The following is an anecdote of a hunting party and the actions by King Louis XIV that followed which the Duke of Saint-Simon attended and wrote about in his memoirs.
One day there was a great hunting party at Saint Germain. The chase was long and hard, it was so long that the King lost interest and returned to Versailles. The rest of the party continued the hunt. They never found their prey, but they did find the country home of a wealthy man who had retired to the country side. The party entered the home and the master of the home warmed them by the fire, provided them rest, and had a supper prepared for them. The master of this house was called Fargues. Fargues was a member of the Parisian Parliament during the troubles instigated by Monsieur de Broussel. For more information on these troubles please check out my blog on the subject, linked at the bottom.
When the party returned to the court the king inquired about the hunt. The members of the party apparently praised this generous and hospitable man who had given them comfort after many days of being in the wilderness. The king asked the name of this man, when it was given to him he exclaimed, "What, Fargues! Is he so near here, then?"
According to Saint-Simon, the King and the Queen-mother were annoyed that he was living in luxury and peace so near Versailles, thinking it was extremely bold to do so even though he had been included in the pardoned after rebellion. They decided to punish him for this boldness and his former insolence.
The King appointed Lamoignon to essentially frame Fargues for a murder that had occurred during during the troubles. Lamoignon did so and along with armed men arrested Fargues and brought him before the king. Fargues argued his own defense before the court, claiming that this murder must be under the original pardon. The king had him decapitated immediately after Fargues had made his defense. All of Fargues' wealth and lands were granted to Lamoignon as a reward.
There are two things in this story that really strike me.
First, Louis XIV is out hunting. He is doing a very physically intensive task that is similar to military duty. As he is doing this he is becoming more familiar with the land around his palace. This is something that Machiavelli claims is very important. Machiavelli argues that a prince must be a military leader, and in order to do this the prince must be intimately familiar with the land that he might have to fight in. For this, he recommends touring the lands and this can be done through hunts.
Second, the relationship between Louis XIV and his mother Anne of Austria. The memoir does not indicate the date of this hunting trip, it only says "one day". However, we know that it must have been some years after the troubles because Louis XIV is now a grown man capable of ruling and his mother is no longer regent, so it must have happened in 1651 (the end of Anne's regency) or later. However, the plan to indict Fargues on trumped up charges simply for vengeance was a plan that Louis XIV and his mother came up with together. It appears that Queen-Mother Anne was one of Louis XIV close advisers. I will try to find more information on their relationship and Anne's standing in relation to Louis' other advisers. It makes sense that Louis XIV was very close with his mother, because his father died when he was only five years old.
Sources: http://seniorseminarhistory.blogspot.com/2015/10/the-arrest-of-parisian-parliament.html
Saint-Simon, Memoirs of Louis XIV and His Court and of the Regency. Vol. 1. New York: P. F. Collier & Son p. 407-418
Fargues treated Louis' men with hospitality and generosity, and he paid a heavy price for it. This is a very puzzling and ironic turn of events. It certainly shows Louis' ruthlessness, having already pardoned Fargues for his crimes, but still exacting revenge in the end. This also seems to reveal contingency on Louis' claims, more emotionally than rationally (not to be sexist, but perhaps this could be due to his mother's influence as regent - emphasis on perhaps). His revocation of the pardon, simply due to Fargues' living on nearby land, and more specifically because he was living well on said land, lends a level of indecisive shadiness to his political demeanor.
ReplyDeleteInteresting stuff as always Michael!
It definitely shows that Louis XIV word was law. This was the kind of thing that Thomas Paine criticized in "Common Sense." I think I should try to incorporate some Hobbes in my philosophical background, given the level at which Louis XIV truly was a leviathan
DeleteIt seems like your project is starting to delve into Louis' psyche pretty heavily; I must admit that I'm intrigued, since it's a lot more interesting than the normal political story that's usually told.
ReplyDeleteMake sure to define the period that you will be analyzing Louis's career. For a comparison paper, your time period is quite large, so it will be best to tighten to specific period that best represents Louis XIV. Louis as a boy or adolescent might not work as well. If you rely on a source like Simon so much, you will need to understand who he is and why he writes with such description, in that way. Your titles are pretty hilarious.
ReplyDeleteI think you may be right. I should clarify that the hunting party took place while Louis was an adult, but other than that I am uncertain. It had to have taken place between 1651 and 1666, to be within the end of the regency and his mother's death respectively.
Delete