displayed, not in resistance, but, if the paradox may be
admitted, in flight. The outflow was for the moment arrested
at the remonstrance of Colbert, now for the last time listened
to in the royal councils, and by reason of the sympathy
aroused by the fugitives in England: but not before 3,000
families had left the country. The retirement and death of the
great minister were the signal for revived action, wherever an
assembly of Huguenots larger than usual might warrant or
colour a suspicion of rebellion. In such excuses, not as yet
an avowed crusade, the troopers of the duke de Noailles were
called in at Grenoble, Bourdeaux, and Nimes. Full forty
churches were demolished in 1683, more than a hundred in 1684.
But the system of military missions was not organized until in
1685 the defence of the Spanish frontier offered the
opportunity for a final subjugation of the Huguenots of Bearn.
The dragonnade passed through the land like a pestilence. From
Guienne to Dauphine, from Poitou to Upper Languedoc, no place
was spared. Then it pervaded the southeast country, about the
Cevennes and Provence, and ravaged Lyons and the Pays de Gex.
In the end, the whole of the north was assailed, and the
failing edict of Nantes was annulled on the 1st of October.
The sombre mind of Madame de Maintenon had postulated the
Recall as a preliminary to the marriage which the king had
already conceded. On the 21st of the month the great church at
Charenton was doomed; and on the 22nd the 'unadvised and
precipitate' Edict of Revocation was registered in the Chambre
des Vacations. ... The year 1685 is fitly identified with the
depopulation of France. And yet, with a blindness that appears
to us incredible, the government refused to believe in the
desire or the possibility of escape. The penalties attached to
capture on the road,--the galleys or the nunnery,--the
vigilant watch at the frontier, the frigates cruising by every
coast, all these difficulties seem to have persuaded Louvois
that few would persist in risking flight. What these measures
actually effected was doubtless to diminish the exodus, but in
no marked degree. At length, it came to be thought that the
emigration was due to its prohibition, as though the Huguenots
must do a thing from mere perverseness. The watch was relaxed,
and a result unlooked for issued. It was the signal of the
greatest of the emigrations, that of 1688. ... In the
statistical question [as to the total number of the Huguenot
exiles from France after the revocation of the edict of
Nantes] it is impossible to arrive at a certain result; and
the range which calculation or conjecture has allowed to
successive historians may make one pause before attempting a
dogmatic solution. Basnage, a year after the Recall, reckoned
the emigrants above 150,000: next year Jurieu raised the total
above 200,000. Writing later Basnage found between 300,000 and
400,000; and the estimate has been accepted by Sismondi.
Lastly Voltaire, followed in our own day by Hase, counted
500,000. These are a few of the sober calculations, and their
mean will perhaps supply the ultimate figure. I need only
mention, among impossible guesses, that of Limiers, which
raises the account to 800,000, because it has been taken up by
the Prussian statesman Von Dohm. ... The only historian who
professes to have pursued the enquiry in exact detail is
Capefigue; and from his minute scrutiny of the cartons des
généralités, as prepared in the closing years of the 17th
century, he obtains a computation of 225,000 or 230,000. Such
a result must be accepted as the absolute minimum; for it was
the plain interest of the intendants who drew up the returns,
to put all the facts which revealed the folly of the king's
action at the lowest cipher. And allowing the accuracy of
Capefigue's work, there are other reasons for increasing his
total. ... We cannot set the emigration at a lower fraction
than one-fifth of the total Huguenot society. If the body
numbered two millions, the outflow will be 400,000. If this
appear an extreme estimate, it must be remembered that
one-fifth is also extreme on the other side. Reducing the
former aggregate to 1,500,000, it will be clearly within the
bounds of moderation to leave the total exodus a range between
300,000 and 350,000. How are we to distribute this immense
aggregation? Holland certainly claims near 100,000; England,
with Ireland and America, probably 80,000. Switzerland must
have received 25,000; and Germany, including Brandenburg,
thrice that number. The remainder will be made up from the
north of Europe, and from the exiles whom commerce or other
causes carried in isolated households elsewhere, and of whom
no record is preserved to us. ... The tale then of the
emigrants was above 300,000. It follows to ask what was the
material loss involved in their exodus. Caveirac is again the
lowest in his estimate: he will not grant the export of more
than 250,000 livres. He might have learnt from Count d'Avaux
himself, that those least likely to magnify the sum confessed
that by the very year of the Recall twenty million livres had
gone out of the country; and it is certain that the wealthier
merchants deferred their departure in order to carry as much
as they could with them. Two hundred and fifty traders are
said to have quitted Rouen in 1687 and 1688. Probably the
actual amount was very far in excess of these twenty millions:
and a calculation is cited by Macpherson which even affirms
that every individual refugee in England brought with him on
an average money or effects to the value of £60. ... It will
be needless to add many statistics of the injury caused by
their withdrawal from France. Two great instances are typical
of the rest. Lyons which had employed 18,000 silk-looms had
but 4,000 remaining by the end of the century. Tours with the
same interest had had 800 mills, 80,000 looms, and perhaps
4,000 work-people. Of its 3,000 ribbon-factories only sixty
remained: Equally significant was the ruin of the woollen
trade of Poitou. Little was left of the drugget-manufacture of
Coulonges and Châtaigneraie, or of the industry in serges and
bombazines at Thouars; and the export traffic between
Châtaigneraie and Canada, by way of La Rochelle, was in the
last year of the century absolutely extinct."
_R. L. Poole,
History of the Huguenots of the Dispersion,
chapters 3 and 15._
ALSO IN:
_C. Weiss,
History of the French Protestant Refugees._
_N. Peyrat,
The Pastors in the Wilderness,
volume 1, chapters 5-7._
_A. Maury,
Memoirs of a Huguenot Family
(Fontaine), chapters 4-9._
_J. I. von Döllinger,
Studies in European History,
chapters 11-12._
_C. W. Baird,
History of the Huguenot Emigration to America,
chapters 4-8 (volumes 1-2)._
FRANCE: A. D. 1686.
Claims upon the Palatinate.
Formation of the League of Augsburg.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1686.
{1239}
FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1690.
War of the League of Augsburg.
The second devastation of the Palatinate.
"The interference of Lewis in Ireland on behalf of James [the
Second, the dethroned Stuart king] caused William [prince of
Orange, now King of England] to mature his plans for a great
Continental confederacy against France. On May 12, 1689,
William, as Stadtholder of the United Provinces, had entered
into an offensive and defensive alliance with the Emperor
against Lewis. On May 17, as King of England, he declared war
against France; and on December 30 joined the alliance between
the Emperor and the Dutch. His example was followed on June 6,
1690, by the King of Spain, and on October 20 of the same year
by Victor Amadeus, Duke of Savoy. This confederation was
called the 'Grand Alliance.' Its main object was declared to
be to curb the power and ambition of Lewis XIV.; to force him
to surrender his conquests, and to confine his territories to
the limits agreed upon between him and the Emperor at the
treaty of Westphalia (1648), and between France and Spain at
the treaty of the Pyrenees (1659). The League of Augsburg,
which William had with so much trouble brought about, had now
successfully developed into the Grand Alliance."
_E. Hale,
The Fall of the Stuarts and Western Europe,
chapter 14, section 5._
"The work at which William had toiled indefatigably during
many gloomy and anxious years was at length accomplished. The
great coalition was formed. It was plain that a desperate
conflict was at hand. The oppressor of Europe would have to
defend himself against England allied with Charles the Second
King of Spain, with the Emperor Leopold, and with the Germanic
and Batavian federations, and was likely to have no ally
except the Sultan, who was waging war against the House of
Austria on the Danube. Lewis had, towards the close of the
preceding year, taken his enemies at a disadvantage, and had
struck the first blow before they were prepared to parry it.
But that blow, though heavy, was not aimed at the part where
it might have been mortal. Had hostilities been commenced on
the Batavian frontier, William and his army would probably
have been detained on the continent, and James might have
continued to govern England. Happily, Lewis, under an
infatuation which many pious Protestants confidently ascribed
to the righteous judgment of God, had neglected the point on
which the fate of the whole civilised world depended, and had
made a great display of power, promptitude, and energy, in a
quarter where the most splendid achievements could produce
nothing more than an illumination and a Te Deum. A French army
under the command of Marshal Duras had invaded the Palatinate
and some of the neighbouring principalities. But this
expedition, though it had been completely successful, and
though the skill and vigour with which it had been conducted
had excited general admiration, could not perceptibly affect
the event of the tremendous struggle which was approaching.
France would soon be attacked on every side. It would be
impossible for Duras long to retain possession of the
provinces which he had surprised and overrun. An atrocious
thought rose in the mind of Louvois, who, in military affairs,
had the chief sway at Versailles. ... The ironhearted
statesman submitted his plan, probably with much management
and with some disguise, to Lewis; and Lewis, in an evil hour
for his fame, assented. Duras received orders to turn one of
the fairest regions of Europe into a wilderness. Fifteen years
had elapsed since Turenne had ravaged part of that fine
country. But the ravages committed by Turenne, though they
have left a deep stain on his glory, were mere sport in
comparison with the horrors of this second devastation. The
French commander announced to near half a million of human
beings that he granted them three days of grace, and that,
within that time, they must shift for themselves. Soon the
roads and fields, which then lay deep in snow, were blackened
by innumerable multitudes of men, women, and children flying
from their homes. Many died of cold and hunger: but enough
survived to fill the streets of all the cities of Europe with
lean and squalid beggars, who had once been thriving farmers
and shopkeepers. Meanwhile the work of destruction began. The
flames went up from every marketplace, every hamlet, every
parish church, every country seat, within the devoted
provinces. The fields where the corn had been sown were
ploughed up. The orchards were hewn down. No promise of a
harvest was left on the fertile plains near what had once been
Frankenthal. Not a vine, not an almond tree, was to be seen on
the slopes of the sunny hills round what had once been
Heidelberg. No respect was shown to palaces, to temples, to
monasteries, to infirmaries, to beautiful works of art, to
monuments of the illustrious dead. The far-famed castle of the
Elector Palatine was turned into a heap of ruins. The
adjoining hospital was sacked. The provisions, the medicines,
the pallets on which the sick lay, were destroyed. The very
stones on which Manheim had been built were flung into the
Rhine. The magnificent Cathedral of Spires perished, and with
it the marble sepulchres of eight Cæsars. The coffins were
broken open. The ashes were scattered to the winds. Treves,
with its fair bridge, its Roman baths and amphitheatre, its
venerable churches, convents, and colleges, was doomed to the
same fate. But, before this last crime had been perpetrated,
Lewis was recalled to a better mind by the execrations of all
the neighbouring nations, by the silence and confusion of his
flatterers, and by the expostulations of his wife. ... He
relented; and Treves was spared. In truth he could hardly fail
to perceive that he had committed a great error. The
devastation of the Palatinate, while it had not in any
sensible degree lessened the power of his enemies, had
inflamed their animosity, and had furnished them with
inexhaustible matter for invective. The cry of vengeance rose
on every side. Whatever scruple either branch of the House of
Austria might have felt about coalescing with Protestants was
completely removed."
_Lord Macaulay,
History of England,
chapter 11._
ALSO IN:
_H. Martin,
History of France: Age of Louis XIV.
(translated by M. L. Booth), volume 2, chapter 2._
_S. A. Dunham,
History of the German Empire,
book 3, chapter 3 (volume. 3)._
See, also, CANADA: A. D. 1689-1690.
FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1691.
Aid to James II. in Ireland.
See IRELAND: A. D. 1689-1691.
{1240}
FRANCE: A. D. 1689-1691.
Campaigns in the Netherlands and in Savoy.
"Our limits will not permit us to describe at any length the
war between Louis XIV. and the Grand Alliance, which lasted
till the Peace of Ryswick, in 1697, but only to note some of
the chief incidents of the different campaigns. The
Imperialists had, in 1689, notwithstanding the efforts it was
still necessary to make against the Turks, brought an army of
80,000 men into the field, which was divided into three bodies
under the command of the Duke of Lorraine, the Elector of
Bavaria, and the Elector of Brandenburg; while the Prince of
Waldeck, in the Netherlands, was at the head of a large Dutch
and Spanish force, composed, however, in great part of German
mercenaries. In this quarter, Marshal d'Humières was opposed
to Waldeck, while Duras commanded the French army on the
Rhine. In the south, the Duke of Noailles maintained a French
force in Catalonia. Nothing of much importance was done this
year; but on the whole the war went in favour of the
imperialists, who succeeded in recovering Mentz and Bonn.
1690: This year, Marshal d'Humières was superseded by the Duke
of Luxembourg, who infused more vigour into the French
operations. ... Catinat was sent this year into Dauphiné to
watch the movements of the Duke of Savoy, who was suspected by
the French Court, and not without reason, of favouring the
Grand Alliance. The extravagant demands of Louis, who required
Victor Amadeus to unite his troops with the army of Catinat,
and to admit a French garrison into Vercelli, Verrua, and even
the citadel of Turin itself, till a general peace should be
effected, caused the Duke to enter into treaties with Spain
and the Emperor, June 3d and 4th; and on October 20th, he
joined the Grand Alliance by a treaty concluded at the Hague
with England and the States-General. This last step was taken
by Victor Amadeus in consequence of his reverses. He had
sustained from Catinat in the battle of Staffarda (August
17th) a defeat which only the skill of a youthful general, his
cousin the Prince Eugene, had saved from becoming a total
rout. As the fruits of this victory, Catinat occupied Saluzzo,
Susa, and all the country from the Alps to the Tanaro. During
these operations another French division had reduced, without
much resistance, the whole of Savoy, except the fortress of
Montmélian. The only other event of importance during this
campaign was the decisive victory gained by Luxembourg over
Prince Waldeck at Fleurus, July 1st. The captured standards,
more than a hundred in number, which Luxembourg sent to Paris
on this occasion, obtained for him the name of the 'Tapassier
de Notre Dame.' Luxembourg was, however, prevented from
following up his victory by the orders of Louvois, who forbade
him to lay siege to Namur or Charleroi. Thus, in this
campaign, France maintained her preponderance on land as well
as at sea by the victory off Beachy Head. ...
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1690.
The Imperialists had this year lost one of their best leaders
by the death of the Duke of Lorraine (April). He was succeeded
as commander-in-chief by Maximilian Emanuel, Elector of
Bavaria; but nothing of importance took place upon the Rhine.
1691: The campaign of this year was singularly barren of
events, though both the French and English kings took a
personal part in it. In March, Louis and Luxembourg, laid
siege to Mons, the capital of Hainault, which surrendered in
less than three weeks. King William, who was in the
neighbourhood, could not muster sufficient troops to venture
on its relief. Nothing further of importance was done in this
quarter, and the campaign in Germany was equally a blank. On
the side of Piedmont, Catinat took Nice, but, being confronted
by superior numbers, was forced to evacuate Piedmont; though,
by way of compensation, he completed the conquest of Savoy by
the capture of Montmélian. Noailles gained some trifling
successes in Spain; and the celebrated French corsair, Jean
Bart, distinguished himself by his enterprises at sea. One of
the most remarkable events of the year was a domestic
occurrence, the death of Louvois."
_T. H. Dyer,
History of Modern Europe,
book 5, chapter 5 (volume 3)._
ALSO IN:
_F. P. Guizot,
Popular History of France,
chapter 44 (volume 5)._
FRANCE: A. D. 1692.
The taking of Namur and the victory of Steinkirk, or
Steenkerke.
Never perhaps in the whole course of his unresting life were
the energies of William [of Orange] more severely taxed, and
never did his great moral and intellectual qualities shine
forth with a brighter lustre, than in the years 1692-93.
See ENGLAND: A. D. 1692.
The great victory of La Hogue and the destruction of the
flower of the French fleet did, it is true, relieve England of
any immediate dread either of insurrection or invasion, and so
far the prospect before him acquired a slight improvement
towards the summer of 1692. But this was the only gleam of
light in the horizon. ... The great coalition of Powers which
he had succeeded in forming to resist the ambition of Louis
was never nearer dissolution than in the spring of 1692. The
Scandinavian states, who had held aloof from it from the
first, were now rapidly changing the benevolence of their
neutrality into something not easily distinguishable from its
reverse. The new Pope Innocent XII. showed himself far less
amicably disposed towards William than his two predecessors.
The decrepitude of Spain and the arrogant self-will of Austria
were displaying themselves more conspicuously than ever. Savoy
was ruled by a duke who was more than half suspected of being
a traitor. ... William did succeed in saving the league from
dissolution, and in getting their armies once more into the
field. But not, unfortunately, to any purpose. The campaign of
the present year was destined to repeat the errors of the
last, and these errors were to be paid for at a heavier cost.
... The French king was bent upon the capture of the great
stronghold of Namur, and the enemy, as in the case of Mons,
were too slow in their movements and too ineffective in their
dispositions to prevent it. Marching to the assault of the
doomed city, with a magnificence of courtly pageantry which
had never before been witnessed in warfare, Louis sat down
before Namur, and in eight days its faint-hearted governor,
the nominee of the Spanish viceroy of the Netherlands,
surrendered at discretion. Having accomplished, or rather
having graciously condescended to witness the accomplishment
of this feat of arms, Louis returned to Versailles, leaving
his army under the command of Luxembourg. The fall of Namur
was a severe blow to the hopes of William, but yet worse
disasters were in store for him. He was now pitted against one
who enjoyed the reputation of the greatest general of the age,
and William, a fair but by no means brilliant strategist, was
unequal to the contest with his accomplished adversary.
{1241}
Luxembourg lay at Steinkirk, and William approaching him from
a place named Lambeque, opened his attack upon him by a
well-conceived surprise which promised at first to throw the
French army into complete disorder. Luxembourg's resource and
energy, however, were equal to the emergency. He rallied and
steadied his troops with astonishing speed, and the nature of
the ground preventing the allies from advancing as rapidly as
they had expected, they found the enemy in a posture to
receive them. The British forces were in the front, commanded
by Count Solmes, the division of Mackay, a name now honourable
for many generations in the annals of continental, no less
than of Scottish, warfare, leading the way. These heroes, for
so, though as yet untried soldiers, they approved themselves,
were to have been supported by Count Solmes with a strong body
of cavalry and infantry, but at the critical moment he failed
them miserably, and his failure decided the fortunes of the
day. ... The division was practically annihilated. Its five
regiments, 'Cutt's, Mackay's, Angus's, Graham's, and Leven's,
all,' as Corporal Trim relates pathetically, cut to pieces,
and so had the English Life-guards been too, had it not been
for some regiments on the right, who marched up boldly to
their relief, and, received the enemy's fire in their faces,
before anyone of their own platoons discharged a musket.'
Bitter was the resentment in the English army at the desertion
of these gallant troops by Count de Solmes, and William gave
vent to one of his rare outbursts of anger at the sight. We
have it indeed on the authority above quoted--unimpeachable as
first-hand tradition, for Sterne had heard the story of these
wars at the knees of an eye-witness of and actor in them--that
the King 'would not suffer the Count to come into his presence
for many months after.' The destruction of Mackay's division
had indeed decided the issue of the struggle. Luxembourg's
army was being rapidly strengthened by reinforcements from
that of Boufflers, and there was nothing for it but retreat.
The loss on both sides had been great, but the moral effect of
the victory was still greater. William's reputation for
generalship, perhaps unduly raised by his recent exploits in
Ireland, underwent a serious decline."
_H. D. Traill,
William the Third,
chapter 10._
On the Rhine and on the Spanish frontier nothing of importance
occurred during 1692. The Duke of Savoy gained some advantages
on his side and invaded Dauphiny, without any material result.
The invasion called into action a young heroine, Mademoiselle
de La Tour-du-Pin, whose portrait has a place at Saint-Denis
by the side of that of Jeanne D'Arc.
_H. Martin,
History of France: Age of Louis XIV.,
volume 2, chapter 2._
ALSO IN:
_W. H. Torriano,
William the Third,
chapter 20._
FRANCE: A. D. 1693 (July).
The Battle of Neerwinden, or Landen.