260He was Cardinal Caietano, brother of the Duke of Sermoneta. He arrived in Paris on January 5.
260He was Cardinal Caietano, brother of the Duke of Sermoneta. He arrived in Paris on January 5.
261The people of Dijon eleven years before had been desirous of having a separate bishopric, but were prevented by the opposition of the Bishop and Chapter of Langres, in which diocese Dijon was situated.—Gallia Christiana, iv. 637.
261The people of Dijon eleven years before had been desirous of having a separate bishopric, but were prevented by the opposition of the Bishop and Chapter of Langres, in which diocese Dijon was situated.—Gallia Christiana, iv. 637.
262These reports were not unfounded. Sultan Amurath had in fact written to Navarre promising protection against Spain, and offering to send a fleet of 200 sail to Aigues-Mortes.—Collection des Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France, Lettres Missives de Henri IV., iii. 364. Part of the letter is quoted by Motley,United Netherlands, iii. 48.
262These reports were not unfounded. Sultan Amurath had in fact written to Navarre promising protection against Spain, and offering to send a fleet of 200 sail to Aigues-Mortes.—Collection des Documents Inédits sur l’Histoire de France, Lettres Missives de Henri IV., iii. 364. Part of the letter is quoted by Motley,United Netherlands, iii. 48.
263The citadel of Rouen was actually betrayed to the Royalists on February 19, but was recovered by Aumale four days afterwards.
263The citadel of Rouen was actually betrayed to the Royalists on February 19, but was recovered by Aumale four days afterwards.
264The siege began on January 9, and was raised in the middle of February.Aubigné, Histoire, vol. iii. bk. iii. ch. iv;Thuanus, v. 41-3.
264The siege began on January 9, and was raised in the middle of February.Aubigné, Histoire, vol. iii. bk. iii. ch. iv;Thuanus, v. 41-3.
265This letter is not dated, but from the mention of the Legate’s arrival and the siege of Meulan, it appears to have been written towards the end of the first half of January 1590. Busbecq was probably then at Mantes, the place from which the next letter was written. Mantes is about twenty-five English miles from Evreux, which corresponds roughly with ten of Busbecq’s miles. See vol. i. page82, note.
265This letter is not dated, but from the mention of the Legate’s arrival and the siege of Meulan, it appears to have been written towards the end of the first half of January 1590. Busbecq was probably then at Mantes, the place from which the next letter was written. Mantes is about twenty-five English miles from Evreux, which corresponds roughly with ten of Busbecq’s miles. See vol. i. page82, note.
266Pierre d’Espinac was born in 1540, and became Archbishop of Lyons in 1574. He was Speaker, or Prolocutor, of the States-General held at Blois in 1576. Catherine de Medici, when the Leaguers first took up arms, sent him to negotiate with them (see p.246.) However, he went over to that party, and was thenceforth one of the strongest partisans of the League. According to his own account, he was forced to take this step by the insults he received from Epernon, the King’s favourite; his enemies, on the other hand, asserted that his motive was the hope of gaining a Cardinal’s hat. After the assassination of Guise, at Blois, in December 1588, the Archbishop was one of those arrested, and he shared the prison of the Cardinal, the brother of the murdered duke. Each expected to meet the same fate, and each confessed to the other, and received absolution at his hands. The Cardinal was put to death the following day without trial, but the Archbishop’s life was spared. On his trial he refused to answer when interrogated by the judges, on the ground that, as Archbishop and Primate, he was subject only to the jurisdiction of the Pope, or of delegates appointed by him. He was then imprisoned at Amboise. On his release he again joined the League, and was Mayenne’s strongest partisan. He died in 1599, refusing to the last to acknowledge Henry IV.—Thuanus, v. 855.
266Pierre d’Espinac was born in 1540, and became Archbishop of Lyons in 1574. He was Speaker, or Prolocutor, of the States-General held at Blois in 1576. Catherine de Medici, when the Leaguers first took up arms, sent him to negotiate with them (see p.246.) However, he went over to that party, and was thenceforth one of the strongest partisans of the League. According to his own account, he was forced to take this step by the insults he received from Epernon, the King’s favourite; his enemies, on the other hand, asserted that his motive was the hope of gaining a Cardinal’s hat. After the assassination of Guise, at Blois, in December 1588, the Archbishop was one of those arrested, and he shared the prison of the Cardinal, the brother of the murdered duke. Each expected to meet the same fate, and each confessed to the other, and received absolution at his hands. The Cardinal was put to death the following day without trial, but the Archbishop’s life was spared. On his trial he refused to answer when interrogated by the judges, on the ground that, as Archbishop and Primate, he was subject only to the jurisdiction of the Pope, or of delegates appointed by him. He was then imprisoned at Amboise. On his release he again joined the League, and was Mayenne’s strongest partisan. He died in 1599, refusing to the last to acknowledge Henry IV.—Thuanus, v. 855.
267Nanteuil-le-Haudoin, 49 kilometres, or about 31 English miles, from Paris. Busbecq’s ‘French miles’ must therefore be leagues. The château had been purchased by Schomberg from the Guises in 1578, and he derived from it his title of Comte de Nanteuil.
267Nanteuil-le-Haudoin, 49 kilometres, or about 31 English miles, from Paris. Busbecq’s ‘French miles’ must therefore be leagues. The château had been purchased by Schomberg from the Guises in 1578, and he derived from it his title of Comte de Nanteuil.
268The appointment of these commissioners, and the seizure of Mayenne’s letters, are mentioned by Busbecq, and, as far as we have been able to discover, by Busbecq alone. These facts are not noticed by Sismondi. As has been already remarked (vol. i. page64, note), these letters have apparently entirely escaped the notice of historians.
268The appointment of these commissioners, and the seizure of Mayenne’s letters, are mentioned by Busbecq, and, as far as we have been able to discover, by Busbecq alone. These facts are not noticed by Sismondi. As has been already remarked (vol. i. page64, note), these letters have apparently entirely escaped the notice of historians.
269Little more than two years intervened between the date of this letter and the writer’s death. See vol. i. pp.70,71.
269Little more than two years intervened between the date of this letter and the writer’s death. See vol. i. pp.70,71.
270See for example vol. i. p.162, pp.239-241, and p.351.
270See for example vol. i. p.162, pp.239-241, and p.351.
271See vol. i. p.94.
271See vol. i. p.94.
272See vol. i. pp.94,167,407.
272See vol. i. pp.94,167,407.
273Ferdinand and Louis had married each other’s sisters. Mary, the wife of the latter, was afterwards Regent of the Netherlands for her brother Charles V. See Motley,Rise of the Dutch Republic, Part I. chap. i.
273Ferdinand and Louis had married each other’s sisters. Mary, the wife of the latter, was afterwards Regent of the Netherlands for her brother Charles V. See Motley,Rise of the Dutch Republic, Part I. chap. i.
274See vol. i. p.410.
274See vol. i. p.410.
275See vol. i. p.409.
275See vol. i. p.409.
276See vol. i. p.166.
276See vol. i. p.166.
277See vol. i. pp.78,79.
277See vol. i. pp.78,79.
278See vol. i. p.301.
278See vol. i. p.301.
279See vol. i. pp.79,176.
279See vol. i. pp.79,176.
280See vol. i. p.80.
280See vol. i. p.80.
281See vol. i. p.236.
281See vol. i. p.236.
282See vol. i. pp.111-118.
282See vol. i. pp.111-118.
283See vol. i. p.80.
283See vol. i. p.80.
284See vol. i. p.81.
284See vol. i. p.81.
285See vol. i. p.190.
285See vol. i. p.190.
286See vol. i. p.85.
286See vol. i. p.85.
287See vol. i. pp.237-239.
287See vol. i. pp.237-239.
288See p.282.
288See p.282.
289See vol. i. p.236.
289See vol. i. p.236.
290See vol. i. p.348, note.
290See vol. i. p.348, note.
291See vol. i. p.297.
291See vol. i. p.297.
292See vol. i. p.386.
292See vol. i. p.386.
293This summary of the treaty is taken from a Latin version of the Turkish original made by John Spiegel, Ferdinand’s first interpreter, which is usually printed with Busbecq’s letters.
293This summary of the treaty is taken from a Latin version of the Turkish original made by John Spiegel, Ferdinand’s first interpreter, which is usually printed with Busbecq’s letters.
294See note 2, p.73.
294See note 2, p.73.
295Nonsuch Park, at Cheam, was a favourite residence of Queen Elizabeth.
295Nonsuch Park, at Cheam, was a favourite residence of Queen Elizabeth.
296See pp.271-2.
296See pp.271-2.
297The original of this patent of Knighthood is preserved in the Imperial Archives at Vienna.
297The original of this patent of Knighthood is preserved in the Imperial Archives at Vienna.
298The blank supplies the place of a foul epithet.
298The blank supplies the place of a foul epithet.