king, at the house of sir John L'Huillier, town-clerk: several ladies
and damsels, with others of the nobility, were present. On this day,
the captain Salazart, with twenty men of his company, sallied out into
the plain, by the bastile of St Antoine, because that gate had been
shut by the king's orders, that no one might thence leave the town; but
for the admittance of the Burgundians it was to be opened for ten at a
time, and on their return ten others were allowed to enter, after which
the drawbridge was raised.
Salazart's twenty men at arms were dressed in jackets of blue camlet,
with large white crosses for their badge: they had handsome chains
of gold round their necks, with bonnets of black velvet on their
heads, having large tufts of golden thread from Cyprus hanging down.
The housings of their horses were covered with bells of silver. To
distinguish Salazart from his men, he was mounted on a beautiful
courser, with housings covered over with plates of silver: under each
hung a large bell of silver gilt. In front of this company rode the
trumpet of Salazart mounted on a grey horse; and as the troop advanced
along the side of the walls, from the gate of St Antoine to the tower
de Billy, the trumpeter's horse fell so heavily with him that he broke
the trumpeter's neck.
The ensuing Monday, news was brought to Paris that the lords de
Hautbourdin and de Saveuses had taken Peronne, and made the count
de Nevers prisoner, who was in the castle. This same day, three
prisoners escaped from the prison of Tizon,[87] one of whom had been
an accomplice with Louis Forbier in the giving up Pontoise to the
Bretons, and was of the company of Joachim Rohault. This day, a house
took fire at Paris in Champ-gaillart,[88] which a little alarmed the
king,--and, in consequence, he ordered fires to be continued during the
nights, in all the squares, and the guards to be reinforced.
During this month of October, some of the party of the duke of Burgundy
came before the town of Beauvais, and summoned the bishop and the
inhabitants to surrender themselves to the said duke. The bishop
demanded to have the summons in writing, which he sent instantly to the
king, who transmitted it to the count de Charolois, with whom he had
concluded a peace.
The count replied, that this summons was not authorised by him, and
that he wished the devil would take those who had made it, for having
done more than they were ordered. The king told the count, that since
peace had been made between them, such things should not be done,--for
that, if he were desirous of having the town of Beauvais, he would give
it to him.
On Wednesday, the 9th of October, the provost and sheriffs of Paris
ordered the head of each ward to have fires lighted at the usual
places, all the chains extended across the streets, and a good watch
kept constantly patroling.
The Thursday following, the lord de Saveuses arrived at the burgundian
camp with a large escort, having with him a great sum of money for
the count de Charolois to pay his troops. And on this day the duke of
Brittany had a meeting with the king to arrange the payment of his
expenses for the army he had raised in the support of the confederated
princes. In settling this account, he regained his county of Montfort,
besides receiving a very large sum in ready money.
On the Friday, master John Boulengier, president of the parliament,
came to the town-house, to acquaint the magistrates, from the king,
that the populace must not be alarmed on seeing the whole of the count
de Charolois' force drawn up before the walls, for that it was only to
form a muster and review before the king. They did not, however, appear
on that day,--but on the following it took place, and the burgundian
troops appeared in great force, extending from the bridge of Charenton
to the bois de Vincennes. The king was present, having only three
persons with him, namely, the duke of Calabria, the count de Charolois,
and the count de St Pol. This has been described by Monstrelet, but not
exactly as I relate it.
When the review was over, the king returned to Paris by water; but
before his departure, the count de Charolois, addressing his troops,
said, 'Gentlemen, you and I belong to the king, my sovereign lord, who
is here present, to serve him whenever he shall have occasion for us.'
On Saturday, the 12th, intelligence arrived that the town of Evreux had
been given up to the Bretons by sir John le Bœuf, who had admitted them
into the town on the preceding Wednesday, the feast of St Denis, while
the inhabitants were engaged in a religious procession,--and as the
procession went out at one gate, the Bretons entered by the other.
The king received information on the 16th, that there was a plot formed
at Paris, by some of his enemies, to make him prisoner, or put him to
death. In consequence, the guards were doubled on the walls and in the
streets,--and great fires were lighted every night in the squares. News
now came, that the town of Caen and the whole of Normandy had submitted
to the duke of Berry: the king, nevertheless, sent great numbers of men
at arms and franc-archers to the town of Mante.
On the ensuing Wednesday, the last day but one of October, the treaty
of peace that had been concluded between the king and the princes was
publicly read in the court of parliament, and there enregistered. This
day, the king went to the princes, in the bois de Vincennes, where
the duke of Berry did homage for the duchy of Normandy, that had been
given him for his appanage. The walls and gates of Paris were this day
strictly guarded until the king returned, as he had gone to Vincennes
with very few attendants. The king wanted to sleep there that night,
and sent to Paris for his bed: but the provost and sheriffs sent an
humble remonstrance, to request that he would not sleep out of Paris,
for many reasons. This request he complied with, and returned to Paris.
On the Thursday following, the duke of Berry, the count de Charolois,
and others, broke up their encampments near Paris, and departed divers
ways. The count went toward Normandy, and was accompanied a long way by
the king on the road to Pontoise, when they went for Villiers-le-bel,
where they remained two or three days; and thence the count marched for
Picardy, in his way to make war on the Liegeois, as has been told by
Monstrelet.
FOOTNOTES:
[Footnote 86: Lifre-lofres,--a mock word for the Germans and Swiss,
Swagbellies, &c.--See Cotgrave.]
[Footnote 87: Tizon,--in the Bourbonnois, near Ganat.]
[Footnote 88: Champ-gaillart. Q.]
END OF VOL. X.
H. Bryer, Printer, Bridge-street,
Blackfriars, London.
NOTES AND EMENDATIONS.
Page 3. last line. _Burgundy._] Brittany is right; Mary, eldest
daughter of John V. and sister of John VI. and Arthur, dukes of
Brittany, was married to John I. duke of Alençon, father of the duke
here mentioned. I can find no alliance between the houses of Alençon
and Burgundy.
Page 12. line 3. _Duke of Orleans._] A mistake. He was succeeded by
Francis II. son of his younger brother, Richard, count of Etampes. See
the table in note to vol. v. p. 390. Richard, count of Estampes, who
died in 1438, married Margaret, daughter of Lewis, duke of Orleans, and
Francis II. was the only son by that marriage.
Page 13. line 1. from the bottom. CHAP. IV. This chapter and the
following afford a further instance of that want of connection and
repetition which is before noticed to be so frequent in this latter
part of the history. It is evident that Monstrelet set down his details
respecting these transactions as they appear in Vol. IX. chapter 76.
and Vol. X. chapter 1. from the information he had then acquired.
The original documents themselves afterwards came to his hands, and
these he transcribed in haste, without reference to his former
accounts. It seems reasonable to conclude that death prevented him from
arranging these different statements, and striking out all that appears
superfluous in them.
Page 48. line 13. _Fell._] Those of most note, on the king's side,
were Humphry Stafford, duke of Buckingham, who was succeeded by his
son Henry; and John, earl of Shrewsbury, lord treasurer of England,
grandson to the great Talbot. The battle was fought at two o'clock in
the afternoon on the 10th of July, and is said to have lasted only half
an hour. _Stow._
Page 49. line 9. from the bottom. _Attempt._] Together with the queen
and the prince of Wales, the dukes of Exeter and Somerset, the earls of
Devon and Wiltshire, the lord Clifford and many other great lords, were
on the king's side this day. The young duke of Rutland was murdered
in cold blood by the barbarous Clifford. The duke of York himself was
killed in the field, not made prisoner as in the text. The earl of
Salisbury was made prisoner and carried to the castle of Pomfret, where
"he had grant of life for a great ransome, but the common people of the
country, who loved him not, tooke him out of the castle by violence,
and smote off his head." The earl of March, now duke of York by his
father's death, and afterwards king of England, was at Gloucester when
this event happened.
Page 54. line 5. _Uncle._] Probably Ralph Nevil, earl of Westmoreland,
who is named among the slain at this battle.
Page 55. line 2. from the bottom. _Earl of Northumberland._] Henry
Percy, the second earl of that name and family who fell in this long
conflict. The former was killed at the first battle of St. Alban's,
mentioned before, vol. ix. p. 360. I believe that no earl of Shrewsbury
fell on this occasion, and that the continuator of Croyland in this
point confounds the battle of Towton with that of Northampton mentioned
before, p. 48.
Page 58. last line. _Towton._] He was created earl of Northumberland in
1463, and marquis of Montacute, or Montague, a short time after; but in
1466 he resigned the earldom in favour of Henry Percy, son of the earl
who was killed at Towton.
Page 64. line 13. _Lord de la Roche-Bourguignon._] Not de la
Roche-Bourguignon, but de la Roche, a Burgundian. This Philip lord
de la Roche, was afterwards in high favour with king Louis, and
advanced him to the dignity of count of St Pol, on the attainder and
confiscation of the constable.
Page 73. line 13. from the bottom. _Counts of Angoulême._] John count
of Angoulesme, brother to the duke of Orleans;--Charles of Artois, last
count of Eu;--John of Bourbon, count of Vendôme.
Page 73. line 12. from the bottom. _Grand-Prè._] Henry de Borselle, a
nobleman of Holland, who purchased the county of Grand-Pré from Raoul
le Bouteiller. He was father to Wolfhard de Borselle, marshal of France.
Page 73. line 11. from the bottom. _Sir Philip de Savoye._] Philip of
Savoy, lord of Bauge, younger brother to the prince of Piedmont, who
married a daughter of the duke of Bourbon, and became duke of Savoy on
the death of his grand nephew, Charles II. in 1496; John the elder,
count of Nassau.
Page 74. line 10. _Duke of Bourbon._] Peter de Bourbon, lord of
Beaujeu, who married Anne of Valois, daughter of Louis XI. and became
duke of Bourbon on the death of his elder brother without lawful issue
in 1488. James de Bourbon, a younger brother of these, died young and
unmarried.
Page 77. line 19. _Lord de la Roche._] Philip Pot, mentioned before in
p. 64.
Page 78. last line. _Perdriac._] Pardiac. See notes to vols. vii. viii.
and ix. Qu. If the count de la Marche and de Pardiac was not one and
the same person?
Page 81. line 9. _Count du Perche._] René, duke of Alençon, after the
death of his father in 1476. His mother was Joanna, daughter to the
duke of Orleans.
Page 82. line 7. from the bottom. _Sister._] Mary of Anjou, queen of
France, who survived her husband only two years, dying in 1463.
Page 93. line 7. _Relative._] I do not understand what relationship
could possibly have existed between the count de Charolois and the duke
of Somerset, and must therefore set this down under the head of mistake.
Page 95. line 18. _Master Nicholas Raullin._] Or Rollin. He was father
of the lord d'Aymeries, mentioned before in chap. lxviii. of volume,
ix. and, by merit, had raised his family from a middling station of
life to the honours of nobility. Heuterus.
Page 98. line 7. _Deceased._] Joan de Bar only daughter and heir of
Robert, count of Marle and Soissons. Her children are said by Moreri
to have been John, count of Marle and Soissons, who was killed in 1476
at the battle of Morat; Peter II. count of St. Pol; Anthony, count of
Brienne, and Charles, bishop and duke of Laon.
Page 98. line 19. _Duchess of Orleans._] Mary, daughter of Adolph, duke
of Cleves, third wife of Charles, duke of Orleans. The infant of whom
she is now delivered was afterwards king of France by the name of Louis
XII.
Page 107. line 6. _Accuser._] Heuterus relates the subject of this
chapter with some varieties which deserve to be noticed. "Coustain,"
he says, "is reported to have sent his accomplice (whose name is
latinized to Ingiëus) into Savoy to a famous witch, from whom he
received certain waxen images of the man whom they designed to destroy,
over which various and admirable forms of incantation had been
practised." Arquembart the informer, should be Hacquenbach--"_Petrus
Haquenbachius, vir nobilis._" Heuterus adds that, in making his
confession, Coustain did not accuse any of the family of Croy, or
other great nobles of Burgundy who were most suspected on the occasion
by the count of having instigated the crime; but he says, "The wiser
sort, however, had their suspicions with regard to king Louis; and the
opinion which they now secretly entertained seemed to be afterwards
confirmed, when they learned that he had procured the death of his
own brother, merely to avoid giving up to him a small portion of his
dominions." This is a very curious passage, for although the alledged
murder of the duke of Guienne, Louis's brother, is at least a very
doubtful point of history, and although, if manifestly proved, it would
be a strange piece of sophistry to urge that the perpetration of one
crime ought to be admitted as evidence of the intention to perpetrate
another, wholly unconnected with it either in time or circumstances,
yet it sufficiently shows what must even at the commencement of his
reign have been the character of the king, and the opinion generally
entertained of his dissimulation, perfidy, and inhumanity. I imagine
however, that Heuterus is hardly to be credited when he adds that the
suspicion entertained by the duke of Burgundy on this occasion was the
immediate cause of his quarrel with the king whom he suspected; unless
it be conjectured that among the secret confessions mentioned in this
chapter to have been made by the villain Coustain previous to his
execution, he actually accused the king and supported his accusation by
some very pregnant reasons. If this be admitted, it may justify in a
great degree the assertion of Heuterus just mentioned.
Page 110. line 12. _Lord de Goux._] Qu. Joux? Peter de Beaujeu du
Columbier, lord of Joux, Montcoquier, Asnois, &c. died after 1469
leaving Blain, lord of Joux, his son and successor.
Page 116. line 11. _Duty._] Heuterus adds that it was the purpose of
the king, with the profits of the Gabelle to have redeemed the lands on
both sides of the Somme which were assigned to the duke by the treaty
of Arras.
Page 116. line 4. from the bottom. _Stamp._] The question, as stated
by Heuterus, was "solidiori è materia Boni ne corpus coagimentatum
foret, quam ceterorum principum?" To which Chimay is made to answer,
"Imò: nam nisi id ita foret, quomodo te patris iram fugientem recipere,
&c. &c. ausus fuisset?" The king was greatly confounded, and from this
time said no more about the gabelle; but the duke of Burgundy, by the
advice of the lords of the house of Croy, and to the great displeasure
of his son, shortly after gave up the towns on the river Somme, as is
mentioned in chapter 23.
Page 118. line 3. from the bottom. _Duke of Orleans._] Qu. Peter, lord
of Beaujeu, was married to Anne daughter of Louis XI. This might be a
second marriage; but I do not find it so in the genealogical tables
which I have consulted.
Page 119. line 8. _Lord d'Arquel._] Here is a double mistake in the
genealogy. Catherine, third daughter of the duke of Bourbon, married
Adolphus, son of Arnold duke of Gueldres, who was himself duke of
Gueldres after his father's death in 1473, and might, during his
father's life time, have been sometimes stiled the lord of Arckeln,
which lordship came into his family by the marriage of his grandfather
John count of Egmond with the heiress of Arckeln and Gelders. The
connection of the families of Gueldres and Cleves with each other and
with the house of Burgundy will be better understood by the following
table, which will also explain at one view the mode by which the duchy
of Gueldres passed successively by marriages into the families of
Juliers, Arckeln, and Egmont, and the county of Cleves into that of
Marck, and how the younger branch of Cleves came into possession of the
county of Nevers.
William VIII. = Mary, sister Adolph V. Philip the
d. of Juliers. | and heir to c. of Marck bold, d. of
| Edward the married the Burgundy.
| last duke of heiress of |
| Gueldres of Cleves. +---+--1>
| the first | |
| house. | John d. of
| Adolph VI. Burgundy.
+-----------+--------------+ c. of M. & C. |
| | | | |
William IX. Reginald Joanna the | |
d. of G. & J. d. of G. & J. duchess of | |
d. s. p. d. s. p. G. married | |
(Juliers being a male John lord of | +---+-----2>
fief, passed to a distant Arckeln. | |
branch.) | Adolph I. duke of = Mary, one of
| Cleves. | the daughters
Mary duchess | of Burgundy.
of G. married |
John count of |
Egmont. |
| +----------------+----+------+
| | | |
Arnold d. of = Catherine John d. of Adolph 3>
G. died 1473. | second C. (m. the lord of
| daughter. heiress of Ravenstein.
| Nevers.)
| |
Adolph d. of |
G. m. Catherine John II. &c.
of Bourbon. (duke of Cleves.)
* * * * *
<1--Philip c. of
Nevers, third
son.
|
|
|
|
<2--+ +---+------------------+
| | |
Philip the Charles c. John c.
good d. of of Nevers. of Nevers,
Burgundy. d.s.p. second son
| 1464. d. 1491.
| |
| +-------+
| |
| Elizabeth,
<3=Anne, natural heiress of
daughter Nevers married
of Philip. John d. of Cleves.
|
+------------+----+
| |
John II. d. Engilbert, c.
of Cleves, &c. of Nevers.
Page 125. line 2. _Lord de Montigny._] Simon de Lalain, lord of
Montigny, who died in 1478, was the father of Jodocus, lord of Lalain
and Montigny, governor of Holland, who was killed at the siege of
Utrecht in 1483.
Page 129. line 5. _Navarre._] By the terms of the marriage-contract
between John of Arragon and Blanche queen of Navarre, Charles prince
of Viana, the eldest son of that marriage, ought to have succeeded to
the kingdom immediately on the death of his mother. This was, however,
delayed from time to time and at last effectually prevented through
the intrigues of Johanna Henriques the second wife of king John. A
civil war was the consequence of these acts of injustice, and the
prince sought the protection of a stronger power by an alliance with
Isabella sister of Henry IV. of Castile. This treaty also was rendered
abortive by the intrigues of his step-mother. He was then inveigled to
Lerida under colour of a pacification, and treacherously made prisoner.
Being at last liberated from his confinement to appease the dangerous
indignation of his adherents, he ended his life in a few days, being,
as some say, poisoned while in prison, but more probably from the
effects of ill-treatment and sorrow.
Mean-while, Blanche, his eldest sister was divorced by her husband
Henry the fourth, for no fault of her own; and the count of Foix (the
husband of Leonora her sister) in order to possess himself of her
right to the crown of Navarre, gained possession of her person and
is reported, by connivance with his own wife, to have put an end to
her days. After this, he turned his views toward the protection of
France, which he hoped to secure by the marriage of his son Gaston to
Magdalen daughter of Charles the seventh, and by a further union of
interests between the crowns of France and Arragon. The advantage of
these skilful manoeuvres soon displayed itself, when the Catalans,
enraged at the death of the prince of Viana, which they attributed
whether justly or unjustly to the king his father, revolted, and their
example was followed by almost all the states of Arragon. King John,
upon this, mortgaged the counties of Cerdagne and Roussillon to France,
in order to obtain supplies to carry on the war, and the count de Foix
obtained the principal command in the conduct of it. The rebels finding
themselves too weak, naturally applied for assistance to Castille, and
the war soon assumed a new face, the principals on each side being
the king of Arragon and the count of Foix, and the king of Castille.
The treaty here alluded to, at which the king of France assisted, was
made in an island of the river Bidassoa which separates France from
Spain. Its articles were such as to offend all parties concerned, and
in particular to sow the seeds of future dissention between the French
and Spanish nations. Those historians, however, may be thought rather
too refined who attribute to this celebrated interview the foundation
for that enmity between the two countries for which they have been
remarkable in modern times. The connexion between the different crowns
of Spain, and succession to the crown of Navarre will be best seen from
the following table.
John, king of Arragon, =1st Wife, Blanche, daughter = 2nd Wife,
and Navarre, died 1479. |and heir to Charles III, king |Johanna daughter
|of Navarre, died 1441. |of the admiral
+----------------------+------------------+ |of Castile.
| | | |
1. Charles prince 2. Blanche, 3. Eleanor, Ferdinand the catholic,
of Viana, died m. Henry IV, m. Gaston IV. king of Arragon
s. p. l. 1461, in king of Castile, C. of Foix. by descent, of Castile
the life of his d. s. p. | by marriage, and of
father. | Navarre by conquest.
+-----------------------+
| |
Magdalen, = 1. Gaston, 2. John viscount of Narbonne, and count
daughter of | pr. of Viana, of Estampes, who, by his marriage with
Charles VII. | d. 1470. Mary of Orleans, had issue, Gastonde
+----------+------------+ Foix, the famous General under Francis I,
| | and Germainede Foix, the second wife of
Francis Phœbus = Catherine, Ferdinand the catholic.
d. s. p. m. John,
1483. lord of Albret.
Page 131. line 2. _Crown._] The principal crime of this nobleman, in
the eyes of Louis, was his high favour with Charles VII. He afterwards
escaped from prison during the war of the public good, and was at last
restored to his offices about the court, and taken into the peculiar
confidence of the king. One act of justice resulted from his temporary
disgrace, the restitution to the heirs of Jacques Coeur of great part
of the plunder made from the wreck of that unfortunate merchant's
affairs. The count de Dammartin is said to have been one of the seven
persons whom Louis excepted out of the amnesty which he granted to the
duke of Burgundy's intercession on ascending the throne. Others were,
as is reported the mareschal de Brézé, the lords de Loheac and de
Chatillon, and the chancellor des Ursins. Duclos.
Page 135. line 5. from the bottom. _Lord de Launoy._] This name should
be always spelt Lannoy. John lord of Lannoy was son of another John
lord of Lannoy by Joanna sister of Anthony lord de Croy and John lord
of Chimay. See notes to the third volume.
Page 139. line 2. _Duchess of Bourbon._] The table to p. 119. will
explain these alliances.