“Either you have lost your understanding or you are the greatest liar
alive. Never in my life have I to my knowledge shown you more kindness
or less than I do at this moment, and I pray you therefore tell me what
it is you mean.”
Then the unhappy gentleman, thinking to better his fortune with her,
told her of the place where he had met her, and of the chalk-mark which
he had made in order to recognise her, on hearing which she was so
beside herself with anger as to tell him that he was the wickedest of
men, and that she would bring him to repent of the foul falsehood that
he had invented against her.
The gentleman, knowing how well she stood with her mistress, sought to
soothe her, but he found it impossible to do so; for, leaving him where
he stood, she furiously betook herself to her mistress, who, loving
Jambicque as she did herself, left all the company to come and speak
with her, and, on finding her in such great wrath, inquired of her what
the matter was. Thereupon Jambicque, who had no wish to hide it, related
all the gentleman’s discourse, and this she did so much to the unhappy
man’s disadvantage, that on the very same evening his mistress commanded
him to withdraw forthwith to his own home without speaking with anyone
and to stay there until he should be sent for. And this he did right
speedily, for fear of worse. (4)
4 It has been mentioned in note 2 that the gentleman in
question was Brantôme’s uncle La Chastaigneraye. Born,
according to most accounts, in 1520, Francis de Vivonne,
Lord of La Chastaigneraye, was a godson of Francis I., and
early displayed marked skill and prowess in all bodily
exercises and feats of arms. He was, however, of a very
quarrelsome disposition, and had several duels. A dispute
arising between him and Guy de Chabot, Lord of Jarnac, they
solicited permission to fight, but Francis I. would not
accord it, and it was only after the accession of Henry II.
that the encounter took place. The spot fixed upon was the
park of St. Germain-en-Laye, and the King and the whole
Court were present (July 10, 1547)--In the result, La
Chastaigneraye was literally ham-strung by a back-thrust
known to this day as the _coup de Jarnac_. The victor
thereupon begged the King to accept his adversary’s life and
person, and Henry, after telling Jamac that “he had fought
like Cæsar and spoken like Cicero,” caused La Chastaigneraye
to be carried to his tent that his wound might be dressed.
Deeply humiliated by his defeat, however, the vanquished
combatant tore off his bandages and bled to death.--Ed.
So long as Jambicque dwelt with her mistress, the gentleman returned
not to the Princess’s house, nor did he ever have tidings of her who had
vowed to him that he should lose her as soon as he might seek her out.
(5)
5 After referring to this tale Brantôme adds that he had
heard tell of another Court lady who was minded to imitate
Jambicque, but who, “every time she returned from her
assignation, went straight to her room, and let one of her
serving maids examine her on all sides to see if she were
marked. By this means she guarded herself against being
surprised and recognised, and indeed was never marked until
at her ninth assignation, when the mark was at once
discovered by her women. And thereupon, for fear of scandal
and opprobrium, she broke off her intrigue and never more
returned to the appointed spot. Some one said ‘twould have
been better if she had let her lover mark her as often as he
liked, and each time have had his marks effaced, for in this
wise she would have reaped a double pleasure--contentment in
love and satisfaction at duping her lover, who, like he who
seeks the Philosopher’s Stone, would have toiled hard to
discover and identify her, without ever succeeding in doing
so.”--(Lalanne’s _OEuvres de Brantôme_, pp. 236-8).--M.
“By this tale, ladies, you may see how one who preferred the world’s
esteem to a good conscience lost both the one and the other. For now
may the eyes of all men read what she strove to hide from those of her
lover, and so, whilst fleeing the derision of one, she has incurred the
derision of all. Nor can she be held excused on the score of simplicity
and artless love, for which all men should have pity, but she must
be condemned twice over for having concealed her wickedness with the
twofold cloak of honour and glory, and for making herself appear before
God and man other than she really was. He, however, who gives not His
glory to another, took this cloak from off her and so brought her to
double shame.”
“Her wickedness,” said Oisille, “was without excuse. None can defend her
when God, Honour, and even Love are her accusers.”
“Nay,” said Hircan, “Pleasure and Folly may; they are the true chief
advocates of the ladies.”
“If we had no other advocates,” said Parlamente, “than those you name,
our cause would indeed be ill supported; but those who are vanquished
by pleasure ought no longer to be called women but rather men, whose
reputation is merely exalted by frenzy and lust. When a man takes
vengeance upon his enemy and slays him for giving him the lie, he is
deemed all the more honourable a gentleman for it; and so, too, when he
loves a dozen women besides his own wife. But the reputation of women
has a different foundation, that, namely, of gentleness, patience and
chastity.”
“You speak of the discreet,” said Hircan.
“Yes,” returned Parlamente, “because I will know none others.”
“If none were wanton,” said Nomerfide, “those who would fain be believed
by all the world must often have lied.”
“Pray, Nomerfide,” said Geburon, “receive my vote, and forget that you
are a woman, in order that we may learn what some men that are accounted
truthful say of the follies of your sex.”
“Since virtue compels me to it, and you have made it my turn, I will
tell you what I know. I have not heard any lady or gentleman present
speak otherwise than to the disadvantage of the Grey Friars, and out of
pity I have resolved to speak well of them in the story that I am now
about to relate.”
[Illustration: 155.jpg Tailpiece]
[Illustration: 157.jpg Page Image]
_TALE XLIV.(A)_.
_In reward for not having concealed the truth, the Lord of
Sedan doubled the alms of a Grey Friar, who thus received
two pigs instead of one_. (1)
To the castle of Sedan once came a Grey Friar to ask my Lady of Sedan,
who was of the house of Crouy, (2) for a pig, which she was wont to give
to his Order every year as alms.
1 This tale, though it figures in all the MSS., does not
appear in Gruget’s edition of the _Heptameron_, but is there
replaced by the one that follows, XLIV. (B).--Ed.
2 This Lady of Sedan is Catherine de Croï, daughter of
Philip VI. de Croï, Count of Chimay. In 1491 she married
Robert II. do la Marck, Duke of Bouillon, Lord of Sedan,
Fleuranges, &c., who was long the companion in arms of
Bayard and La Trémoïlle. Robert II. lost the duchy of
Bouillon through the conquests of Charles V., and one of the
clauses of the treaty of Cambrai (the “Ladies’ Peace”) was
that Francis I. would in no wise assist him to regain it.
His eldest son by Catherine de Croï was the celebrated
Marshal de Fleuranges, “the young adventurer,” who left such
curious memoirs behind him. Robert II. died in 1535, his son
surviving him a couple of years.--Anselme’s _Histoire
Généalogique_, vol. vii. p. 167.--L. and B. J.
My Lord of Sedan, who was a prudent man and a merry talker, had the good
father to eat at his table, and in order to put him on his mettle said
to him, among other things--
“Good father, you do well to make your collection while you are yet
unknown. I greatly fear that, if once your hypocrisy be found out, you
will no longer receive the bread of poor children, earned by the sweat
of their fathers.”