Chapter I (2)

[53] Sismondi (_Hist. des Français_, vol. xxii. p. 86) and Lavallée
(_Hist. des Français_, vol. iii. p. 84) have noticed the
diminution of religious zeal early in the seventeenth century; and
some curious evidence will also be found in the correspondence of
Duplessis Mornay. See, for instance, a letter he wrote to Diodati,
in 1609: 'A beaucoup aujourd'hui il fault commencer par là, qu'il
y a une religion, premier que de leur dire quelle.' _Duplessis_,
_Mém. et Corresp._ vol. x. p. 415. This middle, or secular party,
received the name of 'Politiques,' and began to be powerful in
1592 or 1593. Benoist (_Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. i. p.
113), under the year 1593, contemptuously says: 'Il s'éleva une
foule de conciliateurs de religion;' see also pp. 201, 273. In
1590, and in 1594, the 'Politiques' are noticed by De Thou (_Hist.
Univ._ vol. xi. p. 171, vol. xii. p. 134); and on the increase, in
1593, of 'le tiers parti politique et négociateur,' see
_Capefigue_, _Hist. de la Réforme_, vol. vi. p. 235. See also,
respecting 'les politiques,' a letter from the Spanish ambassador
to his own court, in 1615, in _Capefigue's Richelieu_, vol. i. p.
93; and for the rise in Paris, in 1592, of a 'politisch und
kirchlich gemässigte Gesinnung,' see _Ranke_, _die Päpste_,
vol. ii. p. 243.

[54] The Sorbonne went so far as to condemn Charron's great work, but
could not succeed in having it prohibited. Compare _Duvernet_,
_Hist. de la Sorbonne_, vol. ii. p. 139, with _Bayle_, article
Charron, note F.

[55] In the appendix to Ranke (_Die Römischen Päpste_, vol. iii. pp.
141, 142), there will be found the instructions which were given
to the nuncio, in 1603, when he was sent to the French court; and
which should be compared with a letter, written in 1604, in
_Sully_, _[OE]conomies Royales_, vol. v. p. 122, edit. 1820.

[56] 'Sein Sinn war im Allgemeinen, ohne Zweifel, das Gleichgewicht
zwischen ihnen zu erhalten.' _Ranke_, _die Päpste_, vol. ii. pp.
430, 431. 'Henri IV, l'expression de l'indifférentisme religieux,
se posa comme une transaction entre ces deux systèmes.'
_Capefigue_, _Hist. de la Réforme_, vol. vi. p. 358. 'Henry IV.
endeavoured to adjust the balance evenly,' _Smedley's Hist. of the
Reformed Religion in France_, vol. iii. p. 19. See also _Benoist_,
_Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. i. p. 136. Hence, of course,
neither party was quite satisfied. _Mably's Observations_, vol.
iii. p. 220; _Mezeray_, _Histoire de France_, vol. iii. p. 959.

[57] Compare _Capefigue_, _Hist. de la Réforme_, vol. viii. p. 61, with
_Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. pp. 32, 33. See also, on
his inclination towards the Protestants, _Mém. de Fontenay
Mareuil_, vol. i. p. 91. Fontenay, p. 94, mentions, as a singular
instance, that 'il se vist de son temps des huguenots avoir des
abbayes.'

[58] _Sully_, _[OE]conomies Royales_, vol. iv. p. 134, vol. vi. p. 233;
_Duplessis Mornay_, _Mém. et Corresp._ vol. xi. p. 242; _Benoist_,
_Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. ii. pp. 68, 205. These grants
were annual, and were apportioned by the Protestants themselves.
See their own account, in _Quick's Synodicon in Gallia_, vol. i.
pp. 198, 222, 246, 247, 249, 275-277.

[59] Henry IV. banished the Jesuits in 1594; but they were allowed,
later in his reign, to make fresh settlements in France.
_Flassan_, _Hist. de la Diplomatie_, vol. vi. p. 485; _Bazin_,
_Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. p. 106; _Monteil_, _Divers Etats_,
vol. v. p. 192 note; _De Thou_, _Hist. Univ._ vol. xiv. p. 298.
Compare the notices of them in _Sully_, _[OE]conomies_, vol. ii.
p. 234, vol. iv. pp. 200, 235, 245. But there can be little doubt
that they owed their recall to the dread entertained of their
intrigues (_Grégoire_, _Hist. des Confesseurs_, p. 316); and Henry
evidently disliked as well as feared them. See two letters from
him in _Duplessis_, _Mém. et Corresp._ vol. vi. pp. 129, 151. It
would appear, from the _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. v. p. 350, Paris,
1823, that the king never restored to them their former authority
in regard to education.

[60] _Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. pp. 142, 143; _Le Vassor_,
vol. i. p. 156; _Sismondi_, vol. xxii. p. 116; _Duplessis Mornay_,
vol. i. p. 389; _Sully_, _[OE]conomies_, vol. vii. pp. 105, 432,
442.

Thus it was, that in France, as well as in England, toleration was preceded by scepticism; and thus it was, that out of this scepticism there arose the humane and enlightened measures of Henry IV. The great prince, by whom these things were effected, unhappily fell a victim to that fanatical spirit which he had done much to curb;[61] but the circumstances which occurred after his death, showed how great an impetus had been given to the age.

[61] When Ravaillac was examined, he said, 'qu'il y avait été excité par
l'intérêt de la religion, et par une impulsion irrésistible.'
_Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. p. 38. This work contains
the fullest account I have met with of Ravaillac; of whom there
is, moreover, a description in _Les Historiettes de Tallemant des
Réaux_, vol. i. p. 85, Paris, 1840, a very curious book.

On the murder of Henry IV., in 1610, the government fell into the hands of the queen, who administered it during the minority of her son, Louis XIII. And it is a remarkable evidence of the direction which the mind was now taking, that she, though a weak and bigoted woman,[62] refrained from those persecutions which, only one generation before, had been considered a necessary proof of religious sincerity. That, indeed, must have been a movement of no common energy, which could force toleration, early in the seventeenth century, upon a princess of the house of Medici, an ignorant and superstitious Catholic, who had been educated in the midst of her priests, and had been accustomed to look for their applause as the highest object of earthly ambition.

[62] Le Vassor (_Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. p. 279) calls her
'superstitieuse au dernier point;' and, in vol. v. p. 481, 'femme
crédule et superstitieuse.' See also vol. iii. p. 250, vol. vi. p.
628; and _Grégoire_, _Hist. des Confesseurs_, p. 65.

Yet this was what actually occurred. The queen continued the ministers of Henry IV., and announced, that in every thing she would follow his example.[63] Her first public act was, a declaration, that the Edict of Nantes should be inviolably preserved; for, she says, 'experience has taught our predecessors, that violence, so far from inducing men to return to the Catholic church, prevents them from doing so.'[64] Indeed, so anxious was she upon this point, that when Louis, in 1614, attained his nominal majority, the first act of his government was another confirmation of the Edict of Nantes.[65] And, in 1615, she caused the king, who still remained under her tutelage,[66] to issue a declaration, by which all preceding measures in favour of the Protestants were publicly confirmed.[67] In the same spirit, she, in 1611, wished to raise to the presidency of parliament the celebrated De Thou; and it was only by making a formal announcement of his heresy, that the pope succeeded in frustrating what he considered an impious design.[68]

[63] 'Elle annonça qu'elle vouloit suivre en tout l'exemple du feu
roi.... Le ministère de Henri IV, que la reine continuoit.'
_Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxii. pp. 206, 210; and see
two letters from her, in _Duplessis Mornay_, _Mém. et Corresp._
vol. xi. p. 282, vol. xii. p. 428. Sully had feared that the death
of Henry IV. would cause a change of policy: 'que l'on s'alloit
jeter dans des desseins tous contraires aux règles, ordres et
maximes du feu roy.' _[OE]conomies Royales_, vol. viii. p. 401.

[64] See the declaration in Bazin, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. pp.
74, 75; and notices of it in _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. i. p. 58;
_Capefigue's Richelieu_, vol. i. p. 27; _Benoist_, _Hist. de
l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. ii. p. 7; _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis
XIII_, vol. i. p. 58. But none of these writers, nor Sismondi
(vol. xxii. p. 221), appear to be aware that the issuing of this
declaration was determined on, in council, as early as the 17th of
May; that is, only three days after the death of Henry IV. This is
mentioned by Pontchartrain, who was then one of the ministers. See
_Mém. de Pontchartrain_, edit. Petitot, 1822, vol. i. p. 409; a
book little known, but well worthy of being read.

[65] _Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. p. 262; _Benoist_, _Hist.
de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. ii. p. 140; _Mém. de Fontenay Mareuil_,
vol. i. p. 257; _Le Vassor_, vol. i. p. 604.

[66] 'Laissant néanmoins l'administration du royaume à la reine sa
mère.' _Mém. de Bassompierre_, vol. ii. p. 52. Compare _Sully_,
_[OE]conomies_, vol. ix. p. 177. She possessed complete authority
over the king till 1617. See _Mémoires de Montglat_, vol. i. p.
24: 'avoit été tenu fort bas par la reine sa mère.' See also _Le
Vassor, Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. ii. pp. 640, 677, 716, 764.

[67] _Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. pp. 381, 382.

[68] In 1611, 'le pape le rejeta formellement comme hérétique.' _Bazin_,
vol. i. p. 174. This is glossed over by Pontchartrain (_Mémoires_,
vol. i. p. 450); but the statement of M. Bazin is confirmed in the
preface to _De Thou_, _Histoire Universelle_, vol. i. p. xvi.

The turn which things were now taking, caused no little alarm to the friends of the hierarchy. The most zealous churchmen loudly censured the policy of the queen; and a great historian has observed that when, during the reign of Louis XIII., such alarm was caused in Europe by the active encroachments of the ecclesiastical power, France was the first country that ventured to oppose them.[69] The nuncio openly complained to the queen of her conduct in favouring heretics; and he anxiously desired that those Protestant works should be suppressed, by which the consciences of true believers were greatly scandalized.[70] But these, and similar representations, were no longer listened to with the respect they would formerly have received; and the affairs of the country continued to be administered with those purely temporal views, on which the measures of Henry IV. had been avowedly based.[71]

[69] 'Der erste Einhalt den die kirchliche Restauration erfuhr, geschah
in Frankreich,' _Ranke_, _die Römischen Päpste_, vol. iii. p. 160.

[70] This desire was expressed several times, but in vain: 'Gern hätten
die Nuntien Werke wie von Thou und Richer verboten, aber es war
ihnen nicht möglich,' _Ranke_, _die Päpste_, vol. iii. p. 181,
Anhang. Compare _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. ii. p. 68; _Mém. de
Pontchartrain_, vol. i. p. 428.

[71] This decline of the ecclesiastical power is noticed by many writers
of the time; but it is sufficient to refer to the very curious
remonstrance of the French clergy, in 1605, in _De Thou_, _Hist.
Univ._ vol. xiv. pp. 446, 447.

Such was now the policy of the government of France; a government which, not many years before, had considered it the great duty of a sovereign to punish heretics and extirpate heresy. That this continued improvement was merely the result of the general intellectual development, is evident, not only from its success, but also from the character of the queen-regent and the king. No one who has read the contemporary memoirs, can deny that Mary de Medici and Louis XIII. were as superstitious as any of their predecessors; and it is, therefore, evident, that this disregard of theological prejudices was due, not to their own personal merits, but to the advancing knowledge of the country, and to the pressure of an age which, in the rapidity of its progress, hurried along those who believed themselves to be its rulers.

But these considerations, weighty as they are, will only slightly diminish the merit of that remarkable man, who now appeared on the stage of public affairs. During the last eighteen years of the reign of Louis XIII., France was entirely governed by Richelieu,[72] one of that extremely small class of statesmen to whom it is given to impress their own character on the destiny of their country. This great ruler has, in his knowledge of the political art, probably never been surpassed, except by that prodigy of genius who, in our time, troubled the fortunes of Europe. But, in one important view, Richelieu was superior to Napoleon. The life of Napoleon was a constant effort to oppress the liberties of mankind; and his unrivalled capacity exhausted its resources in struggling against the tendencies of a great age. Richelieu, too, was a despot; but his despotism took a nobler turn. He displayed, what Napoleon never possessed, a just appreciation of the spirit of his own time. In one great point, indeed, he failed. His attempts to destroy the power of the French nobility were altogether futile;[73] for, owing to a long course of events, the authority of that insolent class was so deeply rooted in the popular mind, that the labours of another century were required to efface its ancient influence. But, though Richelieu could not diminish the social and moral weight of the French nobles, he curtailed their political privileges; and he chastised their crimes with a severity which, for a time at least, repressed their former license.[74] So little, however, can even the ablest statesman effect, unless he is seconded by the general temper of the age in which he lives, that these checks, rude as they were, produced no permanent result. After his death, the French nobles, as we shall presently see, quickly rallied; and, in the wars of the Fronde, debased that great struggle into a mere contest of rival families. Nor was it until the close of the eighteenth century, that France was finally relieved from the overweening influence of that powerful class, whose selfishness had long retarded the progress of civilization, by retaining the people in a thraldom, from the remote effects of which they have not yet fully recovered.

[72] As M. Monteil says (_Hist. des Français des divers Etats_, vol.
vii. p. 114), 'Richelieu tint le sceptre; Louis XIII. porta la
couronne.' And Campion (_Mémoires_, p. 37) calls him 'plutôt le
maître que le ministre;' and adds, pp. 218, 219, that he 'avoit
gouverné dix-huit ans la France avec un pouvoir absolu et une
gloire sans pareille.' Compare _Mém. du Cardinal de Retz_, vol. i
p. 63.

[73] The common opinion, put forth in _Alison's Hist. of Europe_, vol.
i. pp. 101-104, and in many other books, is that Richelieu did
destroy their influence; but this error arises from confusing
political influence with social influence. What is termed the
political power of a class, is merely the symptom and
manifestation of its real power; and it is no use to attack the
first, unless you can also weaken the second. The real power of
the nobles was social, and that neither Richelieu nor Louis XIV.
could impair; and it remained intact until the middle of the
eighteenth century, when the intellect of France rebelled against
it, overthrew it, and finally effected the French Revolution.

[74] Richelieu appears to have formed the design of humbling the nobles,
at least as early as 1624. See a characteristic passage in his
_Mémoires_, vol. ii. p. 340. In _Swinburne's Courts of Europe_,
vol. ii. pp. 63-65, there is a curious traditional anecdote,
which, though probably false, shows, at all events, the fear and
hatred with which the French nobles regarded the memory of
Richelieu more than a century after his death.

Although in this respect Richelieu failed in achieving his designs, he in other matters met with signal success. This was owing to the fact, that his large and comprehensive views harmonized with that sceptical tendency, of which I have just given some account. For this remarkable man, though he was a bishop and a cardinal, never for a moment allowed the claims of his profession to make him forego the superior claims of his country. He knew, what is too often forgotten, that the governor of a people should measure affairs solely by a political standard, and should pay no regard to the pretensions of any sect, or the propagation of any opinions, except in reference to the present and practical welfare of men. The consequence was, that, during his administration, there was seen the marvellous spectacle of supreme authority wielded by a priest, who took no pains to increase the power of the spiritual classes. Indeed, so far from this, he often treated them with what was then considered unexampled rigour. The royal confessors, on account of the importance of their functions, had always been regarded with a certain veneration; they were supposed to be men of unspotted piety; they had hitherto possessed immense influence, and even the most powerful statesmen had thought it advisable to show them the deference due to their exalted position.[75] Richelieu, however, was too familiar with the arts of his profession, to feel much respect for these keepers of the consciences of kings. Caussin, the confessor of Louis XIII., had, it seems, followed the example of his predecessors, and endeavoured to instill his own views of policy into the mind of the royal penitent.[76] But Richelieu, so soon as he heard of this, dismissed him from office, and sent him into exile; for, he contemptuously says, 'the little father Caussin' should not interfere in matters of government, since he is one of those 'who have always been brought up in the innocence of a religious life.'[77] Caussin was succeeded by the celebrated Sirmond; but Richelieu would not allow the new confessor to begin his duties, until he had solemnly promised never to interfere in state affairs.[78]

[75] On their influence, see _Grégoire_, _Histoire des Confesseurs_; and
compare the remarks of Mr. Grote, a great writer, whose mind is
always ready with historical analogies. _Grote's Hist. of Greece_,
vol. vi. p. 393, 2nd edit. 1851. Many of the French kings had a
strong natural affection for monks; but the most singular instance
I have found of this sort of love is mentioned by no less a man
than De Thou, respecting Henry III. De Thou (_Hist. Univ._ vol. x.
pp. 666, 667) says of that prince: 'Soit tempérament, soit
éducation, la présence d'un moine faisait toujours plaisir à
Henri; et je lui ai moi-même souvent entendu dire, que leur vue
produisoit le même effet sur son âme, que le chatouillement le
plus délicat sur le corps.'

[76] One of his suggestions was, 'sur les dangers que couroit le
catholicisme en Allemagne, par ses liaisons avec les puissances
protestantes.' _Grégoire_, _Histoire des Confesseurs_, p. 342. The
fullest account of Caussin is in _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis
XIII_, vol. ix. pp. 287-299; to which, however, Grégoire never
refers. As I shall have frequent occasion to quote Le Vassor, I
may observe, that he is far more accurate than is generally
supposed, and that he has been very unfairly treated by the
majority of French writers, among whom he is unpopular, on account
of his constant attacks on Louis XIV. Sismondi (_Hist. des
Français_, vol. xxii. pp. 188, 189) speaks highly of his _Hist. of
Louis XIII_; and so far as my own reading extends, I can confirm
his favourable opinion.

[77] 'Le petit père Caussin.' _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. x. p. 206; and
at p. 217, he is classed among the 'personnes qui avoient toujours
été nourries dans l'innocence d'une vie religieuse;' see also p.
215, on his 'simplicité et ignorance.' Respecting Richelieu's
treatment of Caussin, see _Mém. de Montglat_, vol. i. pp. 173-175;
_Lettres de Patin_, vol. i. p. 49; _Des Réaux, Historiettes_, vol.
ii. p. 182.

[78] _Sismondi, Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiii. p. 332; _Tallemant des
Réaux, Historiettes_, vol. iii. p. 78 note. Le Vassor (_Hist. de
Louis XIII_, vol. x. part ii. p. 761) says, that Sirmond 'se
soutint à la cour sous le ministère de Richelieu, parce qu'il ne
se mêloit point des affaires d'état.' According to the same writer
(vol. viii. p. 156), Richelieu thought at one time of depriving
the Jesuits of their post of confessor to the king.

On another occasion of much more importance, Richelieu displayed a similar spirit. The French clergy were then possessed of enormous wealth; and, as they enjoyed the privilege of taxing themselves, they were careful not to make what they considered unnecessary contributions towards defraying the expenses of the state. They had cheerfully advanced money to carry on war against the Protestants, because they believed it to be their duty to assist in the extirpation of heresy.[79] But they saw no reason why their revenues should be wasted in effecting mere temporal benefits; they considered themselves as the guardians of funds set apart for spiritual purposes, and they thought it impious that wealth consecrated by the piety of their ancestors should fall into the profane hands of secular statesmen. Richelieu, who looked on these scruples as the artifices of interested men, had taken a very different view of the relation which the clergy bore to the country.[80] So far from thinking that the interests of the church were superior to those of the state, he laid it down as a maxim of policy, that 'the reputation of the state was the first consideration.'[81] With such fearlessness did he carry out this principle, that having convoked at Nantes a great assembly of the clergy, he compelled them to aid the government by an extraordinary supply of 6,000,000 francs; and finding that some of the highest dignitaries had expressed their discontent at so unusual a step, he laid hands on them also, and to the amazement of the church, sent into exile not only four of the bishops, but likewise the two archbishops of Toulouse and of Sens.[82]

[79] _Lavallée_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. iii. p. 87; _Le Vassor_,
_Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. iv. p. 208; _Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis
XIII_, vol. ii. p. 144; _Benoist_, _Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes_,
vol. ii. pp. 337, 338. Benoist says: 'Le clergé de France,
ignorant et corrompu, croyoit tout son devoir compris dans
l'extirpation des hérétiques; et même il offroit de grandes
sommes, à condition qu'on les employât à cette guerre.'

[80] In which he is fully borne out by the high authority of Vattel,
whose words I shall quote, for the sake of those politicians who
still cleave to the superannuated theory of the sacredness of
church-property: 'Loin que l'exemption appartienne aux biens
d'église parce qu'ils sont consacrés à Dieu, c'est au contraire
par cette raison même, qu'ils doivent être pris les premiers pour
le salut de l'état; car il n'y a rien de plus agréable au Père
commun des hommes, que de garantir une nation de sa ruine. Dieu
n'ayant besoin de rien, lui consacrer des biens, c'est les
destiner à des usages qui lui soient agréables. De plus, les biens
de l'église, de l'aveu du clergé lui-même, sont en grande partie
destinés aux pauvres. Quand l'état est dans le besoin, il est sans
doute le premier pauvre, et le plus digne de secours.' _Vattel_,
_le Droit des Gens_, vol. i. pp. 176, 177.

[81] 'Que la réputation de l'état est préférable à toutes choses.' _Mém.
de Richelieu_, vol. ii. p. 482. This was in 1625, and by way of
refuting the legate.

[82] _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiii. pp. 477, 478;
_Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. iv. pp. 325, 326. The
Cardinal de Retz, who knew Richelieu personally, says: 'M. le
cardinal de Richelieu avoit donné une atteinte cruelle à la
dignité et à la liberté du clergé dans l'assemblée de Mante, et il
avoit exilé, avec des circonstances atroces, six de ses prélats
les plus considérables.' _Mém. de Retz_, vol. i. p. 50.

If these things had been done fifty years earlier, they would most assuredly have proved fatal to the minister who dared to attempt them. But Richelieu, in these and similar measures, was aided by the spirit of an age which was beginning to despise its ancient masters. For this general tendency was now becoming apparent, not only in literature and in politics, but even in the proceedings of the ordinary tribunals. The nuncio indignantly complained of the hostility displayed against ecclesiastics by the French judges; and he said that, among other shameful things, some clergymen had been hung, without being first deprived of their spiritual character.[83] On other occasions, the increasing contempt showed itself in a way well suited to the coarseness of the prevailing manners. Sourdis, the archbishop of Bourdeaux, was twice ignominiously beaten; once by the Duke d'Epernon, and afterwards by the Maréchal de Vitry.[84] Nor did Richelieu, who usually treated the nobles with such severity, seem anxious to punish this gross outrage. Indeed, the archbishop not only received no sympathy, but, a few years later, was peremptorily ordered by Richelieu to retire to his own diocese; such, however, was his alarm at the state of affairs, that he fled to Carpentras, and put himself under the protection of the pope.[85] This happened in 1641 and nine years earlier, the church had incurred a still greater scandal. For in 1632, serious disturbances having arisen in Languedoc, Richelieu did not fear to meet the difficulty by depriving some of the bishops, and seizing the temporalities of the others.[86]

[83] 'Die Nuntien finden kein Ende der Beschwerden die sie machen zu
müssen glauben, vorzüglich über die Beschränkungen welche die
geistliche Jurisdiction erfahre.... Zuweilen werde ein Geistlicher
hingerichtet ohne erst degradirt zu seyn.' _Ranke_, _die Päpste_,
vol. iii. p. 157: a summary, in 1641, of the complaints of the
then nuncio, and of those of his predecessors. Le Vassor (_Hist.
de Louis XIII_, vol. v. pp. 51 seq.) has given some curious
details respecting the animosity between the clergy and the
secular tribunals of France in 1624.

[84] _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiii. p. 301; _Mém. de
Bassompierre_, vol. iii. pp. 302, 353. Bazin, who notices this
disgraceful affair, simply says (_Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. iii.
p. 453): 'Le maréchal de Vitry, suivant l'exemple qui lui en avoit
donné le duc d'Epernon, s'emporta jusqu'à le frapper de son
bâton.' In regard to Epernon, the best account is in _Mém. de
Richelieu_, where it is stated (vol. viii. p. 194) that the duke,
just before flogging the archbishop, 'disoit au peuple,
"Rangez-vous, vous verrez comme j'étrillerai votre archevêque."'
This was stated by a witness, who heard the duke utter the words.
Compare, for further information, _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis
XIII_, vol. x. part ii. p. 97, with _Tallemant des Réaux_,
_Historiettes_, vol. iii. p. 116. Des Réaux, who, in his own way,
was somewhat of a philosopher, contentedly says: 'Cet archevêque
se pouvoit vanter d'être le prélat du monde qui avoit été le plus
battu.' His brother was Cardinal Sourdis; a man of some little
reputation in his own time, and concerning whom a curious anecdote
is related in _Mém. de Conrart_, pp. 231-234.

[85] _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiii. p. 470. Le Vassor
(_Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. x. part ii. p. 149) says: 'Il
s'enfuit donc honteusement à Carpentras sous la protection du
pape.'

[86] 'Les évêques furent punis par la saisie de leur temporel; Alby,
Nimes, Uzés, furent privées de leurs prélats.' _Capefigue's
Richelieu_, Paris, 1844, vol. ii. p. 24. The Protestants were
greatly delighted at the punishment of the bishops of Alby and
Nimes, which 'les ministres regardoient comme une vengeance
divine.' _Benoist_, _Hist. de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. ii. pp. 528,
529.

The indignation of the clergy may be easily imagined. Such repeated injuries, even if they had proceeded from a layman, would have been hard to endure; but they were rendered doubly bitter by being the work of one of themselves--one who had been nurtured in the profession against which he turned. This it was which aggravated the offence, because it seemed to be adding treachery to insult. It was not a war from without, but it was a treason from within. It was a bishop who humbled the episcopacy, and a cardinal who affronted the church.[87] Such, however, was the general temper of men, that the clergy did not venture to strike an open blow; but, by means of their partisans, they scattered the most odious libels against the great minister. They said that he was unchaste, that he was guilty of open debauchery, and that he held incestuous commerce with his own niece.[88] They declared that he had no religion; that he was only a Catholic in name; that he was the pontiff of the Huguenots; that he was the patriarch of atheists;[89] and what was worse than all, they even accused him of wishing to establish a schism in the French church.[90] Happily the time was now passing away in which the national mind could be moved by such artifices as these. Still the charges are worth recording, because they illustrate the tendency of public affairs, and the bitterness with which the spiritual classes saw the reins of power falling from their hands. Indeed, all this was so manifest, that in the last civil war raised against Richelieu, only two years before his death, the insurgents stated in their proclamation, that one of their objects was to revive the respect with which the clergy and nobles had formerly been treated.[91]

[87] In a short account of Richelieu, which was published immediately
after his death, the writer indignantly says, that 'being a
cardinal, he afflicted the church.' _Somers Tracts_. vol. v. p.
540. Compare _Bazin_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. iv. p. 322.

[88] This scandalous charge in regard to his niece was a favourite one
with the clergy; and among many other instances, the accusation
was brought by the Cardinal de Valençay in the grossest manner.
See _Tallemant des Réaux_, _Historiettes_, vol. iii. p. 201.

[89] 'De là ces petits écrits qui le dénonçaient comme le "pontife des
huguenots" ou "le patriarche des athées."' _Capefigue's
Richelieu_, vol. i. p. 312.

[90] Compare _Des Réaux_, _Historiettes_, vol. ii. p. 233, with _Le
Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. viii. part ii. pp. 177, 178,
vol. ix. p. 277.

[91] See the manifesto in _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiii.
pp. 452, 453.

The more we study the career of Richelieu, the more prominent does this antagonism become. Every thing proves that he was conscious of a great struggle going on between the old ecclesiastical scheme of government and the new secular scheme; and that he was determined to put down the old plan, and uphold the new one. For, not only in his domestic administration, but also in his foreign policy, do we find the same unprecedented disregard of theological interests. The House of Austria, particularly its Spanish branch, had long been respected by all pious men as the faithful ally of the church; it was looked upon as the scourge of heresy; and its proceedings against the heretics had won for it a great name in ecclesiastical history.[92] When, therefore, the French government, in the reign of Charles IX., made a deliberate attempt to destroy the Protestants, France naturally established an intimate connexion with Spain as well as with Rome;[93] and these three great powers were firmly united, not by a community of temporal interests, but by the force of a religious compact. This theological confederacy was afterwards broken up by the personal character of Henry IV.,[94] and by the growing indifference of the age; but during the minority of Louis XIII., the queen-regent had in some degree renewed it, and had attempted to revive the superstitious prejudices upon which it was based.[95] In all her feelings, she was a zealous Catholic; she was warmly attached to Spain; and she succeeded in marrying her son, the young king, to a Spanish princess, and her daughter to a Spanish prince.[96]

[92] Late in the sixteenth century, 'fils aîné de l'Eglise' was the
recognized and well-merited title of the kings of Spain. _De
Thou_, _Hist. Univ._ vol. xi. p. 280. Compare _Duplessis Mornay_,
_Mém. et Correspond._ vol. xi. p. 21. And on the opinions which
the Catholics, early in the seventeenth century, generally held
respecting Spain, see _Mém. de Fontenay_, _Mareuil_, vol. i. p.
189; _Mém. de Bassompierre_, vol. i. p. 424.

[93] As to the connexion between this foreign policy and the massacre of
Saint Bartholomew, see _Capefigue_, _Hist. de la Réforme_,
vol. iii. pp. 253, 268, 269.

[94] On the policy, and still more on the feelings, of Henry IV. towards
the House of Austria, see _Sully_, _[OE]conomies Royales_, vol.
ii. p. 291, vol. iii. pp. 162, 166, vol. iv. pp. 289, 290, 321,
343, 344, 364, vol. v. p. 123, vol. vi. p. 293, vol. vii. p. 303,
vol. viii. pp. 195, 202, 348.

[95] _Capefigue's Richelieu_, vol. i. pp. 26, 369; _Mém. de Montglat_,
vol. i. pp. 16, 17; _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol i. p.
268, vol. vi. p. 349; _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxii.
p. 227. Her husband, Henry IV., said that she had 'the soul of a
Spaniard.' _Capefigue_, _Hist. de la Réforme_, vol. viii. p. 150.

[96] This was, in her opinion, a master-stroke of policy: 'Entêtée du
double mariage avec l'Espagne qu'elle avoit ménagé avec tant
d'application, et qu'elle regardoit comme le plus ferme appui de
son autorité.' _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. i. pp.
453, 454.

It might have been expected that when Richelieu, a great dignitary of the Romish church, was placed at the head of affairs, he would have reëstablished a connexion so eagerly desired by the profession to which he belonged.[97] But his conduct was not regulated by such views as these. His object was, not to favour the opinions of a sect, but to promote the interests of a nation. His treaties, his diplomacy, and the schemes of his foreign alliances, were all directed, not against the enemies of the church, but against the enemies of France. By erecting this new standard of action, Richelieu took a great step towards secularizing the whole system of European politics. For he thus made the theoretical interests of men subordinate to their practical interests. Before his time, the rulers of France, in order to punish their Protestant subjects, had not hesitated to demand the aid of the Catholic troops of Spain; and in so doing, they merely acted upon the old opinion, that it was the chief duty of a government to suppress heresy. This pernicious doctrine was first openly repudiated by Richelieu. As early as 1617, and before he had established his power, he, in an instruction to one of the foreign ministers which is still extant, laid it down as a principle, that, in matters of state, no Catholic ought to prefer a Spaniard to a French Protestant.[98] To us, indeed, in the progress of society, such preference of the claims of our country to those of our creed, has become a matter of course; but in those days it was a startling novelty.[99] Richelieu, however, did not fear to push the paradox even to its remotest consequences. The Catholic church justly considered that its interests were bound up with those of the House of Austria;[100] but Richelieu, directly he was called to the council, determined to humble that house in both its branches.[101] To effect this, he openly supported the bitterest enemies of his own religion. He aided the Lutherans against the Emperor of Germany; he aided the Calvinists against the king of Spain. During the eighteen years he was supreme, he steadily pursued the same undeviating policy.[102] When Philip attempted to repress the Dutch Protestants, Richelieu made common cause with them; at first, advancing them large sums of money, and afterwards inducing the French king to sign a treaty of intimate alliance with those who, in the opinion of the church, he ought rather to have chastized as rebellious heretics.[103] In the same way, when that great war broke out, in which the emperor attempted to subjugate to the true faith the consciences of German Protestants, Richelieu stood forward as their protector; he endeavoured from the beginning to save their leader the Palatine;[104] and, failing in that, he concluded in their favour an alliance with Gustavus Adolphus,[105] the ablest military commander the Reformers had then produced. Nor did he stop there. After the death of Gustavus, he, seeing that the Protestants were thus deprived of their great leader, made still more vigorous efforts in their favour.[106] He intrigued for them in foreign courts; he opened negotiations in their behalf; and eventually he organized for their protection a public confederacy, in which all ecclesiastical considerations were set at defiance. This league, which formed an important precedent in the international polity of Europe, was not only contracted by Richelieu with the two most powerful enemies of his own church, but it was, from its tenor, what Sismondi emphatically calls a 'Protestant confederation'--a Protestant confederation, he says, between France, England, and Holland.[107]

[97] So late as 1656, the French clergy wished 'to hasten a peace with
Spain, and to curb the heretics in France,' _Letter from Pell to
Thurloe_, written in 1656, and printed in _Vaughan's Protectorate
of Cromwell_, vol. i. p. 436, 8vo, 1839. During the minority of
Louis XIII. we hear of 'les zéléz catholiques, et ceux qui
désiroient, à quelque prix que ce fut, l'union des deux roys, et
des deux couronnes de France et d'Espagne, comme le seul moyen
propre, selon leur advis, pour l'extirpation des hérésies dans la
chrestienté.' _Sully_, _[OE]con. Royales_, vol. ix. p. 181:
compare vol. vii. p. 248, on 'les zéléz catholiques espagnolisez
de France.'

[98] See _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxii. pp. 387-389, where
the importance of this document is noticed, and it is said that
Richelieu had drawn it up 'avec beaucoup de soin.' The language of
it is very peremptory: 'Que nul catholique n'est si aveugle
d'estimer en matière d'état un Espagnol meilleur qu'un Français
huguenot.'

[99] Even in the reign of Henry IV. the French Protestants were not
considered to be Frenchmen: 'The intolerant dogmas of Roman
Catholicism did not recognize them as Frenchmen. They were looked
upon as foreigners, or rather as enemies; and were treated as
such.' _Felice's Hist. of the Protestants of France_, p. 216.

[100] Sismondi says, under the year 1610, 'Toute l'église catholique
croyoit son sort lié à celui de la maison d'Autriche,' _Hist. des
Français_, vol. xxii. p. 180.

[101] 'Sa vue dominante fut l'abaissement de la maison d'Autriche.'
_Flassan_, _Hist. de la Diplomatie Française_, vol. iii. p. 81.
And, on the early formation of this scheme, see _Mém. de la
Rochefoucauld_, vol. i. p. 350. De Retz says, that before
Richelieu, no one had even thought of such a step: 'Celui
d'attaquer la formidable maison d'Autriche n'avoit été imaginé de
personne.' _Mém. de Retz_, vol. i. p. 45. This is rather too
strongly expressed; but the whole paragraph is curious, as
written by a man who possessed great ability, which De Retz
undoubtedly did, and who, though hating Richelieu, could not
refrain from bearing testimony to his immense services.

[102] 'Obwohl Cardinal der römischen Kirche, trug Richelieu kein
Bedenken, mit den Protestanten selbst unverhohlen in Bund zu
treten,' _Ranke_, _die Päpste_, vol. ii. p. 510. Compare, in
_Mém. de Fontenay Mareuil_, vol. ii. pp. 28, 29, the reproach
which the nuncio Spada addressed to Richelieu for treating with
the Protestants, 'de la paix qui se traitoit avec les huguenots.'
See also _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. v. pp. 236,
354-356, 567; and a good passage in _Lavallée_, _Hist. des
Français_, vol. iii. p. 90,--an able little work, and perhaps the
best small history ever published of a great country.

[103] De Retz mentions a curious illustration of the feelings of the
ecclesiastical party respecting this treaty. He says, that the
Bishop of Beauvais, who, the year after the death of Richelieu,
was for a moment at the head of affairs, began his administration
by giving to the Dutch their choice, either to abandon their
religion, or else forfeit their alliance with France: 'Et il
demanda dès le premier jour aux Hollandois qu'ils se
convertissent à la religion catholique, s'ils vouloient demeurer
dans l'alliance de France.' _Mém. du Cardinal de Retz_, vol. i.
p. 39. This, I suppose, is the original authority for the
statement in the _Biog. Univ._ vol. xiv. p. 440; though, as is
too often the case in that otherwise valuable work, the writer
has omitted to indicate the source of his information.

[104] In 1626, he attempted to form a league 'en faveur du Palatin,'
_Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxii. p. 576. Sismondi
seems not quite certain as to the sincerity of his proposal; but
as to this there can, I think, be little doubt; for it appears
from his own memoirs, that even in 1624 he had in view the
recovery of the Palatinate. _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. ii. p. 405;
and again in 1625, p. 468.

[105] _Sismondi_, vol. xxiii. p. 173; _Capefigue's Richelieu_, vol. i.
p. 415; _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_, vol. vi. pp. 12, 600;
and at p. 489: 'Le roi de Suède qui comptoit uniquement sur le
cardinal.'

[106] Compare _Mém. de Montglat_, vol. i. pp. 74, 75, vol. ii. pp. 92,
93, with _Mém. de Fontenay Mareuil_, vol. ii. p. 198; and
_Howell's Letters_, p. 247. The different views which occurred to
his fertile mind in consequence of the death of Gustavus, are
strikingly summed up in _Mém. de Richelieu_, vol. vii. pp.
272-277. On his subsequent pecuniary advances, see vol. ix.
p. 395.

[107] In 1633, 'les ambassadeurs de France, d'Angleterre et de Hollande
mirent à profit le repos de l'hiver pour resserrer la
confédération protestante,' _Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_,
vol. xxiii. p. 221. Compare, in _Whitelocke's Swedish Embassy_,
vol. i. p. 275, the remark made twenty years later by Christina,
daughter of Gustavus, on the union with 'papists.'

These things alone would have made the administration of Richelieu a great epoch in the history of European civilization. For his government affords the first example of an eminent Catholic statesman systematically disregarding ecclesiastical interests, and showing that disregard in the whole scheme of his foreign, as well as of his domestic, policy. Some instances, indeed, approaching to this, may be found, at an earlier period, among the petty rulers of Italian states; but, even there, such attempts have never been successful; they had never been continued for any length of time, nor had they been carried out on a scale large enough to raise them to the dignity of international precedents. The peculiar glory of Richelieu is, that his foreign policy was, not occasionally, but invariably, governed by temporal considerations; nor do I believe that, during the long tenure of his power, there is to be found the least proof of his regard for those theological interests, the promotion of which had long been looked upon as a matter of paramount importance. By thus steadily subordinating the church to the state; by enforcing the principle of this subordination, on a large scale, with great ability, and with unvarying success, he laid the foundation of that purely secular polity, the consolidation of which has, since his death, been the aim of all the best European diplomatists. The result was a most salutary change, which had been for some time preparing, but which, under him, was first completed. For, by the introduction of this system, an end was put to religious wars; and the chances of peace were increased, by thus removing one of the causes to which the interruption of peace had often been owing.[108] At the same time, there was prepared the way for that final separation of theology from politics, which it will be the business of future generations fully to achieve. How great a step had been taken in this direction, appears from the facility with which the operations of Richelieu were continued by men every way his inferiors. Less than two years after his death, there was assembled the Congress of Westphalia;[109] the members of which concluded that celebrated peace, which is remarkable, as being the first comprehensive attempt to adjust the conflicting interests of the leading European countries.[110] In this important treaty, ecclesiastical interests were altogether disregarded;[111] and the contracting parties, instead of, as heretofore, depriving each other of their possessions, took the bolder course of indemnifying themselves at the expense of the church, and did not hesitate to seize her revenues, and secularize several of her bishoprics.[112] From this grievous insult, which became a precedent in the public law of Europe, the spiritual power has never recovered; and it is remarked by a very competent authority that, since that period, diplomatists have, in their official acts, neglected religious interests, and have preferred the advocacy of matters relating to the commerce and colonies of their respective countries.[113] The truth of this observation is confirmed by the interesting fact, that the Thirty Years' War, to which this same treaty put an end, is the last great religious war which has ever been waged;[114] no civilized people, during two centuries, having thought it worth while to peril their own safety in order to disturb the belief of their neighbours. This, indeed, is but a part of that vast secular movement, by which superstition has been weakened, and the civilization of Europe secured. Without, however, discussing that subject, I will now endeavour to show how the policy of Richelieu, in regard to the French Protestant church, corresponded with his policy in regard to the French Catholic church; so, that, in both departments, this great statesman, aided by that progress of knowledge for which his age was remarkable, was able to struggle with prejudices from which men, slowly and with infinite difficulty, were attempting to emerge.

[108] This change may be illustrated by comparing the work of Grotius
with that of Vattel. These two eminent men are still respected as
the most authoritative expounders of international law; but there
is this important difference between them, that Vattel wrote more
than a century after Grotius, and when the secular principles
enforced by Richelieu had penetrated the minds even of common
politicians. Therefore, Vattel says (_Le Droit des Gens_, vol. i.
pp. 379, 380): 'On demande s'il est permis de faire alliance avec
une nation qui ne professe pas la même religion? Si les traités
faits avec les ennemis de la foi sont valides? Grotius a traité
la question assez au long. Cette discussion pouvait être
nécessaire dans un temps où la fureur des partis obscurcissait
encore des principes qu'elle avait long-temps fait oublier, osons
croire qu'elle serait superflue dans notre siècle. La loi
naturelle seule régit les traités des nations; la différence de
religion y est absolument étrangère.' See also p. 318, and vol.
ii. p. 151. On the other hand, Grotius opposes alliances between
nations of different religion, and says, that nothing can justify
them except 'une extrême nécessité.... Car il faut chercher
premièrement le règne céleste, c'est à dire penser avant toutes
choses à la propagation de l'évangile.' And he further recommends
that princes should follow the advice given on this subject by
Foulques, Archbishop of Rheims! _Grotius_, _le Droit de la Guerre
et de la Paix_, livre ii. chap. xv. sec. xi. vol. i. pp. 485, 486,
edit. Barbeyrac, Amsterdam, 1724, 4to; a passage the more
instructive, because Grotius was a man of great genius and great
humanity. On religious wars, as naturally recognized in barbarous
times, see the curious and important work, _Institutes of
Timour_, pp. 141, 333, 335.

[109] 'Le Congrès de Westphalie s'ouvrit le 10 avril 1643.' _Lavallée_,
_Hist. des Français_, vol. iii. p. 156. Its two great divisions
at Munster and Osnabruck were formed in March 1644. _Flassan_,
_Hist. de la Diplomatie_, vol. iii. p. 110. Richelieu died in
December, 1642. _Biog. Univ._ vol. xxxviii. p. 28.

[110] 'Les règnes de Charles-Quint et de Henri IV font époque pour
certaines parties du droit international; mais le point de départ
le plus saillant, c'est la paix de Westphalie.' _Eschbach_,
_Introduc. à l'Etude du Droit_, Paris, 1846, p. 92. Compare the
remarks on Mably, in _Biog. Univ._ vol. xxvi. p. 7, and
_Sismondi_, _Hist. des Français_, vol. xxiv. p. 179: 'base au
droit public de l'Europe.'

[111] Compare the indignation of the pope at this treaty (_Vattel_, _le
Droit des Gens_, vol. ii. p. 28), with _Ranke's Päpste_, vol. ii.
p. 576: 'Das religiöse Element ist zurückgetreten; die
politischen Rücksichten beherrschen die Welt:' a summary of the
general state of affairs.

[112] 'La France obtint par ce traité, en indemnité, la souveraineté des
trois évêchés, Metz, Toul et Verdun, ainsi que celle d'Alsace. La
satisfaction ou indemnité des autres parties intéressées fut
convenue, en grande partie, aux dépens de l'église, et moyennant
la sécularisation de plusieurs évêchés et bénéfices
ecclésiastiques.' _Koch_, _Tableau des Révolutions_, vol. i. p.
328.

[113] Dr. Vaughan (_Protectorate of Cromwell_, vol. i. p. civ.) says:
'It is a leading fact, also, in the history of modern Europe,
that, from the peace of Westphalia, in 1648, religion, as the
great object of negotiation, began everywhere to give place to
questions relating to colonies and commerce.' Charles Butler
observed, that this treaty 'considerably lessened the influence
of religion on politics.' _Butler's Reminiscences_, vol. i. p.
181.

[114] The fact of the Thirty Years' War being a religious contest,
formed the basis of one of the charges which the church party
brought against Richelieu: and an author, who wrote in 1634,
'montroit bien au long que l'alliance du roy de France avec les
protestantes étoit contraire aux intérêts de la religion
catholique; parce que la guerre des Provinces Unies, et celle
d'Allemagne étoient des guerres de religion.' _Benoist_, _Hist.
de l'Edit de Nantes_, vol. ii. p. 536.

The treatment of the French Protestants by Richelieu is, undoubtedly, one of the most honourable parts of his system; and in it, as in other liberal measures, he was assisted by the course of preceding events. His administration, taken in connexion with that of Henry IV. and the queen-regent, presents the noble spectacle of a toleration far more complete than any which had then been seen in Catholic Europe. While in other Christian countries, men were being incessantly persecuted, simply because they held opinions different from those professed by the established clergy, France refused to follow the general example, and protected those heretics whom the church was eager to punish. Indeed, not only were they protected, but, when they possessed abilities, they were openly rewarded. In addition to their appointments to civil offices, many of them were advanced to high military posts; and Europe beheld, with astonishment, the armies of the king of France led by heretical generals. Rohan, Lesdiguières, Chatillon, La Force, Bernard de Weimar, were among the most celebrated of the military leaders employed by Louis XIII.; and all of them were Protestants, as also were some younger, but distinguished officers, such as Gassion, Rantzau, Schomberg, and Turenne. For now, nothing was beyond the reach of men who, half a century earlier, would, on account of their heresies, have been persecuted to the death. Shortly before the accession of Louis XIII., Lesdiguières, the ablest general among the French Protestants, was made marshal of France.[115] Fourteen years later, the same high dignity was conferred upon two other Protestants, Chatillon and La Force; the former of whom is said to have been the most influential of the schismatics.[116] Both these appointments were in 1622;[117] and, in 1634, still greater scandal was caused by the elevation of Sully, who, notwithstanding his notorious heresy, also received the staff of marshal of France.[118] This was the work of Richelieu, and it gave serious offence to the friends of the church; but the great statesman paid so little attention to their clamour, that, after the civil war was concluded, he took another step equally obnoxious. The Duke de Rohan was the most active of all the enemies of the established church, and was looked up to by the Protestants as the main support of their party. He had taken up arms in their favour, and, declining to abandon his religion, had, by the fate of war, been driven from France. But Richelieu, who was acquainted with his ability, cared little about his opinions. He, therefore, recalled him from exile, employed him in a negotiation with Switzerland, and sent him on foreign service, as commander of one of the armies of the king of France.[119]

[115] According to a contemporary, he received this appointment without
having asked for it: 'sans être à la cour ni l'avoir demandé.'
_Mém. de Fontenay_, _Mareuil_, vol. i. p. 70. In 1622, even the
lieutenants of Lesdiguières were Protestants: 'ses lieutenants,
qui estant tous huguenots.' _Ibid._ vol. i. p. 538. These memoirs
are very valuable in regard to political and military matters;
their author having played a conspicuous part in the transactions
which he describes.

[116] 'Il n'y avoit personne dans le parti huguenot si considérable que
lui.' _Tallemant des Réaux_, _Historiettes_, vol. v. p. 204.

[117] _Biog. Univ._ vol. xv. p. 247; _Benoist_, _Hist. de l'Edit de
Nantes_, vol. ii. p. 400.

[118] Additions to _Sully_, _[OE]conomies Royales_, vol. viii. p.
496; _Smedley's Hist. of the Reformed Religion in France_,
vol. iii. p. 204.

[119] _Capefigue's Richelieu_, vol. ii. p. 57; _Mém. de Rohan_, vol. i.
pp. 66, 69; _Mém. de Bassompierre_, vol. iii. pp. 324, 348; _Mém.
de Montglat_, vol. i. p. 86; _Le Vassor_, _Hist. de Louis XIII_,
vol. vii. p. 157, vol. viii. p. 284. This great rise in the
fortunes of Rohan took place at different times between 1632 and
1635.