8; in conspiracy of Amboise, 30; counsels Catherine de Medici, 128; Spanish ambassador objects to presence of, at court, 133; joins Condé at Meaux, 137; appears before Paris, 137; overtures made by, 139; lieutenant to Condé, 140; destroys bridge at Jargeau, 151; sent to Germany for assistance, 154, n., 158; plans to cut Paris off, 159; gives Aumale the slip, 162; German horse of, 172; serious position of, in Orleans, 186; asks aid of Queen Elizabeth, 187; quarrels with Catherine de Medici, 238; sent to Switzerland, 307; sent to protect Champagne against Alva, 315; sent to seize Poissy, 332; proposition to marry son of, to sister of duke of Guise, 345; mentioned, 358; death of, 378.

Anduze, Catholic league at, 355.

Angennes, 255.

Angers, Huguenot outburst at, 95, 127; mentioned, 140; cruelties at, 148, 288; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Angoulême, bishop of, French ambassador in Rome, 57, 283; duke of Anjou raises siege of, 378, 405, 406; Charles IX offers to yield to Huguenots, 416; revolts, 502; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Angoumois, revolt in, 150; duke of Anjou in, 381.

Anjou, 141, 154, 286; Catholic league in, 216.

Annates, 80.

Antinori, agent of Pius IV, 250.

Antoine of Bourbon, king of Navarre, wife of Jeanne d’Albret and father of Henry IV: mentioned, 8; character and policy of, 23, 24; attends Elizabeth of Valois into Spain, 24; suspected of complicity in conspiracy of Amboise, 42; Huguenot overtures to, 63; appreciated by Catherine de Medici, 72; promised Sardinia, 73; inclines to Spain, 96; nominal authority of, 99; hopes for restoration of Navarre, 100; relations of, with Spanish ambassador, 100-2; uncertain conduct of, 116, 117; plot against, 119; hopes to compound with Philip II, 131; negotiates with Vatican, 131; promised “kingdom” of Tunis, 132; instructed in Catholic faith, 132; quarrels with Jeanne d’Albret, 132; offended at Coligny, 133; surrenders to Triumvirate, 137; protests against Charles IX’s removal to Blois, 137; supports duke of Guise, 138; overtures to Catherine de Medici, 139; weakens, 141; publishes proclamation against Huguenots in Paris, 149; at Vernon, 152; at Blois, 154; mortally wounded at siege of Rouen, 169; dies, 170; confesses religion of Augsburg, 171, n.

Antwerp, population of, 314; Alva determines to retire his forces into, 444.

Aosta, duke of Alva at, 311.

Aquitaine, 26, 45.

Aragon, Ferdinand of, 395.

Argentan, Montgomery takes, 472.

Argenteuil, 327.

Armagnac, cardinal of: helps form Catholic league at Toulouse, 214; revives Catholic league at Toulouse, 354, 397.

Arnay-le-Duc, battle of, 416.

Arpajon, viscount of, 294, 395.

Artois, frontier difficulty with France, 263; revolt in, 265; mentioned, 267.

Association: of Huguenots in Languedoc, 207; Catholic associations, 213; of Bordeaux, 213, 214; of Provence, 214, 225; of Catholic towns in Rouennais, 216; Huguenot, in Dauphiné, 223; Association catholique at Beauvais, 354. See also Brotherhood of Catholics; Confraternity; Guild; League.

Aubespine, Sebastian de, bishop of Limoges: French ambassador in Spain, 51, 97; letter of, about Philip II, 93, n.; secret letter of, to Philip II, 97, 98; argues with Philip II, 117; sent to Switzerland, 241, 242; sent to Spain, 316; confers about peace, 344.

Aubigné, Huguenot historian, eye-witness of executions of Amboise, 39.

Auch, 405.

Augsburg, Confession of, 122; Antoine of Bourbon dies in, 271, n.; Peace of, 409.

Aumale, Claude of Guise, duke of, 35, 73; joins duke of Guise before Orleans, 152; captures Honfleur, 154; approaches Rouen, 155; atrocious practice of, 155; Swiss and Germans sent to aid of, 162; lets D’Andelot slip by, 162; levies troops in Champagne, 168; blunder of, 168; letter of, intercepted, 255; reiters of, 338; army of, in Champagne, 369; cost of army of, 375; fails to intercept duke of Deuxponts, 380; reproached by Catherine de Medici for negligence and cowardice, 382.

Auvergne, 286; Grands Jours d’, 291; Coligny in, 416.

Auxerre, 127, 388; rising in, 150; plot to seize, 350; duke of Deuxponts in, 380.

Avenelles, betrays conspiracy of Amboise, 33.

Avignon, 50; court at, 256; Joyeuse returns to, 348; Huguenots at, 411; papal nuncio protests against Huguenots in, 417.

Baden, margrave of, 336, 373; mission of Castelnau to, 380.

Bajazet, revolt of, 248.

Bar, duchy of, in vassalage to duke of Lorraine, 425.

Bardaxi, agent of Philip II in negotiations with Montluc, 260; instructions to, 351.

Bar-le-Duc, Huguenot alarm over Charles IX’s sojourn at, 233, 249.

Basel, alarm at, over Alva’s approach, 308.

Bassompierre, 180 and n.; wounded at Moncontour, 389.

Bayeux, Huguenots of, 148; capitulation of, 188.

Bayonne, 50; conference at, 225, 272-81; Spain impatient for fulfilment of promise made at, 283; uncertainty as to what was done at, 294; cardinal Santa Croce at, 295; no proof of alliance between France and Spain at, 318; Philip II’s interest in Catholic provincial leagues at, 351.

Béarn, plot to seize, by Spain, 260; Jeanne d’Albret mobilizes troops in, 307, 350; Montluc’s plan to conquer, 397, 413; proposal to neutralize, 399, 406, 407.

Beaugency, surprise of, 151, 152; Condé marches to, 153; Coligny at, 182.

Beauvais, Huguenot outburst at, 95; Association catholique at, 354.

Beggars of the Sea, capture of Brille by, 444.

Bellegarde, sensechal of Toulouse: routs viscounts, 397; sent to Poland, 497.

Bellièvre, sent to Switzerland, 240, 241.

Bergerac, 406; Edict of, 345; Peace of, 540.

Berghes, De, Flemish noble, 264, 265.

Bern, 154, 240; forms league with Valais, 308; treaty of, with Savoy, 309; neutrality of, 371.

Bernina Pass, 241.

Berry, Tavannes organizes Catholic league in, 354; duke of Deuxponts in, 380.

Besançon, Granvella returns to, 265; Alva’s route through, 308.

Beza, at Colloquy of Poissy, 111, 113, 114; at Synod of La Rochelle, 230; at Synod of La Ferté-sous-Jouarre, 240.

Beziers, court at, 252, 406.

Biragues, a Milanese, archbishop of Sens: made chancellor, 367; made keeper of the seal, 425; treachery of, 425, n.; urges Charles IX to imprison marshal Montmorency, 479; protests against, 492.

Biron, sent to La Rochelle, 454; made a marshal, 407.

Blamont, interview of Catherine de Medici and Louis of Nassau at, 463.

Blanche of Castile, 252.

Blaye, 408.

Blésois, Protestantism in, 238.

Blois, 27, 36, 161, 288; Charles IX removed to, 137, 140; camp at, 151; drownings at, 154; court returns to, 185; working capital of France, 190; viscounts cross Loire at, 396; treaty of, 430; Charles IX signs treaty of, 445; repudiated by Queen Elizabeth, 448; no massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Bochetel, bishop of Rennes, French ambassador in Vienna, 57, 371.

Bohemia, 464.

Bois de Vincennes, 137; court at, 139.

Bolwiller, plans recovery of Metz, 301, 302. See also Cardinal’s War.

Bonneval, 161.

Bordeaux, 27, 408; saved by Montluc, 151; association of, 213, 214; court at, 255, 271; Huguenot plot in, 368; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450; Alençon demands, 508. See also Château Trompette.

Bouillon, duke of, 126; neutrality of, 162; activity of, in Low Countries, 315; disaffection of, 375; Spain’s anxiety over presence of, at Sedan, 472; fear of co-operation of, with Louis of Nassau and prince of Condé, 476; death of, 498.

Boulogne, demanded by Huguenots, 332, 345.

Bourbon. See Antoine of Bourbon.

Bourbon, Charles, cardinal of, accompanies Elizabeth of Valois to Spain, 7, 73; reproaches Catherine de Medici, 288; assumes pay of reiters, 346; with army in Saintonge, 382.

Bourbonnais, famine slight in, 288.

Bourdillon, marshal, succeeds Marshal Termes, 182.

Bourges, 64, 127, 142; siege of, 159-61; Catholic league established at, 354; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Brabant, 265, 268.

Brie, troops levied in, 160; wheat dear in, 286; Catholic army in, 334.

Brille, capture of, by Beggars of the Sea, 444.

Brissac, marshal, 7; transferred from Picardy to Normandy, 60; Philip II writes to, 97; hostility of Huguenots toward, 98; relations with Triumvirate, 98; resigns, 126; charged with corrupt practice, 140; in Rouen, 182; quits Paris for Normandy, 199; mentioned, 350; defeats viscounts in Périgord, 396.

Brittany, 31, 45, 76, 146, 286.

Brochart, Huguenot commander at Sancerre, 372.

Brotherhood of Catholics in France, proposed at Council of Trent by cardinal of Lorraine, 211. See also League; Association; Confraternity.

Brouage, salt staple at, 409, 415.

Brucamonte, Don Gonzalo de, Spanish captain, 310.

Bruges, capture by Sir Humphrey Gilbert, 446.

Bruniquel, Bernard Roger, viscount of, 394, 395.

Brussels, infected with heresy, 266; Alva’s arrival at, 312.

Burghley, Lord, letter of Dale, English ambassador in France to, 232.

Burgundy, 124, 132, 148, 329; troops levied in, 160; petition of Estates for abolition of Protestant worship in, 234; price of wheat in, 286; endangered by Alva’s march, 308; Catholic resentment in, 349; Confrérie du St. Esprit in, 352, 353; vigilance of Tavannes in, 362; concentration of troops in, 363. See also Tavannes; Dijon; Châlons-sur-Saône.

Burie, governor of Guyenne, 36, 127, 156.

Busanval, 327.

Cadillac, Catholic league formed at, 216, 226.

Caen, 142, 162; Huguenots of, 148; arrival of English money at, 188; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Cahors, 405; riot at, 133.

Calais, capture of, 21; mentioned, 125, 126; and Havre-de-Grace, 162; English hope to recover, 163, 164; pale of, 166; Spanish fear lest England acquire, 181; Havre might have been another, 185; England proposes to trade Havre and Dieppe for, 198; English right to, 199; France claims forfeiture of English rights to, 203; restitution of, demanded by English ambassador, 204; Spain’s anxiety over, 267; French alarm over, 316; Condé demands, 332.

Candalle, activity of, in Guyenne, 226; helps to form league of Agen, 254; plans to attack Montgomery at Condom, 407.

Capuchins, 251.

Cardinal’s War, 303. See also Metz; Lorraine, cardinal of.

Carlos, Don, son of Philip II: proposed marriage of, with Mary Stuart, 94, 245, 246; madness of, 246; proposed as husband of Marguerite of Valois, 424; death of, 424.

Carnavalet, Madame, 428.

Cartagena, Alva sails from, 309.

Casimir, count palatine, 158; reiters of, 333, 360; hopes of Huguenots pinned on, 335; reported to be coming, 382; ambition “to Calvinize the world”, 444. See also Count Palatine.

Castlenau, mission of, to margrave of Baden, 380.

Castres, resists Joyeuse, 348; Montgomery at, 405, 406.

Cateau-Cambrésis, Treaty of, 5, 199, 203, 441; commercial importance of, 204.

Catherine de Medici, Queen of France, 1; policy after conspiracy of Amboise, 42, 64; Venetian ambassador’s description of, 65; policy of, after death of Francis II, 72, 73; has custody of seal, 74; control of government by, 75; adroitness of, 77; shrewdness of, 91; fears Spanish intervention, 94; vacillation of, 96; invites bishop of Valence to preach at court, 98; alarmed by formation of Triumvirate, 99; labors for Huguenot cause, 102; warned against policy of toleration, 110; not intimidated, 119, 122; in fear of Guises, 124; endeavors to maintain balance of parties, 126; perseveres in policy of toleration, 128; upbraided by Chantonnay, 133; demands his recall, 133; sends St. André back to his government, 133; offended at Cardinal Tournon, 133; fear lest Guises seize King, 137; overruled by constable and king of Navarre, 139; surrenders to Triumvirate and asks aid of Spain, 143; seizes church plate, 146; supports Triumvirate, 150; wants to end first civil war by composition, 172; activity after battle of Dreux, 182; justifies Edict of Amboise, 195; pays Coligny’s reiters, 198; determines to push war against England, 199; appeals to Paris for loan, 200; enterprise in siege of Havre, 201; character of, 202; in supreme control, 206; demands dissolution of Catholic leagues, 225, 226; seeks to pacify the kingdom, 232; quarrels with D’Andelot, 238; co-operates with the Guises, 243; ambition of, 247; offends Philip II by favorable policy toward Turks, 248; Catholic pressure upon, 249, 250; visits Nostradamus, the astrologer, 251; alarmed at growth of Catholic leagues, 255, 256; interview with Alva at Bayonne, 277; ambition of, in Poland, 283; reproached by Cardinal Bourbon, 288; haunted by conspiracy of Amboise, 288; weakness of, 293, 294; demands withdrawal of Roggendorf, 295; espouses policy of political Huguenots, 295; alarmed at Alva’s march, 307; accused of stealing Spanish ambassador’s cipher, 317, n.; looks to Alva for aid, 328; sends Lignerolles “to practice the stay of the reiters”, 330; urged to make overtures after battle of St. Denis, 333; anxiety over Emperor’s claim to Three Bishoprics, 336; asks aid of Spanish troops against the reiters, 338; popular rage against, 343; consults Nonio, the astrologer, 344; accuses Montluc of secret dealings with Philip II, 351; reproaches Aumale for negligence and cowardice, 382; joins army in Saintonge, 382; approves feigned attack on Châtellerault by duke of Anjou, 387; disappointed at Bayonne, 423; dreams of marrying Charles IX to elder daughter of the Emperor, 424; attitude of, toward proposed marriage of duke of Anjou and Queen Elizabeth, 427; double policy of, 435; jealous of Coligny, 440; responsibility of, for massacre of St. Bartholomew, 449, 452, 453; interview of, with Louis of

Nassau at Blamont, 463; folly of Polish ambition of, 467; tries to bribe La Noue, 477; refuses to put Henry of Navarre to death, 481; assumes regency on death of Charles IX, 484; anxiety for return of Henry III, 488; sinister influence over Henry III, 488, 489; Spanish troops offered to, by Requesens, 494; tries to wheedle Alençon, 505; illness of, 511.

Catholic lines in August, 1562, 161.

Catholics, violence of, 240.

Caudebec, revolts, 148; mentioned, 164, 177, 181.

Caumont, viscount of, 394.

Celles, Coligny at, 182.

Cévennes, viscounts in, 395.

Chalais, 379, 406.

Châlons-sur-Marne, 147, 232.

Châlons-sur-Saône, saved by Tavannes, 149; mentioned, 154, 157; organization of La fraternité des catholiques at, 353, 354.

Chambéry, Alva’s route through, 308.

Chambre ardente, 11.

Chambres mi-parties, 393.

Champagne, 45, 52, 76, 92, 202, 329, 344; troops levied in, 168; reiters meeting in, 200; Protestantism in, 228; price of wheat in, 286; endangered by Alva’s march, 308; ravages of Huguenot army in, 333; Catholic army in, 334; Catholic league formed in, 354; Aumale’s army in, 369; ravages of reiters in, 507.

Champagne, Fair of, devastated by reiters, 420 and note.

Chantilly, Marshal Montmorency goes to, 357.

Chantonnay, Perrinot, sieur de, brother of Cardinal Granvella, Spanish ambassador in France, 25, 32, n.; endeavors to persuade Antoine of Bourbon, 90, 100-2; threatens Catherine de Medici, 97; directs Triumvirate, 131; son of, is christened, 133; upbraids Catherine de Medici, 133; recall of, demanded, 133; protests against Chancellor L’Hôpital, 137; tries to intimidate Catherine de Medici, 176, 195; traverses south of France in disguise, 245, n.; withdrawal of, from France, 266; aids plot to recover Metz, 302; transferred to Vienna, 424.

Charenton, 159; capture of Pont de, by Condé, 326; Condé withdraws from, 332; Huguenot demand for freedom of worshiping at, 416.

Charles III of Lorraine, marries sister of Charles IX, 249.

Charles V, Emperor, 3, 55, 85, 124; fails to capture Tunis, 132.

Charles V, Free Companies in reign of, 396.

Charles VII, Pragmatic Sanction of, 116; grants silk monopoly to Lyons, 234; mentioned, 252.

Charles VIII, fiscal policy of, 83.

Charles IX, King of France (1560-74): accession of, 71, 74, 123; begins reign with policy of toleration, 94; coronation of, 101; urged to stand fast in the faith by Cardinal Tournon, 111; demands repression of sedition in Agenois, 134; fear lest he be seized by Guises, 136; removed to Blois, 137; asks aid of Philip II, 143; unable to control Paris, 154; bitter against cardinal of Lorraine, 196; majority of, declared, 208; reply of, about Calais, 204; industrial crisis in reign of, 217; remonstrance of, to Pope, 230; purpose of tour of provinces, 232; Guises want him to marry Mary Stuart, 244; wants to marry a Hapsburg princess, 247; proposed marriage of, with Queen Elizabeth, 249; threatens to dispossess the Rohans, 288; advocates administrative reform, 290; proposes amendments to Edict of Amboise, 295; asked to permit Spanish troops to cross France to Flanders, 299, 305; Spain fears appeal of, to Huguenots, 302; strengthens garrisons in Languedoc and Provence, 306; sends troops into Lyonnais, 307; Huguenots attempt to kidnap, 319-21 (see Meaux); dares not accept offers of Philip II, 330; insists in disarmament of Huguenots, 333; argues with count palatine, 335; reply to Condé, 341; poverty of, 344; reply of, to demands of Huguenots, 345; accuses cardinal of Lorraine, 350; promises to maintain peace of Longjumeau, 350; displaces Marshal Montmorency as governor of Paris, 358; to marry daughter of Emperor, 364; views renewal of war with alarm, 375; at siege of St. Jean-d’Angély, 390; petitioned to make peace by his council, 391; Teligny sent to, 392; protests against peace made to, 394; goes to Mont St. Michel, 413; secret dealings of, with Montluc, 413; influence of battle of Arnay-le-Duc upon, 416; offers to yield La Rochelle, Angoulême, and Montauban, 416; offers to trade Perpignan or Lansac for La Charité, 416; infractions of Peace of St. Germain by, 420; promises reform of taxes, 421; imposes new taxes, 421; marries Elizabeth of Austria, 424; releases duke of Lorraine from vassalage to France for duchy of Bar, 425; vague replies of, to demands of Spain, 426; character of, 438; haughty reply of, to Alava, 441; signs Treaty of Blois, 445; letter of, found on person of Genlis promising aid in liberation of Low Countries, 447; consternation of, at failure of Genlis’ expedition, 448; overtures of, to La Rochelle, 454; unsuccessful in recruiting footmen in Germany, 454; sends duke of Longueville to La Noue, 467; signs peace with La Rochelle, 459, 460; jealous of Guises, 462; inclines to aid Netherlands again, 462; warned by Morvilliers, 468; plans to convene Huguenot deputies of Languedoc and Dauphiné, 469; ill of smallpox, 469; forbids circulation of bad money in France, 470; makes sale of new offices, 470; orders census to be taken in each bailiwick, 471; sends Torcy and Turenne to Montgomery, 472; tract against, comparing to sultan, 475; plot to seize at St. Germain, 477, 478; urged to execute Cossé and Montmorency, 481; last illness of, 483, 484.

Charron, provost to Paris, Henry III’s threat to, 522.

Chartres, 36, 161, 181; Catholic camp at, 153; Condé retires toward, 177; Condé imprisoned at, 182; court leaves, 185; gunpowder factory at, blows up, 186.

Chartres, vidame of, suspected of conspiracy, 51; arrested, 59; imprisoned in Bastille, 62; prosecution of, 69; sister of, 126; agrees to deliver Havre-de-Grace to English, 164.

Châteaudun, 36, 161, 181; gunpowder factory at, blows up, 186.

Château-Thierry, Swiss at, 320; military base of Catholics, 373; granted to Casimir, count palatine, 521 and n.

Châtelet, 3.

Châtellerault, duchy of, given to young duke of Guise, 206; taken by Huguenots, 384; attacked by duke of Anjou, 387.

Châtillon, cardinal-bishop of Beauvais, 8, 93, 350; proposal to expel from country, 132; banishment of, demanded, 153; feud of, with Guises, 206, 207; resignation of, demanded, 289; sent to confer about peace, 344; learns of plot of Guises, 350. See also Coligny; Andelot.

Châtillons, young duke of Guise refuses to be reconciled with, 293.

Chaudien, Protestant pastor in Paris, 64.

Chavigny, 255; taken by Condé, 350.

Chinon, taken by duke of Guise, 154.

Ciappini Vitelle, marquis of, Italian commander, 311.

Claudine, sister of Charles IX, wife of Charles III of Lorraine, 249.

Clergy, supports Guises, 9; demands at States-General of Orleans, 77, 78; contribute 100,000 écus, 200; loan made by, 329; heavy taxation imposed upon, 344; offer to maintain war at their own expense, 417. See also States-General.

Clérie, 152; combat at, 182.

Cluny, Hôtel de, belonging to the Guises, attacked by a mob, 47.

Coconnas, arrest and execution of, 480, 481.

Cocqueville, failure of his invasion of Artois, 360.

Cognac, 283, 379, 405, 406.

Coligny, Gaspard de, admiral of France, 6; captured at battle of St. Quentin, 8; policy of, after conspiracy of Amboise, 42; sent to Normandy, 43; offers Huguenot petition, 52, 54, 73; influence of, 79; at Council of Fontainebleau, 94; efforts of, for toleration, 103; plot against, 119; made governor of Normandy, 126; counsels Catherine de Medici, 128; Spanish ambassador objects to presence of, at court, 133; Antoine of Bourbon offended with, 133; joins Condé at Meaux after massacre of Vassy, 137; appears before Paris, 137; at Montreuil, 138; aims to seize line of Loire River, 138; overtures to, 139; destroys bridge at Jargeau, 151; at Orleans, 154; solicits English aid, 162; in battle of Dreux, 179; at Villefranche, 181; crosses Loire, 182; tries to join earl of Warwick in Havre, 185; confers with Throckmorton, 185; in fear of his own reiters, 184, 187; asks aid of Queen Elizabeth, 187; desperate position of, 187; Madame de Guise refuses to recognize acquittal of, for murder of duke of Guise, 206; violence of Paris toward, 206, n.; not responsible for surrender of Havre-de-Grace to England, 224, n.; Alva advises his execution, 274; at Moulins, 289; hypocritical reconciliation of, with cardinal of Lorraine, 289; Spain demands banishment of, 300; unadmirable conduct of, 316; retires from court, 317; tries to prevent Strozzi’s coming, 329; saying of, 361; attempt to capture, 365; plans activity in south of France, 375; becomes actual leader of Huguenots after death of prince of Condé, 378; hopes to join duke of Deuxponts, 379; illness of, 383; fights battle of La Roche l’Abeille, 383; aims to take Saumur, 385; besieges Poitiers, 385-87; wounded at battle of Moncontour, 389; falls back on Niort after battle of Moncontour, 389; price put upon head of, 390; confers with Teligny, 392; joins Montgomery, 402; assumes offensive, 405; captures Port Ste. Marie, 406; and plans to winter there, 408; great blunder of, 410; besieges Toulouse, 410; illness of, 411; at Montbrison, 416; fights battle of Arnay-le-Duc, 416; urges marriage of Henry of Navarre with Marguerite of Valois and that of duke of Anjou to Queen Elizabeth, 422, 430 ff.; honorably received in Paris by Charles IX, and made member of Conseil du Roi, 439 and n.; persuades Charles IX to sign Treaty of Blois, 445; upbraids Charles IX for abandonment of Flemish enterprise, 448; attempt to kill, on August 22, 449; murdered in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450. See also Dreux; Jarnac; Moncontour; Arnay-le-Duc; St. Bartholomew, etc.

Colloquy of Poissy. See Poissy.

Cologne, elector of, 467.

Cominges, Bernard Roger, viscount of Bruniquel, 394.

Commendone, cardinal, at Polish Diet, 464.

Commerce: of Low Countries, 163, 267; through Havre-de-Grace, 203; Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis, 204; of Lyons, 233, 234; influence of civil war upon, 235; exportation of grain from Lombardy, 241; commercial promises of Spain, 242; cloth-trade of England, 268, 269; wine trade of France, 267-69; free trade in grain, 286; high price of wine, 287; Huguenots enter Flanders as merchants, 299; in salt, 309; Fair of Champagne devastated by reiters, 420 and n.; English in Flanders, 436, 437; Poland covets Hanseatic, 466; strife between Paris and Rouen, 470. See also Embden; Cateau-Cambrésis.

Compiègne, endangered by William of Orange, 370; Charles IX ill of smallpox at, 469.

Conciergerie, 3; La Mole and Coconnas imprisoned in, 480.

Concordat of 1516, 84, 196.

Condé, Louis de Bourbon, prince of: sent to Flanders, 7; accused of conspiracy of Amboise, 40; confers with Damville, 46; suspected of new conspiracy, 51; arrested, 62; prosecution of, 69-71; approached by Catherine de Medici, 72; acquittal of, 91, 92; seeks government of Champagne, 92; relations of, with Antoine of Bourbon, 100; plot against, 119; sends Hotman to Germany, 122; sent into Picardy, 126; counsels Catherine de Medici, 128; proposal to banish, 132; in Paris when duke of Guise arrives after massacre of Vassy, 136; leaves Paris for Meaux, 137; appears before Paris, 137; occupies St. Cloud, 138; complains of Guises, 139; assumes command of Huguenot forces, 140; controls middle Loire, 141; weakened by Grammont’s failure to reach Orleans, 146; Paris fears coming of, 147, 149; demands withdrawal of Triumvirate, 150; refuses conditions of peace, 153; retires into Orleans, 153; thinks of retiring into Gascony, 154; solicits English aid, 162; overtures made to, 168; hope that he may succeed Antoine of Bourbon as lieutenant-general, 170, 171; advances upon Paris, 172; wheedled by Catherine de Medici and the Guises, 174; fails to attack Paris, 176; retires to Normandy, 177; falls back on Chartres, 177; captured at battle of Dreux, 179; imprisoned at Chartres, 182; promised post of lieutenant-general, 190, 199; anger of, at Catherine de Medici, 206; project of, to marry Mary Stuart, 243; liaison of, with Isabel de Limeuil, 245, n., 249; Alva advises execution of, 274; maintains court preacher to anger of Catholics, 288; marries Mlle. de Longueville, 289; suspected of intercourse with William of Orange, 297; unadmirable conduct of, 316; retires from court, 317; captures Pont de Charenton, 326; extraordinary demands of, 328, 329; aims to overthrow Guises, 329; precarious position of, before Paris, 331; demands Calais, Boulogne, and Metz, 332; withdraws to Troyes after battle of St. Denis, 333; attempts to effect junction with reiters, 333; camped between Sens and Troyes, 339; joins reiters, 339; demands of, in favor of Huguenots, 340; power of, 342; appoints Cardinal Châtillon, bishop of Valence, and Teligny, to confer about peace, 344; complains of outrages on Huguenots, 362; manifesto of, 365; takes Champigny and falls back on Loudun, 369; defeated at Jazeneuil, 369, n.; attempts to join William of Orange, 370; marches to relief of Sancerre, 372; killed at battle of Jarnac, 376; jewels of, are pawned, 378; makes viscount of Rapin governor of Montauban, 395. See also Dreux; Jarnac.

Condé, prince of (the younger): with Henry of Navarre theoretical leader of Huguenot party, 378; refuses to compromise with the crown, 412; abjuration of, on St. Bartholomew’s Day, 450; made governor of Picardy, 469; gets 8,000 cavalry out of Germany, 504; privileges in Peace of Monsieur, 520.

Condom, Montgomery at, 407.

Confraternities (Confréries), nucleus of local Catholic leagues, 216. See also Association; Brotherhood of Catholics; Guilds; League.

Confrérie de Ste. Barbe, 313, n.

Confrérie du St. Esprit, 216, 353-55. See also Association; Brotherhood of Catholics; Guild; League.

Constance, 308.

Correro, Venetian ambassador, describes the Swiss at Meaux, 321.

Cossé, marshal, in Picardy, 369; protests against siege of St. Jean-d’Angély, 390; sent to La Rochelle, 391; urges peace, 394; sent to recover La Charité, 412; Charles IX urged to execute, 481; arrested, 482.

Council, General, of the church, 139.

Council, National, question of, 57, 79, 87.

Council of Blood, 312.

Count palatine, 373, 467; sends deputation to France, 481; claims Three Bishoprics, 521; receives Château-Thierry, 521 and n. See also Casimir.

Counter-Reformation, 124, 196.

Coutances, Montgomery lands near, 472.

Cracow, duke of Anjou arrives at, 467.

Croisade, La, name of new Catholic league at Toulouse, 355. See also League; Armagnac, cardinal of.

Dale, Dr. Valentine, English ambassador in France: quoted, 232; suspected by French government, 505.

Damville, Henry de Montmorency, sieur de: confers with Condé, 46; guards Condé in prison after battle of Dreux, 182; strained relations of, with Montluc, 214; just government of, in Languedoc, 347; moderation of, 356; in Paris, 357; made king’s lieutenant in Languedoc, 383; Politique leanings of, 382; Montluc’s hatred of, 347, 398, 400, 401, 404, 413; Montluc’s overtures to, 403; party of, 474; failure of attempt to seize, 483; leader of joint Huguenot and Politique party, 489; interviews duke of Savoy at Turin, 491; introduces Turkish fleet into Aigues Mortes, 492; attempt to poison, 502; complicity with England suspected, 504; privileges granted to, in Peace of Monsieur, 521.

Dantzig, disaffected by French election in Poland, 466.

Darnley, marries Mary Stuart, 424.

Dauphiné, 38, 45, 52, 142, 147; Huguenots in, 95; militia of, 208; Huguenot association in, 223; viscount of Rapin in, 395, 406; strength of Huguenots in, 461; Huguenot deputies of, 469.

Dax, Turkish ambassador received at, by Catherine de Medici, 248.

Debts, of crown, 13, 67, 208, 366, 371; to Swiss, 242, 371; of Charles IX, 421. See also Finances; Loans; Clergy.

De Losses, captain of Scotch Guard, sent to La Rochelle, 391.

Denmark, 21; sues for French favor, 123.

De Retz, protest against, 492; resigns office as constable, 497.

Dessay, Condé’s camp at, 339.

Deuxponts (Zweibrücken), duke of, 159; reiters of, 370; junction of, with William of Orange, 373, 374; Coligny hopes to join, 379; enters France, 379; captures Nevers and La Charité, 380; death of, 383.

Diaceto, a Florentine banker, 498.

Diane de Poitiers, mistress of Henry II, 6, 11, n.

Dieppe, 39, 142, 162; Calvinists in, 95; revolts, 148; plan for recovery, 154; precarious condition of Montgomery in, 187; England offers to trade Dieppe and Havre for Calais, 198.

Dijon, Tavannes foils attack upon, 149; objects to Edict of Amboise, 192; Catholics of, 288; ravages of reiters around, 357; mentioned, 157, 232; duke of Deuxponts advances upon, 379; no massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Dillenberg, proclamation of William of Orange from, 444.

Dîme, 81, 84.

Dives, Coligny at, 185.

Dole, Alva at, 311.

Don Caratif. See Dîme.

Dordrecht, revolt of against Alva, 444.

Dourdon, 357.

Dreux, battle of, 157, 158, 178-81; Philip II’s joy over, 183, 327.

D’Scars, chamberlain of Antoine of Bourbon, secret agent of Guises, 24.

Du Bourg, protests against inquisitorial practices of Henry II, 12; executed, 13, 15; policy of crown after death of, 42; interceded for by Marguerite of Savoy, 43.

Du Faur, protests against inquisitorial practices of Henry II, 12; suspended from office, 13.

Du Faur (advocate of Toulouse), helps in formation of Catholic league at Toulouse, 241.

Du Plessis, Huguenot pastor at Tours, 64.

Du Plessis-Mornay, memoir of, upon, French intervention in Netherlands, 445; sent to England, 474; radicalism of, 490.

Duras, Huguenot leader, activity of in Guyenne, 156.

Dutch, union of Huguenot and Dutch interests, 364. See also Flanders; Louis of Nassau; Low Countries; Netherlands; William of Orange.

Edict of Nantes, 409.

Edict: of Paris (1549), 10; of Fontainebleau (1550), 10; of Chateaubriand (1551), 10; of Compiègne (1557), 11; of November, 1559, 14; of Romorantin (1560), 43, 104; of January, 94, 128-31, 151, 167, 168; of Rouissillon, 250, 251; of Amboise, evasion of, 377, 378. See also Amboise; Bergerac; January; Longjumeau; Monsieur; Nantes; Romorantin; Rouissillon.

Edward I, war with Philip IV, 83.

Egmont, Lamoral, count, Flemish noble, 12; leader of Flemish revolt, 215; Spain attempts to draw him away from the Gueux, 268; association of, with William of Orange and Hoorne, 298, 312; arrested, 318; sent to scaffold, 361; son of, visits Henry III, 503.

Elbœuf, René of Guise, marquis of, 73; enters Paris, 135; surrenders Caen castle, 188.

Elbœuf, duke of, sent to Poland, 497.

Elizabeth, Queen of England: connection of, with conspiracy of Amboise, 41; precarious position of, 163; offers to aid Huguenots, 164; procrastination of, 174, 198; parsimony of, 184; advises Huguenots to accept “reasonable” terms of peace, 185; implored to send relief, 187; offers to exchange Havre and Dieppe for Calais, 198; her conduct compels Huguenots to make peace, 199; courtships of, 244; proposed marriage of, with Charles IX, 249; revives claim to Calais, 316; project of marriage of, to duke of Anjou, 358, 359; makes loan to Huguenots, 378; duplicity of, 412; marriage negotiations of, with duke of Anjou, 422, 428-30; marriage negotiations of, with duke of Alençon, 430, 431; political problems of reign of, 432-34; repudiates Treaty of Blois, 448; indirectly responsible for massacre of St. Bartholomew, 449, n. 1; enigmatical policy of, 455.

Elizabeth of Austria, marriage of, to Charles IX, 424.

Elizabeth of Valois, daughter of Henry II and queen of Spain: married to Philip II, 1; goes to Spain, 24; dowry of, 207; gives birth to still-born twins, 251; at Bayonne, 278; death of, 364, n. 424.

Embden, staple at, 269.

Emperor, revives claim to Three Bishoprics, 336; Charles IX to marry daughter of, 364, 374; hostility of, to France, 382; refuses to consider marriage of his daughter to Charles IX, 393; asked to stop progress of Protestant reiters, 393; makes truce with Turks, 464; interest in Poland, 464. See also Ferdinand; Maximilian; Three Bishoprics.

England (English), contrasted with Spain, 123; aid expected from, 162; commercial interests in Low Countries, 163; occupy Havre-de-Grace, 165; “adversary of”, 198; and Philip II, 245; adventurers flock to La Rochelle, 372; alliance with France proposed, 440, 441; dares not break with Spain, 455; treaty with William of Orange, 463, n.; Du Plessis-Mornay sent to, 474. See also Elizabeth, Queen; Commerce; Dale; Norris; Smith; Throckmorton; Treaty of Blois.

Este, Hippolyte d’, cardinal of Ferrara. See Ferrara.

Estouteville, 115, n. 2.

Etampes, duke of, 146.

Etampes, Protestant camp near, 174; recovered by duke of Guise, 181; granary of Paris, 327.

Evreux, 177.

Famine, 286. See also “Hard Times;” Plague; Commerce.

Ferdinand, petitioned by Margaret of Parma, 299, 374. See also Emperor; Three Bishoprics.

Ferdinand of Aragon, ancestors of viscounts in war against, 395.

Ferrara, Hippolyte d’ Este, cardinal of: opposed by Chancellor L’Hôpital, 116; likely to succeed his brother as duke of, 423; marriage of, with Marguerite of Valois proposed, 423.

Finances, early history of French, 81 ff., 200; reform of, 292; of Henry III, 498. See also Clergy; Debts; Dîme; Estates-General; Henry II; Loans; Swiss.

Fismes, duke of Guise wounded at battle of, 506.

Flanders, gunpowder brought from, 186, 188; revolt in, 265; change in nature of revolt in, 312, 313; 2000 troops from, arrive in Paris, 335; trade with England, 436, 437. See also Alva; Artois; Brabant; Egmont; Gueux; Hoorne; Low Countries; Valenciennes; William of Orange.

Florida, massacre of French colony in, 299, 300. See also Menendez.

Flushing, revolt of, 444; fleet of, captures Spanish merchantmen, 446.

Foix, Paul de, pope refuses to receive, 469.

Fontainebleau, council at (1560), 54, 52, 65, 89, 94, 117, 333; court goes to, 137; Condé aims to cut off, from Paris, 138; court removes from, to Melun, 139; mentioned, 209.

Fontarabia, Philip II strengthens, 146.

Fontenay (near Toul), Alva at, 311.

Forez, Coligny in, 411.

Fourquevaux, French ambassador in Spain, 306, 307; succeeds St. Sulpice, 283; embarrassed by massacre of French in Florida, 300; urges Charles IX to be cautious, 309; reply to papal nuncio, 315; urges marriage of Charles IX to Princess Anne of Hapsburg and that of Marguerite of Valois to Don Carlos, 424. See also Alva; Florida.

France, social structure of, in sixteenth century, 18, 19; relations with Denmark, 123; possibility of war in, 132; and Philip II, 245; William of Orange enters, 369; state of, described by Sir Thomas Hoby, 294; alliance with England proposed, 440-41; prospect of war with Spain, 443.

Franche Comté, 124, 246, 301; Spain fears French attack on, 418; Huguenot plot in, 492, 493.

Francis I (1515-47), 69, 291; financial policy of, 81-85; fortifications of, around Paris, 173; influence of, upon silk industry, 234.

Francis II, King of France (1559-60), 4, 6, 8, 11; character of, 17, 22; appeals to Philip II, 59; death of, 70, 76, 93, 94, 123.

Franco-Gallia, a pamphlet by Hotman, 475.

Frankfort, duke of Anjou passes through, 467.

Frankfort Fair, William of Orange at, 446.

Fraternité des catholiques de Châlons-sur-Saône, 353, 354. See also Association; Brotherhood of Catholics in France; Confraternity; Confrérie; League.

Freiburg, treaty of, 242; league with Bern and Valais, 308.

Frene, messenger of Parlement of Paris, assassinated, 15.

Froelich, Swiss colonel, 162.

Gabelle, 82; Guyenne exempt from, 8.

Gaillac, destruction of, by viscounts, 396.

Gallican church, liberties of, 196.

Garde, De la, 294.

Garonne River, Huguenots masters of, at Port Ste. Marie, 406.

Garris, siege of, 355.

Gascony, 41, 286; Condé thinks of retiring to, 154; germ of Catholic League in, 226; Protestantism in, 228; influence of provincial traditions upon, 409.

Geneva, exiles from, 44, 94; “Geneva party” among Huguenots, 191; influence upon Lyons, 227, 233; preachers from, in Netherlands, 265; fears joint attack of Spain and Savoy upon, 308.

Genlis, captures Mons, 446; relief column of, intercepted, 447; letter of Charles IX found upon person of, 447.

Genoa, syndicate of, 296; Spain borrows ships from, 306; Alva at, 309.

Genoullac, administrative corruption of, 82.

Germany, activity of Guises in, 48, 52, 85; return of French exiles from, 94; Smalkald war in, 121; chief Protestant princes of, 121, n.; Hotman sent to, 122; Huguenots await aid from, 158; troops sent to duke of Aumale from, 162; refugees from lower, 200; Protestants of, 243; Louis of Nassau’s dealings with Protestant princes of, 299; attitude of Protestant princes of, to French civil wars, 374; reiters levied in, 368; looked to for assistance, 380; Protestants, assistance from, 418; Charles IX unable to recruit in, 454; Schomberg’s missions to, 463, 467, 504; French ambition in, 467, 468; feeling in, because of St. Bartholomew, 468.

Ghent, Alva determines to retire his forces into, 444.

Gien, 161.

Gilbert, Sir Humphrey, captures Sluys and Bruges, 446.

Gondi, bishop of Paris, part of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450.

Gordes, governor of Dauphiné, 396.

Gourdon, viscount of, 394.

Grammont, 126; prevented from reaching Orleans, 146; Alva advises execution of, 274; proposal to neutralize Béarn under, 399.

Grands Jours d’Auvergne, 291.

Granvella, cardinal, 12; gives warning of conspiracy of Amboise, 32; favors international Catholic league, 211; asserts impracticability of helping Triumvirate, 212; discovers Huguenot intrigues in Flanders, 264; implores Philip II to come to Netherlands, 264; retires to Besançon, 265; advises Spanish pressure upon France 266; ridicules rumor of Montgomery’s coming to Flanders, 298; secretly petitioned by cardinal of Lorraine, 304; comment on Flemish revolution, 312.

Gravelines, fortified, 267, 268, 316.

Gray, Alva at, 311.

Gregory XIII. See St. Bartholomew.

Grenoble, 147, 154.

Grisons, Bellièvre sent to, 241, 308.

Guernsey, governor of, 167. See also Leighton.

Gueux, William of Orange and Louis of Nassau allied with, 297; formation of, 312-14; masters of the sea, 444. See also Egmont; William of Orange.

Guilds, revolution in, 217-23. See also Confraternity; Confrérie; Industry; Leagues.

Guise, duchess of, widow of Francis: refuses to recognize acquittal of Coligny, 206; marries duke of Nemours, 293.

Guise, Francis, duke of, 5; in charge of war office, 6; opposition to, 9; character of, 20; captures Metz and Calais, 21; lieutenant-general, 36; leaves court, 73; loses influence, 75; letter of, to Philip II, 97; Huguenot hatred of, 98; peculations of, 98, 141; at Colloquy of Poissy, 112; leaves court, 114; conference of, with duke of Württemberg at Saverne, 123; responsibility for massacre of Vassy, 134, 135, 142; enters Paris, 135, 136; assembles forces in Paris, 142; Condé demands withdrawal of, 150; takes Loudun and Chinon, 154; wounded at siege of Rouen, 169; fortifies Paris, 173; holds Seine River, 177; follows Condé’s retreat, 177; repulsed at Clérie, 182; besieges Orleans, 186; assassinated, 188, 189, 216, 264.

Guise, Henry, duke of, made grand master, 206; given duchy of Châtellerault, 206; returns to court, 290; refuses to be reconciled with Châtillons, 293; in Champagne, 329; follows Condé, 333; organizes opposition, 349; establishes Catholic league in Champagne, 354; defends Poitiers, 385-87; wounded at Moncontour, 389; makes love to Marguerite of Valois, 419; marries princess of Porcien, 419; part of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450-53; Charles IX’s jealousy of, 462; accuses Montmorency of plot to assassinate, 473; urges arrest of Montmorency, 479; feud with Montmorency, 491-94; Spanish soldiery flock to, 494; feud with duke of Montpensier, 498; ordered to resist coming of the reiters, 506; wounded, 506.

Guises, ancestry and wealth of, 20; ambition of, 21; usurpation of, 27; fear assassination, 27, n.; alarmed at conspiracy of Amboise, 32; accuse Condé, 40; pursue Visières and Maligny, 41; feud of, with Montmorencys, 45, 50, 73, 333, n., 356, 357; and war in Scotland, 48; activity in Germany, 48, 221; popular feeling against, 50; make changes in provincial administration, 62, 63; grievances against, 65, 66; designs of, to crush Huguenots, 69; fury of, at release of Condé, 71, 72; aim of, to control regency, 72, n.; overtures of, to Antoine of Bourbon, 73; leave the court, 73; adverse condition of, after death of Francis II, 91; make use of aspirations of Antoine of Bourbon, 96; leave court, 119; Catherine de Medici in fear of, 124; absence of, from court creates suspicion, 131; fear lest they seize King, 137; angry at court’s removal to Blois, 137; tyranny of, 141; besiege Caudebec, 148; maladministration of, 296; interest of, in the “Cardinal’s War”, 303; secret negotiations with Spain, 304; contemplate deposition of house of Valois, 337; plans of, thwarted by reiters, 339; hatred of, 343; proposition to marry daughter of, to prince of Condé, 345; secret conference of, at Louvre, 350; plan to subjugate Gascony and Guyenne, 350; abuse Chancellor L’Hôpital 357; plan to capture Coligny, 365; responsible for continuance of war, 175; feud with Châtillons, 206, 207; tilt with Chancellor L’Hôpital, 210; co-operate with Catherine de Medici, 243; approach Montluc, 254, 255; discomfiture of, after peace of St. Germain, 419; endeavor to break match between duke of Anjou and Elizabeth, 422, 423. See also Aumale, duke of; Elbœuf, duke of; Guise, duke of; Lorraine, cardinal of.

Guitery, joins Montgomery in Normandy, 472; his blunder ruins the plot to seize Charles IX, 478.

Guyenne, Marshal Termes made governor of, 63; exempt from gabelle, 85; badly infected with heresy, 95, 127; rebellion in, 190; Catholic league in, 216; activity of Candalle in, 226; Protestantism in, 230, 283; early republicanism of Huguenots in, 326; civil war in, 347; plan of Montluc to deliver to Spain, 394; saved to Catholics by Montluc, 406; influence of provincial traditions upon, 409; Huguenot movement in, 472.

Gymbrois, 334.

Haarlem, siege of, 463.

Haguenau, grand bailiwick of, 301.

Hainault, 267.

Hanseatic cities. See Dantzig; Revel; Riga.

Hapsburg, union of house of, 364; international plan to break dominion of, 374.

“Hard Times”, 86, 284-87, 391, 421, 455, 456, 470, 509. See also Commerce; Plague; Wheat.

Harfleur, 162.

Haton, Claude, quoted, 284, 285.

Havre-de-Grace, seized by Maligny, 148, 267; fear lest it be given to English, 154, 155; and Calais, 162; occupied by England, 165, 166; question of evacuation of, 185; precarious position of Warwick in, 187; war with England over, inevitable, 198; Alva proposes, be put in Philip II’s hands pending mediation, 198; England proposes to trade, for Calais, 198; English possession of, jeopardizes commerce of Paris, 200; French assault begins upon, 201; difficulties of siege of, 201; Warwick agrees to surrender, 203; yielded to France, 204; Coligny not responsible for surrender of, to England, 224, n.; English occupation of, 267. See also Warwick.

Heidelberg, duke of Anjou passes through, 467.

Hennebault, admiral, fall of, 8.

Henry II, King of France (1547-59): mortally wounded in tournament with Montgomery, 1; dies, 4; character of reign of, 5; suspected of favoring inquisition, 12; French exiles return after death of, 30; government of, 22, 82, 85, 86; wars of, 241.

Henry, duke of Orleans-Anjou, later Henry III (1574-89): industrial crisis of reign of, 217; marriage of, to Juana of Spain proposed, 247; interest of, in Poland, 283; bigotry of, 349, 350; Alva proposes marriage of, to queen of Portugal, 364; project of marriage of, to Queen Elizabeth, 358, 359; lieutenant-general, 367; endeavors to prevent junction between Condé and William of Orange, 370; raises siege of Angoulême, 378; endeavors to repair his losses, 380; keeps the field in Saintonge, Angoumois, and Limousin, 381; wretched state of army of, 381; arms peasantry in Limousin, 384; withdraws across Vienne River, 387; feigns attack on Châtellerault, 387; fights battle of Moncontour, 388, 389; at siege of St. Jean-d’Angély, 390; approves Montluc’s plan to conquer Béarn, 397; marriage negotiations of, with Queen Elizabeth, 422, 427-30; proposed marriage of, to Mary Stuart, 423; offered command of fleet against Turks, 423; part of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450; prospects of, in Poland, 464; elected king of Poland, 465; leaves for Poland, 467; Huguenot-Politique plot to thwart succession of, 467; leaves Poland, 487; arrives at Lyons, 488; hardens his policy toward Huguenots, 489; determines to clear valley of Rhone, 490; raises siege of Livron, 495; coronation of, 495; marries Louise de Vaudemont, 496; debates terms of peace, 501; deposed by Polish Diet, 502; attempts to confiscate lands of the Rohans, 502; excesses of, 508; imposes new taxes, 509; frivolity of, 512, 513; makes light of Henry of Navarre’s escape, 515; grants Peace of Monsieur, 515-21.

Henry of Navarre, not permitted to go to mass, 133; demanded as hostage, 139, 293; at siege of Garris, 355; edict of Nantes and, 409; refuses to make terms with the crown, 412; marriage of, with sister of duke of Württemberg proposed, 422; marriage of, with Marguerite of Valois proposed, 383, 385, 422; marriage of, 442; abjuration of, on St. Bartholomew’s Day, 450; opinion of, on massacre of St. Bartholomew, 452; arrested, 480; escape of, 514; demands of, and terms granted in Peace of Monsieur, 518, 519.

Hoby, Sir Thomas, his description of France, 294.

Holland, revolt in, 265; all lost to Spain except Amsterdam and Rotterdam, 446. See also Louis of Nassau; William of Orange.

Honfleur, captured by Aumale, 154, 162, 177.

Hoogstraeten, failure of his expedition, 360.

Hoorne, Flemish noble, leader of the revolt, 265; association with William of Orange and Egmont, 298; arrested, 318; sent to scaffold, 361.

Hospitals, 93, n.

Hotman, originator of conspiracy of Amboise, 30; author of Le Tigre, a pamphlet, 39, n.; on States-General of Orleans, 90; sent to Germany for aid, 122; author of Franco-Gallia, 475.

Huguenots, under Henry II, 10; origin of the word, 10, n.; “of religion”, 16, 17; “political”, 16, 17, 328; early republicanism of, exaggerated, 19, 324, 325; demand convocation of States-General, 27; in Normandy, 38, 39; Edict of Romorantin (1560) and the, 44, 104; strength of, in the provinces, 45, 95; riot of, in Rouen, 47, 70; and council of Fontainebleau, 53, 54; overtures of, to Antoine of Bourbon, 63; grievances of, 65, 66; hope to organize States-General, 75; Philip II seeks to harden policy of France toward, 93; violence of, 95; hostility of, to Guises, 98; urge cause of toleration, 103; refuse to pay tithes, 118; effrontery of, 120; organized nature of agitation of, 121; diplomatic negotiations of, 122, 123; riots of, 127; proposal to banish from court, 132; undismayed by massacre of Vassy, 137; house of worship of, in Paris destroyed, 139; association of, 140, 141; destroy tax-registers 147; demolish Bourbon tombs at Moulins, 148; communication of, with English, 148; hostility of Paris to, 149; demand withdrawal of Triumvirate, 150; look for English financial aid, 152; await aid from Germany, 158; pillage churches, 159; lines of, in August, 1562, 161; hope for English aid, 162; radicals among, 170; Elizabeth advises, not to refuse reasonable terms, 185; English complication of, 196; procrastination of Elizabeth compels, to make terms, 199; house-to-house search for, in Paris, 207; association of Languedoc, 207; disquietude, 209; party of, made up of working classes, 220; organization of, 225, 319, 321-24; church polity of, 229; proportion of, to Catholics, 229, 230; alarmed at Charles IX’s sojourn at Bar-le-Duc, 233; confiscations imposed upon, 235; iconoclasm of, 236, 240; alarm of, in south France, 252, n.; complain of Candalle and league of Agen, 255; Pius V advocates wholesale slaughter of, 275; fears of, 288; influx into Moulins, 288; rapprochement between, and Montmorencys, 289; principles of, 290; backed by Catherine de Medici, 295; influence of Netherlands upon, 296-98; preachers of, in Low Countries, 297; in Netherlands, 315; alarm of, 316; dismayed at arrest of Egmont and Hoorne, 318; exodus of, from Paris, 326; efforts of, to cut off Paris, 326; plunder churches around Paris, 327, 328; try to break Swiss alliance, 330; overtures of, to revolted Flemings, 331; capture citadel of Metz, 336; terms demanded by, 340, 345; interest of, in Dutch revolt, 364; proscription of, 366; spirit of, 368; not dismayed by death of prince of Condé, 378; strength of, in Saintonge and Rochellois, 378; anxiety of, over effect of death of prince of Condé on foreign negotiations, 379; elated by capture of La Charité, 381; capture Châtellerault and Lusignan, 384; besiege Poitiers, 385-87; intercept King’s treasurer in Limousin, 389; division of party between nobles and bourgeoisie, 391, 412; demands of, 392, 393; Joyeuse tries to prevent co-operation of, east and west of Rhone, 396; council at Milhaud, 396; strength of, in Provence and Languedoc, 405; strength of, in southwestern France, 408-10; new demands of, for peace, 416; papal nuncio protests against, in Avignon, 417; demand restoration of William of Orange and Louis of Nassau, 417; feudal interests of, 417 and n.; excluded from universities, 420; organization of, formed at Montauban in 1573, 461; deputies of, from Languedoc and Dauphiné plan to meet Charles IX, 469; make common cause with Politiques, 471; declaration of, of La Rochelle, 472; division in party of, 474; political theory of, 475, 476; demand of, 486; provincial system of, 480, 490; union with Politiques, 499, 500; relations with England, 503; terms of, in Peace of Monsieur, 516, 517.

Hyères, court at, 251.

Ile-de-France, 148; wheat dear in, 286; Huguenot leaders in, 358; Torcy made lieutenant-general in, 473.

Industry, revolution in, 218, 219.

Inquisition, urged in France under Henry II, 12; Philip II orders maintenance of, in Flanders, 267.

Interest, rates of, in fifteenth century, 83; in sixteenth century, 85, 86, n.

Ireland, 434.

Italians, in battle of La Roche l’Abeille, 383; at siege of Poitiers, 387. See also Strozzi.

Italy, lottery introduced from, 82; wars in, 220, 228; Philip II and, 245; French interests in, 453; French ambition in, 467.

Jacquerie, 502. See also Peasantry.

Jagiello house, last king of, in Poland dies, 464.

Jargeau, attempt to take, 151.

Jarnac, battle of, 376, 377, 397.

Jazeneuil, Condé defeated at, 369, n.

Jemmingen, Louis of Nassau defeated at, 361.

Jesuits, 132 and n., 254.

Joinville, 131, 168; duke of Deuxponts passes by, 379; Madame de Guise flees from, 502.

Joinville, prince de, and Triumvirate, 98.

Joyeuse, viscount of, 125; Pius V sends troops to aid of, 157; campaign in valley of Rhone, fails to take Pont St. Esprit, 348; takes Loudun, Orsennes, and Tresques, 348; defeats Montbrun, 348; garrisons towns of Lower Languedoc and returns to Avignon, 348; tries to prevent co-operation of Huguenots on both banks of the Rhone River, 396; joins duke of Anjou, 397; blocks viscount of Rapin, 448; fails in attempt to seize Damville, 483.

Juana, sister of Philip II, marriage with Henry duke of Anjou suggested, 247, 277.

Junius, Francis, driven from Antwerp 297, n.

La Charité, rising in, 156; captured by duke of Deuxponts, 380, 405; unsuccessfully assaulted by Lansac, 383; Marshal Cossé sent to recover, 405, 416; Charles IX, offers to trade Perpignan or Lansac for, 416; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

La Fére, 71; duke of Alençon demands, 508; dispute over cession of, 511, 512.

La Ferté-sous-Jouarre, Synod of, 246.

Lagebaston, president of parlement of Bordeaux, complains of conduct of Montluc, 226.

Lagny, 327.

La Haye, plots to seize La Rochelle, 471; secedes to Politiques, 492.

La Marche, duke of Deuxponts dies in, 382.

La Mare, valet-de-chambre to Henry II, 8.

La Mole, arrest and execution of, 480, 481.

La Mothe Gondrin, 53; killed, 147.

Langres, duke of Deuxponts passes by, 379; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Languedoc, loans in, 83; Huguenots of, 95, 127; militia of, 207, 208; Charles IX strengthens garrisons of, 306; civil war in, 347; Damville’s government of, 347; Catholic league in Lower, 355; towns controlled by Huguenots in, 362; peasantry rise against Huguenots, 368; viscounts in, 395; control of Huguenots in Lower, 405, 406; divided into two governments by Huguenots, 461; Huguenot deputies of, 469.

La Noue, captures Orleans, 331; seizes Luçon, 384; comes to relief of Niort, 384; in Saintonge, 408; wounded at Ste. Gemme, 415; at La Rochelle, 415; at Rochefort, 418; goes to Netherlands, 446; opinion of, of St. Bartholomew, 452; moderate policy of, 457; overtures to, by Charles IX, 457; negotiations of, in La Rochelle, 457, 458; in Lusignan, 472; persuades La Rochelle to join Politique party, 474; efforts to prevent joining Montgomery, 476; exchanged for Strozzi, 476; attempts to bribe, 477; takes Lusignan, 478; saying of, 487.

Lansac, Charles IX offers to trade for La Charité, 416.

Lansac, sent to Trent, 196; to Rome, 211; to Madrid, 261, 294, 350; repulsed in assault on La Charité, 384.

La Place, vilification of La Noue by, 458.

Lara, Spanish ambassador at Trent, 261.

Larboust, baron, proposes to neutralize Béarn, 399.

La Rive, pastor of church at St. Palais, 355.

La Roche l’Abeille, battle of, 383.

La Rochelle, president of, 77; outbreak at, in 1542, 82; port of, 228; demanded by Huguenots, 345; plot to seize, 350; synod of, 230; arms secretly stored at, 363; secret plan to attack, 365; king sends peace envoys to, 391; townsmen of, 391, 392; sea power of Huguenots at, 408, 409; La Noue at, 415; Charles IX offers to yield, 416; aids Dutch, 426; naval preparations at, in favor of Dutch, 440; terms of peace granted by Charles IX, 459, 460; reply of, to Charles IX, 454; turns to England for aid, 454; siege of, 455-59; radical party in, 458; plot to betray, 471.

Lausanne, treaty of, 309.

La Valette, plans to attack Montgomery at Condom, 407.

League, Gray, 242. See also Switzerland.

League, Holy, 212, 254, 259; interest of Spain information of, 523, 524.

League, idea of Catholic, favored by Granvella, 211; provincial, 212; of Agen, 215, 254; in Anjou and Maine, 216; at Toulouse, 214, 215, 225; influence of guilds upon, 223; pernicious activity of Catholic, 251; in Languedoc, 253; Montluc’s advice concerning, 256-58; forbidden by ordonnance of Moulins, 259; overtures to Philip II for formation of, 304; Holy League, establishment of, 304; between Bern, Freiburg, and Valois, 308; Philip II’s interest in provincial leagues, 351; development of Holy League, 351, 352; Ligue chrétienne et royale in Berry, 354; in Anjou and Maine, 354; revival of, at Toulouse, 354, 355; at St. Palais, 355; Politique league formed in Burgundy, 502. See also Association; Brotherhood of Catholics; Confrérie; Guilds.

League of the Public Weal (1465), 49.

League of Toulouse, 397.

Lectoure, siege of, 215, 408.

Legate, papal, advises recourse to arms, 103. See also Ferrara; Santa Croce.

Leighton, English captain, at siege of Rouen, 167.

Lepanto, battle of, 422.

L’Hôpital, Michel de, chancellor: made chancellor, 43; author of Edict of Romorantin, 44; at council of Fontainebleau, 53; pleads for harmony at States-General of Orleans, 76, 77; influence of, 79; labors for toleration, 103; counsels Catherine de Medici, 128; proposal to expel from country, 132; Chantonnay protests against, 137; protests against findings of Council of Trent, 210; tilt with Guises, 210; policy toward the guilds, 221; Alva’s objection to, 278; supports petition in favor of Huguenots, 288; advocates reform, 290, 291, 296; favors changes in Edict of Amboise, 318; sent to confer with Condé, 328; abused by Guises, 357; clashes with cardinal of Lorraine, 366, 367; dismissal of, 367.

Libourne, Montluc thinks of retiring to, 403, 408.

Lignerolles, sent “to practice the stay of the reiters”, 330; sent to count palatine, 335.

Limeuil, Isabella de, liaison of Condé with, 245, n., 249.

Limoges, Sebastian de l’Aubespine, bishop of. See Aubespine.

Limousin, duke of Anjou in, 372, 382; treasurer of, intercepted by Huguenots, 389; no massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450; Huguenot movement in, 472.

Lithuania, secedes from Poland, 466.

Livron, 490; Henry III raises siege of, 495.

Loans, history of French public, 8.

Loches, 70.

Loire River, Coligny aims to master line of, 138; Condé controls middle, 141; towns of, 154, 155; fighting line, 181, 369; Condé unable to cross, 371; government maintains line of, 384; viscounts cross at Blois, 396; duke of Montpensier instructed to hold passage of, 476.

Lombardy, 124; exportation of grain from, 241.

Londono, Don Sancho, Spanish commander, 310.

Longjumeau, Condé seizes highroad at, 138; Peace of, 345-50, 360; influence of viscounts on Peace of, 396.

Longueville, duke of, 114; assumes pay of reiters, 346; at siege of Poitiers, 387; sent to interview La Noue, 457; death of, 469.

Longueville, Madamoiselle de, marries Condé, 289.

Lorraine, 85; wheat in, 286.

Lorraine, Charles of Guise, cardinal of, († 1574), 5; charge of financial administration of, 20; altercation of, with Coligny, 53; character of administration of, 65; leaves court, 73, 74; Philip II writes to, 97; hostility to Huguenots, 98; at Colloquy of Poissy, 113; leaves court again, 114; corrupt practice of, 141; collects money at Trent for the war, 181; at Council of Trent, 196; bitter against policy of Charles IX, 196; sent to Vienna, 196; persuades Emperor Ferdinand, 200; proposes to form “The Brotherhood of Catholics in France”, 211; feud with Marshal Montmorency, 252, 253; opposes Chancellor L’Hôpital, 288; hypocritical reconciliation with Coligny, 289; accepts situation “telle quelle”, 290; treasonable negotiations of, with Emperor, 303; Alva’s opinion of, 336, n.; negotiations with Spain, 336, 337, 362; political “trimming” of, 356; policy of, hardens, 361; proposes marriage of Philip II and Marguerite of Valois, 364; clashes with L’Hôpital, 363, 367; with army in Saintonge, 382; Jeanne d’Albret protests against, 392; hastens coming of reiters, 392; death of, 396.

Lorraine, duke of, 21; prevented from joining Aumale, 339; vassal for duchy of Bar, 425.

Loudun, taken by duke of Guise, 154; Condé falls back on, 369; skirmish near, 372.

Loudun (in valley of Rhone), taken by Joyeuse, 348.

Louis IX, loans of, 83, 367, 490.

Louis XI, ordonnance of, 217.

Louis XII, 70; financial policy of, 81, 329, 471.

Louis of Nassau, relations of, with the Gueux, 297; dealings of, with Protestant Germany, 298, 299; defeated at Jemmingen, 360, 361; joins Coligny, 411; restoration of, demanded by Huguenots, 417; urges alliance of France and England, 440, 441; persuades Charles IX to sign Treaty of Blois, 445; leaves France for Valenciennes, 445, 446; interviews Catherine de Medici at Blamont, 463; Spain fears co-operation of, with prince of Condé and duke of Bouillon, 476.

Louise de Vaudemont, marries Henry III, 496.

Louvre, 6, 321; secret conference of Guises at, 350.

Low Countries, revolt in, 59, 263; Huguenots in, 315; Huguenot activity in, 503. See also Alva; Flanders; Granvella; Louis of Nassau; Valenciennes; William of Orange.

Lucerne, 154.

Luçon, La Noue seizes, 384, 415.

Lusignan, taken by Huguenots, 384; taken by La Noue, 478.

Lutherans, 122.

Luxembourg, heretics from, 200; difficulty of, with France, 263; France fortifies frontier of, 307; Alva at, 311, 315; Mansfeldt sent to, 336; mentioned, 301, 303. See also Alva; Mansfeldt.

Lyons, loan imposed upon, 61; riot in 1542, 82; commerce of, 86, 233, 234, 237; revolt of, 91; influence of Geneva upon, 148, 227, 233; Reformed church in, 152; recovery of, 154; refuses to tolerate the mass, 192; silk industry at, 227; plague at, 236-38; Catholic pressure upon Catherine de Medici at, 250; Charles IX sends troops to, 307, 368; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Maarck, Count Van der. See Beggars of the Sea.

Macon, 147, 151.

Madrid, L’Aubespine returns from, 241.

Maine, 141, 154; Catholic league of, 216, 354.

Maligny, lieutenant of prince of Condé: pursued by Guises, 41; seizes Havre-de-Grace, 148, 264.

Malta, siege of, 248, 297, 302; Spain borrows ships from, 306.

Manrique, Don Juan de, ambassador of Philip II, 93, 97.

Mans, Huguenot outburst at, 95; bishop of, 255.

Mansfeldt, Count, sent to Luxembourg by Alva, 336; prevented from joining Aumale, 339; troops of, 373; at battle of Moncontour, 380.

Marcel, provost of Paris: participation of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450, n.

Margaret of Parma, half-sister of Philip II and regent of Netherlands: refuses aid to France, 146; urged to send assistance to Triumvirate, 211; asserts impracticability, 212; sends aid, 212; fearful of revolt of Valenciennes, 264; implores Philip II for aid, 264; asks concessions for Netherlands, 267; petitions Emperor for aid, 299.

Marguerite of Valois, sister of Charles IX, marriage of, proposed to Don Carlos, 277; to Philip II, 283; marriage of, with Henry of Navarre proposed, 383; duke of Guise makes love to, 419; duke of Ferrara proposed as husband of, 423; Don Carlos proposed as husband of, 424; marries Henry of Navarre, 442.

Marguerite, sister of Henry II, married to Emanuel Philibert of Savoy, 1.

Marillac, archbishop of Vienne, 53.

Marillac, François, counsel of Condé, 69.

Marmoutier, abbey of, plundered by Huguenots, 140.

Marseilles, riot at, 133; court at, 251, 306.

Martamot, Bernard Astarac, baron of, recovers Tarbes, 406.

Martigues, 255, 350.

Martyr, Peter, 114.

Matignon, captures Montgomery, 485; made marshal of France, 497.

Maximilian, Emperor: France at odds with, 300; urged to recover Metz, 301; affirms suzerainty over, 303; daughter of, 424.

Meaux, 177; Condé goes to, after massacre of Vassy, 137; court at, 310, 338; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Melun, court removes to, 139.

Menendez, massacres French colony in Florida, 300.

Merchant adventurers, 437, n.

Metz, 21, 125; fear lest Emperor try to seize, 193, 194; imperial designs upon, 200, 300, 301; Emperor affirms suzerainty over, 303; Vieilleville sent to, 307; importance of Calvinists in, 307; Condé demands, 332; citadel captured by Huguenots, 336; center of government’s activity against duke of Deuxponts and William of Orange, 379; expulsion of Calvinists from, 379, n.; duke of Anjou avoids, on way to Poland, 467. See also Cardinal’s War; Three Bishoprics; Vieilleville.

Mezières, duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Middelburg, revolt of, 444.

Milan, Spanish governor of, 241, 303; French claim to, 453.

Milhaud, Huguenot association at, 324; Huguenot camp at, 396; alliance of Huguenots and Politiques at, 499.

Minard, vice-president of Parlement of Paris, murdered, 15, 41, n.

Moncontour, battle of, 388, 389.

Mons, capture of, Genlis, 446; surrenders, 447.

Monsieur, Peace of, 516-21.

Montaigu, viscount of, 394.

Montargis, rising in, 150, 161.

Montaubon, demolition of walls of, 207; viscounts at, 306; mentioned, 405, 406; Charles IX offers to yield to Huguenots, 416; resists Joyeuse, 348; three thousand Huguenots and Politiques of Toulouse find refuge in, 454; Huguenot convention at, 461.

Montbrison (in Auvergne), Coligny at, 416.

Montbrun, captain of Scotch Guard killed at battle of Moncontour, 389.

Montbrun, defeated by Joyeuse, 348.

Montbrun, son of the constable, killed at Dreux, 179.

Mont Cenis, Alva’s route over, 308.

Montclaire, Antoine de Rabastenis, viscount of, 394.

Mont de Marsan, court at, 255; massacre at., by Montluc, 403, 404.

Montdidier, entered by Catholic army, 154.

Montereau, Condé establishes headquarters at, 333.

Montfort, 177.

Montfran, battle near, 348.

Montgomery, Gabriel de Lorges, sieur de, captain of the Scotch Guard: mortally wounds Henry II in tournament, 1; at Havre-de-Grace, 165; asks for terms during siege of Rouen, 167; escapes, 168; in Dieppe, 181; precarious condition of, 187; rumor of coming of, to Flanders, 266; attends court at Moulins, 288; swaggers around Paris, 294; fear lest he come to Netherlands, 298; in Lower Normandy, 326; sent to Pontoise, 332; some of the Scotch Guard desert to, 342; in Languedoc, 397; at Castres, 398; near Toulouse, 398; raises siege of Navarrens, 399; campaign in Béarn, 398-402; joins Coligny, 402; Montluc plans to attack at Condom, 407; ravages environs of Toulouse with Coligny, 410; escapes from massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450; appears with fleet before La Rochelle, 458; in England, 471; lands near Coutances and joins Guitery in Normandy, 472; reply of, to Charles IX, 472; takes Carentan and Argentan, 473; captured and put to death, 484, 485.

Montigny, one of the leaders of the Flemish revolt, 265; faithlessness of, 298.

Montjean, marshal, exactions of, 82.

Montluc, Blaise de, suppresses riot at Agen, 134; reputation of, 147; “true creator of the French infantry”, 155; at Sienna, 156; hostility of, to Huguenots, 156; saves Toulouse and Bordeaux, 157; helps form Catholic league at Toulouse, 214; ordered to report to Marshal Termes at Orleans, 215; helps form Catholic league at Agen, 215; protest against, 226; estimate of, of number of Huguenots in Guyenne, 230; approached by Guises, 254, 255; advice of, concerning formation of provincial Catholic leagues, 256-58; proposes formation of international Catholic league, 260; joint plan of, with Philip II, 261; offered asylum in Spain, 261; warns Philip II of connection between Huguenots and revolted Flemings, 298; on political theory of the Huguenots, 325, n.; hatred of, of Damville, 347, 348, 398, 400, 404, 413; sent to Gascony, 350; dealings of, with Philip II, 350, 351; vigilance of, 362; outrages of, 362; Jeanne d’Albret crosses Garonne “under the nose of”, 368, n.; discovers plot in Bordeaux, 368; resigns commission, but retracts resignation, 391; plans with Terride to deliver Guyenne to Spain, 394; plan of, to conquer Béarn, 397; praises Montgomery, 398-402; makes overtures to Damville, 403; thinks of retiring to Libourne or Agen, 403; massacres Mont de Marsan, 403, 404; admiration of, for the reiters, 405; saves Guyenne to Catholic cause, 406; fortifies Agen, 406; plans to attack Montgomery at Condom, 407; secret dealings of, with Charles IX, 413; still hopes to conquer Béarn, 413; terribly wounded in siege of Rabastens, 414, 415.

Montluc, Jean de, bishop of Valence, 52, 53, 65, 80; preaches at court, 98; at Colloquy of Poissy, 114; proposal to expel from country, 312; sent to confer about peace, 344; commissioner of finances in Guyenne, 416, n.; sent on mission to Poland, 464.

Montmorency, Anne de, constable of France: favorite of Henry II, 8; feud of, with Guises, 18, 45, 50, 73; not a party to conspiracy of Amboise 29, n.; holds balance of power after death of Francis II, 72; Philip II writes to, 97; forms Triumvirate, 98; welcomes duke of Guise after massacre of Vassy, 126; advises king to repudiate responsibility for Vassy, 137; organizes Paris, 137; over-rules Catherine de Medici, 139; charged with corrupt practice, 141; begins to weaken, 141; proposes to petition the Pope for aid, 143; Condé demands retirement of, 150; fears English intervention, 162; captured at battle of Dreux, 179; imprisonment of, 182; endeavors to make a settlement, 183; destruction of house of, plotted by Guises, 255; quarrel with cardinal of Lorraine, 289; protest in favor of Cardinal Châtillon, 289; anger of, at Guises, 290; quits court, 290; avarice of, 296; rash reply of, 319; lieutenant-general, 331; killed at battle of St. Denis, 332.

Montmorency, marshal and duke of, eldest son of the constable: governor of Paris, 127, 294; feud with cardinal of Lorraine, 252, 253, 356, 357; approaches Huguenots, 289; succeeds to constableship, 319; Paris furious at, 326; confers about peace, 344; assumes pay of reiters, 346; informed of plot of Guises, 350; moderation of, 356; leaves Paris, 357; advocates marriage of Henry of Anjou and Queen Elizabeth, 358, 359; deposed as governor of Paris, 358; disaffection of, 375; the man of the hour, 419; urges marriage of duke of Anjou and Elizabeth and Henry of Navarre with Marguerite of Valois, 422-26; relations of, with Charles IX, 439; Charles IX urged to execute, 481; arrested, 482; feud with Guises, the “seed of the war”, 493, 494.

Montpellier, Huguenot league at, 121; court at, 252; resists Joyeuse, 348, 405, 406, 411.

Montpensier, duke of, 36, 63, 73; Philip II writes to, 97; and the Triumvirate, 98; mobbed by Huguenots, 120, 121; Alva’s convert at Bayonne, 304; castle belonging to, taken, 369; defeats viscounts in Périgord, 396; sent into Anjou, 476; feud of, with the Guises, 498.

Montreuil, Coligny at, 138.

Montrichard, Coligny at, 182.

Mont St. Michel, Charles IX at, 413.

Morillon, provost, upon Flemish revolt, 314.

Moriscos, revolt of, 417, 418, 422.

Morlaas (in Béarn), captured by Terride, 398.

Morvilliers, bishop of Orleans, 165; confers with Condé, 328; as keeper of the seal protests against feudal release of duchy of Bar and resigns, 425; warns Charles IX, 468.

Moulins, Huguenots destroy Bourbon tombs at, 148, 249; court passes winter at, 288; influx of Huguenots into, 288; interdiction of Protestant worship at, 289; ordonnance of, 291-96.

Mouy, tries to prevent Strozzi’s coming, 329.

Muscovite, Polish hostility to, 465.

Musket, introduction of field, 310.

Nancy, duke of Anjou passes through, on way to Poland, 467.

Nantes, conspiracy of Amboise plotted at, 30, 283; Edict of, 345, 409; no massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Naples, 21; troops from, 310; French claim to, 453.

Narbonne, taken by Huguenot-Politique party, 502.

Nassau. See Louis of Nassau.

“Natural frontiers”, 205.

Navarre, Philip II fears attack upon, 146.

Navarrens, siege of, by Terride, 398, 399; raised by Montgomery, 399, 400.

Nemours, duke of: made governor of Champagne, 92; implicated in plot to kidnap Henry, duke of Orleans-Anjou, 119; forsakes his wife and marries duchess of Guise, 293; breaks Condé’s blockade of Paris, 332; ordered to intercept duke of Deuxponts, 380.

Nemours, Madame de (duchess of Guise): complicity of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 450; demands governorship of Normandy for husband, 498.

Nérac, Huguenot church at, 156; Montgomery at, 407; revolts, 502.

Netherlands, progress of heresy in, 197; critical situation in, 211; Philip II and, 245; revolt of, 263, 264, 360; connection of revolt of, with Huguenots, 266, 296; Huguenot preachers in, 297; fear lest Montgomery come, 298; influence of France upon, 359, 360; proposed alliance for liberation of, 425. See also Alva; Egmont; Flanders; Granvella; Holland; Hoorne; Louis of Nassau; Margaret of Parma; Philip II; Valenciennes; William of Orange.

Nevers, 218; captured by duke of Deuxponts, 380.

Nevers, duke of, claims government of Normandy, 498.

Newhaven. See Havre-de-Grace.

Nîmes, Protestantism at, 228; court at, 252.

Niort, 283; La Noue relieves, 384; Coligny falls back on, after battle of Moncontour, 389; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Nivernais, Protestantism in, 228.

Nobility, policy of, in 1559, 9; impoverishment of, 344.

Noizay, château de, rendezvous of conspirators of Amboise, 34.

Nonio, an astrologer, 344.

Normandy, 26, 41, 45, 60, 76; loans made in, 83; Huguenots in, 95, 142, 148, 232; Coligny made governor of, 126; fear of English intervention in, 150; formidable nature of revolt in, 162; militia of, 208; Protestantism in, 228, 230; coast defense of, 307; war of partisans in Lower, 326, 430; apprehension in ports of, 471; dispute over governorship of, 498. See also Bayeux; Caen; Caudebec; Dieppe; Havre; Rouen.

Norris, Sir Henry, English ambassador, protests innocence of English government’s conduct, 373; urges marriage of Queen Elizabeth with duke of Anjou, 422.

Nostradamus, astrologer, 251.

Nuncio, papal, demands that Cardinal Châtillon resign, 289; at Madrid, 315; protests against Huguenots in Avignon and Verre, 417. See also Ferrara; Santa Croce.

Nürnberg, 219.

Olivier, chancellor, 34; death, 43.

Oran, Philip II’s expedition to, 248.

Orange, cruelties practiced at, 155.

Orange, William of, at deathbed of Henry II, 12; leader of revolt of Netherlands, 264; tactics of, 265; insists upon convocation of States-General, 268; allied with Gueux, 297; relations with Condé, 297; with Egmont and Hoorne, 298; leaves Flanders, 312; seeks to use reiters of Casimir, 360; enters France, 369; anxiety over movements of, 369; effects junction with Deuxponts, 373, 374. See also Egmont; Gueux; Hoorne; Louis of Nassau; Netherlands.

Orléannais, 207; Protestantism in, 228, 230.

Orleans, 36, 61, 63, 64, 70, 74, 127, 314; Huguenot worship at, 80; States-General at, 91, 221, 290; Condé assumes command of Huguenot forces at, 139, 140; troops pour into, 142; Grammont fails to reach, 146; fear lest supplies be cut off from, 151; condition of country around, 152; Condé retires to, 153; Catholic garrisons around, 172; Huguenot center at, 181; D’Andelot’s serious position in, 186; siege of, 186-88; demolition of walls of, 207; captured by La Noue, 331; plot to seize, by Catholics, 350; Catholic headquarters at, 367; relief of, 396; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Orleans, Henry, duke of Orleans-Anjou. See Henry III.

Orsenne, taken by Joyeuse, 348.

Orthez, captured by Terride, 398.

Ostabanés, 355.

Ozances, French ambassador in Spain, 117.

Pacheco, cardinal, 279, 281.

Palatine, count, 122, 158, 303. See also Casimir.

Pampeluna, Philip II strengthens, 146.

Pamphlets, Huguenot, 475, 476. See also Franco-Gallia; Hotman; Huguenots; Le Tigre.

Parat, viscount of, 394.

Paris, 1, 26, 45, 47, 48; loan demanded of, 61; Chaudien, Protestant pastor in, 64; Catholic preachers of, admonished, 80; rentes of, 83-85 (see Finances; Debt); abounds with Huguenot preachers, 94; riot in, 94-96, 120; prince de la Roche-sur-Yon made governor of, 126; Marshal Montmorency made governor of, 127; violence of, 127; receives duke of Guise joyfully after massacre of Vassy, 135, 136; weakness of Huguenots in, 137; prince of Condé leaves, 137; alarm of, 137-39; troops collected in, 143; fears attack by Condé, 147, 149; hostility to Huguenots, 149; people of, armed, 154; Condé advances upon, 172, 173; gunpowder factory at, blown up, 186; refuses to tolerate terms of peace, 191; appealed to for loan, 200; hatred of, of Coligny, 206, n.; witticism of, 207; preponderance of, in formation of Holy League exaggerated, 213; plague at, 284; wheat dear in, 286; Montgomery in, 294; court moves to, 294; bigotry of, 217; exodus of Huguenots from, 326; blockade of, 326; makes loan to king, 329; precarious condition of Condé before, 331; Flemish troops arrive at, 335; loyalty of, 339, 340; prepares for siege, 343; Catholic resentment of, 349; garrison of, 350; Alençon made governor of, 368; anxiety of Guises over, 370; elation at news of Jarnac, 376; frightened by capture of La Charité, 381; offers to maintain war, 417; forced loan in, 461; commercial dispute with Rouen, 470; military preparations in, 476; attacks upon, 507; preparations to defend, 510; remonstrances of, to Henry III, 510, 511; resents Peace of Monsieur, 522.

Parlement of Paris, hostility of, to Huguenots, 96; acquits prince of Condé, 102; hopes of L’Hôpital and Coligny about, 103; forbids speculation in grain, 286; good sense of, 296.

Pau, captured by Terride, 398.

Paulin, Bertrand de Rabastenis, viscount of, 394, 395; captured, 397; Huguenot governor in Languedoc, 461.

Peasantry, armed by duke of Anjou, 384; in Languedoc and Quercy, allied with viscounts, 395; wretchedness of, 491; arms in hands of, 494, 495; revolt of, 502.

Périgord, Condé in, 372.

Perigueux, taken by Huguenots-Politiques, 502.

Perpignan, Charles offers to trade for La Charité, 416.

Peter’s Pence, 80.

Pfiffer, Swiss colonel at Meaux, 320.

Philip II, King of Spain (1557-98): marries Elizabeth of Valois, 1; notified of death of Henry II, 7; suspected of urging inquisition in France, 12; offers aid to Guises, 52; alarmed at project of a national council in France, 59; appealed to by Francis II, 59, 65; said to be inclined to restore Navarre, 73; seeks to harden policy of France toward Huguenots, 93; writes to Catholic leaders, 97; appealed to by Triumvirate, 99; alarmed at policy of France, 116-18; redoubles efforts with Antoine of Bourbon, 123; continental designs of, 124, 125; procrastination of, 131; offers Sardinia to Antoine of Bourbon, 132; asked for aid, 143; fears attack on Navarre and strengthens Fontarabia and Pampeluna, 146; and England, 163; joy over battle of Dreux, 182; hostility to Edict of Amboise, 195; alarmed at England’s possible recovery of Calais, 197; resolved to act after massacre of Vassy, 211; opposed to marriage of Charles IX or Condé to Mary Stuart, 244; and France, 245; and Italy, 245, 247; and England, 245; and Scotland, 245; character of, 247, 248; interest of, in crushing Calvinism, 260; joint plan of, with Pius IV and Montluc, 261; orders maintenance of inquisition in Flanders, 262; implored to come to Netherlands, 264; consents to interview with Catherine de Medici, 270; letter of, to Cardinal Pacheco, 270, 281; consents to have Charles IX marry Elizabeth of Austria, 283; anxiety of, 289; doubt as to his course, 294; overshadows France, 297; worried at connection between Huguenots and revolted Flemings, 298; refused permission to have Spanish troops cross France, 299; knowledge of, of massacre of French in Florida, 300; favors plan to recover Metz, 301, 302; dares not make overt move against France, 302; determines to send Alva to Flanders, 305; angry at alliance of France and Switzerland, 315; self-control of, 337; fears Catherine de Medici will make termswith Huguenots, 341; secret relations of, with Montluc, 350, 351; interest of, in provincial Catholic leagues, 351; proposed as husband of Marguerite of Valois, 364; marries Anne of Austria, 364, 424; war of, with the Moriscos, 417, 418, 422; plans with reference to Mary Stuart, 424; advised by Requesens of Huguenot activity of, in Low Countries, 503.

Philip IV, financial policy of, 83.

Picardy, 60, 70, 126, 204, 232, 268; rebellion in, 190; Huguenots in, 197; militia of, 208; wheat dear in, 286; frontier strengthened, 315; government of, promised to Condé, 316; Marshal Cossé in, 369; prince of Condé made governor of, 469; danger on border of, 503; Spain alarmed at situation in, 511, 512.

Piedmont, Marshal Termes in, 182; viscount of Paulin in, 395.

Pilles, defends St. Jean-d’Angély, 390.

Piracy, 373.

Pius IV, alarmed at plan of National Council in France, 57; offended at action of States-General, 81, 89; sends cardinal of Ferrara to France, 115; petitioned for aid, 143, 144; sends troops to Joyeuse, 151; anticipated death of, 200; remonstrance of Charles IX to, 230; idea of, of a European concert, 247; brings pressure upon Catherine de Medici, 250; joint plan with Philip II and Montluc, 261; favors France at Trent, 261.

Pius V, advocates wholesale slaughter of Huguenots, 275; troops of, 329; takes victory of Jarnac as answer to prayer, 377; elation of, 394.

Plague, at Lyons, 236-38, 283, 284.

Poissy, Colloquy of, 103, 106, 109, 110-14, 117, 230; interest of German princes in, 121, 123; Andelot sent to seize, 332.

Poitiers, 14, 41, 64, 142, 350; exempt from gabelle, 85; Huguenots in, 95; rising in, 150; captured by St. André, 153; rebellion in, 190; Protestantism in, 228; siege of, 385-87.

Poitou, Huguenot movement in, 472. See also Poitiers.

Poland, 283; duke of Anjou elected king of, 465; French ambition in, 464, 465.

Politiques, difficult to distinguish between, and Huguenots, 231; germ of, 358; labor for peace, 372; make common cause with Huguenots, 471; political theory of, 475, 476; imbued with Hotman’s teachings, 486; alliance with Huguenots at Milhaud, 489, 499, 500; Politique league in Burgundy, 502.

Poltrot, assassin of duke of Guise, 188.

Pontacq (in Béarn), captured by Terride, 398.

Pont-à-Mousson, duke of Deuxponts at, 379.

Pont Audemer, 162.

Pont de Cé, 372; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Pontoise, adjourned session of States-General at, 89, 106-9, 117; Huguenot outburst at, 95; demands of States-General of, 290; Montgomery sent to seize, 332.

Pont St. Esprit, Joyeuse fails to take, 348.

Pope, nullifies marriage of duke of Nemours and offends the Rohans, 293; consents to alienation of church property, 366; takes victory of Jarnac as answer to prayer, 377; opposed to Spain’s Polish aspirations, 464, 465; refuses to receive Paul de Foix, 469. See also Pius IV; Pius V; Gregory XIII.

Porcien, prince of, activity of, in Low Countries, 315.

Porcien, princess of, marries duke of Guise, 419.

Portereau, a faubourg of Orleans, 186.

Port Ste. Marie, captured by Coligny, 406; destruction of bridge at, 406, 407.

Port St. Martin, faubourg of Paris, windmills in, burned by Huguenots, 327.

Portsmouth, 188.

Portugal, proposal that queen of, marry duke of Anjou, 364; Portuguese marriage planned for Marguerite of Valois, 419.

Portuguese, 300.

Pouzin, Huguenot stronghold, 490; captured by Henry III, 491.

Poyet, chancellor of Francis I, reforms of, 82.

Pragmatic Sanction of Charles VII, 116.

Provence, 45, 49, 52, 64, 142; Huguenots in, 95, 286; association of, 214; Protestantism in, 230; Charles IX strengthens garrisons of, 306; civil war in, 347; towns controlled by Huguenots in, 361; viscount of Rapin in, 305; Huguenot control of, 405, 406.

Provins, 161, n., 284.

Prussia, Lithuania makes alliance with Russia, Sweden, and, 466.

Puygaillard, outmatched by La Noue, 415.

Quercy, viscounts in, 395.

Rabastens Montluc terribly wounded at siege of, 415, 416.

Ranke, quoted on massacre of Vassy, 135.

Rapin, viscount of, 394; in rising of Toulouse in 1562, 395; governor of Montauban, 395; crosses Rhone into Dauphiné and Provence, 395; ravages in Vivarais, 396.

Reformation in England and Germany, 229.

Regency, of Blanche of Castille, 42; of Anne of Beaujeu, 42; and Salic Law, 72, n. See also Antoine of Bourbon; Catherine de Medici; Charles IX; Francis II.

Reiters, 145, n., 157, 158, 333, 335, 338, 373; cross Seine, 160; introduce German words into French language, 160, n.; in Normandy, 166; at battle of Dreux, 179; Coligny in fear of his own, 184; spoliation of Normandy by, 187, 188; return of, to Germany, 192; depredations of, 193-95; paid by Catherine de Medici, 198; of Rhinegrave, 200; Lignerolles sent “to practice the stay of”, 330; enter Lorraine, 339; effect junction with Condé, 339; pay of, 345, 346; ravages of, 357; effort to prevent, joining William of Orange, 363; levied in Germany, 368; of duke of Deuxponts, 370; urged to advance to Loire River, 370; Paris fears coming of, after capture of La Charité, 381; in battle of Moncontour, 388, 389; threaten to mutiny, 391; hastened forward by cardinal of Lorraine, 393; tentative offer of restoration of Three Bishoprics if Emperor will stay progress of, 393; effective warfare of, 405; mutiny of, 412; devastate Fair of Champagne, 420, n.; plundering of, 491; cross Rhine, 505; ravages in Champagne, 506, 507; return of, to Germany, 522, 523.

Renaudie, Godfrey de Barry, sieur de; leader of conspiracy of Amboise, 30; death of, 38.

Rennes, Bochetel, bishop of, sent to count palatine, 335.

Rentes, 83. See also Finances; Debts; Loans; Paris.

Requesens, succeeds Alva as governor of Spanish Netherlands, 404; offers Spanish troops to Catherine de Medici, 494; warns Philip II of Huguenot activity in Low Countries, 503; fears daughter of William of Orange will marry duke of Alençon, 503.

Revel, discontent with Polish election, 466.

Rheims, 218; endangered by William of Orange, 370; Henry III crowned at, 495.

Rhine, 124; D’Andelot crosses, 158.

Rhinegrave, 177; reiters of, mutiny in Champagne, 200.

Rhinelands, 246.

Rhone river, Joyeuse’s campaign in valley of, 348; Henry III attempts to clear valley of, 490.

Ridolfi plot, 433, 462.

Riga, discontent with French election in Poland, 466.

Robert, Claudius, counsel of prince of Condé, 69.

Rochefort, La Noue at, 415.

Rochefoucauld, count of, 6; driven into Saintonge, 153; Alva advises execution of, 274, 350.

Rochelle. See La Rochelle.

Roche-sur-Yon, prince de, accompanies Elizabeth of France to Spain, 7; governor of Orleans, 63; governor of Paris, 126; supplanted by Marshal Montmorency, 127.

Roggendorf, recruiting sergeant of Guises in Germany, 145, n.; arrives in Paris, 162; Catherine de Medici demands withdrawal of, from Paris, 295. See also Reiters.

Rohan, duke de, forbids Catholic worship in his domains, 288; anger of, at duke of Nemours for divorce of his wife, 293; Huguenots flee to protection of, 326; Henry III attempts to confiscate the lands of, 502.

Rome, 50, 299. See also Gregory XIII; Pius IV; Pius V.

Romero, Julian, Spanish commander, 310.

Romorantin, Edict of, 104. See also Edict.

Rosay-en-Brie, rendezvous of Huguenots at, 320.

Rotrou, county of, given to Condé, 316.

Rotterdam, all Holland lost to Spain save Amsterdam and, 446.

Rouen, 27, 127, 177; riots in, 47, 48, 71, 84, 142, 148; Reformed church in, 152; Condé thinks of going to, 154; Aumale approaches, 155; resolve to attack, 161, 162; siege of, 165-70; Marshal Brissac at, 182; objects to Edict of Amboise, 192; Catholic association in Rouennais, 216; port of, 228; opposition to Peace of Longjumeau in, 347; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450; commercial dispute of, with Paris, 470.

Rouergue, raid of viscounts in, 395. See also Milhaud.

Rouissillon, Edict of, 250, 251. See also Edict.

Roy, Jacques le, archbishop of Bourges, aids in establishment of Catholic league in Berry, 354.

Roye, Eleanor de, princess of Condé, asks Elizabeth for aid, 187; death, 243.

St. Aignan, Coligny at, 182.

St. Ambroise, Alva at, 309, 311.

St. André, marshal, 7, 35, 69; Philip II writes to, 97; hostility of, to Huguenots, 98; joins Triumvirate, 98, 99; reprimanded by Catherine de Medici, 133; charged with corrupt practice, 141, 296; Condé demands retirement of, 150; captures Poitiers, 153; killed at battle of Dreux, 179; succeeded by Marshal Vieilleville, 181; daughter of, not permitted to marry young prince of Condé, 206.

St. Bartholomew, massacre of, influence of Bayonne Conference upon, 271, 281; Huguenot organization before and after, 324, 325, 383; massacre of, 449-53; responsibility of Catherine de Medici for, 449; causes fourth civil war, 474; German resentment because of, 468.

St. Catherine’s Mount, fortress of Rouen, 155, 167. See also Rouen.

St. Cloud, 21, 138, 159; war in, 48, 49, 60.

St. Denis, 177; windmills in faubourg of, burned by Huguenots, 327; battle of, 332, 338.

St. Florens, abbey of, Condé massacres garrison of, 372.

Ste. Gemme, La Noue wounded at battle of, 415.

St. Germain, 131; Peace of, 416-18; infractions of, 420; plot to seize king at, 477, 478.

St. Honoré, faubourg of, windmills burned in, 327.

St. Jean-d’Angély, arms secretly stored at, 363; siege of, 389-90; townsmen of, 391, 392; honorable treatment of garrison of, by Charles IX, 392; revolts, 502.

St. Jean de Maurienne, Alva at, 311.

St. Lô, demolition of walls of, 207; Huguenot forces in, 472.

St. Louis (Louis IX), 367.

St. Marceau, Catholic camp in faubourg of, 343.

St. Martin-des-champs, 334.

St. Mathurin, 161.

St. Maur-des-Fosses, 293.

St. Omer, “Spanish Fury” at, 305.

St. Ouen, 327.

St. Palais, Catholic league at, 355.

St. Pierre, abbey of, Condé imprisoned in, 182.

St. Quentin, battle of, 8.

St. Roman, viscount of, made Huguenot governor in Languedoc, 461.

St. Sulpice, French ambassador in Spain: Catherine de Medici’s correspondence with, 247, 249; discovers plot to kidnap Jeanne d’Albret and seize Béarn, 266; succeeded by Fourquevaux, 283, 424.

Saintes, 283; arms secretly stored at, 363, 406.

Saintonge, exempt from gabelle, 85; revolt in, 150; mentioned, 379; duke of Anjou in, 381; La Noue in, 408.

Salic Law, 337.

Salzedo. See Cardinal’s War.

Sancerre, count of, 33.

Sancerre, siege of, 460.

Santa Croce, cardinal of, 295.

Sardinia, 73; offered to Antoine of Bourbon, 132; troops from, 310.

Saumur, 141; garrison at, 309; Coligny plans to take, 385; duke of Alençon demands, 508.

Sauveterre (in Béarn), captured by Terride, 398.

Saverne, conference between dukes of Guise and Würtemburg at, 123.

Savigny, lieutenant in Touraine, 63, 64.

Savoy, 119, 144, 246; dowry of duchess of, 208; Alva’s march through, 311; troops of, 329.

Savoy, Emanuel Philibert, duke of, marries sister of Henry II, 1; urges extirpation of heresy, 210; mission of Don Juan de Acuna to, 308; treaty of, with Bern, 309; interview, with Damville, 488, 491.

Saxony, John William, duke of, 52.

Schomberg, German colonel in service of France, 371; missions of, to Germany, 463, 467, 504.

Scotch Guard, history of, 7; reduced, 208; meeting of, 342; supplanted by Swiss Guard, 342, n. See also Montgomery.

Scotland, French troops sent to, 199; alliance with France, 243; Philip II and, 245; relations of, with England, 433, 434. See also Cardinal of Lorraine; Mary Stuart.

Sedan, duke of Bouillon at, 472.

Seine River, guard of, 138; mouth of, 148; line of, 181; Coligny unable to cross, 185; Condé unable to cross, 371.

Seize (Sixteen) nucleus of Holy League in Paris, 318.

Sens, archbishop of, 114; Huguenots of, 127, 128; riot at, 133; mentioned, 209, 218, 232, 333, 339; highroad to, held by Huguenots, 327.

Sevignac, viscount of, 394.

Sforza, Ludovico, 70.

Shakerly, Thomas, an Englishman, 126.

Sicily, troops from, 310.

Siena, Montluc at, 156.

Sigismund Augustus of Poland, death of, 464.

Silly, Jacques de, representative of noblesse in States-General, 77.

Sipierre, lieutenant in Orléannais, 63, 69.

Sluys, Spanish fleet in, dispersed, 446; captured by Sir Humphrey Gilbert, 446.

Smith, English ambassador in France, tries to dissuade Huguenots from making peace, 198; demands restitution of Calais, 204; description of plague at Lyons, 236-38; saying of, about cardinal of Lorraine, 290; writes to Burghley, 290; interest of, in marriage negotiations of Elizabeth and duke of Anjou, 429.

Soissons (Soissonais), wheat dear in, 286; captured by Huguenots, 331; plot to seize, 350.

Somarive, cruelties of, 155.

Sorbonne, hostility of, to Huguenots, 96; students of, 127.

Spain, 131, 158; Catherine de Medici inclines toward, 137; money from, 184; urges extirpation of heresy, 210; saying of Spain’s ambassador, 232; commerce of, in Lombardy, 241, 242; impatient for fulfilment of promise at Bayonne, 283; Protestants of, 308, n.; policy of, in Switzerland, 371; fears French attack on Franche Comté, 418; offers duke of Anjou command of fleet against Turks, 423; demands that Charles IX suppress Huguenot activity in Netherlands, 426; prospect of war with France, 443; interest of, in Poland, 464; alarm over possible cession of border fortress in Picardy to prince of Condé, 512. See also Alava; Alva; Chantonnay; Philip II.

“Spanish fury”, 305.

Splügen Pass, 241.

States-General, of Orleans, called, 55, 65, 68; relation of, to proposed National Council, 58, 68; transferred from Meaux to Orleans, 62; Huguenots hope to organize, 75; opening of, 75; debates in, 75-80; legislation of, 81; financial policy of, 87-89; factional rivalry in, 91; resolution of, governing clergy, 92; adjourned session of, at Pontoise, 89, 106-9, 117; demands of, 290; demand for, 421.

Stelvio Pass, 241.

Strasburg, 308.

Strozzi, cardinal, helps in formation of Catholic league at Toulouse, 214.

Strozzi, Italian artillery colonel, 249, 271; troops under command of, 329; destroys bridge of boats across Seine, 332; taken prisoner at battle of La Roche l’Abeille, 383; massacres garrison of Marans, 455; exchanged for La Noue, 476. See also Italians.

Stuart, Mary, 5, 21, 48, 72, 163, 199; proposed marriage of, to Don Carlos, 94; sought in marriage by King of Denmark, 123; project to marry prince of Condé to, 243; Guises want to marry, to Charles IX, 244; duke of Anjou put forward as husband of, 423; marries Darnley, 424.

Stuart, Robert, suspected of murder of president Minard, 41, n.; kills constable Montmorency at battle of St. Denis, 332.

Superstition, 287. See also Nonio; Nostradamus.

Sweden, relations of, with Poland, 466.

Swiss, payment of, by Francis I, 85; join Tavannes, 157; sent to aid of duke of Aumale, 162; enrolment of, to protect French frontier, 315, 318; Huguenots try to break French alliance with, 330; sufferings of, in the army, 342; cannot come till September, 384; at siege of Poitiers, 387, 453; refuse to let France enroll mercenaries, 454; sent into Languedoc and Dauphiné, 461; licensed, 469. See also Froelich; Meaux.

Switzerland, French exiles from, 30, 94; cantonal system of, 111; mentioned, 144, 154; Spain’s ascendency in, 240; French interests in, 240-43; rivalry of France and Spain in, 299; French enrolments in, 307; fears joint attack of Spain and Savoy, 308; true policy of France in, 318; policy of Spain in, 371; debts of French crown in, 371. See also Basel; Bellièvre; Bern; Freiburg; Grisons; Valois.

Taille, 81. See also Debt; Finances.

Tarbes, Huguenots recover, 406.

Tarde, pastor of church at Ostabanès, 355.

Tavannes, marshal opposes extraordinary tribunals, 14; sent to Dauphiné after conspiracy of Amboise, 38; accuses Catherine de Medici of being privy to conspiracy of Amboise, 42, n.; foils attack on Dijon, 140; saves Châlons-sur-Saône, 149; forces of, 154; Swiss join, 157; Margaret of Parma sends aid to, 212; forms Confrérie du St. Esprit in Burgundy, 216; sent to guard frontier against reiters, 339; organizes Confrérie du St. Esprit in Burgundy, 352, 353; organizes Catholic league in Berry, 354; vigilance of, 362; refuses to seize Condé and Coligny by treachery, 365; at battle of Jarnac, 376; protests against siege of St. Jean-d’Angély, 390; bold reply of, to Spanish ambassador, 418, 419; urges marriage of duke of Anjou with Queen Elizabeth, 426; complicity of, in massacre of St. Bartholomew, 453.

Taxes, new, by Henry III, 509-11.

Teligny, sent to confer about peace, 344; sent to king in overtures for peace, 392.

Templars, loans of, 83.

Tende, count of, governor of Provence, blocks viscount of Rapin, 396.

Termes, marshal, 36, 39, 69; sent to Normandy after conspiracy of Amboise, 39; governor of Guyenne, 63; and Triumvirate, 99; succeeded by marshal Bourdillon, 182; Montluc ordered to report to, 215.

Terride, implicated with Montluc in plot to deliver Guyenne to Spain, 394; campaign in Béarn, 398-400.

Thionville, Alva at, 311.

Three Bishoprics, 124, 302; refuge of heretics from Lower Germany, 200; Emperor revives claim to, 336; promise of restoration of, to Emperor if he will stop progress of reiters, 393; counter-claims of France and Austria to, 424; claims of Casimir, count palatine, to, 521. See also Metz; Toul; Verdun; Vieilleville.

Throckmorton, Sir Nicholas, English ambassador in France, 24, 126; urges Elizabeth to give aid to Huguenots, 184; confers with Coligny, 185; tries to dissuade Huguenots from making peace, 198.

Thuringia, landgrave of, 122.

Tigre, Le, a pamphlet written by Hotman, 39.

Tithes, Huguenots refuse to pay, 118. See also Clergy; Dîme; Finances.

Tocsin, 160.

Toledo, Don Ferdinand Alvarez de, Spanish commander, 311.

Torcy, sent to interview Montgomery, 472.

Toul, riot at, 133, 301. See also Metz; Three Bishoprics; Verdun.

Toulon, 306.

Toulouse, 14, 84, 368; riot at, 133, 142, 214; Huguenots suffer heavily in, 150; saved by Montluc, 157; refuses to recognize peace of Amboise, 192; Catholic league formed at, 214; opposition to peace of Longjumeau at, 347; revival of Catholic league in, 354; environs of, devastated by viscounts, 395; parlement of, asserts jurisdiction over Béarn, 397; Montgomery near, 398; invested by Coligny and Montgomery, 410, 411; parlement of, protests against Peace of St. Germain, 417, n.; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Touraine, 45, 63, 141, 154; Huguenots in, 95 and n.; duke of Montpensier mobbed by Huguenots in, 120, 121.

Tournay, heresy at, 197; revolt of, feared, 264.

Tournelles, Palais de, 3, 6.

Tournon, Cardinal, 50; writes to Philip II, 97; and Triumvirate, 98; Catherine de Medici offended at, 133.

Tournon, taken by Huguenots-Politiques, 502.

Tours, 33, 35, 127; Du Plessis, Huguenot pastor at, 64; riots at, 133, 140; drownings at, 154.

Trent, Council of, 114, 116, 117, 118, 124, 209, 299; cardinal of Lorraine collects money at, 181; findings of, 57, 209, 210, 234, 250, 273, 278, 295; conflict of Spanish and French ambassadors at, 261, 262.

Tresques, taken by Joyeuse, 396.

Trèves, archbishop of, 303.

Triumvirate, pillars of, 97; formation of, 98, 99; appeals to Philip II, 99; negotiations of, 121; tries to influence Antoine of Bourbon, 131, 133; intends to compel court to go to Bois de Vincennes, 137; Antoine surrenders to, 138; Catherine de Medici yields to, 143; asks Margaret of Parma for aid, 145; Huguenots demand withdrawal of, 150; overtures of, to Spain, 211; Spain’s slow reply to, 212, 224.

Trompette, Château, Huguenots attempt to seize, 213. See also Bordeaux.

Troyes, 84, 127, 142, 232, 339; treaty of, 204, 209, 238, 239; Condé moves to, 333; Catholic league of Champagne formed at, 354; massacre of St. Bartholomew at, 450.

Tulle, inhabitants of, refuse to pay taxes, 492.

Tunis, “kingdom of”, promised to Antoine of Bourbon, 132.

Turenne, viscount of, sent to Montgomery, 472; sides with Montmorency, 474.

Turin, 311; Henry III at, 488; Damville at, 488.

Turks, 84, 89; relations of, with Catherine de Medici, 248; attack Malta, 248, 297, 302, 306; league proposed against, 277; fleet against, 423; league against, 423, n.; French relations with, 424; Spain demands discontinuance of French relations with, 426; friendliness of, to France, 453; make truce with Emperor, 464; Damville introduces, into Aigues Mortes, 492. See also Lepanto.

Tuscany, money from, 184; duke of, 311; influence of, 423.

Tyrol, 242.

Uloa, Alonzo de, Spanish commander, 310.

Universities, Huguenots excluded from, 420.

Utrecht, revolt in, 265.

Uzes, duke of, resigns, 502.

Valais, forms league with Bern and Freiburg, 308.

Valenciennes, heresy at, 197; rebellious spirit of, 264, 266; Louis of Nassau takes, 445, 446.

Valéry, Synod of, 319.

Valois, wheat dear in, 286.

Valteline, 241.

Vargas, member of Alva’s Council of Blood, 312.

Vassy, massacre of, 134, 135; does not dismay Huguenots, 137; constable advises King to repudiate guilt of, 137; duke of Guise to blame for, 142; Dieppe revolts after news of, 148; convinces Philip II it is time to act, 211.

Vendôme, 127; rising in, 150.

Venetian ambassador, quoted, 65, 70, 201, 232.

Venice, money from, 184; in league against the Turks, 423, n.; Henry III at, 488.

Verdun, 301; France erects citadel at, 307, 315.

Vergt, battle of, 147, 154, 157, 215.

Vernon, 152.

Verre. See Avignon.

Vesalius, physician of Philip II, attends Henry II, 3.

Vieilleville, marshal, governor of Metz, opposed to Guises, 125; succeeds St. André, 181; sent to Switzerland, 240, 241; sent to Metz, 307; confers with Condé, 328; moderation of, 356.

Vienna, cardinal of Lorraine sent to, 196.

Vienne River, duke of Anjou withdraws army across, 387.

Villebonne, governor of Rouen, 47, 48; guards Pont de l’Arche, 177.

Villefranche, Coligny at, 181.

Villeroy, reports on condition of king’s army before La Rochelle, 459; sent to Languedoc, 476.

Viscounts, 375; strength of, in the south, 391; early history of, 394-97; cross Loire River at Blois, 396; cross Dordogne River to join prince of Condé, 396; defeated in Périgord, 396; destroy Gaillac, 396; join Montgomery, 397; helped by feud between Montluc and Damville, 402, 403.

Visières, lieutenant of Montgomery, pursued by Guises, 41.

Vivarais, viscount of Rapin in, 396; Coligny in, 411.

Voulton, 334.

Wallachia, Poland hopes to recover, 455.

Walloons, at siege of Poitiers, 387.

Walsingham, urges marriage negotiations of Elizabeth to duke of Anjou, 422.

Warwick. See Havre-de-Grace.

Warwick, earl of, instructions to, 166; seizes Havre de Grace, 167; hopes to compel towns of Seine to capitulate, 177; urges Elizabeth, 184; precarious position of, 187, 201; surrenders, 213.

Westelburg, count of, 373.

Wheat, price of, 286, 287, 343, 408.

William of Orange, sends assurance to Coligny, 379; restoration of, demanded by Huguenots, 417; urges alliance of France and England, 440, 441; issues proclamation from Dillenberg, 444; at Frankfort Fair, 446; overtures of France to, 462; treaty with England, 463, n.; plots in Franche Comté, 492, 493; possible marriage of daughter of, to duke of Alençon, 503.

Windmills, burned by Huguenots in faubourgs of Paris, 327.

Worcester, earl of, sent to France, 455.

Würtemburg, conference of duke of Guise with duke of, at Saverne, 123; sister of duke of, proposed as wife of Henry of Navarre, 422.

Zealanders, disperse Spanish fleet at Sluys, 446.

Zurich, alarmed at approach of duke of Alva, 308; neutrality of, 371.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The Wars of Religion (“The Cambridge Modern History,” Preface).

[2] In the appendix I have published the constitution of two of these provincial leagues hitherto unknown.

[3] Mém. de Tavannes, 239.

[4] The constable Montmorency, in a letter to Queen Elizabeth dated June 30, 1559, says that the accident happened “yesterday,” i. e., June 29.—C. S. P. Eng. For., No. 698. Almost all the sources, however, give June 30. Cf. Castelnau, Book I, chap. i. Throckmorton gives June 30. See p. 3, note 1.

[5] The origin of the Scotch Guard goes back to the Hundred Years’ War. In 1420, five years after the battle of Agincourt, when Henry V was in possession of all of northern France, the dauphin, Charles VII, sent the count of Vendôme to Scotland to ask for assistance in virtue of the ancient league between the two nations. In 1421 a body of 1,000 Scots arrived in France under the earl of Buchan. They fought at Baugé in Anjou in that year, but were almost all destroyed in 1424 in the furious battle of Verneuil. The remnant, in honor of their services, became the king’s own guard. See Skene, The Book of Pluscarden, II, xix-xxi, xxvi-xxix; Houston, L’Escosse françois (Discours des alliances commencées depuis l’an sept cents septante, et continuées jusques à present, entre les couronnes de France et d’Escosse), Paris, 1608; Forbes Leith, The Scots Men-at-Arms and Life Guards in France, from Their Formation until Their Final Dissolution, 2 vols., 1882. The Guard consisted of the principal captain, the lieutenant, and the ensign, the maréchal-de-loges, three commis, eighty archers of the guard, twenty-four archers of the corps; the pay of whom amounted annually to 51,800 francs, or 6,475 pounds sterling.—C. S. P. For., No. 544, December, 1559.

[6] Claude Haton, whose Catholic prejudice was strong, believed this reluctance to be feigned (Mémoires, I, 107).

[7] D’Aubigné, Book II, chap, xiv, says the blow raised the King’s visor, and that the end of the lance, which was bound with a morne, or ring, to dull the point, crashed through the helmet like a bludgeon. Tavannes, chap, xiv, says that the King had failed to take the precaution to fasten his visor down.

[8] Throckmorton to the Lords in Council, C. S. P. For., June 30, 1559.

[9] D’Aubigné, loc. cit. La Place, 20, says that the King spoke to the cardinal of Lorraine. De Thou, Book II, 674, on the authority of Brantôme, doubts it.

[10] The Palais des Tournelles stood in the present Place Royale. It was torn down in 1575.

[11] Throckmorton, loc. cit.

[12] The constable Montmorency to Queen Elizabeth, C. S. P. For., No. 898, June 30, 1559. Throckmorton, ibid., No. 928, July 4, “doubted the King would lose his eye.”

[13] C. S. P. For., No. 950, July 8, 1559. De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, I, 432, has published Vesalius’ official report. Henry II had a body-physician who also enjoyed a European reputation. This was Fernal. He was the author of a Latin work upon pathology which was translated into French in 1660 under the title: La pathologie de Jean Fernal, premier medicin de Henry II, roy de France, ouvrage très-utile à tous ceux qui s’appliquent à la connoissance du corps humain.

[14] There is an account of the funeral in Arch. cur., III, 309-48. The MS account of the funeral expenses is in the Phillipps Collection, 2,995. Compare Galembert, Funerailles du roy Henri II, Roole des parties et somme de deniers pour le faict des dits obsèques et pompes funèbres. Publié avec une introduction. Paris, Fontaine, 1869.

[15] See the description of Throckmorton, written to Queen Elizabeth, C. S. P. For., No. 1,190, August 15, 1559.

[16] C. S. P. For., No. 1,242, August 25, 1559.

[17] Rel. vén., I, 195. “De fort petit sens,” says La Planche, 202.

[18] Throckmorton to Cecil, June 30, 1559, C. S. P. For., 899.

[19] And yet the evil nature of Henry II’s reign may be exaggerated. An extended and critical history of his reign is still to be written. Claude Haton, no mean observer of economic conditions says: “En ce temps et par tout le règne du dit feu roy, faisoit bon vivre en France, et estoient toutes denrées et marchandises à bon marché, excepté le grain et le vin, qui enchérissoient certaines années plus que d’aultres, selon la stérilité, et toutesfois esdittes treize années de son règne n’ont esté que trois ans de cherté de grain et de vin, et n’a valu le blé froment, en la plus chère des dittes trois années, que 14 et 15. s. t. le bichet (à la mesure de Provins), et les aultres grains au prix le prix, et ne duroit telle cherté que trois moys pour le plus.” A valuable table of prices of food stuffs follows.—Claude Haton, I, 112, 113.

[20] See De Ruble, “Le traité de Cateau-Cambrésis,” Revue d’hist. diplomatique (1887), 385, and the more extensive work (1889) with the same title by this author.

[21] On the general situation between the wounding and the death of Henry II see Nég. Tosc., III, 400.

[22] Castelnau, Book I, chap. i. He was sixteen on January 19, 1560. Cf. Castan, “La naissance des enfans du roi Henri de Valois,” Revue des savants, 6^[me] sér., III.

[23] Throckmorton to the queen, July 18, 1559, C. S. P. For., No. 1,009. This information was given to the council and a deputation of the Parlement, but no official proclamation was made.—D’Aubigné, I, 243, n. 1.

[24] Claude Haton, I, 106; Tavannes, 245. The deposed beauty surrendered the keys of the royal cabinets and some bags of precious jewels to the new queen, La Planche, 204; Baschet, 494, dispatch of the Venetian ambassador, July 12, 1559. Cf. Guiffrey, Lettres inédites de Diane de Poitiers, 1866; Imbart de St. Amand, Revue des deux mondes, August 15, 1866, p. 984. For light upon her extravagance see Chevalier, Archives royales de Chenonceau: Comptes des recettes et despences faites en la Chastellenie de Chenonceau, par Diane de Poitiers, duchesse de Valentinois, dame de Chenonceau et autres lieux (Techener, 1864). Hay, Diane de Poitiers, la grande sénéschale de Normandie, duchesse de Valentinois, is a sumptuously illustrated history.

[25] C. S. P. For., No. 1,024, July 19, 1559.

[26] Castelnau, Book I, chap, ii; C. S. P. For., No. 972, July 11, 1559; No. 1,080, July 27, 1559.

[27] La Planche, 208; Claude Haton, I, 108; Paulin Paris, Négociations, 108, note.

[28] Tavannes, 245; Paris, Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 61, 76, 80, 83, 86; La Planche, 207; C. S. P. For., No. 1,121, August 4, 1559; ibid., August 1, 1559, No. 1,101, Throckmorton to the Queen: “The French ... are in fear because of the king of Spain, who has not as yet restored S. Quentin’s, Ham nor Chastelet, the Spanish garrisons of which daily make courses into the country as far as Noyon, about which the governor of Compegny has written to the King, adding that it were as good to have war as such a peace.” C. S. P. For., July 13, 1559, No. 985, Throckmorton to the Queen: “It is thought that the treaty already made is void by the French King’s death; ... that the king of Spain, seeing his advantage and knowing the state of France better than he did when he made that peace, will either make new demands, or constrain France to do as he will have them, who would be loath to break with him again.”

[29] Tavannes, op. cit.

[30] Jacques d’Alban de St. André, born in the Lyonnais, marshal 1547, favorite of Henry II. He was taken prisoner at the battle of St. Quentin. After the death of Henry II, fearing prosecution for his enormous stealings in office, he became the tool of the Guises. See La Planche, 205, 206; Livre des marchands, 438, 439; and especially Boyvin du Villars, 904 ff., on his administration in Provence.

[31] Brissac was governor of Piedmont under Henry II, where he sustained the interests of France so energetically that Philip hated him. The Guises made great efforts to attach him to their party, with the hope of playing him against the Bourbons and Montmorencys (Paris, Négociations, 73, note). After the peace of Cateau-Cambrésis, the fortresses of the duke of Savoy were dismantled, to the intense anger of the latter. Cf. Fillon Collection, 2,654: Letter of July 16, 1560, to the duchess of Mantua, complaining that the people of Caluz have revolted against the authority of the marshal Brissac. This hard feeling probably explains Brissac’s transfer to the government of Picardy, in January, 1560, to the chagrin of the prince of Condé, who asked for the place (Varillas, Hist. de François II, II, 35; De Thou, Book XXV, 518) after the marriage of Emanuel Philibert to the sister of Henry II. See Marchand, Charles I de Cossé, comte de Brissac, Paris, 1889, chap. xvi.

[32] La Place, 26.

[33] C. S. P. For., Nos. 1,121, 1,149, August 4 and August 8, 1559.

[34] C. S. P. For., No. 972, July 11, 1559.

[35] Tavannes, 244. In Spain it was the prevailing belief that France had been compelled to make the peace of Cateau-Cambrésis more through the troubles caused by the affairs of religion than from any other necessity; cf. C. S. P. Ven., No. 57, 1559. This suspicion is confirmed by Tavannes, who says that the settlement of matters still pending under the terms of the treaty was hastened by the Guises through knowledge that the state of affairs in France was exceedingly unsatisfactory to many of the nobles and fear that their power would be openly rebelled against (Tavannes, 245; C. S. P. For., No. 590, January 18, 1560, and No. 26, October 5, 1559).

[36] The pretext was Montmorency’s complaint because his son Damville was not given the government of Provence, which St. André had held (Rel. vén., I, 435; cf. Nég. Tosc., III, 401).

[37] “Vieil routier.”—La Planche, 207.

[38] “Le connestable ... resigna bien d’estat de grand-maistre entre les mains du roy, mais purement et simplement, et non en faveur du dict de Guyse, déclarant assez qu’il ne cédoit en rien à son adversaire.”—La Planche, 216. Cf. D’Aubigné, I, 245, Book II, chap. xiv; Rel. vén., I, 393; Tavannes, 245; Castlenau, Book I, chap. ii; Baschet, La diplomatie venétienne, 495. La Place, 26, is in error. An attempt was made to soften Montmorency’s fall by making his eldest son a marshal of France; Tavannes, 245; C. S. P. For., No. 376, December 5, 1559.

[39] La Planche, 203.

[40] Castelnau, Book I, chap. iii.

[41] See the interesting analysis of public opinion by La Planche, 203. On p. 208 he gives a highly drawn picture of the venality of the parlements, whose “ancienne splendeur estoit desja esvannoye peu à peu,” while they were frequented by “les soliciteurs des courtisans, et les advocats favoris des grands,” in whose precincts justice was not possible for simple, honest folk. He is as bitter in speaking of the conseil des affaires and the conseil privé, but it must be remembered that the author was a Protestant and imbued with hatred against the government because of its persecution of the Huguenots. See Tavannes’ (p. 243) eulogy of the French bar which is nearer the truth.

[42] For Henry II’s policy toward Protestantism see De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 244-48; Weiss, La chambre ardente, Introd.; Hauser, “De l’humanisme et de la réforme en France,” Rev. hist., LXIV (1897), 258, minimizes the intellectual causes of the French Reformation.

[43] The origin of this word has been much discussed. In the early period of the Reformation in France, all religious schismatics save the Vaudois, whose historical identity was different and familiar, were called “Lutherans.” The Venetian ambassador so characterized the French Protestants in a dispatch to the signory in 1558 (Relazione de Giovanni Sorano, ed. Alberi, I, 2, 409). Boyvin du Villars (Book XII, 204) employs this same term in 1560.

The etymology of the word “Huguenot,” most commonly accepted is that which derives it from the German word Eidgenossen (confederacy) which designated the Swiss Confederates (see Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VII, 660). The word in Geneva was naturally not German but French or Savoyard. It is variously spelled—Eydgenots, Eygenots, Eyguenots. But this derivation, though the best supported, is opposed by the eminent philologist, Littré. Grandmaison, Bulletin Soc. hist. prot. franç., LI (January, 1902), argues against the German origin of the word and gives examples of its appearance as a French surname from the fourteenth century onward. But how it came to be applied to the French Protestants he is unable to say. Cf. Weiss: “La dérivation du nom Huguenot,” Bull. Soc. hist. prot. franç., XLVIII, 12 (December, 1898). A note by A. Mazel states that in Languedoc the word was pronounced “Duganau,” which he conjectures to be a diminutive of “Fugou,” the great owl. If this is so, the origin of the word is akin to that of “Chouan” in the French Revolution. The earliest use of the word “Huguenot” in Languedoc is in Devic and Vaisette, Histoire du Languedoc, XI, 342. It undoubtedly was a term of reproach, ibid., XI, 374, note; cf. Claude Haton, I, 121. Without attempting to pronounce upon the origin of the word, I subjoin some allusions which I have come upon. Castelnau, Book II, chap, vii, says: “qui depuis s’appelèrent huguenots en France, dont l’étymologie fut prise à la conjuration d’Amboise, lors que ceux qui devoient présenter la requeste, comme éperdus de crainte, fuyoient de tous costés. Quelques femmes des villages dirent que c’estoient pauvres gens, qui ne valloient pas des huguenots, qui estoient une forte petite monnoye, encore pire que des mailles, du temps de Hugues Capet d’où vint en usage que par moquerie l’on les appelloit huguenots.” Henri Estienne and La Place, 34, say the word arose from the circumstance that the Calvinists of Tours used to go outside of the Porte du roy Huguon to worship. La Planche’s derivation is a study in folklore (p. 262, col. i).

The Venetian ambassador wrote in 1563: “In quel tempo medesimo fu tra questi principalmente, che cercorno di seminar la false dottrina un predicator della regina di Navarra, madre del presente re di Navarra, nominate Ugo, il quale alienò prima l’animo di quella regina dalla religion cattolica, e poi cercò d’alienare e di corromper, come fece, infiniti altri uomini e donne delli più grandi.”—Rel. vén., II, 50. A unique explanation, which I have not found noticed elsewhere is preserved by Jean de Gaufreton, Chronique bordelaise (1877), I, 92: “En cette année les catholiques commencèrent d’appeller les Luthériens et protestants ‘Huguenots,’ et les autres nomèrent les catholicques papistes à cause, qu’ils tenoyent le parti du pape, et qu’ils soustenoyent son authorité. Mais la raison pourquoy les Luthériens furent appellées Huguenots procède de ce que les princes protestants d’Allemagne et Luthériens ayant envoyé une solemnelle ambassade au roy, à la requête des Luthériens et protestants de France pour demander libre exercice du Luthéranisme en son royaume, en faveur des dits Luthériens français, comme le chef de cette ambassade voulut en sa première audience parler latin devant le roy, assisté des messieurs de son conseil, il ne put jamais dire que les deux mots à sçavait ‘hue nos’ et s’arresta tout court. Despuis les courtisans appellèrent les Luthériens françois ‘hue nos,’ et en suite ‘Huguenots.’”

[44] Isambert, XIII, 494.

[45] Weiss, La chambre ardente, Paris, 1889, a study of liberty of conscience under Henry II, based upon about five hundred arrêts rendered by the Parlement of Paris between May, 1547, and March, 1550. Before its creation heresy was dealt with by the regular courts. In Bulletin des comités historiques (1850), 173 (“Inventaire des lettres relatives à l’histoire de France aux archives de Bâle”), there is noted a letter of the King written in 1552 to the effect that those who have been arrested for heresy at Lyons shall not be dealt with unjustly; but the King reiterates his determination not to permit any new religious doctrine to obtain. In the very month before his death, in June, 1559, the edict of Ecouan prescribed the death penalty for all heretics, without the least limitation or restriction, and with injunctions to the judges not to mitigate the punishment, as they had done for some years (Castelnau, Book I, chap. iii). The Huguenots regarded Henry II’s death as a judgment of God.—C. S. P. For., No. 899, June 30, 1559: “They let not openly to say the King’s dissolute life and his tyranny to the professors of the gospel hath procured God’s vengeance.” A letter of Diane de Poitiers in the Catalogue de la collection Trémont, No. 424, proves that some of the property confiscated from the Huguenots was given by the King to his favorite.

[46] Vargas, Histoire de François II, 314.

[47] Granvella to Philip II, June 14, 1561—Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 569.

[48] Armstrong, Wars of Religion in France, 4, 5. Cf. De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 246. The establishment of the Jesuits was not approved in France until after the death of Henry II, owing to the resistance of the mendicant orders and the Sorbonne.—Claude Haton, II, 636.

[49] Castelnau, Book I, chap. iii.

[50] C. S. P. For., No. 950, July 8, 1559.

[51] Mém. de Condé, I, 264.

[52] He had been converted by Hotman, the famous Huguenot pamphleteer.—Weiss, 31.

[53] Weiss, op. cit.; Castelnau, Book I, chap. iii. La Planche, 209-12 and 235, 236, gives an account of his sufferings and death. The Mém. de Condé, I, 217 ff., contain part of the trial.

[54] Castelnau, Book I, chap. v, and especially La Planche, 220-22.

[55] La Planche, 237.

[56] Ibid., 226.

[57] La Place, 28.

[58] Upon the patriotism and loyalty of the French magistracy see the notable extract from a letter of the Spanish ambassador, April 29, 1560, in Rev. hist., XIV, 78. Cf. the address of M. Alfred Levesque, “Le barreau et la liberté sous les Valois: discours prononcé à la séance d’ouverture des conférences de l’ordre des avocats,” November 28, 1846.

[59] C. S. P. For., No. 451, December 21, 1559. Carriages came into use in the sixteenth century, the practice being borrowed from Italy. Catherine de Medici was the first queen who possessed one. For interesting information on this subject see Burgon, _Life and Times of Sir Thomas Gresham_, I, 242, 305, 383, 486, 487; Ellis, Letters, Series II, I, 253; Strutt, Dresses, II, 90, and a paper in Archeologia, XX, 426 ff.

[60] Castelnau, Book I, chap. v; La Planche, 232-34.

[61] Robert Stuart, who claimed to be a relative of Mary Stuart, was suspected of the murder. It was he who killed the constable Montmorency at the battle of St. Denis in 1567.—D’Aubigné, I, 255. Another upon whom suspicion rested was the natural son of the cardinal of Meudon, whom Minard had persuaded to leave all his property to the poor.—Nég. Tosc., III, 407.

[62] D’Aubigné, I, 255, II, chap. xvi. Two edicts were issued on December 17 from Chambord. See Isambert, XIV, 12.

[63] La Place, 28.

[64] La Planche, 209.

[65] La Place, 41; Tavannes, 241. “There be two kinds of the people whom the Papists term Huguenots, viz., Huguenots of religion, and Huguenots of State. The one of these perceiving that the cardinal works to ruin them, and their own peculiar force not sufficient to withstand his malice, have shown appearance that they will join with the other, who seeing themselves excluded from all government, and those of Guise to usurp the whole authority, presently practise a firm faction and league between themselves, either part promising to support the other.”—C. S. P. For., No. 2,235, May 31, 1568.

[66] Rel. vén., I, 523-25; II, 57; Davila, VI, 359. Claude Haton emphatically asserts the feudal purposes of the Huguenot noblesse: “Les grand seigneurs de la ligue condéienne et cause huguenoticque s’atendoient d’estre haults eslevez, non és offices royaux, mais au partage du royaume qu’ilz espéroient faire entre eux en le contonnant par provinces, desquelles ilz prétendoient d’estre seigneurs souverains, sans recognoistre roy ni aultre personne par dessus eux.”—I, 291. Tavannes characterizes the Huguenot association in 1572 as “demi-democratique et demi-aristocratique” (Panth. lit., 413). The identification of Calvinism with the political purposes of the nobles is shown in the following letter of the cardinal de Tournon to King Henri II, written “De Bains de Lucques, 9 juillet 1559”: “L’une des principal ruses de ces malheureux est de commencer, s’ils peuvent, à semer leur venin et mauvaise doctrine par les plus Grands, les attirer et gaigner à eux, afin de pouvoir après tout plus aisément & sans punition, infecter & gaster le reste & s’aider à un besoin de leur force & authorité.”—Ribier, II, 807.

The cardinal Tournon and the admiral Hennebault had been trusted with the duties of affairs of state after the fall of the constable Montmorency in 1541. When Henry II came to the throne Montmorency was restored to office and Tournon fell. After the death of Henry II the queen mother proposed the return of Cardinal Tournon. The Guises at first hesitated, but soon yielded, first because the cardinal was the personal enemy of the constable, and second, because he was very hostile to the reformed religion (Rev. hist., XIV, 72, 73).

[67] From an admirable article by E. Armstrong, “The Political Theory of the Huguenots,” Eng. Hist Rev., IV, 13 ff. Cf. Weill, Les théories sur le pouvoir royal en France pendant les guerres de religion, Paris, 1891.

[68] See the observations of La Place, 41-45.

[69] It is true that De Thou so says: “et établir en France une république semblable à celle des Suisses,” Book XXV, 501, but it is to be remembered that De Thou was writing late in the reign of Henry IV, and read back into the past the republicanism of 1572.

[70] See the eminently sane remarks of Tavannes, 260.

[71] Cf. Castelnau, Book I, chap. vi.

[72] The avarice and dishonesty of the cardinal, it is said, even went so far as to force Catherine de Medici to divide with him the fees arising from the confirmation of offices and the privileges accorded towns and municipal corporations in the time of Henry II, which sums lawfully went to her; and even then he is said to have fraudulently estimated them in livres instead of écus d’or.—La Planche, 208. The écu d’or was worth two livres tournois in the reign of Francis I, so that the cardinal’s little trick cut the sum in half.

[73] See the character sketch in Rel. vén., I, 437-39.

[74] Cf. La Place, 28.

[75] Baschet, 497, 498.

[76] See C. S. P. For., 1559-61, passim.

[77] Ibid., No. 405, December 12, 1559. The duchess of Lorraine was a daughter of Christian II, the exiled ruler of Denmark. On this question see the long note (with references appended) in Poulet, I, 126. Cf. Arch. de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, I, 132. There is little doubt that Philip II and the Guises contemplated such a move (Languet, Epist., secr., II, 22, 30, 34). The war going on between Denmark and Sweden favored the project. This war lasted for seven years (Arch. de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, I, 103, 104; Raumer, II, 211).

[78] La Planche, 273.

[79] C. S. P. For., No. 451, December 5, 1559.

[80] Tavannes, 245; La Place, 27, 51; La Planche, 216; C. S. P. Ven., No. 272, 1506.

[81] La Planche, 212. “Il Cardinale de Lorraine è quà Papa e re,” Nég. Tosc., III, 404, August 27, 1559.

[82] La Planche, 212; La Place, 28; Rev. hist., XIV, 67, 68. On the economic discontent due to the extravagance of Henry II, see Rev. hist., XIV, 71. Claude Haton, I, 110-12 gives a favorable contemporary judgment.

[83] The act revoking many of the alienations of the royal domain fell hardest upon the followers of the constable and of Diane de Poitiers (Rev. hist., XIV, 71, 72).

[84] Rel. vén., I, 431. See the character-sketch by Suriano in Rel. vén., II, 47; C. S. P. Ven., No. 272, 1561.

[85] La Planche, 212.

[86] Throckmorton to the Queen, C. S. P. Eng. For., No. 1,244, August 25, 1559.

[87] La Planche, 216.

[88] Ibid., 212, 216.

[89] Weiss, L’Espagne sous Philippe II, I, 115, 16. The queen of Spain, in company with Antoine of Navarre and Jeanne d’Albret, arrived at Pau on December 21, having proceeded from Bordeaux. Great preparations were made for her reception and she was nobly entertained. The king and queen of Navarre did their part with great magnificence. The maître des postes of Spain arrived at Pau the same day as Her Majesty did, with instructions how she was to conduct herself toward the Spanish nobles by whom she was to be met on her arrival in Spain.—“Extraict,” written in a French hand, indorsed “My Lord Ambassador,” C. S. P. For., II, No. 469, December 21, 1559. The king and queen of Navarre and the cardinal Bourbon conducted her to the frontiers and then returned; the prince of Roche-sur-Yon went through with her to Guadalajara and carried to Philip the order of St. Michael (C. S. P. For., No. 337, November 29, 1559: Killigrew and Jones to the Queen). Philip II planned to meet his spouse at Guadalajara and thence go to Toledo, where the marriage festivities were to be celebrated until Shrovetide (C. S. P. For., No. 354: Challoner to Cecil from Brussels). At the celebration, the duke of Infantado, whose guest the King was at Guadalajara, had sixty shepherds clad in cloth-of-gold (C. S. P. For., No. 540, January 24, 1560). The marriage was accomplished on January 20, 1560 (C. S. P. For., No. 540, January 24, 1560: statement of Granvella to Challoner). The French were offended because, at the receiving of the Queen-Catholic at Guadalajara, the verse of the forty-fifth Psalm was sung, “Audi, filia, et vide, etc.,” which the French disliked much, “concluding that they did not have altogether that which they looked for at King Philip’s hands by means of his wife” (C. S. P. For., No. 591, January 18, 1560: Killigrew and Jones to Cecil).

[90] See a letter of Francis II to the bishop of Limoges, May 21, 1506, “De l’ambassadeur espagnol, Perrenot de Chantonnay, et de ses intrigues,” in Paris, Négociations, 584. Thomas Perrenot, sieur de Chantonnay, was a younger brother of the cardinal Granvella and was a native of Besançon. He was named Spanish ambassador in France after the treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis (Paris, Nég. relatives au règne de François II, 56-60). His official correspondence is in the Archives nationales at Paris, K. 1,492 ff. Quite as valuable is the private correspondence he maintained with his brother and Margaret of Parma, transcripts of which are in the Brussels archives. The originals are divided between Besançon and Vienna. M. Paris pertinently says of him: “On ne sait pas assez toutes des manœuvres de ce personnage.”—Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 56, note. A history of his public career would be a cross-section of the history of the times. He spoke French and German fluently and had a knowledge of Spanish and Italian. Catherine de Medici feared and hated him and in August, 1560, demanded his recall in vain.—Paris, Négociations, etc., 873. In 1564 he was transferred to Vienna (R. Q. H., January, 1879, 19, 20) and was succeeded by Alava. All the official correspondence of the epoch abounds with allusions to him. See Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VII, 393, 400, 402, 518, 592; VIII, 353, 383, 387, 457, 513, 523, 557, 568, 574, 594, 679; IX, 1, 36, 65, 94-102, 136, 154, 166, 169, 177, 182-98, 225, 421, 264, 345-52, 358, 361, 377-81, 394, 415, 430, 434-37, 446, 452, 461, 468, 482, 489, 510, 514, 522, 538, 540-43, 549-52, 556-58, 562-64, 567, 568, 581-89, 602-9, 615, 625, 628, 654, 668, 671; Gachard, Correspondance de Philippe II, II, 27, 48, 89, 108, 121, 163, 171-74; Poulet, Correspondance du cardinal de Granvelle, I, 565, note; R. Q. H., January, 1879, 10-12. Some of his letters which were intercepted by the Huguenots are published in the Mémoires de Condé. M. Paillard has printed a portion of those relating to the conspiracy of Amboise in the Rev. hist., XIV; at pp. 64, 65 is a brief sketch of the ambassador’s life. See also Weiss’s introduction to edition of Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, I.

[91] C. S. P. For., No. 543.

[92] Ibid., No. 508, December 27. Throckmorton wrote to the council on February 4, 1560: “At present the French have to bestir themselves for the good and quiet of their own country, as factions in religion are springing up everywhere.”—Ibid., No. 685. Indeed, the chancellor at this time for three days refused to sign an order necessary for the prosecution of the war in Scotland, on the ground of the dangers at home and the necessity of harboring the government’s resources (ibid., No. 292, November 18, 1559: Killigrew and Jones to Cecil). Among the financial expedients resorted to at this time was an order in December, 1559, that all posts and postmasters should henceforth be deprived of the fees which they enjoyed which amounted to 100,000 crowns yearly, and for compensation to them the price of letters was increased a fourth part (ibid., No. 508, December, 1559). On May 29, 1560, a royal ordinance abolished the King’s support of the post entirely and some new ordinances of Parlement were calculated to increase the revenue by 2,000,000 francs (ibid., No. 550, January 6, 1560). In February the King raised a loan of 7,000 francs at 8 per cent. from the Parisians (ibid., No. 750, February 20, 1560: Throckmorton to the Queen).

[93] “Six score commissions are sent forth for the persecution for religion.”—Ibid., No. 451: Killigrew and Jones to the Queen, December 18, 1559. This was just after the murder of the president Minard. “The Cardinal of Lorraine lately sent a bag full of commissions for persecution to be done about Poitiers and certain letters which he carried apart in his bosom; the messenger was met and the letters taken from him.”—Ibid., No. 590, January 18, 1560. One of these—“Lettre de roi à tous les évêques de son royaume”—is preserved in K. 1,494, fol. 4. It is dated January 28, 1560.

[94] Nég. Tosc., III, 408, January 22, 1560. On January 29 a poor man, a binder of books, was condemned to be burned for heresy at Rouen. While riding in a cart between two friars to be burned, a quarrel was made with a sergeant who convoyed him and he was unhorsed, the poor man was taken out of the cart, his hands were loosed, and a cloak was thrown over him, and he was conveyed out of the hands of his enemies. The justices and the governors, having knowledge of this, commanded the gates to be shut, and, making a search that night, found him again and burned him next day. And at his burning were three hundred men-at-arms, for fear of the people (C. S. P. For., No. 708, February 8, 1560).

[95] C. S. P. For., No. 256, November 14, 1559; ibid., Ven., No. 132, March 6, 1560.

[96] Baschet, I, 559; cf. Nég. Tosc., III, 310, January, 1560.

[97] The fear of attempts being made to assassinate them or the King haunted the cardinal and his brother. In November the French King, while out hunting near Blois, became so terrified, that he returned to court, and orders were given to the Scotch Guard to wear jack and mail and pistols (C. S. P. For., No. 166, November 15, 1559); in December rumors reached the cardinal’s ears that his own death and that of the duke of Guise was sworn (ibid., No. 528); in January the use of tabourins and masks in court pleasures was forbidden on account of the fear which the cardinal of Lorraine had of being assassinated (ibid., No. 658, January 28, 1559). De Thou says the cardinal was “natura timidus.”—Book XXV. The wearing of pistols and firearms was prohibited by two edicts, the one of July 3, 1559, the other of December 17, 1559. The law also forbade the wearing of long sleeves or cloaks or even top boots, in which a pistol or a poignard might be concealed. Both measures were attributed with good reason to the timidity of the cardinal of Lorraine.

[98] “Les protestans de France se mettans devant les yeux l’example de leurs voisins.”—Castelnau, Book I, chap. vii.

[99] La Planche, 237.

[100] Ibid.; Castelnau, Book I, chap. viii. The Huguenots did not intend to take up arms against the person of the King or to force Francis II to change the religion of the state. The assertion that these were their purposes was an adroit stroke of the Guises (Rev. hist., XIV, 85, 101).

[101] Rel. vén., I, 525.

[102] Volrad of Mansfeldt and Grumbach, counselor of the elector palatine, but personal enemies of the cardinal of Lorraine, had been drawn by sympathy into the plan, and on March 4, through their influence, Hotman was received by the elector at Heidelberg, who gave Hotman a letter of credit to the king of Navarre and the prince of Condé. See Dareste, “Extraits de la correspondance inédite de François Hotman,” Mém. de l’Académie des sciences morales et politiques, CIV (1897), 649.

[103] After the failure of the conspiracy, during the course of the investigation set on foot by the government, the constable was accused of complicity in the affair but vigorously denied it in a remonstrance laid before the Parlement (La Place, 37, gives a part of the text; Castelnau, Book II, chap, xi), and while condemning the conspiracy artfully contrived to imply that the Guises were to be blamed for much (La Planche, 269). De Thou, II, 778, perhaps reproduces the actual language of the constable before the Parlement, his father having been president of the body at this time. But in the early winter Montmorency had visited his lands in Poitou and Angoumois, and his daughter, Madame de la Tremouille, having quitted his usual place of residence at Chantilly, and traveled in those quarters of France which, it will be observed, are identical with those wherein the conspiracy of Amboise was hatched (La Place, 32). Is it reasonable to believe that a man of his political acumen and state of feeling at the time toward the Guises could have been unaware of at least something of what was in preparation? The strongest evidence in favor of the innocence of the constable is the fact that his two nephews, the cardinal de Châtillon and the admiral Coligny were undoubtedly without knowledge of the plot. See the proofs in Delaborde, Vie de Coligny, I, 391-414; D’Aubigné, ed. De Ruble, I, 263, n. 6; Paillard, “Additions critiques à l’histoire de la conjuration d’Amboise,” Rev. hist., XIV (1880), 70, 71. It is hard, however, to believe that the constable had no information at all of what was on foot, considering his politics and his movements during the winter.

[104] La Place, 33; Le Laboureur, I, 386, says his first name was Jean.

[105] C. S. P. Ven., No. 137. He had been imprisoned for devising false evidence in a process of law (D’Aubigné, ed. De Ruble, I, 258, n. 3). La Renaudie is said even to have gone to England to see Queen Elizabeth (Haag, La France protestante, I, 259). No reference is given, but from Hotman’s correspondence (Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV [1877], 645) it is evident some one was so sent. The further fact that Mundt was approached in Strasburg and French proclamations printed in England were circulated in Normandy (C. S. P. For., 954, April 6, 1560) seems to sustain this view.

[106] La Place, 41; Castelnau, Book I, chap. viii.

[107] D’Aubigné, Book II, chap, xvii; I, 259-61 gives the names of the provincial captains.

[108] La Planche, 239.

[109] Mundt, Elizabeth’s agent in Strasburg (he was also agent of the landgrave Philip of Hesse), was applied to and “thought that the Queen would not be wanting in kind offices. Already it is whispered,” he wrote, “that there is a great agreement among the nobility and others throughout France, who will no longer endure the haughty and adulterous rule of the Guises, and that some of the first rank in France are cognizant of the conspiracy who remain quiet; the rest will rise in arms against the Guises.”—C. S. P. For., No. 779, February 27, 1560. Cf. Nég. Tosc., III, 409.

An added element of adventure was the participation of a certain nobleman of wealth who seems to have financially supported the conspiracy for self-advantage. This man imagined that the movement might be converted into a movement for the recovery of Metz from the French (letter of Hotman to Calvin, September 19, 1559). In Hotman’s eyes, to restore Metz to Germany was to restore it to Protestantism, but Calvin was cautious, for his sound policy distinguished between rebellion and constitutional restriction of tyranny. He sent Beza to Strasburg to attempt to prevent such an action. But the Senate of Strasburg seized upon the project, demanded liberty for the Protestants of Metz and Trèves, abolished the Interim, interdicted the Catholic religion, and even expelled the Anabaptists from the city, to the jubilation of radical Protestants, who looked upon it as just reprisal for the repressive policy of the Guises in France.

[110] La Planche, 238.

[111] La Place, 23; La Planche, 238. Some thirty captains were party to it who were to be put in command of some companies of German lansquenets (La Place, 33). “Upward of sixty men, part foreigners and part native Frenchmen” came to aid the plot (C. S. P. Ven., No. 134, March 15, 1560).

[112] C. S. P. Ven., No. 125, March 16, 1560. The correspondence of the Spanish ambassador testifies to the fact that the Protestant soldiery was well paid, the money having been procured by spoliation of the churches. They gave to each footman 14 francs per month and to each horseman 16 sous per day.—Rev. hist., XIV, 104. The Venetian ambassador says the horsemen got 18 soldi, the footmen 10 daily (C. S. P. Ven., March 17, 1560).

[113] The Spanish Ambassador puts it upon the 6th. La Planche, Beza, Castelnau, De Thou, D’Aubigné, La Popelinière, Le Laboureur make March 10 the day. The discrepancy perhaps is to be accounted for by the circumstance that Avenelles had said that March 6 was the day designated, but the unexpected removal of the court from Blois to Amboise (La Place, 33; La Planche, 346) postponed the date of action. Cf. Rev. hist., XIV, 66, 85.

[114] Castelnau, ibid.; La Planche, 239, 246. The statement is confirmed by La Place, 33, 34, and La Planche, 255 who say that the petition was written in invisible ink and intrusted to one Bigne, a servant of La Renaudie, who having been captured after the death of his master, in order to save his life, revealed the secret of the document. The first article was couched in these terms: “Protestation faicte par le chef et tous les ceux du conseil de n’attenter aucune autre chose contre la Majestie du roy et les princes de son sang. Et estoit le but aussi de la dicte entreprise de faire observer d’ancienne coustume de la France par une legitime assemblée des estats.”—Tavannes, 247. Tavannes says Bigne directly said that Condé and Coligny were implicated. Other incriminating papers were found in the boots of the baron Castelnau (Rev. hist., XIV, 99, 100; La Planche, 254, 255).

[115] Castelnau, Book I, chap. xi. De Croze, Les Guises, les Valois et Philippe II, I, 60-70 (2 vols., Paris, 1866), shows admirably that there is no doubt of the formidable nature of the conspiracy of Amboise.

[116] It is said that the cardinal and his brother received intimations of danger from Spain, Italy, Savoy, Germany, and Flanders (La Place 32; Castelnau, Book I, chap, viii) and it is certain that the cardinal Granvella, Philip’s representative in the Netherlands, warned them. De Thou says that warnings came from Germany, Spain, Italy, and France. Paillard in Rev. hist., XIV, 81, is dubious about an Italian source, but it is confirmed by C. S. P. Ven., 137, March 6, 1560. He thinks that any Spanish source of information was impossible, for the reason that Philip II learned everything from Chantonnay. Granvella’s warning is acknowledged by Chantonnay in a letter of March 3, 1560, to his brother. He was expressly told that the aim of the conspiracy was to make away with the cardinal of Lorraine and all those of the house of Guise (Rev. hist., XIV, 80, 81). This is supported by the testimony of the constable and the Venetian ambassador (D’Aubigné, I, 263, n. 3). It seems certain that this information was conveyed to the Guises by February 12 (Rev. hist., XIV, 83; Mém. de Condé, I, 387; D’Aubigné, Book II, chap. xvii). Dareste, “François Hotman et la conspiration d’Amboise,” Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, sér. III, V, 361, thinks that Hotman’s own indiscreet boasting at Strasburg was responsible, at least in part, for the discovery of the plot.

The duke of Guise and his brother were in such fear that they wore shirts of chain mail underneath their vestments, and at night were guarded by pistoleers and men-at-arms. On the night of March 6, while at Blois, the alarm was so great that the duke, the cardinal, the grand-prior, and all the knights of the order there, watched all night long in the courtyard (C. S. P. For., No. 837, March 7, 1560).

[117] Castelnau, Book I, chap, viii; La Planche, 246, 247. He received one hundred écus and a judicial post in Lorraine (De Thou, II, 774, ed. 1740).

[118] “Among the prisoners was a Gascon gentleman, one baron de Castelnau, who considering himself ill-used by the cardinal and the duke of Guise, with many other captains and soldiers, dissatisfied on account of non-payment of their arrears and because they had been dismissed from the Court, finding themselves without salary or any other means, and being half desperate, joined the other insurgents about religion and conspired against the cardinal and the duke of Guise.”—C. S. P. Ven., No. 135, March 16, 1560. Sancerre had known Castelnau during the late war, and when he sought to arrest him and his companions, they resisted. Although the city of Tours took up arms in the king’s name against them, they made their escape into the château de Noizay (Indre-et-Loire), between three and four leagues from Amboise, which belonged to the wife of Renay (La Place, 33. She had been maid of honor to Jeanne d’Albret, C. S. P. Ven., No. 135, March 16, 1560). Cf. C. S. P. For., March 21, 1560, and note, on p. 462—the account of Throckmorton. The two versions substantially agree.

[119] C. S. P. Ven. For., March 16, 1560.

[120] C. S. P. For., No. 859, March 15, 1560; ibid., Ven., No. 135, March 16.

[121] Rev. hist., XIV, 102; La Planche, 247; Arch. de la Gironde, XXIX, 8. Vieilleville was sent to pacify the Beauce and M. de Vassey, another knight of the order, to Maune, near Angers, to subdue a commotion there (C. S. P. For., 902, March 26, 1560).

[122] His orders at this hour are printed in the Mém.-journ. du duc de Guise, 457; Mem. de Condé, I, 342; La Popelinière, I, 166; cf. La Planche, 225, who gives the gist of them.

[123] Lettres-patentes du Roi Francois II au sénéschal de Lyon “concernans la revelacion de grace que sa Ma^[te] veult faire à ceulx qui avaient conspiré contre l’estat de la religion et son royaume,” March 17, 1560.

[124] See the extended account in C. S. P. Ven., March 20, 1560; Nég. Tosc., III 412-15.

[125] His corpse was hanged March 20, 1560, upon a gibbet before the court gate, and left there for two whole days, with an inscription at his feet running: “C’est La Renaudie dict la Forest, capitaine des rebelles, chef et autheur de la sédition” (La Place, 35; D’Aubigné, I, 268, Book II, chap, xvii; C. S. P. For., 463, note, March 23, 1560).

[126] The sentencing to death of prisoners continued daily, several being sent for execution to Blois, Tours, Orleans, and other places, “that these acts of justice might be witnessed universally and be better known.”

[127] The instructions of the King are a curious witness of the fury of the Guises: “Je vous prye, y estant arrivé, faire si bonne dilligence que vous les puissiez chastier comme ils méritent, sans avoir aucune pitié ny compassion d’eux.... Aussy je vous envoye des lettres dont le nom est en blanc et lesquelles vous ferez remplir à votre fantaisie, que j’escrips aux principaux seigneurs et gentilshommes dudit païs à ce qu’ils ayent à assembler leur voysins et vous accompaigner en ceste entreprinse.”—Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 342, 343.

[128] Throckmorton wrote on February 27, 1560: “It is reported that the idols have been cast out of the churches throughout Aquitaine and that the same would speedily be done in Provence.”—C. S. P. For., No. 779. Later, on April 14, the Venetian ambassador reports that the insurgents in Provence “have stripped the churches, and mutilated the images.”—Ibid., Ven., No. 146. In Dauphiné the achievements of Montbrun made him famous; see De Thou, Book XXV, 548 ff.

[129] Chantonnay to the duke of Sessa, March 24, 1560, K. 1,493, No. 45. At St. Malo the insurgents killed certain public officials and prevented an execution. On March 25 the cardinal of Bourbon went to Rouen; and on the same day there was a sermon in a wood without the town to above two thousand people. A priest and a clerk called them Lutherans and cast stones at them, and a riot ensued. Two days after the preacher was taken and burned (C. S. P. For., 930, March 30, 1560).

[130] C. S. P. Ven., No. 142, March 26, 1560.

[131] Ibid., No. 146, April 4, 1560; ibid., For., 952, April 6. The cardinal of Lorraine justified the drastic policy of the government, saying: “It will be more than necessary to apply violent remedies and proceed to fire and sword, as otherwise, unless provision be made, the alienation of this kingdom, coupled with that of Germany and England and Scotland, would by force draw Spain and Italy and the rest of Christendom to the same result.”—Ibid., Ven., No. 142, March 28, 1560.

[132] The court attended the spectacle of these executions “comme s’il eût été question de voir jouer quelque momerie.”—La Planche, 263.

[133] Monod, “La jeunesse d’Agrippa d’Aubigné,” Mém. de l’Acad. de Caen, 1884.

[134] C. S. P. For., 1560, Introd. Hotman vented his disappointment at the failure of the conspiracy and his wrath because of the cruel policy of the Guises in a famous pamphlet directed against the cardinal of Lorraine. It bore the significant title “Le Tigre.” See De Thou, Book XXV, 512; Weill, 40, 98, Asse, “Un pamphlet en 1560,” Revue de France, January 1876, and Dareste, Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV (1877), 605. Hotman’s authorship of it remained undiscovered for years. A counselor named Du Lyon, believed to be the author of it, a printer named Martin, and a merchant of Rouen, who had sponsored it, were hanged in the Place Maubert (Castelnau, Book I, chap, xi; La Planche, 312, 313; La Place, 76, 77).

In 1875 M. Charles Read published this famous pamphlet in facsimile from the only existing copy which was rescued from the burning of the Hôtel-de-Ville in 1871. The text is accompanied with historical, literary, and bibliographical notes.

[135] The baggage of the prince of Condé was opened, it being expected to find therein letters or other writings relating to the conspiracy, and although excuses were made after the search, attributing it to thieves, yet as none of the contents were missing, the belief greatly prevailed of the search having been made for that purpose (C. S. P. Ven., No. 178, 1560).

On March 22 the prince of Condé was confronted with one of the condemned conspirators, but to the discomfiture of his enemies, no evidence against the prince could be elicited (C. S. P. For., No. 919, March 29 1560).

[136] La Planche, 267.

[137] Castelnau, Book I, chap. xi.

[138] La Planche, 268.

[139] May 6, 1560, Navarre to Throckmorton: “Has received a letter enclosing a proclamation of the Queen in which he sees it intimated that the princes and estates of France are to call her to their aid. As first prince of the blood he repudiates this, and hopes she will not mention him or the others in her proclamations again, as it will only injure them with the King” (written from Pau).—C. S. P. For., No. 40.

[140] Mém. de Condé, I, 398; La Popelinière, I, 170.

[141] C. S. P. For., No. 992, April 12, 1560.

[142] Ibid., No. 954, April 6, 1560; Chantonnay wrote to the duchess of Parma that Elizabeth was privy to the conspiracy (Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, II, 142).

[143] C. S. P. For., No. 992, April 12, 1560. The unfortunate baron Castelnau, in view of the fact that he was a knight of the order, was at first sentenced to the galleys for three years, but later, at the instance of the Guises, was condemned to die and was beheaded on March 29, along with the captain Mazères, the duke of Nemours, the baron’s captor, being absolved from keeping his promise to spare his life (C. S. P. For., No. 952, April 6, 1560; La Planche, 264, 265; La Place, 34; D’Aubigné, 268-70, Book II, chap. xvii). One of the most prominent of those arrested was the Scotchman, Robert Stuart, who had already been suspected of the murder of President Minard, and who claimed to be a relative of Mary Stuart. He was imprisoned in the Conciergerie and put to torture, but would admit nothing. It was he who shot the constable Montmorency on the battlefield of St. Denis. Stuart had the reputation of being able to make bullets, called Stuardes, which would pierce a cuirass. He himself was killed in turn at the battle of Jarnac by the marquis of Villars, count of Tende, who stabbed him with a dagger (Rev. hist., XIV, 93; Forneron, Histoire des ducs de Guise, II, 92).

[144] “A conspiracy to kill them both and then to take the King and give him masters and governors to bring him up in this wretched doctrine,” is the way the cardinal of Lorraine and his brother described it to the dowager queen of Scotland in a letter of March 20, 1560 (C. S. P. For., No. 870).

The King’s circular letter to the Parlements, bailiffs, and seneschals of the kingdom on March 30 declared that the conspirators “s’estoyent aidés de certains predicans venus de Genève.”—Mem. de Condé, I, 398.

[145] “It had been well if the Guises had not been so particularly named as the occasion of these unquietnesses, but that it had run in general terms,” wrote Throckmorton to Cecil (C. S. P. For., No. 954, April 6, 1560). Chantonnay advised the queen mother that, in order to avoid further difficulty, it was expedient for the Guises to retire from court for a season (La Place, 38).

[146] La Planche, 219, 20.

[147] Tavannes actually says she was privy to the conspiracy of Amboise, p. 247. During the reign of Henry II, Catherine de Medici had had no political influence. She was hated as an Italian (Rel. vén., I, 105). On one occasion only did she assert herself; “En 1557, à la nouvelle du désastre de Saint-Quentin, qui ouvrait à l’Espagne les portes de la France, il y eut un moment d’indicible panique. Hommes d’état, hommes de guerre, tous avaient perdu la tête. Par un hasard heureux, Catherine se trouvait à Paris; seule elle conserva son sang-froid, et, de sa propre initiative, courant en l’hôtel-de-ville et au parlement, et s’y montrant si éloquente et énergetique, elle arracha aux échevins et aux membres du parlement un large subside et rendit du cœur à la grande ville.”—La Ferrière “L’entrevue de Bayonne,” R. Q. H., XXXIV, 457.

[148] “Ut exorientes tumultus reprimeret,” Raynaldus, XXXIV, 72, col. 1; Chantonnay to Philip II, August 31, 1560, K. 1,493, No. 76; D’Aubigné, I, 27; La Planche, 269. Shortly before the death of Henry II, Coligny had sought to resign his government, wishing to retain only his office of admiral but Henry refused to accept the resignation (Delaborde, I, 362). Coligny then endeavored to have his government of Picardy given to his nephew, the prince of Condé (Rev. hist., XIV, 74). Meanwhile he continued to hold the office of governor to prevent the Guises getting control of it (La Planche, 216). Finally in January, 1560, the admiral again went to court to present his resignation, and at the same time to urge the appointment of his nephew. This time it was accepted, and the prince of Condé was appointed to the post (La Planche, 217; Rev. hist., XIV, 74, 75).

[149] La Place, 36; C. S. P. For., No. 952.

[150] La Place, 38. On L’Hôpital see Dupré-Lasale, Michel de l’Hôpital avant son elévation au poste de chancellier de France, 2 vols., 1875; Amphoux, Michel de l’Hôpital et la liberté de conscience au XVI^[e] siècle; Guer, Die Kirchenpolitik d. Kanzlers Michel de l’Hôpital, 1877; Shaw, Michel de l’Hôpital and His Policy.

[151] La Place, 37.

[152] Castelnau, Book I, chap, xi; C. S. P. Ven., No. 174, 1560; Raynaldus, XXXIV, 66, col. 2; D’Aubigné, I, 274, n. 3; La Planche, 305; La Place, 468, gives the text. The edict was not published, though, until July 17 (K. 1,494, folio 6).

[153] C. S. P. Ven., No. 193, August 30, 1560. The term “interim” was technically applied to a resolution of the sovereign, with or without the approbation of the diet or the estates of the country. By such an edict religious affairs were regulated provisionally, pending a final settlement by a general council of the church. The practice first obtained in Germany, where Charles V issued such a decree in favor of the Lutherans in 1548. See Rev. hist., XIV, 76, 77. “In modo che, restando ciascuno d’allora in dietro assicurato dalla paura che avea per innanzi, di poter esser inquisito, questo si può dir che fosse uno tacito interim.”—Rel. vén., I, 414.

[154] “La reyne mère du roy, monstrant une bonne affection à l’admiral, le pria de la conseiller et l’advertir par lettres, souvent, de tous les moyens qu’il sçauvoit et pourroit apprendre d’appaiser les troubles et séditions du royaume.”—Castelnau, Book I, chap. xi. Those of the Council who were unwilling to consent to such changes absented themselves. The marshals Brissac and St. André did so, the one alleging ill health as his excuse, the other hatred of the king of Navarre (Rel. vén., I, 549).

[155] Castelnau, Book I, chap, xi; Rel. vén., I, 415 and n. 2.

[156] Davila, I, 295; Rel. vén., I, 413. “In the rural portions of Normandy, for unknown reasons, ‘Lutheranism’ had spread so much that to one district of that province was given the name of ‘Little Germany.’”—Hauser, American Hist. Rev., January, 1899, 225.

[157] The Tuscan ambassador, as early as April, 1560, advised his government of the likelihood of this feud (Nég. dip. de la France avec la Toscane, III, 415-17 Rev. hist., XIV, 74).

[158] Nanteuil, near La Fère (Aisne).

[159] La Place, 38.

[160] C. S. P. For., No. 232, June 24, 1560; D’Aubigné, I, 276; Mém. de Condé, I, 151.

[161] La Place, 41; D’Aubigné, I, 277.

[162] La Place, 41.

[163] C. S. P. Ven., No. 149, 1560.

[164] Rel. vén., II, 139; Nég. Tosc., III, 417. La Planche, 217, gives a sample lampoon.

[165] C. S. P. Ven., No. 151.

[166] Ibid., For., No. 992, April 12, 1560. On one occasion the police of Paris, when pursuing a murderer, entered a house at a venture, into which they thought the culprit had made his escape, where they found and arrested the man who printed and placarded over the walls of Paris the writings against the Guise family and against the cardinal (ibid., Ven., No. 178, 1560; Nég. Tosc., III, 417, 418). The offending printer was hanged and then quartered (C. S. P. Ven., No. 186, July, 1560).

[167] C. S. P. Ven., No. 174; ibid., For., No. 232, June, 1560; No. 234, June 24, 1560; La Planche, 261. Francis II, during the course of this investigation, stayed at Maillebois, a house of D’O, the captain of the Scotch Guard, on the edge of Normandy (C. S. P. For., No. 233, June 24, 1560).

[168] D’Andelot and Coligny refused to make war upon the Scotch Calvinists (C. S. P. For., No. 168, June 7, 1560).

[169] “Rapport indiquant les preparatifs faits pour l’enterprise sur l’Ecosse, à Rouen, au Hâvre et à Dieppe,” K. 1,495, No. 2, 11 juillet 1560.

“The embarkment for Scotland hastens. Soldiers arrive daily from Dieppe and New Haven. At Caudebec, Harfleur, and New Haven there is exceeding great store of provision and munitions, sufficient for 25,000 men for six months.”—C. S. P. For., No. 233, June 24, 1560.

[170] Mundt to Cecil, from Strasburg, ibid., No. 52, May 7, 1560.

[171] Gresham to Cecil, ibid., No. 617, January 22, 1560: “The French king brings at least 20,000 footmen in Germany and he has taken up at Lyons as much money at interest as he can get.”

The count of Mansfeldt to the Queen, ibid., No. 33, May 5, 1560: “The French continue to raise troops and to buy horses and ammunition. Possibly these preparations are being made against the insurgents of France, but it is doubtful whether under pretense of invading Scotland.”

After the conspiracy of Amboise the duke of Ferrara sent 1,000 harquebusiers and the Pope 4,000 Italians (ibid., No. 952, April 6, 1560).

[172] C. S. P. Eng., No. 931. The clever Italian, in this case, had more discernment than Cecil, who thought that the French would rather “yield in some part than to lose their outward things by inward contentions.”—Cecil to Elizabeth, June 21, 1560; ibid., 1560-61, No. 152, n.; Keith, 414; Wright, I, 30.

[173] See letter of the cardinal of Lorraine and duke of Guise, Appendix I.

[174] C. S. P. For., No. 255, June 30, 1560. The news was concealed from Mary Stuart for ten days.

[175] Précis d’articles arrêtées conclus entre le commissionaire d’Angleterre et de la France: Affaires d’Ecosse (summary), K. 1493, No. 59, 6 juillet 1560.

Montluc, the bishop of Valence, the bishop of Amiens, and MM. de la Brose, d’Oysel, and Randau were the French ambassadors who accepted the terms offered by Cecil. Their commission was issued from Chenonceaux May 2, 1560. Montluc and Randau signed the instrument, an abstract of which is in C. S. P. For., No. 281, July 6, 1560. Castelnau, Book II, chaps, i-vi, gives an account of the Anglo-Scotch war. See the memoir of Montluc upon his mission, in Paulin Paris, Négociations, etc., 392; and Schickler, Hist. de France dans les archives privées de la Grande Bretagne, 6. The treaty may be found in Rymer, XV, 593; Keith, I, 291; Lesley, Hist. of Scotland (1828), 291.

[176] “The late peace was forced upon the French rather by necessity occasioned by their internal discord than from their desire for concord.”—Mundt to Cecil from Strasburg, August, 13, 1560, C. S. P. For., No. 416.

[177] Chantonnay to Philip II, June 27, 1560, K. 1493, 68_c_.

[178] Nég. Tosc., III, 419, 420, May, 1560. Biragues, king’s lieutenant in Saluzzo, to the duke of Anjou, March 1, 1560, Collection Montigny, No. 298.

[179] C. S. P. For., No. 386, August 3, 1560. Throckmorton was told that “all in this country (Picardy) seem marvellously bent to the new religion.”—Ibid., No. 405, August 7, 1560.

[180] Ibid., No. 416, August 13, 1560.

[181] Ibid., Ven., No. 188, July 30, 1560.

[182] Ibid., For., No. 416, August 13, 1560.

[183] Ibid., No. 494, September 7, 1560.

[184] A pamphlet, issued in the nature of a petition and addressed to the king of Navarre and the princes of the blood, abounded in invective against them.—Castelnau, Book II, chap, vii; C. S. P. For., No. 168, June 7, 1560.

[185] C. S. P. Ven., No. 188, July 30, 1560.

[186] A vidame is a baron holding of a bishop. The vidame of Chartres was cousin-german of Maligny, suspected in the Amboise conspiracy. The vidame not having any children, Maligny and his brother were his sole heirs. The comte de Bastard has written a biography of him, Vie de Jean de Ferrières, vidame de Chartres, Auxerre, 1885.

[187] C. S. P. Ven., No. 193, August 30, 1560.

The prince of Condé, during this summer, had repaired to Guyenne to see his brother, the king of Navarre, at Bordeaux where he protested against the Catholic policy of Antoine (La Planche, 276; La Place, 35). The brothers met on June 25 (Rochambeau, Lettres d’Antoine de Bourbon et de Jeanne d’Albret, 202). In his journey he inveighed against the usurpation of the Guises, and found a hearing from the noblesse and gentlemen of the south, who urged him and his brother to assume the place to which their rank entitled them. The Guises were kept informed of this journey of the prince by the marshal St. André, who, under pretense of visiting his brothers, kept watch of Condé (La Planche, 314, 315; La Place, 53). The discovery of the plot was owing to the suspicious vigilance of the duke of Guise, who marked a Basque gentleman who appeared in Paris as a stranger bent on important business, and surmised that he had been sent by the king of Navarre. It was noticed that he had conferred with the vidame of Chartres, and so, “as he was returning ... to ... Navarre, the duke of Guise had him and his valises, with (his) letters and writings, seized at Etampes. In the valise many letters were found, said to have been addressed both to the king of Navarre and to his brother, the prince of Condé. Among them were letters of the constable and his son, Montmorency, though they were merely letters of ceremony; but those of importance were what the vidame wrote to the prince, part in cipher and part without.”—C. S. P. Ven., No. 193, Aug. 30, 1560. Cf. La Planche, 355-58; De Thou, III, 357; Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 367; De Crue, 277, 278. The vidame of Chartres was arrested on August 29, 1560, by the provost-marshal and the lieutenant-criminal, at his lodgings in Paris, and carried through the streets upon a mule, “with a great rout of armed men to the Bastille.”—C. S. P. For., No. 483, September 3, 1560. Castelnau, Book II, chap, vii, says that the letters promised to assist the prince of Condé against all persons whatsoever except the King and the royal family. The Venetian ambassador says that there was enough in them “clearly to indicate that for many months there had been an intrigue.”—Ibid., Ven., No. 193, August 30, 1560. On the other hand, Throckmorton asserts that “the substance of the letter sent by the vidame to the king of Navarre is said to be so wisely written that it is thought that nothing can be laid to his charge.”—Ibid., For., No. 502, September 8, 1560. He was examined by the archbishop of Vienne and the president De Thou. Upon his arrest the vidame said “he was glad of it, for now the King would know of his innocence.”—Ibid., No. 502; La Place, 70.

[188] The treaty of Edinburgh between Scotland and England was signed on July 6, 1560 (C. S. P. Scot., IV, 42).

On July 28, 1560, Francis II, writing to the bishop of Limoges, says it is unnecessary to do more than inform the king of Spain that he has made peace with Scotland, which will leave him leisure to attend to the internal affairs of the realm and to thank him for his good offices (Teulet, I, 606); cf. C. S. P. For., July 28, 1560, 194, n.

[189] C. S. P. For., No. 345, July 19, 1560.

[190] Castelnau, Book II, chap, vii; C. S. P. For., No. 416, August 13, 1560, from Strasburg.

[191] C. S. P. For., No. 502, September 8, 1560.

[192] Ibid., No. 354, July 19, 1560.

[193] Ibid., No. 317, July 8, 1560; Nég. Tosc., III, 421-23, June, 1560.

[194] At the assembly at Fontainebleau the King proposed four points for deliberation: (1) religion; (2) justice; (3) the debts of the crown; (4) means to relieve the people (Nég. Tosc., III, 424, August 25, 1560). C. S. P. For., No. 442, August 20, 1560; La Place, 53; La Planche, 351; Castelnau, Book II, chap, viii, give the names of those present. The petitions are printed in Mém. de Condé, II, 645. Picot, Hist. des états généraux, II, 14, erroneously gives the date as August 23.

[195] C. S. P. Ven., No. 195, August 30, 1560; Castelnau, Book II, chap, viii, gives an abstract of the speech, in the third person. Cf. La Place, 54, 55.

[196] Castelnau, loc. cit.

[197] “En termes prolixes.”—De Thou, Book XXV, 525. It is printed in Œuvres complètes de L’Hôpital, ed. Dufey, I, 335.

[198] “They might see all states troubled and corrupted, religion, justice, and the nobility, every one of them ill-content, the people impoverished and greatly waxed cold in the zeal and good will they were wont to bear to their prince and his ministers.”—C. S. P. For., No. 442.

[199] La Planche, 352; Castelnau, Book II, chap. viii; the statement of the debt given by La Planche agrees exactly with C. S. P. For., 442.

[200] Castelnau, loc. cit.; La Planche, 352.

[201] See Reynaud, Jean de Montluc, evêque de Valence, 1893.

[202] “Les derniers et plus jeunes conseillers opinent les premiers, afin que la liberté des advis ne soit diminuée ou retranchée par l’authorité des princes ou premiers conseillers et seigneurs.”—Castelnau, Book II, chap. viii. He made a typically episcopal, not to say unctuous, address. Cf. La Place, 54; La Planche, 352; printed in Mém. de Condé, I, 555; La Popelinière, I, 192.

[203] La Planche, 352-61; La Place, 53-65.

[204] Reform in the collation of benefices was one of the important deliberations of the Council of Trent (Baguenault de la Puchesse, “Le Concile de Trente,” R. Q. H., October, 1869, 339).

[205] Nég. Tosc., III, 424, August 29, 1560.

[206] Castelnau, Book II, chap, viii; La Planche, 361.

[207] C. S. P. For., No. 193, August 30, 1560; Paris, Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 481; Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 149, n.; La Place, 68; La Planche, 363. “The government seems determined not to await the meeting of a council general, the decision of which will be tardy, but to convene a national one, assembling in a synod all bishops and other leading and intelligent churchmen of the kingdom, to consult and provide for the urgent need of France in matters of religion which admit of no delay.”—C. S. P. Ven., No. 142, 1560.

[208] La Place, 70.

[209] In Tours as early as April, 1560, a letter was published to all the governors and ministerial officials of the cities and provinces of the kingdom concerning the reformation of the church by means of a congregation of the prelates of the Gallican church to be assembled for a national council (C. S. P. Ven., No. 151, 1560).

[210] The ultra-Catholic party at Trent accused the cardinal of wanting to create an independent patriarchate out of the Gallican church. Desjardins. Nég. de la France dans le Levant, II, 728.

As a matter of fact, at this season, the cardinal was disposed to favor the project of a national council, as he hoped thereby to enlarge the power and dignity of his office as primate of France. His ambition was to become a sort of French pope, so that “he would not have thought it wrong had all obedience to the pontiff ceased.”—Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), September 23, 1560.

[211] Maynier, Etude historique sur le concile de Trente (1545-62), 1874; Journal du concile de Trente, redigé par un secrétaire vénitien présent aux sessions de 1562 à 1563, et publié par Armand Baschet, avec d’autres documents diplomatiques relatifs à la mission des Ambassadeurs de France au concile; Desjardins, Le pouvoir civil au concile de Trente, Paris, 1869; Baguenault de la Puchesse, “Le concile de Trente,” R. Q. H., October, 1869.

[212] C. S. P. Ven., No. 161, 1560.

[213] Ibid., For., No. 232, June 24, 1560. When the Pope showed anger at the determination of France, the cardinal of Lorraine actually apologized for himself by saying that it was neither by his orders nor with his consent, but that the printers took the liberty to give the name of National Council to the “Congregation” which the King intended to convoke! (ibid., No. 174, 1560).

[214] Ibid., No. 569, September 8, 1560.

[215] Ibid., No. 615, October 8, 1560. The demands of the Protestants were as follows: (1) That the Council be convened in a free city of Germany; (2) that summons be not by a papal bull, but by the Emperor, who should provide them with safe-conducts; (3) that the Pope be subordinated to the Council; (4) that those of the Confession of Augsburg have a vote equally with the Catholics; (5) that the judgment be according to the Holy Scriptures, and not according to the decrees of the Pope; (6) that the prelates of the Council be absolved from the oath by which they are bound to the Pope and the Church of Rome; (7) that the acts of the Council of Trent be annulled (cf. C. S. P. For., No. 782, sec. 14).

[216] “A general council is necessary for abolishing these heresies; but ... especial care must be taken with the Emperor and the kings of France and Spain to decide what shall be settled therein.”—C. S. P. For., No. 416, August 13, 1560, from Strasburg.

[217] The Vatican understanding was that the former Council of Trent was to be continued; although in the bull the word continuation was not made use of, as in that of the jubilee, a show of deference thereby being made to the Emperor and the French King, who had demanded a new council. But the French government although it allowed the place, did not allow the continuation of the former Council of Trent convened by Paul III. For if it accepted the council as it was published by the bull, it would have had to accept all the articles which had been concluded in the former council. When it was argued that Philip II was satisfied with the continuation, Francis II replied that although continuation might suffice for the needs of his dominions, it would not do for France, the more so because Henry II of France having caused protest to be made in Trent of the nullity of that council, from its not having been free, his son could not think well of the continuation. (The reply of Francis II to Philip II, October, 1560, is in Paris, Négociations, 615-22. Cf. also the luminous accounts of Elizabeth’s agent in Venice, Guido Gianetti, C. S. P. For., No. 782, December 7, 1560; No. 815, December 21, 1560; and the dispatch of Throckmorton to the queen, of December 31, 1560, giving an account of a conversation with the king of Navarre, No. 832, §7.) In the reply made to Philip in October, 1560, the French King declared that, by the advice of his council, he had resolved upon an assembly of his prelates, from which nothing was to be feared for the apostolic see, it being intended only to provide the necessary remedies, and that it would not be a hindrance but rather an aid to the General Council, for when it came to open, the French prelates would be already assembled and “well informed as well of the evil as of the remedy,” and that when the Council at Trent should have once begun, it would put an end to the lesser assembly. As to the place of the council, the French at first preferred to have it meet in one of the Rhenish towns between Constance and Cologne, or at Besançon in Burgundy, which belonged to Philip II; later, in the answer to Don Antonio and in his letters to Rome, Francis II agreed to accept whatever place the Emperor and the Pope decided upon.

The new session of the Council of Trent was to be preceded by a general jubilee, giving power to confessors to absolve from all sins, even from that of having read prohibited books. The bull warmly exhorted the extirpation of heresy. This jubilee was first celebrated at Rome, on Sunday, November 24, 1560, by a procession, with the Pope walking at its head (C. S. P. For., No. 782, §§ 15, 16).

[218] La Place, 114; C. S. P. For., No. 630, October 12, 1560, from Venice.

[219] Gachard, Correspondance de Philippe II, I, 191, Granvella to Antonio Perez from Brussels, August 9, 1560.

[220] Paris, Négociations, etc., 615-22; Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 137, 149. Don Antonio arrived at the French court on September 23, and departed four days later (C. S. P. For., 619, Oct. 10, 1560). Philip II took the ground that any discussion looking toward the reformation of religion would not only imperil the faith, but prejudice his policy in Spain and the Netherlands; for if France should alter anything, he feared it would cause a schism universally (ibid., No. 619, Oct. 10, 1560). The growth of the reformation in Spain alone was already quite great enough to alarm him. In the early autumn of 1559, Miranda, the archbishop of Toledo, the archbishop of Seville, and twelve of “the most famous and best-learned religious men” in Spain had been arrested for heresy (ibid., No. 133, October 25, 1559), and at this time the inquisitors had just laid their hands on the brother of the admiral of Spain (ibid., No. 619, October 10, 1560). On this whole subject see Weiss, The Spanish Reformers, and Wiffen, Life and Writings of Juan de Valdés, 1865. Montluc accused Jeanne d’Albret of printing Calvinist catechisms and the New Testament in Spanish, in Basque, and in Béarnais, and of secretly distributing them in Spain by colporteurs (La Ferrière, Blaise de Montluc, 61).

[221] Paris, Négociations, 495; Forneron, Histoire de Philippe II, I, 225. The Venetian ambassador learned the news within less than a month (C. S. P. Ven., No. 199, September 28, 1560).

[222] This important offer was Philip’s answer to Francis II’s letter of August 31 and was made to L’Aubespine, the French ambassador in Spain, on September 13, 1560, as appears from the minutes of the Spanish chancellery in K. 1,493, No. 84. After the departure of Don Antonio, Catherine wrote a letter to Philip II, thanking him for the offer (Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 149).

The Venetian ambassador is particular and says he offered to put 3,500 troops in Flanders at the disposal of France, to place 2,000 infantry near Narbonne, and another 4,000 near Bayonne, besides “a large body of Spanish cavalry.”—C. S. P. Ven., No. 199, September 28, 1560. Throckmorton’s figures are 3,000 Spaniards from the Low Countries; 500 men-at-arms and 2,000 footmen, who would enter by way of Narbonne; and 3,000 through Navarre with 500 horses of that country (ibid., For., No. 619, § 13, October 10, 1560).

[223] C. S. P. Eng., No. 620, October 10, 1560.

[224] Ibid., For., No. 411, August 9, 1560.

[225] Ibid., No. 502, September 8, 1560; Chantonnay of Philip II, same date, K. 1,493, No. 83.

[226] Ibid., No. 619, §§ 13, 15, October 10, 1560. The gendarmerie is appointed to remain in divers countries according to an edict. Has been informed that there is a league in hand between him (the king of France) and the king of Spain. On the 16th there departed out of Paris ten cartloads of munitions and artillery, but whither it is to be conveyed and how it is to be employed he cannot learn (C. S. P. For., No. 655, October 22, 1560). On the 30th Du Bois passed bringing with him out of the places and forts in Picardy 1,000 footmen, who marched between this town and Rouen toward Anjou; but where they shall go is only known to himself and the duke of Guise. They keep together strong, as if they were in an enemy’s country. After them come 500 more (ibid., No. 692, Oct. 31, 1360). The Tuscan ambassador notices the ardor of Paris to contribute blood and treasure (Nég. Tosc., III, 436).

[227] “From Strasburg: Frequent negotiations between the French King and the German princes. The Rhinegrave has departed into Hesse ... with Count John of Salm, who is also a French pensioner; where, by the landgrave’s permission and the dissimulation of the Saxon duke of Weimar, they have levied 2,000 cavalry to take into France, which they have partly collected in the territories of the abbot of Fulda on the boundaries of Hesse. The prefect of the Rhenish Circle, the count of Salm, being informed of this preparation of cavalry, assembled his captains at Worms, where it was decided that they would not be permitted to transport their cavalry into France. For a warning had been given in the Imperial Diet that no assembling or travelling of soldiers would be allowed unless by the express permission of the Emperor; for wherever they went they did great damage to the inhabitants.”—Ibid., No. 736, November 26, 1560.

[228] For the organization of Paris at this time see Livre des marchands, 423, 440-43.

[229] C. S. P. For., No. 665, October 22, 1560. The Venetian ambassador says 400,000 francs—twice the amount given by Throckmorton (C. S. P. Ven., 220, October 15, 1560).

[230] Ibid., No. 726, November 18, 1560.

[231] Ibid., No. 619, October 10, 1560.

[232] “The goods of divers Protestants have been seized and divers men dispatched by night and sent by water in sacks to seek heaven.”—Ibid., No. 726, November 18, 1560. Cf. La Planche, 226, 227, 233.

[233] D’Aubigné, Book II, chap, xx; Nég. Tosc., III, 424; for details see La Planche, 366-73.

[234] C. S. P. Ven., No. 200, October 15, 1560.

[235] On October 18 (La Planche, 378).

[236] “Very well armed and numbering more than 300 men in each company and several pieces of cannon.”—C. S. P. For., No. 665, October 25, 1560.

The people of Orleans were completely disarmed, even to knives, by an edict which required all arms to be deposited in the Hôtel-de-Ville (Despatches of Suriano [Huguenot Society], November 1, 1560).

[237] Paris, Négociations, etc., 486. Castelnau, Book II, chap. x, says the change was made because the Huguenots were numerous around Meaux (but so were they also around Orleans), and fear lest another conspiracy might be formed by having the place known so long in advance. A rumor was current that the Huguenots were planning to surprise it. I believe the real reason to be the more central location of Orleans.

[238] “On his arrival with his brethren, the cardinal of Bourbon and the prince of Condé, the prince was taken before the Council who committed him prisoner to MM. de Bressey and Chauverey, two captains, with 200 archers. The king of Navarre goes at liberty but is as it were a prisoner.”—C. S. P. For., No. 716, § 18, November 17, 1560; La Place, 73; Castelnau, Book II, chap. x; Nég. Tosc., III, 425. La Planche, 381, describes the method of his imprisonment.

[239] La Planche, 380; C. S. P. For., No. 725, November 18, 1560; Nég. Tosc., III, 425, 426.

[240] “Qu’il avoit faict et faisoit plusieurs entreprises contre luy (le roi) et l’estat de bon royaume.”—La Planche, 380; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), November 10, 1560.

[241] La Place, 38; La Planche, 378; Castelnau, Book II, chap. x; Rel. vén., I, 557; Brantôme, III, 278.

[242] Yet he was so carefully watched that he was practically a prisoner—“tanquam captivus,” says Throckmorton to Lord Robert Dudley (C. S. P. For., No. 721, 1560). Damville was also regarded with suspicion.

[243] Ibid., No. 716, § 18, November 17, 1560.

[244] Castelnau, Book II, chap. ix; La Planche, 318-38, gives the text of one, which is significant because it is almost wholly a political indictment of the Guises; next to nothing is said touching religion, conclusive evidence that the Huguenot party was much more political than religious.

[245] La Planche, 375, 376.

[246] Ibid., 318.

[247] “Qu’il seroit meilleur pour elle d’entretenir les choses en l’estat qu’elles estoyent, sans rien innover.”—Ibid., 313.

[248] Ibid., 316, 317.

[249] Baschet, La diplomatie vénitienne, 499.

[250] Rel. vén., II, 65.

[251] The more one considers the arrest of the prince of Condé, the more certain it seems that Catherine de Medici inspired it. The Venetian ambassador believed Catherine was at the bottom of his arrest; see Baschet, 500, 501.

[252] “The bishop of Valence says ... that the meeting of Fontainebleau would turn into a general assembly of the three estates of France.”—C. S. P. For., No. 445, August 22, 1560.

[253] La Planche, 218.

[254] See the scathing comparison of the house of Guise with that of Montmorency: “La plus ancienne yssue du premier chrestien du premier du royaume de la chrestienté.”—Livre des marchands, 428-30.

[255] “Messieurs de Guyse vouloyent venir aux armes pour effacer ceste poursuite des estats et réformation de l’église la poursuitte que nous avions si justement commencée de leur faire rendre compte de leurs dons excessifs, c’est-à-dire de leurs larcins, et de leur maniement des finances, ou plustost de leurs finesses.”—Ibid., 456.

The petition of the estates of Touraine, assembled at Tours on October 26, 1560, to the King, is a good example of this popular demand. The articles reflect the state of the times (C. S. P. For., No. 681). In connection with this authentic petition compare the imaginary “discours du drapier” in a fancied meeting of the estates-general, as given in Livre des marchands, 427-40, the satirical forerunner of the greatest political satire of the sixteenth century, the Satyre Menippée.

[256] La Planche, 260.

[257] Cf. La Place, 47-49, 110-13; La Planche, 342; and especially the indictment in Livre des marchands, 436-58.

[258] To be exact, 43,700,000 livres (Isambert, XIV, 63). Part of it was held by the Swiss cantons: “The French King is conferring with the Swiss about paying his debts, and offers two-thirds with a quarter for interest, and to pay the whole within three years; which conditions they refuse, and desire him either to stand to his written promises or that the matter shall be discussed in some place appointed in Switzerland.”—C. S. P. For., No. 763, December 3, 1560, from Strasburg.

[259] “In so much as it was necessary for him to find the wherewithal to satisfy some of these obligations, the late king had abolished certain of them and reduced others; he had let 50,000 footmen be billeted upon the cities of the kingdom and caused money to be raised by the imposition of subsidies, so much so that he had found it necessary in some places to diminish the taille, the people having abandoned the county of Normandy.”—C. S. P. For., No. 658, January 28, 1560; cf. La Place, 47; Livre des marchands, 447, 448; Nég. Tosc., III, 405 and 455.

[260] “The soldiers through necessity have begun to rob.”—C. S. P. For., ibid.

[261] La Place, 48.

[262] La Place, 49.

[263] “Interrogatoire d’un des agens du prince de Condé,” Arch. cur., sér. I, IV, 35. Madame de Roye, Coligny’s sister and mother-in-law of Louis of Condé, was also seized in the expectation of finding papers in her possession which would incriminate Condé, Lattoy, the advocate, and Bouchart, the king of Navarre’s chancellor (Castelnau, Book II, chap. ix; La Planche, 381; Frederick, count palatine of the Rhine, to Elizabeth, from Heidelberg, C. S. P. For., No. 721, November 17, 1560; No. 737, §8, November 28, 1560; No. 781, December 7, 1560; De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 282 ff.).

[264] “MM. de Guise avoient asseuré le pape et le roi d’Espagne de chasser du royaume les huguenots; desseignent (après le procès du prince de Condé et luy executé) d’envoyer de la gendarmerie et de gens de pied sous la charge des sieurs de Sainct André, Termes, Brissac et Sipierre, leurs amis, pour chasser les hérétiques et faire obeyr le roy.”—Tavannes, 257 (1560).

[265] Mém. de Condé, II, 379; Chantonnay to Philip II, November 28, K. 1,493, No. 108; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), November 22; Claude Haton, I, 130, 131.

[266] This action was a legal subterfuge, as Castelnau, Book II, chap. xii, no friend of Condé, is honest enough to admit, citing several precedents in favor of Condé. Cf. La Place, 73-75; La Planche, 400-2; D’Aubigné, I, 294, 295.

[267] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), November 25, 1560.

[268] Francis II, always had been of a frail constitution, and in his passion for hunting seems to have over-exerted himself. “The constitution of his body is such as the physicians do say he cannot be long lived, and thereunto he hath by this too timely and inordinate exercise now in his youth added an evil accident.”—Throckmorton to Elizabeth, C. S. P. For., No. 738, November 28, 1560; Chantonnay to Philip II, same date, K. 1,493, No. 108. He fell ill about November 20, seemingly with a catarrh (Suriano, November 20, 25), accompanied by headache and pain in the ear, of which he died on the night of December 5 at the eleventh hour, although the physicians, on December 1, “mistrusted no danger of his life” (C. S. P. For., No. 758). Throckmorton elsewhere calls the King’s disease “an impostume in the head.”—Ibid., No. 771, December 6, 1560; cf. La Planche, 413, 418; D’Aubigné, I, 299. Very probably the disease was mastoiditis—an affection of the mastoid bone back of the ear, induced by chronic catarrh which finally affected the brain. Suriano says: “Il corpo del morto Re è stato aperto et hanno trovato guasto tutto il cervello, in modo che per diligentia delli medici non si haveria potuto risanarlo” (December 8, 1560.)

[269] D’Aubigné, I, 300, and n. 2. The vidame of Chartres, who had been confined in the Bastille, “though allowed to take the air” (C. S. P. For., No. 764, December 3, 1560), was released also, but died almost immediately (La Place, 78-79, gives a eulogy of him). See Lemoisne, “François de Vendôme, vidame de Chartes,” Positions de thèses de l’Ecole des Chartes, 1901, 89. His death enriched the house of Montmorency, for he left the lordship of Milly-en-Gatinois, worth 3,000 crowns yearly, to Damville, the constable’s second son (C. S. P. For., No. 832, §10, December 31, 1560). The will is printed in Bib. de l’Ec. d. Chartes, 1849, 342; it is dated December 23.

[270] Rel. vén., I, 543. On the situation after death of Francis II see Weill, chap. ii.

[271] C. S. P. For., No. 764, December 3, 1560, Edwards to Cecil from Rouen.

[272] “Lettres-patentes du roi Charles IX; pardon-général au sujet des affaires de religion.” The Spanish ambassador had been summoned to the court that he might write to Philip II to stand ready to offer assistance in case of need.—Despatches of Suriano [Huguenot Society], December 3, 1560; K. 1,493, No. 113, December 3, 1560. Chantonnay’s correspondence shows that the Spanish King was fully informed of the progress of events in France, which is confirmed by Throckmorton. “The King of Spain has given order to stay the five thousand Spaniards in the Low Countries who were to go to Sicily ... the posts run apace and often between the kings of France and Spain.”—C. S. P. For., No. 737, November 28, 1560.

[273] La Place, 76; Claude Haton, I, 116.

[274] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), December 3, 1560.

[275] C. S. P. For., No. 773, December 6, 1560. “They have not only already good forces in this town at their devotion, but have sent for more men-at-arms to be here with all diligence ... so that if they cannot get it by good means, they see none other surety for themselves but to get it by such means as they can best devise ... if the Guise forces and party be best, they will not fail to betrap them all and to stand for it whatever it costs them.”—C. S. P. For., No. 771, December 6, 1560. Catherine de Medici detested Mary Stuart. She called her “notre petite reinette écossaise.”

[276] Claude Haton, I, 118, 119. The Guises wanted, above all, to prevent the undivided regency of Catherine de Medici and even cited the Salic law as a bar to such result (Chantonnay to Philip II, December 28, 1560; K. 1,494, No. 12). They favored the regency of the pliable Antoine of Bourbon, or a combination of the king of Navarre and the queen mother. In either event a galaxy of the Guises was to surround the throne, I. e., the cardinals of Tournon and Lorraine, the duke of Guise, the chancellor and the two marshals Brissac and St. André; cf. Nég. Tosc., III, 434, and De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 288-90, a good brief statement.

[277] Catherine sent the sieur de Lansac at once to the constable at Etampes (cf. D’Aubigné, I, 299, and n. 2) who in turn went to consult with his son, Damville, at Chantilly, where he was kept by his wife’s illness, those two in turn conferring with the princess of Condé (La Place, 76).

[278] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), December 18, 1560.

[279] How much Antoine yielded to the temptation the following report of an interview between Throckmorton and the king of Navarre shows: “Throckmorton said that there was a bruit that the Spaniards had passage given them by Bayonne and other forts of the French King. The king of Navarre said that it was true, and that he was about to verify the letters that are yet denied.”—C. S. P. For., No. 732, December 31, 1560, § 7.

On Sardinia see Rel. vén., I, 555. Even the prospect of becoming emperor was held out to him (ibid., I, 559; II, 76).

[280] “Although the duke of Guise is popular, above all with the nobility, yet everybody so detests the cardinal of Lorraine that if the matter depended upon universal suffrage, not only could he have no part in the government, but perhaps not in the world! It is cynically reported that his Right Reverend and Lordship took the precaution to send his favorite and precious effects early into Lorraine.”—C. S. P. Ven., No. 221, December 16, 1560.

[281] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), December 18, 1560; Rel. vén., I, 433. “I found the court very much altered ... not one of the house of Guise.”—C. S. P. For., No. 832, December 31, 1560.

[282] Claude Haton, I, 11.

[283] The law of France, by ordinance of Charles V, had for generations provided that the king’s majority was attained when he was fourteen years of age; but the King’s uncles claimed that the meaning of the law was that the King’s majority was not reached until the end of his fourteenth year, i. e., upon his fifteenth birthday, which, in the case of Charles IX, would not be until June 27, 1564. This ingenious argument was sustained by various authors subsidized by the Guises, who went farther and argued away the regency of the queen mother also, in spite of the precedents of Blanche of Castille and Anne of Beaujeu, on the ground of the Salic law (Chantonnay to Philip II, December 28, 1560; K. 1,494, No. 12).

[284] D’Aubigné, I, 302; Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 176; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), March 29, 1561; _C. S. P. For._, No. 77, § 3, March 31, 1560; La Place, 120, 121; De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 299.

[285] Cf. Viollet, Inst. polit. de la France, II, 95.

[286] The arrangement of executive offices at this time was very different from that of a modern government. Instead of there being a single secretary for foreign affairs, there were individual secretaries for each country—one for Italy, one for Spain, one for Flanders, one for Germany, etc., and each one attended to his own business. This eliminated one more power in the government, exactly as Catherine wanted.

[287] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), March 29, 1561. “The King is young and the constable has now a great authority in the realm.... But if they recover their authority, it is to be feared that they will use more extremity than they did before, and that therefore the queen cannot but fear his danger in this case.”—C. S. P. For., No. 1,030, February 26, 1561, § 6.

[288] See the remarkable character-sketch of the Venetian ambassador in Rel. vén., I, 425-27.

[289] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), December 8, 1560. On the efforts of the Guises to control the States-General of 1560 see Weill, 40.

[290] D’Aubigné, I, 304; Paris, Négociations, 789.

[291] La Place, 85, 87.

[292] Castelnau, Book III, chap. ii. In this connection the following observation is of interest: “A disputation has lately been at Rome among the cardinals, and the Pope has had the hearing of what is the cause that France is thus rebelled from them. The Romans would conclude that the dissolute living of the French cardinals, bishops and clergy, was the cause; but the French party and the bishop, who is ambassador there, say that nothing has wrought so much in France as of late the practice in Rome of divers of the nobility of France where they have seen such dissolute living of the clergymen as returning into France they have persuaded the rest that the clergy of Rome is of no religion.”—C. S. P. For., No. 822, December 28, 1560.

[293] The address is printed in extenso in Œuvres complètes de l’Hôpital, I, 375 ff.

[294] Suriano, December 20; D’Aubigné, I, 303, 304; La Place, 88, 109. “The estates assembled on December 13, but have done little or nothing; divers of them will not put forth such things as they were instructed in, now the king is dead.”—C. S. P. For., No. 832, December 31, 1560.

[295] La Planche, 389-96; D’Aubigné, I, 305, 306.

[296] Cf. C. S. P. Ven., No. 237, February 17, 1561.

[297] La Place, 93.

[298] Ibid., 93-109.

[299] La Place, 109; La Planche, 397; D’Aubigné, I, 307.

[300] Castelnau, Book III, chap. ii.

[301] C. S. P. Ven., No. 237, February 17, 1561. The action practically flouted a papal bull of November 20, 1560, convening the Council at Trent, which was intended to anticipate and prevent any such action as this at Orleans (La Planche, 403).

[302] There was also a technical argument based on the fact that in the bull of the Council the words “sublata suspensione” were interpreted to mean that the Pope intended to continue the Council already commenced, and that the decrees already made were to be valid; which offended France. The cardinal of Lorraine was the one who raised these difficulties, though he tried to give the opposite impression; from him came the opposition to the words of the bull (C. S. P. Ven., No. 229, January 7, 1561; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), January 14, 1561).

[303] C. S. P. Ven., No. 237, January 23, 1561; La Place, 124-26, practically paraphrases the edicts.

[304] Rel. vén., I, 443.

[305] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), February 17, 1561.

[306] Castelnau, Book III, chap, ii, says 42,000,000; Throckmorton put the figures at 43,000,000: C. S. P. For., No. 1,032, February 26, 1561; cf. No. 988, February 12, 1561; Suriano, the Venetian ambassador, also gives the amount as eighteen million crowns (ibid., Ven., No. 237, February 17, 1561). This would approximate $75,000,000.

The debt of the King to the Genoese, Germans, Milanese, Florentines, and Lucca amounted to 644,287 ducats (ibid., For., No. 1,432, October 5, 1560).

[307] Dareste, Histoire de France, III, 456, 457.

[308] Lorenzo Contarini in 1550 speaks with satisfaction of the even balance of the finances; Soranzo in 1556 speaks of their disorder (cf. Ranke, Französische Geschichte, Book VII, chap, iv, n. 2).

[309] An ordinance of 1270 authorized a loan of 100,000 livres tournois for the crusade that culminated in disaster before Tunis. Cf. G. Servois, “Emprunts de St. Louis en Palestine et en Afrique,” Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, sér. IV, IV, 117. Philip III borrowed of his great vassals and from the Flemish towns (Langlois, Le règne de Philippe le Hardi, chap. v).

[310] Boutaric, La France sous Philippe le Bel, 297.

[311] The preamble of the letters-patent of Francis I, bearing date of September 2, 1522, makes this fact clear; for in that document alienation is made by the government of the “aids, gabelles and impositions” of Paris, the fees of the “grand butchery of Beauvais,” the rates upon the sale of wine, both wholesale and retail, and of fish, as security for the loan made. Cf. Vührer, Histoire de la dette publique en France, I, 15-26; Lavisse, Histoire de France, V, Part I, 241, 242.

[312] Esmein, Histoire du droit français, 631-34.

[313] Vührer, Histoire de la dette publique en France, I, 22-25.

[314] Gold was at a premium, the payments for gold crowns and pistolets being above their valuation. All foreign coins were rated high: English “rose” nobles = 6 francs, 12 sous; “angels” = 4 francs, 6 sous; imperials and Phillipes were current at the same rate as “angels” (C. S. P. For., No. 1,076, February 20, 1561). The gold crown was passable at 51 francs tournois; the pistolet gold and weight, 49 francs (ibid., No. 886, January 17, 1561). Prices of commodities were also high. The duke of Bedford, who came over in February 1561 as a special envoy of Elizabeth, reports, February 26: “France is the dearest country I ever came in.”—Ibid., No. 1,031. Cf. the confession of Richard Sweete, an English fugitive in France, who was forced to return home on account of “hard times.” “Within one month they came back from Paris, partly upon the death of the French king and partly for that victuals were there so dear that they could not live.”—Ibid., II, No. 36, October 5, 1559.

Without attempting to go at length into the intricate subject of the various kinds of money current in France in the sixteenth century, something yet is to be said upon the subject in order to make clear the working of these and other economic sources. In the sixteenth century, as during the Middle Ages, the standard of value was the livre tournois, divided into sous and deniers (1 livre = 20 sous; 1 sou = 12 deniers). The livre tournois was really a hypothetical coin and was merely used as a unit of calculation. The French gold coin was the écu d’or which varied in value between 1 livre, 16 sous, and 2 livres, 5 sous. In 1561 it was equivalent to 2 livres in round numbers. The teston was a silver coin of a value of 10 or 11 sous and was sometimes called a crown or a franc by the English. The sou originally was made of an amalgam of silver and copper and the denier or penny of red copper.

The English during their long occupation of Normandy in the fifteenth century, and owing to their commercial communication with Flanders, introduced the pound sterling or “estrelin” (easterling) (Du Cange, Glossarium, s. v. “Esterlingus;” Ruding, Annals of the Coinage, I, 7; Le Blanc, Traité historique des monnaies de France, 82). Though much more stable than other coinage—except the Venetian ducat and the florin—it nevertheless slowly depreciated. Elizabeth in 1561 rechristened it the gold “sovereign.” It was worth about 8 livres tournois in 1561 (Avenel, “La fortune mobilière dans l’histoire,” Revue des deux mondes, July 15, 1892, 784, 785). The French peasantry still in certain parts of France estimate in terms of ancient coinage. The pistole, by origin a Spanish coin current in Flanders and the Milanais, was forbidden circulation as far back as Louis XIV. Yet the peasants of Lower Normandy at the cattle fairs today will estimate the price of their animals in ancient terms. Similarly the Breton peasantry talk of réaux (real), the last vestige of Brittany’s commercial relations with Spain (Avenel, op. cit., 783).

The actual value of these coins in modern terms has been much debated. M. de Wailly estimated the value of the livre tournois in 1561 at 3 francs, 78 centimes. The vicomte d’Avenel thinks these figures too high and has adopted 3 francs, 11 centimes as a mean value for the years between 1561 and 1572. M. Lavasseur prefers the round number of 3 francs. On the basis of the last estimate one sou would be equivalent to 15 centimes and 1 denier to 1.2 centimes in terms of modern French money. But these figures mean nothing until the purchasing power of money at this time is established. In this particular, estimates have varied all the way from 3 to 12 and even to 17 and 20. M. Lemmonier inclines to the ratio of 5 for the middle of the sixteenth century. For an admirably clear and succinct account of the value of French money in the sixteenth century, see Lavisse, Histoire de France, Vol. V, Part I, pp. 266-69. Larger references will be found in the bibliography appended to the chapter.

But whatever the ratio may have been, the decline in the purchasing power of money was great. Between 1492 and 1544 Europe imported 279 millions worth (in francs) of gold and silver. In the single year 1545, when the famous mines of Potosi were opened, 492,000,000 francs’ worth were brought into Europe. The purchasing power of money is estimated to have fallen one-quarter between 1520 and 1540 and one-half by the year 1600. After the peace of Cateau-Cambrésis when peaceful relations were renewed between France and Spain, France particularly felt the disturbing effect of the new conditions. According to the vicomte d’Avenel (op. cit.), from 1541-61 the livre tournois was valued at 3 francs, 34 centimes; from 1561-72 at 3 francs, 11 centimes; from 1575-79 at 2 francs, 88 centimes. “Un capital de 1,000 livres qui valait 22,000 francs en 1200, n’en valait plus intrinsèquement que 16,000 en 1300; 7,530 en 1400; 6,460 en 1500, et était tombé en 1600 à 2,570 francs.”—Revue des deux mondes, July 15, 1892, 800.

One is astonished not to find greater complaints about the “hard times” in the chronicles and other sources of the period. To be sure, the misery did not reach its acutest stage until the time of the League, when the difference between the price of food stuffs and daily wages was outrageous. For example, since 1500 the wage of the laboring man had increased but 30 per cent., whereas the price of grain had increased 400 per cent. At the accession of Louis XII, wheat had cost four francs per hectolitre and the peasant earned sixteen centimes a day; at the accession of Henry IV (in 1590), wheat sold for twenty francs per hectolitre and the daily wage of the peasant was but seventy-eight centimes (Avenel, “Le pouvoir de l’argent,” Revue des deux mondes, April 15, 1892, 838).

[315] Castelnau, Book III, chap. ii.

[316] La Planche, 112; C. S. P. For., No. 990, February 12, 1561.

[317] La Planche, 113.

[318] C. S. P. For., No. 889, January 16, 1561; No. 890, February 12, 1561.

[319] C. S. P. Ven., No. 237, February 17, 1561.

[320] La Place, 121.

[321] “They mean to levy the greatest subsidy that was ever granted in France. The chief burden rests with the clergy, who give eight-tenths; the lawyers, merchants, and common people are highly rated also. They reckon to levy 18,000,000 francs.”—C. S. P. For., No. 483, September 3, 1560.

[322] “The Pope has given faculty to the King to sell of the revenues of the church by the year, and has granted the like to the French King, meaning to serve them to execute ... the order now to be taken at the General Council.”—Ibid., No. 777, December 7, 1560, from Toledo. A similar arrangement was made in Spain with Philip II, in order to restore his depleted finances.

[323] Ibid., No. 850, January 1, 1561.

[324] The ordonnance of the King proroguing the estates did not appear until a month later, March 25, 1561.

[325] La Place, III; C. S. P. For., No. 938, February 12, 1561. In a letter dated January 22, 1561, to Peter Martyr, Hotman gives an admirable account of the session of the States-General at Orleans. See Dareste, “François Hotman,” Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV, 654-56.

[326] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), March 1, 1561.

[327] C. S. P. For., No. 49, March 18, 1561.

[328] Ibid., Ven., No. 242, March 3, 1561.

[329] La Place, 129; La Popelinière, I, 244; De Thou, IV, 66, 67. The king of Navarre, most of the princes of the blood, cardinals, and nobles being present, chief among whom were the duke of Guise and the cardinal of Lorraine. The prince was declared innocent, all the information brought against him was pronounced false and the letters, forgeries. This rehabilitation was also extended to the vidame of Chartres and Madame de Roye, Coligny’s sister and mother of the princess of Condé, and the parlementary arrêt was ordered to be proclaimed in all the courts of parlement of the realm (C. S. P. For., No. 265, § 8, June 23, 1561).

[330] Nég. Tosc., III, 467, and note.

[331] Ordonnance générale des états assemblés à Orléans, p. 5; Isambert, XIV, 65. In pursuance of this legislation the cardinal of Lorraine resigned a few of his pluralities. He gave the bishopric of Metz to his brother, the cardinal of Guise, and retained for himself the archbishopric of Rheims, with the Abbeys of St. Rémy and St. Denis (Claude Haton, I, 234). On April 1, 1561, the action of the States-General was affirmed in a royal edict which commanded the bishops to return to their dioceses and there reside under pain of seizure of their temporalities, and in every bailiwick in France inventories were to be made of the whole revenues of the priest (Isambert, XIV, 101). It was followed by an edict dealing with the administration of the hospitals and support of the poor (ibid., 105), designed to put an end to corrupt practice on the part of unprincipled and avaricious priests who did not wish to reside at home and so sold their cures to presbyters. Those who had numerous benefices found means to excuse themselves from residence in their cures, in virtue of an article of the edict, which provided that ecclesiastics who had numerous cures, which they held par dispense, or other benefices or charges requiring actual residence in some other church, and who could not by this means reside in their parishes, by residing in one of the parishes or other churches in which they had a benefice or office requiring residence, were exempt from residing in their other cures, provided that they committed them to the care of capable vicars. In virtue of this article they were permitted the enjoyment of their revenues after having satisfied the king’s officers in each bailiwick. Cf. Claude Haton, I, 221, 222. The revenues of hospitals were assumed control of by the government, and the administration thereof was committed to the care of special administrators. Local judicial officers instead of the clergy, as formerly, were to supervise the distribution of money, wood, wine, and provisions, to priors, monks, nuns, and the poor.

The hospitals of various towns of France and in particular the hôtels-dieu at Paris and Troyes, had already, even before this, been governed by lay commissioners. For a complaint of bad administration of the Hôtel-Dieu at Provins by the lay officers, who enriched themselves at the expense of the poor, and let the house run down, for which reason the King was requested to restore the administration to the clergy, see Claude Haton, I, 223.

[332] The letter which the bishop of Limoges, the French ambassador in Madrid, wrote “après la mort de François II,” detailing the Spanish monarch’s fear, is almost prophetic (Paris, Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 782-85).

[333] Philip II, to Charles IX, January 4, 1561, K. 1,495, No. 13; to Mary Stuart, January 7, K. 1,495, No. 17; C. S. P. For., No. 870, January 10, 1561. He arrived on the evening of January 23. Cf. Don Juan de Manrique and Chantonnay to Philip II, January 28, 1561, K. 1,494, No. 55, giving an account of his reception at the French court. He left about February 10, 1561 (C. S. P. For., Nos. 933, January 23, 1561, and 984, February 11, 1561).

[334] C. S. P. For., No. 11, March 4, 1561; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), February 19, 1651. A letter of December 26, 1560, to the King, published in the Revue d’hist. diplomatique, XIII, No. 4 (1899), 604, “Dépêches de Sebastien de l’Aubespine,” states the real mission of Don Juan de Manrique.

[335] The queen mother to the bishop of Rennes, April 11, 1561, Correspondance de. Catherine de Médicis, I, 186. The latter’s reply is in Paris, Négociations, etc., 871, May 26, 1561. Cf. Castelnau, I, 555.

[336] Lacombe, Catherine de Médicis entre Guise et Condé, 108. The edict was actually a confirmation of the edict of Romorantin. See Mém. de Coudé, II, 266; text of the Edict of Romorantin in Isambert, XIV, 31.

[337] Letter of Charles IX, January 23, 1561, Opera Calvini, XVIII, 337. The reply of the senate under date of January 28 is at 343-45.

[338] C. S. P. Ven., Nos. 250, 272, April, 1561. Coligny’s house was a favorite rendezvous. He never went to mass, and when his wife gave birth to a child in the spring of 1561 he had it baptized openly in the popular tongue, according to the Calvinist form (C. S. P. For., Nos. 933, 984, 1561).

[339] For the rise of Protestantism in Normandy see Le Hardy, Histoire du protestantisme en Normandie depuis son origine jusqu’ à la publication de l’Edit de Nantes, Caen, 1869; Lessens, Naissance et progrès de l’hérésie de Dieppe, 1557-1609: Publication faite pour la I^[ére] fois d’après le MS de la biblioth. publ. av. une introd. et des notes, Rouen, 1877; Hauser, “The French Reformation and the Popular Classes,” American Historical Review, January, 1899.

[340] Archives de la Gironde, XIII, 132; XVII, 256.

[341] “There is not one single province uncontaminated,” wrote Suriano, the Venetian ambassador on April 17, 1561 (C. S. P Ven., 272).

[342] See a. long letter of Hotman published by Dareste in Rev. hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, p. 299.

[343] C. S. P. For., 857, January 1, 1561.

[344] Nég. Tosc., III, 456.

[345] C. S. P. For., No. 124, April 20, 1561.

[346] C. S. P. For., No. 155, April 30; C.S.P. Ven., No. 255, May 2, and No. 258, May 14, 1561.

[347] Suriano says this hostility of Paris toward Protestantism was greater, perhaps, because it was favored by the nobles, who were naturally hated—“la plebe di questa Città che per professione è nemica delle nove sette, forse perchè sono favorite dalli nobili, li quali sono odiati per natura.”—Op. cit., May 2, 1561. Cf. May 16, ab init. (Huguenot Society of London).

[348] “Requête de la Sorbonne au roi,” K. 1,495, No. 74, without date but seemingly of this time.

[349] C. S. P., Ven. No. 259, May 16, 1561.

[350] Ibid., For., No. 158, April, 1561; cf. No. 124, April 20, 1561.

[351] Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 188, and n. 1.

[352] C. S. P. Ven., No. 259, May 16, 1561.

[353] January 4, 1561; K. 1,495, No. 15.

[354] Ibid., No. 16.

[355] On the whole see De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 294, 295.

[356] January 31, 1561; K. 1,494 No. 21.

[357] For an example of Chantonnay’s way of working see De Crue, 296, 297, and the letters in K. 1,494, No. 54, January 15, 1561, and No. 56, February 1, 1561.

[358] This important document which has not been published by M. Louis Paris, or elsewhere that I can find, is in K. 1,494, No. 70 (printed in Appendix II).

[359] La Place, 122, 123.

[360] This is the judgment of both Catholic and Huguenot historians; e.g., Castelnau, Book III, chap. v, and Benoist, Historie de l’édit de Nantes, Book I, 29, who says that the chief motive of St. André and the constable in forming the Triumvirate was fear of being compelled to pay back the immense sums which they had embezzled. Yet the constable in 1561 was a poor man as the result of the heavy sums of ransom he and his house had been obliged to pay during the late war. See De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 236.

[361] La Place, 123; Ruble, III, 71; De Crue, 303; Chantonnay to Philip II, April 7, K. 1,494, B. 12, 73; April 9, B. 12, 75. Cf. Mémoires de Condé, III, 210 ff.: “Sommaire des choses premièrement accordées entre les ducs de Montmorency, Connestable et De Guyse, ... et le Mareschal Sainct André, pour la Conspiration du Triumvirate, et depuis mises en délibération à l’entrée du Sacré et Sainct Concile de Trente, et arrestée entre les Parties en leur privé Conseil faict contre les Héréticques et contre le Roy de Navarre en tant qu’il gouverne et conduit mal les affaires de Charles IX.”

[362] La Planche, 454.

[363] Nég. Tosc., III, 448.

[364] Rel. vén., I, 534.

[365] The original letter is preserved in the Musée des Archives Nationales, No. 665. See the Mémoires de Condé, III, 395.

[366] Philip II to the constable, the cardinal of Lorraine, and Antoine of Navarre, April 14 and June 12, 1561, Archives nat., K. 1,495, B. 13, 33, 44. Admission of this step thus early is made in the Mémoires du duc de Guise, ed. Michaud et Poujoulat, sér. I, V, 464. The Huguenots were early apprised of it by the interception of a messenger of the Triumvirate near Orleans. Cf. Bref discours et véritable des principalles conjurations de la maison de Guyse, Paris, 1565, 5, 6.

[367] C. S. P. Ven., No. 259, May 16, 1561.

[368] Cf. De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, III, 251 ff.

[369] On Palm Sunday (1561) Antoine went to mass, for which Pius IV hastened to congratulate him and the church (K. 1,494, No. 74, April 8, 1561), and for some time after Easter he continued to go to mass, and refrained from eating flesh on the days prohibited by the church (C. S. P. For., No. 248, May 18, 1561). But within a month, he is discovered having public preaching in his house by a Protestant minister, and “daily service in the vulgar tongue” (ibid., No. 265, §13, June 23, 1561).

[370] “Como todas actiones no se goviernan siempre con la razon.”—Granvella to Philip II, May 13, 1561, Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 541.

[371] Chantonnay’s letter of April 18, 1562, is almost entirely given up to a report of a conversation between him and the marshal St. André upon this question. It is very interesting (K. 1,497, No. 24).

[372] K. 1,497, No. 33.

[373] See Vargas to Philip II, from Rome, September 30, 1561, in Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 357, where he tells the king of one of Antoine’s speeches. One of the minor duties of Don Juan de Manrique’s mission to France in January, 1561, had been to give Antoine hope in that quarter, in which policy Spain’s grand master of artillery, and the papal nuncio worked together. The nuncio was Hippolyte d’Este, the cardinal of Ferrara. His correspondence is published in Négociations ou lettres d’affaires ecclésiastiques et politiques escrites au Pape Pie IV et au Cardinal Borromée, par Hippolyte d’Est, cardinal de Ferrare, legat en France au commencement des guerres civiles, Paris, 1658.

[374] K. 1,497, No. 28.

[375] “Sa principal espérance de ce costé-la [Sardinia], se fonde sur les bons et vigoureux offices qu’il se promet de nostre Saint-Père.”—Letter II, from St. Germain, January 10, 1561. Négociations ... du cardinal de Ferrare, Lettre XXXIV, June 26, 1562.

Don Juan de Manrique suggested to Antoine—“Que s’il vouloit repudir la reine sa femme, comme hérétique qu’elle estoit, les Seigneurs de Guise luy feroient espouser leur Nièce, veuve de Francis II.”

[376] Apparently the Sardinians were prepared to say something for themselves in the matter. For St. Sulpice, the French ambassador in Spain, who succeeded L’Aubespine, on October 8, 1562, writes to Antoine to this effect: “On lui a rapporté ‘comme les galères d’Espagne, venant d’Italie à Barcelone, et passant près de la Saidaigne, les habitans du pays, s’étaient mis en armes avec contenance de vouloir défendre l’abordée de leurs portes ausd. galères, de quoi s’étant depuis venus justifier par deça; ils avaient remontré qu’ils avaient entendu que ce roi les voulait bailler à un autre prince et qu’ils craignaient que lesd. galères y vinssent pour les contraindre de la recevoir à sgr., ce qu’ils ne voulaient permettre, le suppléant de ne les aliéner de sa courrone,’” etc.—L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 83. His correspondence abounds with allusions to Sardinia, e. g., 17, 25, 35, 37, 79, 83, 84, 90, etc.

[377] In the presence of the king of Navarre, the constable, the dukes of Guise, Nevers, Montpensier, and Aumale, and of spiritual lords, the cardinal of Lorraine, who was archbishop of Rheims, and the bishops of Laon, Langres, Châlons, Noyon, and Beauvais, the last being the cardinal Châtillon, the only prominent Huguenot, who attended the coronation. The prince of Condé, the admiral, the duke de Longueville, the marshal Montmorency, and his brother Damville, were not present, because they would not assist at mass (“M. Damville is the constable’s best-beloved son, a Knight of the Order, one of the paragons of the court and a favourer of the reformed faith.”—C. S. P. For., No. 395, §3, August 11, 1561). For a detailed account of the particulars and party issues manifested at the ceremony see De Crue, 309, 310, Catherine de Medici apparently took her time to advise Philip II of the coronation, for her letter (without date) was not received by the King until June 17, K. 1,494, No. 44.

[378] This mightily offended the Triumvirate, and the duke of Guise, the constable, and the marshal St. André forthwith left the court in high dudgeon.

Rochambeau, Lettres d’Antoine de Bourbon et de Jeanne d’Albret, Inventaire Sommaire, No. CXLIII, 27 juin 1561—“Attestation de Catherine de Médicis et Antoine de Bourbon, pour affirmer que la retraite du duc du Guyse, de conestable de Montmorency, et du mareschal de St. André n’est due qu’au seul respect et affection qu’ils portent au service du roi et au repos de ses sujets.”—Bib. Nat., F. Fr., 3,194, fol. 5.

[379] “Procès-verbal de la reconcilation entre le prince de Condé et le duc de Guise en presence du roi Charles IX,” in K. 1,494, No. 92; Nég. Tosc., III, 460; C. S. P. For., Nos. 449, August 24, 1561, 461, August 30, 1561; La Place, 139, 140.

[380] “Requeste présenté au roi par les Deputez des Eglises esparses parmi le royaume de France.” A printed copy is to be found in K. 1,495, No. 42. It is a really eloquent petition.

[381] Castelnau, Book III, chap, iii; C. S. P. For., No. 304, §3, July 13, 1561.

[382] Suriano definitely says the edict of July was the work of the chancellor. He gives a summary of the edict in a despatch of July 27, 1561 (Huguenot Society).

[383] Cf. C. S. P. For., 1561, No. 237; Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), June 25, 1561.

[384] Chantonnay to Philip II, July 24, 1561, K. 1,495, No. 52; C. S. P. For., No. 321, §2, Paris, July 16, 1561.

[385] Isambert, Anc. lois franç., XIV, 109 (Edit sur la religion, sur le moyen de tenir le peuple en paix, et sur la répression des séditieux).

[386] Suriano, August 25; Nég. Tosc., III, 453-58; Castelnau, Book III; C. S. P. For., No. 357; Beza, Hist. ecclés., I, 294 (ed. 1841); La Place, 130; D’Aubigné, I, 309.

[387] Castelnau, Book III, chap. iii; he admirably depicts the divided state of mind of the Parlement which resulted in the edict taking this neutral form. Suriano pithily observes: “Con questi dispareri le cose del Regno patiscono assai, et non si può far niuna deliberatione d’importanza che sia ferma et rissoluta, et di quà hanno havuto origine tanti editti nel fatto di Religione che sono stati publicati li mesi passati, li quali non solamente sono ambigui, ma diversi l’uno dall’altro et spesse volte contrarii, donde li heretici hanno preso tanto fomento che sono fatti più indurati et più ostinati che mai” (June 26, 1561).

Charles IX sent the Sieur d’Ozances to Spain to soften Philip’s anger as much as possible. In a letter of July 18, from St. Germain to his ambassador in Spain, after stating the motives which have led him to dispatch D’Ozances, he adds: “Au demeurant, je ne doubte point qu’on sème de beaulx bruictz par delà, touchant le faict de la Religion, et qu’on ne nous face beaucoup plus malades que nous ne sommes; et, pour ceste occasion il m’a semblé qu’il serait fort à propos que le Sr. d’Auzances feist entendre au Roy, mon bon frère, les termes en quoy nous en sommes.” Then follow details upon the edict of pacification. This letter was sold at auction in 1877. It is catalogued in the Inventaire des autographes et des documents historiques composant la collection de M. Benjamin Fillon, Paris, Charavay, 1877 (Series I, 34, No. 132—“Lettre de Charles IX contre-sig. Robertet, à l’évêque de limoges, ambassadeur en espagne; St. Germain, 18 juillet, 1561”).

[388] Claude Haton, I, 122.

[389] Ibid., I, 129. In consequence of this state of things we find numerous ordinances passed in the summer of 1561 in restraint of violence; cf. “Edit sur la religion, sur le moyen de tenir le peuple en paix et sur la répression des séditieux, July 1561,” Isambert, XIV, 109; “Edit pour remedier aux troubles, et sur la répression des séditieux,” October 20, 1561, ibid., XIV, 122; “Edit sur le port d’armes à feu, la vente de ces armes et les formalités à suivre par les fabricants,” October 21, 1561, ibid., XIV, 123.

[390] C. S. P. Ven., No. 237, February 17, 1561, says: “one representative with absolute authority to treat and conclude what might be approved by the majority of votes.” But La Place, III, 121, says two representatives were chosen from each bailiwick. Cf. De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 300.

[391] The estates of the Ile-de-France demanded that the council and government of the King should be formed according to the ancient constitution of the realm; that the accounts of the previous administration should be examined; that the queen mother should be removed from the government and be content with being guardian of the King’s person; that no stranger be admitted to be of the council; that no cardinal, bishop, or other ecclesiastical person having made suit to the Pope, should have any place in the Privy Council, not even the cardinal Bourbon, though he was a prince of the blood, unless he resigned his hat; that the king of Navarre be regent of the realm with the title of lieutenant-general, and that with him be joined a council of the princes of the blood and others; that the admiral and M. de Rochefoucault should have charge of the education of the King. On these conditions the Estates offered to discharge the King’s debts in six years; but in the event of refusal, they declared that the King must live upon the incomes of the royal domain, much of which was mortgaged (C. S. P. For., No. 77, sec. 3, March 31). Cf. Despatches of Michele Suriano (Huguenot Society), June 10, 1561; De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 300, 301; letter of Hotman to Bullinger, April 2, 1561 in Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV (1877), 656; Nég. Tosc., III, 455-58. For other information, see “Remonstrances du tiers-état du baillage de Provins,” in Claude Haton, II, 1137; “Remonstrance ... des villes de Champagne,” ibid., III, 1140, which shows the economic distress.

[392] La Place, 158 ff.; La Popelinière, I, 271 ff.; D’Aubigné, Book II, chap, xvi; Beza, Hist. ecclés., ed. 1840, I, 320 ff.; L’Hôpital, Œuvres complètes, I, 485 ff. De Thou, Book XXVIII, 74-77; Claude Haton, I, 155. A test vote, however, on religion was taken, resulting in 62 votes for liberty of worship in the case of the Huguenots, and 80 against it (letter of Hotman in Rev. hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, 300).

[393] C. S. P. For., No. 396, August 11, 1561; La Place, 146, 147, 150.

[394] La Place, 150-52; De Thou, IV, 74, 75. The full text, unpublished, of this discourse is in F. Fr., 3970, a volume which contains much unused material for the history of the estates of Pontoise. L’Hôpital’s address is one of the documents.

[395] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), August 24, 1561.

[396] C. S. P. For., No. 538, §5, September 26, 1561.

[397] De Crue, 312, 313; De Thou, IV, 74; Nég. Tosc., III, 461; Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, III, 160; Rel. vén., II, 21; K. 1,494, fol. 94. Notwithstanding this relief, the King demanded a further subsidy amounting to three million gold crowns from the local Estates to be paid in the following January (C. S. P. For., No. 682, §10, November 26, 1561).

[398] Ibid.; cf. No. 750, §7, December 28, 1561. Most of this debt was held by Paris. It amounted to 7,560,056 livres.

[399] Rel. vén., I, 409-11. Upon the whole question, see De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, chap. xiv; Esmein, Histoire du droit français, 632-33.

[400] De Ruble, Le colloque de Poissy (1889); Klipfel, Le colloque de Poissy (1867).

[401] C. S. P. For., No. 265, §9, June 23, 1561; La Place, 131.

[402] Paris, Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 550, 615-22; Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 137; Klipfel, Quis fuerit in Gallia factionum status, Paris 1863, 23.

[403] Theodore Beza, “the Huguenot pope,” did not reach the court until August 23, where he was cordially received by the prince of Condé, before whom he preached “in open audience, whereat was a great press” (C. S. P. For., No. 461, August 30, 1561). For the active agency of Beza at court before the assembly at Poissy met, see La Place, 155-57.

[404] The Sorbonne protested against the whole proceeding, but its request was not granted (La Place, 154; cf. C. S. P. For., No. 458, August 28, 1561, No. 485, September 8, 1561).

[405] C. S. P. For., No. 492, September 10, 1561.

[406] “Far diventar questo Regno cantoni di Svizzeri” ... (Despatches of Suriano [Huguenot Society], Aug. 15, 1561; cf. English Hist. Review, VIII, 135). Elsewhere the Venetian ambassador says: “E cosi si va alla via di redurre quella provincia a stato populare, come Svizzeri; e distruggere la monarchia e il regno.”—Rel. vén., I, 538. De Thou, Book XXV, observes: “Qui primam, quam Deo debebant, fidem irritam fecissent; qua semel violate, minime dubitaverint regem ipsum petere quo regnum everterent, et confusis ordinibus, in rei publicae formam, Helvetiorum exemplo, redigerent.”

[407] C. S. P. For., No. 421, August 19, 1561; ibid., Ven., No. 280, September 8, 1561.

[408] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), September 18, 1561.

[409] “Demandes des ministres protestantes au roi,” K. 1,494, No. 95.

[410] Upon the personnel of the assembly, see the references in D’Aubigné, I, 315, n. 4.

[411] C. S. P. For., No. 516, §7, September 20, 1561.

[412] “Paroles prononcées par Theodore de Beza touchant le sacrement.”—K. 1,495, No. 77. 1, “Profession de foi concerté par les prélats de France;” 2, “Première proposition des Catholiques; première proposition des hérétiques.”—Latin, K. 1,495, No. 78; cf. Rel. vén., II, 75.

[413] The cardinal’s definition of the church was, “the company of Christians in which is comprised both reprobates and heretics, and which has been recognized always, everywhere, and by all, and which alone had the right of interpreting Scripture.”—C. S. P. For., No. 507, September 17, 1561; cf. Suriano (Huguenot Society), September 22. His address is given at length in La Place, 179 ff. It was published at the time. Suriano, August 23, 1561, says all the delegates “made very long speeches.” Upon the doctrinal tactics of the cardinal of Lorraine at the colloquy of Poissy, see the letters of Languet, Epist. secr., II, 139, September 20, 1561; 159, November 26, 1561.

[414] The first president of the Parlement of Paris was committed to keeping his house because of offensive agitation (C. S. P. For., No. 461, August 30, 1561).

[415] Proposition de Théodore de Bèze, K. 1,494, No. 96.

[416] C. S. P. Ven., No. 280, September 8, 1561.

[417] C. S. P. For., No. 511, September 19, 1561.

[418] Not being a Frenchman, but an Italian—his name was Pietro Martire Vermigli—he received a separate safe-conduct (Suriano [Huguenot Society], August 23; Rev. hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, p. 302).

[419] La Place, 199.

[420] C. S. P. For., No. 602, October 1, 2 1561. For a description of the last days of the Colloquy, see Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), October 16, 1561.

[421] C. S. P. For., No. 624, October 18, 1561. In K. 1,495, No. 66, is a résumé by the Spanish chancellery of Chantonnay’s dispatches dealing with the colloquy.

[422] C. S. P. For., No. 753, from Strasburg, December 30, 1561. Writing just a week earlier, on December 23, to his sovereign, Chantonnay strongly condemned the course of Catherine at Poissy because it had militated against the authority of Trent, and had given courage to the heretics to continue their synods.—K. 1,494, No. 104. Other references to the Colloquy of Poissy are De Thou, IV, 84 ff.; De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, 76 ff.; Corresp. de Catherine de Médicis, I, Introd., ci, 239. Chantonnay’s correspondence, covering both the colloquy and the meeting of the estates at Pontoise, is in K. 1,494, No. 89, August 5; No. 90, August 20; No. 101, September 12 (especially valuable for the financial settlement); No. 102, September 15.

[423] C. S. P. For., No. 659, §10, November 14, 1561. Of these the chancellor was the more aggressive, opposing the efforts of the clerical party to delay and obstruct action (D’Aubigné, I, 311).

[424] Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 248; C. S. P. For., Nos. 225 and 245, June 6-13, 1561; No. 273, June 23, 1561. The choice was a tactless one on the part of the Pope and one certain to antagonize Catherine de Medici as well as the political Huguenots, for the cardinal was a relative of the Guises by marriage. Don Luigo d’Este, the duke of Ferrara’s brother, was the son of Alphonso d’Este and Lucretia Borgia. He resigned his place in the church and married the duchess of Estouteville, a marriage indicating the Guise policy of aggrandisement (C. S. P. For., No. 904, March 27, 1560). The marriage made bitter feeling between the House of Ferrara and the Guises. “There is a breach between the Dukes of Ferrara and Guise touching the former’s mother, who, being very rich, and lately fallen out with her son, had secretly sent to the Duke of Guise, a gentleman with a message that she would come to France and end her life there and be as his mother. Word was sent her that she would be welcome; and if her son would not permit her to come with her substance, he would take into his hands the assignation made by the late king upon certain lands for the payment of 100,000 crowns yearly to the Duke till such time as 600,000 crowns, borrowed from him at the Duke of Guise’s last voyage to Rome, were paid off. The Duke keeps his mother with good watch for fear of her escaping to France.”—C. S. P. For., No. 446, August 22, 1561. The cardinal traveled with great pomp, having no less than four hundred horses in his train.

[425] C. S. P. For., No. 538, §1, September 26, 1561.

[426] D’Aubigné, I, 311; Rel. vén., II, 87; C. S. P. For., No. 602, October 12, 1561.

[427] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), September 23, 1561.

[428] Ibid., October 22, 1561. For further details of the negotiations, see ibid., November 3, 1561; C. S. P. For., No. 682, §9, November 26; Baschet, Journal du Concile de Trente, 89.

[429] Philip II to Catherine, September 29, 1561; to Charles, ibid., K. 1,495, No. 72. To Chantonnay he wrote three days later: “También hazed entender á la Reyna como por este camino perdera su hijo, esse reyno y la obediencia de sus vassalos.”—K. 1,495, No. 80. The words were not merely urgent advice—they implied a threat.

[430] Weiss, L’Espagne sous Phillippe II, I, 114, 115; cf. Forneron, Histoire de Philippe II, I, 253, n. 3. See also the remarkable “Rapport sur une conférence entre l’ambassadeur de France et le duc d’Albe, au sujet des affaires du roi de Navarre et des troubles pour cause de la religion” (French transcript, apparently of a report of the Spanish chancellery), in K. 1,496, No. 136, December 20, 1561. The Pope indorsed the proposition of Spanish intervention in France (Vargas to Philippe II, November 7, 1561, in Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 398, 404).

[431] “Aux villes et pays où ils sont là declaires leur bailler quelques lieux prochaine hors des dictes villes”—Résumé des points principaux traités par l’ambassadeur de France auprès du roi Philippe II (Communications du duc d’Alba), November 9, 1561, K. 1,495, No. 58; “Propositions faites par M. d’Ozance et l’ambassadeur ordinaire en Espagne, l’évêque de Limoges, dans deux audiences à eux données par le roi Philippe II” (Résumé avec annotations), Minute, Notes de chancellerie, K. 1,495, No. 69, Madrid, September 17, 1561; “Points principaux d’une négociation spéciale de M. d’Ozance, envoyé de Catherine de Médici avec réponses notées à la marge, point par point: Communications au duc d’Albe après une déliberation du Conseil d’état, prise lui absent,” November 12, 1561, K. 1,495 No. 89; “Précis des points traités par M. d’Ozance et de l’Aubespine, ambassadeur de France,” K. 1,495, No. 94, December 10, 1561; “Réponses à faire par ordre de Philippe II à M. d’Ozance, sur les nouvelles propositions de cet ambassadeur,” K. 1,495, No. 98, December 15, 1561; “Memento addressé par l’évêque de Limoges au duc d’Albe” (Note à communiquer au roi Philippe II), K. 1,495 No. 100, December 20, 1561; Philip II to Chantonnay: “Avis de ce qu’on a répondu à M. d’Ozance,” December 21, 1561, K. 1,495, No. 102; “Rapport sur une conférence entre l’ambassadeur du France et le duc d’Albe, au sujet des affaires du roi de Navarre et des troubles pour cause de la religion” (copié en Français), K. 1,496, folio 136, Madrid, December 20, 1561.

[432] Summary of Philip II’s letter to Chantonnay of January 18, 1562, in K. 1,496, No. 34.

[433] Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), November 4, 1561. The Journal du Concile de Trente (ed. Baschet), 89, says the intention was to carry him into Lorraine, to prevent his becoming tainted with heresy. Lignerolles, an intimate of the duke of Nemours, later confessed the latter’s complicity in the plot to kidnap the young prince and spirit him away to Savoy, but the affair was hushed up and Lignerolles was shortly afterward released. The prince de Joinville, Guise’s son, seems to have been more actively interested than his father. The correspondence between Chantonnay and Philip leaves no room for doubt of the fact that Nemours was acting as the agent of Spain (K. 1,494, No. 106, October 31, from St. Cloud; No. 114, November 28, 1561), although Philip repudiated complicity in a letter to Catherine (K. 1,495, No. 90, November 27, 1561), and Chantonnay declared the whole story was a trick of the Huguenots.

[434] D’Aubigné, 321. Chantonnay seems to have been apprehensive lest the circumstances might precipitate the civil war which every one feared (Letter to Philip II, November 28, 1561, K. 1,494, No. 114), and seized the opportunity afforded by it to read the queen mother a lecture. The ambassador “used great threatenings toward the queen mother and the king of Navarre for their proceedings in religion.”—C. S. P. For., No. 659, §§1, 2.

Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, III, 245-50; De Crue, Anne de Montmorency, 315, 316. The official inquiry entitled, “Enquête sur l’enlèvement du duc d’Orleans,” is in F. Fr. 6,608.

[435] C. S. P. For., No. 715, §1, December 12, 1561.

[436] Despatches of Michele Suriano (Huguenot Society), November 3, 1561; C. S. P. For., No. 659, §5, November 14, 1561.

[437] C. S. P. For., No. 717, §7, December 13, 1561. For some of the famous Catholic preachers of Paris in 1561, see Claude Haton, I, 213, 214, and notes.

[438] Claude Haton, I, 177, 178.

[439] C. S. P. For., No. 617, October 15, 1561.

[440] C. S. P. For., No. 304, §4, July 23, 1561.

[441] K. 1,495, No.47, June 19, 1561. Cf. Despatches of Suriano (Huguenot Society), October 1. Upon these insurrections in the south, see D’Aubigné, I, 322-26; De Thou, II, 235 ff. (ed. 1740); Mém. de Condé, III, 636; Long, La réforme et les guerres de religion en Dauphiné; Pierre Gilles, Hist. ecclés. des églises réformées vaudoises, chap. xxii; Hist. du Languedoc, V, 211.

[442] “Aulx petites villes, elles se sont ralliez les unes avec les autres en ung faict, ung monopole et une ligue ensemble.”—Mémoires-journaux du duc de Guise (M. & P., sér. I, VI, 467, col. 2); Letter of Joyeuse to the constable; duplicate to the duke of Guise (September 16, 1561). For the work of this league see pp. 468-71. Guillaume, vicomte de Joyeuse; was lieutenant to the governor of Languedoc and later a marshal of France.

[443] These princes were Wolfgang William, duke of Deuxponts; William, landgrave of Hesse; Frederick the Pious, count palatine of the Rhine (D’Aubigné, I, 333, 334; Le Laboureur, I, 673). The leading Protestant princes of Germany were Augustus, elector of Saxony; Joachim II, margrave of Brandenburg, John Frederick duke of Saxony; Christopher, duke of Württemberg; Wolfgang William, duke of Deuxponts (Zweibrücken); John Albert, duke of Mecklenberg; John the Elder, duke of Holstein; Joachim Ernest, prince of Anhalt, and Charles, margrave of Baden. These are enumerated in a letter of Hotman, December 31, 1560. See Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV, 653, and Bulletin de la soc. prot. franç., 1860.

[444] Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV (1877), 66; C. S. P. For., No. 399, August 12, 1561.

[445] C. S. P. For., No. 319, July 15, 1561, from Strasburg. Hotman visited the elector palatine at Germersheim; the landgrave of Hesse at Cassel; the elector of Saxony at Leipsic, whence he went to Stuttgart. He did not see the duke of Württemberg in person, and was compelled to write to him instead. (See his letter, September 27, 1561, in Mém. de l’Acad des sc. moral. et polit., CIV, 660.) Thence he went to Heidelberg, from which point he wrote a second letter to the duke of Württemberg, and one to the duke of Deuxponts.

[446] La Place, 121, 122; C. S. P. Ven., No. 249; Arch. nat., K. 1,495, folio 47, Chantonnay to Philip II, June 19, 1561.

[447] C. S. P. For., No. 736, November 26, 1561.

[448] Chantonnay’s correspondence shows that agents of the duke of Guise were busy in Germany as early as October, 1561, K. 1,494, No. 105, October 28, 1561. Cf. Hubert Languet, Epist. secr., II, 142, 159, 202; Archives de la maison d’Orange-Nassau, I, 216-18, 226-52; Bulletin de la soc. de l’histoire du prot. français, XXIV.

[449] C. S. P. For., No. 724, §2, December 14, 1561.

[450] C. S. P. For., No. 602, October 11, 1561, from Rome.

[451] Papiers d’état du cardinal de Granvelle, VI, 432-43: “Rapport secret du secretaire Courtville,” December, 1561.

[452] Cf. Montluc, bishop of Valence, “Discours sur le bruit qui court que nous aurons la guerre à cause de la religion,” Mém. de Condé, ed. London, III, 73-82. A note adds: “Ce discours se trouve aussi au fol. 61 recto du MS R et il est à la suite d’une lettre de M. de Chantonnay, du 24 mars 1561. Il dit à la fin de cette lettre, que l’on disoit communement que ce Discours étoit de l’évêque de Valence (Montluc). Ce Discours a été copié dans ce MS sur l’édition qui en fut faite dans le tems.”

[453] On November 23, 1561, Charles IX wrote to the bishop of Limoges in regard to Philip II: “Dites-lui que je le prie si l’on luy a donné quelques doubtes et soupçons de mes déportements, qu’il vous en dye quelcun et ce qu’il la mys en doubte, affin que s’il veult prendre tant de paynes d’envoyer ung homme fidelle en lieux où il aura oppinion qu’on fera quelques préparatifs, je luy face cognoistre que c’est une pure menterie.”—Catalogue ... de lettres autographes de feu M. de Lajariette, Charavay, Paris, 1860, No. 667. Five days later, on November 28, 1561, Catherine de Medici wrote to the same ambassador: “Je me défie tent de seux qui sont mal contens ... car je ne veos ni ne suys conselliée de venir aus armes.”—Collection de lettres autographes ayant appartenu à M. Fossé-Darcosse, Paris, Techener, 1861, No. 193.

[454] Hist. du Languedoc, V, 211. Philip II was reputed to have spent 350,000 crowns of his wife’s dowry in Germany (C. S. P. For., No. 659, §18, November 14, 1561). Catherine sent a special agent, Rambouillet, into Germany to assist Hotman in discovering information about Spain’s intrigues there (C. S. P. For., No. 713, December, 1561; Mém. de l’Acad. des sc. moral. et polit., CIV [1877], 661). D’Ozances in Spain received special instructions to decipher Philip II’s conduct if possible.

[455] C. S. P. For., No. 265, §11, June 23, 1561. This was in consequence of the apprehension aroused early in May by the appearance of a large body of Spanish infantry and cavalry to survey Abbeville whence they returned toward Guisnes (ibid., No. 248, from Paris, May 18, 1561).

[456] Ibid., No. 712, December 9, 1561, from Strasburg; No. 717, §6, December 13, 1561, from Paris. There had been some anxiety lest the Emperor might avail himself of the distraction in France to seize the Three Bishoprics. But at this moment, on account of the activity of both the Turk and the Muscovite, and because he was angry with the Pope over the Council of Trent, Ferdinand, was friendly to France and cordially received Marillac, the bishop of Vienne (D’Aubigné, I, 332, 333).

[457] “Le conseil du roi, voyant que les mouvements les plus divers agitaient le royaume, décide que chaque gouverneur, lieutenant, sénéschal et autres ministres, se rendissent à leurs gouvernements.”—Baschet, Journal du Concile de Trente, 89.

[458] C. S. P. For., No. 595, October 9, 1561; No. 602, October 12, 1561; No. 624, October 18, 1561; No. 659, §20, November 14, 1561. The appointments of Coligny and Condé never became operative, owing to the outbreak of civil war early in the next year. They are important only as they reflect Catherine’s policy of caution and craft.

[459] Ibid., No. 729. Thomas Shakerley was an Englishman by birth, who had once been a page to Edward VI, while the latter was prince. He had left England nine years before and had spent most of his time in Rome, where, becoming an organist, he “obtained the estimation of a cunning player for the substance and solemnity of music.” He came to France in the suite of the cardinal of Ferrara. The Spanish ambassador approached him with an offer to enter the secret service of Spain, which Shakerley patriotically communicated to Throckmorton (ibid., No. 730, §5, December 18; No. 750, §10, December 28, 1561).

[460] On December 27, the Protestants congregated in the Faubourg St. Marceau, whereupon the priests and Papists assembled at St. Medard and determined to attack them. One of the Protestant soldiers going to remonstrate was run through. The Protestants who were appointed to guard the assembly, seeing this, ran to his succor, but were driven back by the numbers. Other Protestants coming up put their attackers to rout and forced their way into the church, when the prince de la Roche-sur-Yon, the King’s lieutenant, arrived with a strong force of horse and foot and carried off several to the Châtelet (ibid., No. 783, January 4, 1561; Mém. de Condé, II, 541 ff.; Claude Haton, 179, and note; Arch. cur., IV, 63 ff.; and an article in Mém. de la soc. de l’hist. de Paris, 1886).

[461] C. S. P. For., No. 758, §13, December 31, 1561.

[462] Ibid., No. 789, §2, January 8, 1562. The prince de la Roche-sur-Yon passed for a Calvinist, while the marshal Montmorency was a liberal Catholic. The queen mother hoped the change would be acceptable to both parties. Another reason for this change was that the constable and the prince de la Roche-sur-Yon were the principals in a law-suit involving 10,000 ducats income. It was possible for the lieutenant of Paris to use influence with the Parlement of Paris before which the case was to be tried, and this more obviously favored the constable’s side of the suit. Cf. details in Chantonnay’s letter to Philip II, January 5, 1562, K. 1,497, B. 15.

[463] C. S. P. For., No. 925; cf. Castelnau’s description of the bandits in the Faubourg St. Marcel, Book III, chap. v.

[464] C. S. P. For., No. 789, §2, January 6, 1562.

[465] Archives de la Gironde, VIII, 207. The King sent a special officer to put the offenders to death and destroy the village, but it is significant that this commission was not intrusted to Villars, who was sublieutenant in Languedoc and notorious for his treatment of the Huguenots (C. S. P. For., No. 750, §10, December 28, 1561).

[466] Claude Haton, I, 195-98, 236, 237. His spleen is evidenced, though, in saying that: “à cause de la grande liberté à mal faire et dire qui leur estoit permise sans aulcune punition de justice ... si le plus grand larron et voleur du pays eust esté prins prisonnier il eust eschappé à tout danger voire à la mort, moyennant qu’il se feust déclaré Huguenot et de la nouvelle prétendue religion.”—Ibid., I, 124. This is one of the earliest characterizations of the Huguenot faith. It was afterward currently referred to as the “R. P. R.”

[467] Archives de la Gironde, XV, 57.

[468] Claude Haton, I, 194, 195, and note.

[469] Chantonnay to Philip II, January 5, 1562, K. 1,497, B. 15. The Spanish ambassador violently expostulated with Catherine de Medici, Antoine of Bourbon, and others after this address was over (K. 1,497, January 11, 1562), for which Philip II commended him (K. 1,496, No. 34, 3 verso).

[470] Isambert, XIV, 124-29; Raynaldus, XXXIV, 292, 293. The original document is on exhibition in the Musée des Archives at Paris. It is catalogued K. 674, No. 4. Although authorized on January 17, the edict was not printed until March 13, 1562 (C. S. P. For., No. 930, §11; 934, §1). The Edict of July had been only negative in its character, simply forbidding judges and the magistrates from pursuing the Huguenots, but not in any sense recognizing their religion. Castelnau, Book I, chap. ii, makes this very clear. The Edict encountered strong opposition in the Parlement, which twice rejected it by a plurality vote (C. S. P. For., No. 849, January 28, 1562; Claude Haton, I, 185, 186). Benoist, Histoire de l’Edit de Nantes, I, Appendix, gives the text together with the first and second mandamus of the King, February 14 and March 11, 1562, expressly enjoining the Parlement “to proceed to the reading, publishing, and registering of the said ordinance, laying aside all delays and difficulties.” The first mandamus, “Déclaration et interprétation du roy sur certains mots et articles contenus dans l’edict du XVII de janvier 1561,” declared that magistrates were not officers within the meaning of the edict (Isambert, XIV, 129, n. 2). Klipfel, Le colloque de Poissy, chap. iii, makes the point that the Parlement of Paris was criminally wrong in arraigning itself upon the side of violence and encouraging the intolerance of the populace. The Parlement of Rouen was more complacent, and seems promptly to have registered it (C. S. P. For., No. 891, §10, February 16, 1562).

The Edict of January is sometimes wrongly dated January 17, 1561. The error arises from the confusion of the calendar in the sixteenth century. In 1561 the year in France legally began at Easter, which, of course threw January 17, into the year 1561. But in 1564 a royal ordonnance abolished this usage and established January 1 as the beginning of the year, which brought forward January 17 into its proper year, 1562. The reform of the calendar by Gregory XIII would alter the date of the month also, according to modern reckoning. But it is simpler to let established dates stand. Henry III authorized the use of the Gregorian calendar in France in 1582. For a lucid account of these changes see Commentaires et lettres de Montluc, IV, Introd., x-xi by the baron de Ruble.

[471] Baschet, Journal du Concile de Trente, 71.

[472] Claude Haton, I, 177, and n. 1. For other details see Castelnau, Book III, chap. i; Rel. vén., II, 71.

[473] Lettres de Pasquier, II, 96. Mignet characterizes the provisions of the Edict of January as “généréuses, simples, et sages.” Mignet, “Les lettres de Calvin” (Journal des savants, 1859, p. 762), and Haag, La France protestante, Introd., xix, as “le plus libéral édit qui ait été obtenu par les réformés jusqu’à celui de Nantes.”

[474] C. S. P. For., No. 789, §1, January 8, 1562, and cf. No. 750, §3, December 28, 1561. The importation of money from Germany into Lorraine was no secret.

[475] Ibid., No. 729, §3, December 16, 1561. Catherine de Medici, however, could speak the language (ibid., No. 2,155, December 3, 1571).

[476] Ibid., No. 729, §3, December 16, 1561. Chantonnay was morally the leader of the Triumvirate, beyond a doubt, and guided its policy. “The king of Navarre, the duke of Guise, the constable, the cardinal of Ferrara, the marshals St. André, Brissac, and Termes, the cardinal Tournon, have joined together to overthrow the Protestant religion and exterminate the favorers thereof—which enterprise is pushed forward by the Spanish ambassador here and Spanish threatenings.”—C. S. P. For., No. 934, §1, March 14, 1562.

[477] Ibid., No. 758, §12, December 1; No. 531, §4, September 23, 1561.

[478] Antoine de Bourbon to Philip II December 7, 1561, K. 1,494, No. 116 (not in Rochambeau).

[479] Despatches of Michele Suriano (Huguenot Society), October 18, 1561. The whole letter is exceedingly interesting.

[480] The Jesuits had long tried to get a legal status in France. Henry II, was favorable to them, but the Parlement of Paris, the secular clergy, and the Sorbonne were bitterly opposed. The Act of Poissy recognized the Jesuits as a college but not as a religious order, to the anger of the Sorbonne. See Douarche, L’Université de Paris et les Jesuites, Paris, 1888, chap. iv. At the time of the expulsion of the Jesuits from France in 1761, in reply to the question of the crown as to their legal status, the cardinal de Choiseul made the following answer: “Lorsqu’ils ont été reçus en France l’an 1561, par le concours des deux puissances, ils se sont soumis et ont été astreints par la loi publique de leur établissement à toute superintendance, jurisdiction et correction de l’évêque diocésain et à se conformer entièrement à la disposition du droit commun, avec la renonciation la plus formelle aux privilèges contraires portés dans les quatre bulles par eux présentées ou autres qu’ils pourraient obtenir à l’avenir.” ... “Le véritable état des Jésuites en France parâit donc être, suivant les lois canoniques reçues dans le royaume, l’état des réguliers soumis à la juridiction des ordinaires conformement au droit com mun.” Cf. Eugene Sol, Les rapports de la France avec l’Italie, d’après la série K. des Arch. Nat., Paris, 1905, 119, 120. The original document is in the Archives nationales, K. 1,361, N. 1, C.

[481] C. S. P. For., No. 934, §2, March 14, 1562.

[482] Ibid., No. 931, March 9, 1562.

[483] Ibid., No. 924, §8, March 6, 1562; cf. ibid., No. 715, §4, December 12, 1561: “The Spanish ambassador was wondrous hot with the queen.”

[484] Lettres du cardinal de Ferrare, No. 14, March 3, 1562.

[485] C. S. P. For., No. 891, February 16, 1562.

[486] Corresp. de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 17, March 25, 1562. This circumstance is noticed by almost all the chroniclers: D’Aubigné, Book V, chap, iii, 1; Mém. de Condé, I, 76, 77; Arch. cur., VI, 59.

[487] Claude Haton, I, 189.

[488] Beza, Histoire ecclés., I, 416.

[489] Collection Godefroy (Bibliothèque de l’Institut), Vol. XCVII, folio 19, March 6, 1562.

[490] Inventaire des archives communales d’Agen, BB., “Inventaire sommaire,” XXX, 28 (April 17, 1562).

[491] D’Aubigné, II, 7, gives a long list of cities where disturbances occurred.

[492] Vassy was a little town in the diocese of Châlons-sur-Marne, in a dependency of Joinville belonging to the Guises.

[493] In the Mémoires de Condé, III, 124, there is an elaborate Protestant version of the massacre, preceded by a letter of the duke of Guise. The Guise account is in the Mémoires du duc de Guise, 471-88. Cf. D’Aubigné, 131; Arch. cur., IV, 103. The Spanish ambassador’s long letter of March 16 is in K. 1,497, No. 14. The quotation from Ranke is in his Civil Wars and Monarchy in France, 211.

[494] Correspondance de Chantonnay, March 20, 1562, K. 1,497, No. 16. Accounts of this event abound. See La Popelinière, I, 287; Claude Haton, I, 208; D’Aubigné, II, 10; a letter of Santa Croce in Arch. cur., VI, 55; La Noue, Mém. milit., ed. Petitot, 128—very interesting; and a letter of an eye-witness in Bull. de la Soc. de l’hist. du prot. franç., XIII, 5.

On March 16, 1562, an ordinance of the king of Navarre enjoined the captains and lieutenants of each quarter of Paris who were elected by the bourgeoisie to appoint ensigns, corporals, and sergeants, and to enlist all the men capable of bearing arms in their divisions, both masters and servants (Capefigue, 234, 235).

[495] L’Aubespine to his brother, the bishop of Limoges, French ambassador at Madrid (L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 22; C. S. P. Eng. For., No. 987, §7; manifesto of the prince of Condé to Elizabeth, April 7, 1562).

[496] This is D’Aubigné’s comparison, II, 14, and n. 2.

[497] Delaborde, II, 48; Correspondance de Catherine de Médicis, I, 285, n.; C. S. P. For., No. 987, §12, March 31, 1562.

[498] “La mala reputacion que el chancellerio ne quanto à la fé.”—Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 16, March 20, 1562.

[499] Tavannes, 271; C. S. P. For., No. 943, March 20, 1652.

[500] Paris, Négociations relatives au règne de François II, 880.

[501] “Monsieur le conestable ayst d’opinion que l’on (fasse) une lètre patente par laquelle le roy mon fils déclère qu’i ne voult poynt ronpre l’édist dernier.... Ne distes rien deset que je vous dis de l’ambassadeur (Chantonnay) qui ayst yci, mès au contrère distes qu’i comense à se governer mieulx et plus dousement qu’i ne solet en mon endroyt.”—Catherine de Medici to St. Sulpice, circa April 11, 1562, in L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 15, 16. This is a characteristic example of the queen’s eccentric spelling.

[502] D’Aubigné, II, 15.

[503] L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 22; C. S. P. For., No. 967, March 31, 1562. Elizabeth wrote to Condé to “remember that in all affairs second attempts be even more dangerous than the first.”—C. S. P. For., No. 965, March 31, 1562. On the political theory of the Huguenots that the King was a captive and that they were struggling for his relief, see Weill, 66.

[504] C. S. P. For., No. 969, March 31, 1562.

[505] Correspondance de Chantonnay, March 25, 1562, K. 1,497, No. 17. He reports also that a boat was captured coming down the Seine loaded with 4,000 arquebuses and other ammunition, all of which was taken to the Hôtel-de-Ville.

[506] Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 17, March 25, 1562.

[507] C. S. P. For., No. 967, §12, March 31, 1562.

[508] Correspondance de Chantonnay, April 2-4, K. 1,497, No. 18; April 11, ibid., No. 22.

[509] La Noue, Mémoires, chap. ii, has described this march.

[510] Correspondance de Chantonnay, April 8 and 11, 1562, K. 1,497, Nos. 21, 22.

[511] C. S. P. Ven., No. 283.

[512] According to Hotman who had left Orleans on May 29, the Huguenot forces consisted of 15,000 foot and 5,000 horse.—Letter to the landgrave, June 7, 1562, in Rev. hist., XCVII March-April, 1908, p. 304.

[513] Condé had entered Orleans on April 2. On the 7th he wrote to the Reformed churches of France, requiring men and money in the interest of the deliverance of the King and the queen mother and the freedom of the Christian religion (Mémoires de Condé, II, 212).

[514] Correspondance de Chantonnay, April 11 1562, K. 1,497, No. 22.

[515] Ibid., No. 21, April 8, 1562; De Ruble’s edition of D’Aubigné, II, 18-20; C. S. P. For., No. 997, April 10, 1562; No. 1,043, §2, April 24, 1562. Cf. Boulanger, “La réforme dans la province du Maine,” Revue des Soc. savant. des départ., 2^[e] sér., VII (1862), 548.

[516] “Leurs desseins cachés ont autre racine que celle de la religion, encores qu’ils le veuillant couvrir de ce manteau.”—Catherine de Medici to St. Sulpice, L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 59, August 9, 1562.

[517] “Déclaration faicte par monsieur le prince de Condé, pour monstrer les raisons qui l’ont contrainct d’entreprendre la défense de l’authorité du roy, du gouvernement de la royne, et du repos de çe royaume” (Orleans, 1562); cf. C. S. P. For., No. 1,003, Orleans, April 1, 1562.

The prince of Condé is said to have issued a coinage of his own at this time with the superscription, “Louis XIII.” Chantonnay, however, says that they were medals (K. 1,497, No. 27, May 2, 1562). See the memoir of Secousse: “Dissertation où l’on examine s’il est vrai qu’il ait été frappé, pendant la vie de Louis I^[er], prince de Condé, une monnie sur laquelle on lui ait donné le titre de roi de France,” Mém. de l’Acad. roy. des inscrip. et bell. lettres, XVII (1751); Poulet, Correspondance du cardinal de Granvelle, III, 85. Whitehead, Gaspard de Coligny, 303, is convinced the story is a fabrication.

[518] Correspondance de Chantonnay, April 11, 1562, K. 1,497, No. 22.

[519] K. 1,497, No. 21, April 8, 1562.

[520] C. S. P. For., No. 1,013, §12, April 17, 1562.

[521] Archives curieuses, sér. I, IV, 175.

[522] Rouen was taken in the night of April 15. Floquet, Histoire du parlement de Normandie, II, 380.

[523] Raynal, Histoire du Berry, IV, 35.

[524] The stopping of the couriers in the service of Spain by the Huguenots was a source of great anxiety to Chantonnay. April 8 he wrote to Philip advising that the couriers be sent via Perpignan and Lyons in order to avoid being intercepted, as the Huguenots commanded the whole line of the Loire. Cf. Letters to Philip II, April 24, 1562, K. 1,497, No. 25; K. 1,497, No. 21; K. 1,497, No. 28.

His letter of May 5 (K. 1,497, No. 28) describes the adventure of a courier bearing a dispatch of the bishop of Limoges. He was given twenty blows with a knife, but managed to escape. St. Sulpice reports a similar experience of “le chevaucher de Bayonne” in a letter to Catherine, June 30, 1562. D’Andelot intercepted a letter from the duke of Alva (K. 1,497, No. 26, April 28, 1562) and the prince of Condé one from the bishop of Limoges to Catherine de Medici (K. 1,497, No. 33). The activity of the Huguenots in Gascony gave the French and Spanish governments special disquietude because they continually overhauled the couriers bearing official dispatches between Paris and Madrid. The letters of St. Sulpice contain many complaints because of the rifling of his correspondence (see pp. 30, 35, 37, 38, 41, 59). But the Huguenots were not the only ones who scrutinized letters unduly. Philip II frequently asked to be shown the letters of Charles IX and his mother to his wife, so that St. Sulpice advised Catherine always to send two letters, one of which was to be a “dummy” to be shown to the King (L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 136). The Spanish ambassador told Philip he would have to come out into the open and declare war to protect his own interests (K. 1,497, No. 26, April 25, 1562). He anticipated as early as this the probable combination of the French Huguenots and the Dutch rebels, and warned Margaret of Parma to be on her guard (Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, Nos. 30, 33, to Philip II).

[525] C. S. P. For., No. 1,043, §2, April 24, 1562.

[526] On April 24 the cardinal of Lorraine came to Paris with 1,000 horse (C. S. P. For., No. 1,043, §11, April 24, 1562; Corresp. de Chantonnay, April 28, K. 1,497, No. 2).

[527] This famous document, which is dated April 21, 1562, is in K. 1,496, B, 14, No. 61, and is on exhibition in the Musée des Archives. Chantonnay’s letter to Philip II on April 24 sheds an interesting light on the situation. In it the ambassador advises the King to write personally to the queen mother, but not to write individually to the others, but rather a single letter, because if Antoine of Navarre were not addressed as King of Navarre he would refuse to receive it, whereas if the letter were written to all in common, this complication might be avoided (K. 1,497, No. 25).

[528] The Spanish King acceded to this request on June 8, 1562 (Philip II to Margaret of Parma; Gachard, Correspondance de Philippe II sur les Pays-Bas, II, 218-23.)

He promised to send 10,000 foot and 3,000 cavalry, chiefly Italians and Germans; cf. De Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, IV, 214. At about the same time the constable appealed to Rome through Santa Croce, for a loan of 200,000 écus and a body of soldiers (Arch. cur., VI, 86).

[529] The Swiss Diet, which met at Soleure on May 22, offered 6,000 infantry to be commanded by the captain Froelich (Letter of Hotman in Revue hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, 305).

[530] C. S. P. For., No. 6, §1, May 2, 1562. The Spanish ambassador was deeply incensed at Catherine for making this new overture. The intermediary was the Rhinegrave, but Chantonnay persuaded the leaders not to recognize him (Corresp. de Chantonnay, April 28, 1562; K. 1,497, No. 26). The duke of Savoy offered to furnish 10,000 footmen and 600 horse, 3,000 of the former and 200 of the latter to be at his expense. This was the fruit of Chantonnay’s interview with Moreta, the Savoyard ambassador, early in April, when he discussed with him a possible restoration of the fortresses in Piedmont (K. 1,497, No. 21, April 8, 1562).

[531] The Pope offered to give 50,000 crowns per month.

[532] “Suisses, lansquenetz et reystres, seront en ce pays devant la fin de ce moys, sans vostre secours d’Espagne.”—L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 24, June 12, 1562. It must be understood that in many European states, especially those of Germany, the maintenance of regular troops did not yet obtain as a practice. Instead, the princes depended upon mercenary forces recruited by some distinguished captain. These troops, which answered to the condottieri of Italy were called Lanzknechts or Reiters. Languet stigmatizes this practice in Epist. ad Camerariam, 28; cf. Arch. d’Orange-Nassau, I, 104. In Protestant Germany there was a feeling that the policy of France threatened to extinguish the gospel in other regions besides France and therefore should be opposed by common consent. The elector palatine, the landgrave, and Charles, margrave of Baden, planned to send an embassy into France in the name of the Protestant princes to allay the dissensions there, and to ask that the same liberty of religion might be granted as was allowed by the edict of January 17. Many advocated an open league between all the Protestant states for mutual protection, in the hope that the mere knowledge of such a league would restrain their adversaries (C. S. P. For., No. 11, May 2, 1562). Opinion was divided in Germany as to whether Condé also should make foreign enrolments, or whether the territories of those who had suffered these levies to be made should be invaded by the Lutherans. Agents of the Guises circulated a printed apology for the massacre at Vassy (D’Aubigné, II, 16, and n. 2; La Popelinière, I, 327).

Rambouillet and D’Oysel, the agents of France in these countries (St. Sulpice, 77; Corresp. de Catherine de Médicis, I, 364) made much of the King of Spain’s aid and carried credentials from Chantonnay. The duke of Guise even sent an agent, the count of Roussy, to England, to discover Elizabeth’s intentions, and to ascertain the military state of her kingdom (cf. Beza, Hist. des églises réformées, ed. of Toulouse, I, 373; De Ruble, IV, 103 ff.; L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 13; C. S. P. For., No. 1,037, April 21, 1562).

The argument of the Catholics with the German Protestant princes and imperial cities was that the Huguenots were political dissidents and rebels, and that religion was a pretext with them (L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 65). In order to counteract this teaching the Huguenots circulated a pamphlet written by Hotman throughout the Rhine provinces which attempted to neutralize the differences between Calvinism and Lutheranism. (This curious pamphlet is printed in Mém. de Condé, II, 524; La Popelinière, I, 325. In this capacity Hotman was invaluable. Some of his letters at this time are in Mém. de l’Acad., CIV, 662-65.)

The German princes as a whole tried to prevent soldiers from going out of Germany. The landgrave Philip of Hesse arrested an officer of cavalry who was secretly enlisting horsemen in Hesse and who said he was doing so for Roggendorf, tore up the officer’s commission before his face, and made him swear to leave his castle without a passport. The duke of Württemberg also took care that no volunteers should march through Montbéliard into France, and Strasburg forbade anyone to enlist under severe penalties. The bishops of the Rhine kept quiet; only in Lorraine and the Three Bishoprics was Catholic enlisting unimpeded. The recruiting-sergeant of the Guises in Germany was the famous Roggendorf, a Frisian by birth who had been driven out of his native land in 1548 and since then had lived the life of an adventurer, part of the time in Turkey. (See an interesting note in Poulet, I, 542, with references.) On April 8 the king of Navarre in the name of Charles IX, signed a convention with him engaging the services of 1,200 German mounted pistoleers and four cornettes of footmen of 300 men each (D’Aubigné, II, 33, n.). These forces entered France late in July and reached the camp at Blois on August 7 (D’Aubigné, II, 76, n. 3).

One reason why the Protestant princes of Germany were unable immediately to make strong protest to the French crown was that the envoys of the elector palatine, the dukes of Deuxponts and Württemberg, the landgrave of Hesse and the margrave of Baden, were unprovided for a month with letters of safe conduct, by the precaution of the Guises, with the result that Roggendorf led 1,200 cavalry in the first week in May across the Rhine and through Trèves into France for the Guises, though the Protestant princes did all they could to hinder the passage and expostulated with the bishops of Trèves and Cologne for allowing them to be levied in their territories. Failing greater things, the Protestant princes of Germany, in July, 1562, put Roggendorf under the ban in their respective states (cf. C. S. P. For., Nos. 244 and 269, June 13 and July, 1562). In the end, despite the enterprise of the Guises, the French Catholics may be said to have been unsuccessful beyond the Rhine, that is in Germany proper, but not in Switzerland or the episcopal states. D’Oysel, who was sent by Charles IX in July to Heidelberg (D’Aubigné, II, 97, and n. 1; Le Laboureur, I, 430) received a short and definite answer “which showed him how groundless were his hopes of aid from that quarter, a document to which so much importance was attributed that it was forthwith printed for wider circulation” (C. S. P. For., No. 414, August 3, 1562, and the Introduction, xi).

The king of Spain’s captains had money and were ordered that as soon as soldiers were taken from Germany into France they should enlist men for the defense of his territories (C. S. P. For., No. 11, May 2, 1562). In the bishopric of Trèves soldiers were enrolled easily, as the passage from thence to France was short (ibid., No. 74, May 19, 1562).

In Switzerland the Huguenots endeavored to prevail upon the Protestant cantons to prevent the Catholic cantons from lending support to Guise (C. S. P. Ven., No. 285, April 29, 1562). The Guises asked for a levy of foot from the papist cantons of Switzerland in the King’s name (Corresp. de Catherine de Médicis, I, 289, April 8, 1562). The cantons promised to send 15 ensigns; but the Protestant cantons especially Bern, told the prince of Condé that they would not suffer any soldiers to be levied against him in their territory, on pain of confiscation of goods. Nevertheless the Catholic Swiss managed to make some enrolments, the men quitting home on July 8. On August 7 these mercenaries arrived at Blois, having come by way of Franche Comté (De Thou, Book XXX). They were commanded by Captain Froelich (see D’Aubigné, II, 148; Zurlauben, Hist. milit. des Suisses, IV, 287 ff.; Letter of Hotman in Rev. hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, 307).

[533] Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 22.

[534] “La fleur du monde.”—L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 41. For details see ibid., 24, 26-29, 36-38, 41, 50-54; Correspondance du cardinal de Ferrare, Letter 40, July 3, 1562; D’Aubigné, II, 91, and n. 2; Ruble, Antoine de Bourbon et Jeanne d’Albret, 220.

[535] St. Sulpice was dubious of Philip II’s purpose and suspected political designs “sous le titre de notre secours” (L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 39). Nevertheless he believed in Philip’s methods of repression—even the Inquisition. See his letter to the French ambassador at Trent on p. 28.

[536] C. S. P. For., No. 46, §3, May 11; No. 86, §1, May 23, 1562. Cf. No. 248—Challoner to Elizabeth from Bilboa, June 24, 1562. Spain established a naval base at La Réole to help Noailles, lieutenant of the King in Guyenne (L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 61).

[537] Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 21, April 8, 1562; C. S. P. Eng. For., No. 1,058, April 27, 1562; ibid., No. 6, §2, May 2, 1562.

[538] Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 33, May 2, 1562. Philip has commented on the margin to the effect that if the Catholics were as active as the Huguenots they would be better off.

[539] Chantonnay particularly notices this in a dispatch of April 18, 1562, K. 1,497. So also does the Tuscan ambassador (Nég. Tosc., III, 481, June, 1562). Traveling in France was dangerous (Windebank to Cecil, C. S. P. Dom., XXII, 53, April 8, 1562).

[540] C. S. P. Dom., XXII, 60, April 17, 1562. Paris wore red and yellow ribbons—the Guise colors. “Ceux de Paris disent publiquement qu’on doit renvoyer la reine en Italie et qu’ils ne veulent plus avoir de roi qui ne soit catholique. Ils en ont d’ailleurs un que Dieu leur a donné, c’est le grand ‘roi de Guise.’” Letter of Hotman in Rev. hist., XCVII, March-April, 1908, 305.

[541] D’Aubigné, Book II, chap. iv.

[542] Correspondance de Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 36, May 28, 1562.

[543] The importance of Lyons so near the cantons of Switzerland and Geneva is emphasized in Nég. Tosc., III, 488, July 6, 1562.

[544] Correspondance de Chantonnay, April 24, 1562, K. 1,497, No. 25. On the situation in Rouen, see Mém. de Condé, III, 302 ff.; and the diary of a citizen in Revue retrospective, V, 97. Montgomery who was in western Normandy about Vire sent the King’s letter back to him after polluting it with filth, at least so says Chantonnay, K. 1,497, No. 27, May 2, 1562.

[545] See Carel, Histoire de la ville de Caen sous Charles IX, Henri III et Henri IV, Caen, 1886.

[546] The duke of Bouillon, commandant of Caen Castle, made an attempt to restrain the populace (C. S. P. For., No. 303, §7, July 12, 1562). He posed as a neutral, but ultimately became a Huguenot.

[547] C. S. P. For., No. 101, May 27, 1562.

[548] Ibid., No. 68, May 18, 1562; cf. No. 69, §10.

[549] C. S. P. For., No. 69, §16, May 18, 1562.

[550] Forbes, II, 8; cf. Planche, Histoire de Bourgogne, IV, 556.

[551] Upon these negotiations see Mém. de Condé, III, 384, 388, 392, 393, 395.

[552] C. S. P. For., No. 106, §2, May 28, 1562. The King’s army had but twenty-two pieces of artillery at the beginning of the first civil war (Rel. vén., II, 101).

[553] C. S. P. For., No. 107, May 28, 1562; No. 174, June 9; Mém. de Condé, III, 462. Another edict of the King put the military government of Paris in the hands of the provost of the merchants and the échevins of the city (“Déclaration portant permission au Prévost des Marchands et aux Echevins de la Ville de Paris, d’établir ès Quartiers d’icelle, des Capitaines, Caporaux, Sergents des Bandes, et autres Officiers Catholiques. A Monceaux, le 17 May 1562;” also in Ordonnances de Charles IX, par Robert Estienne, fol. 187; Mém. de Condé, III, 447), in compliance with a popular request made a week earlier; “Ordonnance du Roy, donnée en conséquence de la Requête des Habitans de Paris, par laquelle il leur est permis de faire armes ceux que dans cette Ville sont en état de porter les armes, et d’en former des Compagnies, sous des Capitaines qui seront par eux choisesr,” May 10, 1562 (Mém. de Condé, III, 422, 423). The Venetian ambassador wisely observed “Perciochè dar liberamente l’armi in mano ad un populo cosi grande e cosi furiosi, benchè fosse cattolico, non era farse cosa molto prudente.”—Rel. vén., II, 98; cf. Nég. Tosc., III, 280.

[554] See Chantonnay’s letter to Philip II of May 28, inclosing the edict and giving these and other details, K. 1,497, No. 36.

[555] “Cependant tout se ruyne et se font tous les jours infiniz meurdres et saccagemens de part et d’autre vous verrez par les chemyn’s une partye de la pitié qui y est, et ce royaume au plus callamiteux estat qu’il est possible.”—L’Aubespine à l’Evêque de Limoges, June 10, 1562; L’Ambassade de St. Sulpice, 22.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us