Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

1837.]

The Secrets of History. No. 1.

THE SECRETS OF HISTORY.

NO. I.

THE SPANISH CONSPIRACY AGAINST VENICE.

We must fairly confess we are ra-
ther fond of conspiracies :-not in ac-
tion, be it understood, but in narration;
for in our own person, as all the world
knows, we have abundance of music
in ourselves, and are by no means fit
for treasons, stratagems, and spoils.
But, there is something in the history
of all conspiracies-from Catiline to
Cato Street which has a secret charm
for the imagination. The wild, irre-
gular character of mind of those agents
by whom they are generally organized
-the fierce passions they bring into
play-the "matters deep and danger-
ous" in which they deal the moving
accidents to which they give rise the
mystery in which they are shrouded,
and which in many cases remains to
the last impenetrable-the suspense in
which the mind is held between the
planning of a dreadful thing and the
first motion; all these form a combi-
nation of qualities which renders the
delineation of such events peculiarly
attractive to the romance writer and
the novelist. Schiller, for instance,
felt so deep an interest in such subjects,
that he commenced a history of the
most celebrated conspiracies (which,
however, went no farther than the first
volume), containing the conspiracy of
the Pazzi; that of Fiesco against Genoa;
and that which forms the subject of
the present observations-the Spanish
conspiracy against Venice, which is
simply a translation from the work on
the same subject by the Abbé de St
Real. Two of his dramas are found-
ed on conspiracies-Fiesco, and Wal-
lenstein. His unfinished drama of
Demetrius turns also on a similar event
in the history of Russia. His Ghost
Seer is another version of an analogous
theme, suggested by the secret socie-
ties of the Illuminati and the impos-
tures of Cagliostro. In short, it is
evident that he had a strong sympathy
with the delineation of convulsions of
this nature; and of the characters by
which they are originated, or to
which they give birth.

The Spanish conspiracy of Ossuna,
Bedamar, and Toledo against Venice

in 1618, is among the most interesting
of such events; first, as furnishing,
through the elegant and very interest-
ing work of St Real, the materials for
the best of Otway's dramas; and
secondly, as presenting some histori-
cal problems on which the learning
and ingenuity of modern writers have
been abundantly exercised; and in
regard to which the disputants have
arrived at the most opposite conclu-
sions. For, so far has the scepticism
of modern writers gone, that, not con-
tent with doubting or denying the ac-
curacy of the details given by the Ve-
netian writers of the time as to the
conspiracy, two learned and ingenious
writers - the Prussian diplomatist,
Chambrier, a member of the Acade-
my of Berlin, in his essay Sur les
Problemes Historiques-and Count
Daru in his late history of Venice-
have actually denied entirely the ex-
istence of any Spanish conspiracy
against Venice; while the latter, as
will be afterwards seen, even repre-
sents Venice as truly the conspirator
against Spain.

A question upon which a writer of
Daru's talent, extensive reading, and
sagacity could arrive at a conclusion
so opposite to the received notions,
and to the Venetian authorities of the
time, is one not unworthy of the at
tention of the historical student. It
is our intention in the present paper to
present a short outline of the con-
troversy, and to state the views we
entertain as to the hypothesis hitherto
propounded.

In the month of May, 1618, Venice was suddenly startled by the intelligence announced by the chronicles of the day, that a formidable conspiracy had just been detected, the object of which was to put to death the senate, to sack and pillage the city, to burn the fleet in the harbour, and to seize on the principal fortified places on the continent: that this conspiracy had been organized by Don Pedro Giron d'Ossuna, Viceroy of Naples; Don Pietro de Toledo, Governor of Milan; and Don Alfonso de Cueva, Marquis

E

of Bedamar, the Spanish ambassador at Venice; that French troops were to be the instruments employed, as least likely to excite suspicion; but that the designs of the conspirators had fortunately been discovered by the voluntary confession of one of their number, and that the guilty had been pun. ished. This brief and meagre account received an apparent confirmation from the executions which took place in the city, and on board the fleet; the departure of Bedamar, who, after a protest that he was entirely innocent of any share in the alleged conspiracy, quitted Venice never to return; and the sudden disappearance from the town of a vast number of idle and unemployed adventurers, with whom the squares and town-houses had for some time before been observed to be filled.

Besides those chronicles or diaries, in which it was the custom of the Venetian Government to enter from day to day all occurrences connected with the State, it was long their practice to intrust the preparation of their history from time to time to some senator of established ability and reputation, well acquainted with their archives, with a view to publication. The State historian, within the period of whose labours the conspiracy falls, is the well-known Battista Nani. His account, though more detailed, corresponds in substance with the report as given in the chronicle.*

Nani, though he equally implicates Bedamar and Ossuna in the conspiracy, ascribes the chief share in the original project to Ossuna. He represents him as despatching to Venice one of his confidants, Jacques Pierre, a Corsair of Normandy, a man of great talent, but desperate character, who, on pretence of having left the Duke's service in consequence of some misunderstanding, obtained admission into the Venetian service. The first step he took was a singular one :In order to render himself acceptable in Venice, he showed Ossuna's let ters, proposed many specious things, pretended to reveal the secret de

signs of the Viceroy against Venice, and suggested the means by which they might be frustrated. He thus succeeded in obtaining their confidence, and was employed with Langlade (Langrand) in the arsenal. They held secret conferences with Cueva (Bedamar) ;couriers and messages were constantly despatched to Naples. They gained over to their evil purposes Nicolo Rinaldi (Regnault), Charles and John de Bolio (des Bouleau), Nolot Robert Revellido, Vincent Roberti, and Captain Tournon, who commanded a company in the Venetian service, as well as some others, partly French, partly Burgundians. The plan was, that Ossuna should send some brigantines and barks, under an Englishman named Haillot, which were to make their way into the harbours and canals, the depth of which had been sounded with that view; these were to be followed by larger vessels, which were to cast anchor off Friuli, under cover of which, and during the confusion caused by these, Langlade was to set fire to the arsenal, and others (for the parts were already distributed) to different quarters of the city; the chief places of strength were to be seized on, and the most distinguished inhabitants, whose houses had already been marked out beforehand, to be assassinated; all the confederates expected to enrich themselves by the immense booty which this attempt would open to them.

Some of these projects were indeed difficult of execution; but blinded by rapacity and malice, they looked on this extravagant enterprise as an easy task. In the mean time, Toledo had corrupted Jean Berard, captain of a French company in Crema, with some others, and had made arrangements for seizing on that place, for which purpose he had advanced his troops to Lodi. While the brigantines were doing their best to reach the town, and the conspirators were every day climbing the highest belfry in the city, impatiently looking for their arrival, some of the vessels were taken by corsairs, others dispersed by

Vol. III. of the Chronica Veneta, extending from 1600 to 1635. The volume containing the first announcement of the conspiracy, is written by Geronymo Priuli. † Historia della Republica Veneta, 1663, p. 163.

play.

The name is differently spelt in different accounts. He is the Elliot of Otway's

a storm. They could not be assembled by the appointed time, and the execution of the plan was necessarily deferred till autumn. Pierre and Langlade in the meantime received orders to join the fleet, and could not delay setting out with the Captain-General Barbango. The other confederates who remained behind in Venice continued to deliberate on the means of carrying the plan into effect, and impatiently awaited the time appointed. But as they frequently convened on the subject, and in order to increase their numbers, were obliged to communicate the secret to others of their nation, it so happened-for malice is seldom so blind as not to feel the sting of conscience that Gabriel Moncassin, and Balthazar Juven, both of noble descent, the one from Normandy, the other from Dauphine, and nearly connected with Lesdeguieres,* full of horror at their evil designs, disclosed them to the Council of Ten. By the assistance of others, who secretly found means to overhear their conferences and conversations, their plans were still more exactly ascertained; the treason was proved by letters which were found, and by the confession of the guilty, who were punished either by private or public execution. Nani goes on to state, that many made their escape to Ossuna; that Pierre and Langlade were drowned, and Berard and his confederates executed in Crema, and that Bedamar, apprehensive for his life from the popular indignation directed against him, retired to Milan. He adds, that the Senate, from the fear of disturbing the peace which was about to be finally concluded with the Emperor, and with Spain and Savoy, determined to observe a strict silence in regard to the whole conspiracy.

Such were the accounts given to the world by the Venetian Government. They did not, however, pass unquestioned even at the time. Ossuna and Bedamar, without denying the existence of a conspiracy against Venice, positively maintained their own innocence: the French Envoy, M. de Leon Bruslart went farther, and in his letters to his own Government, expressed doubts of the exist

Marshal Lesdeguieres.

ence of any conspiracy at all. The grounds on which in his despatches he founds his doubts are the improbability that Pierre would be concerned in a design, of which he had himself in the first instance given information to the State; the impossibility of such a project, against a city well armed, and containing 200,000 inhabitants, being attempted by a few miserable adventurers; the unlikelihood that such a power as Spain would connect itself with such instruments in the execution of its plans; the absence of any trial or investigation in the case of Pierre, or of any weapons or proofs of preparation for such an enterprise being found in the possession of the alleged conspirators.

Still it may be said, that the public opinion decidedly was, that the conspiracy had existed, and that the account of it given by the Venetian Government, though it might not contain the whole truth, was, so far as it went, correct.

In 1674 appeared the well known history of the conspiracy, by the Abbé de St Real. St Real's character for historical accuracy, as every one knows, does not stand high. His works in this department, are, at best, historical romances, nor does he seem anxious in general to remove the doubts which their character was calculated to suggest. On this occasion, however, he is at pains to intimate that he had composed his history from new and authentic documents existing in the Royal Library at Paris. The spirit and liveliness of the narrative, the minuteness and apparent probability of the incidents, so far at least as appears on the face of his story, have given to his work a popularity and authority to which it is by no means entitled, for the additional documents of which he has availed himself, are now, on all hands, admitted to be exposed to the greatest suspicion, and may be proved in many parts to be completely inconsistent with the truth. They professed to be copies of the actual examinations and revelations of the conspirators, to the Council of Ten ;t but they were unsigned and unauthenticated in any way. No explanation has ever been given how

They were subsequently published by Villino Sire, in his Memorie Recondite.

such documents should be found in a public library in Paris, when it was admitted that no originals were to be found in the Venetian archives themselves. The names of the conspirators, as there represented, differed entirely (with one or two exceptions) from those given by Nani, or mentioned in the correspondence of the French Ambassador; while some of the circumstances stated in them were palpably impossible, and such as were entirely inconsistent with the idea of their authenticity as official documents, containing the actual confessions of the conspirators, or the transactions which took place in consequence of their disclosures. One or two instan. ces may be given as decisive of the weight due to the authority of St Real, and of the pretended confessions on which it is mainly founded. He ascribes the whole discovery of the plot to a feeling of remorse with which one of the conspirators, Jaffier, was seized, when present at the annual spectacle of the Doge's marriage of the Adriatic, which takes place upon Ascension day. Ascension day took place, in 1618, upon the 24th May, but the conspiracy had been detected, and most of those implicated, punished, on the 14th. Nothing, therefore, which took place upon the 24th, could have led to the revealing of a plot which had already been detected on the 14th.

In the pretended copy of the procedure, it is stated that in consequence of the disclosures of Jaffier, search was immediately made in the house of the Spanish ambassador; that a quantity of arms and gunpowder was found there. The French ambassador, on the contrary, states expressly that no arms had been found, and Bedamar himself, in his address to the College, never alludes to any such step as a search of his house. Several arrests are said to have taken place in the house of the ambassador of France. We have the whole correspondence of the ambassador with his own court, treating the whole as a fiction, entering into the fullest details, giving the names of those arrested, and no

hint is given of any of them having been arrested in his house. A communication is said to have been instantly made of all that had passed to the French ambassador, who was summoned for that purpose. The French ambassador was absent from Venice at the time, and did not return for some weeks. In the confessions a leading part is given to the state inquisitor, Marc Antonio Marcelli. The names of all the state inquisitors at the time are perfectly known, and no such person was to be found among the number. Many other contradictions between the confessions and the true facts of the case, as appearing from undoubted evidence, might be pointed out; but enough has been said to show that their claims to authenticity are of the most suspicious kind. The probability is, that the pretended confessions are a mere ex post facto fabrication, based partly upon the statement of Nani, and partly on the vague reports which, in addition to the official statement, had got into circulation.

In regard, therefore, to historical accuracy, the work of St Real may be laid aside. So far as it differs from or pretends to add to the narrative of Nani, it is entitled to no credit; and, in truth, the two differ in every particular, except in assuming the existence of a conspiracy in which Ossuna and Bedamar were engaged against Venice.

Besides these writers, who, however much they may differ in the details, agree in assuming the existence of a conspiracy, in which Bedamar and Ossuna were the prime movers, we may mention, as supporting the same view, Giovanni Battista Vico, or rather the continuator of his work, t Giam Battista Birago, who, in his history of Venice, relates the story substantially as told by Nani ;-Sandi et Martinioni, in his Continuation of Sansovino's Description of Venice, ‡ who follows the narrative of St Real; Teutori, in his Essays on the History of Venice; Gregorio Leti, in his Life of the Duke of Ossuna, and M. Dreux de Radier,§ who all adopt, in the main

Lettre de Leon Bruslart, à M. de Puysieulx, 19th July, 1618. † Historia Rerum Venetarum, 1684. Historia Civile de Venezia.

Journal de Verdun, Aug. 1756.

Padua.

features, the version of St Real. On the other hand, the existence of the conspiracy is doubted or denied by Capriata, by Naude, by Grosley, who has published a dissertation to prove the incorrectness of St Real's account, and more lately and decidedly by M. Chambrier, by D'Oleires, and Daru.

The two latter have not been content to question the truth of the received accounts, but have at the same time attempted to furnish a new solution of the supposed difficulties in which the matter is involved.

The hypothesis of Chambrier, however, though it has been popular enough, is yet so baseless that we shall deal with it very briefly. His explanation of the problem is this:-That a crusade had been secretly projected on the part of Spain, France, and Savoy, against Turkey, which had been stirred up by the Capuchin Joseph (afterwards so useful a tool in the hands of Richelieu): That Regnault, as the agent of Charles Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, at Venice, had been charged to concert measures for that purpose with the ambassadors of France and Spain That at the same time the Venetian government were extremely hostile to the Spanish ambassador Bedamar, and anxious to obtain any pretext for his removal from the city and from his office: That the Turks, having discovered the intended design, had commissioned the Chiaoux, who was sent from the Porte to announce the elevation of the Sultan Osman to the throne, to demand satisfaction, by the delivery or punishment of the agents at Venice: That the Venetians, in order to avert suspicion from themselves, or to re-establish their good understanding with the Porte, abandoned to their fate those who were most instrumental in promoting the intended expedition to the Levant; that in order to cover the true cause of the executions, a pretended conspiracy was brought forward, and ascribed to Bedamar and the Spanish Court; and that thus the Venetians contrived at once to secure themselves and to banish the obnoxious ambassador.

It might be sufficient to observe as

to this extraordinary theory, that with the exception of the fact which appears from the revelations of Pierre to the Venetian government, namely, that he had at one time suggested an expedition against Albania to the Duke of Nevers, there is not even the shadow of foundation for that supposed crusade against Turkey, the discovery of which, he assumes, led to the executions at Venice. The letter exists in which this proposal was made by Pierre to the Duke of Nevers. It bears a marking on the back in the hand of the French ambassador De Leon, "Discours impertinent fait par le defunt Jacques Pierre." Would the ambassador have used such an expression, if the project had really been approved of by France? Besides, we have only to recollect the state in which France was after the minority of Louis XIII., to perceive that that power was in no state to undertake a crusade against the Ottoman. Again, all we know of the character of Philip III. and of his prime minister Lerma, is equally hostile to the supposition; while no possible advantage could accrue to Savoy from any such scheme. The intended crusade then had really no foundation. Still less were the executions at Venice connected with its discovery.

Chambrier, for instance, ascribes the executions to the demand for satisfaction made by the Chiaoux, who arrived in Venice with the intelligence of Osman's elevation to the throne. Now, a letter from the Venetian Government to the bailo, or envoy, of that state at Constantinople,† proves that the Chiaoux only arrived in Venice on the 10th of June. Jacques Pierre had been condemned to death on the 12th May preceding, and forthwith executed. His death then, and those of his companions, was in no shape connected with the arrival of the Chiaoux.

If it be argued that still the executions took place to gratify the Porte, and that probably it may have been the predecessor of this Chiaoux who had made the demand for this bloodthirsty satisfaction, this view of the case is equally untenable. It is true another Chiaoux arrived in Venice in March

* History of the Affairs of Italy, 1613 to 1650, Book vi.

Lettere Ducale al Bailo, 23d Guigno, 1618. Giunse in questa Citta alli 10 del pre

sente Mehemet Chiaus il quale due giorni dopo venne in Collegio nostro,

« AnteriorContinuar »