[1] CondÉ, on hearing of this, remarked that Luynes was a good Constable in time of peace and a good Keeper of the Seals in time of war, and this jest was repeated everywhere.

[2] CrÉquy had been created a marshal on December 24, 1621.

[3] The MarÉchal de Roquelaure recovered and lived until 1625, so neither Schomberg nor Bassompierre received the coveted bÂton. However, shortly afterwards, the King gave Bassompierre the rank of first marÉchal de camp, and with it authority over the other brigadier-generals and other privileges.

[4] From CoutrÉ to Vivonne, a distance of about two and a half leagues.

[5] Tallemant des RÉaux, little benevolent in general towards Bassompierre, renders him justice on this occasion. “At the Sables d’Olonne,” says he, “he acquired reputation, risked his life, and showed the way to the others; for he plunged up to his neck in the water.”—Historiette de Bassompierre.

[6] Amongst those who honoured themselves by their efforts to protect the women was the Keeper of the Seals, De Vic. Here is the tribute of a contemporary chronicler:—

“I will tell you on this matter an act of charity on the part of the Keeper of the Seals, who ordered one of his people, so soon as the town was taken, to ransom the girls and women whom he found in the hands of the soldiers, in order that by this means their honour and their lives might be saved. This he did of those whom he met, and brought them to the said Keeper of the Seals, to the number of fifteen. They were conducted to his lodging, as to a place of refuge and asylum; and some were sent back under escort to the places from which they had fled to take refuge in NÉgrepelisse on the approach of the Royal Army of his Majesty, while others were conducted to a place of safety.” Le fidelle historien des affaires de France (Paris, MDCXXIII.).

The Duc de Chevreuse and Roger, valet of the King’s wardrobe, also ransomed several women, and an officer named Pontis saved the honour of a young girl of eighteen.

[7] Carmain, called indifferently Caraman, Carmaing, Carman, or Cramail, had been a Huguenot town for nearly fifty years. The principal inconvenience which it caused the inhabitants of Toulouse was the fact that it afforded the few Protestants of the capital of Languedoc facilities for the public exercise of their religion.

[8] Claude de Bullion, Seigneur de Bonnelles. He was successively counsellor to the Parlement of Paris, Counsellor of State, and maÎtre des requÊtes and was appointed Surintendant of Finance in 1632. He died in 1646.

[9] Combalet had recently married Marie Madeleine de Vignerot, afterwards Duchesse d’Aiguillon, Richelieu’s favourite niece.

[10] He was a son of Zamet the financier, and colonel of the Picardy Regiment.

[11] Bassompierre had protected RoucellaÏ after the death of Concini, whose protÉgÉ he had been, and had lately obtained for him a rich abbey.

[12] “The Sieur de Bassompierre, since made MarÉchal de France for his merits, ran thither, sword in hand, with some soldiers of the Piedmont Regiment.... In the midst of the disorder into which our men had been thrown, the MarÉchal de Bassompierre showed his judgment and his courage.”—Histoire du MarÉchal de Toiras.

[13] The Treaty of Montpellier confirmed the Edict of Nantes, and permitted the Protestants to hold ecclesiastical assemblies without the authorisation of the King; but political assemblies were forbidden, unless the King’s permission had been obtained. La Rochelle and Montauban were allowed to retain their fortifications, and it was promised that Fort Saint-Louis, which the Government had caused to be erected within a quarter of a league of the ramparts of La Rochelle, and which was a serious menace to that town, should be razed. But the fortifications of the other Huguenot towns were to be partially dismantled, so that they might never again be capable of defying the royal authority. The chiefs of the insurrection were restored to all their honours and charges, with the exception of those whom the King preferred to indemnify. Among these was Rohan, who exchanged his government of Poitou for that of the towns of NÎmes, UzÈs, and Castries, which, however, he was not allowed to garrison, a large sum of money and a pension of 45,000 livres. La Force had already been indemnified for the loss of his government of BÉarn.

The Protestants’ imprudent recourse to arms had thus cost them dear. They had lost two important governments, their political organisation and all their places of surety, with the exception of La Rochelle and Montauban. It only remained to deprive them of these two towns to reduce the party to a mere sect. In the position in which they were, however, it was as favourable a treaty as they could have hoped for.

[14] After long negotiations, Richelieu had at last obtained his promotion to the cardinalate on September 23 of that year. He was on his way at this moment, not to receive the hat, but to offer his thanks to the King. HÉrouard tells us that the hat was given Richelieu by Louis XIII, at Lyons, on December 10, 1622.

[15] Philip, Duc d’OrlÉans, the King’s brother.

[16] The Comte de Soissons.

[17] Nicolas de Bailleux, afterwards Surintendant of Finance.

[18] Not only had this stipulation of the Treaty of Montpellier not been executed, but the governor of Fort Saint-Louis was working incessantly to strengthen this citadel.

[19] Caumartin had died on January 21, 1623, and the Chancellor had obtained the Seals, without which his office was a sinecure.

[20] “To Seigneur MarÉchal de Bassompierre, for gilded leathers, 40,000 maravedis.”

[21] Bassompierre appears to have got his dates mixed. He places the “Guadamiciles” affair in July, but the disgrace of Ornano, whose offence was that he had instigated Monsieur to demand admission to the Council, occurred at the beginning of June.

[22] August 12.

[23] Captain of the Gardes du Corps.

[24] There was some talk of bringing La Vieuville to trial, on a charge of malversation, but the real motive for imprisoning him was to prevent him from revenging himself for his disgrace by disclosing the secret of the negotiations which were in progress. When there was no longer anything to fear from his indiscretion, he was allowed to escape.

[25] Gregory XV had died on July 8, 1623, and was succeeded by Cardinal Maffeo Barberini, who had assumed the name of Urban VIII.

[26] The accusation was a true one. Richelieu had proved that nothing would stay his arm when the interests of France were at stake.

[27] “He [Barberini],” writes Bassompierre, “was received, lodged and entertained with all the honours that it was customary to render to Legates. But, after several conferences had been held and divers treaties proposed, not having got what he expected, he came to Fontainebleau to take leave of the King, and immediately afterwards, without waiting to receive the customary honour of being escorted and his expenses defrayed on his journey through France, he unexpectedly took his departure, having previously refused the King’s present. The King summoned the princes and officers of the Crown together with certain presidents of his Court of Parlement, and held a famous council at Fontainebleau to deliberate upon this extravagant departure, where nothing was resolved upon except to let him go.”

[28] The siege of Verrua was raised on November 17, 1625, as the result of a defeat inflicted on the Spaniards before the walls of the town. Vignolles had arrived on the 9th.

[29] Ambassade du MarÉchal de Bassompierre en Suisse, l’an 1625. [Amsterdam, 1668.]

[30] Raymond Phelipeaux, Seigneur d’Herbault. He was one of the Secretaries of State, and shared with Potier d’Acquerre and LomÉnie de la Ville-aux-Clercs the Department of Foreign Affairs.

[31] Schomberg had been created a marshal of France in 1625.

[32] Between Louis XIII and her son-in-law Philip IV.

[33] Madame de Molteville, MÉmoires: “The Queen did me the honour to tell me that she did everything she could to stop the marriage of Monsieur ... because she believed that this marriage, which the Queen-Mother desired, was altogether contrary to her interests, being assured that, if the princess were to have children, she would no longer enjoy any consideration.”

[34] “A few days afterwards there was a report that a council had been held, which was attended by nine persons ... at which it was resolved to go and kill the Cardinal at Fleury.”

[35] Henri Martin.

[36] MÉmoires d’un favori du duc d’OrlÉans. Archives curieuses de l’histoire de France. Tome III.

[37] Roger de Gramont, Comte de Louvigny, second son of Antoine, Comte de Gramont. He was killed in a duel on March 18, 1629.

[38] The Comte de Candale was the younger son of d’Épernon and brother of the Marquis de la Valette.

[39] According to Bassompierre, they were both in love with the Duchesse de Rohan.

[40] FranÇois de Montmorency, Seigneur de Bouteville. He was beheaded in 1627. See p. 505 infra.

[41] On July 2.

[42] Among the things which Louvigny appears to have invented was the accusation that Chalais meditated the death of the King, by scratching him on the neck with a poisoned pin when, as Master of the Wardrobe, he was adjusting his ruff.

[43] Here is a specimen: “If my complaints have moved with compassion the most insensible of hearts, when my sun failed to shine in the alleys dedicated to love, where will be those who do not share my tears in a prison into which the sun’s rays can never enter, and in which my lot is so much the harder in that I am forbidden to make known to her my cruel martyrdom? In this perplexity, I felicitate myself on having a master who makes me suffer only in body; and murmur against the marvels of that sun whose absence is killing the soul, and brings about such a metamorphosis that I am no longer myself save in the persistence of adoring it; and my eyes, which survive for that alone, are justly punished for their too great presumption by the shedding of more tears than ever love caused to flow.”

[44] The horrible tortures inflicted on the condemned man are accounted for by the fact that the executioner of Nantes had hidden or taken away his axe, and that his substitute was obliged to make use of unsuitable weapons: “They brought from the prisons of the town two men destined for the gibbet, one of whom played the part of executioner, while the other served as his assistant. But the former was so clumsy that, besides two blows with a Swiss sword, which had been purchased on the spot, he gave him [Chalais] thirty-four with an adze such as carpenters use, and was obliged to turn the body round to finish the severing of the head, the victim exclaiming up to the twentieth blow: ‘Jesus, Maria et Regina Coeli!’”

[45] There can be no possible doubt that, had the marshal lived a little longer, he would have shared the fate of Chalais. “I am infinitely vexed that the death of the MarÉchal d’Ornano has forestalled the judgment of the court,” wrote Richelieu to the King. “The justice of God wished to anticipate yours.”

[46] Bassompierre appears to have been addressed frequently by Louis XIII and Monsieur by the German form of his name.

[47] Enormous as were these revenues, the King was able to sequestrate them by a stroke of the pen, and Richelieu took care that Monsieur should not have in his hands a single fortified place. It was a wise precaution, since Gaston’s first treason was to be followed by others.

[48] “Monsieur was playing cards when the news was brought to him. He did not interrupt his game, but went on with it, as though, instead of Chalais’s death, he had heard of his deliverance.”—MÉmoires d’un favori du duc d’OrlÉans.

[49] When Louis lay on his death-bed, the Queen swore, with tears in her eyes, that she had been innocent of any such intention. “In the state in which I am,” was the reply, “I am obliged to pardon you, but I am not obliged to believe you.”

[50] Tyburn Tree would appear to have stood on the spot which is now the junction of the Bayswater and Edgware Roads.

[51] “They [the Bishop of Mende and the other ecclesiastics of the Queen’s Household] abused the influence which they had acquired over the tender and religious mind of her Majesty, so far as to lead her a long way on foot, through a park, the gate of which had been expressly ordered by the Count de Tilliers [TilliÈres] to be kept open, to go in devotion to a place (Tyburn), where it has been the custom to execute the most infamous malefactors and criminals of all sorts, exposed on the entrance to a high road; an act, not only of shame and mockery towards the Queen, but of reproach and calumny of the King’s predecessors of glorious memory, as accusing them of tyranny on having put to death innocent persons, whom these people look upon as martyrs, although, on the contrary, not one of them had been executed on account of religion, but for high treason.”—Reply of the Commissioners of his Majesty the King of Great Britain, to Monsieur le MarÉschal de Bassompierre, Ambassador Extraordinary from his Most Christian Majesty.

[52] The orthography of this letter is, of course, modernised.

[53] Sir Lewis Lewkenor, Knight. In 1603 an office had been instituted, or rather revived, for the more solemn reception of the Ambassadors by the title of Master of the Ceremonies, with a salary of £200 per annum. Sir Lewis Lewkenor was the first holder of the post. The worthy knight’s emoluments were not confined to his salary, for Stow tells us that when, in March, 1605, he was sent by the Lords of the Council to the foreign Ambassadors to contradict officially a report of James I’s death which had been spread, the Spanish Ambassador was “ravished with a soddaine joy, and gave unto Sir Lewis Lewkner (sic) a very great chaigne of gold, of a large value.”

[54] Greenwich Palace, on the site where now stands the Naval Hospital, had been a favourite residence of Henry VIII and Elizabeth, but the Stuarts appear to have resided there but little.

[55] Sir Edward Sackville, fourth Earl of Dorset (1591-1652). He was one of the handsomest men of his time, and in 1613 had become notorious as the hero of a duel, fought on a piece of ground specially purchased for the purpose near Bergen-op-Zoom, in which he had killed Edward Bruce, second Lord Kinloss, and been himself severely wounded. He had been ambassador in France for a short time in 1621 and again in 1623.

[56] It was customary for Ambassadors Extraordinary to be lodged and entertained at the expense of the sovereigns to whom they were accredited, and we have seen how splendidly Bassompierre was treated at Madrid. Why this practice was departed from on the present occasion was no doubt due to the ill-feeling existing between the two Courts and to the fact that his mission was an unwelcome one, and not to any motive of economy, for in 1610 the Ambassador sent to announce to James I the accession of Louis XIII had been lodged in Lambeth Palace and most lavishly entertained.

[57] It is singular that Bassompierre omits to mention where he lived during his stay in London. It might be supposed that it was at the house of the permanent Ambassador, the Marquis de Blainville, were it not that he states elsewhere that it was in a maison de louage. There was in those days no French Embassy in London, that is to say, a house purchased by the French Government for the accommodation of its representative, and the Ambassadors made their own arrangements. We do not know where Blainville lived, but his predecessor, Bassompierre’s brother-in-law, the Comte de TilliÈres, rented for a time Hunsdon House, in the Blackfriars. It was during his tenancy of this house, in October, 1623, that a most terrible accident occurred. Some three hundred Catholics had assembled there one evening to hear Mass, when the floor of the room in which the service was being held gave way, with the result that a great number of them were killed or severely injured. The bodies of nearly fifty are said to have been afterwards buried in the garden. This disaster was called the Fatal Vespers. “The Protestants,” observes Croker, “considered it as a judgment of Heaven; the Roman Catholics as a treachery of the Protestants, both sides overlooking in the blindness of bigotry the weakness of an old floor and the weight of the inordinate number of persons crowding upon it.”

[58] FranÇois de Rochechouart, Knight of Malta, known also under the name of the Commandeur de Jars, third son of FranÇois de Rochechouart, Seigneur de Jars, and Anne de Monceaux. He had been exiled from the Court of France at the time of the arrest of Ornano, and had come to England, where he had been well received.

[59] Buckingham was much incensed against the Court of France, owing to its refusal to receive him as Ambassador Extraordinary in the autumn of the previous year, though what else he could have expected after his audacious attempt to make love to Anne of Austria is difficult to understand. He had also, it appears, a personal grievance against Richelieu upon a point which was then considered of great importance—the right to the title of Monseigneur. The Cardinal had addressed letters to Monsieur le Duc de Buckingham, and the omission of the Monseigneur had given mortal offence to Buckingham.

[60] York House. It had belonged originally to Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk; but in the reign of Mary, Heath, Archbishop of York, purchased it for the see. Whence the name which so perplexed Bassompierre. In the reign of James I, Matthews, Archbishop of York, disposed of it to the Crown, and after Lord Chancellors Egerton and Bacon had had it, probably as an official residence, it was granted to Buckingham, who converted it into a sumptuous palace.

[61] “It does some credit to the taste at least of the English Court at that period,” observes Croker, “that Bassompierre, himself a man of distinguished taste in decoration and furniture (he nearly ruined himself by fitting up that celebrated house at Chaillot, which his gaoler Richelieu used to borrow), and who had seen all the courts in Europe, should consider this as the finest and best fitted house he had ever seen.”

[62] William Cecil, second Earl of Salisbury, son of Sir Robert Cecil, the first earl, and grandson of the great Lord Burleigh.

[63] Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgomery, afterwards fourth Earl of Pembroke (1584-1650), Lord Chamberlain, second son of Henry, second Earl of Pembroke, by his celebrated wife, Mary Sidney, sister of Sir Philip Sidney. It was to him and his brother William, third Earl of Pembroke, that Heminge and Corleton dedicated the first folio of Shakespeare as “to the most noted and incomparable pair of brothers, who having prosequted these treffles [the immortal plays] and their authour living with so much favour, would use a like indulgence towards them which they have done unto their parent.” Herbert was a generous patron of Massinger and Vandyck as well as of Shakespeare, but, in other respects, a far from estimable person, though much of the abuse heaped upon him by contemporary writers is no doubt due to his desertion of the King’s cause during the Great Rebellion. The charges that he was quarrelsome, dissolute, and wanting in physical courage would seem, however, to be only too well founded. His devotion to the sport of cock-fighting is recorded in the old lines:—

[64] He was at one time the owner of the famous Sancy diamond, which afterwards figured amongst the crown jewels of France, and later amongst those of Russia.

[65] The King’s fear lest his consort “might commit some extravagance and weep in the sight of everyone” was, after all, well justified for, after the audience, Bassompierre writes to d’Herbault: “The Queen would have come near to weeping in this great assembly, if Madame de la TrÉmouille had not led her away.”

[66] Edward, Baron, afterwards Viscount, Conway. He had been one of the Secretaries of State since January, 1623. He was subsequently removed from that office, “for notable insufficiency,” says Clarendon, and in December, 1628, appointed Lord President of the Council. It is somewhat singular that Bassompierre, very particular as a rule to give the English nobles whom he met during his mission their titles, does not do so in the case of Conway. “But it is to be observed,” remarks Croker, “that the office of Secretary of State was still (both in England and France) considered a subordinate one, and even the peerage did not exempt the possessor from the plebeian appellation of ‘Mr. Secretary.’”

[67] In Bassompierre’s dispatches to his Court we find further details of the stormy interview. “I was treated,” he writes to Louis XIII, “with great rudeness, and found the King very little disposed to oblige my master.” Charles complained bitterly of the intrigues of the Queen’s French attendants; of their malice in seeking to wean his wife’s affection from him, and their insolence in prejudicing her against the English language and nation. The King grew at length so warm as to exclaim to the Ambassador: “Why do you not execute your commission and declare war?” “I am not a herald to declare war,” was the answer, “but a marshal of France, to make it when declared.”

[68] The favourite’s presumptuous behaviour towards his sovereign was not always so delicately reproved as it was on this occasion by the well-bred and courtly Bassompierre. “On the eventful day of Dr. Lambe [an astrologer, who went by the name of the ‘Duke’s Devil’] being torn to pieces by the mob, a circumstance occurred to Buckingham, somewhat remarkable, to show the spirit of the times. The King and the duke were in the Spring Gardens, looking on the bowlers; the duke put on his hat; one Wilson, a Scotchman, first kissing the duke’s hands, snatched it off, saying: ‘Off with your hat before the king.’ Buckingham, not apt to restrain himself, kicked the Scotchman; but the king interfered, saying: ‘Let him alone, George; he is either mad or a fool.’ ‘No, sir,’ replied the Scotchman, ‘I am a sober man, and, if your Majesty will give me leave, I will tell you of this man which many know and none dare speak.”—Disraeli, Curiosities of Literature, Vol. II.

[69] John Egerton, Viscount Brackley, created Earl of Bridgewater in 1617, son of Lord Chancellor Egerton.

[70] Sir George Goring, afterwards Earl of Norwich (1583-1663). He was at this time vice-chamberlain to the Queen.

[71] William Herbert, third Earl of Pembroke, elder brother of Philip Herbert, Earl of Montgomery.

[72] There were at this time only two dukes, viz., Buckingham and James Stuart, Duke of Lennox and Richmond; but, as the latter was a lad of fourteen, it is very natural for Bassompierre to speak of the King’s favourite as “the duke.”

[73] Bassompierre also expresses his dissatisfaction with his reception in England, and with the English generally, in a letter to the Bishop of Mende, formerly Grand Almoner to the Queen. “I found,” he writes, “condescension amongst the Spaniards and civility and courtesy amongst the Swiss in my embassies to those nations, but the English would abate nothing of their natural pride and arrogance.” So we see the charge of “insular pride” is nearly three centuries old, at any rate. The bishop replies: “I am not surprised that you found more courtesy and satisfaction amongst the Spaniards than in the island upon which the tempest has cast you. I have always found the English as unreasonable as the Swiss, but less faithful to their honour than the Spaniards.” No doubt the bishop thought it very unreasonable of the English government to deprive him of his post, but, unless all the charges brought against him by the commissioners appointed to reply to Bassompierre’s complaints are to be disbelieved, he had only himself to thank for it.

[74] Madame de Motteville goes so far as to assert, on the authority of Henrietta, that, not only had Buckingham fomented the dissensions between husband and wife, but that he had openly avowed to the Queen that such was his deliberate intention. Whether or no he is to be credited with so perilous a candour, it can scarcely be doubted that his attitude towards the young Queen was a hostile one, and, on one occasion he is said to have told her insolently to beware how she behaved, since in England queens had had their heads cut off before now.

[75] Charlotte de la TrÉmoille, daughter of Claude, Seigneur de la TrÉmoille, Duc de Thouars, and Charlotte of Nassau, daughter of William the Silent, Prince of Orange. She had married James Stanley, Viscount Strange, afterwards seventh Earl of Derby—“the loyal Earl of Derby”—who was beheaded in 1651. She is celebrated in history for her heroic defence of Latham House against the troops of the Parliament.

[76] Presumably, these were Charles’s private jewels, for many of the Crown jewels had been pawned to the States-General. “Warrants are extant,” says Croker, “authorising Buckingham and Sackville Crow to pawn jewels to the amount of £300,000; viz.: ‘a great rich jewel of goulde, call’d the Mirror of Great Britain, having twoe faire litle dyamonds, cut lozenge wise, garnish’d with small dyamonds, and a pendant with a faire dyamond cutt in fawcetts without foyle, etc.’”

[77] During Bassompierre’s embassy, Henrietta Maria wrote her mother a letter which the marshal regarded as a proof that she distrusted him. On learning of this, the Queen wrote to him as follows:—

“My Cousin, Understanding that you had been vexed respecting a letter I wrote to the Queen my mother, and that you think that I distrust you, I beg you to dismiss the idea and to believe that I am not so ungrateful for the services which you have rendered me as to avoid you. M. le Duc [probably the Duc de Chevreuse] will tell you about the affair as it happened; and, as for myself, I can assure you that my intention never was to offend you, for I should be most blameworthy to act thus against persons who testify affection for me, particularly against you, whom I honour, and to whom my obligations are so great that I shall ever remain,

“Your affectionate cousin,
“Henriette-Marie.”

It is perhaps to this episode that Bassompierre here refers.

[78] Perhaps Robert Ker, afterwards Earl of Roxburgh.

[79] Probably, Endymion Porter (1587-1649), groom of the bedchamber to Charles I, whom he had accompanied on his journey to Spain, where he sometimes acted as interpreter, having been educated in that country. He was a generous patron of literature and art, and Herrick declares that poets would never be wanting so long as they had a patron like Porter,

Porter was devoted to Buckingham, to whose favour he owed his rise to fortune, and in his will, dated the year before his death, he “charged all his sons, upon his blessing, that, leaving the like charges to their posterity, they did all of them observe and respect the children and family of his Lord Duke of Buckingham, deceased, to whom he owed all the happiness he had in the world.”

[80] Charles de Brouilly, Marquis de Piennes.

[81] Pierre Gobelin, counsellor to the Parlement in 1618, was appointed maÎtre des requÊtes in 1624.

[82] Wallingford House. It stood near Charing Cross, upon the site of the Old Buildings of the Admiralty.

[83] There were at this time two Duchesses of Lennox: Catherine Clifton, widow of EsmÉ Stuart, the first duke, and Frances Howard, widow of Ludovic, the second duke, whom James I had created Duke of Richmond, in the peerage of England. As the latter was a vain, ambitious, and intriguing woman, and possessed of considerable influence at Court, it is probable that it was to her that Bassompierre’s visit was paid. The duchess had been married three times. She began her matrimonial experiments with a merchant, a Mr. Prannell; continued them with an earl, Edwin, Earl of Hertford, and concluded with a duke of royal blood. If, however, we are to believe the gossip of the time, she would fain have made yet another, and secured a yet more exalted consort. “For, finding the King (James) a widower, she vowed, after so great a prince as Richmond, never to be blown with kisses or eat at the table of a subject; and this vow must be spread abroad that the King might notice the bravery of her spirit. But this bait would not catch the old king, and she, to make good her resolution, speciously observed her vow to the last.”

[84] Mary Villiers, to whom by letters-patent of August, 1627, the duchy of Buckingham was granted in default of heirs male. Like the lady just mentioned, she was married three times: first, to Lord Herbert, son of Philip, Earl of Pembroke; secondly to James Stuart, Duke of Lennox and Richmond, and, finally, to Thomas Howard, a brother of the Earl of Carlisle. She had no children by any of her husbands.

[85] Presumably, a French translation.

[86] An indignant newsmonger thus enumerates the penances to which the Queen had, or was supposed to have, been subjected: “Had they not also made her, on St. James’s Day, dabble in the dirt, in a foul morning, from Somerset House to St. James’s, her Luciferian confessor riding by her in his coach? Yea, they have made her spin, to go barefoot, to eat her meat out of treen dishes [dishes made of “tree,” i.e., wooden trenchers], to wait at table and serve her servants, with many other ridiculous and absurd penances; and if these rogues dare thus insult over the daughter, sister and wife of so great Kings, what slavery would they not make us, the people, undergo?”—Ellis’s Letters, Pory to Mead, July 1, 1626.

[87] The fogs of England have been in all ages a sore trial to foreigners. Gondomar, Spanish Ambassador in the time of James I, when someone who was going to Spain waited on him to ask whether he had any commands, replied: “Only my compliments to the sun, which I have not seen since I came to England.” Caraccioli, Neapolitan Ambassador to the Court of George II, in a conversation with that monarch, took the liberty of preferring the moon of Naples to the sun of England.

[88] In a letter to d’Herbault, Bassompierre gives details of this agreement: “First, she [the Queen] has re-established—and this is for her conscience—a bishop and ten priests, a confessor and his coadjutor, and ten musicians for her chapel; that of St. Gemmes is to be finished with its cemetery, and another is to be built for her in her palace of Somerset, at the expense of the King her husband. In attendance on her person she will have of her own nation, two ladies of the bedchamber, three bedchamber-women, a sempstress, and a clear-starcher. In regard to her health, two physicians, an apothecary and a surgeon. For her household, a grand chamberlain, an equerry, a secretary, a gentleman usher of the privy chamber and one of the chamber of presence, a baxter-groom, (i.e., baker), a valet. All her officers of the mouth and goblet will be French.” This was, in all conscience, a sufficiently numerous foreign establishment; but it was scanty in comparison with the army of more or less useless persons located at the English Court on the strength of the first treaty, which, including the servants of the higher officials, amounted to more than four hundred.

It was further stipulated that all the priests detained in prison should be set at liberty, and that the pursuivants, or officials whose duty it was to prosecute Catholics who offended against the Penal Laws, should be abolished.

[89] The Danes, like the Germans, were at this time proverbial throughout Europe for their too great indulgence in the pleasures of the table, and it would appear that Bassompierre’s guest was, as an ambassador should be, a worthy representative of his country.

[90] The royal coaches of this and, indeed, of a much later period, were huge structures, not unlike four-poster beds on wheels, for they had no glass and were sheltered by leather curtains. They were capable of holding eight persons, two of whom were perched on niches, called boots, at each door. These places were usually reserved for some favoured guest or friend of the King or Queen. When Philip V of Spain left Versailles to take possession of his kingdom, Louis XIV took his grandson the first stage of his journey in his own coach, which accommodated the whole Royal family. “The two kings and the Duc de Bourgogne,” says Saint Simon, “sat on one side, the Dauphin, the Duchesse de Bourgogne and the Duc de Berry on the other; the Duc and Duchesse d’OrlÉans at either door.” A most illustrious coachful! Coaches were introduced into England in the latter part of Elizabeth’s reign. When the Queen went to St. Paul’s to return thanks for the defeat of the Armada, “she did come in a chariot-throne, with four pillars behind to bear a canopy, on the top whereof was a crown imperial, and two lower pillars before, whereon stood a lion and a dragon, supporters of the arms of England, drawn by two white horses.” Two horses would appear to have been the usual number for some time. Buckingham was the first who ventured on six, which, we are told, was looked upon with strong disapproval, as a mark of the “mastering spirit” of the favourite.

[91] The Moorfields were a walk planted with trees, on the north of the city, comprising the Moorfields property, so called, the Middle Moorfields and the Upper Moorfields. Until the beginning of the previous reign, the Moorfields were, according to Stow, “a most noisome offensive place, being a general laystall, loathsome to both sight and smell, ... but, through the pains and industry of Master Nicholas Leate they were reduced from their former vile condition into most fayre and royale walkes.”

[92] “M. Harber” was no doubt Edward Herbert, the celebrated Lord Herbert of Cherbury, who had been Ambassador in France in 1619.

[93] Pembroke was Lord Steward.

[94] The English “country dance” was a corruption in name of the French contredanse.

[95] “The ground on which this palace stood,” observes Croker, “shelved down from the Strand, where the principal entrance was to the river. The principal floor and state rooms were probably on the level with the entrance on the Strand side, but must have been a story above the ground on the river side; and this story was probably the vaulted apartments which Bassompierre mentions. It seems odd that he should think the vaulting a peculiarity worth mentioning, as the ground floor of the Tuileries and the Louvre, in which he passed most of his life, were vaulted; but vaulted domestic apartments were probably then, as now [1819], extremely rare; and the singular and magnificent effect of vaulted rooms, furnished for the purpose, must have struck a person of Bassompierre’s taste.”

[96] A newsletter preserved in the British Museum, which has been published by Isaac Disraeli, in his Curiosities of Literature, gives the following account of this fÊte:

Sir Philip Gibbs, in his admirable biography of Buckingham, says that this “rare device,” was a political allegory, arranged by the duke himself, with the assistance of his master of the ceremonies, Balthazar Gerbier. “It represented Maria de’ Medici, the Queen-Mother, enthroned in the midst of Neptune’s court upon the sea dividing England and France, and welcoming Frederick and Elizabeth of the Palatinate, with her three daughters and their husbands, the Kings of Spain and England and the Prince of Piedmont. It was Buckingham’s new ideal of foreign policy. France as the ally of England, the Elector Palatine restored to his throne, and peace with Spain. Buckingham’s ideal, alas! was no more substantial than the pasteboard and tinsel and flowing draperies of his actors, and, like the masque, a mockery.”

[97] Although Bassompierre could have been no very good judge of the excellence of an English play, it is to be regretted that he does not tell us what it was. Very probably, it was one of Shakespeare’s, as his patron Montgomery was Lord Chamberlain, in whose department the selection of the plays to be performed before their Majesties lay.

[98] Thomas Howard, Viscount Andover, second son of Thomas Howard, Earl of Suffolk. The title of Earl of Berkshire had been revived in his favour in February, 1626.

[99] English horses were much prized on the Continent, and Bassompierre had been presented with quite a number. Carlisle had given him six, Holland three, and Goring two, and very possibly he may have received others which he does not mention. Unfortunately, as we shall see, few, if any, of these poor animals survived to reach the shores of France.

[100] As Carlisle was a convivial soul, it is not improbable that Lady Exeter’s hospitality may have been responsible for this mishap.

[101] See page 489 supra.

[102] “Seventeen would have been nearer the truth,” observes Croker. “Rymer has preserved the warrant under the sign manual, 27 November, 1626, ‘for the release of and permitting to go abroad of sixteen priests at the intercession of the MarÉschal de Bassompierre, Ambassador Extraordinary from the Most Christian King, our dear brother, the Ambassador engaging to carry them abroad.’ Particular care seems to have been taken to express that this was done in compliment to Bassompierre, as the deed runs: ‘to gratify the said MarÉschal.’ Bassompierre, in his Ambassades, gives the same list as Rymer.”

[103] Monsieur was the chief president; the others were the Cardinal de la Valette, Archbishop of Toulouse, and the MarÉchal de la Force.

[104] He had fought a duel shortly before with Jacques de Matignon, Comte de Thorigny, whom he had killed. La Frette had called Boutteville out, through resentment that he had not accepted him as his second.

[105] This duel, like the one with La Frette, had arisen from the Thorigny affair. Beuvron was a cousin of Thorigny, and he had vowed to avenge his death.

[106] Boutteville left three children: a son, FranÇois, afterwards the celebrated MarÉchal de Luxembourg, and two daughters, the younger of whom, Isabelle, who was one of the most finished coquettes of her time, became Duchesse de ChÂtillon and was for some time the mistress of the Great CondÉ. The poet Charpy celebrated her charms in verses wherein he drew an ingenious comparison between the destruction wrought by her father’s sword and the havoc created by the lady’s beaux yeux:—

[107] So called from the Christian name—Michel—of Marillac, the Keeper of the Seals, who had compiled it.

[108] The news of the condition to which the garrison was reduced had been brought to Fort Louis by a soldier named La Pierre, one of three volunteers who had offered to make an attempt to swim across to the mainland. Of his two companions, one was drowned and the other from exhaustion obliged to surrender to the English. La Pierre himself had a narrow escape from being captured, as he was sighted by some English sailors in a boat and hotly pursued; but, by repeatedly diving, he contrived to elude them. Louis XIII subsequently rewarded his brave deed by a pension of 100 crowns.

[109] Their negotiator and admiral Guiton stipulated that the English should not retain the Île de RÉ or any fortified place on the coast after the termination of hostilities. Thus La Rochelle, as Michelet with justice observes, remained faithful at heart to France.

[110] ClÉment MÉtezeau, a celebrated architect, born at Dreux in 1581. Jean Tiriot was a master-mason of Paris.

[111] Beaulieu Persac was captain of a ship-of-war, which had assisted in the defence of the Île de RÉ.

[112] The Emperor Ferdinand, who naturally did not desire to see a prince so closely connected with France as Charles of Gonzaga in possession of Mantua and Montferrato, had confiscated both the duchy and the marquisate. The Duke of Guastalla, whose pretensions were supported by Spain, claimed Mantua; while Charles Emmanuel had long coveted Montferrato, which, once in his hands, would bar the way from France into Italy. Casale, a very strong place, was the key to the whole difficulty, being then to Italy what Alessandria afterwards became.

[113] Henri d’Escoubleau, at first, Bishop of Maillezais, in Poitou, and, afterwards, Archbishop of Bordeaux. He died in 1645. In 1648 the see of Maillezais was transferred to La Rochelle.

[114] At the north-east point of the Île de RÉ.

[115] The passage between the islands of RÉ and OlÉron.

[116] There were forty cannon in the batteries at Chef de Baie, “which made fine music and were very well served,” and twenty-five at Coreilles.

[117] According to English reports, the whole fleet lost only six men on this occasion; but Bassompierre declares that it lost “nearly 200 men,” and “that one of their best sea-captains, who was in a boat which was badly damaged by a shot from the French batteries, was amongst the slain.” According to the marshal, the French had twenty-seven men killed, of whom four were killed at Coreilles by a shot from the Tour de Saint-Nicholas at La Rochelle. This incident caused great astonishment, as Coreilles had always been considered out of range of the cannon of the town.

[118] Claude Bouthillier, Seigneur de Pont-sur-Seine; Secretary of State, 1628; Surintendant des Finances, 1642; died 1651.

[119] Guiton was banished for a time, when the Cardinal caused him to be recalled and made him captain of a ship-of-war.

[120] See page 311 supra.

[121] The Princess of Piedmont subsequently petitioned her brother for the release of this officer; and Louis XIII gave TrÉville, to whom he had surrendered, a valuable diamond by way of ransom for his prisoner.

[122] He means the nobles who served as volunteers.

[123] Claude, afterwards Duc de Saint-Simon, father of the author of the famous MÉmoires.

[124] The intentions of his Majesty, at least so far as the garrison of Privas was concerned, may be gathered from a letter which he wrote the same day to the Queen-Mother. “They are the best men whom M. de Rohan has, and, in causing them to be hanged, as I shall do, and Saint AndrÉ the first, I shall cut off M. de Rohan’s right arm.”

[125] His followers had apparently obliged Saint-AndrÉ to surrender himself.

[126] Such is the account given of this lamentable affair by Bassompierre, but, according to other contemporary relations, there would appear to have been some excuse for the barbarous conduct of the Royal troops. “Those who had remained in the fort,” writes Louis XIII to the Comte de Noailles, “seeing that they were unable to escape the evil which pressed them, likewise surrendered to my discretion; but, since it was God’s will to destroy them and avenge upon themselves their rebellion and disobedience, He permitted that some among them, inured more and more to evil, deliberately set fire to a great sack containing a quantity of cannon-powder, which blew up him who had set alight to it and some others, both of these wretches and soldiers of the Guards, French and Swiss, whom I had ordered thither to secure this fort and prevent any disorder. My Guards, excited by this evil action, and believing that a mine had been fired against them, were transported with fury, and, contrary to my intention and my orders, killed the greater part of those who had thrown themselves into the said fort.”

But if there were extenuating circumstances in the case of the soldiers, there was certainly no excuse for Louis XIII following up the massacre by the execution of a number of the survivors. He even wanted to hang the brave Saint-AndrÉ, and would have done so, but for the intervention of Richelieu. There was between the King and the Cardinal this great difference—that the latter was rigorous only when his interests or policy demanded it, whereas the former was cruel by nature.

[127] Now the chief town of the arrondissement of Castel-Sarrasin, in the Department of Tarn-et-Garonne.

[128] Donatien de MaillÉ, Marquis de Kerman, Comte de MaillÉ. He was killed in a duel in 1652.

[129] Richelieu’s niece, Madame de Combalet, afterwards Duchesse d’Aiguillon, was dame d’atours (mistress of the robes) to Marie de’ Medici.

[130] Charles de la Porte, afterwards Duc and MarÉchal de la Meilleraye, was Captain of the Queen-Mother’s guards.

[131] Monsieur had returned to France at the beginning of February, 1630, after the King had granted him the duchy of Valois, as an addition to his appanage, the lieutenancy-general in the OrlÉanais, and a large sum of money.

[132] Henri Auguste de LomÉnie, Seigneur de la Ville-aux-Clercs, Secretary of State.

[133] Charles Guillemeau, physician-in-ordinary to the King.

[134] With the Queen-Mother.

[135] For Versailles.

[136] See p. 402 supra.

[137] Jean d’Armaignac, one of the King’s valets de chambre.

[138] “On the morrow, the MarÉchal de Bassompierre, who had come to Senlis to meet the King, was arrested in the morning by de Launay, lieutenant of the Gardes du Corps, and brought by the Musketeers and the Light Horse of the King to the Bastille. He was very much regretted in Paris on account of his open-heartedness and good-nature. He was the least distressed by it of all, and took his misfortune as a jest. He was imprisoned, not so much for what he had done as for what he might do.”—Copy of a journal of the Court in the Godefroy collection, cited by the Marquis de ChantÉrac. MÉmoires du MarÉchal de Bassompierre (Édition SociÉtÉ de l’Histoire de France).

[139] Charles Le Clerc, Seigneur du Tremblay, younger brother of PÈre Joseph.

[140] Montmorency met his death with calm resignation and Christian fortitude, and, after hearing his sentence, begged that the time of his execution might be hastened by two hours, in order that he might die at the same hour as his Saviour. As a proof that he died with no feeling of resentment against Richelieu, he bequeathed to the Cardinal a painting of the martyrdom of St. Sebastian, one of the finest pictures in his possession.

[141] Madame de Motteville, MÉmoires.

[142] Ibid.

[143] Nicole Henriette de Bassompierre.

[144] Anne Mangot, Seigneur de Villarceaux. He was Intendant of justice and Finance in the Three Bishoprics.

[145] Not long after this, the Cardinal asked Bassompierre for the loan of the house with the magnificence of which he had taunted him. It is needless to say that the request was granted, though the marshal was obliged to turn out the Duchesse de Nemours, to whom he had lent it.

[146] In the summer of 1636, an army of Spaniards and Netherlanders invaded Picardy, crossed the Somme, took Corbie and threatened Paris, in which for a time the greatest alarm prevailed.

[147] The Comte de Cramail had been arrested and brought to the Bastille in 1638. He had been so ill-advised as to speak against the Cardinal in the presence of the King.

[148] Marie Criton d’Estourmel, dame de Gravelle. Tallemant des RÉaux asserts that she had, while in the Bastille, where she remained several years, an amourette with Bassompierre.

[149] Son of Saint-Luc and the marshal’s sister, Henriette de Bassompierre.

[150] The Governor of the Bastille was allowed thirty-six livres a day for the maintenance of a marshal of France.

[151] Tallemant des RÉaux, Historiettes, art. Bassompierre.