After conducting his widowed mistress back to her parents, Busbecq returned to France to take charge of her affairs. He had to collect the revenues of her dower, which were charged on sundry lands in Berry, Marche, and Forez, and generally to protect her interests at the court. To this employment more important duties were afterwards united. On the death of Maximilian, his son Rodolph succeeded to the throne. The new Emperor was well acquainted with Busbecq, who, as has already been mentioned, had acted as his écuyer trenchant when he left his home for Spain; and though Rodolph’s mind was to a certain extent warped by the education he had received from the Jesuits, he nevertheless inherited his father’s and grandfather’s appreciation of Busbecq. Accordingly, we find him employing Busbecq as his representative at the Court of France, and receiving letters from him containing not only the news, but the gossip of the capital. It is generally stated that Busbecq’s position was that of ambassador; this is doubtful, though there is no question as to his having discharged the duties and exercised the influence of an ambassador. There is an obvious reason for his not having been accredited as a regular diplomatic representative. He was a Fleming, and therefore a subject of Philip of Spain. Even at the court of Constantinople this circumstance had proved an obstacle in the course of his negotiations, and it was still more likely to be a stumbling-block at the court of France. His services, however, being too valuable to be dispensed with by the Emperor, it would appear that the difficulty was surmounted by giving him the work without the title—in short, he was ambassador without the credentials of an ambassador.
The letters of Busbecq to Rodolph, as printed in the Elzevir edition, are fifty-three in number. The first is dated March 25, 1582; the last was written December 8, 1585. We have in them a description of France on the eve of a most important epoch, the wars of the League; and we have also a most valuable account of the progress of events in the Low Countries, in which Busbecq as a Fleming felt a strong personal interest.
It is not necessary to enter into the history of a period which has been made familiar to English readers by Motley’s Rise of the Dutch Republic, and United Netherlands; but, on the other hand, it must not be supposed that there is no additional information to be gleaned from Busbecq’s letters by those who are already acquainted with the works of the American historian. On the contrary, there are points omitted by Motley which are of considerable importance; as, for instance, Alençon’s plan for making Dunkirk the seat of his government. Again, there are questions like that of Salceda’s conspiracy, in which Busbecq’s evidence does not appear to have been sufficiently considered. To those who are content to take their history at second hand, it is useless to suggest the advisability of comparing Busbecq’s letters with the received modern histories; to real students the advantages are obvious. Here is a witness almost, one might say, under cross-examination. Busbecq had to send off his despatches to his master periodically. He could not alter or retouch them; he was obliged to content himself with giving the news of the day, and his estimate of its value at the time. A distinguished general has said that in his profession it was necessary to be near the troops who were actually engaged, in order to feel the pulse of the battle; and it is only by reading the works of contemporary writers that we can feel the pulse of history.
It is not impossible that Busbecq had his own hopes and ambitions with regard to the Netherlands. On September 15, 1578, the eldest of his Imperial pupils, the Archduke Matthias, was appointed Governor-General of the insurgent Provinces. It is vain now to inquire into what might have been, but in 1578 it could not have seemed altogether impossible that peace and happiness might be in store for the Netherlands under the government of the son of Maximilian and grandson of Ferdinand. It is a significant fact that Busbecq’s despatches to Rodolph prior to March 1582 have not been allowed to see the light. Matthias left the Netherlands in October 1581, so that Busbecq’s published correspondence commences just six months after the departure of the Archduke. If ever the earlier letters should be forthcoming, they will, no doubt, be found to contain much interesting information as to this episode in the history of the Netherlands, and this, in all probability, is the reason they have been suppressed.
In writing to Maximilian of William the Silent, Busbecq speaks of the great patriot of the Netherlands in terms of the highest respect. When writing to Rodolph some eight years later, his tone is completely altered. It is evident that he dislikes him. This change is not surprising if we remember the treatment which Busbecq’s pupil had in the interval experienced at his hands. It seems evident that in this instance Orange placed his faith in the strong battalions; he preferred a treacherous scoundrel to an honest and capable[82] man, because the one could bring French troops into the field, and the other had but his own sword to offer. It would be a curious problem to consider whether in this matter Orange was wise in his generation. What did the Netherlands gain by substituting Alençon for Matthias?
With regard to the religious aspect of the struggle, Busbecq’s evidence is peculiarly valuable. He was a Netherlander, who had left his native country before the struggle broke out. Circumstances had never compelled him to cast in his lot with the one party or the other.
A reference to his conversation at Prinkipo with Metrophanes[83] the Metropolitan, shows us what Busbecq’s wishes must have been. If he desired to see the Greek Church reunited to the Western, he must have been anxious to preserve the latter from schism. His views were those of Erasmus; he wished for union and he wished for reform. That Busbecq was a deeply religious man may be gathered from his description of the death of Quacquelben and other passages; that he was not in any way imbued with the superstitions of his time may be seen by the fact that he went to Constantinople accompanied not by his priest, but by his Bible. From the circumstances of the case it is almost necessary that the evidence with regard to a religious war should be the evidence of partisans; hence the great authority due to the testimony of a neutral.
The reader will be left to gather from Busbecq’s own letters an idea of his life at Paris, and it will only be necessary to resume the story at the point where his letters cease.
At the end of his fifty-first despatch we find that his couriers have difficulty in passing through the country, on account of the outbreak of hostilities between the Guises, the King, and Henry of Navarre.