THE FORMATION OF THE TRIUMVIRATE
The factional rivalry which had been engendered during the course of
the session of the States-General at Orleans was so great that this
discord, combined with the agitation prevailing on account of religion,
seemed ominous of civil war, and “every accident was interpreted
according to the passions of the persons concerned.”[326] The affair
of the custody of the seal created bitter feeling for a time between
the duke of Guise and the king of Navarre, until the former out of
policy and the latter either from policy or lack of courage, affected
to become reconciled. The Guises realized that they had suffered a
serious blow politically through the death of Francis II and Catherine
was shrewd enough to know that while she controlled the seal, she was
the keeper of the King’s authority. The prince of Condé was a double
source of friction. In the first place, his trial for treason was
still pending before the Parlement of Paris.[327] The queen mother
was anxious to have the cause settled out of court, for if condemned
(which was unlikely) the whole Bourbon family would be disgraced as
formerly through the treason of the constable Bourbon in 1527, and if
acquitted, the prince would not rest until he had been avenged of his
enemies. Accordingly, she caused a letter to be written in the King’s
name instructing the Parlement to dismiss the case. But the mettlesome
spirit of the prince resented this process, and his discontent was
increased to furious anger when the duke of Guise recommended that all
the evidence be burned and prosecution be dropped, although his opinion
was that legally Condé could not be acquitted as the trial so far had
proved him to have been implicated in the revolt of Lyons.[328] To
both parties Catherine de Medici steadily replied that she had written
the letter in order to adjust the affairs of the prince of Condé to
his honor and to the satisfaction of all, and that the seal was in
her hands. On March 15 the prince was readmitted to the Privy Council;
but the Parlement was not disposed to drop the case so easily and
deliberated at length upon the matter, finally on June 13, going on
record, in a delicately balanced pronouncement which was intended to
please all parties concerned and satisfied none.[329]
A new source of friction was the vacant government of Champagne
which the queen gave to the duke of Nemours. This offended Antoine
of Navarre, because he wanted to have it conferred upon the prince
of Condé.[330] To these dissensions, finally, must be added a recent
ruling of the Privy Council, in compliance with one of the resolutions
of the States-General, that all bishops, including the cardinals, were
to return to their sees.[331] This regulation eliminated some of the
leaders of both parties, the cardinal of Lorraine on the one hand and
the cardinal de Châtillon on the other, to the discomfiture of both
parties. Only the cardinal Tournon, whose great age made him harmless
and who really wanted to pass the rest of his life in retirement, and
the cardinal of Bourbon whose easy disposition also made him harmless,
were permitted to stay with the court.
Philip II of Spain had been an attentive follower of all that had
happened in France since the early autumn of 1560 and had been kept
thoroughly informed by his indefatigable ambassador. His disquietude
over the death of Francis II and the new direction of affairs in France
was so great[332] that in January Philip sent Don Juan de Manrique,
his grand master of artillery, to Orleans, ostensibly to perform the
office of condolence and congratulation,[333] but in reality to win
over the constable, to harden the policy of the French government
toward the Huguenots, to persuade it against the project of a national
council,[334] and to promote Philip’s purposes regarding the marriage
of Mary Queen of Scots, to Don Carlos, Philip’s son.
Catherine de Medici soon divined both the purpose and the danger, and
her alarm was correspondingly great, because the increasing confusion
in the realm on account of religion every day made Spanish intervention
more possible,[335] One of two results seemed certain to happen: either
that things would end with the Huguenots having churches in which they
could preach, read, and perform their rites according to their doctrine
without hindrance, as they had temporarily obtained churches by the
declaration of Fontainebleau, at the end of August, in compliance with
the resolution presented by the admiral; or else that obedience to the
Pope and to the Catholic rites would be enforced at the point of the
sword, and a manifest and certain division in the kingdom would result,
with civil war as the consequence. When Francis II died, a great number
who had fled to Geneva and Germany after the conspiracy of Amboise
came back to France. For the government of Charles IX had inaugurated
the new reign by a declaration of toleration (January 7, 1561) which,
although Calvin disapproved it,[336] may yet with reason be regarded
as a liberal edict. The Protestants were not slow to profit by the
change, and flocked back from Switzerland and Germany and resumed
their propaganda, one phase of which was a vilification of Rome and
the Guises to such an extent that the King protested to the Senate of
Geneva regarding their abuse.[337] Paris soon abounded with Huguenot
preachers from Geneva, who relied upon the division in the council
or the protection of persons in power for the maintenance of the new
edict.[338]
In some provinces, such as Normandy,[339] Touraine, Poitou,
Gascony,[340] and the greater part of Languedoc, Dauphiné, and
Provence, congregations and meetings were openly held. Guyenne save
Bordeaux, was badly infected with heresy.[341] The new religion
penetrated so deeply that it affected every class of persons, even the
ecclesiastical body itself, not only priests, friars, and nuns, but
even bishops and many of the principal prelates. Among all classes
there were Huguenot sympathizers, the nobility perhaps more manifestly
than any other class.[342] The congregations of Rouen and Dieppe sent
to the King for license to preach the word of God openly. In Dieppe the
Calvinists once a day met in a great house, “of men, women and children
above 2,000 in company.”[343] There were Huguenot outbursts at Angers,
Mans, Beauvais, and Pontoise, in April, and at Toulouse in June.[344]
At Beauvais when the cardinal of Châtillon, who was bishop there,
caused the Calvinist service to be conducted and communion administered
in his chapel, “after the manner of Geneva,” the canons and many of the
people “assembled to good numbers to have wrought their wicked wills
upon the cardinal.” Some were hurt and killed in the trouble, and one
poor wretch was brought before the cardinal’s gate and burned.[345] A
similar riot took place in Paris, on April 28, in the evening, near the
Pré-aux-Clercs.
As a result of these excesses things took a sterner turn. A new measure
interdicted Huguenot meetings, even in private houses; and all persons
of every condition _in Paris_ were required to observe the Catholic
religion.[346] The attitude of Paris was ominous for the future. The
populace was wholly Catholic and hostile to religious change,[347] and
was strongly supported by the Sorbonne and the Parlement.[348] The
Sorbonne freely let it be understood that it would never obey any order
issued to the injury of the Catholic religion, asserting that whenever
the crown changed faith and religion, the people were absolved from
the oath of fealty and were not bound to obey.[349] The words “civil
war” were on the lips of all who were attentively observing events.
“Between the two parties, justice is so little feared,” wrote the duke
of Bedford, “and policy has so little place that greater things are to
be dreaded.”[350]
The responsibility for the government’s vacillation at this season
is not to be imputed wholly to Catherine de Medici.[351] It is to
be remembered that France was under a double regency, and that the
weakness of the king of Navarre materially embarrassed affairs. At this
moment he seemed to be inclined toward the faith of Rome in the hope
of conciliating Philip II of Spain, in order to recover the kingdom
of Navarre. The Spanish ambassador and the Guises naturally made the
most of his aspiration, the former telling Antoine that although it was
impossible to obtain what he claimed from His Catholic Majesty by mere
force, he might make a fair agreement with Philip by maintaining France
in the true faith.[352]
During these months of tension and tumult, the ambassador worked out
a scheme, which in principle was that of Philip II, but the details
were of Chantonnay’s own arrangement. The aim was to form a group of
influential persons at the court, who should begin by complaints of
the government’s policy and then proceed to threats and dark hints
of the displeasure of Spain, finally presenting a bold front to
Catherine, and compelling her to abandon her policy of temporizing
and moderation. The constable Montmorency was the objective leader
of this cabal, and his persuasion to the enterprise was one of the
secret purposes of the mission of Don Juan de Manrique. While this
envoy bore letters expressing Philip’s esteem to all the most notable
Catholics at the French court, there was a distinction between them.
The king of Spain wrote in common to the duke of Guise, the constable,
the duke of Montpensier, the chancellor, and the marshals St. André
and Brissac,[353] and a joint note to the cardinals of Lorraine
and Tournon.[354] But Montmorency and St. André each also received
a separate letter. The discrimination shows the wonderfully keen
penetration of Philip’s ambassador, for these two were destined to be
two of the three pillars of the famous Triumvirate.[355] In reply the
cardinal of Lorraine hastened to inform Philip II of his deep interest
in maintaining the welfare of Catholicism.[356] But it required time
and adroitness to overcome the constable’s prejudice against Spain, and
his attachment to his nephews.[357]
In the meantime, before the constable was persuaded, the cabal made
formidable headway by winning Claude de l’Aubespine to its cause. This
paved the way for an action which, if Catherine de Medici could have
known it, would have thrown her into consternation indeed. For Claude
de l’Aubespine’s brother Sebastian, the bishop of Limoges, was Charles
IX’s ambassador in Spain. On April 4, 1561, the latter addressed a
secret letter to Philip II of Spain describing the turmoil in France
and thanking him, in the queen’s name, for the “bons et roiddes
offices” of Chantonnay.[358]
Coincident with this event, things in France had come to a head
precisely as Philip and his ambassador had planned to have them. At
this juncture Montmorency took a decisive stand. When the constable
saw that meat was being freely eaten during these Lenten days; that
Protestant service was held in the chambers of the admiral and the
prince of Condé; that Catherine de Medici invited Jean de Montluc,
the heretic bishop of Valence, to preach at court on Easter Sunday,
the old warrior’s spirit rose in revolt. In vain his eldest son, the
marshal Montmorency, pleaded that his father’s fears were exaggerated
and his prejudices too deep-seated. The old man was firm in his
convictions, in which he was sustained by his wife, Madeleine of Savoy,
a bitter adversary of Calvinism.[359] Moreover, the political as well
as religious demands of the Huguenot party, especially the demands
of certain of the local estates, which advocated drastic reform,
alarmed him. The whole power of the political Huguenots was directed
against the constable, the duke of Guise, the cardinal of Lorraine,
and the marshals Brissac and St. André, the leaders of the party being
determined to call them to account for their peculations during the
reign of Henry II and his successor, and to force them to surrender the
excessive grants which had been given them.[360]
On the evening of April 6, 1561, Montmorency, after having expostulated
with the queen, invited the duke of Guise, the duke de Montpensier the
prince of Joinville, the marshal St. André, and the cardinal Tournon to
dine with him. In his apartments that famous association named by the
Huguenots the Triumvirate, in which the constable, Guise, and St. André
were principals, was formed.[361]
The preparations of the Guises during the former year enabled the
Triumvirate rapidly to lay its plans. Spanish, Italian, German, and
Swiss forces could be counted upon and procured within a very short
time. These forces were to be divided under the command of the duke
of Aumale and the three marshals, Brissac, Termes, and St. André. In
order to support these troops, the Catholic clergy were to be assessed
according to the incomes they enjoyed; cardinals 4,000 to 5,000 livres
per annum; bishops 1,000 to 1,200; abbots 300 to 400, priors 100 to
120; and so on down to chaplains, whose annual stipend was but 30
livres, and who were only assessed a few sous. But as some immediate
means were necessary, the gold and the silver of some of the churches,
and the treasure of certain monasteries was to be appropriated at once,
receipts being given for the value of the gold taken, and promise being
made that reimbursement would be made shortly out of the confiscations
made from the heretics.[362]
Catherine de Medici’s plan to govern through the constable
Montmorency and the admiral,[363] leaving Antoine of Navarre only
nominal authority, received an abrupt shock when the Triumvirate was
established. Her policy partook of both doubt and fear, and vacillated
more than ever.[364]
But more formidable than the project to organize insurrection at
home, thus promoted by the Triumvirate, was the foreign policy it
adopted. The Triumvirate formally appealed to Philip II for aid.[365]
The response was not slow in forthcoming, though the royal word was
prudently couched in vague terms.[366] To make matters worse, Antoine
of Navarre inclined more than ever toward the faith of Rome in the hope
of conciliating Philip II of Spain.[367]
To a man less vain and gullible than Antoine of Bourbon such a
proposition, upon its very face, as the restoration of Navarre, would
have appeared to have been preposterous. Aside from the blow to its
prestige which any loss of territory entails upon a nation, it is
only necessary to look at the position of Spanish Navarre to perceive
that Spain could better afford to lose a war abroad than to part with
this key to the passes of the western Pyrenees. There is no need to
relate at length the story of Antoine’s alternate hopes and fears, of
his great expectations, and of the empty promises made him.[368] The
office Antoine held, not the man, made him important to France and
Spain. For this reason, he was alternately wheedled and cajoled, mocked
and threatened, for more than a year; and all the time the pitiable
weakling shifted and vacillated in his policy.[369] It is amazing to
see how successfully Antoine was led along by the dexterous suggestions
of Chantonnay, and the evasive answers of Philip II. It was a delicate
game to play, for there was continual fear lest he would discover
that he was being made the dupe of Spain, and prevail upon the queen
mother and the prince of Condé to join him in avenging his wrongs, a
not impossible development, as Granvella observed, “considering that
prudence does not always preside over the actions of men.”[370]
The game was the more difficult because Antoine wanted the restoration
of his kingly title more than anything else. If he had been willing to
become vassal to Spain, as Chantonnay said to St. André, there were a
thousand ways to satisfy him. But Spain could not think of alienating
any of her provinces, least of all any frontier possession like Navarre
or Roussillon.[371] Time and again the prince of Condé told his brother
he was a fool to be so wheedled, and Jeanne d’Albret sarcastically said
that she would let her son go to mass when his father’s inheritance
was restored.[372] When the game was likely to be played out, and
Antoine, discovering that fine words did not butter parsnips, began
to complain or boldly to bluster,[373] a possible substitute for the
kingdom of Navarre which Antoine did not want to hold as a Spanish
dependency[374] was suggested. At one moment it was Sienna; at another
the county of Avignon; at a third the crown of Denmark—to be gotten
through the influence of the Guises. The most alluring offer in
Antoine’s eyes, however, was Sardinia.[375] In return for the crown
of Sardinia, Antoine was willing to leave all the fortresses of the
island in Spain’s possession; and to put his children in Philip’s hands
as hostages.[376]
This digression has somewhat anticipated the progress of events.
Charles IX had been crowned at Rheims on May 15 (Ascension Day).[377]
The declared majority and the coronation of her son seems to have
given Catherine new courage, for in spite of the menace implied in the
formation of the Triumvirate, she still labored in the interest of the
Huguenot cause. On June 13, as we have seen, the definite exoneration
of the prince of Condé was pronounced by the Parlement of Paris,[378]
and in the following August an outward reconciliation, at least, was
effected between the prince and the duke of Guise.[379]
Encouraged by the positive attitude of the queen mother and the
vacillation of the king of Navarre, the Huguenots urged the cause
of toleration and presented a request to the King on June 11, 1561,
through the deputies of the churches dispersed throughout the realm of
France.[380] They declared that the reports of their refusing to pay
the taxes and being seditious were false and calumnious; they begged
the King to cause all persecutions against them to cease; that he would
liberate those of them who were in prison, and that he would permit
them to build churches as their numbers were so great that private
houses would no longer suffice; finally offering to give pledges that
there would be no sedition in their assemblies, and promising all
lawful obedience.
The queen mother referred this petition to the Privy Council, but as
it involved so important a matter the council was of opinion that it
ought to be laid before the Parlement as well as to be considered by
the princes of the blood and all the peers and councilors of the Court
of Parlement.[381] The Catholic party was quite willing to have this
course followed, feeling confident that the Parlement in its official
capacity would refuse to register an edict for such purpose. But
L’Hôpital[382] and Coligny had hopes that the interest and authority
of the princes of the blood and other persons of influence might carry
it through the Parlement after all.[383] However, in the end nothing
positive was concluded, final resolution being deferred until a
colloquy of the bishops and other clergy, who were convoked at Poissy,
near St. Germain, for the end of the month, took place.[384] Meanwhile
a tentative ordinance—the Edict of July, similar to the Edict of
Romorantin—was to obtain. This gave the church, as before, entire
cognizance of the crime of heresy and deprived the Parlement, the
bailiffs, seneschals, and other judges of any jurisdiction. In every
case local ecclesiastical courts had to act first; banishment was to be
the severest punishment for heresy; false accusers were to be punished
in the same way that the accused would have been if really guilty;
amnesty was granted for past offenses; and firearms were forbidden
to be carried in towns or elsewhere, with certain exceptions, under
a penalty of 50 gold crowns.[385] Within a short time, accordingly,
the Protestant assemblies appeared as frequently as before, although
the Calvinist clergy seemed to have become more discreet in their
utterances.[386]
This cleverly designed edict, while seeming to pronounce judgment,
really avoided the question at issue. There was sufficient leeway still
for the holding of Protestant assemblies, and moreover, even though
ecclesiastical affairs were to be referred to the spiritual courts,
the Huguenots were protected by a saving clause (except for offenses
cognizable by the secular power).[387] Such qualified toleration, so
guardedly given, was probably all that might with safety have been
granted to the Huguenots at this early date. But they were far from
seeing things in this light. The hotheads among them, in their meetings
and in public places, used the most violent language in detraction of
the Catholic church and its sacraments.[388] In some places popular
feeling against priests was so strong that they were compelled, for the
safety of their lives, to disguise their costumes and not to wear the
clerical habit abroad, nor long hair, nor have the beard shaved, nor
exhibit any other mark which would indicate that they were priests or
monks.[389]