the north, and in return France was to aid Borgia in breaking
the power of the independent nobles who yet resisted Papal
aggression in the south. In July 1499 the work began. At first
the Italians failed to realise what had taken place. When the
French army entered the Milanese territory the inhabitants
fraternised with the troops, Milan, Genoa, Pavia opened their
gates with joy. But in a few months the course of events, in
the south, aroused a dread anxiety. There, Borgia, under the
protection of the French king, and with the assistance of the
French arms, was triumphantly glutting his brutal rage and
lust, whilst Frenchmen were forced to look on helpless and
indignant. Milan, justly terrified, made an attempt to throw
herself on the mercy of her old ruler. To no purpose. Louis
went back over the Alps, leaving a strong hand and a strong
garrison in Milan, and dragging with him the unfortunate Louis
Sforza, a miserable proof of the final destruction of the most
brilliant court of Upper Italy. ... By the campaign of 1507,
the work, thus begun, was consummated. The ancient spirit of
independence still lingered in Genoa, and Venice was not yet
crushed. There were still fresh laurels to be won. In this
Holy War the Pope and the Emperor willingly joined forces with
France. ... The deathblow was first given to Genoa. She was
forced, Marot tells us, 'la corde au coul, la glaive sous la
gorge, implorer la clémence de ce prince.' Venice was next
traitorously surprised and irreparably injured. Having thus
brilliantly achieved the task of first destroying the lettered
courts, and next the free cities of Italy, Louis died,
bequeathing to François I. the shame of fighting out a
hopeless struggle for supremacy against allies who, no longer
needing help, had combined to drive the French from the field.
There was, indeed, one other duty to be performed. The
shattered remains of Italian civilisation might be collected,
and Paris might receive the men whom Italy could no longer
employ. The French returned to France empty of honour, gorged
with plunder, satiated with rape and rapine, boasting of
cities sacked, and garrisons put to the sword. They had sucked
the lifeblood of Italy, but her death brought new life to
France. The impetus thus acquired by art and letters coincided
with a change in political and social constitutions. The
gradual process of centralisation which had begun with Louis
XI. transformed the life of the whole nation. ... The royal
court began to take proportions hitherto unknown.
{1185}
It gradually became a centre which gathered together the rich,
the learned, and the skilled. Artists, who had previously been
limited in training, isolated in life, and narrowed in
activity by the rigid conservative action of the great guilds
and corporations, were thus brought into immediate contact
with the best culture of their day. For the Humanists did not
form a class apart, and their example incited those with whom
they lived to effort after attainments as varied as their own,
whilst the Court made a rallying point for all, which gave a
sense of countenance and protection even to those who might
never hope to enter it. ... Emancipation of the individual is
the watchword of the sixteenth century; to the artist it
brought relief from the trammels of a caste thraldom, and the
ceaseless efforts of the Humanists find an answer even in the
new forms seen slowly breaking through the sheath of Gothic
art."
Mrs. Mark Pattison,
The Renaissance of Art in France,
volume 1, chapter 1.
FRANCE: 16th Century.
Renaissance and Reformation.
"The first point of difference to be noted between the
Renaissance in France and the Renaissance in Italy is one of
time. Roughly speaking it may be said that France was a
hundred years behind Italy. ... But if the French Renaissance
was a later and less rapid growth, it was infinitely hardier.
The Renaissance literature in Italy was succeeded by a long
period of darkness, which remained unbroken, save by fitful
gleams of light, till the days of Alfieri. The Renaissance
literature in France was the prelude to a literature, which,
for vigour, variety, and average excellence, has in modern
times rarely, if ever, been surpassed. The reason for this
superiority on the part of France, for the fact that the
Renaissance produced there more abiding and more far-reaching
results, may be ascribed partly to the natural law that
precocious and rapid growths are always less hardy than later
and more gradual ones, partly to the character of the French
nation, to its being at once more intellectual and less
imaginative than the Italian, and therefore more influenced by
the spirit of free inquiry than by the worship of beauty;
partly to the greater unity and vitality of its political
life, but in a large measure to the fact that in France the
Renaissance came hand in hand with the Reformation. ... We
must look upon the Reformation as but a fresh development of
the Renaissance movement, as the result of the spirit of free
inquiry carried into theology, as a revolt against the
authority of the Roman Church. Now the Renaissance in Italy
preceded the Reformation by more than a century. There is no
trace in it of any desire to criticise the received theology.
... In France on the other hand the new learning and the new
religion, Greek and heresy, became almost controvertible
terms. Lefèvre d' Étaples, the doyen of French humanists,
translated the New Testament into French in 1524: the
Estiennes, the Hebrew scholar François Vatable, Turnèbe,
Ramus, the great surgeon Ambroise Paré, the artists Bernard
Palissy and Jean Goujon were all avowed protestants; while
Clement Marot, Budé, and above all Rabelais, for a time at
least, looked on the reformation with more or less favour. In
fact so long as the movement appeared to them merely as a
revolt against the narrowness and illiberality of monastic
theology, as an assertion of the freedom of the human
intellect, the men of letters and culture with hardly an
exception joined hands with the reformers. It was only when
they found that it implied a moral as well as an intellectual
regeneration, that it began to wear for some of them a less
congenial aspect. This close connexion between the Reformation
and the revival of learning was, on the whole, a great gain to
France. It was not as in Germany, where the stronger growth of
the Reformation completely choked the other. In France they
met on almost equal terms, and the result was that the whole
movement was thereby strengthened and elevated both
intellectually and morally. ... French humanism can boast of a
long roll of names honourable not only for their high
attainments, but also for their integrity and purity of life.
Robert Estienne, Turnèbe, Ramus, Cujas, the Chancellor de
l'Hôpital, Estienne Pasquier, Thou, are men whom any country
would be proud to claim for her sons. And as with the
humanists, so it was with the Renaissance generally in France.
On the whole it was a manly and intelligent movement. ... The
literature of the French Renaissance, though in point of form
it is far below that of the Italian Renaissance, in manliness
and vigour and hopefulness is far superior to it. It is in
short a literature, not of maturity, but of promise. One has
only to compare its greatest name, Rabelais, with the greatest
name of the Italian Renaissance, Ariosto, to see the
difference. How formless! how crude! how gross! how full of
cumbersome details and wearisome repetitions is Rabelais! How
limpid! how harmonious is Ariosto! what perfection of style,
what delicacy of touch! He never wearies us, he never offends
our taste. And yet one rises from the reading of Rabelais with
a feeling of buoyant cheerfulness, while Ariosto in spite of
his wit and gaiety is inexpressibly depressing. The reason is
that the one bids us hope, the other bids us despair; the one
believes in truth and goodness and in the future of the human
race, the other believes in nothing but the pleasures of the
senses, which come and go like many-coloured bubbles and leave
behind them a boundless ennui. Rabelais and Ariosto are true
types of the Renaissance as it appeared in their respective
countries."
A. Tilley,
The Literature of the French Renaissance,
chapter 2.
FRANCE: A. D. 1501-1504.
Treaty of Louis XII. with Ferdinand of Aragon for the
partition of Naples.
French and Spanish conquest.
Quarrel of the confederates, and war.
The Spaniards in possession of the Neapolitan domain.
See ITALY: A. D. 1501-1504.
FRANCE: A. D. 1504.
Norman and Breton fishermen on the Newfoundland banks.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.
FRANCE: A. D. 1504-1506.
The treaties of Blois, with Ferdinand and Maximilian, and the
abrogation of them.
Relinquishment of claims on Naples.
See ITALY: A. D. 1504-1506.
FRANCE: A. D. 1507.
Revolt and subjugation of Genoa.
See GENOA: A. D. 1500-1507.
FRANCE: A. D. 1508-1509.
The League of Cambrai against Venice.
See VENICE: A. D. 1508-1509.
FRANCE: A. D. 1510-1513.
The breaking up of the League of Cambrai.
The Holy League formed by Pope Julius II. against Louis XII.
The French expelled from Milan and all Italy.
See ITALY: A. D. 1510-1513.
{1186}
FRANCE: A. D. 1513-1515.
English invasion under Henry VIII.
The Battle of the Spurs.
Marriage of Louis XII. with Mary of England.
The King's death.
Accession of Francis I.
"The long preparations of Henry VIII. of England for the
invasion of France [in pursuance of the 'Holy League' against
Louis XII., formed by Pope Julius II. and renewed by Leo
X.,--see ITALY: A. D. 1510-1513] being completed, that king,
in the summer of 1513, landed at Calais, whither a great part
of his army had already been transported. The offer of 100,000
golden crowns easily persuaded the Emperor to promise his
assistance, at the head of a body of Swiss and Germans. But at
the moment Henry was about to penetrate into France, he
received the excuses of Maximilian, who, notwithstanding a
large advance received from England, found himself unable to
levy the promised succours. Nothing disheartened by this
breach of faith, the King of England had already advanced into
Artois; when the Emperor, attended by a few German nobles,
appeared in the English camp, and was cordially welcomed by
Henry, who duly appreciated his military skill and local
knowledge. A valuable accession of strength was also obtained
by the junction of a large body of Swiss, who, encouraged by
the victory of Novara, had already crossed the Jura, and now
marched to the seat of war. The poverty of the Emperor
degraded him to the rank of a mercenary of England; and Henry
consented to grant him the daily allowance of 100 crowns for
his table. But humiliating as this compact was to Maximilian,
the King of England reaped great benefit from his presence. A
promiscuous multitude of Germans had flocked to the English
camp, in hopes of partaking in the spoil; and the arrival of
their valiant Emperor excited a burst of enthusiasm. The siege
of Terouenne was formed: but the bravery of the besieged
baffled the efforts of the allies; and a month elapsed, during
which the English sustained severe loss from frequent and
successful sorties. By the advice of the Emperor, Henry
resolved to risk a battle with the French, and the plain of
Guinegate was once more the field of conflict [August 18,
1513]. This spot, where Maximilian had formerly struck terror
into the legions of Louis XI., now became the scene of a rapid
and undisputed victory. The French were surprised by the
allies, and gave way to a sudden panic; and the shameful
flight of the cavalry abandoned the bravest of their leaders
to the hands of their enemies. The Duke of Longueville, La
Palisse, Imbercourt, and the renowned Chevalier Bayard, were
made prisoners; and the ridicule of the conquerors
commemorated the inglorious flight by designating the rout as
the Battle of the Spurs. The capture of Terouenne immediately
followed; and the fall of Tournay soon afterwards opened a
splendid prospect to the King of England. Meanwhile the safety
of France was threatened in another quarter. A large body of
Swiss, levied in the name of Maximilian but paid with the gold
of the Pope, burst into Burgundy; and Dijon was with difficulty
saved from capture. From this danger, however, France was
extricated by the dexterous negotiation of Trémouille; and the
Swiss were induced to withdraw. ... Louis now became seriously
desirous of peace. He made overtures to the Pope, and was
received into favour upon consenting to renounce the Council
of Pisa. He conciliated the Kings of Aragon and England by
proposals of marriage; he offered his second daughter Renée to
the young Charles of Spain; and his second Queen, Anne of
Bretainy, being now dead, he proposed to unite himself with
Mary of England, the favourite sister of Henry. ... But though
peace was made upon this footing, the former of the projected
marriages never took place: the latter; however, was
magnificently solemnized, and proved fatal to Louis. The
amorous King forgot his advanced age in the arms of his young
and beautiful bride; his constitution gave way under the
protracted festivities consequent on his nuptials; and on the
1st of January, 1515, Louis XII. was snatched from his adoring
people, in his 53d year. He was succeeded by his kinsman and
son-in-law, Francis, Count of Angoulême, who stood next in
hereditary succession, and was reputed one of the most
accomplished princes that ever mounted the throne of France."
Sir R. Comyn,
History of the Western Empire,
chapter 38 (volume 2).
ALSO IN:
J. S. Brewer,
The Reign of Henry VIII.,
chapter 1.
L. von Ranke,
History of the Latin and Teutonic Nations
from 1494 to 1514,
book 2, chapter 4, sections 7-8.
FRANCE: A. D. 1515.
Accession of Francis I.
His invasion of Italy.
The Battle of Marignano.
"François I. was in his 21st year when he ascended the throne
of France. His education in all manly accomplishments was
perfect, and ... he manifested ... an intelligence which had
been carefully cultivated. ... Unfortunately his moral
qualities had been profoundly corrupted by the example of his
mother, Louise of Savoy, a clever and ambitious woman, but
selfish, unscrupulous, and above all shamelessly licentious.
Louise had been an object of jealousy to Anne of Britany, who
had always kept her in the shade, and she now snatched eagerly
at the prospect of enjoying power and perhaps of reigning in
the name of her son, whose love for his mother led him to
allow her to exercise an influence which was often fatal to
the interests of his kingdom. ... Charles duke of Bourbon, who
was notoriously the favoured lover of Louise, was appointed to
the office of constable, which had remained vacant since 1488;
and one of her favourite ministers, Antoine Duprat, first
president of the parliament of Paris, was entrusted with the
seals. Both were men of great capacity; but the first was
remarkable for his pride, and the latter for his moral
depravity. The first cares of the new king of France were to
prepare for war. ... Unfortunately for his country, François
I. shared in the infatuation which had dragged his
predecessors into the wars in Italy; and all these warlike
preparations were designed for the reconquest of Milan. He had
already intimated his design by assuming at his coronation the
titles of king of France and duke of Milan. ... He entered
into an alliance with Charles of Austria, prince of Castile,
who had now reached his majority and assumed the government of
the Netherlands. ... A treaty between these two princes,
concluded on the 24th of March, 1515, guaranteed to each party
not only the estates they held or which might subsequently
descend to them, but even their conquests. ... The republic of
Venice and the king of England renewed the alliances into
which they had entered with the late king, but Ferdinand of
Aragon refused even to prolong the truce unless the whole of
Italy were included in it, and he entered into a separate
alliance with the emperor, the duke of Milan, and the Swiss,
to oppose the designs of the French king.
{1187}
The efforts of François I. to gain over the Swiss had been
defeated by the influence of the cardinal of Sion. Yet the
pope, Leo X., hesitated, and avoided compromising himself with
either party. In the course of the month of July [1515], the
most formidable army which had yet been led from France into
Italy was assembled in the district between Grenoble and
Embrun, and the king, after entrusting the regency to his
mother, Louise, with unlimited powers, proceeded to place
himself at its head."
T. Wright,
History of France,
book 3, chapter 1 (volume 1).
"The passes in Italy had already been occupied by the Swiss
under their captain general Galeazzo Visconti. Galeazzo makes
their number not more than 6,000. ... They were posted at
Susa, commanding the two roads from Mont Cenis and Geneva, by
one of which the French must pass or abandon their artillery.
In this perplexity it was proposed by Triulcio to force a
lower passage across the Cottian Alps leading to Saluzzo. The
attempt was attended with almost insurmountable difficulties.
... But the French troops with wonderful spirits and alacrity
... were not to be baffled. They dropped their artillery by
cables from steep to steep; down one range of mountains and up
another, until five days had been spent in this perilous
enterprise, and they found themselves safe in the plains of
Saluzzo. Happily the Swiss, secure in their position at Susa,
had never dreamed of the possibility of such a passage. ...
Prosper Colonna, who commanded in Italy for the Pope, was
sitting down to his comfortable dinner at Villa Franca, when a
scout covered with dust dashed into his apartment announcing
that the French had crossed the Alps. The next minute the town
was filled with the advanced guard, under the Sieur
d'Ymbercourt and the celebrated Bayard. The Swiss at Susa had
still the advantage of position, and might have hindered the
passage of the main body of the French; but they had no horse
to transport their artillery, were badly led, and evidently
divided in their councils. They retired upon Novara," and to
Milan, intending to effect a junction with the viceroy of
Naples, who advanced to Cremona. On the morning of the 13th of
September, Cardinal Scheimer harangued the Swiss and urged
them to attack the French in their camp, which was at
Marignano, or Melignano, twelve miles away. His fatal advice
was acted on with excitement and haste. "The day was hot and
dusty. The advanced guard of the French was under the command
of the Constable of Bourbon, whose vigilance defeated any
advantage the Swiss might otherwise have gained by the
suddenness and rapidity of their movements. At nine o'clock in
the morning, as Bourbon was sitting down at table, a scout,
dripping with water, made his appearance. He had left Milan
only a few hours before, had waded the canals, and came to
announce the approach of the enemy. ... The Swiss came on
apace; they had disencumbered themselves of their hats and
caps, and thrown off their shoes, the better to fight without
slipping. They made a dash at the French artillery, and were
foiled after hard fighting. ... It was an autumnal afternoon;
the sun had gone down; dust and night-fall separated and
confused the combatants. The French trumpets sounded a
retreat; both, armies crouched down in the darkness within
cast of a tennis-ball of each other. ... Where they fought,
there each man laid down to rest when darkness came on, within
hand-grip of his foe." The next morning, "the autumnal mist
crawled slowly away, and once more exposed the combatants to
each other's view. The advantage of the ground was on the side
of the French. They were drawn up in a valley protected by a
ditch full of water. Though the Swiss had taken no refreshment
that night, they renewed the fight with unimpaired animosity
and vigour. ... Francis, surrounded by a body of mounted
gentlemen, performed prodigies of valour. The night had given
him opportunity for the better arrangement of his troops; and
as the day wore on, and the sun grew hot, the Swiss, though
'marvellously deliberate, brave, and obstinate,' began to give
way. The arrival of the Venetian general, D'Alviano, with
fresh troops, made the French victory complete. But the Swiss
retreated inch by inch with the greatest deliberation,
carrying off their great guns on their shoulders. ... The
French were too exhausted to follow. And their victory had
cost them dear; for the Swiss, with peculiar hatred to the
French gentry and the lance-knights, had shown no mercy. They
spared none, and made no prisoners. The glory of the battle
was great. ... The Swiss, the best troops in Europe, and
hitherto reckoned invincible ... had been the terror and
scourge of Italy, equally formidable to friend and foe, and
now their prestige was extinguished. But it was not in these
merely military aspects that the battle of Marignano was
important. No one who reads the French chronicles of the
times, can fail to perceive that it was a battle of opinions
and of classes even more than of nations; of a fierce and
rising democratical element, now rolled back for a short
season, only to display itself in another form against royalty
and nobility;--of the burgher classes against feudality. ... The
old romantic element, overlaid for a time by the political
convulsions of the last century, had once more gained the
ascendant. It was to blaze forth and revive, before it died
out entirely, in the Sydneys and Raleighs of Queen Elizabeth's
reign; it was to lighten up the glorious imagination of
Spenser before it faded into the dull prose of Puritan
divinity, and the cold grey dawn of inductive philosophy. But
its last great battle was the battle of Marignano."
J. S. Brewer,
The Reign of Henry VIII.,
volume 1, chapter 3.
ALSO IN:
Miss Pardoe,
Court and Reign of Francis I.,
volume 1, chapters 6-7.
L. Larchey,
History of Bayard,
book 3, chapters 1-2.
FRANCE: A. D. 1515-1518.
Francis I. in possession of Milan.
His treaties with the Swiss and the Pope.
Nullification of the Pragmatic Sanction of Charles VII.
The Concordat of Bologna.
"On the 15th of September, the day after the battle [of
Marignano], the Swiss took the road back to their mountains.
Francis I. entered Milan in triumph. Maximilian Sforza took
refuge in the castle, and twenty days afterwards on the 4th of
October, surrendered, consenting to retire to France, with a
pension of 30,000 crowns, and the promise of being recommended
for a cardinal's hat, and almost consoled for his downfall 'by
the pleasure of being delivered from the insolence of the
Swiss, the exactions of the Emperor Maximilian, and the
rascalities of the Spaniards.' Fifteen years afterwards, in
June, 1530, he died in oblivion at Paris.
{1188}
Francis I. regained possession of all Milaness, adding
thereto, with the pope's consent, the duchies of Parma and
Piacenza, which had been detached from it. ... Two treaties,
one of November 7, 1515, and the other of November 29, 1516,
re-established not only peace, but perpetual alliance, between
the King of France and the thirteen Swiss Cantons, with
stipulated conditions in detail. Whilst these negotiations
were in progress, Francis I. and Leo X., by a treaty published
at Viterbo, on the 13th of October, proclaimed their hearty
reconciliation. The pope guaranteed to Francis I. the duchy of
Milan, restored to him those of Parma and Piacenza, and
recalled his troops which were still serving against the
Venetians." At the same time, arrangements were made for a
personal meeting of the pope and the French king, which took
place at Bologna in December, 1515. "Francis did not attempt
to hide his design of reconquering the kingdom of Naples,
which Ferdinand the Catholic had wrongfully usurped, and he
demanded the pope's countenance. The pope did not care to
refuse, but he pointed out to the king that everything
foretold the very near death of King Ferdinand; and 'Your
Majesty,' said he, 'will then have a natural opportunity for
claiming your rights; and as for me, free, as I shall then be,
from my engagements with the King of Arragon in respect of the
crown of Naples, I shall find it easier to respond to your
majesty's wish.' The pope merely wanted to gain time. Francis,
putting aside for the moment the kingdom of Naples, spoke of
Charles VII.'s Pragmatic Sanction [see above: A. D. 1438], and
the necessity of putting an end to the difficulties which had
arisen on this subject between the court of Rome and the Kings
of France, his predecessors. 'As to that,' said the pope, 'I
could not grant what your predecessors demanded; but be not
uneasy; I have a compensation to propose to you which will
prove to you how dear your interests are to me.' The two
sovereigns had, without doubt, already come to an
understanding on this point, when, after a three days'
interview with Leo X., Francis I. returned to Milan, leaving
at Bologna, for the purpose of treating in detail the affair
of the Pragmatic Sanction, his chancellor, Duprat, who had
accompanied him during all this campaign as his adviser and
negotiator. ... The popes ... had all of them protested since
the days of Charles VII. against the Pragmatic Sanction as an
attack upon their rights, and had demanded its abolition. In
1461, Louis XI. ... had yielded for a moment to the demand of
Pope Pius II., whose countenance he desired to gain, and had
abrogated the Pragmatic; but, not having obtained what he
wanted thereby, and having met with strong opposition in the
Parliament of Paris to his concession, he had let it drop
without formally retracting it. ... This important edict,
then, was still vigorous in 1515, when Francis I., after his
victory at Melegnano and his reconciliation with the pope,
left Chancellor Duprat at Bologna to pursue the negotiation
reopened on that subject. The 'compensation,' of which Leo X.,
on redemanding the abolition of the Pragmatic Sanction, had
given a peep to Francis I., could not fail to have charms for
a prince so little scrupulous, and for his still less
scrupulous chancellor. The pope proposed that the Pragmatic,
once for all abolished, should be replaced by a Concordat
between the two sovereigns, and that this Concordat, whilst
putting a stop to the election of the clergy by the faithful,
should transfer to the king the right of nomination to
bishoprics and other great ecclesiastical offices and
benefices, reserving to the pope the right of presentation of
prelates nominated by the king. This, considering the
condition of society and government in the 16th century, in
the absence of political and religious liberty, was to take
away from the church her own existence, and divide her between
two masters, without giving her, as regarded either of them,
any other guarantee of independence than the mere chance of
their dissensions and quarrels. ... Francis I. and his
chancellor saw in the proposed Concordat nothing but the great
increment of influence it secured to them, by making all the
dignitaries of the church suppliants at first and then clients
of the kingship. After some difficulties as to points of
detail, the Concordat was concluded and signed on the 18th of
August, 1516. Five months afterwards, on the 5th of February,
1517, the king repaired in person to Parliament, to which he
had summoned many prelates and doctors of the University. The
Chancellor explained the points of the Concordat. ... The king
ordered its registration, 'for the good of his kingdom and for
quittance of the promise he had given the pope.'" For more
than a year the Parliament of Paris resisted the royal order,
and it was not until the 22d of March, 1518, that it yielded
to the king's threats and proceeded to registration of the
Concordat, with forms and reservations "which were evidence of
compulsion. The other Parliaments of France followed with more
or less zeal ... the example shown by that of Paris. The
University was heartily disposed to push resistance farther
than had been done by Parliament."
F. P. Guizot,
Popular History of France,
chapter 28 (volume 4).
"The execution of the Concordat was vigorously contested for
years afterwards. Cathedrals and monastic chapters proceeded
to elect bishops and abbots under the provisions of the
Pragmatic Sanction; and every such case became a fresh source
of exasperation between the contending powers. ... But the
Parliament, though clamouring loudly for the 'Gallican
liberties,' and making a gallant stand for national
independence as against the usurpations of Rome, was unable to
maintain its ground against the overpowering despotism of the
Crown. The monarchical authority ultimately achieved a
complete triumph. In 1527 a peremptory royal ordinance
prohibited the courts of Parliament from taking further
cognisance of causes affecting elections to consistorial
benefices and conventual priories; and all such matters were
transferred to the sole jurisdiction of the Council of State.
After this the agitation against the Concordat gradually
subsided. But although, in virtue of its compulsory
registration by the Parliament, the Concordat became part of
the law of the land, it is certain that the Gallican Church
never accepted this flagrant invasion of its liberties."
W. H. Jervis,
History of the Church of France,
volume 1, pages 109-110.
{1189}
FRANCE: A. D. 1515-1547.
The institution of the Court.
Its baneful influence.
"Francis I. instituted the Court, and this had a decisive
influence upon the manners of the nobility. Those lords, whose
respect royalty had difficulty in keeping when they were at
their castles, having come to court, prostrated themselves
before the throne, and yielded obedience with their whole
hearts. A few words will describe this Court. The king lodged
and fed in his own large palace, which was fitted for the
purpose, the flower of the French nobility. Some of these
lords were in his service, under the title of officers of his
household--as chamberlains, purveyors, equerries, &c. Large
numbers of domestic offices were created solely as an excuse
for their presence. Others lived there, without duties, simply
as guests. All these, besides lodging and food, had often a
pension as well. A third class were given only a lodging, and
provided their own table; but all were amused and entertained
with various pleasures, at the expense of the king. Balls,
carousals, stately ceremonials, grand dinners, theatricals,
conversations inspired by the presence of fair women, constant
intercourse of all kinds, where each could choose for himself,
and where the refined and literary found a place as well as
the vain and profligate,--such was court life, a truly
different thing from the monotonous and brutal existence of
the feudal lord at his castle in the depths of his province.
So, from all sides, nobles flocked to court, to gratify both
the most refined tastes and the most degraded passions. Some
came hoping to make their fortune, a word from the king
sufficing to enrich a man; others came to gain a rank in the
army, a lucrative post in the finance department, an abbey, or
a bishopric. From the time kings held court, it became almost
a law, that nothing should be granted to a nobleman who lived
beyond its pale. Those lords who persisted in staying on their
own estates were supposed to rail against the administration, or,
as we of the present would express it, to be in opposition.
'They must indeed be men of gross minds who are not tempted by
the polish of the court; at all events it is very insolent in
them to show so little wish to see their sovereign, and enjoy
the honor of living under his roof.' Such was almost precisely
the opinion of the king in regard to the provincial nobility.
... Ambition drew the nobles to court; ambition, society, and
dissipation kept them there. To incur the displeasure of their
master, and be exiled from court was, first, to lose all hope
of advancement, and then to fall from paradise into purgatory.
It killed some people. But life was much more expensive at
court than in the castles. As in all society where each is
constantly in the presence of his neighbor, there was
unbounded rivalry as to who should be most brilliant, most
superb. The old revenues did not suffice, while, at the same
time, the inevitable result of the absence of the lords was to
decrease them. Whilst the expenses of the noblemen at Chambord
or Versailles were steadily on the increase, his intendant,
alone and unrestrained upon the estate, filled his own
pockets, and sent less money every quarter, so that, to keep
up the proper rank, the lord was forced to beg a pension from
the king. Low indeed was the downfall of the old pride and
feudal independence! The question was how to obtain these
pensions, ranks, offices, and favors of all kinds. The virtues
most prized and rewarded by the kings were not civic
virtues,--capacity, and services of value for the public
good; what pleased them was, naturally, devotion to their
person, blind obedience, flattery, and subservience."
P. Lacombe,
A Short History of the French People,
chapter 23.
FRANCE: A. D. 1516-1517.
Maximilian's attempt against Milan.
Diplomatic intrigues.
The Treaty of Noyon.
After Francis I. had taken possession of Milan, and while Pope
Leo X. was making professions of friendship to him at Bologna,
a scheme took shape among the French king's enemies for
depriving him of his conquest, and the pope was privy to it.
"Henry VIII. would not openly break the peace between England
and France, but he offered to supply Maximilian with Swiss
troops for an attack upon Milan. It was useless to send money
to Maximilian, who would have spent it on himself"; but troops
were hired for the emperor by the English agent, Pace, and "at
the beginning of March [1516] the joint army of Maximilian and
the Swiss assembled at Trent. On March 24 they were within a
few miles of Milan, and their success seemed sure, when
suddenly Maximilian found that his resources were exhausted
and refused to proceed; next day he withdrew his troops and
abandoned his allies. ... The expedition was a total failure;
yet English gold had not been spent in vain, as the Swiss were
prevented from entirely joining the French, and Francis I. was
reminded that his position in Italy was by no means secure.
Leo X., meanwhile, in the words of Pace, 'had played
marvellously with both hands in this enterprise.' ... England
was now the chief opponent of the ambitious schemes of France,
and aimed at bringing about a league with Maximilian, Charles
[who had just succeeded Ferdinand of Spain, deceased January
23, 1516], the Pope, and the Swiss. But Charles's ministers,
chief of whom was Croy, lord of Chievres, had a care above all
for the interests of Flanders, and so were greatly under the
influence of France. ... France and England entered into a
diplomatic warfare over the alliance with Charles. First,
England on April 19 recognised Charles as King of Spain,
Navarre, and the Two Sicilies; then Wolsey strove to make
peace between Venice and Maximilian as a first step towards
detaching Venice from its French alliance." On the other hand,
negotiations were secretly carried on and (August 13) "the
treaty of Noyon was concluded between Francis I. and Charles.
Charles was to marry Louise, the daughter of Francis I., an
infant of one year old, and receive as her dower the French
claims on Naples; Venice was to pay Maximilian 200,000 ducats
for Brescia and Verona; in case he refused this offer and
continued the war, Charles was at liberty to help his
grandfather, and Francis I. to help the Venetians, without any
breach of the peace now made between them. ... In spite of the
efforts of England, Francis I. was everywhere successful in
settling his difficulties. On November 29 a perpetual peace
was made at Friburg between France and the Swiss Cantons; on
December 3 the treaty of Noyon was renewed, and Maximilian was
included in its provisions. Peace was made between him and
Venice by the provision that Maximilian was to hand over
Verona to Charles, who in turn should give it up to the King
of France, who delivered it to the Venetians; Maximilian in
return received 100,000 ducats from Venice and as much from
France. The compact was duly carried out: 'On February 8,
1517,' wrote the Cardinal of Sion, 'Verona belonged to the
Emperor; on the 9th to the King Catholic; on the 15th to the
French; on the 17th to the Venetians.' Such was the end of the
wars that had arisen from the League of Cambrai. After a struggle
of eight years the powers that had confederated to destroy
Venice came together to restore her to her former place.
Venice might well exult in this reward of her long constancy,
her sacrifices and her disasters."
M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy, during the Period
of the Reformation,
book 5, chapter 19 (volume 4).
ALSO IN:
J. S. Brewer,
The Reign of Henry VIII.,
chapters 4-6 (volume 1).
{1190}
FRANCE: A. D. 1519.
Candidacy of Francis I. for Imperial crown.
See GERMANY: A. D. 1519.
FRANCE: A. D. 1520-1523.
Rivalry of Francis I. and Charles V.
The Emperor's successes in Italy and Navarre.
Milan again taken from France.
The wrongs and the treason of the Constable of Bourbon.
"With their candidature for the Imperial crown, burst forth
the inextinguishable rivalry between Francis I. and Charles V.
The former claimed Naples for himself and Navarre for Henry
d'Albret: the Emperor demanded the Milanese as a fief of the
Empire, and the Duchy of Burgundy. Their resources were about
equal. If the empire of Charles were more extensive the
kingdom of France was more compact. The Emperor's subjects
were richer, but his authority more circumscribed. The
reputation of the French cavalry was not inferior to that of
the Spanish infantry. Victory would belong to the one who
should win over the King of England to his side. ... Both gave
pensions to his Prime Minister, Cardinal Wolsey; they each asked
the hand of his daughter Mary, one for the dauphin, the other
for himself. Francis I. obtained from him an interview at
Calais, and forgetting that he wished to gain his favour,
eclipsed him by his elegance and magnificence [see FIELD OF
THE CLOTH OF GOLD]. Charles V., more adroit, had anticipated
this interview by visiting Henry VIII. in England. He had
secured Wolsey by giving him hopes of the tiara. ...
Everything succeeded with the Emperor. He gained Leo X. to his
side and thus obtained sufficient influence to raise his
tutor, Adrian of Utrecht, to the papacy [on the death of Leo,
Dec. 1, 1521]. The French penetrated into Spain, but arrived
too late to aid the rising there [in Navarre, 1521]. The
governor of the Milanese, Lautrec, who is said to have exiled
from Milan nearly half its inhabitants, was driven out of
Lombardy [and the Pope retook Parma and Placentia]. He met
with the same fate again in the following year: the Swiss, who
were ill-paid, asked either for dismissal or battle, and allowed
themselves to be beaten at La Bicoque [April 29, 1522]. The
money intended for the troops had been used for other purposes
by the Queen-mother, who hated Lautrec. At the moment when
Francis I. was thinking of re-entering Italy, an internal
enemy threw France into the utmost danger. Francis had given
mortal offence to the Constable of Bourbon, one of those who
had most contributed to the victory of Marignan. Charles,
Count of Montpensier and Dauphin of Auvergne, held by virtue
of his wife, a granddaughter of Louis XI., the Duchy of
Bourbon, and the counties of Clermont, La Marche and other
domains, which made him the first noble in the kingdom. On the
death of his wife, the Queen-mother, Louise of Savoy, who had
wanted to marry the Constable and had been refused by him,
resolved to ruin him. She disputed with him this rich
inheritance and obtained from her son that the property should
be provisionally sequestered. Bourbon, exasperated, resolved
to pass over to the Emperor (1523). Half a century earlier,
revolt did not mean disloyalty. The most accomplished knights
in France, Dunois and John of Calabria, had joined the 'League
for the public weal.' ... But now it was no question of a
revolt against the king; such a thing was impossible in France
at this time. It was a conspiracy against the very existence
of France that Bourbon was plotting with foreigners. He
promised Charles V. to attack Burgundy as soon as Francis I.
had crossed the Alps, and to rouse into revolt five provinces
of which he believed himself master; the kingdom of Provence
was to be re-established in his favour, and France,
partitioned between Spain and England, would have ceased to
exist as a nation. He was soon able to enjoy the reverses of
his country."
J. Michelet,
Summary of Modern History,
chapter 6.
"Henry VIII. and Charles V. were both ready to secure the
services of the ex-Constable. He decided in favour of Charles
as the more powerful of the two. ... These secret negotiations
were carried on in the spring of 1523, while Francis I.
(having sent a sufficient force to protect his northern
frontier) was preparing to make Italy the seat of war. With
this object the king ordered a rendezvous of the army at
Lyons, in the beginning of September, and having arranged to
pass through Moulins on his way to join the forces, called
upon the Constable to meet him there and to proceed with him
to Lyons. Already vague rumours of an understanding between
the Emperor and Bourbon had reached Francis, who gave no
credence to them; but on his way M. de Brézé, Seneschal of
Normandy, attached to the Court of Louise of Savoy, sent such
precise details of the affair by two Norman gentlemen in the
Constable's service that doubt was no longer possible."
Francis accordingly entered Moulins with a considerable force,
and went straight to Bourbon, who feigned illness. The
Constable stoutly denied to the king all the charges which the
latter revealed to him, and Francis, who was strongly urged to
order his arrest, refused to do so. But a few days later, when
the king had gone forward to Lyons, Bourbon, pretending to
follow him, rode away to his strong castle of Chantelles, from
whence he wrote letters demanding the restitution of his
estates. As soon as his flight was known, Francis sent forces
to seize him; but the Constable, taking one companion with
him, made his way out of the kingdom in disguise. Escaping to
Italy, he was there placed in command of the imperial army.
C. Coignet,
Francis I. and his Times,
chapter 4.
ALSO IN:
Miss Pardoe,
The Court and Reign of Francis I.,
volume 1, chapters 14-19.
See, also, AUSTRIA: A. D. 1519-1555.
FRANCE: A. D. 1521.
Invasion of Navarre.
See NAVARRE: A. D. 1442-1521.
FRANCE: A. D. 1521-1525.
Beginning of the Protestant Reform movement.
See PAPACY: A. D. 1521-1535.
FRANCE: A. D. 1523-1524.
First undertakings in the New World.
Voyages of Verrazano.
See AMERICA: A. D. 1523-1524.
{1191}
FRANCE: A. D. 1523-1525.
The death of Bayard.
Second invasion of Italy by Francis I.
His defeat and capture at Pavia.
"Bonnivet, the personal enemy of Bourbon, was now entrusted
with the command of the French army. He marched without
opposition into the Milanese, and might have taken the capital
had he pushed on to its gates. Having by irresolution lost it,
he retreated to winter quarters behind the Tesino. The
operations of the English in Picardy, of the imperialists in
Champagne, and of the Spaniards near the Pyrenees, were
equally insignificant. The spring of 1524 brought on an
action, if the attack of one point can be called such, which
proved decisive for the time. Bonnivet advanced rashly beyond
the Tesino. The imperialists, commanded by four able generals,
Launoi, Pescara, Bourbon, and Sforza, succeeded in almost
cutting off his retreat. They at the same time refused
Bonnivet's offer to engage. They hoped to weaken him by
famine. The Swiss first murmured against the distress
occasioned by want of precaution. They deserted across the
river; and Bonnivet, thus abandoned, was obliged to make a
precipitate and perilous retreat. A bridge was hastily flung
across the Sessia, near Romagnano; and Bonnivet, with his best
knights and gensdarmerie, undertook to defend the passage of
the rest of the army. The imperialists, led on by Bourbon,
made a furious attack. Bonnivet was wounded, and he gave his
place to Bayard, who, never entrusted with a high command, was
always chosen for that of a forlorn hope. The brave Vandenesse
was soon killed; and Bayard himself received a gun-shot
through the reins. The gallant chevalier, feeling his wound
mortal, caused himself to be placed in a sitting posture
beneath a tree, his face to the enemy, and his sword fixed in
guise of a cross before him. The constable Bourbon, who led
the imperialists, soon came up to the dying Bayard, and
expressed his compassion. 'Weep not for me,' said the
chevalier, 'but for thyself. I die in performing my duty; thou
art betraying thine.' Nothing marks more strongly the great
rise, the sudden sacro-sanctity of the royal authority in
those days, than the general horror which the treason of
Bourbon excited. ... The fact is, that this sudden horror of
treason was owing, in a great measure, to the revived study of
the classics, in which treason to one's country is universally
mentioned as an impiety and a crime of the deepest dye.
Feudality, with all its oaths, had no such horror of treason.
... Bonnivet had evacuated Italy after this defeat at
Romagnano. Bourbon's animosity stimulated him to push his
advantage. He urged the emperor to invade France, and
recommended the Bourbonnais and his own patrimonial provinces
as those most advisable to invade. Bourbon wanted to raise his
friends in insurrection against Francis; but Charles descried
selfishness in this scheme of Bourbon, and directed Pescara to
march with the constable into the south of France and lay
siege to Marseilles. ... Marseilles made an obstinate
resistance," and the siege was ineffectual. "Francis, in the
meantime, alarmed by the invasion, had assembled an army. He
burned to employ it, and avenge the late affront. The king of
England, occupied with the Scotch, gave him respite in the
north; and he resolved to employ this by marching, late as the
season was, into Italy. His generals, who by this time were
sick of warring beyond the Alps, opposed the design; but not
even the death of his queen, Claude, could stop Francis. He
passed Mount Cenis; marched upon Milan, whose population was
spiritless and broken by the plague, and took it without
resistance. It was then mooted whether Lodi or Pavia should be
besieged. The latter, imprudently, as it is said, was
preferred. It was at this time that Pope Clement VII., of the
house of Medici, who had lately succeeded Adrian, made the
most zealous efforts to restore peace between the monarchies.
He found Charles and his generals arrogant and unwilling to
treat. The French, said they, must on no account be allowed a
footing in Italy. Clement, impelled by pique towards the
emperor, or generosity to Francis, at once abandoned the
prudent policy of his predecessors, and formed a league with
the French king, to whom, after all, he brought no accession
of force. This step proved afterwards fatal to the city of
Rome. The siege of Pavia was formed about the middle of
October [1524]. Antonio de Leyva, an experienced officer,
supported by veteran troops, commanded in the town. The
fortifications were strong, and were likely to hold for a
considerable time. By the month of January the French had made
no progress; and the impatient Francis despatched a
considerable portion of his army for the invasion of Naples,
hearing that the country was drained of troops. This was a
gross blunder, which Pescara observing, forbore to send any
force to oppose the expedition. He knew that the fate of Italy
would be decided before Pavia. Bourbon, in the mean time,
disgusted with the jealousies and tardiness of the imperial
generals, employed the winter in raising an army of
lansquenets on his own account. From the duke of Savoy he
procured funds; and early in the year 1525 the constable
joined Pescara at Lodi with a fresh army of 12,000
mercenaries. They had, besides, some 7,000 foot, and not more
than 1,500 horse. With these they marched to the relief of
Pavia. Francis had a force to oppose to them, not only
inferior in numbers, but so harassed with a winter's siege,
that all the French generals of experience counselled a
retreat. Bonnivet and his young troop of courtiers were for
fighting; and the monarch hearkened to them. Pavia, to the
north of the river, was covered in great part by the chateau
and walled park of Mirabel. Adjoining this, and on a rising
ground, was the French camp, extending to the Tesino. Through
the camp, or through the park, lay the only ways by which the
imperialists could reach Pavia. The camp was strongly
entrenched and defended by artillery, except on the side of
the park of Mirabel, with which it communicated." On the night
of February 23, the imperialists made a breach in the park
wall, through which they pressed next morning, but were driven
back with heavy loss. "This was victory enough, could the
French king have been contented with it. But the impatient
Francis no sooner beheld his enemies in rout, than he was
eager to chase them in person, and complete the victory with
his good sword. He rushed forth from his entrenchments at the
head of his gensdarmerie, flinging himself between the enemy
and his own artillery, which was thus masked and rendered
useless. The imperialists rallied as soon as they found
themselves safe from the fire of the cannon," and the French
were overwhelmed. "The king ... behind a heap of slain,
defended himself valiantly; so beaten and shattered, so
begrimed with blood and dust, as to be scarcely
distinguishable, notwithstanding his conspicuous armour. He
had received several wounds, one in the forehead; and his
horse, struck with a ball in the head, reared, fell back, and
crushed him with his weight: still Francis rose, and laid
prostrate several of the enemies that rushed upon him." But
presently he was recognized and was persuaded to surrender his
sword to Lannoi, the viceroy of Naples. "Such was the signal
defeat that put an end to all French conquests and claims in
Italy."
E. E. Crowe,
History of France,
volume 1, chapter 6.
ALSO IN:
W. Robertson,
History of the Reign of Charles V.,
book 4 (volume 2).
J. S. Brewer,
Reign of Henry VIII.,
chapter 21 (volume 2).
H. G. Smith,
Romance of History,
chapter 6.
{1192}
FRANCE: A. D. 1525-1526.
The captivity of Francis I. and his deliberate perfidy in the
Treaty of Madrid.
The captive king of France was lodged in the castle at
Pizzighitone. "Instead of bearing his captivity with calmness
and fortitude, he chafed and fretted under the loss of his
wonted pleasures; at one moment he called for death to end his
woes, while at another he was ready to sign disastrous terms
of peace, meaning to break faith so soon as ever he might be
free again. ... France, at first stupefied by the mishap, soon
began to recover hope. The Regent, for all her vices and
faults, was proud and strong; she gathered what force she
could at Lyons, and looked round for help. ... Not only were
there anxieties at home, but the frontiers were also
threatened. On the side of Germany a popular movement ['the
Peasant War'], closely connected with the religious excitement
of the time, pushed a fierce and cruel rabble into Lorraine,
whence they proposed to enter France. But they were met by the
Duke of Guise and the Count of Vaudemont, his brother, at the
head of the garrisons of Burgundy and Champagne, and were
easily dispersed. It was thought that during these troubles
Lannoy would march his army, flushed with victory, from the Po
to the Rhone. ... But Lannoy had no money to pay his men, and
could not undertake so large a venture. Meanwhile negotiations
began between Charles V. and the King; the Emperor demanding,
as ransom, that Bourbon should be invested with Provence and
Dauphiny, joined to his own lands in Auvergne, and should
receive the title of king; and secondly that the Duchy of
Burgundy should be given over to the Emperor as the inheritor
of the lands and rights of Charles the Bold. But the King of
France would not listen for a moment. And now the King of
England and most of the Italian states, alarmed at the great
power of the Emperor, began to change sides. Henry VIII. came
first. He signed a treaty of neutrality with the Regent, in
which it was agreed that not even for the sake of the King's
deliverance should any part of France be torn from her. The
Italians joined in a league to restore the King to liberty,
and to secure the independence of Italy: and Turkey was called
on for help. ... The Emperor now felt that Francis was not in
secure keeping at Pizzighitone. ... He therefore gave orders
that Francis should at once be removed to Spain." The captive
king "was set ashore at Valencia, and received with wonderful
welcome: dances, festivals, entertainments of every kind,
served to relieve his captivity; it was like a restoration to
life! But this did not suit the views of the Emperor, who
wished to weary the King into giving up all thought of
resistance: he trusted to his impatient and frivolous
character; his mistake, as he found to his cost, lay in
thinking that a man of such character would keep his word. He
therefore had him removed from Valencia to Madrid, where he
was kept in close and galling confinement, in a high, dreary
chamber, where he could not even see out of the windows. This
had the desired effect. The King talked of abdicating; he fell
ill of ennui, and was like to die: but at last he could hold
out no longer, and abandoning all thought of honourable
action, agreed to shameful terms, consoling himself with a
private protest against the validity of the deed, as having