Mitrovic 1

Marguerite de ValoisPolitical Role and Cultural Achievements of the Last

Valois Queen

Milos Mitrovic 1352110 HISTORY 797 Dr. Megan Armstrong

Mitrovic 2

July 27, 2014

I - INTRODUCTION

Marguerite de Valois (1553-1615) was the sixth of the seven

surviving children of King Henry II and Queen Catherine de

Medici. A sister of the last three Valois kings and the Spanish

queen Elizabeth, she was also a queen by virtue of her marriage

to Henry Navarre. Aside from being a queen, famous for her beauty

and intellect, her contemporaries knew her as an accomplished

writer and a poet, the patroness of an academy, a serious student

of Neoplatonic philosophy, a diplomat, and a skillful political

actor. Alas, she is known less for her achievements and virtues,

and more for her numerous love affairs, as the notorious and

legendary “La Reine Margot,” a symbol of lust and sexual

Mitrovic 3

depravity. This legend, conveyed by the contemporary Bourbon’s

historians, and of the 19th-century novelists and 20th- century

film makers, derive from a distorted historical record. Some of

these records not only created a myth about the “lustful” Queen

Margot, but also excluded her serious intellectual and cultural

achievements and undervalued her political activities. In that

sense, this essay will argue that Marguerite de Valois played a

significant political and cultural role in the French

Renaissance, and, more precisely, at the dawn of the Valois

dynasty.

To demonstrate this, the essay will show first Marguerite’s

direct political engagement in the dynastic politics, by allying

with one brother or another, supporting her husband, and

attempting to mediate between factions. It will be argued that as

a loyal wife, political ally, and reliable friend to her husband

Henry IV, she not only helped to save his life and thus to

preserve and prolong the Bourbon dynasty for another two

centuries, but also, she played a critical role in the

transformation of the French state and culture from the end of

the 16th-century to the more centralized and stronger 17th-century

Mitrovic 4

monarchy. Secondly, the paper will show that Marguerite de Valois

also exercised political power as a foreign envoy and diplomat on

behalf of her brother Francois, and as a rebel against her own

family and husband by allying herself with the Catholic Ligue and

powerful Duke of Guise. In that way, she departed from any

previous loyalties towards her husband and family, and carved her

own way more as a devout Catholic than as a Valois. Finally,

Marguerite de Valois can be seen to have played an important role

in the years of transition between the high Renaissance and the

baroque period in the 17th-century. It will be argued that, as “La

femme de plume,” Marguerite de Valois left a profound influence on

the literary life and culture in the autumn of the French

Renaissance. Moreover, as a patron of the Academy and the

intellectual gatherings she held there, Marguerite played a

central role in the intellectual movement of the day, as

important as those played by her great-aunt Marguerite

d’Angouleme almost a century earlier.

II – Historiography

Mitrovic 5

Despite the modern scholars’ interest in her life,

Marguerite de Valois’ political and cultural role remains

relatively unknown in historiography. In a broader sense, the

restauration of her image falls into the recent studies of royal

women of the French Renaissance. As Eliane Viennot put it out, to

reveal her story is “to find a world whose history is an orphan

so long”.1 However, in order to examine her role in history, we

need to untangle first the layers of fiction and legend that

surround her image in historical sources. Robert Sealy argues

that when we attempt to separate facts from fiction, in order to

arrive at the relatively objective understanding of the actions

of Queen Marguerite, we are confronted with the problem of how to

deal with the vast number of accounts of her character and

actions, which must be catalogued under the rubric of satire.2 In

the sixteenth century, political polemics were very harsh,

especially after the ascent of the Bourbon King Henry IV.

Therefore, already during the Queen's lifetime, her husband's

entourage blackened her image in order to justify the King's

1 Eliane Viennot, Marguerite de Valois: Histoire d’une femme, histoire d’un mythe (Paris: Payot, 1994), p. 12.2 Robert Sealy, The Myth of the Reine Margot: Toward the Elimination of a Legend (Baltimore, MD: Peter Lang, 2004).

Mitrovic 6

annulment of their marriage. In addition, Bourbon historians

consistently disparaged the Valois to present a history favorable

to the new dynasty at the expense of the old. For example, “The

Satiric Divorce,” - a pamphlet published in 1660, defined the

image of Marguerite that has prevailed for centuries, of a woman

of a deranged and aberrant sexuality.3 She traveled widely, the

pamphlet charged, “to pursue sexual depravity with great

liberty,” - legitimizing the annulment of her marriage on the

grounds of her “monstrous lubricity.”4 This text had credibility

because it has been assumed for centuries that the humanist,

historian, and Henry’s Huguenot supporter, Théodore Agrippa

d’Aubigné was its author. According to Kathleen Wellman, recent

studies challenge this account, arguing for less authoritative

authors, offering political motives for its charges, and

suggesting that many of Marguerite’s supposed sexual partners

were actually political allies.5 In the same fashion, the

official Bourbon historian Pierre de L’Estoile has collected many

numbers of these stories directed against the Queen of Navarre3 Théodore Agrippa d`Aubigné, Divorce satirique ou les amours de la reyne Marguerite, in E. Reaume and F. de Caussage (ed.) Oeuvres completes de Théodore Agrippa d’Aubigné, (Paris, 1873-1879).4 Ibid, pp. 653-668.5 Sealy, The Myth of the Reine Margot, p. 187.

Mitrovic 7

during her lifetime.6 Finally, in the 1630s, when Louis XIII and

his courtiers initiated a campaign against the Queen Mother Marie

de Medici, a systematic discrediting of all powerful queens

revived Marguerite's black legend.7

On the other hand, Marguerite’s friend and 16th-century

intellectual, Pierre Bourdeille, abbé de Brantome, left to

posterity a completely different image of the last Valois queen

than his contemporary colleagues. In his work, “Les Dammes lllustres”

he praised Marguerite not only for her beauty and style, but also

for her cultural and intellectual achievements.8 Moreover, when

the famous French philosopher Michel de Montaigne dedicated to

Marguerite his “Apologie,” or the poet Guy Le Fevre his “Discours de

l’honneste amour,” and Honore d’Urfe his “Epistres Morales,” they did so

to express an appreciation of that aspect of the queen’s

6 Pierre de L’Estoile, Mémoires de Pierre de Estoile pour server a l’histoire de France et journal de Henry III et de Henry IV, in Collection compléte des mémoires relatifs a l’histoire de France, 4 vol. (Paris, 1825).7 Richelieu's struggles with Marie de Medici and Anne of Austria, however, inspired a policy of excluding women from power and denigrating their political achievements. Madeleine Lazard and J. Cubelier de Beynac, Marguerite de France, Reine de Navarre, et son temps. eds. Actes du Colloque d'Agen, organise par la Sociéte Franqaise des Seiziemistes et le Centre Matteo Bandello , (Agen: Centre Matteo Bandello, 1994), p. 356. 8 Pierre de Bourdeille, abbé de Brantome, The Book of the Ladies (Boston: Hardy, Pratt and Company, 1902).

Mitrovic 8

personality.9 Unfortunately, the 19th -century fiction, both

perpetuated and exaggerated the charges of the Satiric Divorce.

Many romantic constructions were integrated into the popular

novels of Alexander Dumas, which made sagas of monarchs, queens,

and mistresses especially compelling for readers. In his novel,

“La Reine Margot”, Dumas mythologized the charges of indiscriminate

sexual activity, accepting as true Marguerite’s avid pursuit of

anonymous sex in the streets of Paris.10 Along with the Patrice

Chereau’s 1994 movie of the same name, Marguerite’s political

activity and cultural achievements have been completely ignored.

Even more, 20th-century professional historians’ fascination with

Marguerite de Valois has been motivated by a mixture of sexual

fascination, voyeurism, and both self and audience titillation.11

Nevertheless, the three recent biographies of the last

Valois queen tried to separate the plausible from the

implausible. These new studies disagree on many issues, and do

not create the history of the queen’s life ‘as it really

9 Katherine Wellman, Queens and Mistresses of Renaissance France (Yale: Yale University Press, 2013), p. 314.10 Alexander Dumas, La Reine Margot (Paris, 1845).11 Moshe Sluhovsky, “History as Voyeurism: from Marguerite de Valois to La Reine Margot” Rethinking History 4:2 (2000), pp. 193-210.

Mitrovic 9

happened.’12 For example, Janine Garrison’s Marguerite de Valois

is a tragic figure, used and abused by political forces that

destroyed her at the same time they destroyed her entire family.13

She argues that Marguerite was not an active participant in

historical events, but was rather their victim. Her family and

husband used her for their political needs, while she, motivated

by an unfulfilled need to be loved, was pushed around by them.14

On the other hand, Jacqueline Boucher disagrees that Marguerite

was a victim of her family, finding the queen to be her own

victimizer. Although Boucher’s biography emphasizes the queen’s

achievements as an author and a political figure, she argues that

it was the queen’s immense pride, untameable character, and

‘violent passions’ that led her repeatedly towards self-

destruction.15 What is remarkable in these two biographies is

their inability to sidestep the minefield of psychologism, and

especially the attribution of hysteria to the queen. In that

sense, Moshe Sluhovsky points out that whether Marguerite was a

12 Sluhovsky, “History as Voyeurism”, p. 195.13 Janine Garrisson, Marguerite de Valois: La Reine Margot (Paris: Fayard, 1994), pp. 8–11.14 Garisson, Marguerite de Valois, p. 252.15 Jacqueline Boucher, Louise de Lorraine et Marguerite de France: Deux epouses et reines a la fin du XVIe siècle ( Saint-Etienne, 1995).

Mitrovic 10

helpless hysteric, for Garrison, or an impulsive hysteric, for

Boucher, both interpretations associate sexual freedom in a woman

with hysteria.16

Unlike Garrison and Boucher, Eliane Viennot has concentrated

more on Marguerite’s literary production rather than on her

sexual exploits, portraying the queen first and foremost as an

author, poet, and woman of letters, whose works stand among the

best that the French Renaissance produced.17 Like no biographer

before her, Viennot edited, in two volumes, Marguerite de

Valois's complete works. That brings together the queen's three

prose works and her poetry, and, apart from her correspondence,

has been published separately, representing the bulk of her

written work.18 Her studies desexualize much of the queen’s love

poetry and her letters to alleged lovers, and contextualize the

queen’s writings within the cultural and linguistic systems of

16th-century France. Viennot dismisses the historical reliability

of these portrayals of Marguerite, systematically exposing the

misogynistic assumptions and metaphors they employ. Also, she

16 Sluhovsky, p. 205.17 Viennot, p. 14.18 Marguerite de Valois, Mémoires et autres écrits, 1574-1614, ed. by Eliane Viennot.( Paris, Honoré Champion, 1999).

Mitrovic 11

carefully evaluated her political role, putting a special

emphasis on Marguerite’s diplomatic mission in Flanders and later

correspondence with the Spanish king Phillip II against her

brother and husband. Therefore, one might conclude that Viennot’s

Marguerite de Valois is an intelligent and brave queen, somewhat

pathetic in her loneliness and misfortune, surrounded by a hated

mother and brothers and a distant husband. Based on this

scholarship, Kathleen Wellman’s chapter on Marguerite de Valois

has been the most recent assessment of this controversial queen

in the English language. Wellman’s thesis challenges Joan Kelly-

Gadol’s famous conclusion that women did not have a Renaissance.19

On the contrary, Wellman argues that, at the French court at

least, they not only had a Renaissance, but defined the

movement.20 However, Weelman admits that it was also a moment that

did not last: by the mid-17th century it was more difficult for

royal women to play such central intellectual and cultural roles

due to the rise of the strong government and bureaucratic state.

In any case, this essay will argue that Marguerite de Valois

19 Joan Kelly-Gadol, “Did Women Have a Renaissance”? In Renate Bridenthai and Claudia Koonz (ed): Becoming Visible: Women in European History, (Houghton Mifflin, 1977), pp. 1-18. 20 Wheelman, Queens and Mistressess, p. 8.

Mitrovic 12

should be at the forefront of the French Renaissance, as a queen

who enjoyed a great influence in French politics and culture.

III – Political Role

Studies of women and power between 1400 and 1789 are

rare and usually over a decade old.21 Royal women have remained

defined by older historiography to a degree that their male

counterparts have not. For example, French historians Francois

Guizot and Jules Michelet wrote a heroic, national narrative,

embracing Henry IV in his most legendary dimension, but none of

them acknowledged that any women played any role in his reign.22

In the late 20th century, some of these women have found

sympathetic biographers, but they still have not generally been

acknowledged for their importance to the Renaissance. As we have

already seen, in the 1970s, Joan Kelly-Gadol argued that the

21 Kathryn Norberg, “Incorporating Women/Gender into French History Courses, 1429-1789: Did Women of the Old Regime Have a Political History?” French Historical Studies, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Spring, 2004), pp. 243-26622 Ibid, p. 244.

Mitrovic 13

Renaissance had opened up the world for men, but she denied that

women benefited. Instead, she argued that women’s lives became

more constrained and that state formation eroded elite women’s

authority by limiting their opportunities.23

On the other hand, historians of earlier periods have found

that Old Regime women wielded power in unexpected places. For

instance, Sarah Hanley, Dena Goodman, Kristen Neuschel, Barbara

Diefendorf, Sharon Kettering and aforementioned Wellman, all

demonstrated that women manipulated Old Regime structures,

finding the sources of power and political influence in the

courts, the armies, the churches, and the salons.24 The era of the

Wars of Religion was just such a period, where it was possible

for more women to play important political roles than in the

first half of the 16th-century. In other words, the breakdown of

central authority caused by the Wars of Religion created more

opportunities for women, and some women knew how to use them. In

that sense, royal women were politically engaged, acting as

advisors, diplomats, regents and rulers. For example, Catherine23 Joan-Kelly, “Did women had a Renaissance” p. 7. Natalie Zemon Davis also suspected that women’s power declined from the Middle Ages to 1789, Society and Culture in Early Modern France (Stanford: CA, 1975), p. 72. , 24 Norberg, p. 245.

Mitrovic 14

de Medici manipulated gender stereotypes, presenting herself as

the loyal wife (in the face of Henry II’s long-standing affair

with Diane de Poitiers), the grieving widow, and the devoted

mother. 25 In these traditional images, she found the material to

craft her authority as regent and the most powerful political

figure. Placed into this context, Marguerite de Valois, unlike

her Florentine mother, had displayed avid political activism in

dynastic and foreign policy, but in different circumstances and

with completely different motives.

It could be argued that Marguerite clearly relished her role

as a political player. She experienced her first heady taste for

politics when her brother Henry asked her to protect his interest

while he was on a military campaign. He wanted his sister to be a

friend at court by influencing their mother to “retain him in

good fortune while he is absent, away from any plot that his

younger brother Francois could make against him.”26 According to

Marguerite, her brother said the following:

25 Katherine Crafward, Perilous Performances: Gender and Regency in Early Modern France (Massachusetts: Harward University Press, 2004).26 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs: Written by Her Own Hand. Trans. By Violet Fane. (London). p. 74.

Mitrovic 15

“I believe that it is necessary to leave some very faithful person behind mewho will maintain my side with the queen my mother. I know no one as suitableas you, whom I regard as a second myself. You have all the qualities that canbe desired – intelligence, judgment and fidelity.”27

Marguerite admits in her memoirs that ”his words inspired me

with resolution and powers I did not think I possessed before….I

had naturally a degree of courage and, as soon I as I recovered

from my astonishment, I found I was quite an altered person.”28

So, this Valois coming-of-age story has two phases: first,

Marguerite discovers something about herself that she did not

know before – the desire and ability to play a significant role

at court. Although she was perfectly aware that her brother Henry

was their mother’s favorite child, this was the ideal opportunity

for her to penetrate into the inner court and plan her political

career. Moreover, she knew very well that her threat of feminine

sexuality had made it impossible for her to fulfill that desire

otherwise, except if she enjoys the full support of her brother

or mother. Indeed, the Queen Catherine graciously welcomed her

daughter, no longer regarding her as a child. Marguerite was now

“at the very heart of things,” and looking back to the past

amusements of her childhood – “the dancing and hunting” – she27 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, p. 75.28 Ibid, p. 76.

Mitrovic 16

despised them all as things utterly “vain and unprofitable.”29

However, this fraternal and political union did not last long. On

his return from the victory of Moncontour, Marguerite found her

brother changed, distrustful and ruled by his favorite companion,

De Guast.30 The reason for Henry’s change was the Duke of Guise,

and Marguerite’s alleged affair with him, but, behind the

curtain, his motives were clearly political: the Duke of Guise

was perceived by the royal family as a dangerous rival, and as

such, he could have used Marguerite for his political ambitions.

As a still inexperienced political player, Marguerite learned

this time an important lesson: her status within the royal family

was determined by the fact that she was a female and a daughter,

still dependent and constrained to make her own choices. Whereas

for a man the private and the public can merge in a life of

soldiering, for a woman the public was peripheral and still under

strict control.31 This was the idea behind Catherine’s decision to

use Marguerite for purely political and dynastic purposes. That

decision changed Marguerite’s life forever.

29 Ibid, p. 76.30 Ibid, p. 81.31 Sharon Kettering, French society 1589-1715 (Essex: Pearson, 2001).

Mitrovic 17

The queen of France was usually selected from the daughters

of European monarchs or the highest-ranking nobles to cement an

alliance, seal a peace, or advance a king’s political interest.

With that purpose in mind, Queen Catherine de Medici arranged

Marguerite’s marriage to Henry, the Protestant king of Navarre,

to balance Charles’s marriage to the Catholic Elizabeth of

Austria. In this case, political and dynastic consideration

precluded the personal interest of either party to the marriage.

Thus, such marriages were often inharmonious, but, in her

memoirs, written some 20 years after her marriage, Marguerite

proclaimed her willingness to serve her mother’s political aims

by accepting any spouse she proposed.32 Patricia Francis Cholakian

argues that the marriage effectively put to an end Marguerite’s

hope of playing a significant role in history. At that moment she

assigned to herself the role of dutiful daughter, casting aside

the desire of becoming a Plutarchan hero and a “great man.”33

Indeed, in the first pages of her memoirs she succeeded in

projecting herself as a “great man” by erasing the femininity

32 Memoirs, p. 83.33 Patricia Francis Cholakian, Women and the Politics of Self-Representation in Seventeenth-Century France (Newark: University of Delaware), 2000.

Mitrovic 18

that stood in her way, both historically and textually, but it

becomes increasingly clear that the Plutarchian model was not

well suited to the story she was telling because from this point

on she seemed increasingly ruled by others.34 However, not only

did the marriage fail to ease religious conflicts, it actually

made them worse. In addition, although the St. Bartholomew’s Day

massacre was conducted without Marguerite’s knowledge, it created

a new opportunity to get her involved into the dynastic policy.

Although official Bourbon historians were silent about

Marguerite’s role in the St. Bartholomew massacre, Brantome

claims that she saved Navarre’s life during the massacre:

“I have heard a princess say that she saved her husband’s life on the massacreof Saint Bartholomew for indubitably he was proscribed and his name written onthe “red paper” as it was called, because it was necessary to tear up theroots, namely Navarre, Prince de Conde and Admiral Coligny. Margo flungherself on her knees before King Charles to beg him for the life of herhusband and lord” 35

Furthermore, five or six days after the massacre, when the

Queen Catherine briefly considered having Navarre killed,

Marguerite refused to divorce him and thus saved his life again.

She told her mother that he was” in every sense” her husband, and

34 Cholakian, Women and the Politics, p. 70. 35 Brantome, The Book of the Ladies , p. 176.

Mitrovic 19

that she was content to remain as she was.36 It could be argued

that, although she may have entered into marriage unwillingly,

she was initially loyal to her husband Henry. On the other hand,

her actions not only show loyalty towards her marriage and

husband, but also her concern for him. It could thus be concluded

that as long as Marguerite was Henry’s wife, no overt plot

against his life could be carried out. However, two years after

the massacre, in 1574, Henry Navarre and François d’Alençon

conducted a secret plot to escape from the Louvre, but they

failed. When Parliament investigated Navarre’s involvement in the

plot, Marguerite wrote the ”Supporting Statement for Henry of Bourbon” to

defend him.37 During this perilous period, Henry de Navarre did

not turn to his advisors or court lawyers for assistance. Rather,

it was to Marguerite that he asked for help, and she described

this in her memoirs:

“My husband, having no counsellor to assist him, desired me to draw up hisdefense in such a manner that he might not implicate any person, and, at thesame time, clear my brother and himself from any criminality of conduct. WithGod’s help I accomplished this task to his great satisfaction, and to thesurprise of the commissioners, who did not expect to find them so wellprepared to justify themselves.”38

36 Memoirs, p. 98.37 Viennot, Marguerite et auther ecrits, p. 14.38 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, p. 25.

Mitrovic 20

Marguerite’s defense was, in fact, a brilliant legal strategy

that stunned the Parisian court and secured her place as one of

the foremost intellectuals in France at that time. As a result,

both her brother and husband were acquitted of all charges.

Apparently, she saved Navarre’s life again, but what is also

important here is the fact she had taught him very well how to

“play the game” and use all ways and means to survive around the

politically labyrinthine court. As all these examples show,

Marguerite de Valois had an immense role in preserving Navarre’s

life, as his loyal wife, friend, and political ally, thus

prolonging the Bourbon dynasty for another two centuries.

After the sudden decline in King Charles IX’s health, and

especially after his death, François d’Alençon allied himself

politically, if not religiously, with Henri de Navarre. With the

ascension of Henri III to the throne, Marguerite, Henry de

Navarre, and François d’Alençon all quickly fell out of favor at

court. Therefore, the three were forced to combine forces to

prevent being crushed under Henri III’s suspicious watch. For

Marguerite, this was another political game in which she gladly

participated. Her alliance with her brother François and her

Mitrovic 21

husband was likely based on her assessment of her future

political prospects. If François were to become a king, she would

become an indispensable link between his moderate Catholic

supporters and her husband’s Huguenot supporters.39 Unfortunately,

once Henry III became the king, Marguerite suffered the

consequences of her political option. Together with Navarre and

her younger brother she was confined to the Louvre, but when they

escaped, Henry III accused his sister for helping them to escape,

and, as a result, kept her a virtual prisoner. Only the Queen’s

intervention saved her life.40 Nevertheless, this example clearly

shows not only her bravery in risking her life for her brother

and husband, but also her political calculations, ambition and

open attempt to recruit her to serve their interests.

By creating a bond with her brother François, from the 1574

- 1584, the two of them were to be closely associated political

allies and players. For some historians, Marguerite’s championing

of d’Alençon drew only trouble upon her head, and that he

contributed nothing to her well-being. 41 On the contrary, after

39 Viennot, Marguerite de Valois, pp. 65-66.40 Marguerite de Valois, Memoires, p. 90.41 E. R. Chamberlin, Marguerite of Navarre (New York: The Dial Press, 1974).

Mitrovic 22

his escape from Louvre, d’Alençon did not forget his sister and

political ally, refusing to guarantee any sort of peace until

Marguerite was released from her imprisonment in the Louvre.

Thus, Catherine de Medici, always anxious to preserve harmony

among her children, and for the safety of the dynasty and the

country, convinced Henry III to allow her to escort Marguerite to

Champagne so that d’Alençon would be satisfied and the peace

assured.42 Showing the pragmatism and political skill for which

she became well-known, Marguerite acquiesced to the plan of

Catherine and Henry III. Upon being told that she would be freed,

Marguerite replied that “she was willing to sacrifice everything

for the good of my brothers and the state.43 This statement

clearly shows that Marguerite’s political role was very important

in French dynastic policy, not only in saving her husband’s life,

but also in mediating between her family and her husband.

Facilitating social relations was often women’s work. Women

could plead for peace and harmony without compromising their

honor. For example, queens and aristocratic women often carried

42 Leoni Frida, Catherine de Medici, 43 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, p. 114.

Mitrovic 23

out political missions even though they could not rule outright.44

In 1577, under the pretext of seeking treatment for a skin

inflammation, Marguerite proposed to her mother and brother to

take the waters at Spa, in the Low Countries, but this trip was

in fact a secret diplomatic mission undertaken at François’s

behest. Marguerite was making the case to Flanders of the

advantages of French support in its battle against Spain. Shortly

before that, the French agent in Flanders proposed that French

king considers the possibility of extending sovereignty over his

small neighbor. As King Henry III had no intentions of going to

aid the Flemings and embroiling himself with Philip of Spain, the

unemployed and ambitious d’Alençon was a perfect choice for this

role. To act carefully, the agent suggested d’Alençon to seek

help from his sister who could find a pretext for visiting

Flanders to prepare a way for him and his future actions.

Marguerite accepted this task with enthusiasm, as her memoirs

suggest.45 For a brief period she was free of the confinements of

husband, brother and mother, directing her powerful mind and

personality towards something other than a palace intrigue or a

44 Weelman, Queens and Mistresses, p. 26.45 Almost one quarter of her Memoirs are devoted to this mission.

Mitrovic 24

boudoir affair.46 In Flanders, Queen Marguerite, as a diplomat and

beautiful woman, was welcomed with splendor and extravagance, and

as the unofficial emissary from France, she must have appeared

like an angel of deliverance to the Flemish nobles.

In Namur, she met Don Juan of Austria, the Governor of

Flanders, and the legendary hero of Lepanto. In her memoirs, she

accentuated the fact that she was well received and honored as

the daughter, sister, and wife of a king.47 During the dinner with

him, she must have been afraid, keeping in mind the real nature

of her mission and all political shrewdness that Philip II’s

illegitimate son had, but she apparently concealed all this,

impressing him with her charm and intelligence. In addition, the

same skills helped her to recruit some powerful nobles to her

brother’s cause, and, although a mere footnote in the histories

of the period, this mission is significant in her memoirs because

she had every reason to be proud of what she had accomplished

during this diplomatic endeavor. She created not only some

important alliances for her brother, but, equally important was

the self-discovery of what she had accomplished as a woman46 Chamberlin, Marguerite of Navarre, p. 164.47 Marguerite de Valois, Memoires, p. 192.

Mitrovic 25

involved in high policy. She created a clear path for her brother

and all that he had to do was to follow it and collect the prize

at the end. However, d’Alençon’s relationship with the Dutch

rebels took a revolutionary turn in September 1580. He signed an

agreement at Plessis-Tours with deputies from the seven Northern

provinces still in revolt against Philip II, making him the

successor to Philip II as their sovereign prince.48 Despite his

relying on the Queen Elizabeth’s money, plus what little he could

get from his brother, François was incapable of defeating the

Spanish army. At the end, it seems that Navarre’s description of

d’Alençon was accurate: “I will be surprised if he does what is

expected of him. He has so little courage, a heart so deceitful,

a body so ill made, that I can’t believe that he will ever do

anything very great.”49

Despite the failure of her brother, Marguerite continued

with her political activities, using her diplomatic skills in her

own country. For instance, after rejoining her husband in 1578,

she continued to travel with her mother to seek an agreement

48 Marc P. Holt, The French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), p. 121.49 Ibid, p. 122.

Mitrovic 26

between the Huguenots and the crown. Marguerite saw herself as a

mediator between her brother the King and his Huguenot subjects,

thus serving as intermediary between the Catholics and Huguenots.

Her efforts for peace resulted in the Articles of Nerac, which

was another political success in her biography. Finally,

throughout her time in Navarre, she acted as an advisor to her

husband and a diplomat between him and her brother the king of

France, having already proven herself in this capacity. As such,

the outbreak of another religious war in 1580 meant that

Marguerite’s skills of persuasion and diplomacy were once again

needed to restore peace between her husband and brother. Finding

herself in a very difficult situation between her brother and

mother, on the one hand, and her husband on the other, she

decided to support her husband:

“From the beginning of this war, I realized that the honor of my husband the

King showed by his love demanded that I not abandon him. I decided to follow

his fortune although, with great regret, I saw that the cause of this war was

such, that I could not wish the victory of either party without causing damage

to myself……” 50

50 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs,pp. 148-149.

Mitrovic 27

As these examples clearly show, Marguerite de Valois only wanted

and helped forge the peace, either between her two brothers, by

shifting the attention of her younger brother towards the Low

Countries, or by appeasing the religious attention over her

brother’s and husband’s subjects.

However, Queen Marguerite’s political career did not last

long, and the first serious blow in that direction was the death

of her brother François d’Alençon. After a long illness, on June

10, 1584, he died. His demise hit Marguerite badly, and whatever

his character and motives were, he had been her sole constant

ally ever since she had stepped onto the political battlefield.

With his death, Marguerite lost a powerful ally, and, suddenly

she was alone in an increasingly hostile world.51 In that sense,

François’s death not only isolated Marguerite further, but also

dramatically altered and complicated the political situation. At

the time of his death, King Henry III still remained childless,

which meant that the Protestant Henry de Navarre now took

d’Alençon’s place as the next in the line to the throne. As it

became increasingly clear that the Valois line was ending,

51 Chamberlin, Marguerite of Navare, p. 240.

Mitrovic 28

Catherine de Medici and Henri III were forced to treat Navarre

with new respect and friendship. On the other hand, the thought

of the Protestant king of Navarre on the throne was an outright

abomination for the French Catholics. While most of them still

mourned the death of the Duke of d’Alençon, the rise of Henry de

Navarre finally created the political opening for which the Guise

family had been waiting a long time. As a response to Navarre’s

claim to the throne, the Guises formed the Catholic League.52 Even

Philip II of Spain, alarmed by the possibility of seeing Navarre

on the French throne, supported the League’s efforts. Finally,

the result was a formal treaty signed by the Guises with Spain at

Joinville in December 1584.53 At this point, Marguerite de Valois

took a highly unusual and decisive act. She began negotiations

with the Guises and the League, which was powerful enough to

challenge her husband’s status as an heir. In every sense, her

decision was a striking departure from her earlier loyalty to her

husband and her family. But if we look at Marguerite’s relentless

spirit, her ambition, religiosity and desire to stay in the world

52 Halt, The French Wars, pp. 123-125.53 Ibid, p. 124.

Mitrovic 29

of politics, then her decisions become more clear and

understandable.

Logically, Marguerite had no reason to work against

Henry de Navarre’s nomination as the heir to the French throne

because if he became king after Henri III, she would become the

Queen of France. Therefore, her actions against him made no

sense. Also, her actions seemed somewhat unusual because

Marguerite, whose loyalty to both family and husband had been

tested and maintained so many times, suddenly broke faith with

both. By allying with the Duke of Guise, she had declared herself

an enemy of the family, and from that moment Catherine de Medici

pursued her daughter with an implacable hatred that would

transcend even the grave.54 Horrified by her daughter’s conduct,

Catherine wrote in the letter frequently cited to indicate the

breakdown of mother-daughter relations: “I see that God has left

me this creature as punishment for my sins….” However, at odds

with both, the king her brother and her husband, without allies

or means, Marguerite de Valois had no role to play in these new

political circumstances. Furious and resentful at being

54 Leonie Frida, Catherine De Medici, (London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson), p. 259.

Mitrovic 30

callously thrown aside after her many years of loyalty and

service, Marguerite may have finally decided that she no longer

wanted, or needed, to be the pawn of her husband and brother.

Also, by making a simple political calculation, she may have

believed that she was allied to the likely winner. In any case,

she did not write or mention to anybody why she made such

decision, but from her written works we do get some clues. First,

by joining the third rising power, the radical Catholic League,

Marguerite regained again a place of power and importance in

French dynastic politics. An equally important factor to remember

is that Marguerite had always been a very devout Catholic.55 The

French king was the head of the Catholic Church in France, and,

as such, it was not unreasonable for Marguerite to fear that

Henry de Navarre, if made King of France, would seize Catholic

properties and declare Calvinism the religion of France.

Therefore, Marguerite’s decision to support the Catholic League

was not necessarily a sign that she had forsaken all of her

loyalties. Instead, it revealed that she may have had one loyalty

above all others, and that was to her religion.56 It seems that

55 In many places in her memoirs she accentuates her Catholicism.56 Eliane Viennot, p. 214.

Mitrovic 31

even her friend Brantome confirms that “the quarrel between

Marguerite and her husband came more from the difference in their

religion than from anything else.”57

Finally, it could be argued that this new

situation was worsened by Marguerite’s failure to produce an

heir, and this made her more vulnerable. Throughout history, the

queen was selected to bear heirs to the throne, and, as a result,

her body was of great importance. Although a queen often

jeopardized her health through childbearing, the failure to

produce heirs subjected her to the threat of repudiation.

Although of Catherine de Medici’s ten children only Marguerite

appeared balanced and healthy, time showed that she, too, paid

the price of her heritage in her lifelong barrenness.58 In other

words, she failed to give offspring to her husband, the greatest

fault a queen could commit.59 This significantly undermined her

political power, and prevented political maneuverings. As a

consequence, her husband and family no longer felt that they

needed Marguerite as a diplomat. In other words, once Henry de

57 Pierre de Bourdeille, The Book of the Ladies, p. 75.58 Weelman, p. 329.59 Boucher, Louise de Lorraine et Marguerite de France, p. 397.

Mitrovic 32

Navarre became heir to the throne, he had no reason to keep

Marguerite by his side. In that way, her personal and political

situation became intolerable. According to Brantome “for if ever

there was in the world a being of perfect beauty it is the Queen

of Navarre, and yet she has been little favored by Fortune.”60

Therefore, it could be argued that no matter how illustrious the

queen’s family was, and no matter how close she and her husband

might have been or how politically vital was their marriage, the

failure to provide an heir could undermine and destroy

everything.

These explanations might help us to understand the

military actions that queen Marguerite took, such as the seizing

of the city of Agen in the name of the Catholic League. This

behavior was unusual for Renaissance queens, but more common for

the medieval queens, such as, for instance, the English Queen

Matilda or Eleanor of Aquitaine. In that sense, Viennot argues

that Marguerite de Valois offers the unique example of a 16th-

century queen refusing to share her husband’s fate. In other

words, Marguerite was not an abandoned queen, but rather a queen

60 Brantome, The Book of the Ladies, p.204.

Mitrovic 33

who abandoned the king.61 However, the ensuing events will show

that Marguerite, although ambitious and courageous enough to

succeed, was not sly and cagey enough to justify her bid for

power. Driven more by her heart than reason, entangled in the

quarrels of the petty nobles in the Auvergene, she eventually

missed her best chance to win in this “game of power” against her

brother and husband. After 18 months of independence in Agen,

the Queen was driven from the city by her subjects, and forced to

seek refuge in the Chateau de Carlat. Although a skillful

diplomat and politician, she made two crucial mistakes that cost

her her freedom. First, during her independence in Agen, she

behaved according to her royal status, paying little to no

intention on her subjects and their feelings. As a result, the

rebellion in Agen, when it came, was entirely Marguerite’s fault.

62 Her decision to increase taxes hurt mostly the least

influential in town, but when she decided to erase fifty of the

best houses in Agen in order to construct a second citadel, she

must have known that she was injuring influential class. This

61 Viennot, Marguerite de Valois, p. 314. 62 Viennot, Marguerite de Valois, p. 307; Boucher, Louise de Lorraine et Marguerite de France,p. 388.

Mitrovic 34

situation prompted the town’s leading citizens to seek help from

the King’s marshal Matignon in Bordeaux, who eventually helped

them to drive the Queen from Agen. Second, throughout the story

of her adventure in the Auvergne, there runs a single and

consisted thread – the territorial ambitions of a number of

Auvergnate barons, in particular Lignerac, Aubiac and Canillac.63

Sealy emphasized that these barons were not her lovers, but only

her temporary political allies, devoted only to those who made

enough gold to bribe them. With an empty coffer, Marguerite was

soon left out of the “game of power,” becoming an easy target for

her brother Henry III. On November 13, 1586, Marguerite was

confined at Usson, one of the most impregnable chateaux in

France, in which she would remain for almost 20 years. Sealy

argues that the imprisonment of the rebellious Queen of Navarre

was an event of great political moment. With the arrest of his

sister, the king made his first move against his rebellious

Catholic subjects.64 The second move was to destroy the Catholic

League and their leader – the powerful Duke of Guise.

63 Sealy, The Myth of the Reine Margot, p. 121. 64 Ibid, p. 125.

Mitrovic 35

Despite her captivity, Marguerite’s political activity did

not cease. As long as the Duke of Guise fought against her

brother, boosted by Philip II’s gold, Marguerite was still in the

game. Furthermore, once Baron de Canillac declared himself for

the League, Marguerite dreamed again of the glory which had

eluded her in Agen.65 In that sense, she appealed to the King of

Spain for help, claiming to be serving Catholic interests. She

wrote a few letters to him, and the supporting memorandum in

which she revealed the political reality in France. For this

third attempt, she went beyond the circle of her household to

select the bishop of Comminges as a courier of impeccable

credentials, favorable to her cause, and certain to be well-

received by the King of Spain.66 In her personal letter to the

King, she included a description of her husband’s attempt to find

favor with the Sublime Porte. She did so to show that her

husband’s attack on Spain by using the Ottoman Turks was but a

replica of her brother’s attempt to harm Spain.

What is important here is the fact that both, the

letter and the supporting memorandum reveal the queen’s awareness65 Ibid, p. 123.66 Chamberlain, Marguerite of Navarre, p. 255.

Mitrovic 36

of not only the domestic, but also the foreign policy realities

in detail. In the supporting memorandum, she uses more rhetorical

style, pleading her case with “His Most Catholic Majesty” to get

financial support for her revolt against the impious policy of

her brother, hostile to Spain, and disastrous to the Catholic

cause.67 Viennot argues that Marguerite showed a stunning rhetoric

style, like the ancient rhetors Cicero or Demosten, by attacking

the king’s friend Epernon and his influence on the policy and

strategies of Henry III .68 She continues that Epernon sought an

alliance with England and the German princes in order “to occupy

the Low Countries and Navarre would support the Turks to oust the

Spanish from the Portuguese Colonies in the Indies, which they

had occupied.”69 Unfortunately, Philip II preferred to restrict

his anti-French activities to support for the house of Lorraine.

Spanish king replied to Marguerite’s letter on 28 June, 1588, in

which he suggested that the Queen of Navarre seek the remedy for

her woes in help from God rather than in financial support from

himself, as he was engaged in preparations for the impending

67 Ibid, p. 127.68 Eliane Viennot, Memoires et autres ecrits, ed. (Paris: Honoré Champion, 1999), p. 177.69 Sealy, The Myth of the Reine Margot, p. 128.

Mitrovic 37

invasion of England.70 However, Henry’s strategy to destroy the

religious opposition to his reign focused upon the Duke of Guise.

Eventually, when the news of the assassination of Guise in Blois

arrived in the Auvergne, it was terribly painful for the queen to

bear. Although without money and resources to continue the war,

Marguerite was still eager to participate in the League’s cause

against her despised brother, but the death of the Duke of Guise

destroyed her last hopes. With the disappearance of the

“Balafre,” the exiled princess had no one of stature and power to

defend her interests in the world of politics. Soon, the

belligerent queen changed her interest completely, by devoting

herself to the world of books. The Amazon thus became a Muse of

Art.

But the story of her political activity did not end

there. Although in exile, Marguerite was still an important

figure for the new Bourbon king Henry IV and his dynasty.

Recognizing the political significance that the heir to the

throne had for the future of France, Marguerite accepted to

divorce Henry IV, and thus helped him to prolong his dynasty. In

70 Viennot, Memoirs and other ecrits, p. 167.

Mitrovic 38

addition, after almost twenty years in Usson, Marguerite obtained

permission to visit and stay in Paris. In that way, her

acceptance by the royal family reinforced the continuity of the

monarchy and also suggested to the public that the Bourbon

dynasty was stable enough to welcome the remnants of the former

dynasty. Finally, after Henry IV’s death in 1610, Marguerite

continued to serve the crown, most notably in 1614, when nobles

challenged Marie’s regency. In these dangerous circumstances,

Marie de Medici had confidence in, and relied on, Marguerite in

order to preserve the Bourbon dynasty. As these examples clearly

show, Marguerite de Valois should be regarded among the first

political actors in building the French state and strengthening

the French court at the beginning of the 17th century.

IV – Cultural Role

Like many famous women who were also writers, Marguerite de

Valois is better known for her controversial life in late

sixteenth-century France than for her works. This interest in the

lives of women writers, rather than their works, has led to a

Mitrovic 39

proliferation of biographies rather than critical studies, which

keep these women writers subordinate to the authors (mostly male)

who write about them. As a result, quite often, they are not able

to speak for themselves, and their biographers rarely talk about

their writing. In other words, when a woman defined herself as an

intellectual in the Renaissance, she could not, even if she

wished, detach that role from the cultural expectations of the

society, in which she lived, conventionally attached to her

gender, and, most notably, from issues of love and sexuality.71

For example, this point may be illustrated with reference to the

attempts of Marie de Gournay and Marguerite de Valois to manage,

by intellectual means, the discourses surrounding their personal

lives. Despite the contrasting stereotypes ultimately imposed

upon them – the “old maid” in Gournay’s case, or a “whore” in

Marguerite’s – the recourse of both women to versions of

Neoplatonic philosophy is ultimately inseparable from the erotic

discourses in which they found themselves pre-inscribed.72

71 Cathleen M. Bauschatz, “Plaisir et proficit” in the Reading and Writing of Marguerite de Valois” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1998), pp. 27-48. 72 Richard Hillman, “Les intellectuelles et l’amour: Marie de Gournay and Marguerite de Valois” Renaissance and Reformation, 2000, 24 (4), pp. 115-128.

Mitrovic 40

As the French historian ÉlianeViennot points out, Marguerite

de Valois was an author, poet, woman of letters, and a patron of

the arts, whose work is considered among the best of the French

Renaissance.73 Viennot also points out that Marguerite’s writings

need to be understood within the cultural and linguistic systems

of 16th-century France and the revival of Neoplatonic notions of

love. Regarded in this light, her works show Marguerite’s

intuitive understanding of the power of emotions and her ability

to express herself through her memoirs, poems and letters.74 In

other words, writing was her means of justifying her life and,

thus, she chose to represent herself in an asexual fashion,

seeking existence in another time and in a different space.75 On

the other hand, her intellectual accomplishments reflect her

dedication to the study of philosophy. Interested in Neoplatonic

philosophy, she attended first her brother Henry III’s Palace

Academy, after which she founded her own academic circles in

Nerac, Usson and Paris, where she managed to gather the most

prominent French philosophers of the time. With all this in mind,

73 Viennot, Marguerite de Valois, p. 14.74 Viennot, Memoires et autres ecrits, pp. 88-89.75 Cholakian, Women and the Politics, p. 33.

Mitrovic 41

this chapter will show that queen Marguerite’s intellectual

output and activity ought to place her at the forefront of the

French Renaissance.

Pierre de Brantome, Marguerite’s friend and intellectual,

was well aware of her literary and intellectual accomplishments,

praising her “as much for her works as for her beauty.”76 For him

“this princess is truly the most eloquent and the best-speaking

lady in the world…….and to the Poles who harangued in Latin she

showed that she understood them by replying on the spot.“77

Probably the best passage that could describe Marguerite as a

16th-century intellectual was written by Brantome:

“She is most eager to obtain the fine new books that are composed, as much onsacred subjects as on human; and when she undertakes to read a book, howeverlarge and long it is, she never stops or quits it until she sees the end, andoften loses sleep and food in doing so. She herself composes, both in proseand verse. As to which no one can think otherwise than that her compositionsare learned, beautiful, and pleasing, for she knows the art; and could webring them to the light, the world would draw great pleasure and great profitfrom them.” (pp. 190-91)78

Although Brantome in description of Marguerite’s

intellectual pursuits sometimes exaggerates the truth in order to

glamorize the Valois queen, her own testimony seems to confirm

76 Brantome, p. 43.77 Ibid, p. 45.78 Brantome, The Ladies, p. 190-191.

Mitrovic 42

his description. In her memoirs, Marguerite explains how she

developed the passion for reading and knowledge during her

confinement at the Louvre by her mother and brother. She

explains, however, that this apparent contentment is largely

because her captivity has not been unpleasant:

“Besides, I had found a secret pleasure, during my confinement, from theperusal of good books, to which I had given myself up with a delight I neverbefore experienced. I consider this as an obligation I owe to fortune, or,rather, to Divine Providence, in order to prepare me, by such efficaciousmeans, to bear up against the misfortunes and calamities that awaited me. Bytracing nature in the universal book which is opened to all mankind, I was ledto the knowledge of the Divine Author. Science conducts us, step by step,through the whole range of creation, until we arrive at length, at God.... Mycaptivity and its consequent solitude afforded me the double advantage ofexciting a passion for study, and an inclination for devotion, advantages Ihad never experienced during the vanities and splendour of my prosperity…”79

Bauschatz argues that this passage also shows her awareness of

the pleasure of reading, rather than only its didactic side.80 She

had at her disposal a plenty of books from the Royal Library, one

of the greatest in Europe. Therefore, it could be argued that the

experience of imprisonment changed Marguerite in a subtle but

very real manner. By the end of her captivity, she developed a

solid foundation for learning and future academic work. In

addition, and especially interesting for historians, is

79 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, pp. 112-113.80 Bauschatz, “Plaisir et proficit,” p. 32.

Mitrovic 43

Marguerite’s passion for history and mythology. In her memoirs,

there are a lot of examples from the ancient history and

mythology. For example, she cited the Emperor Nero, King Pyrrhus,

the Greek hero Themistocles, Moses and many others. She was even

familiar with the breaking of the Macedonian battalion –

phalanges, and the military practice and strategy of the French

nobles.81 Finally, by reading the Scripture, she became deeply

religious, but not in the ceremonial and liturgical sense, but as

a result of intellectual effort, by “studying the grand book of

universal nature….which has its origins in God himself.”82

The first known Marguerite de Valois work was “The

Declaration of the King of Navarre”, written in 1574.83 This

aforementioned text reveals all the eloquence and intelligence of

the young queen, who as a 21-year-old girl must have impressed

the Parisian court. However, her most beautiful, prominent and

important work was the “Memoires.” Modern literary scholars cite

her Memoires as the first written by a woman in Renaissance

France. Written during her exile in Usson, around 1594,81 Brantome, The Ladies, p. 202.82 Marguerite de Valois, Memoires, p. 76.83 Marguerite de Valois, Memoire justicatif pour Henry de Bourbon; in Viennot, Memoires et autres ecrit, p.243.

Mitrovic 44

Marguerite dedicated these memoirs to her old friend Brantome,

from whom she previously commissioned “A Life” in the manner of the

“Lives of illustrious men of Plutarch.”84 This shows that her text invoked

the humanist traditions, explicitly using Plutarch as her model

to recreate her life as heroic. Eventually, she abandoned the

idea of comparing herself with the ancient heroes, shifting her

intention more on the need to justify her life decisions. In that

sense, the Memoires offer a fascinating insight into the workings

and intrigues of the Valois court during its twilight years.

The years on which the surviving text focuses, from

1569 to 1581, plunge the reader into the heart of the Wars of

Religion. They were written from a mature perspective rather than

from that of the young woman living through these dramatic

events. They were also written after all other members of her

immediate family were dead. Thus, Marguerite de Valois could tell

her story more freely, and recast her own actions in a more

favorable light. In that sense, significant historical events

receive scant attention as she focused more on the drama of her

84 The Brantome and Marguerite de Valois relationship offers a striking (and unusual) example of male/female intellectual friendship in the French sixteenth century.

Mitrovic 45

life. Thus, it comes as a surprise that her memoirs make almost

no mention of her love life. In order to justify her actions, she

presents herself as an engaged and principled young woman, a

loyal supporter of Henry IV and her family. Viennot argues that

this perspective was deliberate, because she wrote her memoirs as

Henry IV was trying to claim the throne and as she, isolated in

Usson, was seeking his permission to return to Paris.85 For the

same reason, she depicts her relationship to her husband as the

frank camaraderie of siblings. For example, she states that “he

had always spoken to me as openly as to a sister”86 On the other

hand, Garrison argues that the fact that she insists so often on

her unfailing dedication to Henry’s best interest underlines only

her own vulnerability as a woman.87 As a consequence, the young

princess who dreamed of becoming a heroic figure, quite often

equates success with staying in her husband’s good graces.

Another important thread of her memoirs is that Marguerite

often compares her adventures to those of male figures in

history, such as Themistocles and Moses, associating the genre of

85 Viennot, Memoirs et autres ecrits, p. 11.86 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, p. 71.87 Garisson, Marguerite de Valois, p. 10.

Mitrovic 46

history with males. Writing as a queen in exile, organizing her

story around a universal theme that both explains and excuses her

destiny, she imitates Plutarch’s “Lives of the Great Men” recasting

herself as a “great man” in the classical mood.88 She does not

identify herself with other women writers or with female literary

characters (like the tragic Dido, for example, a frequent choice

of Renaissance women writers). For these reasons, however,

despite the difficulty of her circumstances, she does not present

herself as passive and victimized, as female characters in male-

authored tended to be. Rather, she shows herself calling on her

inner resources as her male models did. In that sense, she uses

childhood anecdotes to prefigure greatness and claims that

parallels can be drawn between the lives of heroes who have lived

in different ages.89 It could be argued that all these examples

only complicate her ability to define herself as a royal figure

and as a woman. In order to refute the vicious gossip about her

and a desire from the record of her life, she tried to erase her

femininity. But, on the contrary, her other works, as well as her

88 Cholakian, The Politics of Self-Representation, p. 52.89 Cholakian, p. 53.

Mitrovic 47

correspondence, will reveal that Marguerite was more feminine

than one might think.

While in the official “Memoires” Marguerite de

Valois never speaks of the active love life that she carried on

during her life, in the letters and the dialogue, “La Ruelle Mal

Assortie” (The Ill-Assorted Bedside), the analogy between sexuality and

textuality becomes central.90 In them, Marguerite de Valois

appears in a variety of roles, as a troubled spouse of Henri de

Navarre, lover of Champvallon, daughter of Catherine de Medici,

patroness, and friend, thus allowing modern readers to gain some

impression of the princess’s personality. Until recently, this

correspondence was not widely accessible, so Viennot's volume is,

the first critical edition of all the known letters of Marguerite

de Valois, including a total of 469 pieces of correspondence, of

which 117 have never before been published.91 A close reading of

the correspondence thus complements and corrects the carefully

focused Memoires and provides a much more detailed portrait of the

last Valois queen, her political strategies, and her domestic

90 Eliane Viennot, “Marguerite de Valois et La Ruelle mal assortie : une attribution erronée”, Nouvelle Revue du XVIe Siecle, Vol. 10 (1992), pp. 81-98.91 Viennot, Marguerite et autres ecrits, p.115.

Mitrovic 48

establishments. The interest of this correspondence, beyond the

diversity of its recipients, is to reconstruct the social and

political network created by the Queen.

The correspondence also displays, along with a variety of

subject matter, a range of literary styles. For example, the

letters to Champvallon are eloquent demonstrations of

Marguerite’s Neoplatonic flirtation and love. In them, she used

Platonism to represent earthly love in a spiritualized form.92 She

adopted the Neoplatonic language that male poets used to figure

relationships with beautiful (hence virtuous) women, to claim a

similar function for the male. Her love is “a divine being to

which nothing is unknown.” Through love, she notes, “the soul

ascends above the earthly and experiences such admirable effects

as the happy spirits receive in the breast of eternity. 93

Developing a parallel between love and study, she claims that

studying provides a better consolation for the pain of love than

a new love would: “The activity of knowledge, which always brings

to a love-sick soul, to some new means to console its pain, to

92 Marguerite de Valois, Correspondance, 1569-1614, édition critique établie par Éliane Viennot, (Paris, Honoré Champion, 1998).93 Ibid, p.312.

Mitrovic 49

nourish its passion, and to honor and achieve its goal.94 In these

words we can see that, unlike the examples from history found in

the Memoires, they are more negative and painful. Thus, we can

hear the private, subjective Marguerite speaks, rather than the

more public figure of the Memoires, who played the official roles

of daughter, sister, wife, and diplomat. Thus, she also speaks

here, for the first time, clearly as a woman.

Another feminist text, “La Rule Mal Assortie”, probably written during

the exile at Usson, is a curious autobiographical dialogue

between Marguerite and a lover, in which she reverses the

conventions of Petrarchism and Neoplatonism, describing the

beauty of her younger male lover, but lamenting the fact that he

is not better read. To accentuate the knowledge over love

affairs, in one passage she exclaims:

“I have told you so many times that you would do better to use your time to

read Agricola, Leon Hebreu or Ficino, than in entertaining those coquettes who

talk all the time and don't say anything…….I wouldn't know how to, nor do I

want to, nor can I love an imbecile, an ignoramus who does not even know who

Pythagoras is!”95

94 Cholakian, “Plaisir and proficit”, p. 224.95 Viennot, “Marguerite de Valois et La Ruelle mal assortie”:, p. 85.

Mitrovic 50

The last prose text, written in 1614 and published under the

title “Speech learned and subtle,” is the only work published

during her lifetime. Promptly dictated by Queen Marguerite, this

letter is a refutation addressed to the misogynistic Jesuit

Father Loryot on the reasons why humans make so many honors to

the woman. This long letter testifies to the Queen's attempts to

create a feminine literary persona while following gender and

class preconceptions of her time. In other words, her engagement

with this issue highlights the difficulties that elite women at

the time experienced in their attempts to articulate a new

'feminist' literary strategy.96 For Marguerite, a man must:

“yield to woman and honor her and almost adore her, as the holiest and mostvivid image of divinity. As women bodies are more beautiful and delicate, andtheir spirit more tranquil and restful, women, as the culmination of creationsurpass men in all that is excellent, perfect and worthy”97

The most surprising element here is that Marguerite, who all her

life had identified herself with male exemplary figures and

preoccupations, becomes interested at the end of her life in

defending of women. Viennot attributes this dramatic change to

96 Cholakian, The Politics of Self-Representatio, p. 65.97 Marguerite de Valois, Discourse docte et subtil, in Memoires and autres ecrits, p. 213.

Mitrovic 51

the profound moral transformation that occurred in the queen

after her divorce in 1599.98

Marguerite’s writings might have been sufficiently

influential to gain her an important place in French Renaissance

literature. But her use of patronage and the intellectual

gatherings she held made her central to the intellectual

movements of the day. As a young princess, Marguerite had been

one of the nine muses of the salon vert of the Countess of Retz.

This salon delighted in poetry, especially Petrarchan sonnets,

and it was here that Marguerite became enamored of the poetry

with the Pleiades.99 Nevertheless, the year 1576 marked the debut

of Marguerite to intellectual life. According to contemporary

observers, 1576 to 1579, King Henry III brought together groups

of orators – men and women, poets and courtiers – to discuss

questions of moral philosophy in his Palace Academy. Among the

spectators was Marguerite, who ordered thirteen speeches that

were pronounced in January – February 1576. This album, preserved

in a beautifully-bound manuscript, provides an interesting

testimony to the intellectual curiosity of Marguerite and to the98 Weelman, The Queens and Mistressess, p. 310.99Ibid, p. 314.

Mitrovic 52

abiding interest of the king and his court in the domain of

eloquence.100

The Academy consisted of a series of lectures delivered

during the king’s dinner and followed with discussion by the

participants on the subject of the lecture. These lectures have

been instituted by the king to complete his formal education

which had been less than adequate to prepare him for his life’s

work as ruler of France.101 The subjects treated there were moral

virtues, natural philosophy, natural theology and eloquence.

Among the numerous intellectuals, Marguerite could listen to

lectures on natural theology by Jean Bodin and natural philosophy

by Pontus de Tyard, or to discover the philosophy of Reymond

Sebond and Michel de Montaigne. The lecturers were also the poets

Ronsard, Desportes, Pibrac, Countess of Retz and the Duchess of

Nevers. This Academy had a significant place in Marguerite’s

life, not only as a source of knowledge, but also as a nucleus of

her own Academy, which would flourish in Nerac, Usson and Paris

after her return to the capital in 1605. 100 Francois Rouget, “Les orateurs de La Pleiade a l’Academie du Palais (1576):etude d’un album manuscript ayant appartenu a Marguerite de Valois” Renaissance and Reformation, Vol. 31, No 4 (2008), pp. 9-42.101 Sealy, The Myth of the Reine Margot , p. 184.

Mitrovic 53

It could be argued that in Nerac Marguerite probably enjoyed

the most brilliant time as the queen of Navarre. Around fifty

years before Marguerite’s arrival in Nerac, her great-aunt,

Marguerite d’Angouleme had established a strong intellectual

center there. Highly praised for her literary work, she left an

abundance of books and studies that would quench Marguerite’s

thirst for knowledge and her own intellectual development. In

Nerac, she created a court, “so beautiful and pleasant like the

one in Paris.”102 There, she continued to pursue her interest in

Neoplatonic philosophy and, thus, commissioned the new

translation of Marsilio Ficino’s Commentary on Plato’s Symposium.

In addition, her account books show purchases of both classical

texts and works of French humanists, such as Plutarch’s works,

Cicero’s discourses and Joachim de Bellay’s Memoirs. 103All this

reflects her desire not only to study, but also to spread

humanism.

After her tumultuous political engagement that ended in

failure, Marguerite continued her cultural activities in Usson,

despite her long years of imprisonment. Even to this remote site,102 Marguerite de Valois, Memoirs, p. 163.103 Viennot, p. 135.

Mitrovic 54

Marguerite attracted artists and prominent intellectuals, who

offered courses in mathematics and philosophy, such as Jean de

Champaignac and Scipion Dupleix, who began their careers at the

Chateau d’Usson. During these years of exile from the capital,

she laid the foundation for her future Paris Academy that would

gather the most prominent literati, poets, novelists and

philosophers. In these efforts, Marguerite imitated her brother

by conducting lectures during dinner. In adopting the formula of

these table lectures followed by discussion, the queen provided

the means to resurrect expand and explore the intellectual and

cultural interest of her younger years. Finally, in 1605,

Marguerite de Valois received permission from Henry IV to return

to Paris. By establishing her own salon on the Rue de Seine the

Valois dynasty, she became highly respected intellectual of the

day. The salon she held in Paris during the last ten years of her

life was a veritable center of intellectual life. With Plato’s

Symposium as her role model, Marguerite often gathered a group at

the table to discuss a particular topic. Surrounded by the people

accomplished in all sorts of sciences, she prefered to nourish

the spirit rather than the body. In that way, she was at the

Mitrovic 55

center of Parisian intellectual life, and although she died a

decade later, her cultural legacy and influence will last for

centuries that followed.

So, what has this story of the Queen Marguerite de Valois

told us? Was she Cleopatra, a woman of character, skilled in the

arts of diplomacy and politics, who in all her seeking never

found her Antony? Or was she a prisoner of her own ambitions who

turned out from Amazon into Muse? As a celebrity of her day, she

represented herself publicly as a diplomat, writer, and patron of

the arts, but for good or ill, a woman with intelligence,

political savvy, or, worst of all, political power, was not

entirely female. Thus, as a woman who wanted and did behave as a

man by the 16th-century gender role standards, she sustained a

torrent of criticism and false accusations, which resulted in the

creation of a myth about the notorious Queen Margot. However,

this essay has made clear that Marguerie undertook important

political and cultural activities during the French Renaissance,

particularly during the Wars of Religion, making her in that way

more central to the unfolding of French political, social, and

cultural history than one might expect. Her willingness and

Mitrovic 56

eagerness to play a political role both within and outside the

family led to the transition from Valois to Bourbon power, which

laid the foundation for a strong and centralized monarchy in 17th-

century France. On the other hand, the paper has shown that Queen

Marguerite was also a woman of culture and learning. As a center

of royal family life, governance, and high culture, the French

Renaissance court created a more extensive public and cultural

space for royal women by creating new opportunities for them to

express their thoughts, desires and concerns. In that way,

interested in pursuing knowledge since her early days at court

and under the guidance of Madame Curton and Retz, Marguerite de

Valois became one of the most prominent intellectuals and writer

of her time. Her works reveal aspects of her rhetorical and

literary talents and her feminist awareness. Under the influence

of Classical culture and literature, she contributed to the

spread of the French Renaissance, and especially of Neoplatonic

philosophy in women’s writings. In that sense, a thread that

connects her political activity and cultural achievements in

history is the fact that in both cases she breached traditional

Mitrovic 57

gender norms by behaving as a man, either in leading an army or

writing on Neoplatonic philosophy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bauschatz, Cathleen M. “Plaisir et proficit” in the Reading and Writingof Marguerite de Valois.” Tulsa Studies in Women’s Literature, Vol. 7, No. 1 (Spring, 1998): pp. 27-48.

Boucher, Jacqueline. Louise de Lorraine et Marguerite de France: Deux epouses et reines a la fin du XVIe siècle. Saint-Etienne, 1995.

Chamberlin, E. R. Marguerite of Navarre. New York: The Dial Press, 1974.

Cholakian, Patricia Francis. Women and the Politics of Self-Representation in Seventeenth-Century France. Newark: University of Delaware, 2000.

Crawfard, Katherine. Perilous Performances: Gender and Regency in Early Modern France. Massachusetts: Harward University Press, 2004.

d`Aubigné, Theodore Agrippa. Divorce satirique ou les amours de la reyne Marguerite.in E. Reaume and F. de Caussage (ed.) Oeuvres completes de Theodore Agrippa d’Aubigné, Paris, 1873-1879.

Dumas, Alexander. La Reine Margot. Paris, 1845.

de Bourdeille, Pierre. The Book of the Ladies. Boston: Hardy, Pratt and Company, 1902.

de Valois, Marguerite. Memoirs: Written by Her Own Hand. Trans. By Violet Fane. London, 1970.

Frida, Leonie. Catherine De Medici. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 2006.

Garrisson, Janine. Marguerite de Valois: La Reine Margot. Paris: Fayard, 1994.

Mitrovic 58

Hillman, Richard. “Les intellectuelles et l’amour: Marie de Gournay andMarguerite de Valois” Renaissance and Reformation, 2000, 24 (4): pp. 115-128.

Holt, Marc P. The French Wars of Religion, 1562-1629. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Kelly-Gadol, Joan. “Did Women Have a Renaissance”? In Renate Bridenthaiand Claudia Koonz (ed): Becoming Visible: Women in European History. (Houghton Mifflin, 1977): pp. 1-18.

Norberg, Kathryn. “Incorporating Women/Gender into French History Courses, 1429-1789: Did Women of the Old Regime Have a Political History.?” French Historical Studies, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Spring, 2004): pp. 243-266.

Rouget, Francois. “Les orateurs de La Pleiade a l’Academie du Palais (1576): etude d’un album manuscript ayant appartenu a Marguerite de Valois” Renaissance and Reformation. Vol. 31, No 4 (2008): pp. 9-42.

Sealy, Robert. The Myth of the Reine Margot: Toward the Elimination of a Legend. Baltimore: Peter Lang, 2004.

Sluhovsky, Moshe. “History as Voyeurism: from Marguerite de Valois to La Reine Margot.” Rethinking History 4:2 (2000): pp. 193-210.

Viennot, Eliane. “Parler de soi, parler a l’autre. Marguerite de Valoisface a ses interlocuteurs.” Tangence, No.77, (2005): pp. 37-59.

Viennot, Eliane. Marguerite de Valois: Histoire d’une femme, histoire d’un mythe. Paris: Payot, 1994.

Viennot, Eliane. Marguerite de Valois: Memoires et autres ecrits, 1574-1614, ed. Paris: Honoré Champion, 1999.

Viennot, Eliane. “Marguerite de Valois et La Ruelle mal assortie : une attribution erronée.” Nouvelle Revue du XVIe Siecle, Vol. 10 (1992): pp. 81-98.

Viennot, Éliane. Marguerite de Valois, Correspondance, 1569-1614, ed.(Paris, Honoré Champion, 1998.

Mitrovic 59

Wellman, Kathleen. Queens and Mistresses of Renaissance France. Yale: Yale University Press, 2013.