PARTISANS.
(Religious.)

Francis de Beaumont, Baron Des-Adrets, was one of the noblemen of France, whose courage and military actions made the greatest noise in the religious wars, under the reign of Charles IX. He was of Dauphine, and had learned the profession of arms in Piedmont, which was the best and most famous school of war in that age. It is pretended, that the desire of revenging himself of the duke of Guise, who had been against him in a law-suit, made him declare for those of the Protestant religion. They add, that Catherine de Medicis wrote a letter to him to excite him to revenge, and even that she permitted him to make use of the Huguenots, that he might the better ruin that duke’s authority in Dauphine. The duke of Guise, governor of that province, had made La Mothe Gondrin his lieutenant there; he was his creature, and a person of great courage. Des-Adrets judging that he could not begin his undertakings more successfully, than by ridding himself of that gentleman, practised upon some people in Valence, and managed his intelligence in such a manner, that La Mothe Gondrin, overwhelmed by the sedition which was raised in that city, was stabbed there in cold blood. Thus Valence was the first town which the baron made himself master of, and where his dignity was increased; for, whereas he was before colonel of the legionaries of Lyonnois, Dauphine, Provence and Languedoc, he was chosen, the next day after the sedition, administrator of affairs, till the prince of Conde’s farther declaration. From that time he overran all the country, and understanding that the Protestant party had made themselves masters of Lyons, he went thither, and assumed al) the authority to himself, without much inquiring whether it would be

acceptable. With five hundred men he defeated the three thousand, which St Vital brought with him into the neighbourhood of that city, to ravage the country; he ransacked le Fores, secured Grenoble, where he compelled the whole parliament to go and hear a protestant sermon; he plundered and burnt the great charter-house, seized on Pont St Esprit, entered like thunder into the country of Avignon, and had, doubtless, taken the chief city of it, to treat it as the pope’s troops had treated the city of Orange, had he not been informed, within a league of Avignon, that the Catholics had made themselves masters of Grenoble. He marched that way immediately, and spread such a terror among the catholic troops, that Maugiron, who commanded them, fled into Savoy, and durst not return into Dauphine. Grenoble was soon reduced under our baron’s power, who treated that city more kindly than they had reason to expect. He was much more barbarous in other places, which he seized by main force, and where he exercised great cruelties by way of reprisals; for example, he treated the garrison of Monthrisson, which had surrendered at discretion, very cruelly. They represented to him in vain the laws of humanity; he would divert himself with seeing those miserable soldiers precipitated; they were brought to the top of the platform above the tower. Those who had not the courage to precipitate themselves were cast down headlong, and not so much as their chief was pardoned. Only one soldier was saved; twice he took a run from one end of the platform to the other, as if he designed to leap farther, but stopt short on the brink of the precipice. DesAdrets said to him, with a sharp tone, it was enough to have twice sounded the ford: the soldier replied boldly, that he would give him four times to do it. These words softened the baron’s ill-humour in such a manner, that he gave the brisk fellow quarter, who durst make use of his jests in such a pressing extremity. Some say that the baron’s soldiers, as barbarous as their general, received those who were thrown down from the tower, with horrid cries and shouts, on the points of their halberts and pikes. Here we must take notice of a great falsity of Maimbourg. After having mentioned the cruelties of Des-Adrets, he adds these words: “There were, indeed, some catholics, who, being justly incensed at so many horrid crimes, abused the right of reprisals, and treated them almost in the same manner, of their own authority, but there were but few who perished so.” He supposes, then, that Des-Adrets began to exercise these barbarities, and that the Catholics only followed his example, and made use of them by way of reprisals. But this is either gross ignorance, or prodigious insincerity; for historians least suspected of partiality towards those of the Protestant religion, confess ingenuously that the cruelties which were exercised at Orange, preceded those of Des-Adrets. Read Varillas' History of Charles IX , and you will find there, that, before the leaps of Mornac and Monthrisson, the Catholics had exercised the most enormous cruelties at Orange, and particularly that of precipitating people from the tops of rocks, or on pikes and halberts. Among other things, he more especially informs us that Fabricius Serbellone, a gentleman of Milan, of ancient family and of great experience, who gave himself over to most of the vices that prevail among his countrymen, being also endowed with their virtues, joined with the Catholics of Provence, whom the counts de Sommerive, de Suze, de Carces, &c. had gathered together, and persuaded them to make an attempt upon Orange. He invested that town when the whole garrison was gone out, and taking advantage of that favourable juncture, he gave an assault as soon as his battery had made a sufficient breach. During the assault, the Catholics that were left in Orange opened one gate to him. He went in through it, and his men were contented at first to kill every body they met in arms; but afterwards they renewed the examples of the most refined cruelty invented formerly by tyrants. They employed their ingenuity in contriving how to make those, who had been so unhappy as to escape their first fury, feel themselves die, and killed them gradually. Some were thrown headlong upon stakes, halberds, swords, and pikes; some were hung in the chimnies, and burnt with a slow fire. They took delight in cutting their privy parts; and their fury spared neither children, nor old and sick people, nor the reapers, though the latter had no other arms than their sickles. Women and maids did not come off with the loss of their honour, and with being prostituted to the rabble; for they were set for a mark to be shot at, and after hung upon the windows. The boys were kept, to complete the abomination; and to add derision to their outrage, the ladies, who rather chose to die than to satisfy the lewdness of the victors, were exposed stark naked for a public mockery, with horns thrust into those parts which modesty does not permit to name. Some of both sexes were larded with slips of paper cut out of Geneva bibles. The very Catholics who opened the gate were not spared; for after a place had been appointed for them, and they had been told that they would be safe in it with their wives and children, they were all cut to pieces. There were only a hundred and nine soldiers in the castle, who not being sufficient to defend it, desired to capitulate. All they proposed was granted them; but as soon as they came out, they were surrounded; and those who were not thought worthy of being killed by the soldiers, were thrown headlong from the top of a rock. After the plunder had been secured, the victors employed themselves in demolishing the walls of Orange; and Serbellone, thinking that it would be a piece of madness to leave, so near the country of Avignon, a considerable town, the sovereign whereof was a Calvinist, set fire to it, which quickly consumed the bishop’s palace, and three hundred houses, with those who had concealed themselves in them. The burning had gone on, had it not been for an extraordinary rain, which put it out in a moment, and disappointed those who stirred the fire.

It is observed in the relation of the sacking of Orange, that the castle, the bishop’s palace, and several other places were set on fire, and part of the walls pulled down at the solicitation of the count de Suze. He satisfied his avarice as well as his cruelty; for he took part of the best booty, and furnished his house with it. These are the men on whom we poor private people bestow so many panegyrics, upon account of their pretended zeal for religion, and the glory of God: the Monlucs, the Tavannes, the Suzes, and the Guises will be praised for ever among the votaries of the church of Rome; but what did they do for their religion but get wealth, plunder, and domineer? Was this a service done to God, for which they deserved to be rewarded? “O curas hominum, ô

quantum est in rebus inane!—O empty toils! O vanity of things.”

The victory which Des Adrets obtained against the count de Suze at Vaureas, rendered him master of Orange, and of the county of Venaissin, and made Avignon tremble a second time. He defeated all the pope’s troops; he entered into Provence, and overthrew all that appeared against him; nevertheless, there were some disappointments, or private jealousies, which made him fail of relieving Cisteron. This disgrace was followed by some others: the duke of Nemours, after the ill success of the siege of Lyons, won two battles against the baron Des Adrets; but durst not engage with him a third time; and found it more proper to use artifices to induce this formidable

leader of the Protestants to change sides. They endeavoured to prevail upon him by promises and threats; shewing him that he had great enemies in his party; and at last they staggered him in such a manner, that his conduct became more and more suspected by the prince of Conde and the admiral. The conclusion was, that they secured his person at Romans, the tenth of January, 1563. He did not come out of prison but by the treaty of peace which was concluded the same year; and then he professed his first religion, and afterwards bore arms against the other; but without any success or glory: for which he is not the only person who has given very bad reasons. This general showed no longer the same vigilance, activity, intrepidity, and presence of mind, which had been admired as prodigies whilst he served the Cause. All these great qualities, and the victories which he obtained over the Papists, did not hinder the Protestants from looking upon him as a Goliah, who dishonoured the battles of Israel by his barbarous conduct.

Besides what has been already said on this subject, I shall observe that it was said, that he taught his children to be cruel, and to bathe themselves in blood. The eldest, who was afterwards a Catholic, was very busy in the massacre of Paris. He died at the siege of Rochelle, with contrition for the great quantity of blood that he had shed. The Protestants are little concerned, whether this hearsay of Brantome be true or not; for they were the first who condemned this baron's cruel disposition, but every body is concerned not to suffer the licence of him who published, the Supplement to Moreri’s Dictionary. He says, “that after a great slaughter, Des-Adrets made his two sons bathe themselves in the blood of the Catholics.” Father Maimbourg supplied him with this gloss: both of them should be told, that they ought not to take so great a latitude in their paraphrases. Their

witness, grounded on hearsay, made use only of the word blood. What right had they to pretend that he spoke of human blood?

Des-Adrets died without honour, in an ignominious old age, equally despised by both parties, much unlike that baron Des-Adrets—quantum mutatus ab illo! who had been dreaded as far as Rome; for they were apprehensive there that he would fit out a fleet to pay the pope a visit.

With respect to his children, Brantome says, that the younger was the king’s page, of whom Mr Allard relates a very bold action. “The king ordered him one day to call his chancellor; this page found him at dinner, and, having told him that the king would speak with him, and the chancellor having answered, that ‘ after he had dined he would go and receive the king’s orders:’ ‘ How’ said the page, ‘ will you defer one moment when the king commands you?’ And thereupon he took one end of the table cloth, and threw all that was upon it to the ground. This story was told the king by the chancellor himself, and bis majesty, laughing, said only, ‘ that the son would be as violent and passionate as the father.’”

Des Adrets was at Turin during the massacre on St Bartholomew’s day, but soon returned into Dauphine, and, seeing the small account they made of him, he retired to la Frette, in the Graisivodan. He accompanied la Valette, who was sent into Dauphine against Lesdiguieres, in the year 1585. At last, being tired with so many fatigues, oppressed with age, and extremely disgusted with the world, he retired again to la Frette, where he lived a year with visible marks of bis return into the bosom of the church. He died therefore, a Catholic, after having made his will, the second of February, 1586, and was buried in a chapel of the parochial church, which belonged to his house. The countenance of Des Adrets discovered the fierceness of his temper. Thuanus,

who observed him so nicely, at Grenoble in the year, 1572, that he was able to delineate him by memory, so as any one might know him again, gives this description of him: “He was now quite grey headed, but of a vigorous and robust old age; he had fierce, sparkling eyes, a sharp nose, a lean visage, but flushed; so that you would say, as was observed in P. Corn. Sylla, that his face was sprinkled with a mixture of dirt and blood; for the rest of his bodily constitution, it was altogether military.”

Arts. Beaumont and Serbellone.