he
Sovereign-Pontiff to rescind this declaration, found himself ultimately
compelled to make a donation of the five hundred thousand francs claimed
by his favourite to the cathedral of St. Peter's.

The Grand Duke of Tuscany, in his turn, refused to recognize the right
of De Luynes to the funds which had been entrusted to him by the
Marechal d'Ancre, but from a higher and a holier motive; as the young
Comte de la Pena was no sooner set at liberty, with an injunction
immediately to leave France, than he received him with all the sympathy
due to his unmerited misfortunes, and put him in possession of this
remnant of his inheritance. Thenceforward the son of Concini remained in
Italy until the year 1631, when he fell a victim to the plague.[314]

Before we quit the Court to follow exclusively the fortunes of Marie de
Medicis, it is necessary that we should record three circumstances of
social interest which occurred during the year 1617. The first in order
is the death of the President de Thou, one of the most able and upright
ministers, and, perhaps, the most conscientious historian that France
had ever known. He expired on the 7th of May. The next, in point of
chronology, is the marriage of De Luynes, who--having obtained the most
absolute power, not only over the King personally, but also over all
state affairs--being anxious to strengthen his position yet more by a
great alliance, after having for a time contemplated an union with the
daughter of the Duc de Vendome, ultimately entered into a negotiation
for the hand of Mademoiselle de Montbazon.[315] This negotiation proved
successful; and through her means he became closely connected with the
most ancient and powerful families in the kingdom. The marriage took
place on the 13th of September, and the bride was admitted to the
honours of the _tabouret_;[316] while in order to render him more
acceptable to the haughty houses into which the favour of his sovereign
had thus afforded him ingress, the exulting favourite was elevated to a
duchy-peerage, and took his seat in the Parliament. The last
circumstance to which allusion has been made is the death of M. de
Villeroy, who terminated his life at the ripe age of seventy-four years
on the 30th of December. As we have already stated, he was possessed of
little education, had no taste for either literature or art, but was
singularly upright and shrewd in the management of public business;
while he was, moreover, so thorough