poor shepherd girl from the hills and forests of Lorraine,
that--like the Hebrew shepherd boy from the hills and forests
of Judea--rose suddenly out of the quiet, out of the safety,
out of the religious inspiration, rooted in deep pastoral
solitudes, to a station in the van of armies, and to the more
perilous station at the right hand of kings? The Hebrew boy
inaugurated his patriotic mission by an act, by a victorious
act, such as no man could deny. But so did the girl of
Lorraine, if we read her story as it was read by those who saw
her nearest. Adverse armies bore witness to the boy as no
pretender; but so they did to the gentle girl. Judged by the
voices of all who saw them from a station of good-will, both
were found true and loyal to any promises involved in their
first acts. Enemies it was that made the difference between
their subsequent fortunes.
{1178}
The boy rose to a splendour, and a noonday prosperity, both
personal and public, that rang through the records of his
people, and became a by-word amongst his posterity for a
thousand years, until the sceptre was departing from Judah.
The poor, forsaken girl, on the contrary, drank not herself
from that cup of rest which she had secured for France. ...
This pure creature--pure from every suspicion of even a
visionary self-interest, even as she was pure in senses more
obvious--never once did this holy child, as regarded herself,
relax from her belief in the darkness that was travelling to
meet her. She might not prefigure the very manner of her
death; she saw not in vision, perhaps, the aerial altitude of
the fiery scaffold, the spectators without end on every road
pouring into Rouen as to a coronation, the surging smoke, the
volleying flames, the hostile faces all around, the pitying
eye that lurked but here and there, until nature and
imperishable truth broke loose from artificial
restraints;--these might not be apparent through the mists of
the hurrying future. But the voice that called her to death,
that she heard for ever."
_T. De Quincey,
Joan of Arc (Collected Writings, volume 5)._
A discussion of doubts that have been raised concerning the
death of Joan at the stake will be found in
_Octave Delepierre's
Historical Difficulties and Contested Events,
chapter 8._
ALSO IN:
_J. Michelet,
History of France,
book 10._
_E. de Monstrelet,
Chronicles (Johnes' translation),
book 2, chapters 57-105._
_H. Parr,
Life and Death of Joan of Arc._
_J. Tuckey,
Joan of Arc._
_Mrs. A. E. Bray,
Joan of Arc._
FRANCE: A. D. 1431-1453.
The English expelled.
"In Joan of Arc the English certainly destroyed the cause of
their late reverses. But the impulse had been given, and the
crime of base vengeance could not stay it. Fortune declared
every where and in every way against them. In vain was Henry
VI. brought to Paris, crowned at Notre Dame, and made to
exercise all the functions of royalty in court and parliament.
The duke of Burgundy, disgusted with the English, became at
last reconciled to Charles; who spared no sacrifice to win the
support of so powerful a subject. The amplest possible amends
were made for the murder of the late duke. The towns beyond
the Somme were ceded to Burgundy, and the reigning duke [but
not his successors] was exempted from all homage towards the
king of France. Such was the famous treaty of Arras [September
21, 1435], which restored to Charles his throne, and deprived
the English of all hopes of retaining their conquests in the
kingdom. The crimes and misrule of the Orleans faction were
forgotten; popularity ebbed in favour of Charles. ... One of
the gates of Paris was betrayed by the citizens to the
constable and Dunois [April, 1436]. Willoughby, the governor,
was obliged to shut himself up in the Bastile with his
garrison, from whence they retired to Rouen. Charles VII.
entered his capital, after twenty years' exclusion from it, in
November, 1437. Thenceforward the war lost its serious
character. Charles was gradually established on his throne,
and the struggle between the two nations was feebly carried
on, broken merely by a few sieges and enterprises, mostly to
the disadvantage of the English. ... There had been frequent
endeavours and conferences towards a peace between the French
and English. The demands on either side proved irreconcilable.
A truce was however concluded, in 1444, which lasted four
years; it was sealed by the marriage of Henry VI. with
Margaret of Anjou, daughter of Réné, and granddaughter of
Louis, who had perished while leading an army to the conquest
of Naples. ... In 1449 the truce was allowed to expire. The
quarrels of York and Lancaster had commenced, and England was
unable to defend her foreign possessions. Normandy was
invaded. The gallant Talbot could not preserve Rouen with a
disaffected population, and Charles recovered without loss of
blood [1449] the second capital of his dominions. The only
blow struck by the English for the preservation of Normandy
was at Fourmigny near Bayeux. ... Normandy was for ever lost
to the English after this action or skirmish. The following
year Guyenne was invaded by the count de Dunois. He met with
no resistance. The great towns at that day had grown wealthy,
and their maxim was to avoid a siege at all hazards." Lord
Talbot was killed in an engagement at Castillon (1450), and
"with that hero expired the last hopes of his country in
regard to France. Guyenne was lost [A. D. 1453] as well as
Normandy, and Calais remained to England the only fruit of so
much blood spilt and so many victories achieved."
_E. E. Crowe,
History of France,
volume 1, chapter 4._
ALSO IN:
_J. Michelet,
History of France,
book 11._
_E. de Monstrelet,
Chronicles (Johnes' translation),
book 2, chapter 109, book 3, chapter 65._
See, also,
AQUITAINE: A. D. 1360-1453.
FRANCE: A. D. 1438.
Pragmatic Sanction of Charles VII.
Reforming decrees of the Council of Basel adopted for the
Gallican church.
After the rupture between the reforming Council of Basel and
Pope Eugenius IV. (see PAPACY: A. D. 1431-1448), Charles VII.
of France "determined to adopt in his own kingdom such of the
decrees of the Council as were for his advantage, seeing that
no opposition could be made by the Pope. Accordingly a Synod
was summoned at Bourges on May 1, 1438. The embassadors of
Pope and Council urged their respective causes. It was agreed
that the King should write to Pope and Council to stay their
hands in proceeding against one another; meanwhile, that the
reformation be not lost, some of the Basel decrees should be
maintained in France by royal authority. The results of the
synod's deliberation were laid before the King, and on July 7
were made binding as a pragmatic sanction on the French
Church. The Pragmatic Sanction enacted that General Councils
were to be held every ten years, and recognised the authority
of the Council of Basel. The Pope was no longer to reserve any
of the greater ecclesiastical appointments, but elections were
to be duly made by the rightful patrons. Grants to benefices
in expectancy, 'whence all agree that many evils arise,' were
to cease, as well as reservations. In all cathedral churches,
one prebend was to be given to a theologian who had studied
for ten years in a university, and who was to lecture or
preach at least once a week. Benefices were to be conferred in
future, one-third on graduates, two-thirds on deserving
clergy. Appeals to Rome, except for important causes, were
forbidden. The number of Cardinals was to be 24, each of the
age of 30 at least. Annates and first-fruits were no longer to
be paid to the Pope, but only the necessary legal fees on
institution. Regulations were made for greater reverence in
the conduct of Divine service; prayers were to be said by the
priest in an audible voice; mummeries in churches were
forbidden, and clerical concubinage was to be punished by
suspension for three months. Such were the chief reforms of
its own special grievances, which France wished to establish.
It was the first step in the assertion of the rights of
national Churches to arrange for themselves the details of
their own ecclesiastical organisation."
_M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation,
book 3, chapter 9 (volume 2)._
{1179}
FRANCE: A. D. 1447.
Origin of the claims of the house of Orleans to the duchy of
Milan.
See MILAN: A. D. 1447-1454.
FRANCE: A. D. 1453-1461.
The reconstructed kingdom.
The new plant of Absolutism.
"At the expulsion of the English, France emerged from the
chaos with an altered character and new features of
government. The royal authority and supreme jurisdiction of
the parliament were universally recognised. Yet there was a
tendency towards insubordination left among the great
nobility, arising in part from the remains of old feudal
privileges, but still more from that lax administration which,
in the convulsive struggles of the war, had been suffered to
prevail. In the south were some considerable vassals, the
houses of Foix, Albret, and Armagnac, who, on account of their
distance from the seat of empire, had always maintained a very
independent conduct. The dukes of Britany and Burgundy were of
a more formidable character, and might rather be ranked among
foreign powers than privileged subjects. The princes, too, of
the royal blood, who, during the late reign, had learned to
partake or contend for the management, were ill-inclined
towards Charles VII., himself jealous, from old recollections
of their ascendancy. They saw that the constitution was
verging rapidly towards an absolute monarchy, from the
direction of which they would studiously be excluded. This
apprehension gave rise to several attempts at rebellion during
the reign of Charles VII., and to the war, commonly entitled,
for the Public Weal ('du bien public'), under Louis XI. Among
the pretenses alleged by the revolters in each of these, the
injuries of the people were not forgotten; but from the people
they received small support. Weary of civil dissension, and
anxious for a strong government to secure them from
depredation, the French had no inducement to intrust even
their real grievances to a few malcontent princes, whose
regard for the common good they had much reason to distrust.
Every circumstance favoured Charles VII. and his son in the
attainment of arbitrary power. The country was pillaged by
military ruffians. Some of these had been led by the dauphin
to a war in Germany, but the remainder still infested the high
roads and villages. Charles established his companies of
ordonnance, the basis of the French regular army, in order to
protect the country from such depredators. They consisted of
about nine thousand soldiers, all cavalry, of whom fifteen
hundred were heavy-armed; a force not very considerable, but
the first, except mere body-guards, which had been raised in
any part of Europe as a national standing army. These troops
were paid out of the produce of a permanent tax, called the
taille; an innovation still more important than the former.
But the present benefit cheating the people, now prone to
submissive habits, little or no opposition was made, except in
Guienne, the inhabitants of which had speedy reason to regret
the mild government of England, and vainly endeavoured to
return to its protection. It was not long before the new
despotism exhibited itself in its harshest character. Louis
XI., son of Charles VII., who during his father's reign, had
been connected with the discontented princes, came to the
throne greatly endowed with those virtues and vices which
conspire to the success of a king."
_H. Hallam,
The Middle Ages,
chapter 1, part 2._
FRANCE: A. D. 1458-1461.
Renewed submission of Genoa to the King, and renewed revolt.
See GENOA: A. D. 1458-1464.
FRANCE: A. D. 1461.
Accession of King Louis XI.
Contemporary portrait of him by Commines.
"Of all the princes that I ever knew, the wisest and most
dexterous to extricate himself out of any danger or difficulty
in time of adversity, was our master King Louis XI. He was the
humblest in his conversation and habit, and the most painful
and indefatigable to win over any man to his side that he
thought capable of doing him either mischief or service:
though he was often refused, he would never give over a man
that he wished to gain, but still pressed and continued his
insinuations, promising him largely, and presenting him with
such sums and honours as he knew would gratify his ambition;
and for such as he had discarded in time of peace and
prosperity, he paid dear (when he had occasion for them) to
recover them again; but when he had once reconciled them, he
retained no enmity towards them for what had passed, but
employed them freely for the future. He was naturally kind and
indulgent to persons of mean estate, and hostile to all great
men who had no need of him. Never prince was so conversable,
nor so inquisitive as he, for his desire was to know everybody
he could; and indeed he knew all persons of any authority or
worth in England, Spain, Portugal and Italy, in the
territories of the Dukes of Burgundy and Bretagne, and among
his own subjects; and by those qualities he preserved the
crown upon his head, which was in much danger by the enemies
he had created to himself upon his accession to the throne.
But above all, his great bounty and liberality did him the
greatest service: and yet, as he behaved himself wisely in
time of distress, so when he thought himself a little out of
danger, though it were but by a truce, he would disoblige the
servants and officers of his court by mean and petty ways,
which were little to his advantage; and as for peace, he could
hardly endure the thoughts of it. He spoke slightingly of most
people, and rather before their faces, than behind their
backs, unless he was afraid of them, and of that sort there
were a great many, for he was naturally somewhat timorous.
When he had done himself any prejudice by his talk, or was
apprehensive he should do so, and wished to make amends, he
would say to the person whom he had disobliged, 'I am sensible
my tongue has done me a great deal of mischief; but, on the
other hand, it has sometimes done me much good; however, it is
but reason I should make some reparation for the injury.' And
he never used this kind of apologies to any person, but he
granted some favour to the person to whom he made it, and it
was always of considerable amount. It is certainly a great
blessing from God upon any prince to have experienced
adversity as well as prosperity, good as well as evil, and
especially if the good outweighs the evil, as it did in the
king our master.
{1180}
I am of opinion that the troubles he was involved in, in his
youth, when he fled from his father, and resided six years
together with Philip Duke of Burgundy, were of great service
to him; for there he learned to be complaisant to such as he
had occasion to use, which was no slight advantage of
adversity. As soon as he found himself a powerful and crowned
king, his mind was wholly bent upon revenge; but he quickly
found the inconvenience of this, repented by degrees of his
indiscretion, and made sufficient reparation for his folly and
error, by regaining those he had injured, as shall be related
hereafter. Besides, I am very confident that if his education
had not been different from the usual education of such nobles
as I have seen in France, he could not so easily have worked
himself out of his troubles; for they are brought up to
nothing but to make themselves ridiculous, both in their
clothes and discourse; they have no knowledge of letters; no
wise man is suffered to come near them, to improve their
understandings; they have governors who manage their business,
but they do nothing themselves."--Such is the account of Louis
XI. which Philip de Commines gives in one of the early
chapters of his delightful Memoirs. In a later chapter he
tells naively of the king's suspicions and fears, and of what
he suffered, at the end of his life, as the penalty of his
cruel and crafty dealings with his subjects: "Some five or six
months before his death, he began to suspect everybody,
especially those who were most capable and deserving of the
administration of affairs. He was afraid of his son, and
caused him to be kept close, so that no man saw or discoursed
with him, but by his special command. At last he grew
suspicious of his daughter, and of his son-in-law the Duke of
Bourbon, and required an account of what persons came to speak
with them at Plessis, and broke up a council which the Duke of
Bourbon was holding there, by his order. ... Behold, then, if
he had caused many to live under him in continual fear and
apprehension, whether it was not returned to him again; for of
whom could he be secure when he was afraid of his son-in-law,
his daughter, and his own son? I speak this not only of him,
but of all other princes who desire to be feared, that
vengeance never falls on them till they grow old, and then, as
a just penance, they are afraid of everybody themselves; and
what grief must it have been to this poor King to be tormented
with such terrors and passions? He was still attended by his
physician, Master James Coctier, to whom in five months' time
he had given fifty-four thousand crowns in ready money,
besides the bishopric of Amiens for his nephew, and other
great offices and estates for himself and his friends; yet
this doctor used him very roughly indeed; one would not have
given such outrageous language to one's servants as he gave
the King, who stood in such awe of him, that he durst not
forbid him his presence. It is true he complained of his
impudence afterwards, but he durst not change him as he had
done all the rest of his servants; because he had told him
after a most audacious manner one day, 'I know well that some
time or other you will dismiss me from court, as you have done
the rest; but be sure (and he confirmed it with a great oath)
you shall not live eight days after it'; with which expression
the King was so terrified, that ever after he did nothing but
flatter and bribe him, which must needs have been a great
mortification to a prince who had been humbly obeyed all his
life by so many good and brave men. The King had ordered
several cruel prisons to be made; some were cages of iron, and
some of wood, but all were covered with iron plates both
within and without, with terrible locks, about eight feet wide
and seven high; the first contriver of them was the Bishop of
Verdun, who was immediately put in the first of them that was
made, where he continued fourteen years. Many bitter curses he
has had since for his invention, and some from me as I lay in
one of them eight months together in the minority of our
present King. He also ordered heavy and terrible fetters to be
made in Germany, and particularly a certain ring for the feet,
which was extremely hard to be opened, and fitted like an iron
collar, with a thick weighty chain, and a great globe of iron
at the end of it, most unreasonably heavy, which engines were
called the King's Nets. ... As in his time this barbarous
variety of prisons was invented, so before he died he himself
was in greater torment, and more terrible apprehension than
those whom he had imprisoned; which I look upon as a great
mercy towards him, and as it part of his purgatory; and I have
mentioned it here to show that there is no person, of what
station or dignity soever, but suffers some time or other,
either publicly or privately, especially if he has caused
other people to suffer. The King, towards the latter end of
his days, caused his castle of Plessis-les-Tours to be
encompassed with great bars of iron in the form of thick
grating, and at the four corners of the house four
sparrow-nests of iron, strong, massy, and thick, were built.
The grates were without the wall on the other side of the
ditch, and sank to the bottom. Several spikes of iron were
fastened into the wall, set as thick by one another as was
possible, and each furnished with three or four points. He
likewise placed ten bow-men in the ditches, to shoot at any
man that durst approach the castle before the opening of the
gates; and he ordered they should lie in the ditches, but
retire to the sparrow-nests upon occasion. He was sensible
enough that this fortification was too weak to keep out an
army, or any great body of men, but he had no fear of such an
attack; his great apprehension was, that some of the nobility
of his kingdom, having intelligence within, might attempt to
make themselves masters of the castle by night. ... Is it
possible then to keep a prince (with any regard to his
quality) in a closer prison than he kept himself? The cages
which were made for other people were about eight feet square;
and he (though so great a monarch) had but a small court of
the castle to walk in, and seldom made use of that, but
generally kept himself in the gallery, out of which he went
into the chambers on his way to mass, but never passed through
the court. ... I have not recorded these things merely to
represent our master as a suspicious and mistrustful prince;
but to show, that by the patience which he expressed in his
sufferings (like those which he inflicted on other people),
they may be looked upon, in my judgment, as a punishment which
our Lord inflicted upon him in this world, in order to deal
more mercifully with him in the next, as well in regard to
those things before-mentioned as to the distempers of his
body, which were great and painful, and much dreaded by him
before they came upon him; and, likewise, that those princes
who may be his successors, may learn by his example to be more
tender and indulgent to their subjects, and less severe in
their punishments than our master had been: although I will
not censure him, or say I ever saw a better prince; for though
he oppressed his subjects himself he would never see them
injured by anybody else."
_Philip de Commines,
Memoirs,
book 1, chapter 10,
and book 6, chapter 11._
{1181}
FRANCE: A. D. 1461-1468.
The character and reign of Louis XI.
The League of the Public Weal.