[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.53This episode became a cause célèbre for Catholics, especially when thewidow of Menault de la Grave, one of the deceased Catholic noblemen,laid the blame for her husband s death squarely at the feet of Lagebâton,who, she claimed, had allowed numerous armed Protestant officers andtheir wives, not to mention his own spouse, to attend the prêche.Thewidow demanded that the court determine and divulge the religious affili-ation of its magistrates and their wives, and that it declare the number ofits officials who regularly attended such assemblies.54A similar case, in late December 1561, made for quite entertainingtheatre.When the parlement granted a new injunction preventing all offi-cials of Bordeaux from attending the prêches, it was immediately contestedby two lesser officers of the court.55 These men, Moreau, a procureur, andle Blanc, an avocat, claimed that, as at least sixty other officials hadexpressed a desire to continue to attend such assemblies, the injunctionshould be rescinded.56 Lange, speaking on behalf of the newly-formedsyndicate, challenged their claim, stating that, if there was indeed suchstrong sentiment within the court, it should be presented in written form.So, on 10 December, Moreau and le Blanc returned to the parlement with arequête, signed by forty officials, confirming their wishes.But it was a trap.La Ferrière, an ally of Lange, interjected, stating that every avocat andprocureur had sworn an oath promising to be bons Catholicques and toobserve the constitutions of the Catholic church on taking office.By signingthe new declaration they had contravened the terms of their contract, and,as such, should be suspended until the court decided their punishment.57The syndicate had gained a significant victory, but moderate hackleswere now raised, and over the following months questions over the legi-timacy of this Catholic confederation within the parlement began tosurface.One major bone of contention concerned the validity of the52AMB, ms 767, fo.756.53AMB, ms 767, fo.755.54AMB, ms 767, fos 755 6.55AMB, ms 768, fo.293.56AMB, ms 768, fos 301 9.57AMB, ms 768, fos 313 18. 44 CATHOLIC ACTIVISM IN SOUTH-WEST FRANCE, 1540 1570syndicate s militia.At inception, Lange had divided the syndicate smembership into six quasi-military units, corresponding roughly to thesix administrative jurades of Bordeaux.Each of these districts was to besupervised by a Catholic syndic, who would report directly to Lange,with captains appointed to command each sub-division of quartier andparoisse.58 The combatants of the Confraternity of Saint-Yves, whoduring 1561 had numbered over four thousand, according to Lange, werethen assigned to each syndic to make up the bulk of the syndicate smilitia.The Histoire ecclésiatique asserts that Catholics even had plans toincorporate the suburban peasantry into this enterprise, though there islittle evidence to support this.59 Such initiatives were not novel, of course.Similar measures had been implemented recently by the écoliers of thecollège de Guyenne and the synod of Clairac, and an analogous schemehad even been introduced by the parlement in June 1561, whereby eightconseillers were designated to serve as deputies to the eight parishes ofBordeaux so as to maintain order and prevent unrest before it escalated.60Interestingly, seven of the eight deputies appointed were known Catholiczealots, although the sole moderate parlementaire, de Ferron, wasassigned to the largest parish of Saint-Michel.61In order to combat the potential of the syndicate and its militia,Lagebâton and Burie launched a two-pronged assault on the Catholiccorpus.In March 1562, the premier président ordered a formal investiga-tion into the activities of the syndicate, with its findings dispatched to theconseil privé for deliberation.62 Burie, meanwhile, re-examined the lettres-patentes that had confirmed the syndicate the previous year, suggestingthat, as they had not yet been fully registered before the parlement, Lange sorganization, was in effect little more than an illegal assembly, and thusshould be banned, as per the terms of the edict of January.63 Lagebâton s58Gaullieur, Histoire de la réformation à Bordeaux, I, pp.311 25.Court records alsorefer to this infrastructure: les Catholicques de ladicte ville ont créé six syndics d entre eulx.(AHG, 10, p.320).59[Bèze], Hist.eccl., I, p.872.60AMB, ms 767, fos 536 8.61The Catholic deputies were Malvin (parish of Saint-Projet), Vergoing (Saint-Pierre),Anselin (Saint-Éloy), de Nort (Sainte-Maxance), de Monehn (Sainte-Colombe),Guilleragues (Sainte-Aulaye) and d Alesme (Saint Rémy): AMB, ms 767, fos 536 8.Evenwhen the parlement tightened its hold within the parishes the following December byproviding each deputy with a list of two hundred parishioners eligible to be mobilized foractive duty should the need arise, the bias towards Catholic appointees remained at seven toone: Cocula, Étienne de la Boétie, p.134.62AMB, ms 768, fo.763.63O Reilly, Histoire complète de Bordeaux, II, p.206.For further details of Burie sattempts to censor the syndicate, see Gaullieur, Histoire de la réformation à Bordeaux, I, pp.412 17; Ducourneau, La Guienne historique et monumentale, II, p.192. THE BORDEAUX SYNDICATE 45initiative drew first blood, however, when the conseil privé returned itsverdict on 12 April, demanding the immediate cessation of all syndicateactivity, declaring any and all resolutions passed by its leadership to be nulland void.64 On the face of it, this was a triumph for the moderates atBordeaux.But events soon forced the court to rethink its decision.On26 June 1562, the château Trompette was once more besieged byProtestant forces, this time led by the leading military captains in thesouth-west: Duras, Pardaillan and Langoiran.65 Seemingly, the reformershad colluded with two captains serving in Burie s company, gaining assur-ances that the gates would be opened under the cover of darkness to allowProtestant soldiers to enter unopposed.Crucial to this plan was theassumption that the castle s Catholic commander, Vaillac, the saviour ofthe château in 1561, would remain neutral during this new assault arational if optimistic scheme, given that the captain had recently marriedinto the Protestant Pardaillan family.When Vaillac remained constant inhis duties, and ordered the gates to remain locked, however, Duras sforces were denied and the plan failed.66This had been a close call for the Bordeaux authorities, and Catholicsused it as evidence of the paucity of the town s defences since the suspen-sion of the syndicate.With confessional tensions raised again, Roffignacand Malvin urged the court to require all officials to give a public declara-tion of their faith,67 while Monluc, newly arrived to bolster the town ssecurity, called upon the Catholic population to spare neither their goodsnor their blood in the service of the king and the defence of the trueCatholic church [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl przylepto3.keep.pl
.53This episode became a cause célèbre for Catholics, especially when thewidow of Menault de la Grave, one of the deceased Catholic noblemen,laid the blame for her husband s death squarely at the feet of Lagebâton,who, she claimed, had allowed numerous armed Protestant officers andtheir wives, not to mention his own spouse, to attend the prêche.Thewidow demanded that the court determine and divulge the religious affili-ation of its magistrates and their wives, and that it declare the number ofits officials who regularly attended such assemblies.54A similar case, in late December 1561, made for quite entertainingtheatre.When the parlement granted a new injunction preventing all offi-cials of Bordeaux from attending the prêches, it was immediately contestedby two lesser officers of the court.55 These men, Moreau, a procureur, andle Blanc, an avocat, claimed that, as at least sixty other officials hadexpressed a desire to continue to attend such assemblies, the injunctionshould be rescinded.56 Lange, speaking on behalf of the newly-formedsyndicate, challenged their claim, stating that, if there was indeed suchstrong sentiment within the court, it should be presented in written form.So, on 10 December, Moreau and le Blanc returned to the parlement with arequête, signed by forty officials, confirming their wishes.But it was a trap.La Ferrière, an ally of Lange, interjected, stating that every avocat andprocureur had sworn an oath promising to be bons Catholicques and toobserve the constitutions of the Catholic church on taking office.By signingthe new declaration they had contravened the terms of their contract, and,as such, should be suspended until the court decided their punishment.57The syndicate had gained a significant victory, but moderate hackleswere now raised, and over the following months questions over the legi-timacy of this Catholic confederation within the parlement began tosurface.One major bone of contention concerned the validity of the52AMB, ms 767, fo.756.53AMB, ms 767, fo.755.54AMB, ms 767, fos 755 6.55AMB, ms 768, fo.293.56AMB, ms 768, fos 301 9.57AMB, ms 768, fos 313 18. 44 CATHOLIC ACTIVISM IN SOUTH-WEST FRANCE, 1540 1570syndicate s militia.At inception, Lange had divided the syndicate smembership into six quasi-military units, corresponding roughly to thesix administrative jurades of Bordeaux.Each of these districts was to besupervised by a Catholic syndic, who would report directly to Lange,with captains appointed to command each sub-division of quartier andparoisse.58 The combatants of the Confraternity of Saint-Yves, whoduring 1561 had numbered over four thousand, according to Lange, werethen assigned to each syndic to make up the bulk of the syndicate smilitia.The Histoire ecclésiatique asserts that Catholics even had plans toincorporate the suburban peasantry into this enterprise, though there islittle evidence to support this.59 Such initiatives were not novel, of course.Similar measures had been implemented recently by the écoliers of thecollège de Guyenne and the synod of Clairac, and an analogous schemehad even been introduced by the parlement in June 1561, whereby eightconseillers were designated to serve as deputies to the eight parishes ofBordeaux so as to maintain order and prevent unrest before it escalated.60Interestingly, seven of the eight deputies appointed were known Catholiczealots, although the sole moderate parlementaire, de Ferron, wasassigned to the largest parish of Saint-Michel.61In order to combat the potential of the syndicate and its militia,Lagebâton and Burie launched a two-pronged assault on the Catholiccorpus.In March 1562, the premier président ordered a formal investiga-tion into the activities of the syndicate, with its findings dispatched to theconseil privé for deliberation.62 Burie, meanwhile, re-examined the lettres-patentes that had confirmed the syndicate the previous year, suggestingthat, as they had not yet been fully registered before the parlement, Lange sorganization, was in effect little more than an illegal assembly, and thusshould be banned, as per the terms of the edict of January.63 Lagebâton s58Gaullieur, Histoire de la réformation à Bordeaux, I, pp.311 25.Court records alsorefer to this infrastructure: les Catholicques de ladicte ville ont créé six syndics d entre eulx.(AHG, 10, p.320).59[Bèze], Hist.eccl., I, p.872.60AMB, ms 767, fos 536 8.61The Catholic deputies were Malvin (parish of Saint-Projet), Vergoing (Saint-Pierre),Anselin (Saint-Éloy), de Nort (Sainte-Maxance), de Monehn (Sainte-Colombe),Guilleragues (Sainte-Aulaye) and d Alesme (Saint Rémy): AMB, ms 767, fos 536 8.Evenwhen the parlement tightened its hold within the parishes the following December byproviding each deputy with a list of two hundred parishioners eligible to be mobilized foractive duty should the need arise, the bias towards Catholic appointees remained at seven toone: Cocula, Étienne de la Boétie, p.134.62AMB, ms 768, fo.763.63O Reilly, Histoire complète de Bordeaux, II, p.206.For further details of Burie sattempts to censor the syndicate, see Gaullieur, Histoire de la réformation à Bordeaux, I, pp.412 17; Ducourneau, La Guienne historique et monumentale, II, p.192. THE BORDEAUX SYNDICATE 45initiative drew first blood, however, when the conseil privé returned itsverdict on 12 April, demanding the immediate cessation of all syndicateactivity, declaring any and all resolutions passed by its leadership to be nulland void.64 On the face of it, this was a triumph for the moderates atBordeaux.But events soon forced the court to rethink its decision.On26 June 1562, the château Trompette was once more besieged byProtestant forces, this time led by the leading military captains in thesouth-west: Duras, Pardaillan and Langoiran.65 Seemingly, the reformershad colluded with two captains serving in Burie s company, gaining assur-ances that the gates would be opened under the cover of darkness to allowProtestant soldiers to enter unopposed.Crucial to this plan was theassumption that the castle s Catholic commander, Vaillac, the saviour ofthe château in 1561, would remain neutral during this new assault arational if optimistic scheme, given that the captain had recently marriedinto the Protestant Pardaillan family.When Vaillac remained constant inhis duties, and ordered the gates to remain locked, however, Duras sforces were denied and the plan failed.66This had been a close call for the Bordeaux authorities, and Catholicsused it as evidence of the paucity of the town s defences since the suspen-sion of the syndicate.With confessional tensions raised again, Roffignacand Malvin urged the court to require all officials to give a public declara-tion of their faith,67 while Monluc, newly arrived to bolster the town ssecurity, called upon the Catholic population to spare neither their goodsnor their blood in the service of the king and the defence of the trueCatholic church [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]