A.D.1360. palities, conceived that it would be an advantage to him to form an alliance with the descendants of St. Louis. He therefore demanded the hand of King John's third daughter Isabella in marriage for his son John Galeazzo,1 promising to pay 600,000 florins of gold on the marriage taking place. The people of France were indignant at what they considered a mercenary bargain; but the offer was accepted, the money was paid, and the marriage took place about the 8th of October.2 Hostages for the rest. Treaty signed. The Italian gold was not sufficient, however, to pay the whole of the ransom, and it was necessary to find hostages for the payment of the remainder. These were, the King's brother the Duke of Orleans; his second and third sons whom he now created Dukes of Anjou and Berri; the Counts of Alençon, Saint Pol, Harcourt, Auvergne; Guy of Blois and other nobles; four citizens of Paris and two from each of the eighteen principal towns of the kingdom. At last all was in readiness, and the King of England landed at Boulogne on the 9th of October in order to be present at the formal release of his royal prisoner. A fortnight was passed in festivities, and in finally settling and signing the treaty of peace and other necessary documents. In a formal deed, dated the 24th of October, Edward again agreed to renounce, among other claims on France, all pretensions to the crown and kingdom, as provided by the 12th article of the original treaty signed at Bretigni in May. In com 1 He became the first Duke of Milan in 1395. His sister Violante married Edward's son, Lionel Duke of Clarence, in 1368. 2 Cronica di Matteo Villani, t. iv. p. 317 3 Buchon's Froissart, vol. i. p. 451. 4 Rymer, vol. iii. p. 489. CHAP. III. KING JOHN SET FREE. 59 pliance with this understanding, Edward did not then A.D.1360. call himself King of France, as he had previously done, but gave that title to King John. It was also provided that King John should also renounce all right over the ceded provinces. As will be seen in the sequel, these mutual renunciations were never made.2 The affairs of Brittany were almost the only matter left unsettled. The treaty between the two pretenders was prolonged; the two kings were to examine into their respective rights, and endeavour to mediate between them; but, if no settlement could be made in the course of a year, they were then to be at liberty to do whatever they pleased; the friends of each were, under those circumstances, to be free to help them if they were so inclined, without hindrance from either king, and this was not to be a case of war between the two kings; the homage of Brittany was to belong to the King of France.3 Arrangements were made for the evacuation of the fortresses, held in France by the kings of France and England, which were respectively to be given up. The ransom was then paid; the hostages were delivered; and on the 25th of October the King of France left Calais a free man. King John Shortly afterwards, the King of England embarked for England, with his sons and the hostages, and landed at Dover. Thus ended the first great epoch of the war between England and France; and, deep indeed must have been the misery and humiliation of the latter country, to induce it to consent to so disadvantageous a treaty as that of Bretigni. Almost a third of the 1 Rymer, vol. iii. p. 521. 2 Ibid. vol. i, p. 529. set free. A.D. 1360. kingdom was given up to the English; an enormous sum of money was to be paid for the King's ransom; and the very flower of the land went into captivity as hostages for its fulfilment. But the treaty filled France with joy. The King was everywhere received "greatly and nobly;" on his arrival in Paris, on the 13th of December, "beautiful gifts and rich presents were laid before him; and he was feasted and visited by all the chief prelates and barons of his kingdom.1 The prisoners were received in London with the greatest courtesy. During their residence in England they were allowed to amuse themselves with the chase, they visited the lords and ladies as they pleased, and were subject to no restraint, except such as was absolutely necessary to prevent their escape to France.2 1 Buchon's Froissart, vol. i. chap. 140. 1 CHAP. IV. UNSTABLE FOUNDATION OF THE PEACE. 61 CHAPTER IV. FROM THE PEACE OF BRETIGNI, TO THE CREATION OF THE Peace be tween France and England on an un foundation. NOTWITHSTANDING the signature of the formal and A.D. 1360. elaborate treaty of Bretigni, the peace between the two countries rested on no very sure foundation. The King of England was lord over nearly as much of France as the King of France himself. This came, stable it is true, from the fortune of war; but it was a state of things that could not last, unless unusual wisdom were displayed by the English governor of his foreign people. Beside this, either by accident or design, an important formality in the ratification of the treaty never took place. It was agreed, and confirmed by the Black Prince, that the "renunciations and cessions" should be solemnly made at Bruges on November 30th, 1361; the King of France promised to perform his part, provided the King of England performed his. On November 15th, 1361,1 King Edward sent commis- Mutual resioners to receive King John's renunciations; but it nunciais very doubtful, whether any ever appeared on John's made. part, and certain, that the renunciations were never made. When war broke out again between the two countries, the then King of France, Charles the Fifth, alleged that the treaty of Bretigni was consequently null and void. 1 Rymer, vol. iii. p. 629. tions never A.D. 1360. towns and castles the French with diff culty. 1 Then, again, there were difficulties attending the The ceded surrender of the towns, castles and provinces, which were to be given up by each king. Notwithstanding yielded by the want of confidence felt by the French nation in either the king or his son, still, as Hallam says, "The French were already knit together as one people, and even those whose feudal duties sometimes led them into the field against their sovereign, could not endure the feeling of dismemberment from the monarchy." The inhabitants of Rochelle, who had constantly fitted out privateers against the English, and consequently feared their vengeance, were, with reason, especially averse to being placed under their dominion. They prayed the King of France "for God's sake not to release them from their fealty to him; and they said, they would pay half their means in taxes every year, rather than fall into the hands of the English. But the King told them they must yield to the conqueror, as the peace would otherwise be broken, and that this would be a great evil to France. Rochelle, therefore, was given up on December 6th, 1360;2 but the Rochellois submitted with gloomy sorrow, saying, "We will obey the English with our lips, but our hearts shall never be moved towards them." The nobles of the south, too, remonstrated against their being dismembered from the monarchy; they declared that the King had no right to transfer their homage to another; and that in Gascony they had charters given them by Charlemagne, which showed that this was beyond his legitimate power. At last, however, all the provinces were surrendered; 1 Middle Ages, vol. i. p. 58. 2 Buchon's Froissart, vol. i. p. 452 (note). |