free state, and a connection only of the Confederation. In truth, the
history of that old Rhaetian land at that time forms a striking pendant
as it were to the great drama of the European struggle. The Latin-German
inhabitants, combining northern prudence with southern passion, had
since the middle of the sixteenth century been steeped in internal
dissension, owing to the religious divisions caused by the Reformation.
The Protestant party under Von Salis, and the Catholics headed by Von
Planta, were at deadly enmity with each other, and sided with France and
Venice, and with Austria and Spain respectively. John von Planta, head
of his clan, and solicitor-general of the Papal see, was suspected of
intending to reintroduce Popery into the Grisons. The mountaineers
accordingly descended from their Alps in crowds, and flocked to Chur.
There they brought to trial Planta and sentenced him to death, and his
fall struck the keynote to the tragedy that followed. With the opening
of the seventeenth century the conflict grew fiercer, national interests
and foreign policy being now inextricably mixed. Mistress of the
beautiful Italian Signory Valtellina, Bormio, Chiavenna, and the Alpine
passes commanding the entrance into the Tyrol and Italy, Graubuenden
became the apple of contention between the southern states of Europe.
Austria and Spain possessing Milan were not without hopes of joining
hands across Graubuenden, and France was sanguine of her success in
preventing it. This latter state with Venice had effected an alliance
with Protestant Buenden, and that party strongly opposed the Spanish
union for which the energetic but headstrong Rudolf von Planta was
working. Fuentes, a Spaniard, Governor of Milan, furious at the
resistance offered, erected a chain of strong forts on Lake Como, with
the view of cutting off the Valtellines. Before long, George Jenatsch
from the Engadine, Tschusch, and other high-minded and patriotic
Protestants, began to decry the Spanish scheme, and tumults arose. An
attack on Planta's manor, Zernez (1618), having failed through the
escape of Rudolf, Zambra, Landammann in Bregaglia, and Rusca, a priest
in the Valtellina, both greyheaded old men, were seized. They were
sentenced to death by a new court which had been set up at Thusis, a
court which raged against popery and spread terrorism for some months.
In the Engadine a strange thing happened. The respective chiefs of the
hostile clans were the two brothers Von Travers, and a hand-to-hand
fight between the opposing parties having begun, suddenly the wives,
daughters, and sisters of the combatants rushed amongst them like the
Sabine women of old, and checked them. Foremost amongst these noble
women was the spirited Anna Juvalta. The Plantas were now in exile, and
were conspiring with Austria. Their cousin Robustello (Valtellina) at a
given signal broke into the houses of the Protestants, and, with the
help of hired assassins, put the inmates to the sword. This was on the
19th of July, 1620, and throughout the whole valley no quarter was
given. Zurich and Bern on hearing of this shocking massacre--the "St.
Bartholomew of the Valtellina"--sent troops, but they were defeated at
Tirano by the Spanish forces and adherents. The Plantas returned from
exile and asked the Forest Cantons to give their countenance to their
party, and these were not unwilling; but the plot itself was opposed by
the Protestant Grisons with scorn and fury. Jenatsch penetrated to the
castle of the Plantas at Rietberg, and Pompejus fell by his hands
(1621). The Catholics were defeated at Valendas, and the country was
cleared of the troops of the Forest Cantons and of Spaniards. However,
Jenatsch failed to take Valtellina.
The Austrians still claimed supremacy over part of the
_Zehngerichte_,[69] and we find them, from 1620 to 1629, twice invading
and occupying Graubuenden. The most dreadful cruelties marked the passage
of their general, Baldiron, and Catholicism was reintroduced by force.
In 1629, the Emperor Ferdinand had reached the height of his success and
greatness, and Buenden with all its dependencies lay prostrate at his
feet. France came to the rescue. Richelieu pursued the policy of Henry
IV. to re-establish the balance of power by breaking down the prestige
of the Habsburgs. With the view of gaining supremacy for France, he had
drawn Sweden into the Thirty Years' War; and on the death of Gustavus
Adolphus, when the zeal was somewhat flagging, he revived it by sending
French troops into Alsace, South Germany, and the Grisons. The command
of the Franco-Grison army was entrusted to Duke Henry de Rohan, godson
of Henry IV. of France (and godfather to Charles I. of England), one of
the noblest characters of his age. De Rohan was also appointed
ambassador to the Eidgenossen states in 1631. He had been leader of the
Huguenots, and had supported the Edict of Nantes in opposition to Louis
XIII. Becoming obnoxious to the king in consequence, he withdrew to
Venice. There he wrote a treatise on the strategical importance of the
Grisons, as if he foresaw his future mission.[70] During his residence
in Switzerland he watched zealously over its interests, smoothing over
difficulties in the Diet to avoid war. Richelieu sent him neither money
nor help, but left him to extricate himself as best he could from his
position in that isolated mountain fastness; yet Rohan was the idol of
his soldiers and of the people of the Grisons, and was always spoken of
by them as the "good duke." In 1635, when France was doing its utmost to
oust Austria, open war broke out, and Rohan gained four brilliant
victories in succession--Jenatsch serving as local guide and combatant
in advance, his superior tactics proving too much for the Austro-Spanish
forces. Yet the "good duke" was soon to fall a victim to the perfidious
policy of Richelieu, and the treachery of Jenatsch. This latter was a
strange mixture of the noble and the vile--fierce, and ambitious, a
seeker of gain, yet a man of honour, full of a wild patriotism and
thirst for freedom. Eager to free his country from the grasp of the
stranger, he and the hot-tempered Buendner, at whose head he was,
suddenly found that they were but exchanging masters. Sticking at
nothing to gain his ends Jenatsch entered into a secret understanding
with Austria and Spain, and even turned Catholic to win more favour with
them. Then, forgetting the many kindnesses he had received from his
friend Rohan, he betrayed him to his enemies. It should be observed,
parenthetically, that the question in dispute was that of the
Valtellina, and Rohan had had no instructions from Richelieu to return
that territory. Suddenly the French general found himself surrounded by
hostile troops from the Grisons, and was compelled to capitulate (1637).
Unable to bear the sight of France again, he fought for her under the
banner of Bernhard von Weimar, and fell at Rheinfelden, in Aargovy,
seeking rather than fearing death. Jenatsch, however, did not long enjoy
the fruits of his guilty action. Two years later he was stabbed at an
officers' banquet, during the carnival, by some masked figure. Rudolf
Planta, son of Pompejus, was said by some to have done the deed, whilst
another story has it that the avenger was Rudolf's sister, Lucretia, who
was burning for vengeance on the slayer of her father.[71] One of the
first German novelists of our time, Ferdinand Meyer, of Zurich, has
worked these thrilling episodes into his fine story, "Jenatsch." The
hero was buried with pomp at Chur, but his murderer remained
unpunished. Thus Graubuenden, after a struggle of nearly a hundred years,
recovered both its independence and its lost territory.
That memorable event of the seventeenth century, the signing of the
Peace of Westphalia, which concluded the Thirty Years' War, whilst, on
the one hand, it sanctioned the dismemberment of the German Empire, yet
ratified the independence and autonomy of the Swiss republics. This
result was chiefly due to the noble efforts of two men--Wettstein,
Burgomaster of Basel, who most effectively championed Swiss interests at
the Congress; and Henry d'Orleans Longueville, count and reigning prince
of Neuchatel, the French representative at the same conference, who
supported the Swiss claims.
The religious strife of Villmergen in 1656, which ended in the defeat of
the Protestants, cannot be gone into here. Suffice it to note that this
defeat was fully repaired by the second war of that name in 1712. A more
important matter was the Peasants' Revolt, in 1653. It promised to grow
to alarming dimensions, but was put down by the Government. This rising,
however, is noteworthy, as marking the vast chasm which had formed
between the labouring and the governing classes. The peasantry were now
in a state of complete subjection, and patiently awaited the dawn of a
brighter day, which nevertheless came only with the French Revolution.
What they claimed was the restoration of their old liberties, relief
from the excessive taxation, and the general improvement of their
material interests. But many of the governing classes, councillors,
_landvoegte_, and others, had served abroad at foreign courts, and had
drunk in the spirit of absolutism, and were as much imbued as any James
I. or Louis XIV. with notions as to the "divine right" of the privileged
classes to govern. They claimed seats on the administration as a right.
From their superior positions they looked down on the labouring classes,
and had little or no sympathy with them. Except in name the Swiss
cantons were as absolutely governed by aristocracies as France was by
Louis XIV. Nothing is more ludicrous, or more clearly shows the
affectations and narrow pedantries of the age, than the childish delight
in long or high-flown titles, by which the Swiss "regents," as they were
called, were wont to address each other, and be addressed even by
foreigners. "Leurs excellences," "noble-born," and so forth, were as
common amongst Swiss republicans as in any monarchy.[72] Nor were they
behindhand in the adoption of court fashions, wigs, frills, and the
like; whilst they hunted eagerly for patents of nobility, and placed the
"von" so unblushingly before their names that the higher classes, and
really well-born for the most part dropped it for a time.
The Eidgenossen, however, were eminently useful soldiers, and Louis XIV.
in 1663 wheedled or tricked them into the renewal of the alliance with
France, an alliance into which Le Barde had tried in vain for thirteen
years to coax them. The wily Louis invited a Swiss embassy to his Court,
and for a whole week amused and flattered his guests with a succession
of banquets, ceremonies, and entertainments. Moliere played before them
by royal command. The ambassadors were thus beguiled into admitting some
of the most important points in the treaty, the neutrality of Burgundy,
the liquidation of the old debt, &c. On the 18th of November, in the
presence of the whole French Court, at Notre Dame, the Swiss
representatives agreed to a disgraceful and humiliating bargain with
Louis. The king was not, however, inclined to lavish money on them like
his predecessors had done. One day Louvois complained to him that his
Swiss troops stood him dear, that for the money they had cost him and
his predecessors the road could be paved with crown-pieces from Paris to
Basel. Stuppa from the Grisons, overhearing this, quickly retorted,
"Sir, you forget that with the Swiss blood spilt in the French service
you might fill a canal from Basel to Paris."
Despite the engagements to France which Switzerland had entered into, it
never ceased to give shelter to the French refugees who fled to escape
the persecutions of Louis--to the Waldenses and the Huguenots. After the
revocation of the Edict of Nantes, sixty-six thousand emigrants are said
to have found shelter in Switzerland. Amongst the Swiss cities Geneva
stands out conspicuously and honourably by her great benevolence. Not to
speak of the vast amount of private assistance given, the municipality
spent on the relief of the religious refugees no less a sum than five
million florins between 1685 and 1726. Gradually the Eidgenossen became
alive to the real character of Louis and his negotiations with them,
and ashamed of their own lack of patriotism. As early as 1689, indeed,
we find Swiss envoys from Bern and Zurich at Paris, rejecting his
bribes, his golden chains, and what not. And on their return home they
received the eulogies of their people for their integrity and
independence. Gradually the league with France was set aside, or
ignored. Nevertheless, the system of mercenary service remained an
evil--one may say a cancerous evil--in the Swiss policy of the later
centuries.
FOOTNOTES:
[68] Appealing to the absurd pretended national relationship between
Swedes and Switzers, an etymology of the Middle Ages.
[69] See the chapter on the Swabian wars.
[70] Rohan was a great friend to Zurich, and presented to its city
library which was then forming his "Parfait Capitaine," a Hebrew Bible,
and his portrait. He was by his own request buried at Geneva, and his
death was greatly regretted by the reformed cities. The letters written
by his family in reply to the "Condolence of Zurich" are still preserved
in the library. See pamphlet on Rohan by Professor von Wyss.
[71] In Meyer's novel, Lucretia is betrothed to Jenatsch and takes the
veil after the murder of Jenatsch, but this story has no foundation in
fact.
[72] A few of these magnificent titles, or epithets, may be noted:
"Hoch," "Wohlgeachtete," "Edle," "Fromme," "Fuersichtige," "Fuernehme,"
"Weise Herren," and many more such like.
XXVII.
POLITICAL MATTERS IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY.
Politically Switzerland presents much the same aspect in the eighteenth
as in the previous century, and it needs here only a few words to
indicate more clearly the temper of the times. In Swiss lands, as
elsewhere, we have the inevitable division into the two classes of
governor and governed. The rank and file of the "reigning families,"
_regiments-faehig_, patricians or plutocrats, rigorously kept all power
to themselves, and held sway over the ordinary burghers and common folk.
Unchecked rule and superiority and a life of ease and luxury on the one
side; blind submission and toil on the other, especially in the rural
districts. Even in the professedly democratic cantons the same despotism
is met with; chieftains and family "dynasts" seizing the reins of
government, and overruling the _landsgemeinde_, whilst they contend with
each other for supremacy. Just as in the case of the oligarchies, the
_laender_ make the most of their "divine right" to govern. No wonder
risings took place, as that of the Leventines against the harsh
_landvoegte_ of Uri, and that of the Werdenberger (St. Gall) against
Glarus, though these revolts were in vain. In Zurich, Schaffhausen, and
Basel, there was less oppression, the guilds keeping the nobility at
bay, though this guild system itself was not without blemish. The chief
cities or cantonal _chefs-lieux_ one and all held sovereign sway over
the country districts attaching to them, but, like the old nobility of
France, shifted off their own shoulders nearly all taxation, whilst they
monopolized trade and industry. Thus the peasantry were crushed with the
weight of taxes, imposts, tithes, and what not.
Religious differences had deepened since the second war of Villmergen
(1712), which had brought the Protestants to the fore, and had
established the principle of religious equality. The Catholics, having
lost their supremacy in certain bailiwicks or subject districts, began
to dream of regaining their lost position. To this end they entered into
a secret agreement (_ligue a la cassette_) with Louis XIV. of France
shortly before that monarch's death. It was not till 1777, however, that
France really gained her point. In that year the common fear of Austria
induced both Protestants and Catholics to enter into a league with Louis
XVI. Thus, for the first time since the Reformation, the Confederates
were a united body, or at any rate were agreed as to their joint plan of
action.
Interesting though the task might be, it is here impossible to
investigate the various conditions of the government in the subject
lands--Aargau, Thurgau, Ticino, Vaud, part of St. Gall, portions gained
by conquest, or fragments acquired by purchase. We should meet with
curious remnants of feudalism, and strange mixtures of the mediaeval and
the modern. But our space will permit of only a glance. The subject
lands were deprived of all self-government, and the _landvoegte_ ruled
them as an Eastern satrap might rule his satrapy. A somewhat strange
arrangement for a republic to make and allow; but yet, on the whole, the
government was excellent, and this state of things continued for a long
period. Abuses, bribery, extortions, and the like of course crept in,
but it is to be remembered that the _landvoegte_ were strictly controlled
by the central government.[73] Many of them, especially at Bern, kept up
much state; possessed horses, carriages, and livery-servants, and kept
open house. In their lordships they ruled as veritable sovereigns, but
they cared for their people, as good sovereigns should. They were,
indeed, more like the patriarchs of old, rewarding or admonishing their
peoples as circumstances required. One specimen of the class was greatly
admired by Goethe, viz., Landvogt Landolt von Greifensee (Zurich). A few
traits will serve to mark the man and the system. This governor was of
the old school, and hated enlightened peasants and modern revolutionary
ideas. He advocated compulsory attendance at church, and firmly believed
in flogging as the most rational form of punishment. On the other hand,
he was both benevolent and humane, and watched over his people with a
fatherly care. He was equally anxious to improve their farms and their
morals. He was wont to go about _incognito_--generally dressed as a
Tyrolese--and visited the printshops to find out the gamblers and the
drunkards. The latter he had put into a revolving cage till they got
sober. Quarrelling couples he shut up together, and forced them to eat
_with the same spoon_![74] But among many subject lands the system had
greatly changed.
The greatest holder of subject territory was Bern, with its forty-four
lordships or bailiwicks, Zurich coming next with twenty-nine. The
largest subject district was Vaud, and, thanks to its thriving
agriculture, and the wise, though harsh, administration of Bern, it
flourished greatly. The Vaudois had on the whole submitted quietly to
Bernese rule, though the upper classes amongst them did not relish their
exclusion from the conduct of State affairs. However, bowing to the
inevitable, they gave themselves up to the enjoyment of a life of
pleasure and to intellectual pursuits. About this time Lausanne, their
capital, had become the resort of men like Gibbon, Fox, Raynal,
Voltaire, and many men of lesser mark. They were attracted by the beauty
of the scenery and by the high repute of the Vaud gentry for good
breeding and affability. These noble families opened their salons to the
distinguished foreigners who resided among them, and Gibbon seems to
have particularly appreciated their good qualities.[75] The historian
spent much of his life at Lausanne. An unlucky attempt had been made by
Major Davel, in 1723, to rescue Vaud from the grasp of Bern. This
enthusiastic patriot had himself concocted the plot, and attempted to
carry out his plans without informing a single person of his intentions.
Mustering his men, Davel, on some pretence, led them to Lausanne, where
the council were then sitting, the _landvoegte_ being up at Bern, and
informed the board what he proposed to do. But the members of the
council were not yet prepared to seek emancipation, and, simulating an
understanding, betrayed the luckless patriot to the Bernese authorities.
"Leurs Excellences"--such was the official title of the Bernese
rulers--made use of the rack, with the object of extorting from him the
names of his accomplices, but in vain, and he was beheaded.
Amongst the leading cities of the Confederation, Zurich was conspicuous
as the centre of Liberal tendencies and intellectual progress, whilst
Bern was the political centre, and the leading financial focus.[76] Like
a modern Rothschild, Bern then lent to various European states. Part of
her treasure went towards paying the cost of Napoleon's expedition to
Egypt. Among her sister cities, Freiburg, Solothurn, and Lucerne, Bern
presented the most perfect example of an oligarchy, admired by
Montesquieu, Napoleon, and even Rousseau. Her decided bent was for
diplomacy, and she was completely absorbed in rule and administration,
and she had few other tastes. Trade and industry she considered beneath
her dignity; even literary pursuits to a great extent. The Bernese
aristocrats were politicians from birth, so to speak, and the young men
had a curious society amongst themselves, "Aeusserer Stand," a society
formed for the purpose of cultivating the diplomatic art and practising
parliamentary oratory and tactics, especially their more formal outward
side. Thus trained in bearing and ceremonial they acquired their
much-admired political _aplomb_. Bern was French in fashion, in manners,
and in language, and the German tongue was as little appreciated amongst
the Bernese patricians as at the Court of Frederick the Great. The
constitution presents some features quite unique in their way. There was
an exclusiveness which has lasted in all its force even down to our own
days; and three classes of society sprang up, as widely separated from
each other as the different castes in India. All power was vested in the
360 "reigning families"; the number of these was at length, by death and
clever manipulating, reduced to eighty, and even fewer. From these
families alone were the councils selected, and to the members of these
only were governorships assigned. If male heirs were wanting, then the
seats on the council were given to the daughters as dowries. So
exclusive was this governing body, that even Haller, the great poet, was
not allowed to enter it. The class next lower in rank was that of the
burghers, _ewige habitanten_, with no political rights, and with not a
vestige of power in the commonwealth. They were not allowed to hold
officerships abroad, but trade, industry, and the schools and churches
were theirs. Lastly came the Ansaessige (settlers), the proletariat,
including the country labourers, foreigners, refugees, and commoner folk
generally. Many were their disabilities; they were not permitted to buy
houses, to have their children baptised in the city, to have tombstones
set up over the graves of members of their family.[77] They might not
even appear in the market till their betters had done their business,
viz., 11 a.m., and they were strictly forbidden to carry baskets in the
archways (_les arcades de la ville_), in order that these should not
damage the hooped petticoats of the patrician ladies.[78] Bern has often
been compared with ancient Rome, and certainly its stern council
somewhat resembles in its austerity, solemnity, and pomp the august
Roman Senate. It is not surprising that many attempts should have been
made to induce the Government to relax its severity. In 1744 certain
citizens petitioned the council to that effect, but were banished for
their pains. Five years later a famous man named Henzi, with several
associates, formed a plot against the council, but they were detected
and executed.
But in truth there were risings in almost every one of the cantons. Of
these only the most remarkable can be touched on here, those of Geneva.
These are real constitutional struggles, and, indeed, form the
preliminaries in their way to the French Revolution, on which indeed
their history sheds no little light. These troubles in Geneva are not
unlike those of the Gracchi period in Roman history. By the Constitution
of 1536 Geneva had been granted the right of a "Conseil General," but
this council had never been allowed to act or meet. The patricians who
occupied the _haut de la cite_ had arrogated to themselves well-nigh all
power. But as early as 1707, the burghers, ever on the alert to regain
their liberties, rose with the view of re-establishing the General
Council of 1536. The movement was headed by the generous and
noble-minded Pierre Fatio, himself a patrician. In fiery speeches, made
in the open places of the town, he championed the popular rights,
asserting with vehemence that the rulers were not the masters and tutors
of the people, but the executors of its sovereign will. The attempt to
gain popular liberty miscarried, Fatio was shot in prison, and his
followers were exiled. Yet Fatio's idea lived on amongst the working
classes, and later were again advocated in the pamphlets of Micheli du
Crest. In the years 1734 and 1737 the insurrections burst out afresh,
and resulted in the establishment of the Constitution of 1738, which
secured for a quarter of a century a happiness it had never before
known.
However, the second half of the century witnessed new troubles between
the burghers and the patricians. These latter were called, by way of
nickname, "Negatifs," because they denied the people reform, whilst the
burghers were styled "Representants," because they presented petitions
for political liberty. The artizan class were nicknamed "Natifs." It is
impossible here to follow closely these "tea-cup squabbles," as Voltaire
called them, but the philosopher's sympathies were with the _haut de la
ville_, while Rousseau, on the contrary, sided with the _bas de la
ville_.