wrote Etienne Pasquier. Equally triumphalist was the poet du ‘Victoire, Victoire, Victoire!’ Bartas: He Dieu! quel beau soleil va sur nous rayonăt? Quel hymne triumphal va sur nous resonant Dans les temples voutez? quel bruit court par les rues? … [La?] victoire est donc notre, et la iuste rigueur [Du?] ciel est cheute en fin dessus le . But for Rozée, Ivry was si grande He noted the mood in Paris uns ‘une disgrace’. – ‘les esperans, les autres desesperans la conservation de la He distanced himself from ville’. those who had lost hope, point de Dieu des miracles pour leur Ligueurs ‘qui n’atendoient conservation, de defendre cette But at the same …[qui] remontroient l’impossibilité ville’. time he was sceptical of the purely spiritual response emerging from the theologians at the Sorbonne: raisons estoient plus speculations, et vessant [visant?] mieux une sainte ‘leurs contemplation, solide pratique et experience des Rozée seems to have qu’une afaires’. favoured the course of action advocated by the papal legate Caetani: should keep its nerve and await arrival. Mayenne’s Large battles were rare. After the spate of urban defections to the 1588-89, royalists Ligue, had no choice but to engage in siege warfare. How responded under siege Ligueurs mattered enormously to Rozée, and in places his accounts are absorbing, even inspirational. In what circumstances, if any, a town might surrender, and under what terms a Ligue settlement might be deemed acceptable, were critical issues. We will see that for Rozée a settlement might be honourable if it saved soldiers for future combat (and even then, only provided it secured liberty for the practice of Catholicism); but more commonly his sympathies lay with those who fought on in the knowledge that they were part of a union
‘Victoire, Victoire, Victoire!’ wrote Etienne Pasquier. Equally triumphalist was the poet du Bartas: He Dieu! quel beau soleil va sur nous rayonăt? Quel hymne triumphal va sur nous resonant Dans les temples voutez? quel bruit court par les rues? … [La?] victoire est donc notre, et la iuste rigueur [Du?] ciel est cheute en fin dessus le . But for Rozée, Ivry was ‘une si grande disgrace’. He noted the mood in Paris – ‘les uns esperans, les autres desesperans la conservation de la ville’. He distanced himself from those Ligueurs who had lost hope, ‘qui n’atendoient point de Dieu des miracles pour leur conservation, …[qui] remontroient l’impossibilité de defendre cette ville’. But at the same time he was sceptical of the purely spiritual response emerging from the theologians at the Sorbonne: ‘leurs raisons estoient plus speculations, et vessant [visant?] mieux une sainte contemplation, qu’une solide pratique et experience des afaires’. Rozée seems to have favoured the course of action advocated by the papal legate Caetani: should keep its nerve and await Mayenne’s arrival. Large battles were rare. After the spate of urban defections to the Ligue, 1588-89, royalists had no choice but to engage in siege warfare. How Ligueurs responded under siege mattered enormously to Rozée, and in places his accounts are absorbing, even inspirational. In what circumstances, if any, a Ligue town might surrender, and under what terms a settlement might be deemed acceptable, were critical issues. We will see that for Rozée a settlement might be honourable if it saved soldiers for future combat (and even then, only provided it secured liberty for the practice of Catholicism); but more commonly his sympathies lay with those who fought on in the knowledge that they were part of a union