CHAPTER II

THE LUTHERAN HYMN-BOOK—THE BOOK OF ARITHMETIC—THE GEOMETRICAL INSTRUMENTS—THE MOSAIC PAVEMENT—THE LUTE—THE SEVEN LIBERAL ARTS—THE SILVER CRUCIFIX—OCCULT SCIENCE—CONCLUSION

THE LUTHERAN HYMN-BOOK.—The introduction of a German Hymn-book on the lower shelf of the table, near George de Selve, tends to confirm the belief that the Bishop of Lavaur had already been sent to Germany in a diplomatic capacity as early as 1529, and had there probably attended the Diet of Spires.[457] Certainly, no two hymns could better exemplify his views regarding religious reunion than those selected in the picture.

On the left-hand page is seen the “Veni Creator Spiritus” in Luther’s German rendering: on the right, Luther’s “Shortened Version of the Ten Commandments.”[458]

[Illustration: HYMN BOOK FROM THE PICTURE OF THE “AMBASSADORS.”]

Both these hymns are to be found in Johann Walther’s “Geystliche Gesangbüchlein,” published at Wittemberg in 1524.[459] This, the first Lutheran Hymn-book containing music as well as words which was used in the Reformed Churches of Germany, was the basis of numerous later editions, chiefly published in South Germany. A distinguishing mark of Walther’s “Gesangbuch,” in which it is followed by all these South German reproductions, is the preservation of the old word “Glast,”[460] instead of the more modern “Glantz,” in the hymn “Kom Heiliger Geyst.” This feature may be observed in Holbein’s copy. A slight difference in the termination of each verse suggests that the example he had before him may have belonged to one of the later editions referred to above. If so, that edition must have followed the original very closely; for the actual number XIX. placed by Walther over the second hymn, “Mensch wiltu leben seliglich,” is copied into the picture. Either by inadvertence, or because the first hymn, “Kom Heiliger Geyst,” was here intended to figure only as an antiphon,[461] the number is however placed by the painter over “Kom Heiliger Geyst,” instead of over “Mensch wiltu.”

The following is the exact text of the two hymns, as given in the Chorale-book of the “Ambassadors”:

XIX.

KOm Heiliger Geyst Herregott erfüll mit Deiner gnaden gut Deiner gleubgē Hertz mut un̄ sin dein brūstig lib entzūd in ihn. O Herr durch Deines lichtes glast zu dem glaubē versamlet hast das volck aller Welt zungē [das sey] dir Herzu lob gesungen gesungen.

[On the opposite page:]

Mensch wiltu leben seliglich und bei Gott bliben e[wiglich] Soltu halten die zehen gebot die uns gebeut unser Gott unser [Gott] D[ein]....[462]

Coming now to the setting of the two hymns, it is to be remarked that while Walther preserved the old and familiar melody of “Kom Heiliger Geyst,” the music of “Mensch wiltu leben seliglich” first appeared in the “Gesangbuch” of 1524.[463] The melody of the former hymn is in the treble part, that of the second in the tenor. As the book copied in Holbein’s picture is a tenor part-book, only the counterpoint sung by that voice is found to the hymn “Kom Heiliger Geyst”; while, to the second hymn, the melody is given, which in this instance resided in the tenor.[464]

The reader who has followed the career of the Bishop of Lavaur through the earlier pages of this volume will have seen how large a part the hope of religious reunion between the Roman Catholic and Reformed Churches played in his life. To find means to promote that end was the object of his most earnest thought; to see it accomplished, the dearest wish of his heart. The healing of the schism, so the bishop held, could only be sought in a better endeavour, under guidance from above, to live in conformity with the divine teaching. When therefore it is found that the two hymns chosen in Holbein’s picture to emphasize this point are “Come, Holy Ghost” and the “Ten Commandments,” it is evident that a more telling selection could not have been made.

Had a Latin text of the “Veni Creator” and the Commandments been chosen, in accordance with the use of the Roman Catholic Church, they would have conveyed nothing to the spectator of the Lutheran schism and of efforts towards reunion. But the German version at once emphasizes the desired point.

The doctrine expressed by these two hymns belonged, moreover, to all Christian bodies, orthodox or the reverse. They therefore appeared singularly fitted to furnish the common ground so much desired.

The “Veni Creator Spiritus” was (and still is) the great hymn of Christendom for all specially solemn occasions. Selve must have heard it on the opening day of the Diet of Spires. Soon he would again listen to its strains, on the occasion of his own consecration as bishop.[465] In the Lutheran churches it was sung on all Sundays and Festivals.[466] Thus, no hymn had a more universal character.

It has been plausibly suggested that some of the German objects introduced into the picture may have been a loan from Nicolas Kratzer, the astronomer. In the present instance, however, this idea does not commend itself as probable. There does not seem any reason to suppose that Kratzer, an orthodox Catholic, who had no professional relationship with theology, was the possessor of a collection of Lutheran hymns. If not the property of the Bishop of Lavaur, the book may easily have belonged to Cranmer. Official ties had brought him into contact with the Bailly of Troyes;[467] while the connections of the archbishop with the Protestants of South Germany are well known.[468] But it is not necessary to push the question further, for the channels were multitudinous, both within and without the Steelyard, through which the Hymn-book might have been obtained.

THE BOOK OF ARITHMETIC.—If a satisfactory reason is forthcoming for the representation of the Hymn-book in the German tongue, what can be said to account for the fact that the book of Arithmetic is couched in the same language?

The question brings the reader to one of the _collective_ meanings of the picture. The language of this book, significantly kept open by a square, was probably a matter of indifference, being introduced, so far as can be seen, only to symbolize Arithmetic as one of the Seven Liberal Arts. The interest centred on the numbers, not on the nationality of the book. Any well-known manual of arithmetic, in any language, would have attained this object.

Some separate significance, which it has not been possible to fathom, may of course attach to the book beyond the one here specified; many of the objects of the _mise-en-scène_ being made to do duty two or three times over, first singly, and then in varied combination.

It may be noted also that the Bailly of Troyes shared, to the fullest extent, the love of his time and country for setting such riddles deep. The whole picture is conceived in that spirit of the _devise_ which was “assumed for the purpose of mystification” and contained “a hidden meaning.” If the use of the German language, with which both ambassadors were probably familiar, would complicate the problem of interpretation, Dinteville would have been likely to prefer it for that very reason.

The “Merchant’s Arithmetic Book” selected to represent one branch of the Seven Liberal Arts, was a widely disseminated manual at the period under consideration, and was therefore eminently representative of the subject of which it treats.[469] The exact title is: “Eyn Newe unnd wolgegründte underweysung aller Kauffmannss Rechnung in dreyen büchern ... durch Petrum Apianū von Leyssnick u. Astronomei zu Ingoldstat Ordinariū verfertiget.” (A new and well-grounded Instruction in all Merchant’s Arithmetic, in three books ... compiled by Peter Apian of Leisnig, Astronomer in Ordinary at Ingoldstadt.) The colophon reads; “Gedrückt und volendt zu Ingoldstadt durch Georgium Apianum von Leyssnick im Jar nach der Geburt Christi 1527 am 9. tag Augusti.” (Printed and completed at Ingoldstadt by George Apian of Leisnig, in the year after the birth of Christ 1527, on the 9th day of August.)[470] The page copied by Holbein is in Book III., Q 8, verso.[471]

This manual of arithmetic may have been borrowed from one of the merchants of the Steelyard, or possibly from Kratzer.

SOME OF THE GEOMETRICAL INSTRUMENTS.—Several of these instruments are repetitions of those introduced by Holbein into his portrait of Nicolas Kratzer, painted in 1528.[472] Such are the compasses, seen on the lower portion of the wooden stand; and the columnar dial, the astrolabe, and the decagon, placed upon the upper shelf.

It has been suggested that the torquetum which occupies a conspicuous position on the top of the table, represents an instrument invented by Apian, of which an illustration is given by him in a book published this very year (1533).[473] Variations of this instrument, however, are not, it appears, uncommon at about this period. Nevertheless, the attribution to Apian does not seem improbable, bearing in mind that he was also the author of the book of Arithmetic and was a compatriot of Kratzer’s.

[Illustration: BOOK OF ARITHMETIC, FROM THE PICTURE OF THE “AMBASSADORS.” (Reduced in scale.)

PAGE OF APIAN’S “MERCHANT’S ARITHMETIC” COPIED BY HOLBEIN. (Reduced in scale.)]

A curious question arises in connection with the hands of some of the instruments, the shadows from which fall perplexingly at cross-purposes, pointing sometimes one way, sometimes another. The reader must please himself in deciding whether this was done to bring out special numbers and indicate definite, though now inexplicable meanings, or whether it was merely the result of carelessness on the part of assistants who probably executed some of the mechanical details. In the case of the Death’s-head, the divergence of the shadow was too remarkable to be attributed to accident, and was, moreover, accounted for by having been painted from a reflection. But in the _minutiæ_ of some of the mathematical instruments, such lapses from strict science may be due to chance, and are not unknown to Holbein’s practice. In the series of the Seven Liberal Arts, these instruments help to symbolize Astronomy and Geometry.

THE MOSAIC PAVEMENT.—It is an easy step from these illustrations of mathematical science to the further symbol of Geometry, the beautiful floor of “Opus Alexandrinum,” unique in Holbein’s performance, and perhaps in the annals of pictorial art. And it is surely a point of high interest to observe that this design is an accurate copy of the well-known mosaic pavement in the Sanctuary of Westminster Abbey, for the construction of which marbles and workmen were brought from Italy by Abbot Richard Ware in the reign of Henry III. Nothing brings the English sojourn of the great painter more closely home to us, than to fancy him wandering through the aisles of the venerable Abbey—venerable even then—to sketch the outlines of the historic pavement trodden by so many generations before and since that time.

[Illustration: DESIGN OF THE MOSAIC PAVEMENT IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY, WITH DETAILS OF PATTERNS.

DESIGN OF THE MOSAIC PAVEMENT IN HOLBEIN’S PICTURE, WITH DETAILS OF PATTERNS.]

The mosaic pavement of Westminster consists of a square centre filled with interwoven circles, and flanked on either side by oblong strips, which complete the width of the Sanctuary.[474] The square centre contains the portion copied by Holbein in the floor of the “Ambassadors.” Range upon range of beautiful patterns adorn the interlacing circles of the Westminster mosaic. The reduced scale and perspective view necessary for the picture, has obliged Holbein to simplify some of these to a certain extent. Occasionally he has borrowed smaller patterns from the narrower strips of mosaic on either side of the central figure. But in several instances the patterns are copied with undeviating precision; while the main lines of the great central figure itself, in reversed order, are reproduced in the painting with the utmost fidelity. The colouring is slightly varied to meet the exigencies of another art.

In the presence of so much that is accurate, one notable deviation strikes the eye. The central circle of the Westminster mosaic is filled, at the present day, with a plain round slab of marble, somewhat similar to those which Holbein has placed in the angles of his reproduction. The central circle of the mosaic of the “Ambassadors,” on the other hand, contains a six-pointed star: that double triangle which in a thousand applications played so large a part in the emblematic art of the Middle Ages. A famous figure of Geometry, it was equally well known as the symbol of the Trinity and as the mystical “Solomon’s Seal” of the alchymists.

The first question that arises when considering this discrepancy is whether any alteration has taken place in the central ornament of the Westminster mosaic since the painter sketched it?

Probably this has been the case. The pavement has been much patched and repaired at various times, and, in the judgment of the late Sir Gilbert Scott, “the eye of the great centre circle has a very modern look.”[475] If the six-pointed star once adorned that centre, Holbein’s picture has preserved for us an interesting record of the appearance it then presented.

If, on the other hand, the further surmise of Sir Gilbert Scott is correct, that the centre was “probably originally occupied with an engraved plate of brass,” an unsuitable subject for the painter, the latter would not have had far to seek for the star he has introduced. That ornament was to be seen in abundance, on a small scale, in the mosaics of the Shrine of Edward the Confessor and elsewhere in the Abbey.

THE LUTE.—Balancing the terrestrial globe on the lower shelf of the table, a ten-stringed lute divides the two books already described.[476]

Taken in its most obvious application, this instrument serves as an illustration of Music in the Seven Liberal Arts.

Closer inspection reveals, however, that one string of the lute _is broken_—a discovery which yields some further curious results.

It is hardly necessary to dwell on the universally accepted interpretation of a broken string as an emblem of Death. In the lute we have thus a further insistence on those melancholy symbols which play so large a part in the composition of the picture.

But, beyond this, another more specialized meaning may perhaps have been intended, which, remembering the political import of the terrestrial globe and book of chorales, seems worth consideration.

In the first known edition of Alciati’s “Emblems,”[477] there is one inscribed “Fœdera Italorum.”[478] It is composed, as usual, of two parts: the pictorial device and explanatory text. In this instance the former is a lute[479] and the accompanying Latin poem expounds the author’s meaning in selecting that symbol. The significance is wholly political. The latest commentator of Alciati believes that this emblem was composed to commemorate the League of Cognac of 1526,[480] which, as already explained, united the princes of Italy in a common bond with France and England against the Emperor. Italian patriots anticipated from this league a cessation of those internecine feuds by which their unhappy country had been rent no less than by the intrigues and invasions of foreigners. It was this hope of peace which inspired the choice and composition of the emblem presented by Alciati to his sovereign, the Duke of Milan.

“Hanc citharam a lembi quæ formâ halieutica fertur, Vendicat et propriam Musa latina sibi, Accipe Dux; placeat nostrum hoc tibi tempore munus, Quo nova cum socijs fœdera inire paras. Difficile est, nisi docto homini tot tendere chordas: Unaque si fuerit non bene tenta fides, Ruptave (quod facile est) perit omnis gratia concha Illique præcellens cantus ineptus erit. Sic Itali coërunt proceres in fœdera: concors Nil est quod timeas, si tibi constet amor: At si aliquis desciscat (uti plerumque videmus) In nihilum illa omnis solvitur harmonia.”

“This lute, called ‘Fisher’ for its boat-like form, And claimed by Muse of Latium for her own, Lord Duke, accept; as welcome at this time, When you are bent on new alliances. ’Tis hard, save for skilled hands, these chords to tune; And be there one ill-tuned or broken string, Easy mischance! all grace of music dies, And disconcerted is the concert fair. So, when the lords of Italy unite In congress, fear not whilst good will stands firm, But if (as chanceth oft) one start aside, Dissolved is harmony, and comes to nought.”[481]

It is easy to see how striking is the application of this emblem to the events which took place in the summer of 1533 at Milan, the actual centre for which it was composed. Nothing could more aptly illustrate Alciati’s metaphor of the broken string than the sudden secession of the Duke of Milan from his alliance with France—an alliance which was a leading feature of that very League to celebrate which the emblem is believed to have been composed. The startling manner of Sforza’s defection, proclaimed by the ruthless murder of the French envoy, Merveilles, emphasizes the point.[482] The very hand in which Alciati had placed his exhortation to peace had roughly snapped the string of the lute. In a moment the face of French politics was changed. The clash of arms in the near future seemed the only possible reply to the affront. The jangle of discord was all that remained of the fair promise of harmony.

Viewed in this light, the lute of Holbein’s “Ambassadors” acquires a meaning which well agrees with the important position assigned to it in the picture and with the political significance of some of the surrounding objects.

It is of course neither possible nor desirable to press an interpretation of this kind too far. But, considering the enormous popularity of Alciati’s emblems, and the practical certainty that Dinteville was familiar with them, the suggestion can hardly be considered far-fetched or improbable.

It seems likely enough, indeed, that the ambassador was personally acquainted with Alciati. At the very time when the picture was being painted, that great jurisconsult was filling the Chair of Law at Bourges, which he held from 1529 to 1534. His fame was immense, and hearers flocked to his lectures. Francis I. himself was occasionally counted amongst his audience; and it seems tolerably certain that Dinteville, whose life, when in France, was spent almost entirely at Court, must have been present at one or other of these discourses.

Just at the same moment, the Augsburg edition of the “Emblems” was achieving popularity by leaps and bounds. The woodcuts that it contained were, however, very inadequate; and, anxious to remedy this defect, Alciati was now occupied in arranging with the printer, Christian Wechel, to bring out an improved and refined edition at Paris.[483] In short, the threads which connected Alciati with France, and with the familiar surroundings of the Bailly of Troyes, were numerous, and appear to place beyond doubt the acquaintance of the latter with the “Book of Emblems.”[484]

THE SEVEN LIBERAL ARTS occupy a considerable place in the scheme of the picture. Having been frequently alluded to in detail, their collective appearance shall now be briefly summed up.

It has already been stated[485] that these were divided into two parts. The first group, comprising Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric, had to do with the things of speech. The two ambassadors themselves, whose profession at that period was largely dependent on the dialectic skill of the negotiator, may be held to personify this division.

The second part was concerned with things of fact, and embraced Music, Arithmetic, Geometry, and Astronomy.

Music is represented by the Lute, the Hymn-book, and the Case of Flutes.

Arithmetic is symbolized by Apian’s “Kauffmannss Rechnung.”

Geometry is illustrated by the various mathematical instruments, including the Square and Compasses, and by the Mosaic Pavement.

Astronomy shares with Geometry many of the mathematical instruments, and is further represented by the two Globes, celestial and terrestrial.

THE SILVER CRUCIFIX.—This is perhaps the most puzzling object of the whole elaborate _mise-en-scène_. Pushed away in the upper corner of the picture, as inconspicuously as possible, half-hidden half-revealed by the green drapery of the background, the very fact of its mysterious introduction in such varied surroundings announces some definite object to be attained by its presence. Was it placed there in allusion to the sacred calling of the Bishop of Lavaur? Was it intended as a further indication of the only means by which, in his opinion, the divisions of the Church could be healed and unity re-established?

The Crucifix hangs, however, above Dinteville, not above George de Selve. But there is no doubt that the Bailly of Troyes and the liberal Catholic party in France, led by the Du Bellay brothers, fully shared the bishop’s views. Reunion on the basis of the common grounds of faith formed the essence of their ecclesiastical policy—a policy which was just now reaching its climax. In secular diplomacy, these efforts towards a better understanding with the Protestants of Germany, corresponded with the anti-Imperial alliances which Dinteville so fervently upheld, and which he illustrated by his additions to the terrestrial globe.

THE OCCULT SCIENCES.—Whether the picture contains, besides its more palpable meanings, any hint in the direction of alchemy and astrology, would seem to be a moot point. Votaries of occult science would probably claim the presence of the mystic “Solomon’s Seal” in the mosaic floor as evidence in their favour, and might further be disposed to deduce many things from the presence of the square and compasses, and from the choice and arrangement of the numbers indicated by the various instruments. On that abstruse path the writer cannot pretend to follow them.

It is a fact, however, that just at this period such pursuits were at the height of fashion, not only in France, but throughout the educated circles of Europe. Men of the highest intelligence, such, for instance, as Pirkheimer, at Nuremberg, still believed in them and set horoscopes;[486] whilst the subject of the transmutation of metals claimed general attention. At the Court of France, where the protection afforded by the king to humanistic studies made all branches of learning, or _quasi_-learning, fashionable, the mediæval sciences were specially in vogue. “On s’applique surtout aux fausses sciences,” says M. Decrue de Stoutz, writing of the French Court at this period. “L’astrologie et l’alchimie ont plus de crédit que l’astronomie et la chimie.”[487] The peculiar fashion of the Maison de l’Aûmonier at Polisy seems to suggest that the Dinteville brothers had not escaped some share of the general infection.

At the outset of their career, when Jean received his first appointment at Court, and his brother François was Almoner to Louise of Savoy, the famous Cornelius Agrippa, the “Great Agrippa” of our nursery rhymes, was physician to that princess. He soon lost his post at the French Court, having favoured the enterprise of the Connétable de Bourbon. But the Dinteville brothers were in all probability acquainted with his writings, which had achieved enormous celebrity, as well as with other literature of Hermetic art.[488] Their favourite sciences, geometry and astronomy, were closely linked with occult science on their more abstract side.

Is any illustration of this obscure range of study to be found in the accessories of the picture? It is difficult to answer this question with any degree of certainty, the evidence appearing insufficient to afford definite proof of such an intention. But if for a moment the hypothesis be allowed, the presence of the Crucifix would gain additional point as an indication that only the higher forms of these pursuits, such as were countenanced by Churchmen, were here cultivated.[489] Cornelius Agrippa, in explaining his Key to Occult Science, describes a mysterious kind of Death to all worldly affections as a necessary preliminary to the true understanding of philosophy. This was the common ground on which dignitaries of the Church and men of his type could meet. Agrippa specially illustrates his meaning by quoting the passage from St. Paul, Colossians iii., verse 3. Whatever is to be found in books, says Agrippa, concerning the virtue of magic, astrology, and alchemy, is false and deceitful when literally understood. A mystical sense is to be sought in those studies, and this sense can only be attained by means of the Death above alluded to. “This precious Death,” he continues, “is granted but a small number of people, beloved by God, or favoured with a propitious influence of the stars, or supported by their own merits, and the secret of the art.”[490]

Ideas such as these seem to harmonize not ill with the Device of Death selected, in its more material sense, for representation in the picture, when taken in conjunction with the presence of the Crucifix. But the point leads into a region too abstruse to be further pursued here, and with these few general remarks the reader must be left to decide as he pleases on the presence or absence of intentional allusion to occult science.

CONCLUSION.—Enough has been said here to prove, with tolerable certainty, that while the general design and masterly realization of the whole subject is due to the genius of the artist, the peculiar train of thought expressed in the manifold details, is the outcome of the mind of Jean de Dinteville. From the simply pictorial point of view, the introduction and position of such objects as the foreshortened Skull and half-hidden Crucifix could not be accounted for. An extraneous influence has here been at work. The closer the examination of the picture, the more this conviction is brought home to the attentive spectator. The objects selected for illustration precisely represent the pursuits and occupations most in vogue at the time in France. Geometry and mechanics, the foundations of the builder’s art just then attaining classical expression in the lovely creations of the French Renaissance; Music, especially that of the lute, which was so fashionable that every Frenchman of exalted position carried a lutist in his train; the ingeniously contrived and artistically rendered _devise_; these, as the literature of the period abundantly testifies, were among the favourite studies and pastimes of the Court of France. When to these are added the personal touches arising from the special career and idiosyncrasy of each ambassador, the additions to the Terrestrial Globe, the choice of the Lutheran hymns, and the other striking details already enumerated, it becomes evident that only the active influence of the principal sitter could have produced so perfect an epitome of the lives of the two Frenchmen.

For, while the views of the Bishop of Lavaur receive their full meed of attention in the picture, it may certainly be reckoned to the credit of the Bailly of Troyes that such should be the case. The brief visit of George de Selve terminated so early that little, if any, progress can have been made with the _minutiæ_ of the great composition before he took his leave.

To Jean de Dinteville, therefore, we owe a record, probably unique in the domain of art, of the thoughts and studies, the hopes and fears, which swayed his country and generation, and, through them, were reflected in his individual life.

But it is to the magnificent skill of the painter, Hans Holbein, that the preservation of that record is due in the interesting form we see to-day; and it is to him alone that we are indebted for having wrought the heterogeneous objects which accompany his noble presentment of the two Ambassadors into the abiding unity of a great work of art.

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A

GEORG GYZE, OR GISZE

A letter written by Thomas Houth to the Earl of Kildare, Lord Deputy of Ireland, shows that in 1533 Holbein’s sitter, Georg Gyze, was Deputy to the Alderman of the Steelyard.

The portion of the document which here concerns us, in which recovery is sought of a debt owed by one Wolff, in the employment of Kildare, to a man named Peter Rych, runs as follows:

“Your servant Wolff is indebted to the bearer, as appears by bills of Wolff’s son-in-law’s hand. I ascertained at the Steelyard that the handwriting was his, _by the evidence of George Gyes, the Alderman’s Deputy_....”[491]

The origin of the name of Gyze, and the variations in the mode of spelling it, have been a considerable puzzle to students of Holbein. It occurs several times over on the addresses of letters and other accessories introduced into the portrait of this German merchant painted by Holbein in 1532, and each time takes a different form. Perhaps the most salient version is that placed in the portrait beneath the motto, “Nulla sine merore voluptas,” where the name is variously read “G. Gisze,” or “Gyze,” according to whether the second letter is taken to be an “i,” followed by a long “s,” or whether the two strokes are combined into one letter, and read as a “y.”[492]

Equal uncertainty appears to prevail as to the type of German used in the various inscriptions. The catalogue (1891) of the Berlin Gallery, where the portrait now is, spells “Gisze,” and says, “An der Wand Briefe mit seiner Adresse in _hoch_deutscher Mundart.” (On the wall letters with his address in _High_ German dialect.) Dr. Woltmann, in the first volume of “Holbein und seine Zeit” (2nd German edition, 1874), writes “Gyze,” and says (in his note, page 366), “Die Adressen auf den Briefen sind in _nieder_-deutschen Sprache geschrieben.” (The addresses on the letters are written in _Low_ German language.) In his second volume (1876, “Verzeichniss der Werke von Hans Holbein d. J.,” No. 115), Dr. Woltmann alters the spelling to “Gysse,” a form which adds another stroke to the name and corresponds with no rendering given by Holbein.

Where authorities differ so widely a further suggestion may perhaps be permissible.

It must be recollected that the merchants of the Hansa came from many different localities, and brought a variety of dialects to the Steelyard of London. At this time, when the spelling of proper names was, like some of the languages to which they belonged, still in a fluid state, and largely phonetic, the rendering of any given name was liable to vary very considerably, according to local circumstances and the pleasure or _provenance_ of the writer.

Whether we read Gisze or Gyze, the name was probably a variation of that of Gueiss, which was one of the most distinguished of the Steelyard, and frequently reappears in its annals. The family belonged to Cologne. Albert von Gueiss was a representative of the Steelyard at the conference held at Bruges in 1520 between England and the Hansa.[493] He was Burgher-master of Cologne in 1523 and 1526.[494] As it is recorded in the portrait of George Gyze by Holbein that the sitter was in his thirty-fourth year in 1532, he may have been a younger brother or possibly a son of this Albert von Gueiss. Further research in the archives of Cologne would perhaps reveal his exact identity.

Besides the form already quoted, Holbein gives the name on the portrait in several other versions: “Gisse” and “Ghisse,” and, in Latin, “... Georgii Gysenii.” (See Berlin catalogue under “Holbein.”)

The name of Gueiss is also found in three different shapes in the records of the Steelyard: “Albertum von Gueyss,” “Albert von Gueiss,” and “Albert _Gissen_.”[495]

The third form “Gissen” is practically or wholly identical[496] with at least one of Holbein’s renderings of the name; while Gueiss, Gisze, Gyze, and Gyes are sufficiently nearly related to make it appear tolerably certain that, in the loose orthography of the period, they represent the same name, varied according to the fancy or nationality of the writer.

APPENDIX B

“PRESBYTER JOANNES” (PRESTER JOHN)

“The idea” (says Colonel Yule)[497] “that a Christian potentate of enormous wealth and power, and bearing this title, ruled over vast tracts in the far East, was universal in Europe from the middle of the twelfth to the end of the thirteenth century, after which time the Asiatic story seems gradually to have died away, whilst the Royal Presbyter was assigned to a locus in Abyssinia; the equivocal application of the term _India_ to the East of Asia and the East of Africa facilitating this transfer. Indeed I have a suspicion, contrary to the view now generally taken, that the term may from the first have belonged to an Abyssinian Prince, though circumstances led to its being applied in another quarter for a time.

“Be that as it may, the inordinate report of Prester John’s magnificence became especially diffused from about the year 1165, when a letter full of the most extravagant details was circulated, which purported to have been addressed by this potentate to the Greek Emperor Manuel, the Roman Emperor Frederick, the Pope, and other Christian sovereigns. By the circulation of this letter, glaring fiction as it is, the idea of this Christian Conqueror was planted deep in the mind of Europe, and twined itself round every rumour of revolution in further Asia....”

The title of Prester John, borne by this semi-mythical Christian hero, was transmitted to his successors in Africa; and at the time when Holbein copied the name of his kingdom on to the globe of the “Ambassadors,” was the common appellation of David, King of Abyssinia.

Lord Herbert of Cherbury[498] has a curious passage concerning this personage. In his narrative of the meeting that took place at Bologna between Charles V. and the Pope in the winter of 1532-33,[499] he says:

“During this interview I find in our records a Portuguez in the name of David King of the Ethiopians (vulgarly called Prete Jan) presented himself Ambassador to his Holiness; for authorizing which Charge he brought with him not only Letters of Credence (translated out of the Chaldee to the Italian and Portugal tongues) wherein the said King declared himself to be descended from Queen Candace, mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, but a Crucifix of gold; the further effects of his employment being to require some excellent artificers and 2000 Arquebusiers whom he would use in a war against the Turk in Egypt, when his Holiness would compose the differences in Western Parts, and join all Christian Princes for recovery of the Holy Land; pretending thereupon in the name of that King to render obedience to the Pope as the true successor of St. Peter. But this (as Augustino de Augustini, an Italian there present, and sometimes servant to Cardinal Woolsey, hath it in his letter to Cromwell[500]) made the rest suspected; and the rather that other circumstances made it probable, that this Ambassador was suborned partly by the Portugal to countenance his monopoly of spices towards those parts (much grudged by his neighbour Princes), and partly by the Pope to advance his authority and reputation.”

FOOTNOTES

[1] The terms right and left signify, throughout this study, the spectator’s right and left.

[2] The picture was acquired, with two others, from the late Earl of Radnor, for £55,000; of which £25,000 was contributed by the State, and £30,000 by Messrs. Nath. Rothschild and Sons, Sir Edward Guinness, Bart. (now Lord Iveagh), and Mr. Charles Cotes. (See Catalogue of the National Gallery, under “Holbein.”)

[3] The husband of Mme. Vigée Le Brun, the painter.

[4] These measurements are incorrect. See note 4, page 9.

[5] Le Brun, “Galerie des Peintres Flamands, Hollandais et Allemands.” Paris, 1792, vol. i., page 7.

[6] The following entries occur in the Account Books of Longford Castle:

1808, Feb. 18, Buchanan, Picture Dealer, on account, £100. 1809, June 24, Buchanan and his assignee Halden, £1,000.

As on a print of the picture at the British Museum a note is inscribed, “sold by Buchanan for 1,000 guineas,” there can be no doubt that the entries in question refer to “The Ambassadors.” These and other facts relating to the Longford period in the story of the picture have been kindly communicated to the writer by Lady Radnor.

[7] “Some account of the Life and Works of Hans Holbein,” by Ralph Nicholson Wornum, London, 1867, chap. xiv., page 275.

[8] “Holbein und seine Zeit,” by Dr. Alfred Woltmann, second German edition, vol. i., page 372, vol. ii., page 141.

[9] “Archæologia,” vol. xliv., part ii., pp. 450-455. (“Remarks on some pictures of Quintin Matsys and Holbein in the Collection of the Earl of Radnor at Longford Castle,” by John Gough Nichols, Esq., F.S.A.) In spite of errors of fact and speculation, Mr. Gough Nichols’ treatment of the subject was by far the most scientific it had met with up to that time.

[10] Amongst the Windsor drawings by Holbein there are two portraits of Wyat. Several oil paintings also exist of this personage.

[11] Curiously enough, Mr. Gough Nichols actually cites the name of George de Selve, Bishop of Lavaur, but rejects it, having examined it only with regard to the left-hand figure, which obviously is not that of a Bishop! So near did he come to the truth.

[12] “Times,” September, 1890. “Art Journal,” January, 1891.

[13] It seems unnecessary to record here the many interesting suggestions put forward for the identification of Holbein’s sitters. An exception should perhaps be made with regard to Mr. Sidney Colvin’s proposal of Nicholas Bourbon, the poet, for the second figure; because, in consequence of an article from his pen in the “Art Journal” for January, 1891, the idea was repeated in more permanent form, though merely as a surmise, by Mr. Lionel Cust, in the “Dictionary of National Biography” (art. “Holbein”). It is sufficient to say here that Mr. Colvin immediately withdrew his suggestion when the real identity of the second individual was made known. (“Times,” Dec. 10, 1895.)

[14] The seigneurie of Avaux in Champagne was raised to the rank of a Comté in 1638, in favour of Jean Jacques de Mesmes, who had married the heiress of that estate.

[15] See note relating to the sons of Jean de Selve, part iii.

[16] “Times,” May 15, 1894. Mr. Dickes had a different theory of his own which his interesting find materially assisted to overthrow.

[17] The catalogue of the National Gallery (1898) gives the dimensions as follows: “In oil, of ten vertical panels, 6 ft. 10 in. high, by 6 ft. 10¼ in. wide.” It is curious that while the catalogue of the Beaujon sale makes the picture much wider than high, Le Brun’s description, about five years later in date, exactly reverses those proportions. Le Brun’s measurements are obviously the less incorrect of the two, as the engraving in the “Galerie des Peintres Flamands,” etc., shows that the picture, if represented in proportions that at all corresponded with the original, was, in his time, much higher than broad; but both descriptions must have been very inaccurate. Excessive carelessness on the part of the French writers is probably the main explanation of the discrepancies.

[18] The spectator’s right.

[19] The signature and date have been recorded as existent or non-existent at various times in the history of the picture, according to the condition of the painting and of the light at the moment of examination. In the excellent circumstances it now enjoys, both one and the other are plainly visible.

[20] Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale, Cabinet des Estampes, Cote Yᵈ, 184; and a second copy in the same library, Imprimés, V, 8201, 18. Catalogue de tableaux ... après le décès de M. Beaujon ... redigé par P. Rémy et C. F. Julliot, fils. Pp. 7 et 8, Ecole des Pays-Bas, Jean Holbein. In the margin of the first copy named is a note in ink: “Prix de vente 602L. A été vendu avec le No. précédent et pour la même somme.” The preceding number (16) is under the same heading “Jean Holbein.” But as it is said to represent “La Cour de François II.,” who began to reign in 1559, while Holbein died in 1543, it is scarcely necessary to observe that, _if rightly described_, it can have had nothing to do with this painter. The sale began on April 25, 1787; the “Ambassadors” and its companion picture were disposed of on May 5.

[21] “Revue de Champagne et de Brie,” vol. xxiv., page 318. M. Lefèvre-Pontalis alludes to the same notice in his preface to the “Correspondance politique d’Odet de Selve,” edited by him for the French Foreign Office.

[22] The paragraph in brackets is in another writing. See facsimile, facing page 12.

[23] Up to Easter (April 13), 1533, the year was still 1532 by the old reckoning.

[24] “[Remarks on the subject of an excellent picture of the Sieur d’Inteville Polizy, and George de Selve, Bishop of Lavour, showing the offices they held, and the time of their decease.

“In this picture is represented, life-size, Messire Jean de Dintevile chevalier Sieur de Polizy, near Bar-sur-Seyne, Bailly of Troyes, who was Ambassador in England for King Francis I. in the years 1532 [O.S.] and 1533 and since Governour of Monsieur Charles de France, second son (_sic_) of the said King; the same Charles died at Forest Monstier in the year 1545, and the said Sr. de Dintevile in the year 1555. Interred in the Church of the said Polizy. There is also represented in the said picture, Messire George de Selve, Bishop of Lavaur, a personage of great learning and virtue, who was Ambassador with the Emperor Charles V.; the said Bishop was the son of Messire Jean de Selve, Premier President of the Parliament of Paris; the said Bishop died in 1541, having in the above-mentioned year 1532, or 1533, gone to England by permission of the King, to visit the said Sieur de Dintevile, his intimate friend, and also of all his family; and they two having met in England an excellent Dutch painter, employed him to make this picture, which was carefully preserved at the said place, Polizy, up to the year 1653.”

This document is now the property of the Trustees of the National Gallery.]

[25] Possibly the writing of the docket might be identified by a person conversant with the handwritings of the French antiquaries of the seventeenth century, who did such good service by the preservation of ancient manuscripts.

[26] “Gallia Christiana” (Lutetiæ, 1715), vol. xiii. (1722), page 344. “Ecclesia Vaurensis,” No. xxi., Georgius de Selve.

[27] This deed, preserved at Villiers-par-Cerny, near La Ferté-Alais (Seine-et-Oise), and never before published, was kindly placed at the writer’s disposal by the Marquis de Selve. The Papal licence forms an authoritative standard by means of which the many loose statements regarding the bishop’s age, with which the printed notices of his life abound, may be easily checked. Villiers was owned by Jean de Selve, Premier President, father of the Bishop of Lavaur, at least as early as 1528.

[28] Joachim de Dinteville, the head of the elder line who resided at Dinteville in Champagne, died in 1607. He was Lieutenant du Roi in that province, and a man of great ability and reputation. His correspondence has been published in the “Revue de Champagne et de Brie.” With his demise the male line of the house of Dinteville became extinct in both branches.

[29] Brother to Jean, the Ambassador.

[30] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Du Puy, 702 f. 147. Camusat to Du Puy. Madame de Cessac was niece to the Bishop of Auxerre.

[31] Paris, Bibl. Nat. MSS. fr. nouv. acquisition, 6208 (“Corr. des frères de Sainte-Marthe”), f. 74. Camusat to MM. de Sainte-Marthe, Troyes, 21 August (probably 1607). “Je vous envoye une généalogie qui m’a esté donnée par la dame de Sesac, laquelle est de la maison de Polizy Dinteville....”

[32] “Meslanges Historiques,” part ii., p. 211 (Troyes, 1st ed., 1619).

[33] Not to be confounded with a distant connection, Louis de Castlenau, Marquis de Cessac, a celebrated gambler, who is alluded to by various writers of the time. John Evelyn mentions having paid this person a sum of money owed to him by Lord Berkeley, which Castelnau immediately played away. (“Diary,” Bray’s ed., vol. ii., p. 107.)

[34] Dubuisson-Aubenay, “Journal des guerres civiles,” edited by M. Saige, vol. ii., pp. 65-73. The Dictionaries of Nobility, etc., mention only the daughter, Charlotte-Marie, who survived.

[35] Imperial territory.

[36] Dubuisson-Aubenay, “Journal des guerres civiles,” vol. ii., pp. 65-73.

[37] Polisy was sold 1654, Deschenetz in 1656, the smaller properties no doubt following suit as occasion offered.

[38] Memoir in explanation of three letters sent by Monsʳ. Camusat, Canon of St. Pierre at Troyes, [touching a picture made in England of George de Selve, Bp. of Lavaur, who had gone thither to visit the Bailly of Troies, Sr. de Polizi, Jean d’Inteville, at that time the king’s ambassador].

There are two relating to the Bishop of Lavaur, George de Selve, son of M. le Premier President de Selve, which Bishop had been invited by M. de Polizy, bailly of Troyes, ambassador in England in the years 1532 [O.S.] and 1533, to visit him in England, which he did, having first taken leave of the king. And being in England, they had made the excellent picture by a Dutch painter, Holben, which picture was preserved in the House of Polizy, distant but one league from Bar-sur-Seine, a hundred and forty [_sic_] years and more, as belonging to the Seigneur of the place, Sʳ. de Sessac, until the year 1653, when he had it removed to Paris, to his house near the parish of St. Sulpice; the said picture representing the said Sr. de Polizy, Jean de d’Inteville, and the said Bishop of Lavaur who was afterwards ambassador with Charles V.; the said Bishop died in 1541. The said picture is considered the finest piece of painting in France in the opinion of the best painters. M. le Maréchal du Plessis-Praslain bought the estate of Polisy for three hundred thousand livres from the said Sr. de Sessac.

M. de Vic, garde des sceaux, formerly said that it was the most beautiful piece of painting in France.

M. George de Selve, and his brothers, worthily served France in various embassies and legations.

[39] The portion between brackets is in another hand. See facsimile, on opposite page.

[40] It will be remembered that these dates are reckoned in the old style, _i.e._, the year beginning at Easter. Jean de Dinteville was in England on this occasion from February to November, 1533. The commencement of his sojourn would therefore belong to 1532, by the old reckoning.

[41] The name “Holben” is inserted between the lines, but is in the same hand and of the same date as the writing which surrounds it. See facsimile, on opposite page.

[42] Obviously a slip of the pen for “cent vingt ans.”

[43] “Méri de Vic, sieur d’Ermenonville, président au parlement de Toulouse, conseiller d’Etat, garde des sceaux (24 Dec., 1621), mort le 2 sept. 1622.” (Lalanne, “Dict. Hist. de la France.”)

[44] Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Collection Godefroy, Portefeuille 216, f. 34.

[45] “... The said Bishop ... went to visit in England in 1532 [O.S.] an intimate friend of his, Mr. de Polizy, Jean de d’Inteville, bailly of Troyes, who was then ambassador with Henry VIII.; and then also the said Bishop and Bailly of Troyes had made in England the excellent picture which is now at Paris, in the dwelling of M. de Sessac, in which the said Bailly and Bishop are represented life-size; the said picture is by the hand of a Dutchman; the piece is esteemed the richest and best wrought that is to be found in France.”

[46] Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Fonds Godefroy, p. 520, ff. 282 and 283. Mémoire de M. Camusat, chanoine de Troyes touchant les enfans et descendans de Mr. le premr. président de Selves, etc. Dated 1654.

[47] Archives of Polisy, kindly communicated by M. Abrand, the proprietor’s agent.

[48] Paris, Arch. Nat., Y 25, fol. 325.

[49] Berty et Tisserand, “Topographie Historique du vieux Paris” (Région du Bourg St. Germain), pp. 155, 157, 159. (Paris, 1876.)

[50] In 1779 Carlos de la Traverse wrote from St. Ildefonse (Spain) to M. d’Angeviller, proposing to him to buy some cartoons for tapestry designed by Holbein. But the offer was declined on the ground that Holbein was “_un peintre sec et demi-gothique_.” (“Nouvelles Archives de l’Art français,” IIᵉ Série, t. i., 7th of the collection, pp. 258-262.) The cartoons in question represented scenes from the Passion.

[51] In 1661 M. de Cessac signed a deed in the house “on pend pour enseigne le Croissant,” Rue de Bourbon (Toulouse, Arch. de la Hte. Garonne). In 1669, the date of his marriage with Anne Louise de Broglie, he was in the Rue des Boucheries, Faubourg St. Germain. The marriage contract reveals that he possessed at this time, in all, three houses in Paris; the other two being situated in the Rue des “Viels” Augustins. He had therefore parted with the “logis” in the Rue du Four. The contract confers on him the power to sell, or exchange, in like manner, the three houses now in question. Subsequent legal deeds show a series of further changes.

[52] Archives du Var, B 197 (quoted by M. Dardenne).

[53] Milhars is situated in the Department of Tarn, on a rocky height commanding the junction of the small river Cérou with the Aveyron. For all the facts relating to the history of the Château, and for many of those which concern its occupants, the writer is indebted to M. Henri Dardenne, of Carcassonne, Trésorier-Général of the Department of Aude. This gentleman, who is the author of an interesting (unpublished) history of Milhars and its successive owners, based on original documents, most kindly placed his manuscript at the writer’s disposal.

[54] Camusat himself possessed portraits of Guillaume, Seigneur Deschenetz, and Gaucher, Seigneur de Vanlay, brothers of Jean the Ambassador, as well as that of their cousin, Joachim de Dinteville, head of the elder branch of the family, whose residence was at Dinteville in Champagne. The two first-named portraits Camusat left by will (Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Coll. Godefroy, vol. 308, f. 116), to D’Hozier, author of the “Nobiliaire de Champagne”; that of Joachim de Dinteville, to the Abbé Bonhomme, a well-known collector of the time at Troyes. (See Bonnaffé, “Les Collectionneurs de l’ancienne France”). The indifference displayed by the Marquis de Cessac to Dinteville records, in allowing Camusat to acquire these portraits (either at the time of the sale of Polisy, or earlier), brings into strong relief the value placed upon “The Ambassadors,” which seems to have been the only picture retained. This is the more striking, as M. de Cessac possessed, it appears, a “Cabinet” of portraits of some interest, derived from the neighbourhood of his family estates, Cessac and Cazillac. Two of these were reproduced for Du Chesne’s “Hist. des Cardinaux François” (Paris, 1660, pages 426 and 521). The two Cardinals in question belonged respectively to the dioceses of Cahors and Limoges; proving sufficiently that the Marquis de Cessac who owned their portraits was François de Cazillac, and not, as M. Bonnaffé states (“Dict. des Amateurs français”), Louis de Castelnau, the notorious card-player, whose property lay in quite a different part of the country. (See also note, page 15.)

[55] The deed recording the attempted donation was drawn up at Milhars, 1st September, 1665. Roger de Guénégaud was the son of Henri Du Plessis Guénégaud, Marquis de Plancy, the well-known Secretary of State and Garde des Sceaux. This gentleman had married Isabelle (or Elizabeth) de Choiseul, daughter of Charles de Choiseul, Marquis de Praslin, and of Claude de Cazillac, aunt of M. de Cessac. As such, Roger de Guénégaud descended, through his mother, in as direct a line from the Dinteville heiress as the Marquis de Cessac himself. The latter lived on terms of intimate friendship with these relations. Mme. de Sévigné records having met M. de Cessac at Fresnes, the country place of Du Plessis Guénégaud. (Letter to the Marquis de Pomponne, 1st August, 1667.)

[56] M. Aug. Vidal of Albi (Tarn) kindly made researches for the writer on this point, both in the Archives at Toulouse and at the Château of St. Géry, now owned by Madame O’Byrn, a descendant of the family of Rey de St. Géry, who purchased Milhars from the Lamoignon family in 1765. This lady, who has at St. Géry a large quantity of legal papers brought from Milhars, was good enough to place them at M. Vidal’s disposition, but unfortunately without result.

[57] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MSS. français, 28,998, f. 17a, De la Roche-Fontenilles. At the end are the words: “Copie pour Monsieur Voisin,” and the date 1685.

[58] See _ante_, page 15.

[59] Dardenne MS., p. 164, quoted from the Minutes Gaugiron, p. 51. These are one of M. Dardenne’s most important sources. M. Gaugiron was a notary of Milhars, with whom many of the legal documents of this period were deposited.

[60] St. Simon (“Mémoires”), who has nothing but sarcasm for the family of Mesmes in general, is full of admiration for the goodness, amiability, and unaffected piety of Mme. de Fontenilles. This lady seems to have been in every way a contrast to her husband.

[61] It will be seen later on, however, that the Voisin inheritance was bequeathed elsewhere, so that on Mme. Voisin’s side the connection could only have affected the fate of the picture by supposing that it was given to, or purchased by, the Premier Président, before her death.

[62] Marie-Renée, who, owing to her quarrel with her mother and residence in Champagne, probably knew nothing of the story of the picture, would certainly have been none the wiser if this were the case.

[63] Perhaps no member of the Lamoignon race is better known to history than this one. Born in 1735, Chrétien-François de Lamoignon, Marquis de Basville et de Milhars, became a President _à mortier_ of the Parliament of Paris in 1758. Mixed up in the political storms which preceded the outbreak of the Revolution, he shared the exile of his party in 1772; was recalled; appointed Garde des Sceaux in 1787; resigned the following year, and died at Basville in 1789.

[64] Chrétien-François died, however, and his son fled, at the outbreak of the Revolution, so the arrangement came to an untimely end.

[65] Nicolas Beaujon, a native of Bordeaux, had raised himself, not always by the most creditable means, from a humble origin to a position of great wealth and influence. He was Banker to the Court, and Treasurer to the Order of St. Louis. Although society smiled at the eccentricities of the _parvenu_, the magnificence of his house and collections made it impossible to overlook their owner. His charities, moreover, were immense. For these and the facts given in the text respecting Beaujon, the writer is indebted to Dr. Charles Fournel, whose little work, “L’Hôpital Beaujon depuis son origine jusqu’à nos jours” (Paris, E. Deuter, 1884), gives the only correct information to be had respecting the millionaire, being founded throughout on original documents. The popular compendiums of biography bristle, as usual, with errors; not excepting Jal, who, however, gives one authentic document.

[66] Now the Elysée, the residence of the President of the Republic.

[67] The letters and chronicles of the time are rich in local colouring, and are preferable for the present object to the stately histories written in a subsequent age. The immense stores of manuscripts preserved in the public libraries of France, especially in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, fortunately facilitate the task to a great extent. Among printed sources none are more valuable than the various series of State Papers, published both in England and France, the “Meslanges Historiques” of Camusat, and—for a contemporary French view of the events of the time—the Memoirs of the Du Bellay brothers.

[68] Literally, “Des Chenets,” and often so written in early records. But the name soon lost its original meaning and was corrupted into one word.

[69] Paris, Arch. Nat., X¹ᵃ 8611, dated Amboise, 4th Dec., 1516.

[70] Ph. de Comines, “Mémoires” (ed. by Mlle. Dupont for the Soc. de l’Hist. de France), vol. ii., p. 436.

[71] Michelet, “Hist. de France au XVIᵉ̀ᵐᵉ siècle” (ed. 1855), “Renaissance,” pp. 190, 191.

[72] A royal order of 1511 permits Gaucher de Dinteville to recover certain moneys due to him from the heirs of Jean, Duc de Nemours, which he had previously been unable to claim owing to absence from home. In this deed he is called “Seigneur de Pollisy et bailli de Troyes.”

[73] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds fr. 7853.

[74] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Cab. des Titres, Pièces Orig., vol. 1004, No. 65, Dossier Dinteville.

[75] Charrière, “Négociations de la France dans le Levant” (Doc. inéd. sur l’hist. de France), vol. i., part ii., chap. i., “Premières Relations de la France avec la Porte.”

[76] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fond fr. 5502, f. 50.

[77] Paris, Arch. Nat., X¹ᵃ 1523 (Rég. du Conseil, f. 33).

[78] Boutiot, “Hist. de Troyes,” p. 285.

[79] Marguerite, the widowed Duchesse d’Alençon, was married to the King of Navarre in January, 1527.

[80] Blois.

[81] Louise of Savoy, the king’s mother.

[82] Génin, Lettres de Marguerite de Valois, vol. i., Lettre 56, p. 224. Marguerite “à mon nepveu, M. le Grant-Maistre, de Gabarre, le 17 Octobre, 1527.”

[83] It was not the first, nor perhaps the second visit, which Anne de Montmorency had paid to our shores. In 1519 he had been one of eight hostages, four nobles and four commoners, sent to England in connection with the cession of Tournay to France. He bore at that time the title of La Rochepot, which has caused Du Bellay to confound him with his younger brother, subsequently known by that name (see Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 13, note 1). One of his fellow-hostages in 1519 was Charles de Solier, Comte de Morette, later more than once French ambassador in England, and the subject of the magnificent portrait by Holbein now in the Dresden Gallery. Another was Antoine des Prez, Seigneur de Montpesat, who also returned subsequently as ambassador (see “Mémoires Du Bellay,” ed. Petitot, vol. i., p. 282). Hall is wrong in saying that there were only four hostages altogether, but identifies Montmorency correctly (see Ellis’s “Original Letters,” 3rd series, vol. i., letter lxxviii., where the passage from Hall’s Chronicle is quoted).

[84] Lefèvre had previously been the instructor of Renée of France, whose sympathies with the Reformers were well known. (Fontana, “Renata di Francia,” vol. i., p. 275, where the further authority is cited: Franz Blümmer, “Renata von Ferrara,” p. 24.) Jacques Lefèvre was born at Etaples about 1455, and died at Nérac in 1537.

[85] Guillaume Budé was born at Paris in 1467. He was secretary to Charles VIII.; was sent by Louis XII. on various missions to the Holy See; was appointed Master of the King’s Library under Francis I., and persuaded that sovereign to found the Collège Royal. His learning and his proficiency in Greek brought him high reputation; he was also the author of many works and translations on a variety of subjects. Budé died in 1540.

[86] Desiderius Erasmus was born at Rotterdam in 1467. Famous alike for profound learning and biting wit, no one, perhaps, exercised greater influence than he in preparing the way for the Reformation. Like many of the humanists of his time, especially those of France, he was not, however, prepared to go to the extreme length of secession from Rome, and was therefore blamed by the Lutherans, rather unjustly perhaps, for weakness and half-heartedness. His relations with England, especially with Warham and More, and his portraits by Holbein, are too well known to need more than a passing mention here. It was owing to his introduction that Holbein first came to England, and was received into the house of Sir Thomas More. Erasmus died at Basle in 1536.

[87] Roussel, another divine of Lutheran leanings, became confessor to the Queen of Navarre, and subsequently Bishop of Oloron.

[88] Erasmus to Lefèvre, 24 March, 1527. Quoted by Ch. Schmidt, “Gérard Roussel.”

[89] Ch. Schmidt, _ibid._, p. 74.

[90] Erasmus to Germain Brie, 21 September, 1528, quoted by Schmidt, “Gérard Roussel.”

[91] This princess had been brought up by Madame de Châtillon, a lady of high accomplishments, later secretly re-married, it was said, to the Bishop Jean du Bellay.

[92] Daughter of Louis XII. and Anne de Bretagne.

[93] Boutiot, “Hist. de la ville de Troyes,” p. 432. (Paris, 1874.)

[94] Guillaume Du Bellay, Seigneur de Langey, was born at Glatigny, near Montmirail, in 1491, and died 1543. He was Viceroy of Piedmont from 1537, and displayed high capacity in whatever work he undertook. He was part-author of the well-known memoirs, completed by his brother Martin Du Bellay.—Jean Du Bellay, Cardinal, was born 1492, and died at Rome in 1560. As statesman, churchman, ambassador, and author, his career was one of the most distinguished of the reign of Francis I.

[95] Coxe, “Life of Melanchthon,” p. 371.

[96] _Ibid._

[97] That is, two hands clasped in each other.

[98] A third souvenir of the Dinteville, and record of their artistic tastes, in the Church of Thennelières, is the beautiful but ruined white marble figure of Louise de Coligny, wife of Gaucher the younger, who inherited Thennelières from his father. It is apparently of Italian workmanship, and was formerly recumbent. It now leans disconsolate in an upright position against the wall of the church, despoiled of its black marble base. See, for an account of the Church of Thennelières, and illustrations of its curiosities, M. Charles Fichot, in the “Statistique Monumentale de l’Aube.”

[99] Louis de Dinteville, Knight of Rhodes.

[100] Guillaume, fourth son of Gaucher, was brought up in the household of Henry, Count of Nassau, who was attached to the Court of Charles V. The Count of Nassau was related to the Dinteville family, and at his death left to Guillaume a house in Paris. On this side the family had both Spanish and German connections.

[101] François (II.), Bishop of Auxerre; Jean, Bailly of Troyes; and Gaucher the younger, who was employed in the public service to carry despatches, etc. All the brothers further held Court appointments.

[102] The following is a literal prose translation of the epitaph:

“The support of the good, Gauche de Dinteville After having in the civil wars Of France acquired the name of sage though young; After having in the renowned expedition Made by Charles to Naples and Rome, Won the name of a brave gentleman; After having, in the ancient city of Sienna, Filled the post of head of the Republic; After having been Bailly of Troyes In Champagne, and seen born to him Sons, by whom, in his lifetime, Rhodes, Spain and France were served; After having in the King’s house had the lot Of a good Maître d’hostel in Ordinary, And of First Maître d’hostel to M. le Dauphin: Seeing his end at last approaching, And knowing that happy none can be Until he has put off this terrestrial robe, He desired to give to his agèd eyes That last happiness, of being closed by his own family; The love and pity of whom have laid him here, Full of years, honours, riches, and friends.”

[103] Paris, Arch. Nat., P. 164², côte 1494.

[104] Gaucher de Dinteville attended the coronation of Francis I. as a Knight of St. Michael. (Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds fr. 32865, Chevaliers de l’Ordre de St. Michel depuis 1515 jusqu’en 1560. This list is, however, incomplete, being an early attempt to reconstruct the roll of the Knights after the destruction of the original at the time of the French Revolution. The MS. expressly states, with regard to Jean, that the only documentary evidence at the disposal of the compiler was an act of 1588, in which Jean is termed Chevalier de l’Ordre du Roi, and the manuscript list of the Knights drawn up by D’Hozier, in 1660, which gives him the same quality. D’Hozier, a famous genealogist, and author of the “Nobiliaire de Champagne,” had every opportunity for obtaining correct information, and had, of course, access to the roll which was subsequently destroyed. Although the exact date of Jean’s admission to the Order is unknown, the fact of his having been a Knight of St. Michael is therefore incontestable.)

[105] Charrière, “Négociations de la France dans le Levant,” vol. i., p. 146, Villiers L’Isle-Adam to Montmorency.

[106] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 172.

[107] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, 702, fol. 131.

[108] Lebeuf, “Mémoires concernant l’Eglise d’Auxerre,” pp. 138-199, quoted by Sandret, “Revue Hist. et Nobiliaire,” xiii., 220.

[109] See illustration, Part II., chap. vii.

[110] Letters and Papers, For. and Dom., Henry VIII., vol. v., 1531-32, No. 579.

[111] Gilles de la Pommeraye was a right-hand man of Montmorency. He had previously been French ambassador at the court of the Archduchess Margaret at Brussels.

[112] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” Letter of La Pommeraye to the Bishop of Auxerre, March 10, 1532.

[113] ... “You are right to envy me being with so amiable a prince, for I think that after the king our master, there has been none for two hundred years past of greater intelligence or grace, or more magnanimous than this one. And to speak frankly to you, the said king our master is under an obligation to him for the good will he shows him, by which I profit greatly, for I am treated here, not as an ambassador, but as a prince of the country; lodged in the house of this said king, and, when I go to see him, always eating at his table. So you must not wonder if I beg and exhort you to uphold his quarrel.

“This prince has a great wish to chastise the priests of this country and not to allow them to enjoy such great privileges as has been their habit; which is caused by the wrong that is being done him at Rome, which is so great that it could not be surpassed. It is a strange thing that the Emperor should have so much power over the Pope as to prevent him doing right and justice there where he knows them to be.”

[114] Bridewell Palace.

[115] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 78b, La Pommeraye to the Bishop of Auxerre, 20 March, 1532. The avowed object of La Pommeraye’s mission was to support the king’s desire that his cause should be heard in England and not at Rome. (Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. v., 1531-32, No. 614, Chapuys to Charles V.)

[116] Balavoyne was the maternal uncle of Théodore de Bèze, the historian of the French Reformation, whose uncle, on the paternal side, Monsieur de Bèze the elder, an orthodox Catholic, died beneath the protecting roof of the bishop’s house in Paris, during the absence of the latter in Rome. Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Coll. Godefroy, p. 254, Nos. 23, 24.

[117] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 726, ff. 90, 91. Letter from Berthereau to the Bishop of Auxerre.

[118] _Ibid._, vol. 728, f. 51.

[119] Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Coll. Godefroy, Letter of Balavoyne to the Bishop of Auxerre, Nantes, 25 August, 1532.

[120] Du Bellay, “Mémoires,” ed. Petitot, vol. ii., p. 133. These were certainly the only English subjects admitted to the French Order at this period. The reason given by Du Bellay for the selection of the two dukes sufficiently proves the high esteem in which the distinction was held.

[121] Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” p. 110. Traicté touchant la contribution que le Roy et le Roy d’Angleterre doyvent faire pour la deffension du Turc. See also p. 109, Double des traictés, etc.

[122] Calendar of State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv., 1527-33, No. 832. Zuan Antonio Venier to the Signory, Oct. 31, 1532.

[123] See note 7, p. 42. Morette, another of the hostages, had already been over on a short mission in the spring of 1528.

[124] Katherine of Aragon.

[125] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. v., 1531-32, No. 1579, Chapuy to Charles V., Nov. 26, 1532. The “king’s house” in question was the palace of Bridewell.

[126] Perhaps his unmarried sister at Polisy, or possibly his mother. Married women were sometimes termed Mademoiselle, though in this case the appellation would not have been strictly correct, the rank of Gaucher de Dinteville entitling his widow to the name of Madame.

[127] Paris, Bibl. de l’Institut, Coll. Godefroy, portfolio 225, ff. 23, 24.

[128] “Besides this, the Grand Maître expressly charged me to write to you that the moment they have left you can come away. I am sure it will be quite right to say good-bye. But whatever remonstrances, on the score of the king’s service or other things, are made, come away; and you will be welcomed and well received, I assure you; not by me, for you will not find me, as I leave to-morrow; and I hope, please God, that on your arrival, you will find your appeals despatched.”

[129] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, 726, f. 107. The Bailly of Troyes to the Bishop of Auxerre, 26 Jan., 1533.

[130] “Be assured, at least such is my fancy, that they are not your friends; but, also, the wisdom of a man is to sit firm in his great encounters. I can tell you that you were in as good grace with the master, when I left Court, as they. Continue as you have begun, and vary nothing, no matter what they may say; and, so long as you speak the truth, care nothing for the rest, for the patron is on your side and three of the most valiant champions.”

[131] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 115b. Gilles de la Pommeraye to the Bishop of Auxerre at Rome. From La Morlaix, near Rennes (in Brittany), 4 Dec., 1532.

[132] Calendar of State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv. (1527-1533), No. 188. Marco Antonio Venier to the Doge and Signory of Venice, London, 20 October, 1527.

[133] Whom Falier came to succeed as resident ambassador.

[134] Sir William Weston.

[135] Jean Du Bellay, at this time Bishop of Bayonne, was in 1528 resident French ambassador in London.

[136] Calendar of State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv. (1527-33), No. 380.

[137] Letters and Papers, For. and Dom., Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), Nos. 768 and 1227, De Dinteville to Cromwell.

[138] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. v., 1531-1532, No. 627, Grant 18. Bridewell Palace has fared badly compared with some other houses of the same date, for not only has every trace of it disappeared, but few records or prints exist to give an idea of its appearance in Tudor times. The early period at which it ceased to be a royal residence probably accounts for this deficiency. Edward VI. converted it to benevolent purposes as a kind of workhouse for vagrants; and this use, gradually approaching the functions of a house of correction, was continued in the new buildings erected after the Great Fire almost to the present day. Nearly all the engravings of Bridewell refer to its later history. There are, however, one or two exceptions, on a small scale, and on these the above description is founded. Perhaps the most accurate idea of the palace in Tudor times is to be obtained from the “View of London and Southwark in 1543,” by Anthony Vanden Wyngrerde (Oxford, Bodleian Library; a facsimile in pen-and-ink by N. Whittock may be seen at the Guildhall, London). As certain details of this view agree with a later drawing of about 1660, it is likely that it is more correct than the intermediate version by Ralph Aggas, which shows variations not to be found either in the earlier or later engraving mentioned (“Civitas Londinum,” a map of London, Westminster and Southwark, surveyed by Ralph Aggas about the year 1560, Guildhall Library). The view of 1660 may be seen in “Bridewell Palace as it appeared about the year 1660” (Published for the Proprietors by W. Herbert, Penlington Place, Lambeth, 1817). The same work gives a vignette professing to represent Bridewell in the year 1540. As this view differs equally from that given by Wyngrerde (1543) and that of 1660, it should probably be received with caution.

[139] State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv. (1527-1533), No. 374, Gerardo Molza to the Marchioness of Mantua. So great was the throng that, in leaving, some of the Italians actually lost their shoes.

[140] Subsequently known as Whitehall.

[141] Letters and Papers, For. and Dom., Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 1595, Grant 10, February 16, 24 Henry VIII.

[142] Mario Savorgnano, State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv. (1527-1533), No. 682, quoted from the Sanuto Diaries, 25 August, 1531. The whole letter is of great interest, as is also No. 694 in the same volume (Report of England made to the Senate by Ludovico Falier, 10 November, 1531). The Venetians write with enthusiastic admiration of the country and capital.

[143] Old London Bridge; the only bridge London at that time possessed. It was massively constructed on a large number of boat-shaped piers, and covered with houses and shops. There was also a beautiful Gothic Chapel upon it.

[144] St. Paul’s Cathedral and Westminster Abbey. The latter part of the sentence alludes of course to Henry VII.’s Chapel.

[145] Westminster (in which York Place was now included) and Bridewell.

[146] Howard, Duke of Norfolk; Brandon, Duke of Suffolk; Fitzroy, Duke of Richmond. (State Papers, Venetian, vol. iv., No. 682.)

[147] Grey, Marquis of Dorset; Courtenay, Marquis of Exeter. (_Ibid._)

[148] Apparently of the lesser citizens, apart from the palaces previously described.

[149] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. iv. (1531-1532), pp. 310 and 316, March and November, 1529. The ambassador was one of Dinteville’s predecessors.

[150] _Ibid._, vol. vi. (1533), No. 111, Montpesat to Montmorency.

[151] _Ibid._, vol. vi. (1533), No. 160, Chapuys to Charles V., London, 15 February, 1533.

[152] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” p. 4. Mémoire et Instruction a Monsieur le Bailly de Troyes, etc., 27 January, 1533.

[153] Letters and Papers, vol. vi. (1533), No. 160, Chapuys to Charles V., 15 February, 1533.

[154] _Ibid._, vol. v. (1532), No. 1545, Clement VII. to Henry VIII., 15 November, 1532.

[155] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., pp. 207, 213, where a list of authorities will be found.

[156] It is quite possible that Dinteville was acquainted with More before the embassy of 1533. La Pommeraye, writing from England to the Bishop of Auxerre in the summer of the previous year, says, “Mr. Morres, _que vous congnoissez_, qui estoit Chancelier de ce Roy s’est desfaict, ou l’on l’a desfaict, ne sçay lequel, de sa Chancellerie, & est demeuré personne privée....” (Mr. Morres [note by Camusat: Th. Morus], _whom you know_, who was Chancellor to this king, has resigned or has been deprived of his Chancellorship, I do not know which, and has retired into private life.) Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” p. 93, Gilles de la Pommeraye, from London, to the Bishop of Auxerre at Rome, June 21st, 1532.

[157] Some of the instruments seen in the picture of the “Ambassadors” are identical with those introduced into the portrait of Kratzer, and may have been lent by him (see Part IV., chap. ii.).

[158] In 1533 George Gyze, or Gisze, the subject of Holbein’s fine portrait now at Berlin, was the Alderman’s Deputy (see Appendix A.).

[159] On one occasion the king sent instructions to Cromwell to despatch Barnes immediately in post, to Germany, with Deryk (or Diryk). (Foxe, “Life of Melanchthon,” p. 385.) Holbein, as is well known, painted two Dericks in 1533: Derick Born, whose portrait is now at Windsor, Derick Tybis at Vienna. The latter certainly, the former probably, was a German merchant of London. As the king’s servants were frequently spoken of by their Christian names only (Holbein as “Haunce,” Kratzer as “Nicolas”), either of these Dericks may have been the one sent on the diplomatic mission. Augustus de Augustinus, a foreign agent in English pay, writing to Cromwell from Ratisbon, incloses a copy of an Imperial decree, presumably written in German, with the comment, “_Any of the Steelyard merchants will interpret it to you_.” (Letters and Papers, vol. v., 1532, No. 1027.) In 1538 Kratzer forwarded to Cromwell various papers through the agency of Hans Holbein. It is well known that Kratzer never acquired the English tongue. Had Holbein more success? (Ellis’s “Original Letters,” 3rd series, vol. i., p. 230.)

[160] See the letter of the Bailly of Troyes to his brother, the Bishop of Auxerre, p. 79.

[161] See the extract from Camusat’s memoir on the children and descendants of the Premier Président de Selve, p. 20. Camusat there states that the Bishop of Lavaur came over to England on a visit to Dinteville in 1532; which year ended, according to the old French reckoning, on Easter eve, 1533.

[162] See p. 79, Dinteville’s letter to the Bishop of Auxerre, 23 May, 1533.

[163] Selve had almost certainly been already employed in this capacity by the King of France. See Part III.

[164] Part IV. of this study.

[165] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 465, Chapuys to Charles V., 10 May, 1533.

[166] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” p. 128, Bailly of Troyes to Francis I., 23 May, 1533.

[167] “I have received your letter written from Sommevoyre, by which I understand you to tell me that some time ago you said to the ambassadors of this king [_i.e._, the King of England] when in Italy, that you had heard the Pope say that, regarding the affair of this said king, the marriage would be better made than to make. If this was so, it is a thing which would be of great service to him [_i.e._, to the King of England]. Pray let me know whether, in case the Pope does not desire to take another course than the one mentioned respecting the affairs of this country, I might inform this said king of what you told me; and similarly, if things should become very threatening, whether you would remind the Pope of the expressions he then used to you, telling him that you at once communicated them to the ambassadors of this said king, seeing the affairs of the king [of France] and his, to be but one. If you please, send me your opinion on this matter, which you will do well to discuss a little with our friends, and perhaps with Monseigneur the Grand-Maître and the Bishop of Paris [Jean du Bellay], for the thing is of considerable importance.

“For the rest, we thank you very much, M. de la Tournelle, my cousin and I, for the branches of your yew-tree which you offer to us, but over here we are well furnished with arquebuses and with bad archers, of whom I am the worst.

“Pray send me a drawing of the oval compass of which you wrote; I cannot at all understand the fashion in which it is made.

“I am growing very weary in this country, while awaiting the end of the six months, which will expire on the 22nd July. The Grand-Maître promised me that I should only remain here for the said six months. I pray God he may keep his word. I have had tertian fever, but recovered from it long ago. Please consult a little with M. de Paris about my return. I assure you very earnestly that I am the most melancholy, weary and wearisome ambassador that ever was seen.

“M. de Lavor did me the honour to come to see me, which was no small pleasure to me. There is no need for the Grand-Maître to hear anything about it.

“I have had letters from Scotland from M. de Beauvois. I hope the truce will soon be concluded, for one year, between these two princes.

“The Duke of Norfolk will leave here in two or three days to go and join the king [of France]. Pray make his acquaintance, for here his master holds you in good esteem; he told me so within a week.

“As for the vultures [a species of hawk is here meant], I think it would only be an expense to send them, for this king does not like falconry, and this country is full of such birds.

“I cannot believe that if you go to Rome, it will only be for a short time. If you will believe me, do your utmost to get the commission given to somebody else. Pray attend well to your legal appeals. I cannot think it well that you should leave them behind.

“I am longing to have news of you and to know what you say to the tower and to the pictures. Sir, etc. From London this 23rd May.

“I shall have to go to great expense for this coronation. I have written on the subject to the Grand-Maître, begging him to ask the king to give me some money to meet it with. I should be very glad to hear something of it. I also wrote to M. de Paris, who may mention it to you, and who can help me a great deal about it.

“Your humble servant,

“THE BAILLY.”

[168] The family to which this gentleman belonged was a distinguished one, but it does not appear which individual this was.

[169] The italics are the present writer’s.

[170] French ambassador in Scotland.

[171] The Kings of England and Scotland.

[172] “Evocation” was a legal term which signified the removal of a cause from the jurisdiction of a lower tribunal to that of a higher one.

[173] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 726, f. 46. From the Bailly of Troyes to his brother, the Bishop of Auxerre, 23rd May, 1533.

[174] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 465, Chapuys to Charles V., May 10, 1533. Bonner returned from Rome in January, 1533. See also Froude, “Divorce of Catherine of Aragon,” chap. xii.

[175] Paris, Arch. Nat., J. 962, No. 527. Pagny, 21 Dec., 1533.

[176] Camusat found it amongst the Polisy papers. See “Meslanges Historiques,” part ii., p. 211.

[177] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 205.

[178] “The Queen of England left Greenwich on Thursday at about four o’clock in the afternoon, and came by water in a flat barque, like a brigantine, which was painted in her colours outside, and had several flags flying from it; her ladies and maids of honour being with her. There were besides a hundred or a hundred and twenty other similar barques, which accompanied her, and were much decorated with banners and standards. They had erected on the said barques small masts, slender and very high, to which were attached a great quantity of ropes, as on a large ship, these ropes being all dressed with little flags of taffetas, and, in my opinion, of gold metal, for they shone strongly in the sun. There were also many tambourines, trumpets, flutes, and hautbois. All came in less than half-an-hour from Greenwich to the Tower, where the artillery was very loud. It was very beautiful to see this arrival, for besides the barques, there were, I think, more than two hundred small craft following behind; the whole surface of the river was covered with boats.

“On Friday the Queen did not leave her apartments.

“On Saturday at about five o’clock in the afternoon, the said Lady, attired in her royal robes, which are in the fashion of those of France, or nearly so, mounted a litter, covered within and without with white satin. The litter was open, and above her was carried a canopy of cloth of gold. Behind came twelve ladies on hackneys, who were all dressed in cloth of gold, and their hackneys draped in the same. Then came twelve young ladies on hackneys, all arrayed in crimson velvet. There followed a chariot covered with cloth of gold, with trappings to match. In this chariot were only the Duchess of Norfolk and the Queen’s mother. Then came three gilt chariots, where sat various young ladies; and, behind these, twenty or thirty others on hackneys draped with black velvet.

“Around the litter of the Queen were the Duke of Suffolk, who for that day was High Constable, and the brother of the Duke of Norfolk, Lord William, who was serving in the place of his said brother as Earl Marshal and Lord Chamberlain, which offices are hereditary in this kingdom. Before them went two men, called equerries, who had great bonnets lined with ermine, almost similar to those of the Premier Huissier of Paris.

“After these came the Ambassador of France, accompanied by the Archbishop of Canterbury.

“Afterwards, the Ambassador of Venice, with the Lord Chancellor.

“After these, several bishops, and then the rest of the great lords and gentlemen of this kingdom, to the number, perhaps, of two or three hundred.

“And, before all, went the merchants of France, clad in violet velvet, having each one sleeve in the colours of the Queen; their horses caparisoned in violet taffetas powdered with white crosses.

“At the cross-ways there were scaffoldings, where Mysteries were being played, and fountains running wine; the streets were all lined with the tradespeople, who were kept stationary....

“On Sunday morning, accompanied by all the said lords and gentlemen, the Lady went on foot from her apartments to the church; the road by which she walked was all covered with cloth, and might be of about the same length as the garden of Chantilly. All the bishops and abbots went to fetch the said Lady, accoutred in their mitres and pontifical ornaments, and conducted her to the church; and after having heard a low mass, she mounted on a daïs that had been arranged for her in front of the high altar, which daïs was all covered with red cloth; and round the spot where she sat, which was further raised by two steps, was laid a velvet carpet. And in this place the Lady remained after having been crowned by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who placed the crown on her head and anointed her at the high altar, and then completed the office and mass of the said coronation.

“The Duke of Suffolk, High Constable for that day, remained always near the said Lady, with a great white staff in his hand; close by were also the said Lord William and the Lord Chamberlain. Behind the said Lady were various ladies; duchesses and countesses dressed in scarlet, with cloaks lined with ermine, which are the robes of duchesses and countesses, and their hats on their heads. Similarly the dukes and earls, with many other knights, were dressed in robes of scarlet lined with ermine, almost of the fashion of those of the Premiers Présidents at Paris, with their hoods.

“When the coronation was over the Lady was conducted back as on arrival, with the exception of the bishops, and taken to a great hall where dinner was prepared....

“The hall is very large and was not crowded, for very good order was kept. Beneath the queen’s daïs there were four great tables which filled the whole length of the hall. At the upper end were those of this kingdom who have charge of the Ports, and beneath them, at the same table, various gentlemen: at the corresponding table, at the top and side, were the Archbishops and Bishops, the Lord Chancellor, and several Earl-Knights. At the two other tables on the other side of the hall, at the upper one were the Mayor of London accompanied by the Aldermen; and, at the other table, the ladies, Duchesses, Countesses, and other ladies and young ladies.

“The Duke of Suffolk was gorgeously accoutred, with many stones and pearls, on a courser caparisoned in crimson velvet: he rode about on his horse, round the hall and amongst the tables. Lord William did the same, looking after the service and keeping order. Both remained always bare-headed, which you know is the custom of this country. The king was in a place that he had had made for the occasion, whence he could see all the ceremony without being seen; where he took with him the Ambassadors of France and of Venice.

“At the door of the hall there were conduits spouting wine, anyone who pleased might take some. Similarly there were kitchens to provide food for anyone who came that day; it was a marvel how much was eaten. Trumpets and hautbois sounded for every service, and heralds cried largesse.”

[179] May 29 Anne Boleyn was fetched in state by the Mayor and Corporation of London, and brought to the Tower, whence she returned to Westminster on Saturday for her coronation on Whit Sunday, June 1. (Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 601.

[180] The stepmother of the Duke.

[181] The Countess of Wiltshire.

[182] Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk.

[183] Lord William Howard, brother to the Duke of Norfolk, who, it will be remembered, was now absent in France.

[184] Dinteville and Cranmer.

[185] Carlo Capello and Sir Thomas Audley.

[186] Peeress’s robes corresponding to those still worn by peers.

[187] Westminster Hall.

[188] The hall seems, in fact, to have been arranged much like a College hall at the present day, with the high table across the top and the long tables below placed at right angles to it.

[189] The Barons of the Cinque Ports.

[190] Knights of the Garter?

[191] Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” part ii., p. 17. Narration de l’Entrée et couronnement de la Royne d’Angleterre Anne de Boulan à Londres, le 2 (it should be, le 1) juin, 1533.

[192] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 707. Francis wrote back a pacifying answer denying all knowledge of the rumours referred to.

[193] The 22nd July. Dinteville’s embassy was reckoned from the 22nd January.

[194] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 130_b_, Mr. de Polizy, Bailly of Troyes, to M. Du Bellay, Bishop of Paris, 7 June, 1533.

[195] See description of the Lute, Part IV.

[196] His name was really Maraviglia, but had become gallicized by long residence in France.

[197] The subject, at a later period, when a young widow, of Holbein’s beautiful portrait, now the property of the Duke of Norfolk.

[198] Ranke, “Zeitalter der Reformation,” vol. iii., p. 313. Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 207.

[199] Decrue, etc., p. 213, where a list of authorities is given.

[200] Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” part ii., p. 135. Francis I. to the Bailly de Troyes, 16 July, 1533. See also the following letter from the same to the same, 12 August, 1533.

[201] Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” p. 139. The Bailly of Troyes to Francis I., 3 September, 1533.

[202] “M. le Bailly, knowing well how long you have been over there, and that it is very reasonable you should go to your home to put your affairs in order, I have been willing to grant you leave to depart whenever it may please you; and am sending to take your place the Sieur de Castillon, a gentleman of my chamber, who is the bearer of this.”

[203] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., page 9. Francis I. to the Bailly of Troyes, 6 Sept., 1533.

[204] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., page 142. The Bailly of Troyes to the King of France, Greenwich, 2 Nov., 1533.

[205] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., page 213.

[206] “Nota, that often the king after his tempers has said to me that he esteems me such that I should neither say nor write anything to diminish friendship between them, and that his Council have begged me to the same effect.”

[207] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., pp. 19-21.

[208] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., No. 1481, Grant 10.

[209] _Ibid._, No. 1435, Castillon to the Bishop of Paris, London, 17 November, 1533.

[210] “I begged the Duke of Norfolk and others who seemed to be among the principal members of the Council of this said king, to give the king their master to understand ... that one may so press and worry a friend as to become importunate.”

“... for I doubt if the gentlemen of his Council to whom I spoke will dare to say such things to him as boldly as I shall say them.”

[211] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 143. The Bailly of Troyes to the Grand-Maître, 7th November, 1533.

[212] Claude Dodieu, Sieur de Vély, was repeatedly employed as French ambassador to Charles V., and also to the Holy See. He was made Bishop of Rennes in 1541, and died in 1558.

[213] Some of the most interesting of these letters are only known to have existed by entries in catalogues, having been amongst the objects of the thefts from French libraries perpetrated in the first half of the present century. See “Dictionnaire des Pièces autographes volées,” etc., by MM. Lalanne et Bordier, Paris, 1851.

[214] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MSS. fr. 15629, No. 473.

[215] Sleidan, 132-135. Clairembault, 334, No. 4949; quoted by Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 221.

[216] Boutiot, “Hist. de la Ville de Troyes,” p. 346.

[217] Documents inédits sur l’Histoire de France. Relations des Amb. Vénétiens. Voyage de Jerôme Lippomano, Amb. de Venise en France, par son sécrétaire.

[218] Clement VII. had died in September, 1534, and Cardinal Farnese (Paul III.) had been elected Pope in his place.

[219] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 265, f. 239. Letter of Anne de Montmorency to Cardinal Du Bellay.

[220] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. ix. (1535), No. 434. Chapuys to Charles V.

[221] “Besides the charge which I gave you the other day on your departure, to speak to the King of England on the subject of the contribution, I wish you to say to him that if perchance the Emperor were disposed to invade me, and that I had to arm and equip on a large scale as might be the case, and that ... in order not to lose the occasion and the said expenditure, I chose to employ it for the recovery of my State and Duchy of Milan, Seigneurie of Genoa, and County of Asti, that, in this case, the said King of England would be bound to contribute up to the third portion of the expense I should have to incur for the maintenance of my said army. And do not fail to uphold this stiffly, so that the said king may accede to the terms above demanded.”

[222] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 12v. Letter from Francis I. to the Bailly of Troyes, from Esclarron, 29th Aug., 1535.

[223] _Ibid._, p. 84v. (Traicté entre les Roys de France et d’Angleterre.)

[224] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. ix., 1535, No. 420. Norfolk to Cromwell.

[225] Anthoine de Castelnau.

[226] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. ix. (1535), No. 594. Chapuys to Charles V.

[227] “... You know the tumult which occurred between her and her governess when we went to see her little sister, and that we were told that she was placed as though by force in her room, in order that she might not speak to us, and that it was only possible to appease her and keep her in her room when the gentleman who conducted us had told her that the king her father had ordered him to say to her that she was not to show herself while we were there.”

[228] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” p. 21, “autre memoire non datté,” etc. Chapuys’ letter enables us to fix the date.

[229] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. ix. (1535), No. 595. Chapuys to Charles V.

[230] _Ibid._, vol. ix. (1535), No. 443. Henry VIII. to Gardiner.

[231] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. x. (1536), No. 375. Gardiner and Wallop to Henry VIII.

[232] _Ibid._, vol. x. (1536), No. 908. Chapuys to Charles V.

[233] The Bishop of Tarbes accompanied Dinteville to Court.

[234] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. x. (1536), No. 1069. Chapuys to Charles V.

[235] _Ibid._, vol. xi. (1536), No. 304. Henry VIII. to Gardiner and Wallop.

[236] _Ibid._, vol. xi. (1536), No. 1143.

[237] _Ibid._, vol. x. (1536), No. 1084. Cromwell to Gardiner and Wallop.

[238] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. x. (1536), No. 1084. Cromwell to Gardiner and Wallop.

[239] _Ibid._, vol. xi. (1536), No. 52. Bishop of Faenza to Mons. Ambrogio.

[240] _Ibid._, vol. xi. (1536), No. 228. Castelnau, Bishop of Tarbes, to Cardinal Du Bellay.

[241] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 547, f. 308. Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part iii., p. 44.

[242] ... “The Pope, in Consistory, has created Legate, the Englishman, Cardinal Poule (Pole), not only for England, but for every place which it may suit him to pass through on his way thither ... with the intention, in case the King of England will not return by peaceable means to the obedience of the Roman Church and of the Holy See, of delivering to the said Cardinal, through the merchants, a good sum of money, for the purpose of assisting the people against the said king, in order to oblige him to return to the said obedience by means of force....”

[243] Camusat, “Meslanges Historiques,” p. 13. Instruction au Bailli de Troyes, etc., Moussi, 2 March, 1537.

[244] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xii., part i., No. 817. Henry VIII. to Gardiner, Westminster, 3 April, 1537.

[245] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xii., part i. (1537). F. Wyngfeld to Cromwell, Dover, 8 April, 1537.

[246] _I.e._ forestall.

[247] Flemish fishing-boats. The name is still in use.

[248] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xii., part i. (1537), No. 884. Sir Francis Brian to Cromwell, Calais, 9th April. (These extracts are given in the abridged form printed in the Letters and Papers.)

[249] The only source that the writer has been able to find for this statement is contained in a paper on Polisy by M. Lucien Coutant, published in the “Almanach de Bar-sur-Seine” for 1864. M. Coutant, as a rule, is very unreliable; but in this instance the facts appear too circumstantial to be entirely without foundation.

[250] Nearly all modern writers refer the disgrace of the Dinteville to the accusation made by Montecuculli against Deschenetz at the time of the Dauphin’s death. But this is obviously incorrect, for not only did the accuser make “amende honorable” to the accused, but Deschenetz is found after that time in full enjoyment of the confidence of the king and Grand-Maître. It is quite possible, however, that his enemies made use of that occasion as a basis for fresh insinuations against him, and as a lever to stir up anew the king’s suspicions. The older writers merely state that the accusation was one of high treason.

[251] Henri, formerly Duke of Orleans, was now Dauphin. Charles, Duke of Angoulême, had succeeded to the title of Duke of Orleans when Henri became Dauphin.

[252] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., pages 398, 399.

[253] Ribier, “Lettres et Mémoires d’Estat,” vol. i., page 294. Gaulcher de Dinteville, Seigneur de Vanlay, to the Dauphin, Venice, 20th Dec., 1538.

[254] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Pièces Orig., vol. 1004, Dossier Dinteville, ff. 84, 85.

[255] Ribier, “Lettres et Mémoires d’Estat,” vol. i., page 373. The Duke of Guise to the Connétable, Dijon, 10th Feb.—Whether the year was 1539, 1540, or 1541, makes no difference to the argument; but it was probably the first of the three years named.

[256] Nephew of Vanlay’s mother, whose brother was Seigneur Du Plessis, de Savonnières, d’Ouschamps and de la Perrine.

[257] Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 294. Gaulcher de Dinteville (Seigneur de Vanlay) to the Dauphin, Venice, 20 Dec., 1538.

[258] _Ibid._, vol. i., p. 301.

[259] Renée, daughter of Louis XII., married in 1527 to Ercole, son of the Duke of Ferrara. See also _ante_, p. 45.

[260] Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 449. Grignan to the Connétable, 29 April, 1539.

[261] Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 479. Grignan to the Connétable, Rome, 21 Oct., 1539.

[262] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MSS. fr. 20440, pp. 81-84. Deposition of the Bailly of Troyes in favour of his brother, the Bishop of Auxerre.

[263] Selve died in April, 1541.

[264] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, 702, ff. 138-9. (A gold reliquary set with precious stones; another of silver-gilt set with similar stones; another reliquary of silver enamelled in blue, with a long and large stone called lapis lazuli, engraved with the mysteries of the Passion.)

[265] “On the following day the said Damoyselle de Thelligny and Madame de Brou, her sister, came to dine with me at the apartment of the late Duke of Orleans. Which ladies both told me it would be necessary to come to an agreement with the said Bishop of Lavaur, and that Madame d’Estampes had become very angry when the said M. de Lavaur had come to speak to her in the room where she was playing at cards, and had said that we were not yet where we imagined.... Seeing which I recognized that we should be obliged to take that course. And the next or the same day (I do not remember which) I went to find the said Bishop of Lavaur in his apartment, in a little low room, where was the Bailly of Dijon ... and a few others ...; and I said these, or similar, words to the Bishop of Lavaur:

“‘Sir, my friends have told me that Madame d’Estampes has in the last two days spoken ill words of Monsieur d’Aucerre and of my brothers. For which reason, sooner than to fall again into the king’s disfavour, we would rather lose all we possess. You know that in past times we were friends. You speak of wishing to have the bishopric of Aucerre; I beg and warn you to content yourself with something else instead.’

“He insisted that he wished to have the Abbey of Monstier-aramey. I then begged him to give up the said Abbey of Monstier-aramey. He continued to insist, desiring it rather than that of Monstier-la-Celle. Nevertheless I showed him that the said Abbey of Monstier-aramey was close to Polisy, and that that of Monstier-la-Celle was of the same value, within six or seven hundred livres, which was not a great sum. In the end, the said Bishop of Lavaur agreed to this.

“He then made a great fuss about having the house of the see of Auxerre at Paris, which I would not at all agree to, although, if he became our friend, not only that one, but all others would be at his service....”

[266] Married women were called “Mademoiselle;” only those whose husbands were knights had the right to the title of “Madame.” Decrue de Stoutz, “La Cour de France au seizième siècle,” p. 74.

[267] Charles, Duke of Orleans, died in 1545, and this document, though referring to 1542, was drawn up at a later date.

[268] _I.e._, to resign one of the abbeys.

[269] “... And it was agreed this should be put in writing. Which was done on the following day in my room, at the apartment of the said late Duke of Orleans; in the absence of the said Bishop of Auxerre, who declined to be present.... And I truthfully certify that the resignation of the said Abbey of Monstier-la-Celle, which was then made to the said Bishop of Lavaur, and the receipts given for the furniture and revenues of the bishopric of Auxerre, proceeded from the fear and dread lest Madame d’Estampes should replace the said Bishop of Auxerre, and all of us, his brothers, in the bad graces of the king; and lest it should again be necessary to fly and remain out of the kingdom, as had been done before; and in order that the said Madame d’Estampes and the said Bishop of Lavaur might no longer prevent my brother from returning and re-possessing himself of his houses and benefices.”

[270] The Bishop protested against this enforced resignation. See Camusat, “Promptuarium sacrarum antiquitatem Tricassinæ diocesis,” p. 25.

[271] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Pièces Orig., vol. 1004, Dossier Dinteville, ff. 84, 85.

[272] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, 702, f. 134.

[273] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, 702, f. 134. Camusat, “Promptuarium,” etc., pp. 26-28, June, 1542.

[274] “Bailly, having seen your basque here, I would not allow him to return without sending you some news of me through him; which are, thank God, very good, and such as you desire them to be; but they will be still better when I hear that you have quite recovered your health, which I beg you to take great care of; and, in return, I will tell you, bailly, that I am doing all that is possible to reduce Ivoy, which I shall attack to-morrow from another side; and by these and all other means, I hope to take the place, with the aid of Him who is the giver of victory. For the rest, I have had news from Longueval, who is only at two or three days’ march from here, with his troop, which I am told is as fine and resolute a one as one could wish to see. I shall make him hang about the place where he is with his said troop, pending the return of Iversay, whom I have sent to the king to bring me back orders as to what it will please him that I should do with the said troop, and also with that which is with me here. Meanwhile, having nothing more to say at present, I will end, recommending myself to you, and praying Our Lord, Bailly, that He may give you as good health as I wish to you. Written from the camp before Ivoy this 14th day of August, [1542].

“Your good master,

“CHARLES.

“To M. the Bailly of Troyes, one of my chamberlains.”

[275] The deceased Louis de Dinteville, Seneschal of Rhodes, also had a Basque servant. This may have been the same one, or perhaps it was a fashion of the moment to have a Basque attendant.

[276] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 726, f. 117.

[277] Brantôme, “Hommes Illustres Français,” Discours xlvi., Eloge du Duc d’Orléans. Decrue de Stoutz, “La Cour de France,” etc., pp. 31, 32.

[278] Decrue de Stoutz, _ibid._, p. 23.

[279] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Pièces Orig., vol. 1004, Dossier Dinteville, f. 87a.

[280] Primaticcio designed for the house of the Connétable allegorical figures of the cardinal virtues, which were executed in fresco by Niccolò dell’ Abate. The house was situated in the Rue Sainte-Avoie, now Rue du Temple. It was subsequently the Hôtel de Mesmes. See Félibien, “Entretiens sur les Vies et les ouvrages des plus excellents peintres,” tome i., p. 523, and Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 419.

[281] Mrs. Mark Pattison, “The Renaissance in France,” vol. ii., p. 269.

[282] He may indeed have been acquainted with greater than they. In 1540 Benvenuto Cellini was in the service of the French Court, and twenty-one years earlier, when the future Bailly was yet a boy, Lionardo da Vinci died at the Château Cloux, near Amboise.

[283] The writer is indebted for nearly all the facts relating to the artists of Troyes, and to the Italians employed by Dinteville, to the very interesting paper by M. Albert Babeau (Secretary of the Soc. Acad. de l’Aube), entitled, “Doménique Florentin, Sculpteur du seizième siècle.” It was published in “Réunion des Sociétés savantes des Départements à la Sorbonne, du 4 au 7 Avril 1877. Section des Beaux-Arts.” Paris, Plon, Nourrit et Cie. 1890, part i., page 108.

[284] Archives de l’Aube, registre G. 66, fol. viˣˣ, xii, vᵒ. Quoted by M. Babeau, _loc. cit._, who gives the detailed heading of the Latin act.

[285] This has since been filled in on one side. An old map, preserved at Polisy, shows the original plan, which is partly indicated also in the illustration, page 35.

[286] Page 35. See also his letter to the Bishop of Auxerre, May 23, 1533, page 81.

[287] They are seen in the long gabled front overlooking the river, in the illustration, p. 35.

[288] Was this an allusion to the Bishop of Auxerre’s appointment as almoner to the king and other royal personages? The repetition of the date 1545, and the symbol of Fortune about to be explained, make it clear that the house was built by him.

[289] In the _carrelage_ of Polisy the goddess is seen with both globe and wheel, as well as with the horn of plenty, but without the wings. The attributes varied in different versions. The sphere with the Hermes’ wings is sometimes interpreted as the rising sun, equally a symbol of Fortune.

[290] “Christophori Longolii Lucubrationes. Lugduni, apud Seb. Gryphium, 1542.” The winged globe is here surmounted by the Gryphon, etc., which formed the rest of the bookseller’s device; but these attributes do not concern us here. The “Orations of Longolius” are bound up with the “Epistles of P. Bunelli,” published in 1551 at Paris, by Ch. Etienne. The volume is rare.

[291] Camusat, “Mesl. Hist.,” part ii., p. 212.

[292] _Ibid._, at the end of the volume. The memoir has also been reprinted in some of the French collections of famous memoirs.

[293] ... “as I did not wish to become a monk, she placed me with M. de Polizy, Bailly of Troyes, head of the house of Dinteville, a personage as accomplished and as adorned with all virtues and sciences as any man of his time and quality; having been governour to M. d’Orléans and ambassador for the king in England. But having become paralytic, and helpless in all his limbs, and being unable for this reason to continue at Court, and having therefore retired to his own home, he began for his pleasure and entertainment to build this beautiful house of Polizy. Which personage showed me such friendship that he would take the trouble himself to instruct me in all the sciences of which my youth was capable; and, when I had remained with him up to the age of fourteen or fifteen years, wishing to form me better by the frequenting of society and the exercise of arms, he gave me to M. Deschenetz, his brother, Chevalier of the King’s Order, and captain of fifty men-at-arms, with whom I made several journeys....”

At a later date Mergey fought for “la religion” (_i.e._, the reformed religion), under La Rochefoucauld; but wishing to have, as he says, “another string to his bow,” he did not forget to cultivate “Mr. de Sesac” (a follower of the Guise), who had meanwhile become the husband of Claude de Dinteville, the eldest daughter of Deschenetz and heiress of Polisy. This was the lady with whom, in later years, Camusat was acquainted, and through whom he learnt the story of Holbein’s masterpiece (see Part I., p. 14). It will be perceived, therefore, how close was the connection between Jean de Dinteville, uncle to this lady, and the documents derived from Camusat which relate the history of the picture.

[294] It is probable that at the time of disgrace Jean de Dinteville either resigned or was deprived of the Order of St. Michael, and that Henri II., on his accession, made his special _protégé_ among the Dinteville brothers, Guillaume, Seigneur Deschenetz, a knight of the order in the place of Jean, whose health no longer allowed him to leave home. Article XV. of the statutes of the order provides that any knight can be deprived for treason, or for the accusation of treason. It further lays down that if a knight be grievously wronged by his sovereign, and cannot obtain justice after having requested it, and allowed due time to elapse, that knight may return the collar and quit the order without forfeiting his honour.

[295] “My nephew, I have received two letters from you, one dated the 4th October, the other the 23rd January last. You write to me that you have received letters from my sister De Lyencourt and that it appears to you that she is much pleased with the affair of Monstier la Scelle; she may well be so; she is indeed bound and obliged to pray God to bless Monseigneur d’Auxerre, as we all are, for the great benefit he has been pleased to confer on Benjamin. My niece De Lyencourt, who is with Madame la Connestable, wrote me word that the said Monseigneur d’Auxerre and Monsr. Des Chenetz were at Fontainebleau. And since then Nicolas de la Croix has written to me that the said Monseigneur d’Auxerre was about to arrive at Paris. I had heard of the capture of Aspremont by the forces of the Emperor. The same Nicolas de la Croix writes to me that wheat has been sold at Paris for a hundred and seventeen _solz tournois_ the _septier_, and oats for forty-eight, which is very dear.... I am sorry to hear of the illness of Madame de la Mothe and her daughter, but as they are mending, I hope it will be nothing. Those who come from Court say that there is a great rumour that the king is to go to Germany; that Duke Maurice of Saxony and other German princes are in arms against the Emperor, and that they will take the side of the king and enter his service; that the queen will be Regent in France, and will be at Rheims; that Monsr. l’Admiral will remain with her; that Cardinal Tournon will be the king’s lieutenant at Lyons; that the Grand Seigneur [the Turk] is making great preparations for war in the present year, both by land and sea. I expect you hear all these news better where you are than we do here, for you can receive information from Messrs. d’Auxerre and des Chenetz, who are at Court. I think that by the beginning of the month of March I shall be able to leave this country to go to Lyons, taking Grenoble on the way. When I am at Lyons, you shall have news of me, and I will send you some seeds for your new garden.

“My nephew, etc.,

“From Montpellier, 20th February, 1551 (N.S. 1552).

“Your uncle and friend,

“DUPLESSYS.”

“To my nephew, M. de Pollisy, Bailly of Troyes.”

[296] Guillaume Du Plessis, Seigneur de Liancourt, was a younger brother of Dinteville’s correspondent, Charles Du Plessis, Seigneur de Savonnières, d’Ouschamps, and de la Perrine. Both were brothers of Dinteville’s mother. Guillaume, Seigneur de Liancourt, died in 1550. The lady mentioned in the text was his widow.

[297] The Bishop of Auxerre had presented the Abbey of Montier-la-Celle to his first cousin, Benjamin, son of Guillaume, Seigneur de Liancourt.

[298] De Montmorency.

[299] Dinteville’s sister, Charlotte, had married Louis Raguier, Seigneur de la Motte de Tilly.

[300] Henri II.

[301] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. fr. 20465, f. 299a.

[302] Le Beuf, “Mémoires concernant l’histoire ecclesiastique, etc., d’Auxerre,” page 588. The Bishop had a favourite painter, named Felix Chrétien, whom he had raised from the position of simple chorister to that of canon of the cathedral, on account of his delicacy of hand in penmanship and painting. Chrétien possessed considerable talent, and was the painter of a large triptych representing the “Martyrdom of Ste. Eugénie,” which still hangs in the church of Varzy, in the diocese of Auxerre (Dept. of Nièvres), though now in a terribly dilapidated state. The portrait of the Bishop is introduced amongst a group in the central panel of this picture. (See illustration, p. 56.) Chrétien reproduced the features of the Bishop a second time, in a smaller work, which is in every way inferior to the picture at Varzy. This is the “Stoning of St. Stephen,” which now hangs in the north ambulatory of the Cathedral of Auxerre. The Emperor Louis Napoleon offered a large sum, without success, for the “Martyrdom of Ste. Eugénie,” which he wished to purchase for the Empress. Being unable to obtain the picture, he had a copy made of it. Varzy is a place which travellers should by no means pass by. The church is of very beautiful thirteenth-century Gothic, and resembles a small cathedral. The ancient inn was formerly a religious house, and with its tower and court is strikingly picturesque. The same family has now owned it for upwards of two hundred years.

[303] See illustration, page 110.

[304] Unless it may be assumed that the drawing in question was executed by Holbein on one of his later journeys abroad, which would give some additional latitude of time. On his way to “High Burgundy,” for instance, in the summer of 1538, he would almost pass the gates of Polisy, if the direct route across France were selected. (High Burgundy, or Franche-Comté, was Imperial territory, and lay due east of French Burgundy, in which Polisy was situated.) If the Bailly of Troyes sat to Holbein for this drawing at about the time suggested, the days of adversity which shortly fell upon the Dinteville family would explain the fact that, so far as is known, no painting was ever made from it.

[305] Both hang in one room at the Dresden Gallery.

[306] The late Sir Frederick Burton was of this opinion, which is also held by Mr. Sidney Colvin (see his letter to the “Times,” September, 1890).

[307] The authentic sources for the date of Selve’s birth are given Part I., p. 13. None of the popular compendiums of biography, etc., so far as the writer is acquainted with them, are to be trusted.

[308] Bayle denies this, and says the name in its original form is De Salva, and is of Limousin origin (Dictionary, ed. 1739, Art. Selve).

[309] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” Paris, 1551. Letter to Danès (1541), p. 95.

[310] “Educated where I am, both I and those belonging to me, by your benefaction....”

[311] Of these all, excepting one, sooner or later served the king as ambassadors. They are usually given in the following order: 1, Lazare, Gentilhomme de la Chambre du Roi, ambassador in Switzerland; 2, Jean-Paul, Bishop of St. Flour, ambassador (at a late date) at Rome; 3, George, Bishop of Lavaur, the subject of this memoir; 4, Odet, Président du Grand Conseil, ambassador in England, at Venice, and at Rome, where he died; 5, Jean, Abbé de Saint Vigor; 6, François, ambassador at Constantinople.

[312] Jacques Amyot, author of a famous translation of Plutarch’s “Lives,” was born 1513, and died 1593. He was tutor to the sons of Henri II., was sent on a mission to the Council of Trent, and was Bishop of Auxerre from 1571 until his death.

[313] Probably a relation of Selve’s mother.

[314] All the confusion in popular sources as to the date of Selve’s birth appears to have arisen from one misstatement or misprint, to the effect that he was promoted to the episcopate in 1524. Coupled with the unquestioned fact that he was made a bishop when in his eighteenth year, it was therefore loosely inferred that he must have been born in 1506. The facts given above show that the circumstances of his appointment to Lavaur were such as to preclude all possibility of its having taken place before 1526; even were the Papal licence (page 13) not proof positive as to his age.

[315] The Cardinal of Lorraine, of the house of Guise, was made Archbishop of Rheims in 1534, at nine years old.

[316] The originals of these letters are at the Château of Villiers near La Ferté Alais, and belong to the Marquis de Selve, to whose courtesy the writer is indebted for their use here. Copies are to be found in the Bibl. Nat. at Paris (Carrés d’Hozier, vol. 579). They bear no date of year in either series, but only of day and month. Those addressed to the Cardinal-Legate must, however, have been written in the spring following Selve’s appointment, _i.e._, in 1527. Two series of letters are mixed up both in the originals and the copies, as at least one letter from the Queen of Navarre was not written till after the death of the Président de Selve, which occurred in 1529.

[317] “... for love of me, and at my request, to abandon your claim to the said bishopric, resigning in favour of the son of the Premier Président every right you may have or claim to the said bishopric.”

[318] “My cousin, you have already heard of the king’s desire, and mine, that the son of Monsʳ. the Premier Président should be provided with the bishopric of Lavaur; and as the king and I have not yet received a reply from you which satisfies our intention, I have been moved, my cousin, to write to you again about it, begging you very affectionately and as much as I know how to beg for anything, that you would desist, at the request of the said lord and of me, from your claim, and also would dispose to the profit and in favour of the son of the said Premier Président of all right that you may pretend to the said benefice; assuring you that the said lord and I will recollect this favour in a thing of greater consequence, in such a way that you will be satisfied. For the rest, and in conclusion, you must know that the said lord and I will support the son of the said Premier Président right through this affair, making it our own; for which reason I earnestly beg you again, my cousin, to be so good as to think over it, and to yield in this matter to the very affectionate request made by the said lord and by me. And thus fare well, my cousin, etc.... Written at St. Germain en Laye, 1st April. (Postscript.) I pray you my cousin to oblige the king and me in the matter above treated of, and you will find it to your advantage.

“Your good cousin,

“LOYSE.”

“To my cousin, Cardinal Clermont, Legate of Avignon.”

[319] “... have the thing so greatly at heart that I cannot sufficiently write it to you.”

[320] “Monsr. de Lavaur, my friend, I have received the letter that you wrote to me, and there is no need that you should thank me, for I am too much and too old a friend of your father’s, and should wish to please him and all his race. You, on your side, will consider whether there is anything else I can do for you, and you will never fail to find me a good brother, yet more in deeds than in words, and this I beg you to believe. Which shall be the conclusion of this present, etc. From Avignon this 22nd June.

“Your best brother and friend,

“F. CARDˡ. DE CLERMONT.”

“To Monsʳ. de Lavaur.”

[321] St. Germain, 3rd May, 1528. Paris, Arch. Nat., P556¹, côte 710. Bibl. de l’Institut, Coll. Godefroy, Mémoire de M. de Camusat sur les enfants et descendants du Premier Président de Selve.

[322] “Gallia Christiana,” 1656, vol. iii., p. 1142. The notice there given respecting the missions of 1529 is omitted in the edition of 1715 (hitherto quoted in this work), where the article on George de Selve was rewritten and enlarged. This circumstance might appear to throw doubt on the accuracy of the information conveyed in the earlier edition. But as it receives confirmation from several other independent sources, it is probable that the facts of the previous edition are correct; but that the early diplomatic labours of the Bishop were thrown into shade by the more important work of his riper years dwelt upon in the later edition.

[323] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Cab. d’Hozier, vol. 304, f. 28.

[324] See note at the end of this chapter.

[325] Most observers will agree that the appearance of the Bishop of Lavaur in Holbein’s portrait bears out this remark.

[326] “Œuvres de Feu Révérend Père en Dieu, George de Selve, Evesque de la Vaur,” Paris, 1559. “Autres Remonstrances faictes par ledict De Selve auxdicts Alemans.”

[327] The Diet of Spires of 1529 was, as is well known, one of the most reactionary of the great assemblies held at the epoch of the Reformation. A large majority of those who attended it were partisans of Rome. Consequently, the resolutions passed were all in favour of the old order of things, and actually reversed many decisions advantageous to the Lutherans which had formerly been agreed upon. For a moment, the Reformation received a sharp check. As a result of the proceedings, the minority drew up the famous declaration which first gave rise to the name of “Protestants.”

[328] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. fr. 842, f. 122ᵇ.

[329] Archives of the Château de Villiers (Marquis de Selve); and Paris, Bibl. Nat., Carrés d’Hozier, vol. 579, f. 341. Marguerite, Queen of Navarre, to the Grand-Maître de Montmorency, Blois, 18th April.

[330] Paris, Bibl. de l’lnstitut, Coll. Godefroy, f. 414. Obsèques de la femme du premier président de Selve, 27th November, 1532.

[331] Easter fell in this year on the 13th April.

[332] See pp. 11, 19, 20, 77-78, 80.

[333] “A Mʳᵉ George de Selve, évesque de Lavaur, ... pour aller comme ambassadeur devers le duc et seigneurie de Venise, et illec ... _devant ledit temps_, pour leur communiquer les choses dont il lui a donné charge et celles qui adviendroient ci après.”—Lyons, 2nd December, 1533. Paris, Bibl. Nat., Cabinet d’Hozier, vol. 304 (Dossier Selve), f. 15, Extraits de Comptes, etc. See also page 151.

[334] “Gallia Christiana” (1715), vol. xiii. (1722), p. 344. Ecclesia Vaurensis, No. xxi., Georgius de Selve.

[335] Thevet, “Histoire des plus illustres Hommes,” etc., Paris, 1661, vol. viii., chap. ii., p. 25.

[336] Pierre Bunel, called by Bayle (“Dict.,” second edition, 1735) “one of the politest Latin writers that lived in the sixteenth century,” was born at Toulouse in 1499. He studied with much distinction at the University of Paris, and proceeded thence to Padua. He was three years in the service of Lazare de Baif at Venice (the friend, as we know, of the Bishop of Auxerre); afterwards entering that of George de Selve, with whom he remained until the death of that prelate. He then found himself plunged into poverty, from which he was rescued by the Du Faur family, one of whom sent Bunel to Italy as tutor to his sons. Bunel died of fever, at Turin, in 1546.

[337] Reginald Pole, the celebrated Cardinal, was born in 1500, and was the son of Sir Richard Pole and of Margaret Plantagenet, Countess of Salisbury. He was educated at Charterhouse and Oxford, after which he was sent by King Henry VIII. to study at Padua. He steadily opposed the divorce of the king, and in 1532 had drawn such a hornets’ nest about his ears in England that he asked permission to go abroad again to study theology. He now resided for some years at Padua, and either there or at Venice made acquaintance with Selve. Bembo, Longolius, Sadoleto, Contarini, Ludovico Priuli, were among the circle of his friends. The Pope employed him on a committee for reforming the discipline of the Church, but the greater part of his time was spent in endeavouring to raise the European powers against Henry VIII., with the view to re-establish the Papal authority in England. He was one of the Legates sent to the Council of Trent. On the death of Cranmer in 1557 Pole became Archbishop of Canterbury. He died on the same day as Queen Mary, November 17, 1558.

[338] Pietro Bembo, born at Venice in 1470, was one of the most celebrated Italian writers of the sixteenth century. After a varied existence he was appointed secretary to Leo X. in conjunction with Sadoleto. On the death of that Pope he retired to Padua, where his house became a centre of intellectual life. He was made a Cardinal in 1539, and subsequently Bishop of Gubbio and of Bergamo. He died, covered with honours, in 1547.

[339] Jacopo Sadoleto, Cardinal, in whom brilliant talents were united with extraordinary charm of disposition, was born at Modena in 1477. He studied at Ferrara at the same time as Bembo, which was the origin of their friendship, and was afterwards secretary to Leo X. Sadoleto never asked a favour for himself. He was appointed Bishop of Carpentras (a Papal see in the south of France, depending from Avignon) in 1517. Although reluctant to leave his diocese, such were his qualities of mind and character that he was frequently summoned to Rome on important commissions, and was made a Cardinal in 1536, without having in any way sought or coveted distinction. His gentleness, goodness, and moderation made him beloved by all; he even protected heretics, saying, “Je ne sais comment la nature m’a créé, mais je ne puis haïr parce qu’on ne partage pas mon opinion” (Guettée, “Hist. de l’Eglise de France,” vol. viii., p. 222). His correspondence with Calvin (from whose opinions he of course entirely differed) is well known. Melanchthon sent him every new work he published. After being employed in many high offices, Sadoleto died at Rome in 1547.

[340] Renée of France bore this title until her husband succeeded, as Ercole II., to the dukedom of Ferrara, which happened later in this same year (1534).

[341] Selve even tried to obtain for her the release of some of her French _protégés_ who had been imprisoned on the accusation of heresy. (Bart. Fontana, “Renata di Francia,” vol. i., p. 344.)

[342] See note 2, p. 145.

[343] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” p. 114. To Odet de Selve, from Venice, 16 January 1534.

[344] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” pp. 30 and 45.

[345] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xii., part i., No. 14, Geo. Selva, Bp. of La Vaur to Cardinal Pole. Venice, 3 Non. Jan. 1536 (Latin).

[346] “Dict. Nat. Biography,” Art. Pole.

[347] See p. 108.

[348] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xii., No. 516, Geo. Selva, etc., to Card. Pole.

[349] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Clairembault, 1215, f. 75. The payments for the post of ambassador at Venice expire February 19; those for Rome begin on the following day.

[350] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Clairembault, 1215, f. 78.

[351] _Ibid._, MS. fr. 2968, f. 87; Ribier, “Lettres et Mémoires d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 66.

[352] Ribier, “Lettres et Mémoires d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 41. Cardinal Mascon and the Bishop of Lavaur to the King of France, Rome, 12th July, 1537. _Ibid._, p. 76. The same to the Grand-Maître de Montmorency, Rome, December, 1537.

[353] Ribier, “Lettres et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 128, Card. Mascon and the Bp. of Lavaur to the Conn. de Montmorency, Rome, 14th March, 1538.

[354] Strictly speaking the Bishop of Lavaur alone was accredited as French ambassador to the Holy See, but throughout this period he and Cardinal Mâcon acted in concert.

[355] Letters and Papers, vol. xiii., part i. (1538), No. 972, Card. Tournon to Card. Carpi, Valentia, May 10.

[356] _Ibid._, same time and place.

[357] Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., pages 147 and 150. Mascon and Lavaur to the Connétable de Montmorency. Carpi to the same. Piacenza, 1st May, 1538.

[358] _Ibid._, page 150. The Connétable de Montmorency to Cardinal Mascon and the Bishop of Lavaur, 14th May, 1538.

[359] Letters and Papers, vol. xiii., part i., No. 1004, Montmorency to Castillon, Avignon, 14th May, 1538.

[360] “Monseigneur de Lavaur ... est parti ce jourd’huy matin en diligence, pour aller trouver le Roy....”—Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., page 154. Cardinal Mascon to the Connétable, Savona, 11th May, 1538.

[361] June, 1538.

[362] Which was broken at the end of four years (1542), when war was again declared between France and the Empire.

[363] The final payment he received as ambassador to the Holy See expired June 30, 1538.

[364] The shell of the castle of the Pico family still exists, though in a half-ruinous condition. A theatre has been established in one part of the building, which has lost all traces of former magnificence. The latter can only be guessed at from the great height of some of the apartments. The decision of the municipal authorities some years ago, to pull down the old city walls of La Mirandola, has fatally robbed the little town of poetry and picturesqueness, but it contains one or two interesting churches.

[365] Paris, Archives des Affaires Etrangères, Corr. politiques, Rome, vol. iii., f. 401ᵇ, La Mirandola.

[366] Paris, Bibl. Nat., Fonds Dupuy, vol. xliv., f. 27ᵃ, and Aff. Etrang., Corr. polit., Rome, vol. iii., f. 401.

[367] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Clairembault, 1215, f. 78. Compiègne, 9th October, 1538.

[368] Perhaps it refers to 1529. There would be nothing surprising in the long postponement, as the ambassadors’ salaries were in chronic arrears.

[369] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xiii., part i., No. 11. Geo. de Selve, Bp. of Lavaur, to Cardinal Pole.

[370] The episcopal palace was demolished in the present century by the person who had acquired it at the time of the French Revolution, who pulled it to pieces, and sold it stone by stone, lest the edifice should be claimed as ecclesiastical property. The grounds and site are now used as public gardens. Lavaur ceased to be a bishopric towards the end of the eighteenth century.

[371] “The gate by which we have entered into the park of Jesus Christ where we are now, bearing the name and mark of His sheep.”—“Œuvres de Feu Révérend Père en Dieu, George de Selve, Evesque de la Vaur.” Paris, 1559.

[372] “Œuvres de George de Selve,” etc.

[373] “It seems to me, when writing to you, that I am with you in conversation, which is so great a consolation to me that I cannot or will not find an ending to it.”—_Ibid._

[374] “Discourse containing the only true means by which a servant favoured by his Prince and entrusted by him with the administration of affairs, may preserve eternal and temporal felicity, and avoid those things which might cause him to lose either one or the other.”—“Œuvres,” etc.

[375] “... speak to-day of living in obedience, or of doing good works as necessary to eternal life, one half of the world cries out that he is a Papist and an advocate of justification by works. If he preach salvation through Jesus Christ and the redemption of sins, the other half of the world exclaims that he is a Lutheran and a disseminator of false doctrine....”—_Ibid._ (Letter addressed to a certain “Frère François” who was preaching at Lavaur in the bishop’s absence.)

[376] Ribier, “Lett. et Pap. d’Estat,” vol. i., page 468. Relation of the Bishop-Elect of Avranches on his return from Spain in September, 1539. The Bishop-Elect of Avranches had been sent on a special mission to the Spanish Court, where Anthoine de Castelnau, Bp. of Tarbes, was now resident French ambassador.

[377] “Remonstrances addressed to the Germans, composed and put in writing by George de Selve, Bishop of Lavaur, to be publicly pronounced at the Diet which will be held in Germany [when he was summoned by the Most Christian King, at the request of the Emperor, to go thither in order to procure the reconciliation of the said Germans with the order ecclesiastical].”—“Œuvres de George de Selve,” and Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. fr. 3114, f. 1. The portion of the title placed in brackets was evidently added as a docket in the customary manner by a later hand.

[378] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xiv., part 1, No. 1090. Card. Pole to Card. Contarini, Carpentras, 8 June, 1539. (Pole had found a refuge near Sadoleto, at Carpentras, in the intervals between his diplomatic missions.)

[379] “Petri Bunelli Familiares Aliquot Epistolæ,” Lutetia, 1551, page 80. To the Bishop of Tarbes, French ambassador with the Emperor. (Latin.)

[380] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Clairembault, 1215, f. 77.

[381] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., pp. 376, 377.

[382] Mary, Queen-dowager of Hungary, regent of Flanders, sister of Charles V.

[383] Ribier, “Lett. et Mém. d’Estat,” vol. i., p. 353. Hellin had been appointed to that post on account of his intimate knowledge of the Flemish tongue.

[384] _Ibid._, vol. i., p. 449. Grignan, ambassador at Rome, to the Connétable, April, 1539.

[385] Decrue de Stoutz, “Anne de Montmorency,” part i., p. 383.

[386] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xv. (1540), No. 448. Wyat to Cromwell, Ghent, 2nd April, 1540.

[387] _Ibid._, No. 457. Instructions given to the Bishop of La Vaur, etc. Aumale, 4 April, 1540.

[388] _Ibid._, No. 508. Sir Thomas Wyat to Cromwell. Wyat was at this time English ambassador at the Imperial Court.

[389] “Discourse upon the true and only means by which a good and perpetual peace may be made between the Emperor and the Most Christian King: composed by George de Selve, Bishop of la Vaur, when ambassador of the said King with the said Emperor.” (“Œuvres de G. de Selve,” etc.)

[390] Gasp. Contarini, born at Venice in 1483, was sent by that republic as ambassador to Charles V.; and, after the release of Clement VII. from the Castle of Sant’ Angelo, which Contarini had helped to bring about, filled a similar post at the Holy See. Paul III. made him a Cardinal in 1535. He was Papal Legate at the Diet of Ratisbon in 1540. Contarini urged upon Charles V. the desirability of restoring peace between the nations, and exhorted the bishops assembled at the Diet to renounce luxury, ambition, and avarice, to succour the poor, to stay in their dioceses, and to be careful to select worthy persons for ecclesiastical promotion; in all of which we see the counterpart of the opinions held by George de Selve. Contarini died at Bologna in 1542.

[391] Although convened in 1542, the first session of the Council of Trent was only opened in December, 1545; the final one, after many breaks, one of which lasted ten years, took place in 1563. A famous _bon-mot_ is recorded of Danès when assisting at the conferences. As one of the French representatives was declaiming against the delinquencies of the Papal Court, the Bishop of Orvieto exclaimed scornfully, _Gallus cantat._ Instantly Danès replied, _Utinam ad Galli cantum Petrus resipiscerat!_ (Quoted by Sismondi, “Hist. des Français,” tom. xi., page 380.)

[392] The collapse of the friendship with Charles V., and the failure to promote a marriage between the Duke of Orleans and the Infanta of Spain which should bring in its train the restitution of Milan to France, were the signal for the fall of the Connétable. Throughout his career attached to the Spanish alliance, the success of these negotiations would have placed the brightest jewel in his crown of fame. They failed; and the position of the great minister trembled in the balance. Madame d’Etampes, jealous of his good understanding with the Dauphin, used her influence against him. Finally, in October, 1540, the Emperor gave the _coup-de-grâce_ to French aspirations by bestowing Milan on his son Philip. Henceforth that territory was lost to French ambition. Montmorency, shortly after deprived of all share in the management of public affairs, lived in complete retirement until the accession of the Dauphin (Henri II.), in 1547, restored to him position and importance.

[393] “Imploring you, Monseigneur, after having done me so many other favours, not to forget me so far as to leave me here any longer.”—“Correspondance de Guillaume Pellicier,” edited by M. Tausserat-Radel for the French Foreign Office. George de Selve to the Connétable, The Hague, 7th August, 1540.

[394] M. de Saveuse, formerly Bailly of Amiens, and M. de Castillon, late ambassador in England.

[395] “Corr. de Pellicier,” edited by M. Tausserat-Radel. George de Selve to the Connétable, Antwerp, 25th August, 1540.

[396] _Ibid._, 1st September, 1540.

[397] _Ibid._, Brussels, 8th September, 1540.

[398] “Corr. de Pellicier,” G. de Selve to the Connétable. Brussels, September, 1540.

[399] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. xvi. (1540-41), No. 161. Pate to the Privy Council, 14th October, 1540.

[400] Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Clairembault, 1215, f. 79.

[401] Bunel writes to justify himself from the accusation (see page 175), that he had influenced the bishop’s decision to retire to his diocese, thus cutting short a brilliant worldly career. It was also believed that Bunel had encouraged his patron to lead a life of exaggerated austerity, which had hurried him to a premature death.

[402] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” Paris, 1551. To P. Danès. Tholosæ, 14 Calend. Sextil., MDXLI. (Latin).—Bayle’s “Dictionary,” Art. Bunel.

[403] Many authorities give the date of Selve’s death as 1542. The inscription on his portrait at Villiers, however (see page 193), and Bunel’s letters, place beyond dispute the fact that it occurred in 1541, as stated above. Several of Bunel’s letters dated in the summer and latter part of this year enlarge upon the grief caused by the bishop’s decease. Bayle’s “Dictionary” (Art. Bunel), the “Nouvelle Biographie Générale,” etc., also give the year correctly.

[404] “Gallia Christiana,” _loc. cit._

[405] “Œuvres de feu révérend Père en Dieu,” etc.

[406] The following is a rough literal translation of the epitaph. It makes no pretence to finish or metre, being merely intended to give the meaning.

“G Greatly fortunate in every enterprise: E Excelling in virtue, his familiar guide: O Of countenance at once gentle and proud: R Rich in all qualities required in a Prelate: G Governing duly the flocks in his Bishopric E Enclosed: the light of the people: S Sin’s enemy: of blameless life the friend: D Distinguished on all sides for his surpassing merits: E Esteemed and honoured by virtuous men: S Submissive to all, even to the undeserving: E Endued with all that which becomes a man: L Lieth here the Bishop of la Vaur, who by his V Virtue will live for ever, in peace E Eternal. And thus, O Traveller, disturb not his repose.

_The spirit of Selve to those on earth_:

It is not I, but you, who do not live: It is not you, but I, who am exempt from death: Nor I, nor you, but God, is the mighty and the strong: And you, and I, are servants of His Will.”

[407] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” page 94. To Odet de Selve—Tholosæ, prid. Calend. Januar., 1541. (Latin.)

[408] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” page 95. To Peter Danès. Tholosæ, 14 Calend. Sextil., 1541. (Latin.)

[409] Sismondi, “Hist. des Français,” vol. xi., page 380.

[410] Poverty is the probable explanation of Bunel’s inability to give his time to the writing of his patron’s life. See note 2, page 157.

[411] “Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” page 94. To Odet de Selve.

[412] “Benvenuto Cellini, Life,” translated by J. A. Symonds, vol. ii., p. 187.

[413] H. Green, “Andrea Alciati and his Book of Emblems,” London, 1872. Mr. Green believes that the collection of 1522 was never published, years of laborious research having failed to reveal a single copy. That it should have been reputed published shows, however, the wide fame the emblems at once attained. Pierre Bunel speaks of Alciati’s emblems in a letter dated from Venice in 1530 (“Petri Bunelli Epistolæ,” Lutetiæ, 1551). This must have referred to the Milan collection, as the first edition brought out at Augsburg by Steyner was only published in the following year.

[414] “Robe longue” was worn by lawyers and ecclesiastics; “robe courte” by laymen.

[415] Feathers were not yet as universal in 1533 as they became a few years later, when Brantôme wrote.

[416] The short cape also came into fashion at a rather later period.

[417] Brantôme, “Hommes Illustres François,” Discours xlv. (François I.), Digression contre les ambassadeurs de robe longue. “One thing I should like much to know; if there had been present some brave and valiant knight of the King’s Order, or a captain of gensdarmes, or any other valorous gentleman with a good sword and bravado, whatever the Emperor might have advanced in words, whether he would not have thought twice on seeing the other speak and reply to him bravely; sometimes putting his hand on the hilt of his sword, sometimes to his side as though to draw his dagger, sometimes making a defiant gesture, sometimes drawing himself up proudly, now with his cap drawn down, now raised up with its feather, now placed on one side, now forward, now backward, now letting his cape hang half-way as one who is about to twist it round his arm, in order to draw his sword.... Instead of which M. de Mascon and M. de Vely, although he (_sic_) replied fairly well for his calling and profession, could show no other front than to smooth his square cap from time to time with his fingers; to re-dispose his skull-cap of taffetas, to listen well, with his two hands clasped and his thumbs extended, to gather up the sides of his long gown of velvet or satin: all this could not inspire the smallest terror in the world, nor instil any thought of fear into any soul....”

[418] It may be pointed out that Dinteville’s costume shows many points of similarity with that of Morette, in the portrait by Holbein at Dresden.

[419] Besides the allusion already quoted from Brantôme, the literature of the time has many allusions to “la dague et l’épée,” the ordinary accoutrement at this period of the French gentleman. In 1530, when the children of France were released from captivity on the payment of their father’s ransom, it was ordered that the French and Spanish gentlemen who met on the Bidassoa to effect the exchange, were to be armed only with “dagger and sword,” _i.e._, to wear their every-day dress and not full armour, so as to forestall any possibility of treachery on either side. (Du Bellay, “Mémoires,” ed. Petitot, vol. ii., page 93.) See also for the mention of the same arms, the “Life of Benvenuto Cellini,” translated by Symonds, page 169. In pictures the double weapon is frequently seen: in England more especially among those representing persons who favoured Continental fashions. Thomas Howard, Earl of Surrey, wears dagger, tassel, and sword in the well-known portrait at Hampton Court. Instances could easily be multiplied. Planché (“Cyclopædia of Costume,” vol. ii., page 159) states that Rabelais attributes the origin of this fashion to Spain.

[420] It was a common practice to represent ecclesiastics leaning on or holding a book; sometimes inscribed to show it was the Bible or other work connected with religion.

[421] It resumes normal proportions when viewed downwards from the right-hand side of the picture.

[422] “Some Account of the Life and Works of Hans Holbein.” By Ralph Nicholson Wornum, London, 1867, p. 180.

[423] See illustration, page 196.

[424] And not, as Dr. Woltmann, with singular absence of imagination, suggests, Holbein and his wife! (“Holbein und seine Zeit,” 2nd German edition, vol. i., p. 278.)

[425] Woltmann, “Holbein,” vol. i., p. 279.

[426] See _ante_, page 80.

[427] Page 90.

[428] Page 91.

[429] At the British Museum, Paris, Berlin, etc. See Woltmann, “Holbein,” vol. i., chap. xii., and vol. ii., pp. 174-179.

[430] Mrs. Bury Palliser, “Historic Devices, Badges, and War-cries,” page 4.

[431] The credit of having pointed this out belongs to Mr. C. L. Eastlake, late Keeper of the National Gallery. Mr. Eastlake thought he could discern the letters ASCU, or ASQU, preceded by a doubtful H. The writer confesses to inability to decipher these letters; but fully appreciates the value of the suggestion that some inscription was intended. An alternative reading to that suggested in the text would be that the lettering represents the name or initials of the goldsmith who wrought the sheath (supposing the design to have been actually executed). It was not unusual for armourers to sign any fine piece of work. In this case the letters might possibly be brought into relation with Hans von Antwerpen, a goldsmith residing in London, who had sat to Holbein in 1532, and is known to have executed some of his designs.

[432] Dr. Daniel Burckhardt, director of the Museum, has no doubt that this drawing, though not an original, is copied from one by Holbein, of whose style it indeed bears every mark. The writer is indebted to Dr. Burckhardt’s kindness for all the facts connected with this design. It is not the original of the dagger in the “Ambassadors,” as a glance at the illustration on the opposite page will show; but it furnishes an interesting point of comparison with the one in question.

[433] In 1560, François II., shortly before his death, bestowed the Order of St. Michael simultaneously on eighteen gentlemen, at the instigation of the House of Guise. Down to the death of Henri II., the royal order had always been held in very great esteem, the statutes limiting the number of knights to thirty-six. Continuing the precedent of François II., Charles IX. admitted so many to the order that it became despised and neglected. (See “Mémoires de Castelnau,” with the additions by Le Laboureur, vol. i., pages 11 and 355.) It was not till 1578 that Henri III. founded the Order of the Holy Ghost in consequence of the deterioration of that of St. Michael. The members nominated to the new order were received knights of St. Michael on the eve of their installation as knights of the Holy Ghost. Hence they were called “Chevaliers _des Ordres_ du Roi.” (Lalanne, “Dict. Hist. de la France.”)

[434] Francis I. slightly altered the original arrangement of the connecting chain to make it simulate the rope of the Cordeliers, in allusion to his patron, St. Francis.

[435] “Excepting under arms, when it will suffice to wear only the said image of St. Michael suspended from a small gold chain or silk lace, whoever pleases to do so. And similarly when the said sovereign or one of the said knights shall be travelling, or at their houses in private, or hunting, or in other places where there is no company or considerable assembly, they shall not be obliged to wear the said Grand Collar, but only the said image of the Order, in the manner appointed.”

[436] “Statuts de l’Ordre de St. Michel,” Imprimerie Royale, 1725, article iii. This edition of the statutes was drawn up, as the preface informs us, by collation of all copies then available, whether printed or manuscript. Excepting in one or two trifling verbal details, these statutes are identical, as the writer has proved by comparison, with those contained in the “Livre des Ordonnances des chevaliers de l’ordre du treschrestien roy de france Loys XIᵉ a l’honneur de sainct Michel,” printed at Paris, in 1512, by Guillaume Eustace. The later edition has been quoted in the text only for the sake of the more modern orthography.

[437] Brantôme, “Hommes Illustres français,” Discours lxxxii., art. v., M. de Tavannes.—“Statuts de l’Ordre de St. Michel,” art. iv.

[438] No. 126. It is No. 109 in the Catalogue of the Louvre by M. Frédéric Villot (1880).

[439] Alfonso I. died in 1534; the portrait cannot therefore have been substantially _later_ in date than the “Ambassadors.” He was the father of Ercole d’Este, who in 1527 married Renée of France.

[440] There are two interesting sketches by Holbein, for the Order of St. Michael, in the Basle Museum. They show far more freedom and spirit than the St. Michael of the “Ambassadors.” Possibly the latter was more or less a copy from the actual medallion worn by Dinteville; or it was put in by an assistant.

[441] See illustration, page 210.

[442] Compare illustrations, page 214. The gores found by Mr. Stevens are reproduced here by kind permission of Messrs. Henry Stevens, Son and Stiles.

[443] See the writer’s letter to the “Academy,” February 6th, 1892. The Stevens globe is now the property of Mr. Kalbfleisch of New York.

[444] “Johann Schöner. A reproduction of his globe of 1523, long lost.... By Henry Stevens of Vermont.... Edited by C. H. Coote. London, 1888.” Schöner was a distinguished mathematician, astronomer, and geographer. Born in 1477 at Carlstadt, his name is chiefly associated with Nuremberg, where, at various intervals, he spent long periods of his life. He corresponded with Copernicus; and Melanchthon contributed prefaces to several of his books. The latter, which are mainly concerned with astronomy and mathematics, and the then kindred subjects of astrology and medicine, also include treatises on the various celestial and terrestrial globes of which he was the author. Four of Schöner’s earth-globes, if we include that under consideration, have come down to the present day. A specimen of the earliest, dated 1515, is preserved at Frankfort; of the second (1520) in the Germanic Museum at Nuremberg; the gores found by Mr. Stevens are supposed to represent the third (1523); and the fourth (1534) may be seen in the Grand-Ducal Library at Weimar. Schöner died in 1547. Further information may be found, if desired, in the interesting book named above.

[445] See Mr. Coote’s article on Maximilianus Transylvanus, “Athenæum,” July 16th, 1892.

[446] The late Mr. C. H. Coote, British Museum.

[447] In the illustrations, p. 214, to facilitate comparison with the Stevens’ globe, Holbein’s copy has been placed in the same position as the original gores. To see Holbein’s globe as it is placed in the picture and described above, this book must be turned round, so as to present the globe handle _downwards_.

[448] Pritann. (Britannia), Norma..ia., Avern., Burgund., Languedoc.

[449] Paris, Leon, Baion, Polisy. The rivers Seine and Rhone are also laid down by Holbein, but left unnamed, probably through lack of space.

[450] Castil., Aragon., Navar., Grana.

[451] Roma, Genua.

[452] See page 52, note 2.

[453] Page 54.

[454] Page 55.

[455] The _S_ in Polisy is partially effaced.

[456] See Appendix B.

[457] See _ante_, page 151.

[458] See illustration, page 218.

[459] They are there respectively numbered II. and XIX. In both cases the words in the form given are due to Luther: the first hymn being his translation of the ancient “Veni Creator,” the second his paraphrase of the Ten Commandments. The latter first received the title given to it by him, “Die zehen Gebot kürtzer gefasst” (“A shortened Version of the Ten Commandments”), in the Wittemberg “Gesangbuch” of 1529. In Walther’s “Gesangbuch” it is simply numbered “XIX.”

[460] Brightness, brilliancy.

[461] The first strophe of the “Veni Creator” was, in fact, used as an antiphon in the Roman Catholic Church. (Antiphon: “A short piece of plain song introduced before a psalm or canticle, to the tone of which it corresponds, while the words are selected so as specially to illustrate and enforce the evangelical or prophetic meaning of the text.”—Grove’s “Dictionary of Music and Musicians.”) The suggestion that an antiphon was intended in the picture gains some force from the fact that while a faint “D...” is seen beneath the second hymn (“Mensch wiltu”), pointing to the commencement of the second verse (“Dein Gott allein und Herr bin ich,” representing the First Commandment), no second verse is indicated in the case of “Kom Heiliger Geyst,” which is limited to one strophe. The opening of the “Veni Creator” was actually printed as an antiphon in the “Baseler Plenarium” of the year 1514, beneath a woodcut, by Hans Scheuffelin, representing the Descent of the Holy Ghost. (Winterfeld, “Dr. Martin Luther’s deutsche Geistliche Lieder,” Leipzig, 1840.)

[462] The words between brackets, where the surface of the panel has been injured, are supplied from Winterfeld, “Dr. Martin Luther’s deutsche geistliche Lieder” (Leipzig, 1840), where Walther’s hymns are reproduced. The only exception is in the last line of the second hymn, where the repetition of the word “Gott” is obviously intended. In Walther’s “Gesangbuch,” in place of the repetitions seen above, “Halleluia” is twice sung at the end of “Kom Heiliger Geyst,” and “Kyrioleis” once at the conclusion of the first verse of “Mensch wiltu.” (A stroke over a letter implies a suppressed consonant. Thus, for “gleubgē” read “gleubgen”; for “brūstig,” “brunstig”; for “un̄,” “und,” and so on.) For an English rendering of the first hymn the reader is referred to the numerous translations of the “Veni Creator,” all of which give the sense generally, not literally. The second hymn is a paraphrase of the Ten Commandments, opening with an admonition to obey the behests they contain.

[463] Winterfeld, “Dr. Martin Luther’s Geistliche Lieder.”

[464] See Mr. Barclay Squires’ letter to the “Times,” November 14, 1891. The information there given is based upon Dr. Kade’s reprint of Walther’s “Gesangbuch.”

[465] It will be recollected that this hymn still forms part of the services of the Church of England for the Ordering of Priests and for the Consecration of Bishops.

[466] Spangenberg’s “Kirchengesenge,” Magdeburg, 1545; quoted by Winterfeld, “Der Evangelische Kirchengesang,” p. 306.

[467] “Je receuz ces jours passez voz lettres du premier mars.... J’ay aussy eu le pacquet de celles que m’escripvoit Monsʳ l’Archevesque de Cantorberi auxquelles je faiz response.”—Claude Dodieu, Sieur de Vély, French ambassador with the Emperor, to the Bailly of Troyes. From Paris, 2nd May, 1533. (Paris, Bibl. Nat., Coll. Dupuy, vol. 263, f. 96.)—Throughout the period of Henry VIII.’s divorce and re-marriage with Anne Boleyn Cranmer had probably much to do with the Frenchmen. It will be remembered that in the procession for Anne Boleyn’s coronation he and Dinteville rode side by side. (See _ante_, page 85.)

[468] Cranmer’s second wife, whom he married in Germany in 1532, the year before he became Archbishop of Canterbury, was the daughter of Osiander, the Reformer.

[469] See illustration, page 224, for a comparison of the page painted by Holbein with the corresponding page of the original book.

[470] Peter Apian, or Bienewitz (of which name Apian is the Latinized form), born 1495 at Leisnig in Saxony, became Professor of Mathematics (which included astronomy, etc.) at Ingoldstadt in Bavaria, where he died in 1552. It appears probable enough that he may have been a friend and correspondent of Kratzer, who was himself a native of Munich.—George Apian, mentioned in the colophon, was evidently a member of the same family, and a printer.

[471] The facts given above are taken from a letter to the “Athenæum,” July 30th, 1892, in which the late Mr. C. H. Coote announced his very interesting discovery of a copy of this book in the British Museum, and the identification of the very page seen in the picture.

[472] Now in the Louvre.

[473] See Mr. W. Fred. Dickes in the “Magazine of Art,” November, 1891.

[474] It was formerly of much greater extent than at present, but a portion was removed, and other portions damaged, when “the new altar” was erected early in the eighteenth century. See Dart, “Westmonasterum, or History and Antiquities of the Abbey Church of St. Peter’s, Westminster,” 2 vols. fol., 1724.

[475] Sir G. G. Scott, “Gleanings from Westminster Abbey,” second edition, 1863.

[476] The Hymn-book and Book of Arithmetic.

[477] Published by Steyner at Augsburg in 1531, and reprinted by him in the same year, as well as in 1532, 1533, and 1534. Mr. Henry Green, in his authoritative treatise on “Andrea Alciati and his Book of Emblems” (London, 1872), has shown that in all probability the so-called first edition of Milan, 1522, existed only in manuscript.

[478] Mr. W. Fred. Dickes was the first to point out the probable connection between the lute in Holbein’s picture and this emblem (“Magazine of Art,” November, 1891). The plausibility of the suggestion is happily not invalidated by the fact that Mr. Dickes unfortunately failed to notice the broken string—a circumstance which, on Alciati’s own showing (see the poem cited in the text), exactly reverses the significance of the symbol. This oversight naturally led Mr. Dickes to a wholly fallacious interpretation of the emblem. Had that gentleman read Alciati’s explanation of the device in question, he could not have been so misled.

[479] Mr. Dickes says “a lute and two books” (“Magazine of Art,” November, 1891), which of course brings the emblem much closer to Holbein’s representation. Whether the manuscript collection of Alciati’s “Emblems” of 1522 (see above, note 1) contained “two books,” and whether that collection came under the notice of Holbein and his sitters, it is impossible to say; no copy of it being known to exist. But had Mr. Dickes carefully consulted the only version of Alciati’s “Emblems” which had been _published_ up to 1533—namely, that issued by Steyner—he would have seen that the device there consists of a lute _only_. The two books first appear many years after the picture was painted.

[480] Green, “Andrea Alciati and his Book of Emblems” (London, 1872), pp. 12, 43-45. In later editions of Alciati’s “Emblems,” “Fœdera Italorum” was inscribed “Ad Maximilian Mediolani Ducem.” If it was indeed sent to Maximilian, it must have been composed many years earlier than here suggested, as Maximilian was dethroned on the conquest of the Duchy of Milan by the French, in 1515. It is noteworthy, however, that the name of Maximilian is only appended to this emblem at a considerably later date, when it may have been printed in error for Francesco, who was the reigning duke in 1526. Mr. Green, indeed, appears so satisfied that the League of Cognac gave birth to this emblem, that he excludes it from the possible list of emblems comprised in the Milan collection of 1522, as having been composed at a later date. Internal evidence proves that it was addressed to one of these two Dukes of Milan; to which of them is not very important. The same fair hopes of peace in Italy, which were evoked by the accession of Maximilian, were revived by the League of Cognac, under Francesco. The argument remains the same.

[481] The writer is indebted for this translation to the kindness of Lord Francis Hervey.

[482] See, for an account of all the circumstances, Part II., pp. 90-93. The picture had of course been begun earlier in the year, but it must have taken a considerable time to think out all the elaborate accessories, and still longer to execute them.

[483] This edition was subsequently translated into French by Jean Le Fèvre, a native of Dijon and Canon of Langres (in which diocese Polisy was situated), and was dedicated to the friend of the Dinteville family, Philippe de Chabot, Admiral de Brion.

[484] Andrea Alciati was born in the Milanese in 1492. He studied at Pavia and Bologna, and took his degree as Doctor of Laws in the twenty-second year of his age. In 1518 he was appointed to the Chair of Jurisprudence at Avignon. Returning to Italy in 1521, he remained at Milan till 1529, when he returned to France; this time to lecture on law at Bourges, where he stayed till 1534. He now resided at various Italian centres until his death, which took place in 1550. Erasmus and Paul Jovius were among his friends, and his society was sought on all hands. Charles V. and Francis I. alike protected him. The “Emblems,” which he composed as a recreation from his deeper studies, had extraordinary celebrity, and were printed and reprinted in innumerable editions and languages throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. One such was given to the world by the printer Gryphius at Lyons in 1548. It is curious that the motto of the Dinteville family, “Virtuti Fortuna Comes,” which, it has been seen, was also that of Gryphius in slightly altered form, was used by Alciati as early as 1522, in conjunction with the spread wings and other symbols of Hermes.

[485] See Part II., page 39.

[486] Hagen, “Deutschlands literarische und religiöse Verhältnisse im Reformations-Zeitalter,” vol. i., chap. vi.

[487] Decrue de Stoutz, “La Cour de France au XVIᵉ̀ᵐᵉ siècle,” page 159. Renée of France also cultivated these sciences at the Court of Ferrara. (Bart. Fontana, “Renata di Francia, Duchessa di Ferrara,” vol. iii., page 360.)

[488] It is a curious thing that Agrippa, whose name has descended to posterity as the incarnation of black magic, enjoyed for a time a European reputation for learning of the highest kind. Ecclesiastics such as the Archbishop of Cologne, Cardinal La Marck, and Cardinal Campeggio, were his special protectors. The freedom with which he expressed his opinion of the monks seems first to have drawn from his enraged enemies those accusations of meddling with black art which afterwards sullied his fame. His talents were universal. Secretary, soldier, knight, doctor of law, physic, and divinity, equally at home in France, Germany, England, and Italy, his life was as varied as the professions he undertook to exercise. But by some fault of tact or temper on his part his career always broke off just when apparently about to prosper, and ended in bitterness and disappointment. Agrippa died at Grenoble in 1535.

[489] As opposed to the black magic which was considered to emanate from the Evil One, and, as such, prohibited with the utmost rigour.

[490] Bayle’s “Dictionary,” ed. 1735, Art. Agrippa. The letters from which these passages are quoted were probably not published until a later date, but their purport appears to have formed the substance of that “Key” which Agrippa was in the habit of explaining to favoured persons.

[491] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 1170. Thomas Houth to the Earl of Kildare. In the index to the volume in question Gyes is erroneously identified with one Gee, an altogether different individual, as can be verified by reference to the letters, in the same volume, which refer to the latter person.—The Alderman at this time was probably Barthold Beckman, of Hamburg. (Lappenberg, “Urkundliche Geschichte des Hansischen Stahlhofes zu London,” p. 157.)

[492] In this second form perhaps equivalent to “Gijze.” The “z” would have a hissing sound similar to “ss.”

[493] Lappenberg, “Urkundliche Geschichte,” etc. Urkunden (No. clii., Aus dem Archive zu Cöln), p. 173. Sir Thomas More was one of the representatives of England on this occasion.

[494] _Ibid._, part i., p. 80, No. 11.

[495] _Ibid._, p. 81, Nos. 11 and 57, and part ii. (Urkunden), p. 173. Dr. Lappenberg adds a fourth version, which he brings under the same head: “Hans van der Biesen,” which stands, in his opinion, for “Hans van der Giesen.” (_Ibid._, p. 81, Nos. 39 and 40.)

[496] The entry occurs as “Albert Gissen Kammer” (Albert Gisse’s or Albert Gissen Room). If we may assume “Gissen” to be here in the genitive case, the nominative “Gisse” would show perfect identity with one of Holbein’s versions of the name.

[497] “The Book of Ser Marco Polo, the Venetian,” newly translated and edited, with notes, by Colonel Henry Yule, C.B., vol. i., p. 205, note 3.

[498] “Life and Reign of Henry VIII.” (1532-33, “Ambassador sent to the Pope from the King of Ethiopia”).

[499] See Holbein’s “Ambassadors,” p. 72.

[500] Letters and Papers, Henry VIII., vol. vi. (1533), No. 156.

INDEX

INDEX

Abate, Niccolò dell’, 126.

Act of Supremacy, 100.

Agout, river, 170.

Agrippa, Cornelius, 233, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 234, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Aigues-Mortes, 166.

Albany, Duke of, 91.

Alchemy, 138, 227, 232-234.

Alciati, Andrea, 46, 131, 198, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 228-231, 231, _note_ 3.

Alençon, Chancellor of, 42.

Alfonso I. d’Este, Duke of Ferrara, _see_ Este.

Allegory, 197.

“AMBASSADORS,” HOLBEIN’S PICTURE OF THE; purchased for the National Gallery, 1, 5, 31-32; personages represented, 1, 10, 11, 19, 20, 77, 200-202; owned by Le Brun, 5-6, 31-32; by Jacob, Earl of Radnor, 6, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 31-32; documents showing history of picture, 11, 18, 20; notice in Beaujon catalogue, 9-10, 31-32; description of picture, 200-203; details of same, 203-236 (_see also under each head_).

Ambassadors _de robe longue_ and _de robe courte_, 143, 199-200, 199, _note_ 1.

Amboise, Château of, 42, 126, _note_ 3.

Amboise, George d’, Cardinal Legate, 99.

Amyot, Jacques, Bishop of Auxerre, 146, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Angeviller, Conte d’, 22, _note_ 1.

Angoulême, Charles, Duke of, _see_ Charles.

Angoulême, Duchesse d’, _see_ Louise.

Angoulême, Marguerite d’, _see_ Marguerite.

Anne Boleyn, Queen of England, 62, 72, 79, 82, 83-89, 102, 105.

Antwerp, 186.

Apian, George, 224, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Apian, Peter, 224-225, 224, _note_ 2.

Aragon, Katherine of, _see_ Katherine.

Arithmetic, 223, 224, 225, 232.

Arithmetic, Book of, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 223-224.

Armagnac, Georges d’, Bishop of Rodez, 156, 167.

“Arms of Death” (design by Holbein), 203-204.

Arms of François II., Bishop of Auxerre, 56, 130.

Arms of Jean de Dinteville, 128-129.

Arts, the Seven Liberal, 39; in picture of “Ambassadors,” 210, 223, 225, 228, 231-232.

Arundel Collection, 140.

Aspremont, 136.

Asti, county of, 101.

Astrology, 45, 138, 210, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 233-234.

Astronomy, 45, 210, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 225, 232, 233-234.

Audley, Sir Thomas, Lord Chancellor, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 6.

Aumale, 178.

Auxerre, cathedral of, 117, 137, _note_ 1.

Auxerre, François I. de Dinteville, Bishop of, _see_ Dinteville.

Auxerre, François II. de Dinteville, Bishop of, _see_ Dinteville.

Auxerre, Jacques Amyot, Bishop of, _see_ Amyot.

“Avaux, M. d’,” 5, 7, 8, 10, 22, _see also_ Mesmes.

Avaux, seigneurie in Champagne, 9, _note_ 1.

Avignon, 46, 148, 149, 166, 231, _note_ 3.

Azay-le-Rideau, 125.

Baif, Lazare de, French Ambassador at Venice, etc., 59, 157, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 174.

Bailly, office of, 38.

Bailly of Troyes, The, _see_ Dinteville.

Balavoyne, steward of Bishop of Auxerre, 59, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 63.

Barbier, Domenico del, _see_ Domenico Fiorentino.

Bar-sur-Seine, 11, 19, 36, 41, 121.

Basle, 75.

Basse-Cour of Polisy, 127, 133.

Basville, _see_ Lamoignon.

Basville, seigneurie, 29.

Bayonne, 176, 213.

Beaujon, Hospice (now Hospital), 30, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Beaujon, Nicolas, 9, 21, 29, 30-32, 30, _note_ 2.

Beauvais, M. de, French Ambassador in Scotland, 80, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 95, 98.

Belgrade, 214.

Bellay, Guillaume Du, Seigneur de Langey, 35, _note_ 1, 44, 47, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 48, 53, 232.

Bellay, Jean Du, successively Bishop of Bayonne and Paris, and Cardinal, 42, 44, 45, _note_ 1, 47, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 48, 53, 65, 66, 67, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 80, 89-90, 98, 232.

Bellay, Madame Du, 117.

Bellay, Martin Du, 47, _note_ 2.

Bembo, Pietro, Cardinal, 158, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Berthereau, secretary to Montmorency, 59.

Bèze, M. de, 59, _note_ 2.

Bèze, Théodore de, 59, _note_ 2.

Bidassoa, river, 146, 176, 201, _note_ 2.

Biez, Oudart Du, Governour of Boulogne, 98.

Black Friars, 68, 69.

Blaigny, Charles le Genevois, Marquis de, 16, 26.

Blaigny, Charlotte Marie de Cazillac, Marquise de, _see_ Cazillac.

Blaigny, Marie Renée Le Genevois de, _see_ Le Genevois.

Blois, Château of, 42, 125.

Boisy, Grand-Maître, 39.

Boleyn, Queen Anne, _see_ Anne Boleyn.

Bologna, 72.

Bomy, Truce of, 163.

Bonhomme, Abbé, 24, _note_ 1.

Bonner, Dr., 82, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Bonnivet, Admiral, 39.

Bonvalot, François, Abbot of St. Vincent of Besançon, Imperial Ambassador in France, 177.

Bordeaux, 30, _note_ 2, 144.

Born, Derick, 76, _note_ 1.

Boulogne, 60, 61, 66, 98, 110.

Bourbon, Connétable de, 233.

Bourdaizière, La, 60.

Bourges, Archbishop of, _see_ Tournon, François de.

Bourges, University of, 46, 145, 231, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Brandon, Charles, Duke of Suffolk, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 87-88, 90.

Brantôme, 199-200, 201, _note_ 2.

Breton, secretary to Francis I., 98.

Brian, Sir Francis, 94, 109-110.

Bridewell, Palace of, 58, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 63, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 67-71, 68, _note_ 1.

Brion, Madame de, 117.

Brion, Philippe de Chabot, Admiral de, 65, 98, 116, 118, 146.

Brittany, 59, 213.

Brittany, Anne of, wife of Louis XII., 45, _note_ 2.

Broglie, Anne Louise de, second Marquise de Cessac, 23, 25, 28.

Brou, Denis Feydeau de, 28.

Brou, Madame de, 118.

Brun, Le, _see_ Le Brun.

Brussels, 177, 186, 187, 188.

Buchanan, picture-dealer, 6, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 32.

Budé, Guillaume, 43, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 46, 47.

Bunel, Pierre, 144, 157, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 159, 160, 174-175, 189, 190, _note_ 1, 191-192.

Burgundy, Charles the Bold, Duke of, 37.

Burgundy, County of (High Burgundy or Franche Comté), 16, 139, _note_ 2, 177, 186.

Burgundy, Duchy of, 36, 37, 41, 121, 127, 139, _note_ 2, 213.

Buttes, Dr., physician to Henry VIII., 74, 78.

Buxi, Cécille de, wife of Jean de Selve, 143, 147, _note_ 1, 154.

Buxi, Pierre de, Bishop of Lavaur, 147.

Cahors, 24, _note_ 1.

Calais, 60-63, 66, 109; meeting of Henry VIII. and Francis I. at (1532), 60-63.

Calvin, 46, 158, _note_ 3.

Campeggio, Cardinal, 69, 233, _note_ 3.

Camusat, Nicolas, Canon of Troyes, 14, 15, 18, 20, 21, 24, _note_ 1, 134, _note_ 1.

Canterbury, Archbishops of, _see_ Cranmer, Warham.

Capello, Carlo, Venetian Ambassador in England, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 6.

Carew, Sir Nicolas, Master of the Horse to Henry VIII., 88.

Carpentras, 174, _note_ 1.

Carpentras, Bishop of, _see_ Sadoleto.

Carpi, Ridolfo Pio, Bishop of Faenza, Cardinal, 162-165.

_Carrelage_ at Polisy (tesselated pavement), 129-130, 197.

Castelnau, Anthoine de, Bishop of Tarbes, French Ambassador in England and with Charles V., 102-103, 105, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 172, _note_ 2, 174-175.

Castelnau, Louis de, Marquis de Cessac, 15, _note_ 5, 24, _note_ 1.

Castillon, Sieur de, French Ambassador in England, 95, 96.

Catherine de’ Medici (Duchess of Orleans, subsequently Queen of France), 72, 96, 99.

Cazillac, Charlotte-Marie de, Marquise de Blaigny, 16, 17, 23, 25-27, 31.

Cazillac, Claude de, Baronne de Fontenilles, 15, 26.

Cazillac, Claude de, Marquise de Praslin, 25, _note_ 1.

Cazillac, François I. de, Baron de Cessac, _see_ Cessac.

Cazillac, François II. de, Marquis de Cessac, _see_ Cessac.

Cazillac, seigneurie in Quercy, 24, 27.

Cellini, Benvenuto, 126, _note_ 3, 197.

Cessac, Baronne de, _see_ Dinteville, Claude de.

Cessac, François I. de Cazillac, Baron de, 14, 17, 31.

Cessac, François II. de Cazillac, Marquis de, 15-17, 19-21, 22-25, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 26, 31.

Cessac, Marquise de, _see_ Broglie, Anne-Louise de.

Cessac, Marquise de, _see_ Choiseul, Marie de.

Cessac, seigneurie in Quercy, 24, 25, 27, 28.

Chabot, Philippe de, Admiral de Brion, 65, 98, 116, 146.

Chambord, 125.

Champagne, 14, _note_ 1, 16, 24, _note_ 1, 36, 46, 52, 127.

“Champagne et de Brie, Revue de,” 10-12, 14, _note_ 1.

Chantilly, 55, 83, 100.

Chapeaufort, Maison du, 21.

Chapuys, Eustace, Ambassador of Charles V. in England, 62, 63, 103, 105-106.

Charles VIII., King of France, 37, 51.

Charles IX., King of France, 207, _note_ 1.

Charles V., Emperor of Germany, 6, 40, 41, 42, 48, 52, _note_ 2, 57, 69, 72, 73, 76, 90-92, 95, 99, 101, 102, 104, 106, 107, 116, 128, 151, 152, 156, 157, 162, 163, 165, 166, 169, 172-182, 182, _note_ 1, 184-188, 184, _note_ 1, 193.

Charles, Duke of Angoulême, subsequently Duke of Orleans, 40, 42, 43, 44, 53, 59, 60, 62, 98, 99, 100, 106, 112, _note_ 2, 113, 116, 118, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 119, 121-124.

Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, 37.

Chartres, Duchess of, _see_ Renée.

“Chartreuse,” The, 30.

Châtillon, Mme. de, 45, _note_ 1.

Chelsea, More’s house at, 74, 75.

Chenonceaux, 125.

Choiseul, Charles de, Marquis de Praslin, 25, _note_ 1.

Choiseul, Duché-Pairie, 17.

Choiseul, family of, 16.

Choiseul, Isabelle de, 25, _note_ 1.

Choiseul, Marie de, first Marquise de Cessac, 16, 21, 22.

Chrétien, Félix, 137, _note_ 1.

Christina, Duchess of Milan, niece of Charles V., 91, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Chronology of Holbein’s “Ambassadors,” 31.

Cinque Ports, Barons of the, 87, _note_ 4.

Clement VII., Pope, 41, 57, 58, 59, 61, 62, 72, 73, 78, 79, 82, 91, 93, 95-96, 99, 100, _note_ 2, 155.

Clermont, Cardinal, Legate of Avignon, 148-150.

Clermont, M. de, 150.

Clouet, 209.

Cloux, Château, 126, _note_ 3.

Cobham, 102.

Cognac, League of, 41, 90, 92, 228, _ibid._, _note_ 4.

Coligny, Louise de, wife of Gaucher de Dinteville the younger, 51, _note_ 2.

Collège Royal (Coll. de France), 46, 145.

Cologne, Archbishop of, 233, _note_ 3.

Compass, an oval, 80.

Compasses, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 224, 232, 233.

Concordat, The, 147.

Contarini, Cardinal, 158, _note_ 1, 182, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Conti, Prince de, Governour of Champagne, 16.

Copernicus, 210, _note_ 3.

Cosins Lane, 75.

Council, The General, 78, 106, 162, 163.

Cranmer, Thomas, Archbishop of Canterbury, 78, 85-87, 222, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 223, _note_ 1.

Croix, Nicolas de la, 135, 136.

Cromwell, Thomas, minister of Henry VIII., subsequently Earl of Essex, 74, 76, _note_ 1, 102, 106, 107.

Crucifix, Silver, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 232, 234, 235.

Dagger, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 7, 201, 205-207, 206, _note_ 1.

Dagger-sheath, design for, after Holbein, 206, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Dagger and sword, worn together, 200, 201, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

“Dance of Death,” Holbein’s, 203, 204.

Dance of Death, The, 198.

Danès, Pierre, 144, 145, 146, 157, 183, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 189, 191.

Dauphin François, The, _see_ François.

Dauphin Henri, The, _see_ Henri.

Death, Agrippa’s Mystical, 234-235.

“Death, Arms of,” 203-204, 207.

Death, Device and Emblems of, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203-207, 228, 235.

Death, Mottoes concerning, 206.

Death’s-head Brooch, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 201, 203.

Death’s-head, Distorted, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 10, 203-205, 203, _note_ 1, 206, 225, 235.

Derick, _see_ Born _and_ Tybis.

Deschenetz (Echenay), seigneurie, 17, _note_ 1, 36, 37, 40, 113-114.

Deschenetz, Seigneur, _see_ Dinteville, Guillaume de.

Device of Death, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 204-207, 235.

Device or _Devise_, 197-198, 204-207, 235.

Diane de Poitiers, “Grande Sénéchale,” subsequently Duchesse de Valentinois, 112.

Diet of Hagenau (1540), 172-173, 174.

—— Ratisbon (1541), 174, 175.

—— Spires (1529), 151-153, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 219, 222.

Dijon, Bailly of (M. de Villiers les Potz), 117-118.

Dinteville, Charlotte de, wife of Louis Raguier, Seigneur de la Mothe, sister of Jean the “Ambassador,” 47, 53, 136, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Dinteville, Claude de, Surintendant de Finance to Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, uncle to Jean the “Ambassador,” 37.

Dinteville, Claude de, wife of François I. de Cazillac, Baron de Cessac, niece of Jean the “Ambassador,” 14, 15, 17, 31, 134, _note_ 3.

Dinteville, François I. de, Bishop of Auxerre, uncle of Jean the “Ambassador,” 37, 38, 51, 53, 56.

Dinteville, François II. de, Bishop of Auxerre, brother of Jean the “Ambassador,” 15, 38, 39, 51, 53, 55-60, 62-65, 78, 79-81, 111, 113-121, 129-131, 133, 135-138, 214, 233.

Dinteville, Françoise de, sister of Jean the “Ambassador,” 53, 63, _note_ 4, 134.

Dinteville, Gaucher I. de, father of Jean the “Ambassador,” 37-42, 47, 50-53, 53, _note_ 2, 54.

Dinteville, Gaucher II. de, Seigneur of Vanlay and Thennelières, brother of Jean the “Ambassador,” 51, _note_ 2, 52, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 53, 59, 60, 62, 111-116, 137, 213.

Dinteville, Guillaume, Seigneur Deschenetz, brother of Jean the “Ambassador,” 14, 52, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 53, 59, 107-108, 111-114, 116, 133-138, 167-168, 213.

Dinteville, Jacques de, Grand Veneur de France, uncle of Jean the “Ambassador,” 37.

DINTEVILLE, JEAN DE, SEIGNEUR OF POLISY AND BAILLY OF TROYES (subject of Holbein’s portrait). Birth and lineage, 36; position at French Court, 39, 40, 42, 52, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 53, 59, 60, 62, 63, 99-101, 111-113, 116-121, 122, 134; Bailly of Troyes and Governour of Bar-sur-Seine, 41; Knight of St. Michael, 7-8, 53, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 134, _note_ 2, 201-208; first embassy to England (1531), 54, 56-57; second and longest ditto (1533), 66-98; third ditto (1535), 100-103; fourth ditto (1536), 105-107; fifth and last ditto (1537), 108-110; in disgrace with Francis I., 111-113; back at Court, 116-121; paralyzed, 121; builds Polisy, 125-133; death, 138.

—— His portrait by Holbein (“Ambassadors”), 1, 10-11, 18-20, 31, 77-78, 200; _see also under “Ambassadors.”_

—— Supposed portrait amongst the Holbein drawings at Windsor, 139.

Dinteville, Jean de, son of Pierre de Jaucourt, ancestor of Jean the “Ambassador,” 36.

Dinteville, Jean de, another ancestor, 36-37.

Dinteville, Joachim de, Seigneur of Dinteville in Champagne, 14, _note_ 1, 24, _note_ 1.

Dinteville, Louis de, Knight Commander of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, brother of Jean the “Ambassador,” 39, 53, 54, 60, 213.

Dinteville, Pierre de, Seneschal of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, uncle of Jean the “Ambassador,” 37, 54.

Dinteville, seigneurie in Champagne, 14, _note_ 1, 24, _note_ 1, 36.

St. Dizier, 128.

Dodieu, Claude, Sieur de Vély, French Ambassador with Charles V., 98, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 186-188, 199-200, 222, _note_ 3.

Domenico Fiorentino (Domenico del Barbier), 126-128.

Dossi, Battista, 209.

Dover, 66, 109-110.

Du Bellay, _see_ Bellay, Du.

Du Faur, _see_ Faur, Du.

Du Plessis, _see_ Plessis, Du.

Duprat, Chancellor, 99.

Du Puy, _see_ Puy, Du.

Ecouen, Château of, 125.

Eleanor, sister of Charles V., Queen-Dowager of Portugal, Queen of France, 50, 59.

Elizabeth, Princess, daughter of Henry VIII. and Anne Boleyn, 94, 102-103.

Emblems, Alciati’s Book of, 198, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 228-231, 228, _notes_ 1-4, 231, _notes_ 1 _and_ 2.

Embrun, Archbishop of, _see_ Tournon, François de.

Epitaph of Gaucher I. de Dinteville, 51.

Epitaph of George de Selve, 190.

Erasmus, 43, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 231, _note_ 3.

Ercole II. d’Este, _see_ Este.

Escars, Susanne d’, wife of Charles de Cazillac, Baron de Cessac, 15.

Esmon, Mademoiselle de, 136.

Este, Alfonso I. d’, Duke of Ferrara, 209.

Este, Ercole II. d’, Duke of Ferrara, 45, 115, _note_ 3, 159, _note_ 1, 168.

Este, Leonora d’, 45.

Etampes, Duchesse d’ (Anne de Pisseleu), 112-113, 117-121, 184, _note_ 1.

Evelyn, John, 15, _note_ 5.

Evreux, Hotel d’, 30, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

Falconry, 55, 56, 80.

Falier, Lodovico, Venetian Ambassador in England, 66.

Farnese, Alessandro, Cardinal, 164.

Faur, Du, 157, _note_ 2.

Ferdinand, King of Hungary, 41.

Ferrara, 67, 115, 116, 158, _note_ 3, 159.

Ferrara, Dukes of, _see_ Este.

Ferrara, Duchess of, _see_ Renée.

Fisher, John, Bishop of Rochester, 100-101, 104.

Fitzwilliam, Sir William, Treasurer of the Household to Henry VIII., 71, 74.

Flanders, 109, 176, 177, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 178, 186.

Fleece, Order of the, 207.

Fleet, the river, 67-69.

Flutes, Case of, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 232.

Fontainebleau, 120, 125, 126, 127, 135, 197.

Fontaines, page of Louis de Dinteville, 60.

Fontenilles, _see_ Roche, De la.

Forestmontier, 11, 123.

Fortespice, vassal of the Comte de Vaudemont, 37.

Fortune, emblems of, at Polisy, 130-132.

Four, Rue du (at Paris), 21.

France, Collège de, _see_ Collège Royal.

France, Kings of, _see_ Charles, Francis, Henri, Louis.

Franche-Comté, 16, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 139, _note_ 2.

Francis I., King of France, 10, 11, 19, 40-47, 50, 52, 53, _note_ 2, 54-62, 64, 65, 72, 73, 76, 78-81, 89-98, 99-102, 104, 105, 107-110, 111, 112, 114-122, 125-128, 134, 145-150, 156, 157, 162, 163, 165-167, 172, 173, 175-182, 186, 187, 192, 197, 199, 207, 209, 214.

Francis II., King of France, 207, _note_ 1.

François, The Dauphin, eldest son of Francis I., 39, 40, 42, 50, 52, 53, 62, 103, 106, 107, 112, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Gabarre, 42.

Gardiner, Stephen, Bishop of Winchester, 102, 103, 105.

Garter, Order of the, 61, 207.

Gaucher de Dinteville, _see_ Dinteville.

Genevois, Le, _see_ Le Genevois.

Genoa, 101, 214.

Geometry, 225, 227, 232, 233, 235.

Germany, 41, 45-47, 89, 136, 172, 214, 219.

St. Géry, Château of, 25, _note_ 2.

St. Géry, Rey de, _see_ Rey.

Ghent, 175, 177, 178.

Globe, Celestial, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 202, 209-210, 232.

Globe, Terrestrial, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 202, 210-218, 228, 232, 235.

Godefroy family, The, 14, 18.

Godefroy papers (Bibl. de l’Institut), 18, 20.

Grammont, Gabriel de, Bishop of Tarbes, Cardinal, 62, 64-65, 71, 72, 91, 92, 146.

Grand-Maître, _see_ Montmorency.

Grand-Seigneur (the Turk), _see_ Solyman II.

Grand Veneur de France, _see_ Dinteville, Jacques de.

Granvella, Cardinal (Nic. Perrenot, minister of Charles V.), 186-188.

Greenwich, 70, 71, 84, 94-95.

Grenoble, 136, 233, _note_ 3.

Grignan, French Ambassador at Rome, 114-115.

Gryphe or Gryphius, printer of Lyons, 131-132, 198.

Guénégaud, Henri Du Plessis, Marquis de Plancy, 25, _note_ 1.

Guénégaud, Roger de, 24, 25, _note_ 1.

Guildford, Sir Henry, Comptroller of the Household to Henry VIII., 74.

Guise, Claude de Lorraine, Duke of, 113.

Guise, Duke of, 16.

Guise, The, 134, _note_ 3.

Gyze, Gisze, Gyes, George, 75, _note_ 3; _see also_ _Appendix A_, p. 239.

Hagenau, Diet of (1540), 174.

Hague, The, 184, 185.

Hargerie, Seigneur de La, 93.

Hellin, French resident at Brussels, 177, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Henri, successively Duke of Orleans, Dauphin, and Henri II., King of France, 10, 42, 54, 59, 60, 61-62, 72, 96, 99, 112, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 113, 114, 120, 121, 123, 127, 132, 134, _note_ 2, 136, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 137, 184, _note_ 1, 207, _note_ 1.

Henry VIII., King of England, 8, 20, 40, 42, 47, 48, 50, 56-58, 60-63, 67-74, 76, 78-82, 83, 88, 89-90, 93-98, 100-102, 104-109.

Henry, Count of Nassau, Grand Chamberlain of Charles V., 52, _note_ 2, 213.

Hermes’ wings, 131-132, 231, _note_ 2.

Hermeticism (Hermetic Art), 132, 233.

Hesse, Philip, Landgrave of, 99.

HOLBEIN, HANS, THE YOUNGER, 1, 5-7, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 8, _note_ 2, 9, 10, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 11, 13, 19, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 20-22, 26, 31-32, 35, 41, 43, _note_ 3, 56, 74-78, 134, _note_ 3, 139, 140, 198, 199, 202, 203-206, 208, 209, _note_ 3, 211-212, 215-218, 220-221, 224-227, 230, 235-236.

—— “Dance of Death,” 203-204.

—— Design for the “Arms of Death,” 203-204, 207.

—— —— for the Order of St. Michael, 209, _note_ 3.

—— —— after, for a Dagger-sheath, 206.

—— Drawing at Dresden, of Morette, 140.

—— —— —— Windsor, supposed to represent Dinteville, 139, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 140.

—— Engravings after, by Hollar, _see_ Hollar.

—— Portraits by: The “Ambassadors,” _see under that head_. Born, Derick, 76, _note_ 1. Buttes, Dr., 74. Cromwell, Thomas, 74. Erasmus, 43, _note_ 3. Fitzwilliam, Sir William, 74. Guildford, Sir Henry, 74. Gyze or Gisze, Georg, 75, _note_ 2, _Appendix A_ (pp. 239-240). Kratzer, Nicolas, 74, 75, _note_ 1, 224, _ibid._, _note_ 4. Milan, Christina, Duchess of, 91, _note_ 1. More, Sir Thomas, 75. More family, 75. Morette, Comte de, 42, _note_ 7, 140, 201, _note_ 1. Norfolk, Duke of, 74. Steelyard Merchants, 75. Tybis, Derick, 76, _note_ 1. Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, 74.

Holland, 184.

Hollar, Wenzel, 140.

Holy Ghost, Order of the, 207, _note_ 1.

Hospice (now Hôpital) Beaujon, 30, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Howard, Lord William, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 4, 87-88

Hozier, D’, 14, 24, _note_ 1, 53, _note_ 2.

Humanists, the French, 45 _et seq._

Hungary, Ferdinand, King of, _see_ Ferdinand.

Hungary, John Zapolski, King of, _see_ Zapolski.

Hymn-book, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 151, 173, 202, 214, 219-223, 228, 235.

Instruments, Geometrical, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 202, 224-225, 232, 233, 235.

Italian artists employed in France, 125-127, 128, 129-130.

Iversay, M. d’, 122.

Ivoy, 122-123.

Jaucourt, Pierre de, 36.

John, King of England, 69.

St. John of Jerusalem, Order of, 39, 53, 54, 57, 67, 68, 213.

Joinville, 116, 121.

Julyot, Hubert, 128.

Katherine of Aragon, Queen of England, 57, 63, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 69, 83, 89, 94, 104.

Kingston, 102.

Kratzer, Nicolas, astronomer to Henry VIII., 74, 75, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 222, 224, 225.

Laigne, river, 36, 128, 129.

Lamoignon (place), 29.

Lamoignon, Chrétien de, Marquis de Basville, 29.

Lamoignon, Chrétien-François (II.) de, Marquis de Basville et de Milhars, Président _à mortier_ of the Parliament of Paris, Garde des Sceaux, 29, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 30-31, 32.

Langey, _see_ Bellay, Guillaume Du.

Languedoc, 14, 16, 17, 23, 24, 26, 27, 29, 31, 150, 153, 213.

Lavaur (Lavor, La Vaur), Bishops of, _see_ Buxi, Danès, Selve.

Lavaur, Cathedral of, 170.

Le Brun, Jean-Batiste-Pierre, 5-6, 10, 31, 32.

Lefèvre d’Etaples, Jacques, 43, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 44, 47.

Le Genevois, Charles, Marquis de Blaigny, 16, 26.

Le Genevois, Marie Renée, wife of François Voisin, subsequently Marquise de Milhars, 26-29, 31-32.

Leland, John, 6-7.

Lesches, in Brie, 53.

Liancourt, Madame de, 135, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Liancourt, Seigneur de, _see_ Plessis, Du.

Limoges, 24, _note_ 1, 144.

Lionardo da Vinci, 126, _note_ 3.

L’Isle-Adam, Philippe de Villiers, Grand Master of the Knights of St John of Jerusalem, 54, 59.

Loches, 176.

London, 57, 63, 66-71, 75, 76, 92, 102; description of (1531), 70; Mayor of (Sir Stephen Pecock), 88; Tower of, 84.

Longford Castle, 6, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 32.

Longueval, M. de, 122.

Lorraine, Claude de, Duke of Guise, 113.

Lorraine, Dukedom of, 37.

Louise of Savoy, Duchess of Angoulême, mother of Francis I., 40, 42, _ibid._, _note_ 5, 43, 45, 55, 56, 148-149, 233.

Low Countries, The, _see_ Netherlands.

Lunden, Bishop of (John Vesalius, Archbishop of Linden), 172.

Lute, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 202, 227-231, 232, 235.

Luther, 46, 219, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

Lutheran Hymn-book in picture of “Ambassadors,” _see_ Hymn-book.

Lutherans (Luthériens), 45, 46, 49, 65, 89, 172, 181, 222.

Lützelburger, Hans, 204.

Luxemburg, Duchy of, 116.

Lyencourt, _see_ Liancourt.

Lyons, 93, 99, 105, 107, 108, 131-132, 136, 155, 198, 204, 213.

Mablisteyn, Sir John, 57.

Mâcon, Charles de Hémard, Bishop of, Cardinal, 161-165, 163, _note_ 2, 199-200.

Madeleine, daughter of Francis I., subsequently Queen of Scotland, 99.

Madrid, 40, 146.

Madrid, Château of (near Paris), 125, 126.

Madrid, Treaty of, 41, 50, 146, 213.

Magellan, 212.

Magic, 234, _ibid._, _notes_ 1 _and_ 2.

Maison de l’Aûmonier (Polisy), 130-133, 130, _note_ 1, 198, 233.

Maison du Chapeaufort (Paris), 20, 21.

Malta, 54.

Mantua, 116.

Manuzio, Paolo, 157.

Maraviglia, _see_ Merveilles.

Marck, Cardinal La, 109, 234.

Mareuil, Pierre de, Bishop of Lavaur, 113, 117-121.

Marguerite d’Angoulême, successively Duchesse d’Alençon and Queen of Navarre, sister of Francis I., 42, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 43-45, 98, 153-154.

Marguerite, Princess, daughter of Francis I., 99.

Marignan, Battle of, 144.

Marseilles, meeting of Francis I. and Clement VII. at, 72, 78, 89, 93-94, 95-96, 99.

Mary, ex-Queen of France, sister of Henry VIII., wife of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, 90.

Mary, Queen-Dowager of Hungary, Regent of the Netherlands, sister of Charles V., 109, 177, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Mary, Princess, daughter of Henry VIII. and Katherine of Aragon, 94, 103.

Mass, placards against, 104.

Maurice of Saxony, 136.

Mechanics, 55, 137, 235.

Melanchthon, André, 46.

Melanchthon, Philip, 46, 48, 158, _note_ 3, 210, _note_ 3.

Mergey, Catherine de, 133.

Mergey, Jean de, 133-134, 134, _note_ 1.

Merveilles or Maraviglia, French agent at Milan, 90-93, 90, _note_ 4, 230.

Mesmes, Jean-Antoine de, Conte d’Avaux, ambassador, 27, 28, 31.

Mesmes, Jean-Antoine de, Conte d’Avaux, Premier Président of the Parliament of Paris, 27, 28, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 29, 31.

Mesmes, Jean-Jacques de, Conte d’Avaux, Président _à mortier_ of the Parliament of Paris, 27, 31.

Mesmes, Marie-Thérèse de, wife of François de la Roche, Marquis de Fontenilles, 27, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 28, 31.

Metals, transmutation of, 233.

St. Michael, Order of (Ordre du Roi), 7-8, 42, 53, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 61, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 200, 201, 207-209, _notes_ 207-209.

Milan, city of, 198, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 228, _note_ 1, 230, 231, _note_ 3.

Milan, Duchy of, 67, 73, 90-92, 96, 101, 144, 163, 166, 176-179, 184, _note_ 1, 186, 187, 228, _note_ 4.

Milan, Francesco Sforza, Duke of, 41, 90-93, 228, _note_ 4, 229, 230.

Milan, Maximilian, Duke of, 228, _note_ 4, 229.

Milhars, Château of, 17, 23, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 24, 25, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 26-29, 31-32.

Milhars, Marquis de, _see_ Voisin, François.

Milhars, Marquise de, _see_ Le Genevois, Marie Renée.

Mirandola, La, 115, 167, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Mirandola, La, Pico, Count of, 167.

Modena, 167, 209.

Modena, Niccolò da, 126.

Mons, 177.

Montecuculli, Count Sebastiano di, 107-108, 112, _note_ 1.

Montier-Aramey, abbey of, 117-119.

Montierender, abbey of, 55, 134.

Montier-la-Celle, abbey of, 117-121, 135, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Montier-sur-Saulx, 116.

Montmorency, Anne de, successively Maréchal, Grand-Maître, and Connétable de France, 39, 42, _ibid._, _note_ 7, 43, 44, 48-49, 53, 54, 55, 59, 61, 64, 65, 77, 79, 80, 83, 97, 98, 100, 113, 115, 125, 126, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 146, 150, 153, 154, 161, 162, 164, 165, 171, 176, 177, 184, 185, 186, 188, 198, 213.

Montmorency, church of, 51.

Montmorency, Madame de (Madame la Connétable), 135, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

Montpesat, Antoine des Prez, Seigneur de, French ambassador in England, 42, _note_ 7, 63.

Montreuil, Madame de, 39-40, 42-43, 118.

Montreuil, seigneurie, 40.

More, Sir Thomas, 43, _note_ 3, 74, 75, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 76, 100-101, 104.

Morette, Charles de Solier, Comte de, French hostage, subsequently ambassador, in England, 42, _note_ 7, 63, _note_ 1, 140, 201, _note_ 1.

Mosaic Pavement, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 225-227, 233.

—— Westminster Abbey, 225-227.

Motte de Tilly, De la, 136, _ibid._, _note_ 1. _See also_ Raguier.

Motto of the Dinteville family, 130, 132, 231, _note_ 3.

Mottoes concerning Death, 206-207.

Mottoes on weapons, 205, 206.

Music, 197, 219, 221, 223, 229, 232, 235.

Naples, 51, 116.

Nassau, Henry, Count of, 52, _note_ 2, 213.

National Gallery, The, 1, 5-6, 31-32.

Navarre, College of (University of Paris), 56.

Navarre, Henri d’Albret, King of, 42, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

Navarre, Marguerite d’Angoulême, Queen of, _see_ Marguerite.

Nérac, 44.

Netherlands (Low Countries), 109, 127, 163, 176, 177, 179, 185, 186, 187, 188.

Niccolò dell’ Abate, or, da Modena, 126.

Nice, meeting of Francis I., Charles V., and Paul III. at, 164, 166, 179.

Nice, Truce of, 166.

Nichols, John Gough, 6, _ibid._, _note_ 5, 7, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Norfolk, Duchess of, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Norfolk, Thomas Howard, second Duke of, Lord Treasurer and Earl Marshal, 61, 70, _note_ 5, 71, 74, 77, 78, 81, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 4, 93, 94, 98, 102.

Nuncio, the Papal, in England (Antonio de Pulleo, Baron de Burgo), 71, 73, 82.

Nuncio, the Papal, in France, 165.

Nuremberg, 210, _note_ 3, 211, 214, 233.

Occult Sciences, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 232-235.

—— Agrippa’s Key to, 234, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

“Opus Alexandrinum,” _see_ Mosaic Pavement.

Orange, Prince and Princess of, 188.

Orders of Knighthood, _see_ Fleece, Garter, Holy Ghost, St. John of Jerusalem, St. Michael.

Orleans, Dukes of, _see_ Henri, Charles.

Orleans, University of, 145.

Ouschamps, Seigneur of, _see_ Plessis, Du.

Padua, University of, 56, 115, 157, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 158, _notes_ 1 _and_ 2, 159.

Paris, 15, 18-21, 22, 23, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 27, 29, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 31, 37, 42, 43, _note_ 2, 50, 55, 115, 119, 125, 126, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 143, 144, 146, 153, 176, 213.

Paris, Bishop of, _see_ Bellay, Jean Du.

Paris, Premier Président of the Parliament of, _see_ Mesmes, Selve.

Paris, President _à mortier_ of the Parliament of, _see_ Lamoignon, Mesmes.

Paris, University of, 39, 46, 56, 144, 145, 157, _note_ 2.

Parma, 96.

St. Paul’s, old Cathedral of, 67.

Paul III., Pope, 100, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 101, 104, 108-109, 116, 156, 162-166, 168, 174.

Pavement, Mosaic, _see_ Mosaic Pavement.

Pavement, tesselated, at Polisy, 129-130.

Pavia, battle of, 40, 48.

Pavia, University of, 231, _note_ 3.

Perrine, La, _see_ Plessis, Du.

Philip of Spain, 184, _note_ 1.

Piacenza, 96.

Piedmont, invaded by the French, 104.

Pirkheimer, 233.

Pithou, Pierre, advocate of Troyes, 47.

Plessis, Anne Du (Madame de Polisy), wife of Gaucher I. de Dinteville, mother of Jean the “Ambassador,” 38, 51, 52, 53, 60, 63, _ibid._, _note_ 4, 114, _note_ 2, 134, 135, _note_ 1.

Plessis, Benjamin Du, son of Guillaume, Seigneur de Liancourt, 135, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Plessis, Charles Du, Seigneur of Savonnières, Ouschamps, and La Perrine, uncle of Dinteville the “Ambassador,” 135-136, 135, _note_ 1.

Plessis, Guillaume de, Seigneur of Liancourt, uncle of Dinteville the “Ambassador,” 135, _note_ 1.

Plessis, Jean Du, the elder, Seigneur of Ouschamps and La Perrine, maternal grandfather of Dinteville the “Ambassador,” 38.

Plessis, Jean Du, the younger (“the young Savonnières”), 114-115, 135.

Plessis, Le, seigneurie, 60.

Plessis-Praslin, Maréchal Du, subsequently Duc de Choiseul, 17, 19, 21.

Plutarch’s “Lives,” 145-146.

Poitiers, Diane de, 112.

Poitiers, University of, 56, 145.

Poland, Sigismund, King of, 41, 214.

Pole, Reginald, Cardinal, 108-109, 158, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 159, 161, 169, 174, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Polisy, Château and Seigneurie of, 8, 10-12, 14-17, 18-21, 31, 36, 37, 38, 40, 41, 50, 60, 63, _note_ 4, 111, 113, 121, 124, 125, 127-133, _ibid._, _various notes_, 134, 135, 138, 139, _note_ 2, 171, 197, 198, 213, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 214, 216, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Polisy, Madame de, _see_ Plessis, Anne Du.

Polisy, M. de, _see_ Dinteville, Jean de.

Polonia, 213, 214.

Pomponne, Marquis de, 25, _note_ 1.

Pont, Jean Du, a “busy friar,” 110.

Potz, M. de Villiers les, Bailly of Dijon, 117-118.

“Presbyter Joannes” (Prester John), 217; _see also_ _Appendix B_, page 241.

Primaticcio, Francesco, 126-130.

Puy, Du, 14.

St. Quentin, 176.

Quercy, 17, 24.

Rabelais, 48.

Radnor, Jacob, second Earl of, 6.

Radnor, William, fifth Earl of, 5, _note_ 1.

Raguier family, 47.

Raguier, Louis, Seigneur de la Motte de Tilly, 136, _note_ 1.

Ratisbon, Diet held at (1541), 174.

Reformers, French, 43-49, 104.

Régennes, Château of (Diocese of Auxerre), 137.

Renaissance, French, 127, 129, 235.

Renée of France, successively Duchess of Chartres and of Ferrara, daughter of Louis XII., 43, _note_ 1, 45, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 115, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 159, _ibid._, _notes_ 1 _and_ 2, 209, _note_ 2, 233, _note_ 2.

Rey de St. Géry, family of, 25, _note_ 2, 29, 32.

Rhodes, Knights of, _see_ St. John of Jerusalem, Knights of.

Richmond, Henry, Duke of, 94.

Riez, Bishop of (François II. de Dinteville), 56.

Robbia, Girolamo della, 126, 129.

“Robe courte” and “Robe longue,” 143, 199-200, 199, _note_ 1.

Robes of peers and peeresses, 87, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Roche, François I. de la, Conte and Marquis de Fontenilles, 26, 27, 31.

Roche, François II. de la, Marquis de Fontenilles, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31.

Roche, Jean-Jaques de, Baron de Fontenilles, 15, 26.

Rochepot, La, Anne de Montmorency, Seigneur de, 42, _note_ 7.

Rochepot, La, François de Montmorency, Seigneur de, 42, _note_ 7.

Rochford, George Boleyn, Viscount, brother of Anne Boleyn, 94.

Rodez, Georges d’Armagnac, Bishop of, 156, 167.

Romans, 165.

Rome, 48, 49, 51, 55, 57, 59, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 60, 62, 64, 79, 82, 89, 109, 114, 115, 116, 156, 158, _note_ 3, 161, _note_ 5, 162, 163, 169, 179, 199, 213.

Rosso, Il, 125-126.

Roussel, Gérard, 44, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Russell, Sir Giles, commander of Battisford and Dingley, 57.

Sadoleto, Jacopo, Bishop of Carpentras, Cardinal, 158, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 159, 174, _note_ 1.

St. Alain, Cathedral of (Lavaur), 170.

St. Dizier, 128.

St. Géry, Château of, 25, _note_ 2.

St. Géry, Rey de, _see_ Rey.

St. John of Jerusalem, Order of, 39, 53, 54, 57, 67, 68, 213.

St. Michael, Order of (Ordre du Roi), 7-8, 53, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 61, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 200, 201, 207-209, _notes_ 207-209.

St. Quentin, 176.

St. Simon, 27, _note_ 1.

Sainte-Marthe brothers, 13, 14.

Saluce (Saluzzo), Marquis de, 59.

Saveuse, M. de, Bailly of Amiens, 185, _note_ 1.

Savona, 166.

Savonnières, _see_ Plessis, Du.

Saxonia, 213, 214.

Saxony, Elector of, 41, 214.

Schöner, Johann, of Carlstadt, 210, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 211.

Science, Occult, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 138, 232-235.

Scotland (Escoce), 81, _ibid._, _notes_ 1 _and_ 2, 95, 98.

Seine, river, 36, 128.

Selve, François de, ambassador at Constantinople, brother of the Bishop of Lavaur, 145, _note_ 2.

SELVE, GEORGE DE, BISHOP OF LAVAUR (subject of Holbein’s portrait). Birth and lineage, 143; education, 144-146; Bishop of Lavaur, 13, 147, _ibid._, _note_ 2; Diet of Spires (1529), 151, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 219, 222; visit to England (1533), 11, 19, 20, 77-80, 154, 202, 235-236; ambassador at Venice (1534-1537), 154, 156-161; at Rome (1537-1538), 161-166; interlude at Lavaur, 169-175; addresses and orations, 152, 170-174, 179-182; ambassador with the Emperor (1539-1540), 175-188; last days at Lavaur, 188-190; death, 190.

—— His portrait by Holbein (“Ambassadors”), 1, 10-11, 19, 20, 77-78, 202; _see also under “Ambassadors.”_

—— Posthumous portrait at Villiers, 192.

Selve, Jean de, Premier Président of the Parliament of Paris, father of the Bishop of Lavaur, 9, 11, 13, 19, 20, 143-147, 148-150, 153-154.

Selve, Jean de, Abbé of Saint Vigor, brother of the Bishop of Lavaur, 145, _note_ 2.

Selve, Jean-Paul de, Bishop of Saint-Flour, ambassador at Rome, brother of the Bishop of Lavaur, 145, _note_ 2, 193.

Selve, Lazare de, ambassador in Switzerland, eldest brother of the Bishop of Lavaur, 145, _note_ 2.

Selve, Odet de, Président du Grand Conseil, ambassador in England, at Venice, and at Rome, brother of the Bishop of Lavaur, 145, _note_ 2, 159, 191, 192.

“Selve, M. de,” 5, 7, 8, 22.

Servia, 213-214.

Sesac, _see_ Cazillac.

Seven Liberal Arts, The, _see_ Arts, the Seven Liberal.

Sévigné, Madame de, 25, _note_ 1.

Sforza, Francesco, Duke of Milan, 41, 90-93, 228, _note_ 4, 229, 230.

Sienna (Senes), 37, 52.

Sigismund, King of Poland, 41, 214.

Sinus Adriaticus, 213, 214.

Skull in picture of “Ambassadors,” _see_ Death’s-head.

Sleidan, Johann, 46.

“Solomon’s Seal” (double triangle), 227, 233.

Solyman II., the Grand Turk, 40-41, 61, 72, 73, 136, 156-157, 163, 214.

Sorbonne, The, 44, 144, 145.

Spain (Espagne), 52, 164, 176, 201, _note_ 2, 213.

Spain, Infanta of (Mary of Castile, daughter of Charles V.), 166, 176, 177, 178, 179, 184, _note_ 1.

Spires, Diet of (1529), 151-153, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 219, 222.

Square, in picture of “Ambassadors,” 203, 232, 233.

Steelyard, The, 75, 76, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 224, _Appendix A_ (239-240).

Stevens, Mr. Henry, of Vermont, 210, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

Sturm, Johann, rector of Strasburg University, 46.

Suffolk, Charles Brandon, Duke of, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 87-88, 90.

Supremacy, Act of, 100.

Switzerland, 38, 145, _note_ 2.

Tarbes, Bishop of, _see_ Castelnau.

Thames, river, 67, 68, 70, 71.

Théligny, Mademoiselle de, 118.

Thennelières, 38, 50, 51, _note_ 2, 54.

Toledo, 146.

Tournelle, M. de la, 79, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Tournon, François de, successively Archbishop of Embrun, of Bourges, etc., Cardinal, 62, 64-65, 71, 72, 91-92, 136, 146, 153, 164.

Tower of London, The, 84, 105.

Transylvania, Waiwode of, _see_ Zapolski.

Trent, Council of, 182, 183, _ibid._, _note_ 1.

Trivulzi, Cardinal, 164-165.

Troyes, 17, 38, 39, 42, 47, 51, 52, 56, 99-100, 127, _ibid._, _note_ 1, 128, 138.

Troyes, The Bailly of, _see_ Dinteville, Jean de.

Troyes, Baillies of, belonging to Dinteville family, 37-38, 41, 52, 138.

Troyes, College of, 39, 56, 134.

“Turk,” The, _see_ Solyman.

Tybis, Derick, 76, _note_ 1.

Urbino, 96.

Valence, 165.

Vanlay, Seigneur de, _see_ Dinteville, Gaucher II. de.

Varzy, 137, _note_ 1.

Vaudemont, Comte de, 37.

Vaulx, Seigneur de, 93.

Vély, Sieur de, _see_ Dodieu.

Venice, 9, 67, 72, 85, 154, 156-161, 167.

Venier, Marco Antonio, Venetian ambassador in England, 67.

Vic, Méry de, Garde des Sceaux, 19, _ibid._, _note_ 5.

Villiers-les-Potz, M. de, Bailly of Dijon, 117-118.

Villiers-par-Cerny, Château of, 13, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 148, _note_ 1, 193-194.

Voisin, François, Marquis de Bougueval, subsequently Marquis de Milhars, husband of Marie-Renée Le Genevois, 27, 28, 29, 31.

Voisin, Marie-Renée, Marquise de Milhars, _see_ Le Genevois.

Waiwode, _see_ Zapolski.

Wallop, Sir John, English ambassador in France, 105.

Walther’s “Gesangbuch,” 219-223.

Ware, Richard, Abbot of Westminster, 225.

Warham, William, Archbishop of Canterbury, 43, _note_ 3, 74.

Westminster Abbey, 70, _ibid._, _note_ 3, 86, 225, 227.

—— Mosaic Pavement of, _see_ Mosaic Pavement.

Westminster Hall, 87, _ibid._, _notes_ 2 _and_ 3, 88.

—— Palace, 69, 70, 71, 86.

Weston, Sir William, Prior of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem, 57, 67, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Weston, Young, 57, 105.

Whitehall, 69, _note_ 2.

Wiltshire, Countess of, mother of Anne Boleyn, 85, _ibid._, _note_ 2.

Winchester, 102.

Winchester, Bishop of, _see_ Gardiner, Stephen.

Winkfield, Thomas, comptroller of the king’s works at Dover, 110.

Wolmar, Melchior, 46.

Wolsey, Cardinal, 42, 67, 69.

Woltmann, Dr., 6.

Wornum, Ralph Nicholson, 6.

Wurtemberg, Duke of, 99.

Wyat, Sir Thomas, 6, 7, _ibid._, _note_ 2, 178, _ibid._, _note_ 3.

York Place (Whitehall), 69, 71.

York, see of, 69.

Zapolski, John, Waiwode of Transylvania, King of Hungary, 41.

CHISWICK PRESS: PRINTED BY CHARLES WHITTINGHAM AND CO. TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE, LONDON.

ERRATA

Transcriber’s Note: The errata have been corrected.

P. 11, note 3, line 4 from bottom, _for_ “d’Intevile” _read_ “d’Inteville.”

P. 36, line 7 from top, _for_ “de Jaucourt” _read_ “Jaucourt.”

P. 47, line 8 from top, _for_ “these” (second time) _read_ “them.”

P. 57, line 2 from bottom, _for_ “De la Pommeraye” _read_ “La Pommeraye.”

P. 72, lines 7 and 9 from bottom, _for_ “Henry” _read_ “Henri.”

P. 76, note 1, _for_ “from Lucca, a letter consisting chiefly of foreign political news,” _read_ “various papers.”

P. 78, note 2, _for_ “Bishop of Troyes” _read_ “Bailly of Troyes.”

P. 82, line 3 from top, _dele_ “Campeggio.”

P. 96, line 4 from top, _for_ “Henry” _read_ “Henri.”

P. 96, line 5 from top, _for_ “of Medicis” _read_ “de’ Medici.”

P. 96, line 10 from bottom, _for_ “France” _read_ “Francis.”

P. 109, line 14 from top, _for_ “Margaret” _read_ “Mary.”

P. 125, line 13 from bottom, _for_ “Chenonceau” _read_ “Chenonceaux.”

P. 129, line 4 from bottom, _for_ “tessellated” _read_ “tesselated.”

P. 130, beneath illustration, _ibid._

P. 145, line 3 from bottom, _for_ “five” _read_ “six.”

P. 174, line 13 from top, _for_ “(1540)” _read_ “(1541).”

P. 199, line 3 from top, _for_ “study of symbols” _read_ “symbolism.”

P. 233, note 3, _for_ “de la Mark,” _read_ “La Marck.”