On Wednesday, October 11th, the news of the fray reached Peronne, but news greatly exaggerated by rumour. Bishop, papal legate, and Burgundian lieutenant all had been ruthlessly murdered in the very presence of Louis's own envoys, who had aided and abetted the hideous crime! To follow the story of an eyewitness:[11]

"Some said that everyone was dead, others asserted the contrary, for such advertisments are never reported after one sort. At length others came who had seen certain canons slain and supposed the bishop[12] to be of the number, as well as the said seigneur de Humbercourt and all the rest. Further, they said that they had seen the king's ambassadors in the attacking company and mentioned them by name. All this was repeated to the duke, who forthwith believed it and fell into an extreme fury, saying that the king had come thither to abuse him, and gave commands to shut the gates of the castle and of the town, alleging a poor enough excuse, namely, that he did this on account of the disappearance of a little casket containing some good rings and money.

"The king finding himself confined in the castle, a small one at that, and having seen a force of archers standing before the gate, was terrified for his person—the more so that he was lodged in the neighbourhood of a tower where a certain Count de Vermandois had caused the death of one of his predecessors as king of France.[13] At that time, I was still with the duke and served him as chamberlain, and had free access to his chamber when I would, for such was the usage in this household.

"The said duke, as soon as he saw the gates closed, ordered all to leave his presence and said to a few of us that stayed with him that the king had come on purpose to betray him, and that he himself had tried to avoid his coming with all his strength, and that the meeting had been against his taste. Then he proceeded to recount the news from Liege, how the king had pulled all the wires through his ambassadors, and how his people had been slain. He was fearfully excited against the king. I veritably believe that if at that hour he had found those to whom he could appeal ready to sympathise with him and to advise him to work the king some mischief, he would have done so, at the least he would have imprisoned him in the great tower.

"None were present when the words fell from the duke but myself and two grooms of the chamber, one of whom was named Charles de Visen, a native of Dijon, an honest fellow, in good credit with his master. We aggravated nothing, but sought to appease the duke as much as in us lay. Soon he tried the same phrases on others, and a report of them ran through the city and penetrated to the very apartment of the king, who was greatly terrified, as was everyone, because of the danger that they saw imminent, and because of the great difficulty in soothing a quarrel when it has commenced between such great princes. Assuredly they were blameworthy in failing to notify their absent servants of this projected meeting. Great inconveniences were bound to arise from this negligence."

Such is Commines's narrative. Eyewitness though he was, it must be remembered that when he wrote the account of this famous interview it was long after the event, and when his point of view was necessarily coloured by his service with Louis. Delightful, however, are the historian's own reflections that he intersperses with his plain narrative. To his mind the only period when it is safe for princes to meet is

"in their youth when their minds are bent on pleasure. Then they may amuse themselves together. But after they are come to man's estate and are desirous each of over-reaching the other, such interviews do but increase their mutual hatred, even if they incur no personal peril (which is well-nigh impossible). Far wiser is it for them to adjust their differences through sage and good servants as I have said at length elsewhere in these memoirs."

Then our chronicler proceeds to give numerous instances of disastrous royal interviews before returning to his subject and to Peronne:

"I was moved [he adds again at the beginning of his new chapter] to tell the princes my opinion of such meetings.[14] Thus the gates were closed and guarded and two or three days passed by. However, the Duke of Burgundy would not see the king, nor had Louis's servants entry to the castle except a few, and those only through the wicket. Nor did the duke see any of his people who had influence over him.

"The first day there was consternation throughout the city. By the second day the duke was a little calmed down. He held a council meeting all day and the greater part of the night. The king appealed to every one who could possibly aid him. He was lavish in his promises and ordered fifteen thousand crowns to be given where it might count, but the officer in charge of the disbursement of this sum acquitted himself ill and retained a part, as the king learned later.