# 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica/France

FRANCE, a country of western Europe, situated between 51° 5′ and 42° 20′ N., and 4° 42′ W. and 7° 39′ E.. It is hexagonal in form, being bounded N.W. by the North Sea, the Strait of Dover (Pas de Calais) and the English Channel (La Manche), W. by the Atlantic Ocean, S.W. by Spain, S.E. by the Mediterranean Sea, E. by Italy, Switzerland and Germany, N.E. by Germany, Luxemburg and Belgium. From north to south its length is about 600 m., measured from Dunkirk to the Col de Falguères; its breadth from east to west is 528 m., from the Vosges to Cape Saint Mathieu at the extremity of Brittany. The total area is estimated[1] at 207,170 sq. m., including the island of Corsica, which comprises 3367 sq. m. The coast-line of France extends for 384 m. on the Mediterranean, 700 on the North Sea, the Strait of Dover and the Channel, and 865 on the Atlantic. The country has the advantage of being separated from its neighbours over the greater part of its frontier by natural barriers of great strength, the Pyrenees forming a powerful bulwark on the south-west, the Alps on the south-east, and the Jura and the greater portion of the Vosges Mountains on the east. The frontier generally follows the crest line of these ranges. Germany possesses both slopes of the Vosges north of Mont Donon, from which point the north-east boundary is conventional and unprotected by nature.

France is geographically remarkable for its possession of great natural and historical highways between the Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean. The one, following the depression between the central plateau and the eastern mountains by way of the valleys of the Rhône and Saône, traverses the Côte d’Or hills and so gains the valley of the Seine; the other, skirting the southern base of the Cévennes, reaches the ocean by way of the Garonne valley. Another natural highway, traversing the lowlands to the west of the central plateau, unites the Seine basin with that of the Garonne.

Physiography.—A line drawn from Bayonne through Agen, Poitiers, Troyes, Reims and Valenciennes divides the country roughly into two dissimilar physical regions — to the west and north-west a country of plains and low plateaus; in the centre, east and south-east a country of mountains and high plateaus with a minimum elevation of 650 ft. To the west of this line the only highlands of importance are the granitic plateaus of Brittany and the hills of Normandy and Perche, which, uniting with the plateau of Beauce, separate the basins of the Seine and Loire. The highest elevations of these ranges do not exceed 1400 ft. The configuration of the region east of the dividing line is widely different. Its most striking feature is the mountainous and eruptive area known as the Massif Central, which covers south-central France. The central point of this huge tract is formed by the mountains of Auvergne comprising the group of Cantal, where the Plomb du Cantal attains 6096 ft., and that of Mont Dore, containing the Puy de Sancy (6188 ft.), the culminating point of the Massif, and to the north the lesser elevations of the Monts Dôme. On the west the downward slope is gradual by way of lofty plateaus to the heights of Limousin and Marche and the table-land of Quercy, thence to the plains of Poitou, Angoumois and Guienne. On the east only river valleys divide the Auvergne mountains from those of Forez and Margeride, western spurs of the Cévennes. On the south the Aubrac mountains and the barren plateaus known as the Causses intervene between them and the Cévennes. The main range of the Cévennes (highest point Mont Lozère, 5584 ft.) sweeps in a wide curve from the granitic table-land of Morvan in the north along the right banks of the Saône and Rhône to the Montagne Noire in the south, where it is separated from the Pyrenean system by the river Aude. On the south-western border of France the Pyrenees include several peaks over 10,000 ft. within French territory; the highest elevation therein, the Vignemale, in the centre of the range, reaches 10,820 ft. On the north their most noteworthy offshoots are, in the centre, the plateau of Lannemezan from which rivers radiate fanwise to join the Adour and Garonne; and in the east the Corbière. On the south-eastern frontier the French Alps, which include Mont Blanc (15,800 ft.), and, more to the south, other summits over 11,000 ft. in height, cover Savoy and most of Dauphiné and Provence, that is to say, nearly the whole of France to the south and east of the Rhône. North of that river the parallel chains of the Jura form an arc of a circle with its convexity towards the north-west. In the southern and most elevated portion of the range there are several summits exceeding 5500 ft. Separated from the Jura by the defile of Belfort (Trouée de Belfort) the Vosges extend northward parallel to the course of the Rhine. Their culminating points in French territory, the Ballon d’Alsace and the Höhneck in the southern portion of the chain, reach 4100 ft. and 4480 ft. The Vosges are buttressed on the west by the Faucilles, which curve southwards to meet the plateau of Langres, and by the plateaus of Haute-Marne, united to the Ardennes on the north-eastern frontier by the wooded highlands of Argonne.

Seaboard.—The shore of the Mediterranean encircling the Gulf of the Lion (Golfe du Lion)[2] from Cape Cerbera to Martigues is low-lying and unbroken, and characterized chiefly by lagoons separated from the sea by sand-dunes. The coast, constantly encroaching on the sea by reason of the alluvium washed down by the rivers of the Pyrenees and Cévennes, is without important harbours saving that of Cette, itself continually invaded by the sand. East of Martigues the coast is rocky and of greater altitude, and is broken by projecting capes (Couronne, Croisette, Sicié, the peninsula of Giens and Cape Antibes), and by deep gulfs forming secure roadsteads such as those of Marseilles, which has the chief port in France, Toulon, with its great naval harbour, and Hyères, to which may be added the Gulf of St Tropez.

Along the Atlantic coast from the mouth of the Adour to the estuary of the Girdonde there stretches a monotonous line of sand-dunes bordered by lagoons on the land side, but towards the sea harbourless and unbroken save for the Bay of Arcachon. To the north as far as the rocky point of St Gildas, sheltering the mouth of the Loire, the shore, often occupied by salt marshes (marshes of Poitou and Brittany), is low-lying and hollowed by deep bays sheltered by large islands, those of Oléron and Ré lying opposite the ports of Rochefort and La Rochelle, while Noirmoutier closes the Bay of Bourgneuf.

Beyond the Loire estuary, on the north shore of which is the port of St Nazaire, the peninsula of Brittany projects into the ocean and here begins the most rugged, wild and broken portion of the French seaboard; the chief of innumerable indentations are, on the south the Gulf of Morbihan, which opens into a bay protected to the west by the narrow peninsula of Quiberon, the Bay of Lorient with the port of Lorient, and the Bay of Concarneau; on the west the dangerous Bay of Audierne and the Bay of Douarnenez separated from the spacious roadstead of Brest, with its important naval port, by the peninsula of Crozon, and forming with it a great indentation sheltered by Cape St Mathieu on the north and by Cape Raz on the south; on the north, opening into the English Channel, the Morlaix roads, the Bay of St Brieuc, the estuary of the Rance, with the port of St Malo and the Bay of St Michel. Numerous small archipelagoes and islands, of which the chief are Belle Île, Groix and Ushant, fringe the Breton coast. North of the Bay of St Michel the peninsula of Cotentin, terminating in the promontories of Hague and Barfleur, juts north into the English Channel and closes the bay of the Seine on the west. Cherbourg, its chief harbour, lies on the northern shore between the two promontories. The great port of Le Havre stands at the mouth of the Seine estuary, which opens into the bay of the Seine on the east. North of that point a line of high cliffs, in which occur the ports of Fécamp and Dieppe, stretches nearly to the sandy estuary of the Somme. North of that river the coast is low-lying and bordered by sand-dunes, to which succeed on the Strait of Dover the cliffs in the neighbourhood of the port of Boulogne and the marshes and sand-dunes of Flanders, with the ports of Calais and Dunkirk, the latter the principal French port on the North Sea.

To the maritime ports mentioned above must be added the river ports of Bayonne (on the Adour), Bordeaux (on the Garonne), Nantes (on the Loire), Rouen (on the Seine). On the whole, however, France is inadequately provided with natural harbours; her long tract of coast washed by the Atlantic and the Bay of Biscay has scarcely three or four good seaports, and those on the southern shore of the Channel form a striking contrast to the spacious maritime inlets on the English side.

Rivers.—The greater part of the surface of France is divided between four principal and several secondary basins.

The basin of the Rhône, with an area (in France) of about 35,000 sq. m., covers eastern France from the Mediterranean to the Vosges, from the Cévennes and the Plateau de Langres to the crests of the Jura and the Alps. Alone among French rivers, the Rhône, itself Alpine in character in its upper course, is partly fed by Alpine rivers (the Arve, the Isère and the Durance) which have their floods in spring at the melting of the snow, and are maintained by glacier-water in summer. The Rhône, the source of which is in Mont St Gothard, in Switzerland, enters France by the narrow defile of L’Écluse, and has a somewhat meandering course, first flowing south, then north-west, and then west as far as Lyons, whence it runs straight south till it reaches the Mediterranean, into which it discharges itself by two principal branches, which form the delta or island of the Camargue. The Ain, the Saône (which rises in the Faucilles and in the lower part of its course skirting the regions of Bresse and Dombes, receives the Doubs and joins the Rhône at Lyons), the Ardèche and the Gard are the affluents on the right; on the left it is joined by the Arve, the Isère, the Drôme and the Durance. The small independent river, the Var, drains that portion of the Alps which fringes the Mediterranean.

The basin of the Garonne occupies south-western France with the exception of the tracts covered by the secondary basins of the Adour, the Aude, the Hérault, the Orb and other smaller rivers, and the low-lying plain of the Landes, which is watered by numerous coast rivers, notably by the Leyre. Its area is nearly 33,000 sq. m., and extends from the Pyrenees to the uplands of Saintonge, Périgord and Limousin. The Garonne rises in the valley of Aran (Spanish Pyrenees), enters France near Bagnères-de-Luchon, has first a north-west course, then bends to the north-east, and soon resumes its first direction. Joining the Atlantic between Royan and the Pointe de Grave, opposite the tower of Cordouan. In the lower part of its course, from the Bec-d’Ambez, where it receives the Dordogne, it becomes considerably wider, and takes the name of Girdonde. The principal affluents are the Ariège, the Tarn with the Aveyron and the Agout, the Lot and the Dordogne, which descends from Mont Dore-les-Bains, and joins the Garonne at Bec-d’Ambez, to form the Girdonde. All these affluents are on the right, and with the exception of the Ariège, which descends from the eastern Pyrenees, rise in the mountains of Auvergne and the southern Cévennes, their sources often lying close to those of the rivers of the Loire and Rhône basins. The Neste, a Pyrenean torrent, and the Save, the Gers and the Baïse, rising on the plateau of Lannemezan, are the principal left-hand tributaries of the Garonne. North of the basin of the Garonne an area of over 3800 sq. m. is watered by the secondary system of the Charente, which descends from Chéronnac (Haute-Vienne), traverses Angoulême and falls into the Atlantic near Rochefort. Farther to the north a number of small rivers, the chief of which is the Sèvre Niortaise, drain the coast region to the south of the plateau of Gâtine.

The basin of the Loire, with an area of about 47,000 sq. m., includes a great part of central and western France or nearly a quarter of the whole country. The Loire rises in Mont Gerbier de Jonc, in the range of the Vivarais mountains, flows due north to Nevers, then turns to the north-west as far as Orléans, in the neighbourhood of which it separates the marshy region of the Sologne (q.v.) on the south from the wheat-growing region of Beauce and the Gâtinais on the north. Below Orléans it takes its course towards the south-west, and lastly from Saumur runs west, till it reaches the Atlantic between Paimbœuf and St Nazaire. On the right the Loire receives the waters of the Furens, the Arroux, the Nièvre, the Maine (formed by the Mayenne and the Sarthe with its affluent the Loir), and the Erdre, which joins the Loire at Nantes; on the left, the Allier (which receives the Dore and the Sioule), the Loiret, the Cher, the Indre, the Vienne with its affluent the Creuse, the Thouet, and the Sèvre-Nantaise. The peninsula of Brittany and the coasts of Normandy on both sides of the Seine estuary are watered by numerous independent streams. Amongst these the Vilaine, which passes Rennes and Redon, waters, with its tributaries, an area of 4200 sq. m. The Orne, which rises in the hills of Normandy and falls into the Channel below Caen, is of considerably less importance.

The basin of the Seine, though its area of a little over 30,000 sq. m. is smaller than that of any of the other main systems, comprises the finest network of navigable rivers in the country. It is by far the most important basin of northern France, those of the Somme and Scheldt in the north-west together covering less than 5000 sq. m., those of the Meuse and the Rhine in the north-east less than 7000 sq. m. The Seine descends from the Langres plateau, flows north-west down to Méry, turns to the west, resumes its north-westerly direction at Montereau, passes through Paris and Rouen and discharges itself into the Channel between Le Havre and Honfleur. Its affluents are, on the right, the Aube; the Marne, which joins the Seine at Charenton near Paris; the Oise, which has its source in Belgium and is enlarged by the Aisne; and the Epte; on the left the Yonne, the Loing, the Essonne, the Eure and the Rille.

Lakes.—France has very few lakes. The Lake of Geneva, which forms 32 m. of the frontier, belongs to Switzerland. The most important French lake is that of Grand-Lieu, between Nantes and Paimbœuf (Loire-Inférieure), which presents a surface of 17,300 acres. There may also be mentioned the lakes of Bourget and Annecy (both in Savoy), St Point (Jura), Paladru (Isère) and Nantua (Ain). The marshy districts of Sologne, Brenne, Landes and Dombes still contain large undrained tracts. The coasts present a number of maritime inlets, forming inland bays, which communicate with the sea by channels of greater or less width. Some of these are on the south-west coast, in the Landes, as Carcans, Lacanau, Biscarosse, Cazau, Sanguinet; but more are to be found in the south and south-east, in Languedoc and Provence, as Leucate, Sigean, Thau, Vaccarès, Berre, &c. Their want of depth prevents them from serving as roadsteads for shipping, and they are useful chiefly for fishing or for the manufacture of bay-salt.

Climate.—The north and north-west of France bear a great resemblance, both in temperature and produce, to the south of England, rain occurring frequently, and the country being consequently suited for pasture. In the interior the rains are less frequent, but when they occur are far more heavy, so that there is much less difference in the annual rainfall there as compared with the rest of the country than in the number of rainy days. The annual rainfall for the whole of France averages about 32 in. The precipitation is greatest on the Atlantic seaboard and in the elevated regions of the interior. It attains over 60 in. in the basin of the Adour (71 in. at the western extremity of the Pyrenees), and nearly as much in the Vosges, Morvan, Cévennes and parts of the central plateau. The zone of level country extending from Reims and Troyes to Angers and Poitiers, with the exception of the Loire valley and the Brie, receives less than 24 in. of rain annually (Paris about 23 in.), as also does the Mediterranean coast west of Marseilles. The prevailing winds, mild and humid, are west winds from the Atlantic; continental climatic influence makes itself felt in the east wind, which is frequent in winter and in the east of France, while the mistral, a violent wind from the north-west, is characteristic of the Mediterranean region. The local climates of France may be grouped under the following seven designations: (1) Sequan climate, characterizing the Seine basin and northern France, with a mean temperature of 50° F., the winters being cold, the summers mild; (2) Breton climate, with a mean temperature of 51.8° F., the winters being mild, the summers temperate, it is characterized by west and south-west winds and frequent fine rains; (3) Girondin climate (characterizing Bordeaux, Agen, Pau, &c.), having a mean of 53.6° F., with mild winters and hot summers, the prevailing wind is from the north-west, the average rainfall about 28 in.; (4) Auvergne climate, comprising the Cévennes, central plateau, Clermont, Limoges and Rodez, mean temperature 51.8° F., with cold winters and hot summers; (5) Vosges climate (comprehending Epinal, Mézières and Nancy), having a mean of 48.2° F., with long and severe winters and hot and rainy summers; (6) Rhône climate (experienced by Lyons, Chalon, Mâcon, Grenoble) mean temperature 51.8° F., with cold and wet winters and hot summers, the prevailing winds are north and south; (7) Mediterranean climate, ruling at Valence, Nîmes, Nice and Marseilles, mean temperature, 57.5° F., with mild winters and hot and almost rainless summers.

Flora and Fauna.—The flora of southern France and the Mediterranean is distinct from that of the rest of the country, which does not differ in vegetation from western Europe generally. Evergreens predominate in the south, where grow subtropical plants such as the myrtle, arbutus, laurel, holm-oak, olive and fig; varieties of the same kind are also found on the Atlantic coast (as far north as the Cotentin), where the humidity and mildness of the climate favour their growth. The orange, date-palm and eucalyptus have been acclimatized on the coast of Provence and the Riviera. Other trees of southern France are the cork-oak and the Aleppo and maritime pines. In north and central France the chief trees are the oak, the beech, rare south of the Loire, and the hornbeam; less important varieties are the birch, poplar, ash, elm and walnut. The chestnut covers considerable areas in Périgord, Limousin and Béarn; resinous trees (firs, pines, larches, &c.) form fine forests in the Vosges and Jura.

The indigenous fauna include the bear, now very rare but still found in the Alps and Pyrenees, the wolf, harbouring chiefly in the Cévennes and Vosges, but in continually decreasing areas; the fox, marten, badger, weasel, otter, the beaver in the extreme south of the Rhône valley, and in the Alps the marmot; the red deer and roe deer are preserved in many of the forests, and the wild boar is found in several districts; the chamois and wild goat survive in the Pyrenees and Alps. Hares, rabbits and squirrels are common. Among birds of prey may be mentioned the eagle and various species of hawk, and among game-birds the partridge and pheasant. The reptiles include the ringed-snake, slow-worm, viper and lizard.

(R. Tr.)

Geology.—Many years ago it was pointed out by Élíe de Beaumont and Dufrénoy that the Jurassic rocks of France form upon the map an incomplete figure of 8. Within the northern circle of the 8 lie the Mesozoic and Tertiary beds of the Paris basin, dipping inwards; within the southern circle lie the ancient rocks of the Central Plateau, from which the later beds dip outwards. Outside the northern circle lie on the west the folded Palaeozoic rocks of Brittany, and on the north the Palaeozoic massif of the Ardennes. Outside the southern circle lie on the west the Mesozoic and Tertiary beds of the basin of the Garonne, with the Pyrenees beyond, and on the east the Mesozoic and Tertiary beds of the valley of the Rhône, with the Alps beyond.

In the geological history of France there have been two great periods of folding since Archean times. The first of these occurred towards the close of the Palaeozoic era, when a great mountain system was raised in the north running approximately from E. to W., and another chain arose in the south, running from S.W. to N.E. Of the former the remnants are now seen in Brittany and the Ardennes; of the latter the Cévennes and the Montagne Noire are the last traces visible on the surface. The second great folding took place in Tertiary times, and to it was due the final elevation of the Jura and the Western Alps and of the Pyrenees. No great mountain chain was ever raised by a single effort, and folding went on to some extent in other periods besides those mentioned. There were, moreover, other and broader oscillations which raised or lowered extensive areas without much crumpling of the strata, and to these are due some of the most important breaks in the geological series.

The oldest rocks, the gneisses and schists of the Archean period, form nearly the whole of the Central Plateau, and are also exposed in the axes of the folds in Brittany. The Central Plateau has probably been a land mass ever since this period, but the rest of the country was flooded by the Palaeozoic sea. The earlier deposits of that sea now rise to the surface in Brittany, the Ardennes, the Montagne Noire and the Cévennes, and in all these regions they are intensely folded. Towards the close of the Palaeozoic era France had become a part of a great continent; in the north the Coal Measures of the Boulonnais and the Nord were laid down in direct connexion with those of Belgium and England, while in the Central Plateau the Coal Measures were deposited in isolated and scattered basins. The Permian and Triassic deposits were also, for the most part, of continental origin; but with the formation of the Rhaetic beds the sea again began to spread, and throughout the greater part of the Jurassic period it covered nearly the whole of the country except the Central Plateau, Brittany and the Ardennes. Towards the end of the period, however, during the deposition of the Portlandian beds, the sea again retreated, and in the early part of the Cretaceous period was limited (in France) to the catchment basins of the Saône and Rhône — in the Paris basin the contemporaneous deposits were chiefly estuarine and were confined to the northern and eastern rim. Beginning with the Aptian and Albian the sea again gradually spread over the country and attained its maximum in the early part of the Senonian epoch, when once more the ancient massifs of the Central Plateau, Brittany and the Ardennes, alone rose above the waves. There was still, however, a well-marked difference between the deposits of the northern and the southern parts of France, the former consisting of chalk, as in England, and the latter of sandstones and limestones with Hippurites. During the later part of the Cretaceous period the sea gradually retreated and left the whole country dry.

During the Tertiary period arms of the sea spread into France—in the Paris basin from the north, in the basins of the Loire and the Garonne from the west, and in the Rhône area from the south. The changes, however, were too numerous and complex to be dealt with here.

In France, as in Great Britain, volcanic eruptions occurred during several of the Palaeozoic periods, but during the Mesozoic era the country was free from outbursts, except in the regions of the Alps and Pyrenees. In Tertiary times the Central Plateau was the theatre of great volcanic activity from the Miocene to the Pleistocene periods, and many of the volcanoes remain as nearly perfect cones to the present day. The rocks are mainly basalts and andesites, together with trachytes and phonolites, and some of the basaltic flows are of enormous extent.

On the geology of France see the classic Explication de la carte géologique de la France (Paris, vol. i. 1841, vol. ii. 1848), by Dufrénoy and Élie de Beaumont; a more modern account, with full references, is given by A. de Lapparent, Traité de géologie (Paris, 1906).

Population.

The French nation is formed of many different elements. Iberian influence in the south-west, Ligurian on the shores of the Mediterranean, Germanic immigrations from east of the Rhine and Scandinavian immigrations in the north-west have tended to produce ethnographical diversities which ease of intercommunication and other modern conditions have failed to obliterate. The so-called Celtic type, exemplified by individuals of rather less than average height, brown-haired and brachycephalic, is the fundamental element in the nation and peoples the region between the Seine and the Garonne; in southern France a different type, dolichocephalic, short and with black hair and eyes, predominates. The tall, fair and blue-eyed individuals who are found to the north-east of the Seine and in Normandy appear to be nearer in race to the Scandinavian and Germanic invaders; a tall and darker type with long faces and aquiline noses occurs in some parts of Franche-Comté and Champagne, the Vosges and the Perche. From the Celts has been derived the gay, brilliant and adventurous temperament easily moved to extremes of enthusiasm and depression, which combined with logical and organizing faculties of a high order, the heritage from the Latin domination, and with the industry, frugality and love of the soil natural in an agricultural people go to make up the national character. The Bretons, who most nearly represent the Celts, and the Basques, who inhabit parts of the western versant of the Pyrenees, have preserved their distinctive languages and customs, and are ethnically the most interesting sections of the nation; the Flemings of French Flanders where Flemish is still spoken are also racially distinct. The immigration of Belgians into the northern departments and of Italians into those of the south-east exercise a constant modifying influence on the local populations.

During the 19th century the population of France increased to a less extent than that of any other country (except Ireland) for which definite data exist, and during the last twenty years of that period it was little more than stationary. The following table exhibits the rate of increase as indicated by the censuses from 1876 to 1906.

 Population 1876   .  .  . 36,905,788 1881  .  .  .  . 37,672,048 1886  .  .  .  . 38,218,903 1891  .  .  .  . 38,342,948 1896  .  .  .  . 38,517,975 1901  .  .  .  . |38,961,945 1906   .  .  . 39,252,245

Thus the rate of increase during the decade 1891-1901 was ·16%, whereas during the same period the population of England increased 1·08%. The birth-rate markedly decreased during the 19th century; despite an increase of population between 1801 and 1901 amounting to 40%, the number of births in the former was 904,000, as against 857,000 in the latter year, the diminution being accompanied by a decrease in the annual number of deaths.[3] In the following table the decrease in births and deaths for the decennial periods during the thirty years ending 1900 are compared.

 Births. 1871 – 1880 .  .  .  . 935,000 or 25·4 per 1000 1881 – 1890emsp;.  .  .  . 909,000 ” 23·9 ” 1891 – 1900 .  .  .  . 853,000 ” 22·2 ” Deaths. 1871 – 1880 .  .  .  . 870,900 or 23·7 per 1000 1881 – 1890 .  .  .  . 841,700 ” 22·1 ” 1891 – 1900 .  .  .  . 829,000 ” 21·5 ”

About two-thirds of the French departments, comprising a large proportion of those situated in mountainous districts and in the basin of the Garonne, where the birth-rate is especially feeble, show a decrease in population. Those which show an increase usually possess large centres of industry and are already thickly populated, e.g. Seine and Pas-de-Calais. In most departments the principal cause of decrease of population is the attraction of great centres. The average density of population in France is about 190 to the square mile, the tendency being for the large towns to increase at the expense of the small towns as well as the rural communities. In 1901 37% of the population lived in centres containing more than 2000 inhabitants, whereas in 1861 the proportion was 28%. Besides the industrial districts the most thickly populated regions include the coast of the department of Seine-Inférieure and Brittany, the wine-growing region of the Bordelais and the Riviera.[4]

In the quinquennial period 1901–1905, out of the total number of births the number of illegitimate births to every 1000 inhabitants was 2·0, as compared with 2·1 in the four preceding periods of like duration.

In 1906 the number of foreigners in France was 1,009,415 compared with 1,027,491 in 1896 and 1,115,214 in 1886. The departments with the largest population of foreigners were Nord (191,678), in which there is a large proportion of Belgians; Bouches-du-Rhône (123,497), Alpes-Maritimes (93,554), Var (47,475), Italians being numerous in these three departments; Seine (153,647), Meurthe-et-Moselle (44,595), Pas-de-Calais (21,436) and Ardennes (21,401).

The following table gives the area in square miles of each of the eighty-seven departments with its population according to the census returns of 1886, 1896 and 1906:

 Departments. Area, sq. m. Population. 1886. 1896. 1906. Ain .  .  .  .  . 2,249 364,408 351,569 345,856 Aisne .  .  .  .  . 2,867 555,925 541,613 534,495 Allier  .  .  .  . 2,849}} 424,582 424,378 417,961 Alpes-Maritimes  .  . 1,442 238,057 265,155 334,007 Ardèche .  .  .  . 2,145 375,472 363,501 347,140 Ardennes .  .  .  . 2,028 332,759}} 318,865 317,505 Ariège  .  .  .  . 1,893 237,619 219,641 205,684 Aube .  .  .  .  . 2,326 257,374 251,435 243,670 Aude .  .  .  .  . 2,448 332,080 310,513 308,327 Aveyron .  .  .  . 3,386 415,826 389,464 377,299 Basses-Alpes .  .  . 2,698 129,494 118,142 113,126 Basses-Pyrénées  .  . 2,977 432,999 423,572 426,817 Belfort, Territoire de  . 235 79,758 88,047 95,421 Bouches-du-Rhône .  . 2,026 604,857 673,820 765,918 Calvados .  .  .  . 2,197 437,267 417,176 403,431 Cantal  .  .  .  . 2,231 241,742 234,382 228,690 Charente .  .  .  . 2,305 366,408 356,236 351,733 Charente-Inférieure  . 2,791 462,803 453,455 453,793 Cher .  .  .  .  . 2,819 355,349 347,725 343,484 Corrèze  .  .  .  . 2,273 326,494 322,393 317,430 Corse (Corsica)  .  . 3,367 278,501 290,168 291,160 Côte-d’Or .  .  .  . 3,392 381,574 368,168 357,959 Côtes-du-Nord  .  . 2,786 628,256 616,074 611,506 Creuse  .  .  .  . 2,164 284,942 279,366 274,094 Deux-Sèvres .  .  . 2,337 353,766 346,694 339,466 Dordogne .  .  .  . 3,561 492,205 464,822 447,052 Doubs  .  .  .  . 2,030 310,963 302,046 298,438 Drôme  .  .  .  . 2,533 314,615 303,491 297,270 Eure .  .  .  .  . 2,330 358,829 340,652 330,140 Eure-et-Loir .  .  . 2,293 283,719 280,469 273,823 Finistère .  .  .  . 2,713 707,820 739,648 795,103 Gard .  .  .  .  . 2,270 417,099 416,036 421,166 Gers .  .  .  .  . 2,428 274,391 250,472 231,088 Girdonde .  .  .  . 4,140 775,845 809,902 823,925 Haute-Garonne  .  . 2,458 481,169 459,377 442,065 Haute-Loire .  .  . 1,931 320,063 316,699 314,770 Haute-Marne .  .  . 2,415 247,781 232,057 221,724 Hautes-Alpes .  .  . 2,178 122,924 113,229 107,498 Haute-Saône .  .  . 2,075 290,954 272,891 263,890 Haute-Savoie .  .  . 1,775 275,018 265,872 260,617 Hautes-Pyrénées  .  . 1,750 234,825 218,973 209,397 Haute-Vienne .  .  . 2,144 363,182 375,724 385,732 Hérault .  .  .  . 2,403 439,044 469,684 482,799 Ille-et-Vilaine .  .  . 2,699 621,384 622,039 611,805 Indre .  .  .  .  . 2,666 296,147 289,206 290,216 Indre-et-Loire .  .  . 2,377 340,921 337,064 337,916 Isère .  .  .  .  . 3,179 581,680 568,933 562,315 Jura .  .  .  .  . 1,951 281,292 266,143 257,725 Landes  .  .  .  . 3,615 302,266 292,884 293,397 Loir-et-Cher .  .  . 2,479 279,214 278,153 276,019 Loire .  .  .  .  . 1,853 603,384 625,336 643,943 Loire-Inférieure  .  . 2,694 643,884 646,172 666,748 Loiret  .  .  .  . 2,629 374,875 371,019 364,999 Lot .  .  .  .  . 2,017 271,514 240,403 216,611 Lot-et-Garonne  .  . 2,079 307,437 286,377 274,610 Lozère  .  .  .  . 1,999 141,264 132,151 128,016 Maine-et-Loire  .  . 2,706 527,680 514,870 513,490 Manche  .  .  .  . 2,475 520,865 500,052 487,443 Marne  .  .  .  . 3,167 429,494 439,577 434,157 Mayenne .  .  .  . 2,012 340,063 321,187 305,457 Meurthe-et-Moselle .  . 2,038 431,693 466,417 517,508 Meuse  .  .  .  . 2,409 291,971 290,384 280,220 Morbihan .  .  .  . 2,738 535,256 552,028 573,152 Nièvre  .  .  .  . 2,659 347,645 333,899 313,972 Nord .  .  .  .  . 2,229 1,670,184 1,811,868 1,895,861 Oise .  .  .  .  . 2,272 403,146 404,511 410,049 Orne .  .  .  .  . 2,372 367,248 339,162 315,993 Pas-de-Calais .  . 2,606 853,526 906,249 1,012,466 Puy-de-Dôme .  . 3,094 570,964 555,078 535,419 Pyrénées-Orientales  . 1,599 211,187 208,387 213,171 Rhône  .  .  .  . 1,104 772,912 839,329 858,907 Saône-et-Loire .  .  . 3,330 625,885 621,237 613,377 Sarthe  .  .  .  . 2,410 436,111 425,077 421,470 Savoie  .  .  .  . 2,389 267,428 259,790 253,297 Seine .  .  .  .  . 185 2,961,089 3,340,514 3,848,618 Seine-Inférieure  .  . 2,448 833,386 837,824 863,879 Seine-et-Marne  .  . 2,289 355,136 359,044 361,939 Seine-et-Oise .  .  . 2,184 618,089 669,098 749,753 Somme .  .  .  . 2,423 548,982 543,279 532,567 Tarn .  .  .  .  . 2,231 358,757 339,827 330,533 Tarn-et-Garonne .  . 1,440 214,046 200,390 188,553 Var .  .  .  .  . 2,325 283,689 309,191 324,638 Vaucluse .  .  .  . 1,381 241,787 236,313 239,178 Vendée  .  .  .  . 2,708 434,808 441,735 442,777 Vienne  .  .  .  . 2,719 342,785 338,114 333,621 Vosges  .  .  .  . 2,279 413,707 421,412 429,812 Yonne  .  .  .  . 2,880 355,364 332,656 315,199 ﻿Total .  . 207,076 38,218,903 38,517,975 39,252,245
The French census uses the commune as the basis of its returns, and employs the following classifications in respect to communal population: (1) Total communal population. (2Population comptée à part, which includes soldiers and sailors, inmates of prisons, asylums, schools, members of religious communities, and workmen temporarily engaged in public works. (3) Total municipal population, i.e. communal population minus the population comptée à part. (4Population municipale agglomérée au chef-lieu de la commune, which embraces the urban population as opposed to the rural population. The following tables, showing the growth of the largest towns in France, are drawn up on the basis of the fourth classification, which is used throughout this work in the articles on French towns, except where otherwise stated.}} In 1906 there were in France twelve towns with a population of over 100,000 inhabitants. Their growth or decrease from 1886 to 1906 is shown in the following table:
 1886. 1896. 1906. Paris  . .  .  . 2,294,108 2,481,223 2,711,931 Lyons . .  .  . 344,124 398,867 430,186 Marseilles  .  . 249,938 332,515 421,116 Bordeaux .   . 225,281 239,806 237,707 Lille  .  .  . 143,135 160,723 196,624 St Etienne  . 103,229 120,300 130,940 Le Havre  .  . 109,199 117,009 129,403 Toulouse   .  . 123,040 124,187 125,856 Roubaix  .  . 89,781 113,899 119,955 Nantes .  .  . 110,638 107,137 118,244 Rouen  .  .  . 100,043 106,825 111,402 Reims   .  .  . 91,130 99,001 102,800

In the same years the following eighteen towns, now numbering from 50,000 to 100,000 inhabitants, each had:

 1886. 1896. 1906. Nice  .  .  . 61,464 69,140 99,556 Nancy  .  .  . 69,463 83,668 98,302 Toulon .  .  . 53,941 70,843 87,997 Amiens  .  . {68,177 {74,808 {78,407 Limoges  .  . 56,699 64,718 75,906 Angers  .  .  . 65,152 69,484 73,585 Brest   .  .  . 59,352 64,144 71,163 Nîmes  .  .  . 62,198 66,905 70,708 Montpellier  . 45,930 62,717 65,983 Dijon  .  .  . 50,684 58,355 65,516 Tourcoing  .  . 41,183 55,705 62,694 Rennes  .  .  . 52,614 57,249 62,024 Tours   .  .  . 51,467 56,706 61,507 Calais  .  .  . 52,839 50,818 59,623 Grenoble   .  . 43,260 50,084 58,641 Orléans  .  . 51,208 56,915 57,544 Le Mans   .  . 46,991 49,665 54,907 Troyes  .  .  . 44,864 50,676 51,228

Of the population in 1901, 18,916,889 were males and 19,533,899 females, an excess of females over males of 617,010, i.e. 1⋅6% or about 508 females to every 492 males. In 1881 the proportion was 501 females to every 499 males, since when the disparity has been slightly more marked at every census. Below is a list of the departments in which the number of women to every thousand men was (1) greatest and (2) least.

 (1) (2) Creuse  .  .  .  . 1131 Belfort.  .  .  .  . 886 Côtes-du-Nord .  . 1117 Basses-Alpes .  .  . 893 Seine .  .  .  .  . 1103 Var.  .  .  .  .  . 894 Calvados.  .  .  . 1100 Meuse .  .  .  .  . 905 Cantal  .  .  . 1098 Hautes-Alpes .  . 908 Seine-Inférieure.  . 1084 Meurthe-et-Moselle . 918 Basses-Pyrénées.  . 1080 Haute-Savoie.  . 947
Departments from which the adult males emigrate regularly either to sea or to seek employment in towns tend to fall under the first head, those in which large bodies of troops are stationed under the second.

The annual number of emigrants from France is small. The Basques of Basses-Pyrénées go in considerable numbers to the Argentine Republic, the inhabitants of Basses Alpes to Mexico and the United States, and there are important French colonies in Algeria and Tunisia.

The following table shows the distribution of the active population of France according to their occupations in 1901.
 Occupation. Males. Females. Total. Forestry and agriculture . 5,517,617 2,658,952 8,176,569 Manufacturing industries 3,695,213 2,124,642 5,819,855 Trade .  .  .  .  .﻿. 1,132,621 689,999 1,822,620 Domestic service .  .  . 223,861 791,176 1,015,037 Transport .  .  .  .  . 617,849 212,794 830,643 Public service .  .  .  . 1,157,835 139,734 1,297,569 Liberal professions  .  . 226,561 173,278 399,839 Mining, quarries .  .  . 261,320 5,031 266,351 Fishing .  .  .  .  .  . 63,372 4,400 67,772 Unclassed .  .  .  .  . 14,316 4,504 18,820 Grand Total .  . 12,910,565 6,804,510 19,715,075

Religion.

Great alterations were made with regard to religious matters in France by a law of December 1905, supplemented by a law of January 1907 (see below, Law and Institutions). Before that time three religions (cultes) were recognized and supported by the state—the Roman Catholic, the Protestant (subdivided into the Reformed and Lutheran) and the Hebrew. In Algeria the Mahommedan religion received similar recognition. By the law of 1905 all the churches ceased to be recognized or supported by the state and became entirely separated therefrom, while the adherents of all creeds were permitted to form associations for public worship (associations cultuelles), upon which the expenses of maintenance were from that time to devolve. The state, the departments, and the communes were thus relieved from the payment of salaries and grants to religious bodies, an item of expenditure which amounted in the last year of the old system to £1,101,000 paid by the state and £302,200 contributed by the departments and communes. Before these alterations the relations between the state and the Roman Catholic communion, by far the largest and most important in France, were chiefly regulated by the provisions of the Concordat of 1801, concluded between the first consul, Bonaparte, and Pope Pius VII. and by other measures passed in 1802.

France is divided into provinces and dioceses as follows:

 Archbishoprics. Bishoprics. Paris .  .  . Chartres, Meaux, Orléans, Blois, Versailles. Aix  .  .  . Marseilles, Fréjus, Digne, Gap, Nice, Ajaccio. Albi .  .  . Rodez, Cahors, Mende, Perpignan. Auch .  .  . Aire, Tarbes, Bayonne. Avignon .  . Nîmes, Valence, Viviers, Montpellier. Besançon.  . Verdun, Bellay, St Dié, Nancy. Agen, Angoulême, Poitiers, Périgueux, La Rochelle, Luçon. Bourges .  . Clermont, Limoges, Le Puy, Tulle, St Flour. Cambrai .  . Arras. Annecy, Tarentaise, St Jean-de-Maurienne. Lyons .  .  . Autun, Langres, Dijon, St Claude, Grenoble. Reims .  .  . Soissons, Châlons-sur-Marne, Beauvais, Amiens. Rennes  .  . Quimper, Vannes, St Brieuc. Rouen .  .  . Bayeux, Evreux, Sées, Coutances. Sens  .  .  . Troyes, Nevers, Moulins. Toulouse .  . Montauban, Pamiers, Carcassonne. Tours .  .  . Le Mans, Angers, Nantes, Laval.
The dioceses are divided into parishes each under a parish priest known as a curé or desservant (incumbent). The bishops and archbishops, formerly nominated by the government and canonically confirmed by the pope, are now chosen by the latter. The appointment of curés rested with the bishops and had to be confirmed by the government, but this confirmation is now dispensed with. The archbishops used to receive an annual salary of £600 each and the bishops £400.

The archbishops and bishops are assisted by vicars-general (at salaries previously ranging from £100 to £180), and to each cathedral is attached a chapter of canons. A curé, in addition to his regular salary, received fees for baptisms, marriages, funerals and special masses, and had the benefit of a free house called a presbytère. The total personnel of state-paid Roman Catholic clergy amounted in 1903 to 36,169. The Roman priests are drawn from the seminaries, established by the church for the education of young men intending to join its ranks, and divided into lower and higher seminaries (grands et petits séminaires), the latter giving the same class of instruction as the lycées.

The number of Protestants may be estimated at about 600,000 and the Jews at about 70,000. The greatest number of Jews is to be found at Paris, Lyons and Bordeaux, while the departments of the centre and of the south along the range of the Cévennes, where Calvinism flourishes, are the principal Protestant localities, Nîmes being the most important centre. Considerable sprinklings of Protestants are also to be found in the two Charentes, in Dauphiné, in Paris and in Franche-Comté. The two Protestant bodies used to cost the state about £60,000 a year and the Jewish Church about £6000.

Both Protestant churches have a parochial organization and a presbyterian form of church government. In the Reformed Church (far the more numerous of the two bodies) each parish has a council of presbyters, consisting of the pastor and lay-members elected by the congregation. Several parishes form a consistorial circumscription, which has a consistorial council consisting of the council of presbyters of the chief town of the circumscription, the pastor and one delegate of the council of presbyters from each parish and other elected members. There are 103 circumscriptions (including Algeria), which are grouped into 21 provincial synods composed of a pastor and lay delegate from each consistory. All the more important questions of church discipline and all decisions regulating the doctrine and practice of the church are dealt with by the synods. At the head of the whole organization is a General Synod, sitting at Paris. The organization of the Lutheran Church (Église de la confession d’Augsburg) is broadly similar. Its consistories are grouped into two special synods, one at Paris and one at Montbéliard (for the department of Doubs and Haute-Saône and the territory of Belfort, where the churches of this denomination are principally situated). It also has a general synod—composed of 2 inspectors,[5] 5 pastors elected by the synod of Paris, and 6 by that of Montbéliard, 22 laymen and a delegate of the theological faculty at Paris—which holds periodical meetings and is represented in its relations with the government by a permanent executive commission.

The Jewish parishes, called synagogues, are grouped into departmental consistories (Paris, Bordeaux, Nancy, Marseilles, Bayonne, Lille, Vesoul, Besançon and three in Algeria). Each synagogue is served by a rabbi assisted by an officiating minister, and in each consistory is a grand rabbi. At Paris is the central consistory, controlled by the government and presided over by the supreme grand rabbi.

Agriculture.

Of the population of France some 17,000,000 depend upon agriculture for their livelihood, though only about 6,500,000 are engaged in work on the land. The cultivable land of the country occupies some 195,000 sq. m. or about 94% of the total area; of this 171,000 sq. m. are cultivated. There are besides 12,300 sq. m. of uncultivable area covered by lakes, rivers, towns, &c. Only the roughest estimate is possible as to the sizes of holdings, but in general terms it may be said that about 3 million persons are proprietors of holdings under 25 acres in extent amounting to between 15 and 20% of the cultivated area, the rest being owned by some 750,000 proprietors, of whom 150,000 possess half the area in holdings averaging 400 acres in extent. About 80% of holdings (amounting to about 60% of the cultivated area) are cultivated by the proprietor; of the rest approximately 13% are let on lease and 7% are worked on the system known as métayage (q.v.).

The capital value of land, which greatly decreased during the last twenty years of the 19th century, is estimated at £3,120,000,000, and that of stock, buildings, implements, &c., at £340,000,000. The value per acre of land, which exceeds £48 in the departments of Seine, Rhône and those fringing the north-west coast from Nord to Manche inclusive, is on the average about £29, though it drops to £16 and less in Morbihan, Landes, Basses-Pyrénées, and parts of the Alps and the central plateau.

While wheat and wine constitute the staples of French agriculture, its distinguishing characteristic is the variety of its products. Cereals occupy about one-third of the cultivated area. For the production of wheat, in respect of which France is self-supporting, French Flanders, the Seine basin, notably the Beauce and the Brie, and the regions bordering on the lower course of the Loire and the upper course of the Garonne, are the chief areas. Rye, on the other hand, one of the least valuable of the cereals, is grown chiefly in the poor agricultural territories of the central plateau and western Brittany. Buckwheat is cultivated mainly in Brittany. Oats and barley are generally cultivated, the former more especially in the Parisian region, the latter in Mayenne and one or two of the neighbouring departments. Meslin, a mixture of wheat and rye, is produced in the great majority of French departments, but to a marked extent in the basin of the Sarthe. Maize covers considerable areas in Landes, Basses-Pyrénées and other south-western departments.

 Average Acreage (Thousands of Acres). Average Production (Thousands of Bushels). Average Yield per Acre (Bushels). 1886–1895. 1896–1905. 1886–1895. 1896–1905. 1886–1895. 1896–1905. Wheat .  .  .  . 17,004 16,580 294,564 317,707 17⋅3 19⋅1 Meslin .  .  .  . 720 491 12,193 8,826 16⋅9 17⋅0 Rye  .  .  .  . 3,888 3,439 64,651 56,612 16⋅6 16⋅4 Barley .  .  .  . 2,303 1,887emsp; 47,197 41,066 20⋅4 21⋅0 Oats  .  .  .  . 9,507 9,601 240,082 253,799 25⋅2 26⋅4 Buckwheat  .  . 1,484 1,392 26,345 23,136 17⋅7 16⋅6 Maize .  .  .  . 1,391 1,330 25,723 24,459 18⋅4 18⋅4

Forage Crops.—The mangold-wurzel, occupying four times the acreage of swedes and turnips, is by far the chief root-crop in France. It is grown largely in the departments of Nord and Pas-de-Calais and in those of the Seine basin, the southern limit of its cultivation being roughly a line drawn from Bordeaux to Lyons. The average area occupied by it in the years from 1896 to 1905 was 1,043,000 acres, the total average production being 262,364,000 cwt. and the average production per acre 10½ tons. Clover, lucerne and sainfoin make up the bulk of artificial pasturage, while vetches, crimson clover and cabbage are the other chief forage crops.

Vegetables.—Potatoes are not a special product of any region, though grown in great quantities in the Bresse and the Vosges. Early potatoes and other vegetables (primeurs) are largely cultivated in the districts bordering the English Channel. Market-gardening is an important industry in the regions round Paris, Amiens and Angers, as it is round Toulouse, Montauban, Avignon and in southern France generally. The market-gardeners of Paris and its vicinity have a high reputation for skill in the forcing of early vegetables under glass.
 Potatoes: Decennial Averages. Acreage. Total Yield (Tons). Average Yield  per Acre (Tons). 1886–{1895 3,690,000 11,150,000 3⋅02 1896–1905 3,735,000 11,594,000}emsp; 3⋅1

Industrial Plants.[6]—The manufacture of sugar from beetroot, owing to the increased use of sugar, became highly important during the latter half of the 19th century, the industry both of cultivation and manufacture being concentrated in the northern departments of Aisne, Nord, Pas-de-Calais, Somme and Oise, the first named supplying nearly a quarter of the whole amount produced in France.

Flax and hemp showed a decreasing acreage from 1881 onwards. Flax is cultivated chiefly in the northern departments of Nord, Seine-Inférieure, Pas-de-Calais, Côtes-du-Nord, hemp in Sarthe, Morbihan and Maine-et-Loire.

Colza, grown chiefly in the lower basin of the Seine (Seine-Inférieure and Eure), is the most important of the oil-producing plants, all of which show a diminishing acreage. The three principal regions for the production of tobacco are the basin of the Garonne (Lot-et-Garonne, Dordogne, Lot and Girdonde), the basin of the Isère (Isère and Savoie) and the department of Pas-de-Calais. The state controls its cultivation, which is allowed only in a limited number of departments. Hops cover only about 7000 acres, being almost confined to the departments of Nord, Côte d’Or and Meurthe-et-Moselle.

 Decennial Averages 1896 – 1905. Acreage. Production (Tons). Average Yield  per Acre (Tons). Sugar beet  .﻿. ﻿672,000﻿ 6,868,000 ﻿ ﻿10 ⋅2﻿ Hemp   .﻿.﻿. 64,856﻿ 18,451 [7] ⋅28[7] Flax   .﻿.﻿. 57,893﻿ 17,857 [7] ⋅30[7] Colza   .﻿.﻿. 102,454﻿ 47,697 ⋅46 Tobacco   .﻿. 41,564﻿ 22,453 ⋅54

Vineyards (see Wine).—The vine grows generally in France, except in the extreme north and in Normandy and Brittany. The great wine-producing regions are:

1. The country fringing the Mediterranean coast and including Hérault (240,822,000 gals. in 1905), and Aude (117,483,000 gals. in 1905), the most productive departments in France in this respect.

2. The department of Girdonde (95,559,000 gals. in 1905), whence come Médoc and the other wines for which Bordeaux is the market.

3. The lower valley of the Loire, including Touraine and Anjou, and the district of Saumur.

4. The valley of the Rhône.

5. The Burgundian region, including Côte d’Or and the valley of the Saône (Beaujolais, Mâconnais).

6. The Champagne.

7. The Charente region, the grapes of which furnish brandy, as do those of Armagnac (department of Gers).

The decennial averages for the years 1896 – 1905 were as follows:

 Acreage of productive vines﻿.﻿. 4,056,725 Total production in gallons﻿.﻿. 1,072,622,000 Average production in gallons per acre .﻿.﻿260

Fruit.—Fruit-growing is general all over France, which, apart from bananas and pine-apples, produces in the open air all the ordinary species of fruit which its inhabitants consume. Some of these may be specially mentioned. The cider apple, which ranks first in importance, is produced in those districts where cider is the habitual drink, that is to say, chiefly in the region north-west of a line drawn from Paris to the mouth of the Loire. The average annual production of cider during the years 1896 to 1905 was 304,884,000 gallons. Dessert apples and pears are grown there and in the country on both banks of the lower Loire, the valley of which abounds in orchards wherein many varieties of fruit flourish and in nursery-gardens. The hilly regions of Limousin, Périgord and the Cévennes are the home of the chestnut, which in some places is still a staple food; walnuts grow on the lower levels of the central plateau and in lower Dauphiné and Provence, figs and almonds in Provence, oranges and citrons on the Mediterranean coast, apricots in central France, the olive in Provence and the lower valleys of the Rhône and Durance. Truffles are found under the oaks of Périgord, Comtat-Venaissin and lower Dauphiné. The mulberry grows in the valleys of the Rhône and its tributaries, the Isère, the Drôme, the Ardèche, the Gard and the Durance, and also along the coast of the Mediterranean. Silk-worm rearing, which is encouraged by state grants, is carried on in the valleys mentioned and on the Mediterranean coast east of Marseilles. The numbers of growers decreased from 139,000 in 1891 to 124,000 in 1905. The decrease in the annual average production of cocoons is shown in the preceding table.

 Silk Cocoons. 1891 – 1895. 1896 – 1900. 1901 – 1905. Annual average production over quinquennial periods in ℔. 19,587,000 17,696,000 16,566,000 ${\displaystyle {\Big \}}}$

Snails are reared in some parts of the country as an article of food, those of Burgundy being specially esteemed.

Stock-raising.—From this point of view the soil of France may be divided into four categories:

1. The rich pastoral regions where dairy-farming and the fattening of cattle are carried on with most success, viz. (a) Normandy, Perche, Cotentin and maritime Flanders, where horses are bred in great numbers; (b) the strip of coast between the Girdonde and the mouth of the Loire; (c) the Morvan including the Nivernais and the Charolais, from which the famous Charolais breed of oxen takes its name; (d) the central region of the central plateau including the districts of Cantal and Aubrac, the home of the famous beef-breeds of Salers and Aubrac.[8] The famous pré-salé sheep are also reared in the Vendée and Cotentin.

2. The poorer grazing lands on the upper levels of the Alps, Pyrenees, Jura and Vosges, the Landes, the more outlying regions of the central plateau, southern Brittany, Sologne, Berry, Champagne-Pouilleuse, the Crau and the Camargue, these districts being given over for the most part to sheep-raising.

3. The plain of Toulouse, which with the rest of south-western France produces good draught oxen, the Parisian basin, the plains of the north to the east of the maritime region, the lower valley of the Rhône and the Bresse, where there is little or no natural pasturage, and forage is grown from seed.

4. West, west-central and eastern France outside these areas, where meadows are predominant and both dairying and fattening are general. Included therein are the dairying and horse-raising district of northern Brittany and the dairying regions of Jura and Savoy.

In the industrial regions of northern France cattle are stall-fed with the waste products of the beet-sugar factories, oil-works and distilleries. Swine, bred all over France, are more numerous in Brittany, Anjou (whence comes the well-known breed of Craon), Poitou, Burgundy, the west and north of the central plateau and Béarn. Upper Poitou and the zone of south-western France to the north of the Pyrenees are the chief regions for the breeding of mules. Asses are reared in Béarn, Corsica, Upper Poitou, the Limousin, Berry and other central regions. Goats are kept in the mountainous regions (Auvergne, Provence, Corsica). The best poultry come from the Bresse, the district of Houdan (Seine-et-Oise), the district of Le Mans and Crèvecœur (Calvados).

The prés naturels (meadows) and herbages (unmown pastures) of France, i.e. the grass-land of superior quality as distinguished from paturages et pacages, which signifies pasture of poorer quality, increased in area between 1895 and 1905 as is shown below:

 1895 (Acres). 1905 (Acres). Prés naturels .﻿. ﻿10,852,000﻿ ﻿11,715,000﻿ Herbages .﻿.﻿. ﻿2,822,000﻿ ﻿3,022,000﻿

The following table shows the number of live stock in the country at intervals of ten years since 1885.

 Cattle. Sheep and  Lambs. Pigs. Horses. Mules. Asses. Cows. Other   Kinds. Total. 1885 6,414,487 6,690,483 13,104,970 22,616,547 5,881,088 2,911,392 238,620 387,227 1895 6,359,795 6,874,033 13,233,828 21,163,767 6,306,019 2,812,447 211,479 357,778 1905 7,515,564 6,799,988 14,315,552 17,783,209 7,558,779 3,169,224 198,865 365,181

﻿Agricultural Organization.—In France the interests of agriculture are entrusted to a special ministry, comprising the following divisions: (1) forests, (2) breeding-studs (haras); (3) agriculture, a department which supervises agricultural instruction and the distribution of grants and premiums; (4) agricultural improvements, draining, irrigation, &c.; (5) an intelligence department which prepares statistics, issues information as to prices and markets, &c. The minister is assisted by a superior council of agriculture, the members of which, numbering a hundred, include senators, deputies and prominent agriculturists. The ministry employs inspectors, whose duty it is to visit the different parts of the country and to report on their respective position and wants. The reports which they furnish help to determine the distribution of the moneys dispensed by the state in the form of subventions to agricultural societies and in many other ways. The chief type of agricultural society is the comice agricole, an association for the discussion of agricultural problems and the organization of provincial shows. There are besides several thousands of local syndicates, engaged in the purchase of materials and sale of produce on the most advantageous terms for their members, credit banks and mutual insurance societies (see Co-operation). Three societies demand special mention: the Union centrale des agriculteurs de France, to which the above syndicates are affiliated; the Société nationale d’agriculture, whose mission is to further agricultural progress and to supply the government with information on everything appertaining thereto and the Société des agriculteurs de France.

Among a variety of premiums awarded by the state are those for the best cultivated estates and for irrigation works, and to the owners of the best stallions and brood-mares. Haras or stallion stables containing in all over 3000 horses are established in twenty-two central towns, and annually send stallions, which are at the disposal of private individuals in return for a small fee, to various stations throughout the country. Other institutions belonging to the state are the national sheep-fold of Rambouillet (Seine-et-Oise) and the cow-house of Vieux-Pin (Orne) for the breeding of Durham cows. Four different grades of institution for agricultural instruction are under state direction: (1) farm-schools and schools of apprenticeship in dairying, &c., to which the age of admission is from 14 to 16 years; (2) practical schools, to which boys of from 13 to 18 years of age are admitted. These number forty-eight, and are intended for sons of farmers of good position; (3) national schools, which are established at Grignon (Seine-et-Oise), Rennes and Montpellier, candidates for which must be 17 years of age; (4) the National Agronomic Institute at Paris, which is intended for the training of estate agents, professors, &c. There are also departmental chairs of agriculture, the holders of which give instruction in training-colleges and elsewhere and advise farmers.

Forests.—In relation to its total extent, France presents but a very limited area of forest land, amounting to only 36,700 sq. m. or about 18% of the entire surface of the country. Included under the denomination of “forest” are lands—surfaces boisées—which are bush rather than forest. The most wooded parts of France are the mountains and plateaus of the east and of the north-east, comprising the pine-forests of the Vosges and Jura (including the beautiful Forest of Chaux), the Forest of Haye, the Forest of Ardennes, the Forest of Argonne, &c.; the Landes, where replanting with maritime pines has transformed large areas of marsh into forest; and the departments of Var and Ariège. The Central Mountains and the Morvan also have considerable belts of wood. In the Parisian region there are the Forests of Fontainebleau (66 sq. m.), of Compiègne (56 sq. m.), of Rambouillet, of Villers-Cotterets, &c. The Forest of Orléans, the largest in France, covers about 145 sq. m. The Alps and Pyrenees are in large part deforested, but reafforestation with a view to minimizing the effects of avalanches and sudden floods is continually in progress.

Of the forests of the country approximately one-third belongs to the state, communes and public institutions. The rest belongs to private owners who are, however, subject to certain restrictions. The Department of Waters[9] and Forests (Administration des Eaux et Forêts) forms a branch of the ministry of agriculture. It is administered by a director-general, who has his headquarters at Paris, assisted by three administrators who are charged with the working of the forests, questions of rights and law, finance and plantation works. The establishment consists of 32 conservators, each at the head of a district comprising one or more departments, 200 inspectors, 215 sub-inspectors and about 300 gardes généraux. These officials form the higher grade of the service (agents). There are besides several thousand forest-rangers and other employés (préposés). The department is supplied with officials of the higher class from the National School of Waters and Forests at Nancy, founded in 1824.

Industries.

In France, as in other countries, the development of machinery, whether run by steam, water-power or other motive forces, has played a great part in the promotion of industry; the increase in the amount of steam horse-power employed in industrial establishments is, to a certain degree, an index to the activity of the country as regards manufactures.

The appended table shows the progress made since 1850 with regard to steam power. Railway and marine locomotives are not included.

 Years No. of  Establishments. No. of  Steam-Engines. Total  Horse-Power. 1852 ﻿6,543﻿ ﻿6,080﻿ ﻿76,000﻿ 1861 ﻿14,153﻿ ﻿15,805﻿ ﻿191,000﻿ 1871 ﻿22,192﻿ ﻿26,146﻿ ﻿316,000﻿ 1881 ﻿35,712﻿ ﻿44,010﻿ ﻿576,000﻿ 1891 ﻿46,828﻿ ﻿58,967﻿ ﻿916,000﻿ 1901 ﻿58,151﻿ ﻿75,866﻿ ﻿1,907,730﻿ 1905 ﻿61,112﻿ ﻿79,203﻿ ﻿2,232,263﻿

With the exception of Loire, Bouches-du-Rhône and Rhône, the chief industrial departments of France are to be found in the north and north-east of the country. In 1901 and 1896 those in which the working inhabitants of both sexes were engaged in industry as opposed to agriculture to the extent of 50% (approximately) or over, numbered eleven, viz.:—

 Departments. Total Working  Population (1901). Industrial   Population  (1901). Percentage engaged   in Industry. 1901. 1896. Nord .﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿848,306﻿ ﻿544,177﻿ ﻿64⋅15﻿ ﻿63⋅45﻿ Territoire de Belfort ﻿40,703﻿ ﻿24,470﻿ ﻿60⋅10﻿ ﻿58⋅77﻿ Loire .﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿292,808﻿ ﻿167,693﻿ ﻿57⋅27﻿ ﻿54⋅73﻿ Seine .﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿2,071,344﻿ ﻿1,143,809﻿ ﻿55⋅22﻿ ﻿53⋅54﻿ Bouches-du-Rhône . ﻿341,823﻿ ﻿187,801﻿ ﻿54⋅94﻿ ﻿51⋅00﻿ Rhône﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿449,121﻿ ﻿243,571﻿ ﻿54⋅23﻿ ﻿54⋅78﻿ Meurthe-et-Moselle ﻿215,501﻿ ﻿115,214﻿ ﻿53⋅46﻿ ﻿50⋅19﻿ Ardennes .﻿.﻿. ﻿139,270﻿ ﻿73,250﻿ ﻿52⋅60﻿ ﻿52⋅42﻿ Vosges﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿208,142﻿ ﻿107,547﻿ ﻿51⋅67﻿ ﻿51⋅05﻿ Pas-de-Calais  .﻿. ﻿404,153﻿ ﻿200,402﻿ ﻿49⋅58﻿ ﻿46⋅55﻿ Seine-Inférieure﻿. ﻿428,591﻿ ﻿206,612﻿ ﻿48⋅21﻿ ﻿49⋅85﻿

The department of Seine, comprising Paris and its suburbs, which has the largest manufacturing population, is largely occupied with the manufacture of dress, millinery and articles of luxury (perfumery, &c.), but it plays the leading part in almost every great branch of industry with the exception of spinning and weaving. The typically industrial region of France is the department of Nord, the seat of the woollen industry, but also prominently concerned in other textile industries, in metal working, and in a variety of other manufactures, fuel for which is supplied by its coal-fields. The following sketch of the manufacturing industry of France takes account chiefly of those of its branches which are capable in some degree of localization. Many of the great industries of the country, e.g. tanning, brick-making, the manufacture of garments, &c., are evenly distributed throughout it, and are to be found in or near all larger centres of population.

 Groups. Basins. Departments. Average Production  (Thousands of Metric Tons) 1901 – 1905. Nord and Pas-de-Calais ${\displaystyle {\Big \{}}$ Valenciennes Nord, Pas-de-Calais ${\displaystyle {\Big \}}}$ ﻿20,965﻿ Le Boulonnais Pas-de-Calais Loire﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \{}}$ St Étienne and Rive-de-Gier Loire ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \}}}$ ﻿3,601﻿ Communay Isère Ste Foy l’Argentière Rhône Roannais Loire Gard﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. ${\displaystyle {\Big \{}}$ Alais Gard, Ardèche ${\displaystyle {\Big \}}}$ ﻿1,954﻿ Aubenas Ardèche Le Vigan Gard Bourgogne and Nivernais ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \{}}$ Decize Nièvre ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \}}}$ ﻿1,881﻿ La Chapelle-sous-Dun Saône-et-Loire Bert Allier Sincey Côte-d’Or Tarn and Aveyron ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \{}}$ Aubin Aveyron ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \}}}$ ﻿1,770﻿ Carmaux and Albi Tarn Rodez Aveyron St Perdoux Lot Bourbonnais .﻿. ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \{}}$ Commentry and Doyet Allier ${\displaystyle {\Bigg \}}}$ ﻿994﻿ St Eloi Puy-de-Dôme L’Aumance Allier La Queune Allier

Coal.—The principal mines of France are coal and iron mines. The production of coal and lignite averaging 33,465,000 metric tons[10] in the years 1901 – 1905 represents about 73% of the total consumption of the country; the surplus is supplied from Great Britain, Belgium and Germany. The preceding table shows the average output of the chief coal-groups for the years 1901 – 1905 inclusive. The Flemish coal-basin, employing over 100,000 hands, produces 60% of the coal mined in France.

French lignite comes for the most part from the department of Bouches-du-Rhône (near Fuveau).

The development of French coal and lignite mining in the 19th century, together with records of prices, which rose considerably at the end of the period, is set forth in the table below:

 Years. Average Yearly  Production  (Thousands of   Metric Tons). Average Price   per Ton at   Pit Mouth  (Francs). 1821 – 1830 ﻿1,495 ﻿10⋅23﻿ 1831 – 1840 ﻿2,571 ﻿9⋅83﻿ 1841 – 1850 ﻿4,078 ⋅5﻿ ﻿9⋅69﻿ 1851 – 1860 6,857 ﻿11⋅45﻿ 1861 – 1870 11,831 ﻿11⋅61﻿ 1871 – 1880 16,774 ﻿14⋅34﻿ 1881 – 1890 21,542 ﻿11⋅55﻿ 1891 – 1900 29,190 ﻿11⋅96﻿ 1901 – 1905 33,465 ﻿14⋅18﻿

Iron.—The iron-mines of France are more numerous than its coal-mines, but they do not yield a sufficient quantity of ore for the needs of the metallurgical industries of the country; as will be seen in the table below the production of iron in France gradually increased during the 19th century; on the other hand, a decline in prices operated against a correspondingly marked increase in its annual value.

 Years. Average Annual  Production  (Thousands of   Metric Tons). Price per   Metric Ton  (Francs). 1841 – 1850 1247 ﻿6⋅76﻿ 1851 – 1860 ﻿2414 ⋅5﻿ ﻿5⋅51﻿ 1861 – 1870 3035 ﻿4⋅87﻿ 1871 – 1880 2514 ﻿5⋅39﻿ 1881 – 1890 2934 ﻿3⋅99﻿ 1891 – 1900 4206 ﻿3⋅37﻿ 1901 – 1905 6072 ﻿3⋅72﻿

The department of Meurthe-et-Moselle (basins of Nancy and Longwy-Briey) furnished 84% of the total output during the quinquennial period 1901 – 1905, may be reckoned as one of the principal iron-producing regions of the world. The other chief producers were Pyrénées-Orientales, Calvados, Haute-Marne (Vassy) and Saône-et-Loire (Mazenay and Change).

Other Ores.—The mining of zinc, the chief deposits of which are at Malines (Gard), Les Bormettes (Var) and Planioles (Lot), and of lead, produced especially at Chaliac (Ardèche), ranks next in importance to that of iron. Iron-pyrites come almost entirely from Sain-Bel (Rhône), manganese chiefly from Ariège and Saône-et-Loire, antimony from the departments of Mayenne, Haute-Loire and Cantal. Copper and mispickel are mined only in small quantities. The table below gives the average production of zinc, argentiferous lead, iron-pyrites and other ores during the quinquennial period 1901 – 1905.

 Production  (Thousands of   Metric Tons). Value £. Zinc﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿60⋅3﻿ 206,912 Lead﻿.﻿.﻿. ﻿18⋅5﻿ 100,424 Iron-pyrites    . ﻿297⋅2﻿ 170,312 Other ores﻿. ﻿36⋅0﻿ 68,376

Salt, &c.—Rock-salt is worked chiefly in the department of Meurthe-et-Moselle, which produces more than half the average annual product of salt. For the years 1896 – 1905, this was 1,010,000 tons, including both rock- and sea-salt. The salt-marshes of the Mediterranean coast, especially the Étang de Berre and those of Loire-Inférieure, are the principal sources of sea-salt. Sulphur is obtained near Apt (Vaucluse) and in a few other localities of south-eastern France; bituminous schist near Autun (Saône-et-Loire) and Buxières (Allier). The most extensive peat-workings are in the valleys of the Somme; asphalt comes from Seyssel (Ain) and Puy-de-Dôme.

The mineral springs of France are numerous, of varied character and much frequented. Leading resorts are: in the Pyrenean region, Amélie-les-Bains, Bagnères-de-Luchon, Bagnères-de-Bigorre, Barèges, Cauterets, Eaux-Bonnes, Eaux-Chaudes and Dax; in the Central Plateau, Mont-Dore, La Bourboule, Bourbon l’Archambault, Vichy, Royat, Chaudes-Aigues, Vais, Lamalon; in the Alps, Aix-les-Bains and Evian; in the Vosges and Faucilles, Plombières, Luxeuil, Contrexéville, Vittel, Martigny and Bourbonne-les-Bains. Outside these main groups St Amand-les-Eaux and Foyes-les-Eaux may be mentioned.

Quarry-Products.—Quarries of various descriptions are numerous all over France. Slate is obtained in large quantities from the departments of Maine-et-Loire (Angers), Ardennes (Fumay) and Mayenne (Renazé). Stone-quarrying is specially active in the departments round Paris, Seine-et-Oise employing more persons in this occupation than any other department. The environs of Creil (Oise) and Château-Landon (Seine-et-Marne) are noted for their freestone (pierre de taille), which is also abundant at Euville and Lérouville in Meuse; the production of plaster is particularly important in the environs of Paris, of kaolin of fine quality at Yrieix (Haute-Vienne), of hydraulic lime in Ardèche (Le Teil), of lime phosphates in the department of Somme, of marble in the departments of Haute-Garonne (St Béat), Hautes-Pyrénées (Campan, Sarrancolin), Isère and Pas-de-Calais, and of cement in Pas-de-Calais (vicinity of Boulogne) and Isère (Grenoble). Paving-stone is supplied in large quantities by Seine-et-Oise, and brick-clay is worked chiefly in Nord, Seine and Pas-de-Calais. The products of the quarries of France for the five years 1901 – 1905 averaged £9,311,000 per annum in value, of which building material brought in over two-thirds.

Metallurgy.—The average production and value of iron and steel manufactured in France in the last four decades of the 19th century is shown below:

 Years. Cast Iron. Wrought Iron and Steel. Product  (Thousands  of Metric Tons). Value  (Thousands  of £). Product  (Thousands  of Metric Tons). Value  (Thousands  of £). 1861 – 1870 1191⋅5 5012 844 8,654 1871 – 1880 1391 5783 1058 ⋅5 11,776 1881 – 1890 1796 5119 1376 11,488 1891 – 1900 2267 5762 1686 14,540 1903 2841 7334 1896 15,389

Taking the number of hands engaged in the industry as a basis of comparison, the most important departments as regards iron and steel working in 1901 were:

 Department. Chief Centres. Hands engaged in  Production of  Pig-Iron and Steel. Hands engaged in  Production of Engineering Material and Manufactured Goods. Seine﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. ..﻿..﻿..﻿..﻿.. 600﻿ 102,500﻿ Nord﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Lille, Anzin, Denain, Douai, Hautmont, Maubeuge 14,000﻿ 45,000﻿ Loire﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Rive-de-Gier, Firminy, St Étienne, St Chamond 9,500﻿ 17,500﻿ Meurthe-et-Moselle﻿.﻿.﻿. Pont-à-Mousson, Frouard, Longwy, Nancy 16,500﻿ 6,500﻿ Ardennes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Charleville, Nouzon 800﻿ 23,000﻿

Rhône (Lyons), Saône-et-Loire (Le Creusot, Chalon-sur-Saône) and Loire-Inférieure (Basse-Indre, Indret, Couëron, Trignac) also play a considerable part in this industry.

The chief centres for the manufacture of cutlery are Châttelerault (Vienne), Langres (Haute-Marne) and Thiers (Puy-de-Dôme); for that of arms St Etienne, Tulle and Châttelerault; for that of watches and clocks, Besançon (Doubs) and Montbéliard (Doubs); for that of optical and mathematical instruments Paris, Morez (Jura) and St Claude (Jura); for that of locksmiths’ ware the region of Vimeu (Pas-de-Calais).

There are important zinc works at Auby and St Amand (Nord) and Viviez (Aveyron) and Noyelles-Godault (Pas-de-Calais); there are lead works at the latter place, and others of greater importance at Couëron (Loire-Inférieure). Copper is smelted in Ardennes and Pas-de-Calais. The production of these metals, which are by far the most important after iron and steel, increased steadily during the period 1890 – 1905, and reached its highest point in 1905, details for which year are given below:

 Zinc. Lead. Copper. Production (in metric tons) 43,200 24,100 7,600 Value﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. £1,083,000 £386,000 £526,000

Wool.—In 1901, 161,000 persons were engaged in the spinning and other preparatory processes and in the weaving of wool. The woollen industry is carried on most extensively in the department of Nord (Roubaix, Tourcoing, Fourmies). Of second rank are Reims and Sedan in the Champagne group; Elbeuf, Louviers and Rouen in Normandy; and Mazamet (Tarn).

Cotton.—In 1901, 166,000 persons were employed in the spinning and weaving of cotton, French cotton goods being distinguished chiefly for the originality of their design. The cotton industry is distributed in three principal groups. The longest established is that of Normandy, having its centres at Rouen, Havre, Evreux, Falaise and Flers. Another group in the north of France has its centres at Lille, Tourcoing, Roubaix, St Quentin and Amiens. That of the Vosges, which has experienced a great extension since the loss of Alsace-Lorraine, comprises Epinal, St Dié, Remiremont and Belfort. Other groups of less importance are situated in the Lyonnais (Roanne and Tarare) and Mayenne (Laval and Mayenne).

Silk.—The silk industry occupied 134,000 hands in 1901. The silk fabrics of France hold the first place, particularly the more expensive kinds. The industry is concentrated in the departments bordering the river Rhône, the chief centres being Lyons (Rhône), Voiron (Isère), St Étienne and St Chamond (Loire) (the two latter being especially noted for their ribbons and trimmings) and Annonay (Ardèche) and other places in the departments of Ain, Gard and Drôme.

Flax, Hemp, Jute, &c.—The preparation and spinning of these materials and the manufacture of nets and rope, together with the weaving of linen and other fabrics, give occupation to 112,000 persons chiefly in the departments of Nord (Lille, Armentières, Dunkirk), Somme (Amiens) and Maine-et-Loire (Angers, Cholet).

Hosiery, the manufacture of which employs 55,000 hands, has its chief centre in Aube (Troyes). The production of lace and guipure, occupying 112,000 persons, is carried on mainly in the towns and villages of Haute-Loire and in Vosges (Mirecourt), Rhône (Lyons), Pas-de-Calais (Calais) and Paris.

Leather.—Tanning and leather-dressing are widely spread industries, and the same may be said of the manufacture of boots and shoes, though these trades employ more hands in the department of Seine than elsewhere; in the manufacture of gloves Isère (Grenoble) and Aveyron (Millau) hold the first place amongst French departments.

Sugar.—The manufacture of sugar is carried on in the departments of the north, in which the cultivation of beetroot is general—Aisne, Nord, Somme, Pas-de-Calais, Oise and Seine-et-Marne, the three first being by far the largest producers. The increase in production in the last twenty years of the 19th century is indicated in the following table:—

 Years. Annual Average of  Men employed. Average Annual  Production in Metric Tons. 1881 – 1891 43,108 415,786 1891 – 1901 42,841 696,038 1901 – 1906 43,061 820,553

Alcohol.—The distillation of alcohol is in the hands of three classes of persons. (1) Professional distillers (bouilleurs et distillateurs de profession); (2) private distillers (bouilleurs de cru) under state control; (3) small private distillers, not under state control, but giving notice to the state that they distil. The two last classes number over 400,000 (1903), but the quantity of alcohol distilled by them is small. Beetroot, molasses and grain are the chief sources of spirit. The department of Nord produces by far the greatest quantity, its average annual output in the decade 1895 – 1904 being 13,117,000 gallons, or about 26% of the average annual production of France during the same period (49,945,000 gallons). Aisne, Pas-de-Calais and Somme rank next to Nord.

Glass is manufactured in the departments of Nord (Aniche, &c.), Seine, Loire (Rive-de-Gier) and Meurthe-et-Moselle, Baccarat in the latter department being famous for its table-glass. Limoges is the chief centre for the manufacture of porcelain, and the artistic products of the national porcelain factory of Sèvres have a world-wide reputation.

The manufacture of paper and cardboard is largely carried on in Isère (Voiron), Seine-et-Oise (Essonnes), Vosges (Epinal) and of the finer sorts of paper in Charente (Angoulême). That of oil, candles and soap has its chief centre at Marseilles. Brewing and malting are localized chiefly in Nord. There are well-known chemical works at Dombasle (close to Nancy) and Chauny (Aisne) and in Rhône.

Occupations.—The following table, which shows the approximate numbers of persons engaged in the various manufacturing industries of France, who number in all about 5,820,000, indicates their relative importance from the point of view of employment:

 Occupation. 1901. 1866. Baking﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 163,500﻿ . . Milling﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 99,400﻿ . . Charcuterie﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 39,600﻿ . . Other alimentary industries .﻿.﻿. 161,500﻿ .  . ﻿Alimentary industries: total﻿.﻿. 464,000﻿ 308,000﻿ Gas-works﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 26,000﻿ .  . Tobacco factories﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 16,000﻿ .  . Oil-works .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 10,000﻿ .  . Other “chemical”[11] industries﻿.﻿. 58,000﻿ .  . ﻿Chemical industries: total .﻿.﻿. 110,000﻿ 49,000﻿ Rubber factories﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 9,000﻿ ${\displaystyle {\Big \}}}$ 25,000﻿ Paper factories﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 61,000﻿ Typographic and lithographic printing 76,000﻿ .  . Other branches of book production﻿. 23,000﻿ .  . ﻿Book production: total﻿.﻿.﻿. 99,000﻿ 38,000﻿ Spinning and weaving﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 892,000﻿ 1,072,000﻿ Clothing, millinery and making up of fabrics generally 1,484,000﻿ ${\displaystyle {\Big \}}}$ 761,000﻿ Basket work, straw goods, feathers﻿. 39,000﻿ Leather and skin﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 338,000﻿ 286,000﻿ Joinery﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 153,000﻿ .  . Builder’s carpentering  .﻿.﻿.﻿. 94,900﻿ .  . Wheelwright’s work﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 82,700﻿ .  . Cooperage﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 46,600﻿ .  . Wooden shoes .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 52,400﻿ .  . Other wood industries  .﻿.﻿.﻿. 280,400﻿ .  . ﻿Wood industries: total﻿.﻿.﻿. 710,000﻿ 671,000﻿ Metallurgy and metal working﻿.﻿. 783,000﻿ 345,000﻿ Goldsmiths’ and jewellers’ work .﻿. 35,000﻿ 55,000﻿ Stone-working .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 56,000﻿ 12,000﻿ Construction, building, decorating﻿. 572,000﻿ 443,000﻿ Glass manufacture .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 43,000﻿ .  . Tiles .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 29,000﻿ .  . Porcelain and faïence﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 27,000﻿ .  . Bricks﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 17,000﻿ .  . Other kiln industries﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 45,000﻿ .  . ﻿Kiln industries: total﻿.﻿.﻿. 161,000﻿ 110,000﻿ Some 9000 individuals were engaged in unclassified industries.

﻿Fisheries.—The fishing population of France is most numerous in the Breton departments of Finistère, Côtes-du-Nord and Morbihan and in Pas-de-Calais. Dunkirk, Gravelines, Boulogne and Paimpol send considerable fleets to the Icelandic cod-fisheries, and St Malo, Fécamp, Granville and Cancale to those of Newfoundland. The Dogger Bank is frequented by numbers of French fishing-boats. Besides the above, Boulogne, the most important fishing port in the country, Calais, Dieppe, Concarneau, Douarnenez, Les Sables d’Olonne, La Rochelle, Marennes and Arcachon are leading ports for the herring, sardine, mackerel and other coast-fisheries of the ocean, while Cette, Agde and other Mediterranean ports are engaged in the tunny and anchovy fisheries. Sardine preserving is an important industry at Nantes and other places on the west coast. Oysters are reared chiefly at Marennes, which is the chief French market for them, and at Arcachon, Vannes, Oléron, Auray, Cancale and Courseulles. The total value of the produce of fisheries increased from £4,537,000 in 1892 to £5,259,000 in 1902. In 1902 the number of men employed in the home fisheries was 144,000 and the number of vessels 25,481 (tonnage 127,000); in the deep-sea fisheries 10,500 men and 450 vessels (tonnage 51,000) were employed.

Communications.

Roads.—Admirable highways known as routes nationales and kept up at the expense of the state radiate from Paris to the great towns of France. Averaging 52½ ft. in breadth, they covered in 1905 a distance of nearly 24,000 m. The École des Ponts et Chaussées at Paris is maintained by the government for the training of the engineers for the construction and upkeep of roads and bridges. Each department controls and maintains the routes départementales, usually good macadamized roads connecting the chief places within its limits and extending in 1903 over 9700 m. The routes nationales and the routes départementales come under the category of la grande voirie and are under the supervision of the Ministry of Public Works. The urban and rural district roads, covering a much greater mileage and classed as la petite voirie, are maintained chiefly by the communes under the supervision of the Minister of the Interior.

Waterways.[12]—The waterways of France, 7543 m. in length, of which canals cover 3031 m., are also classed under la grande voirie; they are the property of the state, and for the most part are free of tolls. They are divided into two classes. Those of the first class, which comprise rather less than half the entire system, have a minimum depth of 6½ ft., with locks 126 ft. long and 17 ft. wide; those of the second class are of smaller dimensions. Water traffic, which is chiefly in heavy merchandise, as coal, building materials, and agriculture and food produce, more than doubled in volume between 1881 and 1905. The canal and river system attains its greatest utility in the north, north-east and north-centre of the country; traffic is thickest along the Seine below Paris; along the rivers and small canals of the rich departments of Nord and Pas-de-Calais and along the Oise and the canal of St Quentin whereby they communicate with Paris; along the canal from the Marne to the Rhine and the succession of waterways which unite it with the Oise; along the Canal de l’Est (departments of Meuse and Ardennes); and along the waterways uniting Paris with the Saône at Chalon (Seine, Canal du Loing, Canal de Briare, Lateral canal of the Loire and Canal du Centre) and along the Saône between Chalon and Lyons.

In point of length the following are the principal canals:

 Miles. Est (uniting Meuse with Moselle and Saône)﻿.﻿. 270﻿ From Nantes to Brest﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 225﻿ Berry (uniting Montluçon with the canalized Cher and the Loire canal) 163﻿ Midi (Toulouse to Mediterranean via Béziers); see Canal 175﻿ Burgundy (uniting the Yonne and Saône) .﻿.﻿. 151﻿ Lateral canal of Loire﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 137﻿ From Marne to Rhine (on French territory)﻿.﻿. 131﻿ Lateral canal of Garonne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 133﻿ Rhône to Rhine (on French territory)﻿.﻿. 119﻿ Nivernais (uniting Loire and Yonne) .﻿.﻿.﻿. 111﻿ Canal de la Somme﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 97﻿ Centre (uniting Saône and Loire)﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 81﻿ Canal de l’Ourcq﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 67﻿ Ardennes (uniting Aisne and Canal de l’Est)﻿.﻿. 62﻿ From Rhône to Cette﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 77﻿ Canal de la Haute Marne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 60﻿ St Quentin (uniting Scheldt with Somme and Oise) 58﻿

The chief navigable rivers are:

 Total   navigated   Length. First Class  Navigability. Miles. Miles. Seine .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 339﻿ 293﻿ Aisne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 37﻿ 37﻿ Marne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 114﻿ 114﻿ Oise  .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 99﻿ 65﻿ Yonne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 67﻿ 53﻿ Rhône﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 309﻿ 30﻿ Saône﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 234﻿ 234﻿ Adour﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 72﻿ 21﻿ Garonne  .﻿.﻿.﻿. 289﻿ 96﻿ Dordogne .﻿.﻿.﻿. 167﻿ 26﻿ Loire.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 452﻿ 35﻿ Charente .﻿.﻿.﻿. 106﻿ 16﻿ Vilaine﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 91﻿ 31﻿ Escaut (in France) .﻿. 39﻿ 39﻿ Scarpe﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 41﻿ 41﻿ Lys  .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 45﻿ 45﻿ Aa   .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. 18﻿ 18﻿

﻿Railways.—The first important line in France, from Paris to Rouen, was constructed through the instrumentality of Sir Edward Blount (1809 – 1905), an English banker in Paris, who was afterwards for thirty years chairman of the Ouest railway. After the rejection in 1838 of the government’s proposals for the construction of seven trunk lines to be worked by the state, he obtained a concession for that piece of line on the terms that the French treasury would advance one-third of the capital at 3% if he would raise the remaining two-thirds, half in France and half in England. The contract for building the railway was put in the hands of Thomas Brassey; English navvies were largely employed on the work, and a number of English engine-drivers were employed when traffic was begun in 1843. A law passed in 1842 laid the foundation of the plan under which the railways have since been developed, and mapped out nine main lines, running from Paris to the frontiers and from the Mediterranean to the Rhine and to the Atlantic coast. Under it the cost of the necessary land was to be found as to one-third by the state and as to the residue locally, but this arrangement proved unworkable and was abandoned in 1845, when it was settled that the state should provide the land and construct the earthworks and stations, the various companies which obtained concessions being left to make the permanent way, provide rolling stock and work the lines for certain periods. Construction proceeded under this law, but not with very satisfactory results, and new arrangements had to be made between 1852 and 1857, when the railways were concentrated in the hands of six great companies, the Nord, the Est, the Ouest, the Paris-Lyon-Méditerranée, the Orléans and the Midi. Each of these companies was allotted a definite sphere of influence, and was granted a concession for ninety-nine years from its date of formation, the concessions thus terminating at various dates between 1950 and 1960. In return for the privileges granted them the companies undertook the construction out of their own unaided resources of 1500 m. of subsidiary lines, but the railway expenditure of the country at this period was so large that in a few years they found it impossible to raise the capital they required. In these circumstances the state agreed to guarantee the interest on the capital, the sums it paid in this way being regarded as advances to be reimbursed in the future with interest at 4%. This measure proved successful and the projected lines were completed. But demands for more lines were constantly arising, and the existing companies, in view of their financial position, were disinclined to undertake their construction. The government therefore found itself obliged to inaugurate a system of direct subventions, not only to the old large companies, but also to new small ones, to encourage the development of branch and local lines, and local authorities were also empowered to contribute a portion of the required capital. The result came to be that many small lines were begun by companies that had not the means to complete them, and again the state had to come to the rescue. In 1878 it agreed to spend £20,000,000 in purchasing and completing a number of these lines, some of which were handed over to the great companies, while others were retained in the hands of the government, forming the system known as the Chemins de Fer de l’État. Next year a large programme of railway expansion was adopted, at an estimated cost to the state of £140,000,000, and from 1880 to 1882 nearly £40,000,000 was expended and some 1800 m. of line constructed. Then there was a change in the financial situation, and it became difficult to find the money required. In these circumstances the conventions of 1883 were concluded, and the great companies partially relieved the government of its obligations by agreeing to contribute a certain proportion of the cost of the new lines and to provide the rolling stock for working them. In former cases when the railways had had recourse to state aid, it was the state whose contributions were fixed, while the railways were left to find the residue; but on this occasion the position was reversed. The state further guaranteed a minimum rate of interest on the capital invested, and this guarantee, which by the convention of 1859 had applied to “new” lines only, was now extended to cover both “old” and “new” lines, the receipts and expenditure from both kinds being lumped together. As before, the sums paid out in respect of guaranteed dividend were to be regarded as advances which were to be paid back to the state out of the profits made, when these permitted, and when the advances were wiped out, the profits, after payment of a certain dividend, were to be divided between the state and the railway, two-thirds going to the former and one-third to the latter. All the companies, except the Nord, have at one time or another had to take advantage of the guarantee, and the fact that the Ouest had been one of the most persistent and heavy borrowers in this respect was one of the reasons that induced the government to take it over as from the 1st of January 1909. By the 1859 conventions the state railway system obtained an entry into Paris by means of running powers over the Ouest from Chartres, and its position was further improved by the exchange of certain lines with the Orléans company.

The great railway systems of France are as follows:

1. The Nord, which serves the rich mining, industrial and farming districts of Nord, Pas-de-Calais, Aisne and Somme, connecting with the Belgian railways at several points. Its main lines run from Paris to Calais, via Creil, Amiens and Boulogne, from Paris to Lille, via Creil and Arras, and from Paris to Maubeuge via Creil, Tergnier and St Quentin.

2. The Ouest-État, a combination of the West and state systems. The former traversed Normandy in every direction and connected Paris with the towns of Brittany. Its chief lines ran from Paris to Le Havre via Mantes and Rouen, to Dieppe via Rouen, to Cherbourg, to Granville and to Brest. The state railways served a large portion of western France, their chief lines being from Nantes via La Rochelle to Bordeaux, and from Bordeaux via Saintes, Niort and Saumur to Chartres.

3. The Est, running from Paris via Châlons and Nancy to Avricourt (for Strassburg), via Troyes and Langres to Belfort and on via Basel to the St Gotthard, and via Reims and Mezières to Longwy.

4. The Orléans, running from Paris to Orléans, and thence serving Bordeaux via Tours, Poitiers and Angoulême, Nantes via Tours and Angers, and Montauban and Toulouse via Vierzon and Limoges.

5. The Paris-Lyon-Mediterranean, connecting Paris with Marseilles via Moret, Laroche, Dijon, Mâcon and Lyons, and with Nîmes via Moret, Nevers and Clermont-Ferrand. It establishes communication between France and Switzerland and Italy via Mâcon and Culoz (for the Mt. Cenis Tunnel) and via Dijon and Pontarlier (for the Simplon), and also has a direct line along the Mediterranean coast from Marseilles to Genoa via Toulon and Nice.

6. The Midi (Southern) has lines radiating from Toulouse to Bordeaux via Agen, to Bayonne via Tarbes and Pau, and to Cette via Carcassonne, Narbonne and Béziers. From Bordeaux there is also a direct line to Bayonne and Irun (for Madrid), and at the other end of the Pyrenees a line leads from Narbonne to Perpignan and Barcelona.

The following table, referring to lines “of general interest,” indicates the development of railways after 1885:

 Year. Mileage. Receipts in   Thousands of £. Expenses in     Thousands   of £. Passengers   carried (1000’s). Goods carried     (1000 Metric   Tons). ﻿1885﻿ ﻿18,650﻿ ﻿42,324﻿ ﻿23,508﻿ ﻿214,451﻿ ﻿75,192﻿ ﻿1890﻿ ﻿20,800﻿ ﻿46,145﻿ ﻿24,239﻿ ﻿41,119﻿ ﻿92,506﻿ ﻿1895﻿ ﻿22,650﻿ ﻿50,542﻿ ﻿27,363﻿ ﻿348,852﻿ ﻿100,834﻿ ﻿1900﻿ ﻿23,818﻿ ﻿60,674﻿ ﻿32,966﻿ ﻿453,193﻿ ﻿126,830﻿ ﻿1904﻿ ﻿24,755﻿ ﻿60,589﻿ ﻿31,477﻿ ﻿433,913﻿ ﻿130,144﻿

Narrow gauge and normal gauge railways “of local interest” covered 3905 m. in 1904.

Commerce.

After entering on a régime of free trade in 1860 France gradually reverted towards protection; this system triumphed in the Customs Law of 1892, which imposed more or less considerable duties on imports—a law associated with the name of M. Méline. While raising the taxes both on agricultural products and manufactured goods, this law introduced, between France and all the powers trading with her, relations different from those in the past. It left the government free either to apply to foreign countries the general tariff or to enter into negotiations with them for the application, under certain conditions, of a minimum tariff. The policy of protection was further accentuated by raising the impost on corn from 5 to 7 francs per hectolitre (2¾ bushels). This system, however, which is opposed by a powerful party, has at various times undergone modifications. On the one hand it became necessary, in face of an inadequate harvest, to suspend in 1898 the application of the law on the import of corn. On the other hand, in order to check the decline of exports and neutralize the harmful effects of a prolonged customs war, a commercial treaty was in 1896 concluded with Switzerland, carrying with it a reduction, in respect of certain articles, of the imposts which had been fixed by the law of 1892. An accord was likewise in 1898 effected with Italy, which since 1886 had been in a state of economic rupture with France, and in July 1899 an accord was concluded with the United States of America. Almost all other countries, moreover, share in the benefit of the minimum tariff, and profit by the modifications it may successively undergo.

Commerce, in Millions of Pounds Sterling.

 General Special Imports. Exports. Total. Imports. Exports. Total. 1876 – 1880 210⋅1 175⋅3 385⋅4 171⋅7 135⋅1 306⋅8 1881 – 1885 224⋅1 177⋅8 401⋅9 183⋅4 135⋅3 318⋅7 1886 – 1890 208⋅2 179⋅4 387⋅6 168⋅8 137⋅6 306⋅4 1891 – 1895 205⋅9 178⋅6 384⋅5 163⋅0 133⋅8 296⋅8 1896 – 1900 237⋅8 201⋅0 438⋅8 171⋅9 150⋅8 322⋅7 1901 – 1905 233⋅3 227⋅5 460⋅8 182⋅8 174⋅7 357⋅5

Being in the main a self-supporting country France carries on most of her trade within her own borders, and ranks below Great Britain, Germany and the United States in volume of exterior trade. The latter is subdivided into general commerce, which includes all goods entering or leaving the country, and special commerce which includes imports for home use and exports of home produce. The above table shows the developments of French trade during the years from 1876 to 1905 by means of quinquennial averages. A permanent body (the commission permanente des valeurs) fixes the average prices of the articles in the customs list; this value is estimated at the end of the year in accordance with the variations that have taken place and is applied provisionally to the following year.

 Imports. Exports. Value   (Thousands   of £). Per cent   of Total   Value. Value   (Thousands   of £). Per cent   of Total   Value. Articles of Food— ﻿1886 – 1890﻿ ﻿58,856﻿ ﻿34⋅9﻿ ﻿30,830﻿ ﻿22⋅4﻿ ﻿1891 – 1895﻿ ﻿50,774﻿ ﻿30⋅9﻿ ﻿28,287﻿ ﻿21⋅1﻿ ﻿1896 – 1900﻿ ﻿42,488﻿ ﻿24⋅9﻿ ﻿27,838﻿ ﻿18⋅6﻿ ﻿1901 – 1905﻿ ﻿33,631﻿ ﻿18⋅4﻿ ﻿28,716﻿ ﻿16⋅5﻿ Raw Materials[13] ﻿1886 – 1890﻿ ﻿85,778﻿ ﻿50⋅8﻿ ﻿33,848﻿ ﻿24⋅6﻿ ﻿1891 – 1895﻿ ﻿88,211﻿ ﻿54⋅3﻿ ﻿32,557﻿ ﻿24⋅4﻿ ﻿1896 – 1900﻿ ﻿101,727﻿ ﻿59⋅2﻿ ﻿40,060﻿ ﻿26⋅6﻿ ﻿1901 – 1905﻿ ﻿116,580﻿ ﻿63⋅8﻿ ﻿47,385﻿ ﻿27⋅1﻿ Manufactured Articles[14] ﻿1886 – 1890﻿ ﻿24,125﻿ ﻿14⋅3﻿ ﻿72,917﻿ ﻿53⋅0﻿ ﻿1891 – 1895﻿ ﻿24,054﻿ ﻿14⋅8﻿ ﻿72,906﻿ ﻿54⋅5﻿ ﻿1896 – 1900﻿ ﻿27,330﻿ ﻿15⋅9﻿ ﻿82,270﻿ ﻿54⋅8﻿ ﻿1901 – 1905﻿ ﻿32,554﻿ ﻿17⋅8﻿ ﻿98,582﻿ ﻿56⋅4﻿
Amongst imports raw materials (wool, cotton and silk, coal, oil-seeds, timber, &c.) hold the first place, articles of food (cereals, wine, coffee, &c.) and manufactured goods (especially machinery) ranking next. Amongst exports manufactured goods (silk, cotton and woollen goods, fancy wares, apparel, &c.) come before raw materials and articles of food (wine and dairy products bought chiefly by England).

Divided into these classes the imports and exports (special trade) for quinquennial periods from 1886 to 1905 averaged as shown in the preceding table.

The decline both in imports and in exports of articles of food, which is the most noteworthy fact exhibited in the preceding table, was due to the almost prohibitive tax in the Customs Law of 1892, upon agricultural products.

The average value of the principal articles of import and export (special trade) over quinquennial periods following 1890 is shown in the two tables below.

Principal Imports (Thousands of £).

 1891–1895. 1896–1900. 1901–1905. Coal, coke, &c..  .  .  . 7,018 9,883 10,539 Coffee  .  .  .  .  .  . 6,106 4,553 3,717 Cotton, raw  .  .  .  . 7,446 7,722 11,987 Flax  .  .  .  .  .  . 2,346 2,435 3,173 Fruit and seeds (oleaginous) 7,175 6,207 8,464 Hides and skins, raw  .  . 6,141 5,261 6,369 Machinery .  .  .  .  . 2,181 3,632 4,614 Silk, raw  .  .  .  .  . 9,488 10,391 11,765 Timber .  .  .  .  .  . 6,054 6,284 6,760 Wheat  .  .  .  .  .  . 10,352 5,276 1,995 Wine  .  .  .  .  .  . 9,972 10,454 5,167 Wool, raw  .  .  .  .  . 13,372 16,750 16,395

Principal Exports (Thousands of £).

 1891–1895. 1896–1900. 1901–1905. Apparel .  .  .  .  .  . 4,726 4,513 5,079 Brandy and other spirits  . 2,402 1,931 1,678 Butter  .  .  .  .  .  . 2,789 2,783 2,618 Cotton manufactures  .  . 4,233 5,874 7,965 Haberdashery[15] .  .  .  . 5,830 6,039 6,599 Hides, raw .  .  .  .  . 2,839 3,494 4,813 Hides, tanned or curried  . 4,037 4,321 4,753 Iron and steel, manufactures of . . 2,849 4,201 Millinery  .  .  .  .  . 1,957 3,308 4,951 Motor cars and vehicles . . . 160 2,147 Paper and manufactures of 2,095 2,145 2,551 Silk, raw, thrown, waste and cocoons 4,738 4,807 6,090 Silk and waste silk, manufactured of 9,769 10,443 11,463 Wine  .  .  .  .  .  . 8,824 9,050 9,139 Wool, raw  .  .  .  .  . 5,003 7,813 9,159 Wool, manufactures of  . 11,998 10,190 8,459

The following were the countries sending the largest quantities of goods (special trade) to France (during the same periods as in previous table).

Trade with Principal Countries. Imports (Thousands of £).

 1891–1895. 1896–1900. 1901–1905. Germany .  .  .  .  . 13,178 13,904 17,363 Belgium .  .  .  .  . 15,438 13,113 13,057 United Kingdom .  .  . 20,697 22,132 22,725 Spain  .  .  .  .  .  . 10,294 10,560 6,5251 [16] United States  .  .  .  . 15,577 18,491 19,334 Argentine Republic  .  . 7,119 10,009 10,094

Other countries importing largely into France are Russia, Algeria and British India, whose imports in each case averaged over £9,000,000 in value in the period 19011905; China (average value £7,000,000); and Italy (average value £6,000,000).

The following are the principal countries receiving the exports of France (special trade), with values for the same periods.

Trade with Principal Countries. Exports (Thousands of £).

 1891–1895. 1896–1900. 1901–1905. Germany  .  .  .  .  . 13,712 16,285 21,021 Belgium  .  .  .  .  . 19,857 22,135 24,542 United Kingdom  .  .  . 39,310 45,203 49,156 United States  .  .  .  . 9,337 9,497 10,411 Algeria  .  .  .  .  .  . 7,872 9,434 11,652

The other chief customers of France were Switzerland and Italy, whose imports from France averaged in 19011905 nearly £10,000,000 and over £7,200,000 respectively in value. In the same period Spain received exports from France averaging £4,700,000.

The trade of France was divided between foreign countries and her colonies in the following proportions (imports and exports combined).

 General Trade. Special Trade. Foreign  Countries. Colonies. Foreign  Countries. Colonies. 1891–1895 92⋅00 8⋅00 90⋅89 9⋅11 1896–1900 91⋅18 8⋅82 89⋅86 10⋅14 1901–1905 90⋅41 9⋅59 88⋅78 11⋅22

The respective shares of the leading customs in the trade of the country is approximately shown in the following table, which gives the value of their exports and imports (general trade) in 1905 in millions sterling.

 £ £ Marseilles .  .  .  . 88⋅8 Boulogne .  .  .  . 17⋅5 Le Havre .  .  .  . 79⋅5 Calais .  .  .  .  . 14⋅1 Paris   .  .  .  .  . 42⋅8 Dieppe  .  .  .  . 13⋅5 Dunkirk  .  .  .  . 34⋅8 Rouen .  .  .  .  . 11⋅3 Bordeaux .  .  .  . 27⋅4 Belfort-Petit-Croix  . 10⋅7
In the same year the other chief customs in order of importance were Tourcoing, Jeumont, Cette, St Nazaire and Avricourt.

The chief local bodies concerned with commerce and industry are the chambres de commerce and the chambres consultatives d’arts et manufactures, the members of which are elected from their own number by the traders and industrialists of a certain standing. They are established in the chief towns, and their principal function is to advise the government on measures for improving and facilitating commerce and industry within their circumscription. See also Banks and Banking; Savings Banks; Post and Postal Service.

Shipping.—The following table shows the increase in tonnage of sailing and steam shipping engaged in foreign trade entered and cleared at the ports of France over quinquennial periods from 1890.
 Entered. Cleared. French. Foreign. French. Foreign. 1891–1895 4,277,967 9,947,893 4,521,928 10,091,000 1896–1900 4,665,268 12,037,571 5,005,563 12,103,358 1901–1905 4,782,101 14,744,626 5,503,463 14,823,217

The increase of the French mercantile marine (which is fifth in importance in the world) over the same period is traced in the following table. Vessels of 2 net tons and upwards are enumerated.

 Sailing. Steam. Total. Number  of  Vessels. Tonnage. Number  of  Vessels. Tonnage. Number  of  Vessels. Tonnage. 1891–1895 14,183 402,982 1182 502,363 15,365 905,345 1896–1900 14,327 437,468 1231 504,674 15,558 942,142 1901–1905 14,867 642,562 1388 617,536 16,255 1,260,098
At the beginning of 1908 the total was 17,193 (tonnage, 1,402,647); of these 13,601 (tonnage, 81,833) were vessels of less than 20 tons, while 502 (tonnage, 1,014,506) were over 800 tons.} The increase in the tonnage of sailing vessels, which in other countries tends to decline, was due to the bounties voted by parliament to its merchant sailing fleet with the view of increasing the number of skilled seamen. The prosperity of the French shipping trade is hampered by the costliness of shipbuilding and by the scarcity of outward-bound cargo. Shipping has been fostered by paying bounties for vessels constructed in France and sailing under the French flag, and by reserving the coasting trade, traffic between France and Algeria, &c., to French vessels. Despite these monopolies, three-fourths of the shipping in French ports is foreign, and France is without shipping companies comparable in importance to those of other great maritime nations. The three chief companies are the Messageries Maritimes (Marseilles and Bordeaux), the Compagnie Générale Transatlantique Le Havre, St Nazaire and Marseilles) and the Chargeurs Réunis (Le Havre).

Central Government.—The principles upon which the French constitution is based are representative government (by two chambers), manhood suffrage, responsibility of ministers and irresponsibility of the head of the state. Alterations or modifications of the constitution can only be effected by the National Assembly, consisting of both chambers sitting together ad hoc. The legislative power resides in these two chambers—the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies; the executive is vested in the president of the republic and the ministers. The members of both chambers owe their election to universal suffrage; but the Senate is not elected directly by the people and the Chamber of Deputies is.

The Chamber of Deputies, consisting of 584 members, is elected by the scrutin d’arrondissement (each elector voting for one deputy) for a term of four years, the conditions of election being as follows: Each arrondissement sends one deputy if its population does not exceed 100,000, and an additional deputy for every additional 100,000 inhabitants or fraction of that number. Every citizen of twenty-one years of age, unless subject to some legal disability, such as actual engagement in military service, bankruptcy or condemnation to certain punishments, has a vote, provided that he can prove a residence of six months’ duration in any one town or commune. A deputy must be a French citizen, not under twenty-five years old. Each candidate must make, at least five days before the elections, a declaration setting forth in what constituency he intends to stand. He may only stand for one, and all votes given for him in any other than that specified in the declaration are void. To secure election a candidate must at the first voting poll an absolute majority and a number of votes equal to one-fourth of the number of electors. If a second poll is necessary a relative majority is sufficient.

The Senate (see below, Law and Institutions) is composed of 300 members who must be French citizens at least forty years of age. They are elected by the “scrutin de liste” for a period of nine years, and one-third of the body retires every three years. The department which is to elect a senator when a vacancy occurs is settled by lot.

|Both senators and deputies receive a salary of £600 per annum. No member of a family that has reigned in France is eligible for either chamber.

Bills may be proposed either by ministers (in the name of the president of the republic), or by private members, and may be initiated in either chamber, but money-bills must be submitted in the first place to the Chamber of Deputies. Every bill is first examined by a committee, a member of which is chosen to “report” on it to the chamber, after which it must go through two readings (délibérations), before it is presented to the other chamber. Either house may pass a vote of no confidence in the government, and in practice the government resigns in face of the passing of such a vote by the deputies, but not if it is passed by the Senate only. The chambers usually assemble in January each year, and the ordinary session lasts not less than five months; usually it continues till July. There is an extraordinary session from October till Christmas.

The president (see below, Law and Institutions) is elected for seven years, by a majority of votes, by the Senate and Chamber of Deputies sitting together as the National Assembly. Any French citizen may be chosen president, no fixed age being required. The only exception to this rule is that no member of a royal family which has once reigned in France can be elected. The president receives 1,200,000 francs (£48,000) a year, half as salary, half for travelling expenses and the charges incumbent upon the official representative of the country. Both the chambers are summoned by the president, who has the power of dissolving the Chamber of Deputies with the assent of the Senate. When a change of Government occurs the president chooses a prominent parliamentarian as premier and president of the council. This personage, who himself holds a portfolio, nominates the other ministers, his choice being subject to the ratification of the chief of the state. The ministerial council (conseil des ministres) is presided over by the president of the republic; less formal meetings (conseils de cabinet) under the presidency of the premier, or even of some other minister, are also held.

The ministers, whether members of parliament or not, have the right to sit in both chambers and can address the house whenever they choose, though a minister may only vote in the chamber of which he happens to be a member. There are twelve ministries[17] comprising those of justice; finance; war; the interior; marine; colonies; public instruction and fine arts; foreign affairs; commerce and industry; agriculture; public works; and labour and public thrift. Individual ministers are responsible for all acts done in connexion with their own departments, and the body of ministers collectively is responsible for the general policy of the government.

The council of state (conseil d’état) is the principal council of the head of the state and his ministers, who consult it on various legislative problems, more particularly on questions of administration. It is divided for despatch of business into four sections, each of which corresponds to a group of two or three ministerial departments, and is composed of (132 councillors “en service ordinaire” (comprising a vice-president and sectional presidents), and 19 councillors “en service extraordinaire,” i.e. government officials who are deputed to watch the interests of the ministerial departments to which they belong, and in matters not concerned with those departments have a merely consultative position; (232 maîtres des requêtes; (340 auditors.

The presidency of the council of state belongs ex officio to the minister of justice.

The theory of “droit administratif” lays down the principle that an agent of the government cannot be prosecuted or sued for acts relating to his administrative functions before the ordinary tribunals. Consequently there is a special system of administrative jurisdiction for the trial of “le contentieux administratif” or disputes in which the administration is concerned. The council of state is the highest administrative tribunal, and includes a special “Section du contentieux” to deal with judicial work of this nature.

Local Government.—France is divided into 86 administrative departments (including Corsica) or 87 if the Territory of Belfort, a remnant of the Haut Rhin department, be included. These departments are subdivided into 362 arrondissements, 2911 cantons and 36,222 communes.

Before 1790 France was divided into thirty-three great and seven small military governmentss, often called provinces, which are, however, to be distinguished from the provinces formed under the feudal system. The great governments were: Alsace, Saintonge and Angournois, Anjou, Artois, Aunis, Auvergne, Béarn and Navarre, Berry, Bourbonnais; Bourgogne (Burgundy), Bretagne (Brittany), Champagne, Dauphiné, Flandre, Foix, Franche-Comté, Guienne and Gascogne (Gascony), Île-de-France, Languedoc, Limousin, Lorraine, Lyonnais, Maine, Marche, Nivernais, Normandie, Orléanais, Picardie, Poitou, Provence, Roussillon, Touraine and Corse. The eight small governments were: Paris, Boulogne and Boulonnais, Le Havre, Sedan, Toulois, Pays Messin and Verdunois and Saumurois.

 Departments. Capital Towns. Ancient Provinces Ain﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bourg﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bourgogne (Bresse, Bugey, Valromey, Dombes). Aisne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Laon .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Île-de-France; Picardie. Allier﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Moulins﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bourbonnais. Alpes-Maritimes﻿.﻿.﻿. Nice Ardèche .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Privas﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Languedoc (Vivarais). Ardennes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Mézières﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Champagne. Ariège﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Foix .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Foix; Gascogne (Cousérans). Aube﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Troyes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Champagne; Bourgogne. Aude﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Carcassonne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Languedoc. Aveyron﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Rodez﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Guienne (Rouergue). Basses-Alpes .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Digne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Provence. Basses-Pyrénées .﻿.﻿.﻿. Pau .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Béarn; Gascogne (Basse-Navarre, Soule, Labourd). Belfort, Territoire de﻿.﻿. Belfort﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Alsace. Bouches-du-Rhône﻿.﻿.﻿. Marseilles﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Provence. Calvados .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Caen .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Normandie (Bessin, Bocage). Cantal﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Aurillac﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Auvergne. Charente﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Angoulême﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Angoumois; Saintonge. Charente-Inférieure﻿.﻿. La Rochelle﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Aunis; Saintonge. Cher﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bourges .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Berry; Bourbonnais. Corrèze .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Tulle﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Limousin. Côte-d’Or﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Dijon﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bourgogne (Dijonnais, Auxois). Côtes-du-Nord﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. St Brieuc .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bretagne. Creuse﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Guéret﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Marche. Deux-Sèvres .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Niort﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Poitou. Dordogne Périgueux Guienne (Périgord). Doubs﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Besançon .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Franche-Comté; Montbéliard. Drôme﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Valence﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Dauphiné. Eure .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Évreux﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Normandie; Perche. Eure-et-Loir .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Chartres .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Orléanais; Normandie. Finistère﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Quimper .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bretagne. Gard .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Nîmes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Languedoc. Gers .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Auch .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Gascogne (Astarac, Armagnac). Girdonde﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Bordeaux .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Guienne (Bordelais, Bazadais). Haute-Garonne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Toulouse .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Languedoc; Gascogne (Comminges). Haute-Loire .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Le Puy﻿. .   ﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Languedoc (Velay); Auvergne; Lyonnais. Haute-Marne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Chaumont﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Champagne (Bassigny, Vallage). Hautes-Alpes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Gap .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Dauphiné. Haute-Saône .﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Vesoul﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Franche-Comté. Haute-Savoie﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Annecy Hautes-Pyrénées﻿.﻿.﻿. Tarbes﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Gascogne. Haute-Vienne﻿.﻿.﻿.﻿. Limoges Limousin; Marche. Hérault Montpellier Languedoc. Ille-et-Vilaine Rennes Bretagne. Indre Châteauroux Berry. Indre-et-Loire Tours Touraine. Isère Grenoble Dauphiné. Jura Lons-le-Saunier Franche-Comté. Landes Mont-de-Marsan Gascogne (Landes, Chalosse). Loire St-Étienne Lyonnais. Loire-Inférieure Nantes Bretagne. Loiret Orléans Orléanais (Orléanais proper, Gâtinais, Dunois). Loir-et-Cher Blois Orléanais. Lot Cahors Guienne (Quercy). Lot-et-Garonne Agen Guienne; Gascogne. Lozère Mende Languedoc (Gévaudan). Maine-et-Loire Angers Anjou. Manche St-Lô Normandie (Cotentin). Marne Châlons-sur-Marne Champagne. Mayenne Laval Maine; Anjou. Meurthe-et-Moselle Nancy Lorraine; Trois-Évêchés. Meuse Bar-le-Duc Lorraine (Barrois, Verdunois). Morbihan Vannes Bretagne. Nièvre Nevers Nivernais; Orléanais. Nord Lille Flandre; Hainaut. Oise Beauvais Île-de-France. Orne Alençon Normandie; Perche. Pas-de-Calais Arras Artois; Picardie. Puy-de-Dôme Clermont-Ferrand Auvergne. Pyrénées-Orientales Perpignan Roussillon; Languedoc. Rhône Lyon Lyonnais; Beaujolais. Saône-et-Loire Mâcon Bourgogne. Sarthe Le Mans Maine; Anjou. Savoie Chambéry Seine Paris Île-de-France. Seine-et-Marne Melun Île-de-France; Champagne. Seine-et-Oise Versailles Île-de-France. Seine-Inférieure Rouen Normandie. Somme Amiens Picardie. Tarn Albi Languedoc (Albigeois). Tarn-et-Garonne Montauban Guienne; Gascogne; Languedoc.  | Var Draguignan Provence. Vaucluse Avignon Comtat; Venaissin; Provence; Principauté d’Orange. Vendée La Roche-sur-Yon Poitou. Vienne Poitiers Poitou; Touraine. Vosges Épinal Lorraine. Yonne Auxerre Bourgogne; Champagne. Corse (Corsica) Ajaccio Corse.
has a general secretary and an advisory body (conseil de prefecture),

the members of which are appointed by the president, which has jurisdiction in certain classes of disputes arising out of administration and must, in certain cases, be consulted, though the prefect is not compelled to follow its advice. The prefect supervises the execution of the laws; has wide authority in regard to policing, public hygiene and relief of pauper children; has the nomination of various subordinate officials; and is in correspondence with the subordinate functionaries in his department, to whom he transmits the orders and instructions of the government. Although the management of local affairs is in the hands of the prefect his power with regard to these is checked by a deliberative body known as the general council (conseil général) This council, which consists for the most part of business and professional men, is elected by universal suffrage, each canton in the department contributing one member. The general council controls the departmental administration of the prefect, and its decisions on points of local government are usually final. It assigns its quota of taxes (contingent) to each arrondissement, authorizes the sale, purchase or exchange of departmental property, superintends the management thereof, authorizes the construction of new roads, railways or canals, and advises on matters of local interest. Political questions are rigorously excluded from its deliberations. The general council, when not sitting, is represented by a permanent delegation (commission départementale).

As the prefect in the department, so the sub-prefect in the arrondissement, though with a more limited power, is the representative of the central authority. He is assisted, and in some degree controlled, in his work by the district council (Conseil d'arrondissement), to which each canton sends a member, chosen by universal suffrage. As the arrondissement has neither property nor budget, the principal business of the council is to allot to each commune its share of the direct taxes imposed on the arrondissement by the general council. The canton is purely an administrative division, containing, on an average, about twelve communes, though some exceptional communes are big enough to contain more than one canton. It is the seat of a justice of the peace, and is the electoral unit for the general council and the district council. The communes, varying greatly in area and population, are the administrative units in France. The chief magistrate of the commune is the mayor (maire), who is (r) the agent of the central government and charged as such with the local promulgation and execution of the general laws and decrees of the country; (2) the executive head of the municipality, in which capacity he supervises the police, the revenue and public works of the commune, and acts as the representative of the corporation in general. He also acts as registrar of births, deaths and marriages, and officiates at civil marriages. Mayors are usually assisted by deputies (adjoints) In a commune of 2500 inhabitants or less there is one deputy; in more populous communes there may be more, but in no case must the number exceed twelve, except at Lyons, where as many as seventeen are allowed. Both mayors and deputy mayors are elected by and from among members of the municipal council for four years. This body consists, according to the population of the commune, of from io to 36 members, elected for four years on the principle of the scrutin de liste by Frenchrnen who have reached the age of twenty-one years and have a six months' residence qualification. The local affairs of the commune are decided by the municipal council, and its decisions become operative after the expiration of a month, save in matters which involve interests transcending those of the commune. In such cases the prefect must approve them, and in some cases the sanction of the general council or even ratification by the president is necessary. The council also chooses communal delegates to elect senators; and draws up the list of répartiteurs, whose function is to settle how the commune's share of direct taxes shall be allotted among the taxpayers. The sub-prefect then selects from this list ten of whom he approves for the post. The meetings of the council are open to the public.

J ustice.

The ordinary judicial system of France comprises two classes of courts: (1) civil and criminal, (2) special, including courts dealing only with purely commercial cases; in addition there are the administrative courts, including bodies, the Conseil d'Etat and the Conseils de Préfecture, which deal, in their judicial capacity, with cases coming under the droit administratif Mention may also be made of the Tribunal des Confiits, a special court whose function it is to decide which is the competent tribunal when an administration and a judicial court both claim or refuse to deal with a given case. Taking the first class of courts, which have both civil and criminal jurisdiction, the lowest tribunal in the system is that of the juge de paix.,

In each canton is a juge de paix, who in his capacity as a civil judge takes cognizance, without appeal, of disputes where the amount sought to be recovered does not exceed £12 in value. Where the amount exceeds £12 but not £24 an appeal lies from his decision to the court of first instance. In some particular cases where special promptitude or local knowledge is necessary, as disputes between hotel keepers and travellers, and the like, he has jurisdiction (subject to appeal to the court of first instance) up to £60. He has also a criminal jurisdiction in contraventions, e. breaches of law punishable by a fine not exceeding 12s. or by imprisonment not exceeding five days. If the sentence be one of imprisonment or the fine exceeds 4s, appeal lies to the court of first instance. It is an important function of the jugs de paix to endeavour to reconcile disputants who come before him, and no suit can be brought before the court of first instance until he has endeavoured without success to bring the parties to an agreement.

Tribunaux de premiere instance, also called tribunaux zfarrondissement, of which there is one in every arrondissement (with few exceptions), besides serving as courts of appeal from the juges de paix have an original jurisdiction in matters civil and criminal. The court consists of a president, one or more vice-presidents and a variable number of judges. A procurer, or public prosecutor, is also attached to each court. In civil matters the tribunal takes cognizance of actions relating to personal property to the value of £60, and actions relating to land to the value of 60 fr. (£2Z Ss.) per annum. When it deals with matters involving larger sums an appeal lies to the courts of appeal. In penal cases its jurisdiction extends to all offences of the class known as délits—offences punishable by a more serious penalty than the “ contraventions ” dealt with by the juge de paix, but not entailing such heavy penalties as the code applies to crimes, with which the assize courts (see below) deal. When sitting in its capacity as a criminal court it is known as the tribunal correctionnel Its judgments are invariably subject in these matters to appeal before the court of appeal.

There are twenty-six courts of appeal (cours d'appel), to each of which are attached from one to five departments. Cours d'Appel.

PARIS.

Departments depending on them.

Seine, Aube, Eure-et-Loir, Marne, Seine-et-Marne, Seine-et-Oise, Yonne.

AGEN Gers, Lot, Lot-et-Garonne

AIX . Bas;ses-Alpes, Alpes3Maritimes, Bouches-du-Rh6ne, ar.

AMIENS Aisne, Oise, Somme

ANGERS Maine-et-Loire, Mayenne, 5arthe BASTIA Corse.

BEsANgoN Doubs, Jura, Haute-Saone, Territoire de Belfort. BORDEAUX

BOURGES

CAEN

Charente, Dordogne, Gironde.

Cher, lnclre, Nievre.

CHAMBERY Savoie, Haute-Savoie.

DIJON Cote-d'Or, Haute-Marne, Saone-et-Loire. DoUA1 Nord, Pas-de-Calais.

GRENOBLE Hautes-Al es, Drome, Isére.

Lnuocns

LYoNs

MONTPELLIER

NANCY .

Ninas

Correze, Cieuse, Haute-Vienne.

Ain, Loire, Rhone.

Aude, Aveyron, Hérault, Pyrénées-Orientales. Meurthe-et-Moselle, Meuse, Vosges, Ardennes. Ardéchc, Gard, Lozére, Vaucluse. Cours d'Appel. Departments depending on them. ORLEANS . . Indre-et-Loire, Loir-et-Cher, Loiret. PAU . . Landes, Basses-Pyrénées, Hautes-Pyrénées. POITIERS . Charente-Inférieure, Deux-Sevres, Vendée, Vienne. RENNES Cotes-du-Nord, Finistere, llle-et-Vilaine, Loire-Inférieure, Morbihan.

RIOM . . . Allier, Cantal, Haute-Loire, Puy-de-Dome. ROUEN . . Eure, Seine-lnférieure.

TOULOUSE. . Ariege, Haute-Garonne, Tarn, Tarn-et-Garonne. At the head of each court, which is divided into sections (chambres), is a premier president. Each section (chambre) consists of a president de chambre and four judges (conseillers). Procureurs-généraux and afuocats-généraux are also attached to the parquet, or permanent official staff, of the courts of appeal. The principal function of these courts is the hearing of appeals both civil and criminal from the courts of first instance; only in some few cases (e. g. discharge of bankrupts) do they exercise an original jurisdiction. One of the sections is termed the chambre des mises en accusation. Its function is to examine criminal cases and to decide whether they shall be referred for trial to the lower courts or the cours d'assises. It may also dismiss a case on grounds of insufficient evidence.,

The cours d'assises are not separate and permanent tribunals. Every three months an assize is held in each department, usually at the chief town, by a conseiller, appointed ad hoc, of the court of appeal upon which the department depends. The cour d'assises occupies itself entirely with offences of the most serious type, classified under the penal code as crimes, in accordance with the severity of the penalties attached. The president is assisted in his duties by two other magistrates, who may be chosen either from among the conseillers of the court of appeal or the presidents or judges of the local court of first instance. In this court and in this court alone there is always a jury of twelve. They decide, as in England, on facts only, leaving the application of the law to the judges. The verdict is given by a simple majority.

In all criminal prosecutions, other than those coming before the juge de paix, a secret preliminary investigation is made by an official called a juge d'instruction. He may either dismiss the case at once by an order of “ non-lieu, ” or order it to be tried, when the prosecution is undertaken by the procurer or procurer-général. This process in some degree corresponds to the manner in which English magistrates dismiss a case or commit the prisoner to quarter sessions or assizes, but the powers of the juge d'instruction are more arbitrary and absolute.

The highest tribunal in France is the cour de causation, sitting at Paris, and consisting of a first president, three sectional presidents and forty-five conseillers, with a ministerial staff (parquet) consisting of a procurer-général and six advocates general. It is -divided into three-sections: the Chambre des Requétes, or court of petitions, the civil court and the criminal court. The cour de causation can review the decision of any other tribunal, except administrative courts. Criminal appeals usually go straight to the criminal section, while civil appeals are generally taken before the Chambre des Requétes, where they undergo a preliminary examination. If the demand for rehearing is refused such refusal is tinal; but if it is granted the case is then heard by the civil chamber, and after argument causation (annulment) is granted or refused. The Court of Cassation does not give the ultimate decision on a case; it pronounces, not on the question of fact, but on the legal principle at issue, or the competence of the court giving the original decision. Any decision, even one of a cour d'assises, may be brought before it in the last resort, and may be cassé-annulled. If it pronounces causation it remits the case to the hearing of a court of the same order.

Commercial courts (tribunaux de commerce) are established in all the more important commercial towns to decide as expeditiously as possible disputed points arising out of business transactions. They consist of judges, chosen, from among the leading merchants, and elected by comrnerconts patentés dcpuis cinq ans, i.e. persons who have held the licence to trade (sec FINANCE) for five years and upwards. In the absence of a tribunal de commerce commercial cases come before the ordinary tribunal d'arrondissement. In important industrial towns tribunals called conseils de prud'hommes are instituted to deal with disputes between employers and employees, actions arising out of contracts. of apprenticeship and the like. They are composed of employers and workmen in equal numbers and are established by decree of the council of state, advised by the minister of justice. The minister of justice is notified of the necessity for a conseil de prud'hommes by the prefect, acting on the advice of the municipal council and the Chamber of Commerce or the Chamber of Arts and Manufactures. The judges are elected by employers and workmen of a certain standing. When the amount claimed exceeds £12 appeal lies to the tribunaux d'arron¢lissement.

Police.-Broadly, the police of France may be divided into two great branches-administrative police (la police administrative) and judicial police (la police judiciaire), the former having for its object the maintenance of order, and the latter charged with tracing out offenders, collecting the proofs, and delivering the presumed offenders to the tribunals charged by law with their trial and punishment. Subdivisions may be, and often are, named according to the particular duties to which they are assigned, as la police politique, police des moeurs, police sanitaire, &c. The officers of the judicial police comprise the juge de paix (equivalent to the English police magistrate), the maire, the commissaire de police, the gendarmerie and, in rural districts, the gardes champétres and the gardes fores tiers. Gardiens de la paix (sometimes called sergents de ville, gardes de ville or agents de police) are not to be confounded with the gendarmerie, being a. branch of the administrative police and corresponding more or less nearly with the English equivalent “police constables, '7 which the gendarmerie do not, although both perform police duty. The gendarmerie, however, differ from the agents or gardes both in uniform and in the fact that they are for the most part country patrols. The organization of the Paris police, which is typical of that in other large towns, may be outlined brietiy. The central administration (administration centrale) comprises three classes of functions which together constitute la police. First there is the office or cabinet of the prefect for the general police (la police générale), with bureaus for various objects, such as the safety of the president of the republic, the regulation and order of public ceremonies, theatres, amusements and entertainments, &c.; secondly, the judicial police (la police judiciaire), with numerous bureaus also, in constant communication with the courts of judicature; thirdly, the administrative police (la police administrative) including bureaus, which superintend navigation, public carriages, animals, public health, &c. Concurrently with these divisions there is the municipal police, which comprises all the agents in enforcing police regulations in the streets or public thoroughfares, acting under the orders of a chief (chef de la police municipal) with a central bureau. The municipal police is divided into two principal branches-the service in uniform of the agents do police and the service out of uniform of inspecteurs de police. In Paris the municipal police are divided among the twenty arrondissements, which the uniform police patrol (see further PARIS and POLICE). Prisons.-The prisons of France, some of them attached to the ministry of the interior, are complex in their classification. It is only from the middle of the 19th century that close attention has been given to the principle of individual separation. Cellular imprisonment was, however, partially adopted for persons awaiting trial. Central prisons, in which prisoners lived and worked in association, had been in existence from the commencement of the 19th century. These prisons received all sentenced to short terms of imprisonment, the long-term convicts going to the bagnes (the great convict prisons at the arsenals of Rochefort, Brest and Toulon), while in 1851 transportation to penal colonies was adopted. In 1869 and 1871 commissions were appointed to inquire into prison discipline, and as a consequence of the report of the last commission, issued in 1874, the principle of cellular confinement was put in operation the following year. There Were, however, but few prisons in France adapted for the cellular system, and the process of reconstruction has been slow. In 1898 the old Paris prisons of Grande-Roquette, Saint-Pélagie and Mazas were demolished, and to replace them a large prison with 1500 cells was erected at Fresnes-lés-Rungis. There are (1) the rnaison d'arrét, temporary places of durance in every arrondissement for persons charged with offences, and those sentenced to more than a year's imprisonment who are awaiting transfer to a rnaison centrale; (2) the rnaison de justice, often part and parcel of the former, but only existing in the assize court towns for the safe custody of those tried or condemned at the assizes; (3) departmental prisons, or rnaisons de correction, for summary convictions, or those sentenced to less than a year, or, if provided with sufficient cells, those amenable to separate confinement; (4) rnaisons central es and pénitenciers agricoles, for all sentenced to imprisonment for more than a year, or to hard labour, or to those condemned to travaux forcés for offences committed in prison. There are eleven rnaisons central es, nine for men (Loos, Clairvaux, .Beaulieu, Poissy, Melun, Fontevrault, Thouars, Riom and Nimes); two for women (Rennes and Montpellier). The pénitenciers agricoles only differ from the maisons central es in the matter of régime; there are two-at Castelluccio and at Chiavari (Corsica). There are also reformatory establishments for juvenile offenders, and dépots de sureté for prisoners who are travelling, at places where there are no other prisons. For the penal settlements at a distance from France see DEPORTATION.

Finance.

At the head of the financial organization of France, and exercising a general jurisdiction, is the minister of finance, who co-ordinates in one general budget the separate budgets prepared by his colleagues and assigns to each ministerial department the sums necessary for its expenses. The financial year in France begins on the 1st of January, and the budget of each financial year must be laid on the table B of the Chamber of Deputies in the course of the ordinary Hd!!! . . . . . .

session of the preceding year in time for the discussion upon it to begin in October and be concluded before the 31st of December. It is then submitted to a special commission of the Chamber of Deputies, elected for one year, who appoint a. general reporter and one or more special reporters for each of the ministries. When the Chamber of Deputies has voted the budget it is submitted to a similar course of procedure in the Senate. When the budget has passed both chambers it is promulgated by the president under the title of Loi des finances. In the event of its not being voted before the 31st of December, recourse is had to the system of “ provisional twelfths ” (douziérnes proviso ires), whereby the government is authorized by parliament to incur expenses for one, two or three months on the scale of the previous year. The expenditure of the government has several times been regulated for as long as six months upon this system. In each department an official collector (Trésorier payeur général) receives the taxes and public revenue collected therein and accounts Taxation for them to the central authority in Paris. In view of his responsibilities he has, before appointment, to pay a large deposit to the treasury. Besides receiving taxes, they pay the creditors of the state in their departments, conduct all operations affecting departmental loans, buy and sell government stock (rentes) on behalf of individuals, and conduct certain banking operations. The trésorier nearly always lives at the chief town of the department, and is assisted by a receveur particulier des jinances in each arrondissement (except that in which the trésorier himself resides). From the receveur is demanded a security equal to live times his total income. The direct taxes are actually collected by percepteurs. In the commune an official known as the receveur municipal receives all moneys due to it, and, subject to the authorization of the mayor, makes all payments due from it. In communes with a revenue of less than £2400 the percepteur fulfils the functions of receveur municipal, but a special official may be appointed in communes with lar e incomes.

The direct taxes fall into two classes. (1) Irnpots 'de repartition (apportionment), the amount to be raised being fixed in advance annually and then apportioned among the departments. They include the land tax, '1 the personal and habitation tax (contribution personnelle-rnobihere), and door and window tax. (2) Irnpots de quatité, which are levied directly on the individual, who pays his quota according to a. fixed tariff. These comprise the tax on buildings* and the trade-licence tax (impot des patentes). Besides these, certain other taxes (taxes assimilées aux contributions directes) are included under the heading of direct taxation, e.g. the tax on property in mortmain, dues for the verification of weights and measures, the tax on royalties from mines, on horses, mules and carriages, on cycles, &c. 1

The land tax falls upon land not built upon in proportion to its net yearly revenue. It is collected in accordance with a register of property (cadastre) drawn up for the most part in the first half of the 19th century, dealing with every piece of property in France, and giving its extent and value and the name of the owner. The responsibility of keeping this register accurate and up to date is divided between the state, the departments and the communes, and involves a special service and staff of experts. The building tax consists of a levy of 3-20% of the rental value of the property, and is charged upon the owner. s

The personal and habitation tax consists in fact of two different taxes, one imposing a fixed capitation charge on all citizens alike of every department, the charge, however, varying according to the department from I fc. 50 c. (Is. gd.) to 4 fcs. 50 c. (gs. 9d.), the other levied on every occupier of a furnished house or of apartments in proportion to its rental value.

The tax on doors and windows is levied in each case according to the number of apertures, and is fixed with reference to population, the inhabitants 'of the more populous paying more than those of the less populous communes. ' ',

T he trade-licence tax (impot des patentes) is imposed on every person carrying on any business whatever; it affects professional men, bankers and manufacturers, as well as wholesale and retail traders, and consists of (I) a fixed duty levied not on actual profits but with reference to the extent of a business or calling as indicated by number of employés, population of the locality and other considerations. (2) An assessment on the letting valueof the premises in which a business or profession is carried on.-The

administrative stafi includes, for the purpose of computing the individual quotas of the direct taxes, a director assisted by controleurs in each department and subordinate to a central authority in Paris, the direction générale des contributions directes., The indirect taxes comprise the charges on registration; stamps; custorns; and a group of taxes specially described as “indirect taxes.

Registration (enregistrernent) duties are charged on the transfer of property in the way of business (d titre onéreux); on chan es in ownership effected in the wafy of donation or succession (§ titre gratuit), and on a variety o other transactions which must be registered according to law. The revenue from stamps includes as its chief items the returns from stamped paper, stamps on goods traffic, securities and share certificates and receipts and che ues. .

Tche Direction générale de Venregistrernent, des dornaines et du tirnbre, comprising a central department and a director and staff of agents in each department, combines the administration of state property (not including forests) with the exaction of registration and stamp duties.

The Customs(douane), at one time only a branch of the administration of the contributions indirect es, were organized in 1869 as a special service. The central office at Paris consists of a Directeur général and two adrninistrateurs, nominated by the president of the republic. These officials form a council of administration presided over by the minister of finance. The service in the departments comprises brigades, which are actually engaged in guarding the frontiers, and a clerical staff (service de bureau) entrusted with the collection of the duties. There are twenty-four districts, each under the control of a Directeur, assisted by inspectors, sub-inspectors and other officials. The chief towns of these districts are Algiers, Bayonne, Besangon, Bordeaux, Boulogne, Brest, Chambéry, Charleville, Dunkirk, Epinal, La Rochelle, Le Havre, Lille, Lyons, Marseilles, Montpellier, Nancy, Nantes, Nice, Paris, Perpignan, Rouen, St-Malo, Valenciennes. There is also an official performing the functions of a director at Bastia, in Corsica.

The group specially described as indirect taxes includes those on alcohol, wine, beer, cider and other alcoholic dr1nks, on passenger and goods traffic by railway, on licences to distillers, spirit-sellers, &c., on salt and on sugar of home manufacture. The collection of these excise duties as well as the sale of matches, tobacco and gunpowder to retailers, is assigned to a special service in each department subordinated to a central administration. To the above taxes must be added the tax on Stock Exchange transactions and the tax of 4 % on dividends from stocks and shares (other than state loans). 1 Other main sources of revenue are: the dorna-ins and forests managed by the state; government monopolies, comprising tobacco, matches, gunpowder; posts, telegraphs, telephones; and state I 1 The tax on land (propriétés non baties) and that on buildings (propriétés baties) are included under the head of contribution fonciere. railways. An administrative tribunal called the four des comptes ~ ~, subjects the accounts of the state's financial agents (trésoriers- Date. N€1c[1;H§ n§ ?i?lEl (Méigifgff 0 payeurs, receveurs of registration fees, of customs, of indirect taxes, W &c.) and of the communes* to a close investigation, and a vote of April I 1814 50; 2% definitive settlement is finall passed by parliament. The Cour des A ri! I' 1830 177' 8 Com tes, an ancient tribunal): was abolished in 1791, and reorganized Ngrch 'I 1848 ° 2381 9; by Diiipoleon I. in 1807. It consists of a president and IIO other January'I 1852 ' 220% 9; officials, assisted by 25 auditors, All these are nominated for life ' 1871 ' 4981 15% by the president of the republic. Besides the accounts of the state ” 1876 ' 796; 30 and of the communes, those of charitable institutions* and training ',887 ' 9861 ' 341 colleges* and a great variety of other public establishments are ' 1395 ' losgia 32; scrutinized by the Cour des Comptes. ',905 ' 10371 31 The following table shows the rapid growth of the state revenue of " Ffaflce dlffmg Rh? P¢fl0d 1375“1905» the Hsuresforthe SPeC15ed Years The French debt as constituted in 1905 was made up of funded fepfesenflng 11111110115 Of P0U“dS- debt and floating debt as folllowsii D b | ' f unde e t.

Average Average Per etual °' renter . . 888 8 0 00 1875. 18801 ' 1885" 1890' 1895' '896'I9°°° I9°I'19°5- Terginablg 30% renter . £148;4;0:i00 I°8 U8 122 129 137 144 147 Total of funded debt ..... éI,037,360,800 Of the revenue in 1905 (1501 million Pounds) the four direct taxes G';;f2§§ ;f§ S to railway Compames' &C' (ln £89 72 080 produced approximately 20 millions. 'Other principal items of Otheg debtkn cgi itél ""' 6'80g'840 revenue were: Registration 25 millions, stamps 7% millions, customs 4 p "'°' 4 18 millions, inland revenue on liquors 16% millions, receipts from the Floatin Debt tobacco monopoly 18 millions, receipts from post office I0% millions. ~ g Exchequer bills ...... £9,923,480

Smce 1875 the expenditure of the state has passed through con- Liabilities on behalf of communes and ublic siderable fluctuations. It reached its maximum in 1883, descended establishments includin d t P t I d 188 and since then has continuously in- ' - ' g epar men a Expendl- m 1888 an 9' . . Y . services ........ 17,366,520 tum creased. It was formerly the custom to divide the credits De Osit and current accounts of Caisse des ° voted for the discharge of the public services into two [f;p6tS &C includin Savings banks 15 328 840 heads-the ordinary and extraordinary budget. The ordinary Caution rhonéa, of Trésogiers a eurS géngrau§ (I'43I'680 budget of expenditure was that met entirely by the produce of the other “abilities p y 6' 56200 taxes, while the extraordinary budget of expenditure was that which ""' T ' '4 had to be incurred either in the way of an immediate loan or in aid Total of Boating debt £50, S06'720 of the funds of the floating debt. The policy adopted after 1890 of incorporating in the ordinary budget the expenditure on war, marine and public works, each under its own head, rendered the “ extraordinary budget” obsolete, but there are still, besides the ordinary budget, budgets annexes, comprising the credits voted to certain estab ishments under state supervision, e.g. the National Savings Bank, state railways, &c. The growth of the expenditure of France is shown in the following summary figures, which represent millions of pounds.

1875. IS80. 1885. 1890. 1895. I';;§ f?§§ 0 I';;'ff;"§§ 5 35 39 3 37 43 47

II I I 12 I I I

The chief item of expenditure (which totalled 148 million pounds in 1905) is the service of the public debt, which in 1905 cost 48% million pounds sterling. Of the rest of the sum assigned to the ministry of finance (59% millions in all) 8% millions went in the expense of collection of revenue. The other ministries with the largest outgoings were the ministry of war (the expenditure of which rose from 25% millions in 1895 to over 30 millions in 1905), the ministry of marine (10% millions in 1895, over 12% million sin 1905), the ministry of public works (with an expenditure in 1905 of over 20 millions, I0 millions of which was assigned to posts, telegraphs and telephones) and the ministry of public instruction, fine arts and public worship, the expenditure on education having risen from 7% millions in 1895 to 9% millions in 1205.

Public Debt.-T e national debt of France is the heaviest of any country in the world., Its foundation was laid early in the 15th centu, and the continuous wars of succeeding centuries, combined with iiie extravagance of the monarchs, as well as deliberate disregard of financial and economic conditions, increased it at an alarming rate. The duke of Sully carried out a revision in 1604, and other attempts were made by Mazarin and Colbert, but the extravagances of Louis XV. swelled it again heavily. In 1764 the national debt amounted to 2,360,000,000 livres, and the annual change to 93,000,000 livres. A consolidation was efiected in 1793, but the lavish issue of assignats (q.v.) destroyed whatever advanta e might have accrued, and the debt was again dealt with by a law of; the 9th of Vendémiaire year VI. (27th of September 1797), the annual interest aid yearly to creditors then amounting to 40,216,000 francs (, &i,6o0, oo0). During the Directory a sum of £250,000 was added to the interest charge, and by 1814 this annual charge had risen to £2,530,000. This large increase is to be accounted for by the fact that during the Napoleonic regime the government steadily refused' to issue in convertible paper currency or to meet war expenditure by borrowing. Tgie following table shows the increase of the funded debt since 1 14.

With revenues of over £1200.

For a history of the French debt, see C. F. Bastable, Public Finance (1903).

Departmental Finances.-Every department has a budget of own, which is prepared and presented by the prefect, voted by the departmental council and approved by decree of the president of the republic. The ordinary receipts include the revenues from the property of the department, the produce of additional centimes, which are levied in conjunction with the direct taxes for the maintenance of both departmental and communal finances, state subventions and contributions of the communes towards certain branches of poor relief and to maintenance of roads. The chief expenses of the departments are the care of pauper children and lunatics, the maintenance of high-roads and the service of the departmental debt. Communal Finances.-The budget of the commune is prepared by the mayor, voted by the municipal council and approved by the prefect. But in communes the revenues of which exceed £120,000, the budget is always submitted to the president of the republic. The ordinary revenues include the produce of “ additional centimes " allocated to communal purposes, the rents and profits of communal property, sums produced by municipal taxes and dues, concessions to gas, water and other companies, and by the octroi (q.v.) or duty on a variety of articles imported into the commune for local consumption. The repairing of highways, the upkeep of public buildings, the support of public education, the remuneration of numerous officials connected with the collection of state taxes, the keeping of the cadastre, &c., constitute the principal objects of communal expenditure.

Both the departments and the communes have considerable public debts. The departmental debt in 1904 stood at 2§ million pounds, and the communal debt at 153 million pounds. (. TR.) Army.

Recruiting and Strength.-Universal compulsory service was adopted after the disasters of 1870-1871, though in principle it had been established by Marshal Niel's reforms a few years before that date. The most important of the recruiting laws passed since 1870 are those of 1872, 1889 and 1905, the last the “ loi de deux ans ” which embodies the last efforts of the French War department to keep pace with the ever-growing numbers of the German empire. Compulsory service with the colours is in Germany no longer universal, as there are twice as many able-bodied men presented by the recruiting commissions as the active army can absorb. France, with a greatly inferior population, now trains every man who is physically capable. This law naturally made a deep impression on military Europe, not merely because the period of colour service was reduced-Germany had taken this step years before-but because of the almost entire absence of the usual exemptions. 3 In 1894 the rentes then standing at 4% % were reduced to 3% %, and in 1902 to 3%., Even bread-winners are required to serve, the state pensioning their dependants (75 centimes per diem, up to 10% of the strength) during their period of service. Dispensations, and also the one-year voluntariat, which had become a short cut for the so-called “ intellectual class ” to employment in the civil service rather than a means of training reserve officers, were abolished. Every Frenchman therefore is a member of the army practically or potentially from the age of twenty to the age of forty-five. Each year there is drawn up in every commune a list of the young men who attained the age of twenty during the previous year. These young men are then examined by a revising body (Conseil de révision canional) composed of civil and military officials. Men physically unfit are wholly exempted, and men who have not, at the time of the examination, attained the required physical standard are put back for re-examination after an interval. Men who, otherwise suitable, have some slight infirmity are drafted into the non-combatant branches. The minimum height for the infantry soldier is 1-54 m., or 5 ft. é in., but men of special physique are taken below this height. In 1904, under the old system of three-years' service with numerous total and partial exemptions, 324,253 men became liable to incorporation, of whom 25,432 were rejected as unfit, 55,265 were admitted as one-year volunteers, 62,160 were put back, 27,825 had already enlisted with aview to making the army a career, 5257 were taken for the navy, and thus, with a few extra details and casualties, the contingent for full service dwindled to 147,549 recruits. In 1906, 326,793 men had to present themselves, 25,348 had already enlisted, 4923 went to the navy, 68,526 were put back, 33,777 found unfit, which, deducting 3128 details, gives an actual incorporated contingent of 191,091 young men of twenty-one to serve for two full years (in each case, for the sake of comparison, men put back from former years who were enrolled are omitted). In theory a two-years contingent of course should be half as large again as a three-years one, but in practice, France has not men enough for so great an increase. Still the law of 1905 provides a system whereby there is room with the colours for every available man, and moreover ensures his services. The net gain in the 1906 class is not far short of 50,000, and the proportion of the new contingent to the old is practically 5:4. The ioi des cadres of 1907 introduced many important changes of detail supplementary to the loi de deux ans. Important changes were also made in the provisions and administration of military law. The active army, then, at a given moment, say November 1, 1908, is composed of all the young men, not legally exempted, who have reached the age of twenty in the years 1906 and 1907. It is at the disposal of the minister of war, who can decree the recall of all men discharged to the reserve the previous year and all those whose time of service has for any reason been shortened. The reserves of the active army are composed of those who have served the legal period in the active army. These are recalled twice, in the eleven years during which they are members of the reserve, for refresher courses. The active army and its reserve are not localized, but drawn from and distributed over the whole of France. The advantages of a purely territorial system have tempted various War Ministers to apply it, but the results were not good, owing to the want of uniformity in the military qualities and the political subordination of the different districts. One result of this is that mobilization and concentration are much slower processes than they are in Germany. The Territorial Army 'and its reserve (members of which undergo two short periods of training) are, however, allocated to local service. The soldier spends six years in the Territorial Army, and six in the reserve of the Territorial Army. The reserves of the active army and the Territorial Army and its reserve can only be recalled to active service in case of emergency and by decree of the head of the state.

The total service rendered by the individual soldier is thus twenty-five years. He is registered at the age of twenty, is called to the colours on the 1st of October of the next year, discharged to the active army reserve on the 30th of September of the second year thereafter, to the Territorial Army at the same date thirteen complete years after his incorporation, and finally discharged from the reserve of t'he Territorial Army on the twenty-fifth anniversary of his entry into the active army. On November 1, 1908, then the active army was composed of the classes registered 1906 and 1907, the reserve of the classes 189 5~190 5, the Territorial Army of those of 1889-1894 and the Territorial Army reserve of those of 1883-1888. In 1906 the peace strength of the army in France was estimated at 532,593 officers and men; in Algeria 54,580; in Tunis 20,320; total 607,493. Deducting vacancies, sick and absent, the effective strength of the active army in 1906 was 540, 563; of the gendarmerie and Garde Républicaine 24,512; of colonial troops in the colonies 58, 568. The full number of persons liable to be called upon for military service and engaged in such service is calculated (1908) as 4,800,000, of whom 1,3 50,000 of the active army and the younger classes of army reserve would constitute the field armies set on foot at the outbreak of war. 150,000 horses and mules are maintained on a peace footing and 600,000 on a war footing.

Organization.-The general organization of the French army at home is based on the system of permanent army corps, the headquarters of which are as follows: I. Lille, II. Amiens, III. Rouen, IV. Le Mans, V. Orléans, VI. Chalons-sur-Marne, VII. Besancon, VIII. Bourges, IX. Tours, X. Rennes, XI. Nantes, XII. Limoges, XIII. Clermont-Ferrand, XIV. Lyons, XV. Marseilles, XVI. Montpellier, XVII. Toulouse, XVIII. Bordeaux; XIX. Algiers and XX. Nancy. Each army corps consists in principle of two infantry divisions, one cavalry brigade, one brigade of horse and held artillery, one engineer battalion and one squadron of train. But certain army corps have a special organization. The VI. corps (Chalons) and the VII. (Besancon) consist of three divisions each, and the XIX. (Algiers) has three divisions of its own as well as the division occupying Tunis. In addition to these corps there are eight permanent cavalry divisions with headquarters at Paris, Lunéville, Meaux, Sedan, Reims, Lyons, Melun and Dole. The military government of Paris is independent of the army corps system and comprises, besides a division of the colonial army corps (see below), 3% others detached from the II., III., IV. and V. corps, as well as the 1st and 3rd cavalry divisions and many smaller bodies of troops. The military government of Lyons is another independent and special command; it comprises practically the XIV. army corps and the 6th cavalry division. The infantry division consists of 2 brigades, each of 2 regiments of 3 or 4 battalions (the 4 battalion regiments have recently been reduced for the most part to 3), with 1 squadron cavalry and 12 batteries, attached from the corps troops, in war proportion of the artillery would, however, be taken back to form the corps artillery (see ARTILLERY and TACTICS). The cavalry division consists of 2 or, 3 brigades, each of 2 regiments or 8 squadrons, with 2 horse artillery batteries attached. The army corps consists of headquarters, 2 (or 3) infantry divisions, I cavalry bfigade, 1 artillery brigade (2 regiments, comprising 21 field and 2 horse batteries), 1 engineer battalion, &c. In war a group of “ Rimailho ” heavy howitzers (see ORDNANCE: Heavy Field and Light Siege U nits) would be attached. It is proposed, and accepted in principle, to increase the number of guns in the army corps by converting the horse batteries in 18 army corps to field batteries, which, with other measures, enables the number of the latter to be increased to 36 (144 guns). The organization of the “ metropolitan troops ” by regiments is (a) 163 regiments of line infantry, some of which are affected to “ regional ” duties and do not enter into the composition of their army corps for war, 31 battalions of chasseurs d pied, mostly stationed in the Alps and the Vosges, 4 regiments of Zouaves, 4 regiments of Algerian tirailleurs (natives, often called Turcosl), i foreign legion regiments, 5 battalions of African light infantry (disciplinary regiments), &c.; (b) I2 1 Algerian native troops are recruited by voluntary enlistment. But in 1908, owing to the prevailing want of trained soldiers in France, it was proposed to set free the white troops in Algeria by applying the principles of universal service to the natives, as in Tunis. regiments of cuirassiers, 32 of dragoons, 21 of chasseurs d cheval, I4 of hussars, 6 of chosseurs df'/Ifrique and 4 of Spahis (Algerian natives); (c) 40 regiments of artillery, comprising 445 field batteries, 14 mountain batteries and 52 horse batteries (see, however, iabove), 18 battalionsiof garrison artillery, with in addition 13'companies of artificers, &c.; (d) 6, regiments of engineers forming 22 battalions, and 1 railway regiment; (e) 20 squadrons of train, 27 legions of gendarmerie and the. Paris Garde Républicaine, administrative and medical units. Colonial Troops.-These form an expeditionary army corps in France to which are attached the actual corps of occupation to the various colonies, part white, part natives. The colonial army corps, headquarters at Paris, has three divisions, at Paris, Toulon and Brest.

The French colonial (formerly marine) infantry, recruited by voluntary enlistment, comprises 18 regiments and 5 independent battalions (of which 12 regiments are at home), 74 batteries of field, fortress and mountain artillery (of which 32 are at home), with a few cavalry and engineers, &c., and other services in proportion. The native troops include 13 regiments and 8 independent battalions. The strength of this army corps is 28,700 in France and 61,300 in the colonies.

Command.-The commander-in-chief of all the armed forces is the president of the Republic, but the practical direction of affairs lies in the hand of the minister of war, who is assisted by the Conseil supérieur de la guerre, a body of senior generals who have been selected to be appointed to the higher commands in war. The vice-president is the destined commander-in-chief of the field armies and is styled the generalissimo. The chief of staff of the army is also a member of the council. In war the latter would probably remain at the ministry of war in Paris, and the generalissimo would have his own chief of staff. The ministry of war is divided into branches for infantry, cavalry, &c.-and services for special subjects such as military law, explosives, health, &c. The general staff (élat major de Varmée) has its functions classed as follows: personnel; material and finance; rst bureau (organization and mobilization), 2nd (intelligence), 3rd (military operations and training) and 4th (communications and transport); and the famous historical section. The president of the Republic has a military household, and the minister a cabinet, both of which are occupied chiefly with questions of promotion, patronage and decorations. The general staff and also the staff of the corps and divisions are, composed of certificated (brevelés) officers who have passed all through the Ecole de Guerre. In time of peace an officer is attached to the staff for not more than four years. He must then return to regimental duty for at least two years. The officers of the army are obtained partly from the old established military schools, partly from the ranks of the non commissioned officers, the proportion of the latter being about one-third of the total number of officers. Artillery and engineer officers come from the Ecole Polytechnique, infantry and cavalry from the Ecole spéciale militaire de St-Cyr. Other important training institutions are the staff college (Ecole supérieure de Guerre) which trains annually 70 to Q0 selected captains and lieutenants; the musketry school of Chalons, the gymnastic school at Ioinville-le-Pont and the schools of St Maixent, Saumur and Versailles for the preparation of non-commissioned officers for commissions in the infantry, cavalry, artillery and' engineers respectively. The non-commissioned officers are, as usual in universal service armies, drawn partly from men who voluntarily enlist at a relatively early age, and partly from men who at the end of their compulsory period of service are re-engaged. Voluntary enlistments in the French army are permissible, within certain limits, at the age of eighteen, and the engagés serve for at least three years. The law further provides for the re-engagement of men of all ranks, under 'conditions varying according to their rank. Such re-engagements are for one to three years' effective service but may be extended to fifteen. They date from the time of the legal expiry of each man's compulsory active service. Rengagés receive a bounty, a higher

rate ofpay and a pension at the conclusion of their service. The total number of, men who had re-enlisted stood in 1903 at 8594-

Annament.—The field artillery is armed with the 7 5 mm. gun, a shielded quick-firer (see ORDNANCE: Field Equipments, for illustration and details); this weapon was the forerunner of all modern models of field gun, and is handled on tactical principles' specially adapted for it, which gives the French field artillery a unique position amongst the military nations. The infantry, which was the first in Europe to be armed with the magazine rifle, still carries this, the Lebel, rifle which dates from 1886. It is believed, however, that a satisfactory type of automatic rifle (see RIFLE) has been evolved and is now (1908) in process of manufacture. Details are kept strictly secret. The cavalry weapons are a straight sword (that of the heavy cavalry is illustrated in the article SWORD), a bamboo lance and the Lebel Carbine. . »

It is convenient to mention in this place certain institutions attached to the war department and completing the French military organization. The Hotel des Invalides founded by Louis XIV. and Louvois is a house of refuge for old and infiim soldiers of all grades. The number of the inmates is decreasing; but the institution is an expensive one. 'In 187 5 the “ Invalides " numbered 642, and the hotel cost the state 1,123,053 francs. The order of the Legion of Honour is treated under KNIGHTHOOD AND CHIVALRY. The médaille militoire is awarded to private soldiers and non-commissioned officers who have distinguished themselves or rendered long and meritorious services. This was introduced in 1852, carries a yearly pension of 100 frs. and has been granted occasionally to officers.

Forlzjications.-After 1870 France embarked upon a policy of elaborate frontier and inner defences, with the object of ensuring, as against an unexpected German invasion, the time necessary for the effective development of her military forces, which were then in process of reorganization. Some information as to the .types of fortification adopted in 1870*-1875 will be found in FORTIFICATION AND Srnoacnarr. The general lines of the scheme adopted wereas follows: On the Meuse, which forms the principal natural barrier on the side of Lorraine, Verdun (q.'u.) was fortified as a large, entrenched camp, and along the river above this were constructed a series of forts d'arrét (see MEUSE LINE) ending in another entrenched camp at Toul.(q.v.). From this point a' gap (the lrouée d'Epinal) was left, so as “ in some sort to canalize the flow of invasion ” (General Bonnal), until the upper Moselle was reached at Epinal (q.v.). Here another entrenched camp was made and from it the “Moselle line ” (q.v.) of forts d'arrél continues the barrier to Belfort (q.'v.), another large entrenched camp, .beyond which a series of fortifications at Montbéliard and the Lomont range carries the line of defence: to the Swiss border, which in turn is protected by works at Pontarlier and elsewhere. In rear of these lines Verdun-Toul and Epinal-Belfort, respectively, lie two large defended areas in which under certain circumstances the main armies would assemble preparatory to offensive movements. One of these areas is defined by the three fortresses, La Fére, Laon and Reims, the other by the triangle, Langres-Dijon-Besancon. On the side of Belgium the danger of irruption through neutral territory, which has for many years been foreseen, is provided against by the fortresses of Lille, Valenciennes and Maubeuge, but (with a view to tempting the Germans to attack through Luxemburg, as is stated by German authorities) the frontier between Maubeuge and Verdun is left practically undefended. The real defence of this region lies in the field army which would, if the case arose, assemble in the area La Fefe-Reims-Laon. On the Italian frontier the numerous forls d'arrél in the mountains are strongly supported by the entrenched camps of Besangon, Grenoble and Nice. Behind all this huge development of fixed defences lie the central fortresses of Paris and Lyons. The defences, of the Spanish frontier consist of the entrenched camps of Bayonne and Perpignan and the various small forts d'arrél of the Pyrenees. Of the coast defences the principal are Toulon, Antibes, Rochefort, Lorient, Brest, Oléron, La Rochelle, Belle-Isle, Cherbourg, St-Malo, Havre, Calais, Gravelines and Dunkirk. A number of the older fortresses, dating for the most part from Louis XIV.'s time, are still in existence, but are no longer of military importance. Such are Arras, Longwy, Méziéres and Montmédy.

N avy., ,

The ordnance department of the navy is carried on by a large detachment of artillery officers and artificers provided by the war 'office for this special duty.

The fleet is divided into the Mediterranean squadron, the Northern squadron, the Atlantic division, the Far Eastern division, the Pacific division, the Indian Ocean division, the Cochin China division.

The chief naval school is the Ecole navale at Brest, which is devoted to the training of officers; the age of admission is from fifteen to eighteen years, and pupils after completing their course pass a year on a frigate school. At Paris there is a more advanced school (Ecole snpérieure de la Marine) for the supplementary training of officers. Other schools are the school of naval medicine at Bordeaux with annexes at Toulon, Brest and Rochefort; schools of torpedoes and mines and of gunnery at Toulon, &c., &c. The écoles zfhydrograplzie established at various ports are for theoretical training for the higher grades of the merchant service. (See also NAVY.) I

The total personnel of the arm-ée de mer in 1909 is given as 56,800 officers and men. As to the number of vessels, which fluctuates from month to month, little can be said that is wholly accurate at any given moment, but, very roughly, the French navy in 1909 included 25 battleships, 7 coast defence ironclads, I9 armoured cruisers, 36 protected cruisers, 22 sloops, gunboats, &c., 45 destroyers, 319 torpedo boats, 71 submersibles and submarines and 8 auxiliary cruisers. It was stated that, according to proposed arrangements, the principal nghting elements of the fleet would be, in 1919, 34 battleships, 36 armoured cruisers, 6 smaller cruisers of modern type, IOQ destroyers, 170 torpedo boats and 171 submersibles and submarines. The budgetary cost of the navy in 1908 was stated, as 312,000,000 fr. (£12,480,000). (C. F. A.)

Education.

The burden of public instruction in France is shared by the communes, departments and state, while side by side with the public schools of all grades are private schools subjected to a state supervision and certain restrictions. At the head of the whole organization is the minister of public instruction. He is assisted and advised by the superior council of public instruction, over which he presides.

France is divided into sixteenacadémies or educational districts, having their centres at the seats of the universities. The capitals of these academies, together with the departments-included in them, are tabulated below:

PARIS .... Seine, Cher, Eure-et-Loir, Loir-et-Cher, Loiret, Marne, Oise, Seine-et-Marne, Seine-et-Oise. AIX Bouches-du-Rhone, Basses-Alpes, Alpes-Mari times, Corse, Var, Vaucluse.

BESANQON, . . Doubs, Jura, Haute-Saone, Territoire de Belfort.

BORDEAUX . . Gironde, Dordogne, Landes, Lot-et-Garonne, Basses-Pyrénées.

CAEN . Calvados, Eure, Manehe, Orne, Sarthe, SeineInférieure. CHAMBERY . . Savoie, Haute-Savoie.

CLERMONT-FERRAND Puy-de-Dome, Allier, Cantal, Correze, Creuse, Haute-Loire.

DIJON. . . . . Cote-d'Or, Aube, Haute-Marne, Nievre, Yonne. GRENOBLE . lsere, Hautes-Alpes, Ardéche, Drome. LILLE . Nord, Aisne, Ardennes, Pas-de-Calais, Somme. Lyons . . Rhone, Ain, Loire, Saone-et-Loire. Academies. Departments included in them. - .

MoNr1>a1.uEn . Hérault, Aude, Gard, Lozére, PyrénéesOrientales. NANCY Meurthe-et-Moselle, Meuse, Vosges.

POITIERS Vienne, Charente, Charente-Inférieure, Indre, Indre-et-Loire, Deux-Sevres, Vendée, HauteVienne., Ille-et-Vilaine, Cotes-du-Nord, Finistére, Loire- lnférieure, Maine-et-Loire, Mayenne, Morbihan. Haute-Garonne, Ariege, Aveyron, Gers, Lot,

Hautes-Pyrenees, Tarn, Tarn-et-Garonne.

There is also an académie comprising Algeria.

RENNES

TOULOUSE .

For the administrative organization of education in France see EDUCATION.

Any person fulfilling certain legal requirements with regard to capacity, age and character may set up privately an educational establishment of any grade, but by the law of 1904 all religious congregations are prohibited from keeping schools of any kind whatever.

Primary Instruction.-All primary public instruction is free and compulsory for children'of both sexes between the ages of six and thirteen, but if a child can gain a certificate of primary studies at the age of eleven or after, he may be excused the rest of the period demanded by law. A child may receive instruction in a public or private school or at home. But if the parents wish him to be taught in a private school they must give notice to the mayor of the commune of their intention and the school chosen. If educated at home, the child (after two years of the compulsory period has expired) must undergo a yearly examination, and if it is unsatisfactory the parents will be compelled to send him to a public or private school.

Each commune is in theory obliged to maintain at least one public primary school, but with the approval of the minister, the departmental council may authorize a commune to combine with other communes in the upkeep of a school. If the number of inhabitants exceed 500, the commune must also provide a. special school for girls, unless the Departmental Council authorizes it to substitute a mixed school. Each department is bound to maintain two primary training colleges, one for masters, the otherfor mistresses of primary schools. There are two higher trainin(g colleges of primary instruction at Fontenay-aux-Roses and St loud for the training of mistresses and masters of training colleges and higher primary schools.

The Laws of 1882 and 1886 “ laicized ” the schools of this class, the former suppressing religious instruction, the latter providing that only laymen should be eligible for master ships. There were also a great many schools in the control of various religious congregations, but a law of 1904 required that they should all be suppressed within ten years from the date of its enactment. Public primary schools include (1) écoles maternelles-infant schools for children from two to six years old; (2) elementary primary schools-these are the ordinary schools for children from six to thirteen; (3) higher primary schools (écoles primaires supérieures) and “supplementary courses ”; these admit puéuils who have gained the certificate of primary elementary stu ies (certificate d'études primaires), offer a more advanced course and prepare for technical instruction; (4) primary technical schools (écoles manuelles fapprentissage, écoles primaires supérieures professionnelles) kept by the communes or departments. Primary

courses for adults are instituted by the prefect on the recommendation of the municipal council and academy inspector. Persons keeping private primary schools are free with regard to their methods, programmes and books employed, except that they may not use books expressly prohibited by the superior council of public instruction. Before opening a private school the person proposing to do so must give notice to the mayor, prefect and academy inspector, and forward his diplomas and other particulars to the latter official.

Secondary Education.-Secondary education is given by the state in lycées, by the communes in colleges and by private individuals and associations in private secondary schools. It is not compulsory, nor is it entirely gratuitous, but the fees are small and the state offers a great many scholarships, by means of which a clever child can pay for its own instruction. Cost of tuition (simply) ranges from £2 to £16 a year. The lycées also take boarders-the cost of boarding ranging from £22 to £52 a year. A lycée is founded in a town by decree of the president of the republic, with the advice of the superior council of public instruction. The municipality has to pay the cost of building, furnishing and u keep At the head of the lycée is the principal (proviseur), an officia nominated by the minister, and assisted by a teaching staff of professors and chargés de cours or teachers of somewhat lower standing. To become professor in a lycée it is necessary to pass an examination known as the “ agrégation, " candidates for which must be licentiates of a faculty (or have passed through the Ecole normale supérieurc). The system of studies—reorganized in 1902~<:mbraces a full I FRANCE [EDUCATION

curriculum of seven years, which is divided into two periods. The first lasts four years, and at the end of this the pupil may obtain (after examination) the “ certificate of secondary studies." During the second period the pupil has a choice of four courses: (1) Latin and Greek; (2) Latin and sciences; (3) Latin and modern languages; (4) sciences and modern languages. At the end of this period he presents himself for a degree called the Baccalauréat de Venseignement secondaire. This is granted (after two examinations) by the faculties of letters and sciences jointly (see below), and in most cases it is necessary for a student to hold this general degree before he may be enrolled in a particular faculty of a university and proceed to a Baccalauréat in a particular subject, such as law, theology or medicine.

The colleges, though of a lower grade, are in most respects similar to the lycées, but they are financed by the communes: the professors may have certain less important qualifications in lieu of the “ agrégation." Private secondary schools are subjected to state inspection. he teachers must not belong to any congregation, and must have a diploma of aptitude for teaching and the degree of “ licencié." The establishment of lycées for girls was first attempted in 1880. They give an education similar to that offered in the lycées for boyswith certain modifications-in a curriculum of hve or six years. There is a training-college for teachers in secondary schools for girls at Sevres.

Higher education is given by the state in the universities, and in special higher schools; and, since the law of 1875 established the freedom of higher education, by rivate individuals and bodies in private schools and “ faculties ” gfacultés fibres). The law of 1880 reserved to th state “ faculties " the right to confer degrees, and the law of 1896 established various universities each containing one or more faculties. There are five kinds of faculties: medicine, letters, science, law and Protestant theology. The faculties of letters and sciences, besides granting the Baccalauréat de Fenseignement secondaire, confer the degrees of licentiate and doctor (la Licence, le Doctorat). The faculties of medicine confer the degree of, doctor of medicine. The faculties of theology confer the degrees of bachelor, licentiate and doctor of theology. The faculties of law confer the same degrees in law and also grant “certificates of capacity, ” which enable the holder to practise as an avoué; a licence is necessary for the profession of barrister. Students of the private faculties have to be examined by and take their degrees from the state faculties. There are 2 faculties of Protestant theology (Paris and Montauban); 12 faculties of law (Paris, Aix, Bordeaux, Caen, Grenoble, Lille, Lyons, Montpellier, Nancy, Poitiers, Rennes, Toulouse); 3 faculties of medicine (Paris, Montpellier and Nancy), and 4 joint faculties of medicine and pharmacy (Bordeaux, Lille, Lyons, Toulouse); 15 faculties of sciences (Paris, Besangon, Bots deaux, Caen, Clermont, Dijon, Grenoble, Lille, Lyons, Marseilles, Montpellier, Nancy, Poitiers, Rennes, Toulouse); 15 faculties of letters (at the same towns, substituting Aix for Marseilles). The private faculties are at Paris (the Catholic Institute with a faculty of law); Angers (law, science and letters); Lille (law, medicine and pharmacy, science, letters); Lyons (law, science, letters); Marseilles (law); Toulouse (Catholic Institute with faculties of theology and letters). The work of the faculties of medicine and pharmacy is in some measure shared by the écoles supérieures de pharmacies (Paris, Montpellier, NancY)» which grant the highest degrees in pharmacy, and by the écoles de plein exercice de médecine et de pharmacies (Marseilles, Rennes and Nantes) and the more numerous écoles préparatoires de médecine et de pharmacies; there are also écoles préparatoires d Venseignement supérieur des sciences et des lettres at Chambéry, Rouen and Nantes.

Besides the faculties there are a number of institutions, both state-supported and private, giving higher instruction of various special kinds. In the first class must be mentioned the College de France, founded 1530, giving courses of highest study of all sorts, the Museum of Natural History, the Ecole des Chartes (paleography and archives), the School of Modern Oriental Languages, the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (scientific research), &c. All these institutions are in Paris. The most important free institution in this class is the Ecole des Sciences Politiques, which prepares pupils for the civil services and teaches a great number of political subjects, connected with France and foreign countries, not included in the state programmes.

Commercial and technical instruction is given in various institutions com rising national establishments such as the écoles nation ales projlgssionnelles of Armentieres, Vierzon, Voiron and Nantes for the education of working men; the more advanced écoles d'arts et métiers of Chalons, Angers, Aix, Lille and Cluny; and the Central School of Arts and Manufactures at Paris; schools depending on the communes and state in combination, e.g. the écoles pratiques de commerce et d'industria for the training of clerks and workmen; private schools controlled by the state, such as the écoles supérieures de commerce; certain municipal schools, such as the Industrial Institute of Lille; and private establishments, e.g. the school of watch-making at, Paris. At Paris the Ecole Supérieure des Mines and the Ecole des Ponts et Chaussées are controlled by the minister of public works, .the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, the Ecole des Arts Décoratifs and the Conservatoire National de Musique et de Déclamation by the undt-r-secrr-tary for fine arts and other schools mentioned elsewhere are attached to several of the ministries. In the provinces there are national schools of fine art and of music and other establishments and free subvention ed schools. In addition to the educational work done by the state, communes and private individuals, there exist in France a good many societies which disseminate instruction by giving courses of lectures and holding classes both for children and adults. Examples of such bodies are the Society for Elementary Instruction, the Polytechnic Association, the Philotechnic Association and the French nion of the Young at Paris; the Philomathic Society of Bordeaux; the Popular Education Society at Havre; the Rhone Society of Professional Instruction at Lyons; the Industrial Society of Amiens and others.

The highest institution of learning is the Institut de France, founded and kept up by the French government on behalf of science and literature, and composed of five academies: the COIOUY-I Colonies.

In the extent and importance of her colonial dominion France is second only to Great Britain. The following table gives the name, area and population of each colony and protectorate as well as the date of acquisition or establishment of a protectorate. It should be noted that the figures for area and population are, as a rule, only estimates, but in most instances they probably approximate closely to accuracy. Detailed notices of the separate countries will be found under their several heads:

script ions et Belles-Lettres, the Académie des Sciences, the Académie des Beaux-Arts and the Académie des Sciences Morales et Politiques (see ACADEMIES). The Académie de Médecine is a separate body. Poor Relief (Assistance publique).-In France the pauper, as such, has no legal claim to help from the community, which however, is bound to provide for destitute children (see FOUNDLING HOSPITALS) and pauper lunatics (both these being under the care of the department), aged and iniirm people without resources and victims of incurable illness, and to furnish medical assistance gratuitously to those without resources who are afflicted with curable illness. The funds for these purposes are provided by the department, the commune and the central authority. There are four main types of public benevolent institutions, all of which are communal in character: (1) The hépilal, for maternity cases and cases of curable illness; (2) the hospice, where the aged poor, cases of incurable malady, orphans, foundlings and other children without means of support, and in some cases lunatics, are received; (3) the bureau de bien-faisance, charged with the provision of out-door relief (Secours ai domicile) in money or in kind, to the aged poor or those who, though capable of working, are prevented from doing so by illness or strikes; (4) the bureau d'assistance, which dispenses free medical treatment to the destitute. These institutions are under the supervision of a branch of the ministry of the interior. The hospices and hopitaux and the bureaux de bienfaisance, the foundation of which is optional for the commune, are managed by committees consisting of the mayor of the municipality and six members, two elected by the municipal council and four nominated by the prefect. The members of these committees are unpaid, and have no concern with ways and means which are in the hands of a paid treasurer (receoeur). The bureaux de bienfaisance in the larger centres are aided by unpaid workers (commissaires or dame: AC;)i§ t\$n Area in sq. m. Population. In Asia-

Establishments in India. 1683-1750 200 273,000 In Ind0-China-Annam

1883 60,000 6,000,000

Cambodia 1 863 65,000 1,500,000 Cochin-China. 1862 22,000 3,000,000 Tongking 1883 46,000 6,000,000 Laos .... 1893 100,000 600,000

Kwang-Chow-Wan 1 898 32 5 1 89,000 Total in Asia 293,525 17,562,000 In Africa and the Indian Ocean-Algeria, 1830-1847 185,000 5,231,850

Algerian Sahara 1872-1890 760,000 Tunisia 1881 51,000 2,000,000

West Africa-Senegal

1 626 74,000 1,800,000

Upper Senegal and Niger (including part of Sahara) .. ... 1 880 1,580,000 4,000,000 Guinea .. ... 1848 107,000 2,500,000 Ivory Coast .. . 1842 129,000 2,000,000 Dahomey .. .. 1863-1894 40,000 1, o0o, o00 Congo (French Equatorial Africa)-Gabun 1839 376,000

Mid. Congo .. . 1882 700,000 259,000 Ubangi-C ad 1885-1899 3,015,000 Madagascar 1885-1 896

Nossi-be Island 1840 228,000 2,664,000 Ste Marie Island 1750

Comoro Islands 1843-1886 760 82,000 Somali Coast 186271 884 12,000 50,000 Reunion 1643 965 173,315

St Paul 8 3

Amsterdam ° I 92 19 uninhabited

Kerguelen' . .... 1 893 1,400

Total in Africa and Indian Ocean. 3,869,147 25,151,165 In America-Gularla

1626 51,000 30,000

Guadeloupe 1634 619 1 82,1 I2 Martinique 1635 380 182,024

St Pierre and Miquelon 1635 92 6,500 Total in America 52,092 400,636 111rIOce&n{a5- d

ew a e onia an De tendencies 18 -188, oo 2,000 Establishments in Oceahia 18%-1881 i,241;4,300 Total in Oceania 9,141 106,300 Grand Total 4,223,905 43,220,101 de charité), and in the big towns by paid 1. inquiry officers. Bureaux d'assistance exist in every commune, and are managed by the combined committees of the hospices and the bureaux de bienfaisance or by one of these in municipalities, where only one of those institutions exists. N0 poor-rate is levied in France. Funds for hopitals, hospices and bureaux de bienfaisance comprise: 1. A 10% surtax on the fees of admission to places of public amusement. V

2. A proportion of the sums payable in return for concessions of land in municipal cemeteries.

3. Protits of the communal Monts de Piété (pawn-shops). 4. Donations, bequests and the product of collections in churches.

5. The product of certain fines. 6. Subventions from the departments and communes. 7. Income from endowments. (R. TR.) It will be seen that nearly all the colonies and protectorates lie within the tropics. The only countries in which there is a considerable white population are Algeria, Tunisia and New Caledonia. The “ year of acquisition ” in the table, when one date only is given, indicates the period when the country or some part of it first fell under French influence, and does not imply continuous possession since. Government.-The principle underlying the administration of the French possessions overseas, from the earliest days until the close of the 19th century, was that of “domination ” and “ assimilation, ” notwithstanding that after the loss of Canada and the sale of Louisiana France ceased to hold any considerable colony in which Europeans could settle in large numbers. With 1 Kerguelen lies in the Great Southern Ocean, but is included here for the sake of convenience. the vast extension of the colonial empire in tropical countries in the last quarter of the 19th century the evils of the system of assimilation, involving also intense' centralization, became obvious. This, coupled with the realization of the fact that the value to France of her colonies was mainly commercial, led at length to the abandonment of the attempt to impose on a great number of diverse peoples, some possessing (as in Indo-China and parts of West Africa) ancient and highly complex civilizations, French laws, habits of mind, tastes and manners; For the policy of assimilation there was substituted the policy of “association,” which had for aim the development of the colonies and protectorates upon natural, i.e. national, lines. Existing civilizations were respected, a considerable degree of autonomy was granted, and every effort made to raise the moral and economic status of the natives. The first step taken in this direction was in 1900 when a law was passed which laid down that the colonies were to provide for their own civil expenditure. This law was followed by further measures tending to decentralization and the protection of the native races.

The system of administration bears nevertheless many marks of the “assimilation” era. None of the French possessions is self-governing in the manner of the chief British colonies. Several colonies, however, elect members of the French legislature, in which body is the power of fixing the form of government and the laws of each colony or protectorate. In default of legislation the necessary measures are taken by decree of the head of the state; these decrees having the force of law. A partial exception to this rule is found in Algeria, where all laws in force in France before the conquest of the country are also (in theory, not in practice) in force in Algeria. In all colonies Europeans preserve the political rights they held in France, and these rights have been extended, in whole or in part, to various classes of natives. Where these rights have not been conferred, native races are subjects and not citizens. To this rule Tunisia presents an exception, Tunisians retaining their nationality and laws.

In addition to Algeria, which sends three senators and six deputies to Paris and is treated in many respects not as a colony but as part of France, the colonies represented in the legislature are: Martinique, Guadeloupe and Réunion (each electing one senator and two deputies), French India (one senator and one deputy), Guiana, Senegal and Cochin-China (one deputy each). The franchise in the three first-named colonies is enjoyed by all classes of inhabitants, white, negro and mulatto, who are all French citizens. In India the franchise is exercised without distinction of colour or nationality; in Senegal the electors are the inhabitants (black and white) of the communes which have been given full powers. In Guiana and Cochin-China the franchise is restricted to citizens, in which category the natives (in those colonies) are not included.[18] The inhabitants of Tahiti though accorded French citizenship have not been allotted a representative in parliament. The colonial representatives enjoy equal rights with those elected for constituencies in France.

The oversight of all the colonies and protectorates save Algeria and Tunisia is confided to a minister of the colonies (law of March 20, 1894)[19] whose powers correspond to those exercised in France by the minister of the interior. The colonial army is nevertheless attached (law of 1900) to the ministry of war. The colonial minister is assisted by a number of organizations of which the most important is the superior council of the colonies (created by decree in 1883), an advisory body which includes the senators and deputies elected by the colonies, and delegates elected by the universal suffrage of all citizens in the colonies and protectorates which do not return members to parliament. To the ministry appertains the duty of fixing the duties on foreign produce in those colonies which have not been, by law, subjected to the same tariff as in France. (Nearly all the colonies save those of West Africa and the Congo have been, with certain modifications, placed under the French tariff.) The budget of all colonies not possessing a council general (see below) must also be approved by the minister. Each colony and protectorate, including Algeria, has a separate budget. As provided by the law of 1000 all local charges are borne by the colonies—supplemented at need by grants in aid-but the military expenses are borne by the state. In all the colonies the judicature has been rendered independent of the executive.

The colonies are divisible into two classes, (1) those possessing considerable powers of local self-government, (2) those in which the local government is autocratic. 'I'o this second class may be added the protectorates (and some colonies) where the native form of government is maintained under the supervision of French officials.

Class (I) includes the American colonies, Réunion, French India, Senegal, Cochin-China and New Caledonia. In these colonies the system of assimilation was carried to great lengths. At the head of the administration is a governor under whom is a secretary-general, who replaces him at need. The governor is aided by a privy council, an advisory body to which the governor nominates a minority of unofficial members, and a council general, to which is confided the control of local affairs, including the voting of the budget. The councils general are elected by universal suffrage of all citizens and those who, though not citizens, have been granted the political franchise. In Cochin-China, in place of a council general, there is a colonial council which fulfils the functions of a council general. In the second class of colonies the governor, sometimes assisted by a privy council, on which non-official members find seats, sometimes simply by a council of administration, is responsible only to the minister of the colonies. In Indo-China, West Africa, French Congo and Madagascar, the colonies and protectorates are grouped under governors-general, and to these high officials extensive powers have been granted by presidential decree. 'The colonies under the governor-general of West Africa are ruled by lieutenant-governors with restricted powers, the budget of each colony being fixed by the governor-general, who is assisted by an advisory government council comprising representatives .of all the colonies under his control. In Indo-China the governor-general has under his authority the lieutenant governor of the colonyfof Cochin-China, and the residents superior at the courts of the kings of Cambodia and Annam and in Tongking (nominally a vice royalty of Annam). There is a superior council for the Whole of Indo-China on which the natives and the European commercial community are represented, while in Cochin-China a privy council, and in the protectorates a council of the protectorate, assists in the work of administration. In each of the governments general there is a financial controller with extensive powers who corresponds directly with the metropolitan authorities (decree of March 22, 1907). . Details and local differences in form of government will be found under the headings of the various colonies and protectorates.

Colonial Finance.—The cost of the extra-European possessions, other than Algeria and Tunisia, to the state is shown in the expenses of the colonial ministry. In the budget of 1885 these expenses were put at £1,380,000 in 1895 they had increased to £3,200,000 and in 1900 to £5,100,000. In 1905 they were placed at £4,431,000. Fully three-fourths of the state contributions is expenditure on military necessities; in addition there are subventions to various colonies and to colonial railways and cables, and the expenditure on the penitentiary establishments; an item not properly chargeable to the colonies. In return the state receives the produce of convict labour in Guiana and New Caledonial. Save for the small item of military expenditure Tunisia is no charge to the French exchequer. The similar expenses of Algeria borne by the state are not separately shown, but are estimated at £2,000,000.

The colonial budgets totalled in 1907 some £16,760,000, being divisible into six categories: Algeria £4,120,000; Tunisia £3,640,000; Indo-China[20] about £5,000,000; West Africa £1,600,000; Madagascar £960,000; all rot her colonies combined £1,440,000. The authorized colonial loans, omitting Algeria and Tunisia, during the period 1884-1904 amounted to £19,200,000, the sums paid for interest and sinking funds on loans varying from £600,000 to £800,000 a year. The amount of French capital invested in French colonies and protectorates, including Algeria and Tunisia, was estimated in 1905 at £120,000,000, French capital invested in foreign countries at the same date being estimated at ten times that amount (see Ques. Dip. et Col., February 16, 1905).

Commerce.—The value of the external trade of the French possessions, exclusive of Algeria and Tunisia, increased in the ten years 1896-1905 from £18,784,060 to £34,957,479. In the last-named year the commerce of Algeria amounted to £24,506,020 and that of Tunisia to £5,969,248, making a grand total for French colonial trade in 1905 of £65,432,746. The figures were made up as follows: Total £38,556,864 £26,875,882

Imports. Exports. Total.
Algeria £15,355,500 £9,150,520 £24,506,020
Tunisia £3,638,185 £2,331,063 £5,969,248
Indo-China £10,182,411 £6,750,306 £16,932,717
West Africa £3,874,698 £2,248,317 £6,123,015
All other colonies £4,258,134 £5,481,652 £9,739,786
Total £38,556,864 £26,875,882 £65,432,746

Over three-fourths of the trade of Algeria and Tunisia is with France and other French possessions. In the other colonies and protectorates more than half the trade is with foreign countries. The foreign countries trading most largely with the French colonies are, in the order named, British colonies and Great Britain, China and Japan, the United States and Germany. The value of the trade with British colonies and Great Britain in 1905 was over £7,200,000. (F. R. C.)

Bibliography—P. Joanne, Dictionnaire géographigue et administrative de la France (8 vols., Paris, 1890-1905); C. Brossard, La France et ses colonies (6 vols., Paris, 1900-1906); O. Reclus, Le Plus Beau Royaume sous le ciel (Paris, 1899); Vidal de La Blache, La France. Tableau géographigne (Paris, 1908); V. E. Ardouin-Dumazet, Voyage en France (Paris, 1894); H. Havard, La France artistique et manumentale (6 vols., Paris, 1892-1895); A. Lebon and P. Pelet, France as it is, tr. Mrs W. Arnold (London, 1888); articles on “Local Government in France” in the Stock Exchange Official Intelligence Annuals (London, 1908 and 1909); M. Block, Dictionnaire de Vadministration française, the articles in which contain full bibliographies (2 vols., Paris, 1905); E. Levasseur, La France et ses colonies (3 vols., Paris, 1890); M. Fallex and A. Mairey, La France et ses colonies an debut du XXe siécle, which has numerous bibliographies (Paris, 1909); J. du Plessis de Grenédan, Géographie agricole de la France et dn monde (Paris, 1903); F. de St Genis, LaPropriété rurale en France (Paris, 1902); H. Baudrillart, Les Populations agricoles de la France (3 vols., Paris, 1885-1893); J. E. C. Bodley, France (London, 1899); A. Girault, Principes de colonisation et de legislation colonial (3 vols., Paris, 1907-1908); Les Colonies françarises, an encyclopedia edited by M. Petit (2 vols., Paris, 1902). Official statistical works: Annuaire statistique de la France (a summary of the statistical publications of the government), Statistique agricole annuelle, Statistigue de Vindustrie minérale et des apparels de vapeur, Tableau général du commerce et de la navigation, Reports on the various colonies issued annually by the British Foreign Office, &c. Guide Books: Karl Baedeker, Northern France, Southern France; P. ]oanne, Nord, Champagne et Ardenne; Normandie; and other volumes dealing with every region of the country.

## History

The identity of the earliest inhabitants of Gaul is veiled in obscurity, though philologists, anthropologists and archaeologists pre- historic Gual are using the glimmer of traditions collected by ancient historians to shed a faint twilight upon that remote past. The subjugation of those primitive tribes did not mean their annihilation: their blood still flows in the veins of Frenchmen; and they survive also on those megalithic monuments (see STONE MONUMENS) with which the soil of France is dotted, in the drawings and sculptures of caves hollowed out along the sides of the valleys, and in the arms and ornaments yielded by sepulchral tumuli, while the names of the rivers and mountains of France probably perpetuate the first utterances of those nameless generations.

The first peoples of whom we have actual knowledge are the Iberians and Ligurians. The Basques who now inhabit both sides of the Pyrenean range are probably the last representatives of the Iberians, who came from Spain to settle between the Mediterranean and the Bay of Biscay. The Ligurians, who exhibited the hard cunning characteristic of the Genoese Riviera, must have been descendants of that Indo-European vanguard who occupied all northern Italy and the centre and south-east of France, who in the 7th century B.C. received the Iberians and Ligurians. Phocaean immigrants at Marseilles, and who at a much later period were encountered by Hannibal during his march to Rome, on the banks of the Rhône, the frontier of the Iberian and Ligurian territories. Upon these peoples it was that the conquering minority of Celts or Gauls imposed themselves, to be succeeded at a later date by the Roman aristocracy.

When Gaul first enters the field of history, Rome has already laid the foundation of her freedom, Athens dazzles the eastern Mediterranean with her literature and her art, while{{Right sidenote|Empire in the west Carthage and Marseilles are lining opposite the Celts; shores with their great houses of commerce. Coming from the valley of the Danube in the 6th century, the Celts or Gauls had little by little occupied central and southern Europe long before they penetrated into the plains of the Saone, the Seine, and the Loire as far as the Spanish border, driving out the former inhabitants of the country. A century later their political hegemony, extending from the Black Sea to the Strait of Gibraltar, began to disintegrate, and the Gauls then embarked on more distant migrations, from the Columns of Hercules to the plateaux of Asia Minor, taking Rome on their Way. Their empire in Gaul, encroached upon in the north by the Belgae, a kindred race, and in the south by the Iberians, gradually contracted in area and eventually crumbled to pieces. This process served the turn of the Romans, who little by little had subjugated first the Cisalpine Gauls and afterwards those inhabiting the south-east of France, which was turnedThe Roman Conquest into a Roman province in the 2nd century. Up to this time Hellenism and the mercantile spirit of the Jews had almost exclusively dominated the Mediterranean littoral, and at first the Latin spirit only won foothold for itself in various spots on the western coast—as at Aix in Provence (123 B.C.) and at Narbonne (118 B.C.). A refuge of Italian pauperism in the time of the Gracchi, after the triumph of the oligarchy the Narbonnaise became a field for shameless exploitation, besides providing, under the pro consulate of Caesar, an excellent point of observation whence to Watch the intestine quarrels between the different nations of Gaul.—These are divided by Caesar in his Commentaries into three groups: the Aquitanians to the south of the Garonne; the Celts, properly so called, from the Garonne to the Seine Political divisions of Gaul. and the Marne; and the Belgae, from the Seine to the Rhine. But these ethnological names cover a very of great variety of half-savage tribes, differing in speech and in institutions, each surrounded by frontiers of dense forests abounding in game. On the edges of these forests stood isolated dwellings like sentinel outposts; while the inhabitants of the scattered hamlets, caves hollowed in the ground, rude circular huts or lake-dwellings, were less occupied with domestic life than with war and the chase. On the heights, as at Bibracte, or on islands in the rivers, as at Lutetia, or protected by marshes, as at Avaricum, oppida—at once fortresses and places of refuge, like the Greek Acropolis-kept watch and ward over the beaten tracks and the rivers of Gaul.

These primitive societies of tall, fair-skinned warriors, blueeyed and red-haired, were gradually organized into political bodies of various kinds—kingdoms, republics and Polltical institutions of Gaul. federations—and divided into districts or pagi (pays) institute which divisions the minds of the country folk have remained faithfully attached ever since. The victorious aristocracy of the kingdom dominated the other classes, strengthened by the prestige of birth, the ownership of the soil and the practice of arms. Side by side with this martial nobility the Druids constituted a priesthood unique in ancient times; neither hereditary as in India., nor composed of isolated priests as in Greece, nor of independent colleges as at Rome, it was a true corporation, which at first possessed great moral authority, though by Caesar's time it had lost both strength and prestige. Beneath these were the common people attached to the soil, who 'did not count for much, but who reacted against the insufficient protection of the regular institutions by a voluntary subordination to certain powerful chiefs.

This impotence of the state was a permanent cause of those discords and revolts, which in the rst century B.c. were so singularly favourable to Caesar's ambition. Thus gzffrin after eight years of incoherent struggles, of scattered ° revolts, and then of more and more energetic efforts, Gaul, at last aroused by Vercingetorix, for once concentrated her strength, only to perish at Alesia, vanquished by Roman discipline and struck at from the rear by the conquest of Britain (58~5o B.c.).

This defeat completely altered the destiny of Gaul, and she became one of the principal centres of Roman civilization. Of the vast Celtic empire which had dominated UML Europe nothing now remained but scattered remnants in the farthest corners of the land, refuges for all the vanquished Gaels, Picts or Gauls; and of its civilization there lingered only idioms and dialects-Gaelic, Pict and Gallic

1. which gradually dropped out of use. During five centuries

Gaul was unfalteringly loyal to her conquerors; for to conquer is nothing if the conquered be not assimilated by the conqueror, and Rome was a past-mistress of this art. The personal charm of Caesar and the prestige of Rome are not of themselves sufficient to explain this double conquest. The generous and enlightened policy of the imperial administration asked nothing of the people of Gaul but military service and the payment of the tax; in return it freed individuals from patronal domination, the people from oligarchic greed or Druidic excommunication, and every one in general from material anxiety. Petty tyrannies gave place to the great Pax Romana. The Julio-Claudian dynasty did much to attach the Gauls to the empire; they always occupied the first place in the mind of Augustus, and the revolt of the Aeduan Julius Sacrovir, provoked by the census of A.D. 21, was easily repressed by Tiberius. Caligula visited Gaul and founded literary competitions at Lyons, which had become the political and intellectual capital of the country. Claudius, who was a native of Lyons, extended the right of Roman citizenship to many of his fellow-townsmen, gave them access to the magistracy and to the senate, and supplemented the annexation of Gaul by that of Britain. The speech which he pronounced on this occasion was engraved on tables of bronze at Lyons, and is the first authentic record of Gaul's admission to the citizenship of Rome. Though the crimes of Nero and the catastrophes which resulted from his downfall, provoked the troubles of the year A.D. 7o, the revolt of Sabinus was in the main an attempt by the Germans to pillage Gaul and the prelude to military insurrections. The government of the Flavians and the Antonines completed a definite reconciliation. After the extinction of the family of Augustus in the 1st century Gaul had made many emperors-Galba, Otho, Vitellius, Vespasian and Domitian; and in the 2nd century she provided Gauls to rule the empire-Antoninus (138-161) came from Nimes and Claudius from Lyons, as did also Caracalla later on (211-217).

The romanization of the Gauls, like that of the other subject nations, was effected by slow stages and by very diverse means, furnishing an example of the constant adaptability Roman

', .
;Z'A, of Roman policy. It was begun by establishing a

caltrans- network of roads with Lyons as the central point, f°"“""°" and by the development of a, prosperous urban life ggzman in the increasingly wealthy Roman colonies; and it was continued by the disintegration into independent cities of nearly all the Gaulish states of the Narbonnaise, together with the substitution of the Roman collegial magistracy for the isolated magistracy of the Gauls. This alteration came about more quickly in the north-east in the Rhine-land than in the west and the centre, owing to the near neighbourhood of the legions on the frontiers. Rome was too tolerant to impose her own institutions by force; it was the conquered peoples who collectively and individually solicited as a favour the right of adopting the municipal system, the magistracy, the sacerdotal and aristocratic social system of their conquerors. The edict of Caracalla, at the beginning of the 3rd century, by conferring the right of citizenship on all the inhabitants of the empire, completed an assimilation for which commercial relations, schools, a taste for officialism, and the adaptability and quick intelligence of the race had already made preparation. The Gauls now called themselves Romans and their language Romance. There was neither oppression on the one hand nor servility on the other to explain this abandonment of their traditions. Thanks to the political and religious unity which a common worship of the emperor and of Rome gave, them, thanks to administrative centralization tempered by a certain amount of municipal autonomy, Gaul prospered throughout three centuries.

But this stability of the Roman peace had barely been realized when events began to threaten it both from within and without. The Pax Romana having rendered any armed force Decline

unnecessary amid a formerly very bellicose people, only 0, -me eight legions mounted guard over the Rhine to protect imperial it from the barbarians who surrounded the empire. 'f'"g'“';'-V The raids made by the Germanson the eastern frontiers, m 'W the incessant competitions for the imperial power, and the repeated revolts of the Pretorian guard, gradually undermined the internal cohesion of Gaul; while the insurrections of the Bagaudae aggravated the destruction wrought by a grasping treasury and by barbarian incursions; so that the anarchy of the 3rd century soon aroused separatist ideas. Under Postumus Gaul had already attempted to restore an independent though short-lived empire (258-267), and twenty-eight years later the tetrarchy of Diocletian proved that the blood now circulated with difficulty from the heart to the extremities of an empire on the eve of disintegration. Rome was to see her universal dominion gradually menaced from all sides. It was in Gaul that the decisive revolutions of the time were first prepared; Constantine's crusades to overthrow the altars of paganism, and Julian's campaigns to set them up again. After Constantine the emperors of the East in the 4th century merely put in an occasional appearance at Rome; they resided at Milan or in the prefectorial capitals of Gaul-at Arles, at Treves (Trier), at Reims or in Paris. The ancient territorial divisions-Belgium, Gallia Lugdunensis (Lyonnaise), Gallia Narbonensis (Narbonnaise)-were split up into seventeen little provinces, which in their turn were divided-into two dioceses. Thus the great historic division was made between southern and northern France. Roman nationality persisted, but the administrative system was tottering.

Upon ground that had been so well levelled by Roman legislation aristocratic institutions naturally flourished. From the 4th century onward the balance of classes was dis- SoC, a, d, s turbed by the development of a landed aristocracy 0, ~g -, ,, ;, ,. that grew more powerful day by day, and by the 11011 Gf corresponding ruin of the small proprietors and in- Gam dustrial and commercial corporations. The members of the curia who assisted the magistrates in the cities, crushed by the burden of taxes, now evaded as far as possible public office or senatorial honours. The vacancies left in this middle class by this continual desertion were not compensated for by the progressive advance of a lower class destitute of personal property and constantly unsettled in their work. The peasants, no less than the industrial labourers, suffered from the absence of any capital laid by, which alone could have enabled them to improve their land or to face a time of bad harvests. Having no credit they found themselves at the mercy of their neighbours, the great landholders, and by degrees fell into the position of tenants, or into servitude. The curia was thus emptied both from above and from below. It was in vain that the emperors tried to rivet the chains of the curia in this hereditary bondage, by attaching the small proprietor to his glebe, like the artisan to his gild and the soldier to his legion. To such a miserable pretence of freedom they all preferred servitude, which at least ensured them a livelihood; and the middle class of freemen

The aristocracy, on the contrary, went on increasing in power,

and eventually became masters of the situation. It was through them that the emperor, theoretically absolute, practi\$::°3 cally carried on his administration; but he was no d, ,, d longer either strong or a divinity, and possessed Pvwvrby nothing but the semblance of omnipotence. His

r:';;f official despotism was opposed by the passive but

But the humiliation of Theodosius before St Ambrose proved that the emperor could never claim to be a pontiff, and that the dogma of the Church remained independent of the The sovereign as well as of the people; if she sacrificed g;, ,, ,.d, », her liberty it was but to claim it again and maintain independit more effectively amid the general languor. The;':n“;;"" Church thus escaped the unpopularity of this decadent P empire, and during the 5th century she provided a refuge for all those who, wishing to preserve the Roman unity, were terrified by the blackness of the horizon. In fact, whilst in the Eastern Church the metaphysical ardour of the Greeks was spending itself in terrible combats in the ecumenical councils over the interpretation of the Nicene Creed, the clergy of Gaul, more simple and strict in their faith, abjured t'hese theological logomachies; from the first they had preferred action to criticism andhad taken no part in the great controversy on free-will raised by Pelagius. Another kind of warfare was about to absorb their whole attention; the barbarians were attacking the frontiers of the Empire on every side, and their advent once again modified Gallo-Roman civilization.

For centuries they had been silently massing themselves around ancient Europe, whether Iberian, Celtic or Roman. Many times already during that evening of a decadent Z"";::"" civilization, their threatening presence had seemed

, ,, , s;, ,, , like a dark cloud veiling the radiant sky of the peoples

established on the Mediterranean seaboard. The cruel lightning of the sword of Brennus had illumined the night, setting Rome or Delphi on fire. Sometimes the storm had burst over Gaul, and there had been need of a Marius to stem the torrent of Cimbri and Teutons, or of a Caesar to drive back the Helvetians into their mountains. On the morrow the western horizon would clear again, until some such disaster as that which befell Varus would come to mortify cruelly the pride of an Augustus; The Romans had soon abandoned hope of conquering Germany, with its fluctuating frontiers and nomadic inhabitants. For more than two centuries they had remained prudently entrenched behind the earthworks that extended from Cologne to Ratisbon (Regensburg); but the intestine feuds which prevailed among the barbarians and were fostered by Rome, the organization under bold and turbulent chiefs of the bands greedy for booty, the pressing forward on populations already settled of tribes in their rear; all this caused the Germanic invasion to filter by degrees across the frontier. It was the work of several generations and took various forms, by turns and simultaneously colonization and aggression; but from this time forward the pax romana was at an end. The emperors Probus, Constantine, Julian and Valentinian, themselves foreigners, were worn out with repulsing these repeated assaults, and the general enervation of society did the rest. The barbarians gradually became part of the Roman population; they permeated the army, until after Theodosius they recruited it exclusively; they permeated civilian society as colonists and agriculturists, till the command of the army and of important public duties was given over to a Stilicho or a Crocus. Thus Rome allowed the wolves to mingle with the dogs in watching over the flock, just at a time when the civil wars of the 4th century had denuded the Rhenish frontier of troops, whose numbers had already been diminished by Constantine. Then at the beginning of the 5th century, during a furious irruption of Germans fleeing before Huns, the limes was carried away (4o6~4o7); and for more than a hundred years the torrent of fugitives swept through the Empire, which retreated behind the Alps, there to breathe its last.

Frankish

chieti,

extended

their settlements as far as the Loire. By his conversion, which was due to his wife Clotilda and to Remigius, bishop of Reims, more than to the victory of Tolbiac over the Alamanni, Clovis made definitely sure of the Roman inhabitants and gave the Church an army (496), Thenceforward he devoted himself to the foundation of the Frankish monarchy by driving the exhausted and demoralized heretics out of Gaul, and by putting himself in the place of the now enfeebled emperor. In 500 he conquered Gundibald, king of the Burgundians, reduced him to a kind of vassalage, and forced him into reiterated promises of conversion to orthodoxy. In 507 he conquered and killed Alaric II., king of the Arian Visigoths, and drove the latter into Spain. Legend adorned his campaign in Aquitaine with miracles; the bishops were the declared allies of both him and his son Theuderich (Thierry) after his conquest of Auvergne. At Tours he received from the distant emperor at Constantinople the diploma and insignia of patricius and Roman consul, which legalized his military conquests by putting him in possession of civil powers. From this time forward a great historic transformation was effected in the eyes of the bishops and

of the Gallo-Romans; the Frankish chief took the R place of the ancient emperors. Instead of blaming Zffigga him for the murder of the lesser kings of the Franks, his relatives, by which he had accomplished the union of the Frankish tribes, they saw in this the hand of God rewarding a faithful soldier and a converted pagan. He became their king, their new David, as the Christian emperors had formerly been; he built churches, endowed monasteries, protected St Vaast (Vedastus, d. 540), first bishop of Arras and Cambrai, who restored Christianity in northern Gaul. Like the emperors before him Clovis, too, reigned over the Church. Of his own authority he called together a council at Orleans in 511, the year of his death. He was already the grand distributor of ecclesiastical benefices, pending the time when his successors were to confirm the episcopal elections, and his power began to take Clovis ar on a more and more absolute character. But though he felt the ascendant influence of Christian teaching, he was not really penetrated by its spirit; a professing Christian, and a friend to the episcopate, Clovis remained a barbarian, crafty and ruthless. The bloody tragedies which disfigured the end of his reign bear sad witness to this; they were a fit prelude to that period during the course of which, as Gregory of Tours said, “ barbarism was let loose.”

The conquest of Gaul, begun by Clovis, was finished by his sons: Theuderich, Chlodomer, Childebert and Clotaire. In three successive campaigns, from 523 to 532, they g'2, ;?, ;§ annihilated the Burgundian kingdom, which had maintained its independence, and had endured for nearly a century. Favoured by the war between Justinian, the. East Roman emperor, and Theodoric's Ostrogoths, the Frankish kings divided Provence among them as they had done in the case of Burgundy. Thus the whole of Gaul was subjected to the sons of Clovis, except Septimania in the south-east, where the Visigoths still maintained their power. The F rankish armies then overiiowed into the neighbouring countries and began to pillage them. Their disorderly cohorts made an attack upon Italy, which was repulsed by the Lombards, and another on Spain with the same want of success; but beyond the Rhine they embarked upon the conquest of Germany, where Clovis had already reduced to submission the country on the banks of the Maine, later known as Franconia. In 531 the Thuringians in the centre of Germany were brought into subjection by his eldest son, King Theuderich, and about the same time the Bavarians were united to the Franks, though preserving a certain autonomy. The Merovingian monarchy thus attained the utmost limits of its territorial expansion, bounded as it was by the Pyrenees, the Alps and the Rhine; it exercised influence over the whole of Germany, which it threw open to the Christian missionaries, and its conquests formed the first beginnings of German history. But to these wars of aggrandizement and pillage succeeded those fratricidal struggles which disgraced the whole of the sixth century and arrested the expansion of the Merovingian €:; power. When Clotaire, the last surviving son of Clovis, died in 561, the kingdom was divided between his four sons like some piece of private property, as in 511, and according to the German method. The capitals of these four kings-Charibert, who died in 567, Guntram, Sigebert and Chilperic-were Paris, Orleans, Reims and Soissons—all near one another and north' of the Loire, where the Germanic inhabitants predominated; but their respective boundaries were so confused that disputes were inevitable. There was no trace of a political idea in these disputes; the mutual hatred of two women aggravated jealousy to the point of causing terrible civil wars from 561 to 613, and these finally created a national conflict which resulted in the dismemberment of the Frankish empire. Recognized, in fact, already as separate provinces were Austrasia, or the eastern kingdom, Neustria, or north-west Gaul and Burgundy; Aquitaine alone was as yet undifferentiated.

Sigebert had married Brunhilda, the daughter of a Visigoth king; she was beautiful and well educated, having been brought up in Spain, where Roman civilization still flourished. f;"3°"d Chilperic had married Galswintha, one of Brunhilda's B, ¢, ,,1, ”d, sisters, for the sake of her wealth; but despite this marriage he had continued his amours with a waiting woman named Fredegond, who pushed ambition to the point of crime, and she induced him to get rid of Galswintha. In order to avenge her sister, Brunhilda incited Sigebert »to begin a war which terminated in 575 with the assassination of Sigebert by Fredegond at the very moment when, thanks to the help of the Germans, he had gained the victory, and with the imprisonment of Brunhilda at Rouen. Fredegond subsequently caused the death of Merovech (Mérovée), the son of Chilperic, who had been secretly married to Brunhilda, and that of Bishop Praetextatus, who had solemnized their union. After this, Fredegond endeavoured to restore imperial finance to a state of solvency, and to set up a more regular form of government in her Neustria, which was less womanized and less wealthy than Burgundy, where Guntram was reigning, and less turbulent than the eastern kingdom, where most of the great warlike chiefs with their large landed estates were somewhat impatient of royal authority. But the accidental death of two of herrchildren, the assassination of her husband in 584, and the advice of the Church, induced her to make overtures to her brother-in-law Guntram. A lover of peace through sheer cowardice, and as depraved in his morals as Chilperic, Guntram had played a vacillating and purely self-interested part in the family tragedy. He declared himself the protector of Fredegond, but his death in 593 delivered up Burgundy and Neustria to Brunhilda's son Childebert, king of Austrasia, in consequence of the treaty of Andelot, made in 587. An ephemeral triumph, however; for Childebert died. in 596, followed a year later by Fredegond.,

The Mayoralty of the Palace aimed a third and more serious blow at the royal authority. By degrees, the high officials of the Palatium, whether secular or ecclesiastical, TI" and also the provincial counts, had rallied round f, ::":;'7“';f the mayors of the palace as their real leaders. As under the Empire, the Palatium was both royal court and centre of government, with the same bureaucratic hierarchy and the same forms of administration; and the mayor of the palace was premier official of this itinerant court and ambulatory government. Moreover, since the palace controlled the whole of each kingdom, the mayors gradually extended their official authority so as to include functionaries and agents of every kind, instead of merely those attached immediately to the king's person. They suggested candidates for office for the royal selection, often appointed office-holders, and, by royal warrant, supported or condemned them. Mere subordinates while the royal power was strong, they had become, owing to the frequent minorities, and to civil wars which broke the tradition of obedience, the all-powerful ministers of kings nominally absolute but without any real authority. Before long they ceased to claim an even greater degree of independence than that of Warnachaire, who forced Clotaire II. to swear that he should never be deprived of his mayoralty of Burgundy; they wished to take the first place in the kingdoms they governed, and to be able to attack neighbouring kingdoms on their own account. A struggle, motived by self-interest, no doubt; but a struggle, too, of opposing principles. Since the Frankish monarchy was now in their power some of .them tried to reestablish the unity of that monarchy in all its integrity, together with the superiority of the State over the Church; others, faithless to the idea of unity, saw in the disintegration of the state and the supremacy of the nobles a warrant for their own independence. These two tendencies. were destined to strive against one another during an entire century (613, -714), and to occasion two periods of violent conliict, which, divided by a kind of renascence of royalty, were to end at last in the triumphant substitution of the Austrasian mayors for royalty and aristocracy alike. The first struggle began on the accession of Clotaire II., when Austrasia, having had a king of her own ever since 561, demanded one now. In 623 Clotaire was obliged f, ?, .'j;, ,, , to send her his son Dagobert and even to extend his between territory. But in Dagobert's name two men ruled, IIIUMNIIJ' representing the union of the official aristocracy and gfyomny the Church. One, Pippin of Landen, derived his power from his position as mayor of the palace, from great estates in Aquitaine and between the Meuse and the Rhine, and from the immense number of his supporters; the other, Arnulf, bishop of Metz, sprang from a great family, probably of Roman descent, and was besides immensely wealthy in worldly possessions. By the union of their forces Pippin and Arnulf were destined to shape the future. They had already, in 613, treated with Clotaire and betrayed the hopes of Brunhilda, being consequently rewarded with the guardianship of young Dagobert. Burgundy followed the example of Austrasia, demanded the abolition of the mayoralty, and in 627 succeeded in obtaining her independence of Neustria and Austrasia and direct relations with the king.

The death of Clotaire (629) was the signal for a revival of the royal power. Dagobert deprived Pippin of Landen of his authority and forced him to fiy to Aquitaine; izzzsg, but still he had to give the Austrasians his son Sigebert ~¢|, y III. for their king (634). He made administrative under progresses through N eustria and Burgundy to recall 2;; ';;;"" the nobles to their allegiance, but again he was forced to designate his second son Clovis as king of Neustria. He did subdue Aquitaine completely, thanks to his brother Charibert, with whom he had avoided dividing the kingdom, and he tried to restore his own demesne, which had been despoiled by the granting of .benefices or by the pious frauds of the Church. In short, this reign was one of great conquests, impossible except under a strong government. Dagobert's victories over Samo, king of the Slavs along the Elbe, and his subjugation of the Bretons and the Basques, maintained the prestige of the Frankish empire; while the luxury of his court, his taste for the fine arts (ministered to by his treasurer Eloi 1), his numerous achievements in architecture-especially the abbey of St Denis, burial-place of the kings of France-the brilliance and the power of the churchmen who surrounded him and his revision of the Salic law, ensured for his reign, in spite of the failure of his plans for unity, a fame celebrated in folksong and ballad. But for barbarous nations old-age comes early, and after Dagobert's death (639), the monarchy went swiftly to its doom. The mayors of the palace again became supreme, The “Rohr

and the kings not only ceased to appoint them, ' but fggnémfsfmight not even remove them from office. Such mayors .(d0were Aega and Erchinoald, in Neustria, Pippin and "°“""3 Otto in Austrasia, and Flaochat in Burgundy. One of them, Grimoald, son of Pippin, actually dared the title of king in Austrasia (640). This was a premature attempt and barren of result, yet it was significant; and not less so is the fact that the palace in' which these mayors bore rule was a huge association of great personages, laymen and ecclesiastics who seem to have had much more independence than in the 6th century. We find the dukes actually raising troops without the royal sanction, and even against the king. In 641 the mayor F laochat was forced to swear that they should hold their offices for life; and though these offices were not yet hereditary, official dynasties, as it were, began to be established permanently within the palace. The crown lands, the governorships, the different offices, were looked upon as common property to be shared between themselves. Organized into a compact body they surrounded the king and were far more powerful than he. In the general assembly of its members this body of officials decided the selection of the mayor; it presented Flaochat to the choice of Queen Nanthilda, Dagobert's widow; after long discussion it appointed Ebroin as mayor; it submitted requests that were in reality commands to the Assembly of Bonneuil in 616 and later to Childeric in 670. Moreover, the countries formerly subdued by the Franks availed themselves of this opportunity to loosen the yoke; Thuringia was lost by Sigebert in 641, and the revolt of Alamannia in 643 set back the frontier of the kingdom from the Elbe to Austrasia. Aquitaine, hitherto the common prey of all the F rankish kings, having in vain tried to profit by the struggles between Fredegond and Brunhilda, and set up an independent king, Gondibald, now finally burst her bonds in 670. Then came a time when the kings were mere children, honoured with but the semblance of respect, under the tutelage of a single mayor, Erbroin of N eustria. This representative of royalty, chief minister for four-and twenty years (6 56-681), attempted the impossible, endeavouring Struggle

between

Ebnoih and

Léger.

bishop of

kings).

to take

to re-establish unity in the midst of general dissolution and to maintain intact a royal authority usurped everywhere~ by the hereditary power of the great palatine families. He soon stirred up against himself all the dissatisfied nobles, led by Léger (Leodegarius), Autun and his brother Gerinus. Clotaire III.'s death gave the signal for war. Ebroin's enemies set up Childeric II. in opposition to Theuderich, the king whom he had chosen without summoning the great provincial officials. Despite a temporary triumph, when Childeric was forced to recognize the principle of hereditary succession in public offices, and when the mayoral ties of Neustria and Burgundy were alternated to the proht of both, Léger soon fell into disgrace and was exiled to that very monastery of Luxeuil to which Ebroin had been relegated. Childeric having regained the mastery restored the mayor's office, which was immediately disputed by the two rivals; Ebroin was successful and established himself as mayor of the palace in the room of Leudesius, a partisan of Léger (675), 1 St Eligius, bishop of Noyon, apostle of the Belgians and Frisians (cl. 659 P). following this up by a distribution of offices and dignities right and left among his adherents. Léger was put to death in 678, and the Austrasians, commanded by the Carolingian Pippin II., with whom many of the chief Neustrians had taken refuge, were dispersed near Laon (680), But Ebroin was assassinated next year in the midst of his triumph, having like Fredegond been unable to do more than postpone for a quarter of a century the victory of the nobles and of Austrasia; for his successor, Berthar, was unfitted to carry on his Work, having neither his gifts and energy nor the powerful personality of Pippin. Berthar met his death at the battle of Tertry (687), which gave the king into the hands of Pippin, as also the g-giffgff royal treasure and the mayoralty, and by thus enabling him to reward his followers made him supreme over the Merovingian dynasty. Thenceforward the degenerate descendants of Clovis offered no further resistance to his claims, though it was not until 752 that their line became extinct.

In that year the Merovingian dynasty gave place to the rule of Pippin II. of Heristal, who founded a Carolingian empire fated to be as ephemeral as that of the Merovingians. This political victory of the aristocracy was merely the consummation of a slow subterranean revolution which by innumerable reiterated blows had sapped the structure of the body politic, and was about to transfer the people of Gaul from the Roman monarchical and administrative government to the sway of the feudal system.

The Merovingian kings, mere war-chiefs before the advent of Clovis, had after the conquest of Gaul become absolute hereditary causes of monarchs, thanks to the disappearance of the popular the tall of assemblies and to the perpetual state of warfare. “W Mem' They concentrated in their own hands all the powers Yi"g'“"s° of the empire, judicial, fiscal and military; and even the so-called “ rois fainéants ” enjoyed this unlimited power, in spite of the general disorder and the civil wars. To make their authority felt in the provinces they had an army of officials at their disposal-a legacy, this, from imperial Romewho represented them in the eyes of their various peoples. They had therefore only to keep up this established government, but they could not manage even this much; they allowed the idea of the common interests of kings and their subjects gradually to die out, and forgetting that national taxes are a necessary impost, a charge for service rendered by the state, they had treated these as though they were illicit and unjustifiable spoils. The taxpayers, with the clergy at their head, adopted the same idea, and every day contrived fresh methods of evasion. Merovingian justice was on the same footing as Merovingian finance: it was arbitrary, violent and self-seeking. The Church, too, never failed to oppose it—at first not so much on account of her own ambitions as in a more Christian spirit-and proceeded to weaken the royal jurisdiction by repeated interventions on behalf of those under sentence, afterwards depriving it of authority over the clergy, and then setting up ecclesiastical tribunals in opposition to those held by the dukes and counts. At last, just as the kingdom had become the personal property of the king, so the officials-dukes, counts, royal vicars, tribunes, cenlenarrii-who had for the most part bought their unpaid offices by means of presents to the monarch, came to look upon the public service rather as a mine of official wealth than as an administrative organization for furthering the interests, material or moral, of the whole nation. They became petty local tyrants, all the more despotic because they had nothing to fear save the distant authority of the king's missi, and the more rapacious because they had no salary save the fines they inflicted and the fees that they contrived to multiply. Gregory of Tours tells us that they were robbers, not protectors of the people, and that justice and the whole administrative apparatus were merely engines of insatiable greed. It was the abuses thus committed by the kings and their agents, who did not understand the art of gloving the iron hand, aided by the absolutely unfettered licence of conduct and the absence of any popular liberty, that occasioned the gradual increase of charters of immunity.

Immunity was the direct and personal privilege which forbade any royal official or his agents to decide cases, to levy taxes, or to exercise any administrative control on the domains ofabishop, an abbot, or one of the great secular Immunity nobles. On thousands of estates the royal government, gradually allowed the law of the land to be superseded by local law, and public taxation to change into special contributions; so that the duties of the lower classes towards the state were transferred to the great landlords, who thus became loyal adherents of the king but absolute masters on their own territory. The Merovingians had no idea that they were abdicating the least part of their authority, nevertheless the deprivations acquiesced in by the feebler kings led of necessity to the diminution of their authority and their judicial powers, and to the abandonment of public taxation. They thought that by granting immunity they would strengthen their direct control; in reality they established the local independence of the great landowners, by allowing royal rights to pass into their hands. Then came confusion between the rights of the sovereign and the rights of property. The administrative machinery of the state still existed, but it worked in empty air: its taxpayers disappeared, those who were amenable to its legal jurisdiction slipped from its grasp, -and the number of those whose affairs it should have directed dwindled away. Thus the Merovingians had shown themselves incapable of rising above the barbarous notion that royalty is a personal asset to the idea that royalty is of the state, a power belonging to the nation and instituted for the benefit of all. They represented in society nothing more than a force which grew feebler and feebler as other forces grew strong; they never stood for a national magistracy.

Society no less than the state was falling asunder by process of decay. Under the Merovingians it was a wherein grades were marked by the varied scale of the wergild, a man being worth anything from thirty to six hundred gold pieces. The different degrees were those of slave, freedman, tenant-farmer and great landowner. As in every social scheme where the government is a gradual

hierarchy

Disruption

of ihe

social

frame-

Work.

without real power, the weakest sought' protection of the strongest; and the system of patron, client and journeyman, which had existed among the Romans, the Gauls and the Germans, spread rapidly in the 6th and 7th centuries, owing to public disorder and the inadequate protection afforded by the government. The Church's patronage provided some with a. refuge from violence; others ingratiated themselves with the rich for the sake of shelter and security; others again sought place and honour from men of power; whileiwomen, churchmen and Warriors alike claimed the king's direct and personal protection. - ",

This hierarchy of persons, these private relations of man to man, were recognized by custom in default of the law, and were soon strengthened by another and territorial hierarchy. The large estate, especially if it belonged to the Church, fia, um very soon absorbed the few fields of the freeman. In order to farm these, the Church and the rich landowners granted back the holdings on the temporary and conditional terms of tenancy-at-will or of the benejicium, thus multiplying endlessly the land subject to their over lordship and the men who were dependent upon them as tenants. The kings, like private individuals and ecclesiastical establishments, made use of the beneficium to reward their servants; till finally their demesne was so reduced by these perpetual grants that they took to distributing among their champions land owning the over lordship of the Church, or granted their own lands for single lives only. These various “ benefactions ” were, as a rule, merely the indirect methods which the great landowners employed in order to absorb the small proprietor. And so well did they succeed, that in the 6th and 7th centuries the provincial hierarchy consisted of the cultivator, the holder of the beneficium and the owner; while this dependence of one man upon another affected the personal liberty of a large section of the community, as well as the condition of the land. The great landowner tended to become not only lord over his tenants, but also himself a vassal of the king. The bene- Thus by means of immunities, of the benejicium and of patronage, society gradually organized itself independently "ppm of of the state, since it required further security. Such He, ,StaI extra security was first provided by the conqueror of Tertry; for Pippin II. represented the two great families of Pippin and of Arnulf, and consequently the two interests then paramount, i.e. land and religion, While he had at his back a great company of followers and vast landed estates. For forty years (61 5-6 5 5) the office of mayor of Austrasia had gone down in his family almost continuously in direct descent from father to son. The death of Grimoald had caused the loss of this post, yet Ansegisus (Ansegisel), Arnulf's son and Pippin's son-in-law, had continued to hold high office in the Austrasian palace; and about 680 his son, Pippin II., became master of Austrasia, although he had held no previous office in the palace. His dynasty was destined to supplant that of the Merovingian house.

Pippin of Heristal was a pioneer; he it was who began all that his descendants were afterwards to carry through. Thus he gathered the nobles about him not by virtue of his position, but because of his own personal prowess, and because he could assure them of justice and protection; instead of being merely the head of the royal palace he was the absolute lord of his own followers.-Moreover, he no longer bore the title of mayor, but that of duke or prince of the Franks; and the mayoralty, like the royal power now reduced to a shadow, became an hereditary possession which Pippin could bestow upon his sons. The reigns of Theuderich III., Clovis III. or Childebert III. are of no significance except as serving to date charters and diplomas. Pippin it was who administered justice in Austrasia, appointed omcials and distributed dukedoms; and it was Pippin, the military leader, who defended the frontiers threatened by Frisians, Alamanni and Bavarians. Descended as he was from Arnulf, bishop of Metz, he was before all things a churchman, and behind his armies marched the missionaries to whom the Carolingian dynasty, of which he was the founder, were to subject all Christendom. Pippin it was, in short, who governed, who set in order the social confusions of Neustria, who, after long wars, put a stop to the malpractices of the dukes and counts, and summoned councils of bishops to make good regulations. But at his death in 714 the child-king Dagobert III. found himself subordinated to Pippin's two grandsons, who, being minors, were under the wardship of their grandmother Plectrude.

Pippin's work was almost undone-a party among the N Austrians under Raginfrid, mayor of the palace, revolted against Pippin II.'s adherents, and Radbod, duke of Chtlis the F risians, joined them. But the Austrasians f;';5 ';4, > appealed to an illegitimate son of Pippin, Charles Martel, who had escaped from the prison to which Plectrude, alarmed at his prowess, had consigned him, and took him for their leader. With Charles Martel begins the great period of Austrasian history. Faithful to the traditions of the Austrasian mayors, he chose kings for himself-Clotaire IV., then Chilperic II. and lastly Theuderich IV. After Theuderich's death (737) he left the throne vacant until 742, but he himself was king in all but name; he presided over the royal tribunals, appointed the royal officers, issued edicts, disposed of the funds of the treasury and the churches, conferred immunities upon adherents, who were no longer the king's nobles but his own, and even appointed the bishops, though there was nothing of the ecclesiastic about himself. He decided questions of war and peace, and re-established unity in Gaul by defeating the Neustrians and the Aquitanian followers of Duke Odo (Eudes) at Vincy in 717. When Odo, brought to bay, appealed for help to the Arab troops of Abd-ar-Rahman, who after conquering Spain had crossed the Pyrenees, Charles, like a second Clovis, saved Catholic Christendom in its peril by crushing the Arabs at Tours (732). The retreat of the Arabs, who were further weakened by religious disputes, enabled him to restore Frankish rule in Aquitaine in spite of Hunald, son of Odo. But Charles's longest expeditions were made into Germany, and in these he sought the support of the Church, then the greatest of all powers since it was the depositary of the Roman imperial tradition.

No less unconscious of his mission than Clovis had been, Charles Martel also was a' soldier of Christ. He protected the missionaries who paved the way for his militant invasions. Without Charles him the apostle of Germany, the English monk Boniface, Mg, -ge; would never have succeeded in preserving the purity Hvdfbv of the faith and keeping the bishops submissive to C""”" the Holy See. The help given by Charles had two Very far reaching results. Boniface was the instrument of the union of Rome and Germany, of which union the Holy Roman Empire in Germany was in the 10th century to become the most perfect expression, continuing up to the time of Luther. And Boniface also helped on the alliance between the papacy and the Carolingian dynasty, which, more momentous even than that between Clovis and the bishops of Gaul, was to sanctify might by right. This union was imperative for the bishops of Rome if they wished to establish their supremacy, and their care for orthodoxy by no means excluded all desire of domination. Mere religious authority did not secure to them the obedience Marte; and of either the faithful or the clergy; moreover, they Grfgwv had to consider the great secular powers, and in this "L respect their temporal position in Italy was growing unbearable. Their relations with the East Roman emperor (sole lord of the World after the Roman Senate had sent the imperial insignia to Constantinople in 476) were confined to receiving insults from him or suspecting him of heresy. Even in northern Italy there was no longer any opposition to the progress of the Lombards, the last great nation to be established towards the end of the 6th century within the ancient Roman empire-their king Liudprand clearly intended to seize Italy and even Rome itself. Meanwhile from the south attacks were being made by the rebel dukes of Spoleto and Beneventum. Pope Gregory III. cherished dreams of an alliance with the powerful duke of the Franks, as St Remigius before him had thought of uniting with Clovis against the Goths. Charles Martel had protected Boniface on his German missions: he would perhaps lend Gregory the support of his armies. But the warrior, like. Clovis a fore time, hesitated to put himself at the disposal of the priest. When it was a question of winning followers or keeping them, he had not scrupled to lay hands on ecclesiastical property, nor to fill the Church with his friends and kinsfolk, and this alliance might embarrass him. So if he loaded the Roman ambassadors with gifts in 739, he none the less remembered that the Lombards had just helped him to drive the Saracens from Provence. However, he died soon after this, on the 22nd of October 741, and Gregory III. followed him almost immediately. Feeling his end near, Charles, before an assembly of nobles, had divided his power between his two sons, Carloman and Pippin III. The royal line seemed to have been forgotten for six years, but in 742 Pippin broughta 511° iC'“'° son of Chilperic II. out of a monastery and made him dffisy king. This Childeric III. was but a shadow-and knew it. He made a phantom appearance once every spring at the opening of the great annual national convention known as the Campus Martius (Champ de Mars): a dumb idol, his chariot drawn in leisurely fashion by oxen, he disappeared again into his palace or monastery. An unexpected event re-established unity in the Carolingian family. Pippin's brother, the pious Carloman, became a monk in 747, and Pippin, now sole ruler of the kingdom, ordered Childeric also to cut off his royal locks; after which, being king in all but name, he adopted that title Charles

in 752. Thus ended the revolution which had been going on

for two centuries. The disappearance of Grippo, Pippin's illegitimate brother, who, with the help of all the enemies of the Franks-Alamanni, Aquitanians and § Z'PIff the Bavarians-~had disputed his power, now completed the 75;7&8 work of centralization, and Pippin had only to maintain it. For this the support of the Church was indispensable, and Pippin understood the advantages of such an alliance better than Charles Martel. A son of the Church, a protector of bishops, a president of councils, a collector of relies, devoted to Boniface (whom he invited, as papal legate, to reform the clergy of Austrasia), he astutely accepted the new claims of the vicar of St Peter to the headship of the Church, perceiving the value of an alliance with this rising power.

Prudent enough to fear resistance if he usurped the Merovingian crown, Pippin the Short made careful preparations for his accession, and discussed the question of the dynasty S-#Nd . .

¢b, ,-“fer with Pope Zacharias. Receiving a favourable opinion, Uffhv WW he had himself anointed and crowned by Boniface """"”°°l'~"' in the name of the bishops, and was then proclaimed king in an assembly of nobles, counts and bishops at Soissons in November 751. Still, certain disturbances made him see that aristocratic approval of his kingship might be strengthened if it could claim a divine sanction which no Merovingian had ever received. Two years later, therefore, he demanded a consecration of his usurpation from the pope, and in St Denis on the 28th of Tuly 754 Stephen II. crowned and anointed not only Pippin, but his wife and his two sons as well. The political results of this custom of Coronation were all important for the Carolingians, and later for the first of the Capets. Pippin was hereby invested with new dignity, ffgjfw and when Boniface's anointing had been confirmed p, p, , c, , by that of the pope, he became the head of the Frankish Church, the equal of the pope. Moreover, he astutely contrived to extend his priestly prestige to his whole family; his royalty was no longer merely a military command or a civil office, but became a Christian priesthood. This sacred character was not, however, conferred gratuitously. On the very day of his coronation Pippin allowed himself to be proclaimed patrician of the Romans by the pope, just as Clovis had been made consul. Thistitle of the imperial court was purely honorary, but it attached him still more closely to Rome, though without lessening his independence. He had besides given a written promise to defend the Church of Rome, and that not against the Lombards only. Qualified by letters of the papal chancery as “ liberator and defender of the Church, ” his armies twice (754-756) crossed the Alps, despite the opposition of the Frankish aristocracy, and forced Aistulf, king of the Lombards, to cede to him the ex arch ate of Ravenna and the Pentapolis. Pippin gave them back to Pope Stephen II., and by this famous donation founded that temporal power of the popes which was to endure until 1870. He also dragged the Western clergy into the pope's quarrel with the emperor at Constantinople, by summoning the council of Gentilly, at which the iconoclastic heresy was condemned (767), Matters being thus settled with Rome, Pippin again took up his wars against the Saxons, against the Arabs (whom he drove from Narbonne in 758), and above all against Waifer, duke of Aquitaine, and his ally, duke Tassilo of Bavaria. This last war was carried on systematically from 760 to 768, and ended in the death of Waifer and the definite establishment of the Frankish hold on Aquitaine. When Pippin died, aged fifty-four, on the 24th of September 768, the whole of Gaul had submitted to his authority. Pippin left two sons, and before he died he had, with the consent of the dignitaries of the realm, divided his kingdom Chm 'e between them, making theelder, Charles(Charlemagne), magna king of Austrasia, and giving the younger, Carloman, Burgundy, Provence, Septimania, Alsace and

Alamannia, and half of Aquitaine to each. On the oth of October 768 Charles was enthroned at Noyon in solemn assembly, and Carloman at Soissons. The Carolingian sovereignty was thus neither hereditary nor elective, but was handed down by the will of the reigning king, and by a solemn acceptance of the future king on the part of the nobles. In 771 Carloman, with whom Charles had had disputes, died, leaving sons; but bishops, abbots and counts all declared for Charles, save a few who took refuge in Italy with Desiderius, king of the Lombards. Desiderius, whose daughter Bertha or Desiderata Charles, despite the pope, had married at the instance of his mother Bertrade, supported the rights of Carloman's sons, and threatened Pope Adrian in Rome itself after he had despoiled him of Pippin's territorial gift. At the pope's appeal Charles crossed the Alps, took Verona and Pavia after a long siege, assumed the iron crown of the Lombard kings (June 774), and made a. triumphal entry into Rome, which had not formed part of the pope's desires. Pippin's donation was restored, but the protectorate was no longer so distant, respectful and intermittent as the pope liked. After the departure of the imperious conqueror, a fresh revolt of the Lombards of Beneventum under Arichis, Desiderius's son-in-law, supported by a Greek Heet, obliged Pope Adrian to write fresh entreaties to Charlemagne; and in two campaigns (776-777) the latter conquered the whole Lombard kingdom. But another of Desiderius's daughters, married to the powerful duke Tassilo of Bavaria, urged her husband to avenge her father, now imprisoned in the monastery of Corbie. After endless intrigues, however, the duke, hemmed in by three different armies, had in his turn to submit (788), and all Italy was now subject to Charlemagne. .These wars in Italy, even the fall of the Lombard kingdom and the recapture of the duchy of Bavaria, were merely episodes: Charlemagne's great war, was against the Saxons and lasted thirty years (772-804). The work of organizing the three great Carolingian conquests-Aquitaine, Italy and Saxony-had yet to be done. Charlemagne approached it with a moderation equal to the vigour = which he had Shown in the war. But by multiplying ggaljffgg its advance-posts, the Frankish kingdom came into, ,, ,, , q, ,, ,, ts contact with new peoples, and each new neighbour meant a new enemy. Aquitaine bordered upon Mussulman Spain; the Avars of Hungary threatened Bavaria with their tireless horsemen; beyond the Elbe and the Saa.l the Slavs were perpetually at war with the Saxons, and to the north of the Eider were the Danes. All were pagans; all enemies, of Charlemagne, defender of Christ's Church, and hence the appointed conqueror of the world.

Various causes-the weakening of the Arabs by the struggle between the Omayyads and the Abbasids just after the battle of Tours; the alliance of the petty Christian kings of Wars with the Spanish peninsula; an appeal from the northern the Arabs, amirs who had revolted against the new caliphate of Sl"-S H24 Cordova (7 5 5)-made Charlemagne resolve to cross Danes the Ebro, but was

retreat the Franks

men as they came

rear-guard, famous

the Pyrenees. He penetrated as far as

defeated before Saragossa; and in their

were attacked by Vascons, losing many

through the passes. This defeat of the

The Cm This emperor, who assumed so high a tone with his Iluglan subjects, his bishops and his counts, who undertook R°“iS' to uphold public order in civil life, held himself no "'“' less responsible for the eternal salvation of men's souls in the other world. Thanks to Charlemagne, and through the (800).

restoration of order and of the schools, a common civilization was prepared for the varied elements of the Empire. By his means the Church was able to concentrate in the palatine academy all the intellectual culture of the middle ages, having preserved some of the ancient traditions of organization and administration and guarded the imperial ideal. Charlemagne apparently wished, like Theodoric, to use German blood and Christian unity to bring back life to the great body of the Empire. Not the equal of Caesar or Augustus in genius or in the lastingness of his work, he yet recalls them in his capitularies, his periodic courts, his official hierarchy, his royal emissaries, his ministers, his sole right of coinage, his great public works, his campaigns against barbarism and heathery, his zeal for learning and literature, and his divinity as emperor. Once more there existed a great public entity such as had not been seen for many years; but its duration was not to be a long one.

Charlemagne had for the moment succeeded in uniting western Europe under his sway, but he had not been able to arrest its evolution towards feudal dismemberment. He had, doubtless conscientiously, laboured for the reconstitution of the Empire; but it often happens that

individual wills produce results other than those at which they aimed, sometimes results even contrary to their wishes, and this was what happened in Charlemagne's case. He had restored the superstructure of the imperial monarchy, but he had likewise strengthened and legalized methods and institutions till then private and insecure, and these, passing from custom into law, undermined the foundations of the structure he had thought himself to be repairing. A quarter of a century after his death his Empire was in ruins. The practice of giving land as a beneficium to a grantee who swore personal allegiance to the grantor had persisted, and by his capitularies Charlemagne had made these personal engagements, these contracts of immunity-hitherto not transferable, nor even for life, but quite conditional-regular, legal, even obligatory and almost indissoluble. The benejicium was to be as practically irrevocable as the oath of fidelity. He submitted to the yoke of the social system and feudal institutions at the very moment when he was attempting to revive royal authority; he was ruler of the state, but ruler of vassals also. The monarchical principle no longer sufficed to ensure social discipline; the fear of forfeiting the grant became the only powerful guarantee of obedience, and as this only applied to his personal vassals, Charlemagne gave up his claim to direct obedience from the rest of the people, accepting the mediation of the counts, lords and bishops, who levied taxes, adjudicated and administered in virtue of the privileges of patronage, not of the right of the state. The very multiplication of offices, so noticeable at this time, furthered this triumph of feudalism by multiplying the links of personal dependence, and neutralizing more and more the direct action of the central authority. The frequent convocations of military assemblies, far from testifying to political liberty, was simply a means of communicating the emperor's commands to the various feudal groups.

Thus Charlemagne, far from opposing, systematized feudalism, in order that obedience and discipline might, pass from one man to another down to the lowest grades of society, and he succeeded for his own lifetime. No authority was more weighty or more respected than that of this feudal lord of Gaul, Italy and Germany; none was more transient, because it was so purely personal.

When the great emperor was buried at Aix-la-Chapelle in 814, his work was entombed with him. The fact was that his successors were incapable of maintaining it. TwentyDlssollr tion of the

Frankisb

Empire.

C fv

nine years after his death the Carolingian Empire had tlilgiiij- r been divided into three kingdoms; forty years later 8011111011 one alone of these kingdoms had split into seven; 23:59 while when a century had passed France was a litter of tiny states each practically independent. This disintegration was caused neither by racial hate nor by linguistic patriotism. It was the weakness of princes, the discouragement of freemen and landholders confronted by an inexorable system of financial and military tyranny, and the incompatibility of a vast empire with a too primitive governmental system, that wrecked the work of Charlemagne.

The Empire fell to Louis the Pious, sole survivor of his three sons. At the Aix assembly in 813 his father had crowned him with his own hand, thus avoiding the papal sanction "°""“"' that had been almost forced upon himself in Soo. Pious (8I4- . . .

340, Louis was a gentle and well-trained prince, but weak and prone to excessive devotion to the Church. He had only reigned a few years when dissensions broke out on all sides, as under the Merovingians. Charlemagne had assigned their portions to his three sons in 781 and again in 806; like Charles Martel and Pippin the Short before him, however, what he had divided was not the imperial authority, nor yet countries, but the whole system of fiefs, offices and adherents which had been his own patrimony. The division that Louis the Pious made at Aix in 817 among his three sons, Lothair, Pippin and Louis, was of like character, since he reserved the supreme authority for himself, only associating Lothair, the eldest, with him in the government of the empire. Following the advice of his ministers Walla and Agobard, supporters of the policy of unity, Louis the Pious put Bernard of Italy, Charlemagne's grandson, to death for refusing to acknowledge Lothair as co emperor; crushed a revolt in Brittany; and carried on among the Danes the work of evangelization begun among the Slavs. A fourth son, Charles, was born to him by his second wife, judith of Bavaria. Iealousy arose between the children of the two marriages. Louis tried in vain to satisfy his sons and their followers by repeated divisions-at Worms (829) and at Aix (831)-in which there was no longer question of either unity or subordination. Yet his elder sons revolted against him in 831 and 832, and were supported by Walla and Agobard and by their followers, weary of all the contradictory oaths demanded of them. Louis was deposed at the assembly of Compiégne (833), the bishops forcing him to assume the garb of a penitent; but he was re-established on his throne in St Etienne at Metz, the 28th of February 835, from which time until his death in 840 he fell more and more under the influence of his ambitious wife, and thought only of securing an inheritance for Charles, his favourite son.

Hardly was Louis buried in the basilica of Metz before his sons flew to arms. The first dynastic war broke out between Lothair, who by the settlement of 817 claimed the whole T;'Zs°:" monarchy with the imperial title, and his brothers fhe g::, Es Louis and Charles. Lothair wanted, with the Empire, the sole right of patronage over the adherents of his house, but each of these latter chose his own lord according to individual interests, obeying hisfears or his preferences. The three brothers finished their discussion by fighting for a whole day (June 25th, 841) on the plain of Fontanet by Auxerre; but the battle decided nothing, so Charles and Louis, in order to get the better of Lothair, allied themselves and their vassals by an oath taken in the plain of Strassburg (Feb. 14th, 842). £5359 This, the first document in the vulgar tongue in the b, ,, ., ,, ,, ,, l, history of France and Germany, was merely a mutual contract of protection for the two armies, which nevertheless did not risk another battle. An amicable division of the imperial succession was arranged, and after an assessment of the empire which took almost a year, an agreement was signed at Verdun in August 843.

This was one of the important events in history. Each brother received an equal share of the dismembered empire. Louis had the territory on the right bank of the Rhine, sfggion with Spires, Worms and Mainz “ because of the abund-Bmpire at ance of wine.” Lothair took Ital, the valleys of the y. ~

“l;';';"" Rhone, the Saone and the Meuse, with the two capitals of the empire, Aix-la-Chapelle and Rome, and the title of emperor. Charles had all the country watered by the Scheldt, the Seine, the Loire and the Garonne, as far as the Atlantic and the Ebro. The partition of Verdun separated once more, 'and definitively, the lands of the eastern and western Franks. The former became modern Germany, the latter France, and each from this time forward had its own national existence. However, as, the boundary between the possessions of Charles the Bald and those of Louis was not strictly defined, and as Lothair's kingdom, having no national basis, soon disintegrated into the kingdoms of Italy, Burgundy and Arles, in Lotharingia, this great undefined territory was to serve as a tilting-ground for France and Germany on the very morrow of the treaty of Verdun and for ten centuries after. Charles the Bald was the first king of western F tance.” Anxious as he was to preserve Charlemagne's traditions of government, he was not always strong enough to do so, and 'warfare within his own dominions was often forced on him. gfagefd The Norse pirates who had troubled Charlemagne (8;; f77, showed a preference for western France, justified by the easy access afforded by river estuaries with rich monasteries on their shores. They began in 841 with the sack of Rouen; and from then until 912, when they made a settlement in one part of the country, though few in numbers they never ceased attacking Charles's kingdom, coming in their ships up the Loire as far as Auvergne, up the Garonne to Toulouse, and up the Seine and the Scheldt to Paris, where they made four descents in forty years, burning towns, pillaging treasure, destroying harvests and slaughtering the peasants or carrying them off into slavery. Charles the Bald thus spent his life sword in hand, fighting unsuccessfully against the Bretons, whose two kings, Nomenoé and Erispoé, he had to recognize in turn; and against the people of Aquitaine, who, in full revolt, appealed for help to his brother, Louis the German. He was beaten everywhere and always: by the Bretons at Ballon (845) and Iuvardeil (851), by the people of Aquitaine near Angouléme (845), and by the Northmen, who several times extorted heavy ransoms from him. Before long, too, Louis the German actually allied himself with the people of Brittany and Aquitaine, and invaded France at the summons of Charles the Bald's own vassals. Though the treaty of Coblenz (860) seemed to reconcile the two kings for the moment, no peace was ever possible in Charles the Bald's kingdom. His own son Charles, king of Aquitaine, revolted, and Salomon proclaimed himself king of Brittany in succession to Erispoé, who had been assassinated. To check the Bretons and the Normans, who were attacking from the Atlantic and the Mediterranean, Charles the Bald found himself obliged to entrust the defence of the country to Robert the Strong, ancestor of the house of Capet and duke of the lands between Loire and Seine. Robert the Strong, however, though many times victorious over the incorrigible pirates, was killed by them in a fight at Brissarthe (866).

Despite all this, Charles spoke authoritatively in his capitularies, and though incapable of defending western France, coveted other crowns and looked obstinately eastwards. He managed to become king of Lorraine on the death Qzfion of his nephew Lothair II., and emperor and king of kinzdvm Germany on that of his other nephew Louis II. (875), iizlafge though only by breaking the compact of the year 800. In 876, the year before his death, he took a third crown, that of Italy, though not without a fresh defeat at Andernach by Louis the German's troops. His titles increased, indeed, but not his power; for while his kingdom was thus growing in area it was falling to pieces. The duchy with which he rewarded Robert the Strong was only a military command, but became a powerful fief. Baldwin I. (d. 879), count of Flanders, turned the country between the Scheldt, the Sornme and the sea into another feudal principality. Aquitaine and Brittany were almost independent, Burgundy was in full revolt, and within thirty years Rollo, a Norman leader, was to be master of the whole of the lower Seine from the Cotentin to the Somme. The fact was that between the king's inability to defend the kingdom, and the powerlessness of nobles and peasants to protect themselves from pillage, every man made it his business to seek new protectors, and the country, in spite of Charles the Bald's efforts, began to be covered with strongholds, the peasant learning to live beneath the shelter of the donjon keeps. Such vassals gave themselves utterly to the lord who guarded them, working for him sword or pickaxe in hand. The king was far away, the lord close at hand. Hence the sixty years of terror and confusion which came between Charlemagne and the death of Charles the Bald suppressed the direct authority of the king in favour of the nobles, and prepared the way for a second destruction of the monarchy at the hands of a stronger power (see F EUDALISM).

Before long Charles the Bald's followers were dictating to him; and in the disaffection caused by his feebleness and cowardice prelates and nobles allied themselves against him. If they acknowledged the king's authority at the assemblies of Yiitz (near Thionville) in 844, they forced from him a promise that they should keep their fiefs and their dignities; and while establishing a right of control over all his actions they deprived him of his right of jurisdiction over them. Despite Charles's resistance his royal power dwindled steadily: an appeal to Hincmar, archbishop of Reims, entailed concessions to the Church. In 856 some of his vassals deserted him and went over to Louis the German. To win them back Charles had to sign a new charter, by the terms of which loyalty was no longer a one-sided engagement but a reciprocal contract between king and vassal. He gave up his personal right of distributing the fiefs and honours which were the price of adherence, and thus lost for the Carolingians the free disposal of the immense territories they had gradually usurped; they retained the over-lordship, it is true, but this over-lordship, without usufruct and without choice of tenant, was but a barren possession.

Like their territories public authority little by little slipped Establish-

ment of

feudalism.

from the grasp of the Carolingians, largely because of their Decay of abuse of their too great power. They had concentrated the Caro- the entire administration in their own hands. Like ”"Z""" Charlemagne, Louis the Pious and Charles the Bald power.

were omnipotent. There were no provincial assemblies, no municipal bodies, no merchant-gilds, no autonomous churches; the people had no means of making themselves heard; they had no place in an administration which was completely in the hands of a central hierarchy of officials of all ranks, from dukes to scabini, with counts, viscounts and centenarii in between. However, these dukes and counts were not merely officials: they too had become lords of jideles, of their own advocati, centenarii and scabini, whom they nominated, and of all the free men of the county, who since Charlemagne's time had been first allowed and then commanded to “ commend ” themselves to a lord, receiving feudal benefices in return. Any deprivation or super session of the count might impoverish, dispossess or ruin the vassals of the entire county; so that all, vassals or officials, small and great, feeling their danger, united their efforts, and lent each other mutual assistance against the permanent menace of an overweening monarchy. Hence, at the end of the 9th century, the heredity of offices as well as of fiefs. In the disordered state of society official stability was a valuable warrant of peace, and the administrative hierarchy, lay or spiritual, thus formed a mould for the hierarchy of feudalism. There was no struggle with the king, simply a cessation of obedience; for without strength or support in the kingdom he was powerless to resist. In vain Charles the'Bald affirmed his royal authority in the capitularies of Quierzy-sur-Oise (857), Reims (860), Pistes (864), Gondreville (872) and Quierzy-sur-Oise (877), each time in exchange for assent to the royal will and renewal of oaths he had to acquiesce in new safeguards against himself and by so much to diminish that power of protection against violence and injustice for which the weak had always looked to the throne. Far from forbidding the relation of lord and vassal, Charles the Bald imposed it upon every man in his kingdom, himself proclaiming the real incapacity and failure of that theoretic' royal power to which he laid claim. Henceforward royalty had no servants, since it performed no service. There was no longer the least hesitation over the choice between liberty with danger and subjection with safety; men sought and found in vassalage the right to live, and willingly bartered away their liberty for it.

The degeneration of the monarchy was clearly apparent on the death of Charles the Bald, when his son, Louis the Stammerer, was only assured of the throne, which had passed by Lani, the right of birth under the Merovingians and been Stamhereditary under the earlier Carolingians, through his "'°"¢" election by nobles and bishops under the direction (8”'879) of Hugh the Abbot, successor of Robert the Strong, each voter having been won over by gift of abbeys, counties or manors. When Louis died two years later (879), the same nobles met, some at Creil, the rest at Meaux, and the first party chose Louis of Germany, who preferred Lorraine to the crown; while the rest anointed Louis III. and Carloman, sons of the late king, themselves deciding how the kingdom was to be divided between the two princes. Thus the king no longer chose his own vassals; but vassals and fief-holders actually elected their king according to the material advantages they expected from him. Louis III. and Carloman justified their election by their brilliant victories over the Normans at Saucourt (881) and near Epernay (883), but at their deaths (882-884), the nobles, instead of taking Louis's boy-son, Charles the Simple, as king, chose Charles the Fat, king of Germany, because he was emperor and seemed powerful. He united once more the dominions of Charlemagne; but he disgraced the imperial throne glhagis by his feebleness, and was incapable of using his (8fg4.°;, § 8) immense army to defend Paris when it was besieged by the Normans. Expelled from Italy, he only came to France to buy a shameful peace. When he died in January 888 he had not a single faithful vassal, and the feudal lords resolved never Louis III.

and Carla-

man (879-

884).

again to place the sceptre in a hand that could not wield the sword.

The death-struggle of the Carolingians lasted for a century of uncertainty and anarchy, during which time the bishops, counts and lords might well have suppressed the monarchy had they been hostile to it. Such, however, Zggje of was not their policy;'on the contrary, they needed a the Camking to act as agent for their private interests, since €;é:f:";;;) an official and legitimate character. They did not at once agree on-Charles's successor; for some of them chose Eudes (Odo), son of Robert the Strong, for his brilliant defence of Paris against the Normans in 885; others Guy, duke of Spoleto in Italy, who had himself crowned at Langres; while many wished for Arnulf, illegitimate son of Carloman, king of Germany and emperor. Eudes was victor in the struggle, and was crowned and anointed at Compiégne on the 29th of February 888; but five years later, meeting with defeat after defeat at the hands of the Normans, his followers deserted from him to Charles the Simple, grandson of Charles the Bald, who was also supported by Fulk, archbishop of Reims.

This first Carolingian restoration took place on the 28th of January 893, and thenceforward throughout this warlike period from 888 to 936 the crown passed from one dynasty to the other according to the interests of the nobles. gif? After desperate strife, an agreement between the two (, g g§ .39 g) rivals, Arnulf's support, and the death of Odo, secured it for Charles III., surnamed the Simple. His subjects remained faithful to him for a good while, as he put an end to the Norman invasions which had desolated the kingdom for two centuries, and cowed those barbarians, much to the benefit of France. By the treaty of St Clair-sur-Epte (911) their leader Rolf (Rollo) obtained one of Charles's daughters in marriage and the district of the Lower Seine which the Normans had long occupied, on condition that he and his men ceased their attacks and accepted Christianity. Having thus tranquillized the west, Charles took advantage of Louis the Child's death, and conquered Lorraine, in spite of opposition from Conrad, fffgfiple king of Germany (92 1). But his preference for his new (393.929, conquest, and for a Lorrainer of low birth named Hagano, aroused the jealousy and discontent of his nobles. They first elected Robert, count of Paris (923), and then after his death in a successful battle near Soissons against Charles the Simple, Rudolph of Burgundy, his son-in-law. But Herbert of Vermandois, one of the successful combatants at § ';g3;':, ;f Soissons, coveted the count ship of Laon, which (923.936). Rudolph refused him; and he thereupon proclaimed Charles the Simple, who had confided his cause to him, as king once more. Seeing his danger Rudolph ceded the count ship to Herbert, and Charles was relegated to his prison until his death in 929. After unsuccessful wars against the nobles of the South, against the Normans, who asserted that they were bound to no one except Charles the Simple, and against the Hungarians (who, now the Normans were pacified, were acting their part in the East), Rudolph had a return of good fortune in the years between 9 30 and 936, despite the intrigues of Herbert of Vermandois. Upon his death the nobles assembled to elect a king; and Hugh the Great, Rud0lph's brother-in-law, moved by irresolution as much as by prudence, instead of taking thecrown, preferred to restore the Carolingians once more in the person of Charles the Simple's son, Louis d'Outremer, himself claiming numerous privileges and enjoying the exercise of power unencumbered by a title which carried with it the jealousy of the nobles.

This restoration was no more peaceful than its predecessor. The Carolingians had as it were a fresh access of energy, and the Louis, K struggle against the Robertinians went on relentlessly. the Both sides employed similar methods: one was sup-Fvfeizlwf ported by Normandy, the other by Germany; the (936'954'> archbishop of Reims was for the Carolingians, the Robertinians had to be content with the less influential bishop of Sens. Louis soon proved to Hugh the Great, who was trying to play the part of a mayor of the palace, that he was by no means a roi fainéant; and the powerful duke of the Franks, growing uneasy, allied himself with Herbert of Vermandois, William of Normandy and his brother-in-law Otto I. king of Germany, who resented the loss of Lorraine. Louis defended himself with energy, aided chiefly by the nobles of the South, by his relative Edmund, king of the English, and then by Otto himself, whose brother-in-law he also had become. A peace advantageous to him was made in 942, and on the deaths of his two opponents, Herbert of Vermandois and William of Normandy, all seemed to be going well for him; but his guardianship of Richard, son of the duke of Normandy, aroused fresh strife, and on the 13th of Tuly 945 he fell into an ambush and suffered a captivity similar to his father's of twenty-two years before. No one had befriended Charles the Simple, but Louis had his wife Gerberga, who won over to his cause the kings of England and Germany and even Hugh. Hugh set him free, insisting, as payment for his aid, on the cession of Laon, the capital of the kingdom and the last fortified town remaining to the Carolingians (946), Louis was hardly free before he took vengeance, harried the lands of his rival, restored to the archiepiscopal throne of Reims Artald, his faithful adviser, in place of the son of Herbert of Vermandois, and managed to get Hugh excommunicated by the council of Ingelheim (948) and by the pope. A two years struggle weariecl the rivals, and they made peace in 950. Louis once more held Laon, and in the following year further strengthened his position by a successful expedition into Burgundy. Still his last years were not peaceful; for besides civil wars there were two Hungarian invasions of France (9 SI and 954).

Louis's sudden death in 954 once more placed the Carolingian line in peril, since he had not had time to have his son Lothair crowned. For a third time Hugh had the disposal of {§ , ' § i;§ 6) the crown, and he was no more tempted to take it himself in 954 than in 923 or 936: it was too profitless a possession. Thanks to Hugh's support and to the good offices of Otto and his brother Bruno, archbishop of Cologne and duke of Lorraine, Lothair was chosen king and crowned at Reims. Hugh exacted, as payment for his disinterestedness and fidelity, a renewal of his sovereignty over Burgundy with that of Aquitaine as well; he was in fact the Viceroy of the kingdom, and others imitated him by demanding indemnities, privileges and confirmation of rights, as was customary at the beginning of a reign. 813

Hugh strengthened his position in Burgundy, Lorraine and Normandy by means of marriages; but just as his power was at its height he died (9 56). His death and the minority of his sons, Hugh Capet and Eudes, gave the Carolingian dynasty thirty years more of life.

For nine years (9 56-96 5) Bruno, archbishop of Cologne, was regent of France, and thanks to him there was a kind of enlenfe cordiale between the Carolingians and the Robertinians and Otto. Bruno made Lothair recognize Hugh as duke of France and Eudes as duke of Burgundy; but the sons preserved the father's enmity towards king Louis, despite the archbishop's repeated efforts. His death deprived Lothair of a wise and devoted guardian, even if it did set him free from German influence; and the death of Odalric, archbishop of Reims, in 969, was another fatal loss for the Carolingians, succeeded as he was by Adalbero, who, though learned, pious and highly intelligent, was none the less ambitious. On the death of Otto I. (973) Lothair wished to regain Lorraine; but his success was small, owing to his limited resources and the uncertain support of his vassals. In 980, regretting his fruitless quarrel with Otto II., who had ravaged the whole country as far as Paris, and fearing that even with the support of the house of Vermandois he would be crushed like his father Louis IV. between the duke of France and the emperor, who could count on the archbishop of Reims, Lothair made peace with Otto—a great mistake, which cost him the prestige he had gained among his nobles by his fairly successful struggle with the emperor, drawing down upon him, moreover, the swift wrath of Hugh, who thought himself tricked. Otto, meanwhile, whom he was unwise enough to trust, made peace secretly* with Hugh, as it was his interest to play off his two old enemies one against the other. However, Otto died first (983), leaving a three-year-old son, Otto III., and Lothair, hoping for Lorraine, upheld the claims of Henry of Bavaria, who wished to oust Otto. This was a war-signal for Archbishop Adalbero and his adviser Gerbert, devoted to the idea of the Roman empire, and determined that it should still be vested in the race of Otto, which had always been beneficent to the Church. They decided to set the Robertinians against the Carolingians, and on their advice Hugh Capet dispersed the assembly of Compiégne which Lothair had commissioned to examine Adalbero's behaviour. On Lothair's death in f;, ';'é§ , ;;, 986, Hugh surrounded his son and successor, Louis V., with intrigues. Louis was a weak-minded and violent young man with neither authority nor prestige, and Hugh tried to have him placed under tutelage. After Louis V.'s sudden death, aged twenty, in 987, Adalbero and Gerbert, with the support of the reformed Cluniac clergy, at the Assembly of Senlis eliminated from the succession the rightful heir, Charles of Lorraine, who, without influence or wealth, had become a stranger in his own country, and elected Hugh Capet, who, though rich and powerful, was superior neither in intellect nor character. Thus the triple alliance of Adalbero's bold and adroit imperialism with the cautious and vacillating ambition of the duke of the Franks, and the impolitic hostility towards Germany of the ruined Carolingians, resulted in the unlooked-for advent of the new Capetian dynasty.

This event completed the evolution of the forces that had produced feudalism, the basis of the medieval social system. The idea of public authority had been replaced by one Dismmp that was simpler and therefore better fitted for a half- be, -ment gf civilized society-that of dependence of the weak on U16 HHH the strong, voluntarily entered on by means of mutual d°'” contract. Feudalism had gained ground in the 8th century; feudalism it was which had raised the first Carolingian to the throne as being the richest and most powerful person in Austrasia; and Charlemagne with all his power had been as utterly unable as the Merovingians to revive the idea of an abstract and impersonal state. Charlemagne's vassals, however, had needed him; while from Charles the Bald onward it was the king who needed the vassals-a change more marked with each successive prince. The feudal system had in fact turned against the throne, the vassals using it to secure a permanent hold upon offices and fiefs, and to get possession of estates and of power. After Charles the Bald's death royalty had only, so to speak, a shell-administrative officialdom. No longer firmly rooted in the soil, the monarchy was helpless before local powers which confronted it, seized upon the land, and cut off connexion between throne and people. The king, the supreme lord, was the only lord without lands, a nomad in his own realms, merely lingering there until starved out. F eudalism claimed its new rights in the capitulary of Quierzy-sur-Oise in 857; the rights of the monarchy began to dwindle in 877.

But vassalage could only be a cause of disintegration, not of unity, and that this disintegration did not at once spread indefinitely was due to the dozen or so great military commands -Flanders, Burgundy, Aquitaine, &c.—which Charles the Bald had been obliged to establish on a strong territorial basis. One of these great vassals, the duke of France, was amply provided with estates and offices, in contrast to the landless Carolingian, and his power, like that of the future kings of Prussia and Austria, was based on military authority, for he had a frontier that of Anjou. Then the inevitable crisis had come. For a hundred years the great feudal lords had disposed of the crown as they pleased, handing it back and forward from one dynasty to another. At the same time the contrast between the vast proportions of the Carolingian empire and its feeble administrative control over a still uncivilized community became more and more accentuated. The Empire crumbled away by degrees. Each country began to, lead its own separate existence, stammering its own tongue; the different nations no longer understood one another, and no longer had any general ideas in common. The kingdoms of France and Germany, still too large, owed their existence to a series of dis possessions imposed on sovereigns too feeble to hold their own, and consisted of a great number of small states united by a very slight bond. At the end of the 10th century the duchy of France was the only central part of the kingdom which was still free and without organization. The end was bound to come, and the final struggle was between Laon, the royal capital, and Reims, the ecclesiastical capital, the former carrying with it the soil of France, and the latter the crown. The Capets captured the first in 985 and the other in 987. Thenceforth all was over for the Carolingians, who were left with no heritage save their great name. Was the day won for the House of Capet? In the I rth century the kings of that line possessed meagre domains scattered about in the Ile de France among the seigniorial possessions The House - - —0,

-capen of Brie, Beauce, Beauvaisis and Valois. They were hemmed in by the powerful duchy of Normandy, the counties of Blois, Flanders and Champagne, and the duchy of Burgundy. Beyond these again stretched provinces practically impenetrable to royal influence: Brittany, Gascony, Toulouse, Septimania and the Spanish March. The monarchy lay stifling in the midst of a luxuriant feudal forest which surrounded its only two towns of any importance: Paris, the city of the future, and Orleans, the city of learning. Its power, exercised with an energy tempered by prudence, ran to waste like its wealth in a suzerainty over turbulent vassals devoid of common government or administration, and was undermined by the same lack of social discipline among its vassals which had sapped the power of the Carolingians. The new dynasty was thus the poorest and weakest of the great civil and ecclesiastical lordships which occupied the country from the estuary of the Scheldt to that of the Llobregat, and bounded approximately by the Meuse, the Saone and the ridge of the Cevennes; yet it cherished a great ambition which it revealed at times during its first century (987-IIO8>*& determination not to repeat the Carolingian failure. It had to wait two centuries after the revolution of Q87 before it was strong enough to take upthe dormant tradition of an authority like that of Rome; and until then it cunningly avoided unequal strife in which, victory being impossible, reverses might have weakened those titles, higher than any due to feudal rights, conferred by the heritage of the Caesars and the coronation at Reims, and held in reserve for the future.

The new dynasty thus at first gave the impression rather of decrepitude than of youth, seeming more a continuation of the Carolingian monarchy than a new departure. Hugh Capet's reign was one of disturbance and danger; gif; behind his dim personality may be perceived the (9§ 996) struggle of greater forces-royalty and feudalism, the French clergy and the papacy, the kingdom of France and the Empire. Hugh Capet needed more than three years and the betrayal of his enemy into his hands before he could parry the attack of a quite second-rate adversary, Charles of Lorraine (990), the last descendant of Charlemagne. The insubordination of several great vassals-the count of Vermandois, the duke of Burgundy, the count of Flanders-who treated him as he had treated the Carolingian king; the treachery of Arnulf, archbishop of Reims, who let himself be won over by the empress Theophano; the papal hostility inflamed by the emperor against the claim of feudal France to independence, -all made it seem for a time as though the unity of the Roman empire of the West would be secured at Hugh's expense and in Otto's favour; but as a matter of fact this papal and imperial hostility ended by making the Capet dynasty a national one. When Hugh died in 996, he had succeeded in maintaining his liberty mainly, it is true, by diplomacy, not force, despite opposing powers and his own weakness. Above all, he had secured the future by associating his son Robert with him on the throne; and although the nobles and the archbishop of Reims were disturbed by this suspension of the feudal right of election, and tried to oppose it, they were unsuccessful.

Robert the Pious, a crowned monk, resembled his father in eschewing great schemes, whether from timidity or prudence; yet from 996 to IO3I he preserved intact the authority Rube" he had inherited from Hugh, despite many domestic dis- me pious turbances. He maintained a defiant attitude towards (996-Germany; increased his heritage; strengthened his mm

royal title by the addition of that of duke of Burgundy after fourteen years of pillage; and augmented the royal domain by adding several count ships on the south-east and north-west. Limited in capacity, he yet understood the art of acquisition. Henry I., his son, had to struggle with a powerful vassal, Eudes, count of Chartres and Troyes, and was obliged for a time to abandon his father's anti-German policy. Eudes, who was rash and adventurous, in alliance with the ””'"7 1 (1031-

queen-mother, supported the second son, Robert, 1060, and captured the royal town of Sens. In order to retake it Henry ceded the beautiful valley of the Saone and the Rhone to the German emperor Conrad, and henceforth the kingdom of Burgundy was, like Lorraine, to follow the fortunes of Germany. Henry had besides to invest his brother with the duchy of Burgundy-a grave error which hampered French politics during three centuries. Like his father, he subsequently managed to retrieve some of the crown lands from William the Bastard, the too-powerful duke of Normandy; and he made a praiseworthy though fruitless attempt to regain possession of Lorraine for the French crown. Finally, by the coronation of his son Philip (1059) he confirmed the hereditary right of the Capets, soon to be superior to the elective rights of the bishops and great barons of the kingdom. The chief merit of these early Capets, indeed, was that they had sons, so that their dynasty lasted on without disastrous minorities or quarrels over the division of inheritance.

Philip I. achieved nothing during his long reign of forty-eight years except the necessary son, Louis the Fat. Unsuccessful even in small undertakings he was utterly incapable of great ones; and the two important events of his ZIZZKL reign took place, the one against his will, the other I]08) without his help. The first, which lessened Norman aggression in his kingdom, was William the Bastard's conquest of England (ro66); the second was the First Crusade preached by the French pope Urban II. (IOQS). A few half-hearted campaigns against recalcitrant vassals and a long and obstinate quarrel with the papacy over his adulterous union with Bertrade de Montfort, countess of Anjou, represented the total activity of Philip's reign; he was greedy and venal, by no means disdaining the petty profits of brigandage, and he never left his own domains.

After a century's lethargy the house of Capet awoke once more with Louis VI. and began the destruction of the feudal polity. For thirty-four years of increasing warfare this active Louis VI.

the Fat and energetic king, this brave and persevering soldier, gégi' never spared himself, energetically policing the royal demesne against such pillagers as Hugh of Le Puiset or Thomas of Marle. There was, however, but little diderence yet between a count of Flanders or of Chartres and Louis VI., the possessor of a but small and perpetually disturbed realm, who was praised by his minister, the monk Suger, for making his power felt as far as distant Berri! This was clearly shown when he attempted to force the great feudal lords to recognize his authority. His bold endeavour to establish William Ciito in Flanders ended in failure; and his want of strength was particularly humiliating in his unfortunate struggle with Henry I., king of the English and duke of Normandy, who was powerful and well served, the real master of a comparatively weak baronage. Louis only escaped being crushed because he remembered, as did his successors for long after him, that his house owed its power to the Church.

The Church has never loved weakness; she has always had a secret sympathy for power, whatever its source, when she could hope to capture-it and make it serve her ends. Louis VI. defended her against feudal robbers; and she supported him in his struggles against the nobles, making him, moreover, by his son's marriage with the heiress of Aquitaine, the greatest and richest landholder of the kingdom. But Louis was not the obedient tool she wished for. With equal firmness and success he vindicated his rights, whether against the indirect attacks of the papacy'on his independence, or the claims of the ecclesiastical courts which, in principle, he made subordinate to the jurisdiction of the crown; whether in episcopal elections, or in ecclesiastical reforms which might possibly imperil his power or his revenues. The prestige of this energetic king, protector of the Church, of the infant communes in the towns, and of the peasants as against the constant oppressions of feudalism, became still greater at the end of his reign, when an invasion of the German emperor Henry V. in alliance with Henry Beauclerk of Normandy (Henry I. of England), rallied his subjects round the orifiamme of St Denis, awakening throughout northern France the unanimous and novel sentiment of national danger.

Unfortunately his successor, Louis VII., almost destroyed his work by a colossal blunder, although circumstances seemed much in his favour. Germany and England, the two powers especially to be dreaded, were busy with Louis VII.

in Germany. After two years of constant defeat, Henry's capitulation at Azai proved once more that fortune is never with the old. The English king had to submit himself to “ the advice and desire of the king of France, ” doing him homage for all continental fiefs (1187-1189).

The defection of his favourite son John gave Henry his deathblow, and Philip Augustus found himself confronted by a new king of England, Richard Coeur de Lion, as powerful, Qzggztus besides being younger and more energetic. Philip's and ambition could not rest satisfied with the petty R'°"";' principalities of Amiens, Vermandois and Valois, iff: ° which he had added to the royal demesne. The third - crusade, undertaken, sorely against Philip's will, in alliance with Richard, only increased the latent hostility between the two kings;'and in 1191 Philip abandoned the enterprise in order to return to France and try to plunder his absent rival. Despite his solemn oath no scruples troubled him: witness the large sums of money he offered to the emperor Henry VI. if he would detain Richard, who had been made prisoner by the duke of Austria on his return from the crusade; and his negotiations with his brother John Lackland, whom he acknowledged king of England in excha nge for the cession of Normandy. But Henry VI. suddenly liberated Richard, and in five years that “ devil set free ” took from Philip all the profit of his trickery, and shut him off from Normandy by the strong fortress of Chateau-Gaillard (1194-1 199).

Happily an accident which caused Richard's death at the siege of Chalus, and the evil imbecility of his brother and successor, John Lackland, brilliantly restored the fortunes gggfgtus of the Capets. The quarrel between John and his Zvdk-ZS: nephew Arthur of 'Brittany gave Philip Augustus 80 »

one of those opportunities of profiting by family discord which, coinciding with discontent among the various peoples subject to the house of Anjou, had stood him in such good stead against Henry II. and Richard. He demanded renunciation on John's part, not of Anjou only, but of Poitou and Normandy- of all his French-speaking possessions, in factin favour of Arthur, who was supported by William des Roches, the most powerful lord of the region of the Loire. Philip's divorce from Ingeborg of Denmark, who appealed successfully to Pope Innocent III., merely delayed the inevitable conflict. John of England, moreover, was a past-master in the art of making enemies of his friends, and his conduct towards his vassals of Aquitaine furnished a judicial pretext for conquest. The royal judges at Paris condemned John, as a felon, to death and the forfeiture of his fiefs (1203), and the murder of Arthur completed his ruin. Philip Augustus made a vigorous onslaught on Normandy in right of justice and of superior force, took the formidable fortress of Chateau-Gaillard on the Seine after several months' siege, and invested Rouen, which John abandoned, fieeing to England. In Anjou, Touraine, Maine and Poitou, lords, towns and abbeys made their submission, won over by Philip's bribes despite Pope Innocent III.'s attempts at intervention. In 1208 John was obliged to own the Plantagenet continental power as lost. There were no longer two rival monarchies in France; the feudal equilibrium was destroyed, to the advantage of the duchy of France.

But Philip in his turn nearly allowed himself to be led into an attempt at annexing England, and so reversing for his own benefit the work of the Angevins (1213); but, happily for the future of the dynasty, Pope Innocent LII. prevented this. Thanks to the ecclesiastical sanction of his royalty, Philip had successfully braved the pope for twenty years, in the matter of Ingeborg and again in that of the German schism, when he had supported Philip of Swabia against Otto of Brunswick, the pope's candidate. In 121 3, John Lackland, having been in conflict with Innocent regarding the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury, had made submission and done homage for his kingdom, and Philip wished to take vengeance for this at the expense of the rebellious vassals of the north-west, and of Renaud and Ferrand, counts of Boulogne and Flanders, thus combating English influence in those quarters.

This was a return to the old Capet policy; but it was also menacing to many interests, and sure to arouse energetic resistance. John seized the opportunity to consolidate Cuando#against Philip

Augustus.

(1214).

against Philip a European coalition, which included most of the feudal lords in Flanders, Belgium and Lorraine, and the emperor Otto IV. So dangerous did the French monarchy already seem! John began operations with an attack from Anjou, supported by the notably capricious nobles of Aquitaine, and was routed by Philip's son at La Roche aux Moines, near Angers, on/ the 2nd of July 1214. Twenty-five days later the northern allies, intending to surprise the smaller French army on its passage over the bridge at Bouvines, themselves sustained a complete defeat. This first national victory had not only a profound effect on the whole kingdom, but produced consequences of far-reaching importance: in Germany it brought about Otto's fall before Frederick II.; in England it introduced the great drama of 1215, the first act of which closed with Magna Carta-John Lackland being forced to acknowledge the control of his barons, and to share with them the power he had abused and disgraced. In France, on the contrary, the throne was exalted beyond rivalry, raised far above a feudalism which never again ventured on acts of independence or rebellion, Bouvines gave France the supremacy of the West. The feudalism of Languedoc was all that now remained to conquer.

The whole world, in fact, was unconsciously working for Philip Augustus. Anxious not to risk his gains, but to consolidate them by organization, Philip henceforth until his death in 122 3 operated through diplomacy alone, leaving to others the toil and trouble of conquests, the advantages of which were not for them. When his son Louis wished to wrest the English crown from John, now crushed by his barons, Philip intervened without seeming to do so, first with the barons, then with Innocent III., supporting and disowning his son by turns; until the latter, held in check by Rome, was forced to sign the treaty of Lambeth (1217). When the Church and the needy and fanatical nobles of northern and central France destroyed the feudal dynasty of Toulouse and the rich civilization of the south in the Albigensian crusade, it was for Philip Augustus that their leader, Simon de Montfort, all unknowing, conquered Languedoc. At last, instead of the two Frances of the langue d'oc and the langue d'oil, there was but one royal France comprising the whole kingdom.

Philip Augustus was not satisfied with the destruction of a turbulent feudalism; he wished to substitute for it such unity and peace 'as had obtained in the Roman Empire; and just as he had established his supremacy over the iiilildziii feudal lords, so now he managed to extend it over the Philip clergy, and to bend them to his will. He took ad- A"g"st"s vantage of their weakness in the midst of an age of violence. By contracts of “ pariage ” the clergy claimed and obtained the king's protection even in places beyond the king's jurisdiction, to their common advantage. Philip thus set the feudal lords one against the other; and against them all, first the Church, then the communes. He exploited also the townspeople's need for security and the instinct of independence which made them claim a definite place in the feudal hierarchy. He was the actual creator of the communes, although an interested creator, since they made a breach in the fortress of feudalism and extended the royal authority far beyond the king's demesne. He did even more: he gave monarchy the instruments of which it still stood in need, gathering round him in Paris a council of men humble in origin, but wise and loyal; while in 1190 he instituted baillis and seneschals throughout his enlarged dominions, all-powerful over the nobles and subservient to himself. He filled his treasury with spoils harshly wrung from all classes; thus inaugurating the monarchy's long and patient labours at enlarging the crown lands bit by bit through taxes on private property. Finally he created an army, no longer the temporary feudal ost, but a more or less permanent royal force. By virtue of all these organs of government the throne guaranteed peace, justice and a secure future, having routed feudalisrn with sword and diplomacy. Philip's son was the first of the Capets who was not crowned during his father's lifetime; a fact clearly showing that the principle of heredity had now been established beyond discussion.

Louis VIII.'s short reign was but a prolongation of Philip's in its realization of his two great designs: the recovery from Louis vm Henry III. of England of Poitou as far as the Garonne; (1223 ' and the crusade against the Albigenses, which with 1226). small pains procured him the succession of Amaury de Montfort, and the Languedoc of the counts of Toulouse, if not the whole of Gascony. Louis VIII. died on his return from this short campaign without having proved his full worth.

But the history of France during. the rrth and 12th centuries does not entirely consist of these painful struggles of the Capet dynasty to shake off the fetters of feudalism. France, Universal — Freud,

no longer split up into separate fragments, now began activity. to exercise both intellectual and military influence over Europe. Everywhere her sons gave proof of rejuvenated activity; The Christian missions which others were reviving in Prussia and beginning in Hungary were undertaken on a vaster scale by the Capets. These “elder sons of the Church ” made themselves responsible for carrying out the “ work of God, ” and French pilgrims in the Holy Land prepared the great movement of the Crusades against the infidels. Religious faith, love of adventure, the hope of making advantageous conquests, anticipations of a promised paradise all combined to force this advance upon the Orient, which though failing to rescue the sepulchre of Christ, the ephemeral kingdoms of Jerusalem and Cyprus, the dukedom of Athens, or the Latin empire of Constantinople, yet gained for France that prestige for military glory and religious piety which for centuries constituted her strength in the Levant (see CRUSADES>. At the call of, the pope other members of the French chivalry also made victorious expeditions against the Mussulmans, and founded the Christian kingdom of Portugal. Obeying that enterprising spirit which was to take them to England half a century later, Normans descended upon southern Italy and wrested rich lands from Greeks and Saracens. In the domain of intellect the advance of the French showed a no less dazzling and a no less universal activity; they sang |, ,¢,1. as well as they fought, and their epics were worthy Iectual of their swordsmanship, while their cathedrals were """”°P' hymns in stone as ardent as their soaring flights of ment' devotion. In this period of intense religious life France was always in the vanguard. It was the ideas of Cluniac monks that freed the Church from feudal supremacy, and in the 11th century produced a Pope Gregory VII.; the spirit of free investigation shown by the heretics of Orleans inspired the rude Breton, Abelard, in the 12th century; and with Gerbert and Fulbert of Chartres the schools first kindled that brilliant light which the university of Paris, organized by Philip Augustus, was to shed over the world from the heights of Sainte-Genevieve. In the quarrels of the priesthood under the Empire it was St Bernard, the great abbot of Clairvaux, who tried to arrest the papacy on the slippery downward path of theocracy; finally, it was in Suger's church of St Denis that French art began that struggle between light against darkness which, culminating in Notre-Dame and the Sainte-Chapelle, was to teach the architects of the world the delight of building with airiness of effect. The old basilica which contains the history of the monarchy sums up the whole of Gothic art to this day, and it was Suger who in the domain of art and politics brought forward once more the conception of unity. The courteous ideal of French chivalry, with its “ delectable ” language, was adopted by all seigniorial Europe, which thus became animated, as it were, by the life-blood of France. Similarly, in the universal movement of those forces which made for freedom, France began the age-long struggle to maintain the rights of civil society and continually to enlarge the social categories. The townsman enriched by commerce and the emancipated peasant tried more or less valiantly to shake off the yoke of the feudal system, which had been greatly weakened, if not entirely broken down, by the crusades. Grouped around their belfry-towers and organized within their gilds, they made merry in their free jocular language over their own hardships, and still more over the vices of their lords. They insinuated themselves into the counsels of their ignorant masters, and though still sitting humbly at the feet of the barons, these upright and well-educated servitors were already dreaming of the great deeds they would do when their tyrants should have vacated their high position, and when royalty should have summoned them to power.

By the beginning of the 13th century the Capet monarchy was so strong that the crisis occasioned by the sudden death of Louis VIII. was easily surmounted by the foreign woman and the child whom he left behind him. It 5};;§ IX° is true that that woman was Blanche of Castile, and 1270). that child the future Louis IX. A virtuous and very devout Spanish princess, Blanche assumed the regency of the kingdom and the tutelage of her child, and carried them on for nine years with so much force of character and capacity for rule that she soon impressed the clamorous and Castila disorderly leaders of the opposition (1226-1235). By the treaty of Meaux (1229), her diplomacy combined with the influence of the Church to prepare effectually for the annexation of Languedoc to the kingdom” supplementing this again by a portion of Champagne; and the 'marriage of her son to Margaret of Provence definitely broke the ties which held the country within the orbit of the German empire. She managed also to keep out of the great quarrel between Frederick II. and the papacy which was convulsing Germany. But her finest achievement was the education of her son; she taught him that lofty religious morality which in his case was not merely a rule for private conduct, but also a political programme to which he remained faithful even to the detriment of his apparent interests. With Louis IX. morality for the first time permeated and dominated politics; he had but one end: to do justice to every one and to reconcile all Christendom in view of a general crusade. The oak of Vincennes, under which the king would sit to mete out justice, cast its shade over the whole political action of Louis IX. He was the arbiter of townspeople, of feudal lords and of kings. The interdiction of the judicial Lguig 1X fg duel, the “ quarantine le roi, ” le. “ the king's truce pvlivy 0f of forty days” during which no vengeance might afbitra be taken for private wrongs, and the assuremenl,1t'°n went far to diminish the abuses of warfare by allowing his mediation to make for a spirit of reconciliation throughout his kingdom. When Thibaud (Theobald), count of Champagne, attempted to marry the daughter of Pierre Mauclerc, duke of Brittany, without the king's consent, Louis IX., who held the county of Champagne at his mercy, contented himself with exacting guarantees of peace. Beyond the borders of France, at the time of the emperor Frederick II.'s conflict with a papacy threatened in its temporal powers, though he made no response to Frederick's appeal to the civil authorities urging them to present a solid front against the pretensions of the Church, and though he energetically supported the latter, yet he would not admit her right to place kingdoms under interdict, and refused the imperial crown which Gregory IX. offered him for one of his brothers. He always hoped to bring about an honourable agreement between the two adversaries, and in his estimation Blanche of

1 The assurement (ass ecu ratio, assecuramenlum) differed from the truce, which was a suspension of hostilities by mutual consent, in so far as it was a peace forced by judicial authority on one of the parties at the request of the other. The party desiring protection applied for the assurement, either before or during hostilities, to any royal, seigniorial or communal judge, who thereupon cited the other party to appear and take an oath that<he would assure the person, property and dependents of his adversary (qu'il Vassurem, elle et les siens): This custom, which became common in the 13th century, of course depended for its effectiveness on the degree of respect inspired in the feudal nobles by the courts. It was difficult, for instance, to refuse or to violate an assuremenl imposed by a royal bailli or by the parlement itself. See A. Luchaire, Manuel des institutions françaises (Paris, 1892), p. 233.-(W. A. P.) the advantages of peace outweighed personal interest. In matters concerning the succession in Flanders, Hainaut and Navarre; in the quarrels of the princes regarding the Empire, and in those of Henry III. of England with his barons; it was because of his justice and his disinterestedness that he was appealed to as a trusted mediator. His conduct towards Henry III. was certainly a most characteristic example of his behaviour. The king of England had entered into the coalition formed by the nobility of Poitou and the count of Toulouse to prevent the execution of the treaty of 1229 and the enfeoffment gggfs 'X' of Poitou to the king's brother Alphonse. Louis IX. Hemy1[1 defeated Henry III. twice within two days, at Taillebourg and at Saintes, and obliged him to demand a truce (1242). It was forbidden that any lord should be a vassal both of the king of France and of the king of England. After this Louis IX. had set off upon his first crusade in Egypt <1248- 54), and on his return he wanted to make this truce into a definite treaty and to “ set love ” between his children and those of the English king. By a treaty signed at Paris (1259), Henry III. renounced all the conquests of Philip Augustus, and Louis IX. those of his father Louis VIII.-an example unique in history of a victorious king spontaneously giving up his spoil solely for the sake of peace and justice, yet proving by his act that honesty is the best policy; for monarchy gained much by that moral authority which made Louis IX. the universal arbitrator. But his love of peace and concord was not always “ sans grands despens ” to the kingdom. In 1 2 58, by renouncing his rights over Roussillon and the count ship of Barcelona, conquered The f by Charlemagne, he made an advantageous bargain grgjgfe 0 because he kept Montpellier; but he committed a grave fault in consenting to accept the offers regarding Sicily made by Pope Urban IV. to his brother the count of Anjou and Provence. That was the origin of the expeditions into Italy on which the house of Valois was two centuries later to squander the resources of France unavailingly, compromising beyond the Alps its interests in the Low Countries and upon the Rhine. But Louis IX.' s Worst error was his obsession with regard to the Crusades, to which he sacrificed everything. Despite the signal failure of the first crusade, when he had been taken prisoner; despite the protests of his mother, of his counsellors, and of the pope himself, he flung himself into the mad adventure of Tunis. Nowhere was his blind faith more plainly shown, combined as it was with total ignorance of the formidable migrations that were convulsing Asia, and of the complicated game of politics just then proceeding between the Christian nations and the Moslems of the Mediterranean. At Tunis he found his death, on the 25th of August 1 270.

The death of Louis IX. and that of his brother Alphonse of Poitiers, heir of the count of Toulouse, made Philip III., the Ph, ” I" Bold, legitimate master of northern France and undis-P ~r .

the Bald puted sovereign of southern France. From the latter (1270- he detached the comtat Venaissin in 1274 and gave it to 1285* the papacy, which held it until 1791. But he had not his father's great soul nor disinterested spirit. Urged by Pope Martin IV. he began the fatal era of great international wars by his unlucky crusade against the king of Aragon, who, thanks to the massacre of the Sicilian V espers, substituted his own predominance in Sicily for that of Charles of Anjou. Philip returned from Spain only to die at Perpignan, ending his insignificant reign as he had begun it, amid the sorrows of a disastrous retreat (1 270-1 285). His reign was but a halting-place of history between those of Louis IX. and Philip the Fair, just when the transition was taking place from the last days of the middle ages to the modern epoch.

The middle ages had been dominated by four great problems. The first of these had been to determine whether there should be a universal empire exercising tutelage over the Philip 1%

theFaIr nations; and if so, to whom this empire should ggi' belong, to pope or emperor. The second had been the extension to the East of that Catholic unity which reigned in the West. Again, for more than a century, the question had also been debated whether the English kings were to preserve and increase their power over the soil of France. And, finally, two principles had been confronting one another in the internal life of all the European states: the feudal and the monarchical principles. France had not escaped any of these conflicts; but Philip the Fair was the initiator or the instrument (it is difficult to say which) who was to put an end to both imperial and theocratic dreams, and to the international Crusades; who was to remove the political axis from the centre of Europe, mu0lJ to the benefit of the western monarchies, now definitely emancipated from the feudal yoke and firmly organized against both the Church and the barons. The hour had come for Dante, the great Florentine poet, to curse the man who was to dismember the empire, precipitate the fall of the papacy and discipline feudalism. Modern in his practical schemes and in his calculated purpose, Philip the Fair was still more so in his method, that of legal procedure, and in his agents, the lawyers. With him the French monarchy defined its ambitions, and little fjfglfizjlj, by little forsook its feudal and ecclesiastical character ofmulip in order to clothe itself in juridical forms. His aggres- f:;5*"i"'S sive and litigious policy and his ruthless financial method were due to those lawyers of the south and of Normandy who had been nurtured on Roman law in the universities of Bologna or Montpellier, had practised chicanery in the provincial courts, had gradually thrust themselves into the great arena of politics, and were now leading the king and filling his parlement. It was no longer upon religion or morality, it was upon imperial and Roman rights that these chevaliers és Zois based the prince's omnipotence; and nothing more clearly marks the new tradition which was being elaborated than the fact that all the great events of Philip the F air's reign were lawsuits.

The first of these was with the papacy. The famous quarrel between the priesthood and the Empire, which had culminated at Canossa under Gregory VII., in the apotheosis of philip the the Lateran council under Innocent III., and again pai, -and in the fall of the house of Hohenstaufen under Innocent fhe IV., was reopened with the king of France by Boniface VIII. The quarrel began in 1294 about a question of money. In his bull Clericis Zaficos the pope protested against the taxes levied upon the French clergy by the king, whose expenses were increasing with his conquests. But he had not insisted; because Philip, between feudal vassals ruined by the Crusades and lower classes fieeced by everybody, had threatened to forbid the exportation from France of any ecclesiastical gold and silver. In 1301 and 1302 the arrest of Bernard Saisset, bishop of Pamiers, by the officers of the king, and the citation of this cleric before the king's tribunal for the crime of lése-majesté, revived the conflict and led Boniface to send an order to free Saisset, and to put forward a claim to reform the kingdom under the threat of excommunication. In view of the gravity of the occasion Philip made an unusually extended appeal to public opinion by convoking the states-general at Notre-Dame in Paris (1302). Whatever were their views as to the relations between ecclesiastical and secular jurisdiction, the French clergy, ruined by the dues levied by the papal court, ranged themselves on the national side with the nobility and the bourgeoisie; whereupon the king, with a bold stroke far ahead of his time, gave tit for tat. His chancellor, Nogaret, went to Anagni to seize the pope and drag him before a council; but Boniface died without confessing himself vanquished. As a matter of fact the king and his lawyers triumphed, where the house of Swabia had failed. After the death of Boniface the splendid fabric of the medieval theocracy gave place to the rights of civil society, the humiliation of Avignon, the disruption of the great schism, the vain efforts of the councils for reform, and the radical and heretical solutions of Wycliffe and Huss. The affair of the Templars was another legal process carried Papacy.

out by the same Nogaret. Of course this military religious order had lost utility and justification when the Holy philip the Land had been evacuated and the crusades were over. pai, -3,4 Their great mistake had lain in becoming rich, and the Templar-s.

rich to excess, through serving as bankers to princes, kings and popes; for great financial powers soon became unpopular. Philip took advantage of this hatred of the lower classes and the cowardice of. his creature, Pope Clement V., to satisfy his desire for money. The trial of the order (1307-1313) was a remarkable example of the use of the religious tribunal of the Inquisition as a political instrument. There was a dramatic completeness about this unexpected result of the crusades. A. general arbitrary arrest of the Templars, the sequestration of their property, .examination under torture, the falsifying of procedure, extortion of money from the pope, the auto-da-fé of innocent victims, the dishonest pillaging of their goods by the joint action of the king and the pope: such was the outcome of this vast process of secularization, which foreshadowed the events of the 16th and 18th centuries. External policy had the same litigious character. Philip the Fair instituted suits against his natural enemies, the king of England and the count of Flanders, foreign princes holding possessions within his kingdom; and against the emperor, whose ancient province of Lorraine and kingdom of Arles constantly changed hands between and France. Philip began by interfering in the affairs of Sicily and Aragon, his father's inheritance; after which, on the pretext of a quarrel between French and English sailors, he set up his customary procedure: a citation of the king of England before the parlement of Paris, and in case of default a decree of forfeiture; the whole followed by execution-that is to say by the unimportant war of I2Q 5. A truce arranged by Boniface VIII. restored Guienne to Edward I., gave him the hand of Philip's sister for himself and that of the king's daughter for his son (1298).

A still more lengthy and unfortunate suit was the attempt of Philip the Fair and his successors to incorporate the Flemish def like the English one (1300-1326), thus coming Philip the

Fair an d

Edward L

Germany

Zzggyf' into 'conflict with proud and turbulent republics p|, ,, d, ,., composed of wool and cloth merchants, Weavers, fullers and powerful counts. Guy de Dampierre, count of Namur, who had become count of Flanders on the death of his mother Margaret II. in 1279-an ambitious, greedy and avaricious man-was arrested at the Louvre on account of his attempt to marry his daughter to Edward I.'s eldest son without the consent of his suzerain Philip. Released after two years, he sided definitely with the king of England when the latter was in arms against Philip; and being only weakly supported by Edward, he was betrayed by the nobles who favoured France, and forced to yield up not only his personal liberty but the whole of Flanders (1300). The Flemings, however, soon wearying of the oppressive administration of the French governor, Jacques de Chatillon, and the recrudescence of patrician domination, rose and overwhelmed the French chivalry at Courtrai (1302)a prelude to the coming disasters of the Hundred Years' War. Philip's double revenge, on sea at Zierikzee and on land at Mons-en-Pévéle (1304), led to the signing of a treaty at Athis-sur-Orge (1305).

The efforts of Philip the Fair to expand the limits of his kingdom on the eastern border were more fortunate. His Eastern marriage had gained him Champagne; and he afterpoucyof wards extended his influence over Franche Comté,

g 1Pff|° Bar and the bishoprics of Lorraine, acquiring also

Viviers and the important town of Lyons-all this less by force of arms than by the expenditure of money. Disdaining the illusory dream of the imperial crown, still cherished by his legal advisers, he pushed forward towards that fluctuating eastern frontier, the line of least resistance, which would have yielded to him had it not been for the unfortunate interruption of the Hundred Years' War.

His three sons, Louis X., Philip V. the Tall, and Charles IV., continued his work. They increased the power of the monarchy politically by destroying the feudal reaction excited If;|f;;;, s in 1314 by the tyrannical conduct of the jurists, like une Fair Enguerrandde Marigny, and by the increasingiinancial gig' extort ions of their father; and they also-notably Philip V., one of the most hard-working of the Capets* increased it on the administrative side by specializing the services of justice and of finance, which were separated from the king's council. Under these mute self-effacing kings the progress of royal power was only the more striking. With them the senior male line of the house of Capet became extinct. During three centuries and a half they had effected great things: they had founded a kingdom, a royal family institutions. The land subject to Hugh Capet in and civil

987, barely representing two of the modern departments [The "°-"fl of France, in 1328 covered a space equal t.o fifty-nine C3322 ° of them. The political unity of the kingdom was only fettered by the existence of four large isolated fiefsz Flanders on the north, Brittany on the west, Burgundy on the east and Guienne on the south. The capital, which for long had been movable, was now established in the Louvre at Paris, fortified by Philip Augustus. Like the fiefs, feudal institutions at large had been shattered.. The Roman tradition which made the will of the sovereign law, gradually propagated by the teaching of Roman 1aw-the law of servitude, not of liberty-and already proclaimed by the jurist Philippe de Beaumanoir as superior to the customs, had been of immense support to the interest of the state and the views of the monarchs; and finally the Capets, so humble of origin, had created organs of general administration common to all in order to effect an administrative centralization. In their grand council and their domains they would have none but silent, servile and well-disciplined agents. The royal exchequer, which was being painfully elaborated in the chambre des comptes, and the treasury of the crown lands at the Louvre, together barely sufficed to meet the expenses of this more complicated and costly machinery. The uniform justice exercised by the parlement spread gradually over the whole kingdom by means of cas royaux (royal suits), and at the same time the royal coinage became obligatory. Against this exaltation of their power two adversaries might have been formidable; but one, the Church, was a captive in Babylon, and the second, the people, was deprived of the communal liberties which it had abused, or humbly effaced itself in the states-general behind the declared will of the king. This well-established authority was also supported by the revered memory of “ Monseigneur Saint Louis ”; and it is this prestige, the strength of this ideal superior to all other, that explains how the royal prerogative came to survive the mistakes and misfortunes of the Hundred Years War.

On the extinction of the direct line of the Capets the crown passed to a younger branch, that of the Valois. Its seven representatives (1328'I4Q8) were on the whole very inferior to the Capets, and, with the exception of ':h""”"' ° Charles V. end Louis xr., possessed neither their, ,§ , ,, , political sense nor even their good common sense; they cost France the loss of her great advantage over all other countries. During this century and a half France passed through two very severe crises; under the first five Valois the Hundred Years' War imperilled the kingdom's independence; and under Louis XI. the struggl e against the house of Burgundy endangered the territorial unity of the monarchy that had been established with such pains upon the ruins of feudalism. Charles the Fair having died and left only a daughter, the nation's rights, so long in abeyance, were once more An assembly of peers and barons, relying on two regained.

precedents under Philip V. and Charles IV., declared Egg? W that “no woman, nor therefore her son, could in 1350, France.” This definite decision, to which the name of the Salic law was given much later, set aside Edward III., king of England, grandson of Philip the Fair, nephew of the late kings and son of their sister Isabel. Instead it gave the crown to the feudal chief, the hard and coarse Philip VI. of Valois, nephew of Philip the Fair. This at once provoked war between the two monarchies, English and French, which, including periods of truce, lasted for a hundred and sixteen years. Of active warfare there were two periods, both disastrous to begin with, but ending favourably: one lasted from 1337 to 1378 and the other from 1413 to 1453, thirty-three years of distress and folly coming in between. 820 FRANCE, [HISTORY

However, the Hundred Years' War was not mainly caused by the pretensions of Edward III. to the throne of the Capets; The since after having long hesitated to do homage to Hundred Philip VI. for his possessions in Guienne, Edward at Ye-UFS' last brought himself to it-though certainly only after Wm" lengthy negotiations, and even threats of war in I 3 31. It is true that six years later he renounced his homage and again claimed the French inheritance; but this was on the ground of personal grievances, and for economic and political reasons. There was a natural rivalry between Edward III. and Philip VI., both of them young, fond of the life of chivalry, festal magnificence, and the “ belles apertises d'armes.” This rivalry was aggravated by the enmity between Philip VI. and Robert of Artois, his brother-in-law, who, after having warmly supported the disinheriting of Edward III., had been convicted of deceit in a question of succession, had revenged himself on Philip by burning his waxen effigy, and had been welcomed with open arms at Edward's court. Philip VI. had taken reprisals against him in 1 3 36 by making his parlement declare the forfeiture of Edward's lands and castles in Guienne; but the Hundred Years War, at first simply a feudal quarrel between vassal and suzerain, soon became a great national conflict, in consequence of what was occurring in Flanders. ',

The communes of Flanders, rich, hard-working, jealous of their liberties, had always been restive under the authority of their counts and the influence of their suzerain, the king of France. The affair at Cassel, where Philip VI. had avenged the injuries done by the people of Bruges in 1325 to their count, Louis of Nevers, had also compromised English interests. To attack the English through their colonies, Guienne and Flanders, was to injure them in their most vital interests -cloth and claret; for England sold her wool to Bruges in order to pay Bordeaux for her wine. Edward III. had replied by forbidding the exportation of English wool, and by threatening the great industrial cities of Flanders with the transference to England of the cloth manufacture-an excellent means of stirring them up against the French, as without wool they could do nothing. Workless, and in desperation, they threw themselves on Edward's mercy, by the advice of a rich citizen of Ghent, Jacob van Artevelde (q.'v.); and their last scruples of loyalty gave way when Edward decided to follow the counsels of Robert of Artois and of Artevelde, and to claim the crown of France. The war began, like every feudal war of that day, with a solemn defiance, and it was soon characterized by terrible disasters. The destruction of the finest French Th; t t fleet that had yet been seen, surprised in the port of g7, ,;, ; a Sluys, closed the sea to the king of France; the struggle was continued on land, but with little result. Flanders tired of it, but fortunately for Edward III. Brittany now took fire, through a quarrel of succession, analogous to that in France, between Charles of Blois (who had married the daughter of the late duke and was a nephew of Philip VI., by whom he was supported) and John of Montfort, brother of the old duke, who naturally asked assistance from the king of England. But here, too, nothing important was accomplished; the capture of John of Montfort at Nantes deprived Edward of Brittany at the very moment when he finally lost Flanders by the death of Artevelde, who was killed by the people of Ghent in 1345. Under the influence of Godefroi d'Harcourt, whom Philip VI. had wished to destroy on account of his ambitions with regard to the duchy of Normandy, Edward III. now invaded central France, ravaged Normandy, getting as near to Paris as Saint-Germain; and profiting by Philip VI.'s hesitation and delay, he reached the north with his spoils by dint of forced marches. Having been pursued and encountered at Crécy, Edward gained a complete victory there on the ggiatat 26th of April 1346. The seizure of Calais in 1347, Crévydnd despite heroic resistance, gave the English a port me “"'i"3 where they could always ind entry into France, just ofcalais' when the queen of England had beaten David of Scotland, the ally of France, at Neville's Cross, and when Charles of Blois, made prisoner in his turn, was held captive in London. The Black Death put the finishing touch to the military disasters and financial upheavals of this unlucky reign; though before his death in 135O, Pl'1llip VI. was fortunate enough to augment his territorial acquisitions by the purchase of the rich port of Montpellier, as well as by that of Dauphiné, which extended to the Alpine frontier, and was to become the appanage of the eldest son of the king of France (see DAUPHINE and DAUPHIN).

Philip VI.'s successor was his son John the Good-or rather, the stupid and the spendthrift. This noble monarch was unspeakably brutal (as witness the murders, simply on

suspicion, of the constable Raoul de Brienne, count "°"” the of Eu, and of the count of Harcourt) and incredibly ggggy extravagant. His need of money led him to debase the currency eighty-one times between 1350 and 1355. And this money, so necessary for the prosecution of the war with England, which had been interrupted for a year, thanks to the pope's intervention, was lavished by him upon his favourite, Charles of La Cerda. The latter was murdered in 1354 by order of Charles of Navarre, the king's son-in-law, who also prevented the levying of the taxes voted by the states in I 3 5 5 with the object of replenishing the treasury. The Black Prince took this opportunity to ravage the southern provinces, and then marched to join the duke of Lancaster and Charles of Navarre in Normandy. John the Good managed

to bring the English army to bay at Maupertuis, £55121 not far from Poitiers; but the battle was conducted ° with such a want of intelligence on his part that the French army was "overwhelmed, though very superior in numbers, and King John was made prisoner, after a determined resistance, on thergth of September 1356.

The disaster at Poitiers almost led to the establishment in France of institutions analogous to those which England owed to Bouvines. The king a prisoner, the dauphin dis- credited and deserted, and the nobility decimated, T:.';3;?t” the people-that is to say, the states-general-could?3564raise their voice. Philip the Fair had never regarded the states-general as a financial institution, but merely as a moral support. Now, however, in order to obtain substantial help from taxes instead of mere driblets, the Valois needed a stronger lever than cunning or force. War against the English assured them the support of the nation. Exactions, debasement of the currency and extortionate taxation were ruinous palliatives, and insufficient to supply a treasury which the revenue from crown lands and various rights taken from the nobles could not fill even in times of peace. By the 14th century the motto “ N impose' qui ne veut ” (i.e. no taxation without consent) was as firmly established in France as in England. After Crécy Philip VI. called the states together regularly, that he might obtain subsidies from them, as an assistance, an “aid” which subjects could not refuse their suzerain. /In return' for this favour, which the king could not claim as a right, the states, feeling their power, began to bargain, and at the session of November 13 55 demanded the participation of all classes in the tax voted, and obtained guarantees both for its levy and the use to be made of it. A similar situation in England had given birth to political liberty; but in France the great crisis of the early 1 5th century stifled it. It was with this money that John the Good got himself beaten and' taken prisoner at Poitiers. Once more the states-general had to be convoked. Confronted by a pale weakly boy like the dauphin Charles and the remnants of the discredited council, the situation of the states was stronger thanever. Predominantin influence were the deputies Robettle from the towns, and above all the citizens of the Coq and capital, led by Robert le Coq, bishop of Laon, and é“°""° Etienne Marcel, provost of the merchants of Paris. Maml Having no cause for confidence in the royal administration, the states refused to treat with the dauphin's councillors, and proposed to take him under their own tutelage. He himself hesitated whether to sacrifice the royal authority, or else, without resources or support, to resist an assembly backed by public opinion. 'He decided for resistance. Under pretext of grave news received from his father, and of an interview at Metz with his uncle, the emperor Charles IV., he begged the states to adjourn till the 3rd of November 1356. This was a political coup d'état, and when the time had expired he attempted a financial coup d'état by debasing the currency. An uprising obliged him to call the states-general together again in February 1357, when they transformed themselves into a deliberative, independent and permanent assembly by means of the Grande Ordonnance.

In order to make this great French charter really effective resistance to the royal authority should have been collective, national and even popular, as in the case of the charters gffnde of 1215 and 1 258 in England. But the lay and ecclesiordan- astical feudal lords continued to show themselves ggfe "f in France, as everywhere else except across the Straits of Dover, a cause of division and oppression. Moreover, the states were never really general; those of the Langue d'oc and the Langue d'oil sometimes acted together; but there was never a common understanding between them and always two Frances within the kingdom. Besides, they only represented the three classes who alone had any social standing at that period: the nobles, the clergy, and the burgesses of important towns. Etienne Marcel himself protested against councillors “ de petit état." Again, the states, intermittently convoked according to the king's good pleasure, exercised neither periodical rights nor effective control, but fulfilled a duty which was soon felt as onerous. Indifference and satiety spread speedily; the bourgeoisie forsook the reformers directly they had recourse to violence (February 1358), and the Parisians became hostile when Etienne Marcel complicated his revolutionary work by intrigues with Navarre, releasing from prison the grandson of Louis X., the Headstrong, an ambitious, fine-spoken courter of popularity, covetous of the royal crown. The dauphin's fiight from Paris excited a wild outburst of monarchist loyalty and anger against the capital among the nobility and in the states general of Compiégne. Marcel, like the dauphin, was not a man to turn back. But neither the support of the peasant insurgents -#the “ Jacques ”—who were annihilated in the market of Meaux, nor a last but unheeded appeal to the large towns, nor yet the-uncertain support of Charles the Bad, to whom Marcel in despair proposed to deliver up Paris, saved him from being put to death by the royalist party of Paris on the 31st of July 1358-

Isolated as he was, Etienne Marcel had been unable either to seize the government or to create a fresh one. In the reaction which followed his downfall royalty inherited the financial administration which the states had set up to check extravagance. The “ étus ” and the superintendents, instead of being delegates of the states, became royal functionaries like the baittis and the provosts; imposts, hearth-money (fouage), salt-tax (gabelle), sale-dues (droits de vents), voted for the war, were levied during the whole of Charles V.'s reign and added to his personal revenue. The opportunity of founding political liberty upon the vote and the control of taxation, and of organizing the administration of the kingdom so as to ensure that the entire military and financial resources should be always available, was gone beyond recall.

Re-establishing the royal authority in Paris was not enough; an end had to be put to the war with England and Navarre, and this was effected by the treaty of Brétigny (1360). 5:30, of King John ceded Poitou, Sain tonge, Agenais, Périgord 3, .5¢;g, , y and Limousin to Edward III., and was offered his liberty for a ransom of three million gold crowns; but, unable to pay that enormous sum, he returned to his agreeable captivity in London, where he died in 1364. Yet through the obstinacy and selfishness of John the Good, France, in stress of suffering, was gradually realizing herself. More strongly than her king she felt the shame of fggzlfs 'C defeat. Local or municipal patriotism waxed among 133g) peasants and townsfolk, and combined with hatred of the English to develop national sentiment. Many -of the conquered repeated that proud, sad answer of the men of Rochelle to the English: “We will acknowledge you with our lips; but with our hearts, never l ”

The peace of Brétigny brought no repose to the kingdom. War having become a congenial and very lucrative its cessation caused want of work, with all the evils that entails. For ten years the remnants of the armies of England, Navarre and Brittany-the “Grandes industry,

The

“ Grandes

Com-

Compagnies, ” as they were called-ravaged the pagniesm country; although Charles V., “durement subttl et sage, ” succeeded in getting rid of them, thanks to du Guesclin, one of their chiefs, who led them to any place where fighting was going on-to Brittany, Alsace, Spain. Charles also had all towns and large villages fortified; and being a man of affairs he set about undoing the effect of the treaty of Brétigny by alliances with Flanders, whose heiress he married to his brother Philip, duke of Burgundy; with Henry, king of Castile, and Ferdinand of Portugal, who possessed fine navies; and, finally, with the emperor Charles IV. Financial and military preparations were made no less seriously when the harsh administration of the Black Prince, to whom Edward III. had given Guienne in fief, provoked the nobles of Gascony to complain to Charles V. Cited before the court of Paris, the Black Prince refused to attend, and war broke out in Gascony, Poitou and Normandy, but with fresh tactics (1369). Whilst the English adhered to the system of wide circuits, under Chandos or Robert Knolles, Charles V. limited himself to defending the towns and exhausting the enemy without taking dangerous risks. Thanks to the prudent constable du Guesclin, sitting quietly at home he reconquered bit by bit what his predecessors had lost upon the battlefield, helm on head and sword in hand; and when he died in 1380, after the decease of both Edward III. and the Black Prince, the only possessions of England in a liberated but ruined France were Bayonne, Bordeaux, Brest, Cherbourg and Calais. 1

The death of Charles V. and dynastic revolutions in England stopped the war for thirty-five years. Then began an era of internal disorder and misery. The men of that period, coarse, violent and simple-minded, with few Sfagggo political ideas, loved brutal and noisy pleasures~ 14§ 2) Witness the incredible festivities at the marriage of Charles VI., and the assassinations of the constable de Clisson. the duke of Orleans and John the Fearless. It would have needed an energetic hand to hold these passions in check; and Charles VI. was a. gentle-natured child, twelve years of age, who attained his majority only to fall into a second childhood. Thence arose a question which remained without reply during the whole of his reign. Who should have possession of the royal person, and, consequently, of the royal power? The Nurs Should it be the uncles of the king, or his followers uncle sand Clisson and Bureau de la Riviere, whom the nobles the Maf called in mockery the Marmousets? His uncles first "'°"“ts seized the government, each with a view to his own particular interests, which were by no means those of the kingdom at large. The duke of Anjou emptied the treasury in conquering the kingdom of Naples, at the call of Queen Joanna of Sicily. The duke of Berry seized upon Languedoc and the wine-tax. The duke of Burgundy, heir through his wife to the count ship of Flanders, wanted to crush the democratic risings among the Flemings. Each of them needed money, but Charles V., pricked by conscience on his death-bed, forbade the levying of the hearth-tax (1380). His brother's attempt to re-establish it set Paris in revolt. The Maittotins of Paris found imitators in other great towns; and in Auvergne and Vivarais g'51;'°"°" the Tuchins renewed the Iacquerie. Revolutionary M, , m, ,¢;, , s attempts between 1380 and 1385 to abolish all taxes were echoed in England, Florence and Flanders. These isolated rebellions, however, were crushed by the ever-ready coalition of royal and feudal forces at Roosebeke (1382). Taxes and subsidies were maintained and the hearth-money re-established. The death of the duke of Anjou at Bari (1384) gave preponderant influence to Philip the Bold, duke of Burgundy, who increased the large and fruitless expenses of his Burgundian effect a reconciliation with the Armagnacs, who had 8 2 2 FRANCE [HISTORY

policy to such a point that on the return of a last unfortunate expedition into Gelderland Charles VI., who had been made by him to marry Isabel of Bavaria, took the governgtfggjjgw ment from his uncles on the 3rd of May 1389, and VL recalled the Marmousets. But this young king, aged only twenty, very much in love with his young wife and excessively fond of pleasure, soon wrecked the delicate poise of his mental faculties in the festivities of the Hotel Saint-Paul; and a violent attack of Pierre de Craon on the constable de Clisson having led to an expedition against his accomplice, the duke of Brittany, Charles was seized by insanity on the road. The M armousets were deposed, the king's brother, the duke of Orleans, set aside, and the old condition of affairs began again (1392).

The struggle was now between the two branches of the royal family, the Orleanist and the Burgundian, between the aristocratic south and the democratic north; while the

iffvggi deposition of Richard II. of England in favour of me Ar. Henry of Lancaster permitted them to vary civil war maguacs by war against the foreigner. Philip the Bold, duke gd 'he of Burgundy, the king's uncle, had certain advantages g:;, , m, over his rival Louis of Orleans, Charles VI.'s brother: superiority in age, relations with the Lancastrians and with Germany, and territorial wealth and power. The two adversaries had each the same scheme of government: each wanted to take charge of Charles VI., who was intermittently insane, and to exclude his rival from the pillage of the royal exchequer; but this rivalry of desires brought them into opposition on all the great questions of the day-the war with England, the Great Schism and the imperial election. The struggle became acute when John the Fearless of Burgundy succeeded his father in 1404. Up to this time the queen, Isabel of Bavaria, had been held in a kind of dependency upon Philip of Burgundy, who had brought about her marriage; but less eager for influence than for money, since political questions were unintelligible to her and her situation was a precarious one, she suddenly became favourable to the duke of Orleans. Whether due to passion or caprice this cost the duke his life, for John the Fearless had him assassinated in 1407, and thus let loose against one another the Burgundians and the Armagnacs, so-called because the son of the murdered duke was the son-in-law of the count of Armagnac (see ARMAGNAC). Despite all attempts at reconciliation the country was divided into two parties. °Paris, with her tradesmen-the butchers in particular—and her university, played an important part in this quarrel; for to be master of Paris was to be master of the king. In 1413 the duke of Burgundy gained the upper hand there, partly owing to the rising of the Cabochiens, i.e. the butchers led by the skinner Simon Caboche, partly to the hostility of the university to the Avignon pope and partly to the Parisian bourgeoisie. Amid this reign of terror and of revolt the university, the only moral and intellectual force, taking the place of the impotent states-general and of a parlement carefully restricted to h O . . . . . .

glojuag-gg the Judiciary sphere, vainly tried to re-establish a firm Cabo- monarchical system by means of the Ordonnance C abo;;':;"”° chienne; but this had no effect, the government being now at the mercy of the mob., themselves at the mercy of incapable hot-headed leaders. The struggle ended in becoming one between factions of the townsmen, led respectively by the hdchief Cirasse and by jean Caboche. The former overwhelmed John the Fearless, who fled from Paris; and the Armagnacs, re-entering on his exit, substituted white terror for red terror, from the 12th of December 1413 to the 28th of July 1414. The butchers' organization was suppressed and all hope of reform lost. Such disorders allowed Henry V. of England to take the offensive again.

The Armagnacs were in possession of Paris and the king when Henry V. crushed them at Agincourt on the 25th of Aginmum October 1415. It was as at Crécy and Poitiers; the French chivalry, accustomed to mere playing at battle in the tourneys, no longer knew how to fight. Charles of Orleans being a captive and his father-in-law, the count of Armagnac, highly unpopular, John the Fearless, hitherto prudently neutral, re-entered Paris, amid scenes of carnage, on the invitation of the citizen. Perrinet le Clerc. Secure from interference, Henry V. had occupied the whole of Normandy and destroyed in two years the work of Philip Augustus. The duke of Burgundy, feeling as incapable of coming to an understanding with the masterful Englishman as of resisting him unaided, tried to 142g 'V with them the heir to the throne, the dauphin Charles; but his assassination at Montereau in 1419 nearly caused the destruction of the kingdom, the whole Burgundian party going over to the side of the English. By the treaty of Troyes (1420) the son of John the Fearless, Philip the Good, in order to avenge his father recognized Henry V. (now married to Catherine, Charles VI.'s daughter) as heir to the crown of France, to the detriment of the dauphin Charles, who was disavowed by his mother and called in derision “ the soi-disant dauphin of Viennois, " When Henry V. and Charles VI. died in 1422, Henry VI.-son of Henry V. and Catherine-was proclaimed at Paris king of France and of England, with the concurrence of Philip the Good, duke of Burgundy. Thus in 1428 the English occupied all eastern and northern France, as far as the Loire; while the two most important civil powers of the time, the parlement and the university of Paris, had acknowledged the English king. But the cause of greatest weakness to the French party was still Charles VII. himself, the king of Bourges. This youth of nineteen, the ill-omened son of a madman and of a Bavarian of loose morals, was a symbol of France, f, ;'f';'ff22 timorous and mistrustful. The chateaux of the 146}) Loire, where he led a restless and enervating existence, held an atmosphere little favourable to enthusiasm and energy. After his victories at Cravant (142 3) and Verneuil (1424), the duke of Bedford, appointed regent of the kingdom, had given Charles VII. four years' respite, and these had been occupied in violent intrigues between the constable de Richemontl and the sire de la Trémoille, the young king's favourites, and solely desirous of enriching themselves at his expense. The king, melancholy spectacle as he was, seemed indeed to suit that tragic hour when Orleans, the last bulwark of the south, was besieged by the earl of Salisbury, now roused from inactivity (1428). He had neither taste nor capacity like Philip VI. or John the Good for undertaking “belles apertises d'armes”; but then a lack of chivalry combined with a temporizing policy had not been particularly unsuccessful in the case of his grandfather Charles V. 4

Powerful aid now came from an unexpected quarter. The war had been long and cruel, and each successive year naturally increased feeling against the English. The damage done to Burgundian interests by the harsh yet impotent 'fx' of government of Bedford, disgust at the iniquitous ° treaty of Troyes, the monarchist loyalty of many of the warriors, the still deeper sentiment felt by men like Alain Chartier towards “ Dame France, ” and the “ great misery that there was in the kingdom of France ”; all these suddenly became incarnate in the person of ]oan of Arc, a young peasant of Domrémy in Lorraine. Determined in her faith and proud in her meekness, in opposition to the timid counsels of the military leaders, to the interested delays of the courtiers, to the scruples of the experts and the quarrelling of the doctors, she quoted her “ voices, ” who had, she said, commissioned her to raise the siege of Orleans and to conduct the gentle dauphin to Reims, there to be crowned. Her sublime folly turned out to be wiser than their wisdom; in two months, from May to July 1429, she had freed Orleans, destroyed the prestige of the English army at Patay, and dragged the doubting and passive king against his will to be crowned at Reims. All this produced a marvellous revulsion of political feeling throughout France, Charles VII. now becoming incontestably “ him to whom the kingdom of France ought to belong.” After Reims ]oan's first thought was for Paris, and to achieve the final overthrow 1 Earl of Richmond; afterwards Arthur, duke of Brittany (q.v.). of the English; while Charles VII. was already sighing for the easy life of Touraine, and recurring to that policy of truce which was so strongly urged by his counsellors, and so keenly irritating to the clear-sighted joan of Arc. A check before Paris allowed the jealousy of La Trémoille to waste the heroine for eight months on operations of secondary importance, until the day when she was captured by the Burgundians under the walls of Compiégne, and sold by them to the English. The latter incontinently prosecuted her as a heretic; they had, indeed, a great interest in seeing her condemned by the Church, which would render her conquests sacrilegious. After a scandalous four months duel between this simple innocent girl and a tribunal of crafty malevolent ecclesiastics and doctors of the university of Paris, joan was burned alive in the old market-place of Rouen, on the 3oth of May 1431 (see JOAN OF ARC).

On Charles VII.'s part this meant oblivion and silence until the day when in 1450, more for his own sake than for hers, he caused her memory to be rehabilitated; but ]oan had given the country new life and heart. From 1431 to 1454 the struggle against the English went on energetically; and the king, relieved in 1433 of his evil genius, La Trémoille, then became a man once more, playing a kingly part under the guidance of Dunois, Richemont, La Hire and Saintrailles, leaders of worth on the field of battle. Moreover, the English territory, a great triangle, with the Channel for base and Paris for apex, was not a really solid position. Yet the war seemed interminable; until at last Philip of Burgundy, for long embarrassed by his English alliance, decided in 1435 to become reconciled with Charles VII. This was in consequence of the death of his sister, who had been married to Bedford, and the return of his brother in-law Richemont into the French king's favour. The treaty of Arras, which made him a sovereign prince for life, though harsh, at all events gave a united France the opportunity of expelling the English from the east, and allowed the king to re-enter Paris in 1436. From 1436 to 1439 there was a terrible repetition of what happened after the Peace of Brétigny; famine, pestilence, extort ions and, later, the aristocratic revolt of the Praguerie, completed the ruin of the country. But thanks to the permanent tax of the taille during this time of truce Charles VII. was able to effect the great military reform of the Compagnies d'Ordonnance, of the Francs-Archers, and of the artillery of the brothers Bureau. From this time forward the English, ruined, demoralized and weakened both by the death of the duke of Bedford and the beginnings of the Wars of the Roses, continued to lose territory on every recurrence of conflict. Normandy was lost to them at Formigny (1450), and Guienne, English since the 12th century, at Castillon (1453). They kept only Calais; and now it was their turn to have a madman, Henry VI., for king.

France issued from the Hundred Years' War victorious, but terribly ruined and depopulated. It is true she had definitely freed her territory from the stranger, and

53335 0, through the sorrows of defeat and the menace of me Hun- disruption had fortified her national solidarity, and “fed defined her patriotism, still involved in and not yet ffff dissociated from loyalty to the monarchy. A happy awakening, although it went too far in establishing royal absolutism; and a victory too complete, in that it enervated all the forces of resistance. The nation, worn out by the long disorders consequent on the captivity of King John and the insanity of Charles VI., abandoned itself to the joys of peace. Preferring the solid advantage of orderly life to an unstable liberty, it acquiesced in the abdication of 1439, when the States consented to taxation for the support of a permanent army without any periodical renewal of their authorization. No doubt by the prohibition to levy the smallest taille' the feudal lords escaped direct taxation; but from the day when the privileged classes selfishly allowed the taxing of the third estate, provided that they themselves were exempt, they opened the door to monarchic absolutism. The principle of autocracy triumphed everywhere over the remnants of local or provincial authority, in the sphere of industry as in that of administration; while the gild system became much more rigid. A loyal bureaucracy, far more powerful than the phantom administration of Bourges or of Poitiers, gradually took the place of the court nobility; and thanks to this the institutions of control which the war had called into power—the provincial states-general were nipped in the bud, withered by the people's poverty of political idea and by the blind worship of royalty. Without the nation's concurrence the king's creatures were now to endow royalty with all the organs necessary for the exertion of authority; by which imprudent compliance, and above all thanks to Jacques Coeur (q.'v.), the financial independence of the provinces disappeared little by little, and all the public revenues were left at the discretion of the king alone (1436-1440). By this means, too, and chiefly owing to the constable de Richemont and the brothers Bureau, the first permanent royal army was established (1445)- .

Henceforward royalty, strengthened by victory and organised for the struggle, was able to reduce the centrifugal social forces to impotence. The parlement of Paris saw its monopoly M, ,, ,, ,¢, ,. encroached upon by the court of Toulouse in 1443, lcalcenand by the parlement of Grenoble in 1453. The Z:g" university of Paris, compromised with the English, like the parlement, witnessed the institution and growth of privileged provincial universities. The Church of France was isolated from the papacy by the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges (1438) only to be exploited and enslaved by royalty. Monarchic centralization, interrupted for the moment by the war, took up with fresh vigour its attacks upon urban liberties, especially in the always more independent south. It caused a slackening of that spirit of communal initiative which had awakened in the midst of unprecedented disasters. The decimated and impoverished nobility proved their impotence in the coalitions they attempted between 1437 and 1442, of which the most important, the Praguerie, fell to pieces almost directly, despite the support of the dauphin himself.

The life of society, now alarmingly unstable and ruthlessly cruel, was symbolized by the danse macabre painted on the walls of the cemeteries; the sombre and tragic art Soda, of the 15th century, having lost the fine balance, ,, , shown by that of the 13th, gave expression in its mournful realism to the general state of exhaustion. The favourite subject of the mysteries and of other artistic manifestations was no longer the triumphant Christ of the middle ages, nor the smiling and teaching Christ of the 13th century, but the Man of sorrows and of death, the naked bleeding Jesus, lying on the knees of his mother or crowned with thorns. France, like the Christ, had known all the bitterness and weakness of a Passion.

The war of independence over, after a century of fatigue, regrets and doubts, royalty and the nation, now more united and more certain of each other, resumed the methodic and utilitarian war of widening boundaries. Leaving dreams about crusades to the poets, and to a papacy delivered from schism, Charles VII. turned his attention to the ancient appanage of Lothair, Alsace and Lorraine, those lands of the north and the east whose frontiers were constantly changing, and which seemed to invite aggression. But the chance of annexing them without great trouble was lost; by the fatal custom of appanages the Valois had set up again those feudal institutions which the Capets had found such difficulty in destroying, and Louis XI. was to make sad experience of this. I

To the north and east of the kingdom extended a wide territory of uncertain limits; countries without a chief like Alsace; principalities like Lorraine, ecclesiastical lordships like the bishopric of Liége; and, most important of T:'g”°"'° all, a royal appanage, that of the duchy of Burgundy, Lug; which dated back to the time of John the Good. Through marriages, conquests and inheritance, the dukes of Burgundy had enormously increased their influence; while during the Hundred Years' War they had benefited alternately by their criminal alliance with the English and by their self interested reconciliation with their sovereign. They soon 824 FRANCE [HISTORY

appeared the most formidable among the new feudal chiefs so imprudently called into being by Louis XI.'s predecessors. Fleeing from the paternal wrath which he had drawn down upon himself by his ambition and by his unauthorized marriage with Charlotte of Savoy, the future Louis XI. had passed five years of voluntary exile at the court of the chief of the House of Burgundy, Philip the Good; and he was able to appreciate the territorial power of a duchy which extended from the Zuyder Zee to the Somme, with all the country 'between the Saone and the Loire in addition, and its geographical position as a commercial intermediary between Germany, England and France. He had traversed the fertile country of Flanders; he had visited the rich commercial and industrial republics of Bruges and Ghent, which had escaped the disasters of the Hundred Years' War; and, finally, he had enjoyed a hospitality as princely as it was self-interested at Brussels and at Dijon, the two capitals, where he had seen the brilliancy of a court unique in Europe for the ideal of chivalric life it offered. But the dauphin Louis, although a bad son and impatientrfor the crown, was not 'dazzled by all this. With very simple tastes, an inquiring mind, and an imagination always 5';gfXI° at work, he combined a certain easy good-nature 433, which inspired confidence, and though stingy in spending money on himself, he could be lavish in buying men either dangerous or likely to be useful. More inclined to the subtleties of diplomacy than to the risks of battle, he had recognized and speedily grasped the disadvantages of warfare. The duke of Burgundy, however rich and powerful, 'was still the king's vassal; his wide but insecure authority, of too rapid growth and unpopular, lacked sovereign rights. Hardly, therefore, had Louis XI. heard of his father's death than he made his host aware of his perfectly independent spirit, and his very definite intention to be master in his own house. But by a kind of poetic justice, Louis XI. had for seven years, from 1465 to 1472, to struggle against fresh Pragueries, called Leagues of the Public Weal (presumably from their Zffnes disregard of it), composed of the most powerful of the French nobles, to whom he had set the example of

§ '
'\$' revolt. His first proceedings had indeed given no

promise of the moderation and prudence afterwards to characterize him; he had succeeded in exasperating all parties; the officials of his father, “ the well-served, ” whom he dismissed in favour of inferiors like Jean Balue, Oliver le Daim and Tristan Lermite; the clergy, by abrogating the Pragmatic Sanction; the university of Paris, by his ill-treatment of it; and the nobles, whom he deprived of their hunting rights, among them being those whom Charles VII. had been most careful to conciliate in view of the inevitable conflict with the duke of Burgundy-in particular, Francis II., duke of Brittany. The repurchase in 1463 of the towns of the Somme (to which Philip the Good, now grown old and engaged in a quarrel with his son, the count of Charolais, had felt obliged to consent on consideraé tion of receiving four hundred thousand gold crowns), and the intrigues of Louis XI. during the periodical revolts of the Liégois against their prince-bishop, set the powder alight. On three different occasions (in 1465, 1467 and 1472), Louis XI.'s own brother, the duke of Berry, urged by the duke of Brittany, the count of Charolais, the duke of Bourbon, and the other feudal lords, attempted to set up six kingdoms in France instead of one, and to impose upon Louis XI. a regency which should give them enormous pensions. This was their idea of Public Weal. Louis XI. won by his favourite method, diplomacy rather than arms. At the time of the first league, the battle of Montlhéry (16th of July 1465) having remained g;'g;7d . undecided between the two equally badly organized armies, Louis XI. conceded everything in the treaties of Conflans and Saint-Maur-promises costing him little, since he had no intention of keeping them. But during the course of the second league, provoked by the recapture of Normandy, which he had promised to his brother in exchange for Berry, he was nearly caught in his own trap. On the 15th of June 1467 Philip the Good died, and the accession of the count of Charolais was received with popular risings. In order to embarrass him Louis XI., had secretly encouraged the .people of Liége to revolt; but preoccupied with the marriage of Charles the Bold with Margaret of York, sister of Edward IV. of England, he wished to negotiate personally with him at Péronne, and hardly had he reached that place when news arrived there of the revolt of Liege amid cries of “ Vive F rance." Charles the Bold, proud, violent, pugnacious, as treacherous as his rival, a hardier soldier, though without his political sagacity, imprisoned Louis in the tower where Charles the Simple 7;'"" '”;°" had died as a prisoner of the count of Vermandois.:>;, :, ;, He only let him depart when he had sworn in the treaty of Péronne to fulfil the engagements made at Contlans and Saint-Maur to assist in person at the subjugation of rebellious Liége, and to give Champagne as an appanage to his ally the duke of Berry. A

Louis XI., supported by the assembly of notables (1470), had no intention of keeping this last promise, duchy of Champagne would have made a bridge between Burgundy and F landers-the two isolated branches of the house of Burgundy. He gave the duke of Berry distant Guienne. But death eventually rid him of the duke in 1472, just when a third league at Tours

since the

Ruin ol

the feudal

coalitions.

as being

w

organized, the object of which was to make the duke of Berry king with the help of Edward IV., king of England. The duke of Brittany, Francis II., was defeated; Charles the Bold, having failed at Beauvais in his attempt to' recapture the towns of the Somme which had been promised him by the treaty of Conflans, was obliged to sign the peace of Senlis (1472). This was the end of the great feudal coalitions, for royal vengeance soon settled the account of the lesser vassals.; the duke of Alencon was condemned to prison for life; the count of Armagnac was killed; and “ the Germans” were soon to dis embarrass Louis of Charles the Bold.

1 Charles had indeed only signed the peace so promptly because he was looking eastward towards that royal crown and territorial cohesion of which his father had also dreamed. The charles king, he said of Louis XI., is always ready. He wanted the Borda to provide his future sovereignty with organs analogous i'"P°' '81 to those of France; a permanent army, and a judiciary d”'""s and financial administration modelled on the French parlement and exchequer. Since he could not dismember the kingdom of France, his only course was to reconstitute the ancient kingdom of Lotharingia; while the conquest of the principality of Liége and of the duchy of Gelderland, and the temporary occupation of Alsace, pledged to him by Sigismund of Austria, made him greedy for Germany. To get himself elected king of the Romans he offered his daughter Mary, his eternal candida-te for marriage, to the emperor Frederick III. for his son. Thus either he or his son-in-'law Maximilian would have been emperor. But the' Tarpeian rock was a near neighbour of the Capitol. Frederick-distrustful, and in the pay of Louis XI.-evaded a meeting arranged at Trier, and Burgundian influence in -Alsace was suddenly brought to a violent end by the 522; putting to death of its tyrannical agent, Peter von the Bom Hagenbach. Charles thought to repair the rebulf of Trier at Cologne, and wasted his resources in an attempt to win over its elector by besieging the insignificant town of Neuss. But the “universal spider”-as he called Louis XI.—was weaving his web in the darkness, and was eventually to entangle him in it. First came the reconciliation, in his despite, of those irreconcilable, the Swiss and Sigismund of Austria; and then the union of both with the duke of Lorraine, who was also disturbed at the duke of Burgundy's ambition. In vain Charles tried to kindle anew the embers of former feudal intrigues; the execution of the duke of Nemours and the count of Saint Pol cooled all enthusiasm. In vain did he get his dilatory friends, the English Yorkists, to cross the Channel; on the 29th of August 1475, at Picquigny, Louis XI. bribed them with a sum of seventy-five thousand crowns to forsake him, Edward further undertaking to guarantee the loyalty of the duke of Brittany. Exasperated, Charles attacked and took Nancy, wishing, as he said, “ to skin the Bernese bear and wear its fur.” To the hanging of the brave garrison of Granson the 'Swiss responded by terrible reprisals at Granson and at Morat (March to June 1476); while the people of Lorraine finally routed Charles at Nancy on the 5th of January 1477, the duke himself falling in the battle. V

The central administration of Burgundy soon disappeared, swamped by the resurgence of ancient local liberties; the army fell to pieces; and all hope of joining the two limbs Ruin of

the house of the great eastern duchy was definitely lost. As for °'B:"' the remnants that were left, French provinces and gun y.

imperial territory, Louis XI. claimed the whole. He seized everything, alleging different rights in each place; but he displayed such violent haste and such trickery that he threw the heiress of Burgundy, in despair, into the arms of Maximilian of Austria. At the treaty of Arras (December 1482) Louis XI. received only Picardy, the Boulonnais and Burgundy; by the marriage of Charles the Bold's daughter the rest was annexed to the Empire, and later to Spain. Thus by Louis XI.'s short-sighted error the-house of Austria established itself in the Low Countries. An age-long rivalry between the houses of France and Austria was the result of this disastrous marriage; and as the son who was its issue espoused the heiress of a now unified Spain, France, hemmed in by the Spaniards and by the Empire, was thenceforward to encounter them everywhere in her course. The historical progress of France was once more endangered.

The reasons of state which governed all Louis XI.'s external policy also inspired his internal administration. If they justified The him in employing lies and deception in international admluis- affairs, in his relations with his subjects they led him Z:;Z';"x';f to regard as lawful everything which favoured his authority; no question of right could weigh against it. The army and taxation, as the two chief means of domination within and without the kingdom, constituted the main bulwarks of his policy. As for the nobility, his only thought was to diminish their power by multiplying their number, as his predecessors had done; while he reduced the rebels to submission by his iron cages or the axe of his gossip Tristan Lermite. The Church was treated with the same unconcerned cynicism; he held her in strict tutelage, accentuating her moral decadence still further by the manner in which he set aside or re-established the Pragmatic Sanction, according to =the fluctuations of his financial necessities or his Italian ambitions It has been said that on the other hand he was a king of the common people, and certainly he was one of them in his simple habits, in his taste for rough pleasantries, and above all in his religion, which was limited to superstitious practices and small devoutncsses. But in the states of Tours in 1468 he evinced the same mistrust for fiscal control by the people as for the privileges of the nobility. He inaugurated that autocratic rule which was to continue gaining strength until Louis XV.'s time. Louis XI. was the king of the bourgeoisie; he exacted much from them, but paid them back with interest by allowing them to reduce the power of all who were above them and to lord it over all who were below. As a matter of fact Louis XI.'s most faithful ally was death. Saint-Pol, Nemours, Charles the Bold, his brother the duke of Berry, old René of Anjou and his nephew the count of Maine, heir to the riches of Provence and to rights over Naples-the skeleton hand mowed down all his adversaries as though it too were in his pay; until the day when at Plessisles-Tours it struck a final blow, claimed its just dues from Louis XI., and carried him off despite all his relics on the 3oth of August 1483.

There was nothing noble about Louis XI. but his aims, and nothing great but the results he attained; yet however different cha, ” he might have been he could not have done better, vm, and for what he achieved was the making of France. Bfiffdlly This was soon seen after his death in the reaction which menaced his work and those who had served him; but thanks to himself and to his true successor, his eldest daughter Anne, married to the sirc de Beaujeu, a younger member of the house of Bourbon, the set-back was only partial. Strife began immediately between the numerous malcontents and the Beaujeu party, who had charge of the little Charles VIII. These latter prudently made conces- T F sions: reducing the taille, sacrificing some of Louis XI.'s creatures to the rancour of the parlement, and restoring 1435, a certain number of offices or lands to the hostile princes (chief of whom was the duke of Orleans), and even consenting to a convocation of the states-general at Tours (1484). But the elections having been favourable to royalty, the Beaujeu family made the states reject the regency desired by the duke of Orleans, and organize the king's council after their own views. When they subsequently eluded the conditions imposed by the states, the deputies-nobles, clergy and burgesses-showed their incapacity.to oppose the progress of despotism. In vain did the malcontent princes attempt to set up a new League of Public Weal, the Guerra folle (Mad War), in which the duke of Brittany, Francis II., played the part of Charles the Bold, dragging in the people of Lorraine and the king of Navarre. In vainsdld Charles VIII., his majority attained, at once abandon in the treaty of Sablé the benefits gained by the victory of Saint-Aubin du Cormier (1488). In vain did Henry VII. of England, Ferdinand the Catholic, and Maximilian of Austria try to prevent the annexation of Brittany by France; its heiress Anne, deserted by every one, made peace and married Charles VIII. in 1491. There was no longer a single great lief in France to which the malcontents could fly for refuge. It now remained to consolidate the later successes attained by the policy of the Valois-the acquisition of the duchies of Burgundy and Brittany; but instead there was a. sudden change and that policy seemed about to be fl;°;;';;, f lost in dreams of recapturing the rights of the Angevins f1¢¢, |¢¢, ~" over Naples, and conquering Constantinople. Charles V VIII., a prince with neither intelligence nor resolution, his head stuffed with chivalric romance, was scarcely freed from his sister's control when he sought in Italy a fatal distraction from the struggle with the house of Austria. By this “ war of magnificence” he caused an interruption of half a century in the growth of national sentiment, which was only revived by Henry II.; and 'he was not alone in thus leaving the bone for the shadow: his contemporaries, Ferdinand the Catholic when delivered from the Moors, and Henry VII. from the power of the English nobles, followed the same superficial policy, not taking the trouble to work for that real strength which comes from the adhesion of willing subjects to their sovereign. They only cared to aggrandize themselves, without thought of national feeling or geographical conditions. The great theorist of these “ conquistador es ” was Machiavelli. The regent, Anne of Beaujeu, worked in her daughter's interest to the detriment of the kingdom, by means of a special treaty destined to prevent the property of the Bourbons from reverting to the crown; while Anne of Brittany did t.he like for her daughter Claude. Louis XII., the next king of France, thought only of the Milanese; Ferdinand the Catholic all but destroyed the Spanish unity at the end of his life by his marriage with Germaine de Foix; while the house of Austria was for centuries to remain involved in this petty course of policy. Ministers followed the example of their self-seeking masters, thinking it no shame' to accept pensions from foreign sovereigns. The preponderating consideration everywhere was direct material advantage; there was disproportion everywhere between the means employed and the poverty of the results, a contradiction between the interests of the sovereigns and those of their subjects, which were associated by force and not naturally blended. For the sake of a morsel of Italian territory every one forgot the permanent necessity of opposing the advance of the Turkish crescent, the two horns of which were impinging upon Europe on the Danube and on the Mediterranean. »

Italy and Germany were two great tracts of land at the mercy of the highest bidder, rich and easy to dominate, where these coarse and alien kings, still reared on medieval traditions, were for fifty years to gratify their love of conquest. Italy was their first battlefield; Charles VIII. was summoned thither by Lodovico Il Moro, tyrant of Milan, involved in a quarrel with his rival, Ferdinand II. of Aragon. The Aragonese Lhfnxrs had snatched the kingdom of Naples from the French house of Anjou, whose claims Louis XI. had inherited in 148O. To safeguard himself in the rear Charles VIII. handed over Roussillon and Cerdagne (Cerdana) to Ferdinand the Catholic (that is to say, all the profits of Louis XI.'s policy); gave enormous sums of money to Henry VII. of England; and finally, by the treaty of Senlis ceded Artois and Franche-Comté to Maximilian of Austria. After these fool's bargains the paladin set out for Naples in 1494. His journey was long and triumphant, and his return precipitate; indeed it very nearly ended in a disaster at Fornovo, owing to the first of those Italian holy leagues which at the least sign of friction were ready to turn against France. At the age of twenty-eight, however, Charles VIII. died without issue (1498).

The accession of his cousin, Louis of Orleans, under the title of Louis XII., only involved the kingdom still further in this Italian imbroglio. Louis did indeed add the fief of HZ? X”' Orleans to the royal domain and hastened to divorce 5, ;) Ieanne of France in order to marry Anne, the widow of his predecessor, so that he might keep Brittany. But he complicated the Naples affair by claiming Milan in consideration of the marriage of his grandfather, Louis of Orleans, to Valentina, daughter of Gian Galeazzo Visconti, duke of Milan. In 1499, appealed to by Venice, and encouraged by his favourite, Cardinal d'Amboise (who was hoping to succeed Pope Alexander VI.), and also by Cesare Borgia, who had lofty ambitions in Italy, Louis XII. conquered Milan in seven months and held it for fourteen years; while Lodovico Sforza, betrayed by his Swiss mercenaries, died a prisoner in France. The kingdom of Naples was still left to recapture; and fearing to be thwarted by Ferdinand of Aragon, Louis XII. proposed to this master of roguery that they should divide the kingdom according to the treaty of Granada (1500). But no sooner had Louis XII. assumed the title of king of Naples than Ferdinand set about despoiling him of it, and despite the bravery of a Bayard and a Louis d'Ars, Louis XII., being also betrayed by the pope, lost

• Naples for good in 1504. The treaties of Blois occasioned a

vast amount of diplomacy, and projects of marriage between Claude of France and Charles of Austria, which came to nothing but served as a prelude to the later quarrels between Bourbons and Habsburgs.

It was Pope Julius II. who opened the gates of Italy to the horrors of war. Profiting by'Louis XII.'s' weakness and the emperor Maximilian's strange capricious character, this martial pope sacrificed Italian and religious interests alike in order to re-establish the temporal power of the papacy., ]ealous of Venice, at that time the Italian state best provided with powers of expansion, and unable to subjugate it single-handed, Julius succeeded in obtaining help from France, Spain and the Empire. The league of Cambrai (1508) was his finest diplomatic achievement. But he wanted to be sole master of Italy; so in order to expel the French “ barbarians ” whom he had brought in, he appealed to other barbarians who were far more dangerous-Spaniards, Germans and Swiss-to help him .against Louis XII., and stabbed him from behind with the Holy League of 1 511. Weakened by the death of Cardinal d'Amboise, his best counsellor, Louis XII. tried vainly in the assembly of Tours and in the unsuccessful council of Pisa to alienate the ggi' x"' French clergy from a papacy which was now so little ”, ,, " worthy of respect. But even the splendid victories of Gaston de Foix could not shake that formidable coalition; and despite the efforts of Bayard, La Palice and La Trémoille, it was the Church that triumphed. Julius II. died in the hour of victory; but Louis XII. was obliged to evacuate Milan, to which he had sacrificed everything, even France itself, with that political stupidity characteristic of the first Valois. He died almost immediately after this, on the 1st of January 1515, and his subjects, recognizing his thrift, his justice and the securc prosperity of the kingdom, forgot the seventeen years of war in which they had not been consulted, and rewarded him with the fine title of Father of his People. As Louis XII. left no son, the crown devolved upon his cousin and son-in-law the count of Angouléme, Francis I. No sooner king, Francis, in alliance with Venice, renewed the chimerical attempts to conquer Milan and Naples; g;'; ';f"'L also cherishing dreams of his own election as emperor 1547), and of a partition of Europe. The heroic episode of Marignano, when he defeated Cardinal Schinner's Swiss troops (13-1 5 of September 1 SI 5), made him master of the duchy of Milan and obliged his adversaries to make peace. Leo X., Julius II.'s successor, by an astute volte-face exchanged Parma and the Concordat for a guarantee of all the Church's possessions, which meant the defeat of French plans (1515). The Swiss signed the permanent peace which they were to maintain until the Revolution of 1789; while the emperor and the king' of Spain recognized Francis II.'s very precarious hold upon Milan. Once more the French monarchy was pulled up short by the indignation of all Italy (1518).

The question now was how to occupy the military activity of a young, handsome, chivalric and gallant prince, “ ondoyant et divers, ” intoxicated by his first victory and his tardy accession to fortune. This had been hailed with f:""'“" joy by all who had been his comrades in his days of p, ., ,, ds, difficulty; by his mother, Louise of Savoy, and his sister Marguerite; by all the rough young soldiery; by the nobles, tired of the bourgeois ways of Louis XI. and the patri» archal simplicity of Louis XII.; and finally by all the aristocracy who expected now to have the government in their own hands. So instead of heading the crusade against the Turks, Francis threw himself into the electoral contest at Frankfort, which resulted in the election of Charles V., heir of Ferdinand the Catholic, Spain and Germany thus becoming united. Pope Leo X., moreover, handed over three-quarters of Italy to the new emperor in exchange for Luther's condemnation, thereby kindling that rivalry between Charles V. and the king of France which was to embroil the whole of Europe throughout half a century (1 519-1 5 59), from Pavia to St Quentin. The territorial power of Charles V., heir to the houses of Burgundy, Austria, Castile and Aragon, which not only arrested the traditional policy of France but hemmed her R, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, in on every side; his pretensions to be the head of Francis I. Christendom; his ambition to restore the house of "4 Burgundy and the Holy Roman Empire; his grave chadesfa and forceful intellect all rendered rivalry both inevitable and formidable. But the scattered heterogeneity of his possessions, the frequent crippling of his authority by national privileges or by political discords and religious quarrels, his perpetual straits for money, and his cautious calculating character, almost outweighed the advantages which he possessed in the terrible Spanish infantry, the wealthy commerce of the Netherlands, and the inexhaustible mines of the New World. Moreover, Francis I. stirred up enmity everywhere against Charles V., and after each defeat he found fresh support in the patriotism of his subjects. Immediately after the treaty of Madrid (1526), which Francis I. was obliged to sign after the disaster at Pavia and a period of captivity, he did not hesitate between gem, ,I his honour as a gentleman and the interests of his Pavia and kingdom. Having been unable to win over Henry "'°§ '¢V ° VIII. of England at their interview on the Field of M5'f"'L the Cloth of Gold, he joined hands with Suleiman the Magnihcent, the conqueror of Mohacs; and the Turkish cavalry, crossing the Hungarian Puszla, made their way as far as Vienna, while the mercenaries of Charles V., under the constable de Bourbon, were reviving the saturnalia of Alaric in the sack of Rome (1527). In Germany, Francis I. assisted the Catholic princes to maintain their political independence, though he did not make the capital he might have made of the reform movement. Italy remained faithful to the vanquished in spite of all, while even Henry VIII. of England, who only needed bribing, and Wolsey, accessible to flattery, took part in the temporary coalition. Thus did France, menaced with disruption, embark upon a course of action imposed upon her by the harsh conditions of the treaty of Madrid—otherwise little respected—and later by those of Cambrai (1529); but it was not till later, too late indeed, that it was defined and became a national policy.

After having, despite so many reverses and mistakes, saved Burgundy, though not Artois nor Flanders, and joined to the crown lands the domains of the constable de Bourbon sforégfr who had gone over to Charles V., Francis I. should cation of have had enough of defending other people's independf "°"1=""¢ ence as well as his own, and should have thought more fixup of his interests in the north and east than of Milan. Yet between 1531 and 1547 he manifested the same regrets and the same invincible ambition for that land of Italy which Charles V., on his side, regarded as the basis of his strength. Their antagonism, therefore, remained unabated, as also the contradiction of an ofdcial agreement with Charles V., combined with secret intrigues with his enemies. Anne de Montmorency, now head of the government in place of the headstrong chancellor Duprat, for four years upheld a policy of reconciliation and of almost friendly agreement between the two monarchs (15314 1 53 5). The death of Francis I.'s mother, Louise of Savoy (who had been partly instrumental in arranging the peace of Cambrai), the replacement of Montmorency by the bellicose Chabot, and the advent to power of a Burgundian, Granvella, as Charles V.'s prime minister, put an end to this double-faced policy, which attacked the Calvinists of France while supporting the Lutherans of Germany; made advances to Clement VII. while pretending to maintain the alliance with Henry VIII. (just then consummating the Anglican schism); and sought an alliance with Charles V. without renouncing the possession of Italy. The death of the duke of Milan provoked a third general war (1536-1538); Thetmce but after the conquest of Savoy and Piedmont and a at N, w fruitless invasion of Provence by Charles V., it resulted in another truce, concluded at Nice, in the interview at Aigues-mortes, and in the old contradictory policy of the treaty of Cambrai. This was confirmed by Charles V.'s triumphal journey through France (1539).

Rivalry between Madame d'Etampes, the imperious mistress of the aged Francis I., and Diane de Poitiers, whose ascendancy over the dauphin was complete, now brought court fggiik intrigues and constant changes in those who held office, to complicate still further this wearisome policy of ephemeral “ combinazioni ” with English, Germans, Italians and Turks, which urgent need of money always brought to naught. The disillusionment of Francis I., who had hitherto hoped that Charles V. would be generous enough to give Milan back to him, and then the assassination of Rincon, his ambassador at Constantinople, led to a fourth war (1544-1546), in the course of which the king of England went over to the side of Charles V.

- Unable in the days of his youth to make Italy French, when age began to come upon him, Francis tried to make France Italian. In his chateau at Blois he drank greedily solutism of the cup of Renaissance art; but he found the "Hd" exciting draughts of diplomacy which he imbibed F""'°isL from Machiavelli's Prince even more intoxicating, and he headed the ship of state straight for the rock of absolutism. He had been the first king “ du bon plaisif ” (“ of his own good pleasure ”)-a “ Caesar, ” as his mother Louise of Savoy proudly hailed him in 1 SI 5-and to a man of his gallant and hot-headed temperament love and war were schools little calculated to teach moderation in government. Italy not only gave him a taste for art and letters, but furnished him with an arsenal of despotic maxims. Yet his true masters were the jurists of the southern universities, passionately addicted to centralization and autocracy, men like Duprat and Poyet, who revived the persistent tradition of Philip the F air's legists. Grouped together on the council of affairs, they managed to control the policy of the common council, with its too mixed and too independent membership. They successfully strove to separate “ the grandeur and super excellence of the king” from the rest of the nation; to isolate the nobility amid the seductions of a court lavish in Royal ab-

promises of favour and high office; and to win over the bourgeoisie by the buying and selling and afterwards by the hereditary transmission of offices. Thanks to their action, feudalism was attacked in its landed interest in the person of the constable de Bourbon; feudalism in its financial aspect by the execution of superintendent Semblancay and the special privileges of towns and provinces by administrative centralization. The bureaucracy became a refuge for the nobles, and above all for the bourgeois, whose fixed incomes were lowered by the influx of precious metals from the New World, while the wages of artisans rose. All those time-worn medieval institutions which no longer allowed free scope to private or public life were demolished by the legists in favour of the monarchy. Their masterstroke was the Concordat of 1516, which meant an immense stride in the path towards absolutism. While Germany and England, where ultramontane doctrines had been allowed to creep in, were seeking a remedy giiifg; against the economic ex actions of the papacy in a 1516. reform of dogma or in schism, France had supposed herself to have found this in the Pragmatic Sanction of Bourges. But to the royal jurists the right of the churches and abbeys to make appointments to all vacant benefices was a guarantee of liberties valuableto the clergy, but detestable to themselves because the clergy thus retained the great part of public wealth and authority. By giving the king the ecclesiastical patronage they not only made a docile instrument of him, but endowed him with a mine of wealth, even more productive than the sale of offices, and a power of favouring and rewarding that transformed a needy and ill-obeyed king into an absolute monarch. To the pope they offered a mess of pottage in the shape of annates and the right of canonical institution, in order to induce him to sell the Church of France to the king. By this royal reform they completely isolated the monarchy, in the presumptuous pride of omnipotence, upon the ruins of the Church and the aristocracy, despite both the university and the parlement of Paris.

Thus is explained Francis I.'s preoccupation with Italian adventures in the latter part of his reign, and also the inordinate squandering of money, the autos-da-fé in the provinces and in Paris, the harsh repression of reform and free thought, and the sale of justice; while the nation became impoverished and the state was at the mercy of the caprices of royal mistresses-all of which was to become more and more pronounced during the twelve years of Henry II.'s government. ~Henry II. shone but with a reflected light-in his private life:efiected from his old mistress, Diane de Poitiers, and in his political action reflected from the views of Montmorency or the Guises. He only showed his own 054%

personality in an egoism more narrow-minded, in 1;;9) hatred yet bitterer than his father's; or in a haughty and jealous insistence upon an absolute authority which he never had the wit to maintain.

The struggle with Charles V. was at first delayed by differences with England. The treaty of Ardres had left two bones of contention: the cession of Boulogne to England and the exclusion of the Scotch from the terms of Zig'-V IL peace. At last the regent, the duke of Somerset, ghaflesyq endeavoured to arrange a marriage between Edward VI., then a minor, and Mary Stuart, who had been offered in marriage to the dauphin Francis by her mother, Marie of Lorraine, a Guise who had married the king of Scotland. The transference of Mary Stuart to France, and the treaty of 1550 which restored Boulogne to France for a sum of 400,000 crowns, suspended the state of war; and then Henry II.'s opposition to the imperial policy of Charles V. showed itself everywhere: in Savoy and Piedmont, occupied by the French and claimed by Philibert Emmanuel, Charles V.'s ally; in Navarre, unlawfully conquered by Ferdinand the Catholic and claimed by the family of Albret; in Italy, where, aided and abetted by Pope Paul III., Henry II. was trying to regain support; and, finally, in Germany, where after the victory of Charles V. at Miihlberg (1547) the Protestant princes called Henry II. to their aidg offering to HBHIQ' Il. subsidize him and cede to him the towns of Metz, Toul and Verdun. The Protestant alliance was substituted for the Turkish alliance, and Henry II. hastened to accept the offers made to him (1552); but this was rather late in the day, for the reform movement had produced civil war and evoked fresh forces. The Germans, in whom national feeling got the better of imperialistic ardour, as soon as they saw the French at Strassburg, made terms with the emperor at Passau and permitted Charles to use all his forces against Henry II. The defence of Metz by Francis of Guise was admirable of Mem and successful; but in Picardy operations continued their course without much result, owing to the incapacity of the constable de Montmorency. Fortunately, despite the marriage of Charles V.'s son Philip to Mary Tudor, which gave him the support of England (1554), and despite the religious pacincation of Germany through the peace of Augsburg (1555), Charles V., exhausted by illness Z, ":L°;;; and by thirty years of intense activity, in the truce of Vaucelles abandoned Henry II.'s conquests-Piedmont and the Three Bishoprics. He then abdicated the government of his kingdoms, which he divided between his son Philip II. and his brother Ferdinand (1556). A double victory, this, for France.

Henry II.'s resumption of war, without provocation and without allies, was a grave error; but more characterless than ever, the king was urged to it by the Guises, whose Defence

gg” H' influence since the defence of Metz had been supreme at court and who were perhaps hoping to obtain Naples for themselves. On the other hand, Pope Paul IV. and his nephew Carlo Caraffa embarked upon the struggle, because as Neapolitans they detested the Spaniards, whom they considered as “ barbarous ” as the Germans or the pmup u.

Pe f

Cuisine French. The constable de Montmorency's disaster ffefzis at Saint Quentin (August 1557), by which Philip II. had not the wit to profit, was successfully avenged by Guise, who was appointed lieutenant-general of the kingdom. Calais by assault in January 15 58, after the English He took

had held it for two centuries, and occupied Luxemburg. The treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis (August 15 59) finally put an end to the Italian follies, Naples, Milan and Piedmont; but it also lost Savoy, making a gap in the frontier for a century. The question of Burgundy was definitely settled, too; but the Netherlands had still to be conquered. By the possession of the three bishoprics and the recapture of Calais an effort towards a natural line of frontier and towards a national policy seemed indicated; but while the old soldiers could not forget Marignano, Ceresole, nor Italy perishing with the name of France on her lips, the secret alliance between the cardinal of Lorraine and Granvella against the Protestant heresy foretold the approaching subordination of national questions to religious differences, and a decisive attempt to purge the kingdom of the new doctrines. The origin and general history of the religious reformation in the 16th century are dealt with elsewhere (see CHURCH HISTORY and REroRMAr1oN). In France it had

The Re- - ~ -f0,

m mon originally no revolutionary character whatever, it proceeded from traditional Gallican theories and from the innovating principle of humanism, and it began as a protest against Roman decadence and medieval scholasticism. It found its first adherents and its first defenders among the clerics and learned men grouped around Faber (Lefevre) of Etaples at Meaux; while Marguerite of Navarre, “ des Roynes la non pareille, ”~Was the indefatigable Maecenas of these innovators, and the incarnation of the Protestant spirit at its purest. The reformers shook off the yoke of systems in order boldly to renovate both knowledge and faith; and, instead of resting on the abstract a priori principles within which man and nature had been imprisoned, they returned to the ancient methods of observation and analysis. In so doing, they separated intellectual from popular life; and acting in this spirit, through the need of a moral renaissance, they reverted to primitive Christianity, substituting the inner and individual authority of conscience for the genéral and external authority of the Church. Their efforts would not, however, have sufficed if they had not been seconded by events; pure doctrine would not' have given birth to a church, nor that church to a party, in France, as in Germany, the religious revolution was conditioned by an economic and social revolution. ~ ' A

The economic renaissance due to the great maritime discoveries had the consequence of concentrating wealth in the' hands of the bourgeoisie. Owing to their mental qualities, their tendencies and their resources, 'the bourgeoisie had been, if not alone, at least most apt in profiting 'by the development of industry, 'by the extension of commerce, and by the formation of a new and mobile means of enriching themselves. But though the bourgeois had acquired through capitalism certain sources of influence, and gradually monopolized municipal and public functions, the king and the peasants had also benefited by this revolution. After a hundred and fifty years of foreign war and civil discord, at 5 period when order and unity were ardently desired, an absolutt monarchy had appeared the only power capable of realizing, such aspirations. The peasants, moreover, had profited by tha reduction of the idle landed aristocracy; serfdom had decreased or had been modified; and the free peasants were more prosperous, had reconquered the soil, and were selling their produce at a higher rate while they everywhere paid less exorbitant rents. The victims of this process were the urban proletariat, whose treatment by their employers in trade became less and less protective and beneficent, and the nobility, straitened in their financial resources, uprooted from their ancient strongholds, and gradually despoiled of their power by a monarchy based on popular support. The unlimited sovereignty of the prince was established upon the ruins of the feudal system; and the capitalism of the merchants and bankers upon the closing of the trade-gilds to workmen, upon severe economic

pressure and upon the exploitation of the artisans' labour. A, Though reform originated among the educated classes it speedily found an echo among the industrial classes of the 16th century, fu-rtherassisted by the influence of German and Flemish journeymen. The popular Zigilion reform-movement was essentially an urban movement; of religious although under Francis I. and Henry II. it had already "°f°"'1'i”"0 begun to spread into the country. The artisans, gigfw labourers and small shop-keepers who formed the first nucleus of the reformed church were numerous enough to provide an- army of martyrs, though too few to form a party. Revering the monarchy and established institutions, they endured forty years of persecution before they took up 'arms. It was only during the second half of Henry II.'s reign that Protestantism, having achieved its religious evolution, became a political party. Weary of being trodden under foot, it now demanded much more radical reform, quitting the ranks of peaceable citizens to pass into the only militant class of the time and adopt its customs. Men like Coligny, d'Andelot and Condé took the place of the timid Lefevre of Etaples and the harsh and bitter Calvin; and the reform party, in contradiction to its doctrines and its doctors, became a political and religious party of opposition, with all the compromises that presupposes. The struggle against it was no longer maintained by the university and the parlement alone, but also by the king, whose authority it' menaced. ' '

With his intrepid spirit, his disdain for ecclesiastical authority and his strongly personal religious feeling, Francis I. had for a moment seemed ready to be a reformer himself; but deprived by the Concordat of all interest in the izifogen confiscation of church property, aspiring to political under alliance with the pope, and as mistrustful of popular F"'“""" I forces as desirous of absolute power and devoted °;;;1m, H the revocation in 1 540 of the edict of tolerance of Coucy (1 53 5), and the massacre of the Vaudois (1545). Henry II., a fanatic, went still further in his edict of Chateaubriant (1551), a code of veritable persecution, and in the coup d'état carried out in the parlement against Antoine du Bourg and his'colleagues (1559). At the same time the pastors of the reformed religion, met in synod at Paris, were setting down their Confession of faith founded upon the Scriptures, and their ecclesiastical discipline founded upon the independence of the churches. Thenceforward Protestantism adopted a new attitude, and refused obedience to the orders of a persecuting monarchy when contrary to its faith and its interests. After the saints came men. Hence those wars of religion which were to hold the monarchy in check for forty years and even force it to come to terms.

In Slaying Henry II. Montgomery's lance saved the Protestants for the time being. His son and successor, Francis II., was but a nervous sickly boy, bandied between two women: 055% ' his mother, Catherine de' Medici, hitherto kept in the 1560). background, and his wife, Mary Stuart, queen of Scotland, who beinga niece of the Guises brought her uncles, the constable Francis and the cardinal of Lorraine, into power. These ambitious and violent men took the government out of the hands of the constable de Montmorency and the princes of the blood: Antoine de Bourbon, king of Navarre, weak, credulous, always playing a double game on account of his preoccupation with Navarre; Condé, light-hearted and brave, but not fitted to direct a party; and the cardinal de Bourbon, a mere nonentity. The only plan which these princes could adopt in the struggle, once they had lost the king, was to make a following for themselves among the Calvinist malcontents and the gentlemen disbanded after the Italian wars. The Guises, strengthened by the failure of the conspiracy of Amboise, which had been aimed at them, abused the advantage due to their victory. Despite the edict of Romorantin, which by giving the bishops the right, of cognizance of heresy prevented the introduction of the Inquisition on the Spanish model into France; despite the assembly of F ontainebleau, where an attempt was made at a compromise acceptable to both Catholics and moderate Calvinists; the reform party and its Bourbon leaders, arrested at the states-general of* Orleans, were in danger of their lives. The death of Francis II. in December 1560 compromised the influence of the Guises and again saved Protestantism.

Charles IX. also was a minor, and the regent should legally have been the first prince of the blood, Antoine de Bourbon; but cleverly flattered by the queen-mother, Catherine X (1560 de' Medici, he let her take the reins of government. 1574). Hitherto Catherine had been merely the resigned and neglected wife of Henry II., and though eloquent, insinuating and ambitious, she had been inactive. She had attained the age of forty-one when she at last came into power amidst the, hopes and anxieties aroused by the fall of the Guises and the return of the Bourbons to fortune. Indifferent in religious matters, she had a passion for authority, a characteristically Italian adroitness in intrigue, a fme political sense, and the feeling that the royal authority might be endangered both by Calvinistic passions and Catholic violence. She decided for a system of tolerance; and Michel de l'H6pital, the new chancellor, was her spokesman at the states of Orleans (1560). He was a good and honest man, moderate, conciliatory and temporizing, anxious to lift the monarchy above the strife of parties and to reconcile them; but he was so little practical that he could believe in a reformation of the laws in the midst of all the violent passions which were now to be let loose. These two, Catherine and her chancellor, attempted, like Charles V. at Augsburg, to bring about religious pacification as a necessary condition for the maintenance of order; but they were soon overwhelmed by the different factions.

On one side was the Catholic triumvirate of the constable de Montmorency, the duke of Guise, and the marshal de St The Andre; and on the other the Huguenot party of p8, ,, , es Conde and Cohgny, who, having obtained liberty of conscience in January I 561, now demanded liberty of worship. The colloquy at Poissy between the cardinal of Lorraine and Theodore Beza (September 1561), did not end in the agreement hoped for, and the duke of Guise so far abused Francis Il

Charles

Lutherans. The rupture seemed irremediable when the assembly of Poissy recognized the order of the jesuits, which the French church had held in suspicion since its foundation. However, yielding to the current which was carrying the greater part of the nation towards reform, and despite the threats of Philip II. who dreaded Calvinistic propaganda in his Netherlands, Michel de l'H6pital promulgated the edict of January 17, 1562-a true charter of enfranchisement for the Protestants. But the pressure of events and of parties Edict of

tolerance.

was too strong; the policy of toleration which had rniscarried at the council of Trent had no chance of success in France.

The triumvirate's relations with Spain and Rome were very close; they had complete ascendancy over the king and over Catherine; and now the massacre of two hundred Charade, Protestants at Vassy on the 1st of March r 562 made of the the cup overflow. The duke of Guise had either 'f'§ :f;°“from an interview with the duke of Wtirttemberg at Zabern, where he had once more demanded the help of his Lutheran neighbours against the Calvinistsyand the Catholics having celebrated this as a victory the signal was given for the commencement of religious wars. When these eight fratricidal wars first began, Protestants and Catholics rivalled one another in respect for royal authority; only they wished to become its masters so as to get the upper hand themselves. But in course of time, as the struggle became embittered, Catholicism itself grew revolutionary; and this twofold fanaticism, Catholic and Protestant, even more than the ambition of the leaders, made the war a ferocious one from the very first. Beginning with surprise attacks, if these failed, the struggle was continued by means of sieges and by terrible exploits l ike those of the Catholic Montluc and the Protestant des Adrets in the south of France. Neither of these two parties was strong enough to crush the other, owing to the apathy and continual desertions of the gentlemen-cavaliers who formed the élite of the Protestant army and the insufficient numbers of the Catholic forces. Allies from outside were therefore called in, and this it was that gave a European character to these wars of religion; the two parties were parties of foreigners, the Protestants being supported by German Lands/enechts and Elizabeth of England's cavalry, and the royal army by Italian, Swiss or Spanish auxiliaries. It was no longer patriotism but religion that distinguished the two -camps. There were three principal theatres of war: in the north Normandy and the valley of the Loire, where Orleans, the general centre of reform, ensured communications between the south and Germany; in the south-west Gascony and Guienne; in the south-east Lyonnais and Vivarais. In the first war, which lasted for a year (1562-1563), the triumvirs wished to secure Orleans, previously isolated. The threat of an English landing decided them to lay siege to Rouen, and it was taken by assault; but this gzsgous cost the life of the versatile Antoine de Bourbon. On Wag the 19th of December 1562 the duke of Guise barred the way to Dreux against the German reinforcements of d'Andelot, who after having threatened Paris were marching to join forces with the English troops for whom Coligny and Condé had paid by the cession of Havre. The death of marshal de St André, and the capture of the constable de Montmorency and of Condé, which marked this indecisive battle, left Coligny and Guise face to face. The latter's success was of brief duration; for on the 18th of February I 563 Poltrot de Méré assassinated him before Orleans, which he was trying to take once and for all. Catherine, relieved by the loss of an inconvenient preceptor, and by the disappearance of the other leaders, became mistress of the Catholic party, of whose strength and popularity she had now had proof, and her idea was to make peace at once on the best terms possible. The egoism of Condé, who got himself made lieutenant-general of the kingdom, and bargained for freedom of Worship for the Protestant nobility only, compromised the future of both his church and his party, though rendering its spirit as to embroil the French Calvinists with the German l possible the peace of Amboise, , concluded the IQl'.l1 of March 1563. All now set off together to recapture Havre from the English.

The peace, however, satisfied no one; neither Catholics (because of the rupture of religious unity) nor the parlements; the pope, the emperor and king of Spain alike protested 3°“;';1:f against it. Nor yet did it satisfy the Protestants, (;'63, ° who considered its concessions insufficient, above all for the people. It was, however, the maximum of tolerance possible just then, and had to be reverted to; Catherine and Charles IX. soon saw that the times were not ripe for a third party, and that to enforce real toleration would require an absolute power which they did not possess. After three years the Guises reopened hostilities against Coligny, whom they accused of having plotted the murder of their chief; while the Catholics, egged on by the Spaniards, rose against the Protestants, who had been made uneasy by an interview between Catherine and her daughter Elizabeth, wife of Philip II. of Spain, at Bayonne, and by the duke of Alva's persecutions of the reformed church of the Netherlands-a daughter-church of Geneva, like their own. The second civil war began like the first with a frustrated attempt to kidnap the king, at 5“°°'“' the castle of Montceaux, near Meaux, in September 1567; and with a siege of Paris, the general centre of Catholicism, in the course of which the constable de Montmorency was killed at Saint-Denis. Condé, with the men-at-arms of John Casimir, son of the Count Palatine, tried to starve out the capital; but once more the defection ZZ” “f of the nobles obliged him to sign a treaty of peace at ], , mf;, , Longjumeau on the 23rd of March 1568, by which the conditions of Amboise were re-established. After the attempt at Montceaux the Protestants had to be contented with Charles IX.'s word.

This peace was not of long duration. The fall of Michel de l'H6pital, who had so often guaranteed the loyalty of the Third Huguenots, ruined the moderate party (May 1568). Wm Catholic propaganda, revived by the monks and the jesuits, and backed by the armed confraternities and by Catherine's favourite son, the duke of Anjou, now entrusted with a prominent part by the cardinal of Lorraine; Catherine's complicity in the duke of AlVa's terrible persecution in the Netherlands; and her attempt to capture Coligny and Condé at Noyers all combined to cause a fresh outbreak of hostilities in the west. Thanks to Tavannes, the duke of Anjou gained easy victories at ]arnac over the prince of Condé, who was killed, and at Moncontour over Coligny, who was wounded (March-October 1569); but these successes were rendered fruitless by the jealousy of Charles IX. Allowing the queen of Navarre to shut herself up in La Rochelle, the citadel of the reformers, and the king to loiter over the siege of Saint lean d'Angély, Coligny pushed boldly forward towards Paris and, having reached Burgundy, defeated the royal army at Arnay-le-duc. Catherine had exhausted all her resources; and having failed in her project of remarrying Philip II. to one of her daughters, and of betrothing Charles IX.to the eldest of the Austrian archduchesses, exasperated also by the presumption of the Lorraine family, who aspired to the marriage of their nephew with Charles IX.'s sister, she signed the peace of St Germain on the Sth 5; of August 1570. This was the culminating point of Germ-Hin Protestant liberty; for Coligny exacted and obtained, (15709 first, liberty of conscience and of worship, and then, as a guarantee of the king's word, four fortihed places: La Rochelle, a key to the sea; La Charité, in the centre; Cognac and Montauban in the south.

The Guises set aside, Coligny, supported as he was by Jeanne d'Albret, queen of Navarre, now received all Charles IX.'s favour. Catherine de' Medici, an inveterate match-Peace of

C0lLz11.v .

and me maker, and also uneasy at Philip II.'s increasing mike" power, made advances to Ieanne, proposing to marry ds.

her own daughter, Marguerite deValois, to Jeanne's son, Henry of Navarre, now chief of the Huguenot party. Coligny was a Protestant, but he was a Frenchman before all; and wishing to reconcile all parties in a national struggle, he “ trumpeted war” (cornait la guerre) against Spain in the Netherlands-despite the lukewarmness of Elizabeth of England and the Germans, and despite the counter-intrigues of the pope and of Venice. He succeeded in getting French troops sent to the Netherlands, but they suffered defeat. None the less Charles IX. still seemed to see only through the eyes of Coligny; till Catherine, fearing to be supplanted by the latter, dreading the results of the threatened war with Spain, and egged on by a crowd of Italian adventurers in the pay of Spain-men like Gondi and Birague, reared like herself in the political theories and customs of their native land-saw no hope but in the assassination of this rival in her son's esteem. A murderous attack upon Coligny, who had opposed the candidature of Catherine's favourite son, the duke of Anjou, for the throne of Poland, having only succeeded in wounding him and in exciting the Calvinist leaders, who were congregated in Paris for the occasion of Marguerite deValois'marriage with the king of Navarre, Catherine and the Guises resolved together to put them all to death. There followed the wholesale massacre of St Bartholomew's StBa, Eve, in Paris and in the provinces; a natural con~ thgfgmgw sequence of public and private hatreds which had Avzvsf poisoned the entire social organism. This massacre \$22 had the

Flanders, and destroying Francis I.'s policy of alliance with the Protestants against the house of Austria.

Catherine de' Medici soon perceived that the massacre of St Bartholomew had settled nothing. It had, it is true, dealt a blow to Calvinism just when, owing to the reforms of the council of Trent, the religious ground had been 7""'hP'*"-V crumbling beneath it. Moreover, within the party gilitizuesg itself a gulf had been widening between the pastors, » supported by the Protestant democracy and the political nobles. The reformers had now no leaders, and their situation seemed as perilous as that of their co-religionists in the Netherlands; while the sieges of La Rochelle and Leiden, the enforced exile of the prince of Orange, and the conversion under pain of death of Henry of Navarre and the prince of Condé, made the common danger more obvious. Salvation came from the very excess of the repressive measures. A third party was once more formed, composed of moderates from the two camps, and it was recruited quite as much by jealousy of the Guises and by ambition as by horror at the massacres. There were the friends of the Montmorency party-Damville at their head; Coligny's relations; the king of Navarre; Condé; and aprince of the blood, Catherine de' Medici's third son, the duke of Alencon, tired of being kept in the background. This party took shape at the' Fourth. end of the fourth war, followed by the edict of Wan Boulogne (1573), forced from Charles IX. when the Edict of Catholics were deprived, of their leader by the election B°"'°Z"° of his brother, the duke of Anjou, as king of Poland. (15730 A year later the latter succeeded his brother on the throne of France as Henry III. This meant a new lease of power for the queen-mother.

The politiques, as the supporters of religious tolerance and an energetic repression of faction were called, offered their effect of preventing the expedition into

alliance to the Huguenots, but these, having formed Fmh themselves, by means of the Protestant Union, into Wm a sort of republic within the kingdom, hesitated to accept. It is, however, easy to bring about an understanding between people in whom religious fury has been extinguished either by patriotism or by ambition, like that of the duke of Alengon, who had now escaped from the Louvre where he had been confined on account of his intrigues. The compact was concluded at Millau; Condé becoming a Protestant once more in order to treat with Damville, Montmorency's brother. Henry of Navarre escaped from Paris. The new king, Henry III., vacillating and vicious, and Catherine herself, eager for war as she was, had no means of separating the 'gg'-" H" Protestants and the politiques. Despite the victory 2539; of Guise at Dormans, the agreement between the duke of Alencon and John Casimir's German army obliged the royal party to grant all that the allied 'forces demanded of them in the “peace of Monsieur, ” signed at Beaulieu on the 6th of May 1576, the duke of Alengon receiving the appanage of Anjou, page af Touraine and Berry, the king of Navarre Guienne, Mons, eu, , and Condé Picardy, while the Protestants were granted (1576). freedom of worship in all parts of the kingdom except Paris, the rehabilitation of Coligny and the other victims of St Bartholomew, their fortified towns, and an equal number of seats in the courts of the parlements. This was going too fast; and in consequence of a reaction against this too liberal edict a fourth party made its appearance, The that of the Catholic League, under the Guises-Henry Caawuc le Balafré, duke of Guise, and his two brothers, Charles, League. duke of Mayenne, and Louis, archbishop of Reims and cardinal. With the object of destroying Calvinism by effective opposition, they imitated the Protestant organization of provincial associations, drawing their chief supporters from the upper middle class and the lesser nobility. It was not at first a demagogy maddened by the preaching of the irreconcilable clergy of Paris, but- a union of the more honest and prudent classes of the nation in order to combat heresy. Despite the immorality and impotence of Henry III. and the Protestantism of Henry of Navarre, this party talked of re-establishing the authority of the king; but in reality it inclined more to the Guises, martyrs in the good cause, who were supported by Philip II. of Spain and Pope Gregory XIII. A sort of popular government was thus established to counteract the incapacity of royalty, and it was in the name of the imperilled rights of the people that, from the States of Blois onward, this Holy League demanded the re-establishment of Catholic unity, and set the religious right of the nation in opposition to the divine right of incapable or evil-doing kings (1 576).

In order to oust his rival Henry of Guise, Henry III. made a desperate effort to outbid him in the eyes of the more extreme The States Catholics, and by declaring himself head of the League of BMS I degraded himself into a party leader. The League, (1576), furious at this stroke of policy, tried to impose a council of thirty-six advisers upon the king. But the deputies of the third estate did not support the other two orders, and in their turn refused the king money for making war on the heretics, desiring, they said, not war but the the latter

Sigh War destruction of heresy. This would have reduced Peace of Henry III. to impotence; fortunately for him, how-Zggffac ever, the break of the Huguenots with the “ Mal-Sevegih contents, ” and the divisions in the court of Navarre Warand and in the various parties at La Rochelle, allowed Of Henry III., after two little wars in the south west, U580, during which fighting gradually degenerated into brigandage, to sign terms of peace at Bergerac (1577), which much diminished the concessions made in the edict of Beaulieu. This peace was confirmed three years after by that of Fleix. The suppression of both the leagues was stipulated for (1580). It remained, however, a question whether the Holy League would submit to this.

The death of the duke of Anjou after his mad endeavour to establish himself in the Netherlands (1584), and the accession of Henry of Navarre, heir to the effeminate Henry III., U I

bglffgen reversed the situations of the two parties: the Profile Guises testants again became supporters of the principle of

gzip ” heredity and divine right; the Catholics appealed

to right of election and the sovereignty of the people. Could the crown of the eldest daughter of the Church be allowed to devolve upon a relapsed heretic? Such was the doctrine officially preached in pulpit and pamphlet. But between Philip II. on the one hand-now master of Portugal and delivered from William of Orange, involved in strife with the English Protestants, and desirous of avenging the injuries inflicted upon him by the Valois in the Netherlands-and the Guises on the other hand, whose cousin Mary Stuart was a prisoner of Queen Elizabeth, there was a common interest in supporting one another and pressing things forward. A definite agreement was made between them at Ioinville (December 31, 1584), the religious and popular pretext being the danger of leaving the 1

kingdom to the king of Navarre, and the ostensible end to secure the succession to a Catholic prince, the old Cardinal de Bourbon, an ambitious and violent man of mean intelligence; while 'the secret aim was to secure the crown for the Guises, 'who had already attempted to fabricate for themselves a genealogy tracing their descent from Charlemagne. In the meantime Philip II., being rid of Don John of Austria, whose ambition he dreaded, was to crush the Protestants of England and the Netherlands, and the double result of the compact at Toinville was to allow French politics to be controlled by Spain, and to transform the wars of religion into a purely political quarrel.

The pretensions of the Guises were, in fact, soon manifested in the declaration of Péronne (March 30, 1585) against the foul court of the Valois; they were again manifested in a The mm. furious agitation, fomented by the secret council mittee of of the League at Paris, which favoured the Guises, iggie" '" and which now worked on the people through their terror of Protestant retaliations and the Church's peril. by Philip II., who wished to see him earning his pension of 600,000 golden crowns, Henry of Guise began the war in the end of April, and in a few days the whole kingdom was on fire. The Incited

situation was awkward for Henry III., who had not Eighth the courage to ask Queen Elizabeth for the soldiers warofthe and money that helacked. The craftykingof Navarre g"""" being unwilling to alienate the Protestants save by an cuties apostasy profitable to himself, Henry III., by the treaty of Nemours (July 7, 1585), granted everything to the head of the League in order to save his crown. By a stroke of the pen he suppressed Protestantism, while Pope Sixtus V., who had at first been unfavourable to the treaty of Ioinville as a purely political act, though he eventually yielded to the solicitations of the League, excommunicated the two Bourbons, Henry and Condé. But the duke of Guise's audacity did not make Henry III. forget his desire for vengeance. He hoped to ruin him by attaching him to his cause. His favourite Ioyeuse was to defeat the king of Navarre, whose forces were very weak, while Guise was to deal with the strong reinforcement of Germans that Elizabeth was sending to Henry of Navarre. Exactly the contrary happened. By the defeat of Ioyeuse at Coutras Henry III. found himself wounded on his strongest side; and by Henry of Guise's successes at Vimory andAuneau the Germans, who should have been his best auxiliaries against the League, were crushed (October-November 1587).

The League now thought they had no longer anything to fear. Despite the king's hostility the duke of Guise came urged thereto by Philip II., who wanted to occupy to Paris,

Paris and be master of the Channel coasts whilst he Zl";", ;;m launched his invincible Armada to avenge the death of ¢, des Mary Stuart in 1 587. On the Day of the Barricades (May 12, 1588) Henry III. was besieged in the Louvre by the populace in revolt; but his rival dared not go so far as to depose the king, and appeased the tumult. The king, having succeeded in taking refuge at Chartres, ended, however, by granting him in the Act of Union all that he had refused in face of the barricades -the post of lieutenant-general of the kingdom and the proscription of Protestantism. At the second assembly of the states of Blois, called together on account of the need for money(1 588), all of Henry III.'s enemies who were elected showed themselves even bolder than in 1576 in claiming the ggiajfizi control of the financial administration of the kingdom; guise; at but the destruction of the Armada gave Henry III., the SEUOH4 already exasperated by the insults he had received, szffgl new vigour. He had the old Cardinal de Bourbon ffBM, imprisoned, and Henry of Guise and his brother the cardinal assassinated (December 23, 1 588). On the 5th of January, 1589, died his mother, Catherine de'Medici, the astute Florentine.

“ Now I am king! ” cried Henry III. But Paris being dominated by the duke of Mayenne, who had escaped assassination, and by the council of “Sixteen, ” the chiefs of the League. most of the provinces replied by open revolt, and Henry III. had no alternative but an alliance with Henry of Navarre. Thanks to this he was on the point of seizing Paris, 3:;'Z}""" when in his turn he was assassinated on the rst of Hem, ,, ,” August 1589 by a Jacob1n monk, Jacques Clement; with his dying breath he designated the king of Navarre as his successor.

Between the popular League and the menace of the Protestants it was a question whether the new monarch was to be powerless The in his turn. Henry IV. had almost the whole of his Bourbolm kingdom to conquer. The Cardinal de Bourbon, king according to the League and proclaimed under the title of Charles X., could count upon the Holy League itself, upon the Spaniards of the Netherlands, and upon the pope. Henry IV. was only supported by a certain number of the Calvinists and by the Catholic minority of the Politiques, who, however, gradually induced the rest of the nation to rally round the only legitimate prince. The nation wished for the establishment of internal unity through religious tolerance and the extinction of private organizations; it looked for the extension of France's external power through the abasement of the house of-Spain, protection of the Protestants in the Netherlands and Germany, and independence of Rome. Henry IV., moreover, was forced to take an oath at the camp of Saint Cloud to associate the nation in the affairs of the kingdom by means of the states-general. These three conditions were interdependent; and Henry IV., with his persuasive manners, his frank and charming character, and his personal valour, seemed capable of keeping them all three.

The first thing for this soldier-king to do was to conquer his kingdom and maintain its unity. He did not waste time by withdrawing towards the south; he kept in the neigh-HW!" "5 bourhood of Paris, on the banks of the Seine, within géfgi' reach of help from Elizabeth; and twice-at Arques and at Ivry (1589-1590)—he vanquished the duke of Mayenne, lieutenant-general of the League. But after having tried to seize Paris (as later Rouen) by a coup-de-main, he was obliged to raise the siege in view of reinforcements sent to Mayenne by the duke of Parma. Pope Gregory XIV., an enthusiastic supporter of the League and a strong adherent of Spain, having succeeded Sixtus V., who had been very lukewarm towards the League, made Henry IV.'s position still more serious just at the moment when, the old Cardinal de Bourbon having died, Philip II. wanted to be declared the protector of the kingdom in order that he might dismember it, and when Charles Emmanuel of Savoy, a grandson of Francis I., and Charles III., duke of Lorraine, a son-in-law of Henry II., were both of them claiming the crown. Fortunately, however, the Sixteen had disgusted the upper bourgeoisie by their demagogic airs; while their open alliance with Philip II., and their acceptance of a Spanish garrison in Paris had offended the patriotism of the Palitiques or moderate members of the League. Mayenne, who oscillated between Philip II. and Henry IV., was himself obliged to break up and subdue this 'party of fanatics and theologians (December ISQI). This game of see-saw between the Politique.: and the League furthered his secret ambition, but also the dissolution of the kingdom; and the pressure of public opinion, which desired an effective monarchy, put an end to this temporizing policy and caused the convocation of the states general in Paris (December 1592). Philip II., through Smes' the duke of Feria's instrumentality, demanded the fgggggf throne for his daughter Isabella, grand-daughter of Henry II. through her mother. But who was to be her husband? The archduke Ernest of Austria, Guise or Mayenne? The parlement cut short these bargaining by condemning all ultramontane pretensions and Spanish intrigues. The unpopularity of Spain, patriotism, the greater predominance of national questions in public opinion, and weariness of both religious disputation and indecisive warfare, all these sentiments were expressed in the wise and clever pamphlet entitled the Satire M énippée. What had been a slow movement between 1585 and 1 592 was quickened by Henry IV.'s abjuration of Protestantism at Saint-Denis on the 23rd of July r 593.

The coronation of the king at Chartres in February 1594 completed the rout of the League. The parlement of Paris declared against Mayenne, whowas simply the mouth- Abiumtion piece of Spain, and Brissac, the governor, surrendered 0fHe|uy the capital to the king. The example of Paris and' IV-'JULY Henry IV.'s clemency rallied round him all prudent 23' 1593 Catholics, like Villeroy and Jeannin, anxious for national unity; but he had to buy over the adherents of the League, who sold him his own kingdom for sixty million francs. The pontifical absolution of September 17, 1595, finally stultified the League, which had been again betrayed by the unsuccessful plot of lean Chastel, the Jesuit's pupil. »

Nothing was nowleft but to expel the Spaniards, who under cover of religion had Worked for. their own interests alone. Despite the brilliant 'charge of F ontaine-Française in Burgundy (June 5, 1 59 5), and the submission of the heads of the League, Guise, Mayenne, ]oyeuse, and Mercoeur, the years 1 SQ 5-1 597 were not fortunate for Henry IV.'s armies. Indignant at his conversion, Elizabeth, the Germans, and the Swiss Protestantsdeserted him; While the taking of Amiens by the Spaniards compromised for the moment the future both of the king and the country. But exhaustion of each other, by which only England and Holland profited, brought about the Peace of Vervins. This confirmed the results of the treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis (May 2, 1598), that is to say, the decadence of Spanish power, .and its inability either to conquer or to dismember France.

The League, having- now no reason for existence, was dissolved; but the Protestant party remained very strong, with its political organization and the fortified places/which the assemblies of Millau, Nimes and La Rochelle E'”¢*~°f (1573-1574) had established in the south and the west. Izfgges It was a republican state Within the kingdom, and, . . ', being unwilling to break with it, Henry IV. came to terms by the edict of Nantes, on the 13th of April 1598. -This was"a compromise between the royal government and the Huguennt government, the latter giving up the question of 'public worship, which was only authorized where it, had existed before 1597 and in two towns of each bailliage, with the exception of Paris; but it secured liberty of conscience throughout the kingdom, st-ate payment for its ministers, admission to all ernployments, and courts composed equally of Catholics and Protestants in the parlements. An authorization to hold synods and political assemblies, to open schools, and to occupy a hundred strong places for eight years at the expense of the king, assured to the Protestants not only rights but privileges. In no other country did they enjoy so many guarantees against a return of persecution. This explains why thefedict of Nantes was not registered Without some difficulty.

Thus the blood-stained 16th century closed with a promise of religious toleration and a dream of international arbitration. This was the end of the long tragedy of civil strife and of wars of conquest, mingled with the sound of § 1e'"”f 'if madrigals and psalms and pavanes. It had been the ou; golden age of the arquebus and thetviol, of sculptors and musicians, of poets and humanists, of fratricidal conflicts and of love-songs, ofmignons and martyrs. At the close of this troubled century peace descends upon exhausted passions; and amidst the choir of young and ardent voices celebrating the national reconciliation, the tocsin no longer sounds its sinister and persistent bass. Despite the leagues of either faith, religious liberty was now confirmed by the more free and generous spirit of Henry IV.

Why was this king at once so easygoing and so capricious? Why, again, had the effort and authority of feudal and popular resistance been squandered in the follies of the League and to further the ambitions of the rebellious Guises? Why had the monarchy been forced to purchase the obedience of the upper classes and the provinces with immunities which enfeebled it without limiting it? At all events, when the kingdom had been reconquered from the Spaniards and religious strife ended, in order to fulfil his engagements, Henry IV. need only have associated the 'nation with himself in the work of reconstructing the -shattered monarchy. But during the atrocious holocausts formidable states had grown up around France, observingvher and threatening her; and on the other hand, as on the morrow of the Hundred Years' War, the lassitude of the country, the lack of political feeling on the part of the upper classes and their selfishness, led to a fresh abdication of the nation's rights. The need of living caused the neglect of 'that necessity for control which had been maintained by the states-general from IS6O to 1 593. And this time, moderation on the part of the monarchy no longer made for success. Of the two contrary currents which have continually mingled and conflicted throughout the course of French history, that of monarchic absolutism and that of aristocratic -and democratic liberty, the former was now to carry all before it.

The kingdom was now issuing from thirty-eight years of Its inhabitants had grown unaccustomed to work; its finances were ruined by dishonesty, disorder, and civil war.

Th

Boiirbons. a very heavy foreign debt. The most characteristic Frmvvin symptom of this distress was the brigandage carried fm', on incessantly from 1598 to I6IO. Side by side with this temporary disorder there was a more serious administrative disorganization, a habit of no longer obeying the king. The harassed population, the municipalities which under cover of civil war had resumed the right of self-government, and the parlements elated with their social importance and their security of position, were not alone in abandoning duty and obedience. Two powers faced each other threateningly: the organized and malcontent Protestants; and the provincial governors, all great personages possessing an armed following, theoretically agents of the king, but practically independent. The Montmorencys, the D'Epernons, the Birons, the Guises, were accustomed to consider their offices as hereditary property. Not that these two powers entered into open revolt against the king; but they had adopted the custom of recriminating, of threatening, of coming to understandings with the foreign powers, 'which with some of them, like Marshal Biron, the D'Entragues and the duc de Bouillon, amounted to conspiracy (1602-1606). As to the qualifications of the king: he had had the good fortune not to be educated for the throne. Without much learning and sceptical in religious matters, he had the C"""°"' lively intelligence of the Gascon, more subtle than gauenty profound, more brilliant than steady. Married to a woman of loose morals, and afterwards to a devout Italian, he was gross and vulgar in his appetites and pleasures. He had retained all the habits of a country gentleman of his native Béarn, careless, familiar, boastful, thrifty, cunning, combined since his sojourn at the court of the Valois with a taint of corruption. He worked little but rapidly, with none of the bureaucratic pedantry of a Philip II. cloistered in the dark towers of the Escurial. Essentially a man of action and a soldier, he preserved his tone of command after he had reached the throne, the inflexibility of the military chief, the conviction of his absolute right to be master. Power quickly intoxicated him, and his monarchy was therefore anything but parliamentary. His personality was everything, institutions nothing. If, at the gathering of the notables at Rouen in 1596, Henry IV, spoke of putting himself in tutelage, that was but preliminary to a demand for money. The states-general, called together ten times in the 16th century, and at the death of Henry III. under promise of convocation, were never assembled. To put his absolute right beyond all control he based it upon religion, and to this sceptic disobedience became a heresy. He tried to make the clergy into an instrument of government by recalling the Jesuits, who had been driven away in 1594, partly from fear of their regicides, partly because they have always been the best teachers of servitude; and he gave theyouth of the nation into the hands of this cosmopolitan and ultramontane clerical order. His government was personal, not through departments; he retained the old council though reducing its members; and his ministers, taken from every party, were never-not even Sullyanything more than mere clerks, without independent position, mere instruments of his good pleasure. Fortunately this was not always capricious.

Henry IV. soon realized that his most urgent duty was to resuscitate the corpse* of France. Pilfering was suppressed, and the revolts of the malcontents-the Gaulhiers of Th

Normandy, the Craquanls and T ard-avisis of Périgord aclfieveand Limousin-were quelled, adroitly at irst, and m¢"H='S vf Henry IV.

later with a sterner hand. He then provided for the security of the country districts, and reduced the taxes on the peasants, the most efhcacious means of making them productive and able to pay. Inspired by Barthélemy de Laffémas (1545-1612), controller-general of commerce, and by Olivier de Serres (1539-1619),1 Henry IV. encouraged the culture of silk, though without much result, had orchards planted and marshes drained; while though he permitted the free circulation of wine and corn, on the harvests. But the twofold effect of civil this depended

war-the ruin of the farmers and the scarcity and high price of rural labour-was only reduced arbitrarily and, by fits and starts.

Despite the influence of Sully, a convinced agrarian because of his horror of luxury and love of economy, Henry IV. likewise attempted amelioration in the towns, where the state of affairs was even worse than in the country. But the I"':"'t'” edict of 1597, far from inaugurating individual liberty, was but a fresh edition of that of r 581, a second preface to the legislation of Colbert, and in other ways no better respected than the first. As for the new features, the syndical courts proposed by Laffémas, they were not even put into practice. Various industries, nevertheless, concurrent with those of England, Spain and Italy, were created or reorganized: silk-weaving, printing, tapestry, &c. Sully at least provided renascent manufacture with the roads necessary for communication and planted thern with trees. In external commerce Lafiémas and Henry IV. were equally the precursors of Colbert, freeing raw material and prohibiting the import of products similar to those manufactured within the kingdom. Without regaining that preponderance in the Levant which had been secured after the victory of Lepanto and before the civil wars, Marseilles still took an honourable place there, confirmed by the renewal in 1604 of the capitulations of Francis I. with the sultan. Finally, the system of commercial companies, antipathetic to the French bourgeoisie, was for the first time practised on a grand scale; but Sully never understood that 'movement of colonial expansion, begun by Henry II. in Brazil and continued in Canada by Champlain, which had so marvellously enlarged the European horizon. His point of view was altogether more limited than that of Henry IV.; and he did not foresee, like Elizabeth, that the future would belong to the peoples whose national energy took that line of action.

His sphere was essentially the superintendence of Hnance, to which he brought the same enthusiasm that he had shown in fighting the League. Vain and imaginative, his reputation was enormously enhanced by his Zfeszflf “ Economies royales ”; he was no innovator, and ° being a true representative of the nation at that period, like it he was but lukewarm towards reform, accepting it always against the grain. He was not a financier of genius; but he administered the public moneys with the same probity and exactitude which he used in managing his own, retrieving alienated property, straightening accounts, balancing expenditure and receipts, and amassing a reserve in the Bastille. He did not reform the system of aides and tailles established by Louis XI. in 1482; but by charging much upon indirect taxation, and slightly lessening the burden of direct taxation, he avoided an appeal to the states-general and gave an illusion of relief. Nevertheless, economic disasters, political circumstances and the personal government of Henry IV. (precursor in this also 1 Olivier de Serres, sieur de Pradel, spent most of his life on his model farm at Pradel. In 1599 he dedicated a~ pamphlet on the cultivation of silk to Henry IV., and in 160O published his Thédtre zfagrioulture et ménage des champs, which passed through nineteen editions up to 1675. of Louis XIV.) rendered his task impossible or fatal. The nobility remained' in debt and disaffected; and the clergy, more remarkable for wealth and breeding than for virtues, Criticism

H, ,, ,, y were won over to the ultramontane ideas of the

I V/ S triumphant Jesuits. The rich bourgeoisie began more f:;';"°' and more to monopolize the magistracy; and though the country-people were somewhat relieved from the burden which had been crushing them, the working-classes remained impoverished, owing to the increase of prices which followed at a distance the rise of wages. Moreover, under insinuating and crafty pretexts, Henry IV. undermined as far as he could the right of control by the states-general, the right of remonstrance by the parlements, and the communal franchises, while ensuring the impoverishment of the municipalities by his fiscal methods. Arbitrary taxation, scandalous intervention in elections, forced candidatures, confusion in their financial administration, bankruptcy and revolt on the part of the tenants: all formed an anticipation of the personal rule of Richelieu and Louis XIV.

Thus Henry IV. evinced very great activity in restoring order and very great poverty of invention in his methods. His sole original creation, the edict of La Paulette in 1604, ii'ga'Z was disastrous. In consideration of an annual payment ¢, e of one-sixtieth of the salary, it~ made hereditary offices which had hitherto been held only for life; and the millions which it daily poured into the royal exchequer removed the necessity for seeking more regular and better distributed resources. Political liberty and social justice were equally the losers by this extreme financial measure, which paved the way for a catastrophe.

In foreign affairs the abasement of the house of Austria remained for Henry IV., as it had been for Francis I. and Henry II., a political necessity, while under his successors 532152 f it was to become a mechanical obsession. The peace Hemy[V of Vervins had concluded nothing. The difference concerning the marquis ate of Saluzzo, which the duke of Savoy had seized upon in 1588, profiting by Henry III.'s embarrassments, is only worth mentioning because the treaty of Lyons (1601) finally dissipated the Italian mirage, and because, in exchange for the last of France's possessions beyond the Alps, it added to the royal domain the really French territory of La Bresse, Bugey, Valromey and the district of Gex. The great external affair of the reign was the projected war upon which Henry IV. was about to embark when he was assassinated. The “ grand design ” of Sully, the organization of a “ Christian Republic” of the European nations for the preservation of peace, was but the invention of an irresponsible minister, soured by defeat and wishing to impress posterity. Henry IV., the least visionary of kings, was between 1598 and 1610 really hesitating between two great contradictory political schemes: the war clamoured for by the Protestants, politicians like Sully, and the nobility; and the Spanish alliance, to be cemented by marriages, and preached by the ultramontane Spanish camarilla formed by the queen, Pere Coton, the king's confessor, the minister Villeroy, and Ubaldini, the papal nuncio. Selfish and suspicious, Henry IV. consistently played this double game of policy in conjunction with president Ieannin. By his alliance with the Grisons (1603) he guaranteed the integrity of the Valtellina, the natural approach to Lombardy for the imperial forces; and by his intimate union with Geneva he controlled the routes by which the Spaniards could reach their hereditary possessions in Franche-Comté and the Low Countries from Italy. But having defeated the duke of Savoy he had no hesitation in making sure of him by a marriage; though the Swiss might have misunderstood the treaty of Brusol (1610) by which he gave one of his daughters to the grandson of Philip II; On the other hand he astonished the Protestant world by the imprudence of his mediation between Spain and the rebellious United Provinces (1609). When the succession of Cleves and of Iiilich, so long expected and already discounted by the treaty of Halle (1610), was opened up in Germany, the great war was largely due to an access of senile passion for the charms of the princess de Condé. The stroke of Ravaillac's knife caused a timely descent of the curtain upon this new and tragi-comic Trojan War. Thus, here as elsewhere, we see a vacillating hand-to-mouth policy, at the mercy of a passion for power or for sensual gratification. The Comette blanche of Arques, the Poule au pa: of the peasant, successes as a lover and a dashing spirit, have combined to surround Henry IV. with a haloof romance not justified by fact.-The

extreme instability of monarchical government showed itself afresh after Henry IV.'s death. The reign of Louis XIII., a perpetual regency by women, priests, and favourites, The, was indeed a curious prelude to the grand age of the negency of French monarchy. The eldest son of Henry IV. Mffie de being a minor, Marie de' Medici induced the parlement Medici' . to invest her with the regency, thanks to Villeroy and' contrary» to the last will of Henry IV. This second Florentine, at once jealous of power and incapable of exercising it, bore little resemblance to her predecessor. Light-minded, haughty, apathetic and cold-hearted, she took a sort of passionate delight in changing Henry IV.'s whole system of government. Who would support her in this? On one side were the former ministers, Sillery and president Jeannin, ex-leaguers but loyalists, no lovers of Spain and still less of Germany; on the other the princes of the blood and the great nobles, Condé, Guise, Mayenne and Nevers, apparently still much more faithful to French ideas, but in reality convinced that the days of kings were over and that their own had arrived. Instead of weakening this aristocratic agitation by the see-saw policy of Catherine de' Medici, Marie could invent no other device than to despoil the royal treasure by distributing places and money to the chiefs of both parties. The savings all expended and Sully fallen into disgrace, she lost her influence and became the almost unconscious instrument. of an ambitious man of low birth, the Florentine Concini, who was to drag her down with him in his fall; petty shifts became thenceforward the order of the day.

From 1621 to 1624 Marie de' Medici, re-established in credit, prosecuted her intrigues; and in three years there were three different ministries: de Luynes was succeeded by the /':i:;'"d:f prince de Condé, whose Montauban was found at Med” Montpellier; the Brularts succeeded Condé, and A having, like de Luynes, neglected France's foreign interests, they had to give place to La Vieuville; while this latter was arrested in his turn for having sacrificed the interests of the English Catholics in the negotiations regarding the marriage of Henrietta of France with the prince of Wales. All these personages were undistinguished figures beyond whom might be discerned the cold clear-cut profile of Marie de' Medici's secretary, now a cardinal, who was to take the helm and act as viceroy during eighteen years.

Richelieu came into power at a lucky moment. Every one was sick of government by deputy; they desired a strong hand and an energetic foreign policy, after the defeat of gt-rliizflga the Czechs at the White Mountain by the house of 1624' Austria, the Spanish intrigues in the Valtellina, and Ma' the resumption of war between Spain and Holland. Richelieu contrived to raise hope in the minds of all. As president of the clergy at the states-general of 1614 he had figured as an adherent of Spain and the ultramontane interest; he appeared to be a representative of that religious party which was identical with the Spanish party. But he had also been put into the ministry by the party of the Politiques, who had terminated the civil wars, acclaimed Henry IV., applauded the Protestant alliance, and by the mouth of Miron, president of the third estate, had in 1614 proclaimed its intention to take up the national tradition once more. Despite the concessions necessary at the outset to the partisans of a Catholic alliance, it was the programme of the Poliliques that Richelieu adopted and laid down with a master's hand in his Political Testament. To realize it he had to maintain his position. This was very difficult with a king who “ wished to be governed and yet was impatient at being governed.” Incapable of applying himself to great affairs, but of sane and even acute "°g" Xm judgment, Louis XIII. excelled only in a passion for ljg¢, ,, ,, ,, , detail and for manual pastimes. He realized the superior qualities of his minister, though with a lively sense of his own dignity he often wished him more discreet and less imperious; he had confidence in him but did not love him. Cold-hearted and formal by nature, he had not even self-love, detested his wife Anne of Austria-too good a Spaniard-and only attached himself htfully to his favourites, male or female, who were naturally jealously suspected by the cardinal. He was accustomed to listen to his mother, who detested Richelieu as her ungrateful protégé. Neither did he love his brother, Gaston of Orleans, and the feeling was mutual; for the latter, remaining for twenty years heir-presumptive to a crown which he could neither defend nor seize, posed as the beloved prince in all the conspiracies against Richelieu, and issued from them each time as a Judas. Add to this that Louis XIII., like Richelieu himself, had wretched health, aggravated by the extravagant medicines of the day; and it is easy to understand how this pliable disposition which offered itself to the yoke caused Richelieu always to fear that his king might change his master, and to declare that “ the four square feet of the king's cabinet had been more difficult for him to conquer than all the battlefields of Europe.”

Richelieu, therefore, passed his time in safeguarding himself from his rivals and in spying upon them; his suspicious nature, rendered still more irritable by his painful practice of a dissimulation repugnant to his headstrong character; making him fancy himself threatened more than was actually the case. He brutally suppressed six great plots, several of which were scandalous, and had more than fifty persons executed; and he identified himself with the king, sincerely believing that he was maintaining the royal authority and not merely his own. He had a preference for irregular measures rather than legal prosecutions, and a jealousy of all opinions save his own. He maintained his power through the fear of torture and of special commissions. It was Louis XIII. whose cold decree ordained most of the rigorous sentences, but the stain of blood rested on the cardinal's robe and made his reasons of state pass for private vengeance. Chalais was beheaded at Nantes in 1626 for having upheld Gaston of Orleans in his refusal to wed Mademoiselle de Montpensier, and. Marsha1 d'Ornano died at Vincennes for having given him bad advice in this matter; while the duellist de Boutteville was put to the torture for having braved the edict against duels. The royal family itself was not free from his attacks; after the Day of Dupes (1630) he allowed the queen-mother to die in exile, and publicly dishonoured the king's brother Gaston of Orleans by the publication of his confessions; Marshal de Marillac was put to the torture for his ingratitude, and the constable de Montmorency for rebellion (163 2). The birth of Louis XIV. in 1638 confirmed Richelieu in power. However, at the point of death he roused himself to order the execution of the king's favourite, Cinq-Mars, and his friend de Thou, guilty of treason with Spain (1642).

Absolute authority was not in itself sufficient; much money was also needed. In his state-papers Richelieu has shown that at the outset he desired that the Huguenots should share no longer in public affairs, that the nobles should F";""°': cease to behave as rebellious subjects, and the powerful ';j, ,, k;:, z, ,, provincial governors as suzerains over the lands committed to their charge. With his passion for the uniform and the useful on a grand scale, he hoped by means of the Codo Michaud to put an end to the sale of offices, to lighten imposts, to supprws brigandage, to reduce the monasteries, &c. To do this it would have been necessary to make peace, for it was soon evident that war was incompatible with these reforms. He chose war, as did his Spanish rival and contemporary Olivaresr War- is expensive sport; but Richelieu maintained a lofty attitude towards finance, disdained figures, and abandoned all petty details to subordinate officials like D'Efliat or Bullion. He therefore soon reverted to the old and worse measures, including the debasement of coinage, and put an extreme tension on all the springs of the financial system. The land-tax was, doubled and trebled by war, by the pensions of the nobles, by an extortion the profits of which Richelieu disdained neither for himself nor for his family; and just when the richer and more powerful classes had been freed from taxes, causing the wholesale oppression of the poorer, these few remaining were jointly and severally answerable. Perquisites, offices, forced loans were multiplied to such a point that a critic of the times, Guy-Patin, facetiously declared that duties were to be exacted from the beggars basking in the sun. Richelieu went so far as to make poverty systematic and use famine as a means of government. This was the price paid for the national victories. Thus he procured money at all costs, with an extremely crude fiscal judgment which ended by exasperating the people; hence numerous insurrections of the poverty-stricken; Dijon rose in revolt against the aides in 1630, Provence against the tax-officers (élus) in 1631, Paris and Lyons in 1632, and Bordeaux against the increase of customs in 1635. In 1636 the Croquants ravaged Limousin, Poitou, Angoumois, Gascony and Périgord; in 1639 it needed an army to subdue the Va-nu-pieds (bare-feet) in Normandy. Even the rentiers of the Hotel-de-Ville, big and little, usually very peaceable folk, were excited by the curtailment of their incomes, and in 1639 and 1642 were roused to fury. Every one had to bend before this harsh genius, who insisted on uniformity in obedience. After the feudal vassals, decimated Sw' by the wars of religion and the- executioner's hand, £212 .

with me and after the recalcitrant taxpayers, the Protestants, Pf|;¢¢3¢° in their turn, and by their own fault, experienced this. IB S.

While Richelieu was opposing the designs of the pope and of the Spaniards in the Valtellina, while he was arming the duke of Savoy and subsidizing Mansfeld in Germany, Henri, duc de Rohan, and his brother Benjamin de Rohan, duc de Soubise, the Protestant chiefs, took the initiative in a fresh revolt despite the majority of their party (162 5). This Huguenot rising, in stirring up which Spanish diplomacy had its- share, was a revolt of discontented and ambitious individuals who -trusted for success to their compact organization and the ultimate assistance of England. Under pressure of this new danger and urged on by the Catholic dévéts, supported by the influence of Pope Urban VIII., Richelieu concluded with Spain the treaty of Monzon (March 5, 1626), by which the interests of his allies Venice, Savoy and the Grisons were sacrificed without their being-consulted. The Catholic Valtellina, freed from the claims of the Protestant Grisons, became an independent state under the joint protection of France and Spain; the question of the right of passage was left open, to trouble France during the, campaigns that followed; but the immediate gain, so far as Richelieu was concerned, was that his hands were freed to deal with the Huguenots.

Soubise had begun the revolt (January 1625) by seizing Port Blavet in Brittany, with the royal squadron that lay there, and in command of the ships thus acquired, combined with those of La Rochelle, 'he ranged the western coast, intercepting commerce. In September, however, Montmorency succeeded, with a fleet of English and Dutch ships manned by English seamen, in defeating Soubise, who took refuge in England. La Rochelle was now invested, the Huguenots were hard pressed also on land, and, but for the reluctance of the Dutch to allow their ships to be used for such a purpose, an end might have been made of the Protestant opposition in France; as it was, Richelieu was forced to accept the mediation of England and conclude a treaty with the Huguenots (February 1626).

He was far, however, from forgiving them for their attitude or being reconciled to their power. So long as they 'retained their compact organization in France he could undertake no successful action abroad, and the treaty was in effect no more than a truce that was badly observed. The oppression of the French Protestants was but one of the pretexts for the English expedition under James I.'s favourite, the duke of Buckingham, to La Rochelle in 1627; and, in the end, this intervention of a foreign power compromised their cause. When at last the citizens of the great Huguenot stronghold, caught between two dangers, chose what seemedto them the least and threw in .their lot with the English, they definitely proclaimed their attitude as anti-national; .and when, on the 29th of October 1628, after a heroic resistance, the city surrendered to the French king, this was hailed not as a victory for Catholicism only, but for France. The taking of La .Rochelle was a P”°*" ° crushing blow to the Huguenots, and the desperate fag alliance which Rohan, entrenched in the Cévennes, entered into with Philip IV. of Spain, could not prolong their resistance. The amnesty of Alais, prudent and moderate in religious matters, gave back to the Protestants their common rights within the body politic. Unfortunately what was an end for Richelieu was but a first step for the Catholic party. . The little Protestant group eliminated, Richelieu next wished to establish Catholic religious uniformity; for though in France theeCatholic Church was the state church, unity did . » not exist in it. There were no fixed principles in the R'°g*;Z'=4 relations between king and church, hence - incessant 2:¢, w, ,;s conflicts between Gallicans and Ultramontanes, in which Richelieu claimed to hold an even balance. Moreover a Catholic movement for religious reform in the Church of France began during the 17th century, marked by the creation of seminaries, the foundation of new orthodox religious orders, and the organization of public relief by Saint Vincent de Paul. Jansenism was the most vigorous contemporary effort to renovate not only morals but Church doctrine (see JANSENISM). But Richelieu had no love for innovators, and showed this very plainly to du Vergier de Hauranne, abbot of Saint Cyran, who was imprisoned at Vincennes for the good of Church and State. In affairs of intellect dragooning was equally the policy; and, as Corneille learnt to his cost, the French Academy was created in 1635 simply to secure in the republic of letters the same unity and conformity to rules that was enforced in the state. Before Richelieu, there had been no effective monarchy and 7

no institutions for controlling affairs; merely advisory institutions which collaborated somewhat vaguely in the Destmp administration of the kingdom. Had the king been go, gf willing these might have developed further; but Public. Richelieu ruthlessly suppressed all such growth, and 'P"'3" they remained embryonic. According to him, the, king must decide in secret, and the king's will must be law. No one might meddle in political affairs, neither parlements nor states-general; still less had the public any right to judge the actions of the government. Between 1631 and the edict of February 1641 Richelieu strove against the continually renewed opposition of the parlements to his system of special commissions and judgments; in 1641 he refused them any right of interference in state affairs; at most would he consent occasionally to take counsel with assemblies of notables. Provincial and municipal liberties were no better treated when through them the kingis subjects attempted to break loose from the iron ring of the royal commissaries and intend ants. In Burgundy, Dijon saw her municipal liberties restricted in 1631; the provincial assembly of Dauphiné was suppressed from 1628 onward, and that of Languedoc in 1629; that of Provence was in 1639 replaced by communal assemblies, and that of Normandywas prorogued from 1639 to 1642. Not that Richelieu was hostile to them in principle; but he was obliged at all hazards to find money for the upkeep of the army, and the provincial states were a slow and heavy machine to put in motion. Through an excessive reaction against the disintegration that had menaced the kingdom after the dissolution of the League, he fell into the abuse ef over-centralization; and depriving the people of the habit of criticizing governmental action, he taught them a fatal acquiescence in uncontrolled and undisputed authority. Like one of those physical forces which tend to reduce everything to a dead level, he battered down alike characters and fortresses; and in his endeavours to abolish faction, he killed that public spirit which, formed in the 16th century, had already produced the République of Bodin, de Thou's History of his Times, La Boetie's Contra un, the Satire M énippée, and Sully's Economies royales. In order to establish this absolute despotism Richelieu created no new instruments, but made use of a revolutionary institution Mefhods of the 16th century, namely “ intend ants ” (q.'v.), employed agents who were forerunners of the comrnissaries of by R'°"" the Convention, gentlemen of the long robe of inferior uw' condition, hated by every one, and for that reason the more trustworthy He also drew most of the members of his special commissions from the grand council, a supreme administrative tribunal which owed all its influence to him. However, having accomplished all these great things, the treasury was left empty and the reforms were but ill-established; The for Richelieu's policy increased poverty, neglected Hs, the toiling and suffering peasants, deserted the cause 1 of the workers in order to favour the privileged classes, and left idle and useless that bourgeoisie whose intellectual activity, spirit of discipline, and civil and political culture would have yielded solid support to a monarchy all the stronger for being limited. Richelieu completed the work of Francis I.; he endowed France with the fatal tradition of autocracy. This priest by education and by turn of mind was indifferent to material interests, which were secondary in his eyes; he could organize neither finance, nor justice, nor an army, nor the colonies, but at the most a system of police. His method was not to reform, but to crush. He was great chiefly in negotiation, the art par excellence of ecclesiastics. His work was entirely abroad; there it had more continuity, more future, perhaps because only in his foreign policy was he unhampered in his designs. He sacrificed everything to it; but he ennobled it by the genius and audacity of his conceptions, by the energetic tension of all the muscles of the body politic. The Thirty Years' War in fact dominated all Richelieu's foreign policy; by it he made France and unmade Germany. It was the support of Germany which Philip II. had §§ °;;, ", ;'} lacked in order to realize his Catholic empire; and the Richelieu. election of the archduke Ferdinand II. of Styria as emperor gave that support to his Spanish cousins (1619). Thenceforward all the forces of the Habsburg monarchy would be united, provided that communication could be maintained in the north with the Netherlands and in the south with the duchy of Milan, so that there should be no flaw in the iron vice which locked France in on either side. It was therefore of the highest importance to France that she should dominate the valleys of the Alps and Rhine. As soon as Richelieu became minister in 1624 there was an end to cordial relations with Spain. He resumed the policy of Henry IV., confining his military operations to the region of the Alps, and contenting himself at first with opposing the coalition of the Habsburgs with a coalition of Venice, the Turks, Bethlen Gabor, king of Hungary, and the Protestants of Germany and Denmark. But the revolts of the French Protestants, the resentment of the nobles at his dictatorial power, and the perpetual ferment of intrigues and treason in the court, obliged him almost immediately to draw back. During these eight years, however, Richelieu had pressed on matters as fast as possible.

While James I. of England was trying to get a general on the cheap in Denmark to defend his son-in-law, the elector palatine, Richelieu was bargaining with the Spaniards in the 351355: treaty of Monzon (March 1626); but as the strained exceptm relations between France and England forced him f-"1-"» to conciliate Spain still further by the treaty of April jgjf 1627, the Spaniards profited by this to carry on an intrigue with Rohan, and in concert with the duke of Savoy, to occupy Montferrat when the death of Viccnzo II. (December 26, 1627) left the succession of Mantua, under the will of the late duke, to Charles Gonzaga, duke of. Nevers, a Frenchman by education and sympathy. But the taking of La Rochelle allowed Louis to force the pass of Susa, to induce the duke of Savoy to treat with him, and to isolate the Spaniards in Italy by a great Italian league between Genoa, Venice and the dukes of Savoy and Mantua (April 1629). Unlike the Valois, Richelieu only desired to free Italy from Spain in order to restore her independence.

The fact that the French Protestants in the Cévennes were again in arms enabled the Habsburgs and the Spaniards to make a fresh attack upon the Alpine passes; but after the peace of Alais Richelieu placed himself at the head of forty thousand men, and stirred up enemies everywhere against the emperor, victorious now over the king of Denmark as in 1621 over the elector palatine. He united Sweden, now reconciled with Poland, and the Catholic and Protestant electors, disquieted by the edict of Restitution and the omnipotence of Wallenstein; and he aroused the United Provinces. But the disaffection of the court and the more extreme Catholics made it impossible for him as yet to enter upon a struggle against both Austria and Spain; he was only able to regulate the affairs of Italy with much prudence. The intervention of Mazarin, dispatched by the pope, who saw no other means of detaching Italy from Spain than by introducing France into the affair, brought about the signature of the armisfiice of Rivalte on the 4th of September 1630, soon developed into the peace of Cherasco, which reestablished the agreement with the still fugitive duke of Savoy (June 1631). Under the harsh tyranny of Spain, Italy was now nothing but a lifeless corpse; young vigorous Germany was better worth saving. So Richelieu's envoys, Brulart de Léon and Father Joseph, disarmed 1 the emperor at the diet of Regensburg, while at the same time Louis XIII. kept Casale and Pinerolo, the gates of the Alps. Lastly, by the treaty of Fontainebleau (May goth, 1631), Maximilian of Bavaria, the head of the Catholic League, engaged to defend the king of France against all his enemies, even Spain, with the exception of the emperor. Thus by the hand of Richelieu a union against Austrian imperialism was effected between the Bavarian 'Catholics and the Protestants who dominated in central and northern Germany. Twice had Richelieu, by means of the purse and not by force of arms, succeeded in reopening the passes of the Alps and of the Rhine. The kingdom at peace and the Huguenot R, c, , e, , e, , party ruined, he was now able to engage upon his and policy of prudent acquisitions and apparently dis- G“S*“V"-'I interested alliances. But Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, called in by Richelieu and Venice to take the place of the played-out king of Denmark, brought danger to all parties. He would not be content merely to serve French interests in Germany, according to the terms of the secret treaty of Barwalde (June 1631); but, once master of Germany and the rich valley of the Rhine, considered chiefly the interests of Protestantism and Sweden. Neither the prayers nor the threats of Richelieu, who wished indeed to destroy Spain but not Catholicism, nor the death of Gustavus Adolphus at Liitzen (1632), could repair the evils caused by this immoderate ambition. A violent Catholic reaction against the Protestants ensued; and the union of Spain and the Empire was consolidated just when that of the Protestants was dissolved at Nérdlingen, despite the efforts of Oxenstierna (September 16 34). Moreover, Wallenstein, who had been urged by Richelieu to set up an independent kingdom in Bohemia, had been killed on the 23rd of February 1634. In the course of a year Württemberg and Franconia were reconquered from the Swedes; and the duke of Lorraine, who had taken the side of the Empire, called in the Spanish and the imperial forces to open the road to the Netherlands through Franche-Comté.

His allies no longer able to stand alone, Richelieu was obliged to intervene directly (May'19th, 1635). By the treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye he purchased the army of Bernard of Saxe1

avec son scapula ire et a mis dans capuchon six bonnets électoraux." Adolpbus.

Ferdinand is reported to have said: “ Le capucin m'a désarmé Weimar; by that of Rivoli he united against Spain the dukes of Modena, Parma and Mantua; he signed an open alliance with the league of Heilbronn, the United Provinces and ggggh Sweden; and after these alliances military operations Thlfty began, Marshal de la Force occupying the duchy of Lor\$:: "' raine. Richelieu attempted to operate simultaneously in the Netherlands by joining hands with the Dutch, and on the Rhine by uniting with the Swedes; but the bad organization of the French armies, the double invasion of the Spaniards as far as Corbie and the imperial forces as far as the gates of Saint- lean-de-Losne (1636), and the death of his allies, the dukes of Hesse-Cassel, Savoy and Mantua at first frustrated his efforts. A decided success was, however, achieved between 1638 and 1640, thanks to Bernard of Saxe-Weimar and afterwards to Guébriant, and to the parallel action of the Swedish generals, Banér, Wrangel and Torstensson. Richelieu obtained Alsace, Breisach and the forest-towns on the Rhine; While in the north, thanks to the Dutch and owing to the conquest of Artois, marshals de la Meilleraye, de Chatillon and de Brézé forced the barrier, of the Netherlands. Turin, the capital of Piedmont, was taken by Henri de Lorraine, comte d'Harcourt; the alliance with rebellious Portugal facilitated the occupation of Roussillon and almost the whole of Catalonia, and Spain was reduced to defending herself; while the embarrassments of the Habsburgs at Madrid made those of Vienna more tractable. The diet of Regensburg, under the mediation of Maximilian of Bavaria, decided in favour of peace with France, and on thee 5th of December 1641 the preliminary settlement at Hamburg fixed the opening of negotiations to take place at Munster and Osnabrück. Richelieu's> death (December 4, 1642) prevented him from seeing the triumph of his policy, but it can be judged by its results; in 1624 the kingdom had in the east only the frontier of the Meuse to defend it from invasion; in 1642 the whole of Alsace, except Strassburg, was occupied and the Rhine guarded by the army of Guébriant. Six months later, on the 14th of May 1643, Louis XIII. rejoined his minister in his true kingdom, the land of shades.

But thanks to Mazarin, who completed his work, France in the harvest sown by Richelieu. At the outset no one believed that the new cardinal would have any gathered

f;:;"""» success. Every one expected from Anne of Austria 66, , a change in the government which appeared to be justified by the persecutions of Richelieu and the disdainful unscrupulousness of Louis XIII. On the 16th of May the queen took the little four-year-old Louis XIV. to the parlement of Paris which, proud of playing a part in politics, hastened, contrary to Louis XIII.'s last will, to acknowledge the command of the little king, and to give his mother “ free, absolute and entire authority.” The great nobles were already looking upon themselves as established in power, when they learnt with amazement that the regent had appointed as her chief adviser, not Gaston of Orleans, but Mazarin. The political revenge which in their eyes was owing to them as a body, the queen claimed for herself alone, and she made it a romantic one. This Spaniard of waning charms, who had been neglected by her husband and insulted by Richelieu, now gave her indolent and full-blown person, together with absolute power, into the hands of the Sicilian. Whilst others were triumphing openly, Mazarin, in the shadow and silence of the interregnum, had kept watch upon the heart of the queen; and when the old party of Marie de' Medici and Anne of Austria wished to come back into power, to impose a general peace, and to substitute for the Protestant alliances an understanding with Spain, the arrest of Francois de Vendome, duke of Beaufort, and the exile of other important nobles proved to the great families that their hour had gone by (September 1643).

Mazarin justified Richelieu's confidence and the favour of Anne of Austria. It was upon his foreign policy that he relied to maintain his authority within the kingdom. Thanks to him,

• he duke of Enghien (Louis de Bourbon, afterwards prince of

Condé), appointed commander-in-chief at the age of twenty two, caused the downfall of the renowned Spanish infantry at Rocroi; and he discovered Turenne, whose prudence tempered Condé's overbold ideas. It was he too who by renewing the traditional alliances and resuming against Bavaria, Fer- dinand III.'s most powerful ally, the plan of common T"'4?'” action with Sweden which Richelieu had sketched out, ,'::, :;;ft pursued it year after year: in 1644 at Freiburg im Breisgau, despite the death of Guébriant at Rottweil; in 1645 at Nordlingen, despite the defeat of Marienthal; and in 1646 in Bavaria, despite the rebellion of the Weimar cavalry; to see it finally triumph at Zusmarshausen in May 1648. With Turenne dominating the Eiser and the Inn, Condé victorious at Lens, and the Swedes before the gates of Praguerthe emperor, left without a single ally, finally authorized his plenipotentiaries to sign on the 24th of October 1648 the peace about which negotiations had been going on for seven years. Mazarin had stood his ground notwithstanding the treachery of the duke of Bavaria, the defection of the United Provinces, the resistance of the Germans, and the general confusion which was already pervading the internal affairs of the kingdom. The dream of the Habsburgs was shattered. They had wished to set up a centralized empire, Catholic and German; but the treaties of Westphalia kept Germany in its passive and fragmentary condition; while the Catholic and Protestant princes obtained formal recognition of their territorial independence and their religious equality. Thus disappeared the two principles which justified the Empire's existence; the universal sovereignty to which it laid claim was limited simply to a German monarchy much crippled in its powers; and the enfranchisement of the Lutherans and Calvinists from papal jurisdiction Cut the last tie which bound the Empire to Rome. The victors' material benefits were no less substantial: the congress of Münster ratified the final cession of the Three Bishoprics and the conquest of Alsace, and Breisach and Philippsburg completed these acquisitions. The Spaniards had no longer any hope of adding Luxemburg to their Franche-Comté; whfle the Holy Roman Empire in Germany, taken in the rear by Sweden (now mistress of the Baltic and the North Sea), cut off for good from the United Provinces and the Swiss cantons, and enfeebled by the recognized right of intervention in German affairs on the part of Sweden and France, was now nothing but a meaningless name.

Mazarin had not been so fortunate in Italy, where in 1642 the Spanish remained masters. Venice, the duchy of Milan and the duke of Modena were on his side; the pope and the grand duke of Tuscany were trembling, but the romantic expedition of the duke of Guise to Naples, and the outbreak of the Fronde, saved Spain, who had refused to take part in the treaties of Westphalia and whose ruin Mazarin wished to compass. It was, however, easier for Mazarin to remodel the map of Europe than to govern France. There he found himself face to face with all the difficulties that Richelieu had neglected to solve, and that were now once more giving trouble. Sm The Lit de Justice of the 18th of May 1643 had proved %, , g';om authority to remain still so personal an affair that the person of the king, insignificant though that was, continued to be regarded as its absolute depositary. Thus regular obedience to an abstract principle was under Mazarin as incomprehensible to the idle and selfish nobility as it had been under Richelieu. The parlement still kept up the same extra-judicial pretensions; but beyond its judicial functions it acted merely as a kind of town crier to the monarchy, charged with making known the king's edicts. Yet through its right of remonstrance it was the only body that could legally and publicly intervene in politics; a large and independent body, moreover, which had its own demands to make upon the monarchy and its ministers. Richelieu, by setting his special agents above the legal but complicated machinery of financial administration, had so corrupted it as to necessitate radical reform; all the more so because financial charges had been increased to a point far beyond what the nation could bear. With four armies to keep up, the insurrection in Portugal to maintain, and pensions to serve the needs of the allies, the burden had become a-crushing one. HISTORY] FRANCE 839

Richelieu had been able to surmount these difficulties because he governed in the name of a king of full age, and against isolated adversaries; while Mazarin had the latter against m"'°”“' him in a coalition which had lasted ten years, with and . ~-M, ,

~, , the further disadvantages of his foreign origin and a royal minority at a time when every one was sick of government by ministers. He was the very opposite of Richelieu, as wheedling in his ways as the other had been haughty and scornful, as devoid of vanity and rancour as Richelieu had been full of jealous care for his authority; he was gentle where the other had been passionate and irritable, with an intelligence as great and more supple, and a far more grasping nature. It was the fiscal question that arrayed against Mazarin a coalition of all petty interests and frustrated ambitions; this was always the Achilles' heel of the French monarchy, 5:;;“°'“' which in 1648 was at the last extremity for money. ¢, ,, ,, ,, All imposts were forestalled, and every expedient for obtaining either direct or indirect taxes had been exhausted by the methods of the financiers. As the country districts could yield nothing more, it became necessary to demand money from the Parisians and from the citizens of the various towns, and to search out and furbish up old disused edicts-edicts as to measures and scales of prices-at the very moment when the luxury and corruption of the parvenus was insulting the poverty and suffering of the people, and exasperating all those officials who took their functions seriously. A storm burst forth in the parlement against Mazarin as the patron of these expedients, the occasion for this being the edict of redemption by which the government renewed for ff';;g'°" nine years the “ Paulette ” which had now expired, e, ,, ,, ,, , by withholding four years' salary from all officers of the Great Council, of the Chambres des comptes, and of the C our des aides. The parlement, although expressly exempted, associated itself with their protest by the decree of union of May 13, 1648, and deliberations in a body upon the reform of the state. Despite the queen's express prohibition, the insurrectionary assembly of the Chambre Saint Louis criticized the whole Hnancial system, founded as it was upon usury, claimed the right of voting taxes, respect for individual liberty, and the suppression of the intend ants, who were a menace to the new bureaucratic feudalism. The queen, haughty and exasperated though she was, yielded for the time being, because the invasion of the Spaniards in the north, the arrest of Charles I. of England, and the insurrection of Masaniello at Naples made the moment a critical one for monarchies; but immediately after the victory at Lens she attempted a coup d'état, arresting the leaders, and among them Broussel, a popular member of the parlement (August 26, 1648). Paris at once rose in revolt-a Paris of swarming and unpoliced streets, that had been making French history ever since the reign of Henry IV., and that had not forgotten the barricades of the League. Once more a pretence of yielding had to be made, until Condé's arrival enabled the court to take refuge at Saint-Germain (January 1 5, 1649). Civil war now began against the rebellious coalition of great nobles, lawyers of the parlement, populace, and mercenaries The just set free from the Thirty Years' War. It lasted Fronde four years, for motives often as futile as the Grande U643' Mademoiselle's ambition to wed little Louis XIV., 1652) Cardinal de Retz's red hat, or Madame de Longueville's stool at the queen's side; it was, as its name of Fronde indicates, a hateful farce, played by grown-up children, in several acts. Its first and shortest phase was the Fronde of the Parlement. At a period when all the world was a little mad, the parlement had imagined a loyalist revolt, and, though it raised an armed protest, this was not against the king but against Mazarin and the persons to whom he had delegated power. But the parlement soon became disgusted with its allies-the princes and nobles, who had only drawn their swords in order to beg more effectively with arms in their hands; and the Parisian mob, whose fanaticism had been aroused by Paul de Gondi, a warlike ecclesiastic, a Catiline in a cassock, who preached the gospel at the dagger's point. The

Fronde

of the

Parlemcnt.

When a suggestion was made to the parlement to receive an envoy from Spain, the members had no hesitation in making terms with the court by the peace of Rueil (March 11, 1649), which ended the first Fronde.

As an entfacle, from April 1649 to January 1650, came the affair of the Petits M aitres: Condé, proud and violent; of Orleans, pliable and contemptible' Conti the Gaston

Th

simpleton; and Longueville, the betrayed husband. P1-:uae The victor of Lens and Charenton imagined that every;£i¢"¢ |lC6S~

The development of events had gradually enlarged the royal prerogative, and it now came to its full flower in the administrative monarchy of the 17th century. Of this system

f}';';'iX"z Louis XIV. was to be the chief exponent. His 1715). reign may be divided into two very distinct periods. The death of Colbert and the revocation of the edict of Nantes brought the first to a close (1661-1683~1685); coinciding with the date when the Revolution in England definitely reversed the traditional system of alliances, and when the administration began to disorganize. In the second period (1685-171 5) all the germs of decadence 'we redeveloped until the moment of nnal dissolution. .

In a monarchy so essentially personal the preparation of the heir to the throne for his position should have been the chief task. Anne of Austria, a devoted but unintelligent ffziffs" mother, knew no method of dealing with her son, XI;/ save devotion combined with the rod. His first preceptors were nothing but courtiers; and the most intelligent, his valet Laporte, developed in the royal child's mind his natural instinct of command, a very lively sense of his rank, and that nobly majestic air of master of the world which he preserved even in the commonest factions of his life. The continual agitations of the Fronde prevented him from persevering in any consistent application during those years which are the most valuable for study, and only instilled in him a horror of revolution, parliamentary remonstrance, and disorder of all kinds; so that this recollection determined the direction of his government. Mazarin, in his later years, atilast taught him his trade as king by admitting him to the council, and by instructing him in the details of politics and of administration. In 166I' Louis XIV. was a handsome youth of twenty-two, of splendid health and gentle seriousimien; eager for pleasure, but discreet and even dissimulating; his rather mediocre intellectual qualities relieved by solid common sense; fully alive to his rights and his duties.,

The duties he conscientiously fulfilled, but he considered he need render no account of them to any one but his Maker, the last humiliation for God's vicegerent being “ to take the law from his people.” In the solemn language of gala, the “ Memoirs for the Instruction of the Dauphin ” ideas, he did but affirm the arbitrary and capricious character of his predecessors' action. As for his rights, Louis XIV. looked upon these as plenary and unlimited. Representative of God upon earth, heir to the sovereignty of the Roman emperors, a universal suzerain and master over the goods and the lives of his vassals, he could conceive no other, bounds to his authority than his own interests or his obligations towards God, and in this he was a willing believer of Bossuet. He therefore had but two aims: to increase his power at home and to enlarge his kingdom abroad. The army and taxation were the chief instruments of his policy. Had not Bodin, Hobbes and Bossuet taught that the force which gives birth to kingdoms serves best also to feed and sustain them? His theory of the state, despite Grotius and jurieu, rejected as odious and even impious the notion of any popular rights, anterior and superior to his own. A realist in principle, Louis XIV. was terribly utilitarian and egotistical in practice; and he exacted from his subjects an absolute, continual and obligatory self-abnegation before his public authority, even when improperly exercised. This deitied monarch needed a =new temple, and Versailles, where everything was his creation, both men and things, adored its maker. The highest nobility of France, beginning The forms with the princes of the blood, competed for posts olLouIS in the royal household, where an army of ten thousand 1 XW-'S soldiers, four thousand servants, and five thousand "'°"'"°h°" horses played its costly and luxurious part in the ordered and almost religious pageant of the king's existence. The “ anciennes cohues de France, ” gay, familiar and military, gave place to a stilted court life, a perpetual adoration, a very ceremonious and very complicated ritual, in which the demigod »“ pontificated ” even “ in his dressing-gown.” To pay court to himself was the first and only duty in the eyes of a proud and haughty prince who saw and noted everything, especially any one's absence. Versailles, where the delicate refinements of Italy and the grave politeness of Spain were fused and mingled with French vivacity, became the centre of national life and a model for foreign royalties; hence if Versailles has played a considerable part in the history of civilization, it also seriously modihed the life of France. Etiquette and self-seeking became the chief rules of a courtier's life, and this explains the division of the nobility into two sections: the provincial squires, embittered by neglect; and the courtiers, who were ruined materially and intellectually by their way of living. Versailles sterilized all the idle upper classes, exploited the industrious classes by its extravagance, and more and more broke relations between king and kingdom.

But however divine, the king could not 'wield his power unaided. Louis XIV. called to his assistance a hierarchy of humbly submissive functionaries, and councils over which he regularly presided. Holding the very name, ';, ?, 'f'fs of roi fainéant in abhorrence, he abolished the office, ,, ;, ,}, ¢, ,., of mayor of the palace-that is to say, the prime minister-thus imposing upon himself work which he always regularly performed. In choosing his collaborators his principle was never to select nobles or ecclesiastics, but persons of inferior birth. Neither the immense fortunes amassed by these men, nor the venality and robust vitality which made their families veritable races of ministers, altered the fact that De Lionne, Le Tellier, Louvois and Colbert were in themselves of no account, even though the parts they played were much more important than Louis XIV. imagined. This was the age of plebeians, to the great indignation of the duke and peer Saint Simon. Mere HISTORY] FRANCE 841

reflected lights, these satellites professed to share their 1naster's horror of all individual and collective rights of such a Royal, ' - .

A » nature as to impose any check upon his public authority. Louis XIV. detested the states-general and never convoked them, and the parlements were definitely reduced to silence in 1673; he completed the destruction of municipal liberties, under pretext of bad financial administration; suffered no public, still less private criticism; was ruthless when his exasperated subjects had recourse to force; and made the police the chief bulwark of his government. Prayers and resignation were the only solace left for the hardships endured by his subjects. All the ties of caste, class, corporation and family were severed; the jealous despotism of Louis XIV. destroyed every opportunity of taking common action; he isolated every man in private life, in individual interests, just as he isolated himself more and more from the body social. Freedom he tolerated for himself alone. His passion for absolutism made him consider himself master of souls as well as bodies, and Bossuet did nothing to contravene an opinion which was, indeed, common to every despotism.

jgg'§ , , f"'- sovereign of his day. Louis XIV., like Philip 11., church, pretending to not only political but religious authority, would not allow the pope to share it, still less would he abide any religious dissent; and this gave rise to many conflicts, especially with the pope, at that time a temporal sovereign both at Rome and at Avignon, and as the head of Christendom bound to interfere in the affairs of France. Louis XIV.'s pride caused the first struggle, which turned exclusively upon questions of form, as in the affair of the Corsican Guard in 1662. The question of the right of regale (right of the Crown to the revenues of vacant abbeys and bishoprics), which touched the essential rights of sovereignty, further inflamed the hostility, between Innocent XI. and Louis XIV. Conformably with the traditions of the administrative monarchy in 1673, the king wanted to extend to the new additions to the kingdom his rights of receiving the revenues of vacant bishoprics and making appointments to their benefices, including taking oaths of fidelity from the new incumbents. A protest raised by the bishops of Pamiers and Aleth, followed by the seizure of their revenues, provoked the intervention of Innocent XI. in 1678; but the king was supported by the general assembly of the clergy, which declared that, with certain exceptions, the regale extended over the whole kingdom (1681). The pope ignored the decisions of the assembly; so, dropping the regale, the king demanded that, to obviate further conflict, the assembly should define the limits of the authority due respectively to the king, the Church and the pope. This was the object of the Declaration of the Four DeC, ,, ., Articles: the pope has no power in temporal matters; tion of general councils are superior to the pope in spiritual he FW" affairs; the rules of the Church of France are inviolable; Articles' decisions of the pope in matters of faith are only irrevocable by consent of the Church. The French laity transferred to the king this quasi-divine authority, which became the political theory of the ancien régime; and since the pope refused to submit, or to institute the new bishops, the Sorbonne was obliged to interfere. The affair of the “diplomatic prerogatives, ” when Louis XIV. was decidedly in the wrong, made relations even more strained (1687), and the idea of a schism was mooted with greater insistence than in 1681. The death of Innocent XI. in 1689 allowed Louis XIV. to engage upon negotiations rendered imperative by his check in the affair of the Cologne bishopric, where his candidate was ousted by the pope's. In 1693, under the pontificate of Innocent XII., he went, like so many others, to Canossa.

Recipient now of immense ecclesiastical revenues, which, owing to the number of vacant benefices, constituted a powerful engine of government, Louis XIV. had immense power over the French Church. Religion began to be identified with the state; and the king combated heresy and dissent, not only as a religious duty, but as a matter of political expediency, unity of faith being obviously conducive to unity of law.

Richelieu having deprived the Protestants of all political guarantees for their liberty of conscience, an anti-Protestant party (directed by a cabal of religious devotees, the Compagnie du Saint Sacrament) determined to suppress it completely by conversions and by a jesuitical interpretation of the, o, ,, s terms' of the edict of Nantes. Louis XIV. made XIV. and this impolitic policy his own. His passion for absolu- "lf P"° tism, a religious zeal that was the more active because- t°'“a"ts it had to compensate for many affronts to public and private morals, the financial necessity of augmenting the free donations of the clergy, and the political necessity of relying upon that body in his conflicts 'with the pope, led the king 'between 1661 and 1685 to embark upon a double campaign of arbitrary proceedings with the object of nullifying the edict, conversions being procured either by force or by bribery. The promulgation and application of systematic measures from above had a response from below, from the corporation, the urban workshop, and the village street, which supported ecclesiastical and royal authority in its suppression of heresy, and frequently even went further: individual and local. fanaticism co-operating with the head of the state, the intend ants, and the military and judiciary authorities. Protestants were successively removed from the states-general, the consulates, the town councils, and even from the humblest municipal offices; they were deprived of the charge of their hospitals, their academies, their colleges and their schools, and were left to ignorance and poverty; While the intolerance of the clergy united with chicanery of procedure to invade their places of worship, insult their adherents, and put a stop to the practice of their ritual. Pellisson's methods of conversion, considered too slow, were accelerated by .the violent persecution of Louvois and by the king's galleys, fgzpxfs until the day came when Louis XIV., deceived by the the edict clergy, crowned his record of complaisant legal methods &;Q;”t°s by revoking the edict of Nantes. This was the signal for a Huguenot renaissance, and the Camisards of the, Cévennes held the royal armies in check from 1703 to 171 1. Notwithstanding this, however, Louis XIV. succeeded only too well, since Protestantism was reduced both numerically and intellectually. He never perceived how its loss threw France back a full century, to the great profit of foreign nations; while neither did the Church perceive that she had been firing on her own troops.

The same order of ideas produced the persecution of the Jansenists, as much a political as a religious sect. Founded by a bishop of Ypres on the doctrine of predestination, Louis and growing by persecution, it had speedily recruited Xiu and adherents among the disillusioned followers of the the JM Fronde, the Gallican clergy, the higher nobility, even senlsts at court, and more important still, among learned men and thinkers, such as the great Arnauld, Pascal and Racine. Pure and austere, it enjoined the strictest morals in the midst of corruption, and the most dignified self-respect in face of idolatrous servility. Amid general silence it was a formidable and much dreaded body of opinion; and in order to stifle it Louis XIV., the tool of his confessor, the Jesuit Le Tellier, made use of his usual means. The nuns of Port Royal werein their turn subjected to persecution, which, after a truce between 1666 and 1679, became aggravated by the affair of the regale, the bishops of Aleth and Pamiers being Jansenists. Port Royal was destroyed, the nuns dispersed, and the ashes of the dead scattered to the four winds. The bull U nigenitus launched by Pope Clement XI. in 1715 against a Iansenist book by Father Quesnel rekindled a quarrel, the end of which Louis XIV. did not live to see, and which raged throughout the 18th century. Bossuet, Louis XIV.'s mouthpiece, triumphed in his turn over the quietism of Madame Guyon, a mystic who recognized neither definite dogmas nor formal prayers, but abandoned herself “to the torrent of the forces of fggifhfm God.” Fénelon, who in his M aximes des Saints had L;|, ¢, -¢|, ,, given his adherence to her doctrine, was obliged to submit in. 1699; but Bossuet could not make the spirit of authority prevail against the religious criticism of a Richard Simon or the philosophical polemics of a Bayle. He might exile their persons; but their doctrines, supported by the scientific and philosophic work of Newton and Leibnitz, were to triumph over Church and religion in the 18th century. The chaos of the administrative system caused difficulties no less great than those produced by opinions and creeds. Traditional rights, differences of language, provincial autonomy, ecclesiastical assemblies, parlements, governors, intend ants vestiges of the past, or promises for the future-all jostled against and thwarted each other. The central authority had not yet acquired a vigorous constitution, nor destroyed all the intermediary authorities. Colbert now offered his aid in making Louis XIV. the sole pivot of public life, as he had already become the source of religious authority, thanks to the Jesuits and to Bossuet.

Colbert, an agent of Le Tellier, the honest steward of Mazarin's dishonest fortunes, had a future opened to him by Colbert the fall of Fouquet (1661). Harsh and rough, he ° compelled admiration for his delight in work, his aptitude in disentangling affairs, his desire of continually augmenting the wealth of the state, and his regard for the public welfare without forgetting his own. Born in a draper's shop, this great administrator always preserved its narrow horizon, its short-sighted imagination, its taste for detail, and the conceit of the parvenu; while with his insinuating ways, and knowing better than Fouquet how to keep his distance, he made himself indispensable by his savoir- faire and his readiness for every emergency. He gradually got everything into his control: finance, industry, commerce, the fine arts, the navy and colonies, the administration, even the fortifications, and through his uncle Pussort-the law, with all the profits attaching to its offices.

His first care was to restore the exhausted resources of the country and to re-establish order in finance. He began by measures of liquidation: the Chambre ardefnte of c°"'°"' 1661 to 1665 to deal with the farmers of the revenue, and . . .

mm“ the condemnation of Fouquet, and a revision of the funds. Next, like a good man of business, Colbert determined that the state accounts should be kept as accurately as those of a shop; but though in this respect a great minister, he was less so in his manner of levying contributions. He kept to the old system of revenues from the demesne and from imposts that were reactionary in their effect, such as the taille, aids, salt-tax (gabelle) and customs; only he managed them better. His forest laws have remained a model. He demanded less of the taille, a direct impost, and more from indirect aids, of which he created the code-not, however, out of sympathy for the common people, towards whom he was very harsh, but because these aids covered a greater area and brought in larger returns. He tried to import more method into the very unequal distribution of taxation, less brutality in collection, less confusion in the fiscal machine, and more uniformity in the matter of rights; while he diminished the debts of the much-involved towns by putting them through the bankruptcy court. With revolutionary intentions as to reform, this only ended, after several years of normal budgets, in ultimate frustration. He could never make the rights over the drink traffic uniform and equal, nor restrict privileges in the matter of the taille; while he was soon much embarrassed, not only by the coalition of particular interests and local immunities, which made despotism acceptable by tempering it, but also by Louis XIV.'s two master passions for conquest and for building. To his great chagrin he was obliged to begin borrowing again in 1672, and to have recourse to “ ajaires extravrdinaires ”; and this brought him at last to his grave.

Order was for Colbert the prime condition of work. He desired all France to set to work as he did “ with a contented air and rubbing his hands for joy ”; but neither °°Z'°"' general theories nor individual happiness preoccupied

dus, , y his attention. He made economy truly political:

that is to say, the prosperity of industry and commerce afforded him no other interest than that of making the country wealthy and the state powerful. Louis XIV.'s aspirations towards glory chimed in very well with the extremely positive views of his minister; but here too Colbert was an innovator and an unsuccessful one. He wanted to give 1 7th-century France the modern and industrial character which the New World had imprinted on the maritime states; and he created industry on a grand scale with an energy of labour, a prodigious genius for initiative and for organization; while, in order to attract a foreign clientele, he imposed upon it the habits of meticulous probity common to a middle-class draper. But he maintained the legislation of the Valois, who placed industry in a state of strict dependency on finance, and he instituted a servitude of labour harder even than that of individuals; his great factories of soap, glass, lace, carpets and cloth had the same artificial life as that of contemporary Russian industry, created and nourished by the state. It was therefore necessary, in order to compensate for the fatal influence of servitude, that administrative protection should be lavished without end upon the royal manufactures; moreover, in the course of its development, industry on a grand scale encroached in many ways upon the resources of smaller industries. After Colbert's day, when the crutches lent by privilege were removed, his achievements lost vigour; industries that ministered to luxury alone escaped decay; the others became exhausted in struggling against the persistent and teasing opposition of the municipal bodies and the bourgeoisie—conceited, ignorant and terrified at any innovation—and against the blind and intolerant policy of Louis XIV. Colbert, in common with all his century, believed that the true secret of commerce and the indisputable proof of a country's prosperity was to sell as many of the products of national industry to the foreigner as possible, while C°"'"" and

purchasing as httle as possible. In order to do this, commemg he sometimes *figured as a free-trader and sometimes as a protectionist, but always in a practical sense; if he imposed prohibitive tariffs, in 1664 and 1667, he also opened the free ports of Marseilles and Dunkirk, and engineered the Canal du But commerce, like industry, was made to rely only on the instigation of the state, by the intervention of officials; here, as throughout the'national life, private initiative was kept in subjection and under suspicion. Once more Colbert failed; with regard to internal affairs, he was unable to unify weights and measures, or to suppress the many custom-houses which made France into a miniature Europe; nor could he in external affairs reform the consulates of the Levant. He did not understand that, in order to purge the body of the nation from its traditions of routine, it would be necessary to reawaken individual energy in France. He believed that the state, or rather the bureaucracy, might be the motive power of national activity.

His colonial and maritime policy was the newest and most fruitful part of his work. He wished to turn the eyes of contemporary adventurous France towards her distant

interests, the wars of religion having diverted her °'°"'°*" attention from them to the great profit of English:;':, , f:;; and Dutch merchants. Here too he had no preconceived ideas; the royal and monopolist companies were never for him an end but a means; and after much experimenting he at length attained success. In the course of twenty years he created many dependencies of France beyond sea. To her colonial empire in America he added the greater part of Santo Domingo, Tobago and Dominica; he restored Guiana; prepared for the acquisition of Louisiana by supporting Cavelier de la Salle; extended the suzerainty of the king on the coast of Africa from the Bay of Arguin to the shores of Sierra Leone, and instituted the first commercial relations with India. The population of the Antilles doubled; that of Canada quintupled; while if in 1672 at the time of the war with Holland Louis XIV. had listened to him, Colbert would have sacrificed his pride to the acquisition of the rich colonies of the Netherlands. In order to attach and defend these colonies Colbert created a navy which became his passion; he took convicts to man the galleys in the Mediterranean, and for the fleet in the Atlantic he established the system of naval reserve which still obtains. But, in the 18th century, the monarchy, hypnotized by the classical battle-fields msronvi FRANCE 843

of Flanders and Italy, madly squandered the fruits of Colbert's work as so much material for barter and exchange. A In the administration, the police and the law, Colbert preserved all the old machinery, including the inheritance of office. In ¢, ,||, ,, -¢ the great codification of laws, made under the direction and the of his uncle Pussort, he set aside the parlement of

':'g;:"' Paris, and justice continued to be ill-administered

° and cruel. The police, instituted in 1667 by La Reynie, became a public force independent of magistrates and under the direct orders of the ministers, making the arbitrary royal and ministerial authority absolute by means of lettres de cache! (q.v.), which were very convenient for the government and very terrible for the individuals concerned. Provincial administration was no longer modified; it was regularized. The intend ant became the king's factotum, not purchasing his office but liable to dismissal, the government's confidential agent and the real repository of royal authority, the governor being only for show (see INTENDANT). Colbert's system went on working regularly up to the year 1675; from that time forward he was cruelly embarrassed Rum of for money, and, seeking new sources of revenue, Co, b“ t., begged for subsidies from the assembly of the clergy. work. He did not succeed either in stemming the tide of ~ expense, nor in his administration, being in no way in advance of his age, and not perceiving that decisive reform could not be achieved by a government dealing with the nation as though it were inert and passive material, made to obey and to pay. Like a good Cartesian he conceived of the state as an immense machine, every portion of which should receive its impulse from outside-that is from him, Colbert. Leibnitz had not yet taught that external movement is nothing, and inward spirit everything. As the minister of an ambitious and magnihcent king, Colbert was under the hard necessity of sacrificing everything to the wars in Flanders and the pomp of Versaillesa gulf which swallowed up all the country's wealth;-and, amid a society which might be supposed submissively docile to the wishes of Louis XIV., he had to retain the most absurd financial laws, making the burden of taxation weigh heaviest on those who had no other resources than their labour, whilst landed property escaped free of charge. Habitual privation during one year in every three drove the peasants to revolt: in Boulonnais, the Pyrenees, Vivarais, in Guyenne from 1670 onwards and in Brittany in 1675. Cruel means of repression assisted natural hardships and the carelessness of the administration in depopulating and laying waste the countryside; while Louis XIV.'s martial and ostentatious policy was even more disastrous than pestilence and famine, when Louvois' advice prevailed in council over that of Colbert, now embittered and desperate. The revocation of the edict of Nantes vitiated through a fatal contradiction all the efforts of the latter to create new manufactures; the country was impoverished for the benefit of the foreigner to such a point that economic conditions began to alarm those private persons most noted for their talents, their character, or their regard for the public welfare; such as La Bruyére and Fénelon in 1692, Bois-Guillebert in 1607 and Vauban in 1707. The movement attracted even the ministers, Boulainvilliers at their head, who caused the intend ants to make inquiry into the causes of this general ruin. There was a volume of attack upon Colbert; but as the fundamental system remained unchanged, because reform would have necessitated an attack upon privilege and even upon the constitution of the monarchy, the evil only went on increasing. The social condition of the time recalls that of present-day Morocco, in the high price of necessaries and the extort ions of the financial authorities; every man was either soldier, beggar or smuggler.

Under Pontchartrain, Chamillard and Desmarets, the expenses of the two wars of 1688 and ITOI attained to nearly five milliards. In order to cover this recourse was had as usual, not to remedies, but to palliatives worse than the evil: heavy usurious loans, debasement of the coinage, creation of stocks that were perpetually being converted, and ridiculous charges which the bourgeois, sickened with officialdom, would endure no longer. Richelieu himself had hesitated to tax labour; Louis XIV. trod the trade organizations under foot. It was necessary Recon, ” to have recourse to revolutionary measures, to direct to revolutaxation, ignoring all class distinction. In 1695 the "0"-10 graduated poll-tax was a veritable coup d'élal against "'°""'" privileged persons, who were equally brought under the tax; in 1710 was added the tithe (dixiéme), a tax upon income from all landed property. Money scarce, men too were lacking; the institution of the militia, the first germ of obligatory enlistment, was a no less important innovation. But these were only pro visionary and desperate expedients, superposed upon the old routine, a further charge in addition to those already existing; and this entirely mechanical system, destructive of private initiative and the very sources of public life, worked with difficulty even in time of peace. As Louis XIV. made war continually the result was the same as in Spain under Philip II.: depopulation and bankruptcy within the kingdom and the coalitions of Europe without.

In 1660 France was predominant in Europe; but she aroused no jealousy except in the house of Habsburg, enfeebled and divided against itself. It was sufficient to remain faithful to the practical policy of Henry IV., of jzgigzf Richelieu and of Mazarin: that of moderation in Lang; xnq strength. This Louis XIV. very soon altered, while yet claiming to continue it; he superseded it by one principle: that of replacing the proud tyranny of the Habsburgs of Spain by another. He claimed to lay down the law everywhere, in the preliminary negotiations between his ambassador and the Spanish ambassador in London, in the affair of the salute exacted from French vessels by the English, and in that of the Corsican guard in Rome; while he proposed to become the head of the crusade against the Turks in the Mediterranean as in Hungary. The eclipse of the great idea of the balance of power in Europe was no sudden affair; the most flourishing years of the reign were still enlightened by it: witness the repurchase of Dunkirk from Charles II. in 1662, the cession of the duchies of Bar and of Lorrainegind the war against Portugal. But soon the partial or total conquest of the Spanish inheritance proved “ the grandeur of his beginnings and the meanness of his end.” Like Philip the Fair and like Richelieu, Louis XIV. sought support for his external policy in that public opinion which in internal matters he held so cheap; and he found equally devoted auxiliaries in the jurists of his parlements.

It was thus that the first of his wars for the extension of frontiers began, the War of Devolution. On the death of his father-in-law, Philip IV. of Spain, he transferred into the realm of politics a civil custom of inheritance prevailing in Brabant, and laid claim to Flanders in ¢1¢||,1657 the name of his wife Maria Theresa. The Anglo-Dutch War (1665-1667), in which he was by way of supporting the United Provinces without engaging his fleet, retarded this enterprise by a year. But after his mediation in the treaty of Breda (July 1667), when Hugues de Lionne, secretary of state for foreign affairs, had isolated Spain, he substituted soldiers for the jurists and cannon for diplomacy in the matter of the queen's rights.

The secretary of state for war, Michelle Tellier, had organized his army; and thanks to his great activity in reform, especially after the Fronde, Louis XIV. found himself in possession of an army that was well equipped, well clothed, well provisioned, and very different from the rabble of the Thirty Years' War, htted out by dishonest jobbing contractors. Severe discipline, suppression of fraudulent interference, furnishing of clothes and equipment by the king, regulation of . rank among the officers, systematic re victualling of the army, settled means of manufacturing and furnishing arms and ammunition, placing of the army under the direct authority of the king, abolition of great military charges, subordination of the governors of strongholds, control by the civil authority over the soldiers effected by means of paymasters and commissaries of stores; all this organization of the royal army was the work of le Tellier. His son, Francois Michel le Tellier, marquis de Louvois, had one sole merit, that of being his father's pupil. A paroenu of the middle classes, he was brutal in his treatment of the lower orders and a sycophant in his behaviour towards the powerful; prodigiously active, ill-obeyed-as was the custom-but much dreaded. From 1677 onwards he did but nnish perfecting Louis XIV.'s army in accordance with the suggestions left by his father, and made no fundamental changes: neither the definite abandonment of the feudal afriére-ban and of recruiting-sources of disorder and insubordination-nor the creation of the militia, which allowed the nation to penetrate into all the ranks of the army, nor the adoption of the gun with the bayonet, -which was to become the ultima ratio of peoples as the cannon was that of sovereigns, -nor yet the uniform, intended to strengthen esprit de corps, were due to him. He maintained the institutions of the day, though seeking to diminish their abuse, and he perfected material details; but misfortune would have it that instead of remaining a great military administrator he flattered Louis XIV.'s megalomania, and thus caused his perdition. Under his orders Turenne conquered Flanders (June-August 1667); and as the queen-mother of Spain would not give in, Condé occupied Franche Comté in fourteen days "9 “"P'° (February 1668). But Europe rose up in wrath; the fgagguzf United Provinces and England, jealous and disquieted by this near neighbourhood, formed with Sweden the triple alliance of the Hague (January 1668), ostensibly to offer their mediation, though in reality to prevent the occupation of the Netherlands. Following the advice of Colbert and de Lionne, Louis XIV. appeared to accede, and by the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle he preserved his conquests in Flanders (May 1668).

This peace was neither sufficient nor definite enough for Louis XIV.; and during four years he employed all his diplomacy to isolate the republic of the United Provinces in fffffaff Europe, as he had done for Spain. He wanted to ruin Chapelle. this nation both in a military and an economic sense, in order to annex to French Flanders the rest of the Catholic Netherlands allotted to him by a secret treaty for partitioning the Spanish possessions, signed with his brother-in-law the emperor Leopold on the 19th of January 1668. Colbert-very envious of Holland's wealth-prepared the finances, le Tellier the army and de Lionne the alliances. In vain did the grandpensionary of the province of Holland, ]an de Witt,

mfaxgh offer concessions of all kinds; both England, bound by the secret treaty of Dover (January 1670), and France had need of this war. Avoiding the Spanish Netherlands, Louis XIV. effected the passage of the Rhine in June 1672; and the disarmed United Provinces, which had on their side only Brandenburg and Spain, were occupied in a few days. The brothers de Witt, in consequence of their fresh offer to treat at any price, were assassinated; the broken dykes of Muiden arrested the victorious march of Condé and Turenne; while the popular and military party, directed by the stadtholder William of Orange, took the upper hand and preached resistance to the death. “ The war is over, ” said the new secretary of state for foreign affairs, Arnauld de Pomponne; but Louvois and Louis XIV. said no. The latter wished not only to take possession of the Netherlands, which were to be -given up to him with half of the United Provinces and their colonial empire; he wanted “ to play the Charlemagne, ” to re-establish Catholicism in that count-ry as Philip II. had formerly attempted to do, to occupy all the territory as far as the Lech, and to exact an annual oath of fealty. But the patriotism and the religious fanaticism of the Dutch revolted against this insupportable tyranny. Power had passed from the hands of the burghers of Amsterdam into those of William of Orange, who on the goth Peace of of August 1673, profiting by the arrest of the army Num- brought about by the inundation and by the fears of W¢8W|v Europe, joined in a coalition with the emperor, the WB' -king of Spain, the duke of Lorraine, many of the princes of the Empire, and with England, now at last enlightened as to the projects of Catholic restoration which Louis XIV. was planning with Charles II. It was necessary to evacuate and then to settle with the United Provinces, and to turn against Spain. After fighting for five years against the whole of Europe by land and by sea, the efforts of Turenne, Condé andrDuquesne culminated at Nijmwegen in fresh acquisitions~:(1678). Spain had to, cede to Louis XIV., Franche Comté, Dunkirk and half of Flanders. This was another natural and glorious result of the treaty of the Pyrenees. The Spanish monarchy was disarmed.,

But Louis XIV. had already manifested that unmeasured and restless passion for glory, that claim to' be the exclusive arbiter of western Europe, that blind and narrow insistence, which were to bear outhis motto “ Seul Qzutgbga contre tous.” Whilst all Europe was disarming he » kept his troops, and used peace as a means of conquest. Under orders from Colbert de Croissy the jurists came upon the scene once more, and their unjust decrees were usu stained' by force of arms. The Chambres de Réunion sought for and joined to the kingdom those lands which were not actuallyrdependent upon his new conquests, but which had formerly been so: such as Saarbriicken, Deux Ponts (Zweibrticken). and ~Montbé1iard in 1680, Strassburg and Casale in 1681. The .power of the house of Habsburg was paralysed by an invasion- of the Turks, and Louis XIV. sent 35,000 men into Belgium; while Luxemburg was occupied by Créqui and Vauban. The truce of Ratisbon (Regensburg) imposed upon Spain completed the work of the peace of Nijmwegen (1684); and thenceforward Louis XIV .'s terrified allies avoided his clutches while making geady to fight him ., , r, A

This was the moment chosen by Louis XIV.'s implacable enemy, William of -Orange, to resume the war. His surprise of Marshal Luxembourg near Mons, after the signature A of the peace of N ijmwegen, had proved that in his eyes 'if war was the basisrfof his authority in- Holland and in Europe. His sole arm of support amidst all his allies was not the -English monarchy, sold to Louis XIV., but Protestant England, jealous of France and uneasy about her independence. Being the husband of the duke of York's daughter, he had an understanding in this country with Sunderland, Godolphin and Temple-a party whose success was retarded for several years by the intrigues of Shaftesbury. But Louis XIV. added mistake to mistake; and the revocation of the edict of Nantes .added religious hatreds to political jealousies. At the same time the Catholic powers responded by the league of Augsburg 1 . . (July 1686) to his. policy of unlimited aggrandisement. The unsuccessful attempts of Louis XIV; to force. 1 his partisan Cardinal Wilhelm Egon von Fiirstenberg (sec FURSTENBERG: House) into the electoral see. of Cologne; the bombardment of Genoa; the humiliation of the pope in Rome itself by the marquis de Lavardin; the seizure of the Huguenot emigrants at Mannheim, and their imprisonment at Vincennes under pretext of a plot, precipitated the conflict. The question of the succession in the Palatinate, where Louis XIV. supported the claims of his sister-in-law the duchess of Orleans, gave the signal for a general war. The French armies devastated the Palatinate instead of attacking William of Orange in the Netherlands, leaving him free to disembark atTorbay, usurp the 'throne of England, and construct the Grand Alliance of 1689. Far from reserving all his forces for an important struggle elsewhere, foreshadowed by the approaching death of Charles II. of Spain, Louis XIV., isolated in his turn, committed the error of wasting it for a space of ten years in a W" °' the war of conquest, by which he alienated all that remained %:gw 1 to him of European sympathy. The French armies, notwithstanding the disappearance of Condé and Turenne, had still glorious days before them with Luxembourg at Fleurus, at Steenkirk and at Neerwinden (169O*-1693), and with Catinat in Piedmont, at Stalfarda, and at Marsaglia; but these successes alternated with reverses. Tourville's fleet, victorious at Beachy Head, came to grief at La Hogue (1692); and though, the ex. petitions to Ireland in favour of James II. were unsuccessful, thanks to the Huguenot Schomberg, lean Bart and Duguay- msrorwl FRANCE ~ 845

Trouin ruined Anglo-Dutch. maritime commerce. Louis XIV. assisted in person at the sieges of Mons and Namur, operations for which he.had a liking, because, like Louvois, who died in 1691, he thought little- of the French soldiery in the open field. After three years of strife, ruinous to both sides, he made the first overtures ofpeace, thus marking an epoch in his foreign policy; though William took no unfair advantage of this, remaining content with the restitution of places taken by the Chambres de Réunion, except Strassburg, with a frontier-line of fortified places for the Dutch, and with the official deposition of the Stuarts. But the treaty of Ryswick (1697) = ' ' marked the condemnation of the policy pursued since that of Nijmwegen. While signing this peace Louis XIV. was only thinking of the succession in Spain. By partitioning her in advance ' with the other strong powers, England and Holland, by 'means of the treaties of the Hague and of London (1698¥1699), -as he had formerly done with 'the emperor in 1668, #-he seemed at first to wish for a pacific solution of the eternal conflict between -the Habsburgs and the Bourbons, and to restrict himself to the perfecting of his natural frontiers; but on the death of Charles II. of Spain 1(1700) he' claimed everything in favour; of his grandson, the duke of Anjou, now appointed universal heir, though risking the loss of all by once more letting himself fall into imprudent and provocative action in the dynastic interest.

The death of Louis XIV. closed a great era of French history; the 18th century opens upon a crisis for the monarchy. From 1715 to 1723 came the reaction of the Regency, with its 'chmmr marvellous effrontery, innovating spirit and frivolous gfthg immorality. From 1723 to 1743 came the mealy- vizlffvvvfh century.

mouthed despotism of Cardinal Fleury, and his apathetic policy within and without the kingdom. From 1743 to 1774 came the personal rule of Louis XV., when all the different powers were in conflict-the bishops and parlement quarrelling, the government fighting against the clergy and the magistracy, and public opinion in declared opposition to the state. Till at last, from 1774 to 1789, came Louis XVI. with his honest illusions. his moral pusillanimity and his intellectual impotence, to aggravate still further the accumulated errors of ages and to prepare for the inevitable Revolution.

The 18th century, like the 17th, opened with a political coup d'étal. Louis XV. was live years old, and the duke of Orleans held the regency. But Louis XIV. had in his Th ~

Re;-m.;v will delegated all the power of the government to a council on which the duke of Maine, his legitimated son, had the first, but Madame de Maintenon and the Jesuits the predominant place. This collective administration, designed to cripple the action of the regent, encountered a twofold opposition from the nobles and the parlement; but on the 2nd of September 1715 the emancipated parlement set aside the will in favour of the duke of Orleans, who thus together with the title of regent had all the real power. He therefore re instituted the parlement in its ancient right of remonstrance (suspended since the declarations of 1667 and 1673), and handed over ministerial power to the nobility, replacing the secretaries of state by six councils composed in part of great nobles, on the advice of the famous -duc de Saint-Simon. The duc de Noailles, president of the council of finance, had the direction of this “ Polysynodie.”

Reaction on a no less extensive scale characterized foreign policy during the Regency. A close alliance between France and her ancient enemies, England and Holland, was Tb ~

concluded and maintained from 1717 to 1739: France, Ah;l0~. after thirty years of fighting, between two periods of Zgfl mm

bankruptcy; Holland reinstalled in her commercial position; and England, seeing before her the beginning of her empire over the seas-all three had an interest in peace. On the other hand, peace was imperilled by Philip V. of Spain and by the emperor (who had accepted the portion assigned to them by the treaty of Utrecht, while claiming the whole), by Savoy and Brandenburg (who had profited too much by European conflicts not to desire their perpetuation), by the crisis from which the maritime powers of the Baltic were suffering, and by the Turks on the Danube. The dream of Cardinal Alberoni, Philip V.'s minister, was to set fire to 'all this inflammable material in order to snatch therefrom a crown of some sort to satisfy the maternal greed of Elizabeth Farnese; and this he might have attained by the occupation of Sardinia and the expedition to Sicily (1717-1718), if Dubois, a priest without a religion, a greedy parvenu and a diplomatist of second rank, though tenacious and full of resources as a minister, had Qnot placed his common sense at the disposal of the regent's interests and those of European peace. He signed the triple alliance at the Hague, succeeding with the assistance of Stanhope, the English minister, in engaging the emperor therein, after attempting this for a year and a half. Whilst the Spanish fleet was destroyed before Syracuse by Admiral Byng, the intrigue of the Spanish ambassador Cellamare with the duke of Maine to exclude the family of Orleans from the succession on Louis XV.'s death was discovered and repressed; and Marshal Berwick burned the dockyards at Pasajes in Spain. Alberoni's dream was shattered by the treaty of London in 1720. Seized in his turn with a longing for the cardinal's hat, Dubois paid for it by the registering of the bull U nigenitus and by the persecution of the Jansenists which the regent had jstopped. After the majority of Louis XV. had been proclaimed on the 16th of February 1725, Dubois was the first to depart; and four months after his disappearance the duke of Orleans, exhausted by his excesses, carried with him into the grave that spirit of reform which he had compromised by his frivolous voluptuousness (December 2, 1723).

The Regency had been the making of the house of Orleans; thenceforward the question was how to humble it, and the duc de Bourbon, now prime minister-a great-grandson Mmlsm, of the great Condé, but a narrow-minded man of of the limited intelligence, led by a worthless woman- “WW set himself to do so. The marquise de Prie was the B°"'b°" first of a series of publicly recognized mistresses; from 1723 to 1726 she directed foreign policy and internal affairs despite the king's majority, moved always more by a spirit of vengeance than by ambition. This sad pair were dominated by the self interested and continual fear of becoming subject to the son of the Regent, whom they detested; but danger came upon them from elsewhere. They found standing in their way the very man who had been the author of their fortunes, Louis XV.'s tutor, uneasy in the exercise of a veiled authority; for the churchman Fleury knew how to wait, on condition of ultimately attaining his end. Neither the festivities given at Chantilly in honour of the king, nor the dismissal (despite the most solemn promises) of the Spanish infanta, who had been betrothed to Louis XV., nor yet the young king's marriage to Maria Leszczynska (1725)*3 marriage negotiated by the marquise de Prie in order to bar the throne from the Orleans family could alienate the sovereign from his old master. The irritation kept up by the agents of Philip V., incensed by this affront, and the discontent aroused by the institutions of thecinquantiéme and the militia, by the re-establishment of the feudal tax on Louis XV.'s joyful accession, and by the resumption of persecution of the Protestants and the Jansenists which had apparently died out, were cleverly eziploited by Fleury; and a last ill-timed attempt by the queen to separate the king from him brought about the fall of the duc de Bourbon, very opportunely for France, in June 1726.

From the hands of his unthinking pupil Fleury eventually received the supreme direction of affairs, which he retained for Gaming, seventeen years. He was aged seventy-two when ple, "-y, ” he thus obtained the power which had been his un-1726= measured though not ill-calculated ambition. Soft”“° spoken and polite, crafty and suspicious, he was pacific by temperament and therefore allowed politics to slumber. His turn for economics made Orry,1 the controller-general of finance, for long his essential partner. The latter laboured at re-establishing order in fiscal affairs; and various measures like the impost of the dixiéme upon all property save that of the clergy, together with the end of the corn famine, sufficed to restore a certain amount of well-being. Religious peace was more difficult to secure; in fact politico-religious quarrels dominated all the internal policy of the kingdom during forty years, and gradually compromised the royal authority. The Jesuits, returned to power in 1723 with the duc de Bourbon and in 1726 with Fleury, rekindled the old strife regarding the bull U nigenitus in opposition to the Gallicans and the Jansenists. The retractation imposed upon Cardinal de Noailles, and his replacement in the archbishopric of Paris by Vintimille, an unequivocal Molinist, excited among the populace a very violent agitation against the court of Rome and the Jesuits, the prelude to a united Fronde of the Sorbonne and the parlement. Fleury found no other remedy for this agitation-in which appeal was made even to miracles-th-an tits de justice and lettres de cachet; jansenism remained a potent source of trouble within the heart of Catholicism.

This worn-out septuagenarian, who prized rest above everything, imported into foreign policy the same mania for economy and the same sloth in action. He naturally adopted f'°"%' the idea of reconciling Louis XIV.'s descendants, p':, T|¢f, who had all been embroiled ever since the Polish marriage. He succeeded in this by playing very adroitly on the ambition of Elizabeth F arnese and her husband Philip V., who was to reign in France notwithstanding any renunciation that might have taken place. Despite the birth of a dauphin (September 1729), which cut short the Spanish intrigues, the reconciliation was a lasting one (treaty of Seville); it led to common action in Italy, and to the installation of Spanish royalties at Parma, Piacenza, and soon after at Naples. Fleury, supported by the English Hanoverian alliance, to which he sacrificed the French navy, obliged the emperor Charles VI. to sacrifice the trade of the Austrian Netherlands to the maritime powers and Central Italy to the Bourbons, in order to gain recognition for his Pragmatic Sanction. The question of the succession in France lay dormant until the end of the century, and Fleury thought he had definitely obtained peace in the treaty of Vienna (1731).

The war of the Polish succession proved him to have been deceived. On the death of Augustus II. of Saxony, king of Poland, Louis XV.'s father-in-law had been proclaimed king hy the Polish diet. This was an ephemeral success, ill-prepared and obtained by taking a sudden advantage of national sentiment; it was soon followed by a check, owing to a Russian and jean Orry Louis Orry de Fulvy (1703-1751), counsel to the parlement in 1723, intend ant of finances in 1737, founded at Vincennes the manufactory of porcelain which was bought in 1750 by the farmers general and transferred to Sevres.

German coalition and the baseness of Cardinal Fleury, who, in order to avoid intervening, pretended to tremble before an imaginary threat of reprisals on the part of England. W" of the But Chauvelin, the keeper of the seals, supported by pau", public opinion, avenged on the Rhine and the Po the Swv"unlucky heroism of the comte de Plélo at Danzig, ” the ggg)f"33 vanished dream of the queen, the broken word of Louis XV., and the treacherous abandonment of Poland. Fleury never forgave him for this: Chauvelin had checkmated him with war; he checkmated Chauvelin with peace, and hastened to replace Marshals Berwick and Villars by diplomatists. The third treaty of Vienna (1738), the reward of so much effort, would only have claimed for France the little duchy of Bar, had not Chauvelin forced Louis XV. to obtain Lorraine for his father-in-law-still hoping for the reversion of the crown; but Fleury thus rendered impossible any influence of the queen, and held Stanislaus at his mercy. In order to avenge himself upon Chauvelin he sacrificed him to the cabinets of Vienna and London, alarmed at seeing him revive the national tradition in Italy. Fleury hardly had time to breathe before a new conflagration broke out in the east. The Russian empress Anne and the emperor Charles VI. had planned to begin dismembering the'Turkish empire. More fortunate than Plélo, ggstern Villeneuve, the French ambassador at Constantinople, q, , e, ¢;, ,, , endeavoured to postpone this event, and was well supported; he revived the courage of the Turks and provided them with arms, thanks to the comte de Bonneval (q.v.), one of those adventurers of high renown whose influence in Europe during the first half of the eighteenth century is one of the most piquant features of that period. The peace of Belgrade (September 1739) was, by its renewal .of the capitulations, a great material success for France, and a great moral victory by the rebuff to Austria and Russia.

France had become once more the arbiter of Europe, when the death of the emperor Charles VI. in 1740 opened up a new period of wars and misfortunes for Europe and for W f th

the pacific Fleury. Every one had signed Charles VI.'s 4, ;;;, ,, e Pragmatic Sanction, proclaiming the succession-rights S"°°¢-1 SIUE.

of his daughter, the archduchess Maria Theresa; but on his death there was a general renunciation of signatures and an attempt to divide the heritage. The safety of the house of Austria depended on the attitude of France; for Austria could no longer harm her. Fleury's inclination was not to misuse France's traditional policy by exaggerating it, but to respect his sworn word; he dared not press his opinion, however, and yielded to the fiery impatience of young hot-heads like the two Belle-Isles, and of all those who, infatuated by Frederick II., felt sick of doing nothing at Versailles and were backed up by Louis XV/s bellicose mistresses. He had to experience the repeated defections of Frederick II. in his own interests, and the precipitate retreat from Bohemia. He had to humble himself before Austria and the whole of Europe; and it was high time for Fleury, now fallen into second childhood, to vanish from the scene (January 1743).

Louis XV. was at last to become his own prime minister and to reign alone; but in reality he was more embarrassed than pleased by the responsibility incumbent upon him. He therefore retained the persons who had composed Sass?" Fleury's staff; though instead of being led by a single Loujs Xi/ one of them, he fell into the hands of several, who disputed among themselves for the ascendancy: Maurepas, incomparable in little things, but neglectful of political affairs; D'Argenson, bold, and strongly attached to his work as minister 2 Louis Robert Hippolyte de Bréhan, comte de Plélo (1699-1734), a Breton by birth, originally a soldier, was at the time of the siege of Danzig French ambassador to Denmark. Enraged at the return to Copenhagen, without having done anything, of the French force sent to help Stanislaus, he himself led imack to Danzig and fell in an attack on the Russians on the 27th of ay 1734. Plélo was a poet of considerable charm, and well-read both in science and literature. » See Marquis de Bréhan, Le Comte de Plélo (Nantes, 1874); R. Rathery, Le Comte de Plélo (Paris, 1876); and P. Boyé, Stanislaus Leszczynski ct le troisiizme traité de Vienna (Paris, 1898). of war; and the cardinal de Tencin, a frivolous and worldly priest. Old Marshal de Noailles tried to incite Louis XV. to take his kingship in earnest, thinking to cure him by war of his eheminate passions; and, in the spring of 1744, the kingfs grave illness at Metz gave a momentary hope of reconciliation between him and the deserted queen. But theduc de Richelieu, a roué who had joined hands with the sisters of the house of Nesle and was jealous of Marshal de Noailles, soon regained his lost ground; and, under the influence of this panderer to his pleasures, Louis XV. settled down into a life of vice. Holding aloof from active affairs, he tried to relieve the incurable boredom of satiety in the violent exercise of hunting, in supper-parties with his intimates, and in spicy indiscretions. Brought up religiously and to shun the society of women, his first experiences in adultery had been made with many scruples and intermittently. Little by little, however, jealous of power, yet incapable of exercising it to any purpose, he sank into a sensuality which became utterly shameless under the influence of his chief mistress the duchesse de Chateauroux.

Hardly had a catastrophe snatched her away in the zenith of her power when complete corruption and the flagrant triumph of egoism supervened with the accession to power of

1. iff de the marquise de Pompadour, and fornearlyetwenty

d, ,, ,, years (1745-1764) the whims and caprices of this little bourgeoisie ruled the realm. A pri me minister in petticoats, she had her political system: reversed the time honoured alliances of F rance, appointed or disgraced ministers, directed fleets and armies, .concluded treaties, and failed in all her enterprises! She was the queen of fashion in a society where corruption blossomed luxuriantly and exquisitely, and in a century of wit hers was second to none. Amidst this extraordinary instability, when everything was at the mercy of a secret thought of the master, the mistress alone held lasting sway; in a reign of all-pervading satiety and tedium, she managed to remain indispensable and bewitching to the day of her death.

Meanwhile the War of the Austrian Succession broke out again, and never had secretary of 'state more intricate questions “ to solve than had D'Argenson. In the attempt gjffaf" to make a stage-emperor of Charles Albert of Bavaria, ¢|, , p, ”, defeat was incurred at Dettingen, and the .French were driven back on the Rhine (1743). The Bavarian dream dissipated, victories gained in Flanders by Marshal Saxe, another adventurer of genius, at Fontenoy, Raucoux and Lawfeld (1745-1747), were hailed with joy as continuing those of Louis XIV.; even though they resulted in the loss of Germany and the doubling of English armaments. The “ disinterested ” peace of Aix-la-Chapelle (October 1748) had no effectual result other than that of destroying in Germany, and for the benefit of Prussia, a balance of power that had yet to be secured in Italy, despite the establishment of the Spanish prince Philip at Parma. F rance, meanwhile, was beaten at sea by England, Maria Theresa's sole ally. While founding her colonial empire England had come into collision with France; and the rivalry of the Hundred Years' War had immediately sprung up again between the two countries. Engaged already in both Canada and in India (where Dupleix was founding an empire with a mere handful of men), it was to France's interest not to become involved in war upon the Rhine, thus falling into England's continental trap. She did fall into it, however: for the sake of conquering Silesia for the king of Prussia, Canada was left exposed by the capture of Cape Breton; while in order to restore this same Silesia to Maria Theresa, Canada was lost and with it India. France had worked for the king of Prussia from 1740 to 1748; now it was Maria Theresa's game that was played in the Seven Years' War. In 1755, the English having Th s

yefrsfvm made a sudden attack upon the French at sea, and War. Frederick II. having by a fresh 'volt efface passed into Zig' alliance with Great Britain, Louis XV.'s government accepted an alliance with Maria Theresa in the treaty of the rst of May 1756. Instead of remaining upon the defensive in thistcontinental war-merely accessory as it was-he made it his chief affair, and placed himself under the petticoat government of three women, Maria Theresa, Elizabeth of Russia and the marquise de Pompadour. This error+-theworst of all-laid the foundations of the Prussian and British empires. By three battles, victories for the enemies of F rancw-Rossbach in Germany, 1757, Plassey in India, 1757, and Quebec in Canada, 1759 (owing to the recall of Dupleix, who was not bringing in large enough dividends to the Company of the Indies, and to the abandonment of Montcalm, who could not interest any one in “ a few acres of snow ”), the expansion of Prussia was assured, and the British relieved of French rivalry in the expansion of their empire in India and on the North American Continent. Owing to the blindness of Louis XV. and the vanity of the favourite, the .treaties of Paris. and Hubertusburg (1763) once more proved the French splendid in their conceptions, Treaties of but deficient in action. Moreover, Choiseul, secretary Paris and of state for foreign affairs since 1758, made out of this H”b°""~*° deceptive Austrian alliance a' system which put the burg' . = hnishing touch to disaster; and after having thrown away everything to satisfy. Maria Theresa's hatred of 'Frederick, II., the reconciliation between these two irreconcilable Germans at Neisse and at Neustadt (1769-1770) was witnessed by France, to the prejudice of Poland, one of her most ancient adherents. The expedient of the Family Compact, concluded, with Spain in 1761-with a View to taking vengeance upon England, whose fleets were continual thorn in the side to F rance-served only to involve Spain herself in misfortune. Choiseul, who at least had a policy that wassometimesin the right, andwho was very anxious to carry it out, then realized that the real quarrel had to be settled with England. Amid the anguish of- defeat and of approaching ruin, he had' an acute sense of the actualities of the case, and from -1763 to 1766 devotedhirnself passionately to the reconstruction of the navy.. To compensate for the loss of the coloniesfhe, annexed Lorraine (1766), and by the acquisition of Corsica in,1»768 he gave France an intermediary position in the Mediterranean, between-friendly Spain and Italy, looking forward to the time when it should become.a stepping-stone to Africa. ., . »

But Louis XV. had -two policies. The incoherent efforts which he made to repair by the secretdiplomacyr of the comte de Broglie the evils caused by his official policy only, aggravated his shortcomings and betrayed his weak- F'j§§ t, n ness. The, contradictory intrigues of the king's, f, ';p, ,, ;, , d secret proceedings in the candidature of Prince Xavier, the dauphine's brother, and the patriotic efforts of the confederation of Bar, contributed tobring about the Polish crisis which the partition of 1772 resolved in favour of Frederick II.; and the Turks were, in their turn dragged into the same disastrous affair. Of lthe Old allies of France, Choiseul preserved at least Sweden by the -coup d'état of Gustavus III.; but instead of being as formerly the centre of great affairs, the cabinet of Versailles lost all its credit, and only exhibited before the eyes of contemptuous Europe France's extreme state of decay.

The nation felt this humiliation, and showed all the greater irritation as the Want of cohesion in the government and the anarchy in the central authority became more and more intolerable in home affairs. ' Though the adminis- '"3§ """; tration still possessed a fund of tradition and a T;, ,§ ';' ffm personnel which, including many men of note, protected it from the enfeebling influence of the court, it looked as though chance regulated everything so far as the government was concerned. These fluctuations were owing partly to the character of Louis XV., and partly also to the fact that society in the 18th century was too advanced in it-s ideas to submit without resistance to the Caprice of such a man. His'mistresses, were not the only cause of this; for ever since Fleury's advent political parties had come to the fore. From 1749 to 1757 the party of religious devotees grouped round the queen and the king's daughters, with the dauphin as chief and the comte D'Argenson, and Machault d'Arnouville, keeper of the seals, as lieutenants, had worked against Madame de Pompadour (who leant for support upon the parlements, the jansenists and the philosophers) and had gained the upper hand. Thenceforward poverty, disorders, and consequently murmurs increased. The financial reform attempted by Machault d'Atnouville between 1745 and 1749-a reduction of the debt throughathe impost of the twentieth and the; edict of 174Q againstf the extensive property held in mortniain by the Church-after his disgrace only resulted in failure. The army, which D'Argenson (likewise dismissed by Madame de Pompadour)'had been from 1743 'to 1747 trying' to restore by useful reforms, was riddled by cabals. Half the people in the kingdom were dying of hunger, while the court was insulting poverty by its luxury and waste; and from 17 50 onwards political ferment was everywhere manifest. It found all the more favourable foothold in that the Church, the State's best ally, had made herself more and more unpopular. Her refusal of the sacraments to those who wouldnot accept the bull Unigenitus (1746) was exploited in the eyes of the masses, as in those of more enlightened people was her selfish and short-sighted resistance to the financial plans of Machault. The general discontent was expressed by the parlements in their attempt" to establish a political supremacy amid universal confusion, and by the popular voice in pamphlets recalling by their violence those of the League. Everyone expected and desired a speedy revolution that should put an end to a policy which alternated between overheated effervescence, abnormal activity and lethargy. Nothing can better show the point to which things had descended than the attempted assassination of Louis the Well-beloved by Damiens in 1757. Choiseul was the means of accelerating this revolution, not only by his abandonment of diplomatic traditions, but still more by his improvidence and violence. He reversed Ch°m"I' the policy of his predecessors in regard to the parle ment. Supported by public opinion, which clamoured for guarantees against abitrary power, the parlements had dared not only to insist on being consulted as to the budget of the state in 1763, but to enter upon a confederation throughout the whole of France, .and on repeated occasions to ordain a general strike of the judicial authorities. Choiseul did not hesitate to attack through lits de justice or by exile a judiciary oligarchy which doubtless rested its pretensions merely on wealth, high birth, or that encroaching spirit that was the only counteracting agency to the monarchy. Louis XV., wearied with their clarnour, called them to order. Choiseul's religious policy was no less venturesome; after the condemnation in 17 SQ of the Jesuits who were involved in the bankruptcy of Father de la Valette, their general, in the Antilles, he had the order dissolved for refusing to modify its constitution (1761-1764). Thus, not content with encouraging writers with innovating ideas to the prejudice of traditional institutions, he attacked, in the order of the Jesuits, the strongest defender of these latter, and delivered over the new generation to revolutionary doctrines. A woman had elevated him into power; a woman brought him tofthe ground. He succumbed to a. coalition of the chancellor Maupeou, the duc d'Aiguillon and the Abbé Terray, Tri- .

55,214-, ¢¢, which depended on the favour of the k1ng's latest 1770- mistress, Madame du Barry (December 1770); and nf' the lesuits were avenged by a stroke of authority similar to that by which they themselves had suffered. Following on an edict registered by the lit de justice, which forbade any rernonstrance in political matters, the parlement had resigned, and had been imitated by the provincial parlements; whereupon Maupeou, an energetic chancellor, suppressed the parlements and substituted superior councils of 'magistrates appointed by the king (1771); This reform was justified by the religious intolerance of the parlements; by their scandalous trials of Calas, Pierre Paul Sirven (1709-1777), the chevalier de la Barre and thefcomte de Lally; by the retrograde 'spirit that had, made them suppress the Encyclopaedia in 1759 and condemn Emile in 1761; and by their selfishness in perpetuating abuses by which they profited. But this reform, being made by the minister of a hated sovereign, only aided in exasperating public opinion, which was grateful to the parlements in that their remonstrances had not always been fruitless.,

Thus all the buttresses of the monarchical institution began to fall to pieces: the Church, undermined by the heresy of Jansenism, weakened by the inroads of philosophy, Aman, . discredited by evil-livers among the priesthood, and inguenw, divided against itself, like all losing parties; the 41111 Ivilnobility of the court, still brave at heart, ithough. “'““FS° incapable of exertion and reduced to beggary, having lost all respect for discipline and authority, not only in the camp, but in civilian society; and the upper-class officials, narrow-minded and egotistical, unsettling by their opposition the royal authority which they pretended to safeguard. Even the “ liberties, ” among the few representative institutions which the ancien régime had left intact in some provinces, turned against the people. Theestates opposed most of the intelligent and humane measures proposed by such intend ants as Tourny and T urgot to relieve the peasants, whose distress was very great; they did their utmost to render the selfishness of the privileged classes more oppressive and vexatious. ..-Thus

the terrible prevalence of poverty and want; the successive. famines; the mistakes of the government; the scandals of the Parc aux Cerfs; and the parlements playing the Roman senate: all these causes, added ggfew together and multiplied, assisted in setting a general fermentation to work. The philosophers only helped to precipitate a movement which they had not created; without pointing to absolute power as the cause of the trouble, and without pretending to upset the traditional system, they attempted to instil into princes the feeling of new and more precise obligations towards their subjects. Voltaire, Montesquieu, the Encyclopaedists and the Physiocrats (recurring to the tradition of Bayle and F ontenelle), by dissolving in their analytical crucible all consecrated beliefs and all fixed institutions, brought back into the human society of the 18th century that humanity which had been so rudely eliminated. They demanded freedom of thought and belief with passionate insistence; they ardently discussed institutions and conduct; and they imported into polemics the idea of natural rights superior to all political arrangements. Whilst some, like Voltaire and the Physiocrats, representatives of the privileged classes and careless of political rights, wished to make use of the omnipotence of the prince to accomplish desirable reforms, or, like Montesquieu, adversely criticized despotism and extolled moderate governments, other, plebeians like Rousseau, proclaimed the theory of the social contract and the sovereignty of the people. S0 that during this reign of frivolity and passion, so bold in Conception and so poor in execution, the thinkers contributed still further to mark the contrast between grandeur of plan and mediocrity of result. The preaching of all this generous philosophy, not .only in France, but throughout the whole of Europe, would have been in vain had there not existed at the time a social class interested in these great changes, and capable of compassing them. Neither the witty and lucid form in which' the philosophers clothed their ideas in their satires, romances, stage-plays and treatises, nor the salons of Madame du Deiiand, Madame Geoffrin and Mademoiselle de Lespinasse, could possibly have been sufficiently far-reaching or active centres of political propaganda. The former touched only the more highly educated classes; while to the latter, where privileged individuals alone had entry, novelties were but an undiluted stimulant for the jaded appetites of persons whose ideas of good-breeding, moreover, would have drawn the line at martyrdom.

The class which gave the Revolution its chiefs, its outward and visible forms, and the irresistible energy of its hopes, was the bourgeoisie, intelligent, ambitious and rich; in the forefront the capitalists and financiers of the haute The bout#-

geoisle-

bourgeome, farmers-general and army contractors, fhviucarwho had supplanted or swamped the old landed and ';";?:, 'd::s military aristocracy, had insensibly reconstructed the interior of the ancient social edihce with the gilded and incongruous materials of wealth, and in order to consolidate or increase their monopolies, needed 'to secure themselves against the arbitrary action of royalty and the bureaucracy. 850 FRANCE [HISTORY

Next came the crowd of stockholders and creditors of the state, who, in face of the government's “extravagant anarchy, ” no longer felt safe from partial or total bankruptcy. More powerful still, and more masterful, was the commercial, industrial. and colonial bourgeoisie; because under the Regency and under Louis XV. they had been more productive and more creative. Having gradually revolutionized the whole economic system, in Paris, in Lyons, in Nantes, in Bordeaux, in Marseilles, they could not tamely put up with being excluded from public affairs, which had so much bearing upon their private or collective enterprises. Finally, behind this bourgeoisie, and afar off, came the crowd of serfs, rustics whom the acquisition of land had gradually enfranchised, and who were the more eager to enjoy their definitive liberation because it was close at hand. The habits and sentiments of French society showed similar changes. From having been almost exclusively national during Trmp Louis XIV.'s reign, owing to the perpetual state of war and to a sort of proud isolation, it had gradually of man- become cosmopolitan. After the peace of Aix-laxsogzf Chapelle, France had been flooded from all quarters of the civilized world, but especially from England, by a concourse of refined and cultured men well acquainted with her usages and her universal language, whom she had received syrnpathetically. Paris became the brain of Europe. This revolution in manners and customs, coinciding with the revolution in ideas, led in its turn to a transformation in feeling, and to new aesthetic needs. Gradually people became sick of openly avowed gallantry, of shameless libertinism, of moral obliquity and of the flattering artifices of vice; a long shudder ran through the selfish torpor of the social body. After reading the N ouvelle-H éloise, Clarissa and Sir Charles Grandison, fatigued and wearied society revived as though beneath the fresh breezes of dawn. The principle of examination, the reasoned analysis of human conditions and the discussion of causes, far from culminating in disillusioned nihilism, everywhere aroused the democratic spirit, the life of sentiment and of human feeling: in the drama, with Marivaux, Diderot and La Chaussée; in art, with Chardin and Greuze; and in the salons, in view of the suppression of privilege. So that to Louis XV.'s cynical and hopeless declaration: “ Apres moi le déluge, " the setting 18th century responded by a belief in progress and an appeal to the future. A long-drawn echo from all classes hailed a revolution that was possible because it was necessary.

If this revolution did not burst forth sooner, in the actual lifetime of Louis XV., if in Louis XVI.'s reign there was a renewal of loyalty to the king, before the appeal to liberty was made, that is to be explained by this hope of recovery. But Louis XVI."s reign (1774-I7Q2) was only to be a temporary halting-place, an; artifice of history for passing through the transition period whilst elaborating the transformation which was to revolutionize, together with France, the whole world. Louis XVI. was twenty years of age. Physically he was stout, and a slave to the Bourbon fondness for good living; Lows XVL intellectually a poor creature and but ill-educated, he loved nothing so much as hunting and locksmith's work. He had a taste for puerile amusements, a mania for useless little domestic economies in a court where millions vanished like smoke, and a natural idleness which achieved as its masterpiece the keeping a diary from 1766 to 1792 of a. life so tragic, which was yet but a foolish chronicle of'trifles. Add to this that he was a virtuous husband, a kind father, a fervent Christian and a good-natured man full of excellent intentions, yet a spectacle of moral pusillanimity and ineptitude.

From -1770 onwards lived side by side with this king, rather than at his side, the archduchess Marie Antoinette of Austriaone of the very graceful and very frivolous women fxzim who were to be found at Versailles, opening to life tm like the flowers she so much loved, enamoured of pleasure and luxury, delighting to free herself from the formalities of court life, and mingling in the amusements of society; lovable and loving, without ceasing to be virtuous. F lattered and adored at the outset, she very soon furnished a sinister illustration to Beaumarchais' Basile; for evil tongues began to calumniate the queen: those of her brothers-in-law, the duc d'Aiguillon (protector of Madame du Barry and dismissed from the ministry), and the Cardinal de Rohan, recalled from his embassy in Vienna. She was blamed for her friendship with the comtesse de Polignac, who loved her only as the dispenser of titles and positions; and when weary of this persistent begging for rewards, she was taxed with her preference for foreigners who asked nothing. People brought up against her the debts and expenditure due to her belief in the inexhaustible resources of France; and hatred became definite when she was suspected of trying to imitate her mother Maria Theresa and play the part of ruler, since her husband neglected his duty. They then became persuaded that it was she who caused the weight of taxation; in the most infamous libels comparison was made between her freedom of behaviour and that of Louis XV.'s former mistresses. Private envy and public misconceptions very soon summed up her excessive unpopularity in the menacing nickname, “ L'Autrichienne.” (See MARIE ANTOINETTE.) All this shows that Louis XVI. was not a monarch capable of directing or suppressing the inevitable revolution. His reign was but a tissue of contradictions. External affairs seemed in even a more dangerous position than pgugy gf those at home. Louis XVI. confided to Vergennes Lwll the charge of reverting to the traditions of the crown XV" and raising France from the humiliation suffered by the treaty of Paris and the partition of Poland. His first act was to release French policy from the Austrian alliance of 1756; in this he was aided both by public opinion and by the confidence of the king-the latter managing to set aside the desires of the queen, whom the ambition of Maria Theresa and Joseph II. hoped to use as an auxiliary. Vergennes' object was a double one: to free the kingdom from English supremacy and to shake off the yoke of Austria. Opportunities offered themselves simultaneously. In 1 77 5 the English colonies in America rebelled, and Louis XVI., after giving them secret aid and encouragement almost from the first, nnally in February 1778, despite Marie Antoinette, formed an open alliance with them; while when Joseph II., after having partitioned Poland, wanted in addition to balance the loss of Silesia with that of Bavaria, Vergennes prevented him from doing so. In vain was he offered a share in the partition of the Netherlands by way of an inducement. France's disinterested action in the peace of Teschen (1779) restored to her the lost adherence of the secondary states. Europe began to respect her again when she signed a Franco-Dutch-Spanish alliance (1779-1780), and when, after the capitulation of the English at Yorktown, the peace of Versailles (1783) crowned her efforts with at least formal success. Thenceforward, partly from prudence and partly from penury, Vergennes cared only for the maintenance of peace-a not too easy task, in opposition to the greed of Catherine II. and Joseph II., who now wished to divide the Ottoman empire. Joseph II., recognizing that Louis XVI. would not sacrifice the “ sick man” to him, raised the question of the opening of the Scheldt, against the Dutch. Vainly did Joseph II. accuse his sister of ingratitude and complain of her resistance; the treaty of Fontainebleau in 1785 maintained the rights of Holland. Later on, Joseph II., sticking to his point, Wanted to settle the house of Bavaria in the Netherlands; but Louis XVI. supported the confederation of princes (Fiirstenbund) which Frederick II. called together in order to keep his turbulent neighbour within bounds. Vergennes completed his work by signing a commercial treaty in 1786 with England, whose commerce and industry were favoured above others, and a second in 1787 with Russia. He died in 1787, at an opportune moment for himself; though he had temporarily raised France's position in Europe, his work was soon ruined by the very means taken to secure its successes: warfare and armaments had hastened the “ hideous bankruptcy.”

From the verv beginning of his reign Louis XVI. fell into Fonlgn contradictions and hesitation in internal affairs, which could not but bring him to grief. He tried first of all to ""7"""c, govern in accordance with public opinion, and was figs;/;?v1 induced to flatter it beyond measure; in an extreme of inconsistency he re-established the parlements, the worst enemies of reform, at the very moment when he was calling in the reformers to his councils.

Turgot, the most notable of these latter, was well fitted to play his great part as an enlightened minister, as much from the principle of hard work and domestic economy L';'f:"' traditional in his family, as from a maturity of mind gm developed by extensive study at the Sorbonne and by frequenting the salons of the Encyclopaedists. He had proved this by his capable administration in the paymaster's office at Limoges, from 1761 to 1774. A disciple of Quesnay and of Gournay, he tried to repeat in great affairs the experience of liberty which he had found successful in small, and to fortify the unity of the nation and the government by social, political and economic reforms. He ordained the free circulation of grain within the kingdom, and was supported by Louis XVI. in the course of the flour-war (guerre des farines) (April-May 1775); he substituted a territorial subsidy for the royal coraée-so burdensome upon the peasants-and thus tended to abolish privilege in the matter of imposts; and he established the freedom of industry by the dissolution of privileged trade corporations (1 776). Finance was in a deplorable state, and as controller-general he formulated a new fiscal policy, consisting of neither fresh taxation nor loans, but of retrenchment. At one fell stroke the two auxiliaries on which he had a' right to count failed him: public opinion, clamouring for reform on condition of not paying the cost; and the king, too timid to dominate public opinion, and not knowing how to refuse the demands of privilege. Economy in the matter of public finance implies a grain of severity in the collection of taxes as well as in expenditure. By the former Turgot hampered the great interests; by the second he thwarted the desires of courtiers not only of the second rank but of the first. Therefore, after he had aroused the complaints of the commercial world and the bourgeoisie, the court, headed by Marie Antoinette, profited by the general excitement to overthrow him. The Choiseul party, which had gradually been reconstituted, under the influence of the queen, the princes, parlement, the prebendaries, and the trade corporations, worked adroitly to eliminate this reformer of lucrative abuses. The old courtier Maurepas, jealous of Turgot and desirous of remaining a minister himself, refrained from defending his colleague; and when T urgot, who never knew how to give in, spoke of establishing assemblies of freeholders in the communes and the provinces, in order to relax the tension of over-centralization, Louis XVI., who never dared to pass from sentiment to action, sacrificed his minister to the rancour of the queen, as he had already sacrificed Malesherbes (1776). Thus the first governmental act of the queen was an error, and dissipated the hope of replacing special privileges by a general guarantee given to the nation, which alone could have postponed a revolution. It was still too early for a Fourth of August; but the queen's victory was none the less vain, since Turgot's ideas were taken up by his successors.

The first of these was Necker, a Genevese financier. More able than Turgot, though a man of smaller ideas, he abrogated the edicts registered by the tits de justice; and unable %';é""' or not daring to attack the evil at its root, he thought "sh he could suppress its symptoms by a curative process of borrowing and economy. Like Turgot he failed, and for the same reasons. The American war had finally exhausted the exchequer, and, in order to replenish it, he would have needed to inspire confidence in the minds of capitalists; but the resumption in 1778 of the plan of provincial assemblies charged with remodelling the various imposts, and his compterendu in which he exhibited the monarchy paying its pensioners for their: inactivity as it had never paid its agents for their zeal, aroused a fresh outburst of anger. Necker was carried away in his turn by the reaction he had helped to bring about (1781). Having fought the oligarchy of privilege, the monarchy next tried to rally it to its side, and all the springs of the old régime were strained to the breaking-point. The military Theretum rule of the marquis de Ségur eliminated the plebeians offeudalfrom the army; while the great lords, drones in the 1S"1f°ff1° hive, worked with a kind of fever at the enforcement °ff°""° of their seigniorial rights; the feudal system was making a last struggle before dying. 'The Church claimed her right of ordering the civil estate of all F renchmen as an absolute mistress more strictly than ever. Ioly de Fleury and D'Ormesson, Necker's successors, pushed their narrow spirit of reaction and the temerity of their inexperience to the furthest limit; but the reaction which reinforced the privileged classes was not sufficient to fill the coffers of the treasury, and Marie Antoinette, who seemed gifted with a fatal perversity of instinct, confided the finances of the kingdom to Calonne, an upper-class official and a veritable Cagliostro of Enance.

From 178 3 to 1787, this man organized his astounding system of falsincation all along the line. His unbridled prodigality, by spreading a belief in unlimited resources, augmented the confidence necessary for the success of perpetual?6f;""° loans; until the day came when, having exhausted the 17871 system, he tried to suppress privilege and fall back upon the social reforms of Turgot, and the financial schemes of Necker, by suggesting once more to the assembly of notables a territorial subsidy from all landed property. He failed, owing to the same reaction that was causing the feudal system to make inroads upon the army, the magistracy and industry; but in his fall he put on the guise of a reformer, and by a last wild plunge he left the monarchy, already compromised by the affair of the Diamond Necklace (q.'v.), hopelessly exposed (April 1787). The volatile and brilliant archbishop Loménie de Brienne was charged with the task of laying the affairs of the ancien régime before the assembly of notables, and with asking the nation for resources, since the monarchy could no ";°'"""° longer provide for itself; but the notables refused, and B';., ,, ,, ,, referred the minister to the states-general, the representative of the nation. Before resorting to this extremity, Brienne preferred to lay before the parlement his two edicts regarding a stamp duty and the territorial subsidy; to be met by the same refusal, and the same reference to the states general. The exile of the parlement to Troyes, the arrest of various members, and the curt declaration of the king's absolute authority (November 9, 1787) were unsuccessful in breaking down its resistance. The threat of Chrétien Francois de Lamoignon, keeper of the seals, to imitate Maupeou, aroused public opinion and caused a fresh confederation of the parlements of the kingdom. The royal government was too much exhausted to overthrow even a decaying power like that of the parlements, and being still more afraid of the future representatives of the French people than of the supreme courts, capitulated to the insurgent parlements. The recalled parlement seemed at the pinnacle of power.

Its next action ruined its ephemeral popularity, by claiming the convocation of the states-general “ according to the formula observed in 1614, " as already demanded by the estates of Dauphiné at Vizille on the 21st of July 1788., I\$, ;§ Z ° The exchequer was empty; it was necessary to comply. The royal declaration of the 23rd of September 1788 convoked the states-general for the 1st of May 1789, and the fall of Brienne and Lamoignon followed the recall of Necker. Thenceforward public opinion, which was looking for something quite different from the superannuated formula of 1614, abandoned the parlements, which in their turn disappeared from view; for the struggle beginning .between the privileged classes and the government, now at bay, hadgiven the public, through the states-general, that means of expression which they had always lacked. The conflict immediately changed ground, and an engagement began between privilege and the people over the twofold question of the number of deputies and the mode of voting. Voting by head, and the double representation of the third estate (tiers état); this was the great revolution; voting by order meant the continued domination of privilege, and the lesser revolution. The monarchy, standing apart, held the balance, but needed a decisive policy. Necker, with little backing at court, could not Zffgggg act energetically, and Louis XVI., wavering between g, ,, ,, ,., , Necker and the queen, chose the attitude most convenient to his indolence and least to his interest: he remained neutral, and his timidity showed clearly in the council of the 27th of December 1788. Separating the two questions which were so closely connected, and despite the sensational brochure of the abbé Sieyés, “What is the Third Estate? ” he pronounced for the doubling of the third estate without deciding as to the vote by head, yet leaving it to be divined that he preferred the vote by order. As to the programme there was no more decisive resolution; but the edict of convocation gave it to be understood that a reform was under consideration: “ the establishment of lasting and permanent order in all branches of the administration.” The point as to the place of convocation gave rise to a compromise between the too-distant centre of France and too-tumultuous Paris. Versailles was chosen “ because of the hunting! ” In the procedure.of the elections Thé the traditional system of the states-general of 1614 e, edo, , "e was preserved, and the suffrage was 'almost universal, but in two kinds: for the third estate nearly all citizens over twenty-ive years of age, paying a direct contribution, voted-peasants as well as bourgeois; the country clergy were included among the ecclesiastics; the smaller nobility among the nobles; and finally, Protestants were electors and eligible.

According to custom, documents (ca/tiers) were drawn up, containing a list of grievances and proposals for reform. All the The orders were agreed in demanding prudently modified m, d, esses reform: the vote on the budget, order in finance, regular convocation of the states-general, and a written constitution in order to get rid of arbitrary rule. The address of the clergy, inspired by the great prelates, sought to make inaccurate lamentations over the progress of impietya means of safeguarding their enormous spiritual and temporal powers, their privileges and exemptions, and their vast wealth. The nobility demanded voting by order, the maintenance of their privileges, and, above all, laws to protect them against the arbitrary proceedings of royalty. The third estate insisted on the vote by head, the graduated abolition of privilege in all governmental afiairs, awritten constitution and union. The programme went on broadening as it descended in the social scale. The elections sufficed finally to show that the ancien régime, characterized from the social point of view by inequality, from The the political point of view by arbitrariness, and from e, ec, , o, ,S the religious point of view by intolerance, was completed from the administrative point of view by inextricable disorder. As even the extent of the jurisdiction of the bailliages was unknown, convocations were made at haphazard, according to the good pleasure of influential persons, and in these assemblies decisions were arrived at by a process that confused every variety of rights and powers, and was governed by no logical principle; and in this extreme confusion terms and affairs were alike involved.

Whilst the bureaucracy of the ancien fégime sought for desperate expedients to prolong its domination, the whole social body gave signs of a yet distant but ever nearing disfrom the old order of nobles, reduced in prestige by the savonnette d 'vilains (office purchased to ennoble the holder), enervated by court life, and so robbed of its roots in the soil, from which it had once drawn its strength, that it could no longer live save as a ruinous parasite on the central monarchy. Lastly, to come to the bottom of the social scale, there were the common. people, taxable at will, subject to the arbitrary and burdensome forced labour of the corvée, cut off by an impassable barrier from the privileged classes whom they hated. For them the right to work had been asserted, among others by Turgot, as a natural right opposed to the caprices of the arbitrary and selfish aristocracy of the corporations, and a breach had been made in the tyranny of the masters which had endeavoured to set a barrier to the astonishing outburst of industrial force which was destined to characterize the coming age.

The outward and visible progress of the Revolution, due primarily to profound economic disturbance, was thus accelerated and rendered irresistible. Economic reformers found a moral justification for their dissatisfaction in philosophical theories; the chance conjunction of a philosophy-political idea with a national deficit led to the preponderance of the third estate at the elections, and to the predominance of the democratic spirit in the states-general. The third estate wanted civil liberty above all; political liberty came second only, as a means and guarantee for the former. They wanted the abolition of the feudal system, the establishment of equality and a share in power. Neither the family nor property was violently attacked; the church and the monarchy still appeafed to most people two respectable and respected institutions. The king and the privileged classes had but so to desire it, and the revolution would be easy and peaceful. Louis XVI. was reluctant to abandon a tittle of his absolute power, nor would the privileged classes sacrifice their time honoured traditions; they were inexorable. The king,

more ponderous and irresolute every day, vacillated geetff ° between Necker the liberal-on one side and Marie geijrgfs Antoinette, whose feminine pride was opposed to any concessions, with the comte d'Artois, a mischievous nobody who could neither choose a side nor stick to one, on the other. When the states-general opened on the 5th of May 1 789 Louis XVI. had decided nothing. The conflict between him and the Assembly immediately broke out, and became acute over the verification of the mandates; the third estate desiring this to be made in common by the deputies of the three orders, which would involve voting by head, the suppression of classes and the preponderance of the third estate. On the refusal of the privileged classes and after an interval of six weeks, the third estate, considering that they represented 96% of the nation, and in accordance with the proposal of Sieyés, declared that they represented the nation and therefore were authorized to take resolutions unaided, the first being that in future no arrangement for taxation could take There had been much suffering throughout the 17th 17th, and demanded the immediate dispersal of the

'fn, e, , integration. The revolution was already complete

can-ents before it was declared to the world. Two distinct °""° currents of disaffection, one economic, the other ssfm' philosophic, had for long been pervading the nation. place without their consent-.

The king, urged by the privileged classes, respond ed to this

first revolutionary act, as in 1614, by closing the Salle des Menus Plaisirs Where the third estate were sitting; where- fh I

upon, gathered in one of the tennis-courts under the thi 0 presidency of Bailly, they swore on the zoth of June *WINS* court.

not to separate before having established the constitution of the kingdom.

Louis XVI. then decided, on the 23rd, to make known his policy in a royal lit de justice. He declared for the less er reform,

the fiscal, not the social; were this rejected, he declared The U, 4, that “ he alone would arrange for the welfare of his Justice of people.” Meanwhile he annulled the sitting of the gg; 2-7» and 18th centuries; but no one had hitherto thought of a politico-social rising. But the other, the philosophic current, had been set going in the 18th century; and the policy of despotism tempered by privilege had been criticized in the name of liberty as no longer justifying itself by its services to the state. The ultramontane and oppressively burdensome church had been taunted with its lack of Christian charity, apostolic poverty and primitive virtue. All vitality had been sapped Assembly. The third estate refused to obey, and by the mouth of Bailly and Mirabeau asserted the legitimacy of the Revolution. The refusal of the soldiers to coerce the Assembly showed that the monarchy could no longer rely on the army; and a few days later, when the lesser nobility and the lower ranks of the clergy had united with the third estate whose cause was their own, the king yielded, and on the 27th of June commanded both orders to join in the National Assembly, which was thereby recognized and the political revolution sanctioned. But at the same time, urged by the “ infernal cabal ” of the queen and the comte d'Artois, Louis XVI. called in the foreign regiments the only ones of which he could be certain-and dismissed Necker. The Assembly, dreading a sudden attack, demanded the withdrawal of the troops. Meeting with a- refusal, Paris opposed the king's army with her citizen-soldiers; and 35:23 by the taking of the Bastille, that mysterious dark Bastmg fortress which personified the ancien régime, secured the triumph of the Revolution (July 14). The king was obliged to recall Necker, to mount the tricolor cockade at the Hotel de Ville, and to recognize Bailly as mayor of Paris and La Fayette as commander of the National Guard, which remained in arms after the victory. The National Assembly had right on its side after the 2oth of June and might after the 14th of July. Thus was accomplished the Revolution which was to throw into the melting-pot all that had for centuries appeared fixed and stable.

As Paris had taken her Bastille, it remained for the towns and country districts to take theirs-all the Bastilles of feudalism. Want, terror and the contagion of examples precipitated iP;';'us the disruption of governmental authority and of the d, ,, old political status; and sudden anarchy dislocated all the organs of authority. Upon the ruins of the central administration temporary authorities were founded in various isolated localities, limited in area but none the less defiant of the government. The provincial assemblies of Dauphiné and elsewhere gave the signal; and numerous towns, following the example of Paris, instituted munioipalitieswhichsubstituted their authority for that of the intend ants and their subordinates. Clubs were openly organized, pamphlets and journals appeared, regardless of administrative orders; workmen's unions multiplied in Paris, Bordeaux and Lyons, in face of drastic prohibition; and anarchy finally set in with the defection of the army in Paris on the 23rd of June, at Nancy, at Metz and at Brest. The crying abuses of the old régime, an insignificant factor at the outset, soon combined with the widespread agrarian distress, due to the unjust distribution of land, the disastrous exploitation of the soil, the actions of the government, and the severe winter of 1788. Discontent showed itself in pillage and incendiarismon country estates; between March and July 1789 more than three hundred agrarian riots took place, uprooting the feudal idea of property, already compromised by its own excesses. Not only did pillaging take place; the boundaries or property were also ignored, and people no longer held themselves bound to pay taxes. These jacqueries hastened the movement of the regular revolution.

The decrees of the 4th of August, proposed by those noble “patriots " the duc d'Aiguillon and the vicomte de Noailles, who had already on the 23rd of June made armed ggi ” resistance to the evacuation of the Hall of Assembly, A, , g, ,, ¢4 put the final touch to the revolution begun by the provincial assemblies, by liberating land and labour, and proclaiming equality among all Frenchmen. Instead of exasperating the demands of the peasants and workmen by repression and raising civil war between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, they drew a distinction between personal servitude, which was suppressed, and the rights of contract, which were to be redeemed-a laudable but impossible distinction. The whole feudal system crumbled before the revolutionary insistence of the peasants; for their masters, bourgeois or nobles, terrified by prolonged riots, capitulated and gradually had to consent to make the resolutions of the 4th of August a reality.

Overjoyed by this social liberation, the Assembly awarded Louis XVI. the title of “renewer of French liberty ”; but remaining faithful to his hesitating policy of the gm, gf-the 23rd of June, he ratified the decrees of the 4th of CUUSUUI' August, only with a very ill grace. On the other hand, "°"' the privileged classes, and notably the clergy, who saw the whole traditional structure of their power threatened, now rallied to him, and when after' the 28th of August the Assembly Elabora

1

set to work on the new constitution, they combined in the effort to recover some of the position they had lost. But whatever their theoretical agreement on social questions, politically they were hopelessly at odds. ' The bourgeoisie, conscious of their opportunity, decided for a single chamber against the will of the noblesse; against that of the king they declared it permanent, and, if they accorded him a suspensory veto, this was only in order to guard them against the extreme assertion of popular rights. Thus the progress of the Revolution, so far, had left the mass of the people still excluded from any constitutional influence on the government, which was in the hands of the well-to-do classes, which also controlled the National Guard and the municipalities. The irritation of the disfranchised proletariat was moreover increased by the appalling dearness of bread and food generally, which the suspicious temper of the times-fomented by the tirades of Marat in the Ami du peuple-ascribed to English intrigues in revenge for the aid given by France to the American colonies, and to the treachery in high places that made these intrigues successful. The climax came with the rumour that the court was preparing a new military coup d'éta!, a rumour that seemed to be confirmed by indiscreet toasts proposed at a banquet by the officers of the guard at Versailles; and on the night of the 5th to the 6th of October a Parisian mob forced the king and royal family to return with them to Paris amid cries of “' We are bringing the baker, the baker's wife and the little baker's boyl” The Assembly followed; and henceforth king and Assembly were more or less under the influence of the whims and passions of a populace maddened by want and suspicion, by the fanatical or unscrupulous incitements of an unfettered press, and by the unrestrained oratory of obscure demagogues in the streets, the Cafés and the political clubs.

Convened for the purpose of elaborating a system that should conciliate all interests, the Assembly thus found itself forced into a conflict between the views of the people, who feared betrayal, and the court, which dreaded being overwhelmed. This schism was reflected in the parties of the Assembly; the absolutists of the extreme Right; the moderate monarchists of the Right and Centre; the constitutionalists of the Left Centre and Left; and, finally, on the extreme Left the democratic revolutionists, among whom Robespierre sat as yet all but unnoticed. Of talent there was enough and to spare in the Assembly; what was' conspicuously lacking was common sense and a practical knowledge of affairs. Of all the orators who declaimed from the tribune, Mirabeau alone realized the perils of the situation and possessed the power of mind and will to have mastered them. Unfortunately, however, he was discredited by a disreputable past, and yet more by the equivocal attitude he had to assume in order to 'maintain his authority in the Assembly while working in what he believed to be the true interests of the court. His political ideal for France was that of the monarchy, rescued from all association with the abuses of the old regime and “broad-based upon the people's will ”; his practical counsel was that the king should frankly proclaim this ideal to the people as his own, should compete with the Assembly for p