Back to basics

Based on a historical reconstruction of the ‘Ferrarese imbroglio of 1536’ (a religious scandal in Ferrara involving the Court of the Duchess, Renée de France)), the historiography around this period is deconstructed. Then the focus will shift to the standard biography of Jean Calvin, who visited Ferrara around that time, and whose meeting with the Duchess has achieved canonical status, and whose involvement in the ‘imbroglio’ is routinely recounted. By analyzing the origin, birth and growth of this story, we will proof that it’s a myth. This will finally lead us to a reassessment of the relation (mainly the correspondence) between Jean Calvin and Renée de Ferrare.

Introduction

In April-May 1536, Jean Calvin – only 26 years old – stayed for a short time in Ferrara, probably together with Louis du Tillet, a friend and cleric.¹ No one doubts this statement. It’s an established fact. Why he went, what he did, how long he stayed, with whom he talked, is unknown. There is no documentary evidence to fill in the picture with more detail, and Calvin himself never referred to this trip, not even casually. This is also an established fact. It’s only after Calvin’s death, in the sketch of his life by Théodore de Bèze (1564/1565 and 1575) that the trip is mentioned, still without detail, but informing us that he was received by Renée de France, Duchess of Ferrara (1510-1575, whose court at the time was a haven for French refugees suspected of ‘heresy’), and that this meeting made a deep impression on the Duchess. To accept this information at face value, as is generally doen, is naïve. Bèze’s ‘life of Calvin’ basically is an apologetic document, not a ‘biography’.² More on this below. Nevertheless, a complete mythology has been woven around Calvin’s stay in Ferrara, including vivid accounts of his activity there. This took place mainly in the nineteenth century, but the impact of it is still perceptible today, and not only in popular writing.³ In the leanest version, Bèze’s statement is repeated, generally with the reference that Calvin served as a secretary to the Duchess. In the longer version, Calvin teaches the true religion (often written with capitals), privately in the Chambers of the Duchess, publicly in sermons, attacking the authority of the Pope and denouncing Holy Mass as an abomination, resulting in an investigation by the Ferrarese inquisitor, who arrests a number of ‘heretics.” Calvin himself barely gets away.⁴ Quite odd, that an event about which hardly anything is known, developed into such an eventful story.

Time for a reassessment, not only because the historical truth has its rights, but also because legends and myths impede the vision of what really happened. To achieve this, I will first summarize the events that took place in Spring 1536 in Ferrara – it wàs an eventful period, well documented and thoroughly researched, but Calvin did not play a part in it. This – I will show – is also an established fact, but scholars seem to have trouble to accept this. After having cleared the field, I will try to reconstruct how it was possible that Calvin was perceived as a prominent agent in the Ferrarese imbroglio of 1536 (in which he did not partake). Taken together this reconstruction/deconstruction will spread new light on the true relation between Calvin and the Duchess.

Lent in Ferrara, 1536

Things sparked off in Ferrara, during a religious Service on Good Friday 1536 (April, 14^th), when Jehannet de Bouchefort, a singer of the Ducal Chapel left the church ostentatiously just before the Adoration of the Cross took place.⁵ It caused a scandal, and the local inquisitor (an official of the Duke’s administration) started an investigation. It soon became clear that the French Court of the Duchess was a hotbed of religious free-thinkers (in those days often labelled ‘Lutherans,’ but in reality, there was a wide variety of reformations (plural) going on at that time, both in- and outside the official Church).⁶ Asked for names, Bouchefort kept his mouth shut. Other witnesses were called and testified to lively discussions in private chambers, intensified during Lent, about issues like the authority of the Church and the Pope, the need for Confession, whether or not man had a free will, etc. all hot topics in the 1530s, and indeed not innocuous from the point of view of the official Church. It soon became apparent that religious refugees from France dominated these discussions. They had left France because of the repression following the infamous Affaire des Placards (broadsheets attacking Holy Mass as the abomination of abominations, October 1534/ January 1535). Although the Duke was aware of this situation, he offered shelter to many of them. Both he and his wife engaged several of them in their own Court. The abovementioned Bouchefort was one of them. Before entering the Ducal Chapel, he was a singer in the Royal Chapel of the King of France (chantre de la chambre et valet de garde-robbe du roi).⁷ The same goes for the court poet, Clément Marot (enrolled as secretary to the Duchess) and Lyon Jamet (one of the Duke’s private secretaries, at that time on diplomatic mission in Rome). All three figured on the list of ‘criminals, wanted for heresy’ published in January 1535 in France. As a matter of fact, they were sentenced to death by default. Apparently, the Duke didn’t mind, as long as they did not cause any trouble.⁸ So, together with an ever-increasing number of similar religious refugees, Bouchefort had lived peacefully in the ‘French enclave’ in Ferrara for almost a year, under the high protection of the Duchess and tolerated by the Duke, until that ominous moment during Holy Liturgy, when the singer apparently could no longer reconcile it with his conscience that he had to kneel in front of the cross, saluting it as a salutary object, singing hymns like ‘Pange lingua gloriosa’.⁹ It must have felt like idolatry, an abomination. And, he was not the only one as the inquisitor found out. People very close to the Duchess seemed to be implicated. One witness mentions the names of two of Madame’s secretaries: Clément Marot and Jean Cornillau. He said that it was common knowledge that these were inveterate ‘Lutherans.” Asked what or who caused this sudden uproot of heretical activity during Lent, the witness referred to ‘a man of the religious order of hermits preaching in Madame’s court.” He added that ‘before this preacher came, the women at court were very devout, but after being exposed to his preaching they hardly wished even to appear pious; they instead began to pass judgment on religious matters, claiming that listening to sermons was a waste of time, as was attending the Office of the Holy Virgin’.¹⁰ The account of a second witness confirmed the image of Renée’s court as a breeding ground of free-thinking heretics. This witness adds a physical description of one of the most zealous preachers: ‘a small Frenchman who had received a post as Madame’s secretary.” He is sure that this preacher had the back of Madame’s personal almoner.¹¹ Pressed once more for his name, the witness replied ‘that he had heard he was a religious fugitive from France, and thinks a schoolteacher living in the county of Ferrara might have more information.’¹² Various arrests followed and more were to come. Even the position of Renée was threatened. She asked support from her uncle and aunt (François Ier and Marguerite de Navarre) and Anne de Montmorency (the Grand Master of France). They reacted almost immediately. Diplomatic missions by highly skilled French Ambassadors followed each other. They claimed that the Ferrarese Inquisitor had no jurisdiction over French citizens. The Pope was persuaded to join in this game. He issued a ‘Breve’ in which he demanded that the prisoners (or the accused?) had to be tried by an ecclesiastical court, and thus should be transported to the papal city of Bologna. The Duke did not comply, neither with the Pope, nor with the French, resulting in a gridlock. The investigation slowed down, Clément Marot could not be found, and the mysterious ‘preacher from the order of the hermits’ also seemed to have vanished into thin air. The effort of the Duke to collect incriminating evidence from France via his Paris Ambassador (Girolamo Feruffini), proved less than fruitful. Montmorency and the King informed him that patience was running thin. Finally, the Duke gave in, asked and got permission from the Pope to release the prisoners into the hands of the French authorities, and in August 1536 they were handed over to the Viennese Ambassador, George de Selve, Bisshop of Rodez. The dust settled soon. In a joint venture, the French, with support from the Pope, had triumphed over the Duke and his inquisitor.

Religion? It’s politics

What the above account makes clear, is that eradication of heresy (to which all actors were committed) apparently was not the real issue in this Ferrarese imbroglio. If it were, then all parties (the French, the Ferrarese and the Pope, ecclesiastical and civil) would simply have congratulated the Duke on the arrest of some notorious heretics and would have joined forces to have them executed. Instead they all excelled in obstructing each other’s initiatives. What seems a religious imbroglio, is in fact a political showdown. The Pope (Paul III, i.e., Alessandro Farnese) also uses the affair as an opportunity to strengthen his position vis-à-vis the Duke of Ferrara.¹³ One should not forget that in 1536 the tension between the two superpowers of the day, Habsburg (Charles V) and France (François Ier) rose by the day. A war seemed imminent, and one of the fronts would be in Northern-Italy. The position of Ercole, Duke of Este, was extremely difficult. Through his marriage with Renée de France, he was supposed to be loyal to the French. The Pope on the other hand, used the proximity of the victorious Habsburg Army (returning via Italy after the conquest of Tunis¹⁴) to put pressure on him to join the Habsburg League against the French. The French on their side, had already invaded Savoy-Piedmont, and were very interested in Milan. They wanted to be sure of the loyalty of the Duke. In April 1536, many observers were sure that the outbreak of war only a matter of time. In the diplomatic jousting to avoid war and/or to win ground without actually having to wage war, the Pope (Alessandro Farnese) played a crucial role, and – as a shrewd politician – he profited from it. In all this, the Duke was a minor player, caught between the two super-powers, and not able to keep pace with the diplomatic skills of the French and the Pope. In the end he had to comply to a solution concocted between the French Ambassadors and Pope Paul III, regarding his domestic affairs. In 1536, an open confrontation between the two superpowers on Italian soil was averted, but the Savoy region and Turin remained French. It’s in the corridors of this diplomatic tug of war that the Ferrarese imbroglio was both instrumentalized and settled.¹⁵ It became apparent that the link Ferrara- France was not tenable anymore, and the Duke – reluctantly – gave up his political independence and joined the Habsburg League. To conclude this episode. After another outburst of ‘heresy’ at the Court of the Duchess in 1541, the Duke banished his wife to a castle in Consandolo (about 15 miles from Ferrara) and the size of her French Court was systematically diminished. Her correspondence was intercepted, and Renée became more and more isolated. Ironically, the return to a more ‘normal’ life was prompted by a visit to Ferrara of Pope Paul III, in Spring 1543. He had to be received and entertained properly and admonished the Duke to recall his wife and live together as a marital couple. In the many vicissitudes of the Duchess, it is remarkable that this Pope (from the house of Farnese) at two occasions contributed to effectively finding a way out (1536) or a modus vivendi (1543) in situations where Renée felt wedged between loyalty to her husband and deeply felt inner convictions (loyalty to France, and to her faith).¹⁶

Calvin in Ferrara: the birth of a myth

Considering the facts, one wonders why in the nineteenth Century almost all scholars conducting archival research in Ferrara, made Calvin a main actor in a play of which the script doesn’t even contain his name? The answer is simple. Based on the standard Calvin biography, they were sure he had played a role, so his name had to be in the script. They simply hadn’t found it… yet. Historical research is a complex exercise. There is always more context than one is aware of, and at the same time many of the relevant facts are unknowable, both on the level of the factual history itself (we don’t know all the relevant facts) and on the level of interpretation (we can’t look into hearts and minds of people: what were they really thinking, feeling, experiencing?). However, without an interpretation, all facts and texts remain mute. So, one has to risk an interpretation, starting with the knowledge one has, while constantly being aware that the margin for error is immense. It is clear that in this case, something must have gone wrong. Therefore, it might be useful to start from scratch, trying to differentiate between fact and fiction, and then try to find out what these scholars overlooked, didn’t know, or mis-interpreted.

The facts

Calvin was in Ferrara. That’s certified, nòt because the trip is mentioned in all accounts of Calvins’ life – that’s no guarantee (they were written after Calvin had died in 1564) – but because there is an independent eye-witness The Ferrarese physician and Professor of Medicine, Johannes Sinapius.¹⁷

1. An eye-witness

In a letter, dated 1 September 1539, Sinapius refers to their first meeting in Ferrara in 1536. The letter is a eulogy on Calvin’s qualities as a spiritual mentor, friend, and – surprise – marriage broker. In it he expresses his wish to meet Calvin again, and then writes:

The reference to Alcibiades’ Silenus evokes a passage in Plato’s Symposium, where Alcibiades compares Socrates to a Silenus, on the outside ugly and unattractive, but on the inside full of godly treasures. This comparison tells us that at the time of their meeting in Ferrara, Sinapius had no clue that he was talking to someone special. This is not surprising. In 1536, Sinapius was a professor of Medicine at the University and personal physician to the Duchess of Ferrara, an insider so to speak. Calvin was a visitor, not yet known as a writer and theologian, travelling under the pseudonym of Charles d’Espeville.¹⁹ Apparently, he did not present himself prominently. Unfortunately, Sinapius doesn’t mention a date. However, this can be reconstructed.

2. The timeframe

Based on two certified dates, we can say with certainty that the trip must have taken place between 15 March and 12 June 1536. The first date (terminus post quem) is based on the fact that in March 1536 Calvin was in Basel, assisting at the preparations of the first edition of his Institutio, published by Thomas Platter d.d. 15 March 1536. In a semi-autobiographical section in the Preface to his Commentary on the Psalms (published in Latin in 1557, in French in 1558),²⁰ Calvin informs the reader that he left Basel immediately after having finished the work on the Institutio (‘discessu brevis,’ ‘incontinent après’). ²¹ Unfortunately, he doesn’t say where he went. The second date (terminus ante quem) is also established. On 12 June 1536, he is in Paris with his brother Antoine to arrange family affairs.²² After subtracting the time needed for those quite long journeys, it seems plausible to accept a stay in Ferrara somewhere in April and/or May 1536. The duration cannot be determined.

3. A timid intellectual?

In the same context (Preface) Calvin explains his motives for the publication of the Institutio in 1536. Only 26 years of age, a licentiate in law (since 1532), he had exiled himself from France and had no regular job. Theologically he was an auto-didact. In the Preface he explains he wrote this book as an apology for those who were persecuted in France, because of the repression following the Affaire des Placards.²³ This is also why he addressed the dedicatory Epistle, preceding the first edition of the Institutio, to the French King. Calvin saw it as his duty, as an intellectual, to take their defense. This had nothing to do with vainglory. To demonstrate his humility, he tells that even in Basel he never aired that he, John Calvin, was the author of that book. He lived a hidden life, there.²⁴ This is – still according to Calvin in his Preface – the reason why he left Basel ‘immediately after’ the Institutio was published, and why he kept concealing his identity ‘everywhere else until he arrived in Geneva,’ where he was engaged by Guillaume Farel to become a ‘minister’ of God’s Church.²⁵ This is the moment when he ceases to anonymous and comes into the spotlight. The ‘everywhere else-until’ includes his stay in Ferrara. So, in Ferrara, he was not a self-confident preacher, not the Reformer he would become, but a young scholar, travelling under a pseudonym (Charles d’Espeville), who wanted to write books explaining the gospel to defend the faithful against calumny. That is the maximum one can say about ‘young man Calvin.” It appears that he was still ‘waiting’ to see what God had in mind for him. After Ferrara, things began to move very quickly. After having settled his affairs in Paris (June 1536) ²⁶, he tried to return to Strasbourg to continue his life. He imagined it to be a tranquil and studious, serving the faithful with his brains.²⁷ Things turned out differently: ‘His job found him in Geneva.” There he became a teacher (‘professor’), and a little later a preacher. It will take some more years (roughly from 1540 onwards) before he really emerges as one of the leaders of the Swiss and French Reformation.

This simple sketch of the young Calvin makes it quite unlikely that he in any way was actively involved in the Ferrara imbroglio, even though it is not impossible that he was in Ferrara during that time. He was too ‘bashfull and timid’ for this kind of actions.²⁸ And – even then – if he had participated, Sinapius certainly would have remembered it and Calvin himself would have had no reason to be ashamed of mentioning it. On the contrary, he would have used it in his ‘image-building’: ‘Already as a young man I confessed to the Truth and suffered for it.” Quod non. Although argumenta e nihilo should be distrusted, this one seems not inappropriate.

The Life of Calvin (Bèze)

The next references to his trip can to be found in Bèze’s (and Colladon’s) posthumous accounts of Calvin’s life. The earliest account is written by Bèze in 1564, shortly after Calvin’s death. Bèze relates the story, beginning with the year 1534. It is clear Bèze is familiar with Calvin’s own account of this episode in the Preface to the Psalms. The framing is similar, but Ferrara is now explicitly mentioned as a destination and some details are even given, of which the relevant ones are italicized below:

Although Bèze says that Calvin stayed in Italy/Ferrara for only a very short time (‘Italy, at which he only glanced’), he does suggest that Calvin actually met with Renée de Ferrara and that this meeting was the beginning of a lifelong friendship. Even more, already then the Duchess recognized Calvin’s authority as a god-sent man (‘excellent organe du Seigneur’). But now we must be on the alert. As already signaled, Bèze is not a biographer in the modern sense. He is Calvin’s successor, and France is torn apart by the religious conflict on how to re-build and govern the Church of God. Many factions were struggling for power. Signs were there that the conflict might take a violent turn. We are on the brink of the French Wars of religion.³⁰ The pamphlet press flourished. So, writing that John Calvin died a godly man (this is the main message of the first ‘Vita’) was not simply a matter of supplying the population with correct information. It was a strategic move in Geneva’s public relations policy in which Calvin is not a saint (God forbid!) but a man who lived an exemplary life, and whose vision of the Church was God-inspired. The biographical elements, Bèze adds to this account, serve to underline that Calvin ‘practiced what he preached,’ and that people willingly or unwillingly recognized his authority. The reference to Ferrara is part of this apologetic offensive in propaganda warfare. Bèze is a spin-doctor. Everyone in France knew who Renée de Ferrara was and what she stood for. Things in Ferrara had gone from bad to worse, especially since Ercole and the new order of the Jesuits had joined forces. In 1554 the Inquisition had filed a complaint for heresy against Renée. To save her life, she had to publicly take Holy Communion. After the death of her husband (1559), she had returned to France and withdrawn to her castle in Montargis, transforming her Court once more in a safe place for persecuted people, not discriminating regarding the cause of persecution (much to the irritation of her spiritual adviser, Jean Calvin). That this formidable woman respected Jean Calvin is a signal that the Reformed faction has support in high places. Moreover, it was true. Renée valued Calvin’s advice, although she did not always follow his lead. However, - and this is what we are looking for - this does not imply that their relationship started with an actual meeting in Ferrara in 1536, as Bèze suggests.

Already in 1565, a new edition appeared, this time probably in collaboration with Colladon.³¹ In this edition we read that Calvin went to Italy with a companion, whom the context reveals to be Louis du Tillet.³² The last and definitive edition of Bèze’s Life of Calvin was written in Latin and published in 1575. It’s far more detailed than the earlier editions. New and noteworthy elements from this Vita are italicized below:

Interesting elaborations: For the first time Bèze suggests that Calvin went to Ferrara with a plan: meeting the Duchess. (‘felt an inclination to visit the Duchess’). The wording of Renée’s appreciation is extended with the intriguing statement that Renée gave a brilliant example of her gratitude towards Calvin, even after he had died (1564). As with the previous elaborations it is highly unlikely that suddenly new information had popped up. Bèze is still a spin-doctor and probably only tries to enhance the basic idea of Calvin being Renée’s spiritual mentor to drive his message home. He claims that Renée not only was grateful for, but also remained faithful to Calvin’s advice until her death (June 1575). The ‘brilliant example’ might also refer to her Testament, in which she prohibited burying her with any pomp and circumstance, be it royal, be it ecclesial. The phrase itself replaces the previous statement that ‘the Duchess, who is still alive’ cherished Calvin’s advice. Often overlooked are two other additions. The first stipulates that Calvin not only wanted to visit Renée, but also wished to salute Italy as from a distance. No great plans, nothing definitive. The second addition is the introduction of a quote of Calvin, referring to his stay in Ferrara (“He left Italy, which he – as he used to say – ‘had only entered in order to leave it’”). These two phrases replace the previous statement about ‘Italy at which he only glanced.” In content they are interchangeable: Calvin was in Italy only for a very short time, and was not particularly fond of it. However, the fact that Bèze introduces this appreciation as if he quotes Calvin, gives more weight to the conclusion. Although unverifiable, the quote might be authentic, especially after the deconstruction the myth. In the end, this might well be the most correct factual description of Calvin’s visit to Ferrara: He was there, he did not like what he found, and he left.

It is clear what Bèze is doing, perhaps unconsciously. He uses elements from the later relationship between Renée and Calvin, and projects them to the supposed beginning of their relationship in Ferrara 1536. This procedure will be copied again and again in the 19^th Century, making it possible that the young Calvin became a central agent in the Ferrara imbroglio of Lent 1536.

The myths revisited

After having cleared the field, it’s time to revisit the myth about Calvin in Ferrara and take a fresh look at how Renée and Calvin came into contact (and what their correspondence really is about).

Calvin in Ferrara

It’s clear that in his Vita Bèze sowed the seeds for the creation of the myth: Calvin might have saluted Italy from a distance,’ but he went to Ferrara with the explicit purpose to meet the Duchess. And when they meet, the Duchess is so impressed – according to Bèze – that it became the beginning of a lifelong friendship, in which Calvin played the role of mentor and spiritual coach. As demonstrated above, the relationship between the two is not fictional, but the rest is. However, it is easy to imagine how this myth can begin to grow, in particular when Calvins’ star begins to rise in the era of Reformed Romantic historiography: The hero of faith, the mentor of a woman of royal offspring, whose life captures the imagination. And this scheme delivers even better, when it is combined with the Ferrarese imbroglio of 1536, in which he can play a heroic role. Remember: Neither Calvin nor Bèze ever mention the Ferrarese imbroglio, let alone that Calvin played a part in it. For storytellers however, this combination offers the advantage that there is something ‘to tell.” Basically, this is what Merle d’Aubigné so virtuoso did in volume V of his Reformation History (see note 4). The only problem, as we saw, is that Calvin is not mentioned in that script. Well, this is what we know, now. This is not what a nineteenth Century researcher knew. He honestly believed that Calvin was in Ferrara and played a role in the imbroglio. Origin of this conviction might well have been a casual remark by Ludovico Muratori, an eighteenth-century Modenese historian (Annalist of the Vatican and Estense archives). Writing about the events of the year 1536, Muratori says:

The first part of the statement echoes the standard story of Bèze (albeit in the jargon of a Roman Catholic), the second part triggered a lot of historians to start an investigation. To no avail; the mysterious document could not be found. The one who really cloaked himself in this matter, is Bartolommeo Fontana (1835-1901), who searched all the archives to find evidence that Calvin really was there and was implicated in the imbroglio.³⁵ Although he also did not find that piece of evidence, damage was done. Calvin was ‘smuggled into’ the heart of the Ferrarese imbroglio. The fact that in the other documents, dug up by Fontana and others, some people remain unidentified, gave the historians and novelists plenty of opportunity to fill in names: ‘the hermit who so zealously preached,’ that must have been Calvin. ‘Calvin was no hermit’; No problem: ‘he might have disguised himself as a hermit.” Not convinced? Well, what about that ‘little Frenchman, who was also secretary to Madame’?³⁶ In the last decades of the nineteenth century, a true French-Italian ‘Historikerstreit’ ignited, in which both parties, notwithstanding their disputes, agreed on two things: 1. Calvin dìd play an important role in the Ferrarese imbroglio of 1536, and 2. He had a huge influence on the Duchess. They only disagreed in the evaluation of these events. With Protestant historians this is the story of their hero, the herald of the True Faith, who does not yield to enmity and persecution, and in the end (with or without imprisonment and subsequent narrow escape), triumphantly returned to Geneva. For Roman Catholic historians the same elements form the story of the ‘arch-heretic’ John Calvin, who corrupted the Duke’s wife with his perverse teachings, and – unfortunately – managed to escape. Much havoc could have been prevented, had he been brought to trial then, they implicitly say. Since theological opinions are often connected with deep emotions, it does not come as a surprise that differences of opinion were not perceived as a signal that it’s time to reformulate the research question. On the contrary. One fantasist life is placed over and against the other. Both parties dug in deep and a trenches warfare began. On this point the nineteenth century in many ways echoes the sixteenth, in which the publication of Bèze’s account of Calvin’s life provoked the publication of another ‘Life of Calvin,’ not to celebrate the exemplary life of a godly man, but to utterly and totally destroy that image, using all literary means available. I am referring to Jerome Bolsec’s ‘anti-vita’, Histoire de la vie, mœurs, actes, doctrine et mort de Jean Calvin, jadis grand ministre de Genève (Lyon, 1577). With this book, Bolsec, a Carmelite who had converted to Protestantism, earned a living as physician, studied medicine in Ferrara (and for a while was personal almoner to Renée de Ferrara) settled an old score with Calvin, with whom he had fallen out on the topic of predestination in 1551. He had experienced how the ‘timid’ Calvin could change in a ‘bulldog,’ when he felt personally attacked. This ‘anti-vita’ has more of a satire than of serious historiography but was read by many a Roman Catholic as the pure and simple truth about Calvin. It was republished many times in the sixteenth and seventeenth century and re-edited with annotations several times in the nineteenth century.³⁷ Muratori certainly knew it, and in his novella Castellio gegen Calvin oder Ein Gewissen gegen die Gewalt (1936), Stefan Zweig is still tributary to Bolsec.

Renée and Calvin

Only one topic remains to be addressed. If Calvin and Renée did not meet in Ferrara, how did they get acquainted, when did their correspondence begin, what issue triggered it? With the new arrangement of facts, after the ‘deconstruction of the old myths,’ with the towering figure of ‘the Reformer’ out of the way, other people become visible. Renée’s courtiers, and in particular her Ladies-in-waiting. They were not docile followers, but ‘agents.” They thought for themselves, they acted, they even took risks. Not only the inquisitor, but also the Duke finds it difficult to cope with this phenomenon. And, next to the courtiers, there are the scholars of Ferrara University, the painters, the poets, the musicians. In the first half of the sixteenth century, Ferrara still is a thriving Renaissance city. So, it will not come as a surprise that these men and women, who corresponded with the entire world, also were perfectly capable to contact Calvin, if they had questions or wanted his advice. But in this case, we can even be more precise. We know who contacted John Calvin, and we also know the occasion on which this happened.

In the archives of Geneva, a draft of a letter by Calvin for Renée is kept. It is not dated, but it’s clear that this is the first time Calvin writes to the Duchess.³⁸ The fact that Calvin in this letter not even casually refers to a previous meeting in Ferrara, or to the tumultuous events that had happened there, is notable. For us, this does not come as a surprise: They had not met, and for Calvin his stay in Ferrara was not a memorable event. But it did – of course – trouble historians, in particular those who supported an early date for this letter (Summer 1537, very close to the events), especially if we begin to read this letter: Calvin feels impelled to go into great lengths to justify that he dares to write a letter to the Duchess. This makes it even more improbable he ever spoke with her before, let alone that Renée had already accepted Calvin as her spiritual guide, as Bèze claimed in his Vita.³⁹ Exit myth, one would say. However, the possibility of a falsification of a cherished theory not only causes stress but can also lead to cognitive dissonance. To overcome this nagging feeling that something is not right, many interpreters took resort to a kind of ‘close reading’ to press the text to say the things they wanted to hear. They – of course – honestly believed that they only made explicit what was implicit. One phrase in particular seemed amenable for this purpose, a phrase at the end of the first paragraph, part of the ‘captatio benevolentiae.” Calvin writes: “I have observed in you (J’ay congneu en vous) such fear of God and such disposed faithfulness of obedience that….” This quite general observation is then interpreted as a reference to their meeting in Ferrara 1536.⁴⁰ The English translation of ‘connaître en vous’ with ‘to observe in you,’ already gets one off on the wrong foot, suggesting physical proximity. A more neutral translation like ‘I have known in you’ (meaning ‘I know you to be,’ or even more straightforward ‘I know that you are god-fearing etc...’) does not imply that personal meeting took place. It was common knowledge that the Duchess was a pious woman. The phrase itself is a perfect build-up in order to remind the Duchess of her duty as a Christian princess to act according to God’s will, which Calvin as a chosen minister of God, is going to reveal to her.

It’s a well-known and often cited letter. The issue at stake is very similar to the issue for which Jehannet de Bouchefort and Jean Cornillau had risked their lives during Lent 1536 in Ferrara: attending Holy Mass (even more surprising Calvin does not refer to the events in Ferrara, not even in passing). I paraphrase the question first, because it is easily misunderstood. Protestants and secular historians often have great difficulty understanding the proper meaning of terms like ‘ouïr la Messe’ ( = attend Mass) and ‘faire communion’ (take communion, receiving the Host). In those days, the laity generally participated only ‘by proxy’ in the rite of Holy Communion. The Priest and the Deacon performed the ceremony, the latter representing the people during Communion, the former acting on behalf of God. So, one can perfectly ‘attend Mass’ without ‘taking communion/receiving the Host.” ⁴¹ The question at stake in Ferrara is, that Renée and her court did attend Mass but apparently organized a kind of private service afterwards in which they ‘took communion.” It’s not entirely clear how this was organized, but they viewed this as a celebration of the ‘Lord’s Last Supper.” François Richardot, Madame’s almoner, had claimed that this indeed was the proper thing to do.⁴² One of the ladies-in-waiting, however, had refused to attend Mass.⁴³ The Duchess had withdrawn her goodwill from the lady and warned others not to cause scandal. The history of Jehannet de Bouchefort seemed to repeat itself and this time the Duchess was determined to nip it in the bud, much to the dismay of Madame de Pons (Anne de Parthenay). In one way or the other (by Letter or via-via, many people from Ferrara passed through Geneva on their way to France or the Upper-Rhine cities), she had informed Calvin about the situation and asked him to address this question, suggesting that the Duchess was also eager to hear his opinion. This is the question that Calvin is going to address:

Calvin’s answer is simple: The Mass is an abomination and attending Mass is a sacrilege (the wording used by Calvin, echoes the wording in the Placards of 1534 and the Epistolae Duae of 1537)⁴⁴, so it is simply forbidden for a Christian to attend it. Richardot is wrong, and the lady in question does not deserve scorn, but praise. This is strict position: Not only the ‘taking of communion’ (receiving the consecrated Host) is out of question, but being present when others do that, is also considered a sin. One is ‘guilty by contamination’ (a word that Calvin uses a lot, almost in a literal, physical sense, also a favorite with inquisitors: heresy as contagious illness). So, Calvin strongly advises the Duchess not to listen to Richardot. He is a hypocrite, corrupt, money wolf, and a completely untrustworthy person (When people disagree with Calvin, he always takes this personal, and reacts with vehement attacks ad hominem.) He urges the Duchess to take a firm stand, and reject the Mass, openly and totally. To do this, is a holy duty for any god-fearing woman, and a divine calling for a Princess. Renée’s reaction to this letter is unknown, but it can be inferred from her actions. Richardot remained in service, and this until 1544.

Conclusion

Some reticence (caution) seems advisable, when one addresses the relationship between Calvin and Renée. Seen from Renée’s side (the first one dating from 1553, asking Calvin for suitable husbands for two of her ladies in waiting⁴⁵) there is respect, certainly. He is a spiritual guide, yes, but only up to a certain degree, and with whom she argues, if she doesn’t agree with him. And he certainly did not have monopoly on advice. Labeling their relation as a ‘close friendship,’ is incorrect. The characterization is from the wrong ‘category.” It’s not sentimental. Calvin is a man with a mission, and he corresponds with a woman who has power, related to the French king. He needs her more, than she him. In this respect, the first letter is telling. In nuce all Calvin’s letters are there. As a thread through his entire correspondence run the words spoken by the prophet Elijah urging the people of Israel to take a stand, to choose: “How long will you go limping between two different opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him.” (1 Ki. 18,21).⁴⁶ The topics might change over the years, the scope is the same: Duchess, stop dissimulating, take a stand against the abomination, profess your ‘Protestant faith’ and denounce the Church of the antichrist, the Pope. In short, become a member of my party. That is what God expects from you. When in 1554 the Duchess is – literally – pressed by the Jesuits and the inquisitor to publicly ‘receive communion,’ he is very disappointed and angry that she succumbed to the pressure. He castigates her verbally in his next letter (February 1555), of course ‘with love’ and for the best, that she may repent.⁴⁷ The summative conclusion by Charmarie Blaisdell, who devoted a separate study to Calvin’s correspondence with ‘women in high places,’ might suffice:

In the end his interest in Renée – as in all other women (and men!) in high places – was not personal, only occasionally pastoral (this he left to the ministers, he sent from Geneva), but always political. The way Bèze in his Life of Calvin used the link between Calvin and Renée, corresponds exactly with how Calvin himself viewed this relation, useful for the propagation of the Reformation.

Abbrevations

CO: Baum, G., Cunitz, E., Reuss, E., ed. Calvini opera quae supersunt omnia, 59 vols (Braunschweig, 1863–1900).

Selected bibliography

The family ‘Du Tillet’ is closely linked to the French Court. Louis’ grandfather had served Louise de Savoye (mother of the French King, François Ier) and his father had become ‘valet de chambre du Roy’ and ‘greffier en chef’ of the ‘Parlement de Paris.” Louis du Tillet received Calvin at his home after he left Paris in 1533 and for a while they walked the same road (both literally and spiritually). In 1537 however, Louis decided to return to France and became canon of the Angoulême Cathedral. In the subsequent correspondence Calvin accuses his friend of defection. Du Tillet, however, argues that Calvin’s approach at reforming the Church had proven counterproductive, and thus was not according to God’s will (A. Crottet, Correspondance française de Calvin avec Louis du Tillet (Genève, 1850).↩︎
Irene Backus, Life Writing in Reformation Europe (Aldershot, 2008): In the introduction (p. viii) she warns historians to be “careful before they treat any of these writings as documentary evidence about Luther, Calvin, Zwingli or Bèze. In this instance, chronological proximity does not mean greater accuracy. One should beware of making statements such as ‘Bèze, Calvin’s biographer says …’.” For more detail, see infra.↩︎
For examples of popular writing consult the internet (search ‘Calvin and Ferrara’). Success guaranteed. For an example in recent scholarly literature: “Renée welcomed the scholarly refugees to her court and there is some reason to believe that she offered Calvin a position as secretary…” David Steinmetz, Calvin in context (Oxford, 2010), 10. By the way: an excellent thematic monography.↩︎
The most imaginative version in J.-H. Merle d’Aubigné, Histoire de la Reformation en Europe au temps de Calvin (8 vols., 1862–1877), vol III, 251-254 (his motives); vol V, 537-582 (two chapters!). He mixes real events, excerpts from Calvins’ letters, books and sermons (all postdating the events, thus retro-jecting) – spiced up with dialogues, graphic descriptions and action scenes – to construct a lively portrait of ‘young man Calvin’: a man with a mission, self-confident in his instruction of the Duchess and his rebuttal of a wavering almoner. In the meantime, Calvin is continuously solicited for biblical teaching and counseling by prominent French courtiers etc. Although criticized by fellow historians, this juicy account became an international success, mainly in the USA. See John B. Roney, The Inside of History: Jean Henri Merle d’Aubigne and Romantic Historiography (Westport, 1996). Nowadays, Merle’s History of the Reformation in Europe is freely available on the web. The Ferrara episode can be read on http://www.godrules.net/library/calvin/76calvin_e35.htm (consulted 01/01/2019). No source, author’s name or publication date is mentioned.↩︎
I only sketch the outline of this affair. For a detailed account I refer to the seminal study by C.A. Mayer, Le départ de Marot de Ferrare, BHR, XVII (1956), 197-221. There also a complete overview and evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of all previous studies on this topic (mainly: Jules Bonnet, Bartolomeo Fontana, Emanuel Rodocanachi). Even after his reconstruction, some elements (mainly the number and exact names of the prisoners) remain unclear. Most of the relevant documents from the Ferrara archives were published by Bartolomeo Fontana, Renata di Francia duchessa di Ferrara : sui documenti dell'archivio Estense, del Mediceo, del Gonzaga e dell'Archivio secreto vaticano, 3 vols (Roma 1889-1899), an invaluable source for scholars, but also the cause of a lot of confusion because of his interpretive notes. Later research (Rosanna Gorris, Eleonora Belligni) did not really change Mayer’s general reconstruction of the things that happened but added more personal details regarding the role of the Ladies-in-waiting, and the position of Lyon Jamet (Gorris). References in the bibliography.↩︎
An excellent evocation of this fundamental semantic problem in the introduction of Anne Overell, Italian Reform and English Reformations, c.1535–c.1585 (Aldershot, 2008). One quote: “There was infinite variety in the experiments we call ‘reform.” They could be bold or secretive, individual or communal, progressive or reactionary, ‘Catholic’ or ‘Protestant.” All over Europe there were faltering expressions, uncertain identities. (p. 1). For a summary of the events leading to the ‘Affaire des placards’ and the subsequent suppression, see Wursten, D., Clément Marot and Religion. A Re-assessment in the Light of his Psalm Paraphrases (Leiden/Boston, 2010), 21-53.↩︎
Charmarie Blaisdell [Webb], Royalty and Reform: The Predicament of Renée de France, 1510-1575 (Ph.D. Tufts, 1969), 98, referring to the Catalogue des actes de François Ier, III, 475, 688; VII, 136, 175. On Bouchefort, a talented and well-paid singer of the Royal Chapel, see Christelle Cazaux, La Musique à la cour de François Ier (Paris, 2002), 344-346 and Brobeck, J.T., ‘Musical Patronage in the Royal Chapel of France under Francis I (r. 1515-1547),’ Journal of the American Musicological Society 48/2 (1995), 214-215. Bouchefort published two chansons à quatre, four-part songs (Attaingnant, RISM 1530/4).↩︎
Explicitly so in a letter of the Duke to his Paris’ Ambassador, Feruffini, dated 5 May 1536. The Duke knew that Jehannet was accused of heresy, but if Jehannet would live ‘bene et christianamente,’ he saw no harm in appointing him. ‘Desideravemo che la cosa non procedesse piu oltra et lui si trovasse senza colpa, ma essendo occorso chel venerdi santo, havendo noi fatto cantar qui in una chiesa il pascio et essendo ogniuno secondo il costume andato ad adorare la croce el predetto gianetto, non solo non vi ando, ma per quanti da molti ne fu referto, si parti con demonstrare di dispregiare et di tener [poco] Conto de la fede di Christo...” Fontana, Renata, vol. I, 318-320. French translation in Jules Bonnet, Les premieres persecutions, BSHPF XXXIX (1890), 173-174.↩︎
This is the official hymn for this celebration. Next to the adoration of the cross (‘Crux fidelis’) the faithful are also called to adore the blessed Sacrament (‘Tantum ergo Sacramentum’). The Ducal Chapel at the time consisted of 14 or 15 professional singers. Choirmaster was ‘Maistre Jhan.”↩︎
“… quondam virum religiosum ordinis hermitarum predicatorem in curia madamae, quem credit virum pessimum, et pro certo ex audito, quod predicavit non esse orandum quia orations facte sunt frivole nullius momentj et quod antequam iste vir predicator esset aut predicaret in curia, ille mullieres erant devotissimae sed postquam ille predicavit non pene volunt videre religiosos aut existimare res ecclesiasticas, et dicunt quod orare erat amissio temporis, similiter dicere officium Beate Virginis et similia.” (minutes of the interrogation of April 29^th. Fontana, Renata, vol. II, ix-x).↩︎
. “… cum quodam gallo parve stature cuius nomen ignorat sed ferebat[ur] habere locum Secretarij madame….” Fontana, Renata, vol. I, 324. Two secretaries were already identified as heretics in the first interrogation (28 april), Marot and Cornillau. So perhaps no need to look any further. For this, see Blaisdell, Royalty, 96. The name of Agostino Foliati is mentioned in the registers of the Duchess as ‘confesseur et prédicateur de Madame’ (Rodocanachi, Une protectrice de la Réforme en Italie et en France (Paris, 1896), 107.↩︎
“Et interrogatus cuius vocis sit ac fame dictus gallus dicit se audivisse quod ex Francia aufugerit propter hereses lutheranas, et quod credit se audivisse a quodam gallo instructore scolarium habitante in contracta Zecche civitatis Ferrariae qui de omnibus meliorem dabit informationem.” (Fontana, Renata, vol. I, 324-325, with emendations based on a copy, see Fontana, Renata, vol. II, vii, note 1). Blaisdell, Royalty, 96, knows of no school in Ferrara. Eleonore Belligni, Evangelismo, Riforma ginevrina e nicodemismo, 169, based on research by Chiara Francescini suggests that in 1535 Renée had started an elite boys’ school, where Francesco Paladini and François Richardot were teachers. If correct, this information might be conducive to a new understanding of the role of Richardot in Ferrara. See infra.↩︎
Before and after this affair – and as I suggest: also during this affair – the diplomatic contacts between Ferrara and the Papal state have only one issue: Both the Duke and the Pope claim Modena and Reggio. Ercole’s father (Alfonso) thought he had settled the issue for good with Pope Clement VII (Giuliano de Medici), but in 1535 the new Pope, Paul III (Alessandro Farnese), had reopened the case again. Only in 1539, Ercole succeeded in settling this dispute with the Pope, but at a very high price (financially).↩︎
Charles V had celebrated his triumph ‘over the infidel’ at Rome on April 5, 1536.↩︎
For this, see Knecht, R.J., Renaissance warrior and patron, the Reign of Francis I (Cambridge, 1996), chapter 16: ‘Montmorency’s triumph’; David Potter, Renaissance France at war, (Boydell Press, 2008), 33-37. Focusing on the position of the Duke of Ferrara: Blaisdell, Ch., ‘Politics and Heresy in Ferrara, 1534-1559,’ Sixteenth Century Journal 6/1 (1975), 67-93 with similar observations about the ‘liberal attitude in matters of religion’ of the Duke (72): faithful to Rome, as long as it did not obstruct his objectives as a Renaissance Prince) and the ‘relative weight of the matter of heresy’ (77). Also illuminative is Mary Hollingsworth, The Cardinal’s hat (a popularised version of scholarly research, telling the story of the Duke’s brother, Ippolite d’Este, Ambassador to the French Court).↩︎
Often Renée’s letters to the Pope in which she expresses her gratitude towards him for intervening on her behalf, are considered ‘diplomatic’ (or hypocritical). Considering what Pope Paul III did for her, I suggest abstaining from this kind of evaluation, at least concerning her letters from this period.↩︎
Johannes Sinapius (Johann Senff, 1505-1560) was an eminent Hellenist and medical doctor. He had taught Greek in Heidelberg, and, recommended by Erasmus, had pursued his medical studies at the University of Ferrara. He became Renée’s personal physician and tutor to her children. In 1545 he returned to Germany. He corresponded intensely with Simon Grynaeus. His wife, Françoise de Boussiron de Grand-Ry, was one of Renée’s ladies-in-waiting. Calvin had played a role in convincing Françoise to accept Sinapius as her husband (1538). Their home seemed to have been one of the foyers where religious issues were discussed. His wife was certainly one of the informers of Calvin, who kept him posted about developments in Ferrara. On this, see John Flood and David Shaw, Johannes Sinapius (1505-1560. Hellenist and physician in Germany and Italy (Genève, 1997), in particular 92-95.↩︎
« Quando sane illo quo adfuisti tempore, superioribus annis, revera me sicuti Alcibiades Silenus quispiam latuisti » (Flood and Shaw, Johannes Sinapius, Letter 36, 186). In Plato’s Symposium, Alcibiades compares Socrates to a statue of Silenus, ugly and hollow on the outside, but inside it is full of tiny golden statues of the gods (Symposium 216e-217a). The Silenus’ comparison is applied to the moral and spiritual domain by Erasmus’ in his very popular Adagium ‘Sileni Alcibiadis’ (Erasmus, Adagiorum chiliades , III iii 1 (nr. 2201), in the 1540 Froben edition, 482-491). The metaphor is also used by Rabelais in the Introduction to Gargantua (1534). Another reference to their original meeting in Ferrara can be found in the letter from Sinapius to Calvin of 5 December 1553, in which he informs Calvin of the death of his wife: “A primo die quo nos olim Ferrariae vidimus et salutavimus…” (Flood and Shaw, Johannes Sinapius, Letter 61, 204).↩︎
That Calvin travelled using this pseudonym is based on the note about his visit to Ferrara in Jean-Papire Masson, Vita Ioannis Calvini auctore Papirio Massono, 11-12 (Paris, 1620).↩︎
Semi-autobiographical, because without this prefix the term would be anachronistic, and we might miss the ‘framing’ of the story. Calvin has an ulterior motive when he inserts fragments of his personal life in this Preface. In it, he postulates a more than general likeness (analogy) between what happened to David (and Israel), and what was happening to God’s Church in the sixteenth century. For this, see Barbara Pitkin, ‘Imitation of David: David as a paradigm for faith in Calvin’s exegesis of the Psalms,’ Sixteenth Century Journal 24/4 (1993), 843–863. H.J. Selderhuis, Calvin’s Theology of the Psalms (Grand Rapids, 2007) also recalls Calvin’s far–reaching identification of Calvin with David. He also underlines the asylum or exile motive, which is one of the ways in which he himself (and the refugee community in Geneva) could recognise themselves in the mirror of the Psalms.↩︎
Calvin refers to his Christianae religionis Institutio (Basel: Th. Platter, 1536); full title in note 24. The section with the reference to the publication of this book and Calvin’s departure from Basel in Calvin J., In librum psalmorum Commentarius (Genève: R. Estienne, 1557), iii r. In French: Calvin, J., Commentaires sur le livre des Pseaumes. ([Genève] : Conrad Badius, 1561), iiii r/v.↩︎
12 june 1536, signature on a deed of sale in Paris, 22 june 1536 similar activity in Noyon.↩︎
He stresses that the first edition was not a multi volume ‘Summa theologiae,’ but ‘seulement un petit livret’ (‘breve dumtaxat enchiridion’), only exposing the typical topics of any catechism. This is an understatement: The Basel ‘Institutio’ is in-octavo format, counting 514 pages.↩︎
A little bit hard to believe for someone who succeeds in having the illustrious Thomas Platter print a book of 514 pages, proudly carrying his name on the front page: ‘Christianae religionis institutio, totam fere pietatis summam, & quicquid est in doctrina salutis cognitu necessarium : complectens: omnibus pietatis studiosis lectu dignissimum opus, ac recens editum : Praefatio ad Christianissimum regem Franciae, qua hic ei liber pro confessione fidei offertur / Ioanne Calvino Noviodunensi authore.’↩︎
« Or que je n’eusse point ce but de me montrer et acquerir bruit, je le donnay bien cognoistre par ce

qu’incontinent apres je me retirai de là : joint mesmement que personne ne sceut là que j’en fusse l’auteur : comme aussi partout ailleurs je n’en ai point fait de semblant, et avoye deliberé de continuer de mesme jusqu’à ce que finalement maistre Guillaume Farel me retient à Genève… » (Preface, see note 21)↩︎
He had already broken financially with the Church in 1534 abandoning his right on the revenue of a Prebend at Noyon Cathedral. From Ferrara, he went to Paris cut the last ties that bound him to France leaving the care for the Family fortune to his brother Antoine.↩︎
Some phrasing from the Preface (see note 21) with the caveat this is also ‘image building,’ but there must be a grain of truth in it to sound plausible): ‘Strasbourg, où je vouloye lors me retirer’; ‘quelques estudes particulieres, auxquelles je me vouloye reserver libre’; ‘mon repos et la tranquillite d’estudes que je cherchoye.” Perhaps he went to Ferrara with this kind of career in mind: Why not?↩︎
See Calvin’s introspective words regarding his temperament in the same Preface (reference see note 21): ‘…je me recognoy estre timide, mol et pusillanime de ma nature…’↩︎
« En fin voyant le povre estat du royaume de France, il delibera de s’en absenter pour vivre plus paisiblement et selon sa conscience. Il partit donques de France l’an 1534, et ceste mesme annee fit imprimer, à Basle, sa premiere Institution, comme un Apologetique adressé au feu roi François, premier de ce nom, pour les povres fideles persecutes, auxquels à tort on imposoit le nom d’Anabaptistes, pour s’excuser envers les princes Protestants des persecutions qu’on leur faisoit. Il fit aussi un voyage en Italie, où il vit Madame la duchesse de Ferrare, encores aujourd’huy vivante, graces à Dieu; laquelle l’ayant veu et ouy, dès lors jugea ce qui en estoit, et toujours depuis jusques à sa mort, l’a aimé et honoré, comme un excellent organe du Seigneur. A son retour d’Italie, laquelle il ne fit que voir, il passa à la bonne heure par ceste ville de Genève… » (1564, Preface to Bèze’s edition of Calvin’s unfinished Commentary on the Book of Joshua. The pages are not paginated, but it is page v (recto). For precise references of the several editions, see the bibliography). This text was also printed and sold separately as Discours de M. Théodore de Besze, contenant en bref l’histoire de la vie et mort de Maistre Jean Caluin avec le Testament et derniere volonté dudict Calvin… (Backus, Life Writing, 126).↩︎
Historians divide the outbursts of violence between Roman Catholics and Protestants in France between 1562 and 1598 in six wars.↩︎
About the complex question of authorship, see Backus, Life Writing, 128-130. This Vita is not translated into French until 1681. It is attached as a Preface to Bèze’s edition of a selection of Calvin’s Correspondence, and later also to editions of the ‘Institutio.” The intended readers are scholars.↩︎
The quote : « De Basle Calvin avec son dit compagnon vint en Italie et demeurèrent quelque temps à Ferrare. » (Preface, Commentaries Josué, b.i r/v) In this edition more anecdotical material is present, and a chronology is introduced. Strictly speaking it is not even entirely certain that Du Tillet really accompanied Calvin to Ferrara. In their correspondence (chronologically close to the events, published by Cottret, see note 1) the trip to Italy is not mentioned at all. Also, Colladon’s ‘factual’ additions are not particular trustworthy.↩︎
“Edito hoc libro suaque velut praestita patriae fide, Calvinum visendae Ferrariensis Ducis Ludovici XII. Francorum regis filiae, cuius tum pietas celebrabatur, simulque Italiae veluti procul salutandae desiderium incessit. Illam igitur vidit, simulque quantum id illum facere praesens rerum status sinebat, in vero pietatis studio confirmavit, ut eum postea vivum semper unice dilexerit, ac post quoque superstes gratae in defunctum memoriae specimen ediderit luculentum. Ceterum ex Italia, in cuius fines se ingressum esse dicere solebat ut inde exiret… “ (Quoted from the editio princeps: The Calvini vita included as a preface in Bèze`s edition of a selection of Calvin’s letters: Ioannis Calvini Epistolae et Responsa (Genève, 1575).↩︎
Lodovico Antonio Muratori, Annali d’Italia ed alter opere varie, vol IV: 1358-1687 (Rome, 1838), 374. The original edition is in twelve volumes, 1744-1749. The quote: “Secondo l’annalista Spondano, nell’ anno precedente venuto a Ferrara l’eresiarca Giovanni Calvino, sotto abita finto talmente infettò Renea figlia de re Lodovico XII, e duchessa di Ferrara, degli errori suoi, che non si pote mal trarle di cuore il bevuto veleno. Ma nel presente anno veggendosi scoperto questo lupo, se ne fuggi a Genevra. Vengo assicurato da chi ha veduto gli atti dell’ inquisizion di Ferrara, che si pestifero mobile fu fatto prigione;” See Blaisdell, Royalty, 136-140.↩︎
Next to the three-volume biography of Renée (‘Fontana’), he also published Documenti dell’Archivio Vaticano e dell’Estense circa il soggiorno di Calvino a Ferrara (Rome, 1885).↩︎
One example : “Faut-il reconnaître, dans cet interlocuteur véhément Calvin ou plutôt Marot, inspiré et stimulé par Calvin? Quoi qu’il en soit, directement ou indirectement, c’était toujours la voix de Calvin qui se faisait entendre. Ses arguments convainquirent sans peine Renée, déjà plus qu’à demi gagnée.” (Rodocanachi, Une protectrice, 108). People who followed this identification (most of the historians), also implicitly accepted that Calvin must have been Renée’s secretary for a while. This explains why until today even scrupulous historians write that Calvin ‘for a time served as a secretary to the Duchess’ (see footnote 3). In some reconstructions Louis du Tillet (who was a cleric) is made the foremost preacher and Calvin ‘dressed up like his assistant.” This is based on Jean-Papire Masson, Vita Calvini (1620): ‘etsi clericum sacerdoti inservientem agebat’ (for bibliographical reference, see note 19). On Masson and his source (François Bauduin, ex-secretary of Calvin), see Backus, Life Writing, 169-181.↩︎
On Bolsec and his vita, see Backus, Life Writing, 153–162. An excellent summary is given by A. McGrath, who writes that according to Bolsec ”Calvin was irredeemably tedious and malicious, bloodthirsty and frustrated. He treated his own words as if they were the word of God, and allowed himself to be worshipped as God. In addition to frequently falling victim to his homosexual tendencies, he had a habit of indulging himself sexually with any female within walking distance.” (A. McGrath, A Life of John Calvin (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 16-17. Others who wrote a (partisan) Vita Calvini are Jean-Papire Masson (1620), Jacques Desmay (1621), Jacques Le Vasseur (1633), and Cardinal Richelieu (1651). For this, see Backus, Life Writing, ch. 4 and 5. ↩︎
Geneva BPU, Ms. fr. 196, 79-81. Herminjard, A.L., Correspondance des réformateurs dans les pays de langue française, vol. 7 (Genève/Paris, 1886), 307-319 (ep. 1058). CO XI, col. 323-31 (ep. 374). Jules Bonnet, Lettres de Jean Calvin – lettres françaises (Paris, 1854) vol. I, 43-56 (English: Letters by John Calvin, tr. David Constable (Edinburgh, 1855) vol. I, nr. LXXIX). Some date it in 1541 (CO, Bonnet), others in 1537 (Doumergue, Herminjard). The new edition of Calvins’ correspondence (Opera omnia denuo recognita, Series VI: Epistolae, vol. I: 1530 — sept. 1538 (Genève: Droz, 2005), edited by Cornelis Augustijn e.a.) this letter is republished (nr. 42) with material description, introduction, a précis (a summarizing translation), and footnotes. Based on internal evidence (paper mark, reference to some books Calvin encloses) the editors suggest as date of composition: Summer 1537. Noteworthy: Bèze included this letter (translated into Latin) in his selection of Calvin’s epistles (Epistolae et Responsa (Genève, 1575), 151-155), the same edition that premiered the final version of his ‘Calvini vita’.↩︎
Claiming that these apologies are usual courtesies (epistolary politeness when writing to people in high places) and should not be taken literally, is too simple a solution. It is perfectly possible to be polite and at the same time refer to previous commitments. But the reader may decide for himself while ‘tasting’ the first line: « Madame, je vous supplie humblement de vouloir prendre en bonne part la hardiesse que j’ay eu de vous escripre ces presentes… » Why use such a strong term as ‘hardiesse’ (boldness, brutality) if they were already on speaking terms since Ferrara? And exponentially so, if Renée had already recognized Calvin as ‘organe de Dieu’ (Bèze)?↩︎
« Dadvantaige, j’ ay congneu en vous une telle crainte de Dieu et fidele affection a luy obeir… ». English translation: Letters by John Calvin, vol. 1 (Edinburgh, 1855), 296.↩︎
« … que maistre Francoys, vous avoit persuadé, qu’il ne seroit pas maulvays apres avoir ouy la messe de faire quelque communion laquelle servit de la cene de nostre Seigneur. .” In the précis of the new edition of Calvin’s letters Richardot’s advice is summarized as: ‘attendance of the Lord’s Supper is permissible after hearing the Mass.’ (see note 38). This oversimplifies the issue suggesting there already existed a standardized way of celebrating the Lord’s Supper. However, in 1537 reform-oriented clergy is still experimenting how to do that properly. Many in France believed it was possible to reform Holy Mass without abolishing the ritual of the Catholic Liturgy. Only the words of the consecration had to be corrected (‘christlich bessern’ as Luther called that). Of course, the people had to participate in the ritual, receiving both bread and wine. At the Court of Marguerite de Navarre, this is how holy Mass was celebrated, with Girard Roussel as officiating priest. Calvin’s attack on Roussel (one of the Epistolae Duae) dates from the same period.↩︎
François Richardot (1507-1574) was an Augustinian hermit, who had studied theology in Paris, where he became a professor in 1529. In the early 1530s he disappears from the radar. It is rumored that he became a ‘Lutheran.” What is certain, is that he the Pope discharged him from his monastic vows and that he spent some time as a secular priest in Rome. It is generally assumed that he arrived in Ferrara in May 1537 in the retinue of Vittoria Colonna. He became Madame’s personal almoner, a position he held until 1544. Then he returned to France. He became Bishop of Arras (successor of Granvelle), and preached at the Funeral of Charles V. He was confessor to Margaret of Parma. The only biography available is written by Abbé Léon Duflot, Un Orateur du XVIe siècle. François Richardot, évêque d’Arras (Arras, 1898), a specimen of Roman Catholic historiography (apologetic, thus minimizing his ‘heretical’ period). Protestant historians generally blindly endorse Calvin’s negative judgement of this man. Only recently a more nuanced approach is tried, in which Richardot is sketched as a pastoral orator, with a strong biblical foundation, who tries to preach a message that unites people. See Gustaaf Janssens, ‘‘Superexcellat autem misericordia iudicium.” The Homily of François Richardot on the Occasion of the Solemn Announcement of the General Pardon in the Netherlands (Antwerp, 16 July 1570)’ in, Judith Pollman, Andrew Spicer, Public Opinion and Changing Identities in the Early Modern Netherlands. Essays in Honour of Alastair Duke, Brill, 2007, 107-124. In my opinion it is not impossible that he is that mysterious ‘man of the religious order of hermits preaching in Madame’s court’ in 1536. See supra note 10 and 12.↩︎
Often identified as Françoise de Boussiron (Sinapius’ wife), but without any evidence (so pure speculation). Also in the new edition of this letter, mentioned in note 36. One should be aware that this is how myths are born. Renée’s court was a royal court. She had a considerable dowry and when she arrived from France, her retinue consisted of 126 people.↩︎
On these Epistolae, see note 45.↩︎
CO XIV, nr. 1832. The Opera omnia contain two letters directly addressed to Calvin, both dating from the last period of her life (as a widow): CO XX, nrs. 4085, 4206. They deal with problems she had with the ministers Calvin send to her in Montargis (on her request). Based on other letters, there must have been more, although much of the stream of information was indirectly (messengers, visitors). Sixteenth century scholars and politicians were excellent networkers.↩︎
This text is quoted on the title page of the Epistolae duae, published in January 1537. According to Calvin, true piety cannot exist without public profession (“Vera pietas veram confessionem parit”). The Epistolae duae (Basel, Th. Platter, 1537) have revealing titles: Epistolæ duæ de rebus hoc sæculo cognitu apprime necessariis. Prior, De fugiendis impiorum illicitis sacris, et puritate Christianæ religionis observanda. Altera, De christiani hominis officio in sacerdotiis papalis ecclesiæ vel administrandis, vel abiiciendis. The letter to Roussel has an apocalyptic tone: if attending Mass is already a contamination, administering it is a crime above all abominations: sacrilege. In the Petit traicté monstrant que c’est que doit faire un homme fidèle congnoissant la verité de l’évangile, quand il est entre les papistes (Girard, Geneva, 1543), the advice is even more precise: If emigration is impossible and one cannot keep away from any manifestation of the papist religion, a Christian must constantly confess this sin and ardently pray to God to show the way out (CO VI, col. 570–571). To his first letter he added some of his recent tracts on the topic at hand. Probably these. So, Renée knows what to do. For a more profound analysis, see Wursten, D. Clément Marot and Religion, 410-415.↩︎
Calvin to Renee, 2 February, 1555, CO XV, no. 2105, col. 417. « Et de faict le diable en a tellement faict ses triomphes, que nous avons ete contrainte de gémir et baisser la teste...” Calvin’s messages to other Protestant leaders about the Duchess’ action also express his disappointment. “Of the Duchess of Ferrara, we have sad tidings, and more certain than I could have wished. Overcome by threats and outrages she has fallen off. What can I say, except that an example of constancy is rare among princes?” (= reference to ps. 146,3: ‘Do not put your trust in princes’). (Calvin to Farel. November 1554, CO XV, no. 2037, col. 297-298. “De Ducissa Ferrariens tristis nuncius ac certior quam vellem, minis et probris victam cecidesse. Quid dicam nisi rarum in proceribus esse constantiae exemplum?”).↩︎
Blaisdell, ‘Calvin Letters to Women,’ Sixteenth Century Journal 13/3 (1982), 84.↩︎

Abstract