La Princesse de Clèves, 3

22 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by michelinewalker in 17th-century France, Love

Tags

Ambition, Diane de Poitiers, Gallantry, Henri IV

**The Princess of Cleves**
*Published by G. Kearly N^o. 46 Fleet Street Aug^t. 1, 1777.* (Wikisource)

We are at the court of Henri II (1519-1559) of France, a Valois king. He and Catherine de’ Medici have three sons, which should have ensured the House of Valois’s survival. The video I showed in an earlier post mentions a second François. This second François is François de France (1555-1584). He was the last child born to Henri II and Catherine de’ Medici. He died of tuberculosis in 1584, five years before Henri III’s assassination, King of Poland and France, the last of Henri II’s three heirs. As you know, French King Henri III’s death ended the rule of the House of Valois, a cadet branch of the House of Bourbon. Henri and Catherine de’ Medici had daughters. One of their daughters is Marguerite de Valois. She marries Henri III of Navarre, whose father is a Bourbon. Henri III de Navarre is the future Henri IV of France. However, the Salic Law prevented a woman from ascending the throne of France. Marguerite de Valois is Alexandre Dumas père‘s Reine Margot. Her marriage to Henri IV was annulled. She could not have children. Henri II’s mistress is Diane de Poitiers also called Madame de Valentinois or Duchesse de Valentinois.

La Magnificence et la Galanterie

The novel begins with a praise of Henri II’s court. It is described as magnificent and is also characterized by galanterie. This is where Madame de Chartres has taken her 16-year old daughter who has reached an age when, in 17^th-century France, a young woman looked for a husband.

La magnificence et la galanterie n’ont jamais paru en France avec tant d’éclat que dans les dernières années du règne de Henri second. Ce prince était galant, bien fait et amoureux ; quoique sa passion pour Diane de Poitiers, duchesse de Valentinois, eût commencé il y avait plus de vingt ans, elle n’en était pas moins violente, et il n’en donnait pas des témoignages moins éclatants. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
[Grandeur and gallantry never appeared with more lustre in France, than in the last years of Henry the Second’s reign. This Prince was amorous and handsome, and though his passion for Diana of Poictiers [sic], duchess of Valentinois, was of above twenty years standing, it was not the less violent, nor did he give less distinguishing proofs of it.] (Wikisource, first line)

La Princesse de Clèves

le Prince de Clèves falls in love with Mademoiselle de Chartres
le Chevalier or Duc de Guise is his rival
ambition

The Prince of Cleves first meets Mademoiselle de Chartres at an Italian jeweller’s. He has never seen her. However, the King’s sister, Madame sœur du roi, guesses that he has met Mlle de Chartres and invites him to return in the morning. Mademoiselle de Chartres is a young woman he has met. He is delighted to realize that her beauty matches her rank.

Meeting her was le coup de foudre, love at first sight. Le Prince de Clèves wishes to marry Mlle de Chartres, but his father will not agree to this union. He is not the first-born son, which constitutes a disadvantage. As well, the Prince has a rival. The Duc de Guise has also fallen in love with Mademoiselle de Chartres, but his brother, le Cardinal de Lorraine, will not let him marry Mlle de Chartres. Once again, not being the firstborn is an obstacle. Therefore, it occurs to Madame de Chartres that her daughter should marry a prince of the blood. She would be above the Prince de Clèves and the chevalier de Guise. The Prince de Montpensier shows interest in such an alliance, but Diane de Poitiers, the King’s mistress, tells the King to forbid a marriage between Mlle de Chartres and the Prince de Montpensier.

Deceptive Appearances

The court may scintillate, but ambition and galanterie undermine all relationships. Rank is often put into the service of ambition and not so noble galanterie. Diane de Poitiers is very ambitious.

L’ambition et la galanterie étaient l’âme de cette cour, et occupaient également les hommes et les femmes. Il y avait tant d’intérêts et tant de cabales différentes, et les dames y avaient tant de part, que l’amour était toujours mêlé aux affaires, et les affaires à l’amour. Personne n’était tranquille, ni indifférent; on songeait à s’élever, à plaire, à servir ou à nuire; on ne connaissait ni l’ennui, ni l’oisiveté, et on était toujours occupé des plaisirs ou des intrigues. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
[Ambition and gallantry were the soul of the court, and employed both sexes equally; there were so many different interests and so many cabals, and the ladies had so great a share in them, that love was always mixed with business, and business with love.] (Wikisource [12])

Although the Prince of Cleves is very much in love with Mlle de Chartres, having a private conversation with her is difficult. Mlle de Chartres has entered a court teeming with courtiers. But the Prince de Clèves is so enamoured that he succeeds in speaking with her. He tells her not to marry him simply to obey her mother.

Il ne la voyait que chez les reines, ou aux assemblées; il était difficile d’avoir une conversation particulière. Il en trouva pourtant les moyens, et il lui parla de son dessein et de sa passion avec tout le respect imaginable; il la pressa de lui faire connaître quels étaient les sentiments qu’elle avait pour lui, et il lui dit que ceux qu’il avait pour elle étaient d’une nature qui le rendrait éternellement malheureux, si elle n’obéissait que par devoir aux volontés de madame sa mère. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
([…) he had no opportunity of seeing her but at court or public assemblies, so that it was very difficult for him to get a private conversation with her; at last he found means to do it, and informed her of his intention and of his love, with all the respect imaginable.] (Wikisource [14])

Mlle de Chartres is grateful for the manner in which he has spoken to her and he dares to hope that she loves him.

Comme mademoiselle de Chartres avait le cœur très noble et très bien fait, elle fut véritablement touchée de reconnaissance du procédé du prince de Clèves. Cette reconnaissance donna à ses réponses et à ses paroles un certain air de douceur qui suffisait pour donner de l’espérance à un homme aussi éperdument amoureux que l’était ce prince: de sorte qu’il se flatta d’une partie de ce qu’il souhaitait. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
[As Mademoiselle de Chartres had a noble and generous heart, she was sincerely touched with gratitude for the prince of Cleves’s behaviour; this gratitude gave a certain sweetness to her words and answers, sufficient to furnish hopes to a man so desperately enamoured as the prince was so that he flattered himself in some measure that he should succeed in what he so much wished for.] (Wikisource [14])

La Princesse reports the Prince de Clèves’ words to her mother. Madame de Chartres tells her daughter that if she is inclined to marry the Prince of Cleves, she would consent to this marriage. However, in no way does she press her daughter to marry the prince.

Elle rendit compte à sa mère de cette conversation, et madame de Chartres lui dit qu’il y avait tant de grandeur et de bonnes qualités dans monsieur de Clèves, et qu’il faisait paraître tant de sagesse pour son âge, que, si elle sentait son inclination portée à l’épouser, elle y consentirait avec joie. Mademoiselle de Chartres répondit qu’elle lui remarquait les mêmes bonnes qualités, qu’elle l’épouserait même avec moins de répugnance qu’un autre, mais qu’elle n’avait aucune inclination particulière pour sa personne.
[She gave her mother an account of this conversation; and Madam de Chartres told her, that the prince of Cleves had so many good qualities, and discovered a discretion so much above his years, that if her inclination led her to marry him, she would consent to it with pleasure. (Wikisource [14])

Mlle de Chartres response is baffling. She decides to marry the prince “with less reluctance” than another man and having “no particular affection to his person.”

Mademoiselle de Chartres répondit qu’elle lui remarquait les mêmes bonnes qualités, qu’elle l’épouserait même avec moins de répugnance qu’un autre, mais qu’elle n’avait aucune inclination particulière pour sa personne. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
[Mademoiselle de Chartres made answer, that she observed in him the same good qualities; that she should have less reluctance in marrying him than any other man, but that she had no particular affection to his person.] (Wikisource [17])

So Mlle de Chartres marries the prince willingly, but she remains as she was before the wedding: cold. Madame de La Fayette writes that the Prince the Clèves will continue to love the Princesse because he has something to wish for.

Cela fit aussi que pour être son mari, il ne laissa pas d’être son amant, parce qu’il avait toujours quelque chose à souhaiter au-delà de sa possession; et, quoiqu’elle vécût parfaitement bien avec lui, il n’était pas entièrement heureux. (Gutenberg’s eBook #18797)
[(…) hence it was, that though he was her husband, he did not cease to be her lover, because he had always something to wish beyond what he possessed; and though she lived perfectly easy with him, yet he was not perfectly happy.] Wikisource [17]

Read more: A Lost Post, but … (La Princesse de Clèves meets the Duc de Nemours.)

I must break here. The stage is set as in a comedy or tragedy. Depending on the context, répugnance can mean disgust. The next articles will be brief.

RELATED ARTICLES

Fêtes galantes & Galanterie (25 April 2016)
Gallantry and “l’honnête homme” (16 April 2016)
Dumas père & Marguerite de Valois fictionalized (10 March 2012)

Love to everyone 💕
I am no longer the only author of my posts. Rebuilding posts has led to mental fatigue. I will not post for a few days.

Dumas, père & Marguerite de Valois fictionalized

10 Saturday Mar 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Literature, Mulatto

≈ 33 Comments

Tags

Alexandre Dumas père, François Clouet, Henri IV, La Reine Margot, Marguerite, métissage, Nadar, Saint-Domingue

Alexandre Dumas, père, by Félix Nadar*(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Félix Nadar* was the pseudonym of Gaspard-Félix Tournachon (1 April 1820, Paris – 23 March 1910), a very famous photographer.

From Alexandre Dumas père to Marguerite de Valois

As I mentioned in my post on John James Audubon (16 April 1785 – 27 January 1851), there is kinship between the artist-ornithologist and Alexandre Dumas père. John James Audubon was born in Saint-Domingue, the current Haiti, to a French father and a Creole woman. As for Alexandre Dumas père, he was born in Villers-Cotterêts on 24 July 1802 and died near Dieppe, on 5 December 1870. But there is a Saint-Domingue connection.

Indeed, Dumas père’s father was the son of the “Marquis Alexandre-Antoine Davy de la Pailleterie, a French nobleman and Général commissaire in the Artillery in the colony of Saint-Domingue (now Haiti) and Marie-Cesette Dumas, an Afro-Caribbean Creole of mixed French and African ancestry.” (Wikipedia) Therefore, Alexandre was métissé. Let me quote what he said to a person who found fault with his lineage:

My father was a mulatto, my grandfather was a Negro, and my great-grandfather a monkey. You see, Sir, my family starts where yours ends.

Moreover, both were extremely productive. They were in fact passionate about what they did.

Imagine the hours Dumas spent at his desk writing The Three Musketeers, The Count of Monte Cristo and several other historical novels one of which is La Reine Margot, whose story is linked with the growth of absolutism and the related persecution of the Huguenots or French Calvinist Protestants. You may remember that Marguerite did not want to marry Henri IV, king of Navarre and a protestant who became Henri IV of France after he converted to Catholicism.

Marguerite de Valois (1553-1615)

Dumas’s La Reine Margot (1845)

In La Reine Margot (Queen Margot), Dumas focusses on Marguerite’s wedding to Henri IV, kin of Navarre, which took place on 18 August 1572, five days before the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. Again you may remember that her marriage to Henri IV was an arranged marriage and that, because he was a Huguenot, Henri IV stood outside Notre-Dame de Paris while he was wedded. It appears she had a liaison with Henri, duc de Guise, a leader among Catholics.
By extension, Dumas also focusses on the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre which took place in the early morning hours of 24 August 1572, six days after Marguerite was unwillingly wedded to Henri IV. Huguenots had come to Paris for the wedding, which meant they were trapped. So not only was the marriage an arranged marriage, but Catherine de’ Medici took advantage of favorable circumstances to manipulate her son Charles IX into ordering the St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre. Although she had been compelled to marry Henri IV, king of Navarre, Marguerite protected him.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, Dumas focusses on Marguerite’s subsequent affair with Count Joseph Boniface de La Môle (c. 1526 – 30 April 1574), a nobleman who had befriended François d’Alençon, a prince of the blood and brother to Charles IX, Henri III (duc d’Anjou). La Môle was accused of having participated in the Malcontent’s conspiracy of 1574 and, specifically, of having tried to murder king Charles IX. Despite Marguerite’s pleas, La Môle was tortured and beheaded, place de Grève, in Paris.

Such a story was of course perfect fodder for a novelist and fabulous material for filmmaker Patrice Chéreau whose treatment of the subject was tactful. Chéreau’s Reine Margot, 1994, starring Isabelle Adjani, Daniel Auteuil, Virna Lisi and Vincent Perez was both an artistic and a box office success.

Conclusion

However, I am reflecting that, although she lived a dissolute life, going from lover to lover and plotting, Marguerite de Valois was Marguerite de France and, the last of the Valois line. She ended a dynasty. Had it not been for the Salic law, commissioned by the first king of all the Franks, Clovis I (c. 466–511), she would have been queen of France after her brother Henri III died. Instead, the man she married unwillingly and who would not have anything to do with her, became king of France and king of Navarre. But she refused to have their marriage annulled while his mistress, Gabrielle d’Estrées, was alive.

Marguerite was forced into a marriage. She was a helpless witness to the torture and decapitation of La Môle and, in 1586, her brother Henri III banished her for eighteen years to the inaccessible castle of Usson, in Auvergne.

Yes, Marguerite lived a rather dissolute life, but she was an exceptionally well-educated woman whose Mémoires, written in comfy detention, thanks to Guise, have literary merit. Moreover, when she was free to return to Paris, in 1605, she had a castle built where she was a hostess to writers, artists, intellectuals and, perhaps, lovers. I was taught that she was a “nymphomanic.”

However, she continued to write not only her Mémoires, published in 1658, but also poetry. As the French would say, “elle avait des lettres” or she was well-educated.

After her release, she cultivated a friendly relationship with her former husband, Marie de’ Medici, his wife, and their children.

I am not about to attempt a rehabilitation of Marguerite de Valois, but let’s just say that, somehow, I understand.

The Young Marguerite de Valois, by François Clouet

_________________________

“Margaret Of Valois.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2012. <http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/364625/Margaret-of-Valois>.

Barenboim plays Mendelssohn Songs Without Words Op.53 no.1 in A flat Major

12 March 2012

WordPress

Richelieu & Nouvelle-France

01 Thursday Mar 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in Canada, History

≈ 303 Comments

Tags

duc de Sully, Filles du Roy, Henri IV, Louis XIV of France, New France, Pierre Du Gua de Monts, Quebec City, Samuel de Champlain

Tapis de Savonnerie, Grand Galerie du LouvreCharles Le Brun

Tapis de Savonnerie, Grande Galerie du Louvre
Charles Le Brun

Nouvelle-France under Henri IV and Richelieu

Seldom acknowledged is the attention given New France by Henri IV and Richelieu. Samuel de Champlain (c. 1567 – 25 December 1635), a father of Nouvelle-France, was able to obtain, from Henri IV (13 December 1553 – 14 May 1610), the support he required to create a settlement for the French in Port-Royal, Acadie, now Annapolis Royal, Nova Scotia. Acadie was settled in 1604.

Quebec City

But Du Gas de Monts, the largely unrecognized father of Acadie, and an indefatigable explorer, quickly realized that he had to create a French settlement in what is now Quebec City. Sailing up the St Lawrence River to Quebec City was a relativity safe endeavour. Champlain argued that the inhabitants of the new settlement in Quebec City would convert Amerindians and, second, he emphasized the economic benefits of this “établissement.” Once more the king obliged.

Quebec City: l’habitation

There was kinship between Henri IV, a former or less visible Huguenot, and Champlain, still a Huguenot or French Calvinist Protestant. More importantly, however, Samuel de Champlain and Pierre Du Gua de Monts, (Du Gua de Monts; c. 1558 – 1628), were dealing with a king, Henri IV, who had business acumen, as did his chief advisor, Maximilien de Béthune, duc de Sully (1560–1641).

Pierre Du Gua de Monts and Samuel de Champlain could smell the fur and had caught a glimpse of the natural resources that could be tapped in Nouvelle-France and relayed the message in what must have been an eloquent form of French.

For France’s North-American colonies, the death of Henri IV was tragic and so was the dismissal of Sully, one of Marie de’ Medici’s worst mistakes. But Champlain found advocacy “for the retention of Quebec” under Richelieu who, contrary to Marie, was a man of vision. Richelieu founded the “Compagnie des Cent-Associés and saw the Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye return Quebec City to French rule under Champlain, after the settlement had been captured by the Kirkes in 1629. This in part allowed the colony to develop eventually into the heartland of Francophone culture in North America.”[i]

Les Filles du Roy

In other words, under the leadership of Henri IV and Richelieu / Louis XIII, Nouvelle-France grew. As for its situation after the death of both Richelieu (1642) and Louis XIII, one could say that Nouvelle-France remained in the field of vision of the motherland. For instance, under Louis XIV, between 1663 and 1673, 500 to 900 Frenchwomen, the King’s daughters (les filles du Roy), were given a dowry by king Louis XIV and sent to Nouvelle-France, if they were deemed sufficiently healthy to survive the crossing of the Atlantic Ocean.

Upon their arrival, the brave women were housed in a convent and taught what they needed to know about their domestic duties and the rigours of Nouvelle-France. It was only then that courting began. They were a precious asset to Nouvelle-France because most could read and write and had also studied arithmetic.

Nouvelle-France and Acadie under Louis XV

However, under Louis XV, France’s North-American colonies were no longer a priority. Absolutism has its drawbacks. Voltaire’s Candide contains the famous “a few acres of snow” (quelques arpents de neige), the words he used to describe Nouvelle-France. But I have often wondered whether or not this comment should be read literally. As a writer, Voltaire had mastered oblique writing, what I call “indirection.” His master had been Pascal whose Provinciales he greatly admired. In some of the Lettres provinciales, a candid character asks questions to a Jesuit who then tells the wonders of casuistry. All sins could be absolved under the art of the rather Machiavellian casuistry.

In short, those few words could have been a “candid” indictment of France’s poor administration of its colonies, so poor that in 1763, when given a choice between keeping Nouvelle-France or a few balmy islands to the south, the French let Nouvelle-France go, keeping however Saint-Pierre and Miquelon, small islands off the coast of Newfoundland as a pied-à-terre for its fishermen.

The impoverishment of French Aristocrats

But allow me to return to our “filles du Roy” turned farmers. In the seventeenth century, French aristocrats were expected to be present at the petit lever and grand lever, as well as the petit coucher and grand coucher of Louis XIV. It therefore became very difficult to find a husband for a daughter. How were they to raise the necessary dowry?

March 1st, 2012

WordPress

updated: April 8th, 2013

_________________________

[i] Wikipedia, “Cardinal de Richelieu” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_Richelieu

New Governor Appointed (tkmorin.wordpress.com)
Carignan-Salières Régiment (michelinewalker.com)

Une éminence grise: Armand Jean du Plessis, Cardinal-Duc de Richelieu et de Fronsac

29 Wednesday Feb 2012

Posted by michelinewalker in History

≈ 87 Comments

Tags

Absolutism, éminence grise, Cinq-Mars, Day of the Dupes, Henri IV, Louis XIII, Louis XIV, one king-language-religion, Richelieu, the Fronde

Cardinal de Richelieu, by Philippe de Champaigne *

* Philippe de Champaigne (26 May 1602 – 12 August 1674)

Armand Jean du Plessis, Cardinal-Duc de Richelieu et de Fronsac (9 September 1585 – 4 December 1642) is probably the best example of an éminence grise, the name given persons who stand behind the official ruler, and ensure his or her success. Richelieu was a clergyman, a noble and a statesman. He became a public figure when he was elected one of the representatives of the clergy of Poitou to the States General of 1614.[i] He became Secretary of State in 1616, six years after Henri IV was assassinated by François Ravaillac.

Marie de Médicis

In 1610, when her husband Henri IV was assassinated, Marie de Médicis or Marie de’ Medici (26 April 1575 – 4 July 1642), a potentially powerful widow, could have ruled France. The future Louis XIII (27 September 1601 – 14 May 1643) was only nine when his father was killed. But the French did not like Marie. She was not very intelligent and there was something vulgar about her: “[t]he queen feuded with Henri’s mistresses in language that shocked French courtiers.” (Wikipedia)

Marie’s main mistake was to befriend the corrupt Concini family, nipping in the bud her chances to govern and leaving room for the then bishop and brilliant Richelieu to enter into the service of Louis XIII and become the chief architect of absolutism.

Cardinal de Richelieu, by Philippe de Champaigne (c.1640)

Absolute Monarchy: one king, one language, one religion

As for Richelieu, he would centralize France and establish absolutism as firmly as he could. Put in a nutshell, absolutism required the people of France to have one king, to speak one language, and to practice the same religion. Between 1624 until his death in 1642, Armand Jean du Plessis did achieve the three goals he had set as his objective.

Louis XIII

In theory, Richelieu was nothing more than King Louis XIII‘s chief minister but, in reality, he was king regent and extremely powerful. Louis de Bourbon was a reluctant and unlikely king and therefore needed Richelieu, which goes a long way in explaining the authority afforded Richelieu. The relationship between the king and his chief minister was well nigh symbiotic. In other words, Marie’s intellectual deficiencies and Louis’s inability to rule were ideal circumstances for a bright young Bishop to become a ruler.

Louis XIII was not cut out to be an absolute ruler. Louis liked to go hunting and he and his minions gathered in his hunting lodge at Versailles. He was a homosexual and, as I recently discovered, he was also a composer, as was Frederick the Great.

On the Day of the Dupes (November 10, 1630), when the rumour circulated that Richelieu had been killed, Louis XIII took his chief minister to his hunting lodge in Versailles. According to Britannica, “[a]fter initially agreeing to the cardinal’s dismissal, the king recovered and chose to support Richelieu against the wishes of his mother, his wife, and his confessor.”[ii] Marie was sent to Blois and Richelieu started to rule unopposed, as did his successor Jules Mazarin, the chief minister from December 5, 1642 until March 9, 1661.

La Fronde

The Fronde, a revolt which began in 1635, at the time of the Franco-Spanish War, was the acid test that confirmed absolutism as exercised by Richelieu/Louis XIII. The Fronde opposed, on the one hand, the people (les parlements) and the king, and, on the other hand, the nobility and the king, or his chief minister. Frondeurs actually entered Louis XIV’s bedroom at the Louvre when he was a child. As a result, Louis XIV’s advisors were “bourgeois” who lived upstairs at Versailles which, as I have mentioned recently, fully explains their being called, le conseil d’en haut. Here “en haut” meant upstairs.

One language

We have named the three conditions demanded by absolutism: one king, one language and one religion. I will write about these goals, but not in the order I just used. We will begin with the linguistic condition. All of France had to speack and spoke French.

Well, in this regard, we owe the creation of the Académie-Française (1635) to Richelieu. Very early in the century, Catherine de Vivonne or Madame de Rambouillet, born in Rome, opened her salon. The people who gathered in her chambre bleue, including aristocrats and Richelieu himself, were by an large honnêtes hommes, a term which as I have written in an earlier blog does not mean honest men. Honest men would be called hommes honnêtes. Not only would l’honnête homme speak French, but he would speak it well.

L‘honnête homme is the perfect gentleman. He has Italian roots in that he embodies Baldassare Castiglione‘s courtier. Castiglione is the author of Il Libro del Cortegiano (The Book of the Courtier), published in 1528. During his stay at the Court of Urbino, in what is now Italy, Castiglione observed an “art,” the art of being a courtier, an “honnête homme,” but not necessarily an aristocratic honnête homme. Aristocrats had to learn honnêteté.

In the salons, one spoke well, hence the creation of the above-mentioned Académie-Française whose mission it would be to regulate the French language. The French court and courtiers would have to be as civilized as persons attending salons, but the court could not be “précieuse.” The movement known as La Préciosité was an instance of what Jean Cocteau described as “not knowing just how far one can go too far.” Chairs are chairs and an armchair, an armchair or fauteuil (fautei). Neither are “les commodités de la conversation.”

Ironically, Jean Cocteau’s famous phrase about audacity summarizes l’honnêteté. An honnête homme knew how far he could go too far. “Avoir du tact, c’est savoir jusqu’où on peut aller trop loin.” or “Being tactful in audacity is knowing how far one can go to far.” (Jean Cocteau [5 July 1889 – 11 October 1963]). What a quotation!

The Edict of Nantes, 1598

One Religion

Under Richelieu, being a protestant was a major disadvantage. One could pay a price. So despite the Edict of Nantes, promulgated under Henri IV, in 1598, and dictating tolerance towards Huguenots, Richelieu, our éminence grise, but rouge, given his red garments, brought Louis XIII to La Rochelle when it was besieged, in 1627-1628. That year, some twenty-two thousand Huguenots were starved to death. Out of a population of twenty-seven thousand Huguenots, five thousand survived.

“[Richelieu] believed that their [the Huguenots] right under the Edict of Nantes to maintain armed fortresses weakened the king’s position at home and abroad. Protestant rebellions in 1625 and 1627 persuaded the cardinal of the need for a direct confrontation.”[iii] The British tried to rescue the starving Huguenots, but were defeated.

So the Edict of Nantes was revoked long before its official revocation by Louis XIV, on 18 October 1685.

One King

The centralization of France, absolute monarchy in this case, also demanded that France have but one king. This takes us to La Fronde. Various grands seigneurs, dukes who had owned large portions of France, resented being disempowered, which was a requirement of absolutism as designed by Richelieu and put into pratice by his chosen successor, Jules Mazarin (1602–1661), born Giulio Raimondo Mazzarino.

La Fronde des nobles was severely repressed. No one was drawn and quartered by four horses racing respectively east, west, north and south, which had been Ravaillac’s fate, Henri IV’s assassin. But the story of Cinq-Mars (pronounced: Mar), whose father was a friend of Richelieu, illustrates how ruthlessly Richelieu made everyone in France march to the beat of one drummer.

Henri Coiffier de Ruzé, Marquis de Cinq-Mars (1620 – September 12, 1642) became Louis XIII’s lover and told Louis XIII that Richelieu should be executed. Cinq-Mars had a powerful supporter in Gaston de France, Henri IV’s and Marie de Médicis’s son and Louis XIII’s brother. The conspiracy failed and it would appear that Cinq-Mars’s family did not believe Richelieu would have young Cinq-Mars beheaded. At any rate, they did not hire a good executioner and the head took forever to fall. This type of torture led to the invention of the guillotine.

Not only was Richelieu pitiless, but he insisted on being transported to Lyons where the executions took place, lying on his death-bed. He wanted to be a witness to 22 year-old Cinq-Mars’s execution. François-Auguste de Thou (Paris c. 1607 – Lyon 12 septembre 1642), not a conspirator, but one who knew about the conspiracy and did not tell, was also executed on that day. As for Gaston de France, or Gaston d’Orléans, he lost his claim to the throne of France.

Conclusion

So, to conclude, Richelieu

was the main architect of French absolute monarchy: one language, one religion and one king;
he was or seemed an éminence grise, the man behind Louis XIII;
he ruled France as though he was the king, which makes him look like an impostor, yet he wasn’t.

In other words, Richelieu ruled, but if he did rule, it was because he could not be king. He had no claim to the throne of France, nor did his successor, Mazarin. Both were chief ministers, except that Richelieu was, if not a crowned king, the ruler of France. And if he was, though unofficially, king of France, it is because circumstances created a breech in an otherwise impenetrable world. As mentioned above, his relationship with Louis XIII was all but symbiotic. They were two in one.

There have been several éminences grises. Wikipedia gives a long list of éminences grises. But Richelieu was no ordinary éminence grise. There is always more to tell…

* Henri Motte (1846-1922), peintre historique (Siège de La Rochelle)

(please click on the picture to enarge it and on the titles to hear the music)

Michel Richard De Lalande – Symphonies pour les Soupers du Roy 7º Suite, Airs du Ballet Flore
Michel Richard De Lalande – Symphonies pour les soupers du Roi: Caprice de Villers-Cotterets, Part Two
Charpentier – Marche de Triomphe H. 547 (Marc-Antoine Charpentier)
Airs de Cour – French Court Music from the 17th Century, Marie Claude Vallin, soprano – Lutz Kirchhof, lute

____________________

[i] J. H. Shennan. “France.” Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2012. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/215768/France>.

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] Ibid.

Bourbeau & Suzor-Coté: a Discovery

25 Sunday Sep 2011

Posted by michelinewalker in Sharing

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Bourbeau, Henri IV, Huguenot, Louis XIII, Richelieu, Siege of La Rochelle, Suzor-Côté, WordPress

Log Hauling, by Marc-Aurèle de Foy Suzor-Coté

There are happy and unexpected moments. For instance, a few days ago, I went in search of information on my grandfather’s family. He was a Bourbeau and he is my mother’s father. I have used his name when publishing scholarly articles: Bourbeau-Walker.

The Bourbeaus came to New France in the seventeenth century. They were Huguenots, or French Protestants. Two brothers came to New France: Pierre and Simon. They had survived the Siege of La Rochelle (1627-1628), by Richelieu and Louis XIII. The protestants had chosen La Rochelle as their refuge even though the Edict of Nantes (1598) protected them, at least officially, from persecution in other locations.

However, it is at that point in the history of France that absolute monarchy was consolidated. After King Henri IV was assassinated, in 1610, although still in effect, the Edict of Nantes, which stipulated tolerance of Huguenots, was not always respected. Henri IV, who had converted to Catholicism, had been a Huguenot, which is why he was assassinated. His son, Louis XIII, was too young to be crowned, so a regent was chosen: Richelieu. Richelieu became the chief architect of absolute monarchy in France. It was his belief that the King’s subjects should all speak French and be Catholics: one King, one language, one religion.

During the Siege of La Rochelle, some 22,000 protestants were starved to death, but two Bourbeau brothers were among the 5,000 who survived and the two later moved to New France. In 1685, when the Edict of Nantes was revoked by Louis XIV, the Bourbeaus and other French protestants living in New France moved south, to the English colonies. But a few stayed in Canada.

As I was searching Bourbeau entries, I saw a picture of the Bourbeau farm and realized that it was located in the area of Quebec where my grandmother had grown up. This picture, an oil painting, is the work of Marc-Aurèle de Foy Suzor-Coté (1869-1937), now famous. I knew that my grandmother had been an artist’s assistant, so I was able to determine for certain, first, that the artist was Suzor-Côté and, second, that in all likelihood she met her husband, a Bourbeau, because the Bourbeaus were close friends of Suzor-Coté. There are several Bourbeau paintings by Suzor-Côté.

Research is an extremely interesting endeavour because of surprises and coincidences. I will now attempt to incorporate a least one of Suzor-Coté’s paintings in this blog.