Volume I Part 57 (2/2)

xxvii.) 41-43; Hist. eccles., i. 287; Huguenot poetical libel in Le Laboureur, Add. to Castelnau, i. 745.]

[Footnote 1020: ”Auquel (l'evesque de Valence) il dict qu'il se contentoit de ceste fois, et qu'il n'y retournerois plus.” La Place, Commentaires, _ubi supra_; De Thou, _ubi supra_.]

[Footnote 1021: La Place, Commentaires, 123, De Thou, iii. (liv. xxvii.) 45. How deep the disappointment felt by the Protestants at the constable's course must have been, can be gathered from the sanguine picture of the prospects of the French Reformation drawn by Languet a couple of months earlier. Arguing from the comparative mildness of Montmorency in the persecutions under Henry II., from the fact that he had allowed no one of his five sons to enter the ecclesiastical state, which offered rare opportunities of advancement, and from the influence which his sons and his three nephews--all favorably inclined to, if not open adherents of the new doctrines--would exert over the old man, he not unnaturally came to this conclusion: ”I am, therefore, of opinion that, if the Guises still retain any power, the constable will join Navarre for the purpose of overwhelming them, and will make no opposition to Navarre if he sets on foot a moderate reformation of doctrine.” Epist. secr., ii., p. 102.]

[Footnote 1022: La Place and De Thou, _ubi supra_.]

[Footnote 1023: This doc.u.ment first appears in the Memoires de Conde, under the t.i.tle ”Sommaire des choses premierement accordees entre les Ducs de Montmorency Connestable, et De Guyse Grand Maistre, Pairs de France, et le Mareschal Sainct Andre, pour la Conspiration du Triumvirat, et depuis mises en deliberation a l'entree du Sacre et Sainct Concile de Trente, et arrestee entre les Parties, en leur prive Conseil faict contre les Heretiques, et contre le Roy de Navarre, en tant qu'il gouverne et conduit mal les affaires de Charles neufiesme Roy de France, Mineur; lequel est Autheur de continuel accroiss.e.m.e.nt de la nouvelle Secte qui pullule en France.” The princ.i.p.al provisions are given by De Thou, iii. (liv. xxix.) 142, 143, under date of 1562, who explicitly states his disbelief of its authenticity. Neither, indeed, does the compiler of the Mem. de Conde vouch for it. Among other objections that have been urged with force against the genuineness of the doc.u.ment, are the following: The improbability that the Triumvirs would mature a plan involving all the Catholic sovereigns of Europe without previously obtaining their consent, of which there is no trace; the inconsistency of the project with the well-known policy and character of the German Emperor Ferdinand; the improbability that the Council of Trent would indorse a plan aimed at the humiliation of Navarre, who, when the council actually rea.s.sembled in January, 1562, was completely won over to the Roman party. In favor of the doc.u.ment may be urged: First, that M. Capefigue (Histoire de la reforme, de la ligue, etc., ii. 243-245) a.s.serts: ”J'ai trouve cette piece, qu'on a crue supposee, en original et signee dans les MSS. Colbert, bibl. du roi.”

Prof. Soldan, who has devoted an appendix to the first volume of his Gesch. des Prot. in Frankreich, to a discussion of this reported agreement between the Triumvirs, was unsuccessful in finding any trace of such a paper. Secondly, that the Memoires de Guise, the ma.n.u.script of which, according to the statement of the editor, M. Aime Champollion, fils (Notice sur Francois de Lorraine, due d'Aumale et de Guise, prefixed to his Memoires, first published in the Collection Michaud-Poujoulat, 1851, p. 5), is partly in the handwriting of the duke himself, partly in that of his secretary, Millet, insert the ”Sommaire”

precisely as it stands in the Memoires de Conde, without any denial of its authenticity. This would appear, at first sight, to settle the question beyond cavil. But it must be borne in mind that many of the memoires of the sixteenth century are compiled on the plan of including all contemporary papers of importance, whether written by friend or by foe. Frequently the most contradictory narratives of the same event are placed side by side, with little or no comment. This is precisely the case with those of Guise, in which, for example, no less than _four_ accounts--_three_ of them from Huguenot sources--are given of the ma.s.sacre of Va.s.sy. Now we have the testimony of De Thou (_ubi supra_) that this agreement, industriously circulated by the Prince of Conde and the Huguenots, made a powerful impression not only in France, but in Germany and all Northern Europe. So important a doc.u.ment, even if a forgery, would naturally find a place in such a collection as the Memoires of Guise. Altogether the matter is in a singularly interesting position. Could the ma.n.u.script seen by M. Capefigue be found and re-examined critically, the truth might, perhaps, be reached. M. Henri Martin, in his excellent Histoire de France, x. 79, note, accepts the doc.u.ment as genuine.]

[Footnote 1024: The ”plebe e populo minuto,” the Venetian Michiel tell us, ”e quello che si vede certo con gran fervenzia e devozione frequentar le chiese, e continuar li riti cattolici.” Relations des Amb.

Ven. i., 412.]

[Footnote 1025: ”Aulcuns desditz ecclesiasticques,” is Claude Haton's ingenuous admission respecting his fellow priests of this period, ”estoient fort vicieux encores pour lors, et les plus vicieux estoient ceux qui plus resistoient auxditz huguenotz, jusques a mettre la main aux cousteaux et aux armes.” Memoires, i. 129.]

[Footnote 1026: Memoires de Conde, i. 27.]

[Footnote 1027: ”In viginti urbibus aut circiter trucidati fuerunt pii a furiosa plebe.” Letter of Calvin to Bullinger, May 24, 1561, _apud_ Baum, ii., App., 33. At Mans, on Lady-Day (March 25th), so serious a riot took place, that the bishop felt compelled to apologize in a letter to Catharine (April 23d), in which he excuses his flock by alleging that they were exasperated beyond endurance by the sight of a Huguenot ”a.s.semblee” openly held by day in the ”Faubourg St. Jehan,” contrary to the royal ordinances--some of the attendants, he a.s.serts, coming out of the meeting armed. His letter is to be found in the Mem. de Conde, ii.

339.]

[Footnote 1028: And was openly denounced by his clergy from the pulpit, in Pa.s.sion Week, as an ”apostate,” a ”traitor,” a ”new Judas,” etc.

Bulletin, xxiii. 84.]

[Footnote 1029: De Thou, iii. (liv. xxviii.) 51, 52; Histoire eccles., i. 287; La Place, 124; Calvin to Bullinger, Baum, ii., App., 33; Journal de Bruslart, Mem. de Conde, ii. 27. Interesting doc.u.ments from the munic.i.p.al records of Beauvais, Bulletin, xxiii. (1874) 84, etc. Letter of Chantonnay, Rheims, May 10, 1561 (Mem. de Conde, ii. 11), who adds: ”L'Admiral ha tant peu avec le credit qu'il ha ver Monsieur de Vendosme [Navarre], que l'on a execute deux ou trois de ceulx du peuple; lequel depuis s'est leve de nouveau, et a pendu le bourreau qui feit l'execution.”]

[Footnote 1030: ”Car, de toutes les choses, la plus incompatible en ung estat, ce sont deux religions contraires.”]

[Footnote 1031: Journal de Bruslart, Memoires de Conde, i. 26, etc.; Registers of Parliament, ibid., ii. 341, etc., and _apud_ Felibien, Hist. de Paris, Preuves, iv. 798, Arret of April 28th and 29th.

According to the information that had reached Calvin, twelve had been killed and forty wounded by Longjumeau and his friends (Calvin to Bullinger, _ubi supra_). The parliamentary registers do not give the precise number. The good curate of S. Barthelemi makes no allusion to any attack, but sets down the loss of the Roman Catholics at three killed and nine wounded. Journal de Jehan de la Fosse, 41. Hubert Languet says seven were killed. Epist. secr., ii. 117.]

[Footnote 1032: Letters patent of Fontainebleau, April 19, 1561, Mem. de Conde, ii. 334, 335; La Place; and Hist. eccles., _ubi supra_; De Thou, iii. (liv. xxviii.) 52.]

[Footnote 1033: How the devoted adherents of the Roman church received this edict and its predecessor appears from the Memoires of Claude Haton. In the city of Provins, a short distance from Paris, one or two preachers reluctantly consented to read it in the churches; but ”maistre Barrier,” a Franciscan and curate of Sainte Croix, instead of the required proclamation, made these remarks to the people at the commencement of his sermon: ”On m'a cejourd'-huy apporte ung memoire et papier escript, qu'on m'a dict estre la coppie d'un edict du roy, pour vous le publier; et _veult-on que je vous dye que les chatz et les ratz doibvent vivre en paix les ungs avec les aultres_, sans se rien faire de mal l'ung a l'autre, et que nous aultres Francoys, e'est a.s.savoir les heretiques et les catholicques, fa.s.sions ainsi, et que le roy le veult.

_Je ne suis crieur ni trompette de la ville pour faire telles publications._ Dieu veuille par sa misericorde avoir pitie de son eglise et du royaume de France, les deux ensemble sont prestz de tomber en grande ruyne; Dieu veuille bailler bon conseil a nostre jeune roy et inspirer ses gouverneurs a bien faire; ils entrent a leur gouvernement par ung pauvre commencement, mais ce est en punition de noz pechez.”

Memoires de Claude Haton, i. 123, 124.]

[Footnote 1034: La Place, 124-126; Histoire eccles., i. 288, etc.; De Thou, iii. (liv. xxviii.) 52, 53. The remonstrance of parliament was, in point of fact, little more than an echo of the strenuous protest of the Spanish amba.s.sador to the queen mother. See Chantonnay to Catharine de'

Medici, April 22, 1561, Memoires de Conde, ii. 6-10.]

[Footnote 1035: According to Claude Haton, the edict was received with ineffable delight, especially in those cities of the kingdom where there were Huguenot judges. The Catholics were despised. The Huguenots became bold: ”En toutes compagnies, a.s.semblees et lieux publicz, ilz huguenotz avoient le hault parler.” Despite the prohibition of the employment of insulting terms, they called their adversaries ”papaux, idolatres, pauvres abusez.” and ”tisons du purgatoire du pape.” Memoires, i. 122.

Doubtless a smaller measure of free speech than this would have sufficed to stir up the bile of the curate of Meriot.]

[Footnote 1036: Already, on the 6th of March, Claude Boissiere had written to the Genevan reformer from Saintes: ”G.o.d has so augmented His church that we number to-day by the grace of G.o.d thirty-eight pastors in this province” (Saintonge in Western France), ”each of us having the care of so many towns and parishes, that, had we fifty more, we should scarcely be able to satisfy half the charges that present themselves.”

Geneva MSS., _apud_ Bulletin, xiv. (1855) 320, and Crottet, Hist. des egl. ref. de Pons, Gemozac, etc., 57.]

<script>