THE FIRST MISSION TO ENGLAND OF THE BAILLY OF TROYES (1531) AND THE
CALAIS INTERVIEW OF 1532
Four years had passed since the release of Francis I., when, in 1530, his
two eldest sons were at last set free from their Spanish prison. This
happy event was due in great measure to pecuniary assistance rendered
by Henry VIII. towards the completion of the French king’s ransom. It
was followed almost immediately by the marriage of Francis with Eleanor,
Queen-Dowager of Portugal and sister of the Emperor, which took place in
fulfilment of one of the clauses of the treaty of Madrid.
The following year, 1531, was a memorable one for the Dinteville
brothers. It began with the death of their father, which took place
in March, at the age of seventy-two. In accordance with the curious
custom of the time, his body was buried at Polisy, his entrails at St.
Jean-en-Grève at Paris, and his heart at Thennelières, where so much of
his early married life had been passed.
A now solitary agricultural village, surrounded by blue plains which
melt into the sky in uninterrupted expansion, Thennelières has little
left to testify to the brilliant life of which it was once the scene. Of
the Château formerly inhabited by Gaucher and Anne de Dinteville not one
stone remains upon another, though the _fosses_ still define the site on
which it stood. But in the little thick-walled twelfth-century Church,
the steeple and red roof of which rise at the end of the straggling
village street, a few interesting relics of bygone days may yet be seen.
Let into the pavement before the altar of the north transept—both
transepts are of the sixteenth century—is a square black and white
tablet, in the centre of which is a “bonne-foi”[97] of flesh-coloured
marble. Above this are two intertwined hearts of deeper hue, bearing
respectively the initials “G” and “A.” The tablet is inscribed, “Galtero
de Dinteville, Anna du Plesseys, chara conjonx, 1531.” A leaden box
beneath this plaque is said yet to contain the shrivelled heart of
Gaucher de Dinteville.
On the opposite side of the church is a stained glass window, in which is
represented a bishop, accompanied by his patron saint, St. Francis. This
ecclesiastic is no other than Francis I. de Dinteville, Bishop of Auxerre
(the same who took part in the publication of the Custom of Troyes),
whose portrait was here erected in 1524 by his nephew and namesake, the
brother of Jean the “Ambassador.” The window has been badly restored, and
the portrait is consequently inferior now to that of another window of
similar subject in the Church of Montmorency.[98]
The tombs at Polisy have perished with the chapel that contained them.
But a quaint epitaph, in rhymed doggerel, which was placed to the
memory of Gaucher de Dinteville, survives in a copy preserved at the
Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris.
EPITAPHE DE FEU MONSIEUR DE POLISY.
L’Appuy des bons, Gauche de Dinteville
Apres avoir en la guerre civile
De France acquis le nom de jeune et sage
Apres avoir au renomme passage
Que Charles feit a Naples et a Rome
Gaigné le bruit de hardi gentilhome
Apres avoir a Senes ville antique
Esté le chef de la grand republique
Apres avoir de Troyes en Champagne
Esté bailly, et veu de sa compagne
Naistre des fils, dont il veit en sa vie
Rhodes,[99] Espagne,[100] et la France[101] servie
Apres avoir chez le Roy eu loz tel
D’estre ordinaire et bon maistre d’hostel
Et le premier chez Monsr. le Dauphin
Se voyant là approcher de sa fin
Et sachant bien qu’heureux on ne peult estre
Sans despouiller cette robbe terrestre,
Volut donner a ces yeulx anciens
Ce dernier bien d’estre fermez des siens
Desquelz l’amour et pitié l’ont cy mis
Pleins d’ans, d’honneurs, de richesse et d’amis.[102]
Immediately after the death of Gaucher de Dinteville, on the 26th March,
1531, his eldest son François, who had succeeded his uncle as Bishop
of Auxerre, did homage in his own name, as well as on behalf of his
mother, Anne du Plessis, and of his younger brothers and sisters, Jean,
Guillaume, Gaucher, Charlotte, and Françoise, for the seigneurie of
Lesches in Brie, which had formed part of the dowry of Anne du Plessis.
All now inherited it jointly excepting Louis, the second brother, who was
a Knight Hospitaller.[103]
In his twenty-seventh year, Jean de Dinteville now found himself at the
head of his house. His position at Court seemed to promise a brilliant
future, which was further insured by the friendship of his cousin,
Montmorency, the Admiral De Brion, the Du Bellay brothers, and other
leaders of French politics. It is probable that at about this time he
also succeeded to the Collar of St. Michael rendered vacant by the death
of his father, who had been a Knight of the Order.[104]
Nor were royal favours limited to Jean alone. The same edict that
confirms his appointment as Governor to Charles, Duke of Angoulême,
places his brother Guillaume, now Seigneur Deschenetz, in a like capacity
about the person of the Dauphin, in succession to his father; and
Gaucher, the youngest brother, Seigneur of Vanlay and Thennelières, in a
similar position towards Henry, Duke of Orleans. Thus each of the three
sons of Francis I. was entrusted to the special care of a member of the
Dinteville family.
But all was not unchequered prosperity. In the July following the death
of Gaucher the elder, another heavy blow fell upon the brothers. Louis
de Dinteville, the Knight of St. John, died at Malta, at the age of
twenty-eight; not without having already given promise of distinction
similar to that attained by his brothers. He had been early made a
Knight Commander and Seneschal of Rhodes, probably in the place of his
uncle, Pierre de Dinteville. After the conquest of Rhodes in 1522, the
homeless Knights at length, after many vicissitudes, found a permanent
refuge at Malta, granted to them by Charles V. The Grand Master of the
Order, Philippe de Villiers l’Isle-Adam, who signs himself “uncle” to
Montmorency, and was, like him, a cousin of the Dinteville family,
made a journey to Spain during the captivity of Francis I., in order
to confer with him and with the Emperor on the future of the Order.
Whether Louis de Dinteville accompanied L’Isle-Adam on this occasion is
not known; but it is certain that in the winter of 1529 to 1530, he was
sent as Ambassador of the Order to the Emperor Charles V., and conducted
the negotiations which terminated in the cession of Malta, afterwards
reporting in person to Montmorency, and probably to the French king, the
successful termination of his mission.[105]
The Order of St. John of Jerusalem was divided into seven “languages,” as
the branches in various countries were technically called. The English
language was suppressed soon after the Reformation, but it will be seen
that the only record preserved in England of Jean de Dinteville’s first
visit to this country sprang from the connection of his family with this
illustrious Order.
The death of the Knight of St. John was not the only misfortune which now
befell the family. The high favour in which they stood had, no doubt,
awakened jealousies; and there were enemies ready to take advantage of
any opportunity that might occur, to undermine their credit. Such an
occasion shortly presented itself, and, unfortunately, in a shape which
seems to have afforded some justification for the violent attacks made on
the offender. The eldest brother, François, now Bishop of Auxerre, was
accused of having inflicted a punishment of undue severity on a peasant
belonging to his Abbey of Montierender, who had been guilty of poaching
birds of prey suited to the favourite pastime of hawking. The Parliament
of Paris, the first legal tribunal of the kingdom, was delighted to
assert its authority in the teeth of the Crown, which had curtailed many
of its ancient privileges, by attacking a man who owed his promotion to
Court favour. The bishop was ordered to appear before it and to stand his
trial, and things were beginning to look ugly when the powerful influence
of Montmorency, combined with that of “Madame,” the king’s mother, to
whom the bishop was chaplain, intervened on his behalf. The culprit was
hurried away to the house of the Grand-Maître at Chantilly, and there
kept in security until the storm blew over.[106] It was settled by his
protectors that he should be sent as ambassador to the Holy See in order
to remove him for a time from the pursuit of his adversaries. The king,
who had at first been very angry with his _protégé_, shortly afterwards
issued a royal proclamation intended to give a milder complexion to the
whole affair, and to serve as a preliminary to letting the proceedings
drop.[107] In the July following the bishop was despatched to Rome.
It is tempting to dwell for a moment on the personality of this prelate,
perhaps the best known to history of all his family. Six years older
than the Bailly of Troyes, the Bishop of Auxerre exerted a potent
influence on the intellectual development of the younger brother.
Nothing is more striking in the meagre records that have come down to
us, than the constant proof they afford of the affection and community
of tastes which united these two brothers. “Besides the liberal arts,”
says the biographer of the bishop, “he was a connoisseur in mechanics,
loving above all things painting, and having always some painters in his
house.”[108] Involuntarily Holbein’s presentment of the Bailly of Troyes
rises before the imagination, so exactly do these words describe it.
But while the career of Jean de Dinteville is unclouded by any hint of
blame, that of the Bishop of Auxerre is of a chequered character, in
which light and shadow are almost equally distributed. Hot-tempered,
and failing often in tact and discretion, his mental parts were yet
coupled, to judge by the warm friendships he inspired, with considerable
personal charm. Deeply attached to learning, keenly sensitive to the
beautiful, he was a typical churchman of the Renaissance, as much layman
as ecclesiastic. His love of sport, especially his passion for falconry,
then at the height of fashion, are as oddly contrasted to his exaggerated
asceticism and frugal diet, as the mermaids of his coat-of-arms to his
pastoral staff.[109]
Having learnt grammar at the College of Troyes, François de Dinteville
proceeded to the University of Paris. Here he was a member of the College
of Navarre, which, as the only one at that time providing lectures in
divinity outside the walls of the Sorbonne, was popular with theologians
of moderate views. Thence, probably with the object of studying civil
law, the future bishop was sent to Poitiers; and, finally, to complete
his training in both branches of jurisprudence, to the University of
Padua.
No doubt this residence in Italy, at the crowning moment of the
Renaissance, gave a definite stamp to his tastes in more ways than one.
On his return to France he was made Almoner to Louise of Savoy. Shortly
after he was appointed Bishop of Riez, and suffragan to his uncle; upon
whose death, in 1530, he was promoted to the see of Auxerre. He appeared
well fitted, therefore, for the arduous duties he was now called upon to
undertake as French ambassador to the Vatican, at the difficult moment of
the divorce suit of Henry VIII.
The same year, 1531, witnessed the first mission of the Bailly of Troyes
to England. The friendship between Henry VIII. and Francis I. was now
growing apace. Besides the resident ambassadors at either Court, the
coming and going of special envoys entrusted with messages it was not
deemed prudent to commit to writing, had assumed great activity. Henry
VIII. still clung to the hope of forcing Clement VII., through pressure
from France, to annul his marriage with the Emperor’s aunt, Katherine
of Aragon. The Pope, since the sack of Rome in 1527 more than ever the
Emperor’s tool, caught at every straw to postpone a decision which
must of necessity alienate from him one half of Europe or the other.
Francis I., anxious for his own purposes to keep Henry at variance with
the Emperor, saw in the divorce the most obvious means of doing so. He
accordingly threw the whole weight of his influence on the side of the
King of England.
[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF FRANÇOIS II. DE DINTEVILLE, BISHOP OF AUXERRE,
FROM THE MARTYRDOM OF STE. EUGÉNIE, BY FELIX CHRÉTIEN, IN THE CHURCH AT
VARZY.]
Dinteville’s first visit to England, or the first of which we know,
seems to have been a rapid errand of confidential nature. But, short as
it was, it is likely that it formed the key to his future advancement,
for the only English sentence relating to it which has been preserved
has a decided flavour of success. It has been seen that an intimate
connection existed between the Dinteville family and the Order of St.
John of Jerusalem. Sir William Weston was at this time Prior of the
English language. Dinteville, either now or later, was on friendly terms
with a young Weston who had been at the University of Paris; but, in any
case, seems to have been well known to the English knights of the Order
when, in the late autumn of 1531, he arrived in London. On the 12th
December Sir John Mablisteyn writes to Sir Giles Russell, “Mr. Tyntervile
departed on the 3rd, having had good expedition with the king and his
council.”[110]
Meanwhile the Bishop of Auxerre, at Rome, was busily engaged in urging
the cause of the divorce. Gilles de la Pommeraye, who was sent as
resident ambassador to England within three weeks of the termination of
the Bailly’s brief mission, supported it no less eagerly in London.[111]
La Pommeraye was on terms of intimacy with the Bishop of Auxerre; and
the two friends agreed to communicate to each other, if necessary in
cipher, whatever of importance might occur in their respective spheres of
duty.[112]
It is clear that, apart from questions of expediency, some members of
the liberal party in France frankly ranged themselves with the King of
England on this thorny subject. They saw that the interminable delays of
the Pope were dictated only by self-interest, unworthy of the high office
he was called upon to exercise. For that office they had a profound
respect; for the personality of Clement VII., to judge by scattered
utterances in the correspondence of the time, their feeling bordered
on contempt. Henry VIII. had, it was considered, a right to an answer,
whatever the tenour of that answer might be.
From this point of view, and as showing the charm the king could exercise
when such was his good pleasure, a letter written at about this time by
La Pommeraye to the Bishop of Auxerre has its curious side.
[113] ... “Vous avez raison,” he says, “de me porter envie
d’estre avec un si gentil Prince, car je pense que apres le
Roy nostre maistre ne s’en trouva passé à deux cens ans, un
de meilleur esprit, de meilleure grace ny plus magnanime que
cestuy cy: et, à vous parler franchement, le dit Roy nostre
maistre est obligé a luy du bon vouloir qu’il luy porte, dequoy
je me sens grandement, car je suis traicté icy, non pas comme
Ambassadeur, mais comme Prince du pays, logé en la maison[114]
dudict Sieur Roy, et quand je le veois veoir, toujours mangeant
à sa table; et pource, ne vous esmerveillez si je vous conforte
et prie de porter sa querelle....
“Mr. ce Prince a grand envie de chastier les Prestres de ce
pays et ne leur laisser jouir de si grans privilleges qu’ils
ont accoustumé, dont est cause le tort qu’on lui faict à Rome,
qui est si grand que plus ne peust: c’est chose estrange que
l’Empereur ait tant de pouvoir avec le Pape, qu’il soit par ce
empesché de rendre raison et justice là où il la cognoist.”[115]
The private letters of the ambassadors and other public characters to
each other form an interesting commentary on the political events of
the time. The Bishop of Auxerre, who, in spite of detractors, stood in
high repute for learning, love of art, and distinguished office, had
many such correspondents. Among these, to mention only a few conspicuous
names, were Lazare de Baif, a classical scholar of some celebrity, who
was now French ambassador at Venice; the Marquis de Saluce, who, after
enjoying high favour, later became a traitor to the French Crown; and
Philippe Villiers de L’Isle-Adam, Grand Master of Rhodes. Of lesser
correspondence, none throws more light on the fortunes of the Dinteville
brothers at this period than that of Balavoyne, or Belle Avoine, the
Bishop of Auxerre’s steward in France, who collected his revenues, and
sent him news of his family, during his absence at Rome.[116]
These letters and those of Berthereau, the secretary of Montmorency,
enable us to follow with some precision the movements of the Bailly of
Troyes and his brothers during the year 1532. In the summer Francis I.
made a tour in Brittany, prior to the annexation of that province to
the Crown of France, taking with him the Dauphin François. The latter
selected from among his gentlemen, to be his special attendant on this
occasion, Guillaume, Seigneur Deschenetz. Jean de Dinteville and his
brother Vanlay meanwhile remained with their respective charges, the
Dukes of Angoulême and of Orleans, at the Court of Queen Eleanor. The
plan was to spend Easter at Tours, and later to go to meet the king
and dauphin at Nantes on their return from Brittany.[117] The whole
scheme was afterwards postponed for a few weeks, and came off with some
modifications.
In May the Bailly had a slight attack of fever, an enemy that often
troubled him, and consequently obtained leave to go home for awhile.[118]
He was keenly interested just now in a new tower and some pictures he
was adding to Polisy, where his mother and unmarried sister resided
with him. A little later he was staying at Plessis, the home, it will
be remembered, of his mother’s family, when Fontaines, the page of the
deceased Commander of Rhodes, Louis de Dinteville, was struck down with
the plague. Happily, he recovered; but the Bailly and Vanlay, to avoid
all risk of infection for the young princes, retired for a time to La
Bourdaizière, the house of another connection of the family. Almost at
the same moment, however, an illness which attacked the little Duke of
Angoulême, but seems to have been only of passing severity, obliged Jean
to leave his retreat and return to Court sooner than he had intended.
Shortly after this, Balavoyne received from the Bailly casts of the
features of the Dauphin and the Duke of Orleans, with the order to
forward them to the Bishop of Auxerre. From these models their portraits
were to be executed at Rome.[119]
Thus the summer glided into autumn, which was to be distinguished by an
event of unusual interest.
The meeting which took place at Calais between Henry VIII. and Francis
I. in October, 1532, probably marks the culminating point of the
friendship between the two kings. Though devoid of the excessive luxury
which distinguished the interview of 1520, known as the Field of the
Cloth of Gold, it was conducted with much pomp and magnificence. On the
21st October, Henry, from his town of Calais, and Francis, from the
French territory of Boulogne, rode out to meet each other. Each king was
followed by a splendid retinue. The festivities lasted for ten days,
in the course of which the King of England was received by Francis at
Boulogne, and returned the hospitality by entertaining the French King at
Calais. Much is recorded of the gorgeous robes, flashing with rubies and
diamonds, worn by the two sovereigns; of music, dancing, and feasting,
of bull and bear baiting, games and wrestling, the latter, curiously
enough, undertaken, on the French side, chiefly by priests. Valuable
presents were given and received on either side. But the most welcome
feature to the King of France of all these courtesies must have been the
gift of 300,000 crowns made by Henry VIII. to the young princes. This sum
represented the residue of the loan advanced by him for their father’s
ransom, which he thus gracefully abandoned. Small wonder that Francis
hastened to exhibit his gratitude by conferring on the Dukes of Norfolk
and Suffolk, “comme aux deux estans plus près de la personne dudit roy
d’Angleterre,” the royal order of St. Michael.[120] Henry responded by
bestowing the Garter on Montmorency and Brion.
But the main object of the meeting at Calais lay deeper than in the
desire to exchange mutual civilities. Ostensibly for the purpose of
concerting measures for the defence of Christendom against Solyman, and
actually resulting in a treaty to that effect, it was planned, in the
first place, to discuss a common line of policy directed against Charles
V., in favour of the divorce and of certain objects that the French
King had at heart. No doubt the “damned machinations and enterprises
of the Turk”[121]—with whom, be it noted, Francis I. stood on the most
friendly terms at the very moment when these words were penned—served as
an admirable cloak for these designs. No doubt also the Most Christian
King was anxious to present to Clement VII. an appearance of devotion
equal to that of his Imperial rival. The real purpose of the interview
is, however, sufficiently clearly shown by the fact that no ambassadors
were allowed to be present excepting such as were subjects of the two
kings. Chapuys, the Imperial envoy in England, displayed much chagrin at
this decree. The treaty was, in fact, so much waste paper, except for the
purpose of making dupes; to which account Francis promptly turned it in
his next dealings with the Pope.
The Bishop of Auxerre had received instructions to come from Rome,
in order to be present at the Calais meeting, and to report on the
negotiations he had been conducting at the Holy See. Letters addressed
to him, however, at Rome, immediately after the interview, show that
for some reason this plan fell through. His place was taken, at the
interview, by the Cardinals Tournon and Grammont, who were shortly to
succeed him at the Papal Court, and who received detailed instructions
from both kings as to the part to be played by them with regard to the
King of England’s suit.
But if the Bishop of Auxerre was absent, it can hardly be doubted that
all his brothers took part in the festivities, in attendance upon their
respective charges, the three French princes. Henry VIII. had expressed a
special wish to see at Calais the children whom his liberality had helped
to release from their Spanish prison. The Duke of Angoulême accompanied
his two elder brothers to the royal interview, and on first meeting the
King of England, after the Dauphin and the Duke of Orleans had expressed
their gratitude to the king, the little boy addressed him in another
form, “so sweetly and sagely, according to report, that he spoke like
an angel; so that the English king again embraced him alone, kissing
him several times.”[122] Indeed, Henry treated all three with marked
kindness. More than once in the annals of the proceedings he is mentioned
as playing at tennis with the young princes, and it has been seen that it
was to them he cancelled the debt due to him from the King of France.
Early in November Henry VIII., accompanied by Anne Boleyn, who, not
yet queen, had shared the Calais fêtes as Marchioness of Pembroke, set
sail for England. A new ambassador, Montpesat, returned with him, La
Pommeraye’s mission being on the verge of conclusion. The fresh selection
was probably made in consequence of Montpesat’s previous acquaintance
with the country, and possibly, to some extent, with the language.[123]
At the outset he appeared hardly so successful as his predecessor. The
reason of this, in the present temper of the king, was not far to seek.
“Mons. de Montpesat, the French ambassador,” writes the indefatigable
gossip, Chapuys, to his Imperial master, “has continually followed the
king, and been in Court until yesterday.... The queen[124] has been
informed that the more La Pommeraye solicits the divorce, the more he
(Montpesat) dislikes it. This is beginning to be perceived, for he has
not obtained the favour of lodging in this town in the king’s house,
which the other ambassador did.”[125] It is, perhaps, rash to infer a
recovery of royal favour from the gifts showered on the ambassador at
his departure, which were probably a mere formality. In any case, his
mission was of brief duration, and on its expiration Jean de Dinteville
was appointed to take his place.
“The Bailly,” writes Balavoyne from Paris, on the 2nd December, 1532,
to the Bishop of Auxerre at Rome, “has obtained leave of absence until
Christmas, or if possible until Twelfth Night, by which time he must
return to Court, and then immediately depart for England. Meanwhile he is
going to visit Mademoiselle,[126] and set his affairs in order.”[127]
Just at the same time arrangements wee being made for the return of the
Bishop of Auxerre. His enemies were again showing signs of restlessness,
and Jean was eager that he should come back to confront them and to end
their intrigues. The brothers therefore hailed the termination of the
bishop’s embassy with joy.
On the 26th January, 1533, the Bailly writes to convey to his brother
the express permission of Montmorency for his departure from Rome. After
telling him of the instructions given to the Cardinals, Dinteville
continues:
[128]“En oultre m’a enchargé ledit Sgr. grand maistre
expressément vous escrire que incontinent parties pourrez
vous en venir. Je croy bien qu’il sera honneste dire à Dieu.
Mais quelques remonstrances, pour service du Roy, ny aultres
choses, qu’ilz leur dient, venez vous en, et vous serez le
bien venue et receu, je vous en assure, non pas de moy, car
ne me trouveres, pour ce que demain m’en pars; et espere, au
plaisir de Dieu, trouveres, a vostre arrivée, voz evocations
depeschees.”[129]
La Pommeraye meanwhile had written to inquire how the Cardinals were
behaving to his friend.
[130]“Soyez asseuré” so runs his letter, “aumoings c’est ma
fantaisie, qu’ils ne sont pas voz amys; mais la sagesse d’un
homme aussi est de se tenir ferme en ses grans heurts. Je vous
advertis bien qu’a l’endroit du maistre quant je suis party de
la Cour vous estiez en aussi bonne grace comme eux. Suyvez ce
que vous avez commancé et ne variez poinct pour aucune chose
qu’ils vous puissent dire; et, moyennant ce que vous direz soit
véritable, ne vous souciez du demeurant, car le patron est pour
vous et trois des plus vaillans Champions.”[131]
The frank and manly tone of this letter is a refreshing contrast to the
diplomatic subtleties of much of the official correspondence of the time.
The “master” and “patron” was of course Francis I. The “three champions”
may probably be correctly interpreted as Montmorency, Brion and the
Bishop of Paris.
La Pommeraye’s feeling with regard to the Cardinals was no doubt
correct. Though a devout son of his Church, and a strong opponent of the
Lutherans, the Bishop of Auxerre belonged to the liberal, anti-Spanish
party in France. Cardinal Tournon, on the other hand, was one of the most
violent of the extreme Catholic section. As such the two men, agreed in
dogma, were opposed in politics—a position likely enough to engender
personal animosity.