P R E F A C E . I N order that the two volumes on Protestant E xiles from France in the reign of Louis ma be serviceable to historical and genealogical students, i t i s necessary to rovide y p this Index-Volume. T he author takes the opportunity of introducing new memoirs, and — illustrative documents and notes especially memoirs of refugees in former reign s fugitives ( from the Duke of Alva , the St Bartholomew Massacre, and their descendants. T he surnames in volumes first and second are re produced in a careful analysis of the whole work. dditional surnames admitted in conformity with the plan of volume third are incorporated A , , in the Analysi s and the Alphabetical T ables refer to the pages in volume third. T he original , ork has thus been zealously supplemented annotated and corrected so that the possessors w , , , - of volumes first and second have in thi s Index Volume all the advantages of a new and improved edition without the disadvantage of their former purchasebecoming reduced in , pecuniary value. I t is impos sible that the author can reprint the original work. For the sake of new purchasers therefore the third volume must be complete in itself. And , , , accordingly some repetitions will be observed which the possessors of volumes first and , , second are requested to excuse. A large number of the books and documents quoted in this work can be consulted in the l ibrary of the E nglish Presbyterian C ollege Queen Square House Guildford Street London . , , , GE N E R AL VIE W OF T HE C ON T E N T S OF T HE - I N DEX VOLUME. PAG E S AN ALYSIS OF HIST OR IC AL INT R ODUC T ION T O MEMOIR S R EFUGEES T HE R EIGN OF LOUIS XIV. , MEMOIR S OF R EFUGEES IN FOR MER R EIGNS, AN ALYSIS OF VOLUME FIR ST , . JALYSIS OF VOLUME SEC OND, Q DDIT ION AL C HAPT ER S, ALPHABET IC AL T ABLES , T ABLE OF N E W ME MOIR S AN D NOT E S. - FHE NAT UR ALISAT ION LIST S R E C OPIED FR OM T HE PAT ENT R OLLS WIT H NOT ES 2 to 1 , , 7 7 Q OT E S T O HIST OR I C AL INT R ODUC T ION 6 1 1 6 1 1 8 1 2 , 5 , , 4, , 7 , , 9 , 7 , 7 5 VI E MOIR S OF R E FUGE E S IN FOR ME R R E IGNS AN D T HE IR DE SC E NDANT S. , ' T HE R ADNOR GR OUP , - E arl of R adnor and the families of Bouverie and Pusey. Bonnell. C rawley Boeve . y Francis Lamot or La Motte. Gleanings from Wills 1 68 to 1 8. Houblon. , , 5 5 9 Da C ane. Le T hieu llier. Lefroy. De la Pr m e. Janssen. Delme &c. y , I . T HE C LAN C AR T Y GR OUP , E arl of C lancart Lord Ashtown and the family of T rench. Odet de C hatillon . y, , Vidame of C hartres. Papillon. Dubois or Wood . C ham berlaine. Inglis or , , ’ Langlois. Le Jeune. D Am brun or Dom brain . Paget. E m eris . Despard or , , ’ D E s ard. Dobr ee. Groslot. Brevint 81 0. p , I I . UNIVER SIT Y GR OUP , Le C hevalier. De Marsilliers. C ousin. Bignon. R egius. Baro or Baron. C astol . , C asaubon. De Ma erne. Vignier. Levet. Lamie. Huard. De Lambermont. y ’ De Garencieres. Vasson. C on ard. Da Moulin. D E s a ne. Herault 85 0. y p g , V. A MISC ELLANEOUS GR OUP , Waldo. Howie see C hap . St Michel. Le Keux. C onant. C alam . De ( y ’ Laune. Briot. D Urfe . y NOT ES , MAR U I S DE LA MUSSE, Q R E V. S . LYON , C HAT ELAIN , &C ., ‘ S I R D ONALD M L E OD , C .B ., WILL OF P HI L I P D E L AHAI ZE , E S Q ., Proved 2 9 th N ovember 1 7 69 , M EMOI R S OF B I S HOP T E R R OT AN D R E V. V. P E R R ON E T , S I R F RAN C I S B EAUFOR T , R I C HAR D C HE N E VIX, T . G. FON N E R E AU , PR OFESSOR R IGAUD, J. R . PLAN C H1§, KENNEY D.D. B. LANGLOIS , M.P., , , NOT ES , 1 5 2 , 1 5 4, 1 5 7 : 1 5 8: 1 63 , 1 6 5 , 1 6 7 , 1 69 , 1 7 0 : 1 7 1 : 1 7 2 7 1 85 , 1 8 7 ) I ADDIT ION AL C HAPT E R S. C HAPT ER XXX. R EFUGEES, BEIN G C ONVER T S FR OM R OMANISM, ’ B ion , De Brevall, C hail ot d Argenteu il, Du Veil i Ga m er De Luzamo Mala g y, De la. Fil lonn iere Le Vassor &c, . , , C HAPT ER XXXI. DESC ENDANT S IN BR IT AIN OF HUGUENOT S WHO WE R E R E FUGE E S IN ( ST HE R C O UNT R IE S ‘ T hellusson , Labouchere , Prevost, Du Boulay, Fourdrinier, Maty, Aubertin &c , C HAPT ER XXXI I . ADDIT IONAL FAC T S AN D NOT ES , ALPHABE T IC AL T ABL E S. I . R EFUGEES OF EAR LIEST DAT ES , AN D T HEIR DESC ENDANT S , I I . R EFUGEES DUR ING T HE R EIGN OF LOUIS XIV. , AN D T HEIR DE SC E N DAN T Q I I I . I V. MISC ELLANEOUS NAMES , A N ALYS I S O F VOLU M E F I R S T , W I T H N O T E S A N D D O C U M E N T S. { istortcal ntrohuction. B E C ONSIST ING OF T E N SEC T IONS Vol. I. pages 1 to , ( ’ ' “ ‘ I I ON I . pages 1 to — T /ze Per reczzlzon w/zz cfi dr ove Me P r otestants r om Fr ance and if: , ( f m . I need give n o summary of the historical statements down to the date of the massacre the Huguenots or French Protestan ts by the R omanists by order of King C harles IX. , ( ) , ’ 1 St. Bartholomew s day 1 2 . Bu t I insert an abridgement of the remainder of Section I . 5 7 I n order to understand the u stification of civi l war in France at this period we must con j , ar some poin ts of difference from our views of law and loyalty belonging to the very , nstitu tions of ancien t government as compared with more modern monarchy and executive - 33 0 1 i ty. After considering that the St Bartholomew massacre made personal sel f defence a ’ c gy enot s only protection , the reader must picture a French Protestan t congregation, . J den to carry any arms yet surrounded by R oman C atholics armed with weapons which , , r ing priesthood stirs them up to use against the unarm ed worshippers the law not , . 1 such murderous assaul ts with any punishment. I t must also be realised that i t was g i stent with loyalty for a noble to have a fortress over which the king had no active diction and for a town such as La R ochelle to be equally independent of th e sovereign. , ’ .. h a town by feudal right was as effectual a sanctuary against the king s emissaries as an , , y resiastical bui lding. I t was as lawless for the king to o to war with the town as fo r th e g , an invading army against Paris. T he independent rulers o f a fort or walled ’ e duties to their own dependents to which even the k ing s claims must be post , supreme authority of a king over all town s and castles was a state of things which King of France might wish : but i t was not the constitution of France and ; coveting was a species of radicalism on his part. La R ochelle owed to their independence their escape from the St. Bar om ew massacre. T he Queen o f Navarre though decoyed to Paris escaped by the visi ta , , ” o f God who removed her from the evi l to come and to the heaven ly country about , , , months before. A very great Huguenot soldier second to none but C oligny survived , , massacre namely Francois Seigneur de la Noue. T his Francis with the Iron Arm , , , been Governor of La R ochelle. He was at Mons at the date of the massacre but was , ed and graciously received by the king. Assuming that he would recant in return for his , the C ourt sen t him to La R ochelle to see if the citizens on their l iberty of conscience , promised would surrender to royal authority. La Noue as an envoy was coldly re g , , , Finding the citizens firm and courageous he again accepted the chief command in , stant interest and the R oyalist besiegers withdrew in the summer of 1 . , 5 7 3 ct dated r 1 th August 1 conceded to the Huguenots liberty of domestic worship , 5 7 3 , public exercise of their religion in La R ochelle Montauban and Nismes. T he , , A FRE N CH P R OT E S T AN T E XI L E S . as t Government relieved its feelings of chagrin at such concessions by inventing, d esi nation of French Protestantism for all time comin th e con temptuous title g g , , ” Pretendiie R eformée th e pretended reformed religion or La , ( ), Henry II I. succeeded C harles IX . in 1 bu t his rei n must here be passed 5 7 4 , g h e was assassinated in the camp near Paris in 1 8 the Prote 5 9, ‘ N avarre were in h is army taking the lo al s ide a ainst the rebell ious R oman C atholl , y g T he Papists con tinued the rebellion With a view to displace Henry of Navarre , throne of France which was his rightful inheritance and thus the Protestants being , 3 , l oyal s ti ll require no apologis t. , I t i s alleged , however, that by now becoming a party to a t reaty with the king C country the Protestant C hurch of France assumed an imperial position which no , empire can tolerate and that therefore the suppression of that C hu rch by Louis XIV. , , , , executed with indefensible cruel ty was the dictate of poli tical necessit y. , - reply to this allegation is that th is treaty was only th e re enactment and T he , exten sion of a peculiar method of tolerating Protestants , devised by the kings o the only plan to evade the necessi ty of being intolerant, which the coronation reh l om sts them swear to be. T he plea that Protestants, as g , were n wa to the King but were to be negotiated with like a foreig power , , tolerating them consistent even with the m odified oath sworn by , endeavour to the utmost of my power and in good faith to drive ou t of my un sd1 ct1 on , , j , ” from the lands under my sway al l heretics denoun ced by the C hurch of R ome. As to * olitical treaty with the Huguenots in its first shape Professor Anderson rem , p In stead of rel igious toleration being s ecured to them by a powerful ly administered their protection was left in their own hands as if there was something in , creed which must for ever render them in ca ab p R oyalty which planned the treaty was at I , , en tered into the plan . crime was consent to a royal programme to which the successors of Henri IV. made themsel , parties by deliberate and repeated declarations. T he treaty to which we allude is celebrated E dict of Nantes dated 1 8 as a pledge of the observance of which the Protest , 5 9 , C hurch received several towns w ith garrisons and ammunition to be held and defended , , their own party in independent feudal style . - - T hat th is was a poli tical eye sore in a statesman like view is now acknowledged . Bu t thal , was the last chance for religious peace and tolerance in France cannot be denied on the , otl hand. And to say that i t was the cause of the Great Persecution would be a historical blund T he bigotry of the R oman C atholics was the cause . In the provinces persecution v perpetual. I lle al treatment of individuals and congregations of the Protestan t party was g ran punished while the local magistrate instead of a protector was often a leading , , ersecu t p T hrough priestly instigation and intimidation , the atmosphere of France was heated w u ncontrollable and unextinguishable malignity against the Protestants who gained nothing , - fi htin with truce breakers. g g ’ 1 I t was in the reign of Henri s son Louis XIII . that fi htin in defence of edictal rig , , g g ] came to an end. T he maj ori ty of the Protestants grew weary of fruitless battles and sieg ‘ Bem w al ays conscientiously loyal they began to wish to make an ostentation of their loya g , l and t o rely upon that for fair and paternal treatment from their King and his abin C ’ U ndoubted ly the King s animus was against the feudalism as well as the Protesta tism , n of t cautionary towns. T he former was their special ofiensiveness to the po werful Prime inis M of France C ardm al R ichelieu. , I ntrodu ctory E ssay b y William Anderson , Pr ofesso r in the Anderson ian University , Glasgow 1 8 “ ( 5 prefixed to h is translation o f Jean Migau lt ; o r the T rials o f a French Pro testant Fam il y during the eu od ” p the R evocation of the E d ict of Nantes. AN ALYSIS OF VOL UJl/E FI R S T . v Another argument against Protestants resorting to civi l war was that political malconten ts , , i ots of the R oman C atholic creed , often j oined their ranks, and gave a bad colour to their g — esi n s . Such a malcontent made advances to them ln 1 6 1 5 viz., the P rince of C ondé who g , - the j ustly honoured Protestant Henri , Due de R ohan, to take the field . But their and best counsellor the sainted Du Plessis Mornay entreated hi s fellow-Protestants , , back. He said T he C ourt wil l set on foot a negotiation which wil l be carried o n , , Prince has gained his own ends , when he wi ll leave our churches in th e lurch and with all the odium. Such actually was the result. Histoire des Protestants par D e ( , ’ 2 zzze edi t. 94, ) fall of La R ochelle and the other cautionary towns has been ascribed to the luke of the Huguenots themselves , it may, wi th at least equal reason, be inferred that a principle in their inaction. T o exchange the appearance of feudal defiance for lawful suggestion and experiment. Accordingly not , s tay at home but many of them served l n the royal , s. And after the acification of 1 62 they rested all their hopes of religious liberty p 9, ’ that monarch s satisfaction with their complete subj ection to royal j uri sdiction an d , the very strong loyalty of their principles and manifestoes. During the minority of XIV. their fidelit and good services were acknowledged by the Premier of France , y , nal Mazarin under whose administration they enj oyed much tranquility and by whose , , they filled many important offices l n the financial department of his Maj esty s privilege rendering the E dict of Nantes theoretically dangerous as inconsistent , ation had no being after 1 62 . T he monarch who carried ou t the great and , 9 on of the seventeenth century had no such materials wherewith to fabricate a France was not devoted to the Pope and the liberties which its Govern ; , opposition to Papal ambition might have made the King and his ministers , Huguenots in their love of toleration. Unfortunately however the very , , de i t al l the more willing was the one thing which onement for al l insubordination. - also the father confessors whose powers of , te King and C ourt. An apologies for this y thorities had other motives than sheer bigotry either untruthful harangues or mere exercises of ingenuity dealing not with , , phrases. — was the revocation of the E dict of Nantes that i s the repeal of the law or , — de by Henri IV. a repeal which left Louis XIV. under the dominion of the fearful - his coronation oath on the extermination of heretics . Unqualifi ed and exaggerated ithou t the menacing safeguards of a treaty , was thus no defence to the Protestants. leges of the edict had during many years been revoked one by one first by explaining , , , meaning of the phrases and clauses of that legal document but latterly without an , y estru ction of the surviving sealing of Poictou had been the scen e of T he Marquis de Louvois having , ascendency over Louis was eager , tics . T heir intervention was not efiect because resistance to his ; ” f the booted missionaries con , o f Protestantism. In 1 6 6 7 l lowin entry in his diary g