Henry VIII: November 1521, 26-30

Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3, 1519-1523. Originally published by Her Majesty's Stationery Office, London, 1867.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.

Citation:

, 'Henry VIII: November 1521, 26-30', in Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3, 1519-1523, (London, 1867) pp. 762-779. British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/letters-papers-hen8/vol3/pp762-779 [accessed 26 May 2024].

. "Henry VIII: November 1521, 26-30", in Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3, 1519-1523, (London, 1867) 762-779. British History Online, accessed May 26, 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/letters-papers-hen8/vol3/pp762-779.

. "Henry VIII: November 1521, 26-30", Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, Henry VIII, Volume 3, 1519-1523, (London, 1867). 762-779. British History Online. Web. 26 May 2024, https://www.british-history.ac.uk/letters-papers-hen8/vol3/pp762-779.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

November 1521

26 Nov.
R. O.
1808. CHARLES V. to WOLSEY.
My ambassadors tell me they have delivered to you the letters in my own hand to the King, and that you find them "plus maigres" than the minute you sent me. I am surprised at this, as I kept as close to the substance as I could, and thought that I had made no alteration, except in the language, which you desired me to do. As I trust you in everything, and wish to act on your advice, I have written another letter to the King, word for word with your minute, and you can deliver which you think better. Audenarde, 26 Nov. Signed. Countersigned: Lalemande.
Fr., p. 1. Add.: A mons. le cardinal d'York, legat, primat et lieutenant general d'Angleterre. Endd.
26 Nov.
Vit. B. IV.
205.
B. M.
1809. [CAMPEGGIO to WOLSEY.]
Notifies the flight of the French. On the 19th, the papal army pursuing the French as they fled from the Adda, attacked Milan unprepared, and entered the town by a mine or sewer, more easily than they expected. A great tumult arose, and by the second watch the town surrendered. They entered by the gate of Ticino, where the Venetians were posted, 300 of whom were slain. The French at the Roman gate took refuge in the citadel, and tried to escape. Cremona has surrendered, and all but Parma. Rome, 26 Nov. 15[21].
Lat., pp. 2, mutilated.
28 Nov.
Mon. Habs.
470.
1810. BISHOP OF ELNA to CHARLES V.
Has received his letters to the Chancellor and the other ambassadors, and declared their contents to the Legate, who had shortly before received an answer from the French ambassadors about the truce, of which they enclose a copy. Francis says he will consent to an abstinence of war for thirty days, if Charles will raise the siege of Tournay, and withdraw his armies from his territory. Wolsey says this will not enable Francis to revictual or reinforce the said town. He also will hand over Tournay to Henry, if the money paid and the hostages are returned, and if the treaties between the two princes are ratified. Wolsey suspects three things from this overture: 1. That it arises from their inability to succour Tournay, and that they would prefer this to letting it fall into Charles's hands, besides regaining their money and hostages. Charles must consider whether he is sure of taking it; otherwise he had better receive it from England. 2. That he hopes to sow discord between Charles and Henry, thinking that the former will expect to have it for a small sum, to which Henry will not agree; but Wolsey says that Henry will hand it over to Charles on the same conditions as it was delivered to the French. 3. That he expects to renew the treaty of marriage between the Dauphin and the English princess; but Wolsey says this must not be done. Henry will not receive Tournay without Charles's consent, and for Charles' benefit. Wolsey advises Charles rather to defend Burgundy than assault Tournay. He has endeavored to obtain the neutrality of the former, but in vain. Francis has already sent troops thither. As to English assistance, he says Henry will do nothing before the declaration; but as to the 3,000 foot, he will do what he promised. Before assuming the protection of the Emperor's countries, Henry wishes to know what he will do for their defence; for he means Charles to bear the greater part of the expense, as the countries are his. Wolsey suspects they wish to draw Henry into the war, and then leave it entirely on his shoulders; and said that if, after the declaration, Charles was slow in his operations, Henry would be the same, and vice versâ. Has declared to Wolsey the news from Italy of the 13th Nov. Dover, 28th Nov., 12 noon, where they disembarked at 3 a.m., after fifteen hours' sailing.
Lat.
30 Nov.
Galba, B. VII.
161.
B. M.
1811. SIR RICHARD WINGFIELD and SPINELLY to [WOLSEY].
Wrote on the 25th. There have been various rumors about your going over, to which we could not reply for want of knowledge, but your return in safety is much desired. The allied army in Italy, which, as we wrote, had won the passage of the Adda on the 13th, had arrived at Marignano on the 16th, and was to march next day toward Milan, and lodge in the faubourg. Cardinal de Medici had every hope of their success. A Swiss captain at Milan had written on the 15th to Lucerne, that Lautrec would not remain there. The Pope's ambassadors say the Swiss could not behave better than they do. There was much joy in their country at their success. The French are ill provided with money, and their succors far off. At Tournay yesterday, the artillery being brought to bear on the walls, and some houses injured, the inhabitants sent a message to Nassau to have a safeconduct for four of their deputies to speak with him, which they were to do today. The messenger, on taking leave, besought Nassau to have mercy on the poor people. The town was to have been summoned this morning, but this is now deferred till morrow. Two spies have been taken, with letters of the 19th from the French king to Tournay, to the effect that he found much difficulty in giving them succor, but they should wait 15 days, after which they were at liberty to make the best appointment they could. Francis Seken is here laboring for a resolution and an end of his reckonings. Fellinger, Hans Ruter and John Hannart are those who principally meddle with such matters. Dom Fernando will be shortly at Brussels. The personages to reside in Nuremberg for the rule of the Empire as arranged at Worms are assembled, to the great comfort of all the country. Oudenarde, 29 Nov. Signed.
P.S.—Have been this morning with the Emperor to church, who has kept the feast of St. Andrew. He told us that yesterday four deputies of Tournay came to Nassau, and desired to know what he would have of them. Nassau said they might see that without asking. They said, if the Emperor would respect their privileges they might make some composition with him, and desired a truce this whole day for deliberation. Nassau would only grant them till noon, telling them that they must resolve to yield the town to the Emperor. The result is looked for tonight. Raphael de Medicis, since his return from Rome, has spoken with some Edinburgh merchants at Antwerp, who say that when they left Edinburgh they saw some of Albany's servants and horses arrive there out of France, and divers other great ships, in which they thought the Duke might be, were upon the sea. Last Thursday, Wm. Pawne and Master Mason of Calais came, and were conveyed by Spinelly to the Emperor, who accepted their coming as a new evidence of your affection. This morning he has caused them to be conveyed to Nassau. The Chancellor arrived this morning at 10. Oudenarde, 30 Nov.
Wingfield begs Wolsey will remember his recall. He has no hope to recover here.
Pp. 3.
30 Nov.
Vit. B. xx. 246.
B. M.
1812. VITUS SUTOR, the EMPEROR'S AMBASSADOR in SWITZERLAND, to CHARLES V.
The Emperor [will see] from the enclosed the state of the war in Italy, and the practises of the French with the Swiss; "necnon eorum qu[æ tunc] in conventu Lucernense actitata mihique ex par[te illorum] responsa fuerunt; ac etiam qualiter per com[missarios] domini Papæ in Turego et me scriptum fuit dom. d[uci] Mediolanensi." Meanwhile the deputies of the league who were sent to Italy to make peace or truce between the Pope and the king of France have all come home, having done nothing but spend their money. They say they were treated with contempt by the Pope's legate, cardinal De Medicis, who would not give them an honorable safeconduct. Understands that the deputies of Zurich, Schwitz, Basle, Glaris, Appenzel, and Schaffhausen announced to the deputies of the other cantons at the last diet at Lucerne that in the present wars "nolunt habere ag[endum] cum principibus." The common people in all par[ts] are riotous, "et præsertim subjecta ... n nuper domini eorum vellent defenderent Gallos ... Mediolani, ad idque quinque milia peditum [sub e]orum vexillo exire mandassent, responderunt [p]ræfectis eorum quod nusquam proficiscerentur," and that they who had taken the money of the French ought to help them to keep Milan. Sees in this no small danger to those who have helped the French king to this new alliance, especially as their deputies have returned from Burgundy and Italy. Even their infantry, who have been with the French king for some days in Picardy, have come back, most of them sick, and discontented by reason of the detention of one month's pay. Those who have been in Italy on behalf of France have been ill paid, and lately cut to pieces and robbed of their baggage and property. This alone will prevent their giving a favorable reply to the ambassadors of the French, and there is no fear for the present that the Zurickers will serve again under their banner. Some French and Gascons have returned with the foot ... ill clothed and badly paid "e[t] ... equitum pedibus ex Italia per mo[ntes iverunt]," and have passed through Switzerland into France ... "etiam nonnulli apud Gothardum ipsum ... [mor]tui fuerunt. Præterea Galeacius Vice[comes venit] Lucernam, et dixit se effugisse, et quod in ... contentis non haberet nisi tres coronatos." Zurich, 30 Nov. 1521.
Hol., mutilated, pp. 3. Addressed at top: Sacratiss. Cæs. et Ca[tholicæ Majestati]. Endd.: "Extractum literarum oratoris Cæsaris in Helvetia."
Nov.
Calig. E. II.
185.
B. M.
1813. The TOWN OF DIEPPE (fn. 1) to [the DEPUTY OF CALAIS? (fn. 2) ]
Complaining that the herring fishery guaranteed by your ... dated the 7 Oct., had been interrupted by the Flemings, who had taken prisoners Jehan Bunon and Collin Allais, occasioning a loss of 100,000 crowns. Beg that he will have the said prisoners restored without ransom. The French vessels have withdrawn to the port of Vincenezaye [Winchilsea] or ... in England, or to my Lady, whereby the officers [of that] country can easily provide, "veu quilz ve ... dire lesdictz havres et raddes estre franchises ... combien que de nostre coste soyons de semblable fave[ur] ... eulx." Dieppe, Saturday, ...Nov.
Orig., Fr., faded and mutilated, pp. 2.
Vesp. F. XIII.
71.
B. M.
St. P. I. 93.
1814. HENRY VIII. to WOLSEY.
Letter of thanks for his labors, and enquiring after his health. (fn. 3) Hol., p. 1.
R. O. 1815. DECLARATION by FRANCIS I.
The French king has always striven for peace among Christian princes, but the Catholic king has defied him without cause. The French king has sent to other princes, and among them to the king of England, a justification of his conduct, showing how strictly he had regarded treaties, how his country had been invaded, and he had been compelled to take up arms. Of late days the question has been discussed before Wolsey as the King's lieutenant, by the ambassadors of Francis and the King Catholic, which of the two had broken the treaties, each party demanding the assistance of England, according to treaty. Wolsey at length ordered that what had been said by the ambassadors should be lodged with him in writing. The French ambassadors, therefore, to show that the King Catholic is the cause of the war, state again their arguments in writing, which have been delivered to Wolsey, first by Marigny and Poillot, and afterward by La Bastie.
Lat, pp. 4.
Granvelle
Papers, I. 125.
1816. The CALAIS CONFERENCE. (fn. 4) (Imperial account.)
Prefatory letter of [Claude de Chassey (fn. 5) ] to Margaret of Savoy, stating that the writer, in following the Court to the conferences, had heard much talk of persons who meddled with things out of their vocation; some blaming the sending of the imperial ambassadors, and their remaining so long, and others making conjectures what things were treated of. After the return of the ambassadors, conversed with men of great esteem, from whom he obtained an accurate report in Latin of the whole conference by the grand chancellor (Gattinara) in the very words, almost, used by the speakers; which he found "de tel artifice, utilité et fruict" that he could not refrain from translating it into French or "langue Valonne" for the benefit of the Emperor's subjects. Presents it to Madame as the great promoter (zélatrice et instauratrice) of peace, by whose counsel all the affairs of the monarchy, nay of the universal world, are governed.
ii. Account of the conferences. (fn. 6) —The speakers are, Wolsey on the part of England, the bp. of Asque, nuncio of the Pope, Mercurin de Gattinara baron d'Ozan and of Terruge, grand chancellor of the Emperor, and Anthoine de Prat, chancellor of France.
Wolsey begins the discussion by stating how the King, wishing to compose the differences between the Emperor and France, and also between the latter and the Pope, has offered himself as mediator, and applied to each Power separately to induce them to send ambassadors to treat. He would have come over himself, but for the weighty affairs of his kingdom; he had, however, sent Wolsey to represent him. Has accordingly come over, notwithstanding his weak health, having escaped the dangers of the sea. Advises, in the first place, a truce during the conference, and appeals to the Nuncio to speak first.
The Nuncio was sure of the Pope's inclination, but had no powers.
Wolsey, as legate for the Holy See, would answer for the Pope if the others would agree.
The Imperial Chancellor said the Emperor had always desired peace, and had made a treaty with France to secure it, which he had always observed for his part. He enumerated the injuries done by France, and said it was impossible to treat of peace till redress was made, and that the Emperor could not do so without the Pope's sanction. His commission was only to demand the aid of England against France.
The French Chancellor said the meeting appeared to be fruitless for want of powers on the other side. His master was ready either for peace or war. He denied that France had broken the treaties, or had assisted Robert De la Marche.
Wolsey said both sides demanded aid of England, but it would be necessary for the King to ascertain who was the aggressor. It would have been better if both sides had put their demands and rejoinders in writing with the evidences. The Imperial ambassadors must obtain sufficient powers, or he would have cause to complain that he had come thither at great inconvenience, and with danger to himself, and had lost his labor.
The Imperial Chancellor said his master was so indignant against Francis that he had not only forbidden him and his colleague to treat, but even to see the French ambassadors, but for Wolsey's sake they had exceeded their commission. If Wolsey wished to delay complying with their demands, he might negociate with the Emperor himself.
On this the meeting broke up, and for three days Wolsey entertained the French ambassadors, with whom he agreed that he should visit the Emperor at Bruges, along with the Nuncio and imperial Ambassadors, to induce him to a truce, and that the French ambassadors should await his return at Calais. Wolsey, accordingly, went to Bruges, and remained fourteen days with the Emperor, who promised to send back with him the Ambassadors with full powers to treat with any other princes in conjunction with the Nuncio.
On his return to Calais the Cardinal assembled the Nuncio and Ambassadors, and told them he had been most honorably received by the Emperor, whom he found wise beyond his years, affable, and full of humanity and gentleness. Charles told him two things prevented him from treating; first, that he had no right to do so without the consent of the Pope; and, second, that it was dangerous to trust one who had already violated his oath. Besides it was not expedient to disband his army without having obtained redress. To this Wolsey had answered, that, as legate, he would undertake that the Pope should hereafter send powers; and as to the second objection he would remove that if the Emperor sent his ambassadors back with him to Calais; so that at last he consented.
Each party then declared the powers with which they were furnished. The Imperial Chancellor had only powers to treat with the consent of the Nuncio. The French Chancellor said his powers made no mention of the Pope, for his master regarded him as one of his best friends; and though he chose to turn his back upon him, he was free to treat in presence of the Nuncio.
Wolsey. There are now these subjects for immediate consideration: 1. to provide for freedom of the herring fishery, of which the season is at hand, to the subjects of either side; 2. that the messengers of the ambassadors may pass and repass in safety; 3. that the vivandiers who bring victuals to Calais be not arrested; and 4. that the neutrality of English harbors be respected.
These points appeared reasonable to all; but as the Nuncio had no powers, without whom the others could not act, the two Chancellors agreed to refer them to their masters, and Wolsey ordered them to be drawn up in writing by the bp. of Ely and the master of the Rolls, with a view to their being passed the next Monday.
At the third sitting (fn. 7) of the Conference Wolsey proposed that the draft of the above articles should be read, but the French chancellor desired to read them at leisure at his lodging. Wolsey then moved the principal subject, viz., the overture of peace, confining the discussion for the present to the matters between the Emperor and Francis. After some discussion who should commence, each Chancellor wishing the other to state his demands first,—
The French Chancellor stated the case on behalf of his master. At the beginning of his reign he had, in the interests of peace, made with Charles the treaty of Noyon, wherein the latter agreed to marry his daughter, in consideration of which Francis gave up the kingdom of Naples subject to a charge of 100,000 crowns. Charles had never furnished the required sureties, and had attempted to marry himself elsewhere,—had refused payment of the pension,—usurped the sovereignty of and hindered resort to the counties of Flanders and Artois, for which also he had not done homage,—had supported the French king's enemies, viz., the card. of Sion, the duke of Bari, Jerome Adorno and the outlaws of Milan,—had made war upon the duchy of Milan, and done all he could to keep the Swiss from joining the French. He had also defied Francis, and made war upon him, taking mercenaries into his pay, contrary to the said treaty; had taken and destroyed the castle of Messencourt, occupied Moson, &c. Francis had not given assistance to Robert de la Marche, or allowed the value of a single chicken to be taken on the lands of the Emperor, even when he had his army in readiness on the borders; and if he had helped the king of Navarre he was expressly allowed to do so by the treaty, when within a certain time that King had not received reasonable compensation. The Emperor must therefore be held the aggressor, and make restitution; and he called on the imperial ambassadors to state whether their master meant to keep the treaty of Noyon.
The Imperial Chancellor. The French chancellor has entirely misstated the facts. There was no mention of the lady Charlotte, the French king's daughter, in the treaty of Noyon, for she was not then born. It is true there was an agreement for the marriage of the late princess Louise, and in her default, conditionally, of the child with whom the queen of France was then pregnant, if a daughter. This does not bind the Emperor; nevertheless, he has not asked a dispensation, or practised for another marriage. Francis did not give the kingdom of Naples in dower, for it was not his. He could have no right to it, except that of his father-in-law, Lewis XII., who gave it to his niece, Germaine de Foix (who is still alive), on her marriage with Ferdinand of Arragon. Besides, pope Julius II., as lord of the fief, deprived the king of France, and invested it in the late King Catholic. Thus the pension never was due; and even the portion of it that has been paid may be redemanded by the Emperor, who at the time was ignorant of these facts, being new in the succession. Nevertheless the Emperor paid it so long as France observed the treaty, until the French king, by his ambassador De Lusac (fn. 8), declared to him in Spain that if he did not give hostages for surety of the marriage he would consider the treaty as broken. As to the sureties mentioned in the treaty, it lay first with the king of France to choose the 12 towns and 12 good personages, whose sureties he would have; which he never did. As to the sovereignty of Flanders and Artois, the old charters say nothing about it. It was an invention of duke Philip le Hardi, son of the king of France, to keep his vassals in subjection by the power of France; and duke Charles the Bold, in consequence of the violation of the treaty of Péronne by Lewis XI., kept those countries, while he lived, free from the resort and sovereignty of France. As to Charles favoring the enemies of Francis, it does not appear that the private quarrels of the contracting parties are included in the treaty. The cardinal of Sion is a prince of the Empire, who was deprived of all his benefices by French intrigues, and thereby became dependent on the late Emperor, as he is now on the present. The same is the case with the duke of Bari. Jerome Adorno is the Emperor's vassal, and a subject of Naples, and the fugitives of Milan lost their goods; the service of the late Emperor. The charge might be retorted on the king of France that he has constantly supported the rebels of Naples, the dukes of Gueldres, Lunembourg and Wirtemberg, the count of Fustemberg, Robert de la Marche and others. The accusation touching the Swiss turns entirely against France, for by the treaty of Noyon neither party was to employ mercenaries, and the Swiss are subjects of the empire. The Emperor did not defy the king of France, but told him that if, with his countenance, Robert de la Marche attempted anything against his countries, he would hold the treaty as broken. If this was defiance, the king of France was the first to defy the Emperor, when he said he should hold the treaty broken if he did not deliver hostages. Messencourt has been for 300 years a dependency of Luxemburg, not of France, and as such Robert de la Marche has acknowledged it. Thus the Emperor is guiltless of any breach of treaty. On the other hand, France has supported Robert de la Marche, who was allowed to muster men at Paris, and lead them into the Emperor's countries, where they besieged Vireton in the duchy of Luxemburg, and, being repulsed there, overran and destroyed the country, and burnt the village of Sainct Marc. Before any breach had taken place, Francis caused the president of Paris, here present (John de Selve), to intercept the Emperor's posts, which by the treaty were to pass freely through France. He has also taken every occasion, at the time of the election, to vilify the Emperor, representing him as a monster, without sense, disfigured by every vice, and has ever since tried to hinder his government, endeavoring to frustrate the proceedings of the diet of Worms, that the Emperor might be obliged to leave it without anything having been done. He has also endeavored to stir up the Swiss, Venetians and all the princes of Italy against the Emperor, so as to prevent his coronation, or at least his going thither in arms, when it would be dangerous and dishonorable to go otherwise. He has endeavored to divide the Two Sicilies and all Italy, invaded Navarre and Castile, besieged La Grogne, and would have done more, had not the Spaniards, laying aside their differences, driven out the French and recovered Navarre. The treaty gave no power to France to assist Henry d'Albret, unless the Emperor refused him reason, and no clear exhibition of d'Albret's right was ever made to him. Moreover the Emperor clearly proved at Montpelier, where the matter was first discussed, that the right belonged to him, and in the treaty of London the contracting parties were forbidden to molest each other in their possessions.
The French Chancellor. I am accused of misstating facts. It is true that the treaty of Noyon made no mention of Madame Charlotte, who was not then born, but it distinctly applied to her; and what I said as to the Emperor having demanded a dispensation for another marriage was stated by the Pope, and can be shown by letters from Rome sent to the French king.
The Nuncio. His holiness is not accustomed to disclose things of so much importance, especially when they are not true.
The Imperial Chancellor. Even if the Pope said so, it is not true. I dare to say so as one without whom such things could not take place with the Emperor.
The French Chancellor. We have it in letters from the count de Carpy, which we can show.
Wolsey. I can best explain the truth, for, on hearing the report, I wrote to his Holiness for information, and can show his brief in reply, expressly denying that such dispensation had been applied for, but that it was an invention of a secretary, bribed by the French to fish for secrets.
The French Chancellor. Then I will not insist on that charge. It is denied that Naples was granted in dower, or could be after its cession to queen Germaine; but the treaty of Noyon takes notice of that cession, and provides that even if Charles should not actually enjoy the fruits of it, he should still pay the pension until the consummation of the marriage. As to the privation by pope Julius, we deny that it was formally made, at least with due citation of parties.
Nuncio. For the honor of the Holy See, I must state that it was done quite formally, with all due observances.
The Imperial Chancellor. The privation cannot be proved invalid, for there are cases in which no citation is required, as where the fief has lapsed, as in the present instance; but let us hear what the French chan- cellor can say for the right of his master to Naples after the cession to queen Germaine.
The French Chancellor. I say that even if Naples was given in dower to queen Germaine, the cession is null, for it is inalienably annexed to the crown of France. It is not honorable to pretend ignorance on the part of the Emperor in promising the pension, seeing that it was done by his principal councillors, Chievres and the then Chancellor. As to the sovereignty and resort of Flanders and Artois, I cannot tell what may be in the old treaties, but king Philip of Castile recognised those rights to belong to France. The imperial Chancellor has made no reply about the attempts to hinder the French king in pacifying the troubles in Milan. The Swiss are not the Emperor's subjects by reason of any lordship contained in the treaty, which only referred to his subjects as King Catholic. As to the castle of Messencourt, it can be shown by old documents that it was given to France by an archbishop of Reims.
Wolsey here adjourned the conference, which had sat four hours.
Fourth Sitting.
Wolsey. Let us resume where we left off.
The French Chancellor, being asked by the imperial Chancellor if he had anything to add, said he must complete what he was saying. It was not true that Francis assisted the invasion of Robert de la Marcke; on the contrary, he had done all he could to restrain him, and as soon as he knew that La Marck was mustering men, forbade any of his subjects to go with him, and wrote to the Swiss not to aid him. When La Marck was making musters at Paris, the King was at Blois, and, it is to be presumed, knew nothing of what he was doing; otherwise he might, if so inclined, have assisted him with the great army he had upon the borders. I know the contents of the letters to count Carpy, for I dictated them myself, and will give my head if it can be shown from them that La Marck has made war on the Emperor with the assistance of Francis.
The Imperial Chancellor. I accept the offer of the French chancellor's head, and will bring the original letters tomorrow.
The French Chancellor. In answer to my assertion that the French king might lawfully have aided the king of Navarre, I was reminded of the treaty of London; but that treaty must be interpreted according to the state of matters then, and the French king had treated with the king of Navarre before it was passed. Besides, the treaty of London was made between France and England, and was not meant to apply to Navarre, which was the subject of a special treaty; and it was expressly stipulated that the treaty of London should not be derogatory to preceding treaties. It will be found that the Emperor's posts never were detained in France, except after the defiance; but the Emperor has intercepted the French posts, killed the messengers (fn. 9), and retains in his hands letters of the French king taken from them.
The Imperial Chancellor replied at great length to the French chancellor's arguments. He was interrupted once by the French chancellor reminding him of Lewis XII.'s having received the investiture of Milan from Maximilian, and at other times by some observations of Wolsey on the treaties of Noyon and London. In the course of this reply he stated that Charles had been induced to ratify the treaty of London on the assur- ance that he would thereby put Navarre in surety; and he made the president of Paris, there present, acknowledge that he had arrested the Emperor's letters, and sent them to his master. On the other hand, the French posts were not arrested in the dominions of the Emperor, but very probably in some of the countries unjustly occupied by France, and after the French invasion, as their date showed.
Wolsey. Many things have now been said on both sides elegantly, and abundantly tending to the continuance of war, but not to peace. It is well the matters have been discussed, and as the truth depends on the understanding of treaties it will be well to see them. I propose, therefore, that the documents be brought hither tomorrow.
Agreed to.
Fifth Sitting.
At Wolsey's suggestion, the business was commenced by reading the procurations on each side. The French chancellor had two, the first not naming the Pope; the Emperor's, to Wolsey's surprise, made no special mention of England or France, but gave a general power to treat with any kings whatsoever.
The Imperial Chancellor. You must remember that the Emperor, by his alliance with the Pope, cannot treat for peace or truce with France, and, that he may not seem to have consented to do so, it has been thought right to ignore this meeting, made at the instance of the king of England.
The French Chancellor. Many objections might be made to different clauses of this procuration; and as there is no mention of my master, it will be needful to have another.
The Imperial Chancellor. There is nothing unusual in my procuration; that of the French king is more open to objection, as it gives power only to treat with the king of Castile.
Wolsey. Let us not waste time on these procurations. Others can be had afterwards, if we come to an agreement. Let us look at the treaties and other writings.
The Imperial Chancellor. First let me redeem my promise, and prove that Robert de la Marche has been supported in his rebellion by France; in which case the French chancellor offers his head.
The French Chancellor. You shall not have my head, nor shall you make good your words; for I have the original draft of the letters, and have examined them carefully, weighing every word.
The Imperial Chancellor. If your head were adjudged to me, I would rather have a pig's head, which would be better for eating; and I shall be satisfied with the exchange. Here are the French king's own letters, signed by him and Robertet, sealed with his signet bearing his arms dated Vergy, 19 June, and addressed to count Carpy, in which he uses these words, "the expense I am at for Robert de la Marche;" and afterwards, "It was needful to be at the expense I am at, and it would not have been honorable in me to let a servant of mine be trampled on in my presence, who would not have spared life or goods to obey my commands."
The French Chancellor. These words are only narrative of what the Pope said to count Carpy.
The Imperial Chancellor. They are a positive statement of the king of France himself, not of the Pope or any other, written to excuse himself from contributing his share to the pay of the Swiss who were with his Holiness, as appears still more plainly by the words, "of which I inform you that you may remind our Holy Father, that he may know if the expense made here is with his will and counsel;" and more distinctly still in those other words, "It was needful to be at the expense I am at," &c.
The French Chancellor. These words must be understood by the preceding passage, where he complains that his adversary had a great force upon the borders, and had taken Messencourt, and defied him. This caused his expense.
The dispute on this subject had gone to a considerable length, the French chancellor shifting his ground, arguing first that the expression "would not have spared life or goods" had no reference to past time; then that they were not a positive statement; then that, granting they were so, it did not follow La Marck was ordered to attack the Emperor's countries. At last it was interrupted by Wolsey, who said he was too ill to go on, and would, with their approval, depute the bishop of Ely and master of the Rolls to examine the writings with them, and make report to him; which was agreed to.
Wolsey. Henceforth you will not require to meet every day, but only once in two or three days, that I may have the better leisure to recover my health. Thus you may begin next Wednesday after dinner, then two days afterwards, and so on till I am on my legs again.
Sixth Sitting (Wednesday).
Wolsey's Deputies. We are here by the Cardinal's commission to hear and to report. Do you, therefore, consider how to begin.
The Imperial Chancellor. As the question concerns the breach of treaties, it would be well first to examine the treaty of Noyon article by article, to see if they have been kept or broken, and afterwards that of London.
The French Chancellor. I agree. Let us take the treaty of Noyon.
The Imperial Chancellor. I have a copy on paper, which will be more easily read, in which the points bearing on this affair are noted.
The French Chancellor insisted on reading the originals.
The Imperial Chancellor. Let us see then your originals, and if they disagree with our copies we will refer to our own.
The reading of the treaty then commenced. At the first article—
The Imperial Chancellor said, Note these words, "Friends of friends, and enemies of enemies;" and again, "and will not favor nor support any person whatever, the one against the other; especially, they will not give passage, aid, favor, assistance or reception in their towns or countries, whether with victuals, artillery, men, money or other things, to him or them who by invasion might or would create annoyance or trouble, the one to the other, directly or indirectly." How these words have been kept by France is shown by the doings of Robert de la Marck.
The French Chancellor. We also can show various infractions of this article by the Emperor, in his reception of cardinal Sion, the duke of Bari, Jerome Adorno and others.
The Imperial Chancellor. This charge has already been replied to, especially as these persons did nothing in the way of war till after the invasion of Navarre.
The French Chancellor. Let us leave this, and proceed to the second article.
The second article was then read, which the imperial Chancellor alleged the French king had broken by stopping the Emperor's posts, as he had also broken the third by not punishing Robert de la Marck. On the 4th and 5th the arguments were restated on both sides as to the obligation of Charles to marry the lady Charlotte. On the 15th the French chancellor charged the Emperor with nonpayment of the sureties for the 100,000 crowns.
The Imperial Chancellor. The article does not express the sureties, but refers to the treaty of Paris for the marriage of the lady Renée, and says that sureties should be named by each side, which has not been done. It has been already shown that the payment of the 100,000 crowns was not due; and at all events sufficient provision was made in default of it by the 17th article, in the words, "which, in default of payment, the most Christian king may, of his own authority, by him and his, without any form of procedure, take," &c. The remaining articles are of no consequence, except the 28th.
The French Chancellor. This 28th article contains a proviso which made it lawful for the French king to aid the king of Navarre, for it expressly states that his alliance with that king and the queen of Navarre shall remain in force.
The Imperial Chancellor. That is conditional on what is afterwards said, "in case that the said Queen be not contented according to reason." Previous to which it is said, "If it please the said Queen and her children to send their ambassadors and deputies to him to show him the right that they pretend to the said kingdom of Navarre, and after hearing them, and the same King Catholic having understood the said right, he shall content the said Queen and her children according to reason;" so that the Emperor was not bound till he had cognizance of the said right.
The French Chancellor. The queen and king of Navarre have done their part in sending ambassadors to Spain to show it.
This led to a discussion of the right to the crown of Navarre, which was set forth at some length by—
The Imperial Chancellor. John King of Arragon had two wives. The first was Blanche, queen of Navarre, who had three children, Charles, Blanche and Eleanor, and died during her husband's life. Charles died after her during his father's life; and Blanche, who was married to Henry prince of Castile, succeeded him. She was poisoned by a conspiracy of her younger sister Eleanor, which she perceiving, before her death, renounced her right to Navarre to her father, who thereafter had peaceable enjoyment of it. By his second wife he had a son Ferdinand, the late King Catholic, whose eldest daughter was the Emperor's mother. On the death of king John there remained the said Ferdinand and Eleanor, who married Gaston count de Foix, and was supported by Lewis XI. while Ferdinand was too much occupied in wars with the Portuguese and Saracens for the preservation of Castile to pursue his right. Secondly, the said Gaston and Eleanor had an eldest son, named Gaston, who married Madeleine, sister of Lewis XI., and a second son John. The former had a son and daughter named Francis and Katharine; the latter had a son, Gaston duke of Nemours, count de Foix, who died without heirs at the battle of Ravenna, and Germaine second wife of the late King Catholic. Gaston and Eleanor lost their eldest son Gaston before their deaths,. and the kingdom was disputed between John and Francis, the former maintaining that his nephew and niece could not represent their father in this case. His daughter Germaine ceded her rights to the late King Catholic, and again to the Emperor; so that the only question is whether the second son should have been preferred to the children of the elder; which the doctors consider such a doubtful point, that an express imperial decision is required to clear it. Thirdly, even supposing the right of Francis was preferable to that of his uncle John, John's title was, after the death of Francis without heirs, preferable to that of Francis' sister Katharine, the wife of John d'Albret, father of the present claimant Henry. Fourthly, if Katharine had any right, it was forfeited by allowing the French to enter Navarre contrary to a treaty with the late King Catholic. Fifthly, John d'Albret and Katharine were deprived as schismatics by Apostolic sentence.
The French Chancellor. The cessions and conventions referred to cannot prejudice successors, and the Pope's deprivation does not affect kingdoms that are not fiefs of the Church.
The Imperial Chancellor replied shortly, and the conference adjourned.
Seventh Sitting.
Wolsey's Deputies. We may now read the treaty of London, about which we are the better informed, as it was made with us.
This being agreed to—
The Imperial Chancellor remarked on the first article that it comprised not only the principal contrahents and their allies, but their heirs and successors, and defended not only goods possessed but occupied.
The French Chancellor. Then you pretend occupation, not just possession?
The Imperial Chancellor. No. I note this to show that the plea of occupation is no excuse for your breach of treaties. Note also the words in the second article, "that if any of the said confederates, or those included in the said treaty, by himself, his lieutenant, captain general or other;" so that the Emperor's message to the king of France that he would hold the treaties broken if Rob. de la Marck invaded him, was quite in accordance with this treaty.
The French Chancellor. It must also be noted upon the 6th article, about levying foreign men of war, that it applies to those who were subjects of the contracting parties at the time only.
Here began a repetition of old objections and answers, which was terminated by Wolsey's deputies remarking that they were going beyond their charge, and ending that day's conference.
Eighth Sitting. (fn. 10)
Wolsey said he had received the report of the bishop of Ely and master of the Rolls, and was sorry that his illness, a tertian fever and catarrh (défleux), had prevented him from attending. From what was reported to him he considered that the treaties had been violated, owing to wicked conditions appended to the treaty of Noyon, which reflected on the authors of it, and he proposed that peace should be restored by making new treaties, so that Christian princes might unite against the Turk, who had taken several castles in Hungary, as the ambassador of Hungary had that day informed him.
The Imperial Chancellor expressed his belief that the Emperor would be favorable to this proposal if the Pope consented, and state what the Emperor demanded of the king of France. As to Burgundy, he showed from historical precedents extending back to the year 944, that females were capable of inheriting the duchy, which had been usurped by Lewis XI. from Mary wife of the Archduke and late Emperor Maximilian. Lewis had also usurped the county of Masconnois, Bar-sur-Seine and other lands, ceded to Philip the Good by the treaty of Arras in 1435, the counties of Boulonnois, Guynes, &c., which should be restored. Charles also had a claim to the county of Toulouse, Narbonne, Montpelier and Languedoc, as belonging to the crown of Arragon, to Béarn, Foix and Bigort, with the counties of Champaigne and Brye as belonging to Navarre, to Dauphiné belonging to the Empire, which was given to the son of a king of France on condition that it should not be incorporated with the crown, and the kingdom of Arles, Milan, Genoa and the county of Ast.
The French Chancellor. These proposals show that the Emperor has no inclination to peace. If we were to renew old claims we might demand the kingdoms of Arragon and Valencia, Catalonia and Rousillon, Naples and Sicily, with the county of Burgundy, Flanders and Artois, forfeited by default of homage.—De Prat here proceeded to correct the Imperial Chancellor's statements about the duchy of Burgundy, which he said had not been given to Philip le Hardi by king John, but by Charles V. of France, in exchange for the duchy of Touraine, king John having already incorporated it with the French crown, so that females could not succeed.
The Imperial Chancellor. My proposals were intended to prevent our falling into former errors. We might have claimed the whole kingdom of France, of which Boniface VIII. deprived Philip le Bel, and gave it with the empire to Albert duke of Austria. But we have forgone this claim not to prejudice that of the king of England. It is the French chancellor who is mistaken about the gift of the duchy of Burgundy by king John, and the duchy is not an appanage of France.—The speaker went on further to answer his opponent when—
Wolsey said he must interrupt him. Your demands are high, and do not make for peace. We must try another way, for, after all I have undergone for the sake of peace, it would not be honorable to the King or me to have wasted so much time to no purpose. I beg you both to ponder well the public weal of Christendom, and tell me frankly what you think; and, to take better care of my health, I will again depute the bp. of Ely and master of the Rolls to hear you tomorrow, and if they see any way to peace to declare it to you.
The Imperial Chancellor. The Nuncio is ill, without whom we cannot negotiate; but we are willing to meet the others, under protest that nothing shall be done without him.
The French Chancellor. We are also willing to be there; but as hitherto sufficient powers have not been shown on the part, either of the Pope or of the Emperor, it would be well that the persons on both sides should have such powers.
Wolsey. We will see to that, if things can be arranged for peace. I know the Pope has already sent powers, and that the imperial ambassadors are sufficiently furnished.
Ninth Sitting.
Wolsey's Deputies. Gentlemen, you heard yesterday from the Cardinal the cause of our present meeting. We are ready, therefore, to hear what you have to say, and to promote peace.
The Imperial Chancellor. The proposition must first come from France, who has been the aggressor.
The French Chancellor. The French king has not been the aggressor, so we refuse to speak first.
The Imperial Chancellor. We have not been sent here to treat for peace with France, but only to show who has been the breaker of it. The Emperor does not wish us to treat without the presence and consent of the Nuncio.
The French Chancellor. Since the adverse party has no power, it would not be reasonable for us to propose anything.
The Imperial Chancellor. We do not consider the French powers sufficient either.
Wolsey's Deputies. Then we must make report that no overture has been made, and that you would not speak of it.
The French Chancellor. You must admit that it is not our fault.
The Imperial Chancellor. Nor ours. If then it seem expedient, let the mediator make an overture.
Wolsey's Deputies. We suggest then the first article, that peace and true friendship be between the Pope, Emperor, and Most Christian King, all discords to cease, and that they be friends of friends, and enemies of enemies, according to the usual from.
The French Chancellor. I have already said I would keep silence.
The Imperial Chancellor. I cannot speak in the absence of the Nuncio.
Wolsey's Deputies. For God's sake, not to stultify this meeting. say if this article seems to you reasonable. Afterwards we can obtain powers and the presence of the Nuncio.
The Imperial Chancellor. Then I will speak of myself, and without commission, so that my words may be held as unspoken, if consent of the Nuncio and powers be not obtained. To lay a firm foundation for peace, the treaties of Noyon and Paris must be annulled, and each party shall within six months lay his claims before the king of England as mediator, who shall decide them in other six months.
The French Chancellor thought it unreasonable that he should be expected to say anything while the adverse party had no commission, and declined to speak.
The Imperial Chancellor. Then we are wasting time, and had better return.
Wolsey's Deputies. We beg you not to abandon what has taken so much trouble; and do you, my lord chancellor of France, consider that the insufficiency of powers can be remedied. However, it will be well that promises to ratify be given. But, not to waste time, say if you think the Emperor's proposal good.
The French Chancellor, on this, asked leave to consult with his colleagues; and after doing so said:—I do not like to speak of myself, like the Imperial Chancellor; and, under protestation that I say nothing but in virtue of our commission, and subject to the approval of the Most Christian King, I think the Chancellor would begin to build by throwing down what is built, to which my master will never agree, as rights once acquired by his crown can never be alienated, and the treaties were made by the principal councillor of the parties. Instead of being cancelled they ought to be confirmed, and reparation made for their breach; in which reparation we would not refuse the king of England as mediator, but we cannot submit our rights to arbitration.
The Imperial Chancellor. We do not ask France to renounce anything, only that the treaties which have been broken be declared null and void, and the rights of both parties remain as they were before those treaties. I have already shown how little those who made the treaty of Noyon understood the rights of the Emperor; nevertheless that treaty was broken by France. If France refuses the arbitration of England there is no way but war.
The French Chancellor. Let us withdraw then. You will never get what you ask for.
The Imperial Chancellor. That does not depend on you and your power.
Wolsey's Deputies. We are much grieved to hear this, but must report what we have heard to the Cardinal, who perhaps will find better means to arrive at peace.
From this time the Nuncio and Imperial Ambassadors no longer met with those of France; but Wolsey conferred with either side apart, first for peace, and afterwards for truce. After which he sent some of the King's principal councillors to the Emperor and the king of France to get them to consent to at least a simple abstinence of war, but, not being able to effect it thus, asked that ambassadors should be sent by both Princes to England with sufficient powers to make truce, hoping that the difficulties might be adjusted in winter. This proposal the ambassadors on both sides referred to their masters, and returned home. The day after the return of the Emperor's ambassadors, two posts arrived in his court, of which the one brought news of the taking of Milan and flight of the French, the other of the surrender of Tournay for the Emperor. This was part of the spoil the French have taken by their aggressions.
Fr.
Le Glay, II. 529. 1817. ACCOUNT by DU PRAT'S SECRETARY of the CONFERENCE HELD AT CALAIS. (French account.)
i. Instructions of Francis I. to Anthoine du Prat, seigneur de Nantoillet, chancellor of France, Milan and Bretagne; Jaques de Chabannes, sieur de la Palisse, the King's chamberlain and marshal of France; Jehan de Selva, sieur de Cormieres, president of the Parliament; and Robt. Gedoin, seigneur de la Tour, secretary of finances, his ambassadors now sent to Calais to treat of his variances with the King Catholic, in presence of Wolsey.
1. They are to deliver his letters to the Cardinal, and say that his trust and affection for him has been the principal cause of his consenting to this meeting, and Francis hopes he will act up to what he has said by Jerningham and Fitzwilliam. They shall say, in the presence of Charles's ambassadors, that Francis has always been studious of peace, and greatly desired amity with the King Catholic; for which cause he made treaties with him at Paris, Noyon, Brussels, Cambray and London, and relinquished his claim on Naples and other rights;—that Francis has always kept these treaties without infringement, while the King Catholic has tried to marry elsewhere, after promising to marry madame Charlotte, and has not given the sureties for the accomplishment of that marriage;—has discontinued the payment of the 100,000 cr. for Naples;—has not restored the kingdom of Navarre, as he promised at Noyon;—has not paid homage for the lands he holds of France. Whilst the Fontarabians have attacked and burnt Hodoye, Charles has not restored the goods of Neapolitans who took the French side, according to the treaty of Tripaulde;—he has induced the electors to furnish men to invade Milan;—has tried to prevent the lords of the leagues from making a confederation with France;—has received at court the outlaws of Milan;—that the inhabitants of the prevosté of Yvoix have attacked Vasselles, Ballant, Francheval and Porru;—that Charles has attempted to alienate the Pope from Francis by promising to give him Parma and Placentia, which belong to Milan, and to put the rest in whatever hands the Pope pleases. That, to prevent the French issuing letters of marque, Charles had furnished a commission of redress; but the commissioners never arrived at the appointed place, though the French waited for them six weeks, and no reparation had been made. Has endured these wrongs, to save bloodshed, in hopes that the King Catholic would remedy them in time;—while Charles has interfered with the dominions of Francis, and prevented him from levying the disme and crusade sanctioned by the Pope;—has granted pardons and remissions there, and been guilty of other acts of sovereignty, and prevented French officers from doing their duty;—has made proclamation at St. Omer that none should obey the commissions given by Francis for the abbey of St. Jean au Mont, Terouenne, and sent letters to enlist those capable of bearing arms, which none but the sovereign can do, &c.;—has decried French money, forbidden his people to take provisious for sale into France, even when Francis was at Arde, &c. The ambassadors must get these evils remedied, and write frequently to the King for instructions.
A cipher was given the ambassadors for their correspondence, and a letter to summon the king of England to assist Francis, if there should be occasion to deliver it. The Chancellor left Dijon for Calais, 20 July 1521. He took the great seal with him, and during his absence whatever required sealing had to be sent after him. He and his colleagues arrived at Calais, 4 Aug. Wolsey was already there with the bishops of Durham and Ely, the earl of Worcester, the commander of St. John's, the Master of the Rolls, all the ambassadors of Christian princes with the king of England, and several gentlemen of his household. The imperial ambassadors were Berghes, Gattinara, Fiennes and Hanneton.
On the 5th Aug. 1521, the French ambassadors paid their respects to Wolsey, and were well received, as appears by their letter of that date, q.v.
Agreeably to the arrangement then concluded, the French ambassadors had an interview with Wolsey, of which they gave an account in a letter to Francis, dated Aug. 8th, q.v.
On the 12th Aug. 1521, Wolsey left Calais for Bruges, and took with him the ambassadors of Flanders; intending, as was said, to get the Emperor to send other ambassadors with sufficient powers. He desired the French ambassadors to remain at Calais till his return, promising to be only eight days absent; and they were entertained in the meantime by the deputy and treasurer of Calais. Wolsey was absent nearly three weeks, during which time he sent Brian, a gentleman of the King's household, to excuse his delay, and returned on the 29th Aug., bringing with him another set of ambassadors from Charles, (fn. 11) viz., Mercurin de Gattinara, the Chancellor, a Neapolitan count, a Spanish bishop, and others.
Meanwhile, Nassau was besieging Mouson, which was surrendered in five or six days by its captain Montmor, and then with Francis de Sekinghan laid siege to Mesieres, wherein were captain Bayard, la Rochepot, captain Boucal and the captain of Montmoreau. Francis, perceiving that his enemies were gaining ground, notwithstanding the conferences, raised 12,000 Swiss and brought them into Champagne, commanding Bourbon and Vendôme, governor of Picardy, to raise other forces, and ordering into his presence La Palice, one of the ambassadors at Calais, appointing Olivier de la Vernade, seigneur de la Bastie, in his place. He also determined to go himself into Champagne to raise the siege of Mesieres, and give battle, if necessary.
While the French army was advancing towards Champagne to join M. d'Alençon at Reims, the conferences were continued; and on the 2d Sept. 1521 Wolsey desired each of the two Chancellors to state their case.—Here follows a brief account of the third sitting, agreeing generally with the Imperial account, but with some additional points in the French chancellor's statement; viz., that the treaty of Noyon had provided for an interview between Charles and Francis, and that Charles was bound to have restored the Neapolitan adherents of Francis to their possessions, according to the treaty of La Tripaude; that in June 1518 Charles had sent to Francis at Angers the sieur De la Chaux, his premier sommelier de corps, to tell him he would have madame Louise, who was not then four years old, in his own hands; that he did not mean to pay more than half of the 100,000 crowns, and that he could not come to the interview, &c.
During September Francis, who had little hope of any good from the interview, seeing that Wolsey was not acting impartially, marched his army to Reims, and after a short time to Retheil, where he began the campaign. Meanwhile the Burgundians had beaten down a great part of the wall of Maisières, but the inhabitants still held out, and in about three weeks, owing to some disagreement between Nassau and Sekinghen, the siege was raised. Hereupon Francis set forward to pursue them. The Burgundians in Mouzon abandoned the town to the French, and retired into Hainault, committing great cruelties in their way, burning Aubenton and other places; for which Francis resolved to pursue them through the whole of Hainault, and go and revictual Tournay. The French army was reckoned at 30,000 foot, 3,000 men-of-arms, and a great band of artillery. Alençon led the van, and Bourbon and the duke of Vendçme the rear.
At this time an ambassador arrived at Calais from the king of Hungary to demand aid of Christian princes against the Turk, who had lately taken Belgrade. The Ambassador had been with the Emperor at Bruges, and was going to England, but Wolsey kept him at Calais. Meanwhile the conferences went on, as will be seen by the letters from 1 to 16 Oct. At the latter end of this month, Francis being in Hainault, where he still continued without meeting with the Burgundians, his army had burnt more than 200 (fn. 12) villages in Hainault, and pillaged Bapaulmes, Bouchain and two other towns. But as it rained continually, and the roads were destroyed, he was unable to revictual Tournay, was compelled to retrace his steps through Artois for Picardy, and sent the Constable to besiege Hédin. On the 19th Nov. he wrote from Amiens to the Chancellor, stating he had done all he could to succor Tournay, q.v. Meanwhile Hédin was taken by the Constable. Francis disbanded his army, and sent back the Swiss, with the exception of 2,000, who were placed in garrison at Abbeville. During this time he took the duke of Ferrara under his protection.
The French ambassadors remained at Calais about four months, and no peace or truce could be effected. At last they were dismissed by Wolsey, not without pain, to return to Francis at Compiegne, and had a safeconduct from the King Catholic. They left Calais on the 22nd Nov., and were conducted by the garrison of Calais outside the bounds, where the garrison of Boulogne met them, and conducted them to Boulogne. As Wolsey wished some of the ambassadors to remain at Calais till he left, the Chancellor left M. de Clermont, his brother, and M. Denis Poillot of the great council, who remained till the 28th Nov., when the Cardinal left.
At this time came news of the capture of Milan by the Spaniards and the papal army. Lautrec and a great part of his men escaped to Cremona, where the Venetians lay. Also, after the disbanding of the King's army Tournay surrendered to Nassau.
In the beginning of December Leo X. died at Rome. God forgive him! He consented to a war which has since done injury to Christendom.
Fr.
Nov./GRANTS. 1818. GRANTS in NOVEMBER 1521.
5. John Vicarman of Holme-Cultram, Cumb. Pardon for killing John Archehalde, of Neweton, Cumb., in selfdefence. Westm., 5 Nov.—Pat. 13 Hen. VIII. p. 2, m. 24.
8. John Mynsterley, chaplain. Presentation to the parish church of Guysnes, in the marches of Calais, Terouenne dioc., vice Master Barnard Andrew, resigned. Calais, 8 Nov.—Pat. 13 Hen. VIII. p. 2, m. 13.
10. Th. Golding, of Sabrichesworth, Herts. Pardon for felony and assault upon John Cooke. Windsor Castle, 10 Nov. 13 Hen. VIII. (No date of delivery.)—P.S. Pat. p. 3, m. 20 (undated).
13. Sir Edw. Grey. Wardship of Wm., s. and h. of Wm. Clopton. Signed: Ric. Weyston; Wystan Broun.—S.B. (undated). Westm., 13 Nov. Pat. 13 Hen. VIII. p. 2, m. 9.
13. James Jankyn, yeoman usher of the Chamber. To be "ragler" in co. Cardigan, S. Wales, vice Sir Griffith Rice, deceased. Windsor Castle, 2 Oct. 13 Hen. VIII. Del.. Calais, 13 Nov.—P.S. Marginal note: "Judde. Md to enroll it by the draught in Laten."
—. John, "[G]alipolensis episcopus," prior of St. Mary and Eustache, Shuldbrede, Sussex. Lease of the custody of lands, &c. in Midlovent, Sussex, lately held by Rob. le Coke the bastard, for 40 years; rent, 8s. 10d., and 2s. 4d. of increase. Westm., ..November.—Pat. 13 Hen. VIII. p. 1, m. 19.

Footnotes

  • 1. "Les 1 ... du capitaine et gouverneurs [de la] ville de Dieppe."
  • 2. Addressed as "Treshonoré seigneur."
  • 3. This letter has been printed in vol. II. 4054, under the year 1518. It is referred by the editors of the State Papers to 1521.
  • 4. It appears by the Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits, II. 60, that two modern copies of this narrative exist among the Béthune MSS. (nos. 8478 and 9726) in the Bibliothèque Impériale at Paris. One is entitled "Histoire de la Conférence de Calais, par Nicolas Mande."
  • 5. A native of Burgundy and master of requests to the Emperor. The translation is ascribed to him in a note made upon the MS. by the chancellor de Granvelle.
  • 6. The first sitting was on the 7th August, as appears by the French account.
  • 7. Held on the 2d September, according to the French account.
  • 8. Lansac in the French account.
  • 9. "ès mains duquel se tiennent les lectres hostées ès postes dudit Roy très-chrestien, après les avoir heu lue et murdry." The Editor explains "murdry" in a foot note as "détruites," applying it to the letters; but this is impossible, as the passage itself states that the Emperor kept the letters. Surely the true reading must be "tué et murdry," referring to the posts themselves or messengers.
  • 10. Held, according to the French account, on Sunday, 29th September.
  • 11. The Chancellor, however, was certainly present at the first interview.
  • 12. This, the Editor observes, is evidently an exaggeration, as the Flemish chroniclers, who never omit to record the misdeeds of the French, mention only two villages, in one of which fifty houses were burnt.