Part 21 (1/2)

[Footnote 1: _See_ Lavisse iv^{ii}.,356.]

[Footnote 2: The letters of convocation bear the date February 26, 1467, o.s. Tournay elected four deputies. By April 30th, they had returned home, and on May 2d they made a report. The items of expenditure are very exact. So hard had they ridden that a fine horse costing eleven crowns was used up and was sold for four crowns. M. Van der Broeck, archivist of Tournay, extracted various items from the register of the Council. _See_ Kervyn's note. Chastellain, v., 387.]

[Footnote 3: _See_ Lavisse iv^[ii]., 356.]

[Footnote 4: Dordrecht was not among them. Her deputies held that it was illegal for them to go to The Hague. Some time later Charles received the oaths at Dordrecht. (Wagenaar, _Vaderlandsche Hist._, iv., 101.]

[Footnote 5: Treaty of Ancenis, September 10, 1468. _See_ Lavisse, iv^[ii].] One of the results of the War of Public Weal was that St.

Pol was appointed constable of France.]

[Footnote 6: The original is in the Mss. de Baluze, Paris, Bibl. Nat.; Lenglet, iii., 19.]

[Footnote 7: Commines and a letter to the magistrates of Ypres are the basis of this narrative. (Gachard, _Doc. ined._, i., 196.) There is, however, a ma.s.s of additional material both contemporaneous and commentating. _See also_ Michelet, Lavisse, Kirk, etc. Chastellain's MS. is lost.]

[Footnote 8: _See_ Lavisse, iv^[ii]., 397.]

[Footnote 9: Ludwig v. Diesbach, (_See_ Kirk, i., 559.) The author was a page in Louis's train, who afterwards played a part in Swiss affairs.]

[Footnote 10: It was never captured until Wellington took it in 1814.]

[Footnote 11: Commines, ii., ch. vii.]

[Footnote 12: The bishop did indeed meet his death at the hands of the mob, but it was many years later.]

[Footnote 13: _Le roi ... se voyait loge, rasibus d'une grosse tour ou un Comte de Vermandois fit mourir un sien predecesseur Roy de France_.

(Commines, ii., ch. vii.)]

[Footnote 14: _Memoires_, ii., ch. ix.]

[Footnote 15: Undoubtedly Commines wishes it to be inferred that this was he. The main narrative followed here is Commines, whose memoirs remain, as Ste.-Beuve says, the definitive history of the times. There are the errors inevitable to any contemporary statement. Meyer, to be sure, says, apropos of an incident incorrectly reported, _Falsus in hoc ut in pluribus historicus_. Kervyn de Lettenhove three centuries later is also severe. _See_, too, ”L'autorite historique de Ph. de Commynes,” Mandrot, _Rev. Hist_., 73.]

[Footnote 16: Gachard, _Doc. ined._, i., 199.]

[Footnote 17: _Ibid._, 200.]

[Footnote 18: _Waer ic certiffiere dat het dezen nacht niet wel claer ghestaen heeft._]

[Footnote 19: _Lettres de Louis XI_, iii., 289. The king apparently never resented the part played by Dammartin when he was dauphin. His letters to him are very intimate.]

[Footnote 20: _Lettres_, iii., 295. (Toussaint is probably Toustain.)]

[Footnote 21: Kervyn ed., _Oeuvres de Chastellain_, vii., xviii. _See_ poem, _ibid._, 423. The MS. in the Laurentian Library at Florence bears this line: ”Here follows a mystery made because of the said peace of good intention in the thought that it would be observed by the parties.” Hesdin is, however, a long way out of the route between Peronne and Namur, where the party was on October 14th. It would hardly seem possible for journey and visit in so brief a time.]

CHAPTER XII

AN EASY VICTORY