CHAPTER III.

Second Hypothesis—First Feelings of Anne of Austria towards Louis XIII.—Joy which she experienced on arriving in France—First Impressions of Louis XIII.—His Aversion to Spain—His Dislike to Marriage—Austerity of his Manners—His persistent Coldness—Means adopted to induce him to consummate the Marriage—Political Position of Anne of Austria—Louis XIII. and Richelieu—Watch kept by the Minister over the Queen—The King’s Illness at Lyons.

The political story of Louis XIII.’s marriage with Anne of Austria has been told; the motives which determined this union, the negotiations which preceded it, the great interests connected with it, and the powerful springs which put it in action, have all been set forth and weighed in a decisive manner.[46]

If, neglecting this grave examination, which is entirely foreign to our work, we occupy ourselves solely with the character and secret thoughts of the persons thus tied to one another, and whose private life has been ransacked in order to give a solution to the problem of the Man with the Iron Mask, we see that a very strong liking for France and for her King, on Anne of Austria’s part, was in accordwith the necessities of policy. Contrary to what frequently happens in the case of royal marriages, the obligations imposed on the Infanta by her rank were not repugnant to the sentiments of the woman, and when she crossed the French frontier for the first time, she realized a hope long since conceived and dearly cherished in her heart. With only eight days between their births and at once betrothed to one another in public opinion, the Infanta and the Dauphin had been the object of the researches and predictions of all the astrologers of the time,[47]who proclaimed that, having come into the world under the same sign, they were destined to love each other, even though they might not be united. The Infanta had believed in this augury. She had early liked to hear the young King spoken of, she sought after his portraits, she preferred garments of French cut, she willingly wore ear-rings formed of fleurs-de-lis, and, the changes of the negotiation having for a moment fixed the choice of the two Governments on her sister Doña Maria,[48]Anne, then nine years old, declared, “that if it was to be thus, she was resolved to pass her life in a monastery without ever marrying.”[49]When, three years afterwards, the Duke de Mayenne, on quitting Madrid, whither he had come to sign the marriage contract of Anne and Louis XIII., asked the former what she wished him tosay on her behalf to the King of France, she replied: “That I am extremely impatient to see him.” This answer having shocked the austere Countess d’Altamira, her governess, who exclaimed—“What! madam, what will the King of France think when M. de Mayenne tells him that you have made such a speech?”—the Infanta rejoined, “Madam, you have taught me that one should always be sincere; you should not be surprised then if I speak the truth.”[50]

The two years which elapsed before her departure saw no change in these sentiments. The 9th November, 1615, she parted at Fontarabia from her father, Philip III., with less sorrow than he showed in allowing her at length to leave, and it was with pride and contentment that the new Queen, radiant with youth and beauty,[51]crossed the Bidassoa, on her way to Bordeaux, where the French court was stopping. What kind of husband was she about to meet there?

Very different from those of the Princess Anne were the impressions of Louis XIII., concerning the marriage and the family to which he was going to unite himself. People had frequently, and at an early age, conversed with him about the project. The first replies of the Dauphin, questioned from his most tender infancy, would have no significance.[52]But as he advanced in age, his aversion to everything Spanish manifested itself with characteristic energy. Twice he replied in the negative to Henri IV., when the latter spoke to him of the Infanta as his future wife.[53]One day, on M. de Ventelet asking him if he liked the Spaniards, he answered, “No.” “And why, sir?” “Because they are papa’s enemies.” “And the Infanta?” added De Ventelet, “do you love her, sir?” “No.” “Why, sir?” “I don’t want any Spanish love.”[54]Later, when his chaplain was making him recite the Commandments, on coming to “Thou shalt not kill,” the Dauphin exclaimed: “What, not the Spaniards? Oh, yes, I shall kill the Spaniards, because they are papa’s enemies! I will beat them well!” And on his chaplain observing that they were Christians, he replied: “May I only kill Turks then?”[55]

To this aversion, a great deal more significant since it was contrary to a project generally acquiesced in by those about him, soon came to be added a certain distaste for marriage. Born with the ardent and lascivious temperament of his father, impelled to follow his example by conversations often loose, sometimes obscene, Louis XIII. succeeded in modifying these early tendencies by a force of will and a power of reflection truly rare. He was naturally an observer, he spoke little and laughed still less. He was usually serious and grave at times when his pages found cause for great merriment. All that he remarked became profoundly engraved on his mind, and enabled him years afterwards to reply with marvellous pertinency to questions which weresometimes embarrassing. His young imagination was early struck by the singular effects which the King’s conduct produced at the court. In his cradle he received frequent visits, not only from his mother, but also from Henri IV.’s repudiated wife,[56]and from his numerous mistresses. They all sometimes found themselves assembled around him, the latter proud of their master’s affection, Marie de Medicis irritated, jealous, and showing it. The issue of these very open intrigues, were the Dauphin’s companions; but he instinctively abhorred them. He struck them without motive; would not have them at his table; absolutely refused to call them brothers; and when Henri IV., after having beaten him without overcoming this insurmountable repugnance, asked him the reason of it, he answered, “Because they are not mamma’s sons.”[57]

This hatred for everything connected with illegitimacy was certainly the origin of the chaste reserve which was to characterize so particularly him who was the son of Henri IV. and the father of Louis XIV. From his illegitimate brothers, this aversion extended to their mothers, whom he qualified in very contemptuous terms, and to the intrigues in which they were engaged. “Shall you be as ribald as the King?” said his nurse to him one day. “No,” he answered, after a moment’s reflection. And on her asking him if he was in love, he replied, “No, I avoid love.”[58]

It was especially after Henri IV.’s death that the tendencies of the young king revealed themselves. He loved his father tenderly, a great deal more than Marie de Medicisdid, who, moreover, never showed much affection for her elder son. He worthily wept his violent death,[59]and long afterwards, hearing at the Louvre, one of the late King’s songs, he went aside to sob.[60]But if, while yet a child, he had appreciated the glory of Henri IV., if he had shared his patriotic sentiments, if he was proud of his victories, he had silently blamed the licence which, in acts, and still more in language, then rendered the French Court one of the most gross in Europe. As King, he would not tolerate these excesses. He showed himself openly austere in his speech, and modest in his actions, forbade in his presence obscene songs and scandalous conversations, and in order to avoid any pretext for them, replied sharply to M. de Souvré, his governor, when he wished to talk with him about marriage: “Do not let us speak of that, sir; do not let us speak of that.”

It was nevertheless necessary to speak of it, and to set out for Bordeaux. Louis XIII., then in his fifteenth year, still possessed, and was to preserve for a long time, the tastes and predilections of his infancy. He gave himself up to them in order to divert his mind from the marriage festivities. He kept birds, armed his gentlemen, and enrolled them in a vigilant and disciplined troop; then he assisted at the Council, replied pertinently to thedeputations presented to him, and thus mingled the simple amusements of the child with the grave accomplishment of his business as King.[61]Much less desirous of fulfilling his duties as husband, he nevertheless affected towards the Infanta, either from self-esteem, or from a sense of propriety towards the strangers who were bringing her to him, an attention which surprised and charmed the court. He went to meet the train which accompanied her, showed himself curious and pleased to see her, and was timid, but attentive and courteous, in the first interviews which he had with her.[62]This was all; and, if for an instant, he possessed the manners of a gallant and attentive cavalier, he by no means exhibited the behaviour of a lover. During the evening after the celebration of the ceremony, he remained insensible to the encouragements of M. de Grammont,[63]and Marie de Medicis had to exert her authority in order to induce him to go to Anne of Austria. Four years afterwards the marriage was not yet consummated; and this event, ardently desired by the Court of France, disconsolate at the King’s coldness; by the Court of Spain, which saw an insult in this disdain; by the Pope’s nuncio, and by the Court of Tuscany, which had so much contributed towards the union, became in some degree an affair of State.

Many efforts, many attempts were necessary to induce Louis XIII. to change his course of behaviour, of which the remote cause may be ascribed to his early impressions as Dauphin, and of which a more immediate one has beendiscovered by the Nuncio Bentivoglio.[64]Sometimes the King’s pride was attempted to be touched, and the politic Nuncio, availing himself of the marriage of the Princess Christine with the Duke of Savoy, asked Louis XIII., “If he wished to have the shame of seeing his sister have a son before he had a Dauphin.”[65]Sometimes recourse was had to influences still more direct.[66]At length, January 25, 1619, Albert de Luynes, after vainly begging him to cede to the wishes of his subjects, carried him by force into the Queen’s chamber.[67]The following day, all the ambassadors announced this event to their respective governments.

From that time, Louis XIII. was less scared, but almost as timid[68]as ever, and though, preserving all his repugnances, he sometimes overcame them as a matter of duty, and showed himself a tolerably ardent, but never very tender husband. In the month of December, 1619, there werereasons for hoping that the Queen was pregnant.[69]This hope, which soon vanished, was renewed at the commencement of 1622, but was again destroyed by a fall, which Anne of Austria had while playing with the Duchess de Chevreuse.[70]Buckingham’s rapid visit to France, if it left a profound remembrance in the Queen’s heart, certainly had no influence upon the King’s conduct. Nothing was changed in the intercourse of the two spouses, which was neither more frequent, nor ever entirely interrupted.[71]After, as before this visit, Louis XIII. almost invariably saw in the Queen the Spaniard in blood and affection; and when in May, 1621, he had to announce to her the death of her father, he did it in this wise: “Madam,” said he, “I have just now received letters from Spain, in which they write me word for certain, that the King your father is dead.” Then, mounting his horse, he set out for the chase.[72]It is undoubtedly true, moreover, that Anne of Austria, who was, to her eternal glory, to become thoroughly French on assuming the Regency, and perceiving the true interests of her young son, to serve them with patriotism, intelligence, and firmness, even in opposition to her old friends, was, during the life-time of Louis XIII., the natural centre of a secret but constant and implacable opposition to the system which Richelieu supported. Good, but proud, she had been galled by herhusband’s indifference, humiliated by Richelieu’s chicanery and mistrust, and irritated at not possessing any influence, so that, in the midst of the war which divided Spain and France, she had not wished to dissimulate the attachment which she preserved for her own family and for her country. Badly advised by the frivolous and restless Duchess de Chevreuse, she had engaged in different enterprises by which, without betraying France, she had furnished her enemies with arms sufficiently powerful for them to be able to maintain her in disgrace with Louis XIII.

This Prince, who during his whole life longed for the moment when he should quit his state of tutelage,[73]and who, from being under the control of his governor, was to pass under his mother’s, then under Albert de Luynes’, and lastly, under Richelieu’s, joined to rather a fierce pride a true and just sense and exact knowledge of his inferiority. He detested the yoke, but he felt that it was necessary. Destined by his own incapacity to be for ever accomplishing the designs of others, he submitted to constraint, although constantly disposed to revolt. But he loved neither his mother, whom he discarded, nor De Luynes, whose death he did not regret. Richelieu alone, not only by the vast superiority of his genius, but especially by the obsequiousness of his language, by incessant precautions, by continually new artifices of humility, succeeded in seducing that unquiet and distrustfulspirit, over which flattery had no power.[74]He ended by even attaching the King to himself, whatever may have been said about it, and by inspiring in him an affection which was bestowed quite as much upon the man as upon the indispensable Minister. Louis XIII. had the greatest solicitude for Richelieu, and paid him the most delicate attentions; and it can be affirmed, after a perusal of his letters, as yet unpublished, that these marks of lively friendship were not merely the result of self-interest.[75]Moreover, even when he was in possession of supreme authority, Richelieu, ever on the alert, showed himself to the last as studious in preserving it as he had been ingenious and supple in acquiring it. His efforts were constantly exerted to neutralize the influence of a Spanish Queen over a King whom he wished to maintain in the glorious policy of Henri IV. But he did not content himself with depriving the legitimate wife of his King of the whole of her power, which was a matter of no difficulty. Although incapable of criminal desires, since he could abstain from lawful pleasures, Louis XIII., sickly and morose as he was, reaping from love only jealousy and trouble, devoured by inquietudes and cares, had need of pouring out his complaints, of exposing his griefs, of unbosoming himself to a friendly heart, away from the pomp and noise which he fled. Richelieu always directed this inclination; and if he subjugated the King’s mind by the force of his own genius, if he fascinated him by the seductive power ofhis words, he watched over all his actions by means of spies, with whom he surrounded him, and governed even his soul through his confessors.[76]When the Prince’s affections, “purely spiritual, and enjoyments always chaste,” as says a contemporary, were bestowed on instruments, indocile to the directions of the ruling Minister, the latter knew how to conjure up scruples in the King’s mind, even for these pure connections, and which triumphed over his inclinations. To Madame de Hautefort succeeded, in the royal affections, Mademoiselle de la Fayette, to her Cinq-Mars, and these three individuals, whose relations with the King always continued perfectly irreproachable, but who rebelled against Richelieu’s imperious will, expiated their resistance—one in exile, another in a convent, and the third on the scaffold.

If, then, it was true that Anne of Austria had, in 1630, committed adultery in order to give an heir to her dying husband, how are we to admit that a Minister so suspicious and vigilant would not have been cognisant of it, and knowing it, would not, by informing the convalescent King of this crime, have brought about the ruin of a Queen whom he detested, and who, in union with Marie de Medicis, was then plotting his downfall? It is in vain to object that a feeling of propriety would have restrained the Cardinal:[77]he was incapable of any such sentiment. Inflexible towardshis enemies, because he regarded them, with reason, as the enemies of the State, to unmask and ruin them he employed a stubbornness and a persistence which nothing could overcome. When it was necessary to persuade Louis XIII. of the communication which the Queen kept up with Spain, the implacable Minister could make the most minute search and put the most humiliating questions. He could cause her dearest servants to be arrested; he could confront her with spies; he could treat her as an obscure criminal; and the admirable devotion of Madame de Hautefort[78]could alone enable the Queen, very strongly suspected, but not entirely convicted, to escape from this grave danger. And yet people desire to maintain that Richelieu would have left Louis XIII. ignorant of a much greater crime, and one which touched more immediately the King’s honour! Moreover, where, when, how, and in what interest would this crime have been committed? To conjectures and vague insinuations let us oppose positive facts, which prove that Richelieu did not acquaint Louis XIII., because Anne of Austria had never ceased to be innocent.

The King fell ill at Lyons, not during the early part of August, as has been said, but on September 22, and here especially dates are of the utmost importance.[79]He was seized with a fever, which consumed him. The seventh day—the 29th—it was complicated by a dysentery, which exhausted him. The attack of this last complaint, produced by one of those medicines then much in vogue, wasso violent, and its consequences so rapid, that by midnight the doctors despaired of saving him. Marie de Medicis had retired. Anne of Austria, who did not leave the royal patient, resolved to have him warned by his confessor of the danger he was in. But, at the first cautiously spoken words, Louis XIII. conjured Father Suffren, and those who surrounded him, not to hide the truth from him. He learned it with calmness and courage, confessed, communicated, and asked pardon of all for any wrong he might have done them; then, calling the Queen, he embraced her tenderly, and addressed to her a touching farewell. As she retired on one side in order to weep freely, the King prayed Father Suffren to go and find her, and again beg her from him “to pardon him all the unpleasantnesses he might have caused her the whole time of their married life.” He afterwards conversed with Richelieu, and offered a spectacle of the most edifying resignation. Towards the middle of the day, the Archbishop of Lyons was preparing himself to bring in the extreme unction, when the doctors, who had already bled this exhausted body six times in succession, ordered a seventh bleeding.[80]But then the true cause of the illness, which was unknown to them, was made clear; an internal abscess broke, and nature saved the patient at the moment when the intervention of his physicians promised to be fatal.[81]Louis XIII., soon re-establishedin health, left Lyons with the Queen, who did not cease to lavish on him the most tender cares, and whose sincere grief had touched him. In this crisis the two spouses had forgotten the past.[82]The repugnance and the coldness of the one, the wounded pride of the other, had disappeared, and they were naturally led to appreciate whatever goodness and amiability were to be found in each other’s natures.[83]

Strong in the unaccustomed sway which she exercised, but exaggerating its extent, Anne of Austria was not content with holding in the King’s heart the place which properly belonged to her. Aided by the ambitious and vindictive Marie de Medicis, after having occupied herself with her griefs as a wife, she desired to extend her censure to affairs of State, and to attack, in Richelieu, not only one who had kept alive the mistrust of herself, who had called suspicion into existence, and had separated King and Queen, mother and son, but also the stubborn pursuer of the great policy of Henri IV., who maintained abroad the pre-eminence of France over Spain, and the abasement of the House of Austria. We know how Louis XIII., who was incapable of vast projects, but who understood their value, was recalledby reasons of State to Richelieu, and, on a famous day, confirmed his authority at the very instant that it seemed annihilated.[84]

To what period are we to assign the commission of the fault resulting in Anne’s pregnancy of January, 1631? It cannot have been on September 30, 1630, when Louis XIII.’s life was in danger, for the Queen was delivered during the first five days of April, 1631.[85]Was it on the arrival of Louis XIII. at Lyons, at the commencement of August, 1630? But Anne of Austria did not then have the same interest in being a mother, which, according to her accusers, she would have on September 30, when the King was dying. Either the child was still-born, or else its conception dates from a period when Louis XIII. was its father. The origin of this pregnancy is suspected because Richelieu, in a journal attributed to him, and of which it has been said “that it lent to Voltaire’s supposition rather a serious ground of argument,”[86]was pleased to note theprogress of the Queen’s condition, often sent to inquire after her health, carried off her apothecary, then returned him to her, forbade the Spanish ambassador to make too frequent visits to the Louvre, and, in a word, exercised over Anne of Austria a suspicious and unceasing vigilance. But if we admit the authenticity of this journal, which, probable enough in certain details, is much less so when taken as a whole, all the facts which it relates, the espionage which it chronicles, the suspicions which it insinuates, concern the Spaniard, irritated at Richelieu’s unexpected triumph and dreaming of overthrowing him, not the guilty spouse whose crime it is desired to prove. Accepting this last theory, why should Richelieu have restored to the Queen the medical attendant who could have aided her in concealing the consequences of her fault? Why was she not entirely separated from all her confidants? Why were not the visits of the Spanish ambassador altogether forbidden? Richelieu, it is true, caused the Countess de Fargis to be dismissed. But it was only because she had advised the Queen to espouse her brother-in-law, Gaston d’Orléans, if she became a widow, because she had inflamed Anne of Austria’s resentment, and because she was the soul of the opposition, of the political intrigues, and of the secret plots against the Cardinal. If everything in her long correspondence seized by the latter, and existing in the archives,[87]justifies him for having exiled the dangerous Countess, if we find in it traces of the hopes of the two Queens, of the affections which bind them to Spain, of the successes they desire, of the reverses they hope for, nothing can be discovered that sullies Anneof Austria’s honour. The Countess de Fargis appears in it as the active instigator of cabals, but not as the complacent accomplice and the confidant of a crime.

The truth is thatenceintefor the third time, and fearing a third accident, Anne of Austria did not wish the news of her condition to be spread abroad, or to arouse in the minds of the people a hope which the remembrance of the past rendered very uncertain of fulfilment. That this pregnancy was due to the reconciliation arising from the King’s illness, Richelieu himself attests, not as the doubtful author of a journal which, however, does not contain a single line really accusing the Queen, but as the indisputable writer of those innumerable letters, papers, and authentic documents, which have passed from the hands of the Duchess d’Aiguillon, his niece, into the archives of the State.[88]“It is suspected, not without good reason, that the Queen isenceinte,” he writes. “If this happiness befalls France, it ought to receive it as a fruit of the blessing of God and of the good understanding which has existed between the King and the Queen, his wife, for some time past.”[89]The same care which Anne of Austria took to conceal a third miscarriage, she had already shown with regard to a second, which occurred March 16, 1622, and at that time “they had hidden from the King as long as possible the destruction of his hopes.”[90]But from the first day that Richelieu enteredupon power, nothing escaped the penetrating regard of the attentive Minister. He watched, he observed, he knew everything. Every member of the royal family was surrounded by some of his agents. If from this incessant surveillance, and from the written evidence in which it stands revealed, springs the proof that the Queen had coquetted with Buckingham, been swayed by the counsels of the Duchess de Chevreuse,[91]and faithful to the last recommendations of her father, Philip III., had been always ready to support the Spanish interest near the King; if, in a word, Richelieu represents her as a Queen but little French, he never insinuates that she has been a guilty spouse; and history can scarcely hope to be better informed, and certainly ought not to show itself more rigorous than the clear-sighted and pitiless Minister.

FOOTNOTES:[46]Les Mariages espagnols sous le règne d’Henri IV. et la Régence de Marie de Medicis, by M. Perrens, Professor at the Lycée Bonaparte.[47]Manuscripts of the Imperial Library,fonds Harlay, 228, Nos. 14, 15; Court of Spain, Embassy of M. de Vaucellas, already quoted by M. Armand Baschet in his amusing work, very rich in rare documents,Le Roi chez la Reine.[48]The Infanta Maria, married to Ferdinand III., King of Hungary, afterwards Emperor.[49]Despatch from M. de Vaucellas, November 20, 1610. Manuscripts quoted above.[50]Mercure Français, vol. ii. p. 549.[51]Manuscripts of the Imperial Library,fonds Dupuy, 76, p. 145, and Archives of the Château of Mouchy-Noailles, No. 1706.Mariages des Rois et Reines, by M. Baschet in his book already quoted.[52]Journal de Jean Héroard sur l’Enfance et la Jeunesse de Louis XIII.Manuscripts of the Imperial Library. It has just been published by Didot, having been edited by MM. Eud. de Soulié and Ed. de Barthélemy, with an intelligence, a carefulness, and an erudition on which they cannot be too strongly felicitated.[53]Journal d’Héroard, November 3, 1604, and March 2, 1605.[54]Ibid., April 4, 1605.[55]Ibid., January 29, 1607.[56]Marguerite de Navarre.[57]Journal d’Héroard,passim.[58]Ibid., June 9, 1604, and October 21, 1608.[59]“Ha!” he said, when he was told of Ravaillac’s act, “if I had been there with my sword, I would have killed him.”—Journal d’Héroard, May 14, 1610.[60]Another day, November 14, 1611, he proceeded to St. Germain. “He went there to visit his brother, who was ill of anendormissement, accompanied with slight convulsions. He awoke, and Louis XIII. said to him, ‘Bonsoir, mon frère.’ He replied, ‘Bonsoir,mon petit papa.’ At these words Louis XIII. commenced to weep, went away, and was not seen for the whole of the day.”—Journal d’Héroard, Nov. 14, 1611.[61]Mémoires du Maréchal de Bassompierre.—Journal d’Héroard.[62]Despatch from the ambassador of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Matteo Bartolini, December 4, 1615, quoted by M. A. Baschet.Journal d’Héroard, November 21, 1615.[63]Journal d’Héroard, November 25, 1615.[64]Despatch of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, January 30, 1619.[65]Ibid., January 16, 1619.[66]Despatch of Contarini, ambassador from Venice, Jan. 27, 1619.[67]Despatches of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, vol. i. pp. 157, 240, 300; and vol. ii. pp. 10, 31, 39, 40, 44, 80, 82, and 84. Despatch of Bentivoglio, January 30, 1619. See also despatches from the Venetian ambassador, January 27, and February 5, 1619; theJournal d’Héroard, January 25, 1619; Letter from Father Joseph to the Minister of Spain, February 14, 1619; and, lastly, theMémoires de Bassompierre, vol. ii. p. 147.[68]To the causes of Louis XIII.’s reserve, which we have just cited, may be added another, which the duty of not omitting anything causes us to indicate. According to theRélation de Don Fernando Giron(Archives of Simancas), Louis XIII. held aloof from Anne of Austria “because he had been persuaded that if he had a son, while yet so young, it would cause a civil war in the kingdom.” Nothing, however, confirms this supposition, or renders it likely.[69]Despatch of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, December 4, 1619.[70]Mémoires de Bassompierre, confirmed by theJournal d’Héroard, March 26, 1622.[71]Journal d’Héroard,passim, and especially June 8, and August 21, 1626.[72]Ibid., May 10, 1621.[73]“He was playing with some little balls, rolling them along his taper stand, and calling them soldiers. M. de Souvré reproved him, and told him that he was always amusing himself at childish games. ‘But, Monsieur de Souvré, these are soldiers; this is not a child’s game!’ ‘Sir, you will always be a child.’ ‘It is you who keep me one!’”—Journal d’Héroard, February 21, 1610.[74]Several facts cited by Héroard prove that Louis XIII. was not at all sensible to flattery. (See particularly Oct 8, and Dec. 3, 1610.)[75]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Manuscripts. Original Letters of Louis XIII. Section France, 5.[76]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Manuscripts. Section France, vol. lxxxviii. fol. 99, and lxxxix. fols. 3, 23, 67, 78, and 103.[77]M. Michelet indicates another motive which it is only necessary to cite in order to show its improbability. “Richelieu,” he says, “trusted in the weakness of the Queen’s nature, and, consequently, that one day or other she would be involved in some embarrassment or thoughtlessness which would leave her at his mercy.”[78]Mémoires de La Porte, p. 370.[79]Letter from Richelieu to Marshal de Schonberg, September 25, 1630; Letter from Father Suffren, Louis XIII.’s confessor, to Father Jacquinot, October 1, 1630.[80]Letter from Father Suffren, already quoted. In one year Bouvart, Louis XIII.’s doctor, had him bled 47 times, made him take 212 medicines and 215 injections.—Archives Curieuses de l’Histoire de France, by Cimber and Danjou, 2nd series, vol. v. p. 63.[81]Letter from Richelieu to Schonberg, September 30, 1630; Letter from Richelieu to d’Effiat, October 1, 1630.—Mémoires de Richelieu, book xi. vol vi. p. 296. Letter from Father Suffren, already quoted.[82]A similar and as perfect return of lively affection and reciprocal tenderness was produced anew on the occasion of the illness of February, 1643, to which Louis XIII. succumbed. See theMémoire fidèle des choses qui se sont passées à la mort de Louis XIII., written by Dubois, his valet-de-chambre. The ingenuousness and the precision in details which it exhibits does not permit us to doubt the exactitude and authenticity of this account. See also Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:Mémoires Manuscrits de Lamothe-Goulas, Secrétaire des Commandements du Duc d’Orléans, vol. ii. p. 368.[83]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:Mémoires Manuscrits de Lamothe-Goulas, Secrétaire des Commandements du Duc d’Orléans, vol. ii. p. 367.[84]November 11, 1630—known in French history as “the Day of the Dupes”—when the Duke de Saint-Simon, father of the famous memoir writer, brought about a secret interview between Richelieu, who, in disgrace, was on the eve of retiring to Havre, and Louis XIII., then at his hunting-seat of Versailles. At the moment when every one believed the downfall of the once all-powerful Minister to be complete, the latter succeeded in recovering his lost influence over the King, of which he had been deprived through the intrigues of Marie de Medicis, who had demanded of her son whether he was “so unnatural as to prefer a valet to his mother.” Richelieu, when firmly reinstated in power, did not spare the queen-mother’s partisans, upon several of whom he avenged himself with his accustomed severity.—Trans.[85]This date is given in Richelieu’s Journal, of which we are about to speak.[86]M. Jules Loiseleur,Revue Contemporaine, of July 31, 1867, p. 223. This Journal has been published in theArchives Curieuses de l’Histoire de France, of Cimber and Danjou, 2nd series, vol. v.[87]Imperial Library. Manuscripts,ancien fonds Français, No. 9241.[88]Lettres et Papiers de Richelieu, published in the collection ofDocuments inédits de l’Histoire de France, by M. Avenel, Conservator of the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, with a profound knowledge of the period with which he is concerned, and an exactitude, an intelligence and a care for which one cannot too highly praise him.[89]Lettres et Papiers de Richelieu, vol. iv. p. 115.[90]Mémoires de Bassompierre.[91]Marie de Rohan, Duchess de Chevreuse, who possessed so great an influence over Anne of Austria, was the daughter of Hercule de Rohan, Duke de Montbazon, Governor of Paris, and one of the first noblemen of France. In 1617, she espoused Albert de Luynes, favourite of Louis XIII., who on the occasion of the marriage created his confidant a duke and appointed his wife Superintendent of the Queen’s Household. Shortly after the death of her husband, in 1621, from fever caught at the siege of Montauban, she married Claude de Lorraine, Duke de Chevreuse, the son of that Duke de Guise whom Henry III. caused to be assassinated at Blois. The Duchess de Chevreuse was a charming and beautiful woman, gifted with extraordinary powers of intellect and proud of her high lineage, but incorrigibly given to intrigue.—Trans.

[46]Les Mariages espagnols sous le règne d’Henri IV. et la Régence de Marie de Medicis, by M. Perrens, Professor at the Lycée Bonaparte.

[47]Manuscripts of the Imperial Library,fonds Harlay, 228, Nos. 14, 15; Court of Spain, Embassy of M. de Vaucellas, already quoted by M. Armand Baschet in his amusing work, very rich in rare documents,Le Roi chez la Reine.

[48]The Infanta Maria, married to Ferdinand III., King of Hungary, afterwards Emperor.

[49]Despatch from M. de Vaucellas, November 20, 1610. Manuscripts quoted above.

[50]Mercure Français, vol. ii. p. 549.

[51]Manuscripts of the Imperial Library,fonds Dupuy, 76, p. 145, and Archives of the Château of Mouchy-Noailles, No. 1706.Mariages des Rois et Reines, by M. Baschet in his book already quoted.

[52]Journal de Jean Héroard sur l’Enfance et la Jeunesse de Louis XIII.Manuscripts of the Imperial Library. It has just been published by Didot, having been edited by MM. Eud. de Soulié and Ed. de Barthélemy, with an intelligence, a carefulness, and an erudition on which they cannot be too strongly felicitated.

[53]Journal d’Héroard, November 3, 1604, and March 2, 1605.

[54]Ibid., April 4, 1605.

[55]Ibid., January 29, 1607.

[56]Marguerite de Navarre.

[57]Journal d’Héroard,passim.

[58]Ibid., June 9, 1604, and October 21, 1608.

[59]“Ha!” he said, when he was told of Ravaillac’s act, “if I had been there with my sword, I would have killed him.”—Journal d’Héroard, May 14, 1610.

[60]Another day, November 14, 1611, he proceeded to St. Germain. “He went there to visit his brother, who was ill of anendormissement, accompanied with slight convulsions. He awoke, and Louis XIII. said to him, ‘Bonsoir, mon frère.’ He replied, ‘Bonsoir,mon petit papa.’ At these words Louis XIII. commenced to weep, went away, and was not seen for the whole of the day.”—Journal d’Héroard, Nov. 14, 1611.

[61]Mémoires du Maréchal de Bassompierre.—Journal d’Héroard.

[62]Despatch from the ambassador of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, Matteo Bartolini, December 4, 1615, quoted by M. A. Baschet.Journal d’Héroard, November 21, 1615.

[63]Journal d’Héroard, November 25, 1615.

[64]Despatch of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, January 30, 1619.

[65]Ibid., January 16, 1619.

[66]Despatch of Contarini, ambassador from Venice, Jan. 27, 1619.

[67]Despatches of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, vol. i. pp. 157, 240, 300; and vol. ii. pp. 10, 31, 39, 40, 44, 80, 82, and 84. Despatch of Bentivoglio, January 30, 1619. See also despatches from the Venetian ambassador, January 27, and February 5, 1619; theJournal d’Héroard, January 25, 1619; Letter from Father Joseph to the Minister of Spain, February 14, 1619; and, lastly, theMémoires de Bassompierre, vol. ii. p. 147.

[68]To the causes of Louis XIII.’s reserve, which we have just cited, may be added another, which the duty of not omitting anything causes us to indicate. According to theRélation de Don Fernando Giron(Archives of Simancas), Louis XIII. held aloof from Anne of Austria “because he had been persuaded that if he had a son, while yet so young, it would cause a civil war in the kingdom.” Nothing, however, confirms this supposition, or renders it likely.

[69]Despatch of the Nuncio Bentivoglio, December 4, 1619.

[70]Mémoires de Bassompierre, confirmed by theJournal d’Héroard, March 26, 1622.

[71]Journal d’Héroard,passim, and especially June 8, and August 21, 1626.

[72]Ibid., May 10, 1621.

[73]“He was playing with some little balls, rolling them along his taper stand, and calling them soldiers. M. de Souvré reproved him, and told him that he was always amusing himself at childish games. ‘But, Monsieur de Souvré, these are soldiers; this is not a child’s game!’ ‘Sir, you will always be a child.’ ‘It is you who keep me one!’”—Journal d’Héroard, February 21, 1610.

[74]Several facts cited by Héroard prove that Louis XIII. was not at all sensible to flattery. (See particularly Oct 8, and Dec. 3, 1610.)

[75]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Manuscripts. Original Letters of Louis XIII. Section France, 5.

[76]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Manuscripts. Section France, vol. lxxxviii. fol. 99, and lxxxix. fols. 3, 23, 67, 78, and 103.

[77]M. Michelet indicates another motive which it is only necessary to cite in order to show its improbability. “Richelieu,” he says, “trusted in the weakness of the Queen’s nature, and, consequently, that one day or other she would be involved in some embarrassment or thoughtlessness which would leave her at his mercy.”

[78]Mémoires de La Porte, p. 370.

[79]Letter from Richelieu to Marshal de Schonberg, September 25, 1630; Letter from Father Suffren, Louis XIII.’s confessor, to Father Jacquinot, October 1, 1630.

[80]Letter from Father Suffren, already quoted. In one year Bouvart, Louis XIII.’s doctor, had him bled 47 times, made him take 212 medicines and 215 injections.—Archives Curieuses de l’Histoire de France, by Cimber and Danjou, 2nd series, vol. v. p. 63.

[81]Letter from Richelieu to Schonberg, September 30, 1630; Letter from Richelieu to d’Effiat, October 1, 1630.—Mémoires de Richelieu, book xi. vol vi. p. 296. Letter from Father Suffren, already quoted.

[82]A similar and as perfect return of lively affection and reciprocal tenderness was produced anew on the occasion of the illness of February, 1643, to which Louis XIII. succumbed. See theMémoire fidèle des choses qui se sont passées à la mort de Louis XIII., written by Dubois, his valet-de-chambre. The ingenuousness and the precision in details which it exhibits does not permit us to doubt the exactitude and authenticity of this account. See also Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:Mémoires Manuscrits de Lamothe-Goulas, Secrétaire des Commandements du Duc d’Orléans, vol. ii. p. 368.

[83]Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:Mémoires Manuscrits de Lamothe-Goulas, Secrétaire des Commandements du Duc d’Orléans, vol. ii. p. 367.

[84]November 11, 1630—known in French history as “the Day of the Dupes”—when the Duke de Saint-Simon, father of the famous memoir writer, brought about a secret interview between Richelieu, who, in disgrace, was on the eve of retiring to Havre, and Louis XIII., then at his hunting-seat of Versailles. At the moment when every one believed the downfall of the once all-powerful Minister to be complete, the latter succeeded in recovering his lost influence over the King, of which he had been deprived through the intrigues of Marie de Medicis, who had demanded of her son whether he was “so unnatural as to prefer a valet to his mother.” Richelieu, when firmly reinstated in power, did not spare the queen-mother’s partisans, upon several of whom he avenged himself with his accustomed severity.—Trans.

[85]This date is given in Richelieu’s Journal, of which we are about to speak.

[86]M. Jules Loiseleur,Revue Contemporaine, of July 31, 1867, p. 223. This Journal has been published in theArchives Curieuses de l’Histoire de France, of Cimber and Danjou, 2nd series, vol. v.

[87]Imperial Library. Manuscripts,ancien fonds Français, No. 9241.

[88]Lettres et Papiers de Richelieu, published in the collection ofDocuments inédits de l’Histoire de France, by M. Avenel, Conservator of the Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, with a profound knowledge of the period with which he is concerned, and an exactitude, an intelligence and a care for which one cannot too highly praise him.

[89]Lettres et Papiers de Richelieu, vol. iv. p. 115.

[90]Mémoires de Bassompierre.

[91]Marie de Rohan, Duchess de Chevreuse, who possessed so great an influence over Anne of Austria, was the daughter of Hercule de Rohan, Duke de Montbazon, Governor of Paris, and one of the first noblemen of France. In 1617, she espoused Albert de Luynes, favourite of Louis XIII., who on the occasion of the marriage created his confidant a duke and appointed his wife Superintendent of the Queen’s Household. Shortly after the death of her husband, in 1621, from fever caught at the siege of Montauban, she married Claude de Lorraine, Duke de Chevreuse, the son of that Duke de Guise whom Henry III. caused to be assassinated at Blois. The Duchess de Chevreuse was a charming and beautiful woman, gifted with extraordinary powers of intellect and proud of her high lineage, but incorrigibly given to intrigue.—Trans.

Back to Index Next