perhaps one of the most curious revolutions in literary history is the sudden bull’s-eye light cast by m. longnon on the obscure existence of francois villon. 6 his book is not remarkable merely as a chapter of biography exhumed after four centuries. to readers of the poet it will recall, with a flavour of satire, that characteristic passage in which he bequeaths his spectacles — with a humorous reservation of the case — to the hospital for blind paupers known as the fifteen-score. thus equipped, let the blind paupers go and separate the good from the bad in the cemetery of the innocents! for his own part the poet can see no distinction. much have the dead people made of their advantages. what does it matter now that they have lain in state beds and nourished portly bodies upon cakes and cream! here they all lie, to be trodden in the mud; the large estate and the small, sounding virtue and adroit or powerful vice, in very much the same condition; and a bishop not to be distinguished from a lamp-lighter with even the strongest spectacles.

6 etude biographique sur francois villon. paris: h. menu.

such was villon’s cynical philosophy. four hundred years after his death, when surely all danger might be considered at an end, a pair of critical spectacles have been applied to his own remains; and though he left behind him a sufficiently ragged reputation from the first, it is only after these four hundred years that his delinquencies have been finally tracked home, and we can assign him to his proper place among the good or wicked. it is a staggering thought, and one that affords a fine figure of the imperishability of men’s acts, that the stealth of the private inquiry office can be carried so far back into the dead and dusty past. we are not so soon quit of our concerns as villon fancied. in the extreme of dissolution, when not so much as a man’s name is remembered, when his dust is scattered to the four winds, and perhaps the very grave and the very graveyard where he was laid to rest have been forgotten, desecrated, and buried under populous towns, — even in this extreme let an antiquary fall across a sheet of manuscript, and the name will be recalled, the old infamy will pop out into daylight like a toad out of a fissure in the rock, and the shadow of the shade of what was once a man will be heartily pilloried by his descendants. a little while ago and villon was almost totally forgotten; then he was revived for the sake of his verses; and now he is being revived with a vengeance in the detection of his misdemeanours. how unsubstantial is this projection of a man’s existence, which can lie in abeyance for centuries and then be brushed up again and set forth for the consideration of posterity by a few dips in an antiquary’s inkpot! this precarious tenure of fame goes a long way to justify those (and they are not few) who prefer cakes and cream in the immediate present.

a wild youth.

francois de montcorbier, alias francois des loges, alias francois villon, alias michel mouton, master of arts in the university of paris, was born in that city in the summer of 1431. it was a memorable year for france on other and higher considerations. a great-hearted girl and a poor-hearted boy made, the one her last, the other his first appearance on the public stage of that unhappy country. on the 30th of may the ashes of joan of arc were thrown into the seine, and on the 2d of december our henry sixth made his joyous entry dismally enough into disaffected and depopulating paris. sword and fire still ravaged the open country. on a single april saturday twelve hundred persons, besides children, made their escape out of the starving capital. the hangman, as is not uninteresting to note in connection with master francis, was kept hard at work in 1431; on the last of april and on the 4th of may alone, sixty-two bandits swung from paris gibbets. 7 a more confused or troublous time it would have been difficult to select for a start in life. not even a man’s nationality was certain; for the people of paris there was no such thing as a frenchman. the english were the english indeed, but the french were only the armagnacs, whom, with joan of arc at their head, they had beaten back from under their ramparts not two years before. such public sentiment as they had centred about their dear duke of burgundy, and the dear duke had no more urgent business than to keep out of their neighbourhood. . . . at least, and whether he liked it or not, our disreputable troubadour was tubbed and swaddled as a subject of the english crown.

7 bougeois de paris, ed. pantheon, pp. 688, 689.

we hear nothing of villon’s father except that he was poor and of mean extraction. his mother was given piously, which does not imply very much in an old frenchwoman, and quite uneducated. he had an uncle, a monk in an abbey at angers, who must have prospered beyond the family average, and was reported to be worth five or six hundred crowns. of this uncle and his money-box the reader will hear once more. in 1448 francis became a student of the university of paris; in 1450 he took the degree of bachelor, and in 1452 that of master of arts. his bourse, or the sum paid weekly for his board, was of the amount of two sous. now two sous was about the price of a pound of salt butter in the bad times of 1417; it was the price of half-a-pound in the worse times of 1419; and in 1444, just four years before villon joined the university, it seems to have been taken as the average wage for a day’s manual labour. 8 in short, it cannot have been a very profuse allowance to keep a sharp-set lad in breakfast and supper for seven mortal days; and villon’s share of the cakes and pastry and general good cheer, to which he is never weary of referring, must have been slender from the first.

8 bourgeois, pp. 627, 636, and 725.

the educational arrangements of the university of paris were, to our way of thinking, somewhat incomplete. worldly and monkish elements were presented in a curious confusion, which the youth might disentangle for himself. if he had an opportunity, on the one hand, of acquiring much hair-drawn divinity and a taste for formal disputation, he was put in the way of much gross and flaunting vice upon the other. the lecture room of a scholastic doctor was sometimes under the same roof with establishments of a very different and peculiarly unedifying order. the students had extraordinary privileges, which by all accounts they abused extraordinarily. and while some condemned themselves to an almost sepulchral regularity and seclusion, others fled the schools, swaggered in the street “with their thumbs in their girdle,” passed the night in riot, and behaved themselves as the worthy forerunners of jehan frollo in the romance of notre dame de paris. villon tells us himself that he was among the truants, but we hardly needed his avowal. the burlesque erudition in which he sometimes indulged implies no more than the merest smattering of knowledge; whereas his acquaintance with blackguard haunts and industries could only have been acquired by early and consistent impiety and idleness. he passed his degrees, it is true; but some of us who have been to modern universities will make their own reflections on the value of the test. as for his three pupils, colin laurent, girard gossouyn, and jehan marceau — if they were really his pupils in any serious sense — what can we say but god help them! and sure enough, by his own description, they turned out as ragged, rowdy, and ignorant as was to be looked for from the views and manners of their rare preceptor.

at some time or other, before or during his university career, the poet was adopted by master guillaume de villon, chaplain of saint benoit-le-betourne near the sorbonne. from him he borrowed the surname by which he is known to posterity. it was most likely from his house, called the porte rouge, and situated in a garden in the cloister of st. benoit, that master francis heard the bell of the sorbonne ring out the angelus while he was finishing his small testament at christmastide in 1546. towards this benefactor he usually gets credit for a respectable display of gratitude. but with his trap and pitfall style of writing, it is easy to make too sure. his sentiments are about as much to be relied on as those of a professional beggar; and in this, as in so many other matters, he comes towards us whining and piping the eye, and goes off again with a whoop and his finger to his nose. thus, he calls guillaume de villon his “more than father,” thanks him with a great show of sincerity for having helped him out of many scrapes, and bequeaths him his portion of renown. but the portion of renown which belonged to a young thief, distinguished (if, at the period when he wrote this legacy, he was distinguished at all) for having written some more or less obscene and scurrilous ballads, must have been little fitted to gratify the self-respect or increase the reputation of a benevolent ecclesiastic. the same remark applies to a subsequent legacy of the poet’s library, with specification of one work which was plainly neither decent nor devout. we are thus left on the horns of a dilemma. if the chaplain was a godly, philanthropic personage, who had tried to graft good principles and good behaviour on this wild slip of an adopted son, these jesting legacies would obviously cut him to the heart. the position of an adopted son towards his adoptive father is one full of delicacy; where a man lends his name he looks for great consideration. and this legacy of villon’s portion of renown may be taken as the mere fling of an unregenerate scapegrace who has wit enough to recognise in his own shame the readiest weapon of offence against a prosy benefactor’s feelings. the gratitude of master francis figures, on this reading, as a frightful minus quantity. if, on the other hand, those jests were given and taken in good humour, the whole relation between the pair degenerates into the unedifying complicity of a debauched old chaplain and a witty and dissolute young scholar. at this rate the house with the red door may have rung with the most mundane minstrelsy; and it may have been below its roof that villon, through a hole in the plaster, studied, as he tells us, the leisures of a rich ecclesiastic.

it was, perhaps, of some moment in the poet’s life that he should have inhabited the cloister of saint benoit. three of the most remarkable among his early acquaintances are catherine de vausselles, for whom he entertained a short-lived affection and an enduring and most unmanly resentment; regnier de montigny, a young blackguard of good birth; and colin de cayeux, a fellow with a marked aptitude for picking locks. now we are on a foundation of mere conjecture, but it is at least curious to find that two of the canons of saint benoit answered respectively to the names of pierre de vaucel and etienne de montigny, and that there was a householder called nicolas de cayeux in a street — the rue des poirees — in the immediate neighbourhood of the cloister. m. longnon is almost ready to identify catherine as the niece of pierre; regnier as the nephew of etienne, and colin as the son of nicolas. without going so far, it must be owned that the approximation of names is significant. as we go on to see the part played by each of these persons in the sordid melodrama of the poet’s life, we shall come to regard it as even more notable. is it not clough who has remarked that, after all, everything lies in juxtaposition? many a man’s destiny has been settled by nothing apparently more grave than a pretty face on the opposite side of the street and a couple of bad companions round the corner.

catherine de vausselles (or de vaucel — the change is within the limits of villon’s licence) had plainly delighted in the poet’s conversation; near neighbours or not, they were much together and villon made no secret of his court, and suffered himself to believe that his feeling was repaid in kind. this may have been an error from the first, or he may have estranged her by subsequent misconduct or temerity. one can easily imagine villon an impatient wooer. one thing, at least, is sure: that the affair terminated in a manner bitterly humiliating to master francis. in presence of his lady-love, perhaps under her window and certainly with her connivance, he was unmercifully thrashed by one noe le joly — beaten, as he says himself, like dirty linen on the washing-board. it is characteristic that his malice had notably increased between the time when he wrote the small testament immediately on the back of the occurrence, and the time when he wrote the large testament five years after. on the latter occasion nothing is too bad for his “damsel with the twisted nose,” as he calls her. she is spared neither hint nor accusation, and he tells his messenger to accost her with the vilest insults. villon, it is thought, was out of paris when these amenities escaped his pen; or perhaps the strong arm of noe le joly would have been again in requisition. so ends the love story, if love story it may properly be called. poets are not necessarily fortunate in love; but they usually fall among more romantic circumstances and bear their disappointment with a better grace.

the neighbourhood of regnier de montigny and colin de cayeux was probably more influential on his after life than the contempt of catherine. for a man who is greedy of all pleasures, and provided with little money and less dignity of character, we may prophesy a safe and speedy voyage downward. humble or even truckling virtue may walk unspotted in this life. but only those who despise the pleasures can afford to despise the opinion of the world. a man of a strong, heady temperament, like villon, is very differently tempted. his eyes lay hold on all provocations greedily, and his heart flames up at a look into imperious desire; he is snared and broached-to by anything and everything, from a pretty face to a piece of pastry in a cookshop window; he will drink the rinsing of the wine cup, stay the latest at the tavern party; tap at the lit windows, follow the sound of singing, and beat the whole neighbourhood for another reveller, as he goes reluctantly homeward; and grudge himself every hour of sleep as a black empty period in which he cannot follow after pleasure. such a person is lost if he have not dignity, or, failing that, at least pride, which is its shadow and in many ways its substitute. master francis, i fancy, would follow his own eager instincts without much spiritual struggle. and we soon find him fallen among thieves in sober, literal earnest, and counting as acquaintances the most disreputable people he could lay his hands on: fellows who stole ducks in paris moat; sergeants of the criminal court, and archers of the watch; blackguards who slept at night under the butchers’ stalls, and for whom the aforesaid archers peered about carefully with lanterns; regnier de montigny, colin de cayeux, and their crew, all bound on a favouring breeze towards the gallows; the disorderly abbess of port royal, who went about at fair time with soldiers and thieves, and conducted her abbey on the queerest principles, and most likely perette mauger, the great paris receiver of stolen goods, not yet dreaming, poor woman! of the last scene of her career when henry cousin, executor of the high justice, shall bury her, alive and most reluctant, in front of the new montigny gibbet. 9 nay, our friend soon began to take a foremost rank in this society. he could string off verses, which is always an agreeable talent; and he could make himself useful in many other ways. the whole ragged army of bohemia, and whosoever loved good cheer without at all loving to work and pay for it, are addressed in contemporary verses as the “subjects of francois villon.” he was a good genius to all hungry and unscrupulous persons; and became the hero of a whole legendary cycle of tavern tricks and cheateries. at best, these were doubtful levities, rather too thievish for a schoolboy, rather too gamesome for a thief. but he would not linger long in this equivocal border land. he must soon have complied with his surroundings. he was one who would go where the cannikin clinked, not caring who should pay; and from supping in the wolves’ den, there is but a step to hunting with the pack. and here, as i am on the chapter of his degradation, i shall say all i mean to say about its darkest expression, and be done with it for good. some charitable critics see no more than a jeu d’esprit, a graceful and trifling exercise of the imagination, in the grimy ballad of fat peg (grosse margot). i am not able to follow these gentlemen to this polite extreme. out of all villon’s works that ballad stands forth in flaring reality, gross and ghastly, as a thing written in a contraction of disgust. m. longnon shows us more and more clearly at every page that we are to read our poet literally, that his names are the names of real persons, and the events he chronicles were actual events. but even if the tendency of criticism had run the other way, this ballad would have gone far to prove itself. i can well understand the reluctance of worthy persons in this matter; for of course it is unpleasant to think of a man of genius as one who held, in the words of marina to boult —

“a place, for which the pained’st fiend

of hell would not in reputation change.”

but beyond this natural unwillingness, the whole difficulty of the case springs from a highly virtuous ignorance of life. paris now is not so different from the paris of then; and the whole of the doings of bohemia are not written in the sugar-candy pastorals of murger. it is really not at all surprising that a young man of the fifteenth century, with a knack of making verses, should accept his bread upon disgraceful terms. the race of those who do is not extinct; and some of them to this day write the prettiest verses imaginable. . . . after this, it were impossible for master francis to fall lower: to go and steal for himself would be an admirable advance from every point of view, divine or human.

9 chronique scandaleuse, ed. pantheon, p. 237.

and yet it is not as a thief, but as a homicide, that he makes his first appearance before angry justice. on june 5, 1455, when he was about twenty-four, and had been master of arts for a matter of three years, we behold him for the first time quite definitely. angry justice had, as it were, photographed him in the act of his homicide; and m. longnon, rummaging among old deeds, has turned up the negative and printed it off for our instruction. villon had been supping - copiously we may believe — and sat on a stone bench in front of the church of st. benoit, in company with a priest called gilles and a woman of the name of isabeau. it was nine o’clock, a mighty late hour for the period, and evidently a fine summer’s night. master francis carried a mantle, like a prudent man, to keep him from the dews (serain), and had a sword below it dangling from his girdle. so these three dallied in front of st benoit, taking their pleasure (pour soy esbatre). suddenly there arrived upon the scene a priest, philippe chermoye or sermaise, also with sword and cloak, and accompanied by one master jehan le mardi. sermaise, according to villon’s account, which is all we have to go upon, came up blustering and denying god; as villon rose to make room for him upon the bench, thrust him rudely back into his place; and finally drew his sword and cut open his lower lip, by what i should imagine was a very clumsy stroke. up to this point, villon professes to have been a model of courtesy, even of feebleness: and the brawl, in his version, reads like the fable of the wolf and the lamb. but now the lamb was roused; he drew his sword, stabbed sermaise in the groin, knocked him on the head with a big stone, and then, leaving him to his fate, went away to have his own lip doctored by a barber of the name of fouquet. in one version, he says that gilles, isabeau, and le mardi ran away at the first high words, and that he and sermaise had it out alone; in another, le mardi is represented as returning and wresting villon’s sword from him: the reader may please himself. sermaise was picked up, lay all that night in the prison of saint benoit, where he was examined by an official of the chatelet and expressly pardoned villon, and died on the following saturday in the hotel dieu.

this, as i have said, was in june. not before january of the next year could villon extract a pardon from the king; but while his hand was in, he got two. one is for “francois des loges, alias (autrement dit) de villon;” and the other runs in the name of francois de montcorbier. nay, it appears there was a further complication; for in the narrative of the first of these documents, it is mentioned that he passed himself off upon fouquet, the barber-surgeon, as one michel mouton. m. longnon has a theory that this unhappy accident with sermaise was the cause of villon’s subsequent irregularities; and that up to that moment he had been the pink of good behaviour. but the matter has to my eyes a more dubious air. a pardon necessary for des loges and another for montcorbier? and these two the same person? and one or both of them known by the alias of villon, however honestly come by? and lastly, in the heat of the moment, a fourth name thrown out with an assured countenance? a ship is not to be trusted that sails under so many colours. this is not the simple bearing of innocence. no — the young master was already treading crooked paths; already, he would start and blench at a hand upon his shoulder, with the look we know so well in the face of hogarth’s idle apprentice; already, in the blue devils, he would see henry cousin, the executor of high justice, going in dolorous procession towards montfaucon, and hear the wind and the birds crying around paris gibbet.

a gang of thieves.

in spite of the prodigious number of people who managed to get hanged, the fifteenth century was by no means a bad time for criminals. a great confusion of parties and great dust of fighting favoured the escape of private housebreakers and quiet fellows who stole ducks in paris moat. prisons were leaky; and as we shall see, a man with a few crowns in his pocket and perhaps some acquaintance among the officials, could easily slip out and become once more a free marauder. there was no want of a sanctuary where he might harbour until troubles blew by; and accomplices helped each other with more or less good faith. clerks, above all, had remarkable facilities for a criminal way of life; for they were privileged, except in cases of notorious incorrigibility, to be plucked from the hands of rude secular justice and tried by a tribunal of their own. in 1402, a couple of thieves, both clerks of the university, were condemned to death by the provost of paris. as they were taken to montfaucon, they kept crying “high and clearly” for their benefit of clergy, but were none the less pitilessly hanged and gibbeted. indignant alma mater interfered before the king; and the provost was deprived of all royal offices, and condemned to return the bodies and erect a great stone cross, on the road from paris to the gibbet graven with the effigies of these two holy martyrs. 10 we shall hear more of the benefit of clergy; for after this the reader will not be surprised to meet with thieves in the shape of tonsured clerks, or even priests and monks.

10 monstrelet: pantheon litteraire, p. 26.

to a knot of such learned pilferers our poet certainly belonged; and by turning over a few more of m. longnon’s negatives, we shall get a clear idea of their character and doings. montigny and de cayeux are names already known; guy tabary, petit-jehan, dom nicolas, little thibault, who was both clerk and goldsmith, and who made picklocks and melted plate for himself and his companions — with these the reader has still to become acquainted. petit-jehan and de cayeux were handy fellows and enjoyed a useful pre-eminence in honour of their doings with the picklock. “dictus des cahyeus est fortis operator crochetorum,” says tabary’s interrogation, “sed dictus petit-jehan, ejus socius, est forcius operator.” but the flower of the flock was little thibault; it was reported that no lock could stand before him; he had a persuasive hand; let us salute capacity wherever we may find it. perhaps the term gang is not quite properly applied to the persons whose fortunes we are now about to follow; rather they were independent malefactors, socially intimate, and occasionally joining together for some serious operation just as modern stockjobbers form a syndicate for an important loan. nor were they at all particular to any branch of misdoing. they did not scrupulously confine themselves to a single sort of theft, as i hear is common among modern thieves. they were ready for anything, from pitch-and-toss to manslaughter. montigny, for instance, had neglected neither of these extremes, and we find him accused of cheating at games of hazard on the one hand, and on the other of the murder of one thevenin pensete in a house by the cemetery of st. john. if time had only spared us some particulars, might not this last have furnished us with the matter of a grisly winter’s tale?

at christmas-time in 1456, readers of villon will remember that he was engaged on the small testament. about the same period, circa festum nativitatis domini, he took part in a memorable supper at the mule tavern, in front of the church of st. mathurin. tabary, who seems to have been very much villon’s creature, had ordered the supper in the course of the afternoon. he was a man who had had troubles in his time and languished in the bishop of paris’s prisons on a suspicion of picking locks; confiding, convivial, not very astute — who had copied out a whole improper romance with his own right hand. this supper-party was to be his first introduction to de cayeux and petit-jehan, which was probably a matter of some concern to the poor man’s muddy wits; in the sequel, at least, he speaks of both with an undisguised respect, based on professional inferiority in the matter of picklocks. dom nicolas, a picardy monk, was the fifth and last at table. when supper had been despatched and fairly washed down, we may suppose, with white baigneux or red beaune, which were favourite wines among the fellowship, tabary was solemnly sworn over to secrecy on the night’s performances; and the party left the mule and proceeded to an unoccupied house belonging to robert de saint-simon. this, over a low wall, they entered without difficulty. all but tabary took off their upper garments; a ladder was found and applied to the high wall which separated saint-simon’s house from the court of the college of navarre; the four fellows in their shirt-sleeves (as we might say) clambered over in a twinkling; and master guy tabary remained alone beside the overcoats. from the court the burglars made their way into the vestry of the chapel, where they found a large chest, strengthened with iron bands and closed with four locks. one of these locks they picked, and then, by levering up the corner, forced the other three. inside was a small coffer, of walnut wood, also barred with iron, but fastened with only three locks, which were all comfortably picked by way of the keyhole. in the walnut coffer — a joyous sight by our thieves’ lantern — were five hundred crowns of gold. there was some talk of opening the aumries, where, if they had only known, a booty eight or nine times greater lay ready to their hand; but one of the party (i have a humorous suspicion it was dom nicolas, the picardy monk) hurried them away. it was ten o’clock when they mounted the ladder; it was about midnight before tabary beheld them coming back. to him they gave ten crowns, and promised a share of a two-crown dinner on the morrow; whereat we may suppose his mouth watered. in course of time, he got wind of the real amount of their booty and understood how scurvily he had been used; but he seems to have borne no malice. how could he, against such superb operators as petit-jehan and de cayeux; or a person like villon, who could have made a new improper romance out of his own head, instead of merely copying an old one with mechanical right hand?

the rest of the winter was not uneventful for the gang. first they made a demonstration against the church of st. mathurin after chalices, and were ignominiously chased away by barking dogs. then tabary fell out with casin chollet, one of the fellows who stole ducks in paris moat, who subsequently became a sergeant of the chatelet and distinguished himself by misconduct, followed by imprisonment and public castigation, during the wars of louis eleventh. the quarrel was not conducted with a proper regard to the king’s peace, and the pair publicly belaboured each other until the police stepped in, and master tabary was cast once more into the prisons of the bishop. while he still lay in durance, another job was cleverly executed by the band in broad daylight, at the augustine monastery. brother guillaume coiffier was beguiled by an accomplice to st. mathurin to say mass; and during his absence, his chamber was entered and five or six hundred crowns in money and some silver plate successfully abstracted. a melancholy man was coiffier on his return! eight crowns from this adventure were forwarded by little thibault to the incarcerated tabary; and with these he bribed the jailor and reappeared in paris taverns. some time before or shortly after this, villon set out for angers, as he had promised in the small testament. the object of this excursion was not merely to avoid the presence of his cruel mistress or the strong arm of noe le joly, but to plan a deliberate robbery on his uncle the monk. as soon as he had properly studied the ground, the others were to go over in force from paris — picklocks and all — and away with my uncle’s strongbox! this throws a comical sidelight on his own accusation against his relatives, that they had “forgotten natural duty” and disowned him because he was poor. a poor relation is a distasteful circumstance at the best, but a poor relation who plans deliberate robberies against those of his blood, and trudges hundreds of weary leagues to put them into execution, is surely a little on the wrong side of toleration. the uncle at angers may have been monstrously undutiful; but the nephew from paris was upsides with him.

on the 23d april, that venerable and discreet person, master pierre marchand, curate and prior of paray-le-monial, in the diocese of chartres, arrived in paris and put up at the sign of the three chandeliers, in the rue de la huchette. next day, or the day after, as he was breakfasting at the sign of the armchair, he fell into talk with two customers, one of whom was a priest and the other our friend tabary. the idiotic tabary became mighty confidential as to his past life. pierre marchand, who was an acquaintance of guillaume coiffier’s and had sympathised with him over his loss, pricked up his ears at the mention of picklocks, and led on the transcriber of improper romances from one thing to another, until they were fast friends. for picklocks the prior of paray professed a keen curiosity; but tabary, upon some late alarm, had thrown all his into the seine. let that be no difficulty, however, for was there not little thibault, who could make them of all shapes and sizes, and to whom tabary, smelling an accomplice, would be only too glad to introduce his new acquaintance? on the morrow, accordingly, they met; and tabary, after having first wet his whistle at the prior’s expense, led him to notre dame and presented him to four or five “young companions,” who were keeping sanctuary in the church. they were all clerks, recently escaped, like tabary himself, from the episcopal prisons. among these we may notice thibault, the operator, a little fellow of twenty-six, wearing long hair behind. the prior expressed, through tabary, his anxiety to become their accomplice and altogether such as they were (de leur sorts et de leurs complices). mighty polite they showed themselves, and made him many fine speeches in return. but for all that, perhaps because they had longer heads than tabary, perhaps because it is less easy to wheedle men in a body, they kept obstinately to generalities and gave him no information as to their exploits, past, present, or to come. i suppose tabary groaned under this reserve; for no sooner were he and the prior out of the church than he fairly emptied his heart to him, gave him full details of many hanging matters in the past, and explained the future intentions of the band. the scheme of the hour was to rob another augustine monk, robert de la porte, and in this the prior agreed to take a hand with simulated greed. thus, in the course of two days, he had turned this wineskin of a tabary inside out. for a while longer the farce was carried on; the prior was introduced to petit-jehan, whom he describes as a little, very smart man of thirty, with a black beard and a short jacket; an appointment was made and broken in the de la porte affair; tabary had some breakfast at the prior’s charge and leaked out more secrets under the influence of wine and friendship; and then all of a sudden, on the 17th of may, an alarm sprang up, the prior picked up his skirts and walked quietly over to the chatelet to make a deposition, and the whole band took to their heels and vanished out of paris and the sight of the police.

vanish as they like, they all go with a clog about their feet. sooner or later, here or there, they will be caught in the fact, and ignominiously sent home. from our vantage of four centuries afterwards, it is odd and pitiful to watch the order in which the fugitives are captured and dragged in.

montigny was the first. in august of that same year, he was laid by the heels on many grievous counts; sacrilegious robberies, frauds, incorrigibility, and that bad business about thevenin pensete in the house by the cemetery of st. john. he was reclaimed by the ecclesiastical authorities as a clerk; but the claim was rebutted on the score of incorrigibility, and ultimately fell to the ground; and he was condemned to death by the provost of paris. it was a very rude hour for montigny, but hope was not yet over. he was a fellow of some birth; his father had been king’s pantler; his sister, probably married to some one about the court, was in the family way, and her health would be endangered if the execution was proceeded with. so down comes charles the seventh with letters of mercy, commuting the penalty to a year in a dungeon on bread and water, and a pilgrimage to the shrine of st. james in galicia. alas! the document was incomplete; it did not contain the full tale of montigny’s enormities; it did not recite that he had been denied benefit of clergy, and it said nothing about thevenin pensete. montigny’s hour was at hand. benefit of clergy, honourable descent from king’s pantler, sister in the family way, royal letters of commutation — all were of no avail. he had been in prison in rouen, in tours, in bordeaux, and four times already in paris; and out of all these he had come scatheless; but now he must make a little excursion as far as montfaucon with henry cousin, executor of high justice. there let him swing among the carrion crows.

about a year later, in july 1458, the police laid hands on tabary. before the ecclesiastical commissary he was twice examined, and, on the latter occasion, put to the question ordinary and extraordinary. what a dismal change from pleasant suppers at the mule, where he sat in triumph with expert operators and great wits! he is at the lees of life, poor rogue; and those fingers which once transcribed improper romances are now agonisingly stretched upon the rack. we have no sure knowledge, but we may have a shrewd guess of the conclusion. tabary, the admirer, would go the same way as those whom he admired.

the last we hear of is colin de cayeux. he was caught in autumn 1460, in the great church of st. leu d’esserens, which makes so fine a figure in the pleasant oise valley between creil and beaumont. he was reclaimed by no less than two bishops; but the procureur for the provost held fast by incorrigible colin. 1460 was an ill-starred year: for justice was making a clean sweep of “poor and indigent persons, thieves, cheats, and lockpickers,” in the neighbourhood of paris; 11 and colin de cayeux, with many others, was condemned to death and hanged. 12

11 chron. scand. ut supra.

12 here and there, principally in the order of events, this article differs from m. longnon’s own reading of his material. the ground on which he defers the execution of montigny and de cayeux beyond the date of their trials seems insufficient. there is a law of parsimony for the construction of historical documents; simplicity is the first duty of narration; and hanged they were.

villon and the gallows.

villon was still absent on the angers expedition when the prior of paray sent such a bombshell among his accomplices; and the dates of his return and arrest remain undiscoverable. m. campaux plausibly enough opined for the autumn of 1457, which would make him closely follow on montigny, and the first of those denounced by the prior to fall into the toils. we may suppose, at least, that it was not long thereafter; we may suppose him competed for between lay and clerical courts; and we may suppose him alternately pert and impudent, humble and fawning, in his defence. but at the end of all supposing, we come upon some nuggets of fact. for first, he was put to the question by water. he who had tossed off so many cups of white baigneux or red beaune, now drank water through linen folds, until his bowels were flooded and his heart stood still. after so much raising of the elbow, so much outcry of fictitious thirst, here at last was enough drinking for a lifetime. truly, of our pleasant vices, the gods make whips to scourge us. and secondly he was condemned to be hanged. a man may have been expecting a catastrophe for years, and yet find himself unprepared when it arrives. certainly, villon found, in this legitimate issue of his career, a very staggering and grave consideration. every beast, as he says, clings bitterly to a whole skin. if everything is lost, and even honour, life still remains; nay, and it becomes, like the ewe lamb in nathan’s parable, as dear as all the rest. “do you fancy,” he asks, in a lively ballad, “that i had not enough philosophy under my hood to cry out: ‘i appeal’? if i had made any bones about the matter, i should have been planted upright in the fields, the st, denis road” — montfaucon being on the way to st. denis. an appeal to parliament, as we saw in the case of colin de cayeux, did not necessarily lead to an acquittal or a commutation; and while the matter was pending, our poet had ample opportunity to reflect on his position. hanging is a sharp argument, and to swing with many others on the gibbet adds a horrible corollary for the imagination. with the aspect of montfaucon he was well acquainted; indeed, as the neighbourhood appears to have been sacred to junketing and nocturnal picnics of wild young men and women, he had probably studied it under all varieties of hour and weather. and now, as he lay in prison waiting the mortal push, these different aspects crowded back on his imagination with a new and startling significance; and he wrote a ballad, by way of epitaph for himself and his companions, which remains unique in the annals of mankind. it is, in the highest sense, a piece of his biography:—

“la pluye nous a debuez et lavez,

et le soleil dessechez et noirciz;

pies, corbeaulx, nous ont les yeux cavez,

et arrachez la barbe et les sourcilz.

jamais, nul temps, nous ne sommes rassis;

puis ca, puis la, comme le vent varie,

a son plaisir sans cesser nous charie,

plus becquetez d’oiscaulx que dez a couldre.

ne soyez donc de nostre confrairie,

mais priez dieu que tous nous vueille absouldre.”

here is some genuine thieves’ literature after so much that was spurious; sharp as an etching, written with a shuddering soul. there is an intensity of consideration in the piece that shows it to be the transcript of familiar thoughts. it is the quintessence of many a doleful nightmare on the straw, when he felt himself swing helpless in the wind, and saw the birds turn about him, screaming and menacing his eyes.

and, after all, the parliament changed his sentence into one of banishment; and to roussillon, in dauphiny, our poet must carry his woes without delay. travellers between lyons and marseilles may remember a station on the line, some way below vienne, where the rhone fleets seaward between vine-clad hills. this was villon’s siberia. it would be a little warm in summer perhaps, and a little cold in winter in that draughty valley between two great mountain fields; but what with the hills, and the racing river, and the fiery rhone wines, he was little to be pitied on the conditions of his exile. villon, in a remarkably bad ballad, written in a breath, heartily thanked and fulsomely belauded the parliament; the envoi, like the proverbial postscript of a lady’s letter, containing the pith of his performance in a request for three days’ delay to settle his affairs and bid his friends farewell. he was probably not followed out of paris, like antoine fradin, the popular preacher, another exile of a few years later, by weeping multitudes; 13 but i daresay one or two rogues of his acquaintance would keep him company for a mile or so on the south road, and drink a bottle with him before they turned. for banished people, in those days, seem to have set out on their own responsibility, in their own guard, and at their own expense. it was no joke to make one’s way from paris to roussillon alone and penniless in the fifteenth century. villon says he left a rag of his tails on every bush. indeed, he must have had many a weary tramp, many a slender meal, and many a to-do with blustering captains of the ordonnance. but with one of his light fingers, we may fancy that he took as good as he gave; for every rag of his tail, he would manage to indemnify himself upon the population in the shape of food, or wine, or ringing money; and his route would be traceable across france and burgundy by housewives and inn-keepers lamenting over petty thefts, like the track of a single human locust. a strange figure he must have cut in the eyes of the good country people: this ragged, blackguard city poet, with a smack of the paris student, and a smack of the paris street arab, posting along the highways, in rain or sun, among the green fields and vineyards. for himself, he had no taste for rural loveliness; green fields and vineyards would be mighty indifferent to master francis; but he would often have his tongue in his cheek at the simplicity of rustic dupes, and often, at city gates, he might stop to contemplate the gibbet with its swinging bodies, and hug himself on his escape.

13 chron. scand., p. 338.

how long he stayed at roussillon, how far he became the protege of the bourbons, to whom that town belonged, or when it was that he took part, under the auspices of charles of orleans, in a rhyming tournament to be referred to once again in the pages of the present volume, are matters that still remain in darkness, in spite of m. longnon’s diligent rummaging among archives. when we next find him, in summer 1461, alas! he is once more in durance: this time at meun-sur-loire, in the prisons of thibault d’aussigny, bishop of orleans. he had been lowered in a basket into a noisome pit, where he lay, all summer, gnawing hard crusts and railing upon fate. his teeth, he says, were like the teeth of a rake: a touch of haggard portraiture all the more real for being excessive and burlesque, and all the more proper to the man for being a caricature of his own misery. his eyes were “bandaged with thick walls.” it might blow hurricanes overhead; the lightning might leap in high heaven; but no word of all this reached him in his noisome pit. “il n’entre, ou gist, n’escler ni tourbillon.” above all, he was fevered with envy and anger at the freedom of others; and his heart flowed over into curses as he thought of thibault d’aussigny, walking the streets in god’s sunlight, and blessing people with extended fingers. so much we find sharply lined in his own poems. why he was cast again into prison — how he had again managed to shave the gallows — this we know not, nor, from the destruction of authorities, are we ever likely to learn. but on october 2d, 1461, or some day immediately preceding, the new king, louis eleventh, made his joyous entry into meun. now it was a part of the formality on such occasions for the new king to liberate certain prisoners; and so the basket was let down into villon’s pit, and hastily did master francis scramble in, and was most joyfully hauled up, and shot out, blinking and tottering, but once more a free man, into the blessed sun and wind. now or never is the time for verses! such a happy revolution would turn the head of a stocking-weaver, and set him jingling rhymes. and so — after a voyage to paris, where he finds montigny and de cayeux clattering, their bones upon the gibbet, and his three pupils roystering in paris streets, “with their thumbs under their girdles,” — down sits master francis to write his large testament, and perpetuate his name in a sort of glorious ignominy.

the large testament.

of this capital achievement and, with it, of villon’s style in general, it is here the place to speak. the large testament is a hurly-burly of cynical and sentimental reflections about life, jesting legacies to friends and enemies, and, interspersed among these many admirable ballades, both serious and absurd. with so free a design, no thought that occurred to him would need to be dismissed without expression; and he could draw at full length the portrait of his own bedevilled soul, and of the bleak and blackguardly world which was the theatre of his exploits and sufferings. if the reader can conceive something between the slap-dash inconsequence of byron’s don juan and the racy humorous gravity and brief noble touches that distinguish the vernacular poems of burns, he will have formed some idea of villon’s style. to the latter writer — except in the ballades, which are quite his own, and can be paralleled from no other language known to me — he bears a particular resemblance. in common with burns he has a certain rugged compression, a brutal vivacity of epithet, a homely vigour, a delight in local personalities, and an interest in many sides of life, that are often despised and passed over by more effete and cultured poets. both also, in their strong, easy colloquial way, tend to become difficult and obscure; the obscurity in the case of villon passing at times into the absolute darkness of cant language. they are perhaps the only two great masters of expression who keep sending their readers to a glossary.

“shall we not dare to say of a thief,” asks montaigne, “that he has a handsome leg?” it is a far more serious claim that we have to put forward in behalf of villon. beside that of his contemporaries, his writing, so full of colour, so eloquent, so picturesque, stands out in an almost miraculous isolation. if only one or two of the chroniclers could have taken a leaf out of his book, history would have been a pastime, and the fifteenth century as present to our minds as the age of charles second. this gallows-bird was the one great writer of his age and country, and initiated modern literature for france. boileau, long ago, in the period of perukes and snuff-boxes, recognised him as the first articulate poet in the language; and if we measure him, not by priority of merit, but living duration of influence, not on a comparison with obscure forerunners, but with great and famous successors, we shall instal this ragged and disreputable figure in a far higher niche in glory’s temple than was ever dreamed of by the critic. it is, in itself, a memorable fact that, before 1542, in the very dawn of printing, and while modern france was in the making, the works of villon ran through seven different editions. out of him flows much of rabelais; and through rabelais, directly and indirectly, a deep, permanent, and growing inspiration. not only his style, but his callous pertinent way of looking upon the sordid and ugly sides of life, becomes every day a more specific feature in the literature of france. and only the other year, a work of some power appeared in paris, and appeared with infinite scandal, which owed its whole inner significance and much of its outward form to the study of our rhyming thief.

the world to which he introduces us is, as before said, blackguardly and bleak. paris swarms before us, full of famine, shame, and death; monks and the servants of great lords hold high wassail upon cakes and pastry; the poor man licks his lips before the baker’s window; people with patched eyes sprawl all night under the stalls; chuckling tabary transcribes an improper romance; bare-bosomed lasses and ruffling students swagger in the streets; the drunkard goes stumbling homewards; the graveyard is full of bones; and away on montfaucon, colin de cayeux and montigny hang draggled in the rain. is there nothing better to be seen than sordid misery and worthless joys? only where the poor old mother of the poet kneels in church below painted windows, and makes tremulous supplication to the mother of god.

in our mixed world, full of green fields and happy lovers, where not long before, joan of arc had led one of the highest and noblest lives in the whole story of mankind, this was all worth chronicling that our poet could perceive. his eyes were indeed sealed with his own filth. he dwelt all his life in a pit more noisome than the dungeon at meun. in the moral world, also, there are large phenomena not cognisable out of holes and corners. loud winds blow, speeding home deep-laden ships and sweeping rubbish from the earth; the lightning leaps and cleans the face of heaven; high purposes and brave passions shake and sublimate men’s spirits; and meanwhile, in the narrow dungeon of his soul, villon is mumbling crusts and picking vermin.

along with this deadly gloom of outlook, we must take another characteristic of his work: its unrivalled insincerity. i can give no better similitude of this quality than i have given already: that he comes up with a whine, and runs away with a whoop and his finger to his nose. his pathos is that of a professional mendicant who should happen to be a man of genius; his levity that of a bitter street arab, full of bread. on a first reading, the pathetic passages preoccupy the reader, and he is cheated out of an alms in the shape of sympathy. but when the thing is studied the illusion fades away: in the transitions, above all, we can detect the evil, ironical temper of the man; and instead of a flighty work, where many crude but genuine feelings tumble together for the mastery as in the lists of tournament, we are tempted to think of the large testament as of one long-drawn epical grimace, pulled by a merry-andrew, who has found a certain despicable eminence over human respect and human affections by perching himself astride upon the gallows. between these two views, at best, all temperate judgments will be found to fall; and rather, as i imagine, towards the last.

there were two things on which he felt with perfect and, in one case, even threatening sincerity.

the first of these was an undisguised envy of those richer than himself. he was for ever drawing a parallel, already exemplified from his own words, between the happy life of the well-to-do and the miseries of the poor. burns, too proud and honest not to work, continued through all reverses to sing of poverty with a light, defiant note. beranger waited till he was himself beyond the reach of want, before writing the old vagabond or jacques. samuel johnson, although he was very sorry to be poor, “was a great arguer for the advantages of poverty” in his ill days. thus it is that brave men carry their crosses, and smile with the fox burrowing in their vitals. but villon, who had not the courage to be poor with honesty, now whiningly implores our sympathy, now shows his teeth upon the dung-heap with an ugly snarl. he envies bitterly, envies passionately. poverty, he protests, drives men to steal, as hunger makes the wolf sally from the forest. the poor, he goes on, will always have a carping word to say, or, if that outlet be denied, nourish rebellious thoughts. it is a calumny on the noble army of the poor. thousands in a small way of life, ay, and even in the smallest, go through life with tenfold as much honour and dignity and peace of mind, as the rich gluttons whose dainties and state-beds awakened villon’s covetous temper. and every morning’s sun sees thousands who pass whistling to their toil. but villon was the “mauvais pauvre” defined by victor hugo, and, in its english expression, so admirably stereotyped by dickens. he was the first wicked sansculotte. he is the man of genius with the moleskin cap. he is mighty pathetic and beseeching here in the street, but i would not go down a dark road with him for a large consideration.

the second of the points on which he was genuine and emphatic was common to the middle ages; a deep and somewhat snivelling conviction of the transitory nature of this life and the pity and horror of death. old age and the grave, with some dark and yet half-sceptical terror of an after-world — these were ideas that clung about his bones like a disease. an old ape, as he says, may play all the tricks in its repertory, and none of them will tickle an audience into good humour. “tousjours vieil synge est desplaisant.” it is not the old jester who receives most recognition at a tavern party, but the young fellow, fresh and handsome, who knows the new slang, and carries off his vice with a certain air. of this, as a tavern jester himself, he would be pointedly conscious. as for the women with whom he was best acquainted, his reflections on their old age, in all their harrowing pathos, shall remain in the original for me. horace has disgraced himself to something the same tune; but what horace throws out with an ill-favoured laugh, villon dwells on with an almost maudlin whimper.

it is in death that he finds his truest inspiration in the swift and sorrowful change that overtakes beauty; in the strange revolution by which great fortunes and renowns are diminished to a handful of churchyard dust; and in the utter passing away of what was once lovable and mighty. it is in this that the mixed texture of his thought enables him to reach such poignant and terrible effects, and to enchance pity with ridicule, like a man cutting capers to a funeral march. it is in this, also, that he rises out of himself into the higher spheres of art. so, in the ballade by which he is best known, he rings the changes on names that once stood for beautiful and queenly women, and are now no more than letters and a legend. “where are the snows of yester year?” runs the burden. and so, in another not so famous, he passes in review the different degrees of bygone men, from the holy apostles and the golden emperor of the east, down to the heralds, pursuivants, and trumpeters, who also bore their part in the world’s pageantries and ate greedily at great folks’ tables: all this to the refrain of “so much carry the winds away!” probably, there was some melancholy in his mind for a yet lower grade, and montigny and colin de cayeux clattering their bones on paris gibbet. alas, and with so pitiful an experience of life, villon can offer us nothing but terror and lamentation about death! no one has ever more skilfully communicated his own disenchantment; no one ever blown a more ear-piercing note of sadness. this unrepentant thief can attain neither to christian confidence, nor to the spirit of the bright greek saying, that whom the gods love die early. it is a poor heart, and a poorer age, that cannot accept the conditions of life with some heroic readiness.

the date of the large testament is the last date in the poet’s biography. after having achieved that admirable and despicable performance, he disappears into the night from whence he came. how or when he died, whether decently in bed or trussed up to a gallows, remains a riddle for foolhardy commentators. it appears his health had suffered in the pit at meun; he was thirty years of age and quite bald; with the notch in his under lip where sermaise had struck him with the sword, and what wrinkles the reader may imagine. in default of portraits, this is all i have been able to piece together, and perhaps even the baldness should be taken as a figure of his destitution. a sinister dog, in all likelihood, but with a look in his eye, and the loose flexile mouth that goes with wit and an overweening sensual temperament. certainly the sorriest figure on the rolls of fame.