Cardinal Richelieu and Anna Austrian

cardinal rishelye
cardinal rishelye

At the beginning of the 17th century nobody dared to predict yet decline of Spain and the more so the government of a regent of Maria Medici which changed foreign policy of Henry IV was far from this thought. Regent married the son Louis XIII the daughter of the Spanish king — a banner to that Anna Austrian called so in honor of mother, the Austrian princess. Anna Austrian was, thus, equally a representative of both the Spanish, and Austrian branches of a dynasty Gabsburgov. The conventional opinions on turn in literature in policy of France after Henry IV’s murder underwent criticism from J. M. Haden recently. However for the proof of the thesis this Canadian historian had to rearrange accents in treatment of policy of Henry IV in recent years, claiming that the king mainly sought for preservation, let fragile, the European world, but not for drawing a crushing blow on domination Gabsburgov in Evrope1. When Thirty years’ war, the young Louis XIII who got rid of maternal guardianship began, and his advisers considered the broken-out conflict as fight of the emperor against plot of his Protestant citizens (similar to that which most Ludovic had to conduct pro-type of the French Huguenots). The broderie anglaise who began career by Maria Medici’s favourite assumed to conduct absolutely other line. Having betrayed the patroness and having secured with trust of the king, Richelieu since 1624 became the actual governor of France. It at once abruptly changed the direction and the purposes of the French policy. The broderie anglaise was a direct successor of a foreign policy of Henry IV. In 1616 he wrote: “Professing different belief, we remain uniform under the power of one monarch, being on service of which any Catholic will not be grew so blind to consider the Spaniard it is better than the French Huguenot”. Having come to the power, Richelieu resolutely undertook destruction of political independence of the Huguenots who formed some kind of state in the state. Business came to the end with a siege and occupation in 1628 of the main fortress of the French Protestants La-Rocheli. The head of a secret service of the cardinal Capuchin Joseph de Tremble not without reason with a celebration wrote Richelieu that falling of a Huguenot stronghold will allow the French king to get “with the big right, than to someone, a role of the arbitrator of the Christian world”. Capture La-Rocheli was the measure directed not to involvement of France in the century conflict, and, on the contrary, to extraction by it — more precisely, the monarchy — the maximum benefits from this conflict. Trying to obtain consolidation of the royalty and having for this purpose liquidated a political autonomy of Huguenots, Richelieu at the same time actively supported Protestant camp against the emperor in Thirty years’ war. The broderie anglaise belongs the characteristic remark: “Distinction of religious beliefs can create split in the next world, but not on it”. Throughout those almost two decades when Richelieu was the first minister whether attempts to overthrow him by a court intrigue, palace plot or mutiny of the grandees who were quite often seeking to use discontent of the people which bore burden of quickly increasing taxes in the interests did not stop. However, whatever form took actions of enemies of the cardinal, they as a magnetic needle to the North, were oriented Gabsburgov aside. During all second half of the 20th years party “pious”, supported by two queens: mother and Louis XIII’s wife — Maria Medici and Anna Austrian — demanded concentration of all forces on fight against Huguenots in France and refusal of active antigabsbursky policy abroad. This program served as a convenient pretext for unity of opponents of Richelieu, for the organization of plots against the first minister becoming more and more powerful. But the same program met support and some important supporters of the cardinal, for example the Capuchin Ruo-zefa de Tremble who became the head of a secret service of the cardinal. The father Joseph even wrote a Latin hexameter the epic poem on the occasion of capture of a stronghold of Huguenots La-Rocheli in October, 1628. Progress of Habsburg camp encouraged “pious”, proving danger to France of the introduction in fight against victorious camp of Counter-Reformation. Doubts in this respect sometimes overcame also Richelieu, the way to carrying out consistent anti-Habsburg policy appeared not to straight lines. At the same time the help of the Habsburg block was represented by an indispensable condition of success for all opponents of Richelieu. In this belief they were only strengthened by failures of the previous plots and mutinies when it was not possible to get such support. And the actual price for really active and broad help of the Spanish king and emperor could be only one — a rupture of France with anti-Habsburg forces and in this or that form transition to the party of their opponents. In other words, it was talked not only of refusal of use by France of the century conflict in own state interests, but also of turn of the front — in a full contradiction with these interests. The first plot was headed by the king’s brother Gaston Orleansky, Anna Austrian, collateral brothers of the king princes Vand participated in it. Support by Vienna and Madrid was promised them. The plans of conspirators included Louis XIII and Richelieu’s stealing, and in case of failure — armed revolt. Plot is called sometimes by the name of its active participant count Shale belonging to a noble family Taleiranov-Perigorov. Shale was very ordinary personality, and by him the court intrigantka madam de Chevrez twirled. Richelieu’s investigation headed by Joseph de Tremble tracked plot thread weight, got letters in which its participants discussed plans of murder not only Richelieu, but also Louis XIII, the correspondence received by Shale from Madrid and Brussels. Gaston Orleansky, the traitor at heart to rescue itself, gave the accomplices. After Shale’s arrest Richelieu entreated, begging about mercy. But the cardinal was relentless — approximate punishment of the count Shale was urged to frighten dissatisfied. Shale terminated life under the executioner’s axe. Along with the father Joseph, one of the main figures of confidential diplomacy within the first 10 years, there was also an abbot Fangkan. The broderie anglaise daily held hours-long meetings with Fangkan who repeatedly carried out a role of the secret agent and in various German states. However if the chief of investigation the father Ruo-zef delayed Richelieu to the union the father, the abbot Fangkan was a representative absolutely of other political school. Getting bribes from the German Catholic princes, Fangkan at the same time insisted on that France supported the German protestan more resolutely, than the cardinal considered useful. Subsequently the hidden disagreement between Richelieu and Fangkan escalated, and the abbot who was excessively spaced liberties of the French clergy from the power of Rome, calling for cancellation of the concordat between France and the father and even started contacts with England, the German princes and leaders of Huguenots, in 1627 got into the Bastille. Maria Medici was the head of new plot. Having used an illness of the king, she together with Anna Avstriyskaya tears and entreaties enticed a consent to leave the cardinal at Ludovic. The queen-mother triumphed a victory and roughly turned out Richelieu who attended of it appointment. Crowds of court sycophants already considered timely to remove from the cardinal’s lobby to the queen-mother’s hall. But they too hurried. Louis XIII recovered and, having forgotten about the promise, immediately summoned the cardinal who became the almighty governor of the country again. Not without reason this day — — became on November 10, 1630 history under the name “day of fooled”. Many of “fooled” were removed from the yard, and Maria Medici after unsuccessful attempt to lift revolt in fortress Kappel, near the Spanish Flanders, was sent abroad. “Day fooled” was defeat not only parties “pious”. He struck the strongest blow to chances of a military victory of the Habsburg block. The broderie anglaise could begin, now irrevocably, to pursue anti-Habsburg policy. However it had to combat against all new conspirators who all, whatever personal aims they pursued, steadily put forward the program of change of a foreign policy of France towards the union with Habsburg powers. Gaston Orleansky nevertheless managed to lift revolt in Lorraine and to sign the secret contract with Spain promising the help to opponents of Richelieu. To inspire fear in rebels, by order of the cardinal the court pronounced the death sentence to their supporter marshal Ma-rilyaku who was executed on May 10, 1632 to ploshchadi5. The royal army entered Lorraine and broke troops of risen. One of heads of mutiny — the duke Monmoransi — was beheaded on a scaffold. Gaston Orleansky “regretted” again, betrayed the accomplices, with tears assured the cardinal of eternal love … and started over again spinning intrigues against Richelieu. Soon after Monmoransi Richelieu’s execution itself got to a trap. At the beginning of November, 1632, having left the king on the ways from Toulouse, sick Richelieu there arrived to the lock Kadayak. It belonged to the governor Giyeni to the duke D’Epernon (one of possible participants of the plot which led to Henry IV’s murder). Richelieu was accompanied only by small group of court. Night passed in alarm, perhaps, the cardinal was rescued only by confidence surrounding that the patient had few days to death. Next morning the cardinal hurried to go to Bordeaux, but also there it, in essence, remained in the power of D’Epernon. The queen and duchess de Chevrez traveling together with the yard triumphed. They hurried to abandon the enemy confined to the bed in the city where the duke had to become the tool of their revenge. Their accomplice chancellor Shatnef — the duchess’s creature — already tried on a suit of the first minister of the king. D’epernon decided if the illness does not carry away Richelieu in a grave, to grind the cardinal in the unapproachable lock Trompet. Once the duke was to Richelieu’s house accompanied by 200 adherents, according to him, to inquire about health of the cardinal. It was not necessary to be Richelieu to solve D’Epernon’s intentions. All this occurred at the most intense moment of Thirty years’ war when resolute fight between the army of the Swedish king Gustav Adolphus and troops of the emperor headed by Vallenstein was coming. Destinies of Germany and at the same time destiny of all foreign policy of Richelieu depended on the result of fight … on November 13 the operation which eliminated danger to life was performed on Richelieu. The queen’s butler Laport who was to learn whether the devil of the inconvenient minister carried away with himself at last, came back with sad news that the patient recovers. There was a hope for D’Epernon … on December 20 from the house where the minister stopped, several people from his suite took out some mattress covered with a silk carpet. Under a carpet Richelieu who and was brought to the ship which at once lifted sails lay. Monmoransi’s plot found without interruption continuation in plot of the confidante queen duchess de Chevrez and the chancellor Shatnef, the relying on full support of Anna Avstriyskaya, prince Gaston Orleansky and other enemies of the cardinal. Richelieu’s investigation opened also this plot. Shatnef in 1633 was sent to Angouleme-will hold down prison where spent 10 years. The duchess de Chevrez sent in the lock Dampyer near Paris, secretly visited at night Louvre for meetings with Anna Avstriyskaya. After that the tireless conspirator was sent in the gloomy lock Kuzyer in Tureni. From there letters to Anna Avstriyskaya, to the English queen — Louis XIII’s sister, to the Spanish yard, to the duke Lotharingian began to flow. “Shevretta” enlisted in number of the admirers of the 80-year-old archbishop Tursky, and also the young prince Marsiyyak, future duke La Rochefoucauld, author of well-known “Maxims”. Investigation of the cardinal had to watch also other admirers of the duchess. One of them, the chevalier de Jar connected with the English yard was grabbed, subjected to tortures and sentenced to death, but pardoned already on eshafote6. Richelieu obtained important information from the Portuguese jeweler Alphonse Lopez living in Paris who was connected with many merchants in Spain. However Lopez was spy double, and to the government in Madrid from it data on actions of the cardinal also arrived. In the first half of 1634 Gaston Orleansky signed the secret contract with Madrid, having given the obligation in case of the French-Spanish war to take part in it (on side of “the most august Austrian house” (i.e. Habsburg powers) and by means of a subsidy which was provided to it to gather army for actions against France. The text of this contract was sent to Madrid on the Spanish vessel which, pursued by the Dutch ships, ran aground about the French coast. The governor of Calais withdrew many documents which were on this vessel and sent them to Richelieu who obtained the evidence of change of the brother Louis XIII. But, as it was talked of the successor of the French throne, Richelieu was necessary not to punish Gaston, and to try to draw on the party, cajoling large monetary podachkami8. Well, and in Madrid in due time remembered that already twice god eliminated the enemy of belief and the Spanish crown: in 1572 during the Massacre of St. Bartholomew — the admiral Kolinyi, and in 1610 — Henry IV. At the same time a Lord’s hand — and the murderer’s hand — secret intrigues of the Spanish confidential diplomacy and investigation supported. To one murderer prevented to make attempt at the last minute. Another in a careful form inquired at the Dominican monk whether killing of the minister will be necessary for the sky, but received (unlike Ravaillac) the negative answer. Maria Medici tried to kindle from Flanders new civil strife in France. War knocking las at the doors of France. Richelieu still waited, without wishing to be got involved in the conflict at the adverse moment. He spoke Mazarini (already then enjoying his confidence) that he looks after the world, as for the beloved. When war because of behavior of the Vienna yard became inevitable, Richelieu as Mazarini in March, 1635 wrote, talking to it, “cried, assured that it would give the hand to preserve the peace”. In Madrid the head of the government duke Gaspar Olivares not less cardinal was afraid of war with France, the fact that it and at the successful course of affairs will lead to “an utter ruin of Spain”. In 1635 when war nevertheless began, both Olivares, and Richelieu hoped that it will be short-term, but both of them were mistaken. After an open rupture of France with Habsburg powers to Paris imperial troops under team of Pikolomini and other skilled generals moved. On August 5 imperets crossed Somme. Hasty receding French army was under supervision of the count Suasonsky on whose fidelity as showed events, it was impossible to rely in any way. He conducted secret negotiations with Spaniards and Maria Medici. Paris began to form a militia, hastily constructed and strengthened strengthenings around the capital. Several important fortresses foully were handed over to imperets almost without fight. It seemed, France again as after fight at Pavia in 1525, after defeat at Saint-Cantet not in 1557 and during civil wars, danger to be reduced to a role of the vassal Gabsburgov threatened. Richelieu was necessary to be reconciled with part of opponents, especially with Gaston Orleansky. Louis XIII and Richelieu with army besieged the important fortress of Korbi occupied by the enemy. Then, confident in the impunity, Gaston Orleansky and the Count Suason agreed with Spaniards that will achieve removal of a siege, having killed the cardinal. This time, probably, counterintelligence of the cardinal lost sight of attempt preparation. And still it did not work well as Gaston as usual was afraid and did not give a conventional sign to murderers. Soon Richelieu received all data on this plot, and Gaston and the count Suasonsky, having visited that their plans are open, hasty ran abroad. Only in 1637 imperial threat was eliminated. There was still Anna Austrian who was opposing foreign policy of the cardinal and keeping up secret correspondence with Madrid and Vienna. Richelieu’s investigation constantly monitored each movement of the queen. After a siege of Korbi Richelieu’s spies managed to get the whole lots of the letters which are with own hand written by Anna Avstriysky and addressed to the duchess de Chevrez. The broderie anglaise sought to surround Anna Avstriyskaya with the spies among whom especially important part was assigned to madam de Lannoi. However at the queen devoted servants — the equerry Pyutanon and the butler La Port who by means of the duchess de Chevrez learned to bypass the traps placed by the cardinal’s people remained. The broderie anglaise de Chevrez tried to fascinate Anna Avstriyskaya and the duchess more than once, remembering as he once managed with such success to win Maria Medici’s heart. However the experiment repeated in two decades was not crowned with success. The vanity of the cardinal was relieved of absolutely hard blow only by the fact that its investigation did not manage to intercept the message of the queen to “Shevretta” in which the cardinal was called as “an old wreck” (it is still very softened translation of the used very vigorous French expression). … In the summer of 1637 Richelieu’s investigation — it is probable, through the courtesan mademoiselle Shemero known under a name of “the beautiful profligate” — managed to take control of the letter of the former Spanish ambassador in France the marchioness Mirabella which was the answer to the letter of the queen. In turn, Anna Avstriyskaya responded to this letter of the Spaniard, and Richelieu’s people did not manage to intercept the important document. But they established that the major role in delivery of correspondence was played by La Port. Being afraid that Anna Avstriyskaya will manage to destroy the compromising papers, the cardinal achieved Louis XIII’s permission to execute a search in the queen’s apartments in abbey Saint-Etienne. On August 13 the Parisian archbishop and the chancellor Segye sent to Richelieu found there only nothing the meaning letters. A day before it La Port was imprisoned in the Bastille, in a dungeon which was occupied to him by the alchemist Dubois, several years fooling the minister hope for a gold fabrication from ignoble metals. At arrest at La Port found the queen’s note to the duchess de Chevrez: “The applicant of this letter will tell you news about which I cannot write”. Then Segye was to the room La Port in hotel de Chevrez and ordered to search it carefully. However escaped the most important from attention of people of Segye — the hiding place hidden by a plaster mask in a wall in which the most important papers and keys to the encoded correspondence were stored. Anna Avstriyskaya claimed that she to Mirabel and other persons in Madrid asked to transfer expression of the related sympathies in the letter and inquired about a state of health of members of the Spanish royal family. The queen tried to play skillfully the comedy of full reconciliation with the hated cardinal. It seemed to it that she succeeded in it, actually business was not so much in irresistible charms of the Spaniard how many in political need. For consolidation of an absolutism — in other words, the birth of the successor of a throne was especially important for a celebration politicians Rishelye —. The broderie anglaise understood that he will not manage to achieve from Rome of a consent to divorce of the king so Anna Avstriyskaya could only become mother of a dauphin. “I wish — Louis XIII from dictation of Richelieu wrote — that madam Sennesa gave me the report on all letters which the queen will send and which have to be sealed at her presence. I wish also that Philander, the first maid of honor of the queen, gave me the report on all cases when the queen writes something, and arranged so that it did not occur without her permission as writing-materials are under her authority”. Anna Austrian wrote in the bottom of this document: “I promised the king to carry out sacredly the maintenance of the above”. The promise it cost not much. On August 21 Richelieu personally in the palace was interrogated by La Port, that declared that he will be able to give evidences if receives the order of the queen. Louis XIII demanded from the wife that she in writing enjoined to tell La Porto everything to him known, threatening that differently her butler will be subjected to torture. The concerned queen hurried to make additional confessions: it really gave the code La to Porto for maintenance of communication with Mirabe-l, accepted the disguised duchess de Chevrez, but, according to Anna Avstriyskaya, the correspondence had especially innocent character. The queen had to write La Porto that she orders it to reveal all her secrets. All question was in whether La Port who was interrogated now by the terrible Lafma nicknamed “the pontifical executioner”, a .za a pure coin the instruction of the queen will accept. Maria D’Otfor who is brought closer Anna Avstriyskaya combining roles of the maid of honor of the queen and the king’s favourite changed clothes in a men’s dress and managed to get to one of prisoners of the Bastille, the deadly enemy of the cardinal, the gentleman already famous to us de Jar. And that managed to punch an opening in a chamber La Port and to transfer instructions of the queen. La Port as the skillful actor, when Lafma transferred him the order of the queen, at first pretended that he doubts what valid intentions of his sovereign, but then, as if conceding to threats of “the pontifical executioner”, gave the evidences in accuracy coinciding with what Anna Avstriyskaya agreed to recognize. Mademoiselle d’otfor sent to the duchess de Chev-rez of the messenger with news of the safe end of business. However in a rush of D’Otfor mixed the code and instead of the book of hours with cover from a green velvet sent a small volume in a red cover — a danger sign. Having changed clothes in a men’s suit, the duchess de Chevrez ran to Spain. Against Richelieu Louis XIII’s confessor Jesuit Kossen acting by means of a royal favourite, prayerful Louise Lafayette diligent intrigued. Setting the king on the cardinal, Kossen mentioned 6 thousand church buildings burned in Germany by Protestants whom Richelieu made allies of France. The cardinal, in return, again and again proved to Ludovic that it is impossible to condemn contracts with Protestant princes as they are directed against the Habsburg powers threatening to the existence of France as the independent state. Except [that, the cardinal added, these contracts provide freedom of departure of a Catholic cult in all territories won by Protestants”. In December, 1637 Kossen by means of Louise Lafayette delivered Maria Medici’s letter. In two hours the cardinal received news of it and managed to put counterstroke. For the next day Kossen learned from the king that do not need his services any more; soon after this Jesuit sent from the capital, his papers it was seized. In 1637 the revolt lifted by the count Suasonsky and the commandant of fortress the Sedan the duke Bulyonsky broke out. As before, the help of the Spanish king and German emperor was promised conspirators. The group in 7 thousand imperial soldiers joined army – rebels. The royal army got beaten in fight at Mars.’no in 1641 unexpected news came — the head of plot count Suasonsky fell by hand the unknown murderer. After death Suasop-sky’s column the duke Bulyonsky preferred to agree with Richelieu, other conspirators hid abroad. However plot, even more dangerous to Richelieu, in which it was succeeded to involve Ludovic half already the same year began to be formed. One of royal favourites — Henri Saint-Map, the son of the supporter Richelieu of the marshal Effia — became soul of this plot in which invariable Gaston Orleansky, the duke Bulyonsky and probably Anna Avstriyskaya were involved again. Conspirators signed the secret contract with the first minister of Spain duke Olivares. Spaniards had to attack from the North France, and the duke Bulyonsky — to hand over them the Sedan that would interfere with advance of the French army in Catalonia. Habsburg powers lost by then hope to achieve a victory in the military way. “Remains — the Spanish governor of Youzhny of the Netherlands and wrote 1641 — the only opportunity — to create to itself supporters in France and tried to induce thanks to them the government in Paris to become reasonable”. The further course of Thirty years’ war depended on success or failure of new plot against Richelieu in many respects. Seong-Mara was the most dexterous agent his friend viscount de Fontraille, the cripple spoiled with two humps. Changed clothes by the monk-Capuchin, Fontraille went to Madrid for a meeting with Olivares and returned, holding the signed contract. Richelieu was informed by the investigation watching Fontrayem up to border on a trip of some Frenchman to Madrid, but, apparently, was not still devoted in a plot detail. After return to Paris of Fontray had courage to appear several times at court and even in the cardinal’s apartments with the dangerous papers which are sewn up in a camisole. However even to send several copies of the contract to the conspirators who were at that moment in different places it was business very hard. Everywhere the cardinal’s spies scurried about. Saint-Map, for example, suspected the abbot la Rivier, the entrusted Gaston Orleansky’s adviser. And not without justification — la Rivier was agent Richelieu. While there was a transfer of the contract, its one copy came to be in the cardinal’s hands! Already contemporaries various assumptions from where Richelieu received the copy of the contract with Spain expressed. One called the duchess who was then in Brussels de Chevrez as an information leakage source. Perhaps, it was and so, but Richelieu was not softened concerning the conspirator more than once trying to ruin his plans at all. And in the political testament spoke of it with obvious contempt. Some considered that the cardinal learned about the contract of Shcha of letters of the Spanish governor South of the Netherlands of Don Francesco de Meliossa intercepted by Richelieu’s investigation. According to one more hearing, the copy of the contract was found on the vessel which during a storm ran aground near Perpinyana3. It is necessary to consider that since 1636 Richelieu had the important agent in Madrid — the Provencal baron, the participant of former plots against the cardinal. In the remained correspondence there are hints on the fact that from it, apparently, news of the contract proceeded. Some historians consider that Olivares in exchange for certain compensations from Richelieu could give conspirators. If this is so, Olivares probably sent the contract through the French commander in Catalonia to de Breza, the cardinal’s brother-in-law. However a lot of things speak against this hypothesis. Gaston Orleansky could be the traitor. But could give plot also Anna Austrian — the cardinal Giulio Masarini, the closest adviser and the successor Richelieu on a post of the first minister of France was her confidant and the lover. The riddle was not solved. Conspirators vainly hoped for the hidden hostility which was fed, in their opinion, by Louis XIII for the minister. The remained correspondence demonstrates the closest cooperation between the king and the cardinal, it proves that external signs of displeasure and even envy of the monarch in relation to Richelieu were from Louis XIII rather a game and simulation in which he showed considerable dexterity. Such simulation also induced many contemporaries to consider — it the general belief was reflected by well-known “Memoirs” of La Rochefoucauld — – that the king as if hated the too acute and infallible minister. Having received the text of the contract, seriously ill Richelieu sent it to Louis XIII, and the king agreed to arrest Seong-Mara. Of course, the queen and Gaston Orleansky could not be touched. The duke Bulyonsky was rescued by his wife. The duchess informed Richelieu that if her husband is executed, she will hand over fortress the Sedan to Spaniards. The duke was pardoned, but he paid for it refusal of the Sedan. Sep-Mar on September 12, 1642 ascended to a scaffold. He was then 22 years old. Together with it his best friend — was executed by Tu. He not uchasit-bo a shaft in plot, but knew about it and did not inform the cardinal. Fontray managed to run abroad. He at once thought that game is lost when received news of visit of the king by the messenger from the cardinal. Plots against Richelieu were objectively directed to again to turn a course of foreign policy of France towards Madrid and Vienna. Their failure meant a line victory on support of opponents of Habsburg camp. Formulating the purposes of the foreign policy, Richelieu wrote: “To a limit to what Gallia stretched, France” 14 has to stretch. It was the idea ascending by the time of Henry IV. In the “Geography” published from 1593 to 1643 in France it was proved that this country has to have the same borders as ancient Gallia. The idea of natural borders will be picked up later by the outstanding French military engineer marshal Voban who, however, considered it as argument against impetuous aggressive plans. In written about 1700 the composition “Present interests of the Christian states” Voban wrote: “All ambitious claims of France are limited to tops of the Alps and the Pyrenees, Switzerland and two seas”. “Natural borders” — these words were not in the course in the 17th century yet, and they located also by references to language borders (they can be found already at Henry IV, and they were repeated by his grandson Louis XIV). When it was necessary to justify the “natural border” which was far going beyond area of domination of French — Rhine, ideologists of the monarchy referred to ancient authors — Caesar, Strabon pointing to this river as border of antique Gallia. The French publicists of times of Richelieu nominated France to a role of the arbitrator in disputes between the European powers, in particular between the German princes and the emperor to counteract at the same time the Spanish plans gospodstva18. It is characteristic Henri de Rogana’s example, the active participant of political struggle during the first rule Richelieu. Originally he, the Protestant, was the cardinal’s opponent, but after falling La-Rocheli came over to the side of the almighty minister and became the ardent supporter of his foreign policy. Rogan carried out ‘a role of the agent Richelieu in Venice and other states, later quarreled with the cardinal again and, having come the soldier to Bernard Veymarsky’s army, was fatally wounded in battle in 1638. Rogan was the author of a number of compositions on political and military affairs. In the treatise “About Interests of Monarchs and the States of the Christian World” devoted to Richelieu, Rogan emphasizes that the state interests have to define actions of the sovereign. According to Rogana, the destiny of the Christian world is defined by the conflict between Spain and France which can terminate only in a celebration of one of these powers. However this result can be achieved only in the far future, and in the present balance between these powers is inevitable. In the works Rogan on the example of Spain analyzes use of religion as tools of foreign policy, as covers of aggressive plans. The Spanish diplomacy managed to convince the father and the Italian princes that Philip II was a defender of their belief. Spain tried to use also the French Protestants against the king, and the English Catholics against monarchs-Protestants. The geographical position defines policy of France — she is urged to deliver a barrier to the Spanish pressure and at the same time to convince the father that balance of forces — the only possible guarantee of its independence. In 1641 in the Hague the treatise “Free War” proving legality of actions of the Catholics who are employed soldiers to the sovereigns who are at war against Catholic monarchs was published in French. “The state interest can dictate similar actions and to the whole states”. Richelieu died soon after plot disclosure Seong-Mara. Having learned about death of the cardinal-minister, the Pope Urban VIII exclaimed: “If there is god, Richelieu will pay for everything. If there is no god, he was lucky” 20. However, appear, that Habsburg powers were most of all lucky, but it only seemed.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.