[533] Walsingham to Burghley, 18th July, 1572. Grotius, Ann. p. 37, says 5000 foot and 500 horse.
[534] Alva’s letters of 13th and 21st June, and 18th July.
[535] The Grand Seignor heard of the proposed Flemish war, and offered to help Charles with two galleys and some troops. Sully: Mém. i. p. 15 (Engl. ed.).
[536] Baschet, p. 540: “La guerra per quattro o sei di continui fu tenuta deliberata.” Tommaseo: Relations Vénitiennes, ii. p. 171.
[537] “Tuttavia ne far ogni maggiore istanza.” See also his letters dated 20th and 23d August. Alberi: Vita di Caterina de Medici, 4to. Florence, 1838.
[538] Digges, p. 231.
[539] Letter to Burghley. Digges, pp. 231–234.
[540] Sir Thomas Smith writes 22d August: “There is no revocation (recall of troops) done nor meant.” Digges, p. 237.
[541] The Memoirs of Tavannes put this beyond a doubt.
[542] Digges, p. 234.
[543] Favyn says 10th June; an inscription in the État de France gives Idus Junii (13th).
[544] Letter to Mdlle. de Guillerville, 12 June, 1572; Paris. Cab. Hist. ii. p. 227. Sir H. Norris testifies to the unhealthiness of Paris: he took a house beyond the walls, “to be out of the corrupt air of the town, which surely is such as none other to be compared to Paris.” Wright: Elizabeth, i. 306. See also Coryat: Crudities.
[545] Mdlle. Vauvilliers, whose conscientious biography of Joan of Navarre is marred by the absence of dates and authorities, says that an autopsy was several times ordered, but never made (iii. p. 194). On the other hand, the Chronologie Novennaire expressly states that Caillard, her physician, and Desnœuds, her surgeon, dissected the queen’s brain, which they found in a sound state. On her death, see Villegomblain: Mém. des Troubles, i. 259; Bury: Hist. Henri IV. (4to. Paris, 1765); Favyn: Hist. Navarre, p. 863 (fol. Paris, 1612).
[546] Lettres missives de Henri IV. i. p. 31. Collect. des Doc. Hist. France.
[547] Matthieu, I. liv. vi. p. 343. A long list of these warnings will be found in the Reveille-Matin.
[548] “Non solo con le parole ma con gli effetti;” and Michieli adds, “quanto agli effetti, quello che è poi seguito contra gli Ugonotti.”
[549] Michieli: Relazione; Baschet. Salviati wrote (24th August): “Quando scrissi ai giorni passati che l’ammiraglio s’avanza troppo, e che gli darebbero sù l’unghe (a rap on the knuckles), già mi era accorto che non lo volevano più tollerare.” Walsingham was quite of Coligny’s opinion about the war.
[550] Tavannes says: “There was no other resolution for the massacre than what the admiral and his adherents occasioned.”
[551] Grabut says the marriage took place, “Gregorii XIII. permissu.” Acta Sanctorum.
[552] “Lunedì (25 Agosto) la corte se ritira a Fontanablo, dove la regina farà il suo parto.” Petrucci, letter 20th August. On the 23d, giving Duke Cosmo an account of the attempt on the admiral’s life, he says: “Si pensava che la corte partisse martedì prossimo” (26th August).
[553] Davila says that when she was asked whether she would take Henry for her husband, she made no reply, and that Charles with his own hand bent her head as if to nod assent. Margaret is silent on the matter.
[554] Charles IX. to Ferrails, 24th August: “All my subjects have exhibited the greatest joy and contentment” at the marriage. It is clear from this letter that the dispensation had not arrived. Raumer, i. 281.
[555] This is in direct contradiction to Tavannes, who says: “il continue ses audaces, importune, se fâche, menace de partir,” etc. P. 416.
[556] We abridge rather than translate Anjou’s narrative, whose authenticity is doubtful. It will not bear minute comparison with other statements of indisputable truthfulness.
[557] See Salviati’s letter of 24th August. Mackintosh: Hist. England. Anjou does not mention the presence of the duke at this meeting.
[558] “Maurevers et non pas Maurevel,” according to the Art de Vérifier, but erroneously; he is also called Moruel, Montravel, Maurevert, and Moureveil. His real name was Louvier, sire de Maurevert en Brie. For his murderous services he was rewarded with two good abbeys. L’Estoile’s Journal. He accompanied Marshal de Retz on his embassy to England in 1573, and on his arriving at Greenwich, where the court was staying, he was recognized by a page, and pointed out as “the admiral’s murderer!” A shout of execration was raised, he was chased by the rabble, and never dared show himself again. Etat de France, ii. 217. He was killed in 1583, in the Rue St. Honoré, by young Arthur Mouy, who was immediately after shot by one of the guards who always attended the tueur du roi. Villegomblain, Mém. p. 144. Journal du Règne de Henri III. p. 71, ed. Cologne, 1672. This last epithet could hardly have been earned by the commission of one murder—that of Mouy. At the siege of Rochelle, none of the principal officers would associate with him, and he was sent to an isolated post. See Bouillon’s Memoirs, p. 14.
[559] Some writers have supposed that through her daughter Margaret, Catherine discovered a scheme concerted between Charles and Coligny to banish both her and the Guises from court; and that a common danger made her combine with Duke Henry to crush the Huguenots, trusting to find the means afterward of counterbalancing the house of Lorraine.
[560] It was the hotel of the Counts of Ponthieu; and in the 18th century became an inn, under the title, “Hotel de Lisieux.” Hommes illustres de la France, 1747.
[561] He left with a “sad and dejected countenance,” says the Reveille-Matin: “Si facesse pallido e restasse smarrito oltro modo, e senza dir parola si ritirasse.” Giovanni Michieli, Relazioni, November, 1572.
[562] Letter of Petrucci, 23d August. Archiveo Mediceo.
[563] Cimber, vii. p. 211.
[564] Michieli, the Venetian embassador, says that Guise had nothing to do with it (Baschet: Relazioni, p. 551), and adds that on Friday night the queen and Anjou told Charles of the plot.
[565] The Neustadt letter has “Brüdern und Mütter.” Archiv. f. Geschichte, etc. xvii. 1826 p. 278 (8vo. Wien). This periodical contains a curious letter from an eye-witness of the massacre addressed to L. Gruter, bishop of Wiener-Neustadt, entitled Relation der franz. auff St. Bartholomäi Tag vorgegangenen erschröcklischen Execution über die Hugenoten, 1572, den 24 Augusti, anno 1572.
[566] With a few verbal changes, the account of this interview is taken from Golding’s Life of Jasper Coligny. London, 1576.
[567] La Chapelle des Ursins made the same reproach to Catherine, July, 1572. St. Foix: Hist. Ordre Saint-Esprit, i. p. 203.
[568] “So ime auf den Füss trette, wolle er demsellben auf die Versen tretten.” Neustadt Letter, p. 278.
[569] “Hic regi in arcano quædam a Colinio insinuata divulgatum est; alii tamen negant et secretum hoc de industria a regina impeditum, ne....” De Thou.
[570] This is from Anjou’s narrative; but whether proceeding from him, or De Retz (as some think), there are no means of testing it.
[571] “Il avait alentour de lui neuf médecins et onze chirurgiens.” Mém. de l’État de France, ii. 31 b.
[572] La Noue.
[573] The Hôtel de Clisson, afterward de la Miséricorde, was purchased by the Duchess of Guise in 1553. The old gate-way forms the entrance to the modern École des Chartes.
[574] “Le malheur avait voulu que Maurevel avait failli son coup.” Mém. de Marguerite.
[575] “Se l’archibugiata ammazava subito l’ammiraglio, non mi risolvo a credere che si fosse a un pezzo.” Salviati’s letter of August 24.
[576] This meeting is not mentioned in Anjou’s narrative; but there must have been some such preliminary consultation between the conspirators.
[577] Catherine afterward asserted that she had desired the death of six men only: “Reginam dictitare se tantum sex hominum interfectorum sanguinem in suam conscientiam recipere.” Serranus: Status Reipubl. x. 29.
[578] It is stated in the Neustadt letter that the Swiss soldiers of Navarre mounted guard inside the house, while the French guard were posted outside, immediately after the king’s visit on Friday, and that the pass-word was very strict, in order to prevent any fresh attempt on the admiral’s life. Archiv. für Geschichte, etc. xvii. 1826, p. 278.
[579] Paris: Cabinet Hist. ii. 259.
[580] Archives de Mons.
[581] Digges, p. 254.
[582] Brantome calls De Retz the first and principal adviser of the deed; Davila says that he obtained the king’s consent to the massacre; and Margaret states that the queen-mother sent him to Charles between nine and ten o’clock at night, “because he (De Retz) had more influence with him,” and that he justified his mother and Anjou for trying to get rid of that pest “the admiral.” Tavannes partly supports these statements. I give the preference (reluctantly) to Anjou’s narrative, because it removes much of the confusion which would otherwise envelop the remainder of this eventful day.
[583] On this Menselius remarks, that if the account be true, “Ipse (Anjou) cum matre minime cædis detestandæ particeps habendus esset, sed solus rex Carolus eandem animo concessisset.” Bibliotheca Historica, vii. pars 2a, p. 213. Lipsiæ, 1795. Few will agree with the conclusion.
[584] Juan de Olaegni says that Marcel, “cabeça de los vezinos,” was sent for, but the city registers say Le Charron. Gachard: Particularités inédites in Bull. Acad. Sci. Bruxelles, xvi. 1849, p. 235. If the “au soir bien tard” of Anjou’s narrative means “late in the afternoon,” there were probably two meetings, at the latter of which Marcel was present.
[585] “Envoiez et portez ... de fort grand matin.” Registres in Cimber’s Archives Curieuses.
[586] Réveille-Matin. Margaret, writing twenty-four years after the event, says that Henry, by the king’s advice, had invited them to the Louvre, where they would be safer in case of tumult. I give the preference to her statement.
[587] Mr. Froude (x. 397) writes Malin, which is probably a misprint.
[588] Favyn (Hist. Navarre, p. 867) says that after supper, “about eleven o’clock,” the king went down to his forge with Navarre, Condé, and others, where they all worked as usual, until between one and two, when the tocsin was rung.
[589] The Réveille-Matin and the Mém. État de France say, “attended only by a fille-de-chambre.”
[590] “Ainsi que le jour commençait à poindre.” Now as the sun rose that day at five o’clock, this would make it a little after four, which does not harmonize with other statements.
[591] We must remember that Anjou is vindicating himself, and that his narrative, like the confession of a criminal, endeavors to extenuate his crime.
[592] According to Burg, he, Koch, and Grunenfelder were the admiral’s murderers; he does not mention Dianowitz. “At unus [M.K.] e tribus audacior bipenni (i. e., halberd) ilium miserum transfixit, tertio ipse [C.B.] eum graviter percussit, itaque septimo tactus tandem (mirum!) in caminum cecidit.” Letter of August 26, from Joachim Opserus, then at the College of Clermont, to the Abbot of St. Gall. Archives de l’Hist. Suisse, Zürich, ii. 1827. The Neustadt letter does not corroborate this account.
[593] The Neustadt letter says the admiral was in bed, pretending to be asleep: “Danach wider zu Beth gelegt, und schlaffendt angenomen, dan er woll gedacht es wurde ime ietzo gelten.” P. 279.
[594] A similar story—too well founded on the traditions of Würtemberg to admit of doubt—is told of the reformer Brenz (Brentius); but in his case the period during which the hen supplied him with food was eight days.
[595] “Tened piedad de la vejez,” writes Olaegui.
[596] Beza: Mors Ciceronis.
[597] Juan de Olaegui says that Guise “le dió un pistoletazo en la cabeza,” and then flung him from the window. This is probably the pistol-shot which so alarmed the royal murderers at the Louvre, though another report (Alva’s Bulletin) says it was fired at the body as it lay dead in the court-yard. The Neustadt letter represents Coligny as struggling vigorously against four Swiss soldiers (das irer vier kümmerlich ime bezwingen mögten), and that a French soldier killed him by shooting him in the mouth. Behm was rewarded with the hand of a natural daughter of Cardinal Lorraine, and Philip II. gave him 6000 scudi (ostensibly as a dowry) for his life. See Petrucci’s letter (September 16, 1572), in Alberi, Vita di Caterina, p. 149. In 1575 he was captured by the Huguenots near Jarnac, as he was returning from Spain, and put to death.
[598] Alva’s Bulletin. Tavannes says: “embrasse la fenêtre;” Serranus: “brachio fenestræ columnam complectitur, ibi acceptis aliquot vulneribus.”
[599] It is uncertain to whom the disgrace of this last indignity attaches, some imputing the cowardly act to Angoulême. Alva, who was instructed by Gomicourt, says Guise did it; so also the Journal de Henri III.: “Le roi donna un coup de pied ... ainsi que le Duc de Guise en avait donné au feu amiral,” p. 118. (Cologne, 1672.)
[600] The Neustadt letter says it was cut off for the sake of the reward: “damit noch 2000 Kronen zu gewinnen.” Alva says: “la mettant au bout de son épée, la portait par la ville, criant, Voilà la tête d’un méchant.” Bulletin, p. 563. He adds the body was torn in pieces by the mob, so that “jamais on n’en sût recouvrer pièce.” At the time Gomicourt wrote to Alva, it was not known what had become of it.
[601] Malgaigne, the latest biographer of Paré, does not believe the tradition that the great surgeon was specially saved from massacre, and denies that he was a Huguenot.
[602] Some writers make him two or three years younger.
[603] De Civilibus Galliæ dissentionibus, lib. 2, Nos. 39 and 52, apud Martene, Veter. Script. tom. v. 1459. Jacques Coppier, in a versified pamphlet on the massacre, called the Déluge des Huguenots, calls the admiral “Ce grand Caspar au curedent.”
[604] Harleian MSS. No. 1625. In the Complainte et Regretz du G. de C. (Paris, 1572) the dead admiral is supposed to express his regret: “J’ai honni ma maison en trahissant la France—Et ruiné les miens par mon outrecuidance.” See also another abusive pamphlet: Le Discours sur la Mort du G. de C., Paris.
[605] Coryat (p. 16) describes it as “the fairest gallows” he ever saw. It was on a hill, and consisted of fourteen pillars of freestone, and was “made in the time of the Guisian massacre to hang the admiral.” In this he is wrong; other authorities reckon sixteen pillars on a stone platform, tied together by two rows of beams. The bodies were left a prey to beasts and birds; and the bones fell into a charnel where the filth of the streets was shot. Le Gibet de M. by Firmin-Maillard, 18mo. Paris, 1863; Des Anciennes fourches patibulaires de M., by M. de la Villegille, Paris, 1836.
[606] “After the massacre his body was exposed with the eternal tooth-pick in his mouth.” Edinb. Review, cxxiv. 1866, p. 369. This is a mistake, the body was headless.
[607] “Graveolentiam scilicet hostilium cadaverum, quibusvis odoribus et pigmentis esse sibi fragrantiorem.”
[608] Even Brantome is disgusted: he says the smell is certainly not sweet; “point bonne, et la parole aussi mauvaise.”
[609] The Neustadt letter says that Teligny offered to ransom his life for 1000 crowns, which the captain agreed to accept if Guise would permit him. “I am a poor fellow, and 1000 will be of great use to me.”—“You are a fool,” answered the duke; “don’t you think the king will reward you better?” Teligny and his wife were poniarded. Teligny’s wife was not killed; she afterward married William of Orange.
[611] The tower on the Quai de l’Horloge, pointed out to strangers as that from which the signal was given, is of later date.
[612] “Á las iij horas de la mañana.” Olaegui. Beza’s account would place it a little later. “C’était au point du jour.” Mém. de l’État de France, i. 217.
[613] Jean de Gorris, years after his conversion, was so terrified at seeing his litter surrounded by soldiers, whom he imagined about to repeat the heresies of the Saint Bartholomew, that he was struck with paralysis.
[614] The sun rose at 5h. 6m. on August 24.
[615] There are great difficulties in fixing the time of this murderous scene. Davila and the Neustadt letter (p. 272) place it before the ringing of the tocsin, that is to say, before day-light; while it is hard to believe that Margaret could be mistaken, or that the murders were committed after the tocsin. Probably it was a little after four o’clock, as from an experiment made last 24th August, it would not have been possible to distinguish the king’s features earlier.
[616] The Neustadt letter says the night was far advanced (folgentz spädt in der Nacht) when the king sent for Henry, after which the Duke of Bouillon posted the soldiers told off to murder the Huguenot gentlemen.
[617] Margaret says thirty or forty, which is more probable.
[618] French history has an unfortunate habit of repeating itself in its worst characteristics:—“He is at the outer gate, conducted into a howling sea; forth under an arch of wild sabres, axes, and pikes; and sinks hewn asunder. And another sinks, and another, and there forms a piled heap of corpses, and the kennels were red.” Carlyle: French Revolution (September 4–6, 1792), pt. 3, bk. 1.
[619] Etat de Fr. i. 209 b; at ii. 25. Henry of Navarre is said to have witnessed the murders.
[620] Discours simple et véritable, p. 36. Only two days before this, Charles and De Pilles had bathed together in the Seine, the latter holding the king’s chin and teaching him how to swim. Brantome: Hom. Ill. x. p. 193.
[621] De Furoribus Gallicis; Réveille-Matin, etc.
[622] “Non sine magno et effuso risu.” Serranus.
[623] The name of this individual is not of importance; but he is called Lerac by Brantome, and Teyran by Mongez. Hist. Marg. de Valois. He was probably Gabriel de Levis, Viscount of Léran, the “Leiranus” of De Thou, and Leyran of Laval and Piguerre.
[624] Some accounts place this scene on the 26th, after Charles returned from the lit de justice. Did he threaten them twice? A similar threat is recorded on September 9, when Elizabeth his queen intervened with tears.
[625] The same figure is used by the author of the Illustre Orbandole, où Hist. de Châlons-sur-Saone. Lyon, 1672, b. 1, pt. 2, p. 10. “Une saignée fut si sagement ordonnée pour éteindre la chaleur d’une fièvre que des remèdes plus doux n’avait (sic) fait qu’irriter.”
[626] Cimber, Arch. Cur. vii. 217, Registres. Réveille-Matin, 64. Mezeray, iii. p. 258. Mém. État de France, i. 216.
[627] Comptes de l’Hotel-de-Ville, Félibien, ii. 1121.
[628] Bussy thus effectually gained his suit about the earldom of Renel. “Hérite-t-on, Seigneur, de ceux qu’on assassine?”
[630] It is written Odet Petit in Duplessis-Mornay’s Memoirs.
[631] Supra, p. 343.
[632] Pasquier, Lettres, p. 363. Some Englishmen are reported to have defended themselves successfully.
[633] In a receipt for his stipend (penes auct.) dated 1563, he is called “Seigneur de la Ramée,” and a “noble et scientifique personne.”
[634] There is a picture by Robert Fleury, exhibited about 1840, in which Ramus is represented sitting up in a bed on the floor, while his servant listens anxiously at the door.
[635] Chronographia, p. 776, fol. Paris, 1600.
[636] “Nobis vel potius reip. satis pœnarum dedit.” In the dedication of his “Comparison between Plato and Aristotle,” published in January, 1573, Charpentier compliments the Cardinal of Lorraine on the “brilliant and sweet day that shone over France in the month of August last.” Dorat says of Ramus punningly: “Maximum ramum maxima furca decet.”
[637] Claude Haton says he was killed “more than a week after the declaration,” as he was riding to his court.
[638] Now the Quai de la Mégisserie, between the Pont Neuf and the Pont au Change.
[639] Jacques Coppier jests on the bodies “envoyés à Rouen sans bateau.” Another writer thus plays on the memorable mot of Charles IX.:
A pamphleteer declares:
[640] Agrippa d’Aubigné gives us the sequel of this man’s history. He assumed a hermit’s frock, and murdered the passengers he lured to his hermitage, “so unquenchable was his thirst for blood.” He met his tardy reward on the gibbet.
[641] Journ. de Henri III., i. p. 32 (anno 1574).
[642] Le Tocsain, p. 145 (Rheims, 1579).
[643] Fronde says hastily, that the story rests only on the “worthless authority of Brantome.” Hist. Engl. x. 406. Now Brantome was a terrible gossip, but what could induce him to coin such a detestable story? Smedley (Prot. Ref. France, ii. 367) also says, “the fact is not mentioned by D’Aubigné,” which a subsequent note will show to be a mistake. Mezeray (Abrégé, 1665) says: “Le roy ... tâchait de les canarder;” Bossuet: “Le roi qui les tirait par les fenêtres.” The Réveille-Matin, published in 1574, mentions it: so that the story was at least contemporaneous.
[644] Mém. État de France, i. 1579 (2d ed.), 212 b.
[645] “De laquelle ce prince giboyait de la fenêtre,” ed. 1626, p. 548. In his poem of Les Tragiques he refers to the same report, using the same characteristic expression:
This paints the king firing on the yet living bodies as they floated down the river. Agrippa is not an authority for the fact; but it is something to show that the report existed so early. I am told that a plate of the time represents this window as walled up. If this be true, why was it closed?
[646] Du Cerceau farther tells us that, at the time when the first part of his work appeared, the great gallery intended to unite the Louvre with the Tuileries had been begun.
[647] The time was about five, which gave him two hours’ start of Guise.
[648] Memoirs of Sully (transl.), 4to. London, 1761, p. 27.
[649] Mém. et Corresp. de Duplessis-Mornay (8vo. Paris, 1824–34), i. p. 45. He escaped to Rye, which, after suffering from a severe pestilence, had been “replenished by the French, who sheltered themselves here from the great massacre ...; so that, in 1582, were found inhabiting here 1534 persons of that nation.” Jeake (Sam.): Charters of the Cinque Ports (Lond. 1728), p. 108.
[650] Granvelle, hearing that L’Hopital and his wife were murdered, writes exultingly, and hopes that Catherine will soon be disposed of. See Michelet: La Ligue, p. 475.
[651] Mém. authentiques de Jacques Nompar de Caumont: ed. by Marquis de la Grange, 8vo. Paris, 1843. Voltaire in his poetry adopts Mezeray’s account, that the father and his two sons lay in the same bed; that two were killed, and the third saved as by a miracle: but in his notes to the Henriade accepts the true version. De Thou and Sismondi also adopt the erroneous story.