THE FALL OF THE MARQUISE D’ANCRE AS PRINTED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ENGLISH CHANNEL (1617)¹

Abstract

April 24, 1617, marked the end of the prodigious influence of an Italian couple over the regent of France, Marie de Médicis. By arranging the murder of the Marquis d’Ancre, French Marshal and key figure in the affairs of the kingdom, the Dauphin Louis XIII ensured his grasp over the throne and isolated the Queen Mother thanks to the distribution of the deceased’s riches of among his supporters. However, a question remained: What should be done to widow Léonora Dori, Concini’s legitimate heir? By analyzing how the Marquise is represented in French and English pamphlets, this article rebuilds the ways she was portrayed and the opposing views about her degree of influence in early 17^th-century France. By investigating the interface between the History of Print, the History of Women and the History of Emotions, this work reflects on the mobility of texts and the impact of cheap prints on establishing a specific imaginary around the feminine and opinion formation in early modern France.

Keywords
France; Street Literature; Léonora Dori Galigaï; Louis XIII; Emotions

Resumo

Em 24 de abril de 1617, chegava ao fim a prodigiosa influência de um casal de italianos sobre a regente da França, Marie de Médicis. Ao articular o assassinato do marquês d’Ancre, marechal da França e figura-chave na condução dos negócios do reino, o delfim Louis XIII garantiu sua ascensão ao trono e o isolamento da rainha-mãe, apoiando-se sobre a distribuição das riquezas do falecido entre seus apoiadores. Restava, contudo, a questão em torno do que fazer com a viúva Léonora Dori, herdeira legítima de Concini. Através da análise das representações da marquesa em folhetos franceses e ingleses, este artigo reconstrói as facetas que lhe foram atribuídas e as visões contrastantes em torno de seu grau de influência na França do início do século XVII. No entrecruzamento entre a História do Impresso, a História das Mulheres e a História das Emoções, este artigo se volta à reflexão sobre a mobilidade dos textos e o impacto dos impressos baratos na constituição de um dado imaginário em torno do feminino e da formação da opinião na França moderna.

Palavras-chave
França; literatura de rua; Léonora Dori Galigaï; Louis XIII; emoções

Marquise, marechala, Galigaï, Dragontine, Medea of France – these various titles and monikers attributed to Léonora Dori (1568-1617), Marie de Médicis’ favorite, show the dimension of this character who is little-known outside the circle of researchers dedicated to 17th-century France. Dori, the lady-in-waiting to the queen and owner of a prodigious fortune, not only climbed her way up in the ranks from the moment she arrived at the French court as part of the entourage of Henri IV’s then-betrothed but also helped Concino Concini do the same after their marriage in 1601.⁵ Concini, a Florentine like Dori, came from the small Tuscan nobility under the Médicis and offered her the possibility of attaining a title; in return, he received the support of the one who had become the queen’s refuge in unfamiliar terrain.

From 1615 onwards, the intense slander campaign against the Italian “newcomers” in libelles at first omitted these behind-the-scenes situations that had laid the groundwork for their rise more a decade earlier. Contrary to the widespread idea that he was a lowly foreigner, nobleman Concini was naturalized in France (and frenchfied Conchine) in 1601, when he married Dori (DIZIONARIO, 1982, p. 726; AMSTUTZ; TEYSSANDIER, 2017, p. 2) and, therefore, long before Marie de Médicis became the regent. In the same vein, Léonora’s supposed lowly background was mentioned in a book published in 1618 (which privilege dates back to November 9, 1617), where the anonymous author describes her as the daughter of a carpenter from Florence – despite her upbringing in the Pitti Palace with the then Maria de’ Medici – to reinforce her supposed excessive ambition that would have driven her to take the regent hostage ([MATTHIEU], 1618). The work attributed to Pierre Matthieu, a scholar who supported the League but later became a faithful historiographer of Henry IV during his time as lawyer representing the city of Lyon, La conjuration de Conchine [Conjuration of Concini] brings contemporary events to light with an uplifting purpose, highlighting the relentless effects of fortune. He also wrote La magicienne estrangere (1617) [The Foreign Magician], a tragedy about a couple’s origins, dishonorable paths, and devastating demise.

Even though the protagonists’ identity is evident in both works, Matthieu goes beyond and explores the miseries of his time in that particularly eventful year (at least in literary terms). He published two other tragedies in 1617 that deal with past examples that resonated with his present: Histoire d’Ælius Sejanus [Story of Ælius Sejanus] and Histoire des prosperitez malheureuses d’une femme cathenoise, grande sesnechalle de Naples [Story of the Unhappy Prosperity of a Catana Woman, Great Seneschal of Naples].⁶ In different times, different characters allude to a repeated history: abandoning one’s origins in search of wealth and glory, and then resorting to manipulation and trickery towards those who helped them. Philippa of Catania in particular is closely related to Léonora Dori in the sense that she is the daughter of a fisherman who ascended in the Neapolitan court by marrying a formerly enslaved man who later led the army. In each of these cases, the riches gathered were insufficient to make those characters capable of understanding the love for a kingdom, a motive that is used to justify – on mortal and divine grounds – the misfortunes that befell them.

In his dedication of Ælius Sejanus to the king, Matthieu depicts his work as a mirror that not only shows the stain but also teaches how to erase it (MATTHIEU, 1617a, p. 3). In the literary field, that strengthened a particular view of Louis XIII’s actions as justified by history. No longer the Dauphin, Louis XIII rose as a fully-fledged king who would have resorted to annihilating the Marshal d’Ancre as a preemptive act of preemptive act of sovereign justice. In a letter to the king, Pierre de Bérule likens this episode to “the shadows that enhance a beautiful picture or the stains that do not change the splendor of the Sun”⁷ (JOUANNA, 2014, p. 36). Only a few decades later, in his treatise on coups d’état, Gabriel Naudé highlighted the exemplary actions of the young king in a coup that encompassed premeditation, arrangements (the murder of Concini followed by his wife’s conviction and the Queen’s exile), and an autocratic decision (NAUDÉ, 1989 [1639], p. 101). In other words, from the coup that made him a de facto king, Louis XIII demonstrated the qualities of a go>od sovereign by doing whatever was necessary to rid the kingdom of parasites who squandered the treasury, entranced the queen, and paved the way for an alliance with Spanish rivals. Thus, all actions were justified, including conspiracy and murder. More appropriately, it was a “coup of majesty”, as explored by Yves-Marie Bercé (1996), with the removal of a rival of the king whose prestige prevented him from resorting to traditional means.

However, just as his origin>s reveal themselves to be differ>ent from what would later be immortalized, Concini had some merits of his own. He was assigned as maître d’hotel by Henri IV in 1605 and as the queen’s first squire in 1608; despite the tension of allowing foreigners in after years of the heavily italianized court of Cathérine de Médicis, the Florentine quickly demonstrated a talent for royal affairs. Another example of how much the king trusted him was the fact he accepted to be the godfather of the couple’s daughter, unsurprisingly named Marie; their eldest son had already been named after the king. The assassination of Henri IV and his close relationship with the queen solidified his position at court and guaranteed the marquisate, 1611, and the marshallate, in 1613, which, in practice, made Concino Concini the great official of the crown of France. His power also expanded towards provinces, as he received the superintendence over Picardy in 1611 and Normandy in 1616, major areas to establish regional connections. His influence expanded on multiple fronts and was leading towards the formation of a dynasty of his own⁸ (DUCCINI, 1991; DUBOST, 1999; 2009).

The rise of the outsider was met with resistance inside and outside the court, notably from les grands who were removed from the main decisions and feared losing their privileges despite the fragility of the regency – or, more precisely, because they wanted to prosper at that time (JOUANNA, 1989; CORNETTE, 2000; COSANDEY, DESCIMON, 2002; DUBOST, 2009). The practices that would define absolutism⁹, crowned under Richelieu, were still growing under Concini, who strived to preserve the queen, encouraging an alliance with Spain, maintaining the (albeit fragile) civil peace, and having a more austere stance towards the princes (JOUANNA, 1989; DUBOST, 2009). He embodied the figure of the favorite, a character who, since the mignons of Henri III, was a powerful intermediary in obtaining royal favors and, as Nicolas Le Roux defines, “at a given moment, is characterized by the most extraordinary capitalization of the signs of exception, which are sublimated forms of a relationship of dependence and a manifestation of the creative and legitimizing effectiveness of sovereign power”¹⁰ (LE ROUX, 1998, p. 380-381). This “new man” who rose in the social ranks thanks to his privileged position in the king’s – or, in this case, regent’s – retinue paved the way that would later be treated by the great cardinals (CORNETTE, 2000, p. 201).

However, Concini’s privileged position is not the result solely of personal traits, including his opportunistic attitude, which is commonly associated with another, more famous Florentine. Before Concini, Léonora was part of the queen’s intimate circle¹¹ and acted as her advisor, including being rewarded (scandalously, according to accounts of the time) for her loyalty. As the marquise’s entourage declared, the Queen Mother relied heavily on her advice, be it to distribute gifts or to dispense favors (DUBOST, 1999, p. 72). This reliance put her under the perpetual influence of the d’Ancre couple when appointing ministries (including Richelieu as foreign minister) and assigning positions at royal residences, parliaments, and even the top ranks of the Church, which, as Jean-François Dubost (1999) points out, enabled them to grow both in riches and status.

While Concini is a prime example of the world of favorites in early modern Europe, which majorly consisted of male figures – those who exercise direct power, as explored in the collection by Elliott and Brockliss (1999) – Léonora Dori finds herself in a peculiar position. After all, female royal favorites are traditionally the mistresses of kings, who ascend in the court and elevate their illegitimate children – to the despair of those who prioritized origin over merit and royal influence, as Saint-Simon will demonstrate (LADURIE, 2004 [1997]) –, exerting malicious power over others through sex.¹² Up to Gabrielle de Polignac and the scandals of Marie Antoinette’s entourage – in which, again, sex (or the pretense of sex) is key –, a queen’s relationship with her favorite in the French court is much less studied. Marie de Médicis’ friendship and reliance on Léonora Dori are riddled with accusations of weakness and naivety, as well as allegations that the latter was attempting to gain advantage.

Léonora’s and, by extension, Concini’s access to the queen enabled the distribution of favors to be an indirect way of ruling at the court. That shows a grey area between the regent’s public and private domains; thanks to her intermediaries, she awarded favors to the right people – garnering the discontent of les grands of the kingdom, subjected to scrutiny by the Italians – and was shielded from the vileness of the negotiations. The court was not yet isolated, with the old nobility in direct competition for the sovereign’s favors, as the masterworks of Elias (2001 [1969]) and Le Roy Ladurie (2004) investigate for a posterior moment, but it already showed signs of increasingly becoming “the obligatory culmination of clientelist networks and the best place for the nobility’s symbolic and material capital to be formed”¹³ (LE ROUX, 1998, p. 386). The court structures slowly fall into place in the Great Century, pointing towards the autonomy of the political game.

The favorites position of the d’Ancre couple served their final purpose of protecting the regent, thus garnering the dissatisfaction of the greats, who lost their prerogatives, and the population, who was inundated by reports of undue influence and shameful enrichment. Their rise lasted until the fateful day of April 24, 1617, when Concini was shot three times, in the chest, head, and abdomen, by Nicolas de L’Hospital, Baron of Vitry, and his acolytes at one of the entrances to the Louvre (QUATRIESME, 1617, p. 198). In what was quickly unveiled as a plot orchestrated by Louis XIII (who was 16 years old at the time), and his favorite, Charles d’Albert de Luynes, the marshal was killed and quickly buried; however, his corpse did not escape desecration by the masses, who dragged it through the streets of Paris, tearing it apart and, ultimately, reducing it to ashes (DUCCINI, 1991; BLANCHARD, 2009). The title of one of the reports on the event highlights the unsurmountable hatred that befell the corpse: it was “carbined, buried, dug up, hanged, emasculated, dismembered, dragged, and burned in Paris” (P.B.S.D.V., 1617). What is known in historiography as Louis XIII’s coup d’état promoted his rise to power and the assassin’s ascent to Marshal of France, removing the Queen Mother from the court along with all her ministers – even if the price of his eagerness to ascend to the throne was the postponement of the centralization process, which was later resumed by Richelieu and became a reference under the Sun King¹⁴.

The actions of the late marshal would only be judged after his elimination in a process initiated by the Parliament of Paris on May 9, 1617. That process was summarized in numerous factums out of printing workshops, like the Chef du procès fait à la mémoire de Conchino Conchini, naguères maréchal de France, et à Léonora Galigaï sa veuve, et complices, sur la déprédation et interversion de deniers royaux, depuis la mort de Henry le Grand… [Process in memory of Conchino Conchini, former Marshal of France, and Léonora Galigaï, his widow, and accomplices, regarding the depredation and malversation of royal funds since the death of Henri the Great...] (1617). These printed materials insisted on the nature of the couple’s plot, with Léonora playing the role of primary advisor, leading her husband through the labyrinth of tricks that, on top of their personal enrichment, sought to squander the kingdom for the benefit of foreigners, “since the death of King Henri the Great, to the detriment of King Louis XIII, his authority, and the peacefulness of the State”¹⁵ (CHAPITRE, 1617, title page).

Thus, since the first publications about this topic, the rhetoric employed¹⁶ was permeated with theories about the foreign enemy and the need to save the kingdom. The numerous pamphlets that immediately flooded the streets of the capital after Concini’s murder and Léonora’s arrest describe the scandal in detail, indicating not only the lack of efforts to contain it but even an apparent encouragement by Louis XIII’s faction (DUBOST, 1997; DUCCINI 1995, 2003; TEYSSANDIER, 2013). By reinforcing a specific (and later official) version of those events, the Crown portrayed a coup d’état and assassination order by the dauphin as a legitimate effort to recover the throne from a usurper, a manipulator who had taken advantage of the queen’s good faith to exert their malicious influence.

With a latent anti-Italian sentiment that was already brewing during the regency of the previous Médici>s queen and that would persist in the political scene for the following decades – notably affecting Mazarin and Jean-Baptiste Lully under Louis XIV –, the kingdom’s interests seemed to converge with those of the blood princes, led by Condé: for the high nobility to have sole access to the royal ears, thus freeing France from a supposedly harmful external influence. In addition to the Italians, the usual Spanish rivals¹⁷, the English, the Turks, and the Jews were also targeted, with “Judaism” being the first crime attributed to the fallen marshal in the posthumous process against him (RECUEIL, 1617, p. 1 et seq.). Elie de Montalto, the official physician of Marie de Médicis who was welcomed at court in 1606 and authorized to practice his religion in 1612, was accused of causing the hydropsy that affected the regent in the libelle titled La Chemise Sanglante [The Blood Chemise]. With h>is “basilisk eyes, (…) completely weary body that is nothing more than a cellar of smallpox and infection”¹⁸ (RODIER, 2020, p. 162), the doctor exhausted the Queen with his bloodletting, diverting her from exercising the power. Obviously, he had been introduced by Léonora Galigaï.

The Mercure François¹⁹ in particular, in an entire chapter dedicated to the accusations, emphasize>s Concini’s connection with Jewish people, who>se entry into the the kingdom was allegedly facilitated with the express purpose of undermining it (RECUEIL, 1617, p. 1-8). Thus, prints considerably impact campaigns against foreigners, fueling “State xenophobia” and contributing to the solidification of collective hatred, as highlighted by Yann Rodier (2020, p. 162 et seq.). The author shows how managing public emotion becomes strategic for the State, which is supported by a range of discourses aimed at revealing passions – the same discourses transmitted in rumors and libelles that contribute to its instrumentalization against the regency and that Norbert Elias (1990; 1993 [1939]) had already considered in his classic analysis of the civilizing process.

Therefore, public emotion is a core element to craft a scandal inside print workshops. In just a few months, more than a hundred cheap prints, not counting the Mercure François and Mathieu’s tragedies, were distributed along the streets of the capital, fueling the growing interest in the event, which had an impact far beyond the murder scene, the Louvre. In this quick and effective operation>, an event was shaped in such a way as to justify an arbitrary judgment that was entirely consistent with the interests involved. Exponentiated and echoed by the majority of the prints, the version that gained ground considered that Concini’s execution was necessary and his wife’s trial was the result of divine intervention to put France back on the right path. Of the prints that endured the test of time, very few question the official narrative, and none do so in a blatant manner. If there were doubts about the need to rid the kingdom of the Italian couple, they did not resist the flood of libelles that relentlessly reinforced that discourse.

Such image persists in reflections on France at the beginning of the 17^th century, despite historiographic attempts to readdress Concini’s role in the absolutist démarche since the 1990s. The works of Hélène Duccini (1985, 1991, 2003) and Jean-François Dubost (1997, 2009), notably, highlighted the behind-the-scenes of the rise of Queen Marie de Médicis’s favorite. More recently, Yann Rodier (2020) investigated how the anti-Italian sentiment was developed in the pamphlets, and Bernard Teyssandier (2013) gathered important sources and analyses of the couple’s downfall in print. More broadly, such studies show how exceptionally valuable print culture is to renew research on absolutism and the cultural history of politics.

However, even though there has been a higher number of specific studies on the role of Concino Concini in the crown of France and on the behind-the-scenes of Louis XIII’s rise to power, his main supporter is still underrepresented in historiographical analyses of the (partial) sources from the time. Despite being the object of some foundational studies in the 20^th century (HAYEM, 1910; MONGRÉDIEN, 1968), it is still worth investigating the representations of Léonora Dori and the unique role she played among the women described in cheap prints from 17^th-century France, without being merely considered Concini’s appendage. Both in terms of the number of prints dedicated to her that reached beyond the borders of the kingdom and the French language and the hatred directed towards her, she is the culmination of how the feminine is portrayed in these sources. Inflating the number of libelles and canards with a female presence, the “marechala” was the most evoked character during the peak of French street literature, and the narratives about her crossed borders and amplified the audience of the scandal.

The Fall of the Galigaï on Both Sides of the English Channel

Interest in the Concini scandal is responsible for a sharp increase in street litera­ture in early modern France, which peaked in the first third of the 17^th century. These decades were marked by a rise in the number of reports of female-perpetrated crimes accompanied by an increase in the kingdom’s efforts to enforce morals after the religious wars and the advancement of the Counter-Reformation (LIEBEL, 2013); this scenario was an unprecedented opportunity for printers. Until then, only a few cases had stood out and became the subject of different publications, such as the multiple murders committed by Anne de Buringel, reproduced by four different print workshops²⁰; however, the public rumor surrounding the fall of the Marquis and the Marquise d’Ancre would both boost the publishing market and be fueled by it. As such, the work of printers focused on cheap publications cannot be separated from this logic that implies a symbiosis between two interest groups involved in the process: readers who demand more news and print workshops who take advantage of a favorable scenario to increase their sales. Naturally, this is not a balanced exchange, given that the pamphlets are written from a specific point of view, providing their readers (and listeners) a reading key related to current events and, often, to information in other prints.

To the public rumblings that are fueled by very specific interests, street literature provides tailored ephemeral texts: canards, i.e., sensationalist brochures with just a few pages and a pinch of bloodthirstiness, following their 18^th-century denomination (LEVER, 1993, p. 11; LIEBEL, 2013, p. 28 et seq.); and libelles or pamphlets – an English term that crossed the English Channel after the profusion of this type of printed material during the civil wars and became a synonym for libelle (DUCCINI, 2003) –, longer texts, with up to 48 pages in the octavo format (MARTIN, 2000 [1969]) and with explicitly or implicitly political objects. These two categories are mistakenly taken for one another when these short political publications are analyzed²¹ because all canards with a political tone can be considered a libelle but not every libelle is a canard. In most cases, canards did not have more than two gatherings, i.e., 16 pages. The characteristic content of canards, the fait divers that present a curious, extraordinary event or one with broad repercussions, also applies to this case.

In addition, there are texts in verse, posters, and single sheets, materials that do not present information about the printers, defy classification and are impossible to quantify due to their profusion, fragility, and the fact that only a minimum fraction that has survived to this day. Therefore, with varying focus, the products of print workshops are aimed at a heterogeneous audience, both in terms of the specific appeal of each type of print and the costs involved in their acquisition, which is related to the expectations of Donald F. Mackenzie (1986) about the materiality of prints as an aspect that defines who they are read by and the meanings they produce. Focusing on the canards, the cheapest of the multi-page forms, is, t>herefore, an attempt to establish the cultural horizon of readers with a more modest budget, including listeners who were part of the universe of reading in a society in which sharing was common. Moreover, the canards are a condensed version of what could be covered at length in pamphlets, which makes them particularly profitable since they allowed for faster copies. To a certain extent, they are a thermometer of the interests of the print market in this period that Christian Jouhaud (2003, p. 33) classifies as “the time of libelles”.

An exemplary case of this is the work of Parisian printer Fleury Bourriquant, who was active in the first two decades of the 17^th century and became known for his cheap prints, which ranged from reports on military campaigns to controversial religious ongoings, as well as daily French politics. In 1617, he was responsible for at least six publications about the disastrous fate of the d’Ancre couple²², two of which included the same text with different typographic elements: one served as the starting point for the publication of another printer, based in Lyon²³; the other was a letter printed with permission and reproduced by three other workshops²⁴. The multiplication of copies points to the widespread practices surrounding the (re)usage of the same composition, including those with privilege. After all, the typographers, not the “authors” – the vast majority of whom are anonymous – were responsible for developing this niche, in which composition is part of a process that involves adjustments, cuts, and expansions promoted in print workshops (CHARTIER, 2004 [1987]; 2012 [2000]). Thus, writers, engravers, type preparers, printers, and proofreaders (a job often performed by the authors themselves) collectively contribute to the final version of a work.

Repeating a text opened a set of possibilities for printers of the time, and among the most attractive ones was the possibility of increasing sales for avid readers who might believe it was new material, answering calls for a new issue or even for a price reduction. Particularly in the case of Bourriquant, it is evident that one of the issues was cheaper in comparison to the text that had an engraving and ornamental elements (capitulars and vignette), as this more elaborate typographic model will be repeated in his later prints. Despite most of his canards having just one sheet of paper, i.e., 8 pages, they were singularized by more elaborate cover pages and additional typographical care during the printing process.

Another noteworthy example is the work of Abraham Saugrain, the most prolific of the canardiers – the canards printers – (LIEBEL, 2013, p. 41), who was responsible for five publications regarding the event²⁵ amidst several reports that detail the current events of the time, the wonderful and the unheard-of. By leveraging every chance to publish a news story, the pamphlets by Saugrain and his widow (who ran the workshop after he died in 1622) follow the thematic oscillations that were part of the transition from the 16^th to the 17^th century. In this sense, their publications on the scandal range from the marquise’s laments to her meeting with her husband in hell; meanwhile, more generally, the moralizing news about crimes grew in volume.

The fact that Bourriquant and Saugrain published a total of eleven pamphlets about the case in 1617 is a testament to how popular the news were. Later, they were retold through the reproduction of the sentence, the report of the crimes, and the repentance of Léonora Dori, her journey from the Conciergerie to the scaffold, the life and death of the couple, the tears of her son who was expropriated and banished, in addition to the marquise’s testament, amounting to forty-six canards on the topic only in 1617. Out of these, the Galigaï is the subject of twenty-four, fifteen of which are dedicated exclusively to her and another nine that mention her along with Concini, a non-negligible percentage in this universe. Léonora Dori is, therefore, unique among the (both real and fictional) characters of street literature, and her tragedy will be scrutinized by writers, printers, and certainly, readers.

Moreover, the numerous reports about the fall of the once powerful couple are not restricted to the kingdom of France and served as a basis of comparison for the decline of the greats throughout the century, such as the Dutch brothers Cornelis and Johan de Witt, imprisoned and lynched by the masses as part of a conspiracy by the house of Orange in the early 1670s²⁶. Also, in the decisive year of Louis XIII’s reign, there were fourteen English pamphlets, apart from later testimonies found in memoirs. Using the original French texts as a reference, London printers translated the misfortunes that befell Concini and Dori, sometimes without bothering to adapt the text – in this sense, one can observe the indignation against “this infernall furie” that “came to sprinkle our Countrey of France with the Incke of all miseries”²⁷ (THE ARRAIGNMENT, 1617, p. 3, our emphasis). Although there are no known records of the reception of these prints in England or of the specific motivations for translating a text about a case that occurred in Paris, they explore a fertile topic from the period that transcend borders: pride and its punishment.

In this group of occasional pieces, the patronymic Dori is nothing more than a nod to the protagonist’s modest background, according to some canardiers, while Concini/Conchine is reserved for her husband. Her titles, however, are mentioned continuously within the narrative arc that encompasses her origin, rise, and fall. Thus, the terms of Galigaï (or Galligaya), marquise, and maréchala – a role inconsistent with her sex – are juxtaposed to focus on the ambition and greed that will be her main characteristics in the world of print. Just as (for all intents and purposes) Pierre Mathieu narrates her ancestry devoid of luster, he also explains the origins of the name Galigaï, which Leónora would have supposedly usurped from an old nobleman along with his weapons, with the approval of the Duke of Florence ([MATTHIEU], 1618, p. 5). With the characteristic intertextuality of these narratives, the canardiers often incorporated elements from longer printed materials, such as tragedies and tragic stories, in which Léonora Dori was preferably described based on this “stolen” family name. The name “Galigaï” will even be used as the basis for an anagram in the Bref Recit de tout ce qui s’est passé pour l’execution et juste punition de la Marquize d’Anchre [Brief account of everything that happened leading up to the execution and just punishment of the Marquise d’Ancre] (1617, p. 5), in which “Eleonor of Galliguea” became “Déloyalle ronge Gaule” [Disloyal gnaws the Gaul]²⁸.

The accusations against the marquise thus reach a crescendo: from having a harmful influence over her husband, she becomes the queen’s manipulator, until finally becoming a threat to the entire kingdom. Some people even blame her for Concini’s actions (HARANGUE, 1617a; 1617b), pointing to her lament on the scaffold, when she yearned for forgiveness from the deceased, who she ruined by her ambition: “I will find my better half and ask him for forgiveness for his death, which I unfortunately plotted” (DISCOURS, 1617a, p. 3). Therefore, the denunciations of her crimes are combined with the fear of a genuine female rising to power, after all, she incited her husband to commit the most vile actions to fulfill her ambition, on top of influencing her friend and confidant; these actions were eventually rewarded with her pathetic laments when she was finally imprisoned.

The appeal to the reader’s emotions stands out, especially in The teares of the Marshall d’Ancres wife, shed for the death of her husband, a title that found a French audience, in at least three issues, and an English one, thanks to a considerably faithful translation of the French original, except for a poem in memory of the couple that is present at the end of all copies published in the reign of Louis XIII. The original octavo printed by Parisian Estienne Perrin, on Judas Street, in 1617, is titled Les larmes de la marquise d’Ancre, sur la mort de son mari. Avec les regrets de sa naissance, et détestation de ses crimes et forfaicts [The tears of Marquise d’Ancre’s over the death of her husband. With the laments of her birth, and hatred towards her crimes and misdeeds]. This piece was later reproduced in Tours by Jean Vantard, on rue de la Sellerie, and in Lyon, in a copy supposedly with permission (but without the printer’s name). The three French versions of the pamphlet have different numbers of pages depending on text distribution and type size, featuring a wood engraving with the printer’s mark on the title page, stylized capital letters, and different vignettes attesting to their different origins. The Lyon edition also corrects spelling errors and develops the abbreviations used by Perrin²⁹ on top of an additional poem about Louis XIII at the end.

The English edition leaves the presses of Felix Kingston for the bookseller William Arondell, located in St. Paul’s churchyard. Kingston had a prominent role in spreading the news about the events that happened in France, publishing eleven of the thirteen editions about the Marquis and/or the Marquise d’Ancre in England in 1617, almost in full, with an indication that they had been (faithfully) translated from French copies. In addition to printing, the sales were also concentrated on the English side, with five of the eleven editions printed by Kingston being sold by Nathaniel Newbery, whose stores were located near St. Peter and in Popes-head Alley, and the other six editions were sold by the aforementioned William Arondell. The Teares of the Marshall d’Ancres Wife, shed for the death of her husband. With the Bewailing of her nativitie, and detestation of her heinous crimes and offenses is presented as a translation of a French copy, which can be linked back to Perrin’s original Parisian copy since the Lyon edition has an additional paragraph on the title page regarding the king’s actions and the aforementioned poem.

Figure 1
Original edition of The Tears of Marshall d’Ancres Wife, Shed for the Death of her Husband

Figure 2
Lyon edition of The Tears of Marshall d’Ancres Wife, Shed for the Death of her Husband

Figure 3
English edition of The Tears of Marshall d’Ancres Wife, Shed for the Death of her Husband

Versions of the same texts, therefore, the French and the English pamphlet titled The Teares of the Marshall d’Ancres Wife, shed for the death of her Husband differ from other narratives about the scandal. By adopting a confessional tone for the protagonist, who puts herself in a position of grief, regret, and fear for her future, these sources paint an alternative image for Léonora Dori without freeing her from shame. Stripped of the pride that was clearly used to describe her in the set of pamphlets about her rise and fall, the Marquise d’Ancre plays a role that is commonly imposed on deviant women in French street literature: the repentant one, who curses her own birth and places herself before the judgment of justice and the king, believing in their wisdom. One of the most important women in the kingdom, accused of subjugating the regent for her personal benefit, is thus equated with the group of criminals built by these ephemeral texts, to the point of being stripped of her name. In the pamphlets, readers are introduced to the “poor Florentine”, Conchine/Conchini’s wife, and the marquise, but never to a woman with a proper name.

Thus, reduced to the common denominator of other deviants, i.e., her relationship with the masculine, Léonora Dori blames her husband’s ambition and her ignorance for their misfortunes. However, she does not stop crying out for her partner and lamenting their separation, moving from accusation to supplication. The marquise, once again imagined by an author of fait divers, that is, as conflict-ridden through a male filter, questions how she lost her malicious influence and became isolated:

où sont mes sens, et les esprits les plus subtils dont la nature a semblé de m’honorer? où sont dis-je ces cauteleuses inventions qui sembloient si bien charmer l’>esprit de celle qui devoit servir d’>Aurore dans le Firmament de cet Estat ? Helas ! s’>en est faict, mes prodiges sont ettoufez, les monstres de mes imaginations sont au tombeau

(LES LARMES, 1617a, p. 3-4).

where be those most subtitle wits and conceits that nature seemed too much to honor me whithall? where be those deceitful tricks and inventions, that seemed so strongly to charm the soul of her, that should have been the Aurora in the firmament of this estate? they are gone, my prodigies are smothered, the deformed monsters of my imaginations are buried in the grave

(THE TEARES, 1617, p. 2 [3]).

Therefore, these sources do not present her as a Medea of France (a lofty moniker that will be attributed by another occasional piece³⁰) but as a fallen woman who embraces her destiny. Grief is an essential component of street literature that denounces crime and signals repentance to achieve a coherent world order, restoring the lost harmony – after all, every crime is a rupture. Largely moralizing, street literature is understood as a genre of its own and, as such, implies a reading convention, as per the insights of Christian Jouhaud (2009 [1985]) on posters (placards). Thus, even in the most grotesque cases, remorse is one of the key elements elicited by reading the pamphlets, however unlikely it may sound. As an example, the marquise’s imminent condemnation is accepted as a natural consequence of her actions:

And that is so, divine and human justice can no longer allow the impunity of my crimes, my charms and sorceries can no longer do anything in this world, I must expose myself between the hands of those who should allow me to make the ferry crossing³¹, and by handing over the spirits I ask forgiveness from the one who could keep me in perpetual rest³²

(LES LARMES, 1617a, p. 7).

The reference to her “charms and sorceries” is not gratuitous, considering that witchcraft was the central argument of the case against her, even though it was clearly considered a hoax by the powerful³³ and largely ignored by this scandal-hungry literature. Aimed at building the character and glory of the king, the narratives dedicated to the rise and fall of Léonora Dori do not deviate from the search for forgiveness, an unlikely trait in a true acolyte of the devil. The responsibility to shatter her world therefore falls into the hands of the king (not Old Nick), who the protagonist turns to. It also mentions the coup by Louis XIII, a “living image of clemency”³⁴ (LES LARMES, 1617a, p. 8), to reclaim his own throne; and to prove his benevolence, he is asked to perform a new coup, this time against the ongoing justice. In her cry for royal pardon, the imagined Marquise d’Ancre does not fail to subtly mention the king’s faults, which is further reinforced in the subtitle added to the Lyon edition: “And also the Strophes on the King’s deviations, both on the death of the Marquis d’Ancre and after the effect of his commendable resolution of the subject”³⁵ (LES LARMES, 1617a, p. 1). Thus, the anonymous author of the pamphlet does not deny the winding path the dauphin had to take to rise to power, but reaffirms his sovereignty and infers the justness of his actions. This accidental criticism will be lost in the other pamphlets about the case, which insist on the narrative of a king who is “absolutely taking the government for himself” (THE FRENCH JUBILE, 1617, p. 3), as is the case of The French Jubile, another pamphlet translated into English that even justifies distributing the couple’s wealth among those who helped the king regain the throne, returning the positions usurped due to Italian influence to the French peers.

However, the protagonist of The Teares of the Marshall d’Ancres wife, shed for the death of her Husband is seeking forgiveness that is not within her reach, and so she keeps longing for death and fearing the inevitable torment. From the marquise’s monologue that acts as an exhortation to accept social roles and the order of the world, we move on to the testimony of an onlooker who sees her decadence and misery and states that, from the despair that overtakes her, “it seems the demons are already enjoying it”³⁶ (LES LARMES, 1617a, p. 9). Thus are presented the pride and decadence of the one who dared to go beyond the social position she held at birth: once a “goddess” who held the world in her hands, Léonora Dori finds herself reduced to nothing (DISCOURS, 1617, p. 7- 8).

In her misfortune, the marquise is the epitome of how female power is portrayed in street literature: exceptional, built from the masculine reference and in its absence, a power that corrupts when usurped and ruins itself and its own. In her multiple faces, as an unsubmissive wife who takes over her husband’s natural authority and instills evil in him; as an ungrateful friend of the one who not only welcomed and elevated her but who should have put the protection of the entire kingdom before her whims; as a foreigner, usurping a position of honor from the French elite; as a mother, unable to protect her son from infamy; as an unlikely sorceress, busy perverting and fomenting discord in the very Christian kingdom. She embodies the vices people feared at the time and represents a face capable of channeling hatred.

The contradictions of in the sources are evident; they are simultaneously produced by different hands but share the same androcentric worldview that points the Galigaï’s faults. Her sins are her ambition and weakness, both said to be inherently feminine. Despite her weak constitution, reflected in her defective physique – Michelet (1857, p. 76) will say she was “a type of shadowy dwarf, with sinister eyes, like coals from hell”³⁷ –, she rises above les grands. She is so weak that she becomes responsible for the misery of the French people, who fall prey to her scandalous enrichment. For some, she only fueled Concini’s ambition; for others, she is the one who paved the way for her husband’s rise thanks to her access to the queen, and therefore she would be responsible for his downfall. Therefore, her strength lies in her natural weakness, which opened the way to vices and led her to be despised.

However, Léonora Dori’s image was not constructed in isolation. She shared a foreign origin with the fallen regent and became a target for accusations that could not be raised against her. After all, Marie de Médicis had chosen her circle of trust and, doing so, ended up goading the high French nobility. Still, she could not be directly implicated – this happened more than a century and a half before the proliferation of scandalous publications that would stain the reputation of another queen and make her unable to retain her position. Transported to the kingdom of Persia in one of François de Rosset’s tragic stories (1619), the pair of foster sisters³⁸ comprises “beautiful and wise” Empress Parthénie and the “black and dry” Dragontine. It is only through nefarious arts and spells that the ruler could be controlled and the future of Persia threatened, thus perpetuating the contrast between the two figures that solidified the contemporary fear of placing power in female hands and the importance of Salic law³⁹ for the male organization of the world. Undoubtedly, the order was reestablished thanks to the Sophy/dauphin’s cunningness.

However, the exhaustive repetition of the Marquise d’Ancre’s vices across multiple print materials is not devoid of loopholes. Firstly, the absence of pieces that criticize the couple in prints prior to 1615 is a testament to the opportunistic nature of the avalanche of accusations amidst Concini’s posthumous trial and Léonora’s execution. Furthermore, the hatred instilled against the one who took advantage of the Queen Mother and had her infamy described in detail, including remarks about her appearance, mannerisms, and weaknesses, did not wholly surpass the description of her torment. Executed in the place de Grève on July 8, 1617, her courage would have aroused the compassion of the masses, who up to that point were revolted and eager to lynch her (BLUCHE, 1990, p. 368):

She courageously climbed the scaffold and was resolute on dying with constancy, with the executioner present there, after cutting her hair, (…) she was resolute and not frightened in any way by the unavoidable blow, (…) she received the blow of the sword that severed her soul from her body, was stripped of her clothes, and her body was placed in the wood fire to be set ablaze and burned⁴⁰

(DISCOURS, 1617b, p. 8).

Representations are not arbitrary elements but rather internal products of texts that help shape reality while revealing a particular reading of the world. Founded on the prejudices of the time, they leverage passions in discursive practice and support the construction of a specific imaginary. They also portray the conflicts involved in their constructions, as Roger Chartier (1989) already pointed out when examining them in France during the Old Regime. Crossing borders, the set of representations produced around the feminine and its relationship to power was used to justify actions, however brutal and convenient they might have seemed, as well as fuel an opinion that sought to be hegemonic.

The spread of prints and opinion formation: in conclusion

The impact of prints, especially cheap ones, should not be underestimated due to the high illiteracy rates in the early modern times. Fueled by rumors, scandals, and gossip, as indicated by one of its possible etymological origins⁴¹, canards and libelles follow the reading practices of the time and go beyond individual reading, to the point of street vendors shouting them out in large cities. Bearing in mind that reading and sharing written material are historically mutable, the period became the stage for the development of new skills and strategies for discussions surrounding learning, practices, and events with the breaking of the monopoly over knowledge enabled by the Gutenberg revolution. In this sense, Christian Jouhaud (2003) points out how libelles allow for the instrumentalization of the event, which is read, discussed, and interpreted. The canards opened the path for them to multiply in the years of the Fronde (1648-1653), being largely ignored when controversy befell the printing heart of the kingdom.

At the beginning of the century, the narratives about the most notable cases of French street literature were still concentrated in the canards. Concini’s murder and Marquise d’Ancre’s execution give us a glimpse from various points of view, not only regarding the linearity and justification for the events but also the emotions and ambitions of historical figures who became characters that fed the imaginary of the time. That shows both how the canards were advantageous from a diffusion perspective and also why they progressively fell into decline: compared to libelles, they have an apparently less harmful bias when communicating information thanks to their vivid reports that appeal to a wide range of readers; thus, they do not incite vigilance from the authorities but rather convey the values of the established order.

The spectacularization of politics had been part of the printmaking routine since the assassination of Henry IV and was further intensified with the coup of Louis XIII, gaining ground in France and beyond, with English printers eager for news from the neighboring kingdom. With fervorous apologists among canardiers, the public construction of authority is imbued with an affective dimension that only narrative can cement. As an heir eclipsed by the greatness of his father’s image and who remained under the shadow of Cardinal Richelieu, Louis XIII was, nonetheless, promised a radiant future by the occasional pieces.

By legitimizing the execution of Léonora Dori, when the Marshal of France had already been eliminated and the Marquise posed no threat, cheap prints had an active role in shaping the event at the time. In the crossing between reality over fiction, the event that gave birth to Louis XIII’s government was based on the annihilation (literal and metaphorical) of the ambitious Florentine. This rich set of sources shows the attempts to control, manipulate, and even subtly object, on top of the impossibility to fully control the presses. The testimonies, debates, and rejoicing on behalf of the French people became part of a discussion that will be further developed with the nobiliary revolts of the following years.

Libelles and canards paved their way amid the urban population who, since the large-format pages of the late 15^th and early 16^th centuries, have found printers and street vendors to be the preferred vehicles for gaining access to information. Street literature helps build world order by reinforcing social structures in its moralizing backdrop, which does not go unnoticed under its scandalous content. As the subject of dozens of occasional pieces and having fed the printing market over the course of a year, the Galigaï became the epitome of the wrongful, vicious woman who insists on being dominating and must be put into submission. Thus is formed a set of representations, anchored in prejudices about the feminine that have survived the test of time. By building the memory of events, such representations contribute to legitimizing not only Louis XIII but the monarchical regime of absolute power – the amplified patriarchal model⁴² discussed by Robert Muchembled (1988), Yves-Marie Bercé (1997), Fanny Cosandey and Robert Descimon (2002) – which is in constant fermentation. The French monarchy did not present itself in a coherent and finished way, not even (and above all) on the eve of the Revolution, and its efforts to control bodies and consciences (as well as resistances) were seen in multiple spheres throughout the years during the two centuries when the country was ruled by the Bourbons.⁴³ Thus, amidst this instability, street literature provided a call for order: the kingdom no longer needed to fear the dangers symbolized by (foreign) women being at the forefront of France’s crown, as the world had been put back in place.

• 1
  Article not published on preprint platforms. All sources and bibliography have been referenced. Allusions to archives are as follows: (BnF) Bibliothèque Nationale de France; (BM-Amiens) Bibliothèque Municipale d’Amiens; (SBB) Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin; (HAB) Herzog August Bibliothek; (BL) British Library. Research financed with support from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development – CNPq under research productivity grant PQ-2 (Process 306361/2022-1) and by the Rio de Janeiro State Research Support Foundation – FAPERJ (Process 211.105/2019).
• 3
  Artigo não publicado em plataforma preprint. Todas as fontes e a bibliografia utilizadas são referenciadas. As menções aos arquivos correspondem ao seguinte: (BnF) Bibliothèque Nationale de France; (BM-Amiens) Bibliothèque Municipale d’Amiens; (SBB) Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin; (HAB) Herzog August Bibliothek; (BL) British Library. Pesquisa financiada com apoio do Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico – CNPq, por meio de bolsa de produtividade em pesquisa PQ-2 (Processo 306361/2022-1), assim como pela Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro – FAPERJ (Processo 211.105/2019).
• 4
  Doutora em História Moderna pela Université Sorbonne Paris Nord, Professora Adjunta de História Moderna, Instituto de História, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro – Rio de Janeiro/RJ – Brasil.
• 5
  By supporting the queen’s interactions with the king’s favorite, Henriette d’Entragues, Dori and Concini managed to get Henri IV’s approval of their engagement in 1601, on top of a generous dowry from Marie de Médicis (DUCCINI, 1991). Léonora achieved the coveted position of dame d’atours, the third highest rank in the queen’s household, only below superintendent and first lady of honor. Naturally, all roles required a title of nobility and solid relationships in court politics. In other words, the union magnified the political skills of both, not only overcoming the king’s distrust but also the usual practice of isolating foreigners from key positions at court.
• 6
  The Histoire d’Ælius Sejanus is a translation of books III and IV of Annales by Tacitus, which narrates the story of Tiberius’s favorite and traitor. On the other hand, the Histoire des prosperitez malheureuses is based on Boccaccio’s biography about Philippa of Catania, present in the famous De casibus virorum illustrium (circa 1347). From Boccaccio to Mathieu, the text returned to Italian cities numerous times. Regarding the fortune of Mathieu’s works in the Italian peninsula, see Miotti (2014).
• 7
  French source: “aux ombres qui rehaussent un beau tableau ou aux taches qui n’altèrent pas la splendeur solaire”.
• 8
  Another example of this is the prospect of his daughter marrying one of the prominent families of the kingdom, a plan that failed due to Marie’s death in January 1617 (DUBOST, 1999, p. 77).
• 9
  Fanny Cosandey reflects on the questions surrounding the uses of “absolutism”, a term that only emerged at the end of the 18th century as a critical definition to refer to the practices of the contentious French monarchy and would later become a staple of historiography. Between the search for an apparatus that would isolate the decisions of a sacralized king and the limitations to do so at the time, the concept of absolutism is a testament to the influence of political theory on the exercise of power. As the author concludes, despite its problems, it still has no proper substitute (COSANDEY, 2023, p. 946).
• 10
  French source: “se caractérise à un moment donné par la plus extraordinaire capitalisation de signes de l’exception, qui sont autant de formes de sublimation du rapport de dépendance, et manifestent l’efficacité créatrice et légitimante du pouvoir souverain”.
• 11
  Such proximity is also spatial, as Léonora received a room next to the queen’s in the Louvre and, subsequently, a house next to the royal palace in 1612 (DUBOST, 1999, p. 73).
• 12
  The world of the French maîtresses en titre has dozens of biographies that appeal to a wider audience, focusing on social ascension, influence over the monarch, and sex. Among them, the most prominent ones are from the long reign of Louis XIV, such as Madame de Montespan (PETITFILS, 2009) and Madame de Maintenon (DESPRAT, 2003; MARAL, 2018); as well as Madame de Pompadour (MUCHEMBLED, 2014) and the infamous Madame du Barry (SAINT-VICTOR, 2013) in the reign of Louis XV. Louis XIII did not follow his father’s copious examples.
• 13
  French source: “point d’aboutissement obligé des réseaux clientélaires et le lieux par excellence de la formation du capital symbolique et matériel de la noblesse”.
• 14
  Without, obviously, becoming a truly absolute regime, given the fragile institutional balance that superimposed new administrative conceptions and old, enduring practices, on top of the ever-present resistance. Regardless, the increased strength of the state apparatus, especially under the government of Louis XIV, based on administrative professionalization, the centralization of power in the hands of the royal council and, finally, in the king himself (COSANDEY, 2023, p. 940), set the tone for what came closest to a paradigm.
• 15
  French source: “depuis la mort du roi Henry le Grand, au dommage du roi Louis XIII, au prejudice de son autorité et au repos de son État”.
• 16
  About the influences, debates, and transformations surrounding rhetoric in France in the 16^th and 17^th centuries, see Marc Fumaroli (2009).
• 17
  Until at least 1659, when the Treaty of the Pyrenees sealed the peace between France and Spain by making the marriage of Louis XIV and infant Marie-Thérèse of Austria official. This key year that marks France’s prominence on Europe is considered the end of the first 17^th century, which began after the assassination of Henri IV in 1610 (RODIER, 2020, p. 17).
• 18
  French source: “yeux de basilic, (…) corps tellement gasté que ce n’est plus qu’une sentine de vérole & d’infection”.
• 19
  Considered the first French periodical, the Mercure François was published between 1611 and 1648 and provided accounts of notable kingdom events that occurred between 1605 and 1644. The Mercure was the work of Parisian printers Jean and Estienne Richer and enjoyed royal privilege; in its later years, it was maintained by Théophastre Renaudot, whose efforts to establish a periodical press in France were rewarded with the protection of Richelieu and Mazarin.
• 20
  LE VRAY Discours d’une des plus grandes cruaultez qui ait esté veuë de nostre temps, avenue au Royaulme de Naples. Par une damoiselle nommée Anne de Buringel, laquelle a fait empoisonner son mary par un à qui elle promettait mariage, et depuis elle a empoisonné son pere, sa soeur, et deux de ses petits neveux, et de la mort qui s’est ensuyvie d’un jeune Gentil-homme… Paris: J. de Lastre, 1577 (BnF); LE DISCOURS d’une très-grande cruauté commise par une Damoyselle nommée Anne de Buringel laquelle a fait empoisonner son mary… Lyon: J. Bourgeois, 1587 (BnF); LE VRAY Discours d’une cruauté exercée par une demoiselle envers son mary, son père, sa soeur et deux de ses nepveux. Lyon: T. Ancelin, 1598 (BM-Amiens); LE VRAY Discours d’une cruauté exercee par une Damoiselle envers son Marit, son Pere, sa Sœur, et deux de ses neveux. Rouen, jouxte l’exemplaire imprimé à Paris: J. Hubault, 1609 (BnF).
• 21
  Hélène Duccini (1991), for example, considers there were ٧٦ pamphlets dedicated to the scandal regardless of their various sizes, as well as ٣٥ other pieces in verse.
• 22
  DESTINÉE du mareschal d’Ancre. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617 (SBB); LA MÉDÉE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617a (HAB); LA MÉDÉE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617b (BnF); LE TOMBEAU du Marquis d’Ancre. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617 (SBB); L’OMBRE du marquis d’Ancre, apparue à MM. les Princes. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617 (BnF); LETTRE escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre. Paris: F. Bourriquant, 1617a (BnF). The canard La Médée de la France was also printed by the Lyonnais Claude Pelletier, also in 1617, and it’s not possible to determine which was the original pamphlet.
• 23
  The title page mentions “as per the copy printed in Paris by F. Bourriquant”. French source: “jouxte la coppie imprimée à Paris par F. Bourriquant” (DESTINÉE, 1617a).
• 24
  The Lettre escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre was reproduced in Paris by Joseph Guerreau (also with permission) and in Lyon by Jean Rovaize. There is also a copy with no editorial data.
• 25
  LES ACTIONS et regrets de la marquise d’Anchre après la prononciation de son Arrest. Et les particularitez notables de tout ce qui s’en est ensuivy. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617 (BnF); BREF RECIT de tout ce qui s’est passé pour l’execution & juste punition de la Marquize d’Anchre. Avec son Anagramme, Et deux Epitaphes, dont l’une est Chronologique. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617 (BnF); LA DESCENTE du Marquis d’Ancre aux enfers, son combat et sa rencontre avec Maistre Guillaume… Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617 (BnF); LA RENCONTRE du marquis et de la marquise d’Ancre en l’autre monde. Ensemble leurs discours avec le roi Henri le Grand. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617 (BnF); LES SOUSPIRS et regrets du fils du marquis d’Anchre, sur la mort de son père, et exécution de sa mère. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617 (BnF).
• 26
  The comparison is present in the in-4° pamphlets: VERGELIJCKINGHE over het leven en doodt van der Marquis d’Ancre in Vranckrijck, met dat van Cornelis en Ian de Wit, in Hollandt. [S.l.]: [s. n.], 1672 (BL); DEN BEDROGEN Engelsman met de handen in ‚t hair. Of T‚ samenspraeck tusschen drie persoonen, Daniel, een Fransman. Robbert, een Engelsman. en Jan, een Hollander. Nevens een vergelijckinge tusschen den Marquis d‘Ancre, en Cornelis en Ian de Wit. [S.l.]: [s. n.], 1672 (BL).
• 27
  The pamphlet includes a note explaining the pun Incke and Ancre.
• 28
  Magda Campanini (2019) also draws attention to this canard, specifically the enunciative aspects of the prints dedicated to the marquise.
• 29
  For example, “inventiõs” is spelled “inventions”.
• 30
  LA MEDEE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Paris: Fleurry Bourriquant, 1617 (BnF, HAB); Lyon: Claude Pelletier, 1617 (BnF).
• 31
  An allusion to Charon’s ferry that transported the souls of the dead across the river Styx in Hades.
• 32
  French source: “Puis qu’>ainsi est, & que la justice divine et humaine ne peut plus permettre l’>impunité de mes crimes, que mes charmes & sortileges ne peuvent plus rien en ce monde, il faut que je m’>expose entre les mains de ceux qui me doivent faire passer la barque, & que rendant les esprits je demande pardon à celuy qui me pouvoit conserver en un repos perpetuel”.
• 33
  Richelieu himself questions the legitimacy of the accusation in his Memoir (1837, p. 165).
• 34
  French source: “Image vive de la Clemence”.
• 35
  French source: “Et aussi les Stances, sur les deportements du Roy, tant en la mort du Marquis d’Ancre, qu’après l’effect de sa loüable resolution sur ce sujet”. Here I draw attention to the term “déportement” which, although it is translated as conduct, implies a deviation, i.e., a morally reprehensible behavior which is justified, since his judgment is subsequently described as “commendable”.
• 36
  French source: “semble [sic] il que les demons en soient deja jouyssants”.
• 37
  French source: “une sorte de naine noire, avec des yeux sinistres, comme des charbons d’enfer”.
• 38
  Street literature presents the marquise as the “sœur de lait” [milk sister] of the queen, i.e., Léonora was the daughter of her wet nurse in Florence.
• 39
  Regarding the uses of Salic law to structure the crown of France, see Fanny Cosandey (2000).
• 40
  French source: “Elle monte courageusement sur l’eschaffaut, se resoult de mourir constamment, l’executeur là present, apres luy avoir couppe ses cheveux, (…) elle toute resoluë se debande et ne s’effraya aucunement du coup qu’elle ne pouvoit eviter, (…) elle reçoit le coup d’espée qui luy separa l’ame d’avec le corps, cella fait elle est depouillee de ses habillements, et son corps fut mis sur le bucher de bois pour estre ard et brusle”. In addition to the Parisian edition of Anthoine du Brueil, the same title came out of the presses of C. Larjot in Lyon (DISCOURS, 1617c) and of J. Vatard in Tours (DISCOURS, 1617d).
• 41
  Furetière (1701, p. 249) links the term canard to cancan, i.e., rumor.
• 42
  Across Europe, the patriarchal root of royal authority is declared in the 16^th and 17^th centuries in a return to Plato. Absolute monarchy scholars such as Bodin, Bossuet, Filmer, and Pufendorf will develop their reflections on the regime based on the notion of patriarchy much more than a manorial inheritance. This understanding will even help the State seek control over family relationships.
• 43
  In this sense, there is an attack on legal grounds with the promulgation of royal edicts condemning pregnancy outside of marriage and marriage without parental authorization (HANLEY, 1989), which will be followed by the lettres de cachet and demands for compulsory imprisonment of rebellious children and wives; accompanied by severe judicial repression, where efforts to specifically control women are evident in the persecution surrounding infanticide (MUCHEMBLED, 2007).

Referências bibliográficas

• [MATTHIEU, Pierre]. La conjuration de Conchine. Paris: Pierre Rocolet, 1618.
• [MATTHIEU, Pierre]. La magicienne estrangere Rouen: David Geuffroy & Jacques Besongne, 1617.
• BOCCACCIO. De casibus virorum illustrium [ca. 1347]. Traité des mésadventures de personnages signalez Paris: Nicolas Eue, 1578.
• BREF RECIT de tout ce qui s’est passé pour l’ execution & juste punition de la Marquize d’Anchre. Avec son Anagramme, Et deux Epitaphes, dont l’une est Chronologique. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617.
• CHAPITRE du procès fait à la mémoire de Conchino Conchini, naguères maréchal de France, et à Léonora Galigaï sa veuve, sur le chef de crime de lèse-majesté royale, concernant les intelligences qu’iceux Conchine et sa femme ont eues et entretenues avec les étrangers, depuis la mort du roi Henry le Grand, au dommage du roi Louis XIII, au préjudice de son autorité et au repos de son État, en Italie et Espagne, en Flandre et Allemagne. [S. l.]: [s. n.], 1617.
• CHEF du procès fait à la mémoire de Conchino Conchini, naguères maréchal de France, et à Léonora Galigaï sa veuve, et complices, sur la déprédation et interversion de deniers royaux, depuis la mort de Henry le Grand (…) par autorité qu’icelui Conchine et sa femme, laquelle était son principal conseil, auraient usurpé les officiers du roi Louis XIII, et sur la violence et exactions commises sur toutes sortes de personnes pour amasser or et argent… [S. l.]: [s. n.], 1617.
• DEN BEDROGEN Engelsman met de handen in ‚t hair. Of T‚ samenspraeck tusschen drie persoonen, Daniel, een Fransman. Robbert, een Engelsman. en Jan, een Hollander. Nevens een vergelijckinge tusschen den Marquis d‘Ancre, en Cornelis en Ian de Wit. [S.l.]: [s. n.], 1672.
• DESTINÉE du mareschal d’Ancre. Lyon: G. Mamiolles, 1617a.
• DESTINÉE du mareschal d’Ancre. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617.
• DISCOURS, regrets et harangue de la marquise d’Ancre, despuis la Conciergerie jusques sur l’escchafaut. Ensemble la remontrance à son fils. Avec son oraison. Paris: Joseph Guerreau, 1617a.
• DISCOURS sur la mort de Eleonor Galligay femme de Conchine Marquis d’Ancre. Executee en Greve le Samedy 8. de Juillet. 1617. Paris: A. du Brueil, 1617b.
• DISCOURS sur la mort de Eleonor Galligay femme de Conchine Marquis d’Ancre. Executee en Greve le Samedy 8. de Juillet. 1617. Lyon: C. Larjot, 1617c.
• DISCOURS sur la mort de Eleonor Galligay femme de Conchine Marquis d’Ancre. Executee en Greve le Samedy 8. de Juillet. 1617. Tour: J. Vatard, 1617d.
• HARANGUE de la marquise d’Ancre, estant sur l’échafaud. Ensemble la remontrance à son fils. Paris: J. Viala, 1617a.
• HARANGUE de la marquise d’Ancre, estant sur l’échafaud. Ensemble la remontrance à son fils. Lyon: Claude Pelletier, 1617b.
• L’OMBRE du marquis d’Ancre, apparue à MM. les Princes. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617.
• LA DESCENTE du Marquis d’Ancre aux enfers, son combat et sa rencontre avec Maistre Guillaume… Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617.
• LA MÉDÉE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617a.
• LA MÉDÉE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617b.
• LA MÉDÉE de la France. Dépeinte en la personne de la Marquise d’Ancre. Lyon: Claude Pelletier, 1617c.
• LA RENCONTRE du marquis et de la marquise d’Ancre en l’autre monde. Ensemble leurs discours avec le roi Henri le Grand. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617.
• LE DISCOURS d’une très-grande cruauté commise par une Damoyselle nommée Anne de Buringel laquelle a fait empoisonner son mary, son père, sa soeur, deux petis neveux qu’elle avoit et de la mort d’un jeune Gentilhomme qui s’en est ensuyvie, le tout pour la paillardise… Lyon: J. Bourgeois, 1587.
• LE TOMBEAU du Marquis d’Ancre. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617.
• LE VRAY Discours d’une cruauté exercee par une Damoiselle envers son Marit, son Pere, sa Sœur, et deux de ses neveux. Rouen, jouxte l’exemplaire imprimé à Paris: J. Hubault, 1609.
• LE VRAY Discours d’une cruauté exercée par une demoiselle envers son mary, son père, sa soeur et deux de ses nepveux. Lyon: T. Ancelin, 1598.
• LE VRAY Discours d’une des plus grandes cruaultez qui ait esté veuë de nostre temps, avenue au Royaulme de Naples. Par une damoiselle nommée Anne de Buringel, laquelle a fait empoisonner son mary par un à qui elle promettait mariage, et depuis elle a empoisonné son pere, sa soeur, et deux de ses petits neveux, et de la mort qui s’est ensuyvie d’un jeune Gentil-homme… Paris: J. de Lastre, 1577.
• LES ACTIONS et regrets de la marquise d’Anchre après la prononciation de son Arrest. Et les particularitez notables de tout ce qui s’en est ensuivy. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617.
• LES LARMES de la marquise d’Ancre, sur la mort de son mary. Avec les regrets de sa naissance, et detestation de ses crimes et forfaicts. Paris: Estienne Perin, 1617.
• LES LARMES de la marquise d’Ancre, sur la mort de son mary. Avec les regrets de sa naissance, et detestation de ses crimes et forfaicts. Lyon, jouxte la copie imprimée à Paris: [s. n.], d’après l’édition d’Estienne Perrin, 1617a.
• LES SOUSPIRS et regrets du fils du marquis d’Anchre, sur la mort de son père, et exécution de sa mère. Paris: A. Saugrain, 1617.
• LETTRE escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre. [S. l.]: [s.n.], 1617d.
• LETTRE escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre. Lyon: Jean Royaize, 1617c.
• LETTRE escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre. Paris: Fleury Bourriquant, 1617a.
• LETTRE escrite au Roy, par Monsieur le Mareschal d’Ancre. Paris: Joseph Guerreau, 1617b.
• MATTHIEU, Pierre. Histoire d’Ælius Sejanus Paris: veuve Jean Regnoul, 1617a.
• MATTHIEU, Pierre. Histoire des prosperitez malheureuses d’une femme cathenoise, grande sesnechalle de Naples. Paris: vefve Jean Regnoul, 1617.
• NAUDÉ, Gabriel. Considérations politiques sur les coups d’État. Rome: Les Éditions de Paris, 1639.
• P. B. S. D. V. [Pierre Beaunis de Chanterrain]. Le Définement de la guerre appaisée par la mort de Concino Concini, marquis d’Ancre, lequel a esté carrabiné, enterré, desterré, pendu, décoyonné, démembré, trainé et bruslé à Paris, ayant esté trouvé ateint & convaincu de crime de lèze Majesté, le vingt- quatriesme et vingt-cinquiesme Avril seize cens dix-sept… Lyon, pris sur la coppie imprimée à Paris: [s.n.], 1617.
• QUATRIESME Tome du Mercure François, ou, Les Memoires de la Suitte de l’Histoire de nostre temps, sous le Regne du tres-Chrestien Roy de France et de Navarre Louis XIII. Paris: E. Richer, 1617.
• RECUEIL des charges qui sont au proces faictes à la mémoire de Conchino Conchini n’agueres Mareschal de France, et à Leonora Galigai sa vefve, sur le chef du crime de leze-Majesté divine. In: Quatriesme Tome du Mercure François, ou, Les Memoires de la Suitte de l’ Histoire de nostre temps, sous le Regne du tres-Chrestien Roy de France et de Navarre Louis XIII Paris: E. Richer, 1617. p. 1-8.
• RICHELIEU, Armand Jean du Plessis (duque de). Mémoires du Cardinal de Richelieu, sur le règne de Louis XIII, depuis 1610 jusqu’à 1638. In: MICHAUD, Joseph-François; POUJOLAT, Jean-Joseph-François (éd.). Nouvelle collection des mémoires pour servir à l’histoire de France depuis le XIII^e siècle jusqu’à la fin du xviii^e siècle. Paris: chez l’éditeur du Commentaire analytique du Code civil, 1837. t. VII.
• ROSSET, François de Rosset. Des enchantemens et sortileges de Dragontine: de sa fortune prodigieuse, et de sa fin mal-heureuse. In: Les histoires memorables et tragiques de ce temps. Où sont contenuës les morts funestes et lamentables de plusieurs personnes, arrivées par leurs ambitions, amours desreiglees, sortileges, vols, rapines, et par autres accidens divers et memorables Paris: P. Chevalier, 1619. p. 1-46.
• THE ARRAIGNMENT of the Marques d’Ancre. Translated According to the French Copie, printed at Roan. London: Felix Kingston for William Arondell, at the Angels in Pauls Church-yard, 1617.
• THE FRENCH JUBILE: or, the joy and thanksgiving of all France, to God, and their King, for the death of the Marquise d’Ancre. Translated out of the French Copie printed at Paris. London: printed by Felix Kingston for Nathaniel Newbery, 1617.
• THE TEARES of the Marshall d’Ancres Wife, shed for the death of her Husband. With the Bewailing of her nativitie, and detestation of her heinous crimes and offences. Translated out of the French Copie. London: printed by Felix Kingston for William Arondell, 1617.
• VERGELIJCKINGHE over het leven en doodt van der Marquis d’Ancre in Vranckrijck, met dat van Cornelis en Ian de Wit, in Hollandt. [S.l.]: [s. n.], 1672.
• AMSTUTZ, Delphine; TEYSSANDIER, Bernard. 1617, Louis XIII prend le pouvoir: naissance d’un mythe?. Dix-septième siècle, n. 276, p. 395-398, 2017. Disponível em: https://hal.science/hal-02076482 Acesso em: 6 mar. 2023. doi: 10.3917/dss.173.0395.
  » https://hal.science/hal-02076482
• BERCÉ, Yves-Marie. Les coups de majesté des rois de France, 1588, 1617, 1661. In: BERCÉ, Yves-Marie; GUARINI, Elena Fasano (dir.). Complots et conjurations dans l’Europe moderne. Actes du colloque international organisé à Rome, 30 sept.-2 oct. 1993 Rome: École Française de Rome, 1996. p. 491-505.
• BLANCHARD, Jean-Vincent. Dies Irae Le coup d’État de Louis XIII, les pamphlets et l’institution du public. Littératures classiques, v. 1, n. 68, p. 31-42, 2009. Disponível em: https://www.cairn.info/revue-litteratures-classiques1-2009-1-page-31.htm Acesso em: 6 mar. 2023. doi: https://doi.org/10.3917/licla.068.0031.
  » https://www.cairn.info/revue-litteratures-classiques1-2009-1-page-31.htm
• BLUCHE, François (dir.). Dictionnaire du Grand Siècle. Paris: Fayard, 1990.
• CAMPANINI, Magda. L’actualité au carrefour des langages: formes et destins croisés de quelques occasionnels sur la mort de la maréchale d’Ancre. In: ARNOULD, Jean-Claude; LIEBEL, Silvia. Canards, occasionnels, éphémères: « information » et infralittérature en France à l’aube des temps modernes. Actes…, Université de Rouen, 2018. Publications numériques du CÉRÉdI, n. 23, 2019. Disponível em: http://ceredi.labos.univ-rouen.fr/public/?l-actualite-au-carrefour-des.html Acesso em: 12 ago. 2022.
  » http://ceredi.labos.univ-rouen.fr/public/?l-actualite-au-carrefour-des.html
• CHARTIER, Roger. Leituras e leitores na França do Antigo Regime São Paulo: UNESP, 2004 [1987].
• CHARTIER, Roger. Le monde comme représentation. Annales. Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations, v. 44, n. 6, p. 1505-1520, 1989. Disponível em: https://www.persee.fr/doc/ahess0395-26491989num446283667 Acesso em: 30 jan. 2024.
  » https://www.persee.fr/doc/ahess0395-26491989num446283667
• CHARTIER, Roger. O que é um autor? Revisão de uma genealogia São Carlos: Edufscar, 2012 [2000].
• CORNETTE, Joël. La Monarchie. Entre Renaissance et Révolution, 1515-1792 Paris: Seuil, 2000.
• COSANDEY, Fanny. Absolutismo: um conceito não-substituído. Topoi (Rio J.), Rio de Janeiro, v. 54, n. 54, p. 933-954, set./dez. 2023 [2002]. Disponível em: https://www.scielo.br/j/topoi/a/4rMqfjrwT5WqNkdcTSz45Ld/?format=pdf⟨=pt Acesso em: 30 jan. 2024. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2237-101X02405417.
  » https://www.scielo.br/j/topoi/a/4rMqfjrwT5WqNkdcTSz45Ld/?format=pdf⟨=pt
• COSANDEY, Fanny. La reine de France Symbole et pouvoir Paris: Gallimard, 2000.
• COSANDEY, Fanny; DESCIMON, Robert. L’Absolutisme en France. Histoire et historiographie Paris: Seuil, 2002.
• DESPRAT, Jean-Paul. Madame de Maintenon Paris: Perrin, 2003.
• DIZIONARIO BIOGRAFICO DEGLI ITALIANI. Concino Concini. Roma: Istituto Della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1982. v. XXVII, p. 726.
• DUBOST, Jean-François. Between Mignons and Principal Ministers: Concini, 1610-1617. In: ELLIOTT, John H.; BROCKLISS, Laurence W. B. (ed.). The World of the Favourite New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1999. p. 71-78.
• DUBOST, Jean-François. La prise de pouvoir par Louis XIII. In: CORNETTE, Joël (dir.). La France de la monarchie absolue (1610-1715). Paris: Seuil, 1997. p. 83-100.
• DUBOST, Jean-François. Marie de Médicis La reine dévoilée Paris: Payot, 2009.
• DUCCINI, Hélène. Un campagne de presse sous Louis XIII: l’affaire Concini, 1614-1617. In: JOUTARD, Philippe (ed.). Histoire sociale, sensibilités collectives et mentalités: Mélanges Robert Mandrou Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1985. p. 292-301.
• DUCCINI, Hélène. Concini: grandeur et misère du favori de Marie de Médicis Paris: Albin Michel, 1991.
• DUCCINI, Hélène. Faire voire, faire croire. L’opinion publique sous Louis XIII. Paris: Champ Vallon, 2003.
• ELIAS, Norbert. O Processo civilizador. Rio de Janeiro: J. Bahar, 1990 [1939]. Vol. 1: Uma história dos costumes.
• ELIAS, Norbert. O Processo Civilizador. Rio de Janeiro: J. Zahar, 1993 [1939]. Vol. 2: Formação do Estado e civilização.
• ELIAS, Norbert. A Sociedade de Corte Investigação sobre a sociologia da realeza e da aristocracia de corte. Rio de Janeiro: Zahar, 2001 [1969].
• ELLIOTT, John H.; BROCKLISS, Laurence W. B. (ed.). The World of the Favourite New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 1999.
• FUMAROLI, Marc. L’Âge de l’éloquence: rhétorique et « res literaria » de la Renaissance au seuil de l’époque classique Genebra: Droz, 2009 [1980].
• FURETIÈRE, Antoine. Dictionnaire universel, contenant généralement tous les mots françois tant vieux que modernes et les termes des sciences et des arts..., t. I. La Haye; Rotterdam: A. et R. Leers, 1701 [1690].
• HANLEY, Sarah. Engendering the State: Family formation and state building in early modern France. French Historical Studies, v. 16, n. 1, p. 4-27, 1989. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/286431 Acesso em: 31 jan. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/286431.
  » https://www.jstor.org/stable/286431
• HAYEM, Fernand. Le Maréchal d’Ancre et Léonora Galigaï. Paris: Plon, 1910.
• JOUANNA, Arlette. Le Devoir de révolte, la noblesse française et la gestation de l’État moderne, 1559- 1661 Paris: Fayard, 1989.
• JOUHAUD, Christian. Les libelles en France au XVII^e siècle: action et publication. Cahiers d’histoire. Revue d’histoire critique, n. 90-91, p. 33-45, 2003. Disponível em: https://journals.openedition.org/chrhc/1443 Acesso em: 31 jan. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/chrhc.1443.
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/chrhc.1443» https://journals.openedition.org/chrhc/1443
• JOUHAUD, Christian. Lisibilité et persuasion. Les placards politiques. In: CHARTIER, Roger (dir.). Les usages de l’imprimé. Paris: Fayard, 1987. p. 309-342.
• JOUHAUD, Christian. Mazarinades La Fronde des mots. Paris: Aubier, 2009 [1985].
• LADURIE, Emmanuel Le Roy. Saint-Simon ou o sistema da corte Rio de Janeiro: Civ. Brasileira, 2004 [1997].
• LE ROUX, Nicolas. Courtisans et favoris: l’entourage du prince et les mécanismes du pouvoir dans la France des guerres de religion. Histoire, économie & société, v. 17, n. 3, p. 377-387, 1998. Disponível em: https://www.persee.fr/doc/hes_0752-5702_1998_num_17_3_1992 Acesso em: 31 jan. 2024.
  » https://www.persee.fr/doc/hes_0752-5702_1998_num_17_3_1992
• LEVER, Maurice. Canards sanglants. Naissance du fait divers. Paris: Fayard, 1993.
• LIEBEL, Silvia. Les Médées modernes: la cruauté féminine d’après les canards imprimés (1574-1651). Rennes: PUR, 2013.
• MARAL, Alexandre. Madame de Maintenon La presque reine. Paris: Belin, 2018.
• MARTIN, Henri-Jean. Livres, pouvoirs et société à Paris au XVII^e siècle Genebra: Droz, 2000 [1969].
• MICHELET, Jules. Histoire de France au dix-septième siècle Henri IV et Richelieu. Paris: Chamerot, 1857.
• MIOTTI, Mariangela. De l’Italie à la France, de la France à l’Italie: l’histoire tragique de la femme “cathenoise”. Boccace, Pierre Matthieu (1563-1621), Virgilio Malvezzi (1595-1654). Cahiers d’études italiennes, n. 19, p. 127-147, 2014. Disponível em: https://journals.openedition.org/cei/2158 Acesso em: 31 jan. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.4000/cei.2158.
  » https://doi.org/10.4000/cei.2158» https://journals.openedition.org/cei/2158
• MCKENZIE, Donald Francis. Bibliography and the Sociology of Texts Londres: The British Library, 1986.
• MONGRÉDIEN, Georges. Léonora Galigaï. Un procès de sorcellerie sous Louis XIII Paris: Hachette, 1968.
• MUCHEMBLED, Robert. Fils de Caïn, enfants de Médée. Homicide et infanticide devant le parlement de Paris (1575-1604). Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales, ano 62, n. 5, p. 1063-1094, 2007. Disponível em: https://www.cairn.info/revue-annales-2007-5-page-1063.htm Acesso em: 31 jan. 2024.
  » https://www.cairn.info/revue-annales-2007-5-page-1063.htm
• MUCHEMBLED, R. L’Invention de l’homme moderne Culture et sensibilités en France du XV^e au XVIII^e siècle. Paris: Fayard, 1988.
• MUCHEMBLED, Robert. Madame de Pompadour Paris: Fayard, 2014.
• PETITFILS, Jean-François. Madame de Montespan Paris: Perrin, 2009.
• RODIER, Yann. Les Raisons de la haine. Histoire d’une passion dans la France du premier XVII^e siècle (1610-1659) Paris: Champ Vallon, 2020.
• SAINT-VICTOR, Jacques. Madame du Barry. Paris: Perrin, 2013.
• TEYSSANDIER, Bernard (dir.). Le Roi hors de page et autres textes Une anthologie. Reims: EPURE, 2013.

Edited by

Responsible Editors

Miguel Palmeira e Stella Maris Scatena Franco

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  01 July 2024
• Date of issue
  2024

History

• Received
  15 Aug 2023
• Accepted
  29 Jan 2024