Potter David. Henry VIII and Francis I
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
410 chapter nine
Protestant Mediation at Calais, Autumn 1545
Francis I was also disillusioned by the outcome of Annebault’s mis-
sion. Once the Admiral and Gardiner had been recalled, he thought,
‘the Emperor will regret not having used any other language’ since the
Protestant envoys had told him that Henry and Charles could not agree.
From that point he began to place greater hope in an alliance with the
Protestants.
64
On the other hand, such an alignment could not prosper
while he was at war with England. For their part, the Protestants were
convinced that the key to their security was Anglo-French peace. On
19 August, well before the failure at Bruges, the Schmalkaldic envoys
had received their instructions.
65
ey were Ludwig von Baumbach,
Christo von Venningen,
66
Hans Bruno von Niedpruck of Metz,
67
Johann Sturm, and Sleidan.
68
eir brief was to promote talks, attempt
a truce to last until Easter 1546, suggest that until outstanding dis-
putes over Boulogne and the pension was settled, Boulogne could be
transferred (‘sequestrated’) into Schmalkaldic hands and a peace con-
son maistre et tous ses subjectz avec. J’ay grand peur que la musique ne vauldra rien
et que ne pourrons accorder noz challumeux.’ J.-T. Leblanc, ‘Lettres adressées à Gui
de Maugiron durant les guerres de Piémont et du nord de la France (1545–1552),
Bull. Des Travaux du Comité des Sciences historiques, 1895, 25–83, at p. 26. See also
Nawrocki, II, pp. 359–362.
64
Francis I to Annebault, 25 Nov. 1545, Pariset ‘Les relations des Rois de France
et les princes protestants allemands,’ no. 3: ‘led. Empereur sera bien marry de n’avoir
parlé autre langage’; Guy de Marillac to Jean du Bellay, 21 novembre [1545]: ‘le roy
demoure tousjours et persiste en ceste voulenté de ne riens faire avec l’empereur et
gouste tous les jours de plus en plus ceste alliance avec les protestantz.’ (Scheurer,
Correspondance de Jean du Bellay, III, p. 329).
65
Philip of Hesse to Jakob Sturm, 19 Aug. 1545, Hasenclever, NA, pp. 234–235;
Philip of Hesse to Venningen, Baumbach, Sleidan and Bruno, 19 Aug. 1545, ibid.,
pp. 235–236. Philip to Bucer, 1 Aug. 1545, Lens (ed.) Briefwechsel Landgraf Philipps,
II, 358, urging on the peace negotiations. Memorandum of the Schmalkaldic commit-
tee at Worms, NA, pp. 228–229; Instructions to the envoys, ibid., pp. 229–231.
66
Baumbach had been on several missions to England in the late 1530s for his
master, Philip ot Hesse, notably in May and December 1539 when he negotiated
with Cromwell for an alliance. See Küch, Politsches Archiv des Langrafen Philipp, II,
pp. 454–455. Venningen was the representative of the Duke of Wurtemberg.
67
On Bruno’s connections in France see Zeller, Réunion de Metz à la France, I,
pp. 82–83, About 1535, he was charged with several missions to Germany by Francis
I and in 1539 he became an ocial agent of the Schmalkaldic League. In 1545, he
obtained pensions for himself and his sons from England and became an informant
for the English in Germany.
68
A. Hasenclever, Sleidan Studien: Die Entwicklung der politischen Ideen Johann
Sleidans bis zum Jahre 1545 (Bonn, 1905). H. Baumgarten, Sleidans Leben und Brief-
wechsel (Strasbourg, 1881).
‘
to entreate with the sworde in hand
’
411
ference arranged.
69
Sturm and Chelius had probably concealed these
aims from the French while holding out the prospect of Boulogne.
As a result, they obtained French consent in a series of meetings with
Secretary Bayard and then with Francis himself. e King insisted, as
his maximum demand, on the immediate return of Boulogne and the
full comprehension of the Scots.
70
On the English side, the talks near Calais in November/December
1545 were largely managed by William Paget,
71
using Bruno and Sturm
as intermediaries with those in France favourable to peace. ere,
Marguerite of Navarre and Mme d’Etampes were crucial and, not
surprisingly, the latter’s favourites, Longueval and La Planche, were
involved.
72
Aer the failure of approaches via her secretary in April
1545, Mme d’Etampes sent another envoy in July and in August was
still pushing for talks, using a Florentine merchant named Bartholomeo
Compagni as an intermediary. e terms on oer for Boulogne were:
the renewal of the pension and some sort of nancial indemnity for
Boulogne but the sum was not thought adequate in England.
73
How did the negotiators at Bruges view the Protestant mediation
talks? It is possible that Annebault and Bayard used the talks with the
69
Additional Memorandum, ‘Was an Frankreich und Engellandt geworben soll
werden.’ Hasenclever, NA, pp. 231–233.
70
Johann Sturm and Chelius to the Council of 13, 13 Aug. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 592.
71
See S. Gammon, Statesman and Schemer, see also Johnson, ‘William Paget.’
72
Nicolas Bossut de Longueval, member of the royal council since 1543. La Planche
was maître d’hôtel to the duke of Orléans. ‘Of mean estimation at court though noted
witty’ according to Paget in 1542 he was experienced in negotiating with the English
(L&P, XVII, 838), he was also experienced in troop levies in Germany (Francis I to
Tournon, 28 Sept. 1542, BnF fr. 6616, fo. 110).
73
Van der Del, 17 Aug. 1545, CSP Spain, VIII, pp. 232, 237. e Protestant
envoys in December noted that Compagni ‘qui avait faict deux voyages en cour de
la part des Ang1ais’ had already presented the same proposals which they, the Prot-
estants, had brought when they arrived at the French Court (NA, PRO 31/3/13, fo.
155, transcript). e Ferrarese ambassador reported on 14 September that the Vene-
tian Ambassador had heard ‘da uno Bartholomeo Compagno che è pur andato in
anzi e indrieto per questa pace tra queste Maestate’ that Henry VIII had proposed a
marriage between his daughter and the Duke of Vendôme (ASM, Francia, Busta 21,
fasc. 2, pp. 44–48, passage in cipher). Paget to Norfolk, 25 Aug. 1545: ‘Bartil Com-
peigne, passeng towardes Italy, spake with Madame d’Estampes but their conference
cam to none eect’ NA, SP1/206, fo. 219 (L&P, XX, ii, 209). It is likely that Paget was
being less than honest with Norfolk. ere was a connection between the Protestant
terms and those mentioned by Compagni. Compagni, like Francesco Bernardo and
Antonio Guidotti aer him, seemed to regard it as their mission to bring about peace
between France and England. See D. Potter, ‘e Treaty of Boulogne and European
diplomacy, 1549–1550,’ Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, 55, no. 131 (1982),
50–65.
412 chapter nine
Emperor to undermine them and Michel François certainly argued
that they used their inuence against a Protestant alliance in this
period whereas du Bellay used his in favour. Tournon remained at
court and may have used his crucial inuence against peace.
74
Francis I
in October had ostensibly made it clear to Granvelle that he had put
o the negotiations through the Protestants as long as possible and
much preferred the Emperor to mediate a peace than the Protestants.
75
On the other hand, Annebault later in 1546 seems to have had no
objection to a Protestant alliance. It is far more probable that now, as
in the recent past, two policies were being actively pressed by dierent
groups around the King, with the latter waiting to decide according
to the success of each.
76
In England, it may be that Gardiner was kept
in the dark about the Calais negotiations, though this seems unlikely.
He guessed that the sending of Annebault and his colleagues to Bruges
suggested that Francis ‘myndeth not ernestly with youe there, or the
Emperour meanith not ernestly with us here.’
77
Paget hinted to Sturm
that the reason for Gardiner’s mission was to get him out of the way
but this may have been by way of reassurance.
78
He also told La Planche
that Gardiner was under orders to act in accordance with advice from
74
M. François, Le Cardinal François de Tournon, pp. 201–203. Tournon’s anti-
Protestant stance is one of the themes of this book. Guidiccione, the Papal legate,
said that Tournon and Bayard constituted the King’s Council for the purposes of
interviews with the Protestants: ‘in consiglio, dove che non c’è intervenuto, salvo che
Mons. Tornone, et i1 generale Baiardo.’ See ANG, III, pp. 205, 304.
75
Francis I to Mesnage, 21 Oct. 1545, BnF fr. 17890 fo. 54.
76
Saint Mauris reported French courtiers annoyed at the departure of Annebault
for the Imperial Court, since they felt that dierences with England should have been
settled rst. It is dicult to fault their analysis; the unsettled nature of relations with
England were bound to give the Emperor the whip hand in any talks and when the
Admiral returned unsuccessful the English were more dicult to deal with than ever.
(CSP Spain, VIII, 180, Saint Mauris to Ferdinand, n.d.).
77
Henry VIII to Paget, 29 Nov. 1545. St.P. X, p. 730: ‘all which overtures We woold
have you kepe secrete to your self, without declaring the same to my lord of Win-
chestre.’ Gardiner was consistently suspicious of Protestant motives and did his best
to undermine Protestant credibility. Gardiner to Paget, 6 Nov. 1545, Muller, Letters of
Stephen Gardiner, p. 176. He recognised the ambiguity in motives which lay behind
the talks at Calais and the Admiral’s mission (letter to Paget, 4 Nov. 1545, Muller,
Letters . . . Gardiner, p. 156): ‘Nowe may you there easely she out whither the Protes-
tantes geve in dede the French King a more lightlyhwode of good conditions by ther
meanes thenne ye be pryve unto.’
78
Paget to Henry VIII, 2 Dec. 1545, St.P., X, p. 745: ‘if he wer at home, he might
peraventure devise sum meanes to pluck this practise out of our handes, and therefor
it is good to keep him yet out of the waye for a while, till our thinges here be in sum
better forwardnes.’
‘
to entreate with the sworde in hand
’
413
Paget and that he would be recalled in parallel with Annebault. Francis
thought that this was because Paget ‘ayt envie que tout vienne de son
cousté.’ At any rate, the French King ordered Annebault to return
and that Paget be given the impression this had been done on his
request.
79
Fraisse, recently returned from his success against English
troop recruitment in the Rhineland also acted as an intermediary.
e initial condence of the Protestant envoys did not last long.
Gathering at Strasbourg late in August, they crossed into France
from Metz, where they collected Bruno and his colleague, Caspar
Grammaut.
80
Of their party, Bruno and Sturm were by far the most
signicant. It was they who initiated the proposals of their colleagues
to Henry VIII and corresponded with Jacob Sturm at Strasbourg, their
command post. All ve were received in audience by Francis I the
day Baumbach and Sleidan le for England (13 September).
81
Despite
the grief caused by the recent loss of his favourite son, Orléans, the
King received them courteously. Tournon and Bayard took part in
the discussion and dealt alone with the Germans on the following
day. e talks centred on a set of proposals handed to the King by
the Protestants, now prefaced to the “Avis” of December 1545.
82
e
French ministers thought a truce unsuitable, but the Protestants made
clear their willingness to negotiate the matter of Boulogne and to
accept it temporarily in sequestration.
83
e French answer was not ready until 19th, when Tournon and
Bayard again called the Germans to court. ough few points were
directly refused, the French glossed the terms in such a way as to refuse
one proposal to ‘infeudate’ Boulogne to the young duke of Vendôme,
the rst prince of the blood, or allow the demolition of Ardres, though
they did admit, for the rst time, the possibility of compensation for
Henry’s war costs of up to 100,000 crowns. In their turn, the Protestants
made two more suggestions: peace and the renewal of the pension
should be accompanied by the marriage of Vendôme or his brother
Enghien to the Lady Mary and that the marriage of Mary Stuart to the
79
Francis I to Annebault, 25 Nov. 1545, Pariset, Francia, 10 (1982), no. 3.
80
Caspar Grammaut was a Protestant from Metz who had ed the anti-Protestant
rising there in 1542; becoming close to Johann Sturm, he was frequently used in Sch-
malkaldic diplomatic negotiations (Schmidt, Jean Sturm, p. 95).
81
Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 21 Sept. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 604.
82
NA, PRO 31/3/13, fos. 153–155.
83
Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 21 Sept. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 604.
414 chapter nine
Prince of Denmark should cement an alliance between the Danes, the
Scots, the French and the English.
84
Sturm, in his report of 21 September, describes the reaction of vari-
ous members of Francis I’s entourage. Mme d’Etampes ‘dealt sincerely
and openly with us’ but Tournon and Bayard were obstructive
85
and
in their opposition, they were backed by Papal pressure, exercised by
Girolamo da Correggio, who told the King that ‘things done by dev-
ilish hands do not last long.’
86
e inuence of Bayard on German
aairs continued into 1546,
87
but that of Chancellor Olivier and Mme
d’Etampes was probably outweighing that of Tournon and Bayard in
the King’ s mind. It has been suggested that Annebault was favourable
to peace and tipped the balance.
88
is is not conrmed by Chelius,
who drew up a list of those he did consider favourable: besides Mme
d’Etampes, Longueval and Cardinal du Bellay, there are the King and
Queen of Navarre, the Chancellor, Pierre Remon, premier président
of Rouen, and the Cardinal de Lorraine.
89
Even the Dauphin was to
realise the advantages of Protestant connections.
90
84
Ibid. Alvarotti several times reported that the marriage of Vendôme to one of
Henry’s daughters was in the air, (to Ercole II, 1and 16 Oct. 1545, ASM, Can.Est.
Francia, B. 21, fasc. 2, pp. 70–75, ibid., fasc. 3, pp. 171–173). e scheme for a Scot-
tish-Danish marriage was revived in 1546, cf. Francis I to Richer, Ribier, Lettres et
mémoires, I, pp. 606–607.
85
Pol. Corr. III, 604: ‘syncere et candide et blande nobiscum egit.’ A generous
description when compared to Chelius’ description of Tournon as ‘ein bose, listig
Katz’ – a letter to Bing, 2 Nov. 1545, NA, p. 243. is certainly conrms the hard line
taken by Tournon with the Venetian ambassador at the same time, when he told him
‘che il Re Christianissimo non e mai per fare la pace senon ha Bologna, et che non
lasciara mai la prottettione di Scotia.’ (Alvarotti to Ercole II, Amiens, 15 Sept. 1545,
ASM, Can.Est., Francia, B 21, fasc. 2, pp. 51–52, passage in cipher).
86
Alvarotti to Ercole II, 29 Oct. 1545, ASM, Can.Est., Francia, B 21, fasc. 2, pp.
138–143: ‘le cose fatte per mani diaboliche sono mai ne lunghi ne durabili.’ is is
especially valuable as the despatch of Correggio describing this audience is missing,
cf. ANG, III, no. 211.
87
Certainly until the end of July, with two isolated cases in September. Aer that,
he is replaced entirely by L’Aubespine both in the correspondence with Bassefontaine
and that with Mesnage.
88
Gaston Zeller, La réunion, pp. 81–82.
89
Chelius to Bing, 2 Nov. 1545, Hasenclever, NA, p. 244. is report was occa-
sioned by Chelius’ mission to the French Court to explain the position of the Land-
grave on Reienberg.
90
ough he was not so enthusiastic as his late brother, he was quickly to realise
the usefulness at a connection with Wurtemberg in the next year. See A. von Druffel,
Beiträge sur Reichsgeschichte, 1545–1546 4 vols (Munich, 1873–1876), I, 3, 4, 5, 16, 24,
35, 37, 40, 46, 48, 52.
‘
to entreate with the sworde in hand
’
415
Aer discussions between Mme d’Etampes and Sturm, it was
decided to send Grammaut to England to oer talks on the frontier.
Sleidan and Baumbach had already been received graciously (‘benigne
et humaniter’) at Windsor by Henry on 20 September, and aer dis-
cussions with Paget, councillors were appointed to determine the mat-
ter in the light of the news brought by Grammaut. But, though at rst
pleased with his success, Sleidan was more doubtful about the pros-
pects in early October.
91
Henry proved willing to appoint envoys but
not to consider giving up Boulogne. At any rate, Grammaut returned
with this news to France only to nd that Mary of Hungary’s envoy,
Noirthon, was at court (at the abbey of St. Fuscien near Amiens).
92
is was unwelcome news to the Protestants, since it represented an
attempt by the Emperor to out-manoeuvre them. While Noirthon was
led by Tournon into the royal presence, the Protestants were told to
talk to Bayard.
93
When full talks did begin again, it was clear that the French con-
sidered Henry’s reply inadequate. Grammaut therefore had to go back
to England,
94
only to return on 18 October with a harsher answer. A
breaking-point had thus been reached; the Protestant envoys le the
French Court and Sleidan had some bitter words to say to Paget.
95
He
stayed in England long enough, though, to hear, at an audience on 9
October, that Henry had appointed Tunstall, Paget and Tregonwell
to treat with the French.
96
e spectre of failure receded as quickly
91
Sleidan to Henry VIII, late September 1545, Baumgarten, Briefwechsel, no. 43,
St.P. X, p. 607. ere was a possibility that Francis would fail to send envoys to Calais:
‘si Sa Maiesté n’aura pas depuis Calais nouvelle de nous, qu’elle nous tienne pour
excusez.’ Cf. Baumbach and Sleidan to Paget, [7] Oct. 1545, NA, SP1/208, fo. 198
L&P, XX, ii, 560).
92
On Noirthon’s missions, cf. Charles V to the Regent of the Netherlands, 6 Aug.
1545, BnF fr. 7172, fos. 326–361, Charles V to St.Mauris and Noirthon, 2 I Sept. 1545,
ibid., fos. 377–380. ese are both copies from Besançon. Imperial correspondence
gives the impression of a determined move to outank the Protestants.
93
Sleidan to Paget, 24 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 114 (L&P, XX, ii, 649): ‘Nous sca-
vons tresbien (et il y a long temps que le scavons) que d’aultres s’en meslent, l’autho-
rité desquelz rabaisse paraventure celle de noz estatz . . . Si cecy est vray, certes noz
princes ont esté mal advisez de s’en mesler . . . Le voyage de l’Evesque de Wincesters
pardevers l’Empereur mectra noz princes en suspecon.’ Sleidan to Sturm, 12 Nov.
1545, Baumgarten, op. cit., no. 56.
94
Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, Ham, 10 Feb. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 617.
95
Sleidan to Paget, 24 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 114 (L&P, XX, ii, 649).
96
Baumbach and Sleidan to Henry VIII, 24 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 110 (L&P,
XX, ii, 647). e commission is dated 9 Oct. 1545. A corrected fair copy (NA SP1/208,
fo. 195) originally made out for irlby and Carne, has Gardiner’s name added. At this
416 chapter nine
as it had arisen and Sleidan and Baumbach le for Calais. Henry
had pressed them to work hard and that once they had ensured that
Francis would send his own envoys, the English would be sent to
Ardres. When Sturm sent his colleagues’ letter to the French Admiral,
an answer came back immediately, ordering the envoys to go to Calais
to arrange the conference. Francis would send some of his ‘wyse and
dyscret counsell’ there.
97
Paget and his colleagues were ready to leave
by the end of October.
98
e Protestants, of course, once they arrived at Calais, did their
best to persuade each side that the other had given away more than
was actually the case. is was natural to get talks started.
99
Francis I
now seemed convinced that Paget and his colleagues were prepared
to do business (‘soient en bonne volonté de faire quelque chose’) and
that Paget had full powers to direct the talks both at Calais and at the
Imperial court, certainly an exaggeration.
100
A truce, of course, had to
be arranged and aer Bruno and Sturm had suggested one to last from
the 15th to the end of November, the French agreed on condition that
the English did the same.
101
Mutual suspicion stood in the way of the
point it was probably meant for the negotiations at the Imperial Court. All the names
are crossed and those of Paget, Tunstall and Tregonwell substituted. e reference to
powers to treat for a truce is erased.
97
Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 23 Oct. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 622. Venningen,
Bruno and Sturm to Baumbach and Sleidan, 22 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 92, a con-
temporary English translation. Bruno to Sleidan, 22 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 93.
Baumbach and Sleidan to Henry VIII, 23 0ct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 118. e actual
commissioners were: the Bishop of Soissons, Pierre Remon, and Philibert Babou, sr.
de La Bourdaisière.
98
Paget to Sleidan, 28 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 143 (L&P, XX, ii, 675). Paget
had, as usual, some misgivings about the crossing, which he said he would not nor-
mally do in winter for 50,000 crowns, especially before receiving news of the French
Commissioners.
99
Sleidan told Paget that the French King had consented to Henry’ s temporary
occupation of Boulogne and was prepared to ‘faire beaucoup’ for a nal settlement.
(Baumbach and Sleidan to Henry VIII, 30 Oct. 1545, NA SP1/209, fo. 184). Sturm
informed Annebault on 4 Nov.that Henry had agreed to talks on a truce or on peace
without making preconditions (‘il ne vault avant le pourparler, estre lié ne abstrainct
de traicter de telz ou telz poinctz.’ (Pariset, ‘La France et les princes allemands,’
no. 1).
100
Francis I to Annebault, 25 Nov. 1545, Pariset, ‘La France et les princes alle-
mands,’ no. 3.
101
Pol.Corr. III, 637. e English Council, in fact, conceded a truce for the dura-
tion of the talks (letter to Cobham and Grey, Oatlands, 10 Nov. 1545, BL Harl. 283,
fo. 334). In the preparation of terms, Johann Sturm was the most active, negotiating
with the Governor of Calais, whom he declared ‘vir bonus est et studiosus una cum
uxore nostrae religionis,’ and with the Captain of Ardres on the means of getting
‘
to entreate with the sworde in hand
’
417
appointment of envoys of the highest rank. ough Annebault oered
to serve if Hertford did so, Henry’s brother-in-law was not appointed
so the scheme fell through, as did the idea of appointing Nevers to
lead the French delegation.
102
“Face” was all-important; in the view of
Sleidan and Sturm, they knew negotiators were deceptive but results
were what mattered.
103
English and German sources reveal the crucial importance of the secret
negotiations conducted by the Protestants in France, both directly and
through La Planche and Fraisse. Fraisse had le Liège (where he had
been working against the English troop levy) on 15 November and La
Planche his post at Mézières a little earlier.
104
e latter was at Ardres
by the evening of 20 November with letters of credence from Longueval
to Bruno and a commission to say that Francis was being worked on
by him and Mme. d’Etampes; he added that the King would prefer the
peace to be negotiated by the Protestants than by the Emperor. Henry’s
inclusion in an alliance of France and the Protestant estates was to be
agreed and he was to be sounded out on this without the knowledge of
Annebault’s mission to the Emperor.
105
Astonishingly, the Protestant
idea of sequestration, so opposed by Tournon, was accepted in these
proposals, as was that for the marriage of Mary Stuart to Edward.
is surely shows the unocial nature of their origin. ey were read
and discussed with La Planche on the night of 20th and the next day
round the obstinacy of both Kings about Boulogne. He did show a degree of naiveté,
however, in supposing that a meeting of the two Kings could settle the issue. To
the earlier proposal for marriage between the Lady Mary and the Duke of Vendôme
was now added one for Edward to Jeanne d’Albret. (Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm,
13 Nov. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 657: Sturm thought it ‘non nimis durum puellae pudicae’
to wait ve years or so for Edward’s maturity, for Marguerite de France was still
uncertain about her match at the age of 22. (e Lady Mary’s matrimonial prospects
were even worse.)
102
Paget to Sleidan, Windsor, 2 Nov. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 631. Paget to Sleidan,
11 Nov. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 635. Sleidan to Sturm, 12 Nov. 1545, Baumgarten op. cit.,
no. 56. Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 13 Nov. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, 637.
103
Sleidan to Sturm, 12 Nov. 1545, ibid.: ‘Technas illorum et artes intelligimus et
cupimus quamprimum hinc expediri’ Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 13 Nov. 1545,
ibid.: and Johann Sturm, ‘vides, quo in loco nostra actio constat. nec condere nec
desperare possumus.’
104
Chelius to Bing, 2 Nov. 1545, Hasenclever, NA, p. 244.
105
‘er lieber wolt, das durch uns dann durch die keiserischen der friden gemacht
wurd.’ Here we have the counterpart to Henry’s instruction to Paget to keep things
from Gardiner. See Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, from Villers-Cotterets, 10 Dec.
1545, Pol.Corr. III, p. 680.
418 chapter nine
Fraisse arrived to conrm them and bringing letters from du Bellay
encouraging Sturm and Sleidan in their eorts.
106
Bruno and Sturm hinted at the secret commission when, on 22nd,
they brought letters from Paget to Longueval which renewed the con-
tacts between the two men. Sturm put forward the French proposals
when he saw Paget at Calais on 23rd and says that at their rst meet-
ing, Paget was optimistic (‘das Paget ein gute honung darzu hett’),
though the secretary admitted that he would have to write for fresh
instructions. Later, though, in Cobham’s presence, he raised objections
to details.
107
Paget, in his own despatch, characteristically omits these
details, and in a verbatim report, emphasises his rm, sceptical line.
He does, however, reveal something about the secret diplomacy in
Sturm’s condential words:
And though I make thoverture to you as of myself, to see what you will
saye to it, yet the trueth is that Madame d’Estampes, Monsr le Doulphin
and Monsr Longuevale, which labour to set thAdmirall besides the
cushyn, and desyre (specially Madame d’Estampes) thonour of making
this peax, have willed me to open the same.
ough Paget aected to be shocked by the notion that the English
should retain Boulogne only as a guarantee and made no mention of
the idea of keeping Mary Stuart in Scotland until she came of age,
108
Sturm took away from this meeting a more optimistic view than Paget
sent to his master, saying that Paget had told him he would truly fur-
ther the cause with Henry.
109
e formal negotiations, in tents pitched on each side of the fron-
tier between Guînes and Ardres on 26th (Paget gives the date as
106
‘und was La Planche mit mir geredt hatte, hat Fraxineus bestetigt,’ 22 Nov. 1545,
Baumgarten, Sleidan’s Briefwechsel, no. 57. Du Bellay was not at court during this
period and so was not directly involved in the negotiations.
107
Both Paget and Sturm le detailed descriptions of this meeting. Cf. Johann
Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 10 Dec. 1545, Pol.Corr. III, p. 681.
108
Paget portrayed himself as rather o-hand with the German, but he did sense
the importance of Sturm’s secret commissions ‘howbeit, asfar as I perceyve, if any
thing cum to passe, it is like to be by this Sturmius private practises, who is in good
credit with the French King, and others about Him, such as be not the great favour-
ers of the Bishop of Rome, wherof both thAdmirall, Bayard, and Tournon ar chief
capitains.’ (Paget to Henry VIII, 23 Nov. 1545, St.P., X, p. 712, 714).
109
Johann Sturm to Jakob Sturm, 10 Dec. 1545, Po1.Corr. III, p. 681: ‘Da hab ich
ine uf das höchst ermanet und bin also guter hoffnung vom im gangen, das er die sach
treulich fürdren wurd bei seinem könig.’
‘
to entreate with the sworde in hand
’
419
25th), started while skirmishes went on between the two sides, one
in particular on the coast at Wimille.
110
e talks at rst produced no
resu1t, except for a conversation between Paget, Remon and Philibert
Babou.
111
e French conrmed Sturm’s hopes about Mme d’Etampes,
while Sturm aerwards even suggested that she and Longueval might
come to Calais. But the problem was that the French commissioners
seemed to know nothing of the unocial proposals put forward by the
Protestants, at which Paget professed to be amused.
112
Nor, in the light
of the Reienberg débacle of the previous summer, was he impressed
by Sturm’s oer for Philip of Hesse to provide a guarantee.
113
e next days were taken up by separate talks by Bruno and Sturm
with the French (on 27th) and with Paget (on 28th). Francis’ high
hopes for peace at this time may reect favourable reports from
Calais.
114
La Planche probably le for court on 30th to obtain a copy
of the proposals signed by Francis himself, and, when Sturm heard
from Fraisse that La Planche had returned, he assumed success and
went to Paget to ask him if the terms were acceptable; the Secretary’s
answer was reported as: yes, as long as Francis’ signature had been
110
Described in a letter from Ardres, 28 Nov. 1545, Leblanc, ‘Lettres à Gui de Mau-
giron,’ 1893, p. 30.
111
Accounts cf this meeting may be seen in Pol.Corr. III, pp. 682–683, English
Commissioners to Henry VIII, 27 Nov. 1545, St.P. X, p. 723f. e English date the
meeting on 25th, the Germans on 26th. Elis Gruydd descibes the two tents of the
parties on each side of the frontier (Davies, ‘Boulogne and Calais from 1545 to 1550,’
p. 38). See also the ‘Harangue des deputez des Princes et Estatz Protestans aux Ambas-
sadeurs assemblés pour traicter la paix entre les Roys de France et d’Ang1eterre l’an
1545.’ BnF fr. 23515, piece 5 (transcript PRO 31/3/13, fos. 149–150). Aer the meet-
ing, La Planche went to court to report and received an instruction of 27th which
he brought to Ardres on 30th. is is lost, but notice of it is preserved in a French
instruction of early December, PRO 31/3/14, fo. 261v.
112
‘In good faith,’ quod I, ‘I laughed in my sleve to here you talke all togidre
frenchely and yet I laughed more aerward when the Frenchmen sayd they never had
herd of the matter before.’ Paget to Petre, 27 Nov. 1545, NA SP1/211, fo. 90v (L&P,
XX, ii, 881).
113
‘Now,’ quod he, ‘rex Galliae habet animum exeleratum et recens memoria Bul-
lonie pendet adhuc in animo but if this conclusion were ones taken and a peax made,
our prynces and specially the Lansgrave woold never ceasse til he had obteyned of the
French King a clene renunciacion of Bullen for sum little contribucion of ayde and
entryng in to a straiter amitie.’ ‘e Lansgrave,’ quod. I, ‘hath served the King of late
very il for his army of Almaynes.’ Paget to Petre, 27 Nov. 1545, NA SP1/211, fo. 91r
(L&P, XX, ii, 881).
114
Annebault to Mesnage, 28 Nov. 1545, BnF fr. 17890, fo. 154: ‘Il m’a ce matin
apporté lettres du Roy et, par ce que ledict Seigneur me mande, il semble qu’il y ait
bonne esperance que ses depputez feront quelque chose de bon du costé de Calais.’