Chapter IV: 1644 to 1649 (3)

It is amusing to read, in Madame de Motteville,[343] a piece entitled: “_Particular demands of Messieurs the Generals and others interested_. They each had, at Saint-Germain, deputies who treated for them. For example, the Duke de Beaufort was not contented with what had been privately offered to him. He asked much, because his heart was still swollen by the pride occasioned by the remembrance of his past favor. He wished the ministry to reward him for his chains and his imprisonment; he spoke proudly; he declared loudly that he would not make terms with Mazarin; and, carrying his resentment farther than others, he rendered the adjustment of his affairs more difficult.... Madame de Montbazon, who was beloved by the Duke de Beaufort, gave hopes that she would at least please him, if she could have what she desired. She obtained moneys and abbeys; and the Duke de Beaufort, who loved her, was pleased that this lady could profit by the inclination which he had for her.”

In short, every one was, or strove to be contented. The Prince de Conti was the first who left Paris to salute the queen. He was presented by Condé, who made him embrace the Cardinal Mazarin. The Prince de Conti, in his turn, presented the Duke de Bouillon, La Rochefoucauld, the Count de Maure, and many others. M. de Longueville, who had gone to Normandy to arouse that province and its parliament, did not delay to return to offer his homage, and it was quite time for the beautiful and proud duchess to show her submission. The scene is worth relating: “I was alone,”[344] says Madame de Motteville, “with the queen, and she did me the honor to speak to me of the embarrassment testified by the Duke de Longueville in saluting her. As I knew that Madame de Longueville was about to enter, I arose, for I was on my knees beside her bed, and placed myself near to the queen, resolved not to stir, but to discover whether this witty princess would be more eloquent than the prince her husband. As she was naturally timid and apt to blush, all her care could not save her from the embarrassment which she experienced on meeting the queen. I was sufficiently near to these two illustrious persons to know what they said; but I heard nothing except _Madame_, and a few words which she pronounced so low that the queen, who listened attentively to what she would say, could not comprehend a single sentence.”

This same Madame de Motteville, so veracious notwithstanding her benevolence, so difficult in every thing concerning the queen, her mistress, does not hesitate to give to Condé the honor of the peace: “We should not forget to observe here the disinterested firmness of M. the Prince, who, without considering either his family or his friends, acted always for the interests of the king.”[345]

It is true, for the memorable service which he had just rendered, Condé reaped scarcely any benefit; but his noble conduct increased the splendor of his last campaign of 1648; it added to his military titles those of defender and saviour of the throne, of pacificator of the kingdom, of arbiter and enlightened conciliator of parties; it gave the climax to his credit and to his glory. Happy would it have been, if, after having thus terminated this sad war, he had quitted the court and its intrigues, to seek other battle-fields, and to finish another war somewhat more useful and more glorious to France—that which still remained with Spain! Happy also had been Madame de Longueville, if, taught by her own conscience, in her last interview with the queen, and by the shameful dénouement of the miserable intrigues of which she had the secret, instead of still serving as their instrument, she had shown her courage in resisting them; if, after all the proofs of devotion which she had just given to La Rochefoucauld, she had strongly represented to him that, even for his own interest, a different course was necessary; that it would be better to look for fortune and honors by making himself esteemed, than by trying to be feared; that ambition as well as duty showed his place to be by the side of Condé, in the service of the State and of the king; that it was easy for him to obtain in the army some post, where he would have simply to march forward, trusting to his courage and his merit! But even if she had been wise enough to speak thus to La Rochefoucauld, she would not have succeeded in gaining his ear. This restless spirit, this ever-discontented vanity, pursuing by turns the most dissimilar objects, because it selected none within its reach, this _indefinable something_, as Retz[346] says, which was in La Rochefoucauld, caused him to abandon the great and straight roads, and led him into by-paths full of precipices. The poor woman there follows him, and aids him in his extravagant and guilty designs. Receiving the law instead of giving it, she strives to promote the passion of another by devoting to his service all her coquetry and greatness of soul, her penetration and intrepidity, her attractive sweetness and indomitable energy. She undertakes to mislead Condé, to take away from France the conqueror of Rocroy and of Lens, and to give him to Spain. But let us not anticipate these unhappy times. We have now traced the last glorious days of Condé and the first faults of Madame de Longueville. Let us stop here; let us not enter upon the civil wars about to follow, impious wars, in which the brother and the sister will treasure up long remorse, in which the one will signalize himself by exploits so deplorable, that he will some day veil himself at Chantilly, for the sake of his own glory and of France, and in which the other will display the most brilliant qualities of mind, only to weep for twenty-five years among the Carmelites and at Port-Royal!

THE END.

FOOTNOTES

[1] Fourth Series of our works, _Literature_, vol. ii.

[2] It remains for us to collect from all our writings the scattered elements of a new Theodicea, especially founded upon an exact Psychology, fecundated by a legitimate induction, with the double purpose of defending the great faith of the human race against the detestable philosophy which Germany, in these last times, has sent into France, after having borrowed it from her, and of defending also true and good philosophy against a pusillanimous devotion, unworthy of Christianity, and condemned by the Church, which refuses to human reason the right and the power of elevating itself, even to God. It especially remains to us to put the last hand to that translation of Plato, which we would make the least perishable monument of our philosophic enterprise.

[3] See the work of Villefore: _The Life of Madame the Duchess de Longueville_, in two parts. There are two somewhat different editions. The first, which we shall quote, is of 1738, without indication of place; the second of Amsterdam, 1739.

[4] Quatremère de Quincy: _Dissertation upon the Antique Statue of Venus, discovered in the Island of Milo_, in-4ᵒ; and _Collection of Archeological Dissertations_, 1836, in-8ᵒ, p. 143.

[5] Millengen: _Ancient Unedited Monuments_, in fol.: London, 1826, p. 15, plate viii.

[6] The only two good and complete editions are those of Renouard, 1804 and 1817, and that of the collection of Petitot. See this last vol. 51, p. 455.

[7] This disease attacked her during the year of her marriage. Scarcely any trace of it remained.

[8] Retz, Amsterdam, 1731, vol. i., p. 185. Ibid., vol. iv., p. 219.

[9] _Memoirs_, Amsterdam, 1750, vol. i., p. 44.

[10] Vol. ii., p. 16-17.

[11] _Memoirs_, Amsterdam, 1735, vol. i., p. 45.

[12] Library of the Arsenal, Manuscripts of Conrart, in fol., vol. viii., p. 145. On Mademoiselle de Vaudy, the relative and friend of Madame the Countess de Maure, see Mademoiselle, vol. iii., p. 58, and vol. v., p. 25, as well as her portrait among the portraits of Mademoiselle. See also Tallemant, vol. ii., p. 334.

[13] In an obscure work, entitled, _The Life of Pierre Dubose, Minister of the Holy Gospel, enriched with Letters, Harangues_, etc., Rotterdam, 1698, in-8ᵒ, I find a speech made to Madame de Longueville, at Caen, in June, 1648, in which the good Protestant minister speaks of her very much like Scudéry, p. 328: “The portrait, Madame, which fame has made of you, is known throughout the world; and it is so full of marvels that every one supposes the original to be flattered until he has the happiness of seeing you. Then all admit that what the public voice says of your Highness is but a pencil-sketch of what you are.... It is impossible to paint too well that agreeable mixture of sweetness and majesty which tempers your countenance, and which at once gives boldness and fear to those who have the honor to approach your person. It is impossible to express that inimitable address which appears in all your actions, that brilliant vivacity so admired in your words, that graceful and grand air which causes your silence to be respected. And what pencil can represent that mind, formed by the hand of the Graces and cultivated by that of the Muses, which produces nothing in you but that is judicious, delicate, brilliant, which gains for you the admiration of the age, the rapture of the court, the applause of the provinces, which has even merited the homage of enemies at Munster, bringing them to your feet, while they refused peace to all Europe.”

[14] Attique du Nord, No. 2173.

[15] _Pacificatores orbis Christiani, sive icones principum, ducum et legatorum qui Monasterii atque Osnabrugæ pacem Europæ reconciliarunt, quosque singulos ad nativam imaginem expressit Van Hull, celissimi principis Auriaci dum viveret pictor_, in folio, Rotterodami, 1697. This portrait has been often reproduced, among others, in the _Europe illustre_ and the Collection of Odieuvre.

[16] This is, in fact, the date of the first edition of the first part, as given in the patent, printed January 7, 1649.

[17] Gallery of the first floor, No. 2195.

[18] Cabinet of Medallions, with this inscription: AN. GEN. BORBONIA, D. LONG, S. P. NOVI CASTRI. On the other side of the medal is the portrait of her husband.

[19] There should be at the Château d’Eu a portrait of Madame de Longueville, 22 inches by 18, which comes from the old collection of the Duchess de Montpensier. See vol. ii., p. 124, the work of M. Vatout, entitled, _Historical and Descriptive Catalogue of the Pictures belonging to his Royal Highness the Duke of Orleans_. 4 vols., in-8ᵒ, 1823. It is so long since we have seen this portrait, that we cannot say at what period it represents Madame de Longueville, wherein it differs from or resembles other portraits of her, or by what hand it was produced. It is perhaps the portrait which is at Versailles. Father Lelong mentions the following portraits of Madame de Longueville: 1, Van Hull; 2, Poilly, in fol. (We have not found this portrait in the work of Poilly in the Stamp-Office. See note, p. 363.) 3, Frosne; 4, Moncornet; 5, the collection of Odieuvre.

[20] Villefore, 2d part, p. 170.

[21] Retz, vol. i., p. 219.

[22] Ibid., vol. iii., p. 59.

[23] Retz, vol. ii., p. 18.

[24] In-12ᵒ. We possess the copy of the dedication which belonged to Mademoiselle de Bourbon, and which bears her arms.

[25] Villefore, p. 75.

[26] Vol. ii., p. 19.

[27] Ibid., p. 7.

[28] Boileau, in his letter to Perrault, places the Count de Tréville among the nicest judges of wit. Saint-Simon undertakes to paint him, vol. iv., p. 184, and thus finishes his portrait, vol. vi., p. 372: He had belonged “to the great world, at one time a courtier, then a devotee and recluse, again, by degrees, an active member of the best society, always gallant, full of wit, and of the most refined taste.” He had loved Madame, the amiable Henriette, and the beautiful de Ludre. See the _Memoirs_ of Lafare and Madame de Sévigné, letter of the 13th March, 1671. It is said that the observation, _he talks like a book_, was first made concerning him. He is the _Arsène_ of the _charactères_ of La Bruyère. I have seen some of his unpublished letters; the language is the best, but for any thing else they are not remarkable.

[29] IVth Series of our works, LITTÉRATURE, vol. ii., _Jacqueline Pascal_, p. 20.

[30] _Memoirs_, vol. i., p. 221: “I do not believe that Queen Elizabeth of England had more capacity for State affairs.”

[31] _Oraison funèbre de la Princesse Palatine._

[32] Ægidii Menagii Pœmata, since the first edition, which is of 1652, in-4ᵒ, Ægidii Menagii Miscellanea, until the Elzeverian edition, more complete, of 1663. In this there are more than twenty French, Latin, and Italian pieces to Madame de La Fayette before and after her marriage. Madame de Sévigné does not appear so often; but, as an offset, she is seen in the edition of 1652, both under her own name and under that of Uranie. The study of the different editions of the poems of Ménage would not be useless in a history of Madame de Sévigné and of Madame de La Fayette.

[33] See the Italian Sonnet of Madame de Sévigné, published by M. de Montmerqué.

[34] This correspondence was sold at Sens, in 1849, at the sale of M. Tarbé. I examined it for several hours. It is composed of about seventy-six letters, all unpublished, and runs over almost all the life of Madame de La Fayette. We here find that Ménage felt a passion for his beautiful pupils. Repulsed and discouraged rather quickly by Marie de Chantil, he turned to her relative, Mademoiselle de Lavergne, with no better fortune, but without experiencing so much neglect. The intercourse of Ménage with Mademoiselle de Lavergne continued even after her marriage to the Count de La Fayette, became more intimate during her widowhood, and continued even until her death. Madame de La Fayette coquetted evidently with her Latin and Italian master, and for some time their relations were intimate but not tender. Finally, they became good and perfect friends. Several letters show with what care Madame de La Fayette had studied under Ménage the poets and good writers, both ancient and modern. She consults him, and refers to their disputes in regard to the use of such and such an expression. She speaks continually of their common friend, Huet, who wrote for _Zaïdé_ a dissertation on the origin of the romance. There are a few lines about Segrais. I do not remember seeing the name of La Rochefoucauld once mentioned. This was perhaps a delicate subject, upon which the beautiful lady did not consult her learned friends. What existed between the duke and the countess did not concern the Abbé Huet and the Abbé Ménage. It was only to the Marchioness de Sévigné, or to the Marchioness de Sablé, that she would speak on such a matter. Besides, in this collection, we have only the letters or rather notes of Madame de La Fayette; not one of Ménage. Most of them are autographs, some dictated and signed, all perfectly authentic. M. Tarbé made a copy of this correspondence, which was sold with the autographs. It belongs now to M. Feuillet.

[35] See the dissertation of Madame de Grignan on the _Pure Love_ of Fénelon, in vol. x. of the works of Madame de Sévigné, p. 518, edition Montmerqué.

[36] We shall often return in this work, for example, 1st Part, chap. ii., to this difference between the literature of Louis XIII. and that of Louis XIV. We have elsewhere said, Fourth Series, vol. ii., of the illustrious women of the seventeenth century, p. 13: “Let us go on and examine the age of Louis XIV. An end has come to the manly vigor of the times of Richelieu; the freedom of the Fronde has ceased; Louis XIV. has made politeness and dignity, tempered by good taste, the order of the day. Fortunate are the minds which have been formed in the strength and liberty of the preceding age, which receive the polish of the new epoch! This was the privilege of Madame de Sévigné, as well as of Molière and of Bossuet.”

[37] Part i., chap. iii.

[38] Ibid., chap. iv.

[39] No one has been duped by the disavowal which he made, for political purposes, of the passages of these memoirs which concern Condé and his sister; for they are the very ones which most betray his hand. They shocked the public conscience, whose interpreter is Madame de Motteville, vol. v., pp. 114, 115, and 132.

[40] See Part iii.

[41] _Mémoires_, edit. of Amsterdam, 1733, p. 12.

[42] _Mémoires_, vol. ii., p. 15.

[43] _Mémoires de Guy-Joly_, collection Michaud, 3d Series, vol. ii., p. 15.

[44] Petitot, vol. li., p. 896.

[45] Ibid., p. 398, 399.

[46] Petitot, vol. li., pp. 898, 899.

[47] Petitot, vol. li., p. 899, etc.

[48] Petitot, vol. li., p. 462.

[49] Ibid., p. 401.

[50] Petitot, vol. lii., p. 9.

[51] Vol. iii., p. 295.

[52] Ibid., p. 393.

[53] _Mémoires_, p. 47.

[54] Mémoires de La Rochefoucauld, Petitot, vol. lii., p. 24.

[55] Mémoires de La Rochefouc., Petitot, vol.lii., p. 72.

[56] Ibid., p. 71.

[57] Mémoires de La Rochefoucauld, Petitot, vol. lii., pp. 79, 80.

[58] See Part ii.

[59] _Mémoires de Madame de Nemours_, p. 150.

[60] La Rochefoucauld, p. 198 of the edition of 1664: “The Prince de Condé was warned of the design which she had to ruin his party, by very extraordinary means, for the interest of Nemours, and feared, that similarly prejudiced in behalf of another, she might go to the same extremities if this one should so desire it.” _Was warned_, and by whom, if not by La Rochefoucauld, who then enjoyed the entire confidence of Condé? La Rochefoucauld perceived so plainly the odiousness of this passage, that he afterwards modified and softened it, as may be seen in the editions of Renouard and Petitot.

[61] Vol. v., pp. 114, 115.

[62] Madame de Sévigné doubts it very much. Letter of October 7, 1676: “I do not believe that he was ever in love.” He says himself in making his own portrait: “I who know whatever is delicate and strong in the sentiments of love, if ever I happen to love, it will certainly be in this manner. But in one of my make, I do not believe that this knowledge which I possess ever passes from the mind to the heart.” Segrais, (Mémoires, Anecdotes, edit. d’Amsterdam, 1723, p. 113): “M. de la Rochefoucauld said that he had never found love except in romances; as for him, he had never felt it.”

[63] Vol. v., p. 132.

[64] Edit. of 1664, pp. 229-282; Petitot, pp. 156-158.

[65] _Mémoires_, vol. ii., p. 129.

[66] Some time ago I expressed the same opinion in regard to La Rochefoucauld, and, as may be seen, I still hold it. See 1st series of my works, vol. iv., p. 200; 4th series, vol. i., p. 51, and vol. ii., p. 8.

[67] Mémoires, Anecdotes, p. 31.

[68] Vol. i., p. 217.

[69] On the Fronde and its general causes, see Part i., chap. 4.

[70] See thereon a curious passage of Madame de Motteville, vol. iv., p. 359, etc.

[71] We borrow the translation that Villefore has given of this part of the Italian narrative of the cardinal, Part 1st, p. 22.

[72] Part 1st, p. 44.

[73] See, in the Library of the Arsenal, Manuscripts of Conrart, in-4ᵒ, vol. xvi., p. 642, an unpublished letter of Henri de Bourbon to his mother, upon the assassination of Henri IV., which proves how absurd it is to accuse him of having been concerned in that assassination. The same volume contains different writings of the same prince against Marshal d’Ancre.

[74] We find in regard to all this, new and curious details in a _Journal historique et anecdote de la cour et de Paris_, t. xi., in-4ᵒ, manuscripts of Conrart. This unpublished journal commences January 1, 1614, and goes to January 1, 1620.

M. the Prince was arrested September 1, 1616, by order of Marshal d’Ancre, favorite of the queen regent, Marie de Médicis.

“September 11. Madame the young Princess arrives very much afflicted. It is said that M. de Montmorency was not pleased that the queen was unwilling to permit her to see M. le Prince.

“May 19, 1617. M. le Prince petitions the king to do a charitable deed by delivering to him his wife, that she might remain a prisoner with him.

“May 26, 1617. Madame the Princess de Condé goes to salute the king and supplicate him to let her enter as a prisoner in the Bastile with M. the Prince. The king grants it to her, and permits her to take with her only one damsel. Upon which her _petit nain_, having supplicated the king to be pleased that he should not abandon his mistress, his majesty also permitted him. The same day, after dinner, Madame the Princess entered the Bastile, where she was received by M. the Prince with all the testimonies of friendship that can be imagined; and he gave her no repose until she had said to him that she pardoned him.” In this same journal, there has often been a question of the bad conduct of the prince towards his wife, in regard to which there is not one word of blame.

“August 31, 1617. The undertaking to save the prince from the Bastile discovered.

“September 15, 1617. M. the Prince taken from the Bastile to the wood of Vincennes.... A long time before he had asked that he might be placed there in order to have better air. M. de Modène said to him that, mindful of that, he had pressed the king so much upon the subject, that at last he had obtained it. M. the Prince responded that in the mean time he had become accustomed to the air of the Bastile; and thereupon resisted all that he could, until it was necessary to go. Madame the Princess also went with him in a coach, having been unwilling to enter a litter. It is said that in the beginning M. the Prince only thought it was desired to deprive him of his wife. M. de Vitry, M. de Persan, M. de Modène, were with him in the coach. After his arrival at the wood of Vincennes, it was permitted him, about the beginning of October, to walk upon the top of a thick wall, which is in the form of a gallery. M. de Persan dwelt in the tower of the wood of Vincennes, in order to guard the prince with the greatest part of the soldiers that he had with him in the Bastile, and M. de Cadenet (afterwards Duke and Marshal de Chaulnes, brother of Constable de Luynes), with a dozen companies of the regiment of Normandy, kept guard in the court of the château, which the soldiers are not permitted to leave.

“About December 20, 1617. Madame the Princess very sick. She is put to bed in the wood of Vincennes, at seven months, of a still-born child, and was more than forty-eight hours without motion or feeling. Never was a person in greater extremity without dying. Among other physicians, M. Duret and M. Pietre assisted her with extreme care. When M. the Prince desired that there should be obsequies for this little infant, M. the Bishop of Paris assembled some theologians, who judged that, since, not having received baptism, it had not entered into the Church, no ceremonies ought to be used on the subject of its death.

“September 5, 1618. Madame the Princess is put to bed of two dead boys. The king shows great displeasure thereupon. Several persons had permission to go to see her.

“March 21, 1619. M. the Prince falls sick. Tuesday, April 2. MM. Hatin, Duret, and Seguin came to the Louvre to represent the state of the malady. The cause was attributed to profound melancholy. For several days he was regarded as hopeless. Madame his mother, Madame the Countess, Madame de Ventadour, Madame the Countess d’Auvergne, Madame de la Trémouille, Madame de Fontaines, Madame la Grande, etc., were allowed to go and visit him. Monday, April 8, the king sent to him his sword by M. de Cadenet, and wrote to him: ‘My cousin, I am very much grieved at your illness. I pray you to be comforted. As soon as I shall have set in order my affairs, I will give you your liberty. Be rejoiced then, and have the assurance of my friendship. I am, etc.’

“August 28, 1619. Between midnight and one o’clock, Madame the Princess was put to bed of a daughter, in the wood of Vincennes.

“October 17, 1619. Council held, in which is taken the final resolution of releasing M. the Prince.

“October 18. The king goes to Chantilly, to await there M. the Prince.

“19th. M. de Luynes goes to find M. the Prince at the wood of Vincennes.

“20th. M. de Luynes goes early in the morning to the wood of Vincennes, and gets into a carriage with M. the Prince and Madame the Princess, in which were also MM. de Cadenet and de Modène. He goes to Chantilly to find the king, and sees him in a cabinet, where, it is said, he falls upon his knees, and makes extreme protestations of fidelity, and feeling of obligation, which he had for him.

“22d. The king returns to Compiègne, accompanied by M. the Prince. Madame the Princess arrived there and saw the queen the same day.”

In the xvi. vol. of the same manuscript, p. 933, a French diplomatic agent transmits the reports spread abroad in the Low Countries, on the subject of the Prince and Princess de Condé, prisoners at the Bastile or in Vincennes: “The Princess de Condé, the younger, has written from there to her own _femme de chambre_ married in that city, that M. the Prince de Condé was under the impression that he had been poisoned by his head-cook, named Baucheron, who had practiced and received money for that purpose, and had escaped; and because he might take refuge in that country, she charges her to inform the Prince and Princess of Orange, in order to arrest him if possible. The people of the so-called Prince of Orange also say, that M. the Prince de Condé has thought of escaping, and has been betrayed and discovered by one of his domestics, but that he has still other means for regaining his liberty.”

[75] _Mémoires de Lenet_, collection of Michaud, 3d series, v. ii., p. 448.

[76] _Mémoires de Lenet_, Michaud, 3d series, vol. ii., p. 458.

[77] _Mémoires de Lenet_, Michaud, 3d series, vol. ii., p. 455.

[78] His eldest brother, who, having taken his title after his death, was also distinguished for his beauty, his bravery, his gallantry, played an important part in the life of Madame de Longueville, and perished in a senseless duel with the Duke de Beaufort, his brother-in-law.

[79] Paris, 1800, in-8ᵒ.

[80] There is a constant demand for a collection of the cartularies of the old abbeys. Why will not some friend of religion and letters occupy himself with filling up the lacunes, so much to be regretted, of the _Gallia christiana_, by bringing together, under the name of the Cartulary of the convent of the Carmelites of the Faubourg Saint-Jacques, a multitude of pieces which we have held in our hands, which would establish, upon authentic monuments, the history of that interesting congregation, from the first years of the seventeenth century to the French Revolution? All the notes, extracts, and copies, that we have amassed, belong to him who will undertake to enrich with a new volume of this kind the _Collection des documents inédits relatifs à l’histoire de France_.

[81] For example, Guido, Champagne, and Lebrun.

[82] Among others, a statue, in white marble, representing the Cardinal de Bérulle on his knees. This beautiful work is by Jacques Sarrazin, and is still to be seen in the chapel of the Carmelites.

[83] General Archives, demesnial section, 1st file, letter C: “Letters-patent of King Henry IV. for the establishment of the order of the nuns of Nôtre-Dame of Mount Carmel, verified in parliament October 1, 1602, at the very humble petition of our dear well-beloved cousin, Demoiselle de Longueville.” And in other pieces it is also said: “The said lord (King Henry), favorably disposed to the petition of Catherine d’Orleans, daughter of the late Henri d’Orleans, Duke de Longueville and de Touteville....”

[84] Since that time the convent of the Rue Saint-Jacques has been called the Great Convent, to distinguish it from the house in the Rue Chapon.

[85] The act of donation which is in the General Archives, was made in the name of the duchess dowager de Longueville, as well as in the name of her son, the future husband of Anne de Bourbon. “Madame Catherine de Gonzagues and de Clèves, Duchess de Longueville and de Touteville, widow of the late very powerful prince Henri d’Orleans, during his life, Duke de Longueville and de Touteville, sovereign Count of Neufchâtel and Valengin, in Switzerland, also Count of Dunois and Tancarville, etc., dwelling at Paris, in his hôtel de Longueville, Rue des Poulies, parish of Saint-Germain de l’Auxerrois, as well in his own name as in that of Monseigneur Henri d’Orleans, his son, also Duke de Longueville and de Touteville.” ... Catherine de Gonzagues and Clèves was sister of Charles de Gonzagues, Duke de Nevers, the father of Marie and Anne de Gonzagues, the queen of Poland and the Palatine. Her son, Henry II., exercised himself much in playing at tennis, and one of his shoulders became larger and more elevated than the other. All the skill of the physicians was powerless. The desolate mother addressed herself to Madame Acarie, then sister Marie de l’Incarnation. She engaged in prayer previous to the holy sacrament, and the next day the form of the youth was very much improved. Through gratitude, the mother and son founded the house of the Rue Chapon, endowed it with ten thousand crowns in silver, and two thousand livres a year. The Duke de Longueville testified to this fact before the Apostolic Commissioners, charged with the beatification of Madame Acarie. Catherine de Gonzagues died in 1629. We find in the Archives different acts which prove that the niece of Richelieu, Madame the Duchess d’Aiguillon, was also one of the benefactresses of both convents. “Marie Vignerot, Duchess d’Esguillon, dwelling in her hôtel, situated in Saint-Germain-des-Prés, parish of Saint-Sulpice.”...

[86] See Gomboust’s plan of Paris, in 1652, and the plan called Turgot’s, of Paris, in 1740.

[87] See Malingre, _Antiquités de la Ville de Paris_, in-fol., Paris, 1640, pp. 152 and 153, also pp. 501 and 503, _Nouveaux Mémoires concernant la maison des Carmélites_; a few lines in the _Histoire de la Ville de Paris_ of Felibien and of Lobineau, vol. ii., pp. 1268-1271, and some records in vol. iii. of the _Preuves et Pièces justificatives_, p. 144. Sauval contains but a page on the Carmelites, vol. i., p. 450. The best thing in regard to this convent is found in the _Curiosités de Paris_, 1771, vol. i., pp. 459-463. We take from it the following description of the church: “Although the main body of this church is very ancient, it is one of the best decorated in Paris. The great altar is formed of four marble columns, and is reached by twelve steps, very ingeniously placed, with a balustrade of marble. All the ornaments of this altar are of bronze gilded; the tabernacle, which represents the ark of the covenant, is all of silver; the bas-relief in front is highly wrought, and represents the Annunciation. Nothing is more sumptuous than this altar on feast-days. You then see a sun, bright with stones of great value, accompanied by candlesticks, vases, and other pieces of goldsmith’s ware, whose quantity equals its magnificence. The picture is by Guido, and represents the Annunciation.

“The choir is separated from the nave by four beautiful columns of sea-green marble, surmounted by flames of gilded bronze of wonderful beauty and size. The crucifix of bronze, which you see on the door, is one of the best and highly esteemed of the works of Sarrazin.

“The vault of the church, upon which numerous stories from the Holy Scriptures are represented, was painted by Champagne, through the liberality of Marie de Médicis. Observe in it an excellent piece of perspective, designed by Des Argues: it is a crucifix, with the Holy Virgin and St. John, so artistically painted by the same Champagne, that, on entering the church, they appear upon a perpendicular plane, although horizontal, which produces an agreeable and singular effect.

“Above the door of this church there is a beautiful gallery, containing statues of Saint Peter, of Saint Paul, and of Saint Michael overcoming the devil.

“All the chapels are magnificent: the most beautiful pictures and gildings adorn all parts of it; neatness and good taste reign throughout.

“The twelve pictures ornamented with gilded frames, which are placed under the windows, represent subjects drawn from the New Testament, and were painted by very skilful masters. The first, at the right on entering, represents the _Resurrection of Lazarus_; the second, _The Circumcision of our Lord_; the third, _The Adoration of the Magi_; the fourth, _The Assumption of the Holy Virgin_; the fifth, _The Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles_; the sixth, _The Birth of our Lord_. These six pictures were also painted by the celebrated Champagne, and are very highly esteemed. On the other side, the first represents the _Miracle of the Five Loaves_, by Stella; the second, _The Madeline at the feet of our Lord, at the house of Simon the Pharisee_—it is one of the finest works of the famous Le Brun; the third, _The Entry of Jesus Christ into Jerusalem_, by La Hire; the fourth, _Christ at the side of Jacob’s well, talking with the Samaritan woman_, by Stella; the fifth, _Christ served in the Desert by Angels_—this is also by Le Brun; the sixth, _The Appearance of our Lord to the three Marys_, by La Hire.

“Opposite to the choir of the nuns, observe the great picture representing _the Annunciation_; it is an excellent work by Guido, who painted it for Queen Marie de Médicis.

“Look afterwards at the chapel of Sainte-Marie-Madeleine; it is one of the most ornamented. You will there see the statue of Cardinal de Bérulle, made in marble by Sarrazin, in 1657; it is raised upon a marble pedestal, upon which are excellent bas-reliefs, by Lestocart, a famous sculptor. These bas-reliefs represent the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and that also performed by Noah, when he left the ark. You will also see in this chapel, all covered with pictures, one of the most perfect paintings ever produced by the famous Le Brun; it represents the _Penitent Madeleine_. Grief and repentance are so vividly expressed in this, and the skill of the excellent master so well proved by all the accompaniments, that you can find nothing more finished and more perfect. The life of this saint is represented in the wainscot of this beautiful chapel.”

[88] _Histoire manuscrite_, t. ii.

[89] We have elsewhere established that of the three sources of human knowledge, intuition, induction, and deduction, the first is much the most fertile and the most elevated. It is intuition, which, by its own spontaneous power, discovers directly and without the aid of reflection, all essential truths; it is the source of light to the human race; the voice that speaks to prophets and poets; the principle of all inspiration of enthusiasm, and of that unalterable and sure faith, that astonishes reasoning which is compelled to treat it as a folly, because it cannot account for it by its ordinary processes. See the _Cours de Philosophie_, particularly, First Series, vol. v., p. 301; and Second Series, vol. i., Lecture vi., pp. 131-141, etc.

[90] See the _Vie de la Mère Madeleine de Saint-Joseph, religieuse Carmélite déchaussée_, by a priest of the Oratoire (Father Senault): Paris, 1655, in-4ᵒ. There is a second edition, of 1670, augmented. The Carmelites still have the head of their venerable mother. It is powerful and large. A portrait of her, preserved by the convent, exhibits in her face great strength of character. It has been many times engraved.

[91] The Carmelites have a small portrait, painted on wood, of Mother Marie de Jésus, somewhat advanced in life, but of a noble and sweet visage. It has been engraved by Regnesson.

[92] _Histoire manuscrite_, vol. ii.

[93] _Histoire manuscrite_, vol. ii.

[94] The Carmelites were very willing to let me see the portrait, painted upon canvas, of Mother Marie-Madeleine, which does not belie her reputation for beauty. The face is of the most perfect oval; the eyes are of the finest and deepest blue; the forehead is noble; the general aspect is full of grandeur and grace. It would be difficult to find any thing more beautiful.

[95] We will mention the best known of the general visitors of the order: in 1614, the Cardinal de Bérulle; in 1619, Father de Condren, the second general of the Oratoire; in 1627, the Abbé de Bérulle, nephew of the cardinal, etc. Among the superiors of the monastery, we find, in the earlier period, Father Gibieuf, a learned oratorien, one of the correspondents of Descartes; later, in 1662, M. Ferret, doctor in theology, and curate of Saint-Nicholas-du-Chardonnet; in 1678, M. Pirot, a doctor of the Sorbonne; in 1715, M. Vivant, grand vicar of Cardinal de Noailles; in 1747, the Bishop of Bethlehem, celebrated for having extirpated Jansenism, which had been introduced among the Carmelites at the close of the preceding century.

[96] Her letters from Spain to Madame de Coulanges, are, for attractiveness of style, much superior to those of Madame des Ursins. Letters de Madame de Villars, etc., Paris, 1806 and 1823, and what Madame de Sévigné says of her, letters of October 8, 1679, and February 28, 1680.

[97] The painted portrait that has been shown me, represents her in fact as having the most happy face, with charming blue eyes and beautiful forehead, and a look at once lively and agreeable.

[98] Letter of January 5, 1680.

[99] Letter of November 22, 1688.

[100] Edition of Lebel, vol. xxxix., p. 690.

[101] Varying from our manuscripts: _weighed_.

[102] An autograph billet, for which we are indebted to the Carmelite ladies.

[103] This fixes the date of the note: it is therefore a little while after the death of Mother Madeleine de Saint-Joseph; that is, in 1637.

[104] Several lines effaced and wholly illegible, and half of a page cut.

[105] Mademoiselle Nicolas, born at Bordeaux, agreeable in person and mind, say our manuscripts, and pleasing to everybody. Having read, when quite a child, the Life of Catherine de Sienne, she devoted herself to imitating her, and joined the Carmelites at nineteen, and died at thirty-three. There is a small portrait of her, very well made, representing her in ecstasy.

[106] Paris, 1774, in-12ᵒ.

[107] Vol. 1st, p. 369.

[108] Ibid., p. 74.

[109] Vol. 1st, p. 79.

[110] Ibid., p. 124.

[111] Vol. 1st, p. 146.

[112] The King of Poland, Wladislas, had just espoused Marie de Gonzague, daughter of the Duke de Nevers, sister of the Palatine. After the death of this first husband, she passed with the crown to his brother Casimir, whom Mademoiselle d’Epernon had refused.

[113] Her mother-in-law, Marie de Cambout, niece of Richelieu, whom the cardinal had married to the Duke d’Epernon, as he had married another of his nieces, Mademoiselle de Brézé, to the Duke d’Enghien. Madame d’Epernon was ill-treated by her husband, and died in retreat, in 1691. She was sister of the Abbé du Cambout de Pontchâteau, a celebrated Jansenist. See two portraits of her among the portraits of Mademoiselle.

[114] It is worth while to see, in the Abbé Montis, the great resistance which Mademoiselle d’Epernon had to overcome from her brother, the Duke de Candale, and especially from her father, who appealed to the parliament and to the pope; the death of the Duke de Candale, his remains carried to the Carmelites; the conversion of the duke through the instrumentality of his daughter, the finest portions of her life and her pious death. She was one of the benefactresses. _Histoire manuscrite_, vol. 1st, p. 558. “The gifts bestowed by Anne-Marie de Jésus amounted to more than a hundred and fifty thousand livres. Besides this immense sum, the Duke d’Epernon, her father, dying in 1661, without heirs, bequeathed to it a hundred thousand livres over and above the sixteen thousand which he left as a pious legacy. This lord had already assigned to the house, during the life of our very honored Sister Anne-Marie, three thousand livres pension, finding that the sixteen thousand livres, which were regarded as her dowry, was too slender a sum, and sufficient only to endow a lady who had followed her.” The lady here alluded to, and of whom Mademoiselle also speaks, was named Bouchereau. “Being,” says the Abbé Montis (p. 34), “of an agreeable form, she occupied herself with things quite as fragile; but she finally turned her attention to religion, and, desiring to become a nun, and guessing the views of Mademoiselle d’Epernon, she opened her heart to her, and begged to be allowed to follow her, which was readily granted.” Mademoiselle Bouchereau died during her novitiate, before making a profession.

It is through error that, on the faith of the Abbé Mentis, in the abridged Life of the Mother, joined to that of Mademoiselle d’Epernon, p. 291, the learned editor of the works of Bossuet supposes, vol. xxxiv., p. 690, “the beautiful letter on the Mother Agnès is addressed to Madame d’Epernon, prioress of the Carmelites of the Faubourg Saint-Jacques,” for Mademoiselle d’Epernon—it was thus that she was called—and not Madame d’Epernon, was never prioress. Bossuet wrote to the prioress who succeeded the Mother Agnès, either the Mother Claire du Saint-Sacrement, who died as he entered upon his office; or rather to the one who almost immediately took her place, that is, the Mother Marie du Saint-Sacrement; in the world, Madame de La Thuillerie, who took her vows in 1654, was prioress from 1691 to 1700, and died in 1705. Our manuscripts contain several ancient copies of the letter of Bossuet, all bearing the inscription: _To the Mother of the Saint-Sacrement_.

In 1680, Madame de Sévigné, accompanying Mademoiselle to the Carmelites, there saw Mademoiselle d’Epernon, and found her very much altered. Letter of the 5th of January, 1680: “I was yesterday at the convent of the Carmelites with Mademoiselle, who was good enough to ask Madame Lesdiguières to take me there. We entered this holy place. I was delighted with Mother Agnès. She spoke to me of you, whom she seemed to know through her sister (Madame the Marchioness de Villars). I saw Madame de Stuart, beautiful and contented (she made a profession this very year, say our manuscripts, under the name of Sister Marguerite de Saint-Augustin, and died in 1722). I saw Madame d’Epernon.... More than thirty years had elapsed since we had seen one another: she seemed to be horribly changed.”

And nevertheless, without being a great beauty, she was the worthy sister of the beautiful Candale. The convent of the Carmelites possesses several pictures of her. One is quite large, representing her between forty and fifty, pale and sick, but still agreeable. The best and most perfectly preserved, represents her young and charming. Her figure is delicate and graceful, but of that fragile grace which years do not respect. She is painted with a smile upon her lips, and such as she was in the world. It is probably the portrait of Beaubrun, engraved by Edelinck.

[115] Vol. 1st.

[116] L’Histoire manuscrite, vol. 1st, contains the epitaphs of Michel de Marillac, of Marguerite and Catherine d’Orleans, of Madame the Princess, of the Princess de Conti, etc. When the keeper of the seals, Marillac, was arrested, the Mother Madeleine de Saint-Joseph tried, in every way, to serve and console him in his misfortune. Regardless of the opinion of Richelieu, who was then more powerful than ever, and who was the protector of the order, she caused an exposition of the eucharist during sixty days and sixty nights; procured the offering of a large number of prayers; she wrote often to the pious exile; implored the cardinal to have him treated with less rigor; and after his death earnestly sought and obtained his body from Châteaudun; erected to him a tomb at the base of the sanctuary in the chapel of Saint Thérèse, and composed herself this epitaph: “Here lies Messire Michel de Marillac, keeper of the seals of France, who, having been raised to this and other dignities, has always preserved an esteem for true honors and eternal riches, doing many good works, loving justice, seeking the glory of God, sustaining his Church, succoring the oppressed, giving all that he had to the poor; and when he was, by Providence, deprived of all, he showed his great magnanimity and contempt of earthly things; living contentedly, and journeying on to a holy death, by which he passed from this world to another, in the year of grace 1682.”

[117] _Histoire manuscrite_, vol. 1st, pp. 491, 492.

[118] Villefore, p. 13.

[119] Villefore, p. 14.

[120] Manuscript of André d’Ormesson, fol. 332, verso.—It was on the occasion of the ballet of the 18th of February, 1635, that the _Gazette de France_ cited, for the first time, the name of Mademoiselle de Bourbon. The extra of the 21st of February, gives a full account of the fête of the 18th. It describes all the scenes of the ballet of the king, names all the great lords who danced in it, and concludes thus: “Such was the grand ballet of the queen, which so delighted all who were present that they were unable to decide which was most charming, the beauties who adorned, the gems with which they glittered, or the figures which represented those _sixteen_ divinities of which it was composed: the queen, _Mademoiselle de Bourbon_, Mesdames de Longueville (the first wife of the Duke de Longueville), de Montbazon, de Chaulnes, de La Valette, de Retz, Mademoiselle de Rohan, Mesdames de Lyancourt and de Mortemart, Mesdemoiselles de Senecé, de Hautefort, d’Esche, de Vieux-Pont, de Saint-Georges and de La Fayette, who did not quit it until three o’clock in the morning. Every one left this place of marvels with the feelings of Jacob, who, having seen angels in the night, thought that he was standing upon the spot where heaven and earth united.”

[121] _Mémoire pour servir à l’histoire de la Société polie en France_; Paris, in-8ᵒ, 1835. See also M. Walckenær: _Mémoires touchant la Vie et les Ecrits de Madame de Sévigné_, vol. 1st, chap. iv. and v.

[122] The very word _urbanity_ is from Balzac, one of the first and most illustrious frequenters of the house.

[123] The Château de Rambouillet, above Versailles, ten leagues from Paris. Francis I. died here.

[124] One to Madame the Duchess d’Aiguillon, relating to a certain water-course: Tallemant, vol. ii., p. 228. The other, her epitaph, preserved by Ménage in his _Observations on the Poetry of Malherbe_.

[125] Vol. ii., p. 233.

[126] I do not know where M. Rœderer got the idea that Madame de Rambouillet wrote so simply. Here is one of her billets, which could not have led the person to whom it is addressed to speak of _simplicity_, as M. Rœderer does of the letters of Madame de Rambouillet, and of her daughter to Voiture; we speak from conjecture, for these letters have not been seen by us. The one we give here was found among the manuscripts of Conrart, in the Library of the Arsenal, vol. xiv., in-4ᵒ, p. 53; it is addressed to Godeau, by turns Bishop of Grasse and of Vence:

“SIR:—If my carabineer-poet or poetic carabineer (Arnault,
Colonel of Carabineers, a distinguished warrior, a man of great
wit, but a satirist, and a person enough like Bussy) was in
Paris, I would reply to you in verse, and not in prose; but for
myself I have no familiarity with the muses. I return a million
thanks for your kind wishes; and in recompense, I wish every
moment that you were in a lodge, where I am sure you would
sleep better than you do at Vence. It is supported by columns
of transparent marble, and was built above the mid-region
of the air by Queen Zirfée. The sky there is always serene;
clouds darken neither the sight nor the understanding, and
thence quite at my ease I have considered the downfall of the
terrestrial Angel. It seems to me that on this occasion fortune
has shown that it is a slander to say that she favors only the
young. And because I am no more the subject of change than my
lodge, you may rest assured that I shall continue so as long as
I live.

“Sir,

“Your very humble servant,

ↃC (Catherine) DE VIVONNE.”

_June 26, 1642._

[127] The works of Segrais, Amsterdam, 1723, vol. 1st. _Mémoires Anecdotes_, p. 29.

[128] On Mademoiselle de Rambouillet, Pisani, and his sisters, see Tallemant, vol. ii., pp. 207-262.

[129] Edition of 1659, pp. 118-121.

[130] See Saural, _Antiquités de Paris_, vol. iii., p. 200, and the plan of Paris by Gomboust. These hôtels, or rather their ruins, have just entirely disappeared, with the Rue Saint-Thomas-du-Louvre, to the advantage of the Place du Carrousel. May this admirable place preserve its grandeur, so dearly bought, and no transversal building spoil the beautiful harmony of the Louvre and the Tuileries! May also some competent and industrious man, devoted to the study of Paris and its monuments, resolve not to let the Rue Saint-Thomas-du-Louvre perish without giving its description and a history faithful to the epoch of its greatest glory.

[131] _Mémoires_, vol. 1st, p. 18.

[132] Ed. of Amsterdam. Petitot, vol. xxxvi. of the collection, p. 841, proposes to read _husesas_, from _huso_, spindle. The true reading seems _finezas_.

[133] It is very certain that the author of _Mirame_ show some littleness in the ridiculous quarrel raised against _The Cid_; but it must be acknowledged that he had some State reasons not to be despised. He who had brought about the royal edict against duels could not endure verses in their honor; there was also in _The Cid_ more than one word unfavorable to the prime ministers. Besides, the cardinal loved Corneille; he gave him a good pension, and even performed the marriage ceremony for him. One day Corneille having presented himself more sad and thoughtful than ordinary before the Cardinal Richelieu, the latter asked him if he was working. Corneille replied that he was far from having the tranquillity necessary for composition, that his head was turned with love. It was necessary to explain the whole matter, and he told the cardinal that he was passionately in love with the daughter of Lieutenant General d’Andely, and that he could not obtain her from her father. The cardinal requested this father, so hard to please, to come to him at Paris. He arrived trembling at receiving such an unexpected order, and returned very glad to get off with giving his daughter to a man in such high credit. See the brothers Parfait, _History of the French Theatre_, vol. v., p. 304.

[134] Works of Balzac, in-fol., vol. ii., p. 419.

[135] Maitre Vincent, etc.

[136] Letter of November 24, 1676.

[137] Third Satire.

[138] Tallemant, ii., p. 295.

[139] Edit. of Saint-Surin, vol. iv., p. 375.

[140] See in the _Œuvres diverses_ of Corneille, ed. of Amsterdam, 1740, p. 174, the elegy containing a declaration of love: it is not dated, but must have been written during the youth of Corneille, and even before his glory, for he does not speak of it, whilst later he uses a very different tone. The lady to whom his elegy is addressed, must have been of good birth, if the young poet is to be believed. He paints finely the passage from admiration to love:

Mais de ce sentiment la flatteuse imposture
N’empêcha pas le mal pour cacher la blessure,
Et ce soin d’admirer, qui dure plus d’un jour,
S’il n’est amour dejà, devient bientôt amour.
Un je ne sais quel trouble où je me vis réduire
De cette vérité sut assez tôt m’instruire:
Par d’inquiets transports me sentant émouvoir,
J’en connus le sujet quand j’osai vous revoir.
...
Un désordre confus m’expliqua mon martyre:
Je voulus vous parler, mais je ne sus que dire.
Je rougis, je pàlis, et d’un tacite aveu
Je n’aime point, dis je, hélas! qu’il s’en faut peu! etc.

The piece entitled _Jalousie_, and which is not finished, has parts which seem written by Molière.

Le plus léger chagrin d’une humeur inégale,
Le moindre égarement d’un mauvais intervalle,
Un souris par mégarde à ses yeux dérobé,
Un coup d’œil par hasard sur un autre tombé,
...
Tout cela fait pour lui de grands crimes d’État,
Et plus l’amour est fort, plus il est délicat.