narrated by Montfaucon (tome v. p. 329):

"In 1593, after the death of the Cardinal de Bourbon, the chiefs of the Union made a procession, the most singular and grotesque that was ever seen, which set out from the Convent of the Grands-Augustins. The leaders of it were the Bishop of Senlis, the Curate of St. Cosme, and the Prior of the Chartreux, who held a cross in one hand and a pike in the other; after them came the Minims, the Capucins, the Feuillants, the Cordeliers, the Dominicans, and the Carmelites, all armed with casques, cuirasses, and muskets, which from time to time they discharged. A servant of the Cardinal Cajetano, the legate, was killed by a shot fired by one of these monks. He who most distinguished himself in this procession was Father Bernard, commonly called Le petit feuillant boiteux,' who kept running about first on one side and then on another, making all sorts of gambols, and brandishing a sword with both hands. It was observed at the time that no Celestins, nor Benedictines, nor Religious from St. Genevieve or St. Victor, appeared in this procession."

The moment chosen by the painter

is that of the death of the Cardinal's servant; and the whole scene is a most extraordinary exhibition of fa

natical zeal blended with political fury. On the upper part of the picture is the following inscription:

"Amburbica armati sacricolarum agminis pompa Lutetiæ

CIO.D.XCIII iv eid. Feb. exhibita DNO Rose Collegii Sorbonici Navarreni præfecto et Acad. Rectore duce gladio bipenni et crucis simulacro præeunte."

Between the windows of this room, and placed in a very bad light, is a valuable picture of Charles de Gontaut, Duke de Biron, and Marshal of France. He was executed on a charge of high treason in 1602, within the walls of the Bastile. He had long been a personal friend and favourite of Henry IV. but had been tampering with the Spaniards, and had probably felt himself slighted by his royal master. He was one of the most distinguished men of that day; and his countenance, which is handsome, shews remarkable acuteness of character. His eyes are small, grey, and brilliant, and the forehead high. The picture is well painted, but we do not know by whom, though it is a contemporaneous one. Among

numerous portraits (most of them modern copies from originals) of the distinguished personages in the court of Henry IV. there is one worth looking at as a fine original painting, the portrait of Martin Ruzé, Seigneur de Beaulieu, Secretary of State and Grand Master of the Mines. It is probably by a Flemish hand, as are, we suspect, most of the originals in this room.

La Belle Gabrielle d'Estrées is not much flattered in a picture taken of her while a child (eleven years of age), and placed here in its due rank the notabilities of the times of among Henry IV.; but it is an original, and worthy of all preservation. By its side is a more pleasing original likeness of another mistress of the good monarch, Catherine Henriette de Balsac d'Entragues, Marquise de Verneuil. It is stated on the picture in letters of the same date that this lady had by the king, Henry Bishop of Metz, and afterwards Duke de Verneuil, and also Gabrielle Angelique Duchess de to the Duke d'Epernon. La Valette, who afterwards was married

A third contemporary picture, of much higher artistical interest, and painted apparently by the same haud as the larger portrait of Marie de Medicis noticed above, (both of these are really fine pictures), is the portrait of Anne de Rostaing, Dame d'Escoubleau and Baroness de Sourdis. We should be glad to find a clue towards arriving at the painter's name.

There is an original portrait of Rodolph II. Emperor of Germany, by an unknown hand; and a portrait (probably copied from a Velasquez-it is of that date) of Philip III. of Spain, is also placed on these walls. Close to them is a curious likeness of Margaret of Austria, wife of Philip III. with her hair dressed in a preposterously short manner, of good execution. It bears the inscription

MAGERITE DAVTRICHE REYNE
DESPAIGNE.

The visitor who perambulates this room will be amply repaid for his trouble on coming to two excellent pictures, probably, or rather certainly, by Michel de Mirvelt,-portraits of Albert VII. Archduke of Austria and Sovereign Governor of the Low

familiæ quandiu et illi mascula proles superfuerit.

We have three more pictures to notice in this room, and they are among the best. One is a most vigorous portrait of John Olden Barneveldt, the Grand Pensionary of Holland, by Coept. Another is an equally good picture of his son William Barneveldt, Seigneur of Stautemburg, by Otto Venius; both of them splendid canvasses, of great force of colour and masterly drawing. The third is a small and finely painted portrait of St. François de Sales, Bishop of Geneva, who died in 1622, and was canonised so late as 1665. The painter's name is not mentioned, but it is a valuable picture.

The room we have just described, dedicated to the reigns of Henry III. and his successor, is one in which the connoisseur cannot fail to enjoy a great treat. H. L. J.

MR. URBAN,

in

YOUR Correspondent H. L. J., the first portion of his remarks on the Versailles Galleries of Portraits (March, p. 270), has directed attention to two small pictures, which are described in the catalogue as portraits of Isabella of France, Queen of Edward the Second, King of England, and of her mother Jeanne de Navarre, the Queen of Philip the Fair. Had these pictures been really contemporary with those personages, and thus genuine works of the middle of the fourteenth century, or if they had apparently been derived from any authentic source, I should have rejoiced in the addition which would have been made to the royal series of English portraits. But a very brief examination of the pictures is sufficient to assign them, both as works and as likenesses, to a later period, and that by not much less than two entire centuries. It appears indeed extraordinary, that in France, where the history of costume is well understood, these pictures should have been so greatly antedated, and should continue to be designated by their present names in a public catalogue.

Their description is probably so far correct that they represent a mother and daughter. The attire of both

ladies is in the same fashion. Both are in black and white, and their dress is chiefly characterized by wide black folds passing down each breast, leaving the neck open, which is covered with a shirt buttoned close up to the throat, not very different to the male attire of the reign of Francis the First, for at all periods a conformity may be traced in the costume of the sexes. The mother has a black hood over a white cap; the daughter a white cap only. If the pictures had been added to the innumerable host ascribed to the pencil of Holbein, it would not have been wonderful.

There is another picture which struck me as being misnamed. It is 'No. 1680, Laurent de Medicis, II. If du nom Duc d'Urbin + 1516." I am not mistaken, this will prove on examination to be a copy of the portrait of the English Lord Admiral, Lord Seymour of Sudeley, brother to the Protector Somerset.

I must acknowledge the great gratification I experienced in viewing the Versailles portrait galleries, though I was disappointed of my expectations in regard to the number of ancient and original portraits. I had imagined there were more than we could hope to rival in England; but now I do not think that such a competition, were we to undertake it, would be by any means impossible. The pictures which were recently at Strawberry Hill would have formed an excellent nucleus for the first room of an English his. torical gallery. There are some now at Hampton Court which are suited for such a place. To these should be added careful copies, of the same size as the originals, of such others as are accessible among the very foremost of which would be the interesting picture of Sir John Donne, and his wife Elizabeth Hastings, from the Duke of Devonshire's villa at Chiswick, to which I introduced your readers in your Magazine for Nov. 1840. Imaginary portraits, such as King Alfred, derived from King Henry the Third; Roger Bacon, &c. &c. should be excluded. Too many of this "traditional," or more properly fictitious, class disfigure the Versailles gallery. Yours, &c. J. G. N.

MR. URBAN,

(Continued from p. 477.) There is a long biographical notice of Alphonso de Castro in the Bibliotheca Hispana Nova of Nicolas Antonio, (2 vols. folio, Rome, 1672, and Madrid, 1783.) A memoir is also appended to his collected works, which were published at Paris by Feuardent (also a brother of the Franciscan order,) in 1578; and the Biographie Universelle gives this brief account of his personal history.

"Castro (Alphonse de), grand prédicateur, et l'un des plus célébres théologiens Espagnols du 16e siècle, né à Zamora, entra dans l'ordre de St. François à Salamanque. Il accompagna Philippe II. en Angleterre, lorsque ce prince y alla pour épouser la reine Marie. Philippe voulait en même temps le consulter sur la direction des affaires ecclesiastisques de ce royaume. Alphonse de Castro retourna ensuite dans les Pays Bas, où depuis plusieurs années il avait fixé son séjour. Philippe le nomma à l'archevêque de Compostella; mais il mourut à Bruxelles avant d'avoir reçu ses bulles, le 11 Fevrier, 1558, agé de soixante-trois ans."

Previous to his nomination to the archbishopric of Compostella he was recommended, along with two other persons, on the death of Cardinal Siliceo, Archbishop of Toledo, in 1557, by Carranza, who at first declined accepting the vacant see himself, but subsequently complied with the king's wishes, (Llorente, c. xxxii. p. 413,) unhappily for himself as it proved, since it excited the hatred of several envious aspirants, which issued in a persecution that caused his ruin.

The writings of De Castro are numerous, and a list of them may be seen in Nicolas Antonio. Of these the principal is his treatise "Adversus omnes hæreses," Paris, 1534, folio, in which they are discussed in alphabetical order. Nicolas Antonio, speaking of his residence at Bruges, says, "Hic dum manet, adversus hæreses conscripsisse, seu absolvisse id opus dicitur, quod et immortale ei nomen peperit, et viginti duorum spatio annorum (teste in ultima recognitione auctore ipso,) plusquam decies typographorum Italiæ, Galliæ, atque Germaniæ officinas, exindeque sæpius ad hunc diem exercuit." From this eulo

gium the opinion of the Benedictine Chaudon rather detracts. "L'auteur ecrit passablement. Il avoit lu, mais sans beaucoup de choix. La réfutation des nouvelles hérésees occupe plus de place chez lui que l'histoire des anciennes, et la controverse que l'histoire." (Dict. Hist. vol. ii. ed. 1772.) And Nicolas Antonio says, Reprehendit tamen in eo aliqua Bellarminus Cardinalis, præcipue tomo primo controversiarum lib. 3. De Conciliis et Ecclesia, cap. 4, et tomo 2, lib. 2; de Imaginibus Sanctorum, cap. 6; atque aliis locis, cui facere conatur pro Alphonso nostro satis Lucas Wadingus in Bibliotheca Franciscorum." The last revision of the work at Antwerp, 1556, is dedicated to Philip II. Brunet terms the edition of 1534 (the first) edition non mutilée, a hint from which a careful collator might probably elicit some curious variations. The edition of 1543, printed at Cologne, is probably the last which contains the charge of ignorance of grammar against some of the popes, as it is omitted in that of 1546. Another of De Castro's works (for the principal one will be considered hereafter, though earlier in point of date,) is thus described by Nicolas Antonio.

"De Potestate Legis pænalis libri duo. Salmanticæ, 1550. in fol, ad Michaelem Mun'osium Præsulem Conchensis urbis, et Pincianæ cancellariæ Præfectum, et iterum Lugd. 1656, 8. Scopus est prioris libri, ut probet eos falsos esse qui dicunt nullam legem pœnalem obligare subditorum conscientias ad culpam, præsertim lethalem posterioris, eos similiter a vero errare qui dicunt legem poenalem nunquam sine declaratione aut facto judicis obligare ad pœnam. Parisiis etiam prodierunt in fol. anno 1571 et 1578."

Nicolas Antonio also mentions that he was the author of homilies on the 50th and 31st psalms, (according to the Latin computation,) and adds, "Præterea scripsisse cum pro validitate matrimonii Henrici VIII. Angliæ Regis et Catharinæ conjugis, constat ex Nicolao Sandero, lib. I. Schismat. Anglic." A work in defence of her father's first marriage must naturally have made him welcome to Queen Mary.

Another and his most important work in connection with this subject, for it has deeply marked his memory,

is that on the punishment of heretics. Nicolas Antonio thus describes it: "De justá hæreticorum punitione, libri tres, Salmanticæ, 1547, in fol. ex officina Joannis Giuntæ. Lugduni, 1556, in 8, apud hæredes Jacobi Junctæ. Antwerpii apud Steelsii hæredes 1568 in 8, ut confirmaret justas esse omnes illas pœnas, quibus in jure civili atque canonico hæretici addicuntur." His having published these sentiments has cast an air of mystery over the sermon which he preached in 1555 against the Marian persecution, which some consider as hypocritical, or at best as politic, and taken in compliance with the views of Philip; while those who believe him sincere must acknowledge that, in that case, a great change had occurred in his principles. Two writers, the one a native of Spain, the other well acquainted with Spanish literature, Blanco White and Southey, have touched on the subject, without precisely concurring in their views. The former, after describing his work on the punishment of heretics, says,

"Such was the man that proclaimed forbearance from the pulpit in the presence of those two notorious tyrants, Philip and Mary. He, indeed, exhibits one of the numerous instances of that mixed spirit of fierce intolerance and accommodating casuistry to which men grow prone under the tuition of popes and cardinals. It was certainly not the spirit of Christian meekness that produced that extraordinary contradiction which appears between Castro's works in Spain and his sermon in London; but the same ambitious views of Philip which made him endeavour to acquire popularity by protecting the Lady Elizabeth from the spite of the queen, and by procuring the release of Lord Henry Dudley, Sir George Harper, Sir Nicholas Throgmorton, and many others, who, as Hume observes, had been confined from the suspicions or resentments of the court."

(Practical Evidence, note C, p. 229, 1st ed.; note G, 2nd edition.) Southey, in his Book of the Church, expresses himself thus:

"This Spaniard, who was afterwards raised to the see of Santiago de Compostella, had distinguished himself by his writings against the heretics. It is greatly to his honour that having justified in his books the punishment of heretics by death, what he saw in England brought him to a better mind, insomuch that he ventured

to touch upon the subject when preaching before Philip, and censured the English prelates for their severity, saying they learned it not in Scripture to burn any for their conscience, but rather that they should live and be converted; unless, indeed, as there is too much reason to suspect, this was done with a political view, and in obedience to his instructions; otherwise such opinions would have more probably conducted him to the Inquisition than to Santiago." (Vol. II. p. 177, 1st edit. 1824.)

It would be easier to form an opinion about the sermon if we had it entire, whereas it only exists in a very brief abstract. A perfect copy would enable us to judge whether the preacher was consistent throughout, or drew any subtle distinctions; whether he argued in favour of real clemency or only of delay, and how he would have dealt with cases of invincible perseverance; and perhaps we might then have learned how he got over the positive language of his former work.

To pronounce upon motives is genegrossest injustice. But the conduct of raliy hazardous, and may involve the De Castro on this occasion may be accounted for by existing circumstances. In 1552 he attended an assembly of Spanish divines and civil functionaries, which was called by Charles V. to decide on the conduct of the Pope in removing the Council of Trent to Bologna, and in censuring those divines who objected to doing so.* "Cazalla (says Llorente, c. xx. p. 200) declared that all the members of the

junta acknowledged that the Pope only acted from motives of personal interest." In this case he sided with the Spanish crown against the papacy, and they were at issue for some time after. During the same year the treaty of Passau was concluded, which imposed tolerant conditions on Charles, through the ascendancy of Maurice of Saxony, and his inability to refuse them; and these were confirmed by the peace of religion, as it is termed, in 1555, which excited the anger of

*There is an obscurity in Llorente's narrative, as the removal occurred in 1547. Has he confounded it with the suspension of 1552, against which the Spanish prelates protested?