Chapter V: H. S (9)

The widespread interest taken in Louis XVII. is shown by the fact that
since 1905 a monthly periodical has appeared in Paris on this subject,
entitled _Revue historique de la question Louis XVII._, also by the
promised examination of the subject by the Société d'Histoire
contemporaine. (M. Br.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] F. A. Regnier de Jarjayes (1745-1822). See P. Gaulot, _Un Complot
sous la Terreur_.

[2] Jean, baron de Batz (1761-1822), attempted to carry off the
dauphin in 1794. See G. Lenôtre, _Un Conspirateur royaliste pendant
la Terreur, le baron de Batz_ (1896).

[3] Charlotte Walpole (c. 1785-1836), an English actress who married
in 1779 Sir Edward Atkyns, and spent most of her life in France. She
expended large sums in trying to secure the escape of the prisoners
of the Temple. See F. Barbey, _A Friend of Marie Antoinette_ (Eng.
ed. 1906).

[4] Antoine Simon (1736-1794) married Marie Jeanne Aladame, and
belonged to the section of the Cordeliers. They owed their position
to Anaxagoras Chaumette, procureur of the Commune, and to the fact
that Simon had prevented one of the attempts of the baron de Batz.
Simon was sent to the guillotine with Robespierre in 1794, and two
years later Marie Jeanne entered a hospital for incurables in the rue
de Sèvres, where she constantly affirmed the dauphin's escape. She
was secretly visited after the Restoration by the duchess of
Angoulême. On the 16th of November 1816, she was interrogated by the
police, who frightened her into silence about the supposed
substitution of another child for the dauphin. She died in 1819. See
G. Lenôtre, _Vieilles maisons, vieux papiers_ (2nd series, 1903).

[5] In a bulletin dated May 17-24, Paris, and enclosed by Francis
Drake (June 17, 1794) at Milan to Lord Grenville, it is stated (Hist.
MSS. Comm. Fortescue Papers at Dropmore, vol. ii. 576-577) that
Robespierre in the night of 23-24 May fetched the king (the dauphin)
from the Temple and took him to Meudon. "The fact is certain,
although only known to the Committee of Public Safety. It is said to
be ascertained that he was brought back to the Temple the night of
24-25th, and that this was a test to assure the ease of seizing him."
This police report at least serves to show the kind of rumour then
current.

LOUIS XVIII. (LOUIS LE DÉSIRÉ) (1755-1824). Louis-Stanislas-Xavier, comte de Provence, third son of the dauphin Louis, son of Louis XV., and of Maria Josepha of Saxony, was born at Versailles on the 17th of November 1755. His education was supervised by the devout duc de la Vauguyon, but his own taste was for the writings of Voltaire and the encyclopaedists. On the 14th of May 1771 took place his marriage with Louise-Marie-Joséphine of Savoy, by whom he had no children. His position at court was uncomfortable, for though ambitious and conscious of possessing greater abilities than his brother (Louis XVI.), his scope for action was restricted; he consequently devoted his energies largely to intrigue, especially against Marie Antoinette, whom he hated.[1] During the long absence of heirs to Louis XVI., "Monsieur," as heir to the throne, courted popularity and took an active part in politics, but the birth of a dauphin (1781) was a blow to his ambitions.[2] He opposed the revival of the _parlements_, wrote a number of political pamphlets,[3] and at the Assembly of Notables presided, like the other princes of the blood, over a bureau, to which was given the name of the _Comité des sages_; he also advocated the double representation of the _tiers_. At the same time he cultivated literature, entertaining poets and writers both at the Luxembourg and at his château of Brunoy (see Dubois-Corneau, _Le Comte de Provence à Brunoy_, 1909), and gaining a reputation for wit by his verses and _mots_ in the salon of the charming and witty comtesse de Balbi, one of Madame's ladies, who had become his mistress,[4] and till 1793 exerted considerable influence over him. He did not emigrate after the taking of the Bastille, but, possibly from motives of ambition, remained in Paris. Mirabeau thought at one time of making him chief minister in his projected constitutional government (see _Corr. de Mirabeau et La Marck_, ed. Bacourt, i. 434, 436, 442), but was disappointed by his caution and timidity. The _affaire Favras_ (Dec. 1789) aroused great feeling against Monsieur, who was believed by many to have conspired with Favras, only to abandon him (see Lafayette's _Mems._ and _Corr. of Mirabeau_). In June 1791, at the time of the flight to Varennes, Monsieur also fled by a different route, and, in company with the comte d'Avaray[5]--who subsequently replaced Mme de Balbi as his confidant, and largely influenced his policy during the emigration--succeeded in reaching Brussels, where he joined the comte d'Artois and proceeded to Coblenz, which now became the headquarters of the emigration.

Here, living in royal state, he put himself at the head of the counter-revolutionary movement, appointing ambassadors, soliciting the aid of the European sovereigns, and especially of Catherine II. of Russia. Out of touch with affairs in France and surrounded by violent anti-revolutionists, headed by Calonne and the comte d'Artois, he followed an entirely selfish policy, flouting the National Assembly (see his reply to the summons of the National Assembly, in Daudet, _op. cit._ i. 96), issuing uncompromising manifestoes (Sept. 1791, Aug. 1792, &c.), and obstructing in every way the representatives of the king and queen.[6] After Valmy he had to retire to Hamm in Westphalia, where, on the death of Louis XVI., he proclaimed himself regent; from here he went south, with the idea of encouraging the royalist feeling in the south of France, and settled at Verona, where on the death of Louis XVII. (8th of June 1795) he took the title of Louis XVIII. At this time ended his _liaison_ with Mme de Balbi, and the influence of d'Avaray reached its height. From this time onward his life is a record of constant wanderings, negotiations and conspiracies. In April 1796 he joined Condé's army on the German frontier, but was shortly requested to leave the country, and accepted the hospitality of the duke of Brunswick at Blanckenberg till 1797, when, this refuge being no longer open to him, the emperor Paul I. permitted him to settle at Mittau in Courland, where he stayed till 1801. All this time he was in close communication with the royalists in France, but was much embarrassed by the conflicting policy pursued by the comte d'Artois from England, and was largely at the mercy of corrupt and dishonest agents.[7] At Mittau was realized his cherished plan of marrying Madame Royale, daughter of Louis XVI., to the duc d'Angoulême, elder son of the comte d'Artois. From Mittau, too, was sent his well-known letter to Bonaparte (1799) calling upon him to play the part of Monk, a proposal contemptuously refused (E. Daudet, _Hist. de l'émigration_, ii. 371, 436), though Louis in turn declined to accept a pension from Bonaparte, and later, in 1803, though his fortunes were at their lowest ebb, refused to abdicate at his suggestion and accept an indemnity.

Suddenly expelled from Mittau in 1801 by the capricious Paul I., Louis made his way, in the depth of winter, to Warsaw, where he stayed for three years. All this time he was trying to convert France to the royalist cause, and had a "_conseil royal_" in Paris, founded at the end of 1799 by Royer-Collard, Montesquiou and Clermont-Gallerande, the actions of which were much impeded by the activity of the rival committee of the comte d'Artois (see E. Daudet, _op. cit._ ii., and Remâcle, _Bonaparte et les Bourbons_, Paris, 1899), but after 1800, and still more after the failure of the royalist conspiracy of Cadoudal, Pichegru and Moreau, followed by the execution of the duc d'Enghien (March 1804), and the assumption by Napoleon of the title of emperor (May 1804), the royalist cause appeared quite hopeless. In September 1804 Louis met the comte d'Artois at Calmar in Sweden, and they issued a protest against Napoleon's action, but being warned that he must not return to Poland, he gained permission from Alexander I. again to retire to Mittau. After Tilsit, however (1807), he was again forced to depart, and took refuge in England, where he stayed first at Gosfield in Essex, and afterwards (1809 onwards) at Hartwell in Buckinghamshire. In 1810 his wife died, and in 1811 d'Avaray died, his place as favourite being taken by the comte de Blacas.[8] After Napoleon's defeats in 1813 the hopes of the royalists revived, and Louis issued a fresh manifesto, in which he promised to recognize the results of the Revolution. Negotiations were also opened with Bernadotte, who seemed willing to support his cause, but was really playing for his own hand.

In March 1814 the Allies entered Paris, and thanks to Talleyrand's negotiations the restoration of the Bourbons was effected, Louis XVIII. entering Paris on the 2nd of May 1814, after issuing the declaration of St Ouen, in which he promised to grant the nation a constitution (_octroyer une charte_). He was now nearly sixty, wearied by adversity, and a sufferer from gout and obesity. But though clear-sighted, widely read and a good diplomatist, his impressionable and sentimental nature made him too subject to personal and family influences. His concessions to the reactionary and clerical party of the _émigrés_, headed by the comte d'Artois and the duchesse d'Angoulême, aroused suspicions of his loyalty to the constitution, the creation of his _Maison militaire_ alienated the army, and the constant presence of Blacas made the formation of a united ministry impossible. After the Hundred Days, during which the king was forced to flee to Ghent, the dismissal of Blacas was made one of the conditions of his second restoration. On the 8th of July he again entered Paris, "in the baggage train of the allied armies," as his enemies said, but in spite of this was received with the greatest enthusiasm[9] by a people weary of wars and looking for constitutional government. He was forced to retain Talleyrand and Fouché in his first ministry, but took the first opportunity of ridding himself of them when the elections of 1815 assured him of a strong royalist majority in the chamber (the _chambre introuvable_, a name given it by Louis himself). At this time he came into contact with the young comte (afterwards duc) Decazes, prefect of the police under Fouché, and minister of police in Richelieu's ministry, who now became his favourite and gained his entire confidence (see E. Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_). Having obtained a ministry in which he could trust, having as members the duc de Richelieu and Decazes, the king now gave it his loyal support and did his best to shield his ministers from the attacks of the royal family. In September 1816, alarmed at the violence of the _chambre introuvable_, he was persuaded to dissolve it. An attempt on the part of the Ultras to regain their ascendancy over the king, by conniving at the sudden return of Blacas from Rome to Paris,[10] ended in failure.

The events and ministerial changes of Louis XVIII.'s reign are described under the article FRANCE: _History_, but it may be said here that the king's policy throughout was one of prudence and common sense. His position was more passive than active, and consisted in giving his support as far as possible to the ministry of the day. While Decazes was still in power, the king's policy to a large extent followed his, and was rather liberal and moderate, but after the assassination of the duc de Berry (1820), when he saw that Decazes could no longer carry on the government, he sorrowfully acquiesced in his departure, showered honours upon him, and transferred his support to Richelieu, the head of the new ministry. In the absence of Decazes a new favourite was found to amuse the king's old age, Madame du Cayla (Zoé Talon, comtesse du Cayla), a protégée of the vicomte Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld and consequently a creature of the Ultras. As the king became more and more infirm, his power of resistance to the intrigues of the Ultras became weaker. The birth of a posthumous son to the duc de Berry (Sept. 1820), the death of Napoleon (5th of May 1821) and the resignation of Richelieu left him entirely in their hands, and after Villèle had formed a ministry of a royalist character the comte d'Artois was associated with the government, which passed more and more out of the king's hands. He died on the 16th of September 1824, worn out in body, but still retaining flashes of his former clear insight and scepticism. The character of Louis XVIII. may be summed up in the words of Bonaparte, quoted by Sorel (_L'Europe et la Rév. fr._ viii. 416 footnote), "C'est Louis XVI. avec moins de franchise et plus d'esprit." He had all the Bourbon characteristics, especially their love of power, combined with a certain nobility of demeanour, and a consciousness of his dignity as king. But his nature was cold, unsympathetic and calculating, combined with a talent for intrigue, to which was added an excellent memory and a ready wit. An interesting judgment of him is contained in _Queen Victoria's Letters_, vol. i., in a letter of Leopold I., king of the Belgians, to the queen before her accession, dated the 18th of November 1836, "Poor Charles X. is dead.... History will state that Louis XVIII. was a most liberal monarch, reigning with great mildness and justice to his end, but that his brother, from his despotic and harsh disposition, upset all the other had done and lost the throne. Louis XVIII. was a clever, hard-hearted man, shackled by no principle, very proud and false. Charles X. an honest man, a kind friend," &c. &c. This seems fairly just as a personal estimate, though it does not do justice to their respective political rôles.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--There is no trustworthy or complete edition of the
writings and correspondence of Louis XVIII. The _Mémoires de Louis
XVIII. recueillis et mis en ordre par M. le duc de D. ..._ (12 vols.,
Paris, 1832-1833) are compiled by Lamothe-Langon, a well-known
compiler of more or less apocryphal memoirs. From the hand of Louis
XVIII. are: _Relation d'un voyage à Bruxelles et à Coblentz_, 1791
(Paris, 1823, with dedication to d'Avaray); and _Journal de
Marie-Thérèse de France, duchesse d'Angoulême, corrigé et annoté par
Louis XVIII._, ed. Imbert de St Amand (Paris, 1896). Some of his
letters are contained in collections, such as _Lettres d'Artwell;
correspondance politique et privée de Louis XVIII., roi de France_
(Paris, 1830; letters addressed to d'Avaray); _Lettres et instructions
de Louis XVIII. au comte de Saint-Priest_, ed. Barante (Paris, 1845);
_Talleyrand et Louis XVIII., corr. pendant le congrès de Vienne,
1814-1815_, ed. Pallain (1881; trans., 2 vols., 1881); see also the
corr. of Castlereagh, Metternich, J. de Maistre, the Wellington
Dispatches, &c., and such collections as _Corr. diplomatique de Pozzo
di Borgo avec le comte de Nesselrode_ (2 vols., 1890-1897), the
correspondence of C. de Rémusat, Villèle, &c. The works of E. Daudet
are of the greatest importance, and based on original documents; the
chief are: _La Terreur Blanche_ (Paris, 1878); _Hist. de la
restauration 1814-1830_ (1882); _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_
(1899); _Hist. de l'émigration_, in three studies: (i.) _Les Bourbons
et la Russie_ (1886), (ii.) _Les Émigrés et la seconde coalition_
(1886), (iii.) _Coblenz_, 1789-1793 (1890). Developed from these with
the addition of much further material is his _Hist. de l'émigration_
(3 vols., 1904-1907). Also based on original documents is E. Romberg
and A. Malet, _Louis XVIII. et les cent-jours à Gand_ (1898). See also
G. Stenger, _Le Retour des Bourbons_ (1908); Cte. L. de Remâcle,
_Bonaparte et les Bourbons. Relations secrèts des agents du cte. de
Provence sous le consulat_ (Paris, 1899). For various episodes, see
Vicomte de Reiset, _La Comtesse de Balbi_ (Paris, 1908; contains a
long bibliography, chiefly of memoirs concerning the emigration, and
is based on documents); J. B. H. R. Capefigue, _La Comtesse du Cayla_
(Paris, 1866); J. Turquan, _Les Favorites de Louis XVIII._ (Paris,
1900); see also the chief memoirs of the period, such as those of
Talleyrand, Chateaubriand, Guizot, duc de Broglie, Villèle, Vitrolles,
Pasquier, the comtesse de Boigne (ed. Nicoullaud, Paris, 1907), the
Vicomte L. F. Sosthène de la Rochefoucauld (15 vols., Paris,
1861-1864); and the writings of Benjamin Constant, Chateaubriand, &c.

General Works.--See the histories of France, the Emigration, the
Restoration and especially the very full bibliographies to chapters
i., ii. and iii. of _Cambridge Modern History_, and Lavisse and
Rambaud, _Hist. générale_, vol. x. (C. B. P.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] See Arneth and Geffroy, _Corr. de Marie-Thérèse avec le comte de
Mercy-Argenteau_, vol. i., "Mercy to Maria Theresa, June 22nd, 1771,"
also i. 261, ii. 186, 352, 393. Marie Antoinette says (ii. 393): "...
à un caractère très faible, il joint une marche souterraine, et
quelquefois très basse."

[2] See his letters to Gustavus III. of Sweden in A. Geffroy,
_Gustave III et la cour de France_, vol. ii. appendix.

[3] Two pamphlets at least are ascribed to him: "Les Mannequins,
conte ou histoire, comme l'on voudra" (against Turgot; anon., Paris,
1776) and "Description historique d'un monstre symbolique pris vivant
sur les bords du lac Fagua, près de Santa-Fé, par les soins de
Francisco Xaveiro de Neunris" (against Calonne; Paris, 1784) (A.
Debidour in _La Grande Encyclopédie_).

[4] It has frequently been alleged that his relations with Mme de
Balbi, and indeed with women generally, were of a platonic nature. De
Reiset (_La Comtesse de Balbi_, pp. 152-161) produces evidence to
disprove this assertion.

[5] Antoine-Louis-François de Bésiade, comte, afterwards duc,
d'Avaray. In spite of his loyalty and devotion, the effect of his
influence on Louis XVIII. may be gathered from a letter of J. de
Maistre to Blacas, quoted by E. Daudet, _Hist. de l'émigration_, ii.
11: "celui qui n'a pu dans aucun pays aborder aucun homme politique
sans l'aliéner n'est pas fait pour les affaires."

[6] See Klinckowström, _Le Comte de Fersen et la cour de France_.
Fersen says (i. 7), "Monsieur ferait mieux seul, mais il est
entièrement subjugué par l'autre" (i.e. the comte d'Artois, who was
in turn under the influence of Calonne). See Daudet, _op. cit._ vol.
i.

[7] See E. Daudet, _La Conjuration de Pichegru_ (Paris, 1901).

[8] Pierre-Louis-Casimir, comte (afterwards duc) de Blacas d'Aulps,
was as rigidly royalist as d'Avaray, but more able. E. Daudet, _Hist.
de l'émigration_, i. 458, quotes a judgment of him by J. de Maistre:
"Il est né homme d état et ambassadeur."

[9] See account by Decazes in E. Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc
Decazes_, pp. 48-49, and an interesting "secret and confidential"
letter of Castlereagh to Liverpool (July 8, 1815) in the unpublished
Foreign Office records: "The king sent for the duke and me this
evening to the Thuilleries.... We found him in a state of great
emotion and exaltation at the reception he had met with from his
subjects, which appears to have been even more animated than on his
former entrance. Indeed, during the long audience to which we were
admitted, it was almost impossible to converse, so loud were the
shouts of the people in the Thuilleries Gardens, which were full,
though it was then dark. Previous to the king's dismissing us, he
carried the duke and me to the open window. Candles were then
brought, which enabled the people to see the king with the duke by
his side. They ran from all parts of the Gardens, and formed a solid
mass of an immense extent, rending the air with acclamations. The
town is very generally illuminated, and I understand from men who
have traversed the principal streets that every demonstration of joy
was manifested by the inhabitants."

[10] It is as yet not proved that Blacas returned from his embassy in
response to a summons from the Ultras. But whether it was on his own
initiative or not, there can be no doubt as to the hopes which they
built on his arrival (see Daudet, _Louis XVIII. et le duc Decazes_).

LOUIS I. (1326-1382), called "the great," king of Hungary and Poland, was the third son of Charles Robert, king of Hungary, and Elizabeth, daughter of the Polish king, Ladislaus Lokietek. In 1342 he succeeded his father as king of Hungary and was crowned at Székesfehérvár on the 21st of July with great enthusiasm. Though only sixteen he understood Latin, German and Italian as well as his mother tongue. He owed his relatively excellent education to the care of his mother, a woman of profound political sagacity, who was his chief counsellor in diplomatic affairs during the greater part of his long reign. Italian politics first occupied his attention. As a ruler of a rising great power in search of a seaboard he was the natural adversary of the Venetian republic, which already aimed at making the Adriatic a purely Venetian sea and resented the proximity of the Magyars in Dalmatia. The first trial of strength began in 1345, when the city of Zara placed herself under the protection of Hungary and was thereupon invested by the Venetians. Louis fought a battle beneath the walls of Zara (July 1st, 1346), which has been immortalized by Tintoretto, but was defeated and compelled to abandon the city to the republic. The struggle was renewed eleven years later when Louis, having formed, with infinite trouble, a league of all the enemies of Venice, including the emperor, the Habsburgs, Genoa and other Italian towns, attacked his maritime rival with such vigour that she sued for peace, and by the treaty of Zara (February 18th, 1358) ceded most of the Dalmatian towns and renounced the title of duke of Dalmatia and Croatia, hitherto borne by the doge. Far more important than the treaty itself was the consequent voluntary submission of the independent republic of Ragusa to the suzerainty of the crown of St Stephen the same year, Louis, in return for an annual tribute of 500 ducats and a fleet, undertaking to defend Ragusa against all her enemies. Still more glorious for Hungary was Louis's third war with Venice (1378-1381), when he was again aided by the Genoese. At an early stage of the contest Venice was so hardly pressed that she offered to do homage to Hungary for all her possessions. But her immense resources enabled her to rally her forces, and peace was finally concluded between all the powers concerned at the congress of Turin (1381), Venice virtually surrendering Dalmatia to Louis and undertaking to pay him an annual tribute of 7000 ducats. The persistent hostility of Venice is partially attributable to her constant fear lest Louis should inherit the crown of Naples and thus threaten her trade and her sea-power from two sides simultaneously. Louis's younger brother Andrew had wedded Joanna, granddaughter and heiress of old King Robert of Naples, on whose death, in 1343, she reigned in her own right, refused her consort any share in the government, and is very strongly suspected of having secured his removal by assassination on the night of the 19th of September 1345. She then married Prince Louis of Taranto, and strong in the double support of the papal court at Avignon and of the Venetian republic (both of whom were opposed to Magyar aggrandisement in Italy) questioned the right of Louis to the two Sicilies, which he claimed as the next heir of his murdered brother. In 1347, and again in 1350, Louis occupied Naples and craved permission to be crowned king, but the papal see was inexorable and he was compelled to withdraw. The matter was not decided till 1378 when Joanna, having made the mistake of recognizing the antipope Clement VII., was promptly deposed and excommunicated in favour of Prince Charles of Durazzo, who had been brought up at the Hungarian court. Louis, always inexhaustible in expedients, determined to indemnify himself in the north for his disappointments in the south. With the Habsburgs, Hungary's natural rivals in the west, Louis generally maintained friendly relations. From 1358 to 1368, however, the restless ambition of Rudolph, duke of Austria, who acquired Tirol and raised Vienna to the first rank among the cities of Europe, caused Louis great uneasiness. But Louis always preferred arbitration to war, and the peace congresses of Nagyszombat (1360) and of Pressburg (1360) summoned by him adjusted all the outstanding differences between the central European powers. Louis's diplomacy, moreover, was materially assisted by his lifelong alliance with his uncle, the childless Casimir the Great of Poland, who had appointed him his successor; and on Casimir's death Louis was solemnly crowned king of Poland at Cracow (Nov. 17, 1370). This personal union of the two countries was more glorious than profitable. Louis could give little attention to his unruly Polish subjects and was never very happy among them. Immovably entrenched behind their privileges, they rendered him only the minimum of service; but he compelled their representatives, assembled at Kassa, to recognize his daughter Maria and her affianced husband, Count Sigismund of Brandenburg, as their future king and queen by locking the gates of the city and allowing none to leave it till they had consented to his wishes (1374). Louis is the first European monarch who came into collision with the Turks. He seems to have arrested their triumphant career (c. 1372), and the fine church erected by him at Maria-Zell is a lasting memorial of his victories. From the first he took a just view of the Turkish peril, but the peculiar local and religious difficulties of the whole situation in the Balkans prevented him from dealing with it effectually (see HUNGARY, _History_). Louis died suddenly at Nagyszombat on the 10th of September 1382. He left two daughters Maria and Jadwiga (the latter he destined for the throne of Hungary) under the guardianship of his widow, the daughter of the valiant ban of Bosnia, Stephen Kotromaníc, whom he married in 1353, and who was in every way worthy of him.

See _Rationes Collectorum Pontif. in Hungaria, 1281-1375_ (Budapest,
1887); Dano Gruber, _The Struggle of Louis I. with the Venetians for
Dalmatia_ (Croat.) (Agram, 1903); Antal Pór, _Life of Louis the Great_
(Hung.) (Budapest, 1892); and _History of the Hungarian Nation_
(Hung.) (vol. 3, Budapest, 1895). (R. N. B.)

LOUIS II. (1506-1526), king of Hungary and Bohemia, was the only son of Wladislaus II., king of Hungary and Bohemia, and the French princess Anne of Candale. Prematurely born at Buda on the 1st of July 1506, it required all the resources of medical science to keep the sickly child alive, yet he developed so precociously that at the age of thirteen he was well bearded and moustached, while at eighteen his hair was silvery white. His parts were good and he could speak and write six languages at a very early age, but the zeal of his guardians and tutors to make a man of him betimes nearly ruined his feeble constitution, while the riotous life led by him and his young consort, Maria of Austria, whom he wedded on the 13th of January 1522, speedily disqualified him for affairs, so that at last he became an object of ridicule at his own court. He was crowned king of Hungary on the 4th of June 1508, and king of Bohemia on the 11th of May 1509, and was declared of age when he succeeded his father on the 11th of December 1521. But during the greater part of his reign he was the puppet of the magnates and kept in such penury that he was often obliged to pawn his jewels to get proper food and clothing. His guardians, Cardinal Bakócz and Count George of Brandenburg-Anspach, shamefully neglected him, squandered the royal revenues and distracted the whole kingdom with their endless dissensions. Matters grew even worse on the death of Bakócz, when the magnates István Báthory, János Zapolya and István Verböczy fought each other furiously, and used the diets as their tools. Added to these troubles was the ever-present Turkish peril, which became acute after the king, with insensate levity, arrested the Ottoman envoy Berham in 1521 and refused to unite with Suleiman in a league against the Habsburgs. Nevertheless in the last extremity Louis showed more of manhood than any of his counsellors. It was he who restored something like order by intervening between the magnates and the gentry at the diet of 1525. It was he who collected in his camp at Tolna the army of 25,000 men which perished utterly on the fatal field of Mohács on the 29th of August 1526. He was drowned in the swollen stream of Csele on his flight from the field, being the second prince of the house of Jagiello who laid down his life for Hungary.

See _Rerum Hungaricarum libri_ (vol. 2, ed. Ferencz Toldy, Budapest,
1867); and József Podhradczky, _King Louis_ (Hung.) (Budapest, 1860).
(R. N. B.)

LOUIS, the name of three kings of Naples, members of the house of Anjou.

LOUIS I., duke of Anjou and count of Maine (1339-1384), was the second son of John II., king of France, and was born at Vincennes on the 23rd of July 1339. Having been given the duchy of Anjou in 1356 he led a wing of the French army at the battle of Poitiers and was sent to England as a hostage after the conclusion of the treaty of Brétigny in 1360, but he broke his parole in 1363 and so brought about King John's return into captivity. He took part in the war against England which was renewed in 1369, uniting the rival houses of Foix and Armagnac in the common cause, and in other ways rendering good service to his brother, King Charles V. Anjou's entrance into the troubled politics of Italy was one result of the papal schism which opened in 1378. Anxious to secure the support of France, the antipope Clement VII. persuaded the queen of Naples, Joanna I., to name Louis as her heir, and about the same time the death of Charles V. (September 1380) placed the duke in the position of regent of France. Neglecting France to prosecute his ambitions in Italy, he collected money and marched on Naples; but although helped by Amadeus VI., count of Savoy, he was unable to drive his rival, Charles, duke of Durazzo, from Naples. His army was destroyed by disease and Louis himself died at Biseglia, near Bari, on the 20th of September 1384, leaving two sons, his successor, Louis II., and Charles, duke of Calabria.

LOUIS II., duke of Anjou (1377-1417), born at Toulon on the 7th of October 1377, took up the struggle for Naples after his father's death and was crowned king by Clement VII. in 1389. After carrying on the contest for some years his enemies prevailed and he was compelled to take refuge in France, where he took part in the intestine strife which was desolating that kingdom. A few years later he made other attempts to secure the kingdom of Naples, which was now in the possession of Ladislas, a son of his father's foeman, Charles of Durazzo, and he gained a victory at Roccoserra in May 1411. Soon, however, he was again driven back to France, and after sharing anew in the civil wars of his country he died at Angers on the 29th of April 1417. His wife was Yolande, a daughter of John I., king of Aragon, and his son was his successor, Louis III.

LOUIS III., duke of Anjou (1403-1434), born on the 25th of September 1403, made in his turn an attempt to conquer Naples. This was in 1420, and he had met with considerable success in his task when he died at Cosenza on the 15th of November 1434. In 1424 Louis received from King Charles VII. the duchy of Touraine.

Another titular king of Naples of this name was Louis, a son of Philip, prince of Taranto. In 1346 he became the husband of Joanna I., queen of Naples, and in 1352 he was crowned king. After making an attempt to conquer Sicily he died on the 26th of May 1362.

LOUIS (893-911), surnamed the "Child," king of the Franks, son of the emperor Arnulf, was born at Ottingen, designated by Arnulf as his successor in Germany in 897, and crowned on the 4th of February 900. Although he never received the imperial crown, he is sometimes referred to as the emperor Louis IV. His chief adviser was Hatto I., archbishop of Mainz; and during his reign the kingdom was ravaged by Hungarians and torn with internal strife. He appears to have passed his time in journeys from place to place, and in 910 was the nominal leader of an expedition against the Hungarians which was defeated near Augsburg. Louis, who was the last of the German Carolingians, died in August or September 911 and was buried at Regensburg.

See Regino von Prüm, "Chronicon," in the _Monumenta Germaniae
historica. Scriptores_, Band i. (Hanover and Berlin, 1826); E.
Dümmler, _Geschichte des ostfränkischen Reichs_ (Leipzig, 1887-1888);
O. Dietrich, _Beiträge zur Geschichte Arnolfs von Kärnthen und Ludwigs
des Kindes_ (Berlin, 1890); and E. Mühlbacher, _Die Regesten des
Kaiserreichs unter den Karolingern_ (Innsbruck, 1881). (A. W. H.*)

LOUIS OF NASSAU (1538-1574), son of William, count of Nassau, and Juliana von Stolberg, and younger brother of William the Silent, took an active part in the revolt of the Netherlands against Spanish domination. He was one of the leaders of the league of nobles who signed the document known as "the Compromise" in 1566, and a little later was a member of the deputation who presented the petition of grievances called "the Request" to the regent, Margaret of Parma. It was on this occasion that the appellation of "the Beggars" (_les Gueux_) was first given to the opponents of King Philip's policy. On the arrival of Alva at Brussels, Count Louis, with his brother William, withdrew from the Netherlands and raised a body of troops in defence of the patriot cause. In the spring of 1568 Louis invaded Friesland, and at Heiligerlee, on the 23rd of May, completely defeated a Spanish force under Count Aremberg, who was killed. Alva then advanced to meet the invaders with a large army, and at Jemmingen (July 21), with very slight loss, annihilated the levies of Louis, who himself escaped by swimming from the field across an estuary of the Ems. He now joined the army of his brother William, which had in October to beat a hasty retreat before Alva's superior skill. Then Louis, in company with his brothers William and Henry, made his way across the French frontier to the camp of the Huguenot leader, Admiral Coligny. Louis took an active part in the campaign and fought heroically at Jarnac and Moncontour. In 1572 Louis, not deterred by previous disaster, raised a small force in France, and, suddenly entering Hainaut, captured Mons (May 23). Here he was besieged by Don Frederick of Toledo, Alva's natural son, who blockaded all approach to the town. William made an attempt to relieve his brother, but failed, and Mons had to surrender (September 17). Louis, who was sick with fever, withdrew to his ancestral home, Dillenburg, to recruit his health, and then once more to devote his energies to the raising of money and troops for another invasion of the Netherlands. In the hope of drawing away the Spaniards from the siege of Leiden by a diversion in the south, Louis, with his brothers John and Henry, at the head of a force of mixed nationalities and little discipline, crossed the frontier near Maastricht, and advanced as far as the Mookerheide near Nijmwegen. Here he was attacked by a body of Spanish veterans under an experienced leader, Sancho d'Avila, and speedily routed. In the disorderly flight both Louis and his younger brother Henry, refusing to abandon the field, lost their lives. Their bodies were never recovered. Thus perished at the age of thirty-six one of the most chivalrous and gifted of a gallant band of brothers, four of whom laid down their lives in their country's cause.

See P. J. Blok, _Lodewijk von Nassau, 1538-1574_ (The Hague, 1689),
and the _Cambridge Modern History_, vol. iii. chs. vi. and vii., and
bibliography (1904); also A. J. Van der Aa, _Biographisch woordenboek
der Nederlanden_ (22 vols., Haarlem, 1852-1878).

LOUIS, JOSEPH DOMINIQUE, BARON (1755-1837), French statesman and financier, was born at Toul (Meurthe) on the 13th of November 1755. At the outbreak of the Revolution the abbé Louis (he had early taken orders) had already some reputation as a financial expert. He was in favour of the constitutional movement, and on the great festival of federation (July 14, 1790) he assisted Talleyrand, then bishop of Autun, to celebrate mass at the altar erected in the Champ de Mars. In 1792, however, he emigrated to England, where he spent his time studying English institutions and especially the financial system of Pitt. Returning to France on the establishment of the Consulate he served successively in the ministry of war, the council of state, and in the finance department in Holland and in Paris. Made a baron of the empire in 1809 he nevertheless supported the Bourbon restoration and was minister of finance in 1814-1815. Baron Louis was deputy from 1815 to 1824 and from 1827 to 1832. He resumed the portfolio of finance in 1815, which he held also in the Decazes ministry of 1818; he was the first minister of finance under the government of Louis Philippe, and held the same portfolio in 1831-1832. In 1832 he was made a peer of France and he died on the 26th of August 1837.

LOUIS PHILIPPE I., king of the French (1773-1850), was the eldest son of Louis Philip Joseph, duke of Orleans (known during the Revolution as Philippe Egalité) and of Louise Marie Adelaide de Bourbon, daughter of the duc de Penthièvre, and was born at the Palais Royal in Paris on the 6th of October 1773. On his father's side he was descended from the brother of Louis XIV., on his mother's from the count of Toulouse, "legitimated" son of Louis XIV. and Madame de Montespan. The legend that he was a supposititious child, really the son of an Italian police constable named Chiapponi, is dealt with elsewhere (see MARIA STELLA, countess of Newborough). The god-parents of the duke of Valois, as he was entitled till 1785, were Louis XVI. and Queen Marie Antoinette; his governess was the famous Madame de Genlis, to whose influence he doubtless owed many of the qualities which later distinguished him: his wide, if superficial knowledge, his orderliness, and perhaps his parsimony. Known since 1785 as the duc de Chartres, he was sixteen at the outbreak of the Revolution, into which--like his father--he threw himself with ardour. In 1790 he joined the Jacobin Club, in which the moderate elements still predominated, and was assiduous in attendance at the debates of the National Assembly. He thus became a _persona grata_ with the party in power; he was already a colonel of dragoons, and in 1792 he was given a command in the army of the North. As a lieutenant-general, at the age of eighteen, he was present at the cannonade of Valmy (Sept. 20) and played a conspicuous part in the victory of Jemappes (Nov. 6).

The republic had meanwhile been proclaimed, and the duc de Chartres, who like his father had taken the name of _Egalité_, posed as its zealous adherent. Fortunately for him, he was too young to be elected deputy to the Convention, and while his father was voting for the death of Louis XVI. he was serving under Dumouriez in Holland. He shared in the disastrous day of Neerwinden (March 18, 1793); was an accomplice of Dumouriez in the plot to march on Paris and overthrow the republic, and on the 5th of April escaped with him from the enraged soldiers into the Austrian lines. He was destined not to return to France for twenty years. He went first, with his sister Madame Adelaide, to Switzerland where he obtained a situation for a few months as professor in the college of Reichenau under an assumed name,[1] mainly in order to escape from the fury of the _émigrés_. The execution of his father in November 1793 had made him duke of Orleans, and he now became the centre of the intrigues of the Orleanist party. In 1795 he was at Hamburg with Dumouriez, who still hoped to make him king. With characteristic caution Louis Philippe refused to commit himself by any overt pretensions, and announced his intention of going to America; but in the hope that something might happen in France to his advantage, he postponed his departure, travelling instead through the Scandinavian countries as far north as Lapland. But in 1796, the Directory having offered to release his mother and his two brothers, who had been kept in prison since the Terror, on condition that he went to America, he set sail for the United States, and in October settled in Philadelphia, where in February 1797 he was joined by his brothers the duc de Montpensier and the comte de Beaujolais. Two years were spent by them in travels in New England, the region of the Great Lakes, and of the Mississippi; then the news of the _coup d'état_ of 18 Brumaire decided them to return to Europe. They returned in 1800, only to find Napoleon Bonaparte's power firmly established. Immediately on his arrival, in February 1800, the duke of Orleans, at the suggestion of Dumouriez, sought an interview with the comte d'Artois, through whose instrumentality he was reconciled with the exiled king Louis XVIII., who bestowed upon his brothers the order of the Saint Esprit. The duke, however, refused to join the army of Condé and to fight against France, an attitude in which he persisted throughout, while maintaining his loyalty to the king.[2] He settled with his brothers at Twickenham, near London, where he lived till 1807--for the most part in studious retirement.

On the 18th of May 1807 the duc de Montpensier died at Christchurch in Hampshire, where he had been taken for change of air, of consumption. The comte de Beaujolais was ill of the same disease and in 1808 the duke took him to Malta, where he died on the 29th of May. The duke now, in response to an invitation from King Ferdinand IV., visited Palermo where, on the 25th of November 1809 he married Princess Maria Amelia, the king's daughter. He remained in Sicily until the news of Napoleon's abdication recalled him to France. He was cordially received by Louis XVIII.; his military rank was confirmed, he was named colonel-general of hussars, and such of the vast Orleans estates as had not been sold were restored to him by royal ordinance. The object may have been, as M. Debidour suggests, to compromise him with the revolutionary parties and to bind him to the throne; but it is more probable that it was no more than an expression of the good will which the king had shown him ever since 1800. The immediate effect was to make him enormously rich, his wealth being increased by his natural aptitude for business until, after the death of his mother in 1821, his fortune was reckoned at some £8,000,000.

Meanwhile, in the heated atmosphere of the reaction, his sympathy with the Liberal opposition brought him again under suspicion. His attitude in the House of Peers in the autumn of 1815 cost him a two years' exile to Twickenham; he courted popularity by having his children educated _en bourgeois_ at the public schools; and the Palais Royal became the rendezvous of all the leaders of that middle-class opinion by which he was ultimately to be raised to the throne.

His opportunity came with the revolution of 1830. During the three "July days" the duke kept himself discreetly in the background, retiring first to Neuilly, then to Raincy. Meanwhile, Thiers issued a proclamation pointing out that a Republic would embroil France with all Europe, while the duke of Orleans, who was "a prince devoted to the principles of the Revolution" and had "carried the tricolour under fire" would be a "citizen king" such as the country desired. This view was that of the rump of the chamber still sitting at the Palais Bourbon, and a deputation headed by Thiers and Laffitte waited upon the duke to invite him to place himself at the head of affairs. He returned with them to Paris on the 30th, and was elected by the deputies lieutenant-general of the realm. The next day, wrapped in a tricolour scarf and preceded by a drummer, he went on foot to the Hôtel de Ville--the headquarters of the republican party--where he was publicly embraced by Lafayette as a symbol that the republicans acknowledged the impossibility of realizing their own ideals and were prepared to accept a monarchy based on the popular will. Hitherto, in letters to Charles X., he had protested the loyalty of his intentions,[3] and the king now nominated him lieutenant-general and then, abdicating in favour of his grandson the comte de Chambord appointed him regent. On the 7th of August, however, the Chamber by a large majority declared Charles X. deposed, and proclaimed Louis Philippe "King of the French, by the grace of God and the will of the people."

The career of Louis Philippe as King of the French is dealt with elsewhere (see FRANCE: _History_). Here it must suffice to note something of his personal attitude towards affairs and the general effects which this produced. For the trappings of authority he cared little. To conciliate the revolutionary passion for equality he was content to veil his kingship for a while under a middle-class disguise. He erased the royal lilies from the panels of his carriages; and the Palais Royal, like the White House at Washington, stood open to all and sundry who cared to come and shake hands with the head of the state. This pose served to keep the democrats of the capital in a good temper, and so leave him free to consolidate the somewhat unstable foundation of his throne and to persuade his European fellow-sovereigns to acknowledge in him not a revolutionary but a conservative force. But when once his position at home and abroad had been established, it became increasingly clear that he possessed all the Bourbon tenaciousness of personal power. When a "party of Resistance" came into office with Casimir-Périer in March 1831, the speech from the throne proclaimed that "France has desired that the monarchy should become national, it does not desire that it should be powerless"; and the migration of the royal family to the Tuileries symbolized the right of the king not only to reign but to rule. Republican and Socialist agitation, culminating in a series of dangerous risings, strengthened the position of the king as defender of middle-class interest; and since the middle classes constituted the _pays légal_ which alone was represented in Parliament, he came to regard his position as unassailable, especially after the suppression of the risings under Blanqui and Barbès in 1839. Little by little his policy, always supported by a majority in a house of representatives elected by a corrupt and narrow franchise, became more reactionary and purely dynastic. His position in France seeming to be unassailable, he sought to strengthen it in Europe by family alliances. The fact that his daughter Louise was the consort of Leopold I., king of the Belgians, had brought him into intimate and cordial relations with the English court, which did much to cement the _entente cordiale_ with Great Britain. Broken in 1840 during the affair of Mehemet Ali (q.v.) the entente was patched up in 1841 by the Straits Convention and re-cemented by visits paid by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert to the Château d'Eu in 1843 and 1845 and of Louis Philippe to Windsor in 1844, only to be irretrievably wrecked by the affair of the "Spanish marriages," a deliberate attempt to revive the traditional Bourbon policy of French predominance in Spain. If in this matter Louis Philippe had seemed to sacrifice the international position of France to dynastic interests, his attempt to re-establish it by allying himself with the reactionary monarchies against the Liberals of Switzerland finally alienated from him the French Liberal opinion on which his authority was based. When, in February 1848, Paris rose against him, he found that he was practically isolated in France.

Charles X., after abdicating, had made a dignified exit from France, marching to the coast surrounded by the cavalry, infantry and artillery of his Guard. Louis Philippe was less happily situated. Escaping with the queen from the Tuileries by a back entrance, he made his way with her in disguise to Honfleur, where the royal couple found refuge in a gardener's cottage. They were ultimately smuggled out of the country by the British consul at Havre as Mr and Mrs Smith,[4] arriving at Newhaven "unprovided with anything but the clothes they wore." They settled at Claremont, placed at their disposal by Queen Victoria, under the _incognito_ of count and countess of Neuilly. Here on the 26th of August 1850, Louis Philippe died.

The character of Louis Philippe is admirably traced by Queen Victoria in a memorandum of May 2, 1855, in which she compares him with Napoleon III. She speaks of his "vast knowledge upon all and every subject," and "his great activity of mind." He was, unlike Napoleon, "_thoroughly French_ in character, possessing all the liveliness and talkativeness of that people." But she also speaks of the "tricks and over-reachings" practised by him, "who in great as well as in small things took a pleasure in being cleverer and more cunning than others, often when there was no advantage to be gained by it, and which was, unfortunately, strikingly displayed in the transactions connected with the Spanish marriages, which led to the king's downfall, and ruined him in the eyes of all Europe" (_Letters_, pop. ed., iii. 122).

Louis Philippe had eight children. His eldest son, the popular Ferdinand Philippe, duke of Orleans (b. 1810), who had married Princess Helena of Mecklenburg, was killed in a carriage accident on the 13th of July 1842, leaving two sons, the comte de Paris and the duc de Chartres. The other children were Louise, consort of Leopold I., king of the Belgians; Marie, who married Prince Alexander of Württemberg and died in 1839; Louis Charles, duc de Nemours; Clementine, married to the duke of Coburg-Kohary; François Ferdinand, prince de Joinville; Henri Eugène, duc d'Aumale (q.v.); Antoine Philippe, duc de Montpensier, who married the Infanta, younger sister of Queen Isabella of Spain.

AUTHORITIES.--F. A. Gruyer, _La Jeunesse du roi Louis-Philippe,
d'après les pourtraits et des tableaux_ (Paris, 1909), édition de
luxe, with beautiful reproductions of portraits, miniatures, &c.;
Marquis de Flers, _Louis-Philippe, vie anecdotique, 1773-1850_ (Paris,
1891); E. Daudet, _Hist. de l'émigration_ (3 vols., Paris, 1886-1890).
Of general works on Louis Philippe's reign may be mentioned Louis
Blanc, _Hist. de Dix Ans, 1830-1840_ (5 vols., Paris, 1841-1844), from
the republican point of view; J. O. d'Haussonville, _Hist. de la
politique extérieure de la monarchie de juillet, 1830-1848_ (2 vols.,
Paris, 1850); V. de Nouvion, _Hist. de Louis-Philippe_ (4 vols.,
Paris, 1857-1861); F. Guizot, _France under Louis Philippe, 1841-1847_
(Eng. trans., 1865); Karl Hillebrand, _Geschichte Frankreichs von der
Thronbesteigung Louis Philippes, 1830-1841_ (2 vols., Gotha,
1877-1879); V. du Bled, _Hist. de la monarchie de juillet_ (2 vols.,
Paris, 1887); P. Thureau-Dangin, _Hist. de la monarchie de juillet_
(Paris, 1887, &c.); A. Malet, "La France sous la monarchie de
juillet," in Lavisse and Rambaud's _Hist. Générale_, vol. x. ch. x.
(Paris, 1898); G. Weill, _La France sous la monarchie de juillet_
(Paris, 1902); Émile Bourgeois, "The Orleans Monarchy," ch. xv. of
vol. x., and "The Fall of Constitutionalism in France," ch. ii. of
vol. xi. of the _Cambridge Modern History_ (Cambridge, 1907 and 1909).
Further works will be found in the bibliographies attached by M.
Bourgeois to his chapters (vol. x. p. 844, vol. xi. p. 874; the latter
including works on the revolution of 1848 and the Second Republic). To
the list of published correspondence and memoirs there mentioned may
be added the _Chronique_ of the duchesse de Dino (Paris, 1909).

Louis Philippe himself published the _Journal du duc de Chartres,
1790-1791; Mon Journal, événements de 1815_ (2 vols., 1849);
_Discours, allocutions et réponses de S. M. Louis-Philippe,
1830-1846_; and after his death was issued his _Correspondance,
mémoire et discours inédits_ (Paris, 1863). (W. A. P.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] As M. Chabaud de la Tour. He was examined as to his fitness
before being appointed. Gruyer, p. 165.

[2] This at least was his own claim and the _Orleanist_ view. The
matter became a question of partisan controversy, the legitimists
asserting that he frequently offered to serve against France, but
that his offers were contemptuously refused. A. Debidour in the
article "Louis-Philippe" in _La Grande Encyclopédie_ supports the
latter view; but see Gruyer, _La Jeunesse_, and E. Daudet, "Une
réconciliation de famille en 1800," in the _Revue des Deux Mondes_,
Sept. 15, 1905, p. 301. M. Daudet gives the account of the interview
left by the comte d'Artois, and he also makes it clear that Louis
Philippe, while protesting his loyalty to the head of his house, did
not disguise his opinion that a Restoration would only be possible if
the king accepted the essential changes made by the Revolution.

[3] To say that these protestations were hypocritical is to assume
too much. Personal ambition doubtless played a part; but he must have
soon realized that the French people had wearied of "legitimism" and
that a regency in the circumstances was impossible.