Potter David. Henry VIII and Francis I
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
440 chapter ten
As an initial negotiating position, it looks as though Francis was now
seriously committed to negotiations – ultimately he was prepared to
pay the vast sum of 2 million écus over eight years – but still not pre-
pared to compromise on Boulogne. e imperial ambassador had a
accurate idea of the French negotiating position and reported that ‘as
these conditions are acceptable to the English king, it is assumed that
he will accept them.’
51
e demands of prestige required secrecy on both sides. Paget and
Lisle, who were taking the lead on the English side, therefore decided
that, in the light of Annebault’s delay and with Monluc only at Ardres,
Lisle should return to the camp to await Hertford while Paget remained
at Guînes, on the pretext of the King’s military aairs.
52
is sepa-
ration, however, was later to cause some complications. Preliminary
exploratory talks between Paget and Monluc delayed the rst meeting
until 6 May. e problem was that Annebault was unwilling to risk his
reputation and wished to come only for the nal meetings. Paget, how-
ever, would not agree and demanded the Admiral’s presence. Monluc
nally proposed an agenda: the gure for the recompense of Boulogne,
the position of Scotland, and the amount of the county of Boulogne
to be kept as a guarantee by the English.
53
Paget occupied the rest of
his time in clarifying his instructions and establishing clear authority
for a second line of articles to be put to the French on their inevitable
of the life pension of 100,000 écus p.a., of which 142,104 écus would be due on the
rst of May, the King refused to pay this as it was accumulated during the war ‘car
il seroit bien estrange qu’une pension causee pour entretenement d’amitié qui n’a
debte ny obligation precedente, fust payee à un ennemy durant le temps de la guerre.’
Francis was reluctant, too, to pay the 11 ½ years arrears for the salt – 115,000 – due
under the Treaty of 1527. Nevertheless, if agreement could not be reached in any other
way, Francis agreed to pay the 142,000 and the 115,000 with another 300,000 for the
expenses of English fortications at Boulogne. In total, this was 1,551,841 écus. e
rest of the instruction is concerned with the details of how the money was to be paid,
how the English were to hold Boulogne during its temporary occupation, and with the
King’s obligation to continue the life pension. Strangely, Scotland is hardly mentioned
at this stage, except to say that it was to be comprehended ‘sans prejudice.’
51
Saint-Mauris to commendatore of Leon, 1 May 1546, AN K 1486, no. 63 (micro-
lm): ‘come les dictes conditions sont à l’advantage de l’Anglois, l’on presume qu’il
les acceptera.’
52
Lisle and Paget to Henry VIII, 21 April 1546, NA SP1/217, fo. 51 (L&P, XXI, i,
639); Monluc to Paget, 22 April 1546, SP1/217, fo. 58r), excusing the slowness of the
French communication with their court to Paget ‘comme celluy qui scavez la distance
qui peult avoir entre cy [et] Montargis’ (L&P, XXI, i, 654); Lisle to Paget, 23 April
1546, L&P, XXI, i, 622.
53
Paget to Henry VIII, 24 April 1546, St.P. XI, p. 111.
the admirals
’
peace 441
rejection of the rst.
54
Meanwhile, messengers – Saint Germain and La
Touche – sped back to the French Court.
55
Aer another interview with Annebault, Bernardo saw Paget on 30
April and told him that the Admiral now wanted the meeting on the
Boulogne frontier in order to dispel English fears of his re-victualling
Ardres (he would require nine or ten carts plus pack-horses for his
suite).
56
e English would have none of this and Paget’s patience had
already worn thin.
57
By 1 May, the English had prepared a second set
of oers for Henry’s approval. e French were to re-commence pay-
ments due under the treaties and to pay the arrears in full, half imme-
diately and the rest at intervals. On the payment of all the war expenses
claimed by the English, Boulogne was to be surrendered, but until then
they were to enjoy peaceful possession. e inclusion of Scotland was
to be made dependant on the handing over of Mary Stuart.
58
Henry
assented to these terms but grumbled about including the Scots; only
realism brought him to agree, should the French insist.
59
54
Li.sle and Paget to Petre, 30 April 1546, NA SP1/217, fo. 139, Paget’s hand (L&P,
XXI, i, 711); Paget to Petre, 1 May 1546, NA SP1/217, fo. 153 (L&P, XXI, i, 724). In
these negotiations, in fact, Paget is seen at his best, busying himself with the details
of safe-conducts, requesting clarication of unclear points in his instructions, giving
advice to his fellow secretary, Petre, and reecting on the general situation.
55
Alvarotti was told by the Cardinal of Ferrara on 5 May that M. de Saint Germain,
who had gone with Annebault as far as Montreuil, had returned. Annebault had sent
Monluc to Calais ‘a dire all’ Armiraglio d’Inghilterra ch’egli era quivi, et che li faceva
intendere che se Sua Excellentia non havea commissione di rendere Bologna et volere
che Scocesi fossero compresi per confederati in questa pace, che non accadea che loro
si vedissero.’ Annebault had since sent La Touche to say that Lisle ‘li mando a dire per
Monsignor de Monluch che S. Ex. non guardasse a questo, ma che so vedissero pur
che sperava non al partiriano da uno, se non ben satisfatto l’uno dell’altro. Monsignor
de Monluch volse stuccicarlo per cavare qualche cosa, ma non fu mai remedio, et in
ne S.Ex. li disse, noi parleremo insieme, et io diro a. S.Ex. quanto io porto et vengo in
commissione dal mio Re.’ (Alvarotti to Ercole II, Melun, 5 May 1546, ASM, Francia,
B 22, fasc. 3, p. 131 (deciph.).
56
Lisle, Paget and Wotton to Henry VIII, 30 April 1546, St.P. XI, p. 120.
57
Clearly, Paget felt considerable irritation at this stage by the traditional delays
and approaches which preceded negotiations in the 16th century. ‘had it not bene that
we gret personages have sum tyme gretter regard to our pryvat reputacions then to
the avauncement of the matter which we have in hand, the French Admyral and we
had mette by this.’ While both sides quibbled about commissions ‘the matter passith
little forward and the tyme moche away.’ (Paget to Petre, 30 April 1546, NA SP1/217,
fo. 140r). He repeated the point in chastising Lisle for his withdrawal to ght French
ships in the Channel. ‘I woold wish that when the K.M. is to be served, every man
woold leve apart his own private reputacion” (NA SP1/218, fo. 80v).
58
St.P., XI, p. 124; Paget to Henry VIII, 1 May 1546, St.P., XI, pp. 122–125.
59
Council to Paget, 2 May 1546, St.P., XI, pp. 135–136.
442 chapter ten
ough both sides were by now anxious to get talks going, for fear
of another failure, the French were still intensely suspicious. Cardinal
Ippolito suspected that the negotiations were intended by the English
to gain time to complete the harbour at Ambleteuse.
60
Tournon was of
much the same mind and told the Venetian ambassador on 6th that
peace was impossible without the restitution of Boulogne. He seemed
disturbed by Scepperus’ mission to England.
61
e Papal Nuncio,
though, thought peace assured if the French oered enough money.
62
e Admiral was naturally anxious to avoid another failure, having
committed his prestige; the safe conducts were expedited at his request
and the dicult question of a truce put o.
63
Haggling over Terms
When the six commissioners and Monluc met on 6 May, in a tent in
the same eld as the previous November (near Balinghem), the usual
process of making preposterous demands and then descending step
by step began. At Lisle’s demand for 8 million écus as the price for
Boulogne, the French professed incredulity; all Christendom could not
gather such a sum! Of course, neither side accepted the other’s propos-
als, especially as the French still professed to be unable to give way on
Boulogne. However, by a process of hard bargaining the English nan-
cial demands were beaten down to 3 millions from 8 and the English
suggested the delivery of Mary Stuart as a condition for the inclusion
of Scotland. As Annebault claimed to have no power to increase his
oer by more than 50,000 crowns, deadlock was reached and both
sides agreed to consult their masters.
64
60
Alvarotti to Ercole II, 5 May 1546, ASM, Francia, B 22, fasc. 3, fo. 131v.
61
Alvarotti to Ercole II, Melun, 6 May 1546, ASM, Francia, B 22, fasc. 3, fo. 139
(deciph.); M. François, Le Cardinal de Tournon, pp. 203–204.
62
J. de Vega to Charles V, 30 April 1546, CSP Spain, VIII, no. 253.
63
e Admiral said ‘that he sawe thabstinence could not be parfaicted in due ordre
without tract of tyme,’ NA SP1/217, fo. 175 (Lisle, Paget and Wotton to Henry VIII,
Guînes, 4 May 1546). An English safe-conduct was dated 30 April but not deliv-
ered. For the English safe-conduct (copy) and the original of the French signed by
Annebault, Remon and Bochetel, 2 May 1546 – for 300 persons and for 30 days,
cf. Anglesey MSS, box 1, fo. 21 (no. 11), fos. 29–30 (no. 16), fos. 31–32 (no. 17). e
French safe-conduct was renewed on 30 May for 4 days, ibid., fos. 24–25 (no. 13).
64
Lisle, Paget and Wotton to Henry VIII, Guînes, 6 May 1546, St.P. XI, pp. 127–
134. An argument took place about whether the Scots were included in the Peace
of Crépy: the English, technically correct, said they were not, Annebault that they
the admirals
’
peace 443
e English commissioners estimated that the French were likely to
increase, their oers by 5 or 600,000 cr. at the most for war expenses
and would probably ‘patche up sum blinde couvenant’ for the Scots.
Meanwhile Bernardo tried to nd out from Annebault whether the
French would up their oer to 2 millions and Lisle warned Monluc
that he would have to put to sea to combat the French eet rumoured
to be in the Channel.
65
Paget was privately depressed, since he thought
another breakdown imminent and considered peace to be essential
for both sides.
66
His continual stressing of the need for peace at this
time certainly bears out a remark made by him to Odet de Selve a
year later that he had been the principal cause of Henry’s promise to
restore Boulogne and that he had maintained this against both King
and Council when no one else had dared to do so.
67
Gardiner was
probably lukewarm to the peace and probably Lisle was none too anx-
ious to be associated with it.
68
were by the Emperor’s verbal promise. However, as the English pointed out, Paniter’s
mission to Flanders early in 1545 had tried to obtain conrmation of this and failed.
(Paniter to Morette and Mesnage, 16 Feb. 1545, BnF fr. 17889, fo. 42, also instructions
to Mesnage, ibid, fos. 2–4). On the English proposition of the delivery of Mary Stuart
as the condition for Scottish comprehension, the French submitted certain articles for
eecting this. ese were sent by Paget to Petre on 7th; the Scots were to be compre-
hended without mention of the Treaty of Westminster (1543), the French to recom-
mend Mary’s marriage to Edward on her reaching marriageable age. Alternatively,
the treaty should state that the Treaties of neither country with Scotland should be
prejudiced. St.P., XI, p. 136.
65
Lisle to the Council, Guînes, 6 May 1546, NA SP1/217, fo. 192r–v (L&P, XXI,
i, 751).
66
E.g.: ‘you shall perceyve how untoward this peax is. What remedy? As god will,
so be it; al is for the best. I pray you procure our answer with diligence which, foras-
moche it shalbe at our next meting eyther the conclusion of the peax at this tyme or
thentry to a mortell warre and a dawngerous for one of the partes’ (Paget to Petre, 6
May 1546, NA SP1/217, fo. 189r (L&P, XXI, i, 750). When he received a rebuke from
the King for mentioning peace too oen in his letters, he added: ‘I see, and so doth
all His Majesties Counsail, as both I and you have herd them say, when they ar togid-
ers, the contynuaunce of the warre, for the charge therof so incertain, the wayes and
meanes for the relief therof so strait, and at such en ebbe, and thende in this cace of
the warre so daungerous, as my hart bledith in my body, when I think of it.’ (Paget
to Petre, 6 May 1546, St.P. XI, P. 139; Paget sent another letter to Petre, to be shown
only to the King, which indicates his anxiety about royal favour, NA SP1/218, fo. 17r.)
For a French safe-conduct for a messenger to England., dated 7 May and addressed to
Baron de la Garde, Anglesey MSS, box 1, fo. 28 (no. 15).
67
Selve to Montmorency, 29 Aug. 1547, Lefebvre-Pontalis, Correspondance de
Selve, no. 217.
68
Gardiner (as we have seen) was not totally opposed to peace with France and in
November 1545 had recognised that it was necessary ‘to eskape the thrawldom’ of depend-
ence on men like Reienberg and, by implication, ‘our wantes at hom.’ He considered
444 chapter ten
Meanwhile Monluc had le for the French Court on 7th and arrived
at Fontainebleau with a letter of credence from Annebault in the early
morning of 9th. Alvarotti’s narrative indicates the urgency of the
matter: the King was still in bed so he went to Cardinal de Tournon
who immediately called together the conseil étroit to enable Monluc
to declare his message. When the King’s business time approached,
Tournon led Monluc into his chamber to present his credence.
Aerwards, the King went to mass with the Cardinal of Ferrara and
Monluc returned to the Council with Tournon where they remained
discussing the report through dinner:
which Council remained in session until the dinner hour, with food
brought to the table of the lord Cardinal de Tournon, and went on an
hour longer than that . . .
en Monluc went to give his news to Mme. d’Etampes before return-
ing to Melun to take a boat for Paris on his return journey. Alvarotti
could not nd out what message he had been given to take back. e
secretary of the Venetian ambassador approached Monluc and was told
that he had been sworn to silence; all he could get out of Monluc’s sec-
retary was that the French had commission to oer 1,800,000 crowns
on condition that Boulogne was returned immediately.
69
e Cardinal
of Ferrara, aer all in a position to know the King’s mind, reported to
his brother that:
a good conclusion can be expected from all this nor is there any doubt
that the King is ready to agree to more than reasonable terms. Already
they are in agreement about the place where the payment is to be made
such that Venice being proposed, because the English showed they were
content and if not would enter into further wrangles, it seems to me that
only a good ending can be expected.
70
English honour assured by her having held Boulogne without help and feared to jeopard-
ise that honour by further war (letter to Paget, 7 Nov. 1545, Muller, Letters . . . Gardiner,
p. 180). However, he tended to support the Habsburg alliance as England’s ‘stay.’ In
1547, advising Somerset, he wrote: ‘For of Fraunce it must be taken for a rule, they be
so wanton they cannot do wel lenger then they see how they may be scourged if they
do not.’ (ibid., no. 117, p. 267).
69
Alvarotti to Ercole II, Melun, 9 May 1546, ASM, Francia, B 22, fasc. 3, fos.
163r–164r (deciph.): ‘il qual Consiglio stette adunato tanto che essendo venuta l’hora
del disnare et essendo stata portata la vivandia in tavola del prefatto Signor Cardinale
di Tornone, essa vi stette piu di una grossa hora innanzi.’
70
Cardinal of Ferrara to Ercole II, Fontainebleau, 9 May 1546, ASM, Casa e Stato,
carteggio tre principi Estensi, B 60/147: ‘ne possa seguir buona conclusione, nè dubito
punto che’l Re per questo sia per restar di condescendere à cose piu che ragionevoli.
the admirals
’
peace 445
Monluc was back at Calais on 12th and found a situation, indeed,
in some turmoil. He had brought a message from Annebault regret-
ting the appearance of the French galleys which had led Lisle to take
to sea to clear the Channel. Bernardo had been disturbed by Lisle’s
departure and brought an order from Annebault that his ships should
retire if Lisle would do the same ‘for the tyme.’
71
Paget passed on the
message to Lisle, who was then with his ship, the Pansy o the Downs.
Lisle replied by a letter in his own ‘raggyd hand’ that, had it not been
for the weather, he would have given the French a good beating; as it
was, they had had to retire. He promised to be back on 11th.
72
Paget’s
honourable words about Lisle soon turned to anger and irritation,
however, when the latter failed to turn up. e Admiral’s excuse of
contrary winds may have been true, but Lisle was at this time showing
such reluctance to take part in the negotiations that it must be sup-
posed that he had little wish to see them succeed until he knew which
way the King’s mind was going.
73
Paget had further cause for worry
in that Annebault was refusing to conclude the negotiations without
Lisle and this seems to have convinced Lisle, who was back in Calais
by 13th.
74
Et gia sono d’accordo del luogo dove far il deposito, parcio che essendosi proposto
Vinegia, perche Inglesi mostrino di contentarsene, si che senon vi entr’altro garbu-
glio, non mi par che se ne possa senon sperar buon ne.’
Another courier had arrived
from Annebault aer the departure of Monluc. is reported that the English would
have their answer from Henry on 11th and proposed a meeting for 12th ‘si puo anco
giudicare che questa pratica non anderà molto in lungo et tanto piu che, come V. Ex.
sa ben, Monsignore Ammirag1io non sta molto volontieri fuora, et che questo Re
anco non ha piacer di mantenir le pratiche con molte parole.’ is judgement of the
Admiral is very close to Paget’s.
71
Paget to Lisle, 10 May 1546, NA SP1/218, fo. 36 (L&P, XXI, i, 784), sent as
a cover to Paget’s letter to Petre, same date, St.P., XI, pp. 144–145, in which Paget
included intentionally attering remarks about Lisle.
72
Lisle to Paget, [10] May 1546, dated ‘this mondaye nyght,’ orig. hol., Anglesey
MSS, box 1, fos. 13–14 (no. 5): ‘Sir, I thanke you for that yt pleased you to tarye for me
and allso for your kyde writing to Mister Peters towcheng me. us I leave to trouble
you, trusting to be with you to morro oon tyme of daye lest that my absens . . . be some
occation of thadmyrale to thinke more then nedithe.’ e matter is minor and Lisle
can soon be back again.
73
D. Loades, John Dudley, pp. 77–79, however, argues for the positive role that Lisle
played in the negotiations and, indeed, the credit he gained from their success.
74
Paget rebuked his colleague frankly. Rather than stay in the vain hope of revenge
against the French, he should have returned to full his commission, from which he
had not yet been recalled. ‘this maner departing from thexecucion of your charge
semyth in my poore judgement (undre correction) nother honorable for the Kinges
Majeste nor yet for your lordship . . .’ Paget to Lisle, Guînes, 12 May 1546, NA SP1/218,
fo. 80, hol. (L&P, XXI, i, 806). is was sent by Lisle to Petre with a spirited defence
446 chapter ten
For the meeting which took place at noon on 14 May, the English
had received a clarication of their instructions which demonstrates
the overriding importance of Boulogne to the King and his lack of
real concern about the pension. e French were to be told that, as
they seemed to desire Boulogne so little as to oer only 200,000 for
it, Henry would give a good deal more to keep it. He would remit all
the war expenses and arrears in return for possession of the county
of Boulogne as far south as Hardelot. If this were unacceptable, then
the perpetual pension would be remitted. If this were to be rejected,
the French must be told to pay 2 millions for it and leave the County
north of the Liane in Henry’s hands until it were paid with resump-
tion of the pension. Should even this be impossible, then the English
were authorised to conclude a truce for two years.
75
A series of articles
was drawn up by which the French would pay, for the arrears and
expenses in fortifying Boulogne, 2 millions in gold to be paid by 1554.
Where the English claimed that Francis I owed them 512,000 écus by
the Treaty of 1529, this was to be remitted to arbitrators within two
months. Should these say yes, then the French would pay, if no, then
the matter would be taken to four doctors of Padua or any other neu-
tral university. e life and perpetual pensions were to be continued,
Boulogne north of the Liane was to remain in English hands until the
repayment, the Scots were to be included without prejudice to other
treaties and were to be immune from invasion without new cause, the
Emperor was to be included by both sides, and a proposal was made
that the Dauphin should visit England.
76
It thus looks as though the
real problem which arose at the rst meeting had been dealt with by
reducing the gure demanded to 2 millions and dressing it up with
other schemes which were bound to be unacceptable to the French. In
and a claim that Paget ‘dothe me a little wronge.’ Lisle had been commanded by the
King’s letters to pursue the French, whose action had to be revenged (Lisle to Petre,
Calais, 13 May 1546, SP1/218, fo. 98r–v (L&P XXI, i, 816).
75
Henry VIII to Lisle, Paget and Wotton, 9 May 1546, St.P. XI, p. 140.
76
St.P., XI, p. 163. ere are two copies, in a French secretary’s hand, of these pro-
posals in BL Cotton, Calig. E III, fos. 112–113, 114. e rst is underlined and anno-
tated in the margin in an English hand. e notes ‘le roy s’accorde’ are to be found
against the articles for the 512,000 cr. and the inclusion of the Scots. Some notes about
the proposed frontier are now unreadable. e Emperor is to be included as under
the terms of the Anglo-Imperial Treaty. In addition, no further fortication is to be
commenced (these last two articles are added in the English hand). Memoranda are
added by the English concerning the exchange-rate of English against French crowns
and the manner of the eventual French take-over of Boulogne.
the admirals
’
peace 447
the other major matter – the inclusion of the Scots – Henry showed
he strongly opposed to the French terms. However, Paget considered
this latest oer as ‘godly honorable large for the Frenchmens honour
and prot and a meanes to take all quereles away.’
77
e meeting of 15th was a great success as far as the personal rela-
tions of Lisle and Annebault were concerned. e two men tramped
around the eld talking over the naval campaign of the previous sum-
mer and agreeing on their relief the result had not been a decisive
battle. Annebault suggested that, once God had changed the minds of
their masters they would be allies for the rest of their lives and their
joint eets could outface any other prince. e French Admiral treated
his opposite number to a display of falconry by M. de Canaples.
78
In recommending the proposals of 14th–15th to their King, the
English commissioners pointed out several advantages. Lisle thought
that they could be used to gain time and pointed out, rather cryp-
tically, that, when the time came for repayment, either the French
would not be able to nd the money or ‘there wilbe some naughty
money or broken crowns or some soche matter, you know what I
meane.’ Apparently, Remon pointed out as much to Paget. Once peace
were made, the French were sure to nd themselves at war with the
Emperor.
79
Even the article about arbitration could be used to advan-
tage ‘for the grement uppon the choyse of the doctors and the tyme
of theyr determynation I think wilbe dyfuse and occupye moche tyme
and allways to be a bukler to refuse the reste.’
80
Paget put the matter
more succinctly by quoting the old story of Louis XI and his favourite
ass, which a condemned man agreed to teach to talk in return for his
life. Why worry, he replies to his friends; the ass might die, the King
might die or the ass might talk.
81
All these comments, of course, were
designed to convince the King that, though he agreed to give up his
conquest at a set date, there was still a good chance of keeping it.
On the French side, Monluc seems to have made another rapid
journey back to court, starting on 16th, the day he saw Paget about
77
Paget to Petre, Guînes, 13 May 1546, NA SP1/218, fo. 100r (L&P, XXI, i, 817).
78
Lisle reported a favourable impression of Annebault: ‘the man ys a right proper
man and very gentill and well spoken, and very fyne in his aparell.’ Henceforth they
were to conduct something of a private dialogue (Lisle to Petre, Guînes, 15 Mar 1546,
NA SP1/218, fos. 143–144 (L&P, XXI, i, 837).
79
Lisle to Petre, 15 May 1546, NA SP1/218, fo. 144r–v (L&P, XXI, i, 837).
80
Lisle to Petre, 15 May 1546, NA SP1/218, fo. 145r–v (L&P, XXI, i, 838).
81
Paget to Petre, 15 May 1546, NA SP1/218, fo. 150–51r (L&P, XXI, i, 840).
448 chapter ten
the boundaries and the fortications at Ambleteuse,
82
and returning
on 18th. Between these two dates took place some of the most inter-
esting meetings of the negotiations. Annebault had already sent back
one messenger who arrived at Fontainebleau and went to see the King
at his hunting retreat nearby. ere, the King called in Tournon and
Bayard for advice and the messenger was sped on his way.
83
Shortly
aerwards, however, Monluc must have arrived at court on 17th with
his news of the meeting of 5th. In the evening, he sent a postilion to
the Venetian Ambassador at Melun to say that he was about to leave
Fontainebleau and that, if the ambassador had a boat ready for him
on the Seine at 1 a.m., he would give him an account of the negotia-
tions. e ambassador warned Alvarotti and they were both there at
midnight but, seeing he would not come, they went to bed leaving the
Venetian’s servant to wait. When Monluc eventually did arrive, late,
at 2 a.m., he told the Venetian that he was unable to say as much as
he would have liked as the King had commanded him to secrecy. He
did, however, mention Lisle’s naval activities and the French suspicion
that they were being misled. e commissioners had met all day on
Friday 14th, disputing mainly two articles, one of which was about
the amount of money; on all this they had been unable, yet again,
to agree:
Monluc does not say how much, but because he says he had taken letters
from the Admiral to lord Cardinal de Tournon and to Bayard that they
should persuade His Majesty not to stick over money, especially as it
will not be lacking, and the fortied territory of Boulogne when regained
would be worth more the seven millions in gold.
ese (presumably Bayard and Tournon) had persuaded the King
to agree to pay the 500,000 debt plus the private arrears and that, at
2 millions for Boulogne, they had got a good bargain; if the arrears
and damages amounted to 1,500,000, an extra 500,000 for Boulogne
was good value (the actual proportions were somewhat dierent). e
other article in dispute had been that of Scotland. e English had
wished the inclusion to be worded in such terms that it would have
been meaningless. Other than that he could say no more.
82
Paget to Petre, 18 May 1546, St.P. XI, p. 667.
83
Alvarotti to Ercole II, Melun, 17 May 1546, ASM, Francia B 22, fasc. 3, fo. 187r
(deciph.).
the admirals
’
peace 449
My lord Admiral writes to His Majesty that the English Admiral seems
of good mind and well disposed but that the negotiations have very
much cooled since the rst meeting.
On the day aer the meeting, Monluc had met Bernardo alone and had
agreed certain articles concerning the talks of the day before, showing
them to Lisle and Annebault, both of whom thought they were good.
Annebault sent Monluc with his copy to Fontainebleau. ere, the
King, who was with Tournon and Bayard, resolved to send him back
to conclude on the basis at these terms. At this point, Monluc thought
that, if the English government agreed, peace would be achieved within
eight or ten days.
84
When, aer dinner the next day, Alvarotti went to
ask the Cardinal of Ferrara about all this, the latter conrmed it all and
said there was nothing else he could add.
85
e meeting xed for four days hence was delayed, much to the
resentment of the French, who had their master’s answer by 18th, when
Monluc returned. e English Council replied on 17th with Henry’s
general agreement to the plans put forward in the latest round, though
stipulating care to avoid all trouble later. He wished to get more details
about the boundary and insisted on a line which would make the har-
bour at Boulogne tenable.
86
In fact, the boundary problem was to be
the most dicult from now on.
Monluc had already indicated on 15th that the French would like
to take as their boundary the source of the Liane which would enable
them to get to Ardres an their own land. As it was, their territory
was severely squeezed between the Emperor’s lands and the English
84
Alvarotti to Ercole II, Melun, 18 May 1546, ASM, Francia, B 22. fasc. 3, fos.
193–194 (deciph.): ‘il che dette gran dubbio ch’ei non havesse ucellato li Francesi, et
non volesse piu tornare, o vero tornando non mutasse lingua, et proposito non si sa
se andasse chiamato dal suo Re, o vero per propria satisfattione.’ ‘detto Monluc non
disse la quantita, ma perche disse che havea portato lettere di Monsignor Almiraglio
al Signor Cardinale Tornone et à Baiardo che dovessero suadere Sua Maestà a non
la guardare in denari, si perche non le mancariano, si anco perche sul Territorio di
Bologna vi trano fortifatti da Inglesi che importavano piu di vii millioni d’oro.’ ‘scrisse
Monsignor Almiraglio a Sua Maestà Christianissima che l’Almiraglio Inglese li pareva
che fusse di buon animo et ben disposto, ma che il negocio era molto piu rireddato
del primo abbocamento.’
85
Alvarotti to Ercole II Melun, 18 May 1546 (no. 2), ASM, Francia, B 22, fasc. 3,
fo. 202r (deciph.).
86
Council to Lisle, Paget and Wotton, 17 May 1546, St.P. XI, pp. 165–166. On
the part the engineer John Rogers played in preparing the plans for these boundary
negotiations, see Shelby, John Rogers, pp. 94–101.