Protestant Exiles From France in the Reign of Louis XIV or the Huguenot Refugees and Their ...

291 Pages·2017·16.27 MB·English

P R E F A C E .
I N order that the two volumes on Protestant E xiles from France in the reign of Louis
ma be serviceable to historical and genealogical students, i t i s necessary to rovide
y p
this Index-Volume. T he author takes the opportunity of introducing new memoirs, and
—
illustrative documents and notes especially memoirs of refugees in former reign s fugitives
(
from the Duke of Alva
, the St Bartholomew Massacre, and their descendants. T he
surnames in volumes first and second are re produced in a careful analysis of the whole work.
dditional surnames admitted in conformity with the plan of volume third are incorporated
A
, ,
in the Analysi s and the Alphabetical T ables refer to the pages in volume third. T he original
,
ork has thus been zealously supplemented annotated and corrected so that the possessors
w
, , ,
-
of volumes first and second have in thi s Index Volume all the advantages of a new and
improved edition without the disadvantage of their former purchasebecoming reduced in
,
pecuniary value. I t is impos sible that the author can reprint the original work. For the
sake of new purchasers therefore the third volume must be complete in itself. And
, , ,
accordingly some repetitions will be observed which the possessors of volumes first and
, ,
second are requested to excuse.
A large number of the books and documents quoted in this work can be consulted in the
l ibrary of the E nglish Presbyterian C ollege Queen Square House Guildford Street London .
, , ,
GE N E
R AL VIE W OF T HE C ON T E N T S OF T HE
-
I N DEX VOLUME.
PAG E S
AN ALYSIS OF HIST OR IC AL INT R ODUC T ION T O MEMOIR S R EFUGEES T HE R EIGN OF
LOUIS XIV.
,
MEMOIR S OF R EFUGEES IN FOR MER R EIGNS,
AN ALYSIS OF VOLUME FIR ST ,
. JALYSIS OF VOLUME SEC OND,
Q DDIT ION AL C HAPT ER S,
ALPHABET IC AL T ABLES
,
T ABLE OF N E W ME MOIR S AN D NOT E S.
-
FHE NAT UR ALISAT ION LIST S R E C OPIED FR OM T HE PAT ENT R OLLS WIT H NOT ES 2 to 1
, , 7 7
Q OT E S T O HIST OR I C AL INT R ODUC T ION 6 1 1 6 1 1 8 1 2
, 5 , , 4, , 7 , , 9 , 7 , 7 5
VI E MOIR S OF R E FUGE E S IN FOR ME R R E IGNS AN D T HE IR DE SC E NDANT S.
,
'
T HE R ADNOR GR OUP
,
-
E arl of R adnor and the families of Bouverie and Pusey. Bonnell. C rawley Boeve .
y
Francis Lamot or La Motte. Gleanings from Wills 1 68 to 1 8. Houblon.
, , 5 5 9
Da C ane. Le T hieu llier. Lefroy. De la Pr m e. Janssen. Delme &c.
y ,
I . T HE
C LAN C AR T Y GR OUP
,
E arl of C lancart Lord Ashtown and the family of T rench.
Odet de C hatillon .
y, ,
Vidame of
C hartres. Papillon. Dubois or Wood . C ham berlaine. Inglis or
, ,
’
Langlois. Le Jeune. D Am brun or Dom brain . Paget. E m eris . Despard or
, ,
’
D E s ard. Dobr
ee. Groslot. Brevint 81 0.
p ,
I I . UNIVER
SIT Y GR OUP
,
Le C hevalier. De Marsilliers. C ousin. Bignon. R egius. Baro or Baron. C astol .
,
C asaubon. De Ma erne. Vignier. Levet. Lamie. Huard. De Lambermont.
y
’
De Garencieres. Vasson. C on ard. Da Moulin. D E s a ne. Herault 85 0.
y p g ,
V. A MISC ELLANEOUS GR OUP
,
Waldo. Howie see C hap . St Michel. Le Keux. C onant. C alam . De
( y
’
Laune. Briot. D Urfe .
y
NOT ES
,
MAR U I S DE LA MUSSE,
Q
R E V. S . LYON , C HAT ELAIN , &C .,
‘
S I R D ONALD M L E OD , C .B .,
WILL OF P HI L I P D E L AHAI ZE , E S Q ., Proved 2 9 th N ovember 1 7 69 ,
M EMOI R S OF B I S HOP T E R R OT AN D R E V. V. P E R R ON E T ,
S I R F RAN C I S B EAUFOR T ,
R I C HAR D C HE N E VIX, T . G. FON N E R E AU , PR OFESSOR R IGAUD, J. R . PLAN C H1§,
KENNEY D.D. B. LANGLOIS
, M.P.,
, ,
NOT ES
, 1 5 2 , 1 5 4, 1 5 7 : 1 5 8: 1 63 , 1 6 5 , 1 6 7 , 1 69 , 1 7 0 : 1 7 1 : 1 7 2 7 1 85 , 1 8 7 ) I
ADDIT ION AL C HAPT E R S.
C HAPT ER XXX.
R EFUGEES, BEIN G C ONVER T S FR OM R OMANISM,
’
B ion
, De Brevall, C hail ot d Argenteu il, Du Veil
i Ga m er De Luzamo Mala
g
y,
De la. Fil lonn iere Le Vassor &c, .
, ,
C HAPT ER XXXI.
DESC ENDANT S IN BR IT AIN OF HUGUENOT S WHO WE R E R E FUGE E S IN (
ST HE R
C O
UNT R IE
S
‘
T hellusson
, Labouchere
, Prevost, Du Boulay, Fourdrinier, Maty, Aubertin
&c
,
C HAPT ER XXXI I .
ADDIT IONAL FAC T S AN D NOT ES
,
ALPHABE T IC AL T ABL
E S.
I . R EFUGEES OF EAR LIEST DAT ES
, AN D T HEIR DESC ENDANT S
,
I I . R EFUGEES DUR ING T HE R EIGN OF LOUIS XIV.
, AN D T HEIR DE
SC E N
DAN
T
Q
I I I .
I V. MISC ELLANEOUS NAMES ,
A N ALYS I S O F VOLU M E F I R S T
,
W I T H N O T E S A N D D O C U M E N T S.
{ istortcal ntrohuction.
B E
C ONSIST ING OF T E N SEC T IONS Vol. I. pages 1 to
,
(
’ '
“ ‘
I I ON I . pages 1 to — T /ze Per reczzlzon w/zz
cfi dr ove Me P r otestants r om Fr ance and if:
, ( f
m . I need give n o summary of the historical statements down to the date of the massacre
the Huguenots or French Protestan ts by the R omanists by order of King C harles IX.
,
( ) ,
’
1
St. Bartholomew s day 1 2 . Bu t I insert an abridgement of the remainder of Section I .
5 7
I n order to understand the u stification of civi l war in France at this period we must con
j ,
ar some poin ts of difference from our views
of law and loyalty belonging to the very
,
nstitu tions of ancien t government as compared with more modern monarchy and executive
-
33
0 1 i ty. After considering that the St Bartholomew massacre made personal sel f defence a
’
c
gy enot s only protection , the reader must picture a French Protestan t congregation,
. J den
to carry any arms yet surrounded by R oman C atholics armed with weapons which
, ,
r
ing
priesthood stirs them up to use against the unarm ed worshippers the law not
,
. 1
such murderous assaul ts with any punishment. I t must also be realised that i t was
g
i
stent with loyalty for a noble to have a fortress over which the king had no active
diction and for a town such as La R ochelle to be equally independent of th e sovereign.
,
’
.. h
a town by feudal right was as effectual a sanctuary against the king s emissaries as an
, , y
resiastical bui lding. I t was as lawless for the king to o to war with the town as fo r th e
g ,
an invading army against Paris. T he independent rulers o f a fort or walled
’
e duties to their own dependents to which even the k ing s claims must be post
,
supreme authority of a king over all town s and castles was a state of things which
King of France might wish : but i t was not the constitution of France and
;
coveting was a species of radicalism on his part.
La R ochelle owed to their independence their escape from the St. Bar
om ew massacre.
T he Queen o f Navarre though decoyed to Paris escaped by the visi ta
, ,
”
o f God who removed her from the evi l to come and to the heaven ly country about
, , ,
months before. A very great Huguenot soldier second to none but C oligny survived
, ,
massacre namely Francois Seigneur de la Noue. T his Francis with the Iron Arm
, , ,
been Governor of La R ochelle. He was at Mons at the date of the massacre but was
,
ed and graciously received by the king. Assuming that he would recant in return for his
,
the C ourt sen t him to La R ochelle to see if the citizens on their l iberty of conscience
,
promised would surrender to royal authority. La Noue as an envoy was coldly re
g , , ,
Finding the citizens firm and courageous he again accepted the chief command in
,
stant interest and the R oyalist besiegers withdrew in the summer of 1 .
, 5 7 3
ct dated r 1 th August 1 conceded to the Huguenots liberty of domestic worship
,
5 7 3 ,
public exercise of their religion in La R ochelle Montauban and Nismes. T he
, ,
A
FRE N CH P R OT E S T AN T E XI L E S .
as t
Government relieved its feelings of chagrin at such concessions by inventing,
d esi nation of French Protestantism for all time comin th e con temptuous title
g g , ,
”
Pretendiie R eformée th e pretended reformed religion or La
, (
),
Henry II I. succeeded C harles IX . in 1 bu t his rei n must here be passed
5 7 4 , g
h e was assassinated in the camp near Paris in 1 8 the Prote
5 9,
‘
N avarre were in h is army taking the lo al s ide a ainst the rebell ious R oman C atholl
, y g
T he Papists con tinued the rebellion With a view to displace Henry of Navarre
,
throne of France which was his rightful inheritance and thus the Protestants being
, 3 ,
l oyal s ti ll require no apologis t.
,
I t i s alleged
, however, that by now becoming a party to a t reaty with the king
C
country the Protestant C hurch of France assumed an imperial position which no
,
empire can tolerate and that therefore the suppression of that C hu rch by Louis XIV.
, , , ,
executed with indefensible cruel ty was the dictate of poli tical necessit y.
,
-
reply to this allegation is that th is treaty was only th e re enactment and
T he ,
exten sion
of a peculiar method of tolerating Protestants , devised by the kings o
the only plan
to evade the necessi ty of being intolerant, which the coronation
reh l om sts
them swear to
be. T he plea that Protestants, as g , were
n wa
to the King but were to be negotiated with like a foreig power
,
,
tolerating them consistent even with the m odified oath sworn by
,
endeavour to the utmost of my power and in good faith to drive ou t of my un sd1 ct1 on
, , j
,
”
from the lands under my sway al l heretics denoun ced by the C hurch of R ome. As to
*
olitical treaty with the Huguenots in its first shape Professor Anderson rem
,
p
In stead of rel igious toleration being s ecured to them by a powerful ly administered
their protection was left in their own hands as if there was something in
,
creed which must for ever render them in ca ab
p
R oyalty which planned the treaty was at I
, ,
en tered into the plan .
crime was consent to a royal programme to which the successors of Henri IV. made themsel
,
parties by deliberate and repeated declarations. T he treaty to which we allude is
celebrated E dict of Nantes dated 1 8 as a pledge of the observance of which the Protest
, 5 9 ,
C hurch received several towns w ith garrisons and ammunition to be held and defended
, ,
their own party in independent feudal style .
- -
T hat th is was a poli tical eye sore in a statesman like view is now acknowledged
. Bu t thal
,
was the last chance for religious peace and tolerance in France cannot be denied on the
, otl
hand. And to say that i t was the cause of the Great Persecution would be a historical
blund
T he bigotry of the R oman C atholics was the cause
. In the provinces persecution
v
perpetual. I lle al treatment of individuals and congregations of the Protestan t party was
g ran
punished while the local magistrate instead of a protector was often a leading
,
, ersecu t
p
T
hrough priestly instigation and intimidation , the atmosphere of France was heated
w
u
ncontrollable and unextinguishable malignity against the Protestants who gained nothing
,
-
fi htin with truce breakers.
g g
’
1
I t was in the reign of Henri s son Louis XIII . that fi htin in defence of edictal rig
, ,
g g ]
came to an end. T he maj ori ty of the Protestants grew weary of fruitless battles and sieg
‘
Bem w
al ays conscientiously loyal they began to wish to make an ostentation of their loya
g ,
l
and t
o rely upon that for fair and paternal treatment from their King and his abin
C
’
U
ndoubted ly the King s animus was against the feudalism as well as the Protesta tism
, n
of t
cautionary towns. T he former was their special ofiensiveness to the po
werful Prime inis
M
of France C ardm al R ichelieu.
,
I ntrodu ctory E ssay b
y William Anderson , Pr ofesso r in the Anderson ian University
, Glasgow 1 8
“ ( 5
prefixed to h is translation o f Jean Migau lt ; o r the T rials o f a French Pro testant Fam il
y during the eu
od
” p
the R evocation of the E d ict of Nantes.
AN ALYSIS OF VOL UJl/E FI R S T .
v
Another argument against Protestants resorting to civi l war was that political malconten ts
,
,
i ots of the R oman C atholic creed , often j oined their ranks, and gave a bad colour to their
g
—
esi n s . Such a malcontent made advances to them ln 1 6 1
5 viz., the P rince of C ondé who
g ,
-
the j ustly honoured Protestant Henri
, Due de R ohan, to take the field . But their
and best counsellor the sainted Du Plessis Mornay entreated hi s fellow-Protestants
, ,
back. He said T he C ourt wil l set on foot a negotiation which wil l be carried
o n
, ,
Prince has gained his own ends
, when he wi ll leave our churches in th e lurch and
with all the odium. Such actually was the result. Histoire des Protestants par D
e
( ,
’
2 zzze edi t.
94, )
fall of La R ochelle and the other cautionary towns has been ascribed to the luke
of the Huguenots themselves
, it may, wi th at least equal reason, be inferred that
a principle in their inaction. T o exchange the appearance of feudal defiance for
lawful suggestion and experiment. Accordingly not
,
s tay at home but many of them served l n the royal
,
s. And after the acification of 1 62 they rested all their hopes of religious liberty
p 9,
’
that monarch s satisfaction with their complete subj ection to royal j uri sdiction an
d
,
the very strong loyalty of their principles and manifestoes. During the minority of
XIV. their fidelit and good services were acknowledged by the Premier of France
, y ,
nal Mazarin under whose administration they enj oyed much tranquility and by whose
, ,
they filled many important offices l n the financial department of his Maj esty s
privilege rendering the E dict of Nantes theoretically dangerous as inconsistent
,
ation had no being after 1 62 . T he monarch who carried ou t the great and
, 9
on of the seventeenth century had no such materials wherewith to fabricate a
France was not devoted to the Pope and the liberties which its Govern
; ,
opposition to Papal ambition might have made the King and his ministers
,
Huguenots in their love of toleration. Unfortunately however the very
, ,
de i t al l the more willing
was the one thing which
onement for al l insubordination.
-
also the father confessors whose powers
of
,
te King and C ourt. An apologies for this
y
thorities had other motives than sheer bigotry
either untruthful harangues or mere exercises of ingenuity dealing not with
, ,
phrases.
—
was the revocation of the E dict of Nantes that i s the repeal of the law or
,
—
de by Henri IV. a repeal which left Louis XIV. under the dominion of the fearful
-
his coronation oath on the extermination of heretics . Unqualifi ed and exaggerated
ithou t the menacing safeguards of a treaty
, was thus no defence to the Protestants.
leges of the edict had during many years been revoked one by one first by explaining
, , ,
meaning of the phrases and clauses of that legal document but latterly without an
,
y
estru ction of the surviving sealing
of Poictou had been the scen e of
T he Marquis de Louvois having
,
ascendency over Louis was eager
,
tics . T heir intervention was not
efiect because resistance to his
;
”
f the booted missionaries con
,
o f Protestantism. In 1 6 6
7
l lowin entry in his diary
g