FOOTNOTES:
[291] Order of Louis XIV., dated from Versailles, November 10, 1706:—Correspondance Administrative du Règne de Louis XIV., vol. iv. p. 255.
[292] Gallia Christiana, vol. xi. p. 310: “In confinio Britonum ac Normannorum, medio in mari.”
[293] Such as the Sée, Célune, and Coësnon.
[294] XVII. calend. Novembris, 709:—Gallia Christiana, vol. xi. p. 511.
[295] Letter from Louis XIV. to the Prior of Mount Saint-Michel, November 10, 1706:—Correspondance Administrative du Règne de Louis XIV., vol. iv. pp. 204 and 205.
[296] “He has been depicted to the King as a very great scoundrel and as a persecutor of Catholics.” See letters from the Count de Pontchartrain to the Prior of Mount Saint-Michel of July 13, 1707, and August 22, 1708:—Correspondance Administrative du Règne de Louis XIV., vol. iv. pp. 264 and 265.
[297] We have already seen (Chapter XII. p. 157 ante) that they were intercepted and sent to Ferriol.
[298] Letter from Pontchartrain to the Prior of Mount Saint-Michel, July 13, 1707.
[299] Ibid.
[300] “One can change at any moment,” writes Pontchartrain, who was already hoping for a conversion.
[301] Letter from the Count de Pontchartrain to the Prior of Mount Saint-Michel, August 22, 1708.
[302] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, June 1, 1706:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[303] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 3, 1706:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[304] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 6, 1706.
[305] La Motraye, work already quoted, p. 381.
[306] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Louis XIV., July 10, 1706:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 43.
[307] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 10, 1706.
[308] Unpublished despatch from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 3, 1706:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[309] Unpublished letters from Ferriol to the Pope, November 30, 1707; to the Cardinal de la Trémouille, November 4, 1707; and to the Marquis de Torcy, December 5, 1707.
[310] Unpublished letter from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 6, 1706:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[311] This pseudo-Avedick was arrested and imprisoned in Constantinople, but he managed to escape by applying the money he had collected to corrupt his gaolers.
[312] Unpublished letter from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, May 15, 1707:—Archives of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[313] Here are the two despatches, dated the same day and sent by different channels:—“Pera, November 16, 1707.—Monseigneur—The Grand Vizier, desiring that Avedick, the Patriarch of the schismatic Armenians, who is said to have gone into Christian lands, should return to Constantinople, sends two Armenians to Malta, named Hazadour, son of Margos, and Donabit, son of Yartan, in order to search for the said Patriarch Avedick, and to bring him back to Constantinople, two Turks, formerly at Malta, having assured the Grand Vizier that they had seen him there two months and a half ago. As I have nothing so much at heart as to please the Grand Vizier, I have given passports to the Armenians and a letter of recommendation for M. le Bailli de Tincourt, to the end that they may have every sort of liberty to seek and bring here the said Patriarch Avedick, and return to Constantinople when it shall seem good to them, without suffering any difficulty or impediment; but that on the contrary every kind of assistance should be given to them. As, however, the Turks, who were slaves at Malta, asserted that the said Patriarch Avedick was going on to Rome, I beg your Eminence very humbly to render every kind of assistance to the Armenians, to facilitate their search for the Patriarch Avedick, and give them the means of bringing him back to Constantinople in all security.”
Here is now the secret despatch:—“Pera, November 16, 1707.—Monseigneur—As the two Turks have said that Avedick was going to Rome, I have, at the request of the Grand Vizier, given the Armenians a letter of recommendation to your Eminence. You can judge of the character of these persons. It is, however, important that they should not be ill-treated, and, after having sought Avedick, that they should be permitted to return to Constantinople. But all their proceedings ought to be watched in such a way that they can neither complain of this course nor enter on their return into new plots.”—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[314] Unpublished letters from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, September 1, 1706, and February 19, 1707:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45.
[315] Unpublished letters from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, July 18, and September 16, 1706.
[316] Unpublished letters from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, June 1, and September 10, 1706, and February 19, 1707. It should be remarked that it is especially after the abduction that Ferriol so vehemently accuses Avedick of terrible persecutions. Extracts from his despatches, written previous to the abduction, and which we have given in Chapter XII. (pp. 149 and 153 ante), show that this accusation had much less foundation than the French ambassador wished to make believe, with the evident intention of justifying the abduction of the Patriarch.
[317] Unpublished despatch from the Cardinal de la Trémouille to Torcy, July 21, 1708:—Archives of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Rome, 491.
[318] Unpublished letters from Torcy to La Trémouille, August 17, and September 6, 1708:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Rome, 484 and 492.
[319] Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Rome, 492.
[320] Only a very few persons at Rome knew that Avedick was in France, and even they were ignorant of the precise place where he was detained. The other Cardinals had, with reference to this matter, only vague and inexact information, as is proved by a letter written from Rome, July 27, 1706, in which it is stated that Avedick was a prisoner at Messina.—Archives of the Empire, Monuments Historiques, xi.: Négociations, K 1315-1326.
[321] Letter, February 14, 1707:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 44.
[322] Manuscripts of the Arsenal Library, Dujonca’s Journal, Registres des Entrées. This new extract from this journal proves once more its perfect authenticity, since the date is corroborated by the letter to the governor which we are about to quote.
[323] Letter from Louis XIV. to M. de Bernaville, at “Marly, December 18, 1709:”—Correspondance Administrative du Règne de Louis XIV., vol. iv. p. 285.
[324] Déclaration authentique de M. Pétis de la Croix, Secrétaire-interprète du Roi en langues Arabe, Turque, et autres Orientales, Aug. 24, 1711:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
[325] Profession de foy et réunion d’Avedick, Patriarche Arménien, à la Sainte Église Romaine, Monday, September 22, 1710:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
[326] Pétis de la Croix, Déclaration authentique, &c., already quoted.
[327] Extract from the Registres des Convoys et Enterrements à l’Église paroissiale à Saint-Sulpice, à Paris, delivered by the S. Joachim de la Chétardye, curé of Saint-Sulpice, August 14, 1711.
[328] Ibid. Avedick was interred in the cemetery of the Church of Saint-Sulpice.
[329] Despatches from the Count de Pontchartrain to the Lieutenant of Police d’Argenson, July 22 and 30, 1711:—Correspondance Administrative du Règne de Louis XIV., vol. iv. pp. 292 and 293. Procès-verbal de M. d’Argenson, contenant enqueste sur la vie et la mort de Monseigneur Avedick, patriarche des Arméniens à Constantinople, September 15, 1711:—Manuscripts of the Arsenal Library, Papiers d’Argenson.
[330] Letters from Count Desalleurs, ambassador of France at Constantinople, to the Marquis de Torcy, June 16, 1710, and Aug. 1, 1713.
[331] I have a number of most interesting despatches relating to this end, and to some very curious scenes which occurred during the last years passed by Ferriol at Constantinople. Perhaps I shall utilize them some day. But the laws of proportion prevent me from doing so here and oblige me not to prolong this story beyond the death of the principal personage. After his return to France, whither he had brought that beautiful Circassian slave, who became celebrated under the name of Mademoiselle Aissé, Ferriol lived in obscurity, much, however, against his will, since he did not cease soliciting being sent back to Constantinople as ambassador, and to deny his madness with a vehemence and an excess of language which made his statement seem very improbable.
[332] Unpublished despatches from the King to the Count Desalleurs, ambassador at Constantinople after Ferriol, September 25, 1710, and from the Marquis de Torcy to the same, of the same day:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 48.
[333] Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 48.
[334] Unpublished despatches from the King to M. de Fontenu, Consul at Smyrna, September 19, 1709; from Torcy to Ferriol, November 5, 1709; from the King to Ferriol, March 27, 1710:—Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 48; and from Ferriol to Torcy, May 23, 1711 (ibid. Turkey, 49).
[335] We think it unnecessary to demonstrate this after the circumstantial account we have given. It suffices to add:—1st. That Louis XIV. paid the expenses occasioned by the abduction, which for one consul alone amounted to 105 ounces of gold (unpublished despatches from Ferriol to Pontchartrain, June 25, 1706, and Nov. 8, 1707, Archives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, section Turkey, 45). 2nd. That the first despatch addressed by the King to Ferriol, on October 17, 1706, after the news of the abduction had arrived at Versailles, far from conveying a reprimand, contains the following:—“Versailles, October 17, 1706.—I approve your attention in procuring for the Christian slaves in the Crimea the spiritual succours of which up to the present time they have been deprived, and as you know my sentiments concerning the protection which I wish on all occasions to accord to the Catholic religion throughout the Ottoman empire, you can render me no more agreeable service than to continue to make the effects of it manifest, either publicly or by secret ways, to all those who profess it and who find themselves oppressed by the officers of the Grand Seignior, whether they are his subjects, or of whatever nation they may be, and the more violent you remark the persecution against them on the part of the Vizier to be, the more attentive you ought to show yourself to procure them, with suitable caution, the assistance which they have a right to expect from you.”—(Ibid. Turkey, 43.) 3rd. That in the instructions sent to Count Desalleurs, Ferriol’s successor at Constantinople, Ferriol’s conduct is approved.—(Ibid. Turkey, 47). 4th. That Ferriol’s recall took place three years after the abduction, and was due solely to the proofs of insanity he had exhibited, and of which Louis XIV. had been informed by the chief officers of the embassy.