LECTURE XI.

FRANCE.-CIVIL AND RELIGIOUS WARS.

In my lecture of yesterday I concluded my observations on the Reformation.

I must now turn to the French history, and in the following lecture I must endeavour to give you some general notion of the history of a whole century, the sixteenth.

In considering the first part of this century, I shall have to notice the wars of enterprise and ambition carried on by the French monarchs, Charles the Eighth and his successors.

In considering the second part of the century, I shall have to allude to the great subject of the civil and religious wars of France.

These transactions and events cannot be detailed in any manner, however slight.

I can only make general remarks, - first, on the one period, and then on the other; mentioning, at the same time, such books as will furnish you hereafter with those particulars on which I am now obliged to comment, as if you were entirely acquainted with them already.

We left the French history at the death of Louis the Eleventh; before, therefore, we arrive at the civil and religious wars of France, we must pass through the reigns of Charles the Eighth, Louis the Twelfth, and Francis the First.

Of these the reader will be able to form a very adequate idea by reading the works of Mr. Roscoe and Dr. Robertson. These reigns may also be read in Mezeray, a writer of great authority. Or they may be read in Hénault, and Millot, and Velly, as the rest of the French history has been.

De Thou or Thuanus, it may be also observed, introduces his history with a general review of France and the state of Europe; a portion of his great work that has been

much admired, and then begins with the year 1546, a little before the death of Francis the First. The lesson which may, on the whole, be derived from this first half of the sixteenth century, is, the folly, the crime, of attempting foreign conquests; this is the leading observation I have to offer. Charles the Eighth of France had descended into Italy, Louis the Twelfth must therefore do the same; so must Francis the First and Henry the Second. The honor of the French nation was, it seems, engaged.

But Spain, which was becoming the great rival state in Europe, chose also, like France, to be, as she conceived, powerful and renowned; Ferdinand, therefore, and Charles the Fifth, and afterwards Philip the Second, were to waste, with the same ignorant ferocity, the lives and happiness of their subjects; and for what purpose? Not to keep the balance of Europe undisturbed; not to expel the French from Italy, and to abstain from all projects of conquest themselves; but, on the contrary, by rushing in, to contend for the whole, or a part of the plunder.

The Italians, in the mean time, whose unhappy country* was thus made the arena on which these unprincipled combatants were to struggle with each other, adopted, what appeared to them the only resource, that of fighting the one against the other, if possible, to destroy both; leaguing themselves sometimes with France, sometimes with Spain, and suffering from each power every possible calamity; while they were exhibiting, in their own conduct, all the degrading arts of duplicity and intrigue.

A more wretched and disgusting picture of mankind cannot well be displayed. All the faults of which man, in his social state, is capable; opposite extremes of guilt united; all the vices of pusillanimity, and all the crimes of courage.

The miseries and degradation of Italy have never ceased since the fall of the Roman empire. The great misfortune of this country has always been, its divisions into petty states, a misfortune that was irremediable. No cardinal made

* There is a well-known beautiful sonnet in the Italian, translated by Mr. Roscoe, and imitated by Lord Byron, a Lamentation that Italy had not been more powerful or less attractive, which I have seen an Italian repeat almost with tears.

into a sovereign, could ever be expected to combine its discordant parts into a free government; and unless this was done, nothing was done could this, indeed, have been effected, the Italians might have been virtuous and happy.

Artifice, and a policy proverbially faithless, were vain expedients against the great monarchies of Europe. But while Italy was to be thus destroyed by these unprincipled despoilers, what, in the mean time, was to be the consequence to these very monarchies? In Spain, the real sources of power neglected; immense revenue and no wealth; possessions multiplied abroad, and no prosperous provinces at home; the strength of the country exhausted in maintaining a powerful army, not for the purposes of defence, but of tyranny and injustice; and the whole system of policy, in every part, and on every occasion, a long and disgusting train of mistake and guilt.

In France, the same neglect of the real sources of strength and happiness: the produce of the land and labor of the community employed in military enterprises; the genius of the nobles made more and more warlike; military fame, and the intrigues of gallantry (congenial pursuits), converted into the only objects of anxiety and ambition; licentiousness everywhere the result, in the court and in the nation; the power of the crown unreasonably strengthened; the people oppressed with taxes, their interests never considered; the energies of this great country misdirected and abused; and the science of public happiness (except, indeed, in the arts of amusement and splendor) totally unknown or disregarded.

France and Spain, therefore, concur with Italy in completing the lesson that is exhibited to our reflection : ambition and injustice have their victims in the countries that are invaded and destroyed; and have alike their victims in those very invaders and destroyers. Better governments in all, or in any, would have made these evils less; and good governments are thus, in all times and situations of the world, the common interest of every state, as connected with its neighbours, and of every prince and people, as concerned in their own individual happiness.

I now proceed to make some general remarks on the latter

part of the century. The remaining half comprehends, in French history, the era of the civil and religious wars, an era that is peculiarly interesting; and the great difficulty is, to prevent our minds from being overpowered and bewildered by the variety of subjects which present themselves to our examination.

The events are striking; the actors splendid; the interests important; and could we see and understand the scene, with the rapidity with which we do the dramas of Otway or of Shakspeare, the effect would be even more powerful, and the impression more lasting.

But an acquaintance with a great, and real tragedy like this, that lasted for nearly forty years, can only be acquired by a course of reading, extended to a considerable length, and somewhat steadily sustained. To say the truth, it is more than usually perplexing to know, on this occasion, what books to propose. The great historians of the tines are Thuanus and Davila; but the work of Davila occupies a very large folio, and the history of Thuanus is extended through nearly six folios in the original Latin, and through nearly ten full quartos in the French translation.

I must therefore explain what I think may be attempted, and what will, I conceive, be sufficient. It will be found, that the comprehensive mind of De Thou undertook, and accomplished, the history of all the rest of Europe, as well as of France, and I therefore propose to you, to confine your attention to that part which relates to the French history. The quarto work, the French translation, will be the best to resort to; and there will be here no difficulty in selecting the history of France from the remainder of the work.

Again, a considerable part of the narrative is employed on the progress of the civil wars in the different provinces of France, and on the military operations of the contending parties. These may now be looked at very slightly. It is the conferences, the assemblies, the manifestoes, the treaties, the reasonings and views of the Huguenots and Roman Catholics, to which your observation should be directed.

Now these, though they are detailed, and very properly, at great length, by De Thou, do not, after all, constitute a

mass of reading which may not, and which ought not, to be undertaken. Even here, some parts may be considered far less attentively than others, and with these limitations, and on this system, I do not hestitate to recommend to your perusal, the great work of one of the first of modern historians.

In like manner, Davila may be read in parts; the work may be referred to in all the more important particulars, especially with respect to the views, interests, and intrigues of the different leaders and factions. The narrative is remarkably unaffected, perspicuous, and complete; and every thing is so easy, natural, and relevant to the subject, that the reader who turns to consult the work, will unavoidably read on and do more, and perceive, that if a character is to be estimated, or any particular event to be understood, the account of Davila must necessarily be considered.

The Duke of Epernon, an actor in these scenes, is related by his biographer to have been pleased with this history; and above all, to have commended the exact care which the author had taken to inform himself of the secret motives by which the different parties and leaders were actuated at the time.

But we must not forget, that the family of Davila, and himself, were connected with Catherine de Medicis ; that he has been considered as her apologist; that he was an Italian, and a soldier; and that every thing with him is, of course, referred to faction or to selfishness. Ideas of civil or religious liberty, seem little to have occurred to him; and the reader is to consider his history as supplying him with materials which he must combine with those of other writers; not in any instance as furnishing him with conclusions to which he is to assent, without due hesitation.

De Thou is likewise an historian of facts and of detail, but his sentiments are generous and enlarged; and the student, while he reads what men were, and but too often are, will never be suffered to forget what they ought to be.

French literature is not so eminently distinguished for great regular works of history, as for memoirs of the great characters of history. Books of this kind are, of all, the most amusing; and, when inspected by a philosophic eye, are often well