Full download ebooks at https://ebookmeta.

com

The Routledge International Handbook of

Economic Sociology 1st Edition Milan Zafirovski

For dowload this book click link below

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-international-
handbook-of-economic-sociology-1st-edition-milan-zafirovski/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD NOW
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

The Routledge International Handbook of Fat Studies

Routledge International Handbooks 1st Edition Cat
Pausé

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-international-
handbook-of-fat-studies-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-
edition-cat-pause/

Routledge Handbook of the Sociology of Higher Education

First Edition James E. Cote (Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/routledge-handbook-of-the-
sociology-of-higher-education-first-edition-james-e-cote-editor/

Routledge Handbook of the Horn of Africa Routledge

International Handbooks 1st Edition Jean-Nicolas Bach

https://ebookmeta.com/product/routledge-handbook-of-the-horn-of-
africa-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-edition-jean-
nicolas-bach/

The Routledge Handbook of Political Parties Routledge

International Handbooks 1st Edition Neil Carter
(Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-handbook-of-
political-parties-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-edition-
neil-carter-editor/
The Routledge Handbook of Waste Studies Routledge
International Handbooks 1st Edition Zsuzsa Gille
(Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-handbook-of-waste-
studies-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-edition-zsuzsa-
gille-editor/

The Routledge International Handbook of Religious

Education 1st Edition Derek Davis

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-international-
handbook-of-religious-education-1st-edition-derek-davis/

The Routledge International Handbook of Violence

Studies 1st Edition Walter Dekeseredy

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-international-
handbook-of-violence-studies-1st-edition-walter-dekeseredy/

The Routledge International Handbook of Psychosocial

Resilience 1st Edition Updesh Kumar

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-international-
handbook-of-psychosocial-resilience-1st-edition-updesh-kumar/

The Routledge Social Science Handbook of AI Routledge

International Handbooks 1st Edition Anthony Elliott
(Editor)

https://ebookmeta.com/product/the-routledge-social-science-
handbook-of-ai-routledge-international-handbooks-1st-edition-
anthony-elliott-editor/
The Routledge International
Handbook of Economic Sociology

This handbook presents a systematic and comprehensive overview of economic sociol-

ogy, an exemplary interdisciplinary field which draws on theoretical frameworks and
empirical findings from both economics and sociology to present a unique lens on the
interdependence of the economy and society. The handbook is arranged in four parts
which together present the current state-of-the-art of economic sociology as well as
pointing toward future directions for research. The first part outlines the theoretical
foundations of economic sociology and its relations to other fields, particularly with
regard to other alternative approaches to economics, and looks at conceptions and defi-
nitions of economic sociology vary. The second part provides an overview of the histor-
ical development of economic sociology from classical political economy to the present
day. The third part explores the main problematics of economic sociology, analyzing
the economy in relation to particular social institutions, the state, ideology, culture and
art, religion, gender, race/ethnicity, and more. The fourth part focuses on the principal
branches including sociology of the market, industrial organization and work, uncer-
tainty, distribution and inequality, money and finance, and the environment. The stellar
international cast of contributors is drawn from both economics and sociology, there-
fore presenting a holistic view of the field and contributing to a rejuvenation of eco-
nomic sociology within economics. It is an indispensable reference work for researchers
and students across a broad range of sociological and economic disciplines.

Milan Zafirovski, PhD, is Professor in the Department of Sociology at the University

of North Texas, USA. His research interests are interdisciplinary encompassing sociol-
ogy and economics and focusing on economic sociology and sociological economics.
Routledge International Handbooks

The Routledge International Handbook of New Critical Race and

Whiteness Studies
Edited by: Rikke Andreassen, Catrin Lundström, Suvi Keskinen, Shirley Anne Tate.

Routledge Handbook of Asian Parliaments

Edited by: Po Jen Yap and Rehan Abeyratne

The Routledge International Handbook of Children’s Rights and Disability

Edited by: Angharad E. Beckett and Anne-Marie Callus

Routledge Handbook of Macroeconomic Methodology

Edited by: Jesper Jespersen, Victoria Chick and Bert Tieben

The Routledge Handbook of Digital Social Work

Edited by Antonio López Peláez and Gloria Kirwan

The Routledge International Handbook of Economic Sociology

Edited by Milan Zafirovski

The Routledge International Handbook of Intersectionality Studies

Edited by: Kathy Davis and Helma Lutz

The Routledge International Handbook of the Psychology of Morality

Edited by: Naomi Ellemers, Stefano Pagliaro and Félice van Nunspeet
The Routledge International
Handbook of Economic
Sociology

Edited by
Milan Zafirovski
Cover image credit: © Getty Images
First published 2023
by Routledge
4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN
and by Routledge
605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business
© 2023 selection and editorial matter, Milan Zafirovski; individual chapters,
the contributors
The right of Milan Zafirovski to be identified as the author of the editorial
material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted
in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents
Act 1988.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or
utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now
known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in
any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing
from the publishers.
Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or
registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation
without intent to infringe.
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN: 978-0-367-41993-6 (hbk)

ISBN: 978-1-032-48655-0 (pbk)
ISBN: 978-0-367-81715-2 (ebk)

DOI: 10.4324/9780367817152
Typeset in Bembo
by codeMantra
Contents

List of illustrations ix
List of contributors xi

1 Introduction to the Routledge International Handbook

of Economic Sociology 1
M I L A N Z A F I ROV S K I

PART I
Theoretical foundations and relations of economic sociology 55

2 The conception and definition of economic sociology 57

A L B E RT O M A RT I N E L L I

3 Economic sociology and sociological theory 76

C H R I S T I A N PA P I L L O U D

4 Economic sociology and institutional economics 96

GEOFF R EY M. HODGSON

5 Marxism or economic sociology 109

DAV I D FA S E N F E S T

6 Sociological economics: its elements in economics

and its convergence with economic sociology 127
M I L A N Z A F I ROV S K I

PART II
Historical overview of economic sociology 171

7 Elements of economic sociology in classical political economy 173

R AC H A E L B E H R A N D V I RG I L H . S T O R R
vi Contents
8 Classical economic sociology 188
PHI LI PPE ST EIN ER

9 Neoclassical economic approaches to economic sociology 205

A L E X A N D E R W. C R A I G A N D N AT H A N P. G O O D M A N

10 Elements of economic sociology that reframe the

dominant neoclassical economic paradigm 221
P E T E R D. B R A N D O N

PART III
Main problematics of economic sociology 231

11 The economy, social status, and solidarity 233

DAV I D W E A K L I E M

12 Social rationality and economic sociology 247

S I E G WA RT L I N D E N B E RG

13 Economy and polity 271

H A R LA N D PR ECH EL

14 Sociological and economic approaches to law and

the economy. Friends or foes? 291
M A X IMILI A NO M A R ZETTI

15 Economics of convention – a transdisciplinary approach as

core part of new French economic sociology 307
R A IN ER DI A Z -BON E

16 Economic sociology as comparative macrosociology:

exemplified by the moral economy of debt 326
SA BIN E F R ER ICHS

17 The daily-life and moral economy 343

FILIPPO BA R BER A

18 The creative economy: production, consumption,

and temporality 358
H E N R I K F Ü R S T A N D PAT R I K A S P E R S

19 Emotions and the economy 373

N INA BA N DELJ A N D JIN NA J. K I M

20 Economy and social capital, markets and social networks 392

YA N J I E B I A N A N D L E I Z H A N G
 Contents vii
21 Uncertainty in economics and sociology 407
R EZA AZARIAN

PART IV
Special branches and problems of economic sociology 423

22 Sociology of production, work, and industrial relations 425

CH R ISTOPH DEU TSCH M A N N

23 The sociology of economic enterprise, management,

entrepreneurship, and innovation: public sector, private sector,
and non-governmental organizations 442
J E R A L D H AG E

24 Fiscal sociology 461

A L E X IS SPI R E

25 Sociology of financial markets, monetary policy,

and central banking 475
F R É D É R I C L E B A RO N

26 Sociology of consumption, leisure, and lifestyle:

what is a theory of consumption a theory of ? 490
J Ö RG RÖ S S E L , PAT R I C K S C H E N K A N D S E B A S T I A N W E I N G A RT N E R

27 Economic growth, sociological traditions, and the restoration

of social ecology in economic sociology 508
E DWA R D M . C R E N S H AW

28 The economics and economic sociology of collective

action on global warming 525
DAV I D K N O K E

29 Global economy, culture, and unequal ecological

exchange in late modernity: the role of fractal institutional
processes in addressing imbalances 542
THOM A S J. BU R NS, BETH SCH A EF E R CA N IGLI A A N D CA R R I E M. L E SLI E

30 The sociology of sustainable development: a focus on communities 564

DA L E Y E AT T S , C H R I S T Y C O O K S E Y A N D L E I G H M E S S E N G E R

31 The future in the economy 583

M A RT I N S E E L I G E R A N D T I M U R E RG E N

Index 601
Illustrations

Figures
11.1 Beliefs about how people get ahead in the United States, 1973–2018 243
12.1 Dynamic interdependencies between different kinds of co-regulation 250
12.2 Different consequences of mild-solidarity failure 256
30.1 A model displaying components important to SCD 565

Tables
14.1 
Differences and similarities between the EAL and ESL.
Colour note: Greyer colours suggest identity or similarity
(the greyer, the more similar), whereas white indicates differences 300
15.1 Quality conventions 310
15.2 Four possible worlds 314
15.3 Conventions of competence 316
15.4 Forms of valuation 316
15.5 The state, the market and statistics 317
26.1 Overview of the three approaches to consumption 504
Contributors

Patrik Aspers is Chair of sociology at the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland. He

has previously worked in Sweden and Germany, and is the author of numerous books
and articles. Aspers’ research focuses on sociological theory and economic sociology.
He is currently working on uncertainty and marketplaces.
Reza Azarian is a Senior Lecturer and Researcher, working at the Department of
Sociology, Uppsala University, Sweden. His interest areas are economic sociology,
symbolic interactionism, and social networks. He is the author of General Sociology of
Harrison C. White: Chaos and Order in Networks (2005). He has also published a num-
ber of articles, including Analytical Sociology and Symbolic Interactionism: Bridging the
Intra-disciplinary Divide (2021), Relational Habitat: A Conceptual Contribution to Economic
Sociology (2020), Joint Actions, Stories and Symbolic Structures: A Contribution to Herbert
Blumer’s Conceptual Framework (2017), and Uncertainty as a Common Ground for a Dia-
logue between Economics and Sociology (2016).
Nina Bandelj is Chancellor’s Professor in the Department of Sociology and Associ-
ate Vice Provost for Faculty Development at the University of California, Irvine.
An economic sociologist, Bandelj studies how social relations, culture, power, and
emotions influence economic processes, including investment, debt, inequality, glo-
balization, postsocialist transformations, and ideas about economy. She has published
articles, books chapters, and six books on these topics, most recently, Money Talks:
Explaining How Money Really Works (with Frederick F. Wherry and Viviana Zelizer).
Bandelj serves as one of the editors of Socio-Economic Review, Treasurer of the Soci-
ety for the Advancement of Socio-Economics, and Vice-President of the American
Sociological Association.
Filippo Barbera is Professor of Economic Sociology at the CPS Department of the
University of Turin and Fellow at the Collegio Carlo Alberto (Torino). His research
interests are social innovation, foundational economy, and development of marginal
areas. His recent publications include Alternative Food Networks: An Interdisciplinary
Assessment (2018) and The Foundational Economy and Citizenship (2021).
Rachael Behr completed her PhD in Economics at George Mason University and
joined the faculty at Xavier University in Fall 2022.
Yanjie Bian is Professor of Sociology at the University of Minnesota, USA, and Direc-
tor of the Institute for Empirical Social Science Research at Xi’an Jiaotong Univer-
sity, China. Author and editor of 20 books and 200 articles on social networks and
xii Contributors
social capital, social stratification and mobility, and Chinese society, he has received
recognition from Elsevier as one of the Most-Cited Chinese Researchers in Social
Science (2014–2021) and was the recipient of the Distinguished Scholarly Contribu-
tion Award from the International Association for Chinese Management Research
(2020). His current projects are epidemic-specific social capital and job-search net-
works in China, and his most recent book is Guanxi: How China Works (2019).
Peter Brandon currently works at the State University of New York. Brandon’s in-
terests lie in the relationship between social institutions and the economy, especially
as this relationship relates to economic inequality, poverty, and the welfare state. He
also has interests in game theory and modeling intra- and inter-generational recipro-
cal exchanges and inter vivos transfers. Alongside his economic sociology research, he
has studied the determinants of child and family well-being, the circumstances and
dynamics of inter-generational households, and low-income families’ participation
in social safety net programs.
Thomas J. Burns is Professor of Sociology at the University of Oklahoma and is active
in the Environmental Studies, Religious Studies, and International Relations pro-
grams there. His research focuses on the interface between the natural environment
and social institutions from a comparative and historical perspective, particularly as
they pertain to issues of human flourishing, sustainability, and ethics. His book with
Beth Schaefer Caniglia, Environmental Sociology: The Ecology of Late Modernity, won
the Gerald L. Young Book Award granted by the Society for Human Ecology.
Beth Schaefer Caniglia serves as Senior Scientist Advisor in the fields of resilience
and environmental justice for General Dynamics Information Technology, provid-
ing expert consultation to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. She holds the
post of Editor-in-Chief of The Solutions Journal. Dr. Caniglia is a globally recognized
expert in the area of regenerative urban development. She is author or editor of five
books, including Regenerative Urban Development, Climate Change and the Common
Good (2019), Environmental Sociology: The Ecology of Late Modernity with Thomas J.
Burns (2016), and Resilience, Environmental Justice & the City (2017).
Christy Cooksey, PhD, is an Adjunct Instructor at Texas Wesleyan University, Fort
Worth. Her areas of research interest include Sustainable Community Development,
Globalization, and Crime. Her dissertation, The impacts of urban sustainability on eco-
nomic prosperity: Sustainability in the spotlight, is a quantitative analysis of the effects of
environmental protectionism and social equity on economic prosperity at the city
level.
Alexander W. Craig is a Visiting Assistant Professor of Economics and Business at
Beloit College. He earned his PhD in Economics from George Mason University,
where he was a PhD Fellow with the Mercatus Center and a Graduate Fellow with
the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics.
Edward M. Crenshaw, 1958–2021 – ‘A lifelong academic and charismatic intellec-
tual, he acquired a master’s degree in Sociology from The University of Oklahoma
and later a PhD from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. A longtime
fixture of the Ohio State University Sociology department, passed away on Decem-
ber 25, 2021.’ From https://www.dispatch.com/obituaries/b0057431
 Contributors xiii
Christoph Deutschmann, born in 1946, is Professor Emeritus and former Chair of
Sociology at the University of Tübingen, Germany. He has worked as a Research
Fellow at the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt/M at Tohoku University in
Sendai, Japan, and at the Science Center for Social Research in Berlin. His research
interests and publications are in the fields of economic sociology, the sociology of
work, and social theory. His most important recent publication is Disembedded Mar-
kets. Economic Theology and Global Capitalism (2019).
Rainer Diaz-Bone studied social sciences and applied social research at the Ruhr-Uni-
versity Bochum (Germany). Afterwards, he was an Assistant at the Hochschule für
Musik, Theater und Medien Hannover (Germany) and at the Freie University of Ber-
lin (Germany). His dissertation was awarded the Dissertation prize by the German
Sociological Association. Since 2008 he is a Professor of Sociology with a focus on
qualitative and quantitative methods at the University of Lucerne (Switzerland). His
main areas of research are methodical and theoretical foundations of social sciences,
economic sociology, and cultural sociology, as well as new French neopragmatic and
neostructuralist sociology. He has served as President of the Swiss Sociological Asso-
ciation (SSA) from 2018 until 2021.
Timur Ergen is a Senior Researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of So-
cieties (Cologne) and a JFK-Fellow at the Minda de Gunzburg Center for European
Studies at Harvard University (Cambridge, MA). Timur Ergen’s empirical research
focuses on energy transitions, economic competition, innovation and technology
policy, as well as on the history of the post-industrial economy. He is a Co-Organ-
izer of the SASE Research Network J “Digital Economy” and a member of the SASE
Executive Council.
David Fasenfest is an Associate Professor of Sociology and Urban Affairs, College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences, Wayne State University, the editor of the journal Critical
Sociology and edits the two book series Studies in Critical Social Science and New Schol-
arship in Political Economy. His research focuses on inequality, urban development, and
Marxism. He is the author of “Emergency Management in Michigan: A Misguided
Policy Initiative” (2018) in Ashley Nickels and Jason Rivera (eds.), Community Devel-
opment and Public Administration Theory: Empowerment through the Enhancement of Dem-
ocratic Principles; “Monsieur Le Capital and Madame La Terre on the Brink” (2017)
in Molly Scott Cato and Peter North (eds.), Towards Just and Sustainable Economies:
Comparing Social and Solidarity Economy in the North and South; “The Cooperative
City: Building Economic Democracy” (2015), in Michael Peter Smith and Lucas
Owen Kirkpatrick (eds.), Reinventing Detroit. Most recently, he is the editor of Marx
Matters (2022).
Sabine Frerichs is Professor of Economic Sociology and Head of the Institute for Soci-
ology and Social Research at the Vienna University of Economics and Business, Aus-
tria. She holds a PhD degree in Sociology from the University of Bamberg, Germany,
and was Assistant Professor at the Law Faculty of the University of Helsinki, Finland,
where she led a project on “European Bonds: The Moral Economy of Debt”. In her
research, she is concerned with intersections of law, economy, and society in Europe
and beyond, theory development in socioeconomics and the economic sociology of
law, and understandings of the social in the behavioral and cognitive sciences.
xiv Contributors
Henrik Fürst is a Postdoctoral Researcher in Sociology at Uppsala University and
a Guest Researcher in Sociology at the University of Amsterdam. In his ongoing
research, he studies the conditions for cultural production, especially career contin-
uation and discontinuation in the creative industries.
Nathan P. Goodman is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the Department of Economics at
New York University, where he is affiliated with the Program on the Foundations
of the Market Economy. He earned his PhD in Economics from George Mason
University, where he was a PhD Fellow with the Mercatus Center and a Graduate
Fellow with the F.A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics,
and Economics.
Jerald Hage is the Director of the Center for Innovation at the University of Maryland
and has published 18 books and over 150 papers. His last book, Knowledge Evolution
and Societal Transformations, just appeared in paperback edition, and attempts to syn-
thesize the bulk of social science theory, indicating the new adaptive problems cre-
ated and some proposed solutions. Currently, he is working on an evaluation method
for demonstrating how to study systematic coordinated organizational networks
(SCIONs) with a case study of NicaSalud created after Hurricane Mitch destroyed
the primitive health care system in northern Nicaragua. In addition, he is seeking to
publish paper (with Wilbur Hadden) that demonstrates how SCIONs can solve the
problem of social inequality in the advanced industrialized countries and represents
a new coordination mode for society in addition to market and state coordination.
Geoffrey M. Hodgson is Emeritus Professor in Management at Loughborough Uni-
versity London, UK. His principal research is on the nature, role, and evolution of
social institutions. He is the author of several books, including, more recently, Liberal
Solidarity (2021), Is There a Future for Heterodox Economics? (2019), Is Socialism Feasible?
(2019), Wrong Turnings (2018), and Conceptualizing Capitalism (2015). He has published
widely in leading academic journals, and he is the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of
Institutional Economics. His website is www.geoffreymhodgson.uk.
Jinna J. Kim is a Doctoral Candidate in Sociology at the University of California,
Irvine. Her research interests include economic sociology, culture, inequality, con-
sumption, education, young adults, and identity. Her dissertation examines how
young adults think about money matters, including social mobility, financial literacy,
and ethical or sustainable consumption. She is a Mellon Mayes Undergraduate Fellow.
David Knoke earned a PhD from the University of Michigan in 1972. He is a Profes-
sor of Sociology at the University of Minnesota, where he teaches and does research
on diverse social networks, including political, economic, healthcare, intra- and in-
terorganizational, and terrorist and counterterror networks. His most recent books
are Social Network Analysis, Third Edition (2020 with Song Yang), and Multimodal Po-
litical Networks (2021 with Mario Diani, James Hollway, and Dimitris Christopoulos).
Frédéric Lebaron is Professor of Sociology at the Ecole normale supérieure Paris-Sa-
clay and member of the université Paris-Saclay, where he directs the department of
teaching and research in human and social sciences (DER SHS). He also teaches
at Sciences-Po Saint-Germain-en-Laye, Sciences Po Aix, and Sorbonne Université
(Master in Contemporary Sociology, within the framework of the agreement with
ENS Paris-Saclay). He is a member of IDHES-ENS Paris-Saclay and a Researcher
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
directions submitting, by force of arms, to the king, they made offers
of a surrender on a fair capitulation. The king consented, for two
reasons: first, because he was ready to render good for evil:
secondly, considering the mortality that was to be dreaded, if
matters were pushed to extremities, he was glad to compound for
the departure of the English on the following terms.
The city of Bordeaux was to be yielded up to him, and the
inhabitants were to remain his true and loyal subjects,—they taking
an oath never to rebel again, but to acknowledge the king of France
as their true and legal lord. The English were to be allowed to
transport themselves in their own vessels to England, or to Calais, as
they should please. But because some of the lords of that country
and city had maliciously and traitorously sought the alliance of
England, and had gone thither for that purpose, contrary to their
oaths and declarations made to the king in the preceding year, who,
at a very great expense and loss of men, had conquered them, the
king would reserve to himself the power of banishing from the
country of Bordelois twenty persons, according to his pleasure, such
as had gone to England to seek the aid of the English, and
particularly the lord de Duras, the lord de l'Esparre, and others. This
capitulation was signed on the 17th day of October, in the year
1453.
In truth, the king laboured greatly in these matters, both in body
and mind; for, after the aid of God, he was indebted for the
peaceable recovery of this country to his own prudent conduct, and
to the gracious manner with which he received those who returned
to their obedience. He was also supported by his vassals and
subjects with the same earnestness as if the recovery of his kingdom
had personally concerned themselves.
Sir Pierre de Beauveau, lord de la Bessiere, died of his wounds three
days after the taking of Châtillon, which was a great loss. Sir James
de Chabannes, grand master of the household, was likewise slain
there: he was much lamented, as he was a most valorous knight.
The country being thus recovered, the king determined on going to
Tours, after leaving, for its defence, the count de Clermont his
lieutenant general, sir Theaulde de Valpergue, and sir John de
Bureau, treasurer of France and mayor of the city of Bordeaux, with
a sufficient force of men at arms, archers, and cross-bows. This was
become absolutely necessary by reason of their late treacherous
conduct, for, according to a maxim of law, 'Semul malus, semper
præsumitur malus.' It was therefore expedient to keep a heavy hand
on them, that they might be under greater subjection and prevented
from rebelling again.

FOOTNOTES:
[158] Blanquefort,—a town in Guienne near Bordeaux.
[159] Cadillac en Fransadois,—seven leagues from Bordeaux.
[160] St Macaire,—on the Garonne, nine leagues from Bordeaux.
[161] Langon,—one league from Cadillac from Bordeaux.
[162] Camus,—or Cameise. See Dugdale.
 CHAP. LVI.
THE GRAND TURK BESIEGES CONSTANTINOPLE, AND
BATTERS THE CITY WITH HEAVY ARTILLERY.—IT IS
TAKEN BY STORM.—THE CRUELTIES COMMITTED THERE.
—A REMEDY PROPOSED TO RESIST THE TURK[163].
On the 4th of April, after Easter, in this same year 1453,
Morbesan[164], son of Orestes, great lords in Achaia, advanced near
to Constantinople, and, on the 5th day of this month, besieged that
city all round with two hundred thousand men,—sixty thousand of
whom were archers, and from thirty to forty thousand cavalry. About
a fourth part of them were armed with haubergeons and coats of
mail, others after the french manner,—some in the bulgarian
manner, and in different fashions. Many had helmets of iron, and
others were armed with bows and cross-bows. The greater part,
however, of the sixty thousand were without any other armour than
targets and turkish blades. The remaining hundred were composed
of merchants, artisans, followers of the army, pillagers, and
destroyers of the country.
There were very many bombards and culverins made use of at this
siege,—and one particularly large bombard, that shot stones twelve
spans and four fingers in circumference, weighing eighteen hundred
pounds. These bombards shot daily from one hundred to six score
times,—and this thundering lasted for fifty-five days, expending a
thousand weight of powder each day, which was necessary for the
numerous culverins that were employed.
The Turk had likewise a fleet of sixteen or eighteen galleys, and from
sixty to eighty galiots, having each eighteen or twenty oars, and
from sixteen to twenty small barks, called Palendrins[165], to
transport horses in, and plenty of gun-carriages. When the siege had
been regularly formed, Sangombassa[166] principal minister to the
Turk, and who had the greatest credit and authority with him, had
transported over land, the distance of two or three miles, from sixty
to eighty galleys, and other armed vessels, into the Melse
Mondagarin[167], near to Pera, and between the two cities. The
Turks could not by any other means enter the harbour of
Constantinople, as the Bosphorus and the straits of the Dardanelles
were strongly guarded by the Christians, who were so posted that
they could relieve each other when attacked.
The commander of this expedition was a Turk called
Albitangoth[168], who broke through four of the genoese ships. The
Turk appointed another commander to surround the city by sea and
land. Constantinople is a very strong city, of a triangular form,
twenty miles in circuit on the land side, and five miles wide from the
land boundary to the harbour and gulf. The walls on the land side
are very strong and high, having barbicans and loop holes on the
top, well fortified without by the ditches and ramparts. The principal
walls are from fifteen to twenty-two fathoms high: in some places
six, and in others eight fathoms wide: the outworks are twenty
fathoms high and three in thickness, and the ditches ten deep. The
city contained from twenty-five to thirty thousand persons, and six
thousand combatants. In the harbour were thirty ships and nine
galleys, to defend the chain that had been thrown across it: of this
number were two armed vessels, and three merchant ships, from
the Venetians; three belonging to the emperor,—and one to sir John
Justinian, a Genoese in the pay of the emperor.
Constantinople, although besieged by sea and land, and strongly
battered by bombards and cannon, held out for fifty days, during
which a captain of one of the galleys, in conjunction with others
ordered on this service, attempted to set fire to the turkish fleet; but
the galley was sunk by a heavy stone from a bombard, and the
others ran on the sharp stakes with which the Turks had fortified the
van division of their fleet.
On the land side, Sangombassa, king of the Albanians, had in his
army many who had been accustomed to work in gold and silver
mines,—and he ordered them to open fourteen mines under the
walls of the city, to throw them down. As these mines were opened
at a distance from the walls, the Christians countermined them, and
at times stifled the Turks in their mine with smoke, or suffocated
them with stinks: at other times they drowned them, by introducing
water suddenly on them, or destroyed them by fighting hand to
hand. Sangombassa constructed a high and strong tower of wood
that overtopped the walls, and threw across an arm of the sea a
bridge of boats one thousand fathoms in length and seven wide, for
the army to cross, besides erecting other smaller towers that were
both light and strong, and could be moved from one place to
another when wanted. There were daily skirmishes, in which many
were slain on each side,—but for one that was killed in the town one
hundred were destroyed of the besiegers.
At this siege were many greek Christians, and others from different
parts, who, although subjects to the Turk, are not constrained to
renounce their religion: they therefore pray to and adore God at
their pleasure. There were beside several captains and powerful
Turks, who, out of spite to Sangombassa, as he oppressed them
much, gave information to those in the town, by letters fastened to
arrows and by all other possible means, of what was going forward
in the camp. Among other things, the Christians were informed of
the grand Turk having held a council of his ministers and principal
persons for four whole days; and that in this council a captain, called
Colombassa[169], had advised the raising of the siege, saying to the
Turk, 'Thou hast done thy duty: thou hast already given many great
battles to the Christians, and at each time numbers of thy people
have fallen. Thou seest from the fortifications and defence of the city
that it is impregnable,—insomuch that the more thou sendest to
attack it, so many more are left dead before it. Those who have
mounted the walls have been repulsed or slain,—and thy ancestors
never had the power nor the inclination to advance so far as thou
hast done, which ought to satisfy thy ambition, without wishing the
total destruction of thy people.'
So much was said by others, in consequence of this harangue, that
the Turk doubted within his own breast whether he should return,
and erect two columns on the spot where he then was, to proclaim
to the world that he had done more than any of his predecessors
had ever undertaken, and to inform posterity that no Turk had ever
before dared to approach so near to Constantinople.
Sangombassa was of a contrary opinion, and thus addressed the
Turk: 'Thou hast shown thyself the strongest. Thou hast overthrown
part of the walls; we will completely destroy the remainder. Only let
us give one more determined attack,—and, if we then fail of
conquest, we will submit to act according to thy pleasure.' He
expressed himself with so much warmth and earnestness that the
Turk consented to his proposal; and intelligence thereof was
conveyed into the town, with exhortations to hold out with courage
for a few days longer, and the siege would assuredly be raised.
The Turk, being resolved to storm the city, ordered a solemn fast to
take place three days before the time fixed on, in honour of the God
of Heaven, whom alone he adores. It was kept very strictly for the
three days, none of the army eating any thing during the day-time;
but at night they feasted, and their camp and fleet were then
illuminated with a multitude of torches, so that land and sea seemed
on fire: they added loud music with drums and other instruments,
for with trumpets they were ill provided.
When the time arrived for the storming, both parties seemed
determined on victory or death. The attack began very slowly in the
evening, and the Turk had made the following arrangement of his
forces:—Siglardy[170], captain-general of Turkey, was posted, with
twenty thousand men, at the gate of Pucchi, where was the heat of
the battle: Sangombassa, with about a third of the army, was posted
at the gate St Romain, about a mile distant from Pucchi. Ebbigabeth,
governor-general of Greece, was placed on the side of Galigaria[171],
near to the emperor's palace. The greater part of the mines were
two miles distant from St Romain. The renegade Albanian,
Sangombassa, was posted on the other side of the canal near to
Pera, with other renegade Christians; for, in these countries, many
daily recant from their religion.
At the commencement of the attack, the Christians defended
themselves well, particularly at St Romain, which was the weakest
part of the walls; for lately good part had been damaged, and even
thrown down. The heavy cannon and the culverins kept up so brisk a
fire that breaches were made of many fathoms wide in several
places; and the firing was so incessant that the sky could scarcely be
seen for the thickness of the smoke.
The besieged instantly repaired the breaches with old casks and
bags of earth, and defended themselves as well as they could. At
this spot was sir John Justinian, who behaved with great courage:
indeed, the whole city placed their dependance on his abilities.
As a last effort, the grand Turk now advanced thither in person, with
two banners and ten thousand chosen men for his guard, beside an
infinity of Turks, with scaling ladders, moveable wooden castles, and
other engines. The attack was become very bloody: the ditches were
filled, and the walls scaled. At this critical moment was sir John
Justinian wounded by a ball from a culverin, and carried off to be
dressed, after he had resigned his command to two genoese
gentlemen. The Turks pursued their success,—and the Christians,
seeing themselves overpowered, and that sir John Justinian had
quitted his command, which they mistook for his having fled,
abandoned the walls, and ran away. Thus did the Turks enter
Constantinople, the 28th day of May, in the year aforesaid, putting
all to the sword who made any resistance[172].
No attack was made on Pera, for the greater part of the inhabitants
were in Constantinople assisting in its defence. Those who had
remained did not attempt to carry away any of their effects, but
deliberated to send the keys of their town to the Turk, and offer him
the city, in which were six thousand men, and throw themselves on
the mercy of God. A good many of both sexes, however, embarked
on board a genoese vessel to escape, and one ship laden with
women was seized by the Turks.
The emperor of Constantinople died there. Some say that he was
beheaded,—others, that he was squeezed to death by the crowd as
he was attempting to escape by one of the gates: both may
perchance be true,—as he may have been pressed to death, and the
Turks may have cut off his head afterwards.
This was a melancholy event for the Christians; for after the Turks
had gained peaceable possession of the city, they entered the
churches, more especially the cathedral of St Sophia, which is a very
large and magnificent building,—and finding it full of ladies, damsels,
and others of high rank, they ravished them all without any
distinction, and in contempt of God our Creator and of the catholic
faith. The Turk even violated the empress in this church, made her
his concubine, and carried her with him when he departed from the
city. His troops indulged themselves with impunity in every luxury
and detestable vice.
The large galleys of the Venetians, and from Trebisonde, waited until
the middle of the ensuing day to save some of the Christians, and
about four hundred embarked on board. In the number was Jacques
Totaldi[173], who had been on guard at a part of the wall distant
from where the Turks had entered: perceiving that all was lost, he
made for the shore, and by swimming saved himself on board one of
these galleys.
Had the venetian fleet, under the command of John la Rendour[174],
arrived the preceding day with his troops, most assuredly the city
would have been relieved,—for it consisted of nine galleys and
twenty other vessels. It arrived the day after the conquest at
Negropont.
It has been estimated, that the plunder the Turks made in
Constantinople amounted to four thousand millions of ducats: the
loss of the Venetians alone was said to be fifty thousand ducats. The
Genoese saved on board their galleys twenty thousand: the
Florentines lost twenty thousand,—the merchants of Ancona fifteen
thousand. From conversations with different Turks, we have heard
that the grand Turk, when only twenty-three or twenty-four years
old, was more cruel than Nero, and delighted in shedding blood: he
was bold and ambitious, and more ardent to conquer the world than
Alexander or Cæsar. It is alleged that he possesses larger territories,
and greater power, than any other monarch whatever. He has
different histories read out to him,—and demands the reason why
such and such things have been done. He holds it an easy matter to
throw a bridge from Megara[175] to Venice, for a passage to march
his army thither. He inquires where Rome is situated,—and after the
duke of Milan, of his valiant deeds, and other affairs. He can talk of
nothing but war; and declares that he will make Constantinople his
seat of empire, for that he is able and desirous to establish a large
navy. He imagines that there is not a prince on earth but will bring
him the keys of his towns before he calls for them, considering that
he has taken by storm Constantinople, the strongest city in Europe,
and so powerful that it was thought no army, however great, could
accomplish it, and that he and his troops are bold in arms, holding
their lives of no value to gain an object. It is supposed that the Turk
will not this summer attempt any other warlike enterprise, but
attend to his new settlement in Constantinople, unless some places
he may wish for should surrender quietly. His soldiers want to return
to their homes to enjoy and repose themselves, but he keeps them
strictly to good discipline, that he may be prepared to resist any
attacks that shall be made upon him. However, if the Christians
would firmly unite, and act promptly, they would drive him out of
Europe, never to return again.
This would be the plan I would offer for so desirable an object: First,
an universal peace must be established in Christendom; then the
Venetians, the duke of Milan, the Florentines, and the other princes
of Italy, should raise an army of twenty thousand horse, well
appointed, and under able captains, who should lead them to Pera,
through Albania, as far as the possessions of the Christians, where
they should halt in a country well supplied with all kinds of provision.
They will be there secure, and instantly joined by the Albanians,
Sciavonians, and other Christian nations, who will unite in the
defence of the catholic faith.
In addition to this army, another should be formed at sea by the
king of Arragon, the Venetians, the Genoese, the Florentines, and
other maritime nations, whose fleets will be fully sufficient to
conquer that of the Turk if it be not greatly increased to what it is at
present. This fleet should sail for the port of Negropont, and take
Sagripoch[176], and other places, from the Turk: it should likewise
blockade the passage of the Dardanelles, and prevent any
intercourse between Turkey and Greece.
The emperor of Hungary, the Bohemians, the Poles, the Walachians,
and other nations in that quarter, should raise an army under the
command of John Waiwoda[177], who is much feared by the Turks,
and enter Turkey by Adrianople; and all these armies should so
manage that their invasions take place at the same time, and that
good intelligence reign among them that the success may not be
doubtful.
The Turk, with all his efforts, cannot raise a greater army than two
hundred thousand men, including bad and good; and it must be
added, that among the number are many Christians, and others of
his subjects, that follow him unwillingly, who on the approach of a
sufficient army of Christians will desert and join them.
The Turks, by nature and custom, will not wait to be besieged, but
continually keep the field, which will the more easily encourage
desertions. The Christians from Russia must join this division of the
united forces.
The Caramanian, who is a great prince, and a bitter enemy to the
Turks, should he be informed of this intended warfare against the
Turk, he will harrass him much, and, with some inducements, may
probably become a Christian. In Greece, there will not be a common
peasant but will exert himself to bring provisions to the Christian
army. On the other hand, the Turks will be straitened for provision,
as their resources from Greece will be cut off by sea; and it may be
supposed that the Greeks will be anxious to recover their lands by
the sword,—and the moment that the two armies shall approach
Turkey, the whole of the unbelievers' army must be nearly famished
and defeated.
Should the Christians, however, delay their exertions, and allow the
Turk time to strengthen himself by sea and land, there can be no
doubt but that he will cause great damage to the Christians, which
God forbid!
In the venetian galley, eight citizens of Venice returned, who had
been settled at Constantinople; but thirty-eight gentlemen and forty
others remained behind. May God speedily assist them in their
deliverance.

FOOTNOTES:
[163] M. du Cange says, that this chapter must be compared with
Phrantzes.
This chapter, containing the hearsay account of transactions
which took place at a considerable distance from the kingdom of
France abounds, as it might be expected, with errors, the
correction of which, as they occur, would be a task equally
laborious and unprofitable. Whoever wishes to make himself
acquainted with the details of the siege and capture of
Constantinople by Mahomet II. may peruse the 68th chapter of
Gibbon's History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
[164] Morbesan. Mahomet II. son to Amurath or Morad II.
[165] Palendrins,—Palendric,—a flat boat.——Du Cange's
Glossary.
[166] Sangombassa. Q.
[167] Melse Mondagarin. Q, the sea of Marmora?
[168] Albitangoth. Q.
[169] Colombassa. Q.
[170] Siglardy. Q.
[171] Galigaria. Q. Galata?
[172] 'Constantinople had long been aimed at by the turkish
power; but the diversions formed by Huniades and George
Castriot had retarded an event, which the effeminacy and
profligacy of both rulers and people had rendered inevitable.
Constantine Drakoses, the last emperor, merited a better fate, if
there could be a better, than dying for his country. When he
found Mohammed determined to besiege his city, he raised what
force he could, which amounted to no more than three or four
thousand men; nor could the imperial treasury afford to continue
in its pay a celebrated german engineer, who, on his stipend
being lessened, went in disgust to the Turks, and cast those
immense pieces of cannon which are still the wonder of the
Dardanelles.
'To Giustiniani, a Genoese, who, with five hundred men, came to
defend the city, Constantine gave the chief command, promising
to make him prince of Lemnos if he drove off the Turks.
Meanwhile the citizens sat like ideots determined to suffer the
extremities of war, and expose their wives and children to
violation and slaughter, rather than support an emperor who they
knew wished to unite the greek with the latin church.
'Mohammed had four hundred thousand men in arms around the
city; but though his fleet was large, he could not approach the
walls by the harbour, and had even been witness to the success
of five ships from Genoa, who had forced their way through his
numerous navy. To remedy this, he contrived by engines, and an
immense strength of hands, to draw a vast detachment of galleys
over a peninsula into the harbour, and then the blockade was
complete. The cannoneers, too, of the Turks were instructed by
an hungarian ambassador (moved by a foolish prophecy that
Christendom would never thrive until Constantinople was taken,)
how to do the most damage to the old and ruinous fortifications
of the devoted city.
'When all was ready for an assault, Mohammed sent to offer lives,
liberty, and goods, to the emperor and people, with settlements
in Greece, if they would give up the place,—but in vain. The Turks
were at first gallantly repulsed, Constantine defending the breach,
and Giustiniani bravely seconding his efforts: unhappily the latter
being seized with a panic, on receiving a slight wound, and
quitting his post, the Italians, who were the strength of the
besieged, followed, and the enemy burst in with hardly any
opposition. The wretched emperor saw that all was lost,—and
was only heard to say, 'Alas! is no Christian here to strike off my
head?' A Turk performed that office; and Mohammed with his
army rushing in, every bar to slaughter, rapine, and violence,
gave way.
'Meanwhile numbers of the Greeks stood calmly around the
church of Santa Sophia, while others coolly employed themselves
in a solemn procession, deluded by a fanatic, who had foretold,
that as soon as the infidels should force their way to a certain
part of Europe, and enriched every province, but particularly Italy,
with their science.
'The whimsically superstitious are fond of a silly remark, that as
the western empire began and ended with an Augustus so did
that of the east begin and end with a Constantine; but a much
more useful speculation from the dreadful fate of this metropolis,
and still more from that of Rome in 1527, presents itself to the
rich and indolent citizen, viz. that opulence, far from securing its
owners, only holds out a bait to the destroyer; and that no
wealthy city should think itself secure without union, good
government, and military exertions, among its inhabitants.'
Andrews' Hist. of Great Britain.
[173] Totaldi. Q.
[174] John la Rendour. Q. Giacopo Loredan? He sailed from
Venice with only five galleys, and was to take up five more in the
ports of Dalmatia and Candia.
Storia della Repubblica di Venezia.—Laugier.—Tom. vii. p. 63.
[175] Megara. This must be a mistake: indeed, the whole chapter
is exceedingly confused.
[176] Sagripoch. Q.
[177] John Waiwoda. Q.
 CHAP. LVII.
THE TURK SENDS LETTERS TO THE POPE, WHO, IN
CONSEQUENCE, WISHES TO FORM A CROISADE AGAINST
HIM.—LE BLANC[178], KNIGHT-MARSAL OF HUNGARY,
DEFEATS THE TURKS NEAR THE PORT OF
SAMBRINE[179].
The grand Turk, moved by presumption at his unexpected success
and prosperity, and through his great pride, sent two letters to pope
Nicholas, of similar contents,—the one in Latin, the other in French.
The tenour of the last was as follows: 'Morbesan lord of Achaia, son
to Orestes, with his brothers,—to the high priest of Rome, health,
according to his deserts. Whereas it has lately come to our ears that,
at the request and prayers of the people of Venice, you have publicly
preached in your churches, that whoever shall take up arms against
us shall receive in this life a remission of his sins, with a promise of
life eternal hereafter. This we did not hear of until the arrival of
some pilgrims, who have crossed the sea in venetian vessels,—and it
has caused in us the utmost astonishment. Although you may
perhaps have received powers from the God of thunders to absolve
and release souls, so much the more prudently and discreetly should
you exercise this power, nor by such means induce the Christians to
act hostilely against us, and more especially the Italians; for we have
lately had information that our fathers have declared the turkish
nation was innocent of the death of your Christ crucified,—and that
they neither possess nor have any knowledge of those places which
are by you held sacred, and that we have always had the jewish
nation in hatred, who, from what we have read in histories and
chronicles, did most treacherously betray and deliver up the Christ to
the roman judge in Jerusalem, to suffer death on the cross.
'We marvel, therefore, and grieve, that the Italians should be our
enemies,—for we are naturally inclined to be attached to them, as
being, like to ourselves, of the issue of the trojan race, and of
ancient birth. We are sprung from the same blood, and regularly
descended from king Priam and his line; and it is our intention to
advance with our armies to those parts of Europe that have been
promised to us by the gods of our forefathers. We have also the
intention of restoring Troy the great, and to avenge the blood of
Hector and the queen Ixion[180], by subjecting to our government
the empire of Greece and punishing the descendants of the
transgressors. We also intend subjugating the island of Crete, and
the others in that sea, of which the Venetians have robbed us by
violence.
'We require, therefore, that you act with more discretion, and that
you impose silence on your preachers in Italy, that they may no
longer comply with the requests before mentioned of these
Venetians, and provoke the Christians to wage war against us, as we
have no cause of warfare against them from any difference in our
creeds. It is of no importance that we do not put our whole faith in
your Christ, since we allow him to have been a very great prophet;
and as we do not follow his law, we are not to be compelled to
believe in him.
'If any dispute has arisen between us and the Venetians, it is without
colour of justice, or of authority from Cæsar or from any other
prince. Through their pride and ambition, they have possessed
themselves of many islands and other places that formed part of our
government,—which usurpations we cannot and will not longer
suffer, for the time of repossession is near at hand.
'For these and other reasons you ought therefore to be silent, and
desist from your enterprises, especially as we know the Venetians to
be a distinct people, in their manners and laws, from the Romans,
although they think themselves superior to all the world; but, by the
aid of our great god Jupiter, we will bring their pride and insolence
to an end. Should you not prudently desist from your intentions, we
shall march our whole force against you, aided by the numberless
kings of the east, who seem now to be slumbering; and we will bring
an irresistible force by sea and land, not only against you and your
walking pilgrims bearing the cross, but also against Germany and
France, should you excite them to war upon us.
'With the aid of Neptune, god of the sea, we intend to cross the
Hellespont, into Dalmatia, with numberless armies, and to visit the
northern regions as far as Thrace.
'Given at our triumphal palace in June, in the 840th year of
Mohammed, sealed and enregistered.'
About this time, the chevalier le Blanc, who was not of a noble
family, but originally a smith in Hungary, before he commenced
captain in the wars under the king of Hungary, took the field to
combat the Turks, having with him from twenty to twenty-four
thousand combatants, and had gained the port of Sambrine, where
were full eighty thousand Turks. They had waited at this port fifteen
days, to see if any reinforcements would arrive, which coming to the
knowledge of the knight, he departed from Mortune[181], and came
up with the Turks two hours before day-break, and attacked them
with such courage that twenty-four thousand were slain: the rest
fled to their shipping and escaped,—for the Hungarians had no
vessels to pursue them. The Turks, however, fought valiantly,—and
the knight with many of his companions were wounded. He returned
back with fifty Turks his prisoners: six of whom he sent to pope
Nicholas: six to the king of France, and six to the duke of Burgundy.
In the number was the first cousin of the grand Turk.

FOOTNOTES:
[178] Q. Le Blanc?
[179] Q. 'Le Port de Sambrine?'
[180] Hecuba.
[181] Mortune. Q.
 CHAP. LVIII.
JUDGMENT GIVEN AGAINST JACQUES COEUR AND THE
DAMSEL OF MORTAIGNE.—MASTER WILLIAM EDELIN,
DOCTOR OF DIVINITY, IS PUBLICLY REPRIMANDED AT
EVREUX.
On the 29th of May, in the year 1453, judgment was pronounced by
the chancellor of France, in the presence of the king, against
Jacques Coeur, for the crimes he had been charged with, and for
which he had been imprisoned.
In consequence of the charges made out against him, he was
condemned to death and confiscation of effects; but as the king
inclined to mercy, and would rather sinners should repent than die,
out of his especial grace, he remitted the first part of the sentence,
on condition that he redeemed, at any price, the Christian whom he
had restored to the Saracens,—or if that could not be done, then he
was to redeem some other Christian slave from their power.
In regard to the money which he had unjustly wrung from the king's
subjects, to the amount of incalculable sums, he was adjudged to
repay one hundred thousand crowns; and for the many and various
offences that he had committed against the king, he was sentenced
to pay a fine of four hundred thousand crowns, and the overplus of
his effects, wheresoever they might be placed, was confiscated to
the crown. He was also deprived of his offices, both public and
private, and declared incapable of ever again holding them, and was
likewise banished France.
He was also adjudged to make amende honorable[182] to the king,
in the person of his attorney, bareheaded and ungirdled, having a
lighted link of ten pounds weight in his hands; and he was to
declare, that he had falsely and disloyally restored the Christian to
the Saracens, and supplied them with arms and ammunition,
requesting pardon from God, from the king, and from Justice.
It was also declared, that the bonds of the lords de la Fayette and de
Cadillac were void, and of none effect; and that neither Jacques
Coeur nor any of his heirs should receive any advantage from them,
as they were now annulled.
When the chancellor had passed this sentence, he added, by
command of the king, that his majesty reserved to himself the
ultimate decision of the banishment and other graces.
In regard to the damsel of Mortaigne, although her body and effects
had been condemned, yet in consideration of the great services
which her ancestors and husband had rendered the king, his majesty
remits the capital part of the sentence, and restores to her the
effects that had been confiscated; but she is strictly forbidden, on
pain of suffering the above penalties, to approach, within two
leagues, the persons of the king or queen,—and is likewise
condemned to make amende honorable to the king, by proxy in her
attorney, who is to declare that she had falsely and wickedly accused
Jacques Coeur, Jacques Colone, and Martin Prendoux, and to ask
pardon for the same of God, the king, and Justice. She was
condemned to pay to the said Martin the sum of four hundred livres
of the current coin; and to the wife and two daughters of Jacques
Colone, one hundred livres each, amounting to three hundred livres
more.
On the Sunday preceding Christmas-day in this year, master
Guillaume Edelin, doctor of divinity, prior of St Germain en Laye,
formerly a monk of the order of St Augustin, and of other orders,
was publicly reprimanded on a scaffold in the city of Evreux, and
condemned to perpetual imprisonment in the prisons of the
bishoprick, for having given himself up to the temptations and power
of the enemy of mankind, that he might accomplish his carnal
desires. He was particularly charged with cohabiting with a lady of
birth, and, to accomplish this, had bound himself in such servitude
to Satan that he was obliged to attend him whenever called upon by
him. When such meetings were appointed he had only to bestride a
broom, and was instantly transported to their consistorial meeting.
Master Guillaume frankly confessed that he had done homage to the
enemy, under the form of a sheep, by kissing his posteriors,—and
that he had persevered for many years in this damnable
debasement, and had been aided by the enemy whenever he
required it of him, until the time of his arrest; when, having been
duly convicted by the law, he was detained prisoner, and the power
of the enemy was without effect. He therefore remained, according
to his sentence, closely confined in a dungeon, fed on bread and
water. The inquisitor of the faith frequently remonstrated with him
on the degeneracy of his conduct from what it was formerly, when
he went about preaching so well to the people the faith of Jesus
Christ.
During the reprimands of the inquisitor, the prisoner was placed on a
scaffold, in the presence of great crowds of people.
At the end of these remonstrances, master Guillaume, knowing how
infamously he had relinquished our Creator and Redeemer, began to
groan and repent aloud of his sins, asking mercy of God, the bishop,
and Justice, and recommending himself to the prayers of the
audience. He was then chained, and conducted to his dungeon to do
penance for the horrible sins he had committed.

FOOTNOTES:
[182] Amende honorable,—'A most ignominious punishment
inflicted on great offenders, who were led through the streets
barefooted and bareheaded (with a burning link in their hands)
unto the seat of justice, or some public place, and there to
confess their offences, and ask forgiveness of the party they had
wronged.'——Cotgrave.
 [a.d. 1454.]
CHAP. LIX.
THE KING OF FRANCE SENDS AN EMBASSY TO THE KING
OF SPAIN.—HE BUILDS TWO CASTLES AT BORDEAUX TO
KEEP THE INHABITANTS IN SUBJECTION.—THE DUKE OF
YORK IMPRISONS THE DUKES OF SOMERSET AND
GLOCESTER.—OTHER EVENTS.
In the year 1454, the reverend father in God master John Bernard,
archbishop of Tours, and sir Guillot Destan, knight, seneschal of
Rouergue, set out on an embassy from the king of France to the
king of Castille, to confirm the alliances between France and Spain.
In this same year, the king of France sent a large body of men at
arms and franc archers to Bordeaux, with orders to erect two castles
to keep that people under better subjection: one was placed on the
bank of the river, and the other at the opposite end of the town
toward Béarn.
The count de Clermont, the lord de Saintrailles bailiff of Lyon, the
governor of la Rochelle, sir John Bureau mayor of Bordeaux, and sir
Guichart le Boursier, were appointed to superintend the erection of
these castles. They exerted great diligence to complete them,—and
they were so strong that they were thought impregnable, so that the
inhabitants were kept in more subjection than they had ever before
been.
At this time, the duke of York seized the government of England,
and imprisoned the dukes of Somerset and Glocester[183],—the first
in the tower of London, and Glocester in Pomfret-castle.
In this year also, the count de Charolois, son to the duke of
Burgundy married the daughter of duke Charles of Bourbon.
The king of Spain deceased, at the age of fifty years. It was a pity,
for he was a good, wise, and handsome prince.
In this same year died pope Nicholas, who was but in his prime[184];
and it was found, when the physicians opened his body, that he had
been poisoned. Pope Calixtus was chosen in his stead.[185]
The king of England called a meeting of some of his lords in the
month of February, and remonstrated with them on the
imprisonment of the dukes of Somerset and Glocester, his relatives,
and wished that, if they were not too heavily charged with high
treason, they might be released. They consented to this; and the
mayor of London even said, that he would instantly deliver them
from prison, on receiving good security for their re-appearance.
Soon after, these lords appeared before the tower in great force, and
took therefrom the duke of Somerset, who soon after gained the
complete government of the king. The duke of York, seeing this, and
dreading the effects of Somerset's anger, left the court as secretly as
he could, and retired into his duchy.
About this time, the lord de l'Esparre was arrested, for having,
contrary to his oath, gone to England, and induced king Henry to
send over troops to reconquer the Bordelois. Although his treason
had been manifest, nevertheless the king, at the last capture of
Bordeaux, being alway full of mercy, had pardoned him, on condition
of his being banished Guienne and the Bordelois. However, by the
instigation of the devil in hell, he had attempted, under colour of a
passport, to restore those countries to the English, as a more false
and wicked traitor than before. But as the Scripture says, that every
thing wicked, however secretly done, is at length discovered and
punished, so this came to the king's knowledge, and, as I have said,
he was arrested and carried prisoner to Poitiers, where, on being
tortured, he confessed his guilt, and was judicially condemned. He
was then delivered to the executioner, who smote off his head and
quartered his body, which was hung up at different places, as is
usual in such cases, to serve for an example to all others.
 FOOTNOTES:
[183] There must be a mistake here: the duke of York did
imprison Somerset, but Glocester was a Yorkist.
[184] Pope Nicholas was said to have died of grief for the capture
of Constantinople. He had reigned eight years nineteen days.
[185] Alfonso Borgio, cardinal-bishop of Valencia in Spain, his
native country. He took the title of Calixtus III.
 CHAP. LX.
THE MARRIAGE OF THE COUNT DE CHAROLOIS WITH
THE LADY ISABELLA OF BOURBON.—THE DUKE OF
BURGUNDY RETURNS FROM GERMANY, AND IS MOST
HONOURABLY RECEIVED IN THE TOWNS OF LILLE AND
ARRAS.
On the last day of October, in this same year, and when the duke of
Burgundy was returned from Germany, his son, the count de
Charolois, espoused, in the town of Lille, his cousin-german the lady
Isabella of Bourbon, by dispensations from the holy church, on
account of their nearness of kindred. The duke, being in Burgundy,
was not present at the wedding, but the duchess was. The marriage
was so sudden that many said the count knew nothing of it until the
preceding day: his father would have it so, and strictly ordered him
to comply, which he did like a good and obedient son. Some said,
that it was against his conscience to marry so near a relative; but
others, that he would rather have married the daughter of the duke
of York, and, by this alliance with England, have some claim to that
crown.
Whatever truth may be in these reports, he married to please his
father, and behaved to his cousin in so honourable a manner that no
married couple could behave better; and it was currently said, that
after his marriage, he knew not any other woman.
During the absence of his father in Germany, he had the regency of
his states, and governed them with equity: he was only too prompt
to believe the first reports that were made to him, which is a
misfortune generally attached to great lords.
About the middle of February, the noble duke of Burgundy came to
Lille, where he was received by his subjects with every honour. On
the 24th of the same month, he went to Arras, where he was
likewise honourably and joyfully received,—for he had been long
absent, and God had now permitted him to return from Germany in
good health, and without any hinderance.
 CHAP. LXI.
THE DUKE OF BURGUNDY LAYS HEAVY TAXES ON HIS
ESTATES, TO DEFRAY HIS EXPEDITION AGAINST THE
TURKS.
Five days after the arrival of the duke in Arras, and when the feasts
of his coming were over, he assembled the three estates of Artois,
and declared to them the vow he had made of undertaking a war
against the Turks, and of marching thither in person with his whole
force, provided the king his lord would promise to keep and guard
for him his estates during his absence. To accomplish this vow, he
said, that it would be necessary for him to call for the aid of his good
vassals and subjects; and he required that they would grant him
supplies, amounting, in the whole, to the sum of fifty-six thousand
francs, royal money.
The three estates having consulted together, agreed to grant him
three aides, instead of four, which he had demanded, amounting to
forty-two thousand francs,—but on condition, that if this expedition
was not undertaken, they should not be paid. The good duke
replied, that in truth, if the expedition failed, he should not want any
thing.
The duke then visited Flanders, Hainault, and Brabant, where he
made similar requests; and those countries granted him very great
supplies to carry on the war against the infidels.
 [a.d. 1455.]
CHAP. LXII.
THE BISHOP OF UTRECHT DIES.—THE DUKE OF
BURGUNDY GOES TO HOLLAND TO PROCURE THE
ELECTION TO THE BISHOPRICK FOR HIS BASTARD SON
DAVID, THEN BISHOP OF THEROUENNE.
In the year 1455, died the bishop of Utrecht, which is in Holland,
bordering on Germany. Duke Philip of Burgundy had for a long time
thought of obtaining this bishoprick for his bastard son David, then
bishop of Therouenne, and had even during the life-time of the late
bishop solicited the canons to elect this his son on the first vacancy.
They, however, paid no attention to his solicitations, but elected the
provost of their church, brother to the lord de Brederode, a great
baron in Holland, and a relative to duke Philip.
The duke was much dissatisfied at this conduct, and sent to Rome,
and managed so well with the pope that he gave this bishoprick to
his bastard son: he had even promised him the succession before
the death of the last bishop. The duke went, therefore, to the Hague
in Holland, where he endeavoured, but in vain, to gain over to his
interest the chapter of Utrecht by every kind means, that they might
receive his son for their bishop; and for this purpose he remained in
Holland from the feast of St Remy[186], in the year 1455, until St
John Baptist's day in the ensuing year.

FOOTNOTES:
[186] St Remy. This feast is on the first day of October, and St
John's the 24th June.
 CHAP. LXIII.
THE COUNT DE CLERMONT, THE LORD DE LOHÉAC
MARSHAL OF FRANCE, AND OTHER CAPTAINS, ARREST
THE COUNT D'ARMAGNAC, AND DELIVER HIM UP TO THE
KING.—THEY PUT THE ARCHBISHOP OF AUCH IN
POSSESSION OF HIS ARCHBISHOPRIC.—OTHER EVENTS.
In the month of May of this year, the king of France sent the count
de Clermont, the lord de Lohéac marshal of France, and other
captains, into the county of Armagnac; and likewise the count de
Dammartin, the bailiff of Evreux, and several others, against the
count d'Armagnac, into Rouergue, because he had refused to put
the archbishop of Auch in possession of his archbishopric, to which
he had been duly elected, and had received his bulls from the pope.
The count had wished, contrary to all right, to place therein one
called de l'Estin, and had given him admittance into the city, and
possession of the archbishopric, contrary to the will and orders of
the king.
The king, much angered at de l'Estin having been installed by the
count by force, ordered his men at arms to besiege his city of
Lectoure[187], whither the before-named captains had marched, as
well as into other parts of his possessions in Armagnac and
Rouergue. Thus did the count lose all his territories for his rebellion
against the king; for, as the Scripture saith, it is hard to kick against
the pricks. When this was done, these captains returned to the king
according to his orders.
In this same year, king Henry of England, by the advice of the duke
of Somerset, summoned a parliament of his great lords, to consider
the present state of affairs. For this purpose, very many came to
London; and the duke of York thought it would be advisable for him
to make his appearance also,—and in fact he set out, accompanied
by about a thousand armed retainers. He was, however, joined on
his road by four or five thousand more, of which the king and the
duke of Somerset were ignorant, they having knowledge of the duke
being attended by only one thousand men. The king and the duke of
Somerset held a council with the earl of Northumberland, and other
lords, and determined to collect as large a force as they could in and
about London, and march out to meet the duke of York, in the
expectation of defeating him, as they were astonished he should
come in arms to attend the parliament.
The two armies soon met, and instantly came to blows, when
numbers were slain,—but victory remained with the duke of York.
Among the slain were the duke of Somerset, the earl of
Northumberland, and many other lords, and from four to five
hundred common men. The king was wounded by an arrow in the
neck, and was for some time in great danger. The duke of York
made many prisoners, nobles and others, whom he led to London
with the king,—where some were set at liberty, and others punished
according to their deserts. The late government was entirely
overthrown, and the whole power remained with the duke of York as
regent of the king and kingdom.
At this time, the count d'Armagnac, having lost all his possessions,
retired into the kingdoms of Navarre and Arragon.

FOOTNOTES:
[187] Lectoure,—a city in Armagnac, of which Auch is the capital,
ten leagues from Auch.
 [a.d. 1456.]
CHAP. LXIV.
THE KING OF FRANCE IS DISCONTENTED WITH THE
DAUPHIN, FOR GOING TO THE DUKE OF BURGUNDY
WITHOUT HIS CONSENT.—POPE CALIXTUS MAKES
REGULATIONS RESPECTING THE CROISADE AGAINST
THE TURKS.
In the year 1456, the king of France, learning that his eldest son had
left Dauphiny, and gone to the territories of the duke of Burgundy to
consult with him, was very much displeased that he should have
done this without previously informing him thereof. And because he
doubted his being led away by bad advice, and acting imprudently,
he determined to take possession of Dauphiny, to avoid the
inconveniences that might ensue, and also to reduce him to that
obedience a son owes a father.
In consequence, he marched a powerful army into Dauphiny, and
took full possession of all its rents and revenues, together with the
castles and strong holds, to prevent his son from receiving any
advantages from them, and to induce him the more speedily to
return. The king sent also men at arms to guard the passages at
Pontoise, Compiègne, in Brie, and other parts, and forbade the great
towns to admit the dauphin or any of his partisans, unless they
should be forced thereto. He did all this, from his opinion how
headstrong and obstinate the dauphin was: as a convincing proof of
which, when he left the king, he had asked leave to be absent only
four months, and had remained nearly ten years, to the great
vexation of his father.
About this time, pope Calixtus III. made certain regulations
respecting a croisade, and issued indulgences to all who should carry